ML20196J030
| ML20196J030 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1997 |
| From: | OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196J028 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9708010270 | |
| Download: ML20196J030 (90) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ .. ._ -._ . ~ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . . . . . _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ .. _ . _ _ _ . 1 i l FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2 l 4 l l
//a' 1
i l JUNE 1997 l i i ) SAFE OPERATIONS } PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE l COST EFFECTIVENESS i 1 9708010270 DR 970725 1 ADOCK 05000295 PDR
1 OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT i j FORT CALHOUN STATION 3 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT l-i June . 1997 i i ) i 1 l
- Engineering and Operations Suppati Division l NuclearLicensing i
a
FORT CALHOUN STATION . l 4 JUNE 1997 l
~
Monthly Operating Report t 4 OPERATlONS
SUMMARY
The Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) produced 38% of the district's monthly net generation. The station operated at a nominal 100% power level until June 18, when the reactor power was reduced to 95% to facilitate scheduled Turbine Control Valve testing and repairs. The testing was satisfactorily completed on June 19. The station reached 100% reactor power, at this time, and remained there through the end of the month. t 9
~. .. - . . - - - . . .. .-. . - - . _ _ _ . - -. - _ _ . . _ - . .
~
l I
--* - Fort Calhoun indes Value 97/6 Industry Median was 86.7%
; industry Median indes Value 97/6 OPPD Value was 91.05%
100.. 91 e, 4 87 86 /, [ 84 so . ,
! 70
~i 60 .
50 -. 40 95/1 95/2 95/3 95/4 96/1 96/2 96/3 96/4 97/1 Apr May June PERFORMANCE INDEX TREND The Performance Index Trend calculation is made up of eleven variables each weighted to arrive at an overallindex 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) capability loss factor, unplanned automatic scrams per 7000 hours critical, l high pressure safety injection, auxiliary feedwater, emergency AC power, 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 Station's Performance Index. l f ii 1 1
-_. ___ u. _. . .___ ._... -- -_ -- _ -.._- _ _- - -..-.- -.-- -. . - ...- - ~.- -_. - _ . _ .._ ...___.
. . . o ,
L k 8 16.00 - 14.00 aMAXIMUM VALUE DMay 97 OM 37 8 o g U NEW 12.00 - i 888 888 888- ' 10 00 8 b 888 8
- ll 8.00 - -
8 e-6.00 8 88$ 0.00 -
-+-- H i + -+ +
UCF UC1F HPSI AFW EACP CRE UAS7 FRt CPI TPI 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. The current graph shows the difference between May '97 and June '97. ; UCF Unit Capability Factor TPI Thermal Performance Indicator UCLF Unplanned Capability Loss Factor CPI Secondary Chemistry Indicator 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 Wast'e buried, will no longer be used in calculating the Station's Performance Index. All other parameters have been adjusted to reflect this change. iii
~
FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT June 1997-
SUMMARY
POSITIVE TREND REPORT INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED A performance indicator with data representing three MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT consecutive months of improving performance or three A efformance indicator with data for the rePartin9 consecunve months of performance that is superior to the period that is inadequate when compared to the stated goal is exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear OPPD goal is defined as 'Needing increased Operations Division Qualrty Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37). Management Attention" per (NOD-QP-37). The following performance indicators exhibited positive
, trends for the reporting month: Fuel Reliability Index Unolanned Automatic Reactor Scrams (Page 4) Recordable Iniurv/ Illness Freauency Rate industrial Safety Accident Rate (Page 13) Clean Controlled Area Contaminations Unolanned Safety System Actuations (Page 30) Cents Per Kilowatt Hour 0
Procedural Noncomoliance incidents (Page 43) hjaintenance Overtimg in-Line Chemistry Instruments Out-OF-Service (Page 44) Hazardous Waste Produced (Page 45) ADVERSE TREND REPORT Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area (Page 46) A performance indicator with data representing ,
, three consecutive months of declining performanc9 Loaaable/ Reportable incidents (Security) orthree cormacutive months of performance that is (Page49) trending toward declining as determined by the Manager - Nuclear Licensing, constitutes an outstandina Modifications adverse trend per Nuclear Operations Division (Page 51)
Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37). A supervisor whose performance indicator exhibits an adverse i
- trend by this definition may specify in written form l (to be published in this report) why the trend is not adverse. ~
The following performance indicators exhibited adverse trends for the reporting month: MaiDtenance Workload Backloas (Page 39) i 4 l l
I 1 l WANO INDICATOR VALUES (As compared to previous month) Unit Capability Factor increasing Unplanned Capability Loss Factor increasing High Pressure Safety injection No Change
. Aux. Feedwater System No Change Emergency AC Power No Change Collective Radiation Exposure Increasing Unplannad Automatic Reactor Scrams No Change 4 Fuel Reliability Decreasing l Chemistry Indicator increasing l Thermal Performance Increasing Industrial Safety Accident Ra;0 No Change I
9 I t 4 4
'" mg Table of Contents / Summary eagn oOxtS ............... ...... ......... ... .. ...... . ...........................xii WANO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 3 Unit capability Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .................... ........... ........ .. 2 Unplanned Capability loss Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1
Unplanned Automatic Reactor SCRAMS per 7000 Hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1
. High Pressure Safety injection system . . . ............................ ..... ....... ... . 5 l l
l Auxiliary Feedwater System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . ......... .............6 J Emergency AC Power System . . . . . . . . . ..... .. ..... . . . ....... .. ...... ..... 7 Thermal Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . ... ... ....... 8 Fuel Reliability Indicator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . .... ..... ...... ........" ..... 9 1 Secondary System Chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ..... ..................10 Colle ctive Radhtion Exposure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Volume of low level Radioactive Waste . . . . . . . . . . . ................... .. ........ . . 12 i i 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 i Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in LERs .. . . .. 23 l
l Vi l l l l
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 Dai!yThermal Output . . . . ...... ......... .. . .. ............. . .. . 32 Equipment Forced Outages per 1,000 Critical Hours . . . .. ..... .. . .. . . .. . 33 Chemistry Action Levels Exceeded - Event Days . . ... ..... ... .. . . . . 34 Primary System uthium % Hours Out of umit .. ... .... .. ... .. .. ..... . .. 35 COST Cents Per Kilowatt Hour . . . . ........ . .... ............. . .. . .. .. .. ... . 37 DMSION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage) . . . . .. ... .... ....... . .. .... 39 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance . .. ... . ... .. ...... . . . . . . . 40 j Percentage of Total MWOs Completed per month identified as Rework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Overtime ... ... ............ ... . .. .. ... . .. .. ..... .. .... . . . . d2
. Procedural Noncompliance incidents . . .. ... ... ..... ... . ... ... . 43 In-Une Chemistry instruments Out-of-Service .. . . . ... .......... ....... . 44 Hazardous Waste Produced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. .. .. ...... . 45 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area . ... .. ... . . .. .. ...... 46 Radio!ogical Work Practices Program . . .. .. . . . . . 47 Document Review .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. .. 48 4
4 vil i l l [
I
- \
1 I l l Table of Contents / Summary l Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............49 I Temporary Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ... ... ..... . ... ..... ......50 l l o istanding Modifications' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... . .. .... .. 51 l Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown ........... ...... .... .... . . ... 52 Engineering Change Notices
- Status ....................... ....... .. . .. .. ...... . ... .. . . . . . 53 Open .. .......... ... ... ......... . . .. .. .. ..... .. . .... . . 54 Ucensee Event Report (LER) Root Cause Breakdown . . ... . . . . . . . ...... .. 55 l
Ucensed Operator Requalification Training . .. .. .. . .. . . ....... ... .. . 56 Ucense Candidate Exams . . . . ... ........ .......................57 Condition Reports ...... . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . . .... . . . . ........58 Cycle 18 Refueling Outage MWO Planning Status . . . ... .... . . ..... . .. . ... ...........59 Overall Project Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Outage Modification Planning ... . ... ... ... ........ .. .. .. . . .. . . . . 61 1 On-Urie Modification Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. ... 62 l i Progress of i997 On-Line Modification Planning . . . . .. . .. . ..... . ... .. ...... 63 ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST Action Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . .. .. . .... . ....... . . . . 64 Performance indicator Definitions .. . . . . ... .. . .. .. . .......... . . 66 I i l Safety Enhc . cement Program index .............. . . .. . ... ... . .... 74
- Report Distribution List . . . . . . . .. . .... .. . . .. .. . .... . 76 l
t r l
- e..
Vlil l l t l [ f
NUCLEAR PROGRAM 1997 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 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 INPO ratings. We must KNOW OUR COSTS to CONTROL COSTS. Understanding cost is essential ;o controlling it, and controlling cost is essential to competing in today's market. We are a leaming organization. We must BUILD ON OUR HIGH PERFORMANCE CULTURE. Individuals at alllevels must take responsibility for their actions and must be committed to improve their own performance. I OUR CULTURE MUST SUPPORT THE NEW STRATEGIES. We must continue to develop and 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 key to improving. Follow up and feedback must be candid, forthright and timely. 1 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. I VISION To be recognized as the best nuclear organization in the world and to preserve nuclear energy as a viable future energy source. MISSION The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through conservative decision making and the professional use of nuclear technology. We will conduct these operations to assure the health, safety, and protection of our personnel, the general public, and the environment. e ix
1 l I GOALS l Goal 1: SAFE OPERATIONS l Supports: April 1997 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. 1
. Focus on Achieving an INPO Rating of"1"in 1998, i Reduce 1997 NRC violations with no violations more severe than level 4. l No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations.
l Objectives to support SAFE OPERATIONS. ! i 4 OBJECTIVE 1-1: ! No challenges to a nuclear safety systems. OBJECTIVE 1-2: Comply with applicable policies, technical specifications, procedures, standing orders and work instructions. OBJECTIVE 1-3: Identify conditions BEFORE they affect plant safety and reliability. Address every safety concem. , 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. l l X i 3
1 P i l
. l OPPD NUCI FAR 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. 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.
. Maintain a high level of readiness in the ERO.
Objectives to support PERFORMANCE: OBJECTIVE 2-1: Achieve an annual plant capacity factor of 92.7% and a unit capability factor of 96.0% OBJECTIVE 2-2: Training meets the needs of the plant and the National Academy accreditation objectives.
. 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 intemal accreditation assessments.
. ensures items such as training attendance, attentiveness, punctuality, etc. are uniformly emphasized.
J l 1 i i Xi
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 1908 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 l Supports: April 1996 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 2, Objective: 1, 3, and Goal 5, 1 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 l
i 1 t 1 I l i 1 i l s 4 i a f WANO ! PERFORMANCE l IND CATORS l. 1 i 1
=
' Monthly Unit CapablHty Factor
.m . 12 Menth Unit CapablHty Factor
- 1997 Fort Calhoun Goal (99%)
- a- Yaar 2000 WANO Industry Goal (87%)
' ~ ~
7 T T : T D- 4"-5 % . -- - * -c ^
,h- J. - ..
80% -
.x-
- L ' . .x . . . .o. .
.x.. . . . ..
...n,,,,,,,, .x s0% --
~
40% - l 20% - 0% - Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June 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 June 1997 was reported as 100%. The year-to-date UCF was also reported as 82.4%, the UCF for the last 12 months (July 1996 through June 1997) was 73.5%, and i the 36-month average (July 1994 through June 1997) was reported as 81.5%. l Enerav Losses:
. Forced Outage -Circumferential cracking of a weld down stream of a moisture separator -
due to high system stresses, Event Period: May 28 thru May 291997.
. Forced Outage - Steam leak in the fourth stage extraction steam system, Event Period: April through mid May 1997.
. Forced Outage - Due to a steam leak in the fourth stage extraction steam system, Event Period: April 1997.
. 1996 Refueling Outage, Event Period: Sept. through Nov.1996
- Forced Outage - MOV-CV leakage, Event Period: Dec.1996 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 June 1997, the FCS Value was 16.00. This compares to the previous month's value 12.66. Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None 2
. .. . . . . . - . . - . ~ -, . .. -.
Monthly Unit Capability Fackr t . .a . 12 Month Unit capability Factw j
; 1957 Fort Calhoun Goal (se*/4
- -o-- Year 2000 WANO Industry Goal (87%)
"4' - ~
T T T l __ 7 : : Q
+-6
. y
. : ! .. :. :. . a l ,4
..g~..,..... x
... ... . . . .x .
x-
....x,...... ,
..x ws-e=
ws-
,4 , , ,
n:_. . . . . . . . Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June UNPLANNED CAPABILITY 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 June 1997 was reported as 00.0%. The year-to-date UCLF was 14.7%, the UCLF for the last 12 months (July 1996 through June 1997) was 9.92%, and the 36-month average UCLF (July 1994 through June 1997) was reported as 8.5% 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 June 1997 the FCS Value was 12.00. This compares to the previous month's value of 12.00. Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None l 3 r l l l
-e- 12-Month RoEmg Average
-o--- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical for last 36 rnanths
-*~ Fort Cahoun Goal (0.0)
- Year 2000 WANO IndustryGoal(1) 3-2--
N. : 0: 0 'O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 < Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June FCS Reactor Scrams.1907
. 4-3-
2-o o o o o o o o e o 0 e e 95 94 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June 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 hours of critical operation. There were no unplanned automatic reactor scrams during the month of June 1997. The 12-month rolling average (July 1996 through June 1997) was 0. The 36-month value (July 1994 through June 1997) was 0.311. The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station goal for this indicator is 0. The Year 2000 WANO industry
, goalis a maximum of one unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours critical.
The maximum index point value for this indicator is 8. At the end of the June 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
l M M onthly HPSI System Unavailability Value
-M- 12 M onth Rolling Average .
--*- Fort Calhoun Ocal(0.003)
--er-- Ye ar 2000 WAN O Industry G oal (0.02) j- 0.02 -- e a ; 1 ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
0.015 -- l l 0.01 -- e \ 0.005 --
= = = = = = = = = = = = . ,
l
"*?~
~
0 , M ,
^
- 'mi 1996 Jul Aug Sep O ct Nov Dec Jan Feb M ar Apr M ay June HIGH PRESSURE 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 June 1997 The HPSI System unavailability value for the month of June 1997 was 0.0041. There were 9.2 hours of planned unavailability, and 0 hours of unplanned unavailability, during the month. The 12 month rolling average was (July 1996 through June 1997) was 7.9E-5, l and the year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 1.020E-3 at the end of the month. For the previous year there was a total of 1.2 hours of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours 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 value for this indicator is 10. At the end of June 1997 the FCS Value was 10. This compares to the previous month's value of 10. - Dsb Source: Phelps/Schaffer (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Schaffer Trend: None 5 l l l l
~ l I
m MonthlyAuxiliaryFeedwatersystin: Unavailability
-x-12 Month AFWUnavailability 1
-*-- Fort Calhoun Goal (0.01)
(
- Year 2000 WANo Industry Goal (0.025) l !
O.025 -- 0.022 l 0.02 -- t . o ., a i L 0.015 -- - 0 01388 0.01 -- e 0.00493 0.00504 0.005 -- 0.00356 6 'U I p __ 5 -- V 0 l 1997 Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June I 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 June 1997. ' The AFW System Unavailability Value for June 1997 was 0.00111 hours. There were 1.6 hours of planned and 0.00 hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. The 12 month rolling average (July 1996 through June 1997) was 0.00426, and the year-to-date unavailability value was 0.00572 at the end of June 1997. The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.01. The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 0.025. The maximum index point value for this indicator is 10. At the end of June 1997, the FCS Value was 10. This compares to the previous month's value of 10. Data Source: Phelps/Fritts (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Fritts Trend: None 6 l
. - .- . .- - - . ~~ . . . . . _ . . ,
M MonthlyEmergency AC Power UnavailabilityValue
- ++-- Year-to-Date Ernergency AC Power UnavailabilityValue
-*-- Fort Calhoun Goal (0.024) c Year 2000 WANO IndustryGoal(0.025) 0.05 --
0.04 -- 0.03 -- 0.02 -- 0.01 -. x x-x x x X%x-x
- O I I l
" I t I I E I I I Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June 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 June 1997. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for June 1997 was 0.004. During the month, there were 5.8 hours ofplanned unavailability, and 0.0 hours of unplanned unavailability for testing and repairs. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.009 and the value for the last 12 months (July 1996 through June 1997) was 0.010. There have been 77.0 hours (39.95 for DG-1 and 37.05 for DG-2) ofplanned unavailability and 0.0 hours ofunplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1997. There were a total of 188.6 hours of planned unavailability and 3.7 hours of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1996. The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.024. The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 0.025. The maximum index point value for this indicator is 10. At the end of June 1997, the FCS Value was
- 10. This compares to the previous month's value of10.
Data Source: Phelps/Ronning (Manager / Source) ! Accountability: Phelps/Ronning Trend: None i 7 i l 1
___.__._,-m m _ . . . . _ . , _ _ . . , _ - - . - . . - - _ _ . . - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ . _ . _ _ . l ! l I l m MonthlyThermalPerformance ! l i i 12-Month Rolling Average * '
-+-- Fort calhoun Goal (99.6%)
-o- Year 2000 WANo industry Goal (99.5%) i i
100% -- , E- E ' E E. E [, 3.~ ._ bbI E . E. _ _._ i l l' 99% -- 1996 RFO l 98% , , l l . l l , l l Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June l THERMAL PERFORMANCE l 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 June 1997 was 100%. The year to date value was reported as 99.9%. The 12 month rolling average (July 1996 through June 1997) was reported as 99.8%.
. The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is an index value whth is > 99.7%.
i The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 99.5%. The maximum index point value for this indicator is 6. At the end of June 1997, the FCS Value was 6.00 This compares to the previous month's value of 5.34. Data Source: Phelps/Naser(Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Naser 3 Trend: None ! 8 i I' E- - - - - ,, , , - - -
_ . _ _ ._ ._ m . _ _ _ _ _ -. . _ . . . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _- _ _ _ _ . M Fuel Reliability (E-4)
-tr- Y:ar 2000 WANO Goal (5 x 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram)
-*~ 1997 Goal 147E-4 320 . 290.16 280-. 257.07 .
j 240 - 217.s ; 200 -- l160 " 1996
.2 120 -- RFO i 80 --
29.7 2 S 40 - u 18.1 18 s 22.s 31 1 j 0 T' 1- i
" s
* '1 ~ '
- 1 MtE t E- T M 'T M T M i !
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June j
. I FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The monthly FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR (FRI) for June 1997 was 35 E-4 microcuries/ gram based on the steady state data from June 4 through 30. The plant retumed to 100% power during )
the evening of May 31 after a power reduction for a steam line rr, pair. The plant operate'd at 97 to l 100% power through the month of June. ; t The Cycle 17 monthly FRI is trending lower than the Cycle i s values due to the large contribution of the lodine-134 from the " recoil" Uranium. The lodine-134 activity is released to the coolant from the " recoil" activity that is plated out on fuel assembly surfaces due to fuel failures in prior cycles, i The lodine-134 activity is subtracted from the lodine-131 in the FRi equation. The Cycle 17 recoil i activity is trending two times higher than Cycle 16 while the lodine-131 is trending similar to the Cycle ! 16 values at the same point in the cycle. Consequently, the Cycle 17 calculated FRI value is , trending lower, t t Based on the coolant chemistry data through June 24, Westinghouse has a fuel failure prediction f of 19 leaking rods at lower core power levels (i.e., <50%) or 7 leaking rods at core average power. ' The cesium data indicates the leaking fuel to be mostly in a mixture of second and third bumed , regions, Batch S and T (original grid design). ' The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station FRI Performance Indicator goal is to maintain FRI below 147 E-4 microcuries/ gram. This goal is based upon previous cycles fuel performance, results of the most recent fuelinspection and reconstitution campaigns, and an improved fuel failure resistant grid . : design in the new assemblies (Batch U) in the Cycle 17 core. The maximum index point value for this indicator is 8. At the end of the June 1997, the FCS Value was 2.80. This compares to the previous month's value of 3.24. Data Source: Guinn/Guliani Accountability- Chase /Stafford ! Trend: Needing increased Management Attention 9 -
l M MonthlyChendstryindicator
-o- 12#onth Roging Arerage
-h- Fort Calhoun Gosi(1.17) ,
2.6 -- H:- 2.1 - 2-1.9 - 1.8 - 1.7 - U:- 0:
- q._ __. %'
~
M:- - - - 1-
. N 0.7 -
1996 RFO 0.6 - E5 ' Jul Aug Sep Od Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June 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.
Y The CPI for June 1997 was 1.13. The CPI value for the past 12 months (July 1996 through June 1997) was 1.07. In order to place the FCS in the industry's upper quartile, the 1997 goal has been changed from a CPI value < l.4 to the CPI value < l.17. Six parameters are used in the CPI calculation. Four of the parameters were below the INPO mean value which are as follows: 1) steam generator chloride, 2) sulfate, 3) feedwater iron, and condensate pump discharge dissolved oxygen. Steam Generator sodium was above the mean value and has remained unchanged from the previous month. FH-6 copper remains above the INPO mean but is lower than the previous months value. The maximum index point value for this indicator is 7. At the end of June 1997, the FCS Value was
. 6.77. This compares to the previous month's value of 6.37.
Data Source: Hamilton /Ostien (Manager / Source Accountability: Hamilton Trend None 10 (. ..
_ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . .- . . _ ~_ . . . . . . _. _ . . l I l . l 1 l Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure
-+-- Curnulative PersonnelRaalation Exposure j -e-- FCs Goal 38 person-REM
]
*E = = c. <~ - e e = = = m 35 -- . ,
l 30 -- 42s-- E 20 -- _
.c
]
! 15 --
- a. - l 10 --
s-- gg% 0' "" 4--- ' H- ' i Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec j COLLECT!VE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1997 Fort Calhoun goal for Collective Radiation Exposure is set at 38.0 person-REM. i The exposure for June 1997 was 1.678 Person-Rem (ALNOR). l The year-to-date exposure through the end of June 1997 was 19.892 Person-Rem (ALNOR). , d This indicator is a " COLLECTIVE" indicator. WANO does not differentiate between on-line l 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 (July 1994 through June 1997), the total collective ) radiation exposure was 400.902 person-rem (ALNOR). This gives a Fort Calhoun Station - a three year average of 133.634 person-rem per year (ALNOR). The maximum index point value for this indicator is 8. At the end of June 1997 the FCS Value was 8.0. This compares to the previous month's value of 7.2. Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Gebers Trend: None SEP 54 ! 11
- . _. ._ . _ m _ . . . . _ . . . _ _ -_ . .. . _ . . _. . _ . _
x_ m MonthlyVohime of LLRW(cu ft.) i -x- Year-to Date Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried } -*- Fort Calhoun Goal (1200 cu.ft.) , 1200 c : : : : : : : : : : : 1100 t , 1000 -- goo .. 300 -- . {, 700 -- j 600 --
" 500 --
l 400 -- 300 - o 200 g g
-{' 2 D'I[
itX) - 5 N 0 ---xe*"'T , ; ; l ; , "; ; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul /wg Sep Oct Nov Dec I J ! VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE } This indicator shows the volume of the monthly Radioactive Waste buried, the
- cumulative year-to-date radioactive waste buried, and the Fort Calhoun goal.
. Cuft.
- Arnount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during current month 00.0 j Volume of solid radwaste buried during June 1997 60.1
- Curnulativr- volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1996 131.1
) Amount. of solid radwaste in temporary storage 136.3 4 The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station goal for the volumo of solid radioactive waste (buried) is 1200 cubic feet. The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 45 cubic meters (1,589 cubic feet) per year. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 27.33 cubic meters (965.3 cubic feet) per year. This indicator is no longer used by INPO. The indicator will still be tracked, but will no longer be used in computing the Station's Index Number. Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Gebers Trend: None SEP54 12
-e-- Monthlyindustrial Acdderd Rate
-e- 12 MonthRollirig Average j
~4.- FCS Year 4ind Goal (<0.50) . I
-+- Year 2000 WANO trdatry Goal (<0.40) 1.2 - -
1-R8-a6- ,
- . , ,. - ~ , , - - - -
0 l l l , - 0 0 0 0 ---e July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE The pmpose of this indicator is to monitor progress in improving industrial safety perfor$ nance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the station. Contractor work-hours are not included in the indicator. This indicator is defmed as the number of accidents per 200,000 work-hours worked for all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station that result in any of 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. ISAR = (number of restricted-time accidents + lost-time accidents + fatalities) x 200.000 (number of station person-hours worked) The Fort Calhoun Station industrial safety accident rate for the month of June 1997 was 0.00. The 12 month rolling average (July 1996 through June 1997) was 0.0778. The year to date value was 0.00 at the end ofJune 1997. There were no restricted-time and no lost-time accidents in June 1997. The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal is 50.50. The Year 2000 WANO industry goalis 50.40. The maximum index point - value for this indicatoris 5. At the end of June 1997, the FCS Value was 5.0 This compares to the previous month's value of 5.0. Data Source: Sorensen/Blumenthal (Manager / Source) Chase / Booth (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Bishop Trend: Positive 13
4 e 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 e i 14
-+-- MonthlyDisablingirqur)MenessFrequency ,
--*~ 12 Month RoNing Average
--*- 1997 F.C.S. Goal 2-1.8 -
1.8 - 1A - 1.2 - 1-p O.s -- \ 0.6 p .--A \ 0.4 - E \ 0.2 -
\ N,. .
0 : : : : : : Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June DISABLING INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (. LOST-TIME ACCIDENT RATE) This indicator shows the June 1997 Disabling Injury / Illness Frequency Rate and the disabling injury / illness rate for the past 12 months (rolling average). For tne month ofJune 1997 the disabling injury / illness frequency rate was 0.00. For the 12 month period (July 1996 through June 1997) the disabling injury / illness rate was 0.15. There were no disabling injury / illness cases reported for June 1997. The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5. Data Source: Sorensen/Blumenthal (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Bishop Trend: None SEP 25,26 & 27 15 I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . /
1
- Monthly Recordable injurylliness Frequency Rate
- *- Rolling 12 Month Aerage
..4...- FortCalhoun Goal 1 45 . -
l 40-- 15-- 10- - 2.5 --
- j * ' .
2.0 -- - s s
<>......p.......s..
'3 ; ,
j,$ ...4........e... ..e.......&... .4... . ...
. w . . .. . . 4 1.0 . . , , , l Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS 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 June 1997 was 1.58. The recordable injury / illness frequency rate for the past 12 months (July 1996 through June 1997) was 1.64. During the month of Juae 1997, there was 1 recordable injury in which an employee broke the 5th meta carpal on the right hand while opening a door-way during fire brigade training. l There have been a total of 5 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/Blumenthal (Manager / Source) Accountability: Bishop Trend: Needing increased Management Attention SEP 15, 25, 26 & 27 ! 4 i 16
M Contamination Events (Monthly)
--*- Contamination Events (YTD) 100 --
90 -- i l 80 -- l l 70 -- 1 s0 -- l l l 50 -- l 40 -- I 30 -- 20 -- s * '8 - e 10 -- ', _ \ 0 . . Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep O ct Nov Dec i CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS ) , 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA j l ! 1 l This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for l contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for June 1997. l There was 1 contamination event in June 1997. There have been 13 contamination events in 1997 through the end of June 1997. l l
+
Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Gebers l Trend: Needing increased Management Attention SEP 15 & 54 1 i 8 17
, . _ _ . . _ . _ . - . . . .. ._ - . . ._ _ _ _ _ _ ... . = - . _ . _ . . _ . ...-_.=_.~...m _ . < _ . . _ . m PersonnslErrets (Etch Manth)
- + -- Ptsvantable (18-Manth Tetria)
--G-- Pe rsonnel Error (18-Month Totals) 20 --
l J 15 -- . r i 10 -- I
.j 5- m
. .A .
. .A .A .
~
C C C C - 0 ' ' ' ' E, Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs , This indicator depicts 18-month totals for numbers of " Preventable" and " Personnel I Error" LERs. , t The graph shows the 18-month totals for preventable LERs, the 18-month totals for' , Personnel Error LERs, and the Personnel Error totals for each month. The LERs are > trended based on the LER event date as opposed to the LER report date. ; _ NOTE: Due to the way LERs are tracked & reported, this indicator is one month behind. ; In May 1997, there were two events which were subsequently reported as an LER. One , LER was categorized as Preventable and one LER was categorized as Personnel Error 'i for the month of May. The total LERs for the year 1997 is five. The total Personnel Error : LERs for the year 1997 is one. 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. . l Data Source: Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase - Trend: None- SEP 15 18
)
i
4 i i Ctartup m Chutdown m Operations
~o". IndustryAverage Trend 2-e l1.5--
i u.
% 1-
* *""G 0.5- "*"D" - -
e ""G""""D*""" ""*"""*G""""D*"""*D 0 I I I I I I i i i - ! I 1 i 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 94-1 94-2 94 3 94-4 95-1 95-2 95 3 95-4
. Year-Quarter SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory i Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the annual" Performance Indicators 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 I greater than the allowed limits. This rendered the scram input inoperable at certain operating conditions. l 2nd Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuration for the borated water source of the safetyinjection i system was not seismically qualified. This could have resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event. 4th Quarter 1993: 1) During surveillance testing, both PORVs for the LTOP system failed to open during multiple attempts. The failures were a result of differential expansion caused by a loop seal, excessive venting line back pressure, and cracked valve disks; 2) Calibration errors of the offsite power low signal relays could have prevented offsite power from tripping and the EDGs from starting in the required amount of time during a degraded voltage condition; 3) Both AFW pumps were inoperable when one was removed from service for testing and the control switch for the other pump's steam supply valve was out of the auto position.4) Only one train of control room ventilation was placed in recire 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 since the 4th quarter of 1995. Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Trend: None 19
~ l
~
i m Highest Monthly indMdual Exposura mR l C Highest indMdual Exposure Year-to-date rnR l
-+--FCS Annual year-end Goal 1000 mR/indisdual i 1000 e : : : : : : : : : : y 900 -
800 - 700 - 600-500 - - 400-300 - . 200 - E Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE This indicator shows the highest exposure for an individual during the year 1997. For the month of June 1997, an individual accumulated 98 millirem, which was the highest individual exposure for the rnonth. For the year to date, an individual has accumulated a total of 549 milllRem (TLD). The 549 millirem came from ALNOR readings, and in general, are higher than TLD readings. The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station Annual Administrative year-end goal is a maximum of 1,000 millirem from all sources of occupational exposure at FCS. The OPPD limit for the maximum yearly individual radiation exposure is 4,000 millirem / year from all sources of occupational exposure. Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Gebers - Trend: None i 1 20 1
m FCSOtedMatadons(Mored:$
- . FCS Nancted Mdagens(Moredy)
-Fr- FCS OtedMolascns(1244cnh Awesage)
FCS Nancted Mdakms(12h Aserage)
--x- Man IV Otad Mda5cns (12-Mardh Awarage tr Region IV 4 quertHe) 12 --
10 -- : 8-- l 6-- O e $ h ' ' ' 3 l , 4- 0 0 0 0 $ 0 0 0 0 ^ ^ 0 E l l l l l l l l l Cl
, l l
.Ady Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June 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 months behind the Fort Calhoun Station trend. This lag is necessary to compile information on other Region IV plants. The following inspections were completed during June 1997: IER No. Title ; 97-10 Resident Monthly 97-12 Security Program-Use of Vehiclet, l To date, OPPD has received fourteen violations for inspections reports received in 1997.
~
l Level lli Violations 0 Level IV Violations 10 l . Non-Cited Violations 4 Total 14 The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station Goal for this performance indicator is to be at or below the cited violation trend for the top quartile plants in Region IV. Data Source: Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Tills Trend: None 21
i
. m NRC Significint Events ,
-e--- Industry Aver ge Tr:nd l 1 1 l 1-- .
4 l 0.5 -- E 0 o 0 , , , , 92 93 94 50'-1 95-2 95-3 95-4 96-1 96-2 96-3 96-4 Year - Quarter INPO Significant Events (SEs) 3 3 -- - 2 2- - 7.:.- - 9 9 1-- 'i. g 0 0 0 0 g .. 0 0 0 0 ; , : , , , : , l 93 94 95 1 95-2 95-3 95-4 96-1 96-2 96-3 96-4 97 1 Year-Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS NRC SIGNIFICANT EVENTS The foRowing SEs were ident#ied 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 v#M the potential to degrade the reactor coolant pressure boundary. 4th Quarter 1994: A potential accident scenario invoNing a large break LOCA or a main steam line break inside c'ontainment could resultin the inoperability of both control room A.C. units. INPO SIGNIFICANT EVENTS The following SEs have been identified since 2nd Quarter of 1992 by INPO: 2nd Quarter 1992: Intake of transuranics during letdown filter change-out. 3rd Quarter 1992: Safety Valve malfunction (RC-142). 1st Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear Instrumentation Safety Channel D. l 2nd Quarter 1993: Inadequate control of Switchyard activities. l 3rd Quarter 1993: Loss of reactor coolant due to malfunction of Pressurizer Safety Valve. ist Quarter 1994: 1) Unexpected CEA withdrawal. (Event occurred November 13,1993 but was notidentified as an SE until 1st Quarter 1994). ~
- 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: None 22
~. ._ . . . __ _ __ _
l i l l Missed STs Resulting in LERs - 3 -- 2-- i l l l 1 . l o ; : : : : l ; , : : l 96 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l l I i NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS l RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS l 1 I This indicator shows the Number of Missed Surveillance Tests (STs) at FCS. Licensee ; Event Report 97-007, " Failure to Satisfy Surveillance Requirement for Reactor Coolant l Flow," documented one missed surveillance test during June 1997. The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0. , l l l I Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) ! Accountability: Chase /Phelps Trend - None SEP 60 & 61 l l 23
i 1 e 3 i PERFORMANCE i l Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the
- highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that l result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production.
c j l . 1 i j 24 i l } ) (
Net Generation (10,000 MWi) 40 - R2s R84 R81 g43 3E14 g4, 32.82 30.08 30 --
, 24,37 f 1996 g 20 -- ' "
1s.e4 g . 10 - 0 l l l l l l l l Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June STATION NET GENERATION During the month of June 1997, a net total of 344878.4 MWh were generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 16 was 5,418,326.6 MWh. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 17 was 2,151,268.1 MWh at the end of June 1997. 9 Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None 25
~
' MonthlyForced Outag2 Rate
-+- Rolling 12 Month Average
--*- 1997 Fort Calhoun Goal (I A%)
50% -- 45% - - 40% -- 35% -- l 30% -- - 25% --
- 20% --
15% -- A l 6% - ~ t- : : : : : sl
* * * * * "E * * * *
- 0% , , , , , ;
96 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May J,une FORCED OUTAGE RATE 1 The Forced Outage Rate (FOR) for the month of June 1997 was 0.0 %. The forced outage rate for the previous 12 months (July 1996 through June 1997) was 7.31%. The 1997 year-to-date FOR was 12.5% at the end of June 1997. Energy Losses are described in the " Unit Capability Factor" indicator, page 2 of this report. i 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: Needing increased Management Attention 26
M MonthlyUnitCapacityFactor
... ... v.ar eo Ode Unit capackyFactor '
x UnitcapacityFadorforcycle 17
-e- 1ss7 Fcs sami(eswAl 110 % -
100 % --
,,,,,. E . . .. . ... . '""a..........,,
... E ==_ w.__. .- .
...... yy
*' le 17
,n .
M-m- / 10% - . 0% C-18 Jul Aug Sep Oct . %v Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June 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. Unit Capacity Factor = Net Electrical Enerav Generated (MWH) Max. Dependable Capacity (MWe) X Gross Hours in the Reporting Period Cycle 16 Unit Capacity factor was 85.23%. At the end of June 1997, the Cycle 17 Unit Capacity Factor was 70.82%. The Unit Capacity Factor for the last 36 months (July 1994 through June 1997) was 81.5%. The 1997 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is 96.00%. The year-to-date value is 86.6%. Data Source: Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None 27
. - . - . _ - . -. . . -- - . . = . . . _ - . - --- . . - - -- -
~
4 C-"] Monthly EAF
~4 ~ Year-toCate Average Monthly EAF
--*-- 12 Month RoHing Average
- ** - OPPD G ont 110% -
M*4 ' *
- g. .. , 7 ,,,,,,
" t" . s. .. ., i 90*4 -- -
g I os s.
,,,,, 7 2 #
N,,,_... - -# 4 60% - 50% - I
- 1 40% --
. 30% -
1996 RFO . 20% - 10*4 - 0% 06 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to- - date average monthly EAF, the 12 month rolling average, and the OPPD goal. l I The EAF for June 1997 was 97.45 %. The 12 month rolling average (July 1996 through June 1997) was 73.73%. The equivalent availaoility factor for the past three years (July 1994 through June 1997) was 82.98%. The Fort Calhoun Station goal for this indicator is an EAF of 93.00%. Data Source: DietzNandervort/Mikkelsen (Managers / Source) Accountability: Chase Trend: None 28
I i e SafetySystemMustions(INPO DefirWtion)
+ FCS Goal (0)
-+ IndustryUpper 10 Percertile (0)
- 3. i
. I 1 2. . I 1. o l l l l l : .
- l l l l 96 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June i
UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION) There were no WANO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of June 1997. 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 Trend: None 29
l Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) . i '! FCS Goal (0)
--+-- Critical Hours 10 -- 1888 l ppg -- 800
= 'd
-- 700
.5 8 --
-- 600 6- -- 500 ,
l -- 400 3 4--
-- 300 2--
-- 200 U l
fo -- 100 0 l l l l1l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 0 l AMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJ 1 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION) This indicator shows the number of Unplanned Safety System Actuations (SSAs), which includes the High and Low-Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actuations 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. l Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Phelps Trend: Positive - i 30
.. . . . . - . . . . - . . . . . . . . ~ . . ~ . ~ ~-. . . . - . . . . . - - . . . . - . - . . . - -.-.
l
-l M Cross Heat Rate
-*-- Year tocate Gross Heat Rate i
--*-- Fort Calhoun Goal 14.75 -- !
14.25 - 13.75 -- l 13.25 -- 12.75 -- 12.25 -- l m- ! l g 11.75 - )
# 11.25 --
10.75 - 3 1a.a - ,-, em - .
= w._ mn -
- 9.75 -
9.25 W Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jon Feb Mar Apr May June l t i GROSS HEAT RATE 1 l This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) fo: the reporting month, the year-to-date ! GHR, the goals, and the year-end GHR for the previous three years. ! The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,190 BTU /kWh for the month of June , l 1997. The 1997 year-to-date GHR was 10,089 BTU /kWh at the end of the mc h. l 1 i 1 l The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature. In general, the GHR
- l improves 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 i Fahrenheit. ;
The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 10,166 BTU /kWh. Data Source: GuinriSchawe (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Skiles
. Trend: None i !
1 31 i l I. ._ ,__ _ _ _ . . . . - , . - - . -. - . . - - . . . - - -
Thermal Output Fort Calhoun 1496 MW Goal Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1505-1500
.7 ,
1495 1490. l I 14ss . ;
\
1480. 1476
- a a - = = ~ = a.e : ec: es~ eaannx=xn=aa DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during June 1997, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1498 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal. The station operated at a nominal 100% power level until June 18, when the reactor power was reduced to 95% to facilitate scheduled Turbine Control Valve testing and repairs. The testing was satisfactorily completed on June 19.
Data Source: Guinn/Schawe (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Short Trend: None 32
l
-+- Monthly Equipment FOR Equipm ent FORit,000 Critical Hrs. (Rolling 12. Month Interval)
--#- - Fort Calhouri Year-End Goals [0.2) l
, 2-- l j.. l I 'a L 2 I I N _ _M \ I o : Jul Aug Sep Ost Nov Dee Jan Feb W ar Apr M ay June EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS 1 1 The Equipment Forced Outage rate per 1,000 critical hours for the 12 months from July 1,1996, through June 30,1997, was 0.142. The year-to-dale rate per 1,000 critical hours for the months from April 1,1997 through June 30,1997 was 0.259. The equipment forced outage that occurred April 21,1997 was attributed to the rupture of a fourth stage extraction steam pipe. A second outage occurred on May 24 due to a weld crack which caused reactor power to be reduced to 10% while repairs were made on-line. The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20. Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Chase /Phelps ! Trend: None l l l 7 33 l
~
l l CHEMISTRY ACTION LEVELS EXCEEDED anssus Event Dayu -dr- Average Event Days -+--OPPD Umlit
- 3 -- ..
2.5 - a 2- A ^ 0 '.*
- 1.5 -
1-0.5 - a ; a O 1
'P
8 3 E E 8 3 2 E E 2
~ &
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 levelis exceeded. The parameter action levels are delineated in Chemistry procedure CH-AD-0003, " Plant System Chemical Limits and Corrective 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 levei for the current system mode, with the exception of the Steam Generators during Mode 1. > The Steam Generators are considered to have exceeded an action level in Mode 1 when the plant power is greater than 30% and the power is changing less than 5% per day. The number of event days can exceed the number of days in a month since each event is counted separately and there can be multiple events per day. The 1997 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator it, the 12-month average of two event days per month. There is no goal established for the number of event days per individual month. Historical data is used to calc; late 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 were no event days in June. Data Source: Chase / Hamilton (Manager! Source) Accountability: Hamilton l Trend: None ; 34
- i% Hours Out d Umit 13.00 - --+--- OPPD Goal (5%)
11.00 - 9.00 -- 7.00 - E00 -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 1 00 - - 1.00 -
, . l
-1.00 - 4 <
E E h o E ,E $ % Ei-
< @ E m z o u z s z PRIMARY SYSTEM LITHlUM % HOURS OUT OF LIMIT -
1 i The Primary System Lithium Percent Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the hours per l month that the primary system lithium is out of specification. l l The Primary System Lithium Percent Hours Out of Limit was 0.0% for the month of , June 1997. The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 5% hours out of limit. Data Source: Chase / Hamilton (Manager / Source) l . Accountability: Hamilton Trend: None 35 i I
3 ! l ! I i, i 1 4 ! COST ! l Goal: Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner l that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as i an economically viable contribution to OPPD's bottom line. Cost consciousness is exhibited at all i levels of the organization. , l i ! 4 1 i - G
=
36
-*-- Actual -e- Budget --o-- Plan
- l.
- 3.s0 --
J 3.60 - 1 30 -
~
~."% .
s
.,*1s i
2.80 - 2.40 "M l l 2.20 - 1 2.00 g agbbmaqw z < z ' ' < m e z o ggggg CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR - April 1997 The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The Cents Per Kilowatt Hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12-month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved 1996 and 1997 revised budgets. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report. The December 31 amounts are also shown forthe prioryears 1992 throt1h 1996. In addition, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1998 through 2002 for reference. The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1997 Corporate Planning and Budget Redew. The basis for the generation is provided by Nuclear Fuels. . The 12-month rolling average unit price (period of March,1996 through April,1997) averaged above the budget due to 12-month rolling expenses exceeding the budget and the 12 month rolling average (3/96 through 4/97) is 3.24 cents per kilowatt hour. The year-to-date average is trending in a negative direction, o Cents per KWH Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Budget Y-T-D 2.83 2.66 2.58 2.55 2.31 2.50 2.51 2.49 2.48 2.48 2.46 2.45 Actual Y-T-D 2.89 2.60 2.54 2.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 l l Data Source: Lounsberry/ Dent (Manager / Source) Accountability: Lounsberry Trend: Needing Increased Management Attention i 4 37 1
O 1 DIVISION AND . DEPARTMENT . PERFORMANCE INDICATORS - l Goal: Achieve high standards at Fort Calhoun Station resulting in safe, reliable and cost effective power production. e il l 38
l 1 I l m Cctractive MaintsnInce m Preventiva Mtint2nancs
' Ntn-Carrsctive/Pl:nt improvsments Fort Ctthoun Gotl r 800 -- 78 710 sad 742 72s 713 637 48 625 830 f 400 --
0- 1 I l I I l l
-t-4 E & y $ 2 ,5 f E E D E l
4 m z o a m < s l 4 , Non-outage Maintenance Work Document Backlog ) e TotalMNDs Past Completion ! hMD PRICHTY comp:e eo g i E W 60% i 2D 0-Oh ;j8[
f~- -
l' 1-kh i Pruity Prutty Pnaty Pnsty Pnsty 'O' ' 1 2 3 4 5 Not Completed l MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOG l l 1 l l This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Documents remaming open at
- the end of the reporting month. It also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and priority. The 1997 goal for this indicator is 350 non-outage corrective maintenance ImVDs. The cunent backlog of conective MWDs is 360. To ensure that the MWD backlog is worked in a timely manner, non-outage maintenance completion goals have been established as follows
_G2Al Priority 1 Immediate Action 24 hours Priority 2 Urgent 5 days Priority 3 Operational Concerns 21 days
. Priority 4 Routine Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential 180 dr.ys ;
\
l l Data Source: Chase / Johnson (Manager / Source) ! l Accot;ntability: Chase /Faulhaber Trent: Adverse SEP 36 3 39
Ratio of Prsvantiva to Total Mrintsnancs i 90% _ _ Data N/A l j 80 % . N/A l { 60% - _- 50% -- . i j 40% -. '
- 30% -- >
- 20% -- ,
j 10% .. - j 0% : l i i i ,
- : i i .
j Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June i f m Preventive Maintenanco Itorrs Overdue
- c Fort calhoun Goal 3% -- g
~
i 2% -- ! 1% - 0.39 V. 0.39 % 0.10% 0.25 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.56 % 0.56 % 0.20 % 5 , o----o---e.--- - 0% : , , , E i i i E i Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June i l ATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE l l The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total
- completed non-outage maintenance. The ratio was 90% for the month of June 1997, i
l The lower graph shows the percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance items that , j are overdue. During June 1997,413 PM's out of 414 were completed. i j The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance items , j overdue is a maximum of 0.5%. i j Data Source: Chase / Johnson (Manager / Sources) j Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber
- Trend
- None SEP 41 & 44
} 40 i
mNo. Mamtentence items compkt4d +% Idantdisd as Rspsst 700 - '# 00% 600 ~ 526 5.0% 4.0% 400 - 288 3.0% 207
, 179 170 73 2.0%
100 1.0% 0 l l l l
. . 1 i -
- 0. C %
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June m Rework as identified by Craft
-*~ Fort Calhoun Goal (<3%)
8 6% . 4.s. 5 4% .. 3% -- ----+- 0 0 *- + * --* h- ----+----* 3 2 .. .
- 2% -- .... t ., , ,,,, .... - u*
d i i , . i i i 3 i i i i Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWDs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK / REPEAT This graph indicates the percentage of total MWDs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft. This indicator is calculated from the 15th of May though the 15th of June 1997, due to the delay in closing open MWDs at the end of each month. The Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%. A detailed review is conducted of rework items each month to identify generic concerns. Data Source: Faulhaber/ Johnson (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None 41
i iMonthly overtirne (On-Line) *
- ' Y T-D MonthlyAverage (on-Line)
-o- Fort Calhoun "on-Une" Goal (10%)
25.0% -- 21.4% i 20.0% -- 15.0% -- 10.0% -- e + ggg e + + + + e e- - e e I 6.0% 'x 5.0% -- *d _ - . j 1.7% U" ' ' 0.0% . , , ; l l , l H . I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec 1 1 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME ) i The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired maintenance activitier with the allotted resources. The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 21.4% for the month of June 1997. The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 10%. Data Source: Chase / Johnson (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: Needing Increased Management Attention 42
a
~
l Human Performance CRs (Mdntenance) { n -- , . l 18 -- 16 -- 14 -- l 1 -
.{ 12 --
=
1o __ U o 8-- b 6-- 5 5 0 I i l- --i l l l l i Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE) l This indicator shows the number of Condition Reports related to procedural noncompliance incidents assigned to the Maintenance Department. ; Data Source: Faulhaber Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber ' Trend: Positive SEP 15,41 & 44 43
--mH-% PASS OOS -n-% Nor# ASS OOS
. o... %TotC) OOS -+--Totd % OOS Goal 50% -
I 45% - 40% - 35% - 30% . 25% - - l 20% - ; 15% - 10% b : : : : : : : : : : 5% ^ 4;;. x.. .F. 1 ~- y ' 0% x' . . = = = = ' ~.-x x[y - ["= f 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 a e a a a k k b $ $ $ b $ b $ b $ k IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry systern instruments are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator , include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS). At the end of June 1997, the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments were inoperable was 5.22%. The followirq instrument (s) was out of service for the current month:
- 1. % PASS HOURS OUT OF SERVICE - NONE
- 2. % NON-PASS HOURS OUT OF SERVICE - NONE ,
Data Source: Chase /Ostien (Manager / Source ! Accountability: Chase /Skiles Trend: Positive 44
~
m Wast) Produc:d Each Month (Kilograms)
-O~ Fort CimIun MInthly Avstag) Coal (150 kilograms)
Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max. of 1,000 kg) 1000 . 300 - , l 800 -- l 700 - i 1 600 -- 500 - l
)
400 -- 300 -- ! i 200 -- 100 -- 0 ' l Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June l l l l l l HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED ' ! 1 l This indicator shows the total amount of Hazardous Waste Produced by the Fort Calhoun i Station each month, the monthly average goal and the monthly average total for hazardous . waste produced during the last 12 months. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced. During the month of June 1997,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated,154.5 kilograms of halogenated and 0.0 kilograms of other hazardous waste were produced. Hazardous waste is counted based upon a full drum of waste. l The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for hazardous waste produced is a maximum of 150 kilograms. l
- Data Source: Chase /Shubert (Manager /Sourco)
Accountability: Chase / Hamilton ;
- Needing increased Management Attention Trend
- l 45 l
l - i
____...m,_.. _ - _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ - . - _ _ _ . - - - o m Contaminated Radiation Cowolled Area
-*- Fort Calhoun Goal (6%) ,
10% -- e : : : : : : : : : ge/, .. 8% -- . 7% --
- 6% --
6% -- 4% -- l 3% -- 2% -- . 1% -- 0% I I I l l : i I I I I i Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June , CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the Radiologically Controlled Area that is contaminated based on the total square footage. The 1997 monthly non-outage goal was revised to a maximum of 5.0% contaminated RCA in May 1997. At the end of June 1997, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 7.9%. - Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Gebers Trend: Needing increased Management Attention SEP54 46
Poor Raddon Worker Practices
-*-Fort C2oun Goal (<15) 16 -
14 - 12 10 - 8-6- , l 4 2 2 2-Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec i l RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM I l l The Radiological Work' Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor l Radiological Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month. The number of PRWPs which are identified each month should indirectly provide a means , to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological performance. During the month of June 1997, there was 1 PRWP identified. l There have been a total of 5 Poor Radiation Worker Practices in 1997. The Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for PRWPs is a maximum of 15. l l Data Source: Chase / Hamilton (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Gebers 4 Trend: None SEP52 47
O Documents Schedul:d f:r R: view E Documents Reviewed during month j E Documents Overdue
.4 % --
40g -
- _ j 350 --
300 -- I 250 -- 200 -- 150 -- 100 -- 50 -- 0 -- 3 1- E+ E+ t k -
+ k -
+ -
+ -
+ ":
E 1
' i
< & o B 3" ,5 i k m < # 8 v3 z u. m ,4 1997 DOCUMENT REVIEW '
The Document Review indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. The documents reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Operating Manual. During June 1997, there were 153 document reviews scheduled, while 58 reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were 49 document reviews more than 6 months overdue. There was 10 new documents initiated during June 1997. Data Source: Chase /Plath , Accountability: Chase /Skiles Trend: None SEP 46 48
. . - . _ . . _ _ . . . . . _ . ~ . _ _ . . - _ _ . . _ . . _. _- _._, . _. _ _._ . . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . . . ~ . _ _ ~ _ - . _
~
O Systsm Failures O Non-Systam Failures 22 25 -- 22 20 -- i, i, 3, 0 , i Jul Aug Sep Oct N ov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) ! The Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator is depicted in the above graphics display. The graph depicts the total number of loggable/ reportable non-system failures and system failures which occurred during the reporting month. During the month of June 1997, there were 19 loggable/ reportable incidents identified. System failures accounted for 95% of the total failures. Ten (10) of the fourteen (14) non-environmental system failures (71%), involved the security system computer. Although individually logged all 10 incidents, were attributed to a power supply voltage problem in one multiplexer. The power supply voltage problem was resolved after continued troubleshooting by l&C technicians, security personnel, and system engineering. The non-system error occurred when security force personnel failed to conduct a Protected Area patrol within the prescribed time limits. This indicator provides information on security performance for Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Item No. 58. Data Source: Sefick/Woernor Sv';a wi.' Source) , Accountability: Sefick l Trend: Needing Increased Menage.r. ent Attentior. SEP58 i 49 l i
i i Tomp:rery Modificatisna >1-cycla cid (RFO raquirsd far rsmovci) l Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line)
-*-- Fort Calhoun Goals for >1-cycle and >6 months old
- 3 --
2.5 -- 2 a a2 1.5 -- 1 8 ' 8 i .1 0.5 - o / : 7: # #. ?: . : . : _ : . : . : . : . : 3 F & t 8 i W E P =
' O o E <
4 m z , a 2 q TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number of Temporary Modifications (TMs) greater than , one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary l modifications removable 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 requiring an outage for removal. TM 96-014, Reactor Coolant Gas Vent Line Pressure High Alarm was i installed April 22,1996. Repairs for this TM were completed during the 1996 RFO, but the reactor l coolant gas vent line pressure is still high. MR-FC-97-011 was initiated to solve this problem and l currently DEN is developing a planning estimate for this modification. TM 96-018, Equipment Drain Header Soft Rubber Patch. MWO %3468 is ready to work for removal of this TM. MWO 963468 is expected to be completed during the 1998 RFO. At the end of June 1997, there were two (2) TMs installed that were greater than six months old that could be removed on-line. TM 96-022 containment Low Flow Purge, was installed on June 14,1996. ECN 96-450 was initiated to allow this TM to be a permanent installation. ECN 96-450 has been installed and Ops SACd. ECN 96-450 is currently awaiting final SAC. TM 96-022 is expected to be removed by July 15,1997. TM 96-039, Railroad Siding / Corridor 26 door was installed November 1,1996. System Engineering is required to initiate closing documentation for this TM. TM 96-039 is expected to be removed by September 1,1997. l At the end of June 1997, there was a total of 13 TMs in the Fort Calhoun Station. Seven (7) of the 13 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 6 are removable on-line. In 1997, a total of 12 l TMs have been installed. At the end of June 1997, there were two (2) procedural or maintenance , configuration alterations (PMCAsi u special classification of TM) installed using PRC approved l procedures. These PMCAs are controlled by Standing Order O-25. i Data Source: Phelps/ Frank (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/ Core Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 50 l
( . .-- -
- i. j k ~
l l
' Total Modification Packages Open 1
' Fort Cahoun Year-End Goal (68)' .
l so -- r, t v 2r rr l re - -
~ j j 75 -- r<
l l 70 - E e e * +- + + + e
- e- -e e a .
'I 65 l l l l .
, , , l l
{ j 96 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS i This indicator shows the total number of Outstanding Modifications (excluding outstandina modifications which are orooosed to be cancelled). Reporting ' Categorv '9.4 _M M '9.Z M _M Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 ! Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 0 0 0 2 4 6 12 Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 0 0 0 0 17 0 17 Construction Backlog /in. Progress 4 1 11 3 1 0 20 Design Engr. Update Backlog /in Progress _1 _12 12 __Q _Q Q 21 Totals 7- 13 23 6 22 6 77 (outage + online) (0+2) (5+8) (14+9) (2+4) (20+2) (3+3) At the end of June 1997, 24 modification requests have been issued this year and 2 modification requests have been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) has conducted 50 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) has completed 22 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: Needing increased Management Attention i 51 i
~ . ~
., . . . . . . - --- ~ . . - - -. .~- . - .., - _ . . . . - . -.. - . . -.
4 - SD -- 2 E A2 s R e q uirlag E n gin e e rlag Clase cut - N ot in Cisseest . 40 -- M 5E C3 DEN 80 -- - 24 26 i 20 -- q, 1 1s
~
1 10 g 10 -- a , - 0 M at Apr Maf M ar Apr M ay M at Apr M sy M ar Apr M sy 0-3 M enthe 8 6 M onths 612 M onths *12 M onths i i l 0 Engmeering Response E Cla=ar=4 (SE)
- 30-- a .
I 20 -- 14 10 - 3 5 3 o 3 l 3 l 0 ,1 o o I 0 l l : : : : l 3 Pnonty0 F1iorityi Pnority2 Pnonty3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Pnonty6 68 O verdue C le s e e s t " ' , 6' " " 70 EAR 4en -
';;!!r*
" ','!!"" , , . .e ,. . e l
ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineering and System Engineering. The 1997 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS. The Total EAR breakdown is as follows: EARS ope qed during the month 16 EARS closed during the month 13 Total EARS open at the end of the month 131 Data Source: Jaworski/Livingston (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Jaworski Trend: None SEP62 52
115 329
. jog 58 DEN >6 Months 0-3 Mcnths 6 nths 44%
15 Backlogged O Received B Completed 250 - o -: u' .n tn . l 200 - d 150 - , , is tg , t, 100 p' 7 m 3 .+. w. . 50 O S= n as p,su - g =.- e n. n io m g2o ne e -- ..M.'.,,, Jan Feb Mar Apr May June l 250 - l 200 - ........ j \ ... j 150 -
, , , , , , , , .r l
100 - z. v. v. a q m r-j E "Eg = M .... Q v. l
,4 g .., j id e ,, n ., j 0 # A~h'" 3 1-- ' O E '
Jan Feb Mar Apr May .une l l 16 I'I E 0 3 M onths a ll II0 1.. 3-6 M Ofilh 8 33 O
~~
*#; . .g3 ' A .. .~ . . . '~
.e w entn.
Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May S. 14 0 5 M .nthe 1 M- 24% g ,6 M . n ih a
'***W8f*E"^~
150-E' .. W h [" M,'8dh . h k,, 5~ C 0 4:
, Jan Feb Mar Apr May June *
- 7" . * * * ' " *
^
ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source: Jaworski/Livingston (Manager / Source) Ac.,ountability: Jaworski/Phelps ! Trend: None SEP 6 53 1 i
~
89 l P rizrley 1 01 I 78 135 5&6 P rlssty 142 I DC TYPE FC TYPE 19% 22 % ) , 1 < ' s y 256 27' j 5ElTYPE P rionty i$kf C h M% g" % g; G "4{j' g;/ k ' ) u
"" '~
a 54% Total Open ECNs = 469 384 l 5'% Total Open ECNs = 469 0 0E N . Closeent or Drafting Not Cemplein 1 S Maintenance / Construction / Procurement Work NotComplete i O S ystem E ngineering . Response, Confirmation Not t emplete i G ptN .Ingineering Not Complete Pnomy 3&4
- 4
. 14 . ... Is I, ,
s is 3 j an-97 Feb-97 M ar*f f A p>97 M a y-97 jun97 j FacilityChange ECNs Open ! =0- ,,, ,,,
'";"' . P s.'st,
==- a m ,,, ,,, ,,e M 250 - 4, it is l' 150 - se s, as e, so 100 -
50 - ,7 ,a if ,, , 145 4
- ,, ,s 44 46 4s 9 P riority 0 i l l l l 1 3a4 Jan47 Feb47 Mar 47 Apr47 May47 Jun47 57%
Substitute Replacementitem ECNs Open 5 7 80 7s P Hority la2 7s 3g 80 - re 6.4 %
,, , ,g Priority 3 84,l t 70 - s, 12 48.7%
, 60 - 9 ll 4, so go h j j 20 to P riority 5 4 6 se is , j 0 i : i i i I 44.9 % ( Jan Feb Mar Apr May June l Document Change ECNs open ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN 4 i Data Source: Jaworski/Livingston (Manager Scurce) i Accountability: Phelps/Jaworski
; Trend: None GEP 62 i
i
- 54 4
i 4
D Mministr /lva Control Probi:m a Licensed Operator Error B Other Personnel Error
- M Maintenance Problem O Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem E Misc.
3.. . i 2-- l 1 - - - -
~
l 1 , 0 ' I Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May I l r LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN 1 l ! l This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from June 1,1996, through May 31,1997. To be consistent ' i with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicator, this indicator is reported by t.he LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date. l The cause codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. For detailed l 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. l There were two events in May 1997 that resulted in a LER. i l Data Source: Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) ! Accountability: Chase ! I Trend: None 2 55 t.
_ __ ._. . _ _ . . _ ._ _.__m __ .. . _ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ __ O Total Requalification Training Hours a Simulator Training Hours E Non4equalification Training Hours O Number of Exam Failures 35 -. 34 34 32.5 32 30 -- , 25 -- ' 20 -- , is 5.5 15 -- 4 14 14 2 2
~'
8 8 8 8
.5 s s 5-- 4 l
2 2 . 2 0-- -+ l i 1 1 -
+ 1 l Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle 95-6 96-1 96-2 96-3 96-5 96-7 97-1 97-2 97-3 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 trair'.1g 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. Data Source: Conner /Guliani(Manager / Source) Accountability: Conner /Guliani Trend: None SEP 68 56 1
1 1 M SRO Exams Administered , v O SRO Exams Passed l C RO Exams Administered j El RO Exams Passed ) 10 -- 4
)
l I 77 77 77 77 l 1 4 5-- l ll 0000 00 00 00 00 0000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep O ct Nov Dec l LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS - 1997 This indicator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Operator (RO) quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These intemally administered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthlv progress. During the month of June 1997, there were no (SRO) or (RO) training classes in session. Data Source: Conner /Guliani(Manager / Source) Accountability: Conner /Guliani Trend: None
< SEP 68 57
l
- m Rxdy to Coss
- cosed
~*~ Totd CRs
-o-- open i l
/
2500 - 2000- /y'- \ 1500 -
, -+ --a . w>
1000 ; y- - 500 - o . . . . I e t # 8 8 4 8 s E E k k n a a a
? ? ? k k E $ b k A $ $ k k N $
I CONDITION REPORTS BY LEVEL 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 24 19 118 869 22 85 1138 Closed 11 4 94 1003 442 153 1707 258 Condition Reports are classified as READY to L. LOSE.
. l Data Source: Tesar/Burggraf (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir Trend : None 58
- . . . , . . . .- . ~ . . . , _ . . .
. - - . ~ . . . - . . - . - - . _ . . . . . . . . . _ . _ _ _ -
D a Total Outage M WD s g MWDe Ready to Work 700 . . systern see . Erpnesing Parts , s00 - 400 - T Mar 97 Apr 97 May 97 Jun 97 MWD PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 18 REFUELING OUTAGE) This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Maintenance Work Documents (MWDs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 18 Refueling Outage. This graph indicates: Parts Holds - Planning Complete, Awaiting Parts System Engineering Holds - Awaiting System Engineering Input to Plcnning Planner Holds - Maintenance Planner has not completed planning the work package. ECN Hold - Awaiting Substitute Replacement items ECN from DEN. Data Source: Chase / Johnson (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Herman Trend: None SEP 31 59 l l
. . - - . .. .. . . . ._ ~ . - . . . _ . _ . . . . - . - . . . . . . . . . _ . . - . ~ . . . . . l
~
l l 5 Last Month 3 This Month O For Schedule . l l 120 -- 110 -- 100 --
. go _- ,
so -- 3 70 -- I e so -- g so -- m._ # E 30 - O g N g g E= g .. .. , gi g g i i : i : i -
$ s i I E I. 3?
Y Ei E j 3 !! AA E 3 82 E! i 4 JE - 2 H j ! sa 8 E o of j i
;r, i
a 1 m o p l SPECIAL SERVICES ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1998 OUTAGE PROJECTS STATUS REPORT 1-July-97
. I Data Source: Phelps/Sweamgin (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Phelps/Boughter
~
Trend: None SEP 31 60
- .~. .
l e Actwt PRC One . ., aTarget PRC Dale l 9/28/97 . E 8/2997. 7/30/97 . 6/3097. 5/31/97 . , 5/1/97 . a N1/97 . 3/2/97 . 1/31/97 . 1/1/97 : e l
$ i 1
l I PROGRESS OF 1998 REFUELING OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS CYCLE 18 i l This indicator shows the status of Modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 18 Refueling Outage (March 1998). I The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages which were identified prior to March 20,1997, PRC approved by September 15,1997. , 4 May 1997 Modifications added: 0 Deleted = 0 ) l l Data Source: Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)
. Accountability: Gambhir/Jaworski Trend: None SEP31 l
l l j 61
+ Actual PRC Date 3 Target PRC Date ,
notste! - 8928#91 - 7/14ttT - 8/20te? -
$131/07 -
5/1/97 - 49199 7 - 3/399 1 - 113 118 7 - ittis? E 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. The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages PRC approved by their target date. June 1997 Modifications Added = 0 Deleted = 0 Data Source: Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source) Accountability: Gambhir/Jaworski Trend: None SEP31 - 1 i 62 i
No Data Available 1 i P PROGRESS OF 1997 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING 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 March 20,1997 freeze date are FC 97-016 (tornado venting) and FC 97-003 (supplemental cooling for FW-3). No PRC target approval date available, requires planning estimate. The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages PRC approved by their scheduled date. June 1997 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted: 0 , 4 l . Data Source: Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source) Accountability: Gambhir/Jaworski Trend: None SEP33 l 63 I l
-. _ _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ __m._m_- .. . . ..m...-.._,r.mm_.._.....~..., -..-.m._____ . ~ . .. . ._m..,_ .. . . _ _ . _ _ ...._. . . . __.. .. . .....~_;._m.m 4
=
1 4 5 i b f I 4 i i j - ) i e 1 4 i . i 1 ACT ON PLANS ! l . i l 1 1 f 1 i s i 4 i i 1
~
i l m
ACTION PLANS This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this report. Also included are Action Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing
, Increased Management Attention for three (3) consecutive months.
In accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-QP-37, the following performance indicators would
. require action plans based on three (3) consecutive months of performance cited as "Needing increased Management Attention"-
. 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. ' i I I ! 1 4 5 4 s 65 l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS > 1,000 PERFORMANCE DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROftE AREA ,, The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable The personnel contamination events in the clean controlled area. hours and the eshmated unavailable hours for the auxiliary This indicator tracks personnel performance for SEP #15 8 54. j feedwater system for the reporting period divided by the critical l hours for the reporting period multiplied by the number of trains CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA I in the auxiliary feedwater system. The percertage of the Radabon Controlled Area, which includes COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and areas of the
- C/RP building, that is contaminated based on the total square Co8ective radiation exposure is the total extemal whole-body dose footage. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #54.
received by all on-site personnel (including contractors and visitors) during a time period, as measured by the DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT
- thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Collective radiatiori exposure is reportedin units of persorwem. This indicator tracks This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as measured radiological work performance for SEP #54. j frorn computer point XC105 (in thermal megawatts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet portion of the 1495 MW FCS COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPOM (CFAR) daily goal for the reporting month are also shown.
SUMMARY
DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 Demands) The summary of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station with eyihuy higher (1.645 standard deviabons) failure rates than This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for each j the rest of the industry for an eighteen-month time period. emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start demands and j Failures are reported as component (i.e., pumps, motors, main the last 25 load-run demands. ' steam stop valves, control element rnotors, etc.) categories. DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE Failure Cause Categories are: (LOSS TIME ACCIDENT RATE) AgeSiomial Use -thought to be the consequence of expected This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for all utility wear, aging, end-of-life, or normal use . personnel permanently assigned to the station, involving days away from work per 200,000 man hours worked (100 man-years). , Manufacturing Defect - a failure attributable to inadequate This does rxt include contractor personnel. This indicator tracks i assembly or inibal quality of the responsible component or personnel performance for SEP #25,26 & 27. ! system. DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) Engmeermg/ Design - a failure attributable to the inadequate design of the responsible component or system. The Doctsnart Rewsw Indcator shows the number of documents renewed, the number of documents scheduled for review, and the Other Devices - a failure attributable to a failure or number of document revhws that are overdue for the reporting misoperation of another component or system, including rnanth. A documert review is considered overdue if the review is associated devices. not complete within six months of the assigned due date. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #46. Maintenance / Action - resulbng from improper maintenance, lack of maintenance, or personnel errors that occur curing EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM maintenance activibeson the component.. PERFORMANCE Testing Action resulting from improper testing or personnel The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable and . errors that occur during testmg activities, the estimated unavailable hours for the emergency AC power system for the reporting period divided by the number of hours in initial Installation Error . caused by improper initial the reporting period multiplied by the number of trains in the installaton of equipment emergency AC power system. , CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a twelve-month average for the curront year. The basis forthe budget curve is the approved yearly budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report. 66
l i i I , l l l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY Each emergency generator failure that results in the generator being declared inoperable should be counted as one demand and This indicator shows the number of failures that were reported during one failure. Exploratory tests during corrective rnaintenance and the last 20,50, and 100 ernergency diesel generator dernands at the the successful test that follows repair to verify operability should Fort Camoun Station. Mao shown are trigger values which correlate to a hiGh level of confidence that a units diese; generators have ibtained not be counted as demands or failures when the EDG has not a rehabihty of greater than or equal to 95% when the demand failures declamd opera & agah are less than the trigger values. . EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY
- 1) Number of Start Demands: All valid and inadvertent start l demands, including all start-only demands and all start This indcator measures the total unreliability of emergency diesel f l demands that are follomd by load-run demands, whether by generators. in general, unreliability is the ratic of unsuccessful
! automatic or manual inihation. A start-only demand is a operations (starts or load-runs) to the number of valid demands. demand in whch the emergency generator is started, but no Total unreliability is a combination of start unreliability and load-l
- attempt is made to load the generator, run unreliability.
- 2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the ENGINEERING ASS: STANCE REQUEST (EAR) emergency generator system that prevents the generator BREAKDOWN from achieving specified frequency and voltage is classified as a valid start failure. This includes any condition idenhfied This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of the l in the course of maintenance inspections (with the EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineering I emergency generator in standby mode) that definitely would Nuclear and System Engineering. Thic indicator tracks have resulted in a start failure if a demand had occurred. performance for SEP #62.
- 3) Number of Load Run Demands: For a valid load-run ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS I demand to be counted, the load-run attempt must meet one l or more of the following enteria: The number of ECNs that were opened, ECNs that were completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completion by DEN
( A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real for the reporting month. This indcator tracks performance for , automatic or manualinibation. SEP #62. l l \ B) A load-run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN l l as stated in each test's specifications. This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering Change j C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design Engineering Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and Maintenanct The graphs ) is expected to be operated for at least one hour while provide data on ECN Facility Changes open, ECN Substitute
)
i ! toaded with at least 50% of its design load. i Replacement items open, and ECN Document Changes open. Number of Load-Run Failures: A lead-run failure should This indicator tracks performance for SEP #62. 4)' be counted for any reason in wtalch the emergency generator does not pick up load and run as predicted. EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL i l Failures are counted during any valid load-run demands. HOURS
- 5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful ettempts to start or load-run Equipmert forced outages per t ,000 critical hours is the inverse should not be counted as vralid demar;ds or failures when of the mean time between forced outages caused by equipment they can be attributed to any of the following: failures. The mean time is equal to the number of hours the reaclar is critical in a period (1,000 hours) divided by the number A) Spunous trips that would be bypassed in the event of of forced outages caused by equipment faikres in that period.
l e an emergency. EQUIVALENT AVAILABluTY FACTOR I B) Malfuncbon of eqJpment that is not required during an crnergency. Tnis indicator is defined as the ratio of gmss available generation j to gross maximum generation, expressed as a percentage. I Available generabon is the Energy that can be produced if the unit C) Intenbonal termination of a test because of abnormal condshons that would not have resutted in major diesel is operated at toe maximum power level permitted by equipment generator damage or repair. and regulatory limitabons. Maximum generation is the energy that i can be produced by a unit in a given period if operated l D) Mallun@ns or operating errors which would not have continuously at maximum capacity. prevented the emergency generator from being rastarted and brought to load within a few minutes. E) A failure to start because a portion of the starting system was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a successful FORCED OUTAGE RATE start with the starting system in 2ts normal ahgnment. was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time j l - 67 l l l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SERVICE other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from l
, i service befora the end o' the next weekend. Forced events Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are out-of- ,
include start-up failures and events initiated while the unit is in service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling j reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available but not in service). System (PASS). ' FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This irxficator is defined as the steady-state primary coolant 1-131 This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quizzes and activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contnbution and exams that are administered and passed each month. This
- normalized to a common purification rate. Tramp uranium is fuel indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68.
which has been deposited on reactor core internals from previous defectrve fuel or is present on the surface of fuel elements from UCENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING the manufacturing process. Steady state is defined as ' continuous operabon for at least three days at a power level that The total number of hours of training given to each crew during l does not vary more than + or -5% Plants should collect data for each cycle. Also provided are the simulator training hours (which ! this bdicator at a power level above 85%, when possible. Plants are a subset of the total training hours), the number of non- l that did not operate at steady-state power above 85% should REQUALIFICATION trainrng hou's and the number of exam i collect data for this indicator at the highest steady-state power failures. This indicator tracks training performance for level attained during the month. SEP # 68. The density correction factor is the ratio of the specific volume of LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE coolant at the RCS operating temperature (540 degrees F., Vf = BREAKDOWN
- 0.02146) divided by the specific volume of coolant at normal l
letdown tempeiature (120* F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat This indicator shows the number and root cause code for I exchanger, VI = 0.016204), wtiich results in a density correction Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as follows: l factor for FCS equal to 1.32. I
- 1) Adrninistrative Control Problem - Management and GROSS HEAT RATE supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or actMbes (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of adeTfi% l Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal energy in management or supervisory control, incorrect procedures, i British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the reactor to the total etc).
gross electrical energy produced by the generator in kilowatt. hours (KWH). 2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures errors of hw hown by licensed reactor operators HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED dunng plant activities. The total amount (in Nlograms) of non-halogenated hazardous 3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission / commission waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste committed by non-licensed personnel involved in plant produced by FCS each month. activities. HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY 4) Maintenance Problern The intent of this cause code is to SYSTEM PERFORMANCE capture the full range of problems which can be attributed in any way to %dnii=tsc deficiencies in the maintenance The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable functional organization. Activities included in this category hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the high pressure are maintenance, testing, surveillance, calibration and safety injection system for the reporting period divided by the radaation protection. I critical hours for the reporting period multiplied by the number of . trains in the high pressure safety injection system. 5) Design /Constructmn/ Installation / Fabrication Problem - This cause code covers a full range of programmatic INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE -INPO deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, installation, and fabncahon (i.e., loss of control power due to underrated . This indicator is defined as the number of accidents per 200,000 fuse, equipment not qualified for the environment, etc.). man-hours worked for all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station that result in any of the following: 6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece Parts or Environmental-Related Failures) - This code is used for
- 1) One or more days of restricted work (excluGng the day of spurious failures of electronic piece-parts and failures due the accident); to rneteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high
- 2) One or more days away from work (excluding the day of the winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time accident); and failures. Electric components included in this category are
- 3) Fatalities. circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, diodes, resistors, etc.
Contractor personnel are not included for this indicator. 68
1 l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS J LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) number that are ready to work (parts staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork ready for fold use). Also included is the The total number of security incidents for the reporting month number of MWOs that have' been engineering holds (ECNs, depicted in two graphs. This indicator tracks security procedures and other rniscellaneous engineering holds), parts performance for SEP #58. hold, (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Maintenance Work MAINTENANCE OVERTIME , Requests (MWRs) are also shown that have been identifed for the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage and have not yet been converted , The percent of overtime hours compared to normal hours for to MWOs. I rnantenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as contract personnel. NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS A control room equipment defeiency (CRD) is defined as any e component which is operated or contro!Ied from the Control This indicator shows the bacidog of non-outage Maintenance Room, provides kvfr*n or alarm to the Control Room, provides Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. testing capabilities from the Control Room, provides automatic Maintenance classifcations are defined as follows: actions from or to the Control Room, or provides a passive i function for the Control Room and has been identified as Corrective - Repair and restoration of equipment or defoent,l.e., does not perform under all eonditions as designed. :
-rmi-u that have failed or are matfunctioning and are not This definition also applies to the Altemate Shutdown Panels Al- i performing their intended function. 179, Al-185, and Al-212. 1 Preventive - Actions taken to maintain a piece of equipment A plant component which is dercient or hoperable is considered I within design operating conditions, prevent equipment failure, an " Operator Work Around (OWA) lter.
- If rome other action is I and extend ts life and are performed prior to equipment failure. required by an operator to compensatu % condition of the component. Some examples of OWAs are:
Non Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance activities performed to implement station improvements or to 1) The control room level indicator does not work but a local repair non-plant equipment. sight glass can be read by ar' Operator out in the plant; Maintenance Work Priorities are defined as: 2) A defcient pump cannot be repaired because replacement parts require a long lead time for purchase / delivery, thus Emergency - Conditions which significantly degrade station requiring the redundant pump to be operated continuously; safety or availability.
- 3) Special actions are required by an Operator because of immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which equipment design problems. These actions may be signifcantly degrade station reliability. Potential for unit described in Operabons Memorandums, Operator Notes, or shutdown or power reduction. may require changes to Operating Procedures; Operations Concern Equipment deficiencies which hinder 4) Deficient plant equipment that is required to be used during station opeintion. Eniergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Procedures; Esseritial - Routine corrective maintenance on essential I station systems and equipment. 5) System indication that provides critical information during normt.1 or abnormal operations Non-Essential - Routine corrective maintenance on non-essential station systems and equipment.
A Plant improvement - Non-corrective maintenance and plant improvements. NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING This indicator tracks maintenance performance for SEP #36. IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS MAXIMUM INDMDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Licensee Event Reports (LERs) dunng the reporting rnonth. This indicator The total manmum amount of radiation received by an individual tracks missed STs for SEP #60 & 61. person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, and annual basis. OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING This Indicator displays the tetal number of open incident Reports OUTAGE) (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six months old and the number of open significant irs. The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage and the 69
_ i 1 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS OUTSTANDING MOD!FICATIONS The percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities The number of Modfication Requests (MRs) in any state between each month. This percentage is shown for all maintenance theissuance of a Modification Number and the completion of the crafts. Also showa are the number of emergent MWOs. drawing update. Maintenance activtties include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscellaneous activities. This indicator t) Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress. This number tracks Maintenance performence for SEP #33. represents modification requests that have not been plant approved dunng the reporbng month. PERFORMANCE INDICATOR INDEX
- 2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category This rideator ridex is calculated from a weighted combination of includes: eleven performance indicator values, which include the following:
Unit Capability Factor, Unit Capability Loss Factor, HPSI, AFW, A) Modification Requests that are not yet reviewed. Emergency AC Power System, Unplanned Automatic Scrams,
- Collective Radiation Exposure, Fuel Reliability. Thermal B) Modifcabon Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear Performance, Secondary System Chemistry, and Industrial Safety Projects Review Committee (NPRC). Accident Rate.
C) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs Projects Committee (NPC). This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of LER These Modification Reques's may be reviewed several times event classifcahon, a " Preventable LER" is defined as: before they are approved for accomplishment or canceled. Some - of these Modifcation Requests are returned to Engineering for An event for which the root cause is personnel error (i.e., more information, some approved for evaluation, some approved inappropriate action by one or more individuals), inadequate for study, and some approved for planning. Once planning is administrative controls, a design construction, installation, completed and the scope of the work is clemly defined, these installation, fabrication problem (involving work completed by Modificaban Raquests may be approved O ,rxnplishment with or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a maintenance problem a year assigned for construction or %;r : b canceled. All of (attributed to inadequate or improper upkeep / repair of plant these different phases require r4 ca equipment). Also, the cause of the event must have occurred within approxrnately two years of the " Event Date" specified in
- 3) Design Engineering Ba.%... <rogress. Nuclear the LER (e.g., an event for which the cause is attributed 'o a Planning has assigned a year an which construction will be problem with the original design of the plant would not be completed and design work may be in progress. considered preventable).
- 4) Construction Backlog /In Progress. The Construction For purposes of LER event classifcabon, a " Personnel Error" Package has been issued or construction has begun but the LER is defined as follows:
modification has not been accepted by the System Acceptance Committee (SAC). An event for which the root cause is inappropriate action on the part of one or more individuals (as opposed to being attributed
- 5) Design Engineenng Update Backlog /In Progress. PED to a department or a general group) Also, the inappropriate has received the Modification Completion Report but the action must have occurred within approximately two years of drawings have not been updated. the " Event Date" specified in the LER.
The above mentioned outstanding modifcations do not include modifications which are proposed for cancellation. Additionally, each event classified as a " Personnel Error" should also be classified as " Preventable." This indicator trends OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) personnel performance for SEP ftem #15. . This indicator shows the status of the projects which are in the PRIMARY SYSTEM LITHlUM % OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT scope of the Refueling Outage. The percent of hours out of limit are for lithium divided by the total , PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH number of hou 's possible for the month. IDEN11FIED AS REWORK PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLtANCE INCIDENTS The per:ertage of total MWOs completed per month identified as (MAINTENANCE) rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and cralt. Rework is: Any additional work required to correct The number of identified incidents conceming maintenance defciencns discovered during a failed Post Maintenance Test to procedural problems, the number of closed irs related to the use ensure 'he component / system passes subsequent Post of procedures (includes the number of closed irs caused by Maintenance Test. procedural ru wny;.ance), and the number of closed procedural ru wup;,- irs. This indcator trends personnel performance PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE for SEP #15,41 and 44. ACTIVITIES 70
1 l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE MODIFICATION Essential Compressed Air Systems, Essential or Emergency l PLANNING Service Water, Fire Detection or Suppression Systems, I isolation Condenser, Low Temperature Overpressure This indicator shows the status of modJicabons approved for Protechon, Main Steam Line Isolation Valves, Onsite i completion during the Refuehng Outage. Emergency AC & DC Power w/ Distribution, Radiation 1 Monitonng Instrumentation, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor PROGRESS OF 1995 0N4.INE , MODIFICATION PLANNING Core isolaton Cooling System, Reactor Trip System and Instrumentation, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for Instrumentation, Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety
- completion during 1995. Valves, Spent Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ultimate Heat Sink.
RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE
- The number of identified poor radiological work practices INDEX (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks radiological work performance for SEP #52. The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation based on the concentration of key impunties in the secondary side of the RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & plant. These key impurities are the most likely cause of PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE detenoration of the steam generators. Cnteria for calculating the CPI ara.
i The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveillance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of non-outage corrective 1) The plant is at greater than 30 percent power; and maintenance and preventive maintenance completed over the
- reporting penod. The ratio, expressed as a percentage, is 2) the power is changing less than 5% per day. l calculated based on man-hours. Also displayed are the percent
~
of preventive maintenance items in the month that were not The CPI is calculated using the following equation: completed or administratively closed by the scheduled date plus e grace period equal to 25% of the scheduled interval. This CPI = ((sodium /0.79) + (Chionde/1.52) + (Sulfate /1.44) + indicator tracks preventive maintenance activities for SEP #41. (Iron /3.30) + (Copper /0.30)+(Condensate 02/2.90))/6 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNECS CASES FREQUENCY Where: Sodium, sulfate, chloride and condensate dissolved i RATE oxygen are tne monthly average blowdown concentrations in ppb, l iron and copper are monthly time waghted average feedwater The number of injuries requinng more than normal first aid per concentrations in ppb. The denominator for each of the five 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator trends personnel factors is the INPO median value. If the monthly average for a performance for SEP #15,25 and 26. specific parameter is less than the INPO median vakse, the median value is used in the calculation. REPEAT FAILURES SIGNIFICANT EVENTS The number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS) components with more than one failure and the number of Significant events are the events identified by NRC staff through detailed screening and evaluation of operating experience. The screening pro ss includes the daily review and discussion of all NPRDS much with more than two failures for the eighteen- reported operating reactor events, as well as other operational month CFAR period. data such as special tests or construction activities. An event identified from the screening process as a significant event SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual or , potenbal threat to the hea!th and safety of the public was involved. Safety system failures are any events or conditions that could Specific examples of the type of critena are summartzed as prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of :ib r,tures or follows; systems. If a system consists of muttiple redundant ubsystems 1) Degradation of important safety equipment; or trains, failure of all trains constitutes a safety ,vstem failure. Failure of one of two or more trains is not counted as a safety 2) Unexpected plant response to a transient; system failure. The definibon for the indicator parallels NRC reporting requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The 3) Degradation of fuel integrity, primary coolant pressure following is a list of the major safety systems, sub-systems, and boundary, important P:,sociated features; components monitored for this indicator:
- 4) Scram with complication; Accident Monitonng Instrumentation, Auxiliary (and Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Control, 5) Unplanned release of radioactivity; Component Cooling Water System, Con'ainment and Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Systems, Control 6) Operation outside the limits of the Technical Specificatior.s; Room Emergency Ventilation System, Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety Features Instrumentation, 7) Other.
71
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS INPO significant events reported in this indicator are SERs UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR (Significant Event Reports) which inform utillties of significant events and lessons learned identified through the SEE-iN The nat electrical energy generated (MWH) divided by the screening process. pret of maximum dependable capacity (net MWe) times the gross hu in the reporting period expressed as a percent. Net SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE electricali 1ergy generated is the gross electrical output of the
, unit meast red at the output terminals of the turbine generator The dollar value of the spare parts inventory for FCS during the minus ttv aormal station service loads during the gross hours of reporting period. the repding period, expressed in megawatt hours.
4 STAFFING LEVEL UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS The actual statring avel end the authorized staffing level for the Nuclear Operations Division, The Production Engineering This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned automatic
- Dmson, and the Nuclear Services Division. This indicator tracks scrams (RPS logic actuations) that occur per 7,000 hours of perforrnance for SEP #24. critical operation.
STATION NET GENERATION The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying the total number of mplanned automatic reactor scrams in a specific time : The net generation (sum) produced by the FCS during the period by 7,000 hours, then dividing that number by the total l reporting month. number of hours critical in the same time period. The indicator is i further defined as follows: TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS .
- 1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an anticipated part The number of temporary mechanical and electrical of a planned test.
configurations to the plant's systems.
- 2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor by a
- 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electricaljumpers, rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control rods, electncal blocks, mechanical jumpers, or mechanical blocks liquid injechan system, etc.) that is caused by actuation of the which are installed in the plant operating systems and are not reador protecbon system. The signal may have resulted from shown on the latest revision of the P&lD, schematic, exceeding a set point or spurious.
connection, wiring, or flow diagrams.
- 3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused actuation
- 2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveillance of the reactor protection system logic was provided from one Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Procedures, of the sensor's monitonng plant parameters and conditions, Special Procedures or Operating Procedures are not rather than the manual scram switches or, manual turbine trip considered as temporary modifications unless the jumper or switches (or pusMuttons) provided in the main control room.
block remains in place after the test or procedure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or lab instruments are 4) Cribcal means that during the steady-state condition of the not cor.aidered as temporary modifications. reactor prior to the scram, the effective muttiplication (k ,) was essentially equal to one.
- 3) Scaffold is not considered a temporary modification.
Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for which MRs UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR have been submitted will be considered as temporary modifications until final resolution of the MR and the jumper The rabo of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of or block is removed or is permanently recorded on the time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be drawings. This indicator tracks temporary modifications for produced if the unit wers operated continuously at full power SEP #62 and 71. under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, , expressed as a percentage. THERMAL PERFORMANCE UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS - (INPO The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the adjusted + DEFINITION) , actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percentage. This bdicator is defined as the sum of the following safety system UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR actuations: The ratio of the available energy generation over a given time 1) Thr. number of unplanned Emergency Core Cooling System period to the reference energy generation (the energy that could (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an ECCS be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power actuation set point or from a spurious / inadvertent ECCS under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, signal. expressed as a percentage.
- 2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system I actuations that result from a loss of power to a safeguards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation occurs when an j l
72 j l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS actuation set point for a safety system is reached or when a spunous or inadvertent signal is generated (ECCS 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 counted are < actuations of the high pressure injection system, the low pressure injection system, or the safety injection tanks. UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS.(NRC
- DEFINITION)
The rasnber of safety system actuations which include (gnty) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the Low Pressure Safety ,
- Injection System, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of safety system
=r+ =hans irw* rtaa actuuhons when major equipment is operated gns when the logic systems for the above safety systems are challenged '
VIOLATION TREND i r The Irvfr=hw is defined as Fort Calhoun Station Cited Violations and Non-Cited Violations trended over 12 months. Additionally, - Caed Violabons for the top quartile Region IV plant is trended over ! 12 months (lagging the Fort Calhoun Staten trend by 2-3 ; months). It is the Fort Calhoun Station goal to be at or below the cited violation trend for the top quartile Region IV plant. VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indicator also l shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste which is in i temporary storage, the amount of radioactive oil that has been ! shipped off-site for processing, and the volume of solid dry , radoectNe waste which has been shipped off-site for processing. : Low-level sohd radcactive waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, roerts, and evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuciser power plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioacthe
- a weste includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, disposable protedhe clothng, pleetic containers, and any other material to be l th=f-d of at a low-level radioactive waste drsposal site, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms. Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing. This indicator tracks radiological work p iLii, iwe for SEP #54.
e 73
SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX 1 The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators index is to list performance indicators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended. SEP Reference Number 15 Eagg
. 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 >1,000 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 Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements
= implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...".... 15
- Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .. .... . 16 '
SEP Reference Number 31 i
. Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct 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
. Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule -
1996 0n-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 .
. 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
= Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program Document Review ..... . .. .. .. .. . ... .... .. ... . ... .... ...... .. 48 74
$AFETY I2NHANCEMENT PROGRAM lNDEX SEP. Reference Number 52 Eaga e Establish Supervisory. Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 SEP Reference Number'54 , e Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations >1,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Collective Radiation Exposure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 11 Volume of low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. . . . .. 46 SEP Reference Number 58
- Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . . . . ....... . .... . ............ ..,.... 49 SEP Reference Numbers 60 & 61
< Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program e Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests resulting in Licensee Event Reports . .... ........... . 23 SEP Reference Number 62
. Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .... .... 50 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Engineering Change Notice Status ... ... ... ................ ....... ... . ..... 53 Engineering Change Notices Open . . . ....... . .... .... . .. .. ....... . . . 54 SEP Reference Number 68 l
- Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and establish means to monitor Operator Training License Operator Requalification Training . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .. ........... . . 56 l
, License Candidate Exams . . . . ........... .. ..... .. ................. ... . 57 SEP Reference Number 71 , e improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications . . . . . . . .. ...... ............. . ..... .... . ... 50 i
I i 4 i j 75
REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST R. L. Andrews L.T.Kusek G.C. Bishop C. J. Linden (7 Copies) C. E. Boughter S. A. Lindquist C. J. Brunnert B. R. Livingston J. W. Chase E. R. Lounsberry *
'R. G. Conner T. J. Mcivor M.R. Core K A. Miller '
T. R. Dukarski P. A. Mruz M. L. Ellis R. J. Mueiler H. J. Faulhaber R. L. Plott S. K Gambhir W.J.Ponec J. K Gasper D. G. Ried W. G. Gates M. J. Sandhoefner ' S. W. Gebers F. C. Scofield M. J. Guinn H. J. Sefick R. H. Guy R. W. Short , A. L. Hale J. L. Skiles ' B. R. Hansher R. D. Spies (2) K R. Henry K E. Steele J. B. Herman D. E. Spires R.P.Hodgson M. A. Tesar C. K Huang J. J. Tesarek J. K. Kellams J. W. Tills R. L. Jaworski D. R. Trausch J. W. Johnson L. P. Walling ! D.D. Kloock G. R. Williams ! l l 4 76}}