ML20202H170
| ML20202H170 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden, Byron, Braidwood, Quad Cities, Zion, LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1998 |
| From: | Beach A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Kingsley O COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9802200310 | |
| Download: ML20202H170 (180) | |
Text
- - ___-___- - -__ ___-
I, 4
/pm*8e, u
uNnE3 STATES h
NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION 8
HCGION IH 5'
801 WARRENvlLLL ROAD LISLE. LLilNOIS 60532 4351 8e***
February 9,1998 Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley President, Nuclear Generation Group Commonwealth Edison Company A1TN: Regulatory Services Executive Towers West til 1400 Opus Place, Suite 500 Downers Grove,IL 60515 -
SUBJECT:
STATUS MEETING ON THE PERFORMANCE OF COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY'S NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DIVISION
Dear Mr. Kingsley:
This refers to the meeting conducted at the NRC Region lil office in Lisle, Illinois, on January 14,1998. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) Nuclear Generation Group's (NGG) performance as it relates to actions Comed has taken in response to the NRC's January 27,1997,10 CFR 50.54(f)Istter regarding safety performance at Comed's nuclear facilities. Attendees at the meeting are listed in Enclosure 1.
Enck e.ure 2 is a copy of Comed's presentation materials.
The Comed presentation included a discussion of the recent NGG Performance initiatives, Comed 1997 performance through December 1997 and areas of focus, Individual boiling water and pressurized water reactor performance, corrective action program results, and 10 CFR 50.54(f) action item status.
The NGG Pe:formance initiatives were first communicated to the NRC in your letter dated January 5,1998. The initiatives include 13 Strategic Reform initiatives which provide management priorities and processes for the NGG executive team in its leadership of Comed's nuclear program. These initiatives focus on four overarching goals: operational and technical excellence being the primary driver, excellent material condition, organizational alignman.t and workforce engagement being a priority, and effective leadership and management being developed and reinforced. Comed has concluded that implementation of the Strategic Reform initiatives along with the 10 CFR 50.54(f) action items will result in a successful tumaround of the Comed nuclear program and will encompass the programmatic issues identified by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) as described in the briefing materials used by INPO management during March 14,1996, and September 10,1997, presentations to the Comed Board of Directors, a redacted copy of which was provided to the NRC on November 21,1997, in summary, your staff concluded that performance at Dresden is approaching industry norms, a number of issues have been identified at LaSalle which need to be completed prior to restart, and performance at Braidwood and Byron is consistent, with perfom1ance at Braidwood improving. At Quad Cities, several areas were identified requiring increased management attention, including management team safety focus, engineering, the corrective action program, and radiation protection. The Zion Recovery Plan was broadened to address key process i
e 9002200310 900209 PDR W
ADOCK 05000010 PDR
- 0. Kingsley 2-programmatic issues involving teamwork, morale, and a safety conscious work environment.
However, we note that on January 15,1998, Comed announced that Zion will be permanently shut down for economic reasons.
We emphasized that one year after issuance of the 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter, there are significant problems at Quad Cities involving implementation of the maintenance rule, inadequate post fire safe shutdown procedures, and inadequate reactor coolant system inakage testing. Your staff acknowledged that the performance indicators did not reflect these problems, and that while the performance indicators are of valae, they are only part of the equation. Your staff also acknowledged that in conjunction with using the performance indicators to gauge the effectiveness of performance improvement ultiatives, proactive Comed corporate management involvement is necessary to identify problems before they become significant regulatory issues, and that this involvement is one of the keys to preventing cyclical performance, in accordance with Section 7.700 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
If you have any questions regarding this meeting or if our understanding of actions Comed is taking, as discussed above, differs from yours, please contact me at (630) 829 9657.
Sincerely,
/s/ A. Bill Beach A. Bill Beach Regional Administrator Docket Nos. 50-453; 50-457; 50-454r 455;50-010; 50 237;/
A0-249; 50 373r50-374;'
A0 254,50-265; 50-295;
,50 304 '
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. Licensee Presentation See Attached Distribution J
See Previous Concurrences q
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ COMED \\COM01148. SUM To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box C" c Copy without attach / encl *E" = Copy with attach /enci "N" = No copy OFFICE Rlli Rlli NRR Rillfi NAME PPelke/co GGrant RCapra ABpNh DATE 01/ /98 01/ /98 01/ /98 02/ $98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l
l
O. Kingsley and a safety conscious work environment. However, we note that on January 15,1998, Comed announced that Zion will be permanently shut down based on economic reasons.
We emphasized that one year after issuance of the 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter, there are significant problems at Quad Cities involving implementation of the maintenance rule, inadequate post fire shfe shutdown procedures, and inadequate reactor coolant system leakage testing. The performance indicators did not reflect these problems. Although the performance indicators are of value, they are only part of the equation. In order to prevent cyclical performance, proactive Comed corporate management involvement is necessary to identify significant problems before they become issues with the NRC.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice " Part 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Rot m.
If you have any questions regarding this meeting or if our understanding of actions Comed is taking, as discussed above, differs from yours, please contact me at (630) 829-9657, S!ncerely, A. Bill Beach Regional Administratur Docket Nos. 50-456;50-457;50-454; 50-455;50-010; 50-237; 50-249;50-373;50 374; 50-254;50-265; 50-295; 50-304
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. Licensee Presentation See Attached Distribution See Previous Concurrences DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ COMED \\COM01148. SUM To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box "C" = Copy without attach /enci"E" = Copy with attach /enci "N" = No copy OFFICE Rill Rlll NRR Rill n
NAME PPelke GGrant k
RCapra ABeach DATE 01M/98 014///98 01/ /98 01/ /98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY o
O. Kin 0sley '
Indicators are of value, Ony are only part of the equation, in order to prevent cyclical performance, proactive Comed ce,T,eri management involvement is necessary to identWy signi8 cant problems before they become issues with the NRC.
In accordance with Section 2.700 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures, will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
- If you have any questions re0erding this mooting or if our understanding of actions Comed is taking, as discussed above, differs from yours, please contact me at (630) 8299657.
Sincerely, A. Bill Beach Regional Administrator Docket Nos. 50 456;50 457;50 454; 50-455;50 010;50 237; 50 249; 50 373; 50-374; 50-254;30-265; 50-295; 50 304
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. Licensee Presentation See Attached Distribution DOCUMENT NAME: G:COMEDCOM01148. SUM To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box "C" = Copy without attach /enci "E" = Copy with attach /enci "N" = No copy OFFICE Rlli E.
Rill NRR u b
Rill PPelke/ con RCaprk[(b ABeach NAME GGrant DATE 01/'Mf98 01/ /98 01b /98 b+
01/ /98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
O. Kingsley 3-cc w/encis:
M. Wallace, Chief of Staff D. Helwig, Senior Vice President G. Stanley, PWR Vice President J. Perry, BWR Vice President D. Farrar, Regulatory Services Maneger
- 1. Johnson, Licensing Director DCD - Licensing T. Tulon, Braidwood Site Vice President K. Graesser, Byron Site Vice President M. Heffley, Dresden Site Vice President F. Dacimo, LaSalle Site Vice President E. Kraft, Jr., Quad Cities Site Vice President J. Brons, Zion Site Vice President Braidwoor' Station Manager K. Kofron, Byron Station Manager T. Nauman, Dresden Station Manager Unit 1 P. Swafford, Dresden Station Manager Units 2 and 3 T. O'Connor, LaSalle Station Manager D. Cook, Quad Cities Station Manager R. Starkey, Zion Plant Ceneral Manager T. Simpkin, Braidwood Regulatory Assurance Supervisor D. Brindle, Byron Regulatory Assurance Supervisor F. Spangenberg, Dresden Regulatory Assurance Manager P. Bames, LaSalle Regulatory Assurance Supervisor C. Peterson, Quad Cities Regulatory Affairs Manager R. Godley, Zion Regulatory Assurance Supervisor Richard Hubbard Nathan Schloss, Economist, Office of the Attomey General State Liaison Officer State Liaison Officer, Wisconsin Mayor, City of Zion Chairman, Illinois Commerce Commission W. D. Leech, Manager of Nuclear MidAmerican Energy Company W
O. Kingsley
-4 Distributing Docket File w/encls DRP w/encls J. Callan, EDO w/encls PUBLIC IE-01 w/encls Rlli PRR w/encls H. Thompson, OEDO w/encls A. Beach, w/encls SRI LaSalle, Dresden, T. Hiltz, OEDO w/encls CAA1 w/encls (E-mail)
Quad Cities, Zion, S. Collins, NRR w/encls PM, NRR w/encls Braidwood, Byron, F. Miraglia, NRR w/encls RAC1 (E-Mail) w/encls R. Zimmerman, NRR w/encls Rlli Enf. Coord w/encls DRS (2) w/encls T. Martin, NRR w/encls TSS w/encls Deputy RA, w/encls DOCDESK (E mail)
M. Ring, Rill, w/encls M. Jordan, w/encls K. O'Brien, Rill, w/encls J. Gavula, Rill, w/encls J. Grobe, Rlli, w/encls J. Roe, NRR, w/encls G. Dick, NRR, w/encls L. Gerke, OCA wlencls
I ATTENDANCE AT THE JANUARY 14,1998 MEETING BETWEEN THE NRC AND COMED COMED ATTENDEES O. Kingsley, Jr.
President and Chief Nuclear Officer M. Wallace Nuclear Services Senior Vice President D. Sager Vice President, Generation Support S. Perry BWR Vice President H. Stanley PWR Vice President V. Brown Vice President, Human Resources
- 1. Johnson Licensing Director L. Waldinger Nuclear Oversight Manager J. Reynolds NOC-BOD D. Evans NOC Ed Liaison G. Vanderheyden Executive Assistant to VP Generation Support W. Walschot Corrective Actions L. Guthrie Corrective Action Manager T. Broccolo Corporate Assessment Manager K. Hansing Director of Safety Review M. DiPonzio Nuclear Licensing Department D. Jenkins Senior Counsel J.Lewand Licensing Operations NRC ATTENDEES A. Beach Regional Administrator R. Zimmerman Associate Director for Projects, NRR E. Adensam Director, Division of Reactor Projects, NRR R. Capra Director, Project Directorate 111-2, NRR G. Grant Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP), Region til M. Dapas Acting Deputy Director, DRP, Region 111 M.8 ach Operator Licensing Branch, DRS, Region til R. Lanksbury Chief, Projects Branch 5, DRP, Region 111 K. O'Brien Acting Chief, Projects Branch 2, DRP, Region ill M. Ring Chief, Projects Branch 1, DRP, Region lli J. Strasma Public Affairs Officer, Region 111 P. Pelke Reactor Engineer, Projects Branch 5, DRP, Region 111 M. Jordan Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 3, DRP, Region ill G. Dick Licensing Project Manager, NRR OTHER ATTENDEES P. Kendall Reporter, Chicago Tribune D.Tubbs Senior Engineer, MidAmerican Energy B. Tumbull Senior Engineer, MidAmerican Energy J. Stutsman Director - Nuclear Policy, Illir'ois Commerce Commission
EDC10Sure 2 STATUS MEETING ON COMED NUCLEAR PROGRAM PERFORMANCE January 14,1998
AGEkDA Introductory RemarksNuclear Generation Group Initiatives O.D. Kingsley Performance Results H.G. Stanley BWR Results Action Program J.S. Perry PWR Resul,:s & Corrective Action Program H.G. Stanley 50.54(: D Status L.H. Waldinger
s NUCLEAR GENERATION GROUP PERFORMANCE INITIATIVES Oliver D. Kingsley, Jr.
k
NUCLEAR GENERATION GROUP INITIATIVES 13 Strategic Reform Ini:iatives
- Summary Work Plans Developec. anc.
Accountability Assignec. to Key Nuclear Executives 4 Overarching Goals
- Operational and Technical Excellence 1:he Primary Driver
- Quality of Material Condition an Absolute
- Organizational Alignment anc. Work:Porce Engagement A Priority
- Effective Leac.ership and Management Developec and Rein: forced I
1
NUCLEAR GENERATION GROUP INITIATIVES INPO Corporate Issues Enveloped Review 50.54(f}
- Supplemen,:al Response by
?ebruary 17,1997
\\
NGG STRATEGIC REFORM INITIATIVES NGG-1:
Strengthen Performance
- Monitoring and : Management NGG-2:
Upgrade Operations Department Leadership Role In Ensuring Excellent Plant Operations NGG-3:
Ensure Excellence in Plant
- Material Condition NGG-4:
Align and Integrate Resources NGG-5:
Assess Organizational Accountability and Revise Structure NGG-6:
Refine Business :Managemen':
Processes
NGG STRATEGIC REFORM INITIATIVES NGG-7:
Strengthen Regulatory Compliance Processes NGG-8:
Prioritize and. Enhance Execution of Engineering Improvements NGG-9:
Enhance Management Development NGG-10:
Enhance Communications NGG-11:
Enhance Employee Alignment and Involvement NGG-12:
Reinforce Training Programs for Improved Performance NGG-13:
Strengthen Nuclear Safety Oversight 4
1
PERFORMANCE RESULTS H. G. Stanley
SEMMARY OF CO MED 1997 PERFORMANCE l
(THROUGH DECE WBER 1997)
Ilrmldmxxl Byron
[htsden Quad Otics Zion LaSalle OmEd 1997 OmEd 2000 Performance Performance Target
- Target
- Automatic 0
1 1
0 0'"
Of"
~0.7 0
Scrans %hile oltical sarety spiem 0
0 0
1 4
0
~0.5 0
Actuations Ollathe 160 124 224.6 325.1 61.1 161 P-118 P-110 Radiation Fapmu
B-235 B-215 Unit 82.4 %
82.9 %
723 %
60.4%
6.0*44 0%ru 81.8 %
87 %
Capability Factor Uaplaaned 3.0%
5.9%
173 %
17.8'/o 0*44 0'40 6.5%
3%
Opability loss Factor sarcty sptem
.0030
.0037
.0087
.0070
.0N64
.0010f"
.02
.02 iwformance J
ISAR
.2
.43
.11
.1 33 0
.48
.4 (I) thta docs not prmide meaningful comparison to industry performance while the site is in an extended shutdown.
(2) OmEd Perrormance Tarycts art on a per unit twis.
Shaded Area = Imprmement needed against OmEd 1997 Performance Target.
PLANT PERFORMANCE AREAS OF FOCUS (From 50.54(f) Letter)
Keeping Pace with Industry Stanc ards Safe Operations Getting Work Done
- Maintenance
- Engineering Corrective Action Program
ll BOILING WATER REACTORS PERFORMANCE RESULTS J. Stephen Perry
DRESDEN What We Are Doing Well Operations Perfonnance Improved o
i All Time Low Contaminated Floor Space o
Corrective Actions Effective With Management Supporting o
Program What Is Showing Improvement 5 of 7 Industry Indicators Met 1997 Targets o
Radiation Exposure Approaching Median o
Capability Factor o
Unplanned Capability Loss Factor Higher Than Industry But o
Improving Many Human Performance Areas Improving o
Material Condition o
5 Week Planning Process Having Positive Impact on Getting o
Work Done Focus Areas Business Plan Focus o
- Improving Work Procedures
- Unit 1 Radiation Protection Performance Overtime Control Some Human Performance Weaknesses Remaining o
High Number of Personnel Errors Material Condition Weaknesses o
Equipment Problems Still Challenge to Operators o
Design Basis Issues a
Engineering and Maintenance Troubleshooting o
DRESDEN remogooi..;o.i.onoo,s.m C 3: uen,e t;eot a gonsgtasniom.,
c2:
e o
g.
u
__ _.._ _. _. _rerform ce..... _
g g
g.
1 j.
4 b' M::~ ::r" A " "4
~
=
C 11: Engineering Requests Workdown Curve C 8: Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests
"*f;":"
"'2;;"'i
_. a J-
\\
l~I~~
~
__\\
1-j.
j.
b
____ )
- g - ::--
DRESDEN Overall Conclusion Dresc en Approaching Incustry Norms
- Human Per ~onnance, Material Condition, and Engineering Need Continued At1:ention s
I
QUAD CITIES What We Are Doing Well Automatic Scrams o
Industrial Safety Accic ent Rate o.
Out-of-Service Errors o
What Is Showing Improvement L of 7 Inc ustry Inc icators : Met 1997 Targets o
Operations Performance o
- Maintenance o
Material Condition o
Focus Areas
- Management Team Safety Focus o
Improvements Needed in Engineering o
Quad Cities Strategic Engineering Actions Planning Program Management Safety Focus Corrective Action Program Requires Additional o
- Management Attention Repeat Events-High Number of Corrective Action Item Due Date Extensions Radiation Exposure o
16 QUAD CITIES
(
l 4: Unit Capability Factor C 8: Non Out: e Corrective Work Requests
"'$""In','
100 s.
im 90.0 inoo 1000 60.0 soo 600.
3 30.0-s 400 -
~
LAS 00C
{
E l
{
l l
ll jj g
l j
..'i"._^1'
' '"!")'. _f *.'_i ___' '"*' _ U'
..__1_._____
C 15: Repeat Events I 3: Collective Radiation Exposure 140' 500 120 S
100 y ajo o
, m m m=
17 QUAD CITIES Overall Conclusion L
Management Team Safety Focus Lacking Improvements Needed in
=
Engineering to Address Programmatic Weaknesses
- Appendix R
- Maintenance Rule Renewed Emphasis on Safety Focus (Keep an Emphasis on Safety and Do the Right Thing)
i What We Are Doing Well Implementing Restart Plan o
- Extensively Discussed at Monthly Restart Meeting
- NRC 0350 Checklist Received Good Alignment with Restart Plan ISAR o
Operations Workarounds o
Identification of SFPR Issues o
What Is Showing Improvement Operator Standards o
Out-of-Service Errors o
Personnel Errors / Event Free Clock Performance o
Maintenance Rework o
SFPR Backlog Reduction o
Focus Areas Development of Comprehensive Integrated Schedule o
Restart Strategies o-
- Effective Engineering Support High Engineering Request Backlog Plant Material Condition
- Further Improve Human Performance
- Corrective Action Effectiveness Demonstrate We Can Complete Strategies o
19 LASALLE Overall Conclusion Has Identified Issues to Be o
Completed Prior to Restart
- Restart Items Need to Be Resolved Will Not Restart Until Confident o
That Improvements Are Made Which Will Allow Restart
PRESSURIZED WATER REACTORS PERFORMANCE RESULTS H. Gene Stanley
What We Are Doing Well ISAR o
What Is Showing Improvement Repeat Events Reduced From 57 in 1996 o
to 30 in 1997 Decreased Contaminated Floor Space o
Radiation Exposure o
Scope of Zion Recovery. Plan Broadened Employee o
Teamwork, Morale and Safety Conscious Work Environment Operator Performance / Demonstration Phase o
Focus Areas Human Performance / Teamwork o
Operations Performance o
Rework o
FFD Administrative Adherence o
Corrective Action Program o
Safety Conscious Work Environment o
Restart Issues o
Programmatic Enhancements Closing Remaining Technical Issues System Affirmations Department Affirmations Corporate Readiness Review Prior to Restart o
ZION Overall Conclusion Zion Recovery Plan Broadened to Adcress Key Process Programmatic Issues Improvement Noted in Employee Teamwork, Morale and Safety Conscious Work Environment
- Management Attention Continues Will Not Restart Until Confic ent That Improvements Made Will Allow Restar:
BRAIDWOOD What We Are Deing Well Correc:ive Action Program Effective o
with Line : Management Owners: 1ip Operations Performance What Is Showing Improvement 6 of 7 Incus:ry Ind.icators : Met 1997 Targets
- Ma:erial Condition Opera:or Workarounds Out-of-Service Errors Non-outage Work Request Backlog as a Resul': ofImplementing 5 Week Sc:1ecn:e Focus Areas Human Performance L~nplanned LCO Entries Temporary :Mocifica1: ions Con ~iguration Con::rol
BRAIDWOOD C 1: Operator Work Arounds C 8: Non Outage Corrective Work Requests Work Down Curve Workdown Curve m-P"'"""Q I V "'
Performance s
m 1*P' unt 3
_ _m g_
J he f.
d '"
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
~
i e
}
O
.a do w
u.
d un we e a x
- na Q
C 7: Contaminated Floor Space m.
oypdow n Cune Performance 14
- ng a no ___..
7 j m!
_a b_l[ll. +
..ljl.-
0 00 I e.,
_.- ~
BRAIDWOOD Overall Conclusion Compares Well With Industry o
Consistent Per ~ormer and o
Improving Five Week Schedule anc Other o
Programs Improving Maintenance Engineering Supporting Plant
'o Corrective Action Program o
Effective
26 BYRON What We Are Doing Well Five Week Schedule o
Effective Self-Assessmen:
o Engineering Assurance Group o
Correc:ive Action Program o
Low % Con':aminated Floor Space o
What Is Showing Improvement 6 of 7 Indus,:ry Incica: ors Met 1997 o
Targe':s Percent Rework o
Engineering Reques: Bac: dog o
Operator Woriarounds o
Focus Area Human Performance Errors o
-ZSAR S :eam Genera ~or Rep _acemen-o Next Refueling Outage o
C 1: Operator Work Arounds Work C 8: on utage Correcth \\\\'ork Im $h a
_ _ 2 T
~"~
' (-
~
o 3
e a
y
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
a e
a
- Y AN n ""
8" as a ur
._._L^"".."'"'._.."*_
=*
I
~ ~ ~ ~ - ~
~~
o=
.=w C 7: Contaminated Floor Space Workdown Curve am tm
-. ~ - -.
.}
.l l i.
]..
.e. QW
28 BYRON l
Overall Conclusion l
l Overall Consistent Performer o
Compares We~1 with Incustry o
Maintenance anc Engineering l
o
(
Gooc.
1 Self-Assessment Effective o
CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM What is it Telling Us
- Ac. minis:rative Programs Complica':ec.
- Human Performance Pro iems Main ~ y Rule-Basec.
What are We Doing
- Simie Pocke': Aic.
- Scorecarc anc NGG Accoun:abili:y
30 d
I l
50.54(f) STATUS
~
Lon Walcinger l
50.54(f) STATUS Overall 50.54(f) Action Status:
- 341 To:a. Ac" ion I: ems 255 Actions Closed 86 Actions Are Open or Ongoing 9
Y
Closing Remarks
Semanary of St.54(f) ladicator Variances. Nevember Report M
.r ; g. N
,* A%
s 7,T~n
.ZM.t M 11 Auto Scrams dile Critical l-2 Safety System
{' July (1)3 p3 Actuation g ise4sice/M
- t restafArjuer".
I.) ru,Itad Desmewe w
14 Unit Capability Tactor April (l)
)
metwesepsj meannemw l-5 UClf MajilJ 14 Safety 8) stem Aug (DO)(1)
April NI HP)(1)
Performance 89(U) HrX2)
May(Ul HP)(2)
June (U2 HP)(1)
My Ni u')(1) 17 ISAR August (1)
April (1)
September (2)
May (2)
November (1)
C-l Operator July (1)
August (1)
July (1)
Workarounds September (2)
Ausust (2)
C 2 Out of Service Errors hukf C 3 thanan Perfonnance May(1)
April (1)
May(l)
November (1)
November (1)
LERs June (2)
September (1)
CA Temporary April (1)
May(1)
October (1)
June (1)
November (1)
July (1) wr-sha Ausust (1)
August (1)
August (2)
C-5 Failed 13 Pump A valve surveillance.
C4 Ueplanned Estries October (1)
October (1)
October (1) intoISO Novunbar(2)
November (2)
C 7 Percent rioer Space September (1) rw i
C4 Nonaamse June (1)
May(1)
September (1)
Corrective Work Request June (2)
July (3)
Nevernher (1)
C 9 Pacent Rework June (1)
May(1)
April (l)
May(1)
April (l)
July (2)
June (2)
May(2)
Nov(1)
C 10 0utage Corrective Sep(Deleted)
Sep (D-leted)
Sep(Deleted)
Sep(Deleted)
Sep (Deleted)
Sep(Deleted)
Work Requests C Il Esemuuring aa,.-
October (1)
C 12 Engineenna Raeuests Overdue C 13 Corrective Acuan November (1)
November (1) hans C 14 Overdue Cortactive 2nd Qtr. (2) 2nd QLr,(1) 2nd Qtr.(2)
Action henns C 15 Repeat Events April (l)
April (1)
April (1)
November (1)
May (2)
% (1)
C-16 Nanber of PIFs October (1)
October (1)
Oc W (1)
C 17 Overtune Hours Sep(Deleted)
Sep(Deleted)
Sep(Deleted)
Sep (Deleted)
Sep (Deleted)
Sep(Deleted)
C 1a case wetc visist as voeth N' N indicates the consecutive number of smooths that the indicator has been in vanance First Quarter variances are not included on this chart varsumil. doc 1
12/10/97
NOD Pwformance nrdcator Threshold Cetteria NOD Performance andkator Dresden Qua.1 Cities LaSalle Dyron Ikeldwood Zion 4
11 Automatic Screms while Critk.al
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/unft
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/ unit 1_. 2 Safety System Actuations
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/ unit
>1/yr/un_it
~
l.3 Collective Radist6on Exposure 295 360 244.5 145.5 212.5 74.3 14 Unit t; M ""i Factor 67%
73.60 %
N/A 79.30 %
73.30 %
N/A 16 Unplanned Cap. Loss Factor 13.00 %
20%
N/A 4.60 %
5.40%
N/A 14 Safety System Performance 2 re Musey 2 re M usey 2 re M uswy 2re>*evy 2 re M usey 2 re M usey j
per$ormanos pertwmarue penwmnue persormance pwsermance pwtermance l
17 Industrial Safety Accident Rate 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 C.1 Operator Workarounds
$10%a WDC
- 10%4 WDC >10%4WDC
>10%4 WDC >10%4 WDC >10%A WDC w >3 OWAs. w >3 OWAs w >3 OWAs or >3 OWAs or >3 OWAs or >3 OWAs l
C.2 oui ot Se,,ios E,,o,s
>we,
>we,
>wo,
>weer
>we.
,wo, l
C.3 Human Performance LERs 22/ month J2/ month 22/ month 22/ month 22/ month 12/ month C.4 Temporary Modencations
$10%A WDC w t10%AWDC t10%4WDC t10%4 WDC E10%4 WDC tiotaWDC
$3 T Mode or >3 T Mode or 63 T Mode or #3 T Mode w $3 T Mode or *3 T Mode i
l C.6 Failed T.C. Pump & Valve turv's
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month C.4 Lt;'n.d Entries into LCO
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month
>2 Month C.7
% Floor Spect C /_.12-I
>1%a WDC
>1%a WDC
>1%o WDC
>1%a WDC
>1%a WDC
>1%AWDC C.4 Non outage Corrective Work 310%4WDC 310%aWDC t10%aWDC 310%4WDC 310%aWDC 310%aWDC Request C.6 Percent Rework 24%
t4%
24%
24%
24%
t4%
C.10 Outage Corrective Work Request Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted C.11 Engineering Requests 210%AWDC t10%AWDC 210%AWDC E10%AWDC t10%4WDC t10%A WDC, C.12 Engineering Requests Overdue
>5 Month
>5 Month
>$ Month
>$/ Month
>5 Month
>5 Month C.13 Corrective Action items
- /c%A
- te% A
- /G% A
- /c% A
- /m% A
- /c%A C.14 Overdue Corrective Action
>5 Month
>$ Month
>5 Month
>5 Month
>5 Month
>5 Month C.16 Repeat Events
>2/ month
>2/ month
>2/ month
>2/ month
>2/ month
>2/ month C.16 Numtserof PIFs
<160
<160
<160
<100
<160
<160 C.17 Overtime Hours Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted d
C. it Cited NRC Violations Deleted Deleted Deleted
-Deleted Deleted Deleted I
thres2pi.xis
7 1
PerformanceIndicators e
NOD Monthly Performance Indcators Nov:rnber Results
~
F6b Performance indicator Dresden Quad CNes LaSalle
~ byron Braldwood Zaon 1
1 Automatic Scrams while Crit 6 cal I 2 Safety System Actuations
~
l 3 CoNective Radiat6on Exposure 1 4 Unit CapMilty Factor l.4 Unp6anned Cap. Loss Factor I.6 Safety Syst6m Performance 1.?
Industrial Safety Accident Rate
~
C.1 Operator Workarounds C.2 6did Serv 6ce Errors C.3
.E sma.a Performance LERs
~~
=
~
~
C.6 Falled T.S. Pump & Valve Sury.
Un_3'danned Entries into LCO -
C._. 6=
C.7 Per_r.ent Floor Space C.o._nt.aminate..d _
C.6.... -
Non. Outage _ Corrective Work Request C
11.-. E. npineerin. Re. quests..._-_.._._..
h_}2,,' Ejg@@gy5ijkp,@e]., _,
__[].. {] [_]
[_,,.
[]
~
= _. _ _ _ _ _ ~.. _..
O. Md.de~~ 3.r.r.e._c_t.ive ActIo~'n~ltems..--
=.
C
-~
~
~
~ ~ ~ ~
~
d.~i.T
..... M._ _ _
_ =.-. _ -
C 16. N.u. mb_er of PlFs Performance inacator is in varia'nce.
Tiie~nurnbet 6n the red cell inoicates the consecutive number of monEs that the indicator has been in variance.
Threshold has been exceeded for the year.
l
]
l l
l
I1: Automatic Scrains while Critical 1=
oonmose: The rareer or uryww.e e,trwee scrams that occured wh5e the reactor woe er*5 col I-'
(# per enornh) 7--
~ " " " * ~ " " * " ~
6-5--
5 4-- ----------------
o E
E 3--
E1994 TOT D1995 TOT D1996 TOT.
B1997 TOT l
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
BYR 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
I O
ZIN 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
DRS 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
LAS 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
QDC 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 Table displays rnonthly W of scrame. W W W # M *
~
I2: Safety System Actuations imam Deenleort. Manual or su:or9eec ac:ust: ens of the logic or eW of emer certevi En v.,-
p Core Cooling Systems (ECCS) er, h response to a 6--
,,,,, % m.,
-fg eFoterrt (8 permore) 5--
Threshow: More than one serety se actuseen per un#t per year.
Eo 4--
E 3---
22 2--
o.
BRW BYR ZIN DRS 1.AS QDC G1994 TOT D1995 TOT 01996 TOT s1997 TOT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRur 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
BYR 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
ZIN O
O I
O O
O I
O I
O O
DRS 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
LAS 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
ODC 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Table dsplays rnonthly actusbons. Graph deplays yearto date e.
13: Collective Rac[iation Exposure
>=
Debreort: The Total Ef4ctve Dooe Em N "****d W*"_P"""
GOO TNs indestar is -y. ; es e perunatoes.sm totar)(e for me monthy 500-nweenese-r.p or.ctus re.uns exce.o.te ermuel year end exposure geefs wy.
3 on a j
e 400--
$ 300-E
]
o i _.
D1995 U TOT D1996 U TOT s t997 U TOT eUrdYE GW
{ s1994 U TOT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW l.9 a
2.3 5.9 593 14.8 1.6 13 1.1 73 54.1 3.9 BYR I.8 43 2.5 1.4 1.6 2.5 2.0 2.5 1.7 2.2 49.9 ZIN 12.5 5.6 2.9 10.6 6.1 5.6 5.1 2.1 4.0 3.0 2.1 DRS 7.2 7.0 16.0 79.0 62.5 17.9 4.7 53 6.0 7.0 6.0 LAS I4.0 8.0 8.0 9.0 7.5 6.0 6.4 15 3 16.0 25.2 17.9 QDC l 11.1 143 92.2 106.4 35.1 11.0 10.8 5.1
{
9.0 12.0 7.5 Table dsplays monthly exposure. Graph deploys ysar to date exposure
I I4: Unit CapaMlity Factor
==
Deenleort: The esto v.T avadstne energy genersson ove e even sme penw a reerence energy genera 6cn over the come irne pent 4
--_: = a ww c+ =ne enerar 100.0--
a generston termo C...a + reisthe to re seence
- "*.ne com o for e. wa 90.0--
80.0--
TL l_i F.We or occasi pertxtonce fans g
l 3
70.0--
bee-year-end poet Tw.creerson wa seto sen sd LaSeNe foseweg restart of ther urn's U
E 60.0--
E 5
50.0--
I
"'cd * ' " '+ a' ' o ' '"' "*'6* c '"8 e
Decenter wit resuR in urd wai acter behr f
E g
a 40.0--
ye r.ene,cet t
a 30.0--
I I
I I
20.0--
1I II L.0 -
BRW BYR ZIN DRS I.AS QDC 51994 AVE D1995 AVE 01996 AVE e1997 AVE aYE Goef JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW 99.6 99.4 93.9 49.5 51.6 95.0 98.0 94.7 91.8 49.9 66.0 BYR 96.1 713 76.7 98.4 93.2 92.0 95.7 95.7 96.9 69.2 59.0 ZIN 483 25.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DRS 44.4 91.2 91.4 16.7 16.9 55.5 91.6 95.9 96.6 95.6 84.4 i
LAS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 QDC 96.7 91.7 233 20.8 45.8 53.7 L
92.8 90.2 84.8 453 43.4 Table depteys r,ontNy espetnTity Graph disploys year to date espebsity
. =_ _ -
e
~
I 5: Unplanned Capability Loss Factor
~
Deerwoon: Therseoer6.s ewscenes duririg a givet pened of tme to me i eb.. s emergy ge% wy a d as a pen::ent (% for 60.0 -
,,e,,one3
~
M.0 --
7,,,,,,,e n w,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
3 cepete sees we de revereen 5% abeve r
U
. _ W year-end target This erfterion we scvy i
8
- N*"d****"S"********
- 40.0-3 N
3 30.0 -
E U
mE 20.0 I
D M
M E
E E
- Lull u
l BRW BYR Z]N DRS 1AS ODC 31994 AVE D1995 AVE 01996 AVE m1997 AVE sYE Goat l
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP l OCT NOV DEC BRW 0.2 0.2 03 0.I 5.9 1.8 1.8 5.2 1.5 0.1 8.8 BYR 3.8 2.7 6.0 1.6 4.5 8.I I
43 43 3.1 30.9 1.1 ZIN 51.6 74.9 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DRS 55.6 8.6 3.5 33.4 31.8 5.4 8.2 3.9 3.4 4.4 15.1 LAS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 QDC 3.1 7.7 26.6 29.1 17.1 463 7.I 9.5 15.2 17.7 21.5 Table depters mone*y t or:. - d espebikty sosa. Ge depiers year to date value.
l i
I6: Safety System Performance w=:
DetralSon: The sum of Ibe uneredetstees of the I
tains h me safe *y system c5vkfed by be viur@er et runs in the syneen. (Aversoe for the rnene)
I 0.0200 -
l 0.0180-Threshold: Ur.
-. ' ^ -
% g,,,,, y 4_ excesos turo emes me 0.0160- '
g 0.0140- '
3 l
I 0.0120- '
=
2 g
i 0.0100-3 g
t t
I 3
-f B
E a
E E
5 0.0080- -
E E
M 0.0060-i 3
l 0.0040-1 m
l
{
0.0020- '
h l
\\
0.0000.
t 51994 01995 01996 31997YTD f
i t
i JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC f
BRW 0.0040 0.0050 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0080 0.0000 0.0000 0.0090 0.0000 0.0030
(
BYR 0.0017 0.0028 0.0040 0.0033 0.0053 0.0103 0.0042 0.0021 0.0050 0.0012 0.0005 2IN 0.0110 0.0000 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0026 0.0000 DRS 0.0077. - 0.0072 0.0078 0.0000 0.0030 0.0100 0.0051 0.0207 0.0171 0.0000 0.0005 LAS 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0027 0.0000
[
(
QDC 0.0048 0.0160 0.00b0 0.0040 0.0150 0.0220 0.0100 0.0010 0.0010 0.0010 0.0003 Table is moredy WL.-ce. Graph is year to date WL.. rce.
l 1
l i
?l? {kI 5
l 5
N
~
~
ii 3
P
$ 8 0 3 8 8 8 6
- c t
j
,l,it,i -l g 8 8 8 8 8 8 j
g a
h e
=ga 1
m 8 8 8 8 8 8 y
11 ]
)
$ 8 I. 8 8 8 8 8
usuh======
d B 5 ! ! ! !
S 8 I.
R ! $ $ $ $ $
6 M
o L8 8 8 a.8 8 N
E
- {
g
=
i g
a enname==
~
g k $ $ 'a$ $ $ l e
1 N
E 2,
e
~
a g 8 8 88 8 8 3 N
e d d e S e p,_
g g g
N
~_
'm "
g g
g g
h k b b ! ! ! !
s a
s s
s s
3 sinoH-ueW 000'00g Jed stueptooy jo JeqwnN g Q ]
k
wlm-l l
l l
4 NGG 5
PerformanceIndicators 0
1 i
i l
i l
i t
l l
i l
l j
4
C 1: Operator Work Arounds 1~
Defletettort: An equpr9ent or program M-.cy whch requres that ::n operator take non.-standa'd m to W wth procedu-es, desigri FNub.w.t., or Technics!
g SML^e A (8 ope 9ed during the mertth)
(* *' "d d"*'S * **) (t t ' * * *"d E
100-/
of the rnere) 2 Threshold: Greater tnan 10% dewrtion from
= sae e down curve or three oper.cor
.x y
3 80-
~6as (whicheveris greater) cver the 3
Q
'"* " 8 *" " * *"*-
5 60/
d et 08 BRW BYR ZIN DRS t.AS QDC i
01995 YE D1996 YE a1997YTD JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW Cper-:4 0
0 0
1 1
0 1
0 1
l 0
0 C aeed 0
0 2
7 8
9 3
1 4
0 2
BYR Opened 0
0 0
4 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
i Cosed 0
1 6
0 1
2 2
2 2
3 3
ZIN Opened 4
I 3
5 7
2 5
7 I
O O
l Ocsed 0
0 0
0 9
3 I
10 3
2 4
DRS Opened 5
5 0
12 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
I OM 3
0 3
2 6
7 5
3 5
4 0
L.AS Opcscd 0
3 1
6 0
0 0
10 0
0 0
l 00xd I
I O
7 0
0 0
0 2
1 I
QDC Opcacd 9
2 4
2 4
0 0
3 4
2 2
3 4
14 9
3 l
I 00 sed 2
5 3
6 Table displays number of opened and closed OWAs during the month. Graph displays total nwT.t,er of open OWAs.
C 2: Out ofService Errors I
- 2 a'"
o=*===a: m w e or oos ror ps.
16 '
{
that are doorsted as W (tevet 1.2.3 PIFs er SCAO in te new CAP process)(s for the I
14
- 3 4
4 l
T.c _ :. Greater then 5 per year.
[
12-a m 10-m o
l O
8-o y
D1996 TOT E1997 TOT
)
t i
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG h SEP OCT NOV DEC i
I BRW 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
i BYR 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
I O
O I
[
j ZIN I
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
i DU 0
1 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
l LAS 2
0 I
I O
I I
O O
O O
l Qx 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
j j
Tatde esplays number of errors cunng the month Grsph espisy total number of errors for the y=er
12/10/97 C 3: Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Human Performance Errors h-a,wg pw d 18 '
of are hduded h this Ib~
(mmter forthe month)
Threshoht: Greater then er equel to 2 per rnanth Ij e
wm g
12- '
er=dw=d and erran are h venance for the est E 10- '
\\
i 3
E
- ~
0-BRW BYR ZIN DRS LAS QDC G1994 TOT 01995 TOT 01996 TOT E1997 TOT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 2
BYR 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 2
ZIN 0
0 2
1 1
0 0
0 0
0 1
DRS I
O 5
1 2
3 0
1 3
0 0
LAS 0.
0 1
2 0
1 1
0 0
0 QDC 0
0 2
4 1
0 0
0 I
1 O
Table dsplays number of errors per montt Graph deplays totai nurrter of ermrs for tie year.
C 4: Temporary Modifications (T-1dods)
' 2 oiv, 140 !
" " * *
- d "" ",T e T.
weds are planned changes (nc +.-:} to m. form or f.sieson or any operable system, seucare. % #
/
- ciram e=t does not cor*rm to -vasw 120-drawings or oe.r approved deog i hw a (s
/
opened durW e more)(s esesed esing the more) g 100-
%,,,,,,,ndege,em,e3 k
80-!
E Ttweemoes: Greater eien or equat to 1c% oewwwm eum
"**'""*"'""'"d'W~~~"W B
60-over v. sne morevy go.: on e. or*down cun g
40-
~
v.a.n -
/
er d.ood m h e tw e. nest en=.
20 A
0 BRW BYR ZIN DRS LAS QDC E1997 YTD JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN J11L AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW Opened 2
1 1
17 5
0 I
I 6
8 2
Gosed 2
2 4
14 7
2 I
I 3
11 2
BYR Opened 1
3 2
1 5
1
's 4
2 10 4
Gosed 0
I 4
0 1
2 1
3 1
10 2
ZIN Opened 2
2 4
3 4
4 I
5 1
4 0
Gosed 0
1 3
5 0
0 0
1 2
5 5
DRS Opened 2
1 20 8
3 0
2 3
5 1
1 2
Cosed 1
1 0
4 21 6
3 I
I 6
2 LAS Opened 4
7 4
21 8
14 16 8
10 25 19 Gosed 5
5 5
19 7
15 9
9 11 22 11 QDC Opened 5
3 19 IS 32 0
1 3
3 3
I Gosed 5
.2 8
20 43 14 2
5 1
5 1
Table dspisys number of T-Mods opened and closed dM e monen Graph despisys the totai number of open T-Mods.
ee' mmw C 5: Failed Technical. Specification Pump and Valve Surveillances t
Och Therumberof TectrucerW,.
40-(Ts). pump and vis.es. inen, ens e. service T seng (tsT).wNch do not meet the TS er IST survesence
=
35- /!
- ~-
" M *""*8 N d f
I
- = entw ihe more) 30-9,,
=: = - -
E8
/
7 g 20 -
%2 u. 5 15 -
O j
10 /
z 5/
51997 TOT l
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW 0
1 4
5 2
1 0
0 7
2 0
j BYR 0
2 I
I I
I I
I I
O I
ZIN 2
6 I
I 1
6 I
I 6
0 1
DRS 0
I l
0 11 4
4 I
I 2
0 I
LAS I
O O
2 0
I I
2 1
2 I
QDC 2
I I4 7
4 3
6 0
0 1
2 0
Table duplays number of fatures per monet Graph esplays totsi number of fetures per year.
j
S C 6: UnplannedEntries into Limiting Conditionsfor 12/10/97 Operation (LCOs)
C'-T~"""*"d*"""'"""""""
80-e 7 day or k.es requimi shu&am LCO met was not
-.c
- pommed. (e dums me neag 70-
.E
,E 6 0 -
N: Greer hn 2 pw moret oOM i
=
"'"*"d***""'"'"********""
E 40 eme.
a S
3 30-2 y20-1 10-BRW BYR ZM DR3 f.AS QDC E1997 TOT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC PRW 5
3 2
4 8
8 6
6 8
4 3
BYR 2
2 4
3 17 11 4
7 7
12 3
ZIN 14 8
1 0 -
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 DRS 1
2 5
2 1-0 2
3 0
3 I
LAS I
2 3
2 3
5 9
0 1
0 0
QDC 2
2 2
2 1
2 2
2 1
1 l
2 Table espisys number of entnes pe monet Graph deplers tetsi entnes for the year.
C 7: Percent Floor Space Contaminated 1=
.p.e. emi.cmmr -w.e a 1000 ermnoo em2 g
eeudingwonr=seson.re.e: e d
.cc s.m cc w.re vama,pms and nos e v e for 0.==: wort. cs at end 10.00- '
ofmore)
' Threshoht: Greater then 1% above arte 1
- '*8'""***
8.00-c E
ti.00 -(
I l
4.00-2.00-0.00-BRW BYR ZIN DRS LAS QOC 1
O1994 YE 01995YE D1996 YE E1997YTD l
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW 0.8 0.6 1.8 2.7 2.0 1.7 0.7 1.4 29 3.0 1.7 i
BYR 1.0 2.2 1.5 1.5 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.0 1.1 2.4 j
ZIN 10.6 9.8 8.8 73 5.8 43 3.9 3.2 3.2 3.6 33 DRS 11.1 143 173 16.4 15.5 12.2 10.9 9.7 9.0 7.8 7.2 LAS 22.9 18.7 13.2 10.9 9.9 9.4 8.9 7.5 5.7 4.6 3.4 2.9 5.6 5.9 2.5 2.7 QDC 3.6 3.6 17.0 16.4 13 2 3.0 l
T s. eispi.y. morety e.e or.pn sept.y. current cent mc.e.e noor.p.e. s cs oe.
C 8: Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests
' 2'n o'9'
~
4000 /
Definition: The rrimber of correenvc maintenance vrork request tasks inclu@ng
- d'd ""d *C'"""''5 ' d ""
I 3500 i: ~-
outage and for power block equi aent and t
E structures. Correc5ve maintenance is the repair g
3000 M
and amic, a or eqement nr components tr at (J m
.... f have faBed or are malfuin.L-g (8 opened g,j 2500-during the monm) (* closed during the mone)
Sg (total # at the end of the month) 8 g 2000 E-Threshold: Greater than or equal to 10%
pm
,g 1500
?_
g,,,,,,,n,,,,,,,,3,,3,o,,,x cy,,,.
z o
3 1000 j
Variance:
.o E
A Byron is in venance for the first time this fronth Z
0' BRW BYR ZIN DRS LAS QDC 01996 YE D1997 Y1D JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BWD Opened 572 674 711 504 546 Ii18 284 1002 1250 516 1254 Closed 430 804 731 933 994 1208 335 1033 1204 649
!245 BYR Opened 495 578 473 569 565 446 408 1213 1519 1726 1482 Closed 469 505 523 529 452 648 493 1341 1696 1697 1504
_ ZIN Opened 3099 1956 1320 1105 967 773 735 661 636 424 463 Closed 1030 1342 1061 1395 1270 1366 1141 791 611 662 494 DRS Opened 240 261 430 427 354 302 353 261 779 524 462 Closed 217 238 309 184 194 218 352 531 829
, 674 469 LAS Opened 774 877 619 750 479 648 252 938 1183 1250 279 Closed 398 259 189 318 360 203 195 224 950 1286 412 QDC Opencd 2661 1694 1.185 1201 913 553 542 587 616 864 491 Closed 2064 1476 1490
-1283 1011 550 577 696 701 767 489 Table displays number of opened and closed Non-outage Corrective Work Requests per month. Graph displays total number open at me end of the current month.
l l
\\
C 9: Percent Rework
' 2 c'",
Dermition: The performance of any physecal l
- '""*"*******"i*""'*'""'"'****'
/
money vdthin a twelve month penod The total rework j
4*0 dvided by the total number u 4'.2 work in the power i
bl ek met h gester man EWCS stahn D and not 3.5 -
equal to status 95. (% for the 3 preceding months wf:h 1 month in arrears) th,,, % : ore e,in n o,equ,to 4 1 3.0 vari.ne.:
2.5 -
Zion is in vertence for the first time this month.
E E 2.0 '
1.5 l
0.5 -
~,
l 0.0 -
BRW BYR ZIN DRS 1.AS QDC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BWD 2.5 2.8 2.7 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.9 3.9 2.8 BYR 4.0 4.6 4.0 3.8 3.4 3.4 3.1 3.6 3.9 3.7 3.2 ZIN 9.5 10.9 10.5 6.2 3.5 7.1 2.4 2.8 33 3.9 4.0 DRS 4.2 4.7 3.6 3.4 3.5 5.2 5.6 33 2.7 2.9 25 LAS 5.8 3.6 4.8 4.5 4.6 3.7 4.0 3.9 2.9 2.7 2.7 QDC 2.3 1.2 0.8 1.7 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.7 1.9 2.2 Graph and table display current rework rate t
m C 11: EngineeringRequests
'2'1 = >
Definluon: Engmeering requests wNch are
- '8"*d
- Pd r '"' d ^ 8 ^ *"d 8 1800-priorny Engineedng Requests are 9ed to plant 5
/
neesiones and signJicant issues. (s opened g 16CD o,nn,,,,,n 3, w,,gn,
.on.)
a f
(totes e atme end orme monm)
= 1400-m nn nois: orenerm n um-tromme
.$1200 E
/
.s 1000-cm f
800 o
600-
/
n; 400-n l3RW BYR_
ZIN DRS LAS 003 51997 YTD JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BWD Opened 86 77 113 74 74 113 45 48 26 53 32 Closed 85 69 94 78 83 90 70 63 67 41 31 BYR Opened 60 88 54 78 95 56 92 29 14 32 16 Closed 15 23 44 70 89 67 50 100 66 60 15 ZIN Opened 70 60 49 52 31 28 98 71 51 86 52 Closed 47 47 14 71 50 41 77 87 99 141 8'.
DRS Opened 57 47 58 109 102 68 26 26 70 64 42 I
Closed 78 71 116 104 97 81 59 45
- 53 91 54 LAS Opened 49 100 139 303 260 103 219 90 133 135 165 Closed 15 20 18 57 80 38 64 122 159 201 177 QDC Opened 119 114 198 133 71 55 30 56.
85 98 32 Closed 106 102 180 182 95
- 58 59 64 105 82 51 Graph displeys total number open at the end of the current month. Table displays number which were opened and closed duririg the month.
.u_____.__
C 12: Engineering Requests Overdue
'n'om DeOnipon: The number of overdue ensp.m
,/
requests which are neoigned a priorty level of A or
- 8. A and B priority Engineering Requests are led to plant miestones and signHicant leeues. (8 overdue during the month) (# remaining overdue at the end of the month) a e
,. /
Threshold: Greats than 5 per month E
's Ea, S
2-E l
^
l' so o
5 1 n!z 0-BRW BYR Z^1 DRS LAS QDC l
3 1
9 4
6 4
i BWD 4
3 5
1 4
2' O
O BYR 5
3 6
4 0
0 0
0 ZN 33 42 72 31 28 4
0 4
11 18 13 QDC 0
12 12 12 9
5 12
.4 6
- = No Data Avatable. Graph displays total numbee currently overdue. Table deplays number of ERs which went overdue during the month.
C 13: Corrective ActionJtems
' o'9, Definition:The twmber or coi-ecere ecfkm hee from
/
600 NOve, PfFe, LERs and CARS that have been opened and e
closed per month, and the total open Reme per moret.
E This includes NTS teme with a Doc Type = 100.180 E 500
""'"""'"'**"'")
C
.9 N 400 Dmhold: A 23 MsDon highe orlows man the site's previous sht moi.th romng average.
j 300 y,,,,,,,,.
i ound ase end zien are in variance for the erst 200 E
4 month.
f100 h!I O
E31997 Bacidog l
l JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW Opened 68 47 83 67 104 134 52 41 59 73 72 Closed 68 45 78 126 56 58 173 53 67 64 53 BYR Opened 111 32 74-82 89 52 110 221 33 44 57 Closed 34 30 44 46 52 61 63 63 53 76 62 ZIN Opened 33 29 62 49 37 87 35 151 103 94 125 Closed 60 29 38 56 54 59 71 92 91 82 84 DRS Opened 236 260 129 114 116 149 92 68 54 139 70 Closed 167 239 187 100 132 167 156 124 97 115 107 LAS Opened 96 42 III 82 50 39 72 58 56 ~
43 45 Closed 60 52 44 35 47 72 52 49 56 64 59 QDC Opened
^ 53 56 30 123 51 29 35 39 29 48 129 Closed 80 49 41 69 58 46 31 56
~37 47 27 Graph dsplay total number of open corrective actions at the end of the current month. Table displays number which were opened and closed during the month.
C 14: Overdue Corrective Actions
^1"1=
Hefinition:The entreer et cert,ceve ocean nome resumns from NOVs, PfFe, LERe and CARS that wert 250 /
%%%%3%mm wah a Dor. Type = 100,180,181,200,230, and 315.
(Tetal8 durtne the moe) 8 200- l Threshold: Greater than or equal to 5 per l
~~
/
i 3 150-N 2 100 5
2 B
~-
g 50 A
0 BRW BYR 7tN NRM t.AS QDC D 1996 TOT E1997 TOT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW During i
1 5
3 1
0 4
3 7
4 4
2 2
0 0
1 0
1 0
0 End BYR Dudng 5
1 2
1 0
9 3
0 6
0 0
End 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
ZIN During 53 48 41 37 24 2
4 3
0 16 14 End 12 9
12 4
0 1
1 1
0 5
1 DRS During 2-0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
End 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
' 5 7
8 1
0 1
0 0
LAS During 79 113 3
3 1
1 0
0 0
End QDC During 14 9
14 21 6
0 0
0 4
0 0
End 0
0 1
3 3
0 0
0 4
0 0
- = No Data Ava#able. Graph is total number of overdue corrective actiore. Table displays overdue during the month and number sW overdue at end of month.
^
C 15: RepeatEvents
'2 ~
pennmon:The ramen or.wnee tw ocewr.d m ee pow more adh compMod md came mwangenen reporte. We are.
A samser m netwo no everse that ocewmd b me post 24 mores that have one or more er the emme root 140/
- # d *
- p-==*)
120-
==**s: orean een - e m 2,= more.
M va*a**:
5 100-E E
erskfwood is in variance for em Arzt month.
5 80- '
e x
o 60 q
l E
E 5
40- '
z E
0d BRW BYR ZIN DRS LAS QDC 01996 TOT 51997 TOT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW I
I 3
3 0
1 1
2 2
0 2
BYR 1
0 2
1 0
0 1
0 1
0 0
ZIN 3
4 4
3 10 1
0 2
0 4
0 DRS I
2 6
1 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
LAS I
i 1
3 0
1 I
I 1
0 I
QDC 6
3 I
i 1
1 0
1 1
0 1
Graph displays total number of repeat events. Table displays number of repeat events per month.
C 16: Number ofProblem Identification Forms (PIFs) 12/10/97 Written Deenteon: The nurrber of PIFs wntten by me orte.
8000 '
Threshood:on m e wth.n iso err..
7000-
, 6000-5 y 5000-0-
4000-c 3000-J 2000-1000- '
d != -
w 0-i BRW BYR ZIN DRS LAS QDC G1994 TOT 01995 TOT 01996 TOT s1997 TOT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BRW 354 331 487 550 449 382 542 392 473 793 339 BYR 283 475 453 359 315 335 370 333 371 527 628 ZIN 546 568 480 552 501 487 495 503 519 525 459 746 858 892 1183 730 597 518 566 700 609 471 DRS LAS 653 904 867 554 436 6%
573 668 768 729 507 QDC 283 289 672 842 434 249 275 307 329 512 411 Graph dsplays total number of PIFs written for the year. Table deplays monthly P!F @-. Gen rate.
U Station 4
k WorkDown Curves 4
A
12/10/97 C 1: Operator Work Arounds Work Down Curve - Braidwood
=
_ _.r n
~
deficiency which respAres that an operaler take E
R nometendent seson to comply with procedwen.
80 -- g fg o, ign - ;-_'. A or Technicas M
!j speemicamens. p opened ents the month) y caused aning the more) (totes s at the end E
Hg 3
, 70 9
l %-
at the month) i J
B.
4:
l nee.h e o, rin.o
- =
=
1 n,
ihe e-n _ o,m o,e,.to, g;
g 80
- k.-)
[ j-y workarounds Nis grooter) w the
- W W "" 'h' ""'*8'"" *"
1j f
j g
g so
- g j
[- g e
a o
a l
S
[ ]
j hk w
jx
- 3 5
i ii z,
=
n JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
12/10/97 C 4: Temporary Modi ications (T-Mods - Braidwood Definlllon: Thetotalnumberof terriporaryT. Mode. T.
i rr Y"
Mode are plumed changes to fR. form or funceen of any operatile system, struchre, componard or
'?
- M:
E circut thd does not conlbrm to approved design drawings 7
,o 25 - --!.<:i-,,,,
T or other appreved design documerde. P opened during the lf-::
month) (8 closed during the mordh)(total s at the end of ro.:w.:
j e
E rei rww m
.y
. s.
tye mordh) v-v.
20
- -q
Threshold: Greater then or squel to 10% devengon from workdown ca.sve or three T. Mode ^. M. -le greater)
, i..
over the see mordhly goal on the warhoown curve.
,y,.
l'
- q::
.. i,
- %%~
i-i 3...
s.
.v s<
v
- n. 1
--,.v,.-,s,v-. -.- :
v.-v. -
.'. -,<~
- v. -
g
. v.
s-p y
.=
uy
. s..,
,y
,y.,
v..,
l 3.,..
,.,y v.
' s.
e
,... --.v -.s.-A.,v -. '.
10 --..
- 3..,-
,y
-s.-.
,s.
s
,y..
.,y
,s...,
,s.y
,. y g.,
,s,g..
,gg,
,y
,.f.,.
s..<,
.v,.,.
,.v 5-- :
,q:::-:< :.-.: : -::.::-: >:
,..y
,.,y
,3..,
,y gy, 3..,
/,
,y,
,.,s.,
,.7,,
.,y, y,,,
.,y.,
,y, 0
- t "*-
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Actus'
+ Goal
12/1087 C ~: Contaminated Floor Space Workdown Curve - Braidwood vi 4 00 DeAnNiest: The percerCape of me piert floor spoos that is cordemheted E 1000 $mf100 em2 aeduergi Ngh redetern areas wth 3 50 W eccess. M areas,6 pee and eruse reedtwey used for contamineled userk.M st end et enerdh) 3M l
I 1
- (:
Threelteed: Greater tien 1% stove ese poet. 3 m
=
e 4.',-
L 2.50 I
>::t tt:
/
t
.y:.
- t:
Y 1:5 s 2m
,l g
,.t.
-.jg
~
g a-
- 2.:
'--:i.3:
- i$q gj
[
m m
(h,. -
t' l,
1.50
- - t:::
r,
g.;
- s.):
t:::
.tt:
4.v:::
m
.n
- d..
l..
y-
- w
.v 1.00 J
. b:
- -3+p:
m.
- v <
la<
.(;.;
y,,
,y
- tt:
m
>:t:-
- r
- q:::
l2::
m
- 2l g
- %%i n:
!$3 53.
3.
?
25.
@Si-.:-:-: -
- u-w
. : - -u.
O.50 -
.:u.
.v w
y.-
v w
..v w
y.
s.
.w O.N F.t:',
0.9
.+
l4:<
- 4
.v
'I*
I II'
-:v
,v -
s.
,w I I'
.w
}I
12/1067 C 8: Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests Workdown Curve - Braidwoo'd 3000 E--
The nurrear et corrousse meNonence wertt request teshe. Inteueg doyeded and seesn W Det are pers -
seesgo and Isr power beseft equ4pmere and 2500---{
stuiswee. canoessemansnanceinemrepeer and meesresen et e,dpmere er esmponarde met
. s, g
hea mand er em ne88=userdns. y sp.md i:
- (:::.
I".:
- ?
dwing Ste msnm) p cdused dutig Wie more$
- iS.i
<?.:
'. i.,'
pass e at swand orsemereht 2000-- :i3: - :i:3!
- ?
- %?
m i
T i
Throelteld: Greater ther' w equd to 10%
33i
=
i desessen tem enestashed weedsen eurve.
,.,y
- ?
1500 -
- :n:- :: -
c;.: -c:
.)
- M:
3
- R..:
- M:.
- ?..
- 0 l-
$.3:
$.3.:
.A. %' :
- m. %
- a v
m<
,.y u
- R:
- e
,w
- %y T:. >.,
g
)
- gj g
1000
- 0 v
..v
.w
.. ?
'i'i j$,.$.:
- ?
- t?
- t.?
- '?
,P.
r
,%v l
l b
.v
.w l
- s.$;
- b?
jR:
1
- R:
..+
.w
,w
,s.l.
- R+:
- M:
,w
-v
- .y:-
..R4
- R:
!:i?
ll a
ll
- 33s4
- n:
a:
- l 9
li 500-- :
- n:
,s :
l,t
.t
- M:
- n:
- a:
a:
- .<5:
l l<
i si lli:
- -10
$is a:
85
- ($
,sy
.v
..v
.sy
$j;j
- R:
- <?
- M:
t.
- %d c?
.:1
- M:
- 2<:
0 inna ran aos naav s aa se An un acer tv v aarm DEC
- Aclust
w,om C 11: Engineering Requests Workdown Curve - Braidwood 600 L^-
Enginsonne e whee air senered a petwey level er A er s. A and a pnenty
$2:
Enginsedrg W em 9ed to plert ensaatenes r
m l
]
and misrelienne w p opened dwing the F
i
,."A.
, $::v:
w.
tU$
A:.-
lUs
- ?:
merise y caused dung me mereh) pseer e et the p:. -
- p:
andorthemenes w,
s
,w
- .. s 500-3:.:.
n:
v:
R.v::.,
- n..:
Jtv
- .
- s:
,v.-
s bi:i'
.s-
?i:I
?>:
S>!
Ril l
l L ^ ^ ^ " *'" M 8'd'aori nern the i:
l i
l 8
!!:l l,.l, l
es m etdesine m.-
5:.5.'
s%.<
SiO 9:
.i y:{
')
sy
.v k.v-g;
,4 RD
,,l
- j j
v
~
- 51 5:::
l, t,
l l
l l
400
_:R.ve.
t.g
- s<. :
ll s i
- o:
s&:
'l
,l v
.s <
ll ll ll t,
,5:
l
- .l i
.;ll
- +:.
l ll l
l
-(l p l RD l l e
R::
g:-:
py s
,. y
- S$- 95
>:U l
l l l sl!
N R%
300--:5::
A::
9%
- ?$
AR:
l ll
>ll l
tg'
?gg:
l l
ll ll sn l
Av SD l!l l
- = l
..v 10.:s:
2.4
- U, S.
li.$
l ll l' >
l
.A.,
R:::
n:
g-
: $n E$$ [$E: !l !! [ ll l(l l I. l l l l l , l. o' l l
- ll tW:
R::: $4
- U::
i s,! p:. .n: l, lll l i: j ,' :v !:58.- si:::
- n:
e .v l,l tg
- A:
2::: .~ , + - l l 3 e ja:- sji ll4@ s ii 1"--t}}-si R l 'l l lll P 24 !Is l lv R)] l R$
- .h<
l l! l
- >0
,?.:
- M t,<:::
tE
- 44 l
l l l l l 9::: d. 4' ,,l-li l
- $.3 y
>n R% 25
- 2!
!vl 23 sk
- 33 tis:
ii' ?? 0 3 E I E i 4 W 5 k E I E 15s3 Actual -s.-Goal ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' " ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' ' - - ' " ' ' ...-l.. - -- '-=:-' ' ' ' ' - 4 wwm C 1: Operator Work Arounds Work Down Curve - Byron 70 Ostisest: Anespdymemerpreyam emnessney seem vespees that en operseer tusie gj'
- it:!
'f' ^ - eeentoesaperunhproceewee. s m so -[:i!:- !!! [. ' - gp - gg g spessikseens. p opened estis the menes tM h im d"8F"*'P***='ae,er Tement .f f, 3 di:
- ?::
jaj ttii l
- *==s aas ia====* tia= * === =8 ylll armo nieres
.:t. l . N. %l ..s 50 --lij) Ej3-lh.-j - !:j8 l l- ;; l. ,fllW l L ^ ^ ^ oresserthen ton senssen surn
- M EM
- M l
me ese west asum eieve er swee opereser 'l l l1 worturews teemmever le poseen ever the .f:. 5-5-l SkS $$3 l ' l l M moredy gest en sie westmasum eisrwe. !Q ,i l l i lN l .a i. 'i: !5!! Eiik {!}1 ?Qii {d l e--$;.i! i8i -:::i: -.tii: $l ltt!; i i l pll:' $4!: 'i: 'M
- i EM i::
l l l
- g l
l
- g3 l
l ll l t.:::. t:::. l .s. l S:., I 30 - -li$i $ift-kh!: !:5:5:-..s' lti: l l-l l l,; lI lll l tM o [:" tM t:::, lb5 l h!ll! bl l !ikk b5!!. l h! l k o i l l l ltlll llll ll i,' h !jl!:; l! ll lIS l l .'-l I-l j'l l l l ! p ! t! '4
- )
i H g 20 -- f 1
- M
- 3
.;l l ,,R l l l l l l l l l1 l, ~ i l l l l i ll l l, i i i i '.s. su i i i ll l' l ll l l l l/ ll
- lll llll l lll 1
- M tM
' b'k ,l l ,l l ll l ll li,, e -l' (' o ol 10 <- :M n.q .m ,y
- l l
l l l l" l l ll
- s l
i f ! ] l' h d l l l ld: l I i ) ll M s:.i-l i:iii: !l l M l E, !ssi ll l l l JAN FEB MAR APR EY .JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC M Wl n J 12/1067 C 4: Temporary Modifications (T-Mods) Byron E-- ThegeselnumberertemporaryT-Mode. T-Mode are ptenned changes W to R. form er
- mnceen er any operoMe sraeum, structure. componere or chma that does not eerderm to appmed essign eswings f
er eihar oppmed doesyi doommeres. p opened durtry em 20 f menes y esseed esens the more) (seems e et se end er / ihemenes usensteem cuevo or twee T-Mode tahithever la yester) 4 over 9 e she merely goed on Die usertalemen m 10 JAN FEB MAR APR htAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NCW DEC EME3 Actual + Goal 4 i + 1211067 C 7: ContaminatedFloor Space Workdown Curve IByron } 4 00 DeGrimon: Theperennempsetstoplant Aser apone that is eeramneistada teco symrtoo em2 andmeng Ngh veensen erase meh 3 50 W aceses, bimoesemble aream.wwee. see and asume meansey used ser esserenseed work.(% se and atmoret 3.00 r TIsresessed: Greater sian 1% strove see gest. 2.50 /i \\ !l : f =: g200
- .i.:
~ l:
- Y-e q::
05: i: a- .$i! hk 2i = .s.i:i &.g
- q:
.j:. '.so .ii ..y .+ -c. g 3::
- R:
l WA
- ~
l l 'jp' , !g,,
- 2:
si:!: 2:: jj.! 1.00
- ,j,,
3:g-:$)- l 'p [ ,g: l b
- s u.
.::2 R::: 5 l l 6 l l l $i tis Si:! ll l l ! l sii! ((3: iiis ? o.so -- !!5 y:, ( }. i: l l 2::: S r# 3::.: t Rt: U::t R% l l l l s j f l f ^ iiib !!M. ,m: m: .m ^ m: e .m: g, ~ JAN FEB MAR 'APR MAY JUN JUL AUG -SEP .OCT NOV DEC .... m _.m.____ 12/14"77 C 8: Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests Workdown Curve - Byron 1600 OsenIBen: The numtser et correceve 8 2 meNonenee was request sessa, inesuens degredad and sesen requeste, wat are non. 1400--5::-M p-8 eidage and for power tsack equiptrert and
- 3
.in,esu, <m m i, g,, g and ressorsman et equipment er earnpanerne that i. n: i 3:!; m have sesed or are n ammcser*gr. p opened 1200-- 3 dwtgr the more) y ceased e.stne the month) i 'ii: N:::: (taesis at the end or sw enere) g.: .= J ~ I t000 -'8.8 ~.. .. il 3 m.. $.s.% w. igi ,s. A... Thressises: oresserinenorogwem 1os 3 soo.-::.::-:: ::-:: ::-:: :: -:::::- ::::: -:::::-::.R -:: <: -::::: -.:. - deveman tem enestieshed worte.w n curve. s, s., .<s. u eco -- 3. 55i .$ -:i:.:i -$:: s. s. s .s 3: o n.:..-:::j: -:. :. -::3. ~: s .e. .s.s. .s e.
- .,s::.-
- g.::
400 n,-:. :.-:. :
- q:.,
s.
- m...
.a
- 3 n:
- n. :.
n: .,s ,s,.-... ..-.,.. -.,s. .s. -...- <. -. s. 200 - - -..s. ..s.,. .,s.., .s s s ..s., s ..s.
- 3..,:
- s.,
s w: ,ss d .,s., g JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN jut. AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC i -- Actuel
- "#"" Goal l
1 l l 1 a -12/10/97 C ll: Engineering Requests Workdown Curve - Byron 500 . Engineering requests whicas are emelyned a priertylevel of A er B. A and 8 prierty m " W "* "" 450 '"M
- 55
- f M
g:--'-: and signaicard leaves. p opened seg the ? p5i Q . f. 'if
- 557%..
monen) y closed one h morth) poeal e et the 55 i M', end orthe moneh) 400 Y.
- M
'. :::- -t-f:' . :- -sa
- .J.
ene wortdown curw. Thmehold: Greater then 10% devlegen from the .:e,.: .f. s
- ^o..:.:sa..
- q. :..,
s. 350 q:; . p:, q:, .::.- R-..: ;:---::.:: -,.:: :< s.9. '
- M. '
5 300 - - - ::::-:9:: 2 s f m .as250 .:y. ..,:( .y =,.=.9., ,..s, s >3::--:a->: :- c a ~.
- 3..-:-:-:':
H.:.:: .::- +c.: 200 .s E ,s. a
- a..,
4 s ) 150 -:. .s .::::.:-:.::.:- :q::: - e::- 8:: ...:q:, .:v:
- q:...
,.:s.
- .,.v
- =.,m..
+:.: .v .v .,v .v. a.v., v .e. ,.v .s. s s .v .s .v-
- a. s.._.,.,
.s v,. .. -:.,.:.s, .a:., . v.... s.s, .v.v. .v.s.-.. , v., ..s ..y
- .s.-s..
.s 1M. .s. v, .v. ,s ,x, . v, ,.,.,s. ,s.. s ,cy ,s... ,.c.:. ,.s,,. . v.,. ,:.y s y ,,y g e:.. -., v,. .v,,., r.. s v_ ..a., 50 ,y .s y s s v 3.s. e.. .y ..s c ,.v. .s.y ,.y sy ,s m. m._, 0 E E i 4 5 k E E N Actual 4-Goal b AUMU m wa C 1: Operator Work Arounds Work Down Curve - Dresden 70 DefhWthwc An equgmerf or program deficiency which ser uires that an operator take normlandard actkm to comply with procedures. f.gN deogin rupeements,or Techneens
- k SpeclRestions. (# opened during the month) 60 3
(# ekieed during the month) (treat # st the end T h M ofihn month) _N r 4% ~4 g Threshold: Greater then 10% deviation from w $[i. - j^yhh*x y 3 - -- 3 -- - - : the sRe work down airve or three operator 50 'F ?dj y M n y,y workstounds (n...- is greehr) over the O 4 k k h h h M *" " 2 d [E 1 ih 3 U h, }l fi Q ? 8 - - - 1? - - - - f 4 Yl ^ J 4 d b m S R A E M E V (g 4 $t M. in ik NA 2) e-p d N II$ - x 4 - $n c, = - w n u A g jp' l Y gK in
- j l
E %a: W dl j i ) r as I mi. 4 W 3, i ~. g 3 a i 4 g .e }4: .;i r-ly.._ f g l _ l yd A l l l z R d E l S l l 4 i W 2 c 3 10 -- 'n Mi 4^,;" ) [. y 3$ r jy; n l l l l l l d v- . o i JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC l Actual "#" Goat p- 12/10/97 C 4: Temporary hfodi ications (T-Mods - Dresden = DeAnInon: Thetotalnumberof temporaryT. Mode. T-Mode are pionned changes (non9ermanord) to R form or / mneson et any epwese system, seructw, component or circuit that does rwt eerderm to approved desse drawings / month) (S closed dJring the month) (total # et the end of er other approwd design documeres. (# opened during the 35 1he mordh)
- i.;.:,
30 ~ Thresheed: Greader then or equel to 10% devletion frorn worndown curve or three T4eode (whichever is greater) 4 25 over the see morefy goal on the workdoom eurw. o lE m 1 E 'e. 20 g 1 i J m er-er m en m 5:::-:f-:: if. 15 -s ::-:f5 5:-s8-::-::-$f-
- f.:.::
.n: .- y- :.:.
- s:-::
10 -- .n.: !:Si:-:..::- ,s. ,s. '.$-:33!-$.:. 'i:s-5:
- .3.'
- .3-33!-
5--8.:;- .s. O ^^ JAN FER MAR APR MAY JUN JUl. AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC + Goal Actual I 12/10/97 C 7: ContaminatedFloor Space Workdown Curve - Dresden ~ 18 DeWstellor'.: The percerespe et me peert noor m, epece Wut le certeminated E 1000 4mr100 mi2 andtegng Ngh ross8an areas wth 96
- 4-r.-.:.
Intrequent access,inacceastle areas,veute. ~ pas and areas roteiely woott for cordaminated 1 wargq% et end of more) t4 Thresheet oressor then 1% enove see goat ,.:s g 12 1 i 10 --,:.-:.. u ,s. g >,.?.; ,. ~ * ._,.. ~. ,.f., w 8 ~,.. . =. y
- s,
,m... .e +::-':X -X. :- Y.
- 4..
6 ->.::-:::.. ,.x.. ,.,.,3 ..,y. ,y ,.,y .,s,., 4 f. .,g,,,, g w .w ,y.- .,w. ,.w.,. A ,,y-e. ,w v. w. v.: :., 2--)f -. X: ,w. .x.- . X.-
- .x
,c,.. ,>X. -:.%*- - x: ',v,.;- .w -e. ..v,. ,s f. ,w
- y*
,.,,y ' '. 'd 0 ,.,y JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC E=23 Actual + Goal i l l l s. -- +- -. - ' - --~~- ~- - - - ' - - - - -- - - - d 4 I2/10/97 C 8: Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests Workdown Curve - Dresden t800 0 enem: Therumeerorcorncew meWenance work request is*e. Incsuding w ~
- graded and methn requests that am non-m t600-- :f:-
E E ,.i. ,Y outage and for power block equ5mert and struchews. conocen mewenance k the reper -F
- - 7%g w
and restoreson or equipmere or carryonents that J r:, how fened or are menuncnoning. (s opened .e $430._'i; M.5:._i:s:-::< 'i during the morth) (e closed during the morth) potes e et the end of the morth) n:- 1200 -:: i! -::i
- i::<,'
- i:i::
a
- m. :,
555 m.. 3 k '55: . :-s. Threshoid: Greater then or aquel b 10% 1000 -.
- 5:-
dew!allon Rom estateshed workdswn curve. .wg 3 800 -- :- ,,s,, g ,1 g, o,, ..s, f-R
- <?
"3 600 --:'.. z.,., Cp . s.
- e. s
- )0 --:..s
- -::.-,s.--.:::
o n.: w. ,.4.,. .,.7 ,s., ,,s. g .s,. f, 200--:: ::-::'.:,:-:::
- 9.::-:::;-':::-:::5-::.
. ::-.::::: -::.1:-. , s., ,,s, .,s, ,f.,., . s., .....s. . s. O JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC tilZiT3Actuel + Goal 12n0/97 C ll: Engineering Requests Workdown Curve - Dresden 350 E-- -_ Engineereg requestewheeriare sosiped a prierty level of A or B. A and B p% Engheering Requeste are god te peert presseense = 1 onesignmeerem popeneddatigthe j 300.- ?. g,- ,,,,g,) (8 cdseed chstig Wie enerei) (letal S et Wie .{..; and of Wie eneret) v.- f 7 TZ ^ ^ Greater then 10% doutetten frern the
- Q:;
( ehe wert deusa esswe. 250 -M. : >M:-,3. : ->:- v. ,s,..s.
- i. <
- .:i_
200 -:- m e. .s. m.,.
- . e
.:q ,.,y M: - ': * : -M.s l :.,p"s, 150 e ,,4,.s:, g w .e :. ...s. .y ,y ..gs. .s.f<. l+s,.. .:E.s, o ,s. - ,.,v ,,y n s ':p:
- 4",l
- (N.
'>'e .M. .E..,: l e .:. l 100--. : - sv. ,.,y ,v. y:. ,s. .,s.... ,.9..
- .:y
,v,j ,.,y s s., s 3, . s., ..s s s.. ,s., ,Q. .,s ,s ..s. g,.e. .y ,..s s ,,.v, s..., - s -..., 50,- . s.,y -c s.,y ,+ q , s.. M. :-
- e...'
- Q:
s,. Rl ,s .,.,..s . s., ..s.y g ,s ,,y ,+ g.e.] ,y ,y ,.,y JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN-. JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC E325Actuel ~#-Geet 12/10/97 C 1: Operator Work Arounds WorkDown Curve - LaSalle 80 ~-. ____. _ a An ogwpmert or pre am i:s.: g danesency whicMeguhe ht en oper:dar tehe s. ,- f-J non-stander ocean to comp 4 weh procedurse. M E. 3 .3.%s S.E. $$i. doelenG ' T.orTec# sees r..
- e. c
- 9:
m. .n: spedncemens. (s opened dwing ew meren (s elesed dwing the more) (later e et en end ..,v sy, -:4
- qv
- q::
..s
- q::
- q:
+ a J m., .s ,y ss., ,,g, m
- a.,:-,:< : -:.:: -:.:>: -
v.. ,.v .y
- .: -:.9
.:.,.s a s. v.:.- s 80 , s..
- q::
.v.s: t::t:
- t.:
n.:- Throettote: Greater then trM dedagen from 555- ': ^ 4:
- f.:
..l . R.
- .y
- w, :
the see work denn cerve er esse operator ...i +q: .v. ,,,,iensunde N ie grosser) e wr tw q .55: .3.. v .,+ v:.
- +_
one.e morey guer en em wortaken curve. s s
- .;.+.
..s .L..,.,. .. y 50
- s.
- e..
-g a.. ...3y ,s.,y .,y y g ...y . s., ,. y
- s..,
,.y ,y ,sy y,s. ,s,, ,y, ,y ,yf ly -::s 4 ,. y .v s. 40 - gv .g
- y R
,.,Q.- y ,a. g.,.. ,y ,e., ,s 3 ..,y ,,y s,%, u,.. ,y em 3 ,.v .u .v 3 .w ..v .v.--:.- - w.
- n. :<-:,:::- -
-N: >t: a 30 --: ;,. n: .+ -c.R::-
- s...
sy v.: .:4 c3 ?.. .a >4
- v..y
- q:
?.:: ~ .= v.
- s..
w, w. , t.. .\\ ^
- Q:'
- ..n
,w. ,RR ..j+- :::. ,.g w, .w .w vs
- ,Q+
wn: - .w: 20 -- +9 e
- Q.
- s...
.w.v y a.y .,y .a., ,y... ,s. y:. ,,y y, ...c ,w y. s. ,.,y ,w w. ,w w., ,.e _ ,.a. .,. v_.s. .., _.e. ,s,..,-- ..s._ ...s f..,.- j0 w.,., .j ..a. ,y. ,y ,w ,w ,w .;g. ,w ,w ,.a,. .. s ..,y ,.,y %3, .,.g. ,w w,, a, .a .w w ws. e .w ,v - w ,,y , s.. ,.s., ,v.. ..a ,w w a,w ,.v. ,v ,w .w ,3._. 33 .a., w ..m. 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Actual =#-Gsel 12/10/97 C 4: Temporary Modi,ications (T-Mods - LaSalle t 140 E - '-- _ Theteestresseerof tangeraryT.Meda. T. Mode are piemed changes W to IR. Serm er tendien et erg opereMe syssem, saucewe, een,enere or d'"8 8h8 8"' " "8'"" 'FF"'*8 8"'8" 8'"'"8' 120 er seher approved doelp documenes. y opened deeng the moret y c%eed dwing the meres paesi e d the end at - m iES. the mor8h) s .s. ,v. Y [m..., m gr.
- 6:
- .y:t 2.2.i F$i:
i: .i.i.: +;
- .3
'l .y Thresheed: Greater than er aquel to 10% dmeseen tem $.!_ $*:[_:-::::_ ::.: t ::_ li.:i_!:
- fi)_ hk!
hk "h88""M's or shru T.htrels (uNchever le jpeater) I so._ 2.:s:
- g:
over the see movedy gest en the wortassem curw. .y,. s.
- 8
.::: f t.s. .A .,v. .s .,q .s. 3.::
- s:t l
- 3:: _::g::
g%
- g:
.s: E.8.5 $.3 ,q. so.
- i.
!$..i: ...i....
- g:
- g.
- s.
t.U: tU AR.. i.$.:.i 38..! .v g,. M:
- U.:
l R.U sv ,v. .v 4 ,s. .v . v. i g.. ,. k. .g. :
- U.:
- ^j _..
- sq 40 -:g: _
- g:: -
R.R A.
- s. v.
.v . v. w t.x:
- .g:
- -v l
- s..::.
,v.v .s
- n:.,
l 4, ..v ,.y ..v. s, ..v .v. ,s. !:S jjj! y! 20 - 3::i !:j!: - $.3:-%.$i-.!$.s.... ij 2.v::: 0:: 2::
- s,
,,l ...y a- .v. ,v,
- i-
,y t h R t: R:l l 83 'I R4 3 33 $3! I b.$ 33! y 3!: O JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUM jut. AUG SEP OCT NOV DF.C .... m i-.................. - -1 -iri - i ia- 12/10/97 C 7: Contaminated Floor Space Workdown Curve - LaSalle 25 00 E-- The percomange et me peers floor space met to consommated11000 $mf100 end endiseg Ngh rodagen areas usei I freeque'ilecosse,i esses, votes. sto and erees ruimisfy used Ier eerstemheted 20 00 --Ei.!f mest.M st and of niere$ .v..' -:k vei l
- J si
- 3 TIueesseest: Oposeer tien 1% stume see gaat X:
<2 f9 q:5 15.00 --R::: -.! qq: kb . 3' 7."
- R;
- .:s ch.
..v .v ' ?
- 2. v.-::/.
p5:
- .3
,.s .R. ;. 10 00 -- .,y
- 'k:
,a: a:
- -N-
.v a: q:.: Rq:
- x:
M v, w ,w ,.y ,w ,v:' v .9 w ,w y s.- ,.y .n..:
- R:
<..s ,w ,w
- d<
,w ,w .,w. ,v - ,- v ---.v ,.v ,.v e 5 00 --::s, -.::E..
- R..:
- R: -2.0
,q:{;- .w ,s..
- 2.?
- R:
.s. w R? 20 ^:-: 1 ..s ,w ,w R-:- R ,:4 2%.: ,3 R;::
- 3. :
R,. ,- v s.: .y .v , y-
- v.. <
w v a N: RU i ,3:i.::
- (
l R.t; ,w ..v l 0.33 ^:::
- R:
.R? Y: .3: h 33: 33: ,3h .v. 0.00 - JAN FEB P4AR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC E!!!! Actual -S-Geel 12/10/97 C 8: Non-Outage Corrective' Work Requests Workdown Curve - LaSalle 4 00 T^- Thenummer w cervecese
- isi mecenance use e tusen,musmeng M
wi Q ijji i-x depreded and ocean ngssues,eut see non.
- i.;
.!5 M
- $ij
,1,i;.'- ij$ 7":lj adsce and ser power needt egdymera and l 3500 lk33 struisses. Canusse nuerassunse is wie sepair
- .3 and senesessen of egdpment er esmponeres sw
. 3.:
- M E
1 .w .v tR tR:
- R:
. x. .N 3:., yl home sused er are melkndianing. p opened lpl - sooo.- Eii$ - EE-jjj !:A:- ilk! ,$:k 4} L ll1
- is m as*9 P essse dwins e= me*9 JI!
tea * * * * =ad ar ===*e
- x
- 12!
??: t>{ .$..s!5 !h..s!.!! l !. l ll ll$ ,y .s d.
- l l
[j i I 2500-t'j[:- i jjj j:s,l t ]. g y em .s.. m essase: asemereeneregus =ttm ) llll
- (
!l l hii E*
- .:ki oc lbl ds*8'esn tem esteeshed memesse carne.
li:. 9' !l'l$' i
- 1 1
'i9 t.::$
- t.i
- 2000 -!:75 -.B. s.
E:::
- !-i:
- <$c.
.n 2
- p:
,sN. x-:
- .j:.:
l l
- 53
- t::
,u. l l
- E-t:::..
- .:q
- 3.:::
,R: ,p .p lg l w .s.
- Rj
- t v
- w:
- 9 s
,s fis! .w
- 55:
.ll !(, !:E6 1500 ljii-l*3"%!-:!j{! a t^:g !lil !!l, .v: l ll $%E !!!E Si' $kI $) ik!!
- ib
{j}s: lfil ,3i' 7ll' ! ll g %'i l l! ! l: i{; imo--!!!!-!ll!.- ll! l!.!!-?i.
- q 2
c-: j,) .:x .v ..y !:i:i: BE
- a.
l l
- k:
i - i&: 5 I
- %E 2
l ! ll jh l l l i$i t:2:- lR' tR: -N l D: t:t 500--t:it i l ESE !!.i' (:(s: lj s kj j li,'l tR t:p ll G l1:: 1l ll l l4l i:i !i: Bi; t: L% il l l 0 JAN FEB MAR PR e4AY JUN JdL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC E3355Actuut 12/10/97 C 11: Engineering Requests Workdown Curve - LaSalle t800 E-- _ Esgoose9grequeuseswrettise sempios a pnway==se rA er s. A ene s e 9 g unwey Erghieseg Roossues em see to passt N nemesnee and eiyennera m pspenes
- .55, y
esos sie enereg p camens eseg sie mareg c.-
- (:
,5:
- sese se seendersiemasseg
,w v. ..s IG j{'. E; a____ __ Guesserseen19%essenen temW q? ene weset esem arve. n.: Y ..< /..-
- t...-
,w 1200 J -: ',;- it: a .D n.;:,
- +!-
l 3 M*- m R4: ' v 05 I 2. g1000 =-t:;; W:: : y et g# % RE [.[* R*:) f M..;
- R
, (., 3
- 2. :<
[ . s., Ng., N R.v 800 ,.v ,.v -a. m 'w\\
- e. -
n .w X-f4 1 o:
- qq c )
o .v. C+: , k. - ,N 2:.3.2,-lIS., -R.v2 900 R ,.w 3 .,y
- q.4
.a +. t:..1 R..s:: $q ? R' v m
- <i.,
,s 400
- os
- -n s
- t qs
.::t w
- w s.
- .:+
- .5:.:
A ~; R::: -...4 s.. R. R.
- +'-
m.- s. .w 5 i ,w ..v.s ,.v s- -v ,w w w c->.
- w
- +c.
I 200 - :::::-Hn:-
- 3. ;;<
- < -:+:-
>v sg c+: .:q R.,. 1
- +:.
-. -l ,w ., y ,.,y .3 ,w ,w 0 I*)
- II' I-h1
.,v., tw ss w. y JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN .R1. AUG SEP OCT NCRf DCJ 3:23IActvel 4 D m 12n0/97 C 1: Operator Work Arounds Work Down Curve - Quad Cities 50 - _._ An espdymemerpreyern g '[* <IeNelency uNdt fogdres 9tet at aparater lebe 4--. '.., N., _. 6 atSertle ce$e@t precederse, ,'(( deudyt;_ J _.,orTectodcaf SpotSIceteria (S operiod distig Wie vriere) . s. 9e @ Cleged deWig See eneret) (bold 8 d Wie end 4< it' ef fie snare,* l.7,.,. y. .?..,_,v< 11Wo messe: Gremer fiert t0% dealesert tperie ^::'
- f..
3 Wis eEs tuerk deWPCam erWWee spe !,!. _,.3. fj N {mNdted grederW9te 30 . -2.. ses e rnereer West en Wie weddown cem. s f 4 r. l:..- ( 25 --::: --.: ::,'-::: 5 l-.* :- . e-3 g ,.,.,,4 Q !y:-:E:-::::.. 2 20 --:is!- .4 .R T .,y. y, ... -g.. ,y ,..,..._,f.., 15.,.,y,-,.., g s, ,y g. g. g 1, ,y, ,y,4 t0 g.. ,s.
- g..
g ,y; ,s,y,, ,.,y .,v , y, .,y .,y g.,., e- ,- v .v.-:::
- . -;;:.:-:o.:
e-5- -:g::,- Rg, ,y, .,y .g., y .,y ,3, g., ,y,< .s. '--v. ...-^' wl 0 .lAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Jt.R. AUG SEP OC( NOV DEC 12/10/97 C 4: Temporary Modi ications (T-hfods - Quad Cities. 70 Definleurs: The taint nurnbar of terrgparry T-Moes. T. + e es are ymmes owges W to st.serm er enesien et ery ope =ese eyenem, ennumse.componere er m. ce=== e=r esse not eensermie opp e e.wp esseie. g:s
em-eperwee eier m p opense erow e
meses y cames one, e= meet pois e e e= ene er
== mores so i::-E
[
Throssesse: Grosser tieri or equal to 10% ersemeen srom
-^. curve er teve T-hoses ^. ^~^_... Is yester) en-e. eee meredy goul en vie wsresenni euw e
i m
- Y:'
e
.e x,.-::*
m 20 ---::it: -:::3-:::::-::'j:-:::!: -::-::- s[-3: ![i:- E[ii-::3 i:s:
~
~
ci::
- ij
,s J:
i
.n. :
s to.-:...
- -.:-:e.
+ Goal
wwn C 7: Contaminated Floor Space Workdown Curve - Quad Cities I==-
1-
_ Thepurearempeetthepourtfluer space inst is conesseuend a 1000 epanco sn2%vrestenen armespi ta li i
W 808W88.M arvoa.weidle.
ses aw swee seessy used ihr eeremessed Y..
16 l
- 85 Tswesensee: oresner een ts seese une omri 14
/
see
'Y '
12 l*
l r
E 10 3
s 8
l
,.,y
~;
- QQ:
6 l9. :
m
[
, 0.,
,-Q.N.
,..g g
c.:..
D.,:-:
4
- E:
~
- m..
y
, y.
- q::
>:t::
,.,y
,g.:
- m.,
m
'g.:.
.m.,
- g- -::::-
2---::::.:
c,w.:.:
,s.
,s
.g
- g::
- . y
.s.
- g::
- q:
,s..
p; O
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1
c:=mAcw
-*-o I
1
' ~ ~ ' ' " ' " ' ^ ' '
4 r~
~
j D~%
I J E d_
4 8
~
2 0%
'I
- f
$] l I
da i
..z, If I
j NhMli l-l R
030 O
l
[j$D.:if:@M$s!!ssi:!:!'!:: I:M:iddi!!:::!!!!iissssi?.$hsS!!f i::si!!
ADN kD f
~
lEE:i8iii8:48i$ IBM 88ii #EEEEEsfi UE6iEn:iE6id @iiiEii6ii?3il 100 w%
%4 ti!6! sis!: !: s:his:!!8!:::!!!?.88!:is8 i836:48.:lii?$ll as e,
b D
l:::.::::....:: : :ijssj..::::S.ig: :.::::.::-: :.:r.: :-:::*
DaV 4
liii:::::i~::.::: ::::8iS3:::.:::ir.::i.:::!:..: :::::::i:::i?
ine A
1 y
[5::8i8.:.8!8i::::g:i:: ::-:::.*:.:: :.:::.::": :.:. :::": ii!l Nor
%D I
li!!:8- " "i:!::i:[ :: "" " i " : ':.il 'J :!.: : is:8:
Ayn l
O o
l
[;!!!..::::i.i.ii:!.. ::::ii::!::.:....::::..:.:.;:.::::::.i.:i!...
yay D
Q lj (i:i.:::"..:::.:::> i.::*:::::: "::*:::::.:: ::.:::..:r: :::::.: ::::
gyn i
D 1
uD
[..... 2".!:!!:8 :.. "" : :> : :.. M8!: ".. 3!!:8 : 8i::8i::88...,
gu 8::::::
- i:!(g g
e R
Q l:i! :.... i.......... j....... ; :. :..,..... :,i!!8!:58 Nyt i
I
.I I
00' 8
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o N
o 00 W
T N
Q e-v-
e-essenbeg qsom sapsmos e6eino uoN lo sequsnN
12/10/97 C ll: Engineering Requests Workdown Curve - Quad Cities 450 DeenIBesc E.1pneuring rugseste wNcn are seelyned urterey level of A er B. A and B seterer m aer*w Rogssues are sed to plant a
masso.w.2 elysicant lessee. p opened eeW;Me y csesse eer*g the moreg
- ". :q g_e-#_% anderthe meree 35 0 -
,ve ss-...
g Tr-w2 orweier em sos eswesen nom the n.:
see emasancurve.
m..
300
.: :.:- :::<-:e:
- .a.
3
.y.
m..:.
250 -,-,, :.,-.:.
e...
s.
s
,v.,.
,v,s,.
. s.,
..y
,v,
- n. :
- .n -.:::-
200 w
3 e<
,,y
-s,
- .:.,y
,.,y
,,y
,,s.
,.,y v,.
,v,y,.
. v..,
,.f y
,.,y
.,)
o
,,y, y..
,v,
.y
,:. 3,.,-.:. : -:...:.-
150-
- s.....:..,.,.,
.w
.s,,.s
.,y
...s,
.,v,
,sy
,g s,
- g.,
,. y
,g
.L.
,s,y
.,v,,
,. v
,,y s
, s.
,y,,
..s 3,.,
,s
,. y
,v.,.
s
,y
,v,,.
.v
,.,y
,.,y n..
1M,_
,.s
,m,,
y
,. y
,v,.
,v,.,.
..s.s,
,v.,..
v,
,v,,.
. 3..,
n,y
,v
,,y
, w.,
,,.s.
n...
,s,,y v,,.
.y
.v 50 --..,,
. y
,:::,-:e:.
s y
,v,.
.,..s e,
qq:
r: <
s..
- s.-
5:.:
,,y n s.
n.
. s.s.
s.
s.
. v, n
n.y 0
--^
p
.n
,.,s..,,
s.
^^..
,,%,y y
y s,
^^'
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN jut.
s-12/10/97 C 1: Ope-br Work Arounds WorkDown Curve - Zion so An eqtdyment er prayerm escenancy
.Neh respees that en operuser tehe non.eeendere A
sesentoconge meh
__ m desqpi
^
r m
e
[
N regieurnenes,orTees, scar specatessene. p epened thstg h maneg P cioned thatng the i
.\\
e
+
meren (ineet e et the end et the enersh) v.
..c;
=
,s+
a ryy:
m e.
w 35
- - - - -
- e - -:::
Thressisse: Grosser then 10% deWesen frern the
- 0.s::.
s.
e.
-:p,
\\,,,,
see nem dose cinw or evee operseer wereurounde
.,y 30
-::i:-::::: -::
-::.5:-:: 5-5:::
i:Y-::. - -:::.: -T' (uNeheuer to poseer) over the ese's monedy goal e.:
en the m m y,
,.f,,.
s,
,y.
, 3,
.,y,
,.,y a.
,y,.
,., -s.
,..g -
, 2$.
,.a..
- f.,
3 s,
3
- y...
, y,
,y,.
3 g..,
3 gg
- s..
sy,
,3,.,
y,.
20 --:...-.....:-
s g
,y....
.p,,
o v.-
a,.,
,3,.,
us.
,.c
>:.:-,:y:,:,3-,Q. :- -:e:;-;;;3
- J.,,
15 --
,.,y
,3 a,.f.,,
,yg
.,s, 4,.,
,v
,v..
- s.,
.s, a,,.
,a,
,s-
.v -v..-,
-s-'-.
,.--s. -,as,
, v, a.
v
. v.
,..v
..s.
-s.
10 --,,,y.
,. y
,.3
,,y
,s,.,
,.f.,.
a-
,.,y
, -s
.v.
,,y g...
s..-
,..s.
,.,y
,y, g.,
a.
,.;y
,y, 1
,..,s-.., -
f
,,,+ -
n.., -.,., -,ys,
,,,3,
..3,
,s.
l y..
5
,..,.-c,..
,.,y
.s,
,v.
,yg...
a.,
.s.c
.e.,.
,w
, v.
,.,y f,
0
'"3.,
a..
JAN FEB MAR APM MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC i
\\
l l
e-i I
_.o.
..... --....i..i..........
12/10/97 C 4: Temporary Modifcations (T-hfods - Zion JO
-L - -
The toget rusteer et ter=,erary T. asses. T-g
)
undo are yearned energes ensspermanwg to st, surm er
..R::
..^ ::
kncsen et enr aparense erseum, eerwesse, aerper.nd er Y'
ceramestessenotseveermtoapprovede eigndre e e v
25
< -33 5
er seher asyreved seese deauneren. Is opened sunne w i
3:gj f i;
ii m
F g+
meet to esomed enty m more) tiew e et m and or T
p".:%
the meret
- s
..s.
w
+,.
.,s.
R::
- i>'- :0:
20 t-:-
- R:-
'f: -
'x
- f-Thresesses-Grosser men er equei to 10% deweseen from m
- i ss:
.. emm er eree T.uses p ;_._. h ysseer) i 7
- i$
ever m one meree goes en m wanessen curve.
r
.y
,s
,y
,.,y
,.y A._
.~
.v 15 -,.
3
..g
., + -
y w
s.
y.
.y
- s..
,s, s.y w
,s.,
,s,
y
.y s.
.s.,
s
.s,,
. s.,
,s,...
.,y
.,y to --:i,:j: -5.:$- 33: -93 5- :5: -
5?i:
??i -
- ?.,3 i..3:i 8.:]- if
.,s.
s.
3,,.,
, s.,
w
.,y
,y
.s
.s,
.,y.
,y 3.,.,
gy
,,y
.v
.,y
.,y
,v,
.+
H.
- E.
9.: :-
- qq -
- q:
5-- :,:
w
.,y
,,y
.,y
,4.,
3,,
.,y
,y g.
,y, g
.y
.,y w
.s,.,
g w
,w
'.v.]
w
<..v w
,,a..
w m.
a JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN jut.
_.n
12/10/97 C 7: ContaminatedFloor Space Workdown Curve - Zion 1200 E - --
The percentage et the pamnt floor l
epoce Stat le contarfdristed 31000 squerif100 m a - +,rweire ri.,s.o R:"
w*enpert secuse arnece.sese areas,veune, 10 00 < ::
P I W I"
'j:
.g work.(% st end of morei$
V.
T Thressisse: Grosser Tieri 1% sessee see goat.
8 00 <
T.
, s.
5 6 00 -.:.:.
~
3 s
, A,..
.::._'"..l A
- p. g.
,.1.._,I
'j'
[f
'j f
M
. '.* y A
- m...
m.,.
- x. :
syyl gw
,w 3
,w
,w s
s,.
.,.s
,w
,y,.,
,w s-..
- qq: -
- qq -::::,,
100 <-
- u..
,w
,s
,. y
,w
,w
,w
.y
,w sw
,w s.w...
- 3.,
s g
0 00
,w
,w
,w
~
~~
~
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN jut.
..... m 1
1
e
.l.
nmm C 8: Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests Workdown Curve - Zion
\\
8000 E? - _ Themeeererconsesse muNenence wat fogsset kehn.biceseg dayesed and seman seguesen, met are non.
7 g
emmes and hr power basek equipmers and
\\_
seecwes. conoceve menenenee k se repair
.5 if sooo taf sw reensraean er ogdpment er componeres that
'i:
- ?
- ii.:
9 have heed er are meswiessreg. p opened e.:
.a.:
entis ew mere;y cseems dwingtw maag
- 5. s.
onesie se sw anderse menes
.sy m._,:,: _:. :._:.::<_ ::
r.:q:
- u,s...
,s..
.s.q
- -n.
.q:S, m...
T _ _ - ^ 2 oresser men er equer to 10%
- q::
Ji:3
- q::
- i;.:
devemeen tem esembashed wertseen cuve.
<c
.s,
s,s..
c
,s.
.v
. e.
.s.
. v,,
- y g
,s.
.v iB: 3000 -:::.:-:.::. -::.::- :::
- q; -
- t
- q::
,3.:
,..s.
y s
y, y
s
,s
,y
.,y s.
s.
,v;
.ss.,
x.,,
,.,y s
c.,
.v
.s
- v
- q:
2000-
- n. :- : >:..
- - :-::q.
- f -
.:y
, s.,.
y
,<.s.
w
..y
,s.
,y
, v,
.s.y
.+
,.s
- s. v,.
, v.
. v.-
.s.
v v
s
,,v..
v
.s s.
,.,y, v
..y v..
. v.
, s.g
..v
,q
,.v
,sv
,:. >o,: :. ;-
1000- -:::::- :n..-,-
- <:-l,:. :-
n.:
,y
...q
,y
,s.,
v v.,
.y 9,.,.
,a
.,ss
. s..
,v, v,
.s,
,y g.,
,y
'O
^^
^^
^^.,
^^
. v.
^^...
,s,y
,y
.~~
^^
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
a l
_n i
lm ie
~
Il il l
l da h
"]
E l
W I
h R
E
- O
} if f
j g
t P
O l
I El 1
5 {E 55
, i 1
B e
Q=
SM E
S:
is e r e n e ss m ai m a a m m w e &eai m am A
lYi:i8s8iJsi$i'A8i:MEMMMME8MN8N:iSV.:i8i8i8i:i8i: $i8i8!7J 130
/
X
/
I gh I
l'i35i5$$$:i5$$UF:I3$@E3Ei@$Nin'nE5$5'$$$ HEE $$5$h$5fG$hM$i%5:iinEEEEEdM
%g ai 4QefiB&:s.$i?:s?i:i.i:MeiMS.i::::::iii3422:iengA'.:ii$i8i:i?isii)Qi::Sigis:giggii eny
(::n N
ON 7fiGsiW!Bi36!3?isFF:32!3iEBi!fEF' F:MBii:!E:E:itif!4:w bc dI l%i3:ii$iF :85:6s%h5!E50i8h5$M;:$i:i%!";i35%E lent a
kO' O
[I!!S : :.: 'ii:::!$:8:$@ii:::: 88M?ii$@i@i:ii:.ii@$igii:
Ayn 4
- g 60
[pj. :..:.*.'.....y::g:. : : i: y2jpgj$f$ jggig:g:. :. : jy:g$i:
gay 5
l8: :i' :i"lIfi.!!!Ii:i:fifi :i ::"iii:i:i:'diiiiii'.fi WM 5
U U.:::: ::.":":v..:. :::.".:... "31:sa.: ::. :.:
su lii!:i!!! : ~;' !!:!d::EES:Missi :Esssi?i! : !!E2f2! NVr I
I I
i g
8 g
g 8
8 3
N spenbeg > d e3 ole mest
,,.3 i,m.,,n., nu.
n,m. o.,,,n n, i,m e.q January 7,1998 Attention. Document Control Desk U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission War.hington, DC 20$55
Subject:
Ilraidaood Station Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-456/457) 11yron Nuclear Power Station Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-454/455)
Dresden Station Units 2 and 3 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-237/249)
LaSalle Station Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 373/374)
Quad Cities Station Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 254/265)
Zion Station Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 295 304)
Supplemental Intermation Regarding Commonwealdi Edison Company's (Comed) Response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50 54(17) Regarding Safety Performance at Comed
References:
(1) letter from J.J. O'Connor dated March 28,1997, Providing Comed's Response to
" Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Safety Performance at Commonwealth Edison Company Nuclear Statices."
(2) 8 etter from T.J. Maiman to U.S. NRC dated April 15,1997, Transmitting Information on Comed Nuclear Operations Division Performance Indicators.
(3) letter from H.W. Keiser to U.S. NRC dated June 2,1997, Transmitting Supplemental Information Regarding Co,nmonwealth Edison Company's (Comed) Response to the U.S. Nuclear Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 Regarding Safety Performance.
(4) Letter from H.W. Keiser to U.S. NRC dated July 29,1997, Transmitting Supplemental Information Regarding Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed) Response to the U S. Nuclear Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f)
Regarding Safety Performance.
(5) Letter from R.J. Manning to U.S. NRC dates October 8,1997, Transmitting Supplemental Information Regarding Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed)
Response to the U.S. Nuclear Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 Regarding Safety Performance.
Dear Mr. Callan:
In Reference (1). Comed provided its response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) regarding safety performance at Comed. Under separate cover, via Reference (2), information regarding the perArmance indicators that CemEd selected to measure its performance across the six nuclear stations was provided. Also included cere the defmitions and thresheid values for each sgific indicator. References (3), (4), and (5) provided updated information regarding threshold values and goals for several Performance Indicators viih00 f,
U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Januaiy 7,1998 Page 2
%e purpose of this letter is to inform you of additional changes that are being nude. %csc changes are a result of assessments performed to validate the Nuclear Generating Group (NGO)
Perfonnance Indicators and the NGO Performance Indicator implementation pocess, and the experience gained since the performance monitoring program was implemented.
De changes being made are as follows:
- 1) Revisions to the dermitions of three indicators.
- 2) Changes to the threshold values for two indicators.
Revisions To %e Definitions -
Indicator C.1. " Operator Workarounds" definition change:
An equipment or program deficiency that provides an obstacle to safe plant operations by requiring Operations personnel to take compensate'y actions to comply with procedures.
design requirements, or technical specifications. If compensatory actions have been proceduralized, but were not intended as part of the equipment operating design, the issue is an OWA. (# opened during the month)(# closed during the month)(total # at the end of the month).
De revision clarifies the dermition of an Operator Work Around.
Indicator C 2. "Out Of Service Errors" dermition change:
e
- 2. All PlFs written after the master out+f senice card is placed for an OOS, or
- 3. All OOS configurations discovered that:
a) would have jeopardized personnel safety if the work had prW. or b) nad the potential to danuge isolated or nearby equipment, or c) - did not match the OOS configuration stated on the OOS checklist. (total during the month)
De revision expands the definition to include additional events that are considered Out of Service Errors.
U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Janu:ry 7,1998 Page 3 e C.9 Percent Rework ne reperformance of any physical maintenance task and any maintenance task prior to retum to-sen;ce (RTS). His includes repeat maintenance for identical problems with identical corrective actions that was performed in the 1.ist 12 months after RTS on the svne equipment or cornponent and poorly performed maintenance that causes rework.
Bis revision clarifics the work that is included as part of the indicator and maintains consistency with the implementing procedure or rework reduction.
Changes To The Threshold Values Indicator C4 Threshold change: Braidwood and Byron: Greater than six per month per site.
e Dresden, LaSalle, Quad Cities and Zion: Greater than 2 per month per site.
He revision allows higher thresholds for two sites based upon their more recent Tech Specs.
After LaSalle is restarted, consideration may be given to reviving its threshold for the same reason.
Indicator C 16 -nreshold change: Less than 160 PIFs written per month per site.
The revision deleted the upper limit of greater than 600.
His change was made to avoid discouraging the writing of PlFs.
We will continue to communicate any such changes to the indicators in written correspondence, as well as in our routine performance status meetings.
Sgrely
.)
Mict J. Wallace Senior Vice President cc:
it nompson, Deputy Director for NRR A.B. Beach, Regional Administrator Rill R. Capra, Project Directorate NRR O. Dick, Dyron/Braidwood Project Manager NRR J. Stang, Dresden Project Manage NRR D. Skay, LaSalle County Project Manager NRR R. Pulsifer, Quad Cities Project Manager NRR C. Shirati, Zion Project Manager NRR Braidwood Senior Resident inspector
\\
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Janu:ry 7,1998 PaEe4 Ilyron Senior Resident inspector Dresden Senior Resident inspector LaSalle Senior Resident inspector Quad Citics Senior Resident inspector Zion Senior Resident inspector Omcc of Nuclear l'acility Safety. IDNS i
~
~
U.rnnwa.w t Juh 4 0awan 4Maqiose.'
14fC Opus Pbte txswners Grme. IL 6o$1$ $*ol October 8,1997 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Attention: Docuri,ent Cor. trol Desk
Subject:
13raidwood Nuclear Power Station Units I and 2 Dyron Nuclear Power Station Units I and 2 Dresden Nuclear Power Station Units 2 and 3 LaSalle Nuclear Power Station Units I and 2 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Units I and 2 Zion Nuclear Power Station Units 1 and 2 Supplemental Information Regarding Commonwealth Edison Compan/s (Comed) Response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(17) Regardmg Safety Performance at Comed NRC Debe Nos. 50456/457 NRC Docaat Nas. 50454/455 NRC Docket Nos. 50-237/249 NRC Docket Nos. 50 373/37f, NRC Docket Nos. 50-254/265 NRC Docket Nos. 50-295 304
References:
(1) letter from J.J. O'Connor, dated March 28,1997, Providing Comed's Response to
" Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Safety Performance at Commonwealth Edison Company Nuclear Stations?
(2) letter from TJ. Maiman to U.S. NRC dated April 15,1997, Transmitting Information on Comed Nuclear Operations Division Performance Indicators.
(3) letter from H.W. Keiser to U.S. NRC dated June 2,1997, Transmitting Supplemental Information Regarding Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed) Response to the U.S. Nuclear Ca=iuton (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f)
Regarding Safety Peiformance.
(4) letter from H.W. Keiser to U.S. NRC dated, July 29,1997, Transmitting Supplemental Information Regardmg Commonuralth E6 son Compan/s (Comed) Response to the U.S. Nuclear Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f)
Regarding Safety Performance.
Dear Mr. Callan:
In Reference (1), Comed provided its response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnussion (NRC) request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) regarding safety performance at Comed. Under separate cover, via Reference (2), information regarding the performance indicators tint Comed selected to measure its kM4rMEMO. Doc 41'nc'm Compsm
- l &
Y'/'
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission October 8, !?97 Page 2 performance across the six nuclear stations was provided. Also included were the definitions and threshold values for each specific indicator. Reference (3) and (4) provided updated information regarding threshold values and goals for several Performance Indicators.
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of additional 6anges that are being made. These changes are a result of assessments performed to validate the NOD Pedormance Indicators and the NOD Performance Indicator implementation process, and the experience gained since the performance monitoring program was implemented.
The changes being made are as follows:
- 1) A revision to the variance process relative to the actions taken when an indicator is determined to be in variance;
- 2) Revisions to the dermitions of two indicators;
- 3) Changes to the threshold values for two of the indicators;
- 4) Selection of thresholds for six indicators that are trended; and i
- 5) Deletion of three indicators A Revision To The Variance Process Relative To The Actions Takes When An Indicator Is Deterinised To Be la Vadance i
t' If a performance threshold is not met, a " variance report" describing the preliminary cause of the deviation is presented as part of the next Management Review Meetmg. This teport includes a description of the actions underny or planned to improw performance.
This revision changed cause to preliminary cause to clarify that a root cause investigation was not i
required to be periodned.
If a performance threshold is not achieved for two consecutive months, the Site Vice President's variance I
report shall be submitted to the BWR or PWR Vice President and shall include a written action plan to bring performance back into conformity with the threshold. The BWR Vice President, PWR Vice President or Site Vice President may direct additional specific action, including work standdowns, implementation of special work controls, appointment of root cause or investigation teams, assignment of additional perw..el, special monitoring, or othrt appropriate actions up to and includmg plant shutdown. If the BWR/PWR Vice Presidents ad Site Vice President determine that the cause of the 4
deviation is not tied to descient performance or that the deviation is acceptable for a period of time, they may reset the performance threshold or defer action for that hmited time. Such a decision shall be l
reported to the CNO.
i The revisions made include changing the title of CNOO to BWR and PWR Vice Presidents, and deleting the monthly SVP report reference. The variance report and monthly SVP report are used as same report.
if(1) a performance threshold has not been met for consecutive three rnonths, or (2) responsive action has achiewd insufficient progress owr a sustainad period, the BWR Vice President or PWR Vice President shall report this to the CNO. The CNO, BWR Vice President and PWR Vice President shall review the performance and determine if curmt action plans are addressing the performance issues. If the CNO, BWR Vice President and PWR Vice President determine that current actions address the performance issues, them they may defer action for a knuted time. If the CNO, BWR Vice President kwmruo poc
.~.
_..~-. _ _ _ _ _
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
j
_ October 8,1997 Page 3 and PWR Vice President determine current action plans do not address the performance issues, then an i
assessment team shall be established reporting to the BWR or PWR Vice President. His team shall assess causes and recommend: (a) further actions to restore performance; and (b) other actions that may be appropriate to the seriousness of the problem, such as standdon, stas augmentation, increased i
oversight, modifel operations or shutdown. De results of the team's evaluation and rmemmended actions shall be reported in the regular brie 6ngs of the NOC of the Board of Directors, which includes ComF4s Chairman /CEO, and President. De progress and success of this plan shall be reported at each Management Review Meeting for the afected station. De NOC of the Board shall also be noti 6ed when performance has been returned to conformity with the threshold, ne revisions made include changing the title of CNOO to BWR and PWR Vice President and including j
the option for the CNO and BWR/PWR Vice Presidents to review actions plans and current performance and then determine if an assessment team is necessary to evaluate the aderse performance.
i l
Revisions To The Definitions ladicator 16. Safety System Performance de6nition change: "De sum of the unavailabilities of the 4
i e
l trains in the safety system divided by the number of trains in the system. (Awrage for the snoath)".
I j
ne sevision changed compasset to tmin. His chases was ends to be consistent with the tenninology j
used in the INPO N for Safay System Paformance Indicator C4 Temporary Modi 6 cations (T Mods) de6nitica change: "ne total number of T Mods. T-e Mods are a planned change (c p
) to the 6t, form or function of any operable systern, structure, component or circuit that does not conform to approved design drawings or,other approved design documents.",
De revision changed the name of the indicator from Temporary Alteration to Temporary Modi 6 cations.
l Dis change was made to be consistent with the terminology used in the temporary modi 6 cation control process across all six sites.
Changes Te ne Thresheid Values e - Indicator Cl Operator Workarounds threshold change: " Greater than 10% deviation from the Site Work Down Curw or three Operator Workarounds (whichever is greater) over site's monthly goal on j
the Work Down Curw."
ne revision added "three Operator Work arounds (whichever is greater)". %is change was made to normalise the required accios for sites with Work Down Curves that were more aggressin.
Indicator C4. nreshold change: " Greater than 10% deviation from the Site Work Down Curve or three T Mods (whidwver is grantor) owr site's monthly goal on the Work Down Curw".
T i
ne revision added "three T Mods (d.Weg is greater)". His change was made to normalize the -
required accion for eitas with Work Down Curws that were more aggressin.-
WerMr.Mo poc
- - ~...
U.S. Nuclear Reg;1 story Commission Octoter 8.1G7 Page 4 Selection Of Dresholds Indicator C5 Failed Technical Speelfication Pump and Valve Surveillances threshold change:
" Greater than 2 per month."
Indicator C6 Unplanned Entries into !.CO's threshold change:" Greater than 2 per month."
e Indicator Cll Engineering Requests threshold change:" Greater than 10% deviation from the Site e
Work Down Curve."
Indicator Cl2 Engineering Requests Overdue threshold change:"Orcater than 5 per month."
Indicator Cl3 Conective Action items (CA1) threshold chauge: "A 25% deviation, higher or lower, e
than the site's pervious six month rolling average."
Indicator Cid Overdue Conective Actions threshold change: " Greater than or equal to 5 per month."
His change was made to monitor performance on a more frequent basis, Indicator C16 Number of Problem Identification Forms (PIPS) Written threshold change. "On a e
monthly baala, either less than 160 PIPS or mois than 600 PIPS wiinen per month."
Deletion OfIndicators Indicator C10 Outage Woit Requests e
Data collected for this indicator has not provided quality information to monitor the' sites performance, therefore,it is being deleted.
Indicator C17 Overtime Hours Data collected for this indicator has not provided quality information to monitor the sites performance, therefore,it is being deleted.
Indicator CIS Cited NRC Violations e
ne tagging nature of the indicator inhibited the ability to monitor performance on a real time basis, therefore,it is being deleted.
We will continue to communicate any such changes to the indicators in written correspondence, as well as in our routine performance status meetings.
uumcwovoc
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission October 8.1997 Pese$
Sincerely, 9p q*
Robe J. Manning Executive Vice President ec: H.Thompton, Deputy Director for NRR A.B. Beach, Regional Administrator Rl!!
R.Capra, Project Directorate NRR O. Dick, Byron /Brandwood Project Manager NRR J.Stang Dresden Project Manage NRR D. Skny. LaSalle County Project Manager NRR R. Pulsifer, Quad Cities Project Manager N"'
C.Shiraki, Zion Project Manager NRR Brandwood Senior Resident inspector Byron Senior Resident inspector Dresden Senior Residentinspector Walle Senior Resident inspector Quad Cities Senior Resident inspector Zios Senior Residentinspecear Office of Nuclear Pacility Safety IDNS 6
LWPMEMODOC
_ _ _ - - -.. _ _ _ _ _ _ = _
. - _. - =
twnen, unn. li.am July 29,1997 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington,DC 20555
Subject:
Braidwood Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-456/457)
Byron Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-454/455)
Dresden Units 2 and 3 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 237/249)
LaSalle Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 373/374)
Quad Cities Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 254/265)
Zion Units 1 and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 295 304)
Supplemental Information Regarding Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed)
Response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Infonnation Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 Regarding Safety Perfonnance at Comed
References:
(1) Letter from J. J. O'Connor, dated March 28,1997; Providing Comed's Reeponse to " Request for information Persuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 Regarding Safety Perfonnance at Commonwealth Edison Company Nuclear Stations."
(2) Letter from T. J. Maiman to U.S. NRC dated April 15,1997; Transmitting Infonnation on Comed Nuclear Operations Division Performance Indicators.
(3) Letter from H. W. Keiser to U.S. NRC dated June 2,1997 Transmitting Supplemental Information Regarding Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed) Response to the U.S. Nuclear Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10CFR50.54(0 Regarding Safety Performance.
Dear Mr. Callan:
In Reference (1), Comed provided its response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) regarding safety performance at Comed. We provided under separate cover, via Reference (2), information regarding the performance indicators that Comed selected to measure its performance across the six nuclear stations. Also included were the definitions and threshold values for each specific indicator. Reference (3) provided updated information regarding threshold values and goals for several Performance Indicators, s i nkum r. nqum h y Li J {
- ' 'f
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission July 29,1997 Page T.vo he purpose of this letter is to inform you of additional changes that we are making. neae changes are a result of the monthly perfonnance review meeting that I have been holding with the Nuclear Operations Division (NOD) Senior leadership Committee (SLC) We are making changes to the dermitions of five indicators. De specinc changes are as follows:
. Indicator C4 Temporary Plant Alteration definition: 'De total number of temporary sherations (Tmods). Temporary alterations (modincations) are a planned change (non.
permanent) to the fit, form or function of any operable system, component or circuit that does not conform to approved design drawings or other approved design docume nts.'
nis change was made to implement a new temporary sheration control process across all six sites.
Indicator C5 Failed Technical Specincation Pump and Valve Surveillances deAnition:
e
'he number of Technical (TS) pump and valves including laservice Testing (IST),
which do not meet the TS or IST surveillance required acceptance criteria.' His change was made to clasify that we wanted to count the actual number of failed componentr. not the nanber of failed surveillance tests.
Indicator C9. Percent Rework definition: 'De performance of any physical maintenance task which results in a loss of time or money within a twelve month period.
De total rework divided by the total number of Work Request (WR) work in the power block that is greater than Electronic Work Control System (EWCS) status $0 and not equal to status 95. (Percent for the 3 previous months with 1 month in arrears.)' his change was made to accommodate the fluctuating work package completion rate and the inherent delay in work package investigations for rework.
bdicator Cl1. Engineering Requests dermition: ' Engineering Requests which are assigned a priority level of A or B. A and B priority Engmeering Requests are tied to plant milestones and significant issues.' Dis change was made to clarify that we wanted to count those Engineering Requesu which have assigned due dates, his allows Indicator C11. Engineering Requests and Indicator Cl2. Engmeenns Requests Overdue, to be comparable.
Indicator Cl2. Engineering Requests Overdue dermition: '!.he number of overdue Engmeering Requests which are assigned a priority leW* V A or B. A V j B priority Engineering Requests are tied to plant milestones and signuicant ( *fb His change was made to clarify that we wanted to count those overdre Engineq.A quests which have assigned due dates. His allows indicator Cl1. Engineering Reque:u and Indicator C12. Engineering Requests Overdue, to be comparable.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission July 29,1997 Page Three As you are aware, certain Comed NOD indicators do not have specific threshold values associated with them at this time. A threshold value will be selected following trending the indicator for a period of time. We will continue to communicate any such changes to the indicators in written correspondence as well as in our routine performance status meetings.
Sincerely, f
'd L2.4<2.J.q Harold W. Keiser h President Chief Nuclear Operating Officer cc:
H. Thompson, Deputy Director for NRR A. Beach, Regional Administrator. RI!!
R. Capra, Project Directorate. NRR R. Assa, Braidwood Project Manager NRR G. Dick, Byron Project Manager. NRR J. Stang, Dresden Project Manage. NRR D. Skay, LaSalle County Project Manager. NRR R. Pulsifer, Quad Cities Project Manager. NRR C, Shiraki, Zion Project Manager. NRR Braidwood, Senior Resident inspector Byron, Senior Resident Insrv. tor Dresden, Senior Resident inspector LaSalle, Senior Resident inspector Quad Cities, Senior Resident inspector Zion, Senior Resident inspector Office of Nuclear Facility Safety. IDNS DCD. Licensing
i...
- . N.
16 u s.. r* s.t. o t il ev316 (*.el June 2,1997 U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Docum9nt Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
Subject:
Draidwood Uruts
- I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos 50-456R$7)
Byron Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Ncs. 50-454/455)
Dresden Uruts 2 and 3 (NRC Docket Nos 50 237/249)
LaSalle Units 1 and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 373/374)
Quad Cities Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 254/265)
Zion Units I and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 295 304)
Supplemental Information Regardag Comnwnwealth FAann Company's (Comed)
Response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comminion (NRC) Reg, rest for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Safety Performance at Comed
References:
(1) Letter from J. J. O'Connor, dated March 28,1997; Prosiding Comed's Response to " Request for infonnation Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Safety Performance at Commonwealth Edison Company Nuclear Stations."
(2) Letter from T. J. Maunan to U.S. NRC dated April 15,1997; Transmitting Information on Comed Nuclear Operations Division Performance Indicators.
Dear Mr. Callan:
in Reference (1), Comed provided its response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 regarding safety performance at Comed We provided under separate cover, via Reference (2), information regardag the performance indicators that Comed selected to measure its performance across the six nuclear stations. Also inclukd were the definitions and threshold nlues for each speci6c indicator.
%e purpose of this letter is to inform you of changes that we are making to the threshold values for five indicators The spectSc changes are as follows:
Indicator 17 Industrial Safety Accident Rate Dreshold. Industnal sdety accident rate exceeds 0.4. This change imohid the selection of a specific threshold value consistent for all six sites in lieu of established site target.
Indicator C2 Out of Senice Ermi Ibreshoid: Greater than 5 enors per par. This change reflects a more aggressive goal from the presious i enor per month 6ibe dI N/'
U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission June 2,1997 Page Two lodicator C4 Temporary Plant Alterations Threshold: Greater than or equal to 10% deviation e
from established work &mn curw. This change was made to allow sites to dewlop goals which nere appropriately reflect site status (i.e. outage wtsus nonatage constions).
ineontor C7 Percent Floor Space Contaminated Threshold Granter than 1% abow site goal.
e This change was made to appropriately reflect site status (i e. outage wrsus nonatage conditions).
in&cator C15 Repeat Events Threshold Orsator than or equal to 2 repeat events per month e
1 bis change involwd the selection of a specific threshold value consistent for all six sites in lieu of a site specific value.
As you are awsre, certain Comed NOD inecators do not have specific threshold values associated with thern at this time. A threshold value will be selected folkming trendmg the in&cator for a period of time. We will contmue to communicate any such changes to the indicators in written correspondence as well as in our routine g,L
= status enesung:
Sineerelyi
-- O Lgsu, Hamid w. Kaiser Vice President Chief Nuclear Operating Of5cer oc: - H, Thompson, Deputy Director for NRR A. Beach, Regional Administrator RDI R. Capra, Protect Directorate NRR R. Asea, Braidwood Pryoct Manager NRR G, Dick, Byron Project Manager NRR J Stang, Dresden Project Manage NRR D. Skay, LaSalle County Project Manager NRR R. Pulsifer, Quad Cities Propot Manager NRR C. Shiraki, Zion Project Manager NRR Braidwood, Senior Resident inspector Byron, Senior Resident laspector Dresden, Senior Resident laspector i dan, Semor Resident laspector Quad Cities, Senior Resident inspector Zion, Senor Resident laspector OfBoe of Nuclear Facility Safety IDNS
- DCD Licensing i
Comed April 15,1997 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555
Subject:
Braidwood Units 1 and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-456/457)
Byron Units 1 and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-454/455)
Dresden Units 2 and 3 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 237/249)
Lasalle Units 1 and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-373/374)
Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50-254/265)
Zion Units 1 and 2 (NRC Docket Nos. 50 295/304)
Tiansmittal of Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed)
Definitions of Pedormance Indicators and Associated Performance Criteria Related to 10 CFR 50.54(0 Response Dated March 28,19')7
Reference:
(1) Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed) Response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 Regarding Safety Performance at Comed d) 11. Thompson letter to J.J. O'Connor, dated January 27,1997t
" Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 Regarding Safety Performance at Commonwealth Edison Company Nuclear Stations."
Dear Mr. Callan,
in Reference (1) Commonwealth Edison indicated that we would provided additional information to the NRC staff regarding the performance indicators we planned to use in response to the NRC's request for additional information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(0 (Reference 2) ne purpose of this tener is to provMt Corned's definitions and performance criteria for each of the Indicators listed in Reference (1). Section 4.7.2. Attached are the dermitions for the previously selected division wide 25 performance indicators and associated performance criteria selected to measure our progress towards improved performance. As a result of experience gained in monitoring these indicators, the definition of Collective Radiation Exposure has been unw,,m r.,mmm
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 15,1997 Page 2 modified. Reference (1) stated that this indicator would be measured on a site basis. Thl has been subsequently changed to monitor on a unit basis.
Additionally, dose accumulated from Dresden Unit I will not be included in this indictor.
Hope you find this information usefut in anticipation of our meeting with the NRC Commissioners on April 2$ 1997.
Sincerely, t
(
h Thomas J. M Executive Vi sident and ChiefNuclear Omcer
[
Enclosure:
Commonwealth Edison Performance Indicator Definitions and Criteria cc:
H.1hompson, Deputy Director for NRR A. Beach, Regional Administrator Rill R. Capra, Project Directorate NRR R. Assa, Braidwood Project Meag-r - NRR O. Dick, Byron l'roject Manager NRR J. Stang, Dresden Project Manager - NRR D. Skay, LaSalle County Project Manager NRR R. Pulsifer, Quad Cities Project Manager - NRR C. Shiraki, Zion Project Manager - NRR Braidwood, Senior Resident inspector Byron, Senior Resident inspector Dresden, Senior Resident inspector LaSalle, Senior Resident inspector r
Quad Cities, Senior Resident inspector Zion, Senior Resident inspector Omce ofNuclear Facility Safety IDNS 1
50.54(f) Performance Indicator Definitions and Performance Criteria a
A, INDUSTRY WIDE INDICATORS The following seven indicators, used by the NRC and World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO), provide a high level safety overview, an indication of overall effectiveness in achieving improved performance results, and permit evaluation of whether we are reaching our overall goal of operating each site at a level consistent with it's industry peers.
- 1. Automatic Scrams While Critical The number of unplanned automatic scrams per year while critical Examples include scrams from uriplanned transients, equipment failures, spurious signals, or human error. Scrams occuning during the execution of procedures in which there was a high chance of a scram occuning, but the occurrence of a scram was not planned are included.
Performance criterion: More than one scram per unit per year.
- 2. Safety System Actuations Manual or automatic actuations of the logic or equipment of either certain Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS) or, in response to an actual low voltage on a vital bus, the Emergency AC Power System, input for this indicator are derived from LERs and supplemented by 50,72 reports, in determining which events should be counted by this indicator, the following conventions are used:
- 1. Only actuations of the t 9gh Pressure injection System Low Pressure injection System, or Safety injection Tanks are counted for pressurized water reactors (PWRs).
For boiling water reactors (BWRs), only actuations of the High Pressure Coolant injection System, Low Pressure Coolant Irijection System, High Pressure Core Spray System, or Low Pressure Core Spray System are counted. Actuations of the F.eactor Core isolation Cooling System are not counted.
- 2. Actuations of Emergency AC Power Systems are counted only if they were in response to an actuallow voltage condition on a vital bus, Specifica!!y, actuations are counted only if the Emergency AC Power System's output breaker closed, or should have closed, to power a dead bus, Actuations resulting from momentary low voltage conditions that do not result in emergency output breaker closure are not counted.
1
Rcvision 4-15-97
- 3. Logic actuations rA any of the equipment associated with the specific ECCS or Emergency AC Power System are considered necessary and sufficient to constitute a data count. For example, if only a valve in a system is commanded to move to its emogency operational position, this is counted as an actuation. A pump does not have to be commanded to go to its emergency mode of operation and fluid does not need to be injected for an occurrence to be counted.
- 4. Only one ECCS actuation is counted in any one occurrence, even if multiple ECCS systems actuate during me occunence. For example, actuation of both the High Pressure injection and the Low Pressure injection Systems at a PWR during the same occurrence counts as 07ty a single ECCS actuation.
- 5. - Only one Emergency AC Power System actuation is counted in any occurrence, even if multiple emergency generators actuate during the occurrence. For example, actuation of all four emergency diesel generators (EDGs) at a unit counts as only a single actuation for that occurrence.
- 6. Occurrences involving actuations of both an Emergency AC Power System to power a dead bus and an ECCS are given a count of two, one for the Emergency AC Power System actuation and one for the ECCS actuation.
- 7. At multi-unit sites that share equipment (e.g., a swing EDG or shared buses),
actuations are counted and assigned to the unit at which the actuation signal or loss of power originated, if the signal source cannot be associated with one unit, the actuation is assigned to both units.
Performance criterion; More than onet.Dafety system actuation per unit per year.
- 3. Collecove Radiation Exposure The total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) received by all personnel coming on site.
TEDE includes "unmonitored" or " tracking" dose for contractors and visitors during the quarter. TEDE is the sum of the deep dose equivalent (DDE) and committed effective dose equivalent (CEDE). These terms are defined in 10 CFR 20.1003.
R3 port the totsi per ur'4 value (at Dresden, exclude Unit 1).
Performance criterion: Projected or actual results exceed the annual year end exposure goals expressed on a per unit basis.
2
R:: vision 4-15 97
- 4. Unit Capat;ility Factor The ratio of available energy generation over a Divu time period to reference energy generation over the same time period, expressed as a percentage with both energy generation terms determined relative to reference ambient conditions.
Available energy generation is the energy that could have bcon produced under reference conditions considering only I:mitations within control of plant management (i.e., plant equipment and personnel performance, and work controi).
Reference energy generation is the energy that could be produced if the unit operated continuously at full power unoar reference ambient conditions throughout the period.
Reference ambient conditions are environmental conditions representative of the annual mean (or typical) ambient conditions for the unit.
i Performance criterion: Projected or actual performance falls below year-end goal. This criterion will apply to Zion and LaSalle following restart of their units.
C. Unplanned Capability Loss Factor The ratio of the unplannec' energy losses during a given period of time to tta reference energy generation, expressed as a por::entage.
Unplanned energy loss is energy that was not prode mi during the period because of unplanned shutdowns, outage extensions, or unplanned load reductions due to causes under plant management control. Causes of energy losses are considered to be unplanned if they are not scheduled at least four weeks in advance.
Reference energy generation is the energy that could be produced if the unit operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions throughout the period.
Reference ambient conditions are environmental conditions representative of the armual mean (or typical) ambient conditions for the unit.
- Performance criterion: Projected or actual resuits show capability loss will be > S%
above established year-end site target. This criterion will apply to Zion and LaSalle following restart of their units.
- 6. Safety System Perforrnance This indicater is calculated separately for each of the following three BWR systems and each of the following three PWR systems:
BWRs high pressure injection / heat removal (high pressure coolant injection or high pressure core spray or feedwater coolant injection, and reactor core isolation cooling or isola'Jon condenser systems) residual heat removal system emergency AC power system 3
l
R: vision 4-1Sg7 PWRs high pressure safety injection system e
auxiliary feedwater system e
emergency AC power system e
The sum of the unavailabilities of ttx ;&,T,pciwnts in each safety system listed above -
divided by the number of trains in the system. The component unavailability is the ratio of the hours the component was unavailable to the hours the system was required to be availabla for service. For the emergency AC power system, the indicator is defined as the sum of the emergency generator (diesel or gas turbine) un.wallabilities divided by the number of emergency generate s at a station. For the emergency AC power system, the indicator is displayed for all stations. For the other safety systems, the indicator applies to either BWRs or PWRs and is displayed separately.
u Performance criterion: Unavailability exceeds two times the industry goal for any
- system,
- 7. Industrial Safety Accident Rate The number of accidents for all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station resulting!q one or more days away from work (excluding the day of the accident), or one or more days of restricted work (excluding the day of the accident), or work-related fatalities, per 200,000 man-hours worked. Contractor personnel are not included in this i
indicator.
Performance criteilort: ISAR exceeds the established site target.
B. COMMONWEALTH EDISON SPECIFIC INDICATORS The following eighteen Commonwealth Edison specific indicators were selected based upon review of indicators that Comed has used in the past, review of indicators used by other nuclear utilities, =vi the experience of our management team, many of whom
- have used these indicatorm in other nuclear programs. They will be applied in a consistent manner across our stations and cover the important operating, maintenance, engineering, and corrective action areas that must perfom' well for sustained improvement at each site. They are designed to provide a level of sensitivity and detail so that timely corrective action can be taken when performance trends surface, permitting us to resume tracking toward our overall goal of superior performance.
4
R:: vision 4-15 97 OPERATIONS
- 8. Operator Workarounds An equipment or program deficiency which requires that an Operatcr take non-standard action to comply with procedures, design requirements, or Technical Spedfications.
4
(# opened during the month) (# closed during the month) (total # at and of month)
Performance criterion: Greater than a 10% deviation froni the site workdown curve.
- 9. Out of Servios Errors The total number OOS error PlFs that are designated as significant (Level 1,2, or 3 PIFs or SCAQ in the new CAP process). (total # during the month)
Performance criterion: Greater than one error per mnth.
- 10. Human Performance Error Lloensee Event Reports (LERs)
Errors of omission or commission by any individual during plant activities leading to submission of an LER Count eli LERs that are designated as having the cause being personnel error and LERs with a primary cause code of A. Count the LERs submitted during the month. (# during the' month)
Performance criterion: Greater than or equal to two per month per site.
- 11. Temporary Plant Alterations The total number of temporary alterations. Temporary alterations are non-permanent changes, modifications, or adjustments to the approved design configuration of a structure, system, or component. (# opened durifig the month) (# doced during the month)(total # at end of month)
Performance criterion: Greater than or equal to 10% deviation between the number
- opened and dosed during a month.
- 12. Failed Technical Specification Pump and Valve Surveillances The number of Technical Specification, pump and valve surveillances, including IST, which do not meet the Technical Specification or IST required acceptance criteria for pumps and valves per month. Does not indude Administrative Techn: cal Specification requirements. (# of failed pumps and valves during the month:
Performance criterion: Trend for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting criterion.
5
RCvision 4-15 97
- 13. Unplaaned Entries into LCOs The number of times that the unit was in a 7 day or less required shutdown LCO that was not previously planned. (# during the month)
Performance criterion: Trond for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting criterion.
- 14. Percent Contaminated Floor Space All areas of the plant that have smearable contamination t 1000dpm/100cm'. The only areas excluded from this trending are; high' radiation arsas with infrequent access, areas that are not accessible, vaults, pits, areas routinely used for contaminated work. '
Areas containing gratirig and satellite RPAs shall be trended as part of this indicator.
(% at the end of the month)-
Performance criterion: Greater than 3% total area, as defined, for each site.
S MAINTENANCE
- 15. Non Outage Corrective Work Requests The number of correchve maintenance work request tasks, including degraded and action requests, that are non-outage and for power block equipment and structures.
Corrective maintenance is the repair and restoration of equipment or components that have failed or are malfunctioning. (# opened during the month) (# closed during the month)(total # at and of month)
Perform:nce crtterion: Greater than or equal to 10% deviation from established workdown curve.
- 16. Percent Rework The performance of any physical maintenance task which results in a loss of time or money. During analysis of the component history in which any maintenance (like in kind) is identified within 12 months after maintenance has been performed on that component. The total rework per month divided by the total number of all corrective and degraded maintenance completed by maintenance per month excluding surveillances and preventive maintenance. (% for the month)
Perfutmance criterion: Greater than or equal to 4%.
6
Revision 4-15 17. Outage Work Requests The number of work request tasks that require an outage to complete. (# at the end of the month)
Performance criterion: Trend for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting criterion.
- ENGINEERING
- 18. Engineering Requests The total number of open engineering requests that include requests for design changes cnd support from engineering. (# cpened during the month) (# closed during the month)(total # at and of month)
Performance criterion: Trond for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting criterion,
- 19. Engineering Requests Overdue The number of overdue engineering requests for design changes and support from engineering. (# during the month)
Performance criterion: Trend for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting criterion.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
- 20. Corrective Action items Number of corrective actions resulting from NOVs, PlFs, LERs, or CARS per month that have been opened, closed and total remaining open at the end of the month. This includes NTS items with a Doc Type = 100,180,181,200,230, and 315. (# open during the month) (# closed during the month) (total open at the end of the month)
Performance criterion: Trend for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting critenon
- 21. Overdue Corrective Action Number of corrective actions resulting from NOVs, PlFs, LERs, or CARS that went overdue during the month. This includes NTS items with a Doc Type = 100,180,181, 200,230, and 315. (total # during the month)
Performance criterion: Greater than or equal to 15 / quarter.
7
Rtvision 4-15-g7 -
- 22. Repeat Events Monthly, the number of events that occurred during the past month whose root cause investigation report has been completed during the past month, that are reasonably similar in nature, to an event that occurred during the past 24 calendar months with one or more of the same root causes. There is approximately one month lag in reporting this indicator due to the time to complete root cause investigations. (# during the month)
Performance criterion: Greater than or eqt so 10% of total investigations indicate repeat events.
- 23. Numberof Proble
.entification Forms (PIFs) Written The number of PlFs written by the site. (# during the month)
Performance criterion: Trend for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting crMerion.
OTHER
- 24. Overtime Hours The number of overtime hours worked by hourly and salaried personnel through grade 11 by site per month. (total overtime hours at the end of the month)
Performance criterion:- Greater than or equal to 10% of planned overtime hours.
- 25. Cited NRC Violations The number of cited violations per month. The month in which the inspection report is -
issued is the month in which the cited violation is counted. (total # during the month) b Performance criterion: Trend for 6 months to establish baseline prior to selecting criterion.
s 8
l
t 10 CFR 50.54('f) December,1997 Performance Report (Data through November,1997}
l b
Executive Summary NGG PERFORMANCE Overall NGG performance improvement vs. industry can be seen in:
I
- Dramatic improvement in Automatic Scrams, now better than industry average.
- Safety System Actuations better than industry except at Zion Station.
- Safety System Performance improving to better than industry median.
- Industrial Safety Accident Rate (ISAR) is now better than industry average and has improved every year since 1993.
Continued improvement needed vs. industry in:
i
- Collective Exposure
- Capability and Unplanned Capability Factors l
December 1997 Performance Report Executive Summary Page-2
A SITE PERFORMANCE e Byron Station is a consistent good performer. Two of the seven industry indicators meet year 2000 performance now. The site is challenged by the steam generator replacement outage.
. Braidwood's performance has substantially improved. Five of seven industry indicators meet year 2000 performance now.
. Dresden Station is below industry average but improving rapidly. Four l
of the seven industry indicators meet year 2000 performance now.
. Quad Cities is approaching industry average. Thre~e of the seven industry indicators meet year 2000 performance now. Current l
performance improvement has leveled off.
. LaSalle Station, while shutdown, is challenged by work windows to allow restart.
Zion Station's shutdown performance is driven by completing work down curves and human performance issues.
Executive Summary Pacs-3 December 1997 Performance Report
Industry Csmpariaon Pis:
1-1:
1-2:
1-3:
1-4:
l-5:
!4:
8-7:
Plant industry Automatic Safety Collective Unit Unplanned Safety System lodustrial Comportson l
Scrams System '
Ra mtion CapetmRy CapetmRy Performance Safety Performance ActuatNms Exposure Factor.
Loss Factor Accident Plant Record Braidwood At year 2000 At year -
At industry l At year 2000 At year 2000 At year 2000 5/7 Indicators at year goal 20C3 goal average goal goel goal 2000 goal Byron At industry At year At industry At year 2000 2/7 Indicators at year everage 2000 goat everage goal 2000goel Dresden At year 2000 At year
- ,,,,,..Jed to At year 2000 At year 2000 4/7 mdicators at year gcst 2000 goal nearIndustry goal goal 2000 goal average LaSane N/A At year At year 2000 MA NA N/A At year 2000 3/7 Indicators at year h
goel 2000 goal Quad Cities At year 2000 At industry At year 2000 At year 2000 3/7 Ir@cators at year goal average goal gost 2000 goal Zion N/A
)
At year 2000 N/A N/A N/A At year 2000 2/7 Indiretors at year
~ goal goal m goal NGG l-1:
1-2:
1-4:
l-6:
1-7:
4 NGG FA Indicator Dramatic At or better Capetmity AN operating Shcwing Comperison Performance
- iT.,,,v.e.ren; than is sites at or substantial Performance-mixed to better then Industry improving tmtierthen
- 6.,,, c.c.T4. it but good and industry except for at the 4 industry at all Sites improving for average at Zion operating average ar.d operating plants operating sites showing sites significent improvement N/A = Difficult to use goal for meaningful comparison while shutdown Shaded areas = Industry Comperisons i.;;L,y improvement to meet industry averages December 1997 Performance Report Executive Summary PaDe -4 v
Industry Comparison Conclusions Performance improvement across the division
- Automatic Scrams (Byron = 1 Auto Scram on 10H087 Unit #2)
- Safety System Actuations (Except Zion,3 this year)
Safety System Performance
- ISAR (Except Byron at.48)
. Four sites with improved Capability Factors
. Integrated performance model and INPO index shows
- improvement at Ezaidwood, Dresden, and Quad Cities
- Byron again above industry average
. Continued focus needed on reducing Collective Exposure a Overall, there is mixed performance across the NGG. At the four operating sites there is a general improvement in the measurements
~
compared to the industry.
Executive Summary Page-5 December 1997 Performance Report
Functional Area Performance Pts C-1:
C C-3:
C-4:
C-5 C4: Unplenned I C-7:
Plant Operegens Operh Nork Out-of-Sennee Hur,an Temporary FeNed Tech Er.irlos 8.nic I Percent Floor Performance Arounds-Errors P-7
...e,s Modifications Spec t.COs Space I.ERs PumpNefve Contaminated P'ent SurveNiences l
Braidwood Aheed of Good Good
' Good gMs Wgg; l
Schedule Performance Performance
.mM j
Byron On Good On Good Good Good Schedule F4rformance schedule Performance Performance Performence Dresden Aheed of Average Aheed of Good Good Aheed of Good Schedule Performer ce 3chedule Performance Performance Schedule F 7vis.eis Except for C-3 LaSelle On Schedule g
Average On Good Good Good Good but Goel Performance Schedule Performance Performance Performance Performance e
incrossed a
Goal Substen6el i
j incrossed Reduction Quad Cities On Schedule Good l Average On Good l Good l Ahe'd of Good Performance l Puformance Schahde Performance l Performance l Schedule Pwformence Zion JISSBEtt Gond Average On Good Good Good g$qvg1 Performance Performance Schedule Performence Performance Perforrnance y%
q Satstentlei
-3 am NGG
"~
'^"-
- .., s.M w (f. ?]g On target to AR Dies better p
On Target to
-~
J_-
w g
g%]$p; indicator
(
j Performance a
meet goele then threshold lll Meet Goels
. hp. gJtil except li Performance
~
3 j
4%F J...
- -ML sreldwood.
I g
g>_
Shaded Area = improvement Needed i
l l
December 1997 Performance Report Executive Summary Page-6
Operations Performance Conclusions l
I l
I Overall, Operations performance mixed l
l l
Challenges to operators decreasing
. Operator Work Arounds and Temporary Modifications reduced Continuing focus needed on human performance
. Dresden's human performance corrective actions appear effective with zero new issues in October and November.
. Quad Cities has had nine human performance LERs year to date with none in November.
. Braidwood and Byron each had two human performance LERs in November.
Braidwood and Byron were in variance for the second month for Unplanned Entries into LCOs. The threshold revision has been approved that sets the threshold at greater than six Unplanned Entries into LCO for Braidwood and Byron.
Overall Operations performance is mixed across the six sites. At the four operating sites the majority of the measures related to operational performance show good performance against site goals.
Executive Summary Page-7 December 1997 Performance Report
Maintenance and Engineering Functional Area Performance Pts C-8:
C-9:
Ci1:
C-12:
Plant Maintenance and E..v;..;;.1-@
Non-Outage Percent Rework Ers;.;;.1.s C..y;..;.. ;. s Performance Work Requests Requests Requests Plants Overdue Brakfwood On Schedule Good Ahead of BetterThen Good Performance Substantial Performance Schedule Threshold Decrease Byron f._
' BetterThen l Substantial
] BetterThen l Average Performance W=
__.- Threshold l Reduction l Threshold l
Dresden Ahead of Good AC wf of BetterThen Good Performance Schedule Perforrnance Schedule
. Threshold 34dstantial l
Reduction I
LaSalle Good On Scheduto Better Then d
Ferformance Godtincreased Threshold but i
' 13 overdue j
dudng the month Quad Cities Ahead of Good On Schedule BetterThen Schedule f%rformance Threshold Safety-Related Bacido' Reduced Zion Sl Ahead of BetterThen i$glM l
Schedule
, Threshold Q
Goalincreased NGG Indicator I
Better than All Sites Better Performance l
Wueshold except Then Threshold l
l Shaded Area = Improvement Needed December 1997 Performance Report Executive Summary Page-8
.-- =.
Maintenance & Engineering Performance Conclusions
. Overall, Maintenance performance
- Implementation of 5 week schedule reducing backlogs
- Rework improved at PWRs except Zion
. Overall Engineering performance
- In the process of re-prioritizing the backlogs at all sites.
- Main focus is on improving quality of engineering products
- Need improvement in Maintenance Rule implementation at Quad Cities, Braidwood, LaSalle, and Zion Executive Summary Page-9 December 1997 Performance Repois
- _=
Corrective Actions Furetional Area Performance Pts C-13: Corrective C-14: Overdue C-15: Repeat C-16: Number of Plant Corrective Actions Open Corrective Actions Events P!Fs written Action Plants F.fiv.i. 8rs 3raidwood Backicg Stable HisicM Low Average Acceptable Good i
Overdue Performance Number Periviii.ers Byron Backlog Stable HistviL;;j Low Histoncelly Low Acceptable Good 300 Written for Overdue Repeat Events Number Performance SW Root Cause Dresden Beckivg Zero Overdue for7 Repeat Events Acceptablo Good Decreasing Months Have Decreased Number Perfonnance LaSalle A Stable Ovadoe Average Acceptable Average Decreasing Performance Number Fmiviii.ers and
- .c.v.e "-rq Quad Cities QMg Ovc-idoe Average Acceptable Average Decreasing Performance Number Posiviw.srs h
NGG Indicator fl{ ;p: - ~. '^' 'J, Overa5 good Decreasing across Accepuble Conectrve Action Performance "FT poriviw.eiice Group except at Performance Perfonnance except Zion Zion improving except M@f489f at Zion l
Shaded Area = improvement Needed I
December 1997 Performance Report Execuhve Summary Page-10
Corrective Action Performance Conclusions Common corrective action program implemented at all six sites
- Allows evaluation from site to site and identification of common deficiencies f
- Common thshold for problem identification
- Multi-site trending reduces repeat events Overall performance is strong at Byron, Braidwood, and Dresden.
LaSalle's performance is average and improving. Quad Cities' performance is average. Zion's performance is weak.
I December 1997 Performance Report Exe:utive S~ niary Page-11 l
l
SITE PERFORMANCE a
Site Performance Page-1 December 1997 Performance Report s.
integrated Performance Model Byron Performance l
0
=._.
._./ \\ _.
./_
/
e 2
4
\\/
a 1
6-
= - - -
- - - - - ~ -
- ~~
8 e--/-
- - - - - - -*-8Y"2
-4== 8 vron t
\\. -
%ndwetry to o arters e
S yron IN PO Perform ance Index too
.0* h f.e * *-
N
.0
^
l 70
+9 pron IM P O lades
==4.-B yfon 1 Y ear in d er 60
-M== led s e tty IN P O la d es M ed s.n
- - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -,
50 40
- - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - -
30 so....
s.....
o.....
...7 2...
7
- s.. 7 September 1997 is an estimate. INPO Index numbers are not available.
December 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page-2
. Byron Station vs. Industry l
l The integrated performance model and INPO index indicate that Byron is livipivvirs.
Byron had one Automatic Scrams and zero Safety Gystem Actuations and there was only one OOS error and three LERs Human Performance Error for 1997 through November. This represents good operations and site human performance and improvement over the previous year.
In la'e 1996 Byron performance as indicated on the iraegi&M performance model, declined below the industry average. The key drivers were Collective Rad Exposure due to midcycle S/G adaga=, Scrams, Safety System Actuations, Safety System Failures and Forced Outage Rate. All of these areas have improved in the last two quarters. Station performance is now above the industry average for three quarters.
Safety System Unavailability and the number of Temporary Modifications continue to be low except for the neceesary T=.pesary Modification increase to support the steam generator outage. This and other indicators mentioned above indicate the safety-related portion of the plant is in good condition.
Past Byron Collective Rad Exposure was adversely affected by steam generator mid-cycle outages and RTD Bypass Loop elimination modifications during refueling outages. Byron is currently projedsig to be greater than the industry median for the fourth quarter of 1997 and the first quarter of 1998. This is due to the steam generator replacement outage. 1999 projections are under the industry median.
. Byron's ISAR is presently 0.48 which is above the industry goal of 0.4. A December accident will prevent Byron from achieving the ISAR goal.
Overall, Byron must continue their improvement efforts to meet year 2000 goals. Byron meets two of the seven industry indicator yea-2000 goals now.
SRe Performance Page-3 December 1997 Performance Report
~~
~
I Byron C.4, TGmporary Modification Work Dovm Curve 5
]
1 E
I I
i 5
I I
E I
E l
l 1
Byron C.8, Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests Work Down Curve f
g j
i E
-1 I
I i
4 I
I E
I l
l December 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page-4
Byron Station Performance Operations performance for the month of Nc'vember is mixed. There was continued good performance in OOS Errors and a low percentage of Contaminated Floor Space. Operator Work Arounds are high overall, but the plant has closed 14 in the last six months and is on tradk with their work down curve. Twcpuiwy Modifications increased because of the steam generator repiscerrreid outage. The site had two Human Performance LERs in November.
Lower level indicators continue to indicate that an increased focus on human performance improvement is needed at Byron to ensure future good performance. November indications were as follows:
An accident that increased ISAR to 0.48.
Two Unplanned LCO entries were human performance related.
The crane load drop event.
Two Human Performance LERs.
Overall the non-outage corrective backlog has gone down. However, the site is in variance to the work down curve for Non-Outage Work Requests for November. The steam generator outsee wf* Mallenge the site to make the December work down goal. The equipment related issues that shutdrw-
,5 October are being investigated.
The engineering request backlog was significantly reduced during the reprioritizing effort. A new work down curve will be prepared.
The Corrective Action Program is deemed v.ffective. Additional details on the Corrective Action Program are provided in the Functional Area sect 3n.
In November, there were three significant events involving the drop of the Steam Generator Runway, an inadvertent start of the Control Room Makeup Fan and a 28 CW pump trip because of a dropped chainfall.
Byron is in variance for ISAR (first month) Human performance LERs (first month), and Unplanned entries into LCOs (second month) and Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests (first month).
l The site has analyzed their past LCO entry hLstory and requested a change to threshold. A revision to the threshold has been approved that sets the threshold at greater than six per month for Braidwood and Byron.
Site Performsnce Page - S December 1997 Performance Report
.~
l Integrated Performance Model Braidwood Performance 0 =~.-.-=-=-_ -
- : r
. _./._.- - -
/\\
T 2
3
.._./_... _...
. _./_\\. *./_ _ _\\._
_ _\\__._.
=- -
/
4 i
j5J
\\/
6
~
7
--*-Braidwood 1 8
--=-Breldwood 2 g
- !ndustry l
10 n
n 8
3 8
3 ce 3
3 n
3 n
n ce 8
5 5
h E
N y
8 3
n ce n
e d
N 8
5 e,
m I
Q u f ters BraldwoodINPO P e rfo rm a n c e In d e n 3- - - -
a. n u - ---- - - -
n
- - - -. - - - - - - - - ~
y.
.......,o.u..
--.......,v..,.....
o.....
.....r e....,
September 1997 is an estimate. INPO Index numbers are not available.
December 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page-6
Braidwood Station vs. Industry The integrated performance model and INPO index indicate that Braidwood performance is steady and is above the model and index averages.
At present, Braidwood meets five of severt industry year 2000 goals. Industry performance for the month of November shows a good trend with four of seven indicators positive. Auto Scrams are at zero, Safety System Actuations are at zero. Safety System Performance, and ISAR are better than industry average.
Capability Factor and Unplanned Capaldlity Loss Factor were below the industry average because of startup
~
problems at the completion of the Unit 2 outage.
For Collective Radiation Exposure, Braidwood's Wxxt term performance has improved. However, in relation to the industry, their long term performance has been flat and the steam generator replacement will ad e n:/ mpact future i
industry comparisons.
Overall, Braidwood's performance has substantially improvnd with five of seven industry indicators meeting year 2000 goals now.
I December 1997 Performance Report SNe Performance Page-7
C.3, Human Performance LERs is q 14 1
4 3Rw 3YR ZtM ORS LAS OOC l
Mit t e T O T M19 9 9 T O f E31998 TOT Mee9F70T
)
Braidwood C.8, Non-Outage Corrective Work Requests Work Down Curve
\\
1 ssN s"
)
E E~
l~l l
.m O,c
==:.......
O...
December 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page-8
Braidwood Station Performance Operations performance, for the month of November was mixed. Operator Work Arounds, OOS Errors, Failed TS Pump and Valve Surveillances, and percent Floor Space Contaminated continues to be positive.
Human Performance LERs, Temporary Modifications, and Unplanned entries into LCOs exceeded threshold in November.'
Maintenance implementation of the five week work cycle along with establishing Tool Pouch, Minimal Work Requests, and Job Jar programs have reduced by half the Non-Outage Corrective maintenance backlog (from 2400 in March to 1125 ). As a result the station has adjusted the work down curve to a more challenging goal of 1,000 by year erx! and 800 by mid 1998. In addition, the station is steadily improving the amount of scheduled maintenance work completed each week (now over 80%).
The site's Maintenance Rule improvement plan is on track in preparation for the NRC inspection in December.
The Corrective Action Program is deemed effective. Additional details are provided in the Functional Area section.
Engineering performance is seen in the reduction in Operator Work Arounds and Erg;cs.-irs Requests.
Progress is being made on the station's long-standing equipment problems.
Significant events for the month of Novemtwr were the Si relief vatn feedwater line hammer and a small
~
fire or. the high pressure teorbine's oil seat insulation.
Braidwood is in variance for Human Performance LERs (first month), Temporary Modifications (first month), Unplanned Entries into LCOs (second month), and Repeat Events (first month).
The site has analyzed their past LCO entry history for the first month variance and requested a change to the threshold. A revision to the threshold has been approved that sets the threshold at greater than six per month for Braidwood and Byron.
Temporary Modifications are presently at December work down goal.
Repeat Events werc reviewed to determine common causal factors.
December 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page - 9
- - - - - - - - - = =
Integrated Performance Model n...
}
s 4
a y
C 0 ^
g E
4 m
qp -
s-e g
e s,
i
_e g s_e s/
.. _. -- y.
- *--o...d..,
o,.. d...
g4 n d s. tty ts d
d 5
d 5
d E
d 5
of,,,,,f 3
d E
d E
d I
D re s d en IN P O P e rfo rm a n c e In d e x 100 90
- ~ ~
r 5
=
so yo
~
- 60 0
.- g
}'
+ D'****"*NPO'"**" -D re s d e n t Y e a r f e d e s 3
---~--7----
--#f--in du elty IN P O Ind e n M edle n S0
- - - - - - ~ ~ - - -
-- - - ~ -. -.
l 40 30 M ar-98 J u n.9 6 S ep.9 8 D ec.9 8 M ir-9 7 Jun-97 S ep-9 7 September 1997 is an estimate. INPO Index numbers are not available.
Dacember 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page - 10
IIl1l l!
I eb g
1 a
nn 1
,s ia s
n n h
e c c w
o g
a eh a
i o
t i h
td oc s
P s
ue ri r
ph a
e x
cm pw e
n t
c e
Ay a
y a
d t
m r
si t
n mt in s
r s
I o
e u d u o
f O
sd nr p
t f
r P
yn a0 w.
eP N
Si 2
w o
t n
n2 d
n e
I N
fe ef t
s S
e teh mo r
l h
f t a
a T
ar ela p
o Se v o e
ot og m
g t
r o
0 e
g rb ph c
0 y
a e
n r
r Zr "u t n
r.
0 c
t e
,o e
e e
2 dr h
b r
s v
st a
et a
s w
m e
u ma n
y ae r r a a, e
e y
i d
r s
ca t g c
v t
n n
o g
s n
u Sn ui a
N e
I dn oie sh t
m r
s s
tuh ni i
l r
o e
s w
Aw wb o
f m
v o
f oa f
e oo ht e
g s
r l
s r
e r
n b
el s e p
a o
l za s
r t
o u
n-ai d
e a
t s
h o
v c
i b
e n
o a
d i
i ta y
nc
) e d
en ad g
y n
l i
r t
a da t s t
y s
o e r.
w S
e em s
r t
r e o
u s
t t
o yDb h
d u
s r r Df h
m s
n d
l n
n r
t e
e t
e nxe o
n i
d a
w P
oec i
t d
s n
mde s
o 7
e em nD e
l f
s r
ee di u
e o
e D
st nen n
b 4
s r
s ey agi it s
h ae w
bS ur c n
a D
o t
i ny e n o
w w
h at Ya a c
v cfe r
y s
m n
o
(
d l
r e
t a ear e
t d
nS u eo d
c s yf s
a p
r o
e md mg o3w e
F a
r n
r n
ei ee vv p
p D
s g
x e o
n cr oo Ehd r,
o v
i nt r r o
o L
o p
t ag pp mi mm nno t
e n
r c
y p
R oig a
t i i r v in m
e t
i oo ed ked F
li i
c f r cn dve y
b s
an rep wa a eu a
t i
pm m
i TR Rn n p
n l
i r
i a6 b
a o
o i
d d A
ein a.
c h
f e n eS vdo pe a
e r
t dI ie a c d
aa t
P t
c og cm C
e S
r i
gd pi e
h n
n 97 ee t
yt d
l 9
ot n T.
n e
i n
l l
t i
l r
ni a e Csw U e l
r 1
r a
d ia r
r d p
s e
r ets e
ut hu v p 3de o e n
re b
Ts O ;i nm Fp u
D m
i e
I i
ce D
1,l:ll!
if
)
I!"= =M I
~
g Il i
i k i
r l
i s I
g
! ?
4
{
i j
! I i z
~~ f
}
c--
s s
"b$",;,"-*a aii!!!!!!!-
f a =~a.%%,..%
l E
h I
l n i li lj!
l 1
I
{ll i~ !al
! l
! !! i lt! h{la y li h i a
t l
Il I!I!l f, ifI i
4 91p li11 n! l.
i a
i l
' li gjl
{
j j]; {;
d u 89 jn,i o i,n!!!ellil i l l,
r! ' h n
i i
i i
!n!!!!!h li!!!li Hlili i
3 5
==
.e
_- b:
=
g a
m n
<>l N,
l
~it c.
E y["
-/
i m
s.-
I
\\
\\
&. 2. $.
i L
i
\\
!l.h i
.g "i
o ui m\\ ;>
N l
s i.
j i
i l
l l
j i
I x
it e
I '
tM j
l si I
i
{x i
e a
I u
l ',
i g
a 8
i
- !s j
i i
i 1
i i
e i
i E
4, 8
m a
g s.
i ca.
i
'Ni i
i inl J I
a
- I
<[ ' z 'f'
- j 4
.h i
o.
3
=
A' i
en z
~
p
/
,i t
tu i o
a, i
f'/
s g
.s i
E I
l n.
i i-a m
l o
/'\\{l
{
I 1
i A
i I
E l
I48 4
g; o
2
\\
,l i
"m IM e
I D
j[
q
<[i g\\'
C A
a
.e j
3 k
c tw Il <
l i
.8 1
g a
i a
e
?
i.
w te U) j
"*****2 E E E R E E % R3 E
~
Q O
LaSaile vs. Industry The integrated performarx:e model and INPO Index are opposite with the performance model above industry average and the INPO index below industry average.
The following indicators do not provide adequate data for cuiip ciscri while the plant is shutdown.
- Capability Factor
- Safety System Performance
- Unplanned Capability Loss
- Autvir t;cScrems
- Unplanned LCOs LaSalle has &,rivnstrated good miiviirsics preventing Safety System Actuations with zero year to date.
i LaSalle is positively usitirvuting to the overalf NOD performance in ISAR.
l LaSalle Station, while shutdown, is challenged to wir& 2 the necessary work to allow restart L
1 l
SRe Pe>R,.irew,e Page - 15 December 1997 Performance Report i
'e
. i
i i
,l
- il
- l il l
6 1
e g
a P
e c
n j
a m
r o
f r
e
,,7 it P
<r. h 3_ f g i g3.
eep f
e S
e
~
f e
/
v m
v 1
1 r
g e 3 Q
-n j
ru u
C C
,i
- m, _ =
n n
7:c__54 w
=
=
n w
u_
o o
D D
k k
m m
r 3
r o
o W
W s
s e
e s
s d
t s
u s
n u
e o
u r
q A
e s
a s
e u R
k s
ro g
n W
N i
re r
o e
t n
i a
g r
M e
n K
p E
O 1
1
- gg 1
i "a M u o
C C
e e
.aS u_
l l
l la
~
a S
S
~
E
-[
a a
t L
L o
r p
d e
i
-[
M i
R i
l e
m r
a
" i.*
m r
o y.55 I f
re y!.
P 7
7 1
r e
b m
e c
eD
LaSalle Station Performance In tt e operatio.s area, performance is mixed. LaSalle has a high number of OOS Emxs, Tonipci.y Modifications, and Operator Wo4, Arounds. Human Performance LERs are on pace for industry average perivur>&ci with none in the last three irevidis Hcer.r. LaSalle's OOS Errors are in variance for the year. Actions to pie.e.it recurrence have resulted in no errors the past four months Operator training preyT Ts are on pivid,an.
In the maintenance area, LaSalle has a high Non-Outage Work Request b Giag with almost no change for the last four months. Percentage Rework is steady at 2.7% Management attention will be given to this work request backlog.
In the engineering area, the number of engineering requests remains the highest of all sites by more than a factor of two. Engineering has not yet prioritized the Engineering Request backlog. Management attention will be given to the ER bacIdog.
The Conective Acdon Program is not fuNy effective but improving. Additional details on the Corrective Action Program are provided in the FunctiotW Area section.
Significant events in November worn an k. advertent start of the OA Control Room HVAC and HPCS breaker failure due to lack oflubrication.
LaSalle is in variance for OOS Errors (for the year).
I Site FeJuiinance Page - 17 December 1997 Performance Report
Integrated Performance Model Q u ad Cities Perfo rm an ce o
2
[\\.
.C &
v a
6
,.4 L p\\
j
_\\
s
-- / -
g a.
/
\\
..-*-Q ua d C ases t 10
- Q uod Cries 2 g
12
~.q - - - -=
q,,,,,,y- - - - - - -
p y
y y
a a
c, a
y a
y y
y 8.y y
8 3
8 E
8 N
8 8
2 8
M 4
m d
8 a
N O merters Q u ad Cltles IN P C P erfo rm an ce In d ez ses n
=
=
=
=
=
M~..u
--o... cm.. m eo A..;
--ee-(. e e c m.., y..,....
eo
--as--3...,,, my.........
S0 40
~
30 w ar 9s J.n.s e S e p.9 6 D ec-s e M e t.9 7 J e a.9 7 S e p.9 7 September 1997 is an estimate. INPO Index numbers are not available.
December 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page -18
1 Quad Cities Station vs. Industry i
l t
The integrated performance model shows performance has i-,pc.d for Unit 2 and is steady for Unit 1 at just f
below industry average performance. The INPO Index indicates ;.rpc.c.Twd.
)
i Overall performance ;..pic.eTwd can be seen in zero Automatic Scrams, zero ISAR and improvmg Safety
[
System Performance.
I-3 Collective Radiation Exposure has shown a short term improvement. Year end goal is 360 per unit. Results i
through mid December indicate that this goal will be met. However, this is stiff high as w..,-iwd to industry l
and will not make year 2000 goals at current rate or ;..gc.
.&4.
l t
l
^
l I
f i
December 1997 Performance Report Site Perfomuce Page-19 f
,.-w-
l' 02-egaPecn i
a m
l r
Ng g
o fre c
e I
P o.
v s
,2 o
r t
i u
S C
I nwoD I
k t
ro W
I sR s
E d
L n
I
. o u
e g
c o
n r
a A
I m
k r
r u
o 6
W 1
I P
r 1
o r
t n
a a
r I
m e
p uH O
I 3
1
^
C C
s I
e i
t i
C E
da u
Q
.l t
I ro p
q-e g
R 8 e 4
ec 1
s i na m
ro fre P
7 99 1
re b
meceD
[
l
C uad Cities Station Performance Operations performance is good with Quad having em lowest number of Operator Work Arounds in the divisson. OOS Errors are at zero and Human Performance LERs are showing continued ;...pic.evs4 from past years highs.
Operations is reducog operator distractions. (Operator Work Arounds, Control Room Conectrve Work Requests.
Caution Cards And Temp:)rary Modificahons).
In the Mamtenance area, Quad has the lowe:,t overall Non-Outage Corrective Work Request bacidog. Rework percentage is also the lowest in Comed. Tre Eriv;.n g Department has taken actions to support improved training programs, remove operator distractions, reduce ER backlog and improve performance.
However, the Engineenng Department exhibited serious deficiencies in the implementabon of the Maintenance Rule, including scope determinshon, performance criteria and self assessment Ei y;.;;.-;.g management and quehty needs siipc.eT&d, particularfy in corrective actions, investigshng root cause, cx)rrechng plant deficiencies / deviations ' rom design, the Appendix R Fire Protection program and idsntifying problems ard recognizing their potential significance.
The Corrective Action Program is deemed ineffective. Ad Nelonel detaNs are pic.M+11n the Function Area section.
October significant events were an enforcement conference for Maintenance Rule, loss of B channet RPS due to undervoltage, and both stamRpy Equid control pumps inoperable.
Quad Cities is in variance on Unit Capability Factor (threshold exceeded for the year) and Correcthre Action items (first month).
The decision to shutdown a unit for Appendix R concerns wlII cause the sIIe to not make their capabWty for the year. This is not recoveratde given the short time remaining in the year.
December 1997 Performance Report SNe Performance Page-21
. ~
N.
O E
^s
,,E g
A
>\\
$IE t te E
ww 2
/'
e 5
I 42
~
\\
\\
3 i
E!?
o.
- I l
I..>g E gm O
p b
e f
1
/l l, kkI
- < l l
on n N'\\
l>j t
I i
I E
f f
I 5
e
/'/ A i
=
i
- x i
} l 8
\\l;
,lI i
i
! !i
'M l'il c
~
a 3
j j
S 5
2 I
I
,i o g'll 5
h e
y i
u m.
e.
6
<5 l
I o
4 4
O.
h/r E
i q
i t<s o
g;Nq l
l*
A N
N g
,g [
,i p
Ope,%'5
[g x
l a
li
,T c
,g t
i 3
s E
8' ' '
g '/
lH E
o 18 d
sg i
1 m
o i
I i.
ci
!y
/
8*
h H
A e/
a i
i m
t e
e i
6 i
h C
i N
i 4
=
n 4,
E 4 o
\\
a s
i cn te u
o i
<v
. ~....
8 2 8 R 8 a? R 5 )
e
.8 E
8.O
llj I
l l.
fo t
3 n
2 ee s
sm e
e e
u h
u g
as t
s a
c s f
s P
e o
e i
to s e
c y
c n
s o a c
n a
a a
m r
t n
Ah u
m o
r w
q f
~
.g r
o di e
o e
r s
d f
d r
P lor a
e e
tu he e
h sv e
p t
i g
s eo h
n S
r t
a a
e hr a
n m
r r
t e
a r e o
u v
ol s
i c
t h
a t
t y
n au s
c e
d a
iN u
n s
i.
p d
8 a
u n e q
s d
e ih o
e n
h wt t
v t
n n
r i
e e
e u
ri o
c l
e s
e h
h c s i
i
.g Z
n Tn M
t y
w w
n s e-d w
r o
n a o
.R i
c e
o mL A
an h
s d
f d e
e o
t l
s r y s
b S
pif c
u k
n oit fil I
s a
r u
e e
ebs n
ee r
hh d
c o
r p
s r
d a
oPamO w
i t t n
s m
pa i
n s
o cmarC t
sr h
a g
c a eccl n.
do e
h n
I i
Ft S
ef b
r ti wr c
s e
e o
sd d
es
.s f
f y yeie ni cn e
b p
l t
v x
Snta-v n
i v
r a
r c
i e o
.t s
ya m
m l
o i
i t
x a
byam
.t d
e o
mha l
at n
e d
n c
c eio i
ce og e
y pf pt p o
d e
aanur D
h n
D b
ir gi n
ta CSUAU O
we nn i
I Z
O q
N st r a u
h n
n i
i e
i er n e o
et d
v P
e l
i l
n nd e
r N
d a
i n
r d
t i a
r I
e am ga u
s i
r d
e v
u t r n
i n
d o
ce:
es c
e a
i e
c v
e Atee nt o
nc le o
h mdra d
t a
r o a d
p t
d a
m o
o eo s e e h
t t t m
o s
g su t
r t
o n
g ys n ud n
f e
n Ssi cl o
e r
t c
o ed oa i
r t
o n
d u
yr n f r t
p i
p t
b egi fe a
n e
a s
ir of v
m r
far e de u
w R.
r o
t t n n
Sps us c a o
e t
o a
o e
c nd Al d
f n
en r
c c
p u
a t
eih ea e
i sT nh mn h
m p
d y
r n
le hi e o s
o r
d
'g-v n e.
nn t
t i
f e
aa st s
r d
i oc yc
'n e
ts n
t l
l ain pp Sa o
i P
s i
ht y
w o
aa nn ys 7
i e
o p
s gi oo t
r t u a
9 aia l
9 t
lo s
i i t
eo S
t t n
htsv cc 1
f i
i f
i r
AA av n
e e
e n
ne s h
h o
ovi Se o
b T
T Z
ZInh r
i m
i i
t Ap Z
ece D
[l(
Zion C.8, Non-Outage Corrective Work Request Work Down Curve t
I N
3....
5 g.....
1 I
1.....
l l
8 C.15, Repeat Events
~
.140 7
120 100-I E
80 - '
t 60-1 40 - '
o4 l
Mi t t e T O T Mt997 TOT December 1997 Performance Report Site Performance Page -24
b i
1 Zion Station Performance i
i In the Operations area, performance is poor. The work down curve for C-1 oporetci work aroeids and C-4
(
l l
Teir.pciery Modifications have been recently revised to reflect higher numbers expected due to the C' i;d start up.
l l.
Operations training prvy anim have been put on p vuauvi i
1 L
-The site has completed the demonstration pedod j
The improved tedin;cel specir. cot;cri pr@ is challenging the site to implement on schedule.
s i
i 3
i In the Mainienance area, Zion has high Non-Outage Work Request becidegs The pt,rcentage of scheduled work ceir.p;cided contmues to decime and has dropped to ~42%.
The site has prepared an action plan to improve Maintenance Rule ;. 4;..
^ ^"-:-r l
i I
in the Erv;.;;-ing area, the site is presently repdorttiring Enginsedng Requests.
[
e ii The Corrective Action Program is deemed ineffective. Additional details are provided in the Functional Area
[
section.
4 Significant events for the month of November were a 50 gallon spill dudng RTS of CW Ambertap and cubical F
l mode of HVAC exhaust is not through charcoal filters.
f Zion is in vanance for Safety Gystem Actuations (threshold exceeded for the year), Percent Rework (first i
I month), and Corrective Action Items (first month).
1 Zion is look;i.g at the action plan for Safety System Actuations because of a December actuation.
~
Corrective Action item increase was expected tmw of the incregse in violations that occurred.
l 5
December 1997 Performance Report site Performance Page-25 i
1 i
4 4
i 1
[
i i
l 1
Attachment A i
L I
t i
l
[
i I
i i
i
)
l FUNCTIONAL AREA i
l PERFORMANCE DATA 1
\\
1 1
I i
I i
b December 1997 Performance Report Functional Area Performance Page-1
NOVEMBER COMPARISON TO YEAR 2000 PERFORMANCE L
Braedwood By vi.
Dresden Quad Cries Zion LaSeNe 1997andusty Yeer 2000 Benchmerks F,,L... - s 0
1 0
0 WA NA
- 0.7 0
While Crftical(YTD) 3-2 Safety System 0
0 0
1 70 0
- 0.5 0
Actustions (Wu)
--d5 fj[
72.7 59.6 118 113 p
(pway (yro) p9 p@
3 218.6 133.3 235 215 p%
y pj*
86.0 %
59.8*-
84.4 %
43.4 %
WA WA
[dgy dW$
81.2 %
82.8%
WA NA 80%
87 %
p
)
2.6%
6.4 %
WA NA 6.5%
3%
oss Fador s.s setetysystem
.0030
.0039
.0085
.0000
.0047
.0009
.02
.02 P h (YTD) 1-7 ISAR (Yiu) 4; jggk
.11
.11
.36 0
48 4
N/A = Difficult to use goal for rNaningful comparison while shutdown.
Shaded Area = Improvement Needed i
I l
December 1997 Performance Report Fundfonal Area Fm7vi.i a Page - 2
!V
f f
l
)<li!Il4{lI lII 3
8 eg 9
a t
9 P
n 1
e e
f c
d rr o
n e
u r
a m
c e
m a
e r
o t
r ts h
r.
a fr
)
t a u e
u u
s g
e q P
y t a
n Y
i s
e e
r r
e
(
1 J
c g f A
i e
7 e
a d s
b i
9 e
c tu n n
s 9
g w
o a o
a 1
a h
h n
r o 7 c
e o
e e w9 un r
i v
t c.
t 9
F e
Z a
n y.
y e
. a 1
h t
f t
6 p
k m
r.
s o s
e i
d 9
n 9 6 c
o e
c a
u r
v u we d
n a
1 a
d o
t n
t iaia s
r r
o e
n g
i s
g s
p h u e
i a
e e
c t
e q
h i
t i
e t
h t
s r
i r
e s
t d
s u t
s h o
i a
v l
t e
t a
a e
n h a u y
l r
p 5
t e
c c o A
i y
s 9
6 a
m a
t t
e e f
t r
9 m
s r b e o
t e
o u
t s 7 h u
t u
1 o
g s
t d
a n
q o 9 v
t r
a C
n r
t 9 o f
e e
i c,
,1 f
e v
m e
e r e r
y h
a e
c n
f t
c o g a
r y
v a
p e
h o s r t
n s
a 4
s g
n o
i s
r h
9 6
d n e da u
v u
t 9
1 u
c d
n e
o r r
1 d
e n
d i
l d
s wh y c
l i
i t
s w
t t
e e
d c n
e a
u a n u e
i r
I b
r n
D r e d t
y o
t.
h B b n a
i s
d l
y n
t t
i wiw c
t n
a e
r nt o v
e h
s a a t
r i
r t
s d
wu h o r G
t r, a
u r
d e
d t
i c
e e
v n r a e l
tt e
s a
e c y G
i s
e n
g o e a e e t
i b
g h e p s l
N es e
n r
t r
ie a
s e
e d g o o c
e r
r i
i ia r
t t
t d
uy s
s c
v h e er w t
d bo a
o 4
m n
q h
d ;
t t
o e ; oa e
l ro l t t r s
p s
s E
d r
c e
i iha u
a a
e x d t
n u
w e e n 'e e
wp R
S u
o n
e l
t l
Qa o s cg a e
t s e c
c it a e c
l mh A
a dd s h jmS i
n it o
a a
i at a
ce m
m d
ne a r a L m
r r a
amh d o pe e
R r
t d
o Sv o
t o
t s
ny n c ss n f
c u
y o
er e o
i r
t n A
S w
dt d d at a e
it s
P s
c n
s u a
i t
e e a r e o 9
e y
c 7
m m e
rd r
r yu t
i n
Di D B Bd Z 9
e o e f
l l
1 tuv a
o r
A o S
C e
b g-m 2
3-1 e
n 1
1 c
1 i eD llll l
NOVEMBER COMPARISON TO YEAR 2000 PERFORMANCE I Brh l Synm l
Dresden l Quod Clues l Zion l
name.
1ss7 insusey Year 2000 l
1 1
l 1
Bendedores Perewmenee I
0 1
O-O NfA
' PGA
- 0.7 O
Whge Cecel(YTD) l 1
1 I
I' I
l f
f
'O 1
0
- 0.5 0
O 0
so.s 72.7 its 110 neuna___
21s.e 133.s 235 215 mm p,"f es.Os 50.e%
84.4%
43.4%
WA m'
M
)
Paparey Facser g
gg g
g g
g ljYN
$5MN,,,
2.es e.4 s sea m
o.sm as (YTU)
W
.0030
.cose
.00e5
.0000
.0047 '
.e00s
.c2
.o2 g
l l-7 ISAR (Yiuj l
.20 11 11
"~~"~
38 8
48 '
N/A = Ddficult to use goal for meaningful compenson while shutdown.
Shaded Area = ;..vc.c.T 4 Needed
'l l
I December 1997 Performance Report Funceonel Aree Perfonnance Page-4
)
i
NGG vs. Industry Comparison 1-4 Only Dresden is better than 1997 bernluna* for month of November. Braidwood, Byron, and Quad Cities each had a unFin outage for November.
1-5 B.mWood meets year 2000 goal for Urpienced Capability Loss Factor.
1-6 Sare; System Performance has significantly improved at Braidwood, Dresden and Quad. Byron pedenrance continued to be better than industry median. Zion qnd LaSalle numbers are not meaningful for curveiiscn while i
shutd~.vn.
i I-7 Division ISAR is better than industry performance and has shown continuous Li.g0,eTierd since 1993. "rk,w;,er, injuries occurred at Braidwood, Byron, and Zion in November.
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 ISAR 1.56
.83
.73 g
.66 20 Byron had two injuries from the period of June to September and was slightly above industry median.
Because of an injury in November, Byron is below the.ndustry medan at.48.
As shown in the station sections, the integrated patenrience model shows continued kiir 0,eT&d at Braidwood, Dresden and Quad Cities. After a one year decline in pedvirnence, Byron is again above industry average.
Overall, NGG performance improvement can be seen in Automatic Scrams, Safety System Actuations (except Zion),
Safety System Performance and ISAR. Also, the four Opeisung sites have all LTpic.d Capetslity Factors from last year. The table below indicates top quartile patenriance levels as of September 1997.
1-1:
1-2:
I-3:
1-4:
f-5:
56:
l 3-7:
Automatic Safety System Collective Unit Capetety Unplanned Safety System Industrial Scrams Q yr)
Aduations Radiation factor Q yr)
Capotely L.oss Performance Q Safety Accident e-w Q yr)
Fador Q yr) yr)
Record (1 yr) 1st Quartile BWR 173 BWR.0055 Performance 0
0 PWR 85 88.9 l
3.6 PWR.0025
.1 Functional Area Performance Page-5 December 1997 Performance Report
$lIl!l'l llllll l
l, S
r _a r
e
- n a
0 g
e 2
a A
A y
A A
P o
N N
3 N
M
=
/
/
t 9
3 i.
C i
1 i.
nA N
)
)
)
)
1 3
1 U)
(-
U() U) (-
(+
0 6
4 2 a
(
s
(
e a
5 6
6 0
1 1
r 2
3 L
7
(-
A 1
1 is I
no itcn
)
)
I
)3 a
4
)
U()
Fu 1
o
(-
U) 1
(-
(+
(
(
3 3
iz 1
1 F 4 6
2 3*
3 2
2 I
sn s=
)
o a
1
)
)
)
C
(+
U D
D U) 2
)
)
(
(
+
i
=
8 0
9 2
G 7 2
(
(
(
t d
2 3
9 2 +
a
=
1 1
(
o rep n
)
)
e
)
)
)
)
d U
)
0 0
1 1
O
(
1
(
(
+
+
s
(
(
(
2 8 e
4 6
6 3
3 5
0 7
(-
r 1
1 o
2 2
re b
)
)
3)
)
)
m n
3
)
)
4 1
o 1
(-
1 2
+
+
r 3
(
(
(
(
+
41 r
1
(
e e
2 3
1 0
2 2+
5 2
1 7
(
vo d
)
N o
3 o,
2)
(-
U) 2)
3 U) 3)
)
1
(
(
+
(-
(
(
(
d.,
2 1
3 4
2 5
2 2
7 r
5 7
e 1
)
t u
r d
o e
i e
p Y
e ta
(
M in R
N_
s e
d m
e c
n a
g n
u t
a o
n n
)
o a
m rA v
C h
o r
i k
c f
w r
r o
r e
W f-e P
s m
ro rv 7
S r
r o
r 9
r i
d F.
n 9
o e
1 o
v g
S l
r O
F o
e O
O T
Tp N
b m
1 2
3 y
=
e 6
7
)
c C
C p
C e
(
D l
l,l
i ji; 7i[
i l!lii!
- t r
i i
e t
[
e 7
e e
u r
d w
b ss e
l i
g n
o l
a ei n
P l
e ohw a
r e
t t a
n s
c e
Cso a
n y
Lri a
e Sei e
m t
c wn n
o r
h e
i f
of a
t hl e re t d m
P n
t a
ya r
h b hs o
a f
e t
i r
r s
pt h e
A s
udT p
l e
oe a
l r v r.
n n
y Go a
s o
o i
m e
d t
r r r
c a
ept a u
u n
e epc h
d u
Pai e n F
r l
d l
c.
o a
a sn n i
e nei e
u s v
oe s pi r
v a
ibi e
r t
r s
a h
e e e
d r st
)
v p n
ea:
A it u
t c
o phi C
a s r
v Ond C
y t
n
(
d s b c.
eoe i
a ht d s
e n d i
t i
k u
s n mle t i m
r nl o
oic y
e r
w ken a
md i
t f f
l a
r cd n:
e e
i o
h h e
Ad p
t t
l o
adr f
t i
r e a e n mwin b
r a
s u e
e i
t s
nis ufo r e d p
ev a
o c e r
P o
se o d
n v Cn d a r
r r
s s
r ia e
e s
w aAe i
r n
p s ed g
. b n
o w
S pe h
r r. O i i o t
s c o
s
=
n
. i ooO i i e
c.
g i
r r u r d
t s
r r u
n n d
eef C T i
a n
o l
i e
l r
u SS G
m e n b e
o OOp Gp we e
f s
r d o r
p A
OOy Na e u y r
t t 4 ew h b rs t
k n-c= h hn e e b O
t r
i i
o a
c t
c c. i o
n v s W
ri h di i
i r
n rw8 nt s s b f
d i
a s
v i
o ggs9 ag me p i
ta sse9 sit c
i i r
i 1 Rs e x w t
f e
s e e
aaiy Ev o
y n p
f r r O ).
oo ar Ln s
l tr a
a a o
i l
f e
y p
5 n
cu ce 7
ol dn ns i e e e
d t
1 v
v R
l 2
io n a a u b
= e e
i i i t
Cf ih aJ mc a
c.
c c
n a
r o s
ol el h r
i t
r r
n f
f a er ei ot n e e a
t f o wp p
m ao dh vw o
r t e er r
s s o
t g e
m_ k a
hel g P A r
r f
e e r
t h en d s.
e ci n
k gv r, tynt a
e o o 7
r r
P r
s n1 ef it 6 bi aa me hT WW 9
r ct r2 oais ui 9
t o(
Hs 1
t l f
pl ccid
,l e
r n
pa Odgs l
e 3a b
uo ni m
Sg n asu Ca t
e I
ce D
a:
i i i ii Ij
November Operations Bradwood Byron Dresden Quad Cries Zion N
M ce C-1 OperatorWort Arounds(YTD) 52 (-2) 51 (-3) 34 (U) 18 (+1) 31 (-4) 75 (-1)
MA C-2 OOS Eros (YTD) 1 (D) 2(1) 3(1) 0 (0) 1 (U) 6 (U)
NA l
C-3 Human Performance LERs 3 (2) 3 (2) 16 (U) 9 (U) 5(1) 6 (U)
- 9 / year C4 TempomyN 24 (U) 21 (+4) 16(U) 22 (U) 24 (-3) 10e (-3) 13 to 20 k5 Wm 22(o) 10 (+1) 25 (+1) 30(U) 26 (+1) 11 (+1)
MA 57 (+3) 72 (+13) 20 (+1) 19 (+2) 23 (0) 26(U),
WA 7 % N W NN 1.7% (-1.3) 2.4%
7.2%
2.7%
3.3%
3.4%
-3%
(*13)
I*
I
(-6%)
(+.2%)
(-1.2%)
( ) = November dwge l
1 I
l December 1997 Performance Report Functional Area Performance Page-8
l:
l lI I1jll 9
d d
l e
n o
s g
a h
a a
r s
h P
e f
e e
e r
e L
b r
t a
c h
n i
y.
o dt s
s a
ed c
e e e
e m
t i
t icn O
hh h
i r
t s
o nt pi r
5 r
f ri o
Nts e
g e
n r
n P
eh f
t t n e e
h d
e s h
a ea i
sw l
e w
r r
o mt e
A
'ns a
n p
oi h
yh e
o a
l r n s
l t d
n ye e
t r
nd s
4 o
B d h
ee e
e n.
d i
.s t
cv r
w eo D
ho n
se u
Tis F
r eD o
ep s
.iv r r t
u l
lay e
hp 7t si vd b
t a p
rd e
o i
e kO r
gn c
ah t
i.
o ne x
ct de e
i ds e
r.
t
- d. e a
eb re n s g
c o
a s
es t
r i
a ca t
ec t
n wo w
xh b
ca e
u a
e se t
e d
r t
m yn c
nl o
- i. c o o n
L e n
rh e
cia r
= m a
ys g
o dc m
Be a s.
Jm e
t ia o
dh e u or r
f n
r r
o pf r
r vo l
e np f
nt at se r
r P
hr e
ae ie hn ye np o
p dt o bh in tir t
t wo s
o r
ya e
otoy af aa s
t m
io r
e
'u wn B
- d. l e
n l
r rl pu t
o mn a
dod ia O h r
i in o e n
me n
a t
s e o i
ria t
t g
t u
e Bv a
h a
cm v
ed g.i t d n
r nr o r
e
@r i
ea u
Ao dm d
e i
r e at S
d w
n a e
p s
e
.d r n
- c. e et n
e n
t hi e e v
l O
dh t
o i
ut a r c sis l
nr o
s a
s oB e
t V
e t
efo d
en mr a
co r
r De d
o o
st ri s
n s rf
.t rn i
au a
Oe t
t eo e
C ph cn it a
p t
t s c L2n a
ta n e m
o ps c
t ob u
iam So J, e n ::
n o
r i
r o
t P
r s po ad r.
shr et e oa dM R
ce a W irp oe if s e e
e r
l i
t e Fr x g.
c day nt x A
i n
oe Eaie s eR min a
d r e Mch A
sw m
h n
dr t
egn aL r
yir c
c o
i r
e i
f a
n nf T
nf h iA e v e
c,s o Ts r
r n ot mr eT P
ok d r.
adr ao hi 7
i i
e pi eb plot nd l
e t f t y 9
t ra l
l
,l 9
im nha o e i
eic l
a 1
a l
d.
Fe Usr Cd ar e
Tif r
r e e
d v
o 6 reg i
5 7-c en b
4ow CN e
v e m
Ctht Cd Og e
Cmt a
ce D
I11llll
- I,
Ii !
tit
,(I
, t!
I !
tlfif >J!
l}I 0
1 l
e n
a l
g l
a l
w k o a a k a
os G o o o c P
c Dl r.
G G G r c
a e
a ko T d T
n n < < <
a rG n i
n O h 4
3 2
o 7
O m
W e 8 B
5 3
r o
1 f
re P
ae rA l
ano itc nu F
a 00 0
0 0
0 t
e 5 0
0 0
0 0
t 7
4 3
3 s
D 1
2 2
t s
e uq e
n R
o k
Cc r
u o
d W
e R
e g
v i
o d
t l
c k
n 0
0 0
0 0
0 l
c c
Ea 0
0 0
5 0
0 u
a ro 0
B 2
7 9
2 B
aG o
- ^
~ 3~
~
1 1
3 t
e
~
~
C
~
s Y
e z
e g
uo a
e tu R
O k
n ro o
W N
v 8
C h
0 0
0 0
0 0
g 0 0
0 5
0 0
5 5
6 7
2 5
i H
2~ ~
~
~
5~
1 1
3 1
79 ts op eR ec nan L
no
... 8.
d s
fr e
e 8.
o n e 8
o e
I it P
i in w
c d a C n 7
3 2 2 r
s o
9 d
y e S d Z 9
i ia B r
a a 1
D L u
r r
e
.1t B
O b
m i
uig eceD i:l
- ii
,; i
)
.i; l.
i Maintenance Performance t
C-8 Non Outage Corrective Work Requests shows'that the total backlog has improved except at Zion and LaSalle.
l The 3 sites that have completed implementing the 5 week scheduiing gecess (Braidwood, Byron, and Dresden) have made a step change in reducing the total backlog and increasing the amount of work coiT@e.
i I
I The non-outage corrective work requests that are greater than one year old sre a significian percentage of the tota!
l backlog.
I C-8 Non-Outage Powerblock ADe >360 days Braidwood l
B3 Ton Zion Dresden LaSalle Quad Cities 23% (+3)
I 16% (+1) 24% (+1) 25% (+2) 22% (+7) 31% (+4)
( ) = November change I
(
C.9 Percentage Rework has improved at Braidwood and Byron, all sites are better than threshold (4%) except j
Zion.
l C.9 Percent Rework t
j 4..
3.s 3.S 2.s f
.e t.s 1
e s i
i a
i
)
Decernber 1997 Performance Report Functional Area Perfom.ance Page - 11 I
t
C.11. Engineering Requests C-12, Engineering Requests Overdue
/
4 3,oo /
g 1600-
/
1400 3 /
f1200-
/
} "'
I
/
2 y 800-
$ m-js i
je
/,
~
y
,,y
' ".7. -
_e 7,
. Quad Cities sigrdficantly reduced the number of ERs without due dates.
Braidwood Byron Zion Dresden LaSalle Quad Cities
- of ERs w/o due date 277 (-59) 76 (-54) 304(-15) 8 (+3) 259(-8) 22 (-109)
% of total ERs 50 (-8) 55 (-4) 46 (-3) 6 (+3) 16(0) 14 (-55)
( ) = November Change December 1997 Performance Report Functiormi Area Performance Page - 12
--._m.~.-.w-.
n
-n....
an-en-~ns.,_,--a
...._n---m_~n
_as N
\\-
\\
d11
\\
t-
,s i
k k.
\\;
t i {ti
\\'t
\\
l D{,{diii 1I 1
e 1
i l1 1
.\\
\\
- \\s s b\\a
\\
Q9\\p\\\\
d i
ngji)aIklp1h 1
il
{1l.
I e
s C.13, Corrective Action items 600 500 s
E<
400 D
300 s
U
?
200 3
100 0
1 C.15, Repeat Events 14o
~
12o -
j too -
ao -'
2 eo - '
l k!
40 -
e _
b l
gl31 s e e T O T mt99F TOT l
December 1997 Performance Report Functional Area Performance Page - 14
i Corrective Actions The common Corrective Action Process was implemented in May and performance measures are deceirig recent improvement on overdue items. Repeat events occurred at Braidwood (in variance), LaSalle and Quad Cities in November.
C-13 Backlog of Corrective Action items continues to increase except at LaSalle. There has been an increase of 38% in the last six months across all sitest C-14 Overdue Corrective Actions have decreaW.
C-15 Repeat Events occurred at Braidwood, LaSalle, and Quad Cities, however, data is suspect because of '
the number of root cause reports in backlog at Zion and LaSalle is high. LaSalle's backlog has improved from 30 in August to 11 in October.
Days to complete root causes are high. The goal = 45 days and NGG for October = 63 days compared to 57 days in September.
The site self identification ratios are low but improved in October. The goal =.5 and October NGG range =.30-
.52.
C-16 Total number of problems being identified is at an acceptable level.
Other information shows that improvement is still needed in root cause quality Recent corporate root cause peer reviews of root cause repo61s continue to indicate problems with root cause investigations.
Current root cause approval rate is low except at Braidwood. The industry berds-ik = 85% and the October NGG YTD average range = 60-98%.
December '.997 Performance Report Functional Area Performance Page-15 f-u'-
Y
-3d 5-
-'C' '- ' - - ' " ' ' ~' "
Il ll\\
l 6
a 1
e ga P
ecna m
ro freP ae rA lano idnu F
I t
a tropeR ecna m
rodeP 79 9
1 re b
meceD ll1llltll
Corrective Actions The first NGG-Wide Common Cause Analysis (CCA) was completed in June. A root cause investigation was performed and found:
The accountability system is neither well dr> signed nor implemented.
Workers perceive an excessive burden in compliance with administrative procedures.
Workers perceive a low probability of being observed in the field by supervision.
Corrective Action s+.aties for this Common Cause Analysis is as follows:
The NGG accountability policy is being developed. Final review by the HR Vice President, BWR Vice President, and PWR Vice President.
A pocket w a field instruction that clarifies administrative policies is being developed by a WIN Team sponsort.J q the Station Manager Peer Group.
The Human Behavior Observation Scorecard is ready forimplementation. Awaiting schedule from Station e
l Managers and final executive approval.
Overail due date for the Common Cause Analysis Corrective Actions is June 30,1998.
l 1
Functional Area Performance Page - 17 December 1997 Performance Report
Depar1rnent Self-identification Ratio
.o 0.6 lii a:
g 0.5 a
h 0.4 55 l
5
[h y
0.3 l
i 5
d 5 a en 0.2 9 7 lI E
dl I h
0.1 -
f E
0 BWD BYR ZIN DRS LAS ODC 1996 GOT
""""MMT STD December 1997 Performance Report Functional Area Performance Page e 18
Corrective Actions Braidwood's October performance is good. However, NTS Overdue items increased to 52 items. Some improvement has been seen in Mechanical maintenance and Electrical Maintenance self reporting of problems. Braidwood performed 410 ACES during the month of October, which is approximately three times ti a number of ACES necessary to support the CCA. The station should evaluate the use of resources against the potential gain. OvercH, Braidwood has provided effective management support to the Corrective Action Prognem.
Byron's performance is adversely trending. A significant adverse trend has been measured in NTS Due Date e
Externions (up from 52 to 145). Several other indicators exhibited " slippage" during Oc*ober. They include:
Average time to complete Root Cause Reports (up from 31 to 51 days);
RCA Threshold jumped to 0.35. This was primarily due to a large number of LERs during the month (6);
and RCR Approval Rate was 0% because only one RCR, which was r;;;,.;M, was processed by CARB.
Over-li Byron nas an effect!ve Corrective Action program. Byron continues to provide management support to the Corrective Action program and correction of the recent adverse trend is expected in subsequent months.
Dresden's October performance was acceptable and holding steady. Dresden has taken aggressive corrective action in response to the low number of ACES being performed. Dresden performed 71 ACES up from 30 the previous month. The Average Number of Days to Complete h Action continues to increase. Overall Dresden has provided effective management support to the Corrective Action Program.
December 1997 Perfonvrance Report Functional Area Performance Page - 19
lIIl l,lll i
02
-ega P
e cnanno fre P
ae rA l
C a
s
, D no i
Q C
t R
c D
nu Q
C F
R e
s t
l t
e S
r
. A D
S l
o A
p L
T p
L S
m T
e R
o M
M e
C s
R D
. R u
l o
S E
a t
R D
C D
T s
D Y
t y
o M
o a
G V
A f
6 D
e N
i 9
o T
u e
I Z
9 Y
d s
N 1
. I i
r 3
Z E
ev e
l g
O a
R r
6 Y
e 9
B v
9 R
1 A
Y B
trop Nr/
l Re D
e Y
cna m
D ro W
fre 0
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
B P
0 0
0 s
2 0
8 6
4 7
3 2
1 1
1 9
9 I
5u IjE yE.
r 1
e b
meceD
Corrective Actions LaSalle's performance continued to improve in October. In particular, improved performance has been measured in:
RCA Threshold; LaSalle has exhibited excellent management attention tu assure the proper number of RCRs are performed while not overburdening line organizations; The number of NTS Due Date Extensions are appropriate given the very high volume of NTS Items being processed by the station; Repeat Events were zero for the month; and Overdue Root Cause Reports imprr%d from 19 to 11.
LaSalle continues to be challenged by high backlogs of corrective actions which wfIl cause higher turnaround times. Station CAP management is currently focusing on " quality" and " accountability" indicators rather than the backlog indicators. As a result, overall, the Corrective Action Program is not fully effective at this time.
The recent management support of the Corrective Action Program must continue to achieve the needed improvement. LaSalle will provide management attention to the corrective action backlog.
Quad Cities performance is below standards in some areas. Past Due NTS lterra improved to 16 from 38.
However, NTS Due Date Extensions are extremely high at 254, no improvement has been seen in this indicator over the past 6 months. A more aggressive management expectation needs to be communicated to line managers. Line managers must be held responsible for both overdue and due date extensions on action l
Items.
The low number of corrective action effectiver;ess reviews being performed by the stetion is a concem. In October no effectiveness reviews were performed. Management attention is necessary to assure responsibility is assigned for performing Corrective Action Effectiveness rev'ews. As a result, overall the Corrective Action program is not effective at this time. Management support of the Corrective Action Program must increase to achieve the needed improvement.
December 1997 Performance Report Functional Area Performance Page-21
..1
--.-u-1
l1
,l
-1' 22 3
'at P
ecna m
ro R
fr O
e gC P
ae rA lanio tc C
nu D
F Q
DTS TM s
M n
S o
i A
s L
ne txE e
t D
a S
T D
R Y
D eu j
D s
i eh
,. N 6
I Z
99 1
R
,Y tr B
op e
%D R
ecn a
m ro f
W re 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
B P
0 0
0 0
0 0
7 0
5 0
5 0
5 9
9 3
2 2
1 1
1 r
meO.E=%m 3ao e:a vtz s
e b
me c
eD l1
7 Corrective Actions Zion's CAP performance is of particular concem. All but two indicators were below standards in October. Those that are not meeting standards include:
The number of overdue RCRs (25 up from 21)
RCR Approval Rate (78% improved from 25%)
e Overdue NTS ltems (133 improved from 478). According to station staff the data provided is a " snapshot" at the end of the month. This is inconsistent with the definition of this indicator. Zion must comply with the division's definition.
NTS Due Date Extensions (208 improved from 508, but this number also needs to be validated).
Days to Complete Corrective Actions (168) q Only 1 Corrective Action Effectiveness Review was performed during the month e
Past Due Corrective Actions for the year and Average Number of Days to Complete RCRs for the year, are a
the highest of all the sites Overall, the Corrective Action Program is not effective. Senior management attention is necessary to address l
Zion's Corrective Action Program adverse performance and to implement appropriate corrective actions to remedy the situation.
I Overall Assessment Overall performance was mixed during October. Byron and Zion exhibited adverse performance trsnds.
LaSalle's performance has improved. The vast majority of Zion's CAP pesformance indicators are not meeting the measurement standards.
Braidwood, Byron, and Dresden have effective programs and good management support. Further improvement is needed to the LaSalle and Quad Cities Coirective Action Programs. Significant improvement is needed at Zion.
December 1997 Performance Report Functional Area Performance Page - 23 L
......... m
-