ML20069P994

FCS Performance Indicators Rept for May 1994

ML20069P994
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	05/31/1994
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20069P971	List: LIC-94-0138, Forwards FCS Performance Indicators Rept for May 1994 ML20069P994
References
NUDOCS 9406270199
Download: ML20069P994 (96)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _

-===-m-i--- i .

k

. ~

p , ; . .

n - - _ _ ,

FORT CALHOUN STATION I PERFORMANCE INDICATORS a

lifi"ftdEEdiiliihra,.s mgy '- *% ' , !

' d'#

MAY 1994 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS MA'"l85Li M8E8ss R PDR

I

.. . j i

i 0 % ul e eacx % a w wn, al L L,...

9 d Onvam uasden, wnd sowndjudynwnl...

d w a, fediana,, cam,-Inng canandsnwnl...

e awa,u>ay9(p...dwdan7 ikjd>

nigVlkl inst %,eneu,,%.atw j tavns-dimbd, ul iG wdl e v1km? ,

9 puwme,, d w a wn,998uwJk wG un, as wnd ik geda, wnd $k%

u _p wr iu gu me puwn,, aljud On, dang i6 9Vl%ny.

J-).o'e-

s A+ - _

l l

l OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT  :

1 r

Prepared By: ,

Production Engineering Division l System Engineering Test and Performance Group l l

MAY 1994 i

1 1 FORT CALHOUN STATION MAY 1994 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT l OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

During the month of May, the station operated at a nominal 100% power level. The spent fuel pool reracking project continued.

The condensate cooler was cleaned and returned to service.

Technical Specification (TS) 2.19 on fire protection has been removed from the TSs. Fire pro-tection requirements are now contained within Standing Orders G-102, " Fire Protection Program Plan" and G-103, " Fire Protection Operability Criteria and Smveillance Requirements". I New setpoints wen: put into the Power Operated Relief Valve (PORV)/ Low Temperature Overpressure Protection (LTOP) circuitry to allow plant operation through 20 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY) of operation.

On May 16, Reactor Protection System (RPS) Channel A Thermal Margin / Low Pressure (TM/ f LP) and Axial Power Distribution (APD) trip units failed to the tripped condition. A 48 hour5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> i Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) was entered per Technical Specification 2.15 (1) and trip units for Channel A high power, TM/LP, and APD were bypassed. The problem was traced  !

to a loose connection in the APD calculator and was repaired. The affected trip units were de- i clared operable and the LCO was exited the same day.

On May 26, a Swagelok outlet fitting from the secondary system hydrazine tote to the suction of l the transfer pump was found to be not fully engaged and leaking. Access to the area was con- l trolled and the spill was cleaned up by Hazardous Material personnel. A notification was made i to the State of Nebraska with a follow-up 4-hour notification made to the NRC due to the spill of  ;

hazardous material. I The following NRC inspections were completed during this reporting period:

IER No. Description 94-12 Monthly Resident inspection 94-15 Engineering / Safety Assessment & Quality Verification /SALP Cycle Closcout Team Inspection The following Licensee Event Reports were submitted during this reporting period:

LER No. Description 94-004 Inoperability of Halon Gas Fire Suppression System Due to Inoperable Fire Damper 94-005 Failure to Appropriately Address Out-of Tolerance Test Results for Snubbers Source: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs -

i

=

Year-To-Date Value

_ _ ____________ Performance Categories I l' 3 Performance in Industry l I  ! < Unplanned - Thermal Upper 10% and better Unit i UolplMi{ied [ Automatic . than 1994 OPPD goal

Performance Capability l Chpalpilityi - Scrams /7,000 Factor l LobbFabtor Hours Critical -- T Performance Better Than l ________

] -

u 1994 OPPD Goal i i ii.it i im its . ti t!!

l Ba F6el HPSI Safety @$ Performance Not Meeting

S tem %ty i lySystem; iG Shfe;tf Bellstiility -

1994 OPPD Goal Pefo ance i

'fD' I --~

l j

l l l T i __. i i 1-_- .+-

lI'!  !

'll'l

!' i M , February March

'94 April l '

.. .. ~.- 94 94 t Collective Vo!ume of Industrial ~

l dhemfs'h l 1,i pMdjg l Radiation Low-Level j. Safety:.

Accident - May 1994

'Caldulation - d Exposure Radioactive 7 Rate Year-To-Date 1'9 Mj --, Waste ___

Best Possible Performance 1994 Year-End Performance l

l INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS l (Performance for the months of January through May 1994) 1

n EAuto 4 Scrams:

While l: Critical; Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories E Performance Better Than Industry Average Trend ISafetyi Significant

' kctuat ons Performance Better Than 1994 OPPD Goal Performance Not Meeting 1994 OPPD Goal or Industry Average Trend iSafety 3 Forced 6 System j Outage

Failures . Rate February March April

'94 34 94 May 1994

[ Equipment:I Year-To-Date 1: Forcsly Collective Value Best Possible

?OutNges/1,0003 Radiation Performance 1994 Year-End Exposure Performance iCritfHrsh - -

jg NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Safety System Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for October 1990 through September 1993. Predictor blocks cannot be generated for these performance indicators E because they are based on NRC biannual reports.

All other indicator values are for the months of January through May 1994.)

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT MAY 1994 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT ADVERSE TREND REPORT A performance indicator with data representing three A Performance Indicator with data representing 3 con-consecutive months of improving performance or three secutive months of declining periormance; or four or i connocutive months of performance that is superior to more consecutive months of performaned that is trending the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear towards declining as determined by the Manager - Sta- 3 Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-OP-37). tion Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per NOD-OP-37. A supervisor whose performance indicator ex.

The following performance indicators exhibited positive hibits an adverse trend by this definition may specify in trends for the reporting month: written form (to be published in this report) why the trend ,

is not adverse.

Recordable Iniurv Iltness Rate (Page 4) There were no performance indicators exhibiting adverse trends for the reporting month. l Hioh Pressure Safety Iniection System Safety System Performance j (Page 8)

End of Adverse Trend Report.

Auxiliary Feedwater System Safety System Performance (Page 9)

Emeroency Diesef Generator Reliability  !

(Page 11) INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED Diesel Generator Reliabinty (2s Demands) MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT  ;

A performance indicator with data for the reporting period Emeroency Diesel Generator Unreliabilty that is inadequate when compared to the OPPO goal is (Page 13) defined as *Needing increased Management Attention" per NOD-OP-37.

i Fuel Reliability Indicator (Page 14) The following performance indicators are cited as need- l i

ing increased management attention for the reporting Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resuhino in Lic- month:

ensee Event Reoorts j

(Page 20)

Industrial Safety Accident Rate - INPO Forced Outaos Rate (Page 2)

(Page 23) The year-to-date industrial accident rate value of 1.29 exceeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalof 50.50.

Secondary System Chemistrv (Page 39) Disablino iniurv/tI! ness Frecuenev Rate (Page 3)

Maintenance Overtime The year-to-date disabling injury / illness rate value of (Page 48) 0.644 exceeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal of 50.50.

in-Line Chemistry Instruments Outof-service (Page 51) Clean Controffed Area Contaminations >1.000 Disinte-orations / Minute Per Probe Area Hazardous Waste Produced (Page 5)

(Page 52) Based on the rate of increase in the number of contami-nation events reported year-to-date, it is anticipated that fd2ptaminated Radiation Controlled Area the 1994 year-end goal of 554 will be exceeded.

(Page 53)

Number of Control Room Eouloment Deficiencies i (Page 15)

End of Posrtive Trend Report. The tota! number of control room equipment deficiencies has been above the Fort Calhoun goal since September 1993.

l

• I i

J FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT l MAY 1994 -

SUMMARY

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT (Continued)

Violations Per 1.000 Insoection Hours Temocrary Modifications ]

(Page 18) (Page 57)

The number of violations per 1,000 inspection hours has The number of temporary modifications >1 cycle old has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of a 51.4 for the months exceeded the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since April.

of March and April 1994. The number d temporary modifications >6 months old has exceeded the goal of 0 since January 1994.

Unolanned Automatic Reactor Serams Per 7.000 Hours Critical (Page 27)

The number of unplanned automatic scrams per 7,000 End of Management Attention Report.

hours critical has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February 1994. I i

Unotanned ">afety System Actuations -(INPO Definition)

(Page 28)

The number of INPO unplanned safety system actua. PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT t ons ha coeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since '

IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES Unolanned Safety System Actuations -(NRC Definition) This section lists significant changes made to the report ,

(Page 29) and to specific indicators within the report since the pre- ,

The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuations vious month.

has exceedsd the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February Primary System Chemistry 1994.

(Page 38)

Thermal Performance This indicator has been revised to include only the per-(Page 31) cent of hours out of limit for lithium.

The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value has been below the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of Staffino Level 299.5% since January 1994. (Page 42)

This indicator has been revised to show past data (e.g.,

Ecuicment Forced Outaaes Per 1.000 Critical Hours January 1991 and 1992 values), and will be updated on (Page 33) a quarterly basis in the future.

The equipment forced outage rate has exceeded the 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal of 50.20 since Febru. Maintenance Workload Backtoos ary 1994. (Page 45) ,

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator has been Maintenance Workload Backloos revised from 325 to 400.

(Page 45)

The backlog on non-outage MWOs for corrective mainte-ngna has exceeded the 1994 monthly goal of a maxi-mum of 400 since March 1994. End of Performance indicator Report improvements /

Changes Report Dercent of Comoteted Schedu!ed Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crahs)

(Page 50) ,

The percent of the number of completed scheduled i I

maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities for the reporting month was less than the 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal of 280%.

v

Table of Contents / Summary l l

PAGE GOALS . .. . .. X SAFE OPERATIONS PAGF5 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE . INPO - .2 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE. 3 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE.. . .4 CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIOM6/ MINUTE PER PROBE A.REA.. .5 PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs . .6 SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES . .7 SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY:

INJECTION SYSTEM . .8 AUXlLIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM.. . .. .9 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM . . .10 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY. . 11 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) . .12 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY . . . .. .13 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR 14 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES.. .15 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE. 16 ,

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL HADIATION EXPOSURE., .. .17 i VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS . . .... .18 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS . .19 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LERS . . . 20 l PERFORMANCE PAGE STATION NET GENERATION . . 22 FORCED OUTAGE RATE . . . . . 23 l vi

m _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _

PERFORMANCE (continued) EAGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR.. .. . .. . . . . - . . . 24 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR._ . . . . - . . . 25 l UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR . .. . . 26 I

UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR I

SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL.. . . . . . 27 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION). . . .. . 28 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATiONS-(NRC DEFINITION).. . . .. .. .. . .. . 29 GROSS HEAT RATE.. . . . . . . . . 30 THERMAL PERFORMANCE.. .. . .. . 31 ,

i DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT . . .. . . 32 j EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES ,

PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS .. . 33 COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

. .. . 34 REPEAT FAILURES.. ... ., ... .. .. . 35 CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE. .. ., . .. . .. 36 i VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE . . . . - 37 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT.. .. .. . . . .. . .. . 38 l l

CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY .. . . - . . . . . . . . .. 39 COST EAGE CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR . .. . .. . =41 STAFFING LEVEL .... . . . 42 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE . .. . . . . . . 43 DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS EAGE MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE).. . .. ..e5 .

l l

vii i

V.

DIVISON AND DEPARTMFNT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) PAGE RATO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE

.. 46

& PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE . .

47.

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK =

.48 MAINT!*. NANCE OVERTIME .. ..

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE

.49 INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)..

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES

. 50 (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS)--

IN LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS

.. 51 OUT-OF SERVICE _

. 52 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED ..

.. . 53 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA .

RADIOLOGICAL WORK

. 54 PRACTICES PROGRAM..

.. .. .. . 55 DOCUMENT REVIEW. .

. . . 56 LOGGABLE/REFORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) .

. . 57 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS.. . -

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS ; . . . . . . . 58

.. 59 ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN . ..

. . 60 .

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS .

.. . . . 61 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN .

62 LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN . . . .

.. 63 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING . . ... -. ..

. . 64 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS - .

.. . . 65 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTON REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS .

66 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) . .. ..

. 67 OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) .

. 68 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATON PLANNING..

- 69 PROGRESS OF 1994 ON.LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING . .

viii

1 I

l 1

)

l ACTION PLANS. DEFINIT}ONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST EAGE i ACTION PLANS.. . 70 l 1

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS . . 73 i SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX.. .80  ;

REPORT DISTR!BUTION LIST . .. . 82 E

I I

i i

l

\

ix I

l

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

l

\

l OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS j Vice President - 1994 Priorities MISSION .

l The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. TL Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently and effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the environment. -

GOALS Goal 1: SAFE OPERATIONS i l To ensum the continuation of a " safety culture"in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a l l professional working environment, in the control room and throughout the OPPD nuclear organi-zation, that assures safe operation so that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-i try leader.

l 1994 Priorities:

Impmve SALP ratings.  ;

Improve INPO rating.

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

No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations.

I i  !

Goal 2: PERFORMANCE To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production. ,

i 1994 Priorities- 1 Improve Quality, Professionalism, and Teamwork.

• Improve Plant Reliability.

Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage perfonnance goals.

Reduce the number of human performance errors.

Identify programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment.  !

c Goal 3: COSTS Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a [

viable source of electricity.  !

1994 Priorities:  ;

Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget.

l  ;

Streamline work processes to improve cost effectiveness.

1 1

P Goals Source: Scofield (Manager)

X -

l ]

1 l

l l

I SAFE OPERATIONS Goal: To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional work-ing environment in the control room and throughout the OPPD Nuclear Organization that assures safe operation so that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-try leader.

l l

l l

1

--G-- Year-to-Date INPO Industrial Safety Accident Ra3

-O-- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.50) i 1.8 - --O- Industry Upper 10%

V 1.6 - + 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.50) 1.4 -

1.2 -

1-0.8 -

~~

0.6 -

C 3 0.4 -

0.2 -

O C O O O O O O O O 0- - , . , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Od Nov Dec94 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE-INPO As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descri,tions  ! of World Asso-ciation of Nuclear Operators (WANO) Performance Indicators and Other Indicators for Use at U.S. Nuclear Power Plants': "The purpose of this indicator is monitor progress in improving industrial safety performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the station."

The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year to-date was 1.29 at the end of May 1994. The value for the 12 months from June 1,1993 through May 31,1994 was 1.01.

There were 2 restricted-time accidents (foot and back sprains due to falls from chairs) and 1 lost-timo accident (back injury that occurred when a spool of wire rope was lifted from a rack)in May. There have been 2 restricted-time accidents and 2 lost-time acci-dents in 1994.

The values for this indicator are determined as follows:

(number of restricted-time + lost-time amidents + fatalities) X 200.000 (number of station person-nours worked)

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis 50.50. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 50.50.

The approximate industry upper ten percentile value (for the period from 1/93 through 12/93) is 0.12.

Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Chase / Booth (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None 2

\

1

-@ - 1994 Disabling injury / illness Frequency Rate X 1993 Disabling injury /lliness Frequency Rate l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.5)

V 1.2 -

1-1 0.8 -

0.6 -

C -O O 0.4 -

6 0.2 -

0 = , - ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 l DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

This indicator shows the 1994 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1993 dis-abling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown. ,

i l

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year-to-date was 0.644 at the end of May 1994. There was 1 lost-time accident, a back injury that occurred when a spool of wire rope was lifted from a rack, reported for the month. There have been 2 lost-time acci-dents in 1994.  :

l The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from June 1,1993 through May 31,1994 was 0.38.

I The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5.

Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None SEP 25, 26 & 27 i

3 l

l 5- + 1994 Recordable Injury / Illness Frequency Rate X 1993 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate IGOODI 4.5 -

V

-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 1.5) 3.5 -

3-2.5 -

2-1.5 - C O O O O q 1- M A 0.5 -

0 . , . , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1994 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 1993 recordable injuryAliness cases frequency rate is also shown.

A recordable injuryAllness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divi-sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid.

The recordable injuryA Iness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis.

The recordable injury / illness rate year-to-date was 1.29 at the end of May 1994. There were 3 recordable injuryAiiness cases,2 back injuries and 1 back and foot injury, re-ported for the month of May. There have been 4 recordable injury.Niner* cases in 1994.

The recordable injuryA!! ness rate for the 12 months from June 1,1993 through May 31, 1994 was 1.52.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a r..;ximum value of 1.5.

Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Conner Positive Trend SEP 15,25,26 & 27 i

4

-@- Contamination Events l GOOD l

--O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 54) 70-65-60-55- C O O O O O -- O O O O O O  !

m j50-Lu 45-

,$40-f35-h30-  ;

h25- ,

O ^

l 20-  !

15- '

10-5-

0 , , , , , , ,

, , i i ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep O::t Nov Dec94  ;

CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS /  ;

MINUTE PER PROBE AREA This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month.

There was 1 contamination event in May 1994. There has been a total of 23 contami-nation events in 1994.

The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 54 contamination events.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 l

5  ;

--R-- Preventable (18 Month Totals)

-E}- Personnel Error (18 Month Totals)

O Personnel Errors (Each Month) 40-35-30-25-20- ,

15-10-5-

0 F"1 i

A i i F1 i i i i r,

i r,

i i i i i i i i i i yo8 o

8 g

f a

M s <

E s

% ,E 4 <

? &

m 3z5 o 8 {

f m 3 e

E E

z , ,

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

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

In April 1994, there were 2 events that were subsequently reported as an LER.1 LER was categorized as Preventable and a Personnel Error.

The total LERs for the year 1994 (through April 30,1994) is 5. The total Personnel

, Error LERs for the year 1994 is 1.

The 1994 goals for this indicator are that the year-end values for the 18 month totals be no more than 12 Preventable and 5 Personnel Error LERs. (Note: Because this indica-l toris based on an 18 month period, the 1994 year-end totals willinclude LERs occur-l ring in 1994 and the last 6 months of 1993.)

l l Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 1

6 l

l

@ Operation IGOODI O Shutdown

$~

u.

- PWR Average Trend b

u

$ 2- --- i s

h ( .

?, 5 5 O ,

m

, , i i g i g e i 7

91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3  :

Year-Ouarter SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES ,

This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the  :

Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual" Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power l Reactors" report. .

The following NRC safety system failures occurred between the fourth quarter of 1991  !

and the third quarter of 1993:

First Quarter 1992: 1) Defective control switches in the 4KV switchgear could have rendered safety equipment inoperable; 2) All 4 channels of the SG DP trip for RPS had ,

been calibrated nonconservatively. This occurred due to an incorrect procedure which ,

specified a tolerance band that was too wide.  ;

Second Quarter 1992: Fuse and breaker coordination problems for the DC buses could cause a loss of the entire bus if a fault occurred on one of the loads.

First Quarter 1993: The SG low pressure scram signal block reset values, for all 4 channels of both SGs, were greater than the allowed limits, rendering this scram input inoperable during certain operating conditions.

i Second Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuration for the borated water source of the safety injection system was not seismically qualified. This could have resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event.

f Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission f Accountability: Chase  :

Adverse Trend: None  !

l  :

l

5 1994 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value t

1994 Year-to-Date High Pressure Safety injection System Unava!! ability value

-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.004) 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02)

-D- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.02- 4 a a a a a a a a a a a ,

l GOOD l 0.015 - y 0.01 - l i

F 0.005-C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.00036 g g a g g --O-O- -O-D - - O O O

,0 -,., , , , , , , , , , ,

1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 '

HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE  :

This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defir.ed by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the report-ing month.

The High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value for the month of May 1994 was 0.0. There were no hours of planned or unplanned unavailability during the month. The 1994 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.0001 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.00027.

There has been 1.1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> of planned unavailability (for surveillance tests) and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the HPSI system in 1994. 4 The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.004.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.02 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.0011.

Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Positive Trend 8

l

5 Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater Systern Unavailability Value 1994 Year-to-Date Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value lGOODI

--O-- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01)

V

-A-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.025)

-{"}- Industry Upper 10% (0.0029) 0.025 - A A A A A 4 A A A A A A 0.02 -

\ 0.015 -

0.01 - C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.005 -

0.0022 Q Q D -

-O O O D-D-D--O lamant

, ,9 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by illPO in the Safet jSystem Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for May 1994 was 0.00357. Dur-ing the month, there were 0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 5.32 hours3.703704e-4 days <br />0.00889 hours <br />5.291005e-5 weeks <br />1.2176e-5 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for FW-10 relay maintenance. The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.00292, and the value for the fast 12 months was 0.00282 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 3.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 17.26 hours3.009259e-4 days <br />0.00722 hours <br />4.298942e-5 weeks <br />9.893e-6 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.01.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.002.

Data Source: Jaworski/Nay Accountability: Jaworski/Nay Positive Trend 9

E Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value Year-to Date Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value  !

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal l GOODI t

--6-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025)  ;

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.004)

O.07-0.06-O.05-0.04 -

C O O O O O O O 0.01 - h i

-rca- c i i e

f$ -o i i e

i o

i o

e a-i o

i a

i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Emergency AC Power System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for May 1994 was 0.0157. Dur-( ing the month, there were 23.42 hours4.861111e-4 days <br />0.0117 hours <br />6.944444e-5 weeks <br />1.5981e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability for maintenance and testing, and no hours of unp;anned unavailability. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.0215 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.0096 at the end of the month. The large unavailability value for February is due to maintenance outages on both diesel generators.

There has been a total of 144.27 hours3.125e-4 days <br />0.0075 hours <br />4.464286e-5 weeks <br />1.02735e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 11.25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br /> of unplanned unsvallability for the emergency AC power system in 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.025.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.004.

1 Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning  ;

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 10

@ Number of Failures /20 Demands --R-- Trigger Values for 20 Demands O Number of Failures /50 Demands --V - Trigger Values for 50 Demands

@ Number of Failures /100 Demands --

Trigger Values for 100 Demands 8-l GOOD l 6-

+ i V V "'

V Y Y Y V Y V V V 4-2 2- m y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

i r  ; -

~

00 -

00g 00 i! 00 t 00 : 00 00 00  ! 00 4 00

• 00 '

00 4 3 4 i i i 8 I I I 4 l Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% wnen the failure values are below the corresponding trigger val-ues. The Fort Calhoun 1994 goalis to have fewer failures than these trigger values.

The demands counted for this indicator include the respective number of starts and the respective number of load-runs for both Diesel Generators combined. The number of start demands includes all valid and inadvertent starts, including all start-only demands  !

and all start demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether by automatic or manualinitiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least one of the following criteria: a load-run that is a result of a real load signal, a load-run test expected to carry the plant's load and duration as stated in the test specifications, and a special test in which a diesel generator was expected to be operated for a mini-mum of one hour and to be loaded with at least 50% of design load (see exceptions and other demand criteria in the Definition Section of this report).

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning '

Positive Trend 11

I O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands lGOODI E DG-2 Failures /25 Demands  ;

5- O Failure Trigger Vaiue for 25 Dernands/ Fort Calhoun Goal ,

4 4- C O O O O O O O O O O O 4 3- t i

2- .

r I-l 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 i i i i i i i i i i i i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 i

DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) t This indicator shows the number of failures experienced by each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start demands and the last 25 load-run demands. A trigger value of 4 failures within the last 25 demands is also shown. This trigger value of 4 failures within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 1994.

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

Diesel Generator DG-1 has not experienced any failures during the last 25 demands on the unit.

Diesel Generator DG-2 has not experienced any failures during the last 25 demands -

on the unit.

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning l Positive Trend  !

12

. -_ -- - ____-_____________--_____--___-_______-____________--_-___L

i l

i l D DG-1 Unreliability Value B DG-2 Unreliability Value l GOOD l

-+- Station Unreliability Value

~

Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.0025 - a Three Year Average) 0.002- C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.0015-0.001 -

0.0005 -

0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 i - '

i '

i '

i i i i i i i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 i EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergency AC power generators will respond to off-normal events or accidents. It also provides an indication of the effectiveness of maintenance, operation and test practices in controlling genera-tor unreliability.

The year-to-date station EDG unreliability value at the end of May 1994 was 0.0. The 1994 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.

For DG-1: There was 1 start demand for the reporting month without failure.

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

For DG-2: There was 1 start demand for the reporting month without failure.

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

Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows:

value per DG = EU + LU - (SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands ,

LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values t

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 1 13 l l

i

D Fuel Reliability Irdcator

--&- 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram) l GOOD l h 10 y -()-- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals Cycle 15 A A A A Refueling S N O O O O 4_ """"

M Outage ---.

- M IEl r"""1 r-, r"""1 N Ik Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) value for May 1994 was 3.6 X 10-4 microcuries/ gram.

The purpose of the FRIis to monitorindustry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuelintegrity. The plant operated at full power during the entire month.

The May FRl was calculated based on the average fission product activities present in the reactor coolant during the steady state full power operation days, May 1 through 31.

The May FRI value of 3.6 X 10-' microcuries/ gram is comparable to the April value of 2.89 X 10-' microcuries/ gram. The increase can be attributed to the small change in the 1-131 and 1-134 values. The very low FRI value will see a wide range of values due to many outside factors or small isotopic differences.

Fission product activity data from May full power operation showed a Xenon-133 activity increase early in the month and no lodine spiking or increase. The Westinghouse technical expert has determined that there is a potential for a defective fuel rod in the Cycle 15 core. This prediction is based on a change in the Xe-133 to 1-131 ratio. The ratio has a 50% correlation rate with known defects. A more definitive disposition will be possible when a significant power change is made and specific chemistry data (i.e.

Cesium, lodine and Xenon) can be collated. The presence or lack of Xenon and lodine I

spikes during the power change would confirm or disprove the fuel failure assumption.

The last detected fuel failure was during Cycle 13.

The INPO September 1992 Report " Performance Indicators for U.S. Nuclear Utility l Industry" (INPO No. 92 011) statos that "...the 1995 industry goal for fuel reliability is that units should strive to operate with zero fuel defects. A value larger than 5.0 X 10' microcuries/ gram indicates a high probability of unit operation with one or more fuel l defects. The determination of current defect-free operation requires more sophisticated analysis by utility reactor engineers." The value of 5.0 X 10' microcuries/ gram is de-l fined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a "Zvo Leaker Threshold". Each utility l

j will calculate whether the core is defect free or not. The 1994 Fort Calhoun Station FRI performance indicator goal will be to maintain a monthly FRI below 5.0 X 10-4 microcu-ries / gram.

Data Source: Holthaus/Guliani Accountability: Chase /Spijker Positive Trend 14

f

@ Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line lGOODI C Total Number of Control Ro.sm Equipment Deficiencies V

80- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Total Equipment Deficiencies 70- ~

60- T -

l 50-40-g

/.

g

5 g f..

g

__ g g

g g g l

30- -

f I ': 4 5' _

20-  ; 'I  : I 7 , I: k [  :  ; 2 10- I'.

(

j l ' 'l 5:

.5:

j  ;

0 . i i , , . i i . , i i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 D Operator Work Around items Repairable On-Line O Total Number of Operator Work Around items 10- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Total Operator Work Around items 8-6-

C C C C C C C C C C C C 4- ,

O i i i i i i i i e i r7 i

b i i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb M ar Apr May94 (

NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES  !

This indicator shows the number of control room equipment Qficiencies that are repair-  !

able during plant operations (on-line), the number of outstanding control room equip-ment deficiencies, the number of Operator Work Around (OWA) Items repairable on-line, the number of outstanding OWAs and the Fort Calhoun goals.

There was a total of 49 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of May 1994. 25 t of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 24 require a plant outage to repair.

There were 21 deficiencies added and 21 deficiencies closed during the month.

There were 2 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. The l OWAs were on equipment tag CH-208. C/R pans!s CB-1/2/3, and on equipment tag  !

MOV-D1. Both OWAs require an outage to repair. ,

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 45 deficiencies and 5 OWAs. i l

Data Source: Chase / Tills (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber l Adverse Trend: None 15 l

_ ________________i

5 O Monthly Personnst Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rerack)

-@-- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Non Spent Fuel Rerack)

V

--O-- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 44 Person-Rem)

O O O O O O O O O h40- C O O u~ 30-c 20-8 10- .

O EO 2 , ,

' Jan94 .Nb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94

@ M )nthly Personnel Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack

--e-- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack

--O-- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 23 Person-Rem)

E

${:

s,: ~

C O O O O O O O O O O O

$ 0 i 0 i 0 i 0 4 0 i i i i i i i i 0- Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE l The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for collective Iaciation exposure, excluding the spent fuel rerack, is less than 44 person-Rem.

The exposure for May 1994 was 2.858 person-Rem. i The year-to-date exposure was 8.370 person-Rem at the end of May.

The Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure to complete the Spent Fuel Rerack is less than 23 person Rem.

The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure for May was 0.373 person-Rem. l The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure year-to-date was 0.957 person-Rem at j the end of May.

l The collective radiation exposure at the end of May (i.e., the sum of non-spent fuel l rerack exposure and spent fuel rerack exposure) was 9.327 person-Rem. The collec- i tive radiation exposure for the last 12 months was 156.465 person-Rem at the end of the month.

The 1995 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 185 person-nsm per year. The industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1 Y 1 through 12/93)is approximately 110.5 person-rem per year. The yearly aves w a for Fort Calhoun Station for the three years from 6/91 through 5/94 was 150.L p. son-rem per year.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 16

O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem) i O Highest Exposure for the Year (mrem) ,

5000 -

OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4000 -

3000 -

5 m

E 2000-2 Fort Calhoun 1,000 mrem /yr. Goal 1000 -

468 514 f

%' ~

0 ,

May 1994 I

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE j During May 1994, an individual accumulated 468 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month. This exposure was accumulated during preparation of radwaste for shipping.

The maximum ir,dividual exposure for the year was 514 mrem at the end of May.

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

year. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis a maximum of 1,000 mrem.

Date Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) l l

Accountability: Chase /Lovett  ;

Adverse Trend: None 1 17

=

4- Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal Y 3.03 $

23-

.5 1

E g2-14 k C O O O O O g i

E

$1- ~

2 l' i i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS This indicator displays the number of NRC violations cited in inspection reports per 1,000 NRC inspection hours. This indicator is one month behind te reporting month due to the time in-volved with collecting and processing the data.

The violations per 1,000 inspection hours indicator was reported as 1.54 for the twelve months from May 1,1993 through April 30,1994.

The following inspections ended during this reporting period:

!ER No. Iltkt No. of Hours 94-11 Emergency Plan Walkdown Inspection 80 94-13 Solid Radwaste and Transportation Programs 80 To date, OPPD has received 4 violations for inspections conducted in 1994:

Level ill Violations (1)

Level IV Violations (3)

Level V Violations (0)

Non-Cited Violations (NCV) (0)

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 1.4 violations per 1,000 inspec-tion hours.

Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Short Adverse Trend: None 18 l

j

l l

O NRC Significant Events l GOOD l

- Industry Average Trend V ,

2-1-

0 , , , , , , , ,

91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 Year - Quar 1er

@ INPO Significant Events (SERs) l GOOD l V

2- ,

/b V

/////b /b Y/////b 0 , , , , , , , ,

, 1 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 Year - Quarter  !

SIGNIFICANT EVENTS I

This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Station as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual" Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network.

The following NBC significant events occurred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the third  ;

quarter of 1993: i Third Quarter 1992: The failure of a Pressurizer Code safety valve to reseat initiated a LOCA with the potential to degrade the reactor coolant pressure boundary.

The following INPO significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs), oc-  ;

curred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the fourth quarter of 1993: ,

i Second Ouarter 1992: Intake of Transuranics during Letdown Filter Change-out.

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

First Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear Instrumentation Safety Channel D.

I Second Quarter 1993: SBFU Breaker Relay (Switchyard) Plant Trip  ;

Fourth Quarter 1993: Unexpected CEA Withdrawal.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None  ;

19

l 3-

@ Number of Missed STs Resulting in LERs l

2-l 1-l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i i i i i i i e i i a i e i ;

S2 '93 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the len shows the yearly totals for the indicated years.

There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during May 1994.

During the month of January 1993 it was discovered that during December 1992 an ASME Section XI Code required surveillar.ce was not completed nor corrective mainte-nance performed as a result of AC-10A falling into the " Alert Range" (LER 93-003 Fail-ure to Satisfy inservice Testing Requirements for Raw Water Pump).

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0. l l

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

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive 'Irend SEP 60 & 61 20

PERFORMANCE I

Goal: To strive for ExceIIence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power produc-tion.

l I

21

0-D Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours) 40-35.66 35.03 35.12 34.6 34.9 33.56

. M e

$30- 28.01 M)j:3 / M 25.03

@h N Cycle 15 F .. 27.8

)

llE

{.. . .

~

7g Refueling Outage j p.]

ej ;

j i

{

g m .

e: $ 4 4:5 5 o.20- I' 2  ? ? 3 $$ -- :YI i

$ . _ __-_$  : l l_ _; -  ;

,.se. ;; a .,s .' y ' Q mg  : m ,; '

10- I 4s M .s bNb 9m &nM I

0 bk

""g $  ;

I

. 9.m ,-a m v y g e  ;

y .: :

n 3:n. l , y s N. M; @M$n$ $@z u 1.54 ^

& && LWA 0 m i  : + g

, l i I i i 4 i 6 l i e 4 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 STATION NET GENERATION During the month of May 1994 a net total of 356,578 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 15 was 2,042,960 MWH at the end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of February 1994 were attributable to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January 1994 were attributable to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

Energy losses for the month of December 1993 were a result of a forced outage that began on December 6 and ended on December 7. The outage was caused by an EHC test failure. Energy losses for September, October and November 1993 were attribut-able to the shutdown for the Cycle 15 refueling outage, which began on September 25 and ended on November 26.

Unplanned energy losses for the months of June and July 1993 were attributable to a forced outage that began on June 24 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip. The plant returned to 100%

power on July 2nd.

Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 22 1

l 8 Forced Outage Rate l GOOD l j 12%- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.4%) y ,

I 10.1 9.3 8%-

i 6%- Cycle 15 Refueling Outage ,

4%-

U"~

C C C C C C C C C C C 1.38 f i i i , 0% , , , , , , , , , , , , :

'91 '92 '93 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 j FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 2.02% for the twelve months from June 1,1993 to May 31,1994. The 1994 year-to-date FOR was 1.35% at the end of May.

A forced outage occurred on February 11 due to a generator and reactor trip that oc-curred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Super-visory Circuit. The generator was off line for 48.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br />.

A forced outage occurred on December 6,1993 when the plant tripped during weekly testing of the turbine EHC system. The generator was off-line for 27.1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. There was one forced outage during the month of June 1993. This outage, which occurred when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip, lasted 70.6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 2.4%.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun year-end goal was a maximum value of 2.4%.

)

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & NERC GAD Forms i Accountability: Chase

' Positive Trend l

23

O Monthly EAF

(

Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF 4 l GOOD]

Industry Median Value (76.7%)

100% - _ _

r 85.6 g b ~

~

0 --E -

S -

S -

B-@ E 90' 60.8 ,

• ' - L 60%-

• GRI  % '

Cycle 15 yE f' >

Refueling 40% - Outage g pg .

O '

Er

~

• ?_;)

P,

< . . w- 20%-

6 e <

4  : t, l-""]

• i  ! I i i i i i i I I i i i i 4

'91 '92 '93 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Aveitability Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average monthly EAF, and the year-end average monthly EAF for the previous 3 years.

The EAF for May 1994 was reported as 97.76%. Tne year-to-date monthly average EAF was 96.02% at the end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of February were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January were due to derates for condenser tube repair and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

The April, May and June 1993 EAF values are the result of a maintenance outage and a forced outage that occurred when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip.

The industry median EAF value for the three year period from 7/90 through 6/93 was 76.7%. The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years prior to this report was 75.24%.

Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 24

O Monthly Unit Capability Factor

--t$- Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor

-+- 36 Month Average Unit Capabikty Factor

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l 1995 INPO Industry Goa!( 80%)

Industry Upper 10% (86.7% for a Three Year Average) 100% - =g . g__c e  ;  ;

_W gos _  : 7 w y% _ $ +x Q g y V-M-V -

v v x *g a m m 60T=- g gg g 4 Cycle 15 (( 1

^*

k5 40%- Q #( $ g Refueling g g <

Outage ~j '

20%- ghfl[y

,w .

he [

~ s <

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, the 1994 and 1993 year-to-date UCFs, the goals, the 36 month average UCFs, the 1995 INPO indus-try goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. UCF is defined as the ratio of the available energy generation over a given period of time to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continu-ously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, expressed as a percentage.

The UCF for May 1994 was reported as 100%. The year-to-date UCF was 96.1%, the UCF for the last 12 months was 78.2%, and the 36 month average UCF was reported as 76.0% at the end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of February 1994 were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January were due to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

Energy losses for the month December 1993 were due to rampup from the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and a plant trip that occurred on December 6 during testing of the EHC system. Energy losses for the month of June 1993 were due to Moderator Coeffi-cient Testing and a forced outage from June 24 through June 27.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 60% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 86.7%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 96.03%.

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trond: None 25

O Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor

--80-- Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor 60% - lGOODI

--O-- Fort Calhoun Goal 4 50%- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%)

40%- Industry Upper 10% (1.48% for a Three Year Average) 30%- Cycle 15 Refueling 20% - "9' 0%

f

~,^

J"'

' ~

gw, , , , ,  ;

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the year-to-date UCLF, the goal, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambi-ent conditions), expressed as a percentage.

The UCLF for the month of May 1994 was reported as 0.0%. The year-to-date UCLF was 3.9%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 5.1%, and the 36 month average UCLF was reported as 8.2% at the end of the month.

Unplanned energy losses for the month of February 1994 were due to a generator and ,

reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Unplanned energy losses for the month of January were due to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

Unplanned energy losses for the month of December 1993 were the result of a plant trip that occurred during EHC testing. Unplanned energy losses for the month of June 1993 were the result of a forced outage that occurred as a result of the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard. 3 The 1995 INPO industry goalis 4.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 1.48%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 3.97%.

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 26

l

- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Cntical Year-to-date

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

-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals 1995 INPO Industry Goal 6- -O- Industry upper 10% (0.51 per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical over a 36 rnonth time period) 5-4-

3-2-

j . _:  :  :  ;

h v i hs i b w i U

v i bw i b

wM i s i w i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 O Number of FCS Reactor Scrams 3 4-2 3- Cycle 15 Refueling 7 2~ 1 Outage 1 1 0 0 j pp!Iq 0 0 0 0 0 pn 0 pq 0 0 0 i i i

~

i

'~

i { i i i i i i e i i i i i

'90'91 92 93 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical (as defined in INPO's 12/93 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Interna-tiona! Nuclear Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort Cal-houn Station. The lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred durirg each month for the last twelve months.

The 1994 station value is 1.95 at the end of May 1994. The value for the 12 months from June 1,1993 through May 31,1994 is 2.91. The value for the last 36 months is 1.99.

An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on February 11,1994 when supervi-sory relay 86B/CPHSS failed. An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on December 6,1993 during EHC testing. An unplanned automatic reactor scram oc-curred on June 24,1993 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. The 1995 INPO industry goal is a maximum of 1 unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.51 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical for the 36 month time period from 1/91 through 12/93.

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

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 27

)

3-O Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)

+ Fort Calhoun Goal C Industry Upper 10 Percentile 2-l 1

7 1- -

I #

+ 79 Cycle 15 jQ Refueling g g Outage g

< M 0 4 0 C e i i 3 0 m ,m , m , m , m , m , m , m , m , m , m , m ,

'91'92'93 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION) l l There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of May 1994. .

There was 1 INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of Febnjary 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in tripping relay 86B/CPHS. The CPHS relay trip actuated the Safety injection Actuation Signal, Containment isolation Actuation Signal, Ventilation isolation Actuation Signal and Steam Generator Isolation Signal. The Steam Generator isolation Signal automatically closed both main steam isolation valves, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip.

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

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

I l Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 28 f

w-_-____. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _

4 l

- 12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition)

--+-- Critical Hours

@ Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) 10- - 1000

- 900

$ 8~ cycle is 800 W Refueling - 700 l f 6- * *9' 600  ! l j - 500 y4- -400 :p  ;

2 g 300 j

fg 2- g 200 l d' , ,' , 0 1 3 RR ,

RR 0 31 '92 S3 JJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAM 1992 1993 1994 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(NRC DEFINITION)

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

There was 1 NRC unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concur-rent turbine and reactor trip.

i There were 3 NRC unplanned safety system actuations in 1993: 1) In December 1993 the main turbine and reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing; 2) in June 1993 ,

the inadvertent Jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip I

and 3) In April 1993 a non-licensed operator mistakenly opened the wrong potential fuse drawer, causing a low voltage alarm on bue 1 A1, a loadshed on bus 1 A1 and an auto start of an EDG.

There were 4 unplanned safety system actuations in 1992: 1) In August, due to the failure of an ,

AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system, pressurizer safety valve RC- l I

142 opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip; 2) On July 3 there was an inverter failure and the subsequent reactor trip; 3) On July 23 there was an l unplanned diesel generator start when an operator performing a surveillance test inadvertently '

pushed the normal start button instead of the alarm acknowledge button; and 4) In May the turbine generator tripped on a false high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor trip and subsequent anticipatory start signal to both diesel generators.

There have been 3 unplanned safety system actuations in the last 12 months. The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for thic indicator is 0.

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

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 29

@ Monthly Gross Heat Rate

-&-- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate V

O 1994 &1993 Fort Calhoun Goals 10.5-1 223 I m Cycle 15 10 m O O O

{ y )

Refuehng outage . _

[y y m  ;

R _

d

'j l f l10- ,

w i k

S (' $$

(I 3

h *  !

f '

f I _

, B  ! ?:

$ l!

~

9.5 -  ?!b  ;  :

! g i

M k

11 '92 13 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 GROSS HEAT RATE This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-date GHR, the goals and the year-end GHR for the previous 3 years.

The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,176 for the month of May 1994.

The 1994 year-to-date GHR was 10,093 at the end of the month.

The GHR was not calculated for the months of October and November 1993 because of the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage.

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

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is s10,190.

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 30

l O Monthly Thermal Performance

--M-- Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance 4

-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals l GOOD l

-+- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 99.5%)

Industry Upper 10% (99.9%)

100 % -

a m m m o a a a a o a a Ty h s.j M.. .a. , , , , , ,

h -

PO-D C C '~h :a r y- . . _

Y

%s w_ er- y 99%- M IG kM {s si#

f[f Cycle 15 Refueling

, l A

[2 n

~

IN$

s ". Outage a

' ~ ,

hh .

0l [kk -

> b 98 % i l i i l 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Thermal Performance value for the reporting month, the year-to-date average thermal performance value, the 1994 and 1993 Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value.

The thermal performance value for May 1994 was 99.47%. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value was 99.26% at the end of the month. The average monthly value for the 12 months from June 1,1993 through May 31,1994 was 99.5%.

]

Thermal Performance improved in May as a result of the backwash valve adjustments l on "A" Condenser and improvements in Heater 2A level control. 1 The low thermal performance value for February 1994 is attributable to level control problems on heaters 3A and SB, and to spring runoff resulting in screen carry-over and condenser fouling. Improvements made during the month of March were: warm water recirc. was taken off-line; some recovery in condenser performance was achieved due to backwashing at regular intervals; and the level control problems for heater 3A were corrected.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 99.5%. The 1993 Fort Cal-houn Goal was a minimum of 99.4%. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the one year period from 1/93 through 12/93) is approximately 99.9%.

Data Source: Jaworski/Popek Accountability: Jaworski/Popek Adverse Trend: None 31

O ThermalOutput

-O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal

- Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500 l 1499.5-1499- l 1498.5-f 1498-r 1497.5-1497-

'i -2 '

1496.5-1496- ,

f "

1495.5-1495( )

1494.5-5 1494- -

i 1493.5- <

1493- ,

1492.5- ,  : t- N J.

m 1492-1491.5- -

t 1491-1490.5- q l 1490 , , , , , , , , , , ,,,,,,,,,,',,,,,,,,,

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT ,

The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during April 1994, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal -

megawatt Fort Calhoun goal.  !

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Tills i Adverse Trend: None 32 i

I~

--4>- Equipment Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hours

-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal (0.2) ,

0.75-t 0.5 0.5 -

0.25-C C C C C C C C C C l 0

3 8 6 i 0 ., , , , , , , , , , , ,  ;

'91 '92 '93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours was 0.28 for the month; fiom January through May 1994. The value for the 12 months from June 1,1993 through May 31,1994 is 0.14.

An equipment forced outage occurred on February 11,1994 when the plant experi-  ;

enced an unplanned automatic reactor trip as a result of the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. -

An equipment forced outage occurred in August 1992 and continued through Septem-ber. It was due to the failure of an AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic i Control System. ,

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20.

t  !

l Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) l Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 33 l

1. of Component Categories 40- -+- # of Application Categories 35- --A- Total # of Categories g 30-r 5c 25-y20-O o " N A 10- _ _ _ _y 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

D J93 F M A M J J A S O N D93 J F M A M94

@ WearOut/ Aging D OtherDevices

@ Manufacturing Defect O Maintenance / Action 2.7%

8.2%

0 Engineering / Design G Error / Operating Action

-g 5.5%

38.4 %

Percent of Total Failures During the Past 18 Months

,s f

/ 38.4 %

6.8*2lllll COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from August 1992 through January 1994). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 6 of the 87 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a higher failure rate in 7 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary / )

smergency feedwater pumps, control element drive motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. 1 The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of .

this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 87 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 73. The pie chart reflects known failure causes.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/ Edwards Adverse Trend: None 34

Components With More Than One Fatr l GOOD l Components With More Than Two Failures V 25-20-15-11 11 11 11 11 10- 9 9 8

7 6

5- 4 3, 3 3 3 3

, %,1, ,

1,

-s 1

,s

,s Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the Maintenance Effectiveness" perfor-mance indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear ,

Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/  !

AEOD). The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator l has been dropped, but station management considers it useful to continue to track l repetitive component failures using the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS).  !

This indicator shows the number of NPRDS components with more than 1 failure during the last eighteen months and the number of NPRDS components with more than 2  ;

failures during the last eightcen months. '

During the last 18 reporting months there were 3 NPRDS components with more than 1 j failure.1 of the 3 had more than 2 failures. The tag number of the component with more than 2 failures is AC-100. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat l component failures are listed in the quarterly Component Failure Analysis Report. 4 l

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 35

Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours l GOODI Calculated Industry Check Valve Failure Rate per k Million Component Hours 3-

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 2.5 - gA 3 2- C O O O O O O hk G &

u; 15-1 1 0 1-fl f:* f k[h a u: m 0.5 -

$9 D M^i

=m-  :'"

0

'91 '92 '93 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May No. of Check Valve Failures CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE 1

i This indicator shows the calculated Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate, the Fort Calhoun goal and the industry check valve failure rate average. The failure rates are based on submitted failure reports for an 18 month time interval. They do not include failure reports outside of the 18 month time interval. The interval starts 21 months prior >

to the current month and ends 3 months prior to the current month. For example, the May 1994 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) covers the 18 month interval from August 1,1992 through January 31,1994. This delay is due to the time involved in collecting and processing failure report data.

The actual number of NPRDS reportable check valve failures at Fort Calhoun Station  ;

t are shown above on the graph at the left side of the page.

For May 1994, the CFAR provided the following failure rates:  :

Fort Calhoun Station 1.17 E-6 ,

Industry (excluding FCS) 1.73 E-6 The recent increase in the FCS failure rate is due to 2 reportable failures of RC-374, 3 Pressurizer RC-4 Spray Line Check Valve; one occurred in October and another in -

November 1993.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is s;1.75 E-6.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 36 i l __---__--___-_. - - . -

O Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet)

-- Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried )

--O- l GOOD l Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried (500 cubic feet) v '

- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (3,884 cubic feet) 750-

-O- Industry Upper 10% (1,045.12 cubic feet) 600-  ;

C O O O O O

450-if 0 300-  ;

150- g

+

0 , , ,

li Al , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE

?

This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumulative  ;

annual total for radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the approximate industry upper 10%.

Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during May (cubic feet) 2,080.0 Volume of Solid Radwaste Euried during May (cubic feet) 9.8 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1994 (cubic feet) 337.6 i Amount of solid radioactive waste in temporary storage after July 1,1994 (cubic feet) 0.0  ;

A graph will be added to this indicator in July 1994 to depict the amount of solid radioac-tive waste in temporary storage.  ;

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste which has been I buried is 500 cubic feet. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic j feet) per year. The industry upper ten percentile value from 1/91 through 12/93 is approximately 29.59 cubic meters (1,045.12 cubic feet) per year. ,

Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source)  ;

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 37

5 Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit IGOODl

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal V x'

3%- &:c 2%- *

( =

!ij il1s

~

1%- .: 4i

'..Q'

0% ," , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator has been revised to track the primary system chemistry performance by monitoring only lithium.

The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Lirnit was 0.0% for the month of May 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator had not been approved at the time of this report's publication.

Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Adverse Trend: None 38

l l

1 E Secondary System CPI 2- l GOO'D]

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal 4

1.9 -

1.8 -

1.7 -

i 1.6 -  ;

l 1.5 - C O O O O O O O O O O O i 1.4 -

~

1.3 - +

d

~

(; f 9?] ,

1.1 - k (( h E

i. w l

rJ Lj M EUR . . .

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY l

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

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

per day.

The CPI for May 1994 was 1.15. The year-to-date average monthly CPI value was  ;

1.23 at the end of the month.

The CPI for December 1993 was 1.92. This relatively higher number was due primarily  !

to iron transport following the plant start-up. l The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a maximum value of 1.5.

The CPI calculation is different from that reported in 1993 in that it reflects the recent INPO revision to the calculation. This revision addresses the penalties for the beneficial  ;

I effect of alternative chemistry,i.e., morpholine, such as used at Fort Calhoun Station, and focuses more on specific impurities.

Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend 39 l

COST Goal: To operate For1 Calhoun Station in a manner that )

cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity.

40 l

l Actuals -D- Budget a Plan 3.75-1 3.5 -

I 3.25 -

E -

3 3-2.75 -

2.5 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , i D91 D92 D93 J94 F M A M J J A S O N 094 D95 D96 D97 D98 Months CEIITS PER KILOWATT HOUR  ;

The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station.

1 The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved 1993 and 1994 revised budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report. The information provided is one month behind the reporting month due to the time required for processing the data.

The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1991,1992 and 1993. In .

addition, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1995 through 1998 for refer-ence. The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the ,

1994 Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided ,

by Nuclear Fuels.

The unit price is averaging lower than the budget due to expenses being below budget while generation remains on budget.  ;

Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield i Adverse Trend: None 4,

)

/ Nuclear Services Division Staffing Production Engineering Division Staffing

@ Nuclear Operations Division Staffing

• Total Nuclear Staffing 7 7 8 7 9 0 7 8 8 6 5 4 2 1 4

BM- '

5 9

@ S s.

gi . . .

3 $

700 - 4,, 3 5

5  ; gg kg 5 <

g; t: , -e 4 4 .

6 ~

2 $ 5 I> 4 4 "

4 $p 6 5 5 Y

)'-

500 - >> /

[{ 2 h Q .  ;;:' 7 400- o- >:# ^

• i M gp c  :;  ;' -

1.}

300 - 0 0 0 9 ' '

f g 9 3 5 6 ; 1 3 - 1 2 s 1 M

200 - -

N g

1-4

( 1- ',; 1-6 1

g.

4 5 5 > F f@

100- 8  !- 5 f'.>

0 N k y si f j e [j E O i i i i i i Jan90 Jan91 Jan92 Jan93 Jan94 Apr94 ACTUAL STAFFING LEVEL (UPDATED QUARTERLY)

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

The authorized staffing levels for 1994 are:

1994 Authorized Staffing 453 Nuclear Operations Division 191 Production Engineering Division 117 Nuclear Services Division Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source)

Accountability: Ponec Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 42

l l

1

- Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) l 17- Cycle 15 Refueling Outage 16- _

15-14-13 -

12- f 11 -

10 , , , , , , , , , , , -,

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of May 1994 was reported as $15,916,197.

Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source) 1 Accountability: Willrett/McCormick Adverse Trend: None P

43 l

l

DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS These indicators may be deleted from this report if the responsible group con-tacts the Manager- Station Engineering to request their removal. Indicators referencing SEP ltems require documentation to ensure that the original intent and scope of the SEP ltem will not be altered by removal of the indicator from this report.

l 44

I 9

i l

@ Corrective Maintenance @ Non-Corrective / Plant Improvements  ;

O Preventive Maintenance --O- Fort Calnoun Goal l

776 752 800- ,,

723 700- _ 1 600- '-? - T ,

500- !E O N 400- j O I M O  !

300- C O O O O O v

//

//

% /,.

f/:

/

//,

200- ' /,:

y,.

'/,-

/,,

//.

//,

0 F"71 I77] .b C.R i hm i i rm i

I-'~'l d'i Z':

.N. I Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94  !

Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog  ;

i 400- 0 Totaiuwos e uwos which exceed Maintenance Compietion Goais  ;

350- l 300-250-  ;

200-  !

150-days days days da s f 0

Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Aging  !

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. It also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and priority. The 1994 goal for this indicator has been changed to 400 non-outage corrective MWOs. To ensure that the MWO backlog is worked in a timely manner, non-outage maintenance completion goals have been established as: I Goal Priority i Emergency N/A Priority 2 Immediate Action 3 days Priority 3 Operations Concem 14 days Priority 4 Essential Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential Corrective 180 days Priority 6 Non-Corrective / Plant improvements N/A l i

l Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 36 45 I

=

l 0 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 100% -

90%- -

80%-

70%-

60%-

50%-

40%-

30%-

20%-

10%-

0% , , , , , , , , , , , ,

~

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 2%- O Preventive Maintenance items Overdue GOOD

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal V

1%- Data Unavailable -

C C C O '9 ',*j' 44 3-O-C O 9' I 0% i e i i i i i i i i i i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance.

The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 62.7% for the month of May 1994. The trend of this ratio reflects the revised definition of corrective maintenance which was implemented in March.

The lower graph shows the percentage of preventive maintenance items overdue.

During May,558 PM items were completed. 2 of these PM items (0.36% of the total) were not completed within the allowable grace period or administratively closed.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance items overdue is a maximum of 0.5%.

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Data Source: Chase /Schmitz/Melstad (Manager / Sources)

AdverseTrend: None SEP 41 46

i Rewtik As identified By Planning or Craft l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goat l 1

5.2%

5%- Cycle 15 Refueling 4.56 % ( e Outage ,

j '

b l 4%- C k ;f O

(

? ,

B ,~  ! i e sj o $

3 3%- i; &* ^

O 2.57% 2.58 %

[g (. 2.51 %

j

- - g ;3 3 ;  ;

0 ' -

I ll j j i '9 2.06 %

O2%-

$4 jf l l( k '

k  ;;

8 o

NM  ; l, -!j j y

QNw . i p Q. 1 06 %

4

• I -

i l l 1 y 0%

$Y k ~~ k  : k $$$h$

< .- ,) '

Nov93 Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK This graph indicates the percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%.

Data Source: Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None i 47

80%- 8 Maintenance Overtime

-X- 12 Month Average Maintenance Overtime l GOOD j

)

-O- Fort Calhoun "On-Line" Goal 60%-

50%- Cycle 15 Refueling Outage i 40%-

$$  ?%

30%- $vT h

li44 g} ifsy:-

20%- g ffff;;

3r R rgs

h. 1% %f - u u a u u 10%- O

= n

- h 4

6--O

- n

^

O 5 6

in $$ Nf $uk U @p $i M[

35 I I I i i 4 i 4 i i I l Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired mainte-nance activities with the allotted resources.

The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 7.0% for the month of May 1994. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reponed as 12.46% at the end of the month.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 10%. t Data Scurce: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) .

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Positive Trend l

48

O Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) l 3- i

@ Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)

E Procedural Noncompliance irs (Maintenance) 2-11 1 1 1 h

r 000 000 000 0 I,0$0 000 000 000 000 00 00 000 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)

This indicator shows the number of open Maintenance incident Reports (irs) that are related to the use of procedures, the number of closed irs that are related to the use of procedures, and the number of open and closed irs that received procedural noncom-pliance cause codes for each of the last twelve months.

There were no procedural noncompliance incidents for maintenance reported for the month of May 1994.

There was 1 procedural noncompliance incident (IR 930225) reported in September 1993.

Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner AdverseTrend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 49 l

l

g Completed Scheduled Activities (All Crafts)

Number of Emergent MWOs Comp!eted O Fort Calhoun Goal m 110 10W.-

100 o o

.-U 90%- 89

< - 90 ~0 6.

• 80%- ^

v .

G'//. O 80 o E

c NW < -- .. MhE '//- ,

a h@d%@x ##&t'@ 71 Mh//- l 1 70 0 g 70%- s%y /7, (Mj? %j: - 70 m J W7> 65 x 7)'" i .:- - 0

~ .

gym 77  ?/1 5 60%-

c . . e.T.

y s, O M,,' / y.m e ///, W: ;!;@ // L;

[r/- 60 3ll

, /, pqp" '77, . ?/, y 2 59%_ .%.

~ ','/. L 2'lu /// u /,'. ~

. '// ,

/// /// .0 y

.n o

d.

'//.

//.

'//-

^

//,

///

'//.

'//.  %. , _

'///

///

o

~5 40%- M.

an:.aa 9 '//. y ///

i '// -

'//.

/// 40 0) m K9E98s //, s: 4  ;

'@ gy w. /;, //, //; O Nyg

.c 30%- X Y '//. ""M // W '/s'- 9 /// E

- 30 Lu o MM'M '//. .- m g /// '//.

///

U) . ~ . :.s '

g4yd.k /// v@- . ;. /// -

Q 20%- 1 LB' -

'//.

y s/,/. ,,

?g%

n y ///

"yg.~, 77, yM k.QQ,;.//.

a //. 9 m

p

///

/,,

- 20 0 .

^wre L

.:. '//. w @l /// d '77, //.  :

/// O O 10%- '//. .: - . : ///>

lsA~

=  ? '//. = '// 10 2 E / 'l o 0% , , , 0 0 February '94 March April May '94 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MA!NTENANCE CRAFTS)

This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed scheduled maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning all Maintenance Crafts. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, cali-brations, and miscellaneous maintenance activities. The number of emergent MWOs completed for the month is also shown.

The percent of the number of completed scheduled maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities for May 1994 was 77.8%. Also, there were 70 emergent MWOs completed during the month.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is 80%.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 50

l l

[

E  % of Hours the In-Une Chemistry Instruments are Inoperable 12- --O-- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 10%)

11-10- C O O O O O O O O O O O  !

9- l 8-p 7-E. 6 -

Q-Q$

e 5-4-

)N 3- fj 2- @i L

'P  %

A

@N pg j

g sq g 0-~,G ,

fh Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 ,

IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE .

This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

At the end of May 1994 the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instru-ments were inoperable was 4.99%

It should be noted the total number of in-line chemistry instruments considered within this performance indicator has been increased to 51. This is the result of including the new Waterplant panel, Al-160 (5 instruments), and the chemical lagoon pH sensor, PHE-15198, as well as the deletion of 2 PASS detectors.

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

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 10% in-line chemistry instruments inoperable. 5 out-of-service chemistry instruments make up 10%

of all the chemistry instruments that are counted for this indicator.

Data Source: Chase /Reneaud (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive Trend 51

@ Waste Produced Each Mor.th (Kilograms)

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

--O- Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal

- Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max, of 1,000 Kg) 1000 - 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 3 0 2 2 3 800 -

E 600 -

E

?

Q 400-200 - '

C O---- -C O-- --O O , i ', , , , , , , ,

, i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED -

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

During the month of May 1994,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste was produced,0.0 kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, and 0.0 kilo-grams of other hazardous waste was produced. The total for hazardous waste pro-duced during the last 12 months is 310.9 kilograms. The monthly average for hazard-ous waste produced during the last 12 months is 25.9 kilograms. g Hazardous waste is counted based upon a full drum of waste.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for this indicator is a maximum of 100 kilograms.

Date Source: Chase / Smith (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend 52

• Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months)

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal (outage months) 20%-

t 15%-

f 10%- ,

v v v v v v O l l s I  : i j

5%- 1 ,

r ,

l I  ! "

0% , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is contaminated based on the total square footage. The 1994 monthly non-outage goalis a maximum of 10% contami-nated RCA and the monthly outage goalis a maximum of 13% contaminated RCA.

At the end of May 1994, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.6%.

Data Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Positive Trend SEP 54 53 i

e Number of Identified PRWPs 'Ysar-To-Date IGOODI 30- -O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal (<25) V l

25- C O O O O O O O O O O O Y

g20-uJ 8

j 15-

.G -

E ,

a g10-O 5-

.  :" ~

l i i 4 1 4 i i i i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM The Radiological Work Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor Radio- ,

logical Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month.

The number of PRWPs which are identified each month should indirectly provide a means to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological '

performance.

During the month of May 1994, there was 1 PRWP identified. The PRWP cccurred when an individual was contaminated while moving fuel for the rerack.

There have been 3 PRWPs in 1994.

The 1994 year-end goal for the number of PRWPs is a maximum of 25.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 52 54

i Documents Scheduled for Review

' Documents Reviewed 250 - l Overdue Documents 200-150- f 100- _

, i,

, ,/

Y

}

50-

-f9

, h f,,

f 9 .

.' e 0

, , , , , i , , , , ,

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 DOCUMENT REVIEW This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Operating Manual.

During May 1994 there were 30 document reviews scheduled, while 85 document reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were no document reviews more than 6 months overdue.

There were 27 new documents initiated in May.

Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 46 l

l 1

55

g Non-System Failures lGOODI 30-25 - V 20-15- 12 12 10 1

bh .

0 , , , , , , , , , , , i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Cd Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94

@ System Failures 90- l GOOD l 80- y 70-60 -

33 30 31 32 30- g 26 /

7// .y; -

23 g

'E 26 0 , , , , , , i , , , , ,

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 LOGG AB LE/REPORTAB LE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

The Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator is depicted in two separate graphs. The top graph depicts the total number of loggable/ reportable non-system failures concerning Security Badges, Access Control and Authorization, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors. The bottom graph shows the total number of loggable/

reportable incidents concerning system failures which occurred during the reporting month.

During the month of May 1994, there were 21 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 11 (52%) of the !oggable/ reportable incidents. System failures declined 58% during the reporting month. Non-system failures increased from 2 in April 1994 to 10 in May. There were 5 lost / unattended security badge incidents which contributed significantly to the rise in non-system failures.

Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 56

h Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (RFO rcquired for Removal)

Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removebte on-line) 0-Fort Calhoun Goals for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old &

Temporary Modifications >6 months old 7-6-

5 5

///// '////

4 ///// V///.

4- . .. ///// V///

////,  !//// ////.

'////. ///// V///. 3 7,?// /////. y,?,s/,

3- y///, .?///, y///, ,,,,

y///, .?///,-  ;//,?, .?///,.

7///, /,?,?,?; y///, ///,

2- 7///,  ?,?/// y/,?/, .

</,?/;

////. ///// ////. '////

V///. ///// 1 ////. 1 V///

1- 1/II I/IIi AIII' '////

'////,' ///// 2 . ////, gy.qw ////,

f///,

o ,!////  % ////. N w?&ki&N .'////

0 ,;//// 3?//,- e ,  ;////, m///,

o v i v i v i v i February '94 March '94 April '94 May '94 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are 0.

There is currently 1 temporary modification that is greater than one fuel cycle old requir-ing a refueling outage to remove: Epoxy repairs to ST-4B, which is awaiting completion of MWO 931325, scheduled start date 1995 Refueling Outage. This temporary modifi-cation was previously included in the on-line removable >6 months old classification, but was re-classified as an outage modification to save engineering resources from com-pleting 1 ECN to allow the epoxy repair to remain in place and a second ECN to remove it during the 1995 refueling outage. In addition, at the end of May 1994 there were 3 temporary modifications installed that were greater than six months old that can be removed on-line. These were: 1) Local indication for BAST CH-11 A and CH-11 B, in which Operations is reviewing a draft FLC. After review, Licensing is to issue an FLC, and the NRC is to approve; 2) LP-30 transformer,in which ECN 93-183 is approved for accomplishment prior to 8/31/94; and 3) Door 1011-7 lockset replacement, in which ECN 93-408 is approved for accomplishment 1995 on-line.

l At the end of May 1994, there was a total of 24 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Sta-l tion.12 of the 24 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 12 are removable

on-line. In 1994 a total of 24 temporary modifications have been installed.

I l

I Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 l 57

< Total Mod;fication Packages Open 264 N

w 250- -O- Fort Calhoun Year End Goal M

$f T' 200-8 m

i!f[ 150- C O O O O O fj 127 m

h 5g m?

100

- 100-Y --

T - -

$ }6 . (b e $s5 M@e44 i?

w El $

e 9

W w

~~

n S

1:gf I$jj 5 N kIk $ h h $ R k 3 ,h i * $

!d{h~h E k h ka h h h s 50-a h k

[a p $ !N.

a h a

e au s sn s  :

a ws e a e n a, w s y 4 g@i %va R .

,. e [$ si $n$  % W[! E E f$ 16 ff

-4 TjR  ?$r g 3 $ $ $ k sj y J (? Q g i i i i e i i i e i i 4 a a i

'91 '92 '93 Jun93 Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludino outstand-ino modifications which are orocosed to be cancelled).

Categorv Reoorting Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress 1 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 1 Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 44 l Construction Backlog /In Progress 19 Design Engr. Uodate Backlog /In Prooress 14 Total 79 At the end of May 1994,7 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 37 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com-mittee (NPRC) had completed 86 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 46 backlog modification request reviews this year.

The 1994 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 80 outstanding modifications.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Scofield/Lounsbery (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 58

EARS Requiring Engineering Clos: cut - Not in Closeout O DEN 5 sE 50-40- 40- 40- , , , , , 40- 9 ,_,,,,

30- - 30- 30- , 30- -

20-20 - - ----

20 - 20-0 ""

, , , i iO , """ , """"

N Mar Apr May Mar Apr May Mar Apr May Mar Apr May 0-3 months 3-6 months 6-12 months >12 months May '94 Overdue EARS O Closeout (SE)

O Engineering Response 50-40- gy 30-20- ' "'

10- ' '

O I I ' '

Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 O Priority 1 & 2 s Priority 3 -

Total Open EARS 200 -

150 - Data '

100 - Not ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, _ ,,,,,,,,

50- Available 7 --

G.~_ .

G..

~. '.

0 , i i i , , , , , , , i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 l O 61 overdue Responses  ;

@ 51 EARS Resolved and in Closeout O 49 Overdue Closeouts 0 115 EARS Requiring Response 8 56 EARS on Schedule

'. S?M?nb... . 29.5 %

3o,7*I '

36.8% k 69.3 %

IlllllllIllIIllll  :

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineer-ing and System Engineering. The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS. i l

Total EAR breakdown is as follows:  :

EARS opened during the month 12 EARS closed during the month 15 Total EARS open as of the end of the month 166 Data Source: Skiles/Pulverenti (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 59 i

l l

E in DEN - 210 i

5.7%

5 0 3 Months - 298 l

3.0 O in Systern Engineering - 137 38.6% 46.8 %

I l C 3-6 Months - 93 119.8 % O in Procurernent/Constr. - 126 14.6 1.5 0 >6 Months - 246 S In Closeout - 164 ECN STATUS - OVERALL BACKLOG E ECNs Backlogged O ECNs Received During tho Month y ECNs Completed During the Month

! 250- 2 27.1 % D 0-3 Months -115 50

~

100- f , ;3 18.1 %

~

e g

i l 3 i

a j i

i i a a O >6 uonths - 57 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 (Year-to-Date monthly average of ECNs received was 51.8)

ECN STATUS - DEN 250-200- ll; ;27.0 S 0-3 Months - 37 150-58.4 % " **

100- .

14.6 %

q 88 0 >6 Months - 80 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Ju!94 E,,M,, STATUS - SE ________

200- g D 0-3 Months - 51

~

~

l 50.8 % O 3-6 Months - 11 O >6 Months - 64 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS - PROC /CONSTR 250-200-  ! B 0-3 Months - 95

o. g g 57.9 % O 3-6 uonths - 24 50- O >6 uonths - 45

a. . . , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS CLOSEOUT ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend; None SEP 62 60 1

s - h fg O FC Type - 205 16.2 % O Priority 1 &2 - 103 29.5%

N-li S SRI Type - 244 33.3%

s '

@ Priority 3 & 4 - 322 38.3 % 0 DC Type - 188 50.5%? O Prionty 5 & 6 - 212 s -

TOTAL OPEN ECNS BY TYPE (637 TOTAL) TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY PRIORITY (637 TOTAL)

O DEN- Engineering Not Complete O System Engineering - Response, Confirmation Not Complete

@ Maintenance / Construction / Procurement - Work Not Complete E DEN - Closeout or Drafting Not Complete 250 -

199 210 205 203 I

5 4 28.3%

100 - 90 , @ Prionty 3 or 4 50- x 0 Priority 5 or 6 0 g  ;  ; , i  ; i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Ju!94 Facility Change ECNs Open 271 239 246 250 244  % ..

50 -

15.6* O Priority 1 or 2 70 200 - ,g 150- , 56 - 21 @ Priority 3 or 4 00 - 36 p557a/.i O Prionty 5 or 6

. 50- 82 'v" 0-  ;  ;  ; , i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open 300 -

203 G Prionty 1 or 2 34 @ Priority 3 or 4 150- y f/ 85 l 61.7% k .6% ' '

100 O Priority 5 or 6 yy 26 0 , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Ju!94 Document Change ECNs Open ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN ]

Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 61

O Administrative Control Problem O Licensed Operator Error

@ Other Personnel Error

@ Maintenance Problem 3- E Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem

@ Equipment Failures 2 .

1- - -- -

i 4 i i i i I 4 4 I I I May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from May 1,1993 through April 30,1994. To be consis-tent with the Preventable / Personnel Errors LER indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date as opposed to the LER report date.

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

There were 2 events in April 1994 that resulted in LERs.

Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 62

l 0 Totai Requalification Training Hours O Sirculator Training Hours O Non-Requalification Training Hours i 50- [] Number of Exam Failures i

40- 36  :

33 33 3'. 5 t

30-  ;

f 20- 18 37  ;

~

14 14 14  ;

7, 10- 7 8

~7 3 Z 7 4

' 5 5 m E

/,

4 2 '/ 3 '/. 2 p 3 t

0 I i i i i i i Cycle 93-4 Cycle 93-5 Cycle 93-6

• Cycle 93-7 Cycle 94-1 Cycle 94-2 Cycle 94-3

• Note: The Simulator was out-of-service for maintenance and modifications during Cycle 93-6. l 1

LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING  ;

I This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each l crew during each cycle. The Simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP {

verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Managerlunches. ,

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

There was 1 written exam failure, and no simulator exam failures for Cycle 94-3. The -

l individual who failed the written exam was remediated without impacting the Operations Department shift schedule.

I Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source)  :

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani l

Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 63 l

i )

l 35- O SRO Exams Administered O GRO Exams Passed I 30- E RO Exams Administered O RO Exams Passed 25- i 20-l 1

15-10-NRC -

Exams  ?

5- -

l

/

/ s- .

0 i i i i i i i i i i i i Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 l

LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Opera-tor (RO) quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These internally adminis-tered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress.

Hot Ucense class convened April 11,1994, to conduct General Fundamentals training.

There are 4 RO candidates and 2 SRO candidates enrciled in this phase of the training (3 additional SRO candidates, who are not required to take the Generic Fundamentals examination, will join the class in November).

4 in-house examinations were given to each candidate during May, and all RO and SRO candidates passed all exams. No NRC examinations were given during May.

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64

. . , - . s-

O TotalOpen CARS Q TotalOpenIRs O Open CARS > Six Months Old S Open irs > Six Months Old 320-  :  : -320 Cycle 15 - - _ __

280- Refueling - - - -

280 Outage -

240-  :  :  :  :  : - 240 200- h h h h h h 200 160- _  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  : 160 120- E  :  :  :  :  :  : , 120

: I  :  :  :  :  :  :

80-Xli l ,, l

- 80 40- l $  :

(, f

~

} ) ( l 5 ll7l ! si (l - 40 j 0 , ", , ,

, , , , , , , ,0 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 E Open Significant CARS 77 80- 69 -

67 70- 0 Open Significant irs eo 64 -

80- 51

~

37 25 28 27 30- ~~~

24

'~~

~

20- 8 5 5 4 6 6 7 10- 2 2 2 2 4 0 , , , ," , , , , , , , ,

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Ag May94 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS This indicator shows the total number of open Corrective Action Reports (CARS), CARS

>6 months old, the total number of Open irs, irs >6 months old, the number of opon significant CARS and the number of open significant irs.

At the end of May 1994 there were 71 open CARS.15 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old. There were 7 Open Significant CARS at the end of the month.

Also, at the end of May there were 335 open irs.135 of these irs were greater than 6 months old. There were 77 Open Significant irs at the end of the month.

The 1994 monthly goal for the number of CARS greater than 6 months old is less than 30.

Data Source: Orr/Gurtis (Manager / Source) & CHAMPS Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir/ Gates Adverse Trend: Although the number of irs has been increasing, an adverse trend is not indicated because the increase is a result of a revision to Standing Order R e that lowers the threshold for writing irs and requires completion of all corrective actions prior to closing irs. 65

i i

Engineering Hold -+- Planning Cornplets

-O-- Planning Hold -M- Ready

--V-- Part Hold Total 500 -

475 -

450 -

l 425 -

400 -

375 -

350 - y n 325 -

.jg 300-lE 275-

U 250-225 -

g o 200 - ^

F 175 -

150 -

125 -

100 - ,

75-50- -

--?

25-0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Dec93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Feb Mar 95 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE)

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

Parts Holds (part hold reinoved when parts are staged and ready for use)

Engineering Holds (Engineering hold removed when appropriate engineering paper-work or support is received for the package)

Planning Holds (Planning hold removed when planning is completed to the point when l package is ready or other support is necessary to continue the planning process)

Planning Complete (status given when only items keeping the job from being ready to work are parts or engineering support)

Ready (status when all planning, supporting documentation, and parts are ready to go)

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Johansen Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 66

>>0 >

o.

'o 3 'T 3 e H  % Complete O. g m

,$ co E S ScE e- o o

- to o

o o

a o

m o

m o o

.4 co e o

i$

o m o-- o=3 e i i i i i o, i i O *a @

W 8 C 9h . . - - - ---

m w* E *O R o O

< All Projects I 3m--

k' m

m I, cmm n

m m

i g -

3 g @cg c_. m 2 - = =

h 3 o $ '5 5-FM O CO E r-I Steam Generator Services I

i S

SE

y, f. 9 c mew 9 T

Jts c- ma CT)E g 6 6 Qnm O Balance of Plant ECT I a eg =

m g

meE m O

' e W

o

r 3 O. -mtoo @ u -_ _== Ln

{j- @ $ [$ ul) Erosion / Corrosion i O ils o m o. ct r -i I C g 6 Qo@ >

H

$ $ $ y m - === cn > > co

@ E 'e @:r t5, 5 Snubber Testing I 9@

, @ m o m cm I a a a C

O E v

e oo o 3 in 2 -

m R o.- =m .< "g3 n o o uga ug s Cn o @ uE og O

r" ISI Exams I o o

e C -

l o m, eo m a e e o.

g :r u o o &&

@ my a

a  : swawame+m&mwm 5 3 3 G 6 EF- *=r 3

oa o --

m m

System Pressure Tests I

I E

o 33 n - g g C 3 V

-9 C "L'M 8 g us E, yS p Relief Valve Testing 9 5 g o m 3

yo x Vv Q -

"O

& g O ""fl O o

3*

o-o O

C Check Valves 7 3

g B9

.m e y -

mannw ma wa~

9 to m ca O m Motor Operated Valves (MOVs) m < Ox ~ l T m. a" -

ta

^

6i $ *, wennewsnamum mm Boric Acid Inspection i e 1 9 _.

1995 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS

Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval

- - Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package issued 20 -

l Total Modification Packages (18) (3 added after 1/14/94) 15- lllllll ll'lllllllllllll!!ll!l llllll*llll l l lll 10 -

E 8

!E 5-l i

0 l I 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 & 4 I I & I I I i l l 4 i 6 4 4 I l 4 4 4 4 4 I I 4 4 I I I i1 4 8 l l h 6 6 $ h 6 6 6 $ $ 6 6

;  : 4 a 8 E a e G G G

- M M R m m o  ;

PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/14/94) and the current schedule. This information is taken from

, the Modification Variation Report produced by the Design Engineering group.

l The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by October 15,1994 Modifications added after 1/14/94 are not included in this performance indicator and will be scheduled as soon as possible.

Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 l

68

1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATIONS

--+- Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval & Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package issued (7 FD DCPs issued prior to 1/14/94) l Total Modification Packages (17) (2 are Close Out Only) (1 Added after 1/14S4) 20-u 5 15-Es  ; l  ;: l,'lll, ll ,ll, lll, ll , *: ':: l, ll ,l E .E E%

Art g e 10-m& -

u- j  ::::::::/:::[:

EE S 5-zj g i E l

0 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiieiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii.i iiiii e e e g g e e e g g e e '

i = = a m 8 5 8 e n 8 8

- A B s e a o  ;

PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for on-line installation during i 1994. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/14/

94) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variance Report produced by the Design Engineering Nuclear group.

In May, no modifications were deleted and none were added.

l The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by August 15,1994. Modifications added after 1/14/94 are not included

in this performance indicator and will be scheduled as soon as possible.

4 Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Skiles AdverseTrend: None 69

aa__ A ACTION PLANS

(

l l

1 l

l l

70

_ . . .. __ ~

ACTION PLANS This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this report. Also included are Action Plans forindicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing increased Management Attention for 3 consecutive months.

In accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-OP-37, the following performance indicators would require action plans based on 3 consecutive months of performance cited as  ;

"Needing increased Management Attention"-

Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Critical Hours  ;

. Unplanned Safety System Actuations (INPO and NRC)

Equipment Forced Outages Per 1,000 Critical Hours  !

The Plant Manager and Station Engineering Manager have reviewed the daily and ongoing actions being taken to return these performance indicators to meeting the ,

goals. This review indicates appropriate action is being taken and no explicit action plan is required.

The action plan for Thermal Performance follows:  !

Actions to improve Thermal Performance are:  !

i

1) Pursuing adjustments and repairs (in progress) on condenser i backwash valves to enhance condenser performance. i

2) Investigate the possibility of FW flow nozzle fouling.  ;

3) Investigate the effects of adding Ethanolamine (late summer) to secondary chemistry to clean system and possibly reduce S/G blowdown.  !

1 i

The action plan for Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies follows: .

1) Control room deficiencies are being worked and closed routinely by the maintenance department. A target closure rate of 10 per week has been established. Once the goalis met, the target will be adjusted periodically to ensure a positive or neutral trend.

2) To ensure that these deficiencies are being pursued with the best tech-

nical solutions and that all departments are supporting the Control l Room Deficiency Goal, a working group of Maintenance, Engineering, and Operations personnel has been established.

i 71

' ACTION PLANS (continued)

The action plan for Preventive Maintenance items Overdue follows:

This performance indicator did not meet the goal for the months of February, March and April 1994 primarily because the responsible departments are not closing PMO paperwork in a timely manner. This applies to PM's which have been completed and to PM's which must be deferred for various reasons.

The Maintenance PEP is recommending changes to the administrative closecut process to simplify the process. This should eliminate most of the overdue PM's. Additionally, the Maintenance Planning group will _

begin issuing a weekly ' Overdue PM Report" to responsible department supervisors to increase their awareness of overdue PM's.

72

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR PERFORMANCE The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economi-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- cal operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual auxiliary feedwater system for the reporting period di- cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for vided by the critical hours for the reporting period multi- the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the plied by the number of trains in the auxiliary feedwater approved 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is (

system. the Financial and Operatin0 Report.

CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS Compares the Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate to 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE  !

the industry check valve failure rate (f ailures per 1 million AREA component hours). The data for the industry f ailure rate The personnel contamination events in the clean con-is three months behind the PI Report reporting month. trolled area. This indicator tracks personnel performance i This indicator tracks performance for SEP #43. for SEP #15 & 54 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA Collective radiation exposure is the total external whole- The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which i body dose received by all on-site personnel (including includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and

• contractors and visitors) during a time period, as mea- areas of the C/RP building, that is contaminated based sured by the thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Col- on the total square footage. This indicator tracks perfor-lective radiation exposure is reported in units of person- mance for SEP # 54.

rem. This indicator tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) measured from computer point XC105 (in thermal mega-

SUMMARY

watts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet The number of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station portion of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting with significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) fail- month are also shown.

ute rates than the rest of the industry for an eighteen month time period. Failures are reported as component DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) >

(i.e. pumps, motors, valves, etc.) and application (i.e. This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for charging pumps, main steam stop valves, control ele- each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start ment drive motors, etc.) categories. demands and the last 25 load-run demands.

Failure Cause Categories are:

Wear Out/ Aging - a failure thought to be the conse- DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE quence of expected wear or aging. (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

Manuf acturing Defect - a failure attributable to inad- This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for equate assembly or initial quality of the responsible com- all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, ponent or system. involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours Engineering / Design - a f ailure attributab's to the inad- worked (100 maa years). This does not include contrac- i equate design of the responsible component or system. tor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel perfor-Other Devices - a failure attributable to a failure or mance for SEP #25 & 26.

misoperation of another component or system, including associated devices. DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL)

Maintenance / Testing - a f ailure that is a result of im- The Document Review Indicator shows the number of proper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or documents reviewed, the number of documents sched-personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test- uled for review, and the number of document reviews .

ing activities performed on the responsible component or that are overdue for the reporting month. A document  !

system, including failure to follow procedures. revies is considered overdue if the review is not com-Errors - failures attributable to inwrrect procedures that plete within 6 months of the assigned due date. This were followed as written, improper installation of equip- indicator tracks performance for SEP #46.

ment, and personnel errors (including f ailure to follow procedures properly). Also included in this category are EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM f ailures for which the cause is unknown or cannot be as- PERFORMANCE

, signed to any of the preceding categories. The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-able and the estimated unavailable hours for the emer-gency AC power system for the reporting period divided by the number of hours in the reporting period multiplied by the number of trains in the emergency AC power sys-tem.

73

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS EMERGENCY Df ESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL- EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY ITY This indicator measures the total unreliability of emer-This indicator shows the number of failures that were gency diesel generators. In general, unreliability is the reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die- ratio of unsuccessf ul operations (starts or load runs) to sel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also the number of valid demands. Total unreliability is a shown are trigger values which correlate to a high level combination of start unreliability and load-run of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have ob- unreliability.

tained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the demand f ailures are less than the trigger values. ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR)

1) Number of Start Demands: All valid and inadvertent BREAKDOWN start demands, including all start-only demands and all This indicator shows a t,reakdown, by age and priority of start demands that are followed by load-run demands, the EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design En-whether by automatic or manualinitiation. A start-only gineering Nuclear and System Engineering. This indica-demand is a demand in which the emergency generator for tracks performance for SEP #62.

is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator.

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the emer- ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS gency generator system that prevents the generator from The number of ECNs that were opened. ECNs that were achieving specified frequency and voltage is classified as completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completion a valid start failure. This includes any condition identified by DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks in the course of maintenance inspections (with the emer- performance for SEP #62.

gency generator in standby mode) that definitely would have resulted in a start failure if a demand had occurred. ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN

3) Number of Load-Ruc Demands: For a valid load-run This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering demand to be counted the ioad-run attempt must meet Change Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design one or more of the following criteria: Engineering Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real au- Maintenance. The graphs provide data on ECN Facility tomatic or manualinitiation. Changes open, ECN Substitute Replacement Parts B) A load-run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration open, and ECN Document Changes open. This indicator as stated in each test's specifications. tracks performance for SEP #62.

C) Other special tests in which the eme.gency generator is expected to be operated for at least one hour while EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITI-loaded with at least 50% of its design load. CAL HOURS

4) Number of Load-Run Failures: A load-run failure Equipment forced outages per 1000 critical hours is the i should be counted for any reason in which the emer- inverce of the mean time between forced outages l gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre- caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal l dicted. Failures are counted during any valid load-run to the number of hours the reactor is criticalin a period l demands. (1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />) divided by the number of forced outages

5) Exceptions: Unsumessful attempts to start or load-run caused by equipment failures in that period.

should not be counted as valid demands or failures when they can be attributed to any of the following: EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR l A) Spurious trips that would be bypassed in the event of This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available an emergency. generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as B) Maffunction of equipment that is not required during a percontage. Available generation is the energy that an emergency. can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum C)Intentionaltermination of a test because of abnormal power level permitted by equipment and regulatory limi-conditions that would not have resulted in major diesel tations. Maximum generation is the energy that can be generator damage or repair. produced by a unit in a given period if operated continu-D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would have not ously at maximum capacity.

prevented the emergency generator from being restarted and brought to load within a few minutes. FORCED OUTAGE RATE E) A f ailure to start because a portion of the starting sys- This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that tem was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a suc- the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared cessful start with the starting system in its normal align- to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced m ent. events are failures or other unplanned conditions that Each emergency generaar failure that results in the gen- require removing the unit from service before the end of erator being declared inoperable should be counted as the next weekend. Forced events include start-up fail-one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during uros and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shut-corrective maintenance and the successfultest that fol- down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service).

lows repair to verify op+rkWy should not be cx)unted as demands or failures see EDG has not been de-clared operable again.

74

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAIN-This indicator is defined as the steady-state primary cool- ING

ant 1-131 activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contri- The total number of hours of training given to each crew l bution and normalized to a common punfication rate. during each cycie. Also provided are the simulator train-Tramp uranium is fuel which has been deposited on re- ing hours (which are a subset of the total training hours),

actor core internals from previous defective fuelor is the number of non-requalification training hours and the present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu- number of exam f ailures. This indicator tracks trainmg facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous performance for SEP #68.

i operation for at least three days at a power level that does not vary more than + or - 5%. Plants should collect LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE data for this indicator at a power level above 85%, when BREAKDOWN possible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state This indicator shows the number and root cause code for power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as the highest steady-state power level attained during the follows:

month. 1) Administrative Control Problem - Management and The density correction f actor is the ratio of the specific supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-(540 degrees F., Vf . 0.02146) divided by the specife equate management or supervisory control, incorrect volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 procedures, etc.)

degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooting heat ex- 2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures changer, Vf - 0.016204), which results in a density cor- errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor opera-rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32. tors during plant activities.

3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission /commis-GROSS HEAT RATE sion committed by non-licensed personnel involved in Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal plant activities.

energy in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the 4) Maintenance Problem - The intent of this cause reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by code is to capture the full range of problems which can the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH). be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in the maintenance functional organization. Activities in-HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED cluded in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil-The total amount (in Kilograms)of non-halogenated haz- lance, calibration and radiation protection, ardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other 5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem hazardous waste produced by FCS each month. - This cause code covers a full range of programmatic defciencies in the areas of design, construction, installa-HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM tion, and Iabrication (i.e., loss of control power due to SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the environ.

The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- ment, etc.).

able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the 6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi-high pressure safety injection system for the reporting ronmental-Related Failures)- This code is used for spuri-period divided by the critical hours for the reporting pe- ous f ailures of electronic piece-parts and failures due to riod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pres- meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high sure safety injection system. winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time failures. Electric components included in this category INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE-INPO are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, This indicator is defined as the number of accidents per diodes, resistors, etc.

200,000 man-hours worked for all utility personnel per-manently assigned to the station that result in any of the LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) following: 1) one or more days of restrcted werk (ex- The total number of security incidents for the reporting ciuding the day of the accident); 2) one or more days month depicted in two graphs. This indcator tracks se-away from work (excluding the day of the accident); and cunty pertoi,r ance for SEP #58.

3) fatalities. Contractor personnel are not included for this indicator. MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The % of overtime hours compared to normal hours for IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER- maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as VICE contract personnel.

Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are ,

out-of-service in the Secondary System and the Post i Accident Sampling System (PASS). l LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quiz-zes and exams that are administered and passed each month. This indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68. 75

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFl-This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Mainte- CIENCIES nance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the A control room equipment deficiency (CRD)is defined as reporting month. Maintenance classifications are de. any component which is operated or controlled from the Control Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control fined as. '

Room, provides testing capabilities from the Control Room, provides automatic actions from or to the Control Corrective - Repair and restoration of equipment or com-Room, or provides a passive function for the Contro!

ponents that have failed or are malfunctioning and are Room and has been identified as deficient. i.e., does not not performing their intended function.

perform under all conditions as designed. This definition also applies to the Alternate Shutdown Panels Al-17g, Preventive Actions taken to maintain a piece of equip-Al-185, and Al-212.

ment within design operating conditions, prevent equip-A plant component which ,s i deficient or inoperable is ment failure, and extend its life and are performed prior considered an " Operator Work Around (OWA) ltem" if to equipment f ailure, some other action is required by an operator to compen-sate for the condition of the component. Some examples Non-Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance ac-tivities performed to implement station improvements or of OWAs are: 1) The control room level indicator does not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera-to repair non-plant equipment.

tot out in the pfant; 2) A deficient pump cannot be re.

paired because replacement parts require a long lead Maintenance Work Priorities are defined as:

time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant pump to be operated continuously; 3) Special actions Emergency - Conditions which significantly degrade sta-are required by an Operator because of equipment de-tion safety or availability.

sign problems. These actions may be described in Op-erations Memorandums. Operator Notes, or may require Immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which signifi-changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Deficient plant cantty degrade station reliability. Potential for unit shut-equipment that is required to be used during Emergency down or power reduction, Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Proco-dures. 5) System indication that provides critical infor-Operations Concern - Equipment deficiencies which mation during normat or abnormal operations.

hinder station operation.

NUMBER OF M!SSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RE-Essential - Routine corrective maintenance on essential SULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS station systems and equipment. ,

The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting Non-Essential- Routine corrective maintenance on non-month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 &

essential station systems and equipment.

6 Plant improvement - Non corrective maintenance and OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS & INCIDENT plant improvements.

REPORTS This indicator displays the total number of open Correc-This indicator tracks maintenance performance for SEP n PMs (CARS), the number of CARS that are

1. 36*

older than six rnonths and the number of open significant CARS. Also displayed are the number of open incident MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE Reports (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six The total rnaximum amount of radiation received by an m nths old and the number of open significant irs.

individual person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, and annuabasis.

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS The number of Modification Requests (MRs)in any state MWO PLANN!NG STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING between the issuance of a Modification Number and the OU* AGE)

The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have P hd n Pd e F 33 B p been approved for inclus,on i in the Cycle 15 Refueling resents modification requests that have not been plant Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork

2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category ready for field use). Also included is the number of ,

" l MWOs that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold' M Rea h m M g WW B.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived)

Projects Review Commrttee (NPRC).

and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Ma.in-C.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear tenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that pcts Commhe (NN) have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage These Modificatio.1 Requests may be reviewed several and have not yet been converted to MWOs.

times before they are approved for accomplishment or 76

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l

cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with retumed to Engineering for more information, some ap- the original design of the plant would not be considered proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and preventable).

some approved for planning. Once planning is com- For purposes of LER event classification, a " Personnel pleted and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these Error LER is defined as follows: An event for which the Modification Requests may be approved for accomplish- root cause is inappropriate action on the part of one or ment with a year assigned for construction or they may more individuals (as opposed to being attributed to a de-be cancelled. All of these different phases require re- partment or a general group). Also, the inappropriate view. action must have occurred within approximately two

3) Design Engineering Backlog /In Progress. Nuclear years of the ' Event Date" specified in the LER.

Planning has assigned a year in which construction will Additionally, each event classified as a

• Personnel Error-be completed and design work may be in progress. should also be classified as " Preventable." This indicator

4) Construction Backlog'In Progress. The Construction trends personnel performance for SEP ltem #15.

Package has been issued or construction has begun but the modification has no'. been accepted by the System PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT Acceptance Committee (SAC). OF LIMIT

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /in Progress. PED The % of hours out of limit are reported for lithium di-has received the Modification Completion Report but the vided by the total number of hours possible for the drawings have not been updated. month. EPRIlimits are used.

The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not include modifications which are proposed for cancella- PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS tion. (MAINTENANCE)

The number of identified incidents concerning mainte-OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs This indicator shows the status of the projects which are related to the use of procedures (includes the number of in the scope of the Refueling Outage, closed ,m caused by procedural noncompliance), and the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs.

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK #15,41 & 44.

The percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION maintenance planning and craft. Rework is: Any main- PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICA-tenance work repeated to correct a deficiency which has TIONS) re-omurred within 60 days following similar work activi- This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-ties. Any additional work required to correct deficiencies proved for completion during the Refueling Outage.

discovered during a failed Post Maintenance Test to en-sure the component / system passes subsequent Post PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLAN-Maintenance Tests. This definition can be found in S. O. NING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIFICATIONS)

M-101. This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-proved for completion during 1994.

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE-NANCE ACTIVITIES RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM The % of the number of completed maintenance activi- The number of identified poor radiological work practices ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte- (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks nance activities each rnonth. This % is shown for all radiological work performance for SEP #52.

maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of emergent MWOs. Maintenance activities include MWRs. RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella- PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE neous activities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per- The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil-formance for SEP #33. lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of non-outage corrective maintenance and preventive main-PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs tenance completed over the reporting period. The ratio, This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of expressed as a percentage, is calculated based on man-LER event classification, a preventable LER is defined hours. Also displayed are the % of preventive mainte-as: An event for which the root cause is personnel error nance items in the month that were not completed or ad-(l.o., inappropriate action by one or more individuals), ministratively closed by the scheduled date plus a grace inadequate administrative mntrols, a design /construc- period equal to 25 % of the scheduled interval. This indi-tion /installationMabrication problem (involving work com- cator tracks preventive maintenance activities for SEP pleted by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a main- #41.

unance problem (attributed to inadequate or improper upkeep / repair of plant equipment). Also, the cause of the event must have occurred within approximately two years of the " Event Date* specified in the LER (e.g., an 77 i

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FRE- SIGNIFICANT EVENTS QUENCY RATE Significant events are those events identified by NRC The number of injuries requiring more than normal first staff through detailed screening and evaluation of operat- ,

aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator ing experience. The screening process includes the I trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26. daily review and discussion of all reported operating re-actor events, as well as other operational data such as REPEAT FAILURES special tests or construction activities. An event identi- l The number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System fied from the screening process as a significant ever't (NPRDS) components with more than 1 failure and the candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual number of NPRDS components with more than 2 f ailures or potential threat to the health and safety of the public for the last eighteen months. was involved. Specific examples of the type of criteria are summarized as follows: 1) Degradation of important SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES safety equipment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a Safety system failures are any events or conditions that transient: 3) Degradation of fuelintegrity, primary cool-could prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of ant pressure boundary, important associated features; structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple 4) Scram with complicati m; 5) Unplanned release of redundant subsystems or trains, failure of all trains con- radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-stitutes a safety systern failure. Failure of one of two or nical Specifications; 7) Other.

more trains is not coum3d as a safety system failure. INPO significant events reported in this indicator are The definition for the indicau parallels NRC reporting SERs (Signifi: ant Event Reports) which inform utilities of requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The significant events and lessons learned identified through following is a list of the major safety systems, sub- the SEE-IN screening process.

systems, and components monitored for this indicator:

Accident Monitoring instrumentation, Auxiliary (and SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE Emergen y) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con- The do!!ar value of the spare parts inventory value for trol, Component Cooling Water System, Containment FCS during the reporting period.

and Containment Isolation, Containment Coolant Sys-tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, STAFFING LEVEL Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level Features instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Di v ision. This Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, indicator tracks performance for SEP #24.

Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam Line isolation Valves, Onsite Emergency AC & DC STATION NET GENERATION Power w/ Distribution, Radiation Monitoring Instrumenta- The net generation (sum) produced by the FCS during tion, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core isolation the reporting month.

Cooling System Reactor Trip System and instrumenta-tion, Recir:ulation Pump Trip Actuation Instrumentation. TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves, Spent The number of temporary mechanical and electncal con-Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ulti- figurations to the plant's systems.

mate Heat Sink. 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating INDEX systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the l The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation FuD, schematic, connection, wiring, or flow diagrams. I based on the concentration of key impurities in the sec- 2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveil- l ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro-most likely cause of deterioration of the steam genera- cedures, Special Procedures, or Operating Procedures tors. Criteria for calculating the CPI are: 1) The plant is are not considered as temporary modifications unless the at greater than 30 percent power; and 2) The power is jumper or block remains in place after the test or proce-  :

changing less than 5% per day. The CPIis calculated dure is complete. Jumpers and b!ocks insta!!sd in test or i using the following equation: CPI - (sodium /0.90) + lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-(Chloride /1.70) + (Sutf ate /1.90) + (Iron /4.40) + (Copper / cations.

0.30)/S. Where: Sodium, sulf ate and chloride are tlie 3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-monthly average blowdown concentrations in ppb, iron tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for and copper are monthly time weighted average which MRs have been submitted will be considered as feedwater concentrations in ppb. The denominator for temporary modifications untilfinal resolution of the MR each of the 5 factors is the !NPO median value. If the and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently monthly average for a specific parameter is less than the recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo-INPO median value, the median value is used in the cal- rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71.

culation.

78

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS 758.% MAL PERFORMANCE is actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuation The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percent- actuatons to be counted are actuations of the high pres-age, sure injection system, the low pressure injection system, ,

or the safety injection tanks.  ;

UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR The ratio of the available energy generation over a given UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS(NRC time period to the reference energy generation (the en- DEFINITION) orgy that could be produced if the unit were operated The number of safety system actuations which include continuously at full power under reference ambient con- (gn!y.) the High P - ssure Safety injection System, the Low ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per- Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injection contage. Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of safety system actuations includes actua-UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER tions when major equipment is operated AM when the 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au- lenged.

tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua-tions) that occur per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of critical operation. VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS The value for this indicator is calculated by rnultiplying This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC inspec-in a specific time period by 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />, then dividing tion hours. The violations are reported in the year that the that number by the total number of hours critical in the inspection was actually performed and not based on when same time period. The indicator is further defined as the inspection repod is received. The hours reported for follows: each inspection report are used as the inspection hours.

1) Unplanned rneans that the scram was not an antici-pated part of a planned test. VOLUME OF LOW LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor WASTE by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid ,

rods, liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac- radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica- '

tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig- tor also ;, hows the volume of low-level radioactive waste nal may have resulted from exceeding a setpoint or may which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive  !

have been spurious. oil that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the

3) Automatic rneans that the initial signal that caused volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been actuation of the reactor protection system logic was pro- shipped off-site for processing. Low-level solid radioactive vided from one of the sensors monitoring plant param- waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, and eters and conditions, rather than the manual scram evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power r switches or, in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but- plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive waste tons) provided in the main control room. includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, dispos- t

4) Critical means that during the steady-state condition of able protective clothing, plastic containers, and any other ,

the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication material to be disposed of at a low-level radioactive waste l factor (k,) was essentially equal to one. disposal site, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms. ,

Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent  !

UNPLANNED CAPABluTY LOSS FACTOR fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing. This indica-The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given tor tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54.

period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient con- r ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-  ;

contage.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS- l (INPO DEFINITION)

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

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an ECCS actuation setpoint or f rom a spurious / inadvertent ECCS signal.

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power sys-

] tem actuations that result from a loss of power to a safe-l 1

guards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation oc-curs when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signal is gen-erated (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators Index is to list perfor-mance indicators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended.

SEP Reference Number 15 EaQ2 Increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . . .49 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 21,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area. .5 Recordable injury / illness Cases Frequency Rate . .4 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs . .6 SEP Reference Number 24 Complete Staff Studies Staffing Level . .42 SEP Reference Number 25 Training Program for Managers and Supervisors Implemented Disabling injury / illness Frequency Rate . .3 Recordable Injury /1!! ness Cases Frequency Rate . .4 SEP Reference Number 26 Evaluate and Implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . .3 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . .4 SEP Reference Number 27 Implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . . .3 Recordable injury /lliness Cases Frequency Rate . .4 SEP Reference Number 31 Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status (Cycle 16 Refueling Outage). . 66 Overall Project Status (Cycle 16 Refueling Outage) . . 67 Progress of Cycle 16 Outage Modification Planning . . 68 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts). .50 SEP Reference Number 36 l Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage). . .45 SEP Reference Number 41 Develop and Implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Patio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue. .46 Procedural Noncompliance incidents. . 49 SEP Reference Number 43 Implement the Check Valve Test Program Check Valve Failure Rate. .36 80 ,

l 1

1 1

I SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continued) l SEP Reference Number 44 EaQ2 Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . . . . 49  !

SEP Reference Number 48  ;

Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program i Document Review .. ... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 55 SEP Reference Number 52 Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program . . . . . . 54 SEP Reference Number 54 Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .16 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste. .. . . .37 Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 21,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area . .5 i Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area. . . . . . . .. . 53 l SEP Reference Number 58 ,

i Revise Physical Secunty Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . . . . .. .. . . 56  !

SEP Reference Number 60 ,

improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. .20 SEP Reference Number 61 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests  :

Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . . .. . 20 SEP Reference Number 62 Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications . . . .. . .. . . . 57 Engineering Assistance _ Request (EAR) Breakdown... . 59 Engineering Change Notice Status .. . .. . . .. . . . . . 60 Engineering Change Notices Open. . . . . 61 SEP Reference Number 68 ,

Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training . . . . 63 License Candidate Exams.. . . . . . . . . . . . 64 ,

'f SEP Reference Number 71 '

improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications . .. . . . . 57 i

81

REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST i

R. L. Andrews L.T.Kusek G. L. Anglehart M. P. Lazar K. L. Belek B. R. Livingston B. H. Blome D. L. Lovett C. E. Boughter J. H. MacKinnon C. J. Brunnert J. W. Marcil r

G. R. Cavanaugh N. L. Martice J. W. Chase R. D. Martin A. G. Christensen T. J. Mcivor O. J. Clayton K. G. Melstad R. P. Clemens K. A. Miller R. G. Conner P. A. Mruz J. L. Connolley Nuclear Licensing G. M. Cook & Industry Affairs S. R. Crites J. T. O'Connor D.C.Dictz W. W. Orr H. J. Faulhaber T. L. Patterson M. T. Frans R. T. Pearce D. P. Galle R. L. Phelps S. K. Gambhir W. J. Ponec J. K. Gasper C. R. Rice W. G. Gates A. W. Richard M. O. Gautier D. G. Ried S. W. Gebers G. K. Samide L. V. Goldberg M. J. Sandhoefner D. J. Golden F. C. Scofield R. H. Guy H. J. Sefick A. L. Hale J. W. Shannon J. B. Herman R. W. Short T. L. Herman C. F. Simmons K. C. Holthaus E.L.Skaggs L. P. Hopkins J. L. Skiles C. K. Huang F. K. Smith T. W. Jamieson R. L. Sorenson R. L. Jaworski K. E. Steele R. A. Johansen M. A. Tesar J. W. Johnson J. J. Tesarek W. C. Jones J. W. Tills J. D. Keppler J. M. Waszak D. D. Kloock S. J. Wilfrett I

82

FORT CALHOUN STATION OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES Event Date Range Production (MWH) Cumulative (MWH)

Cycle 1 09/26/73 -02/01/75 3,299,639 3,299,639 1st Refueling 02/01/75 -05/09/75 Cycle 2 05/09/75 -10/01/76 3,853,322 7,152,961 2nd Refueling 10/01/76-12/13/76

• Cycle 3 12/13/76 - 9/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/77 -12/09/77 Cycle 4 12/09/77-10/14/78 3,026,832 12,985,720 4th Refueling 10/14/78-12/24/78 *

• Cycle 5 12/24/78 - 01/18/80 3,882,734 16,868,454 51h Refueling 01/18/80 - 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,893,714 20,768,168 6th Refueling 09/18/81 - 12/21/81

• Cycle 7 12/21/81 -12/06/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 7th Refueling 12/06/82 - 04/07/83

• Cycle 8 04/07/83-03/03/84 3,406,371 27,736,405 8th Refueling 03/03/84-07/12/84

• e Cycle 9 07/12/84 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 9th Refueling 09/28/85 01/16/86 *

• Cycle 10 01/16/86- 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Refueling 03/07/87 - 06/08/87 *

• Cycle 11 06/08/87 - 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 11th Refueling 09/27/88 01/31/89 *

• Cycle 12 01/31/89 - 02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 12th Refueling 02/17/90- 05/29/90 *

• Cycle 13 05/29/90- 02/01/92 5,451,069 51,040,528 13th Refueling 02/01/92 - 05/03/92

• Cycle 14 05/03/92 -09/25/93 4,981,485 56,022,013 14th Refueling 09/25/93 -11/26/93

• Cycle 15 11/26/93 - 03/11/95 15th Refueling 03/11/95- 04/29/95 (Planned Dates)

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

First Electricity Supplied to the System August 25,1973 Commercial Operation (180,000 KWH) September 26,1973 Achieved Full Power (100%) May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 days) June 8,1987-Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Net Generation (364,468,800 KWH) October 1987 Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH)(Cycle 13) May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992