ML20070K360
| ML20070K360 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1994 |
| From: | OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20070K357 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9407260205 | |
| Download: ML20070K360 (95) | |
Text
- - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _
o FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS I
rv (W
./
d /
JUNE 1994 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE
, COST EFFECTIVENESS l
l u n 8ssa u sPDRa R
e
~i d % wa wad,w d_l"M,--g_g
,a,,i
~ ~, H...a a 4 g,p
+ "~14 %,w w . si a u
-sosa' a en , wall of edia r >da em sj ma-s, a -a sys
, } ~'* /= by am" "'* "" "~ r
/* * * " M u % o ,p9 y4_ ,j
~
ja"rm).C'em s
g 9 n
kwd of ww% w wn, auduk...
d unvok wudan, wnd sowndjud g rml...
d w a, q%, cwuwv-fo'ng canunknwal...
d w a, way of !f...d w dn&ng ikja
'agu Uw /ind % , w m % . at w uruna-duadd, el L% wull of whund, pawa,awowvwn,few<vau6
- . aa tu na wnd Auu Uudcornslno,in,kng ik 'agV knd 9 e pen,, uljud u de&ng ik 'uguk. p Jauns ).O'Coinauvo a
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT Prepared By:
Production Engineering Division System Engineering Test and Performance Group JUNE 1994
FORT CALHOUN STATION JUNE 1994 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT OPERATIONS
SUMMARY
During the month of June, the station operated at a nominal 100% power level. The spent fuel pool reracking project continued.
The west raw water header successfully passed its 10-year hydrostatic test on June 2.
A temporary modification (TM) to Main Steam Valve MS-118 on June 27. This valve is a root isolation valve for pressure transmitter FT-941. The TM (a Furmanite box) was installed to seal a packing leak that could not be isolated; the valve could not be replaced on line.
The following NRC inspection was completed during this reporting period:
IER No. Descriotion 94-16 Monthly Resident Inspection The following Licensee Event Report was submitted during this reponing period:
LER No. Description 94-006 Failure to Place Charcoal Filter (VA-66) in Service Prior to Moving Irradiated Fuel l
1 l
l Source: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs i
Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories
- 3. Performance in Industry
!,.!! .. Unplanned Upper 10% and better LThermal - than 1994 OPPD goal Unit Wplabbed DAutomatic ~ .. Performance Capability CapabililY . Scrams /7,000.-
Factor Lo'sslFa:ctdr_. 1 Hours Critical._ r Performance Better Than I " 1994 OPPD Goal i
i aea l un ;
i.i;i i. . .
, it i .
AFW Safety Fuel Performance Not Meeting hhI[- hty EDG p{e;ty Relistjil,ity- 1994 OPPD Goal S step j ! Systemj j j MdtSI ; ldditetor g g f f, , Performance; Perf6tnMrice 4 -
"i i;
'"I
_h ~ ' '
March April May EEE I
I 94 '94 '94 l
Collective Industrial dddmfskry l hV61ume of . >. Safety.
Syfy Radiation XLow-level .
June 94 Exposure IRniosctive': sAccident Waste : Rate
'; Value Best Possible
" Performance 1994 Year-End
,H Performance INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the months of January through June 1994)
Auto ?
. Scrams:
[i$i: Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories 5 Performance Better Than Industry Average Trend
. Safety!-
- Significant
- System ' Events- --
> Actuations L Performance Better Than 1994 OPPD Goal Performance Not Meeting 1994 OPPD Goal or Industry Average Trend fSafety! Forced
- Sy' stems Outage Failures
- Rate March April May
'94 94 '94 June 1994 (Equipment > Year-To-Date
' iForbed3 Collective Value Best Possible i:Othages/11000} Radiation Performance 1994 Year-End Exposure Performance dCrit2 His(.
f .E NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Safety Syster., Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for October 1990 through September 1993. Predictor blocks cannot be generated for these performance indicators because they are based on NRC biannual reports.
All other indicator values are for the months of January through June 1994.)
FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT '
JUNE 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 performance; or four or consecutive months of performance that is superior to more consecutive months of performance that is trending the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear towards declining as determined by the Manager - Sta-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 Itiness Rate (Page 4) There were no performance indicators exhibiting adverse ,
trends for the reporting month.
Auxiliary Feedwater System Safety System Performance (Page 9)
Emeraenev AC Power System Safety System Perfor. End of Adverse Trend Report.
mance (Page 10) .
Emeraency Diesel Generator Unit Reliability (Page 11) INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED Diesel Generator Reliability (25 Demands)
- 9' A performance indicator with data for the reporting period Emeraency Diesel Generator Unreliabibtv that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goal is (Page 13) defined as "Needing increased Management Attention" per NOD-OP-37.
Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resultina in Lic-The following performance indicators are c.ted i as need.
ensee Event Rooorts (Page 20) ing increased management attention for the reporting month:
Forced Outaae Rate Page 2N Industrial Safety Accident Rate Primary Svetem Chemistrv Percent of Hours Out of Limit (Page 2)
(Page 38) The year-to-date industrial safety accident rate value of 0.82 exceeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal of Socondary System Chemistrv 50.50.
89* Disablina Iniurv/II! ness Frecuenev Rate Cerits Per Kilowatt Hour (Page 3)
(Page 41) The year-to-date disabling injury / illness rate value of 0.549 exceeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun year end goal of Percentaae of Total MWOs Comoloted Per Month identi- 50.50.
- ^' **
Clean Controlled Area Contaminations >1000 Disinte-898 orations / Minute Per Probe Area Maintenance Overtime (Page 5)
Based on the rate of increase in the number of contam,-i (Page 48) nation events reported year-to-date, it is anticipated that in-Line Chemistrv instruments Out-of Service the 1994 year end goal of s54 will be exceeded.
9' Violations Per 1.000 Insoection Hours Hazardous Waste Produced (Page 18) ,
(Page 52) The number of violations per 1,000 s,nspection hours has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 51.4 for the months of Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area March, April and May 1994 (Page 53 ,
End of Positive Trend Report.
iv
FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT
, JUNE 1994 -
SUMMARY
INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT (Continued)
Unclanned Automatic Reactor Scrams Per 7.000 Hours Temocrarv Mod!fications Critical (Page 57)
, (Page 27) The number of temporary modifications >1 cycle old has The number of unplanned automatic scrams per 7,000 exceeded the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since April hours critical has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 1994. The number of temporary modifications >6 since February 1994. months old has exceeded the goal of 0 since January 1994.
Uno'anned Safety System Actuations -(INPO Definition)
(Page 28)
The number of INPO unplanned safety system actua-tions has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since End of Management Attention Report.
- February 1994.
Uncianned Safety System Actuations -(NRC Definition)
(Page 29)
The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuations has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT 1994.
IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES Thermal Performance This section lists significant changes made to the report and to spec ic indicators mthin the report since the pre-he year-to-date average monthly thermal performance yg value has been below the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of 299.5% since January 1994.
Industrial Safety Accident Rate Ecuioment Forced Outaaes Per 1.000 Critical Hours '
(Page 2)
- "'" ' * * [ ***
- he equ ment forced outage rate has exceeded the 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal of 50.20 since Febru-re lass a n f a res e acc6%
ary 1994.
Reoeat FaHures Maintenance Workload Backtoos (Page 45) fh s n cator has been revised to be consistent wi
. CFAR method of reporting based on an 18 month time The backlog on non-outage MWOs for correct.ive mainte-period that begins 22 months prior to the report date.
nance has exceeded the 1994 monthly goal of a maxi-mum of 400 since March 1994.
Percent of Comoleted Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts) End of Performance Indicator Report Improvements /
he pe c nt of the number of completed scheduled ""9*
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%.
Document Review (Page 55)
The number of document reviews 26 months overdue at the end of the repoding month (1) exceeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal of 0.
I I
V
Table of Contents / Summary .
esan GOALS . . .. X SAFE OPERATIONS EAQE 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 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA. .5 PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs . ,,6 j SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES . .7 SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE:
HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM . .8 AUXILIARY 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 REllABILITY INDICATOR .. . . . . . 14 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES.. . .15 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE. 16 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE.. .17 i
VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS . .18 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS . . .19 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LERS . . 20 PERFORMANCE EAGE STATION NET GENERATION . . . 22 FORCED OUTAGE RATE . . 23 l
vi
PERFORMANCE (continued) P. AGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR.. . 24 1
UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR.. . 25 !
UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR . . . 26 I
UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR 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 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT . . 32 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS - . 33 COMPONENT FA! LURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)
SUMMARY
. . 34 REPEAT FAILURES . . 35 CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE. . 36 VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE . .37 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT . . 38 CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY., .39 COST EAGE CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR . . 41 STAFFING LEVEL. .42 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE. .43 DIVISON AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE).. . 45 vii
DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) EfG.E RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE
& PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE .
.46 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK..
.47 MA!NTENANCE OVERTIME . . . .48 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/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) .
. 57 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS..
. 58 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS .
ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN .
.59
. 60 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS .
. 61 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN .
LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN., . 62 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING . . 63 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS . .
. 64 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS . . 65
. 66 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) .
. 67 OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) . .
PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING. . 68 PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING . . 69 viii
ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP tNDEX & DISTRIBUTION L!ST PAGE ACTlON PLANS.. . 70 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS . ' . 72 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX . . 79 REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST . . 81 1
I l
l ix
OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS ,
Vice President - 1994 Priorities MISSION The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. The 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 l
To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a j 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-try leader.
1994 Priorities:
Improve 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.
t Goal 21 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.
l l
1994 Priorities:
Improve Quality, Professionalism, and Teamwork.
Improve Plant Reliability.
Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals.
Reduce the number of human performance errors.
Identify programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment.
Goal 3: COSTS Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity. P 1994 Priorities:
Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget.
Streamline work processes to improve cost effectiveness.
i 6
Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) l x
i l
~
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 Ca:houn Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-try leader.
1
- @ -- Year-to-Date INPO Industrial Safety Accident Rate
-O-- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.50) 1.8 - -O- Industry Upper 10%
V 1.6 - + 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.50) 1.4 -
1.2 -
1-0.8 -
0.6 -
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -
0.4 -
0.2 -
O C O O O O O O O O O 0- ; > - s a s s s s s s s s ,
Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE-INPO As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions 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 lndustrial safety accident rate value year-to-date was 0.82 at the end of June 1994. The value for the 12 months from July 1,1993 through June 30,1994 was 0.90.
There were no restricted-time or lost-time accidents in June. There has been 1 re-stricted-time accident and 2 lost-time accidents in 1994.
The values for this indicator are determined as follows:
{ number of restricted time + lost-time accidents + fatalities) X 200.000 (number of station person-hours 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
~
-G-- 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-O.8 -
0.6 -
C O - -
0 0.4 -
0.2 -
0 = , i , , , , , , , , , , i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 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.
The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year-to-date was 0.549 at the end of June 1994. There were no lost-time accidents reported for the month. There have been 2 lost-time accidents in 1994.
The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from July 1,1993 through June 30,1994 was 0.517.
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 3
5- 1994 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate
-X 1993 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate lGOODl 4.5 -
V
--O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 1.5) 3.5 -
3-2.5 -
2-1.5 - C v v v v ('
1- X y/
X 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 injury / illness cases frequency rate is also shown.
A recordable injury / illness case is reported it personnel from any of the Nuclear Divi-sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid.
The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis.
The recordable injury / illness rate year-to-date was 1.372 at the end of June 1994.
There was 1 recordable injury / illness case, a muscle spasm in the back, reported for the month of June. There have been 5 recordable injury / illness cases in 1994.
The recordable injury / illness rate for the 12 months from July 1,1993 through June 30, 1994 was 1.551. ,
The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.5.
Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Conner l Positive Trend SEP 15,25,26 & 27 l
l l
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-tu 45-o 40-35-h30-N25-o -
20- '
15-10-5-
0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 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 were 9 contamination events in June 1994. There has been a total of 32 con-tamination 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 1
5
b
-B- Preventable (18 Month Totals)
-{"}-- Personnel Error (18 Month Totals)
O Personnel Errors (Each Month) 40-35-30-25-20-15- " = "
N_ _
10-C C 5-0 R, , , ,R, ,R, , , , , ,
" ,m,
$,k$$5$?E o
$ $ b $ $ ,h $ $ 5 k.
o s 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 May 1994, there was 1 event that was subsequently reported as an LER,1 LER was categorized as Preventable and a Personnel Error.
The total LERs for the year 1994 (through May 31,1994) is 6. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1994 is 2. The total Preventable LERs for the year is 2.
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-tor is based on an 18 month period, the 1994 year-end totals will include LERs occur-ring in 1994 and the last 6 months of 1993.)
Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)
! Accountability: Chase l Adverse Trend: None SEP 15
{
S l
.- - ~ - - - .
l l
l 8 Operation lGOODI
@ Shutdown l
f - PWR Average Trend 5
u' dr2- g b 4%
$ E 01 5
E g
~'
b w h
e Y #
SN
"- hh~ V,,b,,-
o , , , , ,
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 Reactors" report. 3 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 catiorated 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.
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 I resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event.
Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 7
i e .- -~ ,
@ 1994 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value 1994 Year-to Date High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value
-O- 1994 Fort Ca! noun Goal ( 0.004)
--A-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02)
-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.03-l GOOD l 0.025- y 0.02- t a a a 3--4_a a a a a 0.015- R g
b 0.01 - h 5- $
c c c c o-o -c o o o e o 0.00036 O O - --r'1 D --- E -D , D - ,C O ; 0 -O ,
, 993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 i
HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the report-ing month.
l The High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value for the month of June 1994 was 0.025. There was a total of 54.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability (54.4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> for a PMO on pump SI-2A and 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> for surveillance tests) and no hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. The 1994 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.004 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.003.
There have been 56.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of planned unavailability and no hours of unplanned un-availability for the HPSI system in 1994.
The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 0.004.
The 1995 INPO industry goalis 0.02 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 0.001.
Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer i Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer l Adverse Trend: None 8
@ Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value 1994 Year-to-Date Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value 1GOODI
--O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01)
V
-A- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025)
-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0029) 0.025- A a---A a a a a a a a a 6 0.02-0.015 -
0.01 - C O O O O O-C O O O O O
=
0.005 - 5 #
0.0022 lemmeel O C bQ--Q'- ~#'" #
D- O -D-O-D-D-O 0 "', "','"', , , , , , , , , ,
1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 i AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.
The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for June 1994 was 0.0076. During the month, there were 10.88 hours0.00102 days <br />0.0244 hours <br />1.455026e-4 weeks <br />3.3484e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability for maintenance (relay replacement /back pressure trip check) and no hours of unplanned unavailability. The ,
year-to-date unavailability value was 0.004, and the value for the last 12 months was 0.003 at the end of the month.
There has been a total of 14.58 hours6.712963e-4 days <br />0.0161 hours <br />9.589947e-5 weeks <br />2.2069e-5 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 L unplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1994.
L The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0/)1.
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. i 1
Data Source: Jaworski/Nay l Accountability: Jaworski/Nay i Positive Trend ;
l 9
l 8 Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailabi!!ty Value
--W-- Year-to-Date Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value lGOODj
-O-- Fort Calhoun Goal t
--e- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0425) 0.07 - -O- Industry Upper 10% (0.004) 0.06-0.05-0.04 -
0.02- -
G y
0 0 0 3- O @
, . g '
m "W 0.01 - l h s $$ M 0
i-{Ul- -
D -
O O O O O O O i 4 i i i 4 i 4 i l l l 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 June 1994 was 0.017. Dur-ing the month, there were 23.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability for maintenance and testing, and no hours of unplanned unavailability. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.021 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.011 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 168.17 hours1.967593e-4 days <br />0.00472 hours <br />2.810847e-5 weeks <br />6.4685e-6 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 unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1994.
l The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 0.025.
The 1994 DG unavailability has increased over 1993 DG unavailability due to changes in operational definitions of out-of-service equipment.
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.
Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning
. Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 10
@ Number of Failures /20 Demands Trigger Values for 20 Demands O Number of Failures /50 Demands 7- Trigger Values for 50 Demands
@ Number of Failures /100 Demands -- Trigger Values for 100 Demands 8-l GOOD l
+
6-Y Y V V V -V- V V V- v-- V V 4-
= = = = = = = = = =
2-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 h n0 $ 00 h 00 0 00 00 00 1 00 - 00 00 00 : 00 3 0 , , , , , , , , , , ,
t Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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% when 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
6 O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands lGOODI
@ DG-2 Failures /25 Demands S- --e-- Failure Trigger Value for 25 Demands / Fort Calhoun Goa' O O O O O O O O O O O 4- C 3-2- _
1-00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 i i i i i i i i i i i i Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 Jul93 DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)
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 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 Positive Trend 12
O DG-1 Unre:4.bility Value
@ DG-2 Unreliability Value l GOOD l l
- Station Unreliability Value t I
~
Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.0025 - a Three Year Average) l 0.002- O O O O O O O O O O O O 0.0015- 1 1
0.001 -
0.0005 -
- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
0 - i -
i 1 - i v i i -
i -
i -
i v i i-Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 EMERGENCY DIES 8:.L 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 June 1994 was 0.0. The 1994 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.
For DG 1: There were 3 start demands for the reporting month without a failure.
In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without a failure.
For DG-2: There were 4 start demands for the reporting month without a failure.
In addition, there were 2 load-run demands without a failure.
Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows:
value per DG = SU + LU - (SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts l
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 Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 13 ;
i 1
l
4 5 Fuel Reliability Indicator h --A- 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10-4 Microcuries/Grarn) l GOOD l o +
10-p{ %
^
C O Cycle 15 , , , ,
.h 4 - $ = $ Refueling $ = w w w w
-Q o
f WI ,
use,
, FL"Mi ,
Outage pmq
%,E ,
M ,
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) value for June 1994 was 4.6 X 10-4 microcuries/
gram. The purpose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintain-ing a high level of fuel integrity. The June FRI value, which is slightly less than the zero defect threshold value, discussed below, indicates a potentially defect free core. The j plant operated at full power during the entire month. The June FRI was calculated j based on the average fission product activities present in the reactor coolant during the steady state full power operation days, June 1 through 30.
The June FRI value of 4.6 X 10-d microcuries/ gram is comparable to the May value of 3.6 X 10-d microcuries/ gram. The low FRI value will see a wide range of values due to l
many outside factors (i.e., which chemist analyzes the sample can provide a significant l
shift in the data point).
Fission product activity data from June full power operation showed a Xenon-133 activ-ity increase 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 n 50%
correlation rate with known defects. A more definitive disposition will be possible when l 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 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) states 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 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-fined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a "Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility l ,
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 FRl below 5.0 X 10-4 microcu-ries / gram.
l Data Source: HolthausiWeber Accountability: Chase /Spijker Adverse Trend: None 14
9 O Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line lGOODI O Total Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies V
80- --O- Fort Calhoun Goa! For Total Equipment Deficiencies 70- -
60- .-
4 30-C T
C 0 9
f' C
h U U C
]:-
20-10-
[
I
k 7
?
, .k ,
/
}
, , ?.
, , ?,
i i i i i i i i i i i i Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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-
4-C O O O O O O O O O O O V.
I i h i b i i e i b i b i r1 i
b i b l Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies 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 43 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of June 1994.
13 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 30 require a plant outage to repair.
There were 23 deficiencies added and 29 deficiencies closed during the month.
There were 2 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. The OWAs were on equipment tags CH-208, C/R Panel CB-1/2/3 and MOV-D1, C/R Panel CB-10/11. 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.
Data Source: Chase / Tills (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None i 15 I l
l l
O Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rerack)
--9-- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Non Spent Fuel Rerack)
--O- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 44 Person Rem) h40- C O O O O O O O O O O O Cc 30-c~ 20 -
y10- , , . . O O cu 0 -
Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94
[G Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack lGOODj
-4>-- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack V
--O- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 23 Person-Rem)
E
$ : C O O O O O O O O O O O
~
' ^
$ -- : . i : i i i i i i , , i i CL Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure, excluding the spent fuel rerack, is less than 44 person-Rem.
The exposure for June 1994 was 1.352 person-Rem.
The year-to-date exposure was 9.722 person-Rem at the end of June.
The Fort Calhoun goal for co!Iective radiation exposure to complete the Spent Fuel Rerack is less than 23 person-Rem.
The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure for June was 0.741 person-Rem.
The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure year-to-date was 1.698 person-Rem at the end of June.
The collective radiation exposure at the end of June (i.e., the sum of non-spent fuel rerack exposure and spent fuel rerack exposure) was 11.42 person-Rem. The collec-tive radiation exposure for the last 12 months was 157.5 person-Rem at the end of the month.
The 1995 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 185 person-rem per year. The industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 110.5 person-rem per year. The yearly average for Fort Calhoun Station for the three years from 7/91 through 6/94 was 148.8 person-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)
O Highest Exposure for the Year (m:+,3m) 5000 -
OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4000 -
3000 -
E, a- ,
E 2000-Fort Calhoun 1,000 mrem /yr. Goal 1000 -
431 184 I
0 ,
June 1994 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During June 1994, an individual accumulated 184 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month.
The maximum individual exposure for the year was 431 mrem at the end of June.
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)
Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None 17
1 4- Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours l GOOD 1
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal Y 3.03 $
$3- )
.h 1
82- ~
3 -
1.4 C O O O O O N O b i
8
%1-
~O 5
l i i i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,
'92 '93 Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 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 the 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 1.58 for the twelve months from June 1,1993 through May 31,1994.
The following inspections ended during this reporting period:
1 IER No. Tillft No. of Hours
. 94-15 Engineering and Technical Support and
! SALP Cycle Closeout inspection 600 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) l 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 I
- - - - - - . _ _ . . _ - - _ . - _ _ - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ . - - - - - - - - - L
O NRC Significant Events l GOOD l
- Industry Average Trend Y 2-1 1-0 , , , i i i ,
91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 Year - Quarter
@ INPO Significant Events (SERs) l GOOD l V
2 2-0 , ,
Vf/b V/fb $------- ,
b 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 Year - Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Station as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's O" ice 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 HBQ significant events occurred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the third quarter of 1993:
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:
Second Quarter 1992: Intake of Transuranics during Letdown Filter Change-out.
Third Quarter 1992: 1) RC-142 LOCA; and 2) Premature Lift of RC-142.
First Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear Instrumentation Safety Channel D.
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
3-
@ Number of Missed STs Resulting in LERs 2-1-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i
VJ , 0 . . . , , , i i , , , , ,
'92 '93 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years.
There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during June 1994.
During the month of January 1993 it was discovered that during December 1992 an ASME Section XI Code required surveillance 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 Te. sting Requirements for Raw Water Pump).
The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0.
Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)
Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive Trend SEP SO & 61 20
PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence iu Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power produc-tion.
i 21
50 -
Q Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours)'
40-3 35.12 34.9 35.66 34.6 33.56 E w N.p;8 w N 1 3 14 +
3 1 ,
8 30- QQ I Cycle 15 ? 3
- 27.8 A j Nf Gg 25.03 Refueling J 2 m" ~. 9 Outage .
g o ' l ' ! $
g 20-
~
2 - i i
S. l l
(( 's .'
I ^
[. .
{
w .,
.: r.I, y h ,..%k '
j' I k+
10- g ;yg q pg WQ peM p p-n r- .
nb *'
44 4 y lll y{ u ? h$
j
- )
1.54 ~
h i s XM ;
f 0 , ,
O
,m, ,
.n y.. e Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 STATION NET GENERATION 1 l
During the month of June 1994 a net total of 339,070 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycie 15 was 2,382,029 MWH at the j 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 month of July 1993 were attributable to a forced out-age 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 i
t _ __. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
Forced Outage Rate l G00%
12%- --O- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.4%) y l
10.1 9.3 8%-
6%- Cycle 15 Refueling Outage 4%-
C O O- 0 O O O O O O O 2 /. -
1.38 f i i i , 0% , , , , , , , , , , , ,
'91 '92 '93 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 1.05% for the twelve months from July 1, 1993 to June 30,1994. The 1994 year-to-date FOR was 1.13% at the end of June.
A forced outage occurred on February 11,1994 due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory 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 testinn 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 />.
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 '
Accountability: Chase
- Positive Trend J
23
O Monthly EAF Year to-Date Average Monthly EAF $
-ID- Industry Median Value (76.7%)
t 100% - _ _
(W2 <
q g f<
- g
- . [ [
76.2 80 % -
- _ g eP n -
m u , s >
[?'2 60.8 N '
$, 1'9)
.*o Ei- 60%- $ @
di id. $ x 4
"% ~
j, ',
^
gh Cycle 15 # \ $
!4 b$ EE 40% - -
"*""9 '
if s
M 4 >
Outage
,, : ME Q;
~~
D'-
h p 'l@ 20%- ,
- s hP
l @;[g .
A 0%
, p Fa i i i 1 , , , , , , , , , , , ,
'91 '92 '93 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 EQUlVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to-
The EAF for June 1994 was reported as 97.76%. The year to-date monthly average EAF was 96.3% 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 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 75.3%.
Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 24
O Monthly Unit Capability Factor
- Year to-Date Unit Capability Factor
-+- 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 80%)
Industry Upper 10% (86.7% for a Three Year Average) 100 % - xr- = ^ - - - -
ar- .
b
~
80%- Y y--v--L; O
v E/5 y a m Ea
$s x Y
x 60% - gj ' '
[
Sy; Cycle 15 ~
40%- $$ -
$Ts Refueling 20%- N rw h g Outage , } "
I I l l l 4 I I I l 8 }
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 June 1994 was reported as 100%. The year-to-date UCF was 96.7%, the UCF for the last 12 months was 79.7%, and the 36 month average UCF was reported as 76.1% 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.
The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% 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 Trend: None 25
l -
@ Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor 50%- - Year to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal lGOCDI 40%- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%) (
industry Upper 10% (1.48% for a Three Year Average)
! 30% -
Cycle 15 Refueling 20%- Outage
~~~~
I M
~
M 10%- ,
l 0%
Q
)5-2 l
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 l 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-I ent conditions), expressed as a percentage.
l The UCLF for the month of June 1994 was reported as 0.0%. The year-to-date UCLF was 3.3%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 3.7%, and the 36 month average UCLF was reported as 8.1% 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.
The 1995 INPO industry goal is 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 l Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 3.97%.
t l
Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 26
- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical Year to-date
-+-- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical for the last 36 months
-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals
--b-- 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 month time period) 5-4-
3-2- ,
j . ? ? ?
^
0 hA v i i
Q s i d
w i h
w i s I
i v i v i w i h h f!
w i h Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94
@ Numberof FCS ReactorScrams 3 4-2 3- Cycle 15 Refueling 2- Outage 7 1 1 0 0 f" 0 0 0 0 0 pg] 0 [T-] 0 0 0 0 i i i i i i i i e i i i i i i i i 90919293 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 (ar, defined in INPO's 12/93 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Interna-tional 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 during each month for the last twelve months.
The year-to-date station value was 1.62 at the end of June 1994. The value for the 12 months from July 1,1993 through June 30,1994 was 1.93. The value for the last 36 months was 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, 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-B Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)
O Fort Calhoun Goal O Industry Upper 10 Percentile 2-1 1- -
- Cycle 15 7 Refueling ^>
[ Outage
{
e 4-
, ,', ,0 C i O i O , O , O i O , O ,b,O , O , O , O ,
'91'92'93 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)
There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of June 1994.
There was 1 INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 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.
I The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.
Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)
Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None l 28
- 12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition)
-+- Critical Hours
@ Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) to- -1000
- 900
$ 8- cycle is - 800
$ Refuelin9 - 700
- *9*
h 6- - 600 h 5 - 500 h
}4- - 400 $
g - 300 7,
/ 82- g - 200
, , , , o .
91 92 93 JASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJ 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.
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; and 3) in April 1993 a non-licensed operator mistakenly opened the wrong potential fuse drawer, causing a low voltage alarm on bus 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, pressurizar safety valve RC-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 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 2 unplanned safety system actuations in the last 12 months. The 1994 Fort ;
Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. l I
Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)
Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 29
e
@ Monthly Gross Heat Rate lGOODI
--A-- Year to-Date Gross Heat Rate v
O 1994 &1993 Fort Calhoun Goals 10.5-
' 300
[ ,/g Il h y j
"MU h
10177 M []p__
h f pg i
Cycle 15 Refueling v
m v
v g
/ '
10- j h k .
p/
f- /
b [ *
$"f
$ $ % $ L U b
- l. ';_ $ $
- 9.5 - hl l 1 $
.l
/; '/y x
l Leg n :;
,,,,,e,,42gwe g o 45 9,JA,, U se a 2 , ,
'91 '92 '93 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 For1 Calhoun Station was 10,342 for the month of June 1994.
The 1994 year-to-date GHR was 10,135 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 Outege.
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 I
. .- - _ =
)
l O Monthly Thermal Performance j i
1
--M- Year-to Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance
-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals l GOOD l l
-+- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 99.5%)
Industry Upper 10% (99.9%)
100 % - , , , , , , , , , , ,
u :. .i u .. , o u ,..> . m ..a 6 h . ..:
pp-p 0 0 Qq'% Y
- a
$ bIib b U 5 N 99%- #R{ M M Cycle 15 *"
jk (g h
gg gi ;
Refueling Outage g J -
, g g [ g g g g
~ ~
g uk 8 [
W ,'
~
%V W
98 % , , , , , , , , , , ,
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Thermal Performance value for the reporti :g month, the year-to date average monthly thermal performance value, the Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. >
The thermal performance value for June 1994 was 99.48%. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value was 99.29% at the end of the month. The average monthly value for the 12 months from July 1,1993 through June 30,1994 was 99.47%.
Thermal Performance improved in May as a result of the backwash valve adjustments on "A" Condenser and improvements in Heater 2A level control.
The low thermal performance value for February 1994 is attributable to level control problems on heaters 3A and 58, and to spring runoff resulting in screen carry-over and condenser fouling. Improvements made during the month of March were: warm water l recire 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-l houn Goal was a minimum of 99.4%. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and the l 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 I
O Thermal Output'
-O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal
- Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500 1499.5-1499-1498.5-I 1498-1497.5-1497-1496.5-1496- ,
1495.5- -
1495< M) 1494.5-1494- -
1493.5- '," '
1493- .
1492.5- :
j : .'
1492- : 4 1491.5- .
t 1491-1490.5-1490 , , , , , , , , ,~, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during June 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 Adverse Trend: None 32.
. ~ . . - . . ~ .
~
- t$ - Equiprnent Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hours
--O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goa!(0.2) 0.75-l 1
0.5 !
0.5 - !
0.25-C O O O O O O O O O O
i i i 0 ., , , , , , , , , ,_ , , i
'91 '92 '93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 i f
EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS ,
The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours was 0.23 for the months from January through June 1994. The value for the 12 months from July 1,1993 through :
June 30,1994 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 converterin the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control System.
The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20.
Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)
Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None i
33
- of Component Categories 40-
+ # of Application Categories 35- _g.- Total # of Categories g 30-
% 25- ,
-- 2 8'0-~
2 '- 40 N _ _ _
0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
J93 F M A M J J A S O N D93 J94 F M A M J94 _
O WearOut/ Aging G Other Devices
@ Manufacturing Defect O Maintenance / Action 2.6%
4? 7.9% 0 Engineering / Design @ Error / Operating Action
- yd9 n![hd[ "\
S.3%
40.8 %
f;SiO.3:b - .s
%@ ,# % Percent of Total Failures During the DN$h pa c ,
Past 18 Months ey ; J e ; . 34 + j d
/ /
@ /' 368%
6.6%1lll[l 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 September 1992 through February 1994). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher f ailure rate in 5 of the 87 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a higher failure rate in 6 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary / emergency feedwater pumps, control element drive motors, etc.) during the past 18 months.
The pie chart depicts the breakdown by !NPO cause categories (see the " Definit;ons" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 88 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 76. The pie chart reflects known failure causes.
Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Jaworski/ Edwards Adverse Trend: None 34 1
1
- Components With More Than One Failure l GOOD l l
--X-- Components With More Than Two Failures V 25-l 20-15- 14 1 : 12 12 12 1_2 10-h10[ v 9 7
5- 4 4 2 ,2 %, 2 ,2, n n n - 1, ,1 0
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the " Maintenance Effectiveness" perfor-mance indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclea.r Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/
AEOD). The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator has been dropped, but station management considers it useful to continue to track 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 eighteen month CFAR period and the number of NPRDS components with more than 2 failures during the eighteen month CFAR period.
During the last 18 reporting months there were 7 NPRDS components with more than 1 failure.1 of the 7 had more than 2 failures. The tag number of the component with more than 2 failures is AC-10C. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat component failures are listed in the quarterly Component Failure Analysis Report.
Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 35 ,
3 Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate por Million Component Hours l GOOD I
- Calculated industry Check Valve Failure Rate per Y Million Component Hours 3-
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 2.5 - L 3 2- C O O O O O , ,
U M
@4 ff .5-1 UW 1 1 f $_
~
h $ [\
nvn 0.5 -
si k dl 0 i i I I i l i i 6 i 4 6 1 i i 1
'91 '92 '93 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 No. of Check Valve Failures CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE 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 ot 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 June 1994 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) covers the 18 month interval from September 1,1992 through February 28,1994. 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 are shown above on the graph at the left side of the page.
For June 1994, the CFAR provided the following failure rates:
I Fort Calhoun Station 1.17 E-6 Industry (excluding FCS) 1.71 E-6 The recent increase in the FCS failure rate is due to 2 reportable failures ct RC-374, 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 s1.75 E-6.
Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 36
l O Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet)
Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried (500 cubic feet) 750-
--b - 1995 INPO Industry Goal (3,884 cubic feet) f
-O- Industry Upper 10% (1,045.12 cubic feet)
C O O O O O g 450-if
$ 300-150-m 0 i i . . . i 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 June (cubic f eet) 0.0 Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during June (cubic feet) 206.0 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1994 (cubic feet) 543.6 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 buried is 500 cubic feet. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic 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: Although the 1994 goal was exceeded, this indicator is not exhibiting an adverse trend because Fort Calhoun did not exceed the 18 month goal of 1,500 ft. that was established in 1993. The 18 month total for Fort Calhoun was 1,401.4 ft.3 at the end of June 1994.
SEP 54 37 l
@ Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit l GOOD l
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal V e -
!' ~ .
m
$Q.{
f; g$j 2%- N jj 7j g: 9 1 /* -
b h j
J.i N
l 51 $
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 Limit was 0.0% for the month of June 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 Positive Trend 38
@ Secondary System CPI 2- lG00Dl
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal y 1.9 -
1.8 -
1.7 -
1.6 -
1.5 - C O O O O O O O O O O O 1.4 - R 1.3 - <
wt 1.2 - ffh 3 m E 74 7 j tA 7
., l 1.1 - U #
$g8 a I
$ a 1
h5 i
[?
i lN i
Y i
$t i
R$
i i i i i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY 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 June 1994 was 1.22. 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.
The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a max mum 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 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 l
l 4
l l
COST l
l l
l Goal: To operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that )
cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity.
i i
l 4
40
4-
- Actuals ~{"}- Budget A Plan 3.75 -
3.5 -
I 3.25 -
if .
3-
..A 2.75 -
2.5 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
D91 D92 093 J94 F M A M J J A S O N D94 D95 D96 D97 D98 Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station.
The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 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 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 budget due to expenses being below budget l
while generation exceeds the budget.
Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Scofield Positive Trend 41 l __
@ Nuclear Services Division Staffing O Production Engineering Division Staffing y Nuclear Operations Division Staffing O TotalNuclear Staffing 7 7 8 7 8 9 0 8 7 '
800- 4 2
1 4 g
~
N i -
700- j@g hk. * - !E 5 g 5 h 5 -
?
600- 3
{f . h 4 I 2 5 ! 4 4 jg $ "t 6 ,
5 4
^
5 500- A g
~
- - p n.
2 Je
, se 400- i ? :
- $. J sk _
300- I 1
- f. ! 0 0
3 5 h$ 6 R 1 3 8 1 2 1 200- -
@j
.. 1- , 1_ 1_
1 4 I 5 b 5 { 4 s 7 -
6 y 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
- Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) 17- Cycle 15 Refueling '
Outage 16- _
15-14-13-12-11 -
10 , , , , , , , , , , , 3 Ju!93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of June 1994 was reported as $15,961,649.
Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Willrett/McCormick Adverse Trend: None 43
8 DIVISION AND l DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS l 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 item will not be altered by removal of the indicator from this I report. )
i 44 l - ______ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _____ _ _
l O Corrective Maintenance 9 Non-Corrective / Plant Improvements O Preventive Maintenance -O- Fort Calhoun Goal !
776 800-700- = -
723 7]
= 626 600 - - ___
500- 9.__ N.
a -
400- w , ,w, y, ,,
300- C - - - - a Q, f( ,3,, ;,9 2w- % 2 :9 %
'U0~
g F7;l 3
R I
{Z3 i
[Zl i R i i .a I
r- 1 4
ii i
N A i i 5$
l k'2 l
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog 400- 0 TotaiMWos a MWOs Which Exceed Maintenance Completion Goals 350 -
300-250 -
200- 347 150-100- 187 4 days , ,p days da 7 d s 75 0 , , i i i q 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:
Goal Priority 1 Emergency N/A Priority 2 Immediate Action 3 days Priority 3 Operations Concern 14 days Priority 4 Essential Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential Corrective 180 days Priority 6 Non-Corrective / Plant improvements N/A Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 36 45
- = _ .-
i l
C Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 100% -
90%- -
75 -
80%- ,
^
j[
70%-
M
' ~"~~
60%-
- e[
~
50%- .- [ ,,
> ~
40%- h 9 '
EE 30%- 7 ,
? ,
20%-
10%-
0% i , , , , , i i i i i i Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 2%-
O Preventive Maintenance items Overdue l GOOD l -O- Fort Calhoun Goal V
1%- Data Unavailable C O O due to Cycle -O 4 O O----C O O 15 Refueling i i ("~~~l Outage 0% i , , i , , , , , , , i Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 56.6% for the month of June 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 omrdue.
l During June,543 PM items were completed. 2 of these PM items (0.37% 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)
Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 46
. . .__ - ~_ _
t G Rework As identified By Planning or Craft
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal ,
S.2%
5%- ,
[
4.56 % , ;
4%- '
i I . l 6 ! i 3 3%- ! i i O O O
? 9 2.43 %
[ f.; .?:j i l f: 2.06 % M ,
M
~
o 2%- r s .'
- A e.
E
.. $ S ! b d ';. ;
$4 Q-1%-
1.06 % i g
s.
, ppggy 53 3.
s t ,; .7 ;rg i [ LI , g ! l fhsk 0%
' ~
i i i i
i i
?"$ i ,
Dec93 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 [
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 Positive Trend i
47 !
I l
l 80%-
- Maintenance Overtime 70%-
+ M n h Amage Maintenance Omtime l GOOD l
-O- Fort Calhoun "On-Line" Goal Y '
60%-
i 50%- Cycle 15 l Refueling Outage 40% -
Y e
?? d$?] :
30%-
," ff
? ,
d .2 20%- 7 [ yh{
gj( W 89 a
i A ,, s, ,, s, <,
x ,
10%-
Lo 1 1% , W1 &--e .0_ 0 5 S o c h 5 kk a
[$ Ikh N? 7" 0% m,& , , ,
W ,
h i a 3 .r, e $s i i . , , , ,
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 ,
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 8.0% for the month of June 1994. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 12.97% at the end of the month.
The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 10%.
Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Positive, Trend ;
t' 48
l O Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)
@ Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)
E Precedural Noncompliance irs (Maintenance) 2-1- h l l 000 000 0 l0$0 l ,
000 000 000 000 00 00 000 000 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 June 1994.
There was 1 procedural noncompliance incident (IR 930225) reported in September 1993.
Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) !
Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 49
- 1 I
a Completed Scheduled Activities (All Crafts)
- Number of Emergent MWOs Completed O Fort Calhoun Goal ,
I e 110
- 100 % - 100 u
'5 90%- 89 . .
- 90 d$
< g '
/e; 8 80% - C . Q. ff; O O :jd: - 80 h hilh //-
c 70%-
f 9
71 t
//,- :
1 70
.s i'
'/,'
'// - 70 m O
o ! ? '// //,- l s, '//,
O
,=
g ?// //, ?//
y 60%- - //,
al
'// ,'/< '// ^ '
'//-
- 60 B;
'// //, v/// ; ',?/,
E 3 50%- '// //,- @ '// '//,
- 50 g y ] '/f ff,. m f// ."
i!? //,
- '// ?//
o /// ^//, a
'jj pj; ;jp 40%-
~5 E s '//
j
- ; //,
l
+
'//
l
- f[:
'//, - 40 {
53o%- J33 W:: i l '33 1:
'f ': -30fu U) p 20%-
n '//
A
- /,r,.
,r/,
w a ',t/
- ~
3 //,
f/, - 20 o
'// ,, , .
o n
'f/
c f4 s K; 1 :/ 6 pp -j/,
': 10 Z S 10%- -
- // 'Q'1 i (y
3 '
j , ,
.g '// a 8 ,t/s ? J '// g ://,
f o 0% , ,
t
, -0 0 March '94 April May June '94 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE 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 June 1994 was 77.0%. Also, there were 92 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
@ % of Hours the in-Line Chemistry Instruments are Inoperable 12- -O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 10%) j 11- l 10- C O O O O O O O O O O O 9-8- p 5 7-
$ 6- i
$ 5- [ ;5 4- ;
l
- 3- ( 3 4 0 ,
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 June 1994 the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instru-ments were inoperable was 8.11%. This value is primarily due to the waterplant mixed bed total organic carbon analyzer, the PASS containment atmosphere grab sample flask, and the FW-16 cation conductivity probe being inoperable for the month.
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-1519B, as well as the deletion of 2 PASS detectors.
i The entire instrument channelis 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
9
@ Waste Produced Each Month (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 - = = = = = = = = = = = =
800 -
g 600 -
G 8'
g 400-200 -
O- -C C C C C C O- ----C O O , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 June 1994,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste !
i was produced,0.0 kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, and 0.0 I
kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The total for hazardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 310.9 kilograms. The monthly average for haz-ardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 25.9 kilograms.
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.
Data Source: Chase / Smith (Manager / Source)
- l. Accountability: Chase / Smith j Positive Trend l
l 52
x- Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area
--O- Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months)
V
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal (outage months) 20% -
15% -
10%- m v v v v O 1 q !a g II'
!i
- s f h!
5%- ' -
Ad ~' l
\ u d 0% l l .
-~,
.9
@$YbEB 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 June 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
Number of identified PRWPs Year-To-Date IGOODI 30- -O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal (<25) y 25 - C O O O O O O O O O O O ,
5 g20-uJ o
% 15-5 E
ce g10-O 5-i
" ~
0 , , , , , , , , , , , , l 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 l means to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological l performance. ,
During the month of June 1994, there was 1 PRWP identified. The PRWP occurred when an individual failed to sign FC-RP-214-1 prior to RCA entry.
There have been 4 PRWPs in 1994.
The 1994 year-end goal for the number of PRWPs is a maximum of 25. i Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 52
, 54 l
1,,.
9 Documents Scheduled for Review 250- / Documents Reviewed O Overdue Documents
~
200 - _
T '
150- t,< a
- m 2
3 h $
{g 100- $ j
$ E ! $ $ 5 i f 1-'
r s , e a a a 8 50 - 'j -j -
$ h $ $ % $
_t -: $ -l 1 1 -$ -f _) $
t 2 1 3 4 s 3 s i 0
i i
s, i, t,
i s,
i r1, s, ,
4 s
i L i Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 June 1994 there were 196 document reviews scheduled, while 181 document reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there was 1 document review more than 6 months overdue.
l There were 9 new documents initiated in June.
Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 46 I
1 l 55
y Non-System Failures lG0001 30-25 - V 20-15 - 12 12 10 10- 7 E 7 -
~
0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94
@ System Failures 90- l GOOD l '
80- y 70-60 -
~
38 38 30- 26 30 g 31 g 23 { 26 "E Eh Jul93 i
Aug i
Sep i
h b h $
Oct i
Nov i
Dec i
Jan i
Id Feb i
Mar i
3 Apr i
A$ 4 May Jun94 i
LOGG ABLE/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 June 1994, there were 18 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.
System failures accounted for 16 (84%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. System failures increased by 5 during the reporting month. There were 6 system failures caused by the heavy thunderstorms, which contributed significantly to the rise in system failures. Non-system failures decreased from 10 in May '94 to 2 in June '94. There
( were 5 lost / unattended security badge incidents in May '94 and none in June '94. Unse-cured doors was also reduced from 2 in May to none in June.
2 Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 56 l
a Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (RFO required for Removal)
< Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on line) 0-Fort Calhoun Goals for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old &
7_ Temporary Modifications >6 months old 6-5 5 5- .,,,,
'//// ///// 4 4- '//// ////'
3 5 3 hhhI 3-
- 3353
'////
3355:
////,
/zzz
'////
'sss:
/////
2- '//// ///// '//// /////
///// / ,',?,/,
//// ////,
///// 1 //i/, 1 '//// 1 ////s 0
0 ,'
m i Y w i w i v i
i March '94 April '94 May '94 June'94 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number of temporaiy 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-48, 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 June 1994 there were 4 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 l l
accomplishment prior to 8/31/94; 3) Door 1011-7 lockset replacement, in which ECN l 93-408 is approved for accomplishment 1995 on-line; and 4) CL-106 blank flange I installation, in which ECN 94-298 is approved for accomplishment 1994 on-line.
At the end of June 1994, there was a total of 26 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Sta- I tion.15 of the 26 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 11 are removable on-line. In 1994 a total of 29 temporary modifications have been installed.
Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 57
O Total Modification Packages Open 264
,' 250- -O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal N
. 200 -
Sk 150- C O O O O 5 127
~~~"
J 100 -
C; M _ 100 _ g 7 - - -
- m. ,= + .
hk ;h $ hj gj
, M 50-P y
~7 %?~
3 p
, hg f$
IF , ] kl Mls g 4 m . g; x -
g de @ s ,
> #p l 1 6 i i 6 i i i i i i i i i
'91 '92 '93 Jul93 Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludina outstand-ina modifications which are orocosed to be cancelled).
Categorv Reoortina Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 1 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 4 Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 37 Construction Backlog /In Progress 17 Desian Enar. Uodate Backlog /in Procress 10 Total 69 At the end of June 1994,8 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 39 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com-mittee (NPRC) had completed 93 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 47 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:out - Not in Clostout O DEN O sE 50- -
40- 40- 40- _ 40- _
30- _,,,
30- 30- 30- -
20- 20- -
20-10- 10- 10- 10 -- ,,,,,,, -' -
0
~
, , ,0 , , ,0 , , ,0 , , i Apr May Jun Apr May Jun Apr May Jun Apr May Jun 0-3 months 3 6 months 612 months >12 months June '94 Overduo EARS O Closecut (SE)
O Engineering Response 50-40-30-20-10- ' '
O I I ' '
Priority O Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Prionty 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Pr;ority 1 & 2 Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200 -
150 - -
100 - _
50-
] p l; l l q 4 4 I i 4 I I i i 4 i i Jut 93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 65 Overdue Responses
@ 51 EARS Resolved and in Closeout C 45 Overdue Closeouts O 116 EARS Requiring Response 8 57 EARS on Schedule 3 g,3,,,
- 38.9- 3 b-
%glllllgf.h -
lL, 69.5Y. /
w, '
n .
c' gj
--= .
w _ ma.2./.
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.
Total EAR breakdown is as follows:
EARS opened during the month 12 EARS closed during the month 16 Tots! EARS open as of the end of the month 167 Data Source: Skiles/Pulverenti (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Jaworski/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 59
O in DEN = 192 25.4 % h in System Engineering - 139
$$$ 0 0-3 Months - 292 (M4';30.9% 391%
,g#g l l46.9%. 3-6 Months - 87 In Procurement /Constr. - 133
@1.4%/
22.3 %
1[07 $b >6 Months - 243 Pa In Closeout - 158 ECN STATUS - OVERALL BACKLOG l
l 5 ECNs Backlogged j ECNs Received During the Month
@ ECNs Completed During the Month 250- ~
8 , _
y 200- y 3
0 0 3 Months -107 150-I 100- 1 55.7 %U 3-6 Months - 32 s._ --u> 3 50 ~
16.7% ([
t ] -5 $ >6 Months - 53 i i i a i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 (Year-to-Date monthly average of ECNs received was 49.2) i ECN STATUS DEN 250- g 200- y "
g 23.7 % -
0-3 Months - 33 5 "
i 150- - .
~
( O 3-6 Months - 20 100- 61.9 % 14.4 %
^
l 50 - s ! i 9S >6 Months - 86 O
N % ~
i i i i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS - SE 250-200- g C 0-3 Months - 50 150- "
.6%
p I 53.4 % g 3-6 Months - 12 100- ?
N O -
50 - q g s e .0 >6 Months - 71 0 -'
4 i i i a i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94
- ECN STATUS - PROC /CONSTR 250- ,.
200- @ -
" 0-3 Months - 102 150- ' "
- m
=
e il 100- ) f b 3 <
s s" 14.6 %
20'8% 6Y6
)#p' 3-6 Months - 23
- ;--f '
f dffjghF >6 Months - 33 i i i e i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS - CLOSEOUT l
ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 60
@ FC Type - 200 /, G Priority 1 &2 = 103 f 29.1% 32.2%) f 32.6% F l
@ SRI Type = 241 i ,- @ Priority 3 & 4 - 316
.7% 0 DC Type = 181 p50.8%F 0 Priority 5 & 6 = 203 TOTAL OPEN ECNS BY TYPE (622 TOTAL) TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY PRIORITY (622 TOTAL)
O DEN - Engineering Not Complete
@ System Engineering - Response, Confirmation Not Complete
@ Maintenance / Construction / Procurement - Work Not Complete E DEN - Closecut or Drafting Not Complete 250 -
199 210 205 203 200 %
54 O Priority 1 or 2 100 - gs ,
8 Priority 3 or 4 50- 'x 58.5'/./ O Priority 5 or 6 0- i ; ; ; ; i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Ju!94 Facility Change ECNs Open 239 N 2% 244 241 jg 250 -
14 9% @ Priority 1 or 2 200 - 75 c 150- 59 ,
@ Priority 3 or 4 100- 37 57.7'/.
O Priority 5 or 6 50 - 70 v 0 i ; , ; ; ; ; ;
Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 l Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open 300 -
] 203 3gg 1g1 O Norby 1 or 2
(
150 - / e3 l, @ Priority 3 or 4 7 62.4*/.
10
// 77 O Priority 5 or 6 0-- - ;-- 7 7 i , j Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 i Document Change ECNs Open ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 61
1 O Administrative Control Problem O Licensed Operator Error
@ Other Personnel Error
@ Maintenance Problem 3- 5 Design / Construction / Installation /Fabrict. tion Problem
@ Equipment Failures 2- -
4 1- l 0 g "
?
7; E E
- s
- :
- i lI l E E li E E
- ; i > l E E l
- ! E E
. : E E q - q
- < E E O , , , , , , , ,
Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May94 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 June 1,1993 through May 31,1994. To be consis-tent with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date.
The cause codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. For detailed descriptions of these codes, see the " Performance Indicator Definitions" section of this report.
There was 1 event in May 1994 that resulted in an LER.
Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 62
1 O Total Requalification Training Hours 0 Simulator Training Hours
@ Non-Requalification Training Hours 50- @ Number of Exam Failures 40- 36 '
36 34 d 32 33 33 30- -
l 20-18 37 14 14 14 7.
10- 7 8
7 5 x -
--,3 1 3-5 s r 4 2 9 /, 2 .-. ~J ? 2 3
0 Cycle 93-4 Cycle 93-5 Cycle 93-6
- Cycle 93-7 Cycle 941 Cycle 94-2 Cycle 94-3 *
- Note: The Simulator was out-of-service for maintenance and modifications during Cycle 93 6. +
LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each crew during each cycle. The Simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches. j i
Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance Measures (JPMs) segments of the Licensed Operator Requalification Training.
There was 1 written exam failure, and no simulator exam failures for Cycle 94-3. The individual who failed the written exam was remediated without impacting the Operations Department shift schedule.
Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source)
Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 l
l 63
35- O SRO Exams Administered O SRO Exams Passed 30- @ RO Exams Administered O RO Exams Passed 25-20-15-i 10-g~ 7 3 '
W 5- --
j i
~
0 , i i i i i i i i i i i Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 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 License class convened April 11,1994, to conduct General Fundamentals training.
There are 4 RO candidates and 2 SRO candidates enrolled 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).
There were no in house or NRC examinations given during June 1994.
Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)
Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64
O TotalOpen CARS B TotalOpenIRs O Open CARS > Six Months Old S Open irs > Six Months Old 320- Z = Z
-320 cycle 15 -
l 280- Refueling - - - - -
280 Outage - - - - - -
240 - I : : : : I -240 200- : : : : : : : : 200 160-
= _
f I
- 160 120- : : : : : : : : '!' i 120 80- -
l _ 80
_: 7:
- 7g _., t ,
40- 7: q
[3 f , =' 40 0
I'l",
H' .
- =
I ,
,=,
3 i
tlI ,
Q'
=
_D l
_l=l i
[
lh i'
E' ,
l 4 C=l ll.ld i 0 Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 E Open Significant CARS 77 73 67 69 -
70- 0 Open Signiricant irs 64 -
60 ._
60- 51 50 - 45 -
40- -
28 27 30- 24
~
20-6 6 8 7 a 10- 2 2 2 4 5 5 4 0
Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94
[3 l OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS :
l This indicator shows the total number of open Corrective Action Reports (CARS), CARS l
>6 months old, the total number of Open irs, irs >6 months old, the number of open l significant CARS and the number of open significant irs.
At the end of June 1994 there were 75 open CARS.16 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old. There were 8 Open Significant CARS at the end of the month.
Also, at the end of June there were 332 open irs.141 of these irs were greater than 6 ,
months old. There were 78 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 1 not indicated because the increase is a result of a revision to Standing Order R-4 that lowers the threshold for writing irs and requires ,
completion of all corrective actions prior to closing irs. 65
- +- Engineering Hold -+- Planning Cornplete
-O-- Planning Hold -H- Ready
--V- Part Hold -C- Total 600 -
550 - .
500 -
450- -
v> 400-
- h ~
2: 350 - /
k 300-TB 250-F- 200-150- , ,
100 - -
1 50- _
Y 7 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Dec93Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Feb MaiS5 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) l 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:
j Parts Holds (part hold removed 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) u l Planning Holds (Planning hold removed when planning is completed to the point when package is ready or other support is necessary to continue the planning process) i
. 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 /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 66
>>O
- o. O ca
- c. V DH 3- e 7 % Complete
$86 9:
~.
S c' E
- m -- o o
to o
co o
a o
m o
m o
u o
cn o
e o
8>
o
, e CD m o 3 i i i i comC ao 3 o
-3 =
- T c a 9: Annawan.NyM i i i i i i 4 m_
aEO o. *O E O All Projects I
DN?
aa w {ER
-mm h -
I
' ' L PJ 'o C 7 3 gggg3w, gjy, ,gg g y m
[$$ y- g*$ b Steam Generator Services i 3 o -
" o co m r-- l S gE g, gc O m* co3 c D - - e 41 B g j m. O Balance of Plant ECT
@ym { yoR I a o m I W cN r3 m m
-- mo5 O ~
<~r D
- c. H '
41 U1 g y- @- .-
u) Erosion / Corrosion i O r o
_ o. $@9 a.
m o cp H
I C g ~
O g3o H nenw mei
$ $ $ g c, _ en y > c
@ E
' @j $ Snubber Testing I l7 @ @ (D o S m - I E E g o 5' ma O -
r1 E. o o g
o o.
=m RE O ISI Exams sw m w- va I
g g g o u u g
(D C -
o .9. E F m l o e e o oa a c. c. -+
~
8 '
a mm
- r a m
- * * * * * * * ' + ' ***"**fI u
g g
y r g m o' D System Pressure Tests I o r n>
m 3__. o -- m j 3 E E o o 33 r1 -
E E C g 'o 9 C ~ meed 8 8 y*h to R f Relief Valve Testing I 9 9 "O 5 :: I e 3
cy
$oV O'-
ny a T3 o
o o-O C
Check Valves 3 3
g B9 y -
.m e m ., - - _ .. ,,
cn m (4 O m Motor Operated Valves (MOVs) I m < ox 0
l T m 1 C4 h x U
- M:n *:49*s ' cl e
E mm Boric Acid Inspection I m ? l N _
l 1995 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS
- Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval
-- Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval i
20- Final Design Package issued
?
$ -i- Total Modification Packages (17) (3 added after 1/14/94) c E 15-n.9 llllllllllllllllll,lllll lll llll'l ll
['7 l l l l l ,'
as m a.
S R 10- u>
o @
$E E ,'
it 8 f3 g 5-4 d .'
o iiii,,ii,,,iiiiiiiiiiiii,,,iiiii,iiiiii,,i .
! e e e e g e e e g e e e
- M E
n
$ a 8 E G s
e m
G m
G o
0 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 13 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.
In June 1994, one modification was moved to the 1996 refueling outage and one modifi-cation that was PRC approved on 9/23/93 does not require re-issue.
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 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)
Total Modification Packages (17)(2 are Close Out Only) (1 Added after 1/14/94) 20-9 o 5 15-Es ,ll,'ll' ll: ' . !l ';
lll
,ll, ^ '
!!l ,;l l
.$.5 nre y e 10- }
Ek ........J... J'***~ ^~
m a.
E8 $
W E SP 5-Yku- h cr t:. a.
0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
6 6
6 M
6 6
h a
la 6 E
6 a le le 6 e
le
- M R e e 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 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 June no modifications were deleted and none were added.
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.
Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) '
Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None "
69
ACTION PLANS 70
i ACTION PLANS This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this report. Also included are Action Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing Increased Management Attention for 3 consecutive months.
In accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-QP-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 i 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:
- 1) Pursuing adjustments and repairs (in progress) on condenser backwash valves to enhance condenser performance. .
- 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. '
4 1
l I 71
.. - _ . - . _O
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 Operating 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 f ailure rate (f ailures per 1 million AREA component hours). The data for the industry failure rate The personnel contamination events in the clean con-is three months behind the Pl Report reporting month. trolled area. This indicator tracks personnel performance 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 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. Tt is 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.
ure 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 f ailure 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 attributable to the inad- worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-
! equate design of the responsible component or system. tor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel perfor-i Other Devices - a f ailure 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 failure 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 l system, including failure to follow procedures. review is considered overdue if the review is not com-l Errors - failures attributable to incorrect procedures that plete within 6 months of the assigned due date. This l
were followed as written, improper installation of equip- indicator tracks performance for SEP #46.
ment, and personnel errors (including f ailure to follow procedves properly). Also included in this category are EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM failures 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 ">mber of trains in the emergency AC power sys-tem.
72
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL- EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY iTY This indicator measures the total unreliability of emer.
This indicator shows the number of f ailures that were gency diesel generators, in general, unreliability is the reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die- ratio of unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to selgenerator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also the number of valid demands. Total unreliabihty 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 of 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 breakdown, 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-Run Demands: For a valid load-run This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering demand to be counted the load-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 Facihty 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 emergency 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 should be counted for any reason in which the emer- inverse of the mean time between forced outages gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre- caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal dicted. Failures are counted during any valid load-run to the number of hours the reactor is critical in a period 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: Unsuccessf ul attempts to start or load-run caused by equipment f ailures 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 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) Malfunction of equipment that is not required during a percentage. 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 unava;lable due to forced events compared '
cessful start with the starting system in its normal align- to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced ment. events are failures or other unplanned conditions that Each emergency generator failure that results in the gen- require removing the unit from service before the end of orator being declared inoperable should be counted as the next weekend. Forced events include start-up fail-one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during ures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shut-corrective maintenance and the successful test that fol- down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service),
lows repair to verify operability should not be counted as demands or failures when the EDG has not been de-clared operable again. 1 73
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS ,
FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator is defined as the steady state primary cool- This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quiz-ant 1-131 activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contri- zes and exams that are administered and passed each bution and normalized to a common punfication rate. month. This ind cator tracks training performance for Tramp uranium is fuel which has been deposited on re- SEP #68.
actor core internals from previous defective f uel or is present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu- LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAIN-facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous ING operation for at least three days at a power level that The total number of hours of training given to each crew does not vary more than + or - 5%. Plants should collect during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train-data for this indicator at a power level above 85%, when ing hours (which are a subset of the total training hours),
possible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state the number of non requalification training hours and the power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at number of exam failures. This indicator tracks training the highest steady-state power level attained during the performance for SEP #68.
month.
The density correction f actor is the ratio of the specific LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature BREAKDOWN l (540 degrees F., Vf . 0.02146) divided by the specific This indicator shows the number and root cause code for ;
l volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex- follows:
changer, Vf = 0.016204), which results in a density cor- 1) Administrative Control Problem Management and rection f actor for FCS equal to 1.32. supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-GROSS HEAT RATE equate management or supervisory control, incorrect Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal procedures, etc.)
energy in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the 2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor opera-the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH). tors during plant activities.
- 3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission /commis-HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED sion committed by nondicensed personnel involved in The total amount (in Kilograms)of non-halogenated haz- plant activities, ardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other 4) Maintenance Problem The intent of this cause hazardous waste produced by FCS each month. code is to capture the full range of problems which can be attributed in any way to programmatic deficier cies in HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM the maintenance functional organization. Activities in-SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE cluded in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- lance, calibration and radiation protection.
able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the 5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem high pressure safety injection system for the reporting - This cause code covers a full range of programmatic period divided by the critical hours for the reporting pe- deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, installa- l riod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pres- tion, and f abrication (i.e., loss of control power due to (
sure safety injection system. underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the envir an-ment, etc.).
INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE-INPO 6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Fiece Parts or Er vi-This indicator is defined as the number of accidents per ronmental-Related Failures)- This code is used for spuri-200,000 man-hours worked for all utility personnel per- ous failures of electronic piece-parts and failures due to l meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high
- manently assigned to the station that result in any of the following
- 1) one or more days of restricted work (ex- winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time f ciuding the day of the accident); 2) one or more days f ailures. Electric components included in this category away from work (excluding the day of the accident); and are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors,
- 3) fatalities. Contractor personnel are not included for diodes, resistors, etc.
this ind'cator.
LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)
IN LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER- The total number of security incidents for the reporting VICE month depicted in two graphs. This indicator tracks se-Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are curity performance for SEP #58.
out-of service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS). MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The % of overtime hours compared tc normal hours for maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as contract personnel.
74
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l I
MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFI- !
This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Mainte. CIENCIES A control room equipment deficiency (CRD)is defined as l nance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the any component which is operated or controlled from the reporting month. Maintenance classifications are de, ,
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 f or the Control ponents that have failed or are malfunctioning and are Room and has been identified as defc, ient, i.e., does not not performing their intended function.
perform under all conditions as designed. This definition also applies to the Alternate Shutdown Panols Al-179, l Preventive Actions taken to maintain a piece of equip-Al-185, and Al-212. I ment within design operating conditions, prevent equip- , ,
A plant component which is 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 n t 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 desenbed in Op-erations Memorandums, Operator Notes, or may require Immediate Action Equipment deficiencies which signifi-changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Defc,ient plant cantly degrade station reliability. Potential for unit shut-equipment that is required to be used during Emergency down or power reduction.
Operating Procedures or AbnormalOperating Proce-dures, 5) System indication that provides critical infor-Operations Concern - Equipment deficiencies which m ti n dunng norma! or abnormal operations.
hinder station operation.
NUMBER OF MISSED SURVElLLANCE TESTS RE.
Essential- Routine corrective maintenance on essential station systems and equipment.
SUNG W UCENSEE EVENT REPORTS ,
The number of Surve,llance i 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 a60 &
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 tive Action Reports (CARS), the number of CARS that are
- 36' older than six months and the number of open significant CARS. Also displayed are the number of open incident MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE The total maximum amount of radiation received by an Reports (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six m nths old and the number of open significant irs.
individual person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, a annuabass. '
OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS The number of Modifcation Requests (MRs)in any state MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING between the issuancs of a Modification Number and the ,
OUTAGE) completion of the drawing update.
The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have ,
- 1) Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress. This number rep-been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts resents modifcation requests that have not been plant appr ved during the reporting month.
staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork ready for field use). Also included is the number of 2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. Th,s i category MWOs that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures I
and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, d ication Requests that are not yet reviewed.
(parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) B.) Modifcation Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) i and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Ma.in.
tenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that C.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear 1 Projects Committee (NPC) have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage These Modification Requests may be reviewed several and have not yet been converted to MWOs.
times before they are approved for accomplishment or 75 l
I l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with returned 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 not been accepted by the System PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT Acceptance Committee (SAC). OF LIMIT
- 5) Des:gn 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 riot been updated. month. EPRiliaits are used.
The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not include modifications which are proposed for cancella- PROCEDUR AL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS tion. (MAINTENANCE)
I 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 irs 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 tota! MWOs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION maintenance planning and craft. Reworkis: Any main- PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICA-tenance work repeated to correct a deficiency which has TlONS) re-occurred withM 60 days following similar work activi- This indicator shows the status of rnodifications ap-ties. Any additional v,ork 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 month. This % is shown for all radiological work performance for SEP #52.
maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of l emergent MWOs. Maintenance activities include MWRs, RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &
i MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella- PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE l neous activities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per. The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil-l formance for SEP #33. lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of t
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-t 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-(i.e., inappropriate action by one or rnore individuals), ministratively closed by the scheduled date plus a grace
- inadequate administrative controls, a design /construc- period equal to 25 % of the scheduled interval. This indi-l tion / installation /f abrication problem (involving work com- cator tracks preventive maintenance activities for SEP l pleted by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a main- #41.
tenance 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 76
! PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l
RECORDABLE INJURY / ILLNESS 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-l aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator ing experience. The screening process includes the 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 event (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 failures 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 SAFET( 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 complication; 5) Unplanned release of redundant subsystems or trains, f ailure of all trains con- radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-stitutes a safety system failure. Failure of one of two or nical Specifications; 7) Other, rnore trains is not counted as a safety system failure. INPO significant events reported in this indicator are The definition for the indicator parallels NRC reporting SERs (Significant 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 Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con- The dollar 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- I Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, indicator tracks performance for SEF #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, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation Instrumentation, TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves, Spent The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con-Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and U1. figurabons 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 The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation P&lD schematic, connection, wiring, or flow diagrams.
based on the concentration of key impurities in the sac- 2) Jumpers and blocks wNch are installed for Surveil-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 cpl 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 cpl is calculated dure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or using the following equation: CPI - (sodium /0.90) + lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-(Chloride /1,70) + (Sulf ate /1.90) + (Iron /4.40) + (Copper / cations.
0.30)/5. Where: Sodium, sulf ate and chloride are the 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 f actors is the INPO 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- tary modifcations for SEP #62 & 71.
culation.
77
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS ,
THERMAL PERFORMANCE reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signalis gener-The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the ated (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system is adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percent- actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuation age. was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS actuations to be counted are actuations of the high pres-UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR sure injection system, the low pressure injection system, The ratio of the available energy generation over a given or the safety injection tanks.
time period to the reference energy generation (the en-ergy that could be produced if the unit were operated UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS(NRC continuously at full power under reference ambient con- DEFINITION) ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per- The number of safety system actuations which include centage. (g,cjy) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the Low Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injection UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS classification of safety system actuations includes actua-This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au- tions when major equipment is operated god when the tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua- logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-tions) that occur per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of critical operation. tenged.
The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS in a specific time period by 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />, then dividing This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited that number by the total number of hours criticalin the in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC inspec-same time period. The indicator is further dafined as tion hours. The violations are reported in the year that the follows: inspection was actually performed and not based on when
- 1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an antici- the inspection report is received. The hours reported for pated part of a planned test. each inspection report are used as the inspection hours.
- 2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE rods, liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac- WASTE tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig- This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid nal may have resulted from exceeding a setpoint or may radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica-have been spurious. tor also shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste
- 3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive actuation of the reactor protection systera logic was pro- oil that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the vided from one of the sensors monitoring plant param- volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been eters and cx)nditions, rather than the manual scram shipped off-site for processing. Low-level solid radioactive switches or,in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but- waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, and tons) provided in the main control room. evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power
- 4) Critical means that during the steady state condition of plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive waste the reactor prior to the scram, the effective mu!!iplication includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, dispos-f actor (k,) was essentially equal to one. able protective clothing, plastic containers, and any other material to be disposed of at a low-level radioactive waste UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR disposal site, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms.
The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent period of time, to the reference energy generation (the fuel or a by-product of spent f uel proce ssing. This indica-energy that could be produced if the unit were operated tor tracks radiological work performanc e for SEP #54.
continuously at full power under reference ambient con-ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-contage.
UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(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 from 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-guards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation oc.
curs when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is 78 1
i
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. ,
1 SEP Reference Number 15 Eag2' j increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indicators j Procedural Noncompliance lncidents (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 / Illness 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 /lliness Cases Frequency Rate . . .4 SEP Reference Number 27 Implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . .3 Recordable Injury / Illness 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 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage). . .45 SEP Reference Number 41 Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio 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 1
79
SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continued)
SEP Reference Number 44 Ea22 Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . .. . 49 SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program 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
.5 J Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 21,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area .
Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area. . . . 53 SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security 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 Ste.tus .. . . .. . 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 SEP Reference Number 71 -
Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications .. . .. . .. . . . 57 80 i
1
e
.' l REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST L.T.Kusek R. L. Andrews !
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 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. Dietz 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. Willrett I
\
81
, 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 5th Refueling 01/18/80 - 06/11/80
- Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,899,714 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
- Cycle 9 07/12/84 - 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 l 91h Refueling 09/28/85- 01/16/86
- l Cycle 10 01/16/86- 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Rofueling 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 1ch 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
_ .. _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . --