B14432, Discusses Final Policy Statement on Possible Safety Impacts of Economic Performance Incentives

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Final Policy Statement on Possible Safety Impacts of Economic Performance Incentives
ML20129E110
Person / Time
Site: Millstone, Haddam Neck  File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date: 04/05/1993
From: Opeka J
NORTHEAST UTILITIES SERVICE CO.
To: Selin I, The Chairman
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20129C718 List:
References
FOIA-96-298 TAC-B14432, NUDOCS 9610250271
Download: ML20129E110 (27)
v • d • e


Text

i, NORTHEAST UTILITIES o.nor.i Omc.. . s m n sir.et. Bernn. Conn cticui 1 .wi u.: awns we'=c co***' P.O. BOX 270 2 0 c ..'ea .o cow'*'

HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT 06141-0270 L L [

J [.[',[OC$'c[*,', (203) 665 5000 l April 5, 1993 l Docket Nos. 50-213 50-245 50-336 l 50-423 i 814432 l

Chairman Ivan Selin i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Washington, DC 20555

Dear Chairman Selin:

Haddam Neck Plant Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos.1, 2, and 3 Final Policy Statement on Possible Safety Impacts of Economic Performance Incentives Nuclear Safety Enaineerina Group Evaluations i

l l In its Final Policy Statement on Possible Safety Impacts of Economic Performance Incentives, dated July 24, 1991, 56 Fed. Reg. iio.142, pp. 33945-33947 (" Final Policy Statement"), the NRC expressed its concern that certain forms of economic performance incentive regulation have the potential for adversely affecting nuclear plant operation and public health and safety. In particular, the NRC stated its concern "about any State public utility commission's undue reliance on a utility's corrective actions follcwing an incident to justify the I

disallowance of costs related to the incident" 56 Fed. Reg. 33947. The NRC expressed its intention to continue to monitor state regulatory actions to identify changes in existing programs and how the programs have been implemented.

The NRC also urged licensees to inform the NRC of economic performance incentive programs that can affect safety.

Northeast Utilities (NU) has been periodically providing the NRC with information relevant to this matter. One example (" dealt with a proposed disallowance at our Millstone Unit No. 2 facility stemming from an isolated employee error l

performing routine surveillance.

l

'" E. J. Mroczka letter to S. J. Chilk " Draft Policy Statement -- Possible Safety Impacts of Economic Performance Incentives: Report of NNEC0, Proposed Economic Disallowance Penalty," dated March 28, 1991.

l i

9610250271 961017 PDR FOIA GTOECKE96-298 PDR

j. .

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1

< B14432/Page 2 April 5,1993 .

i Further to our continuing dialogue on this matter, Northeast Nuclear Energy l l Company (NNECO) hereby notifies the NRC of a decision by a hearing examiner of theMassachusettsDepartmentofPublicUtilities(DPU)whichNNEC0believeshas i the potential to adversely affect plant operation and public health and safety.

i The hearing examiner's decision was diametrically opposed to the decisions of the Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control (DPUC) on the same issue. The Connecticut decisions were provided to the NRC in January of this year. Pending i review of the final order from the hearing examiner, Western Massachusetts  !

Electric Company (WMEC0), a subsidiary of NU, intends to request that the hearing i' 2

officer's decision be reviewed by the DPU, who may benefit from any thoughts the NRC may have about the possible impact of such a decision on public health and

, safety.

l The Massachusetts decision grants the Massachusetts Attorney General's motion to

! compel WMEC0, NNEC0's affiliate, to produce reports and other documents prepared l by NU's Nuclear Safety Engineering Group (NSEG) in an economic regulatory i proceeding in Massachusetts, subject to a confidentiality agreement. WMEC0 objected te the Attorr.ey General's request, on the grounds that such documents are subject to the privilege of self-critical assessment and therefore are not 3

discoverable, and that, whether or not the privilege is applicable, strong public

! policy reasons support nondisclosure. In particular, there is a strong public  !

policy in favor of encouraging candid internal self-assessments by operators of  !

i nuclear power plants. If NSEG documents are used as evidence to support an i economic disallowance, the employees whose job it is to prepare such reports will

' view adverse decisions from economic regulators as incentive to be less than fully candid in future NSEG reports. Because the NSEG's function depends upon absolute candor and complete attention to the details of operational events at 4

nuclear plants to prevent recurrence, without regard to other potential implications of their work, any diminution of that candor could have an adverse impact on plant operation and public health and safety.

This issue arose in the context of the DPU's annual review of the performance of 4

the generating units in which WMEC0 owns an interest, including Millstone Units Nos.1, 2, and 3, the Haddam Neck Plant, Vermont Yankee, Maine Yankee, and Yankee Rowe. The Massachusetts performance review program is described in NUREG/CR5975,

" Incentive Regulation of Investor-0wned Nuclear Power Plants by Public Utility Regulators," Sec. 2.9. If the DPU finds, as a result of its review, that management's activities with respect to any outage during the performance year were imprudent, it is authorized to disallow the recovery through rates of replacement power costs related to that outage.

The 1991-92 performance review is currently in the discovery phase. As required by the DPU's rules, WMEC0 has filed voluminous contemporaneous documentation concerning the outage events at each plant during the performance year. WMEC0 has also responded to almost 700 detailed information requests from the Attorney General, the purported advocate for consumer interests in Massachusetts. It is anticipated that the Attorney General will argue for disallowance of replacement power costs based on its analysis of the information filed by WMEC0. WMEC0's total exposure is greater than $20 million.

1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4

B14432/Page 3 l

April 5, 1993

i i

i As part of its massive discovery effort, the Attorney General has requested WMEC0

to provide reports and other documents prepared by NSEG. The NSEG is the group

! that NNECO has tasked with performing independent assessments of operational j events at plants operated by NNECO and Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company.

The NSEG also recommends corrective actions to prevent their recurrence. The

. Attorney General is sponsoring two witnesses whose usual method is to extract 4

self-critical statements and conclusions from the NSEG reports and submit them j to the economic regulator as evidence of imprudence.

NSEG reports were similarly sought by the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC) for use by one of the same adversary witnesses in a Connecticut DPUC proceeding investigating the prudence of outage costs incurred by The Connecticut i Light and Power Company (CL&P), NNECO and WMEC0's Connecticut affiliate. In
September 1992, in a decision previously provided to the NRC, the Connecticut l

DPUC sustained CL&P's objection to producing such documents to the OCC, on the

grounds that

1

"[t]he self-critical assessment conducted by the NSEG is consistent l with the type of evaluation conducted by the NRC, and is designed i not to assign fault for a particular incident but to i prove

! reliability and achieve higher levels of safety in the future

operation of CL&P's nuclear facilities. Such self-critical i assessment is governed by the privilege against disclosure of self-

' critical assessments. Clearly, there is a strong public interest in encouraging continued internal performance assessments by operators ,

l of nuclear power plants. That public interest is not served if I l disclosure of the result of such performance assessments is l compelled, resulting in a chilling effect on the thoroughness and I

candor with which those assessments are performed. Furthermore, the benefits of the search for improved safety at nuclear power plants l far outweigh the interest in disclosure of the information sought by j the OCC in Interrogatories 8(b) and 8(c)."

! NNECO submits that, unlike the Connecticut decision quoted above, the

Massachusetts hearing examiner's decision compelling WMEC0 to produce the NSEG reports is precisely the type of regulatory activity that was identified as a l cause for concern in the NRC's Final Policy Statement. If the employees responsible for preparing NSEG reports know that their evaluations will be used

, as the basis for imposing a financial disallowance, there is a risk that they

will be less candid in preparing their reports. The potential for economic disallowance will have a chilling effect on their work, and the ultimate result will be an adverse effect on nuclear safety.

The NRC also recognized the possibility of such an adverse effect in the Final Policy Statement and reiterated that concern with specific reference to use of 4

i i

f 1

l i

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i B14432/Page 4 I April 5, 1993 SALP ratings in economic incentive programs in NUREG/CR5975, where it stated

that

"The NRC Staff focuses on the issues identified in the SALP report

! and apparent root causes of problems. The NRC's concern is that the 1 safety of the unit could be adversely affected if the issues identified in SALP reports are obscured because of concerns over the financial consequences incurred as a result of specific SALP l ratings"

"[t]he NRC perceives a program that employs SALP ratings as one that could inhibit the operating staff and management from disclosing safety-significant information, which is cause for major concern."

In-the same NUREG, it was acknowledged that: ,

"[i]ncentive programs that focus on nuclear safety rather than  ;

economic operation of nuclear units have one more drawback. They l may interfere with the exclusive Federal regulatory authority under  !

the Atomic Energy Act over safety matters at nuclear power plants '  ;

(56 FR 33947)."

l

SUMMARY

Pending the DPU hearing examiner's final decision, which the company will forward to you, this issue will be presented to the full DPU for review through the Company's appeal of the hearing examiner's decision. If the NRC has views on  ;

this issue that were not expressed in earlier statements concerning the possible effects of performance incentive regulation, it may wish to express those views at this time.

We appreciate your consideration of the above matters and will continue to keep you informed. Please contact me at (203) 665-5323, or Richard M. Kacich at (203) 665-3298 if you have any questions.

Very truly yours, NORTHEAST UTILITIES A

3. M eka

/Mui(J Executive Vice President cc: See Page 2

U.S. Nuclear.. Regulatory Commission B14432/Page 5 April 5, 1993 cc: Commissioner J. R. Curtiss Commissioner G. DePlanque Commissioner F. J. Remick Commissioner K. C. Rodgers J. M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations T. E. Murley, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation F. P. Gillespie, Director, Program Management, Policy Development &

Analysis Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

/

]

Connecticut Yankee Power Company Breakout of c/KWH -

1970 1980 1992 Operating Revenues 21,951,110 78,552,000 206,831,422 Sales 3,537,721 3,563,138 3,891,764 c/KWH 0.62 2.20 5.31 Maior Components-Dollars Fuel 5,204,871 18,422,000 31,366,495 Non Energy O&M 5,468,868 37,894,000 95.918,458 Depreciation 3,765,600 5,234,000 19,015,437 All Other 7.511,771 17,002,000 60,531,032 Total 21,951,110 78,552,000 206,831,422 Maior Components c/KWH Fuel 0.15 0.52 0.81 Non Energy O&M 0.15 1.06 2.46 Depreciation 0.11 0.15 0.49 All Other 0.21 0.48 1.56 Total 0.62 2.20 5.31 Book Value - $ in Millions $46 $51 $100 l

l l

l 1

NURITAR M Vol. 7, No. 5

(

K March 1993 Millstone 2 Refueling Outage Highlis ts - -

i By Mike Ciccone ._ ,

Millstone 2 Staff Engineer One of the most complex and challenging outages ever undertaken j at NU concluded January 24 when Millstone 2 returned to service,  ;; n=

- *^

l following replacement of its two steam generators. Ambitious outage (*

j goals for schedule, safety and radiation exposure challenged NU's . , ' g *;

} workforce to consistently give their best, and they rose to the occasion. .

l The original steam generators, manufactured by Combustion Engi-neering, were replaced because they had developed defects in approxi- ' ' $, 'I.

mately 40 percent of their tubes.  ;

The replacement generators incorporated significant advances '

developed since Millstone 2 began operation in 1975.

,l Their state-of-the-art matenals and design should preclude similar tube defects in the future , nd facilitate inspection and maintenance """ - . . ,<

activities. These include: * ' - - J

-Significantlyimprove j materi- __

als in the tubes and tube FJpports. ABOVE: Operations

-Changes in gener'.tordesign l toimprove access and v3 duce future LEFT: The steam generator 1 radiatior.expmsrefn workers. + waits fortransporttoa waste storage site in Barnwell, S.C.

Althoughunexpectedchallenges . .

-including unanticipated pipe move-9 ment during the cutting of the reactor BELOW: Engineering coolant pipes - prevented the comple- '

tion of the outage on the original schedule, the outage enjoyed many significant accomplishments.

The outage plan included nu-i merous improvements and innova-tions in the areas of radiation expo-Eure reduction, shutdown risk man- '

agement and core melt frequency reduction. e

Radiation exposure control is always a prionty and this outage A ~ g' 'o
  • 'd included aggressive As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) '~~' - **~

j

radiation reduction initiatives

~ Pipe-end decontamination before welding dramatically reduced

' 3*

j' y ; ye m, ,

l j exposure; j - Reactor coolant system decontamination dunng plant shutdown '

resulted in a 15-20 percent reduction in containment area radiation levels; g ,' ,

3;' {- ,

- Narrow-groove welding reduced the amount of time required to -

' > l' O

~

complete the job in radiation fields; N j '~

f -- The exclusive use of electronic dosimetry allowed for careful dj *

.g tracking of total person-rem exposure, provided workers with real-time a

Please see Refueling, Page 7 .

a .A i

t v

~ t' '

MECHANICAL AND .-

CIVIL ENGINEERING h~~1 f Who decides what kind of pipes are needed in our nuclear plants? How do we know if these pipes are sturdy orif they would crack under stress? How do erosion and corrosion affect them? 7 Would they withstand a hurricane or an earthquake?

Chem /stryandMaterials Mecnanical and Civil Engineering, headed by Matthew Kupinski, routinely answers such questions pg ,1 ,

and more. The 43 members share support Ma*

from secretaries JoAnn Crispo and Terry , , L.! * '

]

  • Perugini and clerk Marie Kurdzo. The Berlin-based department is divided into four groups: .
  • Civil Engineering, headed by Walt -

, w LR Briggs;

  • Engineering Mechanics, headed by * '

' b k# .

Subhash Chandra; a

  • Chemistry and Materials, head *d bV '

, Terry Perugini, left, John Klisiewicz; and JoAnn Crispo Engineering Mcchanics

, Stress Analysis, headed by Tom 4 ~

Cl ILEN INEERINGprovidessupportservicestotheProject .

Services Departments and the Nuclear Licensing group. The E group ensures that modifications to a unit won't weaken it

~ '

}~ <

structurally and keeps track of regulatory changes on existing i 'l structures. The group also has experbse in the impact from extemal events, or natural disasters like earthquakes, floods, a

4. A-
g. '{ '

g hurrinnes ortomados. The members are now evaluating CY and .' ' 'Y $

Millsto - 1 and 2 to ensure that all cntical structures can  ? I '.

}l withstand impact from extemal events like a natural disaster. --

ENGINEERING MECH ANICS has myriad duties, but their big

[ )

C/vil Engineering j job these days is developing and implement-ing the corporate Erosion / Corrosion program. -

,  ;{' ,

This deals with the issue of thinning walls in i '. ) i carbon steel piping and components. The *

== $

program outlines methods for finding likely W ,.,'Y

~

$ { }'

, G I j'

trouble spots and provides criteria for inspec- s C" '

l" M, tions, as well as spelling out how wom pipes should be repaired or replaced. The Engineer-f ('  ?

f= ,

1~

' v' {?

g ,

ing Mechanics group also analyzes mechani- .

I

' ~

cal and electrical equipment to determine .g

~ '

what effect an earthquake would have. ,

CHEMISTRY AND MATERIALS is re- StressAnalysis Matthew Kupinski ,

sponsible for three major technical areas:

chemistry, steam generators and materials. Chemistry includes mining how much pressure mechanical components can take primary and secondary system chemistry control, reactor chem- day-to-day or in an extreme event 1ke an earthquake. Group istry, initiatives to reduce workers' radioactive exposure and members also analyze and design pressure vessels and piping evolving Electric Power Research Institute project activities. systems at CY and Millstone. Stress Analysis reviews plant  ;

Steam generator responsibilities include short- and long-te rm design changes and evaluates their impact on the system or strategic planning and associated engineering programs, studies component being modified.

for preoutage and outage support. The area of materials includes The group also is often involved in determining system /'

metallurgy and materials science, failure analysis of steam operability tojustify continued plant operation and in handling plant generator and balance of plant components, corrosion engineer- nonconformance reports and Reportability Evaluatiors ilhas lead ing, non-metallic materials and materials selection and recom- responsibility for certain issues such as the high energ/ ine l bret, i mendations. program for the nuclear units, reactor vessel structural integntf STRESS ANALYSIS has the primary responsibility of deter- and fatigue monitonng.

l i

i SEABROOKREACTORENGINEERING j While it may be a small department at Seabrook Station-with just five people-Reactor Engineering handles a

! very big job: the qua!ity and operation of the 193 fuel assemblies in the plant's reactor, Reactor Engineering is responsible for the plant's fuel for its entire life at Seabrook Station, from the time it is 1 delivered to the site and used in the reactor until it is placed in the spent fuel pool for storage.

! "Our job begins the moment new fuel arrives on site," explained Paul Gumey, Reactor Engineering Depart-l ment manager. "We conduct a visual inspection of the fuel assemblies to ensure that the fuel has arrived safely."

1 A typical delivery consists of 12 fuel assemblies per truckload. North Atlantic's fuel is fabricated by i Westinghouse's Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division in Columbia, S.C. The fuel inspection and testing is con-l ducted by Gumey and the other members of the department: Alan Merrill, Pete Nardone, Anne Marie Chesno and Mitch Lindquist.

Once the fuel has passed inspection, it is stored in the spent fuel pool until needed for the actual refueling. In j preparation for refueling, Reactor Engineering designates the exact location in the reactor core where each

! assembly will go.

l "Each fuel assembly has a unique location in the reactor core," Gumey said. " Placing the assemblies in ,

i these exact locations ensures the most efficient and safe use of our nuclear fuel." l When it comes time for a refueling, one-third of the core is replaced with fresh fuel, and the used fuel assem- l l

l blies are moved out of the reactor through the transfer canal and into the spent fuel pool-a process that takes

{ place completely under water. Before being stored in the spent fuel pool, however, each of the removed assem-

! blies is carefully examined to ensure that it operated properly while in the reactor. l l

l When low-power physics testing and power ascension testing begin, Reactor Engineering-through the use of equipment such as the reactivity computer-will venfy that the core is operating within design parameters. When the reactor is in full-power operation, Reactor Engineering continues to monitor the fuel and reactor performance with the in-core detector system and conducts other Technical Specification surveillances.

t "While we're obviously busiest during a refueling outage," Gumey said, "but our work doesn't stop there. We g

continually check and recheck to ensure that during normal operation, we're using the fuel in the most efficient i and safest manner possible."

i

,l h s n -

LEFT: Members of the Reactor Engineering Department at l

l y the " tag board," which is used during refueling to track the t,

f,_ g *- position of fuelassemblies. From left, Mitch Lindquist, Anne

.V j l\j h) '* '~

l Marie Chesno, Paul Gumey, Alan Merrill and Pete Nardone.

BELOW LEFT: Alan Merrillstands before the flux mapping

,, Y system, used to monitor the performance of the reactur core.

~

Y BELOW RIGHT: Anne Marie Chesno and Pete Nardone.

w , %.,;...,

a cs == o-  ;- k. <

~

7 '

y L

s t

y g . .  ;'

n..::.;. . , i' l i = = 0 . @1;e' ..< y l

1. -

d I _ .- - -_

g g E e most important thing yo j

g',

c. -

%q feed f g i -

= - -

s

<,*- t

! *1

. .==.

a 4

x . ,l.i T ,=

(..

(

l l Eob Kenefick Cathy Ladd Neil Herzig Rod Schlosser Electncian

  • l Instrument and Control NJClear Document Semces System Engineenng Specia!:st Clerk Performance Eng:neering Group Connecticut Yankee l f.fi!! stone Senior Engineer

}

Connect. cut Yannee j Berhn The most important things i g s c My 18 years of expenence in Having been in Nuclear Records NU are rny t;me and my sus As l

i e!ectronics. my 11 years of for sa y ears, I se worked in the Devotion By devotion I mean an ex-operator. I expenenced to- ,

) expenence working for NU in Berlin Connecticut Yankee and inspired, dedicated and commit- stresses assoc:ated . in NRC l Instrumenta!.cn and Contrcd and M listone Nuclear Document 'ed to aiways do my best To requaLticat4on exam., and felt e e my abd.ty to see the immed ate Services Departments. and my continua!!y look to improve other job-associated pressure ;

effect my work wd! have on plant knowledge of the documents things. and to be trusted. are a!so Having left Operations I can operations are the most +mpor- generated by NUSCO and key aspects of devotion. How- ref;ect on the working Cond:te"s tant th:ngs I give NU As I&C NNECO is extensive The most ever, this does not mean bhnd and I feel NU should prov!de l Speciaasts. we perform many !mportant things I give NU are devotion. The most important operators with a reason to j high-nsk tests By high nsk I my knowledge and my endJr- things NU can g ve me are rema n in Operations As for j

mean if we make a mistake, we ance NU has gtven me room to secunty, knowing my job Will be mysetf. the company now could potent: ally tnp the piant grow That s the most important here. satisfact:on, pode in my provides me w:th an opportf 'y j to go home wdh a feelng of

, NU should provide us wdh salue thing I need to be able to leam work. hvehhood, a fair wage. and i for value in other words NU and apply my knowledge in a moyment and a good atmo- accnmphshment expects me to do the best I can I oepartment wheO I m appreci- sc:nere to work in f aiso expect NU to do the best it ated j

8 can regarding job secunty. job satsfact:on. etc. I a!so expect l upper management to make the best decisons for the company.

IncentivePlanExtendedToNuclear h . irs,Mapagers ;

As d:scussed in the Decem- or not they were ehg,bie for the ing extended to all nt. clear d; rec- gram that a"ects most of the rest ber issue of Nuclear Neas. an PEP incentive. tors and managers e ith the same of us is just that. a " bonus" pro-incent ve program has been ex- In some cases. Action Pian trade-off They ele no longer eh- gram where payout depens on tenJed to Nuclear d: rectors and managers received less in the g:ble for overt;me pay. An incen- performance.

managers way of a PEP " bonus" than they tive program has a!so been estab- Performance incentise pro-Theincent:veprograminvolves wot.Jd have received in os ertime hshed for all directors in the NU grams much like those not in-a trade-off - the 23 managers pay. The message was clear system stltuted at NU. place emphas!s would no longer be ehg:bie for Per4ormance. not simp'y hours incentive programs hke these on what is dehvered. not on me overt me pay. Their abihty to meet worked. Is the basis for these are falrly common in the industry t;fne required for indedJa s to the dehverablesin their respective incent;ve payments. and in business in general and, in meetthe expectationsinhererun action plans determined whether In 1993. this program is be- f act, the Performance Reward Pro- a successful team effort

' ean give N'U? What's the most important thing NU can give you?

1 I l l ' W i~ n g i

0 M_ e

f. -

l

^

f g

gi A c A_ , b e 1

tY, H- _

1 J

j g - g<

j y 4

l-m Ol l

1 LA. o I I ,-

t

.. \L i.

l de Stansbury p Judi McKee Nelson Azevedo Mark DuBois l

l E mor Cost and Schedule Information Resources Group h1=nanical & Cwil Eng:neenng hiaintenance Depanment i ' 3!yst Documentation and Tra ning Stress Analysts Group Senior hiechanc l LastOne 2 Analyst Senior Engneer Seabrook l Seabicok Beriin

! e worked for NU for 20 years The most important th:ng I Can

( :d has e been invoNed in every The most important thing I can The most important thing I can g:ve NU is a profess,ona! Job. au l " stone 2 refuehng outage Id gwe NU is a nilhngness to stay gwe NU is my commitment to the time The most important

[ / tn2 experience I have from fiexibie in the future. and a ensure the safe and cost effectn.e thing N1' nan g:ve me is an l 'rking in Operations, Engineer- commitment to gwe 100% every operat on of the four Connecticut honest sense of job secunty in a Ma:ntenance. and now in day The most impor* ant th;ng nuc! ear faciht,es. especiaHy in the workplace where cutbacks l : age p;anning is the most NU can give rne is job secunty. in areas relating to reactor vessel continue. year after year.

l aortant thing I gse NU What Spite of the ups and doAns we ve embr:!tement The most J needs to be cons < stent in emperienced over the last few important thing NU can grve me

.ng me are the tools to do the years. to know that Seabrook is a stab le and st;mulating work lke computer equipment Station is going to be around in env:ronment and the opportun:ty 1 the management support the future and that lll ha.c a job. to grow professionaNy

~essary to accomphsh our age Fanning object ves

{ ew Engineering Support Trmning Program Developed-

) Bruce McLeish developed by each department ing "Th;sprogrambolongstoour Hodge. superasor of Genera!

PIstone Training with assistance from General customers the Engineenng Sup- NuclearTraining "Thatway new l A new train;ng program de- Nuclear Tra:ntng The cards wdl port sta+f Right now. We're sur- personnel can start the>r in:t.a!

i; ned for Engineenng Support replace those now in use to meet vey:ng every NEO department to trainingon a grven Monday and be y personnel has been devel- NEO 2 26 develop comprehensive quahfica- comptetely finished eight weeks p ed by NuclearTra:ning and the The tra:ning wdl consist of a tion Cards for every individualf later? Schedules for 1993 are jt and corporate Eng:neenng mm of classrcom train:ng.on the- Eng:neenng Support Train- avadable from the Nuclear Train-lx artments. job tra:ning. structured self-study ing wdibe required foranyone who ing Department

! Tne ESTraining Programcon- and contracted trawng independently performs a task A!! ES personnel must either lx ; of three parts- 3. Continuing Position Spe- that affects p! ant safety or per- complete or vahdate from the In!-

l 1. Inmat Onentation Train:ng. cific Tra:n ng. conducted as nec- forms the final comprehensive ttal Onentation courses by the ir x of courses on the funda- essary on such things as perti- review of the task This means end of 1994. or for new hires.

ta's of nuclear power. such nent SOERs. changes to major most of the Berkn-based NEO within one year of their start date

)i. + Reactor Theory and P! ant programs and procedures. and Eng:neenng sta'f. as well as the with the company.

Those personne' hired bef ore j, ' ems. and major work pro- position-specific tratning needs. p! ant-based sta'f that had been

es necessary to keep our "The Init;al Or entation pro- attend;ng the TechnOal Staff and December 31.1987, may be va'i-
ts operat,ng safely. such as gram is based on sohc;ted feed- managers tra
ntog program wdl dated from the entire lnitial Or,en-O gnControlandProcurement. back from ES personneland lNPO be required to attend tation Tra:ning Program If you j 2. Initial Position Specific guidehnes " said Larry Chatf: eld. "We're going to run the pro- have questions. call Ted Hodge.

h mng. based on Qua! Cards managerof Genera 1NuclearTra:n- gram hke a schoolf sard Ted Malstone x2567.

. APPLAUSE )

DrechslerWins ASME Award 5

+

m: , ,.

ABOVE, from left: Matt ~ vm s

Kupinski, Subhash Chandra, John Opeka Q -

c RIGHT, fromleft:Eric DeBarba, Matt Kupinski,

~

yy Subhash Chandra, R

, 7' '

Bob Harris b: '

EPRI Honors Chandra, Kupinski From left: Len Johnson, Gerry Drechsler, Bernle Fox Subhash Chandra, supervisorin Engineenng Mechanics, and Gerry Drechsler has won the Engineer of the Year Award from Matt Kupinski, managerof Mechanical ana uvil Engineering, were j the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), an awarded the 1992 Technology Transfer A..ard from EPRI.

l engineenng society focused on technical, educational and re. John Opeka presented the awards on behalf of EPRI to search issues. Chandra and Kupinski in recognition of theirleaderGp roles in the About three dozen of his friends were on hand for Bernie Fox's development and application of the EPRI CHECWORKS code for presentation of the award on February 19. A letter Fox wrote to integrated corrosion control technology for Connecticut Yankee i Drechsler informing him of his honor was tumed into an engraved and Millstone 1,2 and 3.

plaque, which Fox presented during the ceremony. '

Drechsler, who has been at Northeast Utahties for 23 years, is ,

~

now principal engineer for Component Test Services in the Field Services Department. .

Drechsler has been involved in nuclear, fossil & hydro gener- 'j

_ ating station equipment problems. A 27-year member of ASME, ,.

hY he has been involved in the group's Boiler & Pressure Code ,- i activities,its Operation & Maintenance Subcommittee on Steam n f

Turbine Procurement Specification and its Operations & Mainte- -

nance Gubcommittee on Vibration Monitoring. ,

~~ ~

Info Center -

. k.ts

[ggfy(& ,Y From left: John Hartzel, Lou Palone, Terry Walg, John Ferguson On WTNH i L. Four CY Trainees Reunite i

f The Millstone Informa-tionandScienceCenterwas %g -

7 ;

Over 20 years ago, in November 1972, John Hartzel, Lou Palone, Terry Waig and John Ferguson received their initial training

/ together for employment at Connecticut Yankee.

, featuredontheWTNH-TV8 lh  ! '

6 p.m. newscast on Janu- 3 3 R Hartzel started as a mechanic and is now a CY maintenance ary 8 as a good place for A . #r - supervisor. Palone and Waig started as auxiliary operators and j people to visit on day-trips Reva Coleman and Skip Church Palone is now a senior analyst in the Millstone Nuclear Safety j in Connecticut. Engineering G roup and Waig is a senior operator training instructor j While at the Center, Skip Church was impressed with the at Millstone. Ferguson started as a maintenance foreman and is Center's attractiveness to children, its interactive exhibits and its now manager of the Millstone 3 Project Services Department.

l "We held a similar luncheon at our 15th anniversary and have t straightforward and informative displays on nuclear power. Thanks l go to the center's Reva Coleman for her on-came ra interviews with already made plans for our 25th year anniversary reunion,"

WTNH's Skip Church. Ferguson said, "same time, same place." l

Millstone 2 Refueling Outage continued l

l J

t'

'w

. hJg$,g9 ;4

'O

=

19 s.

9

. ;.7 53 m 'k i +  ? .%%

,~  : g. p 1:* q f ' ::;,*

  • Q' g N
  • f. 1

^

f ABOVE LEFT: Maintenance ,

ABOVE RIGHT: Maintenance ,.

3 Planning  ;

RIGHT: Outage Planning BELOW LEFT: Nuclear Docu-mentsandServices

  • Y BELOWRIGHT: Instrumentation )

l and Control t( a l

.k pl

~f. l

.~ . i ,:, .

s ll

  1. ~

(f[}. ([4 g 7

) 4 . ,

s'

' ^

implemented for the outage. It was re-l Refuelingcontinued...

cently expanded and issued as a station indication of exposure and dose rates, Replacement of Millstone 2 procedure (ACP 3.38) applicable to all three units; and allowed for the use of Steam generators IS eX.

preprogrammed alarms when either . -- More stringent controls for infre-dose or dose rate limits were ex- Pected to s.ignif.icantly .im- quently performed tests.

, ceeded; prOVO plant performance. To reduce the risks associated with

- Use of ultra-fine filters signifi-- plant operations, five recommendations cantly reduced contamination and dose identified by the Probabilistic Risk As-rates in some areas; sessment Group were implemented, including increased surveil-j - Robotic technology was used extensively to inspect and lances for DC switchgearventilation and on injection check valves.

videotape in high radiation areas, and was also used during some These initiatives resulted in a 50 percent reduction in Millstone 2's l of the welding process. core melt frequency calculation. The replacement of Millstone 2's J - Comprehensive mock-up training minimized time spent in steam generators is expected to significantly improve plant radiation areas, performance. It should eliminate mid-cycle steam generator Shutdown Risk Management initiatives were also an impor- maintenance outages, remove steam generator work f rom critical tant part of this outage. These initiatives included. path during refuelings, result in significant savings in worker

-- A procedure to better control and manage shutdown risks radiation exposure and enhance long-term safety of the plant.

i l_.._..____ . _

NAMETHATNEWSLETTER i lYou Asked Us...

why is nuclear news printed on such expensive The Final Vote \

! Paper when we're supposed to be cutting costs?

Yourvoteshavebeentallied!! Yourtopfour . We use coated recycled paper for Nuclear News

. choicesareNortheastExposure,Northemlights, . { because photographs are much clearer and sharper than l* NUclearNewsandlntheLoop. l they would be on uncoated stock where the ink tends to

! spread. Because we use so many photos, we believe the Cast your final vote by March 26 by calling l l slight extra cost of coated paper is reasonable.

l

  • Debbie Beauchamp at (203) 665-5188, VAX e Here is how the actual costs for recycled paper BEAUCDL, or Fax (203) 665-5072 or send a e l e  ; compare for a recent issue of NUclearNews coated

. noteto Berlin E-135.  ; l stock - 5325; uncoated stock - $275. Non-recycled paper

. . { would be about $50 less.

....eeeeoeeoeeeeoeeeeeoeoeeeeeeee casam E Nuclear,BerlinIRG j :DITORIAllgg

=e "c" -P Berlin E135, x5188 Complete 1993ITBP By Chuck Scopelitis Mittstone computer Services Manager Myta Ahern Assistant Editor The N uclear organization recently completed its joint effort with the Berlin E135, x3601 Berlin Information Resources Group on the 1993 Nuclear Information TechnologyBusinessPlan(ITBP).

Ed Annino The Nuclear ITBP includes afive-year plan for software development

CYAdministration,x3117 priorities, personal computer acquisitions, and overall computer strate-Moe Clark gies. The ITBP will be consolidated with similar plans from other groups MPGen. Construction,x4309 within NU and the combined effort will be established as the NU ITBP, a companion piece to the NU Business Plan.

. Brendan DuBois The Nuclear ITBP will place additional emphasis on effective and Seabrook,x2709 efficientinformation exchange within the Nuclear organization, and througnout the corporation, by continued networking oi F Os, collaboration en 6,xb15 on the use of standard or open products, and increased computer access Rich Gallagher forNuclearemployees.

Berlin E135,x5424 The NU ITBP is expected to be issued very soon. To support the on-going implementation of our ITBP, a N uclear information Technology Barbara Luce Advisory Committee (NITAC) has been established by John Opeka.

CYinfoCenter,x3513 For more information, feel f ree to contact your NITAC committee Bruce McLeish representatives:

MPTraining,x2568 Mike Bain,CY x3635 ChuckScopelitis,MP x4244 Tom Maynes,Seabrookx3123 Lloyd Frazee,Berlinx5636 Rod Peterson BobTraggio, Berlin x3876 BerlinW218,x3776 Rick Borg, CY x3649 Ray Palmieri, MP x4286 George Gram, Seabrook x4399 Jeff Cataudella,MP x2603 MartyVanHaltem,Berlinx5321 an na7ceEngineering Services,x5451 Published for the Nu Nuclear organization by the Nuclear in-formation services section of Corporate Communications J

l l

'PECIAPEP NURI FAR ^ ^

=

l Vol. 7, No. 2 January 1993

! PROCESS MAPPING GIVES NUCLEAR OPERATIONS A NEW WAY TO WORK Scencio 1: A frog was merrily hop-ll ping along when he leaped into a kettle of j boiling water. He immediately skrauts Scenario 2: A frog was hopping along ,

, when he leaped into a ketde of cool water. - - - 1 l Hestayed. Alow flameslowlywarmedthe ,

I water. The frog adapted; he didn't reahze 0 l

l the water was boiling until it was too late.

ne moral: It's easy not to notice the l' ' I gradual evolution of processes and proce-dures. But after ycars, the result is a tangled maze that interferes with work, says Bob Place, supervisor of the Administrative ,

i

! Control Procedures (ACP) Rewrite Group. .

l "We were like the frog, adjusting to 0 I the climate," Place said. "We didn't reahze 9:. 4 J -

l we were getting to the boiling point where Paul Parulis shows steps in a map of the current work process.

I processes were falling apart."  : They trimmed it to two boards after pro-Six managers, supervisors and engi-l  ;- cess mapping. ney also cut it from six

neers from Millstone and Connecticut Yan- N' -

phases to three, which reduces the number j kee were loaned to form the ACP Rewrite 3' , of hand-offs and increases efficiency and l Group in 1991. "We were just supposed to '

comrol.

I rewrite procedures. But we found that was FrdDacimo,hullstoneSiteServices j not the issue anymore, we had pro:ess ./ ^

director and the PEP Action Plan manager l problems," Place said. A for Procedures, said employee input will Aconceptcalledprocessmappingwas be the key to the success of process map-l used to analyze and simplify how work gets p ng. " People in the know are telling us

, done. Procedures are the detailed steps of how it should be done," he said.

l an action, while a process is the overall De biggest advantage to the new action. For example,if going to the s are Bob Place, ACP Rewrite Group work control process is an integrated team were the pmcess, getting your checkbook, concept. All plannmg will be done by an I driving the car and walking in would be the Roy Brown, Vincent Papadopoli and Ron integrated team, and another group will

! procedures to accomplish it. Rothgeb were facilitators for about 60 me' perform the work. Four teams--one cach Bill Diffley Associates, a Madison- chanics. technicians, planners, supervisors, from CY and the Millstone plants--will based consuhing firm, introduced process engineers and operators from Millsmne include key members from each depart-mapping to NU. Diffley had used it at and CY who spent two months mapping the ment involved in the job who can auto-General Electric and offered it as a proven work control process "We brought to- matically perform reviews and approvals.

concept for any industry, Place said. It uses gether people from different departments The new mapping whittks an 80-a standard methodology to pinpoint prob- because they know what it takes to get work page process to about 10 pages, Parulis lems and work out solutions: accomplished," Place said. "His is the said. Rewriting proedures, too, will help

- Figure out all the steps you now take; most important part, the people doing the tighten the process. "We're reducing alot j -Identify problem areas; work are the ones who design the new way of extraneous words," he said.

{ -Identify areas needing improvement; of doing business." A Writer's Guide was developed to 1 - Set a mission statement, goals and Two groups working separately filled update procedures at Millstone and CY, j cpecifications for the overall process; four bulletin boards each with colored make procedures more user-friendly and i - Outline the process as you want il squares, triangles, circles and arrows to l Place, Paul Parulis, Paul Blomberg, show how work control is usually done. See WORK PROCESS on back j

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

l j

i l NRC MILLSTONE ASSESSMENT PANEL GETS UPDATE ON . PEP PROGRESS i

l Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff '

j members say that NU is makmg pogress s'We See 8 lot Of preliminary Work, but 85 YOU IndlCated, the toward implementing its Performance En-j V8St majority Of your Work has yet to go."

hancement Program. - James Wiggins, NRC j Eight senior managers from NU pre-

sented components of the program to the
NRC Millstone Assessment Panel, which called the meeting at Millstone on January - communications, to ensure that in- programs will be completed in 1993, eight j 13. He panel's job will be to determine fonnation about PEP is reaching into all will be done in 1994 and the rest will be whether PEP is acceptable to the NRC. levels of the organization; finished by 1997.

l John Opeka said NU spent only $12.2 j James Wiggins, deputy director of the - implementation, including the vali-j NRCDivisionofReactorProjects saidthe dation and verification process that will be million of the $19.2 million budgeted for

! agency's role is not to scrutimze every used to ensure that PEP really is achieving the program in 1992, including hiring 226 detail of NU's plan. But NRC officials its goals. workers. More than $30 million is bud-l 2

wanted an update to be assured that the "We see alot of preliminary work,but geted for 1993.

program will improve performance at the as you indicated, the vast majority of your "It's a very complex process and un-

four Connecticut plants. work has yet to go," Wiggins saE NRC's dertaking," Opeka said. "But the value of Wiggins said the NRC was particu- Richard S. Barkley said the panel hopes to PEP will become more and more obvious as larly interested in NU's presentation on complete its evaluation of PEP by spring, new PEP initiatives are put into place, exist-three areas of PEP
Seven of PEP's 42 Action Plans are ing programs are streamlined, unnecessary

- scope, to ensure that the Action Plans finished, and their effectiveness is cur- paperwork is eliminated, and we see real, are adequately addressing root causes; rently being evaluated. Seventeen PEP tangible results."

%s }[ i;I A v.? f g ~_,

y _ - - ~: , r .. W ..; w . w w . m y .~ m ,

e improve procedure compliance. It also will help to standardize

_ - . E procedures, ne new work control plan is scheduled to take

~~

effect in late April, Dacimo said. "We'll feel some growing pains," he said,

[ "butbyJune we'll WORK ORDERS ul 's : Number of work orders each year I' ,I j. see results." Pro-

" ~

cessmappinghas MP1 12,000 MP218,000 been done for MP3 27,000 CY 15,000

[.- " , ' '

safety tagging and is under way for design control in Berlin. It also is planned TOP, Proce- ~ 7 for material control and documentation control.

dures for the 5. ne ACP Rewrite Group is scheduled to work on process current work 1 1 I mapping through 1993 and may continue beyond then. But

? process mapping should go on indefinitely, Place said.

control process c take up four ^

" Familiar patterns for doing something should always be bulletin boards. changing," Place said. " Rey have to be dynamic. His concept

"; .I I I I RIGilT,a is being accepted throughout the business world to position streamlined -

companies for the year 2000 and beyond. The only businesses process fits on that will survive and be profitable are those that can work like two boards. this and be ready to make customer-focused changes."

Publishedfor the NU Nuclear Organization by the Nuclear Information Services section of Corporate Communications. Lg9gL

Tho Q E E I

=g musum m 4

N Nm a.

E IW AvilEW_ '

l Four of NU's five nuclear units are on-line; I today's generation is 3,387 MWe of electricity d

i i

! o The NRC exit from the Millstone 1 Licensed Operator Requalification l Re-examination was held on 3/31 and preliminary results indicate

that the operators passed all sections of the examination. The NRC

! noted a substantial change in NU's performance standards and

! recognized a significant improvement in the quality of instruction, d

as evidenced by the performance of the operators. Congratulations i to the Operations Department and the instructional staff for this

{ exemplary performance.

{ o The NU Nuclear Newsreel, a new nuclear communications video 3

established as part of the PEP Communications Plan, provides

! nuclear employees with information on key events and projects. The j first edition includes features on the Millstone 2 steam generator replacement project; a PEP story on the work control process; and a q fascinating look at the history of the Seabrook project. This

edition also has " mini-features" on the osprey at Millstone and the l l CY 25th Anniversary celebration.

i The video has been distributed to directors and managers in Connecticut and New Hampshire for showings at department meetings

, and will be shown at Millstone on TargetVision. VHS copies will be available for loan from your manager or from Gail Saucier, Nuclear

Information Services, Berlin extension 5189.

l o Osprey returned earlier this week to two of the six active nesto at

Millstone Station. The male and female returned to the Bay Point i nest, which is located near the A-frame, and the male returned to

{ the Fox Island nest, located near the Environmental Lab.

A o The Kansai Electric Power Company (KEPC) in Japan recently

announced plans to replace the 21 steam generators at its seven 1 pressurized water reactors. The KEPC found a number of defects in j existing generators during the annual outages, including a total of 1 356 cracked tubes at the Takahama-2 plant. The steam generator replacements are scheduled for 1994 through 1995.

i d

I I

-l l

k I

i e

I

,t t

f NORTHEAST UTILITIES .

MEETINGS WITH NRC COMMISSIONERS AND SENIOR STAFF APRIL 7,1993 '

i I

i i

! l f

f

l L

After A Difficult Period, There is a Sense of Cautious Optimism Imbuing Our Nuclear Organization i

Performance Enhancement Program Operational Improvements t

New incentive Programs Erihanced Communications Imaroved Handling of Nuclear Concerns 2

Performance Enhancement Program is Moving Ahead  ;

Process Mapping Will Have Positive Effects Programmatic Engineering Approaches to Critical Areas (MOV's, Reliability Centered Maintenance, Erosion / Corrosion, EQ, HELB) are Coming into Place Deliverab e Schedules Being Met / Trac <ed Closely 3

w Operational improvements are Beginning to Appear

- Continued Strong SALP Scores at Haddam Neck

- Capacity Factors Returning to High Levels

- Millstone 2 Steam Generators Working Well

- Operator Requalification Training Program Improvements 1

i 4

New incentive Programs Designed to Enhance Success ,

t Focussed on Key Sa"ety and Operational Issues .

Good Performance is a " Carrot" Stronger Link Between Corporate Goals and Individual Compensation l; All Nuc ear Employees will Soon be Participants, including i Unionized Personne i

5 .

l l

t

Enhanced Communications Vehicles i

Heightened and More Frequent Management Presence .

Nuclear News /TieLine Nuclear Newsreel PEP Brochures Positive NU Stories including Non Nuclear issues 6

e Some Additional Areas of Ongoing Focus Economics of Nuclear Facilities Haddam Neck Plant Haddam Neck Steam Generators Requirements Marginal to Safety Utilization of Risk Based Insights Economic Regulation 7

.- - -- - . - . . - - . . _ - .. =-

4 Connecticut Yankee Power Company Br:akout of c/KWH -

1970 1980 1992 i Operating Revenues 21,951,110 78,552,000 206,831,422 t Sales 3,537,721 3,563,138 3,891,764 c/KWH 0.62 2.20 5.31 Mgor Components-Dollars Fuel 5,204,871 18,422,000 31,366,495 Non Energy O&M 5,468,868 37,894,000 95,918,458 l Depreciation 3,765,600 5,234,000 19 015,437 I All Other 7,511,771 17,002,000 60,531,032 Total 21,951,110 78,552,000 206,831,422 Major Components c/KWH Fuel 0.15 0.52 9.81 Non Energy O&M O.15 1.06 2.46 Depreciation 0.11 0.15 0.49 All Other 0.21 0.48 1.56 4 Total 0.62 2.20 5.31 l I

l Book Value - $ in Millions $46 $51 $100 j

, i i

l I

l l

l l .

l

NOV- H j iut i4.aa huatnn mtha nw r ne .o .mv .

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

NOIRTHAIA!iT UTIIJTiliti

[ .. ...m. .

a E

' J . . . ..

no Sc. 7c aw a - cv., u.... - , s, RICHARD M. KACICH Richard f4 Kn ith i> diiecios of thc Nuclear Licensing Depar tment in Nucleer Engiin-et ing and Opei at ions wi t hin Not t heast littlities (NU), a tegirstered holding comp.$ny [ota,ed in 1966 whose ptincipal opet a t ing-corrpany subsidiat ies are lhe Cunnec ticu t Light and Power

4) Company, Holyoke Watet Pove Company, Public Service Company of y, New Hampshite, and Uestern Hassachusetts Electrie Conpany, and whose principal service-company subsidiaties are North Atlantic r  ;

Enetgy Corporation. North Atlantic Enetgy Service Coiporation, Notthcast Nuclear Energy Company, and Nottheast Utilities Seivicci Company. In addi t ion. r hat ter Oak Enet gy, Inc. , and HEC Inc. ,

are NU's nonutili ty s ubsidiat ies. He directs the planning, scheduling, and cootdination of all licensing activitles for FU's four nuclear generating units. These activi.ies t include the priir.aty interface wi th the Nuclear Regula t ot y Co r.r tssinn.

Born in St. Louis, Mihout i, he e.uned a h..chclor of .ngineeting degtet in nuclear engineering from Rens.r.eliet roly:e.hnic Institute (RPI) in Ttoy, Nm .

York, in 1974. The following ys-a: he n eceived a mas ter ot engineet ing dr gi ee in nuclear engineet i.ig f rorr. RPI . 'lh t l e a t PPI, he was an inrttuctor at the P.PI Critical facility, wrote A Manual of Ey.petirents for the Ren.vselaer Reactor Facility, and held a senior teactor operatot 's license. He joined NU in 19/$ as an assistant engineer. He participated in the initial core loading and start-up testing o f Mills tone '.*ni t 2 dut ing his assignrrent to the MilIstone Station in 1975-76. He subsequently setved in vatious positions in the licensing organir.at ion and was pro noted to licensing supet visoi in 1982. In 198/, he was promoted to manager, Generatinn Facili1.ied Licensing, which involved cootdination of all licensing activities for NU's fossil, hydroelectric, and nuclear generating facilitie.. He assumed his ruiscot position in March 1992. In July, 1992, he earned an Er.ecutive MBA from the University of Hattfold. He is a membct of the Ametican Nuclear Society and a icgirtcied pinfesional engineer in the state of Connecticut.

Kacich has pat titipared in nonet aus nwoerr. gt nups and indus tt y ac t ivi t ics.

including the SEP Ownets r, rou p ( c h.s i t x.$n ) , the BliR Ovners Group, the Nuclear Utility Fi e Ptviettion ronup, f h e. Nio } , 4 t Ur Ili ry r acup on Envit onnent al Qualification, the Nurle.it Utilit:, Uvifir*irc and M*.fntm Group, and m ino. l I

Atomic Indus t rial Foru:n .<nd NilMARC .se t 1/i' in J Kacich is active as an innrtuttet in pte cana wnietences for engaged couples and as a roember of the Ea0t 11.wpt on Playscape Commi t t ee . Kacich and his vife ,

Barbata and daughtets Michelle and Bethan:/ lim in East Hanpton, Connecticut j i

I Septembet 19')2 j

( 4 8 .,, ' I 4( fI

tu - d-33 iut ma u. ann me,w mu , .

IHMETHl!n!Tr uTII.ITil!!i

' ~ ~ ~'

1 . .

k E L d ._ . : _ ' 2 .

o > e .. n

t . ru .sd f n . -i u ' :i c, i

JOIIN P. OPEKA I

1I

! John F. Opeka is executive vice president--Nuclear for Northeast 4

Utilities (NU), a registered holding company formed in 1966 whose 6 principal subsidiaries are The Connecticut Light and Power Company, Holyoke Vater Power Company, Vestern Massachusetts Electric Company, l

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, and Northeast Utilities Service 1 Company. He is responsible for overall technical support and operation of NU's nuclear facilitics.

' A native of Forest City, Pennsylvania, Opeka received a bachelor of science degree in electrical engineering irom Pennsylvania State University and a master's degree in business administration from Rensselaer Polytechnic institute at the Hartford Graduate Center. He also completed the l'

Program for Management Development course at the Harvard Business School, fle 1 served in the United States Navy from 1962 to 1967.

s Opeka began his utility career with NU in 1970 as an engineer in the Nuclear l

Production Department at Berlin. He was assigned to the company's Millstone Nuclear Power Station in that capacity in 1972 and was made senior engineer there in 1973 He obtained a senior reactor operator's license in 1975 and later that year was named Hillstone plant services superintendent. In 1977 he became assistant station superintendent and was named <tation superintendent in 1978. In j

2 this position, Opeka was responsible for the overall operation and maintenance of Millstone tinits 1 and 2. He was named system supetintendent--Nuclear Operations,

~

in 1980, becoming responsible for the ovenall operation and maintenance of both Hillstone un.ts and the Connecticut Yankee nuclear plant. He vas elect ~i vice

~

l i president -Nuclear Operations in June 1981, was named senior vice president--Nuclear J Engineering and Operations in 1985, and was named executive vice president of Engineering and Operations in 1986. !!e assumed his present position in November 1991.

He is a member of the American Nuclear Society and the Pennsylvania State University's Alumni Association, and is a fellow of the American 1.eadership Forum.

He is also on the Board of Directors for the Opportunities Industrialization Center of New London County and on the Board of Trustees for the Thames Science Center.

Opeka and his vife Jacqueline have two daughters and live in Old 1.yme, Connecticut.

May 1992 A

ACvs6'9 w

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=B14432,_Discusses_Final_Policy_Statement_on_Possible_Safety_Impacts_of_Economic_Performance_Incentives&oldid=3461169"