IR 05000277/1987035

Insp Repts 50-277/87-35 & 50-277/87-35 on 871113-880114.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Overall Crew Interaction,Knowledge & Use of Plant Procedures,Knowledge & Use of Tech Specs & Crew Communication

ML20155C089
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	06/01/1988
From:	Howe A, Lange D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20155C077	List: IR 05000277/1987035 ML20155C074
References
50-277-87-35, 50-278-87-35, NUDOCS 8806140077
Download: ML20155C089 (20)

Text

. _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

, . -

.

,

,

.

,U.S.NdCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSION

REGION I

Report No /87-35 50-278/87-35-

Docket No '

License No DPR-44 DPR-56 Licensee: Philadelphia Electric Company .;

2301 Market-Street ,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

. Facility Name: Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 Location: Delta, Pennsylvania Dates: November 13, 1987 to January. 14, 1988 Team Leaders: D. Lange, Chief, BWR Section, Operations Branch, DRS A. Howe, Senior Operations Enginee,*, BWR Section I Members: T. Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector, Peach Bottom H. Williams, Project Engineer, Projects Section-2A R. Turner, Operations Engineer, BWR Section T. Fish, Operations Engineer, BWR Section C. Sisco, Operations Engineer, BWR Section Prepared by: h - M r -- /, // /57 4. Howe, {p61or' Operations Enginear, BWR Section date Approved by: om4 -

6/-89 D. Eange, Chief, BWR Section, Operation's B'rs,ch, DRS date I

'

A special inspection was conducted to assess the newly formed operating shifts at Peach Bottom. The inspection results are given in the Summary (Section 1).

l Philadelphia Electric should evaluate and correct individual communications concerns identified in Section 8 of this repor I No violations were identified. No programmatic weaknesses were identified.

i l-i

.

P

,

j 8806140077 880602 PDR ADOCK 05000277 Q nnn

____

~

.

.

Table of Contents Page N . Summary ....... .................... ................................. 3 Background ........................................................... 4 Scope of Inspection .................................................. 4 Persons Contacted .................................................... 5 Brief Chronology ..................................................... 5 Descript?on of Evaluations . ............... ........................ 6 Summary of Each Crew's Performance ................................... 6 ConclusionandFindings............................................. 10 Enclosures: Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Fall 1987 Simulator Teamwork Trainirig Evaluation Checklist NRC Evaluation Fcrm

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

,y - - - -- , . . _ -

'Nig s e i

p :, - . -

,

"

.

1. SUMMARY As a result of the newly formed operating crews, at the Peach Bottom facility, the.NRC determined that an assessment of crew performance was necessary. Arrangements for the assessments were described in a letter from the NRC to Philadelphia Electric Company (PEco) dated September 21, 198 The assessments were performed to measure overall crew interaction, the knowledge and use of Peach Bottom procedures, the knowledge and use of Technical Specifications, crew communications, and operator responsibility. Additionally the assessments measured the Shift Managers' ability to supervise the operating crews and implement the Emergency Pla The objective of this assessment was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Shift Manager and operating crew training in the above areas to ensure that all operating crews exhibited acceptable performance for the safe restart of the Peach Bottom reactor The assessments were conducted by the NRC between November 13, 1987 and January 14, 1988, at the Limerick simulator, using Peach Bottom tapes in r

the computer memor Sectien 7 of this recort characterizes performance, strengths and weaknesses for each crew. General conclusions on weaknesses and

,

strengths are given belo Two concerns were related to individual performance. The first concern

'

relates to individual communication weaknesses. This area should be reviewed by PECo to correct any problems found and further enhance crew performanc The second concern relates to the attitude expressed by a crew member when he was turning over a stuck rod control problem to an instructor acting as the Reactor Engineer (see Section 7.4). The

'

attitude displayed is of concern because it has the potential to create interface problems between the operators and other departments on sit This attitude was observed on only one occasion and is considered uniqu The crews responded very well to transients. The crews also demonstrated good knowledge and use of Technical Specifications and procedure The Shift Managers were assessed as being effective in their roles as crew supervisors and leader The inspection team concluded that each operating crew exhibited

. satisfactory performance for all areas assessed, a

.

-E

_____--._-__ __ _ ___

',

'

-

.

.

i No violations were identifie No programmatic weaknesses were identifie . BACKGROUND

.

Subsequent-to the NRC Order of March 31, 1987 and the establishment by Philadelphia Electric Company (PECo) of new operating crews, headed-by

.

Shift Managers, the NRC determined that an' assessment of these operating crews was necessary. Arrangements were made for the assessments via a letter from Mr. William Russell, Regional Administrator tu Mr. J. 44.-

Gallagher, Vice President, Nuclear Operations dated September 21, 198 This inspection report-documents the crew assessments. .These assessments-were conducted between November 13, 1987 and January 14, 1988. Interim ,

exit meetings were held by the team leaders after each assessment was '

performed, t SCOPE OF INSPECTION The assessment were performed to measure the following eight (8) areas: overall crew interaction the knoaledge and use of Peach Bottom procedures the knowledge and use of Technical Specifications

' crew communications operator responsibility i supervisory ability 4

' Shift Managers' ability to supervise and lead the operating crews

! Shift Managers' implementation of the Emergency Plan.

i The objective of this assessment was to evaluate the effectiveness of the

Shift Manager and operating crew training in the above areas to ensure

! that the operating crews exhibited acceptable performance fcr the safe

restart of the Peach Bottom reactors.

!

!

!

!  !

l l

- - . _ . , . , _ . - . . . . . . . , - . . . - , - . . _ . . _ . _

- _ _ . .

- - - -

. .

,

5 PERSONS CONTACTED PECo Employees, Consultants and Contractors R. Andrews, Training Coordinator, Peach Bottom R. Bulmer, Superintendent Nuclear Trair.ing, PECo R. Helt, Branch Head, Limerick Training Center D. McClellan, Instructor, Peach Bottom C. Schwartz, Instructor, Peach Bottom J. Clupp, Shift Manager, Peach Bottom G. Gellrich Shift f-tanager, Peach Bottom i

S. Mannix, Shift Manager, Peach Bottom T. Niessen, Shift Manager, Peach Bottom D. Warfel, Shift Manager, Peach Botton T. Wasong, Shift Manager, Peach Bottom K. Brown, Consultant, MAC B. Redick, Consultant, PAC W. Thomas, Consultant, MAC State of Pennsylvania S. Maingi, Pennsylvania Bureau of Radiation Protection, Nuclear Engineer BRIEF CHRONOLOGY

,,

March 31, 1987 - NRC issues shutdown order July 1987 - PECo announces formation of new operating crews and the creation of the Shift Manager position August 14, 1987 - NRC inspectors meet with the Peach Bottom Training Coordinator and members of his staff at the Limerick Simulator to review the physical fidelity and transient response fidelity of the Limerick simulator in order to determine the feasibility of using the Limerick simulator to perform Peach Bottom operating crew evaluations September 21, 1987 - A letter is sent from Mr. William Russell, Regional Administrator to Mr. J. W. Gallagher, Vice President Nuclear Operations requesting information ard formalizing a schedule November 6, 1987 - NRC inspectors conduct familiarization tour of the Limerick simulator November 13, 1987 - Assessmerts started January 14, 1988 - Assessments completed

, , . ~ . _ . - . - .

. - .

.

,

N

, 6 .,

!

~ DESCRIPTION OF EVALUATIONS'

.

Based on the results of the August 14 meeting it was determined that-the Limerick simulator was suitable for assessment of-the Peach Bottom operating crews but the assessment areas would be limited to those described in Section 3 of this repor The Peach Bottom training staff provided the NRC copies of the Simulator Training Scenarios (STS) and an evaluation of how compatible these scenarios were for use on the Limerick simulator. Information on the cause and effect of simulator malfunctions were also provided. The STS's and other information were used by the NRC to develop scenarios for the crew evaluations. A typical scenario contained at least one each of the following: a normal evolution, a component failure not expected to cause a scram, an instrument or controller failure not expected to cause a

scram, and a major. failure causing a transien The Peach Bottom training staff provided the NRC with its team training learning objectives, its evaluation checklist (Enclosure 1), the ,

administrative procedures which define the conduct of operations and *

position descriptions for the Shift Manager and the other members of the operating crew. From the information provided, NRC operator licensing examiner experience, and er sources, the NRC developed an evaluation '

guide for the assessments (Enclosure 2).

l'

Each operating crew was evaluated during the performance of two NRC

'

prepared simulator scenarios. Strengths and weaknesses are given in Section 7 of this repor . SUMMARY OF EACH CREW'S PERFORMANCE A total of six (6) operating crews were assessed between November 13, 1937 and January 14, 1988. The original schedule was to evaluate one cren per week for six weeks. The schedule was revised when two of the crews were determined by the licensee to require additional training and were rescheduled for later date The strengths, weaknesses, and general comments were provided to PECo  ;

during interim exit meetings held by the team leaders after the assessments. The information below is presented chronologicall .1 ASSESSMENT DATE: November 13, 1987 k SHIFT 3 - J. Clupp, Shift Manager

! STRENGTHS:

i -

Identification of off-normal conditions and actions to correct I them

-

Use of procedures and Technical Specifications

!  :

i

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

. . .. . _ _ - . ..

_. ~.

Y ~--,

'

. -

,

.

WEAKNESSES:

-

Under accident. conditions the Shift Technical Advisor (STA)  ;

gathered deta and marked the Emergency Operating Procedure (EOP) flowcharts' including indicating decision steps. 'This ,

activity gave the appearance that the STA was directing the Shift Supervisor (SS);through the~ steps related to the E0P In the post scenario exit meeting the' Shift Manager (SM) state that.he had directed the STA to assist the SS in updating progress through the procedure GENERAL:  !

!

'

The command and control activities of the Shift Manager and overall crew communications were assessed as adequate. No ,

significant generic problem areas were noted. Overall crew ,

performance was assessed as adequat .2 ASSESSMENT DATE: December 4, 1987 SHIFT 6-- T. Wasong, Shift Manager STRENGTHS:

-

Event diagnosis and response using procedures to stabilize the plan '

WEAKNESSES:

-

On a few occasions the operators did not communicate,to other crew members and supervision, major equipment status changes and feedback on operator action ;

<:

SUMMARY:  ;

-

Overall crew performance was assessed as adequat The command

, and control of the Shift Manager and the Shift Supervisor were l assessed as adequate.

'

,

7.3 ASSESSMENT DATE: December 11, 1987 l

l SHIFT 1 - T. Niessen, Shift Manager STRENGTHS:

-

Crew communications and interactio The Shift Manager and the Shift Supervisor worked well togethe Decisions were well thought ou !

,

b

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

. .

.

,

WEAKNESSES:

-

An individual weakness was noted for one Reactor Operator who became overly focused on the process computer information displays and did not review the panel indications (which were behind him) on a regular basis. This action continued throughout the evaluatio GENERAL:

Overall crew performance, command and control of the Shift Manager and the Shift Supervisor and overall crew communications were assessed as goo .4 ASSESSMENT DATE: December 18, 1987 SHIFT 2 - G. Gellrich, Shift Manager STRENGTHS:

-

Use of procedures and Technical Specification Crew communication and coordination with the exception of one R0 (see weakness No. 1.)

-

Quick recognition and actions to mitigate off-normal

'

conditions. This crew appeared particularly ccmpetent in this are WsAKNESSES:

-

In one scenario, the RWCU non-regenerative heat exchanger had a leak, the Shift Supervisor (SS) directed the Control Operator (CO) to "swap the heat exchangers." The C0 called the Plant Equipment Operator (PO) and directed him to place th9 standby RBCCW heat exchanger in service and to secure the operating RBCCW heat exchanger. The unit 3 Reactor Operator, who was at a table with no duties because the unit 3 panels are not siinulated, notified the SS of the improper (ie, swapping the RBCCW heat exchangers vice the RWCU heat exchangers) direction from the C0 to the P0. The SS then gave the CO more specific direction to swap the RWCU heat exchangers vice the RBCCW heat exchanger On an individual level, one unique situation occurred while attempting to corrcct a stuck rod condition: the SS made a statement to an instructor who was acting as the Reactor Engineer to the effect "This is your rod now, take care of it."

This statement was made with a disparaging tone and could have

-

'

-

-

,

.  !

,

"

,

the potential to create misunderstanding when interfacing with support group '

GENERAL:

, - Overal1~ crew performance, command and control of the Shift Manager and the Shift Supervisor, and overall crew communications were assessed as goo The weaknesses noted were individual and did not hamper team performance.

7.5 ASSESSMENT DATE

January 13, 1988 SHIFT 4 - D. Warfel, Shift Manager STRENGTHS:

I -

Knowledge and use of Technical Specifications

WEAKNESSES:

-

Knowledge and use of procedures. In one of the scenarios, an

-

Operational Transient procedure was not entered when it should have been. In another scenario, the SS should have exited E0P-100 and entered E0P-101. Instead, he performed these procedures in parallel. Use of other procedures by the crew was assessed as adequat It, the first scenario with the reactor at high power, the Unit 2 R ractor Operator noted a high reactor water level. Following a eneck of other indications, he reported that a feed pump had t ripped. The other crew members failed to question or correct this erroneous report. The erroneous report led to the occurrence of a reactor scra GENERAL:

Overall crew performance, and command and control of the Shift Manager and the Shift Supervisor were assessed as adequat Performance in all areas evaluated improved during the second scenari .6 ASSESSMENT DATE: January 14, 1988 SHIFT 5 - S. Mannix, Shift Manager STRENGTHS:

-

Knowledge and use of procedures and Technical Specifications

-

Ccntrol of plant parameters during transients

, __

a

, .

,

,

'

.

.. 10 m

WEAKNESSES:

-

In the second scenario, the Unit-2 Reactor Operator reported that-three control rods had failed to insert but he omitted the significant fact that these rods were adjacent. -This is considered an individual weaknesses which impacted the flow of information to the Shift Manager when he was assessing the

-

need to enter the Emergency Pla During the second scenario, at the time the reactor scrammed, conditions for Emergency Plan implementation existed. The '

Shif t Manager (SM) did not reference the Emergency Plan until nineteen (19) minutes after the scram. At this point the STA referenced it'on his own initiative after noting high radiation levels on the air ejectors. The STA and the SM conferre The SM called the Assistant Operations Superintendent for concurrence on the event classification prior to declaring the

_

even Some of the delay in entering the Emergency Plan is attributed to the lack of reporting that the three control rods which did not scram were adjacen In the post assessment exit meeting, the PECo staff stated that the differences in the radiation detection instrumentation (between Limerick and Peach Bottom) added to the delay in entering the Emergency Pla GENERAL:

'

Overall crew performance was sssessed as adequate. . The command and control of the Shif t Manager and the Shif t Supervisor were assessed as adequat . C_0NCLUSION AND FINDINGS No violatinns or programmatic weaknesses were found as a result of this evaluatio The evaluation team concluded that each operating crew exhibited satisfactory performance for the areas assessed and that the Shift Manager adequately controlled each shif Section 7 of this report characterizes the performance deficiencies and strengths for each crew and individual. General conclusions on weaknesses and strengths are given belo Two concerns were related to individual performance weaknesses. The first concern relates to the individual communications weaknesses. As a result of these weaknesses the operators were sometimes delayed in their response to the events. This area should be reviewed by PECo to correct identified deficiencie . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - .

. .

,

The second concern relates to the attitude expressed when the stuck control rod problem was turned over to the Reactor Engineer (see Section 7.4). This is of concern because it has the potential to create misunderstanding between the operators and other departments on sit This attitude was observed on only one occasio In general, the crews responded very well to severe transients. Their fecognition of events was quick and actions to mitigate the consequences were appropriate. The crews also demonstrated good knowledge and use of Technical Specifications and procedure The Shift Managers were assessed as being effective in their roles as crew supervisors and leaders. They called the operators' attention to conditions when appropriate; conducted shift briefings on existing conditions and planned actions; correctly implemented the Emergency Plan when warranted; and coordinated support from other organizations as necessar .

_ . - - - _ - _ . - , _ . - ,

. Eiutosae 3

<

.

_

.

PEACH BOTICM ATOMIC POWER FrATION FALL 1987 SIWLATOR TEAWORK 7 RAINING EVALUATION CHECKLIST CREN: De to Shif t Manager Shift Technical Advisor Shift Supervisor Chief Operator Control Room operator control Room operator (U/2) (U/3)

Evaluator (s) : STS $ 3 Pass (1 2.0) Fail ( 4 2.0)

(Circle appropriate category for each statement)

1. Job Responsibilities ICT TMJE VERY TMJE

, Team members perform their duties within 0 1 2 3 4 their assigned roles , Team members acknowledge the 0 1 2 3 4 responsibilities assigned to other team c o *er Given an abnormal plant condition, team 0 1 2 3 4 membera complete immedlate actions within assigned secpe of responsibility and report completion of these items to the supervisor . When operating controls on panels 0 1 2 3 4 other than those of primary responsibility, the team member comeunicates to those responsible o their in tended action o this completed action

/

- -

_ __ -__ __ _ _- , . _ _ _ -_

-

.

,

2. ?articipation WT TRUE VERY TRUE Team menbers ask questions amorget 0 1 2 3 4 themselves to gather information or to clarify information not fully understoo Team members respond in a timely manner 0 1 2 3 4 with information requested by other team member Team members actively participate within 0 1 2 3 4 their assigned roles during the training se ss io Team members use approved procedures, 0 1 2 3 4 as appropriate to operate the plant in a sa fe , org aniz ed ma nner .

3. Consnunication Skills WT1 RUE VERY 1 RUE Team members inform other members 0 1 2 3 4 of relevant information in a timely manne Team members ensure that information 0 1 2 3 4

,

or instruction was received and understoo Team members provide accurate 0 1 2 3 4 information when requested and corrected erroneous connunication Shift Supervision periodically 0 1 2 3 4 ensures all team members are aware of the plant s ta tus . Sh if t Supe rv is io n d ir ec ts te am me mbe r s 0 1 2 3 4 through appropriate procedures (ON's , OT's , TAIP's , e tc .)

~ Team members inform outside groups / 0 1 2 3 4 organizations of relevant information in a time ly manner .

l l

l i

l

- _ .

.

4. Ta sk a nd Ma in te nanc e B ehav io r s TOT TRyE VERY 1 RUE Team members actively reek and give 0 1 2 3 4 informa tion to accomplish the team goa ls , Team merbers provide input for 0 1 2 3 4 diagnosis and implementation of corrective actio Team members coordinate their actions 0 1 2 3 4 acorgst themselves to control the plant in a safe, organized stanner, Shift supervision directs actions of 0 1 2 3 4 team members to accomplish 'IRIP objectives, as necessar Shif t supervision manages comunication 0 1 2 3 4 flow from team members ensuring relevant information is received /

transmitte . Lack of Ibn Puretional Behavior LOT 'IRUE VERY 'IRUE e Team menbers actively commit themselves 0 1 2 3 4 to accomplishing the team goals , Team members support other members 0 1 2 3 4 in accomplishing tasks. as necessar Team members receive constructive 0 1 2 3 4 critical ccernents in a nondefensive manne . Decision Mak ing LOT TRUE VERY 'IRUE Team members pro /ide input to shif t 0 1 2 3 4 supervison for decislon makin Shift supervision actively seeks 0 1 2 3 4 input from team members for decision mak ing . Team members avoid premture closing 0 1 2 3 4 on decision A

- 6. Decision Mak ing (con t 'd) IOT 114UE VERY MUE

' Team members recognize and accept 0 1 2 3 4 decisions by shif t supervision Shift supervision ensures team 0 1 2 3 4 members are aware of decisions, and reasons for decision, if conditions permi . Leadership Skills (Shif t Manager) ICT TRUE VERY MUE Shift manager ensures the team 0 1 2 3 4 members are aware of the teams's goa l( s) , Shif t manager encourages team members 0 1 2 3 4 participation in the decision making process, as appropriat Shif t manager provides acknowledgement 0 1 2 3 4 for good performance as well as constructive criticism for team members, as appropriat Shif t manager prwides direction 0 1 2 3 4

• for the team in the safe operation of the plan Shif t manager coordinates with other 0 1 2 3 4 departments /agenef.es, as apprcpriat . Feedback ,,

ICT TRUE VERY 1 RUE Team members prwide feedback to shift 0 1 2 3 4 supervision in a timely mariner, upon completion of a task / evaluatio Shif t supervision prwide team members 0 1 2 3 4 with plant status won completion of an evolution, as appropriate , Shif t supervision prwides outside 0 1 2 3 4 grogs / organization information, as appropria te (NRC, Ioad Disp. e tc .)

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _

-

. .

,

9. Re spec t NOT MUE VERY MUE ,

s. Team members respect other members 0 1 2 3 4 advice and opinion b. Team members respect decisions / orders 0 1 2 3 4 made by supervisory personne c. Team me mber s re spec t ou tside 0 1 2 3 4 org anizations advice / decisions ,

as appropria te .

1 Safe Operation of Plant NOT MUE VERY MUE a. Team members participate to operate 0 1 2 3 4 the plant in a safe, oraganized manne b. Team members carry out proper operator 0 1 2 3 4 actions, using approved procedures, in response to the simulator scenario, as appropriat , Team members ensure plant not placed 0 1 2 3 4

,

in an unsafe conditio .,

MTAL POINTS , i applicable catagories = SCORE I!NTER SCORE ON COVER SHEET

._- , _ _ _

.-._ _ _ , _ - - - - . _ - - . - - - - - - -

/

_-_

._ _- - .

Enc /cu w e 2-

.

• .

,

,

. f'esth Fcttoe Deerating Crews Date """""**

h8tC Operaticaal Assesseent Scenario 4,,,,,,

Evaiuaterts1,,,,,,,,,,,_,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

CRfN Shi f t Ma n a g er ,,, ,. _ _,. . . .. ,,,,, , S h i f t in t e r v i s or... . .. ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,, ,, ,, S T A,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,

j Chi 'I D c r a t or ,,,,,,,, _ ,,,,,,,,,,, U / 2 Op e r a t or ,,,,,,,,,,,,, __m , U/ 3 Op er at or ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

OvtRALL CREW INTERAC110N (nostedge/Use of Procedures iCOMMENIS ATTACHED: ,, IES ,,NO)

I........................... .................................... 3.............................................. .... ....... 5

'.reelandtvidual activities mere suth that theft

- could not locate procedures or could not - located cont procedures, and followed - easily located procedures and follow procedures or etssed stest procedures correctly but slowly followed thee quickly and surely

- did set recognite when plant - recogni:ed when plant lisits were exceeded - recognized when plant limits sere approached tients mere exceeded and took corrective action and took corrective action did not verif y automatic actions including - verified most automatic actions including - verified all automatic actions including safety functions when required saf ety functions when required saf ety functions when required

- did not periore er verify performed, req'd - perfore or verify performed, most required - perf ore or verif yforperformed,te andall required operator actions for insediate and operator actions for tenediate and operator actions lacedia subsequent procedure steps subsequent procedure steps subsequent procedure steps did not recognite entry conditions - reco9 sited almost all entry conditions - recognized all entry conditions

- tad incorrett actions / decisions for estets - usually had correct actions / decisions for - had correct actionsidecisions for all act covered by procedures or ehere enny events not covered by procedures or ehere events not covered by procedures er ehere choltes were available many choices were available sany choites were available

- ce61d not interate proced6res to coast - correctly integrattf procedures to coebat - ef f ectively and correctly integrated multiple casualties eultiple casunties procedures to coabat bultiple casualties

.

~

couledge/Use of Technical Specifications (COPL4TS ATTACHED: .,YES ,,liO I........................................3..................................._........_..5

~>eelindividual activities stre such that they

- did not recMaite shee itch Spec ll6tts - recognized when itch Spec limits sere - recognated when Tech Spec limits mere sere estet N es.:essed and took corrective action approached and took corrective action

- csaid *ct locate wrect itch Spec or locattd most Tech Specs in a reasonable - qattkly located Tech Specs and correctly W * r,*.iy inte m :tes tsee W D) ttee and correctly interpreted thes (SRO) interpreted thee (SRO)

- vertised compliance sith Teth Spec actions and limits (SRO)

$

\

l

- -- - -- a

_

-

.

.

NitALL CREW INiluti!Oh (continued) page 2 Eooeunications ICOMENIS AIIACH[D ,,1[$ ..MO)

I................................................................ 3................................................................ 5 trestandtvidsel cosaunications mere such that theys gave unclear, garbled, incoeplete, or -gaveunderstandableandrelevant gave clear, specific, concise and relevant not relevant information/ direction inf er eation/ direction inf or mation/dir ection

- f ailed to verify inforntion/ direction - usaally ensured inforsation/ direction - ensured information/dirntion given uns given was understood given was understood understood by getting others' attention BEFORE coseunicating f ailed to listen to input or indicate - listen to input and usually indicate - actively listen to input and indicate understanding understanding understanding f ailed to ask for cluification of - sosetimes asked for clarification of - asked for clarification of all unclear or unclear or apparently erroneous sessages unclear or apparently erroneous sessages apparently erroneous sessages f ailed to keep other crew seebers aware - kept other crse seaters aware of - keep other cres seebers aware of actions of actions taten or srstes status actions taken and systte status taken, systes status, and a.iticipated events f ailed to ask for necessary inforeation - asked for necessary inforeation f ailed to :orrect erroneous sessages froe self or others - corruted erroneous sessages froe self or others f ail to relay appropriate inforention/ direction .eleyed appropriate information/ direction to/ free outside sources to/ free outside sources apervisory Ability / Responsibility (COMENTS ATTACHED: ,. VES . 11 0 )

I....... .......... ...... .... .......... ............. 3......................... .... -. ....................... 5 rewlindividsal activities mere such that they did n;t set goals or priorities for set sose goals or priorities for - set clear goals and priorities to ensure the cress' actions (SRO) cress' actions (SRD) appropriate actions of the whole tete (SRO)

f ailed to teerdinate sctions to ensure , soordinated actions to ensure saf e - coordinated attions to risure smooth and safe operat Ms eperations safe e;erations f ailed to participate in the decisten - participated in the decision asking - actively participated in the decision sakino uking process process process f ailed to operate eithin their assigned - operated within their assigned roles - ef fectively operated within their assigned roles or understand the roles of others and understand the roles of others roles and understand the roles of others f ailed to provide / accept appropriate - provided/ accepted appropriate feedback - provided timely and useful feedback, and feedback respected the f eedback of others betate etcpletely distracted free - became soeenhat distracted free prieary - always kept primary role in focus primary role by less newtant activities role by less toportant activities direction consistently lagged actions by - d' ection is appropriate for actions - direction is appropriate and droonstrates cres (SRDI by cres (SRO) foresight for tuture probleas (SRO)

f ailed to cocedisate actions aeongst - coordinated actions aeongst thraselves to control theeselves to control the plant in a safe the plant in a s4fe organized canner organized manner

~ ' '

zy -7 l

.s l

,

• . I

.

. Shif t Manager Asusteent page 3 la addition to the previous areas, the Shif t Managw mill be evaluated to the following areati Energency Plan lap'euntation (COMIO il A11ACHEDi .. YES ..I60)

I............................................... ............... 3................................................................ 5 The Shift Manager's activities are such that he

- f ailed to lepleoent the Energency Plan - topleoested the twpacy Plan - anticipated Energency Plaa tulesentation, in a tieely eahner when marraeted sakes preparation to impleeent the plan, and implements the pin when marranted

- failed to propwly conduct hieself as Eewpacy - ensured proper inglesentaties of the Energency Plan Director af ter eetwing the Energency Plan as the fewgency sirector and coordinated activities of os site personnel and coordinated nith other agencies as appropriate 3eperviwy Ability / Leadership Stills (CON O TS ATTACHED: YES ..h0)

I... .......... .... ..... . .. .. .......... 3... ................ . . .......... .... ..... 5 the Shift Manager's activities are such that he:

- f ailed to saintain an overall perspective - saintained an overall perspective of - saintained an overall perspective of plant of plant operations during normal and plant operatinas Aring normal and ostrations durise normal and seerseecy eeergency situations eserpacy situations situations and effectively supervised all groups involved with saintaining sesoth operatices in norsal situatises and these involvei with plaat stabilitation and recovery dering treestents

- failed to monitor crew pwforsance - sonitored cree perforeance and provided - sonitored cree perfernance and provided

, soee geldance instrettion, peldance teenselleg andler praise as appropriate,to leprote operatises

- f ailed to deeoestrate a sanageoest style that - deoonstrated a saeageeeet style that evoted respett and cooperation from all evoted respect and cooperation free all cree seekers crew seebers

..

l l

'

!

.

l l

!

m

, __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - , . , ,

,

a .

.

eagh Detten Operating Crees Pete ...

GC Operatisaal Assetecent COMEM SHEtt

.......... ............................................ ................ ...................... .. ...................................

........ .......................... .................... .. ...... ........................ ........ .................... .......

...... ............................................... _ .......................... .... .... .. .................. ........ .....

,l

.. .. ................ ........ ........ .. ................ ........ ... . .... .... .... .. .......

...... _ . ........ .... ........ .... .... ...... .... ........ .. .... ... .. . .. .. .. .........

... ........ .............. ...... . ... ... . _ ...... .......... .. ... . ........ ... . .. ...

......................................................_:  :... . . .. .......

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

_ .. .....

-... ..... ............ ................. ..... ...... . _ .. .... . . _ ...... ...

.. .. . ....... ........ ...... .. .. ...... .. .. .. .. - _ . _ . ...

.. .. _ .. .. .... .. .... .. ............ .... .................. .... . . .. ...... .. . .

..... .... .... ...................... . ................... _ . _ ........ .... .. .. .... .....

. ... ... ................ .............. .......... .. .... .. .. .. . . ... ..... .....

.

... ...... .................. ....... . .... .... _ ......... .. .. . ..... ...... .......

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . _ . . - . - .. .....

...... .. _ .... .. ... .. .. .. .. ...... . .. .. .... .. .... _ . .. .... . . .... ...

.. . .. .. .... .. _ ....... . .... .... - .. .... .... .. .. ... ...... . .. .. .. . ...

... ~ .. ........ .......... .. . .. .... ... .. .. .. .. . . _ .. .. ...........

... .. .......... .... . .. .. _ .. . .. .. .. . ....... ,

--

.... .. - ................ .. .. _ . . .. ... _ .. .. .. ... . \

.. _ . .. .... ........ . ...... ..... .. .... _ . ... _ . .. .... ...

,

. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . _ . _ . _ . . .

.. .... _ ............... .. .. . .. . . _.- _ ...

.... ...._ ._ . _ . .. .. .. - ._ ... . . ,

. s

. . ... .... .. .. . .... ... . .. .. -.y .. ..

,... .

.-

t  : . 6 . - ...

.... .. .... .. ..... . _ . .

.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . - ... _ - _-- . ...

.. .... ... _ .. ... .. _ .. . .. - . . .. ...

... .. .. .. ...... .. .. .... .. .... .. _ .. .. .. _ . _ . .. _ ...

.. . _ . ...... ... ..... ........ .. .. .... .. .. _ . _ . .. .

. .... ..... .. .. ...... ... .. . .. . ... _ .. ...

. . _ ... . .. .. .. .. _ _ . .. ....- _ .- _ . . . ,

........... ...................... .... .. .... ...... ........................ .... ........ . ...........................

. .. ..... _ ...... ...................... ...... ...... .. ...... ...... .... .... .... .. .. ..... ...... .

... ........................................<. ..................... .......... .................... .............. ................. 1

................................................ .................................................................. .................... .

................ ...... .... .. .. .... .. ..

....... .. .. ........ ........ ............ ..... . ........ .. .. ... - >

v

.. ..... ........... ........ ...............u... .. .... .. .. ..... . _ . .. ...... ........ .. .. .....

...

.. . _ . .. .. . . .. . . . .. _ .

.-- ...

,

._._. ... _ .. .. - . ___ . ...... --

.. . 1

.... . _ .... .. _ ... .... _ _ _ ..

-

. .. . . . . . . . . _ . - . _ . _ . - - - .._ _. _ _ .. . ...

. _ . . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . _ _ . . - . .. _ _ .. ..... t

. . . . . .. . .. . .....

_ - . . -

...- _ .. .. ....

. - _ . .. . _ . _ .. .-

.. . .... .. .. .. .... ... _ .. .. . .. _ _ . ... .

.. .. ..

.

. . . . . . . . . . _ .. . . . . _ _ -

_-- ..

. . . _ .

.... . .. ... . z .. . . . . . _ . - -. . . . _ .

. . ..

. . . _ .-  : .. ...

.... . .... . . .... .. .... .. -

.

.. .. . ... -... .... .. ...

.= . . ... _ ........ .. .. . .

.. _ ..- - . _ .. .. _ . . - . . .

.. .. ... .. .. _ . .. -

I

.. . .. - ...- .__.~: - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - -

._- .

i

- - - - - - - . _ .- _ _ , , _ , ._ - - .v.---- . - - - . , _ . , ._,, m _ m _,. , -, _ _ - - . .--