ML022680286
| ML022680286 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/2002 |
| From: | Myers L FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC/RGN-III |
| References | |
| Download: ML022680286 (73) | |
Text
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 1
Davis-Besse Davis-Besse Management and Human Management and Human Performance Improvement Plan Performance Improvement Plan September 18, 2002
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 2
Welcome Welcome Lew Myers Chief Operating Officer
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 3
Desired Outcomes Desired Outcomes
- Discuss Management and Human Performance Improvement Plan
- Discuss the plan for improving our implementation of the Corrective Action Program
- Review results of the Safety Conscious Work Environment Survey and our plan for improvement
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 4
Proactive Safety Culture
Conservative Operations
FENOC Commitment to Safety
Achieve Goals & Objectives
Positive Change
Reward & Recognition
Measurable Value to Shareholders
Customer Service
Exceed Customer Expectations
Initiative & Leadership
Personal Responsibility for Actions
Honesty & Ethical Behavior
Management Involvement
Knowledge
Skilled & Flexible Work Force
Feedback Valued in Decision-making
Open Communication Vision Vision Mission: People providing safe, reliable and cost effective nuclear generation Mission: People providing safe, reliable and cost effective nuclear generation
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 5
4 Reactor Head Reactor Head Resolution Plan Resolution Plan Bob Schrauder Bob Schrauder Program Compliance Program Compliance Plan Plan Jim Powers Jim Powers Containment Health Containment Health Assurance Plan Assurance Plan Randy Fast Randy Fast Restart Test Plan Restart Test Plan Randy Fast Randy Fast Management and Management and Human Performance Human Performance Excellence Plan Excellence Plan Lew Myers Lew Myers System Health System Health Assurance Plan Assurance Plan Jim Powers Jim Powers Restart Action Plan Restart Action Plan Lew Myers Lew Myers Restart Overview Restart Overview Panel Panel Return to Service Plan Return to Service Plan Basic Building Blocks Basic Building Blocks Designed for restart and to provide for longer-term sustained performance.
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 6
Root Causes Root Causes Steve Loehlein Manager - Quality Assessment
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 7
FENOC QA Investigation Management Issues Condition Report Missed Opportunities Management /
Human Performance Excellence Plan Non-Technical Root Cause Initial Technical Root Cause Other Sources:
of Management/
Human Performance Issues 5 Focus Areas Management /Human Performance Improvement Plan Objectives Actions and Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 8
- Less than adequate nuclear safety focus
- Less than adequate implementation of the Corrective Action Program
- Addressing symptoms rather than causes
- Low categorization of conditions
- Inadequate cause determinations
- Inadequate corrective actions
- Inadequate trending
- Failure to integrate and apply key industry information and site knowledge
- Non-Compliance with the Boric Acid Corrosion Control Procedure and Inservice Inspection Program Root Causes Root Causes
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 9
Root Cause Analysis Team Root Cause Analysis Team
- Lead: Steve Loehlein (Beaver Valley)
- Bill Babiak (Perry)
- Mario DeStefano (Perry)
- Randy Rossomme (Beaver Valley)
- Lesley Wildfong (Conger & Elsea)
- Bill Mugge (Davis-Besse)
- Joe Sturdavant (Davis-Besse)
- Bobby Villines (Davis-Besse)
- Dick Smith (Conger & Elsea)
- Spyros Traiforos
- Oversight:
Dorian Conger and Ken Elsea (C&E)
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 10 Management and Management and Human Performance Human Performance Implementation Plan Implementation Plan Dave Eshelman Director - Life Cycle Management
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 11 Head Degradation Technical Root Cause CR 02-00891 Quality Assessment Effectiveness CR 02-02578 Integrated / Collective Cause Review Operations Role in Site Safety Focus CR 02-02581 Management Failure to Detect Head Degradation CR 02-00891 Management /
Human Performance Improvement Plan Other Management Human Performance Root Causes Other Actions
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 12 Nuclear Safety Focus Safety Conscious Work Environment (SCWE)
Nuclear Safety Culture Leadership Standards Technical Standards Departmental Standards Plant and Equipment Standards Safety Focused Decision-Making Standards and Decision-Making Independent External Oversight FENOC Level Oversight Internal Oversight Management Oversight Review Board Oversight Oversight and Assessments Programs/Corrective Action/
Procedure Compliance Program Improvements Implementation Improvements Corrective Action Process Procedure Adherence Management/Personnel Development Leaders Leadership Behaviors Evaluating Leadership Management Monitoring Feedback and Coaching Management/
Human Performance Improvement Plan
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 13
- We are committed to implementing the FENOC Mission, Vision and Values
We will demonstrate our commitment to safety; demonstrate leadership courage with safety first and foremost
We will recognize the Value of our people
We pledge to uphold the Leadership in Action Principles
We will earn the right to lead through our behaviors and actions.
Senior Management Team Standards Senior Management Team Standards
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 14
- Actions
- Identification of Actions
- Designation of Restart Actions
- Designation of Responsible Managers
- Schedule for Activities
- Verification of Effectiveness
- Performance Indicators and Goals
- Assessments
- Plan is a Living Document long after restart Objectives of the Plan Objectives of the Plan
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 15 Objective:
Objective:
FENOC has the following objective for safety culture at Davis-Besse:
Nuclear, radiological, and personnel safety have the highest priority and take precedence over other objectives, such as cost and production. Personnel feel free to raise safety concerns without fear of retaliation, and concerns are investigated and resolved in a timely manner.
Improvements in Safety Culture Improvements in Safety Culture
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 16
- FENOC Safety Policy
- Safety Focus Training
- People Team
- Business Plan Alignment of Performance Incentives Nuclear Safety Culture Initiatives Nuclear Safety Culture Initiatives
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 17
- Employee communication opportunities: C's meetings; Town Hall Meetings
- ROP Employee Meetings
- Case Study Training
- Management Oversight Improvements:
- Management Monitoring Program
- Management Observation Scheduling Nuclear Safety Culture Initiatives Nuclear Safety Culture Initiatives
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 18
- Self-Identification of Adverse Conditions indicator. The goal for restart is 80% or more.
- Self-Assessments - Each group will include an evaluation of the safety focus.
- Management Observations
- SCWE Assessments - Conduct periodic assessments of SCWE at Davis-Besse. The goal for restart is to have an improving trend in SCWE.
Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 19 Objective Objective FENOC has the following objective for its management of Davis-Besse:
Managers are experienced, have high safety standards, and are involved in directing and overseeing plant activities.
Improvements in Management/
Improvements in Management/
Personnel Development Personnel Development
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 20
- New Management team
- Standards for Management
- Operations Improvement Plan
- Supervisory Evaluations
- Leadership in Action Training
- Foundations for Leadership
- Ownership for Excellence
- Management Monitoring Process Improvements in Management/
Improvements in Management/
Personnel Development Personnel Development
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 21 Indicators Indicators
- Management Monitoring
- Quality of pre-job briefs
- Proper safety practices and equipment
- Effective communications
- Supervisory behaviors
- Procedure or document use
- Use of Station Error-Prevention tools
- Individual -error rate per 10,000 person-hours worked. The goal for restart is 0.50
- Accept As-Is disposition of Condition Reports Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 22 Assessments Assessments
- INPO Assist Visit
- Restart Overview Panel Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 23 Objective Objective FENOC has the following objective for decision-making and technical assessments at Davis-Besse:
Decision-making and technical standards have a nuclear safety focus, have technical rigor, account for operating experience, and seek to correct problems rather than justifying acceptance of the problems.
Improvements in Standards and Improvements in Standards and Decision-Making Decision-Making
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 24
- Decision-Making Nuclear Operating Procedure
- Establish Technical Staff Expectations
- Improvements in Use of Operating Experience
- Increased Resource Sharing with FENOC Plants
- Augmentation of the Engineering Staff
- FENOC Hierarchy of Documents
- Operations Oversight Executive Improvements in Standards and Improvements in Standards and Decision-Making Decision-Making
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 25
- Operations Excellence Plan
- Plant Labeling Improvements and Equipment
- Case Study
- Training on Technical Standards
- Creation of a Management Observation Program
- Establishment of an Engineering Assessment Board Improvements in Standards and Improvements in Standards and Decision-Making Decision-Making
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 26 Indicators Indicators
- Assessment of Decision-Making Nuclear Operating Procedure
- Engineering Assessment Board Indicators
- Management Observation
- Open Control Room Deficiencies
- Open Operator Work-Arounds
- Open Temporary Modifications Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 27 Objective Objective FENOC has the following objective for oversight and assessments at Davis-Besse:
Davis-Besse has provisions for oversight and assessments, which are effective in identifying and correcting problems before they adversely affect safety and quality.
Oversight and Assessment Oversight and Assessment
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 28
- New Oversight Groups
- Creation of a Restart Overview Panel
- Establishment of an Engineering Assessment Board
- Creation of Restart Readiness Reviews by the Senior Management Team Oversight and Assessment Oversight and Assessment
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 29 Permanently Strengthen Existing Groups Permanently Strengthen Existing Groups
- Improvements in Corrective Action Review Board
- Improvements in Senior Training Council
- Improvements in Engineering product reviews (Engineering Assessment Board)
- Improvements in the Project Review Committee
- Improvements in Quality Assessment
- Improvements in the Company Nuclear Review Board Oversight and Assessment Oversight and Assessment
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 30 New permanent assessments activities New permanent assessments activities
- Restart Readiness Reviews
- Periodic System Reviews
- Periodic Program Reviews
- Improved Expectations and Standards for Oversight
- Weekend Duty Oversight
- Management Observation Program Oversight and Assessment Oversight and Assessment
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 31 Performance Indicators Performance Indicators
- Management Assessment of Readiness for Restart
- Corrective Action Program is effectively implemented to support restart
- Engineering products support restart
- Quality Assessment will track the number of Condition Reports it prepares
- Quality Assessment will track the number of Condition Reports it prepares that involve a repeat of previous conditions identified Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 32 Objective Objective FENOC has the following objective for programs, corrective action and procedure adherence at Davis-Besse:
Programs comply with NRC regulations, incorporate applicable operating experience, and are effectively implemented.
Adverse conditions (including adverse trends) are promptly identified and documented. The root causes of significant conditions adverse to quality are identified, actions are taken to preclude recurrence of the conditions, and the preventive actions are effective. Personnel comply with procedures as written, or obtain proper revisions as needed.
Improvements in Programs/Corrective Improvements in Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Compliance Action/Procedure Compliance
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 33 Actions to Improve Programs Actions to Improve Programs
- Program Compliance Building Block Plan
- Program Ownership
- Expectations for Program Ownership
- Improvements to the Ownership Model
- Qualification Process for Owners
- Improvements to the Self-Assessment Program Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Compliance Initiatives Compliance Initiatives
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 34 Actions to Improve Program/Procedure Actions to Improve Program/Procedure Compliance:
Compliance:
- Reinforcing Standards for Procedure Compliance
- Emphasis on Procedure Compliance at Morning Meetings
- Management Observations Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Compliance Initiatives Compliance Initiatives
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 35 Specific Program Changes Specific Program Changes
- Boric Acid Corrosion Control (BACC) Program
- In-service Inspection (ISI)
- Corrective Action program Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Compliance Initiatives Compliance Initiatives
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 36 Improvements in Corrective Action Improvements in Corrective Action
- Improvements in Operability Reviews
- Improvements in Categorization of Adverse Conditions
- Improvements in Cause Determinations
- Improvements in Corrective Actions
- Improvements in Improvements in Trending
- Improvements in the Corrective Action Review Board
- Improvements in Causal Analysis Review Group Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Programs/Corrective Action/Procedure Compliance Initiatives Compliance Initiatives
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 37 Performance Indicators Performance Indicators
- Programs and Procedure Compliance
- Individual program health indicator
- Program and Process Errors The goal for restart is 0.7 per 10,000 person-hours
- Condition Reports due to failure to follow procedures
- Management observations of procedure compliance Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 38 Performance Indicators Performance Indicators
- Corrective Actions
- Categorization Adequacy The goal is to have 95% or better
- Root Cause Quality The goal of 90% or better has been established
- Corrective Action Adequacy The goal is 90% or better
- Repeat Events
- Timeliness of Corrective Actions Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 39 Assessments Assessments
- Programs and Procedure Compliance
- Program Reviews
- Quality Assessment audits of procedure compliance.
- Human Performance Evaluation System (HPES) analysis
- Quality Assessment surveillances of procedure compliance Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 40 Assessments Assessments
- Corrective Actions
- Engineering Assessment Board review of corrective actions
- Independent assessment of the adequacy of corrective actions on a semiannual basis.
- Quality Assessment detailed audits of the adequacy of corrective actions Verification of Effectiveness Verification of Effectiveness
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 41
- Self-Identification of Adverse Conditions The goal for restart is 80%
- Open Control Room Deficiencies The goal is to have zero at restart
- Open Operator Work-Arounds The goal is to have zero at restart
- Open Temporary Modifications The goal is to have zero at restart
- Root Cause Quality The goal is 90% or better Overall Performance Indicators to Overall Performance Indicators to Measure Improvement Measure Improvement
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 42
- EAB Indicators of quality
- Total Maintenance Backlog The goal for restart is less than 500
- Open Modifications The goal for restart is less than 200
- Open Procedure Change Request The goal for restart is 250
- Restart Training Completion Overall Performance Indicators to Overall Performance Indicators to Measure Improvement Measure Improvement
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 43 September 18, 2002 Corrective Action Process Improvement Dave Gudger, Manager - Performance Improvement Corrective Action Process Owner
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 44 Corrective Action Process Improvement Corrective Action Process Improvement Purpose Purpose
- To discuss the Corrective Action Program improvement plan to address the following items:
- Corrective Action Program issue
- Interim/Compensatory measures established for assurance of program integrity
- Approach to long-term improvement plan
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 45 Corrective Action Process Improvement Corrective Action Process Improvement Corrective Action Program Issue Corrective Action Program Issue
- Non-Technical Root Cause identified that the implementation of the Corrective Active Program was less than adequate as indicated by the following:
- Addressing symptoms rather than causes
- Low categorization of conditions
- Inadequate corrective actions
- Inadequate trending
Program elements determined to be adequate
MANAGER - PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT Dave Gudger SUPERVISOR - CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM Brian T. Hennessy CREST ADMINISTRATION (RECORDS)
CREST SOFTWARE ADMINISTRATION TRENDING AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS RECORDS CLOSEOUT OPERATING EXPERIENCE NOP/PROG. GUIDE IMPLEMENTATION CAP/CREST TRAINING RECOVERY IMPROVEMENT Tony F. Silakoski SUPERVISOR - SELF EVALUATIONS PROGAMS
SELF-ASSESSMENT HUMAN PERFORMANCE OBSERVATION PROGRAM COMMUNICATION PLAN/
TRAINING PROGRAM REVIEW TEAM ROOT CAUSE - CAP REPORT WRITING CAUSAL ANALYSIS REVIEW GROUP - CARG CAP SELF-ASSESSMENT/
EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW NRC SUPPORT FOR RESTART PROGRAM REVIEW TEAM ROOT CAUSE - OE Performance Improvement Organization Performance Improvement Organization September 18, 2002 46
Interim and Compensatory Measures Completed Interim and Compensatory Measures Completed September 18, 2002 47 Compensatory Measures Compensatory Measures
- Barrier Analysis
- Corrective Action Program owners directly involved with management categorization
- Standards enhanced for Senior Reactor Operator reviews
- Causal Analysis Review Group established
- Corrective Action Review Board chaired by Plant Manager
- Corrective Action expert facilitation
- Corrective Action Program closure review
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 48 New Causal Analysis Review Group Functions New Causal Analysis Review Group Functions
- Review of Basic Cause Evaluations and selected Conditions Adverse to Quality to:
- Ensure cause quality and programmatic requirement adherence
- Provide peer review feedback to evaluator and approver for long term quality behavior improvements
- Used as a Corrective Action Program Users' Group
- Develop individual departmental corrective action improvement plans in coordination with the Program Owner and other sections and department Major Improvement Initiatives Major Improvement Initiatives
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 49 NEW CAP Performance Indicators NEW CAP Performance Indicators
Purpose:
To monitor transition to improved quality and ownership.
Establishing Performance Category Measures for each program attribute to be in place by September 30th.
Productivity Timeliness Efficiency Quality Effectiveness Major Improvement Initiatives Major Improvement Initiatives
Root Cause / CAP Focused Assessment Root Cause / CAP Focused Assessment September 18, 2002 50
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 51 We understand what the Corrective Action Program issues are. We have interim measures to address them. We are developing a long-term improvement plan.
Conclusion Conclusion
52 DAVIS-BESSE Safety Conscious Work Environment Independent Assessment DAVIS-BESSE DAVIS-BESSE Safety Conscious Work Safety Conscious Work Environment Environment Independent Assessment Independent Assessment Presentation for NRC Meeting September 18, 2002 L.W. Pearce September 18, 2002 52
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 53
- Assessment Structure and Methodology
- Survey Results
- Actions to Address Assessment Findings
- Conclusion Agenda Agenda
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 54 Team:
Team:
G Ken Woessner (FirstEnergy QA)
G Stewart Ebneter (Ind. Consultant, Former NRC Senior Manager)
G George Edgar & Paul Zaffuts (Morgan Lewis)
Four Core Criteria and Thirteen Attributes Derived Four Core Criteria and Thirteen Attributes Derived From NRC Policy Statement:
From NRC Policy Statement:
G Worker willingness to Raise Concerns / Management Support for Raising Concerns.
G Effectiveness of ECP/Ombudsman Program.
G Managements Effectiveness in Resolving Issues Using Normal Processes.
G Managements Effectiveness in Detecting and Preventing Retaliation and Chilling Effect.
Structure and Methodology Structure and Methodology
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 55 Data Sources:
Data Sources:
G Survey of Large FENOC and Contractor Personnel Sample.
G SCWE-Related Policies, Procedures, and Work Practices.
G SCWE Performance Indicators.
G Diagnostic Quiz on SCWE Principles Provided to 20 Management Personnel.
G Interviews of Selected Personnel.
Structure and Methodology Structure and Methodology
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 56 KEY SURVEY QUESTIONS
Ability to challenge non-conservative decision by management?
Feel free to approach mgmt. with nuclear/quality concerns?
Raise nuclear/quality concerns w/out fear of retaliation?
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Condition reports initiated ------------------
AGREE OR STRONGLY AGREE 1999 1/2002 8/2002 48%
81%
70%
80%
92%
80%
73%
89%
72%
1999 2000 2001 7/2002 2308 3253 3478 5700 (annualized)
Although workers are writing CRs in increasing numbers, they have declining confidence in Although workers are writing CRs in increasing numbers, they have declining confidence in their ability to approach management with concerns or challenge non-conservative their ability to approach management with concerns or challenge non-conservative management decisions.
management decisions.
Survey Results - Willingness of Survey Results - Willingness of Workers to Raise Concerns Workers to Raise Concerns
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 57 KEY SURVEY QUESTIONS
Mgmt wants concerns reported?
Mgmt is willing to listen to problems?
Constructive criticism is encouraged?
Mgmt. cares more about identification /
resolution of nuclear/quality concerns than cost/schedule?
AGREE OR STRONGLY AGREE 1999 1/2002 8/2002 84%
86%
76%
47%
72%
63%
44%
70%
52%
NA NA 39%
There has been an erosion in worker perception of managements commitment to There has been an erosion in worker perception of managements commitment to encourage, address, and resolve concerns.
encourage, address, and resolve concerns.
Survey Results - Management Support Survey Results - Management Support for Raising Concerns for Raising Concerns
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 58 KEY SURVEY QUESTIONS
I can use ECP/Ombudsman without fear of reprisal?
ECP/Ombudsman will maintain confidentiality?
Upper management supports the ECP/
Ombudsman program?
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Ombudsman contacts --------------------------
Ombudsman investigations -------------------
AGREE OR STRONGLY AGREE 1999 1/2002 8/2002 59%
85%
70%
56%
77%
66%
NA 77%
60%
1999 2000 2001 7/2002 5
21 18 42 (annualized) 4 6
2 12 (annualized)
- Contacts are increasing while necessary resources devoted to Ombudsman program are not.
Contacts are increasing while necessary resources devoted to Ombudsman program are not.
- Workers continue to use Ombudsman program as alternative to line management.
Workers continue to use Ombudsman program as alternative to line management.
worker confidence in ability of program to adequately address issues.
Survey Results - ECP/Ombudsman Survey Results - ECP/Ombudsman
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 59 KEY SURVEY QUESTIONS
CAP is effective to identify potential nuclear safety / quality issues?
Free to report concerns using CAP without fear of reprisal?
Issues in CAP are prioritized appropriately, investigated thoroughly, and timely resolved?
CAP effective to timely resolve conditions adverse to quality?
CAP effective to address root causes and broader implications of nuclear safety / quality issues?
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR NRC allegations (2002) -------------------------
- At least 4 of the 25 referred allegations were initiated by non D-B personnel.
AGREE OR STRONGLY AGREE 1999 1/2002 8/2002 41%
82%
57%
69%
87%
71%
59%
70%
41%
44%
68%
42%
45%
75%
45%
1999 2000 2001 8/2002 3
0 2
25*
(as of 9/1)
Survey Results - Effectiveness in Survey Results - Effectiveness in Resolving Issues Using Normal Processes Resolving Issues Using Normal Processes
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 60 KEY SURVEY QUESTIONS
I have been adequately trained on the various processes for reporting and documenting nuclear / quality concerns?
My supervisors / managers have been adequately trained on the various processes for reporting and documenting nuclear / quality concerns?
I have been subject to HIRD for raising nuclear / quality concerns?
I know of instances in which workers in my workgroup have been subject to HIRD for raising nuclear / quality concerns?
AGREE OR STRONGLY AGREE 1999 1/2002 8/2002 NA NA 72%
NA NA 61%
NA NA Yes - 7%
(26)
NA NA Yes - 12%
(46)
Survey Results - Mgmt Effectiveness in Survey Results - Mgmt Effectiveness in Detecting and Preventing Retaliation Detecting and Preventing Retaliation
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 61 The assessment recommendations have been translated into a SCWE Action Plan.
- The SCWE Action Plan has been incorporated into is a part of the Management and Human Performance Improvement Plan.
- Additional management resources from outside Davis-Besse will assist in implementing the Action Plan.
Willingness of Workers to Raise Concerns / Management Support for Raising Concerns:
- Perform 2d-level review of survey results to identify any SCWE challenged pockets within the organization.
- Expand Great Catch program.
- Publicize the survey results as a mechanism of change.
- Periodically repeat survey adding targeted questions.
- Continue four Cs meetings program.
- Include SCWE messages in Davis-Besse case study initiative.
Actions to Address Assessment Actions to Address Assessment Findings Findings
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 62
- ECP/Ombudsman:
- Implement industry best practice tools.
- Transform to proactive model.
- Assure no significant issues escape operability / reportability review (see Issue Management Process, below).
- Effectiveness in Resolving Issues Using Normal Processes:
- Complete Program Compliance Plan Review of CAP and implementing corrective actions.
- Create integrated issue management process to assure timely, coordinated, and effective response to issues received outside CAP.
Actions to Address Assessment Actions to Address Assessment Findings Findings
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 63
- Management Effectiveness in Detecting and Preventing Retaliation:
- Train Officers, Directors, Managers, and Supervisors to detect and avoid retaliation and chilling effects.
- Establish People Team to review significant adverse personnel actions (e.g., discipline above oral reprimand, reductions-in-force, etc.) to prevent retaliation and/or chilling effect, and to respond quickly to any SCWE issues that may arise.
- Establish Issue Management Process to ensure SCWE issues are handled consistently independent of where they are raised initially.
Actions to Address Assessment Actions to Address Assessment Findings Findings
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 64
- We Have Developed a SCWE Action Plan To Address the Assessment Results.
- The Action Plan is Underway.
Conclusion Conclusion
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 65
- Willingness of Employees to Raise Concerns /
Management Support for Raising Concerns.
- Communication of management expectations (applicable to all criteria).
- Supervisory and employee training.
- Effectiveness of the Ombudsman Program / ECP.
- ECP elements and implementation.
Success Criteria and NRC SCWE Success Criteria and NRC SCWE Attributes Attributes
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 66
- Managements Effectiveness in Resolving Issues Using Normal Processes.
- The Corrective Action Program.
- Roles and responsibilities of management in resolving employee concerns.
- Allegations raised outside CAP (NRC, HR, ECP).
- Self assessments.
- Managements Effectiveness in Detecting and Preventing Retaliation and Chilling Effect.
- Response to retaliation and related claims.
- Supervisory training on means to detect and prevent retaliation/chilling effect.
- Contractor responsibilities.
Success Criteria and NRC SCWE Success Criteria and NRC SCWE Attributes Attributes
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 67 Conclusions and Conclusions and Closing Comments Closing Comments Lew Myers Chief Operating Officer
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 68
- Completed Root Cause Report and Developed Focus Areas
- Developed Corrective Actions
- Include Corrective Actions into the Work Plan Conclusions on the Plan Conclusions on the Plan
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 69 Completed Actions Completed Actions
- New FENOC Management Team
- New Davis-Besse Leadership Team
- New Engineering Standards
- SCWE Survey
- Engineering Assessment Board Established
- Restart Overview Panel Established Implementation of the Plan Implementation of the Plan
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 70 Completed Actions (continued)
Completed Actions (continued)
- Operations Oversight Executive added
- Weekend Duty Requirements
- Project Review Committee Enhanced Oversight
- Corrective Action Review Board Enhanced Oversight
- ROP Meetings with Employees
- Augmentation of Engineering Implementation of the Plan Implementation of the Plan
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 71 Actions Already Underway Actions Already Underway
- 4-Cs Meetings
- Town Hall Meetings
- FENOC Resource Sharing
- ROP and EAB Reviews
- Equipment Upgrades
- Management Observations Implementation of the Plan Implementation of the Plan
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 72
- We are not where we want to be
- We are showing Improvement Signs of Improved Performance Signs of Improved Performance
September 18, 2002 September 18, 2002 73
- Comprehensive Plan in place
- We are Implementing the plan
- We are beginning to see some improvement
- Additional Improvements Needed Overall Conclusions Overall Conclusions