Text

TIP Action Plan, Revision 1
	ML023010176
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	06/10/2002
From:	; Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD)
To:	; NRC Region 4
References
	FOIA/PA-2003-0001
	Download: ML023010176 (121)
	v • d • e

TIP A*

)N PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Operational Excellence Work Package/Online Schedule Development Purpose/Accountability 5.2.5.1 2.1.1 (2.1.3, 1.2.4)

November 2002 Bill Macecevic Bill Macecevic The Work Control Process is not effectively implemented.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. The Work Control Process is not effectively implemented due to a lack of organizational ownership, commitment, and support. (Action plan steps:1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9)

2. Roles, standards, expectations, and Infrastructure for the Work Control Process are not adequately developed. (Action plan steps: 1, 2, 6, 10)

3. Lack of alignment in priorities between the Work Control Process (Maintenance Work Management) and the Engineering Work Management activities. (Action plan steps: 3, 4, 7, 11)

4. Package status is not effectively communicated In order to identify and resolve restraints. (Action plan steps: 2, 3, 9)

Page 1 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 APPROVAL!,***

I,

TIP At,,,. APLAN DISCUSSION:

CNS is weak in the organizational discipline of planning and execution of plans. In general, activities are not well planned.

Existing planning and scheduling systems have been Ineffective. Management has fostered an environment In which production and work accomplishment has usually been given the first priority with pressure on the staff to achieve results with minimal delay. This statement Is directly out of the 1994 CNS Diagnostic Self-Assessment and can be characterized as being generally representative of current performance. It Is clear from the recent evaluations that the Work Control Process is not effectively implemented due to a lack of organizational ownership, commitment, and support. Recent.

reports clearly Identify problems with engineering work management, even after the implementation of an engineering work management tool In 1999/2000. Areas of continued weakness include:

° Differing priorities between the Work Control Process (Maintenance Work Management) and the Engineering Work Management efforts. Evidence of planning and prioritization silos.

°.Work Week Directors have little or no clout/authority to ensure activities for Work Week preparation and implementation are, being actively pursued.

The Work Control Process has been benchmarked and changed after initial Introduction. Current assessments (since 1999) Indicate the problems are not with the defined process but accountability and reinforcement of the process.

Roles, standards, expectations, and infrastructure for the Work Control Process are not adequately developed or detailed to allow for applicable supervision to reinforce the process. For example, a work package does not have one clear owner who is responsible for driving the package through the process. Instead, collective ownership of the packdge as it is handed off through the process is expected.

Communication of package status routinely only occurs at the scheduled "T" meetings. No communications expectatibns are established outside of these meetings. Thus restraints are recognized late and hand offs missed.

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of the work planning and scheduling process is clearly defined and understood throughout the organization.

Specific organizatlonal and Individual roles and responsibilities for work package and schedule preparation activities have Page 2 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

been explicitly defined Including specifically who will be held accountable for the timeliness, completion and accuracy of an individual work package and for the work week schedule. Individuals who are accountable have the authority to get the job done. The station effectively utilizes the On-line Scheduling Process to aggressively fix degraded plant equipment.

Preventive and Predictive Maintenance is completed on time and effectively minimizes unplanned corrective maintenance.

1 Develop controls to ensure the rigorous Procedure 0.40.1 revised.

Implementation of the 12-week rolling system J. McMahan 05/02 09/02 See attached for window scheduling process currently defined by our recommended controls.

procedures.

2 Define single' point of accountability for an Individual Appropriate Procedures work package. Revise procedure and communicate K. Talbott 05/02 07/02 revised to reflect this new expectations and requirements to staff accountability.

3 Establish a periodic work package accountability Weekly status report to status meeting to review status of all Work Packages K. Talbott 05/02 09/02 Work Control Manager not yet Ready for Work Identifying all packages with outstanding restraints, Individuals responsible for resolution of restraint, expected date of resolution, week work task Is scheduled In.

4 Ensure roles and responsibilities of various All appropriate procedures Individuals / groups involved In the development of K. Talbott 05/02 09/02 revised work order packages are clearly defined and procedurilized, 5

Review the Work Week Director roles and All appropriate procedures responsibilities and revise procedures as necessary.

J. McMahan 05/02 09/02 (0.40, 0.40.1) revised to reflect this accountability.

6 Develop a priorltizaton and decision making tool to All appropriate procedures Improve the consistency of priorltization and

3. McMahan 06/02 08/02 revised screening of work orders.

I I

I Page 3 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 TIPA A-N PLAlN

TIP AL*k..-N PLAN 7

Map the work control process with key implementers All appropriate procedures In the process (planning, engineering, shops, supply B. Macecevic 06/02 09/02 revised chain, operations, work control) identified with roles and responsibilities defined.

8 Develop or modify Performance Indicators as S. Woerth 06/02 09/02 Adequate performance Necessary.

Indicators available to monitor effectiveness of changes being made in the WCD 9

Evaluate current Work Control Organization and Work Control roles and make changes to Improve accountability.

B. Macecevic 05/02 09/02 responsibilities, standards and accountabilitles are procedurilized and communicated to staff.

10 Revise appropriate procedures to allow support more All appropriate procedures effective use of Spot Maintenance.

J. McMahan 05/02 07/02 revised and change management performed.

11 Establish a 12 Month Event Calendar to allow for B. Macecevic 06/02 09/02 12-month event calendar Improvements In Integrated station scheduling.

and process for updating established.

12 Effectiveness Review B. Macecevic 10/02 11/02 Report based off PI data.

Page 4 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 I

I

TM(;E LANI PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

S 0

0 S

0 T-9 through T-0 Schedule Stability.

Package Not Ready Cause Code Trend Graphs (TBD-to be developed)

Average age of open Work Packages Total Online Maintenance Backlog (CM & Elective)

Past Due/Overdue PM Report RESOURCE RE*UIREMENTS:

To Be Determined for Revision 2.

(Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet which must be filled out)

Page 5 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Chanye:

Action Plan 5.2.5.1 - Work Package/Online Schedule Development Purpose/Accountability

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 4

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1 M

More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 M

More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 M

More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 2

3. What training is required for this change?

No training is required......................

Score 0 Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1 0

Classroom training for I department/people from several disciplines Score 2 Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3 Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 1

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

0 Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

& The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3 0

The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 3

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another.....

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4 Page 6 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

"TIP ACTION PLAN 3

Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 7 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

6.

0 0

2 5

20

TIPACL PELAN Operational Excellence Work Package/Online Schedule Development ACTION PLAN TITLE: Completeness/accuracy/timeliness ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

5.2.5.2 WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:.2.1.2 (1.2.4,.2.1.3, 2.3.2)

COMPLETION DATE:

November 2002 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

Ken Talbott FOCUS AREA OWNER:

Bill Macecevic A

VI.

APPROVAL:

Z PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Maintenance planning has been ineffective in producing consistent, quality Work Packages (WP's) in timeframes necessary to allow recipients to become familiar with the work prior to performing It.

C6USAL FACTORS:

1. Expectations for the development of quality work packages have not been clearly established. (Action plan steps:

1, 2).

2. Prioritization of work activities is inconsistent between organizations supporting the development of Work Packages., (Action plan steps: 4, 6).

3. Management oversight has not been effective in reinforcing requirements. (Action plan steps: 2, 3, 8).

DISCUSSION:

Many cases exist in which weaknesses in the quality, completeness, and timeliness of Maintenance WP's have contributed to inefficiencies and scheduling problems that unnecessarily challenge the operators. Maintenance Planning weaknesses Page 1 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

TIPACAL,ILAN have existed since 1994 and still exist In 2002. Additionally, weaknesses In Maintenance Department personnel pre-job preparations for pending work have adversely impacted the schedule, as well as work quality and task duration.

OBJECTIVE:

Station personnel systematically, rigorously, and consistently apply and Incorporate human error prevention techniques in all aspects of work planning and execution. Individuals who will be held accountable for the timeliness, completion and accuracy of an Individual work packages have been Identified. Restraints are clearly Identified in work packages minimizing delays and schedule perturbations. Packages are detailed enough for qualified personnel to consistently and properly execute the work plan, and Include contingency plans for possible scope Increases. Restraints such as rigging evaluations, pending procedure changes, scaffolding requests, component location, and support department requirements are known and resolved prior to the package being defined as shop ready. Operating Experience is systematically, rigorously, and consistently Incorporated Into work planning and scheduling activities.

. Page 2 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 Maintenance and Work Planning develop prototype Planner Desk Guides "Quality Work Packages." Include quality checklist in K. Talbott 05/02 09/02 revised to reflect the "model".

model Work Package format and Quality Indicator.

2 Develop user package feedback process, and K. Talbott 05/02 09/02 Work Packages evaluated response process.

by Planners and Customers as meeting or exceeding defined quality standards.

Feedback form developed and incorporated Into applicable procedures, 3

Establish clear standard regarding types of work Appropriate procedures order packages that should be jointly walked down K. Talbott 06/02 08/02 revised, and change by the planner and the craftsman (and / or Engineer)

I management completed.

'Na, MAW DrAT fromom..

TIP ACI.

.4 PLAN 4

Evaluate the Minor Maintenance process and the Appropriate procedures definition of Minor Maintenance. Revise procedure as K. Talbott 05/02 08/02 revised, and change appropriate to maximize effectiveness of this management completed.

process.

5 Develop or modify Performance Indicators as S. Woerth 06/02 09/02 Adequate performance Necessary.

Indicators available to monitor effectiveness of changes being made In the WCD 6

Establish standard for "non-emergent" work not J. McMahon 06/02 09/02 Appropriate procedures "shop ready" at T-5, which determines the best revised, and change organizational response to this situation management completed.

7 Evaluate Planning Staff resources and if required, Adequate planners hire additional planners.

K.Talbott 06/02 09/02 available to plan Work I

_Packages.

8 Weekly package status meetings as defined In Action Cross reference Item to Plan 5.2.5.1 plan 5.2.5.1 9

Effectiveness Review B. Macecevic 10/02 11/02 Report based off PI data.

Page 3 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP MA,, : PLAN PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

1) Craft initiated Package Feedback Quality Indicator (TBD-to be developed)

2) Work Package Status Meeting results indicator (TBD-to be developed)

3) Number of notifications written due to Inadequate package quality (TBD-to be developed)

RESOURCE REOUIREMENTS:

To Be Determined for Revision 2.

(Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 4 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

"TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.5.2 - Work Package/Online schedule Development Completeness/Accuracy/Timeliness

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 3

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and

ongoing costs)?

Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1 More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 More than $300,000........................

Score 4

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 2

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

"* Reduces work.............................

Score 1

"* No new work..............................

Score 2

"* Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3

"* Adds new work............................

Score 4 Page 5 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 I

Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 6 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 TIP ACTION PLAN 4

6.

7.

0 3

14

TIP ACYL JPLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

Operational Excellence Work Package Implementation Work Practices 5.2.6.1 2.2.1 (1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 2.4.1)

December 2002 Neal Wetherell Neal Wetherell PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Work practices have not consistently met expectations.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. Management oversight has not been effective In addressing improper work practices. (Action plan steps: 2,3,4,5)

2. Inappropriate reliance on "sk/ll-of-the-craft'; for performing maintenance work. (Action plan step 10)

3. Formal pre-job briefs are not consistently conducted.(Action plan step 1)

DISCUSSION:

The 1994 CNS Diagnostic Self-Assessment Identified poor work practices, such as Industrial safety Issues, inappropriate Implementation of procedures, improper or unsuccessful repairs to equipment, low housekeeping standards, and an unacceptable level of human performance errors. In addition, In some cases there has been an over-reliance on "skill-of-the-craft" for performing maintenance work. Assessments and evaluations conducted over the next several years, continued to identify the same types of Issues. Development of formal pre-job briefs, Including use of a checklist, Is the expectation of management. However, even with formal pre-job briefs, management expectations and standards are not being enforced.

Page 1 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 APPROVAL:

At If APPROVAL:

A I

I

TEPA

'NPELAN Objective:

Work practices at CNS Improved to meet management expectations. Station personnel systematically, rigorously, and consistently apply and Incorporate human error prevention techniques In all aspects of work planning and execution. Operating Experience Is systematically, rigorously, and consistently Incorporated Into work planning and scheduling activities, outage preparations, and training programs. CNS experience Is provided to the Industry In a timely manner. The Line Managers own and effectively apply the management and peer observation programs. Line Managers actively evaluate and report on observation quality, problems Identified, and actions taken to Improve performance.

r-sliDIIsnr-uub COIrIt or oUpriburblII/1-,imW Leaders, to Improve the effectiveness Pre lob briefs Revised procedures as necessary reflecting any new controls.

2 Review Principles and Standards Manual and Wetherell 6/02 8/02 Manual reviewed and revise as necessary revised as necessary 3

Shop Supervisors review key performance Supervisors 7/02 10/02 Tailgate sheets standards each week from one principle In documenting presentation the Principles and Standards Manual.

of material (Interim step until formal training completed) 4 Develop training, based on Maintenance Christensen 8/02 10/02 Training developed Department's Principles and Standards Manual 5

Train the Maintenance work force on the Christensen 10/02 12/02 Lesson plan developed performance standards Included In the based on Principles &

Maintenance Department Principles and Standards Manual.

Standards Manual Training conducted 6

Walkdown all systems and housekeeping Supervisors 6/02 9/02 Walkdown database areas per MWP 5.0.8. Within the next 6 established and all months Manager and or Assistant Manager walkdowns completed by will tour with each area owner to Impart due date correct standards Page 2 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

1IP AC. -JN PLAN 7

Evaluate where in the T-12 process to J. Smith 8/02 10/02 Process revised as assign craft ownership of the work activity.

necessary and Revise process as necessary and Implement Implemented the change 8

Establish Clear standards, expectations and Macecevic Per Plan Per Plan 5.2.5.2 Per Plan 5.2.5.2 ownership for work package development.

5.2.5.2 This should Include product content and quality. It should also clearly define roles and responsibilities for package development 9

Implement maintenance observation Departmental HP 9/02 12/02 Department observation program.

Coordinator program Implemented 10 Develop a procedure Improvement plan to C. Markert 7/02 10/02 Procedure Improvement address "skill of the craft" concerns, plan that Includes:

Standard for procedure detail and level of knowledge, list of procedures to be revised, schedule for revision, personnel responsible for revision.

11 Develop Performance Indicators JSmith/A.Scala 7/02 10/02 Performance Indicators 12 Effectiveness Review N. Wetherell 10/02 12/02 Report based off PI data PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

Percentage of jobs completed by team assigned in T schedule.

Percentage of Work Packages completed by craft that performed walkdown

Quarterly MWP 5.0.8 Inspection Status

Departmental Event Free Clock

Rework Page 3 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP AL

'N PLAN RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

To be determined for Revision 2.

(Attached is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet which must be filled out)

Page 4 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

.7 lll

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.6.1 - Work Package Implementation - Work Practices

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one Supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 3

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1 a-More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 0

More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 1

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 2

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 1

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4 3

Page 5 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 6 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

6.

0 0

S 0

0 3

13

IP AM!

PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE: Operational Excellence FOCUS AREA:

Work Package Implementation ACTION PLAN TITLE: First Line Supervision ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

5.2.6.2 WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

2.2.2 (1.1.2, 1.1.4, 1.2.1, 1.2.2)

COMPLETION DATE:

December 2003 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

Neal Wetherell FOCUS AREA OWNER:

Neal Wetherell PROBLEM STATEMENT:

APPROVAL:

,l'1 7/' '

APPROVAL:

A Supervision has hot been effective or consistent in enforcing standards for the planning and performance of work.

CAUSAL iFACORS:

1. Roles and responsibilities were not clearly defined. (Action plan steps 2, 3, 4, 5)

2. Management does not effectively reinforce performance expectations. (Action plan steps 1, 2, 6, 7, 8)

3. Knowledge and skills of Supervisors/Crew Leaders needs improvement (Action plan steps 2, 4, 5)

DISCUSSION:

Several assessments, ranging from the 1994 CNS Diagnostic Self Assessment, through more recent evaluations, indicate continuing problems with the effectiveness and consistency of supervision over the planning and performance of work.

Performance problems include Inadequate supervisory support of the work schedule, weak and untimely review of work products prior to their issuance, lack of verification of training and qualifications of staff prior to assigning them to specific tasks, and Infrequent monitoring of work in the field. In addition, when Supervisors/Crew Leaders are observing work in the field, they are not typically focused on mentoring their personnel and ensuring that appropriate work practices and behaviors are being used.

Page 1 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP AL -.JN PLAN Objective:

Supervisors and Crew Leaders actively coach, mentor, recognize and reinforce high standards and expectations for personnel safety, proper work practices, and Incorporation of human error reduction techniques. An effective work planning and scheduling process enables First Line Supervisors to provide adequate oversight of pre-job briefs and field activities. Station personnel systematically, rigorously, and consistently apply and incorporate human error prevention techniques in all aspects of work planning and execution. Line Managers own and effectively apply the management and peer observation programs. Line Managers actively evaluate and report on observation quality, problems identified, and actions taken to Improve performance.

R______

A A

YN WA#ýO' 0.o O~AtD WE~NDAI OW111 q II, A"1 1

Eliminate/redistribute the work load on the Wetherell 7/02 11/02 Document detailing actual Crew Leaders and Supervisors so that they can transition of work from focus on leading, coaching, mentoring, and Crew Leaders to specific correcting behaviors in the field. (Use recently Individuals.

developed Roles & Responsibilities document (RCR 2000-1042) found In the Principles &

Standards Manual) 2 Schedule and conduct follow up INPO First Wetherell 6/02 6/03 Assist Visit Report with Line Supervisor Assist Visit Action Plan 3

Plan and schedule select Crew Leaders to Markert 6/02 12/03 Personnel scheduled for attend the INPO First Line Supervisors meetings. Trip Reports Working Groups Meetings Include recommendations for Improvements 4

Develop Field Intervention Training for Crew Christenson 06/02 06/03 Approved Lesson Plan for Leaders and Supervisors as part of the all Maintenance Crew Maintenance Supervisor Training Program. Use Leaders and Supervisors industry best as models for training I development 5

Implement field Intervention training Christenson 06/03 12/03 Training complete and documented Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

*J

TIPA%,

,N PLAN 6

Establish method for Maintenance Markert 7/02 10/02 Manager Field Observation Manager/Assistant Manager to Reports documenting observe/evaluate field observations conducted coaching and mentoring of by Supervisor/Crew Leader as part of monthly Maintenance Supervision.

field observation requirements 7

Establish controls to ensure field observations J. Smith 7/02 10/02 Field Observation Report standards (number/month & quality) are being meet.

8 Establish controls and method of validating J. Smith 6/02 8/02 Controls and method of that training and qualifications are adequately validation are In place being verified 9

Develop Performance Indicators J. Smith 7/02 9/02 Performance Indicators developed 10 Effectiveness review Wetherell 11/02 12/02 Report based off PI data.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

0 0

Field observations performed, by Individual, per week - TBD Quality score for Field Observation Reports, by Individual - TBD RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

To be determined for Revision 2.

1 (Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet which must be filled out)

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.6.2 - Work Package Implementation - First Line Supervision

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 2

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no dassroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 2

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4 Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

6.

0 7.

0 1

8 a

TIP A O)N PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Operational Excellence Work Package Implementation Technical Support/Lessons Learned 5.2.6.3 2.2.3 (2.1.2, 2.3.2, 2.4.2)

December 2002 Neal Wetherell Neal Wetherell APPROVAL:

k APPROVAL:

Lack of technical support and poor preplanning has resulted In untimely completion of work.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. Lesson learned are not consistently captured and translated into appropriate documents to improve future performance. (Action plan step 1)

2. Standards and expectations for technical support in the field has not been clearly established or communicated.

(Action plan steps: 5, 6,)

DISCUSSION:,

Ineffective work implementation has occurred at CNS due, in part, to poor planning and lack of technical support.

Additionally, lessons learned from both Internal and external experience have not been consistently applied.

This action plan has significant crossover with 5.2.5.1 and 5.2.5.2. Planning of work packages should consider lessons learned from past work activities and industry experience. Adequate technical support also needs to be provided during planning and execution of work. Frequently this information Is not captured during and after the execution of work and therefore, not considered during the planning of new work.

Page 1 of 5 Revislon 1 6/7/02

'K

TIPA'. ;,ON PLAN Obiective:

Restraints are clearly Identified, where necessary, in work packages to minimize delays In work and schedule

.perturbations. Restraints such as rigging evaluations, pending procedure changes, scaffolding requests, component location, and support department requirements are resolved prior to issuance of the work package. Lessons learned from activities are captured and translated into appropriate documents to Improve future performance. Experience is systematically, rigorously, and consistently Incorporated into work activities. Technical support is provided in the field to resolve issues and support the timely completion of work activities.

'41 EAM a

i 0,047 1/

Evaluae a E

Evaluate and revise appropriate procedures to

f.

Smith 7/02 11/02 Evaluate and revise ensure that lessons learned are captured In appropriate procedures for specific MWR type work packages. Also post job critiques and have establish a process that provides feedback to feedback mechanism In the appropriate organizations place 2

Establish controls in the design change Revise Procedure 3.4 to process to require craft Input prior to Kevin Jones 6/02 9/02 reflect controls completing conceptual design 3

Develop feedback Indicator

.. Smith 9/02 11/02 Feedback Indicator developed and in place 4

Crew Leaders/Job Leads walk down job sites

3. Smith Revise procedures as for equipment Integrity and system cleanliness 6/02 9/02 necessary and ensure work prior to release of clearance order and work packages require sign off order closeout 5

Actions to revise O-CNS-22 to Include the roles and responsibilities of the Maintenance Fadil Dlya Per 5.3.1 Per 5.3.1 Per 5.3.1 Engineering Group and ensure the expectations for coverage during field work for System Engineers Is Included in Action Plan S.3.1 Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TP A

'3N PLAN 6

Establish expectations for Program Engineers 9/02 field support during fieldwork on program Jim Salisbury 6/02 0-CNS-22 revised components/systems 7

Establish expectations for Design Engineers 6/02 Revise Procedure 3.4 to field support during design development and Kevin Jones 9/02 reflect expectations Implementation on assigned modifications/design changes 8

Effectiveness Review Wetherell 11/02 12/02 Report based off PI data.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

0 Develop a feedback performance Indictor Number of field changes to designs changes during Implementation' RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

To be determined for Revision 2.

(Attached is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.6.3 - Work Package Implementation - Technical Support/Lessons Learned

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 3

2. What will this change cost to imollement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 1

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 2

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score I

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, Integrated processes Score 5 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN No new work..............................

Distributes work from one group to another......

Adds new work.........................

Score 2 Score 3 Score 4 0

0 0

6.

0 0

is 0

Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 4

0 3

18 I

TIP2 AC qPLA PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE Corrective action, Operating Experience, Self-Assessment Improve Reinforcement of CAP Standards and Expectations 5.2.7.1 3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4 02/2004 Roman Estrada Jim Hutton High standards and'expectations related to the Corrective Action Program at CNS have not been consistently reinforced to provide a greater level of assurance that CAP is utilized to achieve excellent station performance.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

l. CAP standards and expectations are not consistently documented and disseminated to the CNS staff. (Action plan steps: 1,4)

2. Training on CAP performance issues has not consistently utilized line management to reinforce standards and expectations.(Action plan step 5)

3. CAP processes (performance indicator review meetings, screening of notifications, trending) that evaluate station performance issues do not always include line management/supervision to ensure that issues are fully understood and corrected. (Action plan steps: 7,8)

4. Ownership of CAP performance is sometimes perceived to be the responsibility of the Performance Analysis Department rather than the department managers. This results in lack of understanding and ineffective corrective actions to resolve CAP performance issues. (Action plan steps: 1,4)

Page 1 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 APPROVAL/

.&Iw-ý

,'IP'AC MNPLAN OBJECTIVE:

This action plan will improve management's ability to effectively communicate and reinforce CAP standards and expectations.

Actions apply to management, supervision, team leads and plant personnel. Actions are tactical in nature and ultimately result in focused reinforcement of CAP standards and expectations by NPPD management. Success of this plan will be evident by improved ownership/oversight by management. This will result in the use of the Corrective Action Program as the primary site tool to improve station performance versus being considered a regulatory compliance tool..

Revise procedures to eliminate Pre-Screen Committee and rely on Management Team of CRG to screen Notifications

2.

Revise CARB charter to focus CARB on R. Estrada Completed Revised CARB Charter providing and oversight role in the CAP process

3.

Have Site VP provide discussion session with R. Estrada 06/2002 07/2002 Completed tailgate site management that summarizes CAP Program attendance forms.

infrastructure elements, standards/expectations of its use, a clear understanding of when a problem should be entered into the CAP process, and reiteration of not utilizing other tracking mechanisms outside of CAP to resolve conditions adverse to quality.

4.

Discuss purpose of CAP and CAP standards and M. Coyle 07/2002 12/2002 Communicate Standards and expectations during two all hands meetings in Expectations at all hands 2002 meetings.

Page 2 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 t

TIP A*

NPLAN

5.

Present a summary of the CAP TIP plan to the R. Estrada 07/2002 09/2002 Write CAP Tip summary and B-Can group and provide a talking paper for the issue talking paper. Follow B-Can group to share with their department..

up meeting to receive feedback.

6.

Continue reinforcement of CAP standards and J. Hutton 01/2003 12/2003 expectations in the year 2003 by:

"* Issue a quarterly talking paper to managers 0 Issue talking paper and to allow discussions of current CAP completed tailgate forms performance issues and good practices

"* Discuss CAP standards and expectations at

Talking points from all two all hands meetings hands meetings

"* Attend a B-Can meeting to discuss CAP Write and issue talking performance trends with B-Can members paper.

7.

Ensure that the CAP training given in the year J. Hutton, 06/2002 12/2002 Document kick-off through 2002 includes plans to involve Senior Managers R. Gardner, management observation and Line Managers in the conduct of CAP N. Wetherall, specific training. This should be accomplished T. Chard, Documented effectiveness by ensuring that line management or senior J. Ranalli, review manager:

K. Jones, 0 Reinforces CAP standards through F. Diya management kickoff sessions for specific 2002 CAP training

Conducts training effectiveness reviews of 2002 CAP training

8.

Revise procedures to institute CAP R. Estrada 02/2002 09/2002 Revised procedure and trend/effectiveness reviewers in each department workshop training completed that will interface with CAP evaluator for CAP trends and effectiveness reviews. Provide workshop training to the CAP trend/effectiveness reviewers on the procedures, expectations and tools.

Page 3 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP AC,

N PLAN PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

CAP Open Items CAP Efficiency CAP Quality Submittals CAP Backlog CAP Self Identification SCR Quality RCR Quality SCR Recurrence CAP Root Cause Effectlveness(%)

CAP Items > 1 Year Old CAP Evaluations Average Age CAP Actions Average Age Page 4 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

9.

Revise CARB Charter to establish quarterly R. Estrada 8/2002 12/2002 Revised CARB Charter report out meetings with CARB to discuss departmental CAP trends

10.

Revise current monthly Management D. Kunsemiller 07/2002 12/2002 Revised monthly Performance Review meetings to include performance indicator department specific presentations of actions package that includes required to improve substandard performance department specific indicators presentations for CAP

11.

Establish a process improvement team of R. Estrada 03/2002 12/2002 Procedure revisions that Managers and Supervisors to identify and implement identified process implement short term process improvements in improvements the areas of trending, common cause analysis, use of apparent cause and feedback to the originator

12.

Perform an interim and final effectiveness

0. Olson 01/2003 02/2004 Documented review per the review of this action plan using the guidance requirements of 0.5.CAER provided by the 0.5.CAER procedure.

0 0

IPAL NPLN CRG PIR Quality Management Ownership Attribute Matrix Produced Quarterly RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS; Site Management (all at 10 hours1.157407e-4 days 0.00278 hours 1.653439e-5 weeks 3.805e-6 months a piece)

Site Management (specifically listed at 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months a piece)

B-CAN Network Team (10 hour1.157407e-4 days 0.00278 hours 1.653439e-5 weeks 3.805e-6 months s/member)

CAP Evaluators (80 hours9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months )

Trend Evaluators (10 hours1.157407e-4 days 0.00278 hours 1.653439e-5 weeks 3.805e-6 months a piece)

Effectiveness Reviewer (40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months )

(Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 5 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.7.1 - Corrective Action, Operating Experience, Self-Assessment Improve Reinforcement of CAP Standards and Expectations

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 5

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

0 Less than $5,000..........................

Score I 0

More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 0

More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 3

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 4

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, Integrated processes Score 5 5

Page 6 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4 4

Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score I The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 0

3 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 7 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 a

0 a

0 S

0 7.

24

ThPAL'

' PLEAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE Corrective Action, Operating Experience, Self-Assessment Root Cause ACTIONPLAN NUMBER:

5.2.7.2 WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

3.1.2 COMPLETION DATE:

10/2003 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

Roman Estrada FOCUS AREA OWNER:

Jim Hutton PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Apparent Cause Evaluations and Root Cause Investigations have been Identified, since 1994, as being Inadequate and continue to be Identified as a major contributor to the Ineffective Implementation of the CAP at CNS.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. Ineffective extent of conditions performed In the root cause process has resulted In recurrence of Issues. (Action plan steps: 2,6,7,8)

1. Corrective actions are not assigned to all causal factors to further ensure that problems are resolved. (Action plan steps: 2,6,7,8)

3. Training related to the fundamental building blocks of the CNS CAP process has been inconsistently applied. (Action plan steps: 2,4,8)

OBJECTIVE:

The action will determine the knowledge and skill level related to the Apparent and Root Cause portion of the CAP process. The results of this effort will be used to develop and or modify training to be presented to the targeted audience. In addition, the reduction of Root Cause Investigators will Improve product consistency and Quality. Success of this plan will be Improved quality In RCR and SCR evaluations and reduction of recurrences of root cause Issues.

Page 1 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 APPRAVAL!

APPROVAL:

TIP-At iN PLAN UE ON

... 'A IN I PR ELLW AL 1

Reduce Root Cause Investigators from,"200 to 50 to Roman Estrada 1/2002 Completed New list established and Improve consistency.

maintained for 50 root cause evaluators 2

Perform a training assessment (SAT) to determine Tim Donovan 3/02 4/02 Completed training any knowledge/skill weaknesses with respect to the assessment detailing Corrective Action Process (CAP).

knowledge/skill areas where training needs to be developed.

3 Revise the procedure guidance with respect to the Roman Estrada 06/02 08/02 Revised process for apparent cause report format to differentiate It from apparent cause format.

a root cause report format.

4 Include into the content of CAP training the process Tim Donovan 05/02 07/02 Revised training material.

for development of good problem statements.

5 Promulgate the Quality Indicator Report to the line Roman Estrada 06/02 08/02 Develop PI and Issue to departments. This report provides a quality Index by Departments.

department regarding the quality of their performance of CAP Investigations 6

Institute RC/ACE Trend/Effectiveness Reviewers In Roman Estrada Linked to Refer to Action 7 of Action each department that will Interface with the CAP Action 7 of Plan 5.2.7.1 evaluator for CAP trends and effectiveness reviews.

Action Plan Link to 5.2.7.1 action #7.

5.2.7.1.

7 Reduce Root Cause Investigators from 50 to 30 to Roman Estrada 12/2002 06/2003 30 Root Cause Improve consistency.

Investigators providing consistent Corrective Actions that Include Extent of Conditions.

8 Deliver Training to target population.

Tim Donovan 06/2002 12/2002 Delivered training to targeted audience.

9 Conduct quarterly meetings with the Root Cause Roman Estrada 10/2002 10/2003 Documentation of Investigators to share lessons learned, meetings held.

Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIPA.

ý,N PLAN PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

SCR Quality SCR Recurrence Cap Root Cause Effectiveness (%)

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

0 Training Instructors (400 hours0.00463 days 0.111 hours 6.613757e-4 weeks 1.522e-4 months ) 0 CAP evalauators (400 hours0.00463 days 0.111 hours 6.613757e-4 weeks 1.522e-4 months ) 0 Root Cause Investigators ( 80 hours9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months a piece)

(Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.7.2 - Corrective Action, Operating Experience, Self-Assessment - Root Cause

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 4

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 3

3. What training is required for this change?

No training is required......................

Score 0 Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1 Classroom training for I department/people from several disciplines Score 2 Classroom training for multiple departments......

Score 3 a

Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 3

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1 The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3 The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 I --

TIP ACTION PLAN Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another.....

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4

6.

0 0

7.

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Low:

Moderate:

High:

2 3

17 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 a

TIP AC', IIPLN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE Corrective Action, Operating Experience, Self-Assessment Improve Utilization of OER 5.2.7.3 3.5.2 01/2004 Roman Estrada Roman Estrada CNS is effective in providing Operating Experience topics each day, to the Plan of the Day Meeting and to the Daily Manager's Meeting. However, the line supervision and line workers are not always sensitive to the benefit on 'taking on' the OE lesson.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. There is not a consistent follow-up by line management to ensure that Operating Experience is utilized in the field by the CNS work force. (Action plan steps: 1,3,4)

2. There is not consistent coaching and mentoring by line management to improve the ability of the CNS work force to benefit from Operating Experience lessons. (Action plan steps: 1,4)

OBJECT-IE:

This action plan provides specific actions to improve the ability of CNS to internalize the use of Operating Experience. Success will be evident when the work groups at CNS use Operating Experience information as a way to perform routine work proactively versus having it provided to them by their supervision.

Page 1 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

-W.

ýý

TIAt.)N PLAN

~+WA A'

0

-i~w W

StoolQ VED~Ai "b,~V "11 Provide standards and expectations on use of D. Shrader 06/02 07/02 Talking paper for specified Operating Experience to Plant and Engineering managers and tailgate Management to be used in Improving Implementation provided to these and use of OE by their staffs managers

2.

Review a representative sample of work packages D.Shrader 07/2002 12/2002 Documented management Issued to the field and discuss Identified B. Delay observations on work Improvement areas with the work planners planning group

3.

Perform observations of use of OER in pre-Job briefs R. Gardner, 07/2002 12/2002 Documented management and performance of tasks and discuss Identified N. Wetherell, observations on areas of Improvement for utilization of OER with the T. Chard departments appropriate departments F. Dlya K. Jones J. Salisbury B. Macecevlk

4.

Perform quarterly follow-up observations of use OER R. Gardner, 01/2003 12/2003 Documented management In work planning, pre-Job briefs and performance of N. Wetherell, observations on tasks and discuss Identified areas of "good practices" T. Chard departments.

and areas for Improvement with the appropriate F. Dlya departments K. Jones J. Salisbury B. Macecevlk

5.

Benchmark OE program Implementation use to D. Shrader 08/02 12/02 Completed Trip Report validate if gaps In performance In this area are Improving towards Industry standards.

6.

Perform an effectiveness review of resolution Items R. Estrada 04/03 05/03 Documented review per with respect to ARI OE1-1 Issues from 2002 INPO the requirements of E&A report.

I 0.5.CAER

7.

.Perform an Interim and final effectiveness review on

0. Olson 01/2003 01/2004 Documented review per the Internalization of OER at CNS using the 0.5.CAER the requirements of process 0.5.CAER

8.

Develop and Implement new Performance Indicator B. Delay 07/02 09/02 Performance Indicator to measure number of management observations on established use of OE.

Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

PA

!)N PLAN PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

Number of observations of OER use in the field performed per quarter (new Indicator)

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

Selected Site Managers ( 250 hours0.00289 days 0.0694 hours 4.133598e-4 weeks 9.5125e-5 months a piece) 0 OE Group ( 200 hours0.00231 days 0.0556 hours 3.306878e-4 weeks 7.61e-5 months )

Effectiveness Reviewer ( 80 hours9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months )

PAD Manager (40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months )

(Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.7.3 Corrective Action, Operating Experience, Self-Assessment - Improve utilization of OER

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 4

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

Less than $5,000...........................

Score 1 More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 a

More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

& More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 2

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2 Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3 Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 1

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, Integrated processes Score 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score I No new work..............................

Score 2

° Distributes work from one group to another.....

Score 3

& Adds new work............................

Score-4 Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN

-2 Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Low:

Moderate:

High:

3

6.

7 a

7.

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 18 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 Score 5

-5

FOCUS AREA 5.2.8 FUNCTION.I

'SERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

KEITH WRIGHT FOCUS AREA OWNER:

LAURIE SCHILLING PROBLEM STATEMENT:

CNS Vendor Manuals are not easy to use and are poorly organized.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1.

A cultural acceptance of long-standing vendor manual problems. (Action Plan 5.1.1.4, Action Steps 5.1.1.4.4)

2.

A lack of priority in establishing accurate and reliable vendor Information. (Action Steps 3, 4, 5,6, 7)

3.

A lack of dedicated resources. (Action Step 3, 8)

OBJECTIVE:

CNS Vendor Manuals baselined, scanned and available for online viewing.

Page 1 ofW%

Revision 1 6/7/02 OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE FUNCTIONS & SERVICES (OPEl8.0)

VENDOR MANUAL UPGRADE PROGRAM 5.2.8.1 12/2004 APPROVAL:.*_*

/

..4 7/ JŽ'./.

APPROVAI(j,.

Ul~/ 8Ck I

I I

"T" "I" *T T"...............

FOCUS AREA 5.2.8 FUNCTIQN:.' iSERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN 1

Complete baselining of essential vendor manuals Keith Wright Complete Complete Essential manuals baselined.

2 Develop Performance Indicator(s)

Keith Wright 6/02 7/02 Performance Indicators developed 3

Obtain and Train Dedicated Resources Keith Wright 5/02 8/02 Personnel trained 4

Complete Scanning Process - Essential Vendor Keith Wright 8/02 4/03 Essential manuals scanned Manuals 5

Complete Baselining & Scanning Process - Risk Keith Wright 8/02 6/04 Risk Significant manuals Significant Vendor Manuals baselined & scanned 6

Complete Baselining & Scanning Process - Other Keith Wright 1/04 12/04 Other manuals basellned &

Vendor Manuals.

scanned 7

Develop a plan to address potential PM and Keith Wright 8/02 12/02 Plan developed vendor manual compatibility Issue.

8 Evaluate & obtain appropriate number of Keith Wright 9/04 12/04 Appropriate resources.

dedicated resources to ensure manuals are updated and maintained upon project completion.

9 Determine the appropriate ownership for the Keith Wright 9/04 12/04 Owning department vendor manuals upon prolect completion.

I Identified.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

Work Off Curves - TBD Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 ST

p T I

[

I I I

I I

=

FOCUS AREA,5,,8 FUNCTION-.

SERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

List specific resource requirements for the action plan.

0 Manpower, Internal, external, required skills and/or knowledge. Clerical resources will be assigned to the Vendor Manual Program until the completion of this project.

a Materials and Supplies. Tabs and dividers, already on hand or budgeted.

0 Equipment. None 0

Facilities. None (Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet, which must be filled out)

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 II

FOCUS AREA 5.2.8 FUNCTIONS & SERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.8.1 - Functions & Services - Vendor manual Upgrade Program

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 4

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1 More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 3

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Tr-ining consists of communication only, no dassroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 1

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 1

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

"* Reduces work.............................

Score 1

"* No new work..............................

Score 2

"* Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3

"* Adds new work............................

Score 4 1

Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

FOCUS AREA 5.2.8 FUNCTIONS & SERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3

6.

7 7.

TOTAL Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 0

1 11

FOCUS AREA 5.2.8 FUNCTIONs I.ERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE FOCUS AREA:

FUNCTIONS & SERVICES (OPE/8.0)

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

PROCEDURE CHANGE PROCESS ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

5.2.8.3 COMPLETION DATE:

08/02 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

JAY SCHEVERMANAPRVL FOCUS AREA OWNER:

LAURIE SCHILLING APPROVP.

l.'

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

The existing procedure change process requires the unnecessary routing of many changes to SORC.

CAUSAL FACTOR; Unnecessary complexity of change process (Action Steps 4 and 8).

DISCUSSION:,

While many aspects of the procedure change process are necessary to ensure changes are of high quality and technically accurate, streamlining through adoption of, an Independent Qualified Reviewer (IQR) process, comparable to that being used by several successful nuclear facilities, will remove unnecessary delays from the process.

I An IQR process will provide for Individual high quality technical reviews, in place of SORC's formal committee review, of those procedure changes that do not involve 10CFR50.59 safety evaluations. Removal of SORC from the review process for these changes will reduce the processing time and complexity associated with procedure changes, allowing the workers to see their changes Implemented sooner. Additionally, SORC will be able to focus more attention on those changes that do affect nuclear safety.

OBJECTIVE:

Average procedure change processing time reduced.

_ Worker perception of process Improved.

SORC members and presenters with more time for other issues.

Page 1 of 4 Revision 1 6/7/02

FOCUS ARFA S.2.R FUNCTIONS'

!LFRVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN

""PACTIONWOWNER>W Ž TA.T1DATO**

- O W

'DDA'TE 7

r?^iT Develop procedure structure to support training J. Scheuerman Complete Complete Completed strawman.

development.

2 Develop process procedures.

J. Scheuerman Complete Complete Completed draft process procedures, 3

Approve training TQDs for IQR and IQA.

P. Leininger Complete Complete Completed IQR/IQA TQDs.

4 Develop and approve IQR Implementing J. Scheuerman 3/02 8/02, Completed procedure procedures.

revisions.

5 Develop and approve IQR QAPD revision.

L. Dewhirst 5/02 8/02, Completed QAPD revision..

6 Develop and approve IQR USAR revision.

D. VanDerKamp 5/02 8/02 Completed USAR revision.

7 Develop and Implement initial IQR training.

P. Leininger 3/02 8/02 Completed initial training.

8 Implement IQR process.

J. Scheuerman 8/02 8/02 Process Implemented.

9 Follow-on assessments.

J. Scheuerman 8/02 8/03 Assessment reports Issued.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

"* PI for PCR Processing Time Indicating if new process Is allowing for more timely review and approval of changes.

"* PI for PCRs in Process Indicating if number of changes are outpacing resources devoted to processing of changes.

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

All resources will be provided by Internal labor. No contractor assistance is planned, including Instructors for the various required training classes, Classroom space is available for necessary classes.

Team members Include:

Project Manager:

Project Sponsor:

Project Team:

Jay Scheuerman - Technical Support Supervisor Jim Hutton - Plant Manager Laurie Schilling - Administrative Services Manager Linda Dewhirst - Quality Assurance Audit Supervisor (TA)

Phil Leininger - Design Engineer (Acting Trainer)

Page 2 of 4 Revision 1 6/7/02 V V V V

W W*

WV VV V ww V w w

0

FOCUS AREA 5.2.8 FUNCTIONS & SERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.2.8.3 - Functions & Services - Procedure Change Process

1. How many people are affected by this change?

0 One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1 One department............................

Score 2 No more than four departments................

Score 3 More than four departments..................

Score 4 0

Most of the site population..................

Score 5 4

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4

3. What training is required for this change?

& No training is required......................

Score 0 0

Training consists of communication only, no dassroom Score 1 0

Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2 Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3 Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 3

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1 The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3 0

The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5

-3

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4 3

6. Will this Change require organizational changes?

Page 3 of 4 Revision 1 6/7/02 I

FOCUS AREA 5.2.8 FUNCTIONS & SERVICES - TIP ACTION PLAN No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5

7.

0 TOTAL 15 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 <

Score 21 to 30 Page 4 of 4 Revision 1 6/7/02 10 I

TERALC ILPLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

Problem Statement:

Equipment Excellence Improve Equipment Reliability System/Equipment Performance 5.3.1.1 3.4.2/3.4.3 December 2003 Terry Borgan Fadi Diya APPROVAL:,**,"_V APPROVAL:

Cooper Nuclear Station has repeatedly exhibited a failure to proactively address equipment issues. An unacceptably large percentage of resources are routinely expended to resolve equipment problems.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. Inability to effectively implement actions to correct impending deficient or restraining conditions. (Plan sections 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, & 4.0)

2. Lack of an integrated approach to preclude the initial failure and minimize recurrence. (Plan sections 2.0 & 3.0)

3. Cultural acceptance of long-standing equipment problems due to lack of organizational leadership which continually sets and reinforces high standards for equipment performance. (Plan sections 2.0 & 3.0)

Page 1 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIPAt.

!)N PLAN Discussion:

" Communication of management expectations regarding system and equipment performance has resulted in a "course change" regarding the approach to ensuring a high degree of system/equipment reliability. This is evident by recent actions taken, Including:

o Implementation of, and focus on, Top Ten Equipment Issues List.

o Concentrated efforts to fix equipment problems by formation and Implementation of System Health Teams.

o Revamping the Red Arrow and Operator Work Around Programs. (ref: COP 2.0.12, OPERATOR CHALLENGES) o Submitted changes to streamline Engineering Procedure 3.4, CONFIGURATION CHANGE CONTROL.

" More organizational focus has been placed on Improving equipment reliability. To obtain an improved level of long term system/equipment performance further efforts are required, including the Implementation of a dedicated Equipment Reliability Group.

Objective:

Completion of ongoing activities in support of achieving an Improved level of equipment reliability.

I 1.0 Upgradethe PM Program and reduce the PM backlog 1.1 Review the PM change process for M. Young 4/02 5/02 An effective working Improvement.

complete process.

1.2 Develop and update general PM task lists, M. Young 5/02 10/02 Commitment related task "commitment related".

lists updated.

1.3 Minimize the PM closeout backlog.

M. Young 3/02 9/02 PM closeout backlog I reduced to minimal.

Page 2 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

1.4 Develop a PM feedback process.

M. Young 7/02 9/02 Revised process that has an effective feedback loop.

1.5 Develop PM program performance T. Scala 7/02 9/02 Performance Indicators indicators, developed.

1.6 Update "non-commitment" related task lists.

M. Young 8/02 3/03 Non-commitment related I_ I_

II Itask lists updated.

2.0 Implement the "System Health Team" process 2.1 Conduct health team meetings on pilot T. Hottovy 3/02 6/02 Pilot system health team systems (AOG, CRD, RM, SA, and SW) to meetings held and lessons assess the system health team process.

learned documented and assess thesystemhealthteam process,_results communicated.

2.2 Revise System Health Team Desktop Guide T. Hottovy 6/02 7/02 Updated desktop guide to Include lessons learned from the that Incorporates both nof the pilot system health lessons learned from the implementation oft po spilot System Health teams, and identify Imbedded Operator Teams, and a section Work Arounds. (ref: Plan 5.2.1, Step 1.4) discussing resolution of Operator Work Arounds.

2.3 Implement revised system health team T. Hottovy 7/02 3/03 System health team process for remaining In-scope systems.

process Implemented for remaining In-scope systems.

2.4 Revise 0-CNS-22 to reflect roles and S. Domikaitis 7/02 10/02 0-CNS-22 revised.

responsibilities of Maintenance Engineering Group and ensure expectations for Engineering support of fieldwork are defined.

3.0 Perform a gap analysis to INPO AP-913 "Equipment Rellabili Process" 3.1 Form multi-discipline team to perform gap F. Diya 9/02 10/02 Team formed.

analysis.

Page 3 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 T'aP AtJ L A

"TIP A(,. UN PLAN Perform gap analysis. Areas of focus will be:

Scoping and Identification of Critical Components

Performance Monitoring

Corrective Action

PM Implementation

Continuing Equipment Reliability Improvement

Long-Term Planning and Life-Cycle Manaaement F. Diya 10/02 12/02 Gaps Identified.

3.3 Identify and assign actions to fix the F. Diya 1/03 2/03 Actions Identified and Identified gaps.

I I

assigned, 4.0 Develop and implement an equipment obsolescence program 4.1 Identify obsolescence Issues that can be H. Minassian 4/02 8/02 List of Issues which will addressed In the short term and will give relieve staff of burdens associated with equipment Immediate benefit to CNS. Interview obsolescence.

personnel to Identify obsolescence Issues.

obsolescence.

4.2 Prioritize obsolescence issues based on risk F. Diya 9/02 11/02 Prioritization of issues significance.

associated with equipment obsolescence completed and communicated to site.

4.3 Initiate and begin Implementation of K. Jones 12/02 12/03 Implementation of actions corrective actions for those high-risk associated with equipment obsolescence Issues identified.

obsolescence in accordance with prioritized list.

Page 4 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02 3.2

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

"* Control Room Deficiencies

"* Unplanned LCO Entries (TS)

"* Unplanned LCO Entries (All)

"* Temporary Modifications/Leak Repairs

"* Number of Operability Determinations

"* Components In Accelerated Testing

"* Repetitive Equipment Failures

"* System Health RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

To be developed after Rev. 1 (Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet which must be filled out)

Page 5 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.3.1.1 - Improve Equipment Reliability - System/Equipment Performance

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments.................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 5

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1

. More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 V

,More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 M

More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 3

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for I department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 3

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

" The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

"* Reduces work.............................

Score 1

"* No new work..............................

Score 2

"* Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3

"* Adds new work............................

Score 4 4

Page 6 of 7 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 7 of 7 Revision 1 6/7102

6.

S 7.

2 5

27

TIP A(.J N PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

Equipment Excellence Programs Programs 5.3.2.1 3.4.4 December 2004 Scott Freborg Jim Salisbury I

PBOBLEM STATEMENT:

The extent of condition review performed as a result of programmatic deficiencies in the Environmental Qualification (EQ) Program (SCR 2000 0423) Identified similar weaknesses In other CNS programs. Issues Include lack of commitment to program Implementation, lack of standards and expectations, lack of organizational depth and lack of self-assessments. The review Identified cyclical program performance because of lack of commitment to program Implementation.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. Ownership of programs had been either loosely defined or not defined at all.

Management had not clearly articulated, documented, nor enforced expectations of a program owner. (Action plan Items 3, 4, 5 and 6)

2. Organizational depth In many programs had been lacking. With personnel reassignment or attrition, a backup person to assume program ownership has not been readily available. (Action plan Items 3, 4, 5 and 6)

3. The quality and frequency of self-assessments had been lacking. (Action plan Items 3, 4, 5 and 6)

Page 1 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 APPROVAL:

APPROVAL:

V (""'

TIP AC..

iN PLAN QOBJECTIVE' Ensure that procedure 0-CNS-12 Is closely aligned with Industry norms and contains the proper scope of programs and program categorization. (Action plan Items 1 and 2)

Complete the execution of existing program Improvement project action plans (e.g., Program Improvement Project, EQ Improvement Project) to Insure that CNS technical programs consistently meet or exceed the prescribed management standards and expectations for program scope and definition, program Implementation, program Interfaces, and program monitoring.

Procedure 0-CNS-12 established a graded approach to program management and standards for CNS program Implementation in 2001 to ensure consistent long-term program performance.. 0 CNS-12 addresses program ownership, management standards and expectations, resource allocation, and self assessments. Selected site technical programs (Category A/B) are being systematically improved by applying the management standards and expectations of 0-CNS-12.

Specifically, this is accomplished by utilizing the process currently being employed in the Program Improvement Project of detailed technical assessments followed by Interface assessments, entering the deficiencies identified Into the Corrective Action Program, and finally, performing follow-up reviews to validate Improvements. A separate specific project has been established for EQ program improvement. (Action plan items 3, 4, 5 and 6)

Complete specified corrective and Improvement actions Identified through Program Improvement Program self-assessments performed In 2001, other program Improvement efforts or actions to correct performance Issues. Examples of these actions Included In TIP are:

"o Establish Implementing BWRVIP guidance documents at CNS. (Action plan item 7)

"o Complete 4160 volt circuit breaker refurbishment program. (Action plan Item 8)

"o Establish and Implement a funded and approved 480 volt circuit breaker refurbishment program. (Action plan Items 9 and 10)

"o Complete MOV Program Phase II design calculations. (Action plan item 12)

"* Complete the docketed EQ Improvement Project to correct programmatic deficiencies In the Environmental Qualification (EQ) Program identified during the 2000 Refueling Outage (SCR 2000-0330, SCR 2000-0386 and SCR 2000-0423). (Action plan item 11)

Page 2 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP A.. JN PLAN Benchmark O-CNS-12 against best Industry Hannaford 08/02 09/02 Benchmark report IAW 0 practices In the area of program scope and CNS-06.

management standards and expectations.

2 With Input from benchmark report, re-evaluate Hannaford 10/02 11/02 Revised O-CNS-12, CNS procedure O-CNS-12 to determine if program Program Administration categorizations are sufficiently rigorous and to determine if additional CNS programs should be included in the scope of the procedure or in a series of O-CNS-12 procedures.

I 3

Complete detailed technical self-assessments of S. Freborg In Progress 12/02 Self-assessment reports the following Category A/B CNS programs in submitted and 2002:

notifications written for BWRVIP (currently considered part of ISI deficiencies.

program)

Erosion/Corrosion (FAC)

Appendix.

Welding/Repair & Replacement 4

Complete detailed technical self-assessments of S. Freborg 01/03 12/03 Self-assessment reports five additional Category A/B CNS Programs In submitted and 2003.

notifications written for deficiencies.

5 Conduct Interface assessments of previously K. Thomas 07/02 07/04 Interface assessments selected programs to verify adequate interfaces submitted and for program Implementation.

notifications written for deficiencies.

6 Conduct annual follow-up review assessments of S. Freborg In Progress 12/04 Follow-up assessment previous year's Program Improvement activities reports submitted and to validate Improvements, notifications written for any additional deficiencies.

Page 3 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

P AL-*

rI 7

Develop a separate BWRVIP Program document K. Thomas In Progress 11/02 BWRVIP Program and Implementing procedure.

document In place and Implementing procedure Issued.

8 Implement the 4160 volt breaker refurbishment T. Hough In progress 06/03 Breakers refurbished.

plan.

9 Create and approve the 480volt circuit breaker T. Hough In Progress 09/02 Approved project plan for replacement and refurbishment project plan per 480 volt circuit breakers.

procedure 0-CNS-18.

10 Implement 480 volt circuit breaker project plan T. Hough 10/02 12/04 Breakers refurbished scope through 2004.

11 Complete Implementation of the EQ T. Hough In Progress 06/03 All project milestones Improvement Project.

complete, all project Docketed commitment date 6/30/03 deliverables Issued or

__________implemented.

12 Complete MOV Program Category II Design K. Thomas 10/02 01/03 Calculations completed.

Basis Calculations 13 Develop performance Indicators for circuit T. Hough 08/02 09/02 Performance Indicator breaker refurbishment projects.

developed.

14 Develop performance indicators for Category II K. Thomas 08/02 09/02 Performance Indicator MOV project.

developed.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

CNS Program Cumulative Health Indicator 480 volt and 4160 volt breaker refurbishment programs schedule and cost Indicators (TBD) 0 MOV Category II design basis calculations project schedule and cost Indicators (TBD)

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: (TBD) 0 (Attached Is a copy of the Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 4 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

UIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.3.2.1 - Programs

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department.............

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 5

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1 More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 0

More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 0

More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 4

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 1

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

"* Reduces work.............................

Score I No new work..............................

Score 2

"* Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3

"* Adds new work............................

Score 4 Page 5 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 6 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

6.

7 7.

0 5

21 I

PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

ACTION PLAN OWNER:

FOCUS AREA OWNER:

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Equipment Excellence Key Modifications & Projects; Configuration Design Basis Information/Licensing Basis Information (DBI/LBI) Translation Project 5,3.3.1 3.4.1 12/02 K. Jones K. Jones CNS has Implemented changes resulting in challenges to assumptions used In thie CNS Safety Analysis.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. Retrieval of Design Basis Information can be complex and Inefficient (See actions 1 thru 10)

2. Engineering Design Basis knowledge lacked site specific depth (See action 11)

DISCUSSION:

This action plan validates that the Inputs and Assumptions for the CNS Safety Analysis have been properly translated into the Implementing plant procedures, programs and processes, CNS committed to complete this project by December 31, 2002 In its May 19, 1999 submittal of the CNS Strategy for Achieving Engineering Excellence, Revision 3. This validation effort will provide added assurance that the plant configuration is in accordance with its design bases, and that the extent of condition for previously identified Issues is addressed.

Page 1 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

OBJECTIVES:

1) Validate that the Inputs and assumptions for the CNS safety analysis are properly translated Into the appropriate policies, procedures, and

programs,

2) Develop a tool for CNS engineering use that enables better and quicker access to CNS design basis and supporting design information, and

3) Improve CNS engineering and sitewide understanding of the CNS design, supporting design Information, and its licensing basis.

'No.

AANo 1

Scope and perform a Design Basis K, Jones 8/01 Complete DBI/LBI Database for Information/Licensing Basis Information selected systems; (DBI/LBI) Pilot Project for selected systems.

DBI/LBI Pilot Project Completion Report 2

Develop lessons learned from DBI/LBI Pilot K. Jones 2/02 Complete DBI/LBI Pilot Project Project.

Completion Report 3

Develop DBI/LBI Translation Project Plan, K. Jones 8/01 Complete DBI/LBI Translation Project Plan 4

Develop DBI/LBI Translation Project K, Jones 2/02 Complete DBI/LBI Translation Implementation Phase Project Instructions.

Project Implementation Phase Project Instructions 5

Develop DBI/LBI Translation Project Interim K. Jones 5/02 6/02 DBI/LBI Translation

_Report Project Interim Report 6

Present DBI/LBI Translation Project Interim K. Jones 7/02 To be CNS/NRC Meeting held to Report to NRC scheduled.

discuss DBI/LBI Translation Project 7

Complete DBI/LBI Translation Project K. Jones 3/02 12/02 DBI/LBI Database; ComplementeatBio Project completion Implementation, documentation Create an action plan to correct procedure and K. Jones 3/02 12/02 Associated notification program discrepancies Identified during the actions closed Implementation.

SPage 2 of 5 r~~vi~Ivii 1

,,v M-11RU11 1-2L LY

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

TIP Schedule performance RESOURCE REOUIREMENTS:

0 S

$600,000 for contractor support of project 2200 man-hours In house for Implementation Training hours TBD (See Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 9

Install DBI/LBI Database on CNS LAN K. Jones 10/02 5/03 Installed DBI/LBI Database 10 Develop procedures/process for maintaining K. Jones 12/02 6/03 DBI/LBI database database maintenance procedure and owner.

11 Develop and provide design basis training to K. Jones 12/02 7/03 Lesson plan developed; appropriate plant population, classroom training completed.

12 Perform effectiveness review of DBI/LBI K. Jones 6/02 10/03 Effectiveness review Translation Project Implementation Phase, report.

design basis training administered, and utility of DBI/LBI database.

TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.3.3.1 - Key Modifications & Projects, Configuration - Design Basis Information/Licensing Basis Information Translation Project

1. How many people are affected by this change?

One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1 One department........

Score 2 0

No more than four departments................

Score 3 More than four departments..................

Score 4 Most of the site population..................

Score 5 3

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

0 Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1 0

More than $5,000 but less than $50,000. *......

Score 2 More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 a

More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 4

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disdplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 3

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 1

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Page4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4

6. Will this Change require organizational changes?

"* No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0

"* The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1

"* The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2

"* The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3

7. Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

"* Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1

"* Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3

"* Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 PageS of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 1

0 3

15

TIP Aý 3N PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

COMPLETION DATE:

Equipment Excellence Key Modifications & Projects; Configuration Offsite Power Reliability Improvement - Phase 1 5.3.3.2 5/03 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

J. Gausman FOCUS AREA OWNER:

K. Jones APPROVAL:

W"A/..

APPROVAL.**

PROBLEM STATEMENT: - In recent years there have been a number of events that have challenged off-site power supplies at Cooper.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

CNS did not adequately communicate its need for reliable off-site power supplies to Transmission Services. This resulted in certain substation equipment failures. (Actions 1 and 2) 003ECTIVE:

Switchyard equipment performance meets plant goals for reliability.

Acceptable grid voltage is available at the offsite power sources, barring extreme grid conditions (e.g. peak summer loading with multiple plant/line outages).

Real-time grid analysis provides continuous assurance that acceptable voltage will be available following a CNS trip.

Page 1 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP Aý IN PLAN 1

Implement Recommendations of SOER J. Gausman Complete Complete Implement actions needed to address the 99-1.

recommendations of SOER 99-01 Including agreements, procedures, calculations, training, etc.

2 Improve reliability of off-site power J. Gausman/

In progress 9/02 Required preventive and predictive maintenance activities documented.

sources by establishing a Joint PM D. Soley Taslso evcsadPatP program with NPPD Transmission prgTransmission Services and Plant PM Services. Program will cover "critical" programs revised to incorporate required switchyard components identified maintenance activities.

through SCR 2001-0567.

3 Adjust the Second Level Undervoltage K. Cohn In progress 8/02 Second Level Undervoltage Relays adjusted Relays to have a reset dead-band less to reduced reset dead-band per approved than the present 1%.

CED.

4 Evaluate actual Second Level K. Cohn 7/02 8/02 Technical justification in support of Undervoltage Relay drift, repeatability, Technical Specification revision In 5.

and calibration error. Provide technical justification for a revised (narrower/lower) Technical Specification trip band based on current Analytical Limit and evaluation of Instrument performance.

5 Submit a Technical Specification change C. Blair 9/02 11/02 Proposed Technical Specification revision to the NRC to revise the trip setting of submitted to NRC.

the Second Level Undervoltage Relays based on technical justification provided In step 4.

6 Obtain NRC approval of Technical C. Blair 11/02 05/03 NRC approved Technical Specification Specification change developed in step 5.

revision.

Page 2 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP At LAN 7

Establish a plant specific methodology for K. Cohn 8/02 12/02 Calculations that identify voltage limits to be determining acceptable off-site power compared to voltages calculated by the source voltages, analysis developed In step 8.

8 Provide for an analysis of grid conditions K. Cohn/

8/02 12/02 Analytical model that consistently provides In near real time. Analysis will determine Rexpected post-disturbance voltages.

available grid voltages following aetrmpne R, Gunderson Procedure changes needed for the Cooper and other grid disturbances as operators to use model outputs in necessary, Identifying acceptability of off-site power sources.

9 Evaluate the plant specific potential for G. Seeman In progress 9/02 Documented position on plant specific and consequences of double sequencing, probabilities and consequences of double sequencing. Verify procedural guidance Is optimal for degraded voltage conditions.

10 Lower the ESST permissive setting.

M. Vanwinkle In progress 8/02 Lower ESST Permissive setting In Calculation and procedures will be accordance with approved CED.

revised and relays set to the new

settings, 11 Evaluate switchyard modifications since J. Gausman 11/02 2/03 Document basis of switchyard modification Initial licensing,

_list used in 2001 ALTRAN report.

12 Provide analysis and procedures that J. Gausman 9/02 1/03 Qualification of generator back-feed as an off-site source or application of 5.3.3.2.7/8 support to removal of the deliverables to shutdown conditions.

autotransformer (T2) from service during outage conditions.

13 Closeout review

., Gausman 4/03 5/03 Closeout report assessing effectiveness of project. Input to Phase 2 plan If required.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, 0

0 0

Off-Site Power Supply Unavailability Off-Site Power Supply Malntenancve Preventable Functional Failures Off-Site Power Supply Unplanned LCOs Switchyard System Health Indicator TIP Schedule Performance Page 3 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 I

RESOURCE REOUIREMENTS:

External Contractor Costs = $270,000 Total Resources Internal and External = $627,000 Page 4 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02 IP At.

N PLAN

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.3.3.3 - Key Modifications & Projects; Configuration - Offsite Power Reliability (Phase 1)

How many people are affected by this change?

One work group under one supervisor..........

One department............................

No more than four departments................

More than four departments..................

Most of the site population..................

Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 Score 4 Score 5 2

What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1 More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2 More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 4

3. What training is required for this change?

"" No training is required.......................

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site How will this change affect Cooper processes?

Modifies part of a process....................

The Change modifies or replaces an entire process The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 Score 4 2

Score 1 Score 3 Score 5 Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another.......

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4 2

Page 5 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

1.

0 0

0

2.

0 S

5.

I

TIP ACTION PLAN Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

The Change affects the organization of one division The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions The Change affects most organizations on site....

Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 Score 1 Score 3 Score 5 Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 6 of 6 Revision 1 6/7/02

6.

7 7.

0 3

14 I

TM(

1)N PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

COMPLETION DATE:

Equipment Excellence Key Modifications & Projects; Configuration Unauthorized Modifications Follow'-up Project 5.3,3.3 8/03 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

J. Gausman FOCUS AREA OWNER:

K. Jones APPROVAL:

APROAL.'

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

The purpose of this plan is to track the completion of the actions required to disposition previously Identified unauthorized modifications (UM).

CAUSAL FACTORS:

The causal factors associated with the Introduction of unauthorized modifications have been resolved by actions previously completed. Since the purpose of this plan Is to track action completion, there are no causal factors Identified.

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this plan is to track the completion of actions Included in the unauthorized modification follow-up project.

Page 1 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP AS,.

PLAN 1

Complete review of 562 potentially J. Gausman In 8/02 562 EDP-21 Inappropriately disposltioned UMs.

progress Checklists completed.

2 Complete review of 1478 "White Paper" J. Gausman In 11/02 1478 EDP-21 items.

progress Checklists completed.

3 Prepare design change documents (EEs, J. Gausman 11/02 5/03 Approved EEs and CEDs) to address UMs identified in the CEDs as appropriate.

reviews performed under'the UM Follow Up Project.

4 Revise configuration documents to J. Gausman 3/03 7/03 Revised drawings, reflect the EE's/CED's developed in 3 as databases and well as authorized configuration changes procedures as identified in 1 and 2 appropriate.

5 Complete remaining open "Unauthorized J. Gausman In 7/03 Matrix action items Modifications Follow-Up Project" matrix progress completed.

action Items.

6 Perform a close-out/effectiveness review J. Gausman 7/03 8/03 Closeout report of UM Follow-up Project.

completed.

Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

TIP Schedule Performance RESOURCE REOUIREMENTS:

Presently 6 Engineers have been assigned to this project.

Remaining project resource estimate is approximately 3-4 person years.

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

"TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.3.3.3 - Key Modifications & Projects, Configuration - Unauthorized Modifications Follow-up Project

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 2

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 4

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 0

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

"* Reduces work.............................

Score 1

"* No new work..............................

Score 2

"* Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3

"* Adds new work............................

Score 4 Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

6.

0 0

7.

0

-1 9

TIP At

'4LAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE: Training FOCUS AREA: Training Program ACTION PLAN TITLE: Management Ownership ACTION PLAN NUMBER: 5.4.1.1 WBS CROSS-REFERENCE 353 No:

COMPLETION DATE: 12/02 ACTION PLAN OWNER: John Christensen FOCUS AREA OWNER: John Christensen APPROVAL:

APPROVAL:

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Training at CNS has, at times, not achieved desired results due to ineffective line management ownership of training.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1. Unclear roles and responsibilities for line ownership of training. (Action steps: 1,3)

2. Failure of station management and MTERC to hold line managers and supervisors accountable for proper ownership of training. (The MTERC was replaced by the Training Council in April 2002) ( Action Plan 5.1.1.2; Action steps: 1,2,3)

3. Lack of clear ownership measures and performance indicators.(Action step 2)

OBJECTIVE:

A management team that is accountable for their roles and responsibilities related to training. Line managers and incumbents identify opportunities for improved performance through utilization of training. A decline in station human performance errors.

Page I of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

No.

'1 I

Develop and communicate expectations for Written document line management ownership of accredited containing expectations training programs.

delivered to line Mike Coyle 06/02 07/02 management responsible for accredited training programs.

2 Implement a process to monitor and evaluate Implemented process to management ownership of training. The John Christensen 03/02 08/02 monitor and evaluate CNS Training Council will review this management ownership indicator, of training.

3 Revise procedures NTP 1.0 and 0-CNS-47 as Approved procedures required to refine the expectations for the NTP 1.0 and 0-CNS-47 various Plant Training Committees.

that provides Tim Donovan 07/02 08/02 management's expectations of the Plant Training Committees.

4 Conduct a training self-assessment on Self-assessment results management ownership of training.

indicating effective Tim Donovan 10/02 12/02 corrective action and additional actions, as required.

5 Develop a program-level performance Program performance indicator for the maintenance and technical indicator for staff programs that measures staff qualification John Christensen 8/02 12/02 qualification developed status.

and reported to Training Council.

Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TfIPA, L PLAN PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

0 S

S S

Management Observations Training Attendance Training Observations Program Effectiveness Qualification Matrix Training Schedule Changes Training Effectiveness Scorecard Management Ownership Scorecard Maintenance/Technical Staff Qualification (TBD see Action 5)

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

0 6

Manpower, internal, external, required skills and/or knowledge -None other than normal work load.

Materials and Supplies-None.

Equipment -None.

Facilities -None.

(See attached Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.4.1.1 - Training Program - Management Ownership

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score I

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5

-5

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

0 Less than $5,000..........................

Score I More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3 More than $300,000.......................

Score 4

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for I department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 4

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score I

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

"* Reduces work.............................

Score 1

"* No new work...............................

Score 2

"* Distributes work from one group to another.....

Score 3 Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 0

TIP ACTION PLAN

Adds new work............................

Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

The Change affects the organization of one division The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions The Change affects most organizations on site....

Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 4 2

Score 0 Score I Score 2 Score 3 0

Score I Score 3 Score 5

______I Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 14 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

6.

7 7.

TIP ACTION PLAN PILLAR OF Training EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA: Training Program ACTION PLAN TITLE: Evaluation and Qualification ACTION PLAN NUMBER: 5.4.1.2 WBS CROSS-REFERENCE 3.5.3 No:

COMPLETION DATE: 3/03 ACTION PLAN OWNER: John Westbrook APPRO 7-2, FOCUS AREA OWNER: John Christensen APPRO_

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

CNS has experienced problems with poor quality of exams and the validation of individual staff qualification status, as well as process implementation inadequacies associated with On-The-Job Training and Evaluation (OJT/TPE). As a result, there have been problems with workers performing work for which they were not qualified.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

I. Lack o'f instructor knowledge concerning development of higher order test questions and exams. (see Action plan 5.4.1.3, action 4)

2. The processes to assign work and verify personnel qualifications are difficult to use. (see Action plan 5.4.1.2, actions 2 and

3)

3. The processes to develop evaluation tools, assign work, and verify personnel qualifications are not always followed. (See Action plan 5.1.1.2)

Page 1 of 5 Revisionl 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLANl DISCUSSION:

Tools used to evaluate and qualify trainees have not always met expectations and standards. "Qualification" type issues have also been identified at CNS. Implementation deficiencies associated with OJT/TPE also have been identified at CNS.

OBJECTIVE:

Training program material that thoroughly evaluates and qualifies the staff to the skills and knowledges needed to perform assigned tasks. The CNS staff is capable of determining qualification levels prior to assigning or conducting tasks.

Conduct quarterly monitoring of the use of the qualification tracking system by the line nr an**ftnnQ ftn,ipnfv; nrnlhl1M nrpn*

John Christensen 3/02 12/02 quarteriy monitonng reports with actions to correct noted problems.

Revise Administrative Procedure 0.17, Revised and approved "Selection and Training of Station Personnel" procedure.

2 to provide guidelines, expectations, and roles Tim Donovan 7/02 9/02 and responsibilities for CNS staff relative to maintaining qualification status.

In cooperation with the line, evaluate how Documented evaluation, 3

individual qualifications for task performance John Westbrook 6/02 9/02 results and identified will be verified prior to assigning individuals recommendations.

work.

Conduct an assessment in the Maintenance Completed and and Technical training programs that is documented assessment focused to evaluate effectiveness of actions John Westbrook 9/02 11/02 report. Issues identified taken to address OJT/TPE performance will be entered in the issues.

Corrective Action I Program for resolution.

Page 2 of 5 Revision1 6/7/02 I

7r

TIP ACTION PLAN Using the results from the assessment in Completed and action 4 (lessons learned) conduct an documented assessment assessment of OJT/TPE performance for the Mark Schaible 12/02 3/03 report. Issues identified Operations department.

will be entered in the Corrective Action 1 Program for resolution.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

Qualification Matrix Adherence Maintenance/Technical Staff Qualification (TBD see Action Plan 5.4.1.1 action 5.4.1.1.5)

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

"* Manpower, internal, e~temal, required skills and/or knowledge -None.

"* Materials and Supplies - None.

"* Equipment-None.

"* Facilities - None.

(See Change Complexity Worksheet)

Page 3 of 5 Revislonl 6/7/02 i

U

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.4.1.2 -Training Program - Evaluation and Qualification

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department.............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

. Most of the site population..................

Score 5 5

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score I

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 1_

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score 1

"* Classroom training for I department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 3

4. How will'this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5 3

Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 I

TIP ACTION PLAN Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another.....

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4

5.

S6 6.

Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks..................

Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 0

Score 1 Score 3 Score 5 Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Low:

Moderate:

High:

14 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

The Change affects the organization of one division The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions The Change affects most organizations on site....

7.

32P ACTION1PLANI PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

Training Training Program Organizational Effectiveness 5.4.1.3 3.5.3 12/31/04 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

Tim Donovan FOCUS AREA OWNER: John Christensen APPROVAL:

APPROVAL:

1kLA, PROBLEM STATEMENT:

The methods used by Training Management to communicate expectations and supervision's methods of managing change have contributed to staff performance issues such as procedural compliance.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

I. CNS training administrative processes have become excessively cumbersome and requirements, roles and responsibilities, and standards for effective training have become increasingly hard to determine by the staff. (Plan steps: 2, 3 and 5)

2. Lack of adherence to process requirements. (see Action plan 5.1.1.2)

3. Ineffective communications and change management for implementing process revisions and enhancements. (Plan steps: I)

4. Lack of recent instructor continuing training that focused on identified instructor performance issues. (Plan steps: 4)

DISCUSSION:

Human behavior, management of change, and communications within the training department have at times not met expectations.

As a result, the staff is sometimes unaware of management's expectations. Frequent procedure changes that were not well communicated to the staff have caused procedure adherence issues.

Page 1 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN OBJECTIVE:

A training organization that fosters a culture that values prevention of events, strengthens the integrity of defenses to prevent errors, precludes the development of error-likely situations and maintains a learning environment that encourages continuous improvement.

I Implement a standard communication model Written criteria that that assures consistent alignment between assures consistent training groups and provides a structured John Christensen 07/02 09/02 communications within format for communicating change to the staff.

the department (This item is also tied to Action Plan 5.1.3.2 "Internal Communications")

2 Develop a "Conduct of Training" procedure Approved Conduct of that provides the guidelines for the Training Tim Donovan 09/02 12/02 Training procedure.

Department infrastructures.

3 Implement a training program effectiveness Revision to 0-CNS-47, scorecard that measures the effectiveness of Training Effectiveness training relative to the establishment of Tim Donovan 06/02 09/02 Review Committee measurable goals (0-CNS-47, Training Effectiveness Review Committee).

4 Conduct instructor continuing training Attendance sheets sessions that addresses identified instructor indicating qualified skill weaknesses. This training will include Tom Doray 06/02 12/02 instructors have content to improve exam item development successfully completed and conduct of task analysis.

continuing instructor training.

5 Develop and implement a training process Revised training simplification project with'the purpose of processes.

producing improved procedures and change Tim Donovan 12/02 12/04 process controls. This will incorporate the use of industry benchmarking.

Page 2 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

a Training Effectiveness Scorecards - monitored quarterly - Presented to the Training Council a Training Department Human Performance Event Free Clock resets - Goal of 30 days between resets (Human Performance Clock resets measure performance issues such as procedural adherence errors).

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

" Manpower, internal, external, required skills and/or knowledge - Implementation of this action plan is 'Level of Effort' work.

Each of the action items will require significant person-hours to implement, but resources currently exist to perform the work (i.e., individuals are on staff to write procedures, Continuing Instructor Training was previously planned and budgeted.

" Materials and Supplies - None Equipment - None

" Facilities -- None Page 3 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02

"TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.4.1.3 - Training Program - Organizational Effectiveness

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score I

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5

-2

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score I

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 1

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score I

"* Classroom training for I department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 3

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score I

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5

-1 Page 4 of 5 Revision 1 6[7/02

"TiP ACTION PLAN

5.

So S

0

6.

7.

Low:

Moderate:

High:

Score 5 to 10 Score 11 to 20 Score 21 to 30 Page 5 of 5 Revision 1 6/7/02 Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1 No new work..............................

Score 2 Distributes work from one group to another.....

Score 3 Adds new work............................

Score 4 4

Will this Change require organizational changes?

No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0 The Change affects the organization of one division Score 1 The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2 The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 0

Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score 1 Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3 Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 12

TIP ACTION PLAN PILLAR OF EXCELLENCE:

FOCUS AREA:

ACTION PLAN TITLE:

ACTION PLAN NUMBER:

WBS CROSS-REFERENCE No:

COMPLETION DATE:

Training Training Program Training Program and Process Enhancements 5.4.1.4 3.5.3 12/03 ACTION PLAN OWNER:

Bob Wulf FOCUS AREA OWNER: John Christensen APPROVAL:

APPROVAL:

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

CNS has exhibited problems maintaining some training programs at current industry standards for training excellence.

CAUSAL FACTORS:

1.

2.

3.

4.

The line has not always demonstrated expected ownership of training programs. (Action Plan 5.4.1.1)

Training management and program guardian oversight has been inconsistent. (Action Plan 5.4.1.1 and Action Plan 5.4.1.3)

Failure to conduct focused self-assessment activities for all programs. (Completed prior to TIP Rev.0.).

Lack of rigorous performance indicators and accountability to these PIs. (See new Training Excellence PIs, below explanation of completed actions, and Action plan 5.1.1.2).

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this plan is to track improvement actions for training programs so they will meet or exceed industry standards and guidelines. Training processes will provide assurance that the programs meet the need of the line to provide and maintain a qualified work force at CNS. The causal factors are corrected by other action plans as noted above.

Page 1 of 8 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN Upgrade and implement the following TIP Revision 0 actions training programs to industry-best completed. Reference practices:

"Training Program",

Electrical Maintenance Program. This J. Westbrook 01/02 Complete Actions 3.1 and 3.2.

includes:

Benchmark the EM Program against industry peers.

Facilitate an INPO assist visit.

Maintenance Supervisor Training TIP Revision 0 actions Program. This includes:

completed. Reference Complete material and program "Training Program",

upgrades.

Actions 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 Implement approved Complete and 4.4.

2 recommendations.

J. Westbrook 01/02 05/02 Complete training schedule for Maintenance Supervisors and Crew Leads.

Assess and provide delta training for those already qualified.

Page 2 of 8 Revision 1 6/7/02 i

i

TIP ACTION PLAN

.Y.

Upgrade and implement the following training programs to industry-best practices:

Shift Technical Engineer. This includes:

"* Evaluate the STE task analysis.

Update the STE training material.

Develop a lesson plan for casualty management concepts.

"* Evaluate training needs and assess delta trainin*.

01/02 Complete 05/02 TIP Revision 0 actions completed. Reference "Training Program",

Actions 1.1 and 1.2.

Upgrade and implement the following Implementation of training programs to industry-best Training Program practices:

Materials that fully 4

John Westbrook 01/01 01/03 meet or exceed industry RP/Chemistry Program. This includes:

guidelines and CNS

"* Material revision and development, staff needs.

"* Conduct of delta training.

Electrical Maintenance Program. This Implementation of includes:

Training Program "o Conduct of a benchmark visit.

Materials that fully

"* Review of task analysis and meet or exceed industry 5

objectives.

John Westbrook 01/01 01/03 guidelines and CNS

"* Revision/development of training staff needs.

material.

", Assessment and provision of required delta training.

Page 3 of 8 Revision 1 6/7/02 3

I I

I Mark Schaible

TIP ACTION PLAN Upgrade and implement the following training programs to industry-best practices:

Engineering Support Program. This includes:

"* Complete orientation material development.

"* Complete job/task analysis for position-specific population.

"* Complete material revisions/development.

I Provide required delta training.

Upgrade and implement the following training programs to industry-best practices:

Shift Technical Engineer. This includes:

Completion of STE delta training.

Station Operator Program. This includes:

"* Completion of NLO tabletop task analysis to reanalyze NLO tasks.

"* Revision/development of training materials.

"* Provision of required delta training.

r I

T I

Bob Wulf 01/01 12/03 I

L 4.

Mark Schaible 07/01 12/03 Implementation of Training Program Materials that fully meet or exceed industry guidelines and CNS staff needs.

Implementation of Training Program Materials that fully meet or exceed industry guidelines and CNS staff needs.

Page 4 of 8 Revision 1 6/7/02 1

6 7

I m

I

TIP ACTION PLAN Review the newly revised Accreditation Approved and Objectives and Criteria ACAD 02-001, Implemented Training and revise CNS Training Processes and Process and Procedures Procedures as required. This includes:

that implement industry 8

a Revision of training Tim Donovan 03/02 12/02 guidelines and processes/procedures.

standards.

"* Development of training on new processes.

"* Delivery of training to instructors.

Perform self-assessments that focus on the No significant program effectiveness of training program updates or material deficiencies 9

implemented by this action plan.

Tim Donovan 10/02 05/03 identified during 2003 training self assessments.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:

0 0

Training Effectiveness Scorecard - monitored quarterly - Presented to the Training Council.

Training Excellence Plan performance indicators - monitored weekly - Presented to the Leadership Meeting.

Page 5 of 8 Revision 1 6/7/02

TIP ACTION PLAN RESOURCE REOUIREMENTS:

No external manpower, materials, supplies, equipment or facilities are required to complete this action plan. Skills or knowledge beyond that of the existing staff is not necessary. Significant internal resources are required to implement this action plan. These resources are identified below.

Operations Training Process Training RP Training Chemistry Training Electrical Training ESP Training Operations Site Management Electrical Maintenance DED PED 1000 hours0.0116 days 0.278 hours 0.00165 weeks 3.805e-4 months 1520 hours 1646 hours0.0191 days 0.457 hours 0.00272 weeks 6.26303e-4 months 1177 hours 778 hours0.009 days 0.216 hours 0.00129 weeks 2.96029e-4 months 900 hours 300 hours0.00347 days 0.0833 hours 4.960317e-4 weeks 1.1415e-4 months 20 hours 161 hours0.00186 days 0.0447 hours 2.662037e-4 weeks 6.12605e-5 months 1200 hours 2400 hours0.0278 days 0.667 hours 0.00397 weeks 9.132e-4 months ESD Licensing FRED Procurement Risk Chemistry Eng.

ALARA Engineer FIN Engineer Maintenance Supervisors RP Department Page 6 of 8 Revision 1 6/7/02 1200 hours0.0139 days 0.333 hours 0.00198 weeks 4.566e-4 months 160 hours 160 hours0.00185 days 0.0444 hours 2.645503e-4 weeks 6.088e-5 months 160 hours 200 hours0.00231 days 0.0556 hours 3.306878e-4 weeks 7.61e-5 months 120 hours 120 hours0.00139 days 0.0333 hours 1.984127e-4 weeks 4.566e-5 months 120 hours 100 hours0.00116 days 0.0278 hours 1.653439e-4 weeks 3.805e-5 months 892 hours

TIP ACTION PLAN TIP Change Complexity Worksheet Description of the Change:

Action Plan 5.4.1.4 - Training Programs -Training Program and Process Enhancements

1. How many people are affected by this change?

"* One work group under one supervisor..........

Score 1

"* One department............................

Score 2

"* No more than four departments................

Score 3

"* More than four departments..................

Score 4

"* Most of the site population..................

Score 5 5

2. What will this change cost to implement (exclude training costs and ongoing costs)?

"* Less than $5,000..........................

Score 1

"* More than $5,000 but less than $50,000........

Score 2

"* More than $50,000 but less than $300,000......

Score 3

"* More than $300,000.......................

Score 4 3

3. What training is required for this change?

"* No training is required......................

Score 0

"* Training consists of communication only, no classroom Score I

"* Classroom training for 1 department/people from several disciplines Score 2

"* Classroom training for multiple departments........

Score 3

"* Classroom or workplace training for most of the site Score 4 4

4. How will this change affect Cooper processes?

"* Modifies part of a process....................

Score 1

"* The Change modifies or replaces an entire process Score 3

"* The Change affects multiple, integrated processes Score 5

-3 Page 7 of 8 I

I I

"TIP ACTION PLAN

5. Upon completion, how will this Change affect staff workload?

Reduces work.............................

Score 1

No new work..............................

Score 2

Distributes work from one group to another......

Score 3

Adds new work.............................

Score 4 2

6. Will this Change require organizational changes?

"* No organizational realignment required.........

Score 0

"* The Change affects the organization of one division Score I

"* The Change affects the organization of multiple divisions Score 2

"* The Change affects most organizations on site....

Score 3 0

7. Will this Change cause disruption of daily work?

"* Effects a few daily tasks.....................

Score I

"* Effects few, but the tasks are highly valued......

Score 3

"* Effects most of the daily tasks.................

Score 5 Low:

Score 5 to 10 Moderate:

Score 11 to 20 18 High:

Score 21 to 30 Page 8 of 8 I

I

.2 Site-Wide Performance Indicators Attached are the performance indicator summary sheets for the station performance measures and the performance measures for each of the four Pillars of Excellence.

8.0 ATTACHMENTS 8.1 Action Plan Index and Action Plans 8.2 Site-Wide Performance Indicators 8.3 Charts and Diagrams 26

.1 Action Plan Index and Action Plans

Action Plan Index I

I TIP Action Plans Excellence PM.lr IFocus Area Action Plan #

Action Plan Title I

Action Plan Owner I

Focus Area Owner I*,1 urvianizamona! tzgelene 15.1.1 ManaqerrI gtntffectieness 151..

jOrgantrabonal Amrvnment lt.uck Welr 1M. aon4e 5.1.1.2 Accountablity L Croteau M. Coy&e 5.1.13 Pnoritiatln & Pbnnk)g B. Ma.ecevic M. CoDle 5.1.14 OrgantzatonaVHuman Behaviors E. Cade M. Coyle 5.1.1S Management Obserabtcn Program D. LkUien M. Coyle 5.1.16 Performance Moriftcrlng Jm Dutton M. Coyle 51.1.7 SucceSSon Planning L Croteau M.yle 51.1.8 Learning Organizabon & ndustry Parbcpabon G. Smith IM. Coyle j51.1.9 Program Management M. Boyce M. Coaye 15..1.2

Charmre, M

I

nag 5,.1.2.1 t

Pr~gammaticPrcess Changes lRalph Drier 1Paj Ca,-udi 15S.1.3 Commnri aftins 51.3.1 fExternal Cxirrmmnlcatrnsr Dave Kunsemile Paul CauMl 5.3.2 Combined wrth 5 1.2 1 5.1.41 PrldelExcellence David Montgoery im Hutton

.1.4.2 Trust/Culture David Montgomery Wm Hutton 5.1.43 Teamwork (To be developed for Rev 2)

V.1.5A 1oversight & Asessment R. F. Drier R. M. Esh-md 1571, F!i¢ai Rqponsliirty 15.1.6 Fiscal Poly Improvement ISharon Brown Laurie Wetherel 15.2.1 Overal h"all Focused & Aled Oraniz I~reate an opera focused and aligned IS.2.1 organiza*tonal culture

[rely Borgan Rick Gardner I1,2,2 Ernergemncx Prearedress i5. 2 Emgency Res*onse Greg Casto Dave Cook 15.2.3 Outage PIa Dveom t

5.2.3.1 Outage Management jkfFox Fox 5-2.32 Plannrrrnjlmeliness VfF.x Fo 523.3 2chedullron<

rim g Fox P

Fox s.*.3 Schedui-h*Morli Is.2.40Outage MxcSon S.2.4.3 Montorg Fox Fox A52.4 IContraAdmintstration

. Chard Fox 15..5 orkPacageDeveloorrent 5.2.5.1 jPurposeeAccourrtability Bill Macecevic BRil Macecervic I

r5.2S CompLeteness/accuracylbmeliness Ken Tabtt Bi Macecevic 12.6.1 Work Practices eNealWetherell Neal Wetier 52.6&2 First Line Supervision Neal Wetherell Neal Wetherell 52.6.3 Techral SuportLessons Leard Neal We*ell Neal Wetherel Improve Reinfoement ol CAP Standards and S.2.7.1 Expectat*ons Roman Estrada Roman Estrada 5.2).2 Root Cause Roman Es*rada Roman Estrada 52.7.3 Improve Ulizatbon of OER Roman Estrada Roman Estrada 15,2.8 Functions & Services 52.231 IVedo Manua Upgrae Program K

ILaurie Sctibn P5.2.83 jProcedure Change Process t3ay Scheuerman

[LaurieSdslnrg 15.3 Equipment Ecellnc l5.3.1 Material Condition & EoutketRllb>h 15.31.1 ysrteV,*,VulPm t Performance lTer Borw I Fad Up 5.3:*2 Progrdm 3.2.1 PrOgram*s IS. Freborg 11Salisbury L%

LBasis informatsn/Licensng Basis wIformabon 533.1 (DBIILBI) Translation Proe K. 3ones K. Jones 5332 Offrte Power Ieiatity Improvement - PhaseI

. Gausman K. Jones 5333 Unauthorized Hoadficabons Follow-up Project J. Gausman 1K.-ones

-1 raqm 54 2 2 Evaluation and Qualificabon John Westbroak John Christensen 5 4.13 Organizabonal Effectiveness Tan Dornyvan John Christensen 54.1 4 Training Program and Process Enhancements Bob Wulf Jnhn Chistensen

COOPER NUCLEAR STATION Performance Indicator Summary Degrade CSon.

Cstane.

April 2002 3 Months AgoN, PI Title Yellow-Red Threshold, White-Yellow (Target) Threshold Review to Capture Good Practices Losing Margin:

Initiate Action to Correct Acceptable Performance:

Meets Target UnAcceptable Performance:

Action Required 2 Months Ago

Organizational Excellence Performance Indicator Summary April 2002 Review to Capture Good Practices Losing Margin:

Initiate Action to Correct Acceptable Performance:

Meets Target UnAcceptable Performance:

Action Required White Yello LI-

Operational Excellence Performance Indicator Summa.

April 2002 Review to Capture Good Practices Losing Margin:

Initiate Action to Correct Acceptable Performance:

Meets Target UnAcceptable Performance:

Action Required Y e I I O"'W'-

Equipment Excellence Performance Indicator Summary April 2002 Review to Capture Good Practices Losing Margin:

Initiate Action to Correct Acceptable Performance:

Meets Target UnAcceptable Performance:

Action Required 272 :1 283 26]

On-Line Corrective Maintenance Backlog

'.217 White Yell -0 W-,

Training Excellence Performance Indicator Summary 9.% 93. il Training Staff Qual 96.8%

m',

April 2002 Review to Capture Good Practices Losing Margin:

Initiate Action to Correct White

!-B Acceptable Performance:

Meets Target UnAcceptable Performance:

Action Required

.3 Charts and Diagrams Terminology associated with fishbone diagrams:

Areas of Effect - The descriptor shown at the head (right side of the diagram). Example: Organizational Effectiveness Major Contributor - The descriptor at the end of one of the ribs (top or bottom of the fishbone). Example: 1.1.0 Management Causal Factor Grouping - Individual line on a rib of the fishbone.

Example: 1.1.1 Vision/Mission/Goals/Standards Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)- The hierarchical numbering system used to organize the analysis of causal factor groups. The WBS can be tied to action plans.

Example:

1.0.0 Organizational Effectiveness 1.1.0 Management 1.1.1 VisionlMission/Goals/Standards

AREA OF EFFECT - I 1.2.0 HUMAN 1.1.0 BEHAVIORAL MANAGEMENT

~1.1.1 1.2,1 PRIDE VISIONIMISSIONIGOALSISTANDARDS 1.1.2 1.2.2 TRUST EMPOWERMENT/STYLEICHARTERSI ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES 1.2.3 CULTURE 1.2.4 TEAMWORK

AREA OF EFFECT - 2 2.2.1

AREA OF EFFECT - 3 3.2.03 FUNCTIONS & SERVICES 3.2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT FUNCTnIONX 3.2j2 BUDGETING 3.2.3 M

PROCEDURAL CONTROL SYSTEM 4

TIP IMPROVEMEN '_: PROCESS I

Cause and Effect Analysis Individual Cause Grouping Extent of Condition Assessment INTERNAL ASSESSMENT CRG review S

Problem Statement drafted Apparent Cause drafted Complete Self assessment Reports Apparent/Causal Factors drafted (Action Plans) K Findings Generated Supvr./Focus Area Owner reviews and classify recommendation Notification written (incl. problem statement and apparent cause) 2

ML023010176

Text

Navigation menu

Search