ML032760119
| ML032760119 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 10/01/2003 |
| From: | Christine Lipa NRC/RGN-III/DRP/RPB4 |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 2003-0725 | |
| Download: ML032760119 (92) | |
Text
NRC FORM 658 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (9-1999)
TRANSMITTAL OF MEETING HANDOUT MATERIALS FOR IMMEDIATE PLACEMENT IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN This form is to be filled out (typed or hand-printed) by the person who announced the meeting (i.e., the person who issued the meeting notice). The completed form, and the attached copy of meeting handout materials, will be sent to the Document Control Desk on the same day of the meeting; under no circumstances will this be done later than the working day after the meeting.
Do not include proprietary materials.
DATE OF MEETING The attached document(s), which was/were handed out in this meeting, is/are to be placed in the public domain as soon as possible. The minutes of the meeting will be issued in the near future. Following are administrative details regarding this meeting:
Docket Number(s) S__-3q__
Plant/Facility Name DQ 15- RE$ E.
TAC Number(s) (if available)
Reference Meeting Notice lO63 - 07 as Purpose of Meeting (copy from meeting notice) 0l5ct055 LICSJ5EE'5 Ijb4G-TEgR PLA05 To RODRE55 SAFET Ct3Sr10O5 WoeK Fz0 lP-00rE0r APO 6 0i~ l ER=ECrT-\J EtIE55.
NAME OF PERSON WHO ISSUED MEETING NOTICE TITLE 0,"P5 OE LIPA RNsCH IEP OFFICE DIVISION RP BRANCH Distribution of this form and attachments:
Docket File/Central File PUBLIC NR.OM86(-99 RNE NRCCE AE hsfr a deneduig nom NRC FORM 658 (9-1999) PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER This form was designed using InForms
Davis-Besse Nuclear Power'Station Organizational Effectiveness Di I' 0 is e i.
I I I
FirstEnerg
. - -g Opening Comments i -\. Nk 9
>g<&-F-t-2-6
- 'atj+'3<0 ~
i E
lS r g
' <f}"
vr s ,
s~~~~~~~~
I t
.1.
.n4 Gary Leidich President and Chief Nuclear Officer - FENOC 2
Ri-rsitnergy First@ner~ Agenda Opening Remarks .................................. Gary Leidich eSafety Culture: Definition/Model/Process/Results/Actions Taken/Effectiveness ToDate ............................ Lew Myers
- Oversight Perspectives oqn Safety Culture Effectiveness
... Fred Von Ahn eRemaining Qi3g'jiiational A .......... .....Mark Bezilla
- Long-Term Organizatfi ffiveness Vision.. .Gary Leidich
- Long Term-Improveieint Plan ............................ Randy Fast
- Barriers Demonstrating FENOC' s Strong Safety emark................................................ Lew Myers Focus Closing Remarks .................. Lew Myers/Gary Leidich 3
FrstEnergy Desired Outcomes
- Demonstrate that we have built an Organization with a proactive safety culture that is 'Built to Last' Provide an understan g the key elements of our safety cultured-4.
-Safety Culture Mode
~~~
-Process/Results
, i ,,W I*.- . . 1, 1~~' . -
-Actions taken to date
-Effectiveness of actions
-Long-term plans 4
.erstEngy FirstEnergy is Committed to Nuclear Safety
- Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Commitment to Nuclear Safety, U
_D>Xie '; t oS+:1@ #'
- FirstEnergy Baid of DirectorsResolution
- FENOC Commitment to Safety Culture
- Corporate and Policy Level Commitments
- Management Commitments
- Individual Commitments 5
FirstEnergy
'Built to Last' Commitment
- FENOC has built an enduring organization rooted in and consistently aligned atoall levels to the core values of safe and reliable operation tDavisBesse
- Continuousindtrlnaitnnf yees in these core values Nurturing ai
_-- >eni.
n.g.. ps 6, animent based on a fit with these core values
- Consistent alignment with these core values in goal-setting, problem-solving, and decision-making
- Preserving these core values while driving continuous improvement
- A strong safety focus resolve 6
E-iS IB i.
R-irstEnergy Pe-vOz Previous Organization 7
FrstEnergy Previous Organization
- Potential Pitfalls
- Allowed isolationism adind vidual plant organizations
- Differences i managenesntprcses went unchecked
- Corrective ActkfiiProgram weaknesses
- Differences in cultues
- Resistance to Industr Standards
- Allowed oversight to become part of the problem 8
DI t, Is. II .
FirirstEnnOrggi o Present Organization 9
FrstinergO Present Organization A 1 A
,,A( vantages4
- Common Processes/Indus tryBest 'Practices
- Strong Corporate..G vernarce-:K"-,. e..1, 1 z
- Independent Qualit .. Oversight
- Chief Operating Officer is responsible for consistent imn1PFmP'nt!tinn LA AI A~~~~ LIU,& LL4IA %. XAA
- Senior Vice President Engineering is responsible for development 10 Di~~~~~~~~~~~~F
' g1 g
'I I ~
~~~~~~~~~~~i ~I ~ ~ 1WA N R o
FirstEneg.
Present Organization
- Organization is in:pj-,ace tr safety focus and facilitate top fleet perf6rf 1 : . ,.-
11
FirstEnergy Safety Culture UDefinition UM~odel U Process Resuts UiAc-tions1~a en to Dat e U'Effectiyeness To Date Lew Myers Chief Operating Officer - FENOC 12
FirstEnergy Definitions Safety Culture That assembly of characteristics and attitudes in organizations and iaiduals which establishes an overriding prioritytowars-nuclear safety activities and ensures that issuegeceiv e-fattentfowwarranted by their 4^ ,
Safety Conscious Work Environment An environment in which personnel are encouraged to identify problems, are confident that problems will be effectively evaluated and corrected, and are protected from any form of retaliation 13
F-rstEnergy Safety Culture Model 001:iginal Safety Culture Model Sources
-International Atomnc Enery Agen cy, INSAG-4, "Safety Culture" .4
-INSAG-13, "Management of Operational Safety in Nucl(.ar
'I v Power Plants"
-Dr. S.B. Haber - Performance, Safety, and Health Associates 14
FrstEnegee Safety Culture - AEA M~odel Statement of Safety Policy Definition of Policy Level Commitment Management Structures I Responsibility Resources
' ~ ~...~~~~~~~~~~
[ Definition and Control of Safety Practice Qualification and
, .I:S; 4bt1 Manalgers' Self-Regulation I e:: " : { -
L Commi itment A~n{~ . An.
7~~~~~. P-.
Rewards and Sanctions
- I.,
I . -A tl I Questioning Attitudes Audit, Review and Comparison I Individuals' Rigorous and Commitment Prudent Approach Communication Safety Culture Source: International Atomic Energy Agency - INSAG-4, Safety Culture 15
Firt~n@i Safety Culture - Model Development Organizational Behaviors Impacting Safety Culture 2 ~~~~~E 2
~~~~~ 0<1 3 r
c 2 2 C! C2 1 a E 0 cmE ~ ~ ~-~~~~~~~~~~~~1 0 c c c0 0 cc cc ~ ~ ~ ~~
- ~~~~~~~o ( > , 5 -0 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~S .2 a co (D .a) 0 U .Ujj 0 c 7.2~ > ~
0 0a) 00 -)
C a 2 ) a)
- Q
. E 2 aa) :F 2E c0~~~LL->
U o .o o03 Q. c CRITERIA Policy/Corp Commitment Area l.a. Policies/Core Value X X 1.b. Mgt values in Bus Plan X X X 1.c. Resources are available X X 1.d. Self-Assessment Tool X i.e. Indep. Oversight Tool X X Plant Mgt Commitment Area 2.a. Visible Commit to Safety X x x x X X X x 2.b. Goals/Roles/lntrad.Tmwk X X x x X x x x X 2.c. Ownership/Accountability X x xx x x xx x x 2.d. Trg. & Quals valued x x x x 2.e. Commitment to Cont. Impr. X X xx xx x x x 2.f Cross-func.work mgtlcomm X X X x x 2.g. Envir. of Engagemt/Commit X X X x x xx x Individual Commitment Area 3.a. Drive for Excellence X x x x X X X X x X x x 3.c. Rigorous WC/prudent approach X X X x x X X 3.d. Open Comm-voice concerns X x x x x x xx 3.e. Nuclear Professionalism X x x x x X X Xx xx x 16
FirstEnergy Safety Culture - FENOC Model Safety Culture Drive for Excellence Questioning Attitude Rigorous Work Control and Prudent Commitment to Approach
. a .
Safety Open Individual Communications
[ Goals, Roles and Teamwork
- /
'V. o ofe:'
0-:g to% *
".1W-p)
Commitment Area 1<77o iiI
.,^
1 Nuclear Professionalism
[
,,.'%W Ownership and i' "
Accountability Plant Management Statement of Commitment Area
[ Qualification and Training Safety Policies Management Value
[ Commitment to Structure Continuous Policy or Corporate Improvement Level Commitment Resources Cross-Functional Area Work Management
& Communication Self Assessment New Environment of J New
[ Engagement and Commitment } Independent Oversight 17
FirstEnergy Process
- Improvement of Safety Culture
-Communicated the impoitance of Nuclear Safety to employees
-Created Safety.,Cuture and Safety,Conscious Work Environment 'M&6dls ba§ dbn ciustt-y experience to date and information frof thpe-nteiphatifiaiomic Energy Agency
-Performance, Safety;. aiid Health Associates, Inc. performed independent safety culture audit in February, 2003
-Conducted self-assessments and internal surveys
-Developed Business Practices on safety culture 18
First Eergys Results Performance, Safety, and Health Associates, Inc. Safety Culture Assessment
-Weaknesses in managem ent meetings, employee alignment, communication of safety als, accountability and ownership for safety, and shift turnover focus
- Mode 5 Safety Clture Assessmeni,
-Weaknesses in ndividual Commitment Area, Plant Management Commitment Area, and Policy or Corporate Level Commitment Area
- Mode 4/3 Safety Culture Assessment
-Overall improvements in all three commitment areas 19
FirstEnergy Mode 5 Safety Culture Assessment SafetyCulture ,,Drive for Excellence,`
- g1 Cro t and C 'e Commitment to _________
Safety
- ,
- * >S \ ri -¢ .l~dv~ldua!; < *tCommunications Goals, Roles and .iamenta Teamnwo rk sc .N.le
- '. - u;
- V>A .
- :.;-.:..(:
+;.-
A.ontabhiity . ;:: s ?' Plant S S 31 F at. S . ffi>Professionalism i;
- /--Accountability ;^_,
nM aement'.........: ,-
f .,.., . ., *; . ^9i^.Pa At,.0.L#J1.'° .... i ,q 1<i5It<
Management L-; .^.,,,.Statement of Qualification and Commitment Area Safety Policies Management Value
-r Cmpoementinuo^s> Policy or Corporate ,.t,,,tl Im rovement-. Level Commitment --,-,-
Resources-F.,Cross-Functional . .'Area. ;w'
, .0^.^'^,;:- '^ __________
IWork Manag tS
& Communicatiorn-. Self Assessment Environment of Engagement and Commitment Independent Oversight I 20
FirstEnergy 4 Sa AMode 4/3 Safety Culture Assessment Color Kev Safety Culture 4F or areasare accept-it/h afew minor indi-eviations All n or areasare accept-able ith afew indicators 7e7l7tring management at-tention Allmajor areasare accept-able with several indica-
-itors requiringprompt mnan-agement action I major areasdo not cceptable standards quire iumediate management action 21
FrstEnergy Actions Taken to Date Policy or Corporate Level Commitment
- Safety communication from FirstEnergy Board of Directors oBoard of Directors site visif
- Nuclear Committee QIBfoarjdVof Directors on-site meetings
- FirstEnergy Chief E-l-cutiv i - Hands meetings
- FirstEnergy Chief ExecutiveO'ff er Shift Manager meetings oFENOC Policy on Safety Culture
-Letter issued to all employees, and then made into a policy
- New Chairman of Nuclear Committee of Board 22
FirstEnerg Actions Taken to Date Policy or Corporate Level Commitment
- New FENOC Executive Team
-President
-Chief Operating Officer
-Senior Vie_ residnt FENOC. (Engineering)
-Vice President - Okrsigp4
-Reports directy to oard of Directors
- Company NucleaReview Board Changes
- New Vision, Strategic Objectives, and Metrics
- Nuclear Fleet sharing of resources and experience
- FirstEnergy Talent Management Program
-Ensures talent for the future 23
First~nerrgy Actions Taken to Date Management Level Commitment
- Proven Davis-Besse/FENOC Leadership Team
-Addition of neDirecto f zOrganizational Development byjli a a :ww;' .et InXt-
- New Davis-Bes g*e'men; Evaluated managers oLproper-competencies
-External RHR assessment 24
FirstE-- nergy DAVIS-BESSE SITE ORGANIZATION m..Mm.. . . . . . . . . ,0Xl
- I ~~ -. I: A -
.. I",-I.i -
g g~~-I "a,
V.
A...i I- !i mail Fa ai
-W P iI
- ll E 0 ,
I lweAkMm-vmAlml&wl I 25
FirStEnergY DAVIS-BESSE SITE ORGANIZATION i E i g1 R l
_01_lW ,,,,.
A.
ll g
.w.,j0 .,>,^.sO . ...
.y .
2.^ : . ' . +!
- - id . . .' ' 't! . . '
I' Hi. _ i X r W '1Dt_
i .' . N X s w1i
- @ , W st
>Era :,tj to 4 t4+;.'t . en.. t Bes
. : i .b -
- - S -. S
-. - - I:
- 5* -
"El. flu. 26
FirstEnerg~y Actions Taken to Date Management Level Commitment
- RHR review expanded population to include all management and superviso s
- Anchored behaviorlefxpectations into training and appraisal process
-Development of attribetts Tompetencies) for expected behaviors
-Nuclear Safety
-Nuclear Professionalism
-Training of all supervisors and above on new Nuclear Safety competencies
-Tied competencies to employee appraisals 27
FirstEnergy Actions Taken to Date Management Level Commitment oAnchored oversight into continuing processes
-Corrective Action Re w Board (CARB)
-Root Cau kigor uality^."and,Approval
-Engineering :ssessmeit Boar
-Technical Product Quality Review
-Management Review Board -(MRB)
-Criteria for management review strengthened 28
FirstEnergy Actions Taken to Date Management Level Commitment
- Anchored safety work practices into current processes
-Risk Management Process for ensuring proper management oversight for activities -,-
-Problem-Solvingand Desoenaking Process
-Program Rev6evwPjee
-Latent Issue Review Prcess all
-System Health Readiness Review
-Management Observation Program
-Operability Evaluation Process 29
FirstEnerga Actions Taken to Date Individual Level Commitment
- Case study training focus on Nuclear Safety
- Meetings with employeedto communicate Safety Focus
-Town Hall Cs (Communic a~ion, Chnges,Concerns, and Compliment s)
-All-Hands 'W"mfz _ . n
-Site On-line Articles ,-
-FENOC On-Line Articles Management Observation Program / employee interface opportunities 30
FrstEnergy Actions Taken to Date Individual Level Commitment Supervisor and above leadership training
- Organizational standds and expectations
- Safety Consciouss Woi:Envirnrnent Training
- Problem- sol gID cihsion-n g Nuclear Operating Procedurerollout and communication
- Ad-hoc surveys in department meetings
- New Employee Orientation Manual 31
FirstEnergy.
Actions Taken to Date Safety Conscious Work Environment Definition of Safety Conscious Work Environment:
"An environment in which pIrsonne1 are encouraged to identify probr~hats, Ha t problems will be effectively evaluated'and corrected, and are protected from any form of retaliation."
32
FirstEnergy Actions Taken to Date FOUR PIMLRS OF A SAFETY CONSCIOUS WORK ENVIRONMENT 33
FrstEnetp.y Actions T,aken to Date Safety Conscious Work Environment
- M [anagement Support I Wr C1onfidence Issued FENOC P'o1iy on SC
- Trained all managersan supervisors on SCWE --
- Trained Operators on SCWE 34
-e Actions Taken to Date Safety Conscious Work Environment
- Corrective Action Process
- Enhanced Performance Indicators and Performance Monitoring :f Independent validatin ofopleted Condition Rep drt's$~z,< PROBLE
- Other Restart Impr oveme't-fS
-Process changes
-Procedure enhancement
-Oversight changes CrrAbt ;ro
-Training
-Reinstated trending 35
FrstEnergy
-@ -Actions Taken to Date Safety Conscious Work Environment
- Employee Concerns Process
- Program became effective 12/30/2002
- Benchmarked other nucleiplantsX EFFECTV (Millstone, DiabloE.uanyonSan : AERNATE M~~~~~4 Onofre, Nuclear I,.Kuagement' BLEM, Company) AsR4lUTIOR
- Reports directly to the Vice President .
of Oversight ECP
-Independent of Site Management
- Protection of confidentiality
- Independent investigators available 36
FirstEnergy
- I Actions Taken to Date Safety Conscious Work Environment Safety Conscious Work Environment Review Team
- Chartered team to reviews, proposed personnel actionM a.FE .IV1 t A Oto1 ~'.ii'>X ,J~ (4+,,I,,, METH9D~S'1
-Team comisj~ed of Human e.spour-,c,l ,
Legal, Employee,-. . .
Concerns Program SCWERI
- Team oversaw contractor SCWE Review.Tea reduction effort
- Team actively looks for issues _
which may even give the perception of discrimination 37
FirstEnergwy Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION OPERATIONAL READINESS 100%
CONDITION REPORT SRO REVIEW a
O 0%
co 0
60%
2.
E 0
0 0
"'40%
0 20%
N no m . 0 U 0 Z cD N 0 e> 0 - -
N n w _* _ .0 - 0 °-
- 2 Week Avg 38
'Iw! 1 ll FI
Frstfrg Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS 100%
CONDITION REPORT SELF-IDENTIFIED RATE 90%
- 80%
10 c
.4-is 70%
60%
50%
N~ 0~ ~ ~
0 0 - = V - 0 z C 2~ 0 N C0 00. 0 C 0 0 - 2' R C
' .4 .4 - C c.J C0 N C' 0 J *1 CO -OD 0
- 12 Week Avg.
39
Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS ROOT CAUSE EVALUATION QUALITY 100% \ Restart Goal = improving trend towards > 90% 10 80% 8 0 6_
60%
0 040% -- p 4 20%S M1 1 w f< 2-,
J 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
O .21/0 1 2/6 3/a2 Y39 Y16 jY23 31 46 4/3 412041271/4 5/11 518 5251j61 161 al5 626 9 713 7/20 7/27 j63 810 8617 a/24 31 991 4 1192 b~~rrjrrct (i 1 i !2 i ° i ° ' ° i O 0 w0 1 I j O l O O O 0 0 3 0 0 1 j O 0 0 0 j 0 3 1 1 i i 1 1 0 0 2 AppReje t 0 2 3 6 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0[0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o o00 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 j 0 j0pprso
°jO 13%.
8%
o_ i °O '
Ol2 8% 8% 19/%1 19% ~0 0 0O0
%¶921 0 0 00 01 19% 20%l15% 17% 1010 9% I 1oi27% 33% 36Y 36Y/3% 36,i36,;33% 33%
12.Wek%APdAvg V -
17% 13o 13% 8% %15%
.18e%75%67%:97%;69%67%
6 6%
976%76%9W'6 1
9%19% 19% 19%21 8
6~~~~~ 87/1 7% 93%
~
% 22% P19t 90%
~~1%184%
2190/ 9100 7310%7%
92% %90Y j94% 100% 73% 70% 73%.67%, 64 64% 6t%64% 71% 70% 73%
12.wsek Apv&Apvw/ce 107 Approved C= Approved with comments Reject 12-Week % Apvd &Apvd w/comments - r - 12-Week %Apvd Avg 40 JIMMITIM, Me-NM M7_7 re r I M M I
Fistneg Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS 100%
CONDITION REPORT CATEGORY ACCURACY Goal > 90 %
.X90%
. I - ,emffll~~~~~~~ll I.,-
m 0
0 z
° 80% I=-- -n-=-in--m- Lnnm-in L .-- . . L--- -I=
c 0
E 0
70%
U cn 0
0 0)
.) 60%
(U 50%
N N ( 02NN C 0 CD C 0 ' 7 - rD CO T CD CO r . CD 02 0 N 0 N It - - C_
_ CD 65 m CD
'- 12 Week Avg 41
Firstnerg Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS INDIVIDUAL ERROR RATE 1.0 Good; l a)
., 0.8 3co
- 0.
z o 0.6 0
0 Restart Goal < 0.45
- m - m -
I I I E0.4 Long Term Goal < 0.29 w
- 50.2 S
I - -
"11_
III -
WM%, I -a I I 0.0 lvlluiiI III 2/2 2/9 2/16 2/23 3/2 3/9 316 3/23 3/30 4/6 4/13 4/20 4/27 5/4 5/11 5/18 5/25 6/1 h
6/8 6/15 6/22 6/29 7/6 7/13 7/20 7/27 8/3 8/10 8/17 8/24 8/31 9/7 9/14 9/21 9/28 I_0 Rate- - Restart Goal 12 Week Avg - - - Long-Term Goal 42
'I I _I
FirstEnerg Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS PROGRAM & PROCESS ERROR RATE 1.0 Good 0
0.6 Restart Goal < 0.50 w 0.4 Long Term Goal <0.30 E
a)
I- 0.2 0.0
.4 44 4 X O eC O b22$$$2&O Rate . Resta Gol e A...
v -- - aL g
_Rate- Restart Goal 12 Week Avg - - - Long-Term Goal 43 CO p
F'O.stEnerg Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS ENGINEERING QUALITY 4.0 120
.. ltems mm"12 Wk Rolling Ave S"-Weekly Actual 3.5 100 3.0 0
0 L.
0 80 0~
U 2.5 0 AA 0
0 E 2.0 Post Restart Goal < 0.5 60 .)
A~~_
0 0)
Restart Goal < 1 .E I-0 0 1.5 1 _ 0) 40 -
0)
C Ak- - - - w 1.0
- A4 W. ANN- ,
20 0.5-Eau MN aM 0-ME a%.4-- SEE 00 -ST SEEN B Q~~~~~~U~~
EU EU u E U EM nHn 11-11Hn Hnn nnnnnH HH 0 12W k ol//ngA 2/
06 29 13 0.9 2/ 6 10
/ 3 3 /3 09 09 392 / 6 1
08 9
08
- /2 4
07 I
/309 0.7 46 30 06 4/ 3 4/ 0 5
07 1
07
/ 71/
07 4 5 11 0.6 t07 5 16 5/ 5 5
0.6 6
9/
6 068 06a 66 10 06 6/ 5 9
/ 23 9 19 OL09 9 I0.9 j 7/
14 0.9
/147 04 13 13 2 7/66 0.9q 0.9 29 72 /
3.9 11 0.9 61 11 6 172 12 0L9 0.9 10 6 31 11 0L9 0.9 9/
12 0.6
/1 7
0.6 6 22 5
0.6 We ky c./0. 172 0.9 01 0.3 05 0.4 03 0.6 1.0 1.0 05 1 0. oii~1 7 8 0.6 04 1.1 1.1 1 08 0 09 .99 1. 07 06 005 06 07 3 0 44 C '97 r
First~~~nergn Effectiveness to Date DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION MANAGEMENT AND HUMAN PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE MANAGEMENT OBSERVATIONS 100%
90%
80%
'a 70%
E 0
60%
coi 0
15 50%
0) co) 40%
.0
~0
- 0) 20%
0 0 U) 10%
0%
- 12 Week Rolling Average I 45
FirstEnerg Results of 4-Cs Meeting
- Chief Operating Officer has met with > 700 employees in groups of 15 to reinIorce management support in 4-Cs meetings Open forum wnere employees to make suggestions and voice concerns ___
- Action Items are capt*ud and classified into three areas
-Site
-Department
-Individual
- Management reviews items to consider improvements 46
FrstEnergy, Oversight Perspectives on Safety Culture Effectiveness 4
Fred Von Ahn Vice President - FENOC Oversight 47
FirstEnergy Assessment of Effectiveness a ,Station Attention to Safety Consi cious Work Environment (SCE) a 'Actions Le hli g to M'oIde&4Q
- Mode 4/3 Execution oConclusions to Date 48 Ii W i.I _
FArstEnery Safety Conscious Work Environment
- Actions Completed
- Ems1oyeeConcils Program Program Initiation Safe
- Consou WorkHEn-vironment. Surveys
- Safety scbiious Work. niibfretReview Team Initiation V2
- Effectiveness of Actions 49 1 1 .I : . : L I I : . I I ,.
. .. 1, I I , .
2003 NRC Allegations and ECP Contacts by Month 180 160 140 120 100
- Allegations
- ECP Contacts 80 .
60 40 ..
26 26 22 21 20 0
Jan Feb Mar
-14313 Apr May Jun Jul i0~~
Aug ON Sep 00 Oct 00 Nov 00 Dec Total 50
__IITI~fa
Ftrstnery March 2003 SCWE Survey Results Conclusions
- Significant improvement inresuitsi om 2002 survey
- Continuing ppottyfo mpr~o~vement puhof>6' in areas "BXtasic- Principh
-Management itern-alizationifdespou Basic i I es" in dealing with workers' -
-Management reinforcei ntSo $ 5i`ety:over cost and sched ule 51
.e I ; .I i 1 I I I' .I I .
FrstEneg:
March 2003 S.CWE Survey Results Conclusions (continued) oRigorous follow-through&onC(orrective Actions Prog- ram improvements
- Continuing oppoituty fositedemanazement g ~~~~~~~, WW, E 't~ f. a: j, `rs '
reinforcement of SGWE'wOt tors :i'.
oSignificant challenge IPOCKetsnma,,reas of Radiation Protection/Chemistry, Maintenance, and Plant Engineering for both FENOC and contractor workers 52
FirstEnergy, Response Analysis 2002 / 2003 Comparison 2002 Survey 2003 Survey
-* I Negative Responses Negative Responses U - y y Question ALL I FENOC Contractor ALL FENOC Contractor
- U U U Total Number of Workers 84 1139 666 377 I can raise nuclear safety or qualil 7 concern without fear of retaliation 5.6% 7.1% 4.2% 9.9%
I feel free to raise nuclear safety or "Retaliation" 25 quality issues on CRswithout fear 8.5% 5.6% 3.0% 8.5%
Questions of reprisal r ;4 I can use ECP without feareof 30 jretaliation 4.0% 5.1% 3.2% 7.0%
_ I I I
I I U
- Questions 35 within the last 6 months I am aware of others who have I 7.1% 1 8.9% 1.2%
36 been subjected to HIRD within the 4.8%
last 6 months
<5% Negative Response Between 5%and 10% Negative Response 53 CAO
Actions Leading to Mode 4
.Operations .Leadership Be,,~~~~~ -o f .:
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~jA~: ~ ~ ~ 4
- StatiQo--S afety Culture 54
Mode 4/3 Execution
- Masuremen
.: i Model
'-~~~~~~~~rP ,,,,,f Itt-.I
~Ob~ervatiolns 5 Conclusions .
55
. . i 1. .. :
i
FirstEnerg INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT DURING
. SEVEN DAY NOP TESTING PRODUCT QA PLANT STAFF ERNA READINESS PLANT FCSDASSMN
" GMT. 9(EXERCISES) EXERCISES)
INDEPENDENT INTERNAL OVERSIGHT _- s; 4 ,,s'SAFE PLANT OPERATION PROCEDUREUSE
- EFFECTIVECOMMUNICATION CONDUCTOF MAINTENANCE
- CONDUCT OFRAD FROT.
P LAT _____CONSERVATIVE DECISION MAKING PROBLEM OWNERSHIP STA F SAFEY CLRE.
CORRECTIVEACTION
/FINAL /
- + s . ;t.-: READINESS
. I . REPORT EXTERNAL OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS OA ROOT CAUSE ISSUES ADDRESSED
- I ~~~~~~~~~(INDEPENDENCE, CRlTICALTY) 56
F-irstfeg Mode 4/3 Observations SE . He .
-I # : ,,i I
_'ell;- I .0a'A-'" .,
57
.I
FirstEneg Conclusions M e 413
- r.
dAde 4 1 1, 0K;
^e tif 4 & aS CWE'
- Recommendations 58
,RstEnerg Remaining Organizational Actions
£ 1L Mark Bezilla Vice President - Davis Besse 59
FirstEm-ner Remaining Organizational Actions
- Organizational Actions to be completed
-Completion of 10CFR 50.,9,- 'Completeness and Accuracy of Information' trainin A dz
-Strengthen our ca' u6ion"Prgr' ,
Conacted~
- areand n eondition Report Apparent C au s l i h
-Strengthen our Conditi onep drtt.Process
- Condition Report Evaluators 'will receive Apparent Cause training
- Establish an Apparent Cause Review Group consisting of Condition Report Analysts 60
FistEnerge Remaining Organizational Actions
- Organizational Actions to ,be completed (continued)
-Alignment /teamwork sesibns with all employees
- Onee t ai6ay I ing sessions with employe AfI
- Learning map DO '
-Address Lessons-Leam Wdffd acins resulting from Nuclear Operating Pressure Test
-Restart Readiness Reviews 61
R-irstEngergy Long-Term Organizational Effectiveness Vision f ,
Gary Leidich President and Chief Nuclear Officer - FENOC 62
Long-Term; Organizational Effectiveness Vision r~~~~ ~~~~~;4- _________________________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~J"K - '
1 1
'W~W W;_ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ _
g . . . . . . , .. . . . . . . . .
I 63 V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- -
FirstEnergy Long-Term Organizational Effectiveness Vision New FENOC sio, S bjectives and Metrics
-¢,,4 a.,.,$, z saeS
~'*" la~ eration A P0le e e E tiveness Cnondition Inpr'ovedO-utage-Performance Fleet Efficiency and Effectiveness 64
F~-rs i tE-7:
nerg
~
Long-Term Organizational Effectiveness Vision
- Organizational Effectiveness
-High levels of trust,
-Employees trust leadership
-Leacership trusts employees
-Open coum Mtlpicanb`tist
~~~~~~
-Demon' tkAtdedIZ'res,_elt ,,thr o-a
-Input and feedbawlued'i
-High accountability to each,other
-Demonstrated inter-department teamwork
-Willingness to bring up, hear, and address problems
-Management involvement in activities and decisions
-Fleetwide Organizational Effectiveness Director 65 i
FLn e IpstEenrgl Long-Term Improvement Plan
' I,'iI,> _1 . . I **XI -.
., -. A, -
a I , :. ,:-n, .:
Randy Fast Director- Organizational Development 66
F _rstnergy Actions to Anchor Long-Term Improvement New ofi ers and management Newcoriorate eve.dep-t mentsor feet-wide
- i:;8-*Ae,;@,~affimpromts"'
Improvementslin p antsystems to add margin 67
FrstEergv Actions to Anchor Long-Term Improve ment Improvements for Personnel Performance Training on lessons learned
.iNew~trmLrmanagers and supervisors on sai-y-
>^ -wnuclear s a professionalism
~eprt-iitl~~~
,, ,-yN, eprecthpectations Improvemefszinsnc ormuntioions and teamwork Alignment 0f management and personnel Improvements in personnel evaluations and development Leadership development Operations Leadership New Employee Orientation Manual 68
A cirstEnegy Actions to Anchor Long-Term Improvement Improvements in Programs
..Prograneiewsand benchmarking
. &;JCo1.A o~~
ctqn&Program 4'
perain-x-perience Program Radiatieon-rotection Program Boric Acid Corrosion Control and Leak Detection Programs Operability Evaluations Problem Solving and Decision-Making 69
Actions to Anchor Long-Term Improvement Improvements in Monitoring and Oversight Man gement sevations 6NjwRff6rnmance- iniators-Il.S.
'at'tW S eNtv oX .. _ .. W...,;;..~~-
s New Englneennge ssimenteB oard and improved Cor e iTvetSi then Review Board Augmented independence and capability of Quality Assurance Improvements in Company Nuclear Review Board and Board oversight 70
Fi tPEnan Irsm Long-Term Improvement Plan Ftiture monitoring schedule
- Business Practice to 'monitor' the safety culture monthly along with Business;Practice.. erformance,
- Line organizationxafetysuilture asfsessment prior to Mode 2
,~~~~~$5
. g t w.!;
. ,.,y ar
- Line Managzem aetVeeryt years
- SCWE survey " 2003 (annually thereafter)
- Quality Assurance 1ide'entderF, ssessment in the 4th quarter of 2003 (annually thereafter)
- Outside independent safety culture assessment in the 4th quarter of 2004 71
FirstEnerg Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus a
Lew Myers Chief Operating Officer - FENOC 72
-rtFne ,Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus Indepent lent Programs Oversiq Ihi
.'A Ak
.E
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Individual Commitment - Completed
-Evaluated Supervisors
-Provided Reactor Head Case Study Training
-Provided Supervisor Refresher Training on Leadership in
,,, Action' X W , , ;KI,-,; ,
-r9ieo Supervsor Training on SCWE
-< annership,'and Commitment i> giEnneerinng'-~gRi
~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
'j*,,,,t'
-iW- Fi~a ify7Ds, Ie&isi;M aking;
.. 'A' art
- QpLato~r-Lic>ns e Responsibilities Training
- Shift Manager .ommand Responsibility
-Participation in Town Hall and 4-C Meetings
-Participation in Monthly All-Hands Meetings
-Strengthened Questioning Attitude
- Standard Format for Pre-Job Briefings
-Implemented Operator Leadership Plan
-Requalified All Root Cause Evaluators 74
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus oDrive for Excellence - Assessment Input
-Number of Systems Classified Maintenance "a (1)"
-Number of Workarounds
-Number ofTmoayModifications l________W__~ ~
3-umber o R LDficiencies
~ ~~~~N " Lb r 6I G--; - ' ' -I. g.< ;.
Questioning
'Atiudesnn
-Individual
-@ -a Eiof X.E-'Rates "S U">,.5--;->
"' i Attitudes.: - K*^t~r2Y~eNumber of LogStaidngTquipmentProblems Rigorous Work LXiwercentp ti.eoCr4ndition t.en eports Control and : l tt p-*i Prudent Approach l-Number ifgninerjng Condition Reports Outstanding Communications:
- n-,eEngAeer ssessment Board Index t4 1t*,;
N uclear Professionalism
g 75
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Questioning Attitudes - Assessment Input
-Quality of prejob briefings as a management observation
-Number of Condition Reports (CRs) per person per group
- Number orogrammatic, CRs Drive for . . .- .
_;-Number of roceduieproeblms j:
i,
+- ,,'!
Excellence Pest~o% .g. .<Ni~imber alid~typ~ ~9t~9p9Xaona1events (e.g., tagging errors, Rigorous Work Prudent A roach -...-
Open _4,>-^* D. g Communications-
. Naclear . :
Professionalism
s-3---
a-----3,s
_--- nfl _
~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'7
.__________ X~
II
/U
~~~~~~~~~
- 1- 0 e,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
a ma I I I I . I I
I I Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S
_AA Strong Safety Focus oRigorous Work Control and Prudent I: 111 Approach -, ,Assessment Input
-Employee Event Free Clock
-Industrial! Safety Index . ..
I
- Drive for
- Excellence
-Employee eirorzrate
-. P.rogram processrror.rate.
I :: Questioning;
, Attitudes ':
-.SLgnificant humatnperformance errors resulting in plant t ensen Y*-O Open
-Backlogrpfocedure,'change requests Communications -QualityfControl hld*point/rework rate
- Nuclear. -Number of work orders Professionalism
-Scheduled/completed each week
-Number of late PMs
-Backlog of corrective maintenance
-Number of "a (1)" systems 77 IC
k Alf -fd Ar N
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Open Communications - Assessment Input
- Number of Condition Reports per person per group
-Number of concerns going to Employee Concerns rqgram vs. NRC
-Ad'h; sur spugng of organization
..4'- & ack fromn s Meeting q--
K;lPProgram KeepgJ Performance t^
i 5!u .*
Iw -
- Nuclear V I Professionalisr I 78 Di I' SOGIM.gg M A M01-I.
YI I
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Nuclear Professionalism - Assessment Input
- Completion of Ownership for Excellence
-Training attendance
,.,.Reworf-, Wl.;;
-Rework. veloplentPans.
.' .i lri33~~~~'
9'ts1i; 0 >W o7 ieeqng . ss s
-R7eslts ofng er gsessment Board Assessments
- ?.;9,umhber ofEyelowW qndowsin training seneion Protection events
- Cheti y4erformahce Index 79
! Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus oPolicy Level Commitment - Completed
-FirstEnergy Board Passed Resolution on Nuclear Safety
-CEO - FirstEnergy Reinforced Safety Commitment
-Policy Established on Safety Culture Enh ancedlFENOC alues, Mission, and Vision
-Bjiniess. n FocsAreas on'Safety
, RBoard StrengthenedIncetive Programs Tie to Safety FF.NE ti nn2Structure ornaniza Changes -
-Reviewel Resources for Adequacy
-Established'Independent Executive-Level Quality Assurance
-Greatly Strengthened Employee Concerns Program
-Established a SCWE Policy 80
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Policy Level Commitment - Completed
-Established a safety policy and emphasis on a regular basis by senior 'management
-Ad-Hoc iiiiveys of employee awareness of safety policy
- vrsigh 4;'qva'ionof SCWE and safety performance
, . ;~-'8t--Anchoredtm,"appraisal program
' ,& 4 2Assessed e ,ircy nsi'r g Restart Readiness g w-;
81
1k1h 00V ErI5 Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Management Commitment - Completed
-Improved Management Technical Competence
-Strengthened Corrective Action Review Board
-Established ',Engineering Assessment Board
-Increased&Mana`ger Involvement in Safety-Related Work
... ,:Revised C petencies.i.n Appraisal Process
.' .;Nuclearoe1asmand Safety Consciousness Ledasdership.in,`n ^'Tningnal Competencies t gned Ownesn NExp ections for Engineering
-Establis ahStrongMafnagement Observation Program
-Field and Training.,Observations
-Established High Organizational Commitments
-Programs Benchmarked to Industry's Best
-Design Modifications to Improve Safety Margins
-Improved Problem Solving and Decision-Making Procedure
-Restart Review Meetings for Changes in Plant Modes
-Lincoln Consulting Group Strategies and Activities to Increase Leadership, Teamwork and Alignment 82
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Emphasis on Safety - Assessment Input
-Implementation of Management Observation Program
-Frequencyof -plant tours and questioning of observed conditions,
-uclear afety emphasized to employees on a regular basis
-Qiompletion 4*ofLeadershp in Action and SCWE Training i n' ouragniento f eiloyee queshomng attitude on safety 5 ':~Lr. c' re e, t-<~a 'iag ,6 6.'que ,.r..
o n
,)eCslttr
>"'t"8'4'a;0(;e4 44 s;*M -tings) - iii
-Recognition of employees who improve safety
-Application of NOP-ER-3001, Problem Solving and Decision M1Ving
-Program ownership (e.g., fuel reliability)
-Modifications to improve margins (e.g., containment emergency sump)
-Operator Recertification Program 83
pBarriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Clear Responsibilities and Cohesiveness -
Assessment Input
- PersonneL Error Rate Demonstrahin of c1ear ownership of programs
- .-.$d;Joc suavyeysto.pu eorganization's
- ~ safety, s¢d tes thehig'hes.,
priority Cd ;ftkective tioiR-vi Board assessments of ownership
-EngmeerngAsses d evaluations of ownership
- Program,,ownerstip e.g., Leak Rate Program, Boric Acid Control Program, Reactivity Management Program) 84
PBarriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Acceptance of Responsibility - Assessment Input
- Performance Appraisals/Development Plans
, A.d-Hoc su sreysof willingness to challenge employees,
-, the man rand sueiors regarding safety
., coinsidera idn P
<Qj.Sygtem assessmentuas means to..'increase safety margins,
-FLUS-Leak Monitoring System
- fCntanment Emergency Sump
-Diesel Starting Air
- Nuclear Quality Assurance Field Assessments
- Number of Management Observations Requiring Coaching 85
au FBarriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- Qualification and Training - Assessment Input
-Benchmarking of organizational staffing
-Restart req"uired, training
-Rootcaustyaiening completed (e.g., Tap Root)
- -Opetrbiiiiietmjation training (> 175 individuals)
.: ring ogal reipnsbi1ities of licensed operators S Traing (3 00 :In d ividuas)
-;-s~ t~ e n Safety Culture Policy
-Traiminl OP-E-3.001, Problem Solving and Decision-Making(.'g., DecayHeat Pump, Cavity Seal Post Mod Testing)
-Training on Reactor Head Case Study
-Training on Standards and Expectations
-Training identified by Curriculum Review Committee meetings 86
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus
- High Organizational Commitment -
Assessment Input
- Implementation and training of employees on Sa fety ConsciouYork Enviro onment
-Effective`ploye&Copcern Program
-iR Restart Oversightaner..iAssessment
- --LiSe nsed 1perator.i - - I
- einchffamJ.g st ndustry standards
- Opera~to~-eew benchmarking
- Scheduled Management Observation Program
- Goals for zero temporary modifications, zero control room deficiencies, and zero operator work arounds 87
Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus oIndependent Oversight - Completed
-Enhanced Quality Assessment Organization
-Vice President Oversight
- CNRB chartered E;.
- - iClear-ommittee of-the Board of Directors Qiapty Cqtrdlkhgnment-afty^ QiisW'r Ehviron ment Program
-EmployeeCncern Program
-INPO Assist V isits
-Restart Overview Panel
-Quality Assurance Quarterly Assessment
-Safety Culture Assessment 88
Fnr- Barriers Demonstrating FENOC'S Strong Safety Focus a.- 4 . . l ::i l -- j AL~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'
L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~014d IL~~~~~~~~~~
01141 MODY N *-my ------- ~~~~~~~~~~---- -----
W IA
-. - MN X mm ~ ~ ~ - ----- - --- 4 89
FArstE-:nrgym Seven Day NOP Test
- Challenges occurred during preparation and during Normal Operating Pressure (NOP) Test
- Core Flood Tank Valve-
- Containment Spray PuM pBreaker
- Auxiliary Feedatr Fm f e -
uxlirFeedw)V.aterP N4T Auxiliar i4r ~iy eingt!
- Right level of attentt o nk ti
- Each work activity,$t9--ped uptn discovery of issue
- Problem-Solving/Decision-Making Team assembled
- Management attention focused on issue
- Personnel and material issues resolved
- Completed NOP Test 90
FirstEnergy,
... (k~~~~~~~~~~~
Closing Comments
- j Lew Myers Gary Leidich Chief Operating Officer - FENOC President and Chief Nuclear Officer - FENOC 91