ML052630219

NRC Oversight Status of Salem & Hope Creek Organizational Effectiveness & Work Environment Presentation

ML052630219
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	06/29/2005
From:	NRC Region 1
To:
References
FOIA/PA-2004-0314
Download: ML052630219 (10)

Text

. I C CU C,'I If REGt 0

'I NRC Oversight Status of Salem & Hope Creek Organizational Effectiveness Work Environment June 29, 2004

• C Cl HISTORY Extended S/D and Watch List - Late 1990's Recovery Satisfactory but Performance Improvements Stalled in Early 2000's

• Poorly-conceived realignment to "3-Unit Site"

• Equipment Reliability/Outages/Events stressed the organization

• Corrective Action issues and Work Management ineffectiveness evident

• ORG Changes and Management Transitions

• C C C; NRC Oversight 2000-2003

• All Three Units Have Stayed in Licensee Response or Regulatory Response Column--Occasional White Indicators or Findings

• Strong Cross-Cutting Theme, PIR, Highlighted in Three Assessment Letters; Continues Today

• Increased NRC Management Attention and Site Visits

• Late 2003: Initiated Special Review Based on:

• Crosscutting Themes

• Events Allegations

NRC Oversight 2004 January 28: Interim Results of Special Review NRC Concerns related to work environment for:

- Handling emergent issues and associated operational decision-making

- Addressing potential safety issues These Concerns included:

- Openness of management to concerns and alternate views

- Strength of communication

- Effectiveness of corrective actions and feedback processes Concerns did not involve any serious safety violations NRC Requested PSEG to do their own Assessment

NRC Oversight 2004 (cont)

• NRC Letter to PSEG 1/28/04

• PSEG letter to NRC 2/27/04

• Provided interim assessment plant

• Public Meeting 3/18/04

• Discussed assessment plant

• PSEG letter to NRC 5/21/04

• Submitted assessment results

• NRC Public Meeting 6/16/04

• Discussed PSEG assessment results and action plan

• PSEG Commitment letter 6/25/04

• Documented action Dlans in summary form

(7 C cI PSEG Assessments submitted 5/21/04:

. -.. _ _ . ... --. - - .I . - . . - .. . I - - I 1 ,R . 7 _ ! - i Synergy Cultural Assessment (Dec 2003)

USA Group Safety Culture Assessment (Ma r 2003)--DBLL SOER review Independent Review by IAT (Feb-May 2004)--interviews and overall review, included corporate Results consistent with NRC inspections, assessments and special review Very detailed results (. 200 pages docketed)

Includes stark, unvarnished verbiage None found major safety issues but overall implications are negative about organizational effectiveness

( (C I

PSEG Action Plans

-IM - 7 77M -M..- 7r PSEG letter recently submitted, now under detailed review PSEG focus areas: SCWE, CAP, Work Mngmt, Leadership Effectiveness, Facilities.

Recent emphasis: Conservative decisions, and communications. Expanded outage scope to fix more equipment.

Commitments:

• Pursue Action Plans thru Business Plan

• Submit Key metrics (SCWE and SCWE drivers)

• SCWE and Safety Culture Survey after the HC outage, submit to NRC early 2005

• Meet in early 2005

• Survey for five years

C C C I

NRC Next Steps We are at a key point right now T. ;==7-.;~T7

.- T1,7-TT--7.1 V 7~A-rn-72", n-,"~, 7 M 74T - .;.! 7 7T == 1 T- , C -7 All of the following are being worked in parallel for completion in July 2004

• Finalize NRC Special Review CComplete Evaluation of PSEG Assessments mCompare NRC & PSEG Resu Its CEvaluate PSEG Plans

• Decide Additional Regulatory Actions and Basic Plan for Future Followup

• Stakeholder Communication

( (I c Regulatory Options-Regulatory "Footprint"

• ORDER

• CAL

- LETTER ACCEPTING COMMITMENTS

(3 (c Regulatory Options-Monitoring & Followup Some combination of some of the following:

Site Visits (some with HQ assist)

Review PSEG assessment in more detail?

Review PSEG approach method for future assessments (with HQ assist or lead)

Focused Inspection followup of selected actions Periodic management meetings (how often?)

SCWE x-cut in mid-cycle assessment? (Probably)

Deviation Memo? (Probably not)

Remove site from ROP due to corrective action weaknesses?

(Not needed)