ML060590403

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Continuous Performance Improvement Group Meeting Agenda
ML060590403
Person / Time
Site: Salem, Hope Creek  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 03/27/2003
From:
- No Known Affiliation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML060590403 (8)
v • d • e


Text

-

u^

ee.%^

i i m<^,.

Facilitator:

Note takeir:

Jim Reid Ann Lloyd 12:40 - 12:43 12:43 -112:46 12:46 -12::48 12:48 - 12::50 12:50 - 12:52 12:52 - 1:00 1:00 - 1:20 1:20-1:31) 1:30 - 1:41)

A g e n d a t o i c Qo~rum Verification / Wefcorne./-Opening Remarks Safety I Human Performance Messages SOER 02-04 Proposed Leadership Training for rest of 2003 and the first quarter of 2004 TRG Assessment:

OAIComrmon Site Issues/CAP/Assessment

':Hope Creek Outage Critique Recommendations Report Out:

Operations Chemistry J.^.Carxey 1K. O'Hare E<. Wobensrnith S.- CariSson

-.BJ."Bishop:

N. BerghlB. Henriksen aN Bg

J. Reid/S. Jones C. Fricker G. Rich TRG Report Out Rotation:

January 2003 - Maintenance and Radiation Protection February 2003 - Engineering Support Personnel and Instructor March 2003 - Operations and Chemistry April 2003 - Maintenance and Radiation Protection May 2003 - Engineering Support Personnel and Instructor June 2003 - Operations and Chemistry July 2003 - Maintenance and Radiation Protection August 2003 - Engineering Support Personnel and Instructor September 2003 - Operations and Chemistry October 2003 - Maintenance and Radiation Protection November 2003 - Engineering Support Personnel and Instructor December 2003 - Operations and Chemistry

CONTINUOUS PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT GROUP (CPIG) 1.0 PURPOSE

a.

The purpose of this charter is to establish membership, organization, and responsibilities for the conduct of the CPIG (Continuous Performance Improvement Group). The CPIG is established to:

Provide senior leadership oversight of the PSEG Nuclear Training Programs.

  • Align the Training Review Groups (TRGs) to achieve Top Quartile Performance.
  • Resolve common Site Human Performance Issues utilizing an accepted Human Performance Improvement Model.
  • Achieve flawless execution at the point of contact by identifying and correcting organizational, leadership, and worker weaknesses that affect human performance.
b.

The Vice President - Operations chairs the CPIG and any Vice President can be the Alternate. The Manager - Nuclear Training facilitates all aspects of the meeting.

2.0 APPLICABILITY

a.

This charter is applicable to the following TRGs:

Operations

  • Maintenance
  • Chemistry
  • Radiological Protection/Access
  • Engineering Support Personnel *
  • Security/Fire Protection Planning and Scheduling Instructor
  • = accredited training program 3.0 INSTRUCTIONS
a.

The Chairman is responsible for assuring the implementation of this charter.

b.

Membership of the CPIG consists of the CPIG Chairman, each TRG Chairperson, Manager - Nuclear Training, QA Manager, HPI Manager, and Safety Manager.

I

c.

Quorum requirements are five (5) voting members, 3 of the members must be from accredited training programs.

  • The CPIG Chairman or designee alternate will preside over committee meetings.
  • Resolution of issues will be by a majority vote of the members.

Members in disagreement with the resolution should provide a written statement for inclusion with the meeting minutes. (NOTE: The Corrective Action Program is available if appropriate.)

d.

CPIG meetings should be conducted monthly.

e.

The CPIG is responsible for:

  • Review of Common Site Human Performance Issues to assess the corrective actions in a systematic fashion.
  • Periodic review of each TRG's adherence to the annual/bi-annual plan.
  • Periodic review of each TRG's performance indicators and goals.
  • Periodic review of each program's performance, as compared to their goals.
  • Periodic review of self-assessment results and actions taken as a result of self-assessments.
  • Periodic review of each TRG's actions taken or planned to address deficiencies identified against the program, and actions taken to resolve identified performance deficiencies.
  • Provide periodic assessment and summary of the health of the programs, to the Performance Review Board, as requested.
  • Identify how we are improving our performance through training, as well as other identified performance improvement actions.
f.

The committee secretary, as designated by the CPIG Chairperson, is responsible for:

  • Requesting non-standard agenda items from the CPIG members, and then forwarding proposed items to the CPIG Chairman and Manager -

Nuclear Training for consideration in setting the final agenda.

  • Scheduling CPIG meetings and preparing and distributing the agenda prior to each meeting.
  • Recording and publishing CPIG meeting minutes.

2

Ensuring identified action items include: the responsible individual, committed due date, and a description of the action item. All actions should be documented in the notification system, or as a Microsoft Outlook Task as appropriate.

g.

Written meeting minutes should include the following:

  • Quorum requirements have been met.
  • For each agenda item, a brief description, summary of discussion and recommendations or actions.
  • For each action item, a brief description, individual(s) responsible, committed date and notification number.
  • Brief summary of action items (e.g. new, completed and delinquent.)
  • Written Meeting Minutes will be approved by the Manager-Nuclear Training Ii.

Standard Continuous Performance Improvement Group Agenda Elements, utilizing the Mager Model:

  • Quorum Verification and Welcome Safety/Human Performance message
  • Review of open action items
  • Review Site Performance Indicators
  • QA report of common site issues
  • Site Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Coordinator Report of Common Site Issues and Analysis
  • Report Out by 2-3 Training Review Groups on status of performance enhancement solutions. What are the results? Utilize Section 3.0.e as a guide for the discussion.
  • Review Business Plan.
  • Emergent Topics as requested.
  • Questions/Closing Approved:

Manager - Nuclear Training Vice President - Operations

2/27/03 CPIG Meeting Highlights Attendees:

T. O'Connor D. Garchow M. Schimmel L. Waldinger L. Wagner J. Reid K. Krueger C. Fricker K. Haniin K. O'Hare J. Carey B. Henriksen G. Rich T. Cellmer B. Deppi G. Nagy

0. BurIji B. Campbell T. Anderson M. Crisafulli K. Cutler M. Azzaro B. Detwiler A. Lloyd Tim O'Connor and Dave Garchow kicked off the meeting, providing a handout of January and February lists of events, as well as list of "Thinking/rhemes" to be considered by the CPIG attendees after the VPs left the meeting.

Specifically, Tim O'Connor stated that the CPIG is designed for one purpose: to improve performance and change it in such a way as to take it to another level. He pointed out that the list of events for the month of January was appalling, and February's list was not any better. Tim then gave the example that the stator water cooling pump can't get fixed.

Dave Garchow informed the group that the NRC is looking closely at our performance, and we cannot afford any more events.

Before Tim and Dave left the meeting, Tim O'Connor instructed the group to figure out what needs to be done to turn around the plants, and to notify him when the plans were in place.

A discussion ensued as to what the problem statement was, and what to do from there.

The group decided that:

1) Corrective Action Program is ineffective
2) Management standards are too low
3) Disengagement among the management team and the workforce
4) There is a lack of understanding of Operations/Plant configuration management Some contributing factors to the problem statement were:
  • Too many targets to focus on Lack of accountability High tolerance for low quality

Another discussion ensued as to what is needed to overco ne hurdles/barriers to flawless execution. Two key areas surfaced:

1) Management's need for knowledge of the work beirng performed/configuration of the plants
2) Not enough contact time with the workforce Mark Schimmel pointed out the value of elevating one's knowledge of the plants (i.e.,

Mgr. T-2 review), and he stated that the benefit of contact time includes management requalification and observations of critical tasks. He said that by engaging dialogue between the directors and managers, a follow-on dialogue would then occur between the managers and superintendents, and then down to the workforce in general. Mark suggested a daily 15-minute follow-up management meeting every night to discuss the day's activities.

Actions/Next Steas:

1 ) Revamp the POD morning meetings, condensing information where needed, to allow management more time to strategize the handling of critical tasks

2) Revamp number of meetings on management calendars to allow for more contact time
3) Meet again in CR-255 at 3:00 p.m. on Friday, February 28 to review the Events/Assignment list and bring the following items:

Mike Friedlander's Management ExpectationE document CARB Quals SORC Quals Shift Manager Quals Hop Howlett's Book Reason's Book

2/28/03 CPIG Meeting Highlights (Continuation of 2127103 Meeting)

NOTE: These highlights are a combination of Gene Nagy's and Ann Lloyd's notes.

Attendees:

L. Wacner L. Waldinger C. Fricker S. Harvey T. Cellrner T. Straub K. O'Hare T. Anderson K. Harvin B. Deppi G. Nagy B. Henriksen D. Boyle K. Cutler A. Lloyd Overview of Meeting:

The CPIG Meeting held on February 28, 2003, was a continuation of the CPIG meeting held the previous day. Larry Wagner kicked off the meeting, requesting that the group work on the problem statement and draw actions from that statement. After the group discussion, Larry Wagner and Lon Waldinger came into the meeting room and listened to all suggestions.

Problem Statement:

"Manacgers are not engaged as managers, do not know the work being done each week, are not providing the thinking and defense-in-depth to cause the bleeding to stop and results to be different."

Initial Sugaested Short-Term Actions:

Field Time/Meeting Scheduling

  • MELT (Most Error Likely Task)

Identify and delegate the work Observe Operations/Maintenance Turnover Meetings

  • RP to help Maintenance/Operations SA/CA Problems
  • Superintendent Meetings Weekend coverage
  • Valve lineup Managers on shift around the clock (done on duty week with expectations of weekend coverage, back shift coverage, and 2200 phone coverage Identify five things we cannot tolerate nor accept (suggested homework

.assignment by Bob Deppi)

Short-Term Actions:

Ensure sufficient defense-in-depth to stop the bleeding.

Duty managers' initiative designed to create ownership of the workweek schedule and field performance Champions: Deppi, Nagy, Anderson

Superintendent alignment meetings to create a sense of urgency and an understanding of the current performance by the superintendent team Champions: Phillips, M. Hassler Standard Manager meeting schedule to create focus Management engagement in field activities

  • A predictable and significant field presence for the management team Consistent engagement by required managers in site processes The creation of strategic and tactical approach to our efforts
  • A more productive set of key meetings by creating set agendas, participants, and deliverables for each meeting Champions: O'Hare, Krueger Weekly manager team meetings to ensure continued focus-this will be incorporated into the weekly corrective action meeting as a subset of the CPIG Champions: Fricker, Krueger, O'Hare Intermediate Actions:

Ensure sufficient defense-in-depth to achieve our business plan objectives and improve our quality of life.

DeveloP and implement daily "MELT' (Most Error Likely Task) focus for the management team Champions: Deppi, Phillips, O'Hare Conduct manager observations of Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering turnovers Champions: O'Hare, Krueger, Fricker RP Personnel will become directly involved with Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering corrective actions and self-assessment programs to create improvements in each Champion: Cellmer Conduct a configuration verification of critical plant systems Champions: Fricker, Krueger Long-Term Action:

Ensure sufficient defense-in-depth to achieve our business plan objectives and improve our quality of life.

Conduct a common cause analysis of the January and February events to gain a detailed understanding of the events and their respective causes Champions: Celimer, Henriksen

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML060590403&oldid=5369222"