ML18101A691
| ML18101A691 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1995 |
| From: | Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18101A690 | List: |
| References | |
| PROC-950531, NUDOCS 9505110086 | |
| Download: ML18101A691 (79) | |
Text
- r NBU ISSUE MANAGEMENT AND PRIORITIZED ACTION PLAN PSE&G May 1995
.......... -..... ~
(
I I
9505110086 950503
. PDR
- ADOCK 05000272 PDR p
TABLE OF CONTENTS I.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES............................ 1 II.
CHANGE STRATEGIES..............,..................... 6 Ill.
SOURCES OF ISSUES AND BACKLOGS........................ 11 IV.
CATEGORIZATION AND PRIORITIZATION...................... 1 6
- v.
IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS................................. 21 VI.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND EXPECTED RESULTS............ 26 VII.
MANAGEMENT OF THE IMPACT PLAN........................ 29 VIII.
OVERALL SCHEDULE AND MILESTONES....................... 32 ATTACHMENTS
- 1.
ISSUE SCREENING RESULTS A 1-1
- 2.
MANAGEMENT INTERVENTION ACTIONS.................... A2-1
- 3.
SALEM NEAR-TERM ACTION PLANS....................... A3-1
- 4.
OA/NSR IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SUMMARY
..............,.... A4-1
- 5.
RESOURCE REALLOCATION PLAN
SUMMARY
................. A5-1
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 1 I.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The NBU Issue Management.and Prioritized Action Plan (NBU. IMPACT Plan) is the tool for overall management of improvement actions within the Nuclear Business Unit, including Salem and Hope Creek stations. It provides a roadmap to all currently active or pending actions that have been identified as important to improving the performance of the plants in the near term, and attaining business competitiveness in the longer term. It addresses the need to bring under one common structure existing improvement actions and provide a consistent method to evaluate any new or modified actions.
I. 1 Objectives.
The primary objective of this plan is to describe the comprehensive agenda for the NBU to improve performance to a level acceptable to meet long-term goals.
This will be accomplished by changing NBU's fundamental organizational behaviors - these behaviors constitute the model that individuals apply explicitly and implicitly in their day-to-day work actions.
Changing behaviors involves changing methods, work practices, attitudes and expectations throughout the organization. Once the correct behaviors have been instilled, we expect to see measurable improvement in rest1lts and a self-reinforcing process for sustaining improvement in the longer term. In Section II of this plan, we outline our management strategies for bringing about these changes.
The plan is comprehensive and structured to ensure that we move in a deliberate and progressive manner to address all important issues while maintaining a consistent focus on safe operations. The plan is also a communications tool within the NBU and with external parties to describe the big picture of what we are doing and how the pieces will come together -
what will be done, how we will do it, and when, by measuring actual results, we will have been successful.
The IMPACT Plan identifies the most important actions needed for the NBU to maintain safe operations and improve its performance. These actions are being fully integrated into our day-to-day operations to ensure we have a single agenda to work to and the workload is managed consistent with priorities and available resources.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 2 The overall structure of the plan is consistent with its intent to provide a comprehensive picture of our identified performance improvement needs and the management framework for addressing them. Figure 1-1 illustrates the overall management.process embodied in.the NBU IMPACT Plan.
On the "input" side, the IMPACT Plan accounts for all sources of identified performance issues from approximately the last year, including the recent Organizational Effectiveness Assessment (OEA). Hardware issues and significant work backlogs are also included to assure that equipment reliability and overall workloads are properly addressed. Input sources are discussed in Section Ill of the plan.
On the "output" side, the IMPACT Plan directs the implementation of improvement actions by incorporating a number of existing and new or modified plans, such as the Salem Near-Term Action Plans, and tracking mechanisms such as the Operator Workaround List. Implementation paths are discussed in Section V of the plan. Inputs and outputs are linked through a management decision process to screen, categorize, and prioritize actions.
Like or similar issues may be combined and other issues closed (if complete) or deferred. This process is described in Section IV.
Section VI of this plan addresses the performance measures and expected results for our performance improvement. The IMPACT Plan defines certain overall measures and results appropriate to each stage of the improvement process. More specific measures and results will be embodied in lower tier action plans. The effectiveness *of the IMPACT plan will be determined by the achievement of improved results, and implementing actions will be revised or added as necessary to achieve the appropriate results.
Management of the IMPACT Plan and its subtier plans is critical to*the overall achievement of expected results. The methods for plan management, including the designation of a dedicated project manager, are described in Section VII.
To assure comprehension and consistency, the schedule and milestone information in Section VIII provides a top-level view of NBU's improvement path. For senior management these will constitute significant checkpoints to validate progress in co-njunction with actual performance results. In addition detailed schedules will be developed at the action plan level.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 3 1.2 Timeline The NBU Impact Plan encompasses intervention, near-term and long-term actions necessary to address.our performance issues.. Within each timeframe, the actions are intended to accomplish certain, specific types of changes. The time sequencing is necessary to ensure consistent organizational focus on safe operations, structure a manageable improvement agenda, and provide assurance that improved results are being achieved throughout the improvement process.
Intervention actions are designed to assert management direction in today's situation to reduce the risk of operational events at Salem and, as necessary, at Hope Creek, and to create a catalyst for change to occur within the organization. These actions are defined and initiated by senior management (Chief Nuclear Officer, Vice Presidents, Plant General Managers, and QA/NSR
. Director) to have an impact in a matter of days or weeks. It is expected that these actions will be implemented and accomplish their purpose over a one-to-two month period.
Near-term improvement actions will be those necessary to make fun_damental improvements in the highest priority areas - and develop a reliable baseline to pursue longer-term improvements. Near-term improvements will address specific issues for Salem and Hope Creek through action plans. In addition, attention will be maintained on the highest priority equipment problems based on input from plant operations. These actions are expected to be accomplished within a three month period following the intervention phase.
Longer-term actions for sustained improvement will be those additional actions n~eded for the NBU to achieve and sustain long-term excellence and competitiveness. Accordingly they will address issues in all three areas of top quartile performance: safe operations, reliable power generation and low cost. Many issues in this category will be common to both Salem and Hope Creek, or across the Business Unit. A consistent emphasis* on high-quality results will be needed - for performing work, making decisions, planning and scheduling, self-assessing and taking corrective action. Process improvement, resource allocation, and continuous self-assessment will frequently be the tools employed. These actions will be designed to achieve significant results in the next 12 to 18 months.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 4 1.3 Evolution to Strategic and Business Plans Performance planning subsequent to the completion of the IMPACT plan will be implemented using a business plan and strategic plan framework. These longer-term planning tools require successful implementation of the IMPACT Plan so that a sound foundation for improvement is established.
The NBU Business Plan is a rolling two year tactical plan that presents management priorities and actions for the NBU in terms of safety, operational performance and financial targets. The NBU Strategic Plan utilizes a five year planning horizon to evaluate the vision of the NBU, the external factors that will define the marketplace, and the internal factors that define the way in which the NBU responds to the market to accomplish the defined vision.
Based on this evaluation, the strategic plan will outline the strategies implemented by the NBU to achieve the strategic vision.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
Issues Categorim Ergineerirg Perfoorarre Reliable 11/Bintenanc:e Correctiw Pdioo Eqt.ipm:nt Reliatility Harc:Mae ard Backlogs
_I Figure 1-1 NBU IMPACT Plan Process Aioriti:ze t-qieOeek -
J- ----
awlicability ----
Redi.x:.e risk/Diw charges Manage errergent issoos lrrpementation Salem Near-Tenn Action Plans l.orYJer-TennAction Plans QIVNSR lrrprovement Plan Resource Reallocation Plan Training Program lll'p'OlfelTent Plan Hope Creek Near-Tenn Action Plans Nbnagermnt Intervention !terrs RedJced Backlogs Priootize, schedule ard v.a!ldf OJtage Plans Oosedcx-Dspositioned V\\br1c Plans Performance Nleasu'eS Expected ResUts
- NBU IMPACT Plan Page 6
- 11.
CHANGE STRATEGIES Sustained performance improvement requires substantially different behaviors within the NBU organization. Bringing about significant change in our organizational behavior requires the knowledge of what good performance looks like and clear strategies for how to initiate and achieve the needed changes. Our limited success heretofore in achieving change demonstrates the need for such strategies.
The IMPACT Plan defines five top level strategies to bring about change.
These strategies provide the reference point for understanding what actions need to be taken and when. The strategies should be viewed as phases of the change process - starting with identification and acceptance of the existence of problems (a condition precedent to almost any successful change process) to an end point where it is reasonable to expect that changed behaviors will be sustained and contribute to future performance improvements. The five change strategies are described in the following sections and summarized in Table 11-1.
- 11. 1 Performance Assessment and Acknowledgment Critically examine NBU's performance to identify the causes of problems and needed actions based on the experience of other nuclear programs.
The objective of this strategy is to identify the important problems and issues preventing the ~ * ; from achieving its desired performance results - in a manner such that the organization understands and accepts the problems and their root causes. The approach for accomplishing this has been to conduct both external and internal assessments of our performance, including obtaining the perspective of people from outside the NBU experienced in similar situations at other nuclear plants.
External assessments have included our periodic INPO and NRC reviews, including recognition of the increased level of concerns expressed in the most recent results for Salem. The Organizational Effectiveness Assessment was prompted by this increased level of concern and our inability to solve identified problems. Importantly the OEA helped the organization accept the fundamental causes of its problems and thus is a key element of this first improvement strategy. -
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 7 We also have available a number of internal assessments and other measures of organizational effectiveness such as work backlogs. Even though we recognize that one of our fundamental organizational weaknesses has been a
. lack of strong self-assessment, the issues raised in *CPAT, the Salem revitalization project, the operator workaround list and others are a valuable source of specific items with significance to our overall performance. In addition they are indicative* of our total improvement-related agenda to date.
Bringing all of these identified issues under this IMPACT plan for integrated management is one dimension of assuring we identify the most important problems and remain focused on solving them.
11.2 Intervention Initiate intervention actions by senior management to establish leadership for change and break the cycle of performance problems.
This strategy consists of senior management taking the first steps in initiating change in the organization and signaling its intent to take active leadership in bringing about the needed changes. Specific objectives include minimizing the risk of plant events, including increasing management oversight of operations at Salem and refocusing engineering on recurring equipment problems. The intervention actions closely track the recommendations contained in the OEA, and are intended to be important contributors to the comprehensive actions required to fully resolve those concerns. For Hope Creek management is assessing the need for intervention on an ongoing basis based on the-potential applicability of issues identified for Salem and the significance of operational occurrences.
This strat.egy has both visible and more subtle components. The former category includes direct personal involvement of senior managers in day-to-day activities and increasing the amount of management resources available.
Direct involvement of the CNO with plant management and the utilization of mentors from outside the organization to support key managers are two examples. Less visible is a change in management expectations and emphasis to reinforce the focus on safe operations and reducing challenges to operators. Communications of these expectations and priority attention to the operator workaround list are examples.
This strategy has a limited timeframe in keeping with its objective to intervene and take visible actions to break the cycle of performance problems. It is expected that intervention actions will be essentially impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 8 complete by the end of April and provide the proper groundwork for the near-term improvement plans and other organizationally based actions.
11.3 Strengthen.Management.Resources Assemble a critical mass of experienced managers based on assessment of needed capabilities and addition of managers from outside the organization.
This strategy is directed at the fundamental issue identified in the Organizational Effectiveness Assessment and is at the core of changing NBU 's near-term and longer-term ability to be successful. The objective of strengthening management resources is to bring together a critical mass of experienced management talent t:lble to effect the necessary changes and sustain improvements. This strategy is key to the overall success of our change agenda since it provides the leadership for the specific improvement actions and accountability for results.
Strengthening management resources within NBU includes the elements of assessment, adding management resources with outside perspective and experience, and building bench strength. Assessment of current and potential new managers is being performed against a baseline of attributes exhibited by individuals associated with successful nuclear programs. This assures that each manager, and the management team as a whole, is capable of performing his/her role and communicating expectations to the organization. Some of the appropriate experience and knowledge is not currently available within the NBU, therefore; adding new managers from outside the organization will fill that gap and provide a near-term increase in available bench strength. In the longer term, bench strength will be maintain~d and increased through appropriate development of managers (again guided by the assessment process) and succession planning.
11.4 Redefine the Management Model Communicate and implement throughout the organization the expectations, roles and responsibilities that support operating excellence.
This improvement strategy will establish the proper foundation for long term improved performance. It encompasses all aspects of organizational behaviors and standards that must be applied by individual workers and managers on a day-to-day basis. It also involves an overall blueprint for how the organization implements its core functions and processes in a impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan-Page 9 coordinated and supportive basis to achieve defined results. Examples include issues such as operations taking a plant leadership role and engineering providing an intrusive, problem-solving capability and leadership role in.resolving.technical.issues.
Implementing this strategy involves management intervention and near/long term action plans to address specific problems. It also includes managing the improvement agenda as an integral part of the organization's focus on safe operations, and not an uncoordinated or separate set of actions layered on top of other priorities.
11.5 Systemc:itic and Strategic Improvement Contin~e performance improvement through strategy-based plans to achieve excellence in safe operations, reliable generation and competitive production costs.
This strategy is designed to build on the foundation laid in the near-term action plans and to create a sustainable and self-reinforcing process to continue performance improvement. The emphasis will be on further improvements in processes, resource allocation, and organizational capabilities that support incremental changes to meet desired long term results. Comprehensive attention to quality will be the common denominator of all aspects of performance improvement. Strategy-based planning and strong self-assessment are the key ingredients of this approach. NBU Business Plans and Strategic Plans will provide the mechanism for defining and implementing these ongoing actions. Self-assessment will critically examine organizational performance to identify where and how changes can be made to achieve expected results.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
CHANGE STRATEGIES Assessment/
Acknowledgment Intervention Strengthen Management Resources Redefine the Management Model Systematic/ Strategic Improvement OBJECTIVES Identify problems and their significance Analyze root causes Identify organizational weaknesses Senior management leadership of change Minimize risk of plant operational events Increased management oversight Break cycle of performance problems Critical mass of management talent to effect change Build bench strength Add outside perspective Sufficient resources to operate and implement change agenda Blueprint for orgc:inizational roles and responsibilities Foundation for long term improvement Support of operations Prioritization of work Single point accountability Focus on results Sustainable performance improvement Safe operations Reliable generation Competitive production cost Table 11-1 NBU Change Strategies TYPES OF IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS
- External assessments Internal assessments including QA/NSR Workshops CNO increased direct involvement Multiple walkdowns of equipment tagging Mentors for key managers HIT Team for operability/root cause Assessment of individual managers Recruiting of key individuals Succession plans Transition personnel who cannot contribute Near-term action plans Manage improvement agenda as integral part of safe operations focus Communication/enforcement of engineering role Employee concerns program Performance indicators/management reviews Business/strategic planning Self-assessments Process improvements Resource re-allocation
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 11 Ill.
SOURCES OF ISSUES AND BACKLOGS The sources.of performance issues addressed by this -plan.include a. range of assessments and evaluations performed by external parties during the last year and our own internally generated appraisals, identified plant hardware issues and work backlogs. Many of the source documents focus*on, or were prompted by, NBU's performance problems although each source has its own unique perspective and focus on performance issues. We have reviewed all of them in the preparation of the IMPACT Plan.
External Organizational Effectiveness Assessment NRC SALP Report NRC Inspection Issues NOV responses Salem 1995 INPO Evaluation/Training Accreditation Business Competitiveness Issues Internal (created within NBU)
Open Incident Reports (IRs)
Open QA/NSR Issues Comprehensive Performance Assessment Team (CPAT)
Top-Ten Priority List Operator Work Around List Manager/Supervisor Workshops Improvement Oriented Commitments Work Backlogs Table 111-1 Sources of Issues Addressed by the IMPACT Plan All the sources are listed in Table 111-1, separated into external and internal categories. The external category includes evaluations by the NRC and other outsiders, plus business issues arising from NBU's increasingly competitive marketplace; internal includes self-assessments, known hardware problems and work backlogs.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 12 Some of the sources listed above are self-explanatory because of their narrow scope and purpose. Others are more far-reaching and raise multiple issues. Key sources in the second group are summarized below.
NRC Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALPI Salem's most recent SALP report covered the period ending November 5, 1994 and reflected a composite rating of 2.25. The report noted a few strengths but many more weaknesses, especially in operations and maintenance. An example is operations' lack of engagement of other departments in resolving longstanding equipment problems. One of its g*eneral conclusions was that NBU had initiated many programs to improve overall performance but had realized only incremental gains. The IMPACT Plan encompasses the actions for responding to specific and general issues identified in the SALP report.
Organizational Effectiveness Assessment (OEAI The OEA was performed by a team of experienced nuclear utility executives and managers at the request of NBU senior management. The team's charter was to determine why previously defined corrective actions have not been effective and to identify organizational weaknesses that would hinder performance improvement efforts. The OEA reviewed most of the major NBU functions at Salem. The OEA team concluded that the organization tended to misunderstand basic causes of problems, apply inappropriate corrective actions and fail to follow through; NBU also lacked an-integrated overall work plan. The IMPACT Plan addresses all the key issues mentioned in the OEA.
Nuclear Review Board (NRBI Issues The NRB is an oversight committee, consisting primarily of external members. It was formed in late 1994 and based on a previously existing oversight group. It meets regularly to review plant performance and management's progress in dealing with plant issues. The IMPACT Plan provides a process for addressing concerns and issues raised by the NRB.
Comprehensive Performance Assessment Team (CPAT)
The CPAT was formed, consisting primarily of PSE&G employees, in July 1 993 to investigate a set of unplanned occurrences at Salem and Hope Creek to determine if any previously undiscovered common threads tied them impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan-Page 13 together. Its final report was issued May 5, 1994. The team analyzed the occurrences to identify recurring themes and specific problem statements.
Action plans were developed for each problem statement and integrated into the 1994-1998 Nuclear D.epartment Business Plan. CPAT items (both open and closed) were evaluated and categorized following the process described in the IMPACT Plan. Closed items were evaluated because certain CPAT actions, while complete, have not always been effective in correcting the underlying issues.
NBU 1995-1999 Business Plan The five year business plan describes the changes occurring in NBU's business envir~nment, establishes performance objectives and goals for NBU, and identifies major challenges that must be met to achieve the objectives.
The current version was issued February 24, 1995. The IMPACT Plan is consistent with the business plan and will move NBU toward the performance envelope defined in the business plan.
Salem 1995 INPO Evaluation This evaluation covered all major functional areas including operations, maintenance, engineering support, training and management. A separate training accreditation evaluation also was performed. While progress was noted on some previously-identified concerns, several other concerns were either continuing or similar to earlier ones. This indicates that problems are not getting resolved or are not getting resolved quickly enough, an inference that is consistent with the impetus for the IMPACT Plan. All the INPO concerns have been categorized and assigned for action within the IMPACT Plan.
NRC Notice of Violation Following April 7, 1994 Event The NRC's Notice of Violation following the April 7 grass intrusion event at Salem resulted in a number of commitments to correct deficiencies related to that event. These included actions related to management effectiveness, operations, engineering and work control, system and component reliability, and QA and root cause determinations. All of the actions contained in response to the Notice of Violation were considered. in the formulation of the IMPACT Plan to ensure appropriate closure.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 14 Operator Work Around Lists The work around lists are a set of plant hardware problems that have been identified by operations as constituting a burden or challenge to plant operators. It was developed in response to an observation that operators were being too tolerant of work arounds. The work around list identifies an owner, current status and estimated closure date for each item. The OEA identified reducing workarounds as a priority for NBU management. Work around list items will be evaluated using the IMPACT Plan process.
Manager/Supervisor Workshops The workshops provided the opportunity for Salem and Hope Creek managers and supervisors to review the results of the OEA and INPO evaluation and to identify the highest priority near-term issues and actions for their plants. For Salem, the participants identified eight problem areas and defined suggested improvement actions. While many of these actions are very short-term, and may already be completed, the problem areas were screened in the IMPACT Plan process to assure integration with the overall plan.
Each of the sources described above emphasized a specific scope related to the NBU, Salem and/or Hope Creek and focused on different issues in the areas of performance improvement, regulatory, and/or plant equipment reliability. In addition, our business and strategic plans integrate business-related issues.
Ti--9 focus and scope of some of the major sources are illustrated in Figure 111-1. Collectively, they provide comprehensive coverage and provide the basis for identifying all significant issues facing NBU. While the primary emphasis* has been Salem, we will continue to evaluate the results for applicability to Hope Creek. For example, although the OEA was directed at Salem and NBU management performance, its results are being reviewed by Hope Creek managers for any significance to their situation.
(The figure illustrates this by a solid line for the Salem/management scope, extrapolated by segmented line for application to Hope Creek.) This was also the case generally for CPAT, although it did contain a number of specific Hope Creek issues. In addition, as described earlier in this section of the plan, there are a number of other sources that contributed to issue definition but for clarity it is not possible to include all of them on the figure.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 15 UJ Q)
- J UJ UJ -
0 Q) c.
0
(.)
CJ')
Business Regulatory Hardware Performance Hope Creek NBU/Management Scope of Assessment Top 10 lists, Operations workaro~nd lists, Backlogs Salem Figure 111-1 Scope and Focus of Major Source Documents The number and overlapping scope of the various sources could easily lead us to inefficient and suboptimal responses - one contributing reason why previous corrective efforts have not led to the expected performance changes. The IMPACT Plan integrates all of these sources into a single, manageable work agenda for the NBU. The decision process used to create this work agenda is described in the following section.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 16 IV.
CATEGORIZATION AND PRIORITIZATION Each of the issues identified from the sources described in the previous section was screened to assess the appropriate* issue category and priority for implementation. The process designed 'for this purpose included the definition of screening criteria and the configuration of a team of senior managers to perform the screening. The objectives of this process were to assure that all issues considered were evaluated against an appropriate set of criteria and that the evaluations were consistently performed by a qualified group. The process has been applied to a broad set of issues and problems identified by the NRC, INPO, employee workshops and internal assessments and will be used as necessary to screen emerging issues.
IV. 1 Screening Process
. The screening process was designed to evaluate each specific issue or problem for content, assign it to the appropriate category and evaluate its priority in terms of intervention, near-term and longer-term implementation.
The following steps constituted the screening process:
Issue Identification:
Categorization:
Prioritization:
Validation:
impact.rO May 2, 1995 The source documents were reviewed to identify specific performance issues. An issue statement was extracted from the document including any necessary clarifications.
Issues were assigned to one of the categories as indicated in Table IV-1. These categories correspond to the ten near-term action plans applicable to Salem plus the NBU-wide plans (QA/NSR and Resource Reallocation).
Each issue was assigned a priority based on the application of the criteria specified in Section IV.2.
Each action plan manager reviewed the issues assigned to his/her plan to validate proper categorization and priority. Any changes were identified and justified by the plan manager, and confirmed by the screening team.
NBU IMPACT Plan*
Page 17 Incorporation:
Each action plan manager incorporated the issues assigned to his/her plan in a comprehensive and inclusive plan scope statement. The plan scope
- and related issues form the basis for* plan actions and specification of expected results.
Issue Categories Conduct of Operations Human Performance Management Engineering Performance Reliable Maintenance Outage Performance Work Control Organizational Self-Assessment Corrective Action Program Equipment Reliability Accredited Training Program OA/NSR Improvement Resource Reallocation Table IV-1 Issue Screening Categories The screening team was comprised of senior managers representing all parts of the NBU. The members were as follows:
impact.rO May 2, 1995 Operations Manager - Salem (Team Leader)
Manager, Nuclear Engineering Projects Manager, Nuclear Licensing & Regulation Director, QA/Nuclear Safety Review Technical Manager - Hope Creek.
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 18 IV. 2 Prioritization Criteria Issues were screened for priority based on defined criteria. The criteria incorporate the types of improvements to be realized and the timeframes for implementation. While the criteria contain many specifics, their application is based on the collective judgement of the screening team. Issues where actions were already complete were separately identified. Categories were also established for actions that might be determined to be of low value or that should be combined with other related issues were. No actions were assigned to these categories at this time.
The screening team assigned issues to one (or more) of the following categories:
A - Intervention Actions: Senior management actions that can be implemented and made effective immediately or in the very near term to reduce the risk of plant operational events and induce change.
B - Near-Term Improvement Actions: Actions that can provide high value, measurable change in performance, provide an appropriate foundation for longer term improvements and be implemented and made effective over the next three months.
C - Longer-Term Actions for Sustained Improvement: Actions that are needed for the NBU to improve NBU's safety, cost, and generating performance over the next 12 to 18 months.
D - Actions that are complete or have minimal effort for closure.
E - Actions that are low value and should be discarded.
F - Actions that are combined with or superseded by other actions.
The complete set of screening criteria are presented in Table IV-2.
IV.3 Screening Results The results of the screening determinations are presented in Attachment 1.
The number of total items in all categories is greater than the total number of issues in the original screen due to issue segmentation. In certain cases, an impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 19 issue was identified as having one component that was Category A, and other components that were of lower priority categories.
IV.4 Categorization and Prioritization of Emerging Issues The screening process for emerging issues will follow the same general steps. When issues requiring incorporation into the currently defined action plans are identified by internal or external sources, the screening team will assign a category and lead responsibility and prioritize them against other issues in the category. As with other IMPACT Plan issues, the priority would need validation by the action plan manager. This process would be conducted periodically to ensure that the priority and resources given to emerging issues meet the objectives of the IMPACT Plan.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
INTERVENTION ACTIONS - Can be implemented and made effective in the very near term AND will do ANY of the following:
facilitate safe and reliable operations lead to deliberate and conservative decision making communicate expectations and set high standards of performance unburden operations or make operations easier provide enhanced management oversight of operations initiate appropriate behavioral changes provide better work planning, control, and scheduling ensure proper control of equipment and tagging facilitate prompt, quality maintenance work NEAR-TERM IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS - Can provide high value, measurable change in performance, be implemented and made effective by September AND will do ANY of the following:
facilitate safe and reliable operation improve equipment performance and reliability improve work planning,.control, and scheduling prioritize, reduce, and manage work backlogs reduce operator work arounds integrate plant technical functions improve the management and performance of outages i:nprove the effectiveness and timeliness of assessments improve the corrective action program remove barriers to enhance safety and reliability provide performance indicators to measure the effectiveness of the above actions
- LONGER-TERM ACTIONS FOR SUSTAINED IMPROVEMENT - Can progressively improve NBU's safety, cost, or generating performance AND will do ANY of the following:
facilitate safe and reliable operations improve bench strength in support of operatons improve NBU-wide morale through setting high expectations, focusing on performance and accountability, and recognizing excellence work down equipment backlogs and operator work arounds increase equipment reliability improve work processes improve self-assessments and independent safety and quality oversight improve the corrective action program increase competitiveness while maintaining an improving level of safety performance improve the quality and timeliness of engineering products Actions not placed in one of the above categories should be screened as follows:
Consider value to operational or process improvement by aprlying value-added resource allocation screening process and resource-load as appropriate or drop Consider need from regulatory compliance viewpoint and implement or change/drop by 50.59 or CBLA process Low value items should be dropped.
Table IV-2 Prioritization Screening Criteria
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 21.
V.
IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS The product of the IMPACT planning process is a set of defined implementing actions that are-linked to specific-performance issues and are organized in a manner that is manageable and effective in producing the needed results. Our change strategies recognize several phases of the change process and the need to configure and sequence actions accordingly.
As indicated under the screening criteria, the implementation plan is structured in three phases as follows:
Intervention Actions Near-Term Improvement Actions Longer-Term Actions for Sustained Improvement The criteria discussed in Section IV indicate the specific types of issues that were intended for each phase and Attachment 1 provides a summary listing of the individual issues. These issues will be addressed in actions contained in a number of sub-tier plans. This section describes the sub-tier implementing documents that are being used and their role in the change and improvement process.Section VIII specifies the performance measures and expected results for each phase of improvement.
V.1 Intervention Actions Based on the results of the OEA, and t:-ie escalated concerns expressed in the Salem SALP and INPO evaluations, senior NBU management determined that it needed to intervene relative to the performance at the Salem units.
These actions are consistent with the Intervention change strategy described in Section 11.2.
The senior management team under the direction of the CNO, defined and had principal accountability for implementing the actions. The team is comprised of:
Chief Nuclear Officer Director QA/NSR Vice President Nuclear Operations Vice President Nuclear Engineering impact.rO May 2, 1995 Salem General Manager Hope Creek General Manager Director Human Resources
NBU IMPACT Plan*
Page 22 To satisfy the objectives of minimizing additional operational events at Salem and initiating the change process within the NBU, actions were identified within the framework of issues and recommendations contained in the OEA
.. report.
The time frame for intervention actions was approximately four to five weeks, with completion by the end of April 1995. The short period was to obtain results quickly and to begin to shorten the organization's time constant for change. By their nature the actions were not meant to address issues comprehensively; additional actions in later phases will be required for this purpose. However the intervention actions were intended, and are having, a measurable impact in the targeted areas. Unlike the near-term and longer-term phases, intervention actions were specified and their implem~ntation directed by senior management. This put senior managers in a more visible leadership position to bring about change and increased their direct involvement in day-to-day issues.
A summary of the intervention actions is provided in Attachment 2 to this plan.
V.2 Near-Term Improvement Actions The near-term improvement actions are intended to provide a critical, step improvement in the NBU's performance, particularly at Salem. The time period for accomplishing these actions is approximately three months, assuring that this phase will be complete prior to the start of 1 R 1 2 in early September. T:
. :incipal change strategies applicable to this period are strengthening management resources and redefining the management model.
Management resources will be added to the NBU through the recruitment of experienced individuals from outside the organization. It is expected that all key positions will be filled by July 1.
Near-term improvement actions will be directed at developing key elements of the management model for a good performing nuclear plant as well as strong management oversight and leadership of needed changes. The actions are contained in a number of action plans applicable to Salem, Hope Creek, or NBU-wide as described in the following sections.
!mpact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 23 V.2.1 Salem Near-Term Action Plans A near term step change improvement in performance is required to assure continued operational safety and defense in depth, improve reliability and reduce risks of extenqed plant shutdowns. Specifically, the overall performance at Salem does not meet the standards we require and must be impr.oved.
Ten near-term action plans have been identified for Salem as indicated below:
- 1.
Conduct of Operations
- 2.
Human Performance Management
- 3.
Engineering Performance
- 4.
Reliable Maintenance
- 5.
Outage Performance
- 6.
Work Control
- 7.
Organizational Self-Assessment
- 8.
Corrective Action Program
- 9.
Equipment Reliability
- 10.
Accredited Training Program These plans are responsive to the issues identified in the OEA, the SALP report, the INPO evaluation, the manager/supervisor workshops, and other internal and external source documents. Hardware and equipment issues including operator workarounds; top ten list, system engineer walkdowns, and maintenance and other applicable work backlogs, are addressed under the Equipment Reliability action plan.
Each action plan is responsive to the specific set of issues assigned to it through the screening process. Because of the intent to obtain prompt improvement, the plans do not focus on additional problem definition such as might be obtained through a detailed process re-engineering effort.
Opportunities for these improvements will be identified and directed to longer-term action plans as discussed under Section V.3. In addition, the defined actions are those which can be implemented and provide measurable results in a three month period. Actions that would provide additional benefits outside this tim-e period are included in the longer-term plans.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 24 Summaries of the Salem Near-Term Action Plans are included as Attachment 3 to this plan. The complete action plans are scheduled to be developed by May 10, 1995.
V.2.2 Hope Creek Near-Term Action Plans The performance at Hope Creek will need to address certain aspects of many of the same issues as Salem to improve to top-quartile levels in all important areas. Accordingly, Hope Creek is developing near-term action plans in nine of the ten areas as the Salem plans (all areas except training). The plans will address each area based on an assessment of the applicability of Salem issues as well as other issues identified during manager workshops.
The Hope Creek action plans are scheduled to be developed by May 31, 1995.
V.2.3 NBU-Wide Improvement Plans Two action plans were identified that are generally applicable across the business unit:
QA/NSR Improvement Resource Reallocation The scope and objectives of each of these plans is described below and a summary of each is included as an attachment to this plan.
QA/NSR Improvement Plan This plan includes actions to improve the NBU's independent assessment capability, both to assess the progress being made in performance improvements and to ensure that these improvements can be sustained into the future. Plan elements include upgrading the effectiveness of the QA/NSR organization; establishing assessment groups in the plants and increasing management oversight of assessments and accountability; redefining the Nuclear Review Board's scope and focus; improving the Corrective Action Program; and enhancing the Employee Concerns Program. A summary of the QA/NSR Improvement Plan is included as Attachment 4 to this plan.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 25 Resource Reallocation Plan Both near term and long term success for the NBU will depend on its ability to manage its resources: directing -adequate -resources to the-support.of plant operations; eliminating low value and low priority work to conserve resources and minimize management distraction; and focusing key resources on core functions that directly contribute and add value to the organization's mission.
The Resource Reallocation Plan describes three avenues for matching resources with organizational goals: (1) functional alignment of the NBU organizational structure; (2) functional assessment of each organizational unit to direct resources appropriately; and (3) elimination of low value work including reduction of low safety significance work committed to the NRC (CBLA). A pla*n summary, including an overview of the resource allocation process and progress to date, is provided as Attachment 5.
V.3 Long-Term Actions for Sustained Improvements The intervention and near-term actions will begin the transition to a top performing nuclear generator and competitive supplier of energy. The step change improvement in performance is required to assure continued operational safety and defense in depth, improved reliability and reduced risks of extended plant shutdowns. Accomplishment of these objectives will provide the foundation for the NBU to pursue excellence and competitiveness in safe operations, reliable power generation and low cost. Achieving the latter objectives will generally involve additional process improvements, resource reallocation and prioritization, and an effective self-assessment program to continuously identify needed changes.
Longer-te,rm action plans will continue performance improvements in selected areas. Our approach will be to develop appropriate strategies for the issues not resolved via near-term plans as well as those issues that must be addressed to achieve our vision for organizational performance. A strategic approach will provide the ability to continue our performance improvement across the business unit, addressing safety, generation and cost goals on an integrated basis.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan*
Page 26 VI.
.PERFORMANCE-MEASURES AND EXPECTED RESULTS The purpose of performance indicators is for the-organization to agree and have a consistent basis for measuring performance results. They must be linked clearly to the established organizational objectives and standards, including focus on operations. Specifically, performance indicators should:
( 1) Set appropriate expectations, (2) Provide insight as to needed corrective actions when expected results are not achieved,
(_3) Be a tool for holding managers accountable.
The IMPACT Plan is-designed to-produce specific; measurable results due to the implementation of defined improvement actions. Achievement of results will be measured by the performance indicators specified in Table Vl-1 and Table Vl-2 as well as the indicators contained in each action plan. The indicators are aligned with the expected evolution of change based on intervention, near-term and longer-term actions. In general we expect to see changes occurring initially at a local level with improved individual performance and fewer component-related problems. As we progress to the near and longer-term, we expect to see changes spreading to the work group and organizational level, and to equipment backlogs and overall plant performance.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan.
Page 27 Jnterv.ention/Near-Term Results All identified management* positions filled System health reports* completed and work prioritized for "Gold" systems Reduction in plant events:
- Unplanned entries into LCOs
- Planned entries into LCOs that exit on schedule
- Unplanned releases
- Radiological occurrences
- Rework or maintenance errors
- - Clearance program errors
- Other personnel errors Reduction in important backlogs in Maintenance and Engineering Outage planning milestones met Reduction in backlogs for Corrective Action Program evaluations/actions Improvements in resolving long standing equipment problems:
- Top 10 List schedules met
- Operator work around list
- Control room instruments out of service Employee Satisfaction Survey
-: Quality of performance appraisals
- Effectiveness of supervisor presence in field
- Clarity of roles and responsibilities Table Vl-1 Near-Term Performance Indicators impact.rO May 2, 1995
l..
NBU IMPACT Plan Safety Longer-Term Action Results Event free operations Unplanned automatic scrams Significant events Safety system unavailability ESF Actuations Collective radiation exposure Industrial safety accident rate Operational Excellence Capability factor Capability loss factor Cost Competitive Customer Focus Control room indicators out of service Corrective maintenance backlog Personnel performance Incident Reports Preventive maintenance overdue Repeat cause Incident Reports Recurring CM work orders Temporary modifications Chemistry index Contract service expenditures Fuel reliability and cost Production cost Thermal performance ATS items overdue (Cat 1 and 2)
Licensee Event Reports Low level radwaste generated NRC violations NJPDES violations Table Vl-2 Longer-Term Performance Indicators impact.rO May 2, 1995 Page 28
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 29 VII.
MANAGEMENT OF THE IMPACT PLAN The primary contributors to the.success of the IMPACT Plan.are clear assignment of responsibility for implementation and ensuring that responsible individuals have the resources and authority to complete their assignments.
In addition, it is essential to provide follow through by management to make sure the plan results are being achieved. This is to be done through frequent management review of action plans to hold plan managers accountable for results. These elements of plan management are described below, including the designation of a dedicated project manager for the IMPACT Plan.
Vll.1 Comprehensive Planning (Establishing a single agenda for performance management)
The IMPACT Plan addresses the intervention, near-term improvement and longer-term improvement phases. In addition, as new items arise, it will encompass those other actions important to achieving our defined results, including equipment performance issues.
Vll.2 Project Manager The project manager will coordinate the development and implementation of the plan, monitor and report plan progress, issue revisions and updates, review and concur with changes to action plans and schedules, and inform management when action is necessary to ensure milestones, objectives, and performance expectations are met. The project manager is responsible for the following:
Preparing the NBU IMPACT Plan, facilitating workshops or team meetings to prepare the individual action plans, scheduling the action plans, assisting action plan managers in preparing their plans, and assuring that resources are appropriately assigned for each action.
Monitoring plan development and implementation and preparing management reports and progress assessments for the senior management team.
Integrating plan actions with overall site schedule.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan*
Page 30 Changing existing action plans or developing *new plans as emerging issues develop.
. Establishing the agenda Jor management review.meetings and managing the meetings.
Supporting timely and consistent interface by line management with the NRC and INPO regarding the progress of progress of performance improvement actions.
Reviewing the adequacy and acceptable closure of the action plans.
Vll.3 Management of the Individual Plans Each major.program or improvement plan will have a responsible plan manager. The plan manager is responsible for plan development, coordinating resource requirements and assignments for individual actions, ensuring that milestones are met, and reporting progress and problems to the project manager. The plan managers are also responsible for determining that program actions have their intended positive impact on plant and organizational performance, closeout and appropriate documentation of their action plans. Individual plans will have performance indicators to monitor progress and results in improving performance.
Vll.4 Performance Management A reporting framework will be established to monitor plan implementation.
Performance indicators, described in Section VI of this plan, will be used to measure the impact and effectiveness of improvement strategies. Periodic reporting, coupled with active oversight and involvement by the project manager and line managers, will keep managers aware of and focused on plan actions and implementation progress.
A key element of success will be frequent management reviews. The NBU management team (CNO, VPs, General Managers, and appropriate Responsibility Center managers), assisted by the project manager, will provide the focal point for review of the plan effectiveness. These review meetings have two principal objectives: (1) report on progress on achieving plan schedule and results, and (2) establish senior management expectations and, as appropriate, redirect managers' efforts and resources to assure plan impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 31 and strategy results are achieved. The project manager will be responsible for managing the agenda and coordinating the management meetings. The NBU management team will be responsible for setting expectations for plan managers, monitoring progress in meeting plan results, __ and.. redirecting resources, as appropriate, to achieve results.
Vll.5 Independent Oversight OA/NSR will provide independent oversight of the development, implementation and closeout of the NBU IMPACT Plan action plans. The oversight will focus on performance improvement results and will be regularly reported and reviewed at the management review meetings. Existing mechanisms such as the SRG, MOG and QA audits will be utilized to the maximum extent possible.
VI I. 6 Communications The project manager will be the focal point for developing initial and periodic communications to the organization and external parties regarding the implementation of the improvement plans. Communications. will address the overall structure of the improvement process, how it will be managed, and the performance results, plan progress and milestones achieved. Plan-related communications from individual line managers will be coordinated by the project manager to ensure consistent and timely information is provided.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page 32 VIII.
OVERALL SCHEDULE AND MILESTONES
. The overall schedule for performance improvement will include the three phases of intervention, near-term, and longer-term improvement. As previously indicated, the intervention phase is drawing to a close, the near-term actions will be implemented over the next three months, and the longer-term extends for another 12 to 18 months.
Figure Vlll-1 is an overall, conceptual view of the improvement schedule illustrating the progressive implementation of change strategies, the improvement phases, and the sequencing of expected results. We anticipate that improvement results will start to be seen first at the individual level, in areas such as reduced personnel errors or near misses, exhibition of a questioning attitude, and ability to prioritize work. In time, we expect these improvements to carry over to a broader context to include work group and process performance and ultimately to the organizational and plant level.
This is consistent with the structure of performance indicators we have established in Tables Vl-1 and Vl-2.
In addition to this overall schedule perspective, each near-term and longer-term action plan will have detailed definitions of actions, milestones and performance indicators. This information will provide the basis for periodic management reviews and assessment of progress. The individual plan milestones also will be combined in an integrated schedule to assure coordination of all improvement actions.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
KEY IMPACT PLAN MILESTONES OVERALL NBU CHANGE PROCESS
. Problem Assessment & Acknowledgment Management Intervention Strengthen Management Resources Correct Management Model Systematic/Continuous Im prov em ent IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS Immediate Actions Near Term Actions Salem Action Plans Hope Creek Action Plans QA/NSR Improvement Plan Long Term Actions (NBU wide)
Resource Reallocation Plan Longer Term Plant Plans Strategic/Business Plans RES UL TS EXPECTED Individual Performance Fewer tagging errors Better focus on operations Improved work prioritization Work Group/Process Performance Backlog reduction Fewer operator workarounds Operations assumes plant "ownership" Improved equipment reliability Im proved processes (work control, corrective action)
Organizational/Plant Performance Event-free operation Higher capacity factors Im proved SALP performance Self-identification of problems Figure Vlll-1 IMPACT Plan Change Evolution M
A J
J A
SONDJFMAMJJA SUBMIT IMPACT PLAN TO NRC 5/2 ISSUE ISSUE SALEM --
. HOPE CREEK PLANS 5/10 PLANS 5/31 1-**::-~
1**~-:::::::.~~:;,;,:;~}\\:*:c~ :C~i~']
Develop plans Fully 1mplemenlecJ'.
Immediate action results lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll~
Begin to see results Fully effective lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllljllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.....
Near ter~ action results Long term action results 1111111111111111111111111111111111[1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111~
NBU IMPACT Plan impact.rO May 2, 1 995 ATTACHMENT 1 ISSUE SCREENING RESULTS Page A1-1
j1. Improve Salem Personnel jNLR-N94094 1 !Performance
!CPAT M1/M3
! 1. Improve Salem Personnel 2iPerformance iCPAT M1/M3 i 1. Improve Salem Personnel 3!Performance iCPAT M1/M3 j1. Improve Salem Personnel 4iPerformance lCPAT M1/M3 i1. Improve Salem Personnel 5iPerformance lCPAT M1/M3 j1. Improve Salem Personnel 6iPerformance lCPAT M1/M3 i 1. Improve Salem Personnel 7iPerformance
- lCPAT M1/M3 j2. Improve Supervisory BiPractices lCPAT M1/M3
!2. Improve Supervisory 9!Practices lCPAT M1/M3 j3. Improve the Performance 10!Appraisal Process lCPAT M1/M3 i1. Improve Salem Personnel 11 !Performance 1cPAT M1/M3
!2. Improve Prioritization 12iEffectiveness iCPAT M2
!2. Improve Prioritization 13!Effectiveness
!CPAT M2 14!1. Improve Risk Assessment !CPAT M2 15!1. Improve Risk Assessment iCPAT M2 16i1. Improve Risk Assessment i CPA T M2
!2. Improve Prioritization 17!Effectiveness iCPAT M2
!2. Improve Prioritization 1B!Effectiveness
!CPAT M2 j1. Develop and Implement 19iBLD Program
!CPAT M4 IMPACT PLAN IS~U-EENING RESULTS
!Develop and implement a supervisory monitoring program.
jOperations Department roll down of observation training.
!Original scheduled to complete training in 2/95.
!Weekly focus/ownership/team work meetings.
i Half-day training course using BLD material (to improve
!weekly focus meetings).
!Provide 360 degree feedback to Salem supervision.
!Establish effective ve.hicles for responding to station worker *
!issues, concerns, and productivity recommendations.
!Salem transition to "STAR" self-checking and updated Work
!Standards Handbook.
!Develop and reinforce a descriptive supervisory behavior
!model.
!Conduct quarterly "Dynamics of Leadership" survey and
!track results.
!Revise guidance, policies, and conduct of the performance
!appraisal process.
!Significantly improve two-way communication. Supervisory
!communication training.
!Verification by Vice President-Nuclear Engineering that work
!reduction items did indeed cease.
! Review ND RAP projects to reduce workload and resolve
! NDRAP inconsistencies.
!Roll out and communicate risk framework.
\\Design and administer survey of prudent risk taking.
!Conduct Socratic dialogue (method to demonstrate
!framework application by NBU leadership.)
!Project lists, including Salem revitalization will be reconciled i into a single list prior to Unit 2 RFO (11 /94)
!New NDRAP criteria, collegial self-assessment, and
!business procedure.
!Provide managers and supervisors with a training program.
1 Conduct of Operations Human Performance management Human Performance Management Conduct of Operations.
Human Performance Management Human Performance Management Human Performance Management Human Performance Management Complete Engineering Performanc~
Engineering Performance Human Performance Management Complete Complete Human Performance Management D
c D
E D
D D
D c
F c
F
. C*
D E
c D
D c
5/2/95
j 1. Improve Expectations for 20 ! Self-Assessment
!Access to Timely and
!Accurate Technical 21 j Information (All)
! 1. improve Work Package 22 i Implementation i 1. Improve Work Package 23 !
Implementation
!2. Implement Unitization of 24lSalem
~
j2. Implement Unitization of 25!Salem jCPAT MS lCPATW1
~
lCPATW2 i
lCPATW2
~
lCPATW2 i
jCPATW2 j3. Implement Work Control 26!Process Improvement Team !CPAT W2 j3. Implement Work Control 27!Process Improvement Team iCPAT W2 j4. Optimize Refueling Outage l 28 j Durations
!CPAT W2
! Process Workaround vs.
~Ownership and Continuous 29 j Improvement i Process workaround vs.
1ownership and Continuing 30 ! I mprovemerit
!Timely and Accurate Part 31 !Information*
!Monitor NP&MM 32 ! Effectiveness lCPATW3 I
jCPATW3
!CPATW4 jlntegrate Total Quality
!Initiatives into Initial/
i 33lContinuing Training ProgramslCPAT W5
! 1. Integrate Total Quality llnitiatives into Initial/
l 34jContinuing Training jCPAT W5
!2. Enhance Planner 35lScheduler Training lCPAT W5
~Promulgate uniform understanding of self-assessment
!process.
~Wide variety of computerized and other information
! management activities.
I jAlignment between preparers and users on work package jcontert.
jWork control SRO's to be housed in Planning after 2ROB
!outage.
~
I
!Unitize Salem Planning and Maintenance Departments.
lUnitize Salem Operations Department below manager level.
!Establish full time Work Control Process improvement team
!using Total Quality.
jOn-line automated safety assessment program to be in 1 place by December 1995.
!Develop and implement long range outage improvement
!plans.
~Simplify Nuclear Administrative Procedure process by
! reviewing and combining various NAPs.
I
!Operator work around list resolution.
!At present NP&MM is reporting "Hold for Parts" and
!"Expediting Activity" weekly.
1 Develop methods for tracking costs associated with
!expediting goods.and services.
!Assess Controls Maintenance Technician Training Program.
1Continue to integrate awareness of work standards/
!management expectations into training, I
pmplement training to enhance daily planner and scheduler iskills at planning/scheduling/preventative maintenance.
2 QA/NSR Improvement Work Control Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations Work Control Work Control Outage Performance Organizational Self-Assessment Organizational Self-.
Assessment Reliable Maintenance Reliable Maintenance*
Organizational Self-Assessment Work Control F
D c
F D
F c
c F
c
.i F
E c
8 F
8 5/2/95
llmprove Contractor Work and i 36lSafety Performance
!cPAT W6 pevelop an ongoing plan to improve contractor work and isafety performance during refueling outages...
i 1. Improve Contractor Work 37\\and Safety Performance I i 1. Improve Root Cause 38 lAnalysis Hmplement Higher Standard jfor Corrective Actions and 39!Follow Through
! 1. Improve Performance
\\Trending for Systems and 40 \\Equipment i 1. Review OEF on an 41 lOngoing Basis I
42\\Attachme11t 1 43 lAttachment 1 44 lAttachment 1 45 lAttachment 1 46 \\Attachment 2
~
47iAttachment 2 I
48!Attachment 6 lCPATW6
~
pevelop a performance measure specific to contractor i performance.
I lCPAT S1
!Develop graded approach to insure that root cause analysis
!occurs when appropriate.
1Comrnunicate corrective action process, and review NAP-158.
\\Breakdown performance trending information into various iCPAT S3 1sub-activities.
lSmall group meetings, electronic delivery, LAN use, NTC
!CPAT S4 linitiatives, etc.
I I
i
!Main steam flow transmitter increased dampening will be
\\NOV Response \\installed in Salem Unit 1in1R12. (ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-lLetter lN94194, Task34) iNOV Response !Westinghouse steam line break system being investigated.
lLetter l(ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Task 123)
! Issue and implement new root cause analysis guideline (not
\\NOV Response jfound in ATS). (ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Tasks 5 1Letter land 6) iEnhanced monitoring of corrective action effectiveness and lexpectations of higher standards for self-assessment and lNOV Response lcorrective action. (ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Tasks
!Letter
!10, 16, 45, 67, 114 and 113)
!Schedules for-resolution of _operator workarounds being lfinalized. Line management and Engineering working lNOV Response 1together to identify and prevent. (ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-iLetter j94194, Tasks 30, 31, 32, 36, and 80) lNOV Response jReview representative sample of DCP's to verify UFSAR
!Letter jchanges correctly identified and implemented.
l
!Planned major DCP's will be targeted for approval six
! NOV Response l months prior to outage start. (ATS PSEG PSL T NLR-94194,
!Letter
\\Task 39) iAssign an installation and test engineer to Workbook 1 Engineering Performance D
Engineering Performance D
Corrective Action F
Corrective Action F
Engineering Performance F
D Engineering Performance c
Engineering Performance c
D QA/NSR Improvement F
Conduct of Operations F
Engineering Performance D
Outage Performance F
lNOV Response ldesign change packages that station personnel install. (ATS
~i~a~me~6 j~tter IPSEGPSLT_N_L_R_-9~4_1~~~*~T~a~s~k~2~~~-------~~E=n~g~in~e~e~ri~~~P=e~~~r~m~a~n=re~*~---~c---~
- .......
- ..::.;.:.~,'.,_..!!!::~:.:.:.::::.::..;::..._ _____
~i ~-----1~t-;;A:--c=-=o=-=n:-;fi:-=g~u=ra7 tion control process enhancement is underway to
!NOV Response !provide a sketch for each special application. (ATS PSEG 50!Attachment 6 lLetter
!PSLT NLR-94194, Task 40)
Engineering Performance c
3 5/2/95
111111111------------------------------------------------------------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~ *-
51 iAttachment 6 lNOV Response iUnit 2 "special" modules will be removed and checked for
!Letter
!the correct electronic configuration during 2R8.
Engineering Performance
!Additional personnel ~re being assigned to performance
!NOV Response !improvement plans. (ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Tasks Human Performance l Letter
! 19 and 116)
Management 52!Page 3 54iPage 4 55!Page 4 56iPage 4 57!Page 5 58!Page 5 59!Page 5 60!Page 6 61!Page6 62!Page 7
!Quarterly meetings between Operations Manager and
!NOV Response iseniqr. Nuclear Shift Supervisors, Operating Engineer and
!Letter
!Operations staff. (ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Task 74).
!Updated observation training being provided to station and.
lNOV Response !selected non-station individuals. (ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-
!Letter
!N94194, Task 117)
!Operations management observes crew performance early
! NOV Response i in simulator training and as follow-up. (A TS PSEG PSL T iLetter
!NLR-N94194, Task 76)
!Line management is required to spend quality time in the iNOV Response ifield observing work activities and reinforcing expectations
!Letter i(ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Task 77) jFocus, ownership, and teamwork meetings (weekly). (ATS
!NOV Response iPSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Tasks 79, 65, 62, 59, 48, and iLetter
!others)
! NOV Response !
!Letter
!"Dynamics of Leadership" survey.
!Review of individual performance appraisals to assess iNOV Response !whether they reflect individual performance. Appraise
!Letter
!certain employees first.
!Salem Station management is re-evaluating this work l NOV Response ! (prioritization process) to align with operating needs of the
!Letter
!station.
!Process to provide individuals with feedback on status of
!NOV Response !equipment problems they identify. ((ATS PSEG PSLT NLR-
!Letter
!N94194, Task 58 and 001) i i Interfaces between station line management and
!NOV Response !engineering being strengthened to communicate and resolve
!Letter
!equipment deficiencies.
i NOV Response !
63!Page a lLetter
!Unitization of Operations Department by June 1996.
iMaintenance Organization On!
!Management will continue to review reorganization/
!going Review for Additional
!NOV (NLR-
!unitization of Maintenance. (PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, 64!Changes iN94194)
!Task 21) 4 Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations Human Performance Management Human Performance Management Engineering Performance Reliable Maintenance Engineering Performance Reliable Maintenance Reliable Maintenance D
F D
c D
D D
c D
F D
F F
F 5/2/95
!Improve Self-Assessments 6S!and Corrective Actions jNOV (NLR-jExpectations of higher standard for self-assessment and
!N94194, Page jcorrective actions... are being communicated. ( PSEG PSL T ja)
!NLR-N94194, Tasks 17, 108) j'*
!NOV (NLR-
~Perform third party effectiveness evaluation of NSR. Make jN94194, Page !key personnel changes. Form Nuclear Review Board
- ---::-67~\\..:..:.I m.:..:.Jpc:..:.r..::..ov.:..:e:..:..:m;,:,,;:e:..:..:n:.:::ts:....:.in:..:...:...;N..::..S;...;;R.....,..,,...---:....;i~9)!'=-::-::-::--=----t"l (.._N_R_B.._)._,(_PS_F '3 PSL T NCR-N94194, Tasks 41, 42, and 43) iSupplemental NSR Staffing injNOV (NLR-llnterim (Management
!N94194, Page !Until NRB established, supplement NSR with five individuals
- s8\\0versight Group)
!9) l(Management Oversight Group).
I I
I
!NOV (NLR-
!Training on new root cause guideline will be provided to
!training on New Root Cause \\N94194, Page \\Nuclear Department personnel involved in root cause 69\\Guideline 110)
!evaluations.
70lPerformance Measure 71 lATS Item I
72!ATS Item 73lATS Item
~
\\ATS Item 4/7/94 NOV 7 4 ! Response 75lATS Item
!NOV (NLR-
\\N94194, Page l10)
! Initiate the use of seven performance measures listed in the
!NOV to evaluate performance. Evaluate them periodically
!to confirm performance objects are being met and adjust 1 indicators if necessary as experience suggests. (PSEG lPSLT NLR-N94194, Task 104)
!Develop and show to all NBU employees a video on April 7 jNOV Response jevent. (PSEG PSLT NLR-N94194, Task 0018) l l Provide Nuclear Engineering Project Managers with roles l
\\and responsibilities for proper coordination of work. (PSEG
!NOV Response !PSLT NLR-N94194, Task 0027)
! Issue a letter to Controls Techs requiring them to perform
!two verifications when in doubt about configuration. (PSEG 1NOVResponse jPSLTNLR-N94194, Task054)
!PSEG PSL T j.
1 lNLR-N94194,
!Assure that (Operations) performance objectives are met by l
!Task 102
!using four effectiveness measures (Task 102).
1 jPSEG PSLT
!NLR-N94194,
!Task 106 jPSEG PSLT
!NLR-N94194,
!Continue communication on dynamics of leadership model luntil all supervisors have completed BLD training.
QA/NSR Improvement QA/NSR Improvement QA/NSR Improvement Corrective Action Engineering Performance Reliable Maintenance
- Conduct of Operations Human Performance Management D
F D
F B
D D
D c
c c
!Tasks 108, 111 1communicate and reinforce expectation that employees are 76lATSltem~~~~~~--'l~&~1~1~2:;__~~---"!~re_s~p_o~ns_i~bl_e~f~or~i~d_en~t~if~yi~n~g~p~ro~b~le~m.:.:..;;.:s.~~~~~~~~__._~~~~~~~~~,L_~~~--=D:__~~~---l 5
512195
77iATS Item iEstablish process controls to ensure that emphasis is placed
~PSEG PSLT 1on expectation for problem identification and timely iNLR-N94194,
~resolution. Includes contingency planning for possible
!Task 122 & 124 !negative results.
iOngoing reanalysis of existing projects to ensure Salem 78!Attachment 4, Page 3
!NLR N94094
!management concurs with project scope and priorities.
iSalem QA Manager is meeting with operating shifts during 79!Attachment 4, Page 4
!NLR-N94094
!requ~lification cycle to explain quality.
!Initiated semi-annual QA assessments of each Salem 80,Attachment 4, Page 4
!NLR-N94094
!station department. First set due in July 1994.
iGeneral Manager-QA/NSR personally working with audits 81\\Attachment4, Page 4 INLR-N94094 jgroup to enhance audit effectiveness.
pnitiated periodic issues meetings. QA/NSR managers 821Attachment 4, Page 4 lNLR-N94094 jattend.
iSalem QA meets after POD to define emergent ALL Action Plans, Value Added Resource Allocation Engineering Performance Conduct of Operations QA/NSR Improvement QA/NSR Improvement QA/NSR Improvement F
F D
F F
F F
83!Attachment 4, Page 5 1NLR-N94094 lsurveillances on critical evolutions that day.
QA/NSR Improvement
.:..:.:.....;.!...:....;:;:=~;...._~~t--~~~~--!r.-;-----------=-~--:~;--~--;:~;----;---"---;-;--;:----;:-----;-~-t-~~~~-'-~~~--+~~~~~~~~~~
1Management oversight group. Daily and weekly feedback.
84!Attachment 4, Page 5 INLR-N94094 jMonthly report.
!Marsh grass mitigation plan. (PSEG PSLT NLR-N94094, 85lAttachment 5, Pages 1-4 lNLR-N94094 ffask 10) 86 !Attachment 6 87 !Attachment 6 881Attachment 6 89 !Attachment 6
~
90lAttachment 6
~
91 !Attachment 6 I
92!Attachment 6 93 jAttachment 6
!NLR-N94094 iOnsite Safety Review Group has been assigned
~responsibility for reviewing outage schedules and performing 1qualitative risk assessment.
1Middle-level management personnel to review and approval
!NLR-N94094
!controls troubleshooting. (interim) jNLR-N94094
!NLR-N94094
~
lNLR-N94094
~
! NLR-N94094 I
l NLR-N94094
!NLR-N94094 1PSE&G is carefully reviewing the scope of future outages...
j PSE&G will direct craft supervisory personnel responsible
!tor complex DCP's to arrive onsite prior to the outage for 1 preparation.
I iAll outage craft personnel will receive additional training in
!safety tagging program.
I
! Establish separate Work Control Centers for Unit 1 and Unit i2.
I iWork Control High Impact (HIT) Team performs pre-outage jprocess reviews and reviews of lessons learned. (Outage
!Process Improvement Team) jPSE&G management will assess the effectiveness of the
!corrective adions via tracking and trending of personnel jerror incident reports related to work control and field
!observation results.
6 Engineering Performance Outage Performance Reliable Maintenance Outage Performance
- Outage Performance Outage Performance Conduct of Operations Work Control QA/NSR Improvement c
c c
D F
D D
F c
!A - Report upgrading,
~ B - Corrective Action
!Program 512195
!Evaluate methods to mitigate the impact of marsh grass on
!the Salem Circulating Water Intake. (PSEG PSL T NLR-94!Attachment 1 NLR-N94078
!N94078, Task 4)
Engineering Performance c
! Incorporate procedure changes from April 7 event into 95!Attachment 1 NLR-N94078
!license operator regualification.
\\Reinforce during operator training that Terror recorder Conduct of Operations D
jshould not be read as indicators of required rod speed 96 lAttachment 1 NLR-N94084 lduring, power changes.
Conduct of Operations c
Post-SALP Management jLack of Operator Questioning Presentation
\\Roll down of expectations regarding questioning attitude and 97!Attitude 1/12/95
!self-checking roll down to all crews.
Conduct of Operations A
kack of Operator Questioning Post-SALP Presentation lPersonal accountability for actions when warranted.
Human Performance 98 !Attitude 1/12/95
!Counseling of individuals and documentation in appraisals.
Management A
jLack of C perator Questioning Post-SALP Presentation
~Observation program contains a self-check competency 99 !Attitude 1/12/95
~area.
Conduct of Operations A
kack of Operator Questioning Post-SALP Presentation 100 \\Attitude 1/12/95
\\Improved shift briefs - monitored by management.
Conduct of Operations A
Post-SALP
!Team self-assessment in two focus areas: NEO field 1Lack of Operator Questioning Presentation 1operations and wee retest activities to be conducted 101 !Attitude 1/12/95 12/13/95.
Conduct of Operations D
!Acceptance of Long-standing Post-SALP
\\Equipment Deficiencies/Work Presentation
\\Implementation of station "WIN" team led by an SRO -
102!Arounds 1/12/95
\\current NSS.
Work Control F
!Acceptance of Long-standing Post-SALP
- lPlanning to commence quarterly NSS meetings designed by lEquipment Deficiencies/Work Presentation 103!Arounds 1/12/95
!SNSS's.
Conduct of Operations B
Post-SALP j Non-conservative/unsound Presentation
! Licensed operators received GL 91-18 training with specific 1 O(Operability Calls 1/12/95
!examples cited.
Conduct of Operations c
Post-SA LP
!Operations Manager/Operating Engineer to review each
\\Non-conservative/unsound Presentation
\\operability determination with initiating SRO. Communicate 105 \\Operability Calls 1/12/95
! lessons learned to all SNSS's.
Conduct of Operations A
I
~
Post-SALP
\\Operability directive to be issued by April 1995. Observation j Non-conservative/Unsound Presentation
!program guideline and TS interpretation/LCR review to be 106!0perability Calls 1/12/95
!completed by April 1995.
Conduct of Operations c
7 5/2/95
l
!Con~ervative Decision i107iMakmg
~
!Conservative Decision i1D8lMaking
! Conservative Decision 109lMaking I
1 Conservative Decision 11o!Making
!Inadequate Supervisory 111 l Effectiveness
!Inadequate Supervisory 112 l Effectiveness Inadequate Supervisory 113 Effectiveness Inadequate Supervisory 114 Effectiveness Maintenance Supervisory 115 Effectiveness Maintenance Root Cause/
116 Corrective Action
!Post-SALP
!Management
! Presentation l1/12/95
!Post-SALP
!Management
! Presentation
!1112/95 jPost-SALP
!Management
! Presentation l1/12/95 I
!Post-SALP
!Management 1 Presentation l1/12/95
!Post-SALP
!Management
! Presentation l1/12/95 lPost-SALP jManagement 1 Presentation l1/12/95 lPost-SALP
!Management
!Presentation l1/12/95 I
!Post-SALP
! Management
! Presentation l1/12/95 iPost-SALP
!Management
! Presentation l1/12/95 lPost-SALP
!Management
! Presentation l1/12/95
~Conduct combined training staff/operations management imeetings.
Conduct of Operations
! Evaluate all down power evolutions greater than 5% per
!minute (by Operating Engineer) to determine whether lturbine trip was required.
Conduct of Operations
!Operating Engineer/Operations Manager involvement in reactor startup and shutdown evolutions.
Conduct of Operations
!General ManagerNice President/Chief Nuclear Officer to jmeet with all operating crews (Salem/Hope Creek) annually lto reinforce expectations.
Conduct of Operations
!Increased standards of acceptance in licensed operator and
!new license training.
Conduct of Operations
! Increase focus on field tagging activities. Review 2R08
!tagging IR's.
Conduct of Operations
!Operations Manager, Operating Engineer to conduct training ion 2ROB IR's before 1 R12.
Conduct of O[!Orations
!Plan to visit two other nuclear facilities in 1995 with cross
!section of department.
Conduct of Operations
!Assign specific systems to supervisors.
Engineering Performance Root cause of component failure at technician level. (Root cause determination by worker.)
Corrective Action 8
F D.*
D c
c c
c F
F B
512195
Management Maintenance Root Cause/
Presentation Training (on root cause at equipment level for worker).
117 Corrective Action 1/12/95 Related to No. 69 above, but not identical.
Corrective Action c
Post-SALP Management Feedback from workers on quality of work package Maintenance Root Cause/
Presentation (commonly called "blue sheets"). Not feedback to workers 118 Corrective Action 1/12/95 on AR processing.
Work Control A
Post-SALP
\\A team from the disciplines and Planning will evaluate the
~Planning-Incorporation of Management
~existing feedback process, its effectiveness, and potential 119iFeedback Presentation i enhancements.
Work Control A
Post-SALP jQAINSR Meaningful Management lOrganizational effectiveness review underway - capability 120 iAssessments Presentation land structure (of QA/NSR).
QA/NSR lmproveme.nt.
F Post-SALP jQAINSR Meaningful Management 121 \\Assessments Presentation lAdded emphasis on emerging plant issues/challenges.
QA/NSR Improvement F
Post-SALP jQA/NSR Meaningful Management jlncreased up-front input from line management. Increase 122 iAssessments Presentation Hine management participation in scoping assessment plans.
QA/NSR Improvement c
Post-SALP lOAINSR Meaningful Management 123 lAssessments Presentation Hncreased use of technical specialists.
QA/NSR Improvement c
Post-SALP
~QA/NSR Meaningful Management jRevised expectations for QA/NSR personnel conduct of 124 lAssessments Presentation 1 assessments.
QA/NSR Improvement F
1 Post-SALP 1
lQA/NSR Customer Management l Uphold QA/NSR responsibility for generating good products 125 ! ExEectations Presentation
\\identify meaningful issues.
QA/NSR Improvement F
Post-SALP
\\QA/NSR Customer Management jQAINSR - package and communicate results in a timely and 126 ! ExEectations
- Presentation
!useful way.
QA/NSR Improvement F
Post-SALP
~
~
! QA/NSR Customer Management
~Enforce timely and thorough response from line 127 ! Exeectations Presentation i organizations.
QA/NSR Improvement B
Post-SALP
~ QA/NSR Use of Assessment Management iclarify expectations for follow-up by QA/NSR.
128 ! Results Presentation QA/NSR Improvement F
Post-SALP jQAINSR Use of Assessment Management
~Concur with adequacy of cause determinations for QA 129iResults Presentation lfindings-sample others.
QA/NSR Improvement F
9 5/2/95
!OAJNSR Use of Assessment i 130 i Results jQAINSR Use of Assessment 1131 iResults i132iHandling Tech. Spec. LCO's i I Maintenance-Corrective
\\ 133 lAction Effectiveness iMaintenance-Adequacy of i Procedures/Procedural i 134 iAdherence i
!Maintenance-Excessive l135lProcedure Change Backlog I
I l j Post-Maintenance Test
~ 136 ~Requirements
!Salem In-Service Testing l13iProgram iPost-SALP l Management i Presentation
!Post-SALP
!Management 1 Presentation
!Salem SALP
!Report dated i1/3/95
!Salem SALP i Report dated
!113/95
!Salem SALP
!Report dated
!113/95
!Salem SALP
! Report dated l1/3/95 I
iSalem SALP
~Report dated
!113/95
!Salem SALP
!Report dated l1/3/95
!Salem SALP lSW lntake/RHR Pump Room I Report dated i 138 ! Material Condition
! 1 /3/95
!Salem SALP i'
!Report dated i 139 i Engineering
! 1 /3/95 I
I I
j iSalem SALP
! Report dated l 140 J Engineering
! 1 /3/95
! 141 ! 1.2 Root Cause Analysis I
I I !2.1 Safety Focus and
! 142 i Management Involvement
!Salem Pilot
!Assessment
!9128/94 lSalem Pilot lAssessment
!9128/94 iFollow-up to verify corrective actions were effective.
'Remeasure" to verify change in performance.
Non-9pnservative approach to entering and exiting Tech.
Spec. LCO's repeatedly for same underlying cause.
Corrective action effectiveness of maintenance activities identified as deficient in SALP report and in most recent INPO findings.
Maintenance - quality of procedures and procedural adherence are rated as deficiencies.
Maintenance assessment in SALP identifies excessive procedure change backlog.
Improvement needed in controlling procedures and training of planners on specifying post-maintenance testing/retest requirements.
Program weakness identified in IST program by comprehensive and self-critical PSE&G audits, but not acted upon.
Degraded conditions still noted in SW Intake and RHR Pump Rooms.
Inconsistent implementation of management expectations for support provided to station to resolve equipment performance problems.
Describes material issuance problems which led to incorrect parts installations (PORV's/EDG injector bolts).
Salem is not realizing full potential benefit of SERT process.
Corrective action system deficiencies are allowing uncorrected plant problems to escalate into plant events, &
SERT process is not identifying deficiencies in the corrective actions systems.
Site management needs to improve its general oversight of operations activities (emergent work, operability, workload, outage risk management).
10 QA/NSR Improvement F
QA/NSR Improvement F
Conduct of Operations c
Reliable Maintenance B
Reliable Maintenance c
Reliable Maintenance B
Work Control B
Engineering Performance B
Engineering Performance c
Engineering Performance B
Reliable Maintenance B
QA/NSR Improvement B
Conduct of Operations F
5/2/95
iSalem Pilot
!Assessment
!143!3.3 Understanding of Design !9128/94
!cso training is provided but... does not include recent
!events in which the plant's design was a factor.
, i 144 ! Concern I
~
i 145 i Concern
\\ 146 \\Concern
!The effectiveness of simulator training has been adversely
!affected by exercise guides not used as written/approved; iSalem INPO
!instructor ineffectiveness (repeat). Simulator deficiencies not
!Debrief 3/10/95 ~being briefed to the crew.
iSalem INPO jDebrief 3/10/95 joper~tions - events not looked at in the aggregate.
!Salem INPO
!Some foreign material intrusion problems exist due to
\\Debrief 3/10/95 \\inadequate worker an~ supervisor knowledge...
jEvaluate current methods of control and oversight of the
!NRC Inspection !various groups that perform modification or maintenance
!147iATS Item i272/94-201 jactivities on site. (Task 0030)
Engineering Performance Organizational Self-Assessment Conduct of Operations Reliable Maintenance Engineering Performance c
A A
B c
I i
1
!PSEG PSLT
!Review Salem EDSFI findings for applicability to Hope h4BlATSltem~---------'i~N~L~R~-N77.'.94~1~7~9~~l~C~re~e~k~*~(T~a7.s~k~8~,_9~*~10~)7---:--:----:----:--:--:-:--:-""7":"-~:-i-~E~n~gi~n=e~er~in~g~P~e~rf~o~r~m~a~n=ce~*+------=c=--------i iNRC-VIOL-
!Ensure unitized work control centers are established by end l149lATS Item
!150iATS Item
!151 !ATS Item
!152\\ATS Item l153lATS Item I
I l1541ATS Item l155lATS Item I
I l1ssiATS Item
!272/93-23-01
!of 1996. (Task 0003)
!PSEG PSLT lNLR-N93032
!NRC-VIOL-
!272/94-21-04 jNRC-VIOL-
!311/94-24-01
!INPO Find lHC94-0A.1-1 I
!INPO Find lC94-1.2A-1
!submit closure letter to NRC for all actions. (Task 5)
)Revise pump surveillance procedures to include notification
!requirements when performing post maintenance testing.
!(Task 2)
Hncorporate lessons learned into requal Segment 3 for
!Salem licensed operators. (Task 2)
)Ongoing effectiveness review of management actions to
!address procedural adherence requirements, worker
!proficiency and other deficiencies. (Task 4)
I
!Complete required training after issuance of qualification
!guides. (Task 5) ilNPO Find
!c94-1.2A-1
!NOIT will continue as long as effective. (Task 1S)
!Establish useful performance measures for design change jlNPO Find
!quality and expectations for design quality based on those
!C94-2.4A-1
!measures. (Task 10)
\\INPO Find
!Monthly and annual assessments of plant safety
!157!ATS Item jC94-2.7A-1
!performance by ISEG (NSR). (Tasks 1 & 2)
!INPO Find
!Simplify NA.AP-0059 followed by remainder of NAPs
!158!ATS Item
\\C94SA-1.1A-2 !(approximately 40).
(ATS Task 3)
~~~~~-------:;.;:!
l;..:N;:;P;;;O~F::;i~nd:;--~!r-;;A:-:s:::su:-::r=e-=a~ll;-::instructors receive OEF train-the-trainer skills.
!159!ATS Item
!C94SA-2.3-1
!(Task 2) 11 Conduct of Operations Engineering Performance
- Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations Human Performance Management Engineering Performance QA/NSR Improvement F
D c
c F
c c
D F
c c
512195
160 iA TS Item 161 iATS Item l162~ATS Item l163iATS Item i 16(A TS Item
~165iATS Item i166iATS Item r---:
E l1a1lATS Item
\\168lATS Item i169iATS Item l170iATS Item
\\171 \\ATS Item l 173 l SG.S-N2-1 l 17(SGS-NRSQ5-1 HNPO Find lS92-MA.3-1 ilNPO Find lS92-0P.2-1 HNPO Find lS92-0P.4-1 ilNPO Find lS94-CY.2-2 ilNPO Find jS94-CY.2-2 i1NPO Find lS94-ES.1-1 jComplete the calibration and tools tracking system project.
i(Task 11)
!Upgrade Unit 2 Waste Gas System to address operator work iarounds. (Task 2) lcomplete EOP revisions per commitments, for example, iV&V. (Task 1) iAssure station managers are more involved with the ichelT!i.cal control coordinator meetings to ensure
!management expectations are being followed. (Task 4) l Develop and post guidelines for safer storage of chemicals.
i(Task 0005) i Establish roles/responsibilities for system engineers and icommunicate/train on management expectations. (Tasks 3 l& 4) iReview management (internal) expectations for a proactive
\\response to equipment performance issues and assess i1NPO Find 594-lmanagement tools for motivating/obtaining desired lES.1-1
- lbehaviors. (Tasks 5 & 6)
~INPO Find lS94-ES.5-1 ilNPO Find lS94-MA.3-1 llNPO Find iS94-0P.1-1 jlNPO Find
!S94-0P.1-1
!INPO Find jS94-0P.2-1 HNPO
!Accreditation
!Team Report -
!March 1995 ilNPO
!Accreditation iTeam Report -
iMarch 1995 jlNPO
!Accreditation iTeam Report -
!March 1995
!Refurbish Unit 1 feedwater/condensate controls or upgrade 1to digital feedwater control system during 1995 outage.
\\(Tasks 6, 10, 11) iEnsure forced outage logic changes receive independent
\\review by NSR. (Task 4) lFollow-up improvements associated with completion of the lSalem Operations Self-Assessment. (Tasks 5, 9, 13, 14) jlmplement management guidance/expectations for response ito plant alarms. (Task 12) iOperations supervisory monitoring program participation and
- problem ownership concerns. (Tasks 4 & 8)
\\Senior reactor operators have performed senior nuclear shift
!supervisor responsibilities without having completed the
\\Senior Nuclear Shift Supervisor Training Program
!Provide seasonal utility operators with training appropriate ifor the task they perform independently. Verify seasonal ioperators are qualified for tasks before assigning them to
!work unsupervised.
!Critically assess instructor performance and the quality of ilesson materials provided to students to identify and correct
!problems such as those noted 12 Reliable Maintenance Engineering Performance Conduct of Operations Engineering Performance Engineering Performance Engineering Performance Outage Performance Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations Nuclear Training Center Near Term f?lan Nuclear Training Center Near Term Plan Nuclear Training Center Near Term Plan c
F D
c D
F F
F F
F D
D 8
8 8
5/2/95
175 SGS-N6-1 176. SGS-NRSQ-8
~
~
i i
i111ioP.1-1 l179l0P.3-1 I I
!180lOP.2-1 Appendix I
~
~
l lMA.2-1 (Related to MA.2-1,
!181 \\1994) l1 a2!MA.3-1 i183iMA.4-1
- .184.MA.5-1 jlNPO
!Accreditation
!Team Report -
!March 1995
!INPO jAccreditation
!Team Report -
!March 1995 I
\\Salem 1995
!INPO
!Evaluation lSalem 1995
\\INPO lEvaluation jSalem 1995
!INPO
. ! Evaluation
~
!Salem 1995 l!NPO
!Evaluation I
iSalem 1995 jlNPO
! Evaluation
!Salem 1995
\\INPO
!Evaluation
\\Salem 1995 jlNPO
! Evaluation
\\Salem 1995 jlNPO
!Evaluation i Ensure that task performance evaluations appropriately
!evaluate student knowledge/ skills. Provide guidance for
!evaluating student knowledge during task performance
!evaluations. Observe in-plant training to verify that
!expected performance is achieved
\\Increase operations and training management attention to lidentify and correct problems. Convey management
\\expe~tations for training to station operations and training l personnel. Hold personnel accountable for meeting those iexpectations
!Operations 1pervisors exhibit a wide variability in
\\exercising their supervisory responsibilities
!Operator performance problems are occurring in several lareas including missed surveillances requirements, missed ltech spec entry conditions, mispositioned valves and linappropriate procedure use j Problems exist with implementation of the station tagging i program some of which have contributed to station events
~Absence of a proactive approach by operations to identify
!and require correction of operator work-arounds and
~equipment problems contributes to deficiendes that could
! impact plant operations I
iMany long standing equipment performance and material jcondition deficiencies exist, some of which have caused or
!complicated plant transients
\\Delays in equipment repair and return to service are
! resulting from a lack of schedule adherence and work
!control deficiencies
!weaknesses in foreign materiel exclusion (FME) practices ihave the potential to cause equipment damage
,Equipment failures resulted from ineffective preventive
!maintenance (PM) on station equipment 13 Nuclear Training Center Near Term Plan Nuclear Training Center Near Term Plan Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations B
B A
A A
Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations I B
I Engineering Performance l B/C Work Control Reliable Maintenance
. Reliable Maintenance B
B
.A - ;critical PM (100%-
\\ 125% or deferred)
!B - Approach to reduce
!backlog
\\C - Way of doing business 5/2/95
.ES.1-1 (Related to ES.1-1, i 185~1994) l
!ES.5-1 (Related to OA.3-1,
\\1Bi1992)
!1BB!RP.2-1
!1B9!RP.3-2 (1994) Appendix I I
I
!19o!cv;1-1 h91 !cv:1-2 11921TQ.1-1 i193ffQ.5-1 l194l0M.2-1 I
I
~
~
l195!0A.1-1
,Salem 1995
!INPO
!Evaluation
~
~Salem 1995 llNPO
!Evaluation
~Salem 1995 ilNPO
!Evaluation lsalem 1995
~INPO
!Evaluation iSalem 1995
!INPO iEvaluation I iSalem 1995
~INPO iEvaluation
!Salem 1995
!INPO lEvaluation I iSalem 1995
~INPO
!Evaluation
!Salem 1995
!INPO
! Evaluation
~Salem 1995 HNPO
!Evaluation I
iSalem 1995
~INPO iEvaluation
, Engineering activities and programs have not identified or
! resolved a number of equipment problems, some of which
!are long standing I
iA lack of thoroughness in the preparation/review of station 1 modifications has resulted in operational transients, 1additional plant equipment problems, and frequent
!modification changes'to address installation problems
!Degraded materiel condition of feedwater and condensate
!<FW/CN) unreliable system performance jSome radiation worker practices increase the potential for jpersonnel contamination and the spread of contamination to
!clean areas
!A systematic review to identify and evaluate replacement of iselected components based on their cobalt contribution to
!primary systems has not been performed.
I lThe station has not resolved indications of elevated
~feedwater corrosion product transport which can lead to
!steam generator degradation
!Response to abnormal chemistry conditions is sometimes Hnsufficient and untimely due to deficiencies in
!sampling/trending/review of chemistry data I
i Insufficient line and management oversight of training
~contribute to a wide range of deficiencies in the operator and
!engineering support training/qualification program
! Instructor performance weaknesses and deficiencies in
!simulator scenario guide content and validation reduce the
!effectiveness of simulator training
!A critical review of forced outage schedules with the
!objective of identifying impacts on defense in depth is not iroutinely performed I jWeaknesses in procedure use and adherence were
~observed during several operations and maintenance l activities 14 iA - Redo work lists for
!fall/spring
~outages/Engineering
~support function
!understands role
\\B - Behavioral aspects
!c - Engineering programs Engineering Performance !& activities I
Engineering Performance 1 B/C
~
Human Performance jA - Immediate Management 1B - Outage Engineering Performance 1 I
c Engineering Performance Conduct of Operations Organizational Self-Assessment Organizational Self-Assessment Outage Management Human Performance Management B
B/C
~
!A - Definition of action
~B - Implementation iA - Definition of Action
- !s -Implementation lA - Setting expectations
~B - Establishing process jc - Future outage
!implementation I~ -Setting expectations B
!- Implementation 5/2/95
~~---------
l196lOA.3-1 lSalem 1995 llNPO
!Evaluation
!Salem 1995
,OA.3-2 (Related to OA.3-1,
~INPO 19( 1994)
!Evaluation 198lOA.8-1
!Salem 1995 ltNPO
!Evaluation Salem 1995
!SOER 92-1 Recommendation INPO 199l1 and 2 Evaluation Salem 1995
!soER 9i. -1 Recommendation INPO 200l2 Evaluation Salem 1995
!SOER 94-1 Recommendation INPO 201 l3 Evaluation
. **************************b~~dRi.PTlb*~************** **********************************
lSome station managers, supervisors, and engineers jdemonstrate an insufficient questioning approach toward
!resolving identified plant problems
\\ong standing problems persist in several important areas of
!plant operation, most notably equipment performance,
~materiel condition, supervisory monitoring/coaching,
!engineering support
!Changes to the station's configuration have been made
!without changes in design documents or requirements jReducing the occurrence of plant events through human
!performance
!Verify that normal, off-normal, and emergency procedures
!and associated rules of usage incorporate guidance jPlace a high priority on equipment problems that require
! operator compensatory actions (workarounds)
Organizational Effectiveness 202!A.1 (page 1of14) 203 lA.2 (page 1 of 14) 204.A.3 (page 2 of 14)
.205.A.4 (page 3of14)
Review - March j Lack of leadership/management direction in the Salem 1995
!Technical Support functions Organizational !
Effectiveness l
Review - March !
1995 l Senior management micro management of technical issues Organizational Effectiveness Review - March 1995 QA ineffectiveness Organizational Effectiveness Review - March 1995 QA ineffectiveness 15 Organizational Self-Assessment Human Performance Management Engineering Performance Human Performance Management Conduct of Operations Engineering Performance A - Setting expectations B
- Implementation A - Setting expectations and accountability B - Coaching and Counseling C - Training and measuring B/C B/C B
A/B
,A - Technical Manager
!rotation Engineering Performance !B - Department structure 1A - Mentors
!s -Coaching and Engineering Performance !counseling
!A-New
! leadership/communication jB - Coaching and
!counseling lC - Improved QA/NSR QA/NSR Improvement [products
!A - NBU management lSpohsorship, expectations
!B - NRB monitoring, lC - Improved products and QA/NSR Improvement 1measurements 5/2/95
l206lA.5 (page 3 of 14)
I I
~
~
bo1 !A.a (page 3 of 14) j20sjA.7 (page 3 of 14) l l l210IA.9 (page 4 of 14)
I I
~
~
1211 IA.1 O (page 4 of 14) l213lB.2 (page 4of14) l214lB.3 (page 4of14) j215\\c.1 (page 5of14) iOrganizational i
! Effectiveness
!Review-March !
j 1995 jCorrective Action effectiveness iOrganizational i
! Effectiveness l
! Review - March !
i 1995 i Corrective Action effectiveness jOrganizational i Effectiveness
!Review-March l i1995 jManagement decision making
!organizational !
!Effectiveness
!Salem management team needs to meet on a regular basis lReview - March !to address strategic technical issues or to prioritize l 1995 l resources or management issues.
I I
iOrganizational i
! Effectiveness * !
!Review - March j i 1995 i, Effectiveness of incident reports I jOrganizational i
!'Effectiveness j
jReview-Marchi i 1995
~.Effectiveness of corrective action resulting from QA findings I iOrganizational i
!Effectiveness
\\senior management guidance/expectations to ail personnel lReview - March !that extra caution shall be exercised prior to the conduct of h995
!daily activities
! Organizational iEffectiveness
~Operations Department lack an integrated process to lReview - March !prioritization of technical issues, plant mods and corrective
! 1995 l maintenance iOrganizational i i Effectiveness j
iReview-March!
i1995 iLack of a "team approach" in the resolution of problems
\\Organizational l Effectiveness i l Review - March !
i1995 iOperations department ownership of the plant 16 Corrective Action Corrective Action iA -.single point of iaccountability, i B - Program definition and idevelopment I iA - define expectations,
\\B - Implement/results,
!c - long term
! implementation iA - Setting expectations, Human Performance 1B - counseling and Management
!reinforcement I
Engineering Performance !
B
~
Corrective Action Corrective Action Conduct of Operations Conduct of Operations
~A - Report upgrading,
~B - Corrective Action iProgram c
A B
,A - Setting expectations,
!B -Hoot cau*se Engineering Performance !determinations Conduct of Operations 1
- A 512195
.216. C.2 (page 5 of 14) 12171D.1 (page 5of14) i218lE.1 (page 6of14) l219lE.2 (page 6of14) l220lE.3 (page 6of14)
!221 !F.1 (page 6of14) l222iF.2 (page 7of14)
!223!F.3 (page 7of14)
!22(F.4 (page 7 of 14)
~225~Near Term 1 (page 9 of 14)
!organizational l Effectiveness j
lReview - March Unadequate staffing levels in the Operations Department to l 1995 i perform tagging to support Maintenance lOrganizational !
1Effectiveness iNeed for a cross functional team to revise the scope and
!Review - March ~instal.lation plan for the digital feedwater system at the next
~1995
!outage
!Organizational
!Effectiveness l
!Review-March l
! 1995 jQuality of work packages jOrganizational iEffectiveness
~
jReview - March l l 1995 l Revise the Plan of the Day (POD) 10rganizational l Effectiveness
~
lReview-March l
~1995
~Function of the Work Control Center
~Organizational
!Effectiveness
~
lReview - March lEngineering support for operational issues need a high l 1995 l priority jOrganizational lEffectiveness
!Operability determinations are completed without System
!Review - March 1Engineering and Nuclear Engineering involvement unless l 1995
!specifically requested lOrganizational !Management lacks an understanding of to what System lEffectiveness
!Engineering is to accomplish and f0cus of resources to solve
!Review - March jthe most operationally important technical issues in a timely
!1995
!manner lOrganizational l
!Effectiveness
[Management guidance/expectations relative to a 60 day
!Review - March ~Salem Unit 1 outage and the feasibility of installing the 11995
!digital feedwater control system lOrganizational l l Effectiveness l
!Review - March \\outage scope control program development that addresses l 1995
! late scope additions 17 A-Physical implementation (tagging office),.
B - Long term manning of Conduct of Operations tagging office Engineering Performance B
Work Control B
Work Control B
,A - Defining problem, Conduct of Operations l B - Fix lA - Expectations defined, lB - Integrate support,
~C - relocate inside the Engineering Performance !fence lA-Define 1 expectations/available
!tools, Conduct of Operations ls - Programmatic fix Engineering Performance B
A - Expectations, Outage Performance 8-implementation Outage Performance C
5/2/95
- ...***,$~~;~~******* ****************1***********************~,1~~~***1**********************
226 Near Term 2 (page 9 of 14) 227 Near Term 3 (page 9of14) l228 Near Term 4 (page 9 of 14)
\\229 Near TeTTTI 5 (page 1 D of 14)
!230 NearTerm 6(page10of14) jOrganizational l Effectiveness
!Review-March
!1995 I
jOrganizational
~Effectiveness
! Review - March
!1995 Organizational Effectiveness Review - March 1995 Organizational Effectiveness Review - March Design change packages do not always receive operability/maintainability review prior to finalization Work is delayed, rescheduled or postponed because of spare parts Reactor operator unwilling to accept supervisory positions 1995 Upgrade of Salem System Engineering Organizational Effectiveness Review - March Infrequent visits to other plants to witness corrective action 1995 programs Organizational Effectiveness Review - March Adequate management support to the Outage Manager 231 Near Tern 7 (page 10of14) 1995 during the outage Organizational Effectiveness Review - March High Impact Teams have been poorly organized and 1995 ineffective 232 Near Term 8 (page 10 of14)
Organizational Effectiveness Long Term 1-14(page12, 13 Review-March 233 and 14) 1995 Long term actions for sustained improvement 234 Problem Statement 1 235 Problem Statement 2 Salem Supervisory Meetings - April Reduce supervisor administrative burden to increase field 1995 presence Salem Supervisory Meetings - April Require fixed schedules and planning adherence through 1995 the work control process and control emergent work 18 Engineering Performance Reliable Maintenance Human Performance Management B
B B
A - Rotation of Technical
- Manager,
, Engineering Performance B - Department Structure Corrective Action Outage Performance Outage Performance All Human Performance Management Work Control B
B B
c A
A 5/2/95
l236!Problem Statement 3 237 l Problem Statement 4 238lProblem Statement 5
- .**************************************d~~*bkt....
lSalem
!Supervisory lMeetings - April !System and plant engineering support is not meeting plant 11995 lneeds
!Salem jSupervisory
\\
\\Meetings - April \\Roles and responsibilities clear/concise expectations.
l 1995 lManagers - manager/supervisors - supervise/ workers - work lSalem isupervisory
\\Meetings - April Improve infrastructure - augment identified areas with
! 1995 equipmenUpeople - administrative, technical
!Salem
~Supervisory Engineering Performance Human Performance Management Human Performance Management
!Meetings - April Breakdown managemenUbargaining unit barriers and Human Performance A
A A
239\\Problem~S~ta~te~m.::..:::e~nt~6::_~~-l~1~979~5~~~~+b_a_r_ri_er_s_b_e_tw~ee_n~b_ar~g~a_in_in~g'"---'u~ni~t~d~is~c~ip~li~ne_s'--~~~~~-+~~~M..:.=a~na~g~e~m~e~n~t:__~-+~~~~~A-=-~~~---i
!Salem 240 \\Problem Statement 7 241 Problem Statement 8 242 Item 1 243 Item 2 244 Item 3 245 1Supervisory
!Meetings - April l1995 isalem jSupervisory
\\Meetings - April l1995 jHope Creek jSupervisory
!Meetings - April
\\1995
!Hope Creek
!Supervisory
\\Meetings - April l1995 lHope Creek
!Supervisory
~Meetings - April
!1995 I
!Other Common priorities (Operations lead)
Improve root cause analysis-create teams to attack ATS backlog, !Rs/equipment failures. Implement lessons learned Procedure enhancements Morale Supervisors administrative burden Cost Beneficial Licensing Activities (CBLAs) 19 Conduct of Operations Corrective Action Human Performance Management Human Performance Management Human Performance Management Conduct of Operations A
A A
A A
c 5/2/95
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A2-1 ATTACHMENT 2 MANAGEMENT INTERVENTION--ACTIONS AT-SALEM A number of management intervention actions have been taken to reduce the risk of plant operational events, induce changes in behavior, and make immediate improvements in performance. These management interventions are grouped into the following categories:
Strengthen Resources Recovery Plan Event Control Engineering Root Causes
.Operator Work Around Ust Top Ten Priority Equipment Problems Planning/Scheduling and Outage Management Emergent work Prioritization of New Issues Strengthen Resources:
A number of key managers and supervisors, including all of the Operations Department down to the Senior Nuclear Shift Supervisor level, were assessed by external industrial psychologists with experience in nuclear plant performance ir----
~vement programs. These assessments were intended to evaluate capabilities to perform to the high standards expected and to accommodate needed behavioral changes. Based on these assessments, managers will be provided development programs, have responsibilities adjusted or transitioned. Assessments of all candidates being recruited for key positions within the NBU are also being conducted.
The staffing requirements to accommodate the administrative needs for the operating shifts have been evaluated. In particular, the shift administrative tasks and ways to remove these tasks from the operations staff were identified.
Actions have been taken to define these tasks and reduce the administrative burden on the shifts by dedicating a shift NEO for these tasks.
Additional emphasis is being directed to organizational interfaces to assure comprehensive attention to issues and problems. Specifically, operations is impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A2-2 taking a more direct role in assuring the proper involvement of technical support resources in maintenance and equipment reliability issues.
Mentors have been assigned to assist key staff positions,* identify and implement activities to enhance safe plant operations and address near-term improvement issues. These mentors are from outside PSE&G anc:f have experience with high quality nuclear operations and, in some cases, with performance turn-around situations. Mentors are in place to assist the Salem General Manager and the managers of Operations, Planning/ Scheduling, Technical Department, Nuclear Design Engineering and Licensing. This use of mentors has had the beneficial effect of aiding decision making, providing new perspective, and keeping the manager focused on the proper improvement actions.
Recovery Plan A number of improvement actions had been put in place as a result of CPAT, the recent SALP and Notice of Violation concerning the April 7 event from the NRC, and other assessments. The recent PSE&G initiated Organizational Effectiveness Assessment and the INPO evaluation have resulted in additional corrective actions. As a result, there was a need to modify the "Step Improvement Plan" then in place to accommodate the later assessments and prioritize, in a comprehensive way, all actions to reflect responsible improvement initiatives while ensuring safe plant operations.
Additionally, to improve line management ownership of the improvement actions, two workshops were held with over 1 00 managers, supervisors and representatives of the bargaining unit to solicit input on improvement actions This is the genesis of the IMPACT Plan.
An important piece of the recovery plan initiative is to communicate the need for and philosophy behind the IMPACT Plan to all members of the NBU so that they would understand the overall need, expectations, and their individual contributions. These communications will be achieved through general announcements, memoranda, and roll downs from supervisor to employee.
Event Control Event control actions are intended to reduce the risk of events by ensuring that individuals follow the STAR (stop, think, act, review) process and by providing management direction that extra caution be used in implementing impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A2-3 all plant activities. Additionally, ease of operations has been facilitated by reducing operator work arounds, administrative burdens, and other unnecessary diversions. Communications have been made to all station personnel concerning the need for extra caution.and a focus-on.priority work rather than schedule driven activities. Event control actions have the highest priority and shortest implementation schedule. As an example, to eliminate tagging errors, additional non-licensed equipment operators have been assigned to work control to walk down requested tags prior to their actual implementation.
Engineering The roles and expectations of engineering have been communicated and reinforced by management to the plant staff to ensure increased participation of both system and design engineering in daily activities. Added attention is to be given to operability determinations and technicaLproblem solving. The roles, responsibilities, and skills required of system engineers were re-emphasized and an assessment of the current status of meeting these objectives, and appropriate adjustments, were made.
Root Causes Intervention action to facilitate better root cause determination includes the development and implementation of A comprehensive interdepartmental root cause program. Procedures have been changed to allow a graded approach to root cause evaluations. This will allow a greater focus on root cause evaluations for significant events and failures. A HIT team was formed to take interim responsibility for the need for root cause determination and impleme~tation of root cause determinations. Administrative actions to utilize the HIT team were accomplished and procedural revisions to NAP 6 were made effective for all root cause activities.
Operator Work Around List These management actions were designed to reduce the operator work around list as an unnecessary burden and allow plant operation in accordance with design conditions. Operations determined what is on the work around list. Currently Nuclear Engineering has overall ownership of the list, maintains status and coordinates the closure of specific work arounds. This responsibility will be transferred to the Salem Technical Department in the near future.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A2-4 Planning/Scheduling and Outages Intervention actions to ensure more effective planning/scheduling include
. implementing improvements *in work planning to *coordinate package preparation, tagging, and interdepartmental interfaces. Actions were defined to allow Salem to implement many of Hope Creek's work control processes and to assure proper control of tagging.
Actions are underway to prevent scope changes in outage plans by providing greater accountability to the outage scope control program. An improved outage control center is under construction to provide better focus and facilities for outage control.
Emergent Work Because emergent work has been a continuing problem, an organization-wide definition was prepared to control unsponsored work activities. All emergent work will be reviewed by this definition and prioritized for appropriate implementation into existing plant schedules by the Station Planning Manager.
Prioritization of New Issues New issues, particularly those having significant resource implications, cutting across organizational boundaries, or needing senior management input and tracking will be screened for implementation priority. This will ensure that actions taken on these issues are integrated throughout the NBU and will be assigned resources and prioritization consistent with other important work activities. Examples of issues that will receive screening are those resulting from INPO, NRC, and internal inspections and assessments.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A3-1 ATTACHMENT 3
- SALEM NEAR-TERM ACTION PLANS impact.rO May 2, 1995
I I
I
- 1. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Conduct of Operations Management Sponsor: Lee Catalfamo Problem Statement: The Salem Operations Department must set its standards and.
. expectations to provide the Station the leadership necessary to achieve event free operation.
Establish and Communicate Management Expectations for Performance Improvement Communicate and reinforce expectations of senior station management relative to the conduct of daily activities.
Improve and monitor communications from the SNSS to management, including engineering, planning and maintenance, on important operations issues.
Clarify and reinforce the expectations for operations ownership at both Salem and Hope Creek, including communications to all NBU personnel.
Improve the Shift Staffing Assignments and Provide Additional Support to the Shihs Assess and evaluate operations management, supervisors and crews to ensure optimal assignment of personnel.
- . Provide additional temporary technical support to the day shift SNSS, until the position is unitized.
Reduce the administrative burden of the shifts by adding administrative support and/or reassigning certain administrative tasks.
Assume Leadership by Defining Priorities and Adhering to High Standards of Operations Assume the~ leadership in establishing common priorities, as defined by operations needs, between Salem departments, such that operations becomes part of the planning process and not driven by schedules.
Improve supervisory effectiveness in monitoring control room activities by combining supervisory logs into one log for all licensed personnel to maintain, evaluate the desk configuration in the control room from a human factors perspective, and establish the control room as the base of operation for the NSS's.
Improve the performance of operators by combining all standing orders and engineering memos into one controlled document, evaluating all Technical Specification interpretations, review and trend IR's related to mispositioned components.
I I
I Improve the Processes Which are Key to Event free Operations Improve the tagging activities by increasing staffing, separating tagging from work control activities, reconfigure the work control center, reducing the TRIS backlog, and beginning to implement TRIS Plus.
Improve the identification, prioritization;-evaluation, -and -resolution of operator work arounds by developing a consistent definition of operator work arounds, evaluating the aggregate impact of all outstanding work arounds, and highlighting in the maintenance system those work items that are operator work arounds.
Improve the quality of operability determinations by setting the expectations for active engagement of engineering and development of a specific directive.
Aggressively pursue cost beneficial licensing actions that unburden operations.
Expected Results: A.reduction in the number of unplanned technical specification action statem.ent entries and the number and severity of events at Salem, including tagging errors, operability determination errors, component mispositioning, and significant hardware failures that challenge the plant.
Long Term Plans: As a long term plan, on-shift staffing will be improved by accelerating NEO training, encouraging intra departmental advancement (RO to SRO, NEO to RO), completing current license classes in December of 1995 and June of 1996.
I I
I
- 2. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Human Performance Management Management Sponsor: Eric Katzman Problem Statement:
The Salem management team must have the required leadership capability to *achieve event free operations and NBU's*goals *ofa top performing nuclear plant. Management must improve the definition of roles and responsibilities so that individuals can be held accountable for improved performance, train supervisors to conduct results-oriented performance appraisals, and improve the morale at the Salem Station to create a team oriented spirit.
Assess the Leadership Capabilities of the Salem Management Team Staff and maintain a management team that has the leadership qualities, behaviors and skills necessary to improve Salem Station performance by assessing key line management personnel, identifying positions that require replacements or that need development, and temporarily adding industry mentors to assist in human performance change.
Improve the Definition of the Roles, Responsibilities and Results Expected Define the customer/supplier roles and responsibilities on an inter-and infra-basis that will be used to hold individuals accountable for results.
Improve the Implementation of the Performance Appraisal Process Implement short term improvements in the performance appraisal process to align on results oriented appraisal standards, conduct quarterly performance appraisals, provide training where needed, and implement performance improvement pla. *-.or poor performers.
Improve the Team Spirit at Salem Increase manager/supervisor "field" presence to focus on leadership and decisive decision-making by reducing administrative burdens and eliminating "low value" work.
Improve Station morale and enhance team spirit by communicating and celebrating station successes, breaking down management/union barriers, and by creating recognition tools that can identify progress in resolving long standing problems and reducing outages.
Provide training for supervisors and middle management in human error reduction.
Expected Results: Increased ownership for problem resolution, increased team spirit, and reduced frequency o! human performance related events and near misses.
Long Term Plans: To sustain improvements in human performance by implementing a NBU incentive program, ensuring that new management are properly assessed, _and_ development _of succession plans that improve the bench strength with the NBU. Provide additional human error reduction training for Salem employees and managers.
I I
I
- 3. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Engineering Performance Management Sponsor: Jerry Ranalli Problem Statement:
Leadership and management direction must be improved to provide more effective engineering support to the Salem Station; Engineering activities and programs must be proactive in identifying and resolving long standing equipment problems.
Improve Safety Focus and Management Direction of Engineering Communicate Role and Responsibilities of the Technical Department and Nuclear Engineering to its personnel and those in interfacing organizations.
Establish engineering backlog goals and eliminate low value added work.
Provide timely feedback to engineers on performance appraisals.
Improve the Technical Department's engineering support to Salem departments by assigning engineers to Maintenance, taking ownership of the Work Around and Temporary Modification lists, and providing personnel within the Station a single point of contact for all engineering issues.
Identify and Resolve Problems to Achieve Event Free Operation Engage Nuclear Engineering in the root cause analysis and resolution of past unsuccessful design changes.
Upgrade procedures involving root cause analysis and guidelines for use by system and design engineers. Train engineers in component root cause analysis
- methodology.
Institute periodic management involvement in system walkdowns to set expectations for System Managers and supervisors.
Meet periodically with Station management to set management expectations regarding resolution of the Top 10 Priority Equipment problems.
Establish a prioritized list of key Nuclear Engineering activities and re-establish the Areas of Strategic Focus list.
Improve the Understanding of the Design Basis for Systems Conduct training for System Managers on information systems and data bases that contain design basis information.
Provide a structured approach for operability determinations.
Improve the Quality of Engineering Establish performance improvement plans for poor performers.
Update the System Engineers handbook for system walkdown process and other activities.
Establish qualification guides fnr Nuclear Engineering positions.
Nuclear Engineering will provide the Technical Department a single point of contact for all Nuclear Engineering design issues.
Provide NPRDS training for System Managers.
Create the forum for System Managers to present their recommendations for improving the "health" of systems and components to Station management.
Communicate engineering's contribution to event free.. operation -and the need for a questioning attitude to the Technical Department and Nuclear Engineering personnel through Stand Up meetings.
Include Operations, Maintenance and Planning in the review of all plant modification DCP' s during the comment cycle.
Perform an independent engineering quality review of a sample of DCP's to be installed during the 1R12 outage.
Reduce the number of external engineering firms authorized to develop DCP' s.
Upgrade Programs and Procedures Establish performance indicators for baseload and proactive work.
Establish non-intrusive upgrades to the check valve program.
Revise procedures and clarify responsibilities for the preventative maintenance program.
Expected Results: Improved engineering support to the Station reflected in better operability determinations, effective solutions to long standing equipment problems, higher reliability for important plant systems and timely resolution of emergent issues.
Long Term Plans:
Establish work control tools for supervisors to prioritize and monitor work.
Establish management development training for supervisors. Satisfy all Qualification Card and Guide requirements.
Evaluate the need for additional back shift engineering support.
Implement the Maintenance rule.
Ongoing monitoring of the effectiveness of the System Manager concept.
Monitor system and component reliability under the Maintenance rule using specific component and system objectives.
Rotate system engineers with design engineers.
Evaluate, and upgrade as appropriate, the effectiveness of Salem's preventative maintenance program.
Expand the vibration monitoring program to pumps important to safety and plant reliability.
Assess Technical Department personnel compatibility with new departmental roles and responsibilities.
Evaluate DCP's that did not meet Salem Station expectations to identify cause and appropriate corrective action.
I
- 4. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Reliable Maintenance -
I I
Management Sponsors: Mike Metcalf for Mechanical Maintenance and Mike Morroni for Controls Maintenance Problem Statement: Maintenance backlogs must be reduced, the efficiency of maintenance increased and the quality of maintenance improved such that maintenance is more effective.
Eliminate the Management Barriers Accelerate the training of first line supervisors and complete the process improvement training for Controls maintenance supervisors.
Optimize the organizational.structure of the mechanical and controls maintenance departments.
Eliminate the Process Barriers Reduce work orders on hold for parts and engineering.
Improve spare parts availability.
Reduce delays in scheduled work due to tagging delays.
Reduction of recurring maintenance.
Improve foreign material exclusion (FME) practices.
Expected Results: Higher quality maintenance that produces improved equipment reliability and reduced challenges to Station operators.
Long Term Plans: Monitoring for performance
I I
I
- 5. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Outage Performance Management Sponsors: R. Antonow Problem Statement: Outage management must be improved to achieve uneventful,:
timely and* cost effective refueling and forced outages which* improve plant safety and reliability by resolving equipment problems that can only be addressed in outages. Outage managers must take responsibility for management of the outages.
Improve the Shutdown Safety Program Issue the shutdown safety procedure for forced and planned outages.
Implement enhanced defense-in-depth safety schedule reviews Implement Improvement Initiatives for the Unit #1 Twelfth Refueling Outage (1R12)
Improve the Mod-Ops testing window to preclude previous outage delays.
Refine the High Impact Team (HIT) process to improve the team planning and implementation practices.
Improve the reliability of refueling outage equipment, including a forming crane HIT team.
Improve outage communications including more effective dissemination of 1R12 pre-outage readiness information.
Enhance the outage work control center, including identification of personnel required for wee manning.
- *Improve the quality of daily outage schedules and work packages, and improve schedule adherence.
Assign system window owners and identify single point accountability for key outage activities and systems.
Complete an independent outage readiness assessment using industry experienced-personnel.
Clearly define and re-enforce the roles and responsibilities of key individuals involved in the outage planning and implementation.
Reduce Emergent Work During Outage Periods Implement, and enforce accountability to, the management process to control outage scope including; refining pre-outage milestones for scope and design changes, adhering to the on-line maintenance philosophy, and strengthening the administrative processes to control outage scope.
Review emergent work by system to identify variances to system walkdown plan.
Complete the critique of the Unit #2 eighth refueling outage (2R8), and implement improvements identified in this and other critiques of recent Salem outages.
I I
I Review significant contributors to the outage delays in recent Salem outages to identify improvements necessary to prevent reoccurrence.
Review DEF backlog for impact 1R12.
- ._Jmplementcorrective actions-to.. preclude.conditions.thaLrequired.rework during the 2R8 refueling outage.
- Develop a -recovery plan for key 1R1-2 milestones.
Expected Results: The expected results from these actions is to maximize the safety defense in depth during outages while increasing the ability to effectively and efficiently complete the outage on time. The plan will result in a significant reduction in emergent work for the 1R1 2 refueling outage, which will improve our ability to complete the work required to produce safe, event free operation during the subsequent fuel cycle Long Term Plans: Implement initiatives for future outage improvements including, the development of target implementation schedules for all outstanding outage improvement recommendations, the early development of target critical path schedules for the 1996-1999 Unit #1 and Unit #2 refueling outages, alignment of the ten year outage plan activities to those schedules, and development of specific performance goals for future outages.
I I
I
- 6. Salem Near-:.. Term Action Plan: Work Management Process Management Sponsor: Ernie Harkness Problem Statement: A work management process must be implemented to
.. minimize emergent work and eliminate process inefficiencies such that it meets customer expectations 100 percent of the time, and the process is clear, efficient, measurable, and consistent.
Improve the Work Management Process Improve the work management process at Salem including work package quality and the use of feedback forms Eliminate the Inefficiencies in the Current Work Management Process Upgrade PM package quality..
Control emergent work.
Expand the Work It Now (WIN) Team.
Increase the composite work crew usage for non-WIN team work.
Reduce the backlogs of work order histories, preventative maintenance change requests, and work orders on hold for planning.
Improve planning aspects for post maintenance testing.
Expected Results. The expected results from these actions are an increased capacity to perform work, greater time in the field for maintenance supervisors, fewer entries into Technical Specification action statements, less distraction to operators in the control room, shorter duration of component and system outages, and elimination of avoidable challenges to plant safety or reliability.
Long Term Plans: Implement computerized online safety assessment program and enhance training for planners and schedulers.
I I
I
- 7. Salem N~ar-Term Action Plan: Self-Assessment Management Sponsor:
Terry Cellmer Problem Statement: The Salem Station must develop the capability and acceptance of self-assessment s1:1ch that-it is used effectively and routinely* to-continually improve performance. Self-assessments at Salem must consistently identify problems, processes and programs that need improvement and implement effective corrective actions such that external parties do not identify major weaknesses at Salem. The scope of self-assessment needs to consider individual and group performance; job, process or program activities that cut across department lines; assessment of support functions provided by other organizations, including training; and the integration of self-assessment into the normal, ongoing organizational practices.
Set Expectations for the Use of Self-Assessment, Develop Appropriate Self-Assessment Plans and Hold Managers Accountable for Achieving Results Reinforce the expectations for all individuals at Salem that self-assessment is the primary tool for performance improvement using L. Eliason's directive as guidance.
Develop plans for each RC manager to address weaknesses and establish specific departmental scope and goals for self-assessments.
Hold each Salem RC manager accountable for assuring that their self-assessments identify weaknesses prior to identification by external organization.
Incorporate Self-Assessment Performance into Personnel Appraisals, Facilitate Improvements in Self-Assessment and Monitor Department Performance Incorporate self-assessment performance attributes into normal personnel appraisal process.
Perform short term prototype self-assessment of a job, program or area that has recently challenged the Station. Facilitate the assessment by forming a Salem Field Coaching team and make the assessment available to all departments to assist in improving their self-assessment skills.
Establish Station performance indicators and standards that each department will use in their self-assessments to measure corrective action effectiveness of the program.
Expected Results: A significant improvement in the self identification of problems.
and corrective actions to produce a step change in performance improvement in identified weak areas.
Long Term Plans: Increase problem identification and corrective action quality to prevent recurring problems.
I
- 8. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Corrective Action Program Management Sponsor: John Morrison Problem Statement: A simple process for resolving significant conditions adverse to quality must be developed to address the quality issues that are currently addressed as separate problem types (e.g. IRs, DRs, DEFs), to apply a consistent threshold at which comprehensive root cause evaluations are performed and to improve the quality of root cause evaluations and assessments of the effectiveness of corrective actions. Adequate resources must be provided to the single point of accountability for CAP administration, to establish CAP performance indicators and to eliminate excessive CAP backlogs.
Promptly Improve the Existing Corrective Action Program Implement improvements in the existing corrective action processes by clarifying management expectations for problem identification and documentation of operability determinations for hardware non-conformance.
Revise procedures to provide for different levels of root cause evaluation.
Establish a team to assist Salem staff in determining the significance of issues, evaluating the causes, and assisting in backlog reduction.
Develop an Improved, Integrated Corrective Action Program, Provide Needed Training and Monitor Performance Develop an improved, integrated CAP consistent with the best practices in the industry.
Provide training on root cause determination.
Define management expectations and establish appropriate performance indicators to determine overall CAP effectiveness.
Expected Resu~ts: Reduction in the backlog of CAP. Improved root causes and corrective actions for significant conditions adverse to quality and an increased focus on the more significant problems. Significant reduction in repeat cause incidents.
Long Term Plans: Computerize the revised CAP and incorporate other problem report types. Evaluate the existing root cause procedures and training and make appropriate changes. Transfer CAP administrative responsibility back to the line organization.
I I
- 9. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Equipment Reliability Management Sponsor: Jerry Ranalli Problem Statement: Equipment problems must be prioritized and appropriate
.engineering attention applied to long standing equipment problems such that equipment reliability is improved.
Establish System Walkdowns and System Reviews to Improve Equipment and Plant Reliability System Managers conduct scheduled system walkdowns on priority systems with representatives of operations, maintenance, nuclear engineering, and planning.
Develop system health reports which provide the initiative in establishment of outage and non-outage system work, integrated evaluation of all outstanding work, including DCPs, PMs, and MWRs.
Establish a schedule and implement System Readiness Review Boards to evaluate the results of system walkdowns and system health reports with Station management.
Provide the System Engineers the Tools and Management Systems Necessary to Resolve Important Equipment Problems Make computerized system readiness reports available to all system managers.
Provide the Station leadership in the prioritization of Design Changes and other Nuclear Engineering work.
Take ownership of the Top 10 Priority Equipment problem list and the Operator Work Around list to focus the Station on resolving these hardware problems.
Evaluate the last 10 equipment events for common threads.
Expected Results: Resolution of long standing equipment problems and improvement in equipment reliability.
Long Term Plans:
Implement Maintenance Rule activities.
- 10. Salem Near-Term Action Plan: Accredited Training Program Management Sponsors: Art Orticelle Problem Statement: Deficiencies in Salem's operator training programs identified as a result of self-assessment and INPO accreditation evaluation*must be resolved.
Resolve the Deficiencies Identified in Salem's Operator Training Programs Correct instructor performance weaknesses and some incorrect or confusing lesson materials that have reduced the effectiveness of classroom training.
Raise the standards and expectations for performance evaluations of nuclear equipment operators to assure trainee mastery of the task prior to independent-performance.
Correct instructor performance weaknesses and deficiencies in scenario guide content and validation which may reduce the effectiveness of simulator training.
Improve self-evaluation and corrective action processes which are not fully effective in identifying and resolving training weaknesses.
Improve line and training management oversight of training and qualification activities which have contributed to the deficiencies in these operator training programs.
Expected Results:
Retain accreditation of the training programs.
I Long Term Plans:
Conduct a comprehensive self-assessment of the accredited training programs at Salem and Hope Creek using a team of outside industry peers and independent experts. The scope of the self-assessment should consider line management ownership, training performance indicators, and current industry standards for training self-assessments.
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A4-1 ATTACHMENT 4 QA/NSR IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SUMMARY
Management Sponsor: Jeff Benjamin Problem Statements:
1.
Improved Independent oversight by QA/NSR and the Nuclear Review Board (NRB) is needed to identify performance weaknesses to Nuclear Business Unit (NBU) management in order to effect appropriate improvements.
Increased emphasis on the use of performance based techniques in assessments is needed for more effective feedback into the operating organizations.
- 2.
A more effective Employee Concerns Program (ECP) is needed to ensure that employee concerns are given appropriate confidentiality, technical review, and timely resolution. These changes are needed to assure that NBU employees have confidence in the integrity of the program Actions:
Independent Oversight Restructure QA/NSR Resources to Assure Proper Emphasis on Assessment Realign Audits group and Station QA groups with a focus on performing assessments.
Develop and implement a functional area approach to assessment.
Clarify and reinforce expectations for the Onsite and Offsite Safety Review Groups.
Revise assessment schedules to provide appropriate focus for Maintenance and Operations. In addition, ensure these schedules provide appropriate coverage for all functional areas.
impact.rO May 2, 1 995
I NBU IMPACT Plan Page A4-2 Clarify expectations for the conduct of audits and surveillances -- including the use of performance based techniques.
Develop and issue a QA/NSR Monthly Report that summarizes assessment results and observed NBU performance.
Develop and implement indicators for QA/NSR responsibilities.
Assess Existing Personnel to Ensure Appropriate Assignments in Leadership and Individual Contributor Positions Review skill sets and performance of existing management. Make appropriate changes.
Survey existing organization to determine appropriate assignments for restructured organization. Make appr:opriate changes.
Develop and implement performance expectations for each position in QA/NSR.
Perform quarterly performance reviews.
Implement a Revitalized NRB to Provide Oversight of NBU Activities Develop a charter that defines the NRB function and its interface with the Board of Directors.
Select external members with nuclear expertise as specified in the charter.
Conduct NRB meetings with appropriate focus on NBU issues and Salem improvement actions.
Develop NRB meeting minutes, including an Executive Summary, which adequately communicates NRB observations and issues.
Employee Concerns Develop and Implement an Employee Concern Program (ECP) Consistent with Industry Practice Develop ECP elements, select manager, and determine staff needs.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A4-3 Develop and implement revised ECP as a business procedure.
Define protocol for conducting "significant" investigations.
Train NBU on revised program. Communicate ECP process throughout the NBU.
Develop and implement performance indicators for ECP.
Expected Results:
1.
QA/NSR will perform effective assessments which will assist NBU management in identifying areas in need of performance improvements or areas where improvements have occurred. Performance indicators have been developed to ensure the assessment. process is being conducted properly, that meaningful issues are being identified, and that QA/NSR is ensuring these issues are being resolved. A revised QA/NSR Monthly Report will summarize key observations make by OA/NSR and will serve as an additional measure of progress.
The NRB will continue to report to senior management on significant issues and observations. The NRB meeting minutes and resolution of identified issues will serve to reflect the effectiveness of the Board.
- 2.
The ECP will serve to evaluate issues raised by employees for those instances that the supervisory or management chain was ineffective in resolving concerns. Performance indicators and employee surveys will be utilized to measure the effectiveness of issue resolution and employee confidence in the program.
Long Term Plans: Long term implementation of the above improvements, combined with a hiring strategy that emphasizes line experience and rotations, will result in sustained good performance. In addition, the creation of an ECP that has the confidence of NBU employees and proper management behaviors will result in the need for fewer resources in the ECP function.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
. NBU IMPACT Plan Page A5-1 ATTACHMENT 5 RESOURCE REALLOCATION PLAN
SUMMARY
Management Sponsor:
Stan LaBruna Problem Statement: The NBU needs to assure that it properly allocates and directs resources to support plant operations effectively. An increased focus on core functions will be necessary to achieve simultaneously our performance objectives of safe operations, reliable generation and competitive cost.
Objectives:
Align organizational performance objectives and resources consistent with long-term performance goals.
Change organizational expectations and behaviors consistent with these goals.
Assure allocation of resources consistent with priorities and linkage to the improvement agenda. In the near term, align with plant management to capture an increment of resources in the support organizations by eliminating low value work and stopping or deferring low priority work activities.
Determine the most cost effective approach for getting work done. Internalize core functions and identify competitive alternatives for other needed services. Re-engineer core fl!nctions for efficiency and effectiveness to maximize resource utilization by eliminating duplication and streamlining processes.
Actions:
The NBU organization was evaluated and restructured in January 1 995 to achieve alignment of key functions throughout the organization. Additional adjustments will be made as necessary to assure that operations *management has direct control of all functions required to operate the plant; support functions are arranged logically and duplication of similar functions are eliminated; single point accountability is established for key functions; and appropriate quality and cost controls are present.
impact.rO May 2, 1995
NBU IMPACT Plan Page A5-2 Functional assessment is being performed at the individual organizational unit level to ensure that resources are appropriately directed. There will be a greater focus on operational priorities and concentration of resources on activities that add value in assuring safe,.. reliable and efficient.operation of-the plants. -The resource allocation process includes:
Identifying the core functions necessary for the business now and in future years.
Eliminating low value and low priority work to make additional resources available and reduce the total amount of work to be managed. A key element is accelerated contractor reduction plans, creating better employee ownership and accountability for baseline work.
Applying resources to specific-projects based on the priorities set by plant management. For example, the disposition of improvement actions accrued over the last several years, discussed in Section IV, will provide the basis for support organizations to allocate resources to those activities that best support the execution and completion of the near-term and longer-term action plans.
Identifying regulatory required actions that consume significant resources relative to the safety benefit provided. These actions are processed under the NBU's CBLA program and submitted to the NRC for approval.
Expected Results:
Redirection of 1995 resources to support near-term improvement agenda.
Reduce total contractor and service contractor budget to business plan defined levels.
Longer-Term Plans:
Integration of the resource reallocation results into the NBU strategic and five year Business Plans.
impact.rO May 2, 1995