ML20056E729

Summary of 930816 Meeting W/Util in Region IV Ofc Re Status of Site Activities at Facility.Attendance List & Meeting Summary W/Attachments Encl

ML20056E729
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	08/18/1993
From:	Beach A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	Barkhurst R ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
References
NUDOCS 9308250115
Download: ML20056E729 (40)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:. O *fCoq UNIT E D ST AT ES R f 75 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g f,, fd' REGION IV 4'8 %,r f 611 RY AN PLAZA DRIVE. SulTE 400

1. 4 AR LINGT ON. T E X AS 76011 8064

• g 5

g,, g lg g Docket: 50-382 License: NPF-38 Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: Ross P. Barkhurst, Vice President Operations, Waterford P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066

SUBJECT:

AUGUST 16, 1993, MEETING DOCUMENTATION This refers to the meeting conducted at your request at the NRC Region IV office on August 16, 1993. This meeting related to the status of site activities at your Waterford 3 facility. This meeting was attended by those on the enclosed Attendance List. The subjects discussed at this meeting are described in the enclosed Meeting Summary. It is our opinion that this meeting was beneficial and has provided a better understanding of the status of various activities at your Waterford 3 facility. We appreciate the insights to programs, assessments, and initiatives focused on sustaining and improving plant performance in a broad range of functional areas. We are particularly encouraged by your attention to issues related to component / system reliability, steam generator integrity, self-assessment, and corrective action. In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will be pleased to discuss them with you. Sincerely, A. Bill Beach,fDi ct r Division of Reactor jects

Enclosure:

Meeting Summary w/ attachments cc: (see next page) 9308250115 930818 (h-l / PDR ADOCK 050003B2 1 P PDR 1

i Entergy Operations, Inc., cc w/ enclosure: Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: Harry W. Keiser, Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer l P.O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286-1995 Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: John R. McGaha, Vice President Operations Support P.O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286 i Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway ATTN: Robert B. McGehee, Esq. P.O. Box 651 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 l Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: D. F. Packer, General Manager Plant Operations { P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 1 Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: L. W. Laughlin Licensing Manager P.O. Box B i Killona, Louisiana 70066 1 Chairman Louisiana Public Service Commission j One American Place, Suite 1630 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70825-1697 Entergy Operations, Inc. ATTN: R. F. Burski, Director Nuclear Safety P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 Hall Bohlinger, Administrator Radiation Protection Division P.O. Box 82135 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70884-2135 i j

Entergy Operations, Inc. i Parish President l St. Charles Parish l P.O. Box 302 ( Hahnville, Louisiana 70057 Mr. William A. Cross Bethesda Licensing Office 3 Metro Center Suite 610 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 i Winston & Strawn ATTN: Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq. 1400 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 1 i i l .e

( o AUG l 81993 Entergy Operations, Inc. bcc to DMB (IE45) bcc distrib. by RIV: J. L. Milhoan Resident Inspector Section Chief (DRP/D) Lisa Shea, RM/ALF, MS: MNBB 4503 MIS System DRSS-FIPS RIV File Project Engineer (DRP/D) Section Chief (DRP/TSS) I n i RIV:DRP/DM C:DRP/D h D: DRPH h SMcCrory;df TFStetka ABBeach$N 8//?/93 8/l{/93 8/J(/93h

E I 81993 Entergy Operations, Inc.. I bcc to DMB (IE45) bcc distrib. by RIV: J. L. Milhoan Resident Inspector Section Chief (DRP/D) Lisa Shea, RM/ALF, MS: MNBB 4503 MIS System DRSS-FIPS RIV File Project Engineer (DRP/D) Section Chief (DRP/TSS) l l 1 l RIV:DRP/D[/' C:DRP/D D:DRP SMcCrory;df TFStetka ABBeach4N 8//$/93 8/l{/93 8/j(/93h

l MEETING

SUMMARY

Licensee: Entergy Operations, Inc. Facility: Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 License No.: NPF-38 Docket No.: 50-382

Subject:

Status of Site Activities The licensee summarized for NRC management the status of various site programmatic activities, including engineering, human performance, quality assurance, and modifications. Attachments: 1. Attendance List 2. Licensee Presentation (NRC distribution only) i l l l

t ATTENDANCE LIST Attendance at the status of site activities at Waterford 3 meeting between Entergy Operations, Inc., and NRC on August 16, 1993, at the NRC Region IV office: Enteroy Operations, Inc. fat Waterford 3) R. Barkhurst, Vice President of Operations D. Packer, General Manager, Plant Operations R. Burski, Director, Nuclear Safety J. Hologa, Manager, Mechanical and Civil Engineering L. Laughlin, Manager, Licensing F. Drummond, Director, Site Support J. Houghtaling, Director, Plant Modifications and Construction NRC, Region IV J. Montgomery, Deputy Regional Administrator S. Collins, Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS) T. Gwynn, Acting Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP) D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards (DRSS) T. Stetka, Chief, Project Section D (DRP/D), DRP 1 T. Westerman, Chief, Engineering Section, DRS B. Murray, Chief, Facilities Inspection Programs Section, DRSS S. McCrory, Project Engineer, DRP/D 1 i ) ~ - - -. ~

4 i m G -: -ENTERGY A.es 'r m y .w-1 I f W ATERFORD SES - UNIT 3 ~ f i l j i LEADING THE WAY TO EXCELLENCE j bw;, . 1., Generation m[ ~ __ 3 WATERFORD 3/NRC i MEETING TO DISCUSS STATUS ) OF SITE ACTIVITIES j AUGUST 16,1993 i Entergy Operations, Inc.

AGENDA Introduction - R.P. Barkhurst Plant Status - D.F. Packer Engineering Activities - J.D. Hologa Human Performance - D.F. Packer Quality Assurance - R.F. Burski Total Quality - F.J. Drummond Modification Philosophy - J.B. Houghtaling l Closing Comments - R.P. Barkhurst l

I,,= F.

g:

s.,--,+ l 1 i ll " ENTERGY l j r + a 4 ll I i i PLA3T STATUS 1 N An Entergy Company i

WATERFORD 3 S.E.S. 1993 YEAR TO DATE OPERATION

SUMMARY

5 I d I J 100% jll-- l l-l I !I I I 1 I I - l [1 fj / 1 80% - m - msa vii - io4s w meevt-- i l Z j m m.w tie w.w um w= a,t gr g Lii - im ~ c- ! I O mm.w I m. ism i j 60%~ m-is) w 22m o im m ia m j Z 40% - m - m4 i 32 - is24 m. iu i O ~ mm.w - um um m er np cens =w 2na - m<o usn a w uso m g 1-a22 - um. j-l 20% - 2na - ms2 ~ O ~ En%'s Tm 1" N l C 1m5 N

• * * =
• m-nm i

vi2 - tim mmw MODE 1 - 2rm3 wo i a= - 0o44 mm.w ImilO' l MODE 2 - "d *dwY m2 - teid 2 t l 100% Pwr Ul MODE 3 - a* - m45 ms - iw4 C Rx T@ 'I Rt T@ g,032s i i MODE 4 - as - o628 . came e w. cmwe aw 4 MODE 5. j REFUEL - -[- ili l %g*- 4 i JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC CAPACITY JULY:97M YTD:96M l cormNUOUS OPERAMG MYS - 45 1993 MYS SINCE LAST RX TRIP - 45 FACTOR-COMMERCIAL: 80.3% l i l I i i

UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR (UCF) a GOOD 100.0 -

2-

-~ _ _

? _ _. _. _. _ _ _ _. _ _._.-* GOAL = 90.0 L3 l 80.0 -- ; M a O b 5 [ 60.0 -- i ? ~ j IICF - 98.7 k TTi> - 97.7 ~ -*- tlCF GOAL H 20.0 -- - - - - 72 MEI)l AN 2 0.0 JAN FEU Mall APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCF NOV DEC 1993 l a

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE GOOD I f 250.0 -- [ EXP - 1.7 r-. 200.0 -- [ -* - EXI'(;OAL - - - - T MEDI AN 6 150.0 -- i 1 1 tn O 100.0 -- ~ 4.1

• GOAL = 50 50.0 --

NOTE: l MONTilLY AND YTD i l VALUES ARE

• ~

^~ 0.0 i ESTIMATED USING I turl OF SRD VALUES j JAN FEB Mall APit MAY JUN JUL AUG SEl' O C I' NOV DEC AND ARE CORRECTIkD 1 EACil QUARTER PER 1993 TLD VALUES. E i i l

\\ I INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE awn 1 r 4 2.00 -- M IS AR - 0.00 1.50 - YTD - 0.19 i N ISAR GOAL, h g ">2 MEDI AN 4 1.00 --- W A O U i 0.50 -- * +-

• GOAI, = 0.50 i

i l w r ~ / i 0o0 JAN FEB MAR Al'R MAY JUN JUL AUG SEl* O CI' NOV DEC 1993 i i l

t i LOWLEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE GOOD 140.0 -- 1 f 120.0 -- 7 2 100.0 -- U v 80.0 - W

• GOAL = 75.0 e

i 60.0 -- ] y N I.L R W. 0.C 4 m - 23.7 40.0 -- i . /.- l - *- 1,LRW GOAL /.' 1 l 20.0 -- / '92 MEDIAN j l 0.0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP O CI' NOV DEC i i 1993 i i l i l 1 i i,

RECENT OBSERVATIONS OF AUXILIARY OPERATOR PERFORMANCE IDENTIFICATION OF OPERATOR i ABERRANT BEHAVIOR e - SHIFT SUPERVISOR IDENTIFICATION - SUSPENDED ACCESS AUTHORIZATION - ENTERED EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - RECEIVING MEDICAL TREATMENT i - QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT OF PRIOR WORK PERFORMED - NO WORK PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED IDENTIFICATION OF PROCEDURAL NON-COMPLIANCE INVOLVING TWO l OPERATORS l - SHIFT SUPERVISOR IDENTIFICATION l - SUSPENDED ACCESS AUTHORIZATION l - INITIATED DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS - CURRENTLY CONDUCTING QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT OF PRIOR WORK PERFORMED i .. ~. -

l RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENT TEAM (RIT? WATERFORD 3 RECOGNIZED THE NEED TO ESTABLISH A MANAGEMENT DRIVEN PROGRAM TO: l - FOCUS AND PRIORITIZE ISSUES AFFECTING - NUCLEAR AND PERSONNEL SAFETY a AVAILABILITY w RELIABILITY w PLANT PERFORMANCE - ALLOCATE RESOURCES TO ENSURE RESOLUTION OF IDENTIFIED ISSUES MEMBERSHIP - OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE MANAGER, CHAIRMAN - TECHNICAL SERVICES MANAGER 1 - OPERATIONS SUPERINTENDENT - MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT j - RADIATION PROTECTION SUPERINTENDENT - CHEMISTRY SUPERINTENDENT - SYSTEM ENGINEERING SUPERVISORS - DESIGN ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR - SHIFT TECHNICAL ADVISOR SUPERVISOR - RELIABILITY ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR i .._...,m.__..

\\ RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENT TEAM (RIT) (CONT'D) RIT PROVIDES CENTRALIZED DATABASE FOR DOCUMENTATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF RIT ISSUES l \\ CURRENT RIT ISSUES INCLUDE: j l - REACTOR TRIP BREAKER SWITCHGEAR - CHARGING PUMPS - IMPROVING HUMAN PERFORMANCE j - ELECTROLYTIC CAPACITORS 1992 SUCCESSFULLY RESOLVED RIT ISSUES l INVOLVED: l - FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVES - INSTRUMENT AIR - ESSENTIAL CHILLERS ) l l - - ~,. . -... ~..

l 1 1 STEAM GENERATOR ISSUES i FORMED THE STEAM GENERATOR INTEGRITY COMMITTEE (SGIC) TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN A WATERFORD 3 STEAM GENERATOR STRATEGIC PLAN FOR: k I - INDUSTRY STEAM GENERATOR TUBE DEGRADATION AND FAILURES - MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF STEAM GENERATOR INTEGRITY - ENSURE SAFE, EFFICIENT OPERATION AND MAXIMlZE THE ECONOMIC LIFE OF STEAM GENERATORS SGIC COMPOSITION: GMPO (CHAIRMAN), SYSTEM ENGINEERING, f CHEMISTRY, DESIGN ENGINEERING, CORPORATE SUPPORT, LICENSING ~ SGIC RESPONSIBILITIES INCLUDE: - COMPILING DETAILED OPERATING, CHEMISTRY, INSERVICE INSPECTION AND CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE HISTORY - PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO PROCESS GROUPS l - COORDINATION, REVIEW AND TRACKING OF INTEGRITY ACTIVITIES j - EVALUATION OF INDUSTRY EFFORTS AND TRENDS FOR APPLICATION TO WATERFORD 3 4 4 i . ~. -... -. -... -. -... -.. -

1- \\ l STEAM GENERATOR ISSUES (CONT'D) i i l WATERFORD 3 STEAM GENERATOR ACTIVITIES: l ONGOING GENERATOR ACTIVITIES i - T-HOT REDUCTION - MOLAR RATIO CONTROL - MINIMlZE CONDENSATE DISSOLVED OXYGEN - MINIMlZE STEAM GENERATOR SLUDGE PLANNED REFUEL 6 INSPECTION ACTIVITIES: - CONDUCT INSPECTIONS IN BOTH STEAM GENERATORS - 100% FULL LENGTH BOBBIN COIL i COIL MOTORIZED ROTATING PANCAKE COIL (MRPC) FOR: 100% HOT LEG TOP OF TUBESHEET AND SAMPLE UNDEREXPANDED TUBES IN COLD LEG SIDE l U BENDS ON HOT LEG SIDE i - SLUDGE LANCING 1 ACTIVITIES UNDER CONSIDERATION ^ - ATHOS THERMAL HYDRAULIC MODEL - CONDENSER TUBE EDDY CURRENT TESTING - EPOXY COATING OF CONDENSER TUBESHEET i

i yeis i ii.mm iei j r wsw_8wa ne mw,m... ~~ ',1 D L., n,;) 9.y%,; @.,q;[;j 3.7. Q_m,., i ,y. s_ ~ ugy q w t3 N.~4 p g :, { 'g f a / g' e at. '_ "" r 4 . T

f..

%q g q f.3 w. g[aw mg( n, wxn. uw}79m%e?g. '.K [faQj @ Wry M f 1 g l @s 7 q; w. Y [ Mf :hQ lY -YN lh i;. f*, ' v b ', 'Y - h Y. l h.t-/ ,. al,, - -5

. w.

\\ r .y

• g.

- y.

1. Q,g f.

+ th;. - - . n?Mh,.,%;4y., A g+e gy. W j1. n.h ' y s.p-., %;,;gbg *4.g,qm,y q r,-pq'3ghM y ~hA 4 m, .r .y n. N N.[p'.. y e.,t w.- e d

• % f.m 4 %,a n,. +, % -

eu w 9f . 4 ~, L,,j r , ua q,tkyc- ,.4 ?- g

f. -

4 p ; 3..,, ;e g;., y u. e - s - -,, y:ww + .y, 3,w. 4,,g.. g, y i e.. e, rp .p[. g j 4 h,,,

a. v

, W. I

1. p-

.q-, n.3 , 4, g 4,p ; .q,m.,. r g j 9 p, t,. ) n q. p 4 _. J n ;gg;.g ug ~ w m#.,ef;he,Q;MMi ~ z Lwy m i.. . p p; ';" 3 ;- gp. J r. .:p h W "p' s 96 3 2.j([ N h\\.yg;g.g .[ g,.,g; y , ~, ^ w maw ch.n%.,m 4 >,f.m.,,s y %,y::p%,3% W,*,.) ia. ? 1-v3 ~_ 3+ q 1 . w g, w&: = }.

d-h M-

'.m ,b .p P Y [t> > w 's ,i 'm. a - C. 3, c, N A NM ,r .fl QW2 %[); f'[.gb -'q**; s f ~ > e -n. M d W Q &t ?i,.Q);1ff ;4lv MQ af mm.. 3, . m w -y h:qD.T-4 Q. s . s w q wq g 2l3 ay . s .V, v: / i .a + vr o p+u.c. w, 4, 3 i' r 's3 4p.g., 4 gg+ - ~T~^ fr. x^.f3l4 % ) $en_ s 1 -p-- q'l$4? - - d h h /-

• Mn%;V
• i%,,

l s n wyn gg mmsa$(h ' N.b.N 'if . ~.."s QR L ~ / 4 m ,s w-s,f'-,-. , a-> -.,,.'. E.+% yY ; W 'y?lw ' s v q qh M e w 'Ms .y p ps.;qg, _ p. .o W p r x e-m , utk.WV..Q

~

ENGIXEENIN_R E_$ ~ = ACTIVITES _su V ms,44 mag n m{ y _k: 4 4 wem e( $., A. <1 V .q $' y,. J.' 47' p a. _,yMQM l$ ej friri . q. g4.7r Yt$. M&p t.,. s ;'.*e o,, A-' ..,R en =. - ..e g' n~., s

• ,+

pc ; p y.s%. 'bi'e s.y g. ' 5 ' o n.Y

• W

} . hf

l. D

,, e-k,f A s. 4 4:,. v. ,J.:- n q 5 g3p@e@ jg.;.,. . w w.+Q-. ~./ y,, . ~. -w M , k T ( . O 'I n I 2 ! s e, sV Jwn.W L.. : W-W %, e~ + pnne ..[ A f --n- ,[ g e,, ,f,."[ A.. r we,

ja e

- a e,W 1 { m. ,'. ' Q %. uS., e_?,., % @ T M dhpq WrAm.cg gy;M wn w. ~ > n. w. ' 7 WP M.c; MIS.9M. t A> ,,,.d P -NsNA@'. ,.d .y 4

[ k..f k

^..Nd d i-6 , +~. '. -h k h?%~ e. w w. w_"r

p. m,%h sfJrg p:J:f';Wn.

~ ;.Q i ;k. r;g;17)%.'g'y 'w..- p<;; a.m x

• L, %.m;.M u.,,,

u z mt g - f..y%.. 9,yw 4 ( ye. y 3,.g g w? X. h& - .N! ' by li_['. 3 ^. s%.. d+ ~ ~p,:;w. 3 , %' j. ;J; u j g At .yqu P G - ( g W.4 2.? q yf, MwQ' AMf t.M i i

• .f,.

ix O n-s m"w'My',Ah l-;}y o m.m:47s w;n % &4s g,a;; &-{L ~ ~?,+ &ff-ff - ,p p a kI

• i

[

4. ;g;4-g g'h I-gg-s q J

.4 i e - Q,i p yf_y.; gl c m w aa" [n, w 1 P e.M % yMJ +m g,i%* E M]iAv.ip e/'% %,. y / w.s n 'f idh I d [' E gN m a l , 3, g _ %m,'p@nw..Y.g yy .p+: : 3 4 I [ d,.,. 4-

• p p.

9g

y. m 3;m %q

.w w l 'S ',h ; JL4 i .x t f. .~;; g.M, M A;;;4% g,N h h w 4 99- %M.D% g g

Qggg

1. g.

1 s . mm;w.y gp y+q.y. wmm q m m.o w a 4, a a,. L, W .. r uA m ,.c ,w

ENGINEERING ACTIVITIES SSFI PURPOSE - ASSESS THE OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY OF SAFETY SYSTEMS TO VERIFY THAT THE SYSTEMS ARE CAPABLE OF PERFORMING THEIR i INTENDED FUNCTIONS i SCHEDULE - SSFI PERFORMED ON SEVEN OF THE TOP SEVEN SYS TEMS TO CORE DAMAGE FREQUENCY n 1984 DESIGN VERIFICATION OF EFW ) a 1986 RAB HVAC 1989 COMPONENT COOLING WATER (CCW) & AUXILIARY COMPONENT COOLING WATER (ACCW) n 1990 EDG n 1991 NRC EDSFI n 1992 CVCS n 1993 Si j RESULTS - CONFIRMED FUNCTIONALITY OF THE SYSTEM - CONFIRMED THOROUGHNESS OF THE DBD'S - FOLLOW-UP OBSERVATIONS WERE IDENTIFIED

i ENGINEERING ACTIVITIES PEER ASSESSMENTS SAFETY RELATED ELECTRICAL CALCULATIONS - COMPLETE j l ENGINEER NG DESIGN GUIDES l NOZZLE LOADING CALCULATIONS j - COMPLETE SAFETY RELATED SETPOINT CALCULATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL QlALIFICATION FILE UPGRADE - FORECAST COMPLETION OF NOVEMBER 1993 IS ON TRACK SEISMIC QUALIFICATION FILE UPGRADE l I ,-,---,-c

ENGINEERING ACTIVITIES FLOW ACCELERATED CORROSION INDUSTRY CONCERNS REGARDING RECENT FAILURES i SELF ASSESSMENT BASED ON EPRI NSAC/202L SELF ASSESSMENT PROVIDED RECOMMENDATIONS - OPERATIONS /ENGINEERINGICHEMISTRY INTERFACE ) - PRIORITIZATION OF SMALL BORE PIPING - PROVIDE BASIS FOR EXCLUSION OF SYSTEMS EPRI ASSISTED PEER ASSESSMENT LATE AUGUST

4 ENGINEERING ACTIVITIES l OUTAGE RISK ASSESSMENT 4 MODEL i 1 i OPTIMlZE OUTAGE SCHEDULE TO MINIMlZE j RISK i i { QUANTITATIVELY DETERMINE OUTAGE RISK i j UTILIZE IPE MODEL TO EVALUATE OUTAGE SCHEDULE i i - COMPONENT LEVEL OF DETAll l DEVELOP A TOOL FOR SCHEDULERS TO MEET l CRITERIA BEFORE REVIEW l l i l l i i 1 .._..,-...-em _.,r.

i l >> i,. r 1.... d 1 4 , ', =*- g w ENTERGY ff t 4 l i i, I i 1 1 e 4 I t I J 1 HEMAX PERFORMANCE i i i i l 1 1 i a s I } i i 1 l' 4

d j

i j i i 1 1 J J An Entergy Company

HUMAN PERFORMANCE l HUMAN PERFORMANCE - NUMBER AND RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE OF EVENTS AT i NUCLEAR STATIONS HAVE DECREASED OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS - REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF EVENTS CAUSED BY EQUIPMENT FAILURES ] - HUMAN-RELATED ERRORS ARE THE CURRENT 1 LARGEST CONTRIBUTOR TO SIGNIFICANT EVENTS IN THE INDUSTRY - KEY TO CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT IS TO ENHANCE i HUMAN PERFORMANCE WATERFORD 3 PROGRAMS TO IMPROVE HUMAN PERFORMANCE INCLUDE: - HUMAN PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT SYSTEM (HPES) ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS - SELF CHECKING - HUMAN PERFORMANCE TRENDING - PRECURSOR TRENDING PROGRAM (PTP) - IMPROVING HUMAN PERFORMANCE (IHP) PROGRAM - ON SPOT CORRECTION - MANAGEMENT OBSERVATION - OPERATION ZERO DEVIATION

m HUMAN PERFORMANCE i HUMAN PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT SYSTEM (HPES) ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS - DEDICATED HPES COORDINATOR - 141 TRAINED PERSONNEL - 2 MORE TRAINING CLASSES SCHEDULED FOR 1993 1 SELF CHECKING l - STAR (STOP THINK A_CT R_EVIEW) l - INITIALLY INCORPORATED INTO MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS - BASED ON INDUSTRY GOOD PRACTICE I HUMAN PERFORMANCE TRENDING - ORIGINATED IN-HOUSE - REPORTED IN QUARTERLY TREND REPORT - YEAR END ANALYSIS IS PERFORMED BY CAUSE CODE TO DETERMINE OVERALL TREND OF PLANT - COMPARISON OF 1992 vs 1991 SHOWS AN IMPROVING TREND - PLANT MANAGEMENT CONTINUES TO EMPHASIZE PROCEDURE COMPLIANCE AND ATTENTION TO DETAIL PRECURSOR TRENDING PROGRAM (PTP) - PTP CARD - PTP DATABASE ANALYZED QUARTERLY IMPROVING HUMAN PERFORMANCE (IHP) PROGRAM i - ENHANCED SUPERVISORY SKILLS - RECENT SEMINARS WITH FOLLOWUP l

WATERFORD 3 LER

SUMMARY

LER'S ATTRIBUTABLE TO HUMAN FACTORS Department 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 TOTALS

== ===. - =

= = = _ =

=

== 17 Operations 1 5 4 5 2 Maintenance 4 2 3 1 10 Engineering 2 1 2 2 7 1 1 2 8 Health Physics 2 2 Chemistry 1 2 3 Quality Assurance 1 1 = Total Human Perf 10 13 9 3 7 4 0 46 hotal LER's 28 34 24 20 23 19 1 149 s -m-- -.w-m mm .- - -. m+..--m - e ,_ _- __ _..i_ m

I ~'-ENTERGY ~- i QUALITY ASSURANCE s i i l An Entergy Company

i Key Process Management k WHAT ARE KEY PROCESSES I - THOSE PROCESSES IDENTIFIED BY EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT THAT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT i ON EITHER SAFETY, COST OR GENERATION l FOUR KEY PROCESSES - CORRECTIVE ACTION - OUTAGE SCHEDULING & WORK CONTROL - MATERIALS MANAGEMENT i - DAILY WORK PLANNING & CONTROL WATERFORD 3 IS SPONSOR OF CORRECTIVE ACTION KEY PROCESS - INITIATED MARCH 1993 - EXPECTED COMPLETION OCTOBER 1993

KEY PROCESS MANAGEMENT CORRECTIVE ACTION OBJECTIVE IS TO ANALYZE THE CA PROGRAM AT EACH SITE - AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT - CONSISTENCY BETWEEN SITES - IDENTIFICATION OF BEST PRACTICES ] Results to Date - ELEMENTS OF THE CA PROGRAM WERE IN PLACE - SITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED AS RECOGNIZED - EMPHASIS SHOULD BE ON ENHANCED ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS - DETERMINED PROCESS MEASUREMENTS n IMPROVED REGULATORY PERFORMANCE / PERCEPTION n IMPROVED CAPACITY FACTOR n COST EFFECTIVE RESOLUTION n IMPROVED SAFETY n TIMELY RESOLUTION REDUCED DEFECTS (ERRORS / REWORK)

i CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM CONCERN - CONFUSION EXISTED REGARDING WHICH DOCUMENT TO USE FORMED QAT CURRENT CORRECTIVE ACTION DOCUMENTS - PRE \\ - QN CR - SOR - Cl BENEFITS - SIMPLIFIES IDENTIFICATION OF CONCERNS - CONSOLIDATES PRIORITIZATION AND TRACKING OF REQUIRED ACTIONS - PROVIDES CONSISTENCY IN ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROGRAM

CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM (CONT'D? EXPERIENCE TO DATE - INTENDED TO LOWER THRESHOLD OF PROBLEMS THAT SHOULD BE ENTERED INTO CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM, HOWEVER, INCREASED RECOGNITION OF THIS ENHANCEMENT IS NEEDED STRESS USE OF CR FOR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS { - IMMEDIATE REMEDIAL ACTIONS NOT WELL l DOCUMENTED > REVISE CR FORM TO INCLUDE AREAS FOR REPORTING IMMEDIATE AND REMEDIAL ACTIONS - OVERALL PERFORMANCE IS FAVORAELE - FAVORABLE REACTION FROM SITE ,,,--y

QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM OBJECTIVES - EVALUATE PERFORMANCE AND COMPLIANCE - IDENTIFY WEAKNESSES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT -- REPORT RESULTS - TRACKlMPROVEMENT EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE - PROCESS SURVEYS - AUDITS - SERVICE ASSESSMENTS l i

i i j l 1 447 .3 ki. 2 I ENTERGY 4 i l j j i i. I k i l } TOTAL QUALITY B i ) J 5 a An Entergy Company --.__...,-_.-_,_,_._,,_._.-_._,_,,,,..-.,-.,.._._._..__.-.r,,_._..__-,

TOTAL QUALITY IMPROVEMENT DEVELOPMENT 1990 TOTAL QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ROLLOUT ONE-THIRD OF EMPLOYEES ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN PROCESS IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES EMPHASIS ON PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS - PERSONNEL IN-PROCESSING - ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES FOR OPERATIONS SUPPORT CENTER

i i

i

i 1 ki 1 ENTERGY s \\ \\ i i i f 1 e MODIFICATION 4 PHILOSOPHY 4 5 1 4 i i i i l a ( l An Entergy Company

[ STATION MODIFICATION FOCUS l REVIEWED FOCUS ON MODIFICATIONS - IN AN ENVIRONMENT OF INCREASING COMPETITION, MUST BETTER PRIORITIZE MODIFICATIONS n MUST " PICK THE BEST OF THE BEST" l l MUST TAKE A HARD LOOK AT ROOT CAUSE MUST ENSURE MODIFICATION WILL BE A COMPLETE SOLUTION - MODIFICATIONS CAN BE DISRUPTIVE AND REQUIRE RETRAINING l - MUST OBTAIN EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION OF MODIFICATIONS PRIOR TO OUTAGES BENCHMARK OTHER PLANTS CONSOLIDATED THE STATION MODIFICATION REVIEW PROCESS - PURPOSE ENSURE THE "RIGHT MODIFICATIONS ARE DONE RIGHT" n I

STATION MODIFICATION FOCUS (CONT'D) - MEMBERSHIP FOCUS ON OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND TECHNICAL a SUPPORT STAFF RESULTS - DEVELOP DESIGNS USING "IN-HOUSE" PERSONNEL ) - IDENTIFY AND SELECT MODIFICATIONS WITHIN 60 DAYS FOLLOWING REFUELING - MAXIMUM IMPLEMENTATION AS PART OF SPECIFIC RAMP-UP AND OUTAGE WINDOWS UTILIZING DIRECT SUPERVISION OF CONTRACT CRAFT WORKFORCE - MET TOWER LIGHTNING PROTECTION - IMPROVED RELIABILITY OF ESSENTIAL CHILLERS - CHEMISTRY MODIFICATIONS =}}