ML20058P221

Package Consisting of Attachment to Employee Concerns Programs

ML20058P221
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	07/29/1993
From:	Cerne A NRC
To:
References
NUDOCS 9312230159
Download: ML20058P221 (4)

Text

.,

0 ATTACHMENT A EMPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRAMS PLANT NAME: Pilgrim NPS LICENBEE: Boston Edison Company DOCKET #:

50-293 NOTE: Please circle yes or no if applicable and add comments in the space provided.

A. PROGRAM:

1. Does the licensee have an employee concerns program? (Yes 2r No/ Comments) No. Currently a Nuclear Safety Concern Program is under development with the intent to be implemented in CY 1994.

2. Has NRC inspected the program? No. However, an earlier program which could handle employee concerns, i.e., the Corrective Action Clear House was inspected in 1990, as documented in IR 50-293/89-13.

B. SCOPE: (Circle all that apply)

1. Is it for:

a. Technical? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes. Industrial safety or nuclear quality concerns,

b. Administrative? (Yes, No/ Comments) No. Unless related to industrial safety or nuclear quality.

c. Personnel issues? (Yes, No/ Comments) No. Unless related to industrial safety or nuclear quality.

2. Doer it cover safety as well as non-safety issues? (Yes or No/ Comments) Yes

3. Is it designed for:

a. Nuclear safety?.(Yes, No/ Comments) Yes

. P6-Conal safety? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes

c. I2ersonnel issues - including union grievances? (Yes  ;

or No/ Comments) No. Unless related to a or b above. I

4. Does the program apply to all licensee employees? (Yes or ]

No/ Comments) Yes '

i

5. Contractors? (Yes og No/ Comments) Yes l

1 Issue Date: 07/29/93 A-1 2500/028 7ttachm,RDt j 9312230159 930729 DR ADOCKOSOOOg3 d\ fD b\

~

,d - N

' Ks -

q l

6. Does the licensee require'its contractors and their subs.

to have a similar program? (Yes gI Mo/ Comments) No 1

'Does

~

7. the licensee conduct an exit interview upon f terminating employees asking if they have any ' safety : '

concerns? (Yes pI No/ Comments) No C. INDEPENDENCE: 's j

1. What is the title of ' the person in - charge? Nuclear. 1 Safety Concern Program (N8CP)--Administrator' '

i

2. Who do they report-to? The osiice'of~thC Senior'vice  !

President, Nuclear (may be a technical assistant.) '!

3. Are they independent of.line management? Yes

4. Does the ECP use third party consultants? Yes.- If  !

necessary.  :

t

5. How is a concern about a manager or vice;; presidenti followed' up? Senior VP, Nuclear makes that- 1 determination.

D. RESOURCES:

• I

1. What is the size of the staff. devoted to this; program?

Currently planned for one person (may be part time).

j

)

2. What are ECP staff' qualifications (technical-training, interviewing training, investigator training,- other) ?.

Undetermined at present. ^?

E. REFERRALS:' ~j

1. Who has followup on concerns (ECP staff, line management, j other) ? NSCP administrator routinely.will followup or- A assign followup to an individual'on-line organisation.- }

F. CONFIDENTIALITY: I

'q

1. Are the reports confidential? (Yes 91 No/ Comments).Yes. O i

.L

2. Who is the identity of the alleger made known to'(senior Il' management, ECP. staff, line management, other) ? . (Circle, if other explain) 'ECP staff. Possibly also-the Senior..

VP, Nuclear if his-involvement-is required.

3._ Can employees be:

a. Anonymous? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes Lssue Date: 07/29/93 A-2 2500/028 Attachment .

]!

4 v v --emc w e ~

?

y  :

b. Report by phone? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes.

t G. FEEDBACK: '

l. Is feedback given to the alleger upon completion of the '

followup? .(Yes n No ~_ If so,_.how?). Yes.- NSCP ,1 Administrator will contact or attempt to contact .the  ;

concern initiator with a response. ,

1

2. Does program reward good ideas? Not part of concerns [

program. improvement or savings-may result in a cash ~i reward of from $100.00 to $2,000.00.

3. Who, or at what level, makes 'the final _ decision . of resolution? Generally,, the- responsible Department-  ;

Nanager. 1

4. Are the resolutions of anonymous concerns disseminated?-

Not in current provisions. j S. Are resolutions of valid concerns publicized (newsletter, '

bulletin board, all hands meeting, other)?- Not in  ;

current provisions. "

H. EFFECTIVENESS: '

1. How does the licensee measure the effectiveness of the program? NBCP Administrator tracking and reporting to Senior VP, Nuclear. '

I

2. Are concerns:

a. Trended? (Yes g No/ Comments) No. -No current' history. j

b. Used? (Yes or No/ Comments) No. No current history. .  ;

3. In the last three years how many concerns were raised? m6-of the concerns raised, how many were closed? What- -

percentage were substantiated? N/A '

4.- How are followup technique's_ used to measure effectiveness (random survey, interviews, other)? No current history.  ;

5. How frequently are internal audits of the ECP conducted and by whom? Undetermined. ,

I. ADMINISTRATION / TRAINING:-

1. Is ECP prescribed by a procedure? (Yes R No/ Comments)'

Issue Date: 07/29/93 .A-3 2500/02d Attachment 1

i

, t

.-r_

Yes. Currently in draft form.

2. How are employees, as well as contractors, made aware of this program (training, . newsletter,. bulletin board, other)? Postings, periodic employee communications,- a General Employee training. .

ADDITIONAL' COMMENTS: (Including characteristics which make the program especially effective, if any.)  !

Review ; of the Corrective Action. Clearing house program: in the {

1989/90 time frame (as documentad in IR 50-293/89-13) revealed very-few concerns that would- be characterised as " allegations."

Therefore,.the need for a Nuclear Safety Concern program has been -t determined by BEco management to be a prudent action from a programmatic standpoint, rather than a need from a historical .

perspective. ~

NAME: TITLE: PHONE #: DATE I A. Cerne Resident Inspector 508-747-0565 9/10/93 l

i

't

+

2

~!

I f

Issue Date: 07/29/93 A-4 2500/028 Attachment f i

1 o

4 OCTOBER 20, 1993 I Docket No. 50-293 Mr. E. Thomas Boulette, PhD Senior Vice President - Nuclear Boston Edison Company Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Rocky Hill Road  ;

Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360

SUBJECT:

PILGRIM INSPECTION 93-15 This refers to the safety inspection conducted by Messrs. J. i Macdonald, A. Cerne, and D. Kern, of this office on August 17 -

September 27, 1993 at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, Massachusetts. Areas relevant to the health and' safety of the public examined during this inspection are described in the enclosed report. Our findings were based upon observations of performance and independent evaluations of safety systems and quality records. The preliminary results have been discussed with Mr. J. Kamya and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. ,

Our inspectors observed excellent work coordination during_ plant -

shutdowns on August 22 and 31. The decision to take the plant off line to complete safeguards bus repairs, in light of Hurricane Emily, reflected sound safety judgement. Control room staff demonstrated strong command and control following the weather related reactor trip on September 10, during which the effectiveness of recent training concerning' reactor vessel  :

pressure / temperature monitoring during cooldown was evident. Your multi-disciplinary team efforts to successfully resolve recurring recirculation pump trips were indicative of your ability - to methodically address difficult component performance issues.

No reply to this report is necessary, and your cooperation'with us is appreciated.

l Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY: e James Linville, Chief '

Projects Branch No. 3  !

Division of Reactor Projects

Enclosure:

NRC Inspection Report No. 93-15 t

5

-r

I J

?

I 7

Mr. E. Thomas Boulette, PhD 2 cc w/ encl:

E. Kraft, Vice President, Nuclear Operations and Station Director L. Schmeling, Plant Manager V. Oheim, Manager, Regulatory Affairs and Emergency Planning Department D. Tarantino, Nuclear Information Manager N. Desmond, Compliance Division Manager R. Hallisey, Department of Public Health, '

Commonwealth of Massachusetts '

R. Adams, Department of Labor and Industries, Commonwealth of' Massachusetts The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy The Honorable John F. Kerry The Honorable Edward J. Markey The Honorable Terese Murray The Honorable Peter V. Forman B. Abbanat, Department of Public Utilities Chairman, Plymouth Board of Selectmen Chairman, Duxbury Board of Selectmen Plymouth Civil Defense Director Paul W. Gromer, Massachusetts Secretary of Energy Resources Sarah Woodhouse, Legislative Assistant ,

A. Nogee, MASSPIRG  :

Regional Administrator, FEMA Office  !

of the Commissioner, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Office of the Attorney General, Commonwealth of Massachusetts T.

Rapone, Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety Chairman, Citizens Urging Responsible Energy Public Document Room (PDR)

Local Public Document Room (LPDR)

Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

K. Abraham, PAO (2 copies)

NRC Resident Inspector Commonwealth of Massachusetts, SLO Designee bec w/ encl:

Region I Docket Room (with concurrences) '

E. Kelly, DRP '

J. Shedlosky, DRP bec w/ encl (VIA E-MAIL):

W. Butler, NRR R. Eaton, NRR V. McCree, OEDO J. Lanning (Section 5.3)  !

R. Rosano, OE (Section 5.3) ,

a i