ML20094S240
| ML20094S240 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1992 |
| From: | Drawbridge B PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20094S238 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9204140279 | |
| Download: ML20094S240 (20) | |
Text
- _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ , . _ - _ _ . _ _ - . . _ . _ . _ - _ . . _ _ . . . ._.
I I
6
)
i t
i
SUMMARY
REPORT BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NUCLEAR PRODUCTION REGARDING AO PERFORMANCE CONCERNS i-t i
e i
i.
I l
l i
k !
T h/au% 44C. Drawbridge an- -cv l
Executive Dir Nuclyg Productiott Date April 10, 1992 !
Enclosure 1 9204140279 920410 i PDR ADDCK 05000443 P' PDR
SUMMARY
REPORT BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NUCLEAR PRODUCTf0N REGARDING AO PERFORMANCE CONCERNS Two reports have been provided to me and are enclosed. One report has been provided by the Independent Review Team (IRT) and is an assessment of the Auxiliary Operator performance concernal the second report has been provided by the Station Manager and it summarizes Station Hanagement activities with regard to the Auxiliary Ope.ator performance concerns. The purpose of this report is to provide an Executive Summary of the two reports and to provide a perspective on the Auxiliary Operator watchstander (AO) performance concerns.
There were certain AO watchstanders who did not perform their jobs correctly. Management cannot always prevent an individual from performing poorly if he is predisposed to performing in an unacceptable manner. However, Management must take responsibility for the overall impact on the organization of the AO performance concerns. These concerns have prompted Management to carefully reflect on how the organization performs activities, how Management interacts with all levels of the organization and how Management communicates expectations to the organization. In the final analysis, Management is responsible for all activities at Seabrook Station. Ac Executive Director Nuclear Production, I take ultimate responsibility for these performance concerns.
The Independent Review Team provided a comprehensive report with regard to the Auxiliary Operator performance concerns. I feel 1
i
.m
however, that there are certain additional actions that go beyond the recommendations provided by the IRT that we, as a Company, should pursue. Those additional actions are detailed later in this report.
During the course of their investigation, the IRT performed numerous tasks. The IRT performed data reduction of AO roundkeeping documentation and Security Department keycard transaction 1 cgs. They also interviewed numerous Auxiliary Operators, some of whom had just received disciplinary action. The IRT was not a participant in any of the disciplinary process data gathering interviews or disciplinary action meetings. In order to preserve independence, Station Management and Executive Management were not participants in the confidential interviews that were held between members of the IRT and members of the Auxiliary Operator Ctaff, operations Staff, other members of the plant, and Management. Thorofore, the primary purpose of this report is to provida a total perspective of company actions in response to the AO performance concerns.
As a r6sult of these concerns, thirteen individuals have received disciplinary action. of the thirteen individuals, four individuals havo separated from the Company, and the remainder have been suspended for a period of time without pay. In the case of three individuals who held NRC licenses, these licenses have been withdrawn.
The suspended individuals have been disqualified as A0 watchstanders and will not be requalified until they have completed 2
l l
a remedial training program, the scopa of which is now defined.
They have been placed on probation for a minimum of six months, during which time their performance will be closely monitored. If any individuals cannot be remedia*ed within the probationary period, further disciplinary action will be initiated by Management. None of the suspended individuals will be reinstated to AO watchstanding duties without prior approval of the President.
Management adopted the philosophy from the outset that it is essential to deal with the A0 performance concerns aggressively in order to ensure that its seriousness is well understood by all ,
company employees. It is essential that all NHY cmployees understand Management's expectations and their personal responsibilities and accountability. In addition to the removal from duty of those individuals involved and the immediate initiation of an IRT assessment, the following additional short-term corrective actions have been or are being taken.
. The Shift Superintendent that made the initial identification of_the discrepancy, discussed the incident with the oncoming Shift Superintendent at shift turnover that same night. Each Shift Superintendent has counseled his crew on watchstanding practice and Management expectations regarding AO rounds.
- A comparison of the computerized card key entry logs with the AO's required Rover rounds and log entries are being performed on a daily basis until further notice.
. Operations Management issued a night order on March 3 to the operating crews regarding complacency.
3
._. __ _ . . _ _ _ _ = _ . . . __ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ ._
On March 6, Operations Management issued a second night ordor that addressed shift records requirements, log sheets, attention to detail, and work ethics.
Operations Management briefed all of the operating crews on the disciplinary action taken to date. Additional briefings will be provided as required.
Operations Management has required each Shift Superintendent to perform a set of rounds with each AO and to review the ,
watchstation and all other duties expected of the AO.
On March 9, the Executive Director Nuclear Production began a series of briefings for all Operations Department personnel.
He discussed the investigation, requirements for rounds, and Management expectations.
The Station Manager has begun a serias of briefings to Station departments on this occurrence and on Management's expectations on work performance in order to increase the sensitivity of Station employees in other areas.
The suspended individuals are being required to complete a comprehensive remedial training program. The training program will address, as a minimum, Management expectations of their performance, their specific job responsibilities, Technical Specification nad Technical Requirements and on-the-job refresher training with special emphasis on the proper performance of rounds and filling out logsheets. Each AO will be required to stand each watchstation with a trainer / evaluator. In addition, Station and Production 4
C A.
i Management sill complete interviews with each individual in order to accertain their understanding of their duties and responsibilities and Management's expectations of them. ,
. The NHY Presidont issued a letter to all employees summarizing the AO performance concerns and stressing omployee responsibility regarding accuracy and accountability. Tho NilY President has met with the Management and supervisory statf and has issued a memorandum reminding all employees of the NRC's regulations related to deliberate misconduct.
The IRT, in my opinion, stated correctly that thoro were three groups of AO performance activities. Group I consists of those individuals who knowingly omitted portions of their rounds without any reasonable justification. Group II individual.s understood the importance of and requirements of AO rounds, but had rationalized
.why certain areas or pieces of equipment did not have to be inspected on every round. Those individuals appeared to believe that they were doing the right thing or potentially doing a better job by devoting more of their time to what they felt were more important items. Group III individuals consist of those who clearly understood the importance of and the requirements of the AO rounds and rigorously completed those rounds. There were also instances of Group II Aos who clearly understood the requirements of their rounds, but missed certain areas on rare occasions. These areas were missed due to honest mistakes or due to distraction by other work activities. Their missed portions of rounds were 5
._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ ~
extremely rare and did not represent a pattern of behavior.
I believe that it is the rationale of the IRT, that an Individual who willingly does not perform his activities cannot be prevented from doing so strictly by Management action. I agree that if an individual is predisposed to not performing his job correctly, there are no reasonable preventative measures that Management can put in place to preclude that situation. However, Management has the responsibility to review the process for hiring that individual in order to ensure that there were no potential indications which could have been identified in the preemployment ccreening process. In addition, Management has the responsibility to review the company's processes for development of the affected individuals in order to identify further opportunition to reinforce Management expectations and work ethic.
The IRT, in their transmittal letter for their assessment, noted that the task force found considerable evidence that supports an effective technical task management style and safety culture within the organization. The organization in composed of extremely capable, technically oriented individuals who are very much tasked-oriented in nature. As a result, the organization as a whole, puts less emphasis on people-oriented skills. Therefore NHY should review how we train our managers and supervisors to assure that we improve the manner in which we treat and interact with all individuals within NHY. Special caphasis should be place on assuring that Management's expectations, basic work ethics, and professional interactions at all levels of the organization are l
6
l understood and properly implemented. In the case of the Aos in particular, we need to assure that NHY expectations are communicated to ur First-Line Onerations Management. This includes the expectation that the Aos must be fully integrated into the shift team, and then reinforce this philosophy on all shifts.
There must be a " buy-in" by First-Line Supervisors that they are members of Management, and that they have ownership for the oversight and development of the Aos. The Aos must recognize that although they work in remote areas of the Station, they are an integrated portion of the NHY team. The Aos must realize that their job is important, even in the performance of routine and repetitive activities.
I recommend the following initiatives in addition to the recommendations of the Independent Review Team.
RecommendILt19D_11 New Hampshire Yankee should acquire the services of an expert consultant to work with Management in order to enhance coma.anications and team building. The consultant should be selected by May 15, 1992.
Management Resoonsibility: President & Chief Executive officer / Executive Director Nuclear Production Action Due Date:- May 15, 1992 Reconmendation #2 7
c
l l
Management should review its hiring and orientation practices at in order to assure that they consider all appropriate attributes for hiring and developing employees. This review will be initiated by the Executive Director Nuclear Production, the Station Manager, and the Employee Relations Manager.
Management Resoong.ibilityt Employee Relations Manager Action Due Date: June 15, 1992 Recommendation t1 Management should redouble its efforts in its support and communication with the on-shift crews. The Station Manager, Operations Manager, and the Shif t Superintendents will develop a plan to foster better communications.
Management Responsibility: Station Manager Action Due Date June 1, 1992 Recommendation #4 Hanagement should review industry experience with regard to these types of concerns and implement the lessons learned.
Manacement Resoonsibility: Regulatory Compliance Manager Action D13e Date! December 1, 1992 The following are recommendations recently received from the 8
l \
IRT. I have performed a preliminary review of the IRT Report and I am in general agreement with its recommendations. Based on the initial review, I have made initial assignments to develop action plans in order to implement the recommendations. It should be noted that the assigned Responsible t:anagement will have to carefully review the IRT recommendations and discuss the recommendations with the IRT Manager and Executive Management to gain a full perspective of the issues involved. This will assure that the resultant corrective action plans will be both meaningful and comprehensive. I have requested that the Regulatory Compliance Manager provide periodic status reports c' their implementation, which I intend to make available to the NRC Senior Ree'. dent Inspector. I have also requested that the IRT assess the corrective actions taken prior to closure of the associated recommendations.
IRT Resonmendation #1:
Executive Management should review and evaluate the procedure compliance policy scope with regard to the applicability of verbatim compliance.
Resoonsible Management: President & Chief Executive Officet Action Plan Due Datn May 15,1992 IRT Recommendation #2:
Conduct refresher training on a periodic basis in the following:
Procedure Compliance Policy.
9 I
1
(
i l
. Need for integrity /accurscy/ completeness when documenting work activities. Emphasizing that all documentation may be needed to reconstruct work activities.
NRC regulation on willful misconduct by licensed and/or unlicensed employees. i Responsible Management 1 Training Manager Action Plan Due Date: May 15, 1992 IRT Recommendation #3r streamline Company operations by consolidating and eliminating (as possible) programs, policies, manuals and procedures.
Emphculs should be placed on eliminating redundancy and exce ssive administrative requirements and documentation (e.g. ,
canceling Nuclear Production Manual, quarterly surveillance i for shift superintendents to review Work Request priorities, prescedure for bulletin boards). Consider using outside expertise.
Responsible Management 1 Executive Director Nuclear Production Actlon P).an Due_Datal June 15,1992 IPT Reconmendation #41 Determine where operations administrative burdens for compliance with Technical Specifications and NRC commitments can be reduced by design enhancements. Examples:
. EFW back leakage temperature monitoring 10 l
- 1. . . .
- Spent i>uel Pool cooling pumps area ternperature aq)ponsible Managementt Station Manager Agtlon Plan Due Date: July 15, 1992 1RT Recomnend&Ligg.)32 Revie*> and revise thw AO logs to eliminate checks determined to be a::censive (e.g., Cooling Tower and CST every four '
hours).
- Hggoonsible Managementt -operations rianager Action. Plan Due Datel July 1, 1992 IRL Aarommendation #6:
Consider providing Auxiliary Operators with updated tools for :
recording rounds data to provide consistent documentation and enhanced capability for equipment monitoring. Consider systems such as used by Virginia Power (Nuclear Plant Journal, Jan-Feb, 1992).
ResDonsible Managementi Operations Manager Action Plan Due Date: June 1, 1992 IRT Recommendation #7:
Revise the AC Initial Training Progran so that at the start and the end of the program, the Executive Director Nuclear Production, Station Manager, Operations Manager, and Training Manager addrsss the company's expectations and standards that the AO must meet, and convey the consequences of failing to 11
~
l meet these expectations and standards. This should be emphasized annually during AO continuing Training.
Responelble ManAg.enenta Training Manager Action Plan Du d atgj, July 1, 1992 IRT RgECMat h ion #8t Revise the AO Initial Training Program so that upon AO's arrival at tim ning, the Shift Superintendent (ss) delivers Operations Department sxpectations to the new AO (orientation). In addition, an Ao currently on the shift meeting these expectations will be assigned as a mentor to train this new AO on job requirements during the OJT process.
This will include signing of all qual guide related material.
The Shift Superintendent will be responsible for monitoring the progress of assigned Aos throughout the training program to make sure the department's expectations are being met.
ResDonsible ManaggmentJ. Training Manager Acti"n Plan Due Date: July 1, 1992 IRT Reggngiendation #9:
Revise the AO OJT Program to incorporate the Operations Good Practice on AO logs and round taking.
Resoonsible Manaaement: Training Manager Action Plan Due Date May 15, 1992 12 r
IRT Regsmmendation #10t Add signature blocks on the OJT qual guide to include AO mentor, stating that the AO trainee is ready for qualification approval.
Ao trainee, statir.g he accepts all respcnsibility of information found in qual guide.
Shift Superintendent, stating his er.pectations have been .
met.
. Operations Manager, stating that the department expectations have been met.
Egggonsible Manacement: Training Manager Action Plkn Due Date! May 15, 1992 R .BtiLammendation #11: -
Review applicable OJT lesson plans and Job Performance Measures (i.e. , rounds, logs keeping, CST integrity checks) to ensure that AO administrative requirements have been included in these lesson plans.
Resoonsible Manaaement! Training itanager Action Plan Due Date! May 15, 1992 IRT RecQMERDdation #122 operations and Training should re-evaluate the priority placed on.the AO Continuirg Training Program. Training should ensure 13
.~ _
adequate instructor re' sources are available to conduct the program. Training should consider placing an instructor on-shift in the plant to conduct training.
Responsibl0J13naq2ncatl Operations Manager / Training Manager Action Plan _Qun_Datel May 15, 1992 IRT RenamaandatigtL]121 Re-evalusto the AO training commitments to see if any requirementa can be reduced or eliminate. Recommend that some of the requirements deemed necessary be fulfilled on shift.
Responalbic_liannacnenti Operations Manager / Training Manager Acti.Q1L_Planluglatni May 15, 1992 IRT_llecommendationJ141 Provide conslutent administration of exams, written or walkthrough, to document students have comprehension of the material.
Resoonsible Managencati Training Manager / Operations Manager Action Plan Due Date: May 15, 1992 1RT ReconnRDdation #15:
Examine the training feedback disposition process to ensure that actions are properly addressed and implemented.
14 i
)
Responsible _Managgaent: Operations Manager Action Plan Due Datet July 15, 1992 IRT Reconnendation #16_t Develop a standard orientation program for new employees to convey clear and concise Management expectations and develop a means to reinforce these expectations on a requalification basis. (See Recommendation #7 and #8 for example.)
Responsible Management: Training Manager / Employee Relations Manager Action Plan Due Date May 15, 1992 IRT Recommendation #17L Develop team building opportunities with all on-shift operations personnel. Consider periodic gatherings, other than shift turnover, which would encourage team interplay.
Resoonsible Management Operations Manager Action Plan Due Datet May 1, 1992 IRT Recommendation #18:
Develop Operations Department good practices to incorporate operations standards, management expectations and good practices pertaining to Ao logs and watchstanding.
15 i
l
- - - _ _ . - x
Responsible Maangementt Operations Manager Action Plan Due Datel May 15, 1992 IRT ReqQnagadation #19 Develop Operations Department Qualification Program and include this program in the NYQM.
Rapponsible Management: Operations Manager Action Plan Due Datos May 15, 1992 IRT Recommendation #20s Review and evaluate the processes utilized to manage technical and administrative tasks to streamline and consolidate the Management function. Encourage the decisionmaking processs to be made at the appropriate levels in the organization. Allow managers more time to manage people and to develop strategies in order to facilitate improved interpersonal con.munications.
Consider using consultants to complete thiu review and provide specific recommendations.
Responsible Manaaement! Executive Director Nuclear Production Action Plan Due Datet July 15, 1992 IRT Recommendation #21 Operations Management should ensure that the intent of OA1.14
- 8, " Plant Performance Monitoring" is met.
Resoonsible Management: Operations Manager Action Plan Due Date; May 15, 1992 16
On some occasions the AOa did not truly understand why they had to perform their roundst especially in regards to standby equipment that remained idle. This shows a lack of understanding in the organization regarding Management's expectations and the 1
basis for those en,ectations. We, as an organization, tend to focus on high priority tasks. In that regard, we have the potential to unintentionally minimize the importance of routine activities. Management expectations should be reinferned in trainingt however, training cannot be used as the exclusive method for communicating expectations to the organization. Training is an extension of Management, however, training cannot be used in lieu of proper Management communications. I recommend that NHY concentrate on assuring that the management in each department clearly communicates and reinforces by example, basic expectations related to day-to-day job activities.
In concluding this report, I am heartened by two facts which I believe are important to note. First, we identified these AO performance concerns by means of our internal review programs.
Second, in all of the interviews conducted with the AOs, it became ,
clear that the AOs recognized that if their supervision had been aware of the Aos missing portions of their rounds, such action would have been considered unacceptable and the AOs believe that they would have been directed by their supervision to complete the missing portions of their rounds. Notwithstanding these facts, we must now aggressively implement the recommended actions to prevent these unacceptable practices from recurring. I have and will 17
continue to monitor the effectiveness of our short term corrective actions. I am confident, based on all of our actions to-date, that Seabrook Station continues to be operated safely and in accordance with all our operating license requirements. 1 believe that with the completion of the IRT and Management assessments, we have a good understanding of the root causes of the Ao performance concerns. I also believe that with the short term corrective actions we have put in place and with the implementation of the recommendations contained herein, we can be confident that our activities are being conducted properly. . . , i J
-c;n}xAda Bruce L. Qrawbrid Executive Director Nuclear Production Enclosure 18 l
1
New ilampshire Yankee April 10,1992 ENCLOSUltE 2 TO NYN.92045
.