ML20100P074

Rev 1 to Work Plan for Public Svc Co of Colorado for Mgt Consulting Svcs

ML20100P074
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	11/27/1984
From:	Deest B NUS CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20100P072	List: ML20100P070 ML20100P074
References
PROC-841127, TAC-60566, NUDOCS 8412130621
Download: ML20100P074 (20)

Text

__

Q' '

t WORK PLAN FOR PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY -

OF COLORADO FOR MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES 4

NOVEMBER 1984 Revision 1 Reviewed and Prepared by, - e '- Approved by, nee., n/nts oes.,

i' PDR 4

1-Rev. 1 NUSN'*"

I

1-

> s TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 PROJECT DEFINITION 1 2.0 PROJECT FACTS 1 3.0 WORK SCOPE 2 3.1 General 2 3.2 Overall Program 3 3.2.1 Objectives and Criteria 3 3.2.2 Detailed Plan 4 3.2.3 Material Review Process 4 3.2.4 Interview Process 5 3.2.5 Project Review 7 3.2.6 Project Assessment -7 3.3 Data 8 4.0 REGULATORY CODES 8 5.0 ORGANIZATION 8 6.0 SCHEDULE AND PERSONNEL ASSIGNMENTS 8 7.0 PROJECT BUDGET 10 8.0 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 11 8.1 Project Management 11 8.2 Quality Assurance 12 APPENDICES --

FIGURE 1: FACT SHEET FIGURE 2: INTERVIEW DATA REPORT FIGURE 3: MATERIAL REVIEW REPORT FIGURE 4: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS SHZET

-- FI'GURE 5: ASSESSMENT PROCESS

-- FIGURE 6: PROJECT ORGANIZATION NUS88Ee:W84"v'c"

e- ...

'l. 0 PROJECT DEFINITION NUS Operating Services Corporation (NUSOSC) has been con-tracted by the Public Service Company of Colorado (PSC) ~ to provide consulting assistance for the assessment of manage-ment controls within PSC- and at the Fort St. Vrain (FSV) nuclear station. ,

The preliminary NRC report related to the restart and con-tinued operation of the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station dated October 16, 1984 requires that a comprehensive program be developed to determine the underlying causes for deficiencies noted in the management structure and practices of the Public Service Company of Colorado relative to the operation of Fort St. Vrain. Restart of the plant has been tied to the approval of the program structure and overall schedule. Specifically, the report calls for the program to-be conducted by a third party consulting organization and-that the program should be aimed at reviewing the PSC manage-ment structure and practices relative to the operation of Fort St. Vrain with emphasis on correcting deficiencies noted in the various Region IV inspection reports, the last two SALP reports and programmatic weaknesses identified in Section 4 of the report. Pertinent sections of the NRC report are a part of this work plan as Appendix A.

The NRC requires that the work and report be done without consultation or influence from Public Service Company of Colorado. The report will be submitted simultaneously to both Public Service Company of Colorado and NRC.

2.0 PROJECT FACTS All important facts related to the project are given in the Project Fact Sheet - Figure 1 to this work plan.

1 NUS851"4TM#"**"

30 WORK SCOPE 3.1 General The activities of NUS Operating Services Corporation in regards to this project will be structured to specifically

-address the NRC requirements as specified in the October

~

-16th Report. In addition, at the request of the NRC, INPO findings during corporate and plant evaluations will also be addressed. The proposal (Appendix B) provides a general description of the work to be performed. The purpose of this work plan is to provide additional guidance in regards to the conduct of the NUSOSC assessment.

The project will be broken down into five groups, a manage-ment review team and individual teams for operations and maintenance management, licensing, procedures, and training and administration. Certain members of the various teams will be designated as key staff. Key staff will be assigned to the project for the duration. Other members of the teams will be assigned to interviews or material review on a case-by-case basis.

I i The prime goal of our effort will be to assess the status of nuclear management controls and evaluate the nuclear operat-ing philosophy of the Public Service Company of Colorado.

, The assessment will cover broad areas such as management involvement, operating " attitudes", plant operation, com-munications and management " commitment".

The basic criteria that will be used for the assessment will be performance and objectives criteria similar to those established by INPO for corporate and plant evaluations.

Inasmuch as these criteria can, for the most part, be ex-tremely subjective the team will be required to exercise i judgment during their evaluations.

2 NUS83"-enm"*c"

. 3.0 . WORK SCOPE 3.2 overall Program ,

The Operations Management Services Division (OMSD) Model for a " Program for the Identification and Correction of Underlying causes for Observed Deficiencies" will provide

the framework for the assessment. The expanded model (Figure

5) establishes and identifies the following areas of work:

Objectives and criteria Detailed plan Material review process Interview process Project review process Second interview / material review process i Project assessment o Identification of discrepancies o Identification of solutions o Development of recommendations Report ,

Corrective action / oversight review team establishment Implementation of corrective action o Assignments o Schedule o Review o Feedback

, 3.2.1 Objectives and Criteria The broadbased program objectives established for the

, project are to review and assess:

1. management structure

2. management practices / attitudes

3. deficiencies identified in Region IV reports

4. deficiencies in previous two (2) SALP reports

5. operating philocophy/ commitments 3 NUS852eM84""*"

.r .

~3.0 WORK SCOPE 3.2;l . Objectives and criteria (Cont'd.)

.6. communications-

7. organization and staffing-(plant and corporate)

8. training and retraining practices

9. work control systems / procedures The criteria established for the1 measurement of ob-jectives have been selected from the following:

1. Industry Performance Objectives

2. Industry Performance Criteria

3. Fundamental, subjectivo analysis of practices

4. Good Engineering Practices 3.2.2 Detailed Plan A detailed schedule will be developed following a joint meeting with PSC and NRC representatives.-

This work plan constitutes the required detailed plan and will be augmented by a detailed schedule.- The schedule will include assignment of responsibilities,.

topics, and documents to be investigated and documen-tation requirements. The schedule will be based on the information and instructions of this document.

3.2.3 Material Review Process Material review will be done on documents that reflect the NRC concerns for management controls at PSC.

These documents include the SALP Reports for 1982 and 1983, the utilities response to Generic Letter 82-38, and all INPO evaluations.

4 NUS83"eW34"""

- . ,L -

4

~

3.0' WORK SCOPE

, 3.2.3 Material Review Process (Cont'd.)

The NRC has reported that these documents contain information that reflects on the- management of Public Service Company of Colorado. Connections will be explored bettieen events, actions and responses. The management decision process will be reviewed as part

] of the interview process.

l It is expected that material will be reviewed on an 3 ongoing process throughout the project. During the

material review process, the investigating team will gather identified documents on the status of manage-l ment staffing, control systems and operational per-

formance. They will review the material to document I. the suitability and adequacy of the administrative, management, and technical control systems. In addi-4 tion, the material review process will provide the

, investigating team with information on management

involvement in the performance of operations, main-tenance, licensing and training.

3.2.4 Interview Process The interview process represents the primary source of information for the overall project. The inter-l view process will be structured so as to gather in- >

formation through questioning on the program objec-

tives. It is anticipated that managers and supervisors '

at both the plant and corporate locations will be l interviewed. In addition, a significant number of  ;

non-exempt employees will also b4 interviewed.  !

l The interview process will be structured and performed

! in accordance with the detailed schedule. At the

! present time, the program for Fort St. Vrain indicates i

i 5 NUS89:tME""

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ____.m -___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ .

3.0 WORK SCOPE 3.2.4 Interview Process (Cont'd.)

a possible interview process that will incorporate four distinct rounds of interviews.

o Round-l interview sessions will be conducted with 1

mid-level managers. Mid-level managers are re-sponsible for the transition from ordered to im-plemented action throughout the company. They serve as the tool by which senior management accom-plishes their objectives and as a sounding board for other individuals during the conduct of opera-tions. They can present either a natural barrier to communications or a conduit for enhancing com-munications. Detailed and thorough documentation of the opinions and philosophy of these managers will give us excellent insight into how the com-pany operates.

o Round-2 questions will consist of interviews with first-line supervisors and non-exempt employees.

The sessions will be structured so as to obtain information regarding conduct of business opera-tions, morale, communications, personnel perfor-mance and attitudes.

o Round-3 interviews will be conducted at the senior /

corporate level. They will be structured so as to gauge the knowledge and awareness of these in-dividuals on the conduct of operations of the nu- d clear plant and corporate nuclear staff.

NOTE:

When interviewing it will be important to ascertain the depth ofknowledge that personnel have regarding 6 NUS880eTMarc'S

\

3.0 WORK SCOPE 3.2.4 Interview Process (Cont'd.)

the philosophy and conduct of both subordinates and superiors. Individuals should be able to demonstrate a working knowledge of goals, objectives and conduct.

In addition, there must be an overall compatibility of management philosophy and methods of operations.

o Round-4 questions will be a second process with those individuals identified as requiring an additional interview to either substantiate or document in-formation obtained through the first three rounds.

3.2.5 Project Review A project review will be established to allow the investigating team to meet on a regularly scheduled basis to review the status of their activitiec and compare information. A project review will normally be conducted following each round of interviews.

This process will be augmented with input from the ongoing material review. The project review sessions have two primary objectives, (1) maintain the investi-gating teams in synchronization and (2) provide for a thorough, consistent approach for each successive review.

3.2.6. Project Assessment Project assessment is the final information and docu-mentation phase that will provide input into the final report. Project assessment gathers and summarizes information from the material review process and the interview process to identify discrepancies, solu-tions and recommendations for the implementation of correction action. The project assessment output is the final report.

7 NUS882e! mea""C'S

3.0 WORK SCOPE 3.3 Data Detailed records (Figures 2, 3 and 4) will be kept of all interviews conducted and materials reviewed. Two distinct forms will be used for this purpose. One, the Interview Data Report will detail the person interviewed, criteria /

questions covered, general responses, and the interviewers opinion as to the interview results. The Material Review Report will. detail the document reviewed, the purpose / criteria for the review, and the reviewers assessment. The additional comment sheet shall allow for report expansion as necessary.

Furthermore, both reports shall provide for the identifica-tion of additional studies and/or interviews determined to be necessary. The second sheets will not be included in the final report.

4.0 REGULATORY CODES No specific regulatory codes are applicable to this project.

5.0 ORGANIZATION Project Manager will be B. W. Deist, General Manager of the Operations Management Services Division. He shall have one point of contact in Public Service Company of Colorado, L. Brey, Executive Staff Assistant. The project organiza-tion is displayed in Figure 6.

l 6.0 SCHEDULE AND PERSONNEL ASSIGNMENTS A tentative schedule for the project has been established as follows. Modifications of personnel assignments may be necessary to accommodate client availability.

i l

l

! 8 NUS88E"4Maf?***

l l

+- . .

[- 6.0 SCHEDULE AND PERSONNEL ASSIGNMENTS (Cont'd.)

November.13 -

Review Meeting - (Denver) B. W. Deist November 14 -

NRC Region IV Meeting, (Arlington, Texas)

B. W. Deist November 15-16 -

Program Preparation -~(N.Y.) B . . W. Deist November 19 through-21 -

Plan Development - Denver /Ft. St. Vrain B. Deist J. Randall W. Cummings D. Thomison November 26 through 30 -

. Materiel Review and Interviews - Denver /FSV B. Deist J. Randall W. Cumuings D. Thomison D. Orvis  !

G. Morrell (29 & 30 only) .

December 3 through 7 -

Material Review and Interviews - Continued B. Deist J. Randall D. Thomison D. Orvis A. D'Hoostelaere J. Trotter

(

j E. Hammond (open dates)-

K. Meyer (6 & 7 only)

J. Sorensen '(open dates)

December 10 through 14 -

Material Review and Interviews - Continued B. Deist i

D. Thomison l

l J. Randall

- W. Cummings A. D'Hoostelaere J. Trotter D. Orvis l 9 N U SE8EeTaEaR " " ,

r I

l.

. 6.0 SCHEDULE AND PERSONNEL ASSIGNMENTS (Cont'd.)

December'17 through 21 -

Matgrial Review and Interviews - Continued

-' B. Deist D. Thomison J. Randall January 7 through 30 -

Project Assessment and Report Development - liew York B. Deist D. Thomison J. Randall January 31 -

Report completed - Distributed 7.0 PROJECT BUDGET The project is currently authorized in writing by the Vice-President Electrical Production as part of Purchase Order 38386.

Services will be performed on a cost-reimbursable basis.

The estimated labor cost is based on the assignment of an estimated nine (9) professionals and appropriate clerical assistance. Labor costs reflect a discount of 20% for the duration of the assignment.

Costs are estimated by phases as follows:

l i

! Labor Other Direct Charges Phase I Phase II --

l Phase III Total i

10 N U S885:en?iarv'ess

. 8.0 : ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 8 . l' Project Management 8.1.1 A copy of all project - (NUS Job / Work Order) cost runs shall be provided to the Project Manager. He shall promptly review and' validate cost runs and correct them as necessary.

8.1.2 Each project staff member shall bring to the immediate attention of the Project Manager any condition which has potential for negative impact on project quality,-

schedule or cost. The Project' Manager shall bring all such matters to the immediate attention of Mr. L.

Brey and the President, NUSOSC for resolution.

8.1.3 A Project File shall be established in accordance with OMS Division's Project Management Procedures and Quality Assurance Policies and Procedures.

8.1.4 The Project Manager shall initiate a Project Report every two weeks. The report shall be addressed to the-President, NUSOSC and shall contain:

o A summary of accomplishments.

o A statement of problems encountered and corras-ponding resolutions.

o An assessment of project status in relation to the project milestones.

o A summary of project expenditures.

8.1.5 All final deliverables will be transmitted formally in accordance with OMS Division Quality Assurance Policies and Procedures.

11 NUS882eIMaR"c"*

8.0 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS (Cont'd.)

8.2 Quality Assurance In addition-to other requirements in this section, the quality of project deliverables shall be assured by the following measures:

8.2.1 Project staff members shall adhere to the requirements of this work plan.

8.2.3 Draft deliverables shall receive a second technical review within the project staff organization prior to presentation to the NRC and Public Service Company of Colorado. Final deliverables will be reviewed by the President, NUSOSC prior to formal transmittal.

i i

(.

i

(

l 12 NUS852aR22*'

. . . - . . ... . . ~. . . -. . 2 ; - .

g

.CuErlT: PROJECTTITLE:

Public Service Company.of Colorado Consulting Assistance for the Assessment of Management Controls

'ROPOSAL NUMBER : DATE: CUENT PURCHASE DOCUMENT (PURCHASE ORDER OR CONTRACT NUMBER):

P8411039 11/7/84 Purchase Order #38386 CUENT CONTRACT AUTHORITY (NAME): TITLE:

Lawrence Brey Executiva Staff Assistant PROJECT VALUE: TYPE OF CONTRACT:

Q FP PHASE OR TASK' ALLOCATION O MULTIPUER (less 20%)

. (1) O CPF (23 O OmER (SPECIFY)

(3)

', TOTAL $.

CUENT **NOTTO EXCEED" ~

AUTHORIZATION ON FIXED PRICE $

INVOICINGMETHOD(SPECIFY) Monthly as accrued.

CPERATING UNIT RESPONSIBLE FOR PERFORMANCE:

( Operations Management Services Division PROJECT MANAGER (NAME)

TITLE: OPERATING UNIT:

B. W. Deist ' General Manager Operations Management 9prvirpe 04vicinn REGIONAL RESPONSIBILITY (REGION): INDIVIDUAL:

Larry Kroll (7) Larry Kroll '

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE:

November 13, 1984 - January 31,l'984(Estimated)

! CRITICAL MILESTONES:

NRC Meeting Nov. 14, 1984 DATE Initiate Phase.I ,, ,Nov. 19, 1984 Initiate Phase II o,n Nov. 26, 1984 initiato Phaco TTT ila n . 7 . 14M QUAUTY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: ,

. NONE.

DEUVF.RABLE ITEMS:

Final report on the Assessment of Management Controls due January 31, 1985.

I FIGURE 1

~

l- ..

INTERVIEW. DATA REPOR.T .

~

Pers'o'n(s)' Interviewed - -

Criterta Sheet (s) Attached?

Yes. .

No '-

. Additional' Informatton/ Criteria: -

• J .

. . . -c ..,.. . .

. Connentsi .

. ' ,... + ... ..~ . . .

_ C.. .. > , ; ,_-.' s, .e : .? -

. ...s. .- .

. g .1 .

.34: .

.t .

Additional Comment Sheets ' Attached? 'Yes No

, Additionai Action Required'(If yes,- detail on back) ~ Yes ' No.

~ . .

Signed

. Date' Page of '.

Figure 2 NUS88Rham===

.- 14 .

^ - _. _ . . . . - - - -

MATERIAL REVIEW-REPORT '

- Documen.t(s) Reveiwed'- -

f.

f Purpose / Criteria .,,

.v B

i Comments:' ' . -

~

c;;; - -

. C.,. .

i .. -

j . . . _.-

4 . . .

?

t_

i l

1 1

. Additional Connent Sheets Attached? '

Yes No.

Additional Action Required (If yes, detail on back) -Yes Na j - Signed i l Date .

l l Page _ of _

Figure 3 ,',-

NUS8asa4Wgavc==

c' .

, 15 .

L- -

i; 9

o-

, Mditional Coments Shett - -

Person (s) Int'erviewed -

Comments:-: -

t .

1 O

L- ...

I.

t' t .

1 l.

J i

n.

, Signed date i

Page of ,

Fiyre4 NUSP.stmngavc==

1" ..

. ,N s

Ns s

, W -C-e-~

.. s. .

.- .,.~=. ..*- . ~~.

.,.,,,1. '. . , . ...~3..

s.

.~

.. i

. s ;, .- .: s ...c..... = \ .

.4.,v-.._.....

...w.- .,.s_..

.. .. . ;_n >. ..a..... . . .

- ~ .

s. . ., .

v

, s .' .:: y '. .;, ,

. . . . a.: .

ys - : *: ,

• e !*.' 3-J e . Material .

Deternias _

g,,g,, , _ , , yr gg ,g ,y r(* * *$'. ~~; ..";n t Rstablish Broad.

General-

.Detaile.d ,

^

Plaa ,. and Assessamat observations

,, 3 Frogran objectives . Criteria .

.<. .. ..'- ? ' .

• .. Revie=e '

• Includes:

- Management Structure. . . - INFO Criteria  :- Individual Guides

- Management Practices - Subjective Assessment . Schedule

- Regica IV Reported Deficianei== - Good Engiamering Practices '- Format * -l

/ - SALF Reported Deficiencies -

- Technique, 8 '- PSC (FSV Operating. Philosophy) '

f' i - Communications . .

- Organizaties 4 Staffing Round I l

- Operating Practices 3 Round I. 9

- Training /Ratraining ' -* Interviews -* Project

• (Mid-Level' Mars,.) Reviev t

~

-Descrepancies e -

'S Project Corrective Action & a,. Implementation & __

I ' k Assessment

• 1 at Report oversight Team Feedback g .

- i t

l . -- _

-..c.,. H.

.I .

Z PROGRAM FOR THE IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF UNDERLYING C -

causes roR osscRven ocricIENcIts I) no Ea j y .

, n_ -

l. - M -

g . .

.y...__ .. . .-.c,..,-. .

a .

=

. o.

'.V s .Figur. e5-8 - - - -

. n . .

j i .

g

/ ',

s ; .. . .,e .

, , . . .... . ..a, ,- - . * -

s . .

.  ?.....,.

S ..- . 3-

. . ; . j ,e . t.

. , e,. . _ _.. ,

.t .'.

• r, e f .-s/?, . ..

... *; * . a..

. 4 .-

,.sg..,..... 9,., $ ,......s

, ;" .. .\ . .. ~-. e . .; . ....'..-'.er'...,.,..

. .. .a

. ,4 ,.. :u-*

...c,..-*,..,

3 ..

,' ..s.-  : q.

~ ..

. 3. . . . , . , .,.. .

t.; : [...'..,.y

.s . . . . ."f,s

...r. 4.u..;. .c,.: ....

.. . g:..,

1: -

e f

., PROJECT MANAGER i

B. W. DEIST

• j MANAGEMENT REVIEW TEAM I

J. N. Sorenson-E. L. Hammond

} , J. D. Randall*

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE MGMT. LICENSING PROCEDURES TRAINING & ADMINISTRATION D. M. Thomison* K. A. Meyer A. D' Hoostelaere W. F. Cummings*

G. Morrell,'Jr. D. Orvis J. Trotter I .

i

• = Key Staff i

r 4

i 4 .

m  :

og .  ;

O we i

>2 ,

% r I

i b.<

2 E FIGURE 6

?

-