ML20154P232
| ML20154P232 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1998 |
| From: | Gwynn T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Gambhir S OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9810220258 | |
| Download: ML20154P232 (52) | |
Text
...
3 p,SMeop
'+
~%
UNITED STATES
.D.
[
h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_3' 8
REGION IV
,o'[
0,,
611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 400
- 'g.
ARLINGTON. TEXAS 76011-8064 OCT I 9 i998 S. K. Gambhir, Division Manager Production Engineering Omaha Public Power District i
Fort Calhoun Station FC-2-4 Adm.-
P.O. Box 399 Hwy. 75 - North of Fort Calhoun Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023-0399 i
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC MEETING REGARDING RESULTS OF COMMON CAUSE ANALYSIS j
CONDUCTED AT FORT CALHOUN STATION '
i
Dear Mr. Gambhir:
. This refers to the meeting conducted at the Fort Calhoun Station on October 6,1998..This.
meeting was held to discuss the results of a common cause analysis that was conducted by your i
staff.
The meeting was beneficial in allowing us the opportunity to discuss the results of your analysis, including your proposed wrrective actions to improve performance at Fort Calhoun Station and to compare your results with those obtained by our own efforts.
in accordance with Section 2.700 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.
Sinc homas.G nn, ir ctor Division of R cto
) ject Docket No.: 50-285 License No.: DPR-40
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List 2.1 Licensee Presentation 9810220258 981019 PDR ADOCK 05000285 P
PDR n.
j c
l sfj Omaha Public Power District 2-
- 1 1
cc w/ enclosures:
' James W. Tills, Manager
- Nuclear Licensing
~ Omaha Public Power District.
Fort Calhoun Station FC-2-4 Adm.
P.O. Box 399 Hwy. 75 - North of Fort Calhoun l
Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023-0399
' James W. Chase, Division Manager Nuclear Assessments.
Fort Calhoun Station i
P.O.~ Box 399 Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023 J. M. Solymossy, Manager - Fort Calhoun Station'.
Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FC-1-1 Plant P.O. Box 399
~ Hwy. 75 -_ North of Fort Calhoun Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023
' Perry D. Robinson, Esq.
. Winston & Strawn :.
1400 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 -
Chairman Washington. County Board of Supervisors Blair, Nebraska 68008
' Cheryl Rogers, LLRW Program Manager.
- Environmental Protection Section
' Nebraska Department of Health i
- 301 Centennial Mall, South i
P.O. Box 95007.
Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-5007 4
e s
a a
4 i
s.
.m.
~
e -m%1 s
w-an y%-w p.~--
y q
g
., Q r,
f_
\\
bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib by RIV:
Regional Administrator DRS-PSB DRP Director MIS System Branch Chief (DRP/B)
RIV File i
Project Engineer (DRP/B)
- Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
Resident inspector.
K. Perkins, Director, WCFO l
B. Henderson, PAO C. Hackney, RSLO
-)
1
)
I DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\DRPDIR\\FC1006MS.DRP
,To, receive copy of document, Indicate in boxpsQ" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures 'N' = No copy C:DRP/B U D:DRP M
RIV:DRP/B DNGraves;vih if3 WDJohnso;(/
TPGwynn {J [
10/Q98 10/lt?98 V
1 4 /98
/
6 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 020C06
e.
t
( ".j
- 1 L
u.
.. bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib. by RIV:
Regional Administrator DRS-PSB DRP Director -
MIS System Branch Chief (DRP/B)
RIV File l
. Project Engineer (DRP/B)
Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
. Resident inspector K. Perkins, Director, WCFO B. Henderson, PAO C. Hackney, RSLO i
' DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\DRPDIR\\FC1006MS DRP -
- To receive copy of document, indicate in boxP4;" = Copy without enclosyres *E' = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy RIV:DRP/B C:DRP/B [f D:DRP M
DNGraves;vihlP3 -
WDJohnsop(/
TPGwynn 7 [
5 10hV98 10/lD98 V-1($ /98
/
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY i
i s
4
-o
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT ENCLOSURE 1 FORT CALHOUN STATION y
MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST
SUBJECT:
NRC Public Meeting (Common Cause)
Date:
10/06/98 Name Title /
Telephone (Please Print)
Organization Extension R.L.Jawon k.-
Asp pu,n L,,,_om,
cau O n w H h o > w e z.
S q u N*** m 69s6 s
$c)) $l4M013
$/ ann es - 8*4 denre ce
& 82.3 hJb (J
N &a6 &.
$kBM NY B0l
, \\rbn'<e.Vams.
% ww -Pah1easlab uoyo Wm /)uk6 3 + ww s A c' L 7ac 4e&ew wurm%
nu b % vv As*Twh m, u
Wt 3 svaus x. Gamwr w siu m ~yn - ga,w,.}
g +]
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION y
MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST
SUBJECT:
NRC Public Meetina (Common Cause)
Date:
10/06/98 Name Title /
Telephone (Please Print)
Organization Extension n.~ 3' e + D % c.u:__
H o,2.- h a m rn h > w l fa 29--
e 4 4 A 'u ac/ger/pb cGt (soces-s%
A O p 2 A c oRSH cPPDlrANc
- L (19--
Touri(n-ein a om /$tu PS 5 6 70 [
t%dGn cooh Isw. &~
na b\\t.t
$ lU6t b0Mrt3 No4(P>
cat. em.-am s owo/sc.
%n3
]Os4)# L AWF f41 vnan M+rL GwrAa 61 &)
s Tho+A % w<2J
% <~ L t..+v C,n 1 0hCM kdMWSod Ah 0Mkrr 6&
S7GT JVHJ A/fJ AD AsoGiJ<Cistcn_/C.yp 733 9 A u <. utelud Iken PHsicia / 49 7/4l 2t.5 - ys r
-- ) rf b, MC N hiS
,h-VIet huid blV I kem Pad
& &cd M28 77% ~
D a t., b u " a c e (* L s 3'Achef mtw u kv4ue./rPep aap Mea doa
,ua - c c6., c,, ann s s,9 y
N $.dc Lbrecq (D cR -Qan
(, D I 6
,., /,
1
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST
SUBJECT:
NRC Public Meetina (Common Cause)
Date:
10/06/98 Name Title /
Telephone (Please Print)
Organization Extension A f# r ) b
' N.
0 / k I //Is n + m t 72W0
/
i
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST
SUBJECT:
NRC Public Meetina (Common Cause)
Date:
10/06/98 Name Title /
Telephone (Please Print)
Organization Extension M A K k 1~
F~RAHS vt a - ave tea e u c e u s r a s.
- c. s 31 mike Swet<<n& Nudeess% Gov by87 v
(
b)M sv E. c \\.J 6.qCat.
S CLI - CLt V 0 5 N rt_t b4( 3 bAv. 3 C&+21 N e c. -e iv..c,. /L :.# d,,,,
//ac-\\ Fakhc orts-r + k 6 o) L J
owru r. cwcroa vo.Atek %
? L39 N s C uv ac_
k wc%
GSM
/fts k tu A t
nM cn)
Dww EThupH Mte usu /4dm pt-w/V/ /fWcf T.E L u'TITmom.
a s, ptc_
Ctu 97 tL'> P%
dr.R.Cu m L oppn - u m r.%
m-m-c t 3 Ju/u$ahl '
OffG - Admm $ir <
% vs35-7370 f/k W oAv-n aw ps u J w n-cvn N rn L opn-Mw flAkt
%z.rp.i-7112 A cIna $ k w 00rs. ll&ON $us/YSf 533 ~7/Sfo 84 A lb4r pii M y A d % lu s 5) wo (L 1
((Z fc ca..e b-e wL cne v
[31cA z. Ski /es Aw<,a s-aA;,, Em.
733z.
& S
'o nnEn ihIcae c-Fed tu AJ Neth hw cha J&Y Snl/kw MAL i c46-uaa C h n < 'l i A l b a /' A G V $. i- (. h y d L t l 4935 y
l I.i I !
ill l!:!
il l
l t
i
!l l:
i o
a r
2 i
E h
R U
b SO L
C
/
m NE n
s r
s e
e a
e nt pGt ya s
a wG ah G
s Gy G
e y
ed t
r r
a a o
u a
PGJ S
G n,
sn n
o o
ns it i
c s
a n
A s
o u
mi e
c t
y s
am c
v r
i i
u s
t aD d=
s c
m d
n-o c
r e
e n
me e
r r
t o
n r
o u
p g
P CS O
I A
e B
ra B
5 t
!ll!
l l i!
,l1i 1
! !; I
!ii!
i:
s i
s sy i
l s
an y
A e
a s
s n
s u
i y
a C
A lan t
r A
oo om e
R s
r u
r ra a
o n
C g
Een n
a n
i o
y n
l m2 am1 re emed ms aC aU s
o s
n h
h u
P P
I i
H E
E
... - - -. - <. - ~
. -.. -.. _ -....- ~.-... --.-..-..~..- - +
-..n.~...-----aa--a,..--.-n.n.wa.~...-
.s..--n.-.
aa u--n-e O
%=0 1
E +g 4
4e 3>
eG 3#g3 G
0o e4 C.c y
oR 1t)
GQ ea Et u
g
~i R&
Phase 1 Analysis
=senx:nangay m __
Purpose:
! Identify underlying organizational and programmatic issues 1 Identify focus areas for further investigation a Completed July 1998 a Used Condition Reports Beginning 1/1/97 i Levels 1,2,3 and selected Level 4
Phase 1 Analysis
= aan,,n_g E Selected events involving human errors occurring since 1/1/97 1 Excluded 1 Errors occurring before 1/1/97 I Equipment failures E Data base of 14C inappropriate actions 180% confidence level l
t 15% expected random error i
t i
j ! :!
ljl:
l
!;!i I!!!!!
e s
s u
s a
e Cs s
n n
c o "s o
t o
o ot nt i
i r
Ra o
c gi A
P t
,i st c
e t
s At s
r e
a ov ei i
r s
pnt p
ei a
o y
RS ir r
p p
l E
n a
P o
p o
r nm iH p
a t
p n
Aedd n "e i
I a
nn oaI 1eCs z
i e
y r
ewwsf o
i s
eyt g
n e
i l
a va et end a
h RAI C
P H
B E
- I
a I
Totalinappropriate Actions versus SALP j
Area i
Q.y :
5 50 m
c 45 o
5 40 4
35 e
30 e
m 2 -
0- 25 M
o
.c sw n
- a. 20 4a
~%
2 m
15
.c
' 9;-
.J$t 10 2n A,R
-a x.
s16n i
w s.
o 5
+M F
e,s:m t=g l
~"
0
+
Operations Maintenance Engineering Plant Support SALP Area
[
i l
% of Total 1
o N
A m
O N
A j
Radiation Protection (RP)
Conduct of Business (CB)
E m
m B
Maintenance m
(M N) ar>
1 E.
Plant
>e O perations
~#
0 (0 P) a-
- Ei Document
- x.,.
o Management ot
.~'
"O E
(DM)
T a
8 Engineering J e !
,g
,5 Support (ES)
^
Work Management (W M)
Clearance T(agging)
Safety (CL)
M S
2mesmemewgsg;;g m mg, inappropriate Action by Key Activity (exceed 5% threshold) 12%
10%
m 8%
4
~
- 'O H
0o/o i;;, ;
- .;~: w f
. q,.SQ;:p:
~
,4
- >==
<f o
4%
4 fM
~
2%
7 jf.
'jM$
h.
,w 0%
coordination of docurnent document procedure activities (ca) preparation (dp) review (dr) preparation (pp)
A F
Classed by Type of O Misjudgement Inappropriate Act. ions
. inadequate K&S 18%
~~ ---
~!
r I
16%
i t
i 14%
i C
i 4=8 O
10%
l-i 4=
Q 8%
.f
~
I
- ac 6%
3
~
l j
+
4%
'(
i
- ~jz gy
[
h f
'q
.j'.
h j
2%
~
r
':e fte 0% ---
l Wrong Misinterpretation of Mindset (MJ4)
Lack of information Habit intrusion Not Familiar with Not Familiar with Assumption (MJ5) Information (MJ7)
Valiidation or (MJ2)
Amilability of Job Performance Verification (MJ6)
Information (SK5)
Standards (SK3) i I
e J
l' l
n ia s
o n
i l
t w
a s
t o
z e
e i
i d
n c
D s
k a
n e
t )
a gi e
n1 e
r c ic eP Oni c(
r i
B ef i
e f
oi f
cD u
la t
i t
s n
ne c n
o o
ioi i
t i
t t
a a
ae m z
zc e
n na a i
i p
r a
af g o
r c
g ge o r
r t r
S n
O OiP e )2 t
O 5
O aP u(
qe da n
i d
n g0 n0 as eo(
ams t
a.e uA n o
l q ei) i t 1 e c a c
d az n
af in r
n iea n
o tn g
.e i r O i
t i
a.c
)4 i
n zf o
0 i
in e
et e(
ah tact n aD ci o
nni e
t i
d uh a ami z gc t
i r
mWa n
n i
o
.i
^
g C
Ot r
O a
ym b
g b
a k r i o
n ok J
r e o a
r a W e, M )5 d
t g
c u
n qlsti e
l c o0 o
eiai(
s s
wi, cy M
dk r i
r ASP c sP n
e D
I a
l C
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 4
3 2
1 3_os 5#
m
i Phase 1 Conclusions w
www-2 Inappropriate actions causing FCS events are organizationalin nature vice being associated with particularprocesses or activities
!! No difference in characteristics of inappropriate actions between 1997, 1998, and the '98' refueling outage e
l:
l
- ll,llll. ll!
i r
o s
l e
a l
c u
i e
r n
d t
h d
o c
c e
n M
r e
s a
r T
s e "t o e
n e
r n
c t
i i
n e
v l
u ei c
o u
Rs a m f
s.eV i
l t
i i
r ol c
i
( oF g
u a
s n r "e, n l
r u
gr d
o s
e l
nE auif t o
p l
nja vo i
cniim c
k) s r
n-met t
t i
ad eMl o
aa s
i i
pit rt f
s n"
pat c
o o
CninWepmE n
aI s
ac se e
i i
b t
a l
npc o
epixn r
se a
a a
1nig c
nywsd m
ed r
i r
i e
Dle mors m "A o ro sf s
wogo
%o d erhe%k r
r e
a et et s
p 3
n r
a 0
a h
8K PCl 8T1 P
a a
,mumau_-
a.-as
_.asam_
m.w.
J.-u--me-ame e-gE,..as.W.m.J.
A&ad.m,aea.4e,_g3_4st.e_.aw-4_ma.A.
.1 mL AL
_.A_aJyem 2,4._
Ag.ka,-M4AaJ..M4S_4_,A.m A &# 5 m A, m a 4s.Ji,4_J4.ee.44,4.
,m,44.e.OM6a.4 MaAh
@-M, l'e f
- i l
s m
i 4J C
\\
0 E'
\\.
B t
.B._
c M
.3 D
O-U I
e-i C
0 i
t "O
'O i
m C
l O-0 o
o m
"O W
l b
C c
0 ra D
t o
E
,E
{ E
- f.E3oD o
o C vD E.seen (U
g.,,m%
.O
_u o
4' CD i
4mm N^
0 D
O.m 1
C e
o m
'~
II
@ M (7
Em Z
gm
.u.
g nG EEa o
ru a
O >g vom E
men es ma na
mJ
..J.,,r4._
.a m.
.ma_a 2
A_aW...
m4em
..wm_
a d.
a p.,4.,_4, 3,aa.a..
.,ag,_.sw.m
.um.g.aa-M.g.Aase mauM.Mg.awA.4..mA_.m.e.=A433 5%%
Lp._
ag.i...
,,A_,a a.3_as.,WA 4
4,.a t.
'\\
pl i
e8 O @l3 E5 OO i
gM gC i
b Nf,!
i 4
8E
.h:
O Wa E'
L i
i i'
l i
.il
!ilj j:j i I
,{
)
e s
c en s
a n
nl i
y opi a
l o
g pmt m
a s
o v
r o
eCt o
i Rl o
f l
s n
o aM s
2 r
i u
f-e d
2 nd l
o 3
d e
e n
(
eS c
v a
h s
od t
i t
yP n
c s
r e
w e
af e
f e
e ve yE r
vt v
i Mmui i
y r
t l
i ab r
2mS es t
a ot r
es t
s n
n n
vio m
i e =, dWimo p i
in u
r is l
e as s
c d
c u muc a
eAAS r
s t
oi i
h S
Fd 1
I P
li R
I Administrative Procedure i
Compliance Survey Results women, gam m,
l 1 High perceived mental burden associated with administrative procedure compliance l Low probability of receiving consequences j
when not complying with an administrative j
requirement 1 Low probability of receiving positive feedback when observed complying with management expectations / administrative requirements j
Accountability System Survey Results
= man i
The current accountability system does i
nothave a positive impact on human performance, especiallyin the area of administrative procedure compliance.
l i
i l
l
Survey Results for Supervisory Error Reduction Effectiveness j
x==r==ea l
I Not helping to reduce, or induce, human errors E Supervisory Skill Weaknesses 1 communication & coordination I field surveillance I standards reinforcement
~
)
Conclusions of Lateral Integration and Communication Analysis we==wm_#s m,
l a Breakdowns are occurring in the lateral integration and vertical communication at FCS l The lateral communication mechanisms are in j
place l The breakdowns are occurring due to a lack of l
teamwork l
i i
k 1
Underlying Causes
==aww+n i
i i
11 Most fundamental are cultural issues I Poor and Inconsistent Teamwork
! Ineffective vertical communication 5 The existing accountability system does l
not have a significant, positive effect on human performance l
t i
f
a wae-uer4,A.-es..*'rA-aaa--w vmwa a a-wus ana4.a*:--am.=K-Weas-a_m.C
.A,m.=m.JmE e a 4 al..dheA-,h4
=e-o->+s m 4--u 4 sm44>5_,4de.4 a J 4 dab as,mp,a.d. da M A.&gJ
,_4A44a m.3.eeM__.
,,.aA-64J,.4h,l4.
a, A di a Aa m s 34h,es.c,,._s,au4.a.4;%h..MA,,
m d
e 4
.?
j I
i-U d C4 (U.9 C
X l
C Q. O o
[
C Em l
O "C D
U g3 cD i
C OE l
W oC e,_
u O
O 5--
o, *O
'."3 O fl CT
'O O
O i
3 p
s o
gu s
rg o
[p.t.
j 3,,,,
u) s f%
Q q) i w
6 o o *tU l
u 97, s
s.
C g4 Ec (U
U) suma
,, c g " g" ~
i u
U.-
h:k p
(U y@
C u
m l
b bi O
t gn C =Q.
O
'O 2: EE oS g
U
/
i r
5
g
,,jg, g
...ew a.**4*.W4 s
' f,;
R c
4 O
to W*
C =m e
1 O
E r.n 2
C i
N DO O i E F; 1
a E (S e "O i
u C4 Oos i
ej C
seis W 4h mO 3p L-.
s.-
0 O
mO Y W
0 i
' E !!!
2g 0
E E
oa O
oo c Q
m
iil
!l!
l ii il!!!:!!!I y
b tn de e m
te s
e s
lpv e
mo r
r g
s op o
c r
n m
AI p
o Ce n
Cc i
i t
n s
f c
oa ev m
A wr ita eo i
eaif t
vrl i
vwee a n
rP ni im of t m ndi o
t c
o na w
e-d anr e
e r
sCeiv r
art e
n o
BNI R
C E
I
l l
l lljl
,i l l!:l
!!;!b g
n s
in n
i a
a s
r sl T
gP n
n s
t i
o nd s
e n
e i
s s
n t
s e
mF i
i s
e g
e p
c mn v oO u
r ail P
B ga A
t or h
a eNf v
o npogCi r
t eI eu i
r n
nDf t
o n
vw nP oI e
p n
t i
e t
iw sE a
nh o
m i
i t
eC z
e s
t p
i w
r c
vI n mel o
i u
e wiO l
a nd o
e taH g
g a
s v
r e
e e
r iC i
l r
i" OAL RD t
.n o
1 1
I 1
a l
I C
B i
.l a
1 Corrective Actions me-m E Additional / continued emphasis is needed in the following areas:
8 Improving Lateral and Vertical Integration /
Communications l
l Implementation of an Effective Accountability System and Follow-up i
l i
1 l
J
.T l
l
- : ll l!l:jll ll s
is g
t n
r a
ni o
h ei r
n r
p maE m
eT n
r E
v a
od d
n r
n m
e o
p a
u m
i s
H u
tcI l
s n
u o
n y
oi it d
t n
n el T
s i
o o
R a
s u
n e
C nQi n
o i
e t
e t
/
l c
v c
a d
mui r
t n
u ad c
A o
B r
e e
f s
gRfl it e
o l
Ei i
ead v
r r
k P
o yS i
iwd a /e t
v r
r A
r r
on t
r E
so tar s
u i i n
v t c
o:
nd i
f) e a
r c
e==
eu i
st mc m
pd o
u ue r
and r
r-eoAP H
SR o
A (C l
r I
I i
C E
Corrective Actions Improve Lateral Integration
== = = e o E Integrated Business Planning Process i 1999 Resource Loaded Business Plan l
1 Departmental Business Plans Completed j
i Division Manager review to assure integration and consistency with " CHOICE" Program Initiatives (in progress)
I Review by Division Managers on at least a quarterly basis in 1999 l
L
L Corrective Actions Improve Lateral Integration
=nwannawgam, 8 Site-wide work prioritization system l
(in progress}
l E Behavior-Based Performance Expectations I FCS Values identified by Management (complete)
! Safety Conscious, Individual Respect I Integrity, Accountability, Teamwork
)
I Simplicity l
r Corrective Actions Improve Lateral Integration
= man i
il Behavior-Based Performance Expectations I Behaviors to support values developed by management team (complete)
I Sought additional input during Nuclear Performance Meeting l
l I Behaviors being communicated (in progress)
I Using Multi-discipline teams to resolve problems l
and improve buy-in (e.g. CHOICE teams) il Next Step Is Adoption of These Behaviors l
at the Work Group Level i
i
Corrective Actions j
Vertical Communication Loop
= m e. m m - a,u s E Started with " Team Building" Meetings at the top j
li Several Process Team Building Sessions scheduled over next three months 2 Additional New Leadership Training for j
Managers will focus on:
I Alignment - Creating a Common Reality 1 Integration - He ping people connect l Commitment - Franchising high performance l Culture - Passenger, Navigator, or Architect
Corrective Actions
)
Vertical Communication Loop
=munew i
B FCS Leadership Meetings to Go Over Training & Leadership Issues - scheduled for Mondays 81 Expectations for Face-to-Face Communication Up & Down the Chain 5 More Frequent use of FCS On-Line a Better Use of 3N 8 Nuclear Performance Meetings
,----- - -.-- -,------------------m,._.us-mm_.J.4i se an.g.,gmm44m,._.4 A.,eA-et-..m-we4 m a w_.,
- sulal, A4ema,_J.da,h,-hea.dJeWmA,,44.A.+aRe L44-Wha dem.-E. 4 2 s.M _,ude 44m* 4.u - h A a whM Anh A_
sm..,
- e l
i f
i i
i c
O g;
N l
gu E
C (U
i g
CD m
60 s
l
@ g O
$m
?8 i
C>
E o
m a.
C i
o typ s
v, to 2
M u z'E p
0 0
i H
0 gy t
4,p CD 01 01 a
E to y (a O so c.
c to O
C l
- um i
(U C
gg f) to t-(U muss e
CO y *' E CL.
u) sums
.I C
gi U
01 C
O u
gg C
l W
ti
.g,
g n
W C
O tn
.C mu u
gn i
suas 4mf
.i O
W C
C y>
s 5
3E E
> E 4 # o' C
O 3h O 5 s
Cn m
uC 3O o
Q 24 tu a
o5 0
33 c
nO u
- a. z p
p ro OO I-____
04 na
1 Corrective Actions i
Accountability System j
x m m a n n a a w m,,,,
r 8 Holding People Accountable for Management's Expectations E Motivating Work Force to Maintain Desired 4
Behavior
!i Coaching & Counseling Process B Developed a New Disciplinary Policy I Requires peer review t
f
! \\!
,!!!r l,
l
!! l!l; ii!'
yw g
amd e
/
t se r
r t
u S
e n
c o
o r
it P
c e
u d
mo ne s
oR ne in d
t e
r cd u
r B
Aus t
n s
eBan o
vamM s
i t
ne t
n os c
e =,
s se em uc re co rl or FP op m
E CI l
i l
?
{
Corrective Action l
l Improve Procedure Quality
= = = 3.
l El SC-G-30 revised to implement procedure
)
" owner" concept and facilitate procedure revision process (completej l
!1 Evaluate further improvement to procedure revision process ll Eliminate, downgrade and simplify current i
administrative procedures and policies i Operations Standards Handbook l
i
r L
Corrective Actions
)
Improve Procedure Quality
==amwam n
1 Address Procedure / Program Quality Issue I Line Management Oversight 1 Functional Group Ownership l Production Quality (I.E. Writer Training) 1 Process Simplification i
l
ll l!j,i
!t ll!!!!l o
t y
d t
e i
e w
e d
l e
a ui i
r v
u G
e u
d r
e
's Q
c r
e o
eb r
t p
se il r
l i
r w
Ww n
u e
r e
s o
s c
h e e d
e t
rd i
r g
ui u t
e u
n nd o eG c c d
t i
c a
g o 's Ao er r
c e
n r
e i
rs op n
pt epa O
a gr r
i i
v w
P nW r
ept i
e a=n i h i
s zi t
r ae t
s o
rh v
oa s
t et c owi r
a t
h e
r pt e
a pn e
oe r
r r
mwpl e
e E oOAm l
rp p
om O1 i
i CI 8
1
l!j!
- l
l 1
l:ljlll
)
g r
E n
or C
i r
t I
s E
O y
s a
r n
H a
a L
a e
n C
p l
Ac&
m r
e o
(
u m
nd i
t H
e i
c e
ya ad h
n x
et o
n t
a s
E el mr i
o i
r W
mn s
F b
r B
C i
t o
isf el i
r e
t r
i e
r e
sl o
s mc nVe ai f
e P
ne r
gr r
s n
vh s
e v
a e
s oe g
P e
a aE gg nt L
x o
i a
s m eHnoiM i
tl w
n s
r r
t l
aa aA o
a nt c
r cA n
At wmf S
Ai f
i r
s s
e n
a l
P ee e
e e
u e
v c
w:
H S
o vvi n
l eensuyl nt i
iat t
c e
vnlos r
a a
a aH l
r el o o a
c mei it r
e sTm l
i i
t t
r c
r pi u
p n
o x
ce r
r eit x
dc E
t 2
1 t
a 5
1 1
i r e CPR l
i i
lli i!
l j rj l[l:!!iI i
y r
o r
e r
s E
t e
r n
s n
v u
i a
o o
i a
Vl r
C m
P p
s t
u s
e m
a l
H s
cI t
i n
h s
n o
e A
at m
t i
W e md a
c r
sls n
o e
dn
_ ne af d
n u
r i
v me vioF oe r
P ot L
r c
ec i
o nP u
n tl f
l r
a d
a g
cA e mnRgemi n
P
_ At i+e uie oi r
n a
a r
f a
w nH Bor l
r ee a
a eT
- v nloe u
r ns m
md s
r P
ei E
c om p
g ni i
o tsTs H
o nn a
n r
a mta
_ ce a
O l
i e
n n
vimuT i
ePo<
P a
H" ei.
N e
u r
t r
rdc DTH t
I I
u iv o od E
1 B
1 re CPR j
l
Corrective Actions Supervisory Effectiveness in Reducing Human Error l
=2ncM55c'd 4m,.
lB Improving Supervisory Effectiveness in Reducing Human Errors 1 Organizational Changes in the Operations Area j
l Additional Supervisor in Operations Group I Additional Assistant Plant Manager j
i Plant Manager focused on day-to-day operation, i
leadership skills improvement and communication of management expectations i
4 Corrective Actions l
Supervisory Effectiveness in Reducing Human Error nexameme
,sm.
E Improving Supervisory Effectiveness in Reducing Human Errors l
1 Supervisors will receive human performance training i
a Pre-job briefings have improved i Scorecard concept introduced I
i Improvements discussed previously will have major impact j
a Additional training needs are being evaluated i
- ill jel!t! ! !
!!D n
re d
e gw eh n e d
st eN i
es o
B f
et e
i r
i r
eh t
d rt n
o di ear Af P
s o d
I g
n e snd o m eie i
et t
u r
co sBa eAS s
t eSg es I
r east v s a
e i
h eut r
Av cd tfCiO ed t
r n
oCag rA e
yeit n
o i
yz Co i
t nl t
rmih el rt I ae o
u ad jhhf nes agge ofit m=MuuRi h
i t
tng oot m
i er r
sd es i
hhh ad d n
u TTTL AI I
S a
a
- d a-
+-
- ='a*""
-**"-+"'<=4"'""**-*--'*'e----
"'--'"'-**d'*"'*"*'*"d"+"**'**"**-****'*****"'****"'**M-********"*'^^*****-6*'h**-'-d*"*-*'*d*"'8'-****'^*^**-*-~'6****"-
5
- J g
l a
Yil
' t b
i y
C O
y)
V) l D
D i
(U C
L
~~
e DO-l i
O m
C o
u l
C l
D H
4o gg E
l O
1 l
- li
.9 o
s 4o U
i D
v>
w i
e h.
D u
y V
y D
l 3
l' l
W U) 0 0
@Oj 8
l G..
l
~
m (U
O-
"O (U
C O-D to 30
- < aE&
3 t
to I.
@g
==
L?a EM i
1 e
e e-
-, - - -