ML20198L479
| ML20198L479 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 12/24/1998 |
| From: | Gwynn T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Horn G NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9901050031 | |
| Download: ML20198L479 (61) | |
Text
..-
. ~... -. ~. _. -
's t >* M OUq'
+*
UNITED STATES y - ) ) g/j' g g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~ M C
REGION IV 0, k I
611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE SUITE 400
%W
,o ARUNGTON TEXA5 700118064 oEc 24 sa G. R. Horn, Senior Vice President.
of Energy Supply Nebraska Public Power District 141415th Street Columbus, Nebraska 68601
SUBJECT:
COOPER NUCLEAR STATION MEETING
Dear Mr. Horn:
This refers to the meeting conducted at the Region IV Office on December 17,1998. During i
the meeting we discussed your improvement strategy for engineering and plans to achieve performance improvements. The meeting also discussed your review of unauthorized
[
modifications and preliminary conclusions from a NRC focus inspection conducted onsite November 16-20,1998. The meeting attendees are listed as Enclosure 1. Your presentation is included as Enclosure 2.
j i
The exchange of information during the meeting was candid and informative and allowed us to gain a better understanding of the improvement strategy and lessons learned from the NRC inspection of the Cooper Nuclear Station unauthorized modifications.
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.
l Sincerely,
./
+
g omas P.
irector Division of Reactor Projects Docket No.: 50-298 License No.: L DR-46
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Attendees
- 2. Licensee Presentation 9901050031 981224 PDR ADOCK 05000298 P
e:
' Nebraska Public Power District - )
cc w/ enclosures:~
John R. McPhail, General Counsel Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 499 I
' Columbus, Nebraska' 68602-0499 J. H. Swailes Vice President of Nuclear Energy Nebraska Public Power District
- P.O. Box 98 Brownville, Nebraska 68321 1
B. L. Houston, Nuclear Licensing and Safety Manager Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 98
. Brownville, Nebraska 68321 Dr. William D. Lee'ch MidAmerican Energy 907 Walnut Street 1
P.O. Box 657 Des Moines, Iowa 50303-0657 Mr. Ron Stoddard Lincoln Electric System 1040 O Street
- P.O. Box 80869 Lincoin, Nebraska 68501-0869 Rancolph Wood, Director Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
. P.O. Box 98922 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-8922 Chairman Nemaha County Board of Commissioners Nemaha County Courthouse 1824 N Street Auburn, Nebraska 68305 Cheryl Rogers, LLRW Program Manager Environmental Protection Section Nebraska Department of Health 301 Centennial Mall, South
- P.O. Box 95007 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-5007
l (-'
1 i.
}
Nebraska Public Power District.,
' R. A. Kucera, Department Director of Intergovernmental Cooperation 4-Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 176 I
' Jefferson City, Missouri ' 65102
~
Jerry Uhlmann, Director.
L State Emergency Management Agency P.O. Box 116 -
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 j
l Kansas Radiation Control Program Director-J l
l I
i 4
1
a.
Nebraska Public Power District bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib. by RIV:
Regional Administrator Resident inspector DRP Director DRS-PSB Branch Chief (DRP/C)
MIS System Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
RIV File i
Project Engineer (DRP/C) i i
4 DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\_CNS\\CN1217MS.DRP To receive copy of document, Indicate In box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy RIV:PE:DRP/C l C:DRP/C g, D:DRP l
l l
JFMelfi b
CSMarschalleF TPGwynn i r) 12i%98 W
12 & 98 'g r 1 12K98
\\/
@FICIAL RECORD COPY l
e O
Nebraska Public Power District bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib. by RIV:
Regional Administrator Resident inspector DRP Director DRS-PSB Branch Chief (DRP/C)
MIS System Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
RIV File Project Engineer (DRP/C) l I
DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\._CNS\\CN1217MS.DRP
' To receive copy of document, indicate in box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy RIV:PE:DRP/C l C:DRP/C g, D:DRP l
l l
JFMelfi b
CSMarschallel TPQw)fnn t M
^yi 12498
(/
121%98 W
12W98
@FICIAL RECORD COPY 050115
NRC Attendees - Region IV E. Merschoff, Regional Administrator K. Brockman, Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP)
A. Howell, Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS)
C. Marschall, Chief, Project Branch C,' DRP D. Loveless, Senior Project Engineer, Project Branch C, DRP
' J. Melfi, Project Engineer, Project Branch C, DRP D. Loveless, Senior Project Engineer, Maintenance Branch C, DRS NRC Anendees-NRR J. Hannon, Project Director, PDIV-1, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)
J. Donahue, Project Manager, NRR Nebraska Public Power District J. Swailes, Vice President, Nuclear Energy P. Caudill, General Manager, Technical Services B. Rash, Senior Engineering Manager A. Sessoms Senior Quality Assurance Manager B. Houston, Nuclear Licensing and Safety Manager
'1 J. Long, Nuclear Projects Manager
- T. Gifford, Design Engineering Manager M. Boyce, Plant Engineering Manager P. Adelung, Design Engineer D. Vorpahl, System Engineer B. Turnbull, Senior Engineer, Nuclear R. Kosch, Power Supply Manager R. Stoddard, Chief Engineer J. Peters, Licensing Secretary i
i 1
i
~
4 k
i 6
m O
i 4
l 5
l X
O u.T.,,
p N
gg C z s x-Q N O H Om O-u A
C A
M k
Z l
m i
AGENDA
> Opening Remarks NRC
> Introduction John Swailes
> Unauthorized Mod Project Bruce Rash
> Quality Assurance Oversight Andy Sessoms t
> Status Overview Paul Caudill 1
> Strategy Results Mike Boyce
> Changes and Adjustments Paul Caudill
't
> Conclusions John Swailes t
2 i
=
4 Introduction i
i
> Senior Management Expectations
/ Build Strong Management Team
/ Become Self-Critical & Self-Correcting
> Outage Outcomes
/ Modification Package Improvements i
/ System Engineer Support of Operations
/ MSIV Refurbishment
/ Resolving "Old Design" issues
>EM Review Project Outcome j
> Philosophy " Strategy is a Management Tool" 3
I I
i t
UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS i
REVIEW PROJECT Bruce Rash l
i Senior Manager of Engineering
)
l i
4 i
l
\\
l Preliminary NRC Findings
> Potential Violation for Ineffective i
l Corrective Action to Determine Via MWR l
Review If There Were Any L nauthorized
]
Modifications in the MWR Population.
j
>Seven Potential C nauthorized Modifications Identified.
>Six L nauthorized Modifications Not
)
Properly Evaluated.
i 5
l
.l 1
Preliminary NRC Findings t
> Difficulty of NPPD Personnelin Characterizing the Remaining Unauthorized j
l Modification Resolutions.
i
> Unrelated Item-Question About Lack 10CFR50.59 Evaluations on 1973-80 l
Special Test Procedures.
6
Preliminary NRC Findings
> Interviews With : Maintenance Craft and
- Maintenance Planners Indicate That They Have a Good Understanding of What Constitutes a Design Change.
]
>No Unauthorized : Modifications Identified i
in a Sample of 60 :MWRs From Current Population.
> Key Word Search Appears Effective l
7 l
.j We Understand the Importance of Unauthorized Modifications s
>The plant configuration must be known to ensure that plant response and consequences during an accident would remain withm
~
analyzed limits.
i
> Configuration of the plant must be niaintained so that the operators can properly operate the plant and so the engineers can have accurate information to evaluate technicalissues.
8
Problem Identification t
i
> March 1996 - NRC Inspection (96-04) i Found Improper Modifications
)
/ Steam Tunnel Blow-out Panel
/ Diesel Muffler Bypass
> April 1996 - QA Audit of Design Controls
/ Applicability of design control process inadequately defined
/ Was possible to modify plant outside design j
process
>High Threshold for Station Modifications i
/ " Change to Facility as described in the USAR"9 i
t Purpose of Project
> Review Pre-6/12/96 :MWRs i
> Identify Modifications :Made Without i
50.59 Evaluation.
> Disposition Potential L nauthorized i
Modifications (cms) i i
I 10 l
l CNS Unauthorized Modifications Project
> Unauthorized Mod Screening Criteria:
/ Initial Computer K.eyword Search Criteria was made to identify those MWRs that-Add (ed) or Install (ed) or Remove (d)
Modify (ied) or Delete (d)
/ Computer Keyword Search Criteria was also made j
to screen out those MWRs that:
Were associated with an approved modification,
- Were performed as part of a PM, Were performed as Minor Maintenance.
l
[
f i
.-______..l Definition of l
Unauthorized Modification i
1
>Throughout the Entire Unauthorized Modification Project, the Definition of
" Unauthorized Modification" Was.
/ The implementation of a station mod prior to and/or without documenting a 10CFR50.59 i
evaluation to determine if the proposed activity constitutes an Unreviewed Safety Question.
i 12 t
i i
UNAUTHORIZED MOD REVIEW PROJECT PROCESS r
95,736 Total Population e
i 22,834
{
72,902 Hard copy 1
Electronic I
r Key Word 51,994 l
m sea e f Non-Mod j
gp w
1r r
Level 1 Review = 43,742 40,78s m
Screen for Potential UM'S Non-Mod J
i 318 PUMs identified by f
CNS r
- i 1r l
r Level 2 Review = 3274 (PUM's) 1,023 m
Detailed Evaluation Non-Mod t
,r i
Unauthorized Modifications identified I
i 2,251 13
?
[
5
.. ~..._ -.
..-... ~..
~~
o.
UNAUTHORIZED MOD REVIEW PROJECT PROCESS 95,736 Total Population r
72,902 22.834 Hard copy Electronic NRC Sareple
- 1 - 60 MWR's - 0 PIRs Key Word 51,994 Search /
Non-Mod
/
R
^
NRC Sample y
V
- 2 - 60 MWR's - 1 PIRs Level t Review = 43,742 f
- 3 - 70 MWR's - 0 PIRs Screen for Potential UM's p
40,786 Non-Mod
- 4 - 68 MWR's - 4 PIRs
~T 318 PUMs \\
identified by
[
CNS Y
NRC Sample f
Level 2 Review = 3274 (PUM's)
- 5 - 56 MWR's - 2 PIRs 1,023 Detailed Evaluation Non-Mod s
u f
7 Y
NRC Sample
- #6 - 12 MWR's - 3 PIRs L
'"*d " d * * *
- resolution items - 2 PIRs Identified l
2,2s1
- Backlog - Document uWi!ng ccacerns f
f
[
t i
1
F 1
NRC Identified Unauthorized Modifications l
r Guard on Fire System Flushing Pump l
Tube Clamps (3/8") on Fuel Pool Cooling System Larger Anchors on Fire System Piping I
e Replaced Petcock With NUPRO Valve (AS) f Protective Cover on Computer Power Cord Mwrs Inappropriately Categorized - Capacitor MWR Changed Drywell High Pressure Alarm Set Point r
ji 15 l
l l
i m
m a--
Resolution of Preliminary NRC Inspection Results j
> Disposition for ems
~PIRs from " White t
Paper" l
i l
/ 2 items didn't identify that drawings needed updating l
/ Implementation of G.E. SILs w/o 50.59s
/ EE had Inadequate Seismic Evaluation of i
Partition Near H O NIonitor 2
2 i
/ EE didn't address drip pans appropriately 16 r
J-4 CNS Follow-Up Actions i
> Disposition 7 Additional EM's Identified l
> Evaluate the L~ sage of " White Paper"
~ Methodology L~nder CAP
> Reviewing PIRs Since 6/12/96 for ems
> Resolve QA Surveillance Finding on l
Commercial CED Process h
I 17 h
l n
t Current Actions i
> Root Cause Investigation in Progress
> Characterizing Known L nauthorized i
Modifications
)
>Reperformed Review of Large Sample of cms for Safety Significance
18 i
i l
t
Why Did the Project Miss Some Unauthorized 1
Modifications?
i
> Investigation Identifying the Following
/ Unclear e.xpectations
/ Insufficient resources
/ Insufficient management oversight i
/ Failure to use corrective action process to assist I
in resolving project difficulties 19 i
.l i
Why Wasn't This Identified Prior to the NRC Inspection?
1 internal Review Not Completed i
>Neither Closure Package nor Effectiveness Review Was Closed
> Poor Nomenclature in the Closure Process
> Poor Communication to the NRC Caused i
i by Poor Nomenclature in the Closure j
Process i
l
>QA Follow-up Results Favorable 20
- -- N
-l How Could We i
Have Found This?
> Closure Packages Being Reviewed in Detail and Could Have Sampled the Process Prior j
to Senior Manager of Engineering Closure
> Effectiveness Review Might Have Identified That the Project Did Not Find All Unauthorized Modifications
> Senior Engineering Review Group Action to Review Sample of Project Results i
21 1
i Factoring Lessons Learned into Other Actions
> Establish Clear Objectives for Success
> Develop Template for Effectiveness Reviews
/ Sampling
/ Documentation
/ Interviews j
/ Interaction with other items l
> Example - Past Modification Review 22 l
l i
I Conclusions
>CNS Has Reasonable Assurance That the l
Plant Has Not Been Modified in a Way That Adversely Affects a Safety Function of Any SSC.
>CNS Change Control Processes and Procedures Adequately Control Station Modifications
> Corrective Actions Will Be Taken Under
)
the Coirective Action Program.
23
i I
i QUALITY ASSURANCE OVERSIGHT Andy Sessoms i
Senior Manager of Quality Assurance i
i f
24 l
i a
QA Audit & Surveillance -
Unauthorized Modifications
> Audits and Surveillances:
> Design Engineering Audit 96-07,96-07a (April-June 1996)
> Surveillance - Unauthorized Mods (August 1997)
> Surveillance Follow-up - Unauthorized Mods 1
(October 1997)
> Surveillance - Unauthorized Mods (June 1998)
> Surveillance - Unauthorized Mods (December 1998) 25 1
e O '
}
QA Audit & Surveillance Unauthorized Mods
> Design Engineering Audit (April-June 1996)
/ OBJECTIVE: Evaluate effectiveness of the adequacy of the Design Change Process.
/ CONCLUSION: Deficiencies identified in the design control were caused by ineffective interface with other programs, processes and organizations.
i 26 l
b i
QA Audit & Surveillance Unauthorized Mods i
i
> Surveillance (August 1997)
/ OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effectiveness of UM project activities.
/ CONCLUSION: Identified quality issues with t
project screening activities and closure package adequacy.
27 l
t
QA Audit & Surveillance Unauthorized Mods 1
> Surveillance (October 1997)
/ OBJECTIVE: To perform a follow-up evaluation of UM project response to previous ineffective screening criteria and closure issues.
/ CONCLUSION: Project corrective actions effectively address identified deficiencies and adequately addressed the related project closure t
package issues.
t 28 f
I
i l.
QA Audit & Surveillance Unauthorized Mods i
> Surveillance (June 1998) i
/ OBJECTIVE: Perform a follow-up evaluation j
of UM project.
/ CONCLUSION: Actions completed to date, and remaining actions to be completed should j
be effective in minimizing future unauthorized modification.
29 j
l
QA Audit & Surveillance Unauthorized Mods N
> Surveillance (December 1998)
/ OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effectiveness of CNS to maintain design configuration of structures, systems, and components.
)
/ CONCLUSION: Corrective actions to raise the sensitivity of non-engineering personnel to prevent introduction of UM have been i
effective. Identified a vulnerability in the CED
" Commercial" design change process.
30
e er I
Quality Assurance Oversight Process Samples DATE ACTION SAMPLE ISSUES 8/97 Level 1 Review (Screen for 400 13+3
[
Potential Unauthorized Modifications) 300 0
8/97 Level 2 Evaluation (Detailed 30 2
Evaluation of Closure Packages) 10/97 Level 1 Review (Screen for 100 0
Potential Unauthorized l
Modifications)
Total Sample 830 MWRs 18 31 i
i Quality Assurance Oversight 1
Lessons Learned
> Systematic Follow-up
/ Process quality
/ Sampling
/ Safety significance I
>Related Oversight Activities
/ Precursor integration j
i
/ Process change integration & timing j
> Summary i
32
[
l' I
l 1
STATUS OVERVIEW l
l Paul Caudill s
I l
General Manager Technical Services i
l l
l 33 l
t i
l
General Progress Overview
]
> Objectives for This Period --
i
/ " Rebuild the Engineering Organization "
/ " Balance Engineering Resources between Outage and l
Strategies"
/ " Maintain Senior Management Oversight" s
>RFO-18 Outage Engineering Performance Impro 'ed l
/ Address technical issues from outage j
/ Resolve "old" design issues I
34
)
CNS ENGINEERING EXCELLENCE STRATEGY Action Item Comoletion Status PROGRESS COMPARED TO REVISION 2 ISSUED 7/7/98.
16 48 o
g C
3 a
E 12 C
36 E m
5
=
[..........._;..........
g 5
o g-E i
2 F
5 8
'p x+
24 'P co
- i;
,1
)
s 2
-s
=
v t
M q
4
/ d-d 12
/
R
.v J -l
?
J...
c
.O E
h
....... p..................
s l
1l h N
8' k
0 l
O Ap r-98 M ay-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 Sep-98 Oct-98 ' Nov-98 Dec-98 Jan 99 Fe b-99 M ar-99 i Scheduled 5
10 9
1 3
7 1
0 12 2
0 4
i IEEI Completed 4
8 11 2
3 7
1 0
' Approved 0
l 4
19 2
3 4
4 0
I i
-Scheduled 5
15 24 25 28 35 36 36 48 50 50 54
-G-Completed 4
12 23 25 28 35 36 36 Approved 0
4 23 25 28 32 36 36
1 i
Engineering Staffing
> Engineering Staffing Level (1.1.e) j
> Engineering Staff Retention (1.3) 36 i
CNS ENGINEERING STAFFING LEVEL y...g
-G 100%
100%
u 90%
.2 90%
5<
E
{
80%
80%
$oy PERFORM ANCE INDICATOR MEASURES 70 */. -
RATIO OF TOTAL STAFF TO TARGET.
h DOES NOT INCLUDE PROCUREMENT 70%
1 E_NGINEERING OR ADMIN DEPT CLERKS.
DASHED LINE IS PROJECTED.
60%-
60%
50%
50%
Dec-97 Ja n-98 Fe o-98 M a r-98 Apr-98 M a y-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Au g-98 Se p-98 Oct-98 Nov-98 Dec-98 Ja n-99 Positions Filled 9
5 5
5 8
10 8
5 8
4 3
4 1
2 Positions Vacated 2
1 2
2 1
0 2
0 2
2 0
0 0
1 Total Staff 115 119 122 125 132 142 148 153 159 161 164 168 169 170 Positions Authorized 112 125 125 125 125 125 165 165 165
?65 165 165 165 165 Positions Target 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 Goal 95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95 %
95 %
--G -Total /Ta rg e t 69.7 %
72.1 %
73.9 %
75.8%
80.0%
86.1%
89.7%
92.7 %
96.4 %
97.6%
99.4%
101.8 %
102.4 %
103.0 %
l
c CNS ENGINEERING STAFP RETENTION 100%
100%
l I
g,
.3---D r
90%
E 90 %
i e
8:s N
p G
i m
E 80%
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR MEASURES 80%
$g RATIO OF STAFF AT END OF MONTH COMPARED TO START OF MONTH, E
AVERAGED OVER PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS.
DOES NOT INCLUDE PROCUREMENT ENGINEERING OR ADMIN DEPT CLERKS.
DASHED LINE IS PROJECTED.
70%-
70%
De c-97 Ja n-98 Fe b-98 Ma r-98 Apr-98 M a y-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 Se p-98 Oct-98 Nov-98 Dec-98 Ja n-99 Positions Filled 9
5 5
5 8
10 8
5 8
4 3
4 1
2 Positions Vacated 2
1 2
2 1
0 2
0 2
2 0
0 0
1 Total Staff 115 119 122 125 132 142 148 153 159 161 164 168 169 170 I
Positions Authorized 112 125 125 125 125 125 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 Positions Target 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 Goal 90%
90%
90%
90%
90 %
90 %
90% i 90%
90%
90%
90%
90%
90 %
--G-Retention Rate 83.9%
84.2%
83.6 %
84.9%
84.5%
87.6%
88.1 %
90.2%
89.0%
87.9%
89.1 %
90.2 %
91.8 %
92.1 %
- - - - =
4 6
Training & Qualification i
i
>1998 and 1999 T & Q Plan (1.4.G) i
> Performance Indicators Developed l
> Reinforcing Accountability for Completing
)
ESP Orientation Training f
i 39 I
1
{
CNS ENGINEERING WORK DISTRIBUTION 1
1998 YEAR-TO-DATE l
i l
t Training Program Engineering 11 %
6%
Design Engineering
}
Miscellaneous M9W 12%
System Enginee 11 %
I l
s g;;@M Emergent Work l
13 %
l Outage Support l
Engineering Strategy 18%
l Corrective Action i
14%
i i
l O Program Engineering E Design Engineenng O System Engineering
{
l O Outage Support E Corrective Action O Engineering Strategy l
E Emergent Work O Miscellaneous E Training l
t E__
/
i CNS ENGINEERING WORK DISTRIBUTION REFUELING OUTAGE 18 i
Miscellaneous Training Program Engineerin%esign Engineering I
l 4%
3%
0 7%
System Engineering Emergent Work 7%
1 9%
Engineering Strategy l
y_.
_ gs o x l
i 1
Corrective Action 9%
Outage Support 1
46 %
j 1
i O Program Engineering E Design Engineering O System Engineering O Outage Support E Corrective Action iil Engineering Strategy E Emergent Work O Miscellaneous E Training i
i I
Senior Management Oversight i
> Strategy Performance Weekly Reviews
[
> Meet with NPPD Board Monthly (4.2.c)
>NPPD Executive Progress Review - 12/9/98 i
(4.2.a & b) f i
42 i
1 l
i t
I I
STRATEGY RESULTS t
Mike Boyce Plant Engineering Manager j
l 43 l
a Specific Accomplishments System Engineering Successes:
> Staffing and Qualification
> Established Engineering Work Management Tools
> System Engineering Program i
Improvements l
> Design Basis Ownership
]
> Technical Issues Addressed i
Plant Engineering 3
Staffing & Qualification t
> Personnel with Plant Certifications Increased (1.1.g)
/15 graduated (10 System Engineers)
/17 of 34 Certified in System Engineering
> Plans for Next Plant Certification Class i
/19 total (13 System Engineers) j
> Plant Engineering Staffing Increased (1.1.e) i i
45 1
L
PED STAFF /NG LEVEL
=
3..
s 50 D-- 50 40 NOTE - OCTOBER 1998 GRADUATES FROM PLANT
-- 40 g
CERTIFICATION CLASS 32 REPORTED TO DEPARTMENT.
E E
O 30
.o E
^
~
oz 20 20 PERFORM ANCE INDICATOR MEASURES TOTAL FULL-TIME STAFF ASSIGNED AT END OF MONTH 10 10 l
0 De c-97 Ja n-98 Fe b-98 Ma r-98 Apr-98 May-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 S e p-98 Oct-98 Nov-98 Dec-98 Ja n-99 0
Positions Filled 1
1 2
1 6
7 4
1 4
2 11 2
0 1
Positions Vacated 0
1 1
1 5
0 3
0 0
1 1
1 0
11 Positions Target 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
-g-Total Sta ff 33 l
33 34 34 35 42 43 44 48 49 59 60 60 50
Engineering Work Management
> Implementation
/100% participation
/ Outage use
>Results
)
/ Where we are
/ The future l
l 47 j
I t
---J
CNS ENGINEERING SCHEDULE ADMERENCE 100%
100%
12,810 WORK ACTIVITIES 90%
COMPLETED OVER PAST 90%-
12 MONTHb *l1/98) os 80%
80 %
.o.
E
'~~~
o
~~-~
i o
70% -
70 %
o
<t 60%-
.o 60%
3 e
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR MEASURES s
PERCENT OF ACTIVITIES SCHEDULED 50%
m FOR COMPLETION ACTUALLY 50 %
-o COMPLETED IN THE W EEK SCHEDULED.
ce 2
40%-
40%
e Q.
30%
30%
Jan 98 Fe b-98 M ar-98 Apr-98 M ay-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 Sep-98 O ct-98 Nov-98 Dec-98 PED Adherance 53 %
58%
63%
58%
63%
i DED Adherence 40%
43%
33%
59%
55%
ESD Adherence 41 %
46%
58%
59%
49%
-G-ENG Adherence 45%
49%
45%
59%
56 %
G O A!.
75%
75%
75 %
75%
75%
75 %
75 %
75 %
75 %
75 %
75 %
75 %
System Engineering 1
Program Improvements
> System Engineering Tools (1.1.k)
/ Quarterly health reports
/ System walkdowns i
/ System notebook
(
/ Six year plans (1.1.o) i
/ Communications with operations (1.2.e)
> Control Room Challenges (CSF) i
/ Plant temp mods reduced
/ Operator work-arounds reduced
/ Red arrows reduced i
i I
49 i
k z
PLANT TEMPORARY MODIF/CA TIONS 28 28 24 24 20 20 ts a>
=
.M us
.e 16 16 us lE p.
G.
O w
12 es 12 O
E s
- 3 z
PERFORM ANCE INDICATOR MEASURES
..........g............
s THE NUMBER OF PLANT TEMPORARY 8
MODIFICATIONS INSTALLED AS OF THE 8
DATA DATE. DASHED LINES ARE s
PROJECTED VALUES.
s---
N 4
4 Ja n-98 Fe b-98 Ma r-98 Apr-98 May 98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 S e p-99 Oct-98 Nov-98 Dec-98 PTM Goal 20 20 20 20 5
5
--G-PTM's Open 24 22 21 12 5
__==. =
Design Basis Ownership i
>L SAR Ownership (1.1.i)
>L SAR Rebaseline Project Involvement (3.3.a) i
>ITS Implementation Reviews (3.3.b) l si
i TechnicalIssues Addressed
> Emerging Issues - Outage Related
/ Reactor building exhaust isolation valves
/ REC fan cooler unit flows
> Design Issues
/ 125v/250v D.C. fuses
> Service Water System Health j
52
CHANGES AND i
ADJUSTMENTS t
i Paul Caudill General Manager Technical Services i
1 l
53 l
Changes and Adjustments
> Performance Management & In-Process Quality Controls
> Focus on Prioritization & Resource Planning
>Proceec. with Strategy Action Closures
> Change Two Commitments 54 f
Prepare Strategy Revision 3 i
t I
> Complete Assessments
/ Site-wide self assessment (4.3.e)
/ Design basis training assessment ( 1.4.a)
\\
/ Past modification review (3.3.d) l
> Prepare Strategy Revision 3 i
55 i
\\
.