ML20202B611
| ML20202B611 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 12/01/1997 |
| From: | Gwynn T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Dugger C ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9712030131 | |
| Download: ML20202B611 (33) | |
Text
..
sP 88%,I%
o UNIT E*) ST ATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
o
{
REGloN iv 4
Gli nY AN PLAZA drive. bulT E 400
[
AR LING ton. T E xAS 760114064 DEC - l 1997 Charles M. Dugger, Vice President
. Operations - Waterford 3 Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066
SUBJECT:
WATERFORD 3 PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT MEETING
SUMMARY
Dear Mr. Dugger:
This refers to the meeting conducted at the Waterford 3 Energy Education Center in Killona, Louisiana on November 13,1997. The meeting included discussions of operability assessments, status of actions to improve performance of the engineering organization, and s
actions to reduce the backlog of engineering items, corrective action documents and human errors.
We found the discussions to be detailed and informative with a valuable exchange of information that increased our understanding of your performance in the areas reviewed.
We also found it encouraging that you recognize the significant challenges that you have ahead and the corrective actions required. At the conclusion of the meeting, we agreed that it is appropriate to continue hotriing meetings such as this on a regularly scheduled basis.
- I 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, e
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will be p! eased to discuss them with you.
F;,icer
{
'/
s Thomas P. awynn Dire. or Division of React Pro' c Docket No.: 50-382
/
License No.: NPF-38
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. Licensee Presentation
"~
9712030131 971201 iillmiitaimi!ismI'lililill 1H1111 PDR ADGCK C5000'392 lil.lllll.lllli.llli.llllli.fil.lihl 1u1111 p
pg l
l
e Entergy Operations, Inc. cc:
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286 1995 Vice President, Operations Support Entergy Operations, Inc.
P O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286-1995 Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway P.O. Box 651 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 General Manager, Plant Operations Wate: ford 3 SES Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 Manager - Liconsing Manager Waterford 3 SES Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 Chairman Louisiana Public Service Commission One American Place, Suite 1630 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70825 1697 Director, Nuclear Safety &
Regulatory Affairs Waterford 3 SES Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 William H. Spell, Administrator Louisiana Radiation Protection Division P.O. Box 82135 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70884-2135
_._~..,.
e=
i 3
Entergy Operations, Inc.
i Parish President '
- St. Charles Parish
~
I P.O. Box 302 Hahnville, Louisiana. 70057 Mr. William A. Cross -
Bethesda Licensing Office 3 Metro Center Suite 610-
. Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Winston & Strawn.
1400 L Street, N.W.
' Washington, D.C.. 20005 3502 4
W
'W- - -
t 4
--e-m wiri' m
j 1
i i
Entergy Operations, Inc. bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib. by RIV:
Regional Administrator Resident inspector DRP Director DRS-PSB Branch Chief (DRP/D)
M!S System Project Engineer (DRP/D)
RIV File Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\_WAT\\WT1113MS.DRP To receive copy of document. Indicate in box:"C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy D:DRP 1
D:DRP, JQ D:DRP GAPick:jestM PHHarrelp%
TPGwynn 11/b97 11/ff97 V
11/ /97 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 30C' 4
.o
?REVIOUSCONCURRENCE 3 AGE DEC - l 1997 -
Entergy Operations, Inc.
-4 bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib. by RIV:
Regional Administrator Resident inspector DRP Director DRS-PSB Branch Chief (DRP/D)
MIS System Project Engineer (DRP/D)
RIV File Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\_WAT,WT1113MS.DRP i
To receive copy of document, Indicate in box: "C" = Copy without enclosyres "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy
(
D:DRP 3l D:DRP D:DRP
,f_
s l
GAPick;jeM
PHHar@df TPGwynn 7' /
k 11bk97 117 tis?
11/l /97 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
DEC - l 1997 Entergy Operations, Inc.
4 bec to DCD (IE45) bec w/ Enclosure 2:
DRS PSB MIS System Project Engineer (DRP/D)
Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
RIV File bec w/o Enclosure 2:
Regional Administrator Director, DRP Branch Chief, DRP/D Resident inspector DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\_WAT\\WT1113MS,DRP To receive copy of document, indicate in box:"C" = Copy vnthout enclosures "E" = Copy wdh enclosures "N" = No copy D:DRP D:DRP D:DRP GAPick;jes' PHHarrell' TPGwynn" 11/28/97 11/28/97 12/1/97
- previously concurred OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
e-
' ATTENDANCE LIST Licennes
)
C. Dugger Vice President Operations T. Leonard General Manager Plant Operations J. Hoffpauir Operations Manager J. Laque Superintendent-Intrumentation and Control
~ A. Wrape Director, Design Engineering E. Ewing Director, Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Affairs
- G. Pierce Manager, Quality Assurance NBC E. Merschoff Regional Administrator T. Gwynn Director, Division of Reactor Projects D. Chamberlain Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Safety C. Patel Project Manager, Office cf Nuclear Reactor Regulation P. Harrell Chief, Project Branch D, Division of Reactor Projects J. Keeton Recident inspector, Waterford 3 Other licensee staff and members of the public were also present.~
P
ENCLOSURE 2 n
g j.
e ENTERGY 3a l
l l l l l l I
W ATERFORD SES - UNil4 i
1 S
LEADING THE WAY TO EXCELLEkCE
,W&,G.5
)
w.<r C
%=c%
i WATERFORD 3 / NRC BI-MONTHLY PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN MEETING November 13,1997 Entergy Operations, Inc.
lt!f!-I' !,
ll;;;> j s
!!,,!;!ILI'
.,.t
!t:'
1>
i 1
)
n a
n lP
- s A
o a,;Qe1.
i
-vhmp4y-a W,
C
%:.:~.;%% :
s n;;. ',-
7 t
P n..
sg "nnf'
,;=
n c7?.
= J.
n i
g:
. e:v;?m,$.
mi p7 S.
p5 e
3 r
w ' s.yQ5w*'
me 7
t h,
W ;r,.
"I m
gp _.
~
6 p
e 9
,x,.
. &* 'C ~.
o e
W y.Wf_7.- -
a-m-
+ ~J, h -
e-C M 9
3 e
p g ~ '; 3:f>p4 T :.
1 ysA e
4
- m..."
v aps g
~.Sm;gw,-
r d
uL3
- ; c4 i
ey%
r o
t MnW];Q*L,e% *:
y ot
,1 e
- t o
r M
w _k,nyL.
t aa
~
r
, YB at n
e f
p
- m.
Gp.
S yLN u
ob l
p r
a) f 9.'~
?y" em
-e.
. o+.WQgn4*
glyl m
'3 l
l g *;GQ.
y N
- z i
. n
% c g;r;h..* -
r o
..i, ehKe t
I
., -:.7" ; Ws, T
Rt v
'j r
a e
- e 9, -
e q
n s
s, o
Wc w
s
.1. g+ s h;<;,l a
N n
"6;..w6..
eM
,. s f
t
+
msW'g.. M
~-
l
- g,8
- .
uB a
ci m
- y..
m
,j,f' N
s; ro
,Q:%'. W 6.
7
~
S
+-
.,;9.V f
r U
e P
- fo
, g*p,2.q 4
9, e-
's 4,~;
V T'
f.,[*g= r i-N ssg e,'
- r p;a.,+n^;:
.e.
ha nc.
Y
[,
k ll!
,!i
,11ll,,
l-
,;,I l.l 4!
ia'
I l
L i L' Waterford Performance improvement Plan
,~
1 Agenda l
l l
"mjg4; I
- vM
Introductions
C. Dugger /
i Ubk$
E. Merschoff 4
i Overview of improvement Plan &
T. Leonard Evaluation of Operability Assessments i
Operability Assessments J. Hoffpauir The Operability Confirmation Process J.Laque (Site Directive W4.101)
Engineering A. Wrape j
Open Discussion All i
i 2
!\\
I li l~
i!l!!
l a
3 i-s tn em n
s a
s lP e
s tn s
eA mty dr el a
i vb n
i o
o a
e rpr L
e mp de O
T I
fof o w
s e
n iv o
r i
et a v
u Ol av E
5 l!
1 -
l jN
?
f[
h l
l\\l li il11i
)
!l i
l iI i i.
.I,<l,l
- i. i
,I;
,f;li
. f 5, )
Ji>-[
t I+f!.I;
'.[
t!
r
!tti 4
i.
de s
g l
u u
nd t
d i
e a
ek r s
h t
oo c
S SWC l
n GBD a
s
. +
l yMm k.,
%&,* n k.,A P
n l
'F 7D.$r.*jW e.
o f y,.,-
N t
i h'"'
J:
um
- vMmInC s
t I
.e,.N n
c Qn 4 ' Of :vw i;
_;fN.2q?
wg
= &
S.Y Q,m y".
e A
.,s wfkw 4
k.g;h:bm?'y a ' *$c:a..N N lM e y
l l
.C.
- - F mP
- f t
4., y i
i.
o
.h ?
- W'e_ s1YwMe *$
r s:
b,,,.,#
Fe[pJn ss=.Y.
e
,c
- g wD
.d w!,;m-)*py.h&..r.D.p~5eh I
'sv'<.
s 5
.i 7
v P
sy13 o
%e"F,
um&gg.
2 s.
t,&.
.b iaQ q
p :,v.. wf $!
.i f
w w.4& c,-.k ~.%s4h ':gf, e l
"?
e.
r a
- % 'tf"
/
.^q 3
uh
=.,g, Q xQ.,h 5 j#6!pk&
p ?hmv%
9i w/*% 1,p&g,n$
.W k'>ehr p
t 4
e,
x
?g W
y l
/ - 9
?
eWn+,[f[dhht o
"',3~-
s.
F mT
. ? ?pm k
e.
T S?
~
g XW t
hn'L, i.
</
. ^ n/.N }T.,k.$Rw W
s
}
I
+
$wm ha?r.
- ni e
9 n
g s$ Q
-$w%-
f 9
, pw~,(i%
c 9
.a%e
)c gs/ k{m,S n
3 k:; -
e
~
f,:~ '
a 3,
m r
o f
r e
P 7f l l
a.i1WAp;iN7,n
(
+
t nn$%;:
)
y
- e%E*r6 n
,l'l'Il!
I
- Il
.I;l:/1i,,)t iI l.!
j; 1
l
i
~
i
.I
\\
f, Performance Improvement Plan Status
~
i i
g; e Actions Working j
n.
l
$ij
+ Human Error Reduction Training i
+ Improving Grassroots Communications i
+ Discovery Phase of Design Basis Review Program
+ Updating Plan for IST Program (2nd 10 year interval) e Recent Closures:
l
+ Improved Pre-Job Briefings j
+ Strengthen Management Observation Program t
+ Regulatory Sensitivity Training
+ 12 Week Work Schedule s
l l
l i
i j Performance Improvement Plan Progress
)
t 100
==
ogy 1
/
981h
~
e Iii Actual 95 p e:
g=1 s::.
M n
s w
a 80 -
e a
~
gsn.
l Iggy$
D 0 Scheduled
@d 7
A l
Eityd E,
l 65 24 r
t U.Q O
7 k
Z 60 -
^
~
+ -
~
^
o 52 53 y
3 n1 7:j a) e 6;
p i
u) 4x r
+.
I
' ~
.9 40 m
($
$?
l L
{
O 40 4 36
?
t;7 W
a?
- ?
m w? Q" t
l 2
-y~;
i C-Or g"
Q ff 4
O
- p o
.r 7
j f
"U jg M'
tN
~b
- l O
i
~
I M
~,
[
y v.
u_.
-ze res 1
5:'
Di
\\
O se n-9 7'
>;?
,s n
^
lM Dr*
'O' A
+
f
.l
&m 4,-
- ...?
l
[
';4 Q_g 3
n s..
m
_ar.m w_s
.t-a x
c 3
m a
y a
e m
a m
a e
e m
e o
3
,a 7
4 m
O o
a m
o r
r N
l s
t
(
6 i
Q,j Operability Assessments-Previously Identified Weaknesses I
. s2.,
pk; e Operators had difficulty in recognizing situations
!biMiit that required entry into LCOs and Enginer rs lacked a good understanding of design and licensing bases e Operators tolerated degraded plant material conditions and poor support from other organizations l
l i
7
~;
Operability Assessments-l Evaluation of Corrective Action Program i
i ffh e Assessment of Corrective Action Program performed i
g}Rgj by Entergy and other utilities from
- ]
August 4 to August 15,1997
{
e Operability Assesssents were adequate 1
Documentation of some operability determinations was f
l e
weak i
e Operators entered LCOs as required i
i i
l 8
. l
!7 Operability Assessments-NRCInspection i
, g,,; _
[
7 With Concerns
.P'3; Y.
l u f.
~
- 7 p.
cp5 25 W %
i
~
I l
j 513 WithiNo Concerns y
a
)
w,;
.+
'4-l 1
l Of 520 condition reports sampled, no incorrect Operability l
e Assessments were discovered Engineering staff demonstrated good understanding of Licensing e
and Design Bases in making Operability Assessments i
Operability Assessments were appropriate, however, some lacked e
^
sufficient documentation to justify the assessment i
Some Operability Assessments were not performed 'n a timely i
e fashion
{
9 l
l Operability Assessments - Conclusions i
i t
de ; A'.,1l,
&"d e Strengths
=
+ Operators are making appropriate Operability Assessments (fi[y
+ Operability Assessments are performed with good technical basis i
+ Operations and Engineenng are demonstrating a good understanding of licensing and design bases e Weakness
}
i
+ Quality of documentation on some Operability Assessments j
needs improvement 10 i
h d-
.-4
- A-e 45 4
.A444 4e#
M.
4, a Aan u s
.s.
4mA.L'al.-;mo_2..pume a
.smm-4 4,.-p.,.h amm u 4_.o. s#m.mJ A A me <5 m.aii.e4p h aA Ada.et - 4Jeda E-m^m.d-dJ-a,a.aaim.,e,.
..ws h im
- m..a, amw4 ww_.
e V
P e
1 s
a 1
w i
C
@E m
.m g
(U
@5 m
(m r
M w
-b m
CU I
D D
CU s
Q l
O A,
e*y 4..
e
_ 'F3Mygi L - -
[
s:igfffLwan$%' ;,i.
3 L.
l s[
- ]
Operability Assessments-Overview i
i Any W3 Employee
~
t identifies an adverse condition
'I
,?i':
and initiates a CR j
Z -N w' t
hf6Ph. 3fj
] f j
f
[h Oriainator i
W y? q delivers CR to STA in l
~l+ ;p the Control Room 7
Y Shift Superintendent performs operability revieu 3
V is s
Confirmatio\\
Yes Operaoility No Document is SSC Operable?
n Operability Call Required?
t No i
Yes j
if y
Enter
' EnterW4.101 LCO Process I
12
t
~J,-l j.
Role of ShiftTechnical Advisor l
l l
Reviews Condition Report to understand the issue jg6/
e hd$$g$f Re"iews design and licensing basis documents for operability
- 3 e
determination Consults with Plant and Design Engineering as appropriate e
Documents basis of operability determination e
Reviews results of operability determination with Shift e
Superintendent for concurrence l
13
'[
Role of Shift Superintendent t
I
/'
5%g;;
Review.s the basis for the operability determination i
o W%m y& y**
IMP e
Performs initial operability determination r Bq
(
e Documents concurrence or disagreement that sufficient Tl supporting evidence exists to confirm operability Enters Operability Confirmation Process (W4.101), if required e
I e
Ensures the completion of immediate actions l
14 h
l h
y?i
,> Ir;f
,'!:l>i[lji!,i!i+
l,l!j:
e l;);!t.
5 1
)..
i V
1 O
N
- ~
i T
2 C
O i
P 1
E S
i G
U 1
A 0
i 1
L 2
U 4
J W
i N
e 1
U J
v i
i t
c Y
A e
M r
i i
D R
4 P
e A
t i
i S
R 3
A M
o t
n B
i E
F s
e i
N i
r 5
A t
J n
E 8
h' 4
2 0
mGugWCj m= O g
L v
I
! /.
. h2{3
- '.i c
.i,. ' ;_ = Y9.%
- e th -
y
,i 4
e, a
c e
+s. ' c.bMq -,..,
. yU, n5 -
h~
L T'e 2
ef.
4
- gL 6 gr 1
- il
]
i:
<1
- 1 i
i:!-
ll l'
l
- ll;l!
!!t if!!
l:
I:
i 6
1 I
?
n 3
o d
s r
n o
o f
i t
r a
e r
t e
a p
W o
o r
t s
o n
r t
F o
o p
is p
n ic us a
e st n e
d ge M
e nm v
r i
s s
it e s a
e e ih v
n s
T r
i e
gs s
s nA n
ey e
o t
o c
di l
ei D
g v b n
o a t
r i
r a
k pe h
a p
M mO W
I e
e l
iu@):*
4
<j 4
?:e eB MnB il:.ii!.
--v, w_
w
.e a
saw a,,.e aau...
me_a,_,_,,_..
.a 4
m_m.4e aea.
J.ag
_,_,_s,s.a.....ua uc.m___4._#4
. as yaem.
mJA,a 4
-..mmwa.-md.-
es.-.ah r--ww'aw--m-=
=.----w.--
w we-
.aA.--
F f%
CO O
Ob o_
C-O_
eo
.wN g
3 h
J C
O
- a c
O b_
Og
.O n
n
.2
=
- Cf) sO QO O
C
_g s
+
i b
/
ww'4w:
_-.,7..,
~
m-w.
'f a$ <.... e.i ls _,
^
hX;
?l4.s a
+
....-,, ~.-..-. - _..
1 l
ll:I ll t
- l f
- !
8 1
)
"s s
d e
,e n
c d
a o
l pe r
s P
mw s
o e
1 n
i Sl c
0 o
l e o o
1 t i
r
. a b F Ps
/
Wrm od e e r
t n
r i
e a u u ef r
n d d uo r t ac e e s
e c c dC i
e h
r o o s
i cy g
R r
er r
t r
o P P oi 0
rl N
uC e e pb i
E d
vd e a 3
j e
r, oa l
r R
W ca r
r s
ie T
oe p g vp rl p
eO PC mU R"
I 9
B 1
y n
la g
o o
i e
t G
t c
a A
r P
t I
S P
la
(
i J@mgw l'
A@i:
,l l
,,1i i
l i :
1 dj Site Directive W4.101 - Revisions 1
-g
- q ><
1 ;f; e Engineering Evaluation time requirement i
commensurate with the safety significance e Clarification provided as to when 10CFR50.59 is applicable in the W4.101 process
+ Physical change is made to the plant
+ Change is made to design / licensing bases to accept j
the condition as-is
+ Actions to correct the degraded / nonconforming condition cannot be completed in a timely manner
.+
i j Site Directive W4.101 - Revisions ' Cont.}
~
4 i
i l
i l
pdp e Allowed for testing or physical verification to exit the E33%
W4101 process l
Rawi igWd
[
'T1 e Equipment described in Engineering Evaluations to j
~
be tested when safety significant and practical
=
l e Provided a mechanism for tracking open W4.101s e PORC and GMPO approval required ofinitial Engineeririg Evaluations prior to Shift Superintendent approval 4"
i 20 I
g l
4
,t i
t 1 Site Directive W4.101 n
'L
!l}I Cond*xn Report wated i
I!
!t i !
f i
Tl can OPERAr!!LITY hsen y*5 OPERABitfTY j!
be made vet $m the w
)
gm ot CR 9
Prxess?
f l
Enter care & trne and
$I t
,t evte! trne Imt for incal I!
Ev""staten Log l
"9 Evabaten m Ereer W4101 l;
, i 1
Assign a Lead Grrws for the l
trwtal Erg,-r9 Evabaton
[
N4 yes trutte acbons art paraw Achons 7
,,h incal Engneenng Evabstm j
Necessary?
i I
l No 1
Has or "Y
I been * **d i
Yes Docurrupt on Condaten through tesW or otW F
Report & Ett W4101 physacal venfcaten?
i 4
[
No No further acDons 3
Lead Group de@ and processes the trubai E,y..m n9 Evalumbon
}
No
'I I
De
[
Notdy DPM. PEM. and No yes Ext W4101 ard seal Fngneenng Yes OperaWity Not#v SS & DPM co npy with Tech Specs for docur9e t cate
+
Evabaron tw..+ 4 a cong,,ned?
y g, INOPERABLE components g
S*gm to w E w s.
I m3 5
4 4
I i
i 1
i k
Operability Confirmation Process-l J'
2 fa 1
V,OnClUSIOnS l
I i
- i,
^
i gg e Fixing problems u
j e Conservatively entering LCOs i
i e Simplified and strengthened procedure e Will implement by 12/31/97 l
22 l
- a--c_ 4 %r www awn,4.J,uw e,,ums uma 4.- A, s.
mL-
-m amoas,h. A4 3.he. -
mm i
i a M
N e
- i a
1 a
1 4
5 s
j l
i I
'i V
C m
c (U
L C
l C
LLJ N
7~..
l l
j Engineering Staffing - 1997 Year-to-Date i
l 175 150 -
140
~
j
{b+i?j M Design Engineering 2
125 -
m Plant Engineering i
-+--Total Engineering 100 - 88 88 89 88 90 93 M
M 93 91 75 -
58 56 57 l
52 52 53 53 54 54 55 50 -
l 25 -
0 i
i i
i i
i i
i Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May Jun.
Jul.
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
24 i
,ill' ii:::,:
ii(
tLb r7,\\rl
.l.I-
[i, IIl j
r 52 y
t i
l ib 1
a
.s 6y, i
iD,-
s e
C s
' x "> '
1 y
s J ~~=::m '% y
=%
.d-r o
f a
L m
+
,M~
g' Ry
=
14
,M Mg m
.t
?
p Q;s -
i dn?' m.f "-
fM u
s k'
a&
3' x.
T; @n pJ jpwg;h er r
g s
2r S
s_%,ft d* yi.N sf t e Q
i f b;
a%
b b
s s2
- i
>+4.e $. Ye '.
r f-n a
f a
e Or T
v o
m 1. -
u e
4.K '
' %g*w ~,.
3P 3/
Cr Tt si=
Wy~~
.n a
gD
.F F
2 n
nh5'
=
m' E%:
a
._;p N
- 4 o
l i
c
- f.,'
- Qg,Tw
- 5w4hGg, r
t s
e r-n r
s e
/c, (tF -
- 2 Qi.Ca a
hKy
=
t e
e a
T B
yd. vsQ" u i
n~ V yp q4- _.hgLp hI. + n p
?
I 3.!t nY g?
G
- )1n ixh, s.5 gf %
i g7 7
%" _. E^
f
$ekc'2r gy7'_ -
? >wivtO[W' c13r,a1u:+.hv(*rfbm vh n9
}
s r
. )
- mfe;3h7r ;
s_4.l };gf
?
-e pDy[mk2$
i 9
Abf E1 Q
dmlXy g2j
. k i
- td qMmpuf%tq.5 E
y,[ $*;b' q$%CwM>n:f,?q Y
gr*g ph^M 5
}
t 3& w
[s
- t.h g
%', % g:#
i e,
p g.~
L)~
9j,
[& 4 re[g sdQ G
vQ fQF" 1I
,1
,k
,lli; l
l'
e 4
)
f f
f j
~7f Engineering Education / Professional Certification -
Plant and Safety / Design Engineering I
i J
1 J
l 4
{
o ;.wc w~._
i 4
g5%;
.,m.cdi ^
Y'%;Vl!Q i
1
.._; w, %
%# kg =*
31 Qjf%
~^;--
%76f;O--.s I
4
[M k
=4n ; *
~
Non-Engineering sagi
- , ;bRS(yrg
'd e v-:
%w+:,
\\
Degree c ysy7e wtg w p 3 +^-
i i
- -e ari
. w g 7 Fei-.
i 18 ms
.,. ryy w
' c
~-
-v-,-
t m.f,y i
Y ';;*%
j j
~
,a m
. ~.: # -
K
[' N' :
_y_
,,~Z~
f w
. F - %;
y,-
sy_+
u r, m
i
,,,, ~,.
wh
-+ v r
l u ?_q '; " f.;
l t
m., ;p. :a-, p
+
. m.
n, _
.-u.
)
f
- =
is.
- = a + 2
~'
a 1__%BS/Enginowing M
~.
. ~
~
7*
2 4
.'^.
._9*
3
, +
3
,S
_f
- %l.
,'4.>.'g,t
[
' * * - =
,L
., -m ; 7 n-3,
G.
l
, : ;y s
" -, [! r
. t Sq['. 'r e ~
,_.'r g
~ + ^'
+
",~. '
t
- ,++ ""'"*;
JV 37,_ Q2,
t 1.-e._>?t-l r
.+.M W
p
_g g
l 36 Engineers have obtained a Professional Engineering License 26
!li!j; l!!(!
,!!l!!I!
!llf 7
2 s
tn io P
lo n
r t
g n
ni o
s o
e e
t i
e n
CD t
e t
i t
e e
y m
s t
R s
m s
r i
i w
t lan o
t y
e e
r uo C
p v
o n
i a
i Qt w
E R
e t
x e
m c
lu gA e
s y
n v
n c
y M
i r
e e
o n
o e
i r v
R C
e s
t ei g
a i
t v
r ec n
n n
r o
g g
i t
e p
n e
i i
ir s
s n
p r
gr e
e o
u o
n o
D D
C S
C EC e
e e
e e
j 3' aw%
/4
$uG -
/hInf
[!
- l l
l i;!i!!::
l;
i Safety - Desi n Engineering 2
1 s
Workload 18 Mon s
^
t i
\\
1900 --
l l
^=-
1800 --
DN M,w,%.Md 8 1700__
ETdal Open M j
^
{ti 1600 --
OTaal Open CWons y$$-.N*
j ese.
FA'T 1500 --
OTotal Open ERs c
5 n,
t
'. 1400 --
I w
n
.I b
E i
1300 --
n t-.
v:
1200 --
7 M
I
??
C l
q y
~
,3 5
1100 --
~
~
w' a
f
=
~
p l
1000 --
n e
s 3
a~
900 -
~
m 6
e j
5 I
l i.
i
^
800 --
m s
g i-700 --
o m
g 600 --.
~
n
.o
=
500 --
t 400 --
'i i
-4 O
1 g
- r i
mi.
u y
i I
J l
I*
l A
T 2
+
L 300 --
au g
g g
m me a
um m
m i
200 --
a e
^g-i L
'3-0 2
i e
r-i l
4 i
T
?
m a
m m
W 4
{
i J
J i
i r
4 g-j lj j'
.'t
}
f
. i.
1 l
l 100 -- m, m
4 1
t i
- s. w.nr. X. m, a.er 1.
, m.
0 r
i 5/96 6/96 7/96 8/96 W96 10/96 11/96 12/96 1/97 2/97 3/97 4/97 S97 6/97 7/97 8/97 9/97 10/97 i
t 28 I
l l
I
il I
f f
J Safety, Design, and Plant Engineering -
~
1 Open Condition Report Actions
_d 1,000 --
i ifJiiZ O Plant Engineering
- hwr#4 i
900-- OSafety & Design Engineering i 2Mjh,j l
tm,1;n 2
ate.
[
W #.
u) 800 --
i o
1 c
[
7 700 --
. 4 gr 4m 1
o 600 --
3 31 m
m 9
1 c
321 i
259
'/
a ec. 500 ___
ss2 I
O m
at l.n j
l 17e
+
273 m
213 5 400 --
29G I
O 261 H
i i
,i 300 --
1.
~
t i
00 -
g
~
y'"
fgg E
s E
m l
g a
M e
d t
100 --
- .1 333 M
a l-l NG I2I 4
3 1
r l
~
n f
21-_
p;
?
- f
- {
n
.1
(
t
+
w f
0 7/96 8/96 919 6 10/96 11/96 12/96 1/97 2/97 3/97 497 S97 6/97 7/97 8/97 9/97 1
l 29
[
I i
J f Safety / Design Engineering -
Backlog > 2 Years i
i a
100 r
.i'tll4% si O Other S
d e% pE F
90 --
O Mods sd qw31N OCRs 80 --
j 3
- ~
.1
[
4 t4
+85
i 70 --
ha:e
>w&
a i
q w-u sn ex
- y%~d.
y f ;.n g;3_
.{
.u g W-
- o k
.:w 60 __
- t w
y
& _*f:d lRA
- yf%
I lf ~ ~5 4
~g:.2y
~
m s vW:K y4 gv.%c, fh eM[y f
k ff If M "
=
%2x1 w@x er; r.
~
3 40 __
ys;q:
L wt g
s.., m.,
L.
K,. :
d..m%
e r
.g
,a yn
% M}
gas v4
agy4 ln y tg btr-ppg 1
_ eof dmA-e N
?k "X
- ~.
20 --
112)
N(1pg r12/
- (125 7-f t
i i
.ev
.y 3,
g veg 10 --
.m IF 5/
N ge
.u.,,
P.
M@
Lit?
M:s:
.it y(;s T
T fm
[
q:
-f 0
3/97 4/97 5/97 6/97 7/97 8/97 9/97 f
i 30 6
l
. j Engineering - Conclusions I
i j
jW,@d e Turnover has been observed in both plant and e
d g y' y design engineering t-e Turnover has not resulted in significant
[
organizational problems 1
e Workload trends continue to improve e Quality controls are in place j
e Engineering aerformance is good and continues to improve i
l 31 l
4 i
f N
4a=,aem a ca.m-(.h4._.e.-mm_mmeaMh.,.4-hg7
-%m4 Sa me 4 a -e aw h,AMM maya.,JaA.4%m _ m
,hhe L h a _ & g,4 e m es._ w =m w m - w.m.de.a.-.amwima.eu_4m um u % _.mme MM.6J_A_
-4 N~
D l
I l
1 l
i I
I
.I O
i l
CD o
N m
i e ammmmy c
O J
S
'-N I v8 4
-