ML20203G197
| ML20203G197 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 06/19/1992 |
| From: | Wiggins J NRC |
| To: | Kane W, Martin T, Murley T NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203G108 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-97-469 NUDOCS 9803020228 | |
| Download: ML20203G197 (3) | |
Text
_ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _
4%M
~
ut f MM' P Ib- p Jl$ 1 9 1992 MEMO To: Distribution FROMt James T. Wiggins, MAP Chairman SUBJECT SECOND MAP MEETING HELD ON JUNE 11, 1992 The second Millstone Assessment Panel (MAP) meeting was held in Region I on June 11, 1992, from 1 00 - 2:45.
The attendees at the meeting were Panel Members Clifford Anderson, Acting Chief, Engineering Branch, DRS Randolph Blough, Chief, DRP Branch 4 Lawrence Doorflein, Chief, DRP Section 4A David Jaffe, Project Manager, NRR William Raymond, Senior Resident Inspector, Millstone John Stolz, Director, Projects Directorate I-4 James Wiggins, Deputy Director, DRP Other Attendeest Andra Asars, Resident Inspector, Millstone Richard Barkley, Project Engineer, DRP Branch 4 Robert De La Espirella, Reactor Engineer, DRP Section 4A During the meeting, the following topics were discussed:
Plant Status - Bill Raymond updated the MAP on the operational status of Millstone Station. Currently, Units 1 & 3 are operating at 100% power while Unit 2 is shutdown until mid-October f or refueling and steam generator replacement. There are no major operational safety concerns at the station at the current time.
EEQ Rounds Issue - Bill Raymond updated the MAP on the results of the NU investigation into the falsification of Plant Equipment Operator (PEO) round sheets at Millstone Station. Almost all the falsifications noted-involved PEOs from Units 1-& 2 and most involved the second set of rounds which were conducted on each shift. NU has taken disciplinary actions against the individuals involved and has undertaken extensive corrective actions to ensure that the incidents are not repeated. The NRC is evaluating appropriate enforcement actions in this, as well as similar incidents at other sites.
I 9803020228 980226 s PDR FOIA O'NEALI97-469 PDR
~
?
h
)
June 11, 1992, MAP Meeting 2 MAP Chartex - The MAP charter was discussed, specifically the format of the periodic reports which will be made to NRC senior management (see next page). The charter was approved '
on May 27, 1992 by Regional management; no conflicts with the charter content were identified by the MAP.
MAP Issues Ligi - The MAP issues list, prepared by Bill RaymoM, Rich Barkley and Dave Jaffe, was reviewed by the MAP for content, inclusion of all relevant issues and duplication of effort. The MAP decided to circulate the list through the Region I divisions and NRR f or comment, additions and the elimination of duplicate issues. Comments are due to Bill Raymond in two weeks and the list should be issued to senior NRC management in its final format in four weeks.
PEP Review - Initial review of the PEP effort as well as the results of the meeting with NU senior management on June 11, 1992 indicated that HU has additional work to perform on the PEP with regard to their plans for the verification and validation of PEP implementation actions. The MAP is planning to arrange a detailed review of the PEP by several of its members following the formulation of the MAP issues list.
Those individual will issue a report governing the ilndings of their review, similar in content to the review of the Pilgrim Restart Plan. NRR was tasked with the responsibility of developing a structured format for this review of the PEP.
DRP was tasked with the job of preparing a tentative milestone chart leading up to (and beyond) the final NRC-acceptance of the PEP. This milectone chart should include a possible public meeting in the area around Millstone, significant NRC meetings with NU and any significant ' inspections of NU's operations at Millstone or at the NU corporate office.
Steam Generator Replacement froiect (SGRP) Ef forts - A schedule for the SGRP efforts at Unit 2 was distributed along with proposed NRC review activities of the ongoing work. A formal inspection plan is currently being drafted by DRS.
Method of Briefina NRC Senior Manaaement on mal Activities - As l
previously discussed, the method for informing HRC senior management of the activit.les of the MAP is currently under review. John Stolz was tasked with the job of datermining what type of status reports NRC senior management, as well as the Commission, is expecti1g. \ .
\ su . i M iW 4 a a en a.
l
- & %/c$o
/v l % tn das Ai : loh.
f June 11, 1992, MAP Meeting 3 Next ' Scheduled _ 'teetina -
The MAP tentatively plans to conduct a meeting with Northeast Utilities at or near the Millstone site, in a place accessible for public observation, on July 20, 1992. Bill Raymond was tasked with negotiating this meeting date with NU.
LA JamesT.Wiggi.ns cc
- T. Murley, NRR T. Martin, RA W. Kane, DRA W. Russell, NRR j F. Miraglia, NRR J. Partlow, NRR J. Calvo, NRR -
G. Zech, NRR L. Plisco, NRR M. Davis, NRR J. Roe, NRR S. Varga, NRR W. Hodges, DRS R. Cooper, DRSS W. Lanning, DRS C. Hehl, DRP J. Durr, DRSS L. Bettenhausen, DRS MAP Members and other Meeting Attendees
p hhfMk hi L I '
L ,
^'
,, %i j,K%\U
?
F J t
'go UNITED ST AttS NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)
f.
4 A 4h k
-T, ? gg I Rt oioN i 47s ALLINDALI ROAD dbb \h
% *w [8 KING oF PRUSSIA. F(NNSYLVANIA 19436141b r 3
- ...' ,JUN 2 2 wu .
Docket Nos. 50-245, 50 336 & 50 423 -
hiceting No. 92 83 hir. John F. Opeka Executive Vice President Nuclear Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P.O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270
Dear hit. Opeka:
Subject:
JUNE 11,1992, hiEETING CONCERNING THE NORTHEAST UTILITIES PERFORhiANCE ENHANCEhiENT PROGRAhi (PEP)
This refers to the rnanagement meeting held with you and other members of the Northeast Utilities (NU) staff on June 11, 1992, at the NRC Region 1 Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. A list of the attendees at the meeting is enclosed. In addition, during that meeting, you provided a handout to the NRC describing your presentation; a copy of that
[ handout is also enclosed.
During this meeting, you and various members of your staff presented us with an overview of the Performance Enhancement Program, which was submitted to the NRC on June 4,1992.
Your discussions included a summary of changes authorized by PEP, an overview of the June 4 submittal, the four series of action plans to be implemented, an overview of Phase 111, the implementation of PEP actions plans, continued integration of activities, validation for completeness and lasting effectiveness, and formal clos 6out process.
Region I has formed a hiillstone Assessment Panel to assist Region I and NRR in the coordination of NRC resources for performance rnonitoring, inspection planning, and assessment of the hiillstone Station. This panel will monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the PEP. A copy of the hiillstone Assessment Panel Charter is enclosed.
We appreciate your continuing efforts to keep us informed of critical PEP milestones and look forward to continuing dialogue on this subject.
Sincerely, Charles W. Hehl, Director Division of Reactor Projects
(
@'o?egsc,CL y$[0
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company 2 3
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendees at the June 11, 1992, Meeting
- 2. Performance Enhancement Program Handout
- 3. Millstone Assessment Panel Charter cc w/encls:
W. D. Romberg, Vice President - Nuclear, Operations Services S. E. Secce, Nuclear Station Director H. F. Haynes, Nuclear Unit Director J. S. Keenan, Nuclear Unit Director C. H. Clement, Nuclear Unit Director R. M. Kacich, Director, Nuclear Licensing D. O. Nordquist, Director of Quality Services J. Stetz, Nuclear Station Director, Haddam Neck Gerald Garfield, Esquire Nicholas Reynolds, Esquire K. Abraham, PAO (2)
Public Document Room (PDR)
Local Public Document Room (LPDR)
Nuclear Safety information Center (NSIC)
NRC Resloent inspector State of Connecticut SLO Designee 4
o
.a y u! * , g-7.,.e.9tt--*- w, -- ,- - - + -
4--sist
- y - giev--- p r ow~u- e -,,,-- - - -
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company 3 See w/encls:
Region i Docket Room (with concurrences)
Meeting Attendecs
. 1 4
o 1
0
ENCthSURE1 Attendees at the June 11. 1992 Meeting NRC Attendecs:
T. Martin, Regional Administrator, Region I W. Kane, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region I C. Hehl, Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP)
W. Hodges, Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS)
J. Wiggins, Deputy Director, DRP C. Anderson, Acting Deputy Director, DRS R, Blough, Chief DRP Branch 4 L. Doerflein, Chief, DRP Section 4A W. Raymond, Senior Resident inspector, Millstone Station J. Stolz, Project Director, PD l 4, NRR D. Jaffe, Project Manager NRR R. Barkley, Project Engineer, DRP Section 4A A. Asars, Resident inspector, Millstone Station R. DeLaEspriella, Reactor Engineer, DRP Section 4A NU Attendeest l
J. Opeka, Executive Vice President - Nuclear S. Scace, Station Director, Millstone J. Stett, Station Director, Haddam Neck R. Kacich, Manager, Nuclear Licensing R. Laudenat, PEP Program Manager R. Stinson, President, Atlas Consulting Group
. .A
)
t i
i
- PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT i PROGRAM i
l
! n!
! Si
~
s' U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION JUNE 11,1992 NORTHEAST UTILITIES l
1 :
i !
j
NU -
ATTENDEES J
J. F. OPEKA EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
! - NUCLEAR S.E.SCACE STATION DIRECTOR - MILLSTONE J. P. STt- 14 STATION DIRECTOR - CONNECTICUT YANKEE R. M. KACICH DIRECTOR - NUCLEAR LICENSING
, R. T. LAUDENAT PEP PROGRAM MANAGER R. C. STINSON PRESIDENT, ATLAS CONSULTING GROUP CHAIRMAN OF MANAGEMENT ADVISORY GROUP (MAG) 2 4
+
I AGENDA l
- Introduction John Opeka ,
- Purpose John Opeka
- Background John Opeka
- Summary of Changes Authorized by PEP John Opeka
- Overview of June 4 Submittal Rick Kacich
- Action Plan Summary John Opeka
' - Overview of Phase ill Rich Laudenat .
- Role of MAG Ron Stinson
- Summary John Opeka 3
4 4
0 CD I o e D. o *
(E z 3 3 c.
'l PURPOSE .
1 Continue Performance Enhancement Program (PEP) Dialogue Overview Phase il Results Address initial NRC Questions WorkToward NRC Acceptance of PEP
\
l i
! BACKGROUND I - 1991 Millstone Station SALP Report
- NU Self-Assessment Task Groups
- Commitment to implement 56 Task Group Recommendations j S1D Million Per Year Added to 1992-96 O&M I
Budget .
l Approximately 200 New Permanent Positions Being Added in 1992 and 1993 6
~
BACKGROUND (cont'd) l l
Need to Determine Root Cause Need for More Comprehensive and Integrated Corrective Action Atlas Consulting Group Contracted to Assist NU 1992 Millstone Station SALP Report Task Group Recommendations Integrated into the PEP Millstone Performance Enhancement Efforts incorporated into the PEP 7
- l l)l f
_ ~
d n
a s s e n i c
o s n i
t a a a t b i
) s c m r i f o d a d ic)D d f r
' l e .
t e eS e e t c a pP s P n u n d i
s( a e m o
l t t n o nn i r
c e e d s ue t s
(
c e t e n o amiD n S S y
a n ra s t
w c e t
ed d t op c P n D r i
be t l
o o de r n o t a s p 3 i s
eD t
N d t
e nn n mimc ei n
o p
u s
n gs o d s te e e u
c U e ele s mg r n l
a i
l ac trn da i
i F
o 8 O n tr vr s l
e a e o o oe e o f R
l p n c ai i
t c
i t
a pS p t mn e
s o
f S
t a
m mfo fnu f
r r uc s e u C G e i
p g y f o ar c y n d g o go j
o K a e l se ec l i n
r e iP nr r
r p
t i
r o e i
r e
C t
l r
vu e a e h l a ht n A en e r o e g i r u g i n p iun A s e
l oe wh f i g
n r
o nrh go t e A n a n E B
i g
n Tc E C Et Mig t a s n h
e a
[C l
D P L
~
SUMMARY
OF CHANGES AUTHORIZED BY PEP T
Approximately 250 Additional NU People Authorized Integrate into Five Year Planning Process Peak Annual Added Expenditures of Approximately S30 Million Continued Use of Organizational Development Consultant, Dedicated Team to Assist in Implementation of Program 9
~
SUMMARY
OF CHANGES AUTHORIZED BY PEP (cont'd) 92 Contractor Positions to be Eliminated:
39 - October 1991 53 - June 1992 Approximate 20% increase in Personnel 8-12% Increase in Budget 10
l .
..I i
PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAL'i \\
3oog_ NUCLEAR PERSONNEL
)
2500- .-
l s i
2000-
! 1500-i i 1000-l 500-0 1996 1992 1993 1994 1995 E ORIGINAL E OCT. INCREASE @ PEP 11
e 4
~
PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM NUCLEAR O&M BUDGET 500- ( $ MILLIONS )
400-200-100-1993 1994 1995 1996 1992 E ORIGINAL E OCT. INCREASE $ PEP 12
jl l e
c n
a d n n e a N t n Y O a e i
I Ml C g u t T e odRe a g n
A d a
r l
k c rece d
a i
r e
C S g pB at n n e
n aiolk o e n
O E U g Cnta n et r
o i
g n
L L ei r r ytn n W e E L P d u ei ie eiamr l t
t n m A M e n bMe c gi a dp i l oo pt pl s t
e s
E A o n e l
ui l
y C X P r
E RaInmSMS R E l e
l e
U .
n n n n n n n O o o o o o i i i s r
s r
S l l
i MMM l
l i
l l
i P
e P
e E 2 0 5 0 0 R $
1 1 $ 1 1
8
+
OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL RICK KACICH
~
l
/
OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL l
NRC Transmittal Letter TAB 1 TAB 2 PEP Phase ll Completion Report TAB 3 Reference Figures for Phase il Regart TAB 4 Atlas -Report on Phase I -- Issue Validation and Root Cause Analysis 15
i ACTION PLAN FORMAT I
Title Completion Date Responsible Individual Scope a
16
b ACTION PLAN FORMAT (cont'd) 1
< Objectives
Background
Deliverables
~
Utility Lesscos Learned 17
.l l
UTILITY LESSONS LEARNED
}
Assess Action Plan Against Industry Experiences Capitalize on Proven Techniques & Methods Provide Assurance of Achieving Desired Results i
i t
l 18 t
1 t
+ l ACTIOM PLAN FORMAT (cont'd) . .
.i 1
Interface Matrix Prerequisites Verification and Validation t
! Authorization l
19 i
4 OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL (cont'd) 1 TAB 5 Action Plan Series 1 - Management Practices TAB 6 Action Plan Series 2 - Programs &
Processes TAB 7 Action Plan Series 3 - Performance Assessment TAB 8 Action Plan Series 4 - Functional Programs
/
J
e i OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL (cont'd)
TAB 9 Overall PEP Schedule TAB 10 Individual Action Series Schedules TAB 11 PEP Budget and Resource Allocation 21
OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL (cont'd_1 TAB 12 Action Plan Development Summary TAB 13 Material Used in PEP Action Plan Development TAB 14 Cross-Reference of Task Group Recommendations to PEP Action Plans 22
a s
i l
SUMMARY
ACTION PLAN
\
JOHN OPEKA i
i f
i I
f i
23 .
l
ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
i SERIES 1 l
==-l mesmE
^ LEADERSHIP POLICY PRME R E
imme w -
24
TALENT DEVELOPMENT Implementation of a Comprehensive Management Development Program Addition of Significant Budget Resources (over S500,000/ year for next five years?
Interface With Human Resources Group for Implementation Management Wide Application to NE&O Personnel to Address Management Training Enhancements 25
STANDARDIZATION l
NE&O Standardization Policy Describe Level of Standardization Expected Identify Where Differences are Acceptable
~
Cover Organizational Design, Compensation and Benefits, and Other Categories Related to Working Conditions and Fairness 26
~
ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
SERIES 2 PROGRAMS & ,
PROCESSES M
OPE M M E WORK STRATEGIC PLANNING & PROGRAMS &
PLANNING BUDGETING PROCESSES M M M i
27 i
ENGINEERING PROGRAMS ,
NE&O Procedure Describing Engineering Programs and Providing the Required Procedure Control and Linkage Prepare Engineering Program Manuals for Major Program Areas Integrate Engineering Programs in the NE&O Configuration Management Program Manual 28
........mi. .- . .
e PLANT SYSTEM ENGINEERING s
Multi-year, Two Step Program implementation Implement Program for Principal Plant Systems Provide an Engineer for Each Principal System (s)
Monitor and Analyze System Performance
~
29
~
PLANT SYSTEM ENGINEERING .
(cont'd) '
l Coordinate All Activities on Principal Plant Systems I l
Consistently Apply Industry Experience Promote Communication Between Units and Stations ao
> i
O O ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
SERIES 3
==
imana]"
" " DATA ANSIS DON ES
$1NAL LEM
- ,memme 31
~
INTEGRATION OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS Identify Assessments Currently Performed Which Will Be Integrated Develop List and Description of Categories for Integration Assign Responsibilities for Assessment Integration Proceduralize Integration Process and Results Reporting 32
ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
~
SERIES 4
== ;
imme]r
' CORPORATE A NS Y EE 33
SHUTDOWN RISK MANAGEMENT !
~
Implement Recommendations of NUMARC 91-06 Complete Training, Procedure Revisions and .
Evaluate Potential Hardware Modifications Ensure Consistency in Approach Between Units and Stations t
[
34
STATION ORGANIZATION (CONNECTICUT YANKEE & i MILLSTONE)
Establish Consistent Organizational Structure at CY and Millstone 110 Additional Personnel Authorized (Total For Both Stations,)
Provide for increased Supervisory Presence in the Field Increased Work Planning and Control Resources to improve Productivity and Reduce Supervisory Burden 35
- r . - i- - .
m i
OVERVIEW OF PHASE Ill RlCH LA.UDENAT 36
OVERVIEW OF PHASE Ill 5
Implementation of Action Plans Continued Integration of Activities Validation for Completeness and Lasting Effectiveness ,
Formal Close-Out Process i
l l
37
4 ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION i
- Each Action Plan Manager Organizes and Coordinates Resources Needed to Complete Action Plan Deliverables
- Action Plan Managers Responsible to involve Line Managers and Supervisors in Change Process
- Ensure NU Personnel Recognize the PEP as an Answer to Performance Issues and Improved Organizational Efficiency 38
CONTINUED INTEGRATION Current Resource Allocation and Schedule Developed With Limited Integration ~
Further Detail Development Will Refine Schedu!e arid Resources Opportunity for Further Integration of Activities Adjust Schedules and Resources to Reflect i Efficiencies I
39
_/ i
e VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION Action Plans Require Acceptance Criteria for Closure Criteria Used to Determine Effectiveness of:
Actions taken Underlying issue addressed Lasting results t
40
1 l Iil s
_ s l e
_ n b l
a a r
P e n i l
v o e D
i t
c T A f o
U t o s s
O s e n c e n
E i o n s de e
v 1
4 S i vi e v i
t c
O RE f f
e L e eE C u tv w i i
n c e t
. n ei v j ob e COR 4
- 7 ROLE OF MANAGEMENT ADVISORY GROUP
\
i
~
RON STINSON 1
Y \
42
ROLE OF MAG Monitor and Provide Direct Feedback to NU Senior Executives Advise on Other Key Matters of the Nuclear Program y
\ _
B
MAG MISSION i I
Perform Periodic Assessment of PEP Evaluate Other Programs & Processes Referred to MAG Provide Advice on the Effectiveness of PEP Overview Validation Efforts 44
MAG FOCUS Focus on Level of Performance Improvement Identify Potential Roadblocks Provide Overview of PEP 45
- . .. . , . . . . . . --.........-~...........-....._..a..-.-.,.-., . . . . . - _ . . - - . - . . _ . - _ . - _ . .
e s
I i
l
- E 5 O e, Z
E o o '
CD 4
i l s
I J
1
SUMMARY
r ,
Action items From May 19 Letter From Dr. Murley STATUS '
l Complete Phase ll of the PEP Completed in June 1992 Summarize the Results in a Submitted
~
Docketed Letter to the NRC June 4,1992 Promptly Afteritis Completed Ensure That the PEP is Accept- In Process able to the NRC Authorize the Addition of Any Completed r
Resources Necessary to implement the PEP 47
i
SUMMARY
(cont'd) i Provide Periodic Updates to in Process the Staff on the Progress of PEP Implementation i
Keep the NRC Staff Apprised included in on a Timely Basis of Any June 4,1992 Submittal-Significant Changes in the O&M Separate Letter and Capitai Budgets and Forthcoming ;
Projections Presented in the l
. Attachmentfor Calendar Years
. 1992-1995, including an Expla-nation for Any Such Changes :
I
( i 48
SUMMARY
(cont'd)
NU Will Operate Our Nuclear Plants in a Safe, Dependable, and Efficient Manner at All Times Operational Excellence, in Conjunction With Nuclear Safety, is.Our Top Priority Achieve Category I SALP Ratings and Top Ratings by INPO NU is Committed to Maximize the Value Added for Every investment Made 49
i
SUMMARY
(cont'd) .
l Evidence of Commitment to Operational Excelleryce:
3 Organizational Changes- !
J 1 450 Additional Personnel i 840 Million increase in O&M Budget I Phase 11 of the PEP was a Major Effort, Completed on Schedule Committed to Secure NRC Acceptance of PEP 50
- DCthSURE 3 I*,, isNi1io $tAttt
- f NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, / 3 ,.3 r; RtosoN i
{4 eg
! 47s AltlNDAlt moAo uso or raussia, etussvtvAsiA $54x ms g * * "
- j), MAY 2 71992, MEMORANDUM FOR: James T. Wiggir , Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Projects FROM: Thomas T. Martin, Regional Administrator SUIDECT: MILLSTONE ASSESSMENT PANEL CHARTER As a result of the observed decline in performance at the Millstone Station, a series of NU self. assessment Task Forces were conducted in the Summer and Fall 1991. Subsequently, the recommendations from these efforts were integrated and further analyzed. The licensee currently intends to docket a comprehensive Performance Enhancement Program (PEP) in June 1992 to address idendfied deficiencies. A large agency effort will be required to follow licensee actions resulting from the implementation of the PEP.
+
" The principal purpose of the Millstone Assessment Panel (MAP)is to assist Region I and NRR in the coordination of NRC resources for performance monitgring, inspection planning, and assessment of the Millstone Station. You have been designated Chairman and John Stoir has been designated Vice Chairman of the panel.
The MAP responsibilities are:
- 1. Review the PEP and assure it addresses problems / weaknesses identified by NRC program activities.
- 2. Maintain an ongoing overview oflicensee performance during the period of significant PEP implementation activities.
- 3. Conduct periodic meetings with NU to discuss progress towards satisfactory completion of the Performance Enhancement Program (PEP) and addressing NRC concerns. These meetings shall be open for public observation.
-4. Provide oversight of the NRC's PEP followup activities. Review NRC inspection and assessment plans and findings and facility performance; identify areas where NRC inspection and/or technical review are warranted.
- 5. Provide recommendations at the performance and trends review (PTR) meetings regarding additional followup inspections based on facility performance.
- 6. Periodically, provide relevant MAP assessment of licensee performance trends to N management.
d Memorandum for Jim Wiggins 2
- 7. Membership:
Deputy Director, DRP Chairman Director, Projects Directorate 14 Vice Chairman Chief, Projects Branch 4. DRP Chief. Engineering Branch, DRS (Division Representative)
Chief, Facilities Radiation Protection Section, DRSS (Division Representative)
Chief, Reactor Projects Section 4A. DRP Millstone Project Manager, NRR Millstone Senior Resident inspector
/.a Thomas T. Martin Regional Administrator Cc:
T. Murley, NRR T. Martin, RA W. Russell, NRR W. Kane, DRA S. Varga, NRR J. Richardson, NRR A. Thadani, NRR R. Lobel, OEDO O. Zech, NRR L. Plisco, NRR J. Roe, NRR '
MAP Members
\ x 4
PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT 1 PROGRAM i
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION JULY 8,1992 i, NORTHEAST UTILITIES l
l I
4 I. ~
)'.
l l NU i
AIIENDEES
! J. F. OPEKA EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
- NUCLEAR
! S. E. SCACE STATION DIRECTOR - MILLSTONE
! J.P.STETZ STATION DIRECTOR - CONNECTICUT YANKEE
- R. M. KACICH DIRECTOR - NUCLEAR LICENSING l
l I
i 2
- i. .
l l
AGENDA Introduction ;
l Purpose .
) Background Summary of Changes Authorized by PEP Overview of June 4 Submittal u
I Action Plan Summary i
Overview of Phase 111 l
Role of MAG Summay 3
--__e.-
_ . - -- - , . , _ .Av ..ma- -r.,wh.__ aa 4mm,aemam.A 4_p..,u...wy;,,m. mea _ . -.4__,
e..,_wu,_,,,,,,4_a__wmu g,,a p_%,.%,_,y.24%,_4g,4 g a w g_ y___..A_,, __,,m _gg _, e,3gg , j_ g_
9 P
@ C z
o m
y m
m O s Cn m
l l
i
PURPOSE Contint:e Performance Enhancement Program (PEP) Dialogue Overview Phase 11 Results Address NRC Questions Work Toward NRC Acceptance of PEP
/)1/f(1
l BACKGROUND i
l
- 1991 Millstone Station SALP Report Summer 1991 - NU Self-Assessment Task Groups September 1991 NRC Meeting - Reviewed Allegations Root Cause and Operability, Reportability, and Communications
! Task Group Findings
- October 1991 NRC Meeting - Reviewed Performance and Procedure Compliance Task Group Findings October 1991 Decision to Add S10 Million Per Year to 1992-96 O&M Budget and Approximately 200 New Fermanent Positions Over 1992 and 1993 6
l 1
! N
- BACKGROUND (cont'd) .
i
- December 1991 NRC Meeting - Presented initial Compilation
! of FourTask Groups Reports Recommendations 4
Commitment to implement 56 Task Group l
! Recommendations
- Need to Determine Root Cause i Need for More Comprehensive and Integrated Corrective i Action i
Recognition of Other Outstanding issues
! January 1992 - Atlas Consulting Group Contracted to Assist
] NU i
i 7 1
BACK. GROUND (cont'd)
Phase 1 of PEP Completed in March 1992 - Root Causes Determ,ined g ~
Management Practices l%{
Programs & Processes j ,
A]
Performance Assessment a &"
- March 1992 NRC Meeting - Reviewed PEP Phase i Results
/
May 1992 Millstone Station SALP Report * <a fW3--
May 1992 Correspondence With NRC May 13,1992 Letters (2) From NU to NRC l May 19,1992 NRC Letter to NU June 4,1992 PEP Phase 11 Submittal
- June 11,1992 Meeting in Region i 1
8
1 - -
4 BACKGROUND (cont'd)
) Organization of PEP i
1
)
l PEP committee direct reports of Executive l Vice President - Nuclear i
! PEP team project team working to ,
! implement PEP (NU, Atlas,
- Hay Groupl pisY- cie
! MAG (~9 oversight group reporting tof sy/q, Executive Vice President p
! Nuclear l Action Plan personnel assigned ;
! Managers responsibility to develop
! action plans i e j
PEP ORGANIZATION NU NU PEP TEAM a EXECUTIVE a MAG VP PEP REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION
! PLAN MANAGERS 10
BACKGROUND (cont'd)
Changes Already implemented:
Engineering functions consolidated Corporate operational support consolidated Engineering support aligned on a unit specific basis through Project Services Department (PSD)
Material procurement resources increased (Fraudulent Materials issues)
Two levels of management between nuclear stations and chief nuclear officer eliminated 11
l, l,
l illi '{l ll
~
j NM h O N
- UA CN h R U EG AE l
j G C NLA RR A L N E I
A Z R A
CEGV ONE C I T I
NGN E 5I E 1
HE U
CI OISRI TE l N
TN N D I
E OG N N& T OEPE C OENPS PNRX E PNURE EGEESC " O EGCEN RINI "
RINtSI EI O A ED U &
EENV NNUIC A
T E A EDR I E R NIV T EEi I
ORNv T
" C H
TE V ' A I
R M
EN RE & E A 2 RM S
&I I
& N NE D GN T E A N T
L N 9
[
CDN UOIR U
- K NC NE C L E ET E E CO A T R SR I
I I C T U A T T I
O ONV PCND N PUIC ROUIR EC RL E ONC E AEP TAR GCL RE E C AR A T I I O RE S uNSSR O R
- N I D
MDN I S E A F
i t
RU N 1 i
EC T :
MCT LEA I
Y O
NR OR I E
E S T
A -
T I
O N
M2 l11
CeO s C-RwN N NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION (Mi # -
eRESiDeNT 1992 M DIRECTOR NUCLEAR SAFETY I__ CONCERNS l PROGRAM EXECUTIVE VICE I PRESIDENT NUCteAR - al.
g
~
VICE PRES! DENT NUCLEAR STATION N AR STATION VICE PRESIDENT OtRFCTOR N M EAR DIRECTOR DEECTOR NmW EAR CONNECTICUT OPERATIONS ENG2NEERING ENM : ONE SERVICES YANKEE SERVICES
$ bb'Y DIRECTOR
- OUALITY SERVICES 13
l:
l [
SUMMARY
OF CHANGES l AUTHORIZED BY PEP 42V-j
! Approx!mately 250 Additional NU People
) Authorized l Integrate into Five Year Planning Process Peak Annual kdded Expenditures of Aparoximately S30 Million +m-l Continued Use of Organizational Development i Consuitant, Dedicated Team to Assist in l Implementation of Program I 14
SUMMARY
OF CHANGES AUTHORIZED BY PEP (cont'd) 92 Contractor Positions to be Eliminated:
39 - October 1991 53 - June 1992 Approximate 20% increase in Personnel 8-12% Increase in O&M Budget l
No Change to Capital Budget l
l 15
- i. -
i PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM 3ano. NUCLEAR PERSONNEL
- ~
. YW2 2000-1500-1C00-500-0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 3 ORIGINAL E OCT. INCREASE E PEP 16 i i
~
PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM NUCLEAR O&M BUDGET 500- ( $ MILLIONS )
400-300-200-100-
' ~
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 E ORIGINAL E OCT. INCREASE P 2 PEP 17
i .
f l KEY FEATURES OF PEP l
{'f;/$/
y&r? y",Q c '
! \ :-(}f r h' Living and Dynamic Process d,1#
l (
NU Ownership h Interna Communications Initiatives) l I
l i
18 1
l I
RESOURCE ALLOCATION EXAMPLES S12 Million Procedure Upgrade a
'r en S10 Million Engineering Backlog 85 Million Reliability Centered Maintenance and Maintenance Rule implementation 110 Personnel Support Workload at CY and Millstone 80 Personnel (System Engineering l 19
i :
) -
l i ;
l 4
OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL ,
i i
I i 1
RICK KACICH i
I !
I i
\
20 i
M
- j. -
i l
l
! OVERVIEW OF SUBMrrTAL i
i fke i f//
l
, /g '
- TAB 1 NRC Transmittal Letter j t -
l TAB 2 PEP Phase il Completion Report l TAB 3 Reference Figures for Phase 11 Report I TAB 4 Atlas Report on Phase I -- Issue
! Validation and Root Cause Analysis
., . .,.-,,m --
, - - . , . - - , , , w --
r---
i
! ACTION PLAN FORMAT r qe5
~
f l l b^tb{IlW l
! Title
! Complction Date
! , Responsible Individual 07 Scope '
1 .
t I
1 1
j
- 22
s ACTION PLAN FORMAT (cont'd) '\ )
3 Objectives Background ;
Deliverables ,
Utility Lessons Learned 1
l 23 ,
l -- ------_ - _ -
UTILITY LESSONS LEARNED q.
Assess Action Plan Against Industry Experiences Capitalize on Proven Techniques & Methods Provide Assurance of Achieving Desired Results 24
ACTION PLAN FORMA.T (cont'd) i Interface Matrix Prerequisites Verification and Validation Authorization 2s
1 i
! OVERVIEW OF SUBMIi i AL (cont'd) l TAB 5 Action Plan Series 1 - Management' Practices A '>
l __
! TAB 6 Action Plan Series 2 - Programs & uv w :
6 l Processes 7 TAB 7 Action Plan Series 3 - Performance i Assessment -
3 ~
l t TAB 8 Action Plan Series 4 - Functional w""
l Programs a 26
OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL (cont'd)
TAB 9 Overall PEP Schedule TAB 10 Individual Action Series Schedules TAB 11 PEP Budget and Resource Allocation
- ja --
" E ~a ' S~i. e
(
27
OVERVIEW OF SUBMITTAL (cont'd)
TAB 12 Action PI n Development Summary TAB 13 Material (Eded in PEP Action Plan Development -
TAB 14 Cross-Reference of Task Group Recommendations to PEP Action Plans 28
e .
A_CTION PLAN
SUMMARY
JOHN OPEKA l
29
l' ,
~, !
1 4
ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
l SERIES 1 l
l l MANAGEMENT PRACTICES i
^ ""
LEADERSHIP POUCY R ES &
E
- inne - -
i 30
7 TALENT DEVELOPMENT Implementation of a Comprehensive Management Development Program Addition of Significant Budget Resources (over S500,000/ year for next five years)
Interface With Human Resources Group for Implementation Management Wide Application to NE&O Personnel to Address Management Training Enhancements K
(
! STANDARDIZATION l
NE&O Standardization Policy l Describe Level of Standardization Expected Identify Where Differences are Acceptable I Cover Organizational Design, Compensation and l
Benefits, and Other Categories Related to Working i Conditions and Fairness 4
i j
32 l
ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
EERIES,. w 2
PROGRAMS &
PROCESSES 4
OPERATIONAL WORK STRATEGC PLANNING & PROGRAMS &
"I BUDGETING PROCESSES M M M 33
ENGINEERING PROGRAMS NE&O Procedure Describing Engineering Programs and Providing the Required Procedure Control and Linkage Prepare Engineering Program Manuals for Major Program Areas
, Integrate Engineering Programs in the NE&O l Configuration Management Program Manual d
34
f 1
! PLANT SYSTEM ENGINEERING i
!f
! Multi-year, Two Step Program Implementation
! Implement Program for Principal Plant Systems l Provide an Engineer for Each Principal System (s?
! Monitor and Analyze System Performance j
i 35 l
4
)
PLANT SYSTEM ENGINEERING (cont'd) .
pet' Coordinate All Activities on Principal Plant Systems Consistently Apply Industry Experience Promote Communication Between Units and Stations 36
1 I
! ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
SERIES 3 .
PERFCRMANCE l
ASSESSMENT
! ,mmmmmmu i
I i
i PEOPLE /ORGANIZ- ASSESSMENT MANAGEMENT DATA ANALYSIS i ATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES l M M N M I
I 37
INTEGRATION OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS.
Identify Assessments Currently Performed Which Will Be Integrated l Develop List and Description of Categories for Integration Assign Responsibilities for Assessment Integration l
Proceduralize Integration Process and Results Reporting 38
O ACTION PLAN
SUMMARY
SERIES 4 , .
1 ,
IES*us" / -
" " CORPORATE bioNS TM KEE .
- ,mme- imes i,
39
SHUTDOWN RISK MANAGEMENT Implement Recommendations of NUMARC 91-06 Complete Training, Procedure Revisions and Evaluate Potential Hardware Modifications Ensure Consistency in Approach Between Units and Stations l
40
STATION ORGANIZATION
[ (CONNECTICUT YANKEE &
. MILLSTONE)
Establish Consistent Organizational Structure at CY and Millstone 110 Additional Personnel Authorized (Total For Both Stations)
Provide for increased Supervisory Presence in the Field Increased Work Planning and Control Resources to l
.l improve Productivity and Reduce Supervisory Burden 41
l l
l i
i s
OVERVIEW OF PHASE Ill f
i l
t 4
i RICK KACICH 1
l i
t I
i 1
! 42 i
~
- .=:--.._..
OVERVIEW OF PHASE Ill Clarify Meaning of Three Phases of PEP New Governing NE&O Procedure Implementation of Action Plans Continued Integration of Activities Validation for Completeness and Lasting l
Effectiveness l
l Formal Close-Out Process i
43
! ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION l (
i i
! Each Action Plan Manager Organizes and l Coordinates Resources Needed to Complete
! Action Plan Deliverables
! Action Plan Managers Responsible to involve Line
- Managers and Supervisors in Change Proces
! Ensure NU Personnel Recognize the PEP as an l Answer to Performance issues and Improved i Organizational Efficiency l
! 44 i
, . . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ . , _ _ _ - - .___....._l
~.
l f
! -CONTINUED INTEGRATION l
l l Current Resource Allocation and Schedule .
] Developed With Limited Integration Further Detail Development Will Refine Schedule
- . and Resources Opportunity for Further Integration of Activities l Adjust Schedules and Resources to Reflect i Efficiencies
[
45
1 l
- VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION i
l j Action Plans Recuire Acceptance Criteria for l Closure Criteria Used to Determine Effectiveness of:
Actions taken
- Underlying issue addressed
! Lasting results I
I 46 4
CLOSEOUT Continue Revisions to Action Plans Objective Evidence Review Effectiveness of Deliverables l
l 47 .
,i ;l! $: iI.I);1 , J31i1 ; I i ! . ii , i:ii!;liI ,
e S
J O U H
N M
4 8
O M P
E A K
A R
Y I 'l li 'l : . ll,:
m.. . , .
MANAGEMENT ADVISORY GROUP (MAG) C97 2 um.
3 e4 ,
Monitor and Provide Direct Feedback to NU Senior Execur:ives Advise on Other Key Matters of the Nuclear .
Program Perform Periodic Assessment of PEP Provide Advice on the Effectiveness of PEP Overview Validation Efforts ,
I 49
SUMMARY
g
)
Action Rems From May 19 Letter From Dr. Murley STATUS Complete Phase 11 of the PEP Completed in June 1992 Summarize the Results in a Submitted .
Docketed Letter to the NRC June 4,1992 Promptly After it is Completed Ensure That the PEP is Accept- In Process able to the NRC
- Authorize the Addition of Any Completed l
Resources Necessary to implement the PEP 50 7 l l l l
-- II im
SUMMARY
(cont'd)
Provide Periodic Updates to in Process l . the Staff on the Progress of ,
I PEP Implementation Keep the NRC Staff Apprised included in on a Timely Basis of Any June 4,1992 Submittal -
! Significant Changes in the O&M Update Submitted
- and Capital Budgets and June 30,1992 Projections Presented in the Attachment for Calendar Years l 1992-1995, including an Expla-nation for Any Such Changes i
! ( j
SUMMARY
(cont'd)
NU Will Operate Our N~uclear Plants in a Safe, Dependable, and Efficient Manner at All Times Operational Excellence, in Gonjunction With Nuclear Safety, is Our Top Priority Achieve Category i SALP Ratings and Top Ratings by INPO
- NU is Committed to Maximize the Value Added for Every- ,
Investrrent Made 52 ,
1 i .
SUMMARY
(cont'd)- .
l
}
l j
9
! - Share Results and Insights With Seabrook
- Ensure PEP is Complementary to Focus on Plant l
Safety I
i i
53
~a T i -
~
/
SUMMARY
(cont'd)
Evidence of Commitment to Operational Excel lence:
3 Organizational Changes 450 Additional Personnel S40 Million increase in O&M Budget l
r 54
1..*
SUMMARY
(cont'd) 4 l
l Committed to Secure NRC Acceptance of PEP -
Will Be Responsive to Feedback From MAP
! Phase 11 of the PEP was a Major NU Effort, I Completed on Schedule
) PEP is a Living NU Program Which Will be
! Responsive to Emerging issues within the Nuclear
! Organization
!