ML20210N295
| ML20210N295 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 05/01/1996 |
| From: | Brian Bonser NRC |
| To: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210N181 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-97-178 NUDOCS 9708250177 | |
| Download: ML20210N295 (63) | |
Text
... _........,
d M
l-I[ l s
May 1, 1996 Note To:
Chairman Jackson from:
']
Ann)ette # % w.st W G Coordinated With:
d
Subject:
Pre-Briefing for May 13 Commission Meeting With Commonwealth Edison DISCUSSION:
These are the major points that will be made at the pre-brief to l
. describe Dresden's current performance.
Manaaement There have been significant changes made in management. Many of the managers were brought in from outside the company.
Doerations Operatiors is the area where there has been the most improvement.
+
Improvements have focussed on the control room.
This has translated into a conservative operating philoso)hy, and a reduction in operator work-arounds.
Recent startups on buti units were good.
Liprovements in the control room have not translated to improvements in the equipment operators out in the field.
Material condition has shown improvement, especially in major systems, but a lot remains to be done, liaintenance This area has agi shown a lot of improvement.
There are two major problems - skill of the craft labor and the work control process. These problems _have translated in to a high maintenance backlog.
To resolv'e the skill of the craft problem maintenance personnel are being retrained.
The work control process has involved coordination problems and packaging the work to get it in the field.
A contractor was brought in to overall the process, c.a Work being done has focussed on safety systems.
Therefore operability of safety significant systems does not appear to affected.
970 I
i f-Enoineerina The engineering area is in transition but has been a historic problem.
+
A new engineering manager was brought in from Turkey Point.
There has been a high backlog of engineering changes.
System reviews are being performed by system engineers.
General
+
Electric is assisting the system engineers in the system reviews and acting as tutors.
Self Assessme01 Problem identification has improved and has been a cause of the high backlog. Major equipment and operator work-arounds have been focussed on.
QUESTIONS What is the status of the Dresden improvement Plan?
Is the region satisfied with the progress?
Is the plan realistic?
Is regional management satisfied with the Dresden management changes?
What is it going to take to get Dresden ofrthe Watch List?
+
Does the regional office feel comfortable with the large backlog at Dresden? Does it appear Dresden will be able to resolve their maintenance problems?
!s the licensee in compliance with their licensing basis? How has the NRC reviewed this issue?
ls Dresden getting the resources to complete all the work to resolve their problems? What will be the affect of deregulation?
Itgre are additional orocose_d ouestions in Tab 0 of the briefina book.
These are auestions for utility manaaement.
They would be useful fqt the ore briefina to aet a readina from NRC manaaement on the licensee's prqgress.
96
$. k.g k-
)
- e9$ *f k 4
, h
% t i %.).
bh
- m..
, a c n. ~
u~.
l u
g. ~..
- \\.
u. ::
^11?:
- ~;552'['"*33;3;;,g3333~33g33333,ggyy azgag.
Comed SeniorManagement Brie ing o Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
May 13,1996
. 'B e z
O
- t. 5
,i Z-7 w.
}b O
[.
g Q
h w
':1 n
i O
u, d
o
.T kJ k
NO
[d
}
n4 v
3
{
p!)
6o i
m N
w Sr' F
t,
'L' 44 y:8 bRL VJ
Introduction
- n w: a.sau s k& 4 c a.
s eas
, ir a.wsuu
-=?--
' " " ~ " * " *
- _ " " ~ ~ '
Nuclear is Vital to Comed o Resources o Management Team o Focus on Dresden o Commitment to All Stations t'
3
t j
I '.l4 I
- -i g
g (s) r k
E D
b U
- O m %.
g 5' W Il m
f'a
~.
Q b
bd M
'i t,h hh n
M cf3 Lj
- s s,
1 m
n!
M Jj 0,
r Ei hb[k t -;g
'J n
.~
March 22,1996 LetterIssues
.- _7.,
7;_ g ynna o Performance results - are we executing plans and meeting goals? Have areas of weakness been addressed?
o Does our workforce understand and implement our standards? Is it skilled?
o Has materiel condition improved?
l o Are we identifying and correcting i
deficiencies? (Focus on system reviews?
o Are necessary resources being applied?
o Will the improving trend continue?
Y,0, ss n now rs.Llde-ri ng.
11-it ".1 m rtm e JL % Md
Per ormance Results -
April 301996 Goals
?
. _._.__.__._._ _ -,- ~,-- -.,c
-w
- - :A
.v h WC %
- gggm'g' s &' +,_
es
. &g ,44M W',:' m
- 97 u
%~ N %MY' WOW'
' ^
^*
o Actions to be Accomplished
+ 23 of 23 met a Numerical Performance Targets m
+ 15 of 22 met : u%
_ _t rv yo w
o Updated End-of-Year Goals Established t
6
e i
f
(
i.
mesma I ;-
V
+
3 W~
@.')
Q s
m s'.
b V
hO 5.:
c
,O *e.
(e
,s e W.
R
@W y,
o s
O h\\M a
w
\\f Nm 9
\\
b.
ti) ah Qg 9
\\
o 3M qt
LInit3 Operation
-n_.w.za u.aa.
a=-a-a o Important Upgrades Completed During Forced Outage in 1995
+ Redundant Off-Gas Train o os
" /~5
+ Feedwater Level Control (Transient Conditions) o Deliberate, Error-Free Startup o Strong Unit Operation
+ > 180 Days Continuous Operation
+ > 90% Average Capacity Factor Since Startup October 1995 8
l
IInit2 Outage and Startup n.ma u,au m2maau;%sammu +m o Important Unit 2 Upgrades Completed
+ Will be addressed later MC yNA o Tightly Controlled Startup Process a
+ System checkout (" fast cruise")
pu.-
+ Startup plan
>' ~
+ Just-in-time training; Control Room and.
Plant
+ Monitor watches - crew readiness
+ NSO (reactor operator) plant walkdowns
+ Seniormanagement overviews o Deliberate, Error-Free Startup
Operations Workforce Standards o
s O
to t
+ Standards / Expectations Upgraded
+ Routine Structured Situational Exams
+ Routine Industry Peer Reviews
+ Conservative Decision Making with BWRs o Non-licensed Operators
.+ Standards Training
+ Performance Training and Testing 7 ;Jgls
+ Systems Training-Improved Depth'
+ Conservative Decision Making Seminar l
10 l
OperatorRequalgication Exam Pass Rates April 30 Goal = 95% Pass Rate 100.0%
99.0 %
98.0 %
97.0 %
96.0 %
E % pass this week o
E % to date pass 94.0 %
93.0 %
92.0 %
91.0 %
90.0 %
1 2
3 4
5 6
Week 11
uperations Deparanent LevelIII Events 3_
April 30 Goal = 54 Events per Quarter End of 1996 Goal = <4 Events per Quarter 7-6-
5-4-
3-2-
1-0-
January February March April c.(
<^ b d7 12
Jperations Department Significant Process Nuclear Station Deficiencies Operators 14%
7%
FIELD ACTIVITIES DATR's 9.5%
Non-Licensed Operators 1
Procedure 38%
Adherence 9.5%
MANAGEMENT AND
~
ADMINISTRATION Out-Of-Service f
22%
N 13 p
~
1996 Out-of-Service Events April 30 Goal = 51 Event per Month End of 1996 Goal = 0 Events per Month 10 -
9-8-
7-6-
5-4-
3-2-
('
w 0-Ja n ua ry Feb rua ry M a rc h A p ril l
OOS Event = Proolem founc or createc' in ':le a! ant 14
Operations Self-Assessments
=-
_z
,a 3aaa_wa p J s.t w. t 1 1 - s.
p a o Significant Program Enhancement -
Assessments
+ Self Check Process (STAR)
+ Procedure Revision Process
+ Operations Training
~
+ OOS Process fr me]r ;~g.5 1
a
& q
.,fx cs,
+ Operator Aid Program
+ Outside Departments' Perceptions
+ Communications t'
+ Performance Indicators 15
CD W
I4 OJ A
U1 i
t i
i Jan-96 3
Feb-96
=
Mar-96 E N
Apr-96 E y
B M
w (l
f May-96 a
M Jun-96 8; o$
tn 8
08 T
~
3 Jul-96
$n 1
1 Aug-96
^.
(A Sep-96
[!}
Oct-96 l h;'
Nov-96 lq NI Dec-96
~
d
Days Between Events u-April 30 Goal = 40 Days Between Events e3,
End of 1996 Goal = 40 Days Between Events so l c}=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
30 ;
i za!
1,
)f f/y b)~~l~j
=
o E
_E E
_ _mi v' r Y ein,asinisisisinii 2
e 8
s g
s s
s e
a a
a a
a s
s l
i amm Totais oays Between Events Mean # oays Between Event
+ Station Goal 17
9 Station Exposure History 1996 Exposure Goal = 680 Person-Rem 1996 Exposure YTD = 185 Person-Rem (4-30-96) 3600 3000_
E E
2400-E e
1800-5 g 12m -
5 em_
0-hh0 E
O S
E eeeee e
e e
e e
m e
Year C f..J+1 N
q/k p 18
r'ersonnel Contamination Events Historical Performance h
enfo'r"1996 aso -
oa =
00 1
4 RadioactiveMateriel Control
- a;wm
_ m c x::: _2=2:21 r = m=m m maaa o > 450 Items Identified in 1995 o Multidiscipline Team and Corrective-Actions o Continuing " Sweeps" in Progress
+ Results indicate 95% reduction; several items found are result of activities in prior years a Quarterly " Sweeps" Will Continue
(
20 ll-
c.-- -,., _
-.~g3
,.- m,; c e_; x _ Li c.;.aacaraA:2de w y d eo- % 3x w gc2, g ;;s a g s g eggt s s g w,a,a;,,Al m, 3
Preston D. Swafford DresdenMaintenance Superintendent w
@ S w R r ~ s.
21
6 1996 Dresden Focus
~ rn a _:_::._ m u ar
- ,% m m.g;aggas;&wuaag.uams v w
"Significantly Improve the Materiel Condition ofDresden" aImproving Wor 7c Management 3 hnprovingEngineering Support 3 ReducingRewor7c n
RecentKeyMateriel Condition Accomolishments
=w-n: _-+ --ana-aa-wwawauwa 0 3 of 10 Worst Plant Areas Cleaned (April 30 goal)
+ Unit 3 Reactor Building Equipment Drain Tank Room
+ Unit 3 High Pressure Coolant Injection Room
+ Unit 2/3 Acid-Caustic Area r~' "## Y O Unit 2 Core Shroud Repairs O Unit 2 RWCU Piping and Heat Exchanger Modification Mpg r
23
RecentKeyMateriel Condition Accomplishments (Cont'd)
- u===nm _ m _
- %mmm camar
==am m
l 0 Unit 2 Zinc Addition Modification
/s O Unit 2 Station Blackout Modification
{ Unit 3 in Fall Refuel Outage:i O Unit 2 89-10 Valves (3 to test when HPCI available;l 0 Unit 2 Feedwater Regulating Valve / Control
,e i
24 4
WorkManagementImprovements g,S
,r==2mm _
,_m_ mxr== man _m-2=--w=-
- ( o 12-Week Rolling Schedule
. o Weekly Schedule Adherence Accountability Meetings w
pV o BacklogItems Divided by System and
,g s>
Assigned to First Line Supervisors o Work Week Manager Debrief With Senior
([
Managers d
o Improved LCO Procedure 7
g t 3 en
( C?
U" 0' c,p 25
a
.i t
Non-outage Corrective Maintenance Backilog End 199 G al = 800 taco. -_ _ __ __
1em.
14m April 30 Actua! = 899 1200.
hudTaal
+ God i*
O Preventive Maintenance /
Surveillance Overdue April 30 Goals 0 Overdue or Past Critical End of 1976 Goals = 0 Overdue or Past Critical
- 43) _ _-_ _
4(U--
33)._
3(U--
250 --
)
3 10 --
15)--
1(U --
50--
l 0-1/8/%
1/31/%
2/29/%
3/29/%
4/30/%
7 EM GutheB)/Sunulknus um Ihst Gitial mi + Quthe al/Sunuhus Cml 1
27 1
On-Time Schedule Starts
~'
End f109 G al= 5%
m % Started -+- Goal 28
WorkoffRates
~
- 7ll.: ? h2Gt ', *~* '
r - <
u.
ist Four Months 1996 Avg = Generated = 325 eek pleted = 50/ week 700 -
a Generated O Completons
'p/
g g_
$g o n orrm ri m isiiir 29
l ll i\\lllll{
. R ' f, JF f
',A y
b y,
/,\\ j t'
/.
/N'
)
M 1
1 1
1 0
2 4
6 s
o 2
4 6
8 ir
~
a
~
C
~
t i
t 4
n t
e N
n A
a S
n a
c m
3 E
e c
- n m
5 d
R o
R f
e 1
w 9
w 9
r k
4 6
g
- G p.
o o
r
+
- a l
=
r G
k u
- 5 l
3 E
~~
~
M
~
r 4
~
P>
E" p
C A
~
r-
~
O f
E'
,/
30 1
IndustrialSa ety AccidentRate
.n van
+ve -
2 1993 ISAR Rate = 2.7 1994 ISAR Rate = 2.2
'8-April 30,1996 Goal = 0.8
,s.
3 1996 Goal = 0.5 y, \\
14 2.,
)
.,^
/
i A
/
V VN 08.
p,
(
as.
04.
02.
o 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8-
$ snik,$h &&ob
,k 4
k i
k,$
$ <<@m& o5 $
8 a
s m
z o
m s
s z
o
+12 Atrih Rdiing Average
- Goal 31
Maintenance Training
?I LTRIr m.7 "" w t w g q # _c %;ggs; gage mmaghaA;s;sug;;2gggggaggaringmand a Phase I Fundamentals Training / Testing Completed
+ Fundamental Skills / Worker Qualification
+ Personnel Requiring Remediation a Phase II Upgrade of Ongoing Training
+ Areas of Specialization Determined
+ First Specialization Course - June 1996
+ Benchmarking Against Strong Industry )
'(
Maintenance Training Programs.
- 32
Maintenance Self-Assessment CE Eid22aasa wi=c-x=mn m u muuaumaisig.suausuMaexmam G%M o Completed First Quarterly Self-Assessment on Measurement and Test Equipment (M&TE? and Tool Control o Weekly Maintenance Coaching and Assessment Job Overviews o Management by ngIroi1%
o Maintenance Workforce Standards i
33
i A
)
's'
$/$
w-t VMb k}k
}f QD 4
g 4
y?
Cn *R s.
e v
ti M+ Z, V
Lg Ef I.
%s.
\\$
D en 4
m m
b M
Q d(1 e
h ev4 W
ar%
W 0
v MM h
m, R,
~
t B
1)4 F
a h
M, t*
r
LatentMaterial Condition Inzprovement Project
==wwaaa--=-
wawaaazzzzazrza=zzawamaa
Purpose:
- Identify & Prioritize " Latent" Problems Combined team of Comed, GE, Bechtel &
Duke Industry issues, Vendor Recommendations, System Performance History and Walkd. owns, and Operator Interviews Status:
26 Systems /1 Component (motors) Completed
(
(Met April 30 goal) l
==
Conclusions:==
No Operability Concerns Prioritizing/ Scheduling Many Completed or Underway 35
Summary ofFindings p
Neet4TGhp Mr Preventive Maintenance I
Program 29'/o Predictive Maint./Sy. stem Performance Monitoring 15%
l Equipment Operating Practice 11%
263 issues
.ndustry Experience &
Self-Assessments 10%
l U
l Cause/PlF/ Integrated 10%
l I
Obsolete Equipment iT'./l'.1 [. pii,$, 6%
r: G S.. n,? :e..
Operator Workarounds 5%
Configuration Control /As
- builts 5%
Temp Alterations / Plant Mcds 2%
6
!RQJ 6%
-.,.ou,, h,,p '
Other 1
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%.
30%
36
/
Performance CenteredMaintenance a:se::xa==:=maamma,--mmnammamamumwaua o Goal: Review.a total of14 systems by April 30,1996 and Identify Improvements to Preventive and Predictive Maintenance o Status - Met April 30 Goal Analysis Phase: 30 of 90 systems / components completed Df, Implementation Phase ( 5 of 90 sy' stems / components Mg complet'ed b'
o Fm. ('dmgs t
1 3750 recommendations made to im. prove Preventive y'1
+
gjp*'y Maintenance Program
,)
1
^
65% additions or major revisions (change of scope)
+
+
35% deletions or -minor revisions (change of frequency) l l
37
8 0
U U
o w
Feb-95 l
l O
Mar-95 l
M i
D Apr 95 i
O
._. May 95 I
N Jun-95 l
e j3 Jul 95 M
c ME s
\\5 I
W l-Aug-95 g
i N
l Ser95 j
Q e
a 0:1 95 NW g
e g
Nov-95 l
E]>];l Dec-95 I
E f
e 3
IQ a p' i
o 10 o I Jan-96
$dj Q Bl i O
Feb'96 j
IA O o
Mar-96 o
ME i
Apr-96 I
l i
5 8
8 8
8 8
a 8
k
____.)
ControlRoom Work Requests l-L' L.'-.. ?-. - '
~- - l- !~- YY-
~
April 30 Goal = 5 30 End of 1996 Goals 20 i
(
x l
l l
60 t
l x
a a
e g
c a ^c ru. compi.e.o
,,,,44a.4
_, Toi.i op n w n.
co.i l
39
Unplanned LCO/DATR Days i
.,..,c
,. r; '
_ e.,
Graph Shows Total for Both Units 30.00 - -. _ __
UHF2Xpiif 30 G651 = 5 3--
l 25.00 Unit 3 April 30 Goal = < 3 l
End of 1996 Goa'
}
Unit 20.00 15.00 10.00 l
i 5.00 0.00 l,
s s
=
=
=
=
=
s s
s s
8 s
s h
h k
i k
,k h
i b
b t,
9
,h 4
- 2. ' i k
k 1
7 w
2 s
o O
s 7
z o
a Average # of Unplanned LCO/dK'fR Days Per Week -Average # of Unplanned LCO Days per Week Goal <= 3 LCO/DATR Days Per Week 40
.___._-.____.___.__m_.__________
I Sa ett S1 stem Pei ormance:
HPCI/Isoi!ation Condenser x...u e e:
Unit ~?
April 30 Goals = Meet Industry Average 0.05 r 0.04 i
0.03 0.02 -
3
,b 77 0.01
_/
=
=
=
=
o 5
W 9
9 9
9 8
8 8
8 8
8 4
8 2
y p
t s
G i
4 s
i i
2 Y
0 z
d a
2 2
Unit 3 1
1 hionthly Actual
-e-12 hiontl$ Rolling Avera -
- - -hionthly Goal
-.-..---.---,-_-,-ge 0.05 0.04 0.03 r~
0.02 -
'01 7 0.01 --
A
=
=
=
T
=
=
0 N
9 9
9 9
8 8
8 8
8
'8
?
?
I y
d' i
E i
4 s
t i
i 1
Y z
2 2
[_t i hionthly Actual
--m--12-Afonth Roiiing Average -- - - - hionthly Goal 41
Sa ety System Per ormance:
LPCI/ Shutdown Cooling
+e : gree c m Unit 2 April 30 Goals = Meet Industry Average 0.05 -
i l
0.04 f
0.03 0.02 *
=
=~,
{
0.01 0
?
-=
a S
W 9
9 9
9 8
8 8
8 4
2 Y
A A
d" s
5' 4
s i
k 5
.a z
m 2
2 I "' I
^"'I - - - Ni nthly Goal --=- 12.hionth Rolling Average Y
Unit 3 0.05 r 0.04 -
O.03 7 0.02 --
I l
0.01 =_-. -m b
N.
m_____
O
==u 9
9 9
9 9
9 8
8 8
8 8
8 2
Y 4
d" d'
4 i
i k
1 a
z m
2 2
l[_
1 Monthly Actual -- 3iknthly Goal -a-12-Month Rolling Average 42
a-Sa ety System Per ormance:
EmergencyA/C April 30 Goal = Meet Industry Average 0.07 0.06 -
,,a 4 0 \\;.,/ "
0.05 _
0.04 _
0.03 -
0.02 _
0.01 _
A s-
-c_?.-=C?-
..iN% " -
7 0
,R,o, J ul-95 Sep-95 Nov-95 Jan-%
Afar-96 Alay-%
J ul-96
' Alonthly Actual - - Af onthly Goal ---m--- 12-month Rolling Average i
43 l
I
'l I
l l
ll l(
_ N 1
o 4
6 8
2 o
J n
a 1
n 1
O u
Fe b
ta ge j
M a
3 r
T m
e A
m c
tua A
l p
r pora M
a y
r G
a y
al E A ndp ri A
ol f n Ju 1 o n
9 G l
96o t
a Gl e
o =
al <
r
= 1 J
0 a
ul 7
ti on Au g
s l
i 4
t; f
i 4
o~
il,-
Safety Systent Per ormance Monitoring (V%tMy)
. :.w v..
REACTOR CONTROL ROD STANDBY LIQUID RECIRCULATION D RIVE CONTROL (0200)
(0300)
(1100).
YELLOW YELLOW REACTOR WATER CLEANUP ISO. CONDENSER CORE SPRAY LPCII CCSW (1200)
(1300)
(1400)
(1500)
W HITE W HIT E W HIT E W HIT E PRIM ARY/
SECONDARY HPCI MAIN STEAM I ADS CONTAINMENT (2300)
(3000)
(1600)
WHITE YELLOW W HIT E i
= SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS l
WtilI L l= SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE I
l = fMPROVEMEN'.'NEEDED
= SIGNIFICANT STRENGTH 45
DeparbnentPet ormance Monitoring a
inaicators l
January l
t-coruary l
marcn l
Apni System Performance H sN/As s
YELLOW YELLOW YELLOW Safety System Availability WHITE Unplanned LCOs / DATRs g
Significant Events WHITE System Walkdowns YELLOW Past-Critical Surveillances Operator Workarounds YELLOW WHITE YELLOW p
Control Room Correctives WHITE WHITE NTS item Completion YELLOW YELLOW Budget Adherence YELLOW dRA WHITE YELLOW YELLOW WHITE Business Plan Progress
- N/A; WHITE WHITE System Review Board
'!HITE WHITE WHITE YELLOW ER Backlog
[*
Schedule Adherence
'N/A : -
YELLOW Self Assessment YELLOW YELLOW
= SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS l
N3 3 L l= SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE I
- D*
] = IMPROVEMENT NEEDED GREEN
. SIGNIFICANT STRENGTH 46 1
Engineering TrainingInitiatives CT3W%iHLaaer m q:s. ig1SLCO2bg;;;gggggg;2;;mssgndMffEEEff4 o Phase I
- System Training
- Qualification cards and design certification developed o Phase II - Continuing training and specialization training being planned
}
l 47 1
4 3a D{
i.
in&
V -.
- i. L
==
[ --
\\
t S
M
?
N 4
M Gr3
$8 2
A b
m k
h
^
!!i 9.
N Q
$N
?.
m W
$j N<* Y K
O d
ma a
l?g Ib M
t;,
b t
hi m
b i
rf3 fa s.
M
~_
m W
Is 0,
March 22,1996 LetterIssues
. r=ramassameans:rmemumsaamimeaa o Performance results - are we executing plans and meeting goals? Have areas of weakness been addressed?
o Does our workforce understand and implement our standards? Is it skilled?
~
o Has materiel' condition improved?
o Are we. identifying and correcting l deficiencies? (Focus on system reviews) o Are necessary resources being applied?
o Will the improving trend continue?
i I
l Work orce Standards i
f
"' X T lK % ;ans A c;;gasg57:: T W Z ?Z 2TZjL L TS M E M D Z ESE?d k M *E A S o Two Assessments l
+ Line Management Assessment l
+ Quality Organization Assessment j
o Assessments Covered Industrial Safety,
{
ALARA, Procedure Use/ Adherence, Self-j Verification, Communications, Professionalism 4
i o Results Strong Understanding of Standards
'L "
i w
l
+ Implementation Good in Some Areas; Need for l
Improvement in Others l
o Continuing Action to Improve Standards 1
l 50 i
i f
.m
i L
Per ormance Tar $etAchievement / w i
9 ~, a j1
= ===2 - m. m a = m = m m =maa m m m m uaa-a a
o Corrective Maintenance Backlog < 950 Met 4
l o Operator Workaround Backlog < 30 Met o Control Room Deficiencies < 30 Met a Non-Outage Tem. Alterations < 10 Met iiyV i
o Zero PMs Past Critical Met e
i I
o Zero Surveillances Past Critical Met i
- pr a U2 < 3 LCO/DATR Days / Week Met i
o U3 < 3 LCO/DATR Days / Week Met 1
I 51-
O l
Performance TargetAchievement
)
(Cont'd) l
==mn=====aw==aar====-mme=wwunumaa j
o U2 HPCI/ ISO Condenser Met j g.S o US HPCI/ ISO Condenser Met a U2 LPCI/ Shutdown Cooling Met o U3 LPCI/ Shutdown Cooling M.et a Emergency AC (Dieselsy' Met 1
o < 4 Operations Events Per Quarter Not Met //
q o < 1 Out of Service Events Per Month Not Met 7 l(t.
- ~ ~g4.5 l
52 i
i 0
Per ormance TargetAchievement
)
(Cont'd) i
===au aw~a= nam =nuu=a_m aawnumaaw o Zero Personnel Error LERs Not Met
{
o > 40 Days Between Events Not Met j
o ISAR Rate <.8 Not Met l
o Zero Overdue Corrective Actions Ne r Met o 85% On-Time Work Start Not Met o 95% Licensed Operator Pass Rate Met o < 25 Personnel Contamination Events Met 53
% n [ot 3;Mi. ~l g]
p r r, 3,.c 6,b.
l CLOSING REMARKS
~
i l
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE REPRESENTATIVES OF COMMONWEALTH EDISON FOR BRIEFING THE COMMISSION.
TODAYS PRESENTATION HAS PROVIDED THE COMMISSION WITH
[
A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE PATH YOU ARE FOLLOWING, AND THE STATUS OF THE AREAS WHERE L
COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N IS FOCUSING ITS EFFORTS TO IMPROVE PERF6RMANCE.
i WE RECOGNIZE THAT YOU ARE MAKING PROGRESS.
I CAN i
l NOT OVER STRESS, HOWEVER, THE IMPORTANCE THAT THE i
\\
COMMISSION PLACES ON THE NEED FOR-CONTINUED AND
[
FOCUSSED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION TO ASSURE YOUR IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS ARE_EF'FECTIVE_AND -SUSTAINED-ATw f
l DRESDEN.
IN ADDITION, COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N MUST NOT ONLY DEV0TE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO MAINTAIN l
IMPROVED-PERFORMANCE AT DRESDEN OVER THE LONG TERM BUT MAINTAIN SAFE OPERATION OF THE OTHER NUCLEAR FACILITIES OF THE ' COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N COMPANY.
l
^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~
~ BASED UPON THE COMMISSION'S CONCERNS WITH DRESDEN, i
THE PERFORMANCE OF DRESDEN AND OTHER COMMONWEALTH EDISON NUCLEAR PLANTS tlILL CONTINUE 10 BE MONITORED Eg' 5 o
CLOSELY AND ASSESSED BY THE NRC.
p l
~
TUMMISSIONER R0GERS, D0 YOU HAVE ANY CLOSING i
i i
COMMENTS?
q COMMISSIONER DICUS, DO YOU HAVE ANY CLOSING-COMMENTS?
IF NOT, WE STAND ADJOURNED, '
/
,/
('
I O
t u
ls L'
CLOSING COMMENTS FOR COMMISSION BRIEFING BY
^
COMMONWEALTH EDISON i
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE REPRESENTATIVES OF COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N FOR-BRIEFING THE COMMI3SION.
j TODAYS PRESENTATION HAS PROVIDED THE COMMISSION WITH j
A BETTER UNDERSTANDING 0F THE AREAS WHERE COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N IS FOCUSING.ITS EFFORTS TO l
{
IMPROVE PERFORMANCE.
i COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N_ MANAGEMENT MUST PROVIDE STRONG 1
OVERSIGHT OF PLANT PERFORMANCE AND ENSURE THAT RESOURCES ARE USED TO SEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS THROUGH.T0 THE END.
I CAN NOT STRESS EN0 UGH THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING YOUR FOCUS ON SAFETY.
AS COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N MOVES TO IMPROVE THE ECONOMICS OF'ITS-NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, MANAGEMENT MUST CONTINUE TO ENSURE THAT ADEQUATE RESOURCES ARE PROVIDED TO MAINTAIN AND SAFELY OPERATE YOUR FACILITIES.
SAFETY AND LONG TERM ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE ARE MUTUALLY
)
~
INTERDEPENDENT AND REINFORCING BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH j
TIED TO IMPROVED RELIABILITY.
y,o n Q M-r -
IN CLOSING, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THAT
))
COMMONWEALTH EDISON OPERATES MORE NUCLEAR UNITS THAN
/ANY OTHER UTILITY IN THE COUNTRY AND IF YOU m%
APPROPRIATELY APPLIED THE LESSONS LEARNED FROM YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE YOU COULD BE AN INDUSTRY LEADER.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N TRANSITION TO BECOME AN INDUSTRY LEADER BY FIRST DEMONSTRATING g
OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE AT THE PLANTS YOU OPERATE.
D4 w.t_
' mi y m BASED UPON CURRENT CONCERNS THE PERFORMANCE AT ww&
COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N FACILITIES WILL CONTINUE TO BE St[
CLOSELY MONITORED AND ASSESSED BY THE NRC.
COMMISSI_0NER R0GERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY CLOSING COMMENTS?
IF NOT, WE STAND ADJOURNED.
p.,
a e-2-
J w
.nb*
4 4
_6-san.Gb6mmL sam n
_-m.,
\\.
/
g,c a
ypff/)//$,/)h lb knf&w
<w Ub 1H&os.-W%ka c
N Ldsf /&-zou vASK j%wsm& Qdd&
" Anna
,$.LD lU)
./ &j
$(bW A O vlLu Aair a 4 )?J L AvV#2v',j'/0WR, $ lbv f
b/$$~vsadA h,-1.A,faufusM/df2 W a a5 a n/'s-i 6
na 1'7
a t
.e
.H 4,.
.-.ar..-
.k W8M A4 m'JA.c-,
JS a4.p a--y'a..m4 asa
,ai e
4J_.._$#g4 g _a_ a. dg 4 4 s jMc 4am 4y A,%,4 M A, a.Mnm L JW $_
44b 4 54 W4 an i.gid_2.4su M_AM%44.N-_mm-M4. A, Meh4 e
f
~
4 A'\\
[
. p
,aunww 4 Ad J L s e a a,5j.A a
[
A,o&Ayseat
[
/Juds em.2 A aeg f
e--
k-i 4 $ h v g $ N W &,.
- I
+#g/$8;pptd-h au Ybw tjwt5 fr k w $llAUV f l(&, Y h
7,$0pY j
/
C 4
n A a
- 4,,
'6 S
']
% wmp
~
i,nm a Yg s o s w M A' gau y
18ul d
$ s b i a l,- p A;s$<a/Suj.%d n Q s avs y a 6 v p a u i
ohnss coa 4.
~
+m*
aa.ic
~
j Li L a da2e w / u u k &,,
ac&aww cod V O, & $t,/faj j>&w d2AEL G
i t
\\
W) As l
- A g/ds
-fasua$ dw cban.
g xwA i &c.
_ >&.A ' yM od%yQ
,4nk A
h & yYhwhl' pavsfa b l4e L
lf/
- G a d a t;a
.fd 4
AeAc4
- w ua
/ raw 4 7% s.
s yd mu zkdt
,~e a
cha: /$sdEgnj 294bu Ahk l6Y' x$
U 6n
((
Yb Ju cup;,aw aa~ secuonw 4&u o c-vm us awdad varan /uya zu6 a.%sm,e/u.
Ek'.5 7Icte6c SWhv ev, h wt h g c
C%"+e,
g-e
=
=
?
[
f~
Qh
- L*kW J
e&A l
1 I
W h
.