ML060580616

E-mail from M. Ferdas of USNRC to Various, Regarding PSEG Leadership Presentation on SCWE Results

ML060580616
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	05/24/2004
From:	Marc Ferdas NRC Region 1
To:	Barber S, Dan Collins, Mel Gray, Malone G, Dan Orr, Passarelli A, Ted Wingfield NRC Region 1
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML060580616 (24)

Text

____ . . . - - - - - -- -

Mnvirl Vito - PSFU Leadershin Prpqpntqtion on ZANVE kesuits

[M~i- Vito __ - _S(3Ladrhi m nato onsvt Kesilt Page 1 Paae 13 1It From: Marc Ferdas To: Anne Passarelli; Daniel Collins; Daniel Orr; George Malone; Mel Gray; Scott Barber; Theodore Wingfield Date: 5/24/04 7:16AM

Subject:

PSEG Leadership Presentation on SCWE Results Attached you will find the presentation being used by PSEG management to roll-out the results of their SCWE assessments.

On Friday, PSEG started to conduct group sessions w/ all levels of the organization. These meetings will continue over the next several days as the roll-out continues.

The presentation is honest and open, and provides an accurate description of the assessment results. It paints a picture that improvement is needed and Salem/Hope Creek performance is bottom quartile. The presentation also provides a list of the top 5 items PSEG will go after over the next several years to improve performance at the site. The five areas are: SCWE, Corrective Action, Work Management, Roles

& Responsibilities of Supervision at all Levels, Facilities/Housekeeping.

The last page of the presentation provides a time line describing PSEG's plans going forward in rolling out this information. They are looking to have a press release once the information hits ADAMs and available to the public. We may need to coordinate w/ them on this.

-Marc S. Ferdas Resident Inspector - Hope Creek CC: A. Randolph Blough; Brian Holian; Daniel Holody; David Vito; Hubert J. Miller; James Wiggins; Richard CrIenjak; Wayne Lanning W/0A

t1. . .....- ---------

ID I;go-'/i-t-o - mgmt ;assessment rollou-t 052004.p-pt Na-v-i-d = ^ ...... - And I-L

X Management ...

Assessment.........

Rollout Synergy Survey USA Assessment

1rnntiriV/it IN- - t

- mamt assessqment milint t 0.92004.rD~t

- - n r

-=m.. t 4 t Page

- zI i A Improvement Model Synergy Assessment US5A Assessment IAT Assessment Issues from the Assessments Focus Areas Next Steps 2

I .. - --- Iq I pqvidivito in

-mart ;assessment rollout 052OU4.P~t

.= Pacle -jI=

I MMI i_ II _

I i I I 2104 - Survey by Synergy 2/03

- USA Assessment 1 p5104 - IAT Assessment Ie I u 1IN 3

Page4 David Vito -m mt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Synergy Survey PSECG Nuclear Assessment Results

MMMOMMMMM David'Vito assessment rollout 052004.p)D Paqe 51 I

Dai-t - mamt

- matassmn olut020.o ae5 m1N Plant appears to be in a degraded condition due to long-standing and recurring problems Situation appears to be worsening Contributors:

• Work management program ineffectiveness

• Corrective action program timeliness and ineffectiveness

• Communications ineffectiveness

• Perceived lack of commitment 5

El,- - .. - - - =- n-r-IIDavid'Vito - mgmt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Pagle 61 Paqe 61 FDavid Vito mgmtassessmentrollout 052004.ppt L

Nuclear Safety Values, 3.54 Good 11h %

Behaviors, Practices Safety Conscious Work 4.31 Very Good to 11h %

Environment Excellent Employee Concerns Program 3.41 Adequate to Good 16h %

CAP program effectiveness ratings particularly low Confidence in employee concerns program needs improvement Workload appears to have an impact on our ability to resolve concerns Senior leadership commitment to resolve issues is not where it needs to be - "walking the talk" 6

.0Dav~id'V-ito --mgamt""assessment rollout 052004.P~rt Paae 7 D Vito momt assessment rollout 052004 Paae7I Areas with lowest ratings

• Effectiveness of work management process

• General communications

• Change management

• Performance recognition

• Performance appraisal 7

I David'Vito - mamt assessment rollout 052004.ppt _Page El8I

. - v t=ra A.

Composite - LMS Behaviors / Practices 3.32 Adequate to Good 33%

Leadership Behaviors / Practices 3.19 Adequate 11 %

Business Management Behaviors / Practices 3.18 Adequate 11 %

Personnel Management Behaviors / Practices 3.51 Good 44 %

Areas with lowest ratings

• Confidence in management

• Management of resources

• Management of systems and processes

• Management of change

• Ineffectiveness of leadership to provide clear direction 8

David Vito-mqmt assessment rollout 052004.pt Page 9 Al USA Assessment Results PSEG Nuclear Assessment Results

.Diavid'V i- 3 assessment rollout0-52004.oPt Page 10 11 Overall - NO STRENGTHS Ratings given on a scale of I to 5 1 = Needs much improvement 2 = Needs some improvement 3 = Competent 4 = Strength 5 = Exceptional 10

. I David Vito - mant -assessment rollout 052004.vot Pae 11 I aa -

2.119 Plant Control 2.33 Equipment Reliability 2.40 Corrective Action Program 2.46 Monitoring / Trending 2.48 Work Management Process 2.60 Resource / Schedule 2.61 Management Involvement 2.61 Problem Identification - Questioning Attitude 2.;'0 Staff Capability 2.84 Safety Over Production 2.85 Oversight Capability 2.96 Operating Experience 11

-_ ........... as-- I ......................... ^ ,_ . _ J

iVitoW-mmt assessment rollout 052004.t

_.<.e._ ....

Pagne 12 Independent Assessment Team - IAT i PSEG Nuclear Assessment Results

David Vi -mt assessment rollout 052004.t Page 131 Reviewed SCWE implications

• NRC's inspection record

• Corporate / site interface

• Events involving operational decision making 13

EDavid Vito - marnt assessment rollout 052004.D~t Paae 14 LD Vito m ss - t-0 .

Reviewed 20 Hope Creek & 28 Salem reports Conclusions - record reflects failure to

• Consistently translate engineering information into work documents

• Consistently take prompt and effective corrective action

• Adequately identify and properly classify procedural violations 14

VDavid Vito - marnt assessment rollout 052004.mpt Page Paae 15 1511 David Vito mqmt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Conclusions

• Perceived pressure from corporate to place production over conservative decision making

• Roles and responsibilities in the areas of HR, labor relations, budget, and financial planning are not clear

• Employees perceive the incentive compensation process places a greater emphasis on production than on conservative decision-making 15

. I David Vito - mamt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Paae 161 a V.asm_...ae No events in the report involved reactor operations putting either the plant or public at risk 14 events identified sent mixed message to workforce regarding raising and addressing issues Events demonstrate some in management and the w orkforce:

• Place greater emphasis on production than conservative decision making

• Tolerate degraded equipment conditions

• Tolerate procedural non-adherence 16

- w-

. hI David Vito - mamt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Page 17 1 Paae--7 D Vito-- n .as . O Some management personnel

• Do not clearly communicate standards or the rationale behind decisions

• Take actions or fail to take actions, causing a chilling effect on the willingness of certain employees to raise concerns

• Become involved in decisions more appropriately the responsibility of operations 17

• FDavid Vito -ngmt assessment rolout O52004.ppt Page 18 l 1 ~ ' I *1 i,'t',.

18

David Vito - mgmt assessment rolout 052004.pptP Page 19 l1 U o C, n livedCoflc Is1o 19

I DaV-id D~,id Vito Smart Vito - assessmen rollout mamt assessment milut05052004-not 0L. ~ Paae 20 Paae 20 d u Or'

• Reactivity Management Work Management Corrective Action Program Safety Conscious Work Environment Employee Concerns Program Rewards / Recognizing Behaviors Eng. Work Management / Eng. Rigor / Design Control Long standing equipment reliability Facilities (Housekeeping I Material Condition)

Role / Effectiveness of Supervision at all levels Operations Department doesn't trust Mgmt.

Communication (decision making and "Why's")

No accountability for not following processes 20

lr_ _. - -

Page 21

>n L

. kDavid Vito - mnmt assessment rollout U:ZUU4.Dot I-

@lw Production takes precedence over safety iLack of individual accountability for outcomes 111SToo much turnover in Management K. Reluctance to identify non safety issues t~1;$1 Don't have a Strategic Plan for workforce of future HR related topics 02 Relationship as opposed to a process driven culture 0 Tolerance for low standards Contractor oversight and control Corporate / Site interface 24 lLack of visible Human Perf. Improvement Strategy 25 Perception that we don't have adequate resources Ineffective use of "Change Management" Attitude toward QA 21

=== - -- ---

I David Vito - marnt assessment milout 05Z004.D~t 1lwir Vm mam assessment----- rollou Ob-

- U4 i-aa ZZa Hawze SCWE Corrective Action Work Management U IIEIRoles and Responsibilities of IA' _Supervision at all levels Facilities/

Housekeeping 22

rlm

. 11David Vito - marnt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Page 231l ad- as n r t e hL I May 21 Employee Rollouts May 21 Letter from Roy Anderson May 21 Assessment Documents on SCWE Web Page May 24 Hub Miller Visit / Interviews May 25 Operational Excellence Review (OER)

May 25 (TBD) Reports Posted on NRC Web Site on ADAMS May 25 (TBD) Cover Statement for Press May 25 (TBD) Local Officials Communications June 8 Bi-Weekly Manager's Communication Meeting June 15 Board of Directors Meeting at Nuclear June 16 All-Hands Meetings June 16 NRC Public Meeting June 21 (TBD) Submit NRC Commitment Letter 23