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:	Ferdas M S NRC Region 1
To:	Barber S, Collins D J, Gray M K, Malone G J, Dan Orr, Passarelli A E, Wingfield T V NRC Region 1
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML060580616 (24)

Text

____ ...--------Mnvirl Vito -PSFU Leadershin Prpqpntqtion on ZANVE kesuits Page 1 1It[M~i- Vito __ -_S(3Ladrhi m nato onsvt Kesilt Paae 13 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 ID Na-v-i-d -'/i-t-o -mgmt ;assessment rollou-t 052004.p-pt I;go I-t1. .... ..- ---- -- -- -= ^ ...... -And L:X Management Assessment Rollout.............--.-....

.. .........

... .. ..... ..- --------.

.... ..... ..... .. .. .. .............-...

--..........

.... .... ---- ------- ..... ..... ...Synergy Survey USA Assessment 1rnntiriV/it

-mamt assessqment milint t 0.92004.rD~t Page zI IN- -t ---=m.. n r t 4 t -i A Improvement Model Synergy Assessment US5A Assessment IAT Assessment Issues from the Assessments Focus Areas Next Steps 2 I .. ----Iq I pqvidivito

-mart ;assessment rollout 052OU4.P~t Pacle -j in .= I=II i I_ _I i I I 2/03 -Survey by Synergy 2104 -USA Assessment 1 p5104 -IAT Assessment Ie I u 1IN 3

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

I David'Vito

-mamt assessment rollout 052004.p)D Paqe 51 Dai-t -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-II David'Vito

-mgmt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Pagle 61 F David Vito -mgmtassessmentrollout 052004.ppt Paqe 61 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

.0 Dav~id'V-ito

-- mgamt""assessment rollout 052004.P~rt Paae 7 D Vito : momt assessment rollout 052004 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 8I.-v t=ra El 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 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 Page 1 0 11 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

iVitoW-mmt assessment rollout 052004.t_.<.e._ .... --__- --_ ...........

as-- I .........................

^ ,_ ._ J 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 E David Vito -marnt assessment rollout 052004.D~t Paae 14 L D 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 V David Vito -marnt assessment rollout 052004.mpt Page 15 1 David Vito -mqmt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Paae 151 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 -.I David Vito -mamt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Page 17 1 h D Vito -- .as n .O Paae--7 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 -n gmt assessment rolout O 5 2 0 04.ppt Page 18 l 1 ~ ' I *1 i,'t',.18 David Vito -mgmt assessment rolout 052004.pptP Page 19 l1 U o C, n lived Coflc Is 1o 19 I DaV-id Vito Smart assessment rollout 052004-not Paae 20 d D~,id Vito -mamt assessmen milut05 0L. Paae 20 ~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 l r_ >n L _. --.kDavid Vito -mnmt assessment rollout U:ZUU4.Dot Page 21 I-@l w 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 Hawze ZZ 1 lwir Vm mam assessment-----

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

Housekeeping 22

.11 David Vito -marnt assessment rollout 052004.ppt Page 231lad- as n r t e hL I May 21 May 21 May 21 May 24 May 25 May 25 (TBD)May 25 (TBD)May 25 (TBD)June 8 June 15 June 16 June 16 June 21 (TBD)Employee Rollouts Letter from Roy Anderson Assessment Documents on SCWE Web Page Hub Miller Visit / Interviews Operational Excellence Review (OER)Reports Posted on NRC Web Site on ADAMS Cover Statement for Press Local Officials Communications Bi-Weekly Manager's Communication Meeting Board of Directors Meeting at Nuclear All-Hands Meetings NRC Public Meeting Submit NRC Commitment Letter 23