ML062220297

E-Mail from Cobey to Screnci, Issuance of the Salem and Hope Creek Work Environment Letter

ML062220297
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	07/30/2004
From:	Cobey E Reactor Projects Branch 3
To:	Bores R, Combs T, Diane Screnci - No Known Affiliation, Office of Public Affairs
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML062220297 (7)

Text

ugeneUey-ss e or.ne a-ope. uereeK vvorK _nvrronmenleter lagei From: Eugene Cobey To: Diane Screnci; Robert Bores; Thomas Combs Date: Fri, Jul 30, 2004 11:41 AM

Subject:

Issuance of the Salem and Hope Creek Work Environment Letter Ladies and Gentlemen, At approximately 11:00 AM, Hub Miller signed the letter to PSEG regarding the work environment at Salem and Hope Creek. It is attached.

The communication plan that we are implementing, which was previously forwarded, is also attached.

Thank you for your assistance.

Eugene W. Cobey, Chief Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects (610) 337-5171 CC: A. Randolph Blough; Chris Miller; Daniel Collins; Daniel Holody; Daniel Orr; David Vito; Ernest Wilson; George Malone; James Clifford; Karl Farrar; Lisamarie Jarriel; Marc Ferdas; Mel Gray; Neil Sheehan; Rosemary Hogan; Scott Barber; Theodore Wingfield Information in this record was deleted inaccordance with the Freedom of Information Act, exempti0n --

FOIAr 9,5 V-

p.GW}00 .TMP . ........... .. vage iq I

A*

Mail Envelope Properties (410A6C3F.2F5:16:35038)

Subject:

Issuance of the Salem and Hope Creek Work Environment Letter Creation Date: Fri, Jul 30, 2004 11:41 AM From: Eugene Cobey Created By: EWC@nrc.gov Recipients Action Date & Time kpl-po.KPDO Delivered 07/30 11:42 AM ARB CC (A. Randolph Blough) Opened 07/30 12:38 PM DJH CC (Daniel Holody) Opened 07/30 11:45 AM DJV CC (David Vito) Opened 07/30 1:08 PM DPS (Diane Screnci) Opened 07/30 11:42 AM Deleted 08/27 10:07 AM EPW CC (Ernest Wilson) Opened 07/30 1:05 PM Deleted 07/30 1:16 PM Emptied 07/30 1:17 PM Issuance of the Salem and Hope Creek Work Environment Letter GSB CC (Scott Barber) Opened 07/30 3:48 PM KLF CC (Karl Farrar) Opened 07/30 11:54 AM MXG3 CC (Mel Gray) Opened 07/30 11:52 AM NAS CC (Neil Sheehan) Opened 07/30 12:24 PM RJB (Robert Bores) Opened 07/30 12:48 PM Deleted 07/30 3:52 PM Emptied 08/07 1:05 AM Issuance of the Salem and Hope Creek Work Environment Letter TVW CC (Theodore Wingfield) Opened 07/30 11:42 AM owf4_po.OWFN_DO Delivered 07/30 11:42 AM DXC1 CC (Daniel Collins) Opened 08/02 8:15 AM JWC CC (James Clifford) Opened 08/02 9:22 AM LIU CC (Lisamarie Jarriel) Opened 07/30 5:43 PM Deleted 07/30 5:52 PM owf5_po.OWFNDO Delivered 07/30 11:42 AM CGM CC (Chris Miller) Opened 08/02 9:36 AM TRC (Thomas Combs) Opened 07/30 12:04 PM Replied 07/30 12:45 PM Deleted 07/30 12:45 PM Emptied 07/30 5:21 PM Issuance of the Salem and Hope Creek Work Environment Letter

c:\Aternp\UýYUUU1-. I M.-' t-aqe z A'

twf2_po.TWFN_DO Delivered 07130 11:42 AM RTH CC (Rosemary Hogan) Opened 07/30 11:47 AM nrc.gov kpl-po.KPDO Delivered 07/30 11:42 AM GJM2 CC (George Malone) Opened 08/02 7:23 AM JDO CC (Daniel Onr) Opened 07/30 11:43 AM Deleted 08/09 2:02 PM Undeleted 08/10 2:46 PM MSF2 CC (Marc Ferdas) Opened 08/02 7:18 AM Post Office Delivered Route kpl-po.KPDO 07/30 11:42 AM owf4_po.OWFNDO 07/30 11:42 AM owf5_po.OWFN_DO 07/30 11:42 AM twf2_po.TWFN_DO 07/30 11:42 AM kpl-po.KPDO 07/30 11:42 AM nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1274 Friday, July 30, 2004 11:41 AM Salem-HC SCWE final letter R10.wpd 113612 Friday, July 30,2004 11:24 AM Comm Plan for SCWE Final Assess ltr.wpd 14063 Friday, July 30, 2004 11:40 AM Options Auto Delete: No Expiration Date: None Notify Recipients: No Priority: Standard Reply Requested: No Return Notification: None Concealed

Subject:

No Security: Standard To Be Delivered: Immediate Status Tracking: All Information

He.B 1IEG UNITED STATES 0 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I 475 ALLENDALE ROAD KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415 July 30, 2004 Mr. E. J. Ferland Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer Public Service Enterprise Group 80 Park Plaza P.O. Box 570 Newark, New Jersey 07101

SUBJECT:

Work Environment at the Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations

Dear Mr. Ferland:

In late 2003, we initiated a special review at the Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations (Stations) to assess the environment for raising and addressing safety issues. We undertook this special review in light of information received in various allegations and NRC inspections over the past few years, as well as our annual and mid-cycle performance reviews in 2003 which identified a substantive cross-cutting issue in the problem identification and resolution area. As part of our special review, we conducted in-depth interviews, between October 2003 and June 2004, of over 60 current and former Salem/Hope Creek employees, from various levels of the organization up to and including nuclear executives. Our review also considered our inspection and assessment record over the past several years, as well as allegations involving the Stations. Throughout our review, a panel of NRC managers, technical staff, program support staff, and investigators was periodically convened to evaluate the information obtained. On January 28, 2004, we transmitted interim results to you. We have now completed our review and our results are provided herein. Even though this letter provides the results of our review of the work environment, the NRC staff will continue to review certain discrete issues or events to determine whether violations of regulatory requirements occurred, beyond those already identified in the NRC reports and correspondence.

Our review has validated the interim results provided in our January 28 letter. We have not identified any serious safety violations. Nonetheless, we have found numerous indications of weaknesses in corrective actions and management efforts to establish an environment where employees are consistently willing to raise safety concerns. Weaknesses in leadership and management approaches have led to a perception among some staff and managers that the companyfhas emphasized production to the point that negatively impacts handling of emergent equipment issues and associated operational decision making. Management has not been consistent in its support of Station staff identifying concerns and providing alternate views. We found examples of unresolved conflict and poor communication between management and staff, as well as underlying staff and management frustration with poor equipment reliability.

The equipment issues stemmed, in part, from weaknesses in implementation of Station processes, such as work management and corrective action.

Although the plants have continued to operate safely, and at this point, some of the examples are somewhat dated, continued management attention and action are needed to realize

Public Service Enterprise Group 2 sustainable improvement from the efforts initiated by you and your staff. This need was demonstrated by your own assessments, the findings of which are consistent our review. The PSEG assessments provided to the NRC in a letter with the results of dated May 21, 2004, as well as at a public meeting on June 16, 2004, include: (1) a survey conducted by Synergy Corporation in December 2003 to, in part, characterize the Station's attitude and culture; (2) an onsite safety culture assessment conducted by the Utility Service Alliance involving reviews and observations by industry peers; and (3) an examination (USA) in March 2004, of the work environment conducted by an Independent Assessment Team (IAT) between February and April 2004. The IAT examination, which included interviews of 190 current employees as well as analysis of specific events, was conducted in response and former findings of the NRC review. to the interim These PSEG assessments found that, while no issues or events have risk and staff would raise significant nuclear safety concerns, problemsput the plant or public at in exist. Synergy concluded that site staff were concerned with longstanding the work environment and recurring equipment problems, and perceived equipment condition to be worsening IAT concluded that some in management and the workforce exhibited as of late 2003. The behaviors appeared to place greater emphasis on production and schedule considerations that, at least, conservative decision making, and tolerated degraded equipment conditions than and non-adherence. The IAT concluded that some site staff perceive longstanding procedural not being fixed because the corporate organization had not provided necessary problems are IAT concluded that some in management became involved in decisions funding. The more appropriately the responsibility of licensed operators and the Operations Department, communicated took actions that had a chilling effect on certain employees. Both USA poorly, and and IAT Concluded that repetitive events indicate some weaknesses in the Station's process for learning from industry operating experience. USA concluded that senior management has not adequately demonstrated support for the Quality Assurance (QA) function. Both some self assessments have been ineffective. The IAT concluded that, USA and IAT concluded although the Employee Concerns Program has requisite elements, a significant portion of the viable path for raising concerns. Finally, as you indicated during the staff does not view it as a June 16 public meeting and in your May 21 letter, addressing corrective action and work management be key to making improvements in the work environment. weaknesses will As noted above, in response to these assessments, your staff developed improve the work environment, and described that plan at the June 16, an action plan to well as in the PSEG letter, dated June 25, 2004. We have reviewed 2004 public meeting, as it appears that it will address the key findings of both the NRC and PSEGthe PSEG action plan and assessments.

We recognize that you made a number of management changes in 2003, and have taken steps to realign management responsibilities in an attempt to better support Salem and Hope Creek. You also initiated steps to improve implementation the separate activities of of action program. The IAT report indicated that, although PSEG management your corrective had not yet regained the trust and confidence of operations personnel affected management team is beginning to address underlying issues. The USA by plant events, the current report noted that senior management has recently been in the plant more, has begun to recognize individuals for making conservative decisions, and has an improved relationship with the workforce. However, much work needs to be done to implement the action plan in a way that improvements to the work environment at the Stations. We expect that will effect sustainable you will closely monitor

Public Service Enterprise Group 3 implementation of the action plans, frequently evaluate progress towards achieving intended outcomes, and adjust your plans and efforts accordingly.

The PSEG June 25 letter also provided several commitments, including quarterly submittal to the NRC of a set of metrics for measuring work environment improvements, conduct of periodic cultural assessments for the next several years, and a meeting with the NRC during the second quarter of 2005. Also, following our review of your letter, and during a telephone conversation between Mr. Randy Blough, NRC Region I, and Mr. Chris Bakken, PSEG, on July 27, 2004, you committed to take the following additional actions:

1. Meet with the NRC in late 2004 to discuss your overall progress in improving the work environment. In addition, you will also cover the following topics: (a) role and function of QA; (b) procedure adherence and other elements of human performance; and (c) quality of engineering products particularly as they relate to evaluation of degraded equipment and associated operational decision making. Subsequent meetings, including the meeting in early 2005 to which you had already committed, will continue periodically until PSEG has made substantial, sustainable progress in improving the work environment.

2. Include in your quarterly submittals a brief description of any significant changes to your action plan.

3. At a point when you believe you have made substantial progress in addressing work environment, corrective action, and work management issues at the Stations, obtain a peer assessment to evaluate the effectiveness of your efforts and provide the results to NRC.

We will continue to closely monitor PSEG performance and your efforts to improve the work environment. Specific plans for inspections and related oversight activities will be provided in our Reactor Oversight Program Mid-Cycle Assessment letter to be issued in several weeks.

Prior correspondence pertaining to the work environment at the Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations can be found in the NRC's document system (ADAMS) using accession number ML040610856. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from ADAMS which is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

Sincerely, IRN Hubert J. Miller Regional Administrator Docket Nos. 50-272; 50-311; 50-354 License Nos. DPR-70; DPR-75; NPF-57

Public Service Enterprise Group 4 cc:

A. C. Bakken, President and Chief Nuclear Officer M. Brothers, Vice President - Site Operations J. T. Carlin, Vice President Nuclear Assessment D. F. Garchow, Vice President, Engineering and Technical Support W. F. Sperry, Director Business Support S. Mannon, Manager - Nuclear Safety and Licensing J. A. Hutton, Hope Creek Plant Manager C. J. Fricker, Salem Plant Manager R. Kankus, Joint Owner Affairs J. J. Keenan, Esquire M.Wetterhahn, Esquire Consumer Advocate, Office of Consumer Advocate F. Pompper, Chief of Police and Emergency Management Coordinator J. Lipoti Ph.D., Assistant Director of Radiation Programs, State of New Jersey H. Otto, Ph.D., DNREC Division of Water Resources, State of Delaware N. Cohen, Coordinator - Unplug Salem Campaign W. Costanzo, Technical Advisor - Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch E. Zobian, Coordinator - Jersey Shore Anti Nuclear Alliance