LR-N05-0536, PSEG Quarterly Report for Improving SCWE

PSEG Quarterly Report for Improving SCWE

ML053180430
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	10/31/2005
From:	Levis W Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	Collins S Region 1 Administrator
References
LR-N05-0536
Download: ML053180430 (37)

Text

,

William Levis PSEC Nuclear LLC Senior Vice President andCN0 -.

PO Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 tel 856 339 1100 fax 856 339 1104 OCT 3 12005 L R-N 0 5-0 536 Mr. Samuel Collins Regional Administrator United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406-1 41 5 PSEG METRICS FOR IMPROVING THE WORK ENVIRONMENT SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS QUARTERLY REPORT DOCKET NOS. 50-272,50-311 AND 50-354

Dear Mr. Collins:

This letter provides a copy of the PSEG Nuclear (PSEG) Safety Conscious Work Environment (SCWE) metrics for the third quarter 2005. PSEG put these metrics in place to objectively measure the effectiveness of the SCWE improvements at Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations. PSEG conducted an analysis of each metric and decided whether and to what extent the results warrant additional actions.

The metric of SCWE Management Training Attendance is no longer provided since the training was reported as complete in the submittal of the first quarter 2005 metrics. Also, the Synergy Survey Results Comparisons metric was reported in the second quarter 2005 and will not be resubmitted until the completion of the next employee survey, which is planned for 2006.

PSEGs SCWE action plans continue to provide an effective means to improve the work environment, with several significant action plan changes described on that supercede previous actions taken. These changes were identified in a recent self-assessment that examined the stations progress in improving SCWE.

PSEG considered the results of the recent self-assessment as well as the SCWE metrics in an overall evaluation of its progress toward sustained performance against the pillars of a healthy SCWE with the following results:

OCT 3 1 2005 Mr. Samuel Collins L R-N05-0536 2

Pillar I

Willingness to Raise Concerns The metric monitoring this pillar is Total Notifications Generated.

Overall, personnel will raise nuclear safety concerns and their willingness to do so has improved, in part due to a greater confidence that identified problems will be responded to and corrected. The recent self-assessment of SCWE revealed that employees who are more willing to raise concerns outnumber those who are less willing by nearly seven to one.

The indicator for total notifications shows that site personnel continue to identify problems and write notifications at a high rate. There has been a 25 percent increase in the average number of notifications from 2004 to 2005.

Personnel are knowledgeable of the multiple avenues available to raise concerns (e.g., Corrective Action Program, management, NRC). Focused improvement efforts are underway in several work groups that have not shown the improvement generally observed across the workforce.

PSEG has also continued a number of visible steps to reinforce the expectations for problem identification and reporting. For example, prompt communication of emerging issues is a daily focus during the Salem Unit 1 refueling outage currently in progress; a paired field observation program is in place for managers and their direct reports to jointly observe work activities to ensure standards and expectations for proper behaviors, including problem identification, are being reinforced; and a Good Catch program is used for recognition of those who identify a problem that may not have otherwise been discovered.

Pillar 2: Effective Problem Resolution The metrics monitoring this pillar are Online Corrective and Elective Maintenance Backlogs, Corrective Action Problem Resolution, Condition Report Activities Overdue, Open Condition Report Evaluations with Due Date Extensions, Repeat Maintenance Issues, Operational Challenges, Unplanned Shutdown Limiting Condition of Operation (LCO) Entries, Unplanned Non-Shutdown Limiting Condition of Operation (LCO) Entries, and Safety System Unavailability (i.e., Emergency Diesel Generators, Auxiliary Feedwater System, Chemical Volume Control and Safety Injection System, High Pressure Injection and Reactor Core Isolation Cooling Systems, and Residual Heat Removal System).

95-4933

OCT 3 1 2005 Mr. Samuel Collins LR-NO50536 3

Metrics and equipment performance show that problem resolution has improved, although some latent balance-of-plant equipment reliability issues still exist that reveal weaknesses in historical resolution of problems. The recent self-assessment indicated that the workforce has broadly recognized the overall improvements. Those perceiving better corrective actions are being implemented outnumber those seeing poorer corrective actions by nearly fourteen to one.

During the third quarter, corrective and elective maintenance backlog reduction continued, evaluations in the Corrective Action Program were completed in a timely manner, and corrective action quality continued to be good. A deliberate focus on management and workforce behaviors that foster effective problem resolution has resulted in metrics that reflect the positive outcomes of these efforts, including a low frequency of repeat maintenance and generally low safety system unavailability.

Most safety systems performance indicators are currently at annual top quartile performance levels, though performance in prior years is causing the three-year rolling average goal not to be met in some instances. For those systems where goals were not met, additional actions have been identified to improve their performance and achieve the established goal.

Equipment reliability issues during the quarter resulted in some operational challenges and caused unplanned LCO entries. Several ongoing initiatives address this area for improvement, including a review of internal and external operating experience for events leading to plant shutdowns and derates, single point vulnerabilities of selected plant systems, and latent equipment issues that may challenge plant operations.

There were also changes to previously reported data for several metrics.

Accounting errors were discovered on the metrics for Salem Unit 1 Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability and Salem Unit 2 Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability. The corrected values are reflected in the attached metrics and there was no material impact on the overall assessment of these metrics. This issue has been captured in the Corrective Action Program.

Pillar 3: Alternate Mechanisms to Raise Concerns The metric monitoring this pillar is Employee Concerns Program - Concerns Confident ia I i t y/A no n y m it y Request.

95-4933

OCT 3 1 2005 Mr. Samuel Collins LR-N05-0536 4

The Employee Concerns Program received an increased number of contacts in the third quarter. The consistent use by PSEG employees and contractors demonstrate their confidence in the program as an effective, alternative means to raise issues. The recent self-assessment noted some individuals were concerned with the confidentiality of the process. Efforts to educate the workforce on the comprehensive measures in place to maintain confidentiality are in progress.

Pillar 4: DetectionlPrevention of Retaliation & Chilling Effect The metrics monitoring this pillar is Executive Review Board (ERB) Action Approvals.

Like previous quarters, the ERB reviews found that proposed personnel actions (e.g., personnel movements, discipline) did not have retaliation or chilling effect implications, which demonstrates strong performance in this pillar. The interview results of the recent SCWE self-assessment reinforced the conclusions of the ERB that management actions do not contain elements of retaliation or chill the work environment.

In summary, performance in each pillar has shown improvement. PSEG continues to focus on effective problem resolution (i.e., pillar 2) for the largest impact on SCWE. Through active, open and frequent communications with personnel at all levels in the organization, implementation of the improved operating standards and behaviors, and strong performance in the Work Management and Corrective Action Programs, substantial and sustainable progress in improving the work environment will be demonstrated.

PSEG will continue to monitor its progress and report quarterly to the NRC. If you have any questions, please contact Darin Benyak, Director, Regulatory Assurance at 856-339-1 740.

Sincerely, William Levis Attachments 95-4933

Mr. Samuel Collins LR-N05-0536 C

5 US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Mr. S. Bailey, Project Manager Salem & Hope Creek U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop 08B1 Washington, DC 20555-0001 USNRC Senior Resident Inspector - HC (X24)

USNRC Senior Resident Inspector - Salem (X24)

Mr. K. Tosch, Manager IV Bureau of Nuclear Engineering PO Box 415 Trenton, NJ 08625 95-4933

Mr. Samuel Collins LR-N05-0536 Significant Changes to the PSEG SCWE Action Plans In a letter dated June 25, 2004, PSEG summarized the action plans to improve the work environment at Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations. The plans focused on the three key areas of Corrective Action Program, Work Management Program, and SCWE as the basis for long-term improvement in the work environment. NRCs review of the action plans was subsequently documented in a letter dated July 30, 2004 that included PSEGs commitment to provide a brief description of any significant changes to the action plan. A recent self-assessment of the work environment action plans identified the following significant changes from the PSEG letter dated June 25, 2004:

Oriainal Action: Implement a Safety Conscious Work Environment organization with capabilities to diagnose, intervene in, and assist the line organization with reso I u ti on of concerns.

Revised Action: Designate a SCWE Team Leader to assist the line organization with resolution of concerns, including diagnosis and intervention capabilities.

Current Status: The intent of the SCWE organization (i.e., diagnose, intervene, and assist) has been met as well as its fundamental principle of maximizing line ownership of SCWE issues. However, a recent self-assessment identified that some aspects of the charters initially established as guidance for the SCWE organization were not effectively implemented (e.g., projected staffing of the organization, routine assessments). The SCWE Team Leader has been in place and champions the diagnosis, intervention, and assistance relating to SCWE issues. The need for the SCWE Team Leaders assistance will continue to decrease over time as the line organization matures and effectively resolves their SCWE-related concerns without this assistance.

Oriainal Action: Develop and implement an issues management program.

Revised Action: Develop and implement policies and processes that include guidance for resolving SCWE-related issues.

Current Status: The Executive Protocol Group (EPG) supplanted the People Team. One of the processes associated with the People Team, the issue management program, was similarly replaced by the EPG. A recent self-assessment identified that the charter initially established for issue management was not effectively implemented. The existing SCWE policy, Executive Review 1

95-4933

Mr. Samuel Collins LR-N 05-0536 Board charter, and Executive Protocol Group procedure describe sufficient methods for issue management and resolution of SCWE-related issues without the need for a separate issues management program.

Oriqinal Action: Refocus the Corrective Action Review Board to include Corrective Action Program oversight to improve the oversight of the overall program health.

Revised Action: Provide appropriate oversight of the Corrective Action Program and the overall program health.

Current Status: The Corrective Action Review Board functions and responsibilities are being integrated into the Management Screening Committee (MSC), which is made up of senior managers who provide a collegial challenge of the issues and ensure actions are sufficient to resolve the identified problems.

Each stations MSC reviews and approves new notifications, completed evaluations, and effectiveness reviews as well as review coming due and overdue actions. Additionally, the MSCs periodically perform check and adjust meetings to ensure that the expectations and standards are being met.

The monitoring of overall program health has also been integrated into the routine activities of the station management teams (e.g., Operational Excellence Review meetings, Nuclear Review Boards, and Plan of the Day meetings).

2 95-4933

Updated Monthly EXECUTIVE REVIEW BOARD (ERB) ACTION APPROVALS r r -

Chart Owner I

Goal:

No Adverse Trend L

Safety Conscious Work Environment Manager Executtve Rewew Board (ERE) rewews proposed personnel actions t o ensure no retaliation or chilling effect implications 2 0 zoo6 2o 1 3 5,

3 0 -

K -

rn M -

cc 1 5 -

v) m 0

m w

10 -

5 -

15 i 14 2

2 IThe Executive Review Board IERBl was established to ensure that no adverse action is taken or 2004 18 16 1 1 6 I

percewed to b e taken against site personnel for raising nuclear safety issues This Board reviews significant proposed discipline promotions. transfers and terminations for PSEG employees and supplemental (contract) personnel yl I i o. RepOrtinQldata entry starts In April 0

m E

w 5 -

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oc1 1 ITotal Cases DAnuroved Cases1

.~

only one proposed action. the success rate for the quarter was 98% (97%-YTO) any 10CFR50 7 or chilling effect issues (personnel mwements andlor discipline) on the basis of objective criteria and mth consideration t o work environment impact. irrespecttve of any protected actwty on the palt of employees BrtLpLls No actions required The ObJeCtion was not-related to The success rate is indicative of management praposng act\\ons Nov Dec Jan Fsb I Mar 27 27 16 16 12 12 A p r May Jun I Jul 27 27 II mTotal Cases oApproved Cases Oct Nov Dec sakn+?eM G F N F H A T I N G STATIONS 2

The number of Employee Concerns Program concerns filed anonymously/confidentially versus total number of concerns per month Chart does not include NRC 30-day requests EMPLOYEEE CONCERNS PROGRAM -

CONCERNS Updated Monthly CON F I DENT I AL I TYIANONY M ITY REQUEST

-202006 342006 Chart Owner Goal:

No Adveisc Trend Employee Concerns Program Manager I I IThis metric shows the total number of concerns brought to the Employee Concerns Manager This IS an 60 50 E 40 6 "

6 30

& 5 20 z

3 0 0

51 2003 2004 0 Contidentialty Requosled Anonymous I Total hklmber 01 Concerns lakernate means to have issues addressed outside of line management Analvsts Three of thm anonymous concerns were received in the recently installed ECP drop boxRs

.ndustrial safety tdsiies. whxh wern addreswd using the corrective action process the nurnbrr of concerns F C P received in the third qJarter increase was primarily due to the upcorn ng announcemcnt of the new organization scheduled in September announcement of the new organization the nurnhers returned to normal in Septemner a concern in August tnat ECP separated intn fwe concerns There were no adverse trends ThRre were focir anonymous roncerns submittRd to ECP in the third quarler Two nf those roncerns weie There was a signifrant increase ir ThE Afler the In andition. one individual raisec The anticipated increase in August was event driven

&on%

No action5 required 2 0 I I

18 18 -

16 -

14 -

1 2,

1 1 10 -

8 -

6 -

8 I

Monthly Total of Concerns 0

Monthly Total Confidentiality Requested monthly Total of Ope Concerns 3

Total notifications generated on a monthly basis Updated Monthly TOTAL NOTIFICATIONS GENERATED 202006 302006 Chart Owner Corrective Action Program Manager Goal:

No Adverse Trend I

Site personnel write a notification in the Corrective Action Program (CAP) to identify an issue that needs attention This metric illustrates the total number of notifications written each month by site personnel Monitoring ensures that the volume of issues is consistent wth expected trends, based on past performance as well as industry perspectlve 0

3,500 g

3,000 9

2.500 c-c" 3,500 m

1.000 500 prewous quarter's results a'

D Analpis There is no adverse trend noted for this quarter The notifications generated for the third quarter of 2005 were 5,093 as compared to 4,771 for the third quarter of 2004 A seasonal effect (vacations) has impacted the rate of notifications generated, as reflected in a comparison wlth the t

m2 2003 A c A c No actions required 2004 3.500 3.250 3.000 2,750 2.500 c"

2,250 E

2.OOO L

6 1,750 m

1,500

+

1.250 1.W 750 500 z

0 3.096 I

7 Monthly Actual 2.404 2.508 2,133 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AU9 SeP 0 ct Nov Dec

&&+e&&

G F N F R A T I N G S T A T I O N S 4

I-c 7

/

C

'T -

1 I

I 0

a N

I 0

0 a

0 0

0 r

0 uado ieioi 0

a

ONLINE ELECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG Updated Monthly Chart Owner Salem Maintenance Manager and Hope Creek Maintenance Manager 2004 2.750 I The number of open online elective maintenance work items 1.200 by year end M I 202006 302006 Goal:

/by the end of 2005 anrw<lr Thr n v p r A I F W FI harkirm WAC rerlNgn.Pd by 221 items lri the th rd quarter arld it is expected tu makl

\\ u tic Orders 8 NOW 0 5 2 Orders a NOW -

531 Orders a Now

<Plan I

... _ -. _ -.. I. - - _ - _ _ _... -

the goal by the end of the year Action 5' Continue efforts to focus on EL backlog, increase workdown rate, and monitor upcoming work weeks 2,750 2. m 2.250 2.om 1.750 c

K l.m 2

1.250 c

1.m 750 5m KO 0

0 Good Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct N ov Dec h

6

Updated Monthly CORRECTIVE ACTION PROBLEM RESOLUTION Chart Owner Corrective Action Program Manager Anaksis The Correctwe Action Closure Board acceptance rate results were withln goal at an average of 98 3% for the quarter lndivldual notificatlons were written by tne departments that failed to meet clnsure reqilirements and the cnrrpctwe actions were reopened to corrpct deficiencies noted Actions The Correctwe Action Program Excellence Plan continues to provide focus in this area The percent of correctm action closures determined to be acceptable by Correctwe Action Closure Board renew. based on the problem resolution criterla The performance indicator IS a monthly value 96%

m La 202006 302005 Goal:

I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Ocl Nov Dec 2004 100%,

95%-9,%-9,%-95%-~%,

,ooo I

Goal -Actual

-Number Revlewed Site personnel write a notification in the Corrective Action Program (CAP) to identtfy an issue that need$

attention This metric tracks the quality of the corrective actions that resulted wlth a goal of greater thar or equal to 96% Closure Board acceptance rate, meaning the correct actions resulted from the notification Items that are not accepted by the Board are not closed until the issue is reworked and the Board approves i

99%

I 1,000 0

95 Yo c i i i 1:

u Good

-Actual

-e Number Renewed I

-Goal 96% 1 Jan Feb Mar May Jun Jul Au Q Sep Oct N ov Dec

< S E N E R A T I N G <TATIONS 7

Corrective Action Program Manager 2004 1

10%

By.

4%

2%

w.

-11 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

-Monthly Overdue -?Qoal I

Goal:

5%

SRe personnel write a notification in our Correctwe Action Program (CAP) to identify an issue that needs attention This metric tracks the timeliness of our review and corrective actions by measuring the percentage overdue, w t h a goal of less than or equal to 5%

Analysis The average percent per month for the quarter was 4% versus a goal of 5% The monthly goal was met for each month in the period In September. 1,152 Condition Report actMties were completed of which 44 items (or 3 8%) were completed after the due date Actions No actions required 5%

4%

4%

4%

4 Yo 3 9 0 2%

2%

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug SeP Oct Nov Dec

-Monthly Overdue

--Goal h

%,@creek Gf NERATING STATIONS 8

The number of due date extensions approved tor open Nuclear Condition Report evaluations Updated Monthly OPEN CONDITION REPORT EVALUATIONS WITH DUE DATE EXTENSIONS Chart Owner 202006 302006 n,

Goal:

No Adverse Trend Corrective Action Program Manager I

Analvsis There is no adverse trend Evaluations extended beyond their due dates continue to improve 57 evaluations were extended in the third quarter as compared to 69 extended in the second quarter and 82 extended in the first quarter Significant improvement was made in needs attenbon This metric looks at the timeliness of r m e w and corrective acbons by tracking the number that have a due date extension. which is allowed by the process By tracking those that are extended, an improvement trend in Overall timeliness is expected 2004 m o

~

140 E 120 90 -

BO -

Jan Feb Mar mr May Jun JUI Aug Sep oct NOV Dec 1

September when evaluation extensions were reduced to 13 for the month I

Monmty Total I

1 Actions No actions required SabQQXm G E N F R A T I N G STATIONS 9

SALEM UNIT I REPEAT MAINTENANCE ISSUES Salem Maintenance Manager Goal:

No Adver8e Trend The number of repeat maintenance issues identified on safety related equipment Updated Monthly Chart Owner

-I I

202005 302005 IMonrniy Actual I

Data recoding complete.

_1 m4 7

This metric monitors the number of issues that were not fixed correctly the first time on safe@,-related equipment Items that have been fixed and need to be reworked wthin twelve months are tracked This metric is to ensure a reduction as the corrective action program improves 4

4 3

3 2

0 0

c -" -

35 -

E 2:

E 2 0 -

3 15 -

E 30 -

5 -

0 -

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Au 9 SeP Oct NW Dec Analvsis knowledge based with no commonalities identified between Units 1 and 2 u

n s

The equipment issues are being addressed through the Corrective Action Program and the knowledgc based issue is being addressed for training opportunities There is no adverse trend Of the seven identified issues. six were equipment failures and one was Rsportingldala entry starts in July Month1 Actual G E N E R A l l N G STATION5 10

No Adver8e Trend Salem Maintenance Manager Goal:

equipment Items that have been fixed and need to be reworked wlthin twelve months are tracked This metric is to ensure a reduction as the corrective action program improves 1

~

2004 27--

2 50 -

I 45 -

40 -

6 35 -

I 2 30 -

b 25 -

5 20 -

~ r t n g /,. n. : : l Y...... ; 1 ; ; ; n t w ~

15 -

10 -

n 5 -

0 - I Anaksis There is no adverse trend Of the fwe identified issues. three were equipment failures and two were knowledge based w t h no commonalities identified between Units 1 and 2 A

m The equipment based issues are being addressed through the Correctwe Action Program and the knowledge based issues are being addressed for training opportunities Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JUI Aug Sap oct Nov Dec MonthVActual Data recodlng complete.

20 10 16 2 14 12 L?

?

In -

c m

I z 10 c

r " 0 m

QI 2

6 4

2 0

tx 6

3 3

2 2

Jan Feb Mar 4'

May Jun Jul

&I Sep oct Nov Dec Sakn+pem G f NERATIND STATIONS 11

HOPE CREEK REPEAT MAINTENANCE ISSUES Hope Creek Maintenance Manager The number of repeat maintenance issues identified on safety related equipment Updated M o n t h l y Goal:

I Chart Owner

~~

No Adver8e Trend E l l 2Q2006 3Q2006 2004 This metric monitors the n u m b e r of issues that were n o t fixed correctly the first t i m e on safeh/-rel%ted equipment I t e m s that h a v e b e e n fixed a n d n e e d to b e reworked wthm twelve m o n t h s are tracked This metric is t o e n s u r e a reduction as the corrective action program i m p r o v e s I

E 45 2 40 p 35 Reportingldata entry starts in J U W E 15 5

10 D

Jan Feb Mar Apr Yay Jun JuI Aug Sep Oct NOY Dec Monthly Actual 1

I Data recocilng complete.

There IS no adverse trend A n In depth review of repeat maintenance issues began in the first quarter 20% and wilt continue going fomard to ensure coding accuracy The Troubleshooting Dynamic Learning A c t ~ t y (Om) completed in the second quarter has improved performance and problem identification is more timely and accurate identified as repeal in the third quarter of Z O 5 There were 10 safety related items A total offwe of those items were attributed to recorder failures

&W The items identified lhe third quarter are being addressed ~n the Corrective Action and Correctwe Maintenance Programs and actions are being implemented as per the schedule Reliability of this equipment will be enhanced through the Plant Health Committee and will be evaluated In the Hope Creek training process Additional actlons are being scheduled to evaluate continued failures of aged recorders 14 13 9

5 1

Jan Feb Mar Jun Jul Au g oct Nov Dec Monthly Actual h

saqpqww GFNFRATING S l A l I O N S 12

The number of plant operational issues that warrant implementation of the Operational Challenges Response Team

'I I Updated Monthly 202006 302005 Gad.

SALEM UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES Chart Owner Salem Plant Manager A procedure was established to allow 0,- __

emergent issues These are called 'Operational Challenges ' This metric measures the number of times each month operators engage this assistance The goal is to minimize the challenges to the operating crews By tracking and reviewng the challenges, common causes and potential trends can be investigated I c'lvL'L 2004 r---

0 1 I

Jan Feb Mar m r May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct NOV Dec 1

IMOnthlvTotal I

Analvss There IS no adverse trend There were seven operational challenges initiated in the third quarter Overall station average stands at approximately two operatlonal challenge responses per month 1-No actions requlred I M o n t h l y Total E l G F N F R A T I N G S T A T I O N ?

13

Updated Monthly SALEM UNIT 2 OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES (Includes Unlt 2, Unlt 3, and Common)

Chart Owner Salem Plant Manager 2004

=

(

I The number of plant operational ~ssues that warrant implementation of the Operational Challenges Response Team No Adverse Trend 202006 302006 Goal:

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AuQ Sep Oct Nov Dec A-nalm There 5 nil adverse trerid Tnere were foul oprrational Lhal rnqes iriitiated in the third quarter Ovpiall statim1 average stdnrk at appruxiinatcly two 1ip~rat~on.4 r hallenge re\\pnnses per rnonth Actlo=

No act onb rpqirirea emergent issues These are called 'Operational Challenges ' This metric measures the number of times each month operators engage this assistance The goal is to minimize the challenges to the operating crews By tracking and rewewng the challenges. common causes and potential trends can be investigated Jan Feb Mar Jun Jul Oct Nov Dec I

Monthly Total h

v CFN:RI\\TlNCi STATIONS

Hope Creek Plant Manager 2004 Goal:

No Adverso Trend Repottlnp I data entw stads In April 0

0

-7 0

0 0

0 1

Jan Feb Mar Appr May Jun Jui AUQ S s p Oct NOV Dec I

crews By tracking and rewewng the challenges, common causes and potential trends can be investigated A n a h i s Overall Station average stands at approximately two operational challenge responses per month There is no adverse trend There were four operational challenges inltiated in the third quarter Actions No actions required Jan Feb Mar J""

Jul VCl NO"

-Monthly Told iI SakmQIlOpeaeek GENERATING STATIONS 15

SALEM UNIT 1 UNPLANNED SHUTDOWN LIMITING CONDITION OF OPERATION (LCO)

ENTRIES Salem System Engineering Manager Goal:

2 por Month I

The number of Unplanned Shutdown Technical Specification Limiting Conditions of Operation (LCOs) entered during the month Updated Monthly 2004 1

-0 s 4 -

c 3

I 6

4 2

0 I

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JUI w g Sep Oct NOV Dec

-Monthly Shutdown LCOS

--Monthly Shutdown LCOs Qoal luclear plants are operated under a fundamental set of rules from the Nuclear Regulatory Cornmission YRC) called Technical Specifications Certain rules require operators to enter a shutdown LCO.

neaning the equipment must be fixed in a defined period of time, or unit shutdown is required This ietric measures the unplanned entries made at Salem Unit 1, compared to the expected number at top erforming nuclear units (less than or equal to Zlmonth)

Therr were nine Unplanned ShJtdown I COs this quarter Thr goal of two per month was not

?et

,cbons Evaldations of the IndMdUal failures were conducted Tne causes of these LCOs varies A iajor cuntributor to the unplanned LCOs is the performance of thr Containment Fan Cooler Unit5 C t C U ) Currently, Design tngincering is conducting a study which will determine the feasibility of a fixcc owrat? rnodification to.mprciva CFCU rrliability 8

u7

a.

c -

5 6 0

t:

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JuI Au g SWP O C I Nov Dec 0-Good

-Monthly Shutdown LCOs

--Monthly Shutdown LCOs Goal

__ _ _ _ ~

~-

CFNFRATING S l A l I O N S 16

SALEM UNIT 1 UNPLANNED NON-SHUTDOWN LIMITING CONDITION OF OPERATION (LCO)

ENTRIES The number of Unplanned Non-Shutdown Technical Specification Limiting Conditions of Operation (LCOs) entered during the month Updated Monthly Jan Feb Chart Owner Salem System Engineering Manager

'1 6 per Month E l l 2 ~ 2 0 0 s 302006 (30.1:

Mar AP r 2004

_ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

20 --

2 18 -

5 16 -

I=

14 -

0 12 -

Y 70 -

pl 8 -

15 D

E - -------

-e_.--/-

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep OCt Nov Dec 13 Monthly Non - Shutdown L COS

-f-Monlhly Non - Shutdown LCOs Goal Jun Jul (NRC) c h e d Technical Specifications Certain rules require operators to enter a ion-shutdown LCO.

meaning the equipment must be fixed in a defined period of time. or you are required to take compensatoty measures This metric measures the unplanned entries made at Salem Unit 1, compared to the expected number at top performing nuclear units (less than or equal to Wmonth)

Analysis For the third quarter, there were a total of ten Unplanned Non-Shutdown LCOs The monthly goal was met

&tc No actions required SeP Oct N w Dec a

Good

-Monthly Non -

Shutdown LCOs 7-Monlhly Non - Shutdown LCOs Goal GENFRATING STATIONS 17

SALEM UNIT 2 UNPLANNED SHUTDOWN LIMITING CONDITION OF OPERATION (LCO)

ENTRIES Updated Monthly Chart Owner Salem System Engineering Manager 1

Goal:

2 per Month The number of Unplanned Shutdown Technical Speclfication Limiting Conditions of Operation (LCOs) entered during the month 202006 302006 I

INuclear plants are operated under a fundamental set of rules from the Nuclear Regulatory Commissiur 2004

• r--

Jan Feb Mar A p r May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

-Monthly Shutdown LCOs

-+Monthb Shutdown LCOS Goal (NRC) called Technical Specifications meaning the equipment must he fixed in a defined period of time. or unit shutdown is required This metric measures the unplanned entries made at Salem Unit 2. compared to the expected number at to performing nuclear units (less than or equal to 2imonth)

Certain rules require operators to enter a shutdown LCO.

Analysis: There were nine Unplanned Shutdown LCOs this quarter The goal of two per month was nc met Actions: Evaluations of the indwidual failures were conducted The causes of these LCOs vanes A major contributor to the unplanned LCOs IS the performance of the Containment Fan Cooler Units (CFCU) Currently. Design Engineering is conducting a study which will determlne the feasibility of a fixed flowrate modification to improve CFCU reliability 3= f 1 Jan Fsb Mar n p r May Jun Jul o c t N ov Dec 0-Good

-Monthly Shutdown LCOS

-Y-Monthly Shutdown LCOs Goal

• ,m(xeek GFNFRATING STATIONS 18

The number of Unplanned Non Shuldown Technical Specificailon Limltlng Condltlons of Operation (LCOs) entered during the month SALEM UNIT 2 UNPLANNED NON-SHUTDOWN LIMITING CONDITION OF OPERATION (LCO) 6 Der Month Updated Monthly ENTRIES Chart Owner 202006 302006

~

Salem System Engineering Manager Goal:

r --

Nuclear plants are operated under a fundamental set of rules from the Nuclear Regulatory Commlsslo (NRC) called Technlcal Speclficatlons Certaln rules requlre operators to enter a non-shutdown LCO.

meaning the equipment must be fixed in a defined perlod of time. or you are requlred to take compensatory measures This metric measures the unplanned entrles made at Salem Unlt 2.

compared to the expected number at top performmg nuclear units (less than or equal to Ghonth) 2004 qo I 6

1 goal was met Actions No actlons are requlred Jan Feb Mar API May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oci Nov Dec D

Monthly Non - Shutdown LCOs LCOs Qoal month^

Non - Shutdown I

T Mar

&r Jan Feb a

Good Jun SeP o c t Nov Dec Monlhly Shutdown LCOs Goal

~~~

h q~Mgf?m?k GENERATING S l A T l O N S 19

HOPE CREEK UNPLANNED SHUTDOWN LIMITING CONDITION OF OPERATION (LCO)

ENTRIES The number of Unplanned Shutdown Technical Specification Limiting Conditions of Operation (LCOs) entered during the month Updated Monthly 10 e

cn a,

L -

UJ 6 0

Y -

a, g

4 D

5

?

0 Chart Owner Hope Creek System Engineering Manager i

2 per Month Ell 2Q2006 342005 Goal:

Jan Feb Mar a p r May Jun Jul Au 9 Sep Oct Nov Dwc 40 -

E -

E w

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct N O V Dec

-Monthly Shutdown LCOs

--n-Monlhh/

ShutdOWIl LCOs Goal 0

Good Nuclear plants are operated under a fundamental set of rules from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) called Technical Specifications Certain rules require operators to enter a shutdown LCO. meaning the equipment must be fixed in a defined period of time. or unit shutdown is required This metric measures the unplanned entries made at Hope Creek, compared to the expected number at top performins nuclear units (less than or equal to ?/month)

Anahsis There were eight Unplanned Shutdown LCOs this quarter The goal of two per month was not met Actions An extent of condition evaluation of the eight shutdown LCO for this quarter was performed The conclusion is that there are no common causes identified among each indrvldual equipment failures For the one failure that resulted in a unit shutdown, a failed drywell vacuum breaker, a cause determination has been completed and identified corrective actions to prevent reoccurrence have been completed

-Monthly Shutdown 1

LCOs

--Monthly Shutdown LCOs Goal G F N F R A T I N G S T A I I O N S 20

HOPE CREEK UNPLANNED NON-SHUTDOWN LIMITING CONDITION OF OPERATION (LCO)

ENTRIES Hope Creek System Engineering Manager I

Goal:

6 per Month The number of Unplanned Non-Shutdown Technical Specification Limiting Conditions of Operation (LCOs) entered during the month Updated Monthly n

n Chart Owner Ell 24-302006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May JUn Jul Aug Sep Oct NOV Dec 5

3 1

Monthly Non Shutdom LCOs

--Monthly NOn-ShutdoWn LCOs Goal 4 - -

3 3

Nuclear plants are operated under a fundamental set of rules from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) called Technical Specifications Certain rules require operators to enter a non shutdown LCO.

meaning the equipment must be fixed in a defined period of time. or you are required to take compensatory measures This metric measures the unplanned entries made at Hope Creek, compared to the expected number at top performing nuclear units (less than or equal to Blmonth)

Analvsis 1 he goal was met mlh eight Unplanned NowShutdown LCOs for the third quarter 2005 verus a goal of six per month ( 1 8 total)

Actions No actions required 4 -

_ _ ~

~

6 4

2 -

4 r - __

3 2

2 O T Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

-Monthly Non.

Shutdown LCOs

--Monthly Non - Shutdown LCOs Goal Sakmppecreak GfNFRAlINCi S I A T I O N S 21

The sum of the planned and unplanned hours that the Emergency Diesel Generators were not available Updated Monthly SALEM UNIT 1 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY Chart Owner 202005 302005 21.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> per month Salem System Engineering Manager Goal:

• -month rolling average)

]Nuclear Dlants are desianed wth a series of redundant safetv setems and equipment This allows equipment to be 79 26 7

2002 2003 2004

~~

removed from seMce f& maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the Emergency Diesels are out of sewce. compared against industty top quartle The total represents the sum of the unavailable hours of the three Emergency Diesel Generators at Salem Unit 1 This is a long term trend of our performance Anatysis The goal of no more than 21 9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> has not yet been achieved The Salem Unit 1 Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) 36-month rolling average unavailability increased from 24 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> at the end of the second quarter to 28 0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> The primary contributors to unplanned availability for the Unit 1 EDG's were the 1B EDG relay failure and the 1 C EDG cylinder head failure in August A

Failed components have been replaced and the failure analyses has been completed forthe 16 and 1C EDG component failures The increase in August unavailability has moved the "goal met by" date from the second 75 70 m -

0 Good 60 -

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug SeP Oct N ov Dec GFNFRATING STATIONS 55 -I I

Actual

-=Month Rolling Actual 22

Updated Monthtq SALEM UNIT 2 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY I

Chart Owner Salem System Engineering Manager The sum ofthe planned and unplanned hours that the Emergency Diesel Generators were not available 202006 302005 Goal:

21.9 hour8 per month (36month rolling average)

I INJclear plants are deSlQned wth a series of redmdant safety SvstemS and eauloment This a DWS eauioment to be removed from serwce for maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the Emergency Diesels are out of SeMce. compared against industry top quartile The total represents the sum of the unavailable hours of the three Emergency Diesel Generators at Salem Unit 2 This is a long-term trend of our performance 29 c m 7

6 Analysis The goal was met Salem Unit 2 Emergency Diesel Generator unavailability was 14 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> versus a goa of no more than 21 9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> on a 36-month rolling average Actions No actions required 2002 2003 2004 Jan Feb Mar Jun Jut Sep Oct NW Dec w

Good

-Monthly Actual

-%Month Rolling Actual

--.--36 Month Industry Top Quartile w

CFNERATING STATIONS 23

-I Updated Monthly HOPE CREEK EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY Chart Owner 2c The sum ofthe p l a n i i d x d unplanned hours that the Emergency Diesel Generators were not available Hope Creek System Engineering Manager Goal:

29.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per month Wmonth rolllrq awnage) 126 2002 2003 2004

~1 removed from seMce for maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the Emergency Diesels are out of seMce, compared against industry top quartile The total represents the sum of the unavailable hours of the four Emergency Diesel Generators at Hope Creek This is a long-term trend of our performance Analvsis The three year rolling average goal was not met but continues to improve The system remains on target to meet the one year top quartile performance The unavailability increase in September 2005 was due to planned actions to improve Emergency Diesel Generator reliability Acllons Additional preventive maintenance work is planned for the first quarter 2006 which supports achieving the goal by June 2006 a m - - -

5 0 4

(-Monthly Actug

-%Month Rolling Actual Month Industry Top Quariile a

Good Jan Feb Mar A p r May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DlC O F N i R A T l N G SIATIONS 24

Updated Monthly SALEM UNIT 1 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM U N AVAlLABl LlTY Chart Owner Salem System Engineering Manager The sum of the planned and unplanned hours that the Auxiliary Feedwater Systems were not available 2Q2006 3Q2006 I

Goal:

7.4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> per month

@&month tolling average) 125 f

5 0

z cp 9

a 0

109 2002 2003 2004 Nuclear plants are designed mth a series of redundant safety systems and equipment This allows equipment to bE removed from seMce for maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the Salem Unit 1 Auxiliary Feedwater System IS out of seiwce compared against industry top quarttle The total represents the sum of the three Auxiliary Feedwater Systems on Salem Unit 1 This is a long-term trend of our performance Analvsis 1 hP three year roil ng average qoal was not met and remained ronstant throuqhout the thirn quarter 1 he system remains on target to meet the one year top quartile performance e

Corrective actions implemented relattve to scheduling maintenance during outages will increase system availability Continuing at the current level of performance, Salem Unt 1 Auxiliary Feedwater unavailabilitymll be at goal by January 2007 This change is an improvement from the second quarter 2005 'goal met by' projection of October 2007 1

a Good Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec

-Monthly Actual

- - 36 Month Rolling Actual 1-36 Month Industry Ouartile sakwgMqx?w G F N F R A T I N O STATIONS 25

The sum of lhe planned and unplanned hours that the Auxiliary Feedwater Systems were not available Updated Monthly SALEM UNIT 2 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM U N AVAl LAB1 L ITY 202005 Sa2006 Chart Owner 0,

13 I 15 -

m 12 3

z i

m m -

5 10 -

5 -

0 7 2002 1003 2004 Salem System Engineering Manager Analysis The three year rolling average was not met but continues to improve The system remains on target to meet the one year top quartile performance Actlong Corrective actions implemented relative to scheduling maintenance during outages wll increase system availability Continuing at the current level of performance, Unit 2 Auxiliary Feedwater unavailabilitywll be at goal by February2006 Goal:

7.4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> per month

(%month rolling average)

I INJciear olants are desianed wth a series of redundant safetv systems and equioment lhis allows equioment to be removed from seMce for maintenance This metric monltors the amount of time the Salem Unit 2 Auxiliary Feedwater System is out of service compared against industry top quartile The total represents the sum of the three Auxiliary Feedwater Systems on Salem Unit 2 This IS a long-term trend of our performance 97 I

11 3 10 1

."--..I-__

. - - - - m - - - -. - - -

2 1

+i Jan Feb Mar APr MW Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec D

Monthly Actual 36Month Rolling Actual

--36 Month Industry Quartile

• Hopeaeak 1,FNERATINO STATIONS 26

The sum of the planned and unplanned hours that the Residual Heat Removal Systems were not available Updated Monthly HOPE CREEK RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM U NAVAlLABl LlTY 202006 30-Chart Owner Hope Creek System Engineering Manager Goal:

9.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per month (36month tolllng average)

Nuclear plants are designed wth a series of redundant safety systems and equipment This allows equipment to be removed from service for maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the Hope Creek Residual Heat Removal Systems are out of SeMce compared against Industry top quartile The total represents the sum of both Residual Heat Removal trains at Hope Creek This IS a long-term trend of our I

Derformance 3

i Analysis The three year rolling average continues to improve The RHR System unavailability goal of no more than 9 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> is met The system remalns on target to meet the one year top quartile performance The 24 25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br /> of unavailability in September were for planned maintenance on B RHR A

m No actions required a

r 24 -

22 -

20 -

18 -

ri Jan Feb Mar npr May Jun Jul Aug oct N ov Dec a

Good

-Monthly Actual

-36Month Rolling Actual 36 Industry Month TOP Quarlile 27

The sum ofthe planned and unplanned hours that the Chemical Volume Control and Safety Injection Systems were not available Updated Monthly SALEM UNIT 1 CHEMICAL VOLUME CONTROL AND SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM UNAVAILABILITY 202005 302006 Chart Owner 40-g 30 30 Salem System Engineering Manager Nuclear plants are designed wth a senes of redundant safety systems and equipment This allows equipment to be removed from seMce for maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the Salem Unit 1 Chemical Volume Control and Safety Injection Systems are out of seMce compared against indusby top quartile The total represents the sum of the four trains on Salem Unit 1 This is a longterm trend of our performance God:

7.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> per month (S-monlh iolllng avwege)

AnalVsis The three year rolling average goal is not met but continues to improve The system remains on target to meet the one year top quartile performance Actions Improvements in system components' health have steadily improved system 36month roll ng unavailabilty Continuing at the current level of performance this metric wll be at goal by June 2007 This is an improvement over the second quarter projection of September 2007 z

2002 2003 2001 I

I 60 55 50 45 15 10 5

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Oct N DV Dec n

Good

-Monthly Actual

- I

-36 Month Rolling Actual

--36 Industry Month Top I

Quaride 1

s a m p p l s e e k G E N E R A T I N G STATIONS 28

The sum ofthe planned and unplanned hours that the Chemical Volume Control and Safety Injection Systems were not available SALEM UNIT 2 CHEMICAL VOLUME CONTROL AND Updated Monthty SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM UNAVAILABILITY 242006 302006 Chan Owner Salem System Engineering Manager Goal:

7.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> per month (36-month rolling aveirge) 35 x

17 2002 2003 2004 removed from sewice for maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the Chemical Volume Control and Safety Injection Systems are out of seMce compared against industry top quartile The total represents the sum of the four trains on Salem Unit 2 This IS a long-term trend of our performance Analvs s The three year rnllinq averaqe qoal WAS not met bR rontmues to improve 1 he svstem rema ns on target to meet the one year top quartile performance In May. unavailability was incurred due to required maintenance to correct check-valve back-leakage and oil cooler fouling due to river grass intrusion A

m Recent improvements are expected to continue to lower system unavailability Continuing at the current level of performance. this metric wll be at goal by January 2007 This is an improvement over the second quarter projection of September 2007 Jan Feb Mar 4 r May Jun Jul Aug SeP Oct N ov Dee 11 Good

-Monthly Actual

- rn -%Month Rolling Actual

---36 Monih Industry To1 Quartile

• H q o e M GFNERATING STATIONS 29

HOPE CREEK HIGH PRESSURE INJECTION AND UNAVAILABILITY REACTOR CORE ISOLATION COOLING SYSTEM Hope Creek System Engineering Manager The sum of the planned and unplanned hours that the High Pressure Injection and Reactor Core Isolation Cooling Systems were not available Updated Monthly Goal:

Chart Owner 14.6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> prr month

@-month rolling average) 202006 302006 19 2002 2003 2004 Nuclear plants are designed with a series of redundant safety systems and equipment This allows equipment to be removed from sewice for maintenance This metric monitors the amount of time the High Pressure Injection and Reactor Core lsolatlon Cooling Systems are out of seMce compared against industry top quanlle The total represen the sum of both systems at Hope Creek This is a long-term trend of our performance Analvsis The three year rolling average goal has been met and continues to improve The system remains on target meet the one year top quartile performance The 43 9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> accumulated in August 2005 were for scheduled RClC maintenance. and the 17 1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> in September 2005were due to a combination of planned ( 1 1 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />) and unplannt (5 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />) maintenance on the High Pressure Coolant lnjechon system Acbons No actions required a

-Monthly Actual

-%Month Rolling Actual Month Industry Tor Ouarlile Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AUQ Sep oct Nov Dec h

30