Page 1
Evaluation Improvement InitiativeA New Evaluation Approach
0616 CMBG Discussion on Revised Evaluation Approach.PPT
Institute of Nuclear PowerOperations
Suite 1042 700 Galleria ParkwayAtlanta, GA 30339
DAVID M. FARR ManagerConfiguration Management [email protected]
Page 2
RROP - A “Risk Based Approach”
• NRC’s Mission: To protect the health and safety of the public.– Desired end states:
• Minimize core damage frequency• Avoid a large, early radioactive release
– Manage risk through ensuring the health of these cornerstones:• Initiating events• Mitigating system performance• Containment and fission barrier performance• Emergency Preparedness• Security• Cross cutting issues:
– Human performance– Safety conscience work environment
Page 3
Shouldn’t INPO be “Risk Informed?”
What is INPO’s “risk model?” (What is it that INPO is charged with avoiding?)
– A significant operational event such that the continued viability of the unit is challenged or one that challenges the ongoing operation of other units in the industry.
– The undetected degradation of a major component or equipment such that safety margins are significantly compromised.
– A unplanned, long-duration shutdown requiring substantial upgrades to station programs, processes and/or people to recover the unit.
– Operation outside of plant design and safety margins.– Withdrawal of accreditation of one or more training programs.– Long-term poor performance of a station, as measured by INPO
assessments and the WANO performance indicators.
Page 4
INPO’s Mission – Excellence!
• INPO is not about “risk avoidance” or even “risk management.”
• INPO is about plants “striving for operational excellence.”
• ERG input:– INPO should modify the risk model (the avoidance end
states) to focus on desired outcomes.
Page 6
Why look at Configuration Management?
Plant safety degraded, long-term shutdowns caused by problems with:
Inadequate operating and design margins Problems with design basis validity Deficiencies in plant status and configuration
control Poor design product quality Inadequate oversight of engineering programs
Page 7
CM.1
Plant equipment configuration is rigorously
maintained and performance is consistent with design and
licensing requirements
CM.2
Roles and responsibilities for establishing and maintaining licensing and design basis are
understood and applied consistently
OR.5
Station leadership establishes a culture that
thoughtfully manages safety, design, &
operational marginsCM.4
Processes that are used to control plant design bases are
defined and validated
CM.3
Day-to-day activities are conducted in a way that ensures operational and
design margins are maintained
Well-Managed and Understood Safety,
Design, and Operational Margins
Well Managed Margins
An “Enabler”
The “Outcome”
Page 8
Operating Point Limit
Normal Operating Point
Design or Tech Spec Basis Limit
Functional/Design Failure
Allowed operating range
Analyzed transient range
Greater than design basis range
Operating margin
Design margin
( Design allows operation in the transient range. However operating restrictions consistent with the design, such as the magnitude and frequency of excursions into this range apply)
( The allowed operating range provides the normal margins operators use without violating setpoints )
( This is a prohibited range of operation and represents the additional conservative margin to account for uncertainties in design and construction )
Design and Operating Margins Model
Page 9
Margin Examples
• Turbine lube oil TCV found almost fully closed during operation.
• Safety Related Service Water throttle valve position changed, reducing EDG starting margin.
• Power uprates.
Page 11
ERStation processes and
practices effectively support day-to-day activities and result in high levels of equipment reliability and
availability
Sustainable, High Levels of Plant Performance
ORAn accountable, engaged,
and motivated workforce that achieves station goals
ORStation leadership has
a vision of excellence and acts to keep station on a continuous path of
improvement
ORLeaders emphasize nuclear
safety and establish core values that drive organizational
behaviors
OFIntegrated processes
promote teamwork and align resources to common goals and priorities that support safe and reliable operation
ERPrograms & organizational
behaviors are focused on the prevention of unanticipated or
repeat equipment failures
High Levels of Plant Performance
Page 12
OF #7Station leadership promotes and uses sound operational decision-
making
OF #8Plant activities are controlled to
manage risks and provide compensatory actions
OF #6Operators recognize and respond
correctly to plant conditions
Sustainable, Event-Free Operations
PIStation personnel are
committed to and accountable for achieving performance improvement
by identifying and correcting problems, applying lessons learned from industry operating
experience, and comparing station standards and performance to industry standards of excellence
PIThe frequency and consequences
of human errors are minimized by the application of individual and organizational error reduction and
mitigation techniques
ERPrograms & organizational
behaviors are focused on the prevention of unanticipated or
repeat equipment failures
ERStation processes and
practices effectively support day-to-day activities and result in high levels
of equipment reliability and availability
Sustainable, Event-Free Operations
Page 13
OR #14The organization and leadership
team inspires stakeholder confidence in their ability to
address problems
OR #15Station staff and
infrastructure are capable of responding to emerging problems
without adversely affecting routine station activities
Avoidance of Unplanned, Long-
Duration Shutdowns
OR #16Effective change
management plans that consider unintended
consequences
PIStation personnel are
committed to and accountable for achieving performance
improvement by identifying and correcting problems, applying lessons learned from industry
operating experience, and comparing station standards and performance to
industry standards of excellence
ERVulnerabilities to the
long-term reliability and availability of important plant equipment are recognized and mitigation and contingency plans have
been developed
Avoidance of Long-Duration Shutdowns
Page 14
RPPlant conditions
and processes promote health and safety
RPRadiological and
industrial safety hazards are anticipated, recognized and
managed
High Levels of Plant Worker High Levels of Plant Worker SafetySafety
RPStation leaders establish
and promote a culture that supports worker safety
RPStation personnel
exhibit ownership for industrial and radiation safety
High Levels of Worker Safety
Page 15
ORManagement executes a
long-term human resource strategy
PIManagement and
leadership skills are systematically developed
and reinforced
Highly-Skilled, Knowledgeable and
Collaborative Workforce
PI Training is used as a strategic
tool to provide highly skilled and knowledgeable personnel for safe, reliable operations and to support
performance improvement
PIThe frequency and consequences of human errors are minimized by the application of individual
an organizational error reduction and mitigation techniques
Highly Skilled Workforce
Page 16
-7 months -20 weeks -3 months -11 weeks -10 weeks -9 weeks -8 weeks
*TM contacts site counterpart to discuss pre-evaluation observations, involvement with analysis, host-peer(s), OR/CM questionnaire, and utility self-evaluation
*TM develops pre-evaluation observation plan
*Information request letter sent to plant
*3 month letter sent to plant *Information request material received
*OR and CM questionnaire results received
*Preceding evaluation (week 1) *Preceding evaluation (week 2)
*Pre-evaluation analysis complete
*Report Week
-7 weeks -6 weeks -5 weeks -4 weeks -3 weeks -2 weeks -1 week
*Analysis Turnover
*SR Turnover
*Utility Self-evaluation Report Received
*Pre-exit Meeting
*Team Augmentation Decision Point¹
*Exit * Review CM questionnaire *Prep Week *Sequester Week
¹Based on inputs: - Analysis Turnover -Tech DM Input - Utility Self-evaluation - SR Turnover - Pre-evaluation observations²Based on inputs: - Same inputs as team augmentation decision, plus: - Pre-visit - Simulator Observation
INPO/Utility Evaluation Plan Meeting²(T-4 to T-2) Post Pre-visit and Simulator Observation
Simulator Observation(T-6 to T-3)
Pre-visit(T-5 to T-4)
Evaluation Timeline
Page 17
Analysis Group Functions
• Plant Information Center (PIC) Data– Event history
– Indicators
• Plant Specific CAP database• Plant Specific Information on Engineering
Programs• Self assessments
– “Conduct of”
Page 18
Analysis Group Output
• Identifies areas of focus– “High value” enablers and attributes
• Targets EN programs for review– Based on performance data from plant– Based on self-assessment information
• Targets systems or components for “vertical slice”– Based on performance data from plant– Consolidate with ER review
• Makes Team Augmentation Recommendation
Page 19
CM Questionnaire
• Used to gain insight into roles & responsibilities (CM-2)
• Questionnaire is sent in hard copy format as part of the advance information request.
• Target audience is:– No more than 60 people. Distributed equally between:
• Maintenance supervision and craft• Operations supervision and RO/NLO• Engineering supervision and individual contributors
• CM evaluator analyzes results during prep-week
Page 20
Evaluating Operational Excellence
Six Outcomes:– Sustainable high levels of
performance– Configuration and margin
management– Sustainable event free
operation– Avoidance of extended
shutdowns– High levels of worker
safety– Highly skilled workforce
Five Cross Functional Areas:– Equipment Reliability (ER)
– Configuration and Margin Management (CM)
– Operational Focus (OF)
– Performance Improvement (PI)
– Personnel and Organizational Performance (OR)
Page 21
Advance information gatheringPED/Analysis Division
(3-4 months)
Data analysis of station CAP
Special evolution observations
Previsit
Station Self assessment in “conduct of”
OR/CC questionnaires
Discriminate areas that are functioning well from those that are questionable or unknown
Analyze data and determine focus areas
TM/ORTM/Analysis(1-2 months)
Cross-FunctionalEvaluation team
(12 total)
Develop evaluation plan in conjunction with station leadership • Functional areas• OEO building blocks• Cross-function focus areasOutput: team focus areas
TM/ORTM/Site Leadership (1 month)
Team Manager
Self-Evaluation and Learning Organization(PI)
Design, Configuration and Engineering Program (CM - EN)
OR and Personnel Performance (ORTM)
Operational Focus Reactor Safety(OF - OP)
1-2 Functional Evaluators
Host Peer
3 Industry Peers (OF, CM, ER)
Industry Advisor
Equipment Performance(ER - MA)
Special INPO reviews
NRC PIs, inspections, reports and public meetings
SARC minutes
Information Request
Previous evaluations
PIs, PIC and events
Analyze data considering:• Operational Excellence Outcomes• Operating Experience (TBD)• Framework Document• Lessons Learned from S/Ds
Department specific indicators
Deciding how to focus INPO resources
Page 22
Executive Summary
APS1. Operational Focus (Goddard)2. Performance Improvement (Hamlin)3. Configuration Management (Farr)4. Equipment Reliability (P. Wagner)5. Organizational Effectiveness (Link)6. Personnel Safety (Moss)7. Events (Heublein)
AFI’s & StrengthsCross-functional
Functional Based on Significance and Consequence(Would require utility response)
AppendixOne page per functional area (OP,TR,CY,MA,EN,RP,WM)
Items for CAP (previously lower level AFI)Strengths
Additional Perspective (No Utility Response Required)
Discussion on outcomes of interest -Tools to Evaluate Outcome
-Analysis
-Second Week Meeting
-Report Week Discussion
-DM review during report week
Audience: CEOOwner: TMCheck: Pre-exit
Audience: CNOOwner: DMCheck: TM
Audience: SVPOwner: TeamCheck: DMs
Audience: SVP/PMOwner: EvaluatorsCheck: DM/TM
SOER and Operating Experience UseStatus and Any AFI’s
Audience: SVPOwner: ORTMCheck: TM
Revised Report Structure