Delivering the Nuclear Promise Overview Terry Schuster Manager

Delivering the Nuclear Promise Overview Terry Schuster Manager, Engineering and Configuration Management INPO © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations

Delivering The Nuclear Promise - Vision • Steadily improved safety and reliability – Promise we haven’t consistently delivered on yet is economic production of electricity • Must maintain: – Operational focus – Advance safety and reliability – Increase value and improve efficiency © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 2

Engineering Related Phase 1 Improvement Opportunities • ENG-001, PMP-003, WM-E-02 Critical Component Classification (Scot Greenlee) - Redefine “Critical Components” Eliminate low value PMs • ENG-002 - Margin Management Program (David Czufin) - Eliminate formal margin management program requirement © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 3

Engineering Related Phase 1 Improvement Opportunities Continued • ENG-003, Standardized Mod Process (Brad Adams) - Standard Process, Training, and Software • ENG-004, Standardize SE Core Business (Mark Woodby) - Allow SEs to focus on their core business © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 4

Engineering Related Phase 1 Improvement Opportunities Continued • ENG-005, Engineering Staffing Changes (Rich Wright) - Primary focus is on programs, system engineers but will include standard design function © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 5

ENG-002 Your Actions • Eliminate formal margin management program: – Validate that maintaining adequate margins is integrated in station processes © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 6

ENG-002 Your Actions Continued • Reinforce expectation through ongoing training and leadership interactions – Individuals understand: • their responsibility to monitor plant conditions to identify and advocate for correction of reductions in operating, design or safety margins. © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 7

ENG-002 Take-Away Points • Blue Bulletin: – Action expected at all sites, but is not needed for broad industry viability – Due date is June 30, 2016 • Ensure existing station engineering tools monitor and manage design and operating margins commensurate with the safety importance of the equipment • Margin actions are value and knowledge driven versus process driven © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 8

ENG-003, Standard Design Change Process Objectives • Red Bulletin: Standard Design Process Used As-Written by Every Utility • Expanding use of less complex modification processes • Shared Training and Qualifications • Standard Software to manage design changes © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 9

ENG-003 Executive Oversight Committee EOC Members: – SNC – Brad Adams (Executive Sponsor) – Duke – John Elnitsky – USA – Aziz Khanifar – Next. Era – Joe Jensen – STARS – Jamie Mc. Coy – TVA – David Czufin Project Leads: – SNC – Paul Hayes – SNC – Rick Mc. Adams © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 10

Steering Committee Roster Name Paul Hayes Rick Mc. Adams Lenny Azzarello Denise Brandon Pete Carlone Brian Dunn Sudesh Gambhir Rich Hall Colin Keller Sarah Kovaleski Bruce Montgomery Mayo Oppenhimer Ashley Taylor Jed Ruff Tom Czerniewski Richard Zyduck © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations Utility SNC Duke Energy Columbia Generating Station MPR (Responsible for representing other EOCs) Next. Era INPO Exelon First Energy (FENOC) STARS / Ameren NEI Dominion TVA V. C. Summer Entergy Services, Inc. USA / Xcel 11

Desired End State Process: – Graded approach that improves efficiency – Standard modification process Training & Qualification: – Common training material – Available to all stations and vendors through NANTe. L Enablers: – Behaviors at all levels support improved engagement of all stake holders including vendors – Culture of healthy technical conscience and risk awareness exists – Common software – A repository is created to enable all stations to contribute and benefit © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations

Value Proposition-(Vision of Excellence) • Efficient use of Engineer of Choice (EOC) – Simplified oversight of vendors – Sharing of modifications between utilities – Industry-wide training applicability – Standardized process software • Standard industry guidance to allow expanded use of commercial changes © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations

INPO Actions • Update INPO AP-929, Configuration Management Process Description – Update Definition section, Appendix A, B and C as necessary – Revise Appendix D to be consistent with the new flow chart and screening criteria – Delete Appendix E Performance Indicators © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 14

INPO Actions Continued • Retire INPO 85 -013, Good Practice, Plant Modification Control Program • Retire INPO 90 -009, Guidelines for the Conduct of Design Engineering, Rev 3 – November 2012 © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 15

INPO Actions Continued • Update INPO 12 -010 Temporary Configuration Changes, Rev. 0 (Good Practice) – October 2012 • Update the following documents as necessary: – EN/CM Dept “How-to” for Evaluating Plant Modification Process – EDI-02, Performing Evaluation Activities – EDI-03, Assessment of Configuration Management © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 16

Ownership and Maintenance • Group similar to ERWG (Design Manager Owners Working Group) – Oversight by Engineering VPs • Revised AP-929, Configuration Management Process Description – Tier 2 document • Standard Mod Process / Procedure to be hosted on the INPO website similar to other ERWG documents © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 17

Milestones • Finalize Standard Design Process 07/28/2016 • Issue Bulletin - Fourth Quarter 2016 • Complete Software Development 02/28/2017 • Implement Standard Design Process for Industry 07/30/2017 © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 18

Guiderails • INPO will continue to evaluate modifications in accordance with PO&Cs • If requested, INPO can conduct industry assisted review visits to evaluate adherence to CNO expectations for the Red Bulletin • Performance Indicators for monitoring early signs of decline (TBD) © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 19

Industry Performance © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations

Industry AFIs and PDs Weak Fundamentals Affect Performance Notes: 1) Includes all AFIs and PDs from 2014 and 2015 2) Includes ER, CM, and EN AFI and PDs 10 8 6 4 2 0 Engr Product Qual Margin Mgmt Operational Dsgn Chng Fuel & Rx Engr Leader Engr Config Processes Engr & Tech Fundament Authority al Thoroughness Knowledge & Proficiency Communicate & Manage. Advocate Config Monitor Changes & Trend Performance Category (CM and EN) © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations Fundame ntal Number of AFI & PD 12

Configuration Management Industry AFI Performance Issues • Thoroughness of Technical Products & Decisions – Not verifying assumptions & inputs – Inadequate Oversight & Engagement of Vendor – Inadequate Post-Mod Testing • Time Critical Operator Actions – Missing validation records – Process of re-verifying not maintained • Plant Modified by Others - without Engineering review & approval – Operating – Maintenance © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations

Questions © Copyright 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 23