From INPO AFI to Top Performer Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Industrial Safety From INPO AFI to Top Performer Jan 5th, 2011 Steve Nowak

Comanche Peak Site OSHA Injuries 2001 thru Present Nov. 2010, Zero INPO Injury Rate. Top 10% of all U.S. Nuclear Plants 26 21 19 19 17 12 12 10 3 2

Tier 1 Initiative Team Shaw maintenance manager Shaw safety manager Westinghouse manager Siemens project manager Securitas Operations Maintenance (I&C and Mechanical) Radiation Protection Operating System Management sponsor: Dave Kross Executive sponsor: Mitch Lucas

2009 Tier 1 Goals Improve industrial safety behaviors and accountability at CPNPP with a focus on consistency in applying safety standards and recognition of job hazards 2009 goals: 0 Injuries with restrictions or lost time ≤ 5 OSHA Recordables Establish a framework for continuous improvement Complete by 9/01/2009. Evaluate 1/15/2010

INPO 2008 Personnel do not consistently recognize job hazards, and some hazards are not mitigated by use of personal protective equipment, supervisor intervention in at-risk behaviors, and pre-job hazard reviews. While recent emphasis on safety expectations have improved worker awareness of good safety practices and error rates are decreasing, consequential injuries continue to occur.

2009 Tier 1 Analysis Reviewed: 2006, 2008 INPO results Two IS Self Assessments (Luminant & STARS) Common cause analysis of 2008 injuries Benchmarking top performing plants Review of IS Leading observations Open IS SMFs

Problem Identification Lack of Hazard Recognition Lack of active peer to peer coaching Lack of/or poor communications Unclear expectations Lack of/or inconsistent accountability Safety issues not timely resolved Inadequate causal analysis of safety issues Perceived production over safety Non-focused organizational structure

Fundamentals of a Good Safety Program Management Commitment Executive involvement Supervisors’ support Employee Engagement Awareness Safety Procedures Plant Conditions (safety concerns) Clear Safety Expectations and Procedures Positive recognition Empowerment Resolution of Employee Safety Concerns

Recommended Solutions Hazard Recognition and Peer Coaching: Hazard recognition training: Safe Zone and BEAR “at risk” behaviors Peer to peer training Job Hazard Analysis overview BEAR process overview “New to Comanche Peak” program Five year frequency for core employees Two year frequency for short term workers It’s OK safety program

‘It’s OK’ Means: I am open to receiving help, comments, suggestions or feedback from any person at anytime to reduce my risk of an injury.

New Employee Responsibilities: Attend Hazard Recognition Training Attach New to Comanche Peak sticker on their hard hat Make safety your #1 priority Ask detailed questions if unsure Identify hazards to your supervisor or peers Core Employee Responsibilities: Increase observations of New to Comanche Peak employees Complete New to Comanche Peak department check list Ensure understanding of CPNPP safety rules Identify plant or job specific risk Teach methods to decrease risk or hazards Ensure clear communication and understanding Assume nothing!

Recommended Solutions Organization Structure Establish an employee safety committee Provide input to direction of safety programs Review and prioritize identified safety issues Improve communications Provide a working budget Increased management focus Safety manager: Chairman of Senior Safety Committee BEAR Steering Committee manager Facilitator of the Employee Safety Committee Manager of safety department OSHA Voluntary Protection Program On-site nurse

Recommended Solutions Communications and Accountability Visual boards at AAP and PAP showing current goals and status to include BEAR results Department clocks – HU and Safety Initiate SMFs for safety violations Safety pocketbook Coaching for violators/peers/supervisor

Recommended Solutions Unclear expectations and production over safety perception Safety manager presentations Accountability Stop work for safety expectation Peer coaching Quarterly update of the safety handbook Rewards and recognitions Performance and outage bonus review Perform safety stand downs for OSHA injuries Begin every meeting with a safety topic

Recommended Solutions (cont.) Safety Issue Resolution and Inadequate Analysis Industrial Safety Condition Reports are assigned a risk factor by the Employee Safety Committee Safety department attend root cause training Safety attend prioritization meetings

One of My Biggest Fears! From Hero to Zero !!

Summary of Recommendations Recommendations achieve: Management Commitment Employee Engagement Clear Safety Expectations and Procedures Resolution of employee’s safety concerns Most Important: Employee Engagement

Industrial Safety Survey Results Scale: 1 = never 2 = seldom 3 = regularly 4 = always W = Westinghouse LT = Long term ST = Short term Have you been peer coached? Have you performed peer coaching? Can a job be stopped for a safety concern? Is improving the safety culture at Comanche Peak a priority? Is Safety more important than production? Did you receive the proper amount of safety training? Did the Hazard Recognition training improve your safety awareness? Do your pre-job briefs always discuss safety and job hazards? Do you always perform a “Take Two” at the job site? Does the “New to Nuclear” program help to reduce short term contractor injuries? Wesdyne 5 Wyle 3 Cameron 6 Access Solutions 4 Shaw (LT) 4 (ST) 112 Crane 31 W (ST) 16 W (LT) Bartlett 27 Luminant 32 Siemens 93 Misc Average (1) 2.6 3.3 2.5 2.3 2.8 2.9 (2) 2.8 2.7 2.6 3.1 (3) 4 3.8 3.9 3.6 (4) 4 3.2 3.7 3.5 (5) 3.4 (6) 3.6 3.4 (7) 3.6 (8) 3.8 (9) 3.8 (10) 3.4

Behavior Based Safety

Behavior Based Safety

Results Questions? Nov. 2010, Zero INPO Injury Rate. Top 10% of all U.S. Nuclear Plants 26 21 19 19 17 12 12 10 3 2