Corrective Action Program Owner’s Group Corporate 2013 National Conference Cumulative Effects

1. Corrective Action Program Owner’s Group Corporate2013 National ConferenceCumulative Effects Brad AdamsVP Fleet Operations Southern Nuclear Company

2. Heavy Lift Derrick – Vogtle 3/4 2

3. Vogtle Unit 3 Nuclear Island

4. Cumulative ImpactIndustry Approach

5. Cumulative Impact NRC Interface

6. EAG Cumulative Impact Survey • Holistic Approach to Develop List of Activities: • Protected or Preserved to Ensure High Levels of Safety Performance Maintained • Identify Processes, Programs, etc. That Are Candidates for Streamlining, Modification or Elimination • February 2013 Survey to Entire Industry

7. Working Processes Top Priority • Three (3) Industry Teams Established • Work Management • Human Performance • Corrective Action Program • Existing Industry Groups Engaged (e.g. CAPOG Chair is on the CAP Team) • Industry Executive Sponsors for Each Team • 4th Area Proposed • Methodology to prioritize and manage overall initiatives

8. Work Management • Initial Planning Meeting with WM Industry Team met August 6-7th • Project Direction Established • Eliminate Unnecessary Maintenance Work • Better As-Found Data, Condition Based Monitoring • Better use of Minor Maintenance (graded approach) • Streamline Work Planning / Prep • Instructions, model work orders, risk reviews, walk-downs • Streamline Getting Workers in Field • PJBs, eliminate daily qualification checks, etc.

9. Work Management (cont.) • Project Direction Established (cont.) • Clarify Work Management & Accountability • Meetings, Organizational Behaviors, ROI into System & Program Management • Shorten the T-Week Process • i.e. T-26 to T-12 (or shorter) • Next Steps • Team divided responsibilities • Details TBD • Schedule, Milestones TBD

10. Human Performance • Initial Planning Meeting with HU Industry Team – August 21 / 22 • Focus on Reducing Overall Burden to FLSs, Workers • Streamlined PJBs, Observations, Focus on Important

11. Corrective Action Process • Planning Meeting with Industry Team – June 26-28th • CAP Conference Held in Atlanta July 11th • All US Companies Represented, some Canadian, 55 total • Intent was to Raise Awareness, Solicit Ideas and Obtain Broad Industry Alignment

12. Corrective Action Process (cont.) • Project Direction Established • Differentiate between Required vs. Optional • Ensure Compliance with Regulatory Requirements • Manage Risk of Business Issues • Less formal investigation of individual issues • Greater Management Flexibility to use judgement • More analysis of aggregate issues / bundling • Utilize 80/20 Rule to Investigate / Assign Actions • Develop Common Industry Standard • Standard Set of Industry Performance Indicators Focused on Results

13. Corrective Action Program (cont.) • Short-Term Actions • Provide Initial Guidance to Industry • Draft Issued 8/31/13 • Final 10/1/13 • Paradigm Shift in Leadership Behaviors • Methodology to Reduce Current Backlogs • Close to other processes • Avoid recycling prompt investigations • Guidance on cleaning out old items from backlogs

14. Corrective Action Program (cont.) • Long Term Actions • Fully Developed Improved CAP Standard • Likely Iterations with Short Term Actions with Final Standard • Use “Google” like searches for identification / bundling (no more coding) • Better integration with other processes • 80/20 Rule! • Incorporate into INPO Programs

15. Corrective Action Program (cont.) • Change Management • Communication with key Stakeholders • Maintain Regulatory Trust • Better Oversight of CAP Standards Established

16. Summary • Overall Cumulative Burden Is Having Significant Impact on Industry • Internal Focus Needed • Impact Is Largely Due to Our Own Actions • Nuclear Safety, Plant Reliability and Public Confidence Remain Top Priorities