ML031280706
| ML031280706 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/2003 |
| From: | FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML031280706 (140) | |
Text
1 1
2 PUBLIC MEETING BETWEEN U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O350 PANEL 3 AND FIRST ENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY OAK HARBOR, OHIO 4
5 Meeting held on Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 6 2:00 p.m. at the Camp Perry Clubhouse, Oak Harbor, Ohio, taken by me, Marie B. Fresch, Registered Merit Reporter, 7 and Notary Public in and for the State of Ohio.
8 ---
9 PANEL MEMBERS PRESENT:
10 U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 11 John "Jack" Grobe, Chairman, MC 0350 Panel William Dean, Vice Chairman, MC 0350 Panel 12 Christopher Scott Thomas, Senior Resident Inspector 13 U.S. NRC Office - Davis-Besse Jon Hopkins, Project Manager Davis-Besse 14 Anthony Mendiola, Section Chief PDIII-2, NRR 15 David Passehl, Project Engineer Davis-Besse 16 FIRST ENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY 17 Lew Myers, FENOC Chief Operating Officer 18 Robert W. Schrauder, Director - Support Services 19 James J. Powers, III Director - Nuclear Engineering 20 L. William Pearce, Vice President FENOC Oversight 21 Craig Hengge, Engineer - Plant Engineering Kathy Fehr, 22 Owner-Management Observation Program Lynn Harder, Project Manager 23 Containment Health Inspection Clark Price, Owner-Restart Action Plan 24 Greg Dunn, Manager Outage Management & Work Control 25 ---
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
2 1 MR. PASSEHL: Welcome 2 everybody. Welcome to FirstEnergy and members of the 3 public for coming to this meeting today. This is a public 4 meeting between the NRCs Davis-Besse Oversight Panel and 5 FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company.
6 I am David Passehl, Project Engineer and Assistant 7 to the Branch Chief, Christine Lipa, who is responsible for 8 the NRCs Inspection Program at Davis-Besse. Christine 9 cannot attend todays meeting due to other commitments.
10 The purposes of todays meeting are to inform the 11 public of the NRCs Oversight Panel activities and to 12 discuss the Licensees progress on implementing their 13 Return to Service Plan.
14 On todays agenda, well be doing introduction and 15 opening remarks. Well have a short summary of the 16 February 11th public meetings, which was our last 0350 17 public meeting. Well discuss significant NRC activities 18 since that February 11th public meeting. The Licensee will 19 present the status of their Return to Service Plan. And 20 then well adjourn the NRC meeting with FirstEnergy, take a 21 break. And, then well come back for public comments and 22 questions of the NRC; and then well adjourn the meeting.
23 This meeting is open to public observation. Please 24 note that this is a meeting between the Nuclear Regulatory 25 Commission and FirstEnergy. At the conclusion of the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
3 1 business portion of this meeting, but before the meeting is 2 adjourned, the NRC staff will be available to receive 3 comments from members of the public and answer questions.
4 There are copies of the March edition of our monthly 5 newsletter and copies of the slides for this meeting in the 6 foyer. The newsletter provides background information and 7 also discusses current plan in NRC activities.
8 We also have a public meeting feedback form, which 9 is a good tool to allow us to get feedback from people who 10 are here to let us know aspects of the meeting we can 11 improve on.
12 We have been doing that since our public meetings 13 started in May of 2002, and weve made some changes, and we 14 think that, that we think have made this a better meeting.
15 Copies of the feedback forms are also available in the 16 foyer.
17 Were having this meeting transcribed today by Marie 18 Fresch, to maintain a record of the meeting. The 19 transcription will be available on our web page and we 20 usually have that available on our website in about three 21 to four weeks.
22 Before we get started, I want to make 23 introductions. First on my far left is Jon Hopkins, who is 24 the NRR Project Manager for Davis-Besse.
25 Next to him is Tony Mendiola. He is a Section Chief MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
4 1 in the Division of Reactor Projects in our headquarters 2 offices.
3 Next to him is Bill Dean, Deputy Director for the 4 Engineering Division in NRR located in our headquarters 5 office in Rockville, Maryland. He is Vice President of the 6 Davis-Besse Oversight Panel.
7 And, next to him and to my left is Jack Grobe, 8 Senior Manager in the Region III office in Lisle, Illinois; 9 and hes the Chairman of the Davis-Besse Oversight Panel.
10 Next to me is the Senior Resident Inspector, Scott 11 Thomas.
12 And, also with us in the audience, we have Nancy 13 Keller, who is the site secretary at Davis-Besse; we have 14 our Public Affairs Officer, Jan Strasma, in the audience; 15 and we have our Region III State Liaison Officer in the 16 audience as well.
17 We also have Jack Raczkowski Rutkowski, who will be replacing 18 Doug Simpkins as the Resident Inspector later this spring.
19 MR. GROBE: Stand up, Jack.
20 Let me embarrass you a little bit. Turn around. Were 21 very grateful to have Jack here. He and his wife are in 22 the process of moving to the area. Jack will be full time 23 with us here at Davis-Besse in the next couple of months.
24 Jack has, is a highly educated, highly experienced 25 individual. Hes got degrees from three different MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
5 1 universities. He was an officer with the nuclear Navy.
2 And hes had about 25 years of experience working for a 3 variety of utilities in the nuclear power industry. And, 4 starting with us a few months ago and were grateful to 5 have him assigned out at Davis-Besse. So, youll be seeing 6 more of Jack over the next few months.
7 MR. PASSEHL: Lew, if you 8 wanted to introduce FirstEnergy and return it back to me, 9 please.
10 MR. MYERS: Okay, thank you.
11 Were going to be changing some chairs around at the 12 break. So, Im going to introduce the people now at the 13 table. To my left is Bill Pearce, the VP of Quality 14 Assurance.
15 To my right is Kathy Fehr. Shes in charge of the 16 Management Observation Program, is going to status us on 17 that today.
18 Craig Hengge is the Manager of our new Leak 19 Detection System. Well talk about that today also.
20 Greg Dunn, next to him, is the Outage Director and 21 also the Manager of Work Management. And hes with us 22 today to status us on upcoming activities. Were actually 23 going to try to get around to that today. You can see our 24 package is considerably thinner than it was the last time.
25 Bob Schrauder is next to him. Bob is our Project MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
6 1 Manager for the System Review and also Director of Support 2 Services.
3 Then, Jim Powers at the end of the table and Jim is 4 the Director of Engineering.
5 We have Lynn Harder who is with us today. He will 6 be, he will status us on the Containment Health Project.
7 And finally, Clark Price is the Owner of the Restart 8 Action Performance. Hell status on that today also.
9 MR. PASSEHL: Okay, thank you.
10 MR. MYERS: Thank you.
11 MR. PASSEHL: At this time, I 12 would like any public officials or representatives of 13 public officials to introduce yourselves, please.
14 MR. PAPCUN: John Papcun, 15 Ottawa County Commissioner.
16 MR. ARNDT: Steve Arndt, 17 Ottawa County Commissioner.
18 MR. KOEBEL: Carl Koebel, 19 Ottawa County Commissioner.
20 MR. WITT: Jere Witt, County 21 Administrator.
22 MR. FLIGOR: Dennis Fligor, for 23 United States Senator George Voinovich.
24 MR. PASSEHL: Okay, thank you 25 very much.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
7 1 Next slide, please.
2 Okay, well discuss a summary of our last public 3 meeting. During the meeting on February 11th, we discussed 4 the status of ongoing plant and NRC activities.
5 The NRC staff discussed the status of Restart 6 Checklist items. We described the inspections that weve 7 done and those that are upcoming regarding the adequacy of 8 safety significant structures, systems and components. We 9 mentioned a Resident Inspection Report and a Special 10 Inspection Report that we issued.
11 The Special Inspection Report concerned the adequacy 12 of Root Causes and the Human Performance area. We 13 discussed the status of ongoing System Health Review 14 Inspections, which are particularly focused in the 15 engineering areas.
16 We highlighted some inspection activities that 17 remained, including the normal operating pressure tests, 18 the containment vessel integrated leak rate test, the 19 inspection of the emergency sump, inspections of various 20 Licensee programs, and adequacy of organizational 21 effectiveness in human performance.
22 Later in todays presentation we plan to provide an 23 update on our recently completed and ongoing NRC 24 activities.
25 The Licensee provided an update on efforts made MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
8 1 toward restart. They discussed activities related to fuel 2 reload and the containment integrated leak rate test. The 3 Licensee also covered from a system health standpoint, 4 their Safety Function Validation Project and described the 5 basis for increasing the scope of their system health 6 reviews.
7 The Licensee recapped our January 30th public 8 meeting, which was held to discuss Safety Culture and 9 Safety Conscious Work Environment. And they discussed how 10 they grade their own Safety Culture. The Quality Assurance 11 Organization discussed some of their observations. And 12 finally, the Licensee discussed their schedule and where 13 they were at and where they were going in the next few 14 months.
15 Next slide, please.
16 MR. GROBE: There has been a 17 number of activities that have occurred on our side of the 18 table over the last month, and we wanted to just update you 19 on a few of those. Work level activities for the NRC has 20 gone up significantly and will continue to go up over the 21 next couple of months as this project wraps up.
22 The first thing I wanted to talk about just briefly 23 is we issued a preliminary significance assessment of the 24 performance deficiency of Davis-Besse. On February 24, we 25 issued this letter. It contained what we call a MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
9 1 performance deficiency.
2 That performance deficiency at Davis-Besse was the 3 failure to properly implement the Boric Acid Corrosion 4 Management and Corrective Action Programs that allowed the 5 reactor coolant system pressure boundary leakage to occur 6 undetected for a prolonged period of time, resulting in the 7 reactor pressure vessel head degradation and 8 circumferential tracking cracking of the control and drive mechanism 9 penetration nozzles.
10 We carefully articulate that performance deficiency 11 and then assess the risk significance of that. Under NRCs 12 Reactor Oversight Program, we have four colors that we use 13 to describe the relative significance of findings. The 14 least significant is what we call green, and it ranges up 15 white, yellow, and the most significant is red.
16 Our preliminary decision is that the performance 17 deficiency that resulted in this extended outage was 18 characterized as a red significance finding or a finding of 19 high safety significance.
20 Before the NRC makes its final decision on the 21 significance, we publish our significance letter and give 22 FirstEnergy an opportunity to comment on the analysis that 23 supported that determination, give us any additional 24 information that would provide further insights that would 25 be useful; and FirstEnergy is in the process of evaluating MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
10 1 our letter, and I understand they will be responding with a 2 letter to us.
3 So, another option that FirstEnergy would have, 4 would be what we call a Regulatory Conference. That would 5 be a public meeting. And, I understand that FirstEnergy 6 has opted not to do that, but send us a letter with some 7 comments; and well receive that letter and make our final 8 significance determination.
9 Thanks, Dave.
10 MR. PASSEHL: Okay, the next 11 item there, on February 19th of this year, Region III 12 issued the final significance determination letter for two 13 white findings associated with radiological controls 14 related to steam generator work back in February of 2002.
15 The findings involve failures by plant staff to 16 conduct an adequate evaluation of the radiological hazards 17 in order to characterize radiological work conditions, take 18 timely and suitable measurements to adequately monitor the 19 intake of radioactive materials by workers during and 20 following installation of nozzle dams and steam 21 generators.
22 A public meeting was held back on October 16th, 23 2002, to discuss the findings and observations from our 24 inspection of this issue. Inspection report was issued on 25 January 7th, 2003. FirstEnergy agreed with the NRCs MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
11 1 characterization of the risk significance of the findings 2 and declined the opportunity to provide additional 3 information or discuss the issue in a regulatory 4 conference.
5 After considering the information developed during 6 the inspection, the NRC concluded that the inspection 7 findings were appropriately characterized as white, which 8 is an issue with low to moderate increase importance to 9 safety.
10 The NRC is currently conducting inspections in the 11 radiological protection area, which I will mention in the 12 next slide.
13 MR. GROBE: We also had an 14 opportunity to respond to your governor, Governor Taft.
15 The governor requested a briefing on whats happening at 16 Davis-Besse from the NRCs perspective.
17 On February 27, my boss, Jim Dyer, the Associate 18 Director of our Headquarters Office responsible for Nuclear 19 Reactor Safety, Brian Sherrod Sheron, and myself briefed the 20 governor and about 15 of his staff on a variety of topics, 21 including some historical information on control rod drive 22 mechanism penetration cracking, boric acid corrosion, as 23 well as specific information regarding whats going on here 24 at Davis-Besse, including the significance assessment 25 letter that I just discussed a moment ago.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
12 1 The NRCs response to the reactor head situation at 2 Davis-Besse characterized the FirstEnergys activities that 3 are ongoing, as well as discussed in a broader context the 4 nuclear industrys response to what happened at Davis-Besse 5 and actions that are occurring at other plants around the 6 country.
7 We completed the briefing with a discussion of our 8 Lessons Learned and the improvements that the NRC is making 9 in its programs and processes to ensure that this kind of 10 situation doesnt happen again in the future.
11 MR. PASSEHL: On February 26th, 12 2003, the NRC issued two Special Inspection Reports on 13 review of activities as described in the Davis-Besse System 14 Health Assurance Plan. That inspection examined the 15 Licensees actions relative to NRC Restart Checklist item 16 Number 5B, which is associated with assuring the capability 17 of safety significant structures, systems and components to 18 support safe and reliable plant operation.
19 The Licensees System Health Assurance Plan consists 20 of three review programs; an Operational Readiness Review, 21 a System Health Readiness Review and a Latent Issues 22 Review. Our inspection included reviewing the plans and 23 procedures for the three review programs, monitoring the 24 work of the teams in progress, monitoring nuclear oversight 25 activities, attending review board meetings, and reviewing MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
13 1 condition reports generated by the teams as reviews were 2 conducted and discrepancies were identified.
3 The inspectors also monitored training of reviewers, 4 conducted walkdowns of systems, examined emergent issues, 5 reviewed independent self-assessments of systems and 6 reviewed various reports. We also performed our own 7 Independent Design Review.
8 The NRC concluded in the inspection reports that the 9 System Health Assurance Plan was well designed, with 10 acceptable procedures and oversight; however, because the 11 majority of the System Health Assurance Plan reports were 12 still under development at the time of our inspection, and 13 because several unresolved questions remained involving 14 calculations, analyses and testing, the NRC kept Restart 15 Checklist Item 5B open pending the outcome of some more 16 additional inspection.
17 Next slide, please.
18 Cover some continuing NRC activities. Under 19 Organizational Effectiveness and Human Performance, our 20 inspection in this area is reviewing the Licensees 21 Management and Human Performance Excellence Building Block, 22 which is part of their Return to Service Plan and is an NRC 23 Restart Checklist item.
24 This inspection is being performed in three phases.
25 The first is an examination of Root Causes. The second is MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
14 1 an examination of Corrective Actions for the Root Causes to 2 ensure that FirstEnergy has identified appropriate 3 Corrective Actions to address the causes, and the third is 4 an examination of those Corrective Actions once they are in 5 place to assess the effectiveness prior to restart.
6 Phase one of the inspection is complete. Phase two 7 is under way. The inspection is being conducted by three 8 inspectors and should be completed within the next week or 9 so. The third phase is expected to be conducted as 10 Licensee activities are completed in the upcoming weeks.
11 NRC issued an inspection report Number 02-15 on 12 February 6th, 2003 and provides an update, status update in 13 this area.
14 Under System Health Design Reviews, this is an NRC 15 inspection of the Licensee System Health Assurance Plan I 16 discussed earlier. We continue to perform inspections of 17 this area. The inspection is being conducted by two 18 inspectors, and is scheduled to be completed in the 19 upcoming weeks prior to restart.
20 Under Safety Significant Program Effectiveness, this 21 is an NRC inspection that is reviewing the Licensees 22 implementation of their Program Effectiveness Building 23 Block. Our reviews include assessing the effectiveness of 24 the Boric Acid Corrosion Control Program, the In Service 25 Inspection Program, Reactor Coolant Unidentified Leakage MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
15 1 Program, Plant Modifications, Quality Audits and Operating 2 Experience.
3 The inspection will also evaluate the Licensees 4 program for assuring completeness and accuracy of required 5 records and submittals to the NRC. Three inspectors are 6 reviewing the area, and except for the reviews of 7 completeness and accuracy of required records and 8 submittals, the inspection should be complete by the end of 9 next week.
10 There are two Resident Inspectors stationed 11 permanently at the site, who inspect a broad spectrum of 12 activities, and that is characteristic as of all our sites 13 at the NRC. They primarily look at areas of operations, 14 maintenance and testing on an ongoing basis, and they issue 15 inspection reports every six weeks.
16 Were also performing an inspection of radiation 17 protection and its also a supplemental inspection.
18 I mentioned earlier the findings associated with the 19 inadequate radiological controls during steam generator 20 work in February of 2002. We are performing a follow-up 21 inspection to ensure that the root and contributing causes 22 are understood by the Licensee, that they independently 23 assess the extended extent of condition, and ensure that their 24 corrective actions are sufficient to address the root and 25 contributing causes and prevent recurrence.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
16 1 Were also reviewing the scope, depth and quality of 2 the Licensees Radiological Controls Program and associated 3 corrective actions, and we are reviewing the readiness of 4 the Radiation Protection Organization to support restart 5 and normal operations. Four inspectors are reviewing this 6 area and the inspection should be completed by the end of 7 next week.
8 Were preparing for a couple of upcoming 9 inspections. First of which is the Integrated Leak Rate 10 Test Special Inspection. We are planning to perform a 11 review of the plants integrated leak rate test of 12 containment. The test is intended to show the leak 13 tightness of their containment vessel. Our inspection is 14 scheduled to be conducted by two inspectors from March 17th 15 through March 23, 2003.
16 Were also preparing for an Emergency Core Cooling 17 System and Containment Spray System Sump Inspection. That 18 inspection is intended to review the design and 19 implementation of modification made to the emergency core 20 cooling system and containment spray system sump. That 21 inspection is scheduled to be conducted by one inspector 22 from our headquarters office from March 24th to April 4th.
23 And, were preparing for Corrective Action Team 24 Inspection to review the corrective action process at 25 Davis-Besse to ensure that its being effectively MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
17 1 implemented and appropriate corrective action is taken to 2 prevent recurrence of problems. The inspection will 3 include a review of restart corrective action items to 4 determine if items required to be accomplished prior to 5 startup of the plant have been correctly characterized and 6 actions have been completed in accordance with the 7 Licensees and our NRC requirements. This is an extensive 8 inspection, which is scheduled to be conducted by 8 9 inspectors from mid March to mid April.
10 This briefly summarizes the activities that NRC 11 currently has ongoing. The inspections I covered address 12 part of our Restart Checklist, which is, as I mentioned, a 13 listing of the issues that need to be resolved prior to 14 restart of the plant.
15 So, with that, Ill turn it over to FirstEnergy.
16 MR. MYERS: Good afternoon.
17 I would like to make a statement concerning the Preliminary 18 Significance Assessment finding of red. It is our 19 intention to respond back and agree with that finding; 20 were in complete agreement.
21 Were also in the agreement with the scientific 22 finding which related yellow. However, due to the breadth 23 of the issue, we agree it was red, and it is our intention 24 to discuss the strong actions that weve taken since the 25 event of February of last year. So, thats our position.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
18 1 With that, we have five Desired Outcomes today that 2 we would like to accomplish. First, Craig, Kathy and I 3 would like to provide you with a status of our milestones 4 since the last meeting from a hardware perspective and a 5 management perspective.
6 Second, Bill Pearce will provide you a status of our 7 Safety Culture, Safety Conscious Work Environment 8 activities; and then hell provide you some perspective of 9 some of the Quality Organizations observations since our 10 last meeting.
11 Third, well provide you an update of several of the 12 Building Blocks. Bob Schrauder will discuss System 13 Health. Lynn Harder will discuss Containment Health.
14 Clark Price will provide some views of our Restart Action 15 Performance. Thats on the graphs. And, Jim Powers will 16 discuss the Program Compliance.
17 And fourth and finally, hopefully this time well 18 get around to Greg Dunn. Were looking forward to that 19 Return to Service Schedule. With that being said, I would 20 like to talk about the Return to Service Plan progress 21 since the last meeting.
22 Since last meeting, we have accomplished several 23 milestones in returning the plant to service. I would like 24 to take a few moments to summarize some of these 25 accomplishments in our programs, and in our plant MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
19 1 activities.
2 First, we start our preparation for fuel load. As 3 part of that activity, we performed a thorough inspection 4 of our reactor vessel. We found a small amount of foreign 5 material, including a small cap screw in the bottom.
6 We formed a Decision-Making Team using our Nuclear 7 Decision-Making Operating Procedure. We made a decision to 8 remove our core support assembly, so that we could perform 9 a thorough cleaning of both the plenum and the reactor 10 vessel itself prior to moving forward. This is an 11 infrequently performed activity with significant potential 12 at our station because of the high potential of radiation 13 exposure; and also, the plenum weighs about 140 tons.
14 The core support assembly is a container thats used 15 to support the reactor fuel itself and the alignment of the 16 reactor core assemblies. It is a very activated, and took 17 us about five days to remove that assembly and return it to 18 service, but I think it demonstrates a proper safety 19 culture at our plant.
20 After cleaning the reactor vessel, we began the core 21 load, if you will, of 177 fuel assemblies on February the 22 19th. As we told you in our last meeting, we had developed 23 a core load pattern to reduce a known design issue of fuel 24 grid, fuel grid interaction, and reduce the damage to those 25 grid straps due to that interaction.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
20 1 With only four fuel assemblies remaining to finish 2 our core reload, we did have interaction of two 3 assemblies. We stopped. We formed a decision-making team, 4 using our Decision-Making Nuclear Operator Procedure and 5 performed a detailed inspection of the assembly being 6 loaded. Additionally, we removed the assembly with the 7 interaction. We did find some minor damage to one of the 8 grid straps. We spent three days bringing in Framatone to 9 perform the repairs of the damage assembly. Once again, 10 demonstrating good sensitivity to the safety related 11 activity.
12 This slide shows our fully loaded reactor core. As 13 you know, the fuel assemblies, fuel assembly is normally 14 out of the, in the core for about three cycles or six 15 years. The shiny fuel assemblies observed here are the new 16 fuel assemblies and represents about one third of the core, 17 core load. We completed our fuel load on February the 18 26th, 2003, error free.
19 Our new reactor head is now sitting on the reactor 20 vessel. We are ready for Mode 5, which means the nuclear 21 reactor is intact. This week, well be installing the new 22 manways on the steam generators. At that point, the 23 reactor coolant system, as well as the reactor will be 24 ready to be returned to service. Once again, there is much 25 more to do before we do that.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
21 1 Several months ago -- next slide. Several months 2 ago we told you about a Flus Leak Monitoring System that 3 FENOC was planning to install under the insulation of our 4 reactor vessel. This option is unique to the industry.
5 The Flus System demonstrates our commitment to improving 6 the stations operational and safety margins. At this 7 time, we have installed the system and well be testing it 8 during our upcoming first heatup of the plant.
9 Craig Hengge, our Project Manager, will provide you 10 a status of the system. As you know, in previous meetings, 11 we were not sure we would be able to buy this equipment, 12 much less get it installed. Once again, we think thats a 13 positive approach.
14 We have completed many other activities this month.
15 We have performed the Safety Features Actuation Test to 16 prove that our safety related equipment would respond as 17 designed.
18 We completed our Integrated Diesel Testing to assure 19 that the diesel would start and load to all the emergency 20 core cooling water system equipment. We instrumented the 21 diesel to monitor both the voltage and frequency, and did 22 find some voltage and frequency issues, drops in voltage 23 and frequency that were not expected and were analyzed as 24 we speak.
25 We improved and implemented our Improved Corrective MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
22 1 Action Program on March 1st, 2003. This program and the 2 changes ensure that the proper classifications of condition 3 reports are made and that their proper evaluations get 4 completed. This procedure is critical to the restart of 5 the plant and its implementation.
6 We implemented our new Decision-Making Nuclear 7 Operating Procedure and Problem Solving Procedure this 8 month also; and well talk about that later on in the 9 meeting.
10 Next slide.
11 We have installed new containment air coolers with 12 stainless steel coils. Each of the three cooling units has 13 twelve new cooling coils. You can see them there.
14 We also installed a new stainless steel air plenum 15 below that directs the air to the coolers. We are 16 presently experiencing some problems where the service 17 water trees that supply cooling water to the units. We 18 will not be satisfied until we get the design so that it is 19 both robust and maintainable.
20 Were completing our, an upgrade of the long term 21 problem with the containment decay heat pit. We have lined 22 this pit with stainless, as shown in the picture. It is 23 now a decay heat tank. Once again, we believe the upgrade 24 demonstrates Davis-Besses commitment to ensuring safety 25 related equipment receives the attention it deserves.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
23 1 We spent six days performing a Mode 6 Restart 2 Readiness Review to ensure that our engineers, our 3 mechanics, and our managers all have a common understanding 4 of our readiness for fuel load. We believe that effort, 5 that our effort to continue to support the performance of 6 our scheduled activities are necessary, but safety and 7 doing the job correctly the first time is the gate that we 8 must pass through to go forward.
9 Now, let me turn the meeting over to Craig Hengge 10 who will perform our new Flus Leakage Monitoring System.
11 Thank you.
12 MR. HENGGE: Thanks, Lew.
13 Good afternoon. My name is Craig Hengge. Ive been 14 an engineer over at Davis-Besse since 1981; had a variety 15 of responsibilities, a lot of which have been involved with 16 project management.
17 One of my responsibilities this outage has been 18 overseeing the activities associated with inspection and 19 remediation of the lower portion of the reactor vessel.
20 As youll recall when we did our initial inspections 21 back in April, we identified some staining down the side of 22 the vessel, which obscured the view of some of the incore 23 nozzles on the bottom of the vessel.
24 Im here this afternoon to update you on two of 25 those activities. One, as Lew mentioned, we committed to MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
24 1 pursue installation of the Flus Leak Detection System.
2 Ill give you an update on those installation activities, 3 as well as a brief description of the system. As Lew 4 mentioned, were the first in the country to install this 5 system and were pretty excited about its potential.
6 First, Im going to talk about some leak detection 7 testing that we also committed to pursue down at 8 Framatone. And the purpose of this testing, as youre 9 aware, we committed to do a Mode 3 full temperature and 10 pressure test as a way of confirming whether or not we 11 actually have any leakage down at the bottom of the 12 vessel.
13 As you recall, we had done some sampling and 14 analysis of those samples, and the results of those were 15 inconclusive. One of the things we wanted to determine 16 was, given the annulus configuration on the in-cores, what 17 type of leakage down there would we expect would result in 18 visible deposits at the surface of the vessel which we can 19 visually identify at the conclusion of our test.
20 We were also curious about what other types of 21 chemical residue might result from the leakage from those 22 nozzles. We were also curious to take those results to 23 compare back to our samples and see if they would add any 24 further clarification on the results we got from our 25 earlier samples.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
25 1 To accomplish this testing, we built a 1-2 1 tube mockup 2 down at Framatone that would pressurize the full RCS 3 temperature and pressure. The actual tube we used was 4 actually a four-inch diameter tube, as opposed to the 5 one-inch diameter that the tubes actually are. We did that 6 to accommodate using capillary tubing to actually control 7 the leak rate that we were simulating.
8 We feel the large diameter is conservative and that 9 it gives the leakage residue more volume to accumulate in 10 before its forced to the surface where we can detect it 11 during our post test inspection.
12 The leakage we detected, we simulate a leak in the 13 tube as opposed to the leak in the weld. Again, we thought 14 that was conservative, because a leak through the tube is 15 going to impact the vessel surface, dissipate its energy; 16 whereas a leak in weld, which we think is a more likely 17 scenario given the material, the leakage there would tend 18 to eject material up towards the surface which would 19 enhance our ability to detect it.
20 We ran a number of tests, as indicated on this 21 slide. We varied the Boron concentration, the leak rate 22 and duration. The first four tests were eight hours in 23 duration. Two principle Boron concentrations. The 2680 24 was representative of the Boron concentration we expect to 25 have during our Mode 3 test. We ran one test at 1134 ppm, MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
26 1 which is what we expect to have prior to our midcycle 2 outage.
3 We picked those numbers to get a feeling as to, for 4 different Boron concentrations, how we expect that to 5 affect the residue that might be at the surface.
6 We also monitored several leak rates as indicated, 7 .015 being the highest leak rate. We managed to get the 8 leak rates down to .0004 gallons per minute, which equates 9 to slightly over half a gallon per day.
10 To achieve that leak rate, we actually went back and 11 flattened a portion of the capillary tubing that we had 12 installed to get a leak rate that low.
13 For all four of those tests, at the conclusion of 14 the eight hours, we were able to identify visual source of, 15 visible residue on the surface, both on the tube and the 16 vessel surface.
17 We committed to do one longer test. We had hoped to 18 run the last test for 120 hours0.00139 days <br />0.0333 hours <br />1.984127e-4 weeks <br />4.566e-5 months <br />. Since we already had 19 visual results from the first four indicating they would 20 result in residue at the surface, we attempt to get a lower 21 leak rate by actually running the capillary tube through a 22 milling machine to flatten it out to try to get a lower 23 leak rate.
24 And, we were successful in getting a lower leak rate 25 during the cold testing, but when we put the capillary tube MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
27 1 into the system, our initial leak rate was actually a 2 little higher, .0006 gpm, but it was very erratic during 3 the test; and at 47 hours5.439815e-4 days <br />0.0131 hours <br />7.771164e-5 weeks <br />1.78835e-5 months <br />, the leak rate went to zero.
4 We terminated the test at 55 hours6.365741e-4 days <br />0.0153 hours <br />9.093915e-5 weeks <br />2.09275e-5 months <br />, and determined 5 that the capillary tube we had built had actually clogged.
6 Thats what caused the termination of the leak rate. But 7 again, at the conclusion of that, that test number 5, we 8 did have visible residue again at the surface, both on the 9 vessel surface and the tube surface.
10 The other significant result we got from all of 11 these tests, one of the things we noticed as we were 12 capturing the leak-off from the test, we noticed the Ph 13 continued to decline of the liquid we were capturing during 14 the duration of the test.
15 At the conclusion of test five, what we determined 16 is that the lithium that was in the liquid was not coming 17 clean with the leakage; it was actually staying at the 18 vessel surface. At the conclusion of test five, we 19 actually identified lithium concentrations at the tube and 20 vessel surface of 17,000 parts per million.
21 Thats important to us for two reasons. One is, one 22 of our concerns was, if we were to get a leak late in life 23 where we have very little Boron concentrations would there 24 be some visible residue, some identifiable residue that we 25 could trace back to that. The lithium now seems to MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
28 1 indicate that that would be a clear fingerprint that would 2 be a conclusive indicator of a leak.
3 The other thing that will be helpful for us, when we 4 go back and look at the samples that we took back in June, 5 one of our inconclusive results was, due to lithium 6 concentrations up to the 10,000 ppm range that we got in 7 one of our tubes, but again thats far below what we saw 8 even following this 55 hour6.365741e-4 days <br />0.0153 hours <br />9.093915e-5 weeks <br />2.09275e-5 months <br /> test.
9 MR. HOPKINS: Craig, I have a 10 question. Do you have any pictures of the visible residue 11 from this test you did here that we could see?
12 MR. HENGGE: I didnt bring any 13 with us, but we are looking at coming to Washington to 14 present more detailed results of this test activity.
15 MR. HOPKINS: Okay, thank you.
16 MR. GROBE: Do you have a time 17 frame for that?
18 MR. HENGGE: I think were 19 looking at later this month, somewhere around the March 20 28th time frame.
21 MR. GROBE: Okay. The sooner 22 the better.
23 MR. HENGGE: I understand.
24 Next slide.
25 I would like now to talk a little bit about the Flus MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
29 1 Monitoring System that were going to be installing.
2 Again, as Lew mentioned, were the first utility in the 3 state to install this system. This is a state-of-the-art 4 system.
5 MR. GROBE: Craig, One more 6 question. I apologize. Im not familiar with how you 7 would measure lithium. How do you measure that? Do you 8 take a wipe and then -- how do you get a lithium 9 concentration, in a residue?
10 MR. HENGGE: We took wipe 11 samples of the surface, surfaces that were outside the 12 annulus at the conclusion of the test.
13 MR. GROBE: And what analysis 14 technique is used for that?
15 MR. HENGGE: I believe they use 16 ICP.
17 MS. FRESCH Im sorry, I 18 believe they use?
19 MR. HENGGE: ICP. I used to --
20 if there is any chemists in the audience that can help me 21 out, I dont remember what the acronym stands for. Im not 22 a chemist, sorry.
23 The Flus System as mentioned will be the first to be 24 installed domestically. The system has been installed in 25 twelve other facilities; ten over in Europe and two in MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
30 1 Canada. Its had a very successful life so far from a 2 reliability and detection standpoint, in terms of being 3 able to detect leaks in the vicinity of where its been 4 monitored.
5 Flus is an acronym. Im not going to embarrass my 6 German by trying to pronounce it. It stands for humidity 7 leak detection system. A couple of the words are fairly 8 close to our version, the other two are not.
9 Next slide.
10 Again, where were installing the system is to 11 monitor the under vessel portion of our reactor dealing 12 with the in-core. Its a fairly simple system to install; 13 three cabinets and conduits and tubing. The actual 14 implementation is only going to take us about three weeks.
15 The issue of concern for getting it installed was getting 16 the equipment here and getting the design done, and we were 17 successful in accomplishing both of those.
18 The element identified there is kind of the heart of 19 the system. What this is, is a piece of the sensory 20 tubing. The sensor element depicted there, what that 21 actually allows -- its more coil than actual sensor, but 22 allows the dry air that is inside the tube to communicate 23 with the ambient air around the area where youre trying to 24 sense for a leak.
25 What it allows is humidity or moisture in the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
31 1 ambient air to diffuse into, saturate the air that is 2 inside the tube. And these senator sensor elements are located 3 about every foot or two on the sensor tubing that you mount 4 in the area youre trying to monitor.
5 And, where were going to have these installed is 6 two areas. They will be installed in a ring underneath the 7 reactor vessel. They will also have a short section of 8 sensor tubing mounted in the cavity area, to monitor 9 ambient humidity in the cavity area. Ill spend a little 10 more time about the principle of operation in a later 11 slide.
12 The system itself has eight available channels of 13 which well only be using one, which is one of the reasons 14 were kind of excited, because it does have the capability 15 for future expansion. Once you have the cabinets 16 installed, really to utilize additional channels is just a 17 matter of running some additional tubing to the other areas 18 you want to monitor.
19 The expected sensitivity of the system is between 20 .004 to .02 gpm. And the principle difference between that 21 is how tight your insulation is around the area that youre 22 trying to monitor.
23 We are going to be doing an actual sensitivity test 24 of the system when we do the commissioning test during our 25 Mode 3 Test. What were going to do is were going to have MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
32 1 an extra tube actually mounted to allow us to inject a 2 known quantity of moisture into the bottom of the vessel.
3 We will begin that test actually at .002 gpm. We can step 4 that up, so we can monitor how a system responds to a known 5 leak rate. Well use that to help set the system up when 6 we return to operation.
7 The last slide Im going to talk about is a 8 schematic of how the system is laid out. As I mentioned, 9 there is three cabinets, two of those will be mounted 10 inside containment. Those cabinets are connected by tubing 11 to the sensors that are mounted underneath the reactor 12 vessel, as well to the sensory tube that is going to be 13 mounted in the cavity area.
14 How the system works is periodically dry air is 15 purged into the tubing, forcing out the air thats been in 16 the tubing. As that air is forced out, its forced through 17 a humidity detector, which calculates and produces a 18 humidity profile of the air as it returns.
19 At the beginning of the curve cycle, the system 20 injects a known humidity spike, called a test spike.
21 Thats used for two reasons. One is it helps calibrate the 22 system when it sees it on its return, it knows what that 23 spike is. It also tells it when the first cycle is over.
24 What well be able to do with these humidity 25 profiles, once we establish a known profile, what would MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
33 1 happen is, if you got a leak in the area that youre 2 monitoring, obviously the humidity and moisture content is 3 going to change, its going to become much higher. That 4 will be reflected by the humidity profile increasing with 5 time.
6 One of the things well do with the information 7 well get from our threshold test is calibrate how that 8 humidity profile change, or given the leak rates were 9 going to simulate during our test, we use that information 10 to set up alarm set points. So, if we were to get a leak 11 in the area at a known leak rate and a known humidity 12 threshold, we would get a LOCA alarm that we can take 13 action on.
14 The other cabinet that will actually monitor and 15 track and be able to trend the humidity profiles, we 16 mounted outside of containment and theyre only accessible 17 to our personnel.
18 MR. GROBE: Does this give 19 you the capability to identify which of these sensor 20 elements, since its purged over time and you have this 21 spike; can you tell which sensor element is detecting the 22 higher humidity?
23 MR. HENGGE: Were going to 24 determine that. Dependent on how you set up the first 25 times. If you have the first times fairly close together, MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
34 1 it does give you the accuracy where you can really pick up 2 which individual sensors, but you lose some sensitivity by 3 increasing that.
4 Were more interested from a sensitivity standpoint 5 on going to the longer purge time to detect any leakage, 6 much less than, more so than we are interested in which 7 sensor is picking it up. But the difference, we would be 8 able to sense a difference between what were seeing 9 underneath the vessel and what the RST, the Root Sensor 10 Tube will be detecting. We built that in, because we put a 11 delay coil between the two sensors.
12 MR. THOMAS: Did I understand 13 you correctly when you said this system wouldnt be on line 14 and calibrated during, for service during the NOP and NOT 15 Test, that youre actually calibrating it during that time; 16 is that correct?
17 MR. HENGGE: Correct.
18 MR. PASSEHL: At the time of 19 plant restart, will you have the alarm functions working 20 and the indications in the control room that you would 21 normally expect to have, or once the system is up and 22 running?
23 MR. HENGGE: Well have 24 procedures in place for the system, well have alarms set.
25 We will not have an individual alarm in the control room.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
35 1 Right now, were looking at a computer alarm that would be 2 available in the control room.
3 MR. PASSEHL: And will the 4 profiles, will they be available like on the plant process 5 computer or how eventually will you have that?
6 MR. HENGGE: Profiles will be 7 locally generated on the computer in the process cabinet 8 that we can retrieve locally at that computer. Im not 9 sure if the system is capable of generating that on our 10 process computer. Thats something well be looking at.
11 MR. PASSEHL: Thank you.
12 MR. HENGGE: Any other 13 questions? Thank you.
14 MR. MYERS: Okay. I would 15 like to take a few moments to discuss a new Nuclear 16 Operating Procedure that we are using to provide a 17 systematic approach to addressing our station issues.
18 This particular procedure has been effectively 19 implemented at our other two plants. And, if we had had 20 the system, this process in place here several years ago, I 21 think our approach to asking questions, harder questions on 22 the Boron that we found on the reactor head, we might not 23 be here today.
24 The problem solving and decision-making procedure 25 was already effectively implemented, once again, at our MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
36 1 Perry and Beaver Valley plants. And when we developed it, 2 we used the best industry experience that we could find to 3 develop this procedure.
4 Lets take a few moments to discuss the purpose.
5 The purpose is to ensure the plant issues are addressed 6 consistently and effectively without consequences to plant 7 safety or reliability.
8 Now, what does that mean? We do a lot of 9 troubleshooting on the plant while its running. And 10 understanding what were doing in preventing errors is very 11 important. Thats what thats about.
12 We, the purpose is to evaluate the significance of 13 the issue and the potential impact on nuclear safety. What 14 you see is, well take each issue and categorize it, and 15 finally to determine the level of management approval based 16 on the significance of the issue.
17 Next slide.
18 As you remember, we defined Nuclear Safety Culture 19 as characteristics and attitudes that ensure that the 20 organization and the people provide the correct attention 21 to safety-related activities. Pretty important, both the 22 organization and the people.
23 In this procedure, we characterize issues as either 24 low, medium or high significance. A low significance issue 25 has the following attributes. No personnel or radiological MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
37 1 issue should be present. Not likely to cause damage to 2 plant and components or systems while were doing our 3 troubleshooting or testing. Not likely to effect the 4 operations of the plant or an increase in the probalistic 5 safety assessment, risk assessment, if you will.
6 Medium significance, next slide.
7 Now were going a little more towards the safety 8 issues. There is a potential for personnel or radiological 9 concerns here. Without controls, one could cause damage to 10 plant equipment; without controls. Thats not unusual for 11 us to be troubleshooting what would cause a reactor trip or 12 something like that. Controls required to prevent 13 undesirable change of state of components -- no plant 14 transients. When were troubleshooting, out doing tests, 15 we should prevent plant transients. Often put jumpers in, 16 pumping water to different locations. So, thats a 17 question we have to ask. And finally, reevaluation of the 18 risk associated with the activity.
19 High significance activity is one that could cause 20 damage to critical plant equipment, or could result in 21 either personnel or radiological safety issues. Then 22 finally, without proper controls, will not result in 23 reactor changes, generation or runback, runbacks of power.
24 So, you have to have those controls in place.
25 Next slide.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
38 1 The pride of this process is that we form a team 2 each and every time when issues arise with our best people 3 to work through the six principles shown on this slide to 4 make, and then finally to make recommendations to our 5 managers or our senior managers, management team, if you 6 will, based on the significance.
7 Now we recently used this several times. We have 8 consistently used the process over the past several weeks 9 in addressing the issues; for example, the high head safety 10 injection pump or the leak that we had. We had a leak on 11 one of the nuclear instrument tubes prior to flood up. And 12 then finally that was an option; we formed a team when we 13 removed the upper plenum that I talked about earlier.
14 So, once again, this is a new FENOC procedure that 15 we have in place. Its a Nuclear Operating Procedure.
16 Its important that we demonstrate that we take this, this 17 approach as part of our Safety Culture. Each and every 18 time we have plant issues, we use this procedure 19 religiously. Thats the reason I wanted to talk about it 20 today. Thank you.
21 MR. GROBE: It sometimes is 22 hard for folks to understand the importance of something 23 like this. I think your initial comments regarding Safety 24 Culture were very appropriate.
25 Good people can make bad decisions because they MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
39 1 didnt carefully approach the process of making decisions.
2 I havent seen many procedures like this in the past, but I 3 think its very important that you put something like this 4 in place and it just is a continual reminder of the 5 importance of discipline in decision-making for a high risk 6 activity like nuclear power plant operation.
7 MR. MYERS: Even on something 8 like, you know, the Boron on the head, I think if we went 9 through a thorough process of asking all the hard 10 questions, we would have come up with a conclusion that may 11 not have come from the managers. So, probably would have 12 taken a different approach than what we did and may not be 13 here today.
14 So, I agree with you, from a Safety Culture 15 standpoint, demonstrating and using this approach 16 consistently every time is an important step. Thank you.
17 MR. GROBE: Any other questions?
18 Craig, I thought of a question. I apologize for 19 coming back to you while Lew was talking, not that I wasnt 20 listening, Lew.
21 I dont recall a discussion of using chemical wipes 22 after the NOP/NOT Test. Is it your plan now to use 23 chemical wipes as well as visual inspection following that 24 test?
25 MR. HENGGE: Yeah. Very good MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
40 1 point. One of the issues that I have approached with 2 Framatone, one of the concerns I had was the amount of 3 residue we expect to see could be very small, and we know 4 when we were doing our vessel cleaning activities, pressure 5 washing, that we probably managed to pack some of those old 6 deposits up into the crevice area. And when we heat the 7 plant up and have our Mode 3 test, go through thermal 8 cycle, some vibration, we expect to see all those nozzles; 9 some of that debris is going to come back out and end up on 10 the tubes.
11 We want to be able to differentiate that stuff from 12 something that might be indicative of a real active leak.
13 What were going to use is the results from these lithium 14 concentrations to accomplish that.
15 Before we do the Mode 3 test, were going to go down 16 to a number of tubes and actually take some wipe samples 17 from the surface of the vessel and the tube, use that as 18 our baseline, and well repeat that on those same suspect 19 tubes, as well as any others, and use those results to 20 verify whether any deposits that we see are indeed old or 21 new.
22 MR. GROBE: Okay, very good.
23 Thank you.
24 MS. FEHR: Good afternoon.
25 Ill start out by introducing myself. My name is Kathy MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
41 1 Fehr, and Ive been out at Davis-Besse since 1986, and Im 2 the Observation Program Owner at Davis-Besse.
3 I have my Associates Degree in Nuclear Power. I 4 have a Bachelors Degree in Business Management. And Im 5 currently working on my MBA.
6 Ive had various positions at Davis-Besse since Ive 7 started out there. I have worked in Emergency 8 Preparedness; I have worked in Engineering, Operations and 9 Performance Improvement.
10 Ive been working on the Observation Program for 11 over two years at Davis-Besse. Its a FENOC program. And 12 we have the program implemented at all three sites, all 13 three FENOC sites. We implemented the program at 14 Davis-Besse in September of 2002.
15 The purpose of the Observation Program is to provide 16 management oversight on activities and influence desired 17 behaviors.
18 What I wanted to do is go over some of the 19 categories that we have on the Observation Program, some of 20 the, or some of the answers when they are out observing.
21 Some of them will have satisfactory -- we have 22 satisfactory coached, unsatisfactory coached and 23 satisfactory.
24 The satisfactory means the observer saw conditions 25 that meets or exceeds expectations and no comments were MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
42 1 made by the observer.
2 The satisfactory coached means it meets or exceeds 3 expectations, but comments were made by the observer; would 4 probably be the positive feedback and interaction with the 5 field.
6 Unsatisfactory coached is when we provide feedback 7 for areas of improvement and we influence desired 8 behaviors.
9 And what Ill do is Ill give you a couple of 10 examples of some unsatisfactory coached, so you can see 11 what we see.
12 One of them, an example of unsat coached would be if 13 an observer was watching a prejob brief and the briefer 14 started the brief without a checklist. We had an observer 15 stop, have them use the checklist, and correct the 16 situation right on the spot.
17 Another example would be, we had the Operating 18 Experience Program Owner at the, at a prejob brief, and 19 there was no operating experience provided in the work 20 package. That resulted in an unsatisfactory observation.
21 Another example is when the observer saw a hard, a 22 person working out in the field with his hard hat turned 23 around and his brim was on the opposite side it should have 24 been. The observer stopped him, told him that the FENOC 25 safety manual had him to wear it the proper way. And they MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
43 1 did fix the situation right on the spot.
2 Another example is weve had an observation where 3 the operator was using slang to identify a component.
4 We also have an unsat observation that was conducted 5 by Bob Schrauder.
6 Bob, did you want to talk about CACs?
7 MR. SCHRAUDER: I had done an 8 observation out in the field on the work in progress on 9 containment air coolers. It was during that observation 10 that we observed plant workers actually climbing on the 11 equipment, which is not acceptable under any condition, but 12 in this particular one, it was particularly troublesome, 13 because the connections from service water to the 14 containment air coolers is a bellows-type arrangement made 15 out of stainless steel. That has very limited capability 16 for flex. Its made to flex, so it can take up thermal 17 expansion on the supply line to it. And its only rated 18 for about two hundred pounds of pressure on the thing.
19 The individual climbed and actually stepped right in 20 the center of the bellows, which required a significant 21 amount of preanalysis and in fact some change-out of some 22 of the bellows on the containment air coolers.
23 In that instance, I was able to bring the gentlemen 24 down off of the cooler. I did query him as to whether they 25 had been sensitized, first of all discussed policy pretty MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
44 1 clear; you dont climb on plant equipment, we use ladders 2 and the like.
3 Talked to him to see, to get a sense of the 4 workforce as to whether supervision had in fact discussed 5 with him the sensitivity of the equipment that they were 6 installing. Did not gain a sense that they were 7 knowledgeable enough in that area. So, we went forward and 8 talked to the supervisor also, got Design Engineering 9 involved in creating a better installation approach and 10 workability constructability.
11 So, thats an example of inappropriate actions in 12 the field that we were able to observe and correct.
13 MS. FEHR: Next slide.
14 MR. GROBE: Kathy, before you 15 go on. Im glad you asked Bob to speak, because I had a 16 note that I wanted to ask about containment air cooler 17 work.
18 So, this program applies to contract workers as well 19 as plant staff; is that correct?
20 MS. FEHR: They are not using 21 it right now, the Observation Program.
22 MR. SCHRAUDER: But we do 23 observe --
24 MS. FEHR: We observe 25 contractors. We observe everybody.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
45 1 MR. GROBE: All right. The 2 contract organizations are not required to use it, but you 3 use it.
4 MS. FEHR: Correct.
5 MR. GROBE: Youve had a 6 number of challenges with the containment air cooler work 7 over the last several weeks at least. I was wondering if 8 maybe you could comment on that a little bit, and comment 9 on the effectiveness of this program in that context.
10 MS. FEHR: I have an 11 observation that was conducted by the Human Performance 12 Advocate too on the cast. And, I brought it with me.
13 And this happened on 2-4-03. And part of his 14 observation, I wont go through the whole thing, but he 15 said the copper fins on the new cooling coils have been 16 dinged, and they appeared, or appeared over the last couple 17 days.
18 So, what they did right away, immediately they roped 19 off the situation, and that way it wouldnt, people 20 couldnt get in there. Then they hung sound proofing 21 blankets around all four walls of the CACs, so those are, 22 thats an example of what they did with the CACs.
23 MR. GROBE: What I was trying 24 to get at was a little more comprehensive. There has been 25 a continuing challenge with quality of work on the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
46 1 containment air coolers, and I was wondering how the 2 feedback process or the Management Observation Program 3 feeds into a broader assessment that would get at this kind 4 of an issue?
5 MR. MYERS: Yeah, weve seen 6 several workmanship problems, problems with 7 maintainability. I mentioned that on the, on the, what we 8 call the Service Trees; the connections, waterline 9 connections, which were building in the field. And thats 10 basically with our contract vendor.
11 What weve done since that time, we collected all 12 those issues, sat down with Engineering already, looked at 13 the Lessons Learned, for the next two were installing.
14 Where there are some changes in the way were going 15 to build stuff in the field. There is also changes in the 16 way well pressurize the system. We went out pressurizing 17 the system after putting everything in place the last 18 time. Were going to be pressurizing sections this time as 19 we build it, to make sure its leak free as we build it.
20 Also there is some questions about maintainability 21 with the Service Tree Structure. What I say was, the 22 Engineering Department really did a good job building it 23 robustly, because it could never be moved, you know, the 24 first one. So, it must be robust.
25 So, we probably dont want that, so theyre going MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
47 1 back and looking at how to make a bolted change down below 2 that allows you to move the structure out of place in case 3 you ever want to go pull a cooler or something like that.
4 So, we have collected those issues. Ive already 5 had one meeting on how we go forward here on the next two, 6 and well see if we cant improve the performance there.
7 Okay.
8 MR. DUNN: Jack, I can speak 9 a little about that from the work implementation. Part of 10 what we learned from the Lessons Learned, we also utilized 11 the problem solving decision-making tool when we captured 12 up those observations and Lessons Learned to collectively 13 look at that. And, as Lew mentioned, we have some 14 constructability items where the design is good to respond 15 to the post accident conditions necessary, but how 16 constructable is that and how maintainable is that were 17 some of the challenges.
18 What we found was some improvement opportunities and 19 the methodology in which we do the installation. So, were 20 changing our methodologies for installation. We also had 21 and instituted stop work activity on the actual conduct of 22 the containment air cooler service water pipe side, got the 23 craftsman involved with that problem solving 24 decision-making team. So, actual participation of the 25 craftsmen, so that they could provide their input as to MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
48 1 what the corrective measures going forward are.
2 Many times we pull the engineers together and come 3 up with a solution as to how the craftsmen can do work 4 better, and failed to bring those folks into, bring the 5 customer, if you will, into the participation role.
6 So, this instance, we definitely made sure we 7 accomplished that and came up with a collective corrective 8 measures which involve both how we want to do the 9 installation in the field and how the design will be 10 conducted, so that the workers have a more simpler 11 installation technique.
12 MR. GROBE: Okay, thanks 13 Greg.
14 MR. MYERS: I knew he would 15 give better answers than I do.
16 MS. FEHR: Another thing we 17 do for the Observation Program is we have focus areas and 18 thats in scheduled observations, and Ill get to that in 19 the next slide.
20 This slide represents the February results for the 21 observation program, who is doing observations by title.
22 You can see The VP/Director level did 7 percent of the 23 observations. The Manager/Shift Manager did 18 percent of 24 the observations. Superintendent was 11 percent of the 25 observations. Supervisors, 49 percent of the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
49 1 observations. And the Other is 15 percent of the 2 observations.
3 The Other would be Project Managers, or visiting 4 people from the other sites, or maybe the Human Performance 5 Advocates and stuff like that.
6 Next slide.
7 The next slide talks just in general what the total 8 observations we had this month was 350 observations.
9 Scheduled observations for February was 90 percent 10 average participation, and thats the same as what we had 11 in January.
12 Some examples of the scheduled observations that we 13 do. We do them on a weekly basis. We -- Ill call the 14 Human Performance Advocate. Ill talk to people in the 15 field, find out focus areas we need to concentrate on for 16 the following week. Ill then schedule the observations 17 and notify the people that they do have an observation for 18 the next week.
19 Some of the activities that we have chosen have been 20 the activities that are going out in the field, going on 21 out in the field, relating to the schedule. I schedule Ops 22 hanging and restoring clearances, Ops turnovers. We do 23 containment walkdowns, check for FME. We sit at the 24 entrance of the RRA entrance and make sure people know what 25 theyre doing when they go in there and theyre sure of MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
50 1 themselves. Check for housekeeping, safety in PPE. We do 2 scaffolding checks. We do about any kind of observation, 3 what the focus area maybe for the next week.
4 We also have special activities that are scheduled 5 by Project Managers, which weve done, and use the 6 Observation Program; and three examples of that would be 7 the deep drain valve work, weve scheduled critical path 8 activities, and weve also scheduled observations for fuel 9 movement.
10 The next slide talks about the Condition Reports 11 that we have. This is a live data base, so the numbers do 12 change a little bit, but 6.21 percent of the February 13 observations generated Condition Reports. I believe that 14 number is up just a little bit right now.
15 The number is up from the January observations.
16 And, actually on a year-to-date total, we have, I think it 17 was 92 observations created; they generated CRs from 18 observations.
19 Okay. The next slide talks about the coaching, and 20 thats what I described earlier with the definitions.
21 February we had 12.2 percent coaching, 9.4 was satisfactory 22 coached and 2.8 was unsatisfactory coached. And the 23 numbers there are for January, so you can see the 24 comparison. We had 10.9 percent overall coached in 25 January.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
51 1 What I wanted to talk about too was some strengths 2 and weaknesses that we have in the program and I brought 3 some observations along too, to read some of them to you.
4 The biggest weakness that I see right now in the 5 observations is the housekeeping in containment. And I 6 have a couple examples of some observations from people 7 that went into containment. I was going to tell you what 8 they found and what they did about it.
9 The first example I have is a shift manager went out 10 and conducted a paired observation with a couple of other 11 people in Ops. And they found that the conditions were 12 unacceptable. And they added the containment sump and the 13 565 level inspections back on to the Mode 6 restraint 14 list.
15 Another example is a superintendent in Ops was out 16 doing a safety and PPE usage in containment observation.
17 He found debris, such as tie wraps, loops plastic, tape, et 18 cetera, and they were removed from the 565 level. So, what 19 he did about it was he contacted the project manager, and 20 they drafted up a paper; it was a position paper; on what 21 conditions are acceptable.
22 And he wrote this position paper and it describes, 23 like I said, the acceptable conditions and it also has a 24 handout to it. They gave this handout at turnover and they 25 gave it to all the containment managers. So, this is a MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
52 1 sheet of paper that they are using. Its a summary of what 2 is acceptable and what is not acceptable.
3 MR. THOMAS: Kathy, youre 4 discussing housekeeping issues and lower level of 5 containment. Maybe someone could describe why thats 6 important, based on your present plant conditions. I dont 7 know if thats clear why those are important issues.
8 MR. POWERS: Housekeeping is 9 important down there, Scott, because weve got our 10 containment emergency sump construction complete to the 11 point where the upper portions of the sump is available to 12 the systems, and we utilize that sump as part of our 13 defense in depth for shutdown risk.
14 Its a piece of the equipment of the plant that we 15 want to make sure is available to us, should we need it 16 from a shutdown risk perspective. So, we keep the areas 17 clean, so that the sump remains available and wouldnt be 18 clogged by any potential construction debris.
19 MR. THOMAS: Thank you.
20 MS. FEHR: Another one of the 21 observations that I brought along was, a manager was out in 22 containment and they were surprised that the lack of 23 supervision around the RRA area. So, what I did was 24 scheduled observations and I had people sit out there for, 25 I think it was, I think I scheduled five observations that MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
53 1 week for that.
2 And one of the people did an observation. He went 3 out there for six days and sat at the entrance of the RRA.
4 And he sent in an observation with his statistics on what 5 he found.
6 He said he saw 34 people entering the RRA and 53 7 exit. And the bottom line was, two persons were turned 8 back to their supervisors due to inadequate understanding 9 of work scope.
10 So, the weaknesses are being found out in the plant 11 and there is on the spot correction of the problems.
12 Some of the strengths that I found is a lot of 13 teamwork going on. This is, this is what I see of the 14 observers writing about the observees. They see a lot of 15 teamwork going on in the plant. I have a few observations 16 here to give you examples of when they were, I think this 17 was maintenance, they were lifting some barriers, and they 18 wrote in their observation; they stopped and they went to 19 get engineering assistance, so they could ask what size 20 pipe to use.
21 I have an example of another person who was told 22 that they needed to get engineering involved in the 23 walkdown, along with RP, so they all agreed on how the 24 situation would be done to begin with, at the beginning of 25 the, at the beginning of the project.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
54 1 I have another observation, and the activity was 2 unplugged drain lines in the collection box. This observer 3 mentioned notifying chemistry, RP was notified to take 4 readings, and they stopped and they contacted Ops to make 5 sure the flow was reestablished. And the strengths that 6 this person did identify was teamwork and support from 7 other groups. So, the groups are working together out 8 there. Were seeing that in the observations.
9 Another example of teamwork was a core support 10 assembly, when it was moved from the deep end of the 11 refueling canal to the reactor vessel, this observer 12 noticed great teamwork by FTI, and, which is Framatone and 13 RP.
14 The other strength that I find in this program is, I 15 can see a lot of what the observers, which is what 16 management is doing out there within the field, and how 17 theyre reacting to what theyre finding. The things I 18 find is theyre doing follow-up observations with what 19 theyre finding. Theyre going out there correcting on the 20 spot. Theyre writing CRs. And, I have a couple of them 21 just from this past month where they would go out a couple 22 days later and they would find out if the situation was 23 still occurring.
24 I have that, some examples of a superintendent of 25 Ops that did that. He was out watching fuel handling in MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
55 1 containment in the spent fuel pool. He noticed the 2 self-checking for the containment side operator of the 3 transfer mechanism; they didnt stop; they didnt pause 4 before their peer check.
5 So, this observer went out and he went over and he 6 checked both sides of the spent fuel pool and the other 7 operators out there to see if this was common; if they all 8 knew this was just a problem. He found out it was just a 9 problem with the one operator. What he did was he 10 discussed it, discussed it from becoming complaisant and 11 standards for self-check. Thats what he discussed with 12 them.
13 Then I noticed a couple days -- it was the following 14 day, he went out and did an observation on self-checks just 15 to make sure it was satisfactory.
16 So, I have some more examples of the follow-up that 17 the managers are doing. Heres one from a person. I love 18 these.
19 He was doing an observation of a prejob brief. And, 20 what he did was -- Ill read it to you. The prejob brief 21 form was completed and the work order package. The prejob 22 brief form was not signed by both technicians on the job; 23 however, both technicians stated that they attended the 24 prejob brief. So, this observer questioned the technicians 25 to determine if they were properly briefed; and he MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
56 1 determined that they were, but he questioned them for 2 follow-up.
3 So, in conclusion, I think the Management 4 Observation Program has had some positive, positive effects 5 on what were finding in the people at Davis-Besse. I do 6 believe there is room for improvement with the situation 7 with housekeeping in containment. Thats why we do the 8 scheduled observations.
9 Did you want to add anything to it, Lew?
10 MR. MYERS: I think, I just 11 think its, in September at these meetings you kept asking 12 us, you know, what are you seeing; what are you getting out 13 of the program. It was new and we had a little trouble, 14 difficulty answering that. But I think today our data base 15 is much improved, and we can tell you what were finding, 16 and I think we demonstrated that. So, that was the intent 17 here.
18 MR. GROBE: Okay. Questions?
19 MR. DEAN: I have a couple 20 questions. One is, you know, in your slide where you have 21 the observation percentage by title. You have varying 22 levels within the organization that are out there doing 23 observations.
24 How do you assure that there is some consistency in 25 the way these managers look at what it is theyre looking MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
57 1 at in the field? Is there something to find that they can 2 refer to for expectations in particular, work activity that 3 theyre looking at, or are they just out there kind of 4 winging it in terms of...
5 MS. FEHR: We have set 6 questions on the cards in which they answer. They all read 7 the field observation card or the Ops observation card or 8 the training observation card.
9 MR. DEAN: So, youve got 10 several categories, so that gives you kind of a checklist 11 approach.
12 MS. FEHR: Correct. We go 13 from prejob -- there is probably two hundred questions on 14 each one of the cards, and they go from prejob briefs to 15 housekeeping to safety to FME. There is a lot of questions 16 on those.
17 MR. DEAN: Second question I 18 have is, obviously, a program like this sets itself up for 19 collecting all sorts of data, you talk about percentages of 20 this, coached, uncoached, so on and so forth.
21 Have you set some goals or expectations of the 22 program itself that you would consider to be valuable 23 measures? Like, for example, you talked about 90 percent 24 were done as scheduled. I mean, do you have some goals 25 that you have for yourself in terms of things like that?
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
58 1 MS. FEHR: We do have goals 2 for the scheduled observations, which is 90 percent or 3 better. We also have a goal for coaching within FENOC; and 4 we go with ten percent or better is what were looking for 5 with coaching. And thats all interaction with the field.
6 MR. DEAN: And then the last 7 question is really one maybe more for Bill, is obviously, 8 you talk about generating CRs out of this, which is good.
9 You want to see these types of things, feed them to the 10 Corrective Action System.
11 Bill, in the observations of your organization, do 12 you see some sort of congruence here in the types of 13 observations that you have had from your people in terms of 14 in-field observations and the types of things that are 15 coming out of this program?
16 MR. PEARCE: Yes, we do and 17 Ill go through some of these in just a moment when I 18 talk.
19 MR. DEAN: Good, thank you.
20 MR. SCHRAUDER: I think the 21 challenge for us going forward, we are doing observations.
22 We are doing better, but a lot of us arent as trained.
23 Thats not been our forte of doing focused observations.
24 Organizations like IMPO INPO, the NRC, their inspectors or their 25 observers seem to have their skills honed much better than MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
59 1 we do. So, were looking at methods to hone our skills in 2 the art, if you will, of observation.
3 Some of the things will jump out at you. Like a guy 4 standing on a CAC, its not too difficult to figure out 5 thats probably not the right thing to do, but there are 6 some other subtle types of things that can come out of 7 field observations and stuff; and thats where we have to 8 hone our skills a little bit better.
9 MR. GROBE: Feed them raw 10 meat. (laughter) 11 A couple of questions, you sort of by percentage 12 have who is doing the observations. Do you also have the 13 capability to sort by departments or functions or work 14 groups?
15 MS. FEHR: Yeah, we have 16 that, thats a candid report. Some of the reports that are 17 in the program right now are available by anybody who uses 18 this program. And they can just, any time, at any time and 19 place, they can get these reports of the departments.
20 MR. GROBE: And can you do 21 that both on the who is doing the observing as well as what 22 the outcomes are?
23 MS. FEHR: Correct, we can 24 check the observee and we can have the departments check on 25 what people are finding about their departments.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
60 1 MR. GROBE: Do you produce a 2 a periodic report of some nature that you provide?
3 MS. FEHR: I dont currently 4 right now. What I do, is the managers go over it weekly or 5 monthly with their people and their departments, and they 6 discuss their findings. I know maintenance and I know 7 operations go over weekly and they go over them.
8 MR. GROBE: If you could just 9 pull together a set of the various standard reports that 10 you have, pages, I would like to see those at some time.
11 MS. FEHR: Okay.
12 MR. GROBE: Thanks.
13 I think its one of the observations that you 14 highlighted, the individual used the word complacency, and 15 I think thats real important. I hope folks arent taking 16 these numbers and trying to say, you know, 2.8 17 unsatisfactory coached is not good, and 2.7 is good, 18 because I think thats, thats kind of silly. As soon as 19 you stop looking to improve, thats when you start 20 declining in performance. And its very important to have 21 coaching in the field.
22 So, weve just got to be a little careful with some 23 of these numbers, I want to make sure we dont 24 inappropriately use them.
25 Any other questions?
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
61 1 MR. THOMAS: I have one more 2 question. The discussion about the CACs, I was looking 3 through the program and I didnt see a better place to ask 4 it, so Im going to ask it here.
5 Specifically, with the service water tree 6 installation, and with a lot of your other projects that 7 are ongoing, youve used the at risk change process, 8 significantly, due to a large extent. You used it 9 liberally, I guess. Specifically, with the CAC service 10 water tree installation work, and you can expand to other 11 projects if you like in your answer, have you seen that 12 thats, the use of that process has caused any challenges?
13 MR. POWERS: I would say, what 14 were talking about, what Scott is alluding to on the at 15 risk change; its an engineering work release to the field 16 that is, its like a preliminary engineering design. We 17 havent completed all the details of the full package yet, 18 but its been worked enough that we feel comfortable that 19 we can release work and begin working in the field, and if 20 we find any changes that need to be made as we finish up 21 the formal package, then we have to suffer the cost of 22 rework, but there is no nuclear safety or industrial safety 23 risks associated with it. If there is a risk, commercial 24 risk is what were talking about.
25 But, yes, the CAC service water distribution trees MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
62 1 have been the most significant issue that weve had with 2 our process for work release to the field. The expedited 3 process under the at risk has not had the level of 4 interaction with the installers, the field craft and 5 supervision, as well as what we found recently in 6 evaluating this, the plant engineers and operators or 7 others that we need to engage in this process.
8 And so, we found some good lessons learned with that 9 process with the CAC trees, but we havent seen that level 10 of issue in many other projects that weve had. This one 11 has given us an opportunity to improve in those areas.
12 MR. MYERS: Let me answer 13 that question too. The answer is yes.
14 MR. GROBE: Thats a very 15 interesting question. I appreciate that, Scott. Let me 16 take it a little further, if I could.
17 You had a number of observations in the containment 18 air cooler design issues that might have to do with 19 interface between design and system engineering, interface 20 between design and maintenance, interface between design 21 and operations. Was that process less effective because 22 you were using the at risk modification approach, or did 23 those reviews occur before the installation began?
24 MR. POWERS: In the case of the 25 CAC trees, the process was less effective with the at risk MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
63 1 change. So, the answer again is yes, there was some issues 2 there that needed process.
3 MR. GROBE: I need a little 4 more of an answer there. When you do an at risk mod, 5 youre doing at risk because you dont have all the design 6 work done, but has op -- are you doing that modification 7 before youve integrated the insights from Operations, 8 Maintenance and Plant Engineering?
9 MR. POWERS: In some cases, 10 yes, Jack.
11 MR. GROBE: So, you really 12 have some substantial financial commitment before Ops, 13 Maintenance and Plant Engineering get involved.
14 MR. POWERS: Thats right. And 15 in cases such as the emergency sump or the decay valve 16 tank, now that weve lined, its a static structural 17 component and there is not a lot of input in terms of 18 Operations and Plant Engineering and such.
19 For the CAC tree, it was a rather special case in 20 terms of the long term inspectability in taking those CAC 21 trees off. And what we found was, it was really found in 22 the field once the craft began working with the fellows bellows 23 trying to maintain alignment and control the welding 24 distortion, welding up the stainless steel work piping 25 connections. That began to become apparent that MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
64 1 disassembling that and controlling that alignment would be, 2 would have some difficulty. So, thats what arose on that 3 particular issue.
4 MR. MYERS: If you go back and 5 you look at the entire outage, you know, typically, outage 6 you would build your modifications months and months and 7 months before you come down, order all your parts, do your 8 feasibility reviews up front, all your walkdowns and 9 everything else. Were doing a lot of discovery and were 10 building the ice while were here. So, thats driving some 11 of the at risk changes.
12 But, even early on, if you think back, you know, 13 were cutting the containment. We had some issues with 14 some modifications. We had some issues, installation of 15 the head. Had the crane issues, you know. That was an at 16 risk mod. You know, it is not a, this is not a typical 17 outage. This is not a situation that I think is the best 18 way to do modifications. Thats where were at.
19 MR. GROBE: Sure. Its 20 important to understand that. That this outage is not a 21 normal outage, and these modification approaches are not 22 what you would normally expect to occur, but its, you 23 still have quite a few modifications out there, that youre 24 installing under this at risk program. Have you gone back 25 to look at those, as to whether or not there might have MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
65 1 been some, there might be some additional benefit with 2 respect to Operations and Maintenance in particular, Plant 3 Engineering?
4 MR. POWERS: Well be doing 5 that. The issue on the CAC has really come up over the 6 past several weeks, I would characterize it. This 7 interface has become evident we need to do it. So, yes, 8 there is cases we need to go and look and see if there is 9 better interface needs to occur up front.
10 MR. GROBE: Okay, good.
11 Thank you.
12 MR. PASSEHL: Okay. I think 13 well, if its okay, have one more presenter, Bill Pearce, 14 and then well take a short break. So, go ahead, Bill.
15 MR. PEARCE: Okay. I want to 16 talk about three subjects today. First one I want to talk 17 about is Safety Culture Survey. And, as you remember, this 18 is an independent assessment thats being coordinated by 19 Fred Giese out of our Human Resources Organization in 20 Akron. So, what Im going to read is his statement where 21 we are on this assessment.
22 Doctor Sonja Haber and her team have completed the 23 on-site portion of the Davis-Besse Culture Assessment. And 24 the activities that are completed are they interviewed 25 approximately 90 FENOC employees. These included Senior MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
66 1 Management Team, FirstEnergy corporate executives, all 2 Davis-Besse site managers, and representatives from various 3 job titles and organizational elements throughout the 4 plant.
5 The second part of that was they observed, her team 6 observed a number of normal plant activities, including 7 morning and evening meetings, control room turnovers, 8 manager meetings, prejob briefs, planning meetings and 9 restart readiness meeting.
10 In addition, they conducted a pencil and paper 11 survey, which included approximately 80 percent of the site 12 employees, the permanent employees. Thats approximately 13 661 of 830 employees that actually filled out the survey.
14 Doctor Haber and her team are currently analyzing 15 the information they gathered in those activities. And, as 16 you remember, they do a process they call Convergent 17 Validity. Thats where they bring all those elements 18 together and come to conclusions how they may relate to the 19 culture, the safety culture aspects of the plant.
20 So, thats what theyre in the process of now doing; 21 and we expect that well get some initial results in the 22 next several weeks. And, thats really the status of just 23 to give you, because I know everyone has a lot of interest, 24 as we do, to get that back.
25 The next subject --
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
67 1 MR. GROBE: Bill, before you 2 go on, just a couple of questions in that area.
3 Lew, I know that this assessment thats being done 4 by Doctor Haber is very important, but its important to 5 keep it in context. And, prior to entering Mode 6, you 6 folks did your own assessment of where you were, using your 7 model, and I think that was the first time you tried to use 8 it. And, you presented that last month, I believe.
9 MR. MYERS: Correct.
10 MR. GROBE: Lew, I know that 11 you sent out the first formal procedure for going through 12 that process, and youre going to use it again next week.
13 Then, I think, I understand that after that, youre going 14 to revise the procedure appropriately after running it 15 through its paces and then submit it on the docket; is that 16 correct?
17 MR. MYERS: Thats correct.
18 MR. GROBE: Okay, good.
19 And Doctor Habers work is somewhat of an 20 independent check, not, its important to make sure that 21 folks understand, its not a go-no go. Its not a light 22 switch, yes or no. That its going to provide insights and 23 inputs to further enhance the broader assessment tool that 24 youre going to be using on a regular basis going forward.
25 That being said, its also very important though MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
68 1 that Doctor Habers work be completely independent so that 2 her observations have validity and havent been influenced 3 by your processes and activities.
4 Could you talk a little about the process and how 5 shes going to, how there is going to be independence 6 maintained through the process. I dont know if thats a 7 fair question for you, Bill?
8 MR. MYERS: I cant talk about 9 it, because I dont know.
10 MR. PEARCE: We can say some 11 things about it. I think what you may be referring to, is 12 when we do get the initial report back, the NRC and site 13 management will view that report simultaneously, even the 14 initial report. The first time we see it, the NRC will be 15 involved. Weve made that agreement, so that we make sure 16 that it is done independently, and it doesnt get, we dont 17 have undue influence on it. I think thats probably what 18 youre asking for.
19 MR. GROBE: Yeah, thats 20 good. I appreciate that, Bill.
21 MR. MYERS: Let me add. We 22 went out and developed our process. We think its a good 23 model. We shared that with you. It gives some framework.
24 But the last thing, from my perspective, you know, the 25 reason we put it up for the human employee development MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
69 1 organization, was because from a leadership in action 2 standpoint, thats how we use our training program, to 3 develop our managers, supervisors, thats where its owned 4 at; theyre doing the core sponsors for that.
5 So, the last thing from my perspective anyway, 6 sitting here, I can tell you Ive been interviewed. Other 7 than that, I have had no contact with Doctor Haber since 8 she left the site. Other than being interviewed and taking 9 the, looking at the survey that we did, thats, its 10 completely independent. And, it will stay that way.
11 MR. GROBE: Okay, good.
12 Bill, you mentioned something thats important.
13 Doctor Haber is going to provide you a written draft. And 14 myself and Christine and probably Jeff Geoff Wright, our team 15 leader for that inspection will be there to hear her 16 presentation.
17 Do you know if, have you considered whether that 18 written draft report will be an attachment to the final 19 report, so that if there is any changes in the 20 interpretation or conclusions that that can be clearly 21 understood?
22 MR. PEARCE: Jack, we dont 23 know. We havent seen it. We need to see it and 24 understand, when weve got it, we can talk about that at 25 the time.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
70 1 MR. GROBE: Maybe you can 2 mention that to Fred and he can give me a call.
3 MR. PEARCE: Okay.
4 MR. GROBE: Credibility on 5 this is very important.
6 MR. PEARCE: Absolutely, we 7 agree with that.
8 MR. GROBE: You folks lost 9 some credibility over the last few years and so has the 10 NRC.
11 MR. PEARCE: Yeah, and you 12 know, one of the things thats really important to us, I 13 think, is the congruence between what she comes up with and 14 how weve evaluated ourselves. We really are anxious to 15 see that, to see where that congruence is; not so much to 16 try to change it, but to understand are we looking at 17 ourselves properly in using the tool that were using.
18 Thats what we want to try to validate. Thats whats 19 really important, I think.
20 MR. GROBE: Yep, I agree. If 21 you could mention that to Fred then.
22 MR. PEARCE: I certainly will, 23 Ill be glad to do that.
24 Okay, the next subject I would like to talk about is 25 Safety Conscious Work Environment Survey. Weve talked MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
71 1 about this on several occasions. I know, Jack, you had 2 some interest in when we were going to do the next survey.
3 As I told you in previous meetings, we intended to do the 4 survey after we did the heat up and cool down. Thats 5 moved out some now, and its gone further than we thought 6 it was going to go a couple of months ago.
7 So, weve decided to go ahead and do one now, 8 because we want to get one periodically and have the 9 opportunity to do yet another maybe sometime near the time 10 we restart.
11 So, you know, our Safety Conscious Work Environment 12 Action Plan provides for periodic surveys and the next one, 13 as I said, is going to be on March 24th. The survey will 14 consist of 30 questions. The majority of the questions 15 will be the same as the August of 2002, and the January 16 2000, and November of 1999 surveys.
17 Another point about the survey were going to do, is 18 all the 21 questions that are in the standard industry 19 document will be included in that survey. So, it will have 20 all the standard questions. And, in addition, were going 21 to add some questions, nine more questions to that survey, 22 surround, that surround some specific issues that we seem 23 to try to get some more insight into the Safety Conscious 24 Work Environment.
25 The rating scale will be the same as the previous MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
72 1 survey. And its to be a pen and pencil, or pencil and 2 paper method. The same as the survey that was just done on 3 the Safety Culture. In fact, were going to use a similar 4 methodology, because we got a lot of good participation in 5 the Safety Culture survey. So, we would like to use that 6 same methodology, how to set up people that they can take 7 it, that kind of thing, is what were going to do on the 8 24th.
9 Of course, it will be anonymous. Its voluntary, 10 but we do encourage all, all our site employees to 11 participate.
12 You got any questions about that? Were going out 13 of that subject now.
14 MR. GROBE: No. Great.
15 MR. PEARCE: Okay. The next 16 thing I want to talk about is Quality Assurance. And, as 17 you know, we committed to do a Quality Assurance Program 18 Review, I think it was last October. And so, we started 19 doing that review, and it started on November 1st of 2002.
20 And, we brought a team of people, expert in this area, and 21 we wanted to look at our program, and determine, you know, 22 what are the, make sure we had everything in it that the 23 best programs in the country have.
24 So, we found some improvements we could make in the 25 area of implementation of commitments, audit checklists, MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
73 1 use of operating experience and auditing, training, 2 qualification of auditors, escalation of inadequate actions 3 to audit findings, and interference interface issues with 4 American Society of Mechanical Engineers QA Program were 5 areas that we found we could do some improvement with.
6 It was initially completed and went before the 7 Program Review Board on February 10. When we got it before 8 the Program Review Board, they thought we, that we hadnt 9 focused enough on the ASME, or the American Society of 10 Mechanical Engineers QA Audit Program. We didnt have 11 enough focus in that issue.
12 We went back and revisited that area again. We 13 completed that re-review. And it went to the board again 14 yesterday. And of course, I havent got the update in 15 here, but Ill tell you the update. The update is, it went 16 successfully through the board yesterday. Not saying it 17 didnt have any comments. It did have some comments to 18 it. And Thursday, it is expected that well get the final 19 review of that Thursday morning. Thats the status of 20 that.
21 Lastly, I would like to talk about a few things that 22 Quality Assurance has seen, what weve looked at. Weve 23 done oversight of the new reactor head. And you asked 24 about the, in fact, you led in quite nicely with the At 25 Risk Program. Of course, it all has to come together at MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
74 1 the end with a modification package, so it doesnt miss any 2 of the steps.
3 Weve been reviewing that with the new reactor 4 head. What we found as the package was put back together, 5 there were some, we did have some issues of process. They 6 were, they were fairly minor in my opinion. I looked at 7 them.
8 There is a small amount of work remaining, which is 9 installing the seismic plates on the top of the drive for 10 the control rods, and post insulation testing, which is 11 part of the pressure tests of the reactor vessel that well 12 be doing later on. So, that remains to be done.
13 Restart Station Review Board Oversight. We believe 14 that conservative decisions are being made during that 15 board, and good safety culture discussions are being done 16 in our observations. No major issues. We do see a few 17 minor things, which we gave feedback on or wrote CRs as 18 appropriate.
19 Another area I would like to talk about is fuel 20 handling. Lew talked earlier about a, about the fuel 21 handling that was being done. And, in fact, we loaded the 22 core. And I would like to talk about that a minute.
23 As you know, we had a stop work on fuel handling, 24 and it was about what Lew talked about, about some of the 25 design issues and wed done some minor damage to some of MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
75 1 the fuel in the past. And we lifted that. And we lifted 2 that stop work before we loaded fuel.
3 What we lifted it on was these four issues. We 4 reindexed the spent fuel racks to have more precise 5 indexing to make sure that we didnt have any interaction 6 between the fuel grids and these fuel racks.
7 Fuel assemblies were required to be moved in slow 8 speed in the refueling equipment throughout. That was a 9 change to the process.
10 The core reload sequence was designed to maximize 11 open water moves and minimize potential for unnecessary 12 fuel assembly interaction. So, consciously, were trying 13 to make sure we didnt have those interactions that we did 14 have one of.
15 And most fuel assemblies would be loaded with a, 16 into the core with whats called an open water move, but we 17 have a device where we can actually move it around, and 18 make sure that it moves exactly in the right spot and is 19 not subject to interaction between the grid.
20 So, those were the corrective actions that were put 21 in place, as a result of our stop work. And we lifted the 22 stop work. And then I think we had a fairly successful 23 core load.
24 One of the things I would like to say on the 25 positive side, is Lew talked about the fact that the core MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
76 1 support assembly was removed from the reactor. We oversaw 2 that activity, trying to clean, make sure that the reactor 3 vessel, the entire internal of the reactor vessel were 4 clean.
5 The station spent a lot of effort trying to clean 6 with a core support assembly in place, and, in fact, they 7 did remove a lot of minor material from the reactor. And, 8 I really believe that they could have evaluated the 9 condition that it was in to be okay, and justified that it 10 was all right to go on. Thats what I want to give. I 11 give a lot of negative, I want to give a positive. They 12 actually stopped and took a five day hit in the schedule in 13 order to make sure that the, that the reactor internals and 14 the reactor itself was absolutely clean before we went 15 forward.
16 So, I saw that as a good thing. Ill go down 17 through a few more issues. The In-Service Inspection, see 18 some implementation issues and Condition Reports weve 19 issued in that area.
20 And the Quality Control area. We previously rated 21 the Quality Control Department as marginal for the previous 22 quarter, and the issue was lack of use of Corrective Action 23 Program. That just wasnt enough activity, we didnt 24 believe, to, for where it should have been for the type of 25 things were seeing in the plant. And, since that time, we MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
77 1 saw a marked improvement.
2 Contractor Control. We still saw issues with 3 Contractor Control. Well talk about that more in a 4 minute. I think thats been an issue weve had ongoing, 5 and we continue to have, and were trying to provide a lot 6 of oversight in that area.
7 We did a, an assessment of Safety Culture, an 8 independent assessment that we did ourselves in QA. And, 9 we didnt -- and I think we talked about it, I dont 10 remember if we talked about it at the last meeting or the 11 last public meeting, but we assessed about ten percent of 12 the site population, and we looked at Safety Conscious Work 13 Environment and Safety Culture. And we believe from the 14 assessments weve done previously to this one, that were 15 seeing an improving trend in what were getting.
16 These were all face-to-face interviews and a 17 specific set of questions that were asked, and we think 18 that were seeing an improving trend in that area.
19 Corrective Action Program implementation, were 20 still noting problems with clear and concise corrective 21 actions, and incorporating appropriate level of detail.
22 Traceability, you can look at the condition report always, 23 and were seeing a lot of them, and there is a few of these 24 that, where well see the condition report and the issue 25 identified as the corrective action. Actually go back and MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
78 1 fix the problem clearly without having to find out a lot 2 more story besides whats written down. Thats one of the 3 major issues.
4 Last summer, you may be familiar with, we identified 5 a compliance issue in the fabrication code for the 6 feedwater flow modification that needed to be 7 radiographed. Well, the radiograph was performed and 8 identified that three welds needed to be repaired, and 9 thats ongoing as we speak.
10 And the last thing I wanted to talk about, and this 11 is probably one of the most significant things that Im 12 concerned with; is were concerned with the quality of work 13 being performed on mechanical equipment. You said 14 something about several instances of that. What we 15 witnessed is inconsistent results on equipment. And 16 sometimes it comes out pretty good, and other times it 17 doesnt.
18 We have an issue with that; talked to Lew in depth 19 about that. One of the options were considering, Im just 20 telling you were considering it; one of the things about 21 moving the Quality Control Department back under the 22 Quality Assessment, so we can get more field observation 23 time. Were a limited size group, and to combine those two 24 we get more time in the field in not only the Management 25 Observation Program, but in addition, the Independent MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
79 1 Program to see if we can see what we need to do to improve 2 the quality in that area.
3 And thats my comments, unless you have any 4 questions.
5 MR. HOPKINS: I have a quick 6 question. You mentioned the feedwater flow modification.
7 Is that connected to a power upgrade request at all, Jim?
8 MR. POWERS: That is the 9 caldon, excuse me, Jon, that is the caldon, the install 10 power upgrade uprate request, its related to that. And these 11 were field weld installations and the MBE interpretation on 12 whether radiography was required on those.
13 MR. HOPKINS: So, radiography 14 was done on that?
15 MR. POWERS: Yes.
16 MR. PEARCE: And the weld that 17 remained, trying to get the radiography rescheduled now 18 after the repair.
19 MR. HOPKINS: Just, just so you 20 know, we essentially have suspended review of power upgrade uprate 21 at this time. I mean thats coming later, if it happens.
22 MR. POWERS: Very good. As 23 well with us, thats not our first order of affairs 24 either. So, well be in contact when we want to reactivate 25 that.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
80 1 MR. HOPKINS: Okay.
2 MR. GROBE: Other questions?
3 MR. PASSEHL: Okay, lets take 4 a --
5 MR. GROBE: I was asking for 6 questions from you guys. I have a couple other questions.
7 MR. PASSEHL: Oh, okay.
8 MR. GROBE: Bill, on the 9 Quality Audit Program Review, was that a review of both the 10 program and the implementation of the program?
11 MR. PEARCE: Just a review of 12 the program. It puts the program together in place. Now, 13 were putting all the actions that came out of that in 14 place is what were doing now.
15 MR. GROBE: Okay. Good.
16 I was looking through a little booklet that you 17 folks have for your Operations Organization. I cant 18 remember what its called. Its got a yellow cover on it.
19 It has all the procedures and standards and expectations in 20 it. In the org chart in there, I notice that Mike Ross 21 name was in the Ops Organization. Is he back in the Ops 22 Organization now? I now know that you took him out for awhile.
23 MR. MYERS: No, hes not back 24 in yet.
25 MR. GROBE: Okay.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
81 1 MR. MYERS: But Jack, hes 2 still providing coaching.
3 MR. GROBE: That really gets 4 to my question. There is a couple of areas that I would 5 appreciate some independent observation from your folks on, 6 thoughts on how youre doing, maybe at our next meeting.
7 One is the area of operations ownership and leadership, 8 and the second is operability evaluations.
9 And, I thought if Mike was back in Ops, maybe he 10 could provide some input. And Bill, I would put that to 11 you to provide some input, but those are areas where I 12 dont have a good read on how things are going and there 13 has been some issues coming up, and I would like to get a 14 better, well be focusing a little bit more in that area, 15 and I would like to get a better sense from you folks in 16 what you think.
17 MR. PEARCE: Well try to give 18 you some insight on the next meeting, Jack.
19 MR. GROBE: Okay, thanks.
20 Thank you, Dave.
21 MR. PASSEHL: Lets take 22 about -- everyone be back by 4. Thank you.
23 (Off the record.)
24 MR. MYERS: We have a couple 25 new players here. Lynn Harder is here to talk about MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
82 1 Containment, and Clark Price will go through our 2 performance indicators later on, so weve done some 3 rotation of people.
4 MR. PASSEHL: Bob, are you going 5 to talk System Health progress?
6 MR. SCHRAUDER: Yes.
7 MR. PASSEHL: Okay. Go ahead.
8 MR. SCHRAUDER: Thank you.
9 System Health Progress. We continue to make good 10 progress on answering the questions, the Condition Reports 11 that were generated during the System Health Readiness 12 Reviews, the Latent Issue Reviews, the NRC Inspections and 13 the Safety Function Validation Project.
14 A lot of the analysis for the operability and 15 functionality of those systems are starting to come back, 16 and looks like were going to be able to demonstrate for 17 the most part that the systems will and could have 18 performed their intended function.
19 Not all of the analysis is back and not all of the 20 systems are as far along as others. One notable one that 21 were, I would say behind schedule on is the Electrical 22 Distribution System, and the calculations for that; theyre 23 similar to the water flow calculations with the flow 24 electrons. And so, were behind on the electrical 25 distribution, but we have some corrective actions in place.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
83 1 Well try to get that more organized and completed.
2 We have scheduled a meeting, I think the meeting is 3 scheduled now. Im not sure of the date, but I know were 4 working on scheduling a meeting to go over in more detail 5 all of the design issues that weve identified. But 6 todays meeting topic I want to concentrate on are the 7 topical issue reviews weve done. I would say in adjunct 8 to the Safety Validation Project.
9 There were five of those topical issues that we had 10 identified. Four of them are through the review process 11 and are ready for Lews signature. In fact, I believe he 12 signed one of them. The final one, Appendix R - Safe 13 Shutdown Analysis is in what Im calling the final stages 14 of review, and I expect that will be ready here very soon 15 also.
16 Just real briefly again, the Collective Significant 17 Reviews, how they came about, we had done the System Health 18 Assurance Plan Reviews and they had identified some 19 potential cross-cutting issues. The initial Collective 20 Significance Review identified five topical areas that 21 warranted further evaluations. They were Seismic 22 Qualification, Station Flooding, High Energy Line Break, 23 Environmental Qualification and Appendix R Safe Shutdown 24 Analysis.
25 I went over this last meeting very briefly, but we MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
84 1 did institute a NOP, Nuclear Operating Business Practice, 2 for collective significance reviews and had the process we 3 used to evaluate these topical areas. The process was to 4 look at all the Condition Reports, that had been 5 identified, been bin in common areas; evaluate each and 6 determine its significance to the program, and then conduct 7 extended extent of condition evaluations where warranted.
8 We didn't just look at the Condition Reports that 9 were generated as a result of those System Health Readiness 10 Reviews and Latent Issue Reviews, each of the program 11 owners actually went into the CRS CREST Database and searched 12 that database and pulled out and identified Condition 13 Reports that went back to, I believe it was, January of 14 2001 is what's the CRS CREST Database. So, we went back an 15 additional year and pulled those issues out, and also 16 reviewed those in the Collective Significance Process.
17 I forgot to mentioned mention as we finished those, I don't 18 know if we forwarded them yet, but we had told Marty Farber 19 that we would send those reports to him as part of his 20 inspection plan on the System Health Building Block.
21 I'll go through each of these five topical areas.
22 And, again, I want to remind you that when I talk about 23 Appendix R, that that will be preliminary information, but 24 I don't expect it to change significantly in the review 25 process.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
85 1 What I have done is broken down each one of these 2 categories into actions that we found that we need to take 3 to support restart, and then what I call enhancement items 4 to go forward. Ill talk about how we get out to those 5 actions, what we found, and why thats an action.
6 So, under the first program or topical area I talked 7 about is the Seismic. Reactions to support that, I would 8 say, evaluate impact of Cooling Tower Makeup Pump not in 9 accordance with the USAR. We found some seismic category 10 one issues on that, where that, the documentation, if you 11 will, the USAR and PID identified that that typing piping, which 12 is in the proximity of the service water pumps, it was 13 supposed to be seismic category one. The Condition Reports 14 said it wasnt; it wasnt installed seismic category one.
15 So, we did, first of all, we evaluated that 16 Condition Report, applied SQUG methodology and found it 17 would withstand the appropriate response spec for the 18 earthquake.
19 We did find some improvements that there was a 20 higher than expected stress at the mounting bolts in that 21 pump; that well be changing the bolting configuration on 22 that. But as a result of that issue, we did an extended extent of 23 condition review seeing screening, looking at other potential impacts 24 of doable two over one criteria, particularly impacting multiple 25 trains or multiple systems. We did that review and found MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
86 1 no additional problems in that area.
2 The next one is revolving resolving boundary conflicts between 3 Seismic and Quality classification. That came as a result 4 of a couple Condition Reports that identified what Ill 5 call conflicts that was introduced into the database system 6 where a Q boundary ends, quality boundary ends, but seismic 7 category needs to extend down stream further to an 8 instrument.
9 We looked at that once before and addressed it 10 pretty well for pressure gauge, but hadnt addressed it 11 Ill say thoroughly enough for other interests. It also 12 may need to perform a pressure retention for seismic 13 readings.
14 We went through that, looked at extended extent of condition 15 on that one also, identified where those Q boundaries were 16 and what down stream instruments might need to be 17 assessed. We have about two hundred instruments that we 18 have to go back and look at to make sure that the seismic 19 properties and the pressure retained properties of those 20 instruments are appropriate. That activity is in progress.
21 The next one that was another example we did. HFA 22 relays, thats an issue where very early in the life of the 23 plant, General Electric had sent out a service information 24 letter on these relays identifying that they need to be 25 calibrated.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
87 1 We didnt get the information from the vendors 2 because we had purchase ours through a third party. That 3 third party did not forward the information to us. Were 4 looking at the process to make sure we plugged that gap, so 5 we get all that information.
6 We did an extended extent of condition on those HFA relays.
7 Identified there were in fact six of them that we had to 8 calibrate to make sure, these were chattering in the 9 relays, and whether it could prohibit actuation of a safety 10 function that the relay needed to do. We hadnt had any 11 problems with those, but some of those did need calibration 12 that were identified in that service information.
13 Then, the other extended extent of condition, which is 14 actually part of the Containment Health Walkdown was impact 15 of boric acid on the side supports. We did that and found 16 that was not a problem for us. Each of those had some 17 activity in the containment to work on.
18 Other improvements were going to make in seismic 19 going forward is, well fix this confusion on the database, 20 Q boundary, and seismic boundary.
21 Procedural requirements of control of temporary 22 equipment, we found this begin is two of one type of issue; 23 work in progress, we werent being as diligent as we should 24 have been retaining that two over one criteria. So, were 25 beefing up procedures in that area, and also for storage of MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
88 1 breakers and the like and their impact on seismic 2 qualification equipment.
3 And then were going to pull together all the 4 seismic information programs, procedure to get through that 5 information. And well be looking at using the SQUG 6 methodology for new and replacement equipment. So, thats 7 kind of what we found in the seismic area.
8 There is a lot more details and stuff in the 9 report. Well give that to you, go over that, and assess 10 the impact of that.
11 Next area, I have is station flooding. I put that 12 one next, because it really is very closely related to the 13 seismic issue. In fact, you see the very first issue is 14 the same issue I talked about on the Cooling Tower Makeup 15 Pump, which is because the impact is, if that breaks, then 16 you flood the service water, so the same issue becomes a 17 flooding issue also. So, Ive already talked about that.
18 I wont go over that again.
19 There was another Condition Report that questioned 20 the flooding in the service water tunnel. Now, user 21 identified service water tunnel under certain conditions 22 floods. And equipment was evaluated in there. This, 23 originator of this Condition Report questioned two specific 24 valves that were, lets see, I forget what valves they are, 25 but isolation valves for other buildings.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
89 1 We had to go out and evaluate those specific valves 2 and make sure that they were adequately assessed and that 3 they could perform their function prior to any flooding 4 occurred. And no problems were found in that or any of the 5 other equipment in the service water tunnel that weve 6 already identified that that condition can occur.
7 And the final thing in there, we did an extended extent of 8 condition on functionality of critical floor drains. We 9 had an issue that came up, identified by a condition 10 report, that specifically addressed the diesel generator 11 and the day tank drains in the room, as to whether a 12 flooding issue occurs, whether the room will drain or not.
13 We looked at those, and in fact the diesel generator 14 drains were plugged. They needed to be unplugged. Now, 15 the day tank was fine, but we did additional extended extent of 16 condition review or condition on that, particularly concentrating on 17 essential rooms and the cooling water room was one we had 18 to look at; panic mechanical penetration rooms were another.
19 We found no additional problems. We did water tests 20 on those, and did not find any additional drains plugged.
21 But in the improvements in that one, on the next one, we 22 will implement, we are implementing improving the 23 requirements throughout and will periodically check those 24 floor drains in the process also.
25 MR. GROBE: That will be part MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
90 1 of your maintenance program?
2 MR. SCHRAUDER: Yes. Thats what 3 I would equate it to. I dont know if it would actually be 4 with pm, but I expect it will be. But maybe some 5 programmatic tie to go out and periodically check for 6 those.
7 Other improvements; installing these flood seals and 8 conduit penetrations. That issue involved, identifies 9 there were certain conduits penetrating below the stations 10 flood plan. And when they installed the work on the 11 junction box and the like, rubber gasket and seals and 12 stuff, they were found to be acceptable to maintain the 13 water tight enclosure; however, once again, there were no 14 pms, Ill say, to go out and periodically check that 15 barrier, if you will, which is a flood barrier. And, also 16 that rubber starts aging, you could start getting some 17 leakage.
18 So, what we decided to do, is to go in and install 19 some flood seals in the conduit itself where you can 20 actually seal where it comes in and not rely on the rubber 21 gasket seal any longer.
22 Then, one of the other things that came up, we 23 looked at was the, we have a formal inspection program for 24 barriers in the fire protection program. You know, 25 something everybody has you go out and you have a routine MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
91 1 inspection of your barriers. We dont have that formal 2 program aspect of inspecting other barrier like flood 3 barriers and the like. So, were going to incorporate that 4 as part of our barrier inspection program; where it will be 5 the same type of inspection we do on our independent 6 inspections.
7 Do you have a question?
8 MR. GROBE: Yeah, I was just 9 thinking about what you were talking about, in the context 10 of the reactor pressure vessel head. You were probably 11 wondering what kind of activity there is here.
12 All of the things that youve talked about that 13 youre putting preventative maintenance activities in 14 place, are passive components; floor drains, seals, 15 barriers. And one of the reasons we didnt focus on the 16 reactor head as part of our inspection program is that you 17 focused more on active components that have real 18 significance.
19 Is there some learning here that there might be 20 other important but passive components that arent part of 21 your preventative maintenance program? Kind of a wide 22 open question. I dont expect an answer.
23 MR. SCHRAUDER: I havent thought 24 of any.
25 MR. GROBE: I was wondering MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
92 1 if that was something that may be we should take a look at?
2 MR. SCHRAUDER: Yeah.
3 MR. GROBE: Okay.
4 MR. SCHRAUDER: Again, most of 5 these, as we talk about it, are not in the containment 6 building itself, most of these are really in the other 7 buildings; and most of these, there are seismic concerns, 8 obviously, contained in other, these particular ones are 9 not in the containment building itself.
10 The High Energy Line Break is another one in the 11 Actions to Support Restart. Complete reanalysis of turbine 12 building breaks. And this was, we had already started this 13 in response to Information Notice 2000, 2000 Information 14 Notice Number 1. And so, we need to complete that 15 analysis, and in fact, determinability of analysis will 16 demonstrate a crack or break in a location that we have to 17 further analyze the impact on the feedwater pumps. So, 18 were looking at that.
19 The issue there, we have a high energy line, impacts 20 on the environmental qualification of the equipment, 21 whether it can take that. Well complete that, and any 22 impact on the environmental qualification or any new 23 postulated crack or break in the building as a result of 24 that. Well get that done and complete prior to restart.
25 Again, I consider that to be an extended extent of condition type of MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
93 1 evaluation.
2 The next issue on revise calculations effecting line 3 breaks and cracks. We had an issue that came up that 4 identified that we had misapplied a stress factor, revised 5 stress factor. We applied a new stress factor to an old 6 equation, and impacted the calculations. We did an 7 extended extent of condition on that, where we had applied that 8 stress factor. It did impact some calculations. Most of 9 the calculations, it didnt change anything. I mean, it 10 was wrong in the calculation, but it didnt change the 11 outcome, because the old equation still postulated a break 12 or crack in the same location. So, this would still have 13 identified a crack.
14 But one calculation did show, when we applied the 15 proper stress factor, that we could have a crack in an area 16 that was not previously postulated for it. And it was in 17 an area that we didnt, didnt feel like we, there was too 18 much equipment in there to allow that to happen. The 19 amount of qualification impact would have been pretty 20 significant.
21 So, we moved where that stress would occur in the 22 system, basically to soften the system a bit and move the 23 stressers out into another location. And that required to 24 replace some rigid supports with snubbers and also to move 25 some other supports to move that stress into a more MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
94 1 palatable location.
2 Then the other one is in building free space, we 3 found a high energy line barrier, happened to be an 4 elevator door credited as a high energy line break barrier, 5 and the analysis challenged that. We found it -- I forget 6 what we found, whether it was acceptable or not. I believe 7 it was not. It was not acceptable.
8 We did an extended extent of condition for the rest of the 9 auxiliary building on that; found no other unacceptable 10 barriers in that; but that did lead to another assessment 11 of all the free space volumes and openings in the auxiliary 12 building.
13 I was told before I did come up here, I did have one 14 lifeline to go out to the audience for additional 15 information. I almost had to use it there.
16 So, thats, that was what we did in response to 17 high energy line break.
18 MR. THOMAS: Bob, before we 19 move on, you addressed the Aux feed water pump room. I 20 believe there is also issues of the component cooling water 21 pump room. Are those, has that been resolved or will that 22 be resolved prior to restart?
23 MR. SCHRAUDER: There is issues in 24 the component cooling water room. I forget whether they 25 were due to high energy line break or there was some --
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
95 1 MR. THOMAS: There were high 2 energy line break issues.
3 MR. GROBE: The steam line 4 break right outside the doors there. There is a block wall 5 right behind.
6 MR. SCHRAUDER: We had high energy 7 line breaks --
8 MR. BYRD: It was due to a 9 pipe width in the steam line break outside the wall and it 10 was resolved.
11 MR. GROBE: It was resolved?
12 MR. BYRD: Yes, was 13 resolved.
14 MR. GROBE: Through analysis?
15 MR. BYRD: Through analysis, 16 thats correct.
17 MR. SCHRAUDER: I remember that 18 now. It was a pipe width judgment and it was found to be 19 acceptable.
20 MR. GROBE: Thats it. That 21 was your lifeline.
22 MR. MYERS: Thats your 23 lifeline.
24 MR. SCHRAUDER: Future improvement 25 for high energy line break. When we did that review of the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
96 1 auxiliary building, we did found our model could be updated 2 and made more user friendly in the auxiliary building.
3 Were going to do that.
4 We are going to revise those calculations. I told 5 you we reviewed the calculations and found certain of the 6 calcs didnt impact a crack or break location, but they are 7 in fact incorrect. Well revise those calculations.
8 We had some USAR design criteria manual changes to 9 make that need to be updated in there.
10 And, then one other issue that came out was a time 11 critical operator actions and bases. There were eight 12 condition reports that initiated, that were questioned or 13 challenged whether we could get the operator action done or 14 not. We ran those on the simulator and determined that we 15 could in fact achieve those, net per time critical operator 16 actions.
17 Were going to get the whole list of time critical 18 operator actions to Operations to make sure they can 19 periodically use those in their simulator training 20 scenarios, and make sure that were in good shape there.
21 We dont believe that there is any problems in 22 meeting those times, but its good to have a compiled list 23 of all of them and the basis for those times for the 24 operators, so they have better access to the information.
25 Environmental qualification is the next issue.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
97 1 Again, this one is related to the high energy line break.
2 Any time you do a reanalysis of where your high energy line 3 breaks are, that can have an impact on your qualification 4 of equipment. So, as we complete those analysis, well 5 feed that information to the environmental qualification 6 people to update their files and make sure we havent 7 impacted any of the environmental qualification for the 8 equipment there.
9 Vendors license with EQ Splices on the Containment 10 Limitorque Actuators. One of the things we did as part of 11 the extended extent of conditions, we did a dedicated environmental 12 qualification extended extent of condition in the containment 13 building as a result of the boric acid dispersion in 14 containment.
15 We opened up virtually all of the op, limitorque 16 operators in the containment. One of the things we found 17 in that extended extent of condition review was certain of these 18 limitorque actuators, limitorque supplies when theyre dual 19 voltage actuators, they can not provide a qualified splice 20 in there. And its up to the user to upgrade that or to 21 supply a qualified splice. We found I believe six 22 limitorques that that splicing had not occurred in. We 23 needed to replace those vendor splices or qualified 24 splices.
25 This is probably a good time to mention, we havent MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
98 1 completed this review though. Any of these actions or any 2 of these issues I talked about where we found something not 3 up to snuff with the, like EQ equations or equipment, or 4 the high energy line break, we are reviewing those for past 5 operability reportability concerns for those also.
6 MR. HOPKINS: Let me ask, Bob, 7 in that regard. Are you going to be reviewing your IPEE run 8 Triple E at all to see as to, if thats still correct or 9 not?
10 MR. SCHRAUDER: Ken Byrd, of 11 the individual plant external examination; how does that 12 relate to that?
13 MR. BYRD: Yeah, actually, 14 were going to be, we have been doing quite a bit of work 15 on that, both on our seismic and the fire part of it; in 16 fact, were putting those in the PRA. That should be 17 complete rather shortly, so that is actually ongoing right 18 now.
19 MR. HOPKINS: So, your PRA is 20 then like a living document?
21 MR. BYRD: That is correct.
22 And well include fire and seismic. We already have 23 seismic completed. Fire should be completed by the end of 24 year. That was already ongoing at the time this occurred.
25 MR. HOPKINS: All right, thank MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
99 1 you.
2 MR. SCHRAUDER: Okay, we also 3 found in our reviewing containment four Raychem splices 4 where the bend radius exceeded the bend radius and we need 5 to correct those prior to restart.
6 And then we found one, the containment purge inlet 7 isolation solenoid valve had accelerated aging. What we 8 did is we looked, we discovered this solenoid valve and it 9 appeared to be, have thermal discoloration Ill, call it on 10 the thing, which was strange, because the environment that 11 was shown in the picture or in the documentation showed it 12 should be a certain level, the temperature should be at 13 about 113 degrees. It looked like it had been exposed to 14 temperatures higher than that.
15 What we found was that it was actually at a 16 different elevation in the containment, and it was actually 17 exposed to temperatures in the range of 150 to 170 degrees 18 and it had caused the discoloration. And, what that did 19 was decreased the thermal aging life of the piece of 20 equipment. It was intended to be 40 year life component, 21 and this prematurely aged it, I would say thermally. Its 22 still functioning, but we figure weve used up its thermal 23 aging life. Were replacing that, and changing the pm 24 frequency or the EQ frequency for changeout of that piece 25 of equipment.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
100 1 We did do an extended extent of condition review on that also 2 to see if we had properly identified those components that 3 have a thermal aging aspect to their qualification life.
4 Future things were doing in the world of 5 environmental qualification. Revised the documents for 6 installation of limitorque actuators, make sure were 7 getting qualified splices put in when we get the 8 limitorque.
9 Provide drainage configurations for containment 10 conduit. This is an issue that came out some years ago, 11 actually in NRC information notice or some generic 12 correspondence, on potential for accumulating condensation 13 in unsealed conduits or conduits that dont have weep holes 14 and the like.
15 Our containment extended extent of condition evaluations 16 opened up all of these. We found no current evidence of 17 any precipitation condensation in any of the conduits with 18 the exception of one that we found, some rust around it; 19 could be indicative of that, but we actually believe that 20 was due to a cable pulled through there, is a high liquid 21 content in the material that you put on the cable pulls.
22 But we are going to in the future go back and put 23 these drainage configuration weep holes in there. We want 24 to be able to take the time to, it can be a tricky thing to 25 put weep holes into conduits that have live wire in them.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
101 1 Found no evidence of a current problem. Well fix that as 2 we go forward, after we have proper time to adequately 3 engineer and make sure we know exactly what were doing 4 before we go poking into live conduits.
5 We have some update on the maintenance matrix, EQ 6 files. Revise EQ Program for guidance on recognizing 7 components that need raceway drainage, and improve the 8 problematic direction in that regard.
9 We found that we need to conduct some refresher 10 training in the world of environmental qualification, what 11 you have to do to make sure that maintenance and 12 modification out in the plant can impact the qualification 13 of environmental impact on your equipment. We provide that 14 training.
15 I think what were going to do is go steal that 16 training from Perry, because I know we developed it over 17 there in the years past. And well import that and put 18 that into our continuing training programs.
19 Do you have a question, Jack?
20 MR. GROBE: How could you 21 tell? Your comments on conduits drainage holes didnt 22 make, Im not sure I completely understand them.
23 MR. SCHRAUDER: Okay.
24 MR. GROBE: First off, the 25 issue of, the one issue where you discovered corrosion. It MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
102 1 doesnt make sense to me that the pull lubricant would 2 cause corrosion in that location and not elsewhere. Im 3 not sure I understand how a lubricant could cause 4 corrosion.
5 MR. SCHRAUDER: The lubricant 6 does have a high water content. It can cause it if you 7 dont get it cleaned off properly. The odd old pull Condition 8 Reports show you. I pulled the Condition Report and read 9 it, that was the assessment of that, why that one had it 10 and not others.
11 We only found this, this level of rust, Ill call 12 it, on one. There was no indication of current water in 13 that.
14 MR. GROBE: Ill talk to a 15 couple of my folks. Doesnt make a lot of sense to me, but 16 Im not an expert in this area.
17 MR. SCHRAUDER: Okay. Me either.
18 MR. GROBE: The second 19 question is, Im not sure why this is a post restart 20 issue. Do you have a design requirement to have these 21 drainage holes in the conduits?
22 MR. SCHRAUDER: No, its not 23 a design requirement. It was information to say, hey, you 24 ought to consider this, that you can get condensation in 25 those things from moisture in the air, or humidity in the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
103 1 air. We went and looked at all of them and found that we 2 were not, you know, we werent collecting water. The issue 3 is, if you collect water in them, then you can have 4 shorts.
5 MR. GROBE: Right.
6 MR. SCHRAUDER: There is no, we 7 went in and opened an awful lot of them during this 8 extended extent of condition review in containment and did not find 9 any evidence of moisture intrusion into those. And that is 10 the basis, its not required for restart.
11 MR. GROBE: I understand.
12 Thank you.
13 MR. SCHRAUDER: Then, the final 14 topical issues is the Appendix R Safe Shutdown Analysis.
15 We do have some actions there to complete. Framatone is 16 doing a transient calculation upgrade for us. We want to 17 get that completed prior to restart.
18 Complete flow model of component cooling water fire 19 induced valve failure is a hot short issue, where the 20 component cooling water could reach runout conditions.
21 That analysis has actually been complete. We have not 22 owner accepted it yet, but it was, contractor did the 23 analysis for it, and preliminarily I would say, the 24 analysis will support that you wont reach runout 25 conditions on that issue.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
104 1 Part of that is, the extended extent of condition goes back to 2 that, the Framatone transient calculational analysis.
3 Theyre going to be looking at other pumps in that process 4 also, to make a pump, a high pressure injection pump, to 5 make sure these issues cant cause those pumps to be 6 Appendix R fire scenarios to reach the runout condition.
7 The next issue is a performance technical review of 8 response to request for assistance. Two things to do on 9 that. One is a restart required and one is a going forward 10 issue. A request for assistance, you know, people will ask 11 questions sometimes in the old process under what was 12 called a request for assistance. And answers, technical 13 responses were given to those that would have been more 14 appropriately documented in calculation space.
15 So, first thing weve got to do is, were going to 16 go back and look at those RFAs, make sure theyre 17 technically correct, and then going forward we will convert 18 them to formal calculations and put them in the calculation 19 base, as opposed to a response to request for information.
20 Another action to support restart is, were going to 21 do a triennial audit, QA is going to do that. Prior to 22 restart, well get that. And I know that you folks are 23 coming in and doing an assessment of fire protection also 24 to see whether triennial inspection is required prior to 25 restart.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
105 1 MR. GROBE: When you say 2 triennial audit, is that with the safe shutdown, post fire 3 safe shutdown --
4 MR. MYERS: Right.
5 MR. GROBE: -- or is that 6 classical fire protection?
7 MR. SCHRAUDER: Whenever theyre 8 looking at safe shutdown, theyre also looking at classical 9 fire protection --
10 MR. PEARCE: The whole thing.
11 MR. SCHRAUDER: -- features in 12 that.
13 MR. GROBE: Okay.
14 MR. SCHRAUDER: I talked about for 15 future improvements, I talked about the, formalizing the 16 calculations and requests for assistance. And we have an 17 ongoing safe shutdown procedure upgrade project. And I 18 believe that that is on the wrong slide, because I think we 19 were also completing that prior to restart.
20 So, in conclusion, we looked collectively at the 21 five areas. Weve identified areas in virtually each of 22 those that need correction prior to restart, and identified 23 some additional enhancements that we want to make.
24 We didnt find any of the issues or any of these 25 areas to be fundamentally unsound. The programs as set up MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
106 1 are fundamentally sound. We believe that the actions weve 2 identified in those areas, we take those actions, that 3 those topical areas will support the safe operation of the 4 plant. And again, well be forwarding those to Marty for 5 his review.
6 MR. GROBE: Okay.
7 MR. MYERS: Next area is 8 Containment Health.
9 MR. SCHRAUDER: Next area is 10 Containment Health and Lynn Harder will perform that for 11 us.
12 MR. HARDER: Thank you, Bob.
13 My Name is Lynn Harder. Im the Containment Health 14 Inspection Project Manager. Since Im a new face to the 15 panel, I thought I would give you a little background on 16 myself.
17 Personal note, I was born and raised, and lived in 18 this area pretty much my whole life. Married my high 19 school sweetheart, dream of my life. Two kids. Dream of a 20 marriage, and two grandchildren. Dreams for everything.
21 So, life is good in that perspective.
22 Professional note, I have an Associate Degree in 23 Nuclear Power Technology. I have a Bachelor in Management 24 Organizational Development. Ive been involved in nuclear 25 power, been a nuclear power professional for over 26 years; MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
107 1 the last 22 years at Davis-Besse.
2 While at Davis-Besse, I worked 15, 16 years in 3 Health Physics, Radiation Protection in almost all aspects 4 to include Radiation Superintendent. Five years in 5 Security as a Fitness Duty Program Manager, Access 6 Authorization Supervisor, Security Operations Supervisor.
7 And, last year, early in the spring, I moved to 8 Human Performance, Human Performance Advocate and 9 Performance Improvement Group. And, took Project Manager 10 role over to Containment coating activities in Containment 11 in June. Spent about the last eight months in Containment, 12 looking at changes in the extended extent of condition in 13 transformations that we take a lot of pride in. Were 14 going to talk about today, Containment Health.
15 Last three or four weeks, got involved with 16 Containment Health Inspection, so thats what I would like 17 to talk about. Focus a little bit on the background of our 18 Containment Health Program and what were doing to go 19 forward.
20 Next slide, please.
21 Really the purpose of our Containment Health Program 22 is to ensure that our equipment is maintained to support 23 safe, reliable plant operation.
24 If we go back and look in the spring of last year, 25 we knew we didnt like the extent of the conditions of MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
108 1 things in containment as well as the rigor of our Boric 2 Acid Corrosion Control Program.
3 We brought some specialists in, rewrote our 4 procedures, improved our Boric Acid Control Procedure, and 5 brought over 40 inspectors in, in August and walked 6 containment down top to bottom by area in accordance with 7 these procedures, looking for the extended extent of conditions in 8 containment to do what we call as founds.
9 And those inspectors were diversified in electrical, 10 structural, and mechanical areas. And were specifically 11 looking at over five hundred inspection components and two 12 hundred for Alloy 600.
13 And next slide, please.
14 They resulted in taking pictures and documenting 15 more than 950 Condition Reports, which identified the 16 extended extent of condition of what again we call the as-found 17 condition. Those Condition Reports are given to an 18 independent team of evaluators who looked at the extent and 19 performed cause analysis on 950 Condition Reports and came 20 up with over 6,400 corrective actions that would ensure the 21 appropriate remediation for rework, replace, clean or 22 refurbish done where necessary.
23 The last bullet there identifies those totals of 24 corrective actions, involved more than twelve thousand 25 assets, which is a part, pump, valve, component, conduit, MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
109 1 et cetera.
2 Next slide, please.
3 The problem side of it is, if youre looking at the 4 transformation over the last six months really in some of 5 the work activities, that these would be pictures of 6 as-left conditions of the containment air coolers were 7 completely refurbished, core flood tanks.
8 Next slide.
9 The plenum sensing line and the whole plenum itself 10 was replaced with a stainless steel plenum. All the 11 service water pipe was blasted and recoated with the piping 12 supports. There is a picture of the containment air cooler 13 plenum, and more of the service water pipes, and even 14 conduits.
15 The big project there is the containment dome 16 project was over 40,000 square foot of coatings being 17 removed from the containment dome and repainted.
18 That shows a good picture of some of the supports 19 and service water pipes that were recoated, and the bottom 20 right pictures show a thermography shot of the hydrolasing 21 we were doing internal to the pipe, even doing pipe 22 internal cleaning to remove some of the scale.
23 Next slide.
24 So, where we got involved here, kind of at the end 25 is, after the big projects were pretty much completing with MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
110 1 the as-found conditions, there is still about a thousand 2 corrective actions out there, smaller activities, mostly 3 related to cleaning and clean up, which we refer to as our 4 final inspection and close-out areas. And even these 5 as-left conditions need to be identified as we go through 6 and close out the remaining corrective actions prior to 7 restart.
8 So, weve developed teams, multidiscipline teams of 9 painters, laborers, deconers, and each team is led by a 10 Containment Health Inspector. Theyre in the field 11 together. So the team can take care of business, so to 12 speak, on the spot; make remediations as necessary, as 13 directed by the corrective action.
14 So, then the final as-left inspection is documented 15 in the inspection report. That final photograph thats 16 taken of that asset is compared to the as-left by an 17 independent verifier, so the Corrective Action Program then 18 results in having the as-found versus the as-left condition 19 of before and after pictures, and documentation associated 20 with both, to reside all the evidence of the Boric Acid 21 Corrosion Control Program.
22 So, this method provided for us a systematic method 23 to document all of our findings and going forwards, and in 24 essence, what we conclude will provide us a baseline for 25 Boric Acid Corrosion Control Program before restart.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
111 1 The last bullet discusses our Restart Test Plan. As 2 the Containment Health closes out all the boric acid 3 corrosion inspection, we will still perform four more 4 independent tests on the Reactor Coolant System boundaries 5 to ensure we have an intact and tight RCS.
6 Any questions?
7 MR. GROBE: Nope.
8 MR. HARDER: No questions, I 9 would like to turn it over to Clark Price.
10 MR. MYERS: I have one. How 11 many CAs did you say were still there, condition reports?
12 MR. HARDER: Containment Health 13 Inspection Team is working off about a thousand corrective 14 actions.
15 MR. MYERS: Which are minor in 16 nature in general.
17 MR. HARDER: Minor in nature, 18 but still has to be closed out before we can restart, 19 thats correct.
20 MR. MYERS: The point is, the 21 hard stuff in Containment, we have, before we close up the 22 minor stuff, we had to get the hard stuff out of the way.
23 MR. HARDER: Correct.
24 MR. MYERS: So, a lot of this 25 stuff is fairly easily closeable; is that correct?
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
112 1 MR. HARDER: Thats correct.
2 MR. MYERS: Okay.
3 MR. PASSEHL: Sorry. I have a 4 question. On page 56, what is the, looks like a large 5 thermal gray there, that section of pipe. What are we 6 looking at there?
7 MR. HARDER: Thats service 8 water pipe. We are hydrolasing the service water pipe.
9 That depicted where our laser was at, so we knew the effect 10 of where we were moving within the pipe as it was being 11 cleaned.
12 MR. PASSEHL: I see. Thank 13 you.
14 MR. SCHRAUDER: Before Clark gets 15 started, I have to make a correction to a statement I 16 made. The EQ Program, we did have more than one junction 17 box that rust was identified. It was attributed to the 18 cable pull slime.
19 MR. GROBE: Okay. Thanks.
20 MR. DEAN: That was his 21 second lifeline.
22 MR. GROBE: No, actually it 23 was his third. Hes way over.
24 MR. SCHRAUDER: I didnt ask for 25 that, I was just kidding. But it may get me in trouble.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
113 1 (laughter) 2 MR. MYERS: Lets move on to 3 Clark Price.
4 MR. PRICE: Okay. My name is 5 Clark Price, and Im the Owner of the Restart Action 6 Process at Davis-Besse.
7 I would like to talk today about -- go on to the 8 next slide -- two items; our 350 checklist item status and 9 then our overall restart action progress, which Ill talk 10 about in a little bit of detail.
11 Go on to the next slide.
12 This particular slide is the first set of three 13 slides. And what its looking at is our 350 progress, as 14 we track it on site.
15 As we talked about in the past, our Restart Action 16 Process is really in two major categories; a discovery 17 phase and then an implementation phase. This chart here is 18 showing the progress that were making in those two 19 phases.
20 This first chart identifies the checklist items 21 number one and two, which primarily address the reactor 22 head corrosion event and also the extended extent of condition in 23 containment related to the boric acid.
24 And, as you can see in this area, we have one 25 particular item in discovery that were still working on, MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
114 1 thats the Collective Significance Review. That is being 2 performed right now and there will be a management review 3 of that next week and that should complete it.
4 On the righthand side in implementation area, we 5 have some, a number of items that are still in progress. I 6 failed to mention our green -- if the bar is green, were 7 complete with that activity. If its blue, its in 8 progress. If its gray, its just not applicable.
9 But in that area, in the checklist item two category 10 under the reactor vessel head and containment vessel, we 11 are basically waiting plant conditions in order to finish 12 out the required tests there with the full pressure test on 13 the Reactor Coolant System and also the containment IRT.
14 Were also, as Lynn just talked about in the one 15 area in Containment Health, which is the line called 2C, 16 were making good progress there. Thats closing out.
17 Hopefully, well be done with that area soon.
18 Containment emergency sump is another project that 19 were contending with and well have an inspection coming 20 up on that, that we discussed earlier.
21 Then we have our boric acid systems outside of 22 containment, which Lynn is also responsible for and hell 23 be focusing attention on those areas when were doing the 24 containment IRT. Hell move his teams outside to work on 25 those. So, well make better progress once the, in that MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
115 1 area once they are IRT starts.
2 On the next slide is our program area, or Safety 3 Significant Programs. We talked about those earlier. Dave 4 talked about those in the earlier discussions.
5 We have one area that is still in discovery, and 6 Bill Pearce talked about the Quality Audits Program Review 7 thats currently going on and should complete this week.
8 We have a number of items that are completed in our 9 programs area, and also some that are still in progress.
10 And, were pushing to get these completed this week and 11 next, so that theyre ready for inspection.
12 The one that is, currently the newest checklist 13 item, which is the last item on the chart there, which is 14 Completeness and Accuracy of Required Records and 15 Submittals to NRC; were just in the process of getting the 16 implementation plan put together for that, make sure we 17 have the full scope of that identified and covered.
18 If there is no questions, Ill move on to the last 19 slide.
20 MR. GROBE: Clark, just an 21 observation on that last slide. I believe thats, as far 22 as the discovery and completion of the discovery phase, 23 thats quite an improvement, having essentially by the end 24 of this week possibly all of those done. Is that correct?
25 MR. PRICE: That is correct.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
116 1 MR. GROBE: Good. There was a 2 number of questions regarding John Jacobsens Jacobsons programs 3 inspection where things weren't quite complete when we 4 expected them to be, so that's all ready for inspection, 5 that's good.
6 MR. PRICE: Yes, this is one 7 area we're pushing real hard on and making sure we've got 8 all the implementation planned action items completed and 9 there are just a couple close-out items on a couple of the 10 reports to complete and we'll be ready.
11 Okay, the last sheet here is the last four remaining 12 350 checklist items. The first one is the our 13 Management/Human Performance Improvement Plan. We're 14 continuing our activities there. Discussed that earlier, 15 and we still have some items to complete to be able to 16 finish up that inspection on that particular item.
17 In the, the one item that's in discovery is the item 18 that Bob Schrauder just spoke to in the Design Issues 19 Resolution area and we're making good progress there and 20 should be closing that out from a discovery perspective 21 within the next week.
22 We do have some other areas; the Test Program 23 Development Implementation, that sits at 60 percent 24 complete. That's primarily due to plant conditions. The 25 plan and procedures are essentially ready. Now we're MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
117 1 waiting on plant conditions for the Integrated Leak Rate 2 Test, which will be the first use of that test program, and 3 then the full temperature and pressure test.
4 And, as you can see there too, we have identified 5 our Restart Readiness Reviews, which are a critical process 6 in our assurance that were both from an operational 7 perspective and our system readiness perspective that were 8 ready for restart. Weve discussed those readiness review 9 meetings and thats whats identified there.
10 Yes?
11 MR. DEAN: Clark, before you 12 move on. Going back to the first item, 1 A. We do have a 13 technical root cause in hand, but I note there is still 14 some ongoing work looking at the liner that, testing along 15 with that report.
16 MR. PRICE: Can you address 17 that, or Jim?
18 MR. POWERS: I think there is 19 continued work in terms of the data that was taken at the 20 laboratory in Virginia on the as-found condition of the 21 cladding liner; is that what youre referring to, Bill?
22 MR. DEAN: Correct.
23 MR. POWERS: So, that needs to 24 be rolled up and reported out, and as well, were going 25 forward with extracting some additional samples from the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
118 1 old head per your request, and that needs to continue as 2 well. So, there is ongoing work.
3 MR. DEAN: Do you have a 4 timeline for the analysis of the line?
5 MR. POWERS: No, I dont have 6 that today. Well have to get that information to you.
7 MR. DEAN: Thanks, Jim.
8 MR. PRICE: Okay, if thats 9 all the questions, Ill move on to the next session, which 10 is looking at our overall restart progress.
11 Each month, we display a set of charts that are 12 actually on the audiences right over there. We use those 13 to look at our major building block areas and major 14 contributors to a lot of the work that came out of the 15 discovery phase of our Restart Action Process.
16 Im not going to go back and address each one of 17 those curves today, but I do have a chart in here that will 18 address them in kind of a higher level look. But what I 19 also want to do is put this all in perspective.
20 When we look at the charts, they look rather ominous 21 because of the scale we put them on, but when we look at 22 what we have really completed to-date, this is the total 23 Restart Condition Report that we have set our required for 24 restart. And we have over 5,400 Condition Reports that we 25 placed through the review of the Restart Station Review MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
119 1 Board, as requiring evaluation prior to restart.
2 As you can see there, weve got about actually 3 around 89 percent of those Condition Reports have been 4 evaluated, and Corrective Actions delivered out of those, 5 with the remaining amount down there around 600 that are 6 still to be completed.
7 So, it kind of puts it all a little in better 8 perspective. We completed a tremendous amount of work 9 already in this area that came out of our discovery phase.
10 Its not only on the Building Blocks that these come, but 11 normal day-to-day operations and the generation of 12 Condition Reports, all those Condition Reports are reviewed 13 by the Restart Station Review Board for potential restart 14 requirements.
15 The other thing I would like to mention -- well, 16 Ill wait until a later graph here.
17 The next graph is the Restart Corrective Actions now 18 that have come out of those Condition Reports. As you can 19 see here, we have over, to-date over 5,700 Condition 20 Reports or Corrective Actions that have been identified out 21 of those 5,400 Condition Reports.
22 Now, we talked months ago, we have around 3 to 4 on 23 average Corrective Actions coming out of each Condition 24 Report. And right around 30 percent of those Corrective 25 Actions, when you look at it in total, are being classified MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
120 1 as restart by the board. So, thats why it almost ends up, 2 looks like a one per one relationship with the Corrective 3 Actions and the Condition Reports.
4 The Restart Station Review Board continues to meet.
5 As were now pushing to correct Condition Report 6 Evaluations rather hard, the population of Corrective 7 Actions coming into the board review, are streaming in 8 quite rapidly, so until the board reviews them and 9 classifies them, they dont get into this graph.
10 So, right now, I would expect that this graph will 11 top out a little over 6,000 Corrective Actions when we, 12 when were done. But again, here, what this is showing, we 13 have around almost 60 percent of the Corrective Actions 14 that weve identified as required for restart completed 15 to-date.
16 The last chart, what this is showing is another 17 chart, simple chart that we put together, as we are looking 18 at how were progressing again. These are the major 19 Building Blocks and the same ones that the charts are in 20 the back.
21 A simple way to look at how were progressing in our 22 work-off rates. Essentially what the color coding means 23 is, red means were basically declining in our work-off 24 rate; a green indicator says were improving it, and white 25 says basically from the prior week we remained about the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
121 1 same.
2 Back during the week of the 16th of February, I 3 believe it was, actually it was 23rd of February, earlier 4 that week, we started a process on-site where we have 5 morning meetings, 8:00 every morning, that are focused at 6 Condition Report and Corrective Action progress. And we 7 are reviewing those on a three-day look ahead basis, 8 ensuring that we have everything in place in order to 9 complete the Condition Report evaluations and close out the 10 Corrective Actions.
11 And you can see that that focus attention now has 12 turned a corner on our Condition Reports. We were having 13 positive performance, as you can see from the charts in the 14 back, however it wasnt at a rate that was satisfactory to 15 support the restart scheduling that we wanted to get to.
16 So, this focus effort here has definitely made some 17 improvements in the work-off rates.
18 In addition, we have 2:00 meetings every day that 19 are focused with the sections that are looking at the 20 Corrective Actions and Condition Reports to ensure that 21 each manager has a full grasp on the conditions that hes 22 responsible for, what their status is. And also for the 23 senior management team, because its meeting with the 24 senior management team to ensure we dont have any real 25 hidden items out there.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
122 1 That review has essentially been completed for all 2 the sections. Now its going to start a systematic review 3 of those in the same 2:00 meeting; what were going to be 4 looking at are from a persistence perspective now versus 5 the ownership of those Condition Reports and Corrective 6 Actions from a department perspective.
7 So, thats to ensure that as we work those down, 8 that we know the issues that we have out there. As I 9 talked about before, we have around 600 Condition Reports 10 out there that are still, still open. And out of those 11 Condition Reports, at the rate were working those off 12 right now, that should take about two and a half weeks, two 13 and a half to three weeks. We should have those Condition 14 Report Evaluations completed.
15 Every day we still have incoming, but the incoming 16 rate has significantly dropped. So, it would look like in 17 about two and a half weeks, we should have our Condition 18 Report backlog down. We know weve got some hard ones in 19 there that were working on that well manage those, but 20 right now we want to get the major ones, the masses down, 21 so we can really manage the real issues now that are out 22 there.
23 And the same way goes with the Corrective Actions 24 that were on the prior chart. We still have in the area 25 of, I dont have my glasses on, I think around 320, 400 MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
123 1 Corrective Actions. Like I said, thats going to grow a 2 little bit. But the same thing, were focusing on getting 3 those numbers down, so the real hard ones we have 4 identified what they are and were pushing those into the 5 schedule, the outer schedule, so that theyre scheduled out 6 and then worked on.
7 MR. MYERS: How many are late 8 now?
9 MR. PRICE: How many are late 10 now? We did what we were supposed to do, none of them are 11 late now.
12 MR. MYERS: Thats a good 13 answer.
14 MR. PRICE: Part of our 15 process in the 8:00 meeting is, we had a number of 16 Condition Reports that went late, Corrective Actions. And 17 through this process, weve gone through a -- management 18 reviewed and agreed upon extension to those, placed those 19 out in time in order to support the schedule. And so, 20 thats been completed as part of this activity.
21 I think one last thing to say. One of the things we 22 talked about here, we have to ensure that the quality of 23 the product, quality of these Condition Report evaluations 24 and Corrective Actions are maintained; that the 25 documentation behind those is there. We continuously focus MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
124 1 on that. Weve talked about that today. We know we have a 2 major inspection coming in with a lot of focus in that 3 area. So, were working hard to get the numbers down, but 4 were also working hard to maintain the quality that we 5 need to in all these Corrective Actions and Condition 6 Reports.
7 MR. MYERS: Jack, I would like 8 to move on to Greg Dunn. If were going to skip anything 9 this time, I think the program would be the one.
10 MR. GROBE: I appreciate 11 that, thank you.
12 MR. MYERS: Okay.
13 MR. DUNN: Good afternoon.
14 Im Greg Dunn. Im the Manager of the Outage Management 15 Work Control. I recently joined the Davis-Besse team and 16 my current capacity is Restart Director on day shift. That 17 function is responsible for facilitating the physical 18 implementation of field work and activities for the actual 19 implementation of the corrective measures.
20 My desired outcome in this short discussion is to 21 communicate our upcoming work activities that are necessary 22 to support that testing and restart phase of our Return to 23 Service Plan.
24 Just last evening -- next slide, please. Just last 25 evening, as Lew mentioned earlier, we set our new reactor MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
125 1 head in place on the vessel flange. And our current work 2 in progress includes lowering down the control rod lead 3 screws and run in of the reactor head studs. And then, 4 this evening, we plan to conduct a seating pass of those 5 studs, and then transition into the tensioning, which will 6 move us into Mode 5 Operating Condition of the facility.
7 That will establish the need to establish the 8 technical specification of requirements for Mode 5, and 9 will fully restore the reactor pressure vessel intact for 10 the Davis-Besse station.
11 Placement of the reactor head on the vessel 12 establishes also plant conditions necessary to support 13 going to deep drain conditions. Deep drain is defined any 14 time we go less than the flange level of the reactor 15 vessel, and thats water level less than 80 inches.
16 That will allow the removal of the steam generator 17 nozzle dams. Nozzle dams were put in place as a barrier 18 between the reactor vessel and the steam generators and to 19 allow for layup conditions of those steam generators during 20 our extended shutdown conditions.
21 It is now time with the restoration of the reactor 22 pressure vessel system to remove that isolation and restore 23 normal Reactor Coolant System boundary conditions.
24 Also, during that drain period well be replacing 25 all four reactor coolant pump seals. We elected to replace MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
126 1 those seals based upon industry operating experience, 2 industry experience with an extended shutdown condition, 3 potential for chemical attack on the surfaces of those 4 seals; and as a result, utilize that experience and the 5 need for replacement of all four of those seals also in 6 preparation for restart.
7 Completion of all these activities will place the 8 physical reactor system ready for fill to normal water 9 level, and will establish Reactor Coolant System ready for 10 return to service.
11 Fill of the Reactor Coolant System also supports the 12 next testing activity, which is the Integrated Leak Rate 13 Test. The water level and restoration Reactor Coolant 14 System is necessary for proper monitoring from the control 15 room during the conduct of the Integrated Leak Rate Test as 16 we close up the containment structure and access to 17 containment is limited during the conduct of that test.
18 The Integrated Leak Rate Test will verify or 19 validate the leak tightness of the containment structure 20 after we opened that up for access of our new head, and it 21 will utilize as multiple industrial air compressors 22 essentially and will pressurize the containment to 23 approximately 40 pounds of pressure. And, it will be our 24 first major milestone of the plant rate retest activities 25 in preparation for restart.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
127 1 In parallel with these activities, we have much 2 remaining work in the field. As we know, we talked about 3 much of that today in the Corrective Actions. Two of the 4 important items in there inside containment are the 5 completion of our new emergency sump, and specifically, 6 thats the completion of the lower strainer assemblies 7 installation, which is in progress.
8 That was prohibited earlier as we had the incore, we 9 had the incores removed from the reactor vessel in support 10 of fuel reload and that radiologically prohibited access to 11 the under vessel area. Those incores are reinserted with 12 the completion of the fuel reload, and allowed access in 13 the new lower strainer assemblies installations in 14 progress.
15 And, as we talked of the containment air cooler, we 16 have lessons learned implementation necessary for restoring 17 the service water supply in return to those containment air 18 coolers.
19 And, Jack, as we talked about earlier the 20 implementation of the field implementation lessons learned, 21 as well as the modifications on how the design itself is 22 installed.
23 All that should culminate with what we have called 24 our restart readiness meetings. Define a little bit about 25 what that is, its a Collective Management Team Review of MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
128 1 the completion of implementation of Corrective Actions, 2 that Clark talked about. Also our process in program 3 improvements, our field work execution, as well as our 4 performance matrix that we talked about earlier thats 5 intended to monitor our progress on Safety Culture 6 improvement and all of this is with the purpose to validate 7 our preparation for plant restart.
8 Thats the whole function of our restart readiness 9 meetings proceeding forward. Upon successful completion of 10 those readiness review meetings, and as Lew mentioned, it 11 took us six days for Mode 6. I would anticipate some long 12 hard days for Mode 4 as well.
13 This will be followed by pressurization of the 14 Reactor Coolant System to normal operating pressure for 15 seven days, which will be the demonstration of what I would 16 term the fruits of our labor in establishing Reactor 17 Coolant System integrity and supporting return to service.
18 Those are some major activities that we have 19 upcoming in the near term to support the restart phase of 20 our Return to Service Plan.
21 MR. GROBE: Lew.
22 MR. MYERS: Okay. In summary, 23 our people are making good progress. Were working long 24 hours. Were pushing toward closure of Corrective Actions, 25 CRs, identifying -- in the CR area were trying to find the MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
129 1 correct answer, corrective action area, were trying to 2 implement them, implement the needed actions.
3 If youll look at our work-off rates, every week 4 over there in each one of those categories, theyre 5 improving. The last two or three weeks have been the best 6 weeks ever. So, we think we have a good opportunity to 7 move forward to return the plant to service.
8 We continue to improve the material condition. I 9 think we demonstrated that today. Many of the plant 10 systems and components, a lot of hard work there ahead of 11 us. There is a bunch of AOVs that weve got to go fix.
12 Price and work are going to come out of the 13 electrical reviews and things we have to do, but there is a 14 lot of work ahead of us. Were making a lot of progress in 15 improving the material today.
16 We continue to make progress of the management area 17 also. A few months ago, we couldnt even discuss what the 18 Management Observation Program was telling us. Today, we 19 have a good idea there, as we demonstrated.
20 Also the Safety Culture is an important part of our 21 plant, our plant startup. Were doing our next assessment 22 this week in Safety Culture. Were looking forward to the 23 Sonja Haber review.
24 Additionally, from a plant standpoint, the 25 decision-making Nuclear Operator Procedure, I really do MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
130 1 believe that carries us a long way, that consistent 2 approach to addressing questions.
3 And then, finally, were looking forward to our next 4 meeting to see where were at then. Hopefully, well be 5 through the Integrated Leak Rate Test and looking forward 6 to Mode 4.
7 With that, I thank you very much.
8 MR. GROBE: Thank you. Why 9 dont we -- its ten after 5, why dont we just go right 10 into public questions and comments.
11 (Off the record.)
12 MR. GROBE: I appreciate you 13 folks sticking with us through this meeting. These are 14 long meetings. Theyre very productive for us. Some of 15 the discussion I sure could be dry for you, but I do 16 appreciate you all staying around.
17 What I would like to do is begin with questions from 18 local officials or representatives; local officials, if 19 they were here, if theyre here; and then take any 20 questions from local members of the public, and then move 21 to other folks.
22 So, are there any local officials or representatives 23 here that have a question or comment?
24 Okay. How about local members of the public? You 25 guys going to be easy on me tonight?
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
131 1 Amy shook her head no.
2 Okay, anybody else?
3 MS. RYDER: Amy Ryder. My name is 4 Amy Ryder, and I represent Ohio Citizen Action.
5 I have a few questions today. My first question is 6 in reference to the Management Observation Program that was 7 discussed this afternoon. It seems that when it comes to 8 Safety Culture at Davis-Besse, a lot of the problems keep 9 bringing back to the decisions that are being made by 10 management, not necessarily the work force. And so, I 11 wanted to get your thoughts on what you would think about a 12 program, an observation program that would actually observe 13 management decisions as opposed to decisions or behavior of 14 the work force.
15 MR. GROBE: Thats an 16 excellent question. I know one component of Doctor Habers 17 work was observations of all sorts of different activities, 18 including meetings where managers were making decisions.
19 But thats really not a question for me. Where did Lew go?
20 I think that was a question for you, Lew. Let me 21 repeat the question, just in case you didnt hear it.
22 Amys question was, whether or not the Management 23 Observation Program should not just be limited to observing 24 workers by supervisors, managers, directors and whatnot, 25 but maybe there should be some components of the Management MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
132 1 Observation Program, observing the managers doing their 2 work in decision-making.
3 MR. MYERS: We actually do that.
4 If you want to look at our Corrective Action Program. You 5 know, we make decisions, if we find out like design mod 6 made a poor decision on approach, we write a CR and capture 7 those things in training and look for, like we just talked 8 about awhile ago, at risk mods. Maybe right now were not 9 getting enough operation involved and stuff like that, so 10 we really do that, Jack.
11 MR. SCHRAUDER: The 12 observations that we talked about of infrequently performed 13 tests and evolutions, prejob briefings, those are 14 management decision-making activities. And we do observe 15 those, enter those into the data base. We also do 16 observations of things like the Senior Management Team 17 Meetings where decisions are made. So, all of those 18 activities are in fact incorporated into the program.
19 MS. RYDER: My question is 20 actually specifically geared at one particular decision, 21 which was the decision to fire Andrew Zamiska. Did 22 somebody observe that decision and what was the key facts 23 in that?
24 MR. GROBE: I dont think 25 its appropriate to discuss personnel actions in public.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
133 1 Thats not appropriate.
2 MS. RYDER: Well, its safety 3 culture. This was an individual who was raising safety 4 concerns. Hes claiming that he was fired for safety 5 concerns. It absolutely has to do with safety culture.
6 MR. GROBE: I understand.
7 MR. MYERS: I would suggest 8 you let that play out in court.
9 MR. GROBE: Yes, and thats 10 actually, Andrew has pursued his avenues for adjudicating 11 that issue and thats through the Department of Labor.
12 MS. RYDER: I understand.
13 MR. GROBE: And thats the way 14 it will proceed.
15 MS. RYDER: It, all right, 16 its still related to safety culture.
17 MR. GROBE: Absolutely, I 18 understand what youre saying.
19 MS. RYDER: My second question 20 is not actually a question, more of a statement. This is 21 in regards to whether or not, what was going to happen with 22 the draft report, the bearer report that shes doing, and 23 when she drafts her report I understand its going to be 24 given to FirstEnergy and to the NRC; is that correct?
25 MR. GROBE: Um-hmm. There is MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
134 1 a meeting next Thursday, when Doctor Haber will present her 2 preliminary results to FirstEnergy, and well be observing 3 that meeting.
4 MS. RYDER: Okay, one of the 5 issues that you raised was this issue of credibility on 6 behalf of both FirstEnergy and the NRC. And, I think it is 7 important that members of the public actually are able to 8 compare what the draft report said, in addition to what the 9 final report said.
10 Last, lets see, in January, there was a report 11 issued, it was commissioned by the State of New York, James 12 Lee Witt, former Director of FEMA, was asked to look at the 13 evacuation plan for Indian Point and Millstone. He 14 actually posted his draft report on the Internet and 15 allowed people to respond to that. And once the final 16 draft is issued, you know, people will be able to compare.
17 So, I would like to make the suggestion that when 18 that report is issued, that its posted on line, either on 19 FirstEnergys Website or on the NRCs.
20 My final question, this was an issue that was 21 discussed a little bit today and also last month. This is 22 this issue about these, the thousands of tasks, whatever 23 the number is, that has to be completed before restart, if 24 that should ever happen, as well as the number of tasks 25 that are being deferred until after restart.
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
135 1 I want to know whether or not the NRC has evaluated 2 the criteria used by FirstEnergy to decide what gets done 3 before restart and what gets done after restart?
4 MR. GROBE: Yes. Thats 5 actually contained in Clark Prices, the Owner for that 6 program, is contained in a Building Block called the 7 Restart Action Plan Building Block; and it includes 8 criteria that are fairly obvious that a piece of equipment 9 is not working properly, so its then required by technical 10 specifications, so that clearly would be a restart issue, 11 specific issues to address over 50 checks list items.
12 And then there is more judgmental areas where an 13 issue might affect reliability on equipment, but not 14 directly affect safety. So, there is a variety of criteria 15 in that test plan. And thats something that we review 16 from a program perspective, we look at the criteria to make 17 sure were comfortable. On a regular basis, the resident 18 specialist staff in particular, sample those types of 19 issues to make sure that, two things; that the initial 20 classifications are correct, and if an item is 21 reclassified, that it is done correctly.
22 MS. RYDER: Okay, is there a 23 specific inspection report that documents the scope and 24 results of those?
25 MR. GROBE: I dont know. If MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
136 1 you could give Jan Strasma a call and maybe he can help 2 you.
3 MS. RYDER: Okay. Thank you.
4 MR. GROBE: Thank you.
5 I wanted to make a, a comment regarding your earlier 6 observation, Amy. I feel also strongly that its important 7 that the draft report be available. Thats the way our 8 internal assessments work in the NRC. But when my kids 9 were in grade school and high school, I also let them open 10 their report card, even though it was addressed to me. I 11 let them open it first, and tell me about it. And now 12 theyre in college, I have to ask them if I can see their 13 grades.
14 I think its appropriate for FirstEnergy to have an 15 opportunity to hear the results and then make any 16 clarifications before the final report is issued, but I 17 likewise think its important, if there is any change 18 between the draft report and the final report, that it be 19 understood. So, I appreciate those comments.
20 Yes, sir.
21 MR. WITT: Jere Witt. County 22 Administrator for Ottawa County and a member of the Restart 23 Overview Panel. I would like to make one point for the 24 benefit of the public; and that is in the question of 25 management observation, I believe there are three areas MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
137 1 that Ive observed, that management is out getting their 2 observations done, and one of those would be the new 3 structure with FENOC that provides a much better 4 organization structure to oversee the decision made by 5 management.
6 The second one is, that the Restart Overview Panel 7 certainly reviews and comments and makes recommendations 8 under decisions of that Restart Overview Panel. And I 9 believe that the company Nuclear Review Board serves in 10 that function in many regards.
11 So, I believe there is really three areas that the 12 management team is being observed in. Thank you.
13 MR. GROBE: Thanks Jere.
14 And, in fact, there are others also; some aspects of 15 quality assurance of the management decision-making and an 16 independent assessment, as well as being a student of our 17 operations, there is regular assessments at every nuclear 18 plant in the United States.
19 Criteria they use are industry best practices, are 20 not NRC requirements; and they look for any areas in 21 management and organizational effectiveness that provide 22 independent assessment also. But it was a very interesting 23 question, within the context of the Management Observation 24 Program. Thank you.
25 Any other questions or comments?
MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
138 1 Okay, very good.
2 We have another meeting this evening at 7:00. If 3 you all havent had enough, want to come back, that would 4 be great.
5 Thank you very much.
6 (Off the record.)
7 ---
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO
139 1 CERTIFICATE 2 I, Marie B. Fresch, Registered Merit Reporter and 3 Notary Public in and for the State of Ohio, duly 4 commissioned and qualified therein, do hereby certify that 5 the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of the 6 proceedings as taken by me and that I was present during 7 all of said proceedings.
8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and 9 affixed my seal of office at Norwalk, Ohio, on this 21st 10 day of March, 2003.
11 12 13 14 Marie B. Fresch, RMR 15 NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF OHIO 16 My Commission Expires 10-9-03.
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MARIE B. FRESCH & ASSOCIATES 1-800-669-DEPO