ML040150589

6:00 P.M. Transcript of Public Meeting to Discuss Activities Associated with the Assessment and Actions Being Taken to Address Operational Performance, Safety Culture, and Safety Conscious Work Environment Issues

ML040150589
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	12/29/2003
From:	NRC/RGN-III
To:
References
MC 0350
Download: ML040150589 (119)

Text

1 1

2 PUBLIC MEETING 3 Between U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 0350 Panel and FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company 4

5 Meeting held on Monday, December 29, 2003, at 6 6:00 p.m. at Oak Harbor High School, Oak Harbor, Ohio, taken by me, Marlene S. Lewis, Stenotype 7 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Ohio.

8 9

10 PANEL MEMBERS PRESENT:

11 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 12 Christine Lipa, Branch Chief, NRC 13 William Ruland, Vice Chairman, MC 0350 Panel 14 Scott Thomas, Senior Resident Inspector 15 Jon Hopkins, Project Manager for Davis-Besse 16 Geoff Wright, Leader of Management and Human Performance Inspection 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

2 1 MS. LIPA: Okay, well, hello.

2 Id like to welcome FirstEnergy and members of the 3 public for coming to this meeting today. This is a 4 public meeting between the NRCs Oversight Panel and 5 FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company.

6 My name is Christine Lipa, and Im the Branch 7 Chief at the NRCs Region III office located near 8 Chicago, and Im responsible for the NRCs inspection 9 program at Davis-Besse.

10 UNIDENTIFIED: Could you speak a 11 little closer into the microphone, please?

12 MS. LIPA: Okay. The purpose of 13 this meeting is a discussion between the NRCs 14 Oversight Panel and the licensee on their activities 15 since our exit meeting that was held on December 16 19th, and at that exit meeting on December 19th, the 17 NRC presented the preliminary findings from two 18 inspections. The first one was the Restart 19 Assessment team and the second inspection was the 20 Management and Human Performance Phase 3, and tonight 21 we have Geoff Wright, who was the leader of one of 22 those inspections.

23 The NRC discussed several issues at that 24 meeting and requested the licensee to assess those 25 findings. Weve asked the licensee to provide us MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

3 1 with their assessment and actions that they plan to 2 take to address operational performance and Safety 3 Conscious Work Environment issues.

4 Id like to start off with some 5 introductions. Up here at the NRC table on the far 6 left is Geoff Wright. He was the leader of the 7 Management and Human Performance Inspection. He did 8 Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3.

9 Next to Geoff is Jon Hopkins.

10 MR. HOPKINS: (Indicating).

11 MS. LIPA: Jon is the Project 12 Manager for Davis-Besse, and he works out of 13 headquarters.

14 On my left is Bill Ruland. Bill Ruland is 15 the Senior Manager in headquarters, and hes the Vice 16 Chairman of the Davis-Besse Oversight Panel.

17 On my right is Scott Thomas. Hes the Senior 18 Resident Inspector at the Davis-Besse facility.

19 Other NRC folks today, in the foyer was Nancy 20 Keller greeting you when you came in, and shes the 21 resident office assistant out at the Davis-Besse 22 plant, and we also are expecting Viktoria Mitlyng, 23 our Region III Public Affairs, and Ill go ahead and 24 let you introduce the FirstEnergy folks.

25 MR. MYERS: Thank you. Next to MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

4 1 me is Barry Allen. Barry is sort of new with our 2 company out there. Hes the new plant manager there 3 at the Davis-Besse station. Were pleased to have 4 him with us.

5 Next to me on my right is Mark Bezilla. Mark 6 is our site VP.

7 Fred von Ahn is at the end of the table.

8 Fred is the VP of Oversight, and we have a couple 9 people in the audience.

10 Joe Hagan is with us.

11 MR. HAGAN: (Indicating).

12 MR. MYERS: Joe Hagan is the 13 Senior VP of Engineering and Support Services, and 14 then Gary Leidich, President of FENOC --

15 MR. LEIDICH: (Indicating).

16 MR. MYERS: -- is with us also.

17 MS. LIPA: Okay, thank you, and 18 Id also like any public officials to introduce 19 themselves.

20 MR. ARNDT: Steve Arndt, County 21 Commissioner.

22 MS. LIPA: Hi, Steve.

23 MR. PAPCUN: John Papcun, Ottawa 24 County Commissioner.

25 MS. LIPA: Hi, John.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

5 1 MR. KOEBEL: Carl Koebel, Ottawa 2 County Commissioner.

3 MS. LIPA: Welcome, Carl.

4 MR. OPFER: Darrell Opfer, 5 Director of the Ottawa County Improvement 6 Corporation.

7 MS. LIPA: Hi, Darrell.

8 MR. WITT: Jere Witt, County 9 Administrator.

10 MS. LIPA: Hi, Jere. Okay.

11 Anybody else?

12 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE).

13 MS. LIPA: Okay, Id like to go 14 through just a couple administrative items. This 15 meeting is open for public observation obviously.

16 This is the business meeting between the NRC and 17 FirstEnergy. At the conclusion of the business 18 portion of the meeting but before the meeting is 19 adjourned, the NRC staff will be available to receive 20 comments and questions from members of the public and 21 answer questions.

22 There are copies -- in the foyer when you 23 came in, there were copies of the December edition of 24 our monthly newsletter. This is the same version 25 that was provided at the December 3rd meeting, but we MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

6 1 brought copies today for anybodys information, and 2 we also have a public meeting feedback form, and the 3 licensee had some slides on the table there also that 4 they will be using in their presentation tonight.

5 And were also having this meeting 6 transcribed today to maintain a record of the 7 meeting, and usually we can get that posted to our 8 website within about three to four weeks, so its 9 important that the speakers use the microphones so 10 that the transcriber and the audience can hear the 11 presentation today, so, with that, Ill turn it over 12 to Bill Ruland.

13 MR. RULAND: Good evening, 14 everyone. Id just like to reemphasize that todays 15 meeting -- tonights meeting is not a restart 16 meeting, and the NRC will not be making any decisions 17 regarding the restart of Davis-Besse this evening.

18 The purpose of this meeting is for us to listen to 19 FirstEnergy describe their process, to address the 20 questions we had at our most recent exit meetings, 21 and were here to listen to those and make sure we 22 understand them. Ultimately, this will lead us to 23 plant inspections, and, subsequent to that, wed be 24 in a position to make a decision one way or the 25 other, so thats kind of where we stand right now at MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

7 1 the moment.

2 The restart meeting as it stands now is yet 3 to be scheduled, and I dont have any further 4 information about the schedule. We often get asked 5 schedule questions. The only thing we can tell you 6 about the schedule today is on the 13th of January of 7 next month we will be having a regular -- we 8 currently have a regularly scheduled 0350 Panel 9 meeting with FirstEnergy, and thats it for now.

10 Lew, its up to you now.

11 MR. MYERS: Thank you. Let me 12 spend a moment to just sort of status you on the 13 plant. Our plant is in what we call Mode 4 at the 14 present time. Lots of things have changed since our 15 last meeting. Both of our ECC, our cool water 16 system is -- systems are operable now, our emergency 17 system. The high pressure safety injection pumps we 18 talk so much about are in place and ready to be used.

19 Weve heated the plant up to above 200 degrees -- at 20 270 degrees, 270 pounds of pressure, its above our 21 pressurizer. Were anticipating Mode 3 shortly, so 22 the plant is being heated up as we sit here. We 23 have some work that were doing on the governor valve 24 of the top feed pump. We just want to make sure 25 some switches are correct there, so weve made a MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

8 1 decision today to go prepare those or at least make 2 sure theyre in good standing, and then theres a 3 solenoid valve, thats 101, that were working on 4 right now that has an air leak on it. After that, 5 the plant should pretty well be ready to continue to 6 heat up to what we call Mode 3, and then, from Mode 7 3, go on up to normal operating pressure temperature, 8 which is about 500 degrees -- over 500 degrees, 2,155 9 pounds of pressure, so we anticipate that happening 10 over the next day or so, and were going to continue 11 to heat up slowly, look for leaks. Weve got 12 plateaus laid out, but we are making progress toward 13 heating the plant up to what we call normal operating 14 pressure temperature where we will go into an 15 assessment mode for sometime to make sure some of the 16 things we have talked about are corrected today, 17 okay? I thought Id start out, just give you the 18 status of the plant.

19 Let me tell you what our desired outcomes 20 are. Lets go to the first slide. Today were 21 going to provide an assessment and -- provide you 22 with our assessment and overall conclusions of our 23 responses and our Safety Conscious Work Environment 24 Survey. We did that on December 3, but there were 25 some questions asked, about three or four questions, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

9 1 as to specific areas I want to show you today.

2 Overall, Id like to say, you know, that we continue 3 to be pleased with our survey results and because we 4 continue to show improvements overall. As you go 5 through the plant start-ups that were going through 6 right now, we went through a discovery phase, then we 7 go through a design phase and then implementation, 8 heating the plant up, focus shifts in groups in our 9 organizations from -- from, you know, engineering, 10 design engineering or something, more to the 11 operational phase, operations maintenance, other 12 stresses and standards are -- are very visible in 13 those areas, so we saw some -- some declines on 14 several questions in our Safety Conscious Work 15 Environment Survey that we were concerned about and 16 you were -- also asked questions, so were going to 17 share with you today the results of what we think is 18 causing those declines, some of the actions that 19 were going to take to ensure that those turn around.

20 I think -- I actually feel fairly comfortable right 21 where were at today, and well show you the reasons 22 why. We want to communicate some of our assessment 23 of Operations performance, discuss the operational 24 areas of required continued improvement. As you 25 remember, we did the NOPT test, and we kept -- we had MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

10 1 several, what Id call minor, safe related issues, 2 some minor related -- not of significance importance, 3 but we got unexpected record room signals, and things 4 like that. We think that weve improved on those 5 type of things and the use of procedures and stuff 6 like that, but were still not seeing the consistency 7 in some of the management tools that we expect to 8 see, and well share with you the items that we have 9 in place to -- to demonstrate improvement there.

10 Well provide you with the Corrective Actions to 11 ensure consistent operator performance for the 12 long-term and provide you our plans for our Readiness 13 Reviews and Effectiveness Reviews over the next few 14 weeks that will give us the confidence to come to you 15 when we think were ready for restart, and then, when 16 this is all said and done, we hope to 17 demonstrate that FENOC, we are very, very committed 18 to both safe and effective operations of our 19 facility. We think we have demonstrated the actions 20 weve taken today in saying, but there are some 21 improvements we need to make on effectiveness.

22 The agenda that I have laid out today, Ill 23 talk with you some about the Safety Conscious Work 24 Environment just to summarize the background surveys, 25 then Fred von Ahn will share some information with MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

11 1 you with the survey team that we put in place and how 2 we went -- the methodology that we went through to 3 answer the questions that we had and you had. I 4 talked some about our Corrective Actions and the 5 actions to monitor -- to continue to monitor 6 effectiveness, and then well focus -- well change 7 the tune and refocus on operations again, and both 8 Barry Allen and Mark Bezilla will share with you the 9 management tools that were implementing and the 10 Corrective Actions that were implementing, that we 11 think will take the next step in operator performance 12 to ensure consistent and effective implementation of 13 the Operations standards.

14 With that, let me go to the first slide.

15 The first slide I put in place is, as you remember, 16 we did a survey on November 3rd on Safety Conscious 17 Work Environment. You know, we stand here today, we 18 spend a lot of time talking about the survey because 19 these are good tools, and were very pleased with not 20 only the performance we saw on those surveys, but 21 the -- really, were happy about the areas of 22 concern, if that makes sense, because what we found 23 is thats been a very hell -- or even recursive 24 process that weve been going through with our 25 employees over the last few days. In fact before, a MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

12 1 week or two ago, we had the meetings with each one 2 of -- every employee at our side. We had like four 3 meetings with myself, with Mark Bezilla and Barry to 4 go over the results, and then today, before we came 5 here, we shared with a lot of our employees in 6 Operations and Maintenance and QA and Chemistry some 7 of the things were going to share with you now, had 8 a lot of dialogue with them, so we think the Safety 9 Conscious Work Environment Survey is a healthy thing 10 for us.

11 If youll look, we continue to see 12 improvements in each one of the pillars, the 13 Willingness to Raise Concerns, we think a lot of 14 people will be pleased with some of our scores that 15 we have seen and they are all very important, same 16 thing with RATI, ACR, so you know, and thats almost 17 100 percent of our employees, and the Pillar 2 of 18 resolution, we see some improvements there, from 76 19 to 80 percent. We were at 51 in August of 2002.

20 Pillar 3, you know, is pretty constant, and 21 then Pillar 4, Preventing and Detecting Retaliation 22 issues, were seeing some positive improvements there 23 with really, if you really look at this graph, I 24 think what it shows is that the undecided middle 25 tenth of the more decided to the left-hand side now, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

13 1 and thats the information that we sort of shared 2 with you on December 3rd, at the December 3rd 3 meeting.

4 Lets go to the next slide at the 350 5 meeting, we shared what we thought were some positive 6 results. Now, after that meeting, we went back and 7 started slicing and dicing the data, looking at it 8 both vertically and horizontally. Thats when we 9 noticed a couple groups, groups with three or four 10 different questions, and that gave us concern, and we 11 wanted to figure out what they were trying to tell us 12 there. We provided the information of the results 13 of the survey to our managers, and between November 14 21st and December 8th, youll see on one of my other 15 slides, two different views where we did that, and 16 then based on the December 8th meeting, where we 17 asked our managers to assess what those results meant 18 to them in those four questions or so, we decided to 19 do some personnel interviews, so those interviews 20 were conducted on December 11th. And then somewhere 21 around December 19th, we had some feedback from you 22 all guys that you were concerned about the same 23 questions, so then you asked us to share with you our 24 results, and well do that tonight, so thats sort of 25 the history of the Safety Conscious Work Environment MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

14 1 at Davis-Besse that I thought wed share upfront.

2 With that, Ill turn it over to Fred, and 3 Fred will discuss the analysis process that hell be 4 going through.

5 MR. von AHN: Can you hear me?

6 Good evening, Im Fred von Ahn, the Vice 7 President of Oversight of FENOC. Although the 8 November 3rd and 4th Safety Conscious Work 9 Environment Survey showed overall positive trends, 10 declining trends were noted in some areas by station 11 personnel and investigation into the whys had 12 started.

13 On December 19th, during the Management and 14 Human Performance session, the NRC identified four 15 specific sections, operations, maintenance, plant 16 engineering and quality assurance, as areas that 17 needed further understanding of the whys behind the 18 survey response declines. FENOC commissioned an 19 outside team to continue this investigation into the 20 declining trends. Next slide, please.

21 The purpose of this presentation is to 22 respond to the NRCs questions raised on the December 23 19th meeting regarding the results of the November 24 2003 Davis-Besse Safety Conscious Work Environment 25 Survey. Next slide, please.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

15 1 The outside team first developed a charter 2 and a process to guide its investigation. The 3 charter of the team was to objectively and 4 comprehensively evaluate the apparent decline in 5 certain areas of the November 2003 Safety Conscious 6 Work Environment Survey, determine causes of the 7 apparent decline, and develop corrective actions and 8 plans to monitor the effectiveness of those actions.

9 Next slide, please.

10 The survey team membership consisted of five 11 professionals experienced in both Safety Conscious 12 Work Environment embark, Safety Conscious Work 13 Environment arena, and organizational development 14 arena. The team collectively has over 100 person 15 years of experience in organizational development and 16 Safety Conscious Work Environment. Next slide, 17 please.

18 Todays objectives will be to describe the 19 process used to collect and evaluate data; to discuss 20 the evaluation of the data collected, present the 21 conclusions of the team; a station will then discuss 22 their corrective actions and discuss the mechanisms 23 to monitor the effectiveness of those actions. Next 24 slide, please.

25 This chart represents the process used to MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

16 1 evaluate the Safety Conscious Work Environment.

2 Starting at the upper left with the preparatory work, 3 the teams first assignment was to collect all 4 associated information with the surveys and develop 5 an approach methodology. The approach was developed 6 and codified into a chart which defined a process 7 which the team followed on all the following 8 activities. The major process flow was to collect 9 data, analyze and evaluate the data, draw conclusions 10 and recommend corrective actions. In order to 11 comprehensively evaluate the data, survey results 12 were further processed, which will be discussed in a 13 later slide. Survey comments were analyzed for 14 convergent validity with the interview data and to 15 validate the assumptions that the focused group 16 interviews would not challenge people to speak 17 freely; that is we wanted folks to be -- to hear --

18 to feel that they were relatively anonymous and we 19 wanted to have convergent validity with anonymous 20 tip. Previous corrective actions were analyzed for 21 effectiveness against the latest survey results, and 22 external factors were analyzed. These were factors 23 like personnel changes, organizational changes, 24 changes in compensation practices, major workout 25 changes. Other factors were evaluated for MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

17 1 convergent validity, and work already started as a 2 result of the survey, the November 19th follow-up 3 meetings, site alignment meetings, commonly called 4 the adventure meetings, quality assurance, individual 5 face -- face interviews that were completed in 6 parallel with the surveys. All these data sources 7 were evaluated for convergent validity.

8 MR. HOPKINS: (Indicating).

9 MR. von AHN: Yes.

10 MR. HOPKINS: Who was the second 11 team member of team one, Terry?

12 MR. von AHN: Terry -- the team was 13 a five person team. That was assistance -- we needed 14 Clarks full assistance to type the interview notes 15 when -- after we did the interviews, and that was 16 through the individual ones.

17 MR. HOPKINS: Thank you.

18 MR. von AHN: After the survey 19 results were further processed, focused group 20 interviews were conducted using three teams of two.

21 The sections interviewed were Chemistry, Maintenance 22 and Maintenance Contractors, Quality Assurance, Plant 23 Engineering and Operations. The interview notes 24 were then peer checked by the entire team for 25 accuracy and to see if any different hematic elements MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

18 1 were seen by a different set of eyes. A decision 2 was then made on whether further interviews were 3 needed. This process in conjunction with other data 4 then fed forward into the data evaluation process.

5 Next slide, please.

6 This chart represents the detailed subprocess 7 for the survey data evaluation. Evaluation 8 methodology consisted of processing both the March 9 survey data and the November survey data. 100 10 percent check of the survey formulas for validation 11 was done, and it was found during validation, an 12 error affecting 20 -- question 23 was found, said 13 negligible effect on the overall results and in 14 general resulted in more positive numbers for most 15 sections and a slightly negative effect on the 16 training section. Due to the negligible effect of 17 this, it was not considered in a team review, 18 however, a condition report was written and the data 19 will be corrected in the survey results. Data from 20 the March and November survey was then numerically 21 compared on a question by question basis, and a set 22 of decisions applied on the results. From this 23 process, it was determined that maintenance and 24 maintenance contractors should be evaluated 25 separately.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

19 1 It was further determined that based on the 2 question results that maintenance -- plant 3 maintenance did not need to be interviewed, however, 4 for completeness, a number of interviews were held 5 with maintenance, plant maintenance, to validate 6 survey information, and to make sure no new themes 7 emerged. The results of this subprocess were used 8 to provide a basis for the focused interview sessions 9 that we discussed on the previous slide. Next 10 slide, please.

11 Structured interviews were conducted on a 12 quantitative and qualitative evaluation of sections 13 for responses. The interviewers were experienced in 14 interview techniques, and the interviewers presented 15 the interviewees with the questions that had 16 declining trends and asked open-ended questions to 17 determine the reason behind the trends, making sure 18 not to lead the interviewees in any one direction.

19 The interviewees were also asked for actions that 20 could be taken to correct issues as they saw the 21 issues. The interviews were generally conducted 22 with six or seven interviewees, although some were 23 more and some were less, and the interviews were 45 24 minutes to one hour in length. Next slide, please.

25 This slide --

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

20 1 MR. RULAND: Fred?

2 MR. von AHN: Yes.

3 MR. RULAND: Is now a good time for 4 you to touch a little bit on your choice of why you 5 chose group interviews as opposed to some other 6 method? Is now a good time to talk about that?

7 MR. von AHN: Sure, we could talk 8 back -- could you go back to the process slide?

9 One of the things that the team looked at was 10 whether individual interviews or small group focused 11 interviews were conducted and the pros and cons of 12 each were weighed. It was determined that the team 13 dynamics or the small group dynamics and the 14 attraction of information would be better if there 15 was a relative safety in numbers consideration and 16 then some of the interviewees would be drawn out into 17 the conversation. This may not happen on an 18 individual interview, in fact, some of the 19 interviewers that are skilled in this conducted 20 interviewees -- interviews on an individual basis 21 that have elicited basically no response from 22 somewhat introverted people.

23 Additionally, you can see that all of the 24 sources of data -- there are sources of data that 25 contain anonymous interview information, for lack of MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

21 1 a better term. Survey comments -- we had a number 2 of comments that were given to us along with the 3 survey, and those were essentially individual 4 interviews conducted anonymously as well during the 5 QA simultaneous interviews, those were face to face 6 interviews conducted individually with -- with folks 7 in various departments. Thats the reason -- the 8 rationale behind the small group versus the 9 individual group.

10 MR. RULAND: Thank you.

11 MR. von AHN: This slide 12 represents the percent of interviewees that were 13 interviewed in each area as a percentage of the total 14 section population. About 50 percent of each 15 sections population was targeted for interviews.

16 Again, the team separated maintenance contractors 17 from plant maintenance, and, when this was done, 18 plant maintenance showed an overall improvement, 19 thus, we only did the check interviews, as we call 20 them, in addition, and hit the target 50 percent 21 population. Next slide, please.

22 Data from the focused interviews were 23 evaluated from themes within sections.

24 Additionally, there were a number of Cross Cutting 25 Themes that spanned all sections. Data was compared MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

22 1 to all the other sources of data for convergent 2 validity to ensure convergent validity existed 3 between the survey comments, the external factors, 4 the November follow-up interviews, site alignment 5 sessions and the QA face to face interviews. All 6 sources pointed to the same types of issues as the 7 team interviews showing convergent validity. The 8 March corrective actions were also looked at for 9 comparison. These were the corrective actions 10 generated as a result of the March survey. Next 11 slide, please.

12 The team heard positive statements about many 13 of the areas of Safety Conscious Work Environment in 14 the interviews. The team also heard themes that ran 15 through each section. Those themes were the 16 perceptions that employees have about events that 17 occurred just before or around the interview time and 18 that contributed to the decline in certain questions.

19 Its important to realize in the context of the 20 survey that these perceptions were reality to the 21 people that answered the questions, but not 22 necessarily fact. I want to reemphasize the focus 23 was declined on survey responses and the themes here 24 represent declines in certain areas of response. In 25 Operations, Operations true personnel from all shifts MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

23 1 were interviewed. The theme of long work hours, as 2 well as lack of shift rotation, that is being on the 3 same shift schedule for an extended period of time, 4 emerged in Operations as an issue reflected in 5 declining trends in some questions.

6 Schedule credibility questions were 7 negatively influenced by challenges by the fact that 8 all operational, not all operational activities were 9 in the schedule. Specifically, the operators felt 10 that the schedule was not resource loaded at the time 11 of the interview and that certain activities did not 12 show up on the schedule that contained a large amount 13 of operational resources.

14 Additionally, as part of the Normal Operating 15 Pressure Testing there was a license amendment that 16 imposed a two-hour cool down requirement for certain 17 equipment issues. Issues arose with Auxiliary 18 Feedwater Testing with interpretation of this 19 two-hour cool down requirements that created a 20 session that scheduled a theme placed above safety.

21 Now, this contributed to the declining response in 22 questions related to that theme.

23 Ineffective communication was also a theme.

24 Following the Normal Operating Pressure Test, the 25 shift crews were realigned. The employee perception MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

24 1 of this was that this was retaliatory in nature 2 because the reasons for the realignment were not 3 fully explained to the employees. Its important to 4 note that this is not retaliation for raising a 5 safety concern, but it did contribute to a negative 6 response or a declining trend in the issues around --

7 questions around retaliation.

8 MR. RULAND: Fred?

9 MR. von AHN: Yes.

10 MR. RULAND: What qualified as a 11 theme?

12 MR. von AHN: We looked -- a theme 13 qualified when we heard it a significant amount of 14 times. If during the interviews of five to seven 15 folks, if we heard one isolated case of that, that 16 would not qualify as a theme. If we consistently 17 heard that same message across a number of interviews 18 and with a number of people, that qualified as a 19 section theme.

20 MR. RULAND: And you have the 21 results of the interview records so we can go back 22 and inspect them?

23 MR. von AHN: The interviews were 24 anonymous. We have the numbers of folks that were 25 interviewed and we have the notes from the interviews MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

25 1 and the themes that were generated, but we did not 2 take names of the interviewees. We wanted the 3 interviews to be --

4 MR. RULAND: Uh huh. I understand.

5 MR. THOMAS: I guess I have a 6 question of the last two bullets.

7 Was the Aux Feed Test the only activity that 8 you had comments where there was at least the 9 perception of schedule over safety, thats question 10 one.

11 Question two has to do with the last bullet.

12 Was the crew alignment issue the only time where 13 management effectiveness in communicating was called 14 into question?

15 MR. von AHN: For question one, 16 youll see in a later slide, there was a second issue 17 that was identified as a theme or declining trend in 18 quality assurance. This was the only theme that was 19 brought out consistently in Operations, but it was a 20 fairly passionate theme in Operations. Did that 21 answer question one?

22 MR. THOMAS: I guess I still have a 23 question along the line of Bills -- what exactly a 24 theme is.

25 MR. von AHN: Okay. When we MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

26 1 conducted an interview, we conducted it with five to 2 seven folks at a time. If we heard the same message 3 in the interview -- because we focused the interview 4 by ending the negative questions or the questions 5 with declining response and said, lets talk about 6 this, and if the message that we got back 7 consistently was, hey, you know, the Aux Feed Testing 8 that was an issue, we thought we could have handled 9 better, management -- we thought management was 10 putting schedule over safety because in one case it 11 was an operator that said, you cant do anything in 12 two hours or for anybody to expect anything to be 13 done in two hours is kind of crazy in the first 14 place. Another operator said, well, we started the 15 cool down, but it was only a minimal cool down, so 16 there was a lot of interpretation, there were 17 different -- but that same theme centered around the 18 Auxiliary Feedwater Test. Did that help at all?

19 MR. THOMAS: We can go on to the 20 second question. The --

21 UNIDENTIFIED: Scott, could you speak 22 up, please?

23 MR. THOMAS: The second question 24 was, you list the issue with the crew alignment as an 25 example of where management wasnt particularly MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

27 1 effective in communicating, and Im curious if that 2 was the only example that was brought up?

3 MR. von AHN: No, communication was 4 a Cross Cutting Theme; not fully effective 5 communication youll see in a later slide as a Cross 6 Cutting Theme, cross sections, and other issues were 7 raised at a point for improvements of communication.

8 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

9 MR. WRIGHT: Fred?

10 MR. von AHN: Yes.

11 MR. WRIGHT: In regard to the Aux 12 Feedwater and the scheduling and the way that testing 13 was accomplished, did your group or did the plant 14 look at the scheduling of that and the loading of it 15 to see whether or not the two hour time frame they 16 referenced was a reasonable time frame and the 17 actions that were taken in that time frame were 18 appropriate?

19 MR. von AHN: The issue was looked at.

20 The two hour time frame is a tight time frame. The 21 license amendment request discussed that a cool down 22 would be started commensurate with the safety 23 significance of the issue. The issue was discussed 24 once with senior leadership and the management on 25 shift, and that aspect was broached. I believe that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

28 1 was the reason for the decision to end the melt in 2 the cool down.

3 MR. BEZILLA: Yeah, Geoff, Ill 4 address this one. When we did the NOP, we did it 5 under a license amendment request, but in that 6 license amendment request there was a requirement 7 that said for certain systems if theyre out of 8 service for other than routine testing, youre 9 supposed to take action within two hours, commence a 10 cool down commensurate with the safety significance 11 of the issue or equipment involved, okay, and from an 12 Aux Feedwater perspective, when we initially got into 13 the Aux Feedwater issue, the issue was response time.

14 One of the Aux Feedwater pumps had a time of 40 15 seconds -- 40 seconds or something, to come up to 16 speed to be at full pressure temperature. Dont 17 hold me to the 40 seconds, that may not be the exact 18 number, but it had to come up in a certain period of 19 time. It came up in a time that was about a second 20 or two seconds slower than that time, so a piece of 21 equipment was available, but not meeting its tech 22 spec requirement, all right? What we did as a 23 management team was we assessed the safety 24 significance of that based on the Normal Operating 25 Pressure Test conditions we were at of the decay heat MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

29 1 in the core. That response time was way more than 2 adequate from being able to take care of any issues 3 which had arisen, all right, so from an 4 implementation of a two hour to take action to cool 5 down. At that time, we said, hey, we have the normal 6 tech spec would be an appropriate time to take 7 action, which is a 72 hour8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> tech spec. Later on as 8 we worked through that, we got into more intrusive 9 maintenance, when we got into the more intrusive 10 maintenance, then we said, hey, we need to invoke the 11 cool down and the operators invoked the cool down and 12 commenced the cool down. Eventually, we solved that 13 issue, stopped the cool down, recovered the Aux Feed 14 pump and then recovered to Normal Operating Pressure 15 conditions, so the issue is, is that communications 16 to the troops and through the Ops organization was 17 not as good as it should have been and it was not 18 clearly understood by all the operators, and, as a 19 result, as Fred said, that led to less than -- some 20 less than positive responses, a question about if you 21 consider safety over scheduling or did he consider 22 scheduling costs over safety, all right, and I 23 believe that is that issue, and what Fred and his 24 team did was they found that theres thoughts out 25 there or comments out there that dont understand the MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

30 1 logic behind that and the way we had to proceed in a 2 Normal Operating Pressure Test, and we understand 3 that we need to do a better job at communicating to 4 our folks.

5 MR. MYERS: Going back, Fred, to 6 clear up, we thought our response was fairly good and 7 with the shift managers, and we said -- going back 8 now, you keep hearing the word tech spec action used, 9 and it was really part of the license, you know, that 10 we submitted, and its -- the words were that we 11 started cool down --

12 MS. LIPA: Why dont you try to 13 get a little bit closer to -- to the microphone?

14 MR. MYERS: Let me try something.

15 Does that help? Let me try turning it up. Does that 16 help? Yeah, that helps a lot, and I -- operator 17 error. (Laughter). And the -- but, you know, when 18 all of that was going on, that clause, we had the 19 license amendment, that has got an ambiguity to it 20 compared to what normally a tech spec does, and it 21 was something we committed to do as a management 22 team, but Im not sure that we -- if the lower levels 23 were committed. We communicated how that worked as 24 well as we should, so were going to go back now.

25 Weve already had some meetings to discuss that and MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

31 1 why our behavior was the way it was, you know? We 2 dont think its an issue at the shift manager level.

3 Its down below.

4 MR. von AHN: Did that answer the 5 question?

6 MR. RULAND: Yeah, I think it did.

7 MR. WRIGHT: Yes.

8 MR. von AHN: Next slide, please.

9 Plant Engineering there was a Schedule 3 regarding 10 management comments not in keeping with leadership 11 and action principles. Leadership and action 12 principles has management focused on issues and not 13 on people, and in some cases that was -- that was not 14 done and reflected negatively on comments.

15 Schedule credibility issues with removing 16 some preventative maintenance from the schedule also 17 reflected in comments as well as low threshold on 18 condition reports and long working hours. With 19 regard to low threshold on condition reports, the 20 comment the team heard was that low valued 21 information is put into the corrective action system 22 that dilutes its importance. For example, putting a 23 light bulb thats burned out in the parking lot 24 dilutes the value of that system. Weve discussed 25 that condition reporting system is our data capture MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

32 1 mechanism for all our issues, and well be 2 reinforcing the expectation regarding condition 3 reports. Next slide, please.

4 Two specific issues were introduced --

5 MR. WRIGHT: Fred? Im sorry.

6 MR. von AHN: Yes.

7 MR. WRIGHT: You spoke a little bit 8 about that last item on the condition report 9 threshold. You started to talk about corrective 10 action. Are you going to go back to corrective 11 action and do that later on in that presentation?

12 MR. von AHN: Yes.

13 MR. WRIGHT: Okay, fine.

14 MR. von AHN: Two specific issues 15 contributed to declining response in quality 16 assurance. First, the Auxiliary Feedwater Testing 17 during the Normal Operating Pressure Test contributed 18 to the declining responses in schedule over safety 19 questions, and the activities surrounding a 20 containment spray breaker that was tested in the 21 plant prior to ensuring all process steps were fully 22 completed also reflected as a theme. This was 23 investigated and the significant condition adverse to 24 quality condition report following the NOP testing.

25 A second theme was the perception that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

33 1 internal recommendations do not receive the same 2 level of attention as externally generated 3 recommendations in quality assurance. Next slide, 4 please.

5 Chemistry data presented an additional 6 challenge. In the March survey data, chemistry and 7 rad protection were combined in a single section.

8 In November, the data was separated. After the data 9 was compiled, we determined as a conservative measure 10 to conduct focused interviews with chemistry.

11 During the interviews, the interviews were generally 12 positive, however, one theme involved -- evolved 13 during the interviews concerning a work scheduling 14 issue that happened around the time of the survey.

15 That issue has subsequently been resolved 16 post-survey. Next slide, please.

17 Maintenance and Maintenance Contractors --

18 maintenance being in maintenance and maintenance 19 contractors was the long work hours. Confidence in 20 the schedule was also an issue and translated a 21 little differently. It translated to the work being 22 fully prepared when the schedule said it was ready to 23 work. The team heard that in some cases work was 24 not fully ready. The completion time of work did not 25 change, so the time allotted to do the work would MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

34 1 shrink, and this contributed to the declining 2 response and questions involving scheduling.

3 Maintenance interviewees also felt that the 4 threshold for condition reports was too low and used 5 examples similar to the one I previously mentioned.

6 Next slide, please.

7 Cross Cutting Themes -- communication was an 8 over-arching theme across all the sections.

9 Additionally, employees feel that working long hours 10 for an extended period of time has created a tired 11 and frustrated workforce. This contributed to 12 declines in the schedule versus safety questions, and 13 the perception as all percentage of the work force 14 that management is more interested in schedule than 15 the welfare of their workforce.

16 The team analyzed overtime from January to 17 November via overtime records. The overtime average 18 for that period of January to November was around 55 19 to 58 hours6.712963e-4 days <br />0.0161 hours <br />9.589947e-5 weeks <br />2.2069e-5 months <br /> per week; however, in September and 20 October, particularly in Operations and Maintenance, 21 the average was in the high 60s. In November, it 22 had decreased again to the low 60s, but, 23 additionally, in October, just prior to the survey, 24 13 people had worked over 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> per week.

25 Another theme to the work hours issue is MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

35 1 there appears to be no end in sight.

2 Schedule credibility took a little different 3 twist in each section, depending on the sections 4 interfaced with the scheduling. You heard that when 5 I discussed the Maintenance theme and the Operations 6 theme.

7 Management remarks -- the theme of management 8 remarks not in keeping with leadership and action 9 principles and focused on issues is a theme that went 10 across the various sections as well, and it had a 11 declining contribution to questions having the 12 management play with constructive criticism, 13 management is willing to listen and management 14 expectation type questions.

15 A low condition report threshold contributed 16 to declining response surrounding condition reporting 17 systems, effective utilization of the condition 18 reporting systems.

19 MS. LIPA: Fred?

20 MR. von AHN: Yes.

21 MS. LIPA: When you talked about 22 the approach that the focused group interview took, 23 Im trying to remember, like, if we look at team 3 24 interview maintenance and team 3 also interviewed 25 plant engineering, would they have the same set of MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

36 1 questions that they would use for maintenance and 2 engineering, or were the questions that they 3 approached the groups with dependent upon the survey?

4 MR. von AHN: No, the questions were 5 different, like, what was done in the process and 6 that subprocess we did is the March survey data and 7 the November survey data was compared, and the 8 questions were compared on a one-to-one basis and the 9 negative responses for each -- each set of 10 question -- each question looked at. The 11 response -- the negative responses were then sorted 12 from those positive, i.e, less people responded 13 negatively to most negative. Those questions that 14 reflected most negative trend and response were asked 15 and those questions were different in most cases on a 16 onesie-twosie basis. The questions or the themes --

17 a number of questions were the same, however, 18 specifically the question of schedule, management 19 value schedule over safety more was a -- Ill say the 20 bottom inner for two or more sections, but, in 21 general, the questions were focused specifically on 22 the negative response questions for that section 23 which were slightly different in each case.

24 MS. LIPA: Okay, thank you.

25 MR. THOMAS: What about in the MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

37 1 groups, each team, like, there was more than one 2 Operations group, right? I mean, it was done 3 multiple times like each team, like team 3 --

4 MS. LIPA: Team 1, 2, 3.

5 MR. THOMAS: -- within each small 6 sub group, were the questions asked the same, or were 7 they -- I understand they were focused on the 8 negative questions.

9 MR. von AHN: Correct.

10 MR. THOMAS: But you said a lot of 11 open-ended questions were asked.

12 MR. Von AHN: Okay, the way the 13 focused group interviews were done is a sheet of 14 paper was handed -- distributed to each of the 15 interviewees, and the sheet of paper had the negative 16 questions and the response and marks and the response 17 in November and the changes in that response, so --

18 and each interviewee was asked to look at that, so 19 this framed the four -- the rest of the interviews, 20 so that it focused the interview on the negative 21 questions, and then the interviewees were then asked 22 open-ended questions, like, what do you think 23 contributed to these, do you have any opinions on any 24 of these, those types of questions. You know, once 25 the conversation got started, the interviewees pretty MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

38 1 much took over the conversation -- well, you know, 2 this is that, and, you know, this Aux Feedwater, I 3 tell you, that reflected -- those were the type of 4 responses that we got --

5 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

6 MR. von AHN: -- when the interviews 7 started.

8 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

9 MR. von AHN: Is that --

10 MR. THOMAS: Yeah. Okay.

11 MR. von AHN: Okay, next slide, 12 please.

13 Following the March survey, survey follow-up 14 interviews were conducted and corrective actions were 15 generated; however, the March survey follow-up was 16 essentially a one time communication. There were 17 minimal follow-up actions, and the actions were not 18 tailored individually to the sections specific 19 themes and there was inconsistent feedback and no 20 real monitoring loop existed with the exception of 21 maintenance, there was a bit of a feedback loop, and 22 this may be indicative of the improvement that was 23 seen in the maintenance survey.

24 Does that answer your earlier question on the 25 corrective actions, Bill -- or Jon asked that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

39 1 question.

2 MS. LIPA: Well, before we 3 answer, lets -- let me see, make sure I understand.

4 When we talk about March, you did the survey in 5 March?

6 MR. von AHN: Correct.

7 MS. LIPA: And then when you got 8 the results of the survey in March, you did some 9 interview --

10 MR. von AHN: We did some 11 interviews.

12 MS. LIPA: -- so when you say one 13 time communication, was that one of your corrective 14 actions?

15 MR. von AHN: Right. We did some 16 interviews and some corrective action was documented, 17 and the condition reporting process came out of that.

18 We went back to those corrective actions, documented 19 in the condition reporting process and looked at 20 them, and they were essentially a one time 21 communication method and had the issues that I just 22 previously discussed.

23 MS. LIPA: What was the goal of 24 the corrective action at that time, though, in March?

25 What were you trying to accomplish by having those MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

40 1 communications?

2 MR. von AHN: The communication was 3 an understanding by the section personnel, all the 4 reasons behind the negative responses and -- but 5 didnt elicit any real response, for example, the 6 same themes of long working hours, some of the 7 management comments emerged then. It was 8 communicated, but no other action that we could see 9 from that condition reporting process was in place.

10 MS. LIPA: Okay.

11 MR. MYERS: What I can share with 12 you is the condition reporting system did take some 13 actions. The four Cs took some actions and there 14 were some other actions taken on some of those things 15 that were -- there were actions that were not -- to 16 put in a corrective action program. What we had --

17 we had some -- some organizations monitored where we 18 took some actions to improve meetings and stuff like 19 that, so there were some other actions taken from the 20 March survey that I can share with you that I was 21 personally involved in. It wouldnt show up in any 22 corrective actions, though.

23 MS. LIPA: Okay.

24 MR. RULAND: Fred, if I could maybe 25 summarize what I think youre telling us with the MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

41 1 focused interviews, it sounds like to me that you 2 believe you identified the reasons why folks 3 responded the way they did, and, in particular, on 4 the negative -- on the questions that had the 5 negative trend, is that kind of a summary of --

6 MR. von AHN: Thats correct, and if 7 we go back to the Cross Cutting Themes, those themes 8 were, if you rolled up those specific comments, the 9 themes of communication, work hours, schedule 10 credibility, management comments and low condition 11 reporting thresholds were the reasons for the decline 12 in the trends.

13 MR. RULAND: Okay.

14 MR. von AHN: And if you recall in 15 the survey, the areas that were weak were corrective 16 action areas surrounding management issues, so forth, 17 so they correlated to the --

18 MR. RULAND: Schedule of safety, 19 okay.

20 Did you try to correlate those themes with 21 specific questions that were on the survey trend, on 22 the surveys? In other words --

23 MR. von AHN: Yes, we looked at 24 that, and did that, and as well the themes were 25 framed up by the negative responses because those MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

42 1 questions were handed to the individuals.

2 MR. RULAND: Ive got to think 3 about this a little bit. Continue on, please.

4 MS. LIPA: I had another 5 question. This slide, when you say March Survey 6 Effectiveness, are you providing an assessment of 7 what you thought the effectiveness of the March 8 results were?

9 MR. von AHN: It was effectiveness 10 of the follow-up actions from the March survey.

11 MS. LIPA: And whats your 12 conclusion, effective, not effective?

13 MR. von AHN: Not fully effective.

14 MS. LIPA: Could have been 15 better?

16 MR. von AHN: Could have been done 17 much better.

18 MS. LIPA: Okay.

19 THEREUPON, Mr. Myers conferred with Mr. von 20 Ahn.

21 MR. von AHN: Next slide, please.

22 The last several slides focused on questions that 23 declined in the November survey and the reason for 24 those declines. During the focused interviews, many 25 positive responses and positive comments were heard MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

43 1 in all areas of Safety Conscious Work Environment.

2 Based on the aggregate data found, the survey team 3 concludes that the Safety Conscious Work Environment 4 supports plant restart. All groups exhibit positive 5 responses to questions. Employee Concern Program 6 exhibited positive response. Safety issues are 7 being raised and addressed using Corrective Action 8 Program. Workers understand their responsibility to 9 raise safety concerns. Workers feel free to raise 10 safety concerns, and convergent validity exists with 11 all of the other sources for these conclusions.

12 Next slide, please.

13 MR. THOMAS: Fred, one question, 14 please, just so I understand your position on this.

15 MR. von AHN: Yes.

16 MR. THOMAS: So based on this 17 teams review, all corrective actions taken going 18 forward are just enhancements. I mean, you could 19 essentially do nothing and the team -- teams 20 conclusion is that the Safety Conscious Work 21 Environment is satisfactory for restart; is that a 22 correct statement?

23 MR. von AHN: Safety Conscious Work 24 Environment exists that supports restart. To have a 25 robust Safety Conscious Work Environment, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

44 1 improvements are needed in the areas that were 2 identified.

3 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

4 MR. von AHN: Next slide, please.

5 Areas for Continued Improvement -- FENOC has a 6 changed management process that effectively utilize, 7 can communication and implement changes for 8 management decisions and actions affecting staff.

9 With regard to the corrective action process, 10 the corrective action process will be single 11 collection point for issues at the station. These 12 corrective action process expectations need to be 13 reinforced, and I have recommended that they be 14 reinforced using the changed management process.

15 Employee Concerns Program and the Safety 16 Conscious Work Environment Review Team need greater 17 visibility and periodic reinforcement. The half-life 18 and the knowledge level of these tools is less than 19 one year, so visibility must be improved and 20 retraining provided. Are there any other questions?

21 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE).

22 MR. von AHN: If not, Ill turn it 23 back to Lew for the specific corrective actions.

24 MR. MYERS: Thank you, Fred.

25 Lets take a moment and go over some of the actions MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

45 1 that weve taken. Strong corrective actions were 2 taken since the November survey, and we did not sit 3 around and wait for this team to get through before 4 we started taking some action, and let me explain 5 why, is the managers were provided with results of 6 the survey on November 24th -- on the 21st, we 7 started asking for feedback at that time and making 8 some adjustments and making sure that we improved our 9 communications in that area, some of those areas.

10 The managers in the managers meeting agenda on 11 December 8th was we went over the survey conclusions 12 with the areas requiring actions from survey findings 13 and focused on some communications at that time.

14 Managers shared the results of the Safety Conscious 15 Work Environment Survey with their employees in the 16 November, December time frame, in a couple week 17 period there. Some people -- the plant engineering 18 sat down with all of their employees and went over 19 all the results, analyzed dialogue and came to a 20 consensus on some of the issues. The quality manager 21 performed independent reviews with his employees 22 during that time, so there were a lot of actions 23 taken to make sure that we had a clear understanding 24 and of the behaviors going forward and with the 25 actions of their work, and we think weve made some MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

46 1 good progress during that time frame. Then in a 2 senior management meeting with the section managers 3 on December 2nd, we met in the afternoon for about 4 four hours and went through the survey results and 5 the actions that were taken. After that meeting we 6 decided to go get a -- to make sure that our managers 7 had not missed something, we decided to go get some 8 contractor help, and, at that time, we focused on 9 just the four questions that had showed some 10 performance problems, and we quoted three groups that 11 we interviewed, and what we did is we looked at total 12 interviews of about 40 employees on December 12th, 13 and 10 employees from Operations; Plant Engineering, 14 19 employees; and Maintenance, 11 employees, so we 15 went -- we sat down with about 40 employees at that 16 time, which is not a -- we thought it was a 17 statistically significant number of employees for the 18 size population that were talking about, got some 19 overall themes at that time, went back and had 20 all-hands meetings for two days with each and every 21 employee on our side, December 18th and 19th. I led 22 two of those meetings myself. Mark led one, and 23 Barry performed one at the plant -- is that correct?

24 MR. ALLEN: (Nod indicating).

25 MR. BEZILLA: Yeah.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

47 1 MR. MYERS: And we received --

2 excuse me, two at the plant, and we shared all of the 3 data with our employees and management perspective of 4 that data and also some of the areas of policy that 5 we shared. We had made some changes to implement a 6 pay policy with FirstEnergy, pay thing -- a pay 7 issue, and that theme was a theme we had seen also, 8 and so we shared the pay policy at that time and went 9 over it with our employees.

10 We then performed a, you know, test for 11 understanding. We were able to communicate each and 12 every one of these things and specific reasons why we 13 took the actions that we took with the employees, the 14 results were extremely good, about 99 percent, didnt 15 have any failures, but we did not -- we did not take 16 the employees and ask them names or anything like 17 that. We were just checking for understanding, so 18 we did perform a test for understanding of facts.

19 We changed the nuclear operating procedure. Were 20 changing that as we speak to anchor the schedule 21 expectations and provide a consistent understanding.

22 One of the things that -- one of the 23 questions that we looked at were schedules, and, you 24 know, theres a lot of thoughts about our scheduling 25 process. One of the things that were ruling out MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

48 1 right now is our normal working schedule process, 2 and, as you know, weve been shutdown for a couple 3 years in this outage, and weve been finding 4 problems, fixing problems as we go, but were in a 5 position now, you know, all the design work is done 6 and its correct, okay, and were into our normal 7 schedule process, and were having some issues 8 implementing that process, for example, Operations is 9 scheduling stuff and being brought, you know, system 10 aligned. We need to be scheduling that individual 11 system. How many people does it take to align that 12 system and make sure that we have the right number of 13 people at the plant to support all the operational 14 activities. You all saw some of that when you were 15 in here with RATI. We think we got that resolved, 16 so were going back in the schedule. One of the 17 things we want to make sure of is the individual 18 responses. You know, we tell people in our meetings 19 that, you know, schedule that good safety is in my 20 mind, and groups work together and make sure that 21 were working on the right stuff and that it reels 22 safety in, but when it comes to -- should you stop if 23 you have a problem, you dont understand what youre 24 doing and elevate that issue then, we tell our 25 employees that, but you dont find the employee MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

49 1 responsibilities in our process. Were going to add 2 those employee responsibilities and anchor them in 3 our process. We have that being done as we speak.

4 The changes thats been made in the nuclear operating 5 standard already is out for review, and Ive got a 6 January 15th date here, but I think Ill have it done 7 way before that, so we anticipate those changes in 8 our policy before then. Once again, we have 9 implemented our normal online schedule process now.

10 Youll see its focused more on preventative 11 maintenance items thats been an issue in the future.

12 Lets go to the next slide.

13 MR. WRIGHT: Lew?

14 MR. MYERS: Yes.

15 MR. WRIGHT: You were talking about 16 scheduling. One of the items that, as Fred 17 indicated, was the number of hours working. In your 18 scheduling, its one thing to schedule activities and 19 say, do we have the right people here to do it and 20 schedule people in, but as part of that equation, are 21 you saying the people, have they worked too much time 22 and will that put too much time on their plate for 23 them to work effectively, so, in essence, putting a 24 limit, saying if you killed half the people that had 25 worked less than so many hours, we cant do that task MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

50 1 at this time, well have to schedule it later.

2 MR. MYERS: Go back to the other 3 slide. One of the things were doing is -- the key 4 thing, we add -- we put the activities in there, on 5 the last bullet, you go to the next bullet, you can 6 levelize the amount of people you have. You can 7 make sure that -- either you need to not do as many 8 activities or you need to have the right people there 9 at the right time and do the right work, all right, 10 so you can levelize the schedule and make sure that 11 you do have people there to support all the 12 activities. What that does is reduce the overtime, 13 because you dont have to have 12 people standing 14 around on a daily basis. You can have people on day 15 shift today from noon to 12 or something, so it 16 should reduce the amount of overtime if you schedule 17 properly.

18 Now, another goal that we have in place now, 19 youll hear me talk about that again later, is, you 20 know, were getting in our mind to keep the plant up, 21 we hope to have the plant up, we ask with your 22 permission to restart the plant shortly. One of the 23 goals way at the beginning of the year was to get 24 back to our normal routine schedule for an hourly 25 schedule process. Some people worked, you know, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

51 1 rotating shifts and had some built-in overtime, 2 engineering, get back to what is normal, and then 3 well supplement with some contractors throughout the 4 year as we need to, but one of the goals we had in 5 January when we get the plant back up is -- we had in 6 January was -- January 1st was to levelize our -- all 7 of our staff to a normal operating process again.

8 We got to get that done, and as we get further out, 9 youll see that happen, so -- and that would get you 10 pretty close to -- you know, maybe not a 40-hour 11 week, but something a lot less than were working 12 now.

13 MR. RULAND: Okay.

14 MR. MYERS: Okay.

15 MR. RULAND: Lew, you talked about 16 youre having these meetings with your staff?

17 MR. MYERS: Right.

18 MR. RULAND: And on slide -- back 19 on slide 21 --

20 MR. MYERS: Which one?

21 MR. RULAND: Slide 21, Fred von Ahn 22 said there were several Cross Cutting Themes that 23 were contributing to less positive results of the 24 survey.

25 MR. MYERS: Uh huh.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

52 1 MR. RULAND: Im curious how many 2 of these themes were brought up in meetings with your 3 staff?

4 MR. MYERS: There is no themes 5 there that surprise us. The working hour theme, we 6 knew about. The communication, we knew about.

7 Schedule credibility, we knew about.

8 MR. RULAND: I understand that.

9 What Im asking is how many people brought those 10 themes up in your meetings with them?

11 MR. MYERS: Oh, that happens all 12 the time, yes -- how many?

13 MR. RULAND: Yeah. Im looking 14 for --

15 MR. MYERS: Are you looking for a 16 number?

17 MR. RULAND: Youre telling us 18 youre having these all-hands meetings and youre 19 getting feedback from understanding the survey 20 results, yet your folks go off and do these detailed 21 interviews to try to understand what the survey 22 results were, and they came up with these five 23 themes --

24 MR. MYERS: Correct.

25 MR. RULAND: -- communications, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

53 1 work hours, scheduling credibility, management 2 comments, and low condition report threshold, and Im 3 just trying to understand how effective your meetings 4 were you were having with your staff if you got that 5 consistent message fed back to you, too, similar to 6 what the interviews were getting. Thats kind of 7 what Im looking for.

8 Did you hear those same themes from your 9 staff?

10 MR. MYERS: Absolutely. I mean, 11 all the time. We get the communications message, 12 and were constantly working on that. We got -- we 13 think weve been doing some pretty unique things 14 were improving in Operations. Weve worked on 15 the -- throughout the outage, weve worked on the Ops 16 four Cs meetings. Weve worked in the meeting to 17 improve the communications. Before we came over 18 tonight, we met with a group of employees, shared 19 with them the results of what were going to tell 20 you, but communication in the world were living in 21 right now and -- is pretty difficult all the time, so 22 we get that theme a lot, and we knew that in like the 23 quality area some of the things that -- there were 24 perceptions in schedule over safety that were 25 received during the NOP test.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

54 1 Now, Mark -- they told us that. Mark was 2 setting down with some of the quality guys already, 3 we already had the meetings and sat down and hashed 4 that out, made sure we understood it and come to 5 resolution, and they reaffirmed what some of the 6 employees had told us already, you know? The only 7 one that I would say surprises me a little bit here 8 is the low condition report threshold. I mean, 9 thats not something I hear a lot, you know, but, 10 other than that, theres -- its pretty consistent.

11 One of the reasons we wanted to do this is I got --

12 let me wrap up one of the reason we wanted to do this 13 is to validate what we as a management team think the 14 truth is. You know, theyll tell a contractor, an 15 independent team, what they think. They may not be 16 telling us. Theres pretty good alignment in what we 17 hear every day and the results of this survey. Does 18 that answer your question?

19 MR. RULAND: I think so.

20 MR. MYERS: Okay. Now, where was 21 I? 27? From a -- also from some of the corrective 22 actions weve taken, managers were provided, once 23 again, with the results to get through that, and 24 weve implemented the normal online scheduling 25 process. We are having -- and you saw that in the MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

55 1 RATI, were implementing that about the time that you 2 were here. We were having some problems, you know, 3 with the Operations area there, but we think we got 4 those problems either resolved or being resolved as 5 we speak. The next slide is --

6 MR. THOMAS: Can I ask a specific 7 question --

8 MR. MYERS: Sure.

9 MR. THOMAS: -- on action taken to 10 improve communications within Ops? Can you 11 elaborate on that a little bit?

12 MR. MYERS: Yeah, Im going 13 through that right now.

14 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

15 MR. MYERS: Next slide. Go back 16 one. Okay, in the Operations area, weve had some 17 stand downs with the operators and communications 18 meetings. One of the key things, though, that I 19 think is very important is that the Operations 20 manager is now leaving night orders each and every 21 night which includes schedule items, expectations, 22 changes in plant conditions, conduct of operation 23 issues and other observations thats been made in the 24 past 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. Thats the agenda of items. Theres 25 people that go -- on operating rotating shifts that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

56 1 you may not, you know, on a typical rotation that you 2 may not see for four or five weeks depending if 3 youre back in the program, so the night orders are a 4 key tool in establishing that communication, so -- so 5 were taking actions to -- to ensure better 6 communications in Ops, and well be have -- continue 7 to have some meetings to monitor our effectiveness 8 there, and Ill be happy to share some of that with 9 you in our meetings. Mark, you have something to add 10 on that?

11 MR. BEZILLA: Scott, also in Barrys 12 and my presentation, Barry will talk a little bit 13 about some of the additional things thats been going 14 on with communications from operations.

15 MR. MYERS: Another area we think 16 thats going to help us from an Ops standpoint is we 17 moved the organization to more of an Ops support 18 organization now. You know, we used to have whats 19 called outage center run by the Outage Director. Now 20 we have the Operations Support Center. We think 21 thats fully effective. Its run by Ops. The 22 organization is funded around the Ops organization 23 now. We can get all the stuff from the Ops 24 schedule, for instance, and youre supposed to have a 25 tag-out that can be removed tomorrow and you can MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

57 1 start driving the maintenance organization now, and 2 you can have that work done -- and you can have that 3 work done to make sure we have the operators there 4 and we can tag-out, see, so -- but if you dont have 5 that stuff loaded in, you know, I believe the 6 schedule is communication tool, so -- so we think 7 that the Operations Support Center have been leading 8 the schedule and that Operation Support Center is 9 going to help with communications also. One of the 10 things that we did to be sure the operators in the 11 restart readiness review were ready to heat the plant 12 up was we made sure that the operators got a couple 13 days off last week, so -- we specifically asked about 14 critique questions prior to heat-up this time and got 15 pretty positive response there. Several of our 16 hours of our time was spent last week -- we came in 17 Sunday night and spent probably four or five hours on 18 the restart readiness review before we started to 19 heat the plant up, and at least two or three of those 20 hours were spent going over these general themes and 21 what actions can we take to ensure that we are 22 getting them all from these themes, as you will, and 23 some of the actions weve taken is weve got a --

24 weve asked our supervisors to take -- to leave a 25 form up and were asking our supervisors to survey MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

58 1 their organizations every day, feed that back to 2 management and then in the management meeting were 3 going over any negative results that were getting 4 from our employees about the actions were taking.

5 Were also willing to take anonymous feedbacks. You 6 can take a form and fill it out and turn it in to us, 7 and what that does is it lets them go through a 8 lifetime process so were not waiting weeks to find 9 out that something is festering and questions are 10 being asked that we dont know about.

11 Weve also took our industry observers and 12 were -- we get taking the themes and weve made that 13 part of their shiftly turnover to give us feedback on 14 how those -- if they see the areas where people are 15 complaining that were driving the schedule too hard, 16 schedule over safety or something like that, so -- so 17 we got our management observers now focused in those 18 areas and giving us lifetime feedback also.

19 And then one of the things we did last week 20 as part of the restart readiness review, we talked 21 about Safety Conscious Work Environment and the 22 half-life there, so its been awhile since we did our 23 Safety Conscious Work Environment trainings, so we 24 brought our contractors back in to do that training 25 for us and we did refresher training with all of our MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

59 1 managers on Safety Conscious Work Environment, so we 2 could make sure we were focused on these types of 3 issues, and we did that last week, so thats 4 completed, and then changes being made to the NOP 5 that I talked about, and what were doing there is 6 making sure that the NOP, once again, has the 7 language in it that we expect people to utilize when 8 implementing the change. I mean, its pretty black 9 and white when you look at it, and we can put some 10 philosophy in that procedure, and I think it will 11 make it a much better procedure, so were doing that 12 as we speak.

13 Theres some additional items that we need to 14 take action on, and thats -- once again, we trained 15 our managers, did refresher training on our managers 16 as part of the restart readiness review, so we did 17 that with the supervisors, so what youll see us 18 doing is in the near future -- probably the first 19 quarter or so is, were going to go back and do 20 refresher training on Safety Conscious Work 21 Environment, then to the supervisor levels, and so 22 well be doing that.

23 We have this group of principles that we need 24 to hold ourselves accountable to called Leadership in 25 Action principles, and theyre the behaviors that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

60 1 were supposed to demonstrate. You see those on our 2 wall at the plant in our meetings. Were going back 3 to the senior leadership team and making sure were 4 reinforcing those standards in each and every one of 5 our meetings. From a CAP standpoint, Corrective 6 Action Program, standpoint, we really believe that 7 this is a big change using the CAP database to 8 collect procedure changes. What that did was it did 9 away with a lot of other database, solicited change.

10 We need to go back and reiterate that our commitment, 11 that we believe this CAP database is a good tool for 12 us. One place that we look at all information 13 and -- but that is a change and we need to reiterate 14 our commitment to using the Corrective Action Program 15 as the change process and the database at our plant.

16 Were getting some push back to that area right now, 17 but our election is were going to stay in force 18 there.

19 Another thing that we felt if we need to 20 improve on something, we will, making sure that were 21 out visibly advertising the Corrective Action Program 22 and -- the ECP program rather, and the Safety 23 Conscious Work Environment program, and so were 24 going to -- what we can see them doing over the next 25 month or so a more pro-active approach and well have MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

61 1 to lay out a plan -- well give you that plan, but 2 what were going to do is make that an action and 3 really go out and solicit use of our Safety Conscious 4 Work Environment tools and our program, our ECP 5 program, and then develop and communicate a second 6 specific corrective action. Now that we got this 7 data and everything, were going to schedule some 8 specific meetings in each section, Mark and I --

9 myself or a quantity of 10, Barry, and probably some 10 others, but we want to make sure we come to alignment 11 with our employees on these issues, so were going to 12 share this result with all of the employees in the 13 various groups and make sure we come to alignment 14 there, and well do that during the first quarter 15 also.

16 Theres some actions were taking to monitor 17 effectiveness. I have sort of shared some of those 18 with you here. We want to go -- you know, rather 19 than just have a situation where we find out about 20 some of this stuff when we do the survey, we want to 21 go for more of a real time assessment. You know, 22 what happens is when youre seeing some of these 23 issues is like a -- the term I use today is like a 24 bear collecting postage stamps. You collect these 25 postage stamps, you collect them and finally you have MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

62 1 an issue, so what we need to do is we need to be more 2 effective lifetime about finding these postage 3 stamps, these issues, and thats the reason we put in 4 this process now where were asking the supervisor 5 for the survey every morning and were also asking 6 the management observers to perform assessments for 7 us in these various areas. If we see -- what were 8 going to do here is were going to establish a 9 process theme and if we see emergent issues, then 10 lifetime well be able to push back on those issues 11 immediately rather than wait two or three months or 12 six months before we find them out, so were going to 13 put a team together at the plant that will help us 14 focus on issues as -- and look for those issues on a 15 daily basis.

16 MR. THOMAS: Lew, what type of --

17 Im not asking for names, but what type of individual 18 or numbers of individuals would make up this team?

19 MR. MYERS: Were probably looking 20 for individual from each group.

21 MR. THOMAS: Experience? What 22 types of experience does this team have to be able 23 to -- to identify them?

24 MR. MYERS: Well, right now I 25 dont know that we got that far enough. Were going MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

63 1 to look for somebody in the maintenance shop that 2 will help us out there, somebody in plant 3 engineering, its going to be our employees. If we 4 need to give some training in this area, we will give 5 them training, but we want to get down to the grass 6 roots, of course, so we would hope that -- sort of 7 like human performance. We want to get a sponsor 8 from each area as such.

9 MR. THOMAS: Is this supervisor 10 level? Manager level?

11 MR. MYERS: Employee level.

12 MR. THOMAS: Something else?

13 MR. MYERS: Employee level.

14 MR. THOMAS: Well, employee level 15 is everybody.

16 MR. MYERS: Down below the 17 supervisor level and maybe there will be some 18 supervisors in there, too.

19 (To Mr. von Ahn) you got any comments here 20 for us?

21 MR. von AHN: Can you hear me?

22 MR. THOMAS: I can hear you, they 23 may not be able to.

24 MR. von AHN: Theres certain 25 attributes well look at in an employee. We want MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

64 1 the type of individual who can elicit the responses 2 youre looking for, somebody who has, for lack of a 3 better term, a friend to everybody whos well 4 respected, speaks their mind, so the employees feel 5 that they can talk to this person. Those are the 6 types of characteristics well be looking for in 7 leadership in this team.

8 MR. MYERS: You know, somebody 9 thats a leader in the organization, communicates 10 well.

11 MR. von AHN: And it may not -- it 12 could be a supervisor. It could be an employee.

13 Were looking for certain traits and characteristics 14 and one that is level in the organization. Of 15 course, lower is probably better.

16 MR. THOMAS: Well, the reason I ask 17 is, you can address the issue once its identified, 18 but it has to be identified --

19 MR. von AHN: Right.

20 MR. THOMAS: -- so thats --

21 MR. von AHN: Thats why those 22 characteristics are so important to have that 23 individual a trusted individual by a large 24 population.

25 MR. THOMAS: But that individual MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

65 1 has to be able to identify the issue as --

2 MR. MYERS: We would hope that 3 some of these other feedback mechanisms would help 4 identify the issues also. Were asking the 5 supervisors to survey every morning, asking our 6 manager observers to look for these kind of themes in 7 the organization, and one of the people on the team 8 see the issue, and well take anonymous issues also, 9 so we hope that that recursive process will help 10 stimulate a lot of feedback for us. Okay?

11 MR. HOPKINS: Lew, what Senior 12 Manager is going to be responsible for this team?

13 Mark or Fred, Steve Loehlein, Mindy?

14 MR. MYERS: Mark.

15 MR. HOPKINS: Mark? Okay. So we 16 can go to Mark with questions?

17 MR. MYERS: Sure. And then 18 another thing well do in the next few months is, 19 within the next three months or so after start-up, 20 well bring in a -- well bring a team back in and 21 perform another assessment -- is that our vision, 22 just like we did today, and if we are still having 23 frequent meetings, then Ill be glad to share some of 24 the feedback with you at that time and then we would 25 also anticipate finally another survey somewhere in MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

66 1 the fourth quarter of 2004, beginning of the fourth 2 quarter, something like that, typically you should, 3 say, about a year to perform these surveys.

4 MR. WRIGHT: Lew, as Fred 5 indicated, the corrective actions that you took in 6 the March time frame or following the March survey 7 were not as effective as you had hoped that they 8 would have been.

9 MR. MYERS: Well, thats what Fred 10 indicated. I didnt say that.

11 MR. WRIGHT: I said thats what 12 Fred said, yes.

13 MR. MYERS: Right.

14 MR. WRIGHT: When you take a look 15 at some of the corrective actions that are here, you 16 look at improving communications within the 17 Operations Department. You have been working on that 18 for the last almost two years now.

19 MR. MYERS: Right.

20 MR. WRIGHT: When you -- when 21 things come down and youve been taking actions and 22 they havent been very effective, you know, it really 23 puts you in the spot of fixing two problems; one is, 24 you got to fix whatever the problem is itself --

25 MR. MYERS: Correct.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

67 1 MR. WRIGHT: -- that youve 2 identified.

3 MR. MYERS: Right.

4 MR. WRIGHT: The second piece is 5 you have to look back and say, why havent we been 6 effective. I mean, you can keep addressing what the 7 issue was and youll eventually get it, but you 8 really need to go back and look at why havent we, in 9 this case, as the management team, you know, your 10 team been effective in getting these things fixed 11 upfront?

12 MR. MYERS: Ill --

13 MR. WRIGHT: Did you see any of 14 that here?

15 MR. MYERS: Ill agree with that 16 somewhat because I think that during the NOPT test, 17 we changed some of the ways we were doing business 18 like our weekly meetings, we have weekly meetings, 19 during training with the operators, do as many of 20 those as were typically doing, but, once again, I 21 want to tell you the overall survey results here are 22 positive. Weve seen a few questions thats got 23 some negative trends and were also in a situation 24 where the focus right now is squarely on the 25 operations and maintenance and these groups, so MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

68 1 theyre under more stress, which means we, as a 2 management team, need to be more sensitive to those 3 groups right now, right? Thats what thats telling 4 me. We need to be more sensitive to those groups, 5 but I wouldnt sit here today and say that the 6 actions that weve taken to date were ineffective.

7 MR. WRIGHT: I didnt say they were 8 ineffective.

9 MR. MYERS: Right.

10 MR. WRIGHT: I said they were not 11 as effective as you had hoped they would be, but I 12 guess Im still concerned that with all of the 13 emphasis on communications, with the emphasis weve 14 been hearing about the management accountability and 15 leadership --

16 MR. MYERS: Right.

17 MR. WRIGHT: I have been hearing 18 about that now for the last 18 months and yet were 19 finding, based on this survey, that, you know, 20 anyways, not the surveys, but the follow-up that 21 Freds group did, you know, that there is some issues 22 there that people are -- you know, that they may not 23 be following all of the precips in that -- in that 24 plan, and so Im kind of wondering after all this 25 time, you know, what is there thats stopping people MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

69 1 from seeing some of this or, you know, responding 2 positively to your actions?

3 MR. MYERS: I would go back and 4 say, again, you know, Im not sure that theres any 5 specific thing I would point to, but I will tell you, 6 though, the stress in the organization shifted to the 7 areas that we saw the negative responses, which 8 doesnt overly surprise me, you know, and it is 9 something that we needed to go deal with, but when 10 you put more stress on those particular groups, it 11 causes some -- it causes changes in the behavior, and 12 thats what I think were seeing now. We -- you 13 know, I think since this survey has been taken, for 14 instance, in Chemistry, weve talked about the 15 surveys indicated that they did already, but that 16 problem is fixed, you know, just needed fixed, okay, 17 so that schedule issue, there are still some 18 questions that after the NOP test, some of the 19 changes that we made in peoples lives. You know, we 20 made changes in peoples lives when we changed their 21 schedule. Now, that may not be perceived 22 positive -- theres also some people in some 23 different jobs, you know, after the NOP test, we 24 reorganized after that. I would expect to see some 25 negative results from that. What we have to do is MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

70 1 continue to focus on why we took those actions and 2 demonstrate that they were right. We may have done 3 better than we -- what I would say we could have done 4 better at it when we took some of these actions we 5 could have done better at implementing our 6 communications plan that we didnt do as formally as 7 we should have, so -- and youll see that theme in 8 here, too. We have a changed management process.

9 When we made changes in Operations we didnt 10 physically roll that process out and go through it 11 and develop the communications plans as well as we 12 could have, so thats a good lesson learned for me, 13 and were starting to do that better in the future.

14 MR. WRIGHT: Yeah, I think youre 15 getting around to what I was getting to here that --

16 I mean, part of whether its changed management, or, 17 as you said, the focus of activities at the site have 18 kind of shifted over now to Operations --

19 MR. MYERS: Yeah.

20 MR. WRIGHT: -- and its over to 21 other organizations. Part of the responsibility of 22 your organization then is to see we -- this is 23 shifting, what do we have to do to -- to lessen the 24 impact of that shift or -- and I think thats 25 somewhat what Scott was acting on -- asking on, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

71 1 recognizing that you may have a potential problem 2 before you get there as opposed to, oh, weve got the 3 problem, now lets fix it, stop the problem from 4 happening, and I didnt see that specifically 5 addressed --

6 MR. MYERS: Well, I think the way 7 we address it is the lifetime monitor. Were going 8 more to being more pro-active to looking for these 9 type of issues. Were going to put this -- like a 10 human performance team, they said theres going to be 11 a Safety Conscious Work Environment team together to 12 help us identify and solve problems before they would 13 come. Id say issue before they become problems, 14 okay? Does that answer your question?

15 MR. WRIGHT: Yes.

16 MR. MYERS: Thank you. Let me 17 sort of summarize where I think were at from a 18 conclusion once again as -- from a Safety Conscious 19 Work Environment standpoint at Davis-Besse, you know, 20 I mean, I think all the indications that we have, our 21 scores are still very good -- probably not the best 22 in the country, but theyre good scores, and the 23 Safety Conscious Work Environment, I think, supports 24 restart. The Safety Conscious Work Environment 25 Surveys continue to show improvement, and my question MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

72 1 to the NRC and now you can see, the leadership is 2 there, were going to continue to focus on these 3 areas, and we expect our surveys to indicate and if 4 it goes the next three months, well come to you 5 again, and we expect the next years performance when 6 we do the Safety Conscious Work Environment Survey 7 results continue to show improvement, you know, and 8 were going to monitor those things, so we expect the 9 NRC to see improvement in the Safety Conscious Work 10 Environment. Its a commitment that we have, and 11 thats all I have. Thank you.

12 MS. LIPA: Well, I have been 13 listening to this and trying to piece it together.

14 You know, I think of it like a scientific experiment 15 and one in where you do a survey, you had some data, 16 and then youre trying to analyze the data, but in 17 the middle of that before the survey review team got 18 started you had already started implementing some 19 corrective actions, so Im trying to understand if 20 that might have had an impact on the results of the 21 survey, in fact, some of your, you know, all-hands 22 meetings.

23 MR. MYERS: Right.

24 MS. LIPA: Have you taken the 25 time to consider how that might have affected what MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

73 1 you heard, or do you think it didnt have any impact?

2 MR. MYERS: You know, one of the 3 things that -- you know, we can take all of the -- do 4 all the actions that we want to, but one of the 5 things that we want to do is bring an independent 6 team in here of industry experts, let them report to 7 our quality organization, and they will tell 8 independent people things they may not tell us, you 9 know, and what we found is that in general we have 10 pretty good alignment with the same kind of things 11 that were hearing. I dont see that there was any 12 messages that -- the one area that -- there was one 13 area that I saw, and thats the Corrective Action 14 Program, its a little stronger. I would not have 15 expected that to raise to a theme level, but I dont 16 see that they told the team anything significantly 17 different than what we hear as a management team, 18 which is, I think, a healthy situation.

19 MS. LIPA: One of the things I 20 heard you say is from the initial all-hands meetings 21 that you had, you were thinking that this change in 22 the pay policy might have had some affect on the 23 survey results.

24 MR. MYERS: Right.

25 MS. LIPA: But I didnt hear that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

74 1 as a theme from the teams.

2 MR. MYERS: Well, you sort of did 3 because it has to do with the amount of overtime in 4 the management area that we pay for.

5 Fred, do you want to comment on that any?

6 MR. von AHN: Yeah, I can comment on 7 that. The team was actually surprised that didnt 8 come out as a theme. The theme that came out was 9 the long working hours, not necessarily the 10 compensation issue, and were quite frankly 11 surprised, but that is one of the external factors we 12 looked at was the change in the compensation policy, 13 just wasnt there; the long work hours was.

14 MS. LIPA: Okay. And the other 15 thing I was thinking about is back on slide 23 when 16 you talked about the survey review team concludes 17 that Safety Conscious Work Environment supports 18 restart. The message that I got from that was that 19 with or without the corrective actions the teams 20 recommendation is for restart, or does that take into 21 consideration the fact that some of those corrective 22 actions already have been implemented, so if you 23 could -- do you understand my question?

24 MR. von AHN: Yes.

25 MS. LIPA: Okay. Slide 23, does MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

75 1 that have anything to do with the strong corrective 2 actions that are described on 26?

3 MR. von AHN: It does not have to do 4 with the corrective actions that were already 5 implemented. It had to do with the overall response 6 we got during the Safety Conscious Work Environment 7 Surveys, the positive comments, and as Ive 8 discussed, the negative impact, given that the team 9 concluded that the Safety Conscious Work Environment 10 supports restart; however, were committed to a, as I 11 said, a robust, very strong Safety Conscious Work 12 Environment, so well be driving toward -- every one 13 of those being completely green with zero negative 14 responses. Did that answer your question?

15 MS. LIPA: Yes, you did. Thank 16 you.

17 Anybody else have any questions on this 18 topic?

19 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE).

20 This would be a good time for a 10 minute 21 break?

22 MR. von AHN: Yes.

23 MS. LIPA: So well be back at 24 7:45.

25 THEREUPON, a brief recess took place.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

76 1 MS. LIPA: Okay, were ready to 2 begin.

3 Were there any other questions on the first 4 section?

5 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE).

6 MR. BEZILLA: Okay, thank you, 7 Christine. Next slide, please.

8 The desired outcome for this evening is to 9 communicate our assessment of operations. We will 10 cover the areas requiring continued attention, 11 corrective actions implemented and planned, and well 12 provide our plan for readiness reviews and 13 effectiveness assessments now through 100 percent of 14 our operations. Next slide, please.

15 Id like to turn it over to Barry now.

16 MR. ALLEN: Thank you, Mark.

17 Next slide, please.

18 Our observations of the RATI team 19 observations aligned and improvements are needed and 20 consistent implementation of our management tools.

21 Theres a list of all the slide shift turnover, 22 pre-job briefs. Theres various items that we both 23 observed and feel like we need to improve our 24 consistent performance in just, for example, pre-job 25 briefs. We had seen some pre-job briefs done MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

77 1 extremely well at the station. We have also had 2 observations for pre-job briefs, used checklist and 3 other tools, but we were not fully prepared to 4 implement those effectively. The predominant tools 5 that were focused upon improving of the observations 6 that weve taken, the RATI team were listed up there, 7 Im not going to read those to you, but those are the 8 issues that were focusing on now in Operations.

9 Next slide, please.

10 The barrier chart up here illustrates the 11 barriers that exist to prevent or identifies 12 challenges to the organization. Weve used this 13 slide before. Our observation programs have given us 14 some indications of how were performing as an 15 organization. What weve seen is that our oversight 16 barrier, management barrier, program barrier have 17 been pretty effective, and weve had good results and 18 those barriers help us to either eliminate or reduce 19 challenges to the organization.

20 Weve also had observations that leads us to 21 conclude that we need to improve consistency of our 22 performance on an individual level that complement 23 the individual area. For instance, as a station we 24 continue to demonstrate that our procedure usage 25 adherence barrier is performing very effectively.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

78 1 As we encounter problems, were stopping, were 2 resolving the issue before we proceed on; however, by 3 the same token, our greatest opportunity for 4 improvement is that we use that barrier to identify 5 in a more consistent manner those issues in a 6 planning type activity as opposed to implementing 7 activities. One of the things that were observing 8 at the station is that as we have improved our 9 performance and our procedure usage adherence, as our 10 standards have improved from a personnel standpoint 11 of that area have become more consistent. We are 12 finding more low level minor deficiencies in our 13 procedures, and we are having to stop, deal with them 14 and resolve, and then our focus then is to work in 15 finding those issues and be in the pre-planning, 16 pre-staging, previewing type arena as opposed to when 17 were working. One of the things we have found 18 through benchmarking with two other restart units is 19 that as they went through similar evolutions and 20 raised their level of performance of expectations in 21 terms of procedure adherence, they also encountered 22 very similar instances such as we have, which is low 23 level, minor, latent type deficiencies and procedures 24 that we have not picked up in the past, but there was 25 a new rigor still in the Operations organization.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

79 1 Were now catching that through our processes and 2 stopping and dealing with those issues.

3 In the corrective action section, the policy 4 was always discuss our actions to strengthen all the 5 barriers and how those actions help us to prevent and 6 minimize challenges to the organization. Next 7 slide, please.

8 Based on our observations, we performed an 9 assessment of our performance. We formed the Site 10 Team to help us look at our performance in the 11 Operations area. It was proposed a site member, but 12 we also utilized an outside consultant to help review 13 our results. The assessment team used several 14 methods of analysis, the Barrier Analysis, the TAP 15 Root method, and Human Performance Evaluation System 16 all those to help us evaluate our performance. One 17 of the things that we determined going through that 18 process was that our standards and expectations at 19 the station meet industry standards. We dont need 20 to revise our standards, but they do appear to be 21 acceptable from an industry perspective. The 22 problems we find for the team that we need help to 23 solve is that the Operations Department is not 24 consistently implementing our departmental 25 expectations and standards. Preliminary causes that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

80 1 weve looked at rolled out a couple particular 2 issues. One is the perception on the part of some 3 operators that they felt they needed to complete 4 their activities within the time allotted, the time 5 scheduled, versus making time needed to thoroughly 6 prepare prior to execution.

7 The second component that we discussed as we 8 went through this process was the perception on the 9 part of some of the operators while they understand 10 the administrative procedural requirements, 11 procedural statements are requirements, lower level 12 business practice statements in some cases were not 13 viewed as mandatory site level adherence as 14 procedure. In other words, the business practice 15 statements were viewed as standards of excellence 16 that we would strive for, but were not viewed to have 17 the same rigor establishing required. Next slide, 18 please.

19 Actions were taken to help us consistently 20 implement management tools weve talked about to 21 identify the assessments. Our Operations resources 22 have been loaded and levelized within our scheduling 23 process. Our Operations activities are now included 24 within the schedule. We talked to Mike Roeder, 25 Operations Manager, today. Were getting a level of MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

81 1 detail. Were scheduling in shift turnover for 2 Operations for when we have scheduling and tag-out 3 time for evolutions requiring significant tag-out 4 time. Pre-job briefs for significant operational 5 activities are included and noted and delineated 6 within the schedule. All the pre-job briefs for 7 plant heat-up have been scrubbed. They were 8 validated on the simulator. Those were all verified 9 and validated. We also worked to reaffirm and make 10 sure we have clarified roles in the Operations 11 Support Center, thats supervisors Operations 12 superintendent, to ensure that he and his team 13 understand their role in helping us at the station 14 implement our procedures, our standards and our 15 expectations. That includes such things as ownership 16 schedule, understanding that schedules have to be 17 correct. Its our responsibility to make that 18 happen, make sure that our operational activities 19 include the details required, and then as we have 20 issues with the schedule, either getting activities 21 kicked off or issues on execution that we then notify 22 the senior leadership team, appropriate management 23 team promptly so that we can go with the rest of the 24 scheduled issues.

25 Lews also talked somewhat in his MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

82 1 presentation about improving communication between 2 Operations management and shift management. Weve 3 anchored that in our night orders, strengthened that 4 quite a bit. For instance, the quality observations 5 and insights that we get, insights we get from our 6 independent Operations oversight managers, all the 7 feedback we get on a daily basis. That information 8 is rolled up for Operations. Thats included in the 9 night orders so they understand what the critical 10 content and feedback is coming in from oversight 11 observations, that is we attach our expectations to 12 show where we are in meeting or exceeding our 13 expectations and where we see deficiencies that still 14 need to be corrected, and we also look for management 15 tools to reinforce the positive changes in behavior, 16 so as we see positive things in the organization 17 occurring, these numbers are not only helping 18 reinforce, but, yes, this is the -- this is the 19 expectation were looking for.

20 Weve reinforced our management expectations 21 for preparations on job activities, and weve 22 identified individual level of ownership for 23 Operations activities, so our schedule offset 24 activities are not just by shift or just by crew, but 25 its down to the name of the operator who is MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

83 1 responsible for preparing and executing that. Next 2 slide, please.

3 MR. THOMAS: Barry, Id like to ask 4 a question about reinforce managements expectations 5 for preparations, could you elaborate on that a 6 little bit and tell me to what level those 7 expectations were communicated?

8 MR. ALLEN: Sure, Scott. I would 9 say in several ways. It probably goes all the way 10 back to where we had the all-hands meetings that we 11 talked about where we did some of those. We talked 12 about schedule and preparation in those. As far as 13 reinforce managements expectations, we made sure we 14 redefine those roles for the folks in the Operations 15 organization being that they are most closely 16 impacted with that. Myself, I spent about an hour 17 to an hour and a half with each of the Operations 18 group discussing why that was good, why that was 19 important and how those expectations or preparations 20 were keys to our success, so weve done that several 21 ways.

22 MR. THOMAS: Okay. I guess Im 23 looking for a little -- lets focus specifically on 24 surveillance and the integrated plant procedures and 25 infrequently performed tests which is basically --

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

84 1 MR. ALLEN: Okay.

2 MR. THOMAS: -- down to the NLO 3 level, you know, what the expectation is for that 4 individual for his little, small part of --

5 MR. ALLEN: Ill give you a quick 6 example, Scott. Ill follow this, and this will come 7 up a little bit later, but just --

8 MR. THOMAS: Well, I mean, you can 9 wait until then.

10 MR. ALLEN: But if I dont get 11 your question answered before we get through with the 12 actions weve taken, well, let me know, well provide 13 you some documentation.

14 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

15 MR. ALLEN: Okay, we developed 16 written review criteria from an activities standpoint 17 for preparing activities, thats captioned and 18 anchored by that -- thats somewhat equivalent to 19 what you would think as a maintenance walkdown type 20 sheet. Operations has developed a similar criteria 21 for operations to prepare for evolution. Weve also 22 designated management oversight for significant 23 operational activities coming ahead.

24 Were also piloting a real time system 25 readiness assessment, and this is where were looking MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

85 1 at systems we have not yet placed in service, okay, 2 or major components weve not yet brung -- bringing 3 them back to service to heat-up and restore the 4 plant, so were piloting this readiness assessment to 5 include the management ownership and sponsorship, 6 maintenance representatives, and operations SROs in 7 charge of the evolution, a responsible system 8 engineer, so were getting that team collected and 9 formed ahead of time before that evolution takes 10 place, and then that team is responsible to ensure 11 that we have real time look at that system component 12 and that it is, in fact, its scrubbed and ready to 13 run as we can determine, so that includes such things 14 as that team performing a walkdown, reviewing all of 15 the condition reports that are out there on the 16 system of components. We set a standard to go back 17 and look at the last three times we have run that 18 system for that component to look at what our history 19 was there, what our parameters were, did we challenge 20 the interlocks, did we challenge the limits, whats 21 our internal yield, that type of thing, and issues, 22 what likely issues we might have when we put that 23 system in component service and then for what 24 contingency do we need to plan to lay out as were 25 prepared to do that activity, and then the next step, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

86 1 I think it kind of comes closer to your question, 2 Scott, as that team is preparing for the next 3 evolution coming ahead, weve missed the team 4 challenge reviews, the challenges to that team to 5 challenge ourselves in a professional manner to 6 assure ourselves that we are, in fact, ready to 7 proceed. And so when that team is ready, they get 8 the senior leadership team either on the telephone or 9 some folks they do it with parts, in general, its a 10 combination, some folks who are at home, some folks 11 who are at work, and were challenging that team, 12 going through and asking, okay, what have we done to 13 prepare, have we looked at this, have we considered 14 this? Did we look at previous guides, what are our 15 contingency plans, so -- Ill give you an example.

16 We didnt just estimate this the other day, so last 17 night a little before 0300, you know, we all got 18 called in, personnel who run some teams at the 19 station called those of us at home, and we talked 20 about bringing operation injection back to service.

21 We talked about steam feed rupture control system, 22 bringing impact to service and we stopped and talked 23 about how Aux feedwater brings impact to service, and 24 in each one of those evolutions, we were looking 25 ahead of time in the senior reactor operator who is MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

87 1 the test leader for that initiated that expression 2 with the leadership team with responsible engineering 3 present and/or engineers and/or maintenance personnel 4 were involved in activity, and we talked about what 5 we have done to prepare all the type of things that I 6 mentioned to you awhile ago. Weve gone through the 7 scrub, whats our history, whats our contingencies, 8 and so were setting ourselves up again to go back 9 and look at what we can do to focus on eliminating 10 and/or reducing those challenges in the organization 11 for better preparation of the plant.

12 MR. THOMAS: I think all those 13 things are good, but I was focused more on shift 14 manager down. What you explained was shift manager 15 up, and, you know, including engineering, you know, 16 in that.

17 MR. ALLEN: Let me go a little 18 bit further, Scott, so, for instance, last night we 19 talked about some of these evolutions, who is 20 involved? We got down to heres the equipment 21 operators involved. Theyve reviewed it. They have 22 gone out, they walked it down. Theyre prepared to 23 do the activities, so it goes down to --

24 MR. THOMAS: Okay, thats the piece 25 that I was looking for.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

88 1 MR. ALLEN: Yeah, it goes all the 2 way down through the organization.

3 MR. THOMAS: And is that type of 4 preparation and ownership also present for the 5 routine evolutions, you know, that may not require 6 infrequent performed test and evolution briefs, just 7 the --

8 MR. ALLEN: Expectation is the 9 same. Now, were not necessarily going to have a 10 management oversight person on that. It will be --

11 it will be the Ops superintendent -- the Operations 12 Support Center supervisor that does have that role 13 for all of those other activities, you know, but the 14 same expectation or preparation exists, so there are 15 activities that are put on the schedule that does 16 designate either specific brief time, preparation 17 time, or for very simple activities we loaded in 18 enough time to allow the Operations focus to do the 19 preparation activities, and, again, it goes back to 20 we own that schedule. Were responsible to ensure 21 its appropriately levelized the level of our 22 resources to ensure that we are maximizing our 23 opportunities at the plant to prepare to go --

24 obviously, we can still run into things like issues 25 and procedures, you know, as we raise our standards MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

89 1 we find low level issues and procedures we have to 2 deal with, but were instituting that across the 3 board, Scott.

4 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

5 MR. ALLEN: In Operations, weve 6 also completed refresher training on common 7 operations in our business practices, was essentially 8 a full shift to try to -- of maintenance crew, they 9 go back through, so all Operations persons will be 10 available. Theres six or seven folks who have not 11 been because of illness or other reasons, but all 12 level of Operations personnel have been through that 13 and tested. We have focused our observations on the 14 areas that we recognize need improvement, so that 15 includes, again, pre-job briefs, shift turnovers, our 16 adherence to standards and expectations, consistent 17 communications. Again, were taking that feedback 18 back to the organizations through minor over stuff to 19 ensure that we continue to improve in our 20 performance.

21 Weve also instituted a daily phone call with 22 the FENOC executive leadership team, so on a daily 23 basis now, were taking all the feedback were 24 getting from independent sources internal and were 25 debriefing that with the executive leadership team, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

90 1 which then again is giving us another independent 2 oversight area, and they are critiquing what were 3 doing with the information and challenge us on a 4 daily basis. Theres a couple issues there also at 5 the bottom youll see that we discussed with the RATI 6 team that may not tie directly in with the Operations 7 piece I have been talking about, but we did have 8 discussion with the RATI team, so Id like to, you 9 know, briefly cover those just to get that cleared up 10 as well.

11 One of the issues that the RATI team 12 discussed with us was the qualifications of our plant 13 engineering and consistent leadership. Weve 14 addressed that and resolved that. Qualified 15 individuals are now assigned as either the primary 16 engineer, the backup engineer or as a designated 17 mentor for those engineers that are required.

18 Weve also ensured that all of our restart 19 readiness affirmation forms have been reviewed and 20 either signed or countersigned by qualified 21 individuals. Engineering has for the mentors, 22 signed mentors for all the system engineers with 23 written expectations for those mentors describing 24 what their oversight activities and responsibilities 25 are and help develop that.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

91 1 For measuring and test equipment issues we 2 had some discussion with the RATI team on that.

3 Weve also addressed that, the more significant 4 actions that have been taken at the station. One 5 thing is we now no longer check out measuring and 6 test equipment to organizations, so we will not check 7 out M & TE to Operations. We will not check out M &

8 TE to radiation protection. We will check out the 9 individuals so we have individual accountability, 10 and, therefore, all individuals who also get travel, 11 which requires documentation where they use that 12 measuring and test equipment, so we got -- we have 13 better standards, better controls to ensure we 14 understand where our M & TE is used at the station, 15 so we feel we have done a good job with this.

16 MS. LIPA: Barry, you talked 17 about plant engineering qualifications and at the 18 RATI exit -- at the Restart Assessment Team 19 Inspection team exit that was just 10 days ago, there 20 were some percentage of folks that were not 21 qualified.

22 What have you done to -- you said they are 23 now all qualified?

24 MR. ALLEN: No, if they were not 25 qualified, Christine, we just cant go qualify MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

92 1 individuals.

2 MS. LIPA: Right.

3 MR. ALLEN: So what weve done is 4 we said, okay, we either got to have a primary 5 engineer who may be learning the system, if hes 6 qualified or shes qualified, thats great. If not, 7 were looking to ensure, can we have the backup 8 engineer, that person is qualified in the system, so 9 their backup person may be qualified or were 10 assigning a mentor who may be qualified, so part of 11 that is as you get new people in new positions, you 12 have to train them, you have to groom them, you have 13 to help them develop to become qualified, but for 14 those positions, were assuring that someone -- if 15 its not the primary person, theres a backup or 16 designated assigned mentor, their responsibilities is 17 qualified for the systems.

18 MS. LIPA: Is that a short-term 19 action and you have a longer term action to get them 20 qualified?

21 MR. ALLEN: Long-term is to get 22 everyone qualified.

23 MS. LIPA: Do you have a target 24 date for having them all qualified?

25 MR. MYERS: Its in our plan.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

93 1 MS. LIPA: What page?

2 MR. ALLEN: In 2004.

3 MS. LIPA: Okay. So youre doing 4 a long-term plan. You talked about your short-term 5 plan.

6 MR. ALLEN: Right. Next slide, 7 please. Actions to be taken to help us ensure were 8 consistently implementing management tools we 9 discussed, we have benchmarked and enhanced procedure 10 for pre-job briefs. Thats given us some 11 enhancements and changes to our pre-job briefing 12 procedure which were in the process of making those 13 procedure changes, they are drafted and going through 14 the Operations Department right now. Also, as an 15 outcome of that, well be enhancing, revising, our 16 pre-job checklist to focus more closely on limits and 17 precautions and interlocks. For instance, weve got 18 a pre-job brief checklist. You can look on that, 19 its not clearly out of align. Its kind of a sub 20 tier. Also were going to ensure that we have 21 alignment between our performance indicators for the 22 Operations section with our actual Operations to 23 ensure that our indicators -- our performance 24 indicators for Operations are reflecting proper 25 performance and we have good alignment there, so MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

94 1 thats where our performance indicators are.

2 MR. MYERS: We also had to make 3 some improvements to that.

4 MS. LIPA: Didnt hear you, Lew.

5 MR. MYERS: The process for the 6 benchmark?

7 MS. LIPA: Yeah, you got them 8 benchmarked? I didnt hear the rest of your 9 statement.

10 MR. MYERS: We actually looked at 11 the procedure that we benchmarked and we think we can 12 make some enhancements to that.

13 MR. ALLEN: In summary --

14 MR. THOMAS: Can I ask a question, 15 Barry?

16 MR. ALLEN: Yeah, you got a 17 question, Scott?

18 MR. THOMAS: Yeah, the problem on 19 Page 36 says the Operations Department is not 20 consistently implementing department expectations and 21 standards, and let me elaborate on that, and please 22 correct me if Im putting words in your mouth, but 23 one thing that the RATI identified was that your 24 senior reactor operators on shift werent 25 consistently enforcing Operations management MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

95 1 expectations, and I dont see any of these corrective 2 actions that specifically go to addressing that issue 3 on a shift -- you know, shift for shift type basis.

4 MR. ALLEN: Okay, a couple things 5 there, Scott. Again, Ill go back to the refresher 6 training that we gave the Operations crews that the 7 Operations manager kicked off on sessions. The 8 intent of that kickoff was to ensure that we all were 9 on the same page. In understanding that, the 10 standards and expectations brings us to the green 11 mode, as we typically refer to some of our practices 12 in our business practices. Those are understood 13 that those are requirements. We will adhere to 14 those. We will hold ourselves accountable to those.

15 Then on a day to day, shift to shift basis targeted 16 our independent oversight managers, our internal 17 management assessments and ask the quality 18 organization to look at those standards and 19 expectations that we were not meeting and performing 20 on to target those in the observations and on a daily 21 shift basis give us that feedback, it helps us 22 enforce that we are meeting those expectations, or, 23 if we have shortfalls, we identify those and we 24 identify the issues in a strong and positive -- or 25 issues that we need to correct, and were taking that MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

96 1 and immediately feeding that back into the night 2 orders with reinforcement of what the expectations 3 are and then again reinforcing positive for those, so 4 were looking to reinforce that issue.

5 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

6 MR. MYERS: It seems like, for 7 instance, pre-job briefs, that schedule, when we 8 prepared it we did a pre-job brief, so there was --

9 for those activities that are complex, were 10 physically scheduled on a preparation basis to the 11 person, so that should -- we would expect that to 12 improve the standards in the pre-job briefs.

13 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

14 MR. ALLEN: Scott, Id also like 15 to tell you just as an independent look at, as were 16 getting called up to challenge the organization 17 before we can proceed with evolutions, were going to 18 discuss the things that are in that preparation top 19 phase, we were inconsistent with our performance, and 20 so the leadership team at the station is given the 21 opportunity to challenge that team, is getting ready 22 to take that evolution on as they call us before they 23 go to do their briefs, you know, with the opportunity 24 to force out with their argument on the expectations 25 for preparation. Of course, we have oversight MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

97 1 watching us execute and management oversight watching 2 us execute, so --

3 MR. MYERS: We seen some good 4 examples this week where we talked about the 5 preparation phase.

6 MR. THOMAS: Well, let me ask a 7 question. You talked about management observation.

8 Whats been done to strengthen -- I mean, that was an 9 identified weakness in the Normal Operating Pressure 10 Test, that management oversight was less than 11 effective in addressing -- in identifying some 12 issues.

13 Whats been done since then to better prepare 14 your managers that are performing that role to be 15 more effective?

16 MR. ALLEN: Well, one of the 17 things we have done is we have delineated the 18 criteria that were working -- were working towards 19 improvement. Weve identified that specifically to 20 the management team so that rather than if we had an 21 issue with observations before, maybe we werent 22 looking at the right things, we werent focused on 23 the right things, we may have been desensitizing, 24 didnt recognize we had a problem with some of those 25 standards the same as the Operations Department.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

98 1 Again, were communicating. Heres what were doing 2 with the Operations Department. Were delineating 3 those specific items that we want observations on to 4 ensure as we go through those observations, and we 5 did focus on those areas that were working on, so I 6 would say probably the best thing we have done, 7 Scott, is probably to sharpen our focus down to these 8 are team critical activities, and we got human 9 performance consistently on. You know, of course, 10 those observations are occurring somewhat in parallel 11 with the independent observations that have been 12 going on, so, you know, we have the opportunity then 13 to compare what our internal observations are telling 14 us as opposed to what our independent external type 15 observations are telling us. We have from our 16 perspective now what we have ourselves focused on, 17 heres specific things we want to observe, we get 18 pretty consistent feedback on those results. You 19 know, it dont seem like a big discrepancy, so I 20 think we have at least gotten ourselves focused on 21 what specifically were trying to work on in 22 Operations, consistency in the performance.

23 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

24 MS. LIPA: Okay.

25 MR. BEZILLA: Thank you, Barry.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

99 1 Next slide, please.

2 Okay, now that we have outlined our plan for 3 conducting readiness reviews and effectiveness 4 assessments now through a hundred percent of power 5 operations, we recently completed our restart 6 readiness reviews for the current heat-up, normal 7 operating pressure Mode 4 and 3. Were currently 8 assessing the Restart Readiness Assessment Team 9 Inspection, RATI, findings, and Barry has previously 10 discussed the actions taken and plan to response to 11 the teams feedback. When we complete our heat-up 12 activities, achieve normal operating pressure, well 13 conduct an assessment of our performance. This 14 essentially will include planning, people and 15 processes.

16 Additionally, we will evaluate our 17 performance again for the criteria we established as 18 part of the Operations improvement actions plan, that 19 being no inadvertent safety system actuations caused 20 by human error to process weaknesses, no significant 21 events caused by human error or process weaknesses, 22 no integrated operator procedure content errors that 23 would have resulted in a planned transient or event, 24 and no unplanned entry or tech spec as a result of 25 operator errors.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

100 1 Additionally, well have an external team 2 review our assessments and conclusions, a peer check, 3 if you will, and I will be looking for convergent 4 validation of the assessments.

5 Once at normal operating pressure, we will 6 continue to assess our performance. On or about 7 January 8th, we will present our operations readiness 8 for restart to the FENOC executive leadership team.

9 During the week of January 5th, we will conduct our 10 restart readiness reviews for Mode 2 and Mode 1.

11 This is in accordance with our business practice.

12 The next slide, please.

13 Once restart is permitted, we will perform a 14 post-start-up and prior to generator synchronization 15 effectiveness assessment and then a readiness to 16 proceed review. Again, post-generator 17 synchronization, and after placing the second main 18 feedwater pump in service, we will perform another 19 effectiveness assessment, and then a readiness to 20 proceed review.

21 MR. THOMAS: Mark, can you 22 elaborate on those whole points a little more?

23 Whats going to be happening, what the assessment is 24 going to entail, how long you foresee that taking, a 25 little bit more detail?

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

101 1 MR. BEZILLA: Sure, Scott. In 2 regard to those effectiveness assessments, what well 3 do is well take a look when we get to those whole 4 points, take a look at how the plant performed, how 5 the people performed, how our processes supported us.

6 Take a look at our observations that were occurring 7 during that time period, take a look at our condition 8 report process for any significant issues or trend 9 issues and then well meet as a team and well review 10 those and well determine if there is any actions 11 that needs to be taken prior to allowing proceeding 12 to the next step, if you will.

13 MR. THOMAS: When you said the 14 team, is that the senior leadership team? Is that --

15 MR. BEZILLA: Thats the management 16 team.

17 MR. THOMAS: Management team, okay.

18 MR. BEZILLA: Okay. And then we 19 also have a form that each of the managers will sign, 20 and then that will be reviewed by Barry, myself and 21 Lew prior to proceeding to the next step, whatever 22 that next step is.

23 MS. LIPA: So your documentation 24 of that would be a form thats signed as opposed to 25 an actual report?

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

102 1 MR. BEZILLA: Thats correct, and I 2 believe we put that into our integrated restart test 3 plan as a supplement.

4 Okay, Scott, I have the documents I can show 5 you here after the session.

6 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

7 MR. BEZILLA: Okay, when we get to a 8 hundred percent power operation well conduct a 9 restart test plan critique, and that will be 10 approximately two weeks after being at a hundred 11 percent power operation, and, again, that will look 12 at people, plant, processes, how did we do, and then 13 approximately four weeks after being at a hundred 14 percent power, well conduct an effectiveness review, 15 and a personnel assessment of the operation of 16 shifts. This review and assessment will be by our 17 industry Operations oversight managers, and well use 18 their assessment to determine if we need or want to 19 continue with industry Operations oversight managers 20 or if we want to move to an internal FENOC oversight 21 observation format. The bottom line on these 22 effectiveness assessments and readiness reviews is to 23 ensure that the organization, we, are ready to 24 proceed with the next step. I expect that we will 25 make adjustments as a result of these efforts. The MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

103 1 desired outcome is consistent performance by 2 Operations and the organization and, as always, safe 3 and eventless operations, and the last slide, please.

4 I believe that we have taken actions that 5 should ensure that the management tools in place are 6 consistently implemented with performing operational 7 activities. We will continue to monitor and hold 8 ourselves accountable to use the management tools.

9 Our desire is to preview, review, pre-brief and then 10 execute each task successfully. If challenges still 11 arise, we will stop. We will resolve the issue 12 prior to proceeding. Thats all I have. Any 13 questions?

14 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE).

15 MR. BEZILLA: If theres no 16 questions, Ill turn it over to Lew for final 17 comments.

18 MR. MYERS: Thank you. We talked 19 about post-Safety Conscious Work Environment and our 20 operators today. In the Safety Conscious Work 21 Environment area we continue to show improvement.

22 We will provide a -- continue to provide a strong 23 focus in the area of operations and plant 24 engineering. As the focused area now, if it needs 25 our attention, well give it that attention. We MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

104 1 will continue to show improvements in Safety 2 Conscious Work Environment through a more pro-active 3 approach, as we described, by going out and having 4 our supervisors look for issues, have our management 5 process look for issues. We will then develop a 6 team of our employees to a Safety Conscious Work 7 Environment team, have people looking for our good, 8 confident leaders and people that are trusted within 9 the department, and they will have access to the site 10 Vice President, and well have them cite the issues 11 before they become problems. We think that will 12 carry us a long way in improvements, continue to show 13 improvements in Safety Conscious Work Environment.

14 From an Operations standpoint, weve already 15 taken some strong action. Weve trained all our --

16 retrained all our shifts in conduct of the 17 operations. The basic focused areas that we had 18 issues with was RATI teams here. We think the 19 actions that we took to correct some of the 20 behaviors, talking about our NOP test have been 21 fairly effective. Operators are using that 22 procedure and we seem to have consistency in our 23 routine operations, but we still are having a problem 24 in the area of management tools and getting 25 consistent performance, so that we have event-free MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

105 1 operations and get the desired outcomes each and 2 every time in the areas of procedure usage, pre-job 3 briefs, conduct of operations. We focused on those 4 areas.

5 One of the big issues that we saw when the 6 RATI team was here is the operations had not 7 levelized and fully integrated in the plant schedule 8 at that time. It may not be perfect, but we will 9 continue to define that. Our expectations are that 10 we will need to perform our reviews, make any 11 adjustments that we need to. We will then implement 12 a monitoring period of approximately five to seven 13 days, and we believe that with success in the near 14 future we will be asking for authorization to restart 15 the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant. Thank you very 16 much for your attention and time.

17 MR. RULAND: Thank you, Lew. We 18 appreciate the presentation you gave us this evening.

19 I think its helped us gain an understanding of the 20 actions youve taken, specifically in these two 21 areas, both the results of the questions that we had 22 in responding to our questions in the Safety 23 Conscious Work Environment Survey and on the 24 questions that the Restart Readiness Assessment Team 25 had in the Operations area.

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

106 1 This survey issue is an interesting one. As 2 youre well aware, the NRC doesnt have any 3 requirements for licensees to conduct surveys, and 4 when they do surveys like youve done, we have no 5 requirements on the results of those surveys.

6 However, the NRC has been reviewing this matter 7 because, as you attributed, it was part of the reason 8 were all here together today, so we had some 9 questions based on the survey results, and, like good 10 NRC inspectors often do, we just dont look at the 11 surface. The overall statements that youre making, 12 I think you had it on slide 4 where, you know, 13 generally the survey results are very positive, and I 14 think we poked and prodded a little bit and said, 15 wait a minute, theres some other questions here that 16 bubble to the surface that we need to have resolved, 17 and thats, of course -- thats the purpose of the 18 meeting this evening, was that negative trend in work 19 groups that are particularly important to the NRC.

20 We wanted to assure ourselves that we understood what 21 was happening here at Davis-Besse in this area before 22 we make any decision, whether to recommend restart or 23 not. I think this has helped us gain some of that 24 understanding. We were a little surprised, I think, 25 this evening where you said that the Safety Conscious MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

107 1 Work Environment supports restart today, whether or 2 not your corrective actions go to complete fruition, 3 but we understand that thats -- you know, you have 4 done a number of corrective actions already and, in 5 fact, your position might -- might be a valid one, 6 but, like all things, were going to have to poke and 7 prod, and were going to come out, and were going to 8 plan an inspection, and were going to come out and 9 look. We make no prejudgments about what were 10 going to see, but Geoff Wright, his folks are going 11 to come out and, hopefully, we will be able to come 12 to a common understanding about this matter.

13 As far as Operations goes, you gave us a 14 really long list of areas that youre working on, 15 particularly to improve your management tools. We 16 know also that you have not concluded that Operations 17 is ready for restart.

18 MR. MYERS: Thats right.

19 MR. RULAND: We know that, and in 20 this -- this long list that you have given us is, 21 again, its a blueprint for an inspection, so the 22 NRC -- we havent made any judgments one way or the 23 other about the effectiveness of these actions, but 24 our next step is to go back, talk about what we heard 25 this evening, decide what we want to inspect and when MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

108 1 and the results of that inspection that those 2 inspections could communicate not only to you, but to 3 the public at large, so, with that, I think thats my 4 concluding remarks.

5 Does anybody else have any comments or 6 questions? Christine?

7 MS. LIPA: No.

8 MR. RULAND: That concludes the 9 business portion of our meeting. Thank you very 10 much, everyone. Hopefully we didnt use too many 11 acronyms. We try to -- we try to correct that now 12 and again, but we apologize when we get too acronym 13 crazy, but this concludes the business portion of our 14 meeting, and if we could come back, at what, about 20 15 to nine --

16 MS. LIPA: Okay.

17 MR. RULAND: -- and well open it 18 up to public comments and questions. Thank you.

19 THEREUPON, a brief recess took place.

20 MR. RULAND: Hello, were going to 21 get started in a few minutes. If you could take 22 your seats, please.

23 (Brief pause).

24 MR. RULAND: Well use the usual 25 procedures we do in meetings of this sort. If you MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

109 1 could, just step up to the microphone and write your 2 name down so -- so we can get the correct spelling 3 later on.

4 Are there any members of -- local officials 5 who have any comments or questions this evening?

6 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE).

7 MR. RULAND: Okay. What about are 8 there any members of the local -- any members of the 9 local citizenry here that would like to make a 10 comment or have a question? Step up to the mike, if 11 you would, please.

12 MR. GARN: My name is Kevin Garn.

13 MR. RULAND: Could you say your 14 name again, please?

15 MR. GARN: Kevin Garn, G-A-R-N.

16 My concern is this. We repeatedly tonight heard 17 about the Safety Conscious Work Environment and on 18 slide No. 18, Quality Assurance raised this question.

19 With AD 18 -- AD 1805, Division 27, former plant 20 manager overrode Quality Assurance by taking away the 21 authority to improve the safety related procedures 22 and revisions at Davis-Besse.

23 Has that authority been returned to the 24 Quality Assurance Department? Thats my question 25 and --

MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

110 1 MS. LIPA: Im trying to make 2 sure I understand the question. Youre saying there 3 was an authority taken away on a certain date?

4 MR. GARN: Yes, there was.

5 MS. LIPA: And what was the date 6 youre taking about?

7 MR. GARN: The date was the 8 summer of 1985.

9 MS. LIPA: Summer of 1985? I 10 dont have any information about what was done in the 11 summer of 1985 to be able to compare it to today.

12 MR. GARN: Prior to that, Quality 13 Assurance had the authority required to approve 14 safety related procedures at the plant. After that 15 procedure was passed, that authority was taken away 16 from the Quality Assurance Department.

17 Has that been restored to the Quality 18 Assurance Department and the directors, or has that 19 still been voided?

20 If Quality Assurance doesnt have the 21 authority to do something at the plant, how can it 22 have the responsibility, is what Im asking.

23 MR. RULAND: I think we understand 24 the question now, but we dont have any answers this 25 evening, so what well do is, if you leave your name MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

111 1 there and give us your address, well be happy to 2 provide you a response.

3 Typically, NRC regulations require Quality 4 Assurance through -- of special impressions, among 5 other things, so -- and I dont think weve 6 identified any problem with regard to that here at 7 Davis-Besse during the almost two year shutdown now, 8 but rather than speculate about what happened back in 9 85 relative to now -- its a good question for us, 10 and I appreciate the question, and, you know, well 11 do some research, and well find out and get back to 12 you.

13 MR. GARN: And I also --

14 MR. RULAND: And if you could, 15 maybe after the meeting, just give us your phone 16 number and we could, you know, communicate by 17 telephone, or we could send you a letter.

18 MR. GARN: Id also like to bring 19 up one other point.

20 At that time, a report was submitted in 21 Region III, and Region III asked for a time period to 22 review the facts. After that time period had 23 expired, I called up Region III and they said, we 24 misplaced or lost your report, and it wasnt until 25 two senators from the State of Ohio contacted the NRC MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

112 1 to say were going to reopen this, reinvestigate 2 this. I hope that will not take place in the 3 future, and its more of putting in the quality than 4 actually addressing --

5 MR. RULAND: You know, Im really 6 having -- maybe its my 54-year-old ears or 7 something, Im really having a difficult time 8 understanding you. Could you get closer to the mike 9 and speak louder would be a great help to me. Thank 10 you very much. Sorry for that, but --

11 MR. GARN: Sure. When I brought 12 this to the attention of the NRC in the summer of 13 1985 --

14 MR. RULAND: Okay, this particular 15 concern youve already told us about, okay.

16 MR. GARN: This report was lost 17 for a period of about 90 days and the response was, 18 well, we dont know, and it wasnt until Senator 19 Glenn and Senator Metzenbaum contacted the NRC did 20 they decide to reopen the case. I hope this would 21 not go to that point in the future.

22 Theres been a number of people thats raised 23 concerns at Davis-Besse with the NRC about particular 24 items that have been brought forward. What has 25 happened in those ways and what has accompanied those MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

113 1 employees in the past, I think that should also be 2 taken into consideration. There were people that 3 brought this to the attention of the NRC prior to the 4 findings.

5 My question to the NRC is what happened to 6 those findings?

7 MS. LIPA: Im trying to make 8 sure that I understand your comments, too, but let me 9 tell you one thing.

10 The NRC has a process for people who bring 11 concerns to us, and I dont know if thats what 12 youre talking about or not, but lets just talk a 13 little bit about that process. We do have a process, 14 and if people have safety concerns you can bring it 15 to us, and I think we have a very good process. Its 16 well documented and people are gotten back to.

17 Theres time lines established, so if this type of 18 concern that youre talking about from 1985 is 19 brought to us and was misplaced or whatever youre 20 talking about and it took somebody else to reopen the 21 case, then Im not sure what that would mean for 22 today, but I know that we do have this process, its 23 called the allegation process, and it works well, so 24 thats one avenue. Now, this might be something 25 slightly different and maybe we could talk later so I MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

114 1 could understand better.

2 MR. GARN: Okay.

3 MS. LIPA: Thank you.

4 MR. RULAND: Okay. Any other 5 questions?

6 MR. RIDZON: Paul Ridzon, McDonald 7 Investments. Just, I wanted to get a sense of the 8 next steps here. FENOC has outlined actions they 9 plan to take, and are we going to have more meetings, 10 more surveys, or is it kind of the proof in the 11 pudding for it to be -- has yet to be scheduled 12 inspections, and if you could give some indication as 13 to when you might schedule those inspections.

14 MR. RULAND: Okay. So youre 15 basically asking what -- where do we go from here, 16 whats our process?

17 MR. RIDZON: Yes.

18 MR. RULAND: The Davis-Besse 19 Oversight Panel will -- as a matter of fact, were 20 going to start this process tomorrow. Well have an 21 internal meeting where well discuss what we heard 22 this evening, decide on a course of -- a course of 23 inspections that we will need to conduct to confirm, 24 validate what we heard this evening. Along those 25 lines, we will also be thinking about the public MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

115 1 meeting we have scheduled for January 13th. Right 2 now, its scheduled as a standard restart -- excuse 3 me, our standard oversight, monthly oversight 4 meeting. Thats the way its scheduled today.

5 We, in addition, once we have this -- once we 6 plan these inspections, were then going to have to 7 ask ourselves, well, how -- the results that -- were 8 going to need the results of those inspections for us 9 to be able to make a restart recommendation one way 10 or the other to our management, so, again, were 11 going to plan those inspections, were going to have 12 to conduct those inspections. At some point 13 thereafter, maybe coincident with, a restart meeting 14 would have to happen. We would look toward 15 FirstEnergy to tell us when they are ready.

16 Obviously, were going to be conducting these 17 inspections. In the standard course of business, 18 when we do inspections, we typically debrief with the 19 licensee almost on a daily basis, so theyre going to 20 be hearing what were finding from these inspections, 21 and they are going to be, of course, interested in 22 the results of those inspections, and that would, I 23 would suspect, factor into their decision process 24 about when to ask us to have a restart meeting, so 25 those for sure are the next steps. Let me continue MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

116 1 on hypothetically.

2 At some point well have a restart meeting, 3 and once we would hear from the licensee that they 4 were ready for restart, the restart, the 0350 Panel 5 would meet, and we would recommend -- either 6 recommend or not that Davis-Besse be authorized to 7 restart. We would make those recommendations to our 8 management, and, specifically, Jim Dire in the --

9 hes the Regional Administrator for Region III and 10 then --

11 MS. LIPA: Not Jim Dire.

12 MR. RULAND: Excuse me, sorry, 13 wrong Regional Administrator, excuse me, Jim 14 Caldwell, Jim Caldwell, the Regional Administrator 15 for Region III, and in collaboration with Jim Dire, 16 whos the Director of NRR, and Sam Collins, who is in 17 the Executive Directors office, a restart decision 18 would be made one way or the other, and wed move 19 forward from that, so thats kind of -- again, I have 20 not specified any dates about when that back end of 21 the process would happen.

22 MR. RIDZON: Thank you. You gave 23 a very good synopsis at the end of the business 24 portion of the meeting. I was just wondering if you 25 could elaborate a little bit more on what you think MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

117 1 FENOC addressed particularly well here and maybe some 2 areas where you still have -- you may have some 3 concerns?

4 MR. RULAND: You mean in tonights 5 meeting?

6 MR. RIDZON: Yes.

7 MR. RULAND: Well, as I stated at 8 the end of the meeting, one of the things that 9 surprised us a little bit was that FENOC said that 10 Safety Conscious Work Environment at this point 11 was -- Safety Conscious Work Environment at 12 Davis-Besse was ready for restart. Well, thats not 13 a big surprise. It was something that was a little 14 unexpected for us. Its not, you know, in 15 retrospect, its not that surprising given what the 16 results of their survey found, so were -- like I 17 said -- like I said before, were going to have to go 18 out, kick the tires, kind of find out, you know, 19 confirm for us, for ourselves, what -- what folks at 20 the plant are saying, and kind of arrive at our own 21 independent conclusion.

22 Operations, if you noticed, there was kind of 23 a lengthy list of actions they were taking, and given 24 the importance that we placed in Operations, I think 25 thats appropriate, how effective those, you know, MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

118 1 how effective those actions are going to be taken.

2 How effective those actions will be remains to be 3 seen, so were going to go out, and, like I said, 4 well go out and check that out.

5 MR. RIDZON: Thank you.

6 MR. RULAND: Anyone else?

7 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE).

8 MR. RULAND: Im going to have to 9 tell Jack Grobe that I scared everybody away.

10 (Laughter).

11 (Brief pause).

12 MR. RULAND: Okay. This concludes 13 the comment portion of our meeting. I thank 14 everyone much -- thank everyone for attending.

15 16 17 THEREUPON, the hearing was adjourned.

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900

119 1 CERTIFICATE 2 STATE OF OHIO )

) ss.

3 COUNTY OF HURON )

4 I, Marlene S. Lewis, Stenotype Reporter and 5 Notary Public within and for the State aforesaid, duly commissioned and qualified, do hereby certify 6 that the foregoing, consisting of 118 pages, was taken by me in stenotype and was reduced to writing 7 by me by means of Computer-Aided Transcription; that the foregoing is a true and complete transcript of 8 the proceedings held in that room on the 29th day of December, 2003 before the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 9 Commission.

I also further certify that I was present in 10 the room during all of the proceedings.

11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 12 and seal of office at Wakeman, Ohio this day of

, 2004.

13 14 15 Marlene S. Lewis Notary Public 16 3922 Court Road Wakeman, OH 44889 17 My commission expires 4/29/04 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MARLENE S. LEWIS & ASSOC. REPORTERS (419) 929-0505 (888) 799-3900