ML060690517
| ML060690517 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/2004 |
| From: | Teator J NRC/OI |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2005-0194 | |
| Download: ML060690517 (7) | |
Text
I 3 ((q ay
/
kIN c g(rf
&T0o t2 1
-QUESTIONS PREPPED BY COUNSEL AS TO HOW TO ANSWER QUESTIONS/GUIDANC COUNSEL/DID YOU INFORM YOUR MGMT OF THIS INTERVIEW/
NOT T A qC1 TO BRIE~TlEM A*DOPT WHAT WAS DISCUSSED?
B describe ui6 mE U11\\
Interview Date: 's Subject will raise relationship?
SRO LICENSED??,
if necessary -
Subject raises steward?)
Subject won't raise Others do raise concerns -
Others don't or hesitate to Experienced retaliation for r Identify for self or others) -
concerns (if yes, POTENTIAL SALEM SPECIFIC ISSUES Information in this record was deleted In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, exemptions 2)e
-bL1
APPROX 2 AOISSUE WITH SALEM SJ CHECK VALVES 4/5 AND 12/13 LEG.
SOME Sms AND AOM WANTED LEAK TESTING DONE TO DETER[NE IF IT WAS A PROBLEM -DECISION MADE BY WALDINGER (AND PROBABLY O!C!GNNORTrlN0E TB O
GINEER IT AWAY" SALEM 1, 24 STEAM GENERATOR FEED REG VALVE (FRV) 24BF19 FAILED approximately mid this as a production over safety issue (p.
TO RESPOND - THE NCOs AND AT LEAST I S 0 ON SHIFT BELIEVED THE VALVE WAS MECHANICALLY BOUND... MG N'T WANT TO DECLARE IT MECHANICALLY BOUND AND ORE INOP BECAUSE THAT WOULD REQUIRE A LCO 3.0.3 SHUTDO
. MGMT ELECTED TO PURSUE A CONTROLS FAILURE... SHUTDOWN AYED FOR ABOUT 36 HOURS.
AN USED A METAL B 0 PRY A CI CULATING WATER PUMP`13 kKER w
INTOTS ENERGIZED CB CLE.
(f) rX9 WAGNER TALKED OF 4 POTENTIAL SE ISSUES 3
SALEM GRASSING ISS
- EARLY MARCH 2003 WAS IN ON SO HONE CALLS AND MEETINGS BUT SINCE SALEM - NOT AS MUCH - M EXP ITH HC KEEP1N EACTOR POWER AT PROPER LEVEL WITH SITUATION DETERIORATING I,,
SUPV BY COMMITTEE
LESS EMOTION THAN TURBINE VALVE ISSUE - RIGHT THING WAS DONE -
WAS IT TIMELY DECISION'- "YES" FELT GOOD ABOUT WHERE AND HOW THEY GOT THERE BUT FROM A NLO PERSPECTIVE - WAS PROBABLY A SCWE ISSUE - HE BROUGHT UP FOR y17 REASON a..
GENERAL - DIRECTION THAT OPERABILITY DETERMINATIONS MADE BY TARP -
N
(
I.E. IT HAS TO BE PROVEN INOPERABLE BEFORE AN ACTION CAN BE TAKEN -vs>
'a WHAT EXPERIENCED AT, ER PLANTS THAT IF CAN'T PROVE OPERABLE - IT IS INOPERABLE SALEM GRASSING ISSUE - EARLY MARCH 2003 SOME Sms WANTED MORE CIRCl ATORS (4 INSTEAD OF 3) - O"CONNOR FELT THOSE INDIVIDUALS WE "HOLDING THE PLANT HOSTAGE"???
KEEPING REACTOR POWE AT PROPER LEVEL WITH SITUATION DETERIORATING SUPV BY COMMTTE LESS EMOTION TURBINE VALVE ISSUE - RIGHT THING WAS DONE -
WAS IT TIMELY' ECISION - "YES" FELT GOOD ABOUT WHERE AND HOW THEY GOTM BUT FROM $NLO PERSPECTIVE - WAS PROBABLY A SCWE ISSUE - HE BROUGHT,P FOR THAT REASON t OF #12 NUCLEAR SERVICE WATER PIPE - UNDERGROUND - JUST AS ENTERED BUILDING.. INITIAL OPERABILITY DETERMINATION =
CABLE BYT DEGRAD,
- BY ENGINEERING - WEEKS IN DURATION -
v&4And \\ MS e I*
BUILT HUT FOR NEOs TO OBSfRVE - DID EXCAVATION - DID SHUT DOWN -
BUT TOOK TOO LONG IN §OME EYES - ABLE TO DO TEMP REPAIR WHILE ON LINE -THEN P7rNT FIX DURING SHUTDOWN.
- OCCASIONS WHERE THEY HAD TO DEBATE A POTENTIAL SAFETY ISSUE/EQUIPMENT OPERABILITY OR INOPERABILITY ISSUE FOR 4-61{OURS BEFORE COMING TO A DECISION - COULD BE PERCEIVED TH9YHEY WERE NOT BEING FIRM IN DECISION ON HOW THEY WERE OPE ING THE PLANT
/
T l
- THE ECONOMICS TAKING PRECEDENCE OVER DECISION MAKING REGARDING II i
II I
PLANT OPERATIONS AND OPERATIONS DECISIONS. DID NOT MEAN ECONOMIC PRESSURE TO KEEP PLANT UP. NEWER BEEN IN MEETING THERE WHERE THAT WAS VERBALIZED.
7 ip still positive, but plant mgmt was anged to where production over rode WALDINGER READ PE9PLE THE "RIOT ACT' FOR WAY THEY WROTE NOTIFICATIONS?? -,.SAVE SHAVER NCO CAN HE RAISE/PUSH ISSUE W/O FEARING REPERCUSSION?
FEAR OF BEING H&I FOR RAISING AN ISSUE?
EVER FELT HE COULDN'T RAISE AN ISSUE/CONCERN?
EVER SAW/HEARD/FELT PRODUCTION OVER SAFETY DIRECTIVE?
BELIEVES UNION LEADERSHIP WOULD SAY NOT A BIG CHANGE FOR WORSE IN WORK ENVIRONMENT SINCE 7/02 - CONTRARY TO ALLEGER ASSERTION
- NO PLANT MGR FOR LAST 3 YEARS - LED TO nWHOSE IN CHARGE" MENTALITY
- MANAGEMENT/DECISION BY COMMITTEE LED TO MUCH INPUT BY INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD NO DECISION AUTHORITY OVER ISSUE A/
A' I
i.
Itr iI
'l,-
'A An-z
If the subject offered information regarding other problems with SCWE. briefly identify (such as the CAP, the processing of notifications. handling of routine maintenance)
FEELS HE CAN RAISE/PUSH ISSUE W/O FEARING REP CUSSION NEVER A FEAR OF BEING H&I FOR RAISING AN I SUE NEVER FELT HE COULDN'T RAISE AN ISSUE/CONCERN NO NLOs TOLD HIM THIS EITHER -JUT THEY FEEL FRUSTRATED THAT IN ID SAFETY ISSUES - THEY CAN'TfGET IT FIXED TO THEIR SATISFACTION IN A TIMELY MANNER SEES THIN=S THAT SHOULD BE ID BY NLOs BUT ARE NOT - MAYBE THAT THEY HAY GIVEN UP RAISING ISSUES.
NEVER SAW/HEARD/FELT PRODU TION OVER SAFETY DIRECTIVE HE WOULD NEVER LEAVE WHV HE FELT TO BE A TRUE SAFETY ISSUE - I.E TURBINE VALVE ISSUE /
NEVER SAW/HEARD NEWA K MGMT DIRECT OR SUPERVISE A DECISION AT PLANT REGARDING SAFETjYSTART UP/SHUT DOWN BELIEVES UNION LEADERSHIP WOULD SAY NOT A BIG CHANGE FOR WORSE IN WORK ENVIRONMENT SINCE 7/02 - CONTRARY TO ALLEGER ASSERTION
/
NO PLANT MGR FOR LAST 3 YEARS - LED TO "WHOSE IN CHARGE" MENTALITY -
MANAGEMENT/DECISION BY COMMITTEE LED TO MUCH INPUT BY INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD NO DECISION AUTHORITY OVER ISSUE
HUB'S NEW AREAS TO EXPLORE
- DEREGULATION -
- AWARENESS OF DEREGULATION ENVIRONMENT
- CHANGES IF ANY SEEN IN THE DEREGULATED ENVIRONMENT
-HOW THIS HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED TO YOU BY UPPER MANAGEMENT
- WAS THERE AN APPROPRIATE BALANCE BETWEEN SAFETY AND PLANT OPERATIONS IN DEREGULATED ENVIRONMENT 7Q