ML061980111

Notes #2 Tran Index

ML061980111
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	07/07/2006
From:	NRC/OI
To:
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML061980111 (3)

Text

iUerey i**. . "-Page 1

1. 2TRAN INDEX PAGE 5- TARP report of 2/25/03 operability issue regarding hope creek "B" diesel exhaust fumes.

11 Hope Creek bypass valve issue 3/03 - talks of tech issue (a trouble shooting procedure tech staff usesto ID otentials causes of a problem) dated 3/13/03 where turbine bypass valve is stuck at38%. "ays that valve closure problem was first ID at 2154 hours0.0249 days <br />0.598 hours <br />0.00356 weeks <br />8.19597e-4 months <br /> on 3/14 - go to tech issue fact sheet. Plant was not shut down until 1824 hours0.0211 days <br />0.507 hours <br />0.00302 weeks <br />6.94032e-4 months <br /> on 3/16/03. His recollection that

,meeting took place on afternoon of 3/15 (Saturday). Says plant was within 6 or 7%

of having rolshut down - says by Saturday he and others felt there was com e ling evidence that they needed to shut down the reactor' *lloes nnot recal fi olUng thru and discussing the tech issue/causes on the tech isgues document in a systematic m-ianner during meeting. Says plant was not at point then that they were required by regs or admin procedures to shutdown. Says decision had been made Saturday night to shutdown - scheduled just in time

.a.in* operators on how thatwas going to be done with the valve stuck. Latersat. evening

• led a conference call after exploring all other avenues/causes and the M was in agreement with shutdown. Planned Outage Report from "B" Recirc pump sea-MF--v-replacement dated 4/25/03 attributes "management team failed to determine who was responsible to make final decision on some issues and achieve alignment on the decision. "

22 - reactivity event root cause report # 70030270 - says the transient was not brought to the attention/communicated to sr. mgmt until 2 days following the transient and not communicated to th jtil the next day - and priority and significance was raised did right thing in doing that. He does not recall the basis for why the operators did not inform eir management of this event - MAYBE NRC STAFF NEEDS TO REVIEW THE INCIDENT TO DETERMINE IF THERE VIOLATIONS OF REGS??? SAY ASTH THAT NIGHT = LEAD O" 36 - ON SALEM SHUTDOWN CS ISSUE - DOES NOT RECALL CONCERNS OF GOING FROM GREEN TO WHITE IF PLANT NOT TURNED BACK ON WITHIN A PERIOD OF TIME.

37 - Salem SJ Valves - no first hand or relevant info 40 - Salem 10/03 BF-19 Valve issue - says took just a shift to make decision on what to do 44 jstearn valve issue - no specific info I lu .. .. . .. , ,, rd was deieted in accorda;,c* 4;th the Freedom of 'nformation Act, exemptions '; r.

MIA- 5 _9" y -

Jettrey I eator i- .- -__*_... P-__-

46 - water coming out of ground on intake pipe issue -

54 - since new management group took over.

8/2000 lightening strike which effected Hope Creek Lheld meeting to discuss the event and used words "You don't get it." In essenc told licensed operators that they didn't have the authority to raise power - that was management's responsibility.

Corrective action from event was the TARP process. Not long after it was instituted -

the Effect of the TARP process was disempowerment of the operators -who never felt good about that and who never came to terms with it. Says this.undercurrent was present in some of contentiousmeeting over years - like thet

• urbine bypass valve -

meeting. Lead to the.VPhaving to make the decisiohns'. The ud-nidercurrent dawned in 8/00 and evolved into the turbine bypass valve type issues. Cites how they dealt with BF-19 issue 9which he felt was good) as a difference from how they used to deal with issues i.e.

turbine bypass valve issue.

More on TARP - going from I fire to another - not a well performing site - and because going from 1 fire to another - 'you can never ground the site on the programs and processes needed to move forward in a systematic and controlled fashion... .""and the disempowerment or disengagement tends to feed on itself at that point." "so I will just wait for theýVP to make the 7r decision on the shutdown." Another problem /cause - didn't have plant mangers hen either=

difference between then and current - Also cites lack of system engineering role then contributed

- and now that role/group has been reinstituted. Calls TARP process a "Band-Aid" for not having whose accountable for plant or whose accountable for maintenance or ops... "... if you have somebody who is accountable and they DO GET IT" = PRIMARY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEN AND TODAY UNDER NEW LEADERSHIP. Not perfect - still have a long way to go - but are on the right track.

66 - cannot point to an example of corporate managemenvlro . . . -- .

putting undue business pressures on the plant. Cannot say why he mentioned*2orpate'! in his

[taped] conversation by HARVIN. Post INPO 3 meeting with sr mgmt a aid to ,

group he wanted good operating facility at sale/hope creek - did not take i -at alletha was directing peak capacity eve thou plant may not be able to support that.

got that impression thaU as placing undue pressure on site to eeep p1nrunning. If there is a physical challenge to the piant - corporate will give you what you need - but "then hit what you say you are going to hit."

74- nvolvement in Hurricane Isabel electrical arcing in switchyard issue was not inapprqoriate - says how this was handled is example of good vs. bad - in how old v.s. new functions. ad earlier said - the unit is going to have a strong likelihood of tripping /C.

that night - there were ollow u di cussions on who was resp for cost of clean-up plant or corporate but that nigh akes decision to shut down - CONFLICT WITH OTHER TESTIMONY OBTAINED BY 01 -

/

m am IUcltul 1V11Lj Pagie 2 82 - changes since new mgmt on board - thinks it is getting progressively better e.g. Now have plant managers, moving away from TARP process, having accountability, ability to make decisions at right level of mgmt., system engineering reconstituted, and engineers aren't being drawn in to fire drills like they used too starting Asee some benefits in this new thought process in PM and corrective action programs, new mind set = ownership of plants - but plant and equipment still not running as well as want -.and have much work to do.

a -no expereice w *,ilmilar to taht withl-bine ypass valVe meeting. SayiSl einning to uderstan is role' in new mgmt team and style) ,"

really hands offbut holds you accountable in a positive way - he has empoNWaered I pagers and shift managersto make decisions as opposed to "you don't get it" .. ..

- says mgmt style is "very refreshing" General feeling -WORK ENVIRONMENT HAS IMPROVED SINCE NEW MGMT TEAM HAS COME ON BOARD - FOR REASONS DISCUSSED IN INTERVIEW - I.E. PEOPLE BEING EMPOWERED, BRINGING SYSTEMS ENG. BACK, NAMING PLANT MANAGERS HIS PERSPECTIVE IS THAT SR. MGMT HAVIN D C INPUT INTO PLANT OPERATING DDECISION BEGAN WITH 8/200- 0JA ETrNG -' _

SAYS TARP PROCEDURE NOW USED SPARINGLY - WAS SCALED BACK BY PROCEDURE.