ML101170393
| ML101170393 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Watts Bar  |
| Issue date: | 04/27/2010 |
| From: | Banerjee M Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| Banerjee M ACRS 415-6973 | |
| References | |
| NRC-096 | |
| Download: ML101170393 (148) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Plant Operations and Fire Protection Subcommittee Meeting Docket Number:
(n/a)
Location:
Rockville, Maryland Date:
Wednesday, March 3, 2010 Work Order No.:
NRC-096 Pages 1-108 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
DISCLAIMER UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS The contents of this transcript of the proceeding of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, as reported herein, is a record of the discussions recorded at the meeting.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, and edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 4
(ACRS) 5
+ + + + +
6 SUBCOMMITTEE ON PLANT OPERATIONS AND FIRE PROTECTION 7
+ + + + +
8 SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING REGARDING WATTS BAR NUCLEAR 9
PLANT UNIT 2 10 STATUS OF LICENSING AND INSPECTION 11 DOCKET NO. 50-391 12
+ + + + +
13 WEDNESDAY, 14 MARCH 3, 2010 15
+ + + + +
16 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 17
+ + + + +
18 The Subcommittee met at the Nuclear 19 Regulatory Commission, Two White Flint North, Room 20 T2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, at 3:11 p.m., Harold B.
21 Ray, Subcommittee Chairman, presiding.
22 23 24 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 2
ACRS MEMBERS HAROLD B. RAY, Subcommittee Chairman 2
1 SAID ABDEL-KHALIK, ACRS Chairman 3
J. SAM ARMIJO, ACRS Vice Chairman 4
JOHN W. STETKAR, ACRS Member-at-Large 5
SANJOY BANERJEE, Member 6
MARIO V. BONACA, Member 7
WILLIAM B. SHACK, Member 8
JOHN D. SIEBER, Member 9
10 ACRS STAFF PRESENT:
11 MAITRI BANERJEE, Designated Federal Official 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 3
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
Opening Statement, HAROLD RAY (ACRS) 4 4
Page No.
3
- 1. TVA Licensing and Construction Activities 9
5
Background
6 Separation between Unit 1 and 2 7
Construction Quality 8
- 2. NRC WRAG & NRR Licensing Activities 65 9
- 3. Region II Construction Inspection Activities 77 10
- 13. Public Comments & Subcommittee Deliberations 104 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 4
1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2
3:11 p.m.
3 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I'm Harold 4
Ray, Chairman of the ACRS Plant Operations and Fire 5
Protection Subcommittee, for operating license review 6
of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2.
7 Other ACRS members in attendance are Jack 8
Sieber, who will be joining us very shortly, Mario 9
Bonaca, Charlie Brown, Sam Armijo, and Said Abdel-10 Khalik.
11 ACRS CHAIRMAN ABDEL-KHALIK: Sanjoy just 12 arrived.
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Sanjoy 14 Banerjee is with us as well. I'm grateful for his 15 joint participation, although that accounts for the 16 slight delay in our getting started with this 17 Subcommittee.
18 Ms. Maitri Banerjee is the Designated 19 Federal Official for this meeting.
20 The Subcommittee held a public meeting 21 with the TVA on July 28th last year, followed by a 22 plant tour the same day. We also had a meeting here 23 in this room in the preceding March.
24 We were briefed about the TVA activities 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 5
related to licensing, construction and restart of 1
Watts Bar Unit 2, and received comments and questions 2
from the public.
3 After that meeting, the members visited 4
the NRC Region II offices on July 30th, and were 5
briefed about the NRC inspection activities related 6
to Watts Bar Unit 2 construction, material condition, 7
and the controls TVA had implemented to ensure 8
quality construction.
9 The purpose of today's meeting is to get 10 an update from TVA and the NRC staff regarding issues 11 related to the design licensing and construction 12 activities since their July meetings. The objective 13 of this meeting is to gather information, analyze 14 relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed 15 positions and future actions as appropriate for 16 deliberation by the Full Committee.
17 This briefing is open to the public, the 18 rules for participation in today's meeting were 19 announced as part of the notice of this meeting 20 published in the Federal Register We have a telephone bridge line open, and 23 we have members of the public on the telephone line, 24 as we understand it.
25 on February 22, 21 2010.
22
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 6
To minimize disturbance, the line will be 1
kept muted from this end, that is to say, they can 2
listen only until the last ten minutes of this 3
meeting, to provide an opportunity to the members of 4
the public then joining us through the bridge line 5
who would like to make a statement or provide 6
comments.
7 A transcript of the meeting is being 8
kept, and I request the participants of this meeting 9
to use the microphones located in the meeting room 10 when addressing the Subcommittee, and participants 11 should first identify themselves and speak with 12 sufficient clarity and volume so that they may be 13 readily heard.
14 We'll now proceed with the meeting, and 15 this indicates I should call on Masoud Bajestani of 16 TVA, but I perceive we are going to begin with the 17 staff presentation, is that correct?
18 MR. MILANO: No, sir.
19 My name is Pat Milano, I'm the Senior 20 Project Manager responsible for the Watts Bar 2 21 licensing.
22 I was just going to -- just in case you 23 didn't kick it off right with regard to the agenda, I 24 was just going to say that TVA is going to present 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 7
first, followed by the staff, and then our Region II, 1
and again, Vice President for New Nuclear Generation, 2
Mr. Bajestani, is going to make the presentation for 3
TVA.
4 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay, and 5
before you begin, let me say there are two things, 6
and this is a very short meeting, and I can't account 7
for that, other than that I'm here as scheduled.
8 So, I'm going to be moving things along, 9
otherwise who knows how long we would be here.
10 One thing has come up that we are asking 11 everybody, for at least a while, to address, it came 12 up in a completely different context, but I note that 13 it seems to fit here in reviewing our past meeting 14 agendas, and minutes, and so on, and that is, how 15 issues that arise, or have arisen under Part 21, 16 might be addressed in the context of Unit 2. Because 17 of the Unit 1 ongoing operation, my guess is that 18 there's an active Part 21 program that TVA has, and 19 they are well aware of all the items that are 20 identified as part of that program, and you'll tell 21 us how that's considered in the context of Unit 2.
22 The other thing I would say is, we did, 23 as I review our notes, I'm reminded that we did 24 indicate that schedule was a concern, not a concern 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 8
in terms of your meeting schedule, but it was a 1
concern in terms of what effects meeting the schedule 2
might have on the things that do concern us.
3 I notice that in both the staff and the 4
TVA presentations there's material having to do with 5
schedule. We are interested maybe in the -- as I 6
say, the converse effect of schedule, not are you 7
meeting schedule, but what are the attempts to meet 8
schedule having -- what effects might they be having 9
on the things that do concern us.
10 And so, when you address yourself to 11 that, be mindful that, you know, that the issue in 12 our mind is the effort to adhere to and meet schedule 13 having any negative consequences on the quality of 14 the work, the start-up testing, and all the other 15 things that you have to do.
16 Unless the presentations change from what 17 I've seen before, we'll be told you are going to meet 18 schedule, and that always worries me because of the 19 fact that it's very hard to make a schedule in 20 advance of something as complex as this, that you 21 absolutely, positively are going to meet without 22 question.
23 And so, with those two things, Masoud, 24 would you want to begin then?
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 9
MR. BAJESTANI: Sure.
1 Again, my name is Masoud Bajestani. I'm 2
the VP of Watts Bar Unit 2.
3 Gordon, introduction?
4 MR. ARENT: Gordon Arent, I'm the 5
Licensing Manager for Watts Bar Unit 2.
6 MR. KOONTZ: And, I'm Frank Koontz, a 7
Specialist in Engineering for Unit 2.
8 MR. BAJESTANI: Again, I appreciate the 9
opportunity to update you on Watts Bar Unit 2, the 10 status of the project, and where we are in the 11 completion. And, I'm going to address the two 12 questions that you brought up.
13 Let me address, if you want me to go 14 ahead and do that now I can do that.
15 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: It's entirely 16 up to you.
17 MR. BAJESTANI: Okay. Under Part 21, we 18 look at any Part 21 that is applicable to Watts Bar 19 Unit 2, and we either process that through the 20 corrective action or operating experience that comes 21 to us.
22 As a matter of fact, just to give you an 23 example, it was like two weeks ago we got specific 24 Part 21 *** 3:20:17 ***, so we got the data, came 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 10 into us, we sent it to our Procurement to evaluate 1
applicability to Watts Bar, and the material that we 2
are purchasing as we go through completion of Watts 3
Bar Unit 2, we will note this issue that was 4
identified in Part 21 through *** 3:12:03 *** is 5
applicable to Watts Bar Unit 2. So, every Part 21 6
that comes in, we look at it and see whether or not 7
it's applicable. If it is applicable, obviously, we 8
take appropriate action.
9 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: How do you 10 address the Part 21 issues that may have arisen 11 during the period prior?
12 As I said, before I speculated, well, you 13 are probably tell me that you had an active program, 14 and those things are considered as well.
15 MR. BAJESTANI: What we had pointed to 16 the Watts Bar project, Watts Bar Unit 2 project, We 17 had to go look at all historical data, which Part 21 18 also includes one of those items that we look at.
19 Actually, there are over 30,000 items that we looked, 20 specifically, at historical data from back in the 21 construction days, and once Bar Unit 1 came on line, 22 and anything after Watts Bar Unit 1 came on line, and 23 looked at every one of those items, and again, 24 applicability and what do we need to do for Watts Bar 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 11 Unit 2.
1 So, every one of those items historical 2
is picked up part of the historical data.
3 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Thank you.
4 MR. BAJESTANI: Okay, and I'm going to 5
cover the schedule a little bit later in the 6
presentation, if you don't mind.
7 Real quick again, I'm going to provide 8
you a brief status of where we are on project 9
completion. On page two, we are going to talk a 10 little bit about the integrated schedule, 11 procurement, engineering, construction, 12 refurbishment. Gordon is going to talk about 13 licensing, and Frank is going to talk about where we 14 are on the IPE and IPEEE, and then I'll come back and 15 talk about again on the Unit 1 and 2 integration and 16 where we are on that.
17 If you turn to the next page, this is, 18 essentially, our construction completion status 19 schedule. Anything that doesn't have a date, and you 20 can see that by triangle, that's complete. Anything 21 that's got a date, those are the ones that's not 22 complete.
23 Again, I'm not going to go through a lot 24 of detail here, but again, the Board approved the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 12 project August of 2007. We had the construction 1
reactivation letter, regulatory framework. We 2
developed a lead 0 schedule for the project, and we 3
started the construction in June of 2008, and we are 4
expecting to complete major engineering by end of 5
this month, actually.
6 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Could you 7
move ahead to Slide 5 on that point.
8 MR. BAJESTANI: Certainly.
9 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Could you 10 reconcile what you just said with these numbers here?
11 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes. What I mean by 12 completing the engineering -- major engineering 13 complete by end of March, is all the design output 14 document, which is what we call EDCRs and DCNs.
15 These are the stuff, essentially, the design output 16 document that's issued, it goes into construction, 17 and construction goes to modify the field of data 18 construction.
19 We are still going to have a lot of 20 engineering staff that's going to be remaining to do 21 remaining programs, calculations, and a lot of -- we 22 have -- when we issued some of this DCR, EDCR design 23 output document we had we called a lot of unverified 24 assumptions. It, specifically, says that I have to 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 13 come back on these specific calculations, or on this 1
specific program, remove this unverified assumption.
2 So, we have a lot of work still left after we issue 3
all the major engineering design output documents.
4 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Well, that's, 5
I guess, an application of what I should understand 6
major engineering complete to mean, in other words, 7
the reconciliation is that what's on page five here 8
is largely other stuff.
9 But, gee whiz, these numbers are so out 10 of line with what I would think of as major 11 engineering complete this month, that it was shocking 12 to me.
13 MR. BAJESTANI: I understand.
14 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Is this my 15 definitional problem, is that it?
16 MR. BAJESTANI: You know, from the 17 construction perspective, construction looks at it, 18 what they need to have from engineering to be able to 19 do work.
20 And, really, when we say we are looking 21 at completing major engineering, it's what 22 construction needs to complete their work.
23 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I'm trying to 24 get this straight.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 14 MR. BAJESTANI: Okay.
1 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: If you've got 2
unverified or unconfirmed assumptions and/or 3
calculations, how can you release drawings for 4
construction, which may have those unverified 5
assumptions involved?
6 MR. BAJESTANI: Okay, let me give you an 7
example.
8 Engineering issued a design output 9
document to be replace a bunch of tables. Okay?
10 Construction takes the design output document, this 11 goes from point A to point B. After completion of 12 this job, what we have is what we call *** 3:24 ***,
13 it basically says what the length of the cable is for 14 the calculation.
15 You have to take this information back 16 after the work is complete, you already have some 17 idea what it's going to be, obviously, but the actual 18 field data --
19 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: You are 20 looking for as-built field data --
21 MR. BAJESTANI: As built.
22 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: -- to go back 23 and compare with the initial analysis type 24 calculation.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 15 MR. BAJESTANI: Exactly.
1 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Do all of 2
these fall in that category?
3 MR. BAJESTANI: A lot of them they fall 4
under that category, that we have to go back.
5 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: So, it's 6
taking as built results and going back and comparing 7
them with assumptions.
8 MR. BAJESTANI: Exactly.
9 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Does that 10 deal with mechanical stuff, or stress type stuff?
11 MR. BAJESTANI: It deals with mechanical, 12 as well as electrical.
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: And, you'll 14 be staffed to handle that --
15 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes.
16 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: -- with the 17 same rigor that you had when you developed the main 18 set of drawings.
19 MEMBER SIEBER: I assume things like 20 piping analysis, seismic supports, and all that, are 21 done as construction progresses.
22 MR. BAJESTANI: That's correct. Let me 23 just -- I wanted to -- I think I tried to explain it.
24 MEMBER BROWN: Well, I wanted to, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 16 relative to -- I'm not sure this is related, I think 1
this is related to what you just said, I'm not sure, 2
I'm trying to relate to the mechanical stuff.
3 Pipes go in, hangers are supposed to be 4
put in certain places, they are rarely ever where you 5
think they might be. So, you, actually, have to lay 6
out, even on the mechanical side, on all the major 7
piping, the high stress piping, and, particularly, if 8
they are off then you have to redo that calculation 9
as well to determine if you still meet all the 10 requirements.
11 So, all right, I was just trying to get 12 my handle around this.
13 MEMBER SIEBER: That's usually fit in the 14 field kind of work, where the engineers actually do 15 the job.
16 MEMBER BROWN: This is not non-deviation 17 type stuff, from what I remember. You don't always 18 get to the place where somebody said they were going 19 to -- they were supposed to be, for whatever reasons, 20 and I think that's what you were driving at.
21 MEMBER SIEBER: Right.
22 MEMBER BROWN: Okay. All right, thank 23 you.
24 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I hear the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 17 explanation. I have no reason not to accept it, it's 1
just getting my mind around it is a little difficult, 2
because if you had said major design work complete, 3
or something like that, maybe I'd have understood 4
better, but to me to say major engineering work 5
complete, it's hard then to reconcile what you said 6
with this slide five, other than you've provided it, 7
a reconciliation, and I guess we better move on.
8 MEMBER BROWN: No, I had one other 9
question.
10 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Sure.
11 MEMBER BROWN: If you don't mind.
12 Some of this stuff will have more 13 priority than others, because if you build and 14 construct you lose access for corrective actions.
15 Do you call try to assign to reevaluate 16 these various field as built type stuff to see which 17 ones you've got to do first, is that thought process 18 involved?
19 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes.
20 MEMBER BROWN: The only reason ask is 21 that I worked on -- we had that problem one time, 22 we'd go back and look and they had already covered it 23 up, so it cost a lot of money to fix it.
24 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes, we look at every one 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 18 of them. If there are issues that --
1 MEMBER BROWN: You are going to say yes, 2
we'll go on. Harold, we've got a tight schedule.
3 MR. BAJESTANI: We'll go back to the 4
schedule.
5 I'm not going to mention major 6
engineering complete, I'm going to say some other 7
work, because I have to think about it.
8 We have submitted FSAR amendment for an 9
operating license. Some of our major upcoming 10 months, the next one is actually turbine or turning 11 gear, which is coming up October of this year, Unit 12 2, Integrated Safeguards test, we are going to do 13 this test during the next refueling outage, because 14 this test, actually, can be done only when Unit 1 is 15 shut down.
16 We are also going to do next thing is 17 primary hydro, then we are going to fill the ice 18 condenser with ice, and do the hot functional test, 19 and then ready for fuel load.
20 Any questions? Okay.
21 Next page, page four, 22 Under procurement side, this was also 23 something that we discussed last time, just real 24 quick, Bechtel oversight of procurement and supplier 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 19 quality. Obviously, because of some of the issues 1
that we have had in industry, specifically, on 2
fraudulent material, and counterfeit, we have 3
actually trained our QC inspectors, we have put those 4
requirements, what to look for in our process and 5
procedures.
6 And, what we have done, actually, we have 7
done over 281 visits to date, with 168 report issues, 8
and this is for different vendors that we are buying 9
the materials.
10 And, we have, actually, identified issues 11 during some of this short surveillance that we 12 brought it to the vendors' attention, and got it 13 fixed.
14 Also, the ASME QA program audit for the 15 new suppliers, again, Bechtel has done an audit.
16 And then, on top of what Bechtel is 17 doing, TVA, we have our own TVA oversight of the 18 Bechtel QA performance, and again, we, actually, 19 participate in some of the shop surveillance. We, 20 actually, go to -- TVA, actually, watched some of the 21 factory acceptance tests. We look at -- we have done 22 actual independent review of some of the receipt 23 inspections, and also audit of the ASME procurement 24 and material storage.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 20 And, we do find issues, and we fix them 1
as we go.
2 Next page, engineering. Some of the 3
stuff that we look at right at the beginning, 4
whatever we do to make sure that we maintain the 5
design margin, and if there are opportunities that we 6
can, actually, gain margin, we've been doing that.
7 Specifically, we are replacing all eight ERCW pumps, 8
these are the essential clean water measures, we've 9
got cooling water, essentially.
10 Overall, 60 percent complete, design 11 modification 64, calculations 72 percent. The CAPS 12 and special programs, which are 29 programs, over 60 13 percent complete. And, the data, as far as quality 14 of the records, is all retrievable and legible, and 15 we haven't had really any issues from the 16 construction days, nothing major.
17 Quality of the engineering, so far again, 18 what we do, we, actually, monitor the number of 19 engineering errors, number of field changes that are 20 caused by construction, because they can't implement 21 it, so we monitor all this information, and we look 22 at the trend, and feed that back into the designer to 23 make sure that we don't make the same mistakes, you 24 know, over and over.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 21 Overall again, the quality of engineering 1
has been pretty good.
2 I put a few charts over here to show you 3
where we are on some of the major engineering output 4
document. This is, actually, some of the engineering 5
output documents that we issue, and you can see 6
pretty much we are staying with the schedule.
7 MEMBER BONACA: What are the yearly --
8 number of EDCRs.
9 MR. BAJESTANI: Number of EDCRs, packages 10 that's issued from engineering.
11 MEMBER BONACA: Is that per week?
12 MR. BAJESTANI: That's, actually, per 13 week, per week issue number. On the left is per 14 week, and the right would be cumulative.
15 MEMBER BONACA: Cumulative, okay, good.
16 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: So, some time 17 this month you are going to achieve a level of 18 production considerably higher than you've achieved 19 so far.
20 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes, and let me also 21 explain to you why we end up, actually, going to see 22 other engineering firms, so besides our main 23 engineering, which is Bechtel, we have gone, 24 actually, to three other major engineering, and they 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 22 are doing, actually, packages for us. So, we have 1
got quite a few people to be able to accomplish what 2
we are saying here. So, this is not just Bechtel to 3
perform engineering output documents.
4 Construction, next page, overall a little 5
bit over 23 percent complete, focusing on the 6
refurbishment and bulk work. Quality of 7
construction, just give you some data, data points 8
under a number of welds that we have made so far, the 9
weld reject rate has been less than 1/2 a percent.
10 So, it's been pretty good.
11 Under critical path, safety injection 12 system, chemical and volume control system, plant 13 computer, and component cooling system, every one of 14 these systems, essentially, is tied to material right 15 now. Like for safety injection, chemical and volume 16 control system, and component cooling system, they 17 are all tied to ASME Section 3 valves that we are 18 purchasing, and they go along with material.
19 MEMBER BANERJEE: Where are those valves 20 coming from?
21 MR. BAJESTANI: They are coming from the 22 different vendors, but it's very limited, you know.
23 some of them are coming from Flow Serve, we've got 24 some *** 3:33 ***, we've got a few other companies, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 23 but they are a very limited number of suppliers.
1 MEMBER BANERJEE: I was at a meeting 2
yesterday where this was discussed by a couple of 3
Senators. It was interesting to hear that.
4 MR. BAJESTANI: Some of the ASME Section 5
3 valves, their lead time -- when we put the pressure 6
-- from the time we put the pressures over there it's 7
sometimes 52 weeks, actually.
8 We are on track to complete the 9
construction activities, and ready to go to fuel by 10 April of 2012.
11 Next page will give you some idea about 12 some of the bulk work, like the hangers. These are 13 the 7902, 7914, this is after a number of the stress 14 analysis that we have done, and the walk down that we 15 have done, we came up with a number of modifications.
16 So, this is -- again, this is changing as we do more 17 analysis, but this is a forecast, actually, what we 18 have to do to get all the support modifications 19 complete.
20 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Well, a 21 forecast of what you have to do, I understand.
22 MR. BAJESTANI: What we have to do.
23 I guess this is probably time to address 24 your second question under schedule, and, you know, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 24 when we developed -- when we went through the ***
1 3:35 *** to identify the scope, and really the 2
schedule and budget for this project, we spent a lot 3
of time up front, and we had close to 100 engineers 4
that looked at the material, looked at all the 5
calculations that we need to do, the work that we 6
need to do.
7 We set aside a lot of contingencies, 8
essentially, for breakage, for -- to make sure, 9
bottom line, that we have for breakage, really, we 10 didn't put -- let's put it this way, I'm just going 11 to tell you that the 60-month schedule that we put in 12 is not an idealistic schedule. There are a lot of 13 times that we put in for breakage issues that comes 14 in that we need to deal with.
15 So, besides, you know, the fact that we 16 have oversight on oversight, okay, we stressed to 17 everybody about the quality. Everybody understands 18 that quality comes first. Everybody understands that 19 at the same time we have to have a schedule. Okay.
20 So, the schedule is there, everybody 21 knows what the schedule is, everybody knows what the 22 quality is, and the thing is, everything that we do 23 on safety related we have a QC inspection that we 24 have to do. We have a quality assurance survey, we 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 25 come back after the work is done, we sample some of 1
the work to see if even if after the work has been 2
completed to see if we still need other design specs, 3
the vendor specs, the construction specs, and then 4
the next thing is, obviously, all the testing that we 5
are going to do to prove what we have, actually, 6
installed meets the design output document with 7
respects to flows, pressure, temperature and so on 8
and so forth.
9 So, from the schedule side, and looking 10 at the quality, we are not really seeing anything 11 that's negative that tells us that the schedule is 12 the main driver, and we are getting some poor quality 13 items.
14 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: You've got 13 15 months til the integrated safeguards testing.
16 MR. BAJESTANI: Right.
17 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: How much flow 18 is there in the critical path to that date?
19 MR. BAJESTANI: Right now, the schedule 20 that we have, actually, that we review on a daily 21 basis, shows November of 2011. Again, we are not 22 looking at -- this is the present schedule, this is 23 not the 60-month schedule that we've been talking 24 about.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 26 Today, if you look at where we are, and 1
how much flow we have with respect to the schedule of 2
April of 2012 for loading fuel, the schedule shows us 3
right now that we are in November time frame, 2011, 4
loading fuel.
5 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Let me ask 6
you about integrated safeguards testing, I'm trying 7
to follow what you are saying.
8 You are saying you can't associate any 9
float in the schedule with the critical path between 10 now and the safeguards testing. It's at the end of 11 the schedule, basically.
12 MR. BAJESTANI: Right.
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: So, if that 14 date slips, you've got a problem with Unit 1, because 15 Unit 1 has got to be in an outage condition.
16 MR. BAJESTANI: That's correct.
17 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: And, do you 18 have any float in that?
19 MR. BAJESTANI: Okay, there are things 20 that we have to do during next refueling outage.
21 Okay?
22 Integrated safeguards is one.
23 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Right.
24 MR. BAJESTANI: Then we have some flow 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 27 balancing that we have to do during that time, again, 1
to require shutdown condition.
2 So, if we can't get this integrated 3
safeguards test done during this refueling outage, 4
it's going to push the schedule.
5 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Well, I 6
understand, and it's really not pertinent to the 7
things we need to be concerned about, other than as 8
this issue that you are discussing might affect 9
things that we are concerned about. That's what I'm 10 saying.
11 So, as a way of trying to get at that, 12 I'm just trying to find out, recognizing that Unit 2 13 and Unit 1 have a tie at that point in time, do you 14 have any float to that point in time, on the critical 15 path?
16 It's okay if the answer is no. I just --
17 MR. BAJESTANI: Well, I really can't tell 18 you that -- the reason I'm saying that is, I haven't 19 looked at it with respect to, really, there are a lot 20 of systems that we have to get complete before, you 21 know, we get, obviously, to that integrated 22 safeguards test.
23 And, right now, when I look at the 24 schedule, it shows that it meets -- but I can't tell 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 28 you exactly here's the float time.
1 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay. It's 2
that date that I would be more concerned about than 3
fuel load.
4 The issue is, when you've got something 5
else going on next door, that says I've got to be 6
ready to do this at this point in time, what's my 7
chances of being ready? That's all I'm asking.
8 And, I don't mean to belabor it. Let's 9
just go on. I'm just trying to illustrate the point 10 that I'm -- where I'm coming from.
11 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes, we understand that, 12 and we understand that, you know, we don't make some 13 of this dates, it is going to push and, obviously, we 14 are not going to push the refueling outage, because 15 we are going to have to go through the refueling 16 outage, it is going to be -- we are going to have to 17 find another window, essentially, to do this.
18 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Yes, either 19 that or delay the -- you know, back off Unit 1 until 20 you can delay the refueling date. Whatever you have 21 to do, that's your business.
22 But, it does seem, from where I'm 23 sitting, that that's the date that you are most 24 working against right now, and the question is, how 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 29 much is that affecting how you get things done.
1 I would surmise quite a good deal.
2 MS. BANERJEE: Harold, if I may say 3
something.
4 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Sure.
5 MS. BANERJEE: We can take this as an 6
open item, or anything else that you want us to 7
follow up on, and work with the staff and the 8
applicant.
9 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Well thanks.
10 I don't think I want to make an open item out of the 11 schedule. That's really not our business. It's only 12 a matter that, you raise the issue of schedule, it, 13 naturally, then causes us to think about what effects 14 are the schedule having on the things that we are 15 reasonably concerned about. It's not meeting 16 schedule, that's your business, not ours.
17 MR. BAJESTANI: And again, we have other 18 options that we have to sit down internally to 19 discuss, whether or not we want to extend the 20 refueling outage. I mean, there is a whole bunch of 21 other options that we can sit down and look at.
22 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I understand.
23 MR. BAJESTANI: You know.
24 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I understand.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 30 I don't expect you to say that there's a problem 1
here. I'm just trying to use your own communication 2
to us as a way of asking the question, how seriously 3
is the schedule pressure affecting what else you have 4
to do, and it looks like it's a pretty significant 5
factor, just viewed from my far distant position 6
here.
7 So, why don't you go ahead.
8 MR. BAJESTANI: Okay.
9 MEMBER SIEBER: Well, let me just add one 10 thing.
11 Schedule pressure always is pressure on 12 the quality of work. For example, if you are rushing 13 to finish a lot of engineering jobs, what you end up 14 with is a pile of what we call ECNs, engineering 15 change notices, which is corrections of mistakes, and 16 so forth.
17 And, I think that' where the attention 18 needs to be paid, is keeping the engineering so that 19 the engineering quality is assured, and that quality 20 assurance, and quality control of the construction 21 project is appropriate for the safety level that you 22 are trying to achieve.
23 And, another way to look at it is the 24 accident, industrial accident rate of the craft 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 31 workers. You know, you want to -- you want to look 1
at all these indicators to determine, are you getting 2
the most out of your workforce for the goals that you 3
are trying to achieve, and when you are all done do 4
you end up with a quality project.
5 MR. BAJESTANI: Right, and that's really, 6
again, I keep going back to some of the quality of 7
the construction, and quality of the engineering, you 8
know, just looking at the weld rejects, we are 9
looking at industrial safety, how we are doing that, 10 we've got a whole bunch of different indicators that 11 are really telling us that the schedule pressure is 12 not really causing, the schedule itself is not 13 causing adverse impact.
14 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: That's good.
15 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay.
16 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: It's 17 something we want you to be aware that we are 18 interested in. If this unit was there all by itself, 19 you'd do the integrated test when you got ready to do 20 it, but you've got another unit that you've got to do 21 it when it's ready to do it, and that's a constraint 22 on what you've got to do for the reasons that Jack 23 said and so on, it introduces another factor into 24 what happens.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 32 So, with that all having been said, I 1
think we better proceed.
2 MR. BAJESTANI: Next page talks about the 3
refurbishment program. Essentially, the program is 4
broken out into two separate procedures. One is in 5
the active, and the other one is on the passive 6
components.
7 On the active -- on the passive 8
components, which we have a process procedure that 9
specifically tells you, basically, what to look for.
10 Here is the form, after you've done all this you 11 look at any -- anything, basically, that tells you 12 whether or not you have any type of degradation, and 13 how we can -- how to mitigate it, and the bottom 14 line, at the end it comes in and you have evaluated 15 the system, and the system meets the design basis 16 requirements.
17 On the active components, again, we are 18 replacing a lot of active components that we cited, 19 just based on the business case, and some of them, 20 actually, that we just can't get the parts, we 21 decided to go ahead and replace some items and 22 refurbish them. There are, what, 1,700 to 2,000 23 items that we decided just to replace, and another 24 4,000 items that we, actually, are refurbishing, and 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 33 that's, basically bringing them back to the vendor 1
specifications, you know, replacing soft part 2
materials, and replacing packing, replacing whatever 3
it needed -- whatever material that has certain 4
requirements as far as aging and susceptible to 5
aging, we go ahead and change out to bring it up to 6
the vendor spec.
7 Gordon, on the license?
8 MR. ARENT: Again, I'm Gordon Arent, I'm 9
the Licensing Manager for Watts Bar 2.
10 We've completed the final safety analysis 11 report and the technical specifications for Watts Bar 12 Unit 2, with the exception of one subchapter, which 13 is 2.4 on hydrology.
14 Hydrology has been being reevaluated by 15 TVA for probable maximum flood.
16 You may have heard that at some of the 17 other subcommittee meetings for Bellefonte 3 and 4, 18 so we've been involved in that process, and we expect 19 to complete that for Watts Bar 2 here in March.
20 Emergency planning, we have submitted a 21 template for the emergency action levels for Watts 22 Bar 2. That was submitted in March of this year.
23 As engineering completes, we will 24 finalize set points, numbers, and things in that 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 34 document, and that will be finalized here, again, in 1
March.
2 Security plan, we did submit a cyber 3
security plan for Watts Bar 2, and are currently 4
completing cyber security evaluations on Watts Bar 2, 5
in support of the new rule.
6 In addition, for the new rule on overall 7
security plan, we will make a submittal in March of 8
2010, along with the remainder of the industry.
9 Quality assurance program, we've 10 completed that. That's been in place, and again, 11 that's a program that's the same program that's used 12 on Watts Bar Unit 1.
13 Final environmental impact statement, 14 that's been submitted, and we are in the RAI, request 15 for additional information phase, and we are 16 finalizing requests for additional information, and 17 should have that completed here in March.
18 Special nuclear material license was 19 submitted in November of last year. We need that to 20 be able to acquire fuel for Watts Bar Unit 2. We 21 gave up that license originally back in the '90s for 22 Watts Bar Unit 2, so that has been submitted, and we 23 expect a site visit some time in late spring from the 24 NMSS Branch.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 35 And then as Masoud mentioned, the CAPS 1
and special programs, of the 29 programs we have 2
completed three of those programs, soil liquefaction, 3
concrete quality and seismic analysis, those three 4
programs have been completed, and we've got a number 5
of programs that are currently under inspection by 6
the Region, as we move forward with completing both 7
engineering and construction on the site.
8 Interface remains good with the staff.
9 We've gotten a lot of assistance from them in moving 10 forward with our reviews, and we remain on track for 11 licensing.
12 Any questions?
13 Okay.
14 MR. KOONTZ: I'm Frank Koontz. I'm going 15 to cover a couple special topics, just to update the 16 Committee on what we did for the individual plant 17 examination.
18 You may remember, this all stems from a 19 requirement of the NRC in Generic Letter 88-20, and 20 it was to assess whether plants had specific 21 vulnerability to severe accidents.
22 A lot of the requirements predated people 23 doing a lot of PRA-type analyses, but what we chose 24 to do to address this requirement was to go back and 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 36 do a major update to our PRA model that we had for 1
Unit 1, and we converted it to a dual unit model and 2
did an update on it.
3 Our criteria was to comply with the ASME 4
PRA standard, at least the appropriate sections for a 5
full powered risk assessment, and also comply with 6
the appropriate sections of Reg Guide 1.200 Rev. 1, 7
for the full power PSA.
8 The new model represents both Unit 1 and 9
Unit 2. It's a dual unit model. To give you an idea 10 of some of the work that was required to do that, our 11 original model was a RISKMAN model, which is a 12 proprietary code originally developed by PLG for 13 doing PSA work.
14 We converted to a CAPTA model, which is 15 an EPRI code for risk assessment, and it seems to be 16 the industry standard, it's also used within the NRC.
17 So, it enhances communications between us and the 18 Region when we have PSA-type issues, so they can see 19 what the model is and run it on their code.
20 We updated it, updated the Unit 1 portion 21 of the model. We also added Unit 2 into the model.
22 We updated the human reliability analysis. We 23 updated the systems analysis. We did a success 24 criteria update. We updated the initiating event 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 37 database for the model. We updated the systems 1
models. We assured that we had the appropriate 2
modeling for shared systems, since we were doing a 3
dual unit model we wanted to make sure that we had 4
the common systems modeled appropriately for two 5
units.
6 We did the system dependency update. We 7
did a level two update. We did a data update. We 8
did a containment model update, using the latest 9
version of MAP, at least the one we had was 4.0.7, 10 and we did an internal flooding update.
11 We had a contractor do the majority of 12 the work. It involved over 30 of their personnel in 13 doing the work. We also had probably over 15 people 14 from the TVA staff involved, including our risk 15 assessment people out of Chattanooga.
16 We also involved our pre-op and systems 17 people in doing walk downs in the plant, provide data 18 for the model, and we involved our operations folks 19 when we did the human reliability analysis with 20 interviews and discussing procedures.
21 It required about 40,000 manhours worth 22 of work to do the update, so it's a pretty major 23 update.
24 MEMBER BONACA: These are internal 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 38 events, right?
1 MR. KOONTZ: That's correct.
2 MEMBER BONACA: Okay.
3 MR. KOONTZ: The IPEs were internal.
4 MEMBER BONACA: *** 3:51 *** rates, I 5
mean, it will be on the requirements of IPEs, so you 6
have a full PRA.
7 MR. KOONTZ: Yes, this is an update to a 8
full PRA, yes.
9 What we were using it for was to submit 10 it as our individual plant examination, but it is a 11 full PRA update.
12 If you flip over to page 12, you can see 13 some of the results. I've added in here the pie 14 chart for Unit 2, just to give you an idea of some of 15 the metrics that everybody is interested in. The 16 total core damage frequency for Unit 2 turned out to 17 be 3.28E-05 per reactor year, and the large early 18 release frequencies down at the bottom of the chart 19 there, it turned out to be 2.6E-6.
20 As a comparison, the same model run on 21 Unit 1, there is a little bit of asymmetry between 22 the units. For Unit 1, the core damage frequency is 23 3.69E-5, compared to the 3.28, and the Unit 1 large 24 early release frequency is 2.69E-6 compared to the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 39 2.62.
1 From the update, our previous model, when 2
it was just a Unit 1 only model, the core damage 3
frequency was down around 1.26E-5, so it went up by a 4
factor of about 2.5, but it was a major upgrade in 5
the area of the loss of off site power modeling. We 6
implemented some new EPRI guidance in that area, 7
which divides loss of off site powers off into grid 8
centered, plant centered, and weather related, and 9
also the internal flooding model was significantly 10 enhanced compared to what we had in the original Unit 11 1 only model.
12 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: This is 13 internal flooding then?
14 MR. KOONTZ: This is internal flooding, 15 yes, central R cooling water, dmin water, pipe 16 breaks, high pressure fire protection, water, we did 17 a lot of walk downs in the plant to look at piping in 18 the rooms.
19 MEMBER SIEBER: Just running through 20 those numbers in my head, it would appear that your 21 containment capability from Unit 1 to Unit 2 is 22 slightly different.
23 MR. KOONTZ: Well --
24 MEMBER SIEBER: The LERFs are not in the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 40 same -- they are off by about 10 percent.
1 MR. KOONTZ: Yes.
2 MEMBER SIEBER: What's the reason for 3
that?
4 MR. KOONTZ: I'm not sure what the reason 5
for the LERF being approximately the same, but the 6
CDFs being a little bit different.
7 MEMBER SIEBER: Yes.
8 MR. KOONTZ: But, they are both about a 9
factor of 10 for the containment.
10 MEMBER SIEBER: Yes.
11 MR. KOONTZ: Right in that range.
12 MEMBER SIEBER: But, the containments are 13 identical, right?
14 MR. KOONTZ: The containments are 15 identical.
16 MEMBER SIEBER: So, I'm not sure why the 17 numbers shouldn't be identical.
18 MR. KOONTZ: Where we see the most 19 asymmetry in the model is that we have a component 20 cooling system that's shared between the units, and 21 it has three heat exchangers that have to be shared 22 between train A, train B, and then both Units 1 and 23 Unit 2.
24 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 41 MR. KOONTZ: And, some of the alignments 1
there tend to be a little bit different. That may 2
also factor in to the challenges on the containment, 3
but I'd have to go back and look.
4 MEMBER SIEBER: I notice the electrical 5
seems to dominate your CDF more than I've seen in 6
other plants.
7 MR. KOONTZ: Yes, and --
8 MEMBER SIEBER: Why is that?
9 MR. KOONTZ: -- part of that -- well, 10 there's three things. One we are still looking at, 11 to see why it is more dominant than what we'd seen in 12 the past, but one thing we noted is that this new 13 EPRI model does not credit recovery as much, electric 14 power recovery, as much as the old model did, because 15 it divides it off into these three categories, and 16 then it's got, depending on the initiating event, 17 different recovery factors from being able to recover 18 the off site power.
19 The second thing is, under the RISKMAN 20 model, you would have seen a larger piece of the pie 21 chart here would have said small look, particularly, 22 at like non-isolable small LOCAs, which are really 23 reactor coolant seal ruptures, and what happens in 24 this new model under CAPTA, is all of that small LOCA 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 42 stuff gets shifted over into whatever the initiating 1
event was, the true initiating event. And so, our 2
small LOCAs get dumped either into loss of ERCW or 3
loss of off site power. And, those fractions of the 4
pie then grow, because they are pulling in all these 5
small LOCAs that under RISKMAN were shown separately.
6 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay. Now, you used 7
RISKMAN for Unit 1.
8 MR. KOONTZ: We use RISKMAN currently for 9
Unit 1, but this new model, under CAPTA, is both a 10 Unit 1 and a Unit 2 model, and so we will start using 11 this model for both units.
12 MEMBER SIEBER: And so, these numbers 13 reflect two different models? The numbers you told 14 us verbally.
15 MR. KOONTZ: The numbers I told you 16 verbally, I might have confused there a little bit, 17 but the core damage frequency, for example, of 3.28 18 for Unit 2, with the same Unit 1/Unit 2 model, is 19 3.69E-5 for Unit 1. So, 3.69 versus 3.28, Unit 20 1/Unit 2.
21 MEMBER SIEBER: And, both of them are --
22 MR. KOONTZ: Both CAPTA.
23 MEMBER SIEBER: -- they are -- okay, they 24 are not -- RISKMAN is no longer involved in either 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 43 one.
1 MR. KOONTZ: Right.
2 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay. Well, that would 3
be interesting to examine that in more detail.
4 MR. KOONTZ: Yes.
5 MEMBER SIEBER: But, that's really not 6
our job, but, perhaps, it's the staff's job.
7 MR. KOONTZ: Yes.
8 MEMBER SIEBER: Do you plan to have a 9
peer review?
10 MR. KOONTZ: A peer review has already 11 been conducted, and we'll talk about that on the next 12 slide, I think.
13 MR. BAJESTANI: Next slide.
14 MR. KOONTZ: Yes, we've submitted this to 15 the staff for their review already, and they've got 16 it in their hands.
17 Just to address your subject of peer 18 review, on page 13 we did conduct a peer review back 19 in November of last year. We had seven peer team 20 members. We had utilities represented, Duke Dominion 21 and Exelon had participants in the peer team. From 22 the industry, we had a Westinghouse member that was 23 in dependent of our contractor, Westinghouse turned 24 out to be our PSA contractor also. We had SAIC, and 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 44 we had an independent consultant that came in to do 1
the review on the flooding.
2 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay.
3 MR. KOONTZ: And, we had one foreign 4
participant, Korea Power Engineering sent an 5
individual over, and he participated in the peer 6
review also.
7 The peer review, they did a pre review 8
back at their place, we sent them all the system 9
notebooks and all the documentation for the PSA, and 10 they spent quite a bit of time going over it. They 11 came to the Chattanooga Corporate Office, and we 12 entertained them down there for a week, just going 13 through all the details and answering all their 14 questions, and then, of course, we did a post 15 review, where they went back and assessed the 16 findings.
17 Out of the ASME standard, they have what 18 they call high level requirements and supporting 19 requirements. And, what they review the PRA to is 20 really the supporting requirements, the lower tier, 21 and then they can make an assessment of the high 22 level.
23 But, there's 326 supporting requirements 24 that applied to our PSA. 86 percent met -- fully met 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 45 the category 1 or 2 for risk informed submittals.
1 They have category 1 is lesser, and then category 2 2
is good for risk submittals to the NRC. 6 percent 3
met category 1, most of those were associated with 4
LERF, and they are more application specific, in 5
other words, when the NRC reviews that category 1 may 6
be acceptable for risk informed submittals, as long 7
as you talk about LERF with respect to the actual 8
submittal you are making, the application that you 9
are going in for.
10 And, we had 8 percent where we had the 11 supporting requirements were not met. That ended up 12 to be about 26, 11 of which were associated with this 13 new flooding model. And, in general, just to give 14 you an impression, the flooding model was deemed a 15 little bit conservative by the peer team, and they 16 thought that we could probably trim the flooding part 17 of the pie chart down, if we'd go in and put, you 18 know, more detail into the flooding model.
19 MEMBER SIEBER: I can testify from 20 experience from experience that flooding can be a 21 real issue.
22 MR. KOONTZ: Yes. Well, some of it was 23 interpretation. The EPRI guidance gave various pipe 24 sizes and said, use this. We thought it was 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 46 indicating use this flow rate.
1 The peer team member indicated that his 2
impression was, is that the EPRI guidance was really 3
saying, this would be the maximum flow for that pipe, 4
but you can go calculate a specific flow for your 5
plant.
6 And so, in some cases we over estimated 7
the flows, you know, for the various pipe breaks.
8 The other concern he had was, is that we 9
assessed each of the pipe breaks in the various 10 rooms, and we looked at spray effects and submergence 11 effects, and we looked at the worst case pipe break 12 for where it would go in the plant. In other words, 13 it would go over the floor, over the curb, out the 14 door, down the hallway, down a stairwell.
15 The standard, if you read the standard, 16 it sort of indicates that you should do that for each 17 line break in the room, not the most bounding one.
18 MEMBER SIEBER: Right.
19 MR. KOONTZ: Even though it may go the 20 same place, and, you knwo, as the bounding one, so he 21 had a finding against that.
22 So, that's to give you an idea of what 23 some of the peer team findings were.
24 MEMBER SIEBER: Do you have the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 47 corrective action program for the 8 percent that the 1
peer --
2 MR. KOONTZ: We put them in our PSA 3
database for improvements. We have a database, a 4
living database that we keep.
5 MEMBER SIEBER: When will that happen?
6 MR. KOONTZ: Well, that's a good 7
question. Right now, I was telling Gordon this 8
morning that one of the things they are doing is, 9
they are taking this model and converting it to a 10 Sequoyah model, and as part of that effort, with 11 another contractor and the Chattanooga staff, will be 12 doing some of these peer team improvements also, and 13 then rolling it back into the Watts Bar model, and I 14 don't have a date for when that will all be 15 completed.
16 MEMBER SIEBER: It will be before fuel 17 load?
18 MR. KOONTZ: I would think it would be 19 before fuel load.
20 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay, let's not write it 21 down as a commitment.
22 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: As a time, 23 I'd like to see if you guys can finish up in 15 24 minutes.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 48 MR. KOONTZ: No problem.
1 Final peer team report was received.
2 Like I say, we did evaluate the facts and 3
observations.
4 We worked with the PRA contractor for 5
resolving the important findings before we sent it to 6
the NRC, and we talked about the over conservatism.
7 They did have some complimentary comments 8
about the model, the documentation was thorough, and 9
detailed, and organized.
10 Page 14, this is -- now we are off from 11 individual plant evaluation to individual plant 12 evaluation for external events. So, this would be 13 the floods from the dam, and the tornados, and 14 seismic issues, and things like that.
15 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: And fire.
16 MR. KOONTZ: Yes, and fire is another big 17 one in external events.
18 MEMBER BANERJEE: Can I just ask you 19 about this --
20 MR. KOONTZ: Sure.
21 MEMBER BANERJEE: -- floods, the problem 22 was the methodology with Bellefonte, right, and you 23 were going to develop a methodology which the NRC --
24 MR. KOONTZ: Hydrology study.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 49 MR. ARENT: Yes, it was originally 1
identified during a QA inspection.
2 MEMBER BANERJEE: What are you doing 3
about it for Watts Bar?
4 MR. ARENT: We, actually, went back and 5
did a whole set of new calculations of the entire 6
river system.
7 MEMBER BANERJEE: Okay.
8 MR. ARENT: So, we looked at it for how 9
it would affect Watts Bar, how it would affect 10 Sequoyah, and how it would affect Bellefonte.
11 And so, we've done an aggregate 12 calculation.
13 MEMBER BANERJEE: That's completed also 14 for Bellefonte now?
15 MR. ARENT: Yes, yes, and that was 16 submitted, I believe within the last week or two.
17 MEMBER BANERJEE: Oh, because we haven't 18 seen it.
19 Okay, so that answers that question.
20 What are you doing about GSI-191?
21 MR. KOONTZ: In Unit 1, we installed some 22 advanced sump screens. We went from about, I'll say 23 200 square feet of sump screen area to 4,600 square 24 feet of sump screen area.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 50 MEMBER BANERJEE: Down stream effect, 1
what are you doing about down stream effect?
2 MR. KOONTZ: Down stream into the reactor 3
vessel? We were using the Westinghouse methodology 4
for assessing the down stream effects.
5 MEMBER BANERJEE: That's still an open 6
issue.
7 MR. KOONTZ: I understand that that's 8
still an open issue with the NRC, so we'll follow 9
that and so whatever corrective actions are 10 necessary.
11 We did, like I mentioned, we are a --
12 MEMBER BANERJEE: You are a low fiber 13 plant or not?
14 MR. KOONTZ: -- well, Unit 2 will be, 15 Unit 1 had some 3M fire wrap installed to protect 16 some specific conduits, and they are 3M fire wraps 17 made of a sheet of stainless steel with a matted 18 material, and it's mostly vermiculite, is what it is, 19 with glue. So, that's some fiber there.
20 And then, we had some ***4:04 *** K, 21 which is a microtherm insulation that we used for 22 separation of hot pipes and conduits. And, we've 23 gone through and -- other than that, we are a mirror 24 insulation plant. So, all of the steam generators, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 51 and all the loop piping, is mirror insulated.
1 We've gone through and we've tried to 2
minimize ***4:04*** K to the maximum extent possible.
3 We've taken it out everywhere we can get it out.
4 And, the remaining thing that they are looking at is 5
the 3M issue.
6 MEMBER SIEBER: I understand vermiculite 7
is an EPA listed hazardous material, is that true?
8 You ought to check.
9 MR. KOONTZ: Yes, I don't know. That's 10 an interesting question. I know that they used to 11 use it as insulation in their attics.
12 MEMBER SIEBER: WR Grace Company mined it 13 in Montana.
14 MR. KOONTZ: Sodium tetraborate is what 15 we have in the ice for a pH buffer.
16 MEMBER SIEBER: Right.
17 MR. KOONTZ: And, it seems to be pretty 18 good as compared to trisodium phosphate, and some of 19 these other chemical effects the people have had.
20 MEMBER SIEBER: Yes, you are right.
21 MEMBER BANERJEE: Well, you know that 22 this issue --
23 MR. KOONTZ: It's still open, we 24 understand that. We were talking with staff a little 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 52 bit about it before we came in here.
1 The strainers have already been designed 2
for Unit 2, and they mirror --
3 MEMBER BANERJEE: What type is it?
4 MR. KOONTZ: -- it's an AREVA strainer 5
design, made by PCI, one of their contractors, and 6
they consist of pancakes, they look like square 7
pancakes that are perforated screens, and they are on 8
a core tube. And so, there's multiple of these 9
pancake strainers going up the core tube, and then we 10 have various stocks that feed into it, and then go 11 then down into the sump.
12 MEMBER BANERJEE: Yes, the issue, as you 13 know, there is, of course, when you stop to block 14 these --
15 MR. KOONTZ: Yes.
16 MEMBER BANERJEE: -- then what happens 17 is, your approach velocity --
18 MR. KOONTZ: Changes.
19 MEMBER BANERJEE: -- changes.
20 MR. KOONTZ: Right.
21 MEMBER BANERJEE: It's no longer the 22 approach velocity into the pancake, but into the 23 whole stack.
24 MR. KOONTZ: Right.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 53 MEMBER BANERJEE: And, it's a nightmare 1
when you put them next to each other in a sump, you 2
know.
3 MR. KOONTZ: Right.
4 MEMBER BANERJEE: That's another issue.
5 MR. KOONTZ: Yes.
6 MEMBER BANERJEE: ***4:06*** basically, 7
that people do protypic testing of these types.
8 MR. KOONTZ: Right.
9 One of the things we did when we did our 10 flow testing up at the lab, is after we got the flow 11 testing done we did sort of an unofficial test, where 12 we just took all the fiber material and everything 13 and just dumped it on the strainer, to see what 14 difference it would make, and we still got acceptable 15 results, even dumping the stuff right onto the 16 strainers.
17 MEMBER BANERJEE: Relatively low fiber.
18 MR. KOONTZ: Yes, compared to others that 19 have Nucon for their primary insulation.
20 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Let's move 21 on.
22 MR. KOONTZ: Okay. IPEEE, the generic 23 approach is to follow the guidance associated with 24 generic Letter 8820 supplements 4 and 5, and NUREG-25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 54 1407. It's a focus scope. We do a seismic margins 1
analysis to identify seismic vulnerabilities, and we 2
are using the EPRI FIVE methodology to identify the 3
fire vulnerabilities. That's the same thing.
4 MEMBER SIEBER: Now, your seismic hazard 5
analysis is complete?
6 MR. KOONTZ: Pretty close. The --
7 MEMBER SIEBER: Well, the question I will 8
have is, how do you do the seismic design of piping 9
supports if you aren't sure what the frequencies and 10 magnitudes of seismic events are?
11 MR. KOONTZ: Yes. What you do in this 12 seismic margins analysis is, we go out there and we 13 identify a minimum capability, I guess they call it.
14 For example, our safe shut down 15 earthquake is around.18G, and our minimum 16 capability, our target here is we are shooting for 17 like.3G. So, what you want to do is show everything 18 is good, at least to that criteria.
19 MEMBER SIEBER: But, that's a gamble.
20 MR. KOONTZ: Well, what we found on Unit 21 1 is some of the worst case components were the 22 screen wash pumps, and they were above that 23 capability. They were.36G.
24 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 55 MR. KOONTZ: So that, Unit 1 came out 1
good, they weren't able to identify anything back 2
when we did it a long time ago.
3 MEMBER SIEBER: Just so you know, it's a 4
gamble.
5 MR. KOONTZ: Yes.
6 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay.
7 MR. KOONTZ: Now, they've completed the 8
analysis for the seismic margins part, to the point 9
where they've written the draft reports, and will be 10 reviewing those internally, and getting those to 11 Gordon probably around mid month for submittal later 12 this month.
13 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay.
14 MR. KOONTZ: So, they are pretty close on 15 that.
16 The one that's coming up to the back end 17 a little bit is the EPRI FIVE methodology, and we're 18 working our way through the fire induced 19 vulnerability evaluation right now.
20 MEMBER BONACA: Yes, one comment to the 21 fire, you know, that's a pretty old standard, 1992, 22 and one concern, well, I know that the Browns Ferry 23 fire analysis does not include fire induced 24
- 4:08*** of the equipment. And so, that makes it, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 56 I guess, NRC has a rule that says if you don't treat 1
that you cannot use it for licensing applications, so 2
you may want to look at it.
3 MR. BAJESTANI: Our analysis, actually, 4
we are getting ***4:08***
5 MEMBER BONACA: Very good.
6 MEMBER BANERJEE: You have no issues with 7
Appendix R?
8 MR. KOONTZ: Well, we're working through 9
all the Appendix R analyses right now, identifying 10 which cables need to be relocated, looking at manual 11 actions.
12 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes, we looked at, 13 actually, the number of the manual operated action 14 that we have on Unit 1 versus bringing Unit 2, and we 15 have decided to replace a lot of cables. We had a 16 lot of cable modified the logic and the circuits, so 17 the number that we are coming up, the number of 18 manual operated action is significantly less than 19 what we had on Unit 1.
20 MR. KOONTZ: Well, I think you gentlemen 21 have asked a lot of good questions.
22 Moving on to page 15, I think we've 23 probably covered most of this.
24 The IPEEE report will be used -- the Unit 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 57 1 report will be used as a baseline for writing the 1
Unit 2 report. Like I said, we've gone through all 2
the new analyses, and we're finishing up the FIVE 3
analyses right now for Unit 2.
4 We've used plant corrective action 5
programs where they were needed. For example, we've 6
used the civil seismic caps results, our hanger 7
analysis update program, integrated interaction 8
program, and ESQ program.
9 We've done walk downs over in Unit 2 in 10 the common areas, associated with the IPEEE, looked 11 at fire compartments. We've looked at the ignition 12 frequencies and some of the sources in each of those 13 compartments.
14 Unit 1, we didn't identify any specific 15 vulnerabilities when we did that analysis, except for 16 one, and it was associated with a tornado missile 17 that could enter through a construction opening that, 18 actually, happened to be on the Unit 2 side.
19 So, we protected that construction 20 opening back a long time ago, when we finished Unit 21 1, so it's done for Unit 2 already.
22 So, there shouldn't be anything there.
23 And, our goal is to submit this March of 24 this year, for the staff for review.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 58 We will come back later. This is an as-1 designed report, so in other words we are doing it on 2
our as-designed drawings, and we will come back later 3
in August of 2011 and do an as-constructed version of 4
that for the staff.
5 That's all I have.
6 Masoud?
7 MR. BAJESTANI: Okay, real quick on Unit 8
1 and Unit 2 integration. One of the lessons learned 9
that we had from Browns Ferry was staff operations.
10 Essentially, the whole operating staff did that 11 early, because we did have some -- we were 12 struggling, actually, at Browns Ferry getting the 13 right number of operators to help us on some of the 14 testing. So, we started this way in advance, right 15 up front, when we got the project approved, and they 16 already had hired 160 people for this -- for two unit 17 operations, 160 additional people.
18 MEMBER SIEBER: You are going to need 19 additional operators, right?
20 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes.
21 MEMBER SIEBER: You are going to have 22 dual unit licenses? My experience is, it takes 18 23 months to train an operator, so that should be in 24 progress now, right?
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 59 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes, it is, and like I 1
said, you know, we, actually, started this past 2
August of 2007.
3 MEMBER SIEBER: Okay.
4 MR. BAJESTANI: Just based on what we 5
learned.
6 Okay, right now every department, rad, 7
engineering, operations, they are going through 8
readiness review, to get ready for the two unit 9
operations.
10 we are going to have people to come in 11 and do an assessment, basically, look and see what we 12 are doing, especially, on the department readiness 13 review, and then we are, actually, going to have 14 another follow-up after that with INPO.
15 Also on the work control side of it, any 16 work, actually, any packages that we are getting 17 ready to go work in the field, if it's Unit 1 it goes 18 to a Unit 1 work control center, if it's Unit 2, it 19 goes to Unit 2 X senior reactor operator, X operator 20 that we have hired to do this job.
21 Right now, we are getting ready to, 22 actually, remove some of the interface points that we 23 had between Unit 1 and Unit 2. We are trying the 24 first system on non-safety related systems, going 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 60 through there, we have put the process and procedure 1
in place to remove the interface point and start 2
testing some of those components.
3 Also, on some of the meetings that we 4
have created to make sure that we talk between Unit 1 5
and 2, and we really are going after the right stuff, 6
we look at everything that we do on Unit 2 in the 7
common area on a daily basis in our plan of the day.
8 We look at every corrective action program that may 9
have some operability impact on Unit 1, or Unit 2, 10 both units, actually, they look at it.
11 We have a weekly meeting with the VP of 12 Unit 1, and his Director's Board, and my Director's 13 Board, we sit down and look at all the issues that we 14 need to be looking ahead, and also same thing in pre 15 op start-up having a regular meeting with chemistry 16 and environmental.
17 Next page.
18 We are making steady progress in 19 engineering, procurement and construction, and 20 licensing. Refurbishment activity is going as 21 planned.
22 Again, the project is on schedule and 23 budget to support the fuel load schedule that we 24 have.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 61 Again, there's a lot of lessons learned 1
from the industry. This is back in late '70s and 2
early '80s. We have captured all those lesson plans.
3 We have, actually, incorporated that into how we do 4
business at Watts Bar Unit 2, specifically, and 5
corrective action program.
6 Essentially, we use the same corrective 7
action program that operating site uses.
8 I don't have the latest numbers, but as 9
of last time I looked at it we had over 4,000 parents 10
- 4:15*** evaluation report that we wrote on Watts 11 Bar Unit 2 project, again, based on lessons learned 12 we have the safety conscious work environment, 13 specifically, employee concerns. We have exit 14 interview with everybody that leaves the site, so we 15 can understand what the issues are, if there are 16 issues that we need to be dealing with, so we don't 17 have the same problem.
18 we do that, we've got issues that require 19 some type of stop work, we have done this a couple of 20 times, both on the management and the QA side of it, 21 so we stop to learn and figure out what we need to 22 do, and put a plan that, basically, avoids 23 recurrence.
24 Again, and also, a lot of lessons learned 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 62 from the industry. Watts Bar Unit 1, Browns Ferry 1
Unit 1, 2 and 3, a lot of -- and the industry lessons 2
learned, we have incorporated all those, and also, 3
like I said, we have, actually, brought also input, 4
we look at how we are doing on the construction side 5
of it, and we are going to have another, I guess I'll 6
call it, assist visit with INPO as we go through the 7
rest of the project.
8 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: All right.
9 Anymore questions or --
10 MEMBER BROWN: I've got one, if you don't 11 mind.
12 Back when we were visiting in July, I 13 think it was July last year, you indicated -- well, 14 we asked a question about your I&C, you indicated you 15 were going to be replicating, if I read the words I 16 had written down, the construction for the same specs 17 and standard as the Watts Bar 1 ***4:16*** 21 system, 18 with identical or equivalent hardware, and that you 19 were going to make the same design change that you 20 made post operationally after -- excuse me, post 21 license, initial licensing.
22 And, knowing that that system was 18, 20, 23 20 years old, or whatever, it's not always easy to 24 duplicate that.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 63 I just wondered what the status was of 1
being able to get that under, is it ordered?
2 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes, it's ordered, 3
actually, it's being manufactured, and, actually, a 4
lot of parts, a lot of parts are already fabricated, 5
and there's a factory acceptance test that's coming 6
up April time frame.
7 MEMBER BROWN: Of this year?
8 MR. BAJESTANI: Yes, and we, actually, we 9
are going to notify staff, Region wants to take a 10 look at the factory acceptance test, but right at the 11 beginning of the project we did talk to Westinghouse, 12 and they, specifically, said that they can provide 13 the parts, and they have been able to deliver.
14 MEMBER BROWN: Okay, so you haven't been 15 asked to approve a bunch of exceptions, or waivers, 16 or anything like that? So it looks like you are going 17 to be able to get something relatively close? That's 18 good. That's a real plus.
19 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay. If 20 there's nothing more, I'm going to ask the staff to 21 quickly change places with you, And, while you are 22 coming up, let me say, I do have in mind that we need 23 to provide an opportunity for public comment over the 24 phone line. There's no one here in the meeting room 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 64 is there signed up?
1 MS. BANERJEE: Yes, there are two people.
2 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: On the 3
telephone line.
4 MS. BANERJEE: On the telephone line.
5 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I'm asking, 6
is there anybody here in the room in addition?
7 MS. BANERJEE: No.
8 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay. All 9
right.
10 So, we need to make sure we allow time 11 for public comment.
12 Please, proceed.
13 MR. MILANO: Good afternoon. I'm Pat 14 Milano, with the NRR staff, and with me on my left is 15 Mr. Raghavan, who is a Branch Chief with the 16 assigned responsibility for Licensing for Watts Bar 17 Unit 2, in the Division of Operation Reactor 18 Licensing in NRR. And, on my right is Mr. Robert 19 Haag, from our Region II office. He's a Branch 20 Chief, again, responsible for Watts Bar 2 21 construction inspection, and he's in the Division of 22 Construction Projects.
23 Today the staff's presentation is going 24 to focus on three areas, the licensing, construction, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 65 inspection, and then we are going to give a little 1
bit of information on project oversight, the last 2
part being somewhat in response to some of the 3
questions that you had during the March, 2009 4
presentation.
5 I'll try to go through this thing a 6
little faster than what I was expecting to do, just 7
to keep on schedule for you.
8 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Thank you.
9 MR. MILANO: Okay. I'm going to start out 10 with the review of the -- the current review of the 11 operating reactor licensing application.
12 As you are well aware, the history of the 13 construction licensing has been somewhat unique for 14 Watts Bar Unit 2, and we've covered most of those 15 details during the last presentation. Thus, I won't 16 repeat -- I will only repeat that the operating 17 license application currently before the staff was 18 originally submitted by TVA in 1976.
19 After informing the staff in 2007 of its 20 intent, and then submitting its plan in 2008 for 21 reactivation of construction from after the plant 22 having been in a deferred plant status, TVA submitted 23 a framework for licensing and construction, licensing 24 and construction completion.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 66 In addition, the Commission provided 1
direction to the staff to use the current licensing 2
basis of Unit 1 as the basis for Unit 2.
3 In March of last year, TVA updated its 4
application to support the Unit 2 application. The 5
staff also noticed this in the Federal Register Now I'd like to highlight some of the 10 activities that have been taking place since our last 11 meeting.
12 and 6
offered an additional opportunity for hearing, and in 7
that regard there has been a request for a hearing, 8
and two contentions were admitted.
9 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Are you going 13 to touch on just what the characterization of the two 14 contentions are?
15 MR. MILANO: Our Office of General 16 Counsel has asked me not to go into much detail, but 17 I will -- yes, they centered in the area of 18 environmental.
19 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay, fine.
20 No, I don't want to -- I assumed they were on the 21 public record, and I just wanted to --
22 MR. MILANO: Yes, they are.
23 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: -- have you 24 identify what the general character of them was.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 67 MR. MILANO: Yes, sir.
1 One contention has to do with submittal 2
of information, and that one is just -- it's for TVA 3
to supplement the record.
4 And, the other one has to do, basically, 5
with aquatic environment and impacts.
6 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay.
7 MEMBER BONACA: Are there pipings and 8
wire -- you know, cables buried on the site?
9 MR. MILANO: You mean as part of the 10 original design, are there buried piping and cables?
11 MEMBER BONACA: Yes.
12 MR. MILANO: Yes, there are some.
13 MEMBER BONACA: So --
14 MEMBER SHACK: I think he means in place, 15 actually buried in the ground at the moment.
16 MEMBER BONACA: Buried in the ground.
17 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Let me note 18 that we've been joined by Dr. Bill Shack and John 19 Stetkar, the Subcommittee meeting next door having 20 concluded.
21 MEMBER BONACA: The question is that, 22 then there will be components that will reach 40 23 years of life physically, so the plant exhausts the 24 first 40 years of the license.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 68 MR. MILANO: Recognize that, and as TVA 1
indicated, that -- those aspects were also part of 2
the overall refurbishment review, and the 3
refurbishment took into account the environments in 4
addition to the various systems components, it looked 5
at environments and the susceptibility of various 6
components to degradation. Those were all assessed, 7
and then the program was developed, and appropriate 8
inspections, testing, and things like that were put 9
into place, were developed.
10 That overall program that TVA indicated, 11 that TI-216 program, is currently before the staff 12 for review, and we are, actually, very near 13 completion of the overall program. We just have --
14 we have one minor issue that we are just waiting to 15 supplement some information, and we should -- we 16 should shortly be making an overall assessment of the 17 program.
18 From that then, as you'll hear from Mr.
19 Haag, there will be inspections of the implementing 20 procedures, followed by actual inspection of how the 21 program is done at the field.
22 MEMBER BONACA: All right.
23 MR. MILANO: With regard to the safety 24 reviews, in our last presentation we noted that TVA 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 69 had submitted the Unit 2 specific final safety 1
analysis report, FSAR is part of its updated 2
application, and this, basically, took the Unit 1 and 3
2 FSAR that was in place at the time that Unit 1 was 4
licensed, and now made it into a Unit 2 specific FSAR 5
that's now just meant for licensing for Unit 2.
6 For reference, the current licensing 7
basis of Unit 1 is supported by an updated safety 8
analysis report, USAR, which is now at Revision 7, 9
and that is the -- Rev 7 of that USAR is the current 10 licensing basis that we are applying our review 11 against.
12 The staff's review is fully underway, and 13 the activities, milestones, resources, and schedule 14 constraints are being managed using the Enterprise 15 project management tool with NRR.
16 As you can see by the slide, teh actual 17 changes to TVA's application have been coming in as 18 amendments to the FSAR since about April of 2009.
19 However, the first two amendments contained 20 relatively small amounts of information, or changes, 21 thus the major work before the staff, actually, began 22 with the submittal of amendment 95 on November 27th 23 of last year, through amendment 97, which came in mid 24 January. So, the bulk of our reviews began, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 70 basically, in about -- in teh last couple months.
1 Okay, proceeding on to what -- and TVA 2
spent a lot of time talking about its corrective 3
action programs, just remember, these came out 4
pursuant to the 10 CFR 5054(F) letter back in 1985, 5
due to the staff's identification of a number of 6
construction-related deficiencies going on with TVA 7
system-wise.
8 And, regarding Watts Bar, well, regarding 9
TVA in general, there was a performance -- there was 10 a nuclear performance plan that came out, and each 11 one of its stations had a separate -- a separate 12 volume, which talked about plant-specific ones. With 13 Watts Bar it was in Volume 4 of NUREG 1232, and it 14 was -- excuse me, it was reviewed by teh staff in 15 NUREG 1232, Volume 4, and also there was some 16 carryover into the SERs, which is NUREG 0847.
17 Implementation, however, by TVA only 18 occurred at Watts Bar Unit 1 because of TVA's 19 decision at the time to defer Unit 2. And, although 20 TVA has informed us that they would implement most of 21 the corrective actions as was approved for Unit 1, 22 there were several areas where TVA decided to provide 23 the staff with different approaches, based on the 24 incites that they had learned from Unit 1, and also 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 71 because of some more efficient ways of doing 1
business.
2 The staff has reviewed all those changes, 3
along with, you know, making an assessment of what 4
was done in the past, and, indeed, from the 5
standpoint of program review the staff has completed 6
its review of all the 29 corrective action and 7
special programs, and have turned them over to the 8
Region for inspection of TVA's implementation.
9 With regard to generic communications, as 10 we've indicated in Supplement 21 of the SER that was 11 issued last February, when I say last February I mean 12 February, 2009, there were a number of items that 13 generic communications the staff stated it would be 14 reviewing to determine whether the safety issues were 15 resolved or if additional corrective actions were 16 needed.
17 In this regard, the staff also noted both 18 the expected action that remained open at Unit 2 for 19 each of the generic communication items, and the 20 expected staff action that are currently open.
21 The staff found that most of the vast 22 majority of these items were resolved at the time 23 that Unit 1 was licensed, and most of these pre 1995 24 items that do remain open currently have to do with 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 72 TVA's submission of technical specifications. So, 1
when those technical specifications -- the technical 2
specifications are already in, as the staff reviews 3
those as part of its safety review we'll end up 4
closing out these open generic communications.
5 Also, the staff right now is focusing 6
primarily on those generally generic letters that 7
have been issued post 1995. There were 25 that the 8
staff felt were appropriate for Watts Bar Unit 2, and 9
of those all but ten are -- all but ten are 10 completed. We are waiting for information from TVA 11 on five of them, and five of them the staff review is 12 in progress.
13 MEMBER BANERJEE: Which are the five that 14 you are waiting for information?
15 MR. MILANO: There's -- actually, there's 16 information -- I'll give you an example.
17 TVA, with regard to pressure locking and 18 thermal binding, you know, that one, 9606.
19 MEMBER BANERJEE: Right.
20 MR. MILANO: TVA made some -- in 2007 21 they gave us a letter that addressed these open 22 generic communications, and told us that they were 23 going to implement the same as Unit 1.
24 However, as you heard from TVA this 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 73 afternoon, certain valves they had procurement 1
problems on, so they are not going to get exactly the 2
same valves that were in Unit 1. Also, they had some 3
-- they did have some issues with Unit 1, and had to 4
do some repairs. However, what was presented to the 5
staff wasn't complete, we didn't know -- when they 6
said they were going to do -- when they said they 7
were going to do the same as Unit 1, we want to make 8
sure that the review incorporated these new valve 9
designs, and also, we wanted to know more about what 10 they were, actually, going to do, based on their --
11 based on the discovery during the Unit 1 review.
12 So, that's, basically, it. It's not a 13 significant amount of information, it's generally in 14 the form of clarification and updating of what was 15 presented in 2007 for those five.
16 with regard to the -- TVA has already 17 discussed the fact that there was a final 18 environmental statement that was updated to support -
19
- that was updated to support the Unit 2 operating 20 license application, and a final environmental 21 statement, as described in NUREG-0498, was prepared 22 by the staff in 1987, or, excuse me, 1978, to support 23 operation of both Units 1 and 2.
24 And then, because of the long delay in 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 74 licensing Unit 1, a supplement to the final 1
environmental statement for operations was prepared 2
by teh staff in 1994, to assess changes that had 3
occurred since the original FES-OL was prepared.
4 You'll note that TVA is a Federal agency 5
itself, was required to prepare an environmental 6
impact statement, and TVA supplemented the 7
environmental impact statement for Unit 1 and 2 to 8
assess Unit 2 operation in February of 2008, with 9
further information on supplemental cooling and 10 severe accident mitigation alternatives that came in 11 in January, 2009.
12 And, as a result, the staff has begun its 13 review. We are doing that with contractor support 14 from the Pacific Northwest Labs, and TVA noted that 15 in March of this month TVA's response to some RAIs 16 are due.
17 With that, it's still -- the 18 environmental review is still progressing.
19 With regard to the radiological emergency 20 response plans, in Section 13.3 of the FSAR, TVA 21 states that the REP provided protective measures for 22 TVA personnel and for the health and safety of the 23 public in the event of a radiological emergency, and 24 the TVA nuclear REP contains -- is a corporate 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 75 program, and it contains site-specific appendices 1
that are applicable to each plant.
2 In 1993, TVA had withdrawn -- excuse me, 3
TVA withdrew the REP -- the site-specific REP for 4
Unit 2, and then resubmitted a Unit 1 plan which was 5
approved for licensing a Unit 1.
6 Again, in the March update TVA provided 7
its template, as was indicated, which is Appendix C 8
to the REP, and has indicated that the site-specific 9
data and references were preliminary and that 10 verification would be coming in. And, with that the 11 current status is, the off-site portion of it was 12 being reviewed by FEMA. These are the state and 13 local plans. That is well underway, and we are 14 hoping to get FEMA's finding of reasonable assurance 15 on the ability of the off-site plans to be 16 implemented shortly, and the staff has continued to 17 work on the on-site portion.
18 We are nearing completion of a set of RAI 19 questions on that, but recognizing that it's not 20 questions on the overall plan, it's just they are 21 focused on, basically, the emergency action level 22 information that's specific for Unit 2.
23 Physical security plan, TVA has already 24 indicated this, you know, and this month we are 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 76 expecting a new -- the site security plan for Watts 1
Bar to come in with changes that incorporate the 2
recent rule changes, and also provides a better 3
description of the current status of construction of 4
Unit 2 in it.
5 And, with that, the staff believes it 6
currently remains on schedule with licensing 7
activities, to support TVA's request to receive an 8
operating license in April, 2012.
9 And, subject to any further questions, 10 I'll turn over the discussion on inspection to Mr.
11 Haag.
12 Bob?
13 MR. HAAG: Good afternoon. As mentioned, 14 my name is Bob Haag. I'm the Branch Chief of Region 15 II, with oversight responsibility for Watts Bar Unit 16
- 2.
17 My staff, I have approximately six 18 inspectors working for me, and we are dedicated 19 strictly for Watts Bar Unit 2 activities.
20 What I wanted to do this afternoon was 21 just bring you up to date on what's transpired, as 22 far as our inspection activities personnel-wise, 23 progress that we've made, issues and things that we 24 looked at, since we briefed you back in July of 2009.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 77 Just recently, we completed our end of 1
cycle review for 2009 of Watts Bar 2 construction 2
activities. We followed the process very similar to 3
the ROP, where we look at it periodically, we go 4
through many of the same steps. We looked at the 5
construction programs, and the activities that 6
they've implemented over the past year.
7 For the most part, our conclusion was 8
that TVA had adequate controls in place, and 9
activities that we reviewed were being properly 10 conducted.
11 We'll be sending a letter out to TVA, 12 actually, sent a letter out signed yesterday, and we 13 are going to be conducting a meeting on site --
14 excuse me, a meeting in the local area, to inform the 15 public of the results of our end of cycle meeting.
16 That will happen in April.
17 As far as the resources that we used back 18 in 2009, 8,800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br />. It's not quite what we were 19 budgeted, we had 10 FTE budgeted for the project, so 20 we weren't -- didn't use that fully, and what we've, 21 actually, done as far as that 10 FTE allotment, I 22 mentioned earlier, I have six people working for me, 23 the other four FTE were designated to our 24 instruction, inspection staff in the Region, and we 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 78 pull resources out of those, so that's how we divvy 1
it up.
2 And, what we ended up doing for 2009, 3
obviously, we'd be following construction activities, 4
the pace of the safety-related work really did not 5
dictate that we use the full 10 FTE.
6 We anticipate, as safety-related work 7
does increase this year, and transitioning to 8
completion of construction in 2011, towards testing, 9
we certainly will be using the full allotment of 10 resources.
11 Recently, we hired two new resident 12 inspectors for Watts Bar Unit 2. One of them was to 13 replace an individual who resigned back in October of 14 2009. The other individual was -- our plan was to 15 have three residents, along with a senior, and we are 16 finally getting to that full staffing level, so we 17 have four resident inspectors on site.
18 What we want to do is for that third 19 resident inspector, he will have a lead activity in 20 the pre-op testing, start-up testing, and, 21 eventually, that individual will transition over to 22 the operations staff, and that will be then 23 responsible for looking at two unit operation.
24 Our plan is to have N+1 staffing for the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 79 operating units for at least the initial period of 1
time while they have dual unit operation.
2 We mention here that we are reviewing --
3 currently reviewing the historical construction 4
deficiency reports. I mention that, because that's 5
really the last piece of items that we need to sort 6
through and decide what we need to inspect.
7 I mentioned in previous presentations 8
where we've looked at the scope of our inspection 9
effort, and we've looked at historical allegations, 10 bulletins, generic letters, and we've factored all 11 those into our inspection effort, construction 12 deficiency reports, which is comparable to an LER for 13 an operating plant, was the last piece that we are 14 currently looking into. And, once we get that done, 15 we'll have the full scope of inspection activities 16 that we plan to do for Watts Bar Unit 2.
17 And then, monitoring of construction 18 activities with the possibility of impact of Unit 1.
19 That effort has been ramping up recently, and I 20 think it's partly due to increased work on TVA's 21 part, particularly, on safety-related equipment and 22 interfaces, close proximity to Unit 1 equipment, 23 whether it's actually equipment or just in the 24 general vicinity, just the recognition that we need 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 80 to spend time looking at that. That's really a dual 1
unit -- dual op separate. Both the Unit 1 residents 2
and the Unit 2 residents are sharing in that 3
responsibility. We are scoping out some of the 4
things that we need to do to proactively look, make 5
sure TVA's work controls are in place, and that they 6
are screening those activities that have the jeopardy 7
of affecting Unit 2 and properly controlling them.
8 Some of the major inspections that we 9
have recently performed, we were monitoring the eddy 10 current inspections for steam generators, looking 11 both at the inspection results, and also looking at 12 TVA's efforts on dealing with tube indications, and 13 issues such as the existing plugs they have in 14 generator tubes, changing them out to a newer 15 material. We've looked at that. We've engaged their 16 staff, and we understand their path going forward, 17 and are fairly pleased with that.
18 We still have inspections left to do, to 19 finalize our inspection area there.
20 RCS piping, limited opportunities to look 21 at any welding on RCS piping for the most part, as 22 you saw on your visit RCS is pretty much in tact. A 23 few opportunities we do have, we are looking at that.
24 One of them was the RTD bypass manifold, where they 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 81 were replacing that, installing welds. We just 1
recently did an inspection on that, and there's 2
another upcoming activity, where they are going to be 3
installing caps on the upper head injection nozzles 4
on the head. We've got planned inspectors out there 5
to look at that also.
6 We recently did an engineering inspection 7
that was back in late summer of 2009, to look at the 8
engineering processes, their programs, and we also 9
looked at some of the engineering packages. For the 10 most part, we felt like their programs were thorough, 11 and the products that we looked at, with the 12 exception of one, were fully satisfactory. There was 13 one issue that we identified on like for like 14 replacement, where the implementation of that package 15 really wasn't too good, so we are going to do a 16 follow-up inspection, both to look at that issue, and 17 how they resolved it, and also to look at some of the 18 other areas where they had limited opportunities for 19 us, just some of the functional areas we wanted to 20 look at, the packages weren't as many as we needed to 21 look at, so we want to go back and finish that 22 effort.
23 And, that inspection --
24 MEMBER BONACA: I'd like to go back to my 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 82 question before, because you're the right guy, you 1
are doing the inspections.
2 MR. HAAG: Yes.
3 MEMBER BONACA: And again, buried cables 4
and piping that have been in the ground now for 35 5
years, will be 40 years old by the time the plant 6
restarts. What kind of evaluation is being done of 7
this piping and cables?
8 MR. HAAG: It would be covered under the 9
refurbishment program, as Mr. Milano mentioned 10 earlier.
11 TVA --
12 MR. MILANO: Also under the maintenance 13 rule portion 2, because a lot of the buried piping is 14 piping that's already in operation to support Unit 1.
15 MR. HAAG: Piping and cabling, a lot of 16 it is the ERCW, which is their service water, and 17 they've got underground piping and cabling associated 18 with that.
19 Going back to the refurbishment program, 20 what TVA has done is to look at the various 21 degradation mechanisms for equipment, components that 22 have been sitting there for 25-30 years, identifying 23 those degradation mechanisms, and then addressing how 24 they are going to look at those to make sure they are 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 83 back to the design requirements, or doing what they 1
need to.
2 So, that program has been established.
3 Teh staff is currently reviewing it. I'm getting 4
ahead of myself, because that's a slide later on, but 5
I'll mention it. So, the staff is currently looking 6
at, have they identified all of the appropriate 7
degradation mechanisms. If it's piping, you know, 8
have they looked at piping that's either underground, 9
wedded, identified how it could be damaged, how it 10 could be harmed, and what they are doing to address 11 that.
12 Once the staff completes their review of 13 the program and says, you know, if you go out and 14 take these actions you should appropriately cover 15 that, we will look at its implementation. We'll look 16 at and verify they are doing the inspections that 17 they need to do, wall thickness measurements and so 18 on.
19 But, to answer your question, as far as 20 those components with the age that they have, and how 21 they are going to be assured that they are going to 22 be able to perform their function, will be a 23 refurbishment program.
24 MEMBER BONACA: The reason, clearly, the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 84 components will be 40 years old by the time you start 1
the plant, they'll be 80 years old at the end of the 2
life of this plant. And, it could be 100 years old, 3
you know, that's a pretty significant commitment, and 4
anyway, it will be interesting to see how the 5
disposition will take place.
6 MR. RAGHAVAN: I'm Mr. Raghaven, Branch 7
Chief of the Watts Bar Special Projects.
8 Two things. One is, we will bring up in 9
the next meeting these additional programs, and we 10 will include that. ***4:46*** review, and they, 11 actually, will be more done by then, so there will be 12 more detail.
13 Number two is that, some of these 14 components are already in use in the Unit 1, and they 15 are covered under the maintenance rule for the safety 16 and supply.
17 And so, whatever happens, you know, we 18 will take the licensing program in terms of whether 19 they should be replaced every five years, or ten 20 years, whatever the inspection shows.
21 MEMBER BONACA: I am asking about the 22 buried pipes, so my question was that, because 23 clearly we see that that's probably one of the issues 24 that is going to affect this industry the most, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 85 leakage.
1 So anyway, I think you gave me a proper 2
answer, and we'll think about it.
3 Thank you.
4 MR. HAAG: Upcoming inspections, we have 5
some of the major areas we are going to be looking 6
at. We have the problem identification, resolution 7
inspection. That's a team inspection. We did the 8
PI&R inspection last year, that we go the corrective 9
action program, both from program adequacy standpoint 10 and how they are implementing it.
11 We'll do a similar inspection this time, 12 more focusing on, actually, implementation, since 13 we've looked at the program, and as mentioned 14 earlier, the program that they've established for 15 Unit 2 is very similar to the program they have for 16 Unit 1. So, it's been looked at numerous times.
17 We have an engineering follow-up 18 inspection that I mentioned, and the refurbishment 19 inspection I'll discuss later on.
20 Our preparation for system pre-op 21 testing, that's on our minds now, to make sure we've 22 got the right focus, got the right people in place.
23 We've been spending the majority of the time, 24 obviously, looking at construction inspections, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 86 making sure we have all the inspection procedures 1
called out in our Manual Chapter 2512, which defines 2
the construction inspection program. We've got those 3
activities planned out, and then we are going to make 4
sure we've completed all the inspection objectives, 5
but we recognize that, you know, pre-op start-up 6
testing is coming very soon, so we need to make sure 7
we've got, both the right resources and people in 8
place to be able to do that.
9 Construction scheduling, we mentioned 10 that in the past, that was a challenge from the 11 standpoint of trying to understand the scope of TVA's 12 work on some of these activities, and when they have 13 been performed.
14 We've been able to better get information 15 communicated to us that would allow us to either plan 16 our inspectors, both from how long it's going to take 17 to look at a particular area, and when it's going to 18 be able to be inspected.
19 It's still a challenge. We are still 20 looking at them to be able to identify some 21 particular windows on activities we need to inspect, 22 so we can make sure we have people available.
23 So, I list that still as a challenge.
24 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: You heard the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 87 discussion we had about project schedule.
1 MR. HAAG: Yes. Yes, I wanted to touch 2
base on that.
3 We understand that, because we look at 4
that routinely, whether a unit is in an outage, or 5
whether they have some other production schedule, and 6
we looked at that as far as, you know, have they 7
established the right safety conscious work 8
environment, looking under that umbrella.
9 I'll give you an example of some of the 10 things that we've been looking at. During the last 11 Unit 1 refueling outage, they had a lot of -- they 12 had several mods they needed to install while Unit 1 13 was down. We were looking at those, both from an 14 adequacy of the installation, and also were they 15 taking the right steps, was the quality being 16 included.
17 We had one of our inspectors out t here 18 who was observing a QC inspector doing some non-19 destructive examination testing, and we pointed out 20 it appeared, based on the circumstances, there was 21 pressure on him to get the job done. We raised that 22 up, TVA took appropriate action, so that is a concern 23 of mine.
24 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay. Let me 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 88 ask you, do you -- do you know, and this is not a 1
question I would expect you to have an answer to, but 2
you might, if there's any float in the critical path 3
schedule to this integrated system test next April, I 4
mean, a year from April?
5 MR. HAAG: No.
6 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay. Well, 7
because it's tied to Unit 1, and because I'm sure 8
that the TVA grid needs Unit 1 for the summer peak, I 9
guess I would pick that out as something, if you'd 10 look at the hangers, for example, they are, 11 obviously, pushing up a bow wave here, and so that 12 would be what I would be concerned about in the 13 context that you just mentioned.
14 MR. HAAG: Yes. Well, I mean, there is a 15 lot of work that has to support that, safety-related 16 injection pumps, they have to be installed, all that 17 equipment, yes.
18 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I'm just 19 saying that, because of that, it seems self evident 20 that there has to be a lot of attention from you 21 folks to ensure that the safety conscious work 22 environment, or however you want to measure that 23 attribute, is maintained, because the consequences of 24 missing that date are pretty severe.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 89 So, the pressure to not miss it is going 1
to be pretty severe, and that simply means that you 2
guys have to recognize that, and do what you do 3
accordingly.
4 MR. HAAG: Yes. I mean, that clearly is 5
an objective on our plate to monitor the safety 6
conscious work environment, whether, I mean, we look 7
at the employee concerns programs, are they being 8
responsive to issues. We look during our PI&R 9
inspections. We look at their staff. We question 10 their staff. Do they feel free to raise safety 11 issues?
12 So, we try to monitor that.
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Whatever 14 techniques you use, you know that better than I do, 15 but I mean, like I say, they are going to have to 16 maintain a hanger acceptance rate twice what they've 17 done recently, in order to get where they need to go.
18 And, that's just an example.
19 So, enough said.
20 MR. HAAG: Okay. Moving on to 21 refurbishment, let me just touch base on that a 22 little bit, because, you know, we were here last 23 year, you had a lot of questions as far as how is TVA 24 going to establish quality in the plant, re-establish 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 90 it, verify it, however you want to characterize it.
1 And, refurbishment program, in our minds, does a lot 2
of that, as far as taking the equipment and ensuring 3
design requirements, manufacturing specs are there.
4 I talked a little about, you know, the 5
staff, NRR staff is currently reviewing their program 6
from a scope-wide, that's important so we can 7
understand if they do what's specified in their 8
scope, if they implement that properly.
9 Once the staff has accepted it, and, you 10 know, it's gone through some review and exchange of 11 information, if they implement it properly, which is 12 our job to verify it, the refurbishment program 13 should be successfully done.
14 We had an inspection procedure, a new 15 inspection procedure written for our effort there.
16 One of our very experienced inspectors drafted that, 17 worked with the NRR staff in being able to get that 18 published. That's currently out there, and we are 19 doing some inspection to that, as far as some of the 20 actual refurbishment of components, we are looking at 21 some of that, their operator valve, actuator, 22 refurbishment, and some of the small circulator pump 23 refurbishments.
24 It's really a two-phased approach, our 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 91 inspection effort there. It's to look at scope of 1
their activity, have they identified and included all 2
the right components, systems, into the program, and 3
then sample implementation, look at replacements, 4
look at on-site refurbishment, look at areas where 5
they are accepted as is, based on an evaluation or 6
maybe some testing.
7 So, we'll take that two-phased approach, 8
we'll implement an inspection procedure, to be able 9
to make sure we've properly covered the bases.
10 I mentioned a focus on passive equipment.
11 That's because of, you knwo, the unique nature of 12 some of these passive components, and the fact that a 13 large majority of them they are going to accept as 14 is, based on either evaluation, certain number of 15 tests, certain number of inspections. We want to make 16 sure that they are properly doing that, and they are 17 properly, because they are sampling their 18 inspections, their wall thickness measurements, that 19 they are looking at critical locations and factoring 20 in as found design into, you know, have they 21 properly, you know, looked at sufficient sample size, 22 sample locations and things like that.
23 So, we'll be spending a lot of time 24 looking at their evaluation process and what they are 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 92 doing for passive components.
1 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: You've heard 2
buried piping and cable mentioned a couple of times.
3 MR. HAAG: Yes.
4 And then, the last thing is, just some of 5
our sampling that we are going to be doing, as far as 6
implementation. We'll look both from a risk 7
perspective standpoint, and we are also looking from 8
what's the potential damage that that degradation 9
mechanism could do to the component.
10 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: Bob?
11 MR. HAAG: Yes.
12 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: By the way, for 13 the reporter's benefit, my name is John Stetkar. I'm 14 a member. I came in late.
15 The last bullet there says your samples 16 are being selected based on risk significance. Is 17 the implication of that also applied for passive 18 equipment, because the vast majority of risk 19 assessments don't explicitly include passive 20 components.
21 Passive components, A, and whether 22 general are considered passive component failure 23 modes, for example, spurious closure of a valve or 24 something like that.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 93 So, I was curious how that risk 1
significance was being -- what benchmark was being 2
used to evaluate that risk significance for the 3
sampling.
4 MR. HAAG: For the passive components, 5
the way we've laid out our approach to scoping out 6
and making sure they've got passive components 7
properly included, would be to look at some systems 8
and do vertical slices.
9 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: Okay.
10 MR. HAAG: So, we'll be able to use risk 11 insights to be able to pick out the systems.
12 As far as the actual components within 13 them, you know, we are not going to look at every 14 passive component in the two or three systems, we 15 will look at -- we'll be selective in looking at 16 which passive components.
17 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: I think my 18 question was focused, though, you mentioned taking a 19 vertical slice through systems, based on their risk 20 significance.
21 So, for example, the emergency diesel 22 generators might have relatively high risk 23 significance, but they may not have very many passive 24 components, such that if some systems might have a 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 94 relatively higher percentage of passive components, 1
but not -- may not show up as risk significant, 2
because the risk significance is based on failures of 3
primarily active equipment.
4 MR. HAAG: Yes.
5 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: Do you follow 6
me?
7 MR. HAAG: Yes.
8 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: You know, it 9
gets back into something that -- nobody ever models 10 cables, or failures of cables, and, usually, DC 11 systems, for example, don't show up as being very 12 risk significant, depending on what measures you use.
13 And yet, they may be prone to passive 14 type failure modes.
15 MR. HAAG: As I mentioned, you know, 16 passive components will -- I won't say will receive 17 all of our focus, but certainly they are going to --
18 we are going to give that a good deal of emphasis.
19 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: Sure.
20 MR. HAAG: Because of, you knwo, the 21 unknown nature, and the fact that they are relied on.
22 I mean, they are not presumed to fail.
23 So, we need to look at those, need to 24 make sure -- one of the things that we struggle with 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 95 is for piping, to make sure areas that they go out 1
and sample they've bounded them, that they've looked 2
at the worst case conditions, that they've looked at, 3
you know, low-lying areas. If there has been some 4
water into a system where they didn't think, that 5
they've now captured that back into the program.
6 So, yes, it's got to be more than just --
7 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: I was going to 8
say, but in a sense what you are describing are, 9
primarily, deterministic test types.
10 MR. HAAG: Well, here again, what's the 11 degradation mechanism. You knwo, is it something 12 that you would expect, because it's a wedded system, 13 and it's very likely you could get corrosion versus 14 some of the degradation mechanisms that are just due 15 to handling construction.
16 Well, if it's in an area that doesn't 17 necessarily get a lot of traffic, well, it's probably 18 not going to be that type of damage. So, we'll have 19 to factor that in, too, you know, our sample size.
20 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: Thank you.
21 MR. HAAG: So, as far as the conclusion, 22 you know, we believe, based on the inspections that 23 we've done, construction activities have been 24 properly implemented. We haven't had any significant 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 96 findings of problems that we have identified, TVA has 1
been responsive in addressing those.
2 We believe we have the inspection 3
resources we need, recognizing, you know, the 4
majority of our inspection is yet to come. There's 5
still a lot of unknowns, as far as things that can 6
come up, so that certainly, you know, could surprise 7
us, but we believe we have adequate resources right 8
now.
9 We've identified, once we complete our 10 review of construction deficiencies report, we'll 11 have the scope of all the activities that we want to 12 look at identified. We've got inspectors assigned to 13 a large majority of those, so we have owners, as we 14 refer to people who we can hold responsible, to say, 15 hey, you need to look at these inspections, these are 16 your responsibility, we'll assist you in getting up 17 into the site, but you have to be, you know, 18 proactive and making sure they get done.
19 Scheduling, I think we made progress on 20 there, but that's still a challenge to be able to 21 schedule our inspections and being able to get the 22 information from TVA that we need to properly 23 schedule things.
24 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: And, we've 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 97 talked about that.
1 We are going, of course, hear the last 2
piece of the staff's presentation. We will then hear 3
comments, if any, from the public, then we'll stop 4
that and finally take comments from the members, 5
before concluding the meeting. It's now 5:00, so we 6
are now into overtime.
7 With that said, proceed.
8 MR. MILANO: Okay. All right, the last 9
part of our presentation is discussion of the 10 oversight actions at Watts Bar.
11 In our March, 2009 presentation to this 12 Subcommittee, the staff stated that senior management 13 provided guidance to the staff regarding the review 14 of the operating license application in teh form of 15 an NRR office instruction, LIC-110.
16 And, included in this office instruction 17 was the establishment of a group consisting of 18 participants from both NRR and Region II, which would 19 be established to oversee project completion, 20 In addition to this oversight role, this 21 group, called the Watts Bar Reactivation Assessment 22 Group, and I'll just refer to it as the WRAG, serves 23 as a focal point for the status of the project and 24 for coordination between the Region and the offices 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 98 at Headquarters.
1 Lastly, this office instruction, LIC-110, 2
stated that the specific charter for the group, 3
including its organization and reporting 4
responsibilities, would be established prior to its 5
implementation. And, indeed, this was done, I 6
indicated on here it was done in August of 2009, 7
actually, the Charter itself was signed out in July 8
of 2009, and the August meant that that's when it, 9
actually, got started up.
10 With regard to the Charter itself, I'm 11 not going to go ahead and read this thing, and this 12 Charter, which was jointly prepared or established 13 between the Director of NRR and the Regional 14 Administrator of Region II, both approved the Charter 15 and established the formation of the WRAG.
16 And, in accomplishing these objectives, 17 the Charter describes both the project priorities, 18 the scope of activities, reporting responsibilities, 19 and membership of the group.
20 As you'll see up here, the membership of 21 the group, the Chairman is Mr. Bruce Boger, who is 22 the Deputy Director for Reactor Safety Programs in 23 NRR, and the Vice Chairman is Mr. Tony Gody, Deputy 24 Director, Division of Construction Projects in Region 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 99 II.
1 Along with -- along with those two 2
gentlemen, there are voting and non-voting members of 3
the panel. The voting members are members from the 4
project staffs of both NRR and Region II, along with 5
the senior resident inspector for the construction 6
site, and the other non-voting members are, 7
generally, people that we bring in depending on the 8
scope of the functions that we are going to be 9
discussing at WRAG meetings, like during the last one 10 we had a heavy focus on what we were going to do in 11 terms of vendor inspections. And, we brought our 12 organization into the WRAG meeting.
13 With regard to oversight activities to 14 date, we held our first meeting in September of 2009, 15 and another one recently in January, 2010.
16 Also, following the January meeting, the 17 WRAG met with TVA in an open -- in a public meeting 18 that afternoon, and we discussed a number of the 19 things that were brought up during the staff's 20 internal discussions earlier that day.
21 The last thing I'd like to mention is, is 22 with regard -- there is some formality within the way 23 we review things, and we track everything that comes 24 up within an action item list. We both track it for 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 100 accountability, we make sure that it's a way of also 1
making sure that the issues are resolved, and there's 2
an actual documentation for closure of the items.
3 And, with that, that concludes the 4
presentation on oversight, and it also concludes the 5
overall staff presentation.
6 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Good, thank 7
you.
8 Well, this is, in many ways, a unique 9
effort, and so this unique oversight function is what 10 seems to me at least to be a good way of dealing with 11 that fact.
12 MR. MILANO: That's correct.
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: There isn't 14 any track to run on here for a lot of the issues that 15 have to be addressed, and having a standing group to 16 identify, discuss and resolve them promptly is a good 17 thing.
18 MR. MILANO: That's, indeed, correct, and 19 going back over the -- probably approaching 30 action 20 items that have come out of this, the majority of 21 them are as you indicated. They are things that have 22 come up because of the uniqueness of the Watts Bar 23 situation, more so than just what you'd consider to 24 be just routine activities for any type of project 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 101 completion.
1 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: They will be 2
available to deal with any increasing demands for 3
action on your part that may develop as we get closer 4
to the key dates?
5 MR. MILANO: Well, that's correct, and 6
while we were -- while we originally contemplated 7
like having two of these meetings per year, we are 8
already finding out that that is insufficient, and we 9
are, actually, having our next meeting in May, at the 10 Region II offices, followed several months later with 11 a meeting that will be at the site, and wherein, we 12 will be able to get further direct interaction with 13 TVA.
14 So, it's coming down to about every three 15 months now.
16 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay. Before 17 we go to the public comment period, are there any 18 questions from the members on this last piece?
19 ACRS VICE CHAIRMAN ARMIJO: I don't 20 understand this voting concept as a management 21 concept on a project like this. Could you explain?
22 MR. MILANO: Basically, as an explanation 23 to it is, is as we come up with action items, and we 24 define what we want, what the issue is, and the level 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 102 of effort that needs to go into it, we get the basic 1
group comes to a mutual agreement by vote as to, is 2
that the right approach, is that what we really want, 3
is that the scope of what the action is and stuff, 4
and that's what is meant by voting members.
5 ACRS VICE CHAIRMAN ARMIJO: I don't come 6
from that kind of an environment.
7 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: You don't 8
mean majority rules, right, you mean --
9 MR. MILANO: You reach technical and 10 administrative consensus in some way, and we use the 11 term voting to describe it.
12 MEMBER SIEBER: When I was in industry, 13 there was only one vote.
14 MR. RAGHAVAN: At the end of the project, 15 do you guys think all the safety issues have been 16 addressed? Is there anybody who has a reservation on 17 the safety issues, that either the WRAG meeting or 18 any other staff have anything. That's where the 19 wording comes from.
20 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Yes.
21 MR. RAGHAVAN: Do you believe that to be 22 a consensus. Somebody says four voted in favor, and 23 one not.
24 ACRS VICE CHAIRMAN ARMIJO: Okay, I 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 103 understand.
1 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: All right.
2 So, it's voting, not in a majority rules term, but a 3
detailing term, if I can put it that way.
4 All right. Now, we have, we believe, one 5
or more members of the public on the line. We are 6
going to open it now and ask the first one to speak, 7
be recognized, and provide us their comments, and 8
then when that's done we'll ask if the next person on 9
the line wishes to make any further comments and so 10 on.
11 So, let me ask Maitri, is the line open 12 at this time for comments from the public?
13 MS. BANERJEE: It should be, I can go and 14 verify.
15 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I'll assume 16 it is, subject to checking, and ask the first person 17 who wishes to speak to please identify yourself and 18 provide us any comments that you have.
19 My perception is that the line isn't yet 20 open from the other end, but it soon will be, so just 21 stand by.
22 MS. BANERJEE: The line is open.
23 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Okay. I am 24 told the line is open, so again, let me ask the first 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 104 person, member of the public who has been 1
participating with us, to please identify yourself 2
and give us any comments you have.
3 Well, perhaps, we've overrun the time 4
they wished to spend with us. I'll ask again one 5
more time before we move on, is there any member of 6
the public on the open phone line who wishes to make 7
any comment at this time?
8 We managed, I guess, to extend the time 9
beyond the patience the public member had.
10 So now with that, we'll, as usual, go 11 around the table here to see if any of the members 12 can help us come to some conclusion, based on the 13 Subcommittee meetings, so we can capture that for the 14 minutes that will be prepared.
15 Jack?
16 MEMBER SIEBER: I'd like to thank the 17 people from TVA and the staff, particularly, Region 18 II, for participating.
19 I, actually, have no questions or 20 comments beyond the questions that I asked during the 21 presentation to offer.
22 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Sanjoy?
23 MEMBER BANERJEE: I'd like to join Jack 24 in thanking the staff and TVA for a very interesting 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 105 presentation.
1 I would like to see the hydrology work, 2
which I think the staff has now. It has a bearing, 3
not only on Watts Bar, but also on Bellefonte.
4 I don't think I have any other immediate 5
comments.
6 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: All right.
7 John?
8 MEMBER-AT-LARGE STETKAR: Nothing, 9
thanks.
10 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Sam?
11 ACRS VICE CHAIRMAN ARMIJO: Very tight 12 schedule. That's all I can say.
13 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Said?
14 ACRS CHAIRMAN ABDEL-KHALIK: I have no 15 comments.
16 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Charlie?
17 MEMBER BROWN: None from me.
18 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: Mario?
19 MEMBER BONACA: I have already expressed 20 my thoughts.
21 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: As have I. I 22 will just say that I believe that the -- I know, 23 having been through this a couple of times myself, 24 there comes a time when the regulator says, all 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 106 right, show me your schedule for getting from where 1
you are now to where you say you are going to be at 2
time X in the future, and demonstrate that that's 3
something that you can do, so that I can plan what I 4
need to do.
5 And, that's -- the time that I have in 6
mind is, like I said, 13 months away, so it's not 7
overdue, but before too long it's going to be 8
appropriate, I think, to take a look at what -- the 9
go work to that critical milestone.
10 MEMBER SIEBER: Right.
11 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAY: I don't view 12 fuel load as a critical milestone, fuel load will get 13 loaded when it gets loaded. That's no big deal.
14 But, when you've got to plug in to an 15 adjacent unit, and that unit can only have an outage 16 at a particular time window, that then becomes a big 17 deal, and you need to know what the to go work is 18 starting in the next few months until you get there, 19 would be my only further comment.
20 And, the reason is, not because I have 21 any burden for meeting the schedule, it's because of 22 the impact that schedule can have on the other things 23 that we need to do.
24 Okay, no other comments, we'll stand 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 107 adjourned.
1 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter was 2
concluded at 5:15 p.m.)
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13
1 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY WATTS BAR NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 March 3, 2010
2 Agenda
- Construction Completion Status o Integrated Schedule o Procurement o Engineering o Construction o Refurbishment o Licensing
- Special Topics
- Individual Plant Examination (IPE)
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 Integration
- Conclusion
- Questions M. Bajestani
3 WBN2 Construction Completion Status DSEP TVA Board Decision Full Power Operation October 2012 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M FY 2011 FY2012 FY 2013 FSAR Amendment / OL Update Ready for Fuel Load April 2012 Regulatory Framework Construction Reactivation letter Licensing Activity Significant Project Milestone Major Engineering Complete - March 2010 Detailed Project Schedule Commence Principal Construction Activities Turbine on Turning Gear - October 2010 Primary Hydro - May 2011 Hot Functional - August 2011 M. Bajestani Integrated Safeguards Testing - Apr 2011 U2 Emergency Plan Drill - May 2011 Fill Ice Condenser - July 2011
4 WBN2 Construction Completion Status Procurement Bechtel Oversight of Procurement and Supplier Quality o Shop Surveillance Program Surveillance Reports
281 visits to date
168 reports issued o Training for Counterfeit / Fraudulent Material o ASME QA Program Audits for New Suppliers TVA Oversight of Bechtel QA Performance o Participate in source surveillances o Independent review of receipt inspections o Audit of ASME procurement and material storage M. Bajestani
5 WBN2 Construction Completion Status Engineering Two Unit Operations with margin Overall Progress ~ 60% complete o
Design Modifications ~ 64% complete o
Calculations ~ 72% complete o
Corrective Action Programs and Special Programs ~ 60% complete Historical Design Basis Quality Records o
Retrievable, Legible, Usable Quality of Engineering M. Bajestani
WBN2 Construction Completion Status 6
100 200 300 400 500 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 23-Oct-09 06-Nov-09 20-Nov-09 04-Dec-09 18-Dec-09 08-Jan-10 22-Jan-10 05-Feb-10 19-Feb-10 05-Mar-10 19-Mar-10 02-Apr-10 16-Apr-10 30-Apr-10 14-May-10 28-May-10 11-Jun-10 25-Jun-10 09-Jul-10 23-Jul-10 06-Aug-10 20-Aug-10 Total to Go EDCR Issue M. Bajestani
WBN2 Construction Completion Status Construction Overall Progress ~ 23% complete Construction Focus Areas o Refurbishment Activities o Bulk Work Quality of Construction Critical Path o Safety Injection System o Chemical and Volume Control System o Plant Computer System o Component Cooling System On Track to Complete Construction Activities to Support Current Fuel Load Schedule - April 2012 7
M. Bajestani
8 WBN2 Construction Completion Status M. Bajestani Hangers 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 01-Nov-09 15-Nov-09 29-Nov-09 13-Dec-09 27-Dec-09 10-Jan-10 24-Jan-10 07-Feb-10 21-Feb-10 07-Mar-10 21-Mar-10 04-Apr-10 18-Apr-10 02-May-10 16-May-10 30-May-10 13-Jun-10 27-Jun-10 11-Jul-10 25-Jul-10 08-Aug-10 22-Aug-10 05-Sep-10 19-Sep-10 03-Oct-10 17-Oct-10 31-Oct-10 14-Nov-10 28-Nov-10 12-Dec-10 26-Dec-10 Cumulative Percent Complete Incremental Number of Hangers Fcst Hangers-Incr Actual Hangers - Incr Fcst Pct Complete - Cum Actual Pct Complete - Cum
9 WBN2 Construction Completion Status Refurbishment Program Overview TI-216 WBN 2 Construction Project Refurbishment Program Program ensures WBN2 Plant Equipment meets original:
- Licensing Basis
- Design Basis
- Equipment Vendor Specifications N1302 WBN2 Component Refurbishment Evaluation Component Refurbishment process evaluates each component to assess
- Replacement
- Vendor Refurbishment
- Refurbishment
- No Action Required WBN2 Active Component Refurbishment Procedure/Work Order Work document that provides direction for refurbishment of specific component or active component type.
May include evaluation of passive components during active component work.
00090 WBN2 Passive Component Evaluation/Refurbishment Process that provides criteria for evaluating passive components to determine if further refurbishment is required.
WBN2 Testing Programs Testing Programs to ensure SSCs meet original licensing, design and equipment vendor specifications at turnover.
Testing includes:
- System Flushing
- Construction Testing
- Cold Hydrostatic Tests
- Hot Functional Tests
- RG 1.68 Testing WBN2 Passive Component Evaluation/Refurbishment Procedure/Work Order Work document that provides direction for evaluation and refurbishment, if required of specific passive component/
commodity type.
M. Bajestani
10 WBN2 Construction Completion Status Licensing Overall Progress o Final Safety Analysis Report / Technical Specifications - Complete o Emergency Plan - Template Submitted o Security Plan Cyber Security - Submitted New Rule Update - March 2010 o Quality Assurance Program - Complete o Final Environmental Impact Statement - Submitted o Special Nuclear Material License - Submitted o Corrective Action Program and Special Program Closure Criteria Established - Inspections in Progress G. Arent
11 Individual Plant Examination (IPE)
Probabilistic Risk Assessment Dual Unit Model Key Development Documents o
ASME Standard
Addenda to ASME/ANS RA-S-2008 Standard for Level 1/Large Early Release Frequency Probabilistic Risk Assessment for Nuclear Power Plant Applications, ASME/ANS RA-Sa-2009, February 2009.
Defines PRA capability requirement criteria o
RG 1.200 Rev 1
An Approach for Determining the Technical Adequacy of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Results for Risk-Informed Activities, Regulatory Guide RG 1.200, Rev. 1, January 2007.
Appendix A provides the NRC clarifications and qualifications for the ASME PRA Standard Special Topics F. Koontz
12 Special Topics U2 LERF = 2.62E-6 F. Koontz CDF Initiator Distribution - Unit 2 Total CDF = 3.28E-05/Reactor Year Flood 3.7 3E-06 11%
Others (<3% Each) 2.45E-06 8%
Secondary Side Break Outside 9.49E-07 3%
Loss of 120V AC Vital Instrument Boards 3.0 4E-06 9%
Total Loss of ERCW 5.02E-06 15%
Loss of Offsite Power (Plant Centered) 6.13E-06 19%
Loss of Offsite Power (Grid Related) 7.20E-06 22%
Loss of Offsite Power (Weather Induced) 1.69E-06 5%
Total Loss of Component Cooling System Unit 2 1.11E-06 3%
Loss of Battery Boards 1.46E-06 5%
Special Topics Findings/Enhancements o Peer Review Conducted 11/09 o The peer review covered a total of 326 supporting requirements.
9 not applicable to the WBN PRA.
272 or 86%, rated as supporting requirements met, Category I/II, or greater.
19 or 6%, rated as met, Category I 26 or 8%, rated as not met.
o Disposition and resolution of Facts/Observations evaluated and changes in progress o Peer team concluded PSA meets ASME/ANS PRA standard and that
Documentation is very thorough, detailed and well organized
Processes and tools are at the state of the technology
Qualitative assessment of the sources of modeling uncertainty for the Level 1 model is very comprehensive and well documented 13 F. Koontz
14 Special Topics IPE External Events (IPEEE) General Approach Key Documents o NUREG-1407, Procedural and Submittal Guidance for the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) for Severe Accident Vulnerabilities o Generic letter 88-20, Supplements 4 and 5, Individual Plant Examination Of External Events For Severe Accident Vulnerabilities o Deterministic Seismic Margin Approach (EPRI NP-6041, Electric Power Research Institute, A Methodology for Assessment of Nuclear Power Plant Seismic Margin, Revision 1, August 1991.)
o FIVE Methodology for Fire (EPRI TR-100370 Electric Power Research Institute, Fire-Induced Vulnerability Evaluation (FIVE), Final Report, April 1992.)
F. Koontz
15 Special Topics IPEEE General Approach Utilized WBN Unit 1 IPEEE Report as Baseline WBN2 approach for IPEEE will closely follow the approach used for WBN1 WBN2 Implements same Corrective Action Programs used on WBN1 WBN1 IPEEE program indicated no vulnerabilities and included only 1 modification for tornado wind (applicable to WBN1 and WBN2)
Results for WBN2 are expected to match WBN1, with no vulnerabilities anticipated Schedule IPEEE Design Phase Report Submittal - March 2010 Final Submittal - As Built Validation - August 2011 F. Koontz
16 Special Topics
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 Integration o Staffing o Department Readiness reviews in progress o INPO Visit and Follow-up o Work Control
Work Orders reviewed by experienced Operations personnel
Work on Common systems uses WBN Unit 1 processes o Interface Removal for Testing o Meetings
Work in operating spaces reviewed daily
Problem Evaluation Reports (CAP) reviewed for operability by Operations personnel
Weekly with VP and direct reports
Chemistry/Environment with Preoperational Test M. Bajestani
17 Conclusion Steady Progress in Engineering, Construction and Licensing Refurbishment Activities will ensure plant meets original licensing, design and equipment vendor specifications Project is on Schedule and Budget to Support Current Fuel Load Schedule - April 2012 Stop work when it is required Appreciate Opportunity to Address ACRS on WBN Unit 2 Progress M. Bajestani
18 QUESTIONS
1 ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Regarding Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2 Status of Licensing and Inspection Docket No. 50-391 March 3, 2010
2 Agenda
- Licensing
- Construction Inspection
- Project Oversight
3 NRR Presentation of Status of Licensing Activities
4 Review of Operating License Application
- Original Operating License Application - Sept 1976
- Staff Review Status
5 Safety Evaluation Report Topics
- Staff review in progress
- Project schedule managed with EPM
- Amendment Status
- A92: Baseline FSAR for Unit 2
- A93 April 09: preparation of SER inputs
- A94 Aug 09: TVA responding to staff RAIs
- A95 Nov 09: product review complete
- A96 Dec 09: I&C platforms assessing completeness
- A97 Jan 10: product review underway
6 Corrective Action Programs
- Developed in 1985 in response to NRC letter regarding indentified construction deficiencies
- 29 Corrective Action and Special Programs
- Staff completed program reviews
- Inspection of implementation
7 Generic Communications
- Approach to review
- Reviews completed during licensing of Unit 1 (pre-1995)
- Pre-1995 items reviewed with applicable SER sections
- Items issued after 1995 separately reviewed
- Status of generic communications in SSER 21
- Recent focus on evaluation of Post-1995 items
- Status of NRR review - post-1995:
- Review completed - 25
- Waiting for information from TVA - 5
- NRC Review in progress - 5
8 Final Environmental Statement NUREG-0498, Final Environmental Statement Related to operation of Watts Bar 1 and 2, December 1978
- Supplemented in 1994 for Unit 1 operation TVA Final Supplemental EIS, February 2008 and January 2009 Status of review
- September 2009, notice of intent to prepare supplement to FES-OL for Unit 2 and conduct a scoping meeting
- October 2009, public meeting near the site regarding environmental scoping process and to obtain comments
- Contractor support for Draft supplement from PNNL
- March 2010, TVA response to RAIs (non-SAMA)
9 Section 13.3 of SER TVA WBN REP submitted as a site plan in January 1982 Having withdrawn the WBN REP submitted in 1982, TVA resubmitted WBN REP in February 1993 - reviewed only on Unit 1 Supplement 20 to SER, February 1996
- Includes FEMA findings
- Concludes that requirements for full power license to Unit 1 met.
Status
- Awaiting FEMA finding on off-site planning
- Staff RAI on onsite planning in preparation Radiological Emergency Plan (REP)
10 Physical Security Plan
- Currently approved site security plan
- Plan revisions in March 2010
- Incorporate rule changes
- Better description of the status of Unit 2
11 Schedule
- Staff remains on-schedule with licensing and inspection activities to meet TVAs request to receive an OL by April 2012
12 Region II Presentation of Status of Construction Inspection Activities
13 Inspection Activities
- Completed 2009 End of Cycle review
- construction programs and activities properly implemented
- effective controls were in place
- no significant performance issues were identified
- RII expended 8837 staff hours on the project in FY09
- Two new Resident Inspectors selected (total of 4 construction residents)
- Reviewing 200 historical Construction Deficiency Reports for inspection applicability
- Monitoring construction activities for impact on Unit 1
14
- Major inspections performed:
- S/G eddy current
- RCS welding for RTD bypass manifold replacement
- Engineering
- Upcoming inspections:
- PI&R
- Engineering follow-up
- Refurbishment
- Prepare for system preoperational testing (IMC 2513)
- Construction scheduling information improving but still a challenge Inspection Activities (Cont.)
15
- Staff reviewing TVAs Refurbishment Program
- Inspection Procedure 37002 Issued
- Two phased inspection approach:
- Verify required SSCs scoped into program
- Sample a variety of implementation activities
- Focus on passive components
- Samples selected based on risk significance and potential damage from degradation mechanism Refurbishment
16 Conclusions
- Construction activities properly implemented; no significant inspection findings
- RII has adequate inspection resources
- Required inspections have been identified
- Number of inspections has increased consistent with increase in safety-related construction activities
- Scheduling inspections based on TVAs construction schedule remains a challenge
17 Oversight of Watts Bar Unit 2 Activities
18 Oversight
- Watts Bar Unit 2 Reactivation Assessment Group
- Established by charter in August 2009
19 Oversight
- WRAG Charter Objectives
- To provide oversight and management direction to determine whether the required actions have been reviewed by the staff, implemented successfully by TVA, and the staffs findings and conclusions prepared to ensure that Unit 2 meets all the relevant regulatory requirements and can be safely operated.
- Make a recommendation to the Director of NRR and Regional Administrator, Region II, at the appropriate time, whether the activities discussed in NRR Office Instruction LIC-110 and NRC IMC 2517 have been successfully completed.
20 Oversight - WRAG Membership Chairman:
Bruce Boger, Deputy Director for Reactor Safety Programs, NRR Vice Chairman: Anthony Gody, Deputy Director, Division of Construction Programs, Region II Voting Members: Project staff from NRR and Region II Senior resident Inspector Others: As needed
21 Oversight - WRAG Activities
- Met in September 2009 and January 2010
- Held meeting with TVA on January 12, 2010
- WRAG Action Item Lists being tracked, resolved, and documented for closure