ML19308C567

Interview of W Cavanaugh (AR Power & Light Co) on 791127 in Little Rock,Ar (Part 2).Pp 1-29

ML19308C567
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear, Crane
Issue date:	11/27/1979
From:	Cavanaugh W ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO., NRC - NRC THREE MILE ISLAND TASK FORCE
To:
References
TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001280596
Download: ML19308C567 (30)

Text

[gQ));

c,f i

I

)

Transcript of Proceedings O

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION TMI SPECIAL INQUIRY GROUP INTERVIEW 0F WILLIAM CAVANAUGH, PART II l

l t

O D

D O

' 3

}[

t

~

oc5

b. ]

w a

(THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS PREPARED FROM A TAPE RECORDING)

PLACE:

Little Rock, Arkansas DATE:

Tuesday, 27 November 1979 ACE - FEDERAL REPORTERS,INC.

OfficialReporters M4 North Capitel Street Washington, D.C. 20001 N '***

NATIONWIDE COVELAGE. DAILY (202) 347-37Co

~

8001280ffg {~~

..y.7,,

n r

-1, m

~. ~ -..,. _...........__

. ~.

f 4'

ic

CR8631 1

=

I L'.1 TMI SPECIAL INQUIRY GROUP-12 3

[-

i. +

.- 4 8

p

!5 4

i

-6 t

7 8

'Little Rock,. Arkansas 9

Tuesday, 27 November 1979 t.

s 10 Ill I

s

(.

8 r

' 12 l.

4 -

- 13

=

14 A.

3 I

15 (THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS' PREPARED'FROM A TAPE RECORDING) f 16 i

l17 i

. 18 i

19 I.i'

.20

- 21 i.

i-

- 22 l.;

l[

23 l'

~

. g

[Aco. Federal Reportersfinc.

- 25 l-

z. w.,

w

[.-

,,l.k + m,. ;,.% +

,,.n e.,-

nva-~,,,,'wr,-'

..,-.+.-,,=----w.

.n'-~~w

w. n'-n-.

.- -..~.. --.- -. ~ - _ - -,. --

,n-

--,---+.m n.n-

4 0 3 1 ' 0 1 O'l 2

~mgc0M I

P R 0 C E'E D I N G S

~

2 Cp VOICE:

Mr. Cavanaugh, are any operator actions 3

required on a reactor trip at ANO-1 principally in order to

()~

4 mitigate the eff ects. of decreasing pressurizer level?

5 Cat <Lw.

VOICE:

Well, I would have to say, you have to o

l ook a t the ~ procedure f or that, and I don't -- I can't 7

recall the steps in tha t particular procedure.

I couldn't 6

say at the present time.

9l C>

VOICE:

So you are unaware whether the operators'"

10 a t ANO-1 are taking these operator actions.

11 Causw.

VOICE:

Well, I would say that they're following 12 the procedure.

What they're doing is in accordance with 13 those. procedures.

O-14 CQ VOI CE:

But you're not aware of whether they're kl 15 taking these actions or not?

Io C. Au Aw.

VOICE:

Well, if they're not taking the action, 17 they'd be in violation of procedure.

18 CY VOICE:

Was there a t any time, to your knowledge, 19 direction to the operator to take these actions?

20 Cziojlw.

VOICE:

Which actions are you talking about?

21 (fp VOICE:

Isola ted le tdown and initiating HPI, 22 starting additional makeup.

Cag. pin.

VOICE:

Well, initiating HPI, as I told before, I 23 y

24 oc remember that.

Yes.

(3

(/

25 dh voice:

Was there ever any consideration given to w

--e e

s e-m

=

8631-01"02-3 mgc0ML i

lth's impact on the operator, of having to take those 2

immediate actions?

~3 -

d a vaa.

. VOICE:

We'll. initiating high pressure injection

()

4 on -a. loss of pressurizer level of ~ pressure is something that 5-

.the operator is calle'd on to do.

Tha t's a normal operating o

type t h i n.g.

Now we were directing, I believe, tha t t he 7

operator ensure that high pressure injection was initiated, 8

that we would not lose indicated pressurizer level.

(p VOICE:

Was there ever any concern about tripping 9-10 off the pre ssurizer heaters on low level?

.11 0.- Q u a n.

VOICE:

I -- I don' t recall.

12-C?

VOICE:

Did you at any time during this time 13 period that we're talking about -- let's say, August of 1974 14 to approximately May of 1975 -- ever contact anyone at TMI 15 and discuss this matter?

16 Ocgga p,.

VOICE:

I did not personally, no, but I mean there 17 could have been other members of AP&L that did.

18 Cp VOICE:

Are you r"a - 3f those types of i

19 conversations?

20 0.cLvo.W.

VOICE:

I can't recall today whether those took 21 place'or not..

22 (3p VOICE:

Did you review any of the test 23 deficiencies that were noted during the power (inaudible) 24 test program at ANO-l?

AU 25 bv M.

VOICE:

Did we review --- as part of, as a member rv

,---g e=W

---me-1 u y e-1 g-g v4--P=

g g--

W%-W

8631.01 03 4

mgc0M i

of. the Saf ety Review Conni ttee, yes, I did.

2_

k VOICE:

All of them?

3 Cwa n.

VOICE:

Well, not all of them, no.

The Safety

(')

~4 Review Committee did not review all -- I don't believe they 5-reviewed all test deficiencie s.

dh VOICE:

There was a turbine reactor trip test 6

7 conducted during -- well, there was more than one -- but 8

there was a particular one performed during the power 9

(inaudible) test program, and as an acceptance criteria for 10 t ha t te st, there was a requirement that high pressure

.11 injection not be initiated and that pressurizer level remain 12 between 40 inches and 300 inches.

Were you aware of any ' eficiencies generated in d

13 14 that regard during that test?

15 (Lotu cc a.

VOICE:

I. don't remember that specific test's 16 resul ts.

())

VOI CE:

Next I'm going to show you a communication 17 18 under your sigr.ature to Mr. R.-Govers of. Babcock & Wilcox 19 Corpora tions dated March 3, 1975, and the subjec t is 20

" Arkansas Nuclear one -- Unit One -- Pressurizer Level 21 Setpoint."

Would you take a look at that and refresh your 22

- memory?

23 In ' this memorandum. ita s pointed out that you had 24 had previous wri tten connunica tions and then the previous

}

25 telephone conversation that I refer to on the 12th of r

~8631 01 04 5

mgc0M l-December, 1974.

Apparently during the telephone 2

conversation, the. subject of ' comple tely voiding the 3

' pressurizer. wa s discu ssed.

n

)

4 OQS * -

VOI CE:

Mmm-htam.

5 (f'

VOICE:

And you stated that B&W pointed out that o

there was no operational problem as long as the pressure 7

stays.away from automatic high pressure injection actuation, 8

that manual high pressure injection is not required as long -

9 as pressure indication is available.

10 Could you explain that to me -- what that means?

.11 Let. me read i t again for you tha t there's no operational 12 problem as long as the pressure stays away f rom automatic 13 high pressure injection, that manual high pressure injection 14 is not required as long as reactor coolant' pressitr9 15 indication is available in the control room.

Io Cha n.

VOICE:

Mmm-hmm.

17

. VOICE:

Could you explain what you meant by those 18 words?

19 O o' U c( H.

VOICE:

I don't understand what you mean by 20

" explain."

21 CP VOICE:

Why that high pressure injection is not-22 required as long as you have pressure indication.

-23 CJku m w.

VOICE:

Pre ssure indication above the _high 24 pressure injection setpoint.

h VOICE:

In other 'words, -if on a reactor trip.the 25

8631 01-~05' 6

.mgcOM

- 1.

pre ssure didn't decrease -- I believe-1500 pounds psi is 2

your high pre ssure injection setpoint..

Is that correct?

3

&auaw.

VOICE:

I don't know that.

I -- i t may be.

I'd

'h

-4 have to verify that.

5 C)

VOICE:

~

Well, that s -- down in the body of.the 6

memorandum, I believe you state that.

7 (la u S--

VOI CE:

Okay.

6 C}

VOICE:

Okay.

So if we can understand this -- on 9

a reactor trip, if pressure f alls 'but does not go below 1500 10

. po unds --

.11 Caga a -

VOICE:

Mmm-hmm.

12 (p

VOICE: -- that you don't need to manually initiate 13 high pressure injection.

4 14 Coggp a -

VOICE:

That's wha t B&W told us, yes.

O s/

15 C

VOICE:

Okay.

Well what was your position on 16 that?

17 CS6i? d -

VOICE:

We asked for more information.

C)

VOICE:

Well, what was your reason for asking for 18 4

19 more information?

20 Ca.y_cm.

VOICE:

Well, because we sti11 weren't satisfied.

21 (k

VOICE:

Well, in what way were you not satisfied.

22 (lavcxn.

VOICE:

Well, when you lose -- we lost indication 23 on a = couple of trips, and vna wanted to have f urther 24 information to ensure that, in fact, we did not have a

~25 safety problem because we lost ~ indica tion.

e~g t--

• -7?

-r

=

'8631:01 06' 7

~

mgc0M I

C)

VOICE:

Well, what was your concern?

2 (1932 6 VOICE:

Well, I taink I just told you wha t the 6

3 concern was.

4 CP VOICE:

We'll, would you re phrase i t again?

Maybe

()

5 I. mi ssed it.

6 02iMon.

VOICE:

Well, our concern was that we lost 7

indication on a reactor trip.

8 Cp VOICE:

What was your concern about that?

9 Losing indica tion?

10 (loggpa.

VOICE:

Well, i t's not normal to lose indication.

11 Cd VOICE:

But what was the source of your 12 concern?

You say it's not normal, but you must have had a 13 basis for your concern, rather than it be not normal.

14 CIChP

't -

VOICE:

We's, I 'd -- I haven' t f igured -- is i t O

\\/

15 normal -- I don't think it's normal to lose indication on 16 the pressurizer, and that was our concern -- that we, in 17 fact, did not have assurance at that point in time of what 18 was happening to the pressurizer level.

19 Now B&W subsequently provided that assurance.

We 20 also had a concern about initiating and not initiating high 21 pressure injection.

22 (jb VOICE:

Is it a f air characterization that you 23 were concerned about what the operator -- the information 12 4 the operator had to monitor what was going on inside the --

p)

(.

25 inside the reactor?

8631 Oln07 8

(QCth; VOICE: _That was part of 'it.

mgc0M i

2

.h VOICE:

Have your operators ever demonstrated, to 3

your knowledge, any concern about losing pressurizer level

()'

4 indication.

S CCRA A>

VOICE:

At that point'in time, ye's.

I mean we had 6

a concern.

It's not just the operators.

7 Q

VOICE:

But the operators did have a concern?

hu k" '

VOICE:

Well, i t was the operators that saw the 6

Y loss of level, and they expre ssed a concern to the plant 10 manager.

The plant manager looked into it.

II Q

VOICE:

Was that oral concern or written concern?

9 12 C.g o.

VOICE:

I can't say that.

13 Q

VOICE:

Now when you say that you're concerned 14 about pre ssurizer level indication, is that in the context 15 that the pressurizer level indication provides an indication 16 of liquid inventory in the reactor coolant system?

Cavan..

l 17 VOICE:

Yes.

Q j

16 VOICE:

Now you asked for f urther analysis, 19 f urther information, f rom B&W, and you had a concern that the reactor core remains covered with water.

Was that your 21 only concern?

i -

22 Oavan.

VOI CE:

Well, I -- I thought I just previously

- 23 told you before that -there were -- we had other concerns.

Q VOICE:

I understood it.

You had a concern about 24 25 the information the operator-had on the level in the 4

w pi-

+

er e

3

--1p*-

W+e-7w-ge w y O-

--g-9 t--

7 v'fr--T

4 8631101 08 9

mgc0M-1 reactor coolant system or the inventory.

2-O C' Uh.

VOICE:

We had the concern about the high pressure 3

injection.

'4 Q

VOICE:

The nozzles?

S 606uo.w.

VOICE:

No, the high pressure injection is what I 6

said.

h VOICE:

What do you mean by that?

7 b% "' VOICE:

In'itiating or not initiating high pressure 8

Y injection.

10'-

Cp VOICE:

And the concern for that was - why were

.I l you concerned about initiating high pressure injection?

Q A y. n.

VOICE:

Well, we were, in f act, manually 12 13 initiating high pressure injection.

As I previously stated, 14 that we did not think that the normal recovery for the life 15 of this plan-of a reactor trip should be the manual 16 initiation of high pressure injection in order to maintain 17 pressurizer level.

There were a certain r. umber of cycles on 18 those pressurizer - on the high pressure injection nozzles, 19 and we did not f eel it was prudent to use up those cycles, 20 when ~ in f act we f elt there were other changes that could be 21 made to keep pressurizer level indication within the 22

-indicating band.

Q VOICE:

So if the operator had -to. initiate high l

23 24 pressure injection on a reactor trip - -this was a concern l

~'%

. (d 25 of yours.

I t's something zyou f elt they shouldn't have to l

l 1

1

1

~

d631 0l'09 10

.mgc0M i

do?

2.

Co va~

VOI CE:

Yes.

-Q VOICE: 'Okay.

Next I'm going to show you 3

(f 4

memoranda f rom the Babcock & Wilcox Company addre ssed to you 5

under the. signature of J.B. Kennedy but_ written by or signe-4 6

by R. A. Govers.

The subject here -- this is dated Aprit 3, 7

1975 -- the subject is " Arkansas Nuclear One Pre ssurizer 8

Setpoint", B&W ref erence-NSS-8.

9 In this memorandum it stated that you had 10 previously expressed a concern over the momentary loss of

.11 pressurizer level indication following a reactor trip and 12 requested additional information to clarify that maintaining 13 the pressure above 1500 psi would ensure that the reactor 14 core remains covered with water.

/~)s

(_

15_

I t says this protec tion can be demonstrated by 16 using a very simple principle, and they go into some 17 technical explanation as to why it's a concern.

I assume 18 that you reviewed this information?

Was it reviewed by your 19 Saf ety' Review Commi ttee?

C-gyjyn.

VOICE:

I would have to say it was probably made 20' 21 availble to them as a result of our continuing concern for 22 the pressurizer level indication.

(?

VOICE:

Did this information resolve all your 23 24 concerns regarding the pressurizer level problems that had Q

(./

25

_been discussed previously?

ca-

863tT01 10

.11

.cgc0M-I' O oga r.

VOI CE:

Not to my knowledge.

I believe the t we 2

continued the pursuit of this through 1975.

h VOICE:

You did?

3 OTH. VOI CE:

Yes.

I

~4 5

Q VOICE:

So there are memoranda subsequent to April 6

.3, 1975?

Cap.

VOICE:

Yes.

As a matter of fact, I believe in 7

8 July of '75 there's a - it may not be July, but it's 9

sometime, I believe, in the summer of '75 - we were 10 presented a f airly comprehensive analysis by B&W, and ther,

11 I believe, even maybe into '76, there.were some -- still 12 some continuing discussions related to it.

h VOICE:

Is the issue resolved right now, 13 14 Mr. Cavanaugh?

O V

15 b a-v A a, VOI CE :

Yes.

Io VOICE:

How was it resolved.

17 Ottgm VOICE As I stated previously, i t was resolved 18 primarily by making changes in control systems to ensure 19 that we did not lose pressurizer level indication.

20 Q

VOICE:

You previously stated that if the operator 21 had to initiate high pressure injection, that that was a 22 concern to you, and tha t's some thing you didn't want the 23 operator to have to do.

Oga,,.

Primarily for the reason that we do not VOICE:

24 f3 V

25

-f eel that that was a normal, expected procedure af ter a

,n

.,.,v.

e

8631 01 11 12 tgc0M l-

' reactor trip, and we did not want to use that as a means of 2

maintaining. pressurizer level because there were only a 3

certain amount of cycles on that -- on the nozzle.

( ; '

4 It VOICE:

Let me talk to you hypothetically.

If v

T 5

your operators. were still taking that action, o

hypothetically, today at ANO-l -- t ha t i s, t hey had to 7

isolate letdown and initiate high pressure injection --

6 would you consider the issue to be adequately resolved?

9 (20Lua VOICE:

Well, I don ' t -- I don' t t hin k tha t n.

10 obviously that -- that was not our position then, and I 31 don't think i t would be now.

12 C)

VOICE:

Mr. Cavanaugh, I'm going to terminate the 13 interview at this point to allow you to provide us with the i

14 rest of -the documenta tion tha t I have asked for and that you

/D.

5J 15 have mentioned.

That is all further correspondence related 16 to this subject that you, AP&L, has provided, and when that 17 information is provided to us and we've had a chance to look 18 at it, then we'll go back and finish the rest of the 19 interview.

20 Ogbidr a -

VOICE:

Okay, I guess it was my understanding that 21 you were going to go and look through the files and that 22 that's all you said you wanted to do.

When you say " produce 23 the 'inf ormation", what exactly do you mean?

You know, from 24 our conversation this morning, there were ' ; things you

(~);

~

(-

25 asked me to go back and look for.

One was whether there was

.8631.01 12 13 gc0M i

a wri tten memorandum of the-telephone conversation of 2

December 12 between myself, Don Reeter, and Hal Baker of 3

B&W, and then there. was a -- also a request that we go back

(')

4 and look and see if B&W responded with written 5

correspondence to our December 6,

'74 le tter.

6

'Now tha t -- in providing you a ccess to the 7

files were basically things -- am I correct in this is what 8-you're asking for?

9 Cl)

VOICE:

Let's go off the record.

10' (Discussion off the record. )

11

{ VOICE: Af ter f urther discu ssions with 12 Mr. Cavanaugh about his availability to talk to us later in 13 the week, we've determined it's better to go ahead and 14 complete es much of the interview as possible now, (, / 15 recognizing that we don't have all the documentation and to haven't reviewed it. 17 Mr. Cavanaugh, at any point during your review of l 18 the pressurizer level problems, to your knowledge, was it 19 reported to the NRC that the problems existed? (2 j> 9 n-VOICE: The NRC inspection people were aware that 20 9, 21 we were pursuing this. Yes. 22 CP VOICE: How were they aware? 23 CJN u u n. VOICE: Well, they followed the test program. ~ bh VOICE: Yes, but were they aware of these pieces 24 / 25 of correspondence? i

8631 01'13. 14 tgc0M 1 Cot vo+ VOICE: If you're asking me if they were aware of 2 each piece 'of correspondence that you showed me this 3 morning, I can't say that. (2) VOICE: Well what is your perception of how they ()_ 4 5 were aware of the details of this issue? O yjl" - VOICE: Well, they were aware of the f act that we dh o 7-were, in f act, following this situation. They reviewed all' 6 the Plant Saf ety Committee meeting minutes. They reviewed 9 all the Safety Review Committee meeting minutes. Wha t else 10 they reviewed or above that that was discussed, I can't .11 really say, but they followed the test program, each test, 12 and the cor.cerns that were had, the deficiencies. 13 dh VOICE: And to your knowledge, they were 14 satisified -- by " satisfied" I mean they took no action 15 regarding this issue? They didn't ask you to do anything or lo to provide further information? 17 O CLu3n. VOI CE: I don't remember any specific request. 18 Now there could have been a request, and I just don't 19 remember. 20 Ck) VOICE: Okay. Next I'd like to turn your 21 a ttention to a response to some NRC Bulletins that were 22 generated as a result of the TMI accident. 23 - AP&L cited two 'incidences that involved momentary 24 loss of pressurizer level during_ a reactor trip f rom 100 Q( / 25 percent power. Subsequent tuning of the integra ting control

0331)01:14' 15 cgc0M i system a pparently solved the. problem. 2

In reading some of-the memoranda, I believe tha t

. ou had an event tha t took place during a trip f rom 75 3 y .( ) 4 percent power that-lost -- where there was-a loss of S pre ssurizer level indication. Was there some reason why 6 that wasn't reported? C jd3 % VOICE: Are you saying that that wasn't one of the 7 ,3 8 two instances? (}) VOICE: What was submitted apparently was trips Y 10 from the 100 percent power, the first one being in December ,11 of 1974 and the second one being in May of 1975. I'll refer 12 to your Item 2 in the December 6, 1974, memorandum'where you 13 say, "Following a reactor trip from 75 percent full power, 14 level indication was lost for 45 seconds." 'O D 15 O cs vo -- VOICE: Mmm-hmm. 16 (3p VOICE: Was there some reason why that incident 17 wasn't reported?. 18 Ga.uae. VOICE: Well, I'm not sure how the question was 19 asked and how the da ta wa s developed. I didn't compile that 20 data, so I can't say how it was done -- whether that was, 21 you know, for the trips that have occurred since the unit's 22 been in commercial operation, I'm not sure. 23 Ch

VOICE:

Okay. During your review of these other 24 two events, the reactor trips f rom 100 percent power, 25 a pparently the statement was made: "Following n .,v.< p --n.,

8631. 01 15 16 mgc0M I: investigation, we. determined that the RCS T-ave following '2: reactor trip'was slightly lower than design. 3' C A V A w. VOICE: M mm-hmm. CI _VO ICE: How did you go about de termining wha t ()[ f 4 5 design was? 6 (lous s o. VOICE: Well, I believe that was a recommendation 7 by -- one of the recommencations by B&W's -- where the d average temperatures should be.kept, so that would provide 9 further assurance against losing.the pressurizer level 10 indication. 11 ()) VOICE: So when you say " design", tha t is a number 12 that was f urnished to you by B&W -- not something you 13 extracted f rom a design document? 14 ( CLvan. VOICE: No, I believe B&W gave us tha t O} k-15 recommendation, to the best of my recollection. 16 ()) VOICFr They gave you a specific number for T-ave 17 design during a reactor trip? 'l8 O *^F^ " - VOICE: I think they said -- this is strictly from 19 memory -- I recall them saying something about maintaining 20 T-AB above a. certain value.so that you'd have adequate 21 a ssurance of maintaining pressurizer level indication. 22 (]h VOICE: I :f urther noted a statement that "the -loss 23 of indication was not an anomaly of the system but was due -24 - to the lack of fine tuning of the system." 25 . O A. yv VOI CE: Mmm-hmm. r* -r w. m+

n 8631-01 16-17 -( VOI CE s. 'I have here an excerpt f rom an inspec tion mgc0M 1 2' report, Inspection Report 50-313 74-14. In the inspection 3 re por t, the inspector addresses some test restitr. that he t( [ _4-reviewed and further some explanations of why an acceptance -5 criteria wasn't met. b" " ' VOICE: Mmm-hmm. 6 i 7' (I) VOICE: This explanation that he lists here is: 8 "The corrective action listed in the test document for these 4 9 deficiencies indicate that none is possible and that these 10 deficiencies are characteristic of the primary system." 11 Ye t when I go to the response to the bulk in 7905, 12 the words that I read are : "The loss of indication was not 13-an anomaly of the system, but was due to a lack of fine 14. tuning of the system." 15 (20Luam VOI CE s - Ne ll, if you_look at the date on that, 16 t ha t's ' 74. 17 ()) VOICE: Yes. 18 Q SjaAr-VOICE: And tha t's hi s words. As I stated j 19 previously -- 20 VOICE: Excuse-me. He appears to be quoting 21 what's in the AP&L test document. 22 C@ed? ^* VOICE: I can't say tha t. he's quoting or-not. All 23-I can read is what you're reading there. Okay? And all I'm 24 saying is, that's '74, and as.I. stated. previously, this -- (O ' / 12 5 .this followup on this pre ssurizer level indication af ter

8631 01 17 18 mgc0M l ~ reactor trip went on past 1974,'and the words you see there 2 are words that I'm sure that were at the completion of all 3' the various analyses.that were done. And as I said, the end 4 result -- maintain pressurizer level - was the fine tuning 'S of_the system. 6 VOICE: But for the purpose of approving the test, 7 a pparently the - 6 Covh - VOI CE: Those were wri tten at two dif f erent times, .9 and -I don't think yoe can compare one to the other, if 10 tha t's what you're trying to do. h VOICE: I'm trying to say, in the context of 11 j 12 approving the test during the startup test program, though, 13 the corrective action listed for the test deficiency was 14 apparently that none was po ssible. 15 Cga n. VOICE: I don't know that. 16 Q VOICE: Okay. I'm assuming tha t the -- 17 CAdA"' VOICE: It would be hard for' me to say that, gj 16 seeing as how we continued on with the investigation of the .19 thing through '75. 20 Q VOICE: That does appear -- if this inf orma tion 21 is, in fact, correct - that does appear to -be a conflict 22 of - 23 l Cotah. VOICE: I don't know.- I don't know what he used 24 to write that. I can't say. ~

25 h

VOICE: Okay. Mr. Cavanaugh, at any time during L

m 862110210l? 19 bgc0M 1 this study, on your part, on the people-respons'ible-to you's 2 part,. did anybody. ever talk about getting the taps changed 3 in their posi tion? - ,(); '4-OW8~ .VOI CE : We talked about providing - we 5'. investigated other means of ' pressurizer level indication, a 6 lower: location,.and the. final determination was that we 7 couldn't provide one. -8 C? 1 VOICE: Why was tha t? - '. 9 Ocivan-VOICE: I believe that the investigation we ~ 10_ pursued and -the design change - we put the tap for this ' lower indication, I believe it was in the storage line, and '12 due to the f act of the water movement in the storage line 13 that we.did not f eel we could get adequate indication. 14 9 VOICE: Now was this a formal review that somebody 'v - 15 did, or was this just some thinking? Is there 16 documenta tion? OfL_* - VOICE: Yes. 17 18 VOICE: There is? I9 O A.1'.S " ' VOICE: Mmm-hmm. VOICE: How would that be manifested? 20 21 - O '^r" - VOICE: It's in the files. 22 CP VOICE: At the plant? -23 OS3

• a -

VOICE: Yes. k VOICE: In file 37-40? L24-

25 Og VOICE:

That I.can't say. 37-40 is a number. - I l

8621 02 02 20-cgc0M: l-I'm'.not sure that would be. the 'same. file at the plant. I 2 think the best thing would be, when 'you get to the plant, 3 'ask them. You know, tell them what the subject matter is, (] 4 and I'm sure that they can tell you what other file numbers 5 you should. look into. 6. VOI CE: Was there. ever any thought given to moving 7~ the taps to.where they were l'ocated on the other -B&W units? 8 Ca vu. VOICE: Well, there was no -- there was no point 9 in the pressurizer to do that. I mean there was no tap.in 10 the vessel. to be able to do tha t. .11 VOICE: But you cou make one? D V""' 12 VOICE: I don't believe that that was very 13 practical at that point in time. I4 h VOICE: Why was it impractical? o 00tum1 VOICE: Well, you'd have to drill a new hole L/ 15 lo inside the reactor ve ssel. 17 h VOICE: Why couldn' t you - not the reactor 16 ve sse l, bu t -- 19 C o.u aa. VOICE: You mean into the pressurizer. Yes. 20 VOICE: Why was tha t imprac tical? OM 4-VOICE: Well, f rom the standpoint -of - what. you'd 21. 22 have to do -- associa ted wi th that, you know -- I don't 23 recall. I mean, I know tha t was discussed, but I don't -- 24 but there were problems associated with it. A A L/ = 25 V VOICE: 1611 do you remember why it was ultimately 4

8621=02LO3' 21 mgc0M-

l-rejected?

2-' O Aub. VOI CE:. I gue ss f or. two reasons that I can think '3 of, and there :are probably maybe more. One is we'were >~ 1) 4-looking-a t a dif f erent location for the -- at a lower level j. 5-f or _ the lower tap. And number two._is, by the fine tuning of 6 Lthe system _ we were _ able to maintain 'the' pressurizer level 7 indication af ter a reactor trip. 8 (3) VOICE: ~Which gets back to - _you f eel that the Y problems have been _adequa tely resolved? Cavan. VOICE: Yes. 10 11' lbh VOICE: Getting back to your response to Bulletin - 12 7905.- And your statement here apparently is, "Therefore, 13 level -indication would have been restored by HPI and, as 14 desired,- the steam bubble would have remained in the D, A/ 15-pressurizar." And this is in the context that the 16 pressurizer voided and the pressure dropped. "The steam 17 bubble would have remained in the pre ssurizer." 18 Is that your knowledge of what would ha ppen --- the 19 physical -- 0 0a>bm VOICE: If you'll let me read it, maybe that might 20 - 21 hel p. ' Reading it out of context is a li ttle hard. 22 (Pause.) 23 This -- I'm in agreement with this paragraph, if 12 4 t ha t was ~ your. question. Yes. .,q (3p VOICE: In other words, if the pressurizer voided i _/ 25 s

i 8621102'04: 22 agc0M-I on - a reactor : trip - 2

CQvh, VOICE:

I don't believe ' tha t's what i t says. -k VOICES. Okay. Would you - 3 '4~ bua a i. VOICE: 'I believe what it. says is that the HPI S. system would have come on, restored -pressurizer level, and '6 ' prevented it f rom dropping out of the pressurizer. 7 The ref ore, level indication would have been restored by HPI -8 and, as desired, the steam bubble would'have remained in the 9 ' pressurizer. Q VOICE' So that ~ the issue of voiding the 10 11 pressurizer is not being discussed there? 12 O. a.v o.n. VOI CE: No, it's - the issue is that it doesn't 13 ha ppen. h VOICE: It doesn't happen at all? 14 (3 1.1 15 O. u a~ VOICE: Yes. -Q VOICE: But hasn't.B&W in their analysis said 16 17 t ha t ' Oggu. VOICE: Which analysis are we talking about? 18 l . I'Y Q VOICE: Let me go back. At one time ir the series 20-of conversations, correspondence, that you were having wi th 21 B&W, you were discussing tho issue of voiding in the 22 pressurizer. OM' VOICE: Yes. 23 h ' VOICE: All right. Now f or that - to ha ppen, for '24 y- ? () - ._2 5 the HPI. to automa tically initiate, the pressurizer has to g

0621 02 05: 23 -void. l -ngc0M-buh. - VOICE: HPI is initiated. on. the basis of pressure, 3 - not-on -the bas:s of level ' of --- 3 -4' h VOI CE: 1500 psi. 5' O A6 a.s. VOICE: Right. VOICE: You should have voided ' the pre ssurizer for .6 7 -i t to have come on. Otherwise it would hold up at a 8' pressure higher than.the HPI. Oya m VOICE: Should. 9 h VOICE: Okay, and then if pressure got-down to 10 .11 1500 psi or lower, there should be a void in the reactor 12 coolant system other than in the pre ssurizer. -13 0 0 vo.x. VOICE: Now I don't believe that's what tha t says. 14 You're saying it. it gets down to 1500, there should be a n v 15. void in the reactor coolant system? 16 Q VOICE: I believe that they - Coge VOICE: That letter did not say that. 17 18 VOICE: Their analysis says that if it voids, the 19 pressure will drop to 1300,'to 1100 psi which is the 20-saturation point - 21 C aga.. ~ VOICE: Tha t'.s not what you said, though. - You 22. said that if it gets down to-1500, it comes on, that'you'll-23 have a void in the pressurizer. I mean a void in the 24 reactor coolant system, and that's not what that says. r) (. 25' VOICE: Well, t he n ' I - L

'8$21 02 06 24 O Apn. VOICE: When fyou ge t down to 1500, you don't ge t a mgc0M I 2~ void in /the reactor coolant 1 system.. Tha t's ' wha t.the letter 3 said..The HPI system comes on, restores pre ssurizer level -(] 4. indication. 5 Now I might also point out..that' you're going back 6~ .to some point. in time, and there -are a whole - bunch of 7 analyses that werre presented to us, and as 'I said, in the summer of '75, ' ith curves and et ce tera, maybe it might be 8 w 9 helpf ul to you to take a look at that -- that package of 10 information - because you're looking back at a point in .l l time, and I -- there was a' lo t more information that was 12 provided to us. 13_ (tI VOICE: Okay. We've been talking about 14 pressurizer level -- low type of concerns -- p/r w I5-j VOICE: Mmm-hmm. (f VOICE: -- and so forth. Now, I'd like to turn Io 17 your attention to an event that happened apparently in 18 September of 1974 that involved the f ailure of a 19 power-operated relief valve. 20 What are your recollections about this event? 21 Cioggma. VOICE: To the best of my recollection, it 22 involved a. situation where we had vent coming off the 23 power-opera ted relief valve, the pilot, and the vent went, I 24 believe, to the discharge line of the relief valve.

That, m.

-(_) . ;25 in effect, created a problem wi th the pilot, and I think \\ j

8621.02'07 25 mgc0M- ~l gave' us a problemnwith the operation of athe valve..The 2.. sutisequent fix that eliminated that problem was to vent that 3 particular vent to the -- con tainment atmosphere. I remember (;P) 4 callingdirectly. N h VOICE:.Was the unit operating at power whenever 5 -o this event ha ppened? 00u.iay. VOICE: I don't' recall. 7 h VOICE: Was there any damage sustained during this a 9_ event to any of the equipment? by. VOICE: - Are you talking about to the pilot. 10 11' operated relief valve? h VOICE: To any equipment involved in the incident. 12 13 a-- VOICE: I don't recall'any, but -- 14 (Pause.) 15 VOICE: Did you personally review the event? O OWha-VOICE: Well, I was involved in the fix on it. I Io 17 don't remember the exact occurrence. I recall -- with the 16-design change was to ensure that we didn't have that back-19 pressure on the vent which led to a problem with the 20-operation of the valve. 21 Q VOICE: Do you recall whe ther, in response to ' the 22 - open power-operated relief valve, pre ssurizer level went up? 23~ Coy-YOI.CE: No, I don't. a. '24

h VOICES-Do you recall whether. the event was 25 reviewed by any of the Safety Review Boards, particularly

m_-- f 8321:02.08-26

mgc0M

^I' 'the one of which you'are a member? 2'1 9 !d"' VOICE: -It wa's plant design' change. I'd have to 3 ~go back and look at' the design package to see ~whether-it was (; 4 an unreviewed.saf ety question - you know,.the change to it. -h VOICE: Are !you aware of whether any type of 5 . c' technica1' analysis-was done in-regards to the plant 7 parameter behavior during this event? (9 avan. ' VOICE: Plant parameter behavior? 6 (hi VOICF Pressurizer level, pressure, T-ave. Y OA""d-VOICE: No. I don't recall. The only thing I do 10- .11 recall is that we did have a problem with the operation of 12 the valve, and I recall what.the design change was to fix 13 it, and we didn't have any problem with the valve since that 14 point in time, to my knowledge. ) ~ h5 VOICE: Was there any water released to L '15 16 containment? d 1BdM* VOICE: I don't recall. That particular event, 17 '16 - you're talking about?- i' 19 dh - VOICE: Mmm-hmm.

20 Od ugn.

,0 ICE: N o '. You mean, by the discharge of the i 21 valve into the quench. tank? ~ 22' (C) VOICE: Quench. tank or the quench tank rupture 23 ' disc ~ blew.-- Was there any contamination to' containment? 24-(l?usen. VOICE: I-don't-recall. That was in '74. I'm if there ;;as discharge of water, that informa tion is - 1 25 sure Y e I s

8621/02 09 27 mgc0M. l .available. (h VOI CE: 'The 'impre ssion I'm getting is that it was 2 3 a pretty. insignificant' event. 4 -(3agan, VOICES-Well, I don't know if i t's an [/h ~ 5 insignificant event. When we had a problem with that valve. ~ -6 i t wasn't insignificant, and since the problem was. fixed, 7 it's now.-you know, a closed i s sue. () VOICE: Were there any problems with the snubbers-6 9 on-the discharge line of the EMOV valve? 10 C<uan, VOICE: I don'.t rea lly remember. 11 () VOICE: To your knowledge, was a review per. formed 12 to determine if operator actions were appropriate during the 13 event? 14 Oa us n. VOICE: During the event where we had the problem o n(_/. 15 with the valve? h VOICE: Right. 16. 17_ bu/?n. VOICE: Well, the conclusion of looking into the 16 problem was that venting the pilot to the atmosphere took 19 care of the problem, so therefore no operator action was 20 required, to my knowledge. 21 Ch VOICE: Yes. That's an equipment type of problem. 0 00AN-VOICE: Yeah. 22 [h VOICE: I'm saying did anyone to your knowledge in 23 24 your organization perform a. review of the opera tars' ac tions .O -k / 25' during that transient to determine whether or not they were L

0321402[l'0 28 2 mgc0M. I proper and adequate? 2- [dvan, VOICES-Well, ac tions -- I don't remember the - 3

transient.. I can't tell.you.

h VOICE: Who do you _ think would be the most 4' S.. knowledgeable person in regards to the analysis that was 6-done.of this event, if one exists? 7 [dvAn-VOICE: Well, I would sap probably :- I guess' it 6 - would..be the people at the plant, people like Bob Twilliger, 9 Basil Baker, Tom Cochran, people like that. h VOICE:- Okay. At this time - 10-b9381' VOICE: This has got. to be flipped, uniess ~ 11 12 you're -- h VOICE: I'm ready to terminate it if you - go 13 14-ahead with your' comments. D. V 15 Q VOI CE: Well,_I guess before we close I'll ask if 16 you have any comments you'd like to make. 17 avan. VOICE: No, I'd -- the only thing I can say is, I-16 did'not -- since I didn't know what you were going to ask, I 19- -didn't go back and review all the files. I guess maybe that 20 would have been the thing to do, if I'd known specifically 21 what you were -asking, but since most of that occurred back 22 in '74,- my memory ~exac tly as sharp as it should be related 23 to everything that occurred. And it occurred over a period -24 of time. 25 I'll say-this. We'll be more than happy to let

y t 8021.[02 iliL ' 29- -mgcOMf. l' 'you look ~a t the - t ile s. - If you want - copies of anything, ~ 2 there are ; people that: were - involved in the indication ; thing 3. at the plant who are much;more knowledgeable. They may have 4-a similar problem in recalling exactly what. occurred when 5 'and how,Ebut I would-be glad to. cooperate in any way we can.

61 VOICE:

.Okay. He" - Okay. .With that, it's twenty minutes of VOICE: 7-16 - -eleven, and we'll. terminate the interview. Thank you very f. 9-much for your time. l. .10 .I 1 cl2 i i3 14

o is l 6'

[ .Ie 1 19 20 3 i 21 '22 - 23 24-25' ? L* 1 i [. t I. ,_........,.;.,...__...._.._......_.._.._..,..._.,..__......__,..,._,......_..,,__-.._...._.._..,_...4...,, ,.... _..}}