ML19332G632

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Transcript of 870505 Mgt Meeting in Region I Ofc to Brief Staff on Status of Independent Investigation Into 870331 Order
ML19332G632
Person / Time
Site: Peach Bottom  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 05/05/1987
From:
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
Shared Package
ML19332B472 List:
References
FOIA-89-284 NUDOCS 8912290074
Download: ML19332G632 (56)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:-.. ~ ~ " ~ ~ l i

mm MANAGEMENT MEETING BETh'EEN PHILADELPHI/. ELECTRIC COMPANY and THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REOULATORY COMM W " ' T. " g.

Name of Licen.ae I,a)e h ompany n,, g.. Name,ef'Fao1Qt((jh?p'achBht'tigdg 4g f, g 4, s e k e t No s,.. :g;%40d. ...ii f 4. . gk,7 and $0gplgg,. ityyQp!.-- . w1 27 g4 s, ,..,.... ; ; n M s L p.-.l J.. h ' _'.... (\\\\y\\ If' ~**iffit 'gh'. \\ I / / \\ LP s t' 4ti' T r p' ing ok g sia,_PpnqplY4tnip.'.'_ <T{../ s. Tuesda'..y3 MgyJ 1987 ,.." g y' N ' s.s s. ... c. e-s.

.. n.y p -

Management Meeting between Philadelphia Electric Company and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, held at the Region I office, 631 Park Avenue, at 9: 07 a.m., p on the above date be fore Loretta Melling, Court Reporter, Notary Public of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Purpose of Meeting: Licensee requested meeting to brief NRC Staff and the Office of Investigations on the status of Philadelphia Electric's independen investigation into the matters tha were the subject of the NRC Order, dated March 31, 1987. The matters of NRC's own investigations will not be discussed. l AREA. WIDE FEDERAL REPORTING. INC. i litt W AL N L'l SiH FT SUITE 1316 A. PHIL ADELPHIA. PA 19107 891; !90074 891211 (Ill) Kl 3.700) PDR FOIA JONi189-284 PDR i

l t E U i NRC Attendees: Jamec M.* Taylor, Deputy Executive Director,for Regional Operations 2 James Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement 3 W. Russell; Regional Administrator' W. Kane, Director, Division of Reactor -4 Projects (DRP) J. Outierres, Regional Counsel 5 Ben B.. Hayes, Director, Office of Investigations 6.- Chester W. White, Director, Office of Investigations, Region 1 7 William D. Hutchison, Investigator Mary Wagner, Investigator, Region I 8 Bruce Boger., Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 9 James Linville, Division of Reactor Projects 10 11 t . LICENSEE Attendees: J. Kemper, Senior Vice-P*esident, h 12 ' Nuclear l 13 G. M. Leitch, Manager, Nuclear L Generation Department ri J. W. II . Gallagher, Vice-President, Nuclear Operations E. Bradley, Assistant General 1 Counsel, PECO D. Smith, PECO 3" George Smith, Representative from 17 - MAC 18 f 19 20 21 22 23 21 ) ) >l ARi'A.WIDF FI DI R Al RIl'ORTIN(;. INil .s u y ?-- pr'= k#-a Mw gv w., w e.gww.- m. +---y yemg-c., ,pg-mw.e w w,-iww .-.--e -e-ww-----s-----------w-ry-2 -w-w-t ~ * ' --w=D'**

_ ~ ___-.-._ -c I 1 t - \\ i 1 P R O CE E D I NG S 2 MR. RUSSELL: I would like to 3 welcome you to Region I. Tdday is the 5th of May, the 4 meeting is going on the record at 9:07 5 I am William Russell, the Regional 6 Administrator of Region I. With me today representing 7 Executive Director for Operations is Mr. Jim Taylor, 8 the Deputy Executive Director for Operations, and Jim 9 Lieberman, who is the Director of the Office of i 10 Enforcement from Washington. 11 We have previously introduced other 12 members of the staff who are present and have 13 introduced the participants from Philadelphia Electric 14 Company. 15 The purpose of today's meeting is 16 to have the Philadelphia Electric Company review for us 17 the status of their own investigation into matters 18 which led to the Commission's shutdown order for 19 Peachbottom Units 2 and 3, which was issued on the 31st 20 of March. We are particularly interested in the scope 21 of that investigation, its status, and to the extent 22 the company is prepared to address it, the schedule for 23 completion of that investigation. 24 With those preliminary opening 4 ~ ~. - ,,.. ~.. _ - - - m.

4 1 remarks, I would like to h' ave Mr. Taylor address some 2 points before turning the meeting over to Philadelphia 3 Electric. 4 MR. TAYLOR: I would like to 5 express an appreciation for your suggesting this 6 meeting as you have proceeded; and I would recommend 7 that, as you get closer to completion, the potential 8 for an additional meeting. I think it i s very 9 important that you ist the agency know and the 10 officials in the agency what you have been doing-and 11 what you are doing with regard to this problem, which, 12 needless to say, '13 is viewed with great seriousness by the agency and by 14 the commission. o 15 So I appreciate your setting this l o 16 up and suggest that I am not sure where you are at this 1 3 17 moment; but the potential of a further meeting, or L 18 meetings, if necessary, so the agency can be aware of i 19 what the company has done with regard to this matter. 20 That's all I had to say. 21 Ben, do you have anything? 22 HR. HAYES: No comment. 23 MR. RUSSELL: There i s one 24 administrative matter I want to cover first. We are t

,--,-,---,,,-..-n.--

.,.ee.--ee. ,w_. ,,-,ar-e-. ~.- - - -. -, - - - -, - -,-w -,--s--,,

5 i. + 1 1 taking a transcript of this meeting. It is our l i 2 i n t e n t i o'n, following the meeting, to review that I 3 transcript. To the extent we'can release portions of 4 it publicly, we intend to do so; but if there are I 5 matters which relate to your ongoing investigation i 6 which it would be premature at this time to release, we 7 would' redact those portions of the transcript until r I' 8 such time as your investigation is completed. 9 Similarly, if there is information 10 which we discuss which relates to the NRC's 11 investigation, that is, because of areas you are 12 investigating, areas that we are investigating, wo 13 would also redact those portions, such that there would 14 be a review by Mr. Hayes and Mr. White, for the staff, 15 and a review by you to identify those areas which 1 16 should not be made public at this time because of the [ 17 potential for compromising an ongoing investigation. 18 Other portions of the transcript we would intend to 19 make public. .20 MR. GALLAGHER: Are you saying we 21 would have an opportunity to review the transcript 22 before anything would be made public? 23-MR. RUSSELL: That's correct. 24 MR. GALLAGHER: Thank you. , _.. _ - -.. _.. -. -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " ' - - ' ' ' " ' " ' ' ' ~ ' ~ ' ' ' " ~ ' ' ' ~ " ~ ~

il !l 6 i f 1 HR. K MPER: When you say public, l 2 what does that mean? -i 3 HR. RUSSILL: We will issue a .i l 4-summary of this meeting, which would include those -{ l 5 portions of-the transcript which do not relate to I 6 matters which are under investigation. It would be a 7-meeting summary published by the NRC. ? 8-HR. BRADLEY: Would the summary be I 9. made public or those portions of the transcript which ) 10 are not redacted? H 11 HR. RUSSELL: The summary itself l-12 would necessarily only address those matters which do l 1 13 not relate to ongoing investigations. I 14 NR. BRADLEY: Yes, but would-the 15 summary itself be made public or the portions of 1C transcript which are freed up be made public? L 17 HR. RUSSELL: The meeting summary 18 at this point would simply be a statement that thi l. 19 meeting occurred and the transcript was taken and l ' 20 portions of the t r a ns e.r ip t were redacted because it I i 21 would potentially relate to an ongoing investigation. l I .22 We would not release information in the summary that 23 would potentially compromise the investigation. j ,r 24 HR. DRADLEY: I am not sure I am l l 3

_~- 7 .i. 1 making my point clear.- We' may arrive at a point where d 2 certain portions of the transcript are redacted and 3' others are freed up. p 4 My question is: Will the portions 5 that are-freed up of the transcript itself go to the 6 public or simply a summary of those? 7 HR. RUSSELL: Yes, they would. The 8 transcript itself would be made publicly available with 9 the exception of those portions which are redacted. 10 Mr. Gallagher. 11 HR. GALLAGHER: I thank you, Mr. 12

Russell, i

13' Philadelphia Electric Company is l 14 very pleased to have,the opportunity to be able to sit 15 down and talk and let you know where we stand in our 16 current review of the problem. Let me assure you all 17 that we take this matter very, very seriously, too. We L 18 have been reacting to it, I think, in a professional 1 19 manner and in trying to examine on a broad base the 20 total problem that we have at the Peachbottom plant as 21 well as the relationship between Corporate and - 22 Peachbottom. 23 We are going at the process very 24 methodically, very slowly, and trying to make sure when emme sea-m ...-..--..-,,,..a

.--.n.---.n-,-

..,...w--, ,,.a-.--,n --n-. - -, --,-w .n,-a.a. .-n-. re, ,.--m- - - - - - e 4 na

!C 8 j -1 we come up with something','we come up with a solution 2 that will make Peachbottom one of the'best operating tc 3 plants in the country. We h'. ave every intent of doing 4 that. 5 We have taken a gigantic step, as 6 you know, yesterday in employing Admiral Smith er the 7= future leader, the plant manager, of Peachbottom; and I 8 think it is an indication of how seriously we do take i f 9 this. We recognize the problems that are down there ~ -10 and intend fully to fix them. h 11 We are committed also to improving i l l 11 2 relations with the NRC. We recognize that particularly lL 3 ' at Peachbottom we have-had problems in working with l. -14 your people and we are working very diligently to.make 15 sure those kind of things don't occur. l 16 We examine the root causes of the I 17 problems, spent some real time in doing it, and come up t 18 with solutions that are appropriate to resolve the L. 19 entire problem and not just a particular symptom that 20-may have occurred at the time. I kunow that we have .21 certainly been accused of that and at times probably 22 have been guilty. l' 23 I know that we have been looked 24 upon as being an arrogant company. Dr. Murley has L V + -.. ~..

9 i ) 1 referred to us in that way! You will find that will 2 not be our posture in the future. I intend to work 3 fully cooperative with the NR', mutually work out Q 4 problems and make sure that we are together when we are 5 proceeding down the path towards safe and efficient and 6 appropriate operation. i 7 We are committed to improving plant 8 operations. We have only done two things so far, of 9 course, in hiring Admiral Smith and making a change in 10 the management of the plant and the operations, as you 11 L are well aware of that. j 12 4 Prior to the shutdown I think there 13 were a number of things that were being done in a 14 positive manner and h2d been recognized by the NRC,,and 15

  • lot of our discussions were prior to the problem that 16 6 rose in March.

We had improved our security area, we 17 had improved the problem we had in the radiation 18 protection. We brought in new people to make sure 19 those two areas are in a much better situation, much 20 better light than they had been. We have improved the 21 handling of our radioactive waste management. We have 22 got a complete organization change of both plants and 23 we had been working quite diligently in changing the 24 total plant staff attitude. 6 %Ne ~ m- - _.

t 20 l t 1 We wer's making some new progress { 2 which has been recognized by the NRC.' So we had not 3 been not addressing the prob'lems, but we were 4 addressing them, perhaps, in an evolutionary fashion i 5 instead of the revolutionary fashion we presently have 1 6 to address them in. This r.sy well work out to give us 7 the ability to pake more drastic changes in a much more 8 rapid fashion than we had been able to in the past. 9 Since the shutdown, we have started 10 an extensive review of the problem. We employed the i 11 Hanagement Analysis Company to review, interview and 12 try to determine the root causes of the problems wo 13 have had at the plant. They have been proceeding in a 14 very methodical, ordprly fashion. They have condu,cted j 15 about 170 interviews. 16 is George, something on that order? 17 HR. BROWN: Over 180 at this point. l 18 HR. GALLAGHER: Over 180 interviews h 19 over the past month, a little over a month, and have j 20 been striving to determine what the root causes of the ll 21 problems have been down there. ~ 22 We have proceeded on those interviews in 23 a format of confidentiality to the person being 24 interviewed in order to elicit as much information as

1 1 ~ 11 t i \\ 1 possible and to be able to tie down as best we can what 2 the problems are, what we have to address. 3 We did not start off in that 4 investigation trying to immediately tie down a I I 5 culpability for specific actions that had taken place. 6 HR. HAYES: You did not, Mr. 7 Gallagher? l 8 HR. GALLAGHER: I said we did not 9 at that time. Right. 10 HR. BROWN: Excuse me, sir. Hight 11 I mention this is Management Analysis Company's normal 12 process. Any of this kind of work that we do, we 13 maintain confidentiality. So I want to make it clear 14 that it is not unique to Peachbottom. 15 HR. GALLAGHER: We will go on a + 16 little further from where we are heading. 17 So that review has been going on. 18 We are at the point where, as Mr. Brown indicated, 19 about 180 interviews have been completed. They are 20 basically in the process of collating and analyzing the 21 information, have formed some preliminary conclusions 22 that we recognize we have a management situation down 23 there that has to be cleared up. 24 But we are not prepared to discuss geys .e===

=

._._r.,_..._____ .. -....2.-.

l 12 i 1 a lot of detail, the results of that. I don't think 1 2 you really wanted to anyway. I think that was for a I ) 3 future meeting, as I recall,'when you and I talked, Mr. I i ) 4

Russell, i

5 In the process of analyzing what we 6 are getting and deciding where we go from there, we l 7 have the input from the MAC organization, we have 4 I l 8 committees, an Industry Review Committee, which is 9 working with us, which, basically, has been put in I 10 place by INPO and contains five people from other 9 11 nuclear companies in the country who review what we i 12 have done and offer advice and counsel from a technical i 13 standpoint, what would be proper ways to address the l 14 problems that we see,. t 15 'We reviewed this with the other 16 three owners of the Peachbottom plant, of course, who 17 are very, very interested in the outcome of the whole 18 investigation and what final results. And we have 19 Admiral Wilkinson, who is the former president of INPO, 20 on board, who is an advisor to the special Committee of 21 the Board of Directs, which is reviewing everything we 22 are'doing, 23 so we are getting good input, good 24 review from a number of resources. I believe when we .~....--... _... - ~.. _ _,

13 1 get finished we will have'a solution and a recovery 2 plan that will be acceptable everywhere. 3 our president and our board \\ 4 chairman are intimately involved in all the discussions I 5 and all that we have. So there is no question about 6 the seriousness of how we view the seriousness of the 7 situation and the attention that it is receiving in our 8 company and with the people.that we have looked to for 4 9 advice. 10 As I indicated, we have conducted 11 the initial reviews on the basis of confidentiality, 12 trying to elicit as much information as possible. And 13 if you want to get into details as to how that was 14 done, of course, we, brought George Brown along from MAC 15 to discuss that; and he can tell you whatever you want. 16 We would be prepared, I believe, George, 17 in about a week to have more of the detail of the root l 18 cause analysis. As I say, we are zeroing in. l' 19 Obviously, we have a management problem which we are 20 resolving; but there are more things that I think will j 21 come out of it and we will prepare better to discuss it 1 22 then. Some of the interviews are still going on -- ii 23 HR. BROWN: That's correct. 24 HR. GALLAGHER: and we don't me,..wyn, ..n....

i I want to jump the gun and kave something on the record l 2 that isn't what it quite ought to be.' 3 When we finish that part of the 4 review, we will fully address all the problem areas 5 that come up. We believe that we should be able to 6 submit to you in about a month a recovery plan that you 7 should find quite acceptable because it will have, in f 3 fact, addressed all the prob 1' ens. 9 We have many ideas of what we want to do 10 right now. They are a little bit premature because of 11 the fact that we are not finiched our analysis and we 12 don't wan.t to get into those. We will certainly answer 13 specific questions on items but not get into a total 14 plan discussion. I hope you understand that. \\ 15 We see the recovery plan as 16 containing two major parts: Short-term items that will 17 have l to be done prior to our requesting your approval l 18 for start up of the plant; and a longer term set of 19 items which we believe will be required and we fully 20 intend to implement to make Peachbottom one of the best 21 operating plants. We believe we can do that within a 22 reasonable time. It won't be months, but maybe in a 23 couple of years in which we should be able to have a 24 1 very fine plant there. [}g ARBA-wTne **n=a**

15 1 Some of the things, of course, that we 2 have done, we think we have taken a giant step in 3 ultimately improving the ov,erall operation of the 4 plant. We brought in Admiral Smith and he is replacing 5 the present plant manager tomorrow. He will take over 6 this week and fully take over on Monday. We have 1 7 replaced the operations engine 6r with a qualified / 8 operatiens engineer from Peachbottom who is a no-9 nonsense type who I believe will be very useful in 10 keeping control, better control than we have had there. l 11 The other person in the chain is i 12 the Superintendent of operations. He has been told l 13 that he will be removed and replaced. We have not done s 14 it yet because of two reasons: One, we need a license 15 in that step, in the first two steps, and he holds one 16 and is a good, technically competent person and 17 recognizes the shortcomings that he has had in the past 18 and I am sure will not be a problem while he's in 19 there. But he will be removed. And, of course, the 20 second reason why we haven't done it, we want to give o p 21 Admiral Smith a chance to preview his personnel, take 22 his position as to what is an appropriate replacement 23 and that will be done certainly well before any request 24 to start up goes to you, i %hhNYb -~ ' ' ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

16 1 We intend to give the new 2 management all the tools that it need's to do its job. 3 That means a review of our personnel practices, which 4 have been a problem, which are recognized to be a 5 problem and which we have been criticized by the NRC 6 for in the past. We are doing such things as reviewing 7 the make up of the shift. We don't want to commit to 8 anything at this point,.but we will in the not too 9 distant future as to how we are going to make sure that 10 you can be assured that when that plant comes back, it 11 is a safe, professionally-operated plant. 12 There are other things that we are going 13 to require the operators to do before they can sign on l' 14 board again. So tho,se are the things we are heading. i 15 ~ You are interested in how far we 16 are going in our reviews. We have already started on 17 the next phase of our investigation. We have begun 18 taking statements with the intent of trying to ) 19 determine culpability for individual acts. That will l 20 proceed, I would guess, over the next two weeks. I l 21 i Is that a reasonable time frame, 22 next two weeks time frame? At the end of that we will 23 1 examine what we obtained. If, as I am sure is 24

expected, there is reason for disciplinary action, we geys. wens aa---

i . -. - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ' - - - - - - ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

l 17 I 1 ) 1 will take t the appropriate' disciplinary action and we l 2 will inform you of what we have done. 3 As I say,'we expect to be finished 4 that in about two weeks. We will take statements from 5 certainly all of the operators and some of the 6 peripheral people who have the ability to see what has 7 been done or what might have been going on. \\ l 8 As I indicated, we think in about a 9 month we will be ready to submit a recovery plan to you 10 which will address all of the actions that we believe 11 will be required to make the plant operating safely and i 12 professionally. And we would certainly like to take 13 advantage of any opportunity we have, Mr. Russell, to 14 weekly update you so you know where we stand and we,can 15 keep a better -- as Mr. Taylor indicated -- keep a 16 better contact between us and keep you better informed. 17 We are at the position now where I 18 think we have more to inform you of than we had at the 19 time all the interviews were going on. That's briefly 20 where we' stand. We are certainly here available to j 21 answer any questions that you have. 22 HR. RUSSELL: I would like to have 23 described the process being used by HAC. If you can l 24 give us the flavor for the types of questions and the s h OO O O O ~ - = " " ' - - ' " " ' ' ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~ '

k i ~ 18 {j i ) 1 areas you are exploring ih'the conduct of your 1 2 interviews that have been complee.ed to' date, the first i 3 type of interview, that is,,the one that was done with t 4 confidentiality provided. If you will give us a flavor 5 for some of the types of information that are coming 6 out of those interviews. y ,4 7 I am not looking for conclusions 8 with respec':.to what types of corrective actions might 9 be proposed, but more a feel for the types of raw data 10 that is coming out. 11 MR. BROWN: It is premature to talk 12 about what's coming out. I need to explain why. 13 We are still in the process of 14 completing interviews,. We will be doing some re-I 15 interviewing. We are then going to have to evaluate 16 the data and information. We have reviewed the 17 documentation. 18 MR. RUSSELL: What type of 19 documentation have you reviewed? 20 MR. BROWH: Everything associated 21 with operating the plant. All documentation, policies, i 22 procedures, the reports, everything that we have time 23 to look at, to really home in on root cause analysis. [ n } 24 i I believe that, to date, the data g ...._w,--

I s 19 h} 1 information, our evaluati6ns, indicate that overall the c { 2 technical competence of the people will not be an 3 issue. We believe that based on our progress to date 4 that it is s a programmatic, leadership, management, 5 management systems policies, attitude kind of things. 6 And that is very complex. So for me to descr'4be in a 7 few words what I think you are asking, I am not 8 prepared to do that at this time. 9 HR. GALLAGHER: But you came 10 prepared to discuss the method or the process that was 11 used. 12 HR. BROWN: Oh, the process. I 13 Jidn't think he was asking about the process. 14 \\ HR. RUSSELL: I'm interested f.n.the 15 process that you are using and to the extent you can 16 describe the kinds of areas that you are probing, 17 questioning. 18 HR. BROWN: The process that we 19 use, we use a two-man team to conduct interviews. We 20 do the interviews so as to not disrupt the engoing 21 required activities, yet focus on getting the job done 22 as soon as possible. 23 The questionnaires that we develop 84 developed by our team with having are a composition of I i i g Amma-wvn= =~a"-**

i t m t 80 )p 1 various disciplines, engiheering, operations, QA, QC, i l 2 human and organizational effectiveness kinds of people. } { ) 3 We have used six different a,'ets of questionnaires to l ) 4 talk to corporate management people, middle management, ) 5 site management, operators, contractors and so forth. ) 6 The questions are designed to determine the root cause ) 7 data associated with the items I described, the j! 1 8 management processes, the policies, what's going on, 9 what has gone on and so forth, i 10 Does that answer what you asked 11 about the interview? I e l 12 l HR. RUSSELL: Will the t } 13 questionnaires and the l other information gathering ) 14 tools, mechanisms, you are using be available in the l 15 near future or as n part of your completed report ^to 16 the company? \\ 17 HR. BROWN: The questionnaires j 18 themselves can be made available. The confidentiality, k 4 19 the information there that's on the questionnaires, we 20 maintain that confidentially. 21 HR. KANE: Would you give me a feel 22 of the types of people that you are talking to in the 23 process. ) 24 HR. BROWN: The types of people? ng ,,,,..,n.

- - - - - ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ s 81 J 1 1 I thought I indicated t h a't '. Corporate management, 2 middle management, site management, ,1 operators, 3 supervision, contractors. 1h0 people. Corporate, j i 4 Peachbottom and Limerick. 5 HR. RUSSELL: Let me go back to 6 process. Let's assume in the course of an interview l i 7 you receive information from a confidential source that 8 has potential safety concerns with respect to conduct 'g 9 of operations that are not reinted to, say, sleeping, h 10 improper reading materials or other things which would E 11 relate [< to operator attentiveness to duty. 'l 12 Are you running into such types of 13 items? 14 HR. BROWN: No. If I understand 15 the question. 16 HR. RUSSELL: Your focus is i 17 directed principally to operator attitude and what I iI 18 would characterize control Room decorum behavior as as 19 compared to potential technical issues that are coming l 20 up that may be related to other aspects of operation of 21 facilities? 22 HR. BROWN: Well, no. We are 23 trying to look at the entire picture. I am having 24 trouble following what you want. g gygg.wyne ena==**

i .m t 5 22 I i 1 When*I say we are looking at the 2 entire picture, the interview process does i include 3 demands, job, how long you have been at it, what's your 4 history, what's your experience, what do you think 5 about this, what do you think about that. It is an 6 all-encompassing thing. 7 As I said, policies, procedures, 8 management practices, work habits, all of that, are 9 part of that scope, 10 MR. LIEBERMAN: This questionnaire 11 or six questionnaires that you are using, was that 12 specially designed for the Peachbottom situation or are 13 these the same questionnaires you might use whenever 14 you are doing a revipw at a plant? 15 MR. BROWN: It is part of all' of 16 what you said. We have taken advantage of past 17 experience and did not re-invent the wheel to design a 18 questionnaire. The questionnaire is tailored to the 19 fact that it is a two-unit site. It is tailored to the i 20 fact that it is not a new plant. Those kind of things l 21 are factored into it. 22 MR. LIEBERMAN: Is it tailored to 23 the particular problems that lead up to issue the 24 order? E 1r y news.u,--

? 83 1 hj 1 HR. BROWN: Yes. I would say it is i 2 tailored. Again, if you are asking me*did we go after ) '3 names, no, we did not go after names.

,i

) 4 MR. HUTCHISON: Mr. Brown, the 'e p 5 interviews you are describing, are they primarily the 6 questionnaire and the answering of the questionnaire? 7 HR. BROWN: Yes. 8 MR. HUTCHISON: Are there separate 9 questions asked aside from the questionnaire? ~ 10 HR. BROWN: Oh, yes. The 11 questionnaire is a guide so that we have consistency. 12 HR. HUTCHISON: How do you document 13 the questions and answers? 14 H,R. BROWN: By making notes on, he t 15 questionnaire. 16 HR. HUTCHISON: It was mentioned L 17 that you are starting another phase now which is going l 18 to look more toward the individual culpability. 19 HR. BROWN: Mr. Gallagher will 20 address that. 21 MR. GALLAGHER: That's not being 22 handled by MAC. 23 HR. BROWN: Is that what is 24 confusing here? ( a,,._u.

It $4 i d } 1 MR. HAYES: Yes. 2 HR. RUSSELL: Before we get into l 3 culpability, I would like to continue with an 4 understanding of the scope of what MAC is doing by way' i! i 5 of root cause analysis. 6 The issue I was trying to focus on h 7 is a question of the scope of your evaluation of 8 conduct of operations. Clearly, the instances of g 9 sleeping on shift and improper reading materials and 10 other activities which were going on which relate to 11 operator attentiveness to duties is one aspect of the 12 scope of what you are looking at. You indicated f 13 affirmatively, yes, that was the scope. l 14 What other areas outside that 15 scope, if any, are'you looking at? Because plant 16 operations is a rather large scope of review. What I ~ 1 17 am trying to understand is the scope of the MAC charter 18 with respect to this root cause investigation. L. l 19 i HR. BROWH: Our scope is to review 20 the situation, circumstances, at Peachbottom to 21 determine the root causes for the situation there and 22 assist in generating a recovery plan approvable for 23 future operations. That's the scope. p 24 I said a couple of times that we are { 1 l g ,,,,_w,nw ..n....

35 .} ,i I 1 looking at management, supervision, management { ? 2 processes, systems, procedures, everything associated i t 3 with operating the plant, in', order to determine root l 4 causes. t 5 I'm sorry I am having difficulty trying 6 to answer what you are asking. 7 MR. GUTIERREZ You say you are 8 looking into root cause or looking into root cause p 9 analysis of the problems at Peachbottom. I think what 10 is of concern to the NRC, you do a root cause analysis 11 of some thing of the problem at Peachbottom. I think 12 what I am hearing is what is your understanding of that 13 thing you are conducting a root cause analysis of. 14 , hat is your understanding of the W 15 problems at Peachbottom? In there would lie the scope 16 of your investigation. 17 MR. BROWN What am I missing? 18 MR. RUSSELLt Let me give you a f. 19 clear example. i. 20 HR. BROWN: I thought I answered it 21 .three times. 22 HR. RUSSELL: You have company l-23 procedures where you indicate sleeping is not tolerated 24 or permitted, yet you had instances of operators (; i- ) ARRA-wTns ren*** '. ""a"*"****.

i lj i L 26 d l 0 y .a t } 1 aleeping. Are there oth'e~r aspects of procedures i 2 associated with the operation of the. facility, which l l 3 operators also disregardedf, To what extent l o 4 + HR. BROWN: You are asking for 5 answers. I am not prepared to give you answers. 6 HR. RUSSELL I understand that. I 7 am trying to understand the scope of how you are going 0 about developing information to answer those types of r 9 questions. r 10 HR. BROWN: Do you want to try, 11 Joe? 12 I thought I answered what you g 13 asked. 14 ,MS. WAGNER: Another way of asking 15 Mr. Gutierrez's question is: How were the prob 1' ems ) 16 defined for you? You are looking at root causes of I 17 something. What is that something? l 14 HR. BROWN: How are the problems li I 19 defined? I I-l 20 HS. WAGNER: What are the problems l 21 you are looking at? We are not asking how do you see i 22 the problems in terms of results of your analysis. 23 What are you going in there and looking at? l 24 You say you are determiningg the o

k 127 I i 4 1 root causes of the situation that exists. How do you 2 perceive the situation that exists? Not in terms of 3 the results of your study,',but what are you looking at? 4 HR. GALLAGHER: If I may interject 5 and try to answer your question. What we believe is 6 broken is we have had a very poor attitude at 7 Peachbottom which stems from the management / employee 8 relationship down there.. And there has been lack of h 9 leadership and we see that as being the major problem. 10 The questions are broad and I think 11 that's why George is having problems with the 1 12 questions, because that's a big thing to get hold of, 13 to try to take that and break that down into its i 14 components and date,rmine why that management prob,lem 15 exists. It has existed for a while, apparently.' It is l 16 part of the culture down there of the isolated plant. 17 That is not unusual in the coun',ry, I think you will 18 find. I think you know that's true, h 19 All those things are being 20 analyzed, the pieces that go with that 21 management / employee problem that has developed, and the 22 attitude, I think, is a s y m p t o ni. Sleeping is a 23 symptom. Non-technical reading when the procedure says l 24 you are not supposed to do that is a symptom. And, in 4 ,e.,_....

28 b f <j 1

fact, putting a pump on'without following the i

2 procedure is a symptom of that same problem. He's { 3 really trying to address all that as to their defines. 4 The results of it. So it is a big item that he's j 5 trying to bite pieces off to try and find out what 6 actually caused it. 7 The problem is it is truly lack of 8 leadership. 9 HR. BROWN: In order to fix it. 10 HR. RUSSELL: You described one 11 area, putting the pump on service without following l i 12 procedure, which gets into areas of conduct of 13 operation as compared to attentiveness on a steady l 14 state operation. 15 HR. BROWN Conduct of operations 16 is a management process. I said we are looking at 17 management processes. I am sorry I am not 18 communicating to you what you are -- k 19 HR. RUSSELL: In the process of 20 your interviewing, do you question operators on their g L 21 use of procedures in operating the plant? 22 HR. BROWN: Certainly, yes. Shift I 23 change. 24 HR. RUSSELL: And you get feedback 1,

_ _. _ ~. _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. 89 q 1 from that regarding particular procedures in areas that 2 may need to be revised, modified? 3 HR. BRO;WN Their views, their 4 opinions and so forth, yes, j 5 HR. WHITE: Would the information 6 that you are gathering from individuals be used by 7 Peachbottom, by PECO, to take any type of adverse t l 8 action against any employee? [ 9 HR. BROWN That would be up to 10

them, 11 HR. GALLAGHER:

The information 12 that is being gathered here, up to this point, I feel, 13 is probably too general to be able to do anything of 14 what you are implyi,ng. We believe the next step when 15 we are getting in and talking to individuals, taking 16 statements, seeking names and times, then we are in a i j 17 situation where we will have facts on which we can take I l 18 action. I don't believe we have that at this point. l o l 19 HR. BROWN: Let me finish the 20 process. The interviews, the documentation review. j p 21 Then, after the l necessary validation, the necessary 22 valuation, we will have recommendations to address what 23 we found. I 24 HR. TAYLOR: You mentioned your f a,.._

1 30 1 1 i lg 1 questionnaire. 2 can a copy of the questionnaire be 3 made available to the agenc'y or is that proprietary? 4 HR. BROWN: I believe it can, but 5 that's Philadelphia Electric's. 6 HR. GALLAGHER: As far es that is 7 concerned, we will get it. 8 HR. TAYLOR: That might help to y 9 explain how the MAC process was done. It gives the 10 outline, I presume. 11 HR. BROWN: Again, the 12 questionnaire is just a questionnaire. 4 13 HR. TAYLOR: I understand. It 1 fi 14 covers ths topical, areas that you touched on; is that 15 correct? 16 HR. BROWN: Yes. 17 HR. TAYLOR: Does that sound 18 sensible, Mr. Gs.11agher? Is it an act of proprietary h 19 product? If it is, you should market it. 3 20 HR. BROWN: No, it is not. ,.l. 21 HR. GALLAGHER: You will get a copy 22 of it. We will send it to Mr. Russell. L 23 HR. HAYES: Did you use the same 24 questionnaire with all the various levels? (

31 ju d h! 1 r. l HR. BROWN: No. I said we use six hi l 2 different. i (, t 3 HR. HAYES l: So we can expect a half 4 a dozen or so questionnaires? .J q l 5 i HR. GALLAGHER: You can expect b 6 that. i' [ 7 f. HR. TAYLOR: We appreciate that, j' '; ; 8 L HR. HAYES: One other thing. I got jl j i 9 a little confused about the confidentiality aspect. 10 Would you go over that one more time for me as to i 11 whether or not the information that you have obtained 12 in your study would be made available to the regulator I 13 again. i 14 H,R. BROWN: The method that 15 Hanagement Analysis dompany uses to do work in these .16 type situations consists of maintaining confidentiality 17 to the person being interviewed. To generate the la recommendations and so forth, we reduce the data and J 19 provide recommendations. To the extent that the 20 interview notes or the results of that are available, 21 you have issued a letter to Philadelphia and 22. Philadelphia has passed the letter on to us with your 23 request. I 24 Again, we maintain confidentiality. i \\ g,,a.vyn, ,,n....

32 M. j 1 That's all I can say abo'ut that. I-2 HR. HAYES: Letlme put it very T. 3 direct. If we came to you.and asked for your notes and 1 l 4 any documentation you prepared or gathered in your 5 study, would you provide that to the staff? d (q 6 HR. GALLAGHER: Yes. 7 HR. KEMPER: Yes. 8 HR. BRADLEY: Let me make a 5 9 distinction which we will ask George about. The j 10 distinction between confidentiality as to source and 'f-11 confidentiality as i to the material obtained without 12 identifying the source. I think that's the first step f 13 of what you are inquiring about, the material. .sj 14 MR. HUTCHISON: There is a 15 distinction, but we are asking both questions. 16 HR. KANE: Is that to say the notes 17 don't have a name associated with it? 18 HR. BROWN: That's correct. l 19 HR. BRADLEY: Yes. 20 HR. LIEBERMAN: I can appreciate 21 how HAC might want to treat this with total i l 22 confidentially or PECO might want to treat this with i 23 confidentiality so they can get the information. On ) 24 the other hand, this is information concerning licensed l l

33 I 1 activities. Like Mr. H a $'e s said, he's asking whether { hk ~ 2 he can have all your information. .t Ik) 3 HR. HAYES: I made no' distinction l ( L 4 between names or the data you collected, full well 5 understanding and appreciating the fact that to obtain 6 probably more valuable data, there has to be some ' t. f 7 grants of confidentiality. We have a process within k 8 the commission that we do the same thing. 9 My point is, though, if we think it-7 10 necessary or required for our regulatory %) 11 responsibilities, is that material going to be made i-i 12 available in its totality? Everything you hava is the i' 13 basic question, Mr. Brown. 14 HR. BROWN: Everything we have? We d 15 don't normally do that. 'f' 16 HR. HAYES: That's why I am trying 17 to get it on the record today. If we go there and ask 1 18 you for the data, do you intend to provide it to the 19 staff, yes or no? 20 HR. GALLAGHER: We intend to 21 provide what you ask for. I don't know what may be 22 proprietary to MAC; but anything that comes out of the 23 investigation, since you asked us to save our notes or l 24 whatever, or tapes -- I don't think we have any tapes

~- f i 34 q ql 1 -.but we told everybody'who was involved to save them l 2 and I see no reason why we wouldn't m'a k e them available j! 3 to you, 2! 4 Do you have any problem with that, 5 Gene? 6 HR. BRADLEY: No. I assume there 7 will be no names identified with the particular set of 8 material or particular respdnses. lI 1 9 There is no problem there to 10 identifying names. There are no names. 11 HR. KEHPER: Part of the problem, 12 we wanted to go through this process and interview all 13 of the personnel at Philadelphia Electric associated 14 with Peachbottom and go through all the series of, 15 questions that we could to develop to see just wh'at was 16 the problem and why it manifested itself in this ) 17 leadership problem, why it manifested itself in an 1 18 attitudinal problem. And we felt, as the management of 19 Philadelphia Electric, the best way to get this 20 information, to have it open and free, was to do it 21 anonymously with all the people involved and to do it 22 with an outside agency, MAC, and to do that so we could 23 get the best data base we II could and then to analyze {l 24 that information and make a decision on what truly .-.I L.

] 35 l L 1 generated these leade rshi'p, problems, generated this l .t. .'() 2 attitudinal problem across the board.' l r 3 We wereljust concerned if we 4 started going in and honing in on specific individuals, I court reporters, the whole shebang, that we would not y 6 get the free flowing and promptly and quickly get the 7 information as rapidly as we could or to the broad 8 scope that we could. W 9 So we went down this path. We have 10 gone down this path about 90 percent. We have done the 11 data gathering. We have not done the data reduction. k 12 When we.get the data reduction finished, we will review

i I

13 that and we will go over that with you. The next 14 phase, we said, okay, we reviewed the whole problem, we h 15 looked at the whole ball of wax. Now we want to'go e h 16 down individually and start specifically asking and 17 someone else, other than MAC, interviewing the follows i 18 for culpability. That's the next phase. b 19 HR. TAYLOR: Let me make one 20 request for the agency. This matter, as I said, as you 21 know, is very serious to us. It is a matter of your h 22 own internal investigations and reviews, it is a matter I t h 23 of public agency, the Government's own investigation @l j f 24 and reviews. I would request that you preserve all of l

~ _ _.. _ _ ~ i ,6 l l s " if 1 the material which you have. As HAC is your j) I a 2 contractor. I think I cas, make that request. l 3 HR. REMPER: The request has been ,3 .) 4 made and granted. i f, 5 HR. TAYLOR: Including such names g u 6 as you may have associated. You should maintain those. I 7 I think that's what we should clearly establish this 8 day. This is a matter under public investigation. 9 HR. GALLAGHER: We agree with-that. I 10 HR. BRADLEY: We are working under f 11 that assumption. 12 HR. TAYLOR: I don't want to leave 13 this meeting today with any doubt in your mind. I am 14 speaking, first, to, Philadelphia Electric and, second, g 15 to HAC as a contractor. You should preserve that i 16 material. The protection, the individual 17 confidentiality, there are procedures and processes 18 that can be worked. But let no one doubt that the L; 19 record of what you have and what you have reviewed 20 associated with this shutdown must be preserved. 11 HR. BRADLEY1 That's the assumption l 22 we have been worhing under. I L 23 4 5 MR. TAYLOR: If there is any doubt 1I p 24 in MAC's mind, I suggest we take care of that i I. I g,,s.vyn. ..n...,

==~---- -

f 37 i l ) 1 officially. 1; t 4 MR. BROWN: I hope there is no 3 doubt in the table here of hlow we normally conduct our t 7 h 4 work. I 5 MR. TAYLOR: I understand what you f. ..] I 6 ! g are saying. But you should understand, Mr. Brown, that I .7 you ar4 also involved in a situation that is a matter I. .I 8 of great public concern here as against a typical MAC

pl.\\

L 9 management review. There are differences. All I am l 10 asking you to do is bc sure to preserve it. Is that R- ) 11 satisfactory to you? I i }l t 12 MR. HAYES: .At this point. l 13 MR. TAYLOR: How about our l c 14 attorney? b 15 HR. RUSSELL: Can you make sure I I I 16 understand your normal process. i l 17 If you have a two-man team that l l' 1C interviews someone and they don't keep a record of that 1 l h 1 19 person's name and information develops in the course of l l [ .20 that interview that has safety significance, or if at L Ll 21 some time in the future we wish to go back and follow l t 22 up on that information and determine the extent of it i 23 or to potentially audit or evaluate the P 24 comprehensiveness of your program, we would need to

1 i 38 .e e C 4;I 1 have access both to the source, that is, the individual d .l' c ~,h-2 who first identified it and pote[ntially have a b' 4 e 4 3 need to go back to that individual. If your process is ..j[ 4 not keeping track of the source of the information when ji~ h4 5 you got it, if-it's neutral, if your questionnaire 6 sheet and, of course, your interview doesn't keep a .M 7 recccd of who is bringing this information to you, then I 8 I have a concern. To the extent you have that ) 9 information and you preserve that information, then I 4 10 don't have a concern. 11 Is it the former or latter? 12 HR. BROWN: Well, it is a mixture. 13 We do not have the names of operators on the interview L 14 . sheets. We have the names of certain management.on the 15 sheets that will be preserved. Those that were 16 willing, it would be a way to categorize it. But when I 17 Mr. Hayes talks to an individual and you convey that t 18 this is our process, this is how we work, some i ). 19 individuals say I am not concerned about that.

Okay, t ].

-20 MR. TAYLOR: So the operator L,. ((. 21 responses are anonymous?

3. -

lf 22 i MR. BROWN: That's correct. l c h 23 MR. RUSSELL: The second general %' ; I 24 area that I would like you to discuss. You indicated (

.) k9 3 h 1 you have an Industry Revie'w Committee that has been put h 2 together under support for INPO. What is the scope of i

t 3

that industry review and what is their involvement A 4 today on the site? 1 ft 5 HR. GALLAGHER: They are not on the .h 6 site today. Their scope is to review what we come up-h 7 with so we have periodic meetings with them and make kf 8 presentations on where we stand, our thinking of what 9 would go.into an orderly plan, those kind of things; f 10 and they are reviewing, making comments.and giving us 5 11 suggestions on what they would do. j 12 We have had one meeting with them. \\ t 13 I have to check the date. 14 .H R. RUSSELL: Are they generating ,1 - 15 first-hand information directly themselves or are'they 16 simply responding to information either generated by il _ 17 the company or by others? l 18 k HR. GALLAGHER: They are basically I 19 responding to information generated by the company and i 20 HAC. 21 HR. RUSSELL: So they would not be i r 22 considered a source of raw data? j 23 HR. GALLAGHER: That's correct. l P 24 HR. RUSSELL: They are a consultant l N ~

j.h .c. 40 j i1 i N 1 to you as to how you would' view the material that's N 2 generated by NAC or by your investigation? I 3 MR. GALLhCHER: Precisely. And 4 they are reviewing it from the standpoint of how other k 5 companies would see what is coming up with is affecting [ e 6 them. I'm sure that's all part of their thinking. But .t 7 they are not providing any new source of information 8 about the problem itself.. ( r-r 9 HR. HUTCHISON: Do they follow up 10 on the information at all? They don't conduct any 4 11 interviews independently or themselves? (; 12 MR. GALLAGHER: No, they have not. L ( I 13 HR. KEMPER: They have gone to the 14 site. They have the,ir own meetings where-they review 15 and look at the information they have. We make i n . t 16 presentations to them. They call us for data. They ( 17 gave us suggestions as to what they would do if they +- L i 18 were in the same situation. These are the industry. f 't f-19 members that have come from troubled plants or plants f. 20 that have been excellent plants and also an overview l 21 from INPO themselves. t. L l F 22 We gather the data, present it to 1 ' )[ 23 them, they review it and do some things on their own ni l 24 and they get back to us with recommendations or t i

'.w. 4

41 I

i i 1 suggestions as to where e are going. When we are 2 finally finished, we are going to meet with them on 3-Friday and give them an upd'te and also the co-owners. a I 4 give them an update as to where we are. As a result, H A 5 we get some guidance and direction from them to do more k 6 or to go in another vector, go in another direction. .i' - i 7 As Joe pointed out, they were a 1 V 8 review board and guidance and advisory board and, 9 finally, a findl approval board. We must get their I i 10 approval before we move on to go to the next step. 6 11 HR. GALLAGHER: But they are not a 12 intervi' ewing people. I l' 13 i, HR. HUTCHISON: The things they do i 'O 14 on their own, that','s purely analysis? k 15 HR. GALLAGHER: Yes.

E 16 HR. KEMPER

Yes. They have been 4 7 17 to the site, looked at the site, they have their own i V 18 facilities, they have had their own meetings to have .3 19 discussions about suggestions to us as to what to do l 1 IA 20 and what not to do. They have been very effective. .f 21 i HR. LEITCH: They have been to the =1 22 site and visited with a number of people there and have i$.. 23 made their own observations of conditions at the site. 24 To that extent they have some original data coming to o l

g gg ) : 4 s 1 .them, but, basically, it is mainly recommendations to .f f 2 us based on their own experience and based on that l 3 independent view of-the site'. i 4 MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Gallagher, you I E mentioned unacceptable individual behavior or words to t ) 6 that effect.. Are you going to sketch for us how you f 7 are intending to pursue that beyond, say, MAC's broad 8 view of what they will provide you? (L v 9 MR. GALLAGHER: This is the phase ) L J 10 that we are currently in. Our own security people are C l \\ i L 11 re-interviewing a number of the people whom MAC has il 12 ~already, interviewed. They are interviewing from the e I 13 standpoint of asking specific questions about did you l-L 14 do this, did you do,that, when, did you see anybody i 15 else. Those kind of things. I don't know all the 16' questions. That's the kind of thing. And statements 17 are being taken from the people. ['. l 18 Now, the people we have started out l 19 with are the six vendor engineers whom we have already l 20 interviewed and who have had access to the control Room L 21 regularly. We plan to interview our own shift 22 technical advisors, who, again, are non-operating c 23 personnel with frequent access to the Control Room. We V L 24 then were going to our shift superintendents, then our l L H - l

43 1 1.;- \\ f 1 shift' supervisors and reictor operators. All those i ik t - 2 will be interviewed on a taking a statement basis. ) h 3 There won't be a court repo'rter but 4 our own people l4 i 4 making a statement and getting it signed in'as many l s'

d. '

5 cases as possible, m 6 MR. LIEBERMAN: That will be done 7 in the next two weeks? jf 8 MR. GALLAGHER: Yes. That is 9 already started. It started this week. There are jff 10 about 40 people or so. It is going to take about two .i 11 weeks to get that done. At that time we should have c p.4 12 whatever we-are able to obtain from the standpoint of ) 13 individual involvement and things. They are asking t y 14 about procedures and all the kind of things that.are I f i 15 all part of the total operation. I ' l 3/ 16 , T I have seen none of the statements i l-17 as yet, none have been produced as yet, but certainly 18 should be more detailed and more pinpointing than 19 anything MAC has done to date. So that's under way. I 20 can't say more than that at this point. 21 our intent, of course, is to try to h 22 find specific individuals for whom there is reasonable 23 or substantial proof that they were involved in 24 improper activity. And, as I say, we will take ~ -...

44 f 'l h i appropriate disciplinary action, the disciplinary f -. I 2 action we deem to be appropriate at the time. And we

h 3

will-review that with you af[ter it is done. r

f C 4

MR. HUTCHISON: Mr. Gallagher, how )?i 5 long have these interviews in the Phase Two been going? 6 MR. GALLAGHER: They started this l -} 7 week. [, 8 MR. HUTCHISON: Who exactly is ,r [- 9 conducting'that? 10 MR. GALLAGHER: Our security 11 representatives. 12: MR. BRADLEY: Within the Legal 13 Department we have a' claims Security Division. 14 MR. GALLAGHER: Jim McGoldrick,. 15 MR. BRADLEY: That division is 16 performing this investigation, this phase of the 17 investigation. l '18 MR. KEMPER: It is the same group 19 of people that if we have a problem anywhere with our 20 employees at Philadelphia Electric, be it suspicion of 21 theft, improper operation, improper conduct, our L 'l 22 security division has a group of people that are i I L-23 skilled in investigation and interrogation and they are u 24 the people that are doing this interrogation and o-1 .. -. _, _... -, _.. _ ~ _..,,. _. _ -, _., _. _. _.,. _.... ...m.

,n-( 45 9 1 investigation. So their' specific tasks and assignment ^ 2 with Philadelphia Electric is to do this and they are k-3 the folks that are doing this right now, i 4 Just to back up. Big picture. We i 5 looked at the root cause, did that overall )I 6 investigation. We are into that data reduction phase. 7 We are going to do the analysis. While that phase is l-8 going on, parallel, we are doing after the individuals. l 9 When that's finished, we all ought to be focused into 10 a point about two weeks from now where we will have 11 that information together. We are trying now to t' 1 12 generate a recovery plan; and, hopefully, within three 13 to four weeks, we will be able to be back to you with ]. 14 al'1 the information, the conclusions of a root cause, [ i 15 the conclusions of the individual problems and a'very ,7 i ) 16 positive and strong recommendation as to what we are 17 doing about discipline and what we are doing about 18 recovery. L 19 HR. HAYES: Mr. Kemper, would it be j 20 possible for your securities staff to meet with me or 21 members of my staff in the next couple of weeks so we 22 can get a real, first-hand feel as to their operation, 4 23. what they are doing and the particular investigative f 24 techniques they are using and the type of report and l f

.s 6 ,46 k .r; l' - . analysis and factfinding' mission that~ they have t 2 .ombarked upon? Is that possible? t 3 HR. SMITH: Yes. 4 MR. KEMPER: I have no problem with 5 -- that. '~ 6 HR. HAYES: Mr. Bradley, i f I + 7 understand you, the particular Phase Two is being 8 operated under your leadership out of the in-house 9 counsel? 10 MR. BRADLEY: Out of the 6 11: leadership of the vice-president and general counsel, p 12 I am the associate general counsel. 13 MR. HAYES: If I have the correct i 14 picture, the attorn,eys are working with your }' 15 investigators, your internal security investigators, ,f i: 16 for theft or what have you, in trying to scope and [ 17 develop the facts and circumstances surrounding U 18 culpability here. i l '( = 19 MR. BRADLEY: We are working with 17 20 them not to the extent of participating in the 3-} 21 interviews themselves, but working with them to the i 'I 22 extent of the scope of the interviews, problems they k. 23 may encounter in terms of getting signed statements and ti Ih 24 the need to get to specifics with respect to names, Y , i. r f-M. 'Ie --et-r e, ,.py_. ___,,,,...,-,-.-._..%_m,,,,,m______,,,,m_

amt k l 47, 7 4

L-t l'

dates, possible facts, who, what, where, when. 2 MR. HAYES: Who, wbat, when, where, i l 3 why? 4 MR. BRADLEY: Yes. 5 MR. KEMPER: Just one caution with y 6 respect to the release of the information. The 7-timeliness. Joe Gallagher is going down tomorrow and l 8 tell the operators and the people that we are shifting l i. 9 from root cause to -individual investigation. The 10 gentlemen at the plant do not know this yet. .h 11 I would appreciate-if we would let L 12 Joe tell the people that because we have a strong -t 13 personnel situation here and we want cooperation and wo 14 want openness and w[ want Joe to have the opportunity .I. s l_ j 15 to address the gentlemen, as the management, as to what { 16 we expect from them and what cooperation we want from t-17 them. I must point out to date cooperation has beer 18 excellent. There has been no refusal of interviews. l _' 19 'There has been a very open and free discussion of 20 everything. I think they covered the entire-spectrum. 21 That's why we asked MAC to do a complete, independent ( 22 diagnostic, independent of Philadelphia Electric 23 Company, so that the operators would feel free and open L 24 and spill out everything and let the management look at L

) 4 48 I i 1 the whole spectrum. 2 I think George was'.having-a little. 3 difficulty in the beginning because we are looking at 4 everything. It is hard to get any specificity. You [ A-5 .can see the outline. I have gone through the questions j: h 6 that they asked. They cover the entire spectrum, hl i 7 We have been trying to look at the j k" 8 total picture as to why, why'did this occur. Only when l 9 we know why will we be able to.come up with the 10 recovery plan. F L l 11 .HR. GALLAGHER: Mr. Hayes, it seems i i l 12 to me it might be appropriate for me to mention that it. I ~ 13 would be a great help to us if we could also share what 14 you have. We are certainly willing to share what ,e i; w b . 15 have. If it would be possible to take the other route. 0 1 16 itR. HAYES: Yes. You mentioned 17 that on the phone when we chatted the second week in 18 April. As I explained at that point, our investigation i 19 is done so that staff and the commission can make the 20 regulatory decisions that are mandated by statute to 21 mandate. Before I would feel comfortable in sharing l 's 22 the results of our investigat. ton, I would have to share 23 them with staff. I am sure the staff would want to 24 share them with the Commission. In this case, I will I

kh T '49 \\ s jb' 'l probably end up giving a personal briefing to the he 2 Commission on the results of our investigation. l 3 i Normally, our efforts are not put ~ \\ y 4 in the public domain until the staff has reviewed it to h$ 5 determine what, if any, enforcement action or C) 6 regulatory action is necessary. So it is only at that @/ 7 point that you would probably see the results of our pc 8 effort.

[

9 I appreciate the problem and the S' 10 predicament that you find yourself in. Having been b

J

'11 investigated a few times myself, I am aware of that. o 12 But at this point I don't see any vehicle where we-1f i 13 could share with you other than where we are mandated, 14 obviously, if there is a health and safety question, F 15 to get that out for corrective action. Other than. [ 16 that, we are cranking along as quickly as we can to try h 17 to provide to the-staff the data they need so they can -p 18 have a meaningful discussion with you on corrective 5 19 action and potential culpability and so on. 20 HR. GALLAGHER: Thank you. I i 21 r HR. RUSSELL: Before we caucus for ~ . F 22 just a few minutes, there is one aspect I want to make l 23 sure that was understood with the questions with 24 respect to scope. e

4 $h' 1 50 u q[ 1 We have some idea of what 1 occurred i 4 L 2 with respect to certain types of activities. That q: 3 - activity of sleeping on shift, leaving the controls, ,.jh-4 inappropriate reading materials, was all activity which 5 was contrary to your internal policies and procedures 6 and contrary to the rules'and regulations and ip 7 requirements of the NRC. 7. n 8 The qu,estion I have is: What else? 9 And once you draw the 'r undary around the scope of the s

gk 10 problem, what do you.se by way of assurance to us that 73 3

11 that has indeed deff;ed the scope? That there is not y 12 something else that is outside that boundary as it .1 't relates to conduct of operation, whether it be 14 . procedural compliance in operation of machinery., 15 whether it be procedural compliance associated with 16 administration procedures, tag outs, et cetera. And 17 what has been brought to a head recently with the 18 sleeping on shift is i another symptom of a number of 19 problems we have been facing with time. 20 When I say that you need to define j' 21 the scope of that well, that's what I mean. In { 22 defining that scope, what you use to assure confidence

u t

23 that you have, indeed, not missed something. That's 24 why follow up and attention to detail and the

11 I 9 (51 ' j,j$ 1 information that's being. developed becomes important.

c 2

MR. GALLAGHER: ,'Very good point, 3 MR. RUhSELL: What I would like to .h 4 do at this point is break and go off the record. Let's /+ 5 reconvene at 10:30. a-pk 6 (Brief recess.) p',$; 7 a HR. RUSSELL: The time is 10:40 hh. ? 8 and we are back on the r e c o'r d, 9 fk' 9 HR. HAYES: I-have a couple u ,Jg 10 follow-up questions and one request, gentlemen. I .,a. hp 11 don't know if it should be Mr. Kemper or Mr. Gallagher. n jhl_ 12 First of all, I do appreciate the !~ 13 opportunity to sit ~ down with your security staff and go 14 over some of these things. After the meeting, I.will .,y 15 get with you and get a name and phone number whe're my h 16 staff can make appropriate arrangements. 17 Secondly, as I am sure you are L 18 aware, we are deeply involved in our.own investigative V 19 process. And it would be most beneficial to us to have L 20 your investigative staff at the completion of their-21 interviews or product that they are producing, if they 22 could mail those to Mr. White, my office director in i-23 Region I, say, within two or three busineen days after 24 that has been generated to give you sufficient time to

_m i i fj!I ^r 52 ,h" 1 do what you have to do.wl~th it. That would keep us 4 2 current and updated on the result of'your internal 4 3 investigation, which may or',may not have an impact on jg 4 what we are doing; but it might expedite our particular .,4 : g 5 process. 6 I realize at the end you would make 7 this material available-to us. But if you can do it'on 8 a real time basis, it would be very beneficial to us. b 9 So I pose to you this morning, when my staff meets with q. 10 your security people, we are going to ask them to do y 11

that, if there is a concern about that, we can address L

12 it at that point. If there isn't, I would like to go 13 ahead and get'some recognition of my request

and, 14-hopefully,-you will. honor that.

15 MR. BRADLEY: I don't know th'e 16 mechanics of how quickly they reduce what they have got 17 to a statement. We will find out and get back to you. 18 HR. HAYES: Fine. I 19 My associate, Mr. Hutchison. l 20 Since you already started your L 21 interview process, I am sure it will be a week or so l i 22 before our schedules are going to permit us to get up l, 1 23 and' sit down with your staff. If you can put a packet ~ 24 together of the material you already have accumulated 1 Li r e n+~ .,~ n ,n -.wn-- --,n - - - - - - -, - - ~ -n

'e i 53 1 1 or are in the process of ' accumulating by the end of th$ 2 week and give it to Mr. White and mail-it to Mr. White; 3 we would appreciate that. I.'t might give us some basis 4 to follow up with your staff and discuss techniques and 5 how they are documenting their findings and how they 6 are going about selecting who to interview and when to 7 interview them and that sort of thing-These are the 8 issues that, if I can, I wil1 sit down with your staff 9 and go over. If I can't, I will have one of my 10 headquarters representatives in my stead. 11 MR. KEMPER: Excuse me. This is 12 all-with respect to what I will call Phase Two? 13 MR. HAYES: Yes, sir. Phase Two. 14 MR. KEMPER: No problem. .15 MR. HAYES: Thank you. 16 I don't have anything else, Bill, 17 MR. RUSSELL: Before closing, let i 18 me just make a statement for the record about how we h 19 intend to review the transcript of this meeting. We i 20 will provide a copy to you, a copy to the director of 21 OI, and we will review it here in the Region. To the 22 extent we get into information which is sensitive, you 23 can identify that information; but it is clearly going ,( ~ 24 to be the NRC's decision as to what is redacted or not

9 54 1 redacted. 2 l There may be information which 3 ' relates to privacy matter 'as was the case of the 4 discussion of what individual may be replaced in the 5 future that you have not notified that individual. 6 There may be other matters which relate to ongoing 7 investigation; for example, the information associated 8 with the Phase Two of your' investigation of individual 9 culpability and responsibility. I would hope that could 10 be done with a one-to-two-day working day turnaround so 11 thkt we can promptly make our meeting summary publicly; 12 available. 13 MR. BRADLEY: Upon your review of 4 14 the' transcript, are you looking only to redaction 15 reviews or normal transcript correction reviews?. I 6 16 MR. RUSSELL: Minor corrections and 17 redactions. 18 MR. BRADLEY: Usual? 19 MR. RUSSELL: Yes. 20 The other thing is that I would 21 encourage you to keep us informed. As I understand 22 your schedule within the next two to three weeks, you i 23 expect to complete the MAC review and be in a position y 24 to address some of the details with respect to scope of I

Ith, E,

~

55 'b l. A 1 the problems that you have identified. You may or may fS] e 2 not at that point have all of the cor,rective actions 3 identified. When you get to the point where you are NY 4 prepared to discuss the details of the problem h 5 definition, I think it will be appropriate to meet hl 6 again and discuss those issues. 4. 7 HR. TAYLOR: I appreciate as much INT 8 notice as you can on that d,a t e. That is, I realize it E.( 9 may only be a few days. But as many as you can give 10 because of calendar problems and people who are 11

involved,
~.

c 12 HR. GALLAGHER: I will be in touch 13 with Bill. 14 MR. TAYLOR: Do the best you can to 15 give us a window because of the -+ '16 MR. KEMPER: We will make every 17 effort to target it out so we can have time for l 18 everyone to-be there. 19 MR. TAYLOR: Thank you. 20 HR. RUSSELL: I don't have any 4 21 further questions. 22 At this point I want to thank you l 5'l 23 for, first, requesting the meeting. I think it is 24 important for us to understand what you are doing and de e e ea.c. e.. ..a. ,m,, ._...m.__,,_

56 1 the scope of your own internal investigation. 2 Do you have any qu,'estions for us? 3 MR. K E M P,E R : No, we don't have any 4 more questions at this time. I want to thank you for 5 setting this up and coming out here. I think it is 6 very important that we stay on a target schedule, let 7 you know what we have, keep abreast of it, because it 8 -is extremely critical to us that, one, we find out what 9 the problem is and then come up with a correction that 10 is satisfactory to all of us-that we can assure ourself 11 that Peachbottom will be the fine plant it once was and 12 will be again~. g. 13 I must point out we are under 14 critical load si t u a t,i on s with respect to all three of 15 our nuclear units going to be down this summer and we 16' will make every effort or extra pressure to do that. 17 Limerick I will be going into a refueling outage 18 starting the 15th of May and will be out most of the 19 summer. Peachbottom II and II are down. That's 3,000 20 megawatts are off. 21 In addition to seriousness of this 22 problem, we are also confronted with a load situation 23 problem. So we are working very vigorously to get back 24 and we have a critical pressure on us to get to the [

57 { 1 root cause, straighten it out and satisfy everyone that 2 we can do the job and get back. 3 \\ MR. GALLAGHER: You,.apparently, { 4 have no questions and I want to thank you for the l 5 opportunity for us to have gotten together. We will 6 keep you informed and I will try to talk to you about 3.- 7 setting a date sufficiently in advance and getting 8 together. 9 MR. RUSSELL: Thank you. t k-10 That terminates the meeting. 11 (Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m., the 9;;. - 12 proceedings concluded.) 13 14 't'- ?!- 15 A.. W $'[ 16 j'g:. 17 ,4f! .:n 18 V 4 Q;.: 19 3' ?/t 20 w; . 4 21 22 l; t -23 l l 24 i s. v w.... -e ww- -, + g v y -ns -}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19332G632&oldid=4739465"