ML20091H996

Intervenor Exhibit I-MOSBA-48,consisting of Transcript of Tape 253,side 1

ML20091H996
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	07/18/1995
From:	AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
References
OLA-3-I-MOSBA48, NUDOCS 9508170097
Download: ML20091H996 (15)

Text

T-Inos/6&it 8 '/5 ' W-)1

[O8[

1 TAPE NO. 253, SIDE 1

/

i DOCKETED 2

VOICE:

(Laughing.)

USNRC (inaudibleg ogt ge 3

VOICE:

You o

4 venture?

0FFICE OF SECRETARY 5

VOICE:

I don't care. 00CNistlGVasTRWfy i

BRAHCH 6

entertaining.

7 VOICE:

(Inaudible).

8 VOICE:

No, it's not out there today.

i

[

9 VOICE:

(Inaudible).

10 VOICE:

Yeah, it has been painted now.

11 VOICE:

Yes, it has.

12 VOICE:

(Inaudible) waste of taken care 13 oft get rid of that problem.

14 VOICE:

The question is:

Where is the 15 computer?

16 VOICE:

Yeah, that's the other question.

17 I think that's the one that disappeared.

18 VOICE:

Yeah.

l l

19 VOICE:

That's all there is.

20 VOICE:

I found just one (inaudible).

21 VOICE:

What's that?

22 VOICE:

My wife made up fresh.

1 23 VOICE:

Oh.

24 VOICE:

That's where it just came from.

25 VOICE:

Got a lump problem or?

9508170097 950718 PDR ADOCK 05000424 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y N

T PDR g.&W8 f

50-424'425 OLA-3 EXHIBIT NO.

Docket No in ine m tter of coo,ni, po er Co et ei.. vootie units i s 2 D Staff O Applicant % intervenor O Other Q identified Received O Rejected Reporter N d Ld McA usk cate 7/t f

witnes.

i f%

hMbTHEAs l

1' TAPE 253. PAGE 5.

LINE 3 THROUGH PAGE 21. LINE 21 g ig ceWsis0WT WIT L

2 McCoy:

(inaudible) the meeting.

We're trying to go through l

'3 what our positions are.

We need to oc this by five l

4 o' clock,puty we're going to give thesq'ing in the meeting, positions to the S

NRC, so they can have their team meet j

6 and go over all these divisions and te urear=f-c --

r==

j 4

7 M what they think the concerns are.j rrow morning, 4

8 George and I are going to meet with the team leader from 9

l 10 TMT WI the NRC to see if we can resolve any misunderstandings - :

2where we are at fault a czess purposes mza od!

W5T & -

nothittingthetargets,gowi$h

~

11 hat kind of i

12 1

, 2 -- --- - r ).

]

backgrourd, Georgeb-w3Y DOWT Tou TAkE OVER.

i 13 Bocdold:

Before I Jo to the specifics, I do have one general 14 thing for everybody.

There's still some concern from i

15 some members of the team that,we are speculatino about-IF:

l 16 something, just say we're speculating.

I think we all W

17' have to be careful about that.

If we're not l

16 speculating,4N n say.it more as a positive fact, l

19 WE 6W--

(inaudible) I'd like to escRathat on to help your goal. pgp' i

20 You know, they know when we're speculating, and they i

21 know when we're sure about our fact, okay?

The next 22 thing I would like to do is just start through the list.

l 23 We have a package put together, and it's crossed out 1

24 with diesel record start failures, it's Pete Taylor, l

25-George Frederickp.

George Frederick / has provided a new j

26 page report.

Does everybody have copies?

4 j

27 (no response) 28 1mF6ee: 3EL M Okay.

AND TOM ONT Tfk

{

You M6W, i

29 McCoy:

One thing I noticed on this is that ou did not put a i

30 revision number or anything on these each time it got i

31 revised. AND 1 WesLD SEs4EST TRAT WE ALL ge myt)g6g ggg7 gey l

Mb mT MARK WE CuARENT ME WE HAVE AS REV.i.

j 32 Bockhold:

Well, I put time and date.

33 McCoy:

You have time and date?

34 Bockhold:

Right here.

35 McCoy:

Let's all go through and put it on every one of these.

36 The time and date is 1500 (inaudible).

OR 155sts i

37 Bockhold:

Okay, so we're oing to read -- eve body's going to

]

38.

George Frederic r item.

We're go.

g to go ahead and 39 comment if we've got any questio Why don't we issea Ask 40 7p _- TeresaAcome down, and get a new kage, that corporate j

41 doesn't have, and fax it to them right away?

4 1

1 1

A, i

1 McCoy:

. Bill, we're not sure you have the latest package up 2-

~

there, but we're going to fax you a complete copy.

It's

-3' the latest.

4

-4 Shipman:

We're sure we don't, KEN.

5 McCoy:

Okay, so we'll do it.

We can't wait until you get that, j

6 but we'll just send it over to you.

I 7

1Easse: 5AIPmM ctB]t LANDER 5TAND.

1 wANT T6 54Y Aff0 0F On the second pge, thess::3[ George's it j

8 Bockhold:

. I'm not sure j

9 THE gg g what[insnediate means.

h ^- ' r

==r 2 it = notification of

~

j 10 the residents herevisedLBRwasprehared Anb NRL EMIDN X) 11 Voice:

(inaudible) j 1.

l i~

12 Voice:

(inaudible) 4

}

13 Bailey:

Don't you remember we wrote that letter on the way back?

l DATE.

)

14 McCoy:

' Yeah, that's right.

Ithasthesame[daF-f 15 Bailey:

Yes.

l 16 Bockhold:

Mike Horton.

Your item two, is there a reason for why 17 we have not always renorted.

(Gets &AG. TO THE. LATE. 91 -g1 UNAM)k r) l l-18 Norton:

I'm sure there is. Q%

I DDN'T Wi%T TW AtM I5. M i 3

W f m DWT Teu Abb A srNTrat. TMT sauMitg5 j

-19 Bockhold:

f(inaudible) 4 l

Buty.)?LEyoxE5*

Gdf.ub)BLE) 20

==

= =:

j.

21 Na Well, maybe you need to see the documentation Mike.

And j

22 gggg.

-J Mike and Rick (inaudible) very clear 2F to{(crewed up.

i 3

I im615Lfi) 23-Voice:

(inaudible) l 24 Bockhold:

Well, that's right.' We screwed up and we got a fairly i

{

25 massive offort to figure out what was all those i

26 failures.

27 Voice:

(inaudible) 28 Noice:

(inaudible) ORN A ALLY WE DEdith TDE VIOLATION h

basically, if sep/ mold Boc. $ 9ev.ss (.inettutY lhR anold:

You can read the document, 29 thing new 30 comes out..

You can read the docunantation f-7, and 31 if something new comes out, then you can gA - ---i.

a 32 This is violation number i

--- - r.

DoTwo want to add 33 Stu Ebneter in here?

You otified= Brock man right, Ken.

l 3

kIE

(.lembillt)TosAY l

ventauya

1. w cu Patun e

A setc m. te m T s

1 i

1 McCoy:

Bill Shipman.

2 Bockhold:

Okay, Bill Shipman notified Brockman.ri r You 3

want to add - you have never interviewed?

b asWEM UER S

4 McCoy:

Bill?

Sygw 5

Shipman:

Yes, sir.

2ElO, 6

McCoy:

What we're talking about is that there's statement in 7

here that says, "Therefore, when Vogtle nagement was 8

aware of the problem in the LER 9006 rev/ NRC Region II 9

was notified including the Chief of Reactor Projects, 10 genBrockman.

11 (inaudible) 12 Well, anyway, I think we should put in here that SEtt STEW 1

13 Ebneter was notifiedyir>~ o 41e) -ping foi M%

14 6

15 Shipman:

George Hairston called Stu according to George.

Boc(Knold:

Y cA S.

ANb At ny :

16 So why don't,want to put the names in not the,the 17 titles?

Including Ken Brockman and S u Ebneter.

18 Voice:

And George, you all talked to the resident.

19 Bockhold:

I talked to the resident. 1 T4tXED Tb TRE RESIDENT-20 McCoy:

That's the next paragraph.

It's after " notification of 21 the resident and Region II" -- The revised LER was 22 prepared.

g g,T W W 23 Bockhold:

Why don' t you say, George

- in-l ;i=udible) w r g-,

24 1"'

% the resident, Ken Brockman and Stu Ebneter?'

i 25 IEWN -

gneoftheresidents. notified Ron Aiello, but I can't remembeg I thinx 1 26 S

g 27 Voice:

(inaudible) y g gj 28 Bockhold:

" Including the NRC residents, Ken Brockman."

Why don't 29 you say including the NRC residents, and NR Region II, 30 Ken Brockman and Stu Ebneter.

N ust move the g

31 sentence up.

After notification of the NRC the revised 32 LER was prepared.

g 3 7gg i

/notsure he revised 33 McCoy:

ygg The only thing 2I think on I'

34 LER wasn't in so e form o g 35 pggpT)oN-_

E-t: ::.:r e

er ::ficier.

I think 125t, 4

36 what brought it to our attention was he LER 12Et had gg 37 numbers on it that sua different than the original Vggs)oN.

3 38 Lg THE FACT TMT 1

WE fA14HT WANT TO SAT ltl5TEAD OF " TME REV w THE REVISEb LEA WAs suBMinEb. "

r i

Voice:

(inaudible)

WERE 2

Bockhold:

We struggled through about four or five different revs.

3 The LERs acre different.

4 McCoy:

(inaudible).

On this paragraph two, we're going to have 5

to :cz MAKE. TMAT (INAubl61.E).

UNE TntNG ON TSE5E PAPEILS 15 WE' At 60124 TO WAVE To BE Cl. EAR (IN AMblBt,1)'

6 Bockhold:

Well, item =

b (.INAMb)BLE) 7 Voice:

(inaudible) 8 Bockhold:

Company's position on the NRC issue -- "After thorough 9

(wnyngt, review - "

j 10

%:dee: k(01 *

(inaudible) THE tsSK ASouT TBE DIESELS ANDTHE LETTEAS AND l alt TBAT, THAT'S NOT IN SERE AT ALL.

11 Fredericks:

That's what wo(ries me, "- 3=+f =l cl_i_ -

% iM 2

12 (inaudible).

L S E E.

TPl5ERT.i

~~

HEM.

j 13 McCoy:

Jim Bailey, did you[nsam that2 dLRESTl0N'?

4 MbIT 14 Bailey:

We prepared it here; _ Et[was approved by Hairston.

4 15 McCoy:

I guess we would say that I repared that.

I worked i

16 with you on the preparation, right?

17 1251z:e: IMLEt r - yg (oggtty, KEN 18 McCoy:

So why don't we say that TUR.McCoy and Jim Bailey 19 prepared the letter whic was signed by zr 6toA6E IlMt.570N g

IT Rev 0 M

IN DRMMOAM.

3 20 Fredericks:

On the i tial LER 90-06,fwho pr red that?

Who 21 approved c2523s, and who reviewed n the PRB?

I can get 22 the PRB embership from various meetings.

There's gonna 23 be quite a few.

I can also get who prepared it from the 24 NSAC staff.

I think yutla pproved it is obvious it doog6DEt a

25 out undert airston's signature.

i WHo H

4 i

M.

FVEN 26 McCoy:

That's right.

We have a blue sheet with ER. --

2 r- ";

27 mA I.T HA5 TME flEVIEW St THERE.

WE CAN LCDK AT THAT AWD

& M ERT3 SEE wub fLEVIEWED TOT ONE.

I KNeic i WEu OM #T 51dtE At!dut mW o i

I 28 Fredericks:

The next question that I have that involves corporate 29 is:

Who prepared the cover letter forAI29006 rev one?

That's the transmittal letter that Mr. Halrston signed. LER 30 1

31 He want] to know what the attempt of that paragraph 32 Wh5 ME ANTD N

^ : _ ^

i n=nm m 6: 1rAclarifying the LER 228004rev O.

q0 g d

33 IN

~He's not sure 125 actually did anything to clarify the 34 diesel start that was described in the original LER.

IT fREDEMcU dim TS din h\\ LEY TBEREl 3

Q A

htv hs.

FREbER)(C h A, l'M. C.htL Yen AFTER THE MEETl#4 MD 6ET THE PMtT)C.utd5 09 TBAT ME SKEET To ANSWEt T1 HIT /wwu.

INSERT 1 1

Frederick:

I started work on some of this, for-instance, 2

there's an open question on, who prepared the 3

slides for the 4/9 presentation; who prepared them 4

and who. proofed them?

5 6

Bockhold:

The slides, I did.

7 13 Frederick:

Both?

9-10-Bockhold:

I worked with' Jimmy Paul Cash and Ken Burr.

The 11 three of us worked on it.

I might have put the 12.

bullets down and then got Ken Burr to make sure 13 that the, uh, organized sequence was correct.

14 15 Frederick:

Uh, the second question was who prepared and who 16 approved the confirmatory action letter?

1 I

i l

)

t i

l*

So, l

-1

'Fredericks:

M535, I need to talk to, and I think it's Harry Majors,

' t 2

but -- and he may be out of town, and I may have to talk 3-to Jack Stringfellow.

4 1

i 4'

McCoy:

Why don't you all go ahead and pull that piece of j

5 correspondence?

Do you have a copy of " 3 1

i L rr DOWN REff ?

6 Voice:

(inaudible) r j

7 McCoy:

Okay, so after the meeting, George will give you a call.

8 You all ass see if you can figure out what the question j

9 is and what the answer is.

g gg pg pg 10 Fredericks:

Here's the last one for you im. M r refords show that j

11 the LER9006 rev 0; i' --

on the 18th of April, did m

12-not say anything about subs entia test procram.

After f l

13 George's approval between the 18th and the 19th =+++e-++"a 14 W IT W -

athere was a change made, and the words, 15

" subsequent to the test program,= were included.

The i

16 TMMTQ number of diesel starts was changed to coincide with the 17 number of starts in the April 9th 335C.

E54wants to know ggf i

i 18 LETTE$. "

who put the words, " subsequent to the test program a in 19 here.

Initially I've been told it happened in the 20 telephone conversation between two groups.

One is IN i

21 corporate and one on the plant s:hdeL SITE.

TMAT 22 Bockhold:

Ken McCoy if you remember I believe it happened etween 23 a group in your office and me.

And we had s 24 discussions about it, and given the fact 22suF thought 25 the slides that I made the presentation zas correct.

_ w iTB a

26 u% ANb 1

-athinking more about it, becausf we talked to W Elt' l

27 gg Pete Taylor about it some.

I thought that, youknow -- I 28 thought our discussion tha e clarifying words 29 and my initial thought was were no material change 30 to the facts and they were basica orrect and that's j

31 why I agreed with it.--pa change that s initiated in i

32 corporate --

j

'THESE WERE NY j

33 Voice:

(inaudible)

}

34 McCoy:

Bill does that sound like your recollections.

i j-35 Shipman:

Yes, sir.

j 36 McCoy:

All right, let's get that down in writing here for 37 George.

That's my recollection too.

Ingeneraltermsg.,

i 38.

don't remember the specific words but I do remember the 39 discussion.

40 Shipman:

There was a lot of word engineering that went into that q

41

response, j

i 4

____.__-,w--

,v..,.

--,..w

.-y.

_--._.--r--

y

).

h1 I

I

1 McCoy

Lokay,:now that response.was prepared after:we did the QA 2.-

' audit'and d15 a that intormation/7

{

3 'Bockhold:

' No, No 3 N#.

L

'4 tutuuL.

Mrr Trrr-Tm-TNG.

\\

5 Bockhold:.

'Let me bring you up'to sequence of events.

4 I

6 usses: Mef'..

-okay.

I TWE cE i

h

-7 Bockhold:.

Let me bring everybody up to/ sequent /' of events because.

[

i 8'

it now~ involves corporate.

Bill, can you hear me?-

3 L

.9 ggg3B:5$PAAAh yes.

i e

i THI i

10 Bockhold:

Okay, the sequence of events:

On the w ekend, me, Jimmy i

.11 Paul, and Ken Burr and George Frederic

, and some 12 others worked on transparencies that were going to i

13;

.use in our conference that-occurred o Monday. ORAf.-

l l

14' Basically, Jimmy Paul came up with 3 numberksg of starts i

e 15

'and Ken Burr and I came up with the sequence.. We put it i

16 together into general terms, aban we could discuss that. g0 t s

17 From that point on, then we went to the conference with 18 the NRC.. We presented the slide.

We really didn't talk i

19 g_

about the number of starts stathe conference at alli ge 20

'got sidetracked with a bunch of other issues.

On the 1

21 airplane ride back, you, being 22m corporate, and Ken M N b:

I 22 McCoy, and George HairWton and whoever revised the l

23 letter and sent it out that evening.

It was dated the 24 9th.

It was' Monday evening.

Something like 10 days l.

.25 later, the 19th okay, on the 18th, the PRB came to me j

i 26 with a minor revision, took the numbers up from 18 and i

27 19, respectively to a total of 20.

I okayed that, and l

28 that went to corporate.

On the 20th, because phe _ ep f

29 numbergf going up, I think we felt that it would be 30 gg better to keep the LER consistent with the presentation.

i-31 ye lowerfthe number to 18 because of again, word 1

32 engineering.

We didn't want to have 18 and 19 and break 33 g~ discussion aboutthe diesels =4+h-+4=part.

And then there was some

34 cne preceding sentence, about the i

35 comprehensive testing of the engine logic AND...

y 1

' 3 6.

McCoys

~One thing that I would like to add to that.

As I saa i

g j-37.

tots., the.words were at least 18 --

LAE(ALL AT' LEMT TnE I

f

'fordssay--

3 38,Bockhold:

39 -McCoy:

When the thing was brought up, to 20, it didn't change 40 the accuracy of what was in there...

41 :Bockhold:

That's correct.

I p

i

] IF THAT'S WRERE IT LAMF FROM. THEN TnE QAESTitN WAS WBETHEA vetca.: Mc.Gy:

_i t uaunYhle) wAs THE REASON 1M.

11 MD R WA5 Acc14 LATE.

1 1

2 Bockhold:

And why I think we came up with 20, and I'm onlj 3

guessing at this point, and George is supposed to find 4

out.

But why I think it was 20 was that we probably had 5

within that week, we had another diesel start.

In one 6

case we probably had two, and one engine we had another 7

diesel start.

But I don't remember why the PRB had 20;

{

8 do you remember, John?

[5EE I.NSERT TWO3 9

Aufdenkampe:

. em., it was Tem 6bt hc wr;to-the LS". Morkad From 10 April 3 Zecward and he teek th; numbcr; fre= th: ?.pril 11 9th letier one-

- 2dded the wei 0; th;m en t; th:0.

12 Bockhold:

Well, that corresponds with why I would guess 20 would 13 be okay, 4:ause, you know, we had another engine start T-SE 14 Aufdenkampe:

But then there were some questions in the PRB_about 15 whether 20 was an accurate number or notg That's when 16 we had a phone call Friday night with you and Alan and 17 me and Bill Shi man and Paul Rush and Jim Bailey.u g

Okay, so you were % -.I Tn1 LM 18 Bockhold:

I don't remember, you know, that 19 all those people were in on it.

20 McCoy:

Yeah.

JetKnolb;

)

21 Bockhold:

So everybody then agreed on at least 187 W=ll, ac ' -

6 1ven the facts, if the transparency had been correct.

22 9

D 23 Aufdenkampe:

Everybody agre that based on what you identified as 24 the starting po nt for counting that the 18 and 19 were 25 correct.

C.SEE. I N5t'RT S3 26 MtTt t hr M :

% nanrga dm you hear *b t?

(inaudible)

You-told 27 everyb55y 28 Vuice:

$ h andiLT1r) 29 Ystue:

tinaudibT4) 30 ac er.nc+d:

Rif a - y~h.

chev basically ;r par cy_--

31 Aufdenkampe:

Based on that issue, or based on that statement 32 ever w s agreed T-.ge0T b TMT IT AND let (INAttblM.E).

33 V5Ita: Fa a r:.okay.

g gy 34 vatte:httBOLD:

Friday evening phone call with John, and Alan, and Bill 35

Shipman, vatte:kFbENtAMPE:(in "MMe) 6tLL SHlfmA4; dig 3hltry) 3 ALLEY W45 (INAutlBLE) 36 2

NE TALKED 09 FRIM1 N%RT TRYi% TO IRDN OttT THE LER. TAE h btstuS510N Wh5 WSAT WAS MEANT W{, NugAE WE 6OT TnE 9tWERS

INSERT 2 l

1 Aufdenkampe:

Yeah, it was Tom, Tom Webb wrote the LER and what j

2 he did was take the numbers-from,the April 9 3

letter and worked from April 9th forward and added.

j 4

the rest of them on to that.

i t

t t

V i

T

+

INSERT 3 1

-Bockhold:

Okay,. George, did you hear that?

2-4 13 Frederick: '

Part of it.

4~

.5 Bockhold':

What John-just said.

6-7 Aufdenkampe:

You told everybody, well everybody there, that the 8

.18 and 19 were based on completion of the 9

comprehensive test program.

10 11' Bockhold:.

Associated with the logic.

12 13 Aufdenkampe:

I don't recall that.

14-lLS

Bockhold:

Yeah well, that's basically what the transparency 16 said.

t t

i t

1

(

l l

l 4

1 i

I l

Tile a

1 Bockhold:

That was the p

.,D TO Of ne call.

ay, o the trail of fact is 2

that I believ the transpa ency is correct.

And then 3

Tom Webb adde some numberal on, but that appeared, in my 4

mind, appeared to be confuoing.

And there was come

]

5 giscusslod, ~

--=:: 2;-icnathat John went on about it, okay, that then 6

we got at least 18 because-ntransparengd:ss ts correct.

p--

A g p e other words got 2-

- = c o m p l e t i~o n o f t h e t e s t j

7 i

8 program was, in my ind, that was associated with the j

9 logic and the cont ol testing which really didn't 10 involve diesel sta rts at all.

It involved the air 11 system.-

' Id HEAE ON WHAT THE.

i 12 McCoy:

(inaudible) 13 McCoy:

(inaudible)

E 4

14 Shipman:

Yeah, t way this thing originally came up was when the i

15 LER c up with I think, it was 21 and 22, or something 16 like that.

George Hairston asked a question, "Well, we 17 went to Atlanta, and we told them 18 and 19, and now the

}

18 numbe 21 and 22.

Are we sure that the numbers's 19 right You know, we had this conference call that 20 John's talking about to try to make.sure the numberk WA5 21 assa right.

Coming out of that phone call, as I recall i

22 it, the decision was that we would be completely safe % lf

{

23 we said,

" greater than 18."

24 Aufdenkampe:

Given what we identified as the starting point for that i

25 count.

y 26 VtztCE: 34CtHotD:

Right.

s 27 Fredericks:

What -- where surra the confusion factors, Bill, was when i

28 we threw in the starting point.

That's what$ HA5 klN0 0F 1 i

29 N

TRROWN A AcWEEY IN THE WRENLt og Tlig WRENG IN TRE MONKEY; WRA1EVER You 30 nice!

___)

31 Shipman:

How about a monkey wrench in the works?

PECIDED What happened was when we[startuir to define the 32 Fredericks:

Yeah.

33 starting point, we fuzzed s2% the4 picture up.

S E.

15 -

34 Bockhold:

Yeah, I think, you know, hindsig 20/20. tw-ww umin It 35 would have beena+=++we to leave t first little part of g

36 that phrase out c etely.

DeMBY :

LET ME A5X A Quf5T)oN.

THAT's WHAT RE4 hikl4 37-Fredericks:

N.

era did that JIhzIgb come from?

Dots ANTBoby In5A6REE W ITA ThatFridaynightmeeting[-"E

-- Je w s AECol.l.ECTONI 38 V A-: DeM6Y:

5 ABonT wno WEtt UE I knowhe.T wasfinitely est Alan, George, and Bill Shipman.

39 Aufdenkampe:

g-s s tut %cNE ut.L :

y gg

1 Voice:

(inaudible) 2 Aufdenkampe:

Bill, do you remember who else was there with you on 4

3 that Friday phone call?

4 Shipman:

No, I don't remember, but I know there were several of 5

us.

Louis just said he was involved, and Paul, and Jim, 6

and Jack were involved.

This was one of those, "We've 1

7 got to get this thing right so George will sign it out,"

lastminuteexercisg 8

9 Voice:

(inaudible) wg HAD htALTicAU.T EM fE

'- "'"l--h body up here and U n=uninie) body i

10 Shipman:

v-~-

11 down there that was available on the phone call.

12 Fredericks:

Well, I think I can describe that one.

13-

-4r-: 10CkHOLb: Okay.

i 14 12rstre: Faman:

stay.I CM TALK To JIM % Alt.EY AFTER TRE MEET)M4 DN THE OTHEA ONE.

15 Vuk=.:.Mcloy:

U"-

'%i-)3cKAY.

n THERE We #EED b# Till5 7 16 McCoy:

N[nything else that[i- ;mi-)

m31Znt :

(inaudible)3 WE'LL TALK ABouT TRAT AFTEA THE MEETIN4.

[IMMT]3coneLD:

17 WELL wES AE. 60lW6 TO ) LAVE TD ju=ggive'himsita l

I 18 McCoy:

<-=y 1 i we got.

WHAT 19 Wa : B0C1%8Lt. 7tms.g DLM, WE'LL Sil6T 6WE TinEM WAAT WE 607 Ar sw.

Whatwe[r$ viewed [

20 1ststt*:Swna2witett:

21 V5Trk: Ac.LOY :

N)g WE'RE GOING TD 61VE ThEM WHAT WE 60T.

l 22 V h 5mnwn. DER:Iwa) WE'RE GotN4 70 HAVE A 1.bT DF LeMcN7s (tNAubl6LE).

[ 1NSEG.T C

^

23 10stca:

.:. crx : mi-.

ihi; (ic cdi~=l:~;

24 letstce:

CDIE E EL4) 25 Vtzica:

thum7ft1'Ite) 26 Bockhold:

This LER, about (inaudible) -- so it's not (inaudible).

27 It doesn't coordinate with anything, so we're not going 28 to give him that one.

AcLoy:

OkAY.

LET'S 60 ON TD Tile NEXT ONE.

1 totthtb:

Oh1E tbMAENT T))AT Jim hAb. BE's NOT 601% TO MAkE I'

IT

%Y 5 s:Do.

INSERT 4 1

McCoy:

The problem is'they'reigoing to have an exit on 2

Friday.and.they.have got to-decide and we got'to 3:

decide whether we understand their issues and they 4

understand our; positions, and get that all 5

' resolved tomorrow.

Now, the NRC is meeting at 6.

5:00.. We won't have another team meeting probably.

7 until tomorrow afternoon and so we've got to be 8

.sure we-understand the. team members' concern and 9-

. what we've written down as-the NRC issue, fully 10-

. expresses their concern,. uh, for'one thing, and 11:

they.need, each of their people need to know what 12 facts-we~have and what information we have at this 13 point.

We can continue to work after that.

I

'14

. guess the exposure on this (inaudible) is that 15

.(inaudible conversation).

.