ML20134H590
| ML20134H590 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 04/04/1996 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134H573 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-96-357 NUDOCS 9611140169 | |
| Download: ML20134H590 (30) | |
Text
._ __, _ .... _ . _ _ _ _ _ ._.- _ . _ . _ . __ _ . _ _.. _ - _ .__ . _ _. _ _ .._ _ _ _ _ _ . _
}- , ..
L i
j i
1 InThe Matter Of:
l
} INRE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE
( CRYSTAL RIVER t
l PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART 4
j EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996
}
i i !
- l 1
d BROWNREPORTING, INC.
ATLANTA, ATHENS, AUGUSTA, CARROLLTON ROME 4
!. 1740 PEACHTREE STREET NW i
l ATLANTA, GA USA 30309 l (404) 876-8979 or (800) 637-0293 Original File 0404nucLasc, 240 Pages \
Min-U4cript@ File ID:2718989130 I
l l
Word Index included with this Min-U-Scripte Information in this record was deleted in accord 3nce with the freedora of Information Act, esp as _ /n _
FOIA . 9_ __ f E 1 _ _ g l
i 9611140169 961030 i PDR FOIA CALANDR96-357 PDR .a
q--an nr.: -- . - _ . - - - - - _ _ . _ - . _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _
enEutttstvam , r_airvatamtr.n a cunrr.nr.ncr.- _ _ . . ruus .ees unos mune 3rEWAKr j '
CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CIIAIRMAN April 4,1996 i
Page 1 p,g, 3 i [1] UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGLA.ATORY COMMISSION
~ REoM til MR. EBNETER: I'm Stew Ebneter, regional m pi adeninMmtor for Region II of the Nuclear pi ta RegulatoryCommission.
M p3 MR.URYC:I'm Bruno Uryc.I'm the M IN E ist director of Region II enforcement staff.
isiCRysTn m ) Isl MR. RICHARDS: I'm Stuart Richards. I'm
_m gn the chief of operatorlicensing' branch from our l Isl 1:1 office inWashington.
M l gO PR EFORE isi MR.GIBSON:I'm Al Gibson.I'm the 3 pq STEWART EBNETER, CHAIRMAN pq director of dh'ision of reactor safety here in j pa pij Atlanta.And that's the division of the AP's 4,1998 j 0 31 pri responsibility of operator licensing.
j D'l ****
ps MR. BEALI.: I'mJim Beall. I'm from the l m pio,, 04) headquarters office of enforcement.
! tot Mariettasee t psi MR. LANDIS: Kerry Igndis, chief of j gin Anarna.o orge poi branch 3 reactorprojects.
D'l
! On MR. RAPP:I'm Curt Rapp.I'm the psi regionalinspector. ,
j py pas MR. ENNIS: Jerry Ennis, radiation j Deborah P. L.ongoria. CCR-D-1557. RPR pq spcCl211st assigned to the Mr.Uryc's staff.
t 21 l pq MR. EBNETER: Mr. Morris,are we going to DROWN REPORTING. lNC. p23 proceed with all the gentlemen in the same meeting p4] 1740 PEACHTREE STREET R31 or-( ATLANTAGEORGIA 30309 MR. MORRIS: Mr.Ebneter,I willleave 9 41 I RSI (404)S7& 8979 ps) that to you.That since there is no conference room i
d Page 2 l gy APPEARANCES Page 4 ;
j m pl on this floor for them to sit - l pl Onbehaf of the NRC:
l pi MR. EBNETER: Oh, we can find a place for l'1 J 8**' l j pi them to sit. I f .f g C s'. pi MR. MORRIS: Whatever your preference.
A.oeson Isi (Discussion ensued off the record.) ,
K. L' aruss Is)
J L*b'""*" 8'Y 8*""*)
(si (Mr.Atkinson, Mr. Stewart,Mr(M '
c.Rapp
, m Va Sickle the hearing room.)
m S. Richards is) tsj B. Uryc M 181 oel 0"
Oq Mr. Monts. Esq. 02) p4 p31 p2l Aho Presort U#1 p3) Ms. Haagen, Esq., Florida Power Coppeny Mr. Ennis 0 53 I14) ps]
p51 py psi pn pa)
(tal pgl 0 81 pq pal pil RU p2l p2l
- pa p41 ps; 9 41 ps)
BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min-U-Scripts G) Page 1 - Page 4
'__ .. _ ~ . - . - - - . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IN RE:_.PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE PROCFFDINGS BEFORE STEWART CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 49 Page51 til til
\
P1
\
! M ,
W l 151 \
14 M 'P1
(- m A l- m m l 'm M
} tie tim i lisi tit]
j tia tia t1g tig (Resumed at 9:15 m.
l tiq tsy (Operators present.)
! tis liq MR. EBNETER: Let's go back on the j tisl tiq accord.What we want to do, gentlemen,is to take l tin tin some time for the opening - took 20 minutes or so.
l tis) tial We'll just go through the opening ceremony part l tiol tig first.We'll go all through it, and then we'll talk
{ pq pq to each of you individually as we go through.But I pil pij think it will save us all some time and make the
, na pa proceeding go a little more efficiently.
j mi pq So I'll just go over some general 94 pq remarks.And Mr.Uryc will discuss the agency l
ps1 <
pq policy.And following that, Mr. Gibson ivill discuss Page 50 Page 52 l til .
Itj for all of you the statement of apparen.
l pl -
p violations. And then we'll take you in mrn.
ta p1 We have already talked with Christine.
M M So let me do that for the benefit of all of you.
14 .
~
is I should remind you, Carolyn Evans,the pl te regional counsel for Region II, has joined us now.
m -
m So I'm Stew Ebneter, regional
! M Iq adminierstor of Nuclear Regulatory Commission, m -
m Region II.And Region II has jurisdiction over the
!' (14 tig Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River Plant.And j tiil tiil today we're conducting with the individual operators
. Ita tia - who are Ms.Chnstine Smith, Mr. Jim Atkinson, tig , tig Mr. Jack Stewart, Mr. Mark Van Sickten - we're j ~ tidi -
tig conducting a predecisional enforcement conference risi riq with each of you individuals with regard to some _
tig -
lig activities at Crystal River Plant.
i ( 1 71 lin The meeting is closed to public l 11 4 lie observation,and the conference is being tsunscribed -
i (14 - tte forthe record.
l pq -
pq The basic agenda I've already talked
{ pt: -
pt; about.Bruno will discuss enforcement.And Mr.
j m pa Gibson will discuss apparent violations.
4 ps . , pq Mr.Ileberman,who is the director of our
! P4 g , g. pq office of enforcement inWashington,D.C.,is on the as ( _
pq telephone and is listening and will interject g
BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min-U-Scripte (15) Page 49 - Page 52 i
t
- . . - . _ . . , - -- ~- , --- ~
m . _ .- _ _ _. _ _ _.- _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ - _ __ _ _ _ . _
PROrmmntNGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE I EBNETER, CHAIRMANI April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER l Page 53 Page 55 t l p) whenever he feels the need to do so or has a pj individuals could include a letter of reprimand, a I I
pi question. And so you can expect that you may get a g notice of violation,a civil penalty, or an order to p1 question from Mr.Lieberman. pi prohibit activity in NRC licensed activity. i 91 Once we've gone through the openings and pj Any of these sanctions if applied are tsi turn it over to Mr. Morris and the individuals, {
- iq carefully determined on a case-by-case basis.Now, I l in you'll be given an opportunity to make statements or isi this predecisional enforcement conference is ;
m discuss anything of your relationships to the m essentially the last step of the investigation and ;
sei apparent violations. isi inspection process before the NRC staff makes its tg I want to make clear to you at this point sq final enforcement decision in these matters.
pq th*t the decision to hold the conf rence doesn't pq The purpose of this conference today is l
, pij mean we've decided to take any particular actions at pij not to negotiate a sanction.Our purpose here today '
l pa this point.It is predecisional.And the process na is to obtain information that will assist us in 04 is designed for you to give us your information,any na determuung the appropriate enforcement action, such v41 information you may have tlht we don't have that pq as a common understanding of the facts, root causes, psi would help us reach a decision. pq and missed opportunities associated with the l pq And you should also point out to us if pq apparent violations;a common understanding of '
pa there are any errors in the documents that we've on corrective action taken or planned;and a common
! pa provided to you,such as inspection reports or vei understanding of the significance ofissues and the I pq investigation data.So feel free if you think we're poi need for lasting comprehensive corrective action. I i ga in error or have other information, just make sure pq As Mr.Ebneter said, the apparr nt pi; ycu put it on the record. pij violations discussed at these conferences are l pa I'll let Bruno Uryc discuss quickly the pa subject to further review and they may be subject to j j psi enf >rcement policy.If any individual of you want a psi change prior to any resulting enforcement action.
j pq copy of the policy,we can give you a copy for your pq Again,it's important for you to note l
psi own use also. psi that the decision to conduct this conference does Page 54 Page 56
{ pi MR. URYC: Thank you, Mr. Ebneter. After 01 not mean that the NRC has determined that a i
pi an apparent violation is identified,it's assessed m violation has occurred or that enforcement action pi in accordance with the commission's enforcement pi will be taken.
- pi policy which is published as NUREG 1600. And I have pj I'd like to note at this time that any Iq copics that I can make available for you. ist statements of you or the expressions of opinion made l 1q The assessment of an apparent violation tel by the NRC staff at this conference or the lack i m involves categorizing the violation into one of four m thereof are not intended to represent final agency Im severity levels based on safety and regulatory ist determinations or beliefs in these cases.
l
! in significance. tg Following the conference,the regional i pq For cases where there is a potential for pq adnunistrator in conjunction with the NRC office of
! pq escalated enforcement action,that is,where the pil enforcement and other NRC headquarters offices will l
pa severity level of an apparent violation could be va reach an enforcement decision.And we expect this psi categorized at a severity level one,two,or three, psi process to take about 60 to 90 days to accomplish, pq a predecisional enforcement conference is pq That concludes my remarks.lf anyone has pq conducted.And that's the process that we're in 'pq any questions,we'd be happy to discuss it. -
- og now. pq MR. MORRIS: Thank you. j pa' There are three primary enforcement ya MR. EBNETER:Just quickly, summary of l pq sanctions available to the NRC.And they are 0g theissues:The issue before us is apparent and -I pa notices of violation, civil penalties,and orders. pq deliberate violations of 10 CFR 50.59, conducting 4
sq Notices of violation and civil penalties pq unauthorized tests of the make.up tank over pressure pq are based on identified violations. And orders may pu on two different occasions.
pa be issued for violations orin the absence of a pq - The two occasions identified are pq violation because of a significant public health or pq September 4th and 5th,1994,in which licensed l
pq safety concern. pq operators at the Crystal River Plant apparently psi NRC sanctions against licensed psi deliberately conducted evolutions not required by i Page 53 - Page 56 (16) Min-U4cripte BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 L ._ ._ _ _
l
~ ~
i '
, IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE PROCFFnINGS BEFORE STEWART '
CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CIIAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 57 Page 59 p) plant conditions to gather data regarding the pj available to you,and you should have attempted to p) accuracy of the make-up tank over pressure Curve 8 m explore those, pi and they did so without a required safety review. pi We do want individuals at the plant to pl During the evolutions the operators p) raise safety concerns. And there are various ,
l tsi apparently adjusted make-up tank pressure and level Isi options.We would fully expect you to use those.
l ta to enter a prohibited area of the make-up tank over tq l understand in horing some of the
)
m pressure curve. m testimony and lookir g ai the evidence that there was tal Further,the operators apparently (q a certain envimnment that existed at that time. I te deliberately delayed taking action to alleviate the p1 And we would expect you to comment on that as you pq over-pressure condition while continuing to operate pq go.
vn the tank and move furtherinto the prohibited area pq Perhaps you were right in this instance i
va of the over-pressure curve. na of going into the prohibited region on September 4th psj The consequence is that it could have ps) and 5th.But you could just as easily have been pq affected the operability of the emergency core pq wrong.And you need to recognize that the j ps; cooling system,or ECCS,as a result of those psi individuals do not make safety decisions that are ps actions. l
! Os) outside the scope of the design of the plant.So l vn So the intent of the conference today is on the end cannot justify the means in these cases. I i paj to discuss those issues.You're here as individuals pq And that's about all I want to comment at pq because you are accountable not only to the Florida og this point.Before I ask Mr.Gibson to discuss the I pq Power Corporation, who is the licensed owner of the pq apparent noncompliances,Mr.I.ieberman,would you l l pq Crystal River,but also to the NRC as individual pij like to comment at all?
l pa licensees of ours. pa MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes,I would, Stew. I par And we do expect both the corporation and psi want to emphasize that we consider these issues that pq the individuals to follow the regulations.And you pq we're going to discuss today and the potential psi as individuals swore to that when we gave you a pq enforcement action that could be taken against each Page 58 Page 60 01 license. pj of you as licensed operators are significant l pi The public expects that the NRC - and we pi decisions and these are matters we don't take
! pi are the steward of public safety- the public pi lightly.
, ni expects that we would take action. And we will take p) This decision will be given capital Isi any action as necessary and appropriate to assure ts) consideration after receiving your views today, ts) that both utilities,the corporation,and tel considering the information our office investigation m individuals who are licensed comply with the Nuclear m has gathered,as well as information we've attained la Regulatory Commission's regulations. (s) from the company Florida Power Corporation and our te Based on our review of the investigations pi views as to their actions which coatributed to this pq and inspection findings and data that you have pq matter as well as the actions they've taken in pu submitted on the record as exhibits,it appears that pu response to this matter.
pa you may not have followed NRC requirements.And if pa So I look forward to each of your candid l pai this is true,then you have not complied with the na views.1 want to emphasize that if you have any l pq regulations. pq information you can tell us that we haven't asked l psi Mr.Gibson will go into each of those ps) you the preci e question, please feel free to _
l pq noncompliances in detail.I want to state that we psi provide that information.Because our goalis to pn do recognize that, apparently anyway from the on get relevant information to assist us in making the ne record, that your motives were in the right place. Om right decision in this matter.Thank you.
pa Your motives were to pursue a safety issue. And pq MR. EBNETER: Let me stop one minute.
pq apparently there was some concern on your part about pq It's getting pretty warm in here. Don't hesitate to pq the curve.It was also pretty clear that you pu take your jacket offif you feel uncomfortable.I'm ga anticipated that the evolution would drive you into pa going to uke mine off.
psi a prohibited region. pai (Discussion ensued off the record.)
pq But in essence,we can't condone your pq MR.GIBSON: Good morning,again.I'd psi actions to do that.There were other alternatives psi like to take care of a couple of procedural things BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 MieU-Scripte (17) Page 57 - Page 60
m . ._. _ _ . . .__ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I i PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART . IN REs PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE ERNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAI. RIVER )
- Page 61 Page 63 19 first. p1 requirements ofAI-500 to comply with the following l m This is a closed enforcement conference, m Crystal River 3 procedures.OP.402, Step 4.19.9 was i l
l pi meaning it's not open to the public.You are,of p) not complied with on September 4th or September 5th, i si course, entitled to whatever representation you pj 1994,in that the make-up tank pressure exceeded the
- tsj choose to have here.And you're also entitled to [s1 limits of OP-103B Curve 8 while adding hydrogen to gei exclude representation you do not want. get the make-up tank by manually bypassing the hydrogen
, m And I'd like you to note that Ms.Theresa m pressure regulator. l pi Halligan is here representing FPC today, based upon pi In addition,the limits of OP-103B Curve l e a prior arrangement,I tmderstand. And it's her pj 8 were exceeded on September 4th,1994,for
' l pq intent to remain for each of the individual nq approximately 43 minutes continuously and on i q pil enforcement conferences. nu September 5th,1994,for approximately 37 minutes l pa Is there anyone who objects to having Ms. na continuously.
i pal Halligan present at the conference? nsi In addition, alarm response procedure l p4) (No responses.) 041 AR 403, Item H 04-06, was not met on September 4th psi MR. EBNETER: You'll have another psi or September 5th,1994,in that, timely action was
)
. pai opportunity as we come to each individual, so if you osi not taken to reduce make-up tank pressure within the
- - on object at that point. On limits of OP 103B Curve 8 when a valid alarm was j pai MR. GiBSON
- I would also like to restate vai received.Instead make-up tank level was lowered 1 something that was stated earlier.Please don't nq which caused the make-up tank pressure to exceed pq hesitate to let us know if you believe there are ' pm Curve 8 by an increasing amount.
pq errors in the material that we sent you previously. pq Those are the violations under pa which includes inspection reports and summaries of pa consideration today-apparent violations under tze investigative reports. paj consideration today. And we'll give each of you an p4) And one final point I guess.We would l pq opportuniy to address those in turn. 1 ps; welcome an opportunity to meet with any of you psi That, Stew,I believe concludes our Page 62 Page 64 p1 individually following this conference if there is pj opening comments.
ni any matter that you would like to discuss with us p) MR. LANDIS:Would possibly Mr. Morris pi further. pi like to make his opening remarks? Were you going to i pi . Okay. Having said that,1 would like to pl use the same opening remarks for all three?
(si discuss the apparent violations that are under [s1 MR. MORRIS: Essentially yes.Would you a consideration today.You are required by the tel like them repeated? I guess for the benefit of the !
m licenses that we issued to you to follow the NRC m( 4er three operators who were not present when I tal regulations and to follow Crystal River procedures- tai : my opening remark with regard to Ms. Smith, si The requirement to follow Crystal River gg 4s. Smith, Mr. Van Sicklen, Mr. Stewart, pq procedures is stated again in Crystal River sq and Mr. Atkinson,the operators of A shift on pq administrative procedure Al 500,which requires all on September 4th and 5th,1994,thank you for the pa Crystal River employees to follow procedures. na opportunity of being here to answer any questions psi As a member of an operating crew at val that you might have and to present additional pq Crystal River 3 on September 4th and 5th 1994,you pq evidence to the record in assisting you in making l pq failed to observe the operating procedures and other psi your decision. -
90 conditions in the Crystal River 3 facility operating pq As I stated before for the record we on license. In particular, you failed to observe the nn hand-delivered a written submission with attachments pai regula' tion 10 CFR 50.59 when you conducted tests not ps) on or about March 25th,1996. And we ask that be pa described in the FSAR without a written safety pq considered and made a part of this record.
. pq evaluation. pq None of the operators deny responsibility pq' - Specifically, you conducted tests when sq for the actions of September 4th and 5th,1994.
pa you conducted evolutions involving make-up tank pa They accepted the responsibility for it.
pq pressure and level, evolutions not required by plant psi They ask that you in making your decision pq conditions,for the purpose of collecting data. pq consider the period of August and September 1994 as pq- During these tests you did not meet the psi August and September of 1994,not March '% looking Page 61 Page 64 (18) BEin-U.Scripte BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979
, IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CIIAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 65 Page 67 pj in hindsight to what could have been done and what 01 and were,in my terms, heroes for a period of pi alternatives were theoretically available. m approximately ten days until someone in licensing or pj At the time of these evolutions,these pl engineering said: Wait a minute;this could gi operators had raised what they believed to be p1 possibly be an unauthorized test.
[q significant safety concerns through every chain and (si It took them additional weeks to to: level of Florida Power Company. Discussions were tai determine at management level ifit was a test. )
m had with an NRC representative.They did not ignore m Why? Because as you heard frc,m Ms. Smith already, is) alternatives to performing an evolution. tal there is no definition of a test in these !
Ici They came up with an idea.They pi procedures.Their training is:1f a procedure i pq submitted it to their shift supervisor, as they had va covers it,it's an evolution,it's not a test.lf a l
p q done for years and years. Contrary to some belief on procedure doesn't cover it,it's a test.
pa that you may have been given,the shift supervisor na They were told by their shift supervisor pal was well respected.To the knowledge of these ps) it was covered by the procedures,therefore,it was pq operators had never be disciplined. Management had pq not a test.And all of a sudden a decision was pq never questioned his decision-making.And they had usi made:This could be an unauthorized test;we should pq every right and reason to believe in his judgment. psi report this to the NRC.And the NRC came back and on They came to him and said:What about pri said: How could you let these rogue operators do pai this procedure to resolve this safety issue? And he vej this? l p91 s2id;let's look at it and consider it. lisi And Florida Power Corporation pq Procedures were pulled.They were pq determined:Somebody is going to be in trouble; j pq reviewed. And the shift supervisor said:We can do su it's not going to be management,it's going to be pa it. And the shift supervisor authorized it, and pa the operators.And these four operators were pa) they did it as per the procedures set forth in front paj disciplined, pq of them. pq And we are here today to explain to you pq Now as you know,because your reports pq why you should not feel that you have to condone Page 66 Page 68 pi have pointed out,those procedures were not pl what was done.It's not a question of condoning m sufficient.They did not give sufficient guidance gi it.It's a question of understanding on September p1 and in some respects gave absalutely no guidance. p14th and September 5th what position these operators p) These people had been trained by Florida pi were in and why they feit that what they did was tg Power management,not by their shift supervisor,by tu absolutely proper.
Im Florida Power management to ask their shift (q In hindsight you may well determine it m supervisor for an interpretation of the guidelines m was not proper.We don't debate that.They take tai when one was necessary.They did that.The shift tai responsibility for it.They will each tell you they la supervisor gave his interpretatio:1,which was the pl would never do it the same way they did it before pq evolutions contemplated are witain the existing pq because they understand more now.
pq procedures, no additional proced,tres are necessary. tin But their feelings on September 4th and pa You may judge that that shift supervisor na September 5th were a result of the culture that p31 was wrong in that interpretation.I'm not here to psi existed,the training that they had received,and pq debate that. I'm simply here to present on behalf pq the lack of guidance outside of their shtft pq of these operators what position they were in on pq supervisor. _
psi September 4th and September 5th and how it was pq And we ask ycu to conclude,when all is on reasonable for them to believe that what they were pri said and done,they may have done wrong but they pai doing was within procedure and not in violation of usi didn't intend to,they didn't snean to,they didn't ps) any aspect, either written or implicit,in their poi realize they were,and now they know better and they pq nuclearoperators' licenses. pq are worthy of continued employment by Florida Power pn They went by the book,according to their pu and to hold onto a license, pa shift supervisor.They did the evolutions.They pa And we ask that you take no further p3) reported it.They reported their findings.They psi action against them other than what has been taken pa did a problem report.They were congratulated for pq by Florida Power Company.
pq taking the action on this significant safety concern psi MR. EBNETER: You have no question?
BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min-U-Scripts (19) Page 65 Page 68
IsROmmnINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EBNETER, CHAIRMAN: April 4,1996 CRYSTAI. RIVER Page 69 l til MR.GlBSON: Not at this time,no. p, l
[ .' -
pi MR. RICHARDS: Is this the point in which .g .
pl we talk to the individual operators?
' }
p, I41 MR. EBNETER:We would like to talk with g Isl Mr.Atkinson first. gq ,.
tei MR. MORRIS: That's fine.We'11 cxcuse ,
m everybody else except for Mr.Atkinson at the m
isi scornent. ,,
14 MR. EBNETER:Thank you, gentlemen. , ,,
l 9 M ) pq 11 11 pq
- Da pq U4 (tg 09 04]
l '
I U4 pq l
l 081 pq I U73 V7] l
! Del pq 09 04
~
Rol pq Ril pt]
12 2] pq l' A =>
pq .
% ~c -- .2 a Page 70 72 I Ul (t) i m pi 14 14
- a lil g M N i
c,n ,,
}
m n
'9 is .
R R 09 pq
("1 [11]
. Dal pq
_._.U4 04 sq l It4 psi 04 (ts:
I V71
, . '#3 _
! D4 pq j ' Del pq 189 f Rol j Dil pq
- ma a as l Pol psj 12 4 R81 Page 69 - Page 72 (20) Min-U-Scripte BROWN REPORTING,INC. (404) 8768979 l * '~
t.-.--_--..- -
y ch e gny(gpq w e M ~ ~ ~~ PROrFFDINGSilEFORE STEWART CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, GIAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 97 Page 99 pi pl you mean September 4th and 5th?
pi pi MR. STEWART: Yes, sir,both nights.
pi p1 MR. GIBSON: Okay. On September 4th and 81 81 5th, for the evolutions in question, did you believe ist (q that the activities of your shift met requirements te lg of Crystal River procedures?
m m MR. STEWART: Yes,I did, sir.
pi pi MR.GIBSON: Did you have an pi In understanding - what was your understanding at that pq pq time regarding the authority of the shift supervisor
} pq pq to depart from procedures?
) na na MR. STEWART: AI-500 has a section in it j psi ps that delineates the authority of the shift j pq MR. EBNETER: Mr. Stewart,we waE to pq supervisor on duty.And within that framework there i pq welcome you to the conference. pq is verbiage that gives him the authority to - no, j pq MR. STEWART: Thank you.
pq correct wording - he's allowed to manipulate
! pn MR. EBNETER: And Mr.Gibson is in pn operating procedures perAM00.
! pq charge.Mr.Lieberman,are you there? He said he pq MR.GIBSON: And what do you think that 3 pq would callback. pq means? What did you think that means?
pq (Discussion ensued off the record.) pq MR. STEWART: He was allowed to basically j p9 MR. EBNETER: let's restart. Mr. Gibson. pu change the procedure.He could eliminate steps,
- pa MR.GIBSON
- Okay Mr. Stewart,I think ga take steps out of order.
I pai perhaps - first let me say our objective here is psi MR.LIEBERMAN: Did he have any l p.y just to understand the facts and to see the pq limitations whatsoever? Could he do anything he
{ pq evolutions on September 4th and 5th of 1994 from psi wants?
i f ,
Page 98 Page 100 l In your perspective a littic better. In MR. STEWART: No.There was within
- pi And maybe a good place to begin would be pi reason. Right off the top of my head,I can't
! pi for you to tell us wh'at your involvement was.I pl recall all of the verbiage within AM00. I know l, si understand you were a member of what we have p1 you gentlemen have a copy of that AM00 as that rev
( (q referred to as A shift?
tsi was active in 1994.
l pi MR. STEWART: That's correct, sir. tg And basically in general terms he could j, m (Mr.Lieberman comes,on line.) m change the order of steps.He could omit steps if
{ tm MR. LIEBERMAN: Jim Lieberman here, pi he didn't feel that they were necessary.
I pi MR.GIBSON: Jim,this is A1.We just pi MR.GIBSON: And howlong have you been
! pq began.And Mr. Stewart was about to tell us what pq an operator?
09 his duties were on September 4th and 5th as a member pq MR. STEWART:Ihired on with Florida
- na of the A shift. Va PowerinJune of 1983.I have been in the
{ psi MR. LIEBERMAN: Okay.Very good. pg operations department up until August of 1995. I pq . MR. STEWART: Okay, gentlemen,I was pq obtained my nuclear operator's license in October of pq chief nuclear operator on the shift.I was the pq 1986 and held it continuously uritil Florida Power pq senior of the reactor operators on the control board og returned it to the NRC in August of 1995.
j en of the nuclear plant at Crystal River on the evening on MR. GIBSON: Okay. So during the period
- og of September 4th and 5th in 1994. Og that you served as a licensed operator,was your -
I pq MR. GIBSON: And what were your duties in pq experience such that shift supervisors from time to j pq that regard? pq time departed from operating procedures?
I pq MR. STEWART:To operate the Crystal pg MR. STEWART: I wouldn't say that they,
) pa River Nuclear Plant within the guidelines of Florida pa quote, unquote, departed from operating procedures.
p- Power procedures per the license agreement I have as But they changed operating procedures on a routine pq with the NRC. pq basis.
I pq MR. EBNETER: You say September 5tn.Do psi MR. GIBSON: For example, what might they l BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min-U4cripte (27) 7,- Page 100
. , -.c v n a(. : m- -y,.
.f'y o
, .Q &{. . a;% -
E *%
, PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER d
i I
Page 101 Page 103 4 pl do?
in MR. STEWART:IfI was in the field and I pi MR.EII: WART:IfI opened up a procedure, m was doing an evolution,following this procedure pi ifI yanted to do some sort of an evolution that pl step by step,I'd get to a point where this isn't i vi involved a valve lineup,and we took a look at the 8) going to work with the plant in this specific l isi prints and said,Well,the system is aligned this tsi lineup.I need to go talk to my shift supervisor. I te way;we don't want to open or deviate these valves. (q I go up and talk to him,tell him this is m And the shift supervisor will sit there and say, All m what I think we ought to do.He would have to tai right,we'll put NA on those specific valves. Ist evaluate that:say,Yes,I agree.He then makes the a That's just one example of many different m line-out.I can initial it.He has to initial it sq types of- pq and date it also.So the shift supervisor shows his i pq MR.GIBSON: If a procedure did not exist pq concurrence at that time before I can go any I pa for a desired evolution,might the shift supervisor pri farther.
1 pai direct that it be tried in order to determine vai MR. GIBSON: hat's regarded as a p41 whether or not a procedure should be developed? 04) procedure change?
2 l usi MR. STEWART:If there was no procedure pq MR. STEWART:I would hnagine so,yes.
osi guidance to do an evolution on the plant, then it pq MR. EBNETER: But it didn't go through a on was required that we develop a procedure first. On 50.59 review?
' i pai MR. GiBSON: I see. pai MR. STEWART: No, sir. But I believe the pej MR. URYC: Befort you actually did it? poi criteria that they were using was that if you didn't pq MR. STEWART: That is correct.That was pq change the limits and precautions or set points, pq our definition at that time,the only definition we pu then you weren't changing anything the 50.59 was ga knew of of a test.If you couldn't find procedural pa looking at. ;
pai guidance in existing approved procedures, then it psi MR. EBNETER: That's interesting to me.
R41 was deemed a test;you had to create a new ]
p41 Do you not think Curve 8 at the curve itself is a '
est procedure,go through a 50.59 review and take it psi limit?
Page 102 Page 104 p1 from there. to MR. STEWART: No, sir.There is - if i I
pi MR. GIBSON:I see. A you look in OP.103, you'll find operating curves, l
pi MR. STEWART:That was the criteria back p1 limiting curves.They're alllabeled differently. l 43 then. pt So ifI have an operating curve and then there are tsj - MR. RICHARDS: The limitations that were tsi other curves that are called limit curves,there (si involved in the section of the procedure -I'm not tai must be some difference between them.
m sure what the title is,but did the shift supervisor m Now, Florida Power never came out and (al have a prerogative to deviate outside the tal gave us a definition of an operating curve versus a pi precautions stated in the fmnt of that? pi limiting curve, admin curve.That was left up to pq MR. STEWART:I don't believe shift sq the shift supervisor basically to determine.
pu supervisors had the authority to change limits and pq MR. GIBSON: And Curve 8 has -
pai precautions on the ops. na MR. EBNETER:1.ct me go a little further 03: MR. LANDIS: Could the shift supervisor 03) with that.How many supervisors have you worked 941 - you mentioned NA'ing a step, as not required for 041 for,Mr. Stewart?
pq what you were doing. psi MR. STEWART:It's hard for me to say -
pq MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. pai that.
on MR. LANDIS: Could the shift supervisor un MR. EBNETER: Bunch?
pel change a valve or a switch position called out in a psi MR. STEWART: I've probably worked with pQ pmcedure? pq almost every licensed SRO at the plant over my ten pq MR. STEWART: At that time,yes, sir, pq years.
pq MR. LANDIS: So you could make a line out pq MR. EBNETER: So it was left up to each ca and change the valve or switch number or position? pa individual supervisor to decide what that curve pai MR. STEWART:Yes, sir, pai meant;is that right?
e4j MR. LANDIS: And what would be the p41 MR. STEWART: To my understanding, yes, psi process that would do that? psi sir.
Page 101 - Page 104 (28) Min-U-Scaipte BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979
msg CRYSTAL RIVER PROcFRnIN356ESTEWART EBNETER, CHAIRMAN A,nell 4,1996 Page 105 pj MR. EBNETER:Ilow did you view these Page 107 ni exceeded by the shift supervisor, with a shift ni different supervisors' interpretation of this curve?
m supervisor'sapproval?
pi MR. STEWART:I don't think - well,the pj pj only one I ever talked to about that curve was Dave MR. STEWART: That's correct. But it was j I gj not a routine evolution to happen.
(si Fields. And his view point ofit was that it's an ;
isi MR.UEBERMAN: So from that,I assume i i sq operating curve,and he can deviate with operating '
s during simulator work,you didn't have an m curves.
m opportunity to have an evolution that required pi MR. EBNETER: How many supervisors did p1 exceeding the operatingIlmits?
m you work with who manipulated the make-up tank? m MR. STEWART: To the best of my pq Almost every one of them?
' pq recollection, almost all of my simulator time really oil MR. STEWART: Almost every- well, p q involved, what I recall, crash and burn scenarios.
pa during the time frame that all of these, quote, pa We wpre really doing accident litigation type psi evolutions occurred,if we're looking at time frame psi routines.And we spent very little time doing pq from May of 1994 through September,actually through qq routine operation as we would be at the plant.We pq December of 1994,1 worked strictly for Dave !
psi spent very little time in a steady-state condition i
pq Fields. I was on David Fields' shifts for about pq on the stimulator.
o three years I think it was. Prior to that I was on !
' on Mij LIEBERMAN: Okay.You mentionch l p shift for somewhere around four, four I p@r five.
ps) gmay have donc rnore tests than others,and we pq pq would find that out through the OIinterviews.My MR. EBNETER: Well, that's interesting.
" pq question is:What is a test in your judgment?
pq Could you' describe the @ference in operation pq MR. STEWART: My understanding of a test pa betweengand Mr. Fields?
~~ pa in 1994 was any evolution that was not covered by a pai MR.S?EWART:Th uite a few
] pq differences betweer' grc was pai plant procedure,an approved plant procedure.
i pq and Mr.Fieldsh pq MR. UEBERMAN: And it would be was considere very aggressive, leading-edge pq acceptable - there were no tests - there was no Page 106 Page 108
- .19 type of a shift supervisor.Mr. Fields was pi procedure covering the whole evolution that had been m considered extremely conservative compared to
' pi approved for September 4th and 5th,was there?
pI @ pi MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.There certainly
, pi~ MR. UEBERMAN:What do you mean by pi was.
(si leading edge?
isi MR. UEBERMAN: That covered it from n MR. STEWART ' s willing to push pi beginning to end?
, , m administrative procedures.He was willing to use MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.
m p1 his qtjote, unquote, SRO powers to their fullest. pi MR.UEBERMAN: Okay.What's your n And s probably credited with more, quote, m understanding of a test today? Is it the same or pq unq Tote, evolutions or teses with the plant than any pq it's difierent?
on other shift supervisor that I know of. And I think i
gy. MR. STEWART: No. It's changed. I'm not na some of the O! investigations have probably shown va exactly sure what it is.You have to understand pa that.
psi that at this time I'm working and have been working pq MR.UEBERMAN:Could Iask:During pq since August as a scheduling coordinator.I am pq simulator work on a simulator, did you exceed pq completely out of the operations department,at psi operating curves or does your shift exceed operating pq Florida Power's demands.And I have not been on curves the way they were exceeded during normal on involved with the operation of a nuclear power plant pai operations?
pel since August. In fact,I haven't been on the '
pa MR. STEWART: I'm not sure I understood pq controlboard sinceJuly.
pq the question, sir. pq MR.UEBERMAN: Okay.That's been some 99 MR. UEBERMAN:Well, when you did pq time.
pa exercises on the simulator- pa MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. And there's been psi MR. STEWART:Yes, sir.
psi some sweeping changes made since that time.
pq MR. UEBERMAN:- were operating curves pq MR.UEBERMAN:Iapologize for coming pq exceeded - you indicated operating curves could be psi late into this. So if this has been asked already, BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 87.6-8979 Min-U-Scripts (29) Page 105,- Page 108 j.[ .
bt .h -
[$ M d
PROOFFnINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RF PREDEbSIONAL ENFORCEME!TI'CN bE EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CKYSTAI. RIVER Page 109 page 111 l tu ple:se let me know.My question is:Why was this tg MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.
m evolution being conducted on September 4th and 5th? pi MR. GIBSON: And when that audible alarm pi MR. STEWART:There was no specific pi comes in,is it your understanding that you - that
- si reason whyit was donc those days.It was si the plant no longer meets the limits of Curve 8?
I pi basically, we had a letter that we got from MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.h's either on ist l tg engineering on the 2nd.It was brought to my shift te the curve or exceeding the curve.
J m supervisor's attention by CarlBergstrom.
' m MR. GlBSON: Okay. So you understood on (q And the understanding was that the -
si those days that the plant conditions were either on tq concerns that we had over the Curve 8 issue were pl or above what was described on Curve 8 as the
, pq going to be closed. And my particular understanding pq acceptable region?
l pu ofit was that they were going to be closed on pq MR. STEWART:I.et me clarify my last na September 9th.
na statement a little bk.The alarm comes off of a l psi Now since I've been looking around and pq computer point.I'm driving off of the chart pq stuff,I can't find anything to back that date up. pq recorder that comes off a completely different i eq But that sticks in my mind. I think I was told that usi instrument.
_ pq by Dave Fields, but I'm not sure. pq And it was known that the computer point on MR. LIEBERMAN: You stated what you just on was a little bit high compared to the recorder. And og stated based on firsthand observation.or is this '
pq my training has indicated to me that my legal pq what someone told you about this September 2nd pq operating inrtrument is the recorder.
pq letter? pq So we were basically using the computer 99 MR. STEWART: Dave Fields told me pg point as a warning to pay attention to the 1 pa personally that Carl had come to him with this pa recorder:You're getting close.-
l pai Ictter stating that the engineering department was pai MR. GIBSON: Were you aware of an Email pq going to close out the problem report on our pq instruction that directed operators to use the psi concerns on the Curve 8 of OP-103B unless we could pst computer point instead of the chart recorder;it was Page 110 Page 112 pl come up with more information that would cause them p1 more conservath'e!
la to keep it open.And - .
m MR. STEWART: I understood there was an ni MR.LIEBERMAN: Okay.Thank you. pl Email that had been generated.But that Email was s 81 MR.LANDIS: And? pi never put out to the operators.There was someg pi MR. STEWART: And like I said, for sorne tsi controversy brought up about that I believe by im reason I've got stuck in my mind that that closure Iq k
m was going to occur on the 9th of September.Now,I m MR. GIBSON: Was it your understanding pi h ve absolutely no documentation.I think Dave 1m that you were supposed to operate on or near the '
pi Fields may have said something like that to me.But pi curve? *" '
pq I don't know. pq MR. STEWART:Yes, sir.
pq So we were on mid shift at the time.And pq MR.GIBSON: How did you get that na ence we got off mid shift,we went to re-quil week. na understanding?
pal And since the 2nd was on a Friday and the 9th was psi MR. STEWART: There was numerous Emails t
pq the following Fridayand that whole week we were on ggi sent to the shift supervisors saying that we needed og mid shift,it was going to be done on mid shift (f usi to get up into the upper limits of the operating -
na we were going to do it. pq bands. And if you look at that Curve 8 that you've on So that was why it ended up being 4th and on got right thcre,there is no specific section of _
04 5th.We just - those were the two days that we did sq ideal operating band other than the curve itself.
l pq it, pq So -
lpq MR.GlBSON:On Sepember 4th and 5th our pq MR. GlBSON: Did any member of rnanagement l 99 review of coinputer data at the plant shows that the pq other than Mr. Fields ever discuss this matter with
, pa alarm must have been in for several minutes during ga you, or did you ever hear- get that message from l pai the evolution of the make-up tank. pa anyone other than Mr. Fields?
pq MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. pq MR. STEWART:Just talking with other ps) MR.GlBSON: Do you recall the alarm? psi operators on shift turnovers and such,it was Page 109 Page 112 (30) Min-U-Scripte BROWN REPORTING, INC (404) 876;8979
u>nlierb mecanwMEumoMcwanfigoRuiM6XcLg WOcT iinINGS i
BEFORE STEWART ]
CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 113 Page 115 to relayed to me quite explicitly that we were to run pj MR EBNETER was the director?
m that at the top of the band,as close to the curve p MR. STEWART: at's my understanding. 1 pi as we could possibly put it basically. pj MR. EBNETER g>cing directed by Dave si And that was why we were forced to run pi Jones to do these evolutions?
tsi high levels.I can't remember the actual pressure. Is MR. STEWART: That was my understanding.
ist But you had to be above a certain pressure just to im MR. EBNETER: Did you ever talk to the m he able to reach the 25 cc's per kg without having m engineers, Jack?
(q to sit there and manipulate the make-up tank on a tm MR. STEWART:I talked to Pat Hinman a toi continuous basis.So we did use some sort of a dead toi couple of times. Mark did,I would say,in excess pq band where you could park it.let the system pq of 95 percent of the communications with them.I l 9n stabilize and run for a while without having to make on kind of took a back seat because Mark was so vocal na another hydrogen add. pa about it.And he was keeping me up to speed with psi MR.GIBSON: The manipulation of the psi it. And he was talking enough that I didn't need to pq make-up tank is what you refer to as the pq 'do any talking.
pq press-and-squeeze method? pq So but I did talk to Pat Hinman a couple pq MR. STEWART: Well, there's two methods pq of times.And Pat -most of those couple of times, on that you could do it by.One was in OP-402,which on it was about Curve 8, whether it was accurate or ps) was you could bypass the regulator, send it up. pai not.And I was basically saying the same thing that i
poi Another one was created by I think it was through usi Mark had told him.that we had indications fmm May pq Dave nes.It was actually validated b[% pq of 1994 on the SP-630 that showed that the curve and j pq hift I think on the week of 21st through the pq the plant response don't coincide.
m: 23rd, where they did numerous alternate methods of pa And it was my understanding that Curve 8 psi adding hydrogen. And that was the press-and4queeze psi is actually a calculation derived from a pq method that you're.referrin t pq computer-generated plant response. In other words, psi MR. GIBSON: Sc .rewJuly 21 psi that curve is a plant response curve.
.l
. Page 114 Page 116
- vi through 23 tried numerous alternate methods of p) MR. EBNETER
- That was your opinion?
4 pi controlling pressure? pi MR. STEWART: That was my understanding p1 MR. STEWART: At least they validated the p) of the developing of that curve.
ni press and squeeze.1 don't know if they did any pj MR. EBNETER: Let me ask you:What was isi other type of methodology of raising pressure in the tsj your general relationship with the engineering 2
a make-up tank or not. Im department?
m MR. GIBSON: And were these methods m MR. STEWART:I had a good rapport with tal described in plant procedItres? Isj them.
si MR. STEWART: At that time I don't know- tel MR.EBNETER: Good rapport?
pq I was never. involved with that particular running. pq MR. STEWART: I didn't have any problems og Obviously OP-402 doesn't mention anything about the p q with them. I can - I'm an easygoing type of pa press and squeeze. pa person.If someone disagrees with me,I can work ps Out of theirvalidations, quote, unquote, 03) with that and not get upset or take it personal.
pq validations, there came what I believe is now a pq.
pq CC-mail to the shift supervisors telling us that pq pq this was a viable alternative, that we were pq na authorized to use it by Florida Power management. on MR. EBNETER: But you would describe psi That was our understanding ofit. pai generally your relationship with engineering was -
g.si MR. GIBSON: So it would appear that this pq pretty good,at least yours?
- eq was a procedure that was developed by an operating pq MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.And as an -
4 99 crew and then later validated by rnanagement? pu observation,having seen Mark with around all types pa MR. STEWART: That is correct;under pa of people including engineers and including the psi management's full authority to do so.They were psi specific two engineers that were involved in this, pq being instructed by DaveJones to do these pq Mark was very,very professional.There was never pq evolutions. ps) any indication that Mark had any kind of a personal BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404)m.876-8979. , M,in-U-S..cripte (31) Page 113 - Page 116
. ,,.s .
w.. . _. . ,
.2, 7 ,.
- VNi[.N
'**ke %gi%
k " E'#k ,. N, , , ;.4. , *, y
~ PROCEE. DINGS BEFORE STr. 'tT IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER Page 117 Page 119 v1 beef or a personal vendetta to take against nj Did that raise any anxiety in you about m engineering.That wasn't the case at all.We were p1 approaching that curve and going on the other side pi strictly looking at a pure and simpic nuclear safety pl ofit with it being non conservGet sj concern. pj MR. STEWART: Well,we felt that the tsj You know, something that I'd like to say pl curve was in question when we dug up the calculation m that I think a lot of the American public and p; on it and just on the surface found the calculatica m possibly, with all due respecs, the NRC may forget m was only valid through Refuel 8 and we had altrady j pl la that, at least at the Crystal River Plant,I pi finished Refuel 9.
pi would say 90 percent of the operators live within a pi It meant to me that the curve was pq 10-mile band of the plant. And it is definitely not pq invalid.It rneant that it wasn't right.Put it p y within our best interest to be doing anything that pu didn't necessarily mean that it was wnag either.
pa could jeopardize our family. And that's why I've na MR. LANDIS: So what were your pai got my wife here. psi limitations then?
pq So we were looking, pure and simple,if pq MR. STEWART: Well, that's -I'm not ps; here's a case "re right with that curve,we psi sure what -
psi could be in a , ositrn where we con!d be blowing up psi MR. LANDIS: Well,if the curve was not pn some make-up pumps. on valid,then what were your limits? So what was the I pq Crystal River was in the unique position pq purpose of the curve? Let me ask you that first.
poi back in the late eighties of sheering two reactor om Let me back up.What was the purpose of the curve?
pq cooling pump shafts,which is a prime tin:e - two pq MR. STEWART: My understanding of the pq have needed HPI.By the gace of God,we didn't pn curve was to give us a tools to drive by to place Ini break the seals when that happened. pa hydrogen pressure in such a position that if we were p2j MS. EVANS: Why do you think it was that psi to have a high-pressure injection need,that the pq erigh eering wasn't respnsive to your concerns,if pq hydrogen pressure would riot be such that if we l psi 99 Fave any opinion? ps) drained the make-up tank to the swapover point we I Page 118 Page 120 pl MR. STEWART: I don't knov . t e often pl would entrain hydrogen into the pumps and -
m wondered why they were so Lubboru about it,you pi MR. LANDIS:Which would destroy the pl know. If an operator sits there and says,I can't pi pumps.
j
' pl buy into this;just on a logical standpoint,I don't pi MR. STEWART:- and destroy the pumps, i m know why they were so hesitant to go back and really p1 correct.
Im do a good review of our concerns and take a look at si MR. LANDIS: Okay.lf the curve was m it. I really don't know.I don't knew an answer m invalid by review on the 4th,then on the 5th what p1 for that. pl were your limits to protect thr.t pump?
pi MR. LANDIS: On September 4th did you p1 MR. STEWART: When we did the evolutions, l
pq pull out the calculations or did anybody in the crew pq I personally, being the senior RO, reactor operator, ]
pu pull out the calculations and take a look at it? 09 licensed personnel on the board, had decided that if pa MR. STEWART: After we ran rue first va we exceeded that curve by more than 2 pounds,I was vai evolution on the 4th,I believe that Rob Weiss asked pal going to stop the evolution and bleed the pressure pq Mark to go down to the admin building and dig the pq off.I wasn't going to let us p any farther than psi cricuP 1 up and let's take a look at it. osi that if that's where the planc tas taking the -
pq ! think he was specifically doing that so psi pressure to.
On that we could get the algorithm to load it into th* pn MR.LANDIS: Did you discuss that with l pai computer and computer generate the curve and compare pa) Mr. Fields?
p:; it to the actual data.Because we - the 4th didn't pq MR. STEWART: No.
am have any good data that we could use.We couldn't pq MR. LANDIS: So -
- pg make sense ofit. pq MR. STEWART
- But we kept Dave Fields i ga MR. LANDIS: Wht;n the evolution was done .za intimately up to speed with where the plant was at l
! pa en the 4th and 5th,there was some concern evidently paj all times.Frcm the moment the alarm came in,I pq that this curve was wrong and that,I assume, pq immediately called the alarm out. And he definitely l
pq there's a chance that it might be nonconurvative, pq repeated back to me that he ur.derstood that that
! Page 117 - Page 120 G2) Bgin-U-Scripte BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 j i
gjRDWUccLg Ldo;cm:ohX@ LMORE STEWART l
c CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 121 P:ge 123 pi alarm was in. And Mark was plotting the data. 01 Jack, had you read that letter prior to September pj MR. LANDIS: How did you decide that 2 pj4th?
pj pounds was too much above the curve? pi MR. STEWART:I don't remember now ifI I pj MR. STEWART: I just used what seemed to pj read it before or right after or during.I just (si me was a good reasonable number. ist don't remember.I'm sorry.
tg MR. LANDIS: Is what you're describing a si MR. LANDIS: That's all right.
m good example for what a 50.59 is designed for? m MR. STEWART: But to get back to your n MR. STEWART: Would you - p1 question,the Ictter broke out quite a few different pi MR. LANDIS:Is not knowing where the pi things,if I can recall correctly. I wish I had a pq curve really exists to protect that pump and not pq copy of it here. I could go down through it.
pq having any limit other than what you've personally pq MR. BEALL: Seriously,I'm not really as na decided,is that a good example of what a 50.59 na interested in the technical merits or decisions that pal evaluation is designe 'or to determine what the paj are laid out in writing in the letter -
p:1 reallimits are? v4j MR. STEWART: Okay, ps: MR. STEWART:I would believe so, yes. pq MR. BEALL:- so much as what you recall poi MR. LANDIS: Okay. At that time did that vej of your involvement either in hearing people discuss on not occur to you? pa that memo or in what you may have discussed with pai MR. STEWART: No, sir. Like I said,our ps) somebody concernina, that memo between the time the pel understanding of that curve was it was an operating pq memo came out,I guess on September 2nd,till the pq curve and had according to engineering built-in pq time -
90 conservatism. pq MR. STEWART:- we did it on the 4th.
l pa Now,looking at all of the other Florida pa MR. BEALL:- of that evolution on the
! psi Power curves, when you look at operating curves ps) 4th.
pq versus tech spec curves verst.s design basis curves, p41 MR. STEWART: Well, Dave got the letter l
psi the margin is tremendous and - psj from Carl Bergstrom.
. Page 122 Page 124
! pl MR. LANDIS: Did you get briefed on how pi MR.BEALL: Now, how do you know that?
l pi much margin you had in this curve? pj MR. STEWART: Dave told me, pi MR. STEWART: No, sir.But I was also 91 MR. BEALL: Dave told you that he got the l p1 relying on Dave Fields' expertise as an SRO and his 81 letter from that - the individual you're mentioning
! si experience as a mechanical engineer to let me know isj handed it to him?
n if he thought we were getting too far.And I had gj MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.They had a j m jnt put my own personallimit at, Hey, Dave,we're m face-to-face discussion over it. And that's how gj at 2 pounds;I think we otIght tu i: top this,if we'd si Dave got the understanding from his management, Carl i pl gotten that far. p) Bergstrom, that they wanted us to pursue this.
pq MR. LANDIS: Had Dave Fields discussed pq MR. BEALL: Now, you didn't see this on with you any limits? pu meeting take place?
pa MR. STEWART: No, sir. Da MR. STEWART: No, sir. I wasn't there psi MR. LANDIS: That's all. paj for that.
pq MR. BEALL:I have a couple questions. pq MR. BEALL: Do you know when it would psi Staying with your firsthand knowledge,can you go psi have occurred?
~
pq over again for me what information you had between psi MR. STEWART:I think it occurred that pn September 2nd and Septernber 4th with regards to the on night.Is September the 2nd a Friday night or a pq problem report,the possible resolution and things pal Friday - of 1994? I don't - I think it was, pq alongthoselines? poi because the 9th was the following Friday.So that pq MR. STEWART: The Septembes 2nd letter pq would have made that Friday the 2nd.We came in at l pu covered quite a few differc+ .spects that had come pq II:30 Friday night.
pa out of the problem report generated in May.And Inl Dave may have worked a 12-hour shift.1 psi they broke them up into specific sections.One pai don't know.But he talked to Carl sometime on the pq section they talked about the Curve 8 issue. pq 2nd I'm pretty sure, psi MR.LANDIS: May I ask,in part of this, ps MR. BEALL: So Dave - excuse me for BROWN REPORTIN, G, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min.-U. ..-Scripts. t 1) Page 121 - Page 124
,. 4,
- w. .
,1 , .
- g , MN '* '
s
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EBNETER, CHAIRMANi April 4,1996 CRYSTAI. RIVER Page125 Page 127 pi staying with this part. gg determined in my mind by the shift supervisor on .
pi MR. STEWART:That's okay.
.pl duty.When the alarm came in, he was notified by me pi MR. BEALL: But it's your recollection pj promptly that the alarm was in. And he was kept si that Dave Fields told you that he had had a pi apprised of the situation.
(q discussion,a verbal discussion,with Casi- gq MR. MORRIS:If you're asking if there's pi MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.
pi any guidance in the procedute,there is none.
m - MR. BEALL:- on the 4th preceding this m MR.UEBERMAN:I recognize that.But tg shift? ~
pj I'm wondering, based on training and experience, can p1 MR. MORRIS:TheThursday. pi you leave that alarm on for six,seven hours?
pq MR. STEWART: No.It would have been the pq MR. STEWART: We never did,not that p y 3rd or the 2nd, preceding the 4th.Yes, sir.There sq long.
pa was a day in there.Because we kicked around:What MR. UEBERMAN: Could you?
na nsi can we do? sq MR. STEWART: The longest we left it in I p >i And we still had to operate the plant. . pq bcHeve was documenied as 40-some. odd minutes.I pq Normal routine stuff was going on.Mid shift is pq don't remember right offhand.Dut other shifts have per generally kind of a busy shift for us doing routine pq left an alarm in for hours on end.
on stuff.So it took us awhile by the time we got on MR. LIEBERMAN: I appreciate that. But pq through with all the routines and figuring stuff out sq I'm trying to understand.The ahrm tells you 5 p:: to figure out what we could do. pq you're exceeding the curve, pq MR. BEALL: Let me change the subject for pq MR. MORRIS: Or on the curve, pq a moment.When thi: evolution was done on the 5tt. pg MR.UEBERMAN: On or exceeding the pr wh:tever name we's: going to give this, tes:. or pa curve. ,
pai wh tever,had the alarm cleared by the time you had pq UR. STEWART: But keep in mind,1f the pq began to drain the - pq alarm is in,ifI go to the chart recorder,the pq MR. STEWART: The alarm was not in when I ps chart recorder in those days was very much at the Page 126 Page 128 in started draining down. go beginning ofit,was inside the bounds of Curve 8.
pi MR. BEALL: And the alarm response p So I didn't have to do anything. ;
pi procedure, would you have considered it in that pj MR. UEBERMAN: But were you aware of the i.81 context to be an expected alarm? p1 digital readout too?
(q MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. tg MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.
tg MR. BEALL: Anr1 why would you have pi MR.UEBERMAN: And that you just m considered it to be an expected, alarm? m disregarded?
gm MR. STEWART:Because we were pi MR. STEWART: At that time our p1 Enticipating, we were expecting- we were expecting pl understanding was our legalinstrument of operation as the curve - the plant to foin the curve.We were pq was the chart recorder.
pq anticipating the plant to ci.allenge the curve. pq MS. EVANS: And I think you said earlier na So I was contro!!ing tSe evolution as far na that you used the thing -
pai as I was controlling the drain < lown.And when we pai MR. STEWART: Yeah.I had said earlier 04 talked about the alarm in the prejob briefing, Dave pq that we used the chart recorders.And this was the ne specifically said:I anticipate this alarm coming pq big issue tha nought up when -
pq in because we are not sure about this curve. pq en ring ffred to force us to run on the computer on So that allowed rne to go back to AIS00 on point mid,We don't run on the computer:the na which controls the use of the ARs.And it said,1f pq computer not safety related;it is not a poi l'm doing a specific evolution,a controlled pq real-time computer;it*= running a couple of minutes pq evolution on the plant,I do not have to rely or go pq behind at best.
pq to the AR for that alarm. pg So when engineering tried to force us to .
pa MR.LIEBERMAN:And howlong can you pa run on the computer point, operations engineering psi operate with the alarm on? Do you have an pq said,No,we won't da that;we run off the chart eq indefinite time? pq recorders.
psi MR. STEWART:That, sir,would have to be pq MR.UEBERMAN: Who said that?
Py 125 - Page 128 G4) Min-U.Scripte BROWN REPORTING, INC, (404) 876-8979
m nu ramucusav- uuvaumre Runrr.annui ruvu:mtimic asma<unngamwAun CRYS *I'AL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; Agiril 4,1996 Page 129
- Page 131 nj MR. STEWART
- y that if you put the plant on the curve,the plant pi MR. EBNETER:Fut aren't you required to - pi should follow?
pj acknowledge any alarm that comes in? pi MR. STEWART: Because that's apparently 91 MR. STEWART:We acknowledged the alarm. pl what we were taught.That's what I remember.
(si When the alarm came in,it-tsi MR. RICHARDS: You were taught that in pi MR. EBNETER: What do you say, Hi, alarm; gg yourre-qualtraining?
~ m how are you today? Or what? m MR. STEWART. I don't remember when I was pj MR. STEWART: No.1 called the alarm in. pl - when I gleaned that information.B'ut that's im I told Dave,I said, Dave,make-up tank pl what I remember from the curve.
nq high. pressure alarm is in.We are draining down. ng MR. RICHARDS: But it sounded like you na David said:I understand the tank n g didn't really get much training,if any training, on -
na high-pressure alarm is in;please continue. pa this curve-psj MR. RICHARDS: Did you view Curve 8 a. MR. STEWART: No, sir,we didn't.
nsi ny applying- as a limit during evolution? pq MR. RICHARDS: It didn't sound like you na MR. STEWART: No, sir.It was more as a nq were trained on this curve.But I think you just ps) guide just to where to put hydrogen pressure when ne said you're understanding was the curve was a system vn you added hydrogen to make-up tank.OP 402,in the on response curve. And I'm trying to understand how l pq drain-down section,in the bleed section,doesn't sq you reached that conclusion? .
nq refer at all to Curve 8 of 103B.It specifically og MR. STEWART:I think I got that when I pq apply - refers to Curve 8 for the hydrogen adds and pq was digging through -I don't remember ifI was 99 the nitrogen adds. pu digging through some information that the plant must pa MR. RICHARDS: Does it make since that sa have put out on it or when Greg talked about the psi the curve would apply to the hydrogen add portion psi curve to us back in the outage or prior to the py but not to an evolution that would drain down the pq outage of'94,that he said it's just a plant pq tank?
pq response curve derived by engineering to help us get
, Page 130 Page 132 In MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. It does when you nj to 25 cc's per kg.
pi have the understanding that that curve was a plant pi MR.URYC: That was Greg Halnon?
pl response curve.And by that definition,if pj MR. STEWART: Yes, sir, p) theoretically the curve is correct,if I use the pj MR. RICHARDS: Getting back to the curve b
tsi hydrogen add or nitrogen add section and I . Isj again, you know,what I'm having trouble with is im successfully put hydrogen up close to the curve at si this idea that because it's considered a system m the upper end of the level band and then bleed down, m response curve it's acceptable to allow the piant to (q the laws of physics if the
- curve is correct dictates p1 cross that limit.Can you claborate on why that's pl what that pressure is going to do.And it cannot pj acceptable?
ng cross over. pq My understanding of an operator's duty is on MR. RICHARDS:Well, did you receive on when the plant is exiting the defined envelope that na training on this curve when it was implemented? na you take action to stop the plant from doing that.
ps; MR. STEWART: I don't remember if we did psi MR. STEWART: Being an OP,the shift ny or not.I don't think there was a whole -if there ny supe. 7isor at that time had the authority per AI.500 nq was,there wasn't much to it.It was basically: nq to deviate with the ops.
pq This is an engineering derived curve to give you pq MR. RICHARDS: So you're telling me that
~
nn guys some guidance to run us up to the 25 cc's per nn the crew recognized you were exiting the defined ne kg.Because the flat 12-pound preceding this wasn't ng operating envelope,but you understood that the og cuttingit. og shift supervisor had the authority to do that?
pq MR. RICHARDS: Was there required reading pq MR. STEWART:I don't think that the crew pq or some system descriptions that had occurred,that pq understood that that was an operating envelope.It pa you had available? pa was my understanding that this was a tool to help me psi MR. STEWART:I don't remember. psi get hydrogen pressure up.
pq MR.RICHARDS: So how did you reach the pq It was never-like I said earlier, psi conclusion that this was a tystem response curve, pq you've got - that's called an operating curve.
BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min-U-scripte G5) Page 129 - Page 132
"" [ " [ 'G M,NEjh[tk
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER Page 133 Page 135 j l ~ 01 There's admin curves.There's limits curves You pj operating level,would you have donc a 50.59 for m know,there is such a hodgepodge of stuffin there p) that? Would it have been required?
pi that you could very casily be - reach the pi MR. STEWART:I would have had to, pi conclusion that,because of these different names, 8) because the operating levels were part of the limits p1 cn operating curve must be a guideline and is not si and precautions. And I can't change - shift go; necessarily sacred.
pi supervisor can't change limits and precautions.So m Unlike a design basis curve which is very m if he wanted to go below that,we would have to do a mi blatantly laid out as:You don't challenge a design gq 50.59, come up with a complete, quote, unquote, test pj basis curve. And that's why we have tech spec pi procedure,and run it through that whole process, pq curves.And that's why Florida sower has, quote, pq MR. LAND: And likewise going to 86?
l vn unquote, admin curves to keep you from challenging on MR STEWART: And likewise going above i va the tech spec curves.It's even more conservative. Da 86. I usi And we believed that this was one more than that, psi MR. LANDIS: Okay.Little different pq just an operating curve. pq topic.On the 4th -
pq MR. MORRIS: The answer to your question l pq MR. EBNETER: Before you go to a l pq ! think,if he knew that this was a curve that usi different topic,how often do you use 50.59,the new-on should never be challenged, would he have challenged on procedures,as chief nu: lear operator?
pal it;the answer is no.But that was not his paj MR. STEWART: Well, any time we changed pq understanding of what that curve represented.Is voi the procedure -
l pa that fair? pq MR. EBNETER: Once a shift? Once a I i pn MR. RICHARDS: That's not really the pq week? Once a month? Never?
pa question.You know,the principle of operating a pa MR. STEWART: I was one of the operators ,
l psi plant is you operate it within the defined pal that, well, depending upon your point of view, pq envelope.The engineer's design of the plant,the l pq luckily or unfortunately, never made a whole lot of '
ps) operators don't need to understand everything about psi procedure changes, you know, personally.So my own Page 134 Page 136 I
pl the design of the plant.They need to be provided Dj experience with 50.59 is I may have done maybe 15 or p) with an envelope in which to operate. pj 20 of them over my entire operating career at
! p1 What we keep driving at is it looks like pl Florida Power.
i wy you had an envelope that was defined.There were no pj MR. EBNETER: Okay. l
! pl other curves defined.You had a level, minimum and si MR. LANDIS: On the 4th - we're trymg l is maximum level,iu the tank defined? pi to understand also why was the evolution done on the fm I
MR. STEWART: Yes sir.
- m 5th.Was there a discussion on the 4th as to the pi MR.RICHARDS: And you had this curve si fact that there was a problem with the evolution?
m that defined pressure.So with regard to this pi MR. STEWART: When we got the data on the et system,at least that tank,it would seem that that pq 4th,it was getting towards the end of the shift.
! ,9
, defined the envelope in which you were to operate. vn There was some stuff we started to have to get na We're trying to understand how you na done.So we kind of took a quick look at it and
' pai departed from that envelope without any other limits psi decided that it didn't make any sense.
pq beyond that to find that you would recognize you pq No.1, we used the computer to gather pq couldn't go any further. pst data and we used one-second time span. And it -
pq MR. STEWART: I don't know how to answer pal turned out to give us about probably a 3- or a on it in gny other way than I've already stated. nn 4-pound just stribble.Very close - you really pq MR. RICHARDS: That's why I wasn't ps) couldn't tell what the nature of the plarit response
- pq pressing the point.I think we understand what pq was as far as the curve went.
pq you've told us, pq So and we did the evolution, quote, pq MR. STEWART: Okay. pq unquote,relatively quickly.I added hydrogen.We pa MR. EBNETER: Are there any other pa end up to 86 inches.And I bled down to 55.And psi questions? pst then we termmated.
pq MR. LANDIS: Couple additional. One is, pq So Rob was kind of wondering,you know, psj Jack,would to go below 55 inches,one side of the ps) what all caused us to get this inconsistent or Page 133 - Page 136 (36) Min-U-Scripte BROWN REPORTING,INC (404) 876-8979
1RfLtT~19 D o CasEDLh&T6511LloimmtwXCE CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 137 Page 139 tu inconclusive data. And Friday or- well,the 5th nj - the shift supervisor would say,Well,let's take si then we came back in,and that's all we had done. pi that station into hand and see what that does for pi We had decided that,you know, we need to lool: at p1 us. Troubleshoot it.
p1 this data more and analyze it more. 8) And we may do that. And ifit was te And on the 5th,we completed the ta something with the plant moving around a little bit, n analysis.At which point we decided that,well,one tel maybe he'd say,Well,let's drop power about 2 m of the things that could have impacted this whole in percent, make the system move,and let's see how the n thing was that we added basically 90-degree hydrogen ts; plant responds.
p) into a tank that's 125 degrees. p) And that was basically the way we were pq So as that gas heated up,it would have pq looking at this from my personal point of view.
on expanded, held the pressure up or possibly have pq This was a troubleshooting.
pri caused this erratic indication. p21 MR. LANDIS:In both of those examples psi So we decided that, well, what if we were psi you just described,there was no limiting- no pq to do it again but we'll change the two things that ty41 curves violated that - well, the power limit, of pq we suspect.No.1,we'll go to one minute intervals pq course there is a -
pai on the computer.No.2,we'll add the hydrogen. pai MR. STEWART: Right.There is power pn We'll stabilize the plant;!ct it sit for a period on limits.
psi of time to let the hydrogen thermally equalize;do pq MR. LANDIS: You would not have gone on pq the evolution set at 55 inches and let the plant pq any curve or on any limits?
pq thermally equalize there so that there's no question pq MR. STEWART: No, sir, not on any pu as to the quality of the data, pq limits.But had there been some sort of a reason pal And at the same time,by this time,like p2 for just an operating curve and the shift supervisor psi l'd said earlier,we had the algorithm so that Rob ps; deemed it that he wanted to challenge that curve,
- 94) could load that into the computer and then we could pq then there was not any reason why he couldn't.
psi sit there and compare the computer-generated data pq And yes,I'm going to do a reality check
. Page 138 Page 140 pl with the computer generated curve. pj on him.I'm not going to blatantly follow anybody's pi And it took two days to get that p1 directions.I'm going to,you know: Does this make pi information back because Rob had to take it home and pl sense to me? Does this seem safe to mr ? Does my p) do some stuff with it. pl gut instincts say this,on top of my knowledge of In MR. LANDIS: You just described a pretty Isl procedures and everything else? And then I will (q detailed thought process.Who came up with that? tai holler if I don't feel that that's right.Or if I m MR. STEWART:Well,it,was a combination ta do feel that he's right,111 help him do it.
tai of Rob and me and Mark and Dave and Christine.We tsj MR. LANDIS: Did you have any caution p) were all kind of kicking the whole thing around. It pl back on September 4th?
pq was a brainstorm.You know,why didn't this data pq MR. STEWART: No, sir.1 believed and I pu make sense? Was there something we were missing? 09 believe that the rest of the shift also believed pri Was there something we hadn't done? Was it really pai that we were within the full capability of our psi the way the plant worked? We didn't necessarily psi procedures at that time as they existed at that p4) believe that,but we couldn't rule it out. pq time.
pq MR. LANDIS: Why was the shift management pq MR. EBNETER: Mr. Stewart, was there an
~
pq not consulted? psi alarm on the recorder or was it just a real time -
pn MR. STEWART:I really don't know. pn MR. STEWART: The annunciator alarm was psi MR. LANDIS: That's all I have. ps) tied to the computer.
pq MR. STEWART:It was a -in a lot of pq MR. EBNETER: To the computer?
l pq way:, tnis was like troubleshooting. lf I have many, pq MR. STEWART: Right.
pu many, many occasions where we've had some sort of a pq MR. EBHETER: So once that alarm came in l
r221 problem with the plant,we know something is not p21 and you said fine.But the way you describe it,you l par working right and it's - a good example would be psi always drove by the recorder?
l l
p4) ICS, integrated control system for the plant. pq ER. STEWART: Yes, sir. I
! pq Something would be acting up on it. And it would be rai MR. EBNETER: So once the alarm - but BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min-U-Scripte G7) Page 137 - Page 160
%. g ,w. y ..9 a.. ,
, 'y ON A w w. ', & v H ?
PROCFFDINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMPRT CONFERENCE i EBNETER, CHAIRMANI April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER Page 141 Page 143 l pi there was no alarm on the recorder;you had to gy MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.
l pl Ectually watch the recorder-gi MR. LIEBERMAN:If you are made to become i p1 MR. STEWART:Yes, sir,
' pi a licensed operator in the future, what can you tell pi MR. EBNETER: - to determine where this si us concerning how you would act differently than you
) isi evolution was proceeding;is that right? Isj acted on September 4th and 5th?
j pi MR. STEWART:Yes, sir.
i pi MR. STEWART: Well, the first thing that m - MR.EBNETER:That's all.
m I will do is that I will not be as reluctant as we i si MR.G1BSON:Ijust have one brief pl were in '94 to submit a safety concern to the hdC
{ . pi follow-up question.You worked for different shift in directly.I won't try to work within Florida j og supervisors?
pq Power's frameworks as much as we tried to this l pq MR. STEWART:Yes, sir. oq time.
j na MR. GIBSON: And would you describe Mr.
Da The second thing that I will do, and from j pq Fields as being relatively conservative to the va my understanding everybody up in operations is doing j pq others?
pq now,is questioning everything that goes on.And i pq MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.Like I said,I. pq it's also blatantly understood that the shift j sq was i e unique position of going fro j
pq supervisors have no power at this time as compared '
pn hift directly to Dave Ficids's s And pn to what they had in 1994.
! pq to me Dave Fields was very conse tive compared to pq MR. LIEBERMAN: When you say"have no 6
! pq my experiences og power," does that mean they have no command and i sq MR LANDIS:One w-up que on to pq controlin that control room?
! pu put light on that.Wa[g moved from pg MR. STEWART: No, sir, that is not what I
', ma shift duty? .
pa am trying to imply in any case at all.
l_ pq MR. STEWART: Yes, sir, he was, pai MR. LIEBERMAN: Okay.
i pq MR. LANDIS: When did that occur? pq MR. STEWART: They still have their l psi MR. STEWART: I don't remember exactly psj SRO type capabilities.But their, quote, unquote,
~
q Page 142 Page 144
] pl when it occurred but -
tu capabilities of changing ops or manipulating ops as pi MR. EBNETER: Was it after this l pi we understood it in 1984 does not exist. '
l pi evolution?
i pi MR. EBNETER: Did you ever attempt to use j
' si
, MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.
pi the employee concern program? '
l tsi MR. EBNETER: That's fine. pi MR. STEWART: No, sir,I didn't. Mark t
im MR. STEWART: A long time after that, pi Van Sicklen was really the point man with this m sir.
- m concern.I was just keeping up with it thauugh g
gg MR. EBNETER: We can get it.You im Mark.
. pi apparently were taken off shift;is that right? pi j pq MR. STEWART: Yes, sir.I was banned pq j pu from the operations department. py
} pa MR. EBNETER: What was the reason for pa 031 that?
{ gisi
! pq MR. STEWART:They told me - my letter pq i psi of reprimand states that I operated the Crystal pq -
j pq River Nucicar Plant in a nonconservative manner. pq
- on MR. EBNETER
- And that's all? On . EBNETER: So is it safe to say that i pq MR. STEWART: That's what it said.
pq yt tropinion was that you-pa MR. EBNETER: All right.Anybody have pq MR. STEWART: We were -
pq any- pq MR.EBNETER:- wouldn't rely on that pq MR. LIEBERMAN: I have one question. My su system?
pa question is:If you are allowed - well,first ga MR. STEWART: We were skeptical at best pai question:Do you desire to be a licensed operator pq of an~ successful results coming out of that pq in the future? Would you like to be a licensed pq ende.mr.
pq operatorin the future? psi MR. EBNETER: That's fine. Anybody else?
Page 141 - Page 144 (38) Min-U4cripte BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979
agchMEUMMMh 9mmu 1 CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CIIAIRMAN; April 4,1996 '
1 Page 145 P:ge 147 l (q MR. RAPP: I have a couple of questions. to that.
pi MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. pi MR.RAPP: Discounting the two p) MR. RAPP: As a part of your licensed pi evolutions,the routine normal plant operation,how pi duties in the control room, you perform nutine p) would that alarm be viewed?
Isl evolutions- [q MR. STEWART:Ifit came in while I was n MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. tai on just on a routine evolution,I would get ahold of m MR. RAPP:- on various plant systems, m the aux building operator and tell him that, at your
[si Do you activate alarms when performing those routine [si first convenience, we need to either vent it or at tel evolutions- tel that time, using that CC-mail, which I recognize now pq MR. STEWART: Oh,yes. pq is an unapproved - not a good idea by Florida l pq MR. RAPP: And following the OP, then you pq Power,to go ahead and do the press on it and get i va would activate alarms during that evolution? pa the pressure back up to the high end of the band or pq MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. na onto the other side of the curve.
pq MR. RAPP:Is that indicative that you v41 MR. RAPP: Okay.There was some question i pq violated some sort of regulatory limit or plant pq asked about the shift manager not being consulted.
Os administrative limit? pq Was it routine for the shift supervisor to consult I on MR. STEWART: Not necessarily, no, sir. On with the shift manager on plant evolutions?
pai MR. RAPP: Are all the alarms in the vai MR. STEWART: Not at that time,I don't voi control room of equal significance or importance? pq think so.The shift manager position was relatively pq MR. STEWART: No, sir, they are not. pq new at that time,and I'm not so sure that everybody pq There are definite - there is a definite hierarchy pq really understood the shift manager's role with pa on the annunciator system at Crystal River,a pa respect to the shift supervisor's role at the pa definite hierarchy. pa plant. I think there may have been a little bit of p4j MR. RAPP: Okay.So where would this p4) controversy as to what they really needed to know or pq make-up tank pressure alarm fallinto? psi not know or should be included in or not included in
, Page 146 Page 148 pj MR. STEWART: That would depend upon vi at the time.
pi plant conditions at any given time. For instance, p1 MR. LANDIS: One follow-up question is:
pi if I've had some sort of a LOCA and I'm getting a p3 Mr.Atkinson, why was he placed to be ready to vent gi full high-pressure injection actuation and reactors 81 off the make-up tank during the September 5th l is; trip and I'm trying to gain control from the plant isi evolution? l te - from that situation,that make-up tank alarm is tej MR. STEWART: Well,by the time we did m a very low priority compared to my ensuring that the m the 5th,we had the additionalinformation from the tel engineered safeguard system is actuated and is ist calculation tnat said that,you know,it's just more ta responding properly,that the reactor is shut down 14 evidence that this curve is not totally right.And i pq in a safe configuration,the turbine is tripped and pq so Dave -I suggested to Dave that we go ahead and l pq not overcooling me.So t's a variable with that 09 put somebody down in the valve valley and be ready I
na particularalarm. pa to go with that.
na MR. RAPP: What about during the 4th and na MR.LANDIS: Why?
pq 5th? Where would that alarm fall into within the 04 MR. STEWART:Just as an extra precaution psi routine plant operations? pq obviously.
MR. STEWART: Well, the shift supervisor pq pq MR.LANDIS: To do what?
on made the determination at that time that for those on MR. STEWART: To protect the make-up l 1 si evolutions that we would allow that alarm to stay in vai pumps in case we had the very unlikely event of a l pq while we were watching the plant. pq IOCA daring this time frame.
l pq But in my estimation it was his pq You know,and we basically did the same pq determinations - this is my own personal pq thing the day before.I talked to the aux building pa estimation. Dave Fields made the determination as na operator and said:While - don't have anything ga to how long he wanted to leave the alarm in and what pq clse going on while we're doing this; keep yourself p41 the bounds of that evolution were going to be.And p41 available to vent the make-up tank.
pq at that time we believed he had the authority to do pq MR. LANDIS: Eccause you knew if you did BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876.8979 Min-U-Scripte 09) Page 145 - Page 148 l
.. . , ~ . . - m s.~. .w, 4 , f k1 4 A h' -
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIO AL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE
, EBMETER, CIIAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER Page 149 Page 151 pj have a LOCA you needed to vent that tank - pj MR. STEWART: Not to me.Now,I can't pi MR. STEWART: I wanted to make sure that gi sit here and tell you what Dave Fields knew about pi I had the control over the hydrogen pressur . on that pi that or what his interpretation of the shift p) tank throughout the evolution. p) manager's role was. I don't know that.
im MR.LIEBERMAN:Is it fair to say that But to me at that time I didn't get the Isl tg you thought that curve was wrong?
ts) impression that the shift manager was really a MR. STEWART: I suspected it was wrong. m involved in the actual operation of the plant per tai I didn't know that it was wrong.And trying to be tai sc.To me he was coordinating the shops to the m conservative and invoking my responsibilities as a pi needs of the plant.
pq reactor operator with a reactor operator's license, pq MR. RAPP:That answers my question.
pq I was trying to ensure the protection of the public. pq Thank you.
pa MR. LIEBERMAN:Isn't there also a na MR. GIBSON:Any furtherNRC questions?
psi procedure that says that if you think a procedure is pq Is there anything, Mr. Stewart, you or Mr. Morris pq wrong,you shouldn't do it? pq would like to say before we close this meeting?
pq MR. STEWART: We didn't think that the pq MR. STEWART: Can I have a moment to talk pq evolution we were doing was wrong.We had par with myattorneyfora second?
pa procedural guidance to do it.We were trying to na MR. GIBSON: Sur.:.
paj specifically show engineering that that curve was psi (Mr.Ebneter enters hearing room.)
na wrong and that we shouldn't be - na MR. STEWART: There is one point that I pq MS. EVANS:- be following that? pq would like to cover with the NRC here today.One of my MR. STEWART:- using that curve. pu the allegations apparently that - the main pa MR. LIEBERMAN: Bec tuse that curve may be na allegation against me is that we didn't perform a pa unsafe? pa 50.59 review.
pq MR. STEWART: Correct. pq I think that if you were sitting next to pq MR. LIEBERMAN: So you proceeded to do an ps) me at the time of the 4th' and the 5th when we went Page 150 Page 152 p) evolution you thought may be unsafe? pi through the pmcedure reviews,you would be able to pi MR. STEWART: No, sir.We never at any pi see that I had procedural guidance in OP402 to put pi time thought that that evolution was unsafe, because pi hydrogen pressure up.We had the CC-mail, quote.
..pl we had approved Florida Power ops to guide us. p) unquote, guidance that management was telling us to 151 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yeah,but you thought the tsi use for adding hydrogen to the make up tank.
n approved guidance was in fact probably unsafe? pi OP-402 specifically gave me guidance on m MR. STEWART: No, sir.
- m bleeding water out of the make-up tank. And AI 500 tej MR. MORRIS: Wait a minute, Mr.
tai covered all of the issues as far as what the shift pi Lieberman.With the greatest of respect,I want to si supervisor could or couldn't do at that time as well l
pm object to your use of the worr."" unsafe." pq as what I had to do with respect to AR403. I pq He's also said a number of times it was a pq So based on the fact that I could use and na plant response curve.It didn't rnean that it was na did use all preapproved operating procedures of I pa unsafe if the plant did not actually follow the ps) Florida Power that aircady had 50.59 reviews done, pq anticipated response and they were taking pq we didn't have to do a 50.59.
osi precautions in case it didn't.That doesn't equate psi MR. EBNETER:I understand that.You -
i nei to unsafeness necessarily, poi can't have it both ways though.You constantly va (Mr. Ebneter exits the hearing room.) na refer there was no guidance for all of you and then og MR. LIEBERMAN: Okay.You've answered my . pai at the end you tell me, yeah,we have plenty of i og question. pq guidance. And I recall that.Just a comment.
pq MR. GlBSON: Any further questions? pq Anything else? I 4 pq MR.RAPP:I'd just like to finish up on pq MR. MORRIS: A responsive comment to that ga my earlier question which related back to shift ga would be -
pa manager again.You said at that time it wasn't pq MR. EBNETER: Sure, i
( pq clear what the role of the shift manager was.Was pq MR. MORRIS:- by training- and if you I asi the shift manager- psi disagree with this,please feel free to re-comment.
Page 149 - Page 152 (40) Min-U-Scripte BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979
!.- _ . .an- am _ _a .acurAnsaurut.
.___ ENa'ontLEasta r tuarmau:m.m ~
rau .r r" anus or.rvun a s zwana CRYSTAI. RIVER ELETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 63 Page 155 tg By training,they are told to refer to the ops and gy i
- pi the ARs md the existing procedures and the existing m l l m guidance;and when itis not explicitly set forth, ,
{ p1 to go to their shift supervisor, pj l- ts . That's what they were told to do.That's ,
ist what they were trained to do.And that's what they g
_ m did for as long as ten years. m tel And on September 4th and September 5th, gg m 1994,that's exactly what they did.And for you to ,
pq suggest that you can't have it both ways,we didn't pq pq have it any way but the way it was. py va And the wayit wasis youlook at the gg
! psi guidance you've got.And ifit seems to authorize pq l pq it, check with your shift supervisor to make sure, g pq Which is what they did.And the shift supervisor pq pq said,It's authorized.The 10 CFR 50.59,which they pq j gin were well aware of,was unnecessary according to py ps) their belief and the shift supervisor's directive. tig So I don't think they wanted it one way pai pq pm or the other.1 think they believed that's the way pq pu it existed. pq pa MR. EBNETER: I appreciate your response, pq psi MR. MORRIS:Thank you.
[ pq MR. EBNETER:I don't think we have any pq l pq more questions.Iappreciate yourtime. pq t
- Page 154 Page 156 el MR. STEWART: Gentlemen,1 p a late the s
gy pi opportunity to come up and meet with you m j pi personally.And I think you'll see that I'm trying pg
., pl my very best to be up front, honest, candid,and pg (q give you a unique insight from a reactor operator's gq m point of view at the time - during that time almost g m two years ago.So thank you very much. m I MR.GIBSON:Thank you very much. l tai g m MR.EBNETER:Thank you,Mr. Stewart. g pq MR. STEWART: And ma'am,yes,thank you pq pq very much.I'm sorry. py pa MR. EBNETER: Anyone want to take a quick pq 931 break. , g, pq ;
pq '(Recess was taken at 11: 40 a.m.) v giq eq GIcaring resumed at 11:50 a. pq pel g,q "ItM py I 81 pg t'4 04 M M R11 pq
, 84 A P81 A pq pq PEI PEI Min-U4cripts (41) Pasci153-Page156 BROWN. . R.EP. ORTING,,
n I.g4 INC ,- 8,76-897.m wm.a,(404) n,,9 x s.y,w.e . . , ,
.:Kli 34 : %% QMc >:'d t&ilL $!:W . .ad:' .x . % tMO
- -4,$ a ..
~~]
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART Ifi RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE
- EBNE'rER, CIIAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER l
Page 213 Page 215 f kl n; MR. EBNETER: Before we begin, does the ta ta staff feel the need for a caucus or anything?
Al pi So what we'll do is we'll bring your W
81 clients in.You can do your closing.We'll just (si tsi make some overview comments to close it out and that R
tm will do it.
j m m MR. MORRIS: Thank you, sir.
l W n
tal (A recess was taken at 1:00 p.m.h m GIcaring resumed at 1:05 p .)
M 4
l Iul ng (Ms. Smith,Mr.Atkinson, j nij Stewart,Mr. Van Sicklen present M
na MR. EBNETER: Mr. Morris, do you want to D
ns; make a closing statement?
D4 n41 MR. MORRIS:IfI may,again,let me
- D51 ne thank you for the opportunity of being hem and j 0 81 sq allowing these operators to speak with you and j 09 nn answer the questions that you had and respond to the D81 l sq apparent violations.
l 08]
sq I will tell you that it has been a l 94 pq privilege and a pleasure working with Mr. Van pt) l pij Sicklen, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Atkinson, and Ms. Smith, pai pa I don't think that Florida Power Company has any M
pal better nuclear operators than those individuals. I I R41 p4j don't think they could possibly have any operators *
! p51 {
i psi who were more concerned about safety than these f Page 214 Page 216 01 03 individuals.
ta:
gj The decision that you make affects their pl j pi life significantly, as you know and as they know. i
! M p) When we started out this morning,I asked you to put 1 51 I tsi yourselfin their position in September of 1994 181 l ts before you judge what they did or failed to do.
A If you were in this chair next to me,as m
W in they have been this morning, on September 4th ar d l M
m September 5th and during the period ofJuly and M
sq August leading up to September 4th and September !
("I o 5th,you would know that there was not sufficient 0 21
- 02) guidance to tell these operators that what they were pal psj doing was wmng.
N 04j And many of you - not many of you.Some D51 vsj of you have made very clear from the outset of this M vei proceeding that you have a predisposition and might D9 on have already decided that what they did was wrong.
pel pq And that's fine in 1996.You are allowed that M pq latitude and that privilege oflooking back and 99 sq making a teasoned decision after having pored pi pu through pages and volumes of transcripts and p21 p2] documents.
p31 pai But on September 4th if you were sitting pq MR. MORRIS:I'd like to make some p41 next to them in the control room. talking about what asi closing remarks. psi they were thinking about doing,you would have Page 213 - Page 216 (56) Min-1J-Scripts BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979
l IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT COhPERENCE PROCEEk)INGS BEFbRE STEWART l C'RYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Pcge 217 Page 219 l
c) suffered under the following: vi be closed out.Let's find out.Present them the m " Vague guidance provided to these m information that we come up with, p) operators in the existing procedures for procedures p1 Is there a flaw in that theory? Not p1 for evolutions to be performed, for alarm response vi according to their shift supervisor; not according tsj times, and for determining when an evolution tsj to the then existing procedural guidance.
Iej constituted a test or experiment." te) Al-402B,you found has no guidance on m Now that can't be argued.That is what m plant curves.Therefore,they cannot be faulted for tai you would be laboring under because that is exactly tai not following the guidance that existed because pi what you, the NRC, found in Inspection Report 50- pj you've already found there was no such guidance.
pq 302/95-22 in your synopsis at Page 2.Those were pq CT-103B Curve 8,you found that this pu the conditions existing for these four operators and on procedure does not provide guidance on normal plant na for you if you'd been in the chair next to them in va operations or on the applicability of administrative pst July and August and September of 1994. psi operating limits.
v4 AI-500 Section 4.3.2.3.2A, you, the NRC, 04) You cannot reasonably find that they ps) found that:When the adequacy of the existing psj violated OP-103B when you yourself have already I pe procedures is questioned,the shift supervisor shall vej found that this procedure did not provide adequate l vn make the determination as to which procedural pn guidance. It is unfair for the NRC to hold these l pai requirements are applicable. pai operators to a standard that did not exist on pq There is no evidence anywhere in the vej September 4th and 5th,1994.
pq record that any one of these four people could not pq You've already found that there was pq or should not have relied upon Mr. Dave Fields when pq insufficient guidance and insufficient supervision pa he determined that the evolution they intended to do pa for them to know that what they were doing was ,
psi was properly authorized under the existing psi incorrect or had a flaw in it.
p4) procedures. g41 Management,in its hearing before you, )
psi Now,you may now determine that that psi admitted that the procedural guidance was lacking, l Page 218 Page 220 01 decision was wrong, ameliorated by the fact that the p) deficient,or nonexistent.They admitted that your gi procedures you found were deficient.But don't m apparent violations citing manager :nt's failures to pi blame these people for following a shift supervisor pi provide adequate guidance were e and correct.
pj who they believed was conscreative, who had an 81 Well,if management failed t , .mvide the isj excellent record with the company, and who they were (si proper guidance,you can't is d .hese operators ici directed by the applicable procedures to follow. [si responsible for failing to folic proper procedure m As you pointed out in your same m and guidance when the company has already admitted ai inspection report,AR-403 gave no guidance for tai the guidance wasn't there to begin with, si timeliness to initiate an operator's actions in p) If you are going to discipline these four pq response to an alarm.These people told you and in pq operators for violating Curve 103B,then you must ny fact,in Florida Power Company's own predecisional pu discipline 100 percent of the operators at the na enforcement conference,they admitted to you that na Crystal River Plant who in 1994 operated at the top 031 they had a pattern of exisdag alarms for extended psi of the band of 103B Curve 8 with the alarm in, pq period of times that was known, tolerated,and v41 because,as you found,100 percent of the operators psi accepted.So it was no surprise to these people ps) did that,every one of them.
nei that the alarm might come in. pei These people have been singled out on Did they maneuver the plant so as to pn because of the evolutions.You've already found the l ps) bring it in? No.They put the plant on the curve pai procedural guidance was deficient.No one has
! ps) as directed, bled down to follow what would happen, pq suggested - not you, not Florida Power - no one pq and charted.Did they drive it into the pq has suggested that it was unreasonable for these pu unacceptable area? No.The plant went into the pu people to follow the direction, supervision,and na unacceptable area according to Curve 103B. And pa approval of their shift supervisor, psi that's all they were doing. psj Now,you might say,in fact you have g4) Is the plant going to go there or is it p4) said:"Well, why didn't you try some other psj not? We don't know.We've been told it's going to ps) alternative? You didn't have to be an evolution BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 MJan-U-Scripts (57) Page 217 - Page 220 f
I
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EBNETER, CIIAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER Page 221 Page 223 to man. All you had to do was try any number of to supervisor.They took out the books.They read m alternatives to this." pi them. And they said,There's a procedure for this; p1 These people have testified and there's pi we have procedural guidance;it's appropriate;you si no evidence to the contrary that the employee pi can do it.
isi concern procedure didn't work. It had been tried. tsi You may decide today that that decision I m It had not worked. m was wrong.But if you'd been there on September 4th m Mr. Van Sicklen went as high as he could m and September 5th,there was nothing in existence at m go other than barging in on Pat Beard to raise his m that time that would lead anybody to a contrary m concern about the efficacy of OP-103B Curve 8. Time m conclusion.
pq and time and time again,he asked for somebody to pq The fact that they operated under the I on check on his concern. On supervision of their management is the most j na Now he didn't challenge engineering and na important thing that you have to focus on if you're j vai say,You're wrong,I'm right,I'm going to beat va sitting there on September 4th.
na you.He went to a meeting and said:2)ok, here's pq We're here for enforcement action.Under !
+
sq what we got from SP-630;we think there's a problem pq your enforcement procedures NRC Enforcement Policy na here.Will you please check on it and get back to pq 10 CFR 2 Appendix C,Section XVIII, Enforcement ,
pn me. On actions against individuals, as I know you know: {
psi Nobody got back to him inJune.Nobody paj " Enforcement actions involving na got back to him inJuly.Nobody got back to him in )
pq individuals will be closely controlled and pq August.Did he say,Well,if you don't get back to )
pq judiciously applied.An enforcement action pu me,I'm just going to go prove it myself? No. He un involving an individual will normally be taken only pa waited and he brought it up through management, ga when the NRC is satisfied that the individual fully l pq above the head of his shift superviso na understood or should have understood his or her
, pq nd sai4I've still got these concerns; pq responsibility, knew or should have known the psj what sh'ould I do? And he followed what he believed psi required actions, and knowingly or with careless Page 222 Page 224 to was a reasonable course to work within the system at tu disregard,i.e.,more than mere negligence, failed ;
pj Florida Power to wait for her response. pi to take required actions which have actual or pi The response he got was on September 3rd pi potential safety significance."
pj he was shown the September 2nd letter. And to him pj Now I think you must conclude fmm the (si it said,This issue is being closed out.And it tsj record in front of you that none of these people m says in print explicitly:OP-103B Curve 8 is ist knowingly took any action they believed to be in m conservative. m violation of any regulation, nor did they act with tal Well, he still wasn't sure of that. And m careless disregard.
m he was told, either mistakenly or otherwise,that if p1 This was a planned evolution they pq you've got something to tell us, you better give it pq believed was authorized,and it came after every on to us now because it's being closed out. vn attempt by the representative of this shift to bring pa Now,we can pick bones about whether Mr. na the matter to the attention of management and get it pa Beard told Mr.Bergstrom or Mr.Bergstrom told Mr. na resolved,with no satisfaction whatsoever, pq Fields;a!! of that is irrelevant.You are there on pq That same enforcement procedure says:
pq September 4th sitting next to Mark Van Sicklen when usi " Action against the individual will not be taken if psi he is told: Put up or shut up; give them the pq the improper action by the individual was caused by on information orlet it go. On management failures."
pa What did he say? He said,Well,I guess psi In this case I submit to you that these na what we'll do is exactly what they've told us to pq people should not be disciplined in any way, shape pq do.We'll put it on the curve, bleed it down. If pq or form because theiraction was in fact caused by pq it even comes close to;following the curve,I'll pu management failures,the management of their pa say,Thank you,I'm setTsfied.lfit doesn't,we'll na particular shift.lf you find them to be at fault, ga report to them our data of what happened. pa they were following that direction and approval, na Gec.Can we do StatlAnd he went to pq could do that with reasonable reliance.And under psi shift supervisor and the assistant shift psi the enforcement procedure here,that they should not Page 221 - Page 224 (58) Min-U-scripte BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979
IN RES PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS TEFORE STEWART CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 Page 225 Page 227 01 be punished for that. vi them:You follow the shift supervisor's direction gi Similarly you've already found in your mi and interpretation. And that's what they did.
pi inspection reports and in your apparent violations p1 No.3,the safety consequences of the pj for the company that the company failed in providing pj misconduct. Thankfully,the only safety (51 adequate guidance.So the company failed and the (si consequences of the evolutions were that the plant ici management failed,not these individuals. Isi after September of 1994 changed the curve and was a These go on to say:" Inadvertent m operating safely.lf the evolutions had not been Isl individual mistakes resulting hum inadequate -
tai done, that plant might still be operating on old p training or guidance provided by the facility pi Curve 103B Curve 8,which as we know from the pq licensee shall not authorize action against them." pq evolutions performed was outside the design basis ny A number of you asked each one:Did you o si limits, had a very dangerous situation, and had na ever receive any training on OP-103B Curve 8? pa existed that way for a period of 18 months until pai Answer: No. Had anyone ever told you that this was psi these people took the initiative to find out if it va a design basis curve that could not be violated? '
pq was accurate or not.
ps! No. pq No.4, benefit to the wrongdoer. It's ps) So you can't find that they knowingly pq obvious that not only did these people not seek any on violated it or did it with careless disregard. And on benefit,they've suffered dire consequences.
pai so you should not punish them for that. pai No.5,the degree of supervision of the um it also says that they shall not be poi individual.They were highly supervised at the pq punished in an enforcement proceeding for compliance pq time.They did everything under the watchful eye of pq with an expressed direction of management such as pu the assistant shift supervisor and the shift na the, quote," shift supervisor," end quote. pa supervisor.
pai I don't think any of you dispute the fact pai No.6, the employer's response, for pq that these pmple acted under the imprimatur of pq example, disciplinary action taken.As you already ,
ps) their shift suWvisor, with the concurrence of psi know, Mr. Van Sicklen and Mr. Stewart have been Page 226 Page 228 n) their shift supervisor, with the authority of their p) stripped of their licenses.They're no longerin l
pl shift supervisor and believed that what they were pl operations.They're not allowed in operations, p) doing was at his direction, his suggestion and with pi Ms. Smith has a written reprimand.Mr.
p) his approval.So for that reason you should take no 91 Atkinson had a reprimand.Both of their otherwise ts; action against them. Is) previously spotless records now have a permanent (q , it also says no action should be taken tai stain.
m against them "if the violation results from m No.7,the attitude of the wrongdoer, 181 inadequate procedures." As I've already said, you tal acceptance of responsibility.Each of these people pi have faulted Florida Power Company for having pi came in here and told you they fully accepted pq inadequate procedures. pq responsibility for the actions that they took and oy In the mitigating, whatever punishment p y today knowing what they know now with added guidance na you feel would be appropriate if you made that na would never have done it back in 1994.
pai decision,there are nine factors that you're to paj No.8,the degree of management pq consider, and I want to hit those very briefly. pq responsibility or culpability. I think I've aircady psi No.1, the level of the individual within psi said enough about that.
Um the organization.These folks were not the psj And No.9,who identified the on decision-makers.They relied on others to make on misconduct.These people conducted their evolutions psi those decisions. Vej on September 4th and September 5th.They documented l pq No. 2, the individual's training and poi it in the log books.They didn't have to do any
! pq experience as well as the knowledge of the potential pq more than that.But they did.
l pu consequences of the wrongdoing. As Florida Power pn They went straight to their management
, na said to you and as these people said to you,they pa with their data,with their report, generated a
! pal believed that what they were doing would not result ps) problem report,and followed exactly the procedure pq in a significant danger to the public or to the pq that was expected of them by Florida Power and the psj plant. And their training and experience told ps) NRC.They are the ones who identified this, quote, BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Min-U-Scripte (59) Page 225 - Page 228
~ PRO ('FFnINGS BEFORE STEWART IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EBNETER, CHAIRMAN; April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RWER i
l l Page 229 Page 231 l l 01 " misconduct," end quote. In Florida Power Company ever asked any of these l l
p1 in summation:These operators acted m operators what they did or why they did it.No one pi responsibly as the environment existed in 1994 in pi from management,no one from the NRC, no one from al September.They acted with an absolutely pure p) the St. Petersburg, no one from Crystal River ever l 18 motive.They had a safety concern that they wanted (q came to Mark Van Sicklen, Jack Stewart, Christine I
sq to help get resolved. tai Smith, orJim Atkinson and said, Gee,tell me m They had absolutely no malicious intent. M exactly what you did and why you did it.Not a
! Im There was nothing for them to personally gain from gai single solitary human being.
14 doing these evolutions.They never sought personal m Now,you would expect if there were pq gain.They never thought they were going to get pq viable alternatives of going to management or going
- py personal gain.- ~
n n' to the NRC, somebody would have come to thesFaid pa As they have each told you,and as I l na said: Gee,tell us about this.What prompted it? l pa believe the shift supervisor and the assistant shift na What did you do? How did you do it and why? Not a l ny supervisor has told you in their predecisional pq single solitary person asked them.
usi enforcement conference,no one ignored or pq Florida Power Company told you they no disregarded procedures. At all times they thought ps) handled this on a management review committec ,
na they were working within procedures. On basis.And they apologize;in hindsight it would pa You also know they did not know at the l pai have been wiser to interview the four operators.
pq time of these evolutions that that was a design pq But they didn't.
pq basis curve.If they had,they never would have ga You met with Florida Power Corporation in 99 done it. pq Atlanta, Georgia,to discuss these evolutions.
! pa You know that they consulted the pa Nobody ever talked to these four people.Nobody pa appropriate procedures then in existence.They pa sought their opiniote their advice,or their pq relied upon their shift supervisor for his pq explanation, psi interpretation of the decision.And they made a pq , And that's why it was reasonable for Page 230 Page 232 !
tu reasoned judgment that they were following vi these people to believe that there was no reason to m appropriate procedure as approved by the shift pi go above where they had gone before because nobody p1 supervisor. pi was going to care about their thought process.That p1 I think the most important point you ej had been proven.You tell us what your concerns l
(q made,Mr.Ebneter,you particularly,is:What (q are.We'll take it from there and we'll get back to
[q alternatives they should have considered before they [q you.
A did the evolution? And presumably by that you mean m Well, by whatever you conclude over the m there are two significant alternatives:One,go to (si next 60 or 90 days, not only are you going to decide (q the NRC;two,go to your management outside your (q the fate of these folks and send them a message,but pq s og you're going to send a message to every operator in l
99 pu this country.It's one of two messages.The na d he explained ti you na message is either: Question things when you think ps) the steps he took in going rough managemeat usi there's a legitimate safety concern and do what you vq outside his shift for a number of months thzt nq think following your management supervision is the pq predated this evolution- 'oq right thing to do.And if you're coucerned,you l po But I think the most importact ening you aq ignore what people tell you to do if y u're really on should consider about why neith of those factors, nn concerned about it.You take the bull by the horns pq neither of those alternatives woma Save been pq and you look at that safety concern and you follow l pq sufficient at that time had you been there on og it through until you are satisfied because that's .
pq September 4th,1994,is the evidence of the fact of pq what we the Nuclear Regulatory Commission expect of i what atmosphere existed in September 1994. pq you.
How can we go.htck and prove to you what ga Or you're going to send a message to was like and why those were not viable pai these four people and everybody else: Shut up and
., .ternatives? I'll telhypu'one reason why- Frorn pq watch the board.We know what we're doing.We're
- pq September 5th through a five-month period,no one at pq management,we're engineering;you don't need to Page 229 - Page 232 (60) Mim-U-Scripte BROWN REPORTING, INC. 6-8979 r l%d, . h+A.,
~
IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE l'HOCEEl>1NUS 15Et'OKE STEWAM A CRYSTAL RIVER EBNETER, CHAIRMAN April 4,1996 Page 233 Page 235 ni understand it.Just shut up and watch the board. p) record or you should go somewhere else to file p1 If that's what you want, then take m allegations.And I want you all to understand that pi discipline against these people and send a memo to pi right now.
- 8) every operator in the country If you have a safety p) And I want you to tell your peers at ts concern, write it down. it will be dealt with, don't (s) Crystal River,the NRC expects you to come to us, ici you be doing anything on your own,just shut up and te And if you find that any of our staffis not m watch the board. m receptive to your comments,you have a duty then to Isj Now you're thinking,or may be thinking.
- tsj go to me or to anybody in this region.And the toi Well,I don't want to tell every other operator in rol telephone number is 404 331-5500.
pq the country,any time you want to run an evolution, nm So that was,apparently at least,it vil go right ahead.We're not asking you to do that ni} appears from what we know,that we closed off one of i va cither. na those options to you. And I can understand the ,
ps But we are asking you to consider what nsi frustration that that probably generated, that in l 941 the situation was when you sat in this chair as the v4) conjunction with the closure of management past.
us; fifth operator on September 4th and 5th,1994,in But having said all that, you know, the
)
vs um the situation that existed then with the guidance pq operators need to understand that you can't put the on that you had and the supervision sitting next to you on plant in an unsafe condition to uy to prove a ps) and say to yourself,You know,ifI had that safety vs point. I recognize it's tough,but that's genemlly l poi concern and ifI read those same guidances and ifI pol - that's just not acceptabic.
pq asked my shift supervisor and if I went through the pq I don't have any other comments.I pij steps that I went through and if I was told I'd pi) appreciate na better bring them more information right now or che pa - And Ms.
pai my safety concern is going to be closed out,you psi Ifalligan,again representing FloricTa Power )
pq would have done the exact same thing. And I don't pq Corporation.And,Mr.I.ieberman,we appreciate your ps; think that you would be subjecting yourself to the psi participation.
Page 234 Page 230 i oj discipline that you state in your apparent vi MR. LIEBERMAN: Thank you. l pi violations to these peopic. pi MR. EBNETER: And so I'm going to close l Pi And we ask you to consider that. pi the conference out.I'm not sure of the time frame p1 Consider the punishment they've already received, pj of this proceeding, Mr. Morris.We'll try to get Isl and if not vindicate them,at least determine ist thmugh it as quickly as we can.But things (q there's a sufficient level of mitigation in this tai generally go slow.But we will try to move it along m case that you understand why they did what they did m very fast.
isi and you accept it;maybe not approve it,but at (si MR. MORRIS:I have one question, sir, si least accept it. pl that one or more of my clients has asked me,and I sq Thank you for the opportunit of pq don't know the answer.
On addressing you.If you have any questions of me or vil Who makes the final decision,if you na anyone of the four,please feelfree. na will? Is it one person's decision -
psi MR. EBNETER: Are there any other psi MR. EBNETER: No.
pq questions? Well,thank you,Mr. Morris. Good pq MR. MORRIS:- a group decision or -
psi summation. And appreciate the corr.ments in the -
no MR. EBNETER: No.The process will go -
pq openness of all the operators.We certainly pq in fact, my closing comments will address a little on appreciate you coming in. On bit of that.
pq And having said all of that,the nei MR. MORRIS: Thank you.
poi summation was very good,was to the point. nei MR. EBNETER: But fundamentally, all the, pq Fundamentally though,two wrongs don't make a pq facts we receive,the facts from our staff, from the su right. And looking at all the circumstances, and we an OI staff,you gentlemen, Florida Power Company,all pa can talk aboutjptions,there were other perceptions pa those facts will go to a panel which will be chaired psi created here and some of them on our own side. psi by Mr. Gibson.That panel will consist of most of p4L It is not acqcptable for the NRC staff to pq the people in this room. And Mr.l.ieberrnan will psi tell any of you that you will have to go off the pq participate in it.
BROWN REPORTING, INC. (404) 876-8979 Mira-U-Scripte (61) Page 233 - Page 236
_- -- -. . _. _. -- -_ .=. _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ .
, PROCIl.EDINGS BEFORE STEWART - IN RE: PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE i EBNETER, CHAIRMANI April 4,1996 CRYSTAL RIVER 3
. Page 237 Page 239
} ty . By the way, Mr.Beall here is Mr. vi in that, please let me know. -
A
. m I.ieberman's representative from headquarters.So m MR. ESNETER: Having said all of that, I pi there's a variety of peopic.And once they have pl we'll close the conference and,right along this j gj looked at the record,they'll make a recommendation (4) line,a discussion that these are apparent i tsi to me and to Mr.Lieberman. (q violations that we've discussed today.They are e
14 And then it gets further review.In (q subject to further review and subject to cham:
! m c:'Jes like this,they will probably go to the m prior to any final enforcement action. And any m commission.So it's not a simple process.And it pi the statements or views or expressions of the staff.
- - pi gets multilater review to make sure you get fair toi NRC staff,that were made here today at this .
l ' og treatment across the board. pq conference or even the lack thereof are not intended j 09 MR. LIEBERMAN:This will be an agency su to represent final agency determmations or l j v2 decision. na beliefs.
nsi ~ MR.EBNETER:Yes. Osl That's a good legal statement to end this
- _ 0 41_ MR. LIEBERMAN
- And it's - not pmbably; pq conference on.So let's close the conference.
l nsi this will go to the commission to get their advice nst Thank you, sir.
- osi before we make a final decision. pq MR. MORRIS
- Thank you.
j-na MR. MORRIS:And the final decision is un (Hearing concluded at 1:40 p.m.) ;
- , pel really made by whom,Mr.I.ieberman? 0s1 i
- na ' MR. LIEBERMAN: Mr.Ebneter will sign the voi
$ pq documentation.But the approval will be Mr. pol -
99 Ebneter;myself;Mr. Taylor,he's the executive exec pu -
. pa for operations; and after, consultation with a 12 21
)
ma commissioner. [2 31 I I pq MR. MORRIS:I don't mean this p*1 psi disrespectfully, but do each of you four get an I2 51
)
i Page 240 Page 238 l
- p1 CERTFICATE til equal vote?
m_ MR. EBNETER: Now, you know better than "
'plth:t.
' v1 MR.LIEEERMAN:I work for Mr. Taylor. Is) STATE OF GEORGIA.
151 And Mr. Ebneter works for Mr. Taylor too. So I pl COUNTYOFCOG8:
ri guess it's fair to say that Mr. Taylor gets 51 m m percent of the vote. Ist I hersty cettsy that sw fore;oing But normally Mr. Ebneter and myself, we toi procemenge were taken down. u eteled in the asi voi capuon, and reduced to typewning under rny m work it out. And occasionally others will cause us tuj erecuan.andnunuwsoregoing page 1 pq to change our views.
Oa virough 23e represent a true, conipiste, and py: MR. MORRIS: Yes, sir.
na - MR. EBNETER:I'd like the operators to
"" " '****"8' psi see my name will be on the thing, so I have to pq tecept responsibility.As Mr.Lieberman says,it's pq psi a consensus type decision in the agency and it will pn vel get multilevels of review. DEBORAH P. LONGORIA. CCR-B.1557. RPR pn . MR.LIEBERMAN: And I think H final . (tal CERrFIED COURT REPORTER SROWN REPORTING. INC, poi comment is as I said earlier,this a not treated pq lightly.We appreciate the reasons why the D9 I'"
pm operators have stated they did what tiiey did.We I*U pu rppreciate the messages that can be given to pa operators at Crystal River as well as other ,y pal f;cilities.And we want to make sure we do the py eq right thing.' psi
. psi MR. MORRIS:IfI can give you any help Page 237 - Page 240 (62) Min-U-Scripte BROWN REPOR'ITNG, INC. (404) 876-8979