ML20136A861
| ML20136A861 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/27/1996 |
| From: | Ogle C NRC |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20136A623 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-96-485 NUDOCS 9703100066 | |
| Download: ML20136A861 (3) | |
Text
OV November 27, 1996 MEMORANDUM T0:
File FROM:
Chuck Ogle
SUBJECT:
COURTESY VISIT - Florida Power and Light (FPL)
DATE&TIMfi Thursday, November 21, 1996 - 11:30 a.m.- 12:10 p.m.
ATTENDEES Chairman Jackson Chuck Ogle Brian.tolian Tom Plunkett, President Nuclear Division, FPL TOPICS OF DISCUSSION:
The meeting provided a general update on FPL's nuclear plants. Mr.
Plunkett talked from the enclosed slides. The presentation was upbeat.
Mr. Plunkett provided a brief overview of FPL. He stated that it is the
~
4" largest electric utility in the nation with 7 million customers.
Eighty percent of the customers are located in southern Florida. He noted FPL's location, on a peninsula, isolates it from competition from neighboring utilities. He stressed this as a benefit for FPL in future competition. As described by Mr. Plunkett, the future for FPL is bright. He also reviewed the FPL organization.
1 Next, he covered the history of the Turkey Point turnaround effort from its days as a problem plant in the 1980's. He freely acknowledged the poor shape the facility was in when he arrived. The fundamentals of his rescue included a $250 million investment / upgrade in the plant's material condition, a move away from contractors at the site, and incentives to keep FPL employees from leaving the facility. He stressed that the management and people at Turkey Point were fundamentally sound and that he only had to bring in one new manager. He also pointed out j
that when he arrived, the facility was layered with corrective action programs that were not effectively turning the performance tide. He focused on simplification, accountability, and open communications with the NRC. The Chairman agreed with Mr. Plunkett's point on the downside of multiple layers of plant improvement programs.
The presentation then turned to the future for Turkey Point. Again, his comments were very positive.
Performance has improved to the point that they-only compare Turkey Point to the top 1% of plants.
Key points he highlighted included all SALP ls two times in a' row, very high availability numbers, and a strong Speakout (concerns) program. They are comfortable with staffing levels at the plant; the days of large personnel cuts,are over. He cited Hurricane Andrew as a watershed event. This was a direct hit on the plant that resulted in major plant damage. He stressed how close-knit the employees have become as a result. This was a result of the things the company had to provide such m of crmation Act, c.temphoJs _
9703100066 970228 PDR FOIA BINDER 96-485 PDR
i h,.
f j
as shelter after the storm, a school (K-37), and that a lot of their j
people left the area after settling with the insurance companies j
following total destruction of their homes. He stated that he is l
worried about complacency at the facility and also discussed his desire to " raise the bar" of performance.
i His presentation turned to St. Luc ent 4
rformance of t no e St. Lucie management had a very j
own performance and frequently took on any naysayers. The Chairman questioned him on why so many allegations were being received at St. Lucie. His answer was layoffs and his recent l
drive for personal accountability.
When questioned on whether the i.
employee concerns programs at the two facilities were similar, he said j
yes.,He then went on to state that in the past, St. Lucie management i
had not been receptive to allegations and that this was the reason that.
j the programs at their two facilities had enjoyed such different i
successes.
He described his t.urnaround effort for St. Lucie.
Highlights included a S/f i
major changeout in plant management.
Half of the new personnel have j
come from Turkey Point the rest from industry. He noted that while the i
availability numbers have been good for the facility the " culture" is lacking. He stated that they have turned the corner on equipment i
problems. He made note of the increa rt and the l
cor increase in violations.
He also noted that he expec s to achieve a leaner, better pro ucing f.
He briefly discussed the status of the design basis at both facilities, j
He said that Turkey Point did a design basis reconstitution in _the late 1980's and that St Lucie had condjicted a design basis review.f not provide a lot of detail but it sounded like this was less e(He did i
ffort i
j than at Turkey Point.)j He also stated that both facilities are 1
currently reviewing 1 heir FSARs and design bases.
t lie complimented the NRC on the maintenance rule.
He thinks it is a good i
rule. He is a believer in a strong maintenance organization. He also feels that the rule puts the responsibility for maintenance clearly in j
~
the Tap of the industry.
j
\\
j He briefly talked about the future of FPL nuclear. He stressed l
contTnued safe performance, cost of less than 1. cent /Kw-hour, and license renewal.
G:\\00 tVPLDRP(Xh0GL 4
)
l The Chairman questioned him o he thou ht as r many v
ons today's residents are of a higher qual ty; t e ncrease wi ng s of the facility to report issues; and a changing regulatory environment in which the NRC holds licensees more accountable.
When questioned on his relationship with the media, he focused on steps l
that he has made to improve this relationship. A major point of this I
discussion was weekly press conferences he has instituted at St. Lucie.
He also gave a brief rundown of the recent tampering event that occurred at St. Luci He indicat of media af);j-attention
~
When questioned about thermolag he stated that this was a major problem ^
at Turkey Point. He also expressed disappointment with the staff's objections to a recent amendment request of theirs to reduce fire barrier requirements in the turbine ba;1 ding by taking advantage of its open air construct, ion. He stated they are committed to resolving this issue within the time frame established by the NRC. He also expressed disappointment with the fact that he can't take long-term credit for fire watches and was concerned about the $5-20 million price tag on fixing the problem.
l When questioned on regulatory impact issues, he was very positive on the resident inspectors, stated he enjoyed a professional relationship with the NRC, and does not see any problems.
l l
a i
d c:\\antsnimse ca l
.,,-