ML20137A563
| ML20137A563 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/07/1986 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8601140418 | |
| Download: ML20137A563 (101) | |
Text
ORIGINAL
,r-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of:
COMMISSION MEETING Briefing by Staff on TVA Corporate Plan (Public Meeting)
Docket No.
N_
Location: Washington, D.
C.
Date: Tuesday, January 7, 1986 Pages:
1 - 76 8601140418 860107 PDR 10CFR PT9.7 PDR ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES Court Reporters
(_,
1625 I St., N.W.
Suite 921 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
- D
1 D I SCL4 i MEP 2
3 4
5 6
Th l :t is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the 7
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on s
1/7/86 In the Commission's office at 1717 H Street, 9
N.W.,
Washington, D.C.
The meeting was open to public 10 attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been 11 reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain 12 inaccuracies.
13 The transcript is intended solely for general 14 informational purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is 15 not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the 16 matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript 17 do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs.
No 18 pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in 19 any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any stafement 20 or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may 21 authorire.
22 23 24 25
1 9
e 1
2 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 3
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
5 6
BRIEFING BY STAFF ON TVA CORPORATE PLAN 7
8 9
Public Meeting 10 11 12 Room 1130 13 1717 H Street, N.W.
14 Washington, D.C.
15 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 10:08 16 a.m.
17 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
18 Nunzio J.
Palladino, Chairman 19 James K.
Asselstine, Commissioner 20 Frederick M.
Bernthal, Commissioner 21 Thomas M.
Roberts, Commissioner 22 Lando W.
- Zech, Jr.,
Commissioner 23 STAFF AND PRESENTERS SEATED AT COMMISSION TABLE:
24 H.
Plaine 25 S.
Chilk i
L
2 l
1 J.
Taylor 4
2 N.
Grace 3
V.
Stello 4
M.
Denton 5
H.
Thompson 6
AUDIENCE SPEAKERS:
7 B.
LaGrange 8
D.
Eisenhut t
9 B.
D.
Liaw o
r 10 R.
Walker 11 T.
Novak 12 13 i-14 15 16 17 18 1
19 1
20
.21 22 23 4-24 25 4
3 m
1 P ROCEED I NG S 2
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Good morning, ladies and 3
gentlemen.
4 Commissioner Roberts will be joining us shortly.
5 He's been temporarily detained.
6 This morning the NRC Staff will brief the Commission 7
on the TVA program for improvement.
The Commission last met 8
with the Stati on September 12th, 1985 to discuss TVA.
This 9
morning OI -- that is, the Office of Investigations and 10 OIA, the Office of Inspector and Auditor -- will brief the 11 Commission at a closed meeting on the status of their 12 investigations related to TVA.
13 The primary purpose of this morning's meeting is for 14 the Staff to describe the current status of the Staff *s review 15 and evaluation of the TVA program.
le SECY 86-01, Status of Stati Actions Regarding TVA, 17 discusses the Staff concern about TVA corporate facilities, as 18 well as the actions necessary either to return plants to 19 operation or to complete the licensing process.
20 Copies of the Staff paper are available on the table 21 at the rear of the room.
22 The Commission recognizes that a significant amount 23 of information has been received and is presently under Stati I
24 review.
The Commission further recognizes that TVA has a 25 large amount of work remaining to be done.
For instance, the
4 t
1 TVA Employoo Concorn Program has genorated over 4000 2
allegations, and thesa allegations are under review by TVA.
3 On Thursday of this week, TVA will briet the 4
Commission on the TVA corporate plan.
Last week TVA announced 5
that it had contracted with Stone & Webster to retain Admiral 6
Steve White to fill a position of manager in the TVA Office of 7
Nuclear Power effective January 13th.
8 Further meetings with TVA will be planned after 9
Mr. White has had a chance to take hold of his new job.
10 The topics for today's meeting with the NRC Staff 11 will be addressed by the senior management team which the EDO 12 established in April 1985 to coordinate and manage NRC*s 13 response to TVA*s reaction to our regulatory concerns.
14 Recently the Commission directed that the Director 15 of the Office of Investigation become a member of that team 16 and that a full-time senior executive, Mr. Hugh Thompson of 17 NRR, and additional staff personnel be assigned to this team.
18 The team currently consists of Harold Denton, NRR
,n-19 Director, as chairman; Jim Taylor, IE Director; and Nelson 20 Grace, Region II administrator; and Ben Hayes, OI Director.
21 I also understand that pe,rsonnel from Region II are 22 listening in by telephone.
23 In addition to the senior management, I would like 24 to welcome Victor Stello to this meeting in his new pos tion 25 as Acting Executive Director for Operations.
Over his many
5
.g a
1
.yoors of governmont servico, Vio has hold many important 2
positions.
I would like to take this opportunity to publicly 3
acknowledge his many contributions to the agency and to wish 4
him continued success with respect to the challenges he will 5
face over the next six months.
6 Would any of my fellow Commissioners like to make 7
any other cpening remarks at the present time?
8 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
No.
9 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
No.
10 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
No.
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
All right, then, let me turn 12 the meeting over to Mr. Stello.
13 MR. STELLO:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 14 for the kind words.
I would rather that it were a simpler 15 topic that we could be discussing in the first opportunity of 16 my new capacity 17 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
It's a good one to cut 18 your teeth on.
19 MR. STELLO:
It will be interesting.
20 I wanted to make sure that we helped the Commission 21 understand that we view this as a status briefing of what the 22 NRC has been doing in connection with its review of the TVA 23 facilities.
6 24 The Statt will highlight the principal issues that 25 are pending that we know about with respect to the Sequoyah
=
=..
_ _=
6 1
plants.
Wo will givo you a briot summary of the status of tho 2
other plants as well.
3 We will not discuss in detail corporate or 4
management issues and concerns since, as you have already 5
indicated, TVA has recently announced a major management 6
chtage in that regard, i
?
Mr. Denton in a moment will further summarize this 8
issue.
9 Let me, at the outset, emphasize that this is a
10 clearly a status briefing and it should be recognized that-11 there are still a large number of open issues for which the 12 Staff does not have answers.
13 The TVA Employee Concern program, for example, is 14 still considered as an open issue.
That program contains 15 issues that potentially affect a number of TVA's nuclear I
16 plants.
To date, TVA has not completed their effort of 17 defining or verifying the validity of most of the concerns, 18 which number in excess of 4000, 19 Later in January the Statt would suggest that the 20 Commission would have an additional status briefing.
We i
21 believe that this is important since the overall efforts by 22 TVA and the Statt are expected to accelerate significantly 23 over the next several weeks.
24 With that, let me turn the meeting over to 25 Mr. Denton to make several points, and then we will continue I
y
--y
.-e
.. ~, _.
7 1
tho brioting with all of us intoracting as wo go forward.
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Vic, just before you leave 3
that, you suggested a meeting later in the month.
I agree 4
very much that a lot is happening, it's happening rather 5
quickly.
There is a wealth of information that is coming to 6
light on the TVA situation.
I woinder whether we need 7
meetings more frequently than just one now and one later in 8
the month.
9 In fact, I would like to suggest that you and we 10 think about maybe a weekly meeting on TVA, spend two hours a 11 week keeping track of what is going on down there, both with 12 the corporate organization and with all of the plants.
Why 13 don *t you think about that, and we can think about it as well, 14 MR. STELLO:
I think it's an issue that I would like s
15 to reflect on.
1, myself, probably will be meeting at least 16 weekly, but then I want to make sure that we don't burden the 17 people who have the task in iront of them with preparing 18 meetings and briefings that would significantly detract from 19 their ability to manage what is going on.
Why don *t we 20 consider it further, and let's return to it.
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Why don't we take it up at the 22 agenda planning.
23 CCommissioner Roberts entered the room.]
24 CHAIMMAN PALLADINO; Do you want to proceed?
25 MR. DENTON:
There are a lot of meetings going on.
8 1
You montionod mooting onco a wook.
I think thero aro throo 2
meetings this week between NRC Staff and TVA on various 3
individual plant-specific topics.
So there is a lot of 4
activity.
5 We don't intend today to get into a corporate 6
matter.
As Vic said, retired Admiral Steve White recently 7
accepted a position as manager of Power & Engineering for 8
Nuclear with TVA.
9 We have also been informed by TVA that a Mr. Norm 10 A.
Zigrossi has accepted a position as Inspector General, 11 reporting to the Board.
I understand he comes from the FBI.
12 So I think because of these positive organizational changes 13 down there, it is best to not go into some of the issues that k
14 we had planned to go into with you and, rather, wait until TVA 15 is prepared to talk about how they are going to approach some 16 of the same issues.
17 So today we are going to focus mainly on the 18 activities that have been going on between the Staff and TVA 19 with regard to the Sequoyah facilities.
20
[ Slide.]
21 Sequoyah facility is the number one priority within 22 TVA, and we have accordingly made it our number one priority.
23 That's Sequoyah Unit No 2.
24 We also plan to cover Watts Bar.
Watts Bar is 25 receiving quite a bit of attention, especially the Employee S
9 1
Concorn progrcm, and wo will go into that, and then we will 2
cover Browns Ferry and Bellefonte in somewhat less detail.
3 TVA has not submitted their program elements for Browns Ferry, 4
for example, so there is not a lot going on in that.
1 5
The kind of things we want to cover -- and what I 6
plan to do is have the senior management team memb'ers cover 7
the individual pieces.
For Sequoyah, for example, we're going 8
to go into some detail on the equipment qualification that*s 9
receiving a lot of attention by the Staff at the moment; cable 10 tray support, design control, operational readiness plan, the 11 Employee Concern program.
We're going to go into these in a 12 tow minutes each in order to give you a flavor of the amount 13 of activity that is going on between the Staff and TVA, and 14 tell you where it stands.
15 In some of these areas, we are not going to be able 16 to give you an end point.
For example, with regard to EQ, 17 there are tests going on right now, and if they turn out 18 positive, they might permit EQ to be brought to a timely 19 conclusion.
If the rock-bestos cables don't pass the EQ 20 test, then it might be a while before the Staff can complete 21 its review of the EQ.
We will try to identify those types of 22 areas as we go through the program.
23 You had asked for a little bit of history, 24 Mr. Chairman, to set the stage.
I just wanted to review some 25 highlights of the history, and then I will ask Nelson to 4
10 1
olaborcto if the Ccamission wants to got into any moro dotail 2
[ Slide.]
3 You recall Browns Ferry units shut down in March.
4 They were shut down by TVA, not because of a direct formal 5
order from the NRC, but NRC had a number of concerns and they 6
agreed to not start up until these concerns were resolved.
7 The NRC did suggest they undertake a comprehensive readiness 8
review at Browns Ferry prior to start-up.
The principal 9
reasons for Browns Ferry shutdown, you recall, were related to 10 operational performance, and the low SALP ratings.
11 Later in March a number of allegations began to be 12 received by the Statt with regard to Watts Bar, and I think I 13 brieted the Commission on and off about some of the calls I i
14 have gotten.
Bill Dircks formed a senior management team in 15 April, we began to meet and make sure that we were following 16 and giving appropriate attention to these matters.
17 We had a meeting shortly thereafter with TVA about 18 the employee concerns, and that is when they started the 19 independent Employee Concern Program.
We sent the Commission 20 an enclosure, SECY 85-231, during the summer, and that's the 21 time at which Bill Dircks transmitted the Staff's position on 22 a number of issues to TVA.
23 Sequoyah, you recall, was shut down in August 1
24 because of EQ issues.
At the time they shut down, they shut 25 down because they were unable to satisfy the Commission's i
e-
11 1
roquiremonts with rogard to equipment qualification.
00 havo 2
made start-up now conditional on resolving other issues, such 3
as the ones that I have mentioned that came out of the 4
Employee Concern program.
5 I sent TVA a letter in September stating that we 6
wanted copies of all the K-forms and all the allegations and 7
the line responses and the ultimate resolution of the Employee 8
Concern program.
I have had the boxes brought up.
There were 9
five boxes that we have gotten of information so far that has 10 been generated out of the Employee Concern program, and we 11 will go into some of the results of that a little later today.
12 There have been numerous enforcement conferences and 13 orders issued by the Staff, meetings held.
We did provide the 14 Commission a detailed chronology in the memo we sent down on 15 December 27th.
16 I think in order to get into the presentation 17 directly, 11 we go to the slide about Sequoyah that is in your 18 handout and talk about the actions that are necessary before 19 Sequoyah could return to operation.
If I could have that 20 slide.
21 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Is that No. 4?
22 MR. DENTON:
Yes.
And I have passed out a number of 23 back-up slides this morning, and we will refer to those in the 24 individual presentations.
25
[ Slide.]
12 1
What I'd liko to do is tako those tivo activities, 2
and these are the major activities that are ongoing and have a 3
member of the senior management team or Hugh talk about each 4
one, talk about what the problem is, what the status of the 5
resolution of that issue is, and what actions we have underway 6
to resolve it, issue by issue, and I think there is so much 7
detail on each one of these, we could spend the entire 8
allotted time on any one of these five topics.
We are going 9
to try to just summarize for you the principal status of that 10 topic, and where its sticking points are.
11 I am going to have Hugh Thompson summarize the 12 Employee Concern program as it relates to Sequoyah, and that 13 we are doing there.
I will have Jim Taylor talk about the i
14 equipment qualification issue and our oversight and where that 15 stands, and have Nelson Grace discuss the remaining three 16 issues.
17 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Harold, perhaps just
?
13 before you get into the details of the individual elements, 11 19 you could talk a little bit about strategy or approach.
I 20 understand TVA's philosophy of Sequoyah first, they think that i
21 is the plant in the best shape, and most of the effort on 22 their part and, I guess, on ours seems to be going towards 23 Sequoyah.
And yet when I look at so many of the TVA issues, 24 they seem so interrelated.
You have the corporate issues that 25 seem to attect potentially all of the plants; and then you w-
13 1
havo issues that crop up in occh of the plants that also soom 2
to affect or have the potential to affect other plants.
-~
3 For example, the recent very high failure rate of 4
operators at Browns Ferry.
How are you going to assure 5
yourselves and us that you have enough of a grasp of all of 6
those issues to be able to say either they're resolved for
?
Sequoyah or they're not a problem for Sequoyah?
8 It almost seems to me you have to have a fairly 9
strong understanding of many of those operational issues at 10 Browns Ferry, many of the construction issues at Watts Bar, 11 before you can make a decision on Sequoyah.
12 MR. DENTON:
Well, I think it we could tell you what 13 we're doing, it would become clear how we are going about it.
14 There are, certainly, elements that have to be considered; the 15 high failure rate of the operators at Browns Ferry 16 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Quality assurance problems 17 at Watts Bar.
18 MR. DENTON:
Right.
19 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Lack of traceability.
20 MR. DENTON:
And the generic implications of the 21 Watts Bar employee concerns for Sequoyah.
And they are all 22 being considered, and you have to start somewhere to get the 23 briefing out, and I thought we would start with the Employee 24 Concern program.
1 25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Sure.
14 1
MR. DENTON:
But I did want to make it clocr, whon 1
2 Sequoyah shut down, they shut down because of EO.
That was 1
3 the predominant reason they shut down.
In starting up again, 4
we have linked a lot of other issues to that, and they keep 5
linking more as they turn up.
6 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Right.
7 MR. DENTON:
For example, we have decided we are 8
going to_ conduct the same sort of operator requalification 9
look using the simulator at Sequoyah in view of the high 10 tailure rate of operators at Browns Ferry.
So we are looking 11 at those things.
12 Corporate issues I was going to set aside just for a 13 moment, and it we could get into the Employee Concern Program, i
14 I think maybe that is the motherlode of a lot of concerns, and 15 maybe we,ought to spend just a few minutes here and have Hugh 16 tell you where that program stands for Watts Bar, and then how 17 we are extrapolating its implications over to Sequoyah.
18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Good.
19 MR. THOMPSON:
Thank you.
p 20 If I could have the back-up slide No. 3
- well, 21 that's all right, we can take that one first.
22
[ Slide.]
23 This is a general layout.
I think each of the 24 Commissioners have a general understanding of how the employee 25 concerns are processed at Watts Bar.
They have been reviewed l
15 I
and intorvicwod about 5000 individuals, and from that 5000, 2
they characterized the material goals from the OTC 3
organization down to the NSRS, where they are classified into 4
two or three basic categories.
5 One is safety-related.
Any of those that are 6
identified as saiety-related kind of gets treated on the 7
left-hand side of the program.
8 Those that are welding-related, since it is such a 9
significant issue, are identified in a separate group.
10 And then those which include intimidation and 11 harassment are categorized in two ways:
The technical aspect 12 of those are identified and written up and given to the 13 appropriate technical review activity, whereas the wrongdoing i
14 itself as it relates to the individuals is referred to their 15 Ottice of General Counsel. tor review.
16 And then there are others which typically are 17 non-safety-related activities which are also evaluated with 18 personnel safety.
19 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Now is this the correct 20 structure for handling these?
21 MR. THOMPSON:
This is a flow diagram which is just, 22 I think, a basic flow -- a very detailed procedure that is 23 used to evaluate the specifics, so 24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Is it changing?
25 MR. THOMPSON:
Well, each time TVA has an
1 16
'1 organizatienal roviGw, they try to, ono, onhanco it as wall as 2
look at the capabilities of streamlining.
One of the 3
processes they have is some of the delays that they are 4
experiencing in getting the investigation forms completed --
5 in essence, those -- they are evaluating different approaches 6
to get that completed right now.
7 MR. DENTON:
I know some of you may be unhappy with 8
the pace of our review of these,. compared to what we have done 9
in other mattirs, but look at the number of safety-related 10 allegations that have come up here for these three reactors.
11 There are about 2000, and Hugh has a slide.
12 MR. THOMPSON:
Yes, could we have the slide.
13
[ Slide.]
i 14 MR. DENTON:
And TVA has completed their 15 investigation of only about 20 percent of the safety-related 16 allegations to date, and it has not been our intent to get out 17 in front and take a position on an employee concern until TVA 18 has taken a position on a concern.
19 Of that 20 percent of those that they have completed 20 their own investigation, they have concluded that further 21 action is necessary on about half of them.
So you can tell 22 over 80 percent of these employee concerns are still kicking 23 around in their system.
2 24 Now there have been changes in who reports to who, 25 and there is internal dissent in some of these groups about
17 1
the adequacy of what's going on, but in general every 2
allegation generates a K-torm, and we get copies of every
(
3 K-form.
The K-forms then result in investigations and they 4
either verity or don't verify the allegation, and then it's 5
investigated, and then corrective action is proposed, and so 6
forth.
So they have a system, and we've done several 7
inspections of that system, and they are following their 8
procedures, the best we can t e l l.,
and we are fairly satisfied 9
that their procedures, 11 properly implemented, can lead to 10 successful correction of the issues.
11 Now we haven't been able to see how well they're 12 being implemented yet, because only 20 percent have actually 13 come out the bottom of the system somewhere, and half of those 14 are still requiring f ur tfa r follow-up.
But we have devoted 15 effort to making sure the system is working and in a 16 programmatic sense.
17 M"
THOMPSON:
That's right.
And when we are really 18 down to only some 40 of those whole items have been identified 19 where the corrective action has been really agreed to.
But we 20 are doing a kind of a parallel review of these K-torms.
We 21 have a contractor onboard who is looking and giving us 22 additional confidence that the cut that TVA is making is 23 similar to ours; that is, those which would have generic 24 applicability would be applicable to Sequoyah.
We are having 25 an independent review done of those, such that we will then be
18 1
able to have a check to evaluate how well TVA's process 2
evaluated, and the results of that is coming in now, and we r
3 have finished about half of our K-form evaluations.
4 Secondly --
5 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Wait a minute.
Don't you 6
have to look at all of them now?
I mean if you only look at 7
the ones that they decided do have generic applicability --
8 MR. THOMPSON:
No, no, we are looking at all of 9-them.
TVA is looking at all of them in parallel, That is, wo 10 are somewhat behind them.
We are looking at them in two 11 phases:
12 One, we look at the K-forms themselves.
That is, 13 the one sheet that kind of gives the --
14 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
The raw information.
15 MR. THOMPSON:
The raw information, and based on 16 whatever information is available, you may be able to 17 determine generic applicability up front.
18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Sure.
19 MR. THOMPSON:
That is, it it deals with a 20 procedure, construction activity, that was TVt. wide, right up 21 front you know it s a process that has potential applicability 22 to other plants.
23 Likewise, when you finish the detailed investigation 24 report, of which only 385 or so have been done, a reevaluation 25 is done at that time to see the details with more information
19 1
available, hcw applionblo that may be on your initial out.
2 The preliminary information we have from the individuals-at S
3 TVA who are doing this -- and we haven't done a detailed 4
inspection -- is that more information tends to make them more 5
plant-specific, rather than generic.
That is, to the extent 6
that they have done a number of these reviews based on the 7
detailed investigation reports, it provides, I guess, tower 8
generic applicability items rather than the other way around.
9 MR. DENTON:
There have been so far several hundred 10 allegations identified that are applicable to Sequoyah.
They 11 either came out specifically for Sequoyah as a result of the i
12 interviews, or they were identified by the TVA process as 13 having generic implications.
They have a program in which I
14 they look to see, did the Watts Bar allegation result from a 15 break-- or a misapplication of codes and standards, 16 procedures, and these kinds of things?
Does it have generio 17 application?
And so the TVA line has looked at every K-form 18 to see 11 it applies to Sequoyah and made a determination 19 using the criteria.
20 Then as the investigation gets completed, they look 21 back.
I think the point Hugh is making is an important one.
22 So far it appears that the investigation is not materially 23 increasing the number of ones that they have called generic.
1 24 But there are several hundred issues to be resolved on 25 Sequoyah, and the process has just begun within TVA to follow
J 20 1
up cn thoso, and that is ono reason that the timing of 2
Sequoyah restart is indeterminate.
They have just gone f
3 through this process and they have these several hundred 4
allegations now that are applicable to Sequoyah.
They have to 5
decide what does it mean for Sequoyah.
And I think they 6
intend about the middle of the mo' h to complete some sort at
?
review about what all they mean, plus additional K-forms are 8
still being generated.
Apparently there are still several 9
hundred more coming in.
10 11 12 13
(
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
.s 21 1
MR. THOMPSON:
The program they have set up now will 4
2 lead to several exit interviews.
At the Sequoyah site, you 3
know, there's a Sequoyah site-specific employee concern 4
program as well as the Watts Bar.
5 Could I have Slide 4?
6
[ Slide.]
7 As a part of the process, as you indicated, 8
Commissioner Asselstine, one of the concerns we had, in 9
addition to the identification of specifically which 10 particular employee concerns may have generic applicability, 11 was the aspect of, what is the criteria you are making to 12 evaluate which forms of which concerns must be evaluated prior 13 to restart?
(
14 We specifically addressed this to TVA in our 15 preliminary meetings on their response to the 50.54(fJ 1etter, 16 and further identified this as information that would be 17 needed by the Staff and by TVA, quite frankly, in providing 18 that out.
They provided some new information to us on 19 December 27th, which gave their internal procedure, as well as 20 the criteria which they were using to evaluate and make the 21 cut between those items that were safety-related that needed 22 to be resolved prior to startup, those that weren't 23 safety-related upon their review, as well as those which were 24 safety-related but could be resolved on a longer-term program.
25 From those, you can look at about three groups, and
22 1
they are divided into the first group which are those employee f
2 concerns specifically identified for Sequoyah.
3 Now their December 27th submittal -- and I don't 4
want to focus too much on numbers, because each day the 5
numbers change, and there's different ways to count numbers 6
but they have escentially identified 22 of those that needed 7
to be resolved prior to startup, which would be kind of looked 8
at in five basic categories:
in welding, configuration 9
control, the operational readiness, which we'll be' talking 10 about later, the supports and anchor bolts, one of the areas
=
11 that we had on the list, and just some general numbers.
12 Then with those that had potential generic 13 applicability, there were some 77 that they wanted to -- that 14 they identified as needing to be resolved.
Again, some of the 15 areas were the same:
welding, configuration control.
Some i
16 were environmental qualification issues like the transfer of 17 equipment from the Sequoyah site to the Watts Bar site and 18 making sure the documentation, which was in addition to the 19 environmental qualification issue that we're going to talk 20 about later -- operational readiness cables.
21 One of the bigger areas that they have identified 22 generic applicability, TVA-wide, is cable-pulling procedures 23 and controls, and again, that's one that clearly has 24 applicability cable trays, conduits.
And so those are 77, 25 at least as the count at the end of December or so, which will
e 23 1
probably be addressed in some 29 particular ways.
2 But in any event, they are a fairly large number 3
that will need to be resolved.
And then the employee concerns 4
identified through the employee the Sequoyah site-specific 5
that*s the program they have in place where the individuals 6
are concerned at Sequoyah, 11 they have a safety concern, to 7
come and identity it to their supervisors, which is again 8
where it's most appropriate to be done in the long term, and 9
welding again is one of the issues that's come up on those.
10 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Let me ask you the 11 difference between the employee concern program at the 12 Sequoyah site and the employee concern program at Watts Bar.
r 13 My impression was that the Watts Bar employee 14 concern program got started because a survey that TVA had done 15 early last year had indicated there was a sizeable percentage 16 of employees at Watts Bar that simply said, "It we knew about 17 safety concerns, we wouldn't bring them to our supervisor, and 18 we wouldn't bring them to anybody in the TVA line 19 organization."
And it was that lack of confidence that 20 employees telt able to bring safety concerns to their 21 supervisors that led to the employee concern program and that 22 led to, in essence, mandatory QTC interviews at employees at 23 the site.
24 Now I take it at Sequoyah, they have not done that 25 kind of thorough interviewing of employees by an independent
. ~. - - _
a i
24 1
group, such that 11 employees had the same kinds of concerns t
f 2
at Sequoyah that they clearly had at Watts Bar, that they 3
would identify those safety concerns.
4 Is that a fair characterization?
5 MR. DENTON:
Yes.
We talked about this within the 6
senior management team.
Of course, Sequoyah has been 7
operating for five years, the oldest unit, and the people 8
there today are operational people.
They don't really have 9
many construction people.
10 It seems to us that the approach that TVA is taking 11 is a reasonable approach.
That is, they interview the Watts 12 Bar people.
Anything that has a generic implication, they
.(
13 have kicked over, and there are some of these that are on the 14 side.
Plus they've generated some site-specific.
15 But it is true that they have not interviewed 16 everybody engaged in the construction of Sequoyah.
They 17 won't complete the investigation of the Watts Bar concerns 18 until perhaps June.
So 11 you really wanted to wait for 19 resolution of Just the Watts Bar concerns b e i c.t e making a 20 judgment on Sequoyah, that would be after June.
21 But it does seem as though they have reasonably 22 extrapolated back, and if you look at their criteria for 23 taking a Watts Bar concern back to Sequoyah, it does look like 24 a reasonable basis for doing that.
And I guess so far, we 25 have not concluded that they need to mount the same sort of l
1
f-25 1
program at Sequoyah and at Browns Ferry to go into these.
2 But it will be interesting to see what comes out of wh' ether 3
these.
To some extent, we'll have to wait and see 4
these concerns that are over there now and there are 200 or 5
so over there -- do turn out to be verified and require 6
corrective action or not.
7 I guess there are several that we've hit.
8 Jim, you might want to mention cable sizing.
9 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Bending.
10 MR. DENTON:
I understand cable pulling, 11 instrument line slopes.
There are a number of things which de 12
-a ppe a r to be TVA generic problems and are going to require 13 correction of the hardware in all their facilities, and that's
(
14 part of their program.
15 MR. TAYLOR:
Yes.
If I may have backup Slide 7,
16 please?
17 LSlide.]
18 This is just one very specific area that TVA has 19 looked at and has found applicable and necessary to pursue at 20 Sequoyah.
This is literally the changes to the many, many 21 electrical and distribution circuits and the maintenance of 22 the voltage drop capabilities, so that on the various 23 depressed voltage conditions on buses, you can still operate "4
the equipment.
It*s that type of thing, and it involves their 25 review of all the changes, because the concern is that they*ve
l 26 1
lost track, through the calculational approach of design, of l
(
2 the various contributions to the voltage drops, and these are 3
very complex circuits.
4 Well, to give you an idea of the magnitude of this 5
effort, when we met with TVA several weeks ago, we were quite 6
concerned about this, because it could mean pulling cable; it 7
could mean dorating buses you know, changes in the plant of 8
some significance.
9 They told us that this effort -- I believe the 10 number that I recall was going to take about 8000 man-hours of 11 engineering work when we talked to the Engineering people at 12 TVA, so this is a very significant -- just one singular effort 13 that we will be reviewing very carefully as they proceed to do 14 this.
That a essentially four man-years of engineering 15 effort to go back through.
4 16
[ Slide.]
17 The next slide 18 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
Before you get away from this 19 one, you've got to satisfy that requirement.
20 MR. TAYLOR:
Yes.
21 COMPISSIONER ZECH:
I mean, you know, you've got to 22 make sure that tiis is that we're confident that the 23 electrical calculations are satisfactory.
24 MR. TAYLOR:
Yes.
We will be going in to review 25 this work.
27 1
The next page gives you an idea just in a little 2
more detail of some of the circuitry and calculations that 3
they're back into.
This is a TVA schedule.
The schedule is 4
kind of tight, but we will be going to -- back in to take a 5
look at how this has been done before we're satisfied that 6
they've completed this work adequately.
7 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
Do you think that schedule is 8
realistic?
9 MR. TAYLOR:
Personally, I don't.
10 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
It doesn't look very realistic 11 to me.
12 MR. DENTON:
I think it*s already slipped.
f 13 MR. THOMPSON:
I think some of the initial dates 14 that were to be completed on Christmas Eve have come into an 15 early January date already.
16 But I would say, like Jim Taylor was saying, we're 17 going to look at this from a programmatic aspect up front.
18 We're not going to wait until the program is completed before 19 we look at it to make sure it we have any problems, they're 20 identified early, and that will be done -- we're scheduling 21 that review very shortly.
22 MR. TAYLOR:
Yes.
23 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Jim, let me ask you, 24 though, look at Slide 12 for a moment, and assume for the 25 moment that those things are accurate, NSRS Staff perceptions
38 1
of Watts Bar construction problems.
2 Which of those items doesn*t have at least 3
potentially generic applications for the other plants?
Don't 4
all of them?
Don't you have to satisfy yourself that 5
essentially every one of those construction questions 6
MR. TAYLOR:
Those that are specific may or may
?
not.
For example, instrument line installations.
That 8
depends upon the crews.
There is a lot of skill and slope.
9 This is for the accuracy, and you take a conservative view, so 10 that would I don't know whether that specific one has yet 1*1 been identified by TVA as having applicability, whether the 12 crews were the same, were the tittings supplied the same.
(
13 They have a problem with several different types of tittings.
14 So until we complete our review of the applicability 15 of items that are being identified at Watts Bar, I can't 16 answer that on some of these specifics.
17 COMMISSIONRR ZECH:
But you've got to look at all of 18 them and make a judgment, it seems to me.
I 19 MR. TAYLOR:
We've got to look and see how they're 20 transposing.
That's one of the things that we've got 21 that's why I think Harold was telling you -- we've got a lot 22 of work on Sequoyah as a Statt to satisfy ourselves that the 23 process is working, j
24 MR. DENTON:
But basically TVA has a program to 25 identity the generic applications, and we*ve done several
,+-- -,,,,.
n_ w --
-.,-.n_.,--.-e---.-
n.
29 1
inspections of that program, and it seems to be working.
/
2 Now so far they have kicked over several hundred of 3
them to Sequoyah, and when they get kicked over, then they get 4
risolved on Sequoyah.
S' It*s a little different approach, though.
We are 6
-going down the line of relying so far on their program, rather 7
than saying, "You*ve got to assume that every one is 8
applicable," because out of that 2000, there are ones which 9
are very specitio to Watts Bar, and their program is 10 identifying them, and we're monitoring that program.
11 But it is not -- we're not taking the view that all 12 2000 are applicable to Watts Bar.
They have a program that
/
13 identities those that are.
And a lot of them are.
14 MR. TAYLOR:
And I think if you read the individual 15 K sheets, you know, you hear about a defective weld on the 16 second level of a building or 17 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
But you'll have to look at the 4
18 major issues that you have listed here, certainly, I would 19 think, ana satisfy yourselves that there's not problems.
20 MR. DENTON:
That's right.
And that's why when we 21 talk about schedules 22 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
Or 11 there are problems, 11 23 there*s any doubt about it, you*11 have to get into it.
24 MR. DENTON:
So it we could go back to Item 4 on the 25 slide, these are the ones these are just the areas.
Now
30 1
they might have a lot of specific allegations under them, like t
2 welding.
I know there are several dozens of specific 3
allegations that are applicable to Sequoyah.
4 So when we talk about schedules, I just think it*s
~
5 unrealistic to talk about scheduling until TVA has completed 6
their look to see, what does this allegation mean for
?
Sequoyah?
And we're having a meeting this afternoon, for 8
example, just on welding, and what does it mean for Watts Bar 9
and Sequoyah?
10 We don't want to give as I say, we can bog down 11 on the first area, and we've got fifteen more like this to 12 cover.
(
13 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Let me ask you one other 14 broad question, though.
Is there another category of 15 potential issues for Sequoyah?
And that is, my impression is 16 that one of the weaknesses in the TVA organization is a lack 17 of communication and feedback of information.
18 If that's correct, don't you also have to look at 19 the changes that were made from Sequoyah to Watts Bar, the 20 changes that they made themselves, to determine whether 21 changes in the design were needed because of problems that 22 they had identified, to determine whether those problems, in 23 fact, got corrected at Sequoyah?
24 Now I'm talking about the evolution from Sequoyah 25 to Watts Bar, and I'm under the impression there were a number
31 1
of changes in the design of the plant or the construction of 2
the plants, to make sure that issues that w9re identified and 3
corrected for Watts Bar were also corrected or addressed for 4
Sequoyah.
5 It almost seems to me that that*s a second 6
category.
It*s the other side of the coin.
On the one hand, 7
you have the problems at Watts Bar, to make sure they're not 8
also present at Sequoyah.
The other is, where they did fix 9
things for Watts Bar, to make sure that they did t i, x them at 10 Sequoyah as well 11 MR. DENTON:
Well, there are design differences due 12 to the age of the plant.
Watts Bar does have some design
(
13 features that Sequoyah doesn*t.
\\
14 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I think that*s mixing apples 15 and oranges in a sense, it seems to me.
Are you talking 16 about plant evolution and design changes?
That*s one 17 element.
Or something that you 18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Design changes due to 19 problems that you 20 COMMISSIONED BERNTHAL:
Well, but in a sense, there 21 are many design changes taking place in plants over the last 22 fifteen years, which in a sense are a response to perceived 23 need for improvement.
24 MR. DENTON:
I don *t think we we were focuuing on 25 that aspect.
The plant, in broad aspects, is not that t
}
32 1
dissimilar from other operating similar plants, such as e
2 Maguire or Catswba.
I mean, they're Westinghouse plants with 3
ice condenser containments.
4 MR. TAYLOR:
I might point out, too, that the 5
company is under the obligation of the regulations with regard 6
to identification of anything in the design of Sequoyah that
?
might have safety significance, you know, under the Part 21 8
and reporting criteria.
9 I1 they find that something is, you know, under 10 design and it has safety significance, we've dealt with TVA on 11 that subject.
And so, you know, they are required to first 12 correct it and report it it the condition exists on Sequoyah.
[
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I don't want to stifle 14 discussion, but let me encourage that we try to give the Statt 15 a chance to cover as many of these items as they can and try 16 to restrain our questions as much as possible.
17 MR. DENTON:
We wanted to spend a little bit of 18 time, and I think it's been useful, on the employee concern 19 program, because that is likely to be one of the major factors 20 atteoting restart dates.
Until these issues do get resolved 21 satisfactorily, there is no intent to return to operation.
22 The second one that I think falls right in the same 23 category, and what was the original reason that the plant shut 24 down, was MQ.
25 Jim, could you summarize for us where that stands?
l
33 1
MR. TAYLOR:
Yes.
It we may have Slide 5,
please.
(
2
[ Slide.]
3 As you may recall, TVA had Westeo do an audit, an 4
internal audit of where they s.tood in equipment qualification I guess'that was during the summer 5
and then decided that 6
that was the basis on which they should shut down the Sequoyah 7
units.
8 In follow-on to that, with NRR in the lead, this 9
being principally from the licensing review standpoint, the 10 Statt, working with NRR, conducted a review of where they 11 stood technically back in November.
We wanted to do that to 12 establish sort of a baseline, working out of what Westec had 13 identified to them, to.make sure that where they had things 14 already in hand, that they were ott on the right track.
And 15 then basically that inspection in November indicated a lot of 16 open issues and open items for about 20 or so of the packages 17 that were complete.
They looked in good shape.
18 The Stati reviewed those very carefully, but with 19 the clearcut indication that a follow-up, which would shift y
20 heavily to the inspection side for more field verification, 21 would be coming.
That follow-up started this Monday.
We're 22 down with about eleven people -- NRR, IE, Region II, and 23 Sandia, experienced contractor assistance in the Q area.
24 There are -- we anticipate that there are more 25 packages complete.
That number has been changing.
There is a
30 1
slide on it.
But we expect that we can get through quite a r
2 bit of the material for the packages that are complete, that
.. r.
o 3
there are no outstanding testing 1.ssues to keep some of the 4
packages open.
We're going to be doing walkthroughs to verity 5
the traceability of the equipment to the technical 6
information.
We'll be making sure that they have a program in 7
place to maintain equipment qualitioation to their repair and 8
maintenance oyole.
9 There has been an awful lot of work at TVA in the EQ 10 area in the past couple of months.
They've been into most of 11 the motor-operated valves.
We'll be going in on a selective 12 basis into the motor-operated valves.
i 13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Are you looking into their 14 documentation as you go along?
15 MR. TAYLOR:
Yes.
Well, that's one of the ettorts 16 that will be going on.
17 I should say that we're putting in considerably more 18 ettort than we have with a Licensee where things have been 19 more stable.
So we hope to be able to give you a good story this is a two-week inspection, but we do expect 20 at the end 21 to have to go back.
There are some outstanding issues.
22 There's some testing going on this week at a lab in North 23 Carolina, and we have vendor EQ folks down witnessing parts of 24 that testing.
25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Is this Wyley?
35 1
MR. TAYLOR:
No.
This is I think it's CCL, but I t
2 can't remember the lab name.
3 But there has been continuing testing, and as Harold 4
mentioned, 11 that testing turns on SAT, it could have further 5
implications for work on the plant.
But we expect to have to 6
go back certainly in a few weeks as they begin to finish all 7
this.
8 MR. DENTON:
These are tests connected with the 9
rockbestos cables, and as you recall, we*ve had problems with 10 that type of design over the years, and they were not able to 11 find that the cable had been qualified anywhere for use 12 anywhere else in the country, and that*s why they're running 13 their own test on it.
14 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
What*s the situation on 15 cable traceability?
If the cable is not qualified and needs 16 to be replaced, does TVA know where it is?
Is it all 17 documented and identified, so they could go out and find it?
18 MR. TAYLOR:
That question has to do with the cable 19 pull slip thing.
I think that*s in much better shape at 20 Sequoyah than has occurred at some of the older plants.
21 MR. DENTON:
Well, these two issues, I think, are 22 going to be the pacing items, and either one of them could 23 turn up problems that require a long time to resolve.
24 We are very aggressively looking at both of them.
25 Let me have Nelson now talk about several others,
36 1
some of which came up out of our own inspections and other
?
2 sources.
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Just before we leave EQ, 4
let me ask a historical question.
What was the first evidence, say, within the TVA 6
organization that there were programmatic problems with the EQ 7
program?
8 MR. DENTON:
I guess you'd have to ask TVA.
9 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Was it the Westeo report?
10 MR. THOMPSON:
Well, if you look 11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Well, let me put it this 12 way.
When was the first time that we saw evidence that there
(
13 was a programmatic problem with the EQ program, and what was 14 that evidence?
Was it our inspection?
15 MR. THOMPSON:
Well, we did an audit for the Watts 16 Bar inspection in February of
'84, where we identified a 17 number of programmatic activities, particularly with respect 18 to documentation, that they said, "Oh, yes, the documentation 19 is there.
We've just got to go get it."
And we said, "Well, 20 obviously before you get a license, you know, you have to have 21 those packages.
And by the way, you*d better look at it for 22 your other programs."
23 So we do have, if you want I see Bob LaGrange 24 here.
25 Bob, did we have an earlier view other than the
37 1
February timeframe?
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I take it we did not know 3
about the NSES Report in 1983?
4 MR. LaGRANGE:
No, we did not, Mr. Commissioner.
5 The first indication we had of any significant problem with 6
the way TVA was conducting its EQ program was the results of 7
the Watts Bar audit we performed for licensing that plant.
8 Frankly, that was in the worse shape of any plant that we had 9
over audited from NRR.
10 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
What did we do about 11 Sequoyah at that time, anything?
12 MR. LaGRANGE:
Sequoia at that time, that was
(
13 back in the timeframe when we were completing meetings with 14 the whole group of licensees for which Franklin had reviewed 15 their EQ documentation, prepared those TER*s that have been 16 discussed at some. length.
17 We met with TVA to discuss the Browns Ferry and 18 Sequoyah deficiencies and their corrective actions and frankly 19 expected them to apply the knowledge they had gained as a 20 result of the Watts Bar experience, but apparently it didn*t 21 happen.
22 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Feed back the information 23 frem the other plants.
They didn*t do it?
24 MR. LaGRANGE:
No.
25 MR. THOMPSON:
Mr. Commissioner, you might remember,
38 i
Browns Ferry is one of the plants that we identified early as w
2 an EQ problem to the Commission and is in fact the one that we 3
identified that were not prepared from the Staff *s viewpoint 4
to support start-up.
I guess it was one of my first 5
Commission briefings that I remember back in April of 1985, 6
but that was one that we identified.
If my memory serves me
?
right, it was that the Staff *s initial response was even some 8
time before that.
I think we have been on the record that 9
there are EQ programmatic problems in various TVA facilities 10 for some time.
11 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I would just say I have a 12 very clear recollection of the first time I ever sat at this
(
13 table and listened to a Staff brioting on EQ, of the 14 Commission.
I guess all the Commission sitting here today, 15 with the exception perhaps of the Admiral on the other end of 16 the table, sitting here and looking at the numbers that 17 suggested that TVA had serious equipment qualification 18 problems.
19 I also recall very clearly that one or two 20 Commissioners commented on that serious problem and noted that 21 TVA was generally perceived as being a very strong 22 organization anu yet here they were, by our Staff *s own 23 figures, in the. worse shape of any utility in the country on 24 equipment qualification.
25 The Staff certainly presented those data to the
39 1
Commission.
I don't recall any great cry at the table here 2
among Commissioners that something had to be done immediately 3
about the TVA equipment qualification program.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I do think that helped 5
contribute to our decision to go ahead and try to get after 6
utilities to cope with the EQ problem.
7 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
The point I am making is TVA 8
was so far out of line with any other utility in the country, 9
and comments were made by one or two members of the 10 Commission.
The Staff clearly knew it.
The numbers were 11 there.
It was there for the world to see.
Why those problems 12 weren*t addressed oy an organization of some 30,000 strong is 13 a question that may need to be answered.
It's certainly not 14 from a lack of understanding or information, either on the 15 part of the Commission or on the part of the NRO Staff.
16 MR. THOMPSON:
Mr. Eisenhut, did you want to add 17 something?
18 MR. EISENHUT:
I was just going to somewhat second 19 that comment.
The observation was as we went through all the 20 briefings over the last year now in EQ, where we singled out 21 anywhere from five to ten plants, if I am not mistaken, Browns 22 Perry and Sequoyah units had been highlighted for at least a 23 year.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That's right.
25 MR. EISENHUT:
In fact, where we put the numbers up,
40 1
at one point we put the number I forget the terminology we f-2 used, but it was an unique set of terminology in terms of 3
actual types of equipment.
I think that goes back for about a 4
year that we have been doing that.
Of the ten plants, five of 5
them were TVA and have been ever since the inception of where 6
we cranked through the program.
7 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That*s right, although as 8
I recall, much of the focus was on very large numbers of items 9
still outstanding, whereas what we began to learn, I think, 10 when we saw the Sequoyah problem this year, was that not only 11 lcrge numbers of items outstanding, but a fundamental problem 12 throughout the program in terms of those items that they i
13 thought were qualified.
14 MR. EISENHUT:
I think we also pointed out it was a 15 major programmatic problem at TVA in the EQ area.
16 MR. DENTON:
It always seems like the thrust of the 17 question is why didn*t we fix it back then, well, we were busy 18 fixing EQ at every plant, they were an outline and they would 19 eventually be fixed.
I think TVA is on a road now to resolve 20 the EQ program.
It*s just a question of whether these last 21 tests will turn out proper or not.
I think we have our arms 22 around it, TVA has their arms around it.
It may take more 23 time than they would like to really resolve it, but at least 24 it now has a focus on their attention.
25 One point I wanted to make, Commissioner, you asked
41 1
did we see the earlier report.
We did not get, nor do we get 2
from any utility routinely, internal audit reports.
You asked 3
did we see it.
I said no.
I shouldn't answer that no member 4
of the NRC Sta'if anywhere ever saw it, because I don't know 5
whether an inspector may have read it.
We didn*t require NSRS 6
reports at that timeirame to be submitted to the Staff. NSRS 7
was an internal audit group, somewhat like,o u r OIA at that 8
time, and they report to TVA management.
9 I think you find throughout these whole TVA issues, 10 there were a number of people with different professional 11 opinions about technical matters within TVA that were 12 elevating them through various channels.
Some we knew about 13 and some we didn't.
It is only now that we have all these 14 simmering professional disputes that have surfaced in their 15 context, and some of them have been around for a long time.
16
[ Commissioner Roberts re-entered the meeting.]
17 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
You are right, we did not 18 require and still do not require that the NSRS Reports be 19 provided, although the impression I get is that it is a mixed 20 bag.
Some of the NSRS Reports, I understand, were given to 21 the NRC, in fact, given to senior offi.ials in Region II.
22 Some were destroyed.
Some were returned.
Some were 23 provided.
I don't know whether this one talls in that 24 category or not.
At least on my recent visit, I was told that 25 a couple of the fairly significant reports in the mid-1980*s
42 1
that identified some of the significant QA programs were 2
provided to the Deputy Administrator of Region II, and were 3
reviewed by him and subsequently either destroyed or returned.
4 MR. DENTON:
Nelson, would you like to address that?
5 MR. GRACE:
Yes.
I understand these were reports on 6
the management at TVA.
?
COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
The construction program 8
at Watts Bar and the construction program at Bellefonte?
9 MR. GRACE:
- Again, I'm afraid this was five years 10 before my time.
I can't comment on that.
11 MR. DENTON:
It's clearly not a license condition.
12 I guess 11 the Commission wished us to routinely get them,
(
13 other than in the allegation program, where we have asked for 14 them.
15 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Are we getting them now?
16 MR. THOMPSON:
We have asked for all NSES Reports to 17 be sent to the management team that relate to safety i s.s u e s,
18 and for past NSRS Reports, we have asked by summary 19 disposition of how those issues were resolved, 11 they related 20 to safety issues.
This is only for the TVA plants that we 21 have done that for.
22 MR. DENTON:
Maybe it would be worth for just a 23 moment to talk about this issue in a broader context.
We have 24 at some other plants asked for copies of internal audits when 25 we found out they existed and we were interested. The other
43 e
i side of the coin is that the latility says, well, if I knew you 7
2 were going to get involved ev try time I had a study done on 3
how to improve it, you are going to have a chilling effect on 4
my ability to go out and seek hard hitting studies.
We often 5
face that issue on trying to get what are internal audits that 6
are intended to improve performance.
I don't think we have 7
ever really adopted an uniform position on that.
We really 8
encourage utilities to do hard hitting audits on their 9
operations to try to improve it, but 11 we get it in the front 10 door through a requirement, the management says, why should I 11 continue to do that.
12 Let's spend a little time on the design control 13 survey, cable support issues, and the operational readiness 14 plan.
15
[ Slide.]
16 MR. DENTON:
These are not all the activities.
17 These are some of the major activities that are going on.
18 MR. GRACE:
The next viewgraph, please.
19
[ Slide.]
20 MR. GRACE:
In the cable tray support area, we have 21 done an inspection at Browns Ferry and found some deficiencies 22 in their analyses of the seismic capability.
Based on that 23 finding at Browns Ferry, and this was in early August, the 24 very next week, we sent our inspection team to Sequoyah, to 25 see 11 similar problems existed there.
44 1
As a result of the inspection, there were two f
2 violations found.
One was again in the seismic analysis.
3 They had left out one component of the seismic acceleration.
4 Another problem within the drilling of holes for some bolts, 5
the holes were oversized.
We didn't find any programmatic 6
breakdown.
These were isolated examples.
7 TVA had initiated some corrective actions.
They did 8
re-analyze the seismic performance of the cable tray supports 9
and found they were adequate as designed.
The analysis then 10 was more complete to demonstrate that.
No hardware changes 11 were necessary.
The other item was corrected by putting 12 spacers in the holes that had been drilled too large.
The 13 problems went away and we considered those violations closed 14 and the whole issue closed for the time being, unless this 15 issue comes up again as a result of employee concerns or 16 whatever.
17 Do you want me to go on with these other areas?
18 MR. DENTON:
Yes.
19 MR. GRACE:
In the design control area, TVA, to 20 their credit, had taken the initiative to replace their 21 engineering procedures with an engineering program corrective 22 manual in June, late June.
Then they wrote a site --
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Excuse me.
Which slides are 24 you talking about?
25 MR. GRACE:
These are not in this package.
45 1
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you.
I won't look for
('
2 them.
3 MR. GRACE:
I will provide copies.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
That is okay.
I just didn't 5
want to spend my time looking for them and not listening.
6 MR. GRACE:
Because of these changes that they had 7
done, and they were quite extensive, we thought we had better 8
take a look to see 11 it was adequate.
We found some minor 9
deficiencies but no programmatic breakdown.
10 The changes in issuing these new manuals were 11 motivated primarily by the large number of procedures they 12 had, the overlapping nature of the procedures and the poor 13 proposition and writing of the procedures.
They weren't very 14 useful.
This whole effort was a positive thing.
We were 15 satisfied with the result.
16 They had engaged Gilbert Commonwealth to look at 17 design control for TVA in October.
They found a few issues, a 18 tow findings as well.
TVA has committed to resolve them.
19 Again, these were not major programmatic breakdowns.
20 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Could you describe how 21 extensive the Gilbert -- all I have seen is the reference to 22 this Gilbert Commonwealth survey.
How extensive a review was 23 done to determine the adequacy of design control during 24 construction?
25 MR. GHACE:
Let me ask for help on that from Dave or
o 4G 1
Roger Walker.
I 2
MR. WALKER:
Commissioner, the original Gilbert 3
Commonwealth study did not focus on adequacy of design control 4
during construction.
It focused on improving their design 5
control process.
They had three recommendations.
As you 6
probably know, one of them was the need for reliable 7
information on plant configuration for engineering personnel, 8
which is the one that is most troublesome to us; the need for 9
increased emphasis on the documentation at design inputs, 10 which is not an uncommon finding; the requirements for 11 completed design work to be reviewed for potential safety 12 questions.
In addition, the review team recommended program 13 enhancement.
14 Subsequent to that, because of the concerns from us, 15 that they did not look backward, they have hired Gilbert 16 Commonwealth to do a backward look.
They will be looking at 17 the engineering change notices for that facility and determine 18 on a sampling basis what they feel about the original design 19 control process.
That has not been completed.
It will be, as 20 I understand it, in the process of getting some of the output 21 from that review in the late January timeframe, and we do not 22 expect a final report -- I will let TVA speak for itself --
23 until some time in March.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTIME:
That would go back to the 25 construction process?
e 47 1
MR. WALKER:
As I understand it, that would go back
(-
2 at least to establish that design controls at least from 3
construction on and into the construction area were adequate.
4 How far back, I do not know.
We have not received their 5
proposal yet in a formal fashion.
6 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
At least so far, you don't 7
see a concrete program that looks back now into the 8
construct. ion process to see how well design control functioned 9
during construction, it is post-construction?
10 MR. WALKER:
We won't know anything until they 11 submit it to us.
12 MR. GRACE:
The renewed Gilbert Commonwealth effort 13 just got underway December 23rd.
We will be looking at their 14 program and the scope of it as well as doing some 15 re-inspection, follow-up inspections after it is done.
16 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Let me tell you a generic 17 concern I have about these efforts and the degree of 18 coordination.
It applies to welding and to this and some 19 others as well 20 It TVA goes and hires a contractor and starts one of 21 these major efforts, does the review, and then we look at it 22 essentially when the thing gets done, isn't there a real 23 potential at that point that what we are likely to say, say in 24 design control review, they do this review, it focuses from 25 the time basically of completion of the plant forward, and
48 1
then we come in and say, hey, there is a generic issue here 7_ m
\\
2 that we derive from the Watts Bar experience that says there 3
is a real question about design control during the 4
construction process, and you didn't do it right, and now you 5
have to go hire another contractor and go back and re-do the 6
contract all over again, and in essence, come in with another
?
rock.
8 One of the concerns I have is are we involved enough 9
in saying, here is what the issue is, and here is what you 10 need to do to give us the information that is going to resolve 11 the issue one way or the other, before TVA goes out and lets 12 one of these major contracts, so we are not in the process
(
13 after the work is done, literally months down the road, of 14 saying, you didn't do it right, you have to go back and do it 15 over again.
The same thing applies to the welding issue, I 16 think.
17 Are we all straight on the ground rules of these 18 things so that they understand what information we need to be 19 able to say these issues are resolved?
20 MR. DENTON:
Let me try to answer that with welding, 21 for example.
Welding at Watts Bar, although it has 22 implications for others -- let's go to Slide 13, for example.
23
[ Slide.]
24 MR. DENTON:
We have taken all the K Forms that have 25 been shipped to us in those boxes and categorized them by the
49 1
area of concern.
Slide 13 shows the way they brerkdown,
('
a 2
There are 293 concerns that have been raised in the system 3
about welding.
You can see that TVA har investigated a small 4
fraction of those and ccme to some conclusion.
We are not 5
just sitting idly by waiting for them.
If you turn to Slide 6
14, we have put together a panel of experts to help us review 7
what their plan is.
8
[ Slide.]
9 MR. DENTON:
I think the first meeting that involves 10 Mr. Czajkowski and some others, is this afternoon.
Where it 11 appears that we ought to get heavy in, we do, but we are not 12 taking the view that on every one of these issues, we need to 13 get that involved.
We really don't have the horse power to 14 manage an engineering operation of this size, like cable tray 15 sizing.
I don't see the need for us to try to s t<a e r TVA on 16 every one of these technical issues, but where we think there 17 is a reason to, we do.
18 Let me have B.D.
Liaw, who is heading up the review 19 of the welding issue, say a few words about how we are 20 exercising oversight of their plans there.
They have gone to 21 EG&G as a contractor.
22 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I think welding is a good 23 example.
It is an example where at least my impressions are I
24 that B.D.
and the Statt has been saying, let's have a meeting 25 of the minds up front on what the standard is, what these 4
50 1
t'tinos were supposed to built to, and what we are going to l'
2 ludge these welds by, and then let's make sure that the 3
contract works in a way that verifies that standard is met, 4
and quit playing games and don't try to change standards or 5
come in later on with some code committee rationale that tries 6
to change the ground rules.
?
MR. LONTON:
I think you are bordering on changing 8
the normal reactive role.
We have to wait until TVA says, 9
here is what we want our contractor to do, and when they are 10 ready, we will tell them.
We have not tried to de TVA's work 11 in this area.
12 MR. THOMPSON:
There is a slight difference there, 13 Commissioner Asselstine, as evaluating the program before it 14 is implemented as opposed to developing the program for them.
15 I think we are monitoring those areas that are important, at 16 least that is how I view my role, my new role, to make 17 recommendations and work with the team, as to what those 18 particular areas are.
For instance, in the design control 19 area for the backwards look, we are going to request a 20 program, when TVA has it developed, in order to review it 21 before they go through the effort to implement it.
That will 22 be done.
It is not like we are sitting back at the last 23 minute saying when the last "i" is dotted and the "t"
is 44 crossed and the report is issued -- before we get in there.
25 MR. DENTON:
I think we are in there on Sequoyah.
51 1
We are not in there as much on the other plants because it is
('
2 not the number one priority.
You will find the Stati is 3
putting in two or three times as much effort as we would a 4
normal plant on Sequoyah and then some proportional effort on 5
the other plants.
This one is receiving a lot of attention.
6 We would be diverting a lot of resources awr:r from other 7
operating plants.
I guess that is already beginning to occur 8
in Region II, away from Turkey Point and Brunswick, as we 9
begin to drain and tilt resources into this problem.
10 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I would just like to point 11 out again that TVA is an organization, an (ederal orgtnization 12 that is ten times the size of this Agency.
This may be a
(
13 wounded giant right now, but it is still a giant.
They have 14 engineering expertise down there and engineering talent and 15 experience that is deep and has beso strong for years.
If 16 there is a problem in management, then that is a difficulty 17 that seems rather hard for this Agency to come up against.
18 The thing I agree with you on, Jim, that we must do 19 for TVA, as we do for any other utility, is to make sure that 20 it we have specific procedures that relate to hardware 21 concerns in bringing a plant on line or perhaps in the case of 22 Sequoyah, in answering questions as to its construction or EQ 23 or whatever it might be, that we have to be sure that vre do 24 our work there in a timely manner.
25 This idea that somehow the NRC should tell TVA how
52 1
to manage what is a huge Federal agency, it seems to me that
,e 2
is an illusion.
That is not our job and we are not going to i
3 be able to do that.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
B.'D.?
5 MR. LIAW:
Let me just say a few words.
As you all 6
know, this has plagued the industry for several years now.
It 7
started with Zimmer, Wolf Creek, Comanche Peak.
When the 8
problem started with TVA/ Watts Bar, Mr. Denton recognized the 9
potential that this might broaden to another Zimmer.
At the 10 earliest stage, he directed me to organize this effort.
That 11 is number one.
12 Number two, when we get involved in TVA/ Watts Bar
(
13 issues, first, we wanted to make sure that TVA understood what 14 problems they had before they came to talk to us.
One time 15 they attempted to come in to talk to us about a sampling 16 program and we thought that was inappropriate because at that 17 time, they had not even completed the employee concern 18 program.
There was some issues back and forth between the 19 contractor and the NSRS Staff.
As a result, we refused to 20 talk to them.
21 Further, we insisted that they understand the issue 22 and bring the contractor in, and engags with us at an early 23 stage, to understand criteria they were going to use for 24 re-ir.spection.
From my conversation with my counterpart in 25 TVA, most likely they will come in this attornoon to discuss i
e m
-w.
,, - ~ _
rm.s-
--y m
w ywr w y
er m
uw--
53 1
the approach, philosophy, and then they will go back to 2
develop a detailed program plan for re-inspection, to validate 3
the welding.
I understand they intend to submit a detailed 4
program plan for Statt approval.
I guess that would satisfy 5
whatever concern you might have. COMMISSIONER 6
ASSELSTINE:
It strikes me that that is the right way to go.
7 It strikes me that is likely now to proceed on an effective 8
basis because of the staff *s involvement, that it the stati 9
had not gotten involved and said, "Let*s understand what the 10 issues are."
You, TVA, tell us what the issues are and tell 11 us how your program is going to address them and make sure 12 that everybody understands what the standard is that the welds
/
13 were supposed to be none to, what the acceptance criteria are 14 going to be and that there is now this verification program 15 that will provide that information at the outset up front, 16 that is the right way to go.
17 Having somebody in the staff and somebody in TVA 18 that is responsible and accountable for that issue is 19 precisely the right way to go.
20 I guess the biggest question I have is why that 21 isn*t the approach that we should be taking for every one of 22 the major, at least the major issues.
23 MR. DENTON:
I think it is resource restraints.
24 Mr.
Liaw is also working on BWR pipe cracks and a lot of other 25 mechanical issues and we have taken him off those.
54 1
(SLIDE.)
{
2 MR. DENTON:
It we go to slide 11, this shows the 3
scope of the areas of employee concerns at Watts Ear.
4 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
5 MR. DENTON:
We pick and chose our targets out of 6
this.
Welding is clearly a big area and we have it.
In 7
cables, we have some in-house capability we are looking at but 8
if the Commission wishes more resources, I guess we could 9
always put them in but so far the three offices involved have 10 been able to commit the resources we think that is required.
11 It we go much heavier, we will have to start drawing 12 resources out of other programs and other regions to follow
/
13 this project more heavily.
14 I guess I would hope that the changes in management 15 that are occurring will provide them the capability to take 16 these hard internal looks and diminish the amount of effort we 17 have to put in in checking that.
18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Let me ask you on the 19 welding area, 11 you had not done what you did in the welding 20 area, are you confident that the TVA program would have done 21 all the things that needed to be done and would have provided 22 the information necessary to resolve the issue.
23 MR. DENTON:
I don't know that we will ever know the 24 answer to that, Mr. Commissioner.
25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
My impression was things
1 f
55 1
were proceeding fairly rapidly until the statt basically said, f
2
" Wait a minute.
Let's stop and get this sorted out and make 3
sure that all of the issues are understood and the acceptance 4
criteria are understood before you march ahead with this 5
contract and without understanding it."
6 MR. DENTON:
I think we were not comfortable with 7
the issue.
I felt bringing in EGSG which has a lot of 8
capability in a lot of fields was a positive move.
9 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
10 MR. DENTON:
I felt eventually those issues would 11 straighten out.
12 COMMISECONER BERNTHAL:
When was the decision known 13 to us at least in a preliminary way that EGSG was going to be 14 brought in on those issues.
15 ME. DENTON:
I was first informed about it, I think, 16 by EGSG because we have contracts with EG&G and we were 17 concerned as they were about the potential conflict of 18 interest.
So EG&G let us know very early, I have forgotten 19 the date, and we have terminated EG&G*s involvement with the 20 staff on TVA matters.
Now we still use EGSG at other plants.
21 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Are we talking weeks ago or 22 months ago?
How long ago did we know about their involvement?
23 MR. DENTON:
Maybe somebody can help me, a couple 24 of months, I would think.
25 MR. THOMPSON:
I would say at least in the middle of
56 1
the summer or the latter part of the summer sometime would be 2
my guess.
3 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
So it seemed a r e z : = r.; L i e 4
thing to assume as early as last summer --
5 MR. THOMPSON:
I am sorry.
I am told October is the 6
time trame we knew that EGSG was involved.,
7 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
It seemed reasonable to 8
assume as early as October that TVA had taken an ettective 9
step to deal with the welding problem at least from our 10 staff's point of view.
Is that a fair statement?
11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Is that accurate?
Would 12 you agree with that?
13 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I gather that is the date at 14 which we knew EGSG was being brought in and Marold has just 15 told us that they consider EGSG to be a highly capable 2
16 organization.
17 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
It also depends upon what 18 they were asked to do and what standard they were asked to do 19 it.
20 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Are we supposed to write the 21 contract?
22 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
You have a lot of activity 23 going on behind you.
24 MR. DENTON:
A lot of people want to say something 25 here.
o 57 1
(Laughter.)
('
2 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
There are three of them 3
tighting at the microphone.
4 MR. NOVAK:
Tom Novak, assistant director of 5
licensing in the old organization.
I can recall specific 6
telephone conference calls between TVA and ourselves with 7
regard to getting together to discuss the welding issues.
I 8
remember bringing in Dr. Liaw and discussing what the meeting 9
might accomplish.
10 We were always open to having them come in and tell 11 us what their plans were.
The problem we had is that they 12 were asking for a 24-hour response to the goodness of the 13 program and we said that we couldn*t do that.
14 So, yes, in October we were having discussions but 15 clearly we felt that there was a need to better define the 16 problem that we were going to deal with before we would 17 entertain these meetings and either agree or disagree as to 18 the resolution of the problem.
I 19 MR. DENTON:
Some of these issues on welding have 20 been brought directly to our attention before the employee 21 concern program got mounted, too.
So we were already i
22 developing information in those areas.
i 23 I guess I see it more like Commissioner Bernthal in 24 this matter.
TVA has an immense engineering capability.
They 25 have a lot of highly qualified professional people and the
58 1
main issue is getting them managed in an effective,
(
2 coordinated manner and bringing the views together and 3
resolving concerns and so forth.
4 I felt all along it was just a question of time 5
until that would occur and it may not occur tomorrow but it 6
seems to me that they do swamp us in their capability to 7
design and construct plants.
Their engineering department is 8
bigger than some of the architect engineers around the 9
country.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
But we must make sure that the 11 appropriate technical people are being listened to when 12 problems are being addressed.
I think that is part of the 13 problem that was referred to a bit earlier.
i 14 MR. STELLO:
Let me interject at this moment.
I 15 sense at least one aspect of the conversation that has me 16 troubled and that is leaving the impression that there are 17 things that the NRC is aware of, that we are concerned about, 18 that is not being communicated to TVA.
19 I don't think that is the case.
When we have a 20 concern and when we know of an issue and we think that they 21 ought to be concerned about it, we are doing our best I think 22 to get that out.
23 I think there is maybe a more basic issue, are we 24 getting all the things identified early enough.
Here you 25 have, I think, a little bit of a cart and a horse and
$9 1
potentially a very dangerous issue, with us believing that we f'
2 know more than we know before they have done their job.
3 I think that that organization has a far better 4
4 appreciation of where the real problems are and if they want i
S to start a particular aspect of the design review, it is 6
probably because they really know that they ought to get into 7
that early far before they have even completed, I think it is 8
a real hazard for us to start to interfere lest we are I
9 managing.
10 What I think would create a major problem would be 11 it we start to take on a management role rather than the role 12 of a regulator which is an evaluator and reviewer.
/
13 Maybe we should be more aggressive and we will try 14 to be more aggressive all of the time on everything in what we 15 do.
I think we ought to be and get the problems identified as 16 we know how to identity them.
17 But I think there is a real big distinction between 18 the identification of issues and bringing them to TVA*s 19 attention and stepping in and believing, that we know how to go i
l 20 about managing the issues.
21 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I agree with that l
22 completely, Vic, and I am not suggesting that the NRC try to l
23 manage these programs.
24 All I am suggesting is 11 TVA is putting into place 23 some of these major corrective efforts, major corrective
00 1
programs, in these fundamental areas and we are relying very f
2 heavily on that corrective program to address the issues, we 3
ought to have enough understanding up front of what the 4
program is doing and how it is being implemented to point out 5
any problems we have with it at the outset so that TVA doesn't 6
march down a long and expensive course only to find out at the
?
end of the process that there were fundamental problems in 8
what they were doing, that we knew about those fundamental 9
problems at the outset and now they are forced to go back and 10 start all over again.
11
' MR. STELLO:
I don't think we are going to have a 12 case where we knew something and we didn*t give it to them.
(
13 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
All right.
14 MR. STELLO:
We are going to do that.
We have a 15 problem and you have heard already about EQ.
We know it is a 16 problem.
We know it is a big problem.
We have mustered up 17 all of the resources necessary to make sure that we get in 18 there and evaluate it early so that we get those problems 19 identified as early as we possibly could.
We have done it.
20 Welding is a very judgmental area.
A lot of 21 judgment has to be applied and you need people with particular 22 expertise to get in and help make those judgments quickly.
I 23 think that was seen as a problem and we have done it there.
24 It we see another area where that is necessary, we 25 are not going to hesitate to move in and do it but only where
61 1
we have enough knowledge, f
2 What I am concerned about is where we believe we can 3
move taster than an organization as large and with the 4
resources that they have believe they can move.
TVA has had 5
some management problems, clearly.
I think these-changes are 6
again going to make a large step in resolving those ~ kinds of
?
problems that they have had in the past.
8 They have had a lot of communication problems and a 9
strong leader in there will get rid of them.
.10 MR. DENTON:
I think an example, Vic, of where we 11 did attempt maybe to get out front and found to our surprise 4
12 that we missed the boat was on instrument line slopes.
{
13 he had an early allegation about instrument line 14 slopes and I think we spent a little bit of review and 15 inspection effort looking at the plant to see how the slopes 16 were and I think based on that review we didn't see a 17 problem.
So we tended to think there wasn't a problem.
18 Eventually, the QTC Program turned up what the 19 specific issue was and then suddenly TVA has mounted a big t
20 program to check them.
But it was only through that precise 21 identification of where in the plant and which line were we 22 able to get to it.
23 So I think we are putting a lot of resources in.
I i
24 don't think we have been limiting TVA moving ahead yet and we 4
e 25
- are trying to stay current with them.
I bet we will put in
[
62 1
more resources in the future than we have put in in the past.
(
2 MR. STELLO:
Harold, let's get one thing clear at 3
the table.
Is there any question, any, that any problem that 4
we are aware of, that we know that TVA has to pay attention 5
to, we are communicating that issue, that problem to them 6
quickly?
Is there any question that we are doing that?
?
MR. THOMPSON:
There is no question in my mind that 8
that is the objective of the senior management team and the 9
staff.
10 MR. STELLO:
All right.
To the extent that we have 11 to be mindful in an area where maybe we need more resources to 12 he of benefit, we are doing the best we can.
If there is a
{
13 particular area that you, Mr. Commissioner, are concerned 14 about where we are not doing it separate from this meeting 15 because I think it is already getting kind of long, I would 16 appreciate the opportunity to sit down and have that 17 understanding and I assure you, if there is a need for more 18 resources in a particular area, we are prepared to do whatever 19 it takes to make sure that we aren't a problem in getting TVA 20 back on the set of tracks it needs to be.
21 We will do whatever we need to do to not encumber 22 the process they need to follow to get well 23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
This whole process is going to 24 take continuing interchange of information and I think making 25 sure that that is going on is a very important aspect of our
e 63 1-role as well as TVA's role.
f$
2 MR. STELLO:
I wanted to assure the Commission with 3
the senior statt sitting here and everybody in the room if 4
there is any question that everybody at least hears me now, 5
that if there is a question that we are not communicating that 6
problem, they ought to speak up and we ought to fix it because 7
we ought to let them know when we have a problem.
8 I think we have enough meetings and interactions to 9
achieve that kind of interchange and if we need another 10 mechanism, we will develop it.
i 11 The one thing I did understand in getting into this 12 and I have been watching it from a different point of view in 13 the past is that we are at least letting people know, maybe
{
14 not as aggressively because they haven't been moving as 15 aggressively as they should and I expect that all of that is 16 going to change in the next 30 to 60 days and now I think is 17 where we are going to see the big changes.
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Let me ask how much more you 19 had planned in your presentation.
20 MR. DENTON:
In view of the time, we finished up 21 pretty much Sequoyah which is the principal object.
We could 22 spend about the same length of time on Browns Ferry and Watts 23 Bar but let me just summarize.
24 Browns Ferry, they are having a massive operational i
25 readiness prcgram being conducted there.
It is the type EG&G
-- l
=
$4 1
has done at a number of the DOE tacilities and that sort of f
2 thing.
3 Their restart program is not due to us until 4
February of this year.
Nelson is spending a lot of time 5
following that readiness program but it is not receiving the 6
kind of priority attention by either TVA or ourselves that
?
dequoyah is.
8 Watts Bar is receiving a lot of attention.
The two 9
main issues there, I think, are the employee concerns program 10 that deals with all of the employee concerns that are 11 potentially applicable.
Weld'.ng is the big issue.
There are 12 licensing issues, f
13 Bellefonte is not-getting very much attention at 14 all.
15 The senior management team is meeting once a week.
16 We had a meeting yesterday and we have not been able to supply 17 all of the information you requested, Mr. Chairman, in your 18 note last month about timing and resources but all of that is 19 being put together and we hope that the next time we send down 20 a report, we can get it much better laid out recognizing that 21 the timing on many of these things is contingent on ongoing 22 TVA activities and programs.
23 If they don't get any further than 20-percent of the 24 employee concerns investigated, then we won't be any turther 25 along ourselves in that area.
65 1
COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Harold, how is the proposed 2
budget out for next year _likely to atteet the ability of your 3
people and all of our people to deal with TVA*s problems?
4 (Laughter.)
5 MR. STELLO:
I would hope that we would have the TVA 6
issue behind us by the time those budget cuts come to pass.
?
COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
You think it is going to be 8
behind us by the fall?
9 MR. STELLO:
October is a long time.
It TVA doesn*t 10 have everything in place that needs to be in place, there may 11 he things that they might want to be doing at the facilities 12 that will remain to be done but the identification of the
/
13 issues, knowing what needs to be done, I would think that 14 ought to be behind us.
15 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
It seems to me that is 16 where our job begins.
The misperception that has been 17 developed, I think, over the last few weeks at least is that 18 somehow the NRC ought to tell them what their programs should 19 be.
20 In many cases it-is no surprise to me how we got to 21 this point becausa I recall very clearly that it was a case of 22 our statt waiting to see what the program was.
It is pretty 23 hard for us to evaluate a program until the program is on the 24 table.
25 It seems to me that Harold mentioned a couple of
60 1
minutes ago that we were waiting to see a program or one of f
L 2
you did which we expected to come before us in the next few 3
weeks.
That is when our work really begins it seems to me.
4 We are going to have a major job to do down there 11 5
we are supposed to be very aggressive now about watching how 6
TVA's program is developed.
7 MR. STELLO:
Maybe I should reserve on the question 8
in this context.
TVA has made a major management change.
9 They are now going to be looking at schedules.
If those 10 schedules have substantial work that goes beyond October in 11 terms of a program that is still identifying problems, then we 12 may have a problem and we will tell you about it.
(
13 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Yes.
14 MR. STELLO:
But let's wait with the belief that 15 with the resources TVA has available to them that they will l6 have been able to at least identify all of the problems and s
17 all of the programs that are corrective and we should be back 18 into an inspection activity os looking at the implementation 19 past October.
At least that is my judgment on that.
20 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
That is my point.
It i.* a 21 lot of work.
22 MR. STELLO:
It is inspection resources in terms of 23 getting back into th> tacilities but the amount of resourJes 24 that we are talking about that are enormous are the atount of 25 resources that Harold has been talking about in terms of
G7 1
putting into the review etiot i s right now in looking at their
(
2 program.
Those have been very, very significant.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
It is very obvious that we are 4
going to have some very significant budget decisions to make, 5
selection of where we place our priorities and that will be 6
before the Commission on its first cut within the next 24 7
hours.
8 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
I would suggest 9
though on the near term either Harold or Vic, one of you 10 mentioned, the other areas in Region II that also need some 11 attention, Turkey Point and some of the others.
12 I would consider looking north for some resources.
[
13 When I look at Region I,
there don't seem to be problem 14 plants.
There seem to be very high levels of performance.
I 15 would take 20 positions from Region I and ship them to Region 16 II.
17 MR. STELLO:
So that we will have problems in 18 Region I as well.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
We are going to have to make a 20 balanced judgment on that.
21 MR. DENTON:
We have actually discussed that, 22 Mr. Commissioner, and we will probably be proposing it and we 23 would like to see the creation in Region II of a division sort 24 of level headed by an SES person just for TVA problems it we l
l 25 could make the resources available for that sort of thing.
68 1
COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I would look north.
(
2 MR. DENTON:
It'does mean looking around the country 3
at the better performers and pulling resources out and 4
assigning them to the troublesome ones.
5 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I will bet this time of 6
year, Jim, you could find 20 people who would be delighted to
?
transfer.
8 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That is probably right.
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Harold, let me ask you, what is 10 going on at Bellefonte?
The reason I asked the question is 11 11 there is significant work going on and low priority is being 12 given to attention of that work, we may be facing problems
{
13 later as a result.
14 MR. DENTON:
The senior management team has given 15 very little attention to Bellefonte.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I mean physically.
17 MR. THOMPSON:
I am going to have to ask my staff.
18 I don't know.
I know that they significantly reduced the 19 amount of construction that was going on at Bellefonte but let 20 me see if I can't get a better answer.
21 MR. STELLO:
Before you do that, Hugh, at least the 22 impression I have had from a conversation when they announced 23 the new management changes, they were going to go back and 24 look at where they were going with all of the plants and I 25 think that would be an excellent question to ask Admiral White
69 i
1 after he has had a chance to get the kind of information f
2 necessary.
Whatever we would tell you would be very 3
tentative.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Why don't we bring that up with 5
the TVA on Thursday.
I am interested in making sure that 11 6
activity is going on there, that at least it is getting enough 7
attention by TVA and in turn by us so that we don't face 8
significant problems later that reach the magnitude that now 9
exist for these other plants.
10 MR. THOMPSON:
Roger, do you want to respond?
11 MR. WALKER:
The only thing I wanted to say, 12 Commissioners, is that at this time we are completing the
(
13 inspection program that is consistent with the construction 14 activities at Bellefonte.
15 We do now know of any significant licensing 16 activities that have been backlogged for Belletonte at this 17 time.
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you.
Do you have more?
1 4
19 MR. DENTON:
No, that completes our presentation.
20 MR. STELLO:
I would assume that we will revisit the 21 question of the periodicity of meeting with the Commission at 22 the Agenda Planning Session.
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes.
24 MR. STELLO:
I would at least at tne cutset suggest 25 that the statt and they are under the impression we will be
70 1
back here later in the month to give you what I hope then to
,e 2
be a far more complete status report.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
It is very clear we have some 4
significant challenges before us and it is not only us as a 5
Commission but I think TVA also has challenges before it.
I 6
think we need to keep abreast of what the stati is doing and 7
we need to support the staff where we think it is being very 8
effective in its job and give added guidance when we think 9
there are areas that deserve attention.
10 I think the Commission focussing on that in an 11 organized way will help the stati rather than just taking pot 12 shots on whatever is being done.
(
13 Let me see 11 there are other questions or i
14 comments.
I do want to thank the staff for an excellent 15 presentation.
I know we have a long way to go.
We still have 16 a lot of things that we don't know but as long as the program 17 is aimed at a timely understanding of those problems and what 18 we don *t know we may be able to make' progress.
19 Any other questions or comments?
20 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I would just make a comment 21 that there has been a lot of " Chicken Little/The Sky is 22 Falling" talk here in the last two, three or four months about 23 TVA.
24 I think some unrealistic expectations perhaps have 25 been generated.
TVA didn't get into this problem overnight.
e a
71 1
I think it is a problem that developed over the last several
,e 2
-years at least and they aren't going to get out of it 3
overnight.
I doubt very much with all respect, Vic, to your 4
abilities to project and they certainly are better than mine 5
to project what the schedule will be over the next several 6
months, the problem won't be solved entirely by next October.
7 What I will say is that I would be very surprised 11 8
given all the resources down there and given some of the 9
management changes that have been made it within the next two 10 to three years you don't see this utility merge again to be 11 what it once was and that is one of the strongest programs in 12 the country.
(
13 I think that is going to happen.
I think the 14 changes are in place but it isn't going to happen overnight.
15 So we are all going to have to have a little patience here and 16 watch this thing develop and mature.
17 That is all I wanted to say.
18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I would agree, Fred, that 19 I think that potential is there but I also think a key element 20 of it is making sure that for TVA's part they get all of the 21 issues out on the table now and that they really get them 22 resolved and that they get them resolved in a way that gives 23 us confidence that they are going to stay resolved and they 24 are not going to crop up over and over again as they have in 25 the past.
l
72 1
I think there is an obligation not only upon them fi 2
but upon us to mak-e sure that every issue gets identified and 3
that we make sure that their programs adequately resolve them 4
to give us the confidence that 11 and when these plants go 5
back into operation they are going to operate safely and 6
successfully for the longer term.
?
COMMISSIONER ZECH:
I would just like to say one 8
thing, one brief comment.
I think it is important to 9
recognise and I think as the staff has pointed out too, that 10 our responsibilities at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission are 11 essentially to regulate and the utilities in this case, TVA*s e
12 responsibility is to manage their plant.
{
13 They operate the plant.
They construct it.
They 14 maintain it.
They operate it.
On the other hand, management 15 responsibilities do have a bearing on public health and safety
.16 and that way they do interface so the line of demarcation is 17 something that is not a straight line that we can say you 18 should never jump from one to the other.
19 We have responsibilities for public health and 20 safety to regulate the public health and safety.
The utility 21 has the responsibility to operate for public health and 22 safety.
23 On the other hand, it is important that we 24 communicate, that we work closely with the utility, in this 25 case z'*.
73 1
It seems to me the statt is doing that.
I think the l'
2 briefing has been very useful, very helpful.
I think the 3
attitude, the positive attitude, that I sense of working 4
closely, doing what we can, carrying out cur responsibilities 5
and on the other hand, making sure that TVA itselt does 6
manage their plant.
?
I think they are doing that.
They are taking some 8
very positive directions in that regard and there is much to 9
do.
There have been in my judgment line manag,ement problems 10 clearly at TVA.
11 They must be solved.
I think that is our concern.
12 It is my concern.
But it seems to me that the staff is 13 working with TVA certainly to my satisfaction in a very open 14 and candid way.
That is important.
15 We should lay it all on the table.
We should do 16 what we can to make sure that the problems are recognized, 17 solved technically as well as managerially.
It seems to me 18 that there is much to do at TVA across-the-board.
19 I think we should both, TVA and the NRC essentially, 20 roll up our sleeves and get on with it.
It seems to me that 21-that is what we are doing.
We have a very big problem and we 22 must solve it.
I say the sooner the better.
l 23 On the other hand, it has to be with a certain 24 amount of caution, conservatism, keeping in mind our 25 responsibilities for public health and safety.
We should look L_
74 1
at all these concerns that you have pointed out today and work l
2 together to do what is right for the citizens of our country.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you.
4 COMMISSIONER ASSELETINE:
Joe, I had one last 5
question if I could.
In the past I get the sense that it has 6
been ditticult to get a grip on this large organization, TVA, 7
to pin-point accountability and respons.ibility.
8 Should we insist as TVA makes its management changes 9
now and puts its corrective programs in place that for each 10 item, each major area that we have a concern about that TVA 11 identify someone who is responsible and accountable for that 12 item and who can speak for the organization so that as we go 13 forward we know who speaks for TVA on a particular issue and 14 we can rely upon that individual as the spokesperson for that 15 agency and the person who is accountable for answering our 16 questions and 2ddressing each particular item?
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Do we have a problem now i re 18 knowing who represents TVA on particular problems?
19 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Have we had a historical 20 preblem on that on the range of issues?
21 MR. GRACE:
We have had a problem in the past and 22 TVA recognizes the problem and is identifying individuals 23 responsible in different areas and you will. hear more of that 24 on Thursday.
We haven't heard the whole story yet ourselves.
25 It is true that in our dealings with TVA we deal i
L
j 76 1
1 gentlemen.
We will stand adjourned.
f 2
(Whereupon, the Commission meeting was adjourned at i
3 11:46 o' clock a.m.,
to reconvene at the Call of the Chair.)
J 4
4 5-4 6
7 8
9 f
10 11 12
'[
13 i
14 15 16 1
1 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
i
?
(
1 CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER 2
3 4
5 This is to certify that the attached proceedings 6
before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of: COMMISSION MEETING e
9 Name of Proceeding:
Briefing by Staff on TVA Corporate Plan (Public Meeting) 11 Docket No.*
(
12 Place: Washington, D. C.
13 Date:
Tuesday, January 7, 1986 14 15 were held as herein appears and that this is the original 16 transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear 17 Regulatory Commission.
13 (Signature) if/.4m.
q, <
39
... w,.
(Typed Name of Reporter)
Marilynn Nations 20 21 22 23 Ann Riley & Associates. Ltd.
24 25
CHRONOLOGY OF NRC/TVA ACTIONS IN 1985' 1.
BACKGROUND:
LONG HISTORY OF P0OR TO MEDIOCRE PERFORMANCE; PARTICULARLY AT BROWNS FERRY 2.
INITIAL SITE VISITS BY RA AND MEETINGS WITH TVA MANAGEMENT AND BOARD.
FEBRUARY, 1985.
3.
UNIT 3 BROWNS FERRY SHUT DOWN MARCH 9, 1985 IN RESPONSE TO NRC CONCERNS.
UNIT 1 SHUT DOWN 10 DAYS LATER.
UNIT 2 ALREADY IN OUTAGE.
4.
NRC SUGGESTED COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL READINESS REVIEW PRIOR TO STARTUP.
INITATED BY SITE DIRECTOR.
ASSISTED BY EGG, APRIL, 1985 5.
INITIAL ALLEGATIONS ON WATTS BAR RECEIVED MARCH 23, 1985 6.
ED0 ESTABLISHED SENIOR MANAGEMENT TEAM APRIL 12, 1985
- l'
~
7.
MEETING HELD BETWEEN TVA AND SENIOR NRC MANAGEMENT TEAM; INDEPENDENT EMPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRAM CONSIDERED 8.
COMMISSION ENCLOSURE SENT TO TVA REQUESTING RESPONSE (SECY-85-231) 9.
SEQUOYAH UNITS 1 & 2 SHUT DOWN FOR EQ ISSUES AUGUST 20, 1985 10, 50.5f4(F) LETTER TRANSMITTING SALP SENT TO TVA ON SEPTEMBER 17, 1985.
RESPONSES RECEIVED ON CORPORATE, SEQUOYAH, AND ~ EMPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRAM NOVEMBER 1985 11.
NUMEROUS ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCES AND MEETINGS HELD IN 1985 12.
DETAILED CHRONOLOGY PROVIDED BY ED0 MEM0 0F DECEMBER 27, 1985 1
O KEY BROWNS FERRY ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO RESTART ADEQUACY IMPLEMENTATION OF OPERATIONAL READINESS REVIEW; FINDINGS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ADEQUACY OF MAINTENANCE PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF INTEGRATED SCHEDULE REANALYSIS OF CABLE TRAY SEISMIC CAPABILITY REVIEW OF LICENSEE'S COMPARIS0N OF AS-BUILT VS DESIGN
.(
REVIEW 0F DISPOSITION OF CONTRACTOR RECOMMENDATIONS REVIEW PROGRAM TO QUALIFY ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT TO 50.49 ADEQUACY OF THE LICENSEE'S FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM TO APPENDIX R VERIFY ADEQUACY OF LICENSED GPERATOR REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM i
9 9
Gif0NOLOGY OF NRC/WA ACTIONS
- 1. LONG HISTORY OF POOR TO EDIOCRE PETORMANCE: PARTICULARLY AT BROWNS FERRY
- 2. UNIT 3 BROWNS FERRY SHUT DOWN MARCH 9,1985 IN RESPONSE TO NRC CONCERNS. LEIT 1 SHUT DOWN A FEW DAYS LATER (MARCH 19, 1985).
VERBAL AGREEENT NOT TO START UP ANY UNIT lNTIL CONCERNS RESOLVED
- 3. NRC SUGGESTED COPPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL READIESS REVIEW PRIOR TO STARTUPs LATE MARCH 1985 4.
INITIAL ALLEGATIONS ON WATTS BAR RECEIVED FiARCH 23,1985 i
- 5. DIRCKS FORED SENIOR MANAGEENT TEAM,7RIL 12,1985 1
t
- 6. EETING, TVA APO SENIOR NRC MANAGENNT TEAMS REDESTS INDEPENDENT EWLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRAM
- 7. C0 MISSION PAPER ENCLOSURE SENT TO TVA REWING RESPONSE (SECY-85-231)
1 8.
SEQUOYAH LMITS 1 & 2 SRIT DOW POR EQ ISSLES AUGUST 20,1985 9.
50.54(F) LETTER TRANSMITTED TO TVA ON SEPTEISER 17,1985; RESPONSES ECEIVED ON CORPORATE, SEQUDYAH, Af0 EPR.0YEE CON RNS PROGRAM i
N(NEPBER 19R5
- 10. IUGOUS OFOREPENT QNERENCES AfD PEETINGS ELD IN 1985
- 11. DETAILED CHIDOLOGY PROVIDED BY EDO PEPD OF DECENER 27,1985 l
1 i
l u
g s
9
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SAFETY-RELATED APPROX 1,600 WELDING APPROX 180 INTIMIDATION & HARRASSMENT/ MISCONDUCT APPROX 380 OTHERS APPROX 2,100 TOTAL APPROX 4,300 t
STATUS OF INVESTIGATIONS FOR SAFETY-RELATED ITEMS INVESTIGATIONS COMPLETED APPR0X 325 CORRECTIVE ACTION NEEDED APPROX 180 e
'g AREAS OF EMPLOYEE CONCERNS - SEQUOYAH l
- I, EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIFICAll.Y APPLICABLE TO SEQUOYAH TO BE EVALUATED BEFORE RESTART -
22 WELDING CONFIGURATION CONTROL OPERATIONAL READINESS SUPPORTS / ANCHORS MISCELLANEOUS
- II.
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS FROM OTHER FACILITIES WITH POTENTIAL GENERIC APPLICABILITY TO SEQUOYAH To BE EVALUATED BEFORE RESTART -
77 WELDING I
CONFIGURATION CONTROL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OPERATIONAL READINESS CABLES CABLE TRAY AND CONDUIT HANGERS PIPE HANGERS AND ANCHOR BOLTS
~.
l III.
ESPLOYEECDNCERNSIDENTIFIEDTHROUGHSEQUOYARONSITE EMPLOYEE CONCERN PROGRAM -
5 l
l
, WELDING
, MISCELLANEOUS
' LISTED IN TVA SUBMITTAL TO NRR OF DECEMBER 27, 1985
=-
i O
t SEW /AH EDUIREIT QJALIFICATIm STATUS i
c E AUDIT - NovesER 18,1985 o
NRRLuo-IE, REGION 11PmICIPMs o
SCOPE - RavIm PAcusa DocmENTATION o
ComzTED PAcusEs AccerAst.s o
NueER OP Com1TED PACues 1.Ess THAN EWm.im i
tbmEsoLvEDIssuEsRemns o
IE INSPECTION DEAYED UNTIL JANUARY 6,1986 IE INSPECT!m - JAener 6-17,1986
/
o IE I.EAo - NRR, ResIm 11 PARTICIP M s o
SCOPE i
Fan =J= CN AtoIT Fielms i
REVIm Au. 91 PACMGEs PCR CCEminism REv!m OvERAu. IE9ENTATION OF 50.18 Pnaam s
'REv!m Padste to li' WAIN QUALIFICAT!0N STATUS' ComucT Physical INSPECTION AT SITE To VRIFY As-INSTAU.ED STATUS REVIm COMECTIVE ACTIms FROMIVA-SPONSCRED W.STEC Mai o
Fou.0WUP INSPECTION ON OPEN ITD5 Ekm.:w IN l. ATE JANUARY -
EARLY FEBRUARY
=
I 1
g
1' ;
i S82DIAH ED PAC #' ES - STATUS GEC.' 31,1985) *
- OF PACFMES IEEEEf.
27 l.A. - PACxAGES CGPt.ETE, ALL DEVICES QLIALIFIED f
26 I.B. - ALL CHANGES IDENTIFIED APC TRACKED TO BRING DEVICES TO FLA.L CDPLIANCE, FIELD WORK REMAINS E
I.C. - ISSES 10 BE RESCLVED IDENTIFIED, PACKAGES MAY HAVE CPEN ISSES 2L II. - PACx4GES NOT COPFLETE, EVAURTION STILL IN PROMESS, emm84r CATMORY UNNCHN t
91 - TOTAL
- TOTAL MPBER OF PACKAGES MAY CHANGE. NLMBER IN EACH CATEGORY WILL i
CHANGE AS ISSES ARE RESOLVED.
I 6
J l
e e
g e
4og
.~
d i
TVAEVAL1RTIm SEED /#1 ELEC1RICAL CALCULATIOE TVA HAS NOT MMNTAIED AIE1 RTE D00fENTATIm (F All ELECTRICAL CALIULATIQ6 WlIOi EFE PERRRED 10 StGMT PIM IESIGN QWEES. 10 GRECT THIS PRELEP1, EXISTIE ELECTRICAL CALIULATIGE ARE EING EVIEED #0 ELECTRICAL CALOLATIWS AE EING PERRRED AS EEIED 10 C0FIlf! THAT TE PLM CDFIGEATIm EETS ALL IB11110ENIS RR SAFE STARTIP AND (PERATIOi.'
TE CAlfilATIES WILL E EVIEED m A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS AS TE EVALUATION PIOGESSES TO DETERilE ANY EITECT (DESIGN #0/0R FIEIFICATIGO THAT TE ESlL15 WILL HAVE Qi TE S8E(AH ESTART DATE.'
9
- g;.
re
TVA EVAlljATIm E SEEDIAH B.ECTRICAL DURATIWS CALO1ATIQtS 10 E EVAlllED SOE1LE START GPPLETE
~
i L ADQLIARY PGER Sn EM GPS) LDAD ANALYSIS IN M 12-244
- 2. ADQLIARY PGER SYSTEM OFS) RTME 12-IfH5 01-22-86 CALDAATIGE
{
- 3. 0. ASS IE EUR (Dm0L CBER GED COURL 12-11HS 01-22 4 CIMIT-CABE LENGTH CALQtATIm 4.'
DIESEL EFERATOR LDAD ANALYSIS IN M
- I2-2fH5
~5.'
129/ DC VITAL INSTRPENT PGER SYSTEM IN M 01-F-85 RTAGECALQ1ATI0tS
- 6. 120/ AC VITAL INSTRPENT PGER SYSIEM 12-GHS12-274 WlLTMECALQ1ATI0tS 7.' JETIFICATIm FOR USE F 1VA'S APACITY 01-05 4 01-144 TABLES FOR SEED (AH ElCLEAR PUWT s
g
... s
,~
8' IEPDISTRED INSTRPENT ACDRACY IN M 01-134 CALDIATIOG.- SEISMIC EFFECTS 9.'
.AJSTIFICATIm F 1VA'S #PACI1Y TABLES IN M 01-F-86 AS IELATED TO V3 CABLE TRAYS', GRIFED UNijl15, UN11115 WI1H PCEliAN THEE
~
CABLES, #0 DJCT BAMCS TOOR ' ANALYSIS S!DF 7. " 7 ~.7 ** VE P3tl.TS AVAIURE TO !!)C PR BY 1-22-8 (R E JETIFY 1HIS ANALYSIS 10T E!E lEllIIED FOR PUWT STARTIP.'
\\
EY BROWNS FERRY ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO ESTART ADENACY & LICENSEE MANAGEENT CHANGES ADETACY OF LIGNSEE CONDUCTf D OPERATIONAL EADIESS REVIEW, FINDINGS, AND CORECTIVE ACTIONS ADE0GACY OF LICENSEE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM IPF90VEENTS EVIEW Af0 ACCEPTANCE OF LICENSEE DEVELOPED INTEGRATED SCEDULE I
ADEQUACY OF LICENSEE ACTIONS TO CORRECT SEISMIC DEFICIENCIES FORCABLETRAYS f
EVIEW T LICENSEE'S C0ffARIS0N OF AS-BUILT VS DESIGN i
REVIEW 0F LICENSEE'S DISPOSITION OF CONTRACTOR E00ft00ATIONS REVIEW LICENSEE'S PP0 GRAM TO QUALIFY 9.ECTRICAL EQUIPENT TO50,49 REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF TE LICENSEE'S FIPE PROECTION PROGRAM TO APP 90lX R VERIFY ADEQUACY OF LICENSED OPERATOR EEALIFICATION P80 GRAM l
On
~
WATTS BAR MA.10R ISSUES OUALITY ASSURANCE OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IDVP AND OTHER 3RD PARTY REVIEWS NRC INSPECTIONS WELDING ISSUES QUALIFICATIONS OF WELDERS STRUCTURAL SUPPORTS INSPECTION THRU CARBO-ZINC PRIMER ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION CORPORATE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION s
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS / ALLEGATIONS
~.
SAFETY-RELATED
~
INTIMIDATION a HARASSMENT l
I
I AREAS OF EMPLOYEE CONCERNS - WATTS BAR WELDING FIRE BARRIER PENETRATIONS CABLE / ELECTRICAL CALCULATIONS MATERIALS TRACEABILITY INSTRUMENTATION MATERIAL PROBLEMS OPERATIONAL EVENTS / QUALIFICATIONS ESSENTIAL RAW COOLING WATER l(
NCR PROBLEMS DESIGN CALCULATIONS CONSTRUCTION CONTROL HANGERS DOCUMENT CONTROL EXPANSION ANCHORS PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL PROCEDURE REY!SION CONTROL MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT PAINT AND RUST QA PROGRAM QA RECORDS
~.
b
=
\\
),
MSRSSTAFF-PERCEPTIONS'OhNATT5BAR* STATUS MAJOR Issues 0 AS-CONSTRUCTED WELDING PROGRAM IS INDETERMINATE o ELECTRICAL CABLE PRESENT GUALIFICATION CONDITION IS INDETE'RMINATE o
INSTRUMENT LINE INADEGUACIES SLOPE FITTINGS BENDING INDUCED STRESSES ON CONDUIT HYDR 0 STATIC TESTING 0
CONSTRUCTION PROCESSES, IN GENERAL, ARE LOOSELY CONTROLLED O
RECORDS ARE OF P00R QUALITY 0
LACKOFINDEPENDENCEOFQA)QCPERSONNEL(CONST)
(
0 0-LIST NOT IN 6000 SHAPE AND IS INCONSISTENT WITH CSSC LIST i
0 MATERIAL TRACEABILITY VERY P00R, ESPECIALLY SEISMIC CAT 1 (PIPING, NVAC, CONDUIT, TRAYS, INSTRUMENTATION,ETC.)
0 FIELD CONFIGURATION OF CABLES, SUPPORTS HAS LOST ACCUMULATED LOADING C'ONTROLS ON EMBEDDED PLATES
)
0 NONCONFORMANCE REPORTING DOES NOT ADDRESS CORRECTIVE ACTION ASPECTS APPROPRIATELY 1oTTOM Lime D
DESIGN CONTROL IS NOT INITIALLY SPECIFIED UP FRONT NOR IS FINAL CONFIGURATION FEEDBACK GIVEN BACK TO DESIGN--MARGINS OF SAFETY ARE INDETERM_INATE
(
?
0 10 CFR 50, APPENDIX B, REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT BEING MET
'/
DISTRIBUTION OF WELDING K FORMS CATEGORIZED (AS OF 12/20/85)
CONCERN NUMBER OF K FORMS NUMBER OF K FORMS CATEGORY CATEGORIZED BY FRC INVESTIGATED BY TVA WELDER CERTIFICATION RECERTIFICATION 39 24 BAD WELDS 44 4
WELDING MACHINE ADEQUACY 12 0
BAD WELDER 10 0
WELD FILLER / METAL WELDROD 40 8
WELD FIT-UP 5
0 RECORDS FALSIFICATION 40 13 WELD INSPECTION / DOCUMENTATION 34 7
PRE-HEAT INTERPASS TEMPERATURE 6
0
(,
MATERIAL CONTROL 7
5 INSPECTOR QUALIFICATION 6
0 TRAINING 15 0
INSPECTION TOOLS 3
0 WELD PROCEDURES 6
3 PAINTED WELDS / CARBO-ZINC COATING 10 2
MISCELLANEOUS
_18
_1 TOTAL 293 67 s
~
l EXPERT PANEL ON WELDING CARL J. CZAJK0WSKI STAFF SCIENTIST a BNLs SPECIALIZED IN FAILURE ANALYSISs WELDING & METAL-LURGICAL.
WILLIAM D. DOTY AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT FORMERLY A TECHNICAL DIRECTOR OF U. S. STEEL RESEARCH CENTER.
A MEMBER OF WELDING RESEARCH COUNDIL AND PRESSURE VESSEL RESEARCH COMMITTEE.
CARL E. HARTB0WER AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT; FORMERLY CHIEF WELDING ENGINEER S FHA, NRL 5
SENIOR SCIENTIST, AND AT ARMY; AWS DI.1 MEMBER.
PAUL E. MASTERS AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT; FORMERLY CHIEF WELDING ENGINEER a AMERICAN BRIDGES CO.
ADVISORY MEMBER OF AWS D1.1 COMMITTEE.
WILLIAM H. MUNSE PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS.
3.
MEMBER OF AWS & AISC CODE COMMITTEES.
ROBERT D. ST0UT DEAN EMERITUS, LEHIGH UNIVERSITY, SPECIALIZED IN WELDED STEEL STRUCTURES.
l
-(
l UENSEE PIOGRAM ESUBS AS 7.10/25/85 10E THAN 50% 7 SR (DIEMS WIG HAVE lEEN IIMSTIGED IWE lEEN SLESTANTIATED.
SIGNIFICANT HARMWE ISSlES IENTIFIED CODETE #100R BOLTS INSTRENT SENSING UfE SUPE INSlRMNTlulE (DFESSIM FITTINGS
' r:
INS 1 RENT TulEIB0 LNG INSTRMNT 1UIE 0.#PS ELDI!E i
4 I
.I anus.
=%
+
.-,--..,-,-r.,--~.~.,--.,-
..,--.a-.=..-,- - -,
,__,w-.
e
-,-------,,,------_--..-,,,n
---,-n,-,-,-
r,, - - - -,
e O
IE ACTIVITIES EEMDING MITS BAR UPl.mEE GNMS PIOGMM OS/IEW O FIRST INSFECTIm UE/NRR/REGIm ID 7 PROGMMi JJLY 1618,1985.
O ISSIE TUPOMRY INSTRXT. IM FOR INSPECTIm 7 WATTS BAR MX1 EAR PLM EIPLMEE (Di FNS P!0 GRAM SEFIDEER 13,1985.
O SECDE INSECTIm UE/NRR/REGIm ID & PROGMM SEPT 9EER 30 -
OCTWER li,1985 #0 OCTWER 21-25',1985.
0 ElfLMEE GNMS PIOGR#VESULTS/RESOURIm IS CRITICAL PATH y.
TO LIENS!!E.
O SUBSTANTIAL NRC Eff0RT WILL IE EQUllE.'
~.
i.
t i
e i
1
l 1
JESlLTS T E INS CTIWS FIEINGS(POSITIVE)
PR00HFES GEERLY AIEUATE PBSQtEL GEERAllY WAUFIE AND l@0WlEXBELE INTERVIEWS GEEALLY AIEME IffESTIGATIWS GEBALLY AEEIATE FIEINGS OEGATIVE)
TVA MWGEPENT/CD0RDINATIm PDLEMS INAEEJATE,'INC00RDINATED TRA0GNG 7 QMEMS E TENDING T CWCEMS E IENTIFICATIm T CDEEMS ESLLTING IN m PEVIQJSLY ESOLVED E NCRs, E GR 50.55E OR E DE PART 21 SLW/INAEEIATE ESPOEE TO ENEmS N TVA UE SIGNIFICANT PIGlBS WITH INSTIUENT UE SLEE MSanNT TIBIE GMESSIm FImES W oeu ComDIma m IEmaxT uE esaBs ERK/REWDRK m INSTRMNT UES PROEEING PRIOR TD ESOLNIm 7 PIGLB6 o
~
s s-U NSEE ETImS ESULTING FIUi NRC INS CTIm FINDINGS SIT 10RK m INSTIDENT UES APPOINMNT T "PIRECT l%NAERS" RR INSTIUENTATIm E ELDIE FDFMATIm 7 GROLP TO C00RDINEE EMEN NSRS #8 TVA UE S
(
e k
,~
},
~*
sea 0
1
phh (hhhhih(h{h[h(hphph(h(hph[h[hphphphphphghph((ph h
h
{i{
f 1
9/35
~
TRANSMITTAL 70:
/){ /
rw,wnt (bntrol Desk, 016 Phillips
/
ADVANCED COPY 70: /
/
The Public Document Bocm I!4 DATE:
cc: C&R t
FBOM:
PS BRANCH M
papers)
Attached are copies of a Ctmnission meeting transcript (s) and related meeting document (s). They are being forwarded for entry on the Daily Accession List and placment in the Public Document Bocm. No other distribution is requested or required. Existing DCS identification numbers are listed on the individual documents vnerever known.
Meeting
Title:
Mri beA bu NN ae I\\lA Cor (017.- be.n J
Meeting Date:
f 7 2h Open )(
Closed DCS Copies (1 of each checked)
Item
Description:
Copies Advanced Original May Duplicate To PDR Document be Dup
- Copy
- l.
TRANSCRIPT 1
1 When checked, DCS should send a copy of this transcript to the LPDR for:
M Ut h5
- 2. swv,n a
i l
3.
Suu 2b-1 3-l 5
b I
(PDR is advanced one copy of each document,
- Verify if in DCS, and two of each SELY paper.)
Change to "PDR Available."
5
,N0'03N N N N NdI0IN N NdW N N N N NMIIIIIWI Nd E MN N N NI I/h t
III I
I I
i