ML20138A813
| ML20138A813 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/11/1985 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8510110090 | |
| Download: ML20138A813 (76) | |
Text
.
D
~
,3 e
~
s
.. c.-s
' ?.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_1{
In the matter of:
....,: ~
COMMISSION MEETING DISCUSSION OF PLANT ISSUES WITH
[
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS i%
7
. l.':.
Docket No.
']
~
a
(
+
3 si i
d7
- j Location:
Washington, D.C.
1-70 Date:
Wednesday, September 11, 1985 p,9eg.*
B510110090 850911 PDR 10CFR PT9.7 PDR ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES
(_
Court Reporters 1625 I St.,
N.W.
j Suite 921 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 l
O o
1 D I SC LA I d ER 2
3 4
5 6
This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the 7
United States Nuclear Regu l a t ory Ccenii ss i on held on d
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 cpinion 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 statement 20 or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may 21 authorize.
22 23 24 25
s 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
4 DISCUSSION OF PLANT ISSUES 5
WITH REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS 6
7 PUBLIC MEETING 8
Foom 1130 9
1717 H Street, N.W.
10 Washington, D.C.
11 Wednesday 11 September 1985 12 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 3:44 p.m.
13 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
14 NUNZIO PALLADINO, Chairman of the Commission 15 JAMES ASSELSTINE, Commissioner 16 FREDERICK BERNTHAL, Commissioner 17 LANDO ZECH, Commissioner 18 THOMAS ROBERTS, Commissioner 19 STAFF AND PRESENTERS SEATED AT COMMISSION TABLE:
20 SAMUEL CHILK 21 JAMES XFPPLER Z2 J.
NELSON GRACF 23 WILLIAM DIRCKS 24 THOMAS MURLEY 25 HERZEL PLAINE l
1 l
1
2 1
MARTIN MALSCH 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 I
21 22 O
i l
l 24 l
25
3 0
1 EEEEEEElEEE 2
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Please come to order.
This 3
afterncon the Commission meets with the agency's regional 4
administrators from Regions I,
II and III.
A meeting with 5
Region I and V administrators has been scheduled for 6
October 1st, 1985.
7 I should point out that representatives of Region 8
II, IV and V are listening in by telephone.
9 The Commission intends to hold such meetings on 10 a periodic basis to discuss topics of mutual interest.
Our 11 last such meeting was held on January 29th.
The puroose 12 of today's reeting or the plan for today's meeting is to 13 have a 30 minute discussion with each regional administrator 14 about the major accomplishments, problems, and methods of 15 achieving consistency in the region's activities, as well 16 as ratters of interest in specific plants in the region.
17 Since the last meeting there have been significant 18 concerns at Davis-Besse and TVA clants among others.
During 19 each of the adminirstrator's presentation today it would be 20 helpful to receive any thoughts about trend or plant safety
' 21 since January.
Your concerns about whether problem plants n
were isolated examples or indicative of a bad trend would 23 be worthwhile.
Since you're intimately involved in the 24 daily operation of niants your thoughts will be a valuable 2
input and will provide a basis for Commission perspective.
4 1
We also ask the EDO to make any preliminary 2
comments that he may wish to make at this time.
So unless 3
commissioners have other openina remarks I plan to tt:rn 4
the meeting over to Mr. Dircks.
5 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
No.
6 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
No.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay.
8 MR. PIRCKS:
Well, we' re going to cover the topics 9
You mentioned, Mr. Chairman.
We do have a meeting on TVA to coming up so we're not going to dwell too much on that 11 problem.
We'll refer to it.
12 We do have a lengthy session next week on Toledo 13 Edison and the Davis-Besse plants, and we're not going to 14 get into that issue in great depth today.
Fe might refer to 15 it.
16 But just a logistical problem, Tom is going to 17 be number one.
So at some point during the proceedings he 18 may disappear because he has to get a plane out of town.
19 So I'd like him to go number one, and he may, as I said, 20 leave the table after awhile.
At that point, I'm sure that h
Nelson and Jim will be discussing their problems.
22 CilAIRNAN PALLADINO:
Okay, thank you.
El MR. MURLEY:
Thank yeu.
I will touch, Mr. Chairman 24 on some of the points that you raised in your opening Mi remarks.
5 i
o g
First a brief word about the near term operating 2
license plants.
We have four in the region that are 3
scheduled for fuel load within a year, Millstone 3, Hope Croek 4
Nine Mile Point 2 and Seabrook.
They seem to be going well.
5 Millstone 3 and Hope Creek we expect within a couple months 6
should be nearing completion.
7 We are prepared, as you know, for round-the-clock 8
inspection coverage at TMI-l if it restarts.
We have l
g cranked un that 24-hour coverage twice now and so far we're to well trained.
11 Shoreham is completing its low power testing, 12 I understand, in a couple weeks.
I just talked with our 13 resident there yesterday.
14 So we could have four more -- and with perhaps 15 TMI -- five more plants operating within a year in Region I.
16 With regard to operating plants, the sense that 17 my staff and I have is that the operation of the plants in 18 the region is generally imoroving.
Insof ar as plant 19 availability is an indicator of good operations, I would z) point out that within the cant year there have been six t
21 plants in the region that have exceeded their all-time 22 availability records.
!!addam Neck, Millstone 1, Yankee Rowe, 23 Indian Poir.t 2, Salem 1, and Ginna.
24 So I think that is an indicator.
I don't make i
25 too much of it.
But I think it's one indicator we should l
6 D
1 pay attention to.
2 COS1MISSIONER BERNTHAL:
What is Yankee Rowe's 3
lifetime availability, do you know?
4 MR. MURLEY:
I don't.
Some of the -- the pattern 5
is mixed, however.
There are some of the traditional better 6
operating plants have had some slip-ups lately.
And I 7
don't -- we keep our eye open to see if those are trends 8
or if they are, in fact, isolated slip-ups.
But we do keep 9
our eye on that.
Ifaddam Neck has had some problems.
And 10 Vermont Yankee has had some problems.
11 These have been over the years, some of our best 12 performers.
And I'm confident that the management there is 13 taking them seriously and working on them to correct them.
14 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTIME:
Why do you think those l
15 things happen, Tom?
I mean, is there a root cause for those 16 kinds of things at some of the older plants that have been 17 historically better?
18 MR. MURLEY:
Well, a kind of a facile answer is 19 they kind of take their eye off the ball.
On Ifaddam Neck, 20 the licensee, the utility is focused very much now on getting 21 Millstone 3 operational.
So that does take a lot of n
management time.
n Whethet it takes away enough attention that they 24 get a little lackadaisical, T suspect there's some of that 25 in i t.
I don't think there is a common reason for all this, l
i
7 1
you know.
2 If I may, in Anna Karenina, Tolstoy says that 3
all happy families are alike, but every unhappy family is 4
unhappy in its own way.
I think in some regard each of these 5
plants --
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Our meetings are getting much 7
more literate.
8 MR. MURLEY:
So this applies to --
9 COMPISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Can we have a five-minute 10 pause to think about that?
11 (Laughter.)
12 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I'm going to check you in i
13 Bartlett's though.
I'm not sure --
14 MR. MURLEY:
A good sign that the staff and I 15 see is that all the plants that
- talked about here last 16 January have shown clear signs of improvement.
Beaver Valley 17 2 and Nine Mile 2 in construction, and Maine Yankee and 18 Salem in operations.
19 I want to take just a minute to talk about Salem.
23 They have had traditional record of problems there.
There 21 has been management changes in the last six months.
And the n
signs that we see are ouite encouraaing.
They're reduced 23 the contractor personnel onsite, so that what one sees is 24 an increased sense of accountability on the part of the 25 licen::eo people there.
8 D
1 The housekeeping has improved visibly.
The 2
contaminated area in the plant is reduced.
The manrem 3
exposure is down from the last few years.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
You're talking now about 5
Salem?
6 MR. MURLEY:
This is Salem, yes.
The NRC 7
violations are down by about a half.
And Unit 1, as I said, 8
is on a record run.
I think since January 1st.
So they've 9
had no trips.
10 Unit 2 is still having some problens.
They've 11 had nine -- in terms of trips -- they've had nine trips in 12 a four-month period, which is quite high.
So they're not 13 out of the woods yet, but the signs are very good.
\\
14 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
What are the causes of 15 the trips?
16 MR. MURLEY:
They're mixed.
But one still sees 17 feedwater control problems.
That seems to show up.
18 Instrument technician orablems, that kind of thing.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Do you think it could be m
related to relative training of the two groups?
21 MR. MURLEY:
Nc.
22 I asked our resident inspectors in preparation 23 for this meeting what their thoughts were when we had them 1
24 all together a few weeks ago.
One of the residents --
2 senior residents sent me a note.
I'll share it with you.
l l
f 9
l k
w t
1 He says, there's no doubt in his mind that t,he key to l'
2 safe operation is upoer olant management.
He said, he's 3
been -- the last two plants that he's been at there have 4
been changes in the management at the site, senior site 5
management, and with an aggressive manager. Fe said, but i
6 the same plant equipment, the same people there's -- he sees 7
improved attitude of the workers, improved philosophy of 8
doing business, and improved work production at the r'. ant.
3 i
i 9
Now that kind of just reiterates what we've been i
10 saying all along, that the key is, I think, a good, aggressive 11 manager at the plant and a good,vice president of nuclear 12 operations.
13 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
And you think at Salem 14 you've got that now?
15 MR. MURLEY:
I rest a lot better because of the 16 team that's there at Salem.
I think they've got some 17 improvements to make.
You can't change things overnight.
18 But all the signs are good, yes.
19 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Is it fair to say that 20 you'd be very surprised to see a recurrence of the kind of 21 incident that they had with the breakers, or say that 22 Davis-Besse had on June'9th.at Salem?
. 23 MR. MURLEY:
Oh, boy.
The conditions --
24 COMMISSIONER. ROBERTS:
You'd better duck that one.
N 25 (Laughte r. )
i i
1
. - _ = -
F2 10 t
1 MR. MURLEY:
I don't discount that there could 2 -
be an event at any plant in my region.
{
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
On that magnitude?
4 MR. MURLEY:
I don't believe that the conditions
^ hat existed at Salem in terms of lacksadaisical maintenance, t
5 6
attitudes are still there.
i 7
COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Is the maintenance improved?
9 MR. MURLEY:
The maintenance has improved, yes.
10 And their attitude toward preventive maintenance has improved.
11 Largely as a result of the actions that NRC recuired of all 12 plants after that event.
But if you say, would I be surprised J
13 to.see an event, I can't say that.
1 14 How do we look for problems in the region and
[15 what do we do about them?
There's a few basic principles
- 16 that we apply.
We try to anticipate where there could be 17 problems.
And a place where we've seen them in the past is 18 when a plant is coming out of a long outage, like a piping is replacem,ent where they've been out for sometimes eight to f
20 12 months.
The operators have gotten ru. sty.
There's certain l
21 equipment that they just haven't operated, even if they have 22 been on simulators.
It's not quite the same.
23 So we do a readiness inspection, and we pay i
24 special inspection to the sharpness of the operators when 25 we look into those.
2
11 0
1 We try to give prorpt attention to warning signs 2
that come up.
And here, allecations that come to us we get 3
right on top of and follow those up.
Any events, even though 4
they may appear to be minor, we try to follow through and 5
try to draw conclusions from them.
6 We use the SALP to do an overall assessment and 7
pull together our thoughts.
We get together, as you knew, 8
we with resident inspectors.
But also all of our specialists, 9
our health physicists, our materials experts.
And from that to emerges a picture that gives us, at least yearly, an overall 11 assessment of how a plant is doing.
12 Where we see problems, we talk with the top 13 management about the problems.
I would say that we don't 14 do it systematically, but at least on the average, I would 15 guess probably twice a year I talk with the senior management 16 at each of the licensees on the region.
We have 17 licensees, 17 so that is a -- I'm fairly frequently in touch with senior 18 management.
19 Sometimes enforcements is necessary to get the 20 corrective action that we think is needed.
And what comes 21 to mind is in the past year and-a-half we have issued some 22 orders that -- enforcement orders -- that have required 23 improvements in certain areas where we just weren't getting 24 improvement.
25 The couple that come to mind are at Indian Point
12 4
1 and at Pilgrim in the radiological program.
We just -- we 2
were talking with them, we were pointing out the orogram's i
3 problems.
We just weren't gettino effective action, we t
4 didn't believe.
So in conjunction with I&E we issued orders 5
modifying the license, which required them to get an outside 8
view and an outside review of their health physics program.
7 And I can say that that has led to improvements 1
8 in both cases.
4 9
So those are some of the ways that we look for 10 problems and ways that we try to deal with them.
j 11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Tom, you mentioned Salem.
1 12 For che other three plants that you talked about the last 13 time, Beaver Valley 2, Nine Mile 2 on construction
- side,
(,
i 14 Maine Yankee on the operations side, how did you go about 15 gauging the extent to which you were comfortable that they n
16 were really making real progress in correcting the problems?
17 MR. MURLEY:
Well, I got my senior staff together 18 and the resident inspectors, and we looked at these kinds of 19 things.
I think we've probably had a SALP meeting at each f
f 20 plant in between then.
But at least with regard to each 21 of them there have been management changes.
And what we see 22 is an inproved attitude.
t 2
At Maine Yankee, for example, they're much more 24 pro-active in looking at problems.
That was one of the 2
problems that we -
I talked about last time is that, it i
-.--_-,s_
,-..-,-m-_m-
- --... -. =.
. ~ _ -..-..
13 I
seemed like we kind of had to nag them a bit to get them
' 'r
2 to look into problems.
Now.we don't see that.
i 3
They still -- ve iust had an enforcement meeting 4
with them this week with a problem that they had.
But the 4
5 difference was they were way out ahead of us in terms of 6
corrective actions.
And so that's a sign, I think, of 7
improvement.
8 Let me turn a minute to a problem that's ongoing 9
in Region I, and tha't is the emergency planning and emergency f
i 10 preparedness exercises.
I'm afraid that that's going to be 11 a continuing problem in Regior I.
There are -- of course, i
12 it's a high population density region, but there's also a i
13 tradition in the Northeast of autonomy of town and local i
14 governments.
]
15 And this autonomy leads -- if one of them, for 16 whatever reason decides not to play inaan exercise, then i
17 that leads to deficiencies by -- in FEMA's evaluation.
I 18 deal with three FEMA regions.in my' region, Boston, New York 1
19 and Philadelphia.
And I have met with all three regional i
20 directors.
My staff has continuous dealings with FEMA.
And 21 I would say our relations are good.
22 It's just that they have guidelines that they have 23 to follow, and in these emergency exercises a non-participating i
h 24 county or a town leads to a -- what they call a Category A z
deficiency.
.=
14 1
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Is FEMA consistent region l
2 to region in your judgment?
l 2
3 MR. MURLEY:
Generally, yes.
There are some 4
differences in the way they approach problems.
But in terms 4
1 5
of categorization, I would say they're pretty consistent.
1 6
And they are, of course, watched over by their own 7
headquarters here in Washington.
8 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Fave you had any exercise s j
9 over the past year where Category A deficiencies have been 10 identified?
11 MR. MURLEY:
Many.
There have been 30 Category A 12 deficiencies in the past three years.
(
13 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
For how many plants?
14 MR. MURLEY:
That encompasses nine sites out of 15 the 19 sites in Pegion I.
So just about half of my sites i
16 at one time or another have had Category A deficiencies.
17 Just recently --
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
What fraction of them were 19 to failure on the part of the local government to participate 20 actively?
21 MR. MURLEY:
Seven.
Seven of those 30 deficiencies Zt
-- which means seven of the sites, really, were due to --
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Seven of the sites?
24 MR. MURLEY:
Seven of the sites were due to l
non-participating communities.
l 25 i
l
15 f
1 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Did you start the 120-day
(-,
2 clock in each of those instances?
3 MR. MURLEY:
No.
In fact, we haven't.
i COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
What guides your decision 4
1 5
on when you do and when you don't?
?
6 MR. MURLEY:
What we do is we sit down with FEMA 7
and assess the seriousness of the deficiency.
I was going 8
to mention one we've just had recently with Suscuehanna.
9 There was a little community -- I think it was called Fishing l
10 Creek -- of 900-some people, did not participate.
And 1
11 sometimes it's not necessarily just willfulness.
The few I
12 people can be off on vacation and they're just not available.
(
13 I mean, it could be --
6 14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes, when you've got a town 1
4 15 of 900, that's right.
i 16 MR. MURLEY:
One little community up in
{
17 Massachusetts the fire chief and the police chief couldn't J
18 agree.
And neither one of them, I think, sounded the alarm 19 or something like that.
4 20 Where we judge it's not a serious fundamental 21 flaw in their program -- we do have.to make some judgments --
22 we sit down with FEMA and the states and the local communities i
I 23 and they usually do a remedial drill.
24 So in every one of these cases, the deficiency has c
25 been cleared, and we have not started the 120-day clock.
i t
l-
-.. ~
i 16 i
l j
g COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
So you differentiate p.,
2 among Category A deficiencies then in terms of --
3 MR. MURLEY:
Yes, we --
4 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
P.ven though that's the 5
category that is the most significant under FEMA's own 6
rating plan?
7 MR. MURLEY:
Yes.
8 MR. DIRCKS:
I think FEMA has a role too.
They g
say, well, this police chief, his phone was disconnected, or 10 he didn't get the message.
We can fix this up.
It's a 11 Category A by definition, but it's a Category A -- not a 12 Category A in practice.
They say, we can go back and fix it.
/
13 He's ready to participate.
14 I think Tom and others rely on that.
But if they 15 come in and said, we've got a real problem here because 16 they're not going to participate and there's no way to make 17 them particioate, or they don't have the equipment, then 18 that immediately flags the 120-day issue.
19 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Did you start the 20 120-day clock in any of those cases, the nine sites over the 21 past three years?
22 MR. MURLEY:
No.
In every case there was a --
l 23 well, see the state can take corrective action.
Compensatory-t 24 action they call it..Or they can have a remedial drill, 25 and I'm sure that's what will happen in the Susauehanna case.
r l
[
17 1
The state will say, we can cover that community and compensate 2
for them.
3 And I don't know for a fact, but I'm pretty sure i
there will be a remedial drill and we'll see how that goes.
4 5
But that's been the pattern in the past.
6 The reason I bring it up is because it is a 7
continuing burden on the staff.
And I don't see that we will 1,
8 be -- a change in the pattern in the next two years.
l 9
Finally, I wanted to mention briefly that we are i
to beginning to use PRA, probabilistic risk assessment techniques 11 to guide our inspection program.
As you know, we can't 12 inspect everything in the plant.
The inspection modules that
,y 13 we have are quite useful, but we can't do all of them.
l 14 And so we have started some trial programs in 15 the region to help us sort out what's important to safety, 16 and what rocks to look under.
We've used -- we don't i
17 generate the PRA ourselves.
And where we need some an'alysis 18 help we turn to a laboratory.
I don't want to turn my l'
is inspectors into PRA experts.
t 20 But it does help to use the insights that have 21 come out of these PRA's to judge what's important to safety 22
'and where we should be putting our limited inspection 23 resources.
I will only say here that I think the results 24 so far have been encouraging, and I think after we get a little i
i 25 more experience under our belts, I might want'to come down l
18 4
i i
and tell you a little more in detail what we're doing and i
rm 2
the kinds of results that we see coming out of it.
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Have you seen any j '
4 instances so far where PRA's, reliability studies, those 5
kinds of things would lead you to one conclusion, such as 6
a system or particular system in a plant is one of very i
7 high reliability and yet then you see operating experience 1
8 that directly contradicts that?
4 g
MR. MURLEY:
We haven't looked enough yet to find I
10 that.
But there -- I can give you an example.
It really --
11 I guess the initiative between AEOD and ourselves was kind 12 of at the same time.
They have been looking over the past I
13 several months at -- in boiling water reactors -- the so-called 4
1-14 interfacing system LOCA, Event V event.
l i
15 And they've looked back over operating history.
l 16 And what they're finding is that there have been four cases 17 of over-pressurization, of low pressure ECC systems in 18 boiling water reactors.
They did not lead to a break in I
19 those systems but they -- it's marginal, They could have.
i 20 For example, some -- I think it was 300 psi design i
21 system, suction system saw primary system temperatures and 22 presumably pressures at Pilgrim and a couple -- I think there 23 were three other plants.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Browns Ferry I think was i
i 25 one of --
19 1
MR. MURLEY:
Browns Ferry was another, yes.
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Although I thought there 3
was a leak there, but maybe not.
4 MR. MURLEY:
I think a pump seal was leaking.
5 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Right.
6 MR. MURLEY: Now what we were doing at kind of the 7
same time was using -- you know, PRA tells us that Event V 8
is an important thing to look at.
So we went out and inspecte d 9
these plants to see what their valve lineups were.
But we 10 go even further.
We look at the procedures and their 11 maintenance details, which the PRA people don't do.
They 12 don't really get down to the kind of level that our inspectors
/
13 do.
14 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Did the PRA's tell you 15 that this was a significant sequence for a boiling water 16 reactor?
17 MR. MUPLEY:
No, it didn't, and that was my point.
18 AEOD is -- they didn't do a complete reassessment, but they 19
-- they're suggesting that it may be a factor of ten, or 20 maybe even more greater frecuencies of a small LOCA due to 21 this event than had been thought before.
22 I don't claim credit for that, but I'm saying Z3 that that's an area that we were looking at and we might 24 have come to the same conclusion.
25 COMMISSIONER ASEELSTINE:
I guess what I'm wondering
f 20 1
is, is that an example where the PRA's were sort of leading j
,~
2 us down one path, you don't have to worry about this secuence 3
for a boiler, and then.the operating experience actually 4
began to say, oh, yes you do.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think you gain some benefit 6
from PRA, but I'd be worried that we don't take a sampling 7
of other systems as well, because you can get into trouble 8
in a lot of different ways, not only by those that give you 9
the highest consequence to the situation.
10 MR. MURLEY:
I should mention that we're not going n
11 to throw out our traditional inspection program.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes, I didn't think you were.
1
/
13 MR. MURLEY:
But I do believe that this is a 14 better way to look at a plant.
One other example, we took 15 Calvert Cliff which has an IREP PRA, and the staff picked 1
16 out two secuences that the PRA showed to be high risk.
One 17 is failure of a DC bus followed by loss of all auxiliary i
is feedwater.
19 And they followed that -- they did a lot of 20 homework back in the region as to what equipment was important 21 in that secuence, what equipment failed, what maintenance 1
22 proced'.res were important to that ecuipment, what recovery 23 procedares were important.
And then when they got to the 24 plant, they followed it down.
And it caused them to look 25 into some nooks and crannies that the normal inspection program i
1 J
)
I
21 o
1 would not look at.
2 For example, they found some labeling on an 3
auxiliary feedwater pump that was either misleading or 4
wrong.
We normally might not catch that in our inspection 5
program.
And it was the kind of labeling that you would --
6 that would be important in recovery of this particular 7
secuence.
8 So I think that's an example of how we might use 9
that.
And why don't I just close there, because I think 10 I'll leave you with that.
It's a new way of looking at 11 inspections.
It's not the final answer, and we're just not 12 done yet.
/-
13 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I think it's a good 14 approach.
And I would urge you to continue to make use of 15 that kind of information.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay, any other cuestions 17 or comments?
18 (No response.)
19 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Your attribution was correct 20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay, shall we --
21 CCKMISS10NER ASSELSTINE:
Maybe cae other cuestion 22 for Tom.
You talked about the plants that six or eight 23 months ago or so you thought were having difficulties and 24 the progress that's been made to date.
How about any going 2
the other direction?
Six or eight months ago looked pretty
22 s
1 good and now they seem to be going in a declining direction?
2 MR. MURLEY:
I can't say that there's any that 3
I'm sure are declining.
There are those plants that -- I 4
mentioned two, Connecticut Yankee and Vermont Yankee that 5
have had problems and that we're keeping our eye on.
Now 1
6 I bet I've met with the management of those two utilities 7
three times since that meeting.
And I'm convinced that they i
8 are seriously concerned about improving.
I g
But in terms of, are there any I'm sure that are i
10 cx1 a downcline, I can't say.
l 11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
One other question.
When i
12 we go to the older plants in your region and in others as 1
i 13 well, one thing I sense when you compare the older ones to i
4 14 the newer ones is a greater sense of informality.
Less of 15 a reliance on real detailed procedures, on how things are 16 to be done. -There's more of a reliance on experience, people 17 who have been there for many, many years.
18 Is that a contributing factor in any way to, you i.
is know, some of these -- a couple of the problems that you t
20 mentioned at some of the older plants that.have had fairly 21 long operating experience?
That is, when some of those older 22 experienced pecole leave, move up the chain of command so 23 that they're-no longer at the plant with the same kinds of l
I 24 responsibilities they've had for years and years, the new 25 people come in, that that more informal approach leads to.
l
23 1
things falling'throuch the cracks on occasion?
2 I guess one thi g that comes to mind is the 3
check-in -- the inspection of replacement parts at Vermont 4
Yankee.
5 MR. MURLEY:
Yes, I'll have to agree, there is 6
an element of that informality.
And in the one way, there's 7
a strength there.
And that strength comes from this 8
experience.
9 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That's right.
10 MR. MURLEY:
The older plants also tend to have 11 simpler tech specs, and simpler, plants all the way around.
12 So, it's more important that the newer ones have a discipline,
/ '
13 I think.
14 But on balance, I think the experience that we see 15 in the older plants, more than outweighs the informality.
16 I wouldn't say it's uniformly informal, but there are 17 instances of it, and it's a good coint.
18 As the old generation moves out we have to keep 19 cut eye on that.
3)
COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
One other thing on 21 Vermont Yankee that I'd mentioned.
I was very impressed n
with the pre-planning they were doing for the pipe replacement 23 And I wonder if so far your sense is that that's really l
24 moving fairly well.
It was a tremendous effort, it looked l
25 like to me, to pre-plan, pre-train people with a 'ter?
24 1
aggressive schedule.
I was wondering how that was 2
orogressing.
3 MR. MURLEY:
Well, they haven't actually shut down 4
yet for the outage.
But I agree, my staff was quite impressed 5
with the cuality of the planning that's gone into that.
We'll 6
have to wait and see.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Tom, one item that's been 8
on my mind recently has to do with fitness for duty.
Have s
you observed any fitness for duty problems?
Without getting 10 into specifics, and how do you feel about fitness for duty 11 requirements?
12 MR. MURLEY:
We have not had a major problem
/
13 that I know of.
Most of the utilities in Region I are old 14 experienced nuclear utilities, so they have programs in place.
15 And they've -- I just am not aware that there has been a 16 serious problem.
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay, any other comments 18 or questions?
All right, well, thank you very much, Tom.
19 And when you feel you have to leave, you just go right ahead.
l X)
MR. DIRCKS:
I might have Jim Kenpler go next.
21 MR. KEPPLEP:
You want me to go next?
22 MR. DIRCKS:
Yes, why don't you go next?
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think they're going to
(
24 stay overnight.
25 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
That shouldn't have anything l
l
25 i
J 1
to do with the length of the meeting, however.
.(~
2 (Laughter.)
I' i
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
My target is 5:00.
4 MR..KEPPLER:
I've got some plants to talk about.
1 5
CHAIPMAN PALLADINO:
It will probably be 5:15.
i 6
Okay, go ahead, Jim.
7 MR. KEPPLER:
I think back when I briefed the 8
Commission, I guess it was. February of this year on the 9
Davis-Besse plant.
I hope I don't prove to be another f
10 precursor.
I t
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:,Another what?
4 8
12 MR. KEPPLER:
Precursor of problems.
Mr. Dircks i
lf' 13 mentioned that we will be having a full Commission meeting x
r 14 on Davis-Besse next week so I won't discuss that plant here f
4 j
15 today.
i l
16 At our last meeting --
i i
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
In mentioning those plants I
l 16 I wasn't thinking specifically about the plant, but rather t
l lb are problen plants isolated, or do you see trends?
That was i
t 20 really the thrust of what I intended. 'But go ahead, Jim.
I 21 MR. KEPPLER:
At the last meeting when I talked i
4 l
22 about Davis-Besse I expressed my views to you that I felt 1
2 the agency as a whole had to be more timely in its i
24 identification of oroblem areas at plants, and problem 25 facilities in general, and try to come to grips with these
26 1
problem quicker.
2 And I think we've been doing that.
I outlined 3
to you some initiatives we had undertaken at the last meeting 4
to try to be more aggressive in our identification of problems,
5 and to see if we couldn' t focus our attention on it quicker.
6 And I'm very pleased with the efforts we've made that way.
7 I think we are focusing our insoections more on 8
problem areas, more on problem plants.
And I think this is 9
the way to go.
10 I want to talk to you today a little bit about 11 some of the plants we're having problems with, particularly 12 LaSalle and Byron, Fermi and the Cook plant.
And I'll say
/
13 a couple words on Palisades also.
Let me talk as a general 14 comment about NTOL plants though, since Tom did.
15 Since the Three Mile Island accident we have had 16 five plants licensed in Region III, Callaway, the two LaSalle 17 units, Byron 1 and Fermi.
You will recall that Callaway 18 had a lot of initial problems in its low power testing such 19 that I delayed bringing that plant to the Commission's 20 attention for a full power license consideration until those 21 problems were worked out.
22 I'm happy to say that Callaway is doing a lot 23 better today.
And in fact of the five plants that were 24 licensed, I would clearly rank Callaway at the top of the l
25 list in Region III.
That plant has done well in terms of I
27 1
online time, the numbers of mistakes have reduced.
I still 2
have some concern over what I consider to be too many scrams.
I 3
Put I see the company puttino a lot of attention'to it.
And 1
j 4
my view is that Callaway is progressing nicely.
5 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Jim, is that perception I
A~
6 that you have of the quality of their operation compared to 7
others in your region reflective of the plant itself in some r
I j
8 way?
Is it partly because it is the latest design PWR and 9
it's easier to run or something?
Or is it simply the human 10 factor?
11 MR. KEPPLER:
No, in fact Tom made the comment that 2
l 12 the newer plants are more complex and I certainly agree with i
}
I' 13
- that, e
I 14 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Well, that doesn't j
15 necessarily mean that they aren't easier to run.
1 16 MR. KEPPLER:
I think there's two reasons why I
17 Callaway is doing well.
One is that it-was a SNUPS design, i
1 l
18 and I think it received a lot more attention by the AE's l
l 19 -
and the companies involved.
l 20 But perhaps more importantly, I think they have i
21 very good upper plant management that. Tom talked about as 22 an essential element.
But they have involved top management 23 in the plant.
And they have an insistence on accountability i
i 24 in their operations.
And I think all three of those are 25 very key elements-toward a good operation.
y--,
.--~m.-.---,
ym.myr-,=r-,_,,-,%.,
n, yeg.- -,.--
.;,e-----4,..
---,,er-
-y.%-
,.r--
-e~w--..-,--,-.,-4.-e-
1 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Effective, and the l
record at Wolf Creek, I would submit those are probably the 2
3 most significant.
4 MR. KEPPLER:
Yes.
5 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Well, you're saying it's 6
both.
It's because it's SNUPS, but it's also the. human 7
factor.
l 8
MR. KEPPLER:
Well, that's my view, yes.
)
g COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Okay.
in COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
It's interesting that 8-11 of the NTOL's, that is the new inexuerienced utility.
1 I
12 MR. KEPPLFR:
Well, we were very high on the 1!/
13 project before it got a license.
The regional peoole thought I
14 Callaway was a good licensee, and its initial slin-ups in the 15 beginning were disappointing.
But I thin?c the company is 16 the better for it today.
I i
17 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
How m.tny trips are they I
18 having, say so far this year?
l D.
MR. KEPPLEP:
So far this year I'd say they've l
l 20 had a dozen trips.
That's still a lot of trips.
21 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Does that have'something.
22 to do with the plant, the design, SNUPS?
1 23 MR. KEPPLER:
I think most of the trips are in 24 the secondary' side of the plant.
l 25 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I see.
1
-. -... -. - - = -
,_,,-- _ ~.,. _ _ _...
29 1
MR. KEPPLER:
And the company is now putting 2
extra attention in that area.
But my last recount of that 3
was that better than 50 cercent of the trips were in the 4
4 secondary side of the plant.
5 Let me talk a little bit about LaSalle and Byron.
1 6
LaSalle Unit 1 is now three years old.
And the disaopointing 7
part of the LaSalle operation, in my view, is that it's 8
still acting like a new plant.
The plant has tripped over j
-g 35 times since initial startup.
It's had many repetitive t
]
to equipment problems.
There's a high rate of personnel errors.
11 The health physics. practices have caused us some concern.
f 12 And their control over EO, equipment qualification modifications ii/
13 have just resulted in a number of problems that we'll be 14 taking enforcement action on.
15 Let me talk about-Byron and then come back and
+
16 link the two together, if I could.
Byron started up,
]
17 received its full power license early this year.
And it has 18 had a difficult startup period.
I certainly expected a 19 better startup period out of Commonwealth Edison.
j 20 The plant has had 26 scrams so far this year.
i 21 It's had four safety iniections.
It's had over 80 LER's 22 written against it.
The.y've had over 25 missed surveillances.
23 A lot of problems.
24 Now in 1983 I had a number of concerns with 25 Commonwealth Edison in general.
We had some -- we had issued i
,..,e-
.,--,er-
--a e.,
w-
-<new,mr, y
30 I
10 fines at the operating plants in 1983.
And we had some i
2 very intense meetings with top utility management, the CEO 3
of the company and others, to get them to improve their I
I 4
regulatory performance.
5 At the -- at one of the Commission meetings --
6 I believe it was on Byron -- we discussed the regulatory 7
improvement program that was put into effect, and we submitted 8
a copy to the Commission.
Commonwealth Edison's performanc,e i
e has really improved at Dresden, Ouad Cities and Zion.
I l
10 feel very comfortable today with the performance of those i
11 plants.
12 But for some reason tie performance at LaSalle
/
13 does not measure up to what I think it oucht to be.
And 14 Byron has had its difficulties in the startup period.
This 15 has rekindled a concern I've had over whether the company 16 may be spread too thin at the top levels.
17 In a case like Callaway --
18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
And they've gotrthree j
19 more units to go, too.
20 MR. KEPPLER:
Let me just elaborate a minute.
In 21 a case like Callaway, I see a high quality individual at 22 the top of the operation in Don Shnell.
He spends -- he's 23 a senior vice president.
He puts his total time on the 24 Callaway project.
f 25 In Commonwealth Edison's case Cordell Reed --
i l
i I
another person who I have a high regard for -- is overseeing 2
five nuclear stations.
And that's a tremendous responsibility 3
And I don't know whether it's achievable.
4 I have discussed the concern with the company.
5 They have even brought in outside consultants to look at 6
their organizational set-uo.
And they are trying something 7
different at both LaSalle and Byron by putting another layer
[
8 of management in under Cordell Reed, between the station and g
him.
10 It's too early to tell whether this will help i
11 or not.
But we're watching it closely.
12 I have -- in the case of LaSalle, I have asked my j
13 staff to conduct an in-depth review of the operation to date, i
14 and I plan to get with the senior management of NRR and I&E l
l 15 and discuss strategy of where we go with LaSalle project.
16 But I think clearly we've got to move the company in a 17 direction of improved performance.
I 18 In fairness on Byron, I am seeing some improvement i
19 over the las' couple of months.
But I -- that's a very short i
l 20 time frame, and we're going to continue to watch that closely.
21 Let.me mention Fermi.
Fermi received a full 4
22 power license on July 15th of this year, and we have not l
23 let the utility go above 5 percent power yet.
And I have 24 a hold on the utility going above 5 percent power.
1 l
i 25 The startup of Fermi has been extremely
{
i
~.
_ = - -..
32 l
i disappointing.
Disappointing to me personally because I l
2 felt very strong that here was a comoany that was ready to 4
- 3 move along, move in the right direction.
I think all of 4
you centlemen felt comfortable with Fermi.
5 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
6 MR. KEPPLER:
Several of you were out' there.
We
{
7 were -- we were praising the company.
And I recall the 8
Commission meeting --
l l
9 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
We did too.
10 MR. KEPPLER:
-- being a rather pat-on-che-back i
11 type of meeting for everybody.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Everything was glowing, it 1
I 13 seemed.
I j
14 MR. KFPPLER: Everything was glowing.
[
15 COMMISSIONEP ZECH:
I agree.
16 MR. KEPPLER:
They had an unplanned criticality 17 event.
They've already submitted over 50 LER's in the i
18 operation to date.
About half of these --
l 19 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
Fifty since when?
}
20 MR. KEPPLER:
Since the initial licensing of the i
[
21 plant in the spring.
I 22 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
- Okay, r
23 MR. KEPPLER:
About half of these are people i
24 mistakes.
We learned recently that they have been operating i
2 for several months violating containment integrity.
They had i
33 0
1 a hole in the system.
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
3 MR. KEPPLFR:
Through valving errors.
4 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
How does that happen?
I 5
have never understood why there are not detection systems 6
available that don't tell you immediately if you've got a 7
hole in your containment?
8 MR. KEPPLER?
Well, th,ese were small lines that 9
were omitted from the startup checklist.
And they weren't 10 monitored in the control -- were not displayed.
11 COFMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Isn't there a heat monitor 12 or something?
There surely is the technology for that sort 13 of thing.
14 MR. KEPPLER:
We've had problems before, Commissioner, 15 that plants, that you just don't --
16 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I know.
I think I've 17 asked this cuestion before.
I guess I'need to talk to a good la engineer and find out why we can't do something about that.
i 19 CHAIPMAN TALLADINO:
Don't they also make leak 20 tightness tests once?
21 MR. KEPPLER:
They do them at the beginning of 22 the -- before the plant was licensed they did a leak tightness 23 test.
So it had to hapoen afterward.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTIME:
It was a two-inch line, 25 wasn't it?
34 1
MR. KEPPLER:
I believe it was an inch and-a-half 2
line.
3 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
If NASA can leak test some 4
of its devices, the size that they are, it seens to ne we 5
ought to be able to figure out a way to leak test a 6
containnent.
7 MR. KEPPLER:
I can tell vou that the company is 8
very disappointed in its, performance.
They were in to meet 9
with me yesterday.
They have a good attitude right at the 10 moment.
They're not trying to jumo ahead and bring this 11 plant up fast.
They feel they have let everybody down.
They 12 have taken a number of actions that sound good.
But I intend 13 to see them operate at the 5 percent plateau for a while 14 before I consider letting the plant go above that level.
15 I mentioned briefly the Cook plant.
Cook has 16 been a plant that's been around for some time.
A plant that 17 has been, over the years, average to perhaps slightly below 18 average.
And the -- we've been putting more attention on 19 that olant simply because I feel the progress that's been l
20 made is just not good enough.
I feel they ought to be 21 performing at a better level.
And we're focusing attention 22 that way.
23 They've had a number of problems in the areas of 24 operator licensing testing.
They've had a high fail rate 25 there.
There was a PAT team inspection out there that
35 4
1 identified a number of problems in the surveillance area 2
that we're going to look at.
And I just feel that the 3
company should be onerating at a higher level of excellence 4
and that's where I'm pushing my attention with them.
5 On a positive note, I would say on Palisades 6
last -- beginning of this year we gave them a fairly negative 7
SALP appraisal.
The performance had been declining 8
significantly in the operations and maintenance areas.
And 9
I took a trip over to the plant a couple months ago and they 10 have a new plant suoerintendent in there, who I was quite 11 impressed with.
12 I thought there was considerable effort to improve 13 the appearance of the plant, and to improve the maintenance 14 capabilities of the olant.
And I found it interesting that 15 they were actively monitoring all of the good practices of 16 INPO and trending their performance, and showing progress on 17 the performance.
18 So I came away with a better feeling on Palisades 19 at this time.
20 Did NRR want to say anything on Palisades?
21 MR. DIRCKS:
This is one of the five plants, so 22 I'd thought we'd cover that one now.
We 've got another one 23 tomorrow.
And then we pick up the other plants when we see 24 Regions IV and V.
M MR. THOMPSON:
As you know, Palisades was one of
36 o
t 1
a handful of plants that we had identified to the Commission.
2 I'd like to make sure that you don't think those are all the l
3 issues the staff is working on.
I quess there are some l
4 subset of plants we look for.
We talked with the regional 5
administrators to see if he had some concerns about their i
{
6 performance in the maintenance area, the operations area.
t 7
And as Jim said, this had been one of the olants.
I 8
And we also looked -- had there been an issue that 9
had been ongoing for a fairly long period of time without i
i 10 being -- reaching a resolution.
And particular, where a i
j 11 proposed resolution had been accepted by the utility, and i
j 12 at the same time, there had been a proposal to stop 1
13 implementation of that particular fix because of an analysis, f
14 a PRA or analysis.
t l
15 In this particular case Palisades had made a t
16 commitment to install a fix to a main steam isolation valve, i
17 single failure problem that would result in both steam 1
18 generators blowing down, in the event of a main steam line i
I 19 break in a particular area.
Our evaluation had been -- had l'
20 detected this as part of the SEP program.
And we have 21 recently received their analysis in, I guess it was June --
l 22 May, and we have underway a review by our technical staff.
1 23 And we expect to have a resolution of the issue toward the i
24 end of this year, the first part of the year.
25 So the issues -- the resolution.of the issue.is 4
._m___~_..._
m,
....v
,,m_..
4
.,. _ ~ _,, _ _ _. _... _.,, -.,, _, _ - - _
$1 m
l' fairly well in hand right now.
It's one that we've identified,
_~
2 I guess, sometime both in the SEP program.
And the utility 3
is being very responsive.
We've had them in to again 4
address this issue.
And this is just, again, one of the 5
issues that is not.necessarily a huge safety issue, just 6
one that had been around f,or some period of time and seemed 7
to fit that category, that the Davis-Besse third auxiliary 8
feedwater pump issue did.
9 If you want to go into additional details we 10 can do that, but I think that's generally where we are on 11 that issue.
I know Congressman Markey's staff is, you know, 12 discussing with us lots of details cn1 it.
But I think that's i
13 kind of where we are.
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
What's the problem with the 15 main steam isolation valve?
16 MR. THOMPSON:
If you have -- the current design 17 is such that if you have a f ailure of one of the main steam 18 isolatio valves,.and a failure upstream of the other main 19.
steam isolation valve, you can blow down both steam generators 20 That is a condition that has not been analyzed, and the 21 question then is, how do you remove decay heat, you know, 22 in the event of an accident.
Just in a design basis activity.
23 You still will have, you know, an auxiliary 24 feedwater pump available to feed it.
And the auestion, I 2
believe -- correct me if I'm wrong, Denny -- goes into the
38 i
> i i i
1 containment integrity issue as you're -- because the most
-~
2 likely hlace for this rupture would be in the containment 3
of the unisolated leak.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Don't any other plants face 5
this.same thing?
1 i
6 MR. THOMPSON:
As far as'I know, this is similar --
7 this is a uniaue design, and it may be due to the way their 8
crossover -- the main steam isolation header is connected.
9 Denny?
+
10 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Their. main. steam isolation valves 11 are check valves.
They have an operator that holds the a
valve open.
The main steam flow is out from the steam a
13 generator to the turbines.
But, if you will, the isolation 14
, valves are installed backwards.
So that when you have a 15 main steam isolation signal, the operator disengages, the f
- 16.,
check valve goes shut.
$ 1 17 Therefore, it would allow flow to come from the 18 turbine direction back towards the steam generator.
And 19 with the crossover they have, a single failure of the 20 unbroken MSIV would allow flow out through the break.
21 MR. THOMPSON:
But I think that backward l
22 installation is the way it was designed to be.
I mean --
23 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
That's the design, that's 24 correct.
l 25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay, thank you, i
I
,,,. _. ~
,m,-
.s-
.--,,,,.,p-y
39 e
1 MR. KEPPLER:
Let me just take another couple of 2
minutes and talk about the John C. Haines decontamination.
3 You will recall, we kept the Commission informed of this i
matter in which a licensee in Ohio had americium in excess 4
5 of his license.
And we learned about that through an 6
allegation that he was conducting irradiation of diamonds 7
using material that he wasn't licensed for.
8 And we worked with the FBI, the Department of 9
Justice, DOE, and EPA to successfully recover that material 10 cod to have the place decontaminated and restored to public 11 use again.
And I thought that was really a good success 9
12 story.
We don't have too many of those to tell at times.
13 And I felt very pleased with the performance of all of the 14 sister government agencies that we worked with.
15 And I thought I would crepare some letters for 16 your signature, Mr. Chairman, to go to the key officials 17 of these other agencies to thank them for the helo we got 18 on that.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think I alreadv signed 20 one to EPA.
21 MR. XEPPLER:
You may have.
22 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
Well, I'd like to say, I 23 think Pegion III did a very outstanding job in coordinating 24 that event and bringing it to a successful conclusion.
l
%5 MR. KEPPLER:
Thank you, Commissioner.
l l
40 i
a-i 1
COMMISSIONER ZECH:
They tid a very good job.
f 2
COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I would agree with that.
3 Thank you very much.
Does that company still have a license 4
from us for anything?
5 MR. KEPPLER:
No, it was an individual.
6 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay, the individual?
r s
7 MR. KEPPLER:
Very strange individual.
8 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
9 MR. KEPPLER:
We took care of that.
10 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
All right, good.
I^
11 CHAIPMAN PALLADINO:
He was driving without a
,i 12 license.
13 MR. DIRCKS:
Are you finished, Jim?
14 MR. KEPPLER:
Yes.
15 MR. DIRCKS:
Okay, Nelson?
i 16 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I had maybe one question-
- )
17 for Jim.
In the case of LaSalle, Byron, Fermi and Ccok, 18 do you have a sense for how the senior management of the f
19 utilities view the problems?
Do they view them the same i
20 way you do?
Are they sufficiently concerned about the i
21 situation at those plants?
Z2 MR. KEPPLER:
There's no cuestion in ny mind that 23 the !nanagement at Fermi is embarrassed and concerned, and i
24 dedicated to doing the right thing.
I think Commonwealth l
25 top management is also concerned and -- I guess if I have i
.w..
_+. _ -.,
rr..
,y_m.,
._irm_.__,-
-_my-w-,
,,-,w,r-,._,-
_. ~ _
,--m_,
n A
1 a feeling it's that I'm not sure they see things with the 2
same perspective that I do.
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
4 MR. KEPPLER:
Or the same sense of urgency.
That's 5
my perception.
6 In the case of Cook, I think the record speaks 7
for itself.
The project has gone on with some degree of 8
mediocrity, and I feel that we just have to push harder to 9
get them to perform at a higher level of excellence.
And 10 we're doing that.
11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
You mentioned there were 12 some chcnges at Fermi.
What changes have they made?
13 MR. KEPPLER:
They have taken steps to get in 14 their shift operating advisors who we were relying on to 15 bridge the gap for lack of experience.
They're involving 16 them more in the day-to-day routine operations.
And the 17 shift technical advisors.
These people were really almost 18 only on-call before.
19 And I see them more involved.
They have taken 20 some of the administrative burdens away from people in the 21 control rooms so that they can devote greater attention to 22 ongoing activities, ongoing plant operations.
And there was 23 a whole slew of items that I just can't rr.all others.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Anything with regard to 1
25 the people that were involved in the unplanned criticality?
42 e
1 MR. KEPPLER:
They oulled the operator that was 2
involved off shift for additional training, and I don't know 3 l whether he has been put back on.
In terms of -- I think 4
we'll be discussing this at an additional time.
5 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTrNE:
Fine, okay.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
But how about training 7
generally?
You mentioned, I think that was the plant you 8
said half of the LER's were due to human error or operator 9
error.
10 MR. KEPPLER:
Well, I think -- it's interesting.
11 I asked the president of the company yesterday what he felt 12 went wrong in terms of why -- here was a company who everybody 13 thought was well prepared.
And he had two thoughts that I'll 14 pass on to you.
15 One thought was that as they were d'oing the 16 ore-op proaram -- and that by the way was the only licensee 17 we ever gave a Category 1 to in pre-op testing, the only 18 one -- that they had counterparts there advising them and 19 working with them.
And these oeople are gone now.
20 And the second thing he felt was they got too 21 cocky.
He said, you told me not to get cocky, but he said, 22 I think that's what happened.
I think we were overconfident.
23 COMMISSIONER ASSEl.STINE:
Yes, I have to say, 24 when I think back to the time that we issued the license, 25 they looked awfully good.
The senior managers actively
sa J
1 involved in the project; there at the site on a regular 2
basis; hadn't skimped; first-class in terms of putting the facilities together; experienced oeople.
3 P
4 MR. KEPPLER:
They're not offering defensiveness 5
on this thing.
They're facing up to the issues.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay, any other cuestions?
7 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
No, but I'll be back to take 8
a look at some of those plants again.
9 MR. KEPPLER:
I hooe you will.
10 COMMISSIONER ZECH-LaSalle I haven't had a chance 11 to go to yet, but Byron I've been to, and also Fermi.
But 12 I'd like to go back and nee, if you're having troubles at 13 Fermi like vou've told us, I think I'll go back again sometime 14 fairly soon if I can and see what happened out there myself 15 firsthand.
And Byron too.
That's kind of a disappointment.
16 So I think'I'11 go back there again too.
You can tell them 17 I'm coming, will you?
18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
And tell them I'm coming 19 too.
20 MR. KEPPLER:
I already have.
21
( Laugh te r. )
Z2 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
Good.
23 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I would urge the Admiral 24 to do that.
I think that has a salutary effect, I'll be back.
25 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
I expect to hear good things
44 e
i from them.
And not only hear good things, but see performance.
2 And tell them I'll be watching them from now on, very 3
carefully, i
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Tell them, I shall return, I
5 to quote a general.
6 Peady to move on to Region II?
7 MR. GRACE:
The four main categories on the agenda 8
that you have were suggested to me by the EDO's office as 9
areas that you'd be interested in.
And I've added some 10 bullets under each of the four categories.
If you can bear 11 with r.e, I'll skim through the first three and get to the 12 facilities that are getting increased attention.
13 As you know, I was assioned to Rett. ion II in 14 February of this year, six or seven months ago.
And 15 immediately was faced with the problem of installing new 16 people in many of the key positions.
Of course, I was new 17 and had just two vears with the agency, having spent one 18 year in I&E last year, and spent '83 with NRR on the CRBR.
19 First thing I had to do was select a deputy.
And 20 I was fortunate in having John O'Shinskv available who 21 has been serving as the deputy regional administrator.
In 22 addition we had a vacancy created in the division of reactor 23 projects then, and we selected Roger Walker, who had come 24 to Region II a few months earlier from Region III.
And he's 25 been serving us very well.
He's with us today.
45 e
1 We had to select a deputy for that office, division 2
of reactor projects, and we've done that.
But he is 3
currently serving as acting division director in reactor 4
safety.
And that's because Paul Beamis has left to go with 2
a 5
Jim what's-his-name up the street.
6 (Laughter.)
7 MR. GRACE:
Now I'm recruiting, I'm inter' viewing 8
a number of finalists on Friday when I get back to the e
office to fill that position.
Then Al Gibson can move over 10 to the deputy slot, unless he's selected for the division i
j 11 of reactor safety.
~
1 12 Now we've just received authorization to recruit
(
13 -
a deputy for the division of reactor safety, so that's being 14 posted immediately.
I f
15
'In addition I've replaced ~ tlus director of I
16 enforcement to do our part to enhance communications with i
l j
17 headquarters in that respect.
We're fortunate that our
.I 18 director of the division of safeguards has been with the --
19 well, he's been with the region for just six months I think i
1 20 of last year.
And that's Phil Store, and he's with us today.
i 21 So it's been a probably in developing a new i
22 management team, selecting people, and getting installed.
23 We're not there yet, but I think we've made considerable 24 progress and we're learning to work well together and 25 communicate with each other.
r
--,,-a,.
--....n n-en,,m,.,,..m un.,.-
--,.n.,.
~
~
46 1
We've also made an attempt to communicate with 2
the residents.
I've been to some 16 of the 20 sites in 3
Region II already to get to know the residents on their 4
own home turf.
At the same time, I got to meet utility.
5 management onsite, which is a key indicator to me as to 6
where I might expect trouble, and where I think they're 7
well managed.
8 So we've made considerable progress in this area.
9 I have weekly staff meetings to communicate, to facilitate 10 communications with the principal staff.
The deputy director 11 is having daily stand-up meetings to handle the daily 12 business.
And this is a practice that I've followed from our 13 I&E experience.
14 Then I have monthly staff meetings with the whole 15 staff to facilitate communications there.
And I'm stressing i
16 here two-way communications.
I don't manage in the military i
17 style because we don't have a military operation.
And I 18 depend very strongly on the judgment and the input so that 19 we can arrive at a consensus.
I believe in participatory 20 management, and I didn't learn that from the Japanese, I 21 learned that from experience over the years.
I 22 In addition I have visited the other regional 23 offices to see how they function, and to learn from them.
24 I visited all the regional offices since last February, u
except Region V, which I had visited last year.
47 5
1 So the new management team is working well.
But 2
we're not there yet.
3 !
The second item I want to just touch on is the v
4 Vogle readiness review.
You heard a presentation from 5
Georgia Power recently describing their program and the use 6
so you know all about that.
So far as the NRC activity in 7
this area, the prime responsibility has been assigned to 8
Region II to manage this activity and implement the program.
9 It's moving along well.
It's now underway.
We've had some 10 six modules subnitted.
The first one has been processed 11 by the NRC, including input from NRR and ELD, and I&E.
12 The other five modules are in various stages of 13 completion.
The whole program is expected to be completed 14 by the middle of next year.
We have just a rough estimate 15 of the total manpower being expended on this project so far.
16 It looks like 16 or 17 man-years for the whole effort.
And 17 a little over half of that is Region II effort.
And about --
18 well, the first cut, which is very rough, we had some 30 19 percent I&E effort and maybe 15 percent from NRR.
But that's 20 a rough cut and that will vary.
And we'll keep -- I promised 21 the EDO'to keep him apprised of the resource expenditures.
22 But we're all committed to meet the schedule and get the 23 job done.
24 The third bullet, enhanced interfaces with the g
program offices.
I was told by people in headquarters and
48 e
1 by people in the region -- there were complaints both ways --
2 about communications.
And so early on I made a commitment 3
to my boss to enhance communications between the region and 4
the program offices in particular.
5 In fact the way I put it, I was going to bring 6
Region II back into the Union.
And I think we've made orogres s 7
in that regard.
Naturally there was strong management in 8
headquarters and there was strong management in Region II.
9 I think we still have strong management, but I think we 10 can work well with the p rogram of fices, and I think we're 11 accomplishing that.
12 Toward that end, we've had visits to the region 13 oy the director of I&E, his deputy, his division directors 14 and all his branch chiefs have been to the region for one 15 reason or another.
Next aionday, as a matter of fact, Jim 16 Taylor is coming back along with John Davis to talk to us 17 and resolve some problems, some concerns that we have with 18 the NFS facility at Irving, Tennessee.
It's farther down 19 on the agenda here.
1 20 So I think we're making progress in that area.
21 The next major category, regional innovations, operational Z!
readiness reviews. I think a better term for that is team m
inspections.
These are being done in some of the other 24 regions as well as Region II.
2 And what it is is a team inspection at NTOL's.
nu 1
This is what we focused on.
This was done at 9t..Lucie, at 2
Catawba, at Grand Gulf and at Watts Bar.
So that is serving 3 l a useful purpose.
H 4
Ouarterly status meetings with licensees.
This 5
we just initiated this spring, and have had meetings with 6
let's see, Crystal River, with Hatch, and with Grand Gulf 7
again.
khere NRR is involved and the practice is really 8
being tested, I guess, and we're getting favorable feedback 9
from the licensees as well as NRR.
They all like it.
It's 10 a means of surfacing problems and heloina to identify 11 priorities.
12 The fuel facility SALP is an idea, I'n told, was 13 originated in Region II last year.
That was before my time 14 so I can't take credit for it.
But Mr. Dircks recently 15 urged that that be done, has given new impetus to the effort.
16 In fact, Region II has now completed its regional office 17 instruction on that subiect and working cooperatively with 18 I&E and NMSS, the first such fuel facility SALP will be 19 done at B&W Navy in November.
20 Another iten that was suggested was the interfaces 21 with states, local government, et cetera.
I might just 22 mention briefly that there is a southeast compact on low n
level waste, which comprises eight of the ten states in 24 Region II.
Kentucky is allied with Illinois and the central 25 group, and that will, of course, be monitored by Pegion III.
i I
50 0
1 West Virginia is allied with Pennsylvania and 2
that will be overseen by Recion I.
And they expect to find 3
a site in Pennsylvania.
The eicht states in Region II that 4
have formed the Southeaut Compact have a very aggressive 5
program.
They have already met with the oublic in'four 6
of the eight states, and they expect to select a site by 7
next summer.
We wish them luck.
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Which group is this?
9 MR. GRACE:
The Southeast Compact.
10 CHAIPPAN PALLADINO:
I see.
11 MR. GRACE:
Now agreement state status is Region 12 II.
Again eight of the ten states are agreement states.
13 Those that are not are West Virginia and Vircinia.
Virginia 14 already has taken initiatives to establish themselves as an 15 agreement state.
So that's in process.
16 West Virginia we doubt will ever become an agreemen t 17 state, but they have so little activity, it's probably not is justified.
So that's in good shape.
19 Moving along to the last item which is probably 20 of greatest interest, I have nuclear fuel services on here 21 because of concerns across the board of -- there have been 22 escalated enforcement actions with civil penalties in the 23 criticality control area, a couple of them last year, in 24 the radiation protection area, and in security.
25 The problem is compounded today by their being in
51 1
the midst of a strike.
It's a rather hostile situation.
2 There's been some violence and this causes us concern.
3 This facility has been in operation since '59 or 4
so, 25 years or thereabouts.
It's changed hands several 5
times.
It's currently owned by Texaco, and there's a rumor 6
afoot that Texaco may sell out.
7 But I toured the place a few months ago and Jim 8
Taylor was with me, and had an uncomfortable feeling frankly.
9 Not only because the record of violations, but also the 10 observation that there are a lot of contaminated areas that 11 are nct being decontaminated and decommissioned.
12 They make fuel primarily.
They make 13 fuel material for the Navy program, which is' dear to I
14 my heart because this is the fuel that goes into the reactor 15 that I designed last for the Navy at Bettis, which is now 16 being mass produced.
They produce a beautiful product, but 17 the process introduces some concerns.
18 Of course, they have an opportunity for. criticality 19 in a number of stages.
And having once had responsibility 20 for a fuel: making facility myself for our critical experiments 21 at Bettis, I'm extremely sensitive to that sort of thing.
22 So the / have also made fuel for -- they've made 23 thorium and uranitm 233 for the light water breeder reactor 24 at Shippingoort.
And that fa ility though is no longer in o
25 production, of course.
The so made plutonium for Seaford,
52 v
1 the G.E. plant, licuid metal cooled plant.
That facility 2
is no longer in use.
3 But these facilities remain undecontaminated 4
and.they haven't been decommissioned for the most part.
5 So we're going to discuss Monday what actions we might take 6
and what we might ask the EDO to take.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Do you have any comment on a
the letter that we received from the union?
9 MR. GRACE:
Yes, I understand -- I haven't seen lo that letter, but I understand that letter has come from the 11 union.
12 COMMISSIONER BERNT!!AL:
You better look at it.
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes, it's auite a letter.
14 MR. GRACE:
Okay, I must -- I might say, we 15 recently were faced with the question of should we allow 16 them to start up operations again with supervisory management 17 of the process.
Operations, actually.
18 And we reviewed the situation carefully as did 19 NMSS and I&E.
We also had the benefit of the results of a 20 by a subcontractor.
Bechtel, some part of Bechtel organizatio1.
21 We reviewed that, didn't see any surprises, didn't see any 22 problems we weren't already aware of.
And so we and NMSS 23 concurred that we had no reason to lift their license or 24 shut them down.
They were actually -- they had an operating u
license and it would take that kind of a deliberate action
53 s-1 on our part, and we didn't have that justification was the 2
consensus.
3 But of course, the union doesn't like the idea 4
that somebody else can do their work for them and may have 5
some legitimate concerns as well.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
'The allegations sound very 7
serious to me, and I think you ought to look at it carefully.
8 MR. GRACE:
Sure will.
9 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I'd just make a comment.
10 First of all, I intend to get a meno out on that letter 11 fairly promotly.
Without prejudging anything because I don't 12 know the facts and I keon saying I'm going to ao down and 13 walk through that place.
Been saying it for seven years, 14 and I haven't done it yet.
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes, I've got to do it to.
16 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
We went through this 17 exercise about seven years ago when they were on strike.
A 18 rather similar acrimonious affair.
A number of charges and 19 allegations.
And it just seems to me without saying anything 20 further at this point that it's time to get the whole thing 21 straightened out.
22 I'm troubled by this pattern of union / management 23 discord that apparently, at least, if not in reality has 24 safety implications for the operation of that plant.
And Xi I think this is two, if not three strikes, as far as I'm
54 o
1 concerned.
2 MR. GRACE:
Well, of course, they've had a very 3
bad management / union relationship for some time.
Of course 4
that's a reflection on both sides, and that's a serious 5
concern.
6 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
And that should be a 7
concern to the Navy too, and I'm surprised frankly that it 8
hasn't surfaced as a greater issue from the Navy itself.
9 MR. GRACE:
Well, we'll be discussing all of these 10 facets when John Davis and Jim Taylor are in Atlanta on 11 Monday, and then develop a plan of action.
12 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Okay, good, 13 MR. GRACE:
Let me ask Jim or NMSS representatives, 14 do you have anything to add to this NFS issue?
15 MR. TAYLOR:
No.
I've not seen the letter.
16 MR. GRACE:
We're anxious to see the letter.
17 MR. DIRCKS:
Was the letter addressed to the 18 Commission?
19 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
20 MR. DIRCKS:
And it just came in?
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes.
In the last couple days.
ZZ MR. GRACE:
No presentation by Pegion II'would be 23 complete without the TVA.
That's occupied a lot of our 24 attention particularly in the last six months.
We are going 25 to cover that tomorrow, but let me just give you a few of
55 I
the highlights of Region II involvement before the matter 2
reached the newspapers a couple of months ago.
3 Browns Ferry in particular has had a poor track 4
record in operations and maintenance in six categories all 5
together.
They've had category three ratings in SALP for 6
a long time.
Last spring, which was the time of the last 7
SALP, spring of
'84, because of the continuing marginal 8
performance they developed a regulatory performance improvement 9
program, which was then put in place by conformatory action to order from Region II.
11 And it also required that they meet quarterly 12 with the board o f directors at TVA.
That procram over the 13 rest of the year, obviously wasn't having much effect.
The 14 violations continued, in some cases seemed to get worse.
I 15 don't know why it happened.
Perhaps, sometimes I have seen 16 in other programs where the existence of a program is thought 17 to be an end in itself, rather than a means to an end.
And 18 I'm speaking of the regulatory improvement program.
19 I don't know.
It would be unfair for me to 20 speculate.
I might be unfair to somebody.
But it wasn't 21 working.
And we're looking at the bottom line, not the Z2 program.
23 So when I was assigned to Region II in February, 24 I had spent a large part of the time in January in Region 25 II getting up to speed.
And it was obvious at the outset
56 i
i that Browns Ferry was our number one problem.
2 I was on the job, I guess, one week when I paid 3
my first visit to Browns Ferry.
And I told them that I was 4
new on the job.
I couldn't formulate any final judgments,
5 but my opinion, I had a very uncomfortable feeling that there 6
was a significant probability -- and I don't mean 10 to 7
the - that they were going to have an embarrassing 8
event at Browns Ferry within the next year or so.
And I 9
told this to the site director Jim Coffey.
10 He mentioned that, well, we have this improvement 11 program.
It's going to take a couple of years to get it 12 going.
And I said, you don't have a couple of years.
I must 13 say to Jim Coffey's benefit, he did turn things around, begin 14 to turn things around rather cuickly.
We got his attention.
15 It was the middle of February when I visited 16 Browns Ferry again, this time with Commissioner Asselstine.
17 We had an opoortunity to meet the chairman of the board 18 at dinner at night.
And this was the opportunity I was looking 19 for because I've learned over the years that if you want to 20 get a problem fixed you have to start at the top.
It may 21 or may not get fixed if you try to manage for them at lower 22 levels.
Il So I expressed a similar concern, as the commission ar !
24 will remember, at dinner that evening.
I think we began to Mi get their attention.
Why their attention was not had earlier l
57 r
1 I don't know.
They did have quarterly meetings.
Perhaps 2
the imoression that the board had was that, well, NRC is 3
taking care of the problems.
They assured us, the program's 4
in place and they could get a progress report from time to 5
time.
6 Apparently they were not concerned, because when 7
we met the last time with the chairman in the EDO's office 8
he asked us, why didn't you tell me we had a oroblem.
- Well, 9
maybe that's a good cuestion.
I thought he was told.
But to a better question would be, why hasn't his staff told him 11 he's having problems.
12 Fe found that there's been a serious lack of 13 communication in the upper echelon at TVA.
Now I mention 14 these faults that we found because I also want to mention 15
-- and maybe we'll get into this tomorrow -- the positive 16 asoects.
Because in contrast to what I found just a few 17 months ago, I think they're making every attempt to turn is things around.
Whether they'll succeed or not remains to 19 be seen.
m COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Is our meeting tomorrow 21 on TVA open or closed?
n COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
It's open, a
MR. GRACE:
Now just a couple more points on 24 this.
It was two weeks after that meeting with the chairman s
of the board at Browns Ferry that they had another incident I
i58 e
l' at Browns Ferry.
This was the famous water level discrepancy 1
2 where their water level instruments in the reactor vessel 3
were reading two feet apart, or roughly two feet different.
4 They increased feed flow as if they believed the 5
lower level, and yet they continued to operate as if they 6
believed the upper level and didn't take the conservative 7
route, which is somewhat typical of some other incidents that 8
have occurred there.
This, I thought, was the last straw 9
and convened my staff and asked, now do we shut them down.
10 Cooler heads prevailed and it was suggested that I not shoot 11 first and ask questions later.
12 So I called Hugh Parris, who was the manager of 13 power and engineering who is one person I had sensed I could 14 communicate well with.
He was concerned.
And asked him to 15 come in immediately and justify their continued operation 16 of Browns Ferry 3.
17 Well, his first response was, couldn't it wait 18 a couple of weeks, Jim Darling is about to go on leave.
And 19 he was cuickly persuaded that it couldn't wait two weeks and 20 they agreed -- this was a Friday, I believe -- and they 21 agreed to come in on Tuesday.
Well, Saturday they shut down.
H The board took.the action to shut down.
And it may have 23 been increased sensitivity on the part of Chairman Dean.
24 So from this point on they've been extremely 2
conservative in their approach.
Well, I shouldn't say
59 4
1 extremely, but certainly conservative.
Two weeks after that 2
they had to shut down Unit 1 at Browns Ferry because they 3
had to maintain some valves that they couldn't maintain at 4
power to stay within their specs.
So they shut down.
Then 5
they decided since they were running out of reactivity 6
lifetime they'd stay shut down.
7 So the entire Browns Ferry facility has been 8
shut down since mid-March.
I should wrao this up.
I know g
we're running overtime.
10 MR. DIRCKS:
We're going to get into TVA tomorrow.
11 I'R. GRACE:
We'll talk about a lot more details 12 tonorrow.
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADIMO:
Fe'll be interested in your 14 recommendations tomorrow.
15 MR. GRACE :
Okay.
So thank you for your attention.
16 Any cuestions?
17 CHAIFFIAN PALLADINO:
Okay, any auestions?
18 COMMISSIONER BERNTRAL:
I take it this was a 19
" voluntary" shutdown, as opposed to a voluntary shutdown.
m MR. GRACE:
Well, I could speculate on that, but 21 I think that they saw the writing on the wall.
But at the 22 same time they were sensitive to -- they were becoming a
sensitive to the problems.
24 COMMISSIONER DERNTHAL:
Is that unprecedented?
25 Have we ever -- has this agency ever, in effect, shut down
@0 1
or caused to be shut down a facility of that size for that 2
length of time?
Other than Three Mile Island, of course.
3 Well, that's not the right statement.
Other than 4
a facility that had some major operation difficulty.
5 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
We keot Salem down for 6
several months.
Davis-Besse obviously for awhile, for several 7
months.
8 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
But those were major events.
9 MR. KEPPLER:
There have been plants that have 10 had problems and the NBC has prevented then from starting up 11 until that orablem was fully corrected.
12 COMMIS:iIO:4ER BERNTHAL:
I think Davis-Desse and 13 it's a small point, but not really parallel.
This was a 14 pattern here rather than a sincle maior event that we felt 15 was a serious safety event.
Whereas here I gather it's just 16 been a nattern over some period of time.
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, in a sense Davis-Besse 18 is also that, whole bunch of reasons.
19 CO.vMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
Brunswick I think 20 came kind of close, too, didn't it, in terms of a history 21 of a pattern of events.
And basically there was an agreement a
that some fairly significant work would be done before --
23 on their procedures before the plant would run.
24 MR. GPACE:
Ves, as I understand the history, they 25 also put in effect a performance improvement nrogram.
61 L
1 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That's right.
4 2
MR. GRACE:
And this has proved to be rather successful.
I visited the Brunswick site recently and was 3
l 4
impressed with the management there.
I guess I have a 5
couple of concerns.
6 They had delegated a lot of authority to the site 7
when they first underwent this change.
I sense now that 8
perhaps they're pulling the strings back a little bit.
And 9
for example, on the simulator, they were proud that they had j
10 installed their simulator last year.
Then I learned that i
l 11 it was a 1981 model in effect.
There were many modifications 12 that had not been incorporated.
Is that in the budget?
- Well, 1
13 maybe next year it's in the budget.
And headouarters is 14 holding the purse strings.
15 So this is not a major indictment, but it's just a
16 an indicator that causes me a little bit of concern.
17 MR. DIRCKS:
I think once it gets -- cnce one of 18 these facilities gets the attention and people start probing 19 in it, it could be a small incident, it could be a medium 20 size.
Once you start peeling back the layers, and as they 21 see us poeling back the layers, many times these facilities 22 will say, we're going to shut down.
23 And we've seen this in a couple -- I guess out 24 west Rancho Seco is in the same boat right now.
25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That's right.
Yes, I
62 1
think we're still peeling there.
2 MR, DIRCKS:
Well, it's a process.
It takes --
3 we're still peeling at TVA.
4 MR. GRACE :
And we're almost in a position of 5
keeping Crystal River shut down because of the failure rate 6
of their operators on their recall exam.
But they fortunately 7
got ready by the skin of their teeth and started up.
8 I might -- you mentioned the Davis-Besse thing.
9 I might mention that we've had some concerns at Turkey Point.
10 They've had an improvenent program that has progressed quite 11 well.
But we've had some concerns in the maintenance area 12 and in the follow up to modifications and testing af ter plant 13 modifications and in the design review of modifications.
14 We did a special inspection down there a month 15 or so ago en this subject, and when I learned that I&E was 16 planning a series of inspections at other sites looking for 17 the Davis -Desse kind of symptoms I suggested that they go 18 to Turkey Point.
So that review is not yet complete, but 19 that is also a concern.
20 tiR. DIRCKS:
I think, Fred, you raised a coint 21 and we were talking about it earlier.
Tt's, the Commission 22 has moved now into this regulating, operating facilities.
M And we're regulating -- we're looking at these things more 24 and more on the level of performance than on a failure to 2
adhere to out and out regulations.
I think it's this level
63 1
of performance that we all have to get comfortable with.
2 And I think the Commission has to get comfortable 3
with the notion too, that it's going to be a judgment call 4
in many cases how you treat these plants.
5 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I have just one for 6
Nelson.
I think you've covered two of my three.
Brunswick, 7'
I gather, you feel is still making continued progress.
8 MR. GRACE:
Oh, yes indeed.
9 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
They're still moving in 10 the right direction?
11 MR. GRACE:
There are a few minor concerns.
12 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
And Turkey Point?
13 MR. GRACE:
I think -- I visited Turkey Point early 14 on and I was really impressed with their progress in the 15 improvement program, and the people who spoke for each 16 category, and their dedication and determination to fix things 17 And that was in contrast to a review I had had very near in 18 time at Browns Ferry and their improvement program.
So that's 19 a rather sharp comparison.
El But there's just this recent concern about 21 maintenance and the modifications that suggest that perhaps Z2 a problem in that area.
M COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
The third one that I 24 Wanted to ask you about was Grand Gulf.
25 l'R. GRACE:
Grand Gulf, they have essentially
64 w
1 changed out all the top management over the last year 2
and-a-half.
They made significant strides in recualifying 3
their operators.
I was there in January with my predecessor 4
on the occasion of giving out operator certificates.
5 And there was a lot of patting on the back and 6
praise and mutual admiration and so forth, and it seemed to 7
be.well justified.
I didn't have a good measure myself at 8
the time.
9 I think they're in good shape.
It's a clean 10 olant.
I've been there.
I've been very much impressed with 11 Jim Cross the plant manager.
And they recently acquired a 12 man from Farley who oversees Jim Cross, and it' remains to 13 be seen how that's going to be working -- work out.
But 14 he's a strong leader from Farley.
15 I'm very confident of Grand Gulf.
I must say it 16 was a little embarrassing when we had to issue a $500,000 17 civil penalty after all of this was accomplished.
But that's 18 inherent in the system.
I wish I knew a way to expedite 19 that process.
20 MR. DIRCKS:
There was one warning light that 21 went up on some of those middle south plants.
And it dealt 22 with our concern with the relationship of the PUC actions M
to maintaining very high standards of performance at the 24 facilities.
And I think it was yesterday I sent a letter 25 to the heads of Louisiana Power & Light, Mississippi and i
l
65 4
1 Arkansas saying that we took note of this scale back in the 2
allowabic return on those plants.
And we wanted to know 3
how it might affect their plans on training, maintenance 4
and some of these infrastructure itens that af fect plant 5
performance and safety.
6 And we are -- we did ask for specific information 7
on these facilities.
We're not saying there's unsafe 8
operations there now, but we do want to know how these 1
9 actions have affected their support of these infrastructure f
to items.
11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
12 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
A matter of curiosity --
13 a broad question.
Some of these plants that you have 14 discussed here have been older ones, Turkey Point, and I 15 don't know how long Brunswick has been running, I guess, but i
16 it's not --
17 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Ten, 11 years.
18 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Yes, it's older too.
When l
19 we talk about a plant like that being subpar in operations, 20 is there the institutional memory to tell me how it would 21 compare with whatever, seven, eight years ago?
Have our i
g 22 standards moved up and they stood still?
Is that what has 23 happened?
Or have they just gone downhill from what they 24 once were?
Anybody know?
I 25 MR. KEPPLER:
I think that from my perspective, I
.,m,_.
,s
--_e w m
,_._,-y-
66 l
s
~
1 I think we all are searching for a higher level of excellence.
2 And cerhaps the ground rules that were judged as acceptable l-3
-before are at a higher level today.
I think that's true.
4 TMI taught us certainly an awful lot of lessons.
And I'd 5
like to think we learned from all these lessons.
4 6
So the objective, I think, is to try to bring t
7 about a higher level of excellence.
8 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Well, I agree and 9
obviously I concur in that objective.
I'm curious whether 10 it's a fact that if you walked into the average plant ten 11 years ago, let's say, and looked at operations you would 12 say this is unacceptable.
13 MR. KEPPLER:
I think plants today are clearly 14 safer than they were --
15 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Through today's eyes.
4 16 MR. KEPPLER:
-- ten years ago.
I believe that lt 17 firmly.
But I also believe there can be improvements and 18 should be improvements.
19 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I commend to everybody 20 Chairman Markey's closing remarks of today.
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
What was that?
M.
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I want that reserved.
23 Markey's last comment to us --
1 a
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Best is great, but 25 better is good.or something to that effect.
.,,,,m
....e.
67 o
1 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Hell, perfection is not 2
possible.
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That's true.
'i c s,
4 that's right.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
But we ought to cet as much 6
as we can.
7 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I would not disagree with 8
that.
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
No, that's what I think he 10 added.
11 MR. KEPPLER:
I think it's very important --
12 peccle who try for zero mistakes, recognizing that you can't 13 achieve, if they try for it, that's the goal.
I think they're 14 better than those people, those organizations that tecept the 15 fact that mistakes are going to be made as a way of life.
16 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I was actually asking a 17 factual question, not interested in philosophy.
18 MR. KEPPLER:
Well, I thought I'd give you my 19 philosophy in the meantime.
%)
COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I think, Fred, it depends 21 upon the plant too.
If you look at Brunswick, in my Z!
recollection of when we went through the enforcement thing 23 was that there had been a substandard level of performance 24 for a long time, really starting with the beginning of 25 operation of the plant.
And there had been lots of efforts i
68 I
to fix that and it just hadn't been done.
2 And at Turkey Point, I remember cuite vividly 3
that when I was down there, the senior management of the 4
company was quite open and quite candid and they said, you 5
know, our plant staff did what we asked them to do, which 6
is run the plant and get high performance and high output 7
from the plant.
And we didn't pay attention to maintenance 8
as we should have done, and now we've got a pack of problems 9
here and we've got to deal with those problems.
And they 10 did what we asked them to do, and it turns out it wasn't 11 exactly the right thing.
12 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Unfortunately, Ed Case 13 isn't here.
But Harold, you've been around a long time, 14 what's your opinion?
15 MR. DENTON:
On Brunswick or plants in --
16 COMMISSIOMER BERNTHAL:
Just in general.
17 MR. DENTON:
-- on all plants.
I think plants 18 are safer today than they were.
If you look back --
19 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
That's not the question 20 I'm asking.
I'm asking, if you walked in today and looked 21 at a typical operating plant of ten years ago what would 22 the reaction most likely be about operations?
23 MR. DENTON:
We would be shocked at the lack of 24 rigor and --
M COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
That's what I thought.
69 r
i 1
MR. DENTON:
-- procedural control that was in 1
2 place ten years ago compared to what we have today, I think.
3 The plants look a lot the same, but they were not run nearly 4
so formally as we now recuire.
And they had a lot less 5
NRC surveillance.
We didn't have residents, we didn't have 6
as many rules.
It was a lot more of an audit process.
7 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I'm reminded of a 8
comment by a nuclear utility executive that I saw not too i
9 long ago who said, back in the old AEC days you called up to and asked if you could come to my plant.
Now you just show 11 up.
I 12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Incidentally, an observation 13 made on my Japanese trip.
The Japanese have very-good 14 plant availability now, but they point out that it wasn't 15 too long ago when they had a lot of difficulty.
And they 16 said, it was getting attention to those problems that resulted 17 in the good availability.
It was not going after availability I
18 per se, but going after good maintenance and good operational 19 practice and procedures.
4 20 Well, let'me'-- I think we ought to promptly 21 bring this meeting to a close, but not because it's not an 22 interesting subject.
You as our field officers are on the 23 firing line, and I think it is very important for us to 24 communicate on a regular basis.
And I find every one of 3
these meetings worthwhile.
i 4
ec
,n.
,,,,e
-r
.n.,
e
,--.~m-
,,e-.,=--.e
-..m, 7-m,
^
70 e
1 But I would say that when there are problems, 2
make sure that they get to top management here, as well as 3
expecting top management in the other companies.
But I'm 4
sure you have a good channel for that.
But I do want to 5
express our appreciation for all the things that you do.
And 6
I know as a result you often get a lot of abuse.
But 7
nevertheless, we're very supportive and look forward to 8
continuing interaction with each of you.
9 Anything more?
10 COMMISSIONER ZECH:
I agree.
11 CHAIPMAM PALLADINO:
Thank you, and we'll stand 12 adjourned.
13 (Whereupon, at 5:24 p.m.,
the commission meeting 14 was adiourned.)
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
9 4
I 1
CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER l
2 3
4 5
This is to certify that the attached proceedings 6
before the United States Nuclear Regu l a tory Commi ss i on in the 7
matter of 8
9 Name of Proceeding:
10 11 Docket No.
12 Place:
18 Date:
14
-15 were held as herein appears and that this is the original 16 transcript ' hereof for the file of th e Uni ted States Nuclear 17 Regulatory Commission.
8 13 (Signature) gj (Typed Name of Reporter,) s.(/Panela Briggl& -
20 21 22 23 Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd.
24 25
AGENDA MEETING WITH THE COMMISSIONERS SEPTEMBER 11, 1985 3:00 p.m.
Thirty-minute presentations by each Regional Administrator on the following issues and topics Region I (Thomas E. Murley) 1.
Improvements at Plants Receiving Increased Attention o
Management Changes o
Improved Operations 2.
Regional Actions to Identify and Deal with Problem Plants '.
o Team Inspections o
Use of SALP 3.
Emergency Planning Issues o
Exercise Deficiencies o
Coordination with FEMA 4
Initiatives to Use PRA Results to Guide Inspections o
Focus on Safety Trial Programs at Indian Point and Calvert Cliffs o
Region II (J. Nelson Grace) 1.
Main Accomplishments in Last Six Months o
Establishment of Regional Manage.ent Team m
o Vogtle Readiness Review o
Ennanced Interface with Program Offices i
2.
Regional Innovations o
Operational Readiness Reviews o
Quarterly Status Meeting with Licensees l
o Fuel Facility SALP
I
" O l
l Region II 3.
Significant Interfaces / Issues with States, local (Continued)
Governments, PUCs o
Low level Waste Compact Status o
Agreement State Status 4.
Facilities Receiving Increased Attention o
Nuclear Fuel Services, Incorporated (NFS) o Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
Region III (James G. Keppler) 1.
Initiatives to Improve Performance of Licensees o
Methods for Early Identification of Problems o
Action Plan to Resolve Problems in a Timely Manner 2.
Fermi Premature Criticality -
3.
Facilities Receiving Increased Attention I
o Facilities - LaSalle, Byron, Cook o
Major Concerns and Problems o
Assessments in Process o
Planned Actions 4
John C. Haynes Company Decontamination 5.
State Interfaces / Initiatives o
Agreement State Status and Plans o
Illinois Regulatory Initiatives
-f
f (k(
GhthththhGhh hghghghphghph[ghphph h 9h k
6 9 i
f 4
12/82 TRANSMITIAL 'IO:
Docunent 03ntrol Desk, 016 Phillips ADVANCED COPY 'IO: /
/
%e Public Wmmt Iban l
DATE:
/o[7/[J cc: OPS File C&R (Natalie)
Attached are copies of a Ormission meeting transcript (s) and related meeting h = nt(s). m ey are being forwarded for entry on the Daily Accession List and p1mt in the Public D3cument Ibcm. No other distribution is requested or required. Existing DCS identification numbers are lisJ~1 on the individual gl documents wherever known.
Meeting
Title:
/O H M
tuit-b
- v
.A / A Ad%MY 6 [// / 7 J' Open X Closed Mee Date:
5 DCS (bpies (1 of each checked) lf Iten
Description:
Copies Advanced Original May Duplicate
,3
'Ib PDR rnem ent be Dup
- Copy
- 3!
1.
TRANSCRIrr 1
1 3l When checked, DCS should send a copy of this transcript to the LPDR for:
0)l64ts k 2.
- P l
- :iP
- j 3
2 g
3.
3
- 3.
4.
(PDR is advanced em copy of each docunent,
- Verify if in DCS, and two of each SIIN paper.)
Change to "PDR Available."
l3!
(d c
kW$$NA0$A0b000A000NNNA0A0NNA0A0A0A0bONNA0NA0$A0A0$00d'A*A000A000NNNYNNNN5bb