ML20138G917
| ML20138G917 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 02/16/1996 |
| From: | Barber G NRC |
| To: | Eugene Kelly, Marschall C, Stolz J NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138G636 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-96-351 NUDOCS 9701030058 | |
| Download: ML20138G917 (34) | |
Text
.
I l
From:
G. Scott Barber j
/
1 To:
KPD1.KPP2(EMK), NCD2.KP2(CSM), WND2.WNP3(JFS3, LNO i
Date:
2/16/9611:46am
Subject:
Salem CAL ltem #1 -Reply I believe Charlie's review and conclusions of this effort meets the spirit of the CAL item.
Thus, the inspection report and your explanation (approved by the SAP) forms the basis 1
l for signing off the CAL item in the RAP.
j i
CC:
KPD1.KPP2(ALD1, DJC1, RWC, RXD1), NCD2.KP2(JGS, KA l
i i
i i
I.
9701030058 961226 i
hh_
h5b REVISED July 44 b
~
95-01-01 Chairman SAP Develop specific issue checklist from Closed IR's, SALP, IFS, allegations, public
'2/23/96 RAP
/
and state input
-LTR.
k 95-01-02 SRI /Marschall SRI review gas turbine issue with Closed i
licensee to determine if it has some Added to safety and/or regulatory basis RAP 95-01-03 DRS/
Review of the system readiness review Completed Barber process by Scott Barber /DRS by SAP inspectors to determine its ref.95-03 effectiveness IR 95-17 95-02-01 Barber State of New Jersey to discuss Closed concerns regarding communication 1/11/96 problets which led to a FEMA Meeting deficiency during graded exercise, with NRC and HP weakness highlighted during Hope Creek unplanned release 4
95-02-02 DRS DRS specialists to sample system Completed readiness review process in more by SAP depth, then check the review against ref.95-03 the NRC list of restart items and any items that were not identified during the licensee's SRR process 95-02-03 RI/Marschall 7/25/96 Evaluate the MRC meetings and sample Open them to assure that any related NRC restart items are identified by the licensee for appropriate action 95-02-04 SRI Review IFS list and NRR tracking Completed systems for any items which should be by SAP added to the NRC restart list ref.95-04
~
(
p-rs w ess
~
s
k REVISED July 22, 1996 95-02-05 DRS-Assign lead review responsibilities Closed Engineering Performance, for the impact plans prior to Completed Equipment Reliability, accepting the licensee's overall by SAP Training Restart Plan. Evaluate each plan ref.95-05 NRR-Self Assessment prior to approval by NRC RI Projects-Maintenance, Work Control, Corrective Action, Operations, Human Performance j
95-03-01 DRS System Readiness Review (SRR)
Completed unresolved items were assigned to be by SAP completed by DRS and would be ref.95-04 incorporated in the next inspection IR ??
report 95-04-01 Barber / Kelly Develop proposed Completed inspection / assessment criteria for by SAP each restart item ref.95-05 95-04-02 DRP(Barber)/DRS Review last 2 SALPs for any item Closed which should be added to NRC Restart NRC Restart List, as well as issues from reactive List inspections, i.e., steam generator tube degradation, technical and EP l
aspects of overhead annunciator alerts, E0Ps, and control of contractors 95-04-03 NRR Milestone:
NRR shall disposition TIA on use of Open MRC review jumpers for App. R. safe shutdown of package g:\\ branch 3\\sapatg.tbl 2
k REVISED July 22, 1996 95-04-04 SAP SAP Responsible panel members will Completed 95-05 compare the restart action plans with by SAP the people and process portions of ref.95-05 the NRC Restart List. Any items not covered by this will be discussed with the licensee for proper dispositioning I
95-04-05 NRR As a result of the Regional Closed, E-Administrator's visit, the PM agreed Mail from i
to contact Congressional Affairs to L.01shan to clarify which valves (PORV internals)
(JCL) dated
.l Senator Biden's staff was concerned 10/10/95 with.
95-04-06 Nicholson L. Nicholson agreed to contact G.
Open; 1
Meyer about the possibility of relief Awaiting from the reactivity manipulation NRR requirement for getting an SRO response to licensee.
PSE&G.
Issue has changed to the number of reactivity manipulations. PSE&G submitted waiver to NRR.
1 95-04-07 Kelly Develop a plan for p're-implementation Completed inspection of the Hagan project by -
by SAP 95-05 ref.95-05
.l g:\\ branch 3\\sapetg.tbl 3
i l
=
m u m..
Y
}"'
{
^
REVISED July 22, 1996 l
95-05-01 Human Performance -
SAP SAP determined all Restart Action Completed DRP/Linville 95-06 Plans would be reviewed before 95-06.
by SAP Engineering - DRS/ Kelly The preceding assignments were given.
ref.95-06 Equip. Reliability -
DRS/Ruland Training - DRS/ Modes Self Assessment - NRR/01shan Corrective Action -
DRP/ Barber Operations - DRP/Schoppy Maintenance - DR /Marschall, DePriest Work Control - DRP/ Fish NZb.#
95-05-02 DRP Barber 7/25/96 Place RATI on MIP schedule for Open tentative restart of Unit I
{#
95-05-03 SAP-Nicholson SAP agreed to invite state Complete representative from NJ and Delaware Ref?
to identify and discuss any unresolved items between states and licensee 95-05-04 Nicholson 7/25/96 Nicholson to discuss with Regional Open Administrator if Hope Creek should be included under the SAP cversight 1
95-06-01 SAP SAP noted that there should be some Closed Emergency Preparedness prostisions in (CAL #2 the Restart Action Plan Letter) 96-01-01 Barber Follow up meeting to be conducted Complete 9ki d
between NJ and NRC to present states Ref?
v questions / issues with PSE&G Restart Plan
g:\\ branch 3\\sapatg.tbl 4
9 m
i
(
l REVISED July 22, 1996 i
96-01-02 Karla Smith 7/25/96 Provide guidance document on Closed:
authority of state to do inspections E-Mail from Smith to
^
Cooper, and i
discussed with Nicholson 96-01-03 State liaison Officer State liaison Officer call NJ to Complete request a list of their concerns Ref?
prior to our meeting 96-01-04 Nicholson, State Liaison 7/25/96 Larry Nicholson and State Liaison Open Officer Officer need to incorporate the state of Delaware and use the State Liaison Officer in a more active role i
% 05 Meyer/DRS SAP requested feedback on quality of Complete by j
licensee's Training Restart Plan SAP 96-02 96-01-06 Nicholson Call Clay Warren and discuss LER 95-Complete l
004-01.
copy of e-mail record 96-01-07 Marschall/DRP Review LER 95-004-01, dated 11/2/95 Closed i
and the SERT in the next inspection IR 95-21 report 7
96-01-08 Barber /DRP Barber has action to incorporate any We
/idd s
SAP member comments in CAL Items 2&3 Qef ltr? j gp closeout letter V
96-01-09 Barber /DRP 7/31/96 Research and. incorporate any insight Open from methods used to monitor IP3 restart plan g:\\ branch 3\\sapetg.tbl 5
s
]
i
&S, (p,199(p [g$tus M(A Q
1
/Ag Nf9 g (L5f5 cattN
>2.
, T - L^ d REVISED July 22, 1996
[ _
96-01-10 SAP-Barber 7/31/96 Provide a schedule for non-residentN Open. C/00f[
core inspections currently on MIPs, D EA A L_
h_;
__ g _ g~
plus any additional regional g
initiative inspections 2 --
o 96-01-11 Kelly /DRS 7/15/96 Coordinate with DRS to plan the Open necessary EP inspections, including a look at their EP Program 96-01-12 Barber /DRP 7/31/96 Schedule the core inspections f
0 commensurate with the plant work schedule
,a 96-02-01 Nicholson SAP will send a letter to state of NJ Closed informing them that nearly all of the Ltr???
state's concerns are addressed in the NRC Salem Restart Action Plan, and stating how we addressed these concerns 96-02-02 SAP Letter to close CAL Items 2&3 should Closed note that CAL Item I regarding SERT Ltr???
results is not yet closed and will be addressed in separate correspondence 96-02-03 SAP Panel Members -
SAP agreed to add programmatic issues Closed provide comments to S. Barber list from 1/19/96 meeting with NJ and by 2/5/96 an attachment that lists the major milestones necessary for restart for both NRC & PSE&G.
96-02-04 Marschall, 01shan, Barber Schedule a minimum of 4 mini-team Closed; inspections covering all NRC used checklist items starting late milestones February 1996 g:\\ branch 3\\sapstg.tbl 6
(
4 REVISED July 22, 1996 96-03-01 DePriest 2/23/96 Issue SAP minutes prior to 2/23/96 Closed nae.4-7/25/96 Develop internal SAP minute Closed 96-03-02 t.s.
i distribution 1
96-03-03 Barber Schedule layup inspection for Unit 1, Closed;ref Inspection has been placed on the MIP MIP report 96-03-04 Nicholson Management meeting between PSE&G and Closed NRC to discuss status / progress of 5/24/96 4
PSE&G restart activities Mtg.
96-03-05 Barber Identify restart items warranting a Closed; J
19k 6.Q ref?
SAP presentation 96-03-06 Nicholson SAP members on distribution for all Complete Inspection Reports 96-04 96-03-07 Barber Review IFS quarterly for additional Closed; l
restart items ref?
g 96-04-01 Barber Draft CAL #1 closeout letter Open 7
96-04-02 Nicholson Draft guidance to inspect PSE&G Closed, SAP restart plan mtg minutes 96-04-03 Nicholson Pursue contractor assistance for
- Closed, allegations and open item closure ref. to SAP 96-05 3
96-04-04 Nicholson Provide NRR with a list of
- Closed, allegations ref. to SAP 96-05 96-04-05 Kelly Draft charter for licensing basis
- Closed, inspection ref. to SAP 96-05 g:\\ branch 3\\sapetg.tbl 7
4 j-i -
t 1
]
REVISED July 22, 1996 l
96-05-01 SAP Members 7/3/%
Review the SAP Action Item Tracking Closed list and provide comments to R.
j DePriest 96-05-02 Barber Track NRC inspections of the Salem Closed; i
Restart plans generate E-mail to i
document.
]
96-05-03 Kelly 6/28/96 Develop an inspection plan for the Open
]
NEW DATE inspection of Salem's Integrated 7/31/96 Test Program (ITP). Kelly and DRS are still in process, 7/2/96 meeting 7
i established PSE&G still not ready to l
discuss their program.
4
)
% 04 Nicholson 7/2/96 Set up and have a meeting with the Closed;E-Test Program Manager at Sales to mail Gene 3
discuss the ITP.
Kelly to SAP 7/9/96.
% 05 Marschall Review the transition between U1 and Closed; E-U2 restart activities and determine mail to j
if there was anything. overlooked.
document.
96-05-06 Barber Review the 0350 checklist. The C4%,
revision is to include the Licensing SAP minutes Ic k Basis requirement /FSAR discrepancies m
specifically including the Service Water system design & reliability.
96-05-07 Blough 6/7/96 Develop guidance for Closed by inspection / assessment of the PSE&G SAP 96-05 RAP p
g:\\brar.ch3\\sapetg.tbl 8
4
_____-_--_._.,v__
t REVISED July 22, 1996 96-05-08 Nicholson 7/25/96 Coordinate a discussion with NRR, Open DRP, and DRS to discuss how resources throughout the agency could be incorporated to assist in the Salem restart activities (96-05-08). The discussion is to be scheduled by 6/7/96.
96-06-01 DePriest 7/3/96 Review the SAP Action Item Tracking Closed list and incorporate comments provided by SAP members 96-06-02 Stolz 7/8/96 Acquire and present, to the SAP Open members, Mr. Hubert Miller's list of fundamental items that should be addressed prior to restart 96-06-03 Stolz 7/3/96 Provide a list of NRR personnel that
- Open, would be available for inspection of Reference?
Salem restart open items. List is to be provided to Regional contacts.
96-06-04 Barber 7/8/96 Review the inspection backlog and Open provide the list to NRR to establish resource needs.
IntegratedRestartAssesment(SIRA)[\\_(
96-06-05 Marschall 7/26/96 Review and present the Salem j
at the 96-07 SAP meeting M _la w 96-06-06 Barber 7/8/96 SAP determined that Mr. Barber would Open f 0 add the Integrated Test Program A
programmatic review to the 0350 checklist p'7M g:\\ branch 3\\sapatg.tb1 9
.4
.,.e a
.e,_
L_
4 5MJ M,bJ.p-4.W+e4-d. Jwa 3 2, dwr 8-44aMdA+- a e 9 m.u..4.ee--.4sJ 2MA p..
o W
l m
0 I
I i
i C.. -
m I
/
m
\\
7 4
1 9
==
W M
l 3
m I
5 7La L
/
C M
-d N
3 N
n
~
Y F
.a l
l i.
1 I
I l
l i
e l
M O
1 I
l l
1 i
1 i
i l
i l
I f
i 4
4 h
l 1
SALEM ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING l
l March 26, 1996 ATTENDEES:
I L. Nicholson, DRP l
C. Marschall, DRP S. Barber, DRP 3
J. Stolz, NRR t
l L. Olshan, NRR l
G.
Kelly, DRS OTHERS:
R.
Cooper, DRP R. DePriest, DRP J.
Linville, DRP N. Della Greca, DRS DISCUSSION:
The Salem Assessment Panel (SAP) met on March 26, 1996, from 1:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
1.
Mr. Barber presented the results of his detailed review of the transcript of the public meeting held December 18, 1995.
A line item for QA effectiveness was added to the NRC 1
restart plan as a result of this review.
The panel agreed' that all the issues from the public meeting had been>
captured.
2.
The panel discussed the strategy for public meetings in relationship to the guidance from the Executive Director for Operations memorandum, issued February 12, 1996.
The panel agreed that our original plan met the intent of this EDO memorandum.
In addition to the 12/18/95 public meeting, the SAP will conduct a public meeting just prior to the NRC Readiness Assessment Team Inspection (RATI) to collect any public comments or concerns.
Given the public request during the 12/18/95 meeting to accommodate the public in Delaware, the SAP agreed to conduct this pre-RATI meeting in both Delaware and New Jersey.
3.
The panel discussed a policy for releasing the SAP meeting minutes to the public.
The need and benefit of releasing the minutes as the meetings occur was weighed against the desire to not release pre-decisional information.
The SAP agreed to the following: 1) Issue the minutes for meetings I
prior to the issuance of the NRC restart plan (February 23, 1996), 2) Develop a distribution within the NRC to keep NRC l
management adequately informed of the SAP activities on a I
real-time basis, and 3) Defer issuance of the subsequent minutes to the public until after the restart decision is O
l i
I l
announced.
It was agreed that item 2 would also meet the intent of NRC Manual Chapter 0350-08.e regarding keepinct management informed on an interim basis, rggy g /
4.
Mr. Marschall stated that the core inspection was tracking as required.
PSE&G recently announced a unit 2 core reload date of July 3, 1996.
The panel discussed the need to conduct a "layup inspection" of unit 1.
Mr. Marschall agreed to research the applicable inspection procedures, discuss'any experiences from Region II ( TVA) ', and develop a recommendation for both Salem units.
5.
Mr. Barber facilitated a discussion on the mechanics of the inspection program.
The panel explored ideas to ensure proper inspection planning, reporting the inspection findings back to SAP, and methods for considering a restart item closed.
7 1
The SAP agreed that up front inspection planning should be structured to maximize inspector efficiency.
Mr. Della Y
Greca agreed to coordinate with Mr. Barber to ensure ope
\\
items and allegations are factored into the inspections.
Schedulingofinspectionswillberefinedafteranupcomingl meeting with PSE&G to discuss their schedule.
Mr. Nicholson j }' s agreed to arrange a meting with PSE&G, in the region, on or around April 15, 1996.
It is our understanding that PSE&G
\\
will have at that time a detailed schedule showing projected r
closure of each restart item, as well as a matrix the NRC 1
restart issue to their restart action plan.
The SAP agreed I
L to conduct a sample of inspections during the work in progress, Management Review for closure, and after final g
PSE&Gclosure.d
/
&s Inspecti sa lanned during April for the Hagan module N
projec,
eed trol, =d POP" ice = 4-Additionally, a one week min tea inspection is scheduled for each month during j
f the spring.
This schedule will be revis ted fo 1 wing the mid april meeting with PSE&G. g Mr p 4/g[cf4 The SAP agreed that Mr. Marschall will take the lead to report back to the SAP on restart issues as they are closed.
These presentations will include any insight the inspectors gained from the subjects listed in section IV of the NRC restart readiness assessment checklist, as distributed by the " Generic Inspection Guidance."
Additionally, Mr. Barber will identify those large restart items that warrant a presentation to the SAP from the actual inspector prior to item closure.
Mr. Nicholson will ensure that the SAP members are on distribution for all inspection reports.
,/
Mr. Barber agreed to conduct a review of the inspector followup system about every 3 months erif-the NR restart list remains complete.
i MY&g
i i
i I
The panel discussed the need to keep PSE&G informed of the i
inspection schedule, as well as brief the Regional Administrator prior to the upcoming senior management meeting.
Mr. Barber agreed to these items for action.
l l
h[e h,Ihh.sJfg[N([
L M p' d(:" h '0-IG.d f11ac4Mh -
dd q 'm a, 14 i, p' t *",',
c y nra 2
, cs. <,.. '
\\
we g cw t.euk f j.. -
3'x;g SAP Agen,da df
,7 i
l
,, M, 1 [.
!C Results of review of 12/18/95 public meeting transcript.);g _l'g Barber - 10 minutess l
2[ Establish strategy for public' meetings IAW 2/12/96 EDO memo.
Nicholson - 10 minutes g;g g; g ig/jc p 3.jg Establish policy on publishing SAP meeting minutes.
j b,h[ '
1 ID t(.
rt M t'
, fit u 4
- Status of core inspection. Marschall
.'.0 mi gt l_'.4 - 1 :4L i layup%*pect. ion..Nic.gojpo,ng40 tgintids\\f actQ,(,
- _ ;,q Z.ct )
ins l'4
-(.Q U. nit Tht U.s twU
.i..,,
n '"
G4n /
Presentation on SAP " mechanic (s,. "my,rLy/
A Darb r -
,W'" fgf
'Overal1 inspection strategy. ::::~y#*MourT(sk 2
L' C Integrating open items into inspection activity $
2 Integrating allegations into inspection activity.
i
'1
+y / tJpf-./
Including " Generic Inspection Guidance" in inspections.
j !g,,p 1',P t
Inspection scheduling.
kp g ssessmentracking inspection progress a] gainst restart y i Vl feedback to the SAP J
03 50-08. e.1 U'A R[t g/ /
l plan.
/
% Co Interim progress reports IAW
_J 7.
Future SAP activities. Nicholson - 10 minutes ygp 3, g Meeting critique.
2,34: 2C j
gynabsitS U
.f lg Q I%
l ne blec0 -
L ___.
c o
1 n nars-Pndat T
n(g}c w-
, Djo - SFP - $ - ff d 4"g4#M g%
34 i~
~
/p bl ugh [ llc 7 Y [d'l\\
S'" J h
[
ct y angxd/sur bf
( chu -(W riftba$ $
'7 i
l -. -
/
~
./
i SALEM RESTART INSPECTIONS L
I GENERAL GUIDANCE Backaround i
Both Salem units were shutdown in 1995 in response to equipment problems. The i
NRC used this o)portunity to confirm specific commitments >etween NRC and l
Public Service Electric & Gas (PSE&G) which are contained in a June 9.1995.
Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL). - Shortly thereafter. the NRC chartered the, j
Salem Assessment Panel (SAP) to monitor licensee restart activities per NRC Inspection Manual Cha ter 0350. -This rogram required the defining of key i
issues that required RC followu. Ou February 23 1996, the NRC published its Restart Action Plan (RAP) wh ch listed 43 technical and 21 programmatic restart issues that must be independently. inspected and evaluated by NRC. The plan also requires the evaluation of various management. corrective actions.
J and other programs and practices to assure the licensee's readiness for-restart. These items will provide the focal point for NRC's activities at the-Salem facility. They will, in a large part provide the basis for any future decisions on Salem restart.
It is, therefore imperative that each ins)ector at the facility understand and implement their responsibilities under t11s I
plan.
General Guidance t
The following general guidance applies to inspections performed at Salem Units l
1 and 2 during their respective restart periods.
Individual inspectors are accountable for conducting restart inspections per the enclosed guidance. The following guidance pertains to all Salem restart inspections:
1.
The facility has agreed to provide closeout packages for each technical / programmatic restart issues (Salem RAP Sections II and III).
l Confirm that these packages are complete for each item to be inspected.
-j Inspections should assess the quality of these closecut packages. To the extent practical, your inspection should also include personal observation of system / equipment performance, as well as, interviews with restart issue sponsors and their management.
2.
Review the Salem IFS list for open items in your functional area _.
Develop.your_. inspection-plan-to. include these items. f Coordinate with 3g M area prior to restart...;Tfie SAP verformance acaMsvevaluate and -your functiona g4J'tM D5pO5itivo alI-0DefrTFS items orign_tuggag.
3.
Review open allegations in your functional area. Develop your plan to include these items.
Note that many allegations have concerns that cross into many functional areas. Focus on the oldest allegations first. then move onto any that are closable even the most recent I
allegations.
Develop appropriate plans for allegation closeout.
Use your assessment skills to determine whether allegations are substantiated or unsubstantiated and document such in the closeout J
o L
l.
1 2
l l
letter.
Remember, you can close out an allegation with-violat40n,_as l
[ well asr witban unsubstantiated conclusion. - The SAP performance goal N is to evaluate and disposition all open allegations prior to restart.
(Safety significant issues will have to be resolved 3rior to restart.
l OWhas'ponsoredTo allegations fRITitRorTAWtiit has beenTasked, with defining the followup needed for each and every Salem allegation on a line item basis.
Roy Fuhrmeister is the currently designated AF.
4.
Review the enclosed management performance checklist. This list was derived from Section IV of the Salem RAP and is applicable to all Salem restart inspections. Observations should be made in as many of the areas as possible, such that, at the culmination of all restart inspections, the. SAP can effectively assess management performance relative to safe restart and continued operation.
5.
DRP will assist. as necessary, to facilitate inspection ) reparation.
This may include coordination of planned inspections wit1 other inspections, identifying key technical issues, assisting with IFS and allegation research to ensure inspection adequacy.
l l
l l
Revision 0 March 26. 1996
SALEM GENERIC INSPECTION GUIDANCE Inspectors performing Salem restart inspections should make observations and/or findings that address, if appropriate, the generic items listed below.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS Evaluat adequacy of the comprehensive corrective action plan 3
Evaluate adequacy of the corrective action programs for specific root causes Assess control of corrective action item tracking Effective corrective actions for the conditions requiring the shutdown have been implemented Effective corrective actions for other significant problems have been implemented s
Adequacy of the corrective action verification process SELF ASSESSMENT CAPABILITY s
Adequacy of licensee's startup self-assessment Effectiveness of Quality Assurance Program Adequacy of Industry's Independent Review Groups Experience Review Program Adequacy of licensee Adequacy of deficiency reporting system Staff willingness to raise concerns 1
Effectiveness of PRA usage Adequacy of Commitment Tracking Program Utilization of external audits (i.e. INPO)
Quality and timeliness of 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73 Reports Effectiveness of Line Organization Self-Assessments MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT AND EFFECTIVENESS Management commitment to achieving improved performance Performance goals / expectations developed for the staff Goals / expectations communicated to the staff Resources available to management to achieve goals Qualification and training of management Management's commitment to procedure adherence Management involvement in self-assessment and independent self-assessment capability Effectiveness of management review committees Effectiveness of internal management meetings Management in-plant time Management's awareness of day-to-day operational concerns Ability to identify and prioritize significant issues Ability to coordinate resolution of operability and other significant issues Ability to implement effective corrective actions MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION AND SUPPORT Structure of the organization Ability to adequately staff the organization b
a
i j
l s Effect of any ranaquent reorgarization Establishment 0; proper work environment Ability to foster teamwork among the staff Ability to resolve employee concerns
)
Ability to provide engineering support Adequacy of plant administrative procedures Amount of contractor usage 1
Adequacy of contractor oversight Information exchange with other utilities Participation in industry groups Ability to function in the Emergency Response Organization Coordination with offsite emergency planning officials ASSESSMENT OF STAFF t
)
Staff commitment to achieving improved performance l
Staff's safety consciousness Understanding of management's expectations / goals i
Understanding of plant issues and corrective actions Morale Structure of the organization Effect on the staff of any reorganization Qualifications and training of the staff Staff's work environment Level of attention to detail i
Adequacy of staffing Off-hour plant staffing Staff overtime usage Amount of contractor usage Staff / contractor relationship l
Procedure usage / adherence 1
ASSESSMENT OF CORPORATE SUPPORT Relationship between corporate and the plant staff l
l Adequacy of the request for corporate services process Corporate understanding of plant issues Corporate staff in plant time l
Effectiveness of the corporate / plant interface meetings l
Adequacy of corporate representation at plant activities Adequacy of corporate engineering support Adequacy of corporate design changes l
l Adequacy of licensing support OPERATOR ISSUES l
Licensed operator staffing meets requirements and licensee goals Level of formality in the control room Adequacy of requalification training Adequacy of equipment operability determination training Adequacy of SRO command and control Control room / plant operator awareness of equipment status Adequacy of plant operating procedures Procedure usage / adherence l
. -.. _ -.. ~
s l
log keeping practices ASSESSMENT Of PHYSICAL READINESS OF THE PLANT Operability of technical specifications systems Operability of required secondary and support systems Results of pre-startup testing l
Atiequacy of system lineups At'equacy of surveillance tests / test program l
Significant hardware issues resolved Adequacy-of the power ascension testing program l
Adequacy of )lant maintenance program effectiveness Maintenance Jacklog managed and impact on operation assessed
}
Adequacy of plant housekeeping and equipment storage Adequacy of onsite and offsite emergency preparedness ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS A licable license amendments have been issued A licable exemptions have been granted A licable reliefs have been granted C firmatory Action Letter conditions have been satisfied Significant enforcement issues have been resolved i,
Allegations have been appropriately addressed C0 ORDINATION WITH INTERESTED AGENCIES / PARTIES Federal Emergency Management Agency Appropriate State and Local Officials Appropriate Public Interest Groups Local News Media l
i I
f I
l
'e SALEM ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING January 31, 1996 Attendees:
C. Marschall, DRP S. Barber, DRP W. Lazarus, DRP R. Cooper, DRP L. 01shan, NRR J. F. Stolz, NRR Discussion:
1.
Concerns raised by Nest Jersey DEP in 1/19/96 meeting with Salem Assessment Panel regarding Salem restart issues l
We concluded that nearly all of the State of New Jersey's concerns are l
included in the Restart Readiness Assessment Checklist which is an enclosure to the proposed NRC Salem Restart Action Plan (RAP). Any l
items that were not included did not meet the six criteria referenced in l
Item 2 below. We will send a separate letter to the State of N.J.
reflecting our conclusions, also stating the manner in which we l
addressed the state's concerns. We will also note state comment, by reference, as modification in our 0350 checklist. For example, the state concern on UFSAR updates will be added as item 19 to Programmatic Restart issues.
To address a SAP concern, L. 01shan contacted the state regarding their concern on IN 93-83 " Potential Loss of Spent Fuel Pool Cooling after a l
LOCA or LOOP" as an emerging issue. Dennis Zannoni (NJ) indicated that this was just an example of industry experience that PSE&G should consider. The SAP noted that Item 9 Program to utilize operating (industry) experience feedback will be inspected under the NRC's Restart Action Plan (RAP) and should address these concerns generically.
2.
Criteria used in the preparation of the 0350 restart check list The restart check list was developed based on the documented record of licensee performance at the Salem plant and the judgment of the Salem Assessment Panel. The check list items met the six criteria stated in Salem Restart Action Plan.
3.
Comments from the meeting with the Public held on 12/18/95 at Carney's Point, New Jersey l
Six members of the public made statements at the meeting. These l
individuals identified a number of general and specific concerns with l
the Salem operation. The NRC identified L. Nicholson as a point of contact for any further clarification of these concerns. The transcript of the meeting will be reviewed and analyzed by Scott Barber to determine whether these concerns are adequately addressed by existing mechanisms or will have to be addressed by the NRC's RAP. The SAP will j
revise or approve the analysis, as appropriate.
((
l t]
l t
s Salem Assessment Panel Meeting 2
'4.
The Closure of Items 2 and 3 of the Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL) 1-95-009 Comments in the draft letter dealing with Items 2 and 3 are due to Scott l
Barber Friday, February 2, 1996. We agreed that the letter should also note that CAL Item I regarding the SERT results is not yet closed and i
will be addressed in separate correspondence.
J As' a followup from Glenn Meyer, he found PSE&G's Training Action Plan to be acceptable. Glenn will document his conclusion as a SAP record.
5.
The NRC Restart Action Plan 1
Panel members and those in attendance will provide comments on the draft package to Scott Barber by Monday, February 5, 1996.
l We agreed to add the following to the Plan a)
Add to the Programmatic Restart Issues List, Item 19. UFSAR l
Updates b)
Add an attachment that lists the major milestones needed to be completed by PSE&G and NRC prior to restart of the Salem units.
The milestones do not need estimated target dates at this time due l
to the licensee's current tentative scheoule but should be in an l
appropriate sequence. The licensee's current milestone summary l
can be used for guidance.
The present plan is to schedule four inspections covering all NRC checklist items starting in late February 1996. This is a big job. A working level task group (C. Marschall, S. Barber, L. 01shan and " Tiger Team" inspectors) will meet before mid-February to organize the inspections.
j 6.
Progress made for Unit 1 restart C. Marschall provided copies of the PSE&G's work completion status report and scheduled targets as of 1/25/96. About 33% of the 24,709 restart items are closed, and about 78% of the Action Plan elements have received initial screening approval. The initial screening did not address the overall quality of each response, but simply assured that i
the response addressed the underlying questions on the issue / area. The current schedule for Salem Unit I reload is 4/27/96 and entry to Mode 4 l
of 6/5/95. These dates appear to be optimistic considering the significant volume of work remaining.
CC; l
L. Wicholson, DRP E. Kelly, DRP i
l
(
g:\\ branch 3\\sapetg.131 l
l l
O
~
/
l'p, lP,)
LE SSESSMENT PANEL MEETING u/'
/
January 31,19%
h
'k
)
o l
Attendees:
O C. Marschall, DRP
(
/
g S. Barber, DRP W. Lazarus, DRP g
h I
\\
~
t '" san':NRl Pbwaddaa 4%
- Mww J. F. Stolz, NRR 6
Discussion:
1.
Concerns raised by New Jersey DEP in 1/19/% meeting with Salem Assessment Panel regarding Salem restart issues.
We concluded that nearly all of the State of N.J. concerns are included in the SAP 0350 audit list
' h currently drafted as an enclosure to the proposed NRC Salem Restart Action Plan. We wil F
separate letter to the State of N.J. reflecting our conclusions, also stating the reasons for not including those few State concerns that do not appear on our 0350 checklist; or noting modifications to our 0380 I
I
[j checklist to incorporate an appropriate State comment. For example, the State concern on UFSAR f f updates will be added as item 19 to Programmatic Restart issues.
tr L. Olshan will separately conta State regarding the State concern on IN 93-83 " Potential Loss of p
Criteria used in the preparation of the 0350, restart check list.
Spent Fuel Pool Cooling after or LOOP."
l2 Y
The restart check list was developed based on the documented record of licensee performance at the Salem plant and the Judginant of the Salem Assessment Panel. The check list items fit among the six criteria stated in Salem Restart Action Plan.
3.
Comments from the meeting with the Public held on 12/18/95 at Carney's Point, New Jersey.
Of thc(,sihople who provided comments at this meeting, fivehere ex-employees of PSG&E who expressed concerns over the remaining management and QA. \\ c also heard complaints about their unjustified termination in 1994. These were sjmilar to allegations received by Region I in the fall of 1994, which were a
subsequently closed out. ThQixtidperson's concerns, such as the TMI lessons-learned history and dry cask 4 \\g storage, did not relate to Salem performance. Therefore we conclude that the comments from this meeting k'
/
are captured within our restart list. Scott Barber will confirm this completeness of this finding upon p
/
completing his review of the transcript.
g 0
i
\\ w n " p' %M r
1 p
p f#
h.
w w
s l
i 2-l 4.
The Closure of Items 2 and 3 of the Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL) 1 95-009 Comments in the draft letter dealing with Items 2 and 3 are due to Scott Barber Friday, February 2.
19%. We agreed that the letter should also note that CAL Item I regarding the SERT results is not yet closed and will be addressed in separate correspondence.
N.
As a followup with Glenn Meyer, Glenn finds the Action Plan on training to be acceptable. Glenn will E-mail this finding to us for our SAP record.
(
5.
The NRC Restart Action Plan Panel members and those in attendance will provide comments on the draft package to Scott Barber by Monday, February 5,19%.
We agreed to add the following to the Plan a) Add to the Programmatic Restart Issue List, Jtem 19. UFSAR Updates
.H d PSNCT b)."::,x:: ; hi i;;;.;; i. :Pgle major milestoneyleeded to be completed by the NRC prior to restart of Salem. The milestones do not need estimated target dates at this time du^e to the licensee's current tentative schedule but should be in an appropriate sequence. The licensee's current milestone summary can be used for guidance. The NRC Restart Checklist inspection 9
milestones need to be identified on the block diagram.
The present plan is to schedule four inspections covering all NRC checklist items starting in late February 19%. This is a big job. A working level task group (C. Marschall, Scott Barber, Len Olshan and " Tiger Team" inspectors) will meet before mid-February to organize the inspections.
6.
Progress made for Unit I restart C. Marshall provided copies of the licensee's working status reports and schedule targets as of 1/25/M.
About 33% of the 24,709 restart items are closed; and about 78% of the Action Plan el ments have
')
received initial screening approval 'The current schedule for core reload of 4/27/% an entry to Mode 4 of 6/5/% is optimistic considering the significant volume of work remaining.
d E helly D av
/ fk N Y r*
y
+
f*,; %' y o f Q V p * +' '..
q?
4 f
> P yW,# f,/
ps.
Y /
V.u V
W )% ?
g b Y
$V 4
/J P V
yp y
o cPCEGu O
,g UNITED STATES 8
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
REGION 1 o,
475 ALLENDALE ROAD
~
<g KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406 1415 s
- ..+
3,k4 DATE:
MESSAGE TO:
C v
TELECOPY NUMBER:
NUMBER OF PAGES:
(Including this cover sheet)
MESSAGE FROM:
U.S.R-f.C. Region I, King of Prussia, PA TRANSMITI'ED BY:
DATE & TIME:
k A
I V
VERIFIED BY:
f d0 77(
j u
l i
4 l
Telephone Conversation Record j
Larry Nicholson and Clay Warren l
1/4/96,10:15am I called Clay Warren, Salem General Manager, to discuss the following topics:
1.
I reminded Mr. Warren of my absence from 1/8/96 to 2/5/96, and that Bill Lazrus would be acting. I also stated that he should contact John Stolz of NRR for any SAP discussions during the period.
l 2.
I provided him with an overview of the NRC public meeting of 12/18/95, j
and stated that we would provide a copy of the transcript on the public l
docket in the near future. I also stated that we are reviewing the transcript j
for any issues we should include in our restart inspection list.
3.
I gave an overview of the NRC meeting yesterday with the State of New l
Jersey. Their questions and/or concerns involved both the PSE&G restart j.
plan and specific items they are concerned with. I stated that the NRC had l
committed to meet with the state in the near future for a working level l
meeting to better understand their concerns and questions. We will use this l
information to develop our final restart inspection list. I offered that the
{
state may request PSE&G clarification on items in their restart plan.
l Mr. Warren state that notwithstanding their efforts to improve relationships with NJ, he wa not ntendina to entertain a situation where PSE&G deals l
directly with the state to re, solve their safety and performance concerns.
j Mr. Warren reflected on his experience at Pilgrim, and expressed concern j
that th7 NRC maintain the cognizance of inspecting and resolving the restart issuet.
tated / ot it is our, intent to understand the issues from the state, i
and act as their representative at resolving the issues. I also stated that we are still developing the necessary interfaces to accomplish this, and we are j
uncertain at this time if this meets the state's needs. I closed this topic with asking that if at anytime PSE&G feels they are being impacted by the NRC/ state interface, he should contact the region and inform us of the j
situation. He agreed to this arrangement.
}
I 4.
I gave an overview of the SAP yesterday, and stated that we are close to j
signing a letter closing CAL ltems #2 and 3. Regarding updating their j
restart plan, Mr. Warren stated he wanted to resubmit their plan to reflect i
several changes, including the addition of the EP actions. I stated that while we were not interested in a plan resubmittal each time they make a i
change, we do need an update to address the EP area. Mr. Warren stated it j
was his intent to submit that to the NRC by mid-february. Additionally, Mr.
l l
l e
1 Warren stated he was'still developing the performance indicators. His intent
)
is to eventually have the Indicators on the site LAN, and make them available to the residents. I stated we would continue to follow the development and use for the indicators.
5.
I stated that the SAP was not satisfied with the LER describing the Unit 2 trip to satisfy CAL ltem #1. Mr. Warren agreed that the LER was not of sufficient scope and detail to satisfy the CAL commitment. He stated it was his action to address this issue in a more comprehensive nature. He stated that the original SERT was of poor quality, primarily because the effort involved the previous management with the fundamental cultural flaws identified as the root causes in the subsequent restart plan. Mr. Warren offered that the more recent SERT done for the Overhead Annunciator Alert was more indicative of the presdnt management expectation. I stated that we intend to inspect both their SERT and LER for any performance issues associated with the effort, and would include the more recent SERT for balance. I concluded that the SAP feels that closing CAL ltem #1 is not time critical, and that we would rather see a quality effort, that Indicates an understanding of the performance issues associated with that event, and the accompanying corrective actions. Mr. Warren agreed.
i 0
8
i
+
1 l
o-l 1
\\
Mr. Leon R. Eliason t
Chief Nuclear Officer & President Nuclear Business Unit Public Service Electric and Gas Company 4
l P. O. Box 236 l
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038
}
SUBJECT:
CLOSURE OF ITEMS 2 AND 3 OF SALEM CONFlRMATORY ACTION LETTER 1 95 009 j-
Dear Mr. Eliason:
j l
)
j This letter refers to items 2 and 3 of Confirmatory Action Letter 1 95 009, dated June 9,1995, in 1
l which you committed to perform a special review of the long standing Salem issues and meet with NRC representatives to communicate and gain NRC agreement on the scope and i
1 comprehensiveness of you plan to support Salem restart. In your letter, dated Noveder 24,1995, you submitted to the NRC the results of your review of long-standing equ!pment reliability and operability issues, including corrective maintenance and operator work arounds and the i
effectiveness and quality of the management oversight and review.
A meeting between the NRC and Public Service Electric and Gas (PSE&G) was held on Decemo r i
11,1995 for PSE&G to present the results of your review and the corrective actions you have identified as necessary to ensure that Salem will be operated in a safe and reliable manner.
Attached to this letter is a list of the principle attendees and a copy of the slides presented, l
l Additionally, on December 18,1995, the NRC conducted a meeting with interested members of the t
public to receive their comments and concerns. A transcript of that meeting will be transmitted under a separate cover letter.
ggg
,00 J
-r C, ? 000, m Assessment Panel c -ii_ Ci ' 'd:l rr'rt c' ;;r.....%
i plewYd agreed that piemonted effectively (, should adequately address the numerous l
Salem issues to support safe plant restart. We will continue to pursue, through our inspection i
activities, a more comprehensive understanding of your actions to resolve many of the equipment l
and performance issues. An initial listing of the items we intend to independently inspect will be communicated to you via a separate letter in the near future. Additionally, we intend to conduct a i
Readiness Assessment Team inspection, just prior to restart, to independently confirm that your l
actions, collectively, have r6sulted in the necessary performance improvements. To support this l
effort, we intend to request a submittal and meeting for you to discuss your assessment and i
justification for concluding that adequate improvement has been effected.
i In summary, the NRC has found that commitments 2 and 3 of the subject CAL have been met. in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Thank you for your cooperation.
1 Richard W. Cooper,11, Director Division of Reactor Projects
}
Docket Nos.
50-272: 50-311 i
d 4
. g.
l i
Enclosures:
1.
Meeting Attendee List 2.
Meeting Slides cc w/ encl:
L. Storz, Senior Vice President Nuclear Operations E. Simpson, Senior Vice President - Nuclear Engineering l
E. Salowitz, Director - Nuclear Business Support I
C. Schaefer, External Operations - Nuclear, Delmarva Power & Light Co.
i R. Burricelli, Director - External Affairs I
C. Warren, General Manager Salem Operations l
M. Roddemann, General Manager - Hope Creek Operations l
J. Benjamin, Director - Quality Assurance & Nuclear Safety Review l
F. Thomson, Manager, Licensing and Regulation l
R. Kankus, Joint Owner Affairs A. Tapert, Program Admiriistrator R. Fryling, Jr., Esquire M. Wetterhahn, Esquire P. MacFarland Goelz, Manager, Joint Generation Atlantic Electric Consumer Advocate, Office of Consumer Advocate William Conklin, Public Safety Consultant,' Lower Alfoways Creek Township Public Service Commission of Maryland State of New Jersey State of Delaware 4
9 m
e w ~
w
SCOTT, ATTACHED IS THE FILE FOR THE LETTER WE DISCUSSED IN THE SAP. MY NOTES FROM THE SAP SAY WE NEED TO REVISE TO INCLUDE OUR NEED FOR THE EP PLAN, PLUS A COMMENT ON OUR DESIRE TO MONITOR THEIR PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEVELOPMENT. WE ALSO WANTED TO WAIT TO ISSUE THIS UNTIL MAKE SURE THE STATE HAS NO BIG ISSUES WITH THEIR RESTART PLAN. I WLL *. EAVE ON YOUR DESK THE MARKUPS FROM LINVILLE AND COOPER FOR INCORPOR TION, PLUS THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WHEN WE WERE GOING TO JUST ISSUE YHE MEETING SLIDES AND DISCUSS HOPE CREEK AS WEll TH T Ac VOII KNOW,IS NO LONGER THE CASE. THE GOAL IS TO GET THIS OUTCB FOR TURNDO LAZARUS WILL HAVE SOMETHING HE CAN OFFER AS AN ACCOMPusHMENT.
THANKS.
9 l
5 9
I' Distribution w/ encl:
Region I Dockct Roorr, (with concurrences)
Kay Gallacher, DRF Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
D. Screnci, PAO NRC Resident inspector PUBLIC Distribution w/ encl: (Via E-Mail)
L. Olshan, NRR W. Dean, OEDO J. Stolz, PDI 2, NRR M. Callahan, OCA Inspection Program Branch, NRR (IPAS)
DOCUMENT NAME: a:1212rply.mtg (Salem)
To recolwe a copy of ede document. Indloats in me box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure T = FApy with attachment /encioeure v = No copy OFFICE Rl:DRP NRR: POI 2 Rl:DRP NAME LNicholson JStolz RCooper DATE 1/ /96 1/ /96 1/ /96
< Date >
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
(--.
.1 y
SALEM ASSESSMENT PANEL (SAP) MINUTES 3
1 1/3/96,11:00am
+
Atteendees: D. Cooper, L. Nicholson, S. Barber, C. Marschall, R. DePriest, J.
i Stolz, L. Olshan, B. Lazarus, G. Kelly, N. DelleGrecca 1.
The SAP members (except G. Kelly) met with representatives from the State of New Jersey earlier today to discuss the Salem restart process. The following items resulted from that meeting and the following SAP meeting:
a)
A followup meeting will be conducted within the next 2 weeks for i
New Jersey to present their questions and concerns regarding the j
PSE&G Restart Plan and their (NJ) issues they would like resolved prior to restart. Scott Barber has action to coordinate meeting with Dave Chawaga. We agreed to conduct meeting at Trenton, b)
Karla Smith agreed to author a guidance document on the authority of the state to inspect.
c)
Dave Chawaga agreed to call NJ and reinforce our request to have a list of the state's concerns in writing prior to our meeting with them.
d)
The meeting with the state needs to produce the framework for transfering schedules and information between the NRC and states. Larry Nicholson to discuss with the SLO the need to get Delaware involved, and perhaps a more active role for the SLO in the SAP.
2.
The SAP disc'ussed the below status information needed to brief the NRC senior managers prior to the SMM. The pacing item continues to be training of operator, a)
With the latest addition of David Powell as Licensing Manager, the Salem management organization is in place. Additionally, about 23 STAS /SROs have been hired and in training for both units.
b)
The first phase of the system walkdowns are now complete.
c)
The pipe replacement scheduled for this outage has been completed on both service water headers. They are now taking the headers back out to complete additional pipe replacement planned for the next RFO.
d)
EDG overhauls are complete on unit 1, although issues still remain.
e)
Digital Feed control mods ongoing. Also preparing to replace the -
I i
?;
f I
P250 plant computer. ' New computer will also help fix overhead l
annunciator issues.
i t
f)
Inefficient work planning still results in low work completion rate. for
^
example, on a good day, they are completing about 50% of the work they plan to complete. This could continue to impact their schedule.
j 3.
Confirmatory Action item #1:
i The SAP discussed the supplement to LER 95-004-01, dated 11/02/95, which PSE&G contends constitutes their results of their SERT evaluation of the unit 2 trip. Per Clay Warren, he does not want to place the original SERT report on the docket because of the low quality of the product. The l
SAP was provided a copy of this document, and agrees it is hard to follow.
However, the LER is narrow in focus and not of the level of detail and commitment needed for a CAL ltem.
i The SAP agreed that the LER, as currently issued, is insufficient to close CAL ltem #1. Larry Nicholson has action to call Clay Warren and discuss this conclusion with him. The SAP agreed that closing this CAL ltem is not time critical at this time, and that we would rather see a more complete j
document, either as an LER or separate letter.
Chat'io Marschall has action to review the LER and SERT report in the next inspection report and document any performance issues regarding the effort. The SAP concern was focused on the inability of the PSE&G organization to produce a quality document. The inspection report will not assess the report against the CAL item, as this will be achieved during future SAP meetings.
4.
Confirmatory Action items #2 & 3:
The SAP discussed and agreed that the PSE&G restart plan is comprehensive, and if effectively implemented, should produce the desired performance improvement. However, the following items must be addressed prior to issue of the letter closing CAL ltems 2 & 3:
a)
DRS to review the licensee's restart training plan and conclude that the plan, if implemented effectively, should result in improved performance of the training function. Gene Kelly has the action to ensure this item is completed and closed with Scott Barber prior to issuing the closeout letter.
b)
Scott Barber has action to meet with the State of New Jersey, understand any concerns they have with the plan, and revise our closeout letter, if appropriate.
4 i
c)
Scott Barber has action to incorporate any comments into the closecut letter. The SAP wants the letter to request PSE&G to amend their plan to include their corrective actions for Emerg@ncy Preperedness issues, l
Additionally, the letter should acknowledge the PSE&G statement in the 12/11/95 meeting that their performance indicators were still being developed. Our letter should include a remark that we will continue to rnonitor the development and us's of these indicators.
d)
Scott Barber has a:: tion to research and incorporate any insight from the methods used to monitor the IP3 restart plan.
5.
NRC Chapter 0350 Plar.
Agreement was reached to place the transcript from the public meeting of l
12/18/95 on the docket. The SAP discussed the status of our 0350 letter and list. Mr. Barber presented options for including an inspection schedule with the restart list. The SAP agreed to provide a schedule for non-resident core inspections currently on the MIPS, plus any additional regional initiative
)
inspections that are now scheduled (including the basis for the inspection).
It was agreed that an issue that is contained on the NRC restart list has had adequate rnanagement review and approval to be done as a regional initiative Gene Kelly agreed to coordinate with DRS to accomplish the necessary EP inspections, including an up front look at their program.
Additionally, Scott Barber has the action to start scheduling the core Inspectionu commensurate with.the plant work schedule.
i 9
9
i f
p//
i James C. Linville!(JCL)
From:
To:
G:\\GRPS\\ SAP.GRP l
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 1995 3:58 pm
Subject:
SAP Mee' ting The next SAP meeting will be at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, October 6,1995 in the DRP conference room. The proposed agenda is as follows:
l 1.
Introduce new member-Linville 2.
Results of system readiness review inspection-Kelly 3.
Review additions to restart list-Marschall 4
, 4.
Discuss items on restart list not included as restart items l
from PSE&G system readiness reviews-Marschall i
5.
Review MIP-White j
6.
Discuss Action Plan Observations-Linville & All Observers 7.
Feedback from Regional Administrator visit-Nicholson 8.
Future plans and Schedule including Senior Managemen, %eting Prebrief Preps-Linville If you would like to add anything to the agenda or cannot make the meeting please let me know by COB September 29. The minutes of the September 11 4
conference call are attached for your review and comment.
CC:
G:\\ BRANCH 3\\SAPMIN3.JCL nb
/)
0, two 20 09-Ip w-
/
'%.