ML20151H424
| ML20151H424 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1983 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8305040086 | |
| Download: ML20151H424 (124) | |
Text
l
(
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of:
COMMISSION MEETING Docket No.
Public Meeting Briefing on TMI-2 Clean-Up 1 - 98 Location: Washington, D.C.
Pages:
Date: Friday, April 22, 1983 TAYLOE ASSOCIATES Court Reporters 1625 I Street, N.W. Suite 1004 8305040086 830422 Wuhington, D.C. 20006 PDR 10CFR (202) 293-3950 FT9.7 PDR
o 1
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
BRIEFING ON TMI-2 CLEANUP 4
PUBLIC MEETING 5
6 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Room 1130 7
1717 H Street, N.
W.
Washington, D.
C.
8 Friday, April 22, 1983 9
The Commission convened, pursuant to notice, 10 at 3:15 p.m.
11 12 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
13 NUNZIO PALLADINO, Chairman of the Commission VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner 14 JOHN AHEARNE, Commissioner THOMAS ROBERTS, Commissioner
('
15 JAMES ASSELSTINE, Commissioner 16 STAFF AND PRESENTERS SEATED AT COMMISSION TABLE:
17 S. CHILK H.
PLAINE 18 H.
DIECKAMP R.
ARNOLD 19 8.
KANGA J.
ROTH 20 R.
REID T.
GERUSKY 21 T.
SMITHGALL B.
SNYDER 22 L.
BARRETT 8.
WARD 23 F.
COFFMAN 24 25 TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
f c
l
- l. '
DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meetinS of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on Apri 22, 1983 in the Commission's offices at 1717 H Street, N.
W.~, Washington, D. C.
The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in i
this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in i
any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize, t
l e
T
2 1
PROCEED INGS 2
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Good afternoon, ladies and 3
gentlemen.
4 The Commission is meeting this afternoon to discuss TMI-2 cleanup activities.
6 We are greatly interested in as rapid a process as possible consistent with safe practices.
However, it 8
appears that activities are not progressing as fast as 9
they were originally projected and I hope that today's IU discussion can shed light on the causes for delay and on 11 possible courses of action that can be taken to improve 12 this situation.
I3 Our meeting will be composed of three parts.
I#
First, we will hear from representatives of tne owner of 15 tne facility, General Public Utilities, second, we will 16 near from members of the Advisory Panel on the 17 Decontamination of TMI-2 and third part of the meeting 18 will be a presentation by the NRC staff.
I' Before I begin do any of my fellow 20 Commissioners have any opening remarks?
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Do you have any sense of 22 how long this is going to last?
23 (Laughter.)
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
It seems to have lasted 25 over fcur years.
TAYLOE ASSGCI A T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e et, N. W. - S uit e 10 0 4 w ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i e
3 1
(Laughter.)
2 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I have to leave at 5.
If 3
it continues past 5, it is not because of my lack of 4
interest.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, we have scheduled 30 6
minutes for the GPU presentation, 15 minutes for the 7
Advisory Panel presentation and 10 minutes for the staff 8
and then we multiply that by whatever factor you choose to 9
indicate the delay caused by the Commission.
10 (Laughter.)
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Does that give you a feel 12 for how we are going to ---
13 (Laughter.)
14 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I suspect I will leave 15 before the meeting is over.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
We will try to move as 17 expeditiously as we Can.
18 All right, why don't I turn the meeting then 19 oVer to Mr. DieCkamp.
20 MR. DIECKAMP:
Members of the Commission, thank 21 you.
22 We are pleased to have a chance to be here 23 today to review the status of the program.
We have broken 24 the presentation down into four pieces.
25 First, Bob Arnold will have you a brief TAYLOL ASSO CI A TES 162 5 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 w ashington, 0.C. 20006 (202) 293-1950
4 1
overview of the organizational structure in place at the 2
Island.
3 Secondly, Bahman Kanga, who is the Vice 4
President of GPU in charge of the TMI-2 effort will review 5
the status of the work and the schedule and cost estimate 6
that recently has been completed and the immediate forward 7
look for the next 13 months of key work that has to be 8
done.
9 Then Bob will return with a brief summary of 10 the response that we have underway to some of the 11 allegations about the quality of the work at the Island.
12 Then, lastly, I will try to give you a brief 13 summary of where we are with respect to the funding of the 14 project.
15 I know it is your style and we would certainly 16 welcome your questions as we go along.
17 So, Bob, if you woulc like to start.
18 (Slide presentation) 19 MR. ARNOLD:
If I could have the first 20 viewgraph, please.
l 21 What we have here is the general organization i
22 of the GPU Nuclear Corporation which is responsible for 23 the TMI-2 program.
We are a subsidiary of General Public l
24 Utilities Corporation, the holding company for the owners 25 of the facility.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 1 Stre et, N. w. - Suit e 100 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
5 i
Just very briefly reporting to the Office of 2
the President are some nine divisions, three for each of 3
the three units and six support divisions.
While in 4
general the Nuclear Corp could be described as a 5
functional organization, TMI-2 is projectized to a much 6
greater extent than TMI-l and Oyster Creek.
7 Below the functional or support divisions, the 8
six on the bottom indicate some of the major activities 9
that are carried on in support of TMI-2.
10 I would just note that the project nature of 11 the TMI-2 program includes having essentially all of the 12 engineering functions as part of the TMI-2 division as
- 13 opposed to technical functions which supports Unit 1 and l'
Oyster Creek. The TMI-2 division is of course headed up by 15 Mr. Bahman Kanga who Herman identified earlier.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Mr. Kanga is an employee 17 of GPU?
18 MR. ARNOLD: No. Mr. Kanga is an employee of the 19 Bechtel Corporation on loan to GPU.
20 MR. DIECKAMP:
Yes. I misspoke when I said he 21 was the Vice President.
He is called the Director of 22 TMI-2, but ne has the same authority within the 23 organization as if he nad been one of our employees.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That was the point that I 25 was getting to.
TAYLDE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 100 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
Og e
6 1
MR. DIECKAMP:
That was my error.
2 MR. ARNOLD:
Also, just for clarification, the 3
Maintenance Construction Division to the right on the 4
lower corner does not support Unit 2. Those activities are 5
incorporated within the TMI-2 Division.
6 Turning to the next viewgraph, Mr. Kanga 7
reports directly to me for the TMI-2 activities, and here a
we indicate the major structure of the organization 9
beneath him.
10 There are basically three kind of end product 11 divisions or departments, that of Technical Planning, 12 Recovery Program and Site Operations.
Then he has three 13 kind of staff departments, the Government and Industry 14 programs interface, Licensing and Safety and the Cost and 15 Schedule Controls or Program Controls.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The Deputy Director, is 17 that Barton?
18 MR. ARNOLD:
That is John Barton, yes.
19 COMMISSIONER ASEARNE:
You mentioned the three 20 main lower ones.
Who are they?
21 MR. ARNOLD:
Technical Planning is Jack DeVine.
22 He is a GPU employee.
Recovery Programs is Jim Thiesing.
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Jim who?
24 MR. ARNOLD: Thiesing. He is a Bechtel employee.
25 Site Operations was the position held by Mr. King until TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
~.
7 1
March 23rd, and Mr. Barton is the Acting Head of Site 2
Operations.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
And Mr. Barton is GPU?
4 MR. ARNOLD:
Yes.
5 In the upper-right-hand corner I indicated the 6
Functional Division Support that reports through their 7
management to the Office of the President.
8 Also I would like to highlight on this 9
viewgraph the two safety review type of elements of this 10 organization that are unique to TMI-2, 11 The first one is the safety Advisory Board.
12 That is a ten-member panel chaired by Dr. James Fletcher, 13 former Administrator of NASA, composed of people with 14 similar expertise in their areas of specialty and includes 15 Nuclear Technology, people from the space program as Dr.
16 Fletcher, people from public policy, sociology and we have 17 tried to aggregate a full spectrum of the sort of 18 disciplines or specialities that need to be provided for 19 overview of the total program activities.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Are these all people who 21 are not employees of GPU?
22 MR. ARNOLD:
That is correct, sir. None of them 23 are employees of GPU.
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Or Bechtel.
25 MR. ARNOLD:
Or Bechtel.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
m o.
8 I
We also have a Technical Advisory and 2
Assistance Group, which is fdnded by the Department of 3
Energy.
It aces not have any GPU employees and they are 4
all technical specialists and experts from the nuclear 5
commercial industry, the Navy program or that background 6
and the national laboratories.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
How does the Safety e
Advisory Board and the TAAG differ?
9 MR. ARNOLD:
The TAAG.is a much more intensive 10 effort. They meet typically about'four to six weeks at the 11 site per quarter looking in considerable detail at what we 12 are in fact planning on doing as well as assisting in 13 review of options and evaluation of alternative i
14 approaches.
They also' assist us in forward looking and 15 technical efforts for that. They give us access to the 16 nation's technical base in the course of doing that.
17 The Safety Advisory' Board meets two days.a la quarter.
They have panels.that will typically meet three 19 or four days during each quarter that look at restricted
~
20 areas and then report back to the Board 5 But they-look at 21 things in a much more generalized basis and look also more.
22 generally at the management of the operation and the way 23 in which the prioriti.es are ' eing set within the o
24 organization and the way in which the program is being 25 implemented.
That is not to say they are not involved in TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004~
W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 w
,4
+
l o.
a 9
/
1 the review of technical detail.
2 In addition to that we have the usual in-house 3
safety review and quality assurance program, including a 4
General Office Review Board not shown on here.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Where would they report to, t
6 what level?
7 MR. ARNOLD:
The GORB?
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes.
9 MR. ARNOLD:
The' General Office Review Board as 10 shown on the previous viewgraph reports to me.
It is 11 advisory.
It is about 50 percent internal GPU people and 12 50 percent outside people and the outside people have t
13 backgrounds similar to that of TAG membership.
14 Going to the next viewgraph, I would like to 15 talk a little bit just about the environment within which 16 this program has to be implemented.
17 We find it is one in which the decision-making la process has to deal with a great number of uncertainties.
19 The intangibles do tend to dominate the process.
2c Consequently the information base which decisions can 21 utilize is one that is changing with time, generally 22 improving with time substantially and the implication of 23 that:is that the timing of our decisions is important 24 because they do have to be made such that we can proceed 25 with downstream advance activities and they have to be TAYLDE ASSO CI A TES 16 2 5 I Str e e t, N. W.. S uit e 10 0 4
/
W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
10 I
done at a time when all of the data we would like to have 2
and all the analysis we might like to be able to have 3
completed before making decisions just simply is not 4
available.
5 Another implication of that is that it does 6
require us to revisit and reconsider decisions as 7
additional information becomes available.
I think that 8
over the last three years we have seen the effect of that 9
in a number of cases.
10 We also feel that it is important to keep a 11 perspective on the efforts there.
Inherent in the 12 scheduled increases is increases in public risk, but the 13 the total integrated risk to the public is directly 14 related to the duration of the cleanup.
15 On the next viewgraph I have just tried to 16 highlight what I see as three major interdependent ---
L 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARME:
Before you leave that, I la just want to verify, are you saying anything more than 19 what I guess you and we have said over the last several 20 years that you have a lot of equipment that wasn't planned 21 to be operated in that kind of environment or sit in that l
22 kind of environment, and that the longer you wait before 23 you get it all cleaned up, obviously the probability of 24 some failure increases?
l 25 MR. ARNOLD:
Yes, sir, l
1 l
l TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Str eet, N.W. - Suite 1004 l
W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
11 1
COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
But that is essentially 2
the sense?
3 MR. ARNOLD:
I am not saying that we identify 4
some threshold point at which something deteriorates 5
dramatically.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Has it been helped now that 7
you have drained some of the water away from such things 8
as the instrument tubes?
9 MR. A7NOLD:
Certainly removing the water that to was submerging the instrument tubes in an uncontrolled 11 chemistry environment I think is in the right direction.
12 We also though cannot quantify how much improvement that 13 is.
14 On this viewgraph though the three major 15 variables or contraints that are almost interlocked with 16 each other are highlighted.
17 If we can go to the next viewgraph I think we la can try to summarize this in terms of the philosophy and 19 practice by which we try to make our decisions.
20 I tnink first and foremost is that given the 21 uncertainties that exist, we have seen as the first 22 priority those activities which clearly reduce public 23 risk.
24 So, for example, the processing of the water in 25 the auxiliary building where we were left with virtually TAYLGE ASSO CI A T ES 1675 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
12 I
no free board for additional water, contaminated water to 2
be collected, then the processing of the water in the 3
containment building, very highly radioactive, we saw is 4
major improvements in the risk to the public from 5
ancontrolled releases.
6 We similarly see as the next major milestone in 7
the reduction of risk to the public that of removal of the 8
core.
We have set that, as you will see, in Mr. Kanga's 9
presentation as the major priority milestone to be 10 achieved by the funding that is available to us.
11 Taking into account the competition that exists 12 between schedule, the risk associated with that, and the 13 occupational exposures that will result from the cleanup 14 activities that do have to be conducted, we have 15 approached the reduction of man-rems in the cleanup on the 16 basis of given reasonable cleanup objectives in terms of 17 schedule and in terms of what we know technically, we then 18 apply a very rigorous ALARA program to ensure that the 19 individual elements of the program are conducted with as 20 long an exposure to the workers as we can.
21 Then we are continually reviewing and 22 reassessing the program decisions in light of the new 23 technical information that we gain.
24 With that, unless there are questions on that 25 part, I would like to pass the baton to Mr. Kanga to TAYLOC ASS O CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
13 I
review the status of the plant at this time.
2 MR. KANGA:
I would briefly like to go over the 3
history and the achievement of the project and then talk 4
in terms of the next 12 to 18 months of work that we see 5
and then discuss with you the program estimate and 6
schedule that we have reassessed at the end of 1982.
7 (Slide presentation) 8 MR. KANGA:
The first slide shows you the 9
achievements in the period of 1979 through 1982 when we 10 vented the 43,000 curies of krypton in the third quarter 11 of
'80, the EPICOR II processing of the auxiliary building 12 water in the third quarter of 1980 and the use of the 13 sucmerged demineralizer system in the third quarter of 14
- 1981, 15 The next slide indicates the Decon experiment 16 which was performed in the first quarter of 1982, the 17 reactor coolant system processing which began in the la second quarter of 1982, the " Quick Look" which looked into 19 the reactor vessel to essentially visually determine the 20 damage to the core which took place in the third quarter 21 of 1982 and in the fourth quarter of 1982 we began a dose l
22 reduction campaign which we have now completed at the end l
23 of last month.
l l
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: By saying you completed it, i
i 25 does that mean you don't have any more problems?
I TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 10 04 W ashington, D.C. 20006 l
(202) 293-3950 g.
1 I
14 1
MR. KANGA:
No, sir. It was a specific campaign 2
to reduce the dose in the reactor building, and this is 3
what we have termed as Part A.
We have a Part B which is 4
ongoing which I will address in the next slide.
5 In the next 12 to 18 months we have a series of 6
activities and we just talked about implementing the 7
reactor building ---
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Could we go back to the 9
aQuick Look" inside the reactor vessel. That includes your 10 several different TV cameras?
11 MR. KANGA: Yes, we introduced these three times 12 in three different locations, t
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay. That is all part of 14 your " Quick Look"?
15 MR. KANGA:
That is part of the " Quick Look,"
16 that is correct.
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I am sorry. I didn't mean 18 to interrupt.
I 19 MR. KANGA:
Basically what that did was to 20 visually look at three portions of the core and 1
21 essentially indicate that the previous estimates were in 22 the ball park as we could see them in the " Quick Look."
23 We have already started and will continue on 24 what we call the Part B of the dose reduction program.
25 We will be starting reactor building systems TAYLGE ASSO CI A TES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
15.
I stabilization.
2 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
What does that mean?
3 MR. KANGA: There are a number of systems inside 4
the reactor building that need to be stabilized and then 5
eventually decontaminated.
So that is the first part of 6
that program.
7 MR. ARNOLD: Perhaps another way of saying that, 8
Mr. Chairman, is that activities to ensure that the 4
9 radioactivity there stays where it is until we can get to 10 it to collect it.
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you.
12 MR. KANGA: We will be performing in this period 13 the design for fabrication of the fuel canisters, the fuel 14-removal tooling and the canister racks.
15 We will be requalifying the crane.
Most of the 16 work is already complete on that. We would be removing the 17 reactor vessel head and during the same period of time we la would be performing a number of activities in the design 19 and procurement and installation of the canal cleaning 20 system, in turn, also for the transfer tube mechanism 21 modifications to transfer the canisters from the 22 containment to the fuel pool and also perform the 23 engineering and the Decon to remove some tanks which are 24 in the fuel pool and certain associated components that 25 are in that fuel pool.
i TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 10 0 4 w ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
16 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is this a schedule that 2
you feel fairly confident on even though there is a 50 3
percent range in the estimate?
Is the 50 percent to 4
indicate that you are sure all of these things will be 5
done by the end of 18 months or do you think that they 6
might be done in 12 months, but there is a six-month 7
uncertainty?
8 MR. KANGA:
No. The majority of these 9
activities, they of course span over this period.
As an 10 example, the polar crane requalification, we have 11 essentially performed most of that work other than the 12 final test.
13 In terms of the removal of the tanks from the 14 fuel pool, we are only in the engineering phase of it.
It 15 would be sometime early next year before we completely 16 clean that up.
So that is the range of these activities.
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Let me ask it a different la way.
19 MR. ARNOLD:
I think that our expectation is 20 that the end point of the list we have here, and I think 21 it will show up further along, is that it will ce about la 22 months from now.
We perhaps were inartful in indicating l
23 the 12 to 18.
That is an uncertainty indicator.
l 24 MR. DIECKAMP: John, my sense of it also is that 25 these are fairly straightforward items and these are i
TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
17 3
really kind of to get ready for the next big item which 2
does have a degree of uncertainty in it, and that is the 3
removal of the core hold-down structure and upper plenum 4
and the uncertainty associated with it as to whether or 5
not it might be stuck in some way and thus not come out 6
easily.
But these are all things that get us ready for 7
that next major hurdle, and if we can go by that one e
easily, then you have the fuel exposed underwater where 9
you can go at it pretty directly.
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Mr. Kanga, you have heard 11 your senior management say there is no uncertainty here.
12 (Laughter.)
13 MR. DIECKAMP:
I don't think that is quite 14 right.
15 (Laughter.)
16 MR. KANGA:
Let me say this. There are 17 uncertainties, but the intent of this estimate and the la schedule was to look at the overall schedule in the best 19 form we could without providing a lot of contingency. This 20 is not a project similar to say constructing a new plant 21 where we know what we want to do and therefore we can look 22 at contingency in terms of the knowledge at the time we 23 are preparing it and then as we go along we will reduce 24 the contingency.
25 What we have essentially done here is not to TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
18 I
provide or any specific contingency either in cost or 2
schedule, but to look at this project in terms of what do 3
we know today and prepare for that on the basis of the 4
knowledge we have today.
5 If as we go along and we find differences, what 6
we are going to do is to take a hard look at the new 7
information that we have and then change course if it is e
absolutely necessary.
9 I will tell you one thing, that as we find new 10 information, we analyze it and I have not redirected the 11 project on the first indication of new information because 12 sometimes the new information is not that solid.
We have 13 to analyze it ind we have to ex-examine it.
14 If we ever find that the information indicates 15 that the course in which we are proceeding needs to be 16 changed, I will be the first one to change it.
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But you are comfortable la with this. The description of 12 to 18 is not presenting a 19 big uncertainty.
20 MR. KANGA:
No. That was just perhaps an error.
I 21 If we had put 18 months, that would have ---
t 22 MR. DIECKAMP:
But don't we just have to stop 23 right here and say the polar crane has been somewhat dead 24 in the water for a month now, and I don't know how many 25 more months it is going to be dead in the water.
l l
l l
TAYLOE ASSO CIA TES j
1625 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 j
W ashington, D.C. 20006 l
(202) 293-3950 L
19 1
I think it is indicative of some of the kinds 2
of problems we have at Three Mile Island 2.
Issues like 3
that one, we have got to find a way to resolve those 4
quickly and cleanly.
I am not making a plea for any kind 5
of reduction in the standards of performance that we ought 6
to have on the job, but we are not going to be able to 7
pursue the job aggressively if everything has to come to a e
half every now and then.
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Why is it dead in the 10 water?
11 MR. DIECKAMP:
It was ready for approval from 12 our point of view a month ago.
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Are you holding up for 14 approvals from us or from the NRC?
15 MR. KANGA:
We have presently the ball in our 16 court.
We had sent a couple of procedures for review by 17 the NRC. There were some additional questions to us and we 18 will ce responding to those.
So presently the ball is in 19 my Court.
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The impression I got from l
21 Mr. Dieckamp was that it was dead in the water for a month 22 now.
Perhaps I drew the wrong inference. I inferred that l
23 if it was dead in the water, that there was nothing 24 happening.
But your description, if I got that correctly, 25 j
is that you proposed some procedures and they weren't TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES l
162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D,0, 20006 (202) 293-3950 I
20 I
approved.
2 MR. KANGA:
The NRC has asked some specific 3
questions on those two procedures.
Those two procedures 4
are being looked at and reviewed in light of those 5
questions and we will be responding.
6 We have submitted the safety evaluation report, 7
and I believe that we have responded to all the questions 8
of NRC on the safety evaluation, 9
MR. DIECKAMP:
Well, I will hope very sincerely 10 that the investigations don't hold it up.
11 MR. ARNOLD:
If I could give at least my sense 12 along the lines of Mr. Dieckamp's observation, I think 13 that it is going to be very difficult in any of these 14 situations to sort out all of the elements and isolate 15 them as to which ones contributed in what way, at what 16 time and to what delay.
17 I think that clearly the staff at the site is 18 extremely uneasy as to whether they will get work that 19 they do responded to on its merits, what will be the 20 implications of the investigations going on, and I think 21 that we do have a great deal of uncertainty on our part 1
22 and I can't imagine it not existing on the part of the 23 stafr of the NRC as to what they can move f orward with and -
24 feel they have support in. Maybe we are not dead in the 25 water, but I am not sure it is steaming very smoothly
(
TAYLQE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
21 I
either.
2 MR. DIECKAMP:
Not much headway.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
There was something that 4
you said that gives me a little cause for concern, and 5
maybe I misunderstood it.
6 You say people aren't doing things because of 7
worry about investigations.
Is this a management decision 8
that they not do it or is this not doing it despite 9
management schedules or what?
I guess I am not clear on 10 that.
11 MR. ARNOLD:
I think, Mr. Chairman it is 12 extremely easy to in times of uncertainty to continue to 13 feel like more study is needed and to continue to debate 14 when the point of effectiveness of that has passed.
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: So the greater caution does 16 include some mangement feeling that things ought to be 17 looked at more carefully?
18 MR. ARNOLD:
No, I am not saying that. I am 19 saying that the issues that are looked ac, the people who 20 are responsible for resolving them ana bringing.them to a 21 j
head I think are inhibited in being able to deal with l
22 those as crisply as they normally would without any 23 reduction in safety as they continue to feel the need to l
l 24 debate and document and study and look at alternatives.
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Are you talking about l
I T A Y L GE ASSO CI A TES 162 5 I Street, N.W. - Suite 2004 W cshington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
22 I
us?
2 (Laughter.)
3 MR. ARNOLD:
I am asserting I think that it is 4
on both sides.
5 MR. DIECKAMP:
I think that is right. It is the 6
combination.
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Was there some 8
suggestion in your original remark about the one. month 9
delay that we were being unreasonable?
That is the way I 10 took it, and I didn't know whether that was a correct li inference or not?
12 MR. DIECKAMP:
Dr. Gilinsky, I think it is 13 always impossible for me to say that somebody is 14 unreasonable when it comes time to pursue a safety 15 question.
I think that the environment that we are in 16 though is one wnere there is an extreme level of 17 sensitivity to these kinds of things and very strong 18 reactions, and I tnink, as Bob says, it is very difficult 19 for the organization, whetner it is ours or yours or the 20 combination of the two, and they are locked together very 21 tightly on these kinds of things, it is very difficult for 22 them to make progress.
23 I have got to believe that these investigations
- 4 are going to cause delays and probably delays beyond what 25 would be necessary if somehow we had the ability to come TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suite 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
23 together and resolve the factual issues quickly an'd I
i 2
crisply. I haven't seen the ability to do tnat in the past.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Do you see the failure to 4
approve the procedures that we were talking about earlier 5
as somehow tangled up with these investigations?
6 MR. DIECKAMP:
I think they are inherently tied 7
up just in the way that Bob Arnold indicated, that people a
do get up tight. Listen, when you have a staff like we have 9
that has been investigated and reinvestigated, that is 10 forever being descended upon by investigators and people 11 that are exposed to Grand Jury potential indictments and 12 things of that sort, that organization takes on a character 13 that reflects that environment.
It is impossible for them 14 to separate themselves from that.
1)
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But these were 16 disapproved by our site director, as I understand it.
17 MR. ARNOLD:
Mr. Commissioner, let me perhaps la give you my sense of the answer to your questior..
The 19 answer to your question is yes.
I think that we have other 20 cocuments in to the NRC staff which I am not aware of any 21 questions they have on them at this point, which have not 22 been approved, and while I may have tne wrong 23 understanding, it is my understanding that there is a 24 desire to see the investigation completed before those 25 documents are moved forward.
TAYLOT ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suite 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
24 1
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
And do I gather you think 2
even our staff people are being more cautious in evaluating 3
and ---
a MR. ARNOLD:
From an extension of our own 5
experience, yes, sir, and not from being able to cite a 6
specific example.
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
As I understand, the a
procedures on the crane were not approved because certain 9
aspects were missing that would normally be expected to be 10 there quite apart from anything else that is going on at 11 this site or any investigation that is going on. Do you see 12 it differently?
13 MR. ARNOLD:
I do somewhat, Mr. Commissioner. I 14 think that inherent in the situation we have at TMI where 15 the regulatory guidance criteria that we have available to 16 us and which is very useful during construction and 17 operation and that we have developed a tradition as to how 18 to interpret the'e requirements for those situations it is 19 very difficult often to know for sure just how to apply to 20 some of the conditions we have at TMI-2.
21 So I would not, Ior example, I guess, assign up 22 that the questions that were asked during the review of the 23 two procedures that were returned to us with comments 24 failea to have things that you would normally expect to l
25 have.
I TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
25 1
I would not say that the comments were 2
inappropriate or unreasonable, but I would also think it is 3
fair to say that if someone is very unsure as to the a
support that he has for moving something forward, that the 5
nature of the situation permits asking lots of questions.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I wanted to ask a technical 7
question, and maybe you can answer is a sentence or two.
e What is the basic difference between your Phase A and Phase 9
B?
10 MR. KANGA:
The Phase A basically was a four 11 month program that we wanted to accomplish to reduce the 12 radiation e--
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I meant is one a wash-down 14 and ---
15 MR. KANGA:
No. This was to provide additional 16 shielding around certain areas, certain openings in the 17 floor and things of that nature and it included some la washdown of certain equipment, moving the equipment, 19 shielding it where possible.
20 MR. ARNOLD:
The difference was primarily one of 21 time duration to accomplish it. Part A was what we could do 22 now with major significant improvements. B were things that 23 required a longer term to accomplish.
24 MR. KANGA: The Part A was in effect we wanted to 25 accomplish all that well before we removed the head.
The l
TAYLDE ASSO CI A TES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 1
I other will continue on.
2 I would now like to talk in terms of the 3
reassessment that we performed.
We studied basically five 4
different scenarios.
5 The Case 1, which is shown on this slide, is the 6
base case that we are proceeding with, and in that we have 7
allowed a cash flow of $76 million for 1983, S92,500 for a
1984 and $100 million for 1985 and later years.
9 These dollars are in terms of 1983 dollars and 10 therefore the actual cash flow will be higner due to the 11 escalation, 12 In Case 2, which is ---
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Escalation is one of the 14 things I didn't understand because the staff tables, which 15 I believe came from your tables, talx about total complete 16 and then total for entire cleaning, including escalation, 17 and I thought everything was in constant dollars.
18 MR. ARNOLD:
That will show up in a later 19 overhead.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Then I also was interested, 21 why does your base case assume at least for '83 numbers 22 smaller than what, and it says fully committed which was 23 S77 million. I just didn't understand. We have a table here 24 that says funds fully committed as of March, and it says 25 for '83 S77 million.
In the base Case 1 it says S76 TAYLOC ASSO CIA TES 162 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006
-(202) 293.3950
I million.
2 MR. KANGA:
Is that a staff paper you are 3
referring to?
4 MR. ARNOLD:
I think this is the funding sources 5
fully committed at that time.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Oh, I see.
7 Why don't you go on.
g MR. KANGA: The Case 2 is a more pessimistic case 9
in which we have made-the assumption that the S100 million 10 would be in the current dollars and therefore would be 11 suoject to the reduction which would result from the 12 escalation.
13 We then looked at three additional cases.
14 Case 3 is the same as Case 1, with the exception 15 that in 1985 we asked ourselves the question that if we had 16 additional cash flow and we accelerated the fuel removal ty activities, what would be the cash flow requirements.
When la we look at the various comparisons we will see the 19 acceleration activities in 1985.
20 In Case 4 we took the same case as Case 1, with l
21 the exception that we would separate activities in 1983 and 22
'84 which are mainly the engineering activities for things 23 to perform in 1985 onwards by increasing the cash flow by 24 S10 million in each of those two years.
25 Finally in case 5 we looked at the combination TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W eshington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
28 e
1 of acceleration of engineering activities which would then 2
result in earlier start of the fuel removal as well as 3
reducing the time of the fuel removal from 18 months to 12 a
months.
5 The next slide indicates in effect the five 6
cases and also on the top line we show the July 1981 7
estimate.
Basically you will see that in the Case 1 the a
program completion is June
'88, whereas in Case 5 it is 9
December '87.
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What was the principal it reasons for the big difference between the two-year-ago 12 estimate and the estimate now?
13 MR. KANGA:
Basically in the last two years due la to the restraints in cash flow, we were not able to perform 15 a number of activities that were estimated or predicted in 16 the July '81 estimate.
17 MR. ARNOLD:
Another part of that though, as we la explained at the time of the July '81 anc its prior one in 19 August of
'80, both of those are based upon completed l
l unlimited cash flow forecasts.
This is the first estimate 20 21 we have done where we have made a projection of a schedule 22 when it was cash limited.
23 COMMISSIONER AdEARNE:
I guess I am misreading 24 the top line then.
That isn't a different program. So the 25 "to go" was to go as of July '81 for the first line?
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, h. W. - Suite 1004 W sshington, O.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
29 1
MR. KANGA:
No. The "to go" is basically 11 we 2
were to take that particular estimate in terms of dollars 3
and look at the activities that we would have to perform.
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Today.
5 MR. KANGA:
Correct.
6 MR. ARNOLD:
Well, actually as of the time tne 7
estimate which was January 1,'83.
If we go back to the '81 8
estimate and look at January 1,
'83 onward, it had in it 9
$644.8 million to go for '83 through
'86.
10 MR. DIECKAMP:
And the program is somewhat 11 different in the sense that there are fewer major 12 facilities postulated in the current estimate and there is 13 a reduction in the cost of maintaining some of the 14 auxiliary equipment. So if you combine those two, the added 15 costs inherent in slippage and the take out of costs for 16 major facilities and maintenance of some equipment, they 17 balance out, and we would be reluctant to suggest that le there is great significance between all these numbers.
It 19 is within the uncertainties certainly.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: I guess I am not quite clear 21 in understanding the "to go" column.
That means how much 22 left you have to spend?
23 MR. KANGA:
How much money we have to spend,for 24 the work that is left.
25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think I had the right TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 51 Street, N. W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
30 I
number, S339 million up to 1982.
2 MR. DIECKAMP:
Yes.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
If I add that to $523.8 4
million, for example, I don't get your 974.
5 MR. KANGA:
The reason e.a; 0u don't get
- hat is t
6 that the number S339 million is the actual expenditure. The 7
amount of money that we show in the "to go" coluran is in a
1983 dollars and the total is based upon the escalated 9
dollars.
10 So what you have to do is ---
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Oh, the total is on 12 e.scalated dollars.
13 MR. KANGA:
Yes, sir.
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I thought everything was on 15
'83 dollars.
16 MR. KANGA:
No, sir.
17 MR. ARNOLD: We have it both ways. The number you 18 add up would ---
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
All right. It makes it hard 20 to follow the arithmetic.
21 MR. KANGA:
The reason why we maintained the "to n
go" number is in terms of '83 dollars is because the 23 program completion dates are different and we wanted also 24 to show what was the total escalated program amount. So the 25 first column shows you the escalated amount.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
31 1
The next slice shows the various milestone dates 2
for the five cases as well as the 1981 evaluation.
I would 3
like to draw your attention to the start of the fuel and debris removal, which is January '85 for Case 1, but is 4
5 accelerated to July '84 in Case 5 and in Case 4.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Say that again. Case 1 7
is January ' 85 for' the start of the fuel ---
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
January '85 ---
9 MR. KANGA:
That is the second one.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay, thank you.
11 MR. KANGA:
The fuel completion and debris 12 removal in Case 1 is June '86.
That is the last line. In 13 the case of Case 5, it is June
'85.
So we have in effect a 14 one-year acceleration in terms of fuel and debris remo, val 15 between Case 1 and Case 5, and that is accomplished-by 16 accelerating certain activities in the earlier years of '83 17 and '84 and then concentrating on the fuel removal from 18 18 months to a 12-month period.
19 MR. DIECKAMP:
One of the things that we were 20 looking at in this estimate for our own purposes and also I i
21 think in order to be able to respond effectively to l
22 questions from the staff was to what extent could more 23 money make the project go faster.
l 24 I think one of the things that is also different 25 in this estimate from the prior estimate is I think we are l
TAYLOC ASSO CI A TES 3 6 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
32 I
lot more realistic about the rate at which resources and 2
particular manpower can be applied inside containment.
You 3
can't just pile up the people and send them in there. There is a certain rate at which you can apply those resources, a
5 and I think that begins to show up here.
6 So at some application of additional money in 7
the range of S10 to S20 million a year in the
'33,
'84,
'85 a
time period can c.ar.e, as Bahman indicates, roughly a 9
one-year Cnange in the Completion of fuel removal..
10 MR. KANGA:
Now in this program we have 11 concentrated and given priority to removing the fuel with 12 proper consideration for ALARA. Therefore in the next slide i
13 you will see that there are a number of activities which go 14 beyond the fuel removal in terms of the contamination 15 activities ana finally the shipment of the rad waste.
16 You will note in the last line basically that 17 Case 1, the completion of the program is June
'd8, and in la Case 5 it is December
'87.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
When you say complete rad 20 waste shipping, are you talking about fuel, or are you 21 talking about all components you might remove?
22 MR. KANGA:
All components. You will notice that 23 the line No. 4 indicates the start of the fuel shipment and 24 line No. 6 indicates the completion of the fuel shipment.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
This makes the assumption TAYLOE ASS O CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
33 I
tnat such things as the reactor vessel, et cetera, is not 2
removed.
3 MR. KANGA:
That is quite true, and I will come to what we define as the completion of the program.
4 5
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is June '83 still a 6
realistic date for lifting the head?
7 MR. KANGA:
No, sir, right now it is not.
e COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What would be your 9
estimate now, or is it up in the air?
10 MR. KANGA:
It is somewhat up in the air. We 11 depend very much upon the polar crane to remove the head.
12 Depending upon how quickly we can test the polar crane, we 13 will then proceed with removal of the head.
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
All your schedules had 15 March '83 for the polar crane.
16 MR. KANGA:
And it has not happened.
17 he are also looking at certain under heaa 19 examination and we want to complete that examination before 19 we make the final decision on removing the head.
20 MR. DIECKAMP:
Bahman, is it not true, though, 21 that if you look in the detailed schecules and at the 22 critical paths the efforts necessary to permit us to flood 23 the canal, that is the water region that goes right over 24 the reactor inside tne containment building, the fixing up 25 of the fuel transfer mechanism and the removal of the tank TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16;5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
34 I
farm from the fuel storage pool, those things tend to be 2
the critical path that really prevent us from getting fuel 3
out?
4 MR. KANGA:
Yes. If I can go back to the earlier 5
milestone chart.
I would like to draw your attention that 6
we have shown June '83 as the reactor head removal date and 7
'then we show the plenum removal to be October '84 in Case 1 e
and June '84 in Case 5.
9 We have a certain amount of flexibility here.
10 The reason for removing the head earlier is to provide us 11 an early chance to determine if there are any problems that 12 we have to face up to in the removal of the plenum.
There 13 are various possibilities that the plenum may not come out 14 as easily as we think it might and we want to examine that.
15 he also will have a better access at visually 16 examining the core since once we have removed the head we 17 would have several openings through the plenum through la which we can look by cameras and also lower instruments te 19 determine the condition of the core.
20 MR. ARNOLD:
Another way of saying that also is 21 that in the plenum removal date we perhaps even today have 22 some six months or more of float available without 23 affecting the critical path for starting removing fuel.
24 MR. KANGA:
We are hoping that the past few 25 months that we may have lost will not impact the final TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 10 0 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
=
35 I
removal of the fuel.
2 MR. DIECKAMP:
The plan calls for removing the 1
3 head dty and then we have to flood the canal in order to a
remove the plenum because it is a large enough structure, 5
enough of a source, and you would start seeing the 6
direction.
7 MR. KANGA:
The next slide.
s Basically in this estimate we have included an 9
eight percent per year escalation allowance.
We have 10 already discussed our philosophy of cost and schedule 11 contingency.
Our present approach in that maintenance of 12 equipment and facilities as investment protection is not to 13 be included anc we are proceeding on that basis as the work 4
14 goes on.
/
15 COMMISSIONER AdEARNE:
What exactly does that 16 mean?
17 MR. KANGA: Essentially what we are looking at is la when we are performing the work, we are looking at 19 performing the work in the most economical manner without 20 worrying too much about if we have any damage to the 21 equipment.
Now certainly we would not go do certain things 22 just to camage the equipment deliberately, but we are not 23 trying to maintain the equipment.
he are trying to defuel 4
l 24 and do the work in the most expeditious manner.
25 The next slide.
TAYLGE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 w ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
.s 36 1
Basically.,the program end point that we have 2
assumed for this estimate as well as tne schedule is thac it will not es'tabl'sh plant conditions.cpermitting either i
~
3 4
decommissioning or.raconstruction. That decision would be 5
made downstream.
.x 6
The objective of the program is'to return this A
7 plant to essentially the radiological conditions of a e
typical normal operating plant.
9 That is the end of my presentation.
t 10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is thatca different goal 8
11 tnan you had earlier or we spoke about earlier?.It seems t 12 me to be different.
\\
13 MR. ARNQLD:
No, I don't think it is. One of the 14 reasons we kind of nighlighted it both in the study report is and today is because we didn't feel that that was really 16 understood enat the cleanup program, including the previous, i
\\
17 estimates and plans for it, did not put the plant in t'he l
18 condition that a mbthball plant for decommission would be 19 in, for example.
It was not to go that far.
20 We had not really articulated internally what s
l 21 that meant to us in' terms of the degree of cleanup. So that 22 here we started to try to provide some articulatidn_of what 23 the reference point is for the desired end point of'the 24 program.
i 35 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I must say from what I
's sTAYLGE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006
\\
(202) 293-3950
37 I
remember of the NRC document, it didn't decide on which 2
direction one was going to go in, but that it was going to 3
provide either for reconstruction or recommissioning.
l a
MR. DIECKAMP:
I think this is consistent with
\\
5 that.
We have said that it woula bring us to a point of 6
indifference and at that point you had to make the choice 7
of either to decommission ---
a CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But it says will not
~
establish plant conditions permitting either decommisioning 9
10 or reconstruction.
11 MR. DIECKAMP:
What that means is final. That is 12 particularly for decommissioning.
We would anticipate that 13 if you have to decommission there would be further la decontamination involved in the process, 15 MR. ARNOLO:
I think it is worded improperly. It 16 would be at the point to permit going in either direction.
17 MR. DIECKAMP: But you would expect to have to do 18 more decontamination if you are fully decommissioning from 19 that point on.
20 MR. KANGA:
In either of the two conditions we f
21 will nave to ---
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Or reconstructing.
~
MR. ARNOLD:
Right.
23 24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: You would have to do more N
25 cleanup to reconstructQ T4YLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004
% ashington, D.E. 20006 (202) 293-3950
3g 3
1 MR. ARNOLD: It depends on what would be involved 2
in reconstructing. We don't know at that point. I would not 3
expect that it would require significant additional cleanup I
4 for reconstructing.
5 MR. KANGA: We would have to make a determination 6
depending upon the economics in that situation.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, there is too much J
e uncertainty anyway.
-s 1
/
', MR. KANGA:
That is true.
9 310
, MR. DIECKAMP:
This is one of tne difficult n
j.
.11 things to define'as'~to just what is the end point.
I think 12 one of the things to keep in mind is that while we tend-to 13 focus a lot en fuel removal as a major milestone, we have
'14 got to remember that after what we think of as the core has is been removed, there is undoubtedly a lot of fines.that have s
.16 been distributed throughout the entire primary system.- So
(
17 it is going to be a significant effort beyond the so-called la ccre removal before we are really decontaminated also.
19 G)MMISSIONER ROBERTS :. Who will.do the fuelf L
Y, 20 removal?
[
h 21 g
SMR. KANGA:
We have not as of now selected a i,
22 contractor for that purpose.
\\'
i N
23 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
But,it will be a I
24-contractor?
Thb contractor would essentially N.
25 MR. KANGA: Yes.
',m
\\
i TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006
'(202) 293-3950
39 I
do the design work in conjunction with our team here, and 2
then he would provide for certain equipment and tools and 3
he would work with us during the actual defueling process.
4 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Is that selection process 3
going on now?
6 MR. KANGA: We have talked to a couple of vendors 7
and'We are in the process of working on that.
2 e
MR. ARNOLD: 1 would lixe to move on now for just 9
a very brief discussion of the company's response to the 10 various allegations that have been made.
11 I have indicated here through the timing when 12 some of the events related to this occurred in terms of i
13 discussions relative to concerns being expressed.'
14 On February 7th Mr. King, who is one of the 15 three people who have made allegations about safety 16 concerns, requested a meeting with Mr. Clark who is the 17 Executive Vice President of GPU Nuclear, and that was 18 arranged to taxe place on February 25th with Mr. King's 19 agreement as to the timing on that.
20 He indicated during that telephone conversation i
21 that Mr. King was principally interested in talking about 22 the possibility of working in another part of the GPU 23 Nuclear Corporation.
24 On February 24th Mr. Clark and I learned of Mr.
25 King's involvement with an outside business, and given the TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
49 uspension.
information we obtained from him, placed him on s 25th Mr. Clark proceeded with the meeting on the I
King's 2
as scheduled with the objective of reviewing Mr.
3 specific safety concerns.
several times 4
to that meeting I met Subsequent King to further develop an articulation of his 5
with Mr.
both safety and non-safety, and developed a 6
- concerns, I felt pretty confident and subsequent 7
memorandum which lt the e
events I think confirmed did capture and articu a e 9
concerns-wnich he had.
I 10 On March the 4th utilizing that document, t of the 11 asked two technical consultants who were not par i
ffice Review 12 company, but are associated with our General O l Office 13 Board, and one of wnom is on the Unit 2 Genera the program 14 Review Boarc and therefore has a background on 15 to undertake an and the technical requirements, 16 King's Concerns.
investigation of Mr.
17 I also notified the chairman of our Safety King's concerns and he la Dr. Fletcher, of Mr.
Advisory Board, eet with 19 arranged for one of the members of the Board to m 10th.
King and discuss Mr. King's concerns on March the 20 21 Mr.
fair to indicate the Is it CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
22
?
nature of his concerns and what they related to 23 MR. ARNOLD:
I think that it can be as being consistent with the 24 characterized, Mr. Chairman, 25 TAYLOE ASSO CIA T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 2030 6
)
40 I
information we obtained from him, placed him on suspension.
2 Mr. Clark proceeded with the meeting on the 25th 3
as scheduled with the objective of reviewing Mr. King's 4
specific safety concerns.
5 Subsequent to that meeting I met several times 6
with Mr. King to further develop an articulation of his 7
concerns, both' safety and non-safety, and developed a a
memorandum which I felt pretty confident and subsequent 9
events I think confirmed did capture and articulate the 10 concerns wnich he had.
11 On March the 4th utilizing that document, I 12 asked two technical consultants who were not part of the 13 company, but are associated with our General Office Review 14 Board, and one of wncm is on the Unit 2 General Office 15 Review Boarc and therefore has a background on the program 16 and the technical requirements, to undertake an 17 investigation of Mr. King's concerns.
18 I also notified the chairman of our Safety i
19 Advisory Board, Dr. Fletcher, of Mr. King's concerns and he i
20 arrangers for one of the members of the Board to meet with 21 Mr. King and discuss Mr. King's concerns on March the 10th.
22 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Is it fair to indicate the
{
l 23 nature of nis concerns and what they related to?
l l
24 MR. ARNOLD:
I think that it can be 25 characterized, Mr. Chairman, as being consistent with the l
TAYLOE ASS O CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
41 I
allegations that were made by Mr. Parks and Mr. Gischel, 2
but were more generally stated.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay.
4 MR. ARNOLD:
On March the 16th I informed Mr.
5 King that we were going to terminate him as a result of our 6
review and understanding of his outside business activities 7
and the date of March 23rd was selected so that he would 8
continue to be an employee to the time we wanted him to 9
cooperate in the investigation that was initiated on March 10 4th, which he did do.
He was I think very cooperative 11 throughout that period of time with the company.
12 On March 23rd was the press conference by Mr.
13 Parks, and as a result of that over the next few days we 14 set up an extensive internal investigation or a company 15 sponsored investigation initially putting about six 16 technical people to work on analysis of the allegations to 17 understand and separate them out, so to speak.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Is this separate from your 19 March 4tn GORB investigation or had that completed?
20 MR. ARNOLD:
It had not completed and I do not 21 have the report from that yet.
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That is still a separate 23 investigation?
24 MR. ARNOLD: It is, although it is anticipated it 25 will ce utilized by the group that is identified here on TAYLOE ASSO CIA T ES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suite 1004 w ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
I March 24th and 28th as part of their total information 2
base.
3 We hired an outside trained investigator to head a
up the investigation itself.
The technical effort was 3
really staff work, support work for that individual.
He is 6
a person wno has some 17 years of experience in criminal 7
investigations and has not previously been associated with a
the company. I anticipate that his effort will take several 9
weeks.
10 When Mr. Gischel gave us his affidavit on April 11 4th, that was adoed to the scope of the total investigative 12 effort.
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Just as a matter of 14 procedure, the first review that you mentioned, your GORB 15 review, when that group finishes their investigation and 16 submits a report, does that report at some stage in your 17 process get transmitted to us, or how do you handle that?
18 MR. ARNOLO:
We will provide that to the 19 Commission when it is available to us within a couple of 20 (lays or something like that, and I expect that will be 21 available next week.
22 It is our intent to provide the results of all 23 the investigations to the Commission, and I might also say 24 that, as we have in the past, when there have been 25 concurrent investigations, we told the NRC investigators at TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 h ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
43 I
tne site that if we identified any significant information 2
in the course of our investigation that we would pass that 3
on to them at the time we obtained it.
4 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Has that occurred?
5 MR. ARNOLD:
It has not in this case. It hac 6
occurred on previous investigations.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: All right. Do you want to go e
on.
9 MR. DIECKAMP:
Turning to the next slide then on 10 tne funding, perhaps it is useful to start out comparing 11 our best estimate of the range of funding for the program 12 now compared to the breakdown contained in the Thornburgh 13 plan which adds up to the $760 million.
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: If I can just jump in with 15 one question so I can understand again what we ought to be 16 comparing it to. The dollar funds that you are now going to 17 be talking about, should they be compared against the 18 amount to go in '83 dollars, the escalated total amount?
19 MR.'DIECKAMP:
If one were to adopt the cost 20 estimate in Case 1, the comparable number to the 760 would l
21 be 700, and I think it is actually 699.
1 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So you are saying it is i
23 neither of the previous, i
l 24 MR. DIECKAMP:
That is right.
25 (Laughter.)
TAYLDE ASS O CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N.W. - Suite 2004 l
W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 i
1 MR. DIECKAMP: But that number is 700, and my own 2
posture on it is to not make a big deal about that 3
difference and that is why we continue to compare it 4
against the 760.
But granted, there is that potential 5
reduction that you could look at.
6 Further, depending upon your attitudes about the 7
economy, we do have eight percent inflation built into a
those numbers.
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I was just trying to la understand, but as far as your previous two columns, it is 11 somewhere in between the total and the amount to go, 12 because some of it has been already spent.
13 MR. DIECKAMP:
That is right.
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: It is difficult when you say 15 constant dollars and then somewhere on certain figures 16 there is an eight percent inflation rate.
It is certainly 17 confusing to me.
18 (Laughter.)
19 FB. ARNOLD:
Well, we apologize for that.
20 I think in the report it is a little clearer and 21 as we have extracted tnese tables some of the transition is 22 lost.
23 MR. DIECKAMP:
If you look down the list of 24 expected sources, we are indicating today approximately S80 25 to S85 million from the DOE based upon their most recent TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 1625 I Street, N. W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
45 I
plans. That number used to be identified as 65 when the DOE 2
program was identified as S123 million. This reflects some 3
anticipated extension 6f that program.
4 COMMISSIONER ASEARNE: By DOS, is that equivalent 5
to the Federal Government?
6 MR. DIECKAMP:
- Yes, U.S.
DOE.
7 COMMISSIONER ASEARNE:
If it is just DOE and the a
Federal Government, you weren't looking for any other ---
9 (Laughter.)
10 MR. DIECKAMP: We are available if anyone has any 11 suggestions.
12 For the industry, as you know, they are off on 13 the voluntary program seeking to raise 150 with 100 as the la upset number or the minumum required.
As of today, I think 15 the pledges in hand are almost exactly one-half of the 16 hundred.
17 Moving down to the Pennsylvania customers, we la are indicating full support ot tne Thornburgh plan.
Where 19 the current rates in Pennsylvania are collecting about 60 zu percent of that on an annual basis, we have filed in the 21 current rate cases for Met Ed and Penn Elec to bring that 22 up to the full level and do expect that to occur in the 23 third quarter of this calendar year.
(
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
There no loncer then is 25 the problem of having any of that money go towards cleanup?
i TAYLOE ASS O CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ash;ngton, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
46 1
MR. DIECKAMP:
The thing that you are referring 2
to, I think it was a May 1980, or something like that, 3
order that said no customer monies.
Yes, that has been 4
relieved.
That restraint is no longer there.
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So you cre hoping to be 6
able to go to the full ---
7 MR. DIECKAMP:
Yes, and I think we are quite e
confident that that will occur.
The restraint that you are 9
ceferring to, Mr. Ahearne, was removed at the time that we 10 settled the Pennsylvania rate cases, something like a year 11 and a half ago or so.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
From the wording of the 13 removal, it wasn't obvious to me that it would 14 automatically lead you to conclude that you would be able 15 to get to 100 percent, and that is what I was asking.
16 MR. DIECKAMP:
Again, I think that just based 17 Upon our workings with the Pennsylvania staff, the 10 Commissioners and the proceedings in the rate case, there 19 Seemed to be little question but what we will get to the 20 full level in Penns 1vania, but I have to recognize that we 1
21 don't have that money in tne bag yet today.
22 New Jersey is funded at the full level of the 23 Thornburgh proposal starting about July of last year.
24 The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is proceeding 25 towards the $30 million that they had indicated.
The first TTfLOE ASSO CI A TES 16 2 5 I S tr e et, N. W. - S uit e 10 0 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
47 1
SS million of that has been passed in the legislation and 2
that money is flowing.
3 The State of New Jersey is showing a slight 4
attrition of the incicated 15 because budget 5
stringencies caused that to be deleted I think in the '83 budget, but it is back in the budget for the following 7
years.
8 The insurance time of Thornburgh is indicated as 9
90.
I think as the actual numbers got put together and the 10 year completed, this number is of the order of 80. Then we 11 are incicating that to the extent we get proceeds out of 12 the B&W litigation, that could add as much as 37.
13 So you see we are showing here a range of 586 to 14 636, and if you compare that, let's say, against the 700, 15 then we are somewhere in the region of S60 to S120 million 16 short on this kind of a rackup.
17 CCMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Could I ask two questions la on this, f
19 MR. DIECKAMP:
Yes.
I 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
First, can I correctly I
21 assume that you are listing 37 on litigation proceeds means
{
l 22 that you believe you are going to lose your case against 23 us?
24 (Laughter.)
l 25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
A rhetorical question.
I i
l TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
48 1
(Laughter.)
2 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
What sort of commitments 3
do you have from DOE?
4 MR. DIECKAMP:
I think that what we have is the 5
program tnat they have in place that they have submitted to 6
OMB and are working with the Congress with.
Then beyond 7
that it is going on a year-by-year funnding basis. There is a
no pile of money that has been set aside some place and say 9
here that is yours to spend, but I think we are making the 10 assumption that we will be able to work with thea as we go 11 forward.
12 I think on the next chart you will begin to see 13 for the years '83 we are looking at S14 million in the plan la and for the year '84 somewhere in the S10 tc S15 million 15 range.
So in general that is the level we are looking for 16 from the DOE.
17 The DOE funding to date through February is 18 slightly over S8 million.
If you look through
'84, I think 19 we would expect that number to get up to about $40 million, l
20 integral through
'84, compared to the total indicated on 21 the prior chart.
l 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The other question is you 23 have GPU/ Pennsylvania Customers.
The 184, is that total 24 from ratepayers?
25 MR. DIECKAMP:
That is totally from ratepayers TAYLOE A SS O CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 e ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
49 I
and we use the GPU. customer ---
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I recognize that part of 3
your answer may be well, it is elsewhere, but where are GPU 4
stockholders on this line of range of funding?
5 MR. DIECKAMP:
None of them are shown on this 6
chart.
I don't know that we are able to forecast exactly 7
what that is going to look like over the long term. I think e
one of the things that has to be remembered is that GPU 9
faces two difficult obligations, one to clean up TMI-2 and 10 the second one to serve the customers.
11 Currently whatever monies are left over in the 12 stockholders coffers are doing one of two things.
They are 13 either paying down prior debt incurred to serve the 14 customers or being reinvested to serve the customers.
15 So we have these two immutable tasks that we 16 have to perform and we have to kind of be careful about how 17 the resources are split between those two tasks because is both of them are very significant obligations and as a 19 result the Thornburgh plan showed these kinds of sources 20 for the cleanup, and I am sure that our Commissions are 21 expected whatever other resources we have are dedicated 22 towaras serving the customers and maintaining the kind of 23 financial viability it takes to serve the customers.
24 So wE can't spend that money both places.
We 25 sort of have to choose one or the other.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (2G2) 29 3-39 50
1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I can't go further without 2
crossing the border of between what is not NRC's business.
3 So I will stop.
4 MR. DIECKAMP:
I think we have had some of this 5
discussion before and we can continue it in off hours.
6 (Laughter.)
7 COMMISSIONER AdEARNE:
Let the record show that 4
8 does not mean we have ex parte contact.
9 (Laughter.)
10 MR. DIECKAMP:
Oh, my gosh.
11 (Laughter.)
12 MR. DIECKAMP: On the next chart I am showing the 13 planned sources for '83 and '84 in comparison to what were 14 available in
'82.
You notice that the customer funding goes 15 up to 34 in
'83.
That is reflecting the amount that we are 16 actually collecting now and is actually in rates, and then 17 for '84 that goes to 50 with the added increment that we la expect to get from the Pennsylvania customers.
19 Then, depending upon the assumptions that one 20 uses for U.S.
DOE or the industry, one uses the remaining 21 insurance as the swing item to come up to the indicated 22 S100 million in 1984.
23 Banman's number on his chart was S100 million in 24
'83 dollars.
I am not bothering with that kind of 25 sognistication here.
It is within the ranges of TAYLOE A SSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N. W.. Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
51 I
uncertainty.
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Have you actually received 3
S2 million from industry, or is that indicated?
4 MR. DIECKAMP:
That piece is EPRI, and we expect 5
to be getting that amount during calendar 1983, 6
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Are you developing options 7
for funding into the later years?
You have a plan showing a
what it takes.
9 MR. DIECKAMP:
Right.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: I presume you are developing 11 means whereby you would get it.
12 MR. DIECKAMP:
The prior chart, Mr. Chairman, 13 tries to indicate the degree to which that plan is fully la funded.
Certainly there are some uncertainties in it. The 15 biggest uncertainty I think at this time is whether or not 16 the industry comes up to the minimum level necessary, the 17 Slu0 million a year.
I think the options are ---
la CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, I am looking and the 19 total runs from $124 to S174 million shortfall, and I was 20 wondering what options you nave been looking at?
21 MR. DIECKAMP: Again, that depends on whether you 22 measurb that against the 760 or the against tne 700, but 23 indeed there is of the order of 100 or 100 plus shortfall.
24 We have not worked anything specific on that at this time.
25 We are waiting to see how these things develop.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 100 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
52 4
1 If the plans do not develop as indicated, tnen I 2
think we have no choice but to go back to our state 3
regulators.
We certainly continue to apply wnatever 4
persuasion we can to the other possible sources, 5
But what it does say to us is that the funding 6
that is in place is pretty good in terms of begin able to 7
get through at least core removal.
As the program keepe a
going beyong that, we may well have some need to adjust 9
these numbers. For example, the inflation adjust kind of 10 thing we mignt need to do with the customer contribution to 11 keep this thing going.
12 So I guess what we are tryirig to say is that 13 while it is not all shoot and fish in the barrel, at least la there is a significant fractica of it pretty close to being 15 committed today and we have a plan in place that is 16 reasonably consistent with the program plan that we are 17 pursuing right now.
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Of course, another problem 19 is that the uncertainties in the ability to complete it on 20 a given schedule also add to the uncertainties in funding.
l 21 I am just making that as an observation.
l
[
22 MR. DIECKAMP:
No, I think that is very true. I 23 think one of the ways to think about that though is that 24 the compensation for those schedule uncertainties is not a 25 higher annual level of spending but a spending over a TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 2 C0 4 W eshington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
53 I
protracted period of time, and in the ratemaking 2
environment that annual level of spending tends to be the 3
number that is focused upon.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, let's see, did you 3
have more?
6 MR. DIECKAMP:
No, I don't have anything more to 7
say, except to just s?.y that I think this is a very a
difficult program.
I think the kinds of things that Bob 9
indicated, that the staff is dealing with problems that 10 inherently nave a lot of uncertainties in them, that we 11 inherently are going to have to solving with unconventional 12 solutions, that we are doing a job that none of us have j3 really done in this detail before and so we are kind of 14 putting together a lot of far-flung resources.
15 We certainly I think have all the difficulties 16 there of trying to get in place an organization which is 17 mature enough to be able to deal with these uncertainties is anc difficult environment that we are in.
19 Beyond that I think that our relationship with 20 the agency, the regulators that are looking at this is a 21 very critical one.
I think we somehow jointly have a real 22 incentive to try to get this job done and to try to put in 23 place the kinde of capabiliti
'-d the kinds of 24 decision-making mechanisms, and I guess the cegree of 25 aggressiveness necessary to keep the thing moving along.
TAYLOE ASS O CI A !ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
54 1
It is a challenging joh.
It is not easy and it 2
is going to take a lot of attention and a lot of 3
willingness to, as Bob says, to somehow turn away from what 4
we perceive as the standard ways of doing things and be 5
willing to recognize the realities of what we have to do.
6 The crane is an example of that.
If that crane 7
were out in the yard of a steel mill, there would be no e
question about how you would test its load capacity, just 9
none at all.
But in the situation we are in, we have to 10 looK for ways to bootstrap that tning up to the requisite 11 level of certainty and then go ahead and do that.
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you very much.
13 MR. DIECKAMP:
Thank you.
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I am going to suggest, 15 unless there are burning questions, that we take at least a 16 five-minute stretch rest while we ask the Advisory Panel to 17 Come up.
la I was wondering, could you plan to stay through 19 the rest of it so if we have some questions we could raise 20 them.
21 Okay, thank you.
22 Why don't we take five minutes.
23 (whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)
24 25 l
TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
55 1
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, first of all, I want 2
to begin by welcoming the panel.
3 ne haven't heard from you in quite some time and 4
I thought this would be an appropriate meeting in which to 5
do so so.
6 Joel, you are serving as the chairman of the 7
group today and we look forward to your Comments.
8 MR.ROTH:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of r
9 the panel, and there are normally 12, as Mr. Smithgall has 10 just stated, the notice was short and that is the reason 11 that the majority of the people just could not make it.
We 12 would hope that in the future again we would have some 13 forewarning on this.
14 Basically, I would just like to first make an 15 opening statement on behalf of the panel and then ask the 16 other panel members for their comments. I know Mr.
17 Smithgall nas a prepared statement on his behalf that he la will read.
19 Basically at this time the panel in previous t
20
_ discussions this afternoon and over the phone has felt and 21 are feeling a tremendous amount of pressure and concern on l
l 22 the citizenry in the area. As a matter of fact, the level 23 of concern probably equals the concern of tne public prior-24 to the krypton venting, tnat type of very high intense 25 concern and feelings.
1
[
TAYLCE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
56
.~
1 We judge this by the amount of phone calls that 2
we personally have received and from comments of course in 3
newspapers and tne media on the concern.
It is very high, 4
and on behalf of the Panel I would like to make that quite 5
clear at this time.
6 The Panel is then faced with what de we do.
The 7
consensus is at this point that we must do something, and a
we are planning to have a series of meetings, probably 9
three, on successive evenings at which time we will review 10 the allegations made by those three individuals.
"We will 11 also review and ask questions of the utility and the 12 federal agencies such as the NRC or DOE as may be concerned 13 in this.
14 Third, and certainly not last, a meeting where 15 the public would have the opportunity to make statements 16 and ask questions of the like. That is the reason for those 17 three successive n.ights.
18 Now we understand tnat there is an OI 19 investigation at this tic.e and that should be completed by 20 the end of May.
If I am correct in this information, the 21 Panel then asks that that OI report be made available to 22 them and to us because we will certainly need that 23 technical input for our meeting.
24 Following these three meetings ---
25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Could I ask you a question, TAYLOE ASS O CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
57 c.
1 Joel?
2 MR.ROTH:
Certainly.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
In what time frame do you 4
see the series of the three meetings?
5 MR.ROTH:
Probably the latter part of June, the 6
middle to latter part of June.
7 Following these meetings, we would then a
communicate with the Commission on our findings.
9 That is all I have to say on behalf of the panel 10 at this time.
I would ask that if Tom Gerusky at my far 11 left or Mayor Robert Reid on my right have any comments 12 that they do so and the Tom Smithgall on behalf of nimself.
13 MAYOR REID: The only thing I have to say is I am 14 pleased to be here.
It was on such short notice that I 15 don't have anything prepared.
The only thing that I did 16 mention to the Chairman is that I sent nim a copy of the 17 letter almost pertaining to the same thing Tom is going to la talk about, a letter that I sent to Congressman Udall 19 asking him to have his Interior and Insular Committee 20 conduct a complete and thorougn investigation of the 21 allegations made by these three employees.
22 I don't know if these allegations are true or 23 false, but just to put to rest the concerns of the people 2a living in tnat area, I think this investigation should be 25 carried out and the results of that investigation be i
t TAYLOE A SSO CI A TES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 i
W ashington, D.C. 20006 l
(202) 293-3950
58 I
published and let the people know what is going on.
2 MR.ROTH:
Tom Gerusky.
3 MR. GERUSKY: dell, as you know, this is my first 4
meeting as an official member of the Panel.
5 MR.ROTH:
And we welcome you.
6 MR. GERUSKY:
I wasn't exactly sure what we were 7
supposed to be talking about nere.
So I don't have any a
preparec remarks.
9 The Commonwealth is also looking at the latest 10 allegations and trying to determine how best to approach 11 the problem.
12 I think one of the biggest problems that I see 13 is the lack of response on the part of the utility and the 14 official agencies involved, or agency involved, to those is allegations up to now. The response is we are 16 investigating.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let's see, are you 18 referring to us?
4 19 MR. GERUSKY:
Yes.
2a (Laughter.)
21 MR. GERUSKY:
I will be more direct to make sure 22 everybody uncerstands me.
23 Now I think both the NRC and the utility can 2a only investigate for so long before they have get to make 25 their views known, and the longer it goes without a TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
59 1
response of some nature, that the credibility of the 2
utility company and everyone involved with the 3
decontamination is in trouble.
4 I don't know if the allegations are correct or 5
not, and it is difficult ---
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Are you referring to the 7
latest series of allegations?
e MR. GERGSKY:
Yes, and so was our chairman. The 9
issue as we see it today is resolving those allegations in 10 a proper way.
We haven't touched on the overall cleanup.
11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Those are about a month 12 Old.
13 MR. GERUSKY:
Yes, and it is our first 14 opportunity to tell you that we think you should have 15 responded long ago, or I think you should have responded 16 long ago.
17 (Laughter.)
la COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Okay.
19 MR. GEROSKY:
And not that we are just 20 investigating it.
It just seems like every day goes by and 21 maybe ---
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let's see, when you say 23 responding, you mean having completed an investigation and f
24 have a view of whether or not these are right or wrong?
25 MR. GEROSKY:
Right.
TAYLDE ASSO CI A TC5 16 2 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20t '6 (202) 293-3950
60 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That is what you mean?
2 MR. GEROSKY:
Yes.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I was afraid of that.
4 (Laughter.)
5 MR. GERUSKY:
I don't see how it is going to be 6
resolved any other way.
I think the utility has a 7
responsibilty to Come out and say yes or no, some of them a
were correct and we are going to change thinos, or they are 9
incorrect. But somebody is going to have to say sometning, 10 because right now they are correct by inference, oy 11 silence.
12 The people in the area, I mean when somebody 13 comes up to me in the street and says what is going on down 14 there, and do they know what they are doing, and how do you 15 respond?
Are they watching this?
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I gather, Tom, that your 17 Statement also indicates you think these issues are the la type that can be resolved very quickly.
19 MR. GERUSKY:
I don't know if they can be 20 resolved very quickly.
21 COMMISSIONER AEEARNE: But you said that you feel 22 that we shculd have ---
23 MR. GERUSKY:
I think some of them can be.
24 COMMISSIONER AdEARNE:
In answer to Vic's 25 question, the sense was I got was that you felt we should TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
61 I
have already had investigated and reached a position.
2 My sense, and I have read all tne affidavits, is 3
that they are fairly complicated issues with a lot of 4
people involved and they are ones in which you do have to 5
talk to a lot of people and make sure you understand the 6
issues.
For example, questions about are procedures 7
adequate.
Obviously then you have to understand what a
procedures were proposed and what procedures should have 9
been in place. Are calculations done incorrectly? Well, you 10 have got to understand what the calculations were that were 11 done, what the correct calculations are and what kinds of 12 errors were made.
13 I am not arguing that there shouldn't be an 14 active look, and a tough hard look.
I was just kind of 15 surprised that you believe that in about five weeks that 16 they all could have been wrapped up.
17 MR. GERUSKY:
I think there could nave becn a la response similar to the response you are giving now, that 19 at least the public in the area would have known what the 20 t:3C io doing and what the utility is ucing if they couldn't 21 resolve them in the five-week period.
l 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That is a fair criticism.
23 XR. GERUSKY:
That is the issue of tne day. The 24 cleanup activities, we have been keeping an eye en what i.s 25 going on down tnere.
We would like to see you go faster, TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 i
(202) 293-3950 w
62
~
I but so far the progress-has been I guess acceptable, and 2
the proposal is acceptable because of the funding problems.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think you maKe a good 4
point that we should be giving at least status reports on 5
wnere we are going with our investigation.
But, as 6
Commissioner Ahearne said, it is not a very simple tning.to 7
come up with, e
As a matter of fact, one of the problems.we have 9
with all of our investigations is that if they are not 10 complete, then they not only get criticized, out just 11 violate the question.
I think it does take a lot of 12 background. As a matter of fact, sor.e of the people have to 13 spend a couple of weeks just getting familiar with all'the 14 details that are involved in an investigation.
15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think Tom has a valid 16 point.
17 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I agree with you.
la MR. GERUSKY: As an example, no one knows ynether 19 the polar Crane is going to be used or isn't gcing to be 20 useu until the investigation is complete.
The public 21 doesn't understana what the NRC has done, what the utility 22 has done, and I am not sure I understanc having hearing the i
l 23 utility presentation whetner they want to go ahead and use i
24 the polar crane before the investigation is complete. A lot 25 of the issues revolve around the polar crane.
TAYLCf ASSO CI A T ES l
1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 I
W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 4
a
4 v, -
c v
)
s t
63 1
I think it'is important to know yes, no or what 2
are you doing and what are they doing.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes, that is true.
4 MR.-GERUSKY:
Thank you.
t 5
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Okay. Thankffou.
6 Tom Smithgall.
4 y
7
. MR. SMITHGALL:
I guess what Iamjgoingtobe speaking to is pretty much what we have talky about 8
already,bukI.didfeelthat it was necessary.with the 9
'- s X v;
10 information th'at I nad at hand and I think I was*i'n.the
\\
11 same positionmthat Mr. Gerusky was in.
x g
12 Let me preface this with certain concorns.
,, p 13 Obviously what we saw in the presentation from 'the utility 14 is that there still is the frustration with funding y
I,
\\
proposals and how that will ex'pedite the' cleanup.3g 15 16 I want to mention also what I ' talked with Mr'.
(
4 b
f 17 Ahearne about during the break, the tr9 ole effect of }the,
l 18 cost that the ratepayer will incur es"a' taxpayer and as a i
19 User both. So when we look at those charts and don't see I
'g r
A.
e
(
p 20 stockholders, the question I f eel was' ju*stifiably, asked 'as
\\
w 21 far as that' chart is concerned.
i
,~
I also would like tO menti 6n in refecqice tg the I
22 t.
that we.re submitted a certain;,t -.
i 23 allegations in the affidavits s
t 4 r frustration I have with tne ' int:tef ace between the Progrsm fl 'i G' 24 s
1 25 Office and the Advisory Panel.
i t
d T A Y L,9 E A S S,,4 162S IUtreet, N. W. f l A T E S s
- Suit e 1004 W ash'ington, D.f! 20006 (202) 293-1350 '
e
[
% 2
64
~
t 4
1 When the allegations were made, I called that 2
office and asked for a copy, that the Panel receive a copy 3
of that because I think that was an issue that we ought to 4
look into.
I was told at that juncture that we were not 5
able to procure a copy through that channel.
~
I then called a reporter who supplied me with a 6
7 Copy.
Subsequently we all did receive copies of those a
affidavir.s, but that type of frustration I have with the 9
managemsnt on the, flow of information makes it very
'l a difficult for us to do what we are asked to do, if in fact we are aNked to oe doing anything if we have that problem.
11
'12 So I preface what I have written here with those
'33 comments and suggest that maybe we can work a little bit 14 closer to resolve those.
a.,
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
My impression of past OV 16 interactions witn the office were pretty good when I was on 17 that panel.
Has it deteriorated?
Is MR. SMITHGALL:
Well, the example that I have V
19 g1Ven 1S one.
20
. CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
It certainly sounds like it 21 has.
22 MR. SMITHGALL:
Another is if in fact the
'23 affidavits are true as far as the accuracy of timing of
~ a4 certain statements anu memos that are mentioned in the 25 Parks' affidavit.
We had a meeting after a memo went out w
s TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 i
W as5ington, D.C. 20006 s '.
(202) 293-3950 w
k'
)
3,
s e
t i 65 0
Q w
I from Mr. Barrett to a Mr'. Larson stating disapproval of the
~
use of the polar crane operation, at least as I read it.
2 3
And yet we met three days later and we.were in sense, from 4
what I gathered from the transcrip't reading back on them, 5
told there was no trouble with the polar crane and that it 6
was still being tested.
7 CHA'IRMAN PALLADINO:
Who said there was no a
trouhle?
9 MR. SMITHGALL:
Nell, I looked back at the 10 transcripts to read what was said, and it is inferred in 11 those statements that they were proceeding with them.
- Yet, 12 we weren't given the same type of information here that was 13 sent from the Program Office to a Director of Licensing 14 about problems with that polar crane operation.
If we are 15 not getting the information, then we are not really able to 16 make comment as much as we can in an overall sense and not 17 necessarily in a technical sense.
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADISO:
I was just trying to get a 19 feel for what information.
-Ihis is informaticn that our 20 Program Office is sending to GPU?
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: What Mr. Smithgall I think 22 was saying is that in tne Parks' affidavit the reference is 23 a memo that the Program Office sent to GPU turning down 24 some of the procedures with respecc to the polar crane. The l
25 point I think he is e.aking is that a few days after thac TAYLOE ASSJ CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N.W. - Suit e 2004 W ashiogton, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3150
66
.~
I memo they had an Advisory Panel meeting and I gather you 2
had a discussion en what was the status of the polar crane 3
and your inference is that the Program Office, cr at least 4
you concluded that the things were better off than you now 5
conclude they must have been when you read that memo, is 6
that correct?
7 MR. SMITHGALL:
Yes, and it would be helpful if a
we nave that information in e timely faanion when we are 9
obviously meeting on that.
With everyone else with tne 10 information and us without, it is very difficult to sit at 11 those meetings.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I don't know the details.
13 All I have read is the affidavit.
Sometimes you can hear is information in a big meeting and not understand the 15 significance of it.
16 MR. SMITHGALL:
That is why I read the 17 t"40 scripts.
As I read tne transcripts I see no inference 18 to these six reasons for rejecting the procedure.
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
nell, if the canel feels 20 there is a problem, there is a problem.
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
An ob.servation along the 22 way.
I appreciate these comments, but there must be a lack 23 cf communications because those ougnt to get fec back to us 24 outside of a meeting such as this, and we would appreciate 25 getting that kind of feedback.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C.10006 (202) 293-3950
67 1
MAYOR REID:
In defense of GPU, I must say that 2
deterioration as far' as communications witn GPU nasn't 3
affected me.
At the begining of the accident I would say 4
there was a lack of communcations, but anything I ask of 5
GPU at this point I get.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think they are referring 7
at this point on NRC lac" of communcations, a
MR. SNYDER:
Can we comment on that?
9 CHAIRMAN Pt.LLADINO:
Why don't.we wait until you 10 get your chance.
11 MR. SMITHGALL:
I hate to turn around now.
12 (Laughter.)
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
There is a door right 14 there.
15 (Laughter.)
16 MR. SMITHGALL: If I can take the time here, I do 17 want to read this.
I did take the time to stay up and type la it, anu it is to the NRC frcm myself.
I 19 It begins, recently three engineers from Three l
20 Mile Island have broken ranks and gone public with serious 21 allegations that public safety is taking a back seat to 22 cost cutting shortcats in the cleanup of Unit 2.
23 A Richard Parks, a senior startup engineer witn 24 Bechtel, and Larry King anc Eowin Gi5chel, both employed cy 25 GPU Nuclear, have made public statements that stancard 9
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, O.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
68 1
engineering procedures are frequently ignored in order to 2
maintain unrealistic and unsafe cleanup schedules and that 3
the engineering review process which is required before 4
plant modifications can be made are sometimes circumvented 5
simply by reclassifying safety related systen.m as not 6
important to safety.
7 All three enginects focused their attention on a
tha polar crane, the mechanism of the underside of the 9
containment dome that lifts and moves heavy equipment and 10 wnich will be required to remove the reactor head before 11 defueling can begin.
12 Bechtel Corporation, as I understand it, is it responsible for refurbishing the crane that was damaged 14 during the accident and from these allegations has failed 15 to install the actual ca~ ole to the hoist and, according to
- .5 the alegations again as I read them, does not intend to 17 adequately test the crane before utilizing it to lift the la rsactor head.
19 As we are aware, a loac drop curing the reactor 20, he?d lift could send enormously heavy oojects plummeting 21 dc.n upon a central safety system.
22 So as a result of these recent revelations by 23 Par 4s, King and Gischel, I would li<e to call for a full 24 and complete inquiry by the House Committee on Interior and 25 Insular Affairs chaired by Representative Morris Udall into IAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 L-
69 I
every aspect of the TMI cleanup.
2 The management capabilities, the safety 3
shortcuts and th0 seemingly generic disregard for safety and standara engineering procedures should be thoroughly 4
5 investigated not only at the Congressional level, but at 6
the regulatory level anu at the Advisory Panel level, as we 7
have discussed, in order to adequately address these a
concerns before any further cleanup acitivities are 9
approved.
10 As a member of tne NRC Advisory Panel and as a 11 citizens of South Central Pennsylvania, I feel it 12 imperative that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission act with 13 fairness and forthrigntness in resolving the safety related la problems brought forth by these career nuclear engineers is before proceeding.
16 As a federal regulatory agency you are charged 17 witn the protection of public health and safety and that la the economic and schedule considerations for a speedie'r and 19 potentially more dangerous Cleandp nhould not prevail.
20 Let us set aside tee bureaucratic bickering and 21 professional egos and get on with a safe and expeditious 22 cleanup.
23 I for one do not want Mr. Arnold's prediction of 24-a 20-year cleanup to come to fruition for the sake of the 25 nuclear in.iustry's research and development goals.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
70 I
COMMISSIONER AHBARNE:
Do you ---
2 MR. SMITdGALL:
If I coula finish. There is only 3
another paragraph here and then we can come back to it.
4 I would liKe the Three Mila Islanu Unit 2 5
cleaned up and decommissioned as soon as possible.
I f eel 6
that these investigations will benefit all parties to this 7,
polarizec public policy issue.
e-If you act, hopefully this will begin to restore 9
the American people's confidence in their federal agencies 10 that when there is a crisis situation their government will 11 respond quickly and fairly.
12 I might add that I would like us to forget the 13 accident is over four years old and let us not indulge 14 ourselves with a selective amnesia with the lessons learned 15 at Three Mile Island.
16 I appreciate your letting me finish.
17 COMMISSIONdR AHEAdMt:
ln your statement are you 18' implying that you believe that Mr. Arnold wants a 20-year j
19 cleanup operation?
i f
20 hR. SMITHGALL:
No, am not implying that at 7
21 all.
22 COMMISSIONER AdEARNE:
Or that the length of the 23 time is to help the industry's R&D?
24 MR. SMITnGALL:
I guess you may infer whdt jou 25 lire from the statemenc, but I don't thinK Mr. Arnold wants t
i i
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 100 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 l
71
.~
1 it to last 20 years, no, to answer that part of the 2
question.
3 I am barraged with informational pieces from the 4
utility stating what a wonderful R&D project it is.
So to 5
joint those two together in that sentence, I will answer no 6
to the first and possibly yes to the second.
7 Thank you.
8 CHAIhMAti PALLADINO:
Thank you.
9 Any other comments?
10 MR.ROTH:
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
11 I would just liXe to follow up on the initial 12 statement on oehalf of the Panel on the availability of 13 that OI report to us and when we could expect an answer 14 because it was posed as a question or semi-statement that 15 we really need it. I was wondering if there would be a time 16 frame to receive an answer.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What is our normal Id practice, that we publish them when they are finished?
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADIAO:
My understanding on many of 20 these is that they put a summary in tne Public Document 21 Ro c.u.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
When they are completed?
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: After they are completed and 24 generally they are sanitized to the extent that the names 25 of innocent or people who mignt be erroneously concluded as TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 10 0 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
A 72 I
having had an adverse part in it are deleten. But I am only 2
remembering this from ---
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
hell, there are two other 4
facets.
The report is used sometimes to go furtner wit-a 5
criminal prosecution, in which case obviously that is 6
shipped to the Justice Department and not released.
Then 7
sometimes it is used for an enforcement action, and until e
we take the enforcement action it usually isn't divulged.
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I guess I should have said la certainly with regard to enforcement ---
11 COMMI3SIONER AREARNE:
So my reaction would be 12 that I think we have to look into that because we have to 13 see to what extent 14 MR.20TH:
Right.
15 MR. SMITH 1ALL:
Short of violating those two 16 concerns we can get whatever ---
17 CIIAIRMAN PALL ADIT.0 :
Well, those are not trivial 18 concerns.
19 CCNMISSIONER AHEARNE:
They are very significant 20 ones.
21 MR.ROTH:
But to follow up on Ton Gerusky's is 22 that de would nope that you would then communicate with us.
23 COMMISSIONER AdEARNE:
Absolutely. That I can 24 guarantee, f
25 MR.RCTH:
Okay.
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
73
.~
1 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I appreciate that comment 2
and I think perhaps getting involved in a lot of things we 3
are not always as sensitive to the local situations as 4
perhaps we could be and should be.
So I would say yes, we 5
certainly ought to try to respond and at least give you 6
interim responses.
7 I would say though that when you get such 9
feedback, don't hesitate to send it to us. Getting a letter 9
that five Commissioners will agree to sometimes is a little 10 difficult, but we will work en it.
11 (Laughter.)
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Any other comments?
13 CONMISSIONER AHEARNE: de can, however, keep them 14 aware of what we are doing, because I think that is a very 15 valid point.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Absolutely.
17 MR.ROTH:
We will need some information for our 18 meetings to be scheduled.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Any other questions or 20 ccmments?
21 (No respcnse.)
22 CHAIRNAN PALLADINO:
h' ell, we thank you very l
23 much for coming.
24 MR.ROTH:
Thank you.
I l
25 CHAIRMAN PALLADISO:
You might want to hear what l
l TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES l
162 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293,3950 l
.~
74 I
the staff is anxious to tell us.
2 MR.ROTH:
We do and we will stay.
3 CHAIRMA!! PALLADINO:
Can we have the staff ccme 4
to the table.
l 5
COMMISSIONED AhEARNE:
Quick if you want to get 6
it into the press.
The press may have to leave, so if you 7
want a rebuttal.
8 (At this point in the proceedings the Advisory 9
Panel members were excused and the Messrs. Synder, Barrett 10 and hard joined the Commissioners at tne table.)
11 MR. SNYDER:
I am not concerned about rebutting 12 to the press.
I think though it is appropriate for us to 11 explain a little bit more, and I am going to ask Lake to do 14 taat, as tc what transpired.
15 Let me make one comment though.
There was a 16 statement made that we wouldn't provide the copies of thea 17 affidavit, our office, and that was cy direction from our 18 Office of Investigation at the time.
That was resolvec 19 within a day.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN'O:
what was the problem?
21 MR. SNYDER:
Well, I guesa at the time it wasn't 22 felt appropriate, and I really should ass OI to comment to 23 that, but we were just tolu tnat it is part of the 24 investigation and don't release them.
25 CHAIMMAN PALLADINO:
You mean the allegations?
TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashingt.on, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
75 4
1 MR. SNYDER:
Yes.
2 MR. BARRETT:
Tom Smithgall had called me and I 3
said I needed to check, that this is being done by our OI a
people.
So I talked to the office and then I got back to 5
Tom with the answer.
6 sir. WARD:
Specifically, Lake talked with me.
7 What se had to clarify was whether or not the affidavit, or e
affidavits actually were public documents.
We were not 9
going to make a snap judgment.
We had heard that they had 10 been publicly released, but we wanted to verify that.
11 Then, even though we had verified they were out, 12 I wanted to double check with Mr. Hayes to make sure that, 13 for instance had they been leaked to the street.
There was 14 a possibility then they had been leaked to tne media as 15 opposed to naving been handed out by GPU or some other 16 authorizea outrit for them.
17 Once we established the fact pattern it cecame-18 evident they were a public document and we released the 19 l
cmbargo we had placed on it.
But, yes, I did ask La4e to l
20 withholc the document.
i l
l 21 l
CHAIRMAti PALLACINO:
Was that relayed to the 22 l
Advisory Committee?
t l
23 MR. BARRETT: Yes. I called Tom, and I think tnis l
i 24 l
was in a matter of a couple of days, two days at the most, 25 and we did send it, l
l l
l TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES l
16 2 5 I S treet, N. W. - Suit e 1004 f
W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 l
76
~
1 MR. SNYDER:
What we did at that point is'my 2
office just reproducea them all and we sent it to everybody 3
on the Advisory Panel.
That may have taken a couple more 4
days.
So there may have been a total of four or five days 5
lapse from the time that Tom made the original request to 6
Lake until the time they actually received tnem.
I don't 7
know when exactly tney did receive them.
8 C5fAIRMAN PALLACINO:
I am going to make a 9
statement, the full impact of which I haven't thought 10 through, but nevertheless I would still be inclined to make 11 the statement.
They are an Advisory Panel to us, and I am 12 not saying you shouldn't check to see what the status of 13 things are, but they are an Advisory Panel to help us and I 14 think that ought to be a factor in whatever considerations 15 are involved.
16 Now I don't know the full impact of that 17 statement.
18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It doesn't seem like a i
19 very dangerous statement.
l 20 (Laughter.)
21 l
CHAIRMAN PALLACINO:
No, it is a dangerons 22 statement.
I am saying I think tney ought to be tre.ited a 23 little bit more like in-house when it comes to those kinds l
24 of things.
25 MR. AARD:
Right. That was our call and that was l
l l
TAYLOE ASSO CIA T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 10 0 4 W ashin gt on, D.C. 2000 6 (202) 293-3950
m 77 I
not the Project Office's.
We assume the responsibility for 2
that one.
3 MR. SNYDER:
One of the other things just in 4
general in terms of information flow, what we have done in 5
our office in order to save the complication of the Panel, 6
since we docket all of our correspond. ce from Bethesda, 7
that is not necessarily a very good way to communicate witr.
8 our panel and we decided long ago, I would say at least a 9
year and a half and maybe two years ago, that we would 10 screen everything tnat we sent to GPU-in the way of 11 corresponcence and we send that periodically, package it up 12 and send it to the panel.
13 So they have been getting, not everything we 14 write, we-try to ce selective and we don't want to beseige 15 them with all the paper that se seem to generate, but all 16 the important things, they have been sent directly. So they 17 have been treated differently in that sense.
18 CHAIRMAd PALLADINO:
But let me get back to my 19 otner statement.
There may be circumstances where you are 20 not sure whether it has been released or whether it nasn't 21 been released.
I think the Advisory Panel could be traated 22 cy saying well, we will give it to you.
We are not sure 23 whether it is released and we would 114e you to treat it 24 witn that degree uncertainty, and I think they would 25 respect it, anc it would benefit their ability to TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
a 78 g
contribute.
2 MR. SNYD8R:
That was the first and only time 3
that that sort of an issue did come up.
4 Let me make a few comments going back to the 5
senedule or program recessment that you heard earlier from 6
the corapany.
7 he nave given you a paper which is available 8
nere in the room, and I just wanted to make one point that 9
is made in that paper in more detail, and that is tnat I 10 guess we have looked at the funding situation and the 11 senedule situation and we have been mote pessimistic in our 12 vies in that in tnat paper all the tables of numbers and 13 the casa flow indicate shortfalls because we have assumed 14 only those dollars that are firmly committed as being 15 really available. In ocner words, it is in the bar.k or it 16 isn't in the bank as far as we are concerned in a sense.
17 So we do indicate that se are concernec from '65 18 on wnere significant shortfalls do arise, and that in fact 19 l
is tne time period in which the really difficult work will i
20 l
be undertaken, namely, une defueling work is scheduled at i
21 least for that pericci. So there is somewhat of a oisconnect 22 in, if you want to call it an analysis, but in the point of 23 view we nave.
24 Obviously we are hopeful that the industry comes 25 l
through and meets their comitments, wnich I think are true i
l l
TAYLOE ASSOCIATES 16 2 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 l
l l
79 I
commitments and clearly to their benefit to contribute to 2
the cleanup.
I felt it was important to make that 3
distinction between wnat they presenter; you and wnat you 4
had gotten earlier from us in our paper.
5 Coupled with tnat, plus technical uncertainties, 6
we feel that the schedule for accomplishing both the 7
interim major activities and the end point are really quite 8
optimistic on the point of the company.
I nope they are 9
right.
10 we have attempted in our efforts both at the 11 site and at headquarters to keep off the critical path and 12 still meet our own responsibilities, but I am just not 13 optimistic that they are going to be able to meet the 14 schedules they have laic out for themselves.
15 Recent events in particular indicate that time 16 has been lost at the oeginning of the schedule and I am of 17 the scnool that feels if you lose time at the beginning it 18 compounds itself through the progress of 6 major activity 19 li.<e tnis.
20 I can't quantify, but if I had to guess, I would 21 say that they nave lost several months as a result of tne 22 ongoing investigations, coth theirs and ours, not that the 23 investigations obviously shoulan't be pursued, but the fact 24 is that they have had an istpact and se have discussed tnat.
25 I uncerstand, for example, that there has been a TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Str eet, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington 0.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 i
80 small layoff of some 20 crafts people and I don't know that 2
I can attribute it necessarily to the investigations 3
ongoing or other thinca.
4 But we have had under review prior to Mr. Parks' 5
allegations a number of procedures related to the polar 6
crane.
In fact, in his allegations he quotes quite 7
liberally from our disapproval letter on one of enem.
u I am going to ask Lake to comment a little bit 9
on that one because I Know the Panel brought up some issues 10 on that, but we have approved and disapproved procedures on 11 the polar crane.
At the moment our position is that they 12 have approval to use the polar crane for minor lifts 13 recognizing it is a 500 ton rated crane.
14 Tney are using it as a connection point for a 15 small five ton auxiliary crate, a small portable crane, and 16 they are using the polar crane to move small things, a fey 17 hundreds of pounds up to a thousand or so pounds, items Id within the builaing and using it just for translation and 19 l
net tor raising and lowering in order to oreceed with 20 important work in the building.
l 21 l
he have taken a careful look at thia and feel 22 l
that it is fully justified and we are just very confident i
23 any problem witn a crane of this size l
that there isn't 24 coing this rather minor bct ir.:po ra ta n t work.
25 l
Let me ass Lake to comment in some more detail l
l l
l TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 i S treet, N. W. - Suit e 1004 w as:iington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 I
L
81 1
on the' issue that the Panel brought up on the meeting and 1
2 wnere we stood on the approvals.
3 i
XR. BARRETT:
First of all, on the procedure 4
reviews that we do at.the site, last year in 1982 I think I 5
signed about a thousand documents that GPU. brought over to 6
proceed with cleanup that 1 approved and my staff reviewed.
7 Of tnat I cisapproved of about 10 percent which had been my 8
average.
9 hith the polar crane on Maren 10tn I disapproved i
10 E
one before this became a big issue.
On March 17th we had 11 the Advisory Panel and I was asked about the polar crane 12 and I said tnat was proceeding along, and I think I may' 13 have said that is proceeding alonf and there are no big 14 problems, et cetera.
15 I didn' t see my first rejection of that 16 procedure as a big deal.
They had different people working 17 on it, a new group of people, and I guess they didn't quite la know what my safety diacriminator was.
we are very concernec that things are specifiec 20 in the procedures. For example, if they are going to use i
21 rigging, that the procedure is signed off tnat the riqqing 22 has been testec, et cetera.
Some of tne people did not put 23 those in the proceaures and were rejected for that sort of 24 thing.
I have a four-page list on one of the procedures 25 of that type of comment.
TAYLOE ASS O CI A T ES I
16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 100 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 i
r
G2 1
I am concerned and sorry about at the Advisory 2
Panel meeting not going into the details.
If I had gone 3
into all the details on the submerged demineralizer system 4
and EPICOR and whr.re I disapproved some procedures because 5
it didn't meet my critera, I would speak much longer than 6
the 20 minutes or so I may normally speax at those.
7 If the Advisory Panel would like to go into more 8
detail on these things, I would be more than haopy to do 9
so. It is just a matter of their time. My time is available 10 as much as they would lixe.
11 MR. SNYD6d: I would make one final point. I Know 12 the meeting nas taken a long time.
13 s
I mentioned delays that are related to the 14 investigations.
I feel that there is another issue that if 15 you sit back and look at the cleanup and where we are going 16 and what should be done today or should have been done 17 already, that it has a potential for downturn and 18 long-term down the road delays.
19 he are quite concerned about delays in their 20 planning, GPU's planning for the defueling, including the 21 identification by them of an organization responsible for 22 the engineering of the necessary nes defueling systems and 23 fairly exotic equipment. I <ncw that doe shares our concern 24 in this regara.
25 Basically our concerns are because work is not TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I Street, N. vt. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
83 0
1 proceeding apace in this area which involves long load time 2
activities, and there are some very difficult engineering 3
problems to be solved. I am really quite concerned that the 4
fuel may not be removed as quickly as it mignt be.
5 We will be sorry a few years from now that the 6
work hadn't been done today.
I don't have a good 7
explanation as to why it hasn't proceeded.
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: And yet I gather the plan is 9
to try to lift the head from the vessel this year?
10 MR. SNYDER:
Well, the original plan was this 11 summer.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Now once you lift the head, 13 then of course you nave got some work with the cleanup 14 equipment, but then you will have exposed the fuel and it 15 will be presumably in an exposed pool. I guess I am sort of 16 surprised that the work isn't going on to develop the 17 equipment for nandling the debris and nandling the fuel.
18 MR. SNYDER:
We share that concern.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I can appreciate that.
20 MR. SNYDER:
There is built in their schedules 21 tnat roughly a year from tne time the head is lifted would l
22 one get to tne actual cefueling.
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADIh0: Then I would expect from the 24 staff office at least a comment or perhaps even a 25 disapproval of the schedule because lifting the head too TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
84 I
soon could bring about problems if you don't have the 2
equipment to handle the fuel.
3 MR. SNYDER:
'Ihere are some good reasons to lift 4
the head as soon as possible, and that is to get at the 5
question of is the plenum going to come out in one piece as 6
it normally dces or is it stuck.
7 The only way to really get to the bottom of that 8
question is to remove the head and attempt to raise the 9
plenum a short distance at least.
It also affords 10 considerably greater ability to 1cok at the core, although 11 l
of course the core isn't exposed since the plenum is over 12 the top, but there is'more ready access to tne core area, 13 the fuel area to get a better handle on what the condition 14 1s.
15 So there are some tradeoffs involved here, there 16 is no question.
But I would have expected by now that they 17 would have had a very vigorous program under way perhaps 18 witn a dedicated contractor, however, they chose to do it, 19 but at least have an assigned organization that one could 20 point to and say that they are goina to do the defueling 21 design effort for tnem.
22 That is a concern and that really is the only 23 other point.
24 dell, I must say, thera is anctner benefit of 25 course in getting to the core soon, other than the fact TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 70006 (202) 293-3950
05 I
that it reduces the risk o viously, and that is there is a 2
lot of information there that we should have had by now.
3 There is just a vast amount of 1:1 formation on a great c
amount of damaged fuel that we seem to overlook sometimes.
5 That is all I had for the moment.
If you have 6
any questions, I would be glaa to respond.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Any questions?
8 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I don't have any for 9
them, but I wonder in light of that last comment wnether we 10 could hear from Mr. Dieckamp and Mr. Arnold about wnat the 11 problems are in terms of not moving ahead.
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
We have Frank Coffman here 13 from COE and maybe ne would like to make a comment or two 14 that might be responded to also.
15 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE: Okay. Maybe we could do 16 that anc then hear from Herman and Bob on what the problems 17 are in getting that effort under.'ay.
18 (At this point in the proceedings the staff was I
19 l
excused and Mr. Frank Coffman joined the Commisnioners at 20 l
the taole.)
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I am not trying to put you 22
(
on tne spot, but if you want to make a comment we are l
23 pleaseu to have you join us.
24 (Laughter.)
25 l
l TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES
(
162 5 I Street, N. W.
Suit e 1004 l
W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
86 1
MR. COFFMAN:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
2 I obviously do not have prepared comments.
3 The Department of' Energy's perception on the 4
heac, plenum and fuel removal is that there are major 5
systems companies who are familiar with removal of fuel 6
both with abnormal and normal situations, and our 7
understanding was that that was proceeding.
8 It has been under discussion since January of 9
'82, and it is our opinion that unless this is very 10 promptly resolved, tne fuel removal activity will slip 11 month for month with the absence of that decision.
12 If the problem persists, it will put us in the 13 position of having to restrict our funding work which is 14 aimed at the principal thing that we intend to learn which 15 is througn core removal we hope to get at the ecurce term 16 question and woulc hope that the data for our R&D program 17 would be retrieved in a timely enough manner to input to 18 degraded core rulemaking and emergency plan rulemaking 19 considerations which the Commission has planned over the 20 next couple of years, 21 1
Now if core removal slips into the 'd5,
'o6 or 22
'87 time frame, two tnings nappen. The Department of Energy 23 must delay its allocation of resources, whicn is limited by 24 the Administration until that time and, secondly, the 25 Commission will not have access to the data from the on'ly TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
87 1
major degraded core in the world.
2 so we are very concerned and we are working with 3
GPU to see if we can find a solution.
4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Does that more or less 5
put you in agreement with Bernie?
6 MR. COFFMAN:
Yes, sir, very.nuch so.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: We appreciate your comments.
8 (At this point in the proceedings Mr. Coffman 9
was excused and Messrs. Dieckamp, Arnold and Kanga rejoined 10 the Commissioners at the table.)
11 MR. ARNOLO: I think that the first thing I would 12 identify is that the company shares I think the sense of 13 priority and the sense of need to get into place the major 14 suocontractor that we are going to use for that part-of the 15 effort.
16 I think a little bit of perhaps background in 17 terms of wnat is available within the industry might be 18 helpful, not necessarily to argue with Frank's description, 19 but to give you I guess my perception of it, and that is 20 there are a number of companies who have had experience 21 with the kinds of systems that we are probably going to l
22 l
need for the removal of fuel at TMI-2. They have not really 23 been in equivalent kinds of circumstances and situations 24 that we have.
25 I think a second thing that is very important to TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
88 I
realize is that while an organization or a company may well 2
have nad sometime in the last 15 or 20 years participation 3
in the kind of activities that all of us want to encure 4
that we take advantage of the learning skills as we work on 5
TMI-2. The people within those organizations that have that 6
experience may or may not be available even if that 7
organization comes to bear.
e So that we have not been able to achieve the 9
schedule and perhaps we are subject to the comment of 10 Bernie on being more optimistic than he thinks is 11 reasonable in terms of moving these things along.
12 We have not fulfilled tne objective we had in 13 terms of when we would have that contractor into place.
I 14 thinK that we felt confident that we were moving along a 15 path that would get us there fairly quickly in the early 16 part of this year, and I think over the last six weeks that 17 nas been badly derailed, but it is something that we are la attempting to reorient the management attention to to get 19 into place.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Do you have any particular
(
21 l
schedule on when you are going to start to look at tne 22 l
availability of organizations?
l 23 MR. ARNOLD:
Well, as Frank indicated, this is j
24 something that we have oeen talking about and COE and NRC t
25 people have been at least aware of our work since early 'o2 t
i i
l l
TAYLOE ASS O CI A T ES i
162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
89 I
at least, and we I think believe at this time that we do 2
know what different organizations may be in a position to 3
contribute to the effort here shoulc they really want to 4
have a role.
5 he would hope that within a few weeks to a 6
couple of months to be able to make some decisions along 7
those lines.
8 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I guesa for myself in 9
light of what we heard, I would urge you to do whatever you 10 can to move that alona in light of the concerns of Frank 11 and Bernie have raised.
12 MR. ARNOLD:
I think again though that part of 13 the eventual effectiveness of that move has to be as a 14 result of having a good understanding on the part of tne 15 organization we bring in as well as us and the NRC and the 16 DOE as to how that organitation is really going to function 17 and now the interfaces are going to be managed, 18 particularly with regard to licensing activities.
19 I think as we can see even witn the integrated 20 organization tnat we have had in place for some eight or 21 nine months at TMI, it is extremely important tnat those 22 issues really be sorted through anead of time because they 23 can create consideraole proclems.
24 MR. DIECKAMP:
Sob, let me just add to that. It 25 is our position, and I know it was the very first time that TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 100 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
~
i i
90 1
I spoke with Bechtel about coming into this job, that this
~
2 job was not to ce viewed as kind of a private turf, that 3
this is going to ce our job and we are going to do this 4
job, but that rather is was incumbent upon us to go out and 5
find wnatever resources there were in the nation that could 6
best handle the job.
7 I think as Bob points out, though, there is a e
big difference between saying company "X" has done this 9
with damaged fuel and then being able today to go to that 10 company and find the repository of that knowledge in terms of people that can be put to work on the job.
12 Then beyonc that there is really a complicated 13 question of how do you bring in that contractor and how do 14 you establish the interface relationsnips where that 15 contractor is able to go in there and work in the situation 16 of tne quality assurance program that is there, the health 17 physics program that is there, the need to review things 18 for safety impact relative to the damaged that continues t 19 sit there and all those things.
20 It is not a matter of just saying well, we are 21 going to go get contractor "X" and turn him loose next 22 l
month and off he goes.
I 23 So I think taat while we perhaps appear to have 24 l
been worrying tnis pro'lem a little longer than we would c
I 25 l
like to have, I would lixe for you to recognize that it is l
l TAYLGE ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street. N.W. - Suite 1004 l
W ashington, O.C 20006 (202) 293 3950
,e g,
91
-l s
},
a m
Y m
g
)
not the dimplest kind of thing in the world'and in the 2
l:
N meantime',the things that we do have to do to get ready for 3
that access to tne fuel, we have still got a of work ahead 4
of us to get tc the point where we can, gap access to the' 5
- fuel.
N
.s A..
t
- i, N k
+
6 Sometimes I also think that we tend to becloud 7
/
tnis with words that sound a little too mysterious..
e e
s, Frankly, the first%Ching wA are goin.g to do afterethe y -
9 plenum is out of there is go in there yigh'something that 10 e
is little more in principla than a swimming pool vacuum 11 cleaner and spend a lot 60,Edme su'cking up all of,the loose 12 pafticles and debris that sit right there on the top of the 13 Core.
14 Tne next problem will be tne difficulty of 15 9
, grapplino for the residual stubs of fuel elements, and I 16 think that is going to be complicated by the fact that the 17 materials are not going to have the same integrity that ' ou y
Y I
la are used to in handli.ng fuel alements, s.
?
i 19 As a result, I think enere is a limit on thd
\\
20 degree toTWhich one can design and',cuild all 1;his stuff a
21 ahead of time versus having to approach this job a bit in 22 kind of an R&D mcde..
g c
23 I might just close by saying'that I am very 24 pleased to hear about the extrem'e R&D value that John has 25
- 3 evoked ---
w
%{
T A Y t. 0 E ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006
. 3 (202) 293-3950
,{
' A W
(+
y
u -
[.2, -
92 3
g.
3 (Laughter.)
t' g
2-hs,\\
MP. DIECKAMP' --- and I' hope that that will lead 3'
,te some very gnteresting source.
L i
g 4, g *. -
- \\
j COMMISMONER AdEARNE:
Timely. The value
,,3.
s
' degrades 4 b
'; MP) DIECKAMP:
I will support timely, yes.
.7,
~'
1 q
, MR. NRNOLO:
And presumably the NRC could be
[. k) lboking a't th ynefits that accrue to them in that process.
10 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Idikthinkofone it c*.her one.
4
\\ v.
12 j '
Bernie, I wonder if you or Lake (could explain a T
13 little bit more what the restrictions are that now apply to 14 the use of the polar crane and what has to be done in terms s.~.
~
15
,, f', lifting those, that is what you are looking for in terms o
16 o'q, satisf action and what kinds of specific steps you have 17
(
to take before the crane would be allowed to be used for 1d 1
anything beyonu wnat the limits are now.
=
19 s
I gathered that that was one of the concerns 20 that some of the members of the Advisory Panel nad had.
21 MR. BARRETT:
Right now we.,are allowing its use 22 for small, under five ton transfer movements. To move ahead 23 with larger lifts, which would be the testing program, two 24 basic steps need to be cone.
25 We will approve it on[tnedocket safety 7t w
1 TAYLOE A S S O CI A'T E S 162 5 1 Street, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 b\\
i e
93 1
evaluation, which Bernie has under review in Washington 2
right now.
That has to be completed, as well as GPU has to 3
submit procedures.
They will use two procedure to make 4
these lifts, a generic procedure for the crane and a load 5
specific procedure.
They have to submit both of those 6
procedures to me, and if it meets my standards, then I 7
would sign that.
8 We have asked questions on the SER, we have 9
received responses from GPU and we nave that altogether 10 basically in Washington.
11 4e have not approved the SER because some of the 12 issues we raised in the procedure review, specifically that 13 cf stresses in rigging, also is an SER issue. They state in 14 the SER they will have a safety factor of 5 on rigging, and
~
15 when we reviewed the procedures it wasn't clear that there 16 was a safety factor of 5.
So we asked them for 17 clarification.
18 So when they resolve those technical comments, 19 we should be in a position to go aheaa except for specific 2 ')
things that were brought up in the various allegations.
21 Those are being handled by OI anc we are not looking into 22
- these, 23 MR. ARNOLD:
Could I perhaps comment from the 24 company's standpoint on that.
2' COMMISSIONER AdEARNE: Could I follow up with one TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 16 2 5 I S tr e e t, N. W. - S uit e 10 0 4 W asnington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
94 I
question.
Commissioner Asselstine's question was what nad 2
to be done in order for you to reach approval, and your 3
final comment had to do with respect to the allegations.
4 How is that going to impact your approval of the 5
procedures.
6 MR. BARRETT:
Two potential places. To a certain 7
point our TMI Program Office was involved with Mr. Parks.
8 Then when his allegation went public, we stopped and OI 9
took over. He put things in his allegation that we were not 10 aware of.
He mentioned certain things about fuses, et 11 cetera.
We did not specifically go into those specific 12 items.
13 Before I would sign the final procedures, I 14 would want that reconcilea, either myself reconcile it or 15 OI say we reconcile it.
Someone must reconcile those.
16 MR. SNYDER:
Let me clarity on that one though.
17 Even if OI aces reconcile, we want to look and see how they 18 reach tnose conclusions because basically we have still got 19 more expertise in the sense that we nave got more 20 familiarity with the situation there.
21 COMMISSION 8R ASEARNE:
That is what I wanted to 22 know.
23 MR. SNYDER: But we are deferring to them at this 24 point for obvious reasons tnat we wculd just be in their 25 way and vice versa.
But there are enough issues that we 1AYLOE A SS O CI A T ES 162 5 I Stre et, N. W. - Suit e 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
95 I
nave raised right now, as GPU pointed out when they spoke 2
hera before, that are ir. their court.
3 Hopefully they can come back to us soon and we 4
can get those out of the way.
5 MR. ARNOLO: I think that was helpful in terms of 6
ty cor.ments.
7 I thinK stepping sort of aside from getting the 8
approval of the two procedures, which we think are pretty 9
straightforward kind of technical thinas, from the 10 company's standpoint we will want to have a level of 11 assurance that the allegations made that things weren't 12 to bed done as they were indicated as being done are put 13 before we proceed.
So there will be some portion of our 14 investigation that I will want to see complete before I 15 will agree witit making the load test of the crane, and we 15 will certainly advise the NRC as to what we have done in 17 that area and what we know.
18 We did also have what we call a Readiness Review 19 Board of the senior management of the GPU Nuclear 20 Corporation that met on Maren 12th that reviewed in detail, 21 and in fact it turned out to ce about an eight and a nalf 22 nour meeting, the preparations for the load te'.cing of tne 23 crane and the basis for ther.
24 There were a few action' items that came out of 25 that that may or may not be quite completely finishec up TAYLOC ASSO CI A T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
96 1
yet, but they are essentially complete, that plus the 2
resolution of tne comments on the procecures, and then 3
based upon all the information the management has other 4
than the allegations, would indicate we should be ready to 5
proceed.
So there will be some portion of the allegations 6
that I will also want to have satisfaction on.
7 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE: Just one final point on 8
that.
Lake, will you nave the opportunity to meet with the 9
members of the Advisory panel once you have done tne review 10 of both tne procedures and tne technical aspects of tne 11 allegation?
12 MR. BARRETT:
Certainly, any time they would 13 lixe.
14 MR. ARNOLO:
Mr. Chairman, I think I probably 15 aught to say one thing since we are all here.
I am quite 16 uneasy with the process described by the Advisory Panel and L7 I would like to voice that concern I nave.
18 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
The three meetings?
19 MR. ARNOLD:
The suggestion that they were going 20 to do tneir own investigation of all of the allegations.
I 21 guess I am not sure that de are going to feel that that is 22 going to be an effective way to really deal with these 23 issues.
24 We certainly nave tried to be fully cooperative 25 with them, and I hope we will be in a position where we can TAYLOE ASSO CI A TES 16 2 5 I Street, N. W. - Suit e 100 4 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
97 1
continue to feel that way, but I was quite uneasy with what 2
appeared to be being described.
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Thank you.
4 I was going to say in closing that I think it 5
should be clear that the Commission has a continuing 6
interest in the cleanup at TMI-2.
7 I think one thing that comes clear as we 8
investigatp it is that it is new ground that we are 9
breaking.
It is a complicated process and it is going to IG take both funding and careful design and checking before 11 proceeding.
12 We are concerned that it go forward in a 13 balanced way and we are interested in seeing the efforts 14 made to fund it prcperly handled.
15 I think the NRC office has taken its 16 responsibilities seriously and is trying te do the job that 17 is required.
18 I think our Advisory Committee perhaps ought to 19 have the benefit of more contact, if that is desired, with 20 cur Program office and perhaps we in turn could taxe more 21 advantage of tnem enrough the Program Office. If there are 22 indications of problems they see that cught to be referred 23 to us, I would say we ought to use those good offices to 24 get that word to us.
25 Now with regard to the response on interim TAYLOE ASS O CIA T ES 1625 I Street, N.W. - Suit e 2004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
98 I
letters or reports from the Commission on the status of our 2
investigations, I am sure that will get attention and we 3
may also provice comments on the proposed series of 4
meetings.
5 Is there anything else that anybody has to say?
6 (No raspcase.)
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, we thank you all for 9
coming and we thank you for your patience in sitting so 9
long.
10 We will stand adjourned.
11 whereupon, at 5:45 p.m.,
the meeting adjourned.)
12 13 14
(
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 TAYLOE ASSO CI A T ES 162 5 I Ftreet, N. W. - Suite 1004 W ashington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
CERTIFICATE OF PROCEEDINGS i
I 2
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the s
NRC COMMISSION 4
In the matter of:
Commission Meeting Briefing on TMI-2 s
Date of Proceeding: April 22,,1983 Place of Proceeding:
7 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript for the file of the commission.
10 Mary C. Simons Official Reporter - Typed 12 f.
O 13
~
h.
L' hh g
Officiad Reporter - Signature
\\
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 TAYLOE ASSOCIATES REGISTERED PROFESSION AL REPORTERS NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
PRESENTATION TO NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ON THREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 2 STATUS BY GPU NUCLEAR CORP.
APRIL 22, 1983
?
I l
l " Office of the President'" ""*'"' '** *'*" l ORGANIZATION PLAN TMI-2 l
F4asident l
GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION i
i i
Executive g
l Vice President g
L-----~__J Chairman Gen. Office e
l l
Review Board l
I I
L r Office of the, g
g Vice President Vice President g Director TMi-2 l
Oyster Creek TMI-1 llg
)
l Director l
l l
l Deputy l
d l
Director i
L_-__J I
I I
I I
I Vice President Vice President Vice President Vice President dio g ca
- 3"'*"*"**
I Technical Nuclear Administration Communications Environmental Functions Assurance l
Controls Construction I
I l
I I
i n
1 Manager Director 1
Manager Systers QuaNty Security Environmental Enghee.Ing Assurance Controls i
f l
Other Director Radiological Engineering Training fr Controis Director Support Education TMI-2 1
I Chairman I*"I GRC Training Manager TMI2 1
m ru
TMI-2 ORGANIZATION GPU FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES e
- RADIATION CONTROL PRESIDENT
- QA/QC GPUNC e
- TRAINING e
- PUBLIC RELATIONS e"
SAB l
I DIRECTOR TMI-2 8
-rJ DEPUTY DIRECTOR COST & SCHEDULE TAAG CONTROL i
LICENSING TECHNICAL RECOVERY SITE INDUS RY PLANNING PROGRAM PROGRAMS SAFETY oDOE
- CRITERIA
- DESIGN ENGR.
- LICENSING
- OPERATION &
- DATA
- SITE ENGR.
- SAFETY MAINTENANCE stc.
ANALYSIS
- CORE REMOVAL REVIEW OF SYSTEMS
- EVALUATE
- DECONTAMINA
- RISK
- PLANT ENGR.
ALTERNATIVE TION ASSESSMENT
- WASTE CONCEPTS
- CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
l i
BROAD PERSPECTIVES i
1 i
- TMI-2 DECISION-MAKING PROCESS IS i
OFTEN DOMINATED BY INTANGIBLES.
- THE INFORMATION BASE, UPON WHICH DECISIONS RELY, CONTINUES TO IMPROVE j
WITH TIME. THEREFORE,
- Timing of Decisions is important I
- Decisions Sometimes Must Be Recon-sidered.
i 1
l i
MAJOR INTERDEPENDENT l
VARIABLES / CONSTRAINTS
- PUBLIC RISK
- SCHEDULE
- EXPOSURE (MANREMD
i 4
i i
TMI-2 DECISION MAKING j
PHILOSOPHY AND PRACTICE l
IN MAJOR PROGRAM DECISION MAKING, GPUN HAS ASSIGNED RELATIVELY HIGH IMPORTANCE TO EXPEDI-l TIOUS ACTION, IN LIGHT OF THE UNCERTAINTY AND l
POTENTIAL RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH AN EXTENDED CLEANUP SCHEDULE.
TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE SOMETIMES COMPETING i
CONSIDERATIONS OF PROGRAM SCHEDULE (AND ASSOCIATED RISK) AND OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES, GPUN POLICY HAS BEEN:
{
- To Establish Reasonable Cleanup Objectives, As Early i
As Possible, Consistent With Information and Resources l
- To Apply a Rigorous ALARA Program to the Cleanup Tasks Thus initiated, Ensuring That Resulting Exposures Are ALARA
- To Continually Reassess Program Decisions and Refine as Necessary and Appropriate
PAST lilSTORY
{
(SLIDE 1) 1 l
O FIRST REACTOR BUILDING IELEVISION INSPECTION 4TH QTR - 1979 O
VENTING OF 43,000 CURIES OF KRYPTON 85 ENDS 3RD OTR - 1980 0
EPICOR 11 COMPLETES PROCESSING OF AUXILIARY BUILDING WATER 3RD OTR - 1980 4
O FIRST MANNED REACTOR BulLDING ENTRY 3RD OTR - 1980 0
SUBMERGED DEMINERALIZER SYSTEM (SDS) BEGINS PRJCESSING 3RD OTR - 1981 i
i t
i 4
I l
1
s
~
i i
PAST HISTORY I
(SLIDE 2) t O
DECON EXPERIMENT ENDS IST OTR - 1982 i
l 0
REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM (RCS) PROCESSING BEGINS 2ND OTR - 1982 0
" QUICK LOOK" INTO THE UNIT 2 REACTOR VESSEL 3RD OTR - 1982 0
COMMENCEMENT OF UNIT 2 REACTOR BUILDING DOSE REDUCTION 4TH QTR - 1982 CAMPAIGN O
COMPLETION OF PART "A" - DOSE REDUCTION IST OTR - 1983 1
1 4
i
)
l, a
i l
NEXT 12-18 MONTH ACTIVITIES l:
l 0
IMPLEMENT REACTOR BUILDING PART "B" DOSE REDUCTION I
O START REACTOR DUILDING SYSTEMS STABILIZATION O
DESIGN FOR FABRICATION OF RACKS, CANISTERS, & FUEL REMOVAL TOOLING 0
POLAR CRANE REQUALIFICATION O
PERFORM UNDER HEAD DATA ACQUISITION l
0 REMOVE REACTOR VESSEL HEAD 0
FINALIZE DESIGN, PROCURE, & INSTALL PHASE Il CANAL
)
CLEANING SYSTEM 0
flNALIZE DESIGN, PROCURE, & PERFORM IRANSFER IUBE MECHANISM MODS i
0 FINALIZE ENGINEERING, DECON, & REMOVE "A" POOL TANK FARM
& ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS e
CASE 1:
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CASH FLOW OF $76.0f1M FOR 1983,
$92.6MM FOR 198tl, AND $100.0MM FOR 1985 AND LATER IN 1983 DOLLARS.
ACTUAL CASH FLOW WILL BE HIGHER IN 198tl AND LATER DUE TO ESCALATION.
l
I i
CASE II:
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CASH FLOW OF $76.0MM FOR 1983, AND
$100.0MM FOR 19911 AND LATER IN CURRENT DOLLARS.
A
'l i
d L
l i
j 1
l 1,
,i CASE III:
SAME AS CASE I WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 1985 WHICH HAS UNLIMITED CASH FLOW APPLIED TO FUEL REMOVAL ACTIVITIES AS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THOSE ACTIVITIES IN 1985.
9 l
1 i
l l
l i
l
a i
a l
ii CASE IV:
SAME AS CASE I WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 1983 AND.193fi WHICH ARE INCREASED BY $10,0MM EACH YEAR 0983 DOLLARS).
1 l
l i
i i
1 I
l
i l
- CASE V:
SAME AS CASE IV WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 19811 AND 1985 WHICH HAVE UNLIMITED CASH FLOW AS REQUIRED TO BOTH EXPEDITE THE START OF FUEL REMOVAL AND REDUCE TifE FUEL REMOVAL TIME TO 12 MONTHS.
i 4
e A
PROGRAM ESTIMATE Total To Go Program Completion
($ Millions)
($ Millions)
Escalated 1983 Dollars July '81 1034.0 644.8 August 86 Case 1
974.7 523.8 June 88 11 1041.3 553.6 December 89 III 971.2 525.5 June 88 IV 961.7 520.8 March 88 V
949.6 320.1 December 87 NOTE:
Actual expenditures thru December 31, 1982 are $339.0 million.
i s
~
j PAGE 1 0F 2 SCHEDULE MILESTONES COMPARIS0N 1983 PROGRAM REASSESSMENT g
i EVALUATION CASE I CASE II (ASE Ill CASE IV CAM I
CQMPLETE PART A R. B. DOSE NOT MAR. 83 MAR. 83 MAR. 83 MAR. 83 MAR. 83 NEDUCTION ADDRESSED CQMPLETg Rg/CTOR BUILDING AuG. 86 MAR. 88 JUN. 89 MAR. 88 DEC. 87
'SEP. 87 i
HANDS-UN UECON i
POLAR CRANE REQUALIFICATION SEP. 83 MAR. 83 MAR. 83 MAR. 83 MAR. 83 MAR. 83 IESTING LOMPLETE REACTOR HEAD REMOVED DEC. 83 Jus 83 JUN. 83 Juti. 83 JUN. 83 JUN. 83 REACTOR PLENUM REMOVED FEB. 84 OCT. 84 OCT, 84 OCT. 84 JUN. 84 JUN. 84 i
SIART REACTOR FUEL & DEBRIS MAY 84 JAN. 85 JAN. 85 JAN. 85 JUL. 84 JUL. 84 HEMOVAL CQMPLETE FUEL & DEBRIS FEB. 85 JUN. 86 JuN. 86 Dec. 85 DEC. 85 JUN. 85 NEMOVAL
j PAGE 2 0F 2 1
l SCHEDULE MILESTONES COMPARISON 1983 PROGRAM REASSESSMENT 1981 i
EVALUAUQH CASE I CASE II CASE III CASE IV CASE V SIART REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM FEB. 85 Jul. 86 JUL. 86 JAN. 86 JAN. 86 JUL. 85 UECON i
i COMPLETE CSA REMOVAL JUL 85 DEC. 86 DEC. 86 JUN. 86 JUN. 86 DEC. 85
)
CQMPLETE REACTOR COOLANT APR. 85 MAR 87 AuG. 87 OCT. 86 0CT. 86 MAY 86 SYSTEM DECON l
l START REACTOR FUEL SHIPPING AuG. 84 APR. 85 0CT 86 APR. 85 JAN. 85 SEP. 84
)
COMPLCTION OF PHASE II DECON AuG. 86 MAR. 88 SEP. 89 MAR. 88 DEC. 87 SEP. 87 1
l COMPLETE FUEL SHIPPING NOT IN SCOPE DEC. 87 JUN. 89 DEC. 87 SEP. 87 MAR. 87 i
FINAL DECON NOT IN SCOPE MAY 88 N0v. 89 MAY 88 FEB. 88 N0v. 87 COMPLETE RADWASTE SHIPPING NOT IN SCOPE JUN. 88 DEC. 89 JUN. 88 MAR. 88 DEC. 87 l
l i
i
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS & QUALIFICATIONS 1.
Estimate is for program work remaining as of December 31, 1982.
2.
Estimate is in mid-1983 dollars, i
3.
Escalation allowance for 1984 and later is at 8% per year compounded.
4.
Debt service on capital investment is excluded, i
5.
In-containment work hour week with selected second shift.
Balance of activities hour work week.
l 6.
Equipment hatch con be opened temporarily for movement of large j
materials and components.
i 7.
No salvage value has been considered.
8.
No cost or schedule contingency allowance has been included.
l:
9.
Maintenance of equipment and facilities as investment protection is specifically excluded.
l l
10.
Arrangements can be made for shipping all radwaste offsite.
4 I
l 1
I i
The program end point assumed for this report i
will not establish plant conditions permitting either decommissioning or reconstruction. The objective of the program is to return the plant l
to a radiological condition (i.e., radiation and j
contamination levels) typical of normal operating plants.
i I
GPU NUCLEAR RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS 1
February 7 King requests meeting with Clark - arranged for February 25.
February 24 Clark and Arnold learn of King's involvement with outside business activities - King suspended.
February 25 Clark meets with King to discuss safety concerns.
February 28 Developed memo setting forth King's stated concerns.
l March 3,4 March 4 Technical consultants agreed to undertake investigation of l
safety concerns.
March 8 Notified Chairman SAB of King's concerns.
March 10 Member of SAB interviewed King.
March 16 King informed he would be terminated as of March 23.
l March 23 Parks' Press Conference.
l l
March 2+28 GPUN establishes in-house technical team to analyze allegations and related documents to support an investigation; outside
[
investigator initiates full investigation of all allegations.
April 4 Gischel submits affidavit.
l 1
l
j TMI-2 Cleanup j
FUNDING SOURCES Best Estimate i
Thornburgh Range Source Target of Funding (millions) l Federal Government
$190
$ 83 i
industry 190 100-150 GPU/ Pennsylvania Customers 184 184 l
GPU/New Jersey Customers 61 61 j
Commonwealth of 30 30 Pennsylvania l
State of New Jersey 15 11 Insurance 90 80 Litigation Proceeds 37 TOTAL
$760
$586-$636
TMI-2 Cleanup ANNUAL SOURCES OF FUNDING 1982 1983 1984 Source ll millions)
I millions)
(millions)
Federal Government
$6
$14
$10-15 Industry 2
17-25 l
GPU/ Customer Revenue 18 34 50 i
i Commonwealth of 5
5 Pennsylvania i
j State of New Jersey 2
2
)
Insurance 38 18 16-3 l
TOTAL
$62
$75 100 I
k APRIL 21, 1983 SCHEDULING NOTES TITLE:
BRIEFING ON TMI-2 CLEANUP SCHEDULE:
3:00 P.M., FRIDAY, APRIL 22, 1983 DURATION:
1-1/2 HRS SPEAKERS:
1.
GPU (30 MIN, VUGRAPHS)
HERMAN DIECKAMP, PRESIDENT, GPU ROBERT ARNOLD, PRESIDENT, GPU NUCLEAR BAHMAN KANGA, DIRECTOR, TMI-2 2.
ADVISORY PANEL (15 MIN, NO DOCUMENTS)
JOHN MINNICH, CHAIRMAN OR JOEL ROTH, VICE CHAIRMAN ROBERT REID GORDON ROBINSON TOM GERUSKY TOM SMITHGALL DR. HENRY WAGNER (POSSIBLY) 3.
STAFF (10 MIN, SECY-83-140)
BERNIE SNYDER LAKE BARRETT m..... -,., -, _ _ _
m m,
f kkf h k k k h k k k k h h ht hf k h h hg hq0 h h hg h hg0ghghghghghghghghghghghghghghq(g(q(g gQgh 3
12/82 b
c TRANSMITIAL 'IO:
N/,
Document Cbntrol Desk, 016 Phillips SE ADVANCED COPY 'IO: /
/
The Public Document Prxm
'Y/J{/h3 DATE:
cc: OPS File N
M OPS N C&R (Natalie) iid Attached are copies of a Ormission meeting transcript (s) and related reeting document (s). They are being forwarded for entry (m the Daily Accession List and placement in the Public Ibcumnt Rocm. No other distribution is requested or required. Existing DC5 identification numbers are listed on the individual documents wherever known.
jnt c -J h'u m o g /
Maeting
Title:
/ tu /c,4
/-7 t-V f[2.2[f3 Open )<
Meeting Date:
Closed DCS Copies (1 of each checked)
Item
Description:
Copies Advanced Original May Duplicate To PDR Document be Dup
- Cbpy*
I(-
1 1
TRANSCRIPT [l[d,DCSshouldsenda l.
ALLaCQ tY hhen checke copy of this transcript to the LPDR for:
2.
J41sduhm
)14% )
I l
fliliA Y ://P3 3.
0-,.-
k'5-/WO 0
l
/
E
'~
e 21 (PDR is advanced one copy of each d r e nt,
h two of each SIrY paper.)
Rk Pl0V0WDM9FDWoW09WoToWo9709W6%WojofoM9Wo3W6TDWJTD99W0Wol