ML20195E095

Transcript of 880609 Public Meeting in Rockville,Md Re Briefing on Status of Plant.Pp 1-59.Presentation Matl Encl

ML20195E095
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	06/09/1988
From:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8806230290
Download: ML20195E095 (92)

Text

,

l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Title:

BRIEFING ON STATUS OF PILGRIM Location: ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND  ;

l Date: THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1988 l

PageS: 1-59

~ Ann Riley & Associates Court Reporters 1625 i Street, N.W., Suite 921 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 8806230290 800609 3 PDR ADOCK 0500 T

s DISCLAIMER This'is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on 6-9-88 in the Commission's office at One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland. The meeting was open to public attendance and observation. This transcript has not been rev'iewed, 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 metters discussed. Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs.

No pleading or'other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as -the result of, or addressed to, any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.

w'

- - - . - . . , . , . _ - - -- - , , . , . . - , , , , . , . - , - - - - - - --,- --w -

s

., 1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, 3 ***

4 BRIEFING ON STATUS OF PILGRIM 5 -

6 ***

7 PUBLIC MEETING 8 ***

9 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 One White Flint North 11 Rockville, Maryland 12

~"

13 Thursday, June 9, 1988 14 15 The Commission met in opensession, pursuant to 16 notice, at 10:00 o' clock, a.m. , the Honorable LANDO W. ZECH, 17 Chairman of the Commission, presiding.

18 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:

19 LANDO W. ZECH, Chairman of the commission 20 THOMAS M. ROBERTS, Member of the Commission 4

21 KENNETH CARR, Member of the Commission 22 KENNETH ROGERS, Member of the Commission 23 24 25

s o 2 1 STAFF AND PRESENTERS SEATED AT THE COMMISSION TABLE:

2

_ 3 S. CHILK 4 W. PARLER 5 S. SWEENEY 6 R. BIRD 7 K. HIGHFILL 8 R. ANDERSON 9 R. VARLEY 10 G. TAYLOR il T. MURLEY 12 B. RUSSELL

__ ~

13 S. COLLINS 14 B. BOGER 15 16 AUDIENCE SPEAKERS 17 18 E. HOWARD 19 20 21

/ 22 .

23 24 25

s

. 3 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 (10:00 a.m.)

f_

3 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

4 This morning, the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station officials will 5 discuss the situation at the Pilgrim power plant. The plant 6 was shut down by the Boston Edison Company on April 12, 1986 7 due to a series of hardware problems. The Nuclear Regulatory 8 Commission Region I subsequently issued a confirmatory action 9 letter confirming Boston Edison Company's intent to keep the 10 plant shut down until certain management deficiencies had been 11 corrected.

12 Since that time the plant has remained shut down as 13 corrective actions have been and are being undertaken. The 14 purpose of today's meeting is for Boston Edison Company and the 15 NRC staff to brief the Commission concerning the status cf the 16 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station and the actions being taken to 17 determine the state of readiness for restart of operation at 18 the Pilgrim plant.

19 Today's meeting is for information only. There will 20 be no votes scheduled today. The Commission will meet again at 21 a later date with the Pilgrim officials to consider a restart

^

22 decision for the Pilgrim plant. That date has not been set at 23 this time.

24 I understand that copies of slides are available as 25 you enter the room today. Do any of my fellow Commissioners l

I

. 4 1 have any opening comments to make?

2 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would. I g- 3 think it's very important to remind ourselves and the public 4 that there are steps and matters which the Commission as an 5 agency must.take and carefully examine before rendering a 6 decision which is ultimately made and formalized by a vote by 7 individual Commissionere.

8 The presentation today by the licensee and by NRC 9 Staff to the Commission is a progress report. It's one very 10 important element in a careful process that establishes the 11 record which the Commissioners will examine before coming to a 12 decision. Firsthand visits by individual Commissioners to the 13 licensee site are also of value but by themselves are not 14 definitive.

15 I've rece'4tly visited the Pilgrim site and have seen 16 for my first time the condition of the plant and the persons 17 who are in positions of responsibility there. While I was 18 favorably impressed by what I saw and heard in that visit, my 19 own judgment on the issue of restart has not yet been made and 20 will be based on all pertinent information relating to the 21 safety of the plant including the results of full briefing by 22 the licensee and NRC staff experts.

23 I will have to be satisfied that public health and 24 safety will be protected before I will vote to approve restart 25 of the Pilgrim nuclear plant. I'm confident that my fellow

5 1 Commissioners will approach their decision-making from a 2 similar point of view.

,,_ 3 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you very much. Any other 4 comments? If not, Mr. Sweeney, welcome, and you may proceed.

5 MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, sir, and good morning. My 6 name is Stephen J. Sweeney. I have been CEO of Boston Edison 7 since 1984 and Chairman of the Board since 1986. I joined 8 Boston Edison Company thirty-four and a half years ago 9 beginning as a test man in our laboratory in 1953.

10 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS: You sound like a native son.

11 MR, SWEENEY: I am. I welcome this opportunity to 12 express my continuing commitment and that of our Board of 13 DirecEors to provide the support and resources to ensure that 14 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station is run safely and reliably.

15 I am here today because the Board and I do believe 16 that Pilgrim Station is well along the path to restal: and 17 successful operation. I visit the plant on an averag:' of once 18 a week, attending scheduled staff meetings, touring parts of l 19 the facility and meeting with senior managers. I have gone 20 through the general employee training program for unescorted 21 access and as a result, I have witnessed firsthand many of the 22 physical and management changes that have taken place.

23 I've also observed the operator training on the 24 simulator and have been thoroughly briefed on all aspects of 25 the safety enhancement program. My professional and corporate

• 6 1 background allows me to participate at Pilgrim in more than a 2 cursory manner. I am a Registered Professional Engineer in

, 3 Massachusetts and approximately 22 years of my career at Boston 4 Edison, my assignments were in the generating and engineering 5 disciplines including a 4-year assignment as Vice President of 6 Staam Electric Operations.

7 I took part in the meetings of the management 8 oversight and assessment team during the SALP assessment and I 9 was so impressed by the results that I intend to implement that 10 program in our fossil generation and T&D areas of the company.

11 In addition to hearing from Ralph Lird at the monthly board 12 meetings, the Board's nuclear operations review committee and 13 members of our executive committee toured the plant on April 14 12, 1988.

15 They observed operator training on the simulator and 16 met with key plant managers. Their observations were reported 17 to the full Board at our April meeting. Now before Ralph 18 begins his formal presentation, I want to reaffirm that we are 19 committed to achieving continually rising standards of 20 excellence in all aspects of Pilgrim's operation. Thank you 21 sir.

(~ 22 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you very much. You may 23 proceed.

24 MR. BIRD: Good morning. We are here to give you a 25 status report on our progress towards restart for the Pilgrim

7 0

1 Nuclear Power Station which has been shutdown since April, 2 1986. The SALP assessment report on readiness for restart 3 which was recently submitted contains more detailed information f_

l 4 that is the basis for our conclusions.

5 I'm Ralph Bird, the Senior Vice President, Nuclear.

6 I joined Boston Edison on January 1, 1987. I spent two months 7 in an intensive training program on the Pilgrim Plant before 8 assuming my responsibilities at the end of February, 1987.

9 Since then I have spent most of my time at the plant 10 in order to be closer to the people and their problems. Some 11 of my background may be of interest to you. I'm a U.S. Naval 12 Academy graduate. I retired in 1984 as a rear admiral after 13 spend [ng most of my career in nuclear submarines. All of my 14 assignments in the Navy included responsibility for leadership 15 and management which helped to prepare me for my present job.

16 My experience also includes training, safety evaluatione and 17 personnel and material support.

18 Some related assignments included commanding officer 19 of a nuclear submarine, senior member of the Pacific Fleet 20 Nuclear Propulsion Examining Board, and chief of staff of the 21 Pacific Submarine Force. After leaving the Navy and before 22 joining Boston Edison I was a consultant at several nuclear 23 power plants and I worked for Westinghouse as a consultant and 24 also as an employee.

25 When I joined Boston Edison, Mr. Sweeney and the

1 o 8 1 Board of Directors made it very clear to me that I had their 2 complete support. That support continues and they closely 3 follow our progress. My experience in the Navy, my g_

4 observations of commercial nuclear power --

5 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Excuse me, do you report directly to 6 the Board?

7 MR. BIRD: I report directly to the Chairman and CEO, 8 to Steve Sweeney personally, 9 CHAIRMAN ZECH: To the Chairman and CEO which means 10 that not only as Chairman but as the Board itself, you're the 11 Chairman of the Board?

12 MR. SWEENEY: That's right. And I'm also CEO.

~~

13 CHAIRMAN ZECH: So essentially you report to the 14 Chairman of the Board and the Board members then,.of course, 15 are part of your senior management group, if you will.

16 MR. BIRD: Yes, as you mentioned --

17 CHAIRMAN ZECH: But you have direct access to the 18 Chairman and to the Board?

19 MR. BIRD: Not only direct access, but he visits the 20 plant at least once a week, and I talk to him on the phone.

21 CHAIRMAN ZECH: No, I understand that, but I want to 22 make sure that your line of communication is directly to the 23 Chairman and to the Board, is that correct?

24 MR. SWEENEY: The only senior officer in .the company 25 that reports directly to my office is r<alph.

s . . .

9 f .

1 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you. That's what I wanted to 2 know.

f-3 MR. BIRD: To continue, my experience in the Navy and 4 my observations of commercial nuclear power and related 5 industry convinced me that there are three keys to success in 6 managing a large complex organization. First, high standards.

7 That's understood throughout tbs organization. Second, 8 realistic plans for achieving those standards. And finally, 9 third, a system of controls for measuring performance against 10 the standards.

11 I believe that Boston Edison's nuclear organization 12 now meets those criteria. Although we made substantial 13 progress, we are not completely satisfied with our current 14 status and I really hope we never will be. I believe there is 15 no such thing as steady-state operation. An operation that is 16 not getting better is getting worse, and we are determined to 17 keep on getting better.

18 However, we are satisfied that we are on the path to 19 success and that we will soon be ready to request approval to 20 restart. The two major areas requiring further work are 21 maintenance staffing and procedures and post-work and 22 surveillance testing which we expect to complete this summer in 23 parallel with the ongoing NRC assessment of our readiness to 24 restart.

25 When I arrived at Boston Edison my immediate task was l

l

. 9 1 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you. That's what I wanted to 2 know.

,_ 3 MR. BIRD: To continue, my experience in the Navy and 4 my observations of commercial nuclear power and related 5 industry convinced me that there are three keys to success in 6 managing a large complex organization. First, high standards. l 7 That's understood throughout the organization. Second, 8 realistic plans for achieving those standards. And finally, 9 third, a system of controls for measuring performance against 10 the standards.

11 I believe that Boston Edison's nuclear organization 12 now meets those criteria. Although we made substantial 13 progress, we are not completely satisfied with our current 14 status and I really hope we never will be. I believe there is 15 no such thing as steady-state operation. An operation that is l

l 16 not getting better is getting worse, and we are determined to l

l 17 keep on getting better.

18 However, we are satisfied that we are on the path to 19 success and that W3 Will soon be ready to request approval to 20 restart. The two major areas requiring further work are 21 .iaintenance staffing and procedures and post-work and 22 survaillance testing which we expect to complete this summer in 23 parallel with the ongoing NRC assessment of our readiness to 24 restart.

25 When I arrived at Boston Edison my immediate task was

9 e 10 1 to assess the strengths of the organization and determine the 2 areas that needed improvement. The next step was to assign

,_ 3 priorities and direct our attention and resources accordingly.

4 We have continually reassessed our situation, adjusting 5 resources and refining the process which resulted in filing of 6 the SALP assessment of the readiness for restart report which 7 we recently submitted.

8 We evaluated management practices at Pilgrim, and we 9 presented our conclusions to the NRC at a public meeting in 10 September 1987. We determined plans and actions necessary for 11 restart and in July 1987 issued our restart plan which was the 12 basis for what has gone on since including our SALP assessment.

13 We conducted in-depth assessments of maintenance and 14 radiological controls and implemented improvement actions plans 15 covering both restart-related and longer-term actions. We 16 conducted investigations and critiques of specific events at 17 Pilgrim and identified actions to prevent recurrence.

18 All of these assessments are the building blocks 19 which support our recent SALP assessment report. It is Boston 20 Edisi..#s intention and resolve to continue the self-assessment 21 progress at Pilgrim and to drive this initiative down and 22 across the entire nuclear organization and to make it part of 23 our continuing everyday operation.

24 This morning some of the key line managers and I will 25 describe the corrective actions taken since the plant was

.-_-_______1___.__ _

. 11 1 shutdown and the status of our efforts to achieve continually 2 rising standards of excellence.

c 3 The long-term management organization has been 4 defined and almost all key positions have been filled. All of 5 the key managers, section head and above, are Boston Edison 6 employees. The senior management team includes about a dozen 7 new people who brought with them over 250 man-years of 8 successful nuclear power experience as well as some outstanding 9 Pilgrim veterans.

10 They are all strong individuals who have high 11 standards. They work well together, and they have quickly 12 become an effective team. We've ta' ken action to strengthen 13 'manag~ement by adding people who are among the very best in 14 their field. There are new managers in emergency preparedness, 15 in security, in radiological protection, operations, plant 16 support, special projects, and quality assurance.

17 Shortly you will meet the new station director, Ken 18 Highfill, and the new plant manager, Roy Anderson, and the new 19 manager of emergency preparedness, Ron Varley. We have also 20 upgraded the nuclear safety review and audit committee, which 21 is the senior safety committee and brought in Bill Wagner to be 22 the chairman. Other new outside members of this important 23 group are Murray Miles, Henry Stone, and Jack Gregg who are 24 widely recognized experts in their fields.

25 In addition to the new members of the Pilgrim team,

9

• 12 1 we have maintained continuity of work force in management 2 through retention of most of the long-term Boston Edison

_ 3 employees.

4 (Slide.]

5 The condition of the plant has improved dramatically 6 since the beginning of the outage in 1986 and the rate of 7 improvement has accelerated through 1987 and 1988.

8 The plant has refueled, we have successfully 9 completed the hydrostatic and the integrated leak rate tests.

10 The major modification work has been completed and we are now 11 doing testing, surveillances and continuing maintenance. Any 12 work that is required as a result of testing is being scheduled 13 and is being performed by our resources on site.

14 The details of the very extensive work being done 15 during this period are in our SALP assessment report but some 16 of the maior projects of the outage include items such as 17 completion of the appendix R, power protection modifications, 18 security system upgrades, installation of a plant-specific 19 simulator for training the operators, overhaul of the turbine 20 generator, refurbishment of plant systems including the main 21 steam isolation valves and the residual heat removal pumps and 22 refurbishment of the core spray pumps and decontamination of 23 the process buildings so that virtually all of the accessible 24 areas can now be entered without protective clothing or 25 breathing apparatus.

• 13 1 (Slide.)

2 We set an objective to have 90 percent of the plant

,_ 3 decontaminated, radiologically clean, which is virtually all of

(

4 the accessible area, and we met that goal.

5 Certainly one of the most significant projects has 6 been the safety enhancement program which includes both 7 equipment modifications and procedure improvements. We have 8 dedicated significant resources to this program which exceeds 9 the current NRC requirements and therefore is not a 10 prerequisite for restart.

11 (Slide.)

12 our program, which emphasizes prevention of core

~

13 damage, was a Boston Edison initiative in response to the draft 14 severe accident containment policy for boiling water reactors 15 which the NRC staff presented to the industry in June of 1986.

16 We have kept the NRC staf f informed of our plans and the bases 17 for our decisions in this area.

18 (Slide.)

19 The safety enhancement program modifications are now 20 virtually complete with the exception of the direct torus vent, 21 which is on hold pending final resolution of the NRC staff 22 position on containment venting and the second diesel-driven 23 fire pump which is installed but which will be -- installation 24 will be complete after restart.

25 We proceeded to implement new emergency operating

0 14 1 procedures based on revision four of the boiling water reactor 2 guidelines because they are technically superior to the earlier

- 3 versions. This major initiative has been a well-coordinated 4 effort by our nuclear engineering operations and training 5 departments, who used our new plant simulator extensively in 6 their work.

7 (Slide.)

8 We are very proud of our achievements in this program 9 because we have significantly improved our capability to 10 respond effectively to off-normal events in a safe and reliable 11 manner. We also focused our attention on aggressively 12 upgrading those areas that had been rated category three in the 13 early 198'i systematic assessment of licensee performance, the 14 SALP report. We don't believe that any of these areas should 15 continue to be rated category three.

16 I'll briefly summarize our actions in each of these 17 areas and I do have the appropriate managers here today to 18 respond to any specific questions that you may have.

19 The new security manager has a 28-year record of 20 success in law enforcement and in the nuclear industry. In 21 security we have increased Boston Edison's supervision of the 22 contract personnel. We have upgraded physical security 23 systems. We revised procedures, and we've expanded training to 24 deal with previously recurring problems.

25 The improvements are obvious and there have been no

15 l j

security violations issued during Don Long's tenure as security 1

2 manager. Like security, fire protectioh is now a separate

,_ 3 organization with an experienced manager, Fred WSzniak.

4 Staffing has been increased. Fire brignie training.has been 5 significantly improved. The improvements are very clear and t i 6 have been documented in recent NRC Inspections.

\

7 The new manager of the radiological section, Jeff 8 Jens, has made the changes to produce a very quick turnaround 9 in that important area. Staffing has been increased for health 10 physics technicians. Edison employees are replacing the 11 contractors and new positions of a chief radiological scientist 12 and an independent radiological assessor have been created and 13 both of those report to me.

14 Revised training, plant decontamination, new work 15 practices and new attitudes at the station led to the 16 unconditional lifting of the Commission's 1984 radiological 17 order modifying the Pilgrim license. In the area of -

18 surveillances, we are upgrading our surveillance trackin'J ,

19 system, we are reviewing it to be sure it's accurate.and we're 20 revising procedures to make them easier to follow.

21 Jim Seery, who is the Technical Section Manager, is

~

2 ^. being assisted by a new systems engineering division and 22 improvements have been made to ensure that surveillances will 24 be performed on schedule. Assurance of quality is an issue 25 that goes beyond the quality assurance department.

1

\ ,

1

. . 16 l 1

1 t

1 It requires and has received strong management I l

2-

.[- attention. There is now close, frequent attention to quality

] 1 i

.' 3, issoes at many levels of.the organization including my weekly I 4 mseti f gs'vith senior managers and with Frank Famulari, who is 5

3 Ethe new Quality Assurance Manager and who now reports directly 6 t0 me. This ensures proper attention and prompt action on 7 quality-related cor.cerns.

8 I would now like to-ask the Station Director, Ken 9 Highfill, to continue with tais status report.

10 MR. HIGHFILL: Thank you, Ralph. Good morning,

'[i 11 gentlemen. I'm Ken Highfill. I joined Boston Edison in late 12 1987 as the Pilgrim Station Director. I'm a 1955 graduate of 13 the U.S. Naval Academy. I retired from the Navy in 1977 as a 14 captain after 22 years of service which included three new 15 construction billets. One of those was as officer in charge of 16 construction testing and acceptance of S-5G natural circulation 17 reactor.

18. .

I spent four years as commanding officer of a nuclear 03 bubmarine, and by that time I had qualified to operate six 20 different types c't nuclear power plants. I subsequently spent 23 two, years ns nanior instructor for perspective commanding 22 officers. The core PCO school subjects were tactics, material 23 condition and leadership. On leaving the Navy, I joined San 24 Diego Gas and Electric Company as supervisor of nuclear 25 operations and later, as the first general manager of Gas cool

't

y. . , .

'/[ i.

iji

.f .

/\ }p s,l 17

. /,, ,  ; ,s i

<I', '

1 Reactor AssociaJ.las. (4

' ( i

\ ,) '

< 4 2 In1980/bfoundedasuccessfulg{anagementconsulting jg.

(

> t s 5

3, d

, 3 firmWhichprovidesassistanceinnuclearpowe.f. plant training, c

/! ,

gt>s qj ' (,

4 maintenance and operations toithp utility industry. /In the*

s 5 past aignt' years, I have v/. sited about 35 nuclear plants 6 nationwide ar'd thug have an understandiniJ of leidctry, INJC)and i I ,

7 NRC standards. Inotddsomeitemscommontothebetter[ lads \

-f

(

8 including quality, timeliness, ownership and pride.

, ,w ,

9 Knowing this, Ralph asked me to apply that experience j

s 10 at Pilgrim Station. When I arrived, most of the plant 11 modification work had beeil completed. It was clear that we not  !'

\ v 12 only needed.to get the remaining work done, but that it should

.._ _. I 13 be' done as much as possible by Bcattin Edison people. That is 3

14 what wo are doing.

15 The result is work thit dNg individual can be proud ,

e .

16 of. Collectively, employees at Pilgrim can be ploud of where 17 they work and at what they,do and one'can see the improvements s .-

18 in morale. We are meethA T our goals to complete work, improve >

')

) a 19 housekeeping anr1 preservation, reduce contractors, increase 1

4 20 Boston Edison scaffing and to do quailty work. We are

, > I 21 generally meeting od schedule and vir.itors are commenting very

^

22 favwably upon. plant condition, worker attitudes and our sense 23 of pride.

24 , ,

e A few graphids will help illustrate this progress.

> i 25 (Slide.)

L -

( h

\ l

, i

. < 18

,1 < In July, 1987, there were a total of 1,820 contract 2 personnel working for the nuclear organization. Today there

,- 3 are 435 including the guard force, which will continue to be 4 contracted under Boston Edison's supervision at a year-end 5 level of about 160 people. We intend to be below 250 total 6 contractors by that time.

7 We.have achieved this reduction in manpower while 8 removing most of the temporary plant modifications and while 9 driving the Bechtel contracted work packages to zero. We have 10 instituted new management practices in security and completed 11 physical improvements to the security system, such that we can 12 eliminate guard posts as compensatory measures.

13 (Slide.)

14 We are doing the bulk of our own programmatic and 15 administrative work. At the same time, we ar moving 16 aggressively to do better on planning work and improving 17 productivity so we can reduce overtime. Pilgrim should be a 18 pleasant place to work and that means that people should be i

19 working a 40-50 hour week most of the time. This enhances the 20 productivity, alertness and moral.

21 [ Slide.]

22 This graph shows that we have reduced overtime and 23 are controlling its use while overall manpower is ramping down.

24 We are meeting our goal of filling approved vacancies in the 25 nuclear organization ahead of schedule. We have not

' 19 1 compromised our standards.

2 Although~our work planning capability is not yet

,_ 3 where we want it and this is still restricting productivity 4 somewhat, we are nonetheless seeing improving quality in many 5 of the indicators we use.

6 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Excuse me, before you go on. I had a 7 question on the operator overtime.

8 MR. HIGHFIELD: Yes, sir.

9 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Is operator overtime presently being 10 maintained within the technical specification limits?

11 MR. HIGHFIELD: Yes, sir, well under it.

12 CHAIRMAN ZECH: All right, good. As you move along 13 and as you well know and as the business of the operators 14 becomes more intense, I would caution you to watch very 15 closely, the overtime of your operators so that you're not over 16 committing them and asking them to do too much as you approach 17- the operational phase.

18 MR. BIRD: We are very sensitive to that and we have 19 a system to track it very carefully to make sure that we don't 20 place excessive demands. .Also, we have, as we may mention here 21 later today, we have two classes of operators go through the lr 22 license training and take the exam.

23 They have condition,al licenses now -- they need 20 24 hours of power, but we had 100 percent pass rate on those exams i

25 and we have 16 operators that we didn't have before.

[

. 20 1 CHAIRMAN ZECH: All right. How many total operators 2 do you have?

,, 3 MR. BIRD: The total number --

4 MR. ANDERSON: 22 reactor operators and we have 12 5 watch standing senior reactor operators. We also have many 6 management people who are qualified.

7 CHAIRMAN ZECH: How about reactor operators? SROs, l 8 NRos, can you break those down?

9 MR. HIGHFIELD: 22 and 12.

10 CHAIRMAN ZECH: 22 senior operators?

11 MR. ANDERSON: We have 22 watch standing. We have 22 12 ROs and we have 12 watch standing SROs. We have, management --

13 CHAIRMAN ZECH: On shift?

14 MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir, that are available. We have 15 management personnel that can fill SRO billets and maintain 16 current qualifications.

17 CHAIRMAN ZECH: How many shifts do you have?

18 MR. ANDERSON: We are going to run a four-shift 19 operation and as we get to the 20 percent point where we can 20 release the licenses, we'll go to a five-shift operation. That 21 will be post-restart test program. We made that decision 22 consciously to have extra SROs on watch during the. initial 23 startup and test program.

24 MR. BIRD: Actually, we could have manned a six-shift 25 rotation by using some of the SRO licenses as Ros, but it

o 21 1 seemed to me to make more sense to go to a four-shift rotation.

2 Then I'll have extra operators assigned as assistants

,_ 3 to the watch engineer assistant to the supervisor and will have 4 in the senior most knowledgeable position will actually have 5 double coverage duririg the power ascension test program. We 6 thought it was a good investment.

7 CHAIRMAN ZECH: You eventually plan to go to five 8 shifts, you say?

9 MR. BIRD: We'll go to six.

10 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Eventually six.

11 MR. BIRD: We expect that to be fairly soon after we 12 complete the power ascension test program.

13 COMMISSIONER CARR: But you still have only the eight 14 unrestricted ROs and you're waiting for the hot ops for the 15 rest of them?

16 MR. BIRD: Correct.

17 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Do you have a technical advisor, a 18 shift technical advisor on each shift too?

19 MR. BIRD: Yes, sir.

20 CHAIRMAN ZECH: All right. Thank you.

21 MR. HIGHFIELD: I was about to address the quality 22 improvements that we've made.

23 (Slide.)

24 Despite the fact that we have on three occasions 25 lowered the threshold for issuing radiological occurrence

. 22 1 reports, the method by which we document and effect corrective 2 actions for minor radiological problems, the number of those

,. 3 events has dropped and so has the severity of the RORs.

4 (Slide.]

5 In addition, we have eliminated our backlog and we 6 deal with such events in a timely manner -- usually under one 7 week. This has driven the a tive file to single digits. QA 8 non-conformance reports are also being kept to single digits 9 and only two are presently outstanding on plant installed 10 equipment. These should be cleared this month.

11 Additionally, we have had only one overdue quality 12 assurance deficiency report in the past three and a half 13 months, and that was cleared up in four days.

14 We are also aggressively addressing quality assurance 15 16 (The prepared statement of recommendations with timeliness and 17 thoroughness of response being the keynotes.

18 (Slide.)

19 Our recent self assessment clearly identifies the 20 issues remaining before restart. The major one in my judgment, 21 is the need to upgrade our work control process. That effort 22 is now underway.

23 In summary, quality, timeliness, ownership and pride 24 are evident in the way we're doing business. I'm proud to be 25 part of the Pilgrim Station team and so are my people. With

. 23 1 our present team and the recent track record, I'm confident 2 that we will be ready for restart when we next address the r

- 3 Commission.

4 Roy Anderson, the Plant Manager, will now discuss our 5 efforts to upgrade various aspects of the organization and to 6 improve the material condition and work control processes.

7 Thank you.

8 COMMISSIONER CARR: Before we go on, b)w about 9 running over that quality assurance recommendation for me 10 again. I don't understand what those are.

11 MR. HIGHFIELD: Our Quality Assurance Department, 12 besides issuing NCRs or Non-Conformance Reports and efficiency 13 reports, when they do an audit and they do them frequently in a 14 variety of areas, they will make recommendations for upgrades.

15 Albeit the thing that they observed was not a deficient 16 condition.

17 We have a very highly trained QA department. They're 18 all engineers. We get recommendations from them for 19 improvements and as you can see from the graph, there was a 20 considerable backlog of those. We are addressing those in much 21 more timely manner now. We are required to respond to them as

~

22 to whether or not we will institute the recommendation and if 23 so, when and what will be the institution of it.

24 If we say we will not institute it, then we need a 25 very good reason.

9

. 24 1 COMMISSIONER CARR: Now, are those 17 approved for 2 implementation or are they under review or how many of those -- l

,_ 3 4 MR. HIGHFIELD: Those are all under review. Those 5 are 5 from 1987 audits and 12 from 1988 audits that have'not 4 6 been answered.

7 MR. CARR: That means you haven't decided yet whether 8 to implement them or not?

I 9 MR. HIGHFIELD: Correct, sir. I believe that as we i 10 sit here today, the 5 from '87, in fact, have been done -- I 11 mean, have been addressed. I'm not quite sure that they were 12 supposed to be addressed this last week. We would have now, 13 about 12 of these outstanding.

14 COMMISSIONER CARR: I'm trying to get some feel for 15 what kind of man hours we're talking about if you decide to do 16 those kinds of things. Are they major jobs, or relocate the 17 gauge glass or what? I want a feel for that kind of thing.

18 MR. HIGHFIELD: All right, sir, they can have a whole 19 broad spectrum. They may be something such as the program that 20 you have for well, maintenance of say, one of your maintenance 21 instructions may be difficult to understand and you need to 22 modify the instruction, on the other hand, they may be some 23 very small kind of a thing. They are generally programmatic in 24 nature, as opposed to physical in nature.

25 COMMISSIONER CARR: All right, thank you.

• 25 1 MR. ANDERSON: I'm Roy Anderson. I came to Pilgrim 2 in May of last year as a Vice President of Quadrex Energy

,_ 3 Services Corporation, joining Edison as the planning and outage 4 manager in December of 1987, to complete the major outage 5 projects.

6 When the major outage projects were completed in 7 early 1988, I became the Plant Manager. I have a Bachelor of 8 Science Degree in Marine Nuclear Engineering, as well as a 9 Masters of Business Adminstration Degree. I have over 17 years 10 of nuclear experience in power plant operations, including 11 plant startup, upgrade programs and reactor site overhauls and 12 construction projects.

13 I am qualified to operate three different reactors 14 and have done two tours as plant manager for the General 15 Electric Company.

16 CHAIRMAN ZECH: You came to the Pilgrim, when?

17 MR. ANDERSON: I came to Pilgrim as a consultant in 18 May of last year and joined Boston Edison Company in December 19 of 1987.

20 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you.

21 MR. ANDERSON: As Ralph Bird described earlier in the 22 presentation, a key component of successful management is a 23 system for measuring progress. We have decided to track 24 certain key indicators which are important because one, the 25 indicators contribute to safe and reliable operation of the

O

.o 26 1 power plant; two, the indicators are good overall guides to 2 operation and; three, in some cases, they have been areas of g_ 3 concern for Pilgrim in past years.

4 I will discuss four of those areas which are 5 important'in achieving safe, reliable continued operations --

6 maintenance, the plant decontamination, radiation exposure 7 control and operations preparedness.

8 (Slide.]

9 MR. ANDERSON: We have worked off a mountain of 10 maintenance requests. We intend to stay ahead of the workload.

11 Today, we prioritize maintenance requests of plan and control 12 work more effectively. Using INPO guidelines we focused on 13 power block MR's. When we met the INPO goal of 500, which is 14 the industry average, we raised our sights and toughened our 15 Pilgrim goal. As you can see, we are hovering near our new 16 goal of 400. Despite many recent improvements in maintenance 17 practices, our self-assessment disclosed that our work control 18 process is a hindrance to continuing our plant material 19 condition improvement.

20 We have resolved to correct that prior to requesting 21 the NRC inspection. That effort is well underway. When this 22 outage began, only about 45 percent of the spaces in the 23, process bull' dings were accessible without protective clothing.

24 The entrance to some areas required self-contained breathing 25 apparatus. We made a commitment that before restart, 90

' 27 1 percent of virtually accessible' areas would be decontaminated.

2 We are there, 90 percent clean, and we intend to keep

- 3 it that way. We think-that a cleaner plant promotes safety and 4 quality. Inspections are more frequent and more thorough when 5 operators do not have to dress out in protective clothing to 6 enter the area. Beyond these benefits however, we are always 7 vitally interested in reducing total worker exposure.

8 (Slide.)"

9 ALARA is our policy. As low as reasonably 10 achievable. We are pursuing it aggressively. We are -

11 communicating its importance through training and making sure 12 that every employee knows that individual exposure is an 13 individual responsibility. We originally set our exposure 14 budget for the INPO guideline and as the graph shows, we have 15 been living well within our budget. The industry average has 16 decreased, but we are, in fact, in well below that mark.

17 We are in the process of establishing a new and much 18 tougher goal based on our performance thus far in 1988. ,

19 Finally I would like to discuss the readiness of our Operations 20 Department for restart.

21 Since last summer, two successive classes of reactors 22 operators and senior reactor operators have taken their NRC

23 exams with a 100 percent pass rate. The new licenses are 24 currently limited but once we have power, they will be able to 25 meet those conditions and then we'll be able to take staff a

. 28 1 six-shift rotation to permit scheduling for future operator 2 classes that will ensure we will always have enough operators

- 3 in training to compensate for attrition. During restart, we 4 have planned for a four-shift rotation. This permits an extra 5 senior reactor operator to be assigned to each shift and allows 6 the most efficient use of experienced operators.

7 The operators look better. They are now in uniform 8 and certainly sound better. Training in formal communications 9 has been effective and is showing clearly beneficial results in 10 improved control and a higher level of professionalism. All 11 four crews have completed training on the revised emergency 12 operating procedures. Our operators have been observed as part 13 of our self-assessment, by INPO and by the NRC's EOP 14 inspection. Every assessing team has concluded that they are 15 well-trained and prepared to operate the plant safely and 16 reliably.

17 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Do you have a college degree program?

18 MR. BIRD: We have a limited college degree program 19 which is in place for one group of people, and we are in tha 20 process of expanding that for operators. We think we can have 21 it in place sometime before the middle of 1989. We have made 22 the contact with the university and have arranged credit for 23 various on-the-job performance.

24 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Good. I know you've got -- it's a 25 very busy period for you now but I appreciate the fact that you

. 29 1 have intentions of putting a program like that in place.

2 MR. BIRD: I think it's a very good program. It's

- 3 the right thing tc do.

4 CHAIRMAN ZECH: I agree, and I encourage you to 5 continue that initiative.

6 MR. BIRD: Thank you.

7 CHAIRMAN ZECH: All right. Thank you.

8 MR. ANDERSON: To continue, last December, the NRC 9 evaluated an exercise of the onsite emergency plan and issued a 10 finding of "adequate to protect the public health and safety,"

11 but some public attention has been focused on the offsite 12 emergency plans which are the responsibility of the 13 Commonwealth of Massachusetts. ,

14 Federal standards for offsite radiological response 15 plans do place a financial burden on the surrounding 16 communities. We have therefore made a major commitment to 17 assist and support the Commonwealth and the towns in upgrading 18 their plans. The new draft plans are now clearly better than 19 the offsite plans have ever been.

20 I'd like to now ask Ron Varley to discuss briefly the 21 offsite emergency plan.

~

22 MR. VARLEY: Good morning.

23 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Good morning.

24 MR. VARLEY: I came to Pilgrim Station from Toledo 25 Edison in June of 1987 with 17 years combined Navy nuclear i

30 1 experien'ce and industry experience, ten of them in emergency 2 preparedness. My priority since arriving at Pilgrim has been

- 3 the development of improved relationships with the authorities 4 that are responsible fcr offsite planning and to work with them 5 to provide them with the necessary types of support to assist 6 them in their efforts to upgrade their programs.

7 As Ralph stated, we recognize that the effort 8 required to maintain an emergency preparedness program for 9 Pilgrim Station requires greater resources than the local 10 communities could muster. Accordingly, we've made commitments 11 to provide the necessary resources to the five towns within our 12 emergency planning zone and the two reception center 13 communities that support the EPZ.

14 [ Slide.)

15 We currently have signed letters of agreement with 16 all of the involved communities accepting our support. These 17 resources include a large staff of professional planners trat 18 work on a daily basis with Commonwealth and the communities to 19 ensure that the upgraded offsite emergency preparedness program 20 will meet or exceed all applicable regulatory requirements and 21 address the legitimate issues of local concern.

~

22 We are also providing funding for a full-time civil 23 defense staff position in each of the communities for the 24 operating life of the plant. We're providing funding to 25 upgrade emergency operation centers in each of the seven i

31 1 communities, including renovation of their existing buildings 2' and supplying them with all the necessary emergency response

,_ 3 equipment.

4 Finally, we're providing compensation to all of the 5 offsite emergency workers for the time that they spend in 6 emergency response training. My staff continues to work 7 closely with the offsite officials and those agencies who have 8 a responsibility for emergency preparedness so that we can 9 continue to build on substantial progress that we've made to 10 date.

11 MR. BIRD: Thank you, Ron. Based on our completed 12 self-assessment of readiness for restart, which includes 13 independent reviews that have been performed, we have concluded 14 that upon completion of the actions identified in the self-15 assessment report and in the restart plan, that Pilgrim will be 16 ready for safe and reliable restart and continued operation.

17 This conclusion is the result of a rigorous process 18 which was supervised by a management oversight and assessment 19 team which I chaired. Also on the team are the vice president 20 of nuclear engineering,.the station director, the special 21 projects director, the managers of the nuclear engineering and

~

22 quality assurance departments and my two very experienced staff 23 assistants.

24 The te- used many sources of information to conduct 25 the reviews. We personally spent many hours in plant and

32 1 system walkdowns. We interviewed extensively the line managers 2 who have the direct responsibility for performing work. We

,, 3 evaluated reports and documentation. We observed operators on I

4 the simulator and we reviewed independent performance 5 evaluations to reach our conclusions.

6 Our conclusions included the following. The self-7 accessment confirmed the validity of the restart plan which we 8 submitted last July. We identified some limited areas which do 9 show significant improvement, but which require completion of 10 specific well-defined actions for restart. Thero is improved l

11 performance in all areas that were rated as category three in 12 the early 1987 SALP. The peet evaluation proceus which we put 13 ' ni place and the quality assurance surveillance monitoring 14 program are valuable tools in improving our performance.

15 The essential elements of the long-term organization 16 have been implemented. Substantial nuclear management 17 experience and expertise have been added to the organization in 18 key positions and the bases for self-assessment which we 19 described in our restart plan last July have been substantially 20 met.

21 To summarize, we have come a long way. We have an

~

22 effective management team with talent and experience, that can 23 match any in the industry. We have done a thorough review. We 94 have identified a few things left to do this summer. We will i

2B be back when they are done and when Steve Sweeney and the

33 1 Boston Edison Board of Directors have authorized me to seek 2 your approval to restart the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.

,_ 3 Thank you.

4 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you very much. Does that 5 conclude, Mr. Sweeney, your presentation?

6 MR. SWEENEY: Yes it does, sir.

7 CHAIRMAN ZECH: All right. Thank you very much.

8 Questions my fellow commissioners? Mr. Roberts?

9 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS: No.

10 COMMISSIONER CARR: I've got one comment that I was -

11 -I last visited up there I was a little concerned by your test 12 program for restart. Could you expand on that a little bit on 13 what you're going to do to test and make sure all of those 14 systems, the one's both you've worked and the ones you haven't 15 worked are in place?

16 MR. BIRD: Testing was done for the repairs. We are 17 going back through the nuclear engineering department and 18 reviewing all of the maintenance, all of the modifications that 19 were done, looking at the specific tests that were done to see 20 if there is anything else that should be done.

21 More importantly in the power ascension and test

~

22 program, we have tests that are designed to check the hardware 23 problems that originally caused the shutdown to be sure that 24 the repairs were effective as well as to check out dynamically 25 all of the systems and especially those that were modified or

. 34 1 repaired.

2 We -- to summarize, we did have a test program, we're

,- 3 going back and reviewing it one more time to see if there's 4 anything additional that we should do and we have a dynamic 5 test program during the power ascension phase.

6 COMMISSIONER CARR: But it is a systems test program?

7 You will test systems that were worked as well as ones that 8 weren't worked?

9 MR. BIRD: Yes. Of course, we're redoing a lot of 10 surveillance tests too to reset the clock on those. So between 11 the surveillance tests, the logic system function tests, the 12 individual equipment tests and then -- of course many of the 13 systems have already been run. Anything that we can run we 14 have run. For example, we brought in -- we rented a temporary 15 boiler similar to the shore steam that the Navy uses in 16 shipyards and we checked out the major steam-driven pumps a l

17 long time ago and we did find some minor repairs and we saved 18 some time in the critical path during the restart and power 19 ascension process by doing this.

20 But we've run condensate, RHR, HPCI, RCIC, everything 21 that can possibly be run has been and is continuing to be run.

22 Anything that can be in an operational mode is operating.

23 COMMISSIONER CARR: I understand.

24 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you. Commissioner Rogers?

25 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Yes. What's is the status of

35 1 your own study, ESF actuation status?

2 MR. BIRD: We have done a thorough review and we're -

r r 3 - because we identified that we had more of those than we would 4 like. Roy. would you tell us where we stand on th corrective 5 actions as a result of that review?

6 MR. ANDERSON: Well, the preliminary review has been 7 completed and its on my desk to review right now. What I'm 8 looking for are those things that I can positively do 9 different. Not counseling or instruction, but why. What made 10 it difficult for the maintenance operator to do his job. Why 11 was his procedure not easy to use. We are doing that right 12 now. Part of that is also rewriting our maintenance request 13 processes. Many of these things came in as a result of 14 maintenance, either how it was planned, how it was reviewed or 15 how it was performed and so I believe that --

16 MR. BIRD: This was really one of the elements in our 17 self-assessment that caused us to decide to accelerate the 18 correction or the improvement I should say of the work control 19 process. We had evaluated some time ago that that's something 20 that should be improved and we had originally thought we would 21 do it after restart, after looking at the ESP actuations and 22 some other indicators, we decided that the time is now.

23 And that's what we're doing. Work control process 24 will help and of course, if you go back and reanalyze each 25 particular case of ESP actuations, we will find ways to modify

. 36 1 the procedure, to modify the way the operators goes about 2 taking the readings to reduce the probacility of a mistake.

gm 3 It really is -- has to be a detailed case-by-case 4 evaluation as well as looking for the broader work control 5 processes. We're doing both.

l 6 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Thank you. Could you just l 7 clarify a little bit more on what the delay is on this direct 8 torus venting decision? I'm not quite clear on where the hold 9 point is on that. I see that you've cited that the NRC has 10 approved the -- I think that's what you said -- the revision 11 four of the BWR owner's guidelines. I thought that was 12 possibly a delay but where is the hold-up and --

13 ,

MR, BIRD: I'd like to ask Ed Howard who is our vice 14 president of engineering to respond.

15 COMMISSIONER ROGERS I realize it's not a condition l

l 16 for restart but it is an issue thas t out there of considerable l

17 public interest.

18 MR. BIRD: It's also a question that the NRC staff is 19 reviewing according to our understanding, but Ed can you 20 elaborate?

21 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Would you come to the 22 microphone over here at tae podium and identify yourself to the 23 reporter?

24 MR. HOWARD: Good morning. I'm Edward Howard, vice 35 president of nuclear engineering. The emergency operating

4

• 37 1 procedures have been implemented to the revision for emergency 2 procedure guidelines. Those guidelines have been approved

,. 3 through the owner's group activities and independently reviewed 4 by General Electric and approved by them.

5 They are currently -- the guidelines themselves are 6 currently under review by the staff. It's my understanding 7 that's -- the safety evaluation on that is well along. I'm 8 sure the staff could --

9 COMMISSIONER CARR: We will ask the staff to comment 10 when they come up too but, thank you.

11 MR. HOWARD: The staff has reviewed our EOP 12 implementation but has conditioned that on the -- in the event 13 -- they're reviewing -- the generic review of the guidelines 14 identified some change in the guidelines then we would have to 15 go back and update our emergency operating procedures to 16 reflect those.

17 COMMISSIONER CARR: That is the -- that's the reason 18 you're holding on this now? Is that it?

19 MR. HOWARD: Yes. We are taking a very conservative 20 approach towards that item and are planning on implementing 21 direct torus vent system after the staff has completed that 22 generic review and we can see their -- results of their safety 23 evaluation.

24 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Just one further question. Are 25 there any further developments on the state of the Commonwealth

w.

5

. 38 1 of Massachusetts' position with respect to acceptance of 2 emergency plans? Any further changes in that since I visited

,_ 3 the plant a month and a half ago, whatever it was?

4 MR. BIRD: We see progress being made. Would you l 5 like to comment on that Ralph?

6 MR. VARLEY: Well, the state's position is that their 7 working.with us to develop the best possible emergency plan and 8 we're continuing to support the Commonwealth and the towns in 9 that effort. Progress continues to be made in the development 10 of very detailed ir.plementing procedures that removes a lot of 11 the reliance on ad hoc capabilities that existed in the past.

12 Defining more specifically the resources such as where 13 transportation providers are going to provide transportation 14 and things like that. The process is moving alone. We've 15 started training some of the emergency workers. Draft town 16 plans have been forwarded on to FEMA for their review and 17 comment and their comments are being incorporated into the 18 community's plans so the process is moving along fairly well.

19 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Thank you.

l 20 CHAIRMAN ZECH: When I visited the plant about a year l

21 ago now I believe, I know one thing we discussed was management 22 involvement and I have now modified that term -- call it 23 leadership involvement because I think it has more a 24 connotation of people rather than just resources.

25 I think we talked about discipline and attention to

. 39 1 detail and formality and the things that looked like should be 2 emphasized at the Pilgrim Plant. Follow-up procedures. I'll g_ 3 say Mr. Sweeney, it's obvious that you brought in a number of 4 new senior managers. I know Mr. Bird was there when I visited 5 your plant. He had just'been there a short time. You brought 6 in others since then.

7 I think that the initiatives in that regard have been 8 certainly proper ones but I do think it's important that an 9 effort continue as regards involvement of leadership in order 10 to permeate down through your whole organization that cultural 11 commitment if you will to excellence, reliability and to 12 competent performance across the board. That's the leadership 13 challenge to get that through your organization. You've told 14 us some things this morning that you've done specifically that 15 certainly would appear to be commendable and in the right 16 direction. But the challenge is a leadership challenge and 17 it's yours, Mr. Sweeney and the rest of your team here to make 18 sure that those changes that you want to put in that you're 19 telling us about, actually get executed.

20 of course, the proof is in the results of how things 21 go, and so we'll be watching that very closely, but I just 22 emphasize the importance of attention to detail, formality, 23 following the procedures and a commitment to a very serious 24 attitude towards safety and toward following the technical 25 specifications, teamwork, and a strong commitment to training.

. 40 1 Many of the things you told us would lead us to believe that 2 your training program is a good one.

,_ 3 On the other hand, training is extremely important.

4 It's a leadership challenge there to continue that. So I think 5 that's important that leadership remain involved, and you 6 accept the challenge to get those policies permeated through 7 the whole organization.

8 The plant's been shutdown for over two years, and as 9 I mentioned earlier, as you approach now moving into the more 10 operational stage, I think it's awfully important to recognize 11 that in many ways, it's kind of like a new construction plant.

12 You're shifting from construction or repairs in your case, 13 significant modifications, significant work, but you're 14 shifting towards an operational phase that is very different 15 from the -- than the shutdown phase.

16 You do have experienced people, obviously, in the 17 senior management positions, and I would challenge them to call 18 on their experience to make sure that the supervisors as well 19 as the reactor operators, the maintenance people, the testing 20 people, the surveillance people and all really do shift to the 21 operational mode and recognize that as they accept the systems

/~ 22 for their responsibility that they will be thinking operational 23 rather than thinking in a shutdown condition. ,

24 It's a very important mentality to get into, and my 25 experience has been that it doesn't come necessarily naturally.

• 41 1 You don't just turn a switch and go from shutdown to 2 operational phase. It's a -- it's an attitude, it's a .

- 3 mentality shift that you've got to believe that that plant is 4 about to come alive. It becomes something that is living, and 5 you just can't walk away from it, and so all of your people 6 should, I would hope,.be thinking about the -- that shift from 7 a shutdown phase to an operational phase, and it's something 8 that challenges leadership. I hope you'll be mindful of that.

9 I guess the only thing that I would like to say finally before ,

10 we call the Staff up is that you still have a ways to go, as 11 you well know.

12 It's going to take our staff time to review your --

13 the work that you've done and to assess and evaluate the 14 progress that's been made, and so I want -- and I'm going to 15 tell the staff when they get here, but what I want to tell you 16 while you're still here is that my charge to them is going to 17 be to take the time they need to make sure it's done right, 18 just like you're doing.

19 So we need time, too. Our people need time, and so I 20 hope that you will be reasonable in your expectations. We're 21 not going to authorize you to start up -- if we authorize you

' I 22 to start up -- without being confident that the staff has had l

23 the time they need to -- the regional people, the headquarters l 24 people, whoever on the staff who is particularly responsible I 25 for that and especially the regional administrator, Mr. Bill l

• 42 1 Russell -- we want to,make sure that they have the time they 2 need to do the job that has to be done.

f. 3 So I just want to emphasize that to you. That's 4 going to be our role. When you're done, that doesn't 5 necessarily mean that we're done. We need the time to 6 properly, fully, thoroughly, carefully, and with confidence 7 evaluate and assess the work that's been done.

8 Are there any other comments before we close?

l 9 COMMISSIONER CARR: I need to make one.

10 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Commissioner Carr.

l 11 COMMISSIONER CARR: When I was up there, I mentioned 12 to you that you had a bunch of all-stars gathered together, and

, 13 the challenge was to make them into a team. It looks like l

14 you're working in that direction. Now my concern has shifted 15 to: are you just going for the big game or are you going to be 16 there for the next season?

17 Are you going to be able to hold those people and 18 keep them around awhile? And you're going to have a challenge 19 there, Mr. Sweeney.

20 MR. SWEEMEY: That was a concern of mine and the 21 Board; however, we have -- at the last Board meeting and at the

~

22 upcoming Board meeting -- we are setting in place a program 23 that will cause us to be comforted by the retention of the team 24 that is there. That's all I can say at this point, but that is 25 something that we do recognize and that we will take care of.

o 43 1 With regard to your last comment, as we have quite 2 appropriately taken our ',ime then to do what we have done,and

,. 3 do it right, we would expect no less from you, because I do 4 believe that my interest and your interest are the same.

5 We want a safe and reliable power plant, and when 6 we're ready, we will feel that -- and then, of cource, you must 7 do yours, and we would expect no less fron you than we've done 8 ourselves.

9 CHAIRMAN ZECH: That's exactly right, and I 10 appreciate that. I appreciate your -- I appreciate that 11 comment because that's exactly what we intend to do.

12 Anything else before we call the staff up?

13 (No response.)

14 Thank you very much. We appreciate it.

15 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Mr. Taylor, you may procend.

16 MR. TAY LOR: Good morning, sir. The staff 17 presentation today will be given by Tom Murley and Bill Russelt 18 in two parts, and at the close I would like to add a few words 19 to the staff's presentation.

20 Tom, I'll turn to you first.

21 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Fine. Yov may begin. Thank you.

22 MR. MURLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have 23 discussed Pilgrim with the Commission on several occacions over 24 the past few years.

25 Today is, as you mentioned, a status briefing only.

~

i

> z d '

's# ( ;' I

. A -

ii 44 i

1 We have a lot of work aheadiof ,,

us this summer before we're i 2 ready to conclude that the plant and the plan staff are ready g_ 3 to resume operations.

4 .

The plant was shut down 26 months ago. The immediate 5 reasSn for the shut-down was equipiaent failures, but there was i

6 a b ,c67round of more widenpread problems that were long 7 standing and they ran deep la the organization.

8 It took'about a year after the shut-do,wn for Boston 9 Edison to analyze'their situation and take posicive steps to 10 begin turning things around.

11 '

We buileve that Ralph Bird ha made some major 12 improvements. You've heard some of those today. Brought in a 13 lot of new staff, fresh ideas. 3 14 In addition, which is particularly impressive, is the 15 physical improvements to the plant. There were times, I think 16 it's been only within the last year or so, that we've been able i

17 to go down into some of the corner rooms without getting any 18 apecial-dressed equipment and so forth.

19 -'

They're continuing on that guideline and that can-

. UO. 'on1himproveoperationsandmanatement. Those people can walk 21 around in their street clothes and look at various parts of the i

'~

22 plant. >

23 ,

They have a solid management organization in place 24 and a comprehensive restart plan. I think what deserves.

25 particular mention is the safety enhancement program that m

i , ,

, iI 45

/' v 1 J PostonEdisonha/voluntarilyundertook. l a,' \' .\

/

• l } n 2 It, - not required foil restart, but nonetheless, they

,s 3 havd implemo.ced a number of safety improvements and I think in many regards diey dre industry leaders. I For example, they have noved ahead with luprcved emergency operating procedured. We are close to approving, if

<7 .

we haven't( already, the provision four, and we're doing generic 8 reviews which I u.ederstand should be done in perhaps a month or l fi,e ,

9 s two. l, yf 'I LO V ) They've added a third diesel generator in the plant.

/) ,

11 They've added fire wad r Nrosst.ie to the RHR system so that, in o y 12 fact, ole can use city V .e'r ith some slight modifications, N

) ' /

13 ,and [th well documentenfprocedures,and training, they can use 14 t?.$e fire water system for --

/

L I' 15 CHAIRMAN ZEcij: Was the diesel nngine completely 16 93 r r, additional to what may be ro,c,<uired?

17 MR. fiURLEY: Yps. They saw the station blackout to 18 rule coming and they also' knew there were other good sensible 19 reasons for doing it.

20 , , They could operate the plant with two. But they've i /

21 decided to add three and --

l' 22 ' CHAIRMAN ZECH: Ifi.it safety -- is it safety --

o / c 23 conditioned foi cafevy?' /

24 MR. MURLEY: It'snotjcompletelysafetygrade, but it 25 can'ye used in an emergency and they've got procedures for it.

.' = /

1p.

L

!.V a?

o 46 1 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Well, I certainly think that's a 2 com:aendable initiative.

, 3 MR. MURLEY: Yes.

I 4 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Extra power is something that I think

)'

5' we all think about, ever have any kind of a serious incident.

4 6 That's one of the things I think about first and I think that's 7 a very commendable initiative to take. Certainly if I were a 8 utility executive, I'd feel more comfortable doing it and I'm

]

9 sure that uti Lity feels the same way, j 10 MR. MURLEY: Yes. Another initiative in this safety I'[ 11 enhancement program that commissioner Rogers asked about,. was a

, 12 direct torus vent.

13 They, on their own initiative last summer, made some 14 design modifications. We, at the time, asked them a number of 15 questions about how the vent would be designed, how it would be 16 used, and it also got caught up in the generic review that 17 we're doing of venting in general for Mark I's, but also just 18 the general topic of venting.

, 19 So we have asked Boston Edison and the BWR owners

'20 group a number of questions that pertain to the downside of 21 venting as well as the benefits.

22 These questions are not easy to answer. We're now 23 getting answers to them from the owners group and from Boston 24 Edison.

25 The direct torus vent is not required for restart, s

• 47 1 but I believe that they, if I understood their answer to your 2 question, they were waiting to see how we come down in our

_ 3 generic requirements which are scheduled to cor,e to you this 4 fall.

5 We'll give you a status briefing on the Mark I's 6 probably in a month or two. But if that's the case, then we'll 7 review them when they come in for our approval.

8 If they were to ask now for our approval, we would 9 review them now. But I understand why they might want to wait 10 to see how we come down in generic recommendations.

11 Last year, I switch now to emergency preparedness, 12 last year, FEMA conducted a review of the off-site emergency 13 preparedness plans of Pilgrim and they notified us of a number 14 of significant deficiencies in those plans.

15 And even before that, even before the FEMA report, 16 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts itself had written to NRC 17 expressing concerns about deficiencies in the state planJ.

18 We have told Boston Edison that thest deficiencies 19 must be addressed. We will give particular attention to 20 improvements in the plans for schools and day care centers for 21 transportation dependent populations, and tnc plans for special 22 needs population.

23 Boston Edison is working with the state and local 24 authorities to upgrade these plans. We are following their 25 progress.

48 1 They seem to be making steady progress along these 2 lines and we will work with FEMA to evaluate the plans. As you f_

3 know, public interest is very high in the communities around 4 the Pilgrim plant.

5 The NRC staff has held many public meetings in the 6 Plymouth area. Probably more than any other plant, at least in 7 the last few years, that I'm aware of.

8 We do have a number of 2206 petitions which are still 9 under review by the staff. Moving to our restart criteria, we 10 have discussed with the company that there are three major 11 categories where we expect improvements to be made.

12 You've heard discussions of each of those today. The 13 organization and management. We expect there are stable and 14 effective management and staff at Pilgrim.

15 And I think, Commissioner Carr, we would echo your 16 concern about the stability that this team, which is good, 17 appears to be there and it appears to -- we want to make sure, 18 satisfy ourselves, that they're going to make lasting changes 19 at the site.

20 The condition of the plant is the second major area 21 and here we have a number of technical issues in the plant 22 design that we have to review.

23 We want to see demonstrated improvement in the SALP 24 areas, fire protection, radiological controls, security, 25 surveillance, and we also want to see improvements in the

e 49 1 maintenance program.

2 I think Bill Russell will talk a little bit'more

_ 3 about that. Finally, we want to satisfy ourselves that 4 improvements have been made in the emergency preparedness area.

5 With that, I'll turn to Bill Ru sell and he'll 6 continue.

7 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you. You may.preceed.

8 MR. RUSSELL: I'd like to start by first identifying 9 a part of the process that the staff is using for the review of 10 Pilgrim which is unique.

11 We have formed a restart assessment panel which is a 12 joint panel made up of senior members from both the region and 13 NRR.

14 Sam Collins le the Deputy Director for projects in 15 Region 1. He is the panel Chairman and he is with me today.

16 In addition, Bruce Boger from NRR is the Assistant Director for 17 Region 1 projects and he is the panel Vice-Chairman.

18 We have a number of other staff members in specialty 19 areas that participate on this panel, the purpose of which is 20 to effectively integrate both the inspection and licensing 21 activities and to make sure that issues are identified early 22 and brought to senior management's attention.

23 The panel frequently briefs me and Tom Murley and 24 there are occasions when senior managers get together anu 1

l 25 review the status of the plant.

l _ _ _ _ - _ _ , _ _ _ __ .- - -

50 1 This has occurred four times. In the senior 2 management meetings, which are headed by Mr. Stello, the

- 3 Executive Director, where we meet with all the regional 4 administrators and office directors and discuss the status of 5 plants, principally for the purpose of making a determination 6 as to whether a particular plant deserves agency-wide attention 7 or region-based attention.

8 In each case, the conclusion has been that Pilgrim 9 deserves agency-wide attention and, of course, Commission 10 attention.

11 We have on-site senior management meetings with 12 myself, Dr. Murley, and also Mr. Taylor and the Deputy 13 Executive Director, to review the status and ensure that the 14 activities are managed effectively and that issues that are 15 important are being brought forward.

16 There is a second aspect of the review process for 17 Pilgrim which I think is somewhat unique. And that is that we 18 have made efforts to open the staff review process while the l 19 process is going on.

20 We have solicited comments from the state, local 21 officials, and the public regarding the restart plans l

22 themselves.

l~

23 Once we received those comments, we went back and 24 held meetings and addressed the comments both orally and in 25 writing such that we could, in fact, open that process up.

e 51 1 That dialogue is continuing and I will identify some 2 of those major steps as they relate to the technical and

,_ 3 management issues that we will be addressing.

4 As far as future staff activities, I'd like to start 5 first and follow-up on the comments on the maintenance 6 inspection that we conducted at the site.

7 This was an approach where we looked at how 8 maintenance was being performed on selected systems. We took 9 an in-depth vertical cut through on two systems, and while 10 there were a number of areas that were quite positive, there 11 were some areas that gave us concern.

12 The area of control of work and control of testing 13 following maintenance work and a number of issues which relate 14 the ability of first line superv ! sors to ef fectively implement 15 the programs.

16 These issues are now being addressed by the company.

17 In fact, they were not yet complete with their own self-18 assessment and the findings weren't consistent with some of 19 their own findings.

20 We believe that those issues associated with control 21 of work must be addressed effectively prior to restart. The 22 ESF actuations that were questioned by Mr. Rogers, we believe 23 are in part due to work control issues and really understandlag 24 what is to be done prior to starting it.

25 Those issues clearly need to be addressed prior to

. 52 1 operation. We currently have in hand.and under review with the 2 staff the submittal of the Boston Edison Company self-

- 3 assessment report, and we are also reviewing their power 4 ascension program.

5 We believe that the self-assessment, when it is 6 complete and the supplemental information is presented to the 7 staff, that that review should be able to be completed within 8 about two to three weeks of having all of the information in 9 hand.

10 Once we have completed that and the company has 11 indicated that they are -- our review, and the company has 12 indicated that they are ready to restart, we will commence an 13 in-depth integrated assessment team inspection.

14 This will involve approximately one week of 15 preparations on-site, including interaction between staff 16 members and the company on the details of the self-assessment.

17 Followed by two weeks of inspection that will run 18 continuous, the first several days of which will be around the 19 clock inspection.

20 And we will maintain that team together until we have 21 completed a draft integrated assessment team inspection report.

22 The planning for that inspection has been completed.

23 We've identified the areas to be inspected and we 24 feel it's quite a good plan. We intend to take the results of 25 that inspection and compare those results to the company's

53 1 self-assessmant to use that as a basis for. judging the 2 effectiveness of the management team in determining what needs

- 3 to be done at the facility.

4 We are also in the process of developing a self-5 report. The period closed for this evaluation on the 15th of 6 May and we expect to complete that report in July, and we'll 7 issue that report, such that we will be able to use the SALP 8 report which will characterize the performance over the last 15 9 months, plus the team inspection report, the review of the 10 self-assessment and the power ascension program, as well as the 11 other inspections that have been conducted over the last 15 12 months, to develop a report from me to NRR which indicates the 13 readiness of management and hardware at the facility or which 14 indicates potentially those areas which may not be ready and 15 which require further work.

16 To date, we have, and during this self-assessment 17 period, expended over 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of direct inspection effort 18 at the plant.

19 We have a substantial additional effort that's 20 planned. In addition, we are expecting the ACRS Subcommittee i 21 to hold a meeting on-site to review the status to the plant, 22 along with a Full ACRS Committee meeting and the discussions 23 we've had with the staff of the ACRS are such that they expect 24 the ACRS review to be completed in time to provide their views 25 to the Conmission before a Commission decision.

54 1 We are developing plans for power ascension 2 monitoring should the approval be given to restart the

,_ 3 facility, which will necessarily include the monitoring at each 4 step through power escalation.

5 We have built in a number of hold points at which 6 time NRC approval would be required prior to going to the next 7 plateau.

8 And finally, we feel that it's appropriate to shorten 9 the period for the next SALP assessment following a startup 10 period.

11 We can't be as specific on what that schedule is 12 because it's going to be a function of how long it takes to get 13 to a. restart decision and then how long it takes to complete 14 power ascension.

15 But we do feel it's very important to assess early in 16 a formal way and an integrative manner, the quality cf 17 operations of the facility should a restart decision be made.

18 That concludes my comments on subsequent staf f 19 activities, with the exception, I want to assure you, Mr.

20 Chairman and commissioners, that before I make a recommendation 21 on this facility, I will satisfy myself and use the inputs from 22 the staff in the process I've just described to ensure that 23 this facility is indeed ready, from a management and a 24 technical standpoint, as far as hardware availability at the 25 plant.

+ 55 1 CHAIRMAN ZECH: All right. Thank you very much.

2 MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I was at the Pilgrim

,_ 3 station last week and did meet with the senior managers.

4 I would like to stress the emphasis I placed then 5 upon the improvements in maintenance control, because some of 6 what Comminsioner Rogers asked about is the epitome of these 7 lack of controls in some of the safety system actuation issues.

8 And before startup and rerunning that plant, I think 9 it's absolutely imperative that the company da what they'Ne 10 indicated they will do in that area, so they don't get the 11 challenges when they restart the plant.

12 I must say I saw a changed Pilgrim # rom what I've 13 seen a couple of years ago. It's an improved station. You've 14 heard many of the things today that they've done to improve it.

15 I saw the things that were outlined to you. I saw 16 professional conduct by the operators in both the simulator and 17 the control room.

18 I found that they had done a very extensive overhaul 19 in tests of some of the major safety systems and much to my 20 pleasure completed some long standing G.E. recommended 21 improvements in' the safety systems, some of them which go back

^

22 a number of years.

23 They did a good test by bringing in steam and running 24 some of the safety systems, and in addition to the hardware 25 improvements, I noted a marked differences in the housekeeping

. 56 1 and general state of the plant from what I had seen at Pilgrim 2 in the past years.

,_. 3 Although there's yet work to be done in areas such as 4 maintenance control and some other areas mentioned by the 5 staff, I do see an improved station.

6 That concludes the staff's presentation.

7 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Thank you very much. Questions?

8 Commissioner Roberts?

9 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS: Bill, did I understand you 10 said you've expended 7,000 man hours on the present SALP?

11 MR. RUSSELL: That's correct.

12 CO!IMISSIONER ROBERTS: What would an. average.SALP be 13 if there is any such thing?

14 MR. RUSSELL: About 2,300 for a 12-month period.

15 About 2,300 hours0.00347 days <br />0.0833 hours <br />4.960317e-4 weeks <br />1.1415e-4 months <br /> for a 12-month SALP.

16 MR. TAYLOR: That reflects the additional manpower.

17 MR. RUSSELL: We have staffed the Pilgrim station 18 k_th an additional residence, such that we have three residents 19 in a single unit site.

20 We have extensive support on inspections from NRR and 21 others in headquarters and we've used a number of team 22 inspections. It is a significant resource issue which is.one l 23 of the reasons why I have deferred starting the final team l 24 inspection until such time as the company says they're ready, i

l 25 I, just from a resource standpoint, can't afford to l

57 1 do that inspection twice.

2 MR. MURLEY: I'm sure the NRR resources are running f- 3 two to three to four times as high for this plant as average 4 too.

5 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Mr. Carr?

6 COMMISSIONER CARR: I only have one question for the 7 staff. In reading over the maintenance inspection, one thing 8 that caught my attention in there was the comment about 9 maintenance procedures being modified on the scene. I couldn't 10 figure out whether it was by the workers or by the system 11 engineer or who was there to say, yeah, that's an approved way 12 to do it, or was nobody there?

13 MR. RUSSELL: I think it's some of both. There were 14 examples. The one that immediately comes to mind is the 15 machining work that was done on the throttle valve poppets for 16 the HPCI turban, which appeared to be done in the shop without 17 prior review and approval.

18 But that is exactly one of the concerns that we have 19 that there were modifications being made. There was corrective 20 maintenance work that was being done and troubleshooting work 21 requests.

l le 22 So that the issue is not only what work is being l

23 done, but how well is it being controlled, and we believe that 1 24 some of the ESF actuations that occurred, occurred principally 1

25 as a result of not carefully reviewing what the consequence of l

58 1

1 the action was, what circuits would be de-energized, for 2 example, when pulling fuses.

r 3 But that is the principal issue associated with work 4 control that we have concerns about.

5 CHAIRMAN ZECH: When you come back next time I'd like 6 you to make a point of giving us your evaluation at that time 7 of this issue.

8 MR. RUSSELL: Yes, sir.

9 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Commissioner Rogers?

10 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: I have nothing to add.

11 CHAIRMAN ZECH: Well, let me just say you heard me 12 talk to the Pilgrim people about the time you need to do the 13 job right, and you've indicated that you have a schedule which 14 certainly sounds reasonable to me.

15 But I would just like to emphasize to you and to Tom 16 Murley, too, that the headquarters and the region people and 17 we, the Commission, certainly expect you to take the time you 18 need to review this plan carefully.

19 It's been down for more than two years, and there 20 were a number of concerns we had. We understand there's been 21 significant management changes. It's encouraging t'o hear about

~

22 some of the programs in place and some of the results that you 23 can see from what we've been told this morning.

24 But, still, I think it's important that you take the 25 time you need to assure yourself, and the Commission will want

-- 59 1 to be assured of your confidence, before we go ahead with any 2 restart decision, if we do. So, I think that's very important.

- 3 And, also, of course, we will want to hear from you 4 again before we authorize restart, at a meeting here before the 5 Commission. And we want the Pilgrim Boston-Edison people here, 6 too, before we would make that decision.

7 I think the briefing this morning has been very 8 valuable. There's obviously a ways to go. It's encouraging to 9 see that progress has been made.

10 But we expect the staff, the region, and the 11 headquarters people to continue monitoring the Pilgrim plant 12 and to bring to our attention, prior to the next meeting, if 13 you think it's necessary, any concerns that you think the 14 Commission should be aware of and involved in.

15 We just want to keep in close touch with the Pilgrim 16 plant as it moves ahead. So, we would ask you to do that as 17 you see fit as time goes on.

la Are there any other questions from my fellow 19 Commissioners? If not, thank you very much. We stand 20 adjourned.

21 (Whereupon, the briefing was concluded at 11:35 a.m.)

22 23 24 25

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIBER This is to certify that the attached events of a meeting of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission entitled:

TITLE OF MEETING-* PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION PLACE OF MEETING: Washington, D.C.

DATE OF MEETING: THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1988 were transcribed by me. I further certify that said transcription is accurate and complete, to the best of my ability, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing events, a

sw m.

Ann Riley & Associatos, Ltd.

O O

6/9/88 SCHEDULING NOTES TITLE: BRIEFING ON STATUS OF PILGRIM SCHEDULED: 10:00 A.M., THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1988 (OPEN)

DURATION: APPR0X l-1/2 HRS PARTICIPANTS: BOSTON EDISON COMPANY (LICENSEE)

- ST5 PHEN J. SWEENEY, .

5 MINS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

- RALPH G. BIRD, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT 20 MINS NUCLEAR

- - KENNETH L. HIGHFILL, STATION DIRECTOR S MINS

- ROY A, ANDERSON, PLANT MANAGER 5 MINS

- RONALD B. VARLEY 5 MINS MANAGER EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS NRC

- VICTOR STELLO, ED0 5 MINS

- THOMAS MURLEY, NRR 10 MINS

- WILLIAM RUSSELL, REGION I 10 MINS a

llll;'

N O

I T -

Y A -

N T A S P

R M

8 O E 8 C W 9 O 1

N P O

9 S R I

A E D E N E L U C J N U O N T

S M O I B R G

L I

P l, ll i s

STEPHEN J. .SWEENEY CHAIRMAN AND CEO RA.LP H G. BIRD SENIOR VP, NUCLEAR KEN N ETH L. HIGF FILL STATIO N DIR ECTO R ROY A. ANDERSON PLANT MANAGER .

RONALD A. VARLEY MANAGER, EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

9 N

OW w =

= y

- A = z@

m wC O

w 5.=

es a = = I 5i5z Q w=

1 Ww W I r

1

a. =

" -z= =a ,

PP Ab %

t z

=55I.

a.

z= = a. ~ =

aA =Z OC a. *g y E 2 =c

= w *-

C g z

Ay =

w ~bz y=y ~

wM, ,

Z $&E C ,.  : -

• 1-, v z zw w wz= =23=

r w WaI=

u 53Ia

1. s

• wzw=

Z

$ E E2

. =l a==z Q ==

=

J\ W E =a ,C cw W =m ww h1

=

"W

- za u "wW A3z w W o e -

J =

3

's

~

emyE m md=

k .w5 hEEE 0 ca$h.h

$E

==.hl

=-

w=

I w

z s = =z a

A Og wI g

= A =Q

== wwIW D

aw==

wZ=Z D . g zQA zW w a g

m e m == =

,5

-- 1 O

'sW e'::3 D s $

wm z=

. = IWw W w w w a .I-ee WgwD =

=

w- z =2- 5$I = =Z 3= I =

Aw!Ia c

w = =- =

• M z D m==

CeA y .

N s

~

i l

l a f l

i i

I CURRENT PLANT STATUS l

d

• PLANT REFUELED ,

REACTOR REASSEMBLED l *

! HYDROSTATIC TEST COMPLETE i

• ILRT COMPLETE MAJOR MODIFICATION WORK COMPLETE l

• PLANT CLEAN AND DECONTAMINATED I

l I

I

l - . .

i ,

i i .

MAJOR OUTAGE PROJECTS

• APPENDIX R

• SECURITY SYSTEM UPGRADES

• PLANT SPECIFIC SIMULATOR

• TURBINE GENERATOR OVERHAUL

.

• REFURBISHMENT OF PLANT SYSTEMS

• DECONTAMINATION I -

.s

i 1

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM EQUIPMENT MODIFICATIONS AND PROCEDURE IMPROVEMENTS EMPHASIZE PREVENTION OF CORE DAMAGE i

i i REVISE EOPS l R EV. 4 BWR GUIDELINES

ii i

l l

i .

i i

i i

I i

SALP "3" AREAS ADDRESSED l

e SECURITY l

! e FIRE PROTECTION I

j e RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS j

• SURVEILLANCE

• ASSURANCE OF QUALITY I

l

t  ! l PILGRIM STATION NON - BOSTON EDISON RAMP DOWN 2000--

l M A 1600--

N p 1200--

O 800--

W E 400-- . kg sg 0  :  ;  ; ' '

Sep- Nov- Jan- M ar- May- Jul- Sep- N o v-87 87 88 88 88 88 88 88 E FRCST C ACTUALS -*- GUARD FRCST -o-GUARD ACTUALS

\

E$

Mli Mi .

mi y, ni i

3 m'!

m ;!

E~

M $E

~

e m'g g ..

e o

C $

0 O- $

O 5

ms ms m's s m's E

:  :  :  ; i  ;

o o o e o o o o o o G CD N to th 4 C') N v-

BECHTEL WORK PACKAGE CLOSE-OUTS July 1987 - April 1988 8o .. ,

70 --

N.n%,,

N a es

1. 60 -- h

'. 54 O 50 -- \,,

F *'%e.47N o .44

~-

~ . s.,

, e N, 3

~ 30 --

S 20 -- O 2, 10 -- . ,,

e. (

M SEP OCT n 'O M 27-Feb Sy ,g_

o

- - - - - - - _ _ - A

+%

~

, ~

s

~

. PILGRIM STATION i NUORG OVERTIME"

~

700 T J 60003

~

N 5000-- ..

H 4000-O 3000-- E

!= 0 Jan-88 h limlii R, . .

Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul-88 Aug- Sep-88 88 88 88 88

l. l.l.

88 88 Oct-l l.

N o v- Dec-88 88 88

' Note: Figures are a . E FRCST U ACTUALS I weekly average I

-=

~ ., -

.M"' b  %

l

l -

PILGRIM STATION

) - -

L NUORG STAFFING ~

).

~

1000 -J '

M 900-- --

1 0,  ;  ;  ; -

j Jan- Feb- M ar- Apr May- Jun- Jul-88 Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec-

- 88 88 88 88 88 88_ 88 88 88 x 88 88

~

E FRCST - 24'kUT

'.LS -

2  :

v- _

i _

l RADIOLOGICAL OCCURRENCE REPORTS (ROR'S) l 100 -

\

93 80 -

60 -

~

40 -

j l

20 -

I m a _

2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 i

OPEN RORs  ;, RORs ISSUED I

9 NON-CONFORMANCE REPORTS (NCR'S) 40-33 30-20-E

.w e

e QUALITY ASSURANCE RECOMMENDATION TRENDS (FOR PNPS ORGANIZATION)

O 61 61 P 60 E

50 46 N

40 38 0 30 A 21 39 2o R -

ta 10 _ 2 S

s 4

0 7

0

'_ E 0 s

0  ; ,  ;  ; l.>u  ;

FEB 1,88 MAR 1,88 _APR 1,88 MAY 1,88 JUN 1,88 OAR MONTHLY STATUS j 1986 1987 -

1988 -

TOTAL ITEMS ITEMS ITEMS ITEMS

O I

TOTAL OPEN MRs 3500--

Delta equals MRs 3000- -

.. ./

, , X in Test & Turnover 2500--

] , ,

l 2000- '

i

/ '

p '

I 1500--

I i 1000--

l 500-0  : :- : : ;: .:  : : : :  :  :  : .:  :  : :: ::  :- :  :  :  :  ;: : : :  : :  : , ,  ; + r i. p i. n i .

.r i. p p i. i i

5/29 6/26 7/24 8/21 9/18 10/16 11/13 12/11 1/8 2/5 3/4 4/4 5/2 5/31 Total Open MRs E All Other Open 1988

i

• I l

t l

l l

POWER BLOCK MRs 800--

700-600-OLD GOAL 500- .

NEWGOAL 400- -

300-200- .-

100-0-

5/29 6/26 7/24 8/21 9/18 10/16 11/13 12/11 1/8 2/5 3/4 4/4 5/2 5/31 j 1987 1988

(

i l

f PLANT DECON 90 --

f 85--

80-- ,

P ,

E 75--

R .

i C 70-- - i i E 4 N 65--

i T -

i 60-- -

. t f

55--

50 M .

5/29 6/26 7/24 8/21 9/18 10/16 11/13 12/11 1/8 2/5 3/4 4/4 5/2 5/31 1987 1988 i

I ALARA TRACKING 600.00--

o-o o o p 500.00-- .o-o o.o W o.o o-E o o o-R 400.00-- ,o.o o-" o. .

S o o-O N

300.00-- o-o o o **o-o-R 200.00-- g-gjo-on.oo"oo-

.e ACTUAL YTD

• -*-*....-e-e-*-* 236.03 E

e' pv,?!* *'

M 100.00--

,e~

0 .0 0 o'* ,e 1/2 1/30 2/27 3/26 4/23 5/21 6/18 7/16 8/13 9/10 10/8 11/5 12/3 12/31 4- budget -* actual

O l

i Licensed Operator Staffing Status l

25 --

t i , Planned 15-- .

7 .a 7p;.

I 3 h

(

10-- i 1 Actual ~ $ l 5-0 --

M, I + + II Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aun Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1986 198/

+ l+-+-t-t-4 1988 l

I RESOURCES PROVIDED BY BECo e PROFESSIONAL EMERGENCY PLANNERS

> e FUNDING OF CIVIL DEFENSE POSITIONS j

• UPGRADING OF FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT i

e COMPENSATION FOR TRAINING 1

l

COMMISSION BRIEFING ON THE STATUS 0F PILGRIM tlVCLEAR STATION JUNE 9, 1988

PRESENTATION OUTLINE BACKGROUND  :

RESTART-CRITERIA

-STAFF RESTART ACTIVITIES FUTilRE STAFF ACTIVITIES 1

i 7

SLIDE 1 l i

l I

l l

.._l

BACKGROUND SHUTDOWN APRIL 12, 1986 CONFIRMATORY ACTION LETTER 86-10 MANAGEMENT MEETINGS ON RESTART ISSUES

• TECHNICAL /E0VIPMENT PROBLEMS

' MANAGEMENT CONCERNS

'SALP FINDINGS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

~~ ~

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM 2,206 PETITIONS /PUBLIC CONCERNS p

i SLIDE 2 I

9 PESTART CRITERIA STABLE AND EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT AND STAFF AT PILGRIM RESOLUTION OF MAJOR TECHNICAL ISSUES DEMONSTRATED IMPROVEMENT IN SALP PROBLEM AREAS MAINTENANCE PROGRAM AND WORK BACKLOG ISSUES ADDRESSED

' ~

NPC SATISFIED THAT CERTAIN EMERGENCY PLAN IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE SLIDE 3

0

^d.

STAFF RESTART ACTIVITIES RESTART ASSESSMENT PANEL INSPECTION AND LICENSING ACTIVITIES PUBLIC MEETINGS / STATE INVOLVEMENT SENIOP MANAGEMENT REVIEWS e

i SLIDE 4

a -- ,i ai O

FUTURE STAFF ACTIVITIES PLANNED BECO SELF ASSESSMENT /POWEP ASCENSION PROGRAM REVIEW INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT TEAM INSPECTION (IATI) 2,206 PETITIONS /PUBLIC MEETINGS SALP ASSESSMENT RESTART ASSESSPENT REPORT

__ -_ ACRS/ COMMISSION MEETINGS POWER ASCENSION PROGRAM MONITOP.ING DECREASE PERIOD FOR NEXT SALP SLIDE 5 4

1 .

WNNd%WAWd%%%Wd%%%%%%%%%ffW;pdWdffffggggg g g g ,

TPRISMITTAL TO:

Document Control Desk, 016 Phillips f

j ADVANCED COPY TO: The Public Document Rocm

! DATE: 4/N'///

Sf.CY Correspondence & Records Branch 5 FROM:

E

! Attached are copies of a Comission meeting transcript and related meeting

[

='

document (s). They are being forwarded for entry on the Daily Accession List and placement in the Public Document Room. No other distributiori is requested or

[ required.

g Meeting

Title:

M e% hM #f u o M l V E ll E

! Meeting Date

4 /9/P P Open X Closed

{!

Y Copies

• ll Item Description *: ,

i: Advanced DCS j to POR g li 1 1 ll 1. TRANSCRIPT il a /,uhh4 m i:

+ m&g ll l! #

!! 2.

I 3  ::

_i:'

m :;.

3 3. _

3 -

32 55 4.

il

5. _

3:'

S j! 6.

as-3 3:' -

$!

• PDR is advanced one copy of each document, two of each SECY paper. @

C&R Branch files the original transcript, with attachments, withcut SECY  ;

3i j jj papers, 55 il n .- am a Nbb flflflfiflfiflflYlM YlYlYiYlYb NIYb NIYlYII lYlYIN YIYI lYIYINIYIYIYlYlYlYlYlYlYlYI N N lYlY