ML20207S579
| ML20207S579 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/16/1987 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8703200056 | |
| Download: ML20207S579 (139) | |
Text
-
[
DRIGINAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA l
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Briefing on Status of TVA (Public Meeting) i I
Location:
Washington, D. C.
l Date:
Monday, March 16, 1987 C-Pages:
1 - 77 1
l i
Ann Riley & Associates Court Reporters i
1625 i Street, N.W., Suite 921 Washington, D.C. 20006
~
(202) 293-3950
~
9703200056 070316 PDR 10CFH PDR PT9.7
. ~ _ _ _.
.4 s.
ri i
1 D l S C L.A 1 MER 2
e S
4 5
6 This is in unofficial transcript of a meeting of the 7
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on 8
3/16/87 In the Commission's offlee at 1717 H Street, 9
'N.W..
Washington, D.C.
The meeting was open to pubIic s
10 attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been 11 reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain
(
12 Inaccuracles.
3 g 13 The transcript is intended solely for general 14 Informationa1 purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, It is 15 not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the 16 matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transeript 17 do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs.
No 18 pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in 19 any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement ~
20 or argument contained herein, excapt as the CommiaaIon may 21 authorize.
t 22 23 24 25
4 1
y 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
4 BRIEFING ON STATUS OF TVA 5
6 PUBLIC MEETING
~
7 8
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9
Room 1130 10 1717 H Street, Northwest 11 Washington, D.C.
12 13 Monday, March 16, 1987
\\
14 15 The Commission met in open session, pursuant to 16 notice, at 2:03 o' clock p.m.,
the Honorable LANDO W. ZECH, 17 Chairman of the commission, presiding.
18 COMM.ISSIONERS PRESENT:
19 LANDO W. ZECH, Chairman of.the Commission 20 THOMAS M. ROBERTS, Member of the commission 21 JAMES X. ASSELSTINE, Member of the Commission 22 FREDERICK M. BERNTHAL, Member of the Commission 23 KENNETH CARR, Member of the Commission 24 25
2
.6 1
STAFF AMD PRESENTERS SEATED AT THE COMMISSION TABLE:
2 J. Hoyle 3
W. Parler 4
C.H. Dean 5
S. White 6
J. Waters 7
J. Kirkebo 8
J.E. Huston 9
W. Brown 10 E. 811ger 11 T. Jenkins 12 H. Abecrombie 13
(
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 t
-.,--.,e,.,,
.--,.----y-7,,
3 S.
1 PR0CEEDINGS r'
2 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Good afternoon, ladies and 3
gentlemen.
The purpose of today's meeting is for the 4
Commission to be briefed by the Tennessee Valley Authority 5
officials concerning the current status of the Tennessee 6
Valley Authority's nuclear power program.
7 I understand copies of the slides of the presentation 8
are available at the rear of the room.
Do any of my fellow 9
Commissioners have any opening remarks?
10 CONNISSIONER ROBERTS:
The meeting is scheduled to 11 and at 3:30.
I am sure it is going to last longer.
I have to 12 leave and go to the airport at 4:15, so if I leave, it is not 13 because of any lack of interest.
14 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
All right.
Chairman Dean, you may 15 proceed, sir.
16 MR. DEAN:
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members 17 of the Commission.
I am Charles Dean, Chairman of the Board 18 of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority and to my 19 immediate left is Steve White, the manager of nuclear power 20 and to his left, John Waters, director.
21 We are certainly pleased to have the opportunity to 22 come before you.
Steve White has met with your staff on March 23 loth and he has briefed them on the current status of our 24 nuclear recovery program.
25 The TVA board believes that the pr,ogram is making
.v 1
significant progress to put the best people we can obtain into 2
this effort and we are committed to give them the resources 3
they need to get the job done.
4 The Board is monitoring the activities of the 5
program.
We visit the facilities frequently.
We review the 6
progress being made with the engineers and with the managers.
7 More than anything, we are encouraged by the philosophy of 8
excellence that we see Steve White bringing to this program.
9 The Board will continue to give him our full support 10 in the recovery effort.
Steve has kept us informed of action 11 by TVA and the NRC to maintain good communications and good 12 working relationships.
13 We are aware of the recent reorganization and 14 creation of the office of special Projects with Mr. Kappler in 15 charge and this has provided an even better framework for 16 exchanging information.
17 Already a number of significant issues have been is addressed through this more direct channel of communications 19 in the brief period this group has been in place.
At this
(
20 time, Director Waters might want to add a few words.
l 21 MR. WATERS:
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman and l
22 members of the commission, it is a privilege to be here again J
l 23 with you today and I, too, an encouraged by the progress that 24 I think TVA is making in its nuclear restoration program under
- \\
25 the leadership of Steve White.
l l
5
.O 1
I believe that you will be able to denote significant 2
progress in the report that he is going to make.
We moved into 3
an important phase of our recovery program and Mr. White will 4
be reporting to you about that in detail.
5 We look forward to this opportunity to come before 6
this Commission and make this report.
So I an indeed happy to 7
be here with you.
Thank you very much.
8 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Thank you very much.
You may 9
proceed.
10 MR. WHITE:
Mr. Chairman, I am glad to be here this 4
11 afternoon to give you an update on where wu stand in the TVA 12 nuclear recovery program.
13 (SLIDE.]
14 MR. WHITE:
Because it has been about one year since 15 I last briefed you, I thought it might be valuable at the 16 beginning to spend a few minutes to review some background but 17 before I do that, let me say that one year ago when I was here 18 I reported to the commission that we were facing significant 19 large problems.
That was an underestimation.
i l
20 I think no one in the room that day including myself l
21 truly understood the magnitude, the enormous dimensions of the 22 problems which I. faced at TVA.
23 Now before we get into the history, I thought I 24 would flash a couple of slides up here to recalibrate you on 25 our size and a little bit of geography.-
l
- -.,__- ~_. -- -.
~
m 9
~
' '/1 y
6 l
1 (SLIDE.]
(.
2 MR. WHITE:
The only thing you should take off,.of~
l' thisslideisthaNweareoneofthetwolatrgest' nuclear 3
4 utilities in the cbuntry.
We have both boiling t terand[two 5
types of pressurized watar reactors.
~
6 (SLIDE.)
7 MR WHITE:
Gesgraphy, for example, with my engineers 8
and construction people at Knoxville and at my headquarters in 9
Chattanooga, certain1,y do not siaplify my probicas at all.
10 Next.
j 11 (SLIDE.]
12 MR. WHITE:
Now here is what we want to cover toilay and as much as possible, we will try to follow volure one and 13
\\
14 two of the Nuclear Performance Plans as we go through this 15 today.
I 16 Next ulide, please.
17 (SLIDE.)
l 18 MR. WHITE:
I am just going to let you read this one 19 on history and background because I' think it is importalit to 20 go back to 1985 and to look t.t yonr concerns, the NRC cor;cerns, 21 in 1985, concerns that eventually resulted in my coming to TVA 22 to set up a new management teem.
23 (SLIDE.]
24 MR. WHITE:
Here is the situation as it was in 25 January.
I found no team work, no rear sen,se of direction, a l
l
--_L_._..--.--.-._-,_,
ft4-]\\
i u.a e c
.7
.+
[(
l de-centralized organization, literally a number of fiefdoms at
[\\. '
2 war with one another.
That is the way it was in January of 3
1986.
'.i 4
Now before we get into some specifics of what we 5
hhve been doing during the past year, I thought it might be I
i 6
valuable for me to chat for a couple of minutes on my l
7 perspective of the year 1986.
8 Three significant things happened in 1986 almost j
9 equally, spaced throughout the year so I can literally almost 10 divide the yinar in thirds and I would like to address it in 11 that fashion.
12 When I arrived in January I brought with me a group 13 of experienced managers as part of the team.
In accordance t
14 with the plan approved by the Board of Directors, I then i
15 proceeded to get the best, most experienced people I could get 16 in the nuclear industry to help me dig out the problems of 17 TVA.
I 18 I doubt that any utility in this country at any.one O
19 time has had the talent that I had in the first third of last j
20 year to address our problems.
Even looking back today, we 21 made very significant progress across a very broad front.
22 These people knew what to look for.
They knew where the j
23 problems night be found and they went about doing it and they werequicktoadvisemeonpossiblesolbtions.
24 1
25 That first third ended very abruptly in early May
\\
I l
'... s
-.c.
.?
3
.t 8
s whenthe,GeneralCounsel'andEthicsOfficeratTVAreversedf 1
2 his prior opini,on with regard to the legality of the 1.-
3 arrangements and I did three things at that time.
i d
i i
7 4
We instituted a' hiring freeze.
I asked the board;of 5
directors to have the Inspector General investigate to 6
determine if any wrong doing had occurred and finally, I asked b
7 the board of directors to obtain independent legal counsel to 8
look at the legality of the arrangements.
9 The impacts of those actions in the second third of 10 0 the year were dramatic.
First of all, the IG investigation 11 and the independent counsel as the months wore on, more and i
s 12 more of,my time and that of my senior managers was involved
(-
13 with matters absolutely extraneous to fixing the problem at
,\\
u 14 TVA.
15 We continued to make progress but at a much slower 16 rate.
The freeze did not affectuthe people I had on board so 0
17 I had these experts on board who continued to dig out. problems, 18 continued to recommend solutions to me and because of the 19 freeze, I couldn't bring the resources to bear to fix the problem.
20 21 It ended up, perhaps the best example is,the welding 22 issue at Watts Bar where I knew th'at I didn't have the right 23 people running that program for me.
I knew I wasn't getting therightadvicefromweldingexpertsibthiscountryandI 24 1
25 couldn't bring resources to bear.
i s
..n.,
,.--,-..,,,-----,,n n---------,,
n------,,,...,-,,,-,,,,w--
.g-
= _
O 9
0 o
1 It eventually got so bad that I cancelled, I 2
requested the cancellation of a scheduled meeting with the NRC 3
because I decided it was better not to pass any information 4
than to take what I considered was a high risk of passing 5
erroneous information or information subject to interpretation.
6 Now from my point of view I was fighting a problem 7
literally with one hand tied behind my back.
The NRC 8
perspective on those same issues was quite different.
I 9
received word back of things such as, "TVA is back at their 10 old habits."
"They won't face up to their problems."
"They 11 won't put resources to fix their problems."
"They are 12 cancelling meetings."
4 i
13 The perspective on the part of the NRC was quite r
14 different than my perspective as we fought to correct our 15 problems.
16 That phase, the second third of the year, also ended 1,7 abruptly in early October.
In early October, actually the 18-middle of October, in one day three things happened.
The 19 Inspector General's report and the Independent Counsel's
-20 report came out and said that there had been no wrong doing, 21 nothing wrong had been done.
22 The only suggestion made was by the Independent 23 Counsel was to prevent even perceptions of problems, we should 24 restructure the contracts and we were p epared to do that.
25 Unfortunately, on the same day the Office of Government Ethics l
~..
10
+
1 in essence condemned the very concept we were operating under.
2 So again, very abruptly things changed in the middle 3
of October.
I informed the board that I could no longer do 4
the j ob.
At that point, I felt I had both hands tied behind 5
me and that I was going to leave unless and until they could 6
resolve those issues.
N 7
Now the first thing that happened because of this
~ 8 was that managers overnight, a number of the very experienced 9
contract managers from industry were replaced by the former 10 TVA people who had had those jobs."
11 I think understandably my deputy, who took over, 12 made some changes in the organization which better suited his 13 management concepts.
The plus side was with the loan managers
\\
14 no longer in line positions, the freeze was lifted and TVA was 15 able to start applying resources to fix the problems.
16 As you know, then that third of the year ended in 4
17 early January when I returned to TVA.
So I think it is 18 important to keep these things in mind as we look at what I 19 still think was significant progress last year but perhaps 20 explains some of the perceptions held by others.
21
[ Slide.]
22 First, we will cover objectives.
These are my 1
23 primary goals, and I will briefly review where we stand on
{
24 these prior to in-depth discussion.
25 Next.
~
l l
l
11 1
'[ Slide.]
2 The reorganization is complete, $nd I am going to 3
describe that fully to you in a moment.
4 That third bullet, the position descriptions, 5
approximately 1800 position descriptions for all of our 6
managers have been rewritten.
The purpose was to clearly 7
describe the responsibility and accountability and authority 8
of each of those managers.
I needed something by which I 9
could measure their performance, and, in my opinion, this is 10 unprecedented.
The volume of this is perhaps unprecedented in 11 a government agency.
12 (Slide.]
13 The management team, I will also discuss in more 14 detail and give you specifics.
15 The third bullet, the phase-out of the ten remaining 16 advisors, refers to full-time advisors who are down within the 17 nuclear power organization.
18 (Slide.)
l 19 These items will be discussed in more detail by my 20 responsible managers.
But, for example, the conditions l
l 21 adverse to quality, that third bullet, we now have one system 22 in place instead of a hodgepodge of nine systems we used to 23 have.
We now have in place a corporate commitment tracking 24 system and a corrective action tracking system.
25
[ Slide.)
l
12 1
In terms of the first bullet, the Division of 2
Nuclear Engineering is now assigned the responsibility for the 3
technical ownership of those plants.
4 In the second bullet, we have strengthened the 5
Nuclear Safety Review Boards, and we have strengthened the 6
Nuclear Managers Review Group.
If you will recall, this group 7
used to be called the Nuclear Safety Review Staff.
I have put 8
a strong, experienced leader in charge of that group.
We have 9
upgraded the levels of the people, and now have a very broad 10 experience base in that organization.
11 The other major items will be discussed in more 12 detail by the responsible member of my management team.
13 (Slide.]
14 And finally, the trust and confidence of our i
j 15 employees.
I have split out what I think is an important l
l 16 group of issues, and each person who is responsible for that 17 program will give you a detailed brief.
18 As you know, the Nuclear Performance Plans identify 19 the root causes of our problems and describe our corrective 20 action plans.
Together the corporate and site-specific plans 21 give a complete accounting of all actions that we intend to 22 take to improve our nuclear program.
These volumes were l
23 submitted in response to a request from the NRC.
24
[ Slide.]
l 25 This was my top and immediate goal, organization.
I l
l
,..,,,..--..,,,,..,,,.n,
.,,.,.-.n
~
13 1
felt I needed to get in immediately to provide strength to the r-2 most critical areas, including quality assurance, engineering, 3
licensing, the Nuclear Safety Review Board (my safety 4
conscience), and training.
5 Last year, I told you that I had the responsibility 6
for the design, the oversight, the supervision of the repair 7
of 53 dams, and I no longer have that responsibility.
I also 8
no longer have the' responsibility for designing fish ladders, 9
and I no longer have the responsibility for the large equipment 10 and diesel overhaul facility, the largest in the Southeast
~
11 U.S.
We have truly gotten rid of things that don't have 12 anything to do with the nuclear organization.'
13
[ Slide.]
(
14 This is the same slide I showed you last year, and I 15 think it's important to review it, so you can see the dramatic 16 nature of the change.
Notice a discontinuity between 17 operations, maintenance, and design.
Notice the 18 nuclear /non-nuclear design are mixed.
So also is 4
19 construction.
A fragmented organization with no single person 20 in charge of nuclear.
21 (Slide.)
22 Here's how we are today.
No longer fragmented; 23 simple, clear lines of responsibility and accountability.
But 24 the most important thing on this slide is that it is identical 25 to the slide I showed you last year with th,ree very minor
14 1
exceptions which I'll describe.
In other words, we have had.
/
C 2
stability in'this organization for one year.
In fact, for a 3
little over a year.
4 The three minor changes, I now have two Deputy 5
Managers instead of one.
We have renamed what was formerly 6
the NSRS to the Nuclear Managers Review Group.
That's just a 7
name change.
And last year where I showed the Nuclear Safety 8
Review Board in the big box labeled " Staff," because of its 9
importance, on this chart I break it out separately.
10 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Steve, on that chart, 11 where is the employees' concern program?
12 MR. WHITE:
The employee concern program is in the 13 staff function.
Mr. Sliger reports directly to me.
(.
14 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
All right.
15
[ Slide.]
16 MR. WHITE:
The ne't chart is for the site, and x
although it's labeled "Sequoyah,".it's typical of our operating 17 j
18 plants.
I'm trying to standardize wherever I possibly can.
19 I'm not going to show you what the organization was 20 before this, because you might ask me some questions, and it 21 was too confusing for me to understand.
22 Basically, I am placing the resources and the 23 responsibility with the site director, while maintaining'a centralizedmanagementandtechnicalcoktrolatthe 24 25 headquarters to ensure the design integrity for the life of l
9 15 1
the plant.
[
2 Also significant is that I've consolidated all of 3
.the QA functions under one hat, created a site Licensing 2
+
4 Group, and, of course, those both report to the headquarters 5
for strong technical direction.
6 Again important on this slide is stability.
This is 7
also the same slide I showed you a year ago', with the exception i
8 that Modifications now reports to the Director of Nuclear 9
Construction for central technical direction, where last year 10 he reported to the Site Director.
So that's one change in the 11 past year.
12 COMMISSIONER CARR:
What is the significance of the 13 dotted lines on that chart?
k 14 MR. WHITE:
The dotted lines, Mr. Commissioner, show 15 the interface -- and that's a very good question, because that 16 shows the interface between the corporate and the site.
That 17 shows that these people, on a daily basis, are supporting the 18 Site Director.
But sometimes I'm asked the question, what's 19 the interface between corporate headquarters and what goes on 20 at the site?
21 This is a slide that clearly demonstrates that.
22
[ Slide.]
i 23 Let's get into discussing people.
Now I'm going to 1
24 sP.ow you several slides, and the only thing that I really want i
(
25 yca to look at on these slides are the years of experience of 3
I 16'
. ~.
1 the people involved.
Just look at that -- yes, sir?
2 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Now are these TVA employees?
3
.MR. WHITE:
I will point out where they are not.
On 4
this first page, for example, there are two who are not TVA 5
employees.
Those are the ones that are --
6 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I'm sorry.
I see you've got c
t
(
7 it on there.
~
N 8
MR. WHITE:
But if you look at the years of 9
experience -- and these are TVA people, other than those two.
10 The next slide.
11 (Slide.]
12 Again, look at the years of experience.
And on this 13 slide, there are three loaned employees.
That's all there 14 are.
15 Next slide.
16 (Slide.]
17 Look at the years of experience on this slide.
And 18 on this slide also, there are only two loaned employees.
But 19 look at the total number of years experience that we have 20 hired into TVA, and with the exception of those few I mentioned 21 as loaned managers, these are TVA employees -- over 670 years 22 of nuclear experience, since I came aboard over a year ago.
23 Of the 160 managers that you see at the bottom of 24 that slide, approximately two-thirds of those are middle level 25 managers -- 400 engineers, and that includes almost 300 that
17 1
we have hired into TVA.
,. v.
2 And the last bullet, the special purpose can be 3
deceiving to you, unless you understand that that includes 4
such people as the Nuclear Safety Review Board that I 4
5 mentioned, the outsiders, my safety conscience, the high-level 6
team I have -- oversight team I have over the special employee 7
concerns program at Watts Bar and people such as that.
8 In that last bullet, there is over 1000 years of 9
nuclear experience that I am using down there on a part-time 10 basis.
11 I think that those are significant changes in our 12 management.
m 13 (Slide.]
14 Now let's focus on some of the details of the most 15 significant weak areas that I identified to you a year ago, 16 and these weak areas, by the way, apply across the board as 17 well as specific to Sequoyah.
18 I told you last year that quality assurance was an 19 area with significant problems.
I told you the management was 20 fragmented.
There were no clear lines of responsibility and 21 accountability.
There were five QA manuals.
There were 52 22 units reporting to five different headquarters groups.
You 23 will see that we have made dramatic changes and a lot of-24 progress in quality assurance.
25 Mr. Kazanas is my new head of quality assurance, and
~
18 I
he just reported today.
Mr. Huston, who will be briefing you, 7..
2 has been with me from the beginning, first as Deputy to the 3
Director, then as the Director, and he is now an advisor to 4
the Director.
Mr. Huston has over 20 years nuclear experience.
5 As Mr. Huston talks, I ask that you keep in mind the 6
basics, the very basics of what I'm trying to do.
I'm trying 7
to make quality assurance a tool of line management.
I am 8
trying to get quality out from any pressure dealing with 9
schedule.
I want to hold the line organization responsible 10 for quality, because I think that's where it belongs.
So as 11 Mr. Huston talks, please keep those basics in mind.
12 Mr. Huston?
,. m 13 MR. HUSTON:
Thank you, Mr. White.
t i
14 Mr. Chairman, good afternoon.
As Mr. White has 15 indicated, I'm going to present briefly my perspective of 16 quality assurance at the Tennessee Valley Authority over the 17 last 14 months.
Could I have the next slide, please?
18 (Slide.]
19 MR. HUSTON:
Mr. White indicated that quality 20 assurance has been combined into a single organization 21 reporting directly to the Manager of Nuclear Power.
We have 22 established centralized headquarters organizations and each 23 site we have consolidated all of the various quality activities atthesitesunderasinglesitequalithmanagerwhoreportsto 24 25 th's Director of Nuclear Quality Assurance.
s,,
.i
_____.___.._.____.._,_,-__,m
i 19 1
Next slide, please.
.r, 2
(Slide.]
3 MR. HUSTON:
This slide displays the organization 4
for quality assurance within the Office of Nuclear Power.
5 This organization was established early in 1986 and has been 6
in place since that time.
7 As Mr. White indicated, Mr. Nicholas Kazanas, has t
8 joined TVA as the new Director of Nuclear Quality Assurance 9
today.
Mr. Kazanas comes to TVA on loan from General Public 10 Utilities, Nuclear, where he has spent many years involved not 11 only in the corporate direction of quality assurance but was 12 the Quality Assurance Manager at Three Mile Island Unit 13 Recovery.
i 14 COMMISSIONER CARR:
Is he on loan or is he hired --
15 MR. WHITE:
He is on loan.
16 MR. HUSTON:
He is a loan manager.
17 In addition to Mr. Kazanas, let me point out some of 18 the recent infusions of new outside talent into TVA and give 19 you a little background on where they came from.
20 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Just one question on 21 Kazanas.
He did Unit II at TMI, he did the QA for the clean-up 22 of Unit II or did he focus on the QA program for Unit I or was 23 it combined?
i 24 MR. HUSTON:
It was both.
25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Both?
,_,n,
,,--.-,<-,+-,w---
---e-m---r---ww-e-,-o*'--=-w='
v'~='
V
- * * ' ' " ' " " * ' ' * * ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' * ~ ' " ~ ~ ~ ~ " " ' " '
~
20
{
1 MR. HUSTON:
Yes, sir.
2 We have established engineering assurance and I will 3
speak about that a little more in a minute.
The Manager of 4
Engineering Assurance is Mr. Tony Capozzi.
Mr. Capozzi was an 5
advisor to the Division of Nuclear Engineering and the Division 6
of Quality Assurance for the last year and in fact set up the 7.
8 Mr. Capozzi is now a full time employee with 9
Tennessee Valley Authority and holds the position of Manager 10 of that function.
11 We have recently put in place a new site Quality 12 Assurance Manager at the Sequoyah facility, Mr. Lawrence 13 Martin, who joined TVA about a year and a half ago, has over 14 26 years experience in the nuclear industry.
15 At the Browns Ferry facility, we have appointed 16 Mr. Gerald Turner as the Site Quality Manager.
Mr. Turner was 17 with a major architect engineering firm for a number of 18 years.
He has over 16 years of experience as a quality l
l
, 19 assurance, quality control manager and was the Superintendent 20 of Field Quality Control for the completion of a major nuclear 21 project recently licensed in the northeast.
22 In total, in the last year, we have added over 30 23 new managers to the Division of Nuclear Quality Assurance from l
24 outside of TVA.
I 25 Next slide, please.
1
,. ~, -,,, - -. - - - - -,,.., - - -,., ~ - -,,,, - - -,, -, -,..
21
-1
[ Slide.]
r-2 MR. HUSTON:
Next, I would like to highlight some of-3 the specific improvements and new programs and management 4
initiatives undertaken in quality assurance in the Office of 5
Nuclear Power over the last year.
6 In terms of our quality assurance program, early in 7
1986, we submitted a draft revision to the quality assurance 8
topical report to the NRC.
This revised draft -- this revised 9
topical indicated the methods by which the new organization 10 and the procedures therein would comply with the Commission's 11 regulations.
That draft itself has undergone substantial 12 revision and review not only within TVA, but within the NRC.
13 In fact, was reviewed to the high standards of the Commission's i.
14 standard review plan.
That topical report received your i
15 approval on January 30th of this year.
I 16 Corrective action.
Corrective action was one of the 17 major issues identified in early 1986 as needing attention 18 within the nuclear power activities of TVA.
In order to bring 19 focus to this question, as Mr. White has indicated, we 20 implemented a single program for the handling of conditions 21 adverse to quality.
22 That new program was implemented at the Sequoyah 23 facility on the 23rd of February of this year and will be 24 imple,mented throughout the Office of Nu lear Power within --
! i..
25 by the and of this month.
l
--....--_,.--,-,n,-,,-,_
,._.,--...,.-,,..-n_.,
t 22 1
In the process of implementing this new procedure, 2
over 4,000 TVA employees have received training in this new 3
procedure.
This new procedure focuses on root cause analysis 4
and identification of actions to prevent reoccurrence of 1
5 conditions adverse to quality and quick identification of 6
issues which may have applicability to more*than one plant.
7 In the oversight area, we have upgraded and 8
restructured the audit function to focus on technical 4
9 evaluations in the audit process.
Of the 54 auditors and 10 evaluators in this organization, over 33 have technical 11 degrees and 14 hold special certifications, including one 12 reactor operator and four senior reactor operators.
13 As I mentioned earlier, we have established
(
14 Engineering Assurance within TVA.
Engineering Assurance is 15 responsible for technical QA training within the Division of 16 Nuclear Engineering for engineering,QA program development and 17 performs not only programmatic audits but also in depth j
18 technical audits of the engineering process.
l
_19 The new Engineering Assurance organization has been 20 heavily involved in the design baseline and verification l
21 program at the Sequoyah nuclear facility.
22 The quality control inspection area, we are r
substantially upgrading the certification and training of our 23 24 quality control inspectors.
We have de eloped a detailed 25 training program to provide additional capability within the
23 1
inspection ranks, which will involve, when completely 2
implemented, between 200 and 300 classroom hours of additional 3
training per inspector.
4 Finally, on staffing, the Nuclear Quality Assurance 5
organization has grown over 35 percent since I first came to 6
TVA in January of 1986, from some 500 people, if I aggregate 7
all the various elements, to almost 700 people today.
8 We have upgraded the management levels, that is the 9
pay levels within the Quality Assurance organization, to be 10 more consistent with the balance of the TVA line organization 11 and we have had a major infusion of outside talent.
12 Next slide, please.
13 (Slide.]
~
14 MR. HUSTON:
In conclusion, TVA has invested 15 substantial resources in upgrading the Quality Assurance 16 organization within the office of Nuclear Power.
This upgrade, 17 consolidation and centralization is fully consistent with the 18 commitments made in the nuclear performance plan.
19 Real progress in quality assurance has been made at 20 TVA.
21 Thank you, gentlemen.
22 MR. WHITE:
Now, not on that slide is of course l
something that I learned long ago and that is when the boss is 23 24 interested, so is everyone else.
That' the primary rule in
\\
25 quality assurance.
v+.
--v-w,
,-,w-,-,n
_ m,---,,--
.,--.-.w_,-.v,-,-~---,-,mr--,,-.m---n--agen---,,----,-------------n
24 1
There are some basic things I'd like you to take 2
away from Mr. Huston's presentation.
First, the entire QA 3
organization has been restructured, at the headquarters and 4
plants.
Secondly, the programs have been upgraded and new 5
experienced staff has been added.
Third, the most important 6
point, extensive training is being and will continue to be 7
provided.
Finally, we are institutionalizing these changes.
8
[ Slide.]
9 MR. WHITE:
Engineering.
The problems in 10 engineering, simply put, were lack of accountability for the 11 technical programs and insufficient coordination of engineering 12 work.
Technical and programmatic overview was not nearly as 13 effective as it should have been.
14 Mr. Kirkebo will next brief you.
Mr. Kirkebo has 15 more than 22 years nuclear experience.
As with Mr. Huston, he 16 has been with me from the start, first as a senior loan 17 manager who participated in the evaluation of the problems and i
18 the development of the corrective action.
More recently, we 19 have hired him as a TVA permanent employee.
He is now the 20 Director of Nuclear Engineering.
21 Mr. Kirkebo knows where we were, where we are and 22 where I want to be.
23 24 MR. KIRKEBO:
Thank yo.u, Mr. W ite.
25 Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, Mr. White
25 1
has summarized some of the major problems that existed in 7.
2 engineering when we came to TVA.
I will ba describing some of 3
the specific actions that have been taken to resolve the 4
problems that existed.
5 First of all, as Mr. White has indicated, control 6
of the technical programs at TVA was fragmented.
Some 7
technical programs were controlled in operations, others 8
within the engineering organization.
As of today, the Division 9
of Engineering has been formed and all technical programs are 10 consolidated and technical functions included within the 11 Division of Nuclear Engineering.
12 As far as the accomplishment of engineering work, in 13 the past, it also was fragmented.
We had the primary stress
('
14 in the past on our discipline branches, nuclear, electrical, 15 mechanical, and there was not a focus, there was not 16 coordination, and there was not support of our operating 4
17 plants.
This situation has been rectified by the formation of 18 project teams, dedicated on-site teams in place to support on 19 an on line fashion the engineering needs of each of our 20 facilities.
I l
21 The third area I'd like to address is quality 22 assurance and engineering.
Mr. Huston has outlined how we 23 have upgraded the Engineering Assurance organization, to-providetechnicaloverview,technicalabdits,andtechnical 24 25 control of our business practices, a signif1 cant step in the 1
L
26
- L direction of the control of engineering.
2 Next' view graph, please.
3 (slide.)
4 MR. KIRKEBO:
On this view graph, we outline some of 5
the critical responsibilities for engineering within TVA.
6 Again we emphasize technical requirements and their control as 7
the prime function of the Division of Nuclear Engineering.
8 With that goes the responsibility to disposition 9
non-conformances to technical requirements.
We in Engineering 10 acknowledge the ownership and the responsibility to execute 11 the control of our technical programs.
12 A second area emphasized in our nuclear performance
~
13 plan was the control of as-built documentation and the concept
^
(
14 that the engineers lives with his documentation through all 15 phases, not just the design phase, but the implementation 16 phase and that phase which leads to updating the drawings in 17 the control room.
18 This is now our practice.
Engineering has the 19 responsibility.
20 The third area I want to comment on is modification 21 packages.
The practices utilized in TVA heretofore were not 22 at all designed to support operating plants.
The previous 23 practices were actually aimed at supporting construction-24 projects as stand alone modification pa kages were not part of 25 their process.
That has changed.
F 27
.+
1 We hav'e implemented on Sequoyah and will be
.s 2
implementing on Browns Ferry and our other plants a new 3
procedure for engineering stand alone modification packages, 4
such that the package stands apart and can be~ actualized and 5
tracked through all stages, and at the end of an outage, you 6
can reconcile the configuration of the power plant with the 7
configuration of the documentation.
8 Project Engineering is one of the basic fundamental 9
elements of our Engineering organization.
I'm happy to say 10 today that we have established strong Project Engineering 11 teams at each of our facilities.
We put in place new Project.
12 Engineers at Sequoyah, at Browns Ferry and at Watts Bar.
We
~
13 backed up these Project Engineers with ten Assistant Project 14 Engineers, all new to their jobs, all career TVA employees, 15 and all capable and competent to execute their responsibility 16 of leadership in the area of control of the engineering work, 17 an area that hasn't been emphasized at TVA to the degree 18 necessary.
19 We are developing and implementing a computer based 20 system of planning and scheduling, of budgets and of tracking
'i 21 to facilitate trending and allow the engineers to have a tool 22 to control the implementation of their work.
23 No discussion of a nuclear plant would be complete 24 without mentioning procedures.
Nuclear procedures at TVA.have 25 been completely revised on a division revel basis.
New i
-.,..,.m_.
m,_.--
.-.--._____-._-..___._.,_.,-____,.,,__,_...,..-.......,._.__-m___,,-.-m
28 1
procedures have been issued to the projects and project
'c 2
procedures have been developed and reviewed by our Engineering l
3 Assurance organization.
We have in place today new procedures, 4
both at the project level and at the division level.
5 Design control, I think as you gentlemen recognize 6
is the bread and butter of the engineering process.
Design 7
control has been a weakness in TVA and has been acknowledged 8
for many years.
This is the area where I think I would like 9
to stress the most this afternoon, and I think we have made 10 fundamental and significant improvements in design control at 11 TVA.
12 The foundation for design control at TVA is our 7-13 design baseline and verification program.
It is a program s
14 that is developed at TVA with three fundamental elements.
15 First of all, we have to do a functional walk-down of the 16 power plant.
The second element, we have to compile a database 17 of all commitments, regulatory commitments, technical 18 commitments, review all correspondence and create a database.
19 That database is then condensed into the system design basis 20 documents, so on the one hand we have system design basis 21 documents and on the other hand, we have functional 22 walk-downs.
23 The third element is a review, a review of the 24 engineering work that has gone on in th past.
These three 25 elements come together for what I believe 1s a tota 11y
i t
29 1
comprehensive with a high degree of assurance that TVA is
(,
2 meeting their commitments on their safety systems and forms 3
the element of what I refer to as our new design control 4
process at TVA.
5 In summary, the division of nuclear engineering has 6
taken the initiative.
We have had considerable success in 7
establishing our project engineering teams.
We have defined 8
and developed a work planning and tracking system.
We are 9
implementing new design control procedures, and we are also
~
10 completing for Sequoyah the design baseline and verification 11 programs.
12 I appreciate this opportunity to review the progress 73 13 that we have made to date.
Thank you.
14 MR. WHITE:
If I may take a few seconds to tell you 15 what I would like you to get out of the engineering 16 presentation you just got; first, engineering now has the 17 technical responsibility for our plants.
18 Second is that we have had a major infusion of 19 talent, which has in effect had a net effect of upgrading us 20 closer to the state of the art in the nuclear industry today.
21 Third, we have established in that program discipline 22 and formality.
23 And most important, we are institutionalizing those 24 changes.
i.,
25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Befcre you leave the
30 1
engineering part --
~
2 MR. WHITE:
Yes.
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
-- let me ask a couple of questions about the design baseline and verifdcation program.
4 5
Mr. Kirkebo said that this is a comprehensive 6
program.
When I read Jim Taylor's March 5th letter to you on 7
Sequoyah, that seems to say that most'of the program seems to 8
have been focused on post-licensing, i
9 MR. WHITE:
Before he answers that, let me say that 10 we have answered Mr. Taylor's letter.
As Mr. Taylor said last 11 week -- and I guess I almost have to paraphrase, but the NRC 1
12 didn't attempt to determine in that perhaps any show-stoppers 13 or what was important versus what wasn't important.
A number s
14 of those issues we already knew about and have corrective i
l 15 actions underway.
But go ahead.
16 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
What I'm most interested 17 in is understanding the scope of the problem.
You said there 18 were design verification and baseline verification problems 19 that have been acknowledged for some time within TVA, and I am 1
20 interested in understanding, particularly for the plants that i
21 have the operating licenses, Sequoyah and Browns Ferry, 22 whether you are basically starting from when they got their 23 license, or whether you are basically going back to square Ifyoulookattheextentofthehroblems, 24 one.
is it 25 necessary to basically go back and reverify the original
31 1
design work, the o'riginal calculations, the original 2
assumptions on which the FSAR was based for each of those i
3 plants, and to what extent are you doing that?
And if you are i
4 not doing it, why aren't you?
5 MR. WHITE:
Well, let me -- before you start, John, 6
this same question ~came up last year, Mr. Asselstine, and we 7
have looked at -- we have basically gone back to the operating 8
license, but we have also sampled, for example, at Sequoyah a 9
number of other areas, and where our sampling said it seems 10 like a conservative, prudent judgment to go back earlier, we 11 have done that.
12 For example -- and we have done 100 percent of the 13 electrical calculation.
We are doing it there and Browns
( ",
14 Ferry and so forth.
15 In the welding area, you know, we did the same l
16 thing.
17 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Right.
i.
18 MR. WHITE:
And in the concrete area, we did the 19 same thing.
And there are a number of other ones, but I'll j
20 let John give the details, but basically we are sampling -- we 1
21 are seeing -- would we expect problems in there, do we see 22 some possibilities, and therefore does good judgment tell us 23 go on back to the beginning.
And that's in essence, from my t
24 point of view.
25 Now do you want to add anything to that?
l
l 32 MR. KIRKEBO:
Well, I just wanted to put a little r.
2 different flavor on it, and that was the fundamental weaknesses 1
3 at TVA, I think, are in the design control process.
All right, 4
that process -- the old process was a two-drawing system, where r
5 the engineers were engineering off one set of prints, and the 6
plant was actually -- the configuration of the plant was
\\
7 reflected on another set of drawings, and the control room 8
status was the same as the as-constructed drawings, which the 9
engineers didn't see.
10 Now that's a fundamental weakness in design control, 11 and that's something we are eliminating, such that there's one 12 reconciled set of drawings that the engineers buy in and that 4
I,-
13 the plants walk down to.
I mean I think that's such a
\\
14 fundamental strength that we've walked the plant down, 15 reconstituted the design basis, we have reviewed the l
16 configuration of the plant with the reconstituted design i
17 basis, we have reviewed all the engineering work that's taken i
[
18 place since the operating license.
19 Now we have looked at the configuration and, as I l
20 said, we've got a new design basis, we've confirmed that 21 design basis with our commitments, all right.
We've got the 22 correlation from the commitment to the design basis to the 23 configuration.
24 Now what you're saying is won't you go back to 25 before the operating licensa and go back to that second or
33 I
third level of engineering detail and verify that.
We verified
,-~,
2 it all during the, you know, post-OL, and frankly I don't think 3
that it's all reasonable or necessary.
4 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
So there aren't any 5
signs that during the construction process, these same kinds 6
of deficiencies occurred; that is, the engineers would be 7
designing the plant one way, the guys out in the field building 8
the plant would be building it another way, either with those 9
informal approvals over the telephone, or without ever going 10 back to engineering and saying, " Hey, we're changing the design 11 this way; you guys better be aware of that when you write the.
t 12 FSAR, or see if" --
. ~.,
13 MR. WHITE:
Well, I think my remarks address that
(
s 14 issue.
We have sampled and -- calculations is a good example, 15 electrical.
We went back and did 100 percent, and as a result 16 of that we found something like 137 circuits that we are 17 repulling. We're making hardware changes.
So what's reasonable 18 and prudent to do, we are doing it.
And there's judgment 19 involved, obviously.
20 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
21 MR. KIRKEBO:
I would just like to point out one 22 other example, something that we have docketed as part of our
~
23 restart program, and that's an alternate analysis.
This-is an i
24 area -- it's a very good example and it makes your point, r
25 Commissioner, in that the practices at 139L were not as formal l
l
a
- f 34 1
at the tine.
An' alternate analysis was a way of usingia, 2
cookbook to design and install supports on small bora piping.
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
- Yes, f
4 MR. KIRKEBO:
And this is~an area that there was 5
weaknesses, and those weaknesses have been identiffad, they 6
have been identified on Watts'Bar and fixed on Watts Bar.
We 7
have identified them on Sequoyah and we are fixing them on 8
Sequoyah.. So the areas did exist.
There were weak practices.
9 They have baun' identified, and captured, and we have taken 10 corrective action, and I feel quite -- personally I feel 'quite 11 confident cf the scope and the breadtli of the areas ths.t we 12 have pursued.
t 13 COMMISSIONER ASSELSIINE:
Does the NRC Staff
(
14 understand how you have made those judgments, what critasin i
15 you have applied, and how you have gone about making thoma 16 judgments, and have they bought off on it?
17 MR. KIRKEBO:
In all cases where the criteria or 18 basis is anything other than that which is committed in our l
19 FSAR, they have been brought to the attention of the Staff 20 and, to my' knowledge, they are very limited areasland they
. 21 have been accepted.
22 COMMISSIONE'R ASSELSTINE:
C: cay.
Thank you.
23 MR. IGIITE:
Next slide.
24
[ Slide.]
25 MR. WHITE:
Go on to the next one.
\\
t
-n-
-*--.-w,-.-
---.-.w---
-,,r,,-+--.-,-,.,---,,-,,-,-,--y--,
-._w,
,,,,,w-,
,-,g,m-evv r-w-9-r--*-
WP--e-*
-*-W-FCW=-"-M
,. r s ~
e I
35 1
Employee concerns is, to me, a very important issue, 2
and we havs committed significant resources to it.
Because of
%.f
['
3 the volume of employee concerns that existed when I arrived at 3
'~
o,.
i.
s4 TVA, I 4stablished a special program to handle those, and f
l' 5
Er. Brown will brief you on that.
1 a-6 ",
At the same time, I needed a new restructured
. -s, 7
program to handle'new employee concerns, and Mr. Sliger will 8
brief.ycu on that.
Abdfinally,becauseoftheemphasisthatweplaced 9
10 on intimidation and harassment, even though~that's part of the 11 employee concerns program, I thought it might be valuable to 4
12 break that out separately, and Ms. Jenkins will discuss that.
13 All three of these people are permanent TVA i
14 managens.
Mr. Brown and Mr. Sligey each have 17 years nuclear 1
15 experience, and Ms. Jenkins with 10.
l 16 Mr. Brown.
17 MR. BROWN:
Thank you, Mr. White, Mr. Chairman, 18 Commissioners.
[
19 (Slide.]
- sf' 20 MR. BROWN:
The employee concerns special programs, 21 established in February of 1986, and first introduced to you 22 about a year ago in Volume 1 of the Nuclear Performance Plan, d
~
was reiterated on in Volume 2 as it applied to Sequoyah.
23 24 Through the employee concerns pecial program, the 25 vast' number of employee concerns identified as a result of the 4
l..
36
,.. +
,r 3
special program initiated by TVA in 1985 are evaluated, 1,
x 2 f l/ investigated, and resolved through corrective actions, while 3
at the same time preserving the anonymity and confidentiality 4
of the concerned employces.
5 The slide that I have before you depicts a program 6
that I believe to ha very disciplined, restructured,' executed 7
in a formal way by knowledgeable personnel independent of the b
8 concerned source, with a lot of overview and a lot of audit 9
and a lot of review.
10 Next slide, please.
11 (Slide.]
12 MR. BROWN:
I stated that the program is subjected 13 7
to a lot of' oversight.
I would ask you just to take a look at 14 this slide to get some idea of the caliber and credibility of 15 the individuals that make up the senior review panel that 16 overviews the employee concerns special program, and approves 17 its results and.its product.
18 Next slide, please.
19 (Slide.)
20 MR. BROWN:
For Sequoyah, rCrt 3r specific concerns 21 were directed at Sequoyah.
Some 890 generically applicable 22 concerns from other plants were grouped into 317 technical 23 issues and investigated and evaluated for Sequoyah.
24 Special reports specific to Se uoyah were produced at this issue or element level to document,the eval,uation 25 J
37 1
process, the results of the evaluation, and the corrective
~
2
' actions that would take place at the plant.
)
3 Next slide.
i 4
(Slide.]
5 MR. BROWN:
This slide summarizes the current status 6
of Sequoyah efforts.
The Sequoyah evaluations are complete.
7 The final reports and submittals are all but complete, with 8
314 of the 317 reports having been already submitted to the 9
NRC.
Visible results of the program at Sequoyah in terms of 10 corrective actions proposed, agreed to, and ongoing, which I 11 think is the best measure of the program, are:
12 In terms of hardware fixes, we have some 23 that are 13 either ongoing or scheduled or completed; 76 procedural 14 changes and revisions; 63 documentation corrections; 7 training 15 recommendations; 37 analysis revisions and corrections.
16 In concluding, I would say that parsonnel in the 17 employee concerns special program recognize the importance of 1
18 this program and the tasks before them, and are committed to 19 addressing each and every concern.
The process has proved to 20 be professional, rigorous, and comprehensive, and I think we 21 are confident it will allow us to answer the problems that 22 concerned our nuclear power employees.
23 Thank you.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
How any of these are l
25 there at Sequoyah?
How many employee concerns did you identify
38 1
for Sequoyah?
And on this list here, are,you talking about 2
just the ones that were targeted for Sequoyah or the ones with 3
generic applicability as well?
4 MR. BROWN:
As I stated, there are some 305 or so 5
that specifically named sequoyah.
Out of the rest of the 6
concerns that were voiced were Watts Bar, Browns Ferry, 7
Bellefonte, we did a very conservative generic applicability 8
for all of those and applied them to the rest of the plants, 9
and there were some 800-and-some-odd that was added to that 10 because of the generic applicability.
11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
12 MR. BROWN:
So in essence, we looked at some 1196
~
( '-
13 concerns at Sequoyah.
14 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
Did the Staff look 15 at the judgments that you made and the criteria that you used 16 in making those decisions on generic applicability?
For 17 example, how did you decide whether a Watts Bar issue is also l
18 a Sequoyah issue?
19 MR. BROWN:
Yes.
That is in our program manual.
We 20 docketed our program manual the first time in June, I think, 21 and it was redocketed as a document to Sequoyah's special 22 program again in September.
23 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
Has the Staff 24 bought off on that, oristhatsomethinhyou'restillgoing 25 back and forth on?
I
.~
i 4
39 4
1 MR. BROWN:
Well, they haven't told me that they 2
haven't bought off on it.
They haven't written us a letter 3
back and said, "We approve of it."
4 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
Are there various 5
questions about it, or is this one of the areas of ongoing 6
questions?
7 MR. BROWN:
To my knowledge, there have been no l
8 questions raised about the generic applicability.
And I would l
9 say this, to add to our conservatism that we have applied, we 1
10 have evaluated all the concerns except those in engineering 11 and QA at Browns Ferry and at Bellefonte, and in only one case l
12 have we found anything, you know, going thrcugh the rest of
',. ~
13 the program at the other sites, that might have applied to l
14 Sequoyah, and we came back and evaluated it at Sequoyah and 15 found nothing.
16 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
Thank you.
17 MR. WHITE:
Mr. Sliger?
18 (Slide.)
19 MR. SLIGER:
Thank you.
Good afternoon, gentlemen.
20 Through the lessons learned at Watts Bar, it became i
21 obvious that many employees had lost confidence in our j
22 management's ability to hear and resolve concerns.
As a I
23 result, we implemented on February the st of last year the 24 new employee concerns program.
25 In contrast to the Watts Bar special program that
40 1
Mr. Brown just discussed, the new employee concerns program 2
has been established as a long-term program which provides a 3
function to all nuclear organizations.
4.
The concept, if you will recall, has a Site 5
Representative and a staff at each nuclear plant site and at 6-each corporate office.
These staffs utiliza common databases 7
and common procedures.
8 Individuals may request or express concerns to the 9
staff by interviews, by phone-ins or mail-ins, and may request 10 that their identity be kept confidential.
~
11 The objectives of the program are described in 12 Volume I of the Nuclear Performance Plan and can be summarized 4
13 as follows:
(
14 First, we must provide a means or a program for 15 employees to report problems without fear of reprisal.
This 16 is an interim system designed to promote employee input as a i
17 part of corrective feedback needed by the quality organization.
18 And second, we must promptly investigate and resolve 19 the concerns that employees identify to the program.
20
[ Slide.]
21 As the next slide shows, employees are using the 22 program.
In thirteen months now, we have received more than 23 600 concerns.
We have completed more than 350 investigations, 24 have identified some 150 corrective actions, and have referred 25 some 65 allegations to TVA's Inspector General for,
41
- I 1
investigation, which alleged intimidation and harassment and 2
wrongdoing or misconduct.
3 Also there are some encouraging observations 4
associated with the program.
First, the whole notion of 5
employee concerns is becoming institutionalized.
You see it, 6
and you hear it repeatedly.
Also, supervisors are becoming 7
sensitized to the need to solve people's problems in'the 8
workplace, and the observations relayed to me by my st'aff 9
provide numerous examples of problems being headed off by more 10 direct involvement of supervisors in early recognition and 11 resolution of problems before full-blown investigations by my.
12 staff have become necessary.
13 This increased management involvement has a clear 14 relationship to the trend we're now seeing of declining i
15 numbers of concerns being expressed to the program.
I 16 Next slide.
17 (Slide.)
18 This slide, specific to sequoyah, clearly 19 demonstrates this trend, and this top curve is the number of 20 concerns received at Sequoyah in a cumulative sense.
21 Okay, back to the original.
22 (slide.]
23 Finally, we are making changes within the program 1
24 where needed to improve overall effectiveness.
More than 40 l
25 percent of all concerns are categorized as management and i
i
42 1
personnel.
In order to promote prompt resolution of this type 2
of concern, we are no longer formally investigating each one 3'
of them individually.
Instead, we are working with the 4.
. individual that expressed that concern and his or her 5
supervisors or their personnel officer or union steward or EEO 6
counselor or other organization that should be solving that 7
type of a problem, in an attempt to directly facilitate a C
8 prompt solution.
9 We are then monitoring each one of those situations lo as they are carried out.
To date, the response to this change 11 in the program's policy has been very positive from all 12 parties involved.
13 Then in closing, as Program Manager, I am firmly 14 committed to the idea that one of the keys to establishing 15 employee confidence in TVA Nuclear management is managers and 16 supervisors acquiring the skills and gaining confidence in t
17 themselves to deal with not just the technical issues of the 18 job, but also to manage the people and the program.
19 Thank you.
20 MR. WHITE:
I would like to make a couple of points 21 on this.
One is, the program has been established.
It is in l
22 place, and it's being used by our employees.
I can only tell i
l 23 you subjectively, as last summer when I walked the ship, I foundeventhen,aftertheprogramhadbeeninplaceforfive 24 25 months, I found people that didn't know it existed.
l 1
- - - - - - - - ~ ~~~ l
43 1
Today, I find quite a different story.
It's existed, 2
and almost every response I get is it's a trusted system and 3
people are using it.
4 And it's a very important thing to us, because I 5
have to depend on this as one of my management tools as I 6
improve management.
7 But perhaps the most important thing is that the 8
workers are probably my primary source of finding out if there 9
are any technical or safety concerns that I don't know about.
10 This system must work for me.
l 11 And there are positive signs to date, many positive 12 signs.
I'm continuing to watch it like a hawk, because it has 13 that importance.
14 COMMISSIONER CARR:
I assume that that's really the 15 employees' new concern program?
l'6 MR. WHITE:
That's correct.
17 COMMISSIONER CARR:
Instead of the new employees' 18 concern program.
19 (Laughter.)
20 MR. WHITE:
You are entirely correct, Commissioner.
21 MR. SLIGER:
I would like to introduce Ms. Jenkins, 22 who is responsible for consolidating the concern activities 23 relating to the program at this time.
24 (SLIDE.]
i, i.
25 MS. JENKINS:
Intimidation and harassment is the l
44 1
label that has been put on the category of concerns that 2
includes all types of employee misconduct, such things as 3
selling insurance on site, vehicle misuse, theft, drug use and 4
intimidation and harassment.
5 The focus of my remarks today though will be only 4
6 one type of very serious illegation, that that could be a 7
potential section 210 violation.
Typically the concern is j
8 stated, "The employee believes that he has suffered an averse 9
action after expressing a quality concern."
10 For Sequoyah, under the old program that Mr. Brown l
11 described, there were 12 allegations of this nature.
Eleven 12 of them are closed as of today.
I expect closure on the 13 twelfth one on Friday of this week.
t f
\\*
14 Under the new program, there have been two
)
15 allegations of this type expressed related to Sequoyah.
16 Neither is closed.
One report is in draft form.
The other 17 one, the investigation is underway but we have made personnel i
18 changes in the interim pending the results of that 19 investigation.
20 (SLIDE.]
t 21 MS. JENKINS:
On the next slide, you will see that i
22 we have identified three root causes that lead to the 23 allegations of intimidation and harassment.
They are 4
5 1
24 inappropriate management culture, an authoritarian style, poor i
i
(
25 communications between employees and supervisors, separate l
1
)
45 1
kingdoms of engineering, construction and operation each with r
2 their own differing and often inconsistent policies.
3 Insufficient management skills, TVA had.no formal 4
training program for its managers to give them basic management 5
skills, interrelationship skills with their people or how to be 6
sensitive.to and eliminate intimidation and harassment.
7 We ad improper disciplinary policies.
They were 8
harsh, inflexible and may have, in fact, discouraged the open 9
reporting of mistakes and problems rather than encouraging 10 them as we try to do today.
11 What have we done to correct this?.We have taken a 12 number of actions outlined on the next slide.
i
,. 4 13
[ SLIDE.]
14 MS. JENKINS:
When Mr. White first arrived he met 15 with some 9,600 employees of the Office of Nuclear Power and 16 he delivered his policy, no intimidation and harassment in the 17 workplace.
18 That message was recaptured the next month in our l
19 monthly newsletter which was sent to all employees.
We have 20 reemphasized that message in 25 or more memorandums, daily 21 dispatches.
It is woven into the discussions about technical 22 programs and about the quality of work and about schedules, 23 again, the message that we will elimina e intimidation and 24 harassment in the workplace.
25 Last fall in order to make sure that people knew
46 1
what it meant to implement the policy, a booklet was 2
distributed to all employees called, " Intimidation and 3
Harassment in the Workplace."
It is a common sense type of 4
definition for what intimidation and harassment is what it is-5 not.
6 We reviewed the policies of the past, those that we 7
felt were inappropriate, some that the NRC identified to us.
8 Those policies have been rescinded and new policies have been 9
issued.
10 In order to make sure the new policy was completely 11 delivered, the message was completely delivered, in early 12 February Mr. White pardoned the victims of some of that past 13 policy.
He did this by removing the warning letters from their files and by giving them back pay if they had been 14 l
15 suspended under this.
16 We have disciplined more than 22 individuals for 17 committing acts of intimation and harassment in the last 18 year.
We have conducted special training.
A pilot session on 19 intimidation and harassment was held for senior corporate 20 managers and for the employee concern program staff managers.
21 In addition, we have done special briefings for 22 those managers identified at Sequoyah, from the NRC's letter l
l 23 and last week I completed intimidation and harassment briefings for285Sequoyahmanagers, supervisors $ndforemen.
24 25 Those are the actions that we-have taken.
We have s
47 1
more planned.
As we continue to bring in new managers, they I
2 bring in new views and new skills and they are beginning to 3
shape a new culture within our office.
4 The most significant of the actions planned is a 5
comprehensive management and development program which will 6
emphasize people's skills and how'to get work done without 7
giving the perception of intimidation and harassment.
8 In summary then, we recognize the existence of 9
intimidation and harassment as a problem.
We believe we have 10 identified the root causes of that problem.
We have taken and 11 are taking actions to correct it.
12 Thank you.
13 COMMISSIONER CARR:
How many victims did you have to
'l 14 pardon?
15 MR. WHITE:
There were a total, I believe, of 41.
i 16 MS. JENKINS:
Correct.
17 MR. WHITE:
We completed exonerated like a dozen and 18 the others, we looked at them in an individual case, 19 Commissioner.
In some we gave back pay to, some we took 20 things out of their record.
21 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Steve, how well do you 22 think you are doing in terms of getting people really to i
23 believe that the culture has changed, that management has 24 changed?
(_
25 Part of what I think led the Board,to recognize how l
I'
48 1
serious the problems were that survey of employees that was 2-done back in the early part of 1985 and I have looked at the 3
survey that you all did, I guess, last september and it looks 4
to me like you have made some progress.
5 There are a lot of big question marks on the minds 6
of the people that you surveyed, things like only about a 7
third of your people believe that management is well-informed 8
on things that are important to the employees.
9 only 27-percent of your people believe that 10 management cares about the employees.
Only 45-percent of the 11 people believe that honesty and integrity are important to the 12 office of Nuclear Power Management.
,s -
13 There are a whole string of these both attitudes i
14 toward management and the general experience of working in the 15 office of Nuclear Power and I guess based upon that, do you 16 think that is a fair reflection of the views of the people in 17 the office and on the basis of that, how far do you think you 18 have come?
l 19 MR. WHITE:
Of course, it is very much a subjective l'
20 judgment.
That is the first survey done so it is going to be 21 a relative thing.
You have certainly on,umerated some of the 22 bad things that showed up.
23 some of the things that were good that frankly surprisedmewithalloftheperturbatibnsthatoccurredlast 24 25 year, 51-percent of the people thought -that things were
49 1.
improving.
I was astounded at looking at what went on.
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
3 MR. WHITE:
More than 90-percent feel, and this is 4
important, more than 90-percent feel that top management is 5
concerned about nuclear safety.
Ninety-eight percent of the 6
people committed themselves and t'he whole organization to t
7 wanting quality first.
There are some very good things in 8
there.
9 But it is a subjective thing.
I told you a year ago i
i 10 that it was a culture, I have to change.
I don't know how 11 long it will take.
I think we won't know when the change 12 actually started.
We will only be able to look back on that.
13 I think it has already started.
14 There are many signs.
For example, I recently spoke 15 to the senior resident NRC person at Sequoyah and he said that 16 although the number of concerns that are coming in has 17 fluctuated a little bit, maybe a little down, but essentially 18 constant, important were the types of concerns have completely 19 changed.
20 I don't want to put words in his mouth.
You ought i
21 to ask him but in essence, the concerns that used to be, " Gee, 22 I know a safety problem and I am being harassed about itH hgyg 23 now changed.
It is kind of like, "The water in the drinking 4
1 24 fountain isn't cold enough" and "I don't like my parking 4
25 place."
I
50 1
They are matters quite extraneous to safety so that 2
is one of the signs.
3 One of the signs I see as I walk around, as I walk 4
the ship and talk to people, I sense the change but I would 5
also tell you that I continue to receive perhaps two or three 6
letters a day on the average from people who have complaints' 7
and sign their names, they are not afraid to sign their names.
8 That tells me that they are not afraid of me but 9
perhaps afraid of someone in between us.
I will be happy for 10 many reasons when that mail drops to zero.
But I see some 11 positive signs but we just have to wait.
12 If the question is, is it stamped out?
- Clearly, 13 no.
Will it svar be completely stamped out?
I don't know.
I i
(
14 don't know that it is in any organization so that is the best f
15 I can do to try to explain it but I think as Ms. Jenkins said, 1
16 in the first nine months I punished 20 people.
Since I have 17 been back, I have punished two others and there are four l
18 pending.
I i
19 That is one of the tools.
One of the other tools is 20 reward.
One of the other tools is training.
Over a period of l
21 time, those things will fit together and eventually correct it 22 and I can't predict when that is going to be.
I wish I could.
i l
23 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
You said that two-thirds of l
24 the people thought management knew what was going on?
I 25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
No.
- Two-thirds didn't.
y 1
51 i
1 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Did not?
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Yes.
Management is well 3
' informed, 34-percent.
4 MR. WHITE:
Two-thirds felt communications were 5
inadequate if that is the item you are talking about, l
6 two-thirds felt communication was inadequate and clearly, F
7 communications has been a problem and continues to be.
- Again, 8
I sense some corrections are taking place and there is some i
9 good news but we have to continue to determine new ways if we 10 can.
11 I an open to anyone's suggestion as to anything that.
12 I can do that we are not doing.
I would welcome a suggestion 13 of anything that I am not doing that I can do to improve that 1
1 (
14 climate and that situation.
15 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I grant you that it is i
16 difficult to assess where you are and I would be the first to i
{
17 agree, I think you have a ways to go given some of those j
18 responses.
j 19 MR. WHITE:
That is true and yet, Commissioner l
20 Asselstine, I can also say that last year and I can give you i
21 from the record the right numbers, but I believe that something 4
1 22 like eight Department of Labor allegations since I have been i
f 23 there, eight allegations of 210 violations, that of those i
24 eight, they were all either dismissed or found in our favor.
4 i
25 I can check those numbers but I think our record in er--,-ve-,---v-,-w-,-w w,.w
_w-eewww-------- -,w
-ww w w-e-wwr ar rve--
ve-,-
~_
52 1
that regard and you know, knock on wood, has been good because 2
we have been trying to do the right things, trying to do the 3
right things.
4 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
All right.
Let's proceed.
5 (SLIDE.)
6 MR. WHITE:
Now we will get into Sequoyah.
There 7
are kind of three phases to Sequoyah.
Problem identification 8
was the first phase.
That is where I established task forces, i
9 the task force at Sequoyah with a lot of outside talent to 10 root out the problems and determine corrective actions.
l 11 That phase, we have completed and I disestablished 12 the task force.
13 The second phase was the problem resolution and I
,,.!k 14 believe that in almost every case today, the technical issues i
15 have been resolved and a course of corrective action has been 16 determined.
So we are completing that phase.
l 17 We really are also into the third phase, the restart 18 phase and what I have done there is assign the division of 19 nuclear engineering, Mr. Kirkebo, and his four branch chiefs, i
l 20 electrical, mechanical, nuclear and civil to Sequoyah until we i
I 21 start up.
22 I have assigned a number, approximately half a 23 dozen, program managers to coordinate and push on critical 24 path items.
SoIbelievethatweareibthatfinalphase.
{
,i 25 Mr. Abecrombia is a site director and he has 16 i
}
53 1
years of nuclear experience.
He has been the site director
'rm 2
since 1984 and prior to that had a number of other important 3
operational assignments at TVA'.
4 Among other things, Mr. Abecrombia will discuss the 5
major organizational changes that we made a year ago and their 6
impact and their importance.
Mr. Abecrombie.
7 MR. ABECROMBIE:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8 I.ama pleased to be here this afternoon to tell you 9
about the improvements that we have made at Sequoyah, and to 10 tell you of our preparation for restart.
11 Sequoyah has been shut down now for 19 months.
12 Since that shutdown', we have passed through a problem
- (~-
identificaiton phase, during which organizations, people, 13
\\
14 hardware and programs were thoroughly reviewed, and corrective 15 actions identified.
I 16 We are now ending a phase of fixing those problems 17 and preparing for restart.
i 18 Today I want to take you through some of the major 19 improvements that we have made because of TVA's search for and 20 correction of problems.
Then I want to tell you something of 21 our preparation for restart.
My remarks will address i
22 organization, hardware, programs and restart plans.
23 Slide, please.
l 24 (Slide.]
i j
25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
As you're talking about i
i 54 1
the improvements that you've made, could you sort of list the 2
major problems, the significant issues that you think have to 3
be resolved for Sequoyah restart, and then talk about, in 4
terms of the improvements, what you think needs to be done to 5
resolve those?
And when you do that, could you also tie in 6
for me what the Staff position is on each of those?
For 7
example, are they in agreement that those are the right 8
issues?
Are they in agreement that those are the steps that 9
have to be done to fix each one of them?
or is it something i
10 that is still open?
11 MR. ABECROMBIE:
I think we will touch on those as 12 we go through the --
13 MR. WHITE:
Let me touch on the last one first, 1
14 because with the new reorganization, we were quite comfortable 15 before with the working relationship with the senior management 16 team, there were a lot of good people on that.
But I have 17 noticed even greater coordination and even a better working relationship with the new -- Mr. Keppler and his group.
We 18
{
19 have met several times, the staff has, with him to try to come 20 to the conclusions that you want us to have today.
We are not 21 ready to do that, really.
Do you follow me?
I would be i
22 speaking out of turn to say that I know in all specific areas 23 where the Staff stands.
But with the progress we have made in thelastweekwiththatgroup,Ihopet$atwewillsoonbegin 24 25 to do that.
But I think Mr. Abecrombie will discuss the other
,..,-_,pe,e
_n------., -.,,,_,.
-_-.,.,c-,
_,.,,-,,.c_
~
55 1
, items.
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Great.
Okay.
3 MR. ABECROMBIE:
Following Mr. White's organizational 4
assessments, major improvements were made with the site.
As 5
you will note by the hash marks and the darker borders, a 6
number of changes were made to the site organization.
Site 7
licensing, procedure staff, and radiological assessors were 8
added.
Quality of manager, modifications, project engineers, 9
radiological controls, chemistry, planning and scheduling were 10 all upgraded in both capability and responsibility.
11 Most of the organization that you see here has been 12 in place for about a year.
It has been stable, and except for 13 recent changes in the plant manager and the site quality
(.
14 manager, the personnel have also been stable.
I 15 I might add that all positions that you see on this i
16 organization are filled by TVA managers.
There are no 17 contractor or loan managers --
18 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Everybody on here is a TVA l
19 employee?
I 20 MR. ABECROMBIE That's correct.
21 (Slide.)
22 MR. ABECROMBIE There are loan managers and contract 1'
23 managers at positions just below these principals, but these j
24 principals are all TVA managers.
25 The next slide, please.
i
56 1
We have made major improvements in the safety at 2
Sequoyah, and this list basically addresses, Commissioner, 3
your questions.
The environmental qualifidation program, of 4
course, will not only assure us that components will function 5
in the accident environment, but they will also add 6
considerably to the reliability of those components before 7
operation.
8 I do not know of any major difficulties remaining 9
with the Staff in resolving the EQ questions at this time.
10 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
So are you telling us now 11 that the EQ question, as far as you know, is resolved, 12 completed?
13 MR. ABECROMBIE:
The EQ will never be completed.
It I
14 is -- as I've said before, it is a very complex program, that 15 will require constant attention as we modify the plan, and as 16 we maintain the plan.
But the reason that we shut down has 17 been corrected.
18 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Including the paper work on i
19 it?
20 MR. ABECROMBIE:
Yes.
21 MR. WHITE:
But the piece parts, some would lump 22 piece parts into EQ, so we have to be careful.
We are working 23 on piece parts.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
That is still open?
25 MR. ABECROMBIE:
Yes.
t
.--_-_m,,.__
--_,,m-._-m
57 1
MR. WHITE:
Yes.
Oh, yes.
/
2 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
All right.
3 MR. WHITE:
We're no different than the rest of the 4
industry.
5 MR. ABECROMBIE:
Design verification.
While this 6
has resulted in really very few changes to the plan, it's
' greatly increased our confidence in the as-constructed status 7
8 of the plant.
Mr. Kirkebo addressed that in his remarks.
9 As far as I know, on that program, there are no l
10 outstanding major issues.
There are questions that continue 11 to come up, there are problems, such as the letter that we l
12 received.
We had some recent comments Friday in the exit that 13 we will have to get into and resolve.
But from a programmatic 14 standpoint, I do not know of any major issues.
15 The electrical systems.
There are a list of things 16 there that we have done in the electrical systems that will 17 increase our confidence in the reliability of those systems, 18 not only for accident situations, but also for normal 19 operations.
Some of those you recognize from being basically 20 industry problems as well.
Cable splices, for an example.
21 There is one issue on cable pull that we are now in 22 the process of establishing -- to take worst cases that will 23 ensure that we have not incurred any damage to cable during 24 the construction phrase in the practice of pulling that 25 cable.
But again, that's an issue that's on the table, and
58 1
there are no open problems there.
r~
2 The main steam vault wiring and insulation.
We 3
found on Unit 2 some fairly significant damage to cabling in t
4 one of our main steam valve vaults.
That damage occurred i
5 because of high temperatures in the vault due to stema leaks, 6
and because of conduit that was run next to uninsulated 7
piping.
We are taking action right now to replace all the 8
wiring in one vault, and part of the wiring in another vault.
l
)
9 We are reinsulating the piping.
We have become sensitized to i
j 10 assuring that the environmental conditions in there are such 11 that we won't exceed the limits of our equipment, one of the i
12 major things that has come out of there for me.
l r
13 Piece parts and material control.
Piece parts, l \\
14 spare parts, whichever you choose to use there.
We are now in 15 a program of ensuring that spare parts that have been placed i
16 in environmentally qualified equipment and seismic-sensitive j
17 equipment has not degraded the qualification of those 4
18 components.
That is a major program.
We are continuing 1
j 19 dialogue with the Staff on that.
Again, I do not know of any j
20 major open issues there.
i j
21 Material control.
We are establishing now a control j
22 system, a very rigorous control system to ensure th'at in the i
23 future only qualified spare parts are placed in components.
f 24 That material control system ellainates the use of what we i
25 call shop spares.
It assures that only qua,lified people or i
l
}
i
59 1
qualified personnel can issue the spares to the craft's.
2 Containment coatings.
We fou,nd that we did not 3
really have in place a good program to maintain the coatings 4
on components and structures inside containment.
We reworked 5
that program, and now we have assurance that those coatings 6
are capable of withstanding the design basis event.
There are 7
no technical issues there.
8 Containment air return fans.
In the Sequoyah 9
containment, ice condenser containment, there are fans which 10 recirculate the air on a loss-of-coolant accident.
We found 11 that we had one fan, because of its particular construction, 12 was predicted to fail because of the water from the containment 13 spray system.
We are now taking action to ensure that that fan s
14 will remain operable under all conditions.
There are some 15 structural changes that we are making.
16 Next slide, please.
4 17 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Let me ask one question.
18 I'm reluctant to bring up something that goes beyond -- in the 19 future, shall we say, beyond your possible hope for restart, 20 but Sequoyah is one plant, as you know, for which an extensive 21 PRA analysis has been done.
In fact, it's one of the focuses 22 of our Staff's so-called NUREG 1150 document.
Have you taken 23 a careful look at the outcome of those PRA studies, and do you haveanythoughtsonwhatmightbeconskderedorrequired 24 25 after you restart, and in the future?
t
60 1
MR. WHITE:
Let me try on that one to say that, as 2
we all know, that that particular NUREG has a number of 3
technical inadequacies in it.
But what we have done is we 4
have gone to Westinghouse and asked them to do an IPE, plant 5
evaluation, for us.
That's been completed, and I think we 6
have that, and that says we're not an outlier plant.
If you 7
want to discuss that as m separate issue, I am prepared to get 8
into the thing to the PRA issue in detail at Sequoyah.
9 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
But I would assume that TVA, 10 with its resources and position of leadership, would also be 11 taking a very careful look at your plants in light of the PRA.
12 that was done there.
I gather you are doing that.
I think 13 that's the messaget right?
i.,
14 MR. WHITE:
Yes.
Yes, that's the IPE.
15 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
On the safety list you 16 just finished up, why wasn't welding on that list?
I thought 17 you did a fairly extensive review of welding, not only at 18 Watts Bar, but also at Sequoyah.
19 MR. ABECROMBIE:
We did, and thank you for that l
20 remark.
Really, I was trying to show here things that we have 21 done to improve safety.
That, I think, basically was a 1
22 program to go --
t 23 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Verif cation?
)
24 MR. ABECROMBIE:
Right.
To verify.
25 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
Are there,any 4
-.__,,_,---.-,--_-,,,.,,w
61 1
others that fall in that category?
~
2 MR. WHITE:
Concrete..
3 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Concrete as well?
4 MR. WHITE:
Certainly.
5 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
6 MR. ABECROMBIE:
Next slide, please.
7 (Slide.)
8 MR. ABECROMBIE:
I don't plan to go into any detail 9
on this list.
As you can see, we have done a number of things 10 to increase the reliability of our major components, so that 11 when we return to service, we will have good runs from the 12 units.
13 Next slide, please.
- (
14 (Slide.)
15 MR. ABECROMBIE:
In addition to hardware 16 improvements, we have made a number of program improvements.
i 17 I'd like to just touch on two of those on that list, on design i
18
' control.
Mr. Kirkebo mentioned that he was putting in place a 19 very comprehensive design control program.
That program 20 should assure us that we will never in the future get caught 21 in the situation we're in today; that is, lacking 22 documentation, lacking proof that our equipment and our plant l
23 is capable of operating safely.
24 The second program that Mr. Hu ton mentioned is the 1
25 corrective action program.
I'm fully committed to making that i
_. ~.
s 62 a
1 program work.
Too many times in the past 'I have been, I guesii 2
I would say, embarrassed by the fact that TVA has found 3
problems at~other sites and they have not been brought to my 4
attention in a timely manner..
I am fully behind that program, 5
to bring all the problems identified at all the plants to one 6
system, and.I'm going to know-if Watts Bar has a problem that -
7 affects me.
.s 8
Next slide.
9 (Slide.)
s s.
t 10 MR. ABECROMBIE:
As I' pointed out, we have identified 11 a number of problems.
Wehavehixedmost,andwearenow l
12 preparing to return to power operations.
Before that. is j(
13 possible, I'm goingclo have to assure that our commitments 14 have been met, that all the modifications are completed for s
l 15 rentart, that our licensed operators and other plar.t staff are'
\\
16 fully capable and ready to bring the plant bacN pn 11ae,'and 17 that the plant equipment has been tested and is ready for 18 operation.
t 19 I have implemented a readiness review at the' site 2
20 that has four principal elements:
21 First, it'will assure tha'i' all commitments in thu l
22 operational readinsse -- excuse me, the Sequoyah and the i
23 corporate readineca programs have been completed.
j 24 Second, it will assure that al. r.ajor programs, sach 1
25 as cable pulling issues, fuses are properly closed for i
j i
m,.._. __,_m.._
.m..
f s
63 1
restart.
It will assure that my staff is ready, staffed, p
2 trained, procedures in place.
And I also have included a
)
3 checklist to ensure that non-hardware problems, such as 4
maintenance backlogs or equipment out of service do not affect l
5 operability.
'6 Operator qualifications and training.
of course, as 7
I've said, we've been down for 19 months, it will be a little 8
while,yet before we restart, and we want to be sure that our 9
operators are ready to go.
10 NRC has, of course, maintained surveillance over our
[,
11 requalification program.
Over the last 19 months, 66 Sequoyah 1 8 I'
12 operators have been evaluated by tha staff.
These exams have 1
13 been largely successful, with a 76 percent pass rate.
If we 14 just look at simulator examinations, Sequoyah operators have l
15 been 90 percent successful on the simulator.
,e 16 Commissioner, I think you had the opportunity to see l
17 some of our operators in action a while back.
i~
18 The most recent exams did point out some weaknesses i
19 with our reactor operators in their understanding of bases fcr i
4 20 certain operations.
We have since corrected that problem with 21 both the individuals and with the program.
22 On restart test program, we are now establishing a d
23 testing program to make sure that the volume of electrical j
i
, e 24 work that we have done over the last few months has not or i
25 will not impair or degrade the capability of the engineered I
l I
4
>re
_--,e-+--r-,
---,nnn----n-,
,,,,-,,c-.,_m.
-ww,,,--a-,,,
- -, -, ~, - - -,
64 1
safety features systems to perform their function.
f 2
In conclusion, I will say that TVA has expanded a 3
tremendous number of manhours, a lot of management attention, 4
to be sure that sequoyah is ready to return to service.
It's 5
been a difficult, yet in some ways a rewarding, period.
I'm 6
confident that when we come back to you next for your approval 7
for restart, that Sequoyah will be capable of being one of the 4
8 best operating plants in the country.
9 Thank you for your attention.
10 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Have you submitted the restart 11 criteria to the staff yet?
12 MR. WHITE:
Yes.
13 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Have you submitted it to the Staff?
14 MR. WHITE:
Mr. Chairman, yes.
We had actually 15 defined the restart criteria in Volume II.
That was during my 16 absence.
There was some confusion.
There were a couple of 17 letters written that some people felt modified that. restart 18 criteria./
19 I issued a letter this week in which I clearly 20 establish what the restart criteria are.
21 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Fine.
Thank you.
22 MR. WHITE:
I don't think there is any question.
23 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Thank you.
24 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
When you finish with all 25 of this effort on Sequoyah, are you goihg to be in a position
65 1
to certify at that point that Sequoyah was designed and built
/
2 in conformance with the national industry standards and with 3
the regulations that applied at the time that Sequoyah got its 4
license?
4 5
MR. WHITE:
Well, we are not going to relicense the 6
plant, if that's the thrust of your question.
It's a licensed 7
plant, and we're going to prove that that plant is safe and 8
capable and ready to operate.
That's the best way I can 9
answer it.
We're not going to go back and relicense the 10 plant, if that is the thrust of your question.
11 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Well, is there anything 12 that you are not doing now that you would have to do in order e-13 to make that kind of a judgment.
14 MR. WHITE:
Yes, I would suspect there are some 15 things.
In some areas, for example in testing, in testing, I 1
'16 intend that my program is going to do some things that weren't 17 done initially because of our particular ccnfiguration.
18 Yes, I suspect there are.
I haven't done an analysis 19 of those, but we are not going to try to relicense the plant, 20 if that is the thrust of your question.
21 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
All right.
Go ahead, sir.
22 MR. WHITE:
Before closing, let me very briefly hit 23 on two other topics of importance, and I'll be very, very 24 quick on this.
25 (Slie's.)
66 1
One is the Nuclear Safety Review Board, my safety 2
conscience.
When I arrived, this Board was comprised of 3
relatively low-level managers and engineers, and frankly they 4
were not as effective as they should have been.
5 I have hired a top experienced manager with more 6
than 28 ears of nuclear experience, put him in charge of 7
raising the level of the TVA members of those Boards, and most 8
importantly. I have brought in -- 50 percent of the people on.
9 the Board are now outsiders who are in to advise me of what 10 they think.
And I think it would be perhaps interesting, if 11 you want to put on the screen three -- let me show you the 12 types of people.
I think some of these names will be familiar
-g 13 to you -- the types of people that are part now of my safety 14 conscience.
15 Mr. Stone, in addition to that job, was at one time 16
-- he ran the atomic power lab, the Knolls Atomic Power Lab.
17 Next slide.
18
[ Slide.]
i 19 Again, I think some of the names will be familiar to 20 you, experts -- each expert in their field.
21
_The next slide.
22 (Slide.]
23 Mr. Hamilton was the Director of the Bettis Atomic 24 Power Lab.
But look at the credentials.
We have one more to i
25 fill in on that Board.
67 l
~
1 (Slide.]
,cn 2
In Licensing, we have -- I've placed a contract 3
Manager, Mr. Gridley, with over 30 years experience in 4
licensing.
He's been with me since the beginning.
He's put 5
strong, experienced licensing people at the sites, and I'm putting every pressure on getting both timeliness and quality 6
7
-- and' quality -- in our submittal.
And we made a lot of 8
progress in that area; I am not yet satisfied.
9 The next slide.
10 (Slide.]
11 And now just to give you a few closing remarks, 12 please bear in mind that when I arrived at TVA, I didn't look 13 at my job simply as one of getting plants safely on the line.
k 14 I wanted to correct the root problems at TVA, to make them 15 permanent, and to institutionalize them.
16 We needed to make significant changes in management, 17 both people and organization, and we needed to also build on a 18 lot of good, competent TVA people who are there.
And I think 19 we have done those things.
We have work left to do, but we've 20 come a long way.
21 We needed to establish across the organization a 22 solid foundation, and that's at the headquarters and at the 23 sites.
I think we have done that.
And you have heard some of 24 the keystones of that foundation today.
25 As I mentioned earlier, Commissioner, we're working
68 1
very closely now with Mr. Keppler and his Staff, so that we
(-
2 can sort out and get their comments en our startup plans for 3
Sequoyah and critical path items, and we've, in the short time 4
of a week or so with Mr. Keppler, we've made quite dramatic 5
progress in the resolution of some of those issues.
6 But perhaps the most important thing is that my goal 7
at TVA is to establish excellence, to establish excellence.
I 8
want TVA to be a showcase.
I want the NRC to point to TVA and 9
tell the industry, "That's how you should do it."
And so 10 remember, that's where I'm headed, and I will leave no stone 11 unturned to get there.
12 And we'ra ready for any additional questions that 13 you may have.
14 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
All right.
Thank you very much.
15 Mr. Roberts, I know you have to leave, but do you 16 have any questions?'
17 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Well, I don't have any 18 questions, but I will make a comment.
It sounds, based on 19 what I've heard today, you've got a comprehensive program and 20 one that seems to me that's responsive, and I wish you success 21 on its implementation.
22 I certainly hope this year is not divided into three 23 traumatic segments.
24 (Laughter.]
25 So I wish you well.
This is an ambitious project.
~=
69
~
1.
MR. WHITE:
It is that.
2 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
That's all I have.
3 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
All right.
Mr. Asselstine?
4 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
I've covered most of 5
mine.
A couple more.
6 Steve, 'on the Nuclear Safety Review Board, there was 7.
a question at the briefing of the Staff last week about why t
8 the Review Board had not affirmatively approved various 9
elements of the program plan, the management plans.
And at 10 the time, as I recall, the response was, "Well, we didn't feel 11 comfortable that we had looked at it enough to affirmatively 12 say we endorse it.
We didn't see problems."
And I know that 13' Jim Keppler raised a question about that.
14 Do you know if the Review Board has taken another 15 look at that yet, and whether they're --
16 MR. WHITE:
You're quite correct that the question 17 was raised.
The real response to that question was mine.
I 18 told Mr. Keppler, "That's a good point."
I didn't think of 19 it; I overlooked it.
20 But they aren't in the business of approving the
.21 plans.
But I've already directed that they go back and take a 22 look at them to review them.
We don't want to get them in the 23 business of approving them, but I certainly want to know-if 24 they find some holes in it.
25 And so it was a good suggestio'h by Mr. Keppler, and
70 1
I'm following up on-it.
"f 2
COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:. Good, great.
Okay.
3 It looks like you've hired a lot of people, a lot of 4
experienced people over the past year.
Does that mean the pay 5
cap problem isn't such a great problem after all?
You've 6
been able to attract all these people from industry to become 7
permanent, full-time TVA employees?
8 MR. WHITE:
No, it doesn't mean that at all.
It 9
doesn't mean that at all.
It doesn't mean that at all.
10 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Or is it our great raise 11 that made the difference?
i 12
[ Laughter.]
13 MR. WHITE:
You have to look at the individuals'
'(
14 concerns.
It's a very complex thing.
For example, when 15 Mr. Kirkebo came on board, we were asked by the media, "Why 16 would a guy come on board TVA?"
And the comments given by one 17 of my public spokesmen were -- and I think it's correct --
18 they said, "He smelled success."
You know, that's one of the 19 reasons.
20 We have hired some who have come because they're i
21 form Tennessee; they've had a long time in other parts of the 22 country.
In some cases, they just want to come to Tennessee.
23 It's a very complex thing.
24 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
That's a very rational 25 attitude.
1 1
71 gs 1-(Laughter.]
l
~2 MR. WHITE:
But don't let me indicate to you that 3
the pay cap is not a problem, perhaps for the -- and it isn't 4
that many -- perhaps the two dozen top managers, something 5
like that.
I haven't sat down and figured it out.
But it i
6 isn't a lot of people.
7 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
The last question I had, 8
what does all this cost?
How much money have you spent since 9
the last time we talked in January of last year, I guess it 10 was, or February?
11 MR. WHITE:
About -- I recall something like $75 12 million on Sequoyah, and this week -- this year, I'm sorry --
13 we expect, in terms of get-well costs, we expect this year to 14 spend about $100 million on Sequoyah, and on Browns Ferry 15 about $200 million.
16 I can't give you a number for Watts Bar, because I 17 have to know the full extent of my problems before I can 18 ascertain that.
19 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE:
Okay.
That's all I have.
20-CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Mr. Bernthal?
21 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Just a comment or two.
22 First of all, I agree with Commissioner Asselstine's comments 23 on the number of new hires that you've managed to put on-24 board.
I know one or two of those names, if not more, and I 25 want to ccmmend you for your ability to bring on some people, i
--.-,,,__,.,n.-
n.,-,
72 1
at least -- and I assume all the people -- that are topnotch.
2 What that leaves me with is the question probably l
3 that I asked a year ago, Steve, and that is, what happens now 4
.in the post-Steve White era -- what happens when TVA is now 5
required to make it on its own?
6 How many key slots, upper management slots, do you 1
7 have still to fill before you are able to say and the Board is 8
able to say, "We're ready to go on our own?"
9 MR. WHITE:
A very complex question.
Let me answer 10 it the best way I can.
11 First of all, with regard to Steve White, which is 12 the first part of your question, when Steve White leaves, 13 whenever that is, I will be replaced by a manager as competent e
14 or more competent, with the same principles and philosophy 15 that I have.
16 I commit that to you, that I certainly will ensure 17 that first.
18 I have tried very much to establish a management 19 team.
At what point in time we can get rid of, if I can use 20 that phrase, all contract managers, I don't know at present.
21 But there aren't very many in existence.
You know, there are 22 like a dozen.
Some of them are in key positions.
Licensing 23 is one; QA is one.
24 But if I were to show you the hart -- put up the 25 one on organization, because if I can answer to show you s
i
73 1
progress is more important than promises.
,.s-2
[ Slide.]
3.
MR. WHITE:
If you look at the slide, from last 4
year, let me show you the changes that are now -- last year 5
contracted but now are TVA people.
First of all, the Nuclear 6
Managers Review Group.
We have hired a person this week to 7
replace the INPO person that runs that.
Under staff, the 8
nuclear procedures was a contract manager, now TVA.
Planning 9
and financial, the same.
10 over on the left, the nuclear construction is now a 11 TVA.
The Deputy Director of QA is now TVA, he wasn't.
12 Nuclear Engineering of the top and number two jobs were 7 -
13 contractors, they are now both TVA.
That's about it.
\\
14 As I mentioned, we still have the top job in QA 15 primarily, that one and Licensing.
16 We have -- and two of the Site Directors.
In 17 essence, from whatever the numbers were last year, and they l
l 18 were probably 14 or something on that chart, we are down now 19 to maybe 5.
We have made progress., I'm trying very hard and 20 I just can't predict.
It's hard with a pay cap to recruit at 21 some of these levels and I'm having some difficulty.
22 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
Very good.
Thank you.
23 Mr. Chairman, it's almost midnight in Moscow.
l 24 (Laughter.]
l 25 COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL:
I detect my thought process
74 is~gething a little less coherent than usual, so maybe I'll 1
2 quit.
3 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Let me welcome you home anyway.
4 I'm delighted to have you back.
Mr. Carr?
5 COMMISSIONER CARR:
How about giving me a few words 6
on your fitness for duty program, since you are not a private 7
corporation.
8 MR. WHITE:
We have some problems in terms of kind 9
of approach to fitness for duty and associated elements.
We 10 do have a problem as a Government agency and I am going to let 11 the lawyer speak to it, in terms of drug testing that will 12 make it more difficult for us.
13 As a substitute for that, therefore, I'm putting a 14 lot of pressure in getting dogs and we are having some 15 success.
We have one and perhaps two, I want one at each 16 site.
I want them present constantly, presence constantly 17 observed.
We have those problems.
If you want to know the i
18 legalities, I am sure the lawyers can discuss the problem.
19 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Anything else, Commissioner Carr?
20 COMMISSIONER CARR:
No.
21 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Let me just make a couple of brief 22 comments.
First of all, you described your year of 1986 in 23 three parts.
We all appreciate the difficulties during that 24 year.
25 I think if I understood what you w;ere saying, you I
75 1
were not perhaps certain about some NRC concerns during that.
2 year.
Let me just say that as you recall, prior to that time, 3
NRC had been involved in assuring that those plants at Sequoyah 4
and-Browns Ferry were shut down, so although we may have not 5
known all the concerns in the detail that we would like to 6
have, we were very aware there were problems at TVA and I think 7
TVA was aware of those problems and very likely.that's why they.
8 were addressing them aggressively.
9 I don't think the impression should be left that NRC 10 was just sitting and watching what was happening because we 11 were-involved in making sure the plants were shut down.
12 Also I think it is important that some of the 7
concerns, in fact, I think one of your earlier slides said NRC 13
\\
14 concerns.
Yes, I think that's probably true.
I think during 15 the course of your briefing today, you probably touched on 16 every one of those concerns.
It seems to me that they were 17 valid concerns NRC had and I think NRC was at least attempting 18 to in our regulatory responsibility, to carry out those 19 responsibilities.
i 20 Although 1986 was a difficult year for TVA, I think 21 the important thing perhaps that we should look at in that t
22 regard is important communications, which you focused on, 23 with NRC are extremely important and I think as you have shown
\\
24 us today, a rather aggressive program for identifying problems 25 and trying to do something about them, I really do feel the i
76 1
1.
communications is an extremely important part of it and 2
whereas perhaps we are not going to be aware of in the great l
3 detail that you are of your problems, we rely on the licensees 4
to communicate with us and to inform us.
5 I think perhaps 1986 was a learning process for TVA, 6
and perhaps for NRC, too.
I do think we should not let that 7
drop without recognizing there was a learning experience there 8
for all of us.
9 I would just like to say, too, that to me, at least, 10 the design issues, although you have addressed them here very 11 well today and emphasized them, to me at least they could very 12 well be still controlling.
Frankly, because of NRC's review I
13 of those issues.
I feel the same way about the employee 4
i 14.
concerns program because even though you are apparently making 15 good progress in that regard, you must realize that we want to 16 satisfy ourselves in design control, design verification, 17 calculation programs and so forth and we can't do that i
18 overnight.
'l.
19 I hope you are factoring that into your schedule, 20
-just because you give us those programs, having finished them 21 yourself, you must recognize that it is going to take us time 22 to review them.
I 23 I think those things are important to keep in mind 24 as well as the importance of real solid communications.
I 25 think also your Nuclear Safety Review Board, which has been
77 1
commented on, is certainly an expressive group of people.
I 2
command you for that.
I commend you also for your emphasis on 3
excellence, quality, formality, discipline, those kind of 4
things that are important to TVA and to all utilities, as far 5
as I'm concerned.
6 I think you have given us a very important status 7
report today.
I think we should -- NRC, the Commission and 8
the staff should continue to review your progress and we will 9
look forward to following that progress with a great deal of 10 interest.
We are devoting a lot of resources to TVA, as you 4
11 know.
We will continue to do that.
12 Please, as you are putting your schedule together, 13 recognize that there are responsibilities we have that are 14 going to take time and I think that is important as you put 15 your schedule together.
16 Are there any other comments from my fellow 17 Commissioners?
18
[No response.]
19 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Thank you very much.
We stand 20 adjourned.
21
[Whereupon, at 3:50 p.m., the meeting was adjourned.)
22 23 24 25
-....-y.7,
,,..,._m...,_m.,,..._.,
__,_.,-_._,,,,,,_-,,..m_
1
- (--
1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 3
4 This is to certify that the attached events of a 5
meeting of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission entitled:
6 7
TITLE OF MEETING: Briefing on Status of TVA (Public Meeting) 8 PLACE OF MEETING:
Washington, D.C.
9 DATE OF MEETING: Monday, March 16, 1987 10 11 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original-12 transcript thereof for the file of the Commission taken
{...
13 stenographically by me, thereafter reduced to. typewriting by t2-14 me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and.
15 that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the 16 foregoing events.
17 h *%b u='3 Y-- D N -----
18 f
Marilynn M. Nations 19 20 21 22 Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd.
23
(
24 25 e
wm-
..-e,-,,,-,p-e
,w
,,..-- - -, ~.-w,,--r--.nv s-yy.-o e
,,w,---,.--e
,----.-----,,--,--,--,n,-
-m-. - - --., -,., -,,,,
m-
._.m
..__s__
4
__.-.4_-
.-__m
-..a w
e-" _---
9 9
4 e
O i
)
I i
1 l
1 I
i
!Z!
B f
I t
(
I e
.I E
G
MAJOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES NAMEPLATE CAPACITY IN MEGAWATTS CONSTRUCTION COMMERCIAL NAME UNITS LOCATION (EACH UNITS)
START OPERATION TYPE BROWNS FERRY 3
DECATUR,AL 1,152 9-12-66 UNIT 1-1974 BWR (GE)
UNIT 21975 UNIT 31977 SEQUOYAH 2
SODDY-DAISY, TN 1,221 4169 UNIT 11981 PWR (W)
UNIT 21982 1
WATTS BAR 2
SPRING CITY, TN 1,270 12-26 72 PWR (W) i BELLEFON,TE 2
SCOTTSBOR0,AL 1,332 9-18-74 PWR (B&W)
CORPORATE CHATTAN0OGA,TN (NUCLEAR)
ENGINEERING MN0XVILLE, TN j
(NUCLEAR)
CONSTRUCTION MN0XVILLE, TN 1
w
NUCLEAR FACILITIES
~
KNOXVILLE e
WATTS BAR SEQUOYAH CHATTANOOGA f
0 BROWNS 0
N(p FERRY BELLEFONTE G
/
4
i l
i i
TOPICS h HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OBJECTIVESISTATUS f
'e ORGANIZATION 4
e PEOPLE e
QUALITY ASSURANCE o
ENGINEERING e
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS e
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT SEQUOYAH STATUS -
1 CLOSING REMARKS
~
i
I HISTORY AND BACKGROUND NRC CONCERNS i
CORPORATE CONTROLS WEAK, LACK OF TOP MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT e
e LACK OF NUCLEAR AND OPERATING EXPERIENCE IN PLANT ORGANIZATION e
TECHNICAL SUPPORT NOT MANAGED e
DECENTRAllZATION (0WNER/0PERATOR CONCEPT) NOT IMPROVING PLANT PERFORMANCE e
ALLEGATIONS e
POOR REGULATORY PERFORMANCE e
LACK OF INTEGRATED TRACKING SYSTEM e
LACK OF SITE-TO SITE SHARED OPERATING EXPERIENCE e
UNTIMELY AND INEFFECTIVE CORRECTIVE. ACTION
1
~,
1 1
j l
[
l HISTORY AND BACKGROUND SITUATION IN JANUARY 1986 e
ORGANIZATION WAS FRAGMENTED, UNFOCUSED, AND UNDER FIRE o
LACK OF REQUISITE EXPERIENCED MANAGERS e
LACK OF PROPER DIRECTION AND CONTROL FOR TVA'S NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES e
ALL LICENSED PLANTS SHUT DOWN e
OVER 5,000 OPEN EMPLOYEE CONCERNS
l 1
1 TOPICS l
i HISTORY AND BACKGROUND
- + OBJECTIVES / STATUS 4
e ORGANIZATION I
e PEOPLE i
QUALITY ASSURANCE e
I e
ENGINEERING e
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS l
e INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT SEQUOYAH STATUS CLOSING REMARKS
OBJECTlVES/ STATUS TVA 0FFICE OF NUCEAR POWER OBJECTIVES TO ASSURE SAFE PLANT OPERATION 1.
ESTABLISH A STABLE ORGANIZATION l
2.
PUT A STRONG MANAGEMENT TEAM IN PLACE -
3.
ESTABLISH PROCEDURAllZED AND DISCIPLINED WAY OF DOING BUSINESS l
4.
ENSURE THE TECHNICAL INTEGRITY OF THE PLANTS l
5.
REESTABLISH TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN MANAGEMENT l
t I
I
i l
l h
1 OBJECTIVES / STATUS i
1 l
OBJECTIVE 1: ESTABLISH A STABLE ORGANIZATION t
e REORGANIZATION COMPLETE e
POLICY AND ORGANIZATION MANUAL ISSUED l
e POSITION DESCRIPTIONS WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED I
\\
l t
l l
i l
t OBJECTIVES / STATUS l
OBJECTIVE 2: PUT A STRONG MANAGEMENT TEAM IN PLACE I
l 1
e INFUSION OF SENIOR MANAGEMENT TALENT e
REMAINING TO BE DONE
~
- COMPLETE PHASEOUT OF TEN REMAINING ADVISORS
- REPLACE CONTRACTOR MANAGERS WITH TVA PERSONNEL t
t b
l
4 4
i i
i l
OBJECTIVES / STATUS l
i OBJECTIVE 3: ESTABLISH DISCIPLINED WAY OF D0 LNG BUSINESS i
e APPROVED POLICY FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM l
e TRACKING SYSTEMS e
CONDITIONS ADVERSE TO QUALITY l
e REVISED QUALITY ASSURANCE TOPICAL REPORT e
DEVELOPING A CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM NUCLEAR PROCEDURES SYSTEM 9
I i
OBJECTIVES / STATUS
/
l OBJECTIVE 4: ENSURE THE TECHNICAL INTEGRITY'0F THE PLANTS
~
ORGANIZATIONAL CP.ANGES 70 IMPROVE TECHNICAL PERFORsiANCE ESTABLISHEO, e
e ORGANIZATIONAL CH?.NGES TO IMPROVE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT l
i j
e MAJOR TECHNICAL REVIEWS
~
- DESIGN BASELINE AND VERIFICATION-
- ENVIRONMENTAL QUAllFICATION e
SELECTED USE OF EXPERTS
\\
m j
i 1
i
..,y A..
r-I.
s t
l l
l OBJECTIVES / STATUS OBJECTIVE 5: REESTABLISHING TRUST AND CONFIDENCE BETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES l
l e
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR POWER (ONP) EMPLOYEE CONCERN PROGRAM i
e INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT POLICY s
MANAGEMENT TRAINING PROGRAM UNDER DEVELOPMENT l
1 l
I 1
i OBJECTIVES / STATUS '
~
e
-. CORPORATE NUCLEAR PERFORMANCE PLANS TO NRC
- Revised Corporate Nuclear Performance Plan (i/olume 1)
- March 10,1986
- Revised Sequoyah Nuclear Performance' Plan (Volume 2)
- July 17,1986
- Browns Ferry Nuclear Performance Plan (Volume 3)
August 28,1986,
- Watts Bar Nuclear Performance Plan (Volume 4)
- Now being prepared l
9 w
a
i l
l TOPICS l
l l
~
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND r
j OBJECTIVESISTATUS l
he ORGANIZATION s
PEOPLE e
QUALITY ASSURANCE ENGINEERING e
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS e
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT
)
SEQUOYAH STATUS 1
I CLOSING REMARKS i
ORGANIZATION
SUMMARY
i e
CONSOLIDATION OF NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES WITHIN SINGLE ORGANIZATION AND REMOVAL l
OF NON-NUCLEAR MATTERS e
CENTRAllZED DIRECTION AND CONTROL l
e CLEAR, SIMPLE LINES OF AUTHORITY / RESPONSIBILITY e
STRENGTHENING WEAK AREAS i
- QUAllTY ASSURANCE i
- ENGINEERING I
- LICENSING
- NUCLEAR REVIEW BOARD j
- TRAINING
(
s a
a esa-,
L.
O O
e O
O r
l ORGANIZATION i
1 BOARD M0 GENERAL MANAGER i
NUCLEAR SAFETY REMEW STAFF g
i I
l l
8 l
BALMCE OF 0ESM A110 En TVANISEVERAL CONSim M REr0RimG CNm3 I
1 NUCLEAR l
UCENSillG l
i I
I I
I i
I i
I I
PUWNaNG -
3 OE31GN CONSTRUCTION i
E LEAR I M M EAR
- RESEARCN, I
PUCLEAR&
$1UCLEAR4 OPERAil0NS OPERAT10lis RATE IIANG l
N0ll-pluCLEAR) 11011IluCLEAR)
I 1
I PR000Cil0N l
ENGINEEINNG CONSilluCil0li -
g
4 ORGANIZATION March 1987 1
80ARD OF DIRECTOR $
J GEERAL MANAGER GEERAL COUNSEL NISPECTOR GEERAL MANAGER OF IluttfAR POWER DEPUTY MAllAGERS 1
i MANAGER l
GF A$$1STANT l
IluCLEAR MAllAGER 1
PERSollliEL I
~
muttEAR IluCLEAR MAliAGER1 SMETY REVIEW GROUP ggy 804R0 e lluCLEAR PROCEDURES e PLAINNG & Fanfanirtas gggp e 110CLEARliffoluiATIDel e IITE REPHESENTATlWE3 I
NUCLEAR DIRECTOR ORECTOR DECTOR DNIEClag DulECTOR DmECTOR j
SITE DIRECTOR $
OF OF 0F 0F OF 0F AND NUCLEAR 16UCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCtEAR lluCLEAR SAFETY PROJECT MMAGERS CONSTRUCT 10ll QA ENGIMERWG SEIMCES TRAMNG
& tlCENSillG I
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
- DEPUTY DIRECTOR WPUTY DIRECTOR A$$1STMTS A33ETMT ASSISTMT DRECTOR DEPUTY DRdCTOR
'8ROWNS FERRY C.itY
ORGANIZATION SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT March 1987 i
t MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER
?
i i
l l
I
)
DIRECTOR OF DIRECTOR DIRECTOR OF DIRECTOR ITE NUCLEAR OF NUCLEAR QUALITY CONSTRUCTION O
NUCLEAR OF SAFETY ENGINEFRING
& LICENSING ASSURANCE i
1 i
1
-l 1
I i,
I r--------
T----
'-- ------------------7---
7
.I l
I I
l 1
I I
l I
I i
i i
l i
i i
I I
I I
I l
':!E GA SITE MODiflCATIONS SITE SERVICES NUCLEAR E
M AGER Lgg 3ING ENGINEERING j
i TOPICS HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OBJECTIVES! STATUS e
ORGANIZATION Ne PEOPLE e
QUALITY ASSURANCE s
ENGINEERING e
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS l
t e
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT SEQUOYAH STATUS CLOSING REMARKS
)
PEOPLE SENIOR-MANAGERS HIRED SINCE JANUARY 1986 l
l l
SENIOR-LEVEL MANAGERS R. W. BRADFORD CHIEF, FIELD SERVICES BRANCH
> 17 years nuclear experience ~
DIVISION OF NUCLEAR CONSTRUCTION PERCY BREWINGTON MANAGER, CONTRACTED ENGINEERING SERVICES,
> 32 years engineering and l
(LOANED)
DIVISION OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING
> 14 years nuclear experience ANTHONY P. CAP 0ZZi MANAGER, ENGINEERING ASSURANCE,
> 20 years nuclear experience
)
DIVISION OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING l
JERRY L CHILDS MANAGER, MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, DIVISION
> 13 years nuclear related 0F NUCLEAR SERVICES experience l
TOM CHILES MATERIALS MANAGER, PLANNING AND FINANCIAL STAFF > 27 years financial management experience j
' SILAS.B. FISHER MANAGER, PLANNING AND FINANCIAL STAFF
> 30 years financial management experience CHARLES H. FOX, JR.
DEPUTY MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER
> 21 years nuclear experience i
R. L. GRIDLEY (LOANED)
DIRECTOR, DIVISION 0F NUCLEAR SAFETY
> 30 years nuclear experience AND LICENSING WILLIAM H. HANNUM CHAIRMAN, NUCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW BOARD
> 28 years nuclear experience WALTER V. HORN DEPUTY, SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT
> 18 years nuclear experience MODIFICATIONS MANAGER, DIVISION OF j
NUCLEAR CONSTRUCTION I
PEOPLE i
SENIOR MANAGERS HIRED SINCE JANUARY 1986 i
/
l SENIOR LEVEL MANAGERS N. C. KAZANAS (LOANED) DIRECTOR, NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE
> 25 years nuclear experience 1
]
J. A. MIRKEB0 DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING
> 22 years nuclear experience i
D. M. LAKE (LOANED)
WATTS BAR CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
> 30 years nuclear experience I
LOWELL L. LEPIST0 ASSISTANT TO DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF
> 30 years nuclear experience NUCLEAR ENGINEERING t
j MICHAEL J. MAY MANAGER, BROWNS FERRY SITE LICENSING,
> 23 years nuclear experience j
DIVISION OF NUCLEAR SAFETY AND LICENSING i
DENNIS P. McCLOSKEY MANAGER, SUPPORT OPERATIONS, DIVISION OF
> 9 years nuclear experience NUCLEAR SERVICES G.' R. MULLEE DIRECTOR DESIGNEE, NUCLEAR MANAGER
> 30 years nuclear experience REVIEW GROUP WILLIAM E. PENNELL MANAGER, ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL
> 24 yea,rs nuclear experience SERVICES, DIVISION OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING l
H. P. POMREHN (LOANED) SITE DIRECTOR, BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT
> 25 years nuclear experience j
WILLIAM S. RAUGHLEY CHIEF, ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, DIVISION
> 16 years nuclear experience 0F NUCLEAR ENGINEERING MICHAEL J. RAY ASSISTANT TO DIRECTOR, NUCLEAR SAFETY
> 15 years nuclear experience AND LICENSING j
CLOIN G. ROBERTSON.
ACTING DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR SERVICES
> 20 years nuclear experience
PEOPLE SENIOR MANAGERS HIRED SINCE JANUARY 1986 SENIOR-LEVEL MANAGERS R. K. SElBERLING DIRECTOR, NUCLEAR MANAGERS REVIEW GROUP
> 2S years nuclear experience i
l (LOANED)
PAUL SPEIDEL BROWNS FERRY PROJECT ENGINEER
> 16 years nuclear experience GEORGE TOTO (LOANED)
SITE DIRECTOR, WATTS BAR NUCLEAR PLANT
> 30 years nuclear experience CLAUDE N.TURNBOW,JR. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF NUCLEAR
> 20 years nuclear experience CONSTRUCTION GERALD G. TURNER BROWNS FERRY SITE QUALITY MANAGER,
> 16 years Quality Assurance DIVISION OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE experience JOHN G. WALKER DEPUTY SITE DIRECTOR, BROWNS FERRY
> 20 years nuclear experience NUCLEAR PLANT j
MARK B. WHITAKER, JR.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF NUCLEAR
> 18 years nuclear experience
]
SAFETY AND LICENSING JAMES H. BARKER MANAGER, RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL, DIVISION
> 6 years nuclear experience 0F NUCLEAR SERVICES TOTAL > 670 years experience i
OTHER MANAGERS HIRED
}
Approximately 160 managers.
Approximately 400 engineers hired or transferred into program.
j Special purpose consultants hired.
i TOPICS HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OBJECTIVESISTATUS i
e ORGANIZATION i
e PEOPLE 1
i 3*+
e QUAllTY ASSURANCE e
ENGINEERING j
e EMPLOYEE CONCERNS e
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT SEQUOYAH STATUS CLOSING REMARKS
l l
l l
l QUALITY ASSURANCE l
OVERVIEW OF IMPROVEMENTS: QUALITY ASSURANCE i
i i
e RESTRUCTURING OF THE QUALITY ASSURANCE ORGANIZATION FOR GREATER EFFECTIVENESS: FUNCTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER ONE DIRECTOR NEW EXPERIENCED SENIOR MANAGEMENT TO PROVIDE STRONd DIRECTION, i
e LEADERSHIP AND TRANSITION TO PERMANENT TVA DIRECTOR e
SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS, NEW PROGRAMS, MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES 4
i
l i
l l
l l
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESTRUCTURING OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ORGANIZATION COMBINED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONS UNDER ONE DIRECTOR - REPORTS e
i MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER i
L s
CORPORATE QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONS e
NUCLEAR PLANT QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONS j
+
i t
l l-I
\\
i L
QUALITY ASSURANCE l
0FFICE l
OF NUCLEAR POWER S.A. While NUCLEAR j
QUALITY NUCLEAR ASSURANCE ENGINEERING 1
N.C.Karanas DEPUTY DIRECTOR R.C. Parker i
ENGINEERING ASSURANCE A.P. Capezzi A.UDIT AND TECHNICAL PROCUREMENT GUALITY EVALUATION SUPPORT GUALITY SYSTEMS 3
ASSURANCE G.W. Millian R. W. Olbeler D.R. Armentrout J.E. Law OFFSITE i
DNSITE t
l SITE SITE SITE SITE QUALITY 00ALITY QUALITY ASSURANCE QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSURANCE WATTS BAR ASSURANCE SEQUOYAH BROWNS FERRY H.C. Johnson BELLEFONTE L.E. Martin G.G. Turner (Acting)
- 3. Johnson, Jr.
l
i QUALITY ASSURANCE SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS, NEW PROGRAMS, MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES i
o QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM i
)
e CORRECTIVE ACTION
)
e QUALITY ASSURANCE OVERSIGHT e
ENGINEERING ASSURANCE i
e QUALITY CONTROL INSPECTION UPGRADE t
e TRAINING e
STAFFING t
l I
j i
i 1
QUALITY ASSURANCE l
l l
i j
CONCLUSION i
e QUALITY REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING GIVEN PRIORITY OVER SCHEDULE LINE MANAGEMENT BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR QUALITY e
INDEPENDENCE OF QUALITY ASSURANCE FROM LINE MANAGEMENT ESTABLISHED e
QUALITY ASSURANCE VIEWED AS A TOOL OF LINE MANAGEMENT a
J I
t b
i l
I O
l
l 1
I l
TOPICS k,
l HISTORY AND BACKGROUND l
t OBJECTIVES / STATUS 1
}
e ORGANIZATION e
PEOPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE o
he ENGINEERING e
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS i
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT e
SEQUOYAH STATUS CLOSING REMARKS
i j
i i
l 1
1 t
I 1
ENGINEERING I
i i
j CHALLENGES e
TECHNICAL PROGRAM CONTROL e
DEDICATED PROJECT ENGINEERING TEAMS
)
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN ENGINEERING e
4 l
I t
l
t l
ENGINEERING
- l. RESPONSIBILITIES
~
j e TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS e "AS-BUILT" DOCUMENTATION e MODIFICATION PACKAGES II.
PROJECT ENGINEERING e PROJECT LEADERSHIP e WORK CONTROL
)
e PROCEDURES i
l 111.
DESIGN CONTROL 4
e DESIGN BASELINE AND VERIFICATION PROGRAM e NEW DESIGN CONTROL PROCESS 1
l i
l
i l
TOPICS i
i HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OBJECTIVESISTATUS i
j e
ORGANIZATION 1
e PEOPLE 1
4 QUALITY ASSURANCE 9
e ENGINEERING he EMPLOYEE CONCERNS 4
e INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT t
i SEQUOYAH STATUS g
CLOSING REMARKS j
l l
(
i l
l 1
4 i
l i
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS l
~
Special Employee Concerns Program W. R. Brown New Employee Concerns Program E. M. Sliger i
)
Intimidation And Harassment T. B. Jenkins
]
2 l
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS THE EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM IS:
I i
{
e STRUCTURED e
USES FORMAL PROCEDURES e
FULLY DOCUMENTED AND AUDITABLE EMPHASIZES THE USE OF EXPERTS (INHOUSE AND CONTRACTOR) e e
STRESSES TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE e
EMPHASIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF FINDING AND CORRECTING ROOT CAUSES e
HAS AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW GROUP OF OUTSIDE EXPERTS I
e l
l! --
i
\\
i EMPLOYEE CONCERNS EMPLOYEE CONCERN TASK GROUP OVERVIEW e
SENIOR REVIEW PANEL OF INDEPENDENT EXPERTS
- MICHAEL BENDER
- FORMER DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AT OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY AND CHAIRMAN OF ACRS
- DANIEL GARLAND
- FORMER MANAGER OF QA - WESTINGHOUSE
- JAMES DUNFORD
- MEMBER GPU RESTART COMMISSION
- JOSEPH LEVALLE
- FORMER MANAGER OF PROJECTS - SARGENT AND LUNDY i
- JAMES McGUFFEY FORMER QA MANAGER - OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY
- RICHARD KOSIBA
- FORMERSENIORTECHNICALMANAGER-BABC0CK&WILCOX i
j l
l
4 i
i i
1 EMPLOYEE CONCERNS i
i THE EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM ADDRESSES SEQUOYAH j
e SPECIFIC CONCERNS e
GENERICALLY APPLICABLE CONCERNS e
SPECIAL REPORTS l
i j
i
4 i
l I
i EMPLOYEE CONCERNS I
i SEQUOYAH STATUS AND RESULTS FROM THE SPECIAL PROGRAM l
e EVALUATIONS COMPLETE 100 %
e REPORTS 99 %
RESULTS (CORRECTIVE ACTIONS) e
- HARDWARE
- PROCEDURES
- DOCUMENTATION
- TRAINING
- ANALYSIS
j i
i i
i EMPLOYEE CONCERNS "NEW" EMPLOYEE CONCERN PROGRAM l
e IMPLEMENTATION ON FEBRUARY 1,1986 e
LONG TERM I
APPLICABLE TO ALL TVA NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES 1
4
l
\\
EMPLOYEE CONCERN PROGRAM i
1 j
STATUS AND OBSERVATIONS i
e i
e 600 CONCERNS /350 INVESTIGATIONS /15O CORRECTIVE ACTIONS l
a 65 ALLEGATIONS REFERRED T0 IG e
RECEIPT OF CONCERNS DECREASING l
e POSITIVE INTERACTION WITH LINE MANAGERS I
i e
POLICY SHIFT - MANAGEMENT AND P'ERSONNEL CONCERNS 9
4 i
T D
t Employee Concerns Program
~
Case File Status j
SON Siis - Program To Date 10 0 Legend
~
RE__C..EIV. ED.. YT. D.
7
o 80-
,f,,
]
./
7 i
9 e6
/
a'e 60-
,9' ',,
w C
i L.
o e
i a
i O
8
.A U
o' 40-
/
e-a
-I R
l 9
l Ja,o**
20- /
i 1
t 4
)
l.
i 0-FEBMAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOVDEC JAN FEBMAR APR MAY JUN JUL 1986 1987
1 TOPICS HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OBJECTIVESISTATUS e
ORGANIZATION 1
PEOPLE o
QUALITY ASSURANCE e
ENGINEERING s
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS m->- e INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT SEQUOYAH STATUS l
CLOSING REMARKS
O 9
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT
~
(SECTION 210 - PROTECTED ACTIVITY) l l
l ALLEGATIONS CLOSED WATTS BAR SPECIAL PROGRAM 113 65
- SEQUOYAH 12 11 NEW EMPLOYEE CONCERN PROGRAM 14 2
2 0
- SEQUOYAH t
8 1
/
1 1
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT i
l I
l ROOT CAUSES:
e MANAGEMENT CULTURE l
e MANAGEMENT SKILLS e
DISCIPLINARY POLICIES t
e e
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT l
ACTIONS TAKEN e
EMPLOYEE MEETINGS e
MEMORANDUMS AND ARTICLES e
RESCINDED PAST POLICY e
PARDONED VICTIMS OF PAST POLICY t
PEOPLE DISCIPLINED e
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
TOPICS HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OBJECTIVES / STATUS e
ORGANIZATION e
PEOPLE o
QUALITY ASSURANCE o
ENGINEERING e
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS e
INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT w SEQUOYAH STATUS CLOSING REMARKS
SEQUOYAH STATUS AND OBJECTIVES SEQUOYAH l
e PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION e
PROBLEM RESOLUTION RESTART G
1 l
SEQUOYAH STATUS AND OBJECTIVES i
MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION i
SITE INRECTOR i
l PERSONNEL FWANCIAL SERVEES SERV:CES PLANINNO &
SITE SCHEDULING SERVICES srssvists
<rrisisse RADIOLOGEAL PROCEDURES I
>>,SSESSOR STAFF A
ii>>>>
>>ii>>>rs
$1TE OUAUTY LEENSWG 04ANAGIR RICOIFEATIONS ENGWEER
=
PLANT tlANAGER A$$1STANT TO
{""h""'p bA81AGER I
I h,....!....
sd orf
'=
W=== K 1
I OPERAll0NS &
TECHNICAL RIAINTENANCE SUPPORT I
I l
I I
I I
I I
l CuEmsw'6*'**^'
mRAn0N
- 'aL M ME RECTREAL WCHAWCAL WSIRUWNT Or *m
.w n-e h m. I.se v r u
=i.,
A
SEQUOYAH STATUS AND OBJECTIVES PLANT SAFETY AND RELIABILITY ASSURANCE SAFETY
~
e ENVIRONMENTAL QUAllFICATION PROGRAM e
DESIGN VERIFICATION e
ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS
- DIESEL GENERATOR LOAD SEQUENCE
- AMPACITY - CABLE REPLACEMENT
- FUSES
- CABLE PULL ISSUES
- CABLE SPLlCES e
MAIN STEAM VAULT WIRING AND REINSULATION t
e PIECE PARTS - MATERIAL CONTROL e
CONTAINMENT C0ATINGS e
CONTAINMENT AIR RETURN FANS
SEQUOYAH STATUS AND OBJECTIVES PLANT SAFETY AND RELIABILITY ASSURANCE I
i RELIABILITY e
TURBINE ROTOR UPGRADE e
MAIN GENERATOR INSPECTION & UPGRADE e
FEEDWATER HEATER REPLACEMENT MOISTURE SEPARATOR REHEATER RETUBING STRESS REllEVING UNIT 1 STEAM GENERATOR TUBES e
UNIT 1 REFUELED e
MOTOR OPERATED VALVE ANALYSIS AND TEST SYSTEM e
FEEDWATER PIPING EROSION MONITORING PROGRAM
SEQUOYAH STATUS AND OBJECTIVES PROGRAMIMPROVEMENTS e
DESIGN CONTROL e
PROCEDURE CONTROL o
MAINTENANCE RADIATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROGRAM e
CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM e
4
.e
I i
SEQUOYAH STATUS AND OBJECTIVES RESTART READINESS e
OPERATIONAL READINESS e
OPERATOR TRAINING i
e RESTART TEST PROGRAM 1
I e
TOPICS i
I i
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OBJECTIVESISTATUS e
ORGANIZATION e
PEOPLE e
QUALITY ASSURANCE e
ENGINEERING e
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS i
e INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT SEQUOYAH STATUS m+ CLOSING REMARKS t
e e
l SAFETY REVIEW SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT - NUCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW BOARD OUTSIDE ADVISORS l
DR. JOHN AUXIER DIRECTOR INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES HEAD, PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON TMI ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION DR.T.L.GERBER EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES J. C. GRIGG RETIRED FORMER DIRECTOR, I&C F R ADMIRAL RICKOVER
' H.E. STONE RETIRED; FORMER VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF ENGINEER, j
GENERAL ELECTRIC DR. R. E UHRIG DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE DISTINGUISHED SCIENTIST, OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY FORMER VlQE PRESIDENT, FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT FORMER DEAN OF ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
~
t i
SAFETY. REVIEW J
BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT - NUCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW BOARD l
l OUTSIDE ADVISORS i
DR. J. S. ARMUO MANAGER, NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, TECHNICAL OPERATIONS, j
DR.L.S.B0HL MANAGER, QUALITY ASSURANCE, GENERAL ELECTRIC V.S.BOYER RETIRED, FORMER SENIOR VIC$ PRESIDENT, PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC l
W. S. HUMPHREY RETIRED, NAVAL REACTORS, MANAGER REACTOR FACILITIES AND SHIPYARDS M. E. MILES BETA, FORMER ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY, NAVAL REACTORS
4 i
SAFETY REVIEW I
WATTS BAR NUCLEAR PLANT - NUCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW BOARD i
l OUTSIDE ADVISORS W. H. HAMILTON RETIRED; FORMER GENERAL MANAGER, WESTINGHOUSE - BETTIS J. E. HILDEBRAND DIRECTOR, INDUSTRIAL SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, GPU NUCLEAR M. LEVENSON EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BECHTEL INTERNATIONAL DR. W. F. WITZlG RETIRED: FORMER DEPARTMENT HEAD, NUCLEAR ENGINEERING, PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, FOUNDER NUS CORPORATION VACANT UTILITY b
G O
CLOSING REMARKS e
ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING IN PLACE l
e GOOD PROGRESS RESOLVING ISSUES e
MORE INTERFACE WITH:
- NRC STAFF
- COMMISSION
- TVA HAS CONTROL OF PROBLEMS
- PLAN FOR RESTART OF SQN UNIT 2
~
e t
SCHEDULING NOTES 7
e TITLE:
BRIEFING ON STATUS OF TVA SCHEEULED:
2:00 P.M., MONDAY, MARCH 16, 1987 (OPEN)
DURATION:
APPROX l-1/2 HRS SPEAKER:
(TENNESEE VALLEY AUTHORITY)
- STEVE WHITE, MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER OTHER TVA ATTENDEES:
- C.H. DEAN, CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF DIRECTORS
- JOHN WATERS, DIRECTOR OF TVA ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS:
- W. WILLIS
- J. KIRKEB0
- J.E. HUSTON
- W. BROWN
- E. SLIGER
- T. JENKINS
- H. ABECROMBIE
=
G m
...._..,,,,. suuumirrrrmmvvymq TRANSMITTAL TO:
/
Document Control Desk, 016 Phillips l
ADVANCED COPY TO:
The Public Document Room I
I DATE:
3 l8 S7 FR0h:
SECY Correspondence & Records Branch I
p Attached are copies of a Comission meeting transcript and related meeting
!l 3
$ j!
3 document (s). They are being forwarded for entry on the Daily Accession List and placement in the Public Document Room. No other distribution is requested or j'
s l required.
l Meeting
Title:
% tekeA o d4 ed TVA n
3 :;
J a :
.1 3 :
S i Meeting Date: S}4k Open X
Closed m
1 3
1 3 l J
3 1
3 l Item Description *:
Copies 3 :
- 8 a :-
3 5 h
- 1. TRANSCRIPT 1
1 i
5 !
us/ U t w e aa,bs,< % R,-
f 2 :
r 5 :!
Noke.s b
3 t
3 :
l 3 :
2.
L I
3 3 :
m :
l 3m :
3.
3:
5 di m
3 c
3 e
3 4.
Uil 5
3 3 5l S
3 :.
3 -;
5*
3; 5
ll 3
l 3
6 3
3 :
6-5 l
3 1
3ll l
l 3
-l 3
l l
3 3
- PDR is advanced one copy of each document, two of each SECY paper.
3 :
C&R Branch files the original transcript, with attachments, without SECY
] l papers.
l 3 i :
3 l 0I t$$ Mf M M @@Y@@@@@@Y M NW@@@@@@Y@@@ h M W@@MN5
--- -