ML20246J814
| ML20246J814 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 06/09/1989 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246J809 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8907170460 | |
| Download: ML20246J814 (127) | |
Text
_ _. - _ _ _. _ - _ - _. _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - _ _ _ _. _ - - _ - - - - - - - -
4 v'
ENCLOSURE 3 h-UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY ConGESSION e...............................................,,,,,,,,,,,
s TVA Quality Assurance Conference
)
)
Meeting on the Dissolution of
)
TVA's Engineering Assurance
)
Organization
)
1 1
Pages:
1 through 126 Place:
Rockville, Maryland Date:
June 9, 1989 m amm mm m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m mm m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m *" u m " "'
HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION oshwAverars 122e L Sareas, N.W.,sadne des WasMagnon, D.C. 20005 (2s2) 62 Heat 1
8907170460 890718 ADOCK 0500 7
{DR
\\
4 1/2 UNITED STATES NUCL' EAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION TVA Quality Assurance Conference)
)
Meeting on the Dissolution of )
TVAs Engineering Assurance
}
Organization
)
- Friday, June 9, 1989 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Room 6-B-11 Rockville, Maryland The above-entitled conference came on for hearing, pursuant to notice, at 9: 14 a.m.
APPEARANCES:
On behalf of the Tennessee Vallev Authority:
FRED L. MOREADITH Vice President, Nuclear Engineering LAWRENCE E. MARTIN Manager, Nuclear Quality Assurance NICHOLAS C. KAZANAS Vice President, Nuclear Assurance and Services DAVID L. MALONE Engineering Assurance Technical Audit Manager WILLIAM C. RAUGHLEY Chief Enga.neer, TVA
,i ANTHONY P. CAPOZZI Manager, Engineering Assurance l
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
e y
3 APPEARANCES (continued) :
CHRIS ECKL TVA Washington Office 1
On behalf of the NRC Staff:
B.D. LIAM Director, TVA Projects Division Nuclear Regulatory Commission BARRY ZALCMAN Tschnical Assistant, ADSP 1
JACK SPRAUL l ~
Performance and Quality Evaluation Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission JACK DONOMEW SUZANNE BLACK TVA Projects FRANK HAWKINS NRR Quality Assurance BILL POLK TVA Rockville DEAN HOUSTON ACRS Staff BOB PIERSON Assistant Director, Technical Programs TVA Projects e
GEORGE HUBBARD Chief, Plant Systems Branch TVA Projects
\\
MICK RAY Manager, Licensing Project Management GERRY GEARS TVA Projects, Brown's Ferry Project Manager EDWARD GOODWIN TVA Projects i
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
l m
4 y
4 APPEARANCES (contintied) :
Ev Talenheng KEN BYER Special Projects, Atlanta Section Chief, Matts Barr BILL BRADY Section Chief, Sequoia BILL LITTLE Section Chief, Brown's Ferry KEN JENNISON PAUL HARMON Resident Inspector, Sequoia GLEN WALTON Senior Resident Inspector of Construction Watts Barr MORRIS BRANCH Senior Resident Inspector of Operations Watts Barr DAN CARPENTER NRC Site Manager Brown's Ferry RANDY NEWELL Quality Performance Section Region II I
l 1
i 4
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L___-_---_-_____-______
- s
~
.~
1 F.B2GRRRIEEa 2
(9:08 a.m.)
3 MR. HUBBARD:
This meeting was called to address 4
NRC concerns with the dissolution of the Engineering 5
Assurance organization within Nuclear Engineering at TVA.
4 6
This subject was previously discussed in a meeting between 7
TVA and the NRC here at headquarters on April 10, 1989 as 8
part of organizational changes TVA intended to make.
l l
9 In accordancs with 10 C.F.R. 50.54 and 50.55, a 10 licensee is required to submit any changes to their approved 1
11 QA program, which results in a reduction in their program.
12 The NRC is concerned that the functional aspects of the l
13 Engineering Assurance organization may be diminished in the 14 organizational structure proposed in the-TVA corporate 15 nuclear performance plan and the recent organizational 16 topical, which was recently submitted.
17 That's a summary of the meeting.
At this time, if
~
18 anyone from the NRC staff has further comment, we'll turn it.
o 19 over to TVA, and let TVA proceed.
20 MR. RAY:
Okay.
Thank you, George.
As you l
21 commented, basically ~this is a meeting we're following up 22 from our 4/10 meeting, which we actually requested to l
23 describe the organizational changes that we were making.
l 24 Particularly we were interested at that time, as is 25 indica'ad, discussing the EA integration into the Nuclear Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 C
l-
L.:
1s
~
C 6
r1 1'
. Quality Assurance organization.
2 Again, as you summarized, since that time we 3
submitted actually two documents to describe this 4
organizational change, one being Division VI to the NPP 5
Volume I, and the second document being the topical report 6
which was submitted on June lat.
7 At.the time we had the meeting on April 10th there
~
8 were several questions relative tc the functions that were 9
being. transferred, numbers of people being transferred, and 10 some questions relative to interfaces in Engineering, 11 actually Project Engineering and Corporate Engineering.
We 12 have people here today now to address those topics in quite 13 some detail.
14 So.with that, Lawrence, I'll turn it over to you 15 and we'll get into the background of the meeting and the 16 transition.
17 MR. LIAN:
This is B.D. Liaw.
Before you start, 18 can I ask a couple of questions.
19 MR. RAY:
Certainly.
20 MR. LIAW:
First, what is the status of 21 implementation of the changes?
22 MR. RAY:
Lawrence, do you want to address that 23 first?
24 MR. MARTIN:
Yes, I'd like to address that and we 25 will address it in the presentation, but we'll go on and Heritage
% porting Corporation (202) 628-4888
u.
-[
e 3
7 1
give the answer to the question now, B.D.
We have issued 2
our personnel actions, the personnel actions take place on 3
June 16th and those actions are reductions in forces where 4
appropriate, transfer of personnel and functions where 5
appropriate, and actual integration of the functions and l'j 6
hiring to new positions where appropriate.
7 MR. LIAW:
So in other words, you are implementing 8
the changes before you formally receive.a concurrence or 9
endorsement from the NRC staff.
Is that correct?
10 MR. MARTIN:
That is -- we don't believe that's a 11 true statement, B.D.
Our approach and where we' re at and l
12 what the purpose of this meeting is to provide you with the 13 information that clearly shows that this is not a reduction.
14 This is an organizational change, that the functions are 15 actually transferring.
It is not a dissolution of EA and 16 the EA functions.
17 It is in fact an integration of EA functions in 18 the existing organization, including the integration of o
19 people.
(
20 MR. KAZANAS:
And'as such, there is no reduction?
21 MR. LIAN:
Reduction of commitments?
22 MR. KAZANAS:
Commitments.
I 23 MR. MARTIN:
That's correct.
24 MR. LIAW:
So I guess you are going to make an 25 argument or you're going to persuade us today that indeed, Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 t
a
[.
8 1
that is the case rather than a reduction in commitment in 2
accordance with 10 C.F.R. 50.54 (a) (3), correct?
3 MR. MARTIN:
That's correct.
4 MR. LIAN:
Okay.
5 MR. MARTIN:
And that was our intent really on the 6
4/10 meeting, and that's the reason we requested this 7
additional meeting, was to provide you with that 8
information.
9 MR. LIAW:
Okay, proceed.
10 MR. MARTIN:
The agenda, and we'll go through this 11 real fast, okay?
Since we already handled the introduction, 12 I want to talk some sbout the EA QA transition, some 13 background, relationships to organization, QA plan 14 submittal.
Dave Malone will be addressing the EA functions 15 and organization, what were existing and that are now going 16 to exist in the new organization from a QA perspective.
17 Then Fred Moreadith will talk about the Nuclear 18 Engineering functions and organizations.
Bill Raughley will, 19 address the chief engineer's responsibility, and then we'll 20 wrap up with a summary by Mr'. Moreadith.
21 (Slide.)
22 This is a follow-up meeting.
You've seen this 23 slide before.
We actually used this slide in our 4/10 24 meeting.
In 1985-86, we found ourselves in a situation 25 where we were having significant design control problems.
i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
8 3
9 1
As a result of that, we developed a design baseline 2
verification program, alternate analysis, and developed a 3
program to address the loss of configuration control.
4 In 1986, EA was established with the objectives to 5
establish an improved design control program, perform 6
oversight of design baseline verification programs, 7
strengthen QA oversight programmatic and technical design 8
engineering activities.
9 The current situation is EA reports to Nuclear 10 Engineering.
That was an active management decision that 11 we've already had some discussion with you on when EA was 12 formed, on why we put them into Nuclear, Engineering.
13 Because of the major proportion of activities that were 14 going on and the major interface with Nuclear Engineering, 15 it was felt that was needed in the Nuclear Engineering group 16 at that time.
17 Now, as we're transitioning, we feel that the 18 major elements have been achieved from the EA perspective.
9 19 The program and procedures for design control and the design 20 program are in place.
We're now transitioning from a 21 recovery mode to an operating organization.
What we feel 22 here is that the integration of EA into NQA and NE will 23 provide an increased accountability for the responsibility 24
-- for the quality of the engineering product and output in 25 Nuclear Engineering.
We also feel that there will be an 1
i i
Heritag's Reporting Corporation
]
(202) 628-4888 i
l
[,
r..
,[+
10
]
f 1
-increased independence of the verification functions, by i
2 moving those into QA.
3 (Slide.)
4 George was addressing a while ago and Mick Ray l
5 talked a little bit about, and we'll just cover this real i
6 quick.
This slide shows the submittal status of where we're 7
at.
We had NPP Volume 1,~Rev. 5 and the topical.
We've 8
since submitted three other submittals to you.
The new QA 9
plan,.Rev. O is in review and that's the one we were 10 discussing for 50.54 (f) and also the organizational plan, 11-okay.
12 The QA plan do'es not address this change.
This QA 13 plan was in process, in progress at the time that we 14 identified the direction in which we were^ going.
The two 15 volumes that do address this change are the NPP Volume 1, 16 Rev.
6, submitted on 5/5/89 and the organizational topical, 17 Rev. O on 6/1/89.
Both of those documents you now have 18 under review.
o 19 I think there probAbly wouldn't be this type of 20 meeting if you all weren't co'nvinced that EA has been doing 21 a commendable job where they are, and your concern is 22 whether or not those functions are still going to be 23 continued at the same level of performance quality or an 24 increased performance quality.
25.
(Slide.)
Heritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
[
4 7,
l 11 1
One of the things that we want to do today is 2
address those functions.
In EA today, there are basically 3
eight major functions, and I believe these eight major 4
functions are outlined in the submittals that were on the 5
previous slide.
l 6
Verification functions, program audits, technical 7
audits, monitori.ng and surveillance and procured services, 8
and training problem identification and corrective action l
9 verification. -On the other side, line functions -- they 10 have management and the interpretation of procedures, 11 training and trained analysis.
12 (Slide.)
13 This is simplified organization chart of EA as it l
14 exists today, and for the purpose of the next presentation, 15 we will be discussing the areas within the boundaries of the 16 lines drawn here.
We'll be discussing program audits and 17 procured services, technical audit and surveillance and l
18 prompt reporting and training.
19 At this time, I'd like to introduce to you Dave
~
20 Malone.
Dave introduced hims' elf as the Manager of Technical 21 Audito in EA.
I would like to introduce him as the new 22 manager of Technical Audits in QA.
23 MR. LIAW:
Lawrence, before Dave starts, may I ask 24 you to briefly describe to me what eaca branch there does, i
25 like within the Project Assignments --
Heritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 O
i
12 l --
1 MR. MALONE:
B.D.,
I'll be going into most of 2
that.
3 MR. HARTIN:
Dave is going to go through each of 1
4 those functions --
5 MR. LIAN:
The current as well as future, i
6 MR. MARTIN:
Yes.
7 MR. KAZANAS:
If you look at page 5, B.D.,
it has 8
the functions in the two columns.
Dave will be discussing 9
those under the verification column, and then Mr. Raughley, 10 Bill Raughley will be discussing those under the line 11 functions.
12 MR. DONOHEW:
Well, one thing we're having a 13 problem with people who are sitting away from the table, 14 being able to pick up those voices.
So if you make a 15 comment, if you could come forward toward the table.
I 16 MS. BLACK:
Lawrence, I have a question about --
17 under both of these columns.
Would that be answered by
. 18 the --
19 MR. MARTIN:
Yes, it will Susie.
20 MS. BLACK:
Okay.
'I'll wait.
21 MR. MARTIN:
One of the things I want to point out 22 as I turn this over to Dave Malone is that Dave is not only 23 going to be the Technical Audits Manager within NQA.
Dave 24 is also the manager, along with Tom Burdette, who is the 25 manager of Nuclear Audits and Evaluation.
l I
Heritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 mm__m___________- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _
13 1
The two people that are accountable and 2
responsible for the transition of all the functions, 3
activities, records, and procedures during this transition 4
period.
Dave?
5 MR. GOODWIN:
Now George, before we start on the 6
new organization, are -- this is Ed Goodwin of the NRC 7
staff.
It might be useful, before we leave this slide on 8
present organization, to indicate how many people are 9
involved in each of the blocks there.
10 MR. MARTIN:
Ed will be talking about that as we 11 go through the presentation and I'd like to address it in 12 the aequence that we already have.
13 MR. GOODWIN:
Oh.
14 MR. MARTIN:
That will be addre'ssed.
Any other 15 questions?
Dave.
16 (Slide.)
17 MR. MALONE:
As Lawrence indicated, these.are the 18 QA type functions.
o 19 MR. HUBBARD:
I think you may have to speak up so 20 they can hear you.
21 MR. MALONE:
Is this mike not working?
22 MR. HUBBARD:
No.
23 MR. MALONE:
As Lawrence indicated on the previous 24 slide, these are the functions transferring, integrating 25 from EA into QA.
What I'd like to do is briefly discuss Heritage Reporting Corporation f202) 628-4888
[.
s 14 1
each of these functions, where they're residing, presently 2
res4's in EA.
I'll then talk about the numbers, focusing on 3
the verification functions, the numbers of personnel in 4
those functions and then we'll talk about how those -- where 5
those functions are going to reside in QA and the number of
'6 the personnel who will fill those functions in QA.
7 Now the program called Monitoring and Surveillance 8
and Procured Services.
We're calling those, for simplicity 9
verification functions.
That includes the auditing, audits 10 performed, monitoring, surveillance, reviews, assessments, 11 the planned audits, fact-finding missions, those type of 12 functions.
Trending I'll talk about separately also.
13 Program audits.
In this group -- on this 14 organizational side, these are' auditors w'ith -- most of them 15 with technical backgrounds within the organization.
Their 16 main function is to plan and perform audits of engineering 17 activities with compliance and procedures.
I think some of 18 you are familiar with Jim Tully and his work in performing s
' 19 audits of the various sites.
20 The technical audits, which I should be intimately 21 familiar with, and I think B.D.,
George and Fred Walker, I' m 22 sure, down at Watts Barr and are familiar with EA's 23 oversight of the baseline programs and at Sequoia, Brown's 24 Ferry and Watts Barr.
I believe he's very familiar with the 25 audit we just performed at Watts Barr on baseline programs.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
. i'..
e.
q, I,i.
K 15-
. 1 These are the people that have the strong 2
technical background, a lot of design experience, with the i..
3' capability of challenging -
procedures, technical adequacy-4 of design.
They are looking at their peers.
Monitoring 5
surveillance.
I'm calling that a verification function.
6 These are surveillance, frequently sometimes I would not 7
even consider a verification function because sometimes 8
.those are just fact-finding missions'that are specifically 9
that Fred may need some information or Tony may need some 10 information to go out and do fact-finding.
11 But in addition, they also will look at and 12 perform verification activities, like engineering activities-13 in a narrow scope, real time tight monitoring activities.
14 Procured Services.
Similar to 'what Jim Carr's 15 group has been doing with NEA, looking at corapliance and 16 procedures.
Procured Services performs audits of contract 17 engineering work.
In addition, they also perform pre-award 18 surveys, they review contractor procedures, review 19 procurement documents to be sure all the quality and 20 technical requirements are -- Procured Services as far as 21 contracts.
In addition, these people also have technical 22 backgrounds.
23 MR. HUBBARD:
Are all of them technical or just, 24 you know --
~
25 MR. MALONE:
Nearly all are technical.
I can't l.
Heritage Reporting Corporation l
(202) 628-4888 m______.__-_.-_-----n
l 1
16 1
give you the exact numbers on it, but most of them have 1'
2 technical backgrounds.
3 MR. HUBBARD:
How many?
4 MR. MALONE:
I'll get to numbers.
5 MR. LIAN:
So most of them --
,I 6
MR. MALONE:
Trending, problem identification and 7
corrective action verification.
That includes most of TEA's 8
conditions adverse to quality reports, which for the record 9
so'I can abbreviate, are CAQs.
This function is mainly to 10 take all the data on CAQs within Engineering, either written 11 by EA or developed or issued by EA from audits, are those
~
12 CAQs that may have been initiated by the line function.
13 Collecting the data, coding it specifically for 14 Engineering, and doing a summar~y look at what the data 15 shows, providing that information to the line organization 16 for additional analysis, retrieving that analysis back from.
17 the line function, and issue a summary report.
,18 Problem identification includes part of this, up 19 here in the monitoring area.
It also includes getting the 20 information of a particular problem at one site to other 21 sites.to be sure it's investigated at the other sites.
22 Corrective action verification, for CAQRs that are generated 23 by the audit organization, they perform their own corrective 24 action to those CAQRs.
25 There are also CAQRs that are generated by the Heritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
v 17 1
line organization that may be significant.
For those 2
significant CAQRs, EA verified the corrective actions.
3 MR. SPRAUL:
In Procured Services -- this is Jack 3
Spraul
,- your Procured Services are procured engineering 4
5 services?
i 6
MR. MALONE:
Procured engineering services only, 7
not hardware.
Just engineering services, tha AEs.
There is 8
other engineering services too, but mainly the AEs.
9 MR. KAZANAS:
Jack, the procured services for the 10 hardware is already in Engineering.
11 MR. MALONE:
That's right.
This -- all of these 12 functions that I'm talking about will be integrated into QA.
13 MR. HUBBARD:
The trending that you include in the 14 category of CAQs, so therefore'you would have CAQRs and also 15 ERDs?
16 MR. MALONE:
Yes.
17 MR. HUBBARD:
Where do the administrative controls 18 reside?
o 19 MR. MALONE:
The first control goes to --
20 MR. CAPOZZI:
Nick', I'd like to clarify the 21 record.
EA --
22 MR. KAZANAS:
Why don't you introduce yourself?
23 MR.'CAPOZZI:
On 24 the hardware side, EA has been providing some limited 25 assistance on major hardware vendors that provide a large Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
v '.
/,
18 1
amount of engineering and design activities.
I want to make 2
that clear.
We've done that in NSSS, in some selective 3
procurement where the PQA side of the house, we've worked 4
together and integrated those activities already.
5 MR MALONE They're along the same line.
When we 6
start talking about numbers, we're about people, leaning 7
people back and forth.
Fred loans EA people.
Fred loans 8
his technical people, when Procured Services may go exactly 9
on what they're contracted.
10 We've got people in Procured Services to do-t! hat, 11 but we may, for expediency, we may borrow some people from 12 Fred.
So those -- but those are different numbers.
That 13 will still continue too.
If I need a person from Fred, I 14 wust technical expertise, I'll go to Fred for people.
15 (Slide.)
16 Since we anticipated questions on numbers, we will 17 put up big slides to show numbers.
Now this does not q
18 include -- this includes just the verification functions, 19 the auditing surveillance and monitoring.
The Program
~
20 Audits, Technical Audits, Procured Services, Monitoring and I
21 Surveillance.
This is the existing number of personnel in 22 EA.
Two manager, four supervisors, and 25 verification i
1 23 personnel, monitoring and surveillance personnel.
)
24 After integration into QA, one manager, which just i
25 happens to be me, and 26 verification personnel.
Those Heritage Reporting Corporation i
)
(202) 628-4888 l
y
~
64
/.
19 1
functions.
2 MR. LIAW:
Dave, stop right there.
Would you go 3
back to viewgraph #6, look at the charts, existing QA charts, existing QA organizational charts.
Are you saying 5
that the people in three blocks -- two or three blocks 6
MR. MALONE:
With the two blocks, Technical Audit l
7 and Procured Services.
8 MR. LIAW:
And Trending functions?
l 9
MR. MALONE:
No.
That's not a verification 10 function, okay.
That's not strictly a verification 11 function.
12 MR. RAY:
It's inside of the dashed lines.
13 MR. HUBBARD:
Inside the dashed lines.
14 MR. LIAW:
But on the'viewgraph'#7, your last 15 bullets, you have tending followed by identification and 16 corrective action verification.
17 MR. MALONE:
Yes, yes.
18 MR. LIAW:
So to me, that is the fourth 19 block --
20 MR. MALONE:
Part of the trending is going to 21 Fred, okay?
22 MR. KAZANAS:
The activity gets picked up.
23" MR. LIAW:
Okay.
24 MR. KAZANAS:
But that's where it goes.
25 MR. LIAW:
For the time being, let me assume that Heritagei Reporti.ng Corporation (202) 628-4888 a
c,
= - - - - - - - - -
- -- ~.
4 g
20 l'
I. accept that.
So what you are saying is the two blocks, 2
second and third blocks and part of the fourth block, 3
currently are being staffed with 31 personnel.
4 MR. MALONE:
31 personnel.
5.
MR. LIAW:
Is that what is worked out?
I 6
MR. MALONE:
That's wrong, B.D.
The second and 7
third block are staff of 31 personnel.
8 MR. LIAW:. Well, what about the fourth block?,
9
.MR. MALONE:
The fourth block is not a 10 verification function.
It's a QA function but it's not 11 really a verification function.
12 MR. MARTIN:
It's CAQR coordinator --
13 MR. MALONE:
CAQR coordinator --
14 MR. MARTIN:
And the training people, okay?
Those 15 functions already exist and are duplicated in QA audit.
16 MR. KAZANAS:
But look,where you were though.
17 MR. LIAW:
Problem with quotes and trending,
~
18 T-R-E-N-D-I-N-G and look at your function, and the last o
19 quote, you still talk about trending of the problem.
I 20 couldn't tell the difference 21 MR. RAY:
Which one are you look'ing at?
22 MR. LIAW:
We've got seven compared to -- in your 23 quote box on my right or left.
24 MR. MALONE:
Okay, okay.
25 MR. LIAW:
Now tell me what the difference between Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
i, a
21 l'
those words.
1-MR. DONOHEW:
I'd like to make one comment.
We do 3
have some people on the phone line which do not have a copy 4
of the handouts, which is one problem.
To the Sequoia site, 5
we're telecopying you a copy of the }2andout and to reach
.l h
6 into -- Joe Ray, we're sending you -- telecopying you a-7
. handout.
Unfortunately, we' re not doing it for Watts Barr, 8
MR. LIAN:
That's okay.
They can receive a copy 9
of.the transcript.
10 MR. DONOHEW:
But'if you can talk in terms of --
11 instead of referring to blocNs, if you --
12 MR. MALONE; The title of it.
13 HR. DONOHEW:
That, I think, would help the people 14 on the phone.
15 MR. MALONE:
Let me try again.
QA already has a 16 function within QA of trending CQRs, okay?
They already 17 trend all CQRs except Engineering.
Engineering has been 18 doing that trending.
What we're doing, say, EA take that 19 and give it to QA, to collect the data, provide that data to l
20 Engineering for analysis.
21 MR. MARTIN:
There were actually duplications of 22 activities and functions and people in the two 23 organizations.
24 MR. LIAW:
But in QA type of trending, you are 25 talking about more or less the hardware problems instead of Heritah Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L________________._-
m 4
4..
r' g
22 1
engineering analysis type problems.
2 MR. MALONE:
It doesn't matter.
It's going to i
3 be -- he's doing it for all other departments.
4 MR. LIAN:
What do yo;u mean it doesn't matter?
5 MR. MALONE:
He's doing it for all other t
6 departments already.
The engineering piece is just adding i
7
.that engineering CAQs to that to collect the data, okay?
8-The analysis has got to be done by Engineering as it was 9
done before.
10 MR. MARTIN:
B.D.,
let me -- may have --
11 MR. LIAW:
Say that again?
You say the QA 12 organization is collecting the data, and those data are 13 being transmitted to Engineering analysis and trending.
14 MR. MALONE:
For analysis.
15 MR. LIAW:
For analysis.
16 MR. MALONE:
Yes.
17 MR. LIAW:
Now who is doing the trending?
18 MR. MARTIN:
QA will be doing the trending.
We o-19 have -- if you look at the EA trend report today, and if you 20 look at the QA trend report today, you will see the same 21 CAQRs trended in both of them, and what they have been doing 22 is EA has been trending that, QA has been trending that, and 23 the two of them have been getting together and understanding 24 what the trends mean that they put, and developing the 25 apparent causes and doing root cause analysis, okay?
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9
-C____.
-m_
mm_._.__._
s',,
23 1-There has actually been a duplication of functions 2'
there.
Now on the Engineering side, they had some 3
information that they were providing in their trend report 4
that QA wasn't providing in theirs, talking to the lead 5-engineers.
Now QA is going to perform all of the trending 1
6 functions, remove the duplication, and give Engineering the 7
same information that they were analyzing to begin with.
8 MR. LIAW:
Lawrence, I heard you, but my 9
impression is the type of trending or objects you are 10 dealing with are different sets.
11 MR. MARTIN:
I understand that, and the 12 information is somewhat different.
13 MR. LIAM:
Okay.
14 MR. MALONE:
They are a different set, and they're 15 going to have to be coded --
16 MR. LIAW:
Yes, well that comes back to my -
17 original question.
People doing it, okay, some of them at
. 18 least belong to the fourth bloci, the column Reports and o
19 Trending Manager, right?
20 MR..YALONE:
The p'eople that have been doing this?
21 MR. LIAW:
Right.
22 MR. MALONE:
In this block right here.
23 MR. LIAW:
Right.
Therefore, I'm saying that are 24 you saying that those first -- I'm sorry -- second and third 25 blocks plus a portion of the fourth block, and together you Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
g -
4 9
24 s
1 will have 31 people?
2 MR. MALONE:
No.
3 MR. MARTIN:
We're not counting the people in the 4
third block, okay?
5 MR. LIAN:
Fourth block.
6 MR. MARTIN:
Pardon me, fourth block.
7 MR. LIAN:
So this 31 only represent the number of 8
people in the second and third blocks?
9 MR. NERTIN:
That's correct.
10 MR. MALONE:
That's right.
11 MR. KAZANAS:
And those are the ones that do the 12 verification activities?
13 MR. MALONE:
That's right.
14 MR. LIAW:
Are you at some point in time, are you 1;5 going to tell me the number o.f people in the fourth --
16.
first, fourth and fifth blocks?
17 MR. MALONE:
Fred's going to be talking to those.
18 MR. KAZANAS:
Those are in the Engineering.
19 MR. LIAW:
My last question.
What is the total 20 staff in EA division, now, b'efore -- what is the number?
l 21 MRj CAPOZZI:
I can give you all those numbers.
I 22 have them right here.
But I wanted -- I really think the 23 message hasn't come across, okay?
24 MR. LIAW:
I'm going to ask you a question, okay?
25 What is the number now?
Heritagh Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
l i
5, s-25 s
1 MR. CAPOZZI:
We'll answer the question.
2 (Pause. )
3 MR. LIAW:
Tony, everything under you normally.
4 MR. PIERSON:
Well, wait.
We're getting confused.
5 Why don't we start out and explain this chart and say we 6
have an Engineering Assurance Manager.
Under Project 7
Assignments we have X people.
Under Program Audit, Procured 8
Services we have Y people.
9 MR. LIAW:
Right.
10 MR. PIERSON:
Under the Technical Audit and 11 Surveillance Manager we have Z people.
Of the people that 12 are Project Assignments, some are going here, some are going 13
-- that's what I think he's asking.
14 MR. LIAN:
I was willing to take less.
15 MR. CAPOZZI:
I will answer your question, B.D.
16 MR. MALONE:
Why don't you come up here Tony, so 17 you can be heard.
~
18 MR. CAPOZZI:
Under this block right here, with 9
19 the three sites and one person in Knoxville, one person ;.n 20 Chattanooga, the total is 24 people.
21 MR. GOODWIN:
Could you give the title of the 22 blocks?
23 MR. HUBBARD:
This is the Project Assignment 24 block.
I 25 MR. CAPOZZI:
Project Assignment block.
J Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 5
26 1
MR. HUBBARD:
Block number 1.
l 2
MR. LIAN:
That's 24?
3 MR. CAPOZZI:
That's correct.
That number happens 4
to include clerks, okay?
5 MR. LIAW:
Fine.
6 MR. CAPOZZI:
These two blocks, Dave gave you the 7
number that's 31.
Program Audit and Procured Services and 8
Technical Audit and Surveillance Manager blocks, there are a 9
total of 31 people assigned currently in the Engineering 10 group.
11 MR. LIAW:
That's 31 12 MR. CAPOZZI:
That does not include one clerk, 13 okay?
We did not include that in the number.
I want to be 14 perfectly clear.
Okay, under Problem Rep ~ orts and Trending 15 there are nine people in that group.
16 MR. HUBBARD:
Does that include clerks?
17 MR. CAPOZZI:
That includes one clerk.
In the 18 last block, Director of Standards and Training, that 19 included 18 people, managers and workers total and one clerk 20 as part of that number.
The other numbers are shown 21
-- there's one EA manager and there's two senior staff 22 specialists.
23 MR. GOODWIN:
What is the total?
l 24 MR. CAPOZZI:
We had a lot of resignations 25 recently -- I understand.
That would be a total of 90.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 4
I 27 l
1 That includes all.the clerks as well, across the board.
1 2
MR. HUBBARD:
Now is that 90 what you have say, 3
today?
4 MR. CAPOZZI:
Give or take four or five numbers 5
that have resigned, you know, through this RIF process l
6 recently.
They've taken jobs elsewhere outside of 'TVA.
7 MR. HUBBARD:
What was the number before this l
8 process started?
I 9
MR. CAPOZZI:
90 I'm giving you.
The number 90 10 reflects the number before the RIF process started.
11 MR. KAZANAS:
Otherwise, you'd say 85.
9 12 MR. CAPOZZI:
Otherwise, I'd probably give you a 13 number of 84, 85.
I can give you --
14 MR. LIAW:
That's probably 85 or 90.
So I guess 15 you're going to explain to us the function to be picked up 16 by your new organization, and then you can tell us the 17 adequate staffing level, to justify the staffing level you 18 propose to have.
19 MR. CAPOZZI:
Yes sir.
20 MR. LIAN:
Can you do what you used to have, 85 to 21 90?
22 MI CAPOZZI:
Yes sir.
We're going to explain 1
23 that, every one.
24 MR. HUBBARD:
Give us a chance.
25 MR. CAPOZZI:
We got it all right here.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
e
______.m
7 i
28 s
1 MR. MARTIN:
Dave, would you continue?
2 MR. MALONE:
I'll try again.
Now.
Let's be sure 3
we're talking about the right blocks.
We're talking about 4
the verification function, the numbers we've already said.
5 We're talking about Procured Services, Program Audits, 6
Technical Audits, Monitoring and Surveillance.
These are 7
the numbers existing.
31 personnel, two managers, four 8
supervisors.
After integration into QA, 27 personnel.
9 I'm going to give you where those numbers come 10 from, more detail.
With Program and Procured Services area, 11 that's straightforward.
One manager, one supervisor 12
-- two supervisors, 16 auditors.
Technical Audit 13 Surveillance, one manager, two supervisors, nine 14 verification personnel.
15 MR. LIAW:
So between -
you got eight and nine.
16 One.says 27 or 26 verification personnel, and the other one 17 says 25 verification personnel.
Maybe I'm misreading it.
18 MR. MALONE:
Let's go back to the other slide 19 there.
20 MR. HUBBARD:
Well, your slide number 9 is what 21 you have right now, to give you 31.
22 MR. MALONE:
This is what we have right now.
All l
23
- right, I' m sorry.
24 MR. HUBBARD:
The 31 is what you have?
25 MR. MALONE:
Yes.
25 verification personnel -- 26 Beritage Reporting Corporation 3
(202) 628.-4888 i
_.____.___._____.------__i__-
s'
~
y.
29 1
verification personnel.
2 MR. HUBBARD:
And the next chart that you went 3
through is.just an elaboration of --
4 MR. HALONE:- Of the details.
5 MR. HUBBARD:
Of the --
t 6
MR. MALONE:
Of where those numbers come from 7
specifically.
8 MR. HUBBARD:
Where the existing numbers came 9
from.
10 MR. MALONE:
I wanted to give you those numbers up 11 front, and then show you where they came from.
After 12 integration into QA, after integrating those functions into 13 QA, this is where those people will reside, these functions 14 will reside.
They're mainly, mostly the same people.
At l
15 each site, five verification personnel will give you a total 16 of'l$ verification personnel.
Now this is added to the 17 existing QA staff of verification personnel at these sites.
18 MR. GOODWIN:
Question, are these engineering o
19 verification -- they will be'doing engineering verification?
l 20 MR. MALONE:
That's right.
21 MR. GOODWIN:
What organization on the site will l
22 they be reporting to?
There will be some engineering i
23 verification section within QA?
24 MR. MALONE:
There is an audit -
go ahead.
25 MR. MARTIN:
They will be reporting to three Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
--m
~ -'--- - - - '
i' 3
30 1
organizations in the site quality organization.
Two will be 2
reporting to our Monitoring and Surveillance group, as we 3
want to continue to Monitoring and Surveillance activities.
l I
4 One will be reporting to Audits, and going into.the Audit 5
group, on-site audit group.
~
6 Two will be going into the Quality Engineering 7
organization at each of the sites.
That's the in-line 8
reviews, actual ECN reviews, procedure reviews type 9
activities.
10 MR. GOODWIN:
So there will not be a five person 11 engineering verification separately?
12 p5L. MARTIN:
There is not a five-person and 13 there's a reason that we want to do that, is that provides 14 some integration in those organizations.
If we have a 15 separate organization, then we always have te worry about 16 the communication problem from group to group to group.
17 Where if they' re in that organization, for instance the 18 monitoring people and what they're seeing on the engineering, 19 side of the house, they will be able to talk with their 20 peers in their same group on'what effect that is having in 21 modifications and maintenance.
22 MR. MALONE:
That's a positive I want to address.
23 MR. MARTIN:
We think that is a plus, and from the 24 other side of the house, the person that's monitoring 25 modification activities has immediate access to his peer in Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
____________.__________.m_
~
4 L
31 I
the same group on what out of the engineering product may be 2
causing that problem in modifications.
The same with the 3
audit groups on site.
9o the five people are going into --
4 one into audits, two into monitoring, two into QE.
5 MR. MALONE:
This includes verification activities t
6 involved with both TVA engineering work and contracting at 7
the site.
8 MR. HUBEARD:
These five will be looking at those 9
areas?
10
}R. MALONE:
That's right.
The positive there, 11 one of them Lawrence already mentioned -- the other positive 12 is that these people will be on site, real time there.
It's 13 going to reduce preparation time for the verification, the 14 plan for doing the audit or surveillance.
They'll be 15 familiar with the site activities of where they stand.
It's 16 going to reduce one of our interface problems.
17 MR. HUBBARD:
In this, you know, they're going to 18 be looking at engineering and contractor engineering.
At 19 the present time, you have DNE.is on site doing work for 20 Brown's Ferry, Sequoia.
Are there presently any on-site QA, 21 that is locking at that engineering work, or is it now done 22 by the Engineering Assurance group?
23 HR. MARTIN:
That was a mixed bag on that.
We had 24 some people on site that were doing some review of 25 engineering work.
The QE group has always had the ECH Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 h
M wmmn._____.
_._.m__
__.m_____m m
4
......-i
4 6
32 1
packages and work plan packages coming through them for that 2
level of review.
We were primarily leaving a lot of that 3
review up to the EA people, but we were also doing it and 4
coming up with some of the same type findings that they were 5
doing.
t 6
Now that will be done by one group, and the 7
communication there will be consistent now.
We'll be able 8
to understand that better.
One of the things that the site 9
organization, that the site organization that now exists in 10 EA and it's seven or eight people, I believe Tony.
Is that 11 not correct?
At Sequoia we have a few more.
At' 13 the other sites, it's five or six --
14 MR. HARTIN:
Right.
Those people have been 15 involved in procedure development, procedure interpretation, 16 training, a lot of records for Nuclear Engineering, a lot of 17 special assignments for Nuclear Engineering, and some 18 surveillance and monitoring type of things on call.
I mean
+
19 not a routine, but on call.
l 20 The five people that are now going to the sites, 1
I 21 and it's some of the same people; they have the same 22 expertise.
They're familiar with the procedures.
They're 23 technically trained people, engineering type people.
They 24 are now -- these five people are totally involved in 25 verification activities.
There's no other assignments that Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
F
~<
j
' '. ~
. g.
33 1
they have.
2 That is a strong point and a much higher level of 3
verifi:ation activities of the on-site engineering 4
activities, both contractors auui Nuclear Engineering people.
5 MR. SPRAUL:
Does TVA assume responsibility for 6
quality assurance of engineer contractor work on site?
7 MR. DONOHEM:
Jack, could you come closer and 8
repeat it?'
9 MR. MALCNE:
Fred's going to discuss that, Jack.
10 He's responsible for that.
So I'll let him say it.
11 Corporate program auditing, verification, evaluating 12 engineering activities for compliance with procedures.
13 Three verification people will be added to the existing 14 staff.
In addition, an additional verification person, one 15 QA project engineer, to be sure that these functions are 16 evaluating consistently and that engineering activities are 17 being consistently performed at the various sites, and are 18 consistent with what their commitments are.
So it will be a 19 total of four. verification personnel.
20 Strictly.looking -- I can't say strictly, because 1
21 any time you do an audit of engineering, you may touch on 22 contractors even though you're not there mainly looking at 23 TVA Engineering.
But their main purpoce will be looking at 24 TVA Engineering.
Part of that wil's be looking at 25 Engineering in Knoxville.
Heritag'e Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
]
J-I 4.,
34
)
i 1
MR. HUBBARD:
Are the
- do you have the numbers 2
.under Program Audits and Monitoring.
You have three 3
personnel, verification personnel added.
1 4
MR., MALONE:
That's added to the existing --
5 MR. HUBBARD:
To the existing --
f
'i I
6 MR. MALONE:
--ataf?.
7 MR. HUBBARD:
Then you have one QA project i
8 engineer you don't have added on that.
Is that someone who 9
is existing --
10 MR. MALONE:
We should have -- no.
We should have 11 put that in as added also.
That should be added.
12 MR. HUBBARD:
Then you come down to the technical 13 audit people.
You have five verification personnel?
14 MR. MALONE:
Right.
15 MR. HUBBARD:
Are those --
16 MR. MALONE:
That's brand new, okay?
That's a 17 brand new function.
18 MR. HUBBARD:
Are those added then to those new 19 personnel?
20 MR. MALONE:
It's added into the fact that it's i
21 added into QA, but there's no.really existing staff in QA 22 that absorbs that function.
This is new --
23 MR. KAEANAS:
It's a new block.
24 MR. MALONE:
New block.
'I 25 MR. HUBBARD:
I guess what I'm trying to see or
]
i Heritage Reporting Corporation
- f (202) 628-4888 i
_-_.--x_---___-__----_-__
~
l
.s
-U.
35 1
visualize.is okay, it's a new block. -Are you taking some 2
people from the QA organization and moving those into it, or j
3 is it --
4 MR. hALONE:
I'll get to that.
I have a slide.to 5
cover that, okay?
Now to be clear that most -- until we get 6
through with the personnel actions, etcetera, etcetera, we 7
- can't give you exact numbers.
But right now we're. talking 8
about 24 other people thet are going to be filling these 9
functions are presently EA people.
i 10 MR. HUBBARD:
Now part of those -- of those 24 11 that are filling it, your whole EA organization is. going i
12 away and we discussed the fact that there were 31 that will' 13 be performing these functions.
i 14 MR. NELONE:
They're' going to be from those 15 verification functions.
l 16 MR. HUBBARD:
Okay.
So you're not filling them 17 from some other function where they might lead'outside their
, 18 area?
o 19 MR. MALONE:
They're going to have the same i
20 type -- well, there may be s'ome exceptions to that, but I
21 they'll be from EA that have performed those type functions.
22 It may be an auditor; it may be a project services rep now, 23 but he had been performing those type functions before.
So
~
24 I want to make that clear.
It might be auditor out of 25 Program Audits that may not necessarily be going directly Heritagie Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l 36 1
into Program Audits in --
2 MR. KAZANAS:
Or he may be in training.
3 HR.-MALONE:
Or he may be in training.
,4 MR. KAZANAS:
But his performance --
5 MR. MALONE:
He's going to have the qualifications
' j 6
and background to do it.
We can talk to you more on that 7
later, after we get --
8 You were asking about the Technical Audit staff 9
and you might be interested in that area from the baseline 10 and the technical audits that have been performed.
So I' d 11 like to use that as an example, and walk through that.
12 What you' re saying, and I'll even make the point 13 that you're going to see most of the same familiar faces 14 that have been involved, especially the site people, have 15 been involved in what EA's been performing on technical 16 audits and oversights at the sites.
You're going to be 17 seeing the same familiar faces.
18 I've been technical audit manager in EA; I'm going 19 to be technical audit manager in QA.
I'm going to even go 20 out on a limb and talk about^this position.
I'm s senior 21 engineering specialist.
I'm familiar with the person that 22 runs the audit at Brown's Ferry.
It's going to be the same 23 person.
We're going to have the same basic disciplines 24 representative.
These are the people that have a strong 25 technical background.
They're going to be coming from the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
4 37'
)
i 1
2 Now.
The added attraction which is a plus that I 3
like, we're adding two additional people.
We're adding a
~
4 maintenance modification specialist and an operations 5
specialist.
That to me is the strength, the big strength of 6
this plan.
Previously, the EA has kind of gone up to the 7
fence.
We've gone on the other side of the fence sometimes 8
for operations and maintenance and modifications, but it's 9
been difficult.
Who's turf is it; the communications.
i 10 Now I don't have that.
The expertise, trying to 11 borrow people to do the job.
I don't have that problem any 12 more.
We're talking about highly qualified people to do 13 this.
I will compare it against any group, the NRC, anybody 14 to be able to have the capability to do these things.
15 MR. HUBBARD:
Now this will be the Technical Audit 16 group and it will function as --
17 MR. MALONE:
We've got our schedule.
In EA shows 18 we've got to do an audit at Watts Barr, which is on baseline, 19 and verification program, design control, schedule for QI.
20 That's going to happen.
The' audit we've got planned at 21 Sequoia.
It's going to be design change control and Phase 22 II baseline.
That's going to happen, the same people 23 essentially -- not all of them.
I can't tell you it's going l
24 to be all of them.
'I 25 MR. LIAW:
So let's take a summary here on your I
Heritage' Reporting Corporatie (202) 628-4888 1
]
.l 4
=
i g,
38 1
part.
Basically, you're going to have 26 people to perform 2
the function that used to be performed by 31 people, I
3 correct?
4 MR. MALONE:
Yes and no.
You' re going to have --
5 let's look at the verification personnel, okay?
What we've 6
done is eliminate some of the duplication of supervision, 7
okay.
i 8
MR. LIAW:
I understand that.
9 MR. MALONE:
Let's talk about the number of 10 verification people.
We're talking twenty -- presently, 11 there's --
12 MR. PIERSON:
Could I ask a quick question?
This 13 is Bob Pierson here.
These people on the Technical Audit 14 staff, where will they physical 1y be loca'ted?
~
15 MR. MALONE:
They'11 be physically located in 16 Chattanooga.
17 MR. PIERSON:
Chattanooga?
18 MR. MALONE:
Yes.
o 19 MR. PIERSON:
They'11 be functioning, reporting 20 to?
21 MR. MALONE:
Reporting to me.
22 MR. PIERSON:
To ytu, and eventually to Mr.
23 Kazanas?
24 MR. MALONE:
That's rf ht.
J 25 MR. LIAW:
No, just a minute.
I think both you Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
__________m___._m
}.*f 4
39 1
and'to Mr. Martin.
2 MR. MALONE:
Mr. Martin, eventually, then.to 3
Mr. Kazanas.
4 MR. MARTIN:
Eventually is correct.
5 MR. PIERSON:
And they will function in the sense 6
of going out.in each of these sites and conducting audits?
l 7
MR. MALONE:' Just like we've been doing.
8 MR. KAZANAS:
As they're doing now.
9 MR. MALONE:
As we're doing now.
'10 MR. PIERSON:. How will they interface with the on-11.
site QA people and the on-site operations, in the sense of 12 reporting?
As.an example, when they conduct an audit, how 13 do they relate to audits?
They come back and tell you and 14 then you tell Mr. Martin, who tells Mr. Kazanas and then he 15 tells Mr. Minan, or do they have an exit to the plant --
16 MR. MALONE:
Oh, we'11 have an exit as we have --
17 as it does now.
18 MR. KAZAMAS:
As we're functioning now.
19 MR. MALONE:
As we're functioning now.
We'11 have 20 ar. exit at the site, with tho people, including operatior..t, 21 engineering, site director.
There will be an exit meeting 22 there.
Come back, write a report, issue the report.
23 MR. PIERSON:
Well, who is the report issued to?
24 MR. MALONE:
The report will be issued to the, 25 entire organization, which is to include engineering, Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
)
~
l 1
i 40 1
operations, you know, the site.
2 MR. PIERSON:
Whoever the person, the senior 3
manager or the person that's responsible for tL. function.
4 MR. MALONE:
For that, and it may be two, because 5
we're going to looking at Engineering and Operations and 6
Maintenance.
7 MR. PIERSON:
Now once those findings from those 8
reports are sent there, who is responsible for closing out 9
the items, the line organization or --
10 MR. MALONE:
The line organization is responsible 11 to do the corrective action.
We will be responsible to 12 verify the corrective action.
13 MR. PIERSON:
If there's some concern about how 14 that corrective action has been verified'or say you disagree 15 with the corrective action, what's your recourse?
16 MR. MALONE:
My recourse if I don't -- well, first 17 of all, let's go through process and see.
If I was to write 18 a CAQR and the CAQR is responded to, we accept that responsp 19 or accept that corrective action -- their plan, okay?
If 20 the -- if we don't agree with the plan, we send it back and 21 say try again, come up with one we agree to.
22 MR. PIERSON:
You send it back to 23 MR. MALO!TE :
Back to the organization that 24 developed a response, took corrective action.
If it has to i
25 go -- and then the CAQR process already has an escalation 1
\\
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 m
_________m_____m_
_-.____._m.____
_j' o
4 41 1
factor built-into it.
If it has to be escalated, it is 2
escalated to Lawrence or they could escalate on the other 3
side up to Fred,.to get the -- we would get the appropriate 4
management involved to be sure the corrective action pl.an is i
'I 5
appropriate and everybody agrees to it.
That's not going to
,l l
6 change.
d 7
MR. PIERSON:
Okay.
How is your funding 8
controlled?
Is your funding -- when you're assigned to a 9
site --
10 MR. MALONE:
We're not assigned to a site.
11 MR. PIERSON:
Well, when you go do an audit on a 12 site --
13 MR. MARTIN:
QA budget.
It would be independent.
14 Our schedules --
15 MR. PIERSON:
It's independent.
It's a line 16 organization.
17 MR. MARTIN:
That's correct.
18 MR. MALONE:
That's right.
We will' be --
19 MR. HUBBARD:
Which is the same.
't's different.
It's actually 20 MR. KAZANAS:
No, i
21 different.
Right now, EA's budget comes out of Engineering.
22 MR. MARTIN:
I told you we were going to show you 23 where the verification activities in fact have some 24 additional independence that they haven't had in the past.
25 MR. MALONE:
There is some additional independence Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l v
42 l'
by doing it in QA, by integrating into QA.
Does that --
l 2-MR. PIERSON:
You've answered my questions.
3' HR. MALONE:
Well, essentially nothing's changed I
4 on how, other than I'll be moving -- we'll be moving to l
5 Chattanooga.
I'll be reporting to Lawrence, okay.
The 6
report will do the audits the sames way, the same people, 7
like the CAQRs, evaluate the corrective action, verify ths 8
corrective action, the same thing.
9 We've still got corrective action to verify from 10
-- for action items we generated on oversight of Brown's 11 Ferry.
Those aren't going to disappear.
Those aren't going 12 to fall through the cracks and we've got to do the same --
13 MR. PIERSON:
I understand that.
14 MR. LIAW:
Well, what's the answer to my question?
15 Did you say yes or no.
16 MR. MALONE:
I forgot the question, B.D.
17 MR. RAY:
31 to 26, 27.
18 MR. MALONE:
Okay, we didn't get to that slide.
19 MR. RAY:
I don't know which one you want.
20 MR. MARTIN:
I bel'ieve it basically comes out 25 21 and 25, B.D.
22 MR. LIAW:
I'm not doing exact accounting.
I'm 23 just roughly.
Is that basically what he's talking about i
24 here, is that --
25 MR. RAY:
That's the existing now.
Here's the Heritage reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
\\
E 7
4
_ */
43 1
chart that shows.the existing --
2
'MR. HUBBARD:
What was the comparison?
3 MR. RAY:
The comparison slide --
4 MR. MALONE:
The comparison. slide.
That shows--
5 MR. KAZANAS:
It's essentially the same.
We're i
6 quibbling.
7 MR. MARTIN:
The same.
8 MR. MALONE:
Yes, you're quibbling over nothing, 9
especially elimination of supervision, duplication of 10 supervision.
You're talking the same numbers.
11 MR. LIAW:
I understand.
So basically essentially 12 the same.
13 MR. MALONE:
Essentially the same.
14 MR. KAZANAS:
May I ask Dave a question?
- Dave, 15' how do you feel about this?
Well, let me see.
When did we 16 know about -- when did I -- when did you tell me that the VA.
17 was going to disappear?
When did you tell me that?
18 MR. MARTIN:
Late March.
19 MR. MALONE:
Late March?
That's the way I' felt at 20 the time.
I was, to say the least, skeptical, very 21 skeptical.
I took it personally also.
How the hell do you 22 think we've done a good job, why are you getting rid of us?
23 Why are you doing all this if you don't think we've done an 24 excellent job identi.fying the problems, getting the 25 corrective action done, giving Fred a hard time, making him Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
___--_m___________m_._
l 4
~
4 l
44 1
more responsible.
2 After working with -- and I knew QA had done some 3
good things, start trying to do some good things like the 4
SSFI at Brown'-s Ferry, the Sasome, that was just.done to 5
Sequoia.
But I had this picture of QA being a bunch of 6
nitpickers, not a proactive organization.
7 MR. MARTIN:
Tell them how you feel now Dave.
8 Tell them how you feel now.
9 MR. MALONE:
No, I'd like to say on the other part 10 too.
But after working with Nick and Lawrence,. and 11 understanding more of where they're going and then' listening 12 to me and saying what do you need to set up a good technical 13' audit group, what do you want.
14 I wanted a maintenance and modification guy.
I 15 wanted an operations guy that's got good operations 16 experienge.
I'm tired bf this not being able to cross the 17 fence.
I wanted a good core of technical people.
Lawrence 18 said you've got it.
I said all right.
I'm ready.
19 After seeing how he's going to incorporate and 20 look at engineering at the sites, and the term at NRC is the 21 synergism in doing audits, by having the engineering and the 22 operations and the maintenance people all together in one l
23 team in one area, you can see a hell of a lot more with a 24 hell of a lot less people.
So we're not taking, using other 25 people.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
_m______m.____---------
L J
j.,
j e;.
l 45 1
MR. LIAW:' Well, just a minute.
Why did you just 2
say.something about bothersome.
You say you were asked what 3-
.it takes to set up a-good technical audit organization.
I 4-guess throughout the whole recovery effort of TVA nuclear 5
program in the last two years, the EA organization was
.6 viewed to be one that has done a good job.
7 MR. MALONE:
Yes.
8 MR. LIAW:
Here, the TVA has a good organization.
9 They say dissolve it and set up the organization wer here.
10-MR. MALONE:
No, no, no.
- 11 MR. LIAW:
Well, that's what you aaid.
12 MR. MALONE:
Set up a technical audit group within 13 QA.
14 MR. KAZANAS:
To do,the engineering --
l.
15 MR. LIAW:
Precisely.
Here you have an
.d.
organization viewed to be doing a good job, to get rid of 17 them and I'm going to set up a separate organization and 18 you, Dave Malone, set it up for me.
19 MR. MALONE:
No, not set it up for me.
20 MR. LIAW:
Well, is that not what you said?
21 MR. MALONE:
What else do you want to make it 22 totally like you want it?
I already had the technical 23 people.
I already got those.
What else do you want?
I 24 wanted to hase operations and maintenance modification at 25 the same time.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
l E_
m_______-_._
___i___._
}
,=
4 ',
46 1
MR. LIAN:
I'm not asking you.
I'm asking just a 2
question to whole TVA as a corporation.
I cannot reconcile
{
3
-- I don't know how to respond to that, and I guess I have
~
4 not heard a logical persuasion or logical argument that will 5
persuade me as to why you want to do this.
o 6
MR. KAZANAS:
Let me try it, B.D.
7 MR. LIAN:
Wait a minute.
I still want to hear 8
other pet 1.
Are the remaining 24, 9,
18.
I accepting what-9 you are scying here.
Your 27 were already sufficient to 10 perform a function that essentially used to be performed by 11 31 people.
I accept that, okay?
Now I still have to hear 12 the remaining parts.
13 MR. GOODWIN:
Can I ask a question?
14 MR. MALONE:
Yes sir?'
15 MR. GOODWIN:
Before you sit down, something I 16 just want to clarify in my own mind.
Under project 17 assignmean;, you indicate 24 people.
I'm first sort of surprised that you' assert that only 31 of 90 people are 18 19 actually engaged in the verification of engineering quality.
l 20 I was wondering if these project assignments are in fact two 21 people in project assignments get detailed to the various l
22 audit teams that you send out to the field now, do they?
i 23 Even though they may be called Project Assignments now.
Are 24 they used to supplement your people?
25 MR. MALONE:
Not normally, no.
On occasion, on Heritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 e
4 47 1
occasion, okay,'where I have done an audit of a specific 2
area, and I may borrow a guy from Project Assignments, okay?
3 But that's no different from me borrowing a person from Fred
~
4 or somewhere else or from QA, because I've borrowed a person 5
6 But no, their function is not to -- normal 7
function is not to be a part of audit teams, maybe because 8
they' re there -- they're working too close with the project 9'
engineer.
10 MR. GOODWIN:
Would you tell me what they do, il since --
12 MR. NALONE:
I'll leave that up to Tony, because 13 I'm mainly talking about the verification activities.
14 MR.. CAPOZZI:
It's important to' understand, and.
15 this is part of answering B.D.'s question as well.
What 16 they do is hold people's hands essentially.
They do a let 17 of interpretation -- well for instance, somebody on the 18 project may say if I do thus and thus, is that within the -,
19 what the procedure's r'eally saying.
What they technical'y do is they interpret a lot 20 l
21 of those requirements, okay, before people get in trouble 22 and that kind of thing.
That's what they were set up to do.
23 They were set up as a liaison group on projects.
24 MR. KAZANAS:
Tony, would you say they're teaching 25 the field engineering units, the design control program the ~
Heritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 E
J
1l '
j c
i;..
l 48 1
1 NE procedures.
They're teaching them, they're working with I
2 them, they' re helping them develop and actually muster and
<3 follow the procedures?
Isn't that in essence --
1 4
MR. CAPOZZI:
Yes sir, yes sir.
Exactly that, i
5 They do a lot of unofficial quote, what I call training,
. 6 okay?
But that's really what they' re doing.
They'll sit 7
down with a lead engineer that don't understand the DCM 8
process totally, of all the subtleties of handling an 9
emergency modification.
Things like that, okay, or a FE may 10 ask these folks, you know, to look into something.
1 11 It's not really -- it's never been meant to be an i
12 independent function.
I think to be fair, there's been 13 several of your site residents that sometimes have indicated 14 concerns, from the standpoint that these people -- they 15 thought they were performing independent functions.
But in 16 fact they really never have.
17 Now as Dave indicated, there has been an occasion 18 shere he's used somebody or I might have asked for something, 19 to be verified because I wasn't sure.the problem existed or 20 not.
But really they were set up to work hand and glove 21 with the project and show them things, teach them things, 22 and show them what the process really meant, you know, as 23.
Mr. Kazanas stated.
24 MR. KAZANAS:
This is why we put them in the line
~ {
25 functions, the line categories, because this is truly work Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
_m..m..mm2..m.-_-m..-..m.-m_
-.u
.m---
2.
.-.e.. ore
_ ww u.,
0
}-
4 49 1
that is part cf engineering and it's part of helping the 2
supervision of the Nuclear Engineering organization get its 3
program working.
4 MR. CAPOZZI:
I will throw out a comment, okay, 5-and I know you may not want to hear it but I need to state i
6 it, because I was asked the same question by Nick, okay, 7
.when this all happened.
I'll tell you something.
I made 8
lists of positive and negative things.
One of the negative 9
things is that EA has become a crutch for some folks and 10 loosing a lot of~ accountability.
We've seen evidence of 11 that, where people don't want to read the procedure.
They 12 want to ask EA what it says.
13 Now-it's all well and good to help somebody, but I 14 felt that was a weakness.
I really did.
In my mind, I felt 15 that was a weakness, and 1 felt we'd be getting away from 16 some of these weaknesses on responsibility and 17 accountability.
There's no question about it.
EA's been a 18 crutch, okay, on some of the functions.
19 The technical audits, obviously not, because those 20 are just, you know, cut and dry.
You go in and look at work 21 and you record it and so forth ar.d they'll continue.
But on 22 the non-verification functions, without question we were a 23 crutch to people.
24 MR. LIAW:
Oh, there's question about it.
I think 25 in terms of accountability, I don't have a' quarrel with what i
l Heritage Reporting Corporation l
(202) 628-4888 i
}
50 1
yoe're trying to do and what you intend to do.
But it is, 2
as we indicated last time, there's a difference that during 3
recovery effort, you thought you needed that.
4 I guess you hav.s concluded now that you people 5
have been trained and are now familiar with the process.
6 Therefore, you think you no longer need it, that important 7
aspect, the function MA used to perform.
Is that what you 8
are saying?
I'm saying that plus, plus the one 10 thing that hasn't been discussed about, that Mr. Raughley 11 and Mr. Moreadith are going to discuss.
EA has had an 12 opportunity to take some EA people and put them directly in 13 key positions on the project where they can do an awful lot 14 of good and have the responsibilities that go along with it.
15 MR. LIAW:
No, I don't buy that.
Bob Pierson 16 works for me.
He's good, technically good and he's a 17 supervisor now.
I say you're doing such a good supervisory 18 job supervising George Hubbard.
So get rid of George t
19 Hubbard and put Pierson in George Hubbard's job.
Is that 20 it?
21-MR. MARTIN:
No, no.
I think we've discussed the i
22 verification portion.
I think we've shown you where we're i
23 at, that we're transferring the functions, we're 24 transferring the expertise.
We're going to have adequate 25 coverage.
I think now we need to get to Fr'ad, let him 1
l l
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
._____m_m__.._.
}l
~'
.?
w 51 1
discuss the other side of the house and the other functions.
2.
MR. LIAN:
I understand, and I'm going to ask Fred 3
how you'do with the job used to be performed by 18 people, 9 4
people and what -- 18, 9 and 24.
5 MR. HOREADITH:
This is Fred Moreadith for those 6-of you on the phone.
Let me comment on what you just said, 7.
before I go into the formal part of the presentation.
One 8-
' reason we're here today is in late January of this year, the 9
senior vice president appointed a new VP, and a new VP with 10 senior nuclear engineering management, including Mr.
11 Capozzi, again working on the engineering unit and how it 12 was organized.
13 On March 21st, we started communicating rather-14 openly with all Nuclear Engineering omployees, and the most-15 recent communication went out this week.
Part of that 16 communication is again openly to admit that we had too many, 17 people.
So there's a pitfall in saying you had 90.
Now 18 you've got 50.
How can you do it with 50.
l 19 MR. LIAN:
Fred, can you stop right here.
I guess 20 by your response, your count'ing the number of people,.you 21 think I think you have not enough people here.
But be that, 22 let me tell you for the record, that's not my intent.
The 23 number I'm asking, going to help me to make a judgment of 24 whether or not indeed this organization can be resolved or 25 somebody can pick up function, and whether or not you have 1
Heritage Reporting Corporation
{
(202) 628-4888 i
JJ
~
4.
52 1
an adequate taumber of people to pick up function.
1 2
That's really what I need t6 make a judgment.
You 3
know, back to what you think or your total management
)
4
. thinking about whether TVA has too many people.
I can say 5
to you my personal opinion,.not necessarily to represent the 4
6 total NRC staff, my personal opinion is I think you probably 7
have enough people, more than what you need.
8 You raised an -issue that I'm not prepared to get 9
into it, that is you are -- manage your own organization.
10 I'm not going to manage it for you.
~
11 MR. MOREADITH:
To complete the thought, the point 12 I wanted to make.
Many of our people acknowledge that what 13-we're communicating to them is proper and realistic.
Now 14 usually when we get confidential envelopes with 15 communications from employees, some anonymous, it's 16 criticism in a very negative direction.
I was very 17 pleasantly surprised to open such an envelope yesterday, and 18 a page and a half handwritten note complimenting Nuclear o
19 Power and Nuclear Engineering on what they were doing and 20 how they were doing it and taking into consideration j
21
" people's lives."
22 MR. LIAW:
What?
23 MR. MOREADITH:
Peoples lives, L-I-V-E-S.
24 MR. LIAW:
What do you mean by that?
25 MR. MOREADITH:
There has been a concern that our Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 4
_ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _.. -. - ~., -
)
4:
53 1
people will be so upset that we wouldn't be able to control 2
the transition.
We're finding that that's not the case.
l 3
Well, if I could go into --
l 4
MR. LIAW:
I didn't come to that point, what you.
5 just made.
I also received allegations that what you are 1
-e 6
doing is get rid of people who raise safety concerns, to 7
come to what you-just said, okay?
So that's even.
S' MR. HOREADITH:
Specific situations we could 9
discuss off the reca d.
10 MR. LIAW:
That's right.
I 11 (Slide.)
12 MR. MOREADITH:
Another question or the principle 13 question that I'll address in an overview way, before 14 turning it.over to Bill Raughley, to give many details about 15 the chief engineer's organization, which is the technical.
16 arm of our organization.
One principle question has been 17 who is responsible for the design basis of the plant?
18 The answer is Nuclear Engineering.
The principle 19 responsibility that the senior VP had given the VP of 20 Nuclear Engineering is to be responsible and accountable for 21 the engineering, design, and technical and quality 22 requirements for procurement related to maintaining the 23 design basis of the plant.
24 When we started this venture in late January and I 25 began wprking with Nick evaluating the organization, at an Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i
-4 l
H 2..
~.
54 1
earlier point the slide and the chart that's on it evolved.
L 2
It's such a simple chart that I'll describe it for you folks 3
on the phone.
It shows the VP of Nuclear Engineering as the 4
top manager in Nuclear Engineering.
Not shown the on the 5
slide is the VP of the NE reports to the senior VP.
i 6
Reporting directly to the VF are five line 7
managers.
Engineering managers for Brown's Ferry 8
Engineering, Sequoia Engineering, Matts Barr Engineering, 9
and the Knoxville task structures.
Also reporting directly 10 to the VP is the Chief Engineer.
In a staff capacity, there 11 will be a manager of services, which will contain several 12 functions which relate to project work -- planning and 13 scheduling, computer applications, and training 14 coordination.
In training coordination, Bill Raughley will 15 go into in greater detail as it relates to the subject 16 today.
17 The rest of the chart, you folks on the phone may 18 be sketching it, reporting to the chief engineer are four 19 functions:
a staff, which Bill Raughley will address in 20 detaiJ., which also relates to today's subject -- mechanical 21 nuclear, civil and electrical discipline departments.
Their 22 department chiefs are directly reporting to the chief 23 eagineer.
J I
24 Now our approach in arriving at this I
25 configuration, which will exist until the end of the --
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
i
4 e,
55 i
1 until the middle of FY ' 90, around the and of March.
This 2
will be in place, and the only thing that will go away at 3
the end of March of ' 90 is the task project.
We are in the 4
process of orderly transitioning the task projects out of 5
business, to put it very specifically.
6 The fundamental basis of this organization is the 7
engineering company concept.
This is fundamentally where 8
we've_ worked from to arrive at this organization.
Not only 9
are we organized in that fashion, we are beginning to 10 emphasize operating in that fashion, as an engineering 11 services company providing services to clients, the sit, 12 We're beginning to repeat this so often to our people and to 13 our clients that they're probably wondering when we're going 14 to stop repeating it.
15 But we're really trying to engrain in all of our 16 people that we're in the services business, and in providing 17 engineering services for safe operation of a plant or 18 establishing the design, such as at a Watts Barr plant, we j
19 are providing services.
In spite of that, we are absolutely 20 adamant.that our clients cannot assume our responsibility i
21 for the design basis of the plant.
Anytime that happens, J
22 our backs get up and it's a no-no.
It's not going to 23 happen.
24 Not shown on the. slide, each engineering manager 25 of an engineering unit at a site has repqrting now directly j
Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
4
~'
56 1
at Brown's Ferry the principle-discipline engineers which 2
are currently called lead discipline engineers.
So there is 3
a lead mechanical nuclear at Brown's' Ferry, a lead 4
electrical and a lead civil.
5 This organization, some of you know from our April' 6
10th meeting or you know from your knowledge of TVA's 7
organization previous to this organization, has three: levels 8
of managers where five previously existed.
It is a 9
flattened organization.
There are considerably less 10 management positions and more' production.
11 The approach that we're instilling in our managers 12 is managers at all levels, including my level, are working l
13 managers.
When there's work to be done that's appropriate 14 for the management level, the managers wo'rk also.
15 The part of the organization that. Bill Raughley 16 will focus on is the box designated Chief Engineer's Staff.
17 I will not try to go into detail, but that box will contain 18 what we have.been calling a methods and procedures group.
19 Bill will go into great detail on that.
As a matter of 20 semantics, not talking about dissolving EA, not talking 21 about eliminating EA, Bill will put great emphasis on the 22 transition part of EA, that will now reside in Engineering.
23 (Slide.)
24 The second slide, for those of you on the phone,,
25-simply has two columns.
On the left side of the chart, Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
.an,.
L 1
,l, l
57 1
there's a colcan called " Project."
On the right side of the 2
' chart, there's a column called " Chief Engineer."
The 3
essence of the slide is reflected in its title, " Project and 4
Chief Engineer Responsibilities."
5 Under the Projects column are summary points of
)
6 issue and maintaining quality of deliverables.
The VP and i
7 the chief engineer function with the engineering manager at 8
each site, again in an engineering company concept what do 9
you need to be successful.
What are your problems?
What
~j 10 can we help you with?
We don't thrash around in his 11 project, his or her project, the engineering manager, just 12 doing things at random.
Everything goes through the 13 engineering manager.
14 So in that context, he has the p' rime 15 responsibility and is accountable for issuing and 16 maintaining quality deliverables, in spite of the fact that 17 the chief engineer retains technical adequacy and 18 responsibilities, which Bill will go into.
l 19 The other principle items listed in the left hand 20 column are schedule, budget and cost, contract management, 21 which answers an earlier question.
Nuclear Engineering is 22 responsible for managing the AE contracts and ensuring that 23 training of project personnel -- it's the last bullet -- is appropriat9 y addressed.
~
24 1
25 Under the Chief Engineer column on the right side, Beritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
. +..
~-
58 1
- the chief engineer'is responsible for the design process, 2.
for providing technical direction, for providing-staff to 3
the project's matrix, to each engineering manager,-technical 4
reviews, which Bill will go into in some detail, process' 5'
training requirements with regard to.the procedures and how 6
the wo,rk is to be done, and technical training.
7 With that overview, Bill will -- unless you have 8
some questions about Nuclear Engineering in general, Bill 9
will go into some detail.
10 MR. HOUSTON:
Could I ask just one question?
Dean 11
- Houston, What's the size of this entire staff, the 12 engineering staff of the TVA?
13 MR. MOREADITH:
In late January, we were at 14 approximately 1,710, with 2,000 contractor engineering.
15 personnel.
16
'MR. HOUSTON:
Thank you.
17 MR. MOREADITH:
Today, we are approximately 1,400 18 contractor personnel and 1,600 TVA personnel.
By' 19 September 30th, end of the fiscal year, we will be at 20 approximately 1,100 and I guess you've got those numbers?
21 Eleven hundred TVA full-time permanent and going into a 22 steady state.
23 Now that doesn't mean that you can expect to see 24 1,100, because we will have normal attrition -- retirement, 25 resignation.
In the case of some performance problems, Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
J 59 i
(
1 perhaps a dismissal.
We plan to place a great deal more 2
emphasis on performance and expecting people to do their 3
jobs and be accountable for what they're assigned than has 4
been in the past.
5 MR. LIAN:
Would you be increasing for the design, 6
for the department?
7 MR. MOREADITH:
As you may well appreciate B.D.,
8 that would depend on the specific situation --
9 MR. LIAW:
I understand, I understand.
10 MR. MOREADITH:
--and the critical nature of the 11 assignment.
12 MR. PIERSON:
And contractors?
13 MR. HOREADITH:
I beg your pardon?
I'm not sure 14 what we're projecting yet.
We're going through a budget 15 process next week, and I'm not sure what the projected 16 figures are on that.
17 MR. PIERSON:
Some number between 0 and 1,4007 18 MR. MOREADITH:
Yes.
19 MR. KAZANAS:
But dependent upon the work to be 20 done.
21 MR. PIERSON:
Right.
22 MR. MOREADITH:
Any other questions, general 23 questions?
Well, Bill?
J
, 24 (Slide.)
25 MR. RAUGHLEY:
I'll go over the functions that are Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
)
e 60 1
being transferred from EA and integrated into that arsa, 2
those being monitoring control, interpretation of the l
3 procedures, process training and the trend analysis.
I'll 4
discuss each one of those individually.
5 In the existing structure, EA has the management 1;
6 and control of procedures.
They prepare them, revise them, 7
keep them up to date with the upper tier documents, all the 8
inputs that are received from the corporate standards and 9
directives.
That will be bound by my staff.
Variances to 10 the procedures were previously approved by EI.
They'll now 11 be approved by myself.
12 I'd like to point out that any variances will now 13 be -
prior to myself approving them, NQA will review them.
14 MR. HUBBARD:
Which organization in NQA.would be 15 responsible for that?
16 MR. MARTIN:
Depends on where the variance is and 17 what it affects, okay?
18 MR. HUBBARD:
Could you --
9 19 MR. MARTIN:
It will normally come through one of 20 two areas.
If it's to a sito specific type activity, the 21 SQEP or something like that, it can be the site quality 22 manager.
If it in fact is to the NEP and the higher tier 23 thing, that will come through my office, in the Quality 24 Engineering programs.
25 MR. EUBEARD:
What I'm getting at is at this time, 1
1 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
{
l i
I aj
61 1
- it's approved by people within EA.
2 MR. MARTIN:
Still will be those same type people, 3
same people, okay?
l 4
MR. KAZANAS:
In-some cases.
5 MR. MARTIN:
In some cases, actually doing that 6
review.
We have in the corporate QE programs group, we are 7-picking up any positions or EA type positions and people.
8 At the site, I've already indicated to you we're picking up 9
two of those similar type people in the QE group at the 10 site.
So they will be doing the review.
11 MR. HUBBARD:
Okay, I guess in the corporate 12 structure, you gave us the technical audit people.
13 MR. MARTIN:
I didn't give that you --
14 MR. HUBBARD:
You didn't give us that?
15 MR. MARTIN:
But we have that -- those people are 16 going into the Quality Engineering group.
They're going 17 into the Procurement group.
They're going into the Progr:Ams 18 Audit group.
We've got one special projects, the one up o
19 there that you questioned on whether or not it was added or 20 not.
That's going into our special projects group.
So we 21 have EA -- we're truly integrating the people and functions 22 into the organization.
23 MR. PIERSON:
One question.
Could you define 24 variance?
What do you mean by a variance?
25 MR. RAUGELEY:
It's deviation from the procedure, Heritage-Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
. - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' ' ' " ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ' ' " ' ' ~
^~ ~
~
62
- l which has justification.
2 ~
MR. PIERSON:
So that would be like on a one-time 3'
basis?
4 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
They are typically one-time
-5 basis, anything.that would be generic and proceed to make a t
6 procedura1' revision.
As the long and short of what Larry, 7
just said, the NEP activities will be audited and monitored 8
by this organization.
This job was previously done by 11 9
people.. It will now be done by seveza.
10 In addition, to give you some examples, procedures 11 will also be written by some of the Chief Engineer's staff.
i
- 12 For example, we're currently preparing a vendor manual I
l 13 procedure for managing and controlling vendor manuals.
j 14 That's being done by Larry Boyd, is the senior specialist in 15 mechanical engineering.
16 MR. PLERSON:
How many of these variances do you 17 typically have in some period of time?
Are we talking about 18 one a week, two a day or do we have any specifics?
19 MR. CAPOZZI:
I have that.
20 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Do you have it Tony?
l 21 MR. CAPOZZI:
It really varies, Bob.
You know, it 22 varies when the recovery was at a peak, you know, and the 23 process was new, we have more of the up front -- when you 24 put a new process out there, what happens is we really 25 didn't think it out.
In other words, there's glitch here Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
_m.-.--
._.L.__1_---
.-.L.,__-.-..--
~ -,. _
n
}
2 63 1
or there that we didn't anticipate.
Partials, for instance.
2 How to handle partials, enclosures and. things like that.
3 So, you know, typically we could get -
you know, 4
say something in the neighborhood of you know, one a month 5
say, from the project.
Those are the kind of numbers that
-6 come to mind, just you know, roughly.
7 MR. PIERSON:
So what I'm trying to ask is in your 8
organization, did you have any individual or individuals 9
whose essentially full-time function was approving these 10 variances?
11 MR, CAPOZZI:
The answer is no.
12 MR. PIERSON:
Okay, and you don't intend to have 13 that either?
It will be essentially a collateral duty of 14 other people within your organization is~what you're saying?
15 MR. RAUGHLEY:
I will -
yes.
They will process 16 the variances, but I'll finally approve it.
That will be 17 done myself.
18 MR. PIERSON:
Well, that's why I'm asking.
I was, 19 trying to get a sense of how big the job is, because 20 sometimes there can be --
21 MR. RAUGHLEY:
This group, their primary function 22 is they have 33 procedures, 33 NEPs which they manage and 23 control.
Previously, they were done by 11 and now by seven.
24 As I said, for additional procedures, we'll be writing 25 additional procedures on specific deliverables.
For Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 j
\\
.____________-__________________-___-_____-____a
l h e 64 1
example, vendor manuals and they'll be done by the Chief 2
Engineer's office.
3 MR. PIERSON:
You'll have seven people and their 4
function in life is to keep these 33 procedures updated.
5 MR. RAUGELEY:
That will be their primary i
6 function.
7 MR. PIERSON:
In those areas?
8 MR. RAUGELEY:
Yes.
Any other questions on this 9
slide?
10 (Slide.)
11 The training function, previously procedure a
12 training, procwas training ir performed by EA and oJT was l
13 performed by the line supervC-ton.
In the new organi=ation, 14 there will be -- we're adding a training coordinator.
In 15 some of the recent audits, there was a need to dedicate a 16 person full time to managing and controlling training.
That 17 person did not exist, the central person.
We've added that 18 to the organization.
o 19 The OJT by the line will continue.
Training 20 activities will be audited and monitored by NQA and we're 21 designating a trafner at each site.
This job was previously 22 done by six and now will be done by four.
23 Okay, in addition, we also have access to Joe 24 Johnson's staff, which is the centralized training function.
25 For example, next week there's 50.59 training and I've Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
b
.J e
' I
}
65 1
designated 11 individuals that must go to the 50.59 2
training.. That will be going to training.
That training is 3
sponsored by Joe Johnson.
So I have access to a large staff 4
of trainers also.
5 MR. PIERSON:
Could you elaborate OJT by line 6
supervision?
That is, OJT by line supervi,sion continued.
7 MR. RAUGELEY:
Typically what happens in a group 8
if u new procedure comes down in addition to the training 9
that would be provided by Nuclear Engineering, the 10 supervisor typically sits down and reviews that with his 11-group in a weekly meeting or a biweekly meeting.
There are 12 periodic staff meetings and usually that's -- the project 1
13 engineer will usually --
14 MR. PIERSON:
How does that supervisor -- how is 15 that an EA line function as it exists now?
16 MR. RAUGHLEY:
No, I'm just saying is that that is 17 not a line -- that is not an EA line function.
That's 18 trying to say that if there is training, the first line 19 supervisor has some responsibility for training.
20 MR. PIERSON:
Because you're not saying that 21 there's -- that EA was doing some training with respect to 22 line supervision, on-the-job training?
They didn't do 23 anything then; they're not doing anything now or when you 4
24 implement this change.
It's just that that function 2S occurred.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
d j
66 1
MR. RAUGHLEY:
That is correct.
l l
2 MR. PIERSON:
Okay, I see.
3 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Can I answer any other questions i
4 about training?
Okay, on the trending.
As you heard from 5
Dave Malone, trending will be done by QA.
Trend analysis, 6
which was previously done by EA and the line organizations 7
took corrective actions on the trends.
After the 8
transition, trend data will continue to be collected by QA.
9 Analysis of the trend will be by my staff, and corrective 10.
actions will continue to be taken by the line organizations.
11 You previously had three people dedicated to 12 performing that function.
That will be going into the 13 individual Chief Engineer's staff.
They're going to be done 14. by the individual chief engineer.
15 MR. PIERSON:
I might have missed something.
16 Three to fill --
17 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Previously three people dedicated 18 to that before.
There were two engineering associates and a, 19 specialist.
l 20 MR. PIERSON:
And those functions will go to 21 collateral --
l 22 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Now they're going into the 23 individual chief engineer's organizations.
So for example, 24 Jim Hudson would analyze the trends in electrical.
For 25 project engineers, you' d be looking in the end 'for his Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
J
.c 67 1
trends on the project.
2 MR. HUBBARD:
So what you were saying was the line 3
organization trending, there were three doing that before?
4 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
5 MR. HUBBARD:
And now it's --
i 6
MR. RAUGHLEY:
I think it's a big enhancement in 7
that it's going into the technical sp3cialty area in the 8
corporation, rather than in a small group.
But they'll be 9
going in a group with very senior technical people.
10 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Before I go further, I wanted to 11 re' view several of the key performers and key contributors in 12 EA and I've selected --
13 MR. LIAW:
Excuse me, Bill.
Before you go with 14 the function, could y(u quickly summarize the number of 15 people you're going to have and the responsible functions?
16 MR. RAUGHLEY:
There were previously 11 doing 17 procedures and there will now be seven.
There were 18 previously six doing training and there will be four.
Is 19 that correct now?
20 MR. CAPOZZI:
That's correct.
21 MR. HUBBARD:
While we're on that one, you had 22 down that you had a designated trainer at each site.
l 23 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
24 MR. HUBBARD:
Now is that part of that four?
25 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
]
s 1
4 y
i 68 1
MR. HUBBARD:
So four of the people -- three of 2
them are taken up at the site.
3 MR. RAUGHLEY:
The people are going t'o the sites.
4 So it's logical to put a trainer there to train full time.
1 5
MR. KAZANAS:
For the workers.
,)
j 6
MR. RAUGHLEY:
That's where all the work's being 7
done.
There will be one left at Engineering at Knoxville, 8
but just --
)
9 MR. PIERSON:
Okay.
And the trending you said 10 existing -- do you have that?
Trending when to three, and 11 collateral duties went from nine to zero.
12 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Like I said, that's true in the 13 procedures area also.
There's a larger pool of -- when we 14 get into writing procedures on' individual' products, it's 15 logical that the experts on the product write it.
16 MR. GOODWIN:
Bill, before you go on.
If I'm 17 counting correctly, you've accounted for 20 people.
Ed 18 Goodwin, TVA staff.
If I'm counting correctly, you' re 19 accounting for 20 people that were in the original EA 20 organization.
The previous speaker accounted for 31.
21 That's 51.
There's 40 that I've lost someplace along the 22 line.
Could you -- and I heard that all except 31 performed 23 non-verification activities, and therefore their functions 24 will be picked up by Engineering.
25 MR. MOREADITH:
Now-this is Fred Moreadith.
The Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
)
]
J, 69 1
problem again is we were not trying to account for 90 2
people.
We were trying to account for the complete activity 3
of EA and how it could be performed in QA and in Engineering
~
4 where the sum total gave you all of the processes and 5
functions and checks and balances and everything you felt 6
you needed to try to achieve quality in your work.
So --
7 NR. PIERSON:
Wait.
I think what Ed is asking --
8 this is Bob Pierson -- is that we were under the perception 9
that we had a certain number in the first two organizations, 10 the technical oversig?., and then there was another group 11 that was supposedly going to be packaged into Engineering.
12 But th'e numbers we started with and we a.nded up with, we 13 should have --
14 Presumably, I guess I was under the same 15 impression that Ed waJ, that we could have added up the 16 existing numbers and come up with something in the 17 neighborhood of 45, 50 people or whatever it would be, to 18 equal 90.
We got 7 plus 11 plus 6 or whatever.
The number o
19 doesn't compute.
Where are those other 40 people in the 20 organization?
21 MR. GOODWIN:
Did they have no function?
22 MR. PIERSON:
Where are the ones -
you know, 23 we've accounted, as it exists, for 50 people.
So there's 40 24 other people.
We're wondering where are they.
25 MR. MOREADITH:
Well, as we've -- this is Fred Heritage
- Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
l
- 7. ; _.
i~
5 l; l
4:
70 1
Moreadith'again.- As we've stated previously, part of what' 2
Mr. Kazanas and I acknowledged was we had too'many people.
O MR. PIERSON:
But that's not the point.
The point 4
is right now, supposedly you told us your staff was 85 5
people.
Is that correct?
As existing, it's 85 people.
6 MR. MOREADITH:
That's correct.
7 MR. PIERSON:
Where are those people as it. exists 8
now?
Where are they as it exists now?
I think Tony --
9 MR. MOREADITH:
Dill's next slide will show you 10 where some of them are.
-l 11 MR. CAPOZZI:
First, let me try to answer that 12 question.
Twenty-four of the,se people that you haven't had.
13 any accountability for where the Project Assignment people, 14 okay, that were not doing a.line function.
Neither were 15 they doing a QA function.
So there were 24 people in that
~16 block.
17 MR. PIERSON:
Okay.
I guess I was under the
, 18 impression that from our earlier discussion, that those had, 19 gone into Engineering.
What you're saying is those 24 i
20 people are not going ir.to Engineering.
21 MR. CAPOZZI:
Bill was about to show you that some 22 of them are going in Engineering but not in the EA. function, 23 because we've accounted for those.
These people were 24 liaison people that we had there.
They were the. hand-25 holders that we talked about earlier.
We did take some key Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
71 i
1
-people, and I need to go through some examples for you, but j
l 2
they were put in the line.
{
3 MR. KAZANAS:
Stated another way Bo,b, we're 4
talking -- Bill is talking to the corporate staff people, 5
okay?
The people that are under the Chief Engineer.
You e
6 see, Lawrence has already talked about the 31 and the 9, 7
which gives you the 40.
Twenty-four of the project people 8
that are already in the project.
Okay, now what is the 9
question?
Is there an acco'unting required?
10 MR. PIERSON:
I just added up 85 in the beginning 11 and I'm only counting up with 50 --
12 MR. KAZANAS:
But if you add the 24, I think you 13 get back to 74.
And then the 9 from the trending, did you 14 add that?
15 MR. PIERSON:
Twesty was what I was told were 16 doing trending.
17 MR. MARTIN:
Analysis portion.
The others were 18 doing the duplicated function in the CAQR coordination, and, 19 trending that's being picked up now on the QA side.
20 MR. PIERSON:
That's the organization that you 21 said was a complete duplication of what you already had in 22 Quality Assurance.
l-23 MR. MARTIN:
Yes.
24 MR. KAZANAS:
Yes.
Fe have had some resignations, 25 have we not?
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
_m______.____.__---------------_--
.I a
wa..
72 C
1 MR. CAPOZZI:
Yes.
m 2
MR. KAZANAS':
We've had some voluntary reductions 3
in force also.
So, you know, somewhere it will all add up.
4 MR. GOODWIN:
We are not talking about 90 5
individuals.
We are talking about 90 people that were i.
6 performing a function, and we are trying to account for 7
where the functions went to, and I gather that Project 8
Assignment, the function did not need to be carried out.
m 9
Therefore, the functional equivalent of 24 people 10 disappeared.
11 That's all we're trying to do, is count up all the 12 prior functions and find out where all the functions went 13 to.
You can say that we concluded this function didn't need 14 to be done, and that's fine.
B'ut just make the numbers work 15 that way.
16 MR. CAPOZZI:
Twenty-four of the Project 17 Assignments and you will find six to eight people that fall
>l8 in the area of managers, okay?
19 MR. GOODWIN:
Okay.
20 MR. CAPOZZI:
Managers.
A lair of M-7 people that 21 went across the organization, When you integrate these 22 functions, we'll go with that.
But when you get to the 23 other ones, where you're giving a piece of something, you 24 know, a lot of those weren't needed.
The two senior staff 25 specialists that I had reporting to me that were not in the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
i
1 73 1
line, okay, are part of the numbers that you're not getting 2
the totals.
You're trying to add up exactly 90.
3 MR, GOODWIN:
Okay, that's fine.
4 MR. CAPOZZI:
Well, that's where they are Ed, you 5
know.
i 6
MR. GOODWIN:
That's all we were trying to do was 7
track all of the functions, and management's a function that 8
needed a reorganization.
9 MR. CAPOZZI:
I understand.
10 MR. DONOHEW:
Bill, when you gave us the 11 down 11 to seven and six down to four a*d the three which will go 12 down to zero, were you including supervisors, managers in-13 that?
14 MR. RAUGHLEY:
There was the 11'-- this one man 15 who's a manager of training and standards and correctives.
16 In other words, there's a training manager and a standards 17 and corrective manager and they report to the manager.
18 MR. DONOEEW:
It appears -- I think what seems to,
19 be the problem, not adding up to 85 besides the 24, is that i
20 the total of 27 were associated with the fact of the 21 trending and training directives, problem reports, and the 22 11, 7 and 3 that you gave us add up to 20, so I guess that's 23 7 people which may have been managers that had not been J
24 identified.
l 1
25 MR. KAZANAS:
Secretaries.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
__-___-_m____m
}
74 1
MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
So this -- does that help.
2 MR. HUBBARD:
Under directive, standards and 3
training managers, you've got -- 18 is what you had given us 4
as in the existing organization.
You've got 11 down thera 5
for procedures.
Do you not pick up the other six from 6
training?
7' MR. RAUGHLEY:
No.
There's seven all procedures 8
Seven proceduress The 18 was broken down that.
Eighteen 9
was --
10 MR. HUBBARD:
Yes, but it was composed of 11 plus 11 6 from training, wasn't it?
12 MR. RAUGELEY:
You had 11 procedures --
13 MR. GOODWIN:
11, 6 and one manager.
14 MR. HUBBARD:
Yes, and that giv'es you the 18 that 15 we're looking for there I believe, as in the existing 16 organization.
17 MR. RAUGHLEY:
That's in training.
Okay now the 18 seven --
o 19 MR. HUBBARD:
Plus the managters.
20 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Right.
2.1 MR. HUBBARD:
I think you missed one manager in 22 the 11 -- so you como up with your 18 there.
23 MR. KAZANAS:
Is this special nuclear material, l
24 this accountability?
25 MR. MARTIN:
We need to -- I understand where i
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
q' 4
M'
.e 1
75 1
you're trying to go to, and I understand what Ed said.
2 MR. PIERSON:
No, I really' don't think you do 3
understand where we're trying to get to.
4 MR. MARTIN:
Okay, then please help me.
5 MR. PIERSON:
We're talking about numbers, but 6
ve're talking about numbers in terms of the functional 7
aspects of what those peeple are qualified and capable of 8
performing.
9 MR. MARTIN:
That is'the point, Bob, that we're 10 trying to make to you.
We are picking up those functions.
11 We are picking up people with those qualifications to meet 12 those functions, and then we are picking up the verification 13 of those functions.
It is coming across the board.
The 14 bean count on are you picking u'p five to do what five did or 15 are you picking up five to do it,.the functions are 16 integrated and transferred.
17 The expertise is integrated and transferred.
The 28 capital or budgets or integrating and transferring, The l
19 controls are integrating and transferring.
The management 20 functions are integrating and transferring.
We are not l
l 21 throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
We agree EA has 1
22 done a good job.
23 We believe we can do the same level of job with 24 this new organization and gain a couple of things -- more 25 accountability for the line managers in nuclear engineering.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
x'*
a s 76 1
1 They have to assume the responsibility rather than EA
{
1 2
holding their hand, and an increased degree of independence 3.
for the verification function.
. 4 MR. PIERSON:
That brings up an interesting 5
question here.
You say the line has to assume the 6
responsibility without EA holding their hand.
Is EA holding 7-their hand now?
8 MR. HARTIN:
EA has been holding their hand.
9 MR. PIERSON:
So it seems to me that it would be 10 prudent, should you be willing, you know, starting out to 11 change something like that, you would ensure that these line i
12 managers cculd function by themselves without somebody 13 holding their hand before you pull the hand-holder away from 14 them.
1 15 MR. MARTIN:
Now we' re ready to talk about the l
16 next slide that Bill has up there You're exactly right.
17 MR. PIERSON:
Okay.
18 (Slide.)
19 MR. RAUGHLEY:
There are several key EA people 20 that I've placed in my 5.ine organization.
Henry Jones at 21 Brown's Ferry and I belis e that the manager of Watts Barr 1
22 will be Gary Malden.
Tht ireject control manager at Brown's 23 Ferry is Gary Maddox -- Jim Maddox, I'm sorry.
The project 24, support engineers at Brown's Ferry, Jim Owenby.
Senior 25 electrical pngineer at Brown's Ferry is Dave Berrell.
Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
___-_m______________m_
F_M i...
l',
j 9.: -.
(..
77 1
Design control manager at Sequoia will be Mike Anderson and i
2 there will be others released next week.
There are several 3
vacancies and several people have applied and will likely be i
4 selected.
5 MR. PIERSON:
All of these individuals initially
.l l
6 came from.the' Engineering Assurance organization?
7 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
Each of those names I gave l
8 you.were --
9 MR. PIERSON:
Were these technical managers and 10 hand-holders that you were talking about, by and large?
l~
11 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
l 12 MR. KAZANAS:
By and large, and they come out of 13 that 24 with Project Assignments, by and large.
There are 14 some exceptions.
I 15 16 17 l.
< 18 o
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1
i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
i l
\\
L
- , Y 78 1
MR. RAY:
Any questions?
2 MR. PIERSON:
Well, I see what you said.
I 3
understand the words you've got on the slide.
And I L
i l
4 understand what you're trying to convey.
L 5
I think if we go back to the April meeting there 6
was one thing that I was very concerned about.
And I 7
mentioned several times that before you change something 8
that's working, you need to have some sort of measurable so-9 you can say, "Here's what we were measuring.
We are going 10 to change the organization and we're going to proceed on."
11 And we will say this is working or it's not working because 12 of that measurement.
]
13 I have not seen that measurable presented in this 14 meeting.
I had hoped that I would see that.
15 The second thing is:
By the admission of your own 16 quality assurance representative, you have told me that you 17 need this.
Now, I represent the safety aspects for the 18 public.
What we are concerned about is:
Is your nuclear 19 power program operating safel,y.
We are 1e.ss concerned about 20 where that hand-holding takes place. What we are really 21 concerned about is:
Are we the ones thnt have to do the 22 hand-holding.
23 Now, you are tell me by your own admission thac 24 that hand-holding has to occur.
That's what you just said.
,25 MR. RAY:
I didn't say that.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l
'l l
.\\
'j 79 q
1 HR. CAPOZZI:
Bob, it's fair for me to respond to 2
'that.
3 MR. PIERSON:
All right.
Let's hear it.
4 MR. CAPOZZI:
Okay?
And I'm going to give you a l-5 corollary.
And the corollary is:
It's like saying i
6' corrective action is enough.
You need preventive action.
7 And that's the problem.
We'ra solving problems.
And that's 8
.the problem --
9 MR. PIERSON:
Wait, let me say something here.- I 10 have got the-lead.' This is on my tsrritory.
You can say 11 your thing when I'm done.
12 Here's the point:
Whenever you have an 13 organization and you've got something to' correct.
You are 14 interested in is the qualit chat comes through acceptable.
y 15 And we have just had an engineering assurance audit at 16 Browns Ferry.
- And the results of that engineering assurance 17 audit were such that the plant, the site management decided
'18 to have a work stoppage.
19 Now; what you're telling me then is that we can 20 take these functions and transfer them in to a line 21 organization and prevent that from occurring.
22 And what I am telling you is this:
Ycu've got a q
23 situation now that is working.
We're concerned about a safe 24
-product.
We are concerned ab6ut identifying problems and 25 assuring that the plant is built and operated in a safe i
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
___m__
_ __m-
{
}
80 1
manner.
We have indications now that the line is not doing 2
f: hat as it should in all cases.
Browns Ferry.
3 MR. RAY:
All right.
You want to go through --
4 MR. PIERSON:
Now, wait.
You're telling me -- I 5
would say to you that to make a presentation of this what i
6 yoe need to do is you need to have convinced yourselves and,
7 then c,nvince me and the rest of the NRC that the line 8
management has the problem under control, that the 9
' engineering assurance organization is a superfluous entity.
10 And at that point, dissolve the engineering assurance --
11 MR. RAY:
The concept here somewhere has lost 12 where we are headed.
We have not dissolved the damned 13 function.
. e are not taking it away.
We are putting it, in W
14 my opinion, where it properly ought to be which is quality 15 assurance.
It's is 95 percent a quality assurance function.
16 It is not a project -- they're not responsible for the evils 17 or whatever that happened at Browns Ferry in that audit.
18 MR. PIERSON:
Well, why didn't the quality 19 assurance at Browns Ferry pick these things up then?
20 MR. RAY:
EA should have also, should they not?
21 MR. MARTIN:
Wait a minutes Come back just a 22 minute.
EA did pick up those through their verification 23 function.
We have already shown you we are going to have 24 that same verification capability to identify those types of 25 problems.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
81 1
One of the things we have now done, though, is 2
take some of the better people from EA and look where Browns 3
Ferry is up there.
1, 2,
3, 4 of those positions -- 4 of 4
those key people out of EA are now going down to strengthen 5
that Browns Ferry organization.
6 MR. PIERSON:
What I've got to do, I've got to sit 7
back and wait and six months later I'll send a team down 8
there to decide whether it is working or not.
Is that what 9
you're telling me?
10 MR. MARTIN:
No.
11 MR. KAZANAS:
The team that went down there to 12 look at whether it was working or not and conducted the 13 audit' is the team that we transferred in whole.
It did 14 work.
The program did work.
I't identified the problem.
15 The problem was quickly arrested and it was fixed.
The 16 corrective action is in the process of being finalized.
It 17 is workings What is the questien.
18 MR. PIEPSON:
The question is, is that I don't see, 19 that transfer.
I don' t see that liability and I don' t see 20 the independence, P
21 MR. RAY:
Bob, I guess I've got to go back again.
22 If I go back and look at the OA plan --
23 MR. PIERSON:
Let me ask you a question.
Could 24 you paraphrase very quickly and very succinctly:
Why did 25 you start the engineering assurance organization in the l
l
\\
l Heritage Reporting Corporation l
(202) 628-4888 j
l 1
I
v.
<w.
-. =
}
82 1
first place?
2 MR. RAY:
First of all, that was before my' time.
~
3 Go ahead.
That was.before my time.
4 MR. CAPOZZI:
I was. brought down from-Stone &
5 Webster as'a consultant at the' time.to set up an EA 6
l organization. -We set it.up because we had a design control 7
problem.
Okay?
We had lost design control and we 8
documented that to the NRC at all three plants.
And we 9
immediately wanted to put an EA organization in place.to 10 work directly with the line.
We felt it would be a little 1
L 11 more workable to concentrate, put a concerted. effort to a 12 major recovery.to have that kind of relationship.
Okay?
13 MR. PIERSON:
Now, have you recovered?
14 MR. CAPOZZI:
What we have done, we're through a 15 large part of the recove'ry.
We have completely restructured 16 a design control process and put it in place.
-17 MR.. PIERSON:
See, that's where I would disagree 18 with you.
You have got Browns Ferry which is in the lowest,
19 cetegory of any plant the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has.
20 It has just failed an engineering assurance audit.
It has
'21 got the schedule being delayed.
We don't even know when the 22 schedule is.
23 MR. CAPOZZI:
Bear with me, Bob.
I' ta not 24 suggesting we don't have problems.
I never said that.
25 What I said was, first of all, we had to Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
}.
s 83 1
restructure the process for what it was going to be.
We 2
have done that already.
The procedures are in place.
They 3
totally match the upper tier.
That didn't happen before.
4 The project procedures had to be completely 5
revamped.
We put people on there to work with the line.
We 6
weren't as concerned with the independents.
You know, we 7
wanted to fix the problems.
That's what it was all about.
8 Okay?
Get in there and find the problem, help the line fix 9
it.
10 Okay.
A lot of debate occurred early when we 11 first set that up as far as the relationship.
And we tried 12 to make the argument then why we were doing it.
Okay?
13 Now, what's happening here, you need to re Jnize 14 that there is some shortcomings in doing'that.
Some of the 15 shortcomings are we took on some responsibilities that we 16 should not have taken on.
And if you continue on that path, 17 you are going to find the same problems again.
18 MR. PIERSON:
I am not arguing with you on that.
0 19 What I cm telling you is the way you rectify that is you 20 dcn't have this organization and then dissolve it back here.
l
-21 You create some other organization parallel and when you 22 show me that it is working, then you dissolve this 23 organization.
24 MR. CAPOZZI:
We haven't dissolved it.
25 MR. RAY:
We did not dissolve the organization.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
l'
+
84 1
Okay?
We made it work at Sequoia.
Right?
I mean we 2
got through --
3 MR. LIAW:
We didn't dissolve the organization.
4 Earlier, I pointed out to you -- let's don't continue this 5
discussion.
I would suggest taking a five-minute break and 6
then we will come back.
7 (Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)
8 MR. LIAW:
Let's go back on the record now.
9 Let me say a few words before I let you proceed'.
10 What we need to -- well, let me say what we are not trying 11 to resolve here.
We are not here to deal with allegations.
12 So, we want to make it clear.
We are hear to talk about 13 your proposed implementation of certain asract of 14 organizational changes that relates to an' EA.
15 So, with that clarification, what I' d like to de 16 is for you to finish out your presentation, most likely, 17 just a summary.
18 MR. RAY:
Fine.
o 19 MR. LIAW:
And then we will break for lunch and 20 then cone back at 1:30.
21 MR. RAY:
Bill would like'to have a couple of 22 points he'd like to make on the chief engineer's thing, if 23 that's okay, And then we will go to the summary.
1 24 MR. LIAW:
Okay.
So, you'll finish it and we'll 25 break for lunch.
Also, staff caucused.
And we'll come back Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
v
.4 85
'I at 1:30 here.
l' 2
MR. RAY:
Fine.
Just quickly, Bill.-
Okay?
3 MR..RAUGHLEY:
Chief engineer functions are 4
management and control of the process and review.of critical 5
deliverables, conducting technical reviews are.the primary-6 functions. The deliverables from the chief engineers are L
7 these:
master' specifications, general specifications, 1
l' 8
engineering requirement specs, design standards, design 9
guides, the underdrawings, generic computer and software 10 codes.
All variances are approved by the chief engineerr, 11-for many of these deliverables.
12 MR. KAZANAS:
Before you rush through this, the 13 purpo'se of this slide is to demonstrate how you as the chief 14 engineer is going to maintain control.
15 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Yes.
That's what the first bullet 16 on the next slide is.
And how I used this information is 17 there is a process there that is used to maintain depictable 18 adequacy.
19 The basic process is preparation for review, check 20 and approval.
The chief enginears provide the technical 21 direction to the lead engineers on the projects.
They J
i 22 er.ecute that process.
In addition, we mandate the current
]
23 procedures mandate independent reviews on critical
- 1 24 deliverables.
For example, the calculations, our review, 25 why, the specialists from the chief engineer.
Beritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
]
_m m__.
a p
86 1-I' standardize -- work standardization is an 2
engineering approach and we're mandating in-line review of 3
key design base documents.
This is in place and electrical 4
. has been in place for about two years.
And I'm. putting in 5
place the other disciplines.
It should be in by 7-10.
t 6
What this.is, is for the front-end document, the-7 criteria, the lines, the flows, the PNIBs, the FCD, the 8
control diagrams, the block called " review" will be reviewed 9
1ar person or the project will be reviewed by a specialist
- 10 from the staff.
And that is in place in electrical and will l
11 be put in place in the disciplines.
12
'I have some degree of independence being off site..
13 I am not on site.
I don't get subject to the daily budget 14 and schedule pressures.
I have nothing to-do with the site 15
' scheduling.
And as a recent, to provide direction for 16 the contractors.
l 17 MR. RAY:
Okay, with that, I guess Nick wants to l
l 18.
say a couple of words in summary and then we'll get to Fred.
+
19 Nick?
^
20 MR. KAZANAS:
And just again to reiterate a little j
21 bit of what Raughley says, you also get the sense that a lot 22 of the assuring functions are in the line organization.
I 23 think that is a very important point.
These were also some l
24 of the substance and functions that we also talked about
-l 1
25-earlier that engineering assurance had a piece of.
And now l
t Heritage' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
___________m_._
87 1
you are seeing that that is also transitioning into an 2
assuring role with the line organization because they are in 3
fact responsible for the technical quality of the end 4
product.
5 I am just going to say a couple of words because, 6
obviously, I felt a lot of the questions and concerns that 7
Bob Pierson had indicated.
I am trying to summarize a 8
couple of areas there that I think are important to 9
remember.
10 Now, you talked about the early design. We 11 demonstrated that.
We indicated the reason that we had 12 engineering assurance placed in the engineering 13 organization, because we were in a major development role, 14 we had to put the program in place.
And, essentially, 15 that's all done.
16 The reason we are going the steps that we have 17 described to you today are essentially to get back into line 18 as a regular operating company, take that sr.ep, yet maintainj 19 the measures and controls to insure that we don't lose l
20 control.
21 The technical direction that has been provided to 22 the engineering assurance organization remains the same.
It 23 comes from QA.
It was from QA in the past organization.
24 The particular quality assuring or verification functions 25 are under the manager of QA, they continue to be.
That's Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l 4
1.*.
88 1
all transferred over now in m' neat package.
And he also has 2
the administrative control over the group and added some 3
enhancements.
4 We also recognize that we not only move these 5
things over from engineering assurance, the assuring j
6 function, we not only move.them over to QA, but we also 7
enhanced them.
We spoke to the review functions that were 8
being done by the quality engineering groups at the sites.
9 We enhanced them with the addition of additional technical 10 people that performed in the design function so that when we 11 were doing the first line reviews of engineering 12 specifications or modification work packages that we also 13 had the element that was particular and specific to the 14 design organization and had that kind of' sense in that 15 review.
16 We spoke to the monitoring functions and the 17 enhancements that we put in there.
Particularly, you are 18 going to see a lot of engineering assurance type monitoring i
o i
19' activities being taken place in the engineering side at the 20 work place.
And this is consistent with the work going to 21 the site.
22 We spoke to the enhancements in the auditing 23 function.
I think Dave did a good job in describing that.
24 Not only are we carrying forth this group intact, in total, 25 but we are enhancing it.
We're not satisfied.
We want Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
4 I
89 l
1 better.
So, we added the operational aspects, the l
2 maintenance aspects.
l l
3 Dave talked about that barrier that was there.
We 4
knocked it down.
That barri,er is no longer there.
We will 5
have a more complete product.
So, it is not only a case of 1
6 keeping the functions that were working for as well, but we 7
have enhanced them through this step.
8 Yes, we recognize that there are problems as you l
9 pointed out at Browns Ferry in particular.
We are not where 1
10 we want to be.
But at least it is not a program problem.
1 i
11 It is strictly implementation problems.
And I am here to 12 tell you that program is working.
The Kehoe audit of a 13 couple of weeks ago identified the problem.
It fixed it.
14 It put it in place.
It controlled it.
It contained it.
It 15 bounded it.
It did the necessary elements to insure that 16 the end product was right.
And this time, we got a much 17 more better response I think from the line organization.
18 QA didn't issue a.-top work.
It was a line 4
19 organi=att.on that issued the stop work.
It was a line 20 organization that fixed it and made sure that the product 21 came out satisfies your safety concern, that it is not only 22 your safety concern, it is my safety concern, because that's 23 my job.
24 We are describing to you an organization that 25 we're giving more horsepower to and looking at the work of a Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
- <I 90 1
smaller engineering group.
It all fits.
That is our 2
concern to the quality aspects of the work being done.
- Yes, 3
we are not exactly where we want to be at Browns Ferry, but 4
the steps are in place.
This is an enhancement.
This makes 5
it happen.
This gets you to where you need to get to insure 6
the quality is there.
7 And, sure, in the future, as we get it, we will be 8
able to back off much in the same manner as we have done at Sequoia. ife are teaching the program.
We are teaching the 10 implementation.
We are monitoring the progress.
We are 11 making sure that those problems don't get big and 12 overburdensome.
We are containing the problems.
We are 13 doing enhancements now that we have done in the QA 14 organization that you have recognized us for.
The spot 15 process at Browns Ferry:
You have told us that it is as 16 good or better than any that you have seen from a quality 17 verification organization.
\\
18 We have talked about the SSFI that we've done.
We s
19 are constantly improving the program.
And this is a step 20 that is consistent with meeting that end.
21 MR. RAY:
Fred?
22 MR. MOREADITH:
Before I summarize briefly, let's 23 be sure we all have the same understanding of the, quote, 24 stop work, unquote at Browns Ferry.
25 What it actually was the engineering manager Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
.}
4..
91 1
decided to stop issuing products.
2 MR. HUEBARD:
We understand that.
3 MR. MOREADITH:
Trying to summarize this 4
invigorating,g discussion is probablv going to be a difficult 5
chore.
For those of you on the teJaphone, the last slide 6
shows some bullets and before I draw a diagram on the 7
blackboard, which Mr. Jack Donohew and I decided might be a 8
good summary item, this slide indicates that we are 9
maintaining the same quality assurance functions.
We 10 believe the project and engineering responsibilities are 11 clarified.
And there is more purpose and accountability.
12 We are maintaining and emphas'izing tha' 13 engineering accountability, the quality of the engineering 14 work.
We will continue to provide appropriate training of 15 NE personnel.
NE ownership of the design process and its 16 engineering will be strengthened by the change in 17 organization.
NE resolution and analysis of trending 18 problems will also include more ownership because the o
19 engineer will be doing that analysis and resolution itself 20 and the degree of commitment's as Mr. Kazanas described is 21 not reduced, if anything, it's been increased.
Functions 22 have been enhanced.
23 For tho'se of you on the phone, I have drawn on the 24 board two sketches.
On the left side the BP of nuclear 25 engineering is shown with two hard lines to engineering on l
l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 e
F
~
i
\\.
92 j
s d
1 the left and engineering assurance on the right.
But let it f
2 be noted this engineering was a rather spread heavy layers 3
of management, the engineering we're describing here.
It 4
was not coherent and compact from an organizational point of 5
view.
6 On the right side, I have cried to graphically 7
depict the organization that we were in the process of 8
transitioning into.
It shows the senior VP at the top to 9
coming down to the left is the VP of nuclear engineering to 10 the chiaf engineer and I could show the projects here also.
11 To the right side coming down to the VP from the 12 senior VP to the VP of nuclear assurance and services and 13 NQA.
14 Now, the fact of the matter is EA has not been 15 dissolved.
What has actually happened is wherein the past 16 those in nuclear engineering responsible for getting the 17 engineering work done and the audit procedure writers audit 18 their own procedures, EA both reported to the production 19 line VP responsible for the production.
20 As Tony described, there were a lot of concerns 21 early on because of that several years ago.
22 Now, the reorganized nuclear power group does 23 several things by separating into NQA and the chief engineer 4
l 24 and the engineering managers by separating all of the EA 1
25 functions.
And according to our expert, Mr. Proposi, until
)
l l
l l
Heritage ' Reporting Corporation I
(202) 628-4888 l
l l
_y i
93 1
next Friday our manager of engineering assurance, absolutely 2
not function has been left out.
3 So, now this separation has severa1' desirable
,4 features.
It involves the senior VP directly 5
organizational, two VPs and at least two senior managers in 6
any issues related to qua?.ity of the engineering work.
And 7
I have seen on several occasions in the past few months 8
these issues coming to Mr. Kingsley.
9 So that is a very desirable feature compared to 10 what we are transitioning from.
There is more independence.
11 There is more -- there is room for more objectivity.
And I 12 firmly believe there is going to be significant increase in 13 accountability.
14 Jack also mentioned that -- and it's worth 15 repeating -- that the number and intensity of audits of one 16 kind or another is not going to diminish.
We have our audit 17 schedules.
They are not being changed because of the -- we 18 have our audit schedules for the rest of the year.and I o
19 don't know, you folks may already be working on next year's.
20 And there is not going to be'anything that was being done 21 eliminated.
22 With that, if there are any further questions?
~
23 MR. RAY:
Let me make one more comment.
Your 24 commented earlier about 50.54, the regulation relative to 25 this.
I'd like to comment briefly.
We left the meeting on He:titage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 e
___m___
/.
94 1
4-10 we took back some actions.
I guess we didn't relate to 2
that in fact.
We were thinking of this in terms of purely 3
basically an organizational change and not a reduction in l
4 our quality program.
I guess that'r, why we decided we 5
handled with Rev. 6 to the NBPN.
He didn't consider it at 1
6 that time it would be the kind of thing that would involve a 7
50.54 assessment.
I can understand what you're saying, but 8
it really didn't dawn on us in that direction because we 9
thought with the functions going exactly as they were and 10 all that sort of thing that it basica11y'was an 11 organizational thing and not a reduction in our quality 12 program.
13 MR. LIAW:
Nobody told you that EA as part of the 14 QA function was a topical?
I'm sorry.
I didn't understand the 16 question.
17 MR. LIAW:
That EA was in the topical report on 18 the QA7 o
19 MR. RAY:
Yes, we know that, but I'm saying we 20 handled it with the other two documents, though, when we 21 sent it in because we were thinking of it more in, terms at 22 that time as an organization change rather than a 23 reduction in quality --
24 MR. PIERSON:
Let me paraphrase this a little bit.
25 I think I had serious reservations about whether there was Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 2
m l
w
- o 95
- .1 '
'any change'in this' organization structure.
And one of the 1
.2 things.I asked for in the April meeting, I said I'd like to 3-see'something from you where you said, "Here's what we're
]
4 measuring now.
Here's what we've accomplished.
And here's 5
.what we're going to look at in July or August or November.to-i 6
see that'the' process is still working'as it's previously 7
been.
8 otherwise, me -- more than probably anyone else --
9 in the awkward position of not knowing until six months j
10.
after this is implemented whether it's working and then if i
11 it's'not working, it's almost too late.
And I don't know.
i 12 I didn't hear you address that.
That's because, Bob, I think you are 14 describing a process whereby you are subs'tituting A process 15 for B proc 9ss.
We're not doing that.
16 MR. PIERSON:
See, I don't see that.
17 MR. KAZANAS:
Then 1:a haven't been very good at 18 being able to explain it to you..
19 MR. PIERSON:
Well, I think I've heard the words 20 you've said and I've heard what you've said.
And I see your 21 organization charts and I see what you're trying to convey 22 and I think I understand what you' re saying.
But I don't 23 necessarily see this in a sense of engineering assurance 24 functions are going to be diluted per se.
But I see that 25 the structure of the engineering assurance group is going to Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
, ' ~
4 a
96 1
be substantially changed.
2 The engineering assurance group is an effective 3
group, in my opinion, et this point.
I would prefer if you 4
were going to initiate a change like this that what -
you 5
process it in the fashion that instead of saying, "We're 6
going to take out this engineering assurance and put these 7
functions under these other groups to allow -- and then 8
those same functions will be carried forth."
9 I would prefer that you show me that the other 10 groups in this process are taking these functions.
In other 11 words, rendering the engineering assurance group 12 superfluous.
And then talk about taking the engineering 13 assurance group and doing whatever in terms of the 14 organization change.
Because it was created for a very
~
15 specific purpose.
And that was because of a weakness in 16 your engineering organization.
17 I don't see, personally, that that structural and 18 fundamental weaknesses in your engineering organization have, 19 changed fundamentally enough for us -- for me to say'that 20 your engineering assurance organization will no longer be 21 needed.
R 22 MR. LIAW:
So, basically what Bob is saying is 23 even if we were to agree with the goal you try to achieve 24 this may not be the time to do it.
And maybe you need a 25 transition.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9
7 g
- (I 97 1
Let me pick up the procedural question first..
~ Without stating the staff position to you, let me --
3 MR. KAZAKAS:
I think the point to make is we 4
Laven't caucused yet.
5 MR. LIAN:
That's what I'm saying.
Without 6
stating the position --
7 MR. PIERSON:
These are my opinions.
These are 8
Bob Pierson's opinion.
9~
MR. LIAN:
We would say, no, we disagree with'you 10 that there was a reduction in the commitment.
Therefore, by f
11 regulation, you cannot implement it until staff approves it.
12 MR. MOREADITH:
Let us caucus before we answer 13 that question.
14 MR. LIAW:
I *ill put the question to you.
I 15 MR. DONOHEW:
One point I need to make is I didn't 16 set aside this conference room for the whole day.
So, f've 17 got to go and check.
There is a possibility that we may 18 have to move to another room.
19 MR. MARTIN:
Can I address something before we 20 break?
Bob Pierson in his c'omment on why don't we duplicate i
21 the function over here and then as we see that function 22 picking up then we dissolve -- if I took that approach with 23 the verification aspects, okay?
And I have this highly 24 qualified, high performing cadre of people over here.
And 25 now I go over here and I duplicate that high performing,
- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 98 1
highly qualified cadre of people, all right?
And I 2
duplicate it and then I show that this one is no longer 3
needed.
I have just taken these resources, these highly 4
qualified people and I just-flushed them.- Okay?
Gone.
5 Now, first thing is when I'm at this level is you 6
have those highly qualified people performing.
And you are 7
duplicating their function.
How do you keep them?
They 8
know that's going away.
I can't duplicate that, Bob.
How 9
do I keep motivated and turned on and performing at the'same 10 level'they were in that transition?
!1 By taking their functions and moving over to here, 12 I maintain the resources, maintain the functions, I maintain 13 the high level of performance and the continuity runs right 14 across.
15 MR. PIERSON:
I can understand your arguments and 16 I.can see what you're saying in terms of personal and morale 17-of the people involved.
18 MR. MARTIN:
And the performance of the people.
19 MR. PIERSON:
And the performance of the people.
20 But conversely, I can also s'ee and perhaps I am stepping 21 some toes here,fI see a highly motivated core group of 22 people in engineering assurance that is to be taken and 23 distributed among several organizations.
L 24 From my own perspective, that esprit decor that is 25 so necessary for an organization like this could very well i
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
y -- -_
I.
4 s
99
'l be lost.
In the' event it is: lost, you. won't have that
,2 effectiveness and oversight function that you have now.
3 That's why I would like to see it run in parallel at least 4
for a.. time.
5 Now,- in terms of the people involved of the i
6 engineering assurance group, in terms of they' re lost and 7
they' re gone, I think that proper managerial perspective 8
maybe you would provide some transition and say at.the point 9
this ceases, dissolved, you will go to this organization or 10
.that organization or do this.
.I'm not sure.
But I think I 11 have concerns about whether the effectiveness of this 12 organization will' carry through as you propose.
.13 MR..MOREADITH:
To respond to some of your l
14
. comments.and one of Jack Donohew's earlie'r comments about i
1 1
15 having a transition period.
I guess we have not been' clear 16 at all in communicating that we have be'en in a transition 17 ~
since February, late February when.Mr.,Kazanas, 1
l 18 Mr. Kingsley, and I agreed that in organizing the 19 nuclear engineering --
20 MR. PIERSON:
It is very interesting that you 1
21 mention that date.
22 MR. MOREADITH:
-- in the most effective way.
May 23 I finish, Bob?
24 MR. PIERSON:
Surely.
25 MR. MOREADITH:
That this transition and
~
Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
.}_
100 1
separation of EA' functions was a wise thing to do to have a 2
more effective organization.
3 I guess we should make a very clear point that we 1
4 started informing people back'in March.
As a matter of 5
fact, Mr. Martin earlier than that, not understanding that 6
it was not something we wanted to start discussing, jumped 7
the gun a'little bit at Sequoia.
We did come here in April.
8 We have worked with our employees and all affected groups.
9 Next Friday is the last day for any EA person who has not 10 been placed.
If this is a situation that is challenged, it 11 is going to be difficult for us to turn around and back up 12 to where you would like to see us go and hold for a while so 13 that you can evaluate it.
l 14 MR. LIAW:
You know very well i'n April that the 15 staff had serious concern about your proposed organization 16 an'd we asked a few questions that in my view you have to 17 respond to us before you implement any aspect of the 1
1 l
18 organizational changes.
And I think you proceed with the o
19 changes, that's where it gets you today, and I guess we've 20 got further comment on that.
But there is no question in my 21 mind that that subject is going to pick up again as part of 22 our conclusion.
23 MR. DONOMEW:
Let's discuss that after we go off 24 the record.
25 Okay, since it's 12:00, I was wondering if the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
... I; 1,
1:1..
- 1
. fact, instead of getting back at 1:30, let's make it 2:00.
I-2
' '(Whereupon, at 12:01 p.m., a luncheon. recess was 3
taken, to reconvene at 2:00 p.m.,
this same day, Friday, I
e June 9, 1989,)
5-6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 o
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 h
.______m._-___m____________m_.______.m__.__
e 4
.4 102 1
AFTERNOON 'SESS ION 2
2:06 p.m.
3 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
We have reviewed the information 4
that you presented to us.
I think functionally, we don't 5
have' a problem with what you are proposing.
The t
6 verification functions going over to one side and line 7
functions going to the other location.
8 The problem we have is a problem we've had 9
traditionally with TVA is implementation. There is a concern 10 that if this is done as you propose, instantaneously, 11 essentially, that we may lose something.
We may not get the 12 program we had before.
13 The staff has felt comfortable with the 14 engineering assurance effort that you've had.
We feel it's 15 been identifying the problems and it's been serving you.
If 16 we go to this new organization where there is a nuclear QA 17 and the engineering side picks up some of the line 18 functions, our concern is that you may not perform as o
19 effectively as you should.
20 We feel that the verification functions and the 21 line functions that you propose, that concept is the rdght 22 concept.
Those doing the designing, those doing the 23 engineering ought to be responsible for a quality product.
24 We feel very strongly about that.
25 Our concern as I indicated is implementation.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 U
t l' 3 0
1 We think you need to have some measures of success 2
or failure for this program to see whether you are doing it 3
right, whether the changes are having the beneficial effects 4
that you want them to have.
5 What we are going to tell you to do is we are not 6
going to accept what you are proposing today.
What we want 7
you to do is to go back and develop some, if you will,'
8 performance indicators, some measures that you can look at 9
and assess and to see whether the program is having the 10 desired effects that you want it to have.
11 We want you to go back, develop those performance 12 indicators, quote /uiquote, and get back to us within about 13 four weeks.
We expect at that point then, generally, to 14 accept what you are proposing,' allow you to go to implement 15 the changes that you wish to implement and on a regular 16 basis self-assess those.
Do a critical self-assessment of 17 those performance indicators.
And on a regular basis, 18 quarterly, semi-annually, annually, et cetera, come back and, 19 tell us whether you are being successful or not successful.
20 our expectation is'that you will be successful and 21 that it will be a smooth transition.
But we don't want to 22 find ourselves six months from now or a year from now with 23 an engineering assurance program that is not doing its job, 24 a QA program that is suffering, design engineering that 25 hasn't picked up the responsibility that it should pick up.
l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
}
l a
104 1
Consequently, that's why we're sending you back this way.
2 MR. KAZANAS:
So that I understand:
During the 3
four weeks --
4 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
During the four weeks, we're 5
looking for the engineering assurance organization to E
6
' continue essentially as it has.been.
If you get back to us 7
in two weeks or three days or whatever it is, that's so much 8
the quicker.
We figure you can do it within four weeks.
f 9
Any questions?
10 MR. MARTIN:
I have one question.
11 MR. KAZANAS:
We need to caucus, but let's make 12 sure we understand what it is that has been said here.
13 MR. MARTIN:
The four-week period you're talking
~
14 about, Mr. Crutchfield, is that four weeks that you think we i
15 need to come up with performance indicators.
16 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
That's four weeks we think you 17 need.
18 MR. MARTIN:
When we come up with the performance o
19 indicators, what priority will NRC give to review those 20 performance indicators?
21 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
it will be the highest priority 22 that we can give it.
We will set aside the resources to sit 23 down and do it.
I suspect we will take less than a few 24 days.
25 MR. KAZANAS:
Let me develop it a little bit more.
Heritage ' Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
7
\\;
s o'
4 1
105 l-1 Currently, we have trending reports.
We spend a lot of time 2
' talking about our trends.
And those are the performance 1
3 indicators that we use right now.
They're there on the 4
table.
They are used by EA.
They are'used by EA selective 5
to engineering function.
They are used by QA selective to 6
operations, maintenance, all the other activities.
7 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I want yo*u to be sure, Nick, 8
that the things that you are going to give us are going to 9
be able to measure what you are going to do in the new l
10 organizational structure.
And, also, there is some tie-back 11 to what you have already done in engineering assurance.
12 MR. MARTIN:
Well, then we can't develop any new 1
13
-- it has to be the trends that Nick is talking about 14 because we'll have no back data --
15 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Unless you can come up with 16 something that is the sum or difference or multiple or 17 division of one or the other.
18 MR. KAZANAS:
Let's talk about that.
19 So it is understood:
We.have a large list of 20 performance indicators and trends that we monitor right now.
21 An'd I don't know to what extent the staff knows --
22 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I don't want to have to review a 23 book of performance indicators this thick.
I'm looking for 24 a half a dozen or less of things that you can has as 25 assigned to you, that Oliver will have as assigned to him, Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 se
-s
+
106 l
1 that we will have assigned to us.that the program as you 2
. envision it, the functions as you envision them, the.
3 organization as you envision will have the affect that you 4
want it to have,- We'are concerned about it from the table.
5 MR. KAZANAS:
Well, the key to implementation i
6 again is you've got to have a baseline of data to see that 7
you are going better or trending up or trending down.
8 Mk. CRUTCHFIELD:
You may already have them.
9 MR. KAZANAS:
Well, that's what I'm thinking and 10 maybe it's -- that wasn't really one of the things that we
(
11 laid on the table because that didn't change.
12 Is there enough knowledge within the staff that 13, they know the indicators we are already using?
14 MR. HUBBARD:
I don't'think so, unless the i
15-residents do, i
16 MR. LIAW:
I think in the April meeting, two 17 things we specifically requested.
One is the EPO breakdown 18 of the function to be picked up by new organization which 19 you did today.
l 20 The other one, we asked for a set of criteria or 21 performance indicators we can use to measure the i
l 22 effectiveness of the new organization.
And I guess that's L
23 the piece --
24 MR. KAZANAS:
Yes.
We heard that clearly.
There 25 is no question performance indicators were mentioned.
But Beritage" Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
)
107 L
1 we heard it from'the viewpoint of making a change to the 2
process.
The process did not get changed.
We only enhanced 3
it.
4 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
How in six months are you going 5
to know whether what you have done with this organization is j
6 successful?
7 MR. KAZANAS:
The same way I know now today that 8
we are bettering the program.
The same way that I know now 9
that we actually put in enhancements to improve the level of 10 performance of not only the EA activities that were being 11 performed both on the QA side and on the line side.
We have 12 these indicators.
We are measuring our performance.
- Now, 13 you made mention before of the implementation problems at 14 Browns Ferry.
15 You know, we are ready -- maybe not as far as this 16 meeting, but we are ready to tell you about the indicators 17 there and what we've done.
It is not a cast die situation.
18 You know, we are constantly moving toward bettering the J
19 program.
Certainly, we have your interest in mind as it is 20 our interest and that is the overall safety and quality of 21 the engineering product.
That's what we're talking about.
22 We've been doing it.
We've been measuring it.
We 23 have a baseline of these things.
We can take a look at 24 this.
We could probably add maybe one or two indicators, 25 perhaps.
I don't know.
I mean that is something we can Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i
(.<.
l 108 1
consider.
We may even be able to do that in a rapid order, 2
maybe not four weeks.
But it probably doesn't take four 3
weeks to do that kind of thing.
i 4
MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Whatever it takes for you to do 5
that, do it.
This will give us assurance that we have a 6
process whereby we can look at it and see whether it is 7
having the right effect, it is forcing engineering to do 8
their own quality assurance, quality verification work.
9 But right now, what you are asking us to do is 10 make a big leap of faith, and we are not ready to do it, 11 yet.
We need to have a basis for it.
12 MR. MARTIN:
Can we ask at least up front because 13 you all have a high confidence factor in EA and what they've 14 done.
Can you also share with'us what the performance 15 indicators you all are now using so that we can make sure 16 that we are meshing on what that high confidence factor is 17 now for EA?
,18 MR. PIERSON:
Success of audits.
19 MR. MARTIN:
Success of audits?
20 MR. KAZANAS:
Essentially what we -- we can show 21 you that 100 ways.
That's on the table.
That's in our 22 regular reports.
You have got that.
23 MR. MARTIN:
I'm just wanting to make sure that --
24 MR. KAZANAS:
That's the kind of thing you're 25 talking about.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
~
109 1
MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
You guys are somehow or-another i
2 measuring success of. engineering assurances.
What gives you 3
that confidence?
Give us that information as to what gives 4
you that confidence.
l 5
I am not going to tell you I want you to measure l
6 the number of nails that are crooked or anything like that.
7 Because I am not that good.
You guys know the QA area.
You 8
know your program.
9 MR. KAZANAS:
I am just trying to reflect.
We do 10 that every, you know, you're defining part of our job in 11
- trending, That's what our trending job does.
12 MR. PIERSON:
I would think that you would already 13 have that.
14 MR. KAZANAS:
We do.
15 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Monday, if you want to come in
- 16 Monday, that's fine.
If you think you've got the right 17 information to give us, that's fine, l
18 MR. MOREADITH:
Can we caucus?
i 19 MR. DONOHEW:
I can get you a room either side of l
I 20 this conference room if you would care to.
21 MR. MOREADITH:
Well, several things.
In my mind,
)
22 four weeks, we can't give you anything more than we can give 23 you to date by continuing it.
24 Secondly is we expressed before the break we're to 25 the point where having the same EA organization in place for I
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 n
%_m_m.___m______
s.
s 110 i
1 four more weeks is a practical impossibility.
So, that will 2
not accomplish anything of any value.
3 Mr. Kingsley expressed a wish during our caucus 4
that we stay as long as it takes.
Now, we can go back and 5
caucus with him again.
He even mentioned the possibility of 6
coming over tomorrow.
7 In my mind, I don't know what we are going to 6
accomplish in four more weeks that we haven't accomplished 9
in the last four months.
10 MR..CRUTCHFIELD:
Are you ready to sit down and 11 give us the indicators that you want to measure and you want 12 us to assess in six months'and a year?
13 MR. KAZANAS:
Right now.
14 MR. CAPOZZI:
Right now as we speak.
15 HR. LIAW:
We can also --
16 MR. KAZANAS:
We would like to caucus to make sure 17 that we're happy.
18 MR. LIAW:
That is right.
I would advise you to o
19 ejo and caucus.
I don't want you to say something that you 20 will retract.
21 MR. KAEANAS:
Well, you know, I have to take it in 22 context.
In context, I guess I am hearing you don't know 23 what*we're doing now in terms of indices.
24 MR. LIAW:
We asked for in February --
25 MR. KAZANAS:
April.
April 5th.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 e
4 4
111 1
MR. LIAN:
April and also informally several times l
2 through conversations I had with your people.
George 3
Hubbard with people.
But that now is water over the bridge.
l 4
MR. KAZANAS:
Again, I don't want it to sound 5
defensive, but we're not changing anything.
6 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I don't want to go through the l*
7 chronology.
Wo. don't need to do that.
We have asked you.
8 We haven't got them yet.
If you want to give them to us 9
today, you can go out for an hour or whatever it takes you 10 and do it.
We'll be here.
But I think that is the key to 11 our accepting this change.
And we want to look at four 12 months, six months, a year, whatever the period is and if it 13 ain't working, guys, we're going to tell you --
14 MR. KAZANAS:
If it ain't working, we' re not going 15 to wait for you to tell us, we're going to make the 16 adjustment.
You can be assured of that.
17 Okay, we will caucus.
18 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
How long do you think it will o
19 take?
Just 10 minutes or an hour?
20 MR. KAZANAS:
It will take Oliver a couple of 21 hours2.430556e-4 days <br />0.00583 hours <br />3.472222e-5 weeks <br />7.9905e-6 months <br /> to get here by charter.
i 22 (Whereupon, at 2:20 p.m.,
a brief recess was 1
23 taken.)
24 (Whereupon, at 3:00 p.m.,
the hearing was 25 reconvened.)
I Heritage Reponting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 i
112 1
MR. KAZANAS:
All right'.
We labeled it as success 2
measurement, looking at the engineering product and we're 3
going to start off and the first thing we ask ourselves is:
4 What is it we're talking about?
5 We are looking at the output.
The performance 6
indices themselves.
That's what's important.
That's what 7
makes you feel good.
That's what makes me feel good.
8 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
You' re measuring engineering 9
performance.
10 MR. KAZANAS:
Engineering performance, absolutely.
11 And these are examples.
The kinds of things we were talking 12 about earlier,-the iterations that we gave you, we named 13 some before.
But, for example, the calculations, the 7
14 drawings, the quality of.the drcwing packages, the DCNs, the 15 changes, themselves.
When we issue engineering product to 16 the field, is it right?
Is it representative of what's in 17 the plant?
Is it successful in terms of the number of DCNs 18 and things of that nature.
o 19 How are we going to measure it?
We talked to you 20 about the transition to the new organization.
We start off with a tech'ical line management review.
The quality coming 21 n
22 from the line organization.
And we are speaking of Bill 23 Raughley's organization, the disciplined engineers, 24 themselves.
They are going down.
They are physically
~
25 measuring, they are redoing calculations.
We talked about Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9
\\
4 g
l 113 1
essential cales, we talked about critical packages.
They 2
are going to be doing that.
3 We' re going to be pulling this information 4
together.
In addition to that, we also have on top of that 5
what comes out of the QA organization.
And we start with 6
the programmatic audits and then, thirdly, the technical 7
audits of the same kinds of activities, the functions 8
themselves.
And we'll do it just the way we've always done 9
it:
by product, by' engineering organization.
And we'll be 10 able to take the various cuts through it in terms of not 11
.only the product of the organization source, itself, whether 12 it's. coming from the mechanical discipline, whatever the 13 particular problem areas are and may in fact be.
14 The indicators themselves:
How do we know?
How 15 do we know that this is trending up or trending down or we 16 need to tweak the process.
The same way we've been using in 17 the past is (1) the trends themselves and then the
.18 individual CAQRs if they are issued from the QA 19 organization.
Those are the particular things that we would 20 look at.
So, you would not 'only have the trends, you would 21 also have the negative indicators that come out of the QAos.
22 So, we'll be looking at that and looking to make whatever 23 adjustments we make.
I 24 When will we do it?
In our monthly reporting.
We 25 will be instituting both for the line. organization and to Heritagin Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 u
'~
l1 114 1
supplement what we already have in the QA side of the house.
2 Then -- and we thought about this again -- we
- 3 wanted to step back and say, in addressing your concern, 4
Denny:
How do we know that-after so much time that all of l
5 this transition is right?
How do we know the package that o
6 we've provided you in terms of the transition plan is in 7
fact working?
The way we originally expected it to work by 8
the design?
And we will conduct and we'll commit to 9
performing an independent NMRG investigation overview of the 10 effectiveness of all of this and how it fits together.
11 We need some time and we need a baseline so we 12 anticipate in about three months we'll set off the MRG and 13 we'll do an overall assessrsnt to make sure we didn't miss 14 anything, that we didn't miss any holes.
And we will 15 further commit to a six-month follow-up on anything that 16 comes out of that review.
17 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
And what are the 5, 6,
7 things
]
i 18 that you're going to look at?
You have give us three i
19 examples up there.
Are those the only -three that you' re 20 proposing to look at?
21 MR. KAZANAS:
No, no.
These are meant to be l
22 examples.
We would go back and look at the specific items 23 that were in the deliverable list.
Okay?
We talked about 24 the deliverable list.
It's in one of the handouts.
25 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
When are you going to give us I
i Heritage Reporting Corporation l
(202) 628-4888
e
'. +.. '
115 1~
those 4, 5,
6, 7 items that you want'to talk about that 2
you're going to look at, that Fred's going to look at and.
3 measure the performance of engineering that you want us to 4
look at as a measure of the performance of engineering?
5 MR. KAZANAS:
It's in that list.
I t
6 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
That's what we're waiting here J
7 for.
8 MR. MOREADITH:
It took us over 30 minutes to 9
figure out what the question was.
1 10 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I thought the question was 11 clear.
12 (Pause. )
13 MR. HUBBARD:
Let me ask a question, Nick, while 14 they're looking there.
How are you going to measure tech 15 line management review?
You know, you're going to see how 16 those things, how you're checking the product coming out, I 17 guess.
18 MR. KAZANAS:
Yes.
In addition, you have your 19 design control program, which presumably issues you a good I
20 product.
We talked about the chiefs, the disciplined 21 engineer, his check of the project engineer to see that the 22 quality of the product is right.
He'll be going in there 23 and sampling a piece of this from the mechanical design, 24 nuclear design.
He'll be doing a piece of this in line.
25 In addition to that, he will also be doing the, Heritage Reporting Corporation I
(202) 628-4888 l
l 1
1
-. ~
116 L
1 quote, significant packages.
2 MR. HUBBARD:
How does he record if he finds a 3
problem?
4 MR. KAZANAS:
That's a detail now -- Bill, have 5
you given that any thought?
E 6
He is looking at, you know, "How am I going to 7
report.
The report is in terms of the trends in the monthly 8
report."
9 MR. HUBBARD:
But if you have a CAQ you track 10 those things?
This is the in-line engineering.
11 MR. KAZANAS:
That's right.
12 HR. HUBBARD:
And it hasn't gotten up to the QA 13 check or whatever.
14 MR. RAUGHLEY:
Right now it is done via the 15 reviewer writes me a trip report.
We're in the process of 16 and a draft is supposed to be completed Monday formalizing 17 the technical process procedure.
Bob Costa'is working on 18 the procedure to formalize that process.
o 19 MR. KAZANAS:
And this is expected to find 20 problems.
It is not going to be, you know, 100 percent 21 here.
We expect to find problems.
The problems may be 22 isolated to a particular engineering group or unit or an 23 engineer.
24 MR. HUBBARD:
Based on our discussion earlier, I 25 would expect the in-line checks probably are going to have a Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
. '. ~.
- 117 high level'to begin'with if people have been using EA as a 1
2 crutch if you implement this.
I would expect that.
3 MR. KAZANAS:
Well, you know, we would word it a 4
little differently.
We would say because we were using EA 5'
in that process that there was some betterment in terms of I
6 that product.
We were using EA to teach the design control 7
progrma.
8 Now, a lot of this comes out in what?
It comes 9
out in a design. control report.
All right.
You're going to 10 have calculation.
You have an independent going through a 11 calculation.
He comes up with a different answer.
They 12 resolve it.
They look at the base and they resolve the 13 issue.
You are having a lot of it now.
This is more of a 14 management review of the product that comes out..
15 MR. HUBBARD:
I guess what I was looking at was 16 trying to see how you were 911ng to measure.
When they 17 interface and resolve the problem, the problem gets 18 resolved --
(
4
+
19 MR. KAZANAS:
And I don't think it is significant 20 to indicate the before-line problem.
I think it is 21 significant to indicate the after it's gone through the 22 design control effort.
23 MR. RAUGHLEY:
That end line technical review is 1
24 two things.
One, it is a control.
Okay
The other is it 25 tells me things like:
Does the person understand the l
l Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
b
4-
'a. :
118 1L concept design, input design, output?
Is he going' ahead and 2
translating requirements into the other drawings?
Is he --
3'
'has he dealt with the interface properly?
Does he 4
understand how to develop the correct technical approach?-
5 It's both'a control and to get some feedback as to what we 6
are primarily looking for:
Does the individual know what he 7
is doing?
8 MR. CRUTC.TIELD :
I think you have the framework 9
here of what we're looking for.
Now, the questien is:
What 10 are the measures?. What are the items that you are going to 11 evaluate that are measures of success of performance of 12 engineering?
I thought that was the question we gave you 13 about an hour ago.
14 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
And I guess what we are 15 struggling with --
16 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:. And if you want to go away and 17 think about it and come back Monday, that's fine.
No 18 problem..
4 19 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
I would like to maybe focus it just 20 so I have an understanding.
You have calculations come out, 21 drawings.
You have design control modus packages.
What is 22 that?
Is that a plant change?
23 MR. KAZANAS:
Yes.
24 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
Couldn't you go to the plant and 25 see if the design change is made effectively or if there are Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
4 i
I i
\\
119 l
~1 a:ty problems with it.
Or it came back because we don't --
I 2
MR. KAZANAS:
That's what we were talking about.
)
i 3
This package here, we would look at the change document.
]
4 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
Your drawings?
Doesn't anyone ever 5
audit whether or not the drawing packages are good?
ij 6
MR. KAZANAS:
Yes.
7 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
Can we get a measure of that?
l 8
MR. KAZANAS:
That would again come down to here.
9 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
You.know, when we did the pipe 10 supports at Sequoia, you did 10,000 calculations.
I know we 11 looked at that 18 different ways from Sunday.
And there are 12 all kinds of reports.
I 13 MR. KAZANAS:
Atd we would look at revisions to 14 the cale package.
15 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
Well, those are parameters, aren't 16 they, that might kind of answer some of the questions that I 17 hear the staff asking?
i 18 MR..KAZANAS:
I thought that that's what it was 19 showing.
.I though, you know, when I s.ee calculations, then 20 I would look at the number of changes against that 21 calculation.
22 MR. MOREADITH:
Denny, may I ask you a question?
23 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Certainly.
24 MR. MOREADITH:
When you say:
What are we 25 trendin'g?
The kinds of things we would trend from the HOW, i
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
-._________-____.____m----
- - - - _ - - - - _ _ - - - = -
L s.4 i 4
120 1
that:we get'from the HOW-would be things like -- and I.want 1
2 to find out'if this is this kinds of things that..you're 3
flooking for we haven't given you yet:
4 Rejected DCMs.and the evaluation.of them.
WhyL 5
were they rejected?
Is corrective action required?
I 6
Calculation ALARAs and evaluation of same.
7 Walkdowns compared to --
8 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Is that,what you look at to-9 measure whether your engineering group is performing as you 10 expect it-to?
11 MR. MOREADITH:
And I look at another thing which 12 doesn't relate directly to safety is:
What was Browns. Ferry 13 expected to produce last week?
What did they produce?
If 14 they didn't produce what they were supposed to, why did they 15 not?
And what are their actions to recover?
16
,MR. LIAW:
To me, that is your management 17 efficiency.
18 MR. MOREADITH:
I said -- Denny asked me what did o
19 I look at to determine if I thought one of the engineering 20
' groups was performing satisfactorily.
21 MR. LIAW:
I can give you an example.
Like the 22 way you resolve the issue, to me, that is a success.
23 Technical resolution of that issue.
You look at a problem, 24 you look at a range of possible solution, you come to staff 25 with certain thing.
And staff accept it on the spot right Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
4 121 1
away.
That is a success.
2 For example, I can give you another one.
If 3
79.14 issue is a failure, how long did it take to get 4
resolutions.
And yet until one person come on board, a new 5
person come on board.
He say, "What you got there?
What t
6 you got here?"
7 If we're not there to say we're going to complete 8
100 porcent of a rigorous analysis and to fix every one of 9
them, that will not meet the interim criteria before wo 10 start.
To me that is a very, very successful approach.
11 So, I guess the kind of thing we are looking for 12 is the rate, you pass NRC with an escort near to hold your 13 hand.
I think the message was very clear at Sequoia.
14 Engineering.
15 Denny was correct.
What Nick described up here is 16 nothing but a framework process which we don't disagree.
17 But we are still looking for a list of things.
18-MR. MOREADITH:
And what I was asking is are those o
19 examples that I mentioned what you are looking for.
20 MR. LIAW:
The er, ample I give you.
21 MR. RAUGHLEY:
This is what I keep.
This is my 22 known problems in cales.
Okay?
And this is what I've got 23 to do.
This is my known design.
24 MR. RAY:
Why don't you read some of the things 25 you've got.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
4 122 1
MR. RAUGHLEY:
So, I'know I have problems in not 2
identifying limiting conditions.
I know I have problems i
3 with incomplete documentation.
I know I have some problems 4
with incomplete input.
And design control process, I know 5
that we are not fully using the DCTS system.-
I know the 6
technical reviews isn't going well.
So, I have initiated a i
7 formal, an NEP..
We're working on an NEP to formalize that 8
process.
I know I.'m not happy with the safety evaluation.
9 I initiate a training next Thursday and Friday. I've 19 reviewed who is doing them and initiate a training next 11 Thursday and Friday for those individuals.
I even changed 12 out some of those individuals.
13 The design DCN of plant modification package.
I 14 have problems there with closure.
Phase ~II implementation, I
15 I-haven't seen a complete activity there.
16 I have got other areas where we're working on.
17 Authority and responsibility associated with matrix, system 18 engineers require speciali=ed training.
Browns Ferry EQ o
19 program.
So, I have these.
But that's.something I noticed.
20 I'm going to be looking for that.
But you don't want to 21 confine it -
you don't want to confine yourself so much 22 that you're looking at this and something else is going 23 sour.
. 24 MR. CRUTCEFIELD:
All right.
I want to bring this 25 to a close.
I think generally the type of things that Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
___._-____._.__.____________mm_
._______.__.____m
s.,.
As 123 1.
you're talking about' are the type of things that we-'re 2
looking for.
Now,'I want to have this information 3
documented no later'than Tuesday.
On the docket.
I want l'
4 the package in-hand that says:
These are the six or seven
'5.
or eight or whatever the number you think are the right 6
number.
These are the ones we have picked.
And they ought 7-to treasure engineering performance.
8 Is that clear to everybody?
Engineering 9
performance.
Not verifications.
Not audits.
Engineering 10 performance.
And your basis for selecting those, what 11 they're going' to tell you and why they are going to tell you 12 whether you're doing bad or good.
13 I was hoping that's what I' d get at 3 :30.
B u t,.
14 okay.
You seem to be heading in the right track, you've got 15 an outline of the right program.
I think you understand by 16 the questions what we're after.
17 Do you want to say something, Bob?
18 MR. PIERSON:
I just wanted to add:
the basis.
19 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Yes, the basis for those.
No 20 later than Tuesday.
21 MR. RAY:
You'll have it.
22 MR. LIAW:
I don't want to see 20 other things 23 that you've described.
Some of them, clearly nothing but 24 your management issue or management process.
~
25 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
You guys have got-your own Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
e c,.
124 1
processes to which you want to measure and monitor, that's 2
fine.
Go forth and do that.
But you don't look at all of 3
them and analyze all of them in detail.
What do you think 4
are the most bnportant and why.
5 MR. KAZANAS:
My only comment is part of the 6
engineering management process that Bill does is look at 7
these parameters and adjust them.
8 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
That's fine.
If you feel that 9
one of them at the end of three months or six months is not 10 giving you what you think you want to do, ask us and I don't 11 think we'll have a problem then.
12 MR. KAZANAS:
We want it in that text.
13 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Don't apologize up front for 14 what you're going to give us.
Take your b'est shot at it and 15 give it to us.
And if you see at some point in the future 16 you've got to change it, come talk to us.
17 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
I was under the impression that
~
38 they had PIs of some sort for EA over the past three years.
19 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Well, the guy has a whole book 20 there.
But I don't want to --
21 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
I don't understand why some of 22 those wouldn't be considered.
23 MR. KAZANAS:
They will.
24 MR. CAPOZZI:
I know you don't want to get too 25 much into details.
I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 M
~
f' e
LT c
I
125 1
MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I wouldn't understand it in the l
2 first thcaght.
s 3
MR. CAPOZZI:
This gives you no more than six or 4
seven.
This tells you where the problems are, the problem 5
types, this ties up the components.
i 6
MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
Tony, I appreciate it.
- Thanks, 7
by no thanks.
8 Is there any questions?
Does everybody 9
understand?
10 I'm willing to let them implement, but they are 11 going to have that damned letter in here Tuesday and it's 12 going to be right.
13 MR. ROTELLA:
This is Tom Rotella.
I didn't hear 14 you say you wanted them to commit to those very things that 15 we are suggesting that they train.
Are you asking 16 them for --
17 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I would expect they are going to 18 commit to do that in the letter that we get Tuesday.
19 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
Absolutely.
20 MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I would expect that the letter 21 says, "Here is the things we're going to do.
We think we 22 need to trend engineering performance.
Here is why we think 23 we need them.
And we are going to do them."
24 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
And later if there are some other 25 things we want to shift to, we send you another letter.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
--wLfO._T_.
Q_
w@w.pmm
M 4
g 4
i 126 1
MR. LIAW:
Yes.
2 MR. ZWOLUSKI:
These are be. coming more important l
3 and these are the ones we are watching more closely now."
4 MR. LIAW:
But don't put that in this letter.
l 5
MR. CRUTCHFIELD:
I am going to go forward now 1
6 seeing that letter.
But if it ain't the right eight or l
7 seven oPr six, there will be hell to pay.
Unquote.
8 MR. LIAW:
Denny, have a condition, one year 9
conditional approval.
10 MR. PIERSON:
The meeting is now officially closed 11 and we will adjourn.
Thank you, TVA, for attending the 12 meeting.
13 (Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m.,
the hearing was 14 adjourned.)
15 16 17 18 4
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 m_
,,w
u;.
I 1
CERTIFICATE I
2 3
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the 1
4 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter 5
of i:
6 Names TVA Quality Assurance Conference, Meeting on the Dissolution of TVA's Engineering Assurance Organization 7
8 Docket Number:
9 Place:
Rockville, Maryland 10 Date:
June 9, 1989 11 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original 12 transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear 13 Regulatory Commission taken stenographically by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the 14 15 direction of the court reporting company, and that the 16 transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing 17 proceedings.
/
fW,
'1 B
/s/
,/
y 19 (Signature typed:}
Robert Beeman 20 Official Reporter 21 Heritage Reporting Corporation 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
_- ___ - _ __ _ _ - ___-_____ = __ -_ -._
.