ML20082B936
| ML20082B936 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 04/04/1995 |
| From: | Aufdenkampe J GEORGIA POWER CO., SOUTHERN COMPANY SERVICES, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082B919 | List: |
| References | |
| 93-671-OLA-3, OLA-3, NUDOCS 9504060101 | |
| Download: ML20082B936 (124) | |
Text
.
^
00CKETED 5000BBESPGgar,E USHRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA YN~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION !
0FFICE OF SECi'ETAfil '
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD n_ncKE fiNU # UEHh'
- g,jt p i;'ti
'In the Mattar of :
- Docket Nos. 50-424-OLA-3 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, at A1 : 50-425-OLA-3 Re: License Amendment (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, : (Transfer to Units 1 and 2) : Southern Nuclear)
- ASLBP NO. 93-671-OLA-3 PREFILED TESTIMONY OF JOHN GILBERT AUFDENKAMPE, JR.
ON DIESEL GENERATOR REPORTING ISSUES l
l I
1 h400101950404 DOCK 05000424 l
7 PDR i V . .
4-t 1 TESTIMONY OF JOHN GILBERT AUFDEniKAMPE, JR.
2 Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
3 A. My name is John Gilbert Aufdenkampe, Jr.
4 Q. WHAT POSITION DID YOU HOLD IN 1990?
5 A. In 1990, I was employed by Georgia Power Company as the 6 Manager, Technical Support at the Vogtle Electric Generating 7 Plant site. I reported to Mr. Allen Mosbaugh, who served as 8 acting Assistant General Manager -
Plant Support until 9 sometime in May, 1990. Thereafter, I reported to Mr. Thomas 10 Greene, the Assistant General Manager - Plant Support.
11 Q. WHAT ARE YOUR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS?
12 A. A summary of my professional qualifications is attached hereto 13 as Exhibit A.
14 Q. DID YOU PARTICIPATE IN THE PREPARATION OF LICENSEE EVENT 15 REPORT ("LER")90-006, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED TO THE NRC ON APRIL 16 19, 19907 17 A. Yes I did. The Nuclear Safety and Compliance group ("NSAC"),
18 and specifically Mr. Tom Webb in that group, drafted LER 90-19 006. NSAC was supervised by Mr. Rick Odom who reported 20 directly to me. A copy of LER is attached to Mr. McCoy's 21 prefiled testimony as Exhibit L (GPC Exh. 14). Also, I was a j 22 member of the Plant Review Board ("PRB") which reviewed 23 several drafts of LER 90-006. !
l 1
i
. . . . .. .. .-~
.i
-1 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN THE PREPARATION OF THE
- 2 DIESEL GENERATOR STARTS LANGUAGE IN LER 90-006 PRIOR TO APRIL 3 19, 1990. ,
~
4 A. The initial drafts of LER 90-006 were prepared by Tom Webb and 5 adopted the same diesel starts language that was included in 6 Georgia Power's April 9, 1990 letter.to NRC. I~ reviewed a 1 7 number of drafts prepared by Mr. Webb. On April 12, 1990 the 8 PRB reviewed a draft of LER 90-006 and ' discussed at some 1 l
9 length what information should be included in the LER. At the 10 PRB's request, the LER was redrafted to reduce its-length from - ,
1 11 about 16 to about 8 pages.
1 12 On or about April 13, 1990 the diesel starts statement in j 13 the draft LER was revised by Tom Webb to replace the r3ference 14 to 18 and 19 ' starts with a general reference to "several" 15 starts. I believe it was changed because a question had been 1
16 raised about the numbers. l 17 On April 18, 1990, the PRB reviewed the draft LER and ,
18 voted unanimously to approvo the LER with certain comments.
19 The voting members of the PRB were Messrs. Allen Mosbaugh, !
l 20 James Swartzwelder, Mike Herton (part time attendee), Harvey 21 Handfinger, and myself. A comment was made by Mr. Mike Lackey 22 that the draft LER language referring to "several starts" of 23 the diesels should be changed to " state the number of starts 1
24 rather than several." San PRB Meeting Minutes, Mtg. No. 90-25 59, and Comment Review Sheet, attached hereto as composite 26 Exhibit B. As approved, the diesel starts statement read:
=. -
?
A
~
1, Numerous sensor calibrations - (including jacket water ;
c2: temperatures), -special pneumatic. leak testing, and 3 . multiple engine starts . and runs were : performed under i' 4 various conditions. Since 3-20-90, DG 1A and DG 1B have 5 been started more than twenty times each and no failures -j
.6 or problems have occurred during any of these starts'. In
'7 addition,.an undervoltage start test without air roll was 8 conducted on 4-6-90 and DG1A started and loaded properly.
9 As the transcript of Tape 58 (GPC Exh. 2) reflects at p. l
[
10 7, the "more than twenty times each" language which was ,
11 inserted into the draft LER was - based on a review of the.
12 Control Log performed by members of the NSAC staff in which 13 the number of diesel' starts occurring after April 9 was added 14 to the 18 and 19 numbers' reported in the April 9 letter. ]
)
l 15 Q. DID THE CORPORATE OFFICE PROVIDE COMMENTS WITH. RESPECT TO.THE ;
i 16 DRAFT LER 90-006 ON APRIL 19, 1990?
17 A. Yes. On the morning of April 19, 1990, the corporate office 18- sent a facsimile to the site containing the corporate office's 19 comments on the draft LER. Han Stringfellow Exh. B (GPC Exh.
i 20 25). Those comments included a request from Mr. Hairston to 21 " verify > (greater than) 20 starts." l 22 Q. DID THE PLANT VOGTLE PRB MEET ON APRIL 19, 1990 TO DISCUSS LER .
23 90-006?
24 A. Yes. On April 19, 1990, a PRB meeting, which Mr. Mosbaugh i
. 25 tape recorded (Tape No. 57), took place from 1:25 p.m. to 2:45 26 p.m. , during which the PRB reviewed and approved the corporate 27 comments on the draft LER. 333 PRB Meeting Minutes, Mtg. 90-28 60, attached hereto as Exhibit C. Those voting to approve the
~ . . _ _ _ __ _ -
1 LER included Messrs. Skip Kitchens, Harvey Handfinger, James 2 Swartzwalder and myself. Mr. Mosbaugh abstained on the stated 3 reason that he had just entered the room. During the meeting,
-4 I was tasked with verifying the number of diesel starts. Mr.
5 George Frederick stated that he thought the number of starts 6 was being questioned by the corporate office because GPC 7 personnel had counted the diesel starts in front of the NRC 8 and a number different than 18 or 19 was counted. Egg 9 transcript of Tape 57, GPC Exh. 1, at p. 15. On the NRC's 10 transcript of Tape 57, at p. 62, Mr. Mosbaugh wrote the l 11 following note:
12 Chaffee team had questioned the start data in the [4 i 13 90] COA [ response letter) and couldn't figure how we I 14 counted starts. )
15 A copy of that hand-written note is attached hereto as Exhibit l I
16 D. l 17 Q. PRIOR TO APRIL 19, 1990 HAD YOU DISCUSSED THE NUMBERS OF 18 DIESEL STARTS WITH NRC PERSONNEL?
l 19 A. Yes. Although I was not involved in the April 9, 1990 1
20 presentation to NRC, I spoke with the NRC Incident l 21 Investigation Team ("IIT") and Region II personnel on April 22 10, 1990 about the numbers of diesel generator starts reported 1
23 to the NRC during the April 9 presentation. (After the IIT 24 personnel left the Vogtle site on about April 2, 1990, we held j 25 daily telephone conferences with IIT and Region II personnel 26 to follow up on items of interest to the NRC concerning the l
4 l
F 1 site area emergency.) The April 10 conversation was 2 transcribed by the NRC (IIT document #212) and a portion of 3 that transcript, which I believe to be accurate, is attached 4 hereto as Exhibit E. During the discussion, the NRC's Mr.
5 Rick Kendall said "one of the problems we were having was that 6 we were listening on yesterday's call [GPC's April 9 7- presentation to NRC) where we understand there has been ,
8 something like 16 successful starts in a row of the 1-A diesel ,
9 generator. And we go back, and.we try to count them up, and 10 we don't get that many. So somewhere along the line we are 11 missing a few and we want to complete the picture." Mr.
12 Kendall also said " Paul Kochery prepared a table that 13 discussed the starts between starting with the 20th, starting 14 on March 20th, and going through, I guess, the first phase of 15 troubleshooting. But it does not go beyond that point."
16 Q. WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER THE PRB MEETING WITH RESPECT TO THE 17 DIESEL STARTS STATEMENT IN THE DRAFT LER?
18 A. Sometime after the PRB meeting, Mr. Mosbaugh and I discussed 19 the draft LER with Mr. Stringfellow in the corporate office. l 20 As the transcript of Tape 57 indicates, we advised Mr.
21 Stringfellow that we thought the draft diesel starts language 22 appeared to be a material false statement because there had 23 been two problems with the 1B diesel since March 20. I also 24 said that the draft LER language would have to change and may 25 need to be deleted depending on the results of a review of the 1 numbers of diesel starts which Mr. Webb was conducting using 2 the reactor operators' log (the " Unit control Log" or " control 3 Log"), but which had not yet been completed. We also 4 discussed the fact that the April 9 letter appeared to be 5 false because of the failures of the 1B diesel after March 6 20th. (We had not determined at that time that the numbers 7 reported in the April 9 letter were inaccurate. That would 8 depend on the results of Mr. Webb's review of the control 9 Log.) The telephone call ended with me stating that I was 10 " working on that." Ega transcript of Tape 57, GPC Exh. 1, at 11 pp. 44-46, 48-51.
12 Q. WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT?
13 A. While I do not recall specifically what I did next, the next 14 discussion I was involved in that Mr. Mosbaugh taped involved 15 Messrs. Mosbaugh, Rick Odom and Tom Webb. Eg.g transcript of 16 Tape 57, GPC Exh. 1, at pp. 72-79. I recounted for Messrs.
17 Odom and Webb essentially what had transpired earlier in the 18 day as described above. We discussed the two 1B diesel 19 failures and concluded that they were not valid failures. We 20 also discussed the accuracy of the April 9 letter and 21 concluded that, even though there were two la diesel failures l
22 after March 20, the statement could still be interpreted as j i
23 accurate if there were 19 successful starts of the 1B diesel l l
24 since the last failure of which we were aware, i.e., the one i 25 on March 23 at 1700 hours0.0197 days <br />0.472 hours <br />0.00281 weeks <br />6.4685e-4 months <br />. Mr. Mosbaugh said it was critical l
i l
1 to know the accurate count of diesel starts in order to 2 determine the accuracy of the~ statement. Mr. Mosbaugh also
-3 advised Mr. Odom that he needed to get the diesel start 4 information from the control Log. This was necessary because 5 the Diesel Start Log maintained by Mr. Stokes was not l l
6 sufficiently up to date. It is apparent to me now that this j 7 discussion was contrary to the statement that the April 9 )
8 letter was a material false statement, which Mr. Mosbaugh and 9 I had made earlier to Mr. Stringfellow. I do not know whether !
I 10 we further advised Mr. Stringfellow of the substance of the 11 conversation discussed above.
12 Q. WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?
13 A. The next discussion of the diesel starts data that I am aware 14 of on April 19, 1990 is the one that is reported in the 15 transcript of Tape 58 (GPC Exh. 2) , beginning at p. 7. There, 16 Mr. Mosbaugh joined, and began taping, a conversation already i
17 in progress. Based on the transcript, the persons ,
18 participating in the discussion with me included Messrs.
19 Bockhold, McCoy, Shipman, Stringfellow, Mosbaugh, and later 1 20 Mr. Hairston. While it is impossible to tell how long the !
21 conversation had been in progress, I believe there had been f
22 some discussion of the diesel starts statements which was not 23 recorded by Mr. Mosbaugh. At the beginning of Mr. Mosbaugh's 24 recording, I informed the group that my staff initially came 25 up with the "at least 20 times each" language in the draft LER
d
' l -. by adding starts occurring '. after : April 9 to ' the 18-and 19 -
- 2 numbers reported in the April 9th letter. Mr. Bockhold l 3 : indicated his agreement with the greater-than-20 number. Mr.
4 McCoy said they needed to know the number of starts after the L5 completion of the comprehensive test. program of the control j 6 systems. Mr. Bockhold said the 18 and 119 numbers were 7 verified correct by Mr. Jimmy Cash. Mr. McCoy asked if those 8 numbers were'after the completion of the comprehensive test 9' program and Mr. Bockhold assured that they were. ~ Mr. Shipman. i 10 proposed that they use the words " greater than 18" but McCoy 11 interjected that it would not be greater than 18 for one of l 12 the diesels, "it would ha 18." Egg transcript of Tape 58 (GPC 13 Exh. 2), at pp. 7-9. The group then discussed another subject' 14 concerning what the plant equipment operator saw on March 20.
15 It was during' that discussion that it appears 'from the 16 transcript that Mr. Hairston entered the conversation. & at 1
17 10. Next, the short part of the conversation can be heard 18 which was aired on the NBC Nightly News on August 9, 1992. l 19 Mr. Hairston stated "We got the starts, so we didn't have no j 20 ... didn't have no trips." Mr. Shipman can then be heard to 21 say, "No, not not...." & at 11-14.
l l
22 Q. DO YOU AGREE WITri THE INTERVENOR'S VERSIONS OF THE DISCUSSION '
23 WHICH APPEARS AT P.14, LL. 7-27 OF THE TRANSCRIPT OF TAPE 58? i 24 A. No. While I cannot understand completely what is being said 25 on that portion of Tape 58, and I don't have any independent .
1 recollection of it, based on listening to the tape, I believe 2 that. Georgia Power's transcript version of that conversation 3 (GPC Exh. 2, p. 11, 1. 23 to p. 13, 1. 11) is the most 4 accurate. I have no recollection of anyone responding to or 5 telling Mr. Hairston that there had been no trips. If anyone 6 had said that, I, and I believe others, would have corrected 7 that statement during the discussion. .In any event, I do not' l
8 believe that this portion of the conversation is evidence of l 9 an intent by Georgia Power to mislead the NRC.
I 1
10 Q. WHAT ELSE OF NOTE OCCURRED BEFORE THAT CONVERSATION ENDED?
11 A. After some discussion about other aspects of LER 90-006, the l
12 group conversation ended with Mr. McCoy advising me that the j 13 corporate office would call me back in about 30 minutes to 14 read me the changes to the LER and to let me know whether ;
15 there were any other changes which might have to be reviewed i
16 by the PRB. GPC Exh. 2 at p. 18.
17 Q. ONCE THE CHANGES TO THE LER WERE INCORPORATED, HOW DID THE 18 DIESEL STARTS STATEMENT READ?
19 A. The statement read as follows: ;
20 Numerous sensor calibrations (including jacket water 21 temperatures), special pneumatic leak testing, and 22 multiple engine starts and runs were performed under 23 various conditions. Af ter the 3-20-90 event, the control 24 systems of both engines have been subjected to a 25 comprehensive test program. Subsequent to this test 26 program, DG1A and DG1B have been started at least 18 27 times each and no failures or problems have occurred 28 during any of these starts. In addition, an undervoltage i
- 9 ,
.l 1
i
~1 start test without air roll was conducted on 4-6-90 and .
'2 DG1A started and loaded properly. )
l i
j 3 Q. AT THE TIME THIS LANGUAGE WAS SENT TO YOU BY THE CORPORATE ]
4 OFFICE, WERE THE' DIESEL START NUMBERS REPORTED IN THE DRAFT- !
5 LER VERIFIED AS ACCURATE?
~
'6 A. No. At that point in time on April 19, 1990, we were still 7- awaiting the results of Messrs. Odom's and Webb's review of i
8 the Control Logs. As indicated on the transcript of Tape 57 .
9 (GPC Exh. 1) , at pp. 78-79, Mr. Odom earlier said he was 10 having trouble locating all of the days of the control Log for l
4
.11 the period March 23 to April 9, and Mr. Williams said he had i
12 copies of them. Therefore, the question concerning the 13 accuracy of the diesel starts numbers was still unresolved 14 pending receipt of the data from Messrs. Odom and Webb.
I 15 Q. WHEN DID YOU RECEIVE THE DATA FROM MESSRS. ODOM AND WEBB !
16 CONCERNING THE NUMBERS OF DIESEL STARTS? j 17 A. Although I do not have a specific recollection of the time I 18 when I received their data, the transcript of Tape 58 19 convinces me that Mr. Mosbaugh and I~ had received that data by 20 the time of our final telephone conversations with the ;
21 corporate office on April 19, 1990 concerning the diesel 22 starts statement. E.gg transcript of Tape 58, GPC Exh. 2 at 23 23, 26, 27, 34, 35, 38. j l
i I
l
- ., - .-. . . . , ._I
1 Q. WHAT TRANSPIRED IN THE FINAL TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS THAT. YOU
'2 HAD WITH THE CORPORATE OFFICE ON APRIL 19, 1990 CONCERNING THE
'3 ACCURACY OF THE DIESEL STARTS STATEMENT IN THE LER7 a
'4 A. Mr. Mosbaugh, Mr. Shipman and I discussed that Mr. Bockhold ,
5 had said earlier in the day that the 18 and 19 starts, t
5 reported to the NRC on April 9, occurred after allLthe sensors 7 had been recalibrated, i.e. , after all the bugs had been 8 worked out. Mr. Mosbaugh informed Mr. Shipman that we had the 9 diesel starts data but didn't know the date and time of the 10 completion of the instrument recalibrations. Mr. Shipman said i 11 they could begin the count at the point at which the diesels 12 were declared operable but that those numbers would be a lot 13 smaller than the numbers. reported to NRC .on April 9.
14 Nonetheless, Mr. Shipman was. clear that if that was the only )
I 15 valid explanation, that's what he wanted to say. I believed '
i 16 there was reasonable assurance that the diesel statement in 17 the LER was accurate, based on Mr. Bockhold's assurances that 18 the 18 and 19 numbers had been validated, which was not called 19 into question by the data we had received from Messrs. Odom 20 and Webb. When I asked Mr. Mosbaugh if he took exception to 21 that, he did not disagree. Egg transcript of Tape 58 (GPC 22 Exh. 2), at pp. 22-27.
23 Next, Mr. Shipman read the final diesel starts statement 24 and Mr. Mosbaugh then said that the statement suggested the 25 diesel start count began after the UV (i.e., undervoltage) 26- testing. Mr. Shipman explained that Mr. McCoy had spoken with l l
" ap .:
j l
1 the NRC's Ken Brockman about the diesel start numbers and the 2 basis for them as it had been described by.Mr. Bockhold and
- 3 that Mr. Brockman understood that basis and so did the IIT 4 team. IgL. at 27-29. Mr. Mosbaugh had no further comment and-5 the conversation moved on.to a discussion of Mr. Mcdonald's )
< i 6 comments on other portions of-the LER.- Later, Mr. Shipman
]
7 read the diesel starts statement one more time, and. thanked. j 1
8 everyone for their efforts in getting the LER finalized. No ~l l
l 9 further- concerns were expressed about the diesel starts 10 statement. Isb. at 31-32. Based' on the transcript 'of Tape 58, J
11 that was the last conversation about the diesel starts 12 statement between the site and the corporate office.
13 Q. WHAT WAS YOUR VIEW OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIESEL STARTS 14 STATEMENT IN LER 90-006? ,
i 15 A. I believe that all material communications with the NRC must l
. 16 be accurate and complete. On April 19, 1990, my focus was on l 17 the numbers of consecutive successful starts after the last 18 failure of the diesel. This was to me the real indicator of 19 reliability, not whether there were so many starts after point 20 A or point B. Because I had been informed that Mr. Bockhold's 21 description of the comprehensive test program had been 22 discussed with the NRC, the ambiguity of that phrase was not .
23 significant to me. The numbers of consecutive, successful 24 starts prior to April 19 was significant to me.
-,. -,.-,u - , - - - ,- - - - - . n., n,-,,---an , - , - , , . , , - , - , . , - , , , ,
4
- . e
'l Q. WERE THERE.ANY FURTHER CONCERNS ABOUT THE FAILURES OF THE 1B 2 DIESEL WHICH HAD OCCURRED AFTER MARCH 20?.
3 3 A. As far as I recall there were not. There was no doubt that 4 the NRC was aware of those failures -- they were identified on 5 the list prepared by Mr. Kochery, which I believe Rick Kendall 6 had on April 10 when I spoke to him. s.g3 my testimony 7 conerning the April 10 discussion with NRC at pp. 4-5, above.
8' The language of the draft LER had been revised to clarify what 9 had been previously reported in the April 9 letter by 10 indicating, in essence, that there were at least 18 successful 1
11 starts after any diesel failures. As for the April 9 letter, 1
12 I simply did not give it any further consideration because my )
13 focus was on the LER. I also knew that Mr. McCoy had spoken j 14 with the NRC's Ken Brockman about the diesel starts statement 15 and that the NRC knew the basis for the statement. Sag j 16 transcript of Tape 58 (GPC Exh. 2) at pp. 28-29, 39.
17 Q. DID YOU HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH SITE PERSONNEL ON APRIL 18 19, 1990 CONCERNING THE DIESEL STARTS STATEMENT?
19 A. Yes, as reflected in the. transcript of Tape 58 (GPC Exh. 2),
20 at pp. 34-39. First, Mr. Mosbaugh and I discussed the number 21 of diesel starts, referring to the data that Messrs. Odom and 22 Webb had compiled, and the point at -which the count should 23 begin. Mr. Mosbaugh felt that it should begin after the 24 undervoltage test. I felt that, consistent with Mr.
25 Bockhold's understanding, which I believed had been discussed .
o . . . - . . ._ _ _.
32 s
1 with _the NRC, it should .begin with after the sensor
, 2 calibrations which I understood coincided with the third and 3 last diesel failure after March 20. . & at 34-36. Wo.. spoke !
4 to Jimmy Cash ( & at 36-38), who had made the original count -
.51 of the 18 and 19 diesel' starts for the April 9 presentation.-
, l6 Mr. Cash said he counted everything after March 20 on the 1A 7 diesel through.about April 9. However, Mr. Cash's responses 8 to our questions did not convince me that the diesel starts 9 statement in LER 90-006 was inaccurate. 'In the end, when I 10 asked Mr. Mosbaugh what he wanted to do about'the matter, he 11 decidad to let it drop, apparently agreeing with my reasoning.
12 & at 39. That was the last I heard about the matter on.
13 April 19, 1990.
i 14 Q. DID MR. MOSBAUGH RAISE THE ISSUE OF THE DIESEL STARTS 15 STATEMENT WITH YOU AFTER APRIL 19, 1990?
16 A. Yes. Based on tape recordings that Mr. Mosbaugh made of many 17 of our conversations, I know that we discussed the issue on 18 Tape No. 71, which apparently was made on April 27, 1990. The I 19 transcript'of our conversation on Tape 71, attached hereto as l
20 Exhibit F, is an accurate account of that discussion. During 21 that conversation, Mr. Mosbaugh said he thought there was a
.22 high probability that there was.a problem with the diesel l 23' starts statement in the LER. I told Mr. Mosbaugh that there i 24 was probably a better way to word the statement but that I did ,
25 not believe the words in the LER were meant to be "weasely," ,
l l
l l
l
, , . . - . , , , ~ . . -- ,,. , - . -
.n i
, I 1 meaning misleading. Mr.=Mosbaugh indicated tht he would 2- -
review diesel starts data and determine whether what was meant .
3 by the LER statement was true or not. [
- 4 According to Tape No. 75, Mr. Mosbaugh showed me diesel-5 starts data on April 30, 1990, which he had compiled frca the 6 Control Log. I believe the data which Mr. Mosbaugh showed me 7 at the time was the 1B list of starts attached to his April 8 30, 1990 ~ memorandum to Mr. Bockhold, a copy of which 'is
. 9 attached hereto as Exhibit G. Based on Mr. Mosbaugh's 10 representation that the data was the best data available, I
{
11 acknowledged that it appeared that the LER statement was ;
L12 false. Egg transcript of excerpt of Tape 75, attached hereto 13 as Exhibit H.
r 14 Q. WHAT ACTIONS WERE TAKEN TO CORRECT THE - DIESEL STARTS :
15 STATEMENTS IN THE APRIL 9 LETTER AND LER 90-006?
16 A. By May 2, 1990, I directed Mr. Odom to correct the statements l 17 in both the April 9 letter and LER 90-006. Mr. Mosbaugh told 18 Mr. Odom that the correction could be made by simply changing j 19 the number of starts in the LER to eleven. Mr. Mosbaugh 20 recorded these conversations on Tape No. 89, to which I have 21 listened. I believe the transcript of that conversation, 22 attached hereto as Exhibit I, accurately reflects that 23 conversation.
24 There was a Plant Review Board ("PRB") meeting on May 8, 25 1990, which Mr. Mosbaugh taped (Tape No. 98), that I ,
l
= _ .__ __ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
y, ; +
.x. .
.1< participated in as.a~ member.- I have listened-to the excerpt
- 2 from-Tape 98Lcontaining the'above-described [PRB' meeting and 3 the transcript - of ithat conversation, attached hereto as 41 Exhibit .7 , accurately represents that conversation.- .As. -)
'5 indicated: in the PRB meeting minutes for that: meeting,.
6 attached hereto as Exhibit ' K, 'there was some disagreement .l 7 ' about the numbers of diesel starts " subsequent to the test ..
. 1
'8 program." As the acting Chairman, Mr. Mosbaugh . asked the
-9 members to determine what was tha- completion of .the {
10 comprehensive test program ("CTP") of the diesels. Mr. l l
11 Mosbaugh explained the basis for the number of ." eleven" diesel 3 l
12 starts ' following the CTP and the PRB voted to approve a 13 revision to LER 90-006 which stated: f 14 After the 3-20-90 event, the control systems of' both 15 engines were subjected to a comprehensive test program j 16 which culminated in control logic tests on 3-31-90 for ;
-17 DG1A and L 3-27-90 for DG1B. Subsequent to this test-18 program, .DG1A and DG1B have been started 11 times each
~19 (through 4-19-90) and no failures or problems' have ,
20 occurred during any of these starts. These included an i 21 undervoltage start test without air roll which was l 22 conducted on 4-6-90 and DG1A started and loaded properly. j 23 A marked-up copy of the PRB approved. language is attached l 24 hereto as Exhibit L. As the transcript of Tape 98 reflects, ,
25 after the PRB meeting, Mr. Mosbaugh directed Tom Webb to ,
26 approve the revision to the LER with a comment "to clarify ;
27 what the comprehensive test program is, so that it is j 28 factually correct." I believe the PRB-approved revision to l e
29 LER 90-006 was sent to the corporate office for review shortly ;
30 after the May 8 PRB meeting.
. . . .- .- .. . . . - = - . , -_
v.
.s f i 1p
~-1. Another PRB meeting was held on May 10; 1990, inLwhich-I' 2 participated as a. member. 333 PRB Meeting Minutes,-Mtg..No.
^
3 90-67,--attached as-Exhibit M. As stated in the PRB meeting 4 . minutes, Mr. Mosbaugh assigned an action-item to the General
- 5. ' Manager,-Mr..Bockhold, to determine how-the April 9 letter would be corrected. I believe that I was instructed to.use- ,
7 the cover letter for the revised LER to correct the April 9 8 letter and that I discussed this with NRC Resident Inspector
~
9 Lee Trocine on June 15, 1990, as discussed below.
10 Q. DID YOU HAVE OTHER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE REVISION TO LER 90-11 006 OR THE APRIL 9 LETTER THAT YOU RECALL IN MAY AND JUNE OF 12 19907 i 13 A.. Not that I specifically recall. However, there are two tape. :
14 recordings made by Mr. Mosbaugh on which I can be heard 15 discussing this matter (Tapes 157 and 167). I have listened 16 to the pertinent excerpts of those tapes and believe that the
- 17. transcripts referred to below are an accurate representation 18 of those conversations.
19 On June 8, 1990, we discussed the delay in the revision 20 of LER 90-006. Egg transcript excerpt of Tape 157, attached t
'21 hereto as Exhibit N. I explained that Mr. Stringfellow was 22 too busy with other work to get to the LER revision. We had 23 also heard that Mr. Hairston was upset about the inability of 24 the Vogtle staff to determine the correct diesel starts count.
25 We then had a conversation with Messrs. Bailey and Rushton in ,
{y.
i
& {
I' 1 the corporate. office, who were attempting to determine what 2 caused the error. I. summarized for them what I recalled from.
i 3 April 19 and told them that the detailed data we . reviewed -i 4 showed there were not 18 or 19 consecutive successful starts -
4 5 of the diesel between March 20 and April 9,1990. I told them i
6 that when we issued the LER we had data that we thought I 7 supported the numbers presented on April 9, but that on closer i 8 scrutiny, it did not support that. I said 'we had not
, 9 corrected the April 9 letter but that I believed the NRC's IIT 10 personnel knew exactly what happened. I explained that we had 11 given the IIT opecific data on start sequences and failures 12 that we used to write the revised LER. The data to which I J l
13 was referring is identified as IIT document #336, which was i 14 provided to the IIT on May 9, 1990, and which is included-15 among the documents attached to the'NRC's response to Freedom 16 of Information Act Request No.92-388. S.g3 McCoy Exh. H (GPC I
17 Exh. 10).
18- On June 15, 1990, Mr. Mosbaugh and I discussed the status ;
19 of the LER revision. Sag transcript excerpt of Tape 167, 1
20 attached hereto as Exhibit O. I inf:ormed Mr. Mosbaugh that I 21 had discussed the error in the diesal starts data with the NRC 22 resident inspectors, who said they discussed the matter with ;
23 Ken Brockman. The inspectors asked what the correct numbers 24 were and I told them it 69 pends on where you start counting, 25 but that the latest numbers I heard were 16 and 11.
I
)
l
1 4 l l
l l
1 Q. DID THE JUNE 29, 1990 REVISION TO THE LER ADDRESS THE APRIL 9 2 LETTER? ;
3 A.- Yes. The June 29, 1990 revision to LER 90-006 included I 4 language in the cover letter to address the April 9 letter.
5 Q. WERE YOU INVOLVED IN PREPARING THE JUNE 29, 1990 REVISED LER i l
6 AND COVER LETTER?
l 7 A. I should have seen the revised LER before it was issued, but !
l l
8 I don't recall seeing the cover letter for it before it was 9 signed.
l 10 Q. DO YOU BELIEVE THE LACK OF AVAILABILITY OF THE DIESEL START l
11 LOG ON APRIL 19, 1990 FROM WHICH TO COUNT STARTS CONTRIBUTED l
12 TO THE ERROR IN LER 90-006? ;
l 13 A. Yes. Had the Diesel Start Log been available on April 19, 14 1990 we would have had a single source document in which we 1 l
15 had confidence from which to discuss the diesel start history. l l
16 It would have had more information concerning each of the ,
17 starts (e.g., the Completion Sheets would have been included
-l 18 in the Log) and there would have been a fuller discussion of ;
l 19 the basis for the diesel starts numbers. I believe I would 20 have had a more questioning attitude towards Mr. Bockhold's 21 representations if I had the Diesel Start Log, rather than a 22 tabulation of data compiled from the Control Log. As I said I 23 on one of Mr. Mosbaugh's tape recordings in June 1990, the 24 lack of the Diesel Start Log may not have been the cause of I
l
i 4
1- the error, but it would have been the cure for it. SAq 2 transcript excerpt of Tape 159, attached hereto as Exhibit P.
3 Q. DID YOU MISLEAD THE CORPORATE STAFF ON APRIL 19, 1990 4- CONCERNING THE ACCURACY OF THE DIESEL STARTS STATEMENT IN LER 5 90-006?
6- A. No. I based my comments to the corporate office on April 19, 7 1990 on an honest assessment of the diesel starts information 8 available to me on April 19. I focused on the fact that the 9 data and Mr. Bcckhold's statements convinced me that, as of 10 April 19, there were at leest 18 consecutive, successful 11 starts of the 1A and 1B diesels.
h GPC EXHIBIT 27 AUFDENKAMPE EX. A
SUMMARY
OF PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS JOHN GILBERT AUFDENKAMPE, JR.-
Education / Licenses / Certifications:
1995 Registered Professional Engineer, State of Alabama 1992 Senior Reactor Operator License - Vogtle Electric Generating Plant 1983 Senior Reactor Operator Cold License Certification - General Electric Training Program - Perry Simulator 1980 Bachelor of Science, Electrical Engineer - University of Cincinnati Exoerience:
5/94 - Present Design Team Leader - Southern Company Services, Inc., Vogtle Project, Birmingham, Alabama 3/93 - 5/94 Mechanical Group Manager - Southern Company Services, Inc. - Vogtle !
Project, Birmingham, Alabama 8/90 - 3/93 Manager in Training - Georgia Power Company - Vogtle Electric l Generating Plant - Waynesboro, Georgia 6/89 - 8/90 Manager - Technical Support - Georgia Power - Plant Vogtle I
10/87 - 6/89 Superintendent, Engineering Support - Georgia Power - Plant Vogtle '
12/86 - 10/87 Plant Engineering Supervisor - Georgia Power - Plant Vogtle 4/84 - 12/86 Senior Plant Engineer - Georgia Power - Plant Vogtle l 4/83 - 4/84 Nuclear Steam Supply Systems Test Coordinator - Cincinnati Gas &
Electric Company ("CG&E") - Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station -
Moscow, Ohio 5/82 - 4/83 Nuclear Steam Supply Systems Group Izader - CG&E - Zimmer Station 12/80 - 5/82 Containment Leakage Rate Test Coordinator - CG&E - Zimmer Station 6/80 - 12/80 Technical Staff Engineer - CG&E - Zimmer Station 12/76 - 6/80 Engineer-in-Training - CG&E - Zimmer Station
GPC EXHIBIT 28 AUFDENKAMPE - --
EX. B VEGP PLANT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 4/18/90 PAGE 1 0F 3 ME! *NG NO. 90-59 DATE 8:30 AM/PH; MEETING ADJOURNED 9:45 AN/PN-MEETING CONVENED
(
- VIA TELECON)
TNIS MEETING CHAIRED BY W. F. Kitchens (x) CHAIRMAN ( ) VICE CHAIRMAN J. G. Anidenkampe VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT J. E. Swartzwelder A. L. Mosbaugh H. M. Handfinger R. L. LeGrand PRB SECRETARY C. Cross Tynan M. W. Norton*
C. P. Stinespring G. R. Frederick NON-VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT:
M. B. Lackey VOTING ALTERNATES PRESENT FOR FOR ,
NO' 10 TING ALTERNATES PRESENT!
- 3. Driver FOR R. R. Holmes FOR FOR FOR FOR GUESTS / TECHNICAL ADVISORS:
T. E. Hekk PRB ACTION ITEMS OPENED: None PRB ACTION ITEMS CICSED: None PR5 MINUTES APPROVED : None buLy:-- CA A.4 4 ~i"~w 4 v h)1 hhIa-*
~
PRS CRAIRMAN PRSSECRETAR[
- (FORM NAME=PRBAGEND)
Ce NRC RESIDENT INSPECTOR
-PR3 90-59 Page 2 of 3 FRS MBETING MINUTES CONTINUATION SEERT
. A. The following items were unanimously recommended for approval with comment. No unreviewed safety question involved.
ISI-P-006, Rev. 4 Inservice Test Program.
Review Safety Evaluation for editorial corrections.
LER 2-90-02 " Unit 2 Reactor Trip From Unit 1 Reserve Auxiliary Transformer Feeder Line Fault". Clarification needed on last paragraph of'cause of Event.
LER 1-90-007 " Inadequately Nonitored Liquid Effluent Release". Tech.
Spec. 3 3.3.9 Action Statement
- add " independently".
Corrective Action (3) should remain.as previously approved.
Need better date for revision of 10008-C.
B. The board recommended approval of LER l-90-4, "Iass of Offsite Power Leads to site Area Energency*, with comment. The' vote was 5:0. No unreviewed safety question involved.
Haag,L R. L. ImGrand abstained from the vote due to insufficient review time.
The comments are as follows:
- Section F.2.b - Reword to 3 times per week - Add additional wording to 2.b.
- Root cause 2) - Include setpoint of 200 F.
Root cause 2) - Add that the switch was
" mechanically" reset.
f
' - Section F.2.b - Wording on valid failures, etc.,
should be in a separate paragraph. .
- Page 6 - Should state the number of starts rather than "several".
i e
e -
PRS 90-59 Page 3 of 3
- Section C - Change "and" to "with" the security escort. Change " driving" to "in" a fuel truck. .
- Description of Event - delete "to the ground".
- Analysis of Event - resolve appropriate temperature (exit thermocouple and NRC IEN).
- Page 3 - Delete "the loads" or reword to "available loads".
- Page 3, paragraph 3 - Reword to automatically restart after it tripped.
- Section F.2.C - Is this statement necessary since it is not included elsewhere in LER?
This iten should be deleted.
C. The board unanimously recommended approval of procedure 19100-C, Rev. 5, "ECA-0.0 Loss of All AC Power". No unreviewed safety question involved. This procedure was previously approved (PRB-90-57, 4/12/90) with comments. J. E. Swartzwelder returned the procedure to discuss withdrawal of the comments based on guidelines in the EOP writer's guide. The board concurred with this discussion and the procedure was recommended for approval without comment.
Meeting adjourned
- :21 o > > r
. "s M b -@ b '
Sd sk Y j'Ti
)
s t /i
=3- 'i l i
3 -
i' 'is e h_ ta i
.I
}$$g3 h h ;! $
l . . t ) f v 4 4 4 4 J A d.
lij,Is$l .=
i u t i c f; ;-
y-rs .
.s s s
a c c a
Ais I J e ; o 'x, w : .
j * -
2 x 3- - ' :
.c : . f i.
1,-l I 5# #
!]
- ge:
s r '. 4 s
- c. ,
M 3s J 0 4 0
33 t so l, b, If j
~ w , y _ w s q l]ll S..O 5
, : 9 i $
4 .
d s
'[5 s
w
- 0 5 55 4 .; ~. , g.
= SIII '
Y d- x 9 69 sa H-: i@ i g =v-
-- i ,s ) .
' M e
s
~
c<>- y[- .
.,8 IFh!5]* (
w .
j 9'
k 'i - I -e h. '.,!,Ih. 55.1I 2
c, .) i 4
% N x m :.
I C' Y N '
A T 7, L ' 5 t.-
,d
'sc 1,.g ig -
'd t
m 9 q =
2 3
+
4 e
d $-
3 E ::8 m 4 s
4s 4+
ft s
s - 3's,4 p
4 s a W, a~
e;w ; --
a2 s e
3
- 12. E , e s s y , g q e ,,
4 a *-
3-j*Il i ty
., i z i' S ,d M.. d J a -)Q ,S eA jEy
. k .
0 9 w
==
3 2 h5* .:3
-- - i r .T. y - -
- < ; 388E i t, s 3- 2 9 s
- : $ 0 !I s3 t :t c 4, < *[1 Ik[{t E
' ~
.:5 E jgz
~ s_ ]33i 5 4 - 2 7 3 *- 2 E*,*a x j '3: 4 .S i <'. .
.y i !- i" s1 #.
4 J
A 4 4 x
l -
M il wte s ,:
82
- )
-[
E s .. g-2 -j J u. . y e %m e a p ) W m __ s t
i.
\
1 I
i i
4
' GPC EXHIBIT 29 AUFDENKAMPE EX. C
~
- VEGP PLANT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES PAGE 1 OF 3 1 ME ING NO. 90-60 DATE 4/19/90 1:25 AM/PM; MEETING AD7OURNED 2:45 AM/PM MEETING CONVENED l
( o VIA TELECON)
THIS MEETING CHAIRED BY: W. F. Kitchens I (x) CHAIRMAN ( ) VICE CHAIRMAN VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT:
N. M. Handfinger J. E. swartzwalder J. G. Aufdenkampo A. L. Mosbaugh
- PRB SECRETARY .C. Cross Tynan G. R. Frederick NON-VOTING ME C. P. Stinesp .
VOTING ALTERN N E. @E. Ho-ob . L. LeGrand kOH H T6 . 90-60 NC V O T I N G A L'
- " bN baAc ATi oc FeR 4657=CTiod d(N . bd#4 FO,R FOR GUESTS / TECHNICAL ADVISORS:
PRB ACTION ITEMS OPENED: NONE PRB ACTION ITEMS CLOSED: NONE PRB MINUTES APPROVED : 90-57, 90-58, 90-59 m
b \ Ah ( . TLM w S) f b_kd14J - 92 PROJECT 060253 PRB SECRETARY PRB CHAIRMAN CC: NRC RESIDENT INSPECTOR (FORM NAME=PRBAGEND)
.~ . . . - .. . - -
VEGP' PLANT REVIEN BOARD MEETING MINUTES PAGE 1 0F 3 j ING NO. 60 DATE 4/19/90
.M.
AN/PM; MEETING AD:IOURNED 2:45 AM/PM RETING CONVENED 1:25 -
(-'o VIA TELECON) -
l
?HIS MEETING CHAIRED BY
( ) VICE CHAIRMAN N. F. Kitchens
'x) CHAIRMAN N. M. Handfinger J. E. Swartzwaldar l 10 TING MEMBERS PRESENT l A. L. Nosbaugh
- T. G. Aufdenkampo PRB SECRETARY .C. Cross Tynan ION-VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT: M. B. Lackey G. R. Frederick
- 2. P. Stinespring _
70 TING ALTERNATES PRESENT:
I. A. Kochery FOR R. L. ImGrand FOR NC~ VOTING ALTERNATES PRESENT: FOR FOR FOR ,
FOR FOR j GUESTS / TECHNICAL ADVISORS:
PRB ACTION ITEMS OPENED: NONE PRB ACTION ITEMS CIASED: NONE
- 90-57, 90-58, 90-59 PRB MINUTES APPROVED
\ 5- b. Ly N- idfIdlE*J - m PROKCT 00mS4 i
PRB CMAIRMAN PRB SECRETARY (FORM NAME=PRBAGEND)
CC: NRC RESIDENT INSPECTOR
_ _ ._. ._ . - . - _ ~ . .
PRS 90-60 Page 2 of 3 PRS NEETING NINUTES CONTINUATION SHEET A. Neeting Ninutes 90-57, 90 58 and 90-59 were unanimously approved as presented.
B. The following items were unanimously recommended for approval. No unreviewed safety question involved.
TCP 12001-C-17-90-1, " Unit Heatup to Hot Shutdown" TCP 12002-C-15-90-1, " Unit Heatup to Normal Operating Temperature .
and Pressure" l l
TCP 12006-C-15-90-1, " Unit Cooldown to Cold Shutdown" l Fire Report 90-01 Fire Report 90-02 The following items were unanimously recommended for approval with comment. j C.
No unreviewed safety question involved.
" Plant Housekeeping / Material Condition !
00254 C, Rev. 9, !
Program". Page 8 - The foreman or supervisor I responsible for the work activity will ensure... (not the Shift Superintendent).
00409-C, Rev. 7, "Open Item / Commitment Tracking". Section 4.1.6.2 - Define NTS.
D. LER l-90-006, " Loss of Offsite Power Leads to Site Area Energency', was returned to PR8 with Corporate comments. The board recossended approval of the LER. The vote was 4:0. No unreviewed safety question involved.
!!QIli A. L. Mosbaugh abstained from the vote, due to insufficient review time.
E. The board unanimously concurred with the reportability determination'for the following Deficiency Cards.
1-90-0098 2-90 0035 1-90-0190 2-90-0036 1-90-0195 2-90 0037 1-90 0201 1-90-0203 1-90 0204 1 90-0209 l-90-0208 F. The board tabled the Annual 10 CFR 50.59 (b) Report. Additional review time needed.
92 PROJECT 060255
l PR8 90-60 Page 3 of 3 G. The following items were tabled until a future meeting.
ISI-P-008, Rev. 5, Transmittal Letter ISI-P 016. Rev. 2, Transmittal Letter ISI-P-006, Rev. 4 Transmittal Letter . l LER 2-90-003, " Trip of Heater Drain Pump Results in Exceeding The Reactor Power License Limit" 00001-C, Rev. 5, " Plant Organization; Managerial Staff Responsibilities and Authority" H. The board discussed the proposed revision to the Software Controls program.
The level of quality assurance for various software onsite was an issue ;
with differing opinions by the board members. The procedure will be !
submitted to the board at a future meeting.
Meeting Adjourned l
92 PROJECT 060256 l i
fj9fE Sl l} f. (
62 1 VOICE: I just don't see the [ inaudible.)
. GPC EXHIBIT 30 2 VOICE: (Inaudible.) AUfDENKAMPE EX. D 3 Usd VOICE: It doesn't have to be in there 4 (inaudible.)
5 M/ VOICE: I understand -- we -- our comment 6 change it from 16 pages to eight pages, and take out all 7 that emergency planning stuff thatfs not required.
8 [ Inaudible.)
9 VOIN: (Inaudible.)
10 / q VOICE: Did you correct the diesel starts. I had 11 given .Tohn a comment on the diesel starts.
74< L 12 7fb VOICE: We have (4 meed &b&e)*a comment in the FRS
/9.wth
( 13 (inaudible)- fither verify the sentence, reword the E.73'T
^ - ^ ' - ^ - ^ - - ' - '
14 sentence,9x1" or delete F .x.the sentence.
5 .. - - . . . . . - -.a... .D 15
' ' ' ^^ ^ ^ ^ ^)ll-l N )[ ~~J f5t}4Mhw .ce '
16 M M**f' ICE: Now, if we can verify the (inaudible), I g f,we he ed A* Sv".
h think it wou d y
more a n .-- .s. ,a latetothudiblek.dehnmaane. .
4 N ,B ,,ggoingtogodand ither ve it or take these a rs out, g, ,
andtakeoutthewordingthatsaysthereare{
h ..,;..ar u"r> rur rura ar
- . f * * ^d --
20 ,
- ; no fsilures and no problems.
21 [s)[a,*./f.) VOICE:
4 .7 WM *4sf .cef--
, "" : on ithe& number Me(Inaudible.) I W45 22 of startsy gpen they tallied them up in front of the NRC, RC .
23 th y were a different number. One came out 20, and A
24 (Inaudible.)
25 jkt VOICE: ifeah, but we've started them a dozen times 7
fk% K"b)
/
0" y ,,M( -
-He h4 g ;,,
(CA a wy p[s.
pj uJb'S S{Y"'
,, . E.iA-b GPC EXilIBIT 31 AUFDENKAMPE EX. E t . OFFICIALTRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
Tide: r.l.conter.ne. netw..n tir, l Licensee, and Region II Docket No. !
1 k
l (OCATIOM Bethesda, Maryland l l
DATE Tuesday, April 10, 1990 PAGES: I 1 - 31
( ANN MIEYHSSOCImS, EID.
1612 K 5t. N.W. Suke 300 mshington, D.C. 20006 (202) 295-3950 92 PROJECT 062159 1
l t
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceed-ings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of '
NAMR OF PROCEEDING: Teleconference DOCRET NUMBER:
t PLACE OF PROCEEDING: Bethesda, Maryland were held as herein appears, and that this is ,
the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by se and thereafter reduced to typewriting by se or under the direction of the court report-ing company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
AD ./~v Ye g
1 \
1 Marilynn Nations Official Reporter Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd.
e e
i l
92 PROJECT 062160
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4
2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 ***
4 INCIDENT INVESTIGATION TEAM 5 Teleconference between IIT, Licensee, 6 and Region II 7 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8 Operations Center 9 Maryland National Bank Bldg. ,
10 7735 Old Georgetown Road 11 Bethesda, Maryland 12 Tuesday, April 10, 1990 a~ 13 The above-entitled proceedings commenced at 10:00 ;
14 o' clock a.m., pursuant to notice.
15 PARTICIPANTS:
16 A. Chaffee, IIT , san Leader 17 R. Kendall, IIT Menner 18 G. West, Jr. , IIT Member 19 W. Lynn, IIT Member 20 H. Beacher, Georgia Power 21 L. Ward, Georgia Power 22 K. Burr, Georgia Power 23 C. Miller, Georgia Power 24 J. Aufdenkampe, Georgia Power 25 K. Brockman, NRC, Rogion II pp 4tg q % st
2 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 (10:00 a.m.) -
3 MR..CHAFFEE: It is April 10. It is 10:00 O' clock 4 in the morning. This is the IIT Team. Herb, first, 's 5 there anything new to report on the diesel? Any new 6 information?
7 MR. BEACHER: None that I know of right now.
8 MR. CHAFFEE: Okay. The main thing that we wanted 9 to talk to you this morning about was our needs for i 10 documentation, based on our understanding of what we do and i 11 don't have. And I guess in doing this, let me preface it by 12 saying, Herb, that in all honesty, the team is beginning to l l
13 become a little concerned that some of the stuff, we have a 14 sense that it is dragging out. We are not sure what is i
15 going on. We may be premature in our concern, but as we 16 said before, we need you guys to get us the documentation as 17 soon as possible, and the stuff that we haven't gotten is 18 beginning to cause the team to not be able to complete its 19 activities in a timely fashion. And you need to realize 20 that, that it is beginning to have a negative impact on us 21 being able to complete the stuff that we are doing. So 22 again, what we are going to try to do is what we have been I
23 doing the last couple of times with thesr, calls, which is i
24 trying to identify those documents that are most critical to I
25 us to get, to help ensure that we can get this thing done in
~
l J
92PROMCT Onm l
l b
1 a timely fashion.
l 2 So in doing that,.let me'just kind of give you a 3 little bit of an overview of some of the types of documents, ;
4 and then I have some of the guys here and they can go i 5 through in detail some of the documents that we are anxious i 6 to get. !
i 7 But let me give you sort of a feeling for why we l 8 are a little concerned, so that you understand what we are i 9 thinking, and to the extent it is incorrect, then you can i 10 tell us, and to the extent it is not, you can go do what is '
11 necessary to give us the stuff we need.
12 : We have been asking for, periodically, the history 13 on the sensors on the diesel. And in fact, finally, I guess. .
14 it was Thursday or Friday last week, because we were having 15 so much trouble trying to put it all together with the 16 different things that we had gotten -- and some of them are i
conflicting -- Rick had put together a chart to try to 17 18 ensure that we got all the information that was pertinent to i 19 the sensors and asked you guys to get that filled out. And !
20 I think we provided that to you on Thursday or Friday. And, 21 to the best of our knowledge, we haven't gotten it back yet. i 22 We need that, because we are having a very difficult time ,
23 making sure that we do have a correct understanding of what 24 transpired with those diesels. And it is causing 25 significant frustration on the part of the guys on the team "DECT g
4 I that are dealing with that and not having that information, '
2 because it makes it very hard to validate that we have a ;
3 proper understanding of what is going on in the diesel 4 sensors. -
5 so, are you guys close to being ablo to giving 6 that to us?
7 MR. AUFDENKAMPE: John Aufdenkampe. We have !
8 worked, ever since you gave that to us, on consolidating ;
9 that data in the format you have asked for. We work'ed over !
10 the weekend and we will be working, we worked on it 11 yesterday and today, and will be able to fax it up to you '
12 tomorrow morning. i 13 MR. CHAFFEE: Okay. -
14 MR. BROCKMAN: Please send us a copy, too.
15 MR. CHAFFEE: Next is, again we have asked for the 16 diesel starts and stops. And I guess what is true is that 17 we have gotten it in one form, but I guess it wasn't 18 complete, or what we have gotten seems to not be consistent 19 with some other information we have. So we are, I guess we 20 are a little frustrated and a little confused that we cannot 21 seem to get a finalized complete picture on that. And I 22 can't, we can't tell, just because the difference documents 23 we look at are fue some reason in conflict with it. But we 24 need to have a licensee's position on what the starts were 25 and what the stops were and we need to get that document. i 22 PROJECT 062164
1 i
1 5
1 MR. AUFDENKAMPE: A1, again, this is John 2 Aufdenkampe. What I will have Herb do is, we will get with 3 Kenny Stokes and make sure that the diesel log is totally up ,
4 to date. That is how we keep track of our starts and stops. ;
5 and we will fax you the latest copy of the diesel log.
6' MR. KENDALL: John, this is Rick Kendall. Maybe a 4
7 good thing also would be to have Ken give me a call. He has 8 my number. And I can better explain what it is we are 9 trying to get.
10 MR. AUFDENKANPE: Okay, Rick, we can do that.
11 MR. CHAFFEE: Because I think what Rick wants is, l 12 you know, when the diesel started and stopped, how was it ,
13 started, did you ever have any problems, that sort of stuff. ,
14 MR. KENDALL: One of the problems we were having i 15 was that we were listening on yesterday's call where we 16 understand there has been something like 16 successful 17 starts in a row of the 1-A diesel generator. And we go 18 back, and we try to count them up, and we don't'get that 19 many. So somewhere along the line we are missing a few and
- 20 we want to complete the picture.
21 MR. CHAFFEE: So it sounds like what would be good 22 is, when you have the product, probably call Rick and go 23 over it with him, so that we can make sure we have an 24 agreement.
25 MR. WARD: A1, this is Lewis Ward. Just so we are 92Pf10 JECT 062165
t
~'
6
-1 all thinking of the same request, is this since March 20th, 2 since day one?
3 MR. KENDALL: The best thing to do is to have Ken
[
4 St'okes call me,-I think. Paul Kochery prepared a table that 5 discussed the starts between starting with the 20th, 6 starting on March 20th, and going through, I guess, the
~7 first phase of troubleshooting. But it does not go beyond 8 that point.
9 MR. WARD: Okay. So it is 3-20 up through today.
10 MR. CH'.FFEE: I am going to say something here, ,
11 and Rick, you can correct me. We want to know all the i
12 diesel starts and stops since the time the diesel went into 13 this outage because we want to understand what your testing 14 is as well. Now, as far as the stuff prior to the outage, I 15 guess what is true there is that is a secondary priority.
16 First, let's get the stuff that takes the outage up to a 17 current day and then once we've got that and we've digested 18 that, then the secondary priority, we can go back and look 19 at the stuff prior to that; is that what you want, Rick?
20 MR. KENDALL: I had not asked for starts prior to 21 the outage.
22 MR. CHAFFEE: So then let's get the stuff that 23 goes from the outage on so we can get a clear picture of 24 what has happened to that diesel since all the outage work 25 was done to it.
92 PROJECT 062166
GPC EXHIBIT 32 j
.' AUFDENKAMPE EX. F J
1 1
2 l 3 .
I 4 l 5
6 7
8 !
9 ;
10 Transcript of audiotape No. 71, April 27, ,
11 1990, transcribed by Judy J. Bragg, Certified Court 12 Reporter and Notary Public, on June 30, 1992. ;
( 13 r
14 15 ;
16 17 18 19 1 20 21 22 23 BROWN REPORTING, INC.
24 1100 SPRING STREET, SUITE 750 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309 25 (404) 876-8979
(
)
4 3
[APPROXIMATELY 3/4 THROUGH SIDE A)
(LINES 1 - 6 DELETED) 7 MOSBAUGH: How many times do you have to 8 bring up the fact that there is a problem 9 with this before somebody takes 10 actions to correct it?
11 AUFDENKAMPE: You only had to bring it .
12 up once.
13 But there is a difference between 14 bringing up I think this might be wrong, 15 versus --
16 MOSBAUGH: The problem is is that you think it 17 might be wrong is there is a high probability 18 of there being a problem, but until somebody 19 spent a lot of time with some of this 20 information, you cannot absolutely 21 determine...
22 AUFDENKAMPE: That's right.
23 MOSBAUGH: . . . And then it will be subject to the lawyer-type 24 guessing, well, the words really mean this and 25 that.
(
l 4
i But the problem I have with that is that 2 when there is no management action to do 3 anything when a potential of a problem comes 4 up, you know, you have something wrong in 5 your management.
6 AUFDENKAMPE: Well, what I was telling Rick 1
7 is --
8 MOSBAUGH: Wait! Let me tell you, just by 9 comparison, if-somebody said, you know, well, 10 I'm not sure if that's right or I know there 11 has been failures, you know, like on this 12 diesel stuff; and Paul Rice was there, he 13 would immediately jump on that.
I 14 He would immediately have, you know, assign somebody to 15 check through the log and he would say, you 16 know --
17 AUFDENKAMPE: We know that. We know 18 that there were three failures. We are sure 19 there were two and I think there were three.
I 20 MOSBAUGH: Did your guys -- what is the 21 third failure?
22 AUFDENKAMPE: I don't know.
23 MOSBAUGH: I need to find out the 24 information.
AUFDENKAMPE: Kenny (Stokes) has not finished his log book.
4 (cont.)
MOSBAUGH: Kenny's log is immaterial, 25 really, to this.
1 I
l l
l i
l j
i l
(,
l
r 5
1 AUFDENKAMPE: I don't know because we documented all the t 2 failures. There's no question. . . .
1 3 MOSBAUGH: I have looked at some of Kenny's 4 sheets. Unfortunately the PEO entries are so 5 bad that they say the diesel tripped, but you 6 really don't think it did trip.
7 ****
8 9
10 11 12
( 13 AUFDENKAMPE: Let's go back and talk 14 about this diesel thing. Because if you think that. . .
15 MOSBAUGH: I think that there is a high 16 probability that there is a problem with 17 their statement.
18 AUFDENKAMPE: What George told me over ,
19 the phone --
20 MOSBAUGH: George who?
21 AUFDENKAMPE: Bockhold.
22 MOSBAUGH: When? .
23 AUFDENKAMPE: Before we issued the LER. ,
24 MOSBAUGH: Yes.
25 AUFDENKAMPE: We had a big conversation k
1 6
1 on those numbers with George Hairston --
2 MOSBAUGH: Yeah.
3 AUFDENKAMPE: Not Hairston, Bill Shipman.
4 MOSBAUGH: They were all on there?
5 AUFDENKAMPE: And what George said is 6 they had explained to the Region that they 7 had -- they used -- Tom Webb got those numbers 8 from what was presented to the NRC and then he 9 just added the additional. starts after that.
10 MOSBAUGH: Yeah, that's right. .
11 AUFDENKAMPE: And we questioned that 12 with George and what George said is "yes, we
( 13 did have failures, the Region was aware we 14 had failures, but we were in the 15 trouble-shooting mode and once we cleared the 16 trouble-shooting mode, then we had that many 17 successful starts."
18 MOSBAUGH: That's not true. Okay.
19 AUFDENKAMPE: That's what I was told.
20 MOSBAUGH: You can interpret --
21 AUFDENKAMPE: Yeah.
22 MOSBAUGH: But that was a presumption 23 on George's part.
24 AUFDENKAMPE: No. George did not 25 presume anything. He made that as a
(
=
i 7
- ,, 1 statement of fact and all that information l 2 was presented to him before he made the NRC 3 presentation and that's the way he made the -
-4 _ presentation.
5 MOSBAUGH: Okay, well, that's -- I t
6 AUFDENKAMPE: George was aware of the !
7 . fact that --
8 MOSBAUGH: You've got to establish, you 9 know, you have weasel words in this thing.
10 You've got to establish your criteria, 11 okay, between X and X, how many successful i
12 starts do I think I had? What's my criteria? ,
13 The words in there say " failures and problems."
i 14 What's a " problem?" !
15 AUFDENKAMPE: Well, I think probably 16 the mora appropriate way would have been to 17 word it to say we have had -- we have had 18 18 consecutive starts without a trip from this 19 date going back. !
20 MOSBAUGH: Whatever. The words in there are 21 weasely, okay?
22 AUFDENKAMPE: Well, they aren't --
23 MOSBAUGH: They say " failures and problems,"
24 and they say "since the 20th."
25 AUFDENKAMPE: They weren't intended to
(
h r
8 1 be weasely. From my standpoint, they weren't.
2 intended to be weasely.
3 MOSBAUGH: You can read those words a couple !
4 of different ways. All I'm saying is that r 5 somebody, you know, we need to decide what we 6 missed --
7 AUFDENKAMPE: You'll probably want to i 8 mention that to George.
9 MOSBAUGH: We need to decide what we missed, 10 then we need to review the data and see if 11 what we meant is true or not. But I have yet 12 to be able to figure out, among the various 13 ways of interpreting it, I find a flaw with j
(
14 each method of interpreting the words. !
15 AUFDENKAMPE: We also need to tell !
16 George that (inaudible) diesel unavailability l 17 (inaudible).
18 MOSBAUGH: For what period?
19 AUFDENKAMPE: For (inaudible). I'm 20 going to mention that to Mike today, and I've 21 all sorts of people to help me do that stuff.
22 MOSBAUGH: Kenny just yesterday finished up 23 the diesel --
24 AUFDENKAMPE: B Diesel, i 25 MOSBAUGH: No, well --
N l l
l l
l
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - - _ _(
i i
9 1
t' 1 AUFDENKAMPE: B Diesel. !
2 MOSBAUGH: He finished the logs on all the [
3 diesels. I don't know as far as our ;
4 accounting -- l 1
5 (WALKING SOUNDS /END CF TAPE, SIDE A) 6 .
7 8
9 10 11 12
(
13 ;
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ,
23 24 25 k
/
.//
m%- I-f A x., g om ALLEN MOS8AUGH N ']* ' 10 ogc L.kf,,fk To I has af % I>c f % d a ! OaIa si- a
-fen i8 D:esel ( w olo r ,
76,e a,e pob4m>
wh ,
3 90 0S h*be e J bor 69evakio4 fog.S I bel.e ve -14 ? p a~.> .dah,ad>
nycGy IB n,Je h % N8 c pidel dads we<e in eo erec4h > Ig ht f
8 afvue ~a ,f d' +k.s dla . Pleu.ss 4, 4fw.
wkd odic 8 ye wad
,ac
.Y $ fff) i l
wu
.s. e e 3 -Jo g
[L4e Lc 5)od Ecf Ca m <d..s l
V I 3-zr #1o 21. 4 1
~
DG -fi:(d .4.d,J l
z 3 21 - 10 29 A D G fo;(J f _gf f
) 3 7, 2 2 o 2. 22:f 7 1 3 . zg . yp :2 : s*\ 2} ; !' DG JIwges a Jt,, 4c l 4
/* kalop rn .< C rn gy '
S 3 - Z' ~ 90 2I*
- f. 6; Fo 4 P h*
G 3-zz-go 00:/7 00:23 7 3 To 01.2g e4 21
- y 3 t 2 - 9'o 0 7;14 0 7
- .30 i 3-2.1.-To 0 $ *. 54 08:37 t
o f: 2.1 67:20 ~-
j ce.,4 1 jo 3,- 2 2 - 70 Y ji 3-22. g-p 01:.50 6il35 I2. lo. o2, I e.- l}
3 22 - so I2:++ DG -l#:pged es l$ 4 l3 3 - 2 2 - 90 t (;oS Te -y.
/f 3 2.>- to 05:09 12 :02 Reai d C>fron 1:so J./
relay as cle+
I5 y -y3 - yo /7:3o / 713 3 DG Y*;m 8 eviloJa
/tzo p k r Ice /7v.k4o r
/ y 94 2c2t j fg 3- 23-fo 3-24-90 So't1 01:3i A;4f DG 16f/ 4;&
$ /7 pao J,;/ty olem.fDGA ho< h e;nt Ll d.h 4 .
/G:94 /7:22.
\ 15 3- 27-fc
/4:09 20:oq
/T 3-27-4!
- $;5; ,g,3,,
I
,4
" 20 3 27-gg 1939
~2! 3 - L7 ~fo I1:37 Zo o+ 20:io . las4 G d ol L.sw Tes t .
.S
- h.
- 21 3 1g g y .2o U/7 og gg vJr.,0.y Ted ,
2.3 f 3,77,7, l
6Lt37 ST I49so 3-29-s0 o+'o5 24 2
/3*SS 9 2S
} 3 -2 4 - 10 13 : 5 0 M'*o 2G 4 3-22-To /3.*S6
<=r I& DG ck(~.cf egenble 4'4*10 / C'.M iX++
27 5 I
oo..SS F<~d Ted 29 f.D l
4-s 90 ce 3o 2.4 L '
0591 }T MTC zq -
4 5-4o 03:o7 '
" ~-
~~
L oA .46%
Mapaf*
o3.'21 .ST 191to 01: 37 30 7 4-to - so
/2'3R .sT /ffsp 31 9 4 12 - To /o:20
,$r 14 eg, op.pp oz m
- 32. /0 1-16 to e7:59 o1:H .5T H M 23 // 4'/s*41 O .aa .a,.ed -- - . . _ _
r 4
O
k .YL ~(f GPC EXIIIBaT 34 1 1 (NRC TAFE 75, SIDE A) AUfDENKAMPE EX. II 2 ,/ VOICE / Cood morning [ '
3 VOICE: Good morning.
4 VdICE: Good morning.
5 VOICES Good morning.
7
/
'6 VOICE: Good morning. .
/
7 (Pause.) -
/ ,
, f
/
/ 8 VOICE: Good morning. / /
9 VOICE: Good morning. +
10 Vo!CE: Good morning. /
11 VOICE: Okay, Unit 1 100 percent reactor power.
12 (Inaudible) average for lastj 24 is 1125. Current hour is 13 1150. '10,100 STUs. (Inaudible).
/
Average [ inaudible) 14 connectivity on the staa's generator is about .32. /
15 WecurrentlyhavetheRAM[ inaudible) 120 LCo.
16 The 14-day report,s ould be worked on today. We just added 17 another LCO (inaudible) maintenance. (InaudibleJ'and it 18 should stay.on line. We had several instances last night of 19 the LCD [ inaudible). I got a recorder hooked up to the i
20 monitors trying to isolate what the problen'is.
21 I guess IC has an (inaudible) out on Loop 4 that's l l
22 due today or they were found during the,fnight that'll l
23 require my taking a look at that, whetbar it's' just a#due 24 date or a late date. - ! .
/ '
25 . Now we're [ inaudible) on 'the run' back, on the a
p O
1 6
/ -
1 VOICE: (Inaudible). And recal some feedwater.
2 V ICE: They've got an under-power ev4nt. , l
. / .
3 VOICE: O h ', an under-power event? On Unit 27 !
.- / /
4 Vo!CE: ,. { Ina udible ) . / ,'
5 VOICEt, No, this is Unit 2. '/ ,
7 !
6 VOICE: [Inaudib ). , / l 7
l l ,
VOICE: , I gues Gus was making a stink 1 8 on getting the cal?
Well, /
Is that right
/
on Unit #17 Maybe they
, 1 I
9 went overjand (inaudi ej. /
/ Vo!CE: ( audible). /
/,
/ /
11 / Vo!CE: want to e ock into/that. It9s on th'e '
12
/ / e
)
screen for Unit .
Theta was a feedvater cal issue. ~ i
/ / l 13 , VOICE: (Inaudibie). / .
14 vol E What? , /
/
15 VOICE: (Inaudible).
~ ~
g f str fouw op
- ~
- 16 /t.N : Fidt, they i' _ i; i;;- out e cal, or 17 somethin . Somethisig like that. ,
s4dFOR N gA M W / l 18 7 4 USSCE: ,[Inaudib1'e 19 /./1WOECS[Youdid!). ,
/ ,'
20 g.A (Inaudible)Un!t1. / l
/ / / > \
21 jl4 M iteEce: Oka . Did you get at powered up? '
i I 22 (Gtl 3
^= - - - - -^^ ^ ^-- - l7's o N Fgct?JY7 g f , .
/ l an .a,.
7 .a, .,lnt t. ta,. a ,. at
\
34 ~ rsi . (s* oorjmgsfossum) as ,7 4 A wazcz,3 -( -- L Wypy's yttis; yyre pigsgi .5 ry l
l l
l l
1
7 MY p/rstL 1 M4M-iteses: 4eine tabulation of the M I
/7**$ NAAD Tb KAM W UtfM TM ARC &MDJ /,/KC &
2 think I got them all. i ? --- - ^ i - - j Some of them aren't ]
3 t na u'dibla 1.
B USt< / 7W ftA f4-4 VOI : (Inau le).
5 ICE: ( udible).
6 VOICE: Do you ve any id why it we here?
7 Vo E: (I dible).
s VOICE: You know, metimes [ inaudible) ,<
trat ther a a p3 icular (ina ible) o
/
his [inaudib d). I
/ / #
10 ,/ / VOICE: ,Ya&h. ,
s / /
11' VOICEf/
(Inaudi e). ,-
12 ,
YOICE: Bu t wasn't,,(i'naudible
< /
13' VOICE Yeah. Ite1was blowin the --
14 V CE: In tKe irectio - I could see -t' hat it 15' (inau le). .-
,[ f
~
16 VoT6Es Rightr* .#
1 / VOICE:/ .<([naudible) th noor. /
- ./ /
18 VOICE: It was. (fnaudible). The [ inaudible)" was /
a
/ ,.
1 switchesF(yinaudible)[ / ,-
20 VOIstfi You couldda e put it closer, but itdas 2 inaud / -
22 VOIC
- I*/think that was probabl an./inadvar 6t 2 (inaudib turned on. Maybe it was sorebody's i to-24 [1 ible) underst g [ you know dible 2 VOICES I don't kno(. /~~
i 1
r G
31 1 (TAPE 75, SIDE 3) 2 Sc wdAr- D/D WJ re'/NN good.
^^^^; ^ ^ ^
e
? Yk/~DArs4 *J g/M stoscs: 4_ i - -
3 J"#4 Senacts [ Inaudible). N M f
'f*Mf' D4rd'$
4 /4M M : e opd. ,
5 O[k 90ects d
jh'" #
^ As4y 5 94.
_ % agree with what h ,-- . car rst 6 /'%Jettet This is the best data there is. This is a 7 combination of multiple portions of data. There is no a better data -- thic is better than any single source of 9 data. This is an integrated data.
g ,d 10 M [68 6 It sounds like temo satorial 4 !'-- * -) ,
11 .sAar tN 7'Mr 1.c4 -
M 12 /M 128222: These are not logged in the control room 7.4,k Z~~
13 log. These are not logged in the diesel log. 14 emend 4 Met 14 you couldn't tell initially, but this is my interpretation 15 of what actually happened, having talked to Kenny.
16 Messe: Those are the ones that really concern me.
17 RUM Sates: That one ought to concern you. That ona is ought to concern you. That one should concern you. That 19 one. In fact, there's a lot of them. I mean, these are 20 obviously real live problems, okay? And there are problems 21 with the features that we're investigating.
22 voIcts (Inaudible).
23 /M, 402c3,3 But as far as I can tell, N> that isTh'fff as gookg <,
24 a list as exists, and a better list than -- well '--
n 25 Nf' ' 'i gones that aren't in the log.j DNES T'Mr coNctMW ME, TMr,$ r
32 Ii kJtut 0 1 /*Ps,suscsJ Yeah. -etheede 4 bothereseg me sa that things 2 aren't in the log.
3 Mwptos: I don't understand this .
4 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
5 M I thought that was a [ inaudible).
6 g/* it02ct That's a three-minute run here.
7 p itetSct: That's another thing that bothers me a a little bit -- taking credit for these one- and two-minute 9 runs.
10 74 -402ct: But it did run.
t 11 /JLrf N: Did it?
12 f54 40209 ' Yes.
12 UN inste3J why would we run it for three minutes?
14 d b 90Sct: Anything that is a blank, any -- these --
15 anything that has a number in this column is a start and 16 run.
y M;t, 17 CdM woect: I?-- ' gsbut it down and restart it.
is /% untes: That's part of the logic testing.
19 Ud 102c3 Yeah.
20 / W totes: Last control logic test. They were 21 tripping it on the various sensors, I believe.
22 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
23 M D0308: Okay.
24 /)% 403cs: . Maybe I'll sake a copy of that for George.
25 I think somebody needs to do something about it. I think
l 33 1 some information is -- Aces 4Arr.
l 2 VOICE: (Inaudible). 1 3 , vo!CE: -- inaccyIA$es_ _
4 7 V Es (I dible) etingwithfinaudiblep' 5 .
VOIC (Inaud e]. f
/ e' i
~
6 ICE: Yes ,, ,/
VOICE naudib 8 , CE: Iw 't invit .
I 9' VOICE: ere you ited (in ble). l 10 / VOI Es (Ina ble) iny de I thin 1 OICE: got a o all fr ordon. I, 12 Jif(Eudible). I 13 VOICES ah.
p 14 Mm ICE: And I a phone c back n 1 George wanted to t to you, sdlf and San Cr n at 4:15
/ \
16 in his office '
17 $m VOICE: He* alking about'the droppe d, and 18 H 's not inv d.in that #
a*
1 CE: (Inaunible). /,
20 6b VOICV I don't knoy/They're c used.
/
2 4CE: 0=ay. - (Ina.d m . .. if you can .0
{
22 a ing. f.' ' . i 2 ..-VOICE : In r know anythi .
24 VOICE: d you talk to iley yet?
)
2 S.A CE: no, not ye . v.* r. .tiddibl.) in. I i
l
)
i l
l l
l
e .
53 1 '
V0ZCE: [ Inaudible).
2 .ThICE: yeah, we're , going to [irtaudible copi .
/
Let ne'/make somb extra copie/s. ".-
/
- l. 4 s' Oka
/ / /
That s bh*OVOICE: 9;.e' d[.b 'llIwas" going}odo.
was going to (iNa'udible) .J, '.
I y ' . .-
5
\
/
,, f f' /
i dif, f /
6 V
/ oiCE: Well,, let me make a copy /for Stoke's /
and 7 one fo[Jimey 7 ,! ,
8 VO, ICE : [ Inaudible) two pa'ges. / -
VOICE: audible).
in unferr finaudib _
ALM:(B,,kd*M IN 11 TAftN4)
, yyy pono7- wr 4:4Ag fr=/Mstff 12 4*f~t 3Q%r2urt-Oc4 1 4-Weece: Tell as where the problems are. Is this 13 the problem side or is this the problea side?
14 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
15 7"Jr$ 1808eeJ Is this the problem side?
16 gy vesct: No. Does that say "Not logged in the 17 control log *?
18 JL Af m Yeah.
19 M tt03 cts That's just the statement of fact, 20 ^^ 1~MrJe* MF
_." -- - : Anot logged in the control 109 But that's not a 21 probles [ inaudible).
22 )#** 90308: What is the problem?
23 Y sotcr The problem is this. The problem is I believey}'Muteas Kr4rrMcNr* ArgMP!N piesces 4 NRC .' AfADE R(were incorr+ect.
24
' 1-the
^ ^ ^ -3 4 25 Resenbar what we said? That was the C0A response. CCA l
l
54 1 response said --
2 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
1~kr MRM/A'[e 3 h 903 t cst coa response saidg e- "1 ; ATWf and 3
! - - " ' :NA cMtNFstarted 18 and 19 times respec wtL Y 4
_;4was since 5 the 30th, and there have been no problems {'- "! 1
" - - - - f'*' 4 6 i=1 start counting back from that date, you go one, 7 two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, pSbN 8 eleven, twelve, 13 has a problem, 14 tripped, 15 " ' - ' ' ' ? = 1 N
9 problem, {- '2: ; tripped, w whatever.
10 eneear -
^ ^ .k j d f d
11 ,7*E[ isoses: [ Inaudible).fy M M
- 7.s f j,,j 12 //44 Mates: Ye 's (4 1 _g 13 T r $ isoscS: [ ]Aoriginal ti 14 /M inetcas J ---- ^ r-- !y numbers wily 0*
apr~togetherf*Se7 the first 15 time. You know, you've got George's presentation, ou8ve 16 got the COA response letter, and you've got the gL&itr*
S KI NMS i 17 ilates: [ Inaudible) the COA response letter t 4
18 [ inaudible).
19 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
~fbe 20 et ir ? 1 the 1A diesel was started 18 21 times, and the 15 diesel was started 19 times [ inaudible).
22 No f ailures or problems have occurred in any of these 23 starts. '
we ,ns. bei 27 M I.
24 ftS/** '
906034 4[ Inaudible]4 74<.ir a-r 4* l 25 ,gy m. p = ~ " ;4 s j l
i I
1 I
l e
1 h VOICE: No, no. This is only 3.
2 - I don't have an A : -- --- ;
3 NS[ esscs: -(Inaudible). The thing in question is 4 probably no failures or problees have occurred in any of 5 these starts --
sN sf NY C/* rnrsf 6 MJ./1 Mfee 3 starts.
M 7
.[/fs[ VOICE: [ Inaudible) didn't declare it operable 8 until --
9 A4 N *e8CS4 The second ' ' ! '" 21 - - -
1 t
l 10 S K ip -itetet:
-- the second^fA6&~ ^-3. you phic scuQet "
-: ' - - know. '
11 Failed to start the# first If=W time [ inaudible) Maintenance ,
12 (inaudible). [ Inaudible)4t ake credit for that time, )
i AN# 34Y Ne 13 2
_l! 1_; failures or/deda'Y] MMr
'-- ^"
- 3_ .
ecc.a44cD. l 14 &
- This s, 15 asessed This is your standard inadequate 1 veEmn lal laen
- - - _4 "
- ' _ ^,of the r '---'' - L f ailure to start every time, 16 __
A 17 right?
18 ,f6,e -teeses s
__ YY.. ."( ! th U f> $9% hr*..
- - --- --- - - ; 4 19 VOICE
- (Inaudibid).
Jh $5W 20 /W isesce: Two trips, one g trip M 21 r-:- _ - - - - ' - .
7 _ we SW1 f)ep ~O!
22 g- m --
--- 1,% ^ 1 -; get it,
- down and ade=a 23 y' _:_ .,, tkn$ Erp YTb= Fl fV" s'Yn ak 24 VOICE: (Inaudible).
25 $x/# 4aescS (Inaudible) (inaudible).
4 i
1
)
I i
l i
1
t 56 1 rehensive test A talks uses about comp &
2 program. It?: - :--- those words. ' 4 - '_'
4 3 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
4 hiposcts [ Inaudible) numbers.- It has the 18 number 5
and comprehensive AND test program. Thg L was what corporate 6 added,jthe way they doctored the p a'up for final submittal.
7 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
a h* teoses4 It's ii
~
0- , ir 1 -
9 VOICE: [Inoudible).Ne[M b- y ,'] ],'
10 /4Ninosos Yeah. J., _ __d, ;
.j ;
11 r
- itosee: There's numbers in it. l 12 [ Pause. ) (ddth IN rAhN4) fff. Cd3M. !
13 j/l./f 1toses:4 ttwndhoot. George has asked you to work 1 7"Mi y y67tg-AM rd"
-- "' 1
- { (1_, - i,.._.. c ._______c 14 with somebody,3 _
which I
,KrN4/)' S re A r5.
15 guess would be "' ' ,
I 16
'r/MY '
A
/AvA cAJNasoscE: Uh-hub.f l f5 $to'dt /f \
17 MwSeters te===*++'+=t that list is a good list.
4 18 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
19 TAC.
j 20308: r?
}8,w f.)
20 A M 1B03CE: I'm go g to give the list to Kenny. Mais-
^ YevM >
21 rr-i put -'- .!
l- """- together and figure out what Mel 22 the [im. 4itic] number is.
23 7/ [d)b m U--
' ' ' ' ^
_. (k 24 VOICE: [ Inaudible). -
25 h ito*CE: All righ (wssxin+. seawos) cens e, :rior e)
,- -__m______ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___m_
GPC EXHIBIT 35 -
AUFDENKAMPE EX. I c 1
1 2 '
3 4
5 6
7 8 '
9 10 Transcript of Audiotape No. 89, 11 transcribed by Maribeth J. Williams, Certified Court 12 Reporter and Notary Public.
( 13 14 1
15 16 :
)
17 I J
18
)
19 20 21 22 23 BROWN REPORTING, INC.
24 1100 SPRING STREET, SUITE 750 ,
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309 l 25 (404) 876-8979 i i
, -. .. . . . - ~ . - - .
i t
i 2
1 2 Tape 89, Side A (APPROXIMATELY 70% THROUGH TAPE) i 3 -* * *
- 4 MOSBAUGH: Hey Rick, John needed you to 5 write a revision of that LER. P 6 ODOM: I just told John, I said'-- ha 7 asked me where I was. I said, "have you talked to ;
8 Allen?" He says "no." I says, " Allen," I says,
" talked l
9 to Tom yesterday and basically my understanding was 10 that we just back up and stay out of it right now 11 until things are verified and everything."
12 MOSBAUGH: Tom? What?
{
13- WEBB: Which LER?
14 ODOM: The emergency LER.
15 WEBB: We've got four months so we can wait 16 for the (corrective) actions to get done, so we can say, "we did this, we 17 did this, we did this, and we did that."
18 MOSBAUGH: No, I was talking about the 19 false statement.
20 ODOM: Right, right. I 21 MOSBAUGH: My understanding -- That's why 22 -- That's why I'm asking.
23 ODOM: Right. John told me to get into 24 it yesterday. I asked him to look into it. He i
25 talked to you. My understanding --
I l
l 3
1 (Muffled conversations in background.)
2 WEBB: Didn't he ask you what these l 3 statements were on the side of your log sheets? I 4 MOSBAUGH: Right. Yeah.
5 ODOM: My understanding from him back was 6 that basically you had somebody else working on that !
7 and --
8 WEBB: Cash and Stokes were working on '
9 that list.
10 MOSBAUGH: They are validating the list. i 11 ODOM: Right.
12 MOSBAUGH: And I think they validated
( 13 it.
14 ODOM: Okay. !
l 15 MOSBAUGH: It's a problos.
16 ODOM: Okay, i 17 MOSBAUGH: I mean, that list is a good 1
18 list. '
l 19 ODOM: Okay. My understanding --
20 MOSBAUGH: It was a good list to start 21 with. George wanted it validated by cash.
22 ODOM: That's what I told you yesterday, 23 I guess. i' 24 MOSBAUGH: George wanted it validated, I 25 okay. Now Stokes has produced the A list. l l
)
4 1 ODOM: Right.
2 MOSBAUGH: And you've got both of then 3 now. l i
4 ODOM: Okay.
5 MOSBAUGH: Okay. And I think both of 6 those are good lists.
7 ODOM: Okay.
8 I MOSBAUGH: They were good lists when I 9 gave them to you.
10 ODOM: I was under the impression, that 11 from you, from Tom talking to you yesterday, that ha 12 should back out of it. i 13 MOSBAUGH: No.
( 14 ODOM: Okay.
15 WEBB: I did back out of it. .
16 ODOM: Right. But --
17 MOSBAUGH: Back out of data compilation.
18 WEBB: Yeah.
MOSBAUGH: The data's good.
19 ODOM: But John -- But what John told me 20 to do -- What John said to me, he said, basically 21 he holds me responsible for anything in an LER.
22 MOSBAUGH: Right.
23 ODOM: So I can't -- he said, "you need to 24 verify everything's correct."
25 MOSBAUGH: I told Tom that he didn't need
4 5
l 1 to be generating a list of diesel starts, that cash 2 and Stokes would validate the list that I had 3 prepared on B, okay, and that Stokes was going to generate 4 one on A.
5 ODOM: Okay.
6 MOSBAUGH: Today we have both those 7 lists. I believe they are good, I believe they are 8 validated.
9 ODOM: Okay (inaudible).
10 MOSBAUGH: The point is now --
l 11 ODOM: Now where do we go. I i
12 MOSBAUGH: Now we have a problem. In
( 13 fact, I just was reviewing the A list and I think we 14 have a problem on the A machine statement.
15 ODOM: Okay. We need to look at those 16 statements. So that's what we were talking about 17 that yesterday, where do we go from here.
18 ODOM: LER said you had 19 or something 19 starts.
20 WEBB: That's what the April 9, letter 21 said, did the LER say the same thing?
22 MOSBAUGH: No, the LER is worded 23 differently.
24 ODOM: The LER ---
25 MOSBAUGH: The LER says that we completed
r
'6 l
4 1 a comprehensive test' program on.both machines, -
2 including logic and under voltage and et cetera 1
3 types of tests and that subsequent to the completion -
4 of the comprehensive test program, both machines 5 have been started at least 18 times without failures :
6 or problems. 'Okay?
7 WEBB: Right. ,
t 8 MOSBAUGH: I felt that that statement was 9 wrong on B and put that lis*_ together because of 10 that; and it is clear to me that that statement has l
11 a problem on B as did the previous letter.
12 ODOM: Okay.
( 13 MOSBAUGH: And, now that I have the A 14 list, I think we got a problem with the A 15 statement, too. The problem being right here is 16 that here is your last logic test.
17 ODOM: Uh-huh. !
18 MOSBAUGH: On 3/31, engine run for logic 19 test, normal start and simulated trip. Now we go 20 down to the undervoltage test. At earliest, I start 21 counting right here for the LER.
22 ODOM: Uh-huh.
t 23 MOSBAUGH: The earliest point I would say 24 we have the comprehensive test program completed is 25 probably right here. ,
t t
7 1 ODOM: Okay.
2- MOSBAUGH: I haven't even declared it 3 operable yet. J 4 ODOM: Right.
5 MOSBAUGH: So I'm taking some liberties 6 with the counting. One, two, three, four, five, j 7 six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven. Oops, I 8 missed the LER date.
9 WEBB: Who got that data for the LER?
ODOM: We 10 didn't write it in there. So who's the one that put 11 that statement in there?
12 WEBB: Which statement?
( '
13 ODOM: In the LER. Remember, on the LER, 14 we left it out. -
15 MOSBAUGH: _ Corporate came up with the 16 statement.
17 WEBB: We put in that it had been started 18 several times.
19 ODOM: Right. And then they reworded 20 it. I'm saying we left it very vague.
21 MOSBAUGH: Corporate came up with the ,
22 statement.
23 ODOM: Okay.
24 MOSBAUGH: I told corporate they better 25 validate their data before they put it in there.
o i 8
1 WEBB: It was started 18 times, though.
2 ODOM: No. What he's saying is that -- oh, 3 he's talking about A, he's talking about A, now?
4 MOSBAUGH: Yeah.
5 ODOM: We'll look at it. You got that !
I 6 data? j 7 WEBB: It Mag started 18 times, wasn't 8 it?
9 MOSBAUGH:- " Subsequent to the completion 10 of the comprehensive test program."
l 11 ODOM: Do you have what he has there?
12 WEBB: Is that what the LER
(' 13 said, " subsequent?"
14 (Muffled conversations with Herb Becker in background.)
15 ODOM: It's not like we didn't know this 16 statement was questionable to begin with. You know 17 what I mean?
l 18 MOSBAUGH: Yeah, I know what you mean. '
19 (Inaudible.)
20 MOSBAUGH: Is this the final one?
21 WEBB: Yeah.
1 22 MOSBAUGH: Here it is. " Subsequent to !
23 this test program, DG1-A and DGi-B have been started 24 at least 18 times each and no failures or problems 25 have occurred during any of these starts." You've
9 l
1 got a problem with the 8 machine and you've got a 2 problem with the A machine.
3 ODOM: The B machine - .
4 MOSBAUGH: The B machine had failures and 5 problems.
6 ODOM: Yeah.
j 7 MOSBAUGH: But the A machine hadn't been )
8 started enough.
9 ODOM: No, no. The B machine -- whoever 10 put that wording in there, looks like they worded it 11 real carefully and were very particular on the !
12 wording, because it said 18 starts and no failures 13 occurred during these starts.
14 15 So that could be a true 16 statement. It's misleading as hell, I'm the first 17 to admit that. You see what I'm sar{ng? You know, 18 it --
19 MOSBAUGH: You're back on the letter, 20 now.
21 ODOM: Yeah. I'm back on the letter. I 22 think the letter says the same thing the FSAR, I 23 mean, LER.
24 MOSBAUGH: The letter -- I tried to read 25 those every way I could and I can't find the letter
b 10-1 statements to be true for the 8 machine.
2 ODOM Didn't McCoy call Brockman, -
3 though, and go through that letter with him?
4 MOSBAUGH: Who knows.
5 ODOM: That's what I heard, 6 MOSBAUGH: I heard something like that, l
7 too. I 8 MOSDAUGH: "Since March 20th, the 1-A 9
diesel has been started 18 times and the 1-B diesel l 10 has been started 19 times." Now those statements are 11 false. They were started more than that.
12 ODOM: Yeah, right.
l
{ 13
~
MOSBAUGH: I know, but it's going to get 14 you one way or the other, okay. If you are going to ,
i 15 say "no failures or problems have occurred during any H 16 of these starts" and if you are going to focus on the 17 starts, then the number of times of starts is 18 false. If you are going to focus on "no problems.* 1 1
19 ODOM: I'm not sitting here defending !
20 that letter, trust me. That's misleading as hell.
21 MOSBAUGH: Well, it's more than i 22 misleading. It's more than misleading.
23 24 ODOM: .(Laughter.) I mean, you could --
25 MOSBAUGH: If you are going to put i
e i
11
+
1 blinders on and only look at these starts, then your 2 numbers of starts is wrong.
3 ODOM: Well, but no, what he said there 4 is they had is starts. Like I say, whoevar put that 5 wording in there was dancing all around it because 6 look at it --
7 MOSBAUGH: Yeah.
8 ODOM: -- it'was started 18 times --
9 MOSBAUGH: Yeah, but see, that's not 10 true, it was started 20.
i 11 ODOM: Yeah. But no, it has been started 12 18. It has been started 20. Both are true
( 13 statements.
14 MOSBAUGH: Huh-uh (No).
15 ODOM: Uh-huh (Yes). I could say I walked to 16 the door, okay, and I walked to Carolyn's office, 17 okay. I did both to get to Carolyn's office. I had 18 to do one to do the other.
19 MOSBAUGH: Hold it, hold it.
20 ODOM: I'm not --
21 MOSBAUGH: Hold it. I'm going to apply 22 for a job.
23 ODOM: Uh-huh.
24 MOSBAUGH: Okay. And I'm going to say, 25 I've been arrested once.
12-1 ODOM: Okay.
2 MOSBAUGH: But hire me, I'm a good-guy, 3 I've been arrested once. While, indeed, I've been 4 arrested 36 times.
5 ODOM: True.
6 MOSBAUGH: Okay. Are you going to say 7 I've been arrested --
8 ODOM: No, I'm going to say, how many 9 times have you been arrested? You said, I've been ;
10 arrested once. I say, you been arrested more than 11 that, you say no, then you lied.
12 MOSBAUGH: Nobody asked --
( 13 ODOM: I understand statement. I'm just 14 trying to -- I'm just trying to tell you that we 15 went through it word for word. I said --
16 MOSBAUGH: You know, think about this.
17 I've been arrested, the guy has a felony record and 18 a civil record.
19 ODOM: Okay.
20 MOSBAUGH: And it's 36 times. Okay. And 21 he goes in and the guy says, "I've been arrested 22 once;" and then I say, "and that one case was just for 23 failure to make a child support payment, that was 24 only a civil issue." I've been arrested once and 25 that arrest was for a civil issue. Now, come on.
- 1) l l
l 1
)
1 13 1 ODOM: Let me ask you a question.
2 MOSBAUGH: That's no different than this.
3 ODOM: I can say that there, what can I 4 tell you, it's misleading as hell.
5 WEBB: It is misleading.
6 ODOM: Misleading as hell.
7 MOSBAUGH: You can either -- like I say, a you can either focus on "no failures or problems," and 9 then the starts is wrong, or you can say the start 10 numbers is okay and there has been failures or 11 problems.
12 ODOM: Give me some insight, who wrote
(
13 that?
14 MOSBAUGH: That?
15 ODOM: Yeah.
16 MOSBAUGH: I have no idea. I think 17 George and corporate people wrote that.
18 ODOM: Okay.
19 MOSBAUGH: And they got their technical 20 information 21 from information from a review with Jimmy Paul 22 Cash. That is where the detailed information come 23 from to write this letter. The information that was 24 used to write this letter --
25 ODOM: I don't know where the hell they
14 1 got that from.
2 MOSBAUGH: -- I think, came from your 3 review and extension of the statements already made 4 in that letter.
5 ODOM: Well, wait, that's stupid of us.
6 If we knew that.
7 MOSBAUGH: And then questioned by us with 8 the final words being put together by corporate.
9 ODOM: We knew - .
10 MOSBAUGH: The LER words were put together 11 and submitted by corporate.
12 ODOM: Yeah, like I say, that was their
( 13 (i.e., corporate's) question from day one.
14 WEBB: When we sent it to corporate we 15 said they had been started several times each. We 16 didn't give them that.
17 ODOM: Right. ,
18 ODOM: We left it blank, we left it very 19 broad.
20 MOSBAUGH: Do you have that; whatever 21 we --
22 ODOM: Yeah, we got it.
23 MOSBAUGH: Remember we PRB'd one of 24 these?
25 ODOM: Yeah, we left it very broad.
i i
[
15 1 MOSBAUGH: But the PRB didn't have l
2 numbers in it?
3 ODOM: Very broad. '
4 MOSBAUGH: I'd like to see what we i 5 actually PRB'd. You know, we PRB'd them and then we 6 had a total rewrite.
7 ODOM: Yeah. i 8 MOSBAUGH: And so forth.
9 ODOM: I tell you what, like I say, I'm 10 not trying to defend the letter with you. I*'m just !
11 trying to tell you --
12 WEBB: Too many rewrites, many rewrites.
(
13 ODOM: It's very misleading.
14 MOSBAUGH: But I didn't realize, until I 15 got this, okay, that I got a problem with the statement ,
on the A l
16 machine, too. ;
17 ODOM: I didn't realize we had problems 18 with the A machine, either.
l i
19 MOSBAUGH: Okay. I 20 ODOM: I see what you are saying, though.
21 MOSBAUGH: Here's one, two, three, four, 22 five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven.
23 (Inaudible.)
24 WEBB: This is what the PRB approved.
4 25 ODOM: What did we say there?
16 ,
1 WEBB: "More than 20 times each."
2 ODOM: Yeah, those are very broad.
3 WEBB: "No problems or failures." l 4 ODOM: That's right (laughter).
5 MOSBAUGH: 20. That's what's in there, 6 huh? God, where did that come from?
7 WEBB: Well, because that was the 8 extension from operable that was going all the way 9 up to the 18th and 19th of April. You go that far, 10 you get like 32 times for 1A and twenty-seven times l, 11 for 1B. i 12 ODOM: It's like shooting ourselves in i i 13 the damn foot more than we do anything else. ;
i 14 MOSBAUGH: Oh, I know why I didn't l 15 remember this, because I came to that meeting late. ,
l 16 WEBB: There was a comment on that.
17 There was a comment on that. When I first brought 18 it in, I put --
19 MOSBAUGH: I was late to the meeting.
20 WEBB: -- more than 18 times each, more 21 than 19 times each, that's what went to the PRB; but 22 there was a comment from Lackey. He said, we don't l
23 need to say we need to say -- (inaudible) we need to 24 take -- we need to take more than 18 or 19, you need 25 to take the credit, say, more than 20 times each or l
I
~
l l
17 1 something like that. That's where the "20 times each" I 2 comes, I guess. )
1 3 MOSBAUGH:- Okay.
4 ODOM: Yeah, I know what I need to do.
5 MOSBAUGH: Bottom line, okay, please 6 continue on the revision of the LER.
7 ODOM: Cause I understood yesterday from, 8 you know -- the corporate communication; I told John 9 that, too.
10 MOSBAUGH: In addition, you'll have to 11 figure out what words you want to put Ire, You're 12 going to have to figure out what the right words ,
(
13 are, now. Okay.
14 WEBB: Well, does the NRC need to get 15 this information in written form through the LER or 16 can they get it through May 15, letter or by some 17 other means?
18 ODOM: Well, my understanding is McCoy's 19 already told Brockman about a letter. That's what I 20 was told. ,
21 WEBB: (Inaudible.)
22 ODOM: You heard the same thing. He walked 23 him through it. And whether that's true or 24 not, I don't know; but, I mean, obviously there are 25 some problems with that letter.
i i
,. ~~
~
1 i
l l
i
- 18. )
l l
1 WEBB: We wrote the LER with the 2 intention we were going-to send them a supplement on j 3 September 30th.
4 ODOM: We need to send it before that. I 5 (Inaudible.)
6 MOSBAUGH: I have referred -- I have 1 I
7 provided my data to George Bockhold; and if I were j 8 George, I would do something soon.
9 ODOM: Yeah, I would, too.
10 MOSBAUGH: Like real soon.
11 ODOM: I would, too. I agree with you 12 there. I mean, like I say, even that day of the 13 phone call, we were back there on that phone call 14 and, and ah uhm, Chaffee said, "Something's wrong 15 with that, the way it's worded."
16 MOSBAUGH: They are on to it, too.
17 ODOM: Oh, yeah, and that's what Brockman 18 -- I kept --
19 MOSBAUGHz Chaffee's got all the same 20 data we have.
21 ODOM: I kept waiting for Brockman to )
I 22 jump in and help us, remember.
23 ODOM: I kept waiting for Brockman to j 24 jump in and help us. And he said,"Yes, you got that 25 from us." And I went, "that's not help." Remember ;
l l
19 1
1 that, Herb? l 2 BEACHER: Yeah.
3 MOSBAUGH: Certainly they got all this 4 data, right?
i 5 BEACHER: Yeah, what's amazing is he 6 (inaudible). ;
7 ODOM: After lunch we got two missions 8 then, okay.
9 MOSBAUGH: And then you are going to have i 10 to figure out what you are going to say.
11 ODOM: Oh, I know.
12 MOSBAUGH: I mean, you can either keep
( 13 all the words the same and change the numbers, you 14 know.
15 ODOM: (Inaudible.)
16 hEBB: (Inaudible.)
17 ODOM: I mean, I swear to God, it ain't 18 like -- before the LER was sent out, that April 9th 19 letter was talked about on how questionable it was.
20 I mean, that's stupid. Why do we try and write 21 things like that when we know they are 22 questionable?
23 MOSBAUGH: Well, I think, I think what 24 you have is a situation where they had already gone 1
25 on record, okay, and basically none of the
(
l 4
20 1 principals wanted to change that. They were on 2 record. George made a presentation up there and P
3 Hairston had signed out the COA response letter. So 4 we bring it up when we are writing the LER and they 5 are on record, so what do they want to do? How deep 6 do they want to look at this?
7 ODOM: I was on that phone call this 8 morning. ,
9 BEACHER: I know.
10 ODOM: Oh, you heard me a couple of times 11 say something like that?
12 BEACHER: Yeah.
~
( 13 ODOM: Boy, I could fall asleep over 14 there.
15 BEACHER: Anybody have to go soon?
16 ODOM: All right.- Thanks, Allen.
17 MOSBAUGH: You're on track.
18 (End of Tape 89, Side A) 19 ****
20 (Side B, START OF TAPE) 21 MOSBAUGH: I think we've got a problem on l
22 the A machine, as well. Where is it? I think I.am 23 only counting 11 starts. So, I told Odom he needed 24 to figure out what aords he wanted to use. You 25 know, with the LER. You know, we are going to have l
4 21 1 to come up with new words or we can just put the new.
2 numbers in, that will be less of a rewrite, you 3 know. Anyway . . . .
4 AUFDENKAMPE: Part of the problem --
5 okay.
6 MOSBAUGH: Oh, I know what the problem ,
7 is.
8 AUFDENKAMPE: What's that?
9 MOSBAUGH: Why we --
10 AUFDENKAMPE: Why we have material false 11 statements?
12 MOSBAUGH: Why we have material false l l' 13 statements in three different correspondences.
14 AUFDENKAMPE: What? See, what I told 15 Rick Odom, when I gave him the list, "this is a list 16 Allen put together." I said, "it has not been 17 verified." I said, "those guys need to understand, 18 again, that I hold them responsible for insuring 4 19 that what is in there is in fact correct."
20 MOSBAUGH: I lost my list, A machine 21 list. But anyway, the A machine list has a problem.
22 (Phone dial tone, dialing.). ;
23 MOSBAUGH: Oh, anyway, there is only 11 24 atarts.
25 i
f GPC EXHIBIT 36_
AUFDENKAMPE EX. J 5 % C) 1
[BEGIN TAPE NO. 98, SIDE A.)
2
[ Beeping n se).
o 3
[ Beeping n 1se).
4
[ Beeping oise).
5
[ Beeping noise).
6 [Beepi noise).
7 VOICE: [Inaudib1 .
s VOIC Good so ing. , Bill naudible) here.
9
[ Inaudible).
10 VO CE: Good rning, Bill 11 [ pause).
f
/ 12 .
~
! OICE: [ Inaudible). /
13 VOICE: [ audible).
, 14 VOICE:
a naudible). f 15 1 VOICE: [Inaudib'le) . [
16 l !
VOICE: [Inaud ble) 11 VOICE (Inaudible . /
18 VOIC : [Ine dib1 ) three. [:.knaudible) tripped 19 e reactor a out 04: 6t a morning./ The [ inaudible) te'am 20 l ?
e already i the ca (i udible). .
l 21
[ oping ois ).
/ , /j 22 OICE:
< l ey re starti
'the[ inaudible).l 23
[Seepi ' no se].
s 24 VOICE: [I audible 6 degrees. The ree'ctor 25 v,essel nit is ina dible) oil is. Tell Mark should be e
I I
Es 1
inaudible) 2 VOICE: Yeah. [ audible) !
/J V0I : [Ina ible) ev ently endy [1 udib 4 /4//1porce: Muh? -
5 QA -set ltter: 3)Q(wartswolder has already Theheard ewssxurn Occ t $re N= ,
6 mesw4 making enspeech.
7 VOICE: There he is.
e 32 wasese old you bring your data?
}% ;,* ref*$ TW4 T*
9 p h uttscE: Yeah. I got "
,,___-4 Alan made des 10 up.
11 i VOICE: [ Inaudible).
P 12 M ~ueses (Inaudible) on the third page.
12 VOICE: [ Inaudible). A'v. l 14 7V teatets4 $rnriag^
i-
^
oN After rst rmd /d+r, Pcv eer ror the start number, 15 oNt; there's another [ inaudible)j two, three, four, five. That's 16 for 1A.
17 VOICE: Well ~~
( 18 % instes: Then the last page desgthe You'VC #eT~
other eleven 19 for 15.
20 M L/7 inetcW: Do we have enough?
T W:
- ffwds/dids(7.
g 21 CA! r#1*We AL/1 teseta AfrxT* re f. DST *//64~4 got enough. We got ^ ' ^ (e.*f *
,g 22
,dhwetesJ The data is right here. What we need to 23 do is just talk in general terms and maybe then we can take 24 this thing to an action ites or something. But the point is 25 according to these words, when and on what point in time or l
k..
69
- N45 8te A/
1 what start is the comprehensive test progras. %
2 subjected to a comprehenslye
-j % g(nytir hon test program.gubsequent to this
.bres. '
3 test program, i'
^ 2-yetarted..80 key.
4 At what point in tiae, you know, is everybody 5
going to agree that we have completed the comprehensive test 6 program and basically what you have is you have 1
troubleshooting, you had component testing, you had logic '
8 tests, then you did a W test. There were a couple of s special tests in there for some DCP functionap, then an 10 operability declaration was made and then routine 11 surveillance tests were done after the operability 12 declaration.
13 You know, at what point in time are we comfortable 14 saying that the comprehensive tact program was complete?
15 VOICE: (Inaudible).
16 A N specsJ The revised 12R. Let me tell you what the 11 eleven is based on. The eleven is based on calling the '
( 1s comprehensive test program complete right -- complete. fev4@/d40*
19 meem 20 M/kn otrw: .T Mtmk W -tatect You< Ar teAsr off by one there.
21 J.Ast" 1"N N+ F W #4c.
NW# mosca: The W test was the [ inaudible)W4ur# 74 SE4 22 M maets: Well, we did make the declaration that in 23 addition the W test was part of [ inaudible), but / /Agre#
24 rNC" L!Y 7~r37*
g[ inaudible].
25 W inotett The last sentence.
se
I 10 1
VOICE: [ Inaudible).
2 7"V teact: We defined it -- 73 /NUv4f //"
3 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
4 7"4 A isoect: Yeah.
5 7"d asetes: Yeah.
6 ,"f(,butect We made a sentence that states that.
7 fNA r*3 M 43r *M.
7"W 1803c3: 4[ Inaudible) in the origina1 eeebeer.
4 e
[*;, esses: That's the logic that got the eleven.
9 okay? The UV is one of them.
10 g g f ,[ni'6 sweges: Which tests Q'e w t K Nes.) rW F
' ~ - ; list of tests, Twt,-
11 2; 5 r4 4 7' N W H d E d.I 12 7'M 1sozct: Thirty-five.
13 $ 4 F 2000E: Thirty-five?
14 7"W usecs: For A.
15 44 N ueces Thirty-five for A and --
7 16 gjd ~./ Aweset
- What about the special engineering tests?
17 M VOICE: [ Inaudible). It looks like 41 is the 18
[ inaudible) first start after [ inaudible).
19 "Yestet: First. ht's see. One, two, three, four, 20 five, J ex, TurM - -
21 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
22 % watets You know, the question is we got to pick 23 the point. If you're going to go with when you declared it 24 operable, if these are starts since operable declaration , or 25 since comprehensive test program.
l
( ;
l
a 71 1
votes: (Inaudible).
2 cyh meess: If you do it on an operability, it's five.
3 AA M esses: For which nachine?
4 7"g A unsets both. l j
$ /4 :s esser: No. For a machine, it's sever.. How many 6 for A7 7
- Five.
e f**9,*.1 > sr&s#p eses: Why does it have to W to the 9 test progras? j E /
10 M enges: _rr g f(p wo.,---.C6EAH}
right here.
1 11 h mesets Yeah, but that's the second 140. It's 12 been -- your first 140 cleared up here and then you did some 13
-- those are some -- that was the slug of water test.
14
[,[re*'kMa Why can't we say subsequent to ^ -!
15 the last valid failure?.
16 p e secess -- -- NoN4'.~7WAf* N dTN'T \
___, get you anything. Don't !
17 get into that because all these tests are invalid tests and
{ 18 invalid failures.
19 estces Except for the surveillance. That would 20 be a valid test.
,1
$Nmeessa Except for the surveillances. But all 22 these up in the area we're talking about are all invalid 23 tests.
3[UtseOS: -;ws*ve ONLt* NAD No VAlt9 s
24 ' ' sug *gg ,y p
^-4 failures. But M 25 ehet the engine fail g to start many times. When you're
(
i i
Ji 72-1 doing a maintenance check and it fails to start, [ inaudible) 2' maintenance check, it's an invalid failure.
3 h mates: fit we're getting into that, then we need 4
to table it and come back, because that's a whole other set 5 of research.
6 O b easts: We won't get into that.
7 jfLM eeSeE Okay.
8 VOICE: [ Inaudible).
9 7 Psb iussats ej Io that you don't look foolish lo or look like you didn't know what you were talking aboutg 11 the first time,you to change as few words as possible.
12 That's what I attempted here, to try to change as few words 13 as possible from the original.
14 VOICE: The original [ inaudible).
15 /4N aseects No.
16 7 W esees The original --
Jbke$
17 /4 N tseger: The original M.
( 18 TW: ScNr To rMr NA C .
A L M essets This is a revision.
19 7 V tensets THIS 11 WoMr WF frA/r VWr N4C
- ^ ^
I b*;N'r ukocurANo --- -- all marked up.
20 ) VOICE:4 I don't understand why - -
21 'J6b esses: Eleven can be right.
22 /4 M 1poscts Eleven is right per that.
23 J"Edvd2 saaess:We A 3m rA4rgo the finaldeTM ef 7 MEN 47* under requested rNT fo4MC- Od/WF 24 voltage testing A2 ur
- us4C Aber 90sA4 f> De Ad f^ I'Mof ;--
^ ; under-voltage test,4 25 requested to have it be an under-voltage test ^' ^
Dy upM*3 M13 NAMl', NAC 4 0!'.
(
s
l 1 73.
VOICE: [ Inaudible).
2 fr$ ilNC23: No, no.
3 g GA inesee: Kcsdyll Oh, alck 4
4 Tr3 ilosce: No. It was --
S i
TGA VOICE: Nilt P s ^ '4 rr.s mosca MILr: YrA +t. r 4 ?*
+fn r ppN 7* ANe V& [/N4013AE.]
7 J~ES Wegss: . W ZE nts 7** O K" 8
W M th6 appropriate place to start.
9 i
/
- m Well, we're running out of 10 roca. You got three minutes to go to the 10:00 aceting 11 to adjourn.
I think we need 12 Is everybody comfortable with that or not?
7"E7 Woessa , ' -.t r**3 40eD 13
^'114 data.
/14 9eces: I think this data is good. 'the question 14 is what point. Okay. All in favor.
15 VOICE:
[Iesudible).
16 VOICE: )
[ Inaudible).
17 WMr 18 r-44F t b N N can't -- !
- C 19 I know that on the jacket water en/MC. seg8P test, we were trying to identify whether or no t the 20 temperature switches picked up. j 21 M 1sosce: asar'ofC SriLL ?~4Y/N+ r** /PrM7W"r 22 4 (Inaudible).
[Simultaneo/4MIA#/84#*
us4 conversatio .
23 Gdr unect 24 That was part of the test plan developed
[ inaudible]g /4crA(rt.
2S ^ ^ ~
- 2 j (W4L KING- fe 0NO3)
, GPC EXHIBIT 37 l
-o*
AUFDENKAMPE EX. K l VEGP PLANT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES l l
MEETING NO. 90-66 DATE 5/8/90 PAGE 1 CF 2 EETING CONVENED 9:15 AM/PM: MEETING AD7OURNED 10:00 AM/PM l
(
- VIA TELECON)
THIS MEETING CHAIRED BY:
( ) CHAIRMAN (X) VICE CMAIRMAN A. L. Mosbaugh VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT: J. G. Aufdenkampe J E. Swartzwebsr i H. Handfinger M. W. Horton PRB SECRETARY W. C. Gabbard NON-VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT: G. R. Frederick l
VOTING ALTERNATES PRESENT:
I. A. Kochery FOR R. L. LeGrand FOR I
l NON-VOTING ALTERNATES PRESENT FOR FOR FOR FOR FOR GUESTS / TECHNICAL ADVISORS:
W. K. Smith T. E. Webb T. V. Greene PRB ACTION ITEMS OPENED: 90-66-01 PRB ACTION ITEMS CI4 SED: None PRB MINUTES APPROVED : None 8 Nu Mi 92 PROJECT 060257 PRB SECRETARY PRS CMAIRMAN CC: NRC RESIDENT INSPECTOR (FORM NAME=PRBAGEND)
l PRB 90-66 Page 2 of 2 PRS MIETING 'aINUTES CONTINUATION SEEET A. The following items were unanimously recommended for '
approval with comment. No unreviewed safety question involved.
LER 1-90-11 " Manual Reactor Trip Due to Inadvertant Closure of Main ,
Feed Regulating Valve". !
' Sections D & F (Cause and l Corrective Actions) - Remove references to labeling and locking device. 1 EQIE: PRB Action Item 90-66-01 issued to Trip Reduction Committee to re-evaluate Trip Hazards !
and Single Point Trips (Ref. review of LER 1-90-11). Report results to PRB.
LER 1-90-6, Rev. 1 " Loss of Offsite Powe'r Leads to Site Area Emergency". i Section D (Cause of Event) - l clarify what Comprehensive Test Program means.
l Comment to PRB minutes of 5-8-90 by G. R. Frederick: ,
1 Do not concur that 11 diesel starts " subsequent to the ;
test program" as stated in last paragraph of Section E, I page 6 of 8, for DG1A is accurate. Based on the information presented to the board start #39 completed the program using T-ENG-90-016 which makes 11 an incorrect value. Without further review I would agree 6 successful starts were made starting on 4/6/90 at 2347.
P 92 PROJECT 060258 I
l
___-_-_-___-______-____I
. .u m ... u - v a.-===.
' UCENSEE EVENT REPORT RERI h ? . N E". ***
TEXT CGNTINUATION g g g7 @ g f [_"Q..gg
", he.
.m.-
,~ m .ec.et awassa en un winen m i.
VEGP - UNIT 1
=; asp p m g o Is lelelel4 l2g4 9l0 0 p l6 --
OR 0l6 or 0$
N During the subsequent test run of the DG on 3-30-90, one of the g J dq4 1.g .
C switches (TS-19111) trip >ed and would not reset. This appeared to be an intermittant fathre. enu..t.t. subsequently mechanically reset W
0$4 This switch and the leaking switch (TS-19112) were replaced with new
[$
switches. All subsequent testing was conducted with no additional s*
( ' I .g 4( problems. ,
g
,h
~
A test of the jacket water system temperature transient during engine i
)g 5i starts was conducted. The purpose of this test was to determine the (2 e$
actual jacket water temperature at the switch locations with the engine i$g in a normal standby lineup, and then followed by a series of starts o q 'r without air rolling the engine to replicate the starts of 3-20-90. The test showed that jacket water temperature at the switch location j % .y 3 decreased from a standby temperature of 163 degrees F to approximately jg 156 degrees F and remained steady.
' Numerous sensor talibrations .(including jacket water temperatures),
special pneumatic leak testing, and au tiple engine starts and runs were performed under various condi s. After the 3-20-90 event, the
, k Jntrol systems of both engines 5:g H;q= subjected to a comprehensive test oTogrant Subsequent to this test program, DGIA and DGIB have been startedtt h;;, ;" t!r =h and no failures or problems have _ sfA sie.
occurred during any of these starts. r,:ff!!!a= 'iin undervoltage_ "Wed start test wit tout air ro11 was 4 conducted on 4-6-90 and DGIA started 1
and loaded properly. Ls4h4
'B h es eec.h (nr. 4.n.so) .
Based on'the above facts; it :13. concluded that the jacket water high temperature switches were the most probable cause of both trips on 3-20-90. .
E. ANALYSIS OF EVENT The loss of offsite power to Class IE bus IBA03 and the failure of DGIA to start and operate successfully, coupled with DGIB and RAT IB being out of service for maintenance, resulted in Unit I being without AC power to both Class IE busses. With both Class IE busses deenergized, the RHR System could not perform its required safety function. Based on a noted rate of rise in the RCS temperature of 46 degrees F in 36 minutues, the RCS water would not hatve been expected to begin boiling until approximately I hour and 36 minutes after the beginning of the event.
Restoration of tHR and closure .of the containment equipment hatch were completed well within the estimated 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 36 minutes for the projected
(
onset of boilinrter-tirer RCS'.'- Wrertow of information obtained from the Process and Eff vent Radiation Monitoring System (PERMS) and grab sample analysis indicated all normal values. As a result of this event, no -
increase in radioactive releases to either the containment or the envfronment occurred.. ; 9& -
'yg 92 PROJECT oS7503
UOGTLE-TEO+41CA. SLPPORT TO 914346585900 P.82
. . fES-06-1992 18:33 FRCri
- VEGP PLANT REVIEN BOARD NEITING NINUTES
)
NEETING NO. 90-67 DATE S/10/90 PAGE 1 0F 3 IETING CONVENED 1 20 AM/PNs MEETING AD700RNED 3:08 AN/FM
(
- VIA TELECON) ,
a j
THIS MEETING CHAIRED BY A. L Nosbaugh ni
( ) CNAIRMAN ,
(x) VICE CRAIRMAN VOTING NENBERS PRESENT: J. G. Aufdenkampe M. N. Norton b:d2 5y J. E. Svartsvolder _._
N. M. Handfinger 5g g
PRR SECRETARY C. Cross Tynan 'd o<
h NON-VOTING NENBERS PRESENT: M. 5. Lackey E. N. Danneallier G. R. Frederick _
VOTING ALTERNATES PRESENT:
P. A. Cure FOR R. L. ImGrand FOR NON-VOTING ALTERNATES PRESENT:
FOR FOR -
_ 1 FOR I FOR l FOR GUESTS / TECHNICAL ADVISORS A. G. Rickman T. E. Webb PRB ACTION ITEMS OPENED: 90-67-01 PR5 ACTION ITEMS CICSED: NONE PRE MINUTES APPROVED 1 90-65 Y LJA VGhua n 4AlY $
prs SECRETARv " rRE CEAIRMAn CC: NRC RESIDENT INSPECTOR ,
(FORN NAME=PRSAGEND)
TO 9140465Er5900 P.83
, .. fEB-06-1992 11:34 FROM V0GTLE-TECH 41CR. SPPORT PRS 90 67 Page 2 of 3 PR8 MEET!MB MllElTES CONTIltl4 TION SNEIT A. Meeting Minutes 90-65 were unanteously approved as presented.
B. The followinti itens were unanteously recomended for approval. No unreviewed safety quest' on involved.
19212 C, Rev. I, 'FR.$.2 Response to Loss of Core Shutdown" 19222-C, Rev. 5 'FR-C.2 Response to Degraded Core Cooling' 19235-C, Rev. 4, 'FR H.5 Response to Steen Generator Low Level' 00057-C, Rev. 5. " Event Investigation' 18007-C, Rev. 8, 'Cheatcal and Volume Control System Malfunction' LDCR FS 90 023, Revise FSAR Section 13.1.2.2.2 page 13.1.t-4 to add Assistant General Manager - Plant Support to the line of succession of responsibility for plant operation.
Transmittal Letter - Emergency Plan Revision 12 (ELV-01591)
Transmittal Letter - Emergency Plan Revision 13 (ELV-01592)
LDCR $P 90-03, (SAFEGUARD $)
00656-C, Rev. 1, " Vehicle Control' l
C. The following itees were unanimously recommended for approval with comment.
No unreviewed safety question involved. ,
l 00262 C, Rev. 8, ' Control of Chemicals / Fluids". Section 2.1.2 - l Clarify and use exception listing. Section 2.6 - i Include Domin. Water Building. Section 4.5.2.2 - l Include writeup / reference of HP signeff acceptance i of contaminated chemicals. Generic coement - Delete
'I' from Muclear Specialist title. Include ensuring MSDS on file prior to enteri PA in Receipt
! aspect. tan, procedura - 4 L. 8'"---
- ta.taka action.
00260 C, Rev. 6, ' Hazardous Substance and Waste Control". Section 2.22
- Definition of critical areas should be modified to address this specific procedure. Section 9.1.3 -
correct reference (8.9.1 should be 8.8.1).
Letter to NRC - Site Area Emergency Corrective Actions (ELV 01632). Ensure Corrective Actions are completed as stated prior to this letter being issued.
General Manager needs to determine if clarification (Diesel starts) provided in LER 190 06 should also be included in the May 14, 1990 letter or the Response to the confirmation of Action letter. PRS Action Item 90-67-01.
V0GTLE-TEO+11CR. SLPPCRT TO 914046585900 P.04
, ,F C-06-1992 ilt'A FROM MtB 90 67 Page 3 of 3 D. The board unanteously concurred with the reportability detemination for the following Deficiency Cards.
1-90-0149 -
1-90-0242.. -
1-90 0243 ,
3-90 0044 -
2 90 004s !
2 90 0049 Meeting Adjourned ,
.! \
i 4 i
+ !
GPC EXHIBIT 40 AUFDENKAMPE EX. N
. 1
- E 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 Transcription of Audiotape No. 157 10 transcribed by Janice Walters, certified Court 11 Reporter and Notary Public.
12
( 13 ,
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 BROWN REPORTING, INC.
24 1100 SPRING STREET, SUITE 750 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309 25 (404) 876-8979
(
m 9
l 2
(APPROXIMATELY 10% THROUGH SIDE A) 1 (Phone dial tone and phone ringing.)
RUSHTON: Paul Rushton.
2 MOSBAUGH: Paul, this is Allen. I 3 understood from Theresa you wanted to talk to me.
4 RUSHTON: Yes, I did. I am trying to get 5 the background on this LER for the diesel generator 6 starts.
7 MOSBAUGH: Uh-huh.
8 RUSHTON: And we had originally reported 9 at least 18 and now we are going to report that was 10 in error and that it was, I think, 15 and 14 11 respectively was the correct numbers and Tom Greene 12 told me that you had the background on that because
[ 13 I am going to need to explain it to management up 14 here.
15 MOSBAUGH: I think John Aufdenkampe has 16 been talking to Jim Bailey about that.
17 RUSHTON: Yeah. I got a part of that 18 story. John -- wasn't real clear in listening to 19 John about a couple of things. Like, I understand 20 that the 18 came from a tally of the starts logged 21 in the control room operator's log, and that when we 22 vent back and filled in the diesel generator logs 23 that Engineering maintains, they came up and counted 24 them differently.
25 And it wasn't clear to me why one log has k.
. ~ . - _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ ,
t I 4
3 1
got 18 or more but other logs'only count 15 or 14.
2 I didn't understand the difference _ between the two 3 logs. !
4 B
MOSBAUGH: Yeah. Well, I guess you would 5
have to ask the operations people about how they 6 keep their logs. (Pause.) They initiate both logs.
7 (Ice biting _ sounds.)
They initiate the log in the 8 control room and they initiate the data sheets that 9 count the starts. (Pause.) So why don't you call 10 Jim Swartzwalder or somebody about that? '
11 RUSHTON: So you don't know what the i 12 history is on it?
13 MOSBAUGH: I know some of the history !
14 because I was in the PRB when we approved the 15 revision to the LER. And I can only tell you that 16 any differences between the logs that operations 17 generates that fills out data sheets versus the logs 18 that they maintain in the main control room that 19 I -- that you would have to ask Jim Swartzwelder why 20 there are discrepancies between their logs.
21 RUSHTON: Okay.
22 MOSBAUGH: And I am not sure that that 23 fact explains all the discrepancies. I do not 24 believe actually that that fact is a discrepancy, 25 but that fact does not explain the discrepancies and I
4
'{
i i
1 t'he reason why ~ the previous numbers were incorrect.
2 I believe that mistakes were made in the 3
previous numbers and that that probably started with' 4
George Bockhold and his presentation to the NRC.
f 5
RUSHTON: -If Bockhold'made a presentation 6
to the NRC, then he used numbers like 18 and 19.
7 MOSBAUGH: I believe that that is where 8 the mistake originated.
9 RUSHTON: And those got put into the LER 10 without verification? ,
11 MOSBAUGH: Uhm. No, I think there was -- i 12 A I believe that inaccuracies in those numbers were
( 13 flagged -- were flagged in the LER, in the LER '
14 development. (Ice biting sounds.)
i 15 RUSHTON: You are telling me I need to go '
16 talk to operations and find out what the problem 17 was?
18 MOSBAUGH: In terms of logs, the log 19 discrepancies, I can't exp1'ain why there are 20 differences in the way operators fill out logs. You 21 know, I don't work in that area.
22 RUSHTON: Okay. Well, fine. I will call 23 Operations then.
24 MOSBAUGH: But I think that will not 25 explain everything.
b l
J l
l i
i 5
e 1 RUSHTON: What else is there that I need 2 to know?
3 MOSBAUGH: I think there is whatever 4 initial mistake wee wede, And, as far as I know, 5 :
George Bockhold and maybe some of the Operations 6
people developed the initial information that George '
7 used in his presentation.
8 RUSHTON: Okay. .You don't know where 9 that information came from?
i 10 MOSBAUGH: (Biting ice sounds.) John says 11 Jimmy Paul Cash. -
12 RUSHTON: Okay.
13
[ MOSBAUGH: Beyond that it is merely a 14 comparison between what was originally developed by 15 George and them to what the data sheets and the !
16 control logs say.
i 17 RUSHTON: Okay. I will check with 18 Operations then. i 19 MOSBAUGH: Okay.
20 RUSHTON: Bye.
21 MOSBAUGH: See ya. Bye.
22 (Movement sounds.)
23 MOSBAUGH: What's going on?
(Inaudible) 24 AUFDENKAMPE: Hairston's evidently on a L 25 tear for misinformation.
l
k l
6 1 MOSBAUGH: He's on a what?
2 AUFDENKAMPE: He's on a-- He's on a--
3 He's pissed off over misinformation.
4 MOSBAUGH: On this? .
5 AUFDENKAMPE: Well, he's pissed off over 6' the revised LER for a- date change because Lackey 7 didn't get the stuff done on time and he's pissed 8 off over this one.
(Movement sounds) 9 MOSBAUGH: (To himself) I should have 10 asked him. I didn't ask him why the hell are you 11 calling me. All I did was cospare two sets of 12 data. That, anybody can do. Now, they have got the
(
13 experience, the responsible parties will need to 14 account.
15 (Pause in tape.)
16 MOSBAUGH: (Inaudible) from the middle of 17 May and now on Friday today is, it's finished.-- Well, 18 come on.
19 AUFDENKAMPE: I can tell you why they've 20 had it for so long.
21 MOSBAUGH: Sosething's going on.
22 AUFDENFAMPE: Nah, nah. (Inaudible) your stock trader's. . .
23 MOSBAUGH: Yes, my instinct.
24 AUFDENKAMPE: I will tell you why they
( 25 have had it for so long is basically they have got
i 7
1 it and they have been sitting on it because I talked 2 Jack Stringfellow several times, and he said he ,
3 hasn't had time to work on it with the other ones 4 going out that have a time clock on them. '
5 MOSBAUGH: Right. [ Facetious tone.)
6 AUFDENKAMPE: -- times clocks on it.
7 MOSBAUGH: Right. (Facetious tone.)
8 AUFDENKAMPE: And that is true. That is 9 true.
10 MOSBAUGH: Get out of here. I don't 11 believe that for anything.
12 AUFDENKAMPE: That's the way Bailey
(
13 operates, Bailey operates the clock.
14 MOSBAUGH: I don't believe that for a 15 second.
16 AUFDENKAMPE: That is true.
17 MOSBAUGH: That is my stock trader's 18 instinct.
19 AUFDENKAMPE: The second part of it is 20 more elementary than that and that is the same thing 21 that always concerns you is that the NRC misleading 22 diesel information and Hairston gets nervous about 23 that.
24 (Pause.)
25 ****
- . . . . _ . . ._ . .. - -. . . . - . . . _ , . _ . ~ . _ _ . - - . . . . , ..
t 8
1 2 l 3
4 !
4 5
, 6 I
7 I
8 9
10 11 i
.12 13
('
14 l.
i 15 !
16 1 17 i
?
18 ;
19 l
.I 20 i
21 i
22 I t
23 ;
24 (Phone rings.) i 25 AUFDENKAMPE: John Aufdenkampe.
i
-' t. ,
r t
+
a 9
1 BAILEY: John, how are you doing?
2 AUFDENKAMPE: Wonderful.
3 BAILEY: I don't think we've had the full 4 Ltory on the generator starts, the numbering, who 5 is supposed to have the exact story on that.
6 AUFDENKAMPE: Jim, I don't think -- is 7 Paul in there with you?
8 BAILEY: Yes.
9 AUFDENKAMPE: Okay. Allen is in here with 10 me. I don't think anybody has and I didn't say 11 because I am not really sure what you are looking 12 for with respect to the whole story, but I am not 13
( sure anybody has the whole story as to why we've 14 got misinformation in there, okay.
15 RUSHTON: That's the --
16 AUFDENKAMPE: The real bottom line on why 17 we have the misinformation in there, if you want to 18 point at one thing, is because we made the decision 19 -- we as management made the decision and the 20 Shipmans, Bockholds, Bailey, Aufdenkampe, Mosbaugh, 21 who else was on that phone call -- to put those 22 numbers in based on the fact that George [Bockhold) -
23 told us that they were good numbers because they 24 used as the start point, completions of, I 25 think it was, the undervoltage testing, okay.
Il
10 1 And when we went back, what was it ha 2 said?
3 MOSBAUGH: For George's?
4 AUFDENKAMPE: Yeah, George.
5 MOSBAUGH: .I have no idea. I have no 6 idea what George's basis was for the data he 7 presented to the Commission.
8 BAILEY: You're talking about George 9 Bockhold?
10 MOSBAUGH: Yes. But I have no idea what 11 the basis was.
12 AUFDENKAMPE: It is based on --
13 f MOSBAUGH: It was not based on 14 undervoltage. It couldn't be.
15 AUFDENKAMPE: It was based on George's 16 comment that that, that he had used this point, 17 whatever the point was, whatever the point was, 18 that's exactly what he said as the start point. And 19 we have completed the critical testing associated 20 with declaration of or with (operability?).
21 MOSBAUGH: George never presented what 22 his basis was.
l 23 AUFDENKAMPE: And I know those numbers 24 were counted by Jimmy Paul Cash.
25 MOSBAUGH: The final numbers are based on k
-7m 1
L i 11 i starting with the UV test as the first test. But 2 what George's basis was, only George knows.
3 RUSHTON: When was the UV test in the 4 sequence of events?
5 AUFDENKAMPE: Pretty far down the line.
l I
6 Right before we declared them operable, I think.
7 MOSBAUGH: Yes. I 8 RUSHTON: So we may have done 18 or 19 9
successful starts, but it just depends on where you 10 start counting.
11 BAILEY: Yeah. l 12 AUFDENKAMPE: No, that is not true.
13 BAILEY:
l
( That's what it looks like.
14 AUFDENKAMPE: No, that is not true.
15 There were not 18 or 19 successful starts, 16 continuous starts, regardless of where you started 17 counting when we reviewed the detailed data, not 18 consecutive.
19 RUSHTON: Starting from March 20th?
j 20 AUFDENKAMPE: Starting from March 20th.
21 There were not 18 or 19 consecutive, which is the 22 LER implies to consecutive starts without a failure ,
23 of some type or another.
24 BAILEY: Here is what George has got l 25 listed on his chart that he presented in Atlanta. i
- 12 1- BAILEY / RUSHTON: He said five starts in 2 troubleshooting, there is a UV run test, sensor ,
3 calibration, logic testing, E-run bubble testing, 4 multiple starts five more, UV test, six months' .
5 surveillance, high jacket water runs three times and 6 the UV run test. That adds up to 18.
7 MOSBAUGH: In amongst 18 are numerous 8 failures.
9 AUFDENKAMPE: Failures.
10 BAILEY: What was that, Allen?
11 AUFDENKAMPE: There are failures in 12 amongst those, mixed in with.
( 13 BAILEY: Yes. Okay. He just says 18 14 successful starts. He didn't say there vere 15 consecutive successful starts. ;
16 AUFDENKAMPE: What we put in there was 18 j
17 starts without a failure.
18 BAILEY: I am talking about on the chart, 19 it doesn't say consecutive.
20 AUFDENKAMPE: That is what we put in the 21 April 9th letter was 18 starts without a failure.
22 BAILEY: This chart isplies that, that ha 23 didn't mention any failure. !
24 MOSBAUGH: You have to check the data but 25 you may find that some of those five ones mentioned l
h 13 1 failed, for example. '
2 BAILEY: Five troubleshooting?
3 MOSBAUGH: Uh-huh.
4 BAILEY: Yes.
5 MOSBAUGH: I don't think you have any 6 guarantee that those were all successful.
7 BAILEY: Like I said, it doesn't say 8 that, but it implies that. And this is --
9 MOSBAUGH: It says that, because at the 10 bottom it says 18 successful starts.
11 BAILEY: I mean, it implies that they 12 were consecutive successful starts.
[ 13 MOSBAUGH: It may imply that. Yeah. It 14 probably implies that.
15 BAILEY: I think that that's what we led 16 the NRC to believe that in Atlanta.
17 i AUFDENKAMPE: I think that's what people 18 thought at the time. You know, Paul, when you go to 1 i
19 Hairston, you have got to tell him that we just !
20 plain old screwed up; that we had data based on what 21 we thought -- we had data that we felt supported the 22 statements that were made in the LER and the, what 23 George presented in Atlanta; that upon further 24 scrutiny that it did not support that and at the 25 time we issued the LER we were more concerned about k, l l
l
FT 1 14 1
whether those numbers were right or wrong.
2 BAILEY: The information was supplied to 3 IIT.
Did we ever correct what we told them or do 4 you know?
5 AUFDENKAMPE: We have not corrected the 6 April 9th letter. The IIT, I guarantee you, knows 7 exactly what happened.
8 BAILEY: They had to get the information 9
from us somehow, but we don't know what they are 10 going to present today in Washington?
11 AUFDENKAMPE: I doubt they will get into 12 those kind of specifics. But we have --
g 13 BAILEY: I mean, in the report.
14 AUFDENKAMPE: But these lists that we put 15 together, this gave the summary of the start 16 sequences as failures and what happened and stuff i
17 like that we wrote the revised LER on, the IIT was l 18 given that.
19 BAILEY: In the revised numbers that we 20 are presenting now, where did these numbers come 1 21 from?
22 AUFDENKAMPE: Kenny Stokes took all the 23 diesel starts, put that down, wrote the diesel log, 24 and I guess -- did he review the operator's logs, !
25 too? He, reviewed the operator's logs to make sure that
(
l I
i
r-1
, < l 15 ;
s 1 we had picked up everything, that we had the big 2 picture. !
3 BAILEY: Doesn't look like there is a 4 good story other than we were just in the process of 5 all the confusion and stuff that we just' screwed up.
6 AUFDENXAMPE: You know, you might would 7 argde that if there was.a good story, we could 8 probably argue not revising the LER. If we had some 9 good sound basis for what is in the LER, we could.
10 get around revising it.
11 BAILEY: Yeah.
12 AUFDENKAMPE: Paul, is that what you are 13 looking for?
{
14 RUSHTON: Yes. I was looking for a 15 good story that, you know, we could use to explain 16 how this error had been made and not make us'all 17 look like a bunch of dummies, but sounds like we la were a bunch of dummies. '
i 19 AUFDENKAMPE: That is my perspective (chuckling).
r 20 RUSHTON: We did the best we could at 21 the time and we went so fast through everything that 22 we didn't have adequate checks and balances to make 23 sure that every single piece of data was absolutely 24 correct and now that we have been through the IIT 25 investigation and done a whole lot more I
,, - , . ~ - . - . - - .- -n.. -- - - -, - n , , , - . . -
i I
I 16 I 1 documentation, probably with further review and 2
study we found that we were in error, you know. i 3
And that's the best story we got to go 4 with.
j 5 BAILEY: You know, based on that it 6 seemed to me like that we ought not to send in this {
7 dann LER or revised LER until the IIT report.
8 Otherwise we may have a damn conflict in there, (in the 9 revised LER).
10 AUFDENKAMPE: Well, I would only make the l l
11 warning -- and throw it up to you guys. We felt 12 compelled down here as soon as we identified the 13 problem to correct it as expeditiously as possible.
14 BAILEY: And I agree with that, but I am 15 saying now that that report may be coming out next 16 week or today that we give them (inaudible).
17 AUFDENKAMPE: Well, anyway.
18 BAILEY: We still are confused about 19 these numbers.
20 AUFDENKAMPE: I understand.
21 RUSHTON: I think that, you know, 22 Hairston feels that we have -- he's gone on the 23 record attesting to the information in the LER and 24 now we come back and say it's wrong.
25 And based on past precedent, I think he's going to
(
1 I
17 1 probably either document it in the cover letter on 2 the LER or somewhere in the record'why it was wrong !
3 and what corrective action we have taken to make 4 sure we don't report wrong information in the 5 future.
6 AUFDENKAMPE: Okay. Let me, I will tell you 7 what, Paul, let me bring that up with Tom Greene.
8 Now, I will tell you what, generally the LER 9 .information is verified by my people, okay, up to a ,
10 point.
11 BAILEY: Yes.
12 AUFDENKAMPE: We can't verify everything, 13 but generally it is verified by my people. Now, my 14 people started with the original April 9th letter as 15 their bases.
16 RUSHTON: Yes.
17 AUFDENKAMPE: Now, I don't think -- I 18 think -- I am not trying to dump this back in your l 19 lap, Jim. \
I just really don't recall. I think you 20 guys generated the April 9th letter up there.
21 BAILEY: We did.
22 AUFDENKAMPE: We may have verified this 23 stuff on the April 9th letter. I do not knov 24 whether I did that on-site or how we did the 25 verification of that information.
(
- , , , , . - - - + - - e- -.-. - . , e - - , , , - - - , - - - , , . - - n o n- -- ,. , - - - ,,,m e
18 1 MR. RUSHTON: The PRB reviewed it.
2 AUFDENKAMPE: Yes, the PRB reviewed it, 3 but they won't always go back and verify that kind :
4 of -- huh? The April 9th letter.
5 MOSBAUGH: I'm not sure we PRBed that --
6 It was sent before.
7 AUFDENKAMPE: The PRB did after it went 8 out.
9 BAILEY: Well, the PRB had it prior to 10 that time. We made some revisions.
11 AUFDENKAMPE: I am getting a vicious 12 shaking cf a "no" by a head here, who will remain 13 nameless.
(
14 But anyway regardless, regardless. I 15 don't know who did verification of that and I 16 suspect that the majority of that verification was 17 done through hearsay (inaudible) .
18 MR. RUSHTON: Probably was.
19 AUFDENKAMPE: And that's where we erred.
20 If you want to point out where we erred on that, 21 ,
that's where we erred and -- as far as written 22 communications.
23 And George probably erred in his 24 presentation because a lot of that presentation was 25 made on hearsay because of the time frame involved
(
19 1 in putting the presentation together.
2 So, if Mr. Hairston wants to do something 3 different, we certainly can, but all we can do is 4 say.that we will verify everything before we send it 5 out and I will personally do that and'it will -- I 6 don't mean this in a threatening nature at all. It 7 just takes longer sometimes. Sometimes we won't be t
8 able to make the dates that we want to meet.
9 BAILEY: I agree with you.
10 RUSHTON: All right.
11 AUFDENKAMPE: Do you guys feel better now I
12 that you understand the whole story?
13 BAILEY: (Laughter.)
14 RUSHTON: Yeah. Yeah. I an a little 15 better equipped now.
16 AUFDENKAMPE: Paul --
17 RUSHTON: Yeah. i 18 AUFDENKAMPE: -- this is my recollection l
1 19 and Allen's recollection of how things went. We are '
20 about to go to the PRB. I will recount this 21 conversation and concerns that you. guys have to the 22 PRB and specifically Tom Greene to see if he wants 23 to do anything else.
24 e e**
1 25
(
.. - . . = - - .
GPC EXHIBIT 41
, AUfDENKAMPE EX. O 1
(StGIN TAPE MO.,167, SIDE A.) . , _ , .
2 ,Vo!CE: Inaudible.J ,
/ '
./
2 .. / V03 It's c ainly pos'eible.,Jou know, right 4 now e*we /t four to written We*we'got Anaudible.y*
/
5 And the re on ho awaltlag'/ the r,esoluti [inaudib1d.) In
/ /* / "
6 par el, (inaddible) 14 doing.a revi of del full
,' ,' l 4 own SI taking'[ inaudible) o of service That' kind 8 of who we 8 redt We,'re just ind of wa ng on
/ ,
(in&udib1 We're worki but wai .
l 10
/,e Vo!CE: (Ina ble) lrevi by Dan 11 ( udible.]
12 ,' VOICE Not the I'm av . I be e -- ye 1 He knows wh we're ng to and I love Den I don't 14 know if (inagdible) w id lik chance (i udible.)
15 Dan inaudiblefwas e inde at revie (inaudible.
la , VOICE: eah.
(
1 Vo : [I ible.) -
18 . VOICE That's right. '
19'
/
V
/
s (Inaud'ible. ) /
20 VOICE: You know, wo 1d actually'probably ge 2 ou and do this task and n out of ten' mee not have any /
22 probles, but unfortu ly we all that shit'bappone and 22' we can't afford haveanyahithappenrighEnow. ,-
/
24 V Es Yeah.
pecially when you're,gdtting 25 (inaud e.)
l i
I
- a 1
23 I
1 / VOICE: - '
/ / [ Inaudible / /[ / ..-
2 VOICE: And L41d find out that SAe new syartem hat NP Mants to b 3 is big o gger an our inframe.
hn,4nal.. .
~
,n.ud m.7 y g , , y m y . ----
S CMA amese. m't o in. attern.y t
saa row .rcar c.neral. ir 6
h 900 83 Yeah. Is that just part of the standard 7 distribution?
8 903cs: I don't think so.' [ Inaudible.)
9 [4 m or did somebody get the wrong ,
, 10 distribution?
11 voIcs: Muh?
12 p 5e0e8: or did somebody get the wrong 13 distribution. I think I've seen his on there. Well, h 4s43 7"* M '3 14 back today.
i 15 , U6b tesess Yeah. Did be go to that thing?
16
@ Weset I don't know. But if he's back, are they 17 -- they're not doing anything on the 1.2R revision, then,
(- 18 until you guys resubmit. Is that the plan? So we're not 19 going to talk all day on that like we did on monday and 20 Tuesday. j g _ / _n
,,7, ,
21
-7 3 , q -
w,rv . - -- - _ __ ..._______.,
r_; ;' n _L A 1- -- A'-
q -- -
22 //.// 90eCE: They said what was [4ased6b&o.)
g onfratMG" 23 d A 90eets I told them that we had a oes h 24 fstatementinthet2R.
25 Artg, SEIECE: Uh-huh.
f ggicfrp Tyr 4'strJrN7.5 4ND rMer 1MLKED r* 0$0<k"AN AND Y~MY 3 A/O f*MA r WA.5 F/MC.
$ s H r*- - 3 /4/c r T N f" A/ME G ,
c 4 M r OU T* 6 o. PCCIDED 7o" 34 1 1 744 Steep: And th we've been Aryina to J ,f w f,(pj ;, 1"? *4 eft'/4.5* x get
~
.*revised nem 2 [ inaudible.) And we have ^ _:, revise the whole Lta.
3 (Inaudibleg) 1.K4 [tAMM/dLf)e j' ^
4 /9 Seest: Did you tell his what was specifically 5 wrong?
'30g T'sct 'A v4J /4. "y kt *d"' -~".
s eases m 7 dW ineses: Yeah.
s Q66 means: Depe ty w nt to start counting
[/NA@ tdL4,7 '
/k 9
as the right suahomen M numbers I've heard, ,
10 are sixteen and eleven.
11 d % seges You mean updated through now, today, or Od" 417"7f W.
f f & //w w jak s,Y T4db Ak 13 f(r4 1saets: W [soe$nsody e ,,je r) som .
14 M lasteB: Sixteen and eleven.I p,foJhj 16 Weges: I need to talk to [iae WBete) about that.
17 At the time we submitted --
(
le T&4seeens (i=Q *l Amew, Deal *r XN0 W.
^^ ^
19 d 9 1seest: The P -- you know. The revision the PRS 20 approved was right.
- .Z f % $ o$ dy 21 Vdd1 poses: (Inaudible.)
22 ALM m well, I mean, you know, the numbers you 23 quoted are different than the ones that the PRS approved.
24 744 1seece: [ Inaudible.)
25 h emeet I was just wondering if -
, . . , - - , ,, e --
l 1
25 1 T54 tenscra they probably used some other criteria.
W U Lo 2 /4 N 90888: Did Fredericks find some other starts, you 2 know, or failures or -- 'l Z DIPN '7~d$r. //" /7 5 Alor M 7WF UM, Z MH' o. ;
4 TfA testes (Inaudible.)
S ,/ % -5e3e31 I'll ask Fredericks. I talked to hin 6 about it before from when he got the direction to start the 7
investigation. I'll,get back to (in ible.)
a
/ so,fwv.7.,
Tip4 Sup court a ruled,tha /
9 m nu
/ ear i s amis L fLo stry fc4h~ , -~
for Npun SJKive # 4 C h/40under dama)ges YMS lt 10 et e law.
A ilOECS/ What
/ a that n? Sta
[
/
/
/
e law!Sua t 'm
/'
e ot%-- '
12 und ,'-
- s. Does j / j 1 t maati an ext 4nsion?
1 Vo!CE: (Inaudib,le . ) /
14 dbk / .
/ / '/ I 203cra (Ilnaudible)a'responsible / (inaudible) 1 requesting,/ NRC to order Prairie Plant to shut down until 16
,l (inaudible) emetgency service Aw/'
j audible] made operable and
. i 17 t apose vil penalty (inaudible.)
18 j/ // taeses: For the mergency service water? We know 1! a about that. yow s ould remember that (inaudible.) j 20 7Yr-4 *
(Inaudible.) f'
/
2 A/ M Yeah.
e
/ . ,
22 7'S M s,.'(Inaudible.) /
22 f 4M seescE: Yeah.
It's a hundred foot -- was it a 24
/undredfNtdeep? I believe it's a hundree/
foot deep 2V (inapdible.)
( -
I 6 -//-@ ;
GPC EXHIBIT 42 AUFDENKAMPE EX. P 1 1 Tape 159, Side A 2 VOICE: [ Inaudible.)
3 VOICE: [ Inaudible.]
4 VOICE: Oh. Well --
5 VOICE: [ Inaudible.)
6 VOICE: It's the newspaper.
7
[ Inaudible conversation.)
8 VOICE: [ Inaudible) the way I look at it 9
[ inaudible). I 10 (Inaudible conversation.) i 11 VOICE: i I hope they don't get too involved in that !
12 [ inaudible). !
I 13
[ Inaudible conversation.)
14 VOICE: It's either correct or it's not, and the 15 only other way [ inaudible). -
1 16 We don't have enough data. I 17 VOICE: Right.
i l
18 VOICE: [ Inaudible.)
19 VOICE: [ Inaudible.)
20 VOICE: But there's a formal process for it, and 21 frequently, we do it without the necessary information.
22 (Inaudible conversation.)
23 VOICE: I was talking to Ed [ inaudible).
24
[ Inaudible conversation.)
25 VOICE: And one of the things --
i l
l
T Gd
- 7WA r ACf, TH r D/r.trL sTMr x o9 l
7"A d o L x rio N 7x4/~ 7s 0 A/r rsdrurg j AAID KENNY Srckr3 /L'r redr7WA - -
AL M : E S4/r' /r 7 s deNNy sroxes, 5
\
1
[ Inaudible conversation.) 1 2 VOICE: [ Inaudible) get together [ inaudible).
3 VOICE: l
[ Inaudible.]
4 kr-- R- m-- albl -) ""t*'
( 6 4 x /< / N rde/N&) m ,
- uiy o' _
i 5 h l 6 [Gk ' YOU 0/0 Calf AA/O MENAlY D/t? C A/E,'
A p':Dogsxxy you know what I'm talking about? ,
pio cors e , ,,,n, i 7 774 S W33CE: [ Inaudible.)f 4cr A copy, !
8 VOICE: [ Inaudible.) l 9
h :503C2: [ Inaudible) the one that -- all bl cked 10 out with lines and all that?
11 Tiv f4282c3: Yeah.
12 /[*7wCzes: Kenny did both the A and the B.
13 Af03Ct: Okay.
14 //./d ^ - CE :
Do you have that? i 15 C(/k e- [ Inaudible.] [a y*" "A =
16 b itetCE: m.J Mc rear eix+ .. .
Inaudible.)
SMintM # ** i 'j -
7 Jfs,,ylo n wss' 3 f3
- 0"p t 17 Cdd 1202c3: fInaudible)gthe LER. ,
18 AL h WOSCS: [ Inaudible.) OKAV 19 7'(rA 3203CE: [ Inaudible.)#c405E //E S / DSS EP.
20 A4490ZCE: [ Inaudible.) Ot4V 21 h6k m: Because it was wrong the first time.
22 VOICE: !
[ Inaudible.)
23 M: And now he doesn't want correctj$$'4 /T 2 24 70Av0 C=:
-lo }~M Anotherthingyou.mightwanttoj'^o1.--
.b. hih .lcd e }> row -A-25 is [ inaudible).'A}$n { 'r '!
"" h 'fddCh f JO TM/edfH p pxit - -
l vo tet : Qasvatett]
HA: s,c nu ir rs reen ss senerwar. i l
6 1
(Inaudible conversation.)
2 N: I wouldn't task M A with doing that 3 immediately, but I -- that may be the'next step. ;
i 4 # Wesce: (Inaudible.)
5 y 202cs: WHA"I-- 7- 445 THEY 7~4t k/N4 A8607 ? Settf
= tit ' : }jaudits?
6 it02CE:
They're To going to have QA auditk TNE log-7 ^- ICE.
S CC / F TNr c.o urs r /s 4/fM7'
" In -- + ' t 1 - - };
i 8 /~~W WOSCS.: That's corporate QA or site?
9 UO2CS.: Site QA, I'm'sure.
10 states:
Anyway (WAL K/N4 (inaudible)).
To0ND3 11 VOICE: Good morning (inaudible).
12 VOICE:
, (Inaudible.)
13 [Whistlin . ( 4'Ep /N 7AA/Nf) 14 "-x-"'M; clin wif.Wii b +'gee 44th- for about five minute this 15 morning, right before i::=12:--l--j meeting (inaudible At( fN // NM c
dACl{ ANO,.kfL* ??kg;OETA'A*E .
B _ } }' d- - - - ' ^=
~ ' '
l 17
~
l)^tk^ jrh5& #df ?= -
^~: ^ ~~ $
^
M TroICE: They seem to be very confused.
18 VOICE: Who?
19 h VOICE: y'lh $8 }?*'tlM'YE
--- - -t ; 4 nd - 4they have a distinct lack 20 of confidence right now (inaudible).
21 7~Ma~ 5/TUA r/oN ~ ~
VOICE: 1 =r' -] I don't know. I mean you 22 were in the P meetings, weren't you?, , ,:
23 IS F4t<LY CL EAg f -
I think the situation4i :=- U; ' = 3_- It's also 24 fairly simple. J 'M Wa40E4/N4 j 25 (1.-;_;i_1--hhythey'regoingtoanaudit.
GgF: Dieset 7Wenp/N + ; E 'L L /dedA6LY
-, LeoK Ar ALL TMr rdcapiN + . .E /
~ . . -
i S
k k t o R T 43 7
h 1 I $/[ #etcs: Well, I think their big concern is -- is fu2 that --
that there is not a -- a phiL .5c7' n;M cf DCC0MrNTS
=' m ; r +~SeMEh '- Ac f"
!' k 3 Id,Q7j,_% @ 4 M N M N J W Wh M@MM -
a j 4 / $ vozct : There is a set of documents,4 w: raza a-should be.
o 5 ALH:
' ^There is a set of documents. <
\ 6 Z E 7~ 7"a A 4. \
\ W ,That c au- set of documents w4swas even:-given USeD, tp &the c' *pg f )
l I 7 g ' ; - -- *' Sir'_ That set of documentsg ' ---' M?r) 3 ,_
m ys-
- i A ur:r w y y Dia frEoM docKMCAD Add 7/MM
. - - - -_ - T ' ~ - 'y a _- &_'- ."- - - - - -+ , =
8f40L CA$rt * : L ::i'i-2-
'~ '
,ot.
M4xa- Mi ? You'L t HM&~ 7** ASt< 7~herf, '" "I!--
9 7'f' rW O'
- I've got to go look.
f J_ ='L '
[ Inaudible.). '
10 M 303CE: How long is this going to take?
11 frh : Should t take oe a,na,cgugleofdgs4 ,4 1 12
( [ Inaudible conversatio'n ) /74,A de M "#
I think the problem -xgg Jf be has .s;ps).
13 p VOICE: the problem 14 nothing to do with [ inaudible), doesn't have anything to do 15 with that. -
16 /M' VOICE:
h [ Inaudible.) [ Inaudible) was a moving target, you know.
17 I think there was a problem with the definition 18 while we were trying to -- the piece of information we were i
19 trying to convey with it.
20 VOICE: [ Inaudible.) :
21 VOICE: Oh, there are problems with --
22 VOICE: [ Inaudible.)
23 D VOICE: -- with the work. I'm just saying --
24 VOICE: [ Inaudible.)
25 A7 VOICE: -- that that is not related to the issue
h
, dL/1: [ 4SKED JcW E d E </C K AC{d J 7* 7ME jfUD/[ //O VE </ OWED 7/Mr ME' D dEEAl '
C AL L ED TM/S Mo4N/Nf- B Y A T4 J A!! To 00 AN 40D/7~ 11 1 VOICE: And we say the same thing.
2 ALN N : And we say the same thing.
W/LL/At13 3 Gv5 4 sc4cs: Well, the problem is that -- is that 4 ^ i r-- ud i bi ; _ h* ** I -
5 _
[In_audibleconversationf.)
" WMT-MCTHeY froN4'A 6 VOICE: [ Inaudible) -t tn %= t-- -t i -- ^*
-+_
7 ^'-1 =--
I Q hfr 8
M * '-
ud F 1 - ..
--r==t k n-) g 'A> .Jo "[
- 9 h VOICE: That has n thing to do with the 10 i --- t-21 )#Y D 11 d[N VC@CT: Oh, no, no, no, no, no.
12 7/f47'] w//Ar 7' HEP'AE GC/Nfr To 0 -
[ Vo*CE: iu rudli-1-) I can see it -- I can see it 13 coming. pg 14 That's how the 're oing to -- d i;; 'r nt one?
15 Volcc : C/Ndo 64 -
J f. ),d 7'f/) VOICE: Right before -- 1 # -
16 I wout0 AA&ur roovcid //= wr KE/7~ THE Lo - [7ff'
. . . ~ . -- Ir o out b M4
^
^= O z : E ; E VG A'7 ED ,
17 ?? '?? '0 ??. .'-_ ;h W AQ jf .gysqs, (pre. ho"
---_-_=. ,
t:,
18 ~s- -E- - -- u i d r.
J.. .u. - r/,f404/d 4 E]
19 VOICE:
f [ Inaudible.)
20 VOICE: [ Inaudible) the wrong set of [ inaudible).
21 (Inaudible.)
I 22 !
[ Inaudible conversation.)
23
[ Pause.)
24
[ Inaudible conversation.)
25 [ Pause.) i l
i ALM: THE D474 JHEr7 MASN'r EVsN BEEM fudtr/77Ep yyr*
l l
28 ;
1 VOICE: Doesn't [ inaudible). 4 2 VOICE: Trowbridge swore that the version I got -- e 3 there was Version 2 that was supposed to'do it all. '
4 VOICE: M-ham.
5 VOICE: What I heard this morning was that you .
6 were having trouble with it, and someone put out Version 1.
7
[ Inaudible conversation.)
8
[ Pause.] '
9
[ Inaudible conversation.)
10 VOICE: Look in the phone book. I don't think 11 it's a real name.
12 t [ Inaudible conversation.)
13 VOICE: Yeah.
14 VOICE: But he's only got one, and she's made it .
15 plural [ inaudible), so that would make you think of Hank - -
16 Williams [ inaudible). '
17
[ Inaudible conversation.)
18 {'84EAK /N TAf/Al4-)
fry, VOICE: And -- but now they're assigning !
19 Fredericks to go audit the area and using their QA ara 20 a g a i n . _ i i --- W M THAT s' MAA4h)t.4 7WE AS MELL. \
21 They've assigned Fredericks to go audit the --
)
22 they've assigned him to go audit the diesel start records in j 23 the engineering log. They're trying to blame this on the l
24 engineering log. i 25 g cMcLYN TYNAN I g
pq -,$.A-poses:
[ Inaudible.) 'h7' QQ '
\
1 I
(!
i 29 1 y Y'Woegeu Well, I told -- I told Fredericks, I said 2 there may be more -- I told Fredericks there may be more 3 than one problem here. You may find some more problems, 4 Okay? w 4eA)f /AJ Gre44 E 'S
/bfeSevu774 But7?otheA/ issue of how that information gotA[' =-
-1-;
i 4 and then in the letter and then in the LER y S TE /7 5 -- ~
5 i
6 T rru i i
7 W _ JoW
-; u;;;;;r ;4an Ywft's C h^ir^l-1[can only be answered by Geo t
8 VOICE: [ Inaudible.) ~
i 9 / f"1 SO2ct: And it's totally independent of any Ac c ud4cr of 4 *+3.
10 engineering log or log conflicts or g --- 'it-le; : 1:._ _ - ,
11 okay?
12 VOICE:
' [ Inaudible.)
13 usso l*6 A4 4 WOEct: He eess4the operations control h .
14 )) i~ VOICE: [ Inaudible.)
15 /14 /1 Vo**c: Okay? (Inaudible.) .
i 16 f464 VOICE: They should be accurate, wouldn't you 17 think?
18 /Aq votet: They are accurate, but there's a little '
19 error in them. I caught a little error in them. Okay? But 20 they are accurate.
21 The problem is -- is that he, either through 22 vr/tYZED carelessness or through convenient interpretation,4 1 11;::'
23 the data to our advantage in a misleading way. That's the 24 issue.
25 VO / c E :[7A/4LJ0/6L E]
A4/1, Missed -- missed -- missed items in the log is not i