ML19207B431
| ML19207B431 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1979 |
| From: | Diebler W, Pyke T Metropolitan Edison Co |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908290316 | |
| Download: ML19207B431 (71) | |
Text
l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 11 In the Matter of:
2, IE TMI INVESTIGATION INTERVIEW 3
of Mr. Walter E. Diebler, Jr.
Radiation Chemistry Technician, Jr.
4 Mr. Thomas E. Pyke 5
Radiation Chemistry Technician, Jr.
6 7
8' Trailer #203 9
NRC Investigation Site TMI Nuclear Power Plant 10 Middletown, Pennsylvania 11!
June 1,1979 12 (Date of Interview) 13i July 5,1979 (Date Transcript Typed) 14l 280, 281, and 282 15' (Tape Numcer(s))
16l 17' 18l l,, ( '
~
20{
21l bgb h,
l NRC PERSONNEL:
O 9
22; g'3 Gregory P. Yuhas
/
O 23l Dale E. Donaldson 49 Mark E. Resne" 24,!
25t i
l i
1759 256 J
l
1 RESNER:
This is an interview with Mr. Walter E. Diebler, Jr. and Mr.
2 Thomas E. Pyke.
Mr. Diebler is a radiation chemistry technician, Jr.
3 employed with Metropolitan Edison Company at the Three Mile Island facility 4
and Mr. Pyke is also a radiation chemistry technician, Jr. employed with 5
Metropolitan Edison at the Three Mile Island facility.
The present time is 6
10:25 AM, Eastern Daylight Time.
Today's date is June l',
1979.
This 7
interview is being conducted in Trailer 203 which is located just outside 8
of the South Gate to the Three Mile Island facility.
Individuals present g
representing the NRC at this interview are Mr. Gregory P. Yuhas.
Mr. Yuhas 10 is a radiation specialist employed with Region I of the U.S. Nuclear Regula-tory Commission.
Also present are Mr. Dale E. Donaldson.
Mr. Donaldson is g
also a radiation specialist employed with Region I of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mr. Pyke and Mr. Deimler have both been interviewed prior to this.
At that time they were given a two page document which explained the purpose, the scope and the authority with which we have to conduct this investigation.
Both individuals signed and dated this document.
This document also explained that they are entitled to a represehtative of their choice to be present during the interview and that in no way are they compelled to talk to us should they not want to.
On the second page of this document, each individual has answered three questions.
I wil state these questions for the record.
Mr. Deimler, this document, Question 1, do 21 you understand the above? He has checked yes.
Is that correct, Mr. Deimler?
22 cl DE NLER:
Yes.
It is.
24 25 l
1759 257 h
r
2 1
RESNER:
Question 2, do we have your permission to tape the interview?
He 2,
has checked yes.
Is that correct, Mr. Deimler?
3 4
DEIMLER:
Yes, it is.
5 6
RESNER:
Question 3, do you want a copy of the tape? Mr. Deimler has 7
indicated yes, is that correct?
8 g
DEIMLER:
Yes, that is.
10 RESNER:
OK, we will provide you with a copy of the tape.
Mr. Pyke, this document, Question No.1, Do you understand the above?
He has checked yes, is that correct, Mr. Pyke?
3 14 PYKE:
Yes.
15) i 16' RESNER:
Question No. 2, Do we have your permission to tape this interview?
You have checked yes, is that correct, Mr. Pyke?
181 19f PYKE:
Yes.
20 21 RESNER:
Question No. 3 Do you want a copy of the tape?
Mr. Pyke has 22, checked yes.
Is that correct, Mr. Pyke?
23 24 25 I
i 1759 258
3 1
PYKE:
Yes.
2 3
RESNER:
OK, we'll provide you with a copy of the tape.
Both individuals 4
were additionally given a statement which explains the fraud and false 5
statement section of the United States Code.
Each individual has signed 6
and dated this document.
At this time, Mr. Yuhas has some questions that 7
he would like to pose.
8 YUHAS:
This is Yuhas.
The purpose of this interview is based on previous g
interviews, where individuals, yourselves included, have made statements to 10 the effect that you have not been provided adequate training.
In addition, on previous tapes, statements have been made that documentation of a training made by the licensee was not in fact provided.
Today, both of you have been provided a copy of the documentation of your training as put forth by the licensee to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as a true and correct record of the training that has been provided to you.
You each have been asked to review that training and to evaluate in your own mind whether or not you actually received the training as noted on your individual training records that you have before you.
At this point I would like to begin by first asking Mr. Pyke to comment on his training record and to make any statement he would like to make regarding whether or not he, in fact, 21 received the training as noted on his training recoro.
Mr. Pyke.
22 23 PYKE:
I generally find the training sheet in order except for two fallacies.
24 The first one is Unit 2 HP and Startup Training, a 24-hour block of instruc-25 1759 259
4 1
tion and it's dated 12/1/78.
I'm not sure the scope of this training which 2l they refer to.
There has been some discussion on equipment when asked 3
about it.
I was trained on the air monitoring systems in Unit 2 by a Ralph 4{
Jacobs of Rad Services.
Outside of that training, to the best of my know-5 ledge, any Unit 2 HP and startup training was done by myself through asking 6
questions and being unfamiliar with the equipment in Unit 2 versus Unit 1.
7 The second part of this that I definitely was not trained on, was the 8
operation and use of the SAM-2, and the date of that, it was a 2-hour block of instruction on 9/14/77.
I did not receive this training.
g 10' YUHAS:
Thank you.
Mr. Deimler, will you comment on your training record, g
P1*"8"?
2 13 DEIMLER:
Yes.
Generally speaking on this record, a lot.of this is true.
To the best of my knowledge, it's true, let's put it that way.
A lot of the things on this training record, I don't completely understand.
For instance, the Unit 2 health physics and startup.
That's 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of training on 12/1/78.
Now that 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, I don't ever remember being here 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> straight and on that day.
As far as the startup, I was never talked to 191 about the different procedures or operation of a lot of the equipment, 20' including the air monitors in Unit 2.
I have never had any formal training on the air monitors in Unit 2.
The weekly health physics instruction, 22 well, when we first started in Unit 1, this was true.
But that was back in 23
'76, '75-76.
We did have somewhat of a half decent training program set up 24 then.
As far as Unit 2, I'd say that we had very little to no training 25 whatsoever as far as weekly health physics instructions.
l
?
1759 260
5 1
YUHAS:
Mr. Deimler, could you indicate the date of the entry that you are 2
referring to?
3 4
DEIMLER:
That's dated 1/27/78.
That was one hour.
Health Physics discus-5 sion en procedures, they have me marked there for one hour of health physics 6
discussion on procedures on 1/13/78.
This possibly is true, although I 7
really don't believe this.
The only instruction we get on procedures is 8
when we go to a procedure and read it and find out that it has changed.
g The high-voltme sampler the Iodine 131 RED 5CO, to the best of my knowledge, 10 at least I don't remember having any training on that.
They have that date as 9/19/77.
Now that is a good ways back, but I still don't ever remember 77 12 having any training as far as calibration, or anything like that, operation f that particular instrument.
The next item is the operation and use of 13 the SAM-2.
They have me marked down for two hours of lecture on the SAM-2 15 16l DONALDSON:
Have you ever had any instruction on the SAM-2?
18{
DEIMLER:
1Sl I have never had any instruction on the SAM-2 other that what I I
have tried to get and learn on myself.
21 YUHAS:
For the rest of the interview, will you please say your last name first so that there is no confusion in the typist's mind when she makes the transcript up.
So when you're answering questions, in case one of you 24 wants to jump in and answer the question first.
To review then, both of 25 l
l l
1759 261
6 1
YUHAS:
As far as you're concerned the SAM-2, as indicated on that training 2
record, is not correct.
3 4
DEIMLER:
That's not correct.
5 PYKE:
That is correct that I did not receive it.
6 7
YUHAS:
8 Now, the other topics you both are at a loss to explain the 24 g
hours of training but you do not feel that you can say that is definitely a false statement.
10 11 DEIMLER:
I can say that as far as the 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> on that particular day, I did not have that training for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
And, I feel fairly sure, I'm not sure what they mean by Unit HP and startup, I'm not sure what they mean by 15l that.
But as far as Unit 2, I've "1 very little training with anything in
- y HP in Unit 2 as far as monitors, different counting equipment, which, well, there's only a few pieces of equipment over there that we use for counting, but I've... I don't think that that statement is true that we've had the 24 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br /> in Unit 2 and Unit 2 Health Physics and Unit 2 startup.
I feel that is not a true statement.
20 21l YUHAS:
At this point then based on your conversations, both of you, we are 22 going to focus in on two things.
The first thing we'll focus on is the 24 23 hours2.662037e-4 days <br />0.00639 hours <br />3.80291e-5 weeks <br />8.7515e-6 months <br />, because that is an apparently clear to both of you what that was.
24 Then we'll focus in on the SAM-2.
With regard to the other items that you 25 i
'1759~262
7 1
brought forth, you made statements to the effect that to the best of your 2
knowledge, even though it was a long time, you can't remember for sure 3
whether or not you were provided it, and we don't want to get in a position 4
where you are not sure about something, because the purpose of this inter-5 view is to establish the credibility of the record.
O K.
So we're going to 6
begin by discussing the 24-hour startup training.
I have before me the 7
original input for that 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of Unit 2 chem and HP startup and it is a g
coinputerized form that was used as an input to the training records that both men have.
The form is signed by Mr. P. Valez, the date is not entirely g
ledgible.
It appears to indicate 12/1/78 and then it is cross signed by 10 11 the signature of the supervisor, training coordination.
This form lists the names of apparently all the rad chem techs.
The title of the course is y
Unit 2 HP chem Startup.
Location was TMI.
This list clearly includes Mr.
13 Deimler and Mr.Pyke.
The number of hours indicated on the course is 24 g
15l hours, the completion date is indicated as 12/1/78.
The reverse side of i
- 'E
"" # 9 * * ""
" "9' 16 Under instructor's trainee evaluation, Section 7, Mr. Valez apparently wrote this statement.
"During the past six months the techs have been 8
getting good instructions in both HP and Chem aspccts of Unit 2 startup."
19l 20lt At this point I am going to pass this document to both Mr. Pyke and Mr.
Deimler to see first, did you sign your name to that form, indicating you had received that training?
23 PYKE:
I did not sign my name.
25{
1759 20 i
l 1
8 1
DEIMLER:
No, I dio not sign my name.
I 26 3
YUHAS:
Can either of you comment with respect to this entry on the reverse side of the form as to what exactly that means?
Item 7.
5 6l PYKE:
Item 7.
It says here that we have been getting good instructions on 7
HP and chemistry.
I find, referring back to the title of this, Unit 2 HP 8
and startup,... the chemistry aspect to this, yes we were receiving on-the-g job training in chemistry in relation to startup.
There were... come of us 10 had been trained on the equipment in the sampling room at various times.
yp Most of it was picked out by asking questions because we didn't understand Ig the sampling apparatus in Unit 2 versus Unit 1.
There was a big flap about that because we weren't familiar with the changes.
A lot of this work was 3
cross related between Unit 1 and Unit 2, but in reference to HP, this is the part that I am a little confused about because it could be their inter-pretation of this.
We did not receive any formal classroom instruction or 16 group instruction on HP training outside of what I have already stated.
18l DONALDSON:
I would just call your attention to the fact that it is listed as an 0JT.
20 21 DONALDSON:
Does that change...
23 PYKE:
That changed the scope.
Because anything entitled 0JT, which refers 24 to on-job-training could be myself walking up to a supervisor and asking a 25 1759 264 l
9 1l question from time to time, versus changes from Unit 1 and Unit 2.
Generally 2'
our training was constructed from the point that we were already trained in 3
Unit 1, we had a good handle and good scope on Unit 1.
When we made the 4
transition to Unit 2, we were still, we were cross techs between Unit 1 and 5
Unit 2 so anything that we didn't understand, we had to ask questions and 6
if they're interpreting that we asked 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> worth of questions, I won't 7
comment on whether that is a true or false statement.
I don't personally 8
know, because I ask questions everyday when I am at work.
In relation to g
Unit 2, I really personally feel that the training in the HP end of Unit 2 10 was vague in relation to systems and equipment.
11 YUHAS:
12 Mr. Deimler, would you like to comment on that form that you have before you?
13 14 DEIMLER:
15l Yes, it says here in Sec.. ion 7, During the past six months, the
- " 9" 9' 9 16 aspects of Unit 2 startup.
Well, like I stated before, I didn't sign this sheet of paper and I would say that statement is false.
I felt that we were getting very poor training due to the fact that it was a completely I
almost different unit.
The air monitoring systems were different.
The 20' only way we learned anything about the monitors was experimental and asking questions.
The c..emistry end of this I also feel is incorrect in this statement because I didn't learn anything about... I had no instructions, hardly at all, in the sampling room, the different sample points and every-thing else that had anything to do with chemistry, including most of the 25' 1759 265
10 t
l 1l instruments that we used to do the analysis.
The instruments were com-2 pletely... well not completely different, but were changed.
We had no 3
instructions on them unless we'd ask a question.
That was about the only 4,
training that we got in Unit 2, was mainly on-the -ob training.
5 6
DONALDSON:
Then, what I'm hearing you say then, within tr e scope of the 7
form, listing it as 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of on-the-job training, is that an accurate g
representation or is it not outside of whether or not it was adequate, g
that's the summary question.
10 DEIMLER:
No, I feel that it is not adequate.
yy 12 NA N:
wasM t OR, or R wasn4 24 houn?
13 14 i
- Y 15 training.
16[
I have had no formal classroom or group training in Unit 2 that g
I can remember.
18[
I DONALDSON:
Did you work at least 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> in Unit 2?
19{
20 DEIMLER:
Oh sure, I've worked quite a few hours in Uni'. 2.
22 00NALOSON:
Up until this period of time, 12/1/78, had you worked at least 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> on the Unit 2 side in chemistry and health physics functions?
24 25 I
i l
1759 266 i
11 1
DEIMLER:
I would say so, yes.
2 3
DONALDSON:
OK, you were then on the job then for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, at least.
4' 5
DEIMLER:
In the priod of six months, yes.
But this is stating that I have 6
had 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of training.
It also says on-the-job training.
But on the 7
j b training without any instructions I feel is very poor.
It is a very 8
poor way of trying to operate a power plant.
9 10 PYKE:
I find this sheet of paper in relation to the training aspects, it doesn't have anything on here except the list of techs and their employee 3
numbers.
It doesn't document anything in relation to equipment that we g
were a ne n, it doesn't give you any scope of what the training was, it 13 just states that we had training.
Training of what?
It's very, very g
vague.
It tells me nothing,. absolutely nothing.
If I were to look at this piece of paper, and not knowing the people's names on here and what jobs 16!
I they're related to, I would have no idea what they were trained of.
It just says HP-chemistry requirements for Unit 1-Unit 2 startup 0JT.
On the job training of what?
It does not tell you a thing outside of these names that were printed on and the numbers.
21, DONALDSON:
We're not really dealing with the adequacy of the form or the training at this point.
What we're trying to establish is whether or not 23 (a) you two gentlemen did in fact work at least 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> on the Unit 1 24 side, therefore meaning that it was a fact on-the-job training, good or 25[
l 17 5<) 267 i
12 1
bad.
We're working just with whats on this form right now, either its 2
correct or it isn't.
It may be possible that some of the individuals 3
listed here never worked in Unit 2 at all.
Now that would, of course, mean 4
that the form would not be correct.
That is what we're trying to establish 5
right now.
Do you see what I'm trying to say?
6 7
PYKE:
I see what you're trying to say.
8 g
DONALDSON:
If you had never been on Unit 2 at all, and your names are on 10 there, then we've got a problem.
11 PYKE:
12 OK, well then you know, it's once again an interpretation thing and 73 if they're going to interpret that. the 0JT or the job or the hours spent in Unit 2 side were as in fact training, I will have to renege on that state-ment that I said that we were not trained in Unit 2.
That would be a false 5
16 statement on my part because if they're considering on the job training, yes, we did have on the job training because we were scheduled for so many hours over there as normal work load.
But as far as specifically depicting the difference in equipment versus Unit 1 and Unit 2 and the systems that 19{
I are different and so forth.
No we weren't formally trained on that side.
21 DONALDSON:
We understand that and that is really a separate issue.
Right now we are trying to establish the accuracy of the training record as it stands.
But we will deal with that aspect under a separate thrust.
24 251 1759 268 t
13 1
PYKE:
OK.
2 3
DONALDSON:
The first thing we have to do is find out if the records are 4
accurate.
5 6
PYKE:
Well, if you're analyzing this as a record, I guess its going to 7
stand as correct. If this is a record, in fact, it looks to me like there g
ought to be a lot more on there than names and.1 umbers.
9 DEIMLER:
Yea, this is Deimler then.
I'll have to change my statement 10 g
that, yes it is correct, although, I feel that it is not a very good document.
It doesn't tell you, yes, Mr. Deimler has been trained on such and such an 7
instrument at such and such a time for such and such hours.
And I also did not sign my name on this statement.
It was printed on and according to this document, it looks to me...
According to this document the instructor 15:!
was Mr. Pete Valez and that evidently he is the one who printed my name on this statement, on this document.
But it is very vague.
18l YUHAS:
Let me interject a few points here.
To start off with, have you seen these types of forms before?
21 DEIMLER:
I've never seen this type of form.
23 YUHAS:
When you attend a training lecture, do you normally sign an atten-24 dance sheet similar to that in your own pen?
25' 1759 269 i
14 1
DEIMLER:
In our training lectures, most of the time what they do is pass a 2
blank sheet of paper around and you sign it and date it.
3 YUHAS:
Had either of you been told that you had received 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of on 4
5 the job training for Unit 2 startup?
61 DEIMLER:
No, I was not told that I had received 24 haurs of on the job 7
training.
8 9
YUHAS:
Let me ask you some very specific questions.
What we would expect 10 to be covered in on the job training for a new startup.
The first question is:
Have either of you as a result of this training record in the previous six months prior to startup, been trained by any individual as far as the new tech spec requirements for Unit 2 that relate either to the chemistry rea or the health physics area?
15 16 PYKE:
Yes.
17 181 DEIMLER:
I don't remember being trained on tech spics or chemistry require-191 I
ments although most of the chemistry requirements are just about the same as Unit 1 chemistry requirements.
22 YUHAS:
Now training can simply take the form of the, for instance, a 23 senior tech or a heath physics supervisor saying, "now Walt, at Unit 2 24 these tech specs require that, for instance, on startup you do a gross l
1759 270 l
t)
15 1;
iodine 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after a power change of 50%."
In other words, if it's 2
something different than Unit 1, something different than you're accustomed 3
to, training can be simply be the foreman telling you hey, when you do one 4
over here, it's a little different and this is what is required.
5' 6
DEIMLER:
I can't remember.
I'm not sure I don't think that I've had any 7
training like that, although I have had some training in Unit 2 chemistry 8
as far as...
How would you say it? Well, whatever it was, it was very g
vague.
10 RESNER:
Resner speaking.
At this time we'll break to change the tape.
11 Time now is 10:55 AM.
12 13 RESNER:
Resner speaking, this is a continuation of the interview with Mr.
Walter Deimler and Mr. Thomas Pyke.
The time now is 10:56 AM.
5 I
16!
YUHAS:
Does anyone have any additional comments related to this 24-hour 171 I
entry for the Unit 2 HP chemistry startup training.
Apparently, no one has 18f any more comments relative to this one.
The conclusion of this discussion 19{
is that, in fact, although vague, the form appears to be accurate in that 20l the individuals acknowledged they may have, in fact, received 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of some form of training in the previous six months although that training did not take a formal traditional structure in terms of classroom training followed by written or oral examination to determine the adequacy of the training.
Is that correct, gentlemen?
1759 271 i
i
16 li DEIMLER:
Yes, that is correct.
2, 3
PYKE:
Yes.
4 5
YUHAS:
Well, let's move to the next issue, that being that the both of you 6
indicate that you are clearly sure you did not receive the SAM-2 training 7
on both of your records indicated on 9/14/77.
Correct?
8 DEIMLER:
Yes, that is correct.
g 10' PYKE:
Correct.
12 YUHAS:
At this time, I am going to break out a similar entry called the
" training program administrative form" which has been provided to this inspector by the training department.
Item 1 is Operation and Use of the 151 16l SAM-2.
Item 2, dates provided:
9/12/, 9/13, and 9/14.
Location was TMI.
Course duration, 2-hour sessions.
Instructors were P. Melevie and Sid Porter.
On this form the name of Mr. Deimler and Mr. Pyke is noted.
The 18{
signature of the instructor is Mr. Tom Melevie and it is dated 9/16/77.
19f The signature of the training supervisor is a Mr. Richard W. Zeckman, dated 1/77.
The method of evaluation is indicated as oral spot questioning.
21 Under " instructor's evaluation" the following comment appears: "All indivi-22 duals were responsive to the material as it was presented.
They were 23 allowed to use the equipment and each demonstrated his ability to use the 24 equipment." That comment is signed by Thomas L. Mulleavy and dated 9/16/77.
25 I
l 1759 272
17 1
I am at this point passing this form to Mr. Pyke for his review and comment.
2' 3
PYKE:
To the best of...
Not to the best of my knowledge.
I definitely 4
never received this training on dates 9/12, 9/13, and 9/14 on the SAM-2, 5
the Operation and Use of the SAM-2.
My name is printed on this sheet of 6
paper, I have not signed it, I did not receive this training, and I had 7
numerous times confronted our supervisors about our shift was the shift 8
that was not trained on the SAM-2, and we confronted them several times g
about it, and they said "yes, we're going to get back to you."
And it was 10, put off and put off and we were never formally trained on the SAM-2.
11 DONALDSON:
And you say you mentioned that your shift and your supervisor...
Would you give me your shift at that time and your supervisor to whom you directed that comment?
14, 15!
PYKE:
Our shift is the C shift and the supervisor that was confronted was 16' Mr. Tom Melavie and Pete Valez.
17 18 i
DONALDSON:
19l Had you ever been aware that this training had supposedly been entered on your records?
21 PYKE:
No, I was not aware of that.
22 23 YUHAS:
As a part of your responsibilities, in an emergency organization, 24 would you be expected to take an emergency kit and to go out and be able to 25 l
use the SAM-2 instrument.
1759 273
18 1
PYKE:
Yes, I would.
2 3
DEIMLER:
This form that I have in front of me is Operation and Use of SAM-4 2.
They have my name marked down here, printed, that yes, I have had 5
training on this.
That is untrue.
I have never had any training whatsoever 6
on the SAM-2 instrument, on any of the dates listed on this form and I was...
There's another statement written down on this form that states 7
"all individuals..." Can't read it too well, but it looks like " responsive 8
g to material as it was presented, they were allowed to use the equipment, 10 and "... something..." demonstrated his ability to use the equipment."
Well, that is untrue also, I never did this under any supervision or under during any training session because I didn't have it.
I'd say that whoever put my name on this stating that "yes, I have had this trainino. Well, it's just not true.
I have never any.
151 YUHAS:
Looking at the list of names provided, is that the entire rad chem 16!
I stech staff as of September 77, to the best of your knowledge?
17 '<
18l DEIMLER:
To the best of my knowledge, yes, that is the whole staff of the 191 i
HP group, technicians and Jrs.
20' 21 YUHAS:
Does it appear to both of you that the signatures printed were done 22 3
l in the same hand?
23 24 25 1759 274
19 PYKE:
Yes, it does.
1, 2
3 DEIMLER:
Yes, I think it does.
4 5
00NALDSON:
Mr. Deimler and Mr. Pike, were you both on C shift at this 6
time?
7 DEIMLER:
Yes.
8 9
DONALDSON:
Who else was on C shift with you?
10 11 DEIMLER:
Vince Heilman and Pat Donneke.
And one other thing that I would like to add.
3 Not only did Mr. Pyke approach our supervisors and foreman about the training on the SAM-2, but I also approached them.
I talked g
15l to Mr. Landry.
He supposedly was the one who was going to offc this
)
i training to us which he never seemed to be able to get around to giving it 161 to us.
I approached Mr. Vales and I also approached Mr. Melavie and we always got an answer like "we'll get back to you or we'll get this done or we'll make sure that you get this training."
Now, I know that Melavie...
According to this it looks like Mr. Melavie signed this and I know that he was aware of the fact that our shift, C shift, was not trained on this.
22 DONALDSON:
Let me ask a question.
Do either of you inspect emergency kits as a part of your routine functions?
24 25 1759 275 i
20 1
DEIMLER:
Yes. We have a surveillance that calls for us to inspect the 2
emergency kits.
3 DONALDSON:
Is part of that surveillance involving the checkout of the SAM-4 5:
2 to insure operability?
I 6
DEIMLER:
Yes, it is.
7 8
DONALDSON:
g How, in fact then, do you then conduct that operability?
10 DEIMLER:
So far I have never done the surveillance check on the SAM-2 equipment so I haven't had the chance to be able to try and check it out.
13 DONALDSON:
14l; Mr. Pyke, do you have any comments that?
15l PYKE:
Whenever it came time to check the SAM-2s, I always had a senior go 16' with me.
I had a trained senior that could check the SAM-2s.
A lot of the 17:
times they were inoperable and there was a problem in '77 with the SAMs.
l This gentleman's name was...
19}
20 DONALDSON:
Mr. Porter?
21 22 PYKE:
Yes.
Mr. Porter was working with the problem with mnagement in 23 relation to getting them properly..., to get them working properly and 24 calibrated.
There was a problem in the beginning with the SAM.
In fact, 25 i
1759 276 I
I
21 1
this is what led, I think, to this fallacy in relation to the training.
2 Initially, when they came in there was a group of techs that were taken 3
aside and they were given some t:af ning and then Mr. Landry was working 4
directly with that and then they found they weren't working properly on I think it was our first emergency drill where they were going to 5
ur...
6 use them the SAM.
So from that point on, then, they were working with 7
getting them working properly and so forth and that's where the fallacy came in.
8 There were other groups that were trained, but our shift was the g
one that was never properly trained.
Then when they did become operable, 10 it was just put aside, in relation to our training.
11 YUHAS:
Mr. Deimler, are you a part of the emergency team and would you be expected in an emergency to use the SAM-2?
14, l
DEIMLER:
Yes, I am.
15l 16 YUHAS:
Have either of you during the emergency that occurred, or the incident that occurred March 28th, did either of you participate in emergency functions such that you did have to use the SAM-2?
19l 20 DEIMLER:
No, I participated in a monitoring team, but I wasn't required, 21' or wasn't asked, or didn't have to use the SAM-2.
And I'm glad I wasn't, 22 because I wouldn't have known how.
23 1
24 25l l
i j
1759 277 t
22 1.
DONALDSON:
In any of the past emergency drills that have been run, have 2
either of you been assigned to monitoring teams where you had to use the 3
SAM-2?
4 5
DEIMLER:
Yes, I was.
Myself and Pat Donneke.
Pat had the procedure, we 6
had a copy of the procedure with us, to operate the SAM-2, but...
7 DONALDSON:
Do you recall that procedure number?
8 9
DEIMLER:
No, I don't.
I don't require the procedure.
Now evidently what 10 happened, the SAM-2 would not operate.
Either we weren't doing something g
2 properly or the procedure was wrong and to this day...
Well, let's put it this way.
I think the SAM-2 at that time was inoperable, wouldn't operate.
But it could have been that we were doing something wrong by the procedure.
15 DONALDSON:
On these drills, was there a representative of management or the training department acting as an observer, reviewing your performance during the drill?
Id!
DEIMLER:
Yes, we had someone there observing the drill, but I don't 20]
remember who it was anymore.
21 22 00NALDSON:
Did you attend any of the drill critiques following your exercises 23 and make any comments relative to your familiarity with the operation of 24 the equipment?
25 i
i 1759 278 f
i
23 1
DEIMLER:
No, I didn't attend any critiques after the drills.
2 3
DONALDSON:
Are you permitted to attend the critiques?
4 5
DEIMLER:
I think we are, but at the time I wanted to either go home, or I 6
had something important that I had to do right after because it ran past 7
our shift time and I just had other things at the time to do.
8 DONALDSON:
g So your understanding is that you could have attended if you 10 wished to make any pertinent comments but you did not at that particular time.
3 12 DEIMLER:
That is correct.
3 14 i i
DONALDSON:
Mr. Pyke, you shook your head indicating no to that.
15f 16!
l PYKE:
Well, it is my understanding that that's...
In the past we have 17l never been invited to final critique.
I have looked in on them and our 18l supervisors and foremen attend those critiques and in relation to the SAM i
19j versus the emergency drill, we did it the same way.
We took a procedure 20l and we plugged it into the procedure and our SAM didn't work properly 21 either.
Now whether it was the SAM-2 or the procedure or our performance, I can't really say.
But it is interesting that you asked the question 23 about the critiques because it often bothered me a little bit why we were 24 never formally invited to those.
Those were held in the auditorium following 25 i
the drill.
I l
1759 279
24 1,
DONALDSON:
Did you ever make a practice to write a memo or pass on to your 2
supervisor any comments that you had as a result of having participated in a drill?
3 4
PYKE:
That's negative.
5 6
00NALDSON:
Let me ask you the next logical question.
Do you have or did 7
8 y u have, at any time, a significant comment other than the SAM-2, which I g
think we've established, that you felt should have been passed on or should 10 have been taken care of to better improve the response of your organization, from your end?
12 PYKE:
Frequently.
I always voice my opinion.
I think I learned that in the military.
He who sits back and takes it in the ear is going to get nowhere.
But I voice my opinion, it doesn't go anywhere around here.
I i
let them know how I feel, usually.
16' 17 DONALDSON:
Could you detail any of those comments in brief fashion?
I would like to pursue those further and see if they have found their way l
into the system in some way.
20 21 PYKE:
Well, some, I have made some suggestions in the past and some have 22 been taken and actually implemented.
Strangely enough, even coming from a 23 peon like I am.
I noticed that in our first refueling they were going 24 through some strains in removing the core barrel and in rigging tc do that.
25 I
l 1759 280
25 1
1 It was appalling to see how they were doing it, and I felt it was a very 2
hazardous fashion in which they were doing this and I made a suggestion to 3
the foreman on the job.
I said, "if we're going to rig the following latch 4
boxes in the same manner that we rigged the first one, I don't care to be 5
part of it "and.he asked me why.
I told him that it was very unsafe and, 6
utside of damaging the equipment, somebody may get hurt.
And he didn't 7
ask me then to perform on the next rig because obviously I was a little g
upset about it, and then while I was standing there I made a suggestion to him.
I said "why couldn't we build a receiving jig to hold these latch g
boxes rather than rig them with chain falls and what they call coffin 0
hoist" and he didn't...
He said yeah, that's a good idea and let it slide and didn't do anything more about it and the very next latch box that they rigged got away from them and slid accross the floor and slammed into the first one.
These are big and clumsy but they are very highly machined f
parts and they have to work because you have to control these under 40 feet of water with little aluminum rods that we use to open and close the latches l
on them.
So it was about a year later that we got into a bull session with management because they were upset about our attitudes.
I brought it up to
- 18j, them.
I thought I had a very valid suggestion in relation to this, and no 19!
l one ever did anything about it.
It was taken as a grain of salt and over-20' looked, and the next time we go to do that I am sure they are going to do 21l it the way they did it before and the hell with anybody's suggestions.
So 22 he said, "well I'm listening, will you come to me and let's talk about it 23 at a later date." Which I did.
Shortly after that, about three weeks 24 later, they told me that they were under construction and they built them.
25 i
i 1759 281
26 1
And I had another suggestion where I told them what I felt they could do 2
about their contaminated lumber.
They wanted to use it over again and they 3
had an enormous amount of it and they were storing it in the model room 4
which wasn't kosher with our fire loading procedures but they always bypassed 5
the model room if there were any inspections. But they knew they had a 6
pr blem; they had to do something with this lumber.
7 DONALDSON:
You said "they bypassed" if they ever had any inspections.
You 8
g mean the Metropolitan Edison fire inspectors, the QA group? Who bypassed them?
10 11 PYKE:
Well, I can't say.
It was always convenient that the model room was n t accessible during those periods of time.
So finally, I went down to 13 them.
I had a suggestion.
I said "why don't we get tractor... old trailers, 1
and we could just back them in, load that stuff up, pull it outside, rope 15 the trailers off, and use it and just store them there.
Whenever we ' lave to use this stuff for an outage again just back them right in again, unload this stuff right in the reactor building for scaffolding and so forth, and use it over and over again.
It's contaminated, as long as you use it in controlled areas.
I sat in a meeting with Dick Dubiel about it because I was upset that nothing was being done about it and he told me at that point that it wasn't feasible.
I asked him why? And he said because we don't have tractor on the island.
I said, well, we do have a tractor on the 23 island.
He didn't really want to talk about it much further, but before 24 the week was out the word must have gotten to somebody.
They got a trailer 1759 282
27 1,
and they did it that way.
But in relation to other suggestions, I have 2
made a lot of suggestions.
I really can't say...
3 4
00NALDSON:
Have.you made any suggestions in relation to emergency response?
5 6
PYKE:
Emergency response?
I had suggestions where I felt I wasn't properly 7
trained in emergency procedures, which I wasn't.
I guess they felt in due 8
time that I would be trained or feel comfortable.
I felt very uncomfortable g
during the first one because I really felt like I wasn't trained to the 10 p int where I sh0old be and that was probably due to the fact that I was still a first year tech.
n 12 DONALDSON:
13 Sc. your comments then, as it relates to emergency plan, were primarily training oriented.
g 15 PYKE:
Training oriented.
Yes.
6 17 YUHAS:
I would like to nail down a few specifics.
First the drill that both of you participated in where neither of your SAM-2s worked.
Do you know which drill that was.
What year?
21 PYLE:
It was the last one, whenever that was.
23 YUHAS:
The last drill; this year?
24 25 i
1759 283 i
[
(
28 1
PYLE:
That was the fall of 1978, I believe.
6 I
2 i
3 YUHAS:
It's indicated on the form there, let's see...
-4 5
DONALDSON:
I believe it was November 8th, ther abouts.
6' 7
PYLE:
'78.
Yes.
It was in the fall.
8 g
YUHAS:
Was it the same drill for both of you where your SAM-2s didn't w rk?
10 11 DEIMLER:
I can't recall whether it was the same drill.
I can't recall which drill that myself and Pat Donneke were on.
It's been a while back.
13 I don't even remember which drill that we were on that the SAM-2 didn't 14j perate.
I think it was the last drill that they have listed here.
15 1
16i It was in 78, I don't remember what month or day it was.
17
~YUHAS:
To the best of your recollection, it was fall of 1978.
l 191 i
PYKE:
I think, yes, it was.
20 21 YUHAS:
When, time frame, did you address the fact that this training on the SAM-2 had not been provided to you? When did you tell Melavie that.
You both indicated you did, now about when did you tell him that?
25 1759 284
29
~
1 PYKE:
I confronted with him prior to the emergency drill.
I was never on 2
an offsite team until that time and at that point I still didn't know 3
whether 4
I was going to be on an offsite team and this is where these come into 5
play.
All I could visualize was me going out there fumbling around not 6
knowing how to operate this equipment and trying to buffalo my way through it.
I didn't like that and I confronted it then.
Pat Donneke confronted 7
them also.
They said don't worry about it we'll get back to you.
Well the 8
g time came and time went and, consequently we had to rely solely on the 10 procedure and it was very cumbersome to try and figure out where all these little points were on the instrument and whether or not we were in fact, actually, performing properly.
p 13 DONALDSON:
I believe that there is a program that is highlighted on the 15l forms that are before you, " radiation monitoring team training," listed asunder Procedure 1670.9.
In reviewing some of that training, I believe that they cover procedure for offsite monitoring.
Do they not?
18{
PYKE:
Possibly they do and this could be construed as the training that 19 Sid Porter gave in a large group form in the auditorium prior to the emergency drill.
It was some weeks, I think, before the emergency drill.
Sid Porter showed up and he gave an hour...
I'm really not sure of the 22 time frame of his block of instruction, but he did nive some instruction 23 and he talked about the SAM-2 but he did not give operational manipulation 24 of the instrument and this was to a large group which encompassed operators, 25 I
l l
1759 285
30 1
control room operators, and just sort of a general synopsis of what was 2
going to happen in relation to the drill and not just offsite/onsite repair 3
teams.
The whole gamut.
4 5
DONALDSON:
So the radiation monitoring training indicated on your forms on 6
1670.9 dated, what's the date?
7 PYKE:
9/20/78.
8 9
DONALDSON:
OK, you believe that was given by Mr. Porter.
10 11 2.
PYKE:
As far as I...
I'm going to surmise that was by Mr. Porter because 1.3 he was here and he did give one, but as far as the date, we're talking a year ago.
I 15i DEIMLJ' I don't remember ever having the course or sat in to any training with a large group or anything on this rad monitoring team training, although I have had... I have been on offsite monitoring teams, washdown station, l
18j and things like this.
But even that I think is very poor training because there was nobody there to instruct.
I had no previous training other than going out on the drill at that time to do any of this that I can remember.
22 YUHAS:
Let me...
I have before me two additional forms.
Again titled
" Training Program Administrative Forms" and they should correlate with your 24 training sheets in front of you.
One of them, dated 9/27/78, is entitled 25 i
1759 286 f
i
31 1
" Radiation Emergency Assessment - Accident Assessment Training," and the 2
other one is entitled, " Rad Monitor Team Training," OK?
It appears that 3
both of you individuals signed these forms.
They both indicate two hours 4
of lecture were provided.
At this point I would like you to review the 5
forms, comment if in fact, that is your signature on there, because it 6
appears somewhat differently on some of the forms.
And in the course of 7
either of those training, did someone present have the SAM-2 present, say 8
this is a SAM-2 and this is how it works or did they just talk about the g
SAM-2, or did they say they want you to a kit and break open a kit and perate it? Just generally, I want you to review this form, first by 10 saying whether or not you signed those forms and secondly by indications 11 whether or not the SAM-2 involved the instrument being present and the g
pp rtunity to use it.
13 14; eyu e ew e
ms, let's take a break to change the tape.
15 16 17 RESNER:
This is a continuation of the interview with Mr. Walter Deimler 18l l
and Mr. Thomas Pyke.
The time now is 11:35 a.m.
19j 20 YUHAS:
During the break you've been given the opportunity to review two forms that I've just provided you that were provided to the Commission by the licensee.
At this time I would like both of you to answer the question, is that in fact your signature on each form?
24 a
25l i
i 1759 287 l
32 1
PYKE:
Yes.
2 3
DEIMLER:
Yes, it is.
4 5
YUHAS:
At this time, would both of you comment or offer your comments 6
relative to training that that form connotates that you have received.
7 PYKE:
Radiation training accident assessment group 2, my name appears on 8
g there and I did in fact sign it.
I am not sure what the training...what 10 scope of training that they are referring to.
Yes I do to, Greg Hits was 11 there, this training was conducted in the training trailer to the best of 12 my knowledge and it was in relation to...if we in fact do have an accident, 13 we were studying wind drifts basically and we were tested on that following the block of instruction and that form was dated 9/27/78.
The second form sa a mn r ng eam a n ng, w c my names appears and I & in fact 15 sign that and to that I think it would constitute nothing more than depicting 6
that I was in fact on a offsite monitoring team during a emergency radiation emergency drill.
And I was on that drill with Mr. Heilman and in that drill there were two other people present, one was an engineer from Met Ed and one was also a GPU rep, I don't know there names and that form was dated 9/28/78, lecture hours were two.
There was no lecture, it was all 0JT in relation to the drill itself.
22 23 YUHAS:
Was that the drill that your SAM II didn't work on?
24 25 1759 288
33 1,
PYKE:
Yes.
If I am reading this properly, there is nothing here that says 2
in relation to what we did, I am just surmising that this is what this is.
3 That this is probably laid down the day after the drill and said to sign 4
it, which we did, depicting that we were on these teams.
5 6
DONALDSON:
I might mentioned that we had no records indicating that the 7
drill was conducted on or about that date.
8 gl PYKE:
I have no comment to that.
Do you know when the drill was conducted, 10 exactly what day it was conducted?
11 DONALDSON:
I have seven dates, conducted seven drills in 78.
One was 12 13{
conducted on October 8, October 6, October 2, I am sorry let me back up a bit, November 8, November 6, November 2, October 30, October 27, October 25 g
and October 23.
g 16' PYKE:
Well then I have a problem with the date then, I am not sure what g
this training program administrative form represents.
If the date is g
proper, I don't recollect the training.
9 20' DEIMLER:
On this drill, a rad monitoring team, I think what the story is I
on this, is everyone in the department was suppose to have be on this pre-22' drill exercise before we had to do one in front of the NRC and whoever 23 else.
I don't remember who else was here to see how things would come out.
I And yeah we, I remember the drills as far, but as far as the dates, you-know, I can't recall the dates.
l 1759 289 i
34 1
DONALDSON:
Let me try to help you through this because I think you may be 1
21 a little confused as to what the training requirement is for you, okay, on 3
the monitoring teams.
And I am reading right now from procedure 1670.9, 4
which is Emergency Plan Training and Exercises, and there.is a section 5
3.1.3, Training Program for Radiological Monitoring Team.
Now let's start 6
and address this form with the title that says Radiation Monitoring Teams 7
Training, alright.
And it is listed on the training record I believe as 8
1670.9, Radiation Monitoring Training.
So I am assuming from that entry' g
that it in fact did encompass the scope of that procedure.
And I am just 10 g ing to go through and ask you whether or not you recall whether or not 3
that training did in fact meet the scope or whether you recall anytime during 78 your having this training.
7 13 YUHAS:
g Before you do that Dale, I want to point that this training apparently was conducted by Mr. Mulleavy in a classroom section, additional forms not present at this interview indicated that Mulleavy conducted it and it was a 16 discussion between you fellows and Mulleavy regarding the information contained in this, in this requirement for rad monitoring training.
19 00NALDSON:
Okay, let's just go down this.
According to this procedure, the responsibility of the radiological monitoring team is to perform on and off site radiation surveys, supervising the decontamination of personnel and equipment, determining personnel exposure and providing monitoring service for all emergency repair and post accident reentry activities.
Is that statement consistent with either the training or your understanding of 25r the duties of radiation monitoring team member?
l 1759 290
{
35 1
DEIMLER:
Yes, I do understand che responsibility of this procedure.
2t 3
DONALDSON:
Mr. Pyke?
4' 5
PYKE:
Yes, I do.
6 7
DONALDSON:
Now the training is to be given to rad chem technicians and 8
auxiliary A operators and the instructor is to be a supervisor of radiation g
protection or his designee.
I am going to cover the content, what I would 10 like to do is have each of you acknowledge whether or not the training that is supposed to be represented by that form had been conducted.
Now Greg 11 inf rms me that he found the, we have the second page of that radiation 12 monitoring team training and I will address it to you right here.
The g
evaluation through oral questioning and spot check indicated that individuals ask many questions and after the session I feel they are now able to conduct 5
themselves in an emergency in an acceptable manner and it is signed by 16 Mr. Thomas Mulleavy and the date is 9/28/78.
This was an ev.11uation of I
your grasp of the material on the training conducted.
Okry, now, what I 18jg would like to do is first of all, I guess we have to establish did you in fact attend the a classroom lecture?
20 21, DEIMLER:
I can't recall sitting in a classroom prior to any, this drill.
23 DONALDSON: 'Did you sit in someone's office perhaps?
25 I
36 1
DEIMLER:
None that I recall.
2 3
DONALDSON:
Okay, well let me go through the things that are to be covered 4
in this particular training class and tell me whether or not in any form or 5
matter Mr. Mulleavy covered these topics with you during 1978.
6 DEIMLER:
I have read this procedure so all of it just about is going to be 7
familiar with me.
8 9
DONALDSON:
10 Okay so maybe what I want to establish is that you did or did g
not receive refresher training on these specific topics during this class on 9/28/78, okay? Okay, one topic to be covered are types of emergencies, 1 cal, site and general, had you received a discussion or description of 3
what constituted each of these classes?
i 15j l
DEIMLER:
Yes but it wasn't, it was not on this form.
16i 17{
DONALDSON:
Okay, answer these questions in context of that form, in other 18l words this form is telling me that on that date and as you indicated by your signature you received the training represented by 1670.9.
If this record is in error and you don't believe that it is an accurate representa-tion, I'd like to know that and I guess I'd also like to know what was 22 covered.
23 24 25{
l 1759 292 I
37 1
DEIMLER:
I really can't be sure.
I don't remember what was covered 2
positively on this point.
3 4
DONALDSON:
Okay, let me discuss some of the other issues here.
At this 5
training or anytime during 1978 in a radiation monitoring team training 6
class did anyone cover all the responsibilities of radiation monitoring 7
team, review these with you?
8 DEIMLER:
Not in 78 that I can recall.
I had this training back when I g
first came down to the island in some of the classes that we had then.
10 11 DONALDSON:
Alright, but you cannot recall having had it in 1978?
13 DEIMLER:
No I can't, unless it was in the general emplovee training I
class.
15l 16 DONALDSON:
Mr. Pyke do you recall?
7 18{
PYKE:
I can recall having training as such but the one that sticks in my mind was from the training that was conducted by Sid Porter in a large group.
21 22 DONALDSON:
I have those records also.
Okay, were either of you gentlemen apprised as to the method for determining of external and internal radiation 24 exposure during an emergency, how you would conduct yourselves in doing 25 l
that?
l i
i
38 1
DEIMLER:
Could you repeat that question again?
2 3
00NALDSON:
In one of the topics to be covered in radiation monitoring team 4
training is the methods for determining external and internal radiation 5
exposures during an emergency and assuming from that, that such things as 6
contamination or entries that people may have made that you would be respon-7 sible for assisting in the determination of dose.
5 DEIMLER:
No I don't recall that.
g 10 DONALDSON:
Could either of you do this?
g 12 :
DEIMLER:
I could, as far as internal, I think about the only thing I would 3
know to do there would be to send him out and have a whole body count, as 15l far as external contamination, we could guess, I could determine whether he j
has external contamination.
16 17 DONALDSON:
Okay Mr. Pyke?
19l PYKE:
Yes.
20 21 DONALDSON:
Another topic is use of emergency kit and among that kit is of 22 course, the SAM-2 and the RadeCo high volume sampler, use of the emergency 23 kit and equipment and the location of the kit, scott air packs and protec-24 tive clothing?
25
{
1759 294 i
39 1
DEIMLER:
Yes, I know the locations and I know about the scott air packs 2
but as far as the operation of the SAM-2, I couldn't operate it.
3 4
DONALDSON:
And to your knowledge it was not covered in this training 5
course on the 28?
6 7
DEIMLER:
No it was not covered.
8 DONALDSON:
Did the training course cover medical procedures to be followed?
g 10 DEIMLER:
I am not sure whether it was covered or not.
If it was it was g
g very vague.
13 PYKE:
Some of this has been, SAM-2 definitely was not discussed in to us as far as operation of the SAM-2.
In relation to the contamination factors of a person, yes they are covered, they were covered.
17 DONALDSON:
In that class?
18' l
19l PYKE:
That I said whether that class is the one that I can really say I received, I can't really, I cannot swear to that no.
22 DONALDSON:
How about interfaced with other teams such as seach and rescue, 23 repair tezas, fire team so on and so forth, was that interface discussed?
24 25 1759 295 i
40 1
PYKE:
In a vague manner.
2 3
DEIMLER:
I can't even for sure recall being in this course.
According to 4
this yes I was in this course, in this classroom but I can't remember being 5
there I can't say for sure what was and what was not covered.
6 7
DONALDSON:
Thcn what I am hearing you say is that based on the outline of g
the several topics that I have just read that didn't refresh you memory to g
say ch yes I remember we did attend a class something like that.
10 DEIMLER:
No it didn't refresh my memory.
g 12 DONALDSON:
And whatever class that was no one said this is a radiation 3
monitoring team training class for those individuals who may be responsible i
for mcnitoring team functions, is that unclear?
15l
(
16' DEIMLER:
It's that unclear, yes.
18{
DONALDSON:
Okay, let's mention something that you thought perhaps you 19{
wrote that down after a drill you had been in.
21 OEIMLER:
I think that is what happened.
We went, we were informed that we were going to be in this particular drill and we were told where to muster and what monitoring team that we were going to be on and we were informed 24 of where we were supposed to go when we were sent out and what supposedly 25 we were going to have do.
r j
1759 296
41 1
DONALDSON:
Is this a normal procedure prior to every drill that people are 2
gathered together and pre assigned specific duties?
3 4
DEINLER:
Yes it is.
5 DONALDSON:
Is this also true for the drill that is observed by the NRC?
6 7
That is on the day before is there a discussion or are people assigned to perform certain duties?
8 9
DEIMLER:
To the best of my knowledge, yes that is a true statement.
10 11 DONALDSON:
Have you yourself ever been told that you were going to perform a specific duty during a " unannounced" drill to occur?
14 I
DEIMLER:
Yes.
15i i
16' PYKE:
Yes.
17 18 DONALDSON:
Were either of you present on the island or did you participate in the November 8 drill, that was the very last drill you conducted in 1978?
If you like I can refresh your memory on that drill? Okay the text of that drill was a once-through steam generator tube rupture.
Do you 22 recall whether or not you participated in that?
That drill was conducted 23 in the late afternoon.
I have Mr. Pyke I see your name has been entered on 24 a training program administrative form.
And Mr. Deimler it was indicated 25 that you were also involved in the drill, is that correct?
1759 297 i
t
42 1
OEIMLER:
Yeah.
2 3
DONALDSON:
Have you ever done a drill that was observed by the NRC?
4 5
DEIMLER:
Yes, that is correct.
6 7
PYKE:
Yes, that is correct.
8 DONALDSON:
Alright, now could you just tell me briefly which, what g
10 duties you performed during that drill, Mr. Pyke?
11 PYKE:
I was on an offsite team.
7 13 00NALDSON:
Mr. Pyke were you assigned to that team the day before the drill or any time prior?
15 I
16 PYKE:
To the best of my knowledge, I was.
18 DONALDSON:
You were told that of all the monitoring team functions that i
19!
you could possibly form that would be the liquid monitor, the north or south gate monitor, the assembly area monitors, onsite monitors and offsite monitors, you were told the day before that during the drill you were to function as an offsite team monitor?
23 24 25i i
I 1759 298 i
43 1
PYKE:
To the best of my knowledge, I'd say yes.
2 DONALDSON:
And then when the drill came about did you in fact perform that 3
4.
duty?
5 PYKE:
Yes I did.
6 7
DEIMLER:
8 Yes I was on an offsite monitoring team and I think this is the drill that the SAM-2 didn' t operate.
And yes I was told prior to the drill g
that I would on an offsite monitoring team.
10 11 YUHAS:
Prior to the drill, Mr. Pyke did you know who you would be with and what your specific designation would be?
14 l
PYKE:
Who I would be with, yes.
15l 16' DONALDSON:
Who was your team member?
18 PYKE:
Vince Halman.
19f 20 DONALDSON:
Your were assigned to team up with Vince Halman.
21' 22 PYKE:
And the duties were to accomplish the offsite team, which would be 23 conducted out of the ECS.
24 25
i l
1759 299
}
I 44 1
DONALDSON:
Did you in fact on the day of the drill team up with Mr. Halman?
2 3
PYKE:
This is a true statement, yes.
4 5
DEIMLER:
Yes, my partner on the drill was Pat Donnachie and we were both 6
assigned to an offsite monitoring team and yes in fact I did team up with him.
7 8
DONALDSON:
And were you both assigned the day before?
g 10' DEIMLER:
I was assigned the day before.
Pat Donnachie, I couldn't say or 11 w n't say yes or no whether he was assigned.
12 13 0 NALDSON:
Did you know if Mr. Donnachie was supposed to be on the team 14 Y"
Y 15 16' DEIMLER:
I think yes.
18l DONALDSON:
19i Were you instructed tommorrow is going to be the drill and your are going to be in offsite team with Mr. Donnacnie is going to be you know, Pat Donnachie is going to be your teammate.
You were told that?
22 DEIMLER:
Yes.
23 24l 25, l
1759 300
45 1.
YUHAS:
Who told you the assignments?
2 3
DEIMLER:
Tom Mulleavy normally conducts or handles these drills down at 4
the lab areas.
5 PYKE:
I am really not sure usually a foreman would instruct me in where I 6
7 would be going.
8 YUHAS:
Now we are talking about day before the drill.
We are not talking g
after the drill.
We are trying to conclude who made the pre assignments.
10 11.
PYKE:
I really can't be sure.
13 DEIMLER:
I think it was Mr. Mulleavy that informed me of what team I would be on and who I was going to be with.
151 i
16 YUHAS:
Has this happened to either of you in the past where you have been pre-assigned even to the point of knowing your partner what your specific assignment would be for drills?
20' DEIMLER:
Yes.
21 22 DONALDSON:
This is a standard practice that you are pre-assigned.
23 24 25 1759 301 i
)
6
\\
i
46 1
DEIMLER:
I won"t say that it's a standard practice because I came, come 2
into work already and found out we were going to have a pre-drill exercise 3
and was assigned to a monitoring team.
Maybe two or three years back this 4
happened and I was assignement for washed down station and I wasn't told 5
then until...I like said this was a pre-drill exercise, and I was told when 6
I came in to work that I would be going on this.
7 DONALDSON:
8 But the drill and question drill gear that is on the eighth of November the one certified by the NRC you were in fact pre-assigned.
g 10 DEIMLER:
Yes 12 PYKE:
Yes 13 14 DONALDSON:
How far did this pre-assigned go?
Did they give you the cenario? Tell you what kind of readings you were going to be calling back?
Did they tell you to review the procedure and make you were out to speed?
Just what instructions were you given?
19 DEIMLER:
As far as what readings we were supposed to report to the ECS, 20 no.
They didn't give us anything like that.
We got the readings from the 21 observer, who had a list of where we were going to be heading and at this 22 point what kind of radiation level would we be seeing, things like this.
23l t
And what was the other part of the question? The procedure?
24 25 1759 302 i
i'
47 1.
DONALDSON:
Right.
l 2
3 DEIMLER:
Normally I think yes we were always told, you know, a day or so 4
before, you know, hey make sure you got look over the procedures.
5 YUHAS:
On this drill on the eight observed by the NRC, was there an NRC 6
7 observer in either of your areas when you were out in the environment 8
supposedly taking readings.
9 DEIMLER:
10 We had two observers with us and I believe I am almost positive that both observers were Met Ed personnel either Met Ed Engineer or QC representative.
13lI DONALDSON:
I am reading from a critique sheet that was taken by an bserver on that day, and I have to verify with Mr. Pyke it's just that a 5
critique sheet dated 11/8/78, the observer was Don Repert, and notation at the top of this form indicates that Mr. Heilman and Mr. Pyke were in fact team mates for the drill on the eighth.
In reading through the drill 181 critique, I don't find any outstanding comments where the team did not 19l i
20 perform in other than...what the observer classifies as an exceptable manner I guess my question would be.
I'll take that back there is a comment here that you did have trouble getting the SAM-2 to work, to verify what you had said earlier.
I guess the thing that I would like to know now is, 23 I think once you look here Greg to see if you can find the other team mate 24 here?
If in fact the purpose of this drill is to determine how well things 25 1759 303
48 1
operate and how well you are trained a.1d ready to function.
Do you feel 2
that the drills conduct in that manner? Do you think that that drill is 3
really a representative of your ability to function in all areas of monitor-4 ing team functions? That is decontamination, repair party team monitor, 5
ffsite monitor, northsouth wash down areas, so and so forth.
6 DEIMLER:
No I don't feel that it's representative of myself that...
7 8
YUHAS:
g Did any of the discussion involving the preparation of the drill state why they want you to do well on the drill? Were you instructed to?
10 What I am getting to is why did they tell you they they were pre-assigning you?
13 DEIMLER:
I think probably because they didn't want any bad marks in the 15l NRC.
They want them reherse.
i 16!
DONALDSON:
Do you think after having gone through the event of the 28th and thereafter that the way things are run during the drill, as who does l
what, and the way things stick together was representative of the ways 19!
things occur on the 28th through say the 30th?
21' DEIMLER:
There was some changes but as far as the location that we went 22 to.
23 24 25l l
1759 304
49 1
DONALDSON:
How much more difficult was it, because three days prior to 2
the accident someone didn't assign you to a team? Did people have any 3
trouble gravitating to their right position?
4 5
DEIMLER:
No.
I don't think they did.
6 7
PYKE:
I here there that day.
I can only reflect the following day and I 8
had no problems in my job assignments.
9 DONALDSON:
Okay.
Let's go move from the radiation monitor team training 10 g
now to the second, wait I think Greg has a comment here.
12.
YUHAS:
It appears that 8. A. Good was the observer for team Bravo on the 3
11/8/78 which include Mr. Donnachie and Mr. Deimler.
The record enclosure g
g 2 of that drill report indicates that first the auditor appears to say that
.g the invertor was not working or had trouble working.
Do you remember that?
17 DEIMLER:
Yeah.
18j 19 YUHAS:
Okay.
And next entry says SAM-2 doesn't work and some eligible...
(Donaldson)... waiting for parts to count sample, whatever that means.
(Yuhas) Do you ar.tually remember that SAM-2 not working on that day?
23 DEIMLER:
Yes, yes I do.
24 251 l
1759 305 i
50 1
DONALDSON:
Let's flip the tape then before we have them answer the next 2
question.
3 4
RESNER:
We will take a break to change the tape.
The time is now 12:03 5
P *-
6 RESNER:
Mr. Deimler and Mr. Thomas Pyke.
(Donaldson) What I like to do 7
8 is in relation to the radiation monitoring team training, make a summary g
statement and if you agree with it indication your agreement or disagreement.
If you disagree qualify if you wish.
Regarding emergency monitoring team yg training as represented by the form that you have in front of you dated 3
9/28/78 neither of you can specifically recall having attended that training.
You in fact think that perhaps that was a mini-drill or pre-drill drill 13 that you had perticipated in and were asked to sign the form after that.
I Is that correct?
15!
16 DEIMLER:
I think you are cor.ect, yes.
18 PYKE:
In relation to procedure 970 and the point you have covered I would 19!
say that it's kind of vague to say whether or not this is the training form that was to represent that.
It could of been a pre-drill it probably is a pre-drill but in relation to the full scope in relation to procedure 970, 22 or 1970, or...
23 24 1759
$06 25 i
f l
l t
51 1
YUHAS:
1670.9.
2 3
PYKE:
1670.9.
The training that I received would of revolved around the 4
offsite team and there was class room instruction that gave us some training 5
on wind drift and meteorology in relation to an emergency.
6 7
DONALDSON:
Okay.
Then during 1978 am I correct in saying that you, 8
neither of you gentlemen received the scope of the training that I have g
previous read?
10 PYKE:
That's true.
11, 12, DEIMLER:
That's true.
13 14, YUHAS:
Regarding drills, am I correct in stating that on several practice 15 drills in 1978 you were pre-assigned to positions on the emergency team 16 before the drill occured.
And in particular on a drill which took place on November 8, of 1978 of which the NRC observed, you were pre-assigned at 18{
least one day before to specific duties.
i 19l 20 PYKE:
That's true.
211 22 DEIMLER:
That particular drill, I think everybody in the department at one time or another was out in the field or on one of the monitoring teams or search teams.
At one time or another prior to the NRC monitoring how 25 we perform the drill.
1759 307 l
52 1
DONALDSON:
What I am saying is that someone specifically said to you that 2.
tomorow during the drill you Mr. Diemler and you Mr. Pyke will be offsite 3
monitoring team member, brush up on your procedures you will have Mr. Heilman 4
with you Mr. Pyke and you will have Mr. Donnachie with you.
5 6
DEIMLER:
Yes, I think so.
7 PYKE:
To the best of my knowledge, yes.
8 9
DONALDSON:
10 Let's leave that particular training topic and move to the 11 second form which is indicated radiation emergency training accident g
assessment training group 2.
And again I would like to go through a similar evolution with that.
Again reading from the training procedure 13 1670.9, the discuss of training for action assessment personnel, and again i
the personnel, who are to be provided, grouped in training are health 15l 16l physics technicians, shift supervisors, nuclear engineers, and a number of others.
Since you're rad technicians we'll then talk about that.
Now the topic to be covered under the training program for accident assessment group two people which you're a part of the following:
Meteorological and radiation monitoring instrumentation; Use of Isopleths; Offsite dose calcu-lations; protection action guides; on and offsite radiological controls.
Do these topics coinside with your memory of that course that was conducted and documented on 9/27/78?
23 24 25!
I i
i 1759 308
53 1
DEIMLER:
Yes.
2l 3
DONALDSON:
You did attend those course.
4 5
DEIMLER:
Yes I did.
6 7
DONALDSON:
And you did take an examination of the completion?
8 DEIMLER:
I think yes that we did.
Yes as a matter of fact I know we did.
g 10 PYKE:
11:
Yes we did and we did in fact take an exam and I think I though the training form that was done on the 9/28/78 will confuse with this one of g
9/27/78.
13 In relation to what I said in re'Jt.ic:= to what I said regards to meteorological acertations.
15j j
DONALDSON:
lo!
So that record does appear tt< be representative of the training you received.
g 18 OEIMLER:
Yes.
19l
\\
20l 00NALDSON:
Okay.
We'll jump back on ycu again, bact to the radiation monitoring team training.
I have here lesson plans that were supposedly used for that radiation monitoring team training, it's hand writing, it's not typed.
I don't know what procedure is used to formalize it, but this appears to be the lesson a plan that is to be used for radiation monitoring.
I 1759 309'
54 1
I would just like you to take a look at that and see if the text of that 2
lesson plan was covered or was not covered just to verify one more time.
3 4l DEIMLER:
Yes, I think it was.
l 51 6
DONALDSON:
Now you think it was covered?
7 p
OEIMLER:
Unless I'm confusing that with training when I first came down to.
g the island as a...when I first got in the health physics department and I d recall, most of the material is covered in this.
I don't recall that it 10 11 was covered on the rad monitoring team training.
12.
00NALD50N:
Okay, we wont...
Mr. Pyke does that refresh your memory at 13 all.
g i
15i PYKE:
Well you have six headings here.
I would say generally no.
We were n t trained on the full scope of what I am initially looking at.
Types of 7
emergency, response procedures...
19l I
DONALDSON:
There are follow ones...as well which detail those topics to some greater extend.
22 PYKE:
In relation to this form, no, was there a time?
24 5
1759 3i0 l
i
55 1
DONALDSON:
No this is a lesson planned that is...
I 2
3 PYKE:
Two hour block instruction.
4 DONALDSON:
Yes, this lesson is to be covered during this training.
5 6
PYKE:
I would have to say no.
That the full scope of this lesson plan was 7
~
n t covered.
That it was...
This would be a general training of the 8
entire scope of the emergency drill and we were more zerced into what g
particular team you were going to perform on.
It could of been possibly 10 more than one.
12 00NALOSON:
You seem to think that -- and I'm looking at these four names here again on this training form.
You seem to think that perhaps the 15l discussion that took place before pre-drill might of been documented as t
emergency team training.
17 PYKE:
I think so yes.
19l l
00NALDSON:
Another words, this teaming up of people might of been documented 20 as the training for the radiation monitoring team.
21, t
22 PYKE:
Yes.
23 24 25}
t e
i, i
1759 111 i
56 1
DONALDSON:
That seem to acount for what you said before.
Okay.
I think 2
we could.
I don't need to beat that any more.
3 4
YUHAS:
I have one point.
Mr. Pyke did you during the actual incident, do 5
you anytime serve liner on onsite survey team.
6 7
PYKE:
Yes I did.
~
8 YUHAS:
At anytime during that period of time was there a need for~you to g
10 collect air sample and count it on a SAM-2.
11 PYKE:
12 We collected air samples you're talking the first three days.
Okay.
Yes I did take air samples and I took them with a Redeco and I turns those 13 in to be counted.
I did not have to operated the SAM or the GeLi system.
g 15 00NALDSON:
Did you in fact know how to operate the sampler the air sampler.
16 17 18' 19l l
YUHAS:
Was the team equipped with SAM-2.
21l PYKE:
No.
Our truck had air sampler and various radiation monitors.
23 YUHAS:
If you had been, if you had had a SAM-2 with you during initial phase during this real emergency.
Do you feel confident that you could collected the air sample and counted on that SAM-2?
1759 312 l
l
57 1.
PYKE:
No I would not have been at,le to do that.
2 3
YUHAS:
The same question to you Mr Deimler.
4 5l DEIMLER:
Yes I was on an offsite monitoring team and luckily I didn't have 6
a SAM-2 with me.
Now I did have a RedeCo air sampler with the inverter.
7
. Now, through experimentation I finally I was able to get the Redeco air 8
sampler working so that I can take air sampies.
Now what I meant by luckily g
I didn't have a SAM-2 with me is if I would of had one with me they would 10 f wanted me possibly count a sample and I would of been shit out of luck.
11 DONALDSON:
y Now your saying that you would not of known how to do it.
13 DEIMLER:
That is correct.
I 15l YUHAS:
How long did experimentation was required so you can figure out how 16 to run a Redeco.
g I
18j DEIMLER:
I'd say it took approximately maybe 10 minutes from the time took it out of the trunk of the car till finally got it hooked up right and went through the procedures step by step.
Experimenting on how to make the...
to make it work.
22 23 YUHAS:
During the actual accident did either one of you had an individual with you who hz.d been trained in proper use of the SAM-2 inverters.
In l
i l
1759 313
4 58 1.
other words were there individual who had been trained with you in the team I
2, or were there someone who was not helpful to you in trying to figure out 3
how to make things work.
4l DEIMLER:
I had an aux A operator with me.
No he was almost no help 5
6 whatsoever trying to operate the Redeco.
7 g
DONAF,SE:
I have two prMedures' that I would like you to look at again on to whether or not these were the procedures available in the kits.
One g
pr cedure is 1670.6 offsite radiological monitoring.
Paragraph 2.1 under 10, there, offsite radiological monitoring team were released.
You flip the page then there are some brief instructions on operation of the sample of the SAM-2.
14j DEIMLER:
I'm not familiar with this procedure as far as the volumes and settings on the Redeco any thing like this.
17 DONALDSON:
What volumes did you collect?
19l l
DEIMLER:
I can't recall the volumes that I collected.
I just took a 20' guess.
I think I had my Redeco set at maximum whatever, you know, I could 21 get out of it by runing it off the Redeco or off the inva.:rtar.
22 23 DONALDSON:
Do you know what the maximum?
24 25 t
I 1759 M 4
59 1
DEIMLER:
I think it was about 5 or -- between about 4 and 5 cubic feet per 2
minute, and I think I ran for about a 10 minute period.
3 4
DONALDSON:
So in locking at the procedures step 219 states that you 5
should adjust the flow to indicate 3 cubice feet per minute and sample for 5
6 3 minutes to yield a 15 cubic foot or 5 x 10 CC sample.
Did you? When 7
you recorded that data, did you keep the start time the stop time and the 8
total volume that you collect?
9 DEIMLER:
Yes I did.
10 11 DONALDSON:
Did you phone that information by radio or phone to the ECS?
13 DEIMLER:
Yes I did.
I 15l DONALDSON:
You did give them total volume collected?
16i 17 DEIMLER:
Yes.
18 19 DONALDSON:
I believe there are also some brief procedures there in the 20' operation to SAM-2.
Was this procedure in the the kit?
22 DEIMLER:
This particular orocedure was not in the kits.
The only procedure 23 that I had with me was attached to the inverter.
That was specifically how 24 to operate the inverter.
25j 1759 315 t
I
k 60 1,
00NALOSON:
Okay, now I have another procedure here 1764, entitled operation 2 ;
and calibration of the SAM-2 analyzer.
I wonder if you would take a look 3
at this procedure and see if that procedure was present or whether you have 4
been instructed on that procedure.
5 6
DEIMLER:
No, this procedure was not present, and no I was never instruction 7
on this procedure.
8
~
DONALDSON:
Alright so.
g 10' PYKE:
You want me to go back to this...
11 12 00NALOSON:
Yes why don't you go back to the implementing procedure for the 3
g emergency plan 1670.6 first.
I 15j PYKE:
In relation to 1670.6 the equipment that I had which was a day after 161 the incident did not represent that in such that I had all the equipment available.
I was, I had the basic equipment with the converter naturally to run a Redeco air sampler, but it w s less a SAM, but what you have to 191 take in consideration here is at that point better 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after the I
initial accident, there was more than just the initial amount of monitoring 21l teams out.
And at that point they have had condensed this into a form where we took air sampler and if they weren't super critical, they would stay in the field until they would be return back to be counted.
We actually 24 that they should be counted.
Immediately then we would return back to the 25l t
i 1759 316 I
i i
61 1
island and it would be turned in with the pertinent information, on times, 2,
stop times and volumes and so forth.
3 4.
DONALDSON:
If you had been on the initial offsite team.
Have you at 5
anytime...? Did you know this procedure exists?
6 7
PYKE:
Yes.
8 DONALDSON:
Okay, you were aware of this procedure.
And would you have g
1 ked for this procedure to follow it?
10 11 PYKE:
g That's the only way I would of been able to function then if I function at all.
13 14 DONALDSON:
Did you review that procedure to determine whether or not it 15
]
would be adequate for you to function?
17 PYKE:
Yes sir.
19 00NALDSON:
What's your opinion.
21, PYKE:
Well that would have to be uh...
My opinion was that I had though that I was doing everything right.
Now I'm going back.
24 25' i
1759 317 i
i
62 1
DONALDSON:
Now the question of the context is with your status of training 2
as it was in the morning of the '?8th of March, was that status adequate for 3
you to pick up this procedure?
Follow through it and accomplish your 4
mission?
5l 6
DEIMLER:
I would have to answer that as no.
Now in relation to this f
procedure in regards to the operation calibration SAM-2.
8 DONALDSON:
Have you procedure 1764?
g 10 PYKE:
I have looked at this.
I have taken this procedure, applied it to 11 12:
the SAM-2, and I was having trouble on my cwn.
I did this because, I 13 definitely, I wanted training on the SAM-2 cause I knew that it was going to come to a point, or a day whenever if I didn't get the training.
I was g ing to have to know how to operate it, and I played with it till I felt I 15 had a handle on it and what I though was representative turned out that it 6
wasn't so I would have to say that I didn't do well in following this 1764 I
without proper instruction.
18l 19 DONALDSON:
Okay.
Let's turn from monitoring team functions.
I would like to just go to something else now since I got you here.
You have other functions in the emergency organization as well.
Is that correct?
23
}Q b\\0 24 25 e
63 1
DONALDSON:
Okay.
One of these functions, I believe, would be as a member 2
of the (let's find the exact terminology here) of the first aid.
Is that 3
correct?
4 5
PYKE:
Your asking me or your telling me?
6 7
DONALDSON:
I'm asking you if you are aware of the fact that you...
8 PYKE:
That I would be on the first aid team?
g 10 DONALDSON:
That you would be on the first aid team?
g 12.
PYKE:
I'm not sure I follow you.
I'm not following this.
3 14 DONALDSON:
Alright.
Let's go back to the training procedure again.
15 16!
l DEIMLER:
Before you do that one comment.
We, personnel in out department.
I think most of us have this red cross training.
I think that is every year or every other year we go through a training it's an 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> training i
19!
I course on red cross.
Things we would do if somebody was cut, broke their 20' arm, or, you know, anything like that.
And we also wen', through drills of people being hurt in a highly contaminated area or in a high radiation area, you know, things that you would do, things like this.
24 25 l
1759 319 t
64 1
DONALDSON:
Okay.
I understand that.
I would like to set where you're at 2
now and just.
Mr. Pyke, in looking at the print out which has been provided 3
the NRC it's entitled emergency training qualification status as of 3/1/79.
4 And I'm looking now at the page that indicates that on 9/78 that month that 5
y u had received training required by the training program to qualify you 6
to be a member of the first aid team.
I would like to read that course 7
content and to tell me whether or not you meet that.
Again from procedure 8
1670.9 page 8 subparagraph 3.1.6.4 course content.
Each member of the g
first aid rescue team will receive the standard red cross multimedia first aid course.
10 Satisfactory completion of this course will certify them as a first aid team member for a period of three years.
Have you in fact have 3
that course.
13 PYKE:
Yes I did.
l 15l DONALDSON:
Okay.
The paragraph goes on to state that anually a refresher course will be made available for the team members and will include a 17 review'of the multimedia course material.
And procedure 1670.11 onsite 18[
medical emergency procedure.
In 1978 did you in fact have a review of multimedia course and the material contained in the reference procedure?
21 PYKE:
I did have the course, but in relation to the radiological aspects of it I don't recall that.
23 24 25 1759 320 6
65 00NALDSON:
You don't recall having been familiarized with proce_.re 1,
2; 1670.11 onsite medical emergency injured and contaminated.
3 4'
PYKE:
Not within that lession criteria.
No.
5 6
DONALDSON:
Okay.
Let me see if I can find Mr. Deimler here.
You were...
7 This indicates that you were, Mr. Deimler, were received first aid training 8
in 8/78 that would be according to this the multimedia course and review of g
Procedure 1670.11.
10' DEIMLER:
Yes that's true.
n 12 DONALDSON:
Did your training in fact during that month cover the review of 13 the medical emergency procedure.
14 15 1gj Deistea:
No it didn t to my anomiedge.
Tnis treining tnet I received on that was the red cross multimediate.
7 I
18[
00NALOSON:
So I understand you corrected both of you had received the g,
multimedia certification, however, you have not been instructed in accordance 20(
with the emergency procedure, as how you were to carry out thosa functions in emergency condition.
23 DEIMLER:
No.
24 25 t,
1759 321 l
i
1, 66 1
PYKE:
No.
2, 3
YUHAS:
Mr. Pyke, does your training record indication first aid training 4
this year or 1978, excuse me?
5 6
PYKE:
It indicates on 9/25/78 I received first aid.
That's all it says 7
first aid.
Yes I received a first aid course, but I didn't not the radio-8 logical aspects of it.
9 DONALDSON:
Mr. Deimler does yours indicates that you...
10 11 DEIMLER:
g In any case yes I have had first aid, and of agree with the first aid yes there's a refresher course in that.
13 14 DONALDSON:
But the point is you have not had the review of the medical 15 emergency procedure to be followed at this station in the event the person 16 is injured and/or contaminated.
18l DEIMLER:
That's correct.
19 20' DONALDSON:
Are you familiar with those procedures at all?
21 22 DEIMLER:
Not completely familar with them no.
24 25 l
I 1759 322 i
67 1!
DONALDSON:
Are you aware from your stand point if you had to go in and 2
rescue somebody? What kind of emergency risk doses might be applicable to 3
such situations?
4 5
DEIMLER:
Well, I look at it this way, if somebody is in there hurt if it's 6
not going to kill me right away I'm going to go in there and try to help 7
the guy.
8 DONALDSON:
Is that in fact the station policy.
g 10 DEIMLER:
I don't know it's it's...
You don't have to risk your life.
11 It's not a policy no that you have to go help somebody.
12 13 DONALDSON:
As the policy then is clearly articulated to you.
l 151 i
DEIMLER:
I think it has been back a few years ago.
Not recently.
17 YUHAS:
Let me postulate one incident.
You know, you had very high dose rates in the aux building now in containment.
20 DEIMLER:
Unit 2.
21 22 YUHAS:
Unit 2 that's right.
In the event you became aware that there was an individual injured in let's say Unit 2 auxiliary building where the dose 24 rates were known to you to be 1000 R per and you were outside of the auxiliary l
l 1759 323 I
r
68 1
building, and someone said hey fellow there's a guy in there he's trapped 2
the dose rate were 1000 R per.
What would be your decision making process?
3 4
DEIMLER:
There wouldn't be any decision to make.
(Pyke) You just would 5
n t make an entry.
(Deimler) That is up to the individual.
The company 6
w nt assign you to go rescue that person.
I don't know for sure even if 7
let's I would say okay I'll go there or try to get him out of there.
Dose 8
rates like that I don't know if the company would even.
9 YUHAS:
That's not my question.
My question is your reasoning would ycu 10 enter the auxiliary building...
12 DEIMLER:
No.
14 i
YUHAS:
To save the man in 1000 R per hour or 1000 R per sec field.
15j l
16l DEIMLER:
No.
17 18(
YUHAS:
Thank you.
19 20 DONALDSON:
You don't think.
Alright.
Again following through I also see 21 that the as, I believe, you're both rad chem technician juniors.
Is that 22 correct?
23 24 25 1759 324 I
l t
I i
69 1,
DEIMLER:
Yes.
I 2
3 DONALDSON:
You were just saying your name.
4' 5
PYKE:
Yes.
6 7
DONAL0 SON:
Let me now at the fire brigade team training.
And this paragraph 8
reads that the fire brigade team consists of five shift employees, and it's g
made up of auxiliary operators, and rad chem techs juniors, who have received 10, the required training.
Have either of you been to...
11 DEIMLER:
Fire training.
YES.
12 13 PYKE:
Yes.
15 ONALD50N:
16 Was this training conducted by Metropolitan Edison.
The training of fire fighting instructors?
18(
I DEIMLER:
The fire instructors that I had was not an Met Ed employee 19' instructor.
I don't recall I think he was from an private fire company.
At least the man outside when we were practicing with the hoses things like I'
that was not Met Ed employee.
22 23 00NALOSON:
Did you receive that training in 1978?
25j i
175c) 325 I
I
70 1,
DEIMLER:
Yes I did.
2 3
PYKE:
Yes that was...
4 5
DEIMLER:
We have had other training the same day by Met Ed safety constructor 6
on types of fire extinguishers.
What types to use for different types of 7
fire?
Things like this.
8 DONALDSON:
Let me run down the subjects to be covered you could just g
indicate yes or no.
Why don't you go ahead and flip the tape.
10 11 RESNER:
We will change the tape at this time it is now 12:33 p.m.
13 RESNER:
This is a continuation of the 6.tarview with Mr. Walter Deimler and Mr. Thomas Pike.
The time now is 12:38 p.m.
15 16i DONALDSON:
When the tape had ended, I was about to ask you if your fire fighting training encompassed the following areas:
reporting of fires,
- 18j, installed systems and portable equipment, portable respiratory equipment, 19 types of fires and their particular hazards, the chemistry of fires, equip-20 ment to be used on each type of fire, use of water on electrical fires, a practicle demonstration of fire fighting, a review of the Three Mile Island Station fire emergency procedures, the Three Mile Island fire emergency plan, and housekeeping?
24 25l l
1759 326
71 1
DEIMLER:
Yes.
We were informed of this.
2!
3 PIKE:
Yes.
4 5
DONALDSON:
- 0. K.
I don' t have any more questions, Greg, do you want to...
6 YUHAS:
No, I don't have any further questions.
I appreciate both you 8
fellows taking the time to come over here, and be honest with us and lay g
out... and sit through all this brow beating we've done.
With the same 10-token, I would appreciate that you don't discuss this conversation at 11 length with anyone until we complete some interviews this afternoon and tonight.
In other words, we don't want you to taint Mr. Donnachie's pre-12 13 sentation or Mr. Heilman or other people that you would logically conclude we would interview as a result of this discussion, i
15j DONALDSON:
Mr. Yuhas said at length.
I think the prudent thing to do 16l would not to discuss it at all.
18 YUHAS:
That's all I have at this time.
19 20 RESNER:
This concludes the interview of Mr. Pike and Mr. Diemler.
The 21 time now is 12:40 p.m.
23 24 25 1759 327