ML19289F890
| ML19289F890 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/11/1979 |
| From: | Seyfrit K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Grier B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMM NUDOCS 7906210029 | |
| Download: ML19289F890 (3) | |
Text
.
g n'ro u
UNITED STATES
{o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Y ' >
y
)p7
,n REGION IV 5.
.. j 611 RYAN PLAZA ORIVE, SUITE 1000 o,
ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011 f
April 11,1979 1
MEMORANDUM FOR:
B. H. Grier, Director, Region I, IE FROM:
Karl V. Seyfrit, Director, Region IV, IE
SUBJECT:
REPORT OF ACTIVITIES AT THREE MILE ISLAND In response,o your request dated 4/9/79, the following is provided, with the items keyed to your memo:
1 1.
Following a telephoned request frcm Dudley Thompson at about 6:30 a.m., Saturday, March 31, flight arrangements were made, I
and I arrived on site at TMI about 9:30 p.m. that same day.
I remained on site until about 3:30 p.m. the following day 1
(4/1/79).
The following two days, I spent the time from i
about 10 p.m. until about 10 a.m. (ostensibly the 12-8 shift)on site.
I For the remainder of my time, until 0800 on 4/9/79, I was on site from about 10:30 p.m. to about 9:30 a.m. daily.
(The j
specific hours varied somewhat.)
i i
2.
While on duty, the time was spent in coordinating special surveys, including ARMS flights, with operational activities.
l The daily PN was developed each day for disiatch to HQ by about 6 a.m.
A considerable amount of time was spent conversing with NRR personnel (Stello, Madsen, Ross, Vollmer, and others) regarding planned activities and progress.
Effort I
was also devoted to obtaining records (copies of charts, logs, procedures, etc.) associated with the events preceding and subsequent to the accident.
These efforts involved interfacing with GPU and Met. Ed. personnel.
The early part of the period (about the first 3 days) involved a great deal of effort to respond to reporters' questions regarding news briefings, etc.
A considerable effort also involved obtaining detail infor-mation for HQ use in briefings or hearings (ACRS, Commissioners, Congressional groups, etc.,.
3.
Based on reports from our inspectors, the licensee's actions in the plant were well controlled and performed very well.
The Corporate level personnel seemed to be indecisive, and 9 0 8 21oeq f
- - 24b M6
B. H. Grier, RI 2
April 11, 1979 did not appear to really be in control. As will be mentioned further in item 4., the demands for instant answers by the press and by our (NRC) management created pressures which greatly interferred with management of the activities at the I
site, and may have contributed to the impression of lack of l
control.
4.
The continuing struggle between NRR and IE was evident.
NRR seemed to feel that only by getting information firsthand could t1ey depend on its accuracy; IE inspectors questioned the actions being taken by NRR.
All in all, there was an air of two separate organizations, sometimes working at cross purpuses, rather than a unified agency team approach.
It should be noted that there were no ovart antagonisms involved to my knowledge, but rather a feeling that the "right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing."
Inspectors expressed feelings to the effect that they were merely errand boys for NRR, that they could not find out why a particular course of action was being taken.
Much of this is, of course, understandable and is somewhat historic in the NRR/IE relation-ships. A more difficult problem, in my view, is the concern for obtaining detailed answers to questions relating to the sequence of events, placing blame, etc., during the period of emergency.
It must somehow be recognized that the first obligation of all involved in events such as this is to assure.
public safety.
The same people who must provide information pertinent to the sequence of events, who did what when, etc.,
are those most needed to make alert and proper decisions regarding activities necessary to ensure the public safety.
The pressures exerted on both the licensee's staff and the NRC staff at the site diluted, unnecessarily in my view, the efforts to correct conditions existing in the plant.
In the way of suggestions or recommendations, it would seem prudent to have clearly defined roles for NRR and IE for response to emergencies such as this. Likewise, it should be possible, to greatly reduce the impact on those responding to the emergency created by the persistent demand for information i
which cannot be obtained without interference with ongoing activities.
Having expounded on a number of negative aspects, it would not be proper not to note some very positive impressions.
The dedication and cooperation of inspectors from all regions is something of which the agency can be proud.
The degree of professionalism exhibited by those sent to assist 24)
\\S7
B. H. Grier, RI 3
April 11, 1979 was outstanding.
Everyone willingly sac.-ificed, pecting in hours not scheduled, to ensure proper turnover of information.
Even when the situation was tense and pressure packed, all involved seened to rise to the occasion and respond in a truly professional way.
In spite of my earlier, somewhat critical comments, the overall response and control were well executed.
It is my view, however, that some serious attention should be given to improving agency response in some of the areas mentioned.
GL4 KarlV.Seyfrij!/
Director 241 158
.