ML19308C514
| ML19308C514 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/11/1979 |
| From: | Allision D, Bryan K METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., NRC - NRC THREE MILE ISLAND TASK FORCE |
| To: | |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001280512 | |
| Download: ML19308C514 (62) | |
Text
,
[j )
/
I 4
d o
l N U CLE A R R E G U L ATO R'l CO MMIS SIO N l
E')
{
v l
I l
i IN THE MATTER OF:
i THREE MILE ISLAND SPECIAL INQUIRY DEPOSITIONS DEPOSITION OF KENNETH P.
BRYAN l
C) l Place -
Middletown, Pennsylvania Date.
Thursday, October 11, 1979 Pages 1 - 61
( 's
,)
Telephone:
(,
(202)347-3700 m
ACE -FEDERAL REPORTERS,INC.
3 J
OffiaalReponen
{plJMi'((Q,Q@!lfi Q
f 444 North Ccpitol Street 8001~os0 6/
D
'[ i y! ;O E.Jdu!hb5b'bUdLa Washianton, D.C. 20001 s
NATIONWIDE COVERAGE. DAILY f
1 J
I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA O
2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
X 3
- ()
In the Matter of:
i THREE MILE ISLAND 5
SPECIAL INQUIRY DEPOSITIONS 6
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -X 7
DEP SITION OF KEN BRYAN 8
9 Trailer #203 Three Mile Island 10 Middletown, Pennsylvania Thursday, October 11, 1979 i
11 8:00 a.m.
12 BEFORE:
13 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
14
]
DENNIS ALLISON, TMI/NRC Special Inquiry Group 15 BARRY HORVICK, TMI/NRC Special Inquiry Group DR. W. JOHNSTON, TMI/NRC Special Inquiry Group 16 RONALD HAYNES, TMI/NRC Special Inquiry Group 17 18 19 20 21
(:)
22 23
-(
24 Acs Federr) Reporters, Inc.
25 I
l i
1 2
i l
l C _0 _N _T _E _N _T _S i
h WITNESS:
EXAMINATION 2
en can 3
l 3
4 i.
5 f
1 l
6 7
8 9
i j
10 11 i
l 12 G
)
14 I
15 16 v
17 18 J
i i
19
}
20 21 22 le 1
23 h
24
~ Ae.peder.: n serwn, Inc.
,25 I
CR 7621 3
DAR/rtl 10/11 1
PR_OCEEDINGS 2
MR. ALLISON:
This is an interview of Kenneth P.
3 Bryan, of Metropolitan Edison Company, being conducted by the U,,
4 NRC Special Inquiry Group into the accident at Three Mile 5
Island.
The interview is being conducted at Trailer 203 6
at the Three Mile Island site on October 11, 1979.
7 My name is Dennis Allison.
Also present are William 8
Johnston, Ron Haynes, and Barry Horvick, from the Special 9
Inquiry Group.
10 Whereupon, 11 KENNETH P. BRYAN 12 was called as a witness and was examined and testified as kh 13 follows:
14 BY MR. ALLISON:
15 Q
Mr. Bryan, prior to going on the record, I have 16 shown you a copy of our standard witness notification.
Have 17 you had a chance to read it?
18 A
Yes, I have.
19 Q
And do you have any questions about that?
20 A
No.
21 Q
Have you been interviewed befcre in connection with
~
\\
)
22 the accident at Three Mile Island?
23 A
Yes, I have.
(m
(-
24 Q
And can you recall how many interviews there were Ace Federet Reporters, Inc.
25 and who conducted them?
I
4 1
A One by the GPU, three by the NRC, and one with the 2
President's Commission.
3 0
Are you sure about three by the NRC?
O 4
A No, it seems like there was three. How many do you
^
S have?
6 0
I have here:today transcripts of two interviews by 7
the NRC.
8 A
I believe it is three.
9 Q
You think it is three?
Okay.
10 Off the record.
11 (Off the record.)
12 BY MR. ALLISON:
()
13 0
We have here today transcripts of two interviews 14 by OIE and transcripts of the interview conducted by GPU and 15 Met Ed, which are available, and you can refer to them if you 16 like.
Those previous interviews.
We don't have any trans-17 cript or tape of the President's Commission's interview of 18 you.
19 A
Excuse me.
20 (Off the record.)
21 MR. ALLISON:
Back on the record.
. ()
22 BY MR. ALLISON:
23 Q
Mr. Bryan, I believe you were a shift supervisor
)
24 in charge of Unit 1 at the time of the accident, is that Ace Fsderd Reporters, Inc.
25 correct?
I
i f
1 A
Yes, it is.
2 Q
And you were in Unit 1 because it was heating up?
3 A
Yes.
C) 4 Q
So you were an extra station supervisor assigned to that unit because it was going through an evolution?
5 6
A Yes.
7 Q
You arrived in the Unit 2 control room about 4:08, which would be 8 minutes after the trip?
I am just. recounting 8
9 some of this, so the transcript makes sense.
Correct me when 10 I am wrong.
11 You noticed and told Mr. Faust that he lacked feed water 12 to the steam generators?
()
13 A
Yes.
la Q
After which he diagnosed that the 12 valves were 15 closed, and opened them and initiated feed water to the steam 16 generator, is that correct?
17 A
That's correct.
18 Q
Now you were there when the reactor coolant pumps 19 were secured a little later on, about 5:40 in the morning, is 20 that right?
21 A
Yes.
.. ()
22 Q
Okay.
Do you remember any discussions before 23 securing those pumps about natural circulation?
()
24 A
There wasn't too much discussion on natural circula-Ace Federst Reporters, Inc.
25 tion.
It was just said that let's take the reactor coolant l
I
t I
6 i
1 pumps off and go on natural circulation.
2 Q
Was it your feeling that the people in the control 3
room expected natural circulation to work when they stopped the 4
reactor coolant pumps?
5 A
Yes.
6 Q
Isn' t it true that when you turn open the RC pumps,
7 you naturally had natural circulation to work?
8 A
Yes.
9 Q
That is then the method of forcing flow through the 10 core to cool it, is that right?
II A
That's right.
12 Q
Was there clear in your mind at the time when the
()
13 pumps came off, you had to have natural circulation in order to 14 cool the core?
15 A
Yes.
i 16 Q
Do you feel it was clear in everybody's mind?
17 A
Yes.
i 18 Q
But you don't recall any discussion about " gee, I l
19 wonder if it will work in these particular conditions"?
20 A
No, there was no discussion whether it would work 1
21 or no, it was just assumed, turn the electric pumps off and we
. ()
22 would have natural circulation.
l 23 Q
That's almost always the case when you turn them
(
24 off, it works?
Am Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 A
It's supposed to.
I
7 1
Q Do you remember anyone getting out the procedure 2
and looking?
3 A
No, I don't.
You are talking about natural O
4 circulation procedures?
5 Q
- Yes, Do you think that reaction would have been 6
different if someone, anybody in the control room, would have 7
said, " Hey, let's get out the procedure," or if they said, 8
" Hey, I wonder if it will really work in these conditions" --
9 if someone had just raised the question.
10 A
No, I don't think so, unless we had actually got 11 the procedure out and went by the procedure, that would have 12 made a difference probably, but if somebody had just raised
()
13 the question, "Would it work?" probably it would have had no 14 effect on it.
15 0
Can you explain to me perhaps in your own words 16 rather than my trying to lead you, why it was that everyone 17 felt it would work and didn't really wonder any further than 18 that?
19 A
Probably it goes back to just our training when 20 you secure your natural reactor coolant pumps, you have natural 21 circulation.
In the training that we got on it, we never done
. ()
22 it other than on a simulator, and it was just assumed that it L
1 23 would work.
I 24 O
To your knowledge, does it in fact work for every Ace. Federal Reporters, Inc.
25
-- ordinarily, every condition when you turn the RC pumps off l
t
8 1
that you run into?
2 A
If you have a solid system.
1 3
Q By "every" and "nearly every" condition, I mean all i
(
4 of the standard look-at scenarios, loss of outside power, 5
reactor coolant pumps, tripped, these kinds of things.
The 6
things that are looked at that you train on and that you have 7
procedures for.
Does it work in all those cases to your 8
knowledge?
9 A
Off the top of my head, I can't think of any case s
10 that wouldn't work.
11 Q
Okay.
I want to go on to a different area, and 12 that is the possibility of a steam generator tube leak. There
()
13 was a feeling during the first 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of the accident that you 14 might have a steam generator tube leaking,iis that correct?
15 A
Yes.
16 O
And do you remember the reasons for that idea?
17 A
One was the steam generator level was increasing 18 and we had thought it was isolated.
I think we got the 19 radiation monitoring on and on the condenser off --
20 0
And the generator was isolated then, was it not?
21 A
Yes.
. ()
22 O
When you say isolate, on this plan you can't 23 actually isolate the generator by closing off valves and all
(
24 the pipes that lead to that, can you?
_.,.m.-...~.
25 A
Yes, all but the main steam relief valves.
I i
9 I
Q On the secondary side?
O 2
A Yes, I'm talking about the secondary side.
3 0
You can't isolate on the ')rimary side to stop the O
4 in-leakage of cooling if there is ar.y?
5 A
No.
6 Q
Did you ever attribute the pressure and temperature 7
in the containment tube to a leak in the steam generator?
8 A
There was mention that morning, I don' t know that
~.
9 we thought that was another possibility.
10 Q
I thought that was a possibility.
Okay.
Looking 11 back on it, would the kind of a steam generator stuff like 12 that give you activity on the secondary side or an increase in
()
13 the level on the secondary side, would that cause any effect 14 on the containment pressure?
15 A
No, there would have been two different problems 16 of that at the same time.
We did not associate the leaking 17 in the steam generator from the primary to the secondary as 18 being a leak in the building, but we thought there was the 19 possibility that we had a secondary leak in the building, a
20 steam line break.
l So you thought there might be another problem with 21 Q
.. ()
22 the generator, given one problem there might be another one?
23 A
Not necessarily.
24 Q
So it sounds like you were never confused that the Am FMed Rmorwrs, lm.
25 steam generator or tube leak could cause a leak in the i
l 10 j
1 containment, is that right?
2 A
Yes.
3 Q
It was really -- so those two things are two (s
4 different ideas?
5 A
Yes.
6 Q
Now, I believe your I&E interviews indicate that Iw 7
you were also involved in checking reactor coolant drain tank 8
level shortly after you checked the reactor building, 9
temperature alarm came on, and you and others in the control 10 room diagnosed that the drain tank rupture disc had blown.
11 A
Yes.
12 Q
And then you went back to the Unit 1 control room (m
q) 13 at about 6:30 in the morning, is that right?
14 A
That's correct.
15 Q
After that time, did you have any other involvement 16 in Unit 2 plant operations on the day of the 28th?
li A
No, I didn't.
18 0
You were completely involved with radiation release 19 matters?
20 A
Yes.
21 Q
The 28th.
Okay.
When did you --
~
e
( )x 22 A
I wasn't totally involved with radiation release 23
- matters, I was also taking care of Unit 1 secondary side
,ex
(._)
24 and other things.
Ace Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 Q
Right.
Okay.
I understand.
But we are talking I
11 I
about Unit 1 control-room type activities.
O 2
A Yes; right.
3 Q
Now operation of Unit 2 plan.
Okay.
When did you 4
next come on watch; when did you come 'back to the plant after 5
the 28th?
6 A
The 29th.
7 Q
Okay.
Do you remember what time?
8 A
Three or four o' clock in the morning.
I 9
Q And do you remember how long you stayed on the 29th?
10 A
No, I don't remember; probably 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> or something.
Il Q
Okay.
Were you involved on the 29th with operation 12 of Unit 2?
O\\
13 A
No, I wasn't.
(_/
14 Q
What were you doing?
15 A
Unit 1, I think we were still cooling down.
I don't 16 remember exactly what we were doing, but we were talking Unit 1 17 back down and getting ready to or already had -.it had 18 something to do with Unit 1, I know that.
l9 Q
Okay.
Well, instead of going day by day, let me 20 ask you when was your first involvement again in Unit 2 plan 21 operation as opposed to emergency plan or radiological release
. ()
22 type involvement?
23 A
I have to go back and check the time sheet, but it 24 was like a week or maybe two weeks, probably closer to two
. ~. m. _.,.....
25 weeks.
i
12 1
O Well, then is it your recollection that you f
O 2
definitely had nothing to do with operation of Unit 2 from the 3
time that you left that morning until, let's say, through the O
4 weekend, through Saturday and Sunday?
i 5
A Sure.
6 Q
Did you stay in the shift supervisor watch later, 7
like a week or two, which was when the recovery organization 8
was here and wholly'in place?
9 A
Recovery organization was-started.
I don't know 10 how fully in place it was.
11 Q
Okay.
Can you tell me what the role of the GPU 12 engineers who were standing in the control room was when you
()
13 were there?
14 A
They were advising us, and they were doing a lot of--
15 they were watching the natural circulation pretty heavily, did 16 some calculations for that.
They were calculating -- they drew 17 up a curve for bypass valve closure types of things like that.
1B Q
Did they provide you input, let us say, each day on 19 what these management plans were, what it was, procedures that 20 were to be followed?
21 A
No, that didn't come from them.
I got that from O ()
22 probably Jack Herbein and they would, if I had a problem vith 23 the procedure, they would be around, and I could ask them
(
24 what do you really mean by this?
And what are you.eally Ace Federce Reporters, Inc.
25 trying to do?
And they would be in the control room to answer i
13 I
those types of questions.
But the direction I got was from O
2 more or less Jack Herbein.
3 Q
And if you had questions, you could ask these guys?
Of 4
A Yes.
5 0
And they would find the answers for you?
6 A
Yes.
7 0
Were they directly involved in plant operations, 8
were they there to watch you and make sure you didn't make any 9
mistakes or anything like that?
10 A
They were there to observe, make recommendations, II and sometimes we would discuss with them before we did it, and 12 sometimes we wouldn't, depending on consequences of what the 13 action was.
They were there also if we wanted to take the 14 plant solid or depressurize, form an air bubble, they are 15 usually sitting there, looking over your shoulder and say, 16 "You look good," or "Let's wait a little bit and see what I7 happens," this type of thing.
18 0
WEre you still clearly responsible for plant I9 operation at that time in your mind?
20 A
Yes, if something went wrong, they would come and 21 see me, yes.
22 MR. ALLISON:
Ron, would you like to ask some 23 questions now?
24 MR. HAYNES:
Yes, if I may.
Ace Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 I
l 14 1
BY MR. HAYNES:
O Mr. Bryan, according to my recollection, you started 2
0 3
tx) work with Met Ed at the Crawford Station in 1969 and you O
4 entered the training program at Three Mile Island facility, 5
is that correct?
6 A
Yes, sir.
7 Q
And that was a 42-week course?
8 A
Yes, it was.
9 O
And the aim of that course was to what?
10 A
The aim of the course was to provide CRO's for the 11 start-up of Unit 1.
12 Q
So to receive an NRC license to operate Unit 1, is.
()
13 that correct?
14 A
That's right.
15 0
All right.
What did that course comprise of, the 16 42-week course?
17 A
It started off with mathematics, went to HP, had 18 reactor theory, systems, all the plant systems we went through 19 and specifically I can't think of anything else.
If you take 20 an NRC test and go back to the categories, it covers everything 21 in that in detail.
o 22 Q
Who conducted the 42-week training course or were 23 there more than one party?
24 A
There was more than one party.
It was probably Ace Federet Reporters, Inc.
25 seven or eight different instructors.
1
15 1
Q Were these all Met Ed people who were instructors?
O 2
A We11. most of them were -- we11, yes.
They were 3
all Met Ed at the time they were doing this program.
We had 4
hired a man from Penn State who was associated with their 5
small reactor up there, who will come down to more or less run 6
the training program.
7 Q
Do you recall any training being provided by 8
Babcock and Wilcox?
9 A
Simulator time.
10 Q
Well, only at simulator?
II A
Yes.
12 Q
What was the training at the simulator?
13 A
That consisted of start ups, reactor theory, 14 casualty procedures, running with the simulator.
15 Q
Did that training involve both course work as well 16 as manipulations of the simulator?
17 A
Yes.
18 Q
How long was that course at Lynchburg?
i 19 A
The original one was two weeks, I believe.
20 Q
Since the original training, what other training 21 have you had with respect to reactor operation?
22 A
The Met Ed training or requal program that we have.
23 Q
The requalification program?
Q 24 A
Yes.
Ace <-eder:.1 Reporters, Inc.
25 0
What is the requalification program?
What type of I
16 I
studies and courses and so forth are involved in that and O
2 testing?
3 A
Well, the requalification program is mainly O
4 conducted on the Island here, and if you are in a six-week 5
rotation, one of the weeks you attend training program for a 6
solid week, and it covers reactor theory and instrumentation, 7
emergency procedures, about everything.
8 Q
Do you cover plant response to planned transients n
9 and events?
10 A
Yes.
II Q
Requalification, did the requalification program--
12 does that also involve training at the simulator?
()
13 A
Once a year we go down there 'for a week.
14 Q
What do you do during that week at the simulator?
15 A
Generally, the first day you get involved with a 16 start-up, to get yourself refamiliar with their controls down 17 there, and the rest of the week is usually emergency procedures 18 and drills.
19 Q
Is this five days at eight hours a day?
20 A
The simulator procedure, five days, eight hours a 21 day, with four hours of each day spent on the simulator, and
(
22 four hours in classroom.
23 Q
Are there examinations associated with the simulator 24 training?
Am-FMw:l Rmorwes lm.
25 A
Before'or after the accident?
I
17 1
O Before the accident.
()
2 A
No, other than the initial two weeks.
3 0
Which took place back before you received your 4
initial AEC license, is that correct?
5 A
Right.
6 Q
You received the AEC license when?
7 A
Early seventies.
I forget the year;
'72.
8 O
Around '72, prior to Unit 1 start-up, is that 9
correct?
O 10 A
Yes.
No, after Unit 1 start-up.
11 Q
After Unit 1 start-up?
12 A
Right.
13 Q
You received what is called a hot license?
()
14 A
Yes.
15 Q
At that time, what was your position?
16 A
Control room operator.
17 Q
Later on you obtained a senior reactor licensa did 18 you not?
19 A
Yes.
20 Q
Do you recollect what year you received your senior 21 license?
()
22 A
No, I quess '76 or '77.
23 Q
It would be at the time you moved up to the shift
()
24 foreman's position, is that correct?
, Ace Federet Reporters, Inc.
25 A
- Yes, I
18 1
O You are also licensed for Unit 2, is that not
/G
()
2 correct?
3 A
Yes.
(3
(_/
4 0
What kind of license is that?
5 A
SRO license.
6 Q
SRO license?
7 A
Yes.
8 Q
Was testing from the NRC involved with your 9
receiving the senior operator's license for Unit 27 10 A
No.
11 Q
This is what is called a cross license?
12 A
Yes, sir.
13 Q
I think our record is fairly clear on that, that the
{}
14 NRC permitted the Metropolitan Edison Company to issue cross 15 licenses based upon a training program on differences between 16 Unit 1 and Unit 2, is that correct?
17 A
Yes.
18 Q
And upon successful completion of the written 19 examination by the applicant?
20 A
Right.
21 Q
A while ago you said testing at the simulator was
(~')
22 not done before the accident, and I take it now the applicants v
23 at the simulator are examined while in training?
g 24 A
At the end of the week, they have an evaluation Am FecaI Regerters, inc.
25 that is performed on the whole shift, not on any individual l
1 1
19 1
basis.
They will come in and I believe there was like three O
2 different people that come in and did the evaluation on how 3
the shift reacted.
It was a pass-or-fail type of thing.
O 4
Q How they reacted to what?.
5 A
Emergency procedures, casualty, they would throw at 6
us, they would just oversee and see if the shift foreman did 7
his job and how well the communications went in this type of 8
thing.
9 Q
Who did this evaluation?
10 A
One of the instructors -- there was one, somebody 11 who was in charge of training down there.
12 Q
So they are B&W people who are doing the evaluation
()
13 as opposed to Metropolitan Edison, GPU management people, is 14 that correct?
15 A
When I was down, I had the superintendent.
He sat 16 in on the evaluation.
I don't know how much weight one guy 17 carries with the others as far as evaluation goes, but there 18 was one Met Ed person to two B&W people.
19 Q
On the evaluation board?
20 A
Like I said, all I know is when I left, they said 21
" You passed."
If they actually sat down and wrote this out, O
22 I had no idea.
23 O
All right.
()
24 BY MR. JOHNSTON:
! Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 Q
Ken, I would like to ask you a couple of questions on i
20 1
the simulators aspect of it.
The simulator at B&W in Lynchburg
(
is a fair snount smaller than the control room that you have 2
3 at Unit 2, for example.
When you were asked to go through 4
the simulation of various activities, do you feel that -- does 5
it give you a good feeling that you are doing the same things 6
as you might be doing back up at -- up here, or is it sufficiently different that it is like a whole new situation 7
8 that you are simply accommodating to somebody else's different 9
control room?
10 A
The ICS and controls on the panel, at the electro-11 panel, relief valves, feed pumps, turbine, this type of thing 12 is pretty much similar.
The one big difference is the ES panel 13 is a little bit different.
It's not that much different.
(])
14 Q
How about, say, alarms, and things of that sort?
15 A
They are pretty realistic.
16 O
And you would have a feeling then that the sense 17 you get would be similar to the sense of the situation that 18 you would find yourself in if it actually happened up here?
19 A
Other than the fact that, you know, you can't break 20 anything when you are down there, yes.
As much as you can 21 possibly be in that same kind of a situation with that, also
(])
22 in the back of your head.
23 Q
So in other words, you feel fairly satisfied that
()
24 the kind of simulation, the position that you are put in, the Acefoderot Reporters, Inc.
25 kinds of feelings that you have in responding to the things
21 1
they give you would be pretty good carryover to what you might O
2 feel you would be in if it was happening up here in real life?
3 A
I hadn't always felt this way.
Since the O
4 accident -- I was down at B&W and the training program has 5
changed a lot.
It's much more realistic now than what it was 6
before, I feel. Before we never carried a casualty out.
Once 7
a person recognized it, we would stop there.
The last time we 8
were down, they made it a little bit different, they really got 9
you in a trouble, and it was sink or swim and you had to get 10 out.
It usually took three or four hours.
It has changed a 11 lot.
12 O
Okay.
One more question.
It has to do with the
()
13 way that you mentioned evaluations take place, and you get 14 evaluated as supervisor and so forth.
Do you iotate 15 responsibility during that week down there of requalification 16 in the sense that one time you would act as an operator, and 17 another time as a supervisor, or was it always the same role 18 that you played throughout the week?
19 A
Prior to the accident, we used to rotate a lot, so 20 that that was basically the only time that I had a chance to 21 work with the controls, the ICS stations.
And you don't get
(
22 that much time on them in the plant, so we always rotated 23 around.
24 The time I was down after the accident, we didn't rotate Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 that much.
I got in on the panels a little bit, but if somebody
. ~'
22 1
else, the shift supervisor -- if he wasn't doing anything else, O
2 because nothing else was going on at that time, then --
3 O
So you do feel it is best to go through the rotation O
4 of the functions and roles during this simulation?
5 A
No, I didn't say that.
A little bit of time is all 6
right, but to rotate for the whole week'I don't feel is 7
necessary.
- 2 8
Q Okay.
Now, I guess I am a little bit confused.
i 9
A Before the accident, we used to rotate all the time, 10 which I felt was good enough for me to get on the controls a 11 little bit, but I didn't need to do that.
If there was three 12 of us on the panel, I didn't have to spend every third day on
()
13 it.
If I can go down and get a day on it, that is fine with 14 me, or a couple of hours.
The types of questions and your 15 responses vary with what job you are doing.
All right.
And 16 if I spent most of my time on the panel or a third of my time, 17 I am not getting my training for what I'm supposed to be doing.
18 Q
Okay.
Are the responses to actions that you take 19 down there on the simulator, is the response rate of that 20 simulator roughly the same kinds of responses that you get if 21 you made a similar change of valve position or something at thi s
(
22 plant?
23 A
Yes, it is.
2d Q
I guess that's all I have, Ron.
! Ace Federd Reporters. Inc.
25 1
1
23 1
BY MR. HAYNES:
1 2
Q Changing the subject a little bit, here on the date 3
of the accident, I understand that you arrived in the control 4
room about 4:08 in the morning and you stayed until shortly 5
after 6 o' clock in the morning?
6 A
That's correct.
7 Q
And want back to Unit 1.
I also understand that 8
when you entered the control room, some of your initial 9
observations were that the P average temperature was some 10 40 degrees above what you would expect, and it was actually Il reading somewhere in the 592, you stated.
12 A
Yes.
(}
13 Q
And you noticed the full pressurizer?
Id A
Yes.
15 Q
I also understand your prior testimony is that the 16 full pressurizer did not seem unusual to you because of the 17 abnormally high P average, and as I understand it, you believe 18 that the high pressurizer was probably due to the expansion of 19 the water from the temperature, is that correct?
20 A
Yes.
21 Q
Were there any other immediate observations you made 22 when you entered the control room other than feed water not
()
23 going into the steam generators?
()
24 For example, did you notice that the reactor pressure was
- Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 low at that time?
1
24 I
A No, I didn't, not -- a minute or two minutes, I O
2 don't know.
3 Q
But it was within a few minutes that you did become O
4
-aware that the reactor pressure was low?
5 A
A short time after I got there, yes.
6 O
Of course, prior to coming to the control room, 7
I understand Mr. Zewe, who requested your assistance, had 8
informed you that they had had an emergency safety injection, 9
is that correct?
10 A
Yes.
' II Q
Which would have occurred only on low reactor 12 pressure, is that correct?
()
13 A
That's true, Id Q
All right.
During your training, Mr. Bryan, l
15 did you ever have any study or simulator training on the plant 16 response to a leak in the steam space of the pressurizer, such 17 as a stuck open relief valve?
18 A
Yes.
19 Q
You had had training on that?
20 A
Yes.
21 Q
What was the plant response during that training,
(
22 or were you taught what the plant response would be?
23 A
We did this on a simulator as part of the casualty O
(/
24 drills they throw at you, and it was fairly simple.
They look Am Fewd Reorters,1N.
25 over and see the pressurizer and see that the reactor coolant
l 25 1
system was decreasing, so you'would reach over and close the O
2 block valve, and if it didn't that wasn't the problem.
There ld 3
was never any concern that theblock valve wouldn't reopen once O
4 you closed it, and that would be the end of the drill.
It 5
was something that you would try and be out of it within five I
6 seconds, either that stopped it or it didn't, and you would 7
go on and look for something else.
8 0
The only symptom then that was used to identify the 9
leak of the steam pressurizer was the decreasing reactor l
10 pressure, is that right?
Was there any response shown with 11 respect to the level in the pressurizer, the water level in 12 the pressurizer?
O is
^
no.
14 Q
Prior to the accident, what did you believe the 15 response of the water level in the pressurizer would be upon 16 a leak in the steam space of the pressurizer?
1 17 A
I don't think I have ever carried that thought 18 beyond the capability of the make-up pumps to maintain l
19 pressurized level, or if a small leak, a small leak, you 20 wouldn't see any change.
All right.
The leak that we ended 21 up with that day was quite a different story, but I had not
. ()
22 really thought about that.
23 Q
If you have a leak in the primary system, what do
(
24 you expect the water level in the pressurizer to do?
A leak, Ace Federd Reporters, Inc.
meaninglikeasmallloca[boralargeloca'."j 25 I
26 1
A Other than the steam space or the pressurizer?
2 O
Yes.
3 A
I would expect the level to start decreasing.
If O
4 it was greater than the capability of the make-up pump to handle 5
it, where you look at the make-up tank and wonder how I am 6
making up so much.
7 Q
You said other than the leak in the steam space or 8
the pressurizer, but you had not had training or had not 9
really thought that through before the accident; is that 10 correct?
II A
That's correct.
12 O
You had had no prior knowledge of the plant response
()
13 to that, nor had that been covered in the training courses?
14 A
I wouldn't say it has never been covered, it has 15 never been stressed.
I can't recall it.
It's not one of the 16 big topics.
17 0
To your knowledge, is that expressed in any of your 18 plant operating procedures or emergency procedures?
19 A
No; to my knowledge, it is not, or wasn't before 20 the accident.
21 Q
One of the other activities that you did when you
()
22 came to the control room on the 28th of March was that you 23 monitored the tailpipe temperatures from the power operator 24 relief valve as well as the safety valves which are located on
. Ace FederJ Reporters, Inc.
25 the steam space of the pressurizer, is that correct?
27 1
A Yes, it is.
2 Q
At that time, were you familiar with the piping 3
configuration of the discharge piping from the safety valves O
4 and the relief valves?
5 A
Yes.
6 Q
That they did come into a common line?
7 A
Yes.
Atthetimeyoumdeyour-=h'#
mtsusd.\\\\.5 ccc temperatures, by 8
Q 9
calling them out on the computer, both the safety valve s
10 discharge pipe temperature as well as the power operator 11 relief out temperature, I believe your prior testianony is that 12 you believed they were only about 20 degrees apart or so
()
13 between three lines, is that correct?
14 A
That's true.
15 0
What kind of a tailpipe temperature were you 16 expecting?
I understand that your recollection was that the 17 temperatures were around 230 degrees F or thereabouts.
What 18 kind of temperatures were you expecting, if a valve were 19 leaking through badly or were stuck full open at that time?
20 A
Probably closer to 450 or 500.
21 Q
So close to the temperature of the fluid in the
.. ()
22 passurizer, is that correct?
23 A
Yes, one thing I found, I found out since my
(
24 testimony on these temperatures, I saw the computer printout Acs-Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 of what I was reading, and the one time I looked at temperatures I
a
t 28 1
and I said they were about the same, some way turned the 2
computer a couple notches between the temperature of power 3
operator relief valve outlet, and I actually had printed up O
4 three temperatures, two of which were the same.
I-printed 5
up one of the safety valves twice, and the other safety valve 6
once, and I did not -- when I was reading the temperatures off, 7
I did not look at the numbers associated with the computer, 8
I didn't read anything but the temperatures.
I didn't read m
9 the word in front of it, and I saw this and the power operator O
10 relief valve temperature was some degrees higher than the 11 other two.
12 Q
But as I recollect at the time that you were calling
()
13 them off to Mr. Zewe in the control room, you reported them 14 to about 230, 235 degrees F, and later it said tailpipe 15 temperature was 285 degrees, I believe.
16 A
Yes.
17 Q
On the discharge side of the power operator relief 18 valve?
19 A
Yes.
1 20 Q
During the training program that you went through, 21 which includes both the course work at the Island and the
.. ()
22 sir.alator training at the B&W facility at Lynchburg, did they
-th & &
ever cover what you would expect '14C4e14} pipe temperature to 23
(
24 be with a stuck open relief valve or stuck open safety valve?
Ace Federst Reporters, Inc.
25 A
No.
29 h
1 0
The fact that when the steam goes through and-E ise J A eo f
2 gen:- <*'
an' expansion -- that eb the temperature will drop
.gwo
$ r U3W C-3 according to what the back. temperature is, and the h==de /K O
e 4
temperaturnsg could be about 285 or 290 degrees F?
5 A
No.
6 0
Okay.
7 BY.MR. JOHNSTON:
8 0
One question, did you know when you came in that O
9 there had been prior leakage through either the code relief 10 valves or the PORV prior to the start of the accident?
Did 11 you know that it had been leaking before?
12 A
Yes, I did.
We monitored the temperatures daily.
()
13 0
You had been working on Unit 2 then in the last, say,
14 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or so?
15 A
I don't remember that, but I knew we had a problem 16 with the leaking valves.
17 0
Okay.
So you ainutdy had a feeling that the 18 temperatures might be high on it, so that you weren't surprised 19 in the sense when you saw all of them running up in the 200s, 20 instead of running in the 150 range, or something like that?
21 A
No, I expected over 200.
()
22 O
In normal operation, are they normally running down 23 in the 150 or 130 range, or had the plant been running for some
()
24 time with some kind of leaking up there, so almost for that l
' Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
l 25 plant, the normal temperatures were higher?
l 30 A
That was a normal situation for that plant with the 3
O 1eexeee we haa.
r o of them were runni=e 1e then 200, e=a 2
the one was running over 200.
3 Q
And that had been for a month or more?
I mean, 4
f r this whole period of operation while the plant was up, it 5
had been showing that kind of a pattern?
6 A
That's right.
7 ON:
M at is all.
8
~
BY MR. HAYNES:
9 Q
If I may, I would like to get back to the stuck-10 open relief valve transient that was run at the simulator.
You 11 say that normally you would terminate that transient in just a 12 few seconds, as soon as you would recognize that the valve was Q
13 y
open.
How did you recognize at the simulator that the valve was open?
15 A
Reactor coolant pressure was decreasing.
16 only, not tailpipe _pr_fv M /&*
4to
- ure at all?
j Q
17 A
We never took the time to look at it on the 18 i
19 computer.
It was easier just to reach down and close the blocked valve.
20
~
Q S
y u don't know how the tailpipe temperature was 21 programmed or modeled for a stuck-open valve?
22 A
No, I don't.
23 24 Q
Relief valve at the simulator, you also mentioned Ace Feders Reporters. Inc.
that of course at the simulator it was easier if you just 25 4
1
31 1
reached over and clocod the blocked valve to the simulator, and OC/
2 you didn' t have to worry about it getting stuck, or words to 3
that effect.
Had that been a problem in the operation of the O
4 facility where the block valve would get stuck in the closed 5
position, if closed?
6 A
I'm not certain that it is a block valve in 7
particular, but we have had problems with similar types of 8
valves, where I believe we had one close one time and when we 9
went to open it, and it actually pulled the stem out of the 10 seat and the seat stayed in the valve, and it was a Il consideration, if we close this valve, are we going to be able 12 to get it open.
(
13 Q
So that thought was going through your mind that Id morning on the 28th, that if you do close the block valve, you 15 may not be able to get it open?
16 A
That's right.
17 Q
And that was based upon your prior experience with 18 valves in the plant?
19 A
Valves in general.
20 Q
During the first few hours of the accident, the 21 I&E report alludes that diesel generator system was disabled
)
22 in that the fuel racks were tripped and not reset.
Are you 23 familiar with that finding in the I&E investigation report?
24 A
No, I'm not.
I had no idea what the diesels Ace Fedwel Rgorters, lrc.
1 25 were that morning.
I don't remember if they were running or
32 1
not.
I don't get involved with that, i
2 0
Okay.
At no time did you issue any orders to any 3
auxiliary operator or you yourself tripped the fuel rack?
O 4
A No, I didn't.
5 0
Also, when you arrived in the control room, you saw 64%fw 6
that no feed was going into thetfeed generator, no feed water 7
was going in.
Mr.sFaust discerned that the 12 A and B block 8
valves were closed, and h'e opened them and thereby reestablish-n 9
ing feed water to the steam generators. From your operating 10 experience at this facility, have there been occasions in the 11 past where valves have been -- like these -- have been found ou 12 of position during plant operation?
()
13 A
Are you talking about feed water valves or any 14 valves in general?
15 Q
Critical valves in any system.
16 A
I would have to say yes, we probably have found 17 something like that before.
Specifically, whatever valve was 18 involved, I couldn't say off the top of my head.
If I went 19 back, I know we would have found it.
20 0
To whom would it have been reported?
21 A
To the NRC.
(')
22 Q
That a valve was closed and out of position?
23 A
Right.
()
24 O
That is if it disabled the system or where it put I Aw FWwd Reorwrs, Inc.
25 you out of operation according to the specifications?
6 I
33 A
That's right.
j
()
2 O
Who normally does the valving out in the plant of ku4t-3 emergency 3 Steam valves, is this done by licensed operators, or
()
is it done by auxiliary operators?
4 A
It is done by unlicensed auxiliary operators.
5 6
Q Is it done under the presence of licensed personnel?
A No.
It's done by a procedure that they take out 7
and sign off step by step.
8 9
0 To your knowledge, do these people always have a procedure available when they do any valving operation in the jo 11 plant -
"these people" meaning the auxiliary operators?
12 A
It depends on what type of valving operation they 13 are doing.
If they are doing a valve line up for a start-up,
(])
ja yes, if they are doing a switch order that returns a piece of 15 equipment.to service, they will have a switchingtorder telling 16 them where they ought to put a valve, but not a valve order.
i And when di'd }they take a system out of service?
30 N 17 Q
18 A
If they shut it down for repair.
19 0
Yes.
20 A
Normally, we don't shut a whole system down for 21 repair.
If we are operating, we would just take out part of it and that would be done with a switching order.
When I
()
22 23 speak of valving up, I mean, the part of the procedure in the
()
24 back.
They wouldn't take that out for partial shutdown.
Ace FedertA Reporters, Inc.
I 25 Q
But the switching order itself would specify the i
34 1
valves?
O 2
A Yes.
And the position they should be left in.
3 O
How does the operator know that he is on the right O
4 valve; how does the valve identify?
5 A
Most of the valves in the plant have brass tags 6
attached to them with the number engraved on them.
7 Q
Do all valves have the brass tag?
8 A
To the best of my knowledge.
You might very well 9
be able to find one or two that don't.
10 Q
At this facility, as I understand it, you have three 11 grades of auxiliary operators, A, B, and C; is that correct?
12 A
That's right.
()
13 Q
With A being the highest grade?
14 A
Right.
15 Q
And C being the lowest auxiliary operator, is that 16 correct?
17 A
Yes.
]
l 18 Q
Can the C grade auxiliary operator, and do they, do 19 valving on critical systems at this facility?
20 A
Yes.
21 Q
About how much experience and training does a C
. ()
22 grade auxiliary operator have?
23 A
Not much training.
24 Q
How much experience does he have --
f Am FMwot Resorters, lrm.
25 A
But the training involves several months of classroom F
1
35 1
training, I guess.
2 Q
Before he can become a CL-3 operator, does he have 3
to go through a 42-week training course before he can do any 4
work at that facility?
5 A
No.
6 Q
If I were an auxiliary operator, and I hired on, 7
this is prior to the accident, could I be out in the plant and 8
doing the valve manipulations, say, within 2 weeks?
9 A
Yes.
10 0
Without any supervisory coverage over my shoulder 11 continuously, or licensed operator?
12 A
Yes, you could, but you would probably have an A
()
13 Operator with you.
14 Q
I may or may not have?
15 A
It depends on what job you were doing.
16 Q
Certainly, if I had done the job one or two times 17 and, say, that is valving in or out of system like or perform-18 ing valving operations in a system like the emergency feed 19 water system, and I had done that one or two times, I may be l
20 able to do that by myself, if the other person is satisfied 21 that I am knowledgeable?
o ()
22 A
That's possible, yes.
23 Q
And the other person -- but the A or B operator, if
()
24 he was satisfied --
Ace Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 A
No, he wouldn't make that determination.
Probably I
I 36 1
the shift foreman would, or the shift supervisor.
If you were O
2 sitting around the control room and needed someone, and he 3
said, "Oh, yes, I did that a couple of times," I might say, O
4 "Okay, go ahead."
5 0
Is that always the shift foreman or shift super-6 visor who makes the decision?
7 A
No, it could be a control room operator also.
8 Q
If you issued an order to an A auxiliary operator 9
to perform a particular valve operation, could he in turn 10 reassign that to a B or C auxiliary operator without your 11 knowledge?
12 A
That's possible, but it doesn't -- don't usually
()
13 operate that way.
14 Q
At least not to your knowledge?
15 A
Not to my knowledge, right.
16 Q
I would like to get on a little bit different topic 17 right now, if I may, Ken. And this has to do with the minimum 18 shift crew complement at the facility.
According to my reading 19 of the technical specifications, the NRR or the NRC require-20 ments for a minimum shift crew complement is one senior reactor 21 operator, two licensed reactor operators, and two others on
-. ()
22 shift, while the plant is in the power mode.
Is that your 23 recollection?
24 A
Yes.
Ace Federr.A Reporters, Inc.
25 Q
There is also an exemption that for a period of up i
37 to two hours, the number of licensed reactor operators may be 1
(
2 reduced by one.
3 A
Okay.
I don't recall that.
4 O
Thattis stated in the technical specification.
And 5
the technical specification also states that during the period 6
of power operation without any significant reactivity changes 7
going on, that the number of people required in the control 8
room is one licensed operator.
Is that your recollection?
9 A
That's right.
C 10 0
With that background, to your knowledge, have you 11 ever operatedswith just one licensed reactor operator in the 12 centrol room and no others during the power operation?
O is
^
'e -
14 Q
You have?
15 A
Yes.
16 0
What were the circumstances at that time?
17 A
Steady state operation, and the other guy wanted to 18 go look at something.
19 O
He went out and looked in the plant?
20 A
Sure.
21 Q
Was the shift foreman in the control room during
. ()
22 that period, or would it just be the one man?
23 A
Just one guy.
()
24 Q
Just the one guy.
All right.
With respect to the Ace.Federol Reporters, Inc.
25 two others on shift, Mr. Bryan, my reading of the technical i
I l
l 1
38 1
specifications doesn't cay that they have to be auxiliary 2
operators, as I read it, they could be clerks.
But have you, 3
when you operated with these two others on shift, are these 4
always auxiliary operators?
5 A
Yes, and there is usually four.
I don't think we 6
have ever gone below four.
7 Q
And what are the grades of these operators; these 8
four, with respect to A, B, C?
~
9 A
'ou almost always have to have two, because there 10 has to be an A working on the primary side, so that one A 11 right there, and then you need an A for the secondary side.
12 If you have two c's, if you have a B, a B can operate the
()
13 secondary plant. You have to look at the union contract.
14 Q
So you can operate.
What is more dependent upon 15 that is what the union contract has to say as opposed to what 16 the people's knowledge is or is it a combination of both?
17 A
No, what they can operate is by their knowledge, 18 okay?
Like if an A worker comes, he can operate on the primary 19 plant.
A C worker is allowed to operate on the secondary plant,
20 but I'm not god.ng to let him over there by himself.
If he has 21 only been there for 2 months, I am going to have someone like
()
22 an!A or a B with him.
23 Q
But there is no union rule that says a C cannot 24 operate?
Ace Federst Reporters, Inc.
25 A
No, he cannot operate on the primary.
~
i
39.
j Q
Can a B operate on the primary side?
2 A
Yes.
3 O
And when you say primary side, does that include 4
the auxiliary feed water system?
5 A
No.
6 O
So you are really talking about what we call 7
reactor coolant pressure boundary?
Is that correct?
t#3 8
A Yes, and you have the evaporators and RC evaporated, 9
misplaced evaporated.
10 0
That is included in the primary side?
11 A
Yes.
12 O
So if something is carrying radioactive fluids,
()
13 whether it be gases or liquids --
14 A
Right.
15 Q
How about with respect to high pressure injection 16 oU d ei which is carrying a borated water which is supposedly 17 nonradioactive?
1 18 A
That is primary.
19 Q
That is computed to be primary?
20 A
Yes.
With your operating experience at the facility and, 21 Q
o
(])
22 of course, you have considerable experience in that you have i
23 been a reactor operator shift foreman and a shift supervisor,
()
24 do you believe that the minimum shift crew, as specified in i Ace Federet Reporters, Inc.
25 the technical specifications, is adequate for handling plant I
40 1
O 2
A No.
3 Q
The answer is no?
O 4
A That's correct.
5 O
Where does it fall short, Mr. Bryan, in your view?
6 A
Normally, a plant transient in Unit 1, say, you need A
7 one man at the aux boiler and one at the powegx.
And that's 8
two guys right there.
And if everything else went smoothly, C
9 you probably wouldn't need anyone else, but then you don't have 10 anybody to go over to the primary side.
11 Q
Now, are these primary auxiliary jobs you specify 12 here?
()
13 A
Correct.
14 Q
How about with respect to the control room, the 15 number of licensed operators in the control room which the 16 normal complement would be two reactor operators and one 17 senior reactor operator, is that sufficient for plant 18 transients?
19 A
Yes.
20 0
What would the three people in the control room 21 at Unit 2 do when you would undergo a feedwater trip?
. ()
22 And if I understand, what transpired in the control room 23 on the morning of the 28th of March, is that one man went to 24 the pressurizer to monitor that level, one man was working the
- Am Feders Reporters, Inc.
25 make-up pumps and supply --
I
41 1
A one guy could do both of those.
}
2 Q
And one man was working the secondary side, is that 3
correct?
4 A
That's right.
5 Q
You are saying that two operators are all that are 6
needed to manipulate the controls to respond to a feedwater 7
8 A
You asked me if three licensed operators in the 9
control room is sufficient, and I said yes.
10 Q
I am trying to find out what the three guys would 11 be doing.
12 A
The two guys would be operating the controls, and
()
13 the third guy would also read the procedures.
14 Q
What I am trying to get at, Is there enough people 15 to -- for one guy to be standing back and looking at the over-16 all picture while the accident is taking place?
If I am 17 basically reading the procedures, I am not trying to figure out 18 what the plant is doing, and if I am operating controls and 19 manipulating, again, I don't have the opportunity to sit back 20 and take a look.
21 So what I am really trying to get at in these types of
. ()
22 transients and potential accident situations, if I have got a 23 specific job to do, such as manipulating controls, I don't have
()
24 time to sit back and take a look.
- Ace Feder:1 Reporters, Inc.
25 A
That's right.
I
42 1
Q And in that viewpoint, if you say that you need a O)
's_
2 guy to sit back and look, are three people enough in the 3
control room?
~
(v) 4 A
No.
5 MR. HAYNES:
I guess I am putting words in your 6
mouth.
Off the record.
7 (Off the record.)
8 THE WITNESS:
Let me say one thing: if you are 9
talking about an accident like March 28th, that's one thing.
10 If you have a feed pump trip where you have a runback and 11 nobody has to do too much with a reactor trip, three is enough.
12 And it depends.
You could ve ry easily get in a situation where 13 three is not enough, but normally we haven't been in that
(}
14 situation.
15 BY MR. HAYNES:
16 Q
Sure, and certainly one would say that when -- let 17 me hear it from you.
If you are down to one man in the control 18 room, which the plant has been, if I understood your testimony 19 previously, there would not be enough to respond to a transient 20 in the control room or an accident in the facility?
l.
21 A
Well, that's a tough one,because it depends upon
/~)
22 whether the other guy is coming back.
If he is capable of l
v 23 getting back, if there is one man to do the whole thing, no, 24 it may be 3 or 4 minutes, one guy is enough.
l AceToderal Reportm, Inc.
l 25 0
Then in the real world, if there is one man in the i
l 43 i
I control room and the other two guys are out, the shift guy n(-)
2 and the other operator, they might be going out and doing 3
some plant evolution and that plant evolution results in a
(~)h
\\-
4 broken pipe, and they would not be available to get back to 5
the control room?
6 A
Right.
One guy is not enough to handle the whole 7
thing.
He is capable of handling it for the first couple of 8
minutes, but then he needs some help.
It depends upon the 9
situation you are trying to get into.
10 MR. HAYNES:
Okay.
Dennis.
II BY MR. ALLISON:
12 O
Yes, let me do a follow-up.
The discussion that
('~/}
13 we have just had, I believe your testimony was that three
~
Id operators in the control room are enough to handle a transient; 15 two of them would be working the panels and one would pull the 16 procedures out.
That doesn't leave a man to sit back and watch 17 over everybody's shoulder and look at the whole picture; is I8 that correct?
I9 A
That's correct.
20 Q
In your opinion, is that man to watch over the 21 whole picture necessary?
l')
22 A
Yes.
(
23 MR. ALLISON:
That's all.
' Ac9e-oder;t Reporters, Inc.
2d BY MR. HAYNES:
25 Q
You heard this proposal about a shift engineer or a i
44 1
shift safety officer, what is your view on that?
What are
/s
(_)
2 your views on that?
3 A
I think it is a good idea.
We have them in Unit 1 x>
4 now, they are already on shift.
5 Q
What is the background and training of these 6
individuals?
Are they licensed operators?
7 A
No, no, they are all full degree engineers.
Their 8
training right now is not that much, but they are, a two-year 9
training program.
They have not guaranteed these guys a 10 license.
They told them they probably wouldn't get them a 11 license, but the training program is the same as the shift 12 supervisor as far as the plant goes, plus with his knowledge,
}
he is a four-year degree person.
He is a four-year degree 13 14 person, he just may not have his license, that's all.
But 15 he should be trained equally.
16 0
You are a shift supervisor, do you see that as any 17 challenge to you in a situation of who is in charge during 18 critical periods?
19 A
No.
20 0
Is it clear to everyone so far, that if you did have 21 a problem, who would be in charge?
22 A
The way I understand the set-up now, of course, this
( })
23 is just getting it started and we just had a meeting on it 24 yesterday, he is not going to have license.
If there is a oderd Reporters, Inc.
l Ace-I 25 decision that has to be made, the licensed person is going to I
45 1
have tx) make it.
But if he said, "Why don't you do it this
()
2 way?" you should be able to sit down and discuss it.
1 3
0 So he is input, but he is not in the decision 4
approval chain?
Is that correct?
5 A
The way it is set up right now, yes.
6 Q
Do you think it is going to be different?
7 A
I have no idea.
They have so many different letters 8
out about this now, Mr. Denton just wrote a ten-page letter.
9 Q
Denton being head of the NRR?
10 A
Yes.
There was a meeting in Philadelphia today or 11 something, and it is just something new that is just getting 12 started.
How it's going to end up, I don't have any idea.
13 I think it's basically a good idea, but I don't know where it
(}
14 is going to end up.
15 0
Well, he is not going to be licensed, you say?
16 A
May or may not be.
17 Q
Now, you were cross-licenced on Unit 2, meaning that 18 the test was administered by the Metropolitan Edison Company, 19 and that test is, from what I understand, was one written 20 examination about four hours' duration, is that correct?
21 A
It took longer than that.
(
22 Q
Well, it was less than 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />?
23 A
About 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />.
, ()
24 Q
But there was no oral examination or demonstration
. Ace Feder:4 Reporters, Inc.
25 associated with the cross license, is that correct?
I
46 1
A Not as a final written test.
During the training
(')
(/
2 program, yes, I did have orals that I was graded on.
3 Excuse me.
I did have an oral examination during the 4
course of the training program.
5 Q
For the cross license?
6 A
Yes.
7 Q
And that was administered by whom?
8 A
The training department.
9 Q
Was it necessary that you pass that oral examina-10 tion to get your cross license?
11 A
Yes.
12 Q
And when you received your license for Unit 1,
(])
13 that included about an 8-hour written examination for the 14 reactor operator's license?
15 A
Yes.
16 Q
And about an 8-hour written examination for a 17 senior reactor's license?
18 A
Yes.
19 Q
And an oral examination for the reactor operator's 20 license?
21 A
For the oral part, yes.
l 22 Q
And also did you have to do a demonstration at the 23 plant through some plant evolution to get your reactor
()
24 operator's license?
Ace.Feder-A Reporters, Inc.
25 A
No, just a talk through.
47 I
Q It was a talk through, okay.
But anyhow, there (s',h
/
2 were at least two writtens, and an oral involved to get a 3
senior reactor operator's license for you on Unit 1, is that n
4 correct?
5 A
Yes.
Q And to get a senior reactor operator's license on 6
7 Unit 2, you took an oral examination and a written examination 8
administered by the Metropolitan Edison training department, 9
is that correct?
10 I took a written test administered by the training A
11 department.
The oral examinations I took were part of the 12 training program.
When it got down to the final date, the
(}
13 test was a written test.
There wasn't an oral involved.
I4 Q
So it was one test as opposed to three, for the 15 s,enior reactor license in Unit l?
16 A
This is for the cross license.
I7 Q
Yes.
I am saying the senior reactor's license in 18 Unit 1 requires three different tests, two written examina-19 tions and an oral examination?
20 A
Right.
2I Q
The cross license on Unit 2, to receive a senior
~
(1
/
22
_)
reactor's license in Unit 2, involved one written examination?
23 A
Correct.
24 Q
The point I was trying to make is that now we are M.
er;t Reporters, Inc.
25 going to have the shift engineers, the safety engineers on l
I l
4 48 1
shift, and they will not be licensed.
What type of testing
<g
(,)
2 are they going to have, or do you know?
3 A
The way it is set up right now, is that they go O
k/
4 through the same requal program that the shift supervisor 5
does, which involves a test.
6 0
Which involves examinations?
7 A
Yes.
8 MR. HAYNES:
Okay.
That's all I kve.
9 BY MR. ALLISON:
10 0
I have one little follow-up regarding the differ-II ence of the tailpipe temperatures.
They were actually 285, 12 and I believe you reported 235, in that neighborhood, is that 13 correct?
()
Id A
Yes.
15 Q
Now looking with hindsight and knowing that that 16 is what the situation was, do you have any explanation, do 17 you know why that happened?
18 A
Why the relief was stuck open?
I9 Q
No, I guess my question -- correct me now if I am wrong.
I believe the computer was printing 285 degrees, and 20 21 you were reporting 235 to Bill Zewe, is that correct?
l 22 A
It wasn't always reading at 285 degrees.
It was 23 a different temperature.
n) 24 Q
Sometimes it was different temperatures?
(,
xe4 m f el Reporters, Inc.
25 A
There was a decrease in trend there for a while, I I
49 ll 1
remember.
o 2
Q So are you convinced now that you were reporting 3
the wrong temperature at that time, or do you know that?
O 4
A I know one of the times I gave him the wrong 5
temperature.
I saw it on the computer printout.
6 Q
And the difference was something like 230 to 280, is 7
that correct?
8 A
Yes.
9 0
And do you know why?
Did you misread a 3 for an 8?
10 A
No, what happened, it prints out on lines about like 11 this, okay?
And I punched the numbers into the computer and 12 it got like a line like this, it takes some amount of time, and O.
13 av the time 1 oeme seox to 1oox ee it, eomedoar hea turmea it-14 The electromatic relief valve temperature there might have been 15 three spaces between it and the next set of the numbers, and I 16 just looked at the numbers I wanted to see.
I did not read 17 anything but the temperatures associated with the lines.
Had I 18 read it, I would have seen that I had one of the relief valves 19 printed out twice.
I had three temperatures down there like I 20 thought I should have.
The electromagnet relief valve temperature 21 was approximately an inch and a half or 2 inches higher than the 22 numbers I was looking.
1 23 Q
So you think it was a matter of spacing or of reading 24 t;he three temperatures in and misreading what those three ice Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 t;emperatures were?
I i
}
50 1
A Right.
b 2
MR. ALLISON:
Thank you.
That is all.
3 MR. JOHNSTON:
Okay, I have some.
/\\
J 4
Do you have any questions?
5 MR. HORVICK:
No.
6 BY MR. JOHNSTON:
7 Q
Okay, I have three questions, and then I need to 8
go onto the other room also.
I want to ask you about my 9
understanding of the time period that you were in the control 10 room on the morning of the 28th.
If I understand correctly 11 from what you said before, when you got -- you were called in 12 the control room and got in there in the neighborhood of 4:08
()
13 in the control room or roughly eight minutes after it started, 14 and you left in the neighborhood of 6:30.
I guess after 15 Brian Mehler came in and sometime around 6:30 you went back 16 to the Unit 1 area and then, if I understand you correctly, you 17 did not come back into Unit 2 area in any sense of operating 18 or controlling or supervising or anything, any time the rest of 19 that day?
20 A
That's correct.
21 Q
Okay.
So I would like to ask you a little bit then, l
22 you were there for roughly the first 2-1/2 hours of the event.
23 There are a couple of things -- well, we are all fairly
(~)
s, j familiar with the sequence of events in the first couple of 24 Ace Feder:0 Reporters, Inc.
25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br />, but there are a couple of things I guess that by that
51 I
time those sets of pumps had been shut off.
The hot legged O
t/
2 temperatures, if I remember correctly, had begun to diverge.
3 I'm wondering if you were looking -- many of the people in the 4
room have testified that they were tending to look at key s
5 average readings and I guess my question to you is that weren't 6
you also looking at any of the individual temperatures of hot 7
legs and cold legs?
8 My memory is that if the temperature indicators are 9
located right beside each other, the hot leg, cold leg, and 10 T average are all in a row.
Were you looking at any of those II indicators and did you have any sense of what was going on in Il the individual hot and cold leg temperature set?
g )
A I had no sense of what was going on in that situation 13 14 I may have looked at the T hot, but probably did not look at 15 T cold.
It didn't dawn on me at that time.
16 0
You didn't have the sense of hot leg being above I7 saturation or at an unusually high temperature at the time you 18 left?
19 A
No, I didn't.
20 0
Did you have any -- what would you say was the 21 feeling, or what did people think was the extent of the problem 22 at the time that you left?
How serious was the feeling with 23 the problem of the plant and so forth?
24 I thought we had something that was serious.
We A
, Ace Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 thought, but we didn't know, it was as serious as it was for I
52 1
probably another 15 minutes or 20 minutes.
2 Q
What would be some of the things that were making 3
people feel that there was something serious?
What were some A
J 4
of the indicators?
5 A
Pressurizer level.
6 Q
That was high?
7 A
Yes, and we couldn't get it down.
8 Q
Okay.
9 A
The monitors on the reactor coolant pumps.
I should 10 say vibration monitors.
The biggest thing was the pressurized 11 level.
12 O
You shut off all the water in input and increased
(}
13 letdown as much as you could and you just weren't getting 14 anywhere with it?
15 A
Right.
16 0
In the letdown line, there is an orifice that limits 17 the maximum flow except there is a bypass around it.
As far 18 as you know, was the bypass open to maximize the downflow which 19 I guess was one of the objectives?
20 A
I did not look at it.
The discussion was, Do you 21 have a letdown flow, and he said, yes, 100 gallons a minute, or 22 something in that regard.
To get that, youiwould have to have 23 it open.
l lll 24 0
WEre you there at the time the emergency boration Ace Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 was done?
There were cases of low bron about that time.
I
53 1
A I don't recall it.
I 2
0 You don' t rec all?
3 A
No, he may have done without me knowing it.
It is
[^)
\\'
4 just a matter of starting a few pumps.
5 Q
Okay.
I was wondering if there was any feeling in 6
the room at the time the ion chambers were indicating increased 7
activity, if there was some concern about recriticality.
I 8
wonder if that was any part of the concerns.
9 A
I didn't hear about that until later on in the day 10 about the increase in counts.
11 O
I have been a little bit confused in connection 12 with the emergency boration, and you may not be the right
(
13 person to talk to, since you weren't there, but, anyway, let Id me ask you, if one pushes the button or whatevar they uid, 15 roughly, what happens?
Where does the flow ccme in?
Where is 16 it drawn from?
And, roughly, what is the flot' rate?
17 A
The pump from the boric acid mix tank into the make-18 up tank, flow rate probably 30 gallons or 40 gallons a minute, 19 with two pumps running.
20 Q
And at what concentration would the boron be?
21 A
12,000, 22 Q
Parts per million?
23 A
Yes.
And it then has to get from the make-up tank 24 to the primary system.
An-cal Reporters,1%
25 0
only through the make-up pumps?
54 1
A Right.
()
2 O
Now, is there any change in valving up or any 3
increase in the flow in the make-up pumps?
D) is 4
I mean, what you suggested is that it simply goes into the 5
make-up tank, but if the make-up pumps weren' t putting anything 6
in, then it wouldn't have gone in anyway, is that correct?
7 A
Yes.
8 Q
So that we don't, I guess -- is there any way that 9
one could determine whether the extra boron was actually put 10 into the primary system even though the button was pushed, or II whatever, to put it in?
12 A
only by analysis later on to see what your final
(~}/
13 product is.
I don't know if that was such a big concern that 14 day, because they were using the BWST for make-up, which is 15 2300 ppm., going straight into the system.
16 O
I see.
If you were on automatic on the system that 17 controls the make-up pumps, keys on the level of the pressurizer,
18 and if you were on manual -- if you were on automatic, and the 19 pressurizer level was high, then there would be essentially 20 no make-up water being put in because the valve would automatically 21 be keeping it closed?
22 A
That is right.
23 Q
Was general procedure that morning to have it on l
24 automatic or as far as you know, was it put on the manual at
,Am w;I Recorters. Inc.
25 all?
f t
55 1
A You are talking about the presurizer level, and I (j
2 don't recall as that was automatic or manual.
There was some 3
high pressure low which would be putting in boric water into the O(_,
4 system.
5 0
And that would be a manual or at least when you --
6 A
After we defeated it and controlled the rate.
7 0
would it be normal then to switch it back onto 8
automatic as soon as that immediate situation was over?
9 A
The level controller for pressurizer was probably 10 on automatic all the time.
There was no reason to put it.cn1 11 manual.
I didn't look at it, though.
12 O
Had the radioactive release begun at the time you 13 left the plant?
Were you aware of that?
{'}'
14 A
Left the plant or Unit 2?
15 Q
I'm sorry, left Unit 2.
16 A
No, we hadn't seen anything on the radiation monitors 17 yet.
18 0
okay. So there was no particular concern then at the 19 time you left as far as you can now remember of any particular 20 danger to the core or the likelihood of recovery or things were 21 getting to the point where that would become a concern?
22 A
That is true, 10 to 15 minutes after I got back to 23 Uni 1, we first saw it.
9 24 0
I had asked you a few minutes ago about what were Am-Metel Reporters, lm.
25 some of the other factors that were giving you some concern, t
t
RTL 56 and I think you mentioned a couple, and I let you stray a little i
dhh 2
bit.
Are there some other things that were a point of concern 3
that you and other people had at that time that perhaps shouldn' t
()
4 go beyond that?
You mentioned pressurizer level.
5 A
Yes.
Pressurizer level and RC drain tanks.
6 0
Yes.
A And we had had prior alarm in the reactor building.
7 8
0 Did anybody make a guess as to what caused that?
9 A
Ruptured disc on the RC drain tank.
We figured 10 the detector was sitting somewhere near it, and the steam was end #3 11 going over it.
12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 l
21 23 24 Ace.
eral Reporters, ir.
25 1
CR 7621 57 ROSE t-4 mte 1 i
G Were you surprised that the drsin tank had ruptured j
2 its disk?
3 A
I was surprised, but not shocked or anything.
If
()
all three safety valves liftod long enough, it is possible 4
5 to do that.
I could reason that through where that could 6
have happened.
7 G
So you did feel that, well, okay, the tank's 8
probably full and full enough to rupture a disk, but that 9
you could get that volume of water out plus what was already
~
10 Jeaking in previous to the start of the incident, to give you 11 a full tank in there; is that it?
12 A
Well, it's not that we filled the tank.
When the r~h 13 relief valves lift, they go into a sparger line that is N.]
14 underneath the water.
Now, if we had walled the water off 15 to where it had had water enough to create steam in there, 16 not that we had a completely solid tank.
17 G
I see.
Okay.
Were there -- my final question is, 18 and this one relates to equipment or control systems that 19 would appear to have been at least misfunctioning or not 20 really giving you the kind of information that you would 21 like to have in this two-hour period that you were there, are
~ ['1 22 there some things that you could identify there that you
( ')
23 could mention at this time?
9ederd Reponers, Inc.
24 A
No, not really.
Everything worked the way it was Ace-25 supposed to.
If we had went a different direction, everything I
58 mte 2 i
would have been fine and'we wouldn't have gotten to the 1
j 2
problem we did get into.
The pressurizer level -- well, even 3
hot leg level would have been nice to know.
That's a little 4
hard to do, but say we have a big steam bubble in both legs, 5
would have been a different indication.
6 0
Was there any feeling that you did have any, a 7
bubble or anything or a steam bubble or anything, in the hot 8
leg at the time that you left?
9 A
Not the time I left, not a steam bubble in the
~
10 hot leg.
We thought we had some steam in the reactor coolant 11 pumps, but not to the point where we had formed a bubble in 12 both hot legs.
("'
13 G
How about something that might have been interfering,
%)
14 though, with natural circulation?
15 A
Nothing that large.
16 0
You didn't feel that there was nothing, but you 17 didn't have any evidence, or how would you tell?
Perhaps I 18 should ask you that.
How could you tell if you had natural 19 circulation?
20 A
Look at temperatures, T hot and T cold, and that's 21 the only thing ';ou've got, really, to look at.
~
22 0
I think you said a few minutes ago that you didn't L
23 Particularly look at them, you were looking at"the T average, 1
24 but hadn't noticed, really, those.
f Ace oderd Reporters, Inc.
I 25 A
I didn't.
When the pumps went off, I left shortly I
59 mte 3 I
after both, all the pumps were off.
I never got into the 2
plant looking for natural circulation.
3 MR. JOHNSTON:
I think that is all the guestions I s
have.
5 MR. ALLISON:
Barry?
6 MR. HORVICK:
. 'o.
7 BY MR. ALLISON:
8 g
One last question that I have just thought of.
You 9
mentioned that if you had gone in a different direction things 0
10 would have been all right.
The direction that you have in II mind, leaving on the HPI in its emergency injection mode with 12 the valves wide-open, two pumps on?
r ^,
13
()
A Yes, that's one thing.
Before that, even, if we Id had closed the block valve, the whole thing would have gone 15 away a lot sooner.
16 g
Let me ask a question about high-pressure injection I7 system.
Is that initiated automatically?
18 A
Yes.
I9 g
Does that happen once in a while?
20 A
Yes.
2I G
In plant operation?
. l 22 A
Yes, in Unit 2.
23 0
Do you have any feeling for about how often that (1
(~
24
)
happens?
l Ace Federd Reporters, Inc.
25 A
Most of the time on a turbine trip, or frequently 1
i l
i
60 mte 4 I
on a turbine trip, let me put it that way.
2 G
Any feeling as to how often that is?
3 A
No, I can't give you a number.
G d
O Would it be ten times a year?
5 A
Unit 2 hasn't been around that long.
Unit 1, we 6
didn't have that problem.
Unit 2, we did have the problem, 7
and it has h appened probably three or four times.
8 G
During while Unit 2 was running, it probably happened 9
three or four times?
How often would it have happened on 10 Unit l?
II A
Never.
s I2 O
You never had an ECCS actuation on Unit l?
s 13 A
No, I can't remember any.
g)
Id G
Have you had an ECCS actuation for, any other 15 reason on Unit l?
16 A
No.
17 0
I have the impression that ECCS actuations occur 18 rather regularly.
19 A
On Unit 2.
20 0
In Unit 2 and on other PWRs as well, so that the 21 operator is actually in the habit of turning it off when it 22 comes on automatically?
Is that your impression?
l l
23 A
No, Unit 1 it never happened.
Unit 2, it does 24 happen.
! Ace Federcl Reporters, Inc.
25 0
All right.
I think that is all the questions we I
61 mte 5 i
have.
1 Mr. Bryan, I want to thank you very much for your cooperation.
2 W
appreciate it.
We will close the interview, and we may get 3
back to you later with some questions.
But as far as we can tell you now, we are done.
5 (Whereupon, at 9:42 a.m.,
the interview was e-4 adjourned.)
7 8
9 10 l
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 l
21 22 23
,rt
\\
q,)
24 Aca Federc4 Reporters, Inc.
25 l
l i