ML19343D428
| ML19343D428 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1980 |
| From: | Raymond W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105040459 | |
| Download: ML19343D428 (23) | |
Text
AR:ar 1 _
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA l
(}
2 NUCLEAR RESULATORY COMMISSION 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x 4
In the matter of:
{}
e 5
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY 3
8 6
(Three Mile Island, Unit 2) o R
8 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x s
j 8
Room 332
,3 d
9 East-West Building i
Bethesda, Maryland 10 g
Tuesday, October 7, 1980 g
11 3
d 12 INTERVIEW OF WILLIAM JOSEPH RAYMOND Ea
('s y
13 commenced at 1:00 p.m.,
pursuant to notice.
s) m E
14 APPEARANCES:
du E
15 NORMAN MOSELEY, Office of Inspection & Enforcement, i
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
j 16 w
JOHN CRAIG, Office of Inspection & Enforcement, d
17 Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
18 TERRY HARPSTER, Office of Inspection & Enforcement, 5
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
19 2
5 RICHARD h0EFLING, ESQ., Of fice of the Executive Legal
(
20 Director, Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
21 22
,. ()
23,
-o00-l 24 i
()
25 i
j t
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
L
%Io30t/o4!59
2 1
_P _R _O _C _E _E _D _I _N _G _S 2
MR. HARPSTER:
Bill, the purpose of this investigation 3
is to continue our inquiry into the flow of information at 4
Three Mile Island on March 28th, 1979.
s O
e 5
Would you raise your right hand.
8 1
3 6i Whereupon, h
1 n
R 7
v!ILLIAM JOSEPH RAYMOND b,
n j
8, was called as a witness and, having been first duly sworn, was 0
9 examined and testified as follows:
io 4
10
_E _X _A _M _I N _A _T _I _O _N E
11 '
BY MR. HARPSTER:
<3 g
12 Q
Would you state your full name for the record,.please.
5 g
13 A
William Joseph Raymond.
}
("T
=
i
\\~J wg 14 Q
Okay.
b r
15 BY MR. MOSELEY:
ax j
16 O
Bill, in early May of 1979, you were asked, I'believe, w
d 17 by members of the IE investigation team cout a discussion that w
/
5 18 you had, or discussion you overheard which included Gary Miller
=
l
{"
I 19 !
on Friday, March the 30th, concerning the pressure spike in n
20 containment.
Also -- well, at that time, that is in May, you 21 said that you had notes on this conversation, and you have, 22 prior to b,eginning this interview -- you indicated that you had j
.23 with you a copy of notes that you had taken during that time i
24l period; is that correct?
l
)
25 A
That's correct.
i l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
3 l
1' Q
Referring to your notes and your recollection, can you
~
2 describe for us this conversation on March 30, and its
,\\
%)
3 participants, and what the substance of the discussion was?
4 A
Okay.
As indicated by nctes that I have recorded f
k_)
L e
5 on 10:15 in the morning on March the 30th, I was in the shift X
l 6
supervisor's office, participating in a shift turnover in which R
7 NRC people coming in and going off shift got together with Met
)
Aj 8
Ed people coming on shift, going off shift, gathered in the i
d
[
9 shift supervisor's office to present the summary of pinnt status
\\
zog 10 and where they are headed for during that day.
I 11 During chat turnover meeting, the subject of the I
3 l
12 containment pressure spike on Wednesday came up, and as I recall 5
j 13 it, the subject came up as part of an offhand discussion between n
=
\\' ~')
x 5
14 Gary Miller and some other members, Met Ed people, who were in l
b I
=
15 the room.
.g
=
j 16 During the discussion, it was -- the disuussion went
'A d
17 l along cne liucs of the recollection of events and kind of putting 5
i
}
18 together information.
If they hadn't done it prior to this time, P
h 19 they recognized that there was the spike in the building pressure, n
20 and there was an activation of the building spray, and I guess 2I Gary Miller, putting those events together with his own recollec-22 tion of hearing a thud, from this point in the control room at (gJ 23 that time, tuey put this information together and realized maybe i
24 for the first time that there had been an actual burn in the (o) 25 containment, or an explosion of hydrogen, something to that i
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
4 1
effect.
2 Q
Mr. Raymond, at the time or in early May, some af
}
3 the people who were working on the investigation were asked to
)
prepare some information about the knowledge of the pressure 4
e 5
spike, and I have in front of me a draft of some information 5
6P that was put together by-that group.
I'd like to read the l
e i
7 appropriate question into the record, and then we will discuss tha ta l
yn j
8 "In an additional interview NRC Inspector d
t d
9 William Raymond conducted at approximately 11:15 z'
Og 10 a.m. on May 8, 1979, Inspector Raymond stated E
I h
11 his notes reflect a meeting conducted on March 3
p 12 30, 1979 in which Mr. Gary Miller, section 5
d 13 superintendent, was asked to comment on the
()
14 March 28 activation of the containment spray 5
9 15 system.
1.'spector Raymond states that Miller, N.'
16 in discussing the event, recalled hearing a j
w d
17 '
thump at his location in the Unit 2 control 18
- room, concurrent with the activation of an 4
C.
{
19 EMOV valve in the containment by one of the t
20 CROs, and concurrent with the activation of the i
21 containment spray system.
Inspector Raymond 22 recalls Miller's postulation of an association
()
23!
between these three events and the possibility I
24 I that a hydrogen burn may have occurred. "
(~T
'~#
25,
Mr. Raymond, you sail earlier you recall that Miller l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
r 5
I was present in this conversation to which your notes refer to, I
n.
which this. thing that I just read refers to; is that correct?
V 3
A Yes, that's correct.
0 4
Q Do you recall Mr. Miller linking the noise that he Iv 5
)
y heard with the activation of the containnent spray in that 9
]
6{
conversation?
I cE y
By that, I mean did he indicate to you or say words
}
A
[
8 to the effect that he was aware of both of these on March 28?
0 9l
~*
i!!
.A I don't think Gary Miller's remarks were that h10 specific, to the point where he said that on March 28th, on II i Wednesday, he was aware of both the spike in the building i
a 1
5-II lI pressure, along with the spray activation, and put that together
- 4.,
5 at that time with the noise that he had heard in the control i
14 room.
i:
~
j 15 '
All that I was a party to on that morning was the
=
j 16 conversation -- well, in that conversation, both -- all three
- ri i
i l
- h. I7 i elements were mentioned, namely the noise that was heard, the i
E 18 spike in the building pressure, along with the building spray w
I9 activation.
5 20 '
Now when Miller or anybody else became aware of each 21 one of those things individually, it could have transpired any 22 l time within the last two days.
I had no idea when.
23
~
BY MR. HOEFLING:
l f
24l Q
Miller didn't say something to the effect, "I hmrd 5
2 the thud, I remember hearing the thud"?
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
6 1
A Words to that effect,'right.
(~'
2 Q
That would indicate that he knew obviously of the noise d
3 at the time he heard it, which would be on Wednesday; right?
4 Did he say anything to the effect that, "I recall the sprays
{)
e 5
coming on," or 'T recall seeing the pressure spike"?
h j
6 Let's stay with the spray for a minute.
n'
}
E 7
A Okay.
If I can just think for a minute and try to s
j 8
recapture the words.
It was something to the effect of Miller G
}
=}
9 speaking now, talking to somebody else, " Yeah, do you remember
}
g 10 '
the thud, and do you remember at the same time somebody said, 3_
?
j p
11l you know, the pressure -- building pressure is going up or
~
3 g
12 the building spray was coming on," and, " Hey, guys, that 5
13 probably was a burn in the' containment," that sort of thing.
j
-s sd I
l 14 Q
Did Miller -- I don' t know if I'm reading you right --
2 15 did Miller indicate that he knew on the 28th that the sprays j
16 had come on and that the pressure had spiked?
Perhaps that's e
d 17 separate events in his mind that he didn't put together until 18 la ter, but did he seem to indicate he was awara of thoso on the i
f
{g 19 28th?
20 A
Nothing that was said when I was there told me that
+
21 Gary was aware of the spray and the spray activation actuation 22 and the pressure spike on Wednesday.
It was always -- he's 23 speaking now in the present tense to events that had occurred on t
i 24 Wednesday.
()
25 j Q
okay.
l i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
7 1
A Okay.
g 2
/~s 2
BY MR. MOSELEY:
(_)
3 Q
Then the specific wording-that said -- in this draft 4
that I refarred you to, " Inspector Raymond states that Miller, e
5 in discussing the event, recalled hearing a thud at his location-d rl 6
in the Unit 2 control room, concurrent with the -activation of
-n 8
7 an EMOV valve in the containment by one of the CROS, and j
8; concurrent with the activation of the containment spray," is d
d 9
not an accurate reflection of your understanding of the Miller --
I E
10 or the discussion that involved Miller on March 30th.
I E=
g 11 Would you like to look at the words?
u j
12 A
Yeah, let'me look at those words again.
5j 13 (Witness examining document.)
=
14 Okay.
Can we maybe try to clarify what we are 5
2 15 trying to clarify?
Whether or not Gary had knowledge on March y
16 28th of the three different things that happened as compared w
g 17 to whether or not here he was sitting Friday morning, and some-5 18 where along the line he had heard about the three different
{
19 things and all of a sudden put them together?
I guess I am n
[
20 pretty hard pressed to differentiate now as to what was going 21 on then, but I would maybe contradict what I said earlier today 22 now and say maybe he did have that information.
23,
In other words, he was aware of the spray, he was 24 aware of the pressure spike on Wednesday.
1lO
\\~l 25 j Q
Whatever your recollection is, is what we want, L
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1 8
[
l whatever your best recollection is, given your notes and this 2
other draf t which was prepared in that same timeframe.
g 3
A Okay.
em 4
Q Recognizing that the draft probably was not prepared-h,'N-]
5 by you, but prepared by someone else-based on what you had told e
5 3
3 6 !
them.
R S
7 A
Right.
And this is really just a summary of what I a
j 8;
had told Bob Martin.
d d
9 BY MR. HOEFLING:
?
iog 10 0
The whole object is to try to focus in on the Friday g
11 conversation as best as you can recollect it, refreshing yourself 3
g 12 with these materials, to identify what Gary knew then and
=
.h 13 possibly as a result of conversations, what you think he
(_/
l 14 indicated to you on the 28th.
2 15 A
As I recall the discussions then on Friday morning, g'
16 Gary was putting together a relationship between those three A
d 17 events for the first time, which is the way that I saw him or E
18 the way that I heard the conversations.
5
{
19 BY MR. MOSELEY:
n 20 0
Well, when you say " putting together the relation-
+
21 ship," do you mean the fact that at this point in time it 22 can be concluded -- by Frilay it could be concluded that there 6
(~)
23 was an explosion?
Okay, you are saying that he was putting j
24 together and coming to that conclusion on Friday; is that correct?
'(["l 25 A
That's correct.
i i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
9 1
Q Okay.
Now the question we are trying to address 2
ourselves to is which of the other pieces of information do you 3
believe Miller had on Wednesday, even if he didn' t come to the 4
hydrogen thing until Friday?
g 5
A I can only speculate that he-had knowledge of all 8
9 k
j 6-three events, and I cannot say for certain that he did because, t
- ~
g 7
one, I wasn't in the control room on Wednesday with him; and aj 8
two, in comments that were made, it wasn' t all that clear.
d d
9 BY MR. HOEFLING:
7:
h 10 0
The comments that were made on Friday?
3_
E 11 A
On Friday.
d j
12 Q
Miller didn't stand up and say, "I knew all these 5d 13 three things on Wednesday"?
()
14 A
Oh, for sure.
5 2
15 Q
The thud, I think from what you said, it was clear
~
16 g
that he obviously knew about the -- it was th e other two elements t
x 6
17 that were uncertain, the spray pumps and the spike?
I 18 A
I cannot make a positive statement one way or another.
if
{
19 My tendency is that, yeah, he did know about all three things A
20 on Wednesday, es best as I recall.
21 MR. CRAIG:
Can we go off the record for a second?
a' 22 (Discussion off the record.)
()
23 (Whereupon, the reporter read from the record, 24 as requested.)
g
(-)
25[
(Discussion off the record.)
l f
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 5
i i
10 1
BY MR. HOEFLING:
(~}
2 Q
Okay, Bill, before you were read a statement which
\\,
3 came from a draft document.
That draft document was a reconstruc-4 tion by an I&E interviewer of an oral interview that he conducted v
e 5
with you, and that statement dealt with the conversation you had 2
N 6
with Gary Miller on Friday morning.
R
{
7 Now that statement, is it viewed by you as accurate,,
s j
8 or do you wish to add to it or clarify it in any way at this time?
dd 9
A Okay.
I guess, to begin with, one of the statements io G
10 made by this draft statement indicated that Miller was requested
.E g
11 to address the events on March 30th.
I'm looking for the 3
g 12 specific words here.
5 I
d 13 l Oh.
Mr. Miller was asked to comment on the March
()
l l
14 28th activation of containment spray system.
It's not as though 2
15 he was'really asked to talk about containment spray or what y
16 happened -- what specifically happened on March 28th.
The s
g 17 l subject came up in kind of an impromptu discussion between himself 18 and a couple of other individuals in the room.
~
P
{
19 O'
Was Jim Higgins in that discussion?
n 20 A
I believe Jim was there.
21 Q
Okay.
)
22 A
But, now, understand it wasn't a discussion between
]
l 23,
NRC and Met Ed.
24 Q
It was amongst the Met Ed people?
O'
'~
25 I A
It was Met Ed people talking about events as they l
t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l
-+e-TI!
'48) e[<<
4 e
.. e. Ev <e 1,.
TEST TARGET (MT-3)
==
l.l bbb
.]
l
/
].8 1.25 1.4 I.6
\\
/
s" a
- 4
+<$
4
'$ )44
+%f,,4//)x g
f
- +Me/
'% 4 4A s
-E E_ _
TEST TARGET (MT-3) l.0 gang y !8 LM I.l Qm ll!M LL l.25 1.4 1.6
\\
$h y%ih 'III
& $e /s,4 r
+ /4 vg 7//
4,4 4v 4
11 I
recalled tnem happening.
i( f^}
2 Now let me go through this' -- read through this -as f,.
v 3
it is worded.
4 Miller, in discussing the events, recalled hearing a
\\
e 5
thump at his location in the Unit 2 control room, concurrent 3a 3
6 with the actuation of the EMOV valve in the containment by one
^n R
7 I
of the CROS and concurrent with the activation of the containment
-nj 8
spray system.
d 0
9
)
I'm not quite sure that's accurate, in that Ga ry on
?
)
10 Friday morning was saying that on Wednesday he heard a thump, l
3 l
11 and yeah, it was concurrent with the activation of-the spray 3
g 12 system.
At least I'm not sure.
E 13 0
Okay.
In this particular statement, there are two
)
h 14 elements _that the sentences associated with the thump.
The
$j 15 first element is actuation of the EMOV.
=
j 16 Now, in that conversation on Friday, did you have 6
17 j the view that Gary was saying that he was aware of the EMOV x
~.:.
5 18 actuation at or nearly at the time of the thump?
Can you speak
[{
19 to that?
n 20 A
On Friday morning's discussion, I cannot say i
21 specifically whether or not Gary was aware of the EMOV actuation
+
22 or the activation of the containment spray system at the same
("g l
t
('/
23 l time he heard the thump, er whether or not the activation of 24 the containment spray and the pressure spike on the building O'
25l was knowledge that he obtained since then, since Wednesday N
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
12 1
=orning.
(')Y 2
O Okay.
So you can't recall anything specifically on u
3 that point during the Friday conversation.
(~
4 Did you get an i=pression or general impression that g
5 he had this knowledge fro =.the way he was speaking or conducting na j
6 the discussions?
R 7
A
[
As I heard the statements made Friday =orning, I could j
81 not say whether -- when specifically Gary had all the infor=ation a
d 9
z.
available to him that was available on Fridav..
10 All that I heard was the putting together of the z=
{
11 three different events as stated here or, you know, just putting 3
Y 12 together the different events.
That's the best I can do.
Can we go off the record?
=
2 5
14 (Discussion off the record.)
+=
j 15 sy ga, nogyLIng:
g' 16 0
Okay, Bill.
Do you have any reason to believe that 17 Miller heard a thud at acercxi=ately 2:00 c.=. on March 28th?
=
{
18 A
Yes, I do, based on the conversation that I heard on
=
8 I9 g
Friday.
As Gary spoke about things that occurred in the Unit 2 20 control roo= on Wednesday, the way he said it would appear to 21 show objectively that Gary knew about the thud on Wednesday.
22 Q
Can you recall what he said?
i (~)
r.,
D A
I'm going to very loosely, if I could sun =arize his d
24 words, it's something to the effect of, "Do yc2 rene=her when we
, ()
25 ?I heard the thud on Wednesday?"
k 2
li ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
{
t
13 1
Q Okay.
Now let's go to actuation of the containment
?
2 sprays, which we all~now know occurred on Wednesday at approxi-3 mately 2:00 p.m., March 28th.
)
Do you have any reason to believe that Gary Miller 4
v e
5 knew at or close to the time of the actuation of the sprays that M
9 1
they had actually actuated?
3 6!
g e
i 4
R 7
A As I recall, in the same statement where Gary talked I
sj 8,
about hearing the thud, he may have also mentioned the actuation dd 9
of the building spray, which again,. thinking back on_it, would
\\
3i) 10 seem to indicate he knew of both of those events at the same z=
1 g
11 time.
3 4
12 Q
You say he may have mentioned it.
You're not certain?
z.
=
13 A
I'm not certain, based upon what I remember now, and
()
g 14 I'm probably relying upon the statements made back in May -- on x"
2 15 !
May 8th of 1979.
j 16 ;
Q You're referring now to the draft statement?
w i
g 17 l A
That's correct.
y 5
18 Q
You recognize that draft statement was a reconstructior.
e[
19 of an oral interview?
n 20 A
That's correct.
I recognize that, but again, after I
21 '
thinking about this, and talking about what I recall, I would --
l i
22 I would -- I seem to -- I'm not being very positive here.
I
(-)
~
23l will state that he appeared to have known about the actuation 4
24 I of the containment spray system, as well as the thud, on the 25.l 28th.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
b
i 14 1
Q Okay.
Now let's turn to the pressure spike indication l
e 2
which again, as we all now know, was recorded at the time of
(
3 the hydrogen burn on 3/28, approximately 2:00 p.m.
4 Do you have any reason.to believe that Gary Miller e
5 knew of that recording at or close to the time it was actually 2"
f 3
6 made on the 28th?
l I
7 A
No.
In the conversations that I overheard on Friday j
8 morning, there is nothing that I remember in hearing that would l
e d
9 indicate that Gary positively knew about the pressure spike.
}
i 10 0
Was the pressure spike discussed?
g 11 A
On Friday morning, the pressure. spike, together with 3
y 12 the building spray activation, together with the thud, were all 5
d 13 mentioned as -- were all mentioned during the discussion in
() l 14 support of the conclusion that, yeah, that was probably a 2
15 hydrogen burn on Wednesday.
E y
16 Q
But to your recollection, there was no indication by w
b^
17 Miller that he knew of a pressure spike on the 28th?
18 A
To my recollection, there was no indication that he f[
19 knew of the pressure spike.
-r:
20 Q
Okay.
Turning to the actuation of the EMOV valve on 21 3/28 at approximately 2:00 p.m. when the hydrogen burn occurred, 22 do you have any reason to believe that Miller knew of that on
\\
23 3/28, in the timeframe of the hydrogen burn?
24 l A
In regard -- I can be least positive in my statements
(-
25 ~
regarding the EMOV, because I cannot recall that a t all now, i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
3 15 I
so I'll --
I 2
rm Q
You cannot recall that at all, looking at this draft i, ( )
m 3
document, which indicates you speaking to that point to the I&E i
f j
4 interviewer?
This does not help you refresh your recollection
, s.
t x/
5) l on that point?
i 9,
l i
g 6;
A That's correct.
g i,
7 BY MR. MOSELEY:
R j
8l Q
Let me clarify one thing.
Earlier Mr. Hoefling asked d"
9
~.
you about the pressure spike.
I believe he was talking about i
3 10 the chart recording of the pressure spike.
Was your answer 3_
1 5
II directed toward knowledge of the chart recording of the pressure B
d 12 E
spike?
3 13 l 5
l A
Yes, but I'm having a hard time differentiating
,s
! )
=
\\/
3 j4 g
between a chart recording and any statements made regarding u
h 15 building pressure.
I think they are one and the same, in my mind.
~
E I0 Q
Okay.
Then it's related to the chart, of the knowledge A
l C
17 '
g of the magnitude of the pressure increase?
E I
3 IO l A
Correct.
F i
8 19 {
Q Okay.
Good.
n 0l Now, Mr. Raymond, we have had prior testimony i
2I concerning an order to not start equipment on March 28 inside 22 '
f containment.
I believe before the interview tarted, you said
- l. r'N
\\~/
23 '
you didn't arrive in the control room until about mid. tight on 4l March 28; is that correct?
o)
(_
25 i
A That's correct.
t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l 16 g
1l Q
Subsequent to your arrival about midnight on March 1
2 28th, did you hear an order to not start equipment inside 3
containment?
F-5 4
A Would this be an order from the Commission to Met Ed?
I
(_)
5 Q
This w ould be an order by someone in authority in.
e R
6 Met Ed to the operators.
t c
E i
2 7i A
May I refer to my notes?
8 0
Certainly.
J d
9 A
I don't recall there being an order not to start i
j h
10 equipment in containment, but let me fall back on anything that 3_
E 11 might be written here to shed light on that subject.
L j
12 Q
Fine.
E E
13 A
(Witness examining document.)
(2) i g
14 I I'm talking about the period from --
uu E
15 Q
From your arrival, where you might have knowledge --
ji j
16 i A
On site, too.
Okay.
2 i
i i
17 I have nothing in my notes, nor do I recall any p
z i
=
{
18 l specific order on the part of Met Ed not to start equipment 19 l inside the containment.
20 0
Do you have recollection of any such order being l
l 21 given at a later time?
r 22 A
Not offhand.
()
23 I Q
Like Friday or later?
h 24 A
I cannot be positive.
(
25 Q
You don't recall either way?
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1 17 1
A After the knowledge of the hydrogen in the core, as
(~}
2 well as the burn inside the building became general knowledge, v
3 there may have been a general understanding not to change the 4
state of electrical equipment inside the containment, but I'm e
5 not positive.
M N
6 Q
Do you believe that such an order was given, or you N'
2 7
h just don't have a recollection one way or the other?
8 A
I don't have a recollection.
\\
Gd 9
Q Okay.
What time did you arrive in-the observation i
j 3:
10 center?
What time did you arrive?
You went directly there f'
5 5
11 upon arriving in the vicinity?
[
4 12 A.
That's correct.
E I have roughly 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday,
=
=
13 3/28.
(Z) :
y 14 Q
Were you in the vicinity of Mr. Herbein during the i
2 15 period of time that you were in the observation center?
2 g
16 A
Yes.
y 17 l 0
Constantly occupying the same room or something?
/
E 18 A
More or less, off and on. As things went that day, s
E 19 I got to the observation center.
When I first arrived, I didn't n'
20 even known Jack Herbein was there.
I did join up with Met Ed i
21 '
people who were gathered around the table on which there was a l
22 survey map and they were correlating environmental data for the P
\\-
23 offsite releases.
I stayed with them for "X"
number of minutes, 24 l gathering -- essentially gathering information, trying to get
(~S l
25 status information as to what was going on.
Some time after that, i
I l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l 18 1
I became aware that Herbein was in an anteroom'right j
2 off the main foyer where the environmental people were set up, 3
and was in phone conversation with the plant.
Specifically I s
4 recall him talking to Gary Miller, recognizing Miller's voice,
\\
e 5
and I then sat down with Herbein and listened to the exchange 3n j
6, of information that was going on then.
E M
7 0
About what time was this, do y, ar notes have that?
l T
nj 8
A Okay.
What I have in my notes is a diagram of the d
d 9
reactor coolant system that was reconstructed during that time, Y
h 10 and I have written down roughly 5:10 as to the plant status, z=
g 11 5:10 p.m.
3 p
12 Q
So does that mean that you believe that this
=,
13 l conversation occurred about 5:00, 5:15, somewhere in there?
=
(]
2 t-l g
14 A
Oh, yes, most definitely.
I y
i 2
15 Q
Do you recall the substance of the conversation
)
5 y
16 between Herbein and Miller, or do your notes indicate?
A 6
17 I A
Well, in general, Herbein had copied down a schematic y
18 of the RCS to which he had listed several pertinent primary E
19 parameters.
?
20 Q
Which were?
21 A
Do you want to hear them all?
4 22 0
Yes.
()
23 A
okay.
What I'll do is read what I have here in 24 writing as general notes, and if you're looking for all pertinent
, ()
25,:
information that was available about the plant status, at least I'
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l
19 1
as transmitted to me,'I'll --
2 Q
No, what-I'm really interested in is the substance
)
3 of a conversation between Miller and Herbein, if your notes 4
indicate that.
(v-)
g 5
A Oh, I think the bottom line of that conversation was N
6l that Herbein and Miller were talking about where they were, t
R R
7 plantwise, plant status, and where they needed to go, and Herbein s
j 8.
was giving some pretty positive directions, and needed to get d
9 the high pressure pumps back on to get the plant solid.
Y 10 Q
To repressurize the plant; is that the discussion that 3
11 was going on?
Herbein believed that that was the proper thing 12 l to do?
l A'
Yes.
E
()
I z
3 14 0
Okay.
b r
15!
BY MR. CRAIG:
w f.16 Q
Did Herbein order Miller to restart the pump?
You z
17 said strong direction, then we characterized it as --
N E
18 A
Well, I've got it written down here.
Order to take P
{
19 5
plant solid, open PORV and put on all high head pumps.
l 20 '
Q This is an order given by Herbein to Miller?
i 21 A
Yeah, it wasn't, "I order you to do it," but a l
22 pretty strong suggestion after -- following the conversation in (T~)
23 '
which they pursued alternatives and Herbein convinced Miller 24 l that there was probably no other better way to go.
" Gary, you've
, ()
25 got to do it."
P i
I l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
20
.1 MR. MOSELEY:
Okay, that completes this interview.
!O 2
tusereogem, ee 1,so g.
., tu, 1,,,,,1, 3
concluded.)
- O j
5 "a
i 3
6 l
e
~n
(
8.
I I
d ci 9
ie b
10 E
=
11 E
-i 3R d
12 I
z
=
l 5
! O
=
13 1 1
E 14
..i N
E L
2 15 m
[
2 b
I$
.j
,f E
17 m
L M
18 I
19 8
I t
r n
t l
h 20 l
?
~
l 21 f
!O i
23 ;
i e
l J
24
!O
[
25 I
e
(
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
J NUC' EAR REGUT A"ORY CO!?iISSION
,4 w
w.4..
.7
.w,.
..w. a. 3...c.w.,.,
e.
.s.
w.
w..
...w.
.w.
.~
J.
'd it: th e *:a t t e."
O f: METROPOLITAN EDISON CO(THI II) s' a. e ~.#
wc=.=r..'
October 7, 1980
.~,
.e Decket N u=!: e. :
. lac e O f. !*0 C eeC i".5 :
Bethesda, Md.
.. e.e a.
u.. a..T e.=.n u.. a..e s. e C.. e d.e.e. p
.=..e. s. u. =... u..s,
t.,. u. a c<.g.,.. '...:
e..t..t
.t se w
yp w
..Jw.
yr
. h. a..n a. p *.*. e
. %. a.
.49 e'
. %. a,.
- .m ww m4 4 w,.. e. e 4
. s.
w w.
.w.
w.
._ND b,
.* c.e t 4..c.T
- 3. a.. e w =..s..e
( ~ 7. a. A,.,\\
y-s
...p D
/1 L.
9
- ~ c..<..
e.
s.e
..g...w.
w.
w.
.5 s
k e
- U P
Q o
UNITE] STATES g
8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[/
o g
r REGION I O,
[
631 PARK AVENUE
/
KING OF PRUS$1A, PENNSYLVANIA 19406 FILE NO, WJP/VY/80-24
,.G, DATE: December 29, 1980 T0:
/ Noman C. Moseley, Director, DROI
<...i:
William J. Raymond, Resident Inspector, Yemont Yankee N.P.S.
SUBJECT:
TESTIMONY CORPICTIONS I have reviewed the transcript of the testimony I gave on October 7,1980, regarding the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 accident.
I have no substantive corrections, additions or coccents to make regarding that testimony.
Please contact ce if I can be of any further assistance.
,.U.
William Jg Rayr.d Resident Inspector Vemont Yankee N.P.S.
cc:
John W. Craig RRI Memo File WJR:eci
/T L,!
.