ML20072J033
| ML20072J033 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/08/1982 |
| From: | Scheimann F GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| TASK-*, TASK-01, TASK-02, TASK-03, TASK-06, TASK-1, TASK-2, TASK-3, TASK-6, TASK-GB NUDOCS 8306290884 | |
| Download: ML20072J033 (112) | |
Text
.
t UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 888 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
,s
_ _ _x U
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORPORATION, JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY and
- 1. ]
PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, Plaintiffs, s
-against-80 Civ. 1683 8
(R.O.)
THE BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY and J.
RAY M cDE RMOTT &
CO.,
INC.,
8 i
Defendants.
- - - - -x Continued deposition of General Public Utilities Corporation by FREDERICK J.
SCHEIMANN, O
taken by Defendants, pursuant to a d j o urn me nt,-
at the offices of Davis Polk & Wardwell, Esqs.,
One Chase Manhattan Plaza, New York, New York, on Tuesday, June 8,
1982, at 9:55 o' clock in the forenoon, before,Harvey B.
Kramer, RPR, Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York.
DOYLE REPORTING, INC.
CERTIFIED STENOTYPE REPORTERS 369 LEXINGTON AVENUE
(
WALTER SHAPIRO, C.S.R.
NEw YQaw. N.Y.
10017 CHARLES SHAPIRO, C.S.R.
TELEPHONE 212 - 867 8220 8306290884 820608 PDR ADOCK 05000289 T
1 889 2
Appe aran ce s
(_
3 4
KAYE, SCHOLER, FIERMAN, HAYS & HANDLER, ESQS.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
')
5 425, Park Avenue New York, New York 6
By:
ANDREW MacDONALD, ESQ.,
7 of Counsel 8
9 10 DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL, ESQS.
Attorneys for Defendants 11 One Chase Manhattan Plaza New York, New York
~
By:
WILLIAM E.
WURTZ, ESQ.,
13 of Counsel 14 15 16 KILLIAN & GEPHART, ESQS.
Attorneys for the Witness 17 Box 886 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 18 By:
JANE G.
PENNY, ESQ.,
19 of Counsel 20 21 Also Present:
22 JONATHAN QUINN, Law Assistant, Davis Polk & Wardwell, Esqs.
23 24
1 8R0 2
F RE DE R I CK J.
S CHE I MAN N,
(~)h
\\-
3 resumed, having been previously duly sworn 4
by a Notary Public, was examined and
')
5 testified further as follows:
6 EXAMINATION (Continued) 7 By MR. wuRTz:
0 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like to show you 9
two exhibits that have been previously marked in 10 the course of depositions in this action. One is 11 Exhibit 246 and the second is Exhibit 186.
These 12 are both B&W exhibits.
They represent reports 13 by GPU and Met Ed concerning the April 23, 1978
(
14 trip and HPI initiation at Unit 2.
15 I would 1 Eke you to look first at 16 Exhibit 246.
If you could turn to page 2,
there 17 is a synopsis of this incident.
10 In particular I would like to call your
'19 attention to the last paragraph on page 2.
It 20 re ads as follows:
"The safety valves failing to
- /' 21 reseat coupled with overfeeding caused a rapid 22 depressurization and cooldown of the reactor coolant 23 system. -The RCS went from 583F to 464F in three 24 minutes.
The RCS shrinkage from the cooldown caused 25 the pressurizer to drop below the indicated level
\\_
+ -.
s
.,, - +..
1 Scholmann 891 2
range approximately one minute after the reactor O
(_/
3 trip."
~
4 Do you see that paragraph?
')
5 A
Yes, sir.
6 MR. MacDONALD:
That is a portion of the 7
paragraph.
8 THE WITNESS:
Yes, it wasn't the 9
complete one.
10 Q
There is one more sentence which reads, 11 "Due to the rapid depressurization of the RCS, P.SFAS 12 safety injection occurred approximately one minute 4
13 after the reactor trip."
()
I 14 My question is, were you aware before 15 the accident that during the course of this e ven t 16 pressurizer dropped below the indicated level 17 range?
18 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of whether 19 I was aware of this or not.
20 Q
Were you aware before the accident 21 that in the firs t three ministes of this event the 22 temperature dropped from approximately 583F to 464F?
23 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of the 24 specifics involved.
25 I had variously, various times reviewed v
?
1 Scheimann 892 2
these LERs but I can't recall a specific one.
f'h
(_)
3 Q
I don't think this is an LER.
I think 4
this is a report from Met Ed.
'}
5 Do you see that?
6 A
Yes, sir.
l I
It does appear to be a report.
O Q
Do you recall reviewing this report?
9 A
- Sir, I' don't have a recollection of it.
l 10 Q
Do you recall reviewing reactor trip 11 reports like this one, prepared by Met Ed after 1~9 reactor trips at Unit 27 13 A
Sir, I have reviewed some, but I don't l
14 recall just which ones they were at the present 15 time.
16 Q
You have reviewed some reactor trip 17 reports; is that right?
18 A
Yes, sir.
19 Q
Were you aware before the accident 20 that there was a temperature drop of this magnitude i
21 that occurred in this transient, leaving aside now 22 whether you knew those exact numbers?
I am not 23 trying to hold you to a precise number, but I am 24 asking you whether you were aware that there was a 25 drop of this magnitude, of over a hundred degrees vO i
t
1 Schaimann 893 2
Fahrenheit.
- ,,_/
3 MR. MacDONALD:
In the first three 4
minutes?
')
5 MR. WURTZ:
Well, during the early 6
stages of the transient.
7 Q
I am not really holding you to a 8
p re cis e time or precise temperature.
9 A
Sir, in this particular transient, 10 I don't have a recollection of what happened 11 during the transient.
12 However, as I recall,*this was one 13 where I was not up on shift at that particular time.
/~N 14 Q
So you don't recall whether you were 15 aware of the temperature drop then of that 16 nagnitude; is that right?
17 A
No, sir, I don't recall of it at the 18 present time.
19 Q
Could you look at graphs D and E in this 20 Exhibit 2467 21 Do you see that graph D shows that 22 pressurizer level went down to the zero indicated 23 level as shown on graph D?
24 A
Yes, sir, that is what it shows on this 25 graph.
\\.
1 Scheimann 894 2
Q Do you see on graph E the temperature
(_)
3 went down to approximately 460 and remained there 4
at least for the first 26 minutes of the
'N 5
event, as shown on this graph?
)
6 A
That is what the graph shows, sir.
7 Q
Now would you look back at graph D at 8
the pressure, which is the middle curve there.
9 Do you see that?
Pressure was below 1600 10 from approximately two minutes into the event to 11 approximately eight or n'ne minutes into the event?
i 12 A
That would appear what the chart.is 13 showing there.
/
14 Q
Were you aware before the accident 15 that in this transient, though the pressurizer level 16 level vent below the indicated level and though the 17 temperature was at 460, that primary pressure was 18 below 1600 only for a period of about six or seven 19 minutes?
20 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of having 21 that knowledge.
22 Q
If you would look at Exhibit 186, and in 23 particular at pages 25 and 26, I would like you to 24 read paragraph -- actually it is beginning with the 25 third paragraph on page 25 and then on to page 26.
(~s\\
'wI
I Schnimann 895 2
You may read anything else that you i
3 feel you would like to, but those are the two 4
paragraphs that I believe are relevant to the
]
5 question I,am going to ask.
6 Have you had a chance to read those I
paragraphs, Mr. Scheimann?
O A
Yes, sir.
9 Q
Looking at the paragraph on page 26, 10 it reads as follows:
"In summary, it is concluded 11 that a bubble was not drawn in the hot legs, a 1
bubble was drawn in the reactor vessel upper 13 head" it says " lead" but I believe it is a 14 typographical error --
the core remained covered 15 during the transient and the pressurizer probably did 16 not empty."
17 Did you read that portion of the 18 report before the accident?
19 A
I don't have a recollection of it, sir.
20 Q
Were you aware before the accident of 21 this conclusion reached by GPU?
22 A.
I don't have a recollection of hearing of 3
this particular conclusion.
24 Q
Before the accident, what did you 25 understand was the connection between a bubble in v
l g
1 Scheimann 896 2
the upper head of the reactor vessel and whether x-)
3 the pressurizer emptied or not?
4 A
Sir, I don't recall having an
')
5 understanding on that particular subject prior 6
to the accident.
7 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like to hand you 8
Exhibit 191, marked by B&W previously.
This is a 9
Met Ed report on the reactor trip of November 7, 10 1978.
11 Would you take a minute or two to read 12 or to look briefly at that report and synopsis 13 which appears on page 1 (i
14 Mr. Scheimann, did you review this 15 particular reactor trip report before the accident?
16 A
I don't have a recollection of it, sir.
17 Q
I would like you to look at the synopsis 18 on page 1.
The second paragraph up from the bottom.
19 The following sentence appears:
"The decreased RC 20 system volume due to the cooldown and depressurization 21 caused the pressurizer volume to decrease below 22 zero indicated level for approximately 30 seconds.
23 However, calculations shown in Appendix A support 24 that the pressurizer was not emptied during the 25 transient."
v l
L
1 S chaimen n -
897 4
2 Were you aware before the accident that
[)/
in this transient, pressurizer decreased to below 3
s-4 zero indicated level?
^}
5 A
I d n't have a recollection of it, sir.
I 6
Q I would like you to look at Exhibit 192, 7
and in particular at the table on page 12.
This is a 8
report prepared by GPU after the November 7, 1978 9
event.
10 Do you see that it shows on this table 11
_that T-Av dropped from approximately 594 Fahrenheit 12 when the trip occurred, to 525 Fahrenheit by 14 13 minutes, which is the time shown on the table?
(~'
14 A
I can't see that by this table that 14 V) 15 minutes later it was at 525 T-Av.
16 However, I don't see the exact 17 tie-in with when he was at 594 there.
18 Q
You said you do see the 525 but not 19 the 20 A
I see the number 594, but I don't see a 21 time related with it.
22 Q
Maybe if you read the first paragraph 23 on page 7, this states, "The scram was initiated by 24 the variable temperature-pressure trip at approximately 25 2080 psig and 612F TH.
Reactor' power had been
I 1
Scheimann 898 2
reduced to 66 percent by the runback while the 3
partial loss of feedwater had increased T-Av i
4 to 594 and pressurizer level to 265."
i
'}~
5 Do you see that?
6 A
- Yes, I see that written there.
4 7
Q cid you know before the accident that 8
in this incident T-Av dropped from approximately 594 4
1 9
to approximately 525?
10 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of it.
11 Q
Looking again at Exhibit 191, on page 24 i
12 there is a graph of reactor coolant pressure for this 13 transient.
()
14 Do you see that, Mr. Scheimann?
15 A
Yes, sir, I see the graph.
16 Q
And do you see on this graph that 17 during this transient, primary pressure remained below 18 1600 psi from approximately seven minutes to f
19 approximately 11 minutes into the transient, or a 20 period of approximately four minutes?
21 A
Yes, sir, that is what the graph shows.
22.
Q Before the accident were you aware that 23 in this transient, though the pressuriner indicated j
24 off-scale low and temperature dropped to approximately 25 525, that primary pressure was below 1600 for only a k
l
,,,s_,_
i Scheimenn 899 2
period of about four minutes ?
[V 3
A Sir, I don't have a re collection of it.
4 Q
Would you look in that same exhibit,
]
5 No. 191, at Appendix A which appears on page 29.
O This is entitled " Pressurizer Level Calculations. "
7 Do you see that?
8 A
Yes, sir.
9 Q
And then on the next page the discussion 10 is entitled " Pressurizer Level Calculations" and the 11 first sentence reads, "The following is a rough 12 estimate to determine the extent of steam bubble 13 form tion in the RCS following the rapid cooldown a
14 on No ve mbe r 7,. 19 78. "
15 Before the accident did you review 16 this Appendix A?
17 A
Sir, I don ' t ha ve a recollection of this 18 particular appendix.
IO Q
Were you aware, before the accident, 20 that after'this incident Met Ed analyzed the question 21 of steam bubble formation in the RCS during the 22 transient?
23 A
I-don't have a recollection whether they 24 did or not.
Q You don't recall being told that that
- G
1 Schnimann 900 2
was going to be analyzed or the results of any sd.
3 analysis?
4 A
I don't have a recollection of it one way
')
5 or the other, sir.
6 Q
And this appendix entitled " Pressurizer 7
Level Calculations" involves an analysis of the 8
extent of steam bubble formation in the RCS.
9 What did you understand steam bubble 10 formation in the RCS had to do with pressurizer 11 level before the accident?
12 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of that 13 particular topic.
(}
14 Q
Well, I would like to know what if any 15 understanding you had of that.
I am not asking 16 whether you remember discussing it uor remember any 17 particular specific training on it, but what 18 understanding you had of that relationship before 19 the accident.
20 MR. MacDONALD:
You are asking for his 21 recollection of that understanding; is that
)
22 correct?
23 MR. WURTZ:
I don't know that there is 24 any difference between those two questions.
25
("%
MR. MacDONALD:
I just want to make
1 Scheimenn 901 2
it clear --
\\~)
3 MR. WURTZ:
I am asking what his 4
understanding was before the accident.
')
5 I do.n't know how he can tell me that except 6
by recollection.
7 Q
My intention is to get information as 4
8 to your state of mind, understanding, before the 9
accident.
10 A
Could I have that again, what your 11 original question was?
1~9 Q
Yes.
13 MR. WURTZ:
Could you read that back,
(
14 please?-
15 (Ques tion read back.)
16 THE WITNESS:
You will have to read the 17 question before that.
MR. WURTZ:
I will put the question 19 again.
20 Q
Mr. Scheimann, let me put the question 21 again.
22 What was your understanding before the 23 accident of the relationship between the extent of 24 steam bubble formation in the RCS and pressurizer 25 level?
- m
.f
\\
NJ
1 Scheimann 902 2
A Sir, I don't recall having an O)
(_
3 understanding about that particular -- how do I 4
say that?
that particular set of conditions you
'}
5 were giving.
6 As far as I can recall, we never really 7
discussed formation of a s' team bubble, neither at our 8
own training facility or at B&W, as being likely 9
outside of the reactor coolant -- outside of the 10 reactor vessel itself or else the pressurizer.
11 Q
You mean until Met Ed itself analyzed th'is question after the November 7, 1978 transient 12 13 on Unit 2 in this reactor trip report, you never
(
14 even heard that, that there was such a relationship?
15 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of it.
16 Q
Mr. Scheimann, you understood before 17 the accident that when water cools, it shrinks and 18 takes less space, is that correct?
19 A
Yes, sir.
20 Q
And when it heats, it expands and 21 takes more space.
22 A
Yes, sir.
23 Q
And if the coolant shrinks, the pressurizer 24 level drops, and likewise, if the coolant expands, 25 the pressurizer level increases?
1 Schnimann 903 2
A Yes, sir.
(D' 3
Q Did you understand that when water l
4 boils it takes more space than it does in liquid form?
')
5 A
Yes, sir, it would require more volume.
6 Q-And did you understand then that when 7
water boiled and took more volume, that one of the 8
things that would happen is that pressurizer 9
level would increase?
10 MR. MacDONALD:
This is a function of the 11 pressurizer you are talking about?
12 MR. WURTZ:
I don't know what the 13 ambiguity is in the* question, m
(_)
14 MR. MacDONALD:
The ambiguity is whether 15 or not you are speaking of what is going on in 16 the pressurizer as to expanding and contracting 17 of steam space in the pressurizer, I thought is 18 what you were talking about, and I wanted to 19 clarify.
20 MR. WURTZ:
I have been talking all along
~
21 about water in the reactor coolant system.
22 Q
Isn't that clear to you, Mr. Scheimann?
23 MR. MacDONALD:
The reactor coolant 24 system as a whole or in'the pressurizer?
y ~3 25 e
MR. WURTZ:
Q)
1 Schsimenn 904 2
A I have be-c looking in terms of the 3
pressurize r itself.
4 Q
So the answers you gave before
')
5 don't apply in the case of the reactor coolant 6
system?
7 MR. MacDONALD:
Do you want to go back 8
through each one?
You have about four 9
questions and answers and that is what the 10 ambiguity was.
I didn't know whether you 11 were speaking to 12 MR. WURTZ:
I don't think there was 13 an ambiguity.
/T 14 Q
Do I need to put the questions again --
V 15 A
Yes, sir.
16 Q
-- in order to understand that it is 17 the reactor coolant system?
i 18 A
Yes, I think you shosid.
19 Q
Did you know that when water shrinks 20 it takes less space?
21 A
Yes, that I was aware of.
22 Q
Did you know that that would affect 23 the pressurizer level?
24 A
It would tend to affect pressurizer. level.
- 25 Q
And did you know that when water in the
--~.. -._. --_ _ _
-1 Schaimann 905 2
reactor co'olant system heats up, it expands?
(~T
(_)
3 A
Yes, sir.
4 Q
Did you know that that would raise
])
5 the pressurizer level?
j 6
A Yes, sir, it would tend to have that 7
e f fe ct.
8 Q
Now, those are the same answers you 9
gave before, are they not?
10 A
Yes, sir, they are.
11 Q
Now, you understood that when water 12 boils, it takes up more space than it does when it 13 is in liquid forms is that right?
(
14 A
When water boils, it would tend to 15 occupy more space.
16 However, we were never really told that 17 we would have any boiling in any other location 18 other than the pressurizer.
19 Q
Did you understand before the accident 20 that if boiling did occur in the reactor coolant 21 system outside the pressurizer, that_this would 22 result in an increase in the pressurizer level?
23 A
I don't have a recollection of an 24 understanding pertaining to boiling outside 25 o f -- as I pointed out the pressurizer or the f-s.
,m.e
1 ScheimEnn 906 2
reactor vessel at times.
3 Q
Well, could you answer that question 4
4 directly?
I don't want to get side issues involved
]
5 here.
6 Is your answer that, no, you did not 7
understand that?
8 A
My answer was that I did not have an 9
understanding about boiling outside of the components 10 that I had named existed.
I 11 Q
Mr. Scheimann, did you become aware before 12 the accident that during the time the PORV was stuck 13 open in the March 29, 1978 transient at Unit 2, that 14 the primary pressure was dropping and pressurizer J
15 level was increasing?
16 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of that.
17 Q
You were never told that in any of your 18 training at Met Ed?
19 A
I don't have a recollection of it, sir.
20 Q
Mr. Scheim. ann, did you know Mr. Floyd?
21 A
Yes, I do know Mr. Floyd.
22 Q
You knew him during this period before 23 the accident as well; is that correct?
He was 24 supervisor of operations.
l 25 A
I knew him at that particular time.
1 Scheimann 907 2
I don't recall at this, time what his position was.
3 Q
You don't recall that he was supervisor 4
of operations?
'}
5 A
I don't have a recollection of whether 6
he was or not during that particular time, sir.
7 Q,
During the period from March 1978 to 8
March '797 That is the time period I was 9
referring to.
10 A
Yes, sir, I was aware that is the time 11 you were referring to, but I don't recall precisely 12 who was in what position at that time.
13 Q
During that time period did you have
[
14 contact with Mr. Floyd from time to time?
15 A
I would have seen him from time to time, 16 yes.
17 Q
Under what circumstances?
18 A
I don't recall specifics or circumstances, 19 but he did tend to spend some time in the control 20
-room.
21 Q
Doing what?
22 A
I'm not really sure, sir.
23 Q
You don't know what he was doing there?
24 MR. MacDONALD:
Each time he was there?
1 25
,es MR. WURTZ:
In general what was his b/
1 Scholmann 908 2
understanding of his job, what he was doing.
(%
(_)
3 A
In general he would have been checking 4
with the different supervisory people to see how
')
5 the plant was operating and things of that nature.
6 Q
was he involved in your training in any 7
way?
8 A
I don't have a recollection that he was 9
or wasn't.
10 Q
He has testified in his deposition in 11 this action, in this lawsuit, that a steam bubble 12 in the reactor coolant system would cause an 13 increase in the pressurizer level.
(j 14
'Did he ever convey that information to you?
15 A
I don't have a recollection of it, sir.
16 Q
Did you know Mr. Toole before the 17 accident?
18 A
I had seen Mr. Toole on occasion.
19 Q
What was his position?
20 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of what 21 his position was.
22 Q
Was it some kind of managerial position?
23 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection.
24 Q
You don't know what it was specifically.
25 7-.
You do know that he was in a managerial
&]
I scheimann 909 2
position or you have no idea what he was?
/'~'N
(_)
3 A
Sir, I knew he was managerial as 4
opposed to union.
'N 5
Q He has a'so testified in this lawsuit I
)
6 that he was aware before the accident that formation 7
of a steam bubble in the reactor coolant system I
8 would result in increase in the pressurizer level.
9 Did he ever convey that information to you?
10 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of it.
11 Q
Do you recall receiving any training 12 at Met Ed at any time that formation of a steam 13 bubble in the reactor coolant system would result 14 in an increase in pressurizer level?
15 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of it.
.16 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like to show you 17 what has been previously marked as Exhibit 558, 18 which is a volume entitlad " Nuclear Power Preparatory 19 Training, Core Performance 4, a Course for 20 Metropolitan Edison Company," prepared by the NUS 21 Corporation.
22 Would you take a few monents to look at 23 that,-Mr. Scheimann, so you can tell me whether l
24 you are familiar with the volume.
25 -
A sir, based on what I have looked at 3
1 Scheimann 910 2
already, I don't have a recollection of this 3
particular volume.
4 Q
You don't remember ever seeing this before?
]
5 A
No, sir, I don't have a recollection of 6
seeing it.
7 MR. MacDONALD:
You are talking about i
8 prior to the accident.
9 MR. WURTZ:
Yes.
l 10 Q
I would like you to look in particular 11 at a chapter here cal 3ed " Heat Transfer and Heat 12 Generation."
It begins on page numbered 4-1.
13 Would you take a look at that chapter 14 and tell me if you have ever seen that before.
15 A
sir, I don't have a recollection of 16 seeing this material.
17 Q
You don't recall ever seeing that?
18 A
No, sir, I don't.
I don't have a 19' recollection of it.
20 Q
Would you look at page 4-20 in that 21 chap te r.
There is a paragraph right about the heading 22 that says " Problem."
I would like to read that.
23 The paragraph reads, "The reactor coolant in a PWR 24 system is kept under pressure to prevent bulk boiling in 25 the core.
In the case of an abnormal transient,
1 Scheimann 911 4
2 where this pressure is lost and some steam is generated 3
in the core, how will we know it?
We will see a large 4
increase in level in the pressurizer until pressure is
')
5 built back up above the saturation value corresponding 6
.to the temperature in the core.
The steam bubbles 7
will then condense and the level will drop back 8
down close to its normal value."
J 9
Do you recall seeing that paragraph before 10 the accident?
11 A
No, sir, I do not.
12 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like to show you a 13 three-ring binder produced from your files em d
()
14 previously marked as Exhibit 530.
I 15 Do you recognize that volume?
16 A
Yes, sir, I do.
17 Q
That contains notes representing the i
18 results of various studies you did; is that correct?
19 A
Sir, what this primarily represents is 20 my initial Ao training, auxiliary operator training.
21 Q
What did that training involve?
22 A
Various, different reactor theory courses, 23 instrumentation courses, some core performance.
24 Q
Was this the basic training you got when 25 you first took our job at Met Ed?
f3 N_)
1
1 Scholmann 912 2
A Essentially, yes, it was our initial 3
training program.
4 Q
Was it your understanding that the
')
5 purpose of this training program was to cover the 6
fundamental principles involved with a pressurized' 7
water reactor?
8 A
As best I can recall, yes.
9 Q
I would like you to look at pages in 10 your volume entitled " Core Performance."
11 Do you see those pages in there?
12 A
Yes, sir, the'r e is a segment in there
~
2 13 on core performance.
1
()
14 Q
Were the notes made by you in this 15 section -- well, let me ask first, is that your
. c 16 writing in this section titled " Core Performance"?
17 A
Yes, sir, it is my handwriting.
~
18 Q
Did you make these notes during the
'IS course of your study in the training program?
f p
20 A
As best I can recall, yes, sir.
21 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like you to 22 compare your notes in your binder entitled " Core 23 Performance" to the chapters in Exhibit 558 which we 24 looked at just before and tell me if you see -
25 any tell me if you can' determine that the notes g-]3
\\,.
g
.-w j
c, r,
a
1 Schaimann 913 2
are, would reflect studies you did of Exhibit 558.
3 Mr. MacDONALD:
Studies of the book that 4
he did or the courses that involved material
')
5 from the book?
6 MR. WURTZ:
Well, both.
Both, yes.
7 MR. MacDONALD:
Let's deal with one at a 8
time because he has testified as to his 9
recollection about the book.
I don't know 10 exactly what ycu are asking him for.
11 Are you asking for his recollection as 12 to whether his notes reflect the material 4
13 that was --
( )h 14 MR. WURTZ:
No.
u 15 l
MR. MacDONALD; culled out of that book?
16 MR. WURTZ:
We will do it together.
17 Q
Why don't you take Exhibit 558, 18 Mr. Scheimann; and put it over next to your notes.
19 Now, could you first find chapter 2 in 20 Exhibit 558?
I believe it appears on page 2-1.
21 What is the title of that chapter, 22 Mr. Scheimann?
23 A
The title of that chapter appears to be 24
" Thermodynamics and Heat Balances."
25
- 73 Q
Now looking at your notes entitled t
I
\\.s
t
+
a u
1 Scheimann 914 s
1 1
2
" Core Performance," do you see a section at O'O 3
the beginning titled " Thermodynamics"?
4-A There is a'section at the beginning of
-]
5 that labled " Thermodynamics."
.b' 6
However, I have no idea what the i
7 instructor pulled his reference material from.
b" Q
Would you look at the set I problems
\\.
9 beginning on page 2-42 of the NUS core performance 4
w 10 text.
w 11 Do you see that first problem in the
'i x-1 s
12 problem set there?;
It. states, Wh a t is the change s
N%
13 in enthalpy of one p und.of water when it is heated 14
,from 100F to 180F7" 4
15 A
Yes, sir,\\I see that is the first problem 16 they have there.
s s,
17 Q
Could you looks in your pages on 18x Exhibit 530 to the problem set for chapter 2?
s IS' A
Did I go by it?
s 20 MR. WURTZ:
Off the record, i
4-3 21 (Discur:sion of f the re cord. )
22 BY MR. WURTZ:
s s
x 23 Q
Have you foundsthat page in your notes,
?,
24 Mr. Scheimann?
4 25 A
I found a quest' ion that looks similar i
l n-v v,
g l
i i
. - ~ _
y
-c.~
i I
I Schnimann 915 2
to that.
O)
Y-3 Q
Could you read, beginning -- well, what 4
is the title.of the page in your book?
')
5 A
It says in there " Chapter 2 Problems."
6 Q
And that is the same chapter we are looking at in the core performance text; is that e
8 correct?
9 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection that 10 it is or is not.
I don't recall seeing this 11 particular core performance volume, 12 Q
Could you read from your notes the first 13 question in the chapter 2 problem set?
O(,)
14 A
"What is the change in enthalpy of one 15 pound of water when it is heated from 100 degrees to 16 180 degrees F?"
17 Q
Do you see that that's exactly the same 18 question that appears in the NUS t e::t for the first 19 question in the chapter 2 problem set?
20 MR. MacDONALD:
Be fc re he answers, you 21 read the question and the documents speak for
)
22 themselves.
23 It is not going to add anything to sit 24 here today and say one-resembles another.
25 Q
My question is, are you with me that you
1 Schoimann 916 2
see they read the same?
3 A
I see they read the same.
4 However, I was not aware of where these
')
5 particular questions came from.
6 Q
could you look at question No. 8 in this 7
problem set?
In the NUS text it reads, "What must 8
be the temperature of saturated water at a pressure 9
of," and then it gives various pressures A through 10 g.
11 Do you see question Lio. 8 in yoar notes?
12 could you read that question No. 8 into 13 the record?
()
14 A
"What must be the temperature of 15 saturated water at a pressure of,"
and then it lists 16 seve ral dif ferent pressures.
17 Q
A through H, again?
18 A
A through H, yes, sir.
19 Again I might point out that I don't 20 know what the source of these questions'were that 21 I had been given at that time.
When we were given 22 the problem sets to do, most of the time they were 23 questions written up on the board.
24 Q
Mr. Scheimann, would you look at chapter 3 g-s, 25 in the NUS text that begins on page 3-1.
'm]
l c
1 Scheimann 917 2
1 7s Do you recognize this chapter?
U 3
A No, sir, I do not recognize this volume 4
in particular.
5 Q
would you look in your notes, 0
Exhibit 530, at page beginning at the end of the I
chapter 2 problem set.
8 Do you see that your notes have a drawing 9
of a pipe with an inlet and outlet and a calculation 10 which is exactly the same as the one that appears on 11 the bottom of page 3-1 and the top of 3-27 12 A
Yes, sir, I see that the drawing in 13 question does appear to appear in both places.
O)
\\-
I4 However, again, I might add that these 15 notes that were taken in this book were taken from IO~
material that was put up on the board, not 17 necessarily knowing what the source of that material 18 was.
19 Q
Could you look at page 3-27, which is the
.20 problem set in the NUS text for chapter 3?
To sp.eed 21 g
this up, what I would like you to do is look at 22 the questions in this problem set in the text and i
23 look at the chapter 3 problems in your notes and 24 tell me whether the questions are the same.
(
25 A
In the case of No.
2, that does not appear
\\_
l
1 Scheimann 918 2
to read the sane as what the problem in the
,. 0)
\\_
3 previous exhibit showed.
4 Q
What does No. 2 read in your notes?
'}
5 A
In my notes No. 2 reads that, "The water, 6
in problem 1 is saturated water.
Convert the 7
pressure drops to pressure heads."
8 Q
And in the NUS text, it reads the same, 9
except for the second sentence which says, " Convert 10 the pressure drops to head losses"?
11 A
Yes, that is the diffe rence between the 12 two.
13 Q
Are you finished?
()
14 A
Yes, sir.
15 4
Q What are the results of your examination?
16 A
With the exact with the exception of 17 the problem No. 2 difference in wording, they 18 appear to be the same questions.
19 Again, though, I will point out that 2C these questions were presented to us on the chalkboard, 21 whereupon we wrote our questions down and then answered 22 them.
We did not at that time have the text presented 23 to us as the text for what the instructor was teaching.
24 Q
You specifically recall that now from 25
(}
looking at these pages?
(/
1 Scheimann 919 2
A I can remember that the material we were OkY 3
presented was done on the board.
4 Q
Who was presenting that material to you?
')
5 A
As best I can remember, it would have 6
been Mr. Zechman.
In our initial program he had 7
the majority of it.
8 Q
So it was Mr. Zechman's practice to 9
write on the boards is that it, and then you 10 copied down what he wrote?
11 A
Yes, sir, as best I can recall.
' 12 Q
Was anybody else involved in the 13 classroom training that resulted in your core
()
14 performance notes besides Mr. Zechman?
15 A
I don't have a recollection of any other 16 individual involved.
i 17 Q
Could you look next at chapter 4-1 in the 18 NUS text?
Do you see that that chapte.r is entitled 19
" Heat Transfer"?
20 A
sir, it is titled " Heat Transfer and Heat 21 Generation."
h 22 Q
Right.
23 Do you have a chapter in your netes 24 entitled " Heat Transfer"?
25
.(~}
A I do have a title in my notes that says s~-
1 Scheimann 920 9
2
" Heat Transfer."
It does not say " Heat Generation" l
3 also.
4 Q
Could you look at the problem set of
'}'
5 chapter 4 which begins on page 4-247 Could you look 6
at the problems in the text and compare them to the 7
problems in your notes and tell me whether this NUS 8
text forms the basis for these problems that you 9
worked out in your notes?
10 I understand that you don't recall seeing 11 the book but only seeing the problems on the board.
12 MR. MacDONALD:
If you want to ask 13 him -- the document is going to say what it says.
()
14 You are going to ask him whether or not they 15 reflect the same words?
Fine.
16 Q
Let me refer you to the first problem in 17 the chapter 4 problem set.
It reads, "A particular 18 PWR fuel rod is 12 feet long and has a clad outside 19 diameter of.422. inches.
Find the average heat 20 flux at the surface of the rod if the power' produced 21 inside the rod is," and then it gives A through F 22 problems to work out, the first one being 500,000 23 BTUs.
24 Could you read the first problem that 25 you have in your notes for chapter.47
(- -
I l
1 Schoimann 921 2
A' The first problem in my notes reads as
(~)
(_,/
3 follows:
"A particular PWR fuel rod is 12 foot 4
long and has a clad outside diamter of.422 inches.
'}
5 Find the average heat flux at the surface of the 6
rod if the power produced inside the rod is," and 7
then it lists A thorugh F for examples, the first 8
one being 500,000 BTUs per hour.
9 Q
We will look at one more chapter.
I 10 Could you look at chapter 5 in the NUS 11 text?
Do you see that is entitled " Core Thermal I
12 Performance"?
13 A
Yes, I do see that that is what the title 14 of the text is.
15 Q
Do you have such a title in your notes?
16 A
Sir, I don't see a title in my notes to 17 that effect.
Oh, I didn't go back far enough.
18 0.K.
19 Q
You have found it?
20 A
Yes, sir.
21 Q
Could you turn to the set of problems 22 for chapter 5 in both the NUS text and in your notes?
23 That appears on page 5-25 of the text.
24 Do you see that question 1 in the NUS l
25 g-text and question 1 shown in your notes are exactly
\\_))
l
1 Schsimann 922 2
the same question?
Q (m/
3 A
Sir, they do appear to read the same.
4 Q
As you sit here today you do not recall
'}
5 ever receiving a copy of this text that was prepared 6
for Met Ed; is that correct?
7 A
No, sir, I do not.
Our instruction 8
during that period had been strictly from the board, 9
primarily.
10 Q
I would like you to look again at page
~
11 4-20, which is in chapter 4 of this core performance 12 text.
This is the paragraph that I read to you 13 before which states that when steam is generated
(
14 in the core, there will be an increase in pressureizer 15 level.
16 My question is, did Mr. Zechman ever 17 convey that information to you which is e:: pressed 18 in this page 4-20 of the NUS text?
19 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of it.
20 Q
How many people attended this classroom 21 training that Mr. Zechman gave you?
22 A
Sir, I don't recall how many.
23 Q
Well, approximately?
Was it five people, 24 ten people?
Can you give me some rough idea?
25 A
As best I can recall, possibly ten.
%,/
1-Scheimann 923 2
Q Was it a situation where he would be 3
discussing things and asking question or would r
4 he just lecture?
'}
a recollection of whether 5-A I don't have 6
it would have been all of one or all of the other.
7 Q
Could you describe what the practice was 8
for working out the various problem sets for the 9
sections of the core performance course reflected 10 in your notes?
11 A
As best I can recall, the questions 12 would be written up on the board.
We would copy them 10 down on to our notes and then we would solve them.
()
14 Q
Would you solve them right at the time 15 in class?
16 A
As best I can recall, yes, sir.
17 Q
Would he be solving it on the board 18 with you and would you just be copying the answer 19 off of the board or would you work the problem 2'O out yourself?
21 A
No, sir, as best I can recall, we would 22 have had a period of time to work the problems, 23 and then he would have gone over them with the class.
24 (Recess taken.)
95 C:)
~
1 Scheimann 924 2
BY MR. WURTZ:
[t Q
Mr. Scheimann, before the accident x_/
3 were you aware that in the fall of 1977, during 4
5 the course of hot functional testing on Unit 2, f])
6 a situation developed where a steam bubble formed in 7
the hot leg and that this affected the pressuriser 8
level?
9 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of it.
10 Q
You were never trained that that happened 11 at Met Ed?
12 A
Sir, I just don't recall having been e
13 or having not been.
()
14 Q
You don't recall any discussions about 15 that; is that correct?
16 A
No, sir, I don't.
17 Q
Were you aware of a group of Met Ed 18 employees who had a position of test engineer?
19 A
Yes, sir, I was aware that they did have 20 some test engineers.
21 Q
Did those test engineers have certain 22 responsibilities during the course of hot functional 23 testing?
24 A
As best I can recall, they had certain 25 tests that they were required to run during hot
1 Schnimann 925 2
functionals.
O(_)
3 Q
Did they also do certain testing 4
even at a later point when the reactor was critical?
^}
5 A-Sir, I don't recall just how far their 6
tes ting proceeded.
I 7
Q Did these test engineers work on shifts?
8
.A At various points of time, yes, they would 9
have operated on shifts.
10 Q
During hot functional testing on 11 Unit 2, did they operate on shifts?
12 A
Sir, I don't recall if they did for 13 the whole time frame or not, but during periods f']
14 of that time they did.
U 15 Q
When they operated on shifts, did 16 their shifts correspond to the shifts served by the 17 control room operators?
18 A
Sir, are you referring to as far as the 19 hour2.199074e-4 days <br />0.00528 hours <br />3.141534e-5 weeks <br />7.2295e-6 months <br /> is concerned?
20 Q
Yes, I mean, was it 7:00 to 3:00, 3:00 to 21 11:00, 11:00 to 3:007 22 A
Those would be the shift hours they would 23 have worked.
However, they would not necessarily 24 have been on with the same crew on every shift.
25 Q
Right.
m
1 Schsimnnn 926 2
When the test engineers are doing hot
'# n U) 3 f un ctional testing, or when they did it on Unit 2, 4
did control room operators have contact with test
]
5 engineers?
6 A
As best I can r.ecall, to some extent, 7
yes, they would, they did.
8 Q
What kind of contact would that be 9
or was it?
10 A
Essentially we were told what the test 11 for the day was going to be and then we were told at 12 the various points in the test what evolutions we 13 were to perform for the required testing.
14 Q
So the operators, control room 15 operators, would actually be controlling the unit I
16 during the course of the testing; is that correct?
17 A
They would be performing the testing 18 or directing the auxiliary operators in the testing.
19 Q
What would the test enginee r lie doing 20 at that time?
21 A
Sir, to tell you the truth, I don't know 22 what he would have been dcing exactly during that 23 time.
Because he would have been in the field, 24 perhaps following the test results in the field.
25 Q
Do you mean out in the reactor building u
1 Scheimann 927 2
or outside the control rooms is that what you mean?
O k/
3 A.
Mrst of the time, yes, sir, outside of 4
the' control room.
~)
5 Q
Actually watching the equipment; is 6
that it?
7 A
I really don't know just what he would 8
be doing out there.
9 Q
Did you have contact with the test 10 engineers by telephone during the course of a test?
11 A
As best I can recall, at various times 12 we might have a telephone communication pertaining 13 to a test.
(O 14 j/
Q With the test engineer calling you 15 with additional instructions or telling you what 16 step to take or to ask you about a particular 17 parameter; is that the kind of thing that would go l
18 on in the telephone conversation?
19 A
Exactly what went on in the conversation, 20 sir, I don't recall.
21 Q
In September of 1977 you were a control h
22 room operator; is that right?
You had not yet taken 23 the shift foreman's position?
24 A
During that time period I would have been
(~)
25 a control room operator, yes.
\\_/
I 1-Scheimann 928 2
Q So at that time you were responsible I~')
s/
3 for filling in the control room log?
4 A
That would have been one of my t
')
5 responsibilities.
6 MR. WURTZ:
I would like to~ mark as 7
Exhibit 785 a copy of a control room log 8
for the period April 2,
1977 to October 21, 1977.
9 (Copy of a control rcom log for the 10 period April 2,
'977 to October 21, 1977 11 marxed 3&W Exhibit No. 783 for identification 12 as of this date.')
13 Q
Mr. Scheimann, could you look at
()
14 Exhibit 785 and tell ue whether you can identify 15 that as the control room log?
16 A
It does appear to be a copy of the 17 control room log.
18 Q
What was the purpose of the control room 19 log as you understood it?
20 A
As best I can recall, the purpose of 21 the control room log was to keep track of the 22 evolutions that were taking place in the ple.nt and 23 to note any conditions that were not expected l
24 during the course of the shift.
25 Q
Was it filled out every shift?
l l
1 Scheimann 929 l
l-
~
2 A
As best I can recall, yes, sir, it was O
_ (,)
3 required to be filled out on a shiftly basis.
4 Q
I would like you to look in particular
'}
5 at pages 393 and 394, which show an entry for 6
September 8, 1977.
7 Do you see that?
8 A
I see an entry there for September 8,
9 1977.
10 Q
It indicates that this is the 3:00 to 11: 00 11 shift; is that ccrrect?
13 A
No, the top starts off at 7:00 to 3:GO, 13 sir.
()
14 Q
I see, 15 I Down there in the middle of the page,is 16 that your writing in the middle of the page?
17 A
Sir, as best I can recall, yes, it is.
18 Q
You recognize that as your writing; is 19 that right?
20 A
Yes, sir.
21 Q
Does that indicate that on September 8,
22 1977 you were on shift for the 3:00 to 11:00 time ZJ period?
24 A
That's what it would show there, sir.
25 Q
Who was the control room operator on s_-
l 4-
..-.v-,
1 Scheimann 930 2
shift with you that day?
!'s_/
3 A
I don't have a recollection', other than 4
what it says in the log book here, sir.
')
5 Q
What does it say there?
6 A
According to the log entry, it says 7
that Mark Coleman was on shift with me.
8 Q
He was a control room operator during 9
that time?
10 A
Yes, sir, as best I can recall.
11 Q
Where is he now?
12 A
Sir, as best I can recall, he is 13 still a control room operator.
(h
(_)
14 Q
At Unit 27 15 A
Yes, sir.
16 Q
When you arrived on the shift as a 17 control room operator, what was your practice as 18 far as obtaining.information about what was going 19 on at the plant?
20 A
What particular type information are 21 you re fe rring to, sir?
22 Q
Well, whatever information it was that 23 you would seek out when you came on duty.
I am 24 thinking now in this time period when you were a
("3 25 control room operator.
\\~e s
I' 1
Scheimann 931 2
A Essentially, when I first come on duty, 3
what I did was to take and read over the log since 4
the last time I was on shift, and then I would ask
)
5 the control room operator that had the duty.what l
6 was going on in the plant at the present time, 7
and then I would take and look at my instrumentation.
8 Q
I see that the first thing you write is, 9
" Relieve d the shift.
Conditions as before."
10 was that statement based on the things 11 that you were just describing?
12 A
As best I can recall, yes, sir.
l 13 Q
Now, if you would look at the entry
)
14 I
at 1625, it states, " Cycled R0-V137."
15 What is that valve?
16 A
Sir, at present I just don't recall 17 what that particular valve is, 18 l
Q Could you read the entries that you i
r 19 h
made for September 8, 1977 and the entries for the l
20 prior shift and tell me what evolution or what condition l
21 the plant.is in as evidenced by these entries?
~
22 MR. MacDONALD:
Just so I am clear, 23 you are asking him what his understanding is 24 of what his recollection is of what evolution 25 the plant was in?
Or are you asking him
=.
I 1
Scheimann 932 2
sitting here today and reading the document
)
3 to tell you what he would --
4 Q
Let me ask first whether, reading the
'}
5 entries for the shift before yours and.the 6
entries you made while you were on shift, you can 7
recall what evolution was being performed and what 8
testing was going on.
i 9
A Based on the entry before mine and mine, 10 I really don't recall what evolution in particular t
11 was taking place as far as what test was being gone 12 r over.
13 Q
Does the fact that the decay heat pumps
, ()
14 were being started tell you anything?
15 A
No, sir, it doesn't.
16 Q
Uoes looking at these two entries 17 refresh your recollection as to what valve 137 is?
18 A
No, sir, it really doesn't.
19 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like you to look 20 at some pages from the test engineer's log.
This
-21 log has already been marked as Exhibit 175, and 22 these pages are for september 8 and September 9,
1977.
23 Was it your practice to read the test 24 engineer's log?
25 gg A
No, sir, I would.not have seen the test i
\\_)-
i
1 Scheimann 933 2
engineer's log.
3 Q
Did you ever read the test engineer's 4
1097
'}
5 A
I don't recall ever reading it.
6 Q
Where was it kept?
7 A
Sir, I have no idea.
8 Q
Was it in the cor. trol room?
9 A
I don't recall it as being in the 10 control room.
I 11 Q
Do you know Mr. Ulrich?
12 A
Yes, sir, I knew John Ulrich.
4
[
13 Q
What was his position?
14 A
He was a shift test engineer at that 15 particular time.
16 Q
Did you know Mr. Dominquez?
17 A
Yes, sir.
18 Q
Was he also a shift test engineer?
19 A
Yes, sir.
20 Q
How about Mr. Garrison?-
21-A Yes, sir.
22 Q
You knew him?
23 A
Yes, sir,-I did.
24 Q
And he was a test engineer also?
25 A
Yes, sir.
1 Scheimann 934 2
Q Now looking at the first entry for
)
[\\
(_/
3 September 8, 1977, you see that Mr. Ulrich was 4
on for the first shift on that date?
Look at the
')
5 page numbered 6071, that is, the stamped page, 6
and you will see his signature there after the 7
first entry.
8 A
All I see on 6071 is his signature, 9
sir, up at the top of the page.
10 Q
Do you see that that is the first entry 11 for that date, September 8, 19777 12 A
Sir, what it appears to me is that there 13 is one continuous entry dating from -- well, f
14 starting from page 6069 and proceeding to the s/
15 signature on 6071.
16 Q
Do you see that that is the first 17 entry for that date, first entry for September 8, 18 19777 19 MR. MacDONALD:
On what pages now?
20 MR. WURTZ:
It starts on '69 and goes 21 to
'71, yes.
22 A
The entry j ust prior to that is still 23 dated 9/7/77.
24 Q
Then there is this entry, which appears 25 to be the first one for September 8,
1977; is that gg L)
1 Scheimann 935 2
correct?
\\-
3 A
It does appear as such.
4 Q
The first shift for that date would
~}
5 go from 11:00 p.m.
to 7:00 a.m.s.is that correct?
6 A
Yes, sir.
It would actually start 7
like 11:00 o' clock on the 7th.
8 Q
And go to --
9 A
7:00 on the 8th.
10 Q
Then do you see that on page 6072 11 Mr. Dominquez has signed fcr the seccnd shift I2 on September 8, 19777 13 A
Yes, sir, I see his signature at the D) 14
(
top of the page or nearly the top.
15 Q
So that would be the 7:00 a.m.
to 3:00 16
)
p.m.
shift?
17 A
Yes, sir, that would indicate when he 18 had been on his shift.
19 Q
Then if you look at page 6073, you see 20 that Mr. Garrison has made the final entry for 21 September 8, 1977?
22 A
Yes, sir, that is what is indicated on 23 the page.
24 Q
So Mr. Garrison was on the shift from
("]
25 3:00 o' clock to 11:00 o' clock on September 87 V
n
\\
l 1
Scheimann 936 2
MR. MacDONALD:
You are aEking as to
(%
O 3
his recollection or from the log?
4 Q
Is that what that shows?
]
5 A
From the log, it appears as such.
6 Q
Now I would like you to look at page 6071, I
at the entry made by Mr. Dominquez in the middle of 8
the page.
He writes, " Pressurizer level unexpectingly 9
increased when venting the pressurizer and decreased 10 pressure from 500 psig to 4 60 psig."
11 l
tow, Mr. Dom:.nquer. is on the chift 12 before tr.c coe that you served on.
13 Was that ir. formation provided to you I4 whan you arrived on shift on September 8 at 3:00 15 o,cloch?
'6 A
Sir, I don't ha e a recollection of whether 17 it was or was not.
18 Q
You don't recall hearing that from the control room operators or from the test engineers?
20
.A Sir, I don't have a recollection of it 21 one way or the other.
22 Q
Could you next look at page 6072, at 3
the entry made by Mr. Garrison?
This covers the 24 time period when you nere on shift as a control room 25 operator.
\\
)
~.-
e
,---,.c e--
. ~
w
,w
,,-t,
1 Scheimenn 937 2
I would like you to look at the
/'N k_),
3 sentence that states, " Comparison was made between 4
LT1-LT2-and LT3."
^}
5 What are those?
6 A
Sir, from the -context of this particular 7
entry, it would appear that they are level transmitters 8
on the pressurizer level.
9 Q
Where do those read out?
10 A
They would read out in the control room 11 j
on the pressurizer -- it is over on panel 3,
i 12 i
I believe.it is, or 4.
13 Q
In one of the front panels?
e f
(
14 A
Yes, sir.
l 15 Q
Then the following sentence states, 4
1G
" Pressurizer level indication as shown in 17 control room is believed to be correct."
18 Do you recall that during this shift 19 you were providing information to Mr. Garrison j
20 about the pressurizer level?
21 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of 22 whether I was or wasn't.
23 Q
When a test engineer wanted to get 24 information about pressurizer level indication in 25 the control room, was it the practice for the
~-).
~ -. -
1 Scheimann 938 2
engineer to call the control room and ask for that
'lN/
3 information?
4 MR. MacDONALD:
Is.that assuming he is
')
5 not in the control room itself?
6 MR. WURTZ:
Yes.
7 MR. MacDONALD:
I object to the form.
l 8
MR. WURTZ:
I think we established earlier 9
they spent most of their time out in the field, 10 as Mr. Scheimann put it.
11.
MR. MacrONALD:
I don't think he said out I
12 in the field a.11 the time.
13 MR. WURTZ:
I understand that.
I asked
()
14 l for the practice.
15 Q
I am not asking for now a specific 16 instance, but what the practice was, as you recall it.
17 A
As best I can recall, the test engineer, 18 if he was out in the field, would request information 19 that he would need for other pieces of his testing.
20 However, on occasion they were right in the control I
21 room and would take the reading themselves.
22 Q
So it would-happen both ways.
Sometimes 23 they would call you and ask for it, and sometimes 24 they would be there and just look for themselves; is 25 that it?-
%J
~
4
^
1 Schsimann 939 4
2 A
As best I recall, yes, sir.
(~h
~'
3 Q
Mr. Garrison goes on to state, "Whenever 4
RC-V137 was opened to vent pressurizer, level would
)
5 ind'icate an increase."
i 6
When v.alve 137 or any valve was opened l
7 or closed during the course of testing, would that-be 8-done from the control room?
9 MR. MacDONALD:
Any valve in the plant?
10 MR. WURTZ:
Well, I am thinking of valve j
11 137 in particular.
i 12 Q
Can you tell me?
13 A
As best I can reca13, 137 could have been 14 controlled in the ecutrol room or it could ha"e b2en 3
15 controlled by a local control.
l 1
16 Q
Do you recall now what valve 137 is?
]
17 A
In context of this particular entry, it 18 would appear that it is a pressurizer vent valve.
19 Q
And you believe that could be controlled 20 from the control room, or where else?
21-A Possibly out in the plant at the local I
h.
22 control station.
Most valves that we had control in i
23 the control room for, we had also local stations.
24 Q
Although looking at the entry you made in
/~%
25 the control room log. for Sep tembe r 8, 1977, it says, U
1
,. - ~ -
.-e,-.,
I scheimann 940 2
"At 1625 we cycled RC-V137."
<~\\-
s-)
3 Do you see that in there?
4 A
Yes, sir, I see that.
')
i 5
Q Does that mean, at least in that particular 6
instance, the valve was being centrolled from the I
control room?
O MR. MacDONALD:
I assume what you are 9
asking for is his recollection.
10 MR. WURTZ:
Well, no.
11 Q
I am s ayir.g, can you conclude, from 12 looking'at the control room log and the entry you made 13 in it on September 8,
1977, that at least with respect
'( ')
14 to the cycling th a t occurred at 1625, that that cycling
.j s'
. 15 - [
was done from the control room?
i l
16 A
No, sir, you cannot conclude that just by 17 looking at the log.
18 Q
You mean you may have made the entry, 1
19
" Cycled RC-V137" even if that valve was cycled from 20 outside the control ro6m?
21 A
Yes, sir, any major piece of equipment or
)
22 any piece of equipment that was operated pertaining 23 to the plant, if it was operated locally, I would also 24~
log it.
25 Q'
And so in that particular situation, that i
. Cg[
~
t F*
e, S
e-w
-,y g
m
---w-,-
-,ny-e e
--m-ee a-w
--m 3
q
1 Schoinonn 941 2
would be the result of somebody out in the reactor
^
g 3
building letting you know or somebody outside the 4
control room letting you know that they had done its
)
5 is that it?
6
- A In this particular' case?
7 Q
Well, if yoa recall this particular case.
8 A
I don't recall whether it was done in the 9
control room or done locally.
10 Q
In the case where it is done locally, then 11 somebody would call you and tell you and then you 12 would make the entry; is that it?-
13 A
Essentially, yes, sir.
()
14 Q
Would you look at page 6073, and I would j
15 like you to look at the first antry made for September i
16 9,
1977.
This is an entry made by Mr. Dominquez in 17 the test engineer's log.
And in particular, I would I
18 like you to look at the sentence that reads, "The 19 pressurizer level came down, proving that there was 20 a steam bubble in each of the hot legs."
21 Now, Mr. Dominquez made this entry on 22 the shift after the one in which you served.
Were 23 you told about this the next day when you came on 24 shift?
r~'s 25 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of V
>I Schelmann 942 l
,. s s
2 whether I had or had not been.
( ~'
1, 3
Q Does looking at and reading these pages 4
from the test engineer's log and looking at and
^)
5 reading the entry you made in the control room log
~
6 refresh your recollection that on September 8 and t
7 September 9, 1977, during the period of hot functional 8
testing, pressurizer level unexpectedly increased 9
or that a steam bubbla formed in the hot legs?
s s
10 A
No, sir, it doesn't refresh my memory at 11 that particular time.
s.
12 Q,
Though you' served a shift in the control boom for an night-hour period duridg 'the 13 time when t
(')N l
It" l
these events were occurring,, you did not hear or you 13 don't recall hearing ab out', this situation?
s 16.
A Sir, I don't stem'to have a, recollection 1
17 whether I did or didn't.
(
4 v.,
s 18 MR. WURTZ:
I think it might be useful,'i 19 if we marked as Exhibit 786 just the two pages t.
20 from the log representing Mr. Scheimann's 21 entry.
22 (Two pages fromrlog shuwing Mr.
M Scheimann's entry were marked B&W Exhibit No.
24 786 for identification, as of'this date.)
y'S 25 Q
Mr. Scheimann, just one final' question on
)-
\\
m i
{
l I
Scholmann 943 l
2 this.
I believe you have already stated that the e'g
+
3 writing on these two pages from the cor trol room log 4
is your writings is that correct?
~
)
5 A
The part from 9/8/77, 3 to 11, on Page 6
393, up until 2248, on 394, as best I can recall, is 7
my own writing.
8 Q
And that is your signature at the end 9
there?
4 10 A
Yes, sir.
11 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like to show you i
12 a copy of what has been marked as Exhibit 176, 13 which is a test engineer's log for a time period b)
(,
14 including October of 1978.
I would like you to turn 15 in that document to Page 235, for an entry made 16 October 4, 1978.
~
17 Mr. Scheimann, at the bottom of the page, 18 there is an entry that states, " Tested RC-RV2 per 19 MEC SOP 2-78-86."
20 What is an SOP?
21 MR. MacDONALD:
Are you asking apart 22 from this, specifically what it is?
23 Q
Can you tell me what an SOP is?
24 A
An SOP would primarily be a procedure that C) 25 would be written to perform a given evolution that 1
l l
. ~.. -
- - -... - - ~.
1 Scheimann 944 2
would not be performed by the existing operating T
)
3 procedures.
4 Q
Who prepared the SOP's?
)
5 A
Sir, that varies, depending on who has a j
I 6
certain job to perform.
That particular person would 7
probably take and write his SOP, and it would have to t
8 go through the channels.
9 Q
Would a control room operator ever write 10 one?
11 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection that 12 control room operators necessarily would or would not I
13 write one.
),
14 Q
At the time of this log entry, which is 15 for October 4, 1978, you were a shift foreman; is l
16 that right?
17 A
Yes, sir, I was a shift foreman'at that 18 time.
19 Q
What was the role of a shift foreman in 20 SOP testing?
21 A
The shift foreman's function was overall 22 responsibility for the plant, the direction of the 23 reactor operators, and the direction of the auxiliary 24 operators in the performance of-their duties.
j 25 Q'
Would the shift foreman be aware when W
L
1 Scheimann 945 2
testing is being done under an SOP?
a s
\\-)
3 A
The STE would tell the shift foreman if 4
there was something going to be done on testing for
')
5 the evening.
6 Q
What is that that you referred to, STE7 7
A Shift test engineer.
8 Q
So the shift test engineer would tell the 9
foreman about the testing and describe what was going 10 to take place; is that it?
11 A
Essentially he would bring the test 12 procedure that was going to be used, and then they 13 would take and review what was necessary for the
()
14 performance of the test.
15 Q
The log entry here states, " Raised RCS 16 pressure to 2275.
Received the red open indication o' pen signal is 17 for RC-RV2, which indicates that an 18 going to the solenoid at the valve."
19 Did you understand in october of 1978 20 that the PORV should open at a pressure of 22757 21 A
Sir, I don't remember what my understanding 22 was at this particular date.
23 Q
At that point you knew what the PORV 24 setpoint was, did you not?
(~
25 A
I recall I knew what it was. I am not V
l 4
1 Scheimann 946 2
sure, though, that that would be it.
T'N 3
Q The pressurizer operations operating 4
procedure shows the setpoint was at 2255, so you
)
5 understood when the pressure was above that setpoint, 6
the PORV was supposed to open; is that right?
7 A
Yes, sir, when the pressure was above 8
the setpoint for the PORV, it should have opened.
9 Q
You also understood at that time when the 10 red light, the indicator light, was on, that indicated 11 that there was a signal to the solenoid?
12 A
Sir, I don't recall at what time I a
13 Ppecifically understood that the light was a signal i
14 to the operator of the valve.
15 Q
Well, as of October 4, 1978 did you 16 understand that?
17 A
Sir, I knew that the red light was just 18 strictly a signal, but I don't recall when I learned 19 that particular piece of information.
20 Q
When you say " strictly a signal," what 21 do you mean?
22 A
It meant that the red light indicated 23 that the power signal was sent to the valve to be 24 opened.
"S 25 Q
When you say " strictly" a signal, what do (d
\\
1 1
Scheimann 947 2
you intend to say?
What do you mean by that?
What 3
does the word " strictly" mean?
4 A
That it indicated that it was a signal
)
5 going to that valve.
6 Q
You mean that it was not a physical, an 7
actual physical indication of the status of the valve 8
or an actual indication of the physical status of the 9
valve?
Let's put it that way.
10 A
I knew at some time that the only thing 11 that light indicated was that it was a signal going 12 to'the valve, yes.
I don't recall when it was 13 that I got that understanding.
f( )
14 Q
Do you recall whether it was before the 15-accident?
16 A
Yes, sir, it would have been prior, it 17 was prior to the accident.
18 Q
Before the accident what did you 19 understand would happen to primary pressure when 20 pressure went above the PORV setpoint and the PORV 21 opened?
22 A
My understanding was that when that PORV 23 opened, the ' pressure would drop down in the~RCS.
24
_Q I would like to continue with this entry
.r 3 25 in the log.
Just for context, I will read this part V
l
1 Scheimann 948 t
2 I read before and then continue.
3 It states, " Raised RCS pressure to 2275, 4
received the red open indication for RC-RV2, which
)
5 indicates that an open signal was going to the 6
solenoid at the valve.
However, there was no decrease 7
in RCS pressure.
Reduced RCS pressure by manually 8
spraying 2155 psig."
9 Do you recall this testing incident that 10 occurred on October 4,
1978?
11 A
No, sir, I don't recall it.
12 Q
You were never told about this in your 13 training?
14 A
I don't'have a recollection of whether I 15 was or not, sir.
16 Q
You don't recall talking to any of the 17 other operators about it?
18 A
I don't have a recollection of whether I 19 did or not, sir; 20 Q
Before the accident what did you 21 understand the fact that there was no decrease in the 22 -
RCS pressure to indicate about the PORV in a situation 23 like this?
24 MR. MacDONALD:
I object unless he has l
25 a recollection about an incident like that, so
g Schaimann 949 2
he can base it on a recollection.
It is 3
hypothetical.
4 Q
I am asking for your understanding now.
')
5 I am not asking about recalling a specific incident.
6 I am asking, what was your understanding before the 7
accident about the status of the PORV in a case where 8
pressure rose above the PORV setpoint and there was 9
no drop in primary pressure?
4 10 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of 11 having an understanding of such an event taking 12 place.
A11'the times I had ever seen the PORV light 13 indicate on, we did get a drop in pressure, as best
( )-
14 I can recall.
15 Q
If that did not happen, I gather you 16 would have noticed it?
17 MR. MacDONALD:
I object to the form.
18 Is there any basis for that question, or is 19 it solely hypothetical about a situation that 20,
never occurred but if it did, he would have 21 known --
22 MR. WURTZ:
I am asking for his judgment 23 about that.
(
24 MR. MacDONALD:
I object.
It is
.O
-25 extremely hypothetical.
V-2 4
n.
.,. - -, ~ - -, -, - -.., -, -,,
,,--v-v n,,,.-.-.,,n,
I Scheimann 150 2
Q Mr. Scheimann, I am not going to press O
3 the question.
Let me ask another question.
4 Did you understand before the accident
)
5 that in a, situation where the primary pressure rose 6
above the PORV setpoint and the light was on indicating 7
a signal to the PORV, that if the primary pressure 8
did not drop, that was an indication that the POR7 9
had in fact not opened?
10 A
Sir, I don't recall having an 11 understanding of the pressure not dropping when the 12 PORV did open.
All the times I had ever heard 13 anything about it, pressure always dropped, as best
/~N ts) 14 I can recall.
15 Q
I understand that.
What I am asking you 16 is whether you understood enough about the operation 17 of the system so that you can testify today that you 18 understood the principle that if the pressure did 19 not drop in the primary system in the circumstances, 20 that you understood that that was an indication that 21 the PORV had not in fact opened.
22 A
Sir, I don't recall if I had that 23 understanding or not.
24 Other things could have led to that
~
25
' pressure not decreasing.
1 Scheimann 951 2
One other thing would be that the block
-[ h v
3 valve had not been shut.
You would get that signal 4
and would not see a pressure drop.
5 Q
In that circumstance, the PORV cannot 6
relieve the pressure because it's isolated in effect; 7
is that correct?
8 A
- Sir, it would be isolated on the 9
downstream side.
10 Q
But you understood it was also possible 11 that the PORV had simply not opened?
12 A
- Sir, I don't recall having an 13 understanding to that length.
/
14 Q
You don't recall understanding that that 15 was even a possibility under the circumstances?
16 A
- Sir, I don't recall an understanding of 17 that nature.
18 Q
I just want to make sure I am being clear.
19 I am not at this particular moment asking you if you 20 specifically considered that question, but I am asking 21 you whether you had sufficient understanding of the 22 way the system worked so that you can say today that 23 you did understand that principle, that when pressure 24 went above the PORV setpoint and the red light was T
25 indicating a signal to the solenoid, if the primary (d
1
i 1
Scheimann 952 2
pressure did not drop, that that was an indication of d
3 a possible failure of the PORV to opens 4
A Sir, I don't recall whether I considered 5
that or no.t.
6 That is why I said I am not really asking g
7 you now whether you specifically considered that.
I 8
am asking whether you understood that principle.
Do 9
you understand the difference there?
I am not asking 10 you to search your mind and try to recall a time and 11 place where you remember having that thought.
I am 12 asking you instead whether you had enough 13 understanding of the way the system worked before the p).
(_
14 accident so that you knew that that was a possible 15 cause of that situation, of that kind of performance 16 in the plant.
17 MR. MacDONALD:
You are still asking 18 based on his recollection.
Recollection of an, 19 understanding leads him to a particular answer 20 to your question.
You are not asking him to 21 take and to speculate whether or not he may or 22 may not have --
23 MR. WURTZ:
I think the question is 24 clear.
(~}
25 g
I am asking whether you recall, based on
\\._/
1 Schei.mann 953 2
your understanding of the way the plant worked --
3 MR. MacDONALD:
Whether he had this 4
Q Once again, this does not require you to
)
5 remember a specific time when you thought this specific 6
thing.
It requires only your telling me whether you 7
believe, based on what you recall about your 8
understanding of the way the system worked, that you 9
understood that principle.
10 A
Sir, I don't recall whether I had that 11 understanding or not.
12 Q
Now, we have previously looked at Exhibit 13 305, which is the pressurizer failure procedure.
[)%
(,
14 I believe you testified that you were 15 familiar with that procedure, is that right, before 16 the accident?
17 A
Yes, sir, I had been familiar with that 18 procedure prior to the accident.
19 Q
Were you aware before the accident that 20 that procedure' listed, as a symp. tom of an inoperative 21 PORV, a situation where pressure rose above the PORV 22 setpoint and the PORV did not open?
23 A
Are you asking me, sir, if there was such 24 a part of the procedure that related to that O
25 particular part?
V
1 Scheimann 954 2
gg Q
Do you recall whether there was such a V
3 symptom for an inoperative PORV?
4 A
I recall there was in that procedure
)
5 several di.fferent types of failures for that 6
particular -- for the pressurizer system.
7 Q
Do you recall that it was a symptom of a 8
failed closed PORV to have pressure continuing to rise 9
after the PORV setpoint had been reached?
10 A
Sir, at present I don't recall that that 11 was one of the particular symptoms.
12 Q
Looking at the test engineer's log again, 13 it states, as I read earlier, that there was a manual
(_)
14 spray going on.
Does that get done in the control r
15 room?
16 A
Sir, that could be done in the control 17 room or locally.
18 Q
When you say " locally," where are you 19 referring to?
20 A
As best I can recall, that is our 21 shutdown from outside the control room area located 22 on the floor below the control room.
23 Q
In the same building?
24 A
Yes, sir, in the control building.
(~}
25 Q
This entry for October 4, 1978 in the
'V
l 1
Scheimann 955 2
test engineer's log is made by -- I believe the name 3
is John Maduss.
4 Is that correct?
M-a-d-u-s-s?
)
5 A
That appears to be the spelling of that, 6
as is written in the log, sir.
I am not familiar with 7
if that is the correct pronunciation or not.
8 Q
Do you know Mr. Maduss?
9 A
I don't have a recollection of him, sir.
10 MR. WURTZ:
I would like to mark as the 11 next exhibit some pages from the shift foreman's 12 log for October 4, 1978.
13 (Pages from the shift foreman's log for e-(_g) 14 October 4, 1978'were' marked B&W Exhibit No. 787 15 for identification, as of this date.)
16 Q
Mr. Scheimann, can you identify this as 17 pages from the Unit 2 shift foreman's log?
18 A
Sir, it appears to be pages from the 19 Unit 2 shift foreman's log, 20 Q
What was the purpose of that log?
21 A
To keep running track of any tech, spec 22 violations or possible tech. spec surveillances that 23 were peak performed.
Also to keep track of plant 24 operating conditions and evolutions that were taking 25 place.
p/
\\_
l
~
y Scheimann 956 2
Q Was it filled out every shift by the shift O
3 foreman on duty for that shift?
4 A
Yes, sir, as best I can recall.
)
5 Q
Now, do you see that Exhibit 787 indicates 6
that you came on duty on October 4, 19787 7
A
- Sir, the log would -- the copy of the 8
log would tend to indicate that.
9 Q
This indicates you came on at approximately 10 7:00 o' clock; is that right?
-11 A
Sir, that is what that indicates.
12 Q
Are the entries made done in your 13 handwriting?
.14 A
Sir, the entries do appear to be in my 15 handwriting down to 1400 hours0.0162 days <br />0.389 hours <br />0.00231 weeks <br />5.327e-4 months <br />.
16 Q
Whose handwriting appears for the period 17 1625 to 2230?
Do you recognize that?
18 A
I do not.
19 Q
Looking at the entries for 1350 and 1428, 20 is that your handwriting? :They appear on the next 21 page, and though these pages are in order, it appears 22 that there may have been some later entries inserted 23 and that you made another insertion in the log.
Is 24 that right?
25 A
Sir, the 1350 and 1428 entries do appear
}
1 Scheimann 957 to be in my handwriting.
2 (h
-/
Q And then that is your signature for 3
4 "10/4/78 shift relieved"?
')
5 A
Sir, it does appear to be my signature.
6 Q
Do you see the entry at 13327 It states, 7
"Tes ted RC-RV-2. IAW 2-78-86 SOP."
Then I believe g
it says "Unsat,"
u-n-s-a-t.
Does that appear to be 9
what it says?
10 A
That appears to be what it says, yes, sir.
11 Q
What do those letters, IAW, refer to?
12 A
"In accordance with."
13 Q
So does that indicate that the testing 14 is being done pursuant to the SOP identified there?
15 A
Sir, that's what that entry says.
It is 16 being done in accordance with SOP 2-78-86.
17 Q
You have written "Unsat" in that entry.
18 What does that refer to?
19 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of what 20 that entry pertains to at the present.
~
\\
21 Q
Is that your shorthand for saying that 22 the test was unsatisfactory?
23 A
As best I can recall, that would have l
24 indicated " Unsatisfactory."
/N 25 Q
could you look at the entry you made at k.)
I r
.,k r
-, - ~..,
p r
n
- --s e,
-,4
+-
1 Scheimenn 958 4
2 g3 13507 It states, " Completed SOP 2-78-86.
Unsat."
3 Is that a correct reading?
4 A
Yes, sir, it is, as best I can recall.
5 Q
Does that l'ndicate that you entered a 6
second time that the t'est being 'done under that SOP 7
, as not performed satisfactorily?
w 0
A Sir, I don't recall what that indicated 9
one way or the other.
10 Q
When a test did not go right, is that how 11 you indicated in the log, by writing "Unsat"?
12 A
As best I can recall, sir, yes, if a test 13 did not pass.
14 Q
Do you see that the SOP referred to in the 9
15 shift foreman's log by you and the SOP referred to in 16 the test engineer's log are in fact the same SOP?
17 MR. MacDONALD:
Are you asking if they 18 have the same number?
19 MR. WURTZ:
Yes.
20 Q
Do you see that they have the same number?
21 A
Sir, they appear to be the same SOP.
22 Q
Does looking at the test engineer's log 23 and at the foreman's log refresh your recollection 24 that you were on shift as shift foreman during the f~)
25 course of testing being done on the PORV on October 4, a
1 Scheimann 959 2
1978?
3 A
No, sir, it does not refresh my memory of 4
it.
)
5 Q
Looking at these documents doesn't refresh 6
your recollection that during testing on that date, 7
the PORV did not open even though the red indicator 8
light indicated there was power going to the solenoid?
9 A
No, sir, it doesn't refresh my memory of l
I 10 it.
11 Q
You don't recall any discussion that you 12 had with other operators or supervisors or anybody 13 at Met Ed about this incident?
)
14
.A Sir, I don't recollect one way or the 15 other whether I did have any discussions pertaining 16 to this.
17 Q
In fact, that is your signature at the 18 end of this entry on the third page of the exhibit?
19 MR.-MacDONALD:
I think you asked him 20 that before.
21 MR. W URTZ :
Yes, I think so.
22 A
And, sir, I said it does appear to be my 23 signature.
21 Q
Next to that, there are some initials.
(-}.
25 Are those your initials?
'V L.
1 Scheimann 960 2
A Yes, sir, they appear to be my initials.
3 Q
In your handwriting?
4 A
Yes, sir.
)
5 Q
I would like you to look at what has been 6
previously marked as Exhibit 665, which is a copy of 7
the SOP that we have been discussing.
I would like 8
you to look at this and tell me whether you recognize 9
your handwriting in this document.
10 A
No, sir, I don't recognize my handwriting 11 on this document.
12 Q
You have looked through the entire
,13 document?
14 A
Yes, sir.
That does not appear to be my 15 handwriting.
16 Q
Do you recognize the handwriting?
17 A
No, sir, I do not.
18 Q
Now, I note on the last page, the data 19 sheet, though there are lines for somebody to sign 20 indicating they performed the test or approved the test 21 and put the date there, these lines-are all blank.
22 Was it the practice to fill these data 23 sheets in in the course of doing the testing?
24 A
Sir, as best I recall, we would, we did rx 25 fill in data sheets as we performed testing.
c b
. ~.
.. ~.
-_-_.= -
I scheimann 960-A 2
Q Whose responsibility was it to fill in O
3 the data sheet?
4 A
Sir, that varied, depending on who was
)
5 performing the, testing.
6 Generally the person performing the actual i
7 steps in the evolution would fill in the data sheet.
8 MR. WURTZ:
We can take a lunch break.
9 (Whe re upon, at'12:49 o' clock p.m.,
a i
10 luncheon recess was taken.)
l 11 12 13 1 ()
14 i
15 16 17 18 19 20 22 24
- ()
0 v
~_,.,-m._-
.. -., _ - _ -. - ~, -. -,,
,...-.,,..,.~-n.,
-..... _. ~. -
1 961 2
AFTERNOON SESSION OO 3
2:10 p.m.
4 FRE DE R I CK J.
S CH E IMAN N,
Resumed.
O EXAMINATION (Continued) 6 BY MR. WURTZ:
7 Q
Mr. Scheimann, before the accident, in 0
the course of your training at Met Ed were you given 9
instruction in the subject of saturation?
10 A
Sir, as best I can recall, we did deal i
11 with saturation pertaining to the pressurizer system 12 as a means of providing steam to control reactor 13 reactor coolant system pressure, as well as in the 14 steam generator, whose sole function was to provide 15 steam to drive the turbine.
16 Q
So you heard about the concept of 17 saturation then.
18 A
Yes, in terms of the fact that we did have 19 boiling in the pressurizer.
20 Q
Did you understand that saturation 21 depended upon the relationship between pressure and 22 temperature?
23 A
Sir, in terms of pressurizer operation, 24 we were trained that there was a certain temperature (a~')
25 that you could expect to get boiling in the 4
l
=
1 Scheimann 962 4
4 2
. pressurizer for a given pressure condition.
5 3
Q So did you understand that whether l
4 something was saturated, whether water was saturated,
).
5 depended on a pressure-temperature relationship?
6 A
Sir, I don't seem to recall talking about 7
it in terms of whether water was saturated.
We 8
referred to it primarily as steam generator and 9
pressurizer as boiling.
To the best I can recall, we 10 didn't refer to it as saturation.
11 Q
It is the same thing right?
12 A
Are you referring to what I know now e
13 pertaining to that particular time?
14 Q
No.
I am asking, did you understand at 15 the time that boiling occurred because water became
.16 saturated?
17 A
Sir, I don't seem to recall talking about i
18 it necessarily in terms of saturation versus boiling.
19 I do recall looking at steam tables 20 periodically and seeing saturation being used in that 21 particular sense of the word.
But as far as the 22 pressurizer was concerned, we talked primarily about 23 boiling-in there.
24 Q
Did you understand that saturation and 25 boiling were the same thing?
l 1
Scheimann 963 2
A Sir, I don't recall whether I had that U
3 understanding or not.
4 Q
Did you understand that boiling would
)
5 occur when. a certain pressure and temperature was 6
reached and that whether boiling would occur depended 7
on the relationship between pressure and temperature?
O A
Sir, the boiling that we took in, 9
discussed as far as the reactor coolant system, in 10 particular in the reactor core itself, was not really 11 based on temperature versus pressure.
J 12 As far as the steam generator, you did 13 have to have a given temperature and given pressure
(~T) 14 condition in order to have steam formation.
15 Q
And the same was true in the pressurizer, 16 was it not?
17 A
Sir, in our procedures there were j
18 reflections that at a given pressure and temperature 19 you would get boiling in the pressurizer, which is 20 what we expected.
21 Q
Did you understand that whether boiling was 22 going to occur depended on having a particular pressure 23 and'a particular temperature?
i 24 A
No, sir, not in all cases.
1
~{/']
25 Q
Did you know that you had to be within a
\\_
i
.. -., - ~
..w.-
1 Scheimann 964 2
certain range of pressures and temperatures in order O,
V 3
to have boiling in the steam generator and in the 4
pressurizer?
)
5 A
In the pressurizer and in the steam I
6 generator for a given temperature, you had a given I
pressure condition that would have to be met in order 8
to have boiling in that particular area.
9 Q
Did you understand that in the reactor 10 coolant system outside the pressurizer, there was not 11 to be any boiling other than,in the course of 12 operations, nucleate boiling?
13 A
Sir, my understanding was the only boiling
('~N
(,)
14 we would see in.the remainder of the system would be 15 nucleate boiling in the core regions.
16 Q
Did you understand that that was because 17 the reactor coolant system was kept under pressure?
18 A
Sir, as best I can remember, the nucleate 19
. boiling.was not related to pressure in the system.
20 Q
Did you understand that the reason in 21
-normal operations you saw no boiling other than this 22 nucleate boiling right around the fuel pins, did you 23 understand the reason for that to be that-the primary 24 system was kept under pressure?.
(~5p 25 A
Sir, in a pressurized water reactor, as
\\_/
- ~
t 1
Scheimann 965 2
opposed to a boiling water system, there is the 3
purpose of keeping it under pressure so that you don't 4
have boiling.
)
5 Q
That is a basic part of the 6
pressurized water reactor, is it not?
7 A
Say it again, sir.
8 Q
Is it correct that that is a basic part 9
of the pressurized water reactor?
10 A
I would say yes.
Otherwise, you wouldn't 11 need a pressurizer.
12 Did you understand that before the Q
13 accident that if you had film boiling or bulk boiling
()
14 in the primary system, that this could lead to 15 cladding or fuel damage?
16 A
Sir, I had understanding, based on the 17 hoiling water curve, that if we were to exceed the 18
.DNB point, or the " departure from nucleate boiling,"
19 as it is commonly called, we would have a possibility 20 that we could have fuel element damage to the cladding.
9 21 Q
Did you understand that if the relationship 22 between pressure and temperature reached a point where 23 film boiling or bulk boiling occurred in the primary 24 system, that that could lead to fuel damage?
(~
25 MR. MacDONALD:
When you refer to the
\\_)}
n
~
1 Schsimann 966 7,,
2 primary system, you are talking about in the D
3 core itself?
l 4
MR. WURTZ:
I am talking about the entire
)
5 primary system outside of the pressurizer.
6 MR. MacDONALD:
I object to the form.
7 A
Sir, as far as bulk or film boiling, 8
when we_ discussed that, it was ir. relationship to 9
temperature versus amount of heat being put out r
10 by the fuel ansembly.
We never talked about it in 11 terms as far as I can recall
- in terms of pressure, 12 and it was strictly in the core that we 13 talked abcut it.
14 BY MR. WURTZ:
15 Q
Did you understand?
I am not asking what 16 you talked about at this moment.
I am asking whether 17 you understood that the occurrence of boiling in the 18
. primary system, whether boiling would or would not 19 occur, depended on the relationship between 20 temperature and pressure in the primary system.
j!1 A
Sir, as best I can recall, that was not 22 my understanding based on what I had mentioned earlier.
23 Q
Well, did you understand that there was a 24 pressure component to the DNE safety envelope?
~
/'h 25 A
Sir, the DNB safety envelope or the Nj f-y y 7
e-r j-e-E
--yr 9
y i
e-
+-
y y w M
-b
-- g
l 1
Scheimann 967 2
tech. spec envelope, as it would really be called, was A
3 based on temperature and pressure.
However, if you 4
did not exceed the conditions of ' chat envelope if
)
5 you did exceed the conditions of that envelope, you 6
would trip, and therefore you would not get into the 7
situation of boiling.
8 Q
In other words, if the pressure-tempernture 9
relationship did not stay within the safety limit,-
10 then the reactor would automatically trip; is that 11 right?
12 A
If you got to the low end on the pressure 13 setpoint, the reactor would trip be fore you would
~
r~s i ).
14 exceed your DNBR requirements.
s 15 Q
Did you understand before the' accident 16 that if boiling were allowed to occur in the primary 17 system, that this could lead to fuel damage?
18 MR. MacDONALD:
Excactly where are we 19 talking about in the primary' system?
You are 20 using these terms interchangeably, and the 21 witness has a certain understanding, I am 22 sure, and you may have another one.
I am just 23 just trying to make it precise whether you are 24 talking about the nucleate b' oiling occurs in
- (~}
25 the core, outside the core, in the pressurizer, v
l i
4
I schelpsnn 968 2
where 3
MR. WURTZ:
I am talking about the reactor 4
coolant system outside of the pressurizer, and
)
5 I am talking about boiling beyond nucleate 6
boiling.
Film boiling or bulk boiling.
7~
MR. MacDONALD:
So you are talking about 8
boiling outside the core in the primary system, 9
not including the pressurizer.
10 MR. WURTZ:
Anywhere in the primary system 11 outside the pressurizer.
Boiling beyond the 12 normal small bubbles that exist around the core 13 during operations.
()
14 MR. MacDONALD:
Just so I am clear, you 15 mean to include in that 16 MR. WURTZ:
I mean_to include the loops 17 and ' the entire primary system outside the 18 pressurizer.
19 BY MR. WURTZ:
20 Q
so the question is, did you understand 21 that boiling in the primary system outside the 22 pressurizer could lead to fuel damage?
23 MM. MacDONALD:
I am going to object to 24 the form of the question because I don't think I
(~N 25 there has been proper foundation laid as to
%.)
'A Sch21.mann y
969 f
2 whether that is or is not\\his understanding.
(
'h 3
A Sir, what my unde,rstanding was pertaining 4
to boiling at that particular. time, if you had -- we 5
talked about boiling in the sense of the boiling 6
water curve.
And when we dealt with the boiling 7
water curve, we referenced that into the reactor 8
vessel area solely.
9 The DNBR considerations, however, were such 10 that we did not get into a situdtion where we exceeded a
11 DNBR.
The reactor would trip first.
12 Q
What is this boiling water curve you are 13 referring to?
14 A
That curve is the curve where you are l
15 plotting heat output or heat flux as opposed to 16 difference in temperature between the cladding 17 surface and the bulk fluid temperature.
18 Q
Where does the curve appear?
19 A
The curve would appear essentially in any l
20 heat transfer tech. manual or any heat transfer i
i T
21 manual would have s6me. variation of the curve.
J
,s
,s N
22 Q
Was this curve part of your procedures?
23 A
' Sir, I d not recall.whether cir not' this 24-particular curve had made 1t into any of our
\\,
(7 25 proceduresc i
(
A L) h ll o,
(,
~.
g I'
g 5
i g
'kg
\\
h ik
970 1
Scheimann d
2-Q Is this a curve you had in the control bQ.
3 room?
4 A
- Sir, I don't recall whether it was in the
)~
5 control ro,om or not.
6 Q
When did you make reference to this curve?
7 When did you use it?
8 A
I had seen the curve in various stages of 9
my training pertaining to talking about boiling.
10 Q
Did you use it while you were a licensed 11 operator?
12 MR. MacDONALD:
Do you mean it for 13 training or operating?
14 MR. WURTZ:
First, for operating.
15 A
Sir, I don't recall whether or not it was 16 used for operating the plant.
However, we did use 17 it for discussions of boiling and thermodynamics and 18 heat transfer.
19 Q
In classes, do you mean?
20 A
As best I can recall, yes, sir.
21 Q
I mean, what discussions were you 22.
referring to just now?
4.
23 A
Classroom type.
24 Q
What was on the vertical axis of the
' (q)~]
25 curve?
_.,., _ _. -. _ _ _. -, _. _ ~...,
1 Scheimann 971 2
A The vertical axis of the curve was a t
\\
3 measurement of heat flux.
4 Q
And the horizontal?
- )
5 A
The horizontal was difference in temperature 6
between the clad surface and the bulk fluid 7
temperature.
8 Q
Why was it called the boiling water curve?
9 A
It was called the boiling water curve 10 because it showed that as you increased heat flux 11 until you got up to the point of the DNB, you would 12 see the different regimes of boiling that could occur 13 theoretically along the cladding s urf ace.
f'h
(_)
ljl Q
For purposes of this curve, was pressure 15 held at a constant level?
16 A
Sir, as best I can recall, I don't recall i
17 pressure being even discussed in conjunction with this 18 curve.
19 Q
Do you know whether it was held at a 20 constant level for the purposes of making the curve?
21 A
- Sir, I_ honestly can't recall whether it 22 was or not.
23 Q
Did you understand, as a result of your 24 training before the accident, that if the
. ()
25
-pressure-temperature relationship were such that C/
I-
\\
1 Scheimann 972 2
boiling could occur in the primary system outside the (A) 3 pressurizer -- and with all these questions, I am 4
excluding the normal expected nucleate boiling and
)
5 am talking about boiling more extensive than that 6
did you understand that if the pressure-temperature 7
relationship permitted that to occur, that this could 8
lead to fuel damage?
9 A
Sir, I don't recall having an 10 understanding of any other type of boiling creating 11 fuel damage other than that which would have been 12 done as a result of that boiling water curve I 13 described. I don't recall of a condition where we
(~%
(,)
14 talked about pressure versus temperature being the 15 cause of this particular boiling.
16 Q
Well you did know that what produces 17 boiling is a particular pressure-temperature 18 relationships isn't that correct?
19 A
I did know that a particular 20 temperature-pressure relationship causes boiling.
21 Q
I would like to mark as the next exh1 bit, 22 Mr. Scheimann, some pages from one of the training 23 manuals you brought which was earlier marked as 24 Exhibit 533.
Exhibit 533 is entitled, "A Lecture 25 Series in Nuclear Power Plant Operations Training."
1 schoimann 973 r
2-Your name appears on the upper right-hand corner of l
3 the cover.
As this exhibit, which will be, I guess, i
4 788, I would 'like to mark the cover page and page
)
5 9 - 71 '.
6 I also have the entire book here, in case 7
you wish to look at any other part, but my questions 8
will be directed tc the page we are marking.
9 (Cover and one page of training manual l-10 entitled "A Lecture Series in-Nuclear Power 11 Plant Operations Training," were marked B&W 12 Exhibit No. 788 for identification, as of this j-13 date.)
(
14 Q
Mr. Scheimann, I would like to read thi's 15 paragraph number 9.14.2.5, entitled, "Importance of 16 Pressure Measurement."
17 It reads, " Accurate measurement of 18 pressure and resulting control actions are of l-19 paramount importance in the PWR.
If the pressure 20 increases beyond a certain-point, certain~ irreversible 21 relief devices are provided such as safety valves 22 and rupture disks which, while protecting the primary
~ 13 piping,. produce an inevitable shutdown of the reactor.
24 If pressure decreases, the possibility exists ~that
)
25 boiling will begin, which may, produce a sufficient 2
f w
- --e.
+ -
r
-.w w
a e5 9. w, y -e w y __ y w yim y
- m 9 F
- T'
- "VT**4'**W'*
"--9"Tv"7-'F'W-NMw' F*** * * '"*V W
t'4' * * *'"' * *
- 1 Scheimann 974 i
l 2
change in the heat transfer from the core to cause
('
3 damage to fuel."
4 Do you-recall reading that paragraph from
)
5 this training manual?
6 A
No, sir, I do not, mainly because that section fits into the instrumentation section.
~
8 Secondly, I had never received training 9
from this book per se -- from this book.
I used it 10 merely as a reactor system reference.
Any system 11 orientation lectures we would have been given would 12 be based on our in-plant instrumentation manuals.
13 Q
You don't recall ever making reference 14 to this particular section during the course of your 15 training or during the time you were an operators is 16 that right?
17 A
I don't have a recollection of having done 18 so, sir.
19 Q
In the course of the training that you 20 received, were you given the information that appears 21 here on Page 9-71,.namely, that if pressure decreases, 22 the possibility exists that boiling will begin and 23 that that may in turn cause damage to fuel?
24 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of
(~}
25 having this point being stressed to me.
As far as
^
\\J
1 Scheimann 975 2
this book was ccncerned, we never did have training O
~
3 from this book.
We got this book as an after -- as 4
an afterthought to the training for a reference in
)
5 reactor theory primarily.
6 Q
So you don't remember this point being 7
stressed; is that it?
8 A
I don't recall that it had been, whether 9
it had or not, sir.
10 Q
Do you recall who provided this book, 11 which was prepared at Penn State, to you?
12 A
Sir, I don't recall how I did come into 13 possession of this b o o k ', as far as who gave it to me.
14 Q
After the time you received it, did you 15 continue to use it as a general reference source?
16 A
I did on occasion use the reactor theory 17 portion as reference material.
18 Q
As Exhibit 789 I would like to mark two 19 pages from documents produced to us by Met Ed..
This 20 appears to be a summary of your study program, 21 self-study program, in connection with obtaining SRO 22 license.
23 (Two pages showing summary of study 24 program'in' connection with obtaining SRO
(~]
25 license were marked B&W Exhibit 789 for
'.q)
.__.__.__._,m.-_,
1 Scheimann 976~
2 identification, as of this date.)
O).
('_
3 Q
Mr. Scheimann, can you identify these 4
pages which have been marked Exhibit 789?
)
5 A
This appears to be a tally of the hours 6
I spent in various areas of self-study in preparation 7
for my SRO license.
8 Q
Is this your writing on the firs t page of 9
the exhibit?
10 A
Yes, sir, it appears to be my own writing.
11 Q
What was your purpose in prep aring this?
12 A
My purpose in preparing this particular 13 piece of paper was to give some documentation as to 0
(_j 14 areas I had covered in my training program.
15 Q
You were off studying by yourself, and 16 you were reporting to somebody what you had dones is 17 that it?
18 A
Yes, sir, as best I recall, and reporting 19 in for weekly quizzes.
20 Q
I see.
The weekly quizzes were part of 21 the program?
22 A
Yes, sir.
23 Q
For whom did you prepare this summary of 1
24 your self-study program?
25 A
As best I can recall, I turned that in.
s-e ene
- =1
-y r
w t
e--
t'**e--"W--y
-y 7-P-
- * + - - -
- P 7-w eT F-'
'N
1 Schelmann 977 2
to the. training department.
, O 3
Q Did you also prepare a calendar, which is 4
the second page of this exhibit?
)
5 A
I don't recall having prepared that 6
calendar.
7 Q
What does that calendar reflect?
8 A
What that calendar appears to reflect 9
is the time that I had spent studying or a schedule 10 of how I was to study areas prior to taking my quizzes
. 11 every week.
12 Q
Kere you given that calendar by the i
13 training department?
14 A
Sir, I don't recall whether I had been 15 given it, to me, by them or not.
16 Q
I see on the first page of Exhibit 789 17 your entry number 10 states, " Study on Section H, 18 Reactor Theory, 45 hours5.208333e-4 days <br />0.0125 hours <br />7.440476e-5 weeks <br />1.71225e-5 months <br />."
19 Do you see that?
20 A
Yes, sir, I see that.
21 Q
What does Section H refer to?
22 A
Section H, in that sense, referred to a 23 category of the NRC exam.
24 Q
After you did your self-study on Section
(~'T; 25 H,
did you.then receive an exam from Met Ed?
I am L.J
1 Scheimann 978 2
talking about the weekly quiz or whatever you were 3
referring to before.
4 A
As best I can recall, yes, I did receive
)
5 an exam on that material.
6 Q
What materials did you study during that 7
part of ycur self-study program; do you recall?
8 A
No, sir, I do not recall what I did study 9
pertaining to that, what material I looked at.
10 Q
Was material provided to you or were you 11 free to find materials for yourself?
12 A
As best I can recall, material was 13 provided to me for study on the areas in question.
r~N
(_,)
14 Q
What kind of material was that?
15 A
Sir, I don't recall what the material 16 consisted of at present.
17 Q
Did it include a sample set of questions, 18 for. example?
19 MR. MacDONALD:
Did it?
20 Q
Do you recall that it did?
21 A
I recall that I did see some questions 22 on various categories.
I don't recall whether they 23 were necessarily on reactor theory or not.
24 MR. WURTZ: I would like to mark as
g 25 Exhibit 790 also some pages provided during the (d '
~
l 1
Scheimann 979 2
course of this lawsuit.
This document from
. /}
3 the cover says, " Category H Exam, Reactor 4
Theory."
5 (Pages with a cover bearing the title, 6
" Category H Exam, Reactor Theory," were marked 7
B&W Exhibit No. 790 for identification, as of 8
this date.)
9 Q
Mr. Scheimann, do you recognize this 10 document?
11 A
The document does appear to be a quiz on 12 reactor theory.
o 13 Q
Do you see your writing in this exhibit?
,O\\
()
14 A
Yes, sir, I see my writing on the front.
15 Q
Where is it on the front?
16 A
Where I have my name and the date that 17 the quiz was taken.
18 Q
Is that April 5 th, 19787 19 A
Yes, sir, that appears to be April 5th, 20 1978.
4 21 Q
Do you see your writing anywhere else in
-g J
\\
22 this exhibit?
23 A
Back after the question section, I see 24 my writing appearing in the answer section.
25 Q
So this is a copy of a quiz that you took
I scheimann 980 2
on April 5, 1978 on Category H; is that it?
3 A
It does appear to be so.
4 Q
It says this was corrected by -- I believe w) 5 that is Nelson Brown.
Is that correct?
6 A
That is what it says there, sir.
7 Q
Would you identify Mr. Brown?
8 MR. MacDONALD:
What position he held in 9
April '78?
10 Q
(Continuing) who was he, at the time of 11 this exam?
12 A
At the time of that exam, as bes t I.can 13 recall, he was an instructor.
14 Q
After he corrected this exam, did he then 15 discuss it with you?
16 A
I don't have a recollection of whether he 17 did or not, sir.
18 Q
Was it his practice to do that after one 19 of the practice exams in the SRO study program, to 20 do that, sir?
21 A
I don't have a recollection whether it was 22 normal or not.
23 Q
I mean, would they just give you this and 24 say, "Here it is"?
Or did.they sit down and discuss 25 the results with you?
Do you recall?
L-
~-,.......,
1 Scheimann 981 1
e
\\
2 cm MR. MacDONALD:
Now you are talking about U
3 Nelson Brown's practice or in general with all 4
instructors?
You first referenced Nelson Brown.
)
5 Q
I am talking about the training department.
6 Was it the practice during the SRO self-study program I
that you went through?
O A
As best I can recall, sir, general 9
practice was that the exams would be reviewed with 10 the personnel taking them.
11 Q
What did you understand was the basis on 12 which the questions were selected that were included 13 in this reactor theory practice exam?
14 A
I don't think I see what you are getting 15 at, sir.
16 Q
Well, is it correct that this practice 17 exam was to prepare you for taking the NRC 18 examinations was that it?
19 A
The primary function of these exams was 20 to find out what my level of knowledge was after 21 having gone through the self-study program.
22' Q
Was it the purpose to determine whether 23 your level of knowledge was sufficient to qualify you 24 to go and take the SRO exam to be administered by 25 the NRC7 y
- o-m-t-g
- P-wt--gee g
- -=== - <
tn----m--t-r-
-t
-f9*'
P ir -- e q'-
t--grv-4-tem r---
g eam+?-*
a-W-w
1 Scheimann 982
^
2 A
As best I can recall, it was to check my N-3 level of knowledge.
4 Q
I would like you to lobk, Mr. Scheimann,
)
5 at questio_n No.
5.
It reads, "The TMI plant will 6
operate with the primary system pressurized to about 7
2155 psig."
And t'en sub A under that is, " Explain h
8 why the system is pressurized."
Do you see that?
4 9
A Yes, I see that written there.
10 Q
I would like you to go back to that 5-A 11 in your answers.
Do you see that you have written an 12 answer there to question 5-A?
13 A
I see that there is an answer there to
)
14 5-A.
15 Q
Is that your writing?
16 A
It appears to be my writing.
17 Q
Your answer reads, "The primary system 18 is pressurized in order to give us a higher saturation 19 temperature to limit the amount of boiling that 20 occurs."
21 somebody has written, up between the two 22 sentences there, the word " bulk."
Is that your 23 writing?
24 A
No, sir, it is not.
(~}
25-Q Then later somebody wrote an additional v
. l
1 S ch.simann 983 2
g, sentence.
Is that your writing?
3 A
No, sir, that is not my writing, either.
4 Q
How did those additional remarks get
)
5 there?
6 A
Sir, I do not know how -- I don't know I
how those remarks got put in there.
0 Q
Now, continuing with your answer, "This 9
increase in the saturation temperature allows us to 0
operate at a higher primary plant temperature and i
11 thus we are able to transfer more heat from the 1
primary,,to the secondary in the OTSG and thus generate 13 more power in MWE."*
()
14 Somebody has added certain comments to 15 your answer.
4 16 Do you recall that Mr. Brown did that?
17 A
Sir, I don't recall who had done it.
i 18 Q
Do you recognize that to be Mr. Brown's 19 writing?
20 A
Sir, I don't recognize it to be Mr.
21 Brown's handwriting, as best I can recall.
22 Q
Let me just read the. answer then as 23 amended.
It reads, "The primary system is pressurized 24 in order to give us a higher saturation temperature
(-}
25 to limit the amount of," and then the word " bulk" is
% J.
1 Scheimann 984 2
added, " bulk boiling that occurs."
1
- ^'
3 Then an additional sentence is added, 4
"This prevents fuel (clad) damage."
)
5 Do you. remember, at the time you took this 6
examination, discussing with Mr. Brown this particular 7
answer?
I 8
A Sir, I don' t recall whether I had or had 9
not discussed this particular answer.
10 Q
Do you remember being told, after the time 11 you submitted this exam, that the primary system is i
12 pressurized to limit the amount of bulk boiling and 13 therefore to prevent clad damage?
f^%
(_)
14 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of such.
15 Q
Mr. Scheimann, on the day of the accident, 16 did you understand that the reactor trip procedure 17 required the operator to restore pressure to 2155 18 psig after a trip?
19 A
' Sir, I don't recall that as one of'the 20 immediate actions of that particular procedure.
21 Q
Do you recall that it was a follow-up
~
L 22 action?
23 A
Sir, I don't recall'whether it was as a
)
24 follow-up action.
f~}
25 Q-You don't recall that it was a follow-up
%J
1 Schaimann 985 2
action of the reactor trip procedure to restore gg
.\\
)
v 3
pressure to 2155 psi?
4 A
Sir, I don't recall whether or not it was
)
5 written in,those words in the " follow-up" section.
6 MR. WURTZ:
We will mark the Unit 2 7
reactor trip procedure as Exhibit 791.
8 (Document showing Unit 2 reactor trip 9
procedure was marked B&W Exhibit No. 791 for 10 identification, as of this date.)
11 Q
Let me ask you this.
Did you understand 12 on the day of the accident that after a trip the 13 primary pressure was supposed to be at 2155 psig?
h,/
14 A
Sir, I understood that system pressure 15 normally was kept at 2155 or threreabouts.
16 Q
And that was true even after a trip; did 17 you understand that?
18 A
The pressure would not necessarily be 19 2155 following a trip.
20 Q
Did you understand that after a trip, it 21 was to be restored to or was to recover to that point?
22 A
Sir, in the end you would desire to be 23 at 2155 pounds.
4 24 Q
If you could look at page 3 of the reactor
[~J')
25 trip procedure, I would like to read you, under s
I 1
Scheimann 986 2
" Follow-up action," paragraph 3.4.
It states, "Ve ri fy 3
that the pressurizer heaters and spray have returned 4
RCS pressure to normal operating pressure of 2155
)
5 p s ig. "
6 Is it correct that was the time period 7
after the trip?
8 MR. MacDONALD:
Are you talking about 9
immediately after the trip or --
10 Q
(continuing)
Some time period after the 11 trip.
some time period a[ter the trip you would 12 A
13 expect to get back to 2155 pounds.
(
14 Q'
Now, on the date of the accident, as I 15 understand it, you had this reactor trip procedure out l
16 at some point; is that right?
i 17 A
At one point I did have it out.
18 Q
And that was in the early stages of the 19 accident; is that right?
20 A
As best I can recall, yes.
21 Q
Did you proceed to this section entitled 1
22
" Follow-up action"?
23 A
sir, as best I can recall, I never got to 24 the follow-up action before I was directed over to
(~}
25 the pressurizar control station.
Li
1 Scheimann 987 2
Q Did,you know on the day of the accident, 19
\\/
3 did you have memorized, what was in the follow-up 4
action?
).
5 A
No, sir, I did not have memorized what was 6
in the follow-up action.
Our requirements were that 7
we memorized the symptoms as well as the automatic 8
and immediate manual actions.
9 Q
Were you aware on the day of the accident 10 that Paragraph 3.4 that I read to you was one of the 11 follow-up actions for reactor trip?
12 A
Sir, on various occasions we had taken 13 and studied the procedures.
I don't recall if I
)
14 picked out that particular step and was aware, yes, 15 it was in there.
16 Q
You don't recall whether on the day of 17 the accident you were aware of that particular step; 18 is that right?
19 A
I don't recall whether I was or not, sir.
20 Q
After the time you went to the pressure 21 control station, did you at any later time look at the 22 reactor trip procedure?
23 A
I don't recall having done so, sir.
)
24 Q
At the point when you were told by Mr.
(]
25 Zewe to go to the pressure control station, did you
'w/
I scheimann 988 2
consider that any responsibilities you had for O
3 following the reactor trip procedure were over?
4 A
Sir, as far as the reactor trip procedure
)
5 was concerned, our main evolution at that point was 6
to insure that the immediate actions had been carried 7
out.
I don't recall that I had thought any further 0-than the immediate actions or not after going to the 9
pressure control station.
10 Q
well, who did you understand was going 11 to be responsible for the follow-up actions in the 12 reactor trip procedure?
13 A
I don't recall, sir.
14 Q
Did you understand that you had any 15 responsibility for the follow-up action?
16 A
I don't recall whether I thought about it 17 at that time or not, as my major function at that point 18 was to try to control level in the pressurizer.
19 Q
Well, at any point after you went to the 20 pressure control station, did you believe that you had 21 any responsibilities for the follow-up action in tha 22 reactor. trip procedure?
23 A
Sir, based on what I was doing at that 24 particular time, I don' t recall whether I had_ thought 25 about it or not.
1 Scheimann 989 l
2 Q
You don't recall Mr. Zewe saying to you in
('~
3 substance, "I'll handle the follow-up a c tior..
You go J
4 to the pressure control station," and recall Mr. Zewe
)
5 assigning.the follov.-up action to come other operstor?
6 A
Sir, I don't recall whether such took place 7
or not.
I just got the word to go over to the 8
pressure control, and at that point we had a level 9
problem on our hands.
10 Q
Now, did you understand, on the day of the 11 accident, that if you held temperature constant and 12 dropped the pressure, you could reach a point where 13 boiling would occur?
14 A.
Sir, in the case of a large double shear 15 of a major system piping where we lost pressure 16 completely, I was under the understanding that it would 4
17 would be conceivable that we would get boiling in 18 that case.
19 Q
And the reason was that pressure had 20 dropped sufficiently so that the relationship between 21 pressure and temperature would permit boiling to 22 occur; is that righ t?
23 A
The main cause I understood about that 24 was the lack of inventory in the system to begin with.
j
{~m}
25 Q
I don't want to keep coming back to the
.=
1 Scheimann 990 2
same thing.
I would like to get this done, but I g
i 3
thought we had discussed that boiling occurs when a 4
certain pressure and temperature relationship exists.
5 Is that correct?
Did you understand that?
6 A
Boiling will occur at a given 7
temperature-pressure condition.
8 Q
And so in the case of this large break 9
that you just referred to, did you understand that 10 what was happening there was that the pressure had 11 dropped far enough so that the relationship between 12 pressure and temperature was such that boiling could 13 occur?
p) 14 A
I understood in that case that we did
,%d
~
15 have the possibility of boiling.
However, we also 16 were concerned with the fact that we had massive loss 17 of system inventory under that particular condition.
18 Q
Is it fair to say that you understood 19 before the accident that it was desirable not to have 20 boiling in the primary system, SEli boiling, in a -
21 pressurized water reactor?
22 A
I would have to say since we were not a 23 boiling water reactor, we would not have thought it 24 a good idea to have boiling in the pressurized water t
('
25
- reactor, v
j
l ~
scheimann 991 2
Q Now, did you understand that in order 3
to prevent boiling in a pressurized water reactor, 4
it was important to know at what point boiling would
)
5 occur?
In other words, if you want to prev ent it, 6
you have to know when it's going to occur; is that 7
correct?
8 A
Theoretically, yes.
However, we would 9
never get to a' condition where we dropped pressure 10 with a continuous steady temperature, because our trip 11 envelope would take and shut the plant down.
12 Q
During the course of the accident, in 13 the first 30 minutes of the accident, from 4:00 to
/~N A,_)
14 4:30, did you check the pressure-temperature 15 relationship to see if it was possible to have boiling 16 in the primary system?
Outside the pressurizer, I 17 am referring to, in these questions.
18 A
sir, during most of the early stages I had 19 looked at the various instrumentation to see what the 20 parameters were doing.
However, the major 21 influencing was the pressurizer level and the fact 22 that it was going up and it was in danger of and had 23 at points violated tech. spec requirements.
24 Q
At any time in the first 30 minutes did
("T 25 you look'at the primary pressure and the primary
\\
t
%)
v c-
-,.r--
1 Scheimann 992 2
temperature and check to see if the conditions that
( 'N 3
would allow boiling existed?
4 A
I don't recall whether I did intentionally
)
5 compare the two.
6 Q
You say " intentionally."
What do you 7
intend to convey by that?
Do you believe that you 8
would normally de this?
l 9
MR. MacDONALD:
Normally do what?
10 Q
(Continuing)
What did you intend to 11 convey by adding the word " intentionally" there?
12 A
What I tried to convey is that I did not 13 do it as a definite -- you know, as a thought process,
b
(,/
14 that I compared the two of those.
At least, I don't 15 remember whether I had or not.
16 Q
Do you believe that you did it in some 17 fashion?
18 MR. MacDONALD:
What? Look at temperature 19 and pressure?
20 MR. WURTZ:
To check for boiling, the 21 possibility of boiling in the primary system 22 outside of the pressurizer.
23 A
Sir, I don't believe that I consciously 24 gave thought to the fact that boiling was existing at
/~N 25 the earlier times during the transient.
-]
1 Scheimann 993 2
Q I just asked you about the first 30
\\/
3 minutes.
what about during the first hour?
Did 4
you check the temperature and pressure in the
)
5 primary system for boiling during the first hour?
6 A
Sir, I checked pressure and temperature 7
at various times during the course of the day.
I l
8 don't remember whether I checked them pertaining to 9
boiling or not.
10 Q
You don't remember; is that what you are 11 saying?
12 A
I don't specifically remember checking the 13 parameters based on boiling.
14 Q
What about during the first hundred 15 minutes, up to the time the reactor coolant pumps 16 got turned off?
Did you check the primary temperature 1
17 and pressure for boiling during that time period?
18 A
Sir, I don't have a specific time when I 19 looked at primary temperature and pressure.
I looked 20 at it at various points.
I don't recall whether I 21 had done it based on any thought of boiling or not.
22 Q
Is it correct -- and I believe we i
23 discussed earlier in this deposition that primary 24 pressure and temperature are available on panel 4.
l
}v]s 25 A
Yes, sir, primary system pressure and
1 Scheimann 994 2
temperature are available on panel 4.
\\
3 Q
And that is where you were standing;
~4 isn't that right?
)
5 A
Yes, sir, at the edge of panel 4 and 6
panel 3, where they combine.
7 Q
On the day of the accident, did you recall 8
from your training that for a temperature of about 9
550 Fahrenheit, boiling would occur at a pressure 10 of about 1050 psi?
11 MR. MacDONALD:
Boiling would. occur 12 where?
13 MR. WURTZ:
Wherever those two conditions 14 exist.
4 15 A
Sir, I don't recall having covered that 16 particular set of circumstances.
17 Q
Did you learn in the course of your 18 studies, in working with the steam table, or did you 19 come to memorize certain pressure-temperature 20 relationships as being ones that would produce 21 boiling?
22 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of 23 whether I memorized specific ones or not.
24 A
Did you have enough familiarity with when 25 boiling occurs so that on the day of the accident
)
1 Scheimann 995 t
2 you were aware that boiling would occur when
(~h
'\\2 3
temperature is at about 550 and pressure is at about 4
1050 psi?
)
5 A
Sir, I don't have a recollection of.those 6
two sets of parameters.
7 Q
Do you recall any pressure-temperature _
8 relationships that you were aware of on the day of~the 9
accident that would produce boiling?
10 A
Sir, at that particular time I had known 11 what the saturation characteristics were in the 12 pressurizer and the steam generator.
I don't recall 13 right now what they were, though.
. O)
(,
14 Q
Would you look for your notes o r.
core 15 performance which are part of the exhibit we looked 16 at earlier today, Exhibit No. 530, and in particular 17 at questions numbers 8 and 9, in chapter 2 on 18 thermodynamics.
19 A
Did you say chapter 27 20 Q
That's correct, and then the problem' set 21 f r chapte r 2.
22 A
Yes, sir.
What questions?
23 Q
Questions 8 and 9.
Do you have those?
24 Number 8 is, "What must be the
('}.
25
. temperature of saturated water at a pressure of,"
and NJ
~.
1 Scholmann, 996 2
g3 than there is a listing of various pressures.
And
\\
3 over to the right are temperatures.
4 Do you recall?
Did you go to the steam
)
5 table to get those temperatures?
6 A
Sir, I don't recall whether I used the 7
steam table or what for that particular exercise.
8 Q
And then question 9 is, "What must be the 9
temperature of saturated steam at a pressure of," and 10 again there is a list of pressures on the left side 11 and then on the right-hand side there is a list of 12 temperatures."
13 Again, do you recall, was this an exercise
)
x/
14 in the use of the steam table that you were carrying 15 out here?
16 A
Sir, I don't recall whether it was or not.
17 Q
Do you see that in both question 8 and 9, 18 for a pressure of 1000 psi, you recorded the 19 saturation temperature as 544.58 degrees Fahrenheit?
20 A
Yes, sir, I do see that there.
21 Q
Is that one of the pressure-temperature 22 relationships that you recalled and were aware of on 23 the day of the ac c i.de n t, that saturation would occur 24 if pressure was at.1000 psi and temperature at 25 approximatly 545 degrees Fahrenheit?
. p.
I i
Scholmann N
997 f
,t
^
,f 2
A Sir, I don't recall as to whether I s
s 3
thotaght about that one or not.
s 4
Q' You don' t re call-whe'the r that is one of x
)
5 the pre [ssure-temperature rel'ationships you were t
s 3 1
s 6
familiar with as of the daisof the accident?
t 3
'I don't recall whether it was or not, sir.
7 A
8 (Time noted:
3335 o'cisch p.m.)
a.
Ye 9
\\
\\
r s
't 10 s
Frederick J. Scheimann I
11 I
1 i
s.
12 Subscribed and sworn to before me
' s 13
,this day 'of
/
1982.
g V
I4 s
15
)
s Notary Publ~ic 16
,~
s j
- %g
+
17 g
(
4
'~
18
(
(
s s,
g
~.
19 M
A
\\
20 1
g 22 N.
M
.N j
e y
s.
24 s
, "?
(
g
}
25
\\
'l ' N.
Y
O g
"[
[
- 2 g.,
g
'/
/
f s
f I
t
_-_-____-_________._________-_______1___-
1 998 CERTIFICATE
(
STATE OF NEW YORK
)
3
- 3s,:
i COUNTY OF NEW YORK
)
4 I @.
I, HARVEY B.
KRAMER, RPR, CSR
\\]
5
, a Notary Public of the State of New York, do hereby certify that the continued deposition of FREDERICK J.
SCHEIMANN was taken before l
me on Tuesday, June 8,
1982.
9 Consisting.
l -.
of pages 888 through 997 l
10 4
I further certify that the witness had been previously sworn and that the within transcript is a true record of said testimony; That I am not connected by blood or
's marriage with any q,f the said parties nor interested directly or indirectly in the matter in controversy, nor am I in the employ of any of the counsel.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 1
19 hand.this 5[ day of
(,In &
1982.
__. 20 21
. w.
22 1
WW WIN Q HARVEY B.
KRAMER, RPR, CSR 24 O
2s I
t t
_. - - -~
. ~..i 999 I NDEX WITNESS PAGE FREDERICK J.
SCHEIMANN, Resumed 890
- -)
i B&W FOR IDENTIFICATION 785 Copy of a control room log for the period April 2, 1977 to October 21, 1977 928 786 Two pages from log showing Mr.
Scheimann's entry 942 4
i 787 Pages from the shif t foreman's log for Oct.
4, 1978 955 788 Cover and one page of training manual entitled "A Lecture Series in Nuclear. Power Plant Operations Training" 973 9
789 Two pages showing summary of l
study program in connection with obtaining SRO license 975 790 Pages with a cover bearing the g
title, " Category H Exam, Reactor Theory" 979 791 Document showing Unit 2 reactor trip proceduro 985
.e