ML20072J042
| ML20072J042 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 06/24/1982 |
| From: | Perrone P BABCOCK & WILCOX CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| TASK-06, TASK-6, TASK-GB NUDOCS 8306290889 | |
| Download: ML20072J042 (67) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:,. _ s ; ' s .
- i. -
s[ '
,/ -
\ ,
; UNITED STATES < DISTRICT COURT -
s SOUTHERN D'ISTRICT OF NEW YORK _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -x s _. , GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORPORATION,
,, JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY,
\i METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY and :
PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, t e Plaintiffs, 80 CIV. 1683
- (R.O.)
-against-THE BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY and J. RAY McDERMOTT & CO., INC., t
,, Defendants. e:
_x
\
t Deposition of the BABCOOC & WI LCOX COMPAN Y, O by PAUL PERRONE, taken by Plaintif.f, pursuant to 3 agreement!, at the of51ces of Kaye Scholer Pierman Hays & Handler, Esqs., 425 Park Avenue, New, York, New York on Thursday, June 24, 1982 m s. s s s at .10:10 o' clock a.m., before Nancy A. Rudolph, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and m c for the State of New York. s 4 sx
? .
;Pa T
T a !!' J % 3 y) '
- DOYLE REPORTING. INC.
CERTIFIED STENOTYPE REPORTERS I WALTER SHAPIRO, C.S.R. ' 369 LExtNGTcN AVENUE Nsw Yonx. N.Y. 10017 CHARLES SHAPIRO, C.S.R. TsLEPNoNE 212 - 867 8220
;.r .. .
2 7- . w 7..x & - - - - - - - - -
- . , . ~c,- . - -
_, _ - - .. - ~ 1 2
- O App eara n ce s :
2 3 KAYE, SCHOLER, FIERMAN, HAYS & HANDLER, ESQS. , Attorneys for Plaintiffs i 4 425 Park Avenue New York, New York BY: RICHARD C. SELTZER,-ESQ., 6 of Counsel 7 .c . . . 4 * - -
)
8 DAVID POLK & WARDWELL, ESQS. 9 Attorneys for Defendants One Chase Manhattan Plaza 10 New York, New York . 11 BY: RODMAN W. BENEDICT, ESQ., of Counsel 13
- l-14 Also Present ,
15
^
DAVID TAYLOR 16
~
17 18 oOo 19 l
-20
.{ 21 22 .IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and 23 between the attorneys for the respective parties O I Q.
- 24 hereto that the sealing, filing and certification 25 ' f.the within-deposition be, and the same hereby 4[Pb r t] 1% , y -N, f '"e. 4
1 l 1 3 2 are waived; that the transcript may be signed 3 before any Notary Public with the same force and 4 effect as if signed before the Court. 5 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that all 6 objections, except as to the form of the question, 7 are reserved to the time of trial. 8 9 9 e 10 000 - 11 12 . 13 PAUL P E RRONE, having been first duly sworn 14 by the Notary Public (Nancy A. Rudolph), was 15 examined and testified as follows: . 16 MR.-SELTZER: I would like to mark for 17 identification a resume of Paul E. Perrone,today's 18 witness. This is GPU Exhibit 570. 19 -(Resume of Paul E. Perrone marked GPU 20' Exhibit 57,0 for identification, as of this date.) 21 EXAMINATION BY MR, . SELTZER: 22 23 Q Please state your name and address for en
) the record.
24
- . 25 Q Paul Perrone.. 3400 ~Ivylink Place, Lynchburg,
[?w k N- 7, h- '
. . - = . . . _ .
1 Perrone 4 C:). - 2 Virginia. 3 Q For what purpose was GPU 570 prepared? 4 A I am sorry, I didn't hear the question. ('s 5 Q Why was GPU 570 prepared? 6 A I was asked to prepare it for the testimony 7 today. 8 Q Is it accurate with respect to all the 9 data that is set forth on it? (: 10 A It's accurate to the best of my knowledge 11 and recollection, yes. 12 Q So it accurately states every employee 13 for whom you have worked since graduation from college?
'14 A Yes..
15 Q And it accurately states all of your formal 16 education since high school? 17 A .I may have taken some other c6rrespondence 18 courses that'aren't listed here, if you consider that 19 to be formal education. But my. institutional education is 20 listed here, yes. 21 Q What correspondence courses have you had 22 that are not indicated on GPU 5707. 23 A one in computers and one in television
- ~%
,j 24 servicing.
- 25 .Q_ KAfter youl graduated ~from Rensselaer
. ,. h -- =#
1 Perrone 5 f~) (d. 2 Polytechnic Institute, you went into the U.S. Navy? 3 A That's correct. 4 Q Did you ask to be assigned to the Naval 5 Reactors Division? ' 6 A I asked to be interviewed for the Navy 7 Nuclear Propulsion program and as a part of that 8 interview, the opportunity to work there was offered l 9 to me, and I took that, yes. t 10 Q What did you do as an engineer for primary 11 plant equipment? g- 12 A That was my first assignment at Naval L.) 13 Reactors and it was a junior engineering position,
, 14 and I had assignments such as the review of drawings 15 and documents and specifications that were prepared 16 by contractors for certain primary plant components, 17 worked under the supervision of another engineer, that 18 sort of thing.
i
. 19 Q Was that your first exposure to
{ l 20 nuclear technolgoy? 21 A Other than physics courses in college, 22 that was my first exposure, yes. 23 Q Had you had any college courses that were
-p)
(_ ~ 24 devoted substantially to nuclear engineering or 25 nuclear physics?
,,b.L
.5 - . . __ _
1 Perrone 6 [ V) 2 A I can't recall having any that were i 3 substantially devoted. 4 Q Were your Naval assignments for five years ( 5 land-based assignments? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Did you have any courses while you were 8 in the Navy that dealt with the operation or design 9 of a nuclear plant? E 10 A The Bettis Reactor Engineering School 11 that is listed here is run by -- was run at that w 12 time by Naval Reactors. That program dealt with 13 nuclear engineering and the design of Naval plants. , 14 I recall an orientation course that was given new 15 employees at Naval Reactors that lasted probably on 16 the order of a month or six weeks, as best I can 17 -recall. Those would be the only ones I can recall. 18 Q Was the Bettis assignment a full year? 19 A No. It was six months. 20 Q Where is Bettis?- i 1 21 A It's at the Westinghouse Bettis Laboratories ( 22 in Pittsburgh. It's the -- it's in Pittsburgh, outside 23 of Pittsburgh, West Milton, Pennsylvania, I believe f) () 24- is the of ficial city. 25 9 What courses did you take during the six-
, s, y _ , , - , - - - - , - --s, , -,
1 Perrone 7 O -
\ ) -
2 month program at Bettis? s 3 A The best I can recall, there were courses 4 in mathematics, physics, thermal hydraulics, reactor 5 plant control systems, shielding design. That's about
. 6 all I can remember.
7 Q Did you study fluid flow? 8 A There was a course in fluid flow, yes. 9 Q Did you study heat transfer? E 10 A Yes, there was a course in heat transfer. 11 Q Did you study nuclear physics? - 12 A Yes. i O' ,, 13 Q Were the Naval reactors that you were 14 dealing with during the five years.that you were in 15 the Navy pressurized water reactors? , 16 A Yes. 17 Q Did the instructors at Bettis apply'what 18 they were teaching you to PWR's? In other words,
, 19 did they discuss the application of what they were 20 teaching to pressurized water reactors?
A The instruction at Bettis was predominantly ( 21 ( 22 academic in principle. Specific designs of reactors I 23 were n t discussed. It was a -- moreHof an academic im
- l h! 24 program, but.it was centered'around PWR. technology 25 as opposed:to_any other type of reactor technology, a . '
1 Perrone 8 ! r~T b-2 but not -- there were hypothetical designs and they 3 were more in the academic abstract as opposed to 4 discussion of any particular design. 5 Q Did you study at Bettis thermodynamics? 6 A I believe the course was called heat 7 transfer and fluid flow, and to that extent it 8 incorporated 'some thermodynamics. I don't recall a 9 specific course in thermodynamics. t 10 Q Did you learn about the throttling 11 principles applied to fluids passing through an
. 12 orifice?
13 A I don't remember that specific -- I don't 14 remember that specific topic. That doesn't stand out 15 in my mind. , 16 Q Is that a topic on which you ever had 17 training or education? - 18 A I don't recall specifically. 19 Q Did your Navy experience after 1966 call 20 upon the knowledge that you acquired during .the-21 Bettis courses? i 22 A Iticalled on some of it, not all of the l j i L 23 topics that were discussed there. l g 3- " [ Aq,) 2i Q When you got out of the Navy, you went 25 'to' work for an outfit in Alexandria? 1
- v. ui . - - ~,~
1 Perrone 9 O 2 A Yes. 3 Q did that job have anything to do with , 4 nuclear energy? 5 A No, it did not. 6 Q After you exhausted all the opportunities
'7 there were at that job, you moved on to General 8 Electric Mobile Radio Department?
9 A Well, I wouldn't say after I had exhausted t 10 all the opportunities at that place. Those were your 11 words. I left that job and went to General Electric 12 after the period of time that is shown in the resume. Og 13 Q About four months? - 14 A That's right. 15 Q Did the GE Mobile Radio Department job 4 16 -involve anyth'ing connected with nuclear power? 17 A Not to my recollection. 18 Q You would remember if it did, wouldn't 19 you? 20 A I may or may not remember if it did, but I do:not remember it having anything to do with_ nuclear ( 21 22 P0"*#* 23 .Q- After working at that. job for a couple of
S
(' ,) 24 years, you went back to a government job, right?. A That's-correct. 25
~ '
, . , . . , . , 'T , , .
o 1 Perrone 10 t . 2 Q You were the chief of the New Power Plants 1 3 Branch of th'e FEA for one year, October '74 through 4 October '75. You list that after the notation 5 " positions." Your resume seems to imply that from 6 June 1972 when you went to work for the government 7 through October 1974, you had no position. 8 MR. BENEDICT: That is not right, Mr. i 9 Seltzer. Look below in the two paragraphs 10 below " positions." . l 11 MR. SELTZER: I see. They are in reverse 12 chronological order. Thank you.
- 13 Q What did you do as a supervisory reactor 14 engineer from June '72 through November '73?
15 A You are referring to here at the office 16' of Plant Engineering U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 17 is that what you are talking about? -
?
18 Q Yes. 19 A. I was an engineer working in a branch called the Facility, Branch of the Plant Engineering 20 21 Gr up at the AEC that was involved in the sodium 22- breeder reactor, and this group that I worked in had h 23 the responsibility for test facilities for components I J. g to be-used_in the breeder reactor, and I was an 25 engineer in that group that,again, reviewed contractor-
~
F g_^_' hM ,iM 4
- 4F
.-r . - - -. . . - . . .,_n, ,. . , . ,, , . - ,
l 1 Perrone 11 2 prepared documents involving the design of these test 3 facilities. 4 Q Was this sometimes referred to as the 5 liquid metal fast breeder project? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Is that the same or different from the 8 Clinch River project? 9 A The Clinch' River breeder reactor is a ( 10 liquid metal reactor. It is one of many liquid 11 metal reactors, but that program covers several. I f-w 12 did not work on the Clinch River projec,t specifically. (_ 13 Q Let me turn just a minute to the Bettis 14 training. I was asking you about any training on 15 the throttling process or education on it,, and you 16 didn't recall that being covered. 17 Do you recall your training is fluid 18 flow or heat transfer or thermal hydraulics covering , 19 an isenthalpic expansion through a throttle or an ori fic e? 20 21 A No, .I don't.
'(
22 Q Are you familiar with something called
~
g Joul/ Thompson expansion? f\
'h 24 A No, I.am not.
25 9 At Rensselaer - that is also called RPI?
">5 l [ - w '.[
n --
I l l 2 1 Perrone 12 2 A. Yes. s 3 Q Did you study isenthalpic expansion through 4 an orifice? 5 A I don't recall. 6 Q Did you take any physics courses at RPI? 7 A Yes, I did. 8 Q Did you study fluid flow and heat transfer 9 in RPI? 10 A I don't recall having a specific course 11 in that. It may have been included in physics courses,' 12 but I don't remember having specific courses in that. O 13 Q Did you take a course in thermo? e 14 A I don't remember specifically taking a 15 course in thermo. It is not an area that I am deeply 16 in love with. 17 Q What were your responsibilities as chief 18 of the Liquid Metal Engineering Center Branch? 19 A The original job I had in the Facilities 20 Branch as a. supervisory engineer, that branch, that I 21 guess,.got big enough to where it was broken up into. ( 22 a couple of branches, and I was promoted to ~ supervisor, 23 the chief of one of those branches, and that isolated
-\D)L 24
- a'few f the test facilities, so I was in charge of 25 a small branch of. engineers that were reviewing-the
.. ., . . , - *L , ,
1 Perrone 13 O wJ-2 documents generated by the contractor associated with t 3 test facilities at a place called the Liquid Metal 4 Engineering Center in California, which is why it l 5 is called that. And there were seversi test 6 facilities in that place, and I was responsible back 7 in headquarters in Washington for reviewing those 8 documents. 9 Q Were you reviewing the suppliers' designs a 10 to see if they were suitable designs? - 11 A We were reviewing the suppliers' designs, 12 yes. 'I O. . 13 Q Were you reviewing the designs of the 14 reactor? 15 A No. These facilities did not have reactors. 16 Q Do they have nuclear cores? 17 A No, not the facilities that I'was 18 responsible for. 19 Q Aren't they nuclear plants?
~
20 A No, they are not. , 21 Q What are they? _ (_ 22 A They are-test.facil'ities for testing 23 components that are to be used in the breeder program.
/ \
_.( ,): The sodium is'usually heated by a different means than 24 25 a nuclear core.
1 Perrone 14 t 2 Q What influenced you to seek employment with 3 B&W7 4 A The breeder program activities were going I 5 slower at that time than they were when I went up to 6 work on the breeder program. That basically had slowed 7 down to the point where it*wasn't as interesting as 8 it was before, which prompted my change to work at 9 the FEA. And that was even less interesting from e 10 a technical standpoint, so that is why I sought e 11 other opportunities. 12 Q Did you apply for a position with a 13 particular part of B&W or did you just ask them what 14 do they have available for an engineer with your 15 background? $ e I. 16 A As best I can recall, I believe B&W 17 was recommended to me and I inquired, and'I am not 18 exactly sure of the process that took place there. 19 But it was specifically. centered around NPGD as 20 opposed to anyplace else in B&W. I think someone 21 advised me that there was an opportunity there or
- 22 something like that.
23 Q Was.,your first assignment-when you walked W
' (,) 24. through the door at B&W to be technical consultant 25- to the manager >of engineering?
- k
I l 1 Perrone 15 2 A That was my first assignment at B&W. s 3 Q When you joined B&W in October 1975, was 4 Deddens the manager of engineering? 5 A Yes, he was. 6 Q Before you took over as technical 7 consultant to the manager of engineering, had there 8 been any predecessors in that role? 9 A I don't know whether there was or not. 10 Q You don't know of anybody w'ho had 11 previously been such? A (g
'~
12 I know that I did not relieve someone
. 13 at that time.
14 Q You didn't take over any files that had 15 been assembled by a prior technical consultant to 16 the manager of engineering? 17 A No. - 18 Q To the best of your recollection, you had 19 never heard of anybody else serving in that role 20 before you? - 21 Let me state it more. straightforwardly. ( 22 Do you have.any recollection today of ever hearing ; l 23 of anybody else previously being technical consultant j n
- k. ) 24 to the manager of engineering?
- 25 A- 'I recall some people being called technical m - , -yy y a y o,e- n-,r--~-mws w
1 Perrone 16
~b -
(%-) : 2 consultants, but precisely whether they were to the 3 manager of engineering or someone else, I don't 4 recall. But I do remember a couple of people who 5 had a title of technical consultant. 6 Q During the time that you were technical 7 consultant, was there a formal job description that 8 existed, sometimes called the position description? 9 A I remember at some point during having 10 that job, reviewing an official position description. 11 I don't know at what point during the time I was in 12 that job I reviewed that. 13 Q What were_the principal responsibilities 14 of your position? 15 A The technical consultant position, you 16 mean? 17 Q Yes. '- 18 A The primary responsibilities as was 19 d'iscussed with me when I came aboard was to serve 20 as an independent review function for the manager
- 21. :of engineering with particular emphasis in the area
(
~
22 of plant availability because at that time B&W was 23 focusing on. improving plant availability. There were rx k,,) 24 programs in place and the engineering manager requested 25 that I review independent of_those< people that were e r
1 Perrone 17 r~T - U ' 2 doing the work, some of the things going on in the 3 a'ailability v area as a primary responsibility, and 4 he specifically suggested certain areas to review. 5 The second responsibility that I remember 6 having is that of an, independent reviewer on any 7 specific design questions that he would ask me to 8 review independent of the people doing the work. 9 Again, I think it is important that you understand 10 that this position was a staff position (as opposed 11 to a line position, and that all of my reviews 12 were independent of what the people in the line 13 organization were doing to produce the product. 14 Q What other principal responsibilities a 15 did you have as technical consultant? 16 A I think, to the best of my recollection, 17 that about sums it up. . 18 Q Were there any design questions for which 19 you had a continuing assignment to monitor? 20 MR. BENEDICT: Could I hear that again? 4 21 (Question read) k 22 A I didn't have a continuing assignment 23 to monitor, you know, what I understand from your (~s-) 24 question as specific design issues. I was given a 25 continuing design assignment to look at things in i
- s. -
\
1 Perrone 18 b(-~s 2 the area of availability and things that would affect 3 availability obviously oftentimes involve design 4 issues, or things like that, but I don't recall k 5 any specific design iss,ues being asked to monitor 6 any specific design issue. 7 Q For how long did it continue to be part 8 of your job to review the issue of plant ' 9 availability? 10 A During the entire period o[. acting as 11 a technical consultant. 12 Q You said that Mr. Deddens suggested 13 certain areas for you to focus on in the review of 14 plant availability and how to improve it. What 15 were the areas he suggested? e 16 A one of the areas that I recall was 17 reactor coolant pump seals. '- 18 Q What else? 19 A Steam generators at a much later period, 20 sort of towards the.end of the time I did some 21 specific focusing on steam generators and some 22 effort on valves. 23 Q 'B&W had done studies that showed that (*) 4 24 valves were adversely affecting' the availability 25 of their plants?
- o _
1 Perrone 39 O I don't know whether they did or not. 2 A 3 Q You were aware that valve malfunctions 4 were adversely affecting the availability of B&W 5 nuclear plants? 6 A I was aware that valves, some malfunctions 7 of valves had contributed to plant down time. 8 Q Down time is another way of saying g adversely affecting availability, right? 10 A I would agree with that. . 11 Q Why don't we make it as clear as we can?
,f si 12 When you use the word " availability" in the phrase V..
13 " plant availability," what do you mean?. 4 14 A When you use the term " plant availability," i- 15 I believe there is a formula by which you, 16 calculate that in terms of the amount of time 17 -the plant is actually available to produce 18 electricity versus calendar time or whatever. I 19 don't know the exact details of the formula,-but-20 plant availability involves a lot of things in-21 addition to just the NSS, so that it is the 22 context that I use it in is everything affecting 23 the availability ~to have the plant available to
. ,rm )s ,); - 24 produce power if somebody wants the power.
25 Q. Was theffocus of your efforts on the
- ~
~ _ _ _ ._ _ . __
i l l
- j. 1 Perrone 20 2 effects of equipment that was within B&W's scope 3 of supply on plant availability?
i 4 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat that 5 question, please? , , 6 (Question read) l 7 A Yes. 8 Q In other words, if a valve supplied by 9 Bsw was malfunctioning and causing nuclear plants 10 to lose availability, that was somethin(g you were 11 concerned with? i i 12 A It is something I may have been concerned (2) with. 13 I mean it is not -- I don't want to imply that 14 I w uld know of or act on every malfunction of any 15 B&W-supplied valve in any of the plants because 16 that was-not the nature of my assignment. 17 Q Did there come a point during your 18 serving as techn.ical consultant when you did focus 19 on problems occurring on valves suppliedbh-B&W? 20 A .I d n't understand the context in which-21 you use the word " focus." 22 - Q .You don't know what " focus" means? Give 23 attention to. 24 A - As opposed to --
. 25 Q .Instead of playing cards or tennis when c ~ . G-
- a
_ . , -- . . . . . - . . . . . ..r.. - . . - . . . . - , - , , . ~ _ . .
7. 1 1 Perrone 21
/m.
U. , 2 you came into the office, was there ever a time during j 3 the period when you were working as technical 4 constiltant when you directed your energies at 5 problems that were happening with valves supplied L 6. by asw? 7 A You seem to use the term in an exclusive -- 8 I never played cards and you can't play tennis
.g because there are no courts in - - th e building. But
- you seen to focus on it on an exclusive'. basis.
10 Valves 1 i 11 were one of the areas in my review of availability 12 that I looked at. I mentioned two others that I 13 can remember. Now, there were probably,others that 14 I can't remember, plus there were other assignments 15 that I had in this role of technical. consultant, 16 so I wouldn't want to leave you with the impression that 17 I came into the office and worked on nothing but 18 valves at any period of time because that is 19 . incorrect. That was just one of the many things 20 that I did. ' 21
.g Are y u saying, Mr. Perrone, that there 22 - .was-never.a point during the 3-1/2 years ~that you 23 were technical consultant working'on availability'
. problems when you had a project going that was
~
24 ; fdirected:at valve malfunctions? 25 i
.;& n,dv ..
1 Perrone 22 (~h V 2 MR. BENEDICT: I take it you are not trying 3 to characterize his past testimony? This is 4 a new question? 5 MR. SELTZER: That's right. 6 A I don't recall having a specific project 7 on valve problems. 8 Q Do you know whether anybody else in NPGD 9 ever launched a project, and I am using the term t 10 " project" loosely, that was directed at* studying 11 problems with valves supplied by B&W7 12 A I recall a set of programs ,or projects called 13 availability improvement action programs or plans, or 14 something like that. The actual name was AIAP, and 15 there was one program for this component,and to the 16 best of of my recollection, I think there was one for 17 valves. 18 Q These were programs that were going o~n 19 at the time you were technical consultant? Is that 20 y ur. recollection? A ( 21 Yes. 22 Q In what part of NPGD were those 23 pr grams being conducted?
,O
(,,! 24 A What department? 25 Q Department, section, unit, however precise
1 Perrone 23 2 you can get. 3 A well, it was in the Engineering Department. 4 I don't know if I can recall any more precisely than 5 . that. 6 Q It wasn't in the Licensing Section, was it? 7 A I don't recall. 8 Q Or the Training Section? 9 A I don't recall whether it was or wasn't. t 10 I know the Engineering Department had a' hand in it 11 per se. 12 Q As part of your staff assignment to be
- 13 looking into improvements in plant availability, did 14 you keep yourself informed to any degree about 15 the availability improvement action programs?
16 A I don't recall making any conscious ' '~ 17 effort to participate in those programs because 18 again they were being administered by the line 19 managers as part of their function, and I viewed 20 my function to basically approach the problem from i 21 a different direction or independently of that. So I 22 I don't recall being involved in those.very 23 directly.. I may have seen some correspondence (O k2 24 n them, but I don't' recall any real direct
- 25 inv lvement.
- - ~
_ .=. --. i 1 Perrone 24 2 2 What was the name of the manager who - 3 was in charge of the AIAP program? i 4 A I don't recall that there was a -- these 5 AIAP were assigned to the cognizant managers for 6 each of the components. If there was one for valves,
.7 the assignment would be given to the manager in 8 charge of valves, I believe. I am not 100 percent 9 certain about that, but I don't recall.
E 10 Q I am not looking for 100 percent 11 certainty. Whatever is your best recollection 12 without speculating or guessing. , V 13 Who was the individual who was 14 responsible for valves at that time you were 15 technical consultant? .
-16 A The time period from '75 to '79 that 17 . I was technical consultant, I think there were a 18 few people. I believe one of'the-unit managers 19 was' named Bud, another one was King. One of
~
2'O the.section managers was Carl Thomas, and I believe 1
/
21 another one of the section managers was Larry A 22 Stanek. 23' 'Q What was your understanding as to why I'h : . As / B&W'was concerned about plant availability? ! 2d !
-25 MR. BENEDICT . Richard,_do-you have'a-a 4 3 ,
s---w4- g 4 w -e r--=1-- r- - ge w -w9ty-
l' Perrone 25
.- 2 particular time period we are talking about?
3 MR. SELTZER: Yes. 4 Q During the time that it was a continuing 5 responsibility of yours to review problems affecting
,6 plant availability.
7 A My understanding and perhaps it's somewhat 8 colored by my experience at working at the FEA was 4 9 at that time period, shortly after the oil embargo . t. 10 and that situation, there was greater emphasis on 11 producing power from domestic resources which 12 nuclear is.one. I felt there was a gre,at deal of 13 emphasis being placed by our tustomer, the utilities, l 14 on increasing their share of power generation from j 15 domestic resources, and therefore a way tp accomplish 16 that is by having greater availability of the nuclear plants. And I felt that 17 thatopinionwas}sharedby 18 those that I came in contact with there at B&W. .. i 19 Q Were you aware during the time that you 20 - were working on availability problems that'if a plant ( 21 has greater availability,.it reduces the cost per 22 kilowatt' hour?. 23 A I don't recall knowing that-specific
.p)
T,s 24 fact. I~never thought of it that way, but I think 25 - you could deduce that. But I never remember. s . L i' _. , . , , ~ . . . . - . . , . . - . - , , , . , . . - , . . , .
i l 1 Perrone 26 ( 2 thinking about that particular fact. 3 Q Did you think about the fact that it 4 is economically advantageous to utilities to have 5 better availability on their nuclear power plants? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And the reason it was economically 8 advantageous was because their average cost of 9 generating a kilowatt went down if the nuclear t 10 plant was on line longer, isn't that right? 11 A The words I would say is 12 t' hat I knew it cost them less to generate electricity Os 13 using nuclear fuel than any other fuel, so I was 14 in favor of increasing generating electricity 15 with nuclear fuel. , J 16 Q I take it you discussed your-17 ' . availability with Deddens and then with D6n Roy 18 when he became your boss? 19 A Yes, I did. 20 Q
'And"did you discuss. comparative --
21 A Let me step back to that answer a minute 22 because you used the term "my availability project." 23 I didn't have an availability-project as such. .That-C's (jl 24 was one of my assignments. I discussed that 25 , assignment with both of my bosses, r N Ed
i ..
,1,
/
1 Perrone 27
- b
\_J 2 -Q Whether it was a project or just an 3 assignment, did you discuss the analysis that you 4 were doing on availability problems with Deddens , . . 5 and Roy? < 6 MR. BENEDICT: I will object to the. form -
- 7. of'the questio'n, but you can answer it.
8 A You keep using the term "availabill'ty 9 project," and that is what makss it difficult for t 10 me to answer, because it was just one of many 11 things I did, and I discussed basically everything 12 I did periodically with my boss.. Os . 13 Q Did you discuss with your boss - 14 comparisons of availability of B&W NSS equipment 15 with competitors' NSS equipment? 16 A I don't recall having those specific 17 discussions. I recall that those kinds of , 18 discussions.were often had in terms of.a spurring 7 19 on of the goal as general discussions among_ lots- , 20 of people. I don't remember either. bringing that (, 21 to their attention or making that really a part.of 22 my focus.- 23 Q I.take it during the time thstiyou were r~ /~ ;. k_)5 3g . working en availability problems you were aware 25 Of' statistics,that' compared'availab'ility of B&W plants
,. , , , :e: .-
_ _. __ A-
' N t
q. I Perrone . 28 ' 2 and equipment with the availability of other vendors' 3 plants and equipment? 4 A Yes, I was. ( 5 Q And you knew that B&W plants and
- 6 equipment compared unfavorably to the availability i
l . 7 of competing United states vendors? 8 A I think that depends en the time. There 9 was a curve that was published that went as time and E 10 it was like a rolling twelve-month average, or 11 something of that nature, that I remember seeing on ' 4
, (~N 12 it, but I do believe seeing times on it,during the ,
[ (~2 13 period ti;at the numbers for B&W were favorable. 2 14 But again, I really didn't preoccupy myself.very 15 much with that. y 16 Q Uere there other times when the i 17 ' numbers-for B&W were not favorable compared to , 18 other vendors? l . i Ig_ A~ Yes. I recall seeing the order.that. t f 20 WAY , i Q Did you understand that there was s om'e
. (.
21
. :q a L competitive significance to the comparison of' '
22 -- L d, i
. availability among-competing NSS vendors? ' ' '
I . 23 p. (- - 24 A I suppose.IJfalt that'in a general ay . ' 1^
' 25 = I_mean:I had-no specific knowledge.of any ordsrss 3
' C-6 3 >s rii Nhk r e - -
n, , A s E m
? *.
1 Perrone 29 Q(T-2 won or lost on the basis of percentage availability, 3 s hut again, having worked at FEA, where there were 4, suggestions made by government people that there 5 should be some rate penalty associated with lack t 6 of availability or something like that, you know, 7 I wasn't unfamiliar 'ith w that thought. But I didn't 8 pay very much -- I didn't focus very much on that 9 part ofsit. t 10 Q fot me tell y'ou what I am thinking about 11 and then I will ask you a question. If a car breaks t , 12' down'a lot,'the owner tends to think it,is not
- .J I 13 as good a car as one that doesn't break down so 14 frequently. Did you understand when you were'doing
.\
15 workonavailpbilitythatB&Wconsideredit 16 desirable to improve the availability on the
~
17 , equipment that they were supplying?
' l. '
18 , MR. BENEDICT: I object to the form of
. 19 ,,- the question. I missed the relevance of the
.)- % : %
1
'20) ,
i Pr e amb1'e , but I will note my. objection and you i ?- .' t 2p ; may (nswer thh question. @. , .{- . .; t - '* 22'i J .D- THE' WITNESS: Let me' hear the question
.e 3_ %.
-(
agai'n. 4 ,q n ; ?'t h 23 ,
'N
~
V1 Y
'f
; .s 2 (Question read).
m .
'N
) ,25 - hT AN Is it possible f o r - me -~ to respond.to the
{ f
> y.q. . E-3 ye U- ,
s.. ,
, . _ ,u .,. .- . . .
l l l l
=
l 1 Perrone 30 m V - 2 question part of that? 3 Q Yes, just respond to the question. 4 MR. BENEDICT: Yes, I think the stuff 5 about the car was ridiculous and improper. 6 . I object to the form of the question, but you
- 7. can answer- it.
8 THE WITNESS: Can you read me just the g part that is the question, because now I am E 10 getting a little confused. - 11 (Question read) O 12 A Yes. N_ 13 Q Did you understand that that would make 14 it a better product? . , 15 A I don't recall having that specific 16 connection or understanding. 17 Q You didn't think that a produ6t that 18 breaks down less is a better product? 19 A I don't recall making that connection, nor 20 d I think that is necessarily a valid connection. 21 Q Why don't you think that is a valid 22 connection? l i
\
23 A well, a piece of machinery cannot break .! ("3 l (-) 24 down by being shut off and never being run. I don't 25 know:that that is a valuable product. g en ,-.y-, -,ww+-y- -
,e ,9 e n -e- e y-, --
1 Perrone 31 U O 2 Q That would be zero availability, though? s 3 A But it wouldn't be breaking down. Your 4 question was if it wouldn't be breaking down, would 5 it be,a better product, so I really never nade
-6 that connection.
7 Q Didn't you believe that if you could 8 reduce the forced outage rate oh B&W N SS's , 9 that that would make them a better product? t 10 A I don't recall having that specific 11 belief. 12 Q Weren't you trying to improve the 13 availability? - 14 A Yes, I was. 15 Q But you didn't think that that would 16 contribute to making a better product? 17 A I don't recall making that connection or ~ 18 having that thought. 19 Q Did you think it might make it a worse 20 . product? 21 A I don't recall having that thought. 22 Q Did you see anything positive in what'you . 23 were doing in trying to improve availability? X[ ( - 24 A Y6s, I did. 25 -Q What did you.think was the benefit to be
.g [ Q -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . a
1 Perrone 32 4 2 achieved by improving availability? 3_ A thought by the work I was doing in 4 terms of trying to get to contribute to less down 5 time, the plant would run longer at power to 4 6 generate more electricity from domestic resources, 7 and I felt good about that. l 8 Q Less down time was better than more down 9 time? e 10 A You are asking for my belief of whether less-it down time is better than more down time? i r'- 12 Q Yes. N-]N 13 A Yes, I believe that is a good thing, 14_ yes. 15 Q But it never occurred to you that a 1
, 16 machine that has less down. time is a better machine i 17 than one that has more down time?- ~~
18 MR. BENEDICT: I object to the question.- 19 You can answer it.- Go ahead. It's 20 been asked and answered. i 21 A I have answered it three_ times, that 22 - that specific connection I don't recall occurring j to me, nor.do I basically agree that that in the 23 i 'f% s ,)l g- exclusive sense, that you are using it, means that 25 - the machine is a better machine. S .I- V % % 4- y , , , . , . - . _ , . ~ , , , - .
..,e~ , , , . ..s- _.- , - .
I + 1 Perrone 33 (n~ - 2 Q You have told me what areas Deddens 3 suggested you focus on in reviewing plant 4 availability. Did. Don Roy make any suggestions 5 about areas you should focus on? . J:
- 6 A I don't recall any shift in the pattern 7 of activities in terms of changes or,again, the 8 thing that it is important to keep in mind is that g that part of it focusing on the availability of 4
e ! 10 these particular selected components was only a 11 part of what I was doing. I had these other, 12 would you look at this and would you look at that 4 13 kind of assignments, as well, and, of course, Roy gave l I 14 .me those things to do. But I perceived no real 15 change in what I was asked to do. , 16 Q You said that Deddens had suggested 17 . that you look at valves supplied by B&W, And you 4 18 have indicated that Roy didn't change the' focus 19 or emphasis of the assignment on availability 20 that you had gotten from Deddens. 21 Did yc :: . assignment-to look into 22 valves availability encompass all valves connected 4 23 to or part of ~the B&W' scope of supply? - s . 1
, j' A The assignment per se was to.look into 2O 25 things affecting availability and the suggestion of 4
$ es
-- , , , - - . , ,,nm -- , emw, - . - , , + , , , - - . , - - - - ~ + - , , , , - , - . , - , . - . . , e
__ .a E 1~ Perrone 34 (~h. ' L-) ' 2 components -- the areas of components were more or 3 less made as a suggestion. And I don't recall 4 with respect to that suggestion of what components 5 to look at, any particular focus on any particular 6 valves. . 7 Q So you were free to examine any valves 8 that were adversely affecting availability? 9 A Yes. t 10 Q That would include pilot operated relief 11 valves? 12 A Yes, it.would. s. 13 Q In fact, you did look at pilot operated . 14 relief valves, right? 15 A In the sense of -- that there,were any 16 other valvec, I mean, is your question did I 17 specifically decide to look at pilot opersted relief , 18 valves as opposed to any other valve? Is that your 19 question? 20 Q No. Within your sthdy of valves, you 21 specifically looked at pilot operated relief valves?
.(
22 A I did not specifically look at pilot 23 operated relief valves. I looked at valves and I may O 4 ,) 24 have -- in fact, I know that I have reviewed i 25 malfuncti ns of pilot operated relief valves,.but with
)
-- - . - - p- 4 9 w.we--w -w ,m
-- ---y-,- T T W ' ~ =
1 Perrone 35
- O
(_) 2 no specific intent. . r 3 Q what do you mean, no specific intent? 4 A You asked -- 5 Q Do you mean it was pure inadvertence? 6 MR. BENEDICT: Let's not step on each 7 other's words. Is there a question? 8 Q Is it by pure inadvertence that you 9 happened to include a PORV in a study? E 10 MR. BENEDICT: I don't think Mr. Perrone 11 has characterized anything he is doing as a r- 12 study. k./ 13 other than that if you can-answer the 14 question, go ahead. 15 Q Let me be clear. I am not trying to 16 cubbyhole your availability work by calling it a 17 program, project, study, analysis, review'or anything 18 else. I am just referring to your ongoing assignment 19 to be reviewing problems affecting availability, and 20 if I call it a- program or a proj ect, I am just 21 referring to the ongoing assignment. 22 A The ongoing assignment of reviewing 23 availability and the suggestion that I looked at rx () 24 these three component areas that I remember carried no 25 specifity with respect to' type of valve, so I looked at
1 Perrone 36 A (./I 2 information about all valves. 3 Q There were times at which you were 4 specifically looking at a piece of information
. 5 that related to a pilot operated relief valve; 6 isn't that right?
7 A Yes. 8 Q On what occasions do you recall doing 9 that? ( 10 A I recall reviewing a pilot operated 11 relief valve SPR. I don't recall much more about /^s 12 it than that, but I do recall a piloti operated relief U _ 13 valve SPR. . g4 Q You don't recall what plant it was? A Yes. I believe it was on Davis-Besse. 15 16 Q That is Toledo Edison's Nuclear Plan.t? A -Yes. ~~ 77 18 Q Were site problem reports one source gg that you referred to for information in pursuing y ur ava a y assignment? 20 A Y'e s . 21 22 Q Did you regularly receive site problem repons? 23 lW (_,l ' A Yes. Q All of them?
* "'t . - ._. _ _ _ _ .. . ._ ,__._
l l Perrone 37 n V. 1 2 A I have no way of knowing that-I received t all f them, but I received a lot of them. 3 i 4 Q Was it your understanding that you were 5 n the regular distribution for all site problem 6 reports? 7 Let me interrupt you before you answer. 8 I know that you may not know whether the person 9 who was responsible for distributing them to you E 10 missed you on some, so all I am asking is was it 11 y ur understanding that you were supposed to be 12 getting all of them? V
. A My understanding is that I was on 13 g distribution for site problem reports. I have a
, recollection that there were certain categories 16 r stages in site problem reports. Maybe there were g as many as three. And I remember making a 18 distinction that I wanted to see certain, but not g all, of the stages. So I can't answer your question with respect to all by saying yes, because I do 20 ( think I asked to be selectively included on the distribution. But for those categories that I asked, I did ask to be put on the automatic distribution, yes. Q SPR's or site problem reports went through
^
_ 1 Perrone . 38 L) 2 successive stages of review, right? 3 A That's right. 4 Q And you wanted to be involved in one 5 specific stage; is that right? 6 A I can't recall whether it was one or 7 two of the stages. I don't remember the 8 distinction I made. I just remember having made 9 a distinction. e 10 Q So for site problem reports;'you wanted 11 to be involved in some but not all of the stages 12 of their review? , 13 eMR. BENEDICT: I am not sure Mr. Perrone 14 has testified that he was involved in any 15 stages of the review. I think he said he 16 g t copies of the SPR's in -- or in those
~
17 stages of review. 18 Q Is what Rod:says accurate? i gg A Yes, it is. I think that is important 20 to make a point that those were distri'buted to me for 21 inf rmation, you know, for my benefit as part of l-22 availability, as you said, as a source of information I g3 about availability. I had'no line function with l
\_ l 4 respect to site problem reports.
2a.. Q You got trite problem reports . at certain.
l 1
-1 Perrone 39 O ,
U. 2 stages of their review cycle for information only; 3 is that right? 4 A That is correct. C. 5 Q Was it your understanding that when 6 site problem reports reached the stage at which
~
7 you asked to be included in the distribution, you 8 were to get all site problem reports? g A Yes. t . What was your method of reviewing the 10 Q i 11 site problem reports that came to you? 12 A I read them and thought abo,ut them a little 13 bit. 14 Q Did you file them after you had read 15 them? 16 A I don't recall specifically filing them. 17 I may have kept some that were of particul'ar interest 18 to me, but I don't remember specifically filing them. 19 Q Did you set up files for your availability 20 assignments by setting up filing, any files at all? A Well, I had a file cabinet. ( 21 I don't know 22 that I specifically had a set of files that I set up g for availability assignments because, again, that was O-( )s just one of the things that I was doing, and I had my wn file drawer f material that I'kept that I 25-y . , - , , , , . , , , - , , , . - , - ,,, ,g -
,- . --y-,
1 Perrone . 40 . \vi - 2 worked on. 3 Q So you don't think you had any files that 4 were specifically related to the availability assignmentsj 5 is that what you want to testify to? 6 A To the availability assignment -- would J
~
7 you say the question again, please? 8 (Question read) g MR. BENEDICT: Now that I have gotten t 10 a second chance, I am going to object to it the form of the question. I am not sure 12 his testimony was that. He said ye kept a
%)
13 file or he said he kept files, and he said 14 that he had a filing cabinet in his office, so 15 I don't think he said that he didn't keep a
~16 file n SPRs. If you want to ask a question,
~
17 fine. 18 MR. SELTZER: Let me state on the
.gg record something that maybe we can clear 20 something up. When I ask a' question of him,-
21 I am trying to get a answer. I am not 22 purporting to create a summary of prior, 7 O. 23 testimony, to'which I am not soliciting,an
- (,,.) answer. If the witness wants to tell me,"No,
.\ '-
25 that is not true, now I see what you.have'been-
, driving ati yes, I-did have certain files which ,
~ .
+.-, , w '"'T ~
1 Perrone 41 2 were segregated for the availability assignments, 3 and these were they," that is fine. I am 4 not seeking to lock in any prior testimony. 5 If he wants to say something different, he 6 should. That is what the purpose of the 7 examination is. g- MR. BENEDICT: 'Mr. Seltzer, I think g you are right as to what the witness should e 10 do. That doesn't mean that your question gg isn't improper. It is not for you or I to 12 decide whether it is. It is just.for me to 13 make my objection and for you to'go on. g MR. SELTZER: I miss entirely the 15 basis of the objection, but I am sure you 16 will do what you have to do. 77 Do you remember the question now? 18 THE WITNESS: No, I don't remember the gg question. 20 A No, I don't want to say that. I think { that many of the files that I kept could be
~
related to the availability assignment. I don't ,O Cl. recall keeping a file that said " availability assignment." 'I kept a lot'of. files in my own way 25
1 Perrone 42 1 2 with material in them that related to the work I 3 was doing on' availability as well as the work I 4 was doing on all kinds of other things, so -- 5 Q You said your position was a staff 6 Position, not a line position. I understand that 7 distinction. As a staff man assigned to review 8 availability problems, what did you understand g was the purpose of your, review? How was mankind 10 g ing to be better off for Paul Perrone.having it studied availability? 12 MR. BENEDICT: I object to the form of v 13 the question, but you can answer,. Mr. Perrone, 14 if yo'u understand it. g A I am not so sure that I really ig. understand how mankind would ' perceive they would 7 be better off from my assignment, but I can tell 18 y u how I thought-about my assignment, if ou age g interested in~that. My background is primarily one of hardware,and I felt, and I believe my boss anticipated that by;my_ reviewing various components that were impacting availability, I might be able to offer s4 24 s ugge s tions to the-people involved in the design
.of those components:that would. reduce the-frequency s.
s y , p 9 -- ~ + ~ , - , , a-, se m , - -
1 Perrone , 43 h. O - 2 of their malfunction, or whatever. That was the 3 contribution I felt that I could make by looking 4 at things like SPR's independent of the people who C 5 were working on the immediate problem and faced 6 with producing the answers to the immediate 7 problem. 8 Q What was the vehicle by which you 9 would make suggestions to reduce the frequency a 10 of malfunction? - 11 A I did a variety of things. I had 12 conversations with the managers responsible for 13 the components and offered suggestions to them. 34 I would send them notes sometimes that would offer 15 my views to them. I would have discussions with 16 my b ss and offer my views to him. That was 17 usually the method I worked. 18 Q If y u wanted to get-copies of the
-19 n tes which you sent to people regarding ways
-to rbduce the frequency.of malfunction, is there anyplace that you would be able to go to get those?
{ e 1. -. You mean today? 22 MR. BENEDICT: Yes, that is what Mr.
\
s) Seltzer means. Yes, today. A I guess I would ask them. I don't have h *s- S' d N 'E
% p "
1 Perrone 44
/
t 2 them in my files. I would ask them. s 3 Q Who is the "them"? 4 A Whoever I sent the notes to. 5 Q Did you ever direct that anything be
.6 done to improve the availability of pilot operated 7 relief valves?
8 A I' don't recall directing anything in g my job as technical consultant. I had no authority E 10 to do that. - 11 Q I used the wrong verb. Did you ever
~% 12 make any suggestions for ways to reduce the - (d 13 frequency of malfunction on pilot operated relief g4 valves? ' A I recall asking question of the manager 15 16 responsible for the valves at the time, and those 77 questions were prompted by my review of an SPR 18 and were -- y u know, if you consider a question gg a suggestion by virtue of its stimulating the person's 20 thought, perhaps to think about things that he didn't think-about, then, you know, in that 22 ntext the question would qualify asia suggestion.
But I remember making lots of questions on SPR's to (~h j (,)- 24 lots of people. I do remember making some questions l ! or posing some questions on the PORV SPR from a t 25 [ < . 1 .5
.,2 . r; %, '. i^ .:; ;--
. < - w uv .L
1 Perrone , 45 V 2 standpoint of not knowing what the right answer is. 3 That is an important distinction. A lot of my 4 questions in the review of the SPR's were on the 5 basis of either principle or prior experience as 6 opposed to having any detailed knowledge that 7 some specific thing was right or wrong, and they 8 were tossed at the person as a question to say, g "You who are the expert in this thing, how about a 10 considering this or that or the other thing?" gi Q You tossed a suggestion to the valve 3 12 expert after you had read the Davis-Besse SPR 13 dealing with a pilot operated relief valve malfunction, 34 right? A I believe I did, yes. 15 , 16 Q When you didn' t get any response from 17 the recipient of your suggestion, you went and told 18 y ur boss that you were not getting a response? gg MR. BENEDICT: I object to the form f the question. .It presumes a fact not in 20 evidence.
-{
MR. SELTZER: It was a question. g MR. BENEDICT: Where have you established (f - that he didn't ge< a response from this person? Q You may answer.
% F . v P- 4 0
1 1 Perrone 46 bu,) - 2 MR. BENEDICT: No, I object to the form 3 f the question. 4 MR. SELTZER: You have objected. Your 5 objection i.s noted. , 6 MR. BENEDICT: If you don't establish 7 the antecedent fact, then the question is g improper and he can't answer. You are 9 f r ing him to assume a fact that you haven't t 10 established. - gg Q When you sent your suggestion based on 12 the Davis-Besse site problem report, is,n't it a 13 fact that you didn't get any response back 14 initially? A I don't know whether that is a fact 15 1 r n t. I d n't recall getting a response, but 16 77 I don't know whether I got a response or not. 18 Q There came a point in time when you gg told Don Roy that you either hadn't gotten a 0 response or couldn't recall getting a response to (s _ your suggestion based on the Davis-Besse site problem report; isn't that true? A I don't recall specifically telling ( j' 4 fN , 24- Don Roy that I did not get a response to the comment on 2a_ the Davis-Besse site problem report. I had over the w t .
-1 Perrone . 47 2 period of time that I was technical consultant probably 3 had several discussions with both Deddens and Roy 4 that, you know, would indicate dissatisfaction from (s 5 people on response time on my comments, but I have 4
6 no recollection of that specific one. 7 Q Did either Deddens or Roy take any
, 8 effective action to improve the responses that t
you were getting? 9 t , 10 A well, I d remember Deddens'on occasion 11 calling the -- you know, calling a section manager 12 in and discussing with him the need to_ respond i 13 to.my comments. . l 14 Q When Deddens did that, did he have some 4 15 specific Paul Perrone-comment that he would show l 16 to the individual that was being called on the carpet? j g7 A I don't recall. 18 Q After.Deddens had called somebody into 19 .his office to tell him what you'have just-described,- did that produce a response to your prior. comments ( z to that individual? A: :Iscan't think of any specific case where 23-it did or.it didn't. I have the general feeling 4 <<^ %_.[ ) - that'it did, but I. don't recall a specific' case where
'24 it didior did'n't..
7 9 . - + , + + - ~ -r e e , . . . =.,,e~, e v, <-m-- ,-.%,- ,-,-e +,<c.,- -w-- . . - , , . . -,
1 Perrone 48 2 0. Did you feel that being in a staff 3 p sition rather than a line position,your comments 4 were not given very much weight? (. ' 5 .A No, I did not. I mean, let's make 6 sure we got the "no 's" right to that. I did not 7 feel that because I was in a staff position my 8 comments were not given very much weight. g Q Did you have any indication that your ( 10 comments were being given significant attention? gy MR. BENEDICT: What does "significant" 4 fN 12 mean? I mean what did they have to do to show (_) ' ', i 13 they are significant? . e g MR. SELTZER: Well, we will find out. 15 MR. BENEDICT: Do you understand the 16 question? A Maybe we can sharpen the definition of 77
. c.
18 "significant." gg Q Did you have evidence that your Comments were being given serious attention? A Yes, I did. Q What evidence did you havo? 1 A I recall one case where I had made some (~'% i
'~' ) 24 comments on the design of a particular piece of e ipment and the -- and they ran, counter to the 25
?
j
# 'w
1 Perrone 49 l A _ i Y 2 course of events that were happening among the line i 3 P*ople who were responsible for the design of that { -4 piece of equipment, and Mr. Deddens called a 5 meeting in his office of the section manager involved 6 and the unit manager involved and their people, and i 7 we spent an afternoon and into the evening reviewing 8 those comments and resolving them with Mr. Deddens g present in the room, so that gives me some evidence v. 10 that he did care about the comments. .- 1 11 Q Do you have any other evidence?
- 1 12 MR. BENEDICT: Do you mean does he
%q) 13 remember any other specific events?
14 MR. SELTZER: Right. 1 15 A Yes, I do remember two or three more 4 16 of those kinds of events, and I would say they were 17 relatively frequent by my term of 'relatively 18 frequent," a couple of times a month maybe. 4 gg Q Do you remember any effective action
~
20 being taken with respect to the suggestions you made, ! 21 f 11 wing y ur review f the' Davis-Besse site 22 problem report?
. 23 MR. BENEDICT: I am sorry. Can I hear e-
-)
l. g that again, please? (Question read) 4 4 # 4. (+ y , , - .,n,- ,, . . - . - , , , - . ,,_.y_ ,y -.,.p ~9 r,- ... ,, , --~r-ve.9 #,. ,. y
. -. . -- - . . - - - . . _ . . ~. ~ . . . - - . . - . -
1 1 .Perrone 50 2 MR. BENEDICT: I-am going to object 3 because I don't know what you mean by
-4 " effective." The witness can answer the C 5 question.
6 Can I hear the question again? The I l 7 objection, I guess, is whether you used the 4 8- word " suggestions," because I am not sure Mr. g Perrone had-characterized what he said to be was ( , 10 suggestions. If you want to ask him whether 11 he made any suggestions, that is fine. 12 (Question read) ,, 13 A I guess.I do have a problem with ' 1 14 characterizing'what I said about that as suggestion. 15 My recollection is that I asked some ques,tions about 16 that specific site problem report. i-Do you r'emember any effective
- action
^
17 Q a 4 18 being taken to-follow up on-any of1the matters that 39 you raised?. i 20 MR. BENEDICT: I have-the'same objection, 21 but go ahead. A Do you mean with respect to that specific 22 23 suggestion on.that particular site problem report, or _ matters'in general?.'
,, o o..thae sp.ci,ic suggestion on tsae y
, ,, , :D;.,; ;-+ 3 = wi +
1 Perrone 51 O
\_/
2 site problem report. 3 A I don't recall whether anything was 4 changed on that site problem report. I have no C. 5 recollection of that. 6 Q I am not talking just about changing 7 words in an SPR. 8 Do you know whether any action was 9 taken in NPGD as a result of any matters that you E 10 raised in your comments on that Davis-Besse site
- 11 Problem report?
12 A I am having a problem in that my
- 13 recollection of that SPR, I remember only one 1
- 14 question that I raised, and I am not sure that 15 there weren't more that I raised. And so ,to answer 16 a subsequent question about whether I know or have 17 any evidence _that there was any action on'*any of 18 the questions is broader than I can answer based on
. 1 gg what I can remember of that.SPR. !
1 20 Q What do you remember raising? A I remember raising a question about 21 22 whether or not a field change should be instituted ' to the Valve because of, I believe' some' Changes in
,~ .
/\ ,,. g dimensions that=were made in the resolution.of that
~ 25 Problem.
W- 0' b
, , . , , , , , , ,c.- ., w - , , - - .-c- ,. ,
? i 1 Perrone 52 es .
-V 2 Q What would the significance be of s
3 requiring a field change? 4 MR. BENEDICT: Do you mean what he 5 understood at the time? 6 A My understanding at the time was that 7 if a design change was made to a piece of equipment g in the field, that a field change was required. g Q What do you mean by the phrase "a field 10 change"? . gg A A field change, as I understood it, and g 12 as I understand it, is a document that is
\#
13 transmitted, that transmits design modifications-14 to be made to equipment that is already in the 15 . 16 Q If a piece of equipment that is within 4 B&W scope of supply is modified in the field, you gg understood it was B&W's practice to require a field g change authorization form to be filled out? A My understanding at the time was that if it were a B&W-instituted change or design change to a piece of equipment, the vehicle by which that was transmitted to the field was through a field (A
\- 24 change notice or field change authorization, or something of that nature.
- . - - . -.,-w +r, -,. -
m- , .%4 +me-,_ e -r----7
1 Perrone 53 A ' (% )) . 2 Q You also posed a question in your 3 comments on that SPR, didn't you, about whether ' 4 the modifications that were being made to the
.{ 5 Davis-Besse pilot operated relief valve should be 6 incorporated on valve,s at other plants?
7 MR. BENEDICT: Well, I am going to object 8 at this point. You can exhaust the witness' i 9 recollection if you want, but we all know t 10 there is a document that has that outlined. 11 It has been marked as an exhibit in prior 12 depositions. Why don't we put it,on the 13 table so we can get along with the examination? 14 I don' t know what the point of saying if he 15 remembers it now or vis-a-vis once zou have 16 shown it to him, but you can answer the question 17 if you remember what Mr. Seltzer says as an 18 accurate characterization of what you recall. 19 A' I don't remember that as a current 20 memory of the thing. I mean this particular SPR has ( 21 been discussed recently, so -- but I. don't recall-l 22 the events at the time. l 1 23 Q When you say it's been discussed recently,
,y ,
() 24 among'whom? 25- A Myself and counsel. , 1 _ _ . . _ - .l
I 1 Perrone 54
<"g .N) 2 Q Counsel Benedict?
3 A Yes. 4 Q Anyone else? , 5- MR. BENEDICT: You don't have to answer 6 that. 7 MR. SELTZER: I am entitled to find out, 8 if he says he had a discussion, I am entitled 9 to find out who the people were with whom the t 10 discussion was held and find out if people
- 11. who are not part of the privileged group were present at the conversation, beca,use that is 12 13 information that can'be presented to argue that.the substance of the conversation is not
^
14 15 privileged. ,, 16 MR. BENEDICT: You have convinced me, 17 Mr. Seltzer, provided you advise your. fellow , 18 associates and partners that that same goes 19 for us. The question as I understand it, tha t is 20 pending, Mr. Perrone, is.did you discuss this with anyone other than me? ( - 21 22 THE WITNESS: No. 23 Excuse me, you are referring to recently? O, s -
\_ / 24 MR.. SELTZER:. Yes.
25 Q Within the last year, have you discussed 6 4 4 -$ %.,'rg 'y Y e 9
1- Perrone 55 O G 2 it with anybody other than counsel Benedict? 3 A N* 4 Q I shoved you the note that you had 5 written commenting on the SPR? 6 MR. BENEDICT: Mr. Seltzer, what is going 7 on here? Are we now going to be able to ask g your witnesses about all the documents they 9 have been shown in preparation for a deposition? j l 10 If y u are willing to stipulate t'o that, then 11 y u can ask this witness the question. I 12 MR. SELTZER: I think your boss has O 13 handled these matters on a case-by-case 14 b' asis . We have never been able to get Bob 15 Fiske to agree to any stipulations of how l IG he will conduct future depositions. All we 17 have ever been able to work out with him is i 18 a modus vivendi for a particular deposition. ' 19 MR. BENEDICT: I think that is a gross i 20 mischaracterization of Mr. Fiske's operations in this case, and I think -- ( 97
~
22 MR. SELTZER: Well, for this particular
.g subject area,.I think it is a 100 percent (im) v 24 accurate representation.
25 MR. BENEDICT: I can't disagree with you
- . - . _ = . - .- -_--. . - . _ .
1 Perrone 56 (~))
\_
2 more, but based on the facts that you,are much of 3 what is sauce for the goose is sauce 'or the f 4 gander, and what you have presented in this C 5 case as being the " Richard seltzer approach to, 6 litigation," I am going to say if you ask this 7 question, I am going to view it as carte blanche d 1 8 to answer the question. The question is, did I g show you -- let's back up. 10 Mr. seltzer, can we at leas't see what 11 document we are talking about so thers'isn't 12 confusion on the record? Do you wa t to ask 13 him whether I showed him a specific document? 14 I will let him answer that. 15 BY MR. SELTZER:
.t Within the '
16 Q last week, did you review 17 your comments on the Davis-Besse site problem. i : .-
\
18 report? 19 MR. BENEDICT: You can answer that question 20 yes or no. ,' s 21 A My understanding is you are talking , ,
- 22. about the one relative-to the relief valve?
23 Q Right. > / ( (- (_) , 24 A Yes.
'25 Q I would like to show you what has s.
; s ._,, 1%
'~# ~
_ _ , _ . _ "; y h. , , "Lt-
. 3~ } ! r
\ ~ a, - - , s
- b. 1 Perrone 57
\
l 2 previously been marked as GPU Exhibit 453. You are
. g.
3 familiar with this do c'.io e n t , right?
, \-
\
4 MR. BENEDIOT: I don't know what that 5 . question means. - 3
.6 Q Do yo'u w t me to give you time to s
~
7 review it again or have you reviewed it recently? p '. . A
- - s' '
8' Let me loon through it. 9 oka~y. ' L 7 10 Q Is GEU 453 a copy of a memo <randum with s 11 attached sheets which yoL'- received from Don Roy 12 in or about mid September, 19787 s ** 13 MR. BENEDICT: The question.is do you 14 recall receiving it. 15 A ch, I don't recall receiving this, no. e 16 Q Do you know from any review of your 17 files that this is a document that you did receive?
,7 s. .
1
'ou referring a
f 18 A .Are y to this memo or the _r . a , 19 whole package , or what? E -
- m.
20, 3 IQ , Don Roy sai , "The attached SPR's and' fte , SPR comment forms nee , et cetera. And underneath
, p his capitalized initials there is the word " attachments."
r 23 Do you see thAt?- g ' %' ) "
\ ,;.
()I 24 Ac. Yes , s 1 25 0 Kow, in normal business practice, this i 4 3
- p. Q .,',*
,t < }, '
l , _ ., . - , . . - L.
1 Perrone 58 0 2 would indicate that Don Roy was sending this memorandum 3 and its attachments to Larry King and to the people 4 who were. marked for copies. 5 Do you see where you and Stanek are 6 marked for copies? 7 A Yes. 8 Q I am just trying to find out whether 9 you have in any way determined before coming here ( 10 today that GPU 453 is a document that you received 11 from Don? 12 A No, I don't recall receiving it. 13 Q Have you ever checked your files to see 14 whether a copy of GpU 453 was in it? 15 MR. BENEDICT: With the purpose of 16 finding this documents, is that what you are 17 asking him? ~ 18 MR. SELTZER: For any purpose, including 19 specifically to look for this. 20 MR. BENEDICT: Do you remember seeing 21 this document in your files? ( 22 THE WITNESS: No, I don't. 23 Q Af ter your deposition was noticed and 24 your lawyers called you and said they want to take 25 your deposition, did you look in your files or have m ;. .
1 Perrone 59 i ( 2 anybody else look in your files to see if there was 3 a copy.of this document? 4 A No, I didn't. F : 5 , Q Take a look at the third page from the 6 back. Is that your penmanship? 7 A Yes, it is. 8 .Q Is this something that you wrote on or 9 about November 17, 19777 t 10 A I don't recall writing it, but I don't 11 dispute that it is my writing. 12 Q From the appearance of this with the ' 13 date, would you conclude today that this is something 14 you wrote on or about Nove mb e r 17, 19777 15 MR. BENEDICT: I object to the form of a 16 the question, but you can answer it. 17 A I don't really understand. I 'mean -- i s 18 the question does it -- 19 Q Let me be very explicit. You are looking 20 at the third page from the back? 21 A Lyes. ( 22 Q- Is there anything on that page that tells gg ' you what' day you wrote it?:
'^
( 1 (._) 24 MR. BENEDICT: Mr.. Seltzer, isn't the way 25 to ask this is doesn't he have any reason to y 4 ' h ' , $ e .'.
, ,,,-,e, , , -- - , , - . , ,n - - n , , - - -
1 Perrone 60 r'% 2 believe that he didn't write it at that time? , 3 MR. SELTZER: No, he is looking at a 4 document. He wrote it. He wrote the date. C. 5 MR. BENEDICT: And everybody can read the 6 document, Mr. Seltzer, and that is what they 7 mean when they say the document speaks for 8 itself. It has got a date written. Do you want 9 to ask him if that is his handwriting on the ( 10 date? What you are asking him to.do is something 11 David could do, you could do or I could do, and 12 he doesn't have any special knowledge for it. 13 MR. SELTZER: Don't get shrill and 14 don't get so silly. I am not going to play a 15 Mickey Mouse game with you. . 16 MR. . BENEDICT: I will get as excited about 17 questions as you do in response to dy objections. I 18 Q What date did you write this? 19 MR. BENEDICT: If you recall. 20' A I don't recall what date I wrote this. 21 Q Is there anything on the document that 22 refreshes your recollection about what date you wrote 23 this? ('3 (_) 24 A No, there isn't. 25 Q T here is nothing in the document that
1 Perrone 61 ("n '
. 2 refreshes your recollection?
3 A The document is dated November 17, 1977, 4 but that doesn't refresh my recollection that I wrote 5 it on that date. 6 Q If somebody handed you this and asked 7 you, Mr. Perrone, "When did you write this," are you 8 saying you would not be able to answer that g question? 19 MR. BENEDICT: I think you hust did that, 11 and I think he answered. He doesn't recall 12 when he wrote that. That question is improper. O' You don't have to , answer Jt. 13 14 Q Do you refuse to answer that question? 15 MR. BENEDICT: He le not refusing. I 16 am directing him not to answer it. 17 Q Do you follow your counsel's direction? 18 A Yes, I do. gg MR. SELTZER: You are not going to let 20 him testify as-to whether there is anything - 21 n this document that informs him when or. 22 about when he wrote this? 23 MR. BENEDICT: That is not the question,and A( j' 24 I direct him not to answer. 25 MR. SETLZER: That is the question.
~
1 Perrone 62 f'i
\j.
2 MR. BENEDICT: Ask the question, Mr. s 3 seltzer. 4 Q Is there anything on this page that tells i 5 you when you wrote this page? 6 MR. BENEDICT: If you understand the 7 question, you can answer it. 8 A I don't really understand that question. 9 The thing that is on this page is the date 11/17/77. I 10 That doesn't refresh my memory of writing this 11 document on that date. ( 12 Q I wasn't asking you whether it
\
13 refreshes your recollection that on that day you 14 wrote it. I am asking you whether knowing your 15 Practices, knowing how you date things, whether 16 looking at this document you could tell from 17 anything that is on it when or about when you 18 wrote it? 19 MR. BENEDICT: Well, I will object to the 20 _f rm of ths question. I think there is a 21 Proper way of getting his testimony and this 22 isn't it, but you can answer it. 23 A I - d n' t . understand the subtlety to that rh
!,,_) 24 question.
25 Q There is no subtlety to it whatsoever. x .. /.a -
,. - . ~, . ,- , , - -
i 1 Perrone 63
/~h
- \_) -
2 A Well, I don't understand it. 3 MR. SELTZER: Read the question back. 4 (Question read) 5 MR. BENEDICT: Do you understand what
\
6 Mr. Seltzer is getting at? If you understand , 7 what he is asking you, you can answer it. i, 8 I do not consider this the proper way to 9 get evidence . 10 THE WITNESS: I don' t know khat he is 11 saying. The document is dated. If I picked 12 up any document with that date on it, I would [G 13 presume it was written on the d a t,e that is 14 written on that document. 15 Q. Including this document, you would 16 presume based on your practices -- 17 A No, I would presume it based on 18 just presumption, not practices or anythi g else. 19 I would presume that is the date it was written. 20 Q_ Am I correct, the title you put on 21 this document was "Electromatic Relief Valve 22 Modifications"?-
- 3 MR.' BENEDICT
- Mr.' Seltzer, the witness A(
w/ 24 has testified he.doesn't remember the document. 25 What are you going to ask him to do, say
~
1 Perrone 64
%)
2 title, colon, now read what you have written? 3 The document speaks for itself. He has 4 identified his handwriting. If you want to 5 ask him what his practice was to include after , 6 the word " title," fine. He doesn't remember 7 this document, Mr. Seltzer. There is nothing g he can do about that fact. 9 MR. SEMZER: We are suspending this 10 dep sition if you are going to be i,that gg recalcitrant with this witness on a document 12 that he wrote. I am not going to waste my time anymore. 13 I consider this an, absolute 14 outrage. 15 MR. BENEDICT: Mr. Seltzer, why don't 16 y u sit down and calm down? I have objected g7 to the form of your question. Mr. Seltzer, gg you know I cannot guarantee this deposition will 19- ever be recommenced. I want you to understand
. that. If you walk out,we are walking out, and 20
,. 21 Mr. Perrone is going home, and I don't guarantee K
22 when it will be recommenced or if it will be. 23 (Whereupon, Mr. Seltzer left the room 9 (V 24 and portions of the record were read back by ' l the reporter.) 25 i l
+ . a:
l l 1 Perrone 65
/ -
2 MR. BENEDICT: Mr. Seltzer, Mr. Perrone 3 and I stand ready to continue this deposition 4 today. I will continue to object to what I t 5 consider to be improper lines of questioning. 6 If you don't like it, it is your prerogative 7 to suspend the deposition, but I strongly 8- recommend at this late date if you all want g to continue your October 18 trial date, that 10 you continue, and if you have a qharrel about 4 11 a specific question, that can be resolved at 4 12 ' a later date with a judge. 13 If you don't abide by my su.ggestions 4 14 that is your business, but I cannot tell you 15 when Mr. Perrone will again be available. 1 16 MR. SELTZER: Given your conduct at this 17 deposition, we are finished with Mr< Perrone. 18 I am not going to put up with that kind of 19 pattern of objecting and instructions to 20 the witness not to answer. We had a
, 21 similar problem with counsel for B&W-at the
(- 22 first two days of the deposition of Mr. i 23 Go s lo w . I had to schedule a hearing with the
- f~\
g ).- court before. counsel for B&W agreed to'stop 24 '
.25 the kind of objecting and instructing that you _
_ i _ . . , - . ._ _ ._ . . . - '.i . . _ . . . _ -_.
l 1 Perrone 66 {JN 2 have engaged in during this deposition this 3 m rning. I had told your firm at the Goslow 4 deposition that I was not going to continue j 5 under those circumstances, and I am not 6 , continuing this deposition under those 7 circumstances. 8 MR. BENEDICT: Then you are finished g with Mr. Perrone. 10 MR. SELTZER: I said I was.I , 11 (Time noted: 12:30 p.m.) es 12 , oco 13 Paul Perrone , 14 15 16 Subscribed and sworn to 17 before me this .
-18 day of 1982.
19 20
- 21
{- . 22
~
23 O
%) 24 25
. e. -
, , ,, ~ . , ,, ,.a..- - - - - . , - - - - , . ,-
9 68
.;s n .
- i. IN DE X 4'q 5
Witness Page C .g ,
'N Paul Perrone 3
?;
,^
a t .}9i:,,. p .d; $,i g,t , t E XH I B I TS ts GPU ',, For Ident. 570 Resume of Paul E. Perrone 3 4 4 00o o O 4 9 6
.-g e
W 4
. *f se' , ,, m e . 'w*- ,i
,f, t
_ h5 ^3:l'% ,,$ v2[o , gR ,fa - ' 3 g. ;j,. s_Q.6/[]
. . _ , -.];(
. ..,' - h .;,.4*;-h ;' 3 ]
- Ih4$d 4C/A'N:' - 4
,s hyu,'_> :.. ____
.,y.
__ _f g jg
s 1 67 O' . 2 CEH11FICAZE 3 STATE OF NEW YORK )
- ss.:
4 COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) 5 6 I, Nancy A. Rudoloh ,a 7 Notary Public within and for the State of New York, 8 do hereby certify that the foregoing deposition 9 of Paul Perrone Was taken Defore 10 me on Thursday, June 24, 1982 ; 11 That the said witness was duly sworn 12 before the commencement of his testimony and 13
- that the within transcript is a true ecord of 'said 14 testimony; -
15 That I am not connected by blood or 16 marriage with. any of the parties herein ,nor 17 interested directly or indirectly in the' matter in 18 controversy,.nor'am I in the employ'of an'y of the 19 counsel.- . 20 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set 21 my hand this 7 day of' e , / 78 1
/-
-O ; 2 u,w 24 Nancy A. Rudolph I 25
- =
- " !*}}