ML20082E550

Affidavit of Bp Garde Re 831103 Telcon W/Welding Inspector on Testimony of Util Employees

ML20082E550
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	11/23/1983
From:	Garde B GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
To:
Shared Package
ML20082E536	List: ML20082E532 ML20082E548 ML20082E550 ML20082E560
References
NUDOCS 8311280233
Download: ML20082E550 (3)

Text

- - - - ~. . .- .. . - - ~ ._ .. _ - - - --- - - . .

..\

AFFIDAVIT 4

1. My name is Billie.Pirner Garde. I am the Director of the Citizens Clinic of the Government Accountability Project of the Institute for Policy Studies,1901 Que Street, N.W. , Washington, D.C. 20009. 1 e,

, e' .

2. In that role I have been directly conducting or supervising the investigation of the Catawba Nuclear Power Plant since late March of 1983. That investigation has included a complete review of all available documentation amassed through both the Operating License Hearings and '

r available in the Public Document Room of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

("NRC"), as well as obtained by GAP through the Freedom of Information j# ,,

Act (FOIA). It has also included a detailed analysis of information f

and complaints provided by the welding quality control inspectors to <

i Duke Power Company, its contractor. the Maragement Analysis Corporation (MAC), and the NRC Staff. Finally, our investigation has included contacts and interviews with enployees, former employees, and management officials of Duke. Some of these contacts have been initiated by GAP IFvestigators, some of them have been in response to contacts from workers l ( .

and former workers. ,

3. Currently GAP is working with the Office of Investigations (01), the Of fice of Inspector and Auditor (OIA), and the Office of Inspection and Enforcement ,

(IE) Region II in their respective investigations / inspections of worker l

concerns about the Catawba facility and NRC oversight.

l ,

4. Of particular concern to GAP in recent weeks has been information received l

about excessive pressure on the Catawba site toward welding quality control inspectors scheduled to testify concerning their 1981 complaints regarding L .

831'1280233 831123 l .PDR ADOCK 05000413 g, PDR l -

1:

\.

harassment of QC Inkpectors, lack of support of QC inspectors from QC supervisors, verbal overriding of non-conforming conditions indentified by QC inspectors, specific hardware problems identified by QC inspectors, and other issues identified by inspectors in their complaints to their own management as well as complaints made to the NRC.

5. For example, in conversations that I have had with welding quality control inspectors in recent weeks that are scheduled to testify I have been told that "We just want the pressure off of us by Duke.," and "I intend to testify truthfully when they put me on the stand, but I know that I am going to lose my job as soon as this trial is over.," and "I cannot volunteer any information that I know, all I can do is answer questions."

6. More importantly, on November 3,1983, a call was received at the GAP office from a welding inspector who identified himself as a welding quality control inspector not scheduled to testify who was calling out of concern for, and at the request of, other welding quality control inspectors who were scheduled to testify in the proceeding. This inspector, who did not reveal his name, disclosed the following information relevant to the matter before the Commission:

(1) His " buddies" were undergoing " training sessions" at Duke's Charlotte offices in which they were being closely questioned about what they were supposed to say.

(2) The " pressure on the job site was so thick that you could cut it with a knife."

(3) His co-workers were having to go "over and over and over" what they said in their written statements and told to practice saying it in many dif ferent words.

\

(4) He stated that they were all afraid that as soon as they were finished with the hearing that they would be laid off because Duke would not have any need to keep them anymore.

(5) He said that they were all aware, through CAP and the newspaper and television reports, that there was supposed to be a new NRC investigation into their claims, but they were afraid it would be too late.

(6) He said that he did not know whether or not what the lawyers were doing to his buddies was illegal or wrong, but they wanted to find out.

7. I talked to this gentleman for approximately 45 minutes about his questions on the hearing process, as well as about other issues concerning the plant not relevant to this matter now before the Commission. Mr.

Louis Clark, Exceutive Director of CAP, also discussed his concerns about the pre-hearing witness preparation by Duke's attorneys.

8. At the conclusion of the conversation I recommended that he convey all of the information he had told me to Mr. John Sinclair of the Office of Investi-gations of the NRC and provided him with the phone numbers of OI in Washington, and Atlanta.

9. It is my understanding that he called OI with his information the next l

l day.

The above information is true and complete to the best of my knowledge under threat of perjury.

LL W ' h*

BILLIE PIRNER GARDE Subscribed and sworn to me this_ d.8/!([ day of November,1983 in the District of Columbia.

.z ( Md My Commission expires kne 14,1995 IN U'inMI l'U Dirl L ,

. _ - , __ __ _ . . - _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ __