ML20082H342

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Affidavit of R Messerly Re Intimidation,Harassment or Threatening of Util Employees
ML20082H342
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 11/16/1983
From: Messerly R
Citizens Association for Sound Energy
To:
Shared Package
ML20082H284 List:
References
NUDOCS 8312010114
Download: ML20082H342 (6)
v • d • e


Text

,

O AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT MESSERLY Q: Please state your name and address for the record.

A: Robert Messerly, Route 10, Box 619C, Fort Worth, Texas 76135.

Q: Are you aware of any instances of intimidation, harassment, or threatening of employees at Comanche Peak?

A: Yes.

Q: Are you aware of any instances of employees being discouraged from doing work right to begin with at Comanche Peak?

A: Yes.

Q: In your opinion, have such instances of intimidation, harassment, threatening, or discouragement had an effect on morale of employees at the plant?

A: Yes.

Q: In your opinion, have such instances of intimidation, harassment, threatening, or discouragement had a detrimental effect on the quality of work -

at Comanche Peak?

A: Yes.

Q: If so, what effects have they had?

A: The people get an attitude that they don't care. The morale is very, very low. It's just get the job done, get the boss off their back. The atti-tude of management is get the job done and they don't care how it's done as long as it looks good on paper, to make what they call production, which is

, footage or tonnage, etc., whether it's right or wrong.

O B312010114 831128 PDR ADOCK 05000445 PDR

, g

O Q: Are there specific instances you could tell us about?

A: I discussed several in the deposition taken by the NRC Investigators on April 14, 1983.

Q: Was that the deposition which was attached to CASE's 8/3/83 letter to the Licensing Board under subject of: Record Regarding Discouragement from Reporting Nanconforming Conditions at Comanche Peak Nuclear Plant?

A: Yes.

Q: Please refer to that deposition. Are the instances you are referring to those on pages: 4 (line 12) through 25 (line 7), especially pages 6 (line

9) through 8 (line 9), 20 (line 25) through 21 (line 9), and 23 (line 24) through 25 (line 7); regarding illegal use of rebar eaters under orders;

, O V 25 (line 8) through 32 (line 18), especially page 32 (lines 2 through 18); regarding use of polar crane to pull l

piece of 32" main steam line pipe to. steam generator

into position without engineering present; 34 (line 25) through 55 (line 17), especially pages 46 d-(line 11) through 48 (line 14) and page 51 (lines 3 through 18); regarding illegal use of cutting torch on hangers, and bolts for Richmond inserts
at wrong ' angle, under orders; 58 (li~ne 15) through 61 (line ll), especially pages 58 (line 15)through 59 (line 1); regarding illegal or improper work. or work done out of procedure, under orders?

J e-

A U

A: Yes, those are the' main instances I was referring to.

Q: Are there other specific instances which are not contained in your deposition?

A: Yes. In my own case, four days after I made a complaint to the top people with QA/QC, I was fired and was out on the street looking for a job.

I talked to Antonio Vega and then to Dave Chapman, and four days after a tele-phone conversation with them I didn't have a job.

Also, I've actually seen supervision grab hold of QC Inspectors and threaten them because QC wouldn't buy something in order to make their precious production. It's common knowledge all over that that's the way it is.

For four years I heard nothing but production, production, production. They don't question how it's put up as long as it's bought off by QC. If a gift

~ of gab doesn't buy QC, I've seen them threatened. Sometimes they never even went and looked at the item to be bought off.

Q: Are there specific problems in construction or design at Comanche Peak which you believe currently exist (which have not, as far as you know, been put into the process to be corrected) to which you could take the Licensing Board and show them? And would you be willing to attempt to do so?

A: I do if they still exist, but due to publicity, I doubt it. There are certain things they can't hide, but they're going to have to pull hangers down to look and "not just visually look at them on the wall. You'd have to have wrenches, take the hengers down to check the concrete inserts as far as their being off in degrees to the wall. You'd have to pull several hangers to see how many Hilti bolts are welded to the back of the plate to get the torque on them. These would have to be physically pulled. There were in the

.O thousands that were done.

O Q: Has the NPC Region IV office issued an inspection report regarding the matters discussed in your deposition?

A: Yes. The report by the NRC was very humorous. If a man sits at his desk all day long and hasn't done this kind of work and hasn't inspected this kind of work on an ongoing basis, what are his qualifications for inspect-ing this when you can hide so many things behind what he can actually see?.

If you go and ask the people who fiave been doing the illegal things if they >

have been doing illegal things, they aren't going to just haul off and admit that they have been.

Q: You were not satisfied that everything is all right based on your reading of the NRC inspection report?

A: I'm certainly not. It didn't resolve anything as far as I can see.

O Q: Can you give us an example of what you mean?

A: Well, for one example, they didn't pay any attention to what I stated in my deposition -- that there wasn't any engineer anywhere around when the main steam pipe was forced into position by the polar crane. The Board needs to put the people involved on the stand and swear them in under penalty of

. perjury where they'll face 10 years in the nen if they lie, and their jobs will be protected, and they won't have to take the harassment that's every day, 365 days a year out there, and they'll testify and tell the truth.

Q: Why should the Licensing Board be concerned about such intimidation, harassment, threatening or discouragement of employees, or such deficiencies as you may tell them about or show them at Comanche Peak? What's the bottom line as far as the safety of the plant is concerned?

O J

1 O

A: The man who has~ a bad attitude or a bad morale situation is not C

going to do the best of his ability as far as quality; he's' going to satisfy or par **y upper management. He's going to do anything possible to keep '

management off his back in order to make production, which is management's <

1-sole purpose regardless of the outcome. What you've got out there is bad 1 .

quality, bad work, a lot of cover-up work, and all of this done just for

~ production so that upper management looks good as far as footage or t'onnage is concerned.

l l

i

O I have read the foregoing affidavit, which was prepared under my personal direction, and it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

I lW (Sigried) u D ' '. . $w- 2 h /7 f T

, s-e STATE OF (/fx/ I'1 COUNTY OF /7/f 4 L'0 On this, the 3. b day of 91rF ,1983, personally appeared

,D ra M r- m c e s f7 t v , known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes therein expressed.

Subscribed and sworn before me on the 3b day of /,LL M 2 a V 198 _[ 3 4

A ux $W142/ Y Notary Public in and for the State of (C <tf1'P.s sAf.1UEL W. NESTOR MY Commission Expire)

My Comiss. ion Expires:

O

-- - - - .

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20082H342&oldid=2750360"