ML20091H860

Applicant Exhibit A-135,consisting of Transcript of 940824 Interview of a Mosbaugh

ML20091H860
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	07/19/1995
From:	GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:
References
OLA-3-A-135, NUDOCS 9508140296
Download: ML20091H860 (44)

Text

_ _ _ _ . . _ . . . . - - - . - - . - . -

g -/35 G C.]I- / IT n r r. v e r e n IJdliMb i

l

% Jll 27 P4 :43 In The Matter Of:

0FFICE OF SECRETARY 5 00CKETING A SERVICE

, BHANCH L

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY ALLEN MOSBAUGH Vol. 3, August 24,1994 i

1

? l I

4 4

i BROWN REPORTING, INC.

? ATIANTA, AUGUSTA, CARROLLTON ROME 1

1100 SPRING STREET  ;

i SUITE 750 1

ATLANTA, GA USA 30309 i

(404) 876-8979 or (800) 637-0293 Original Flie 0824mosb.asc, 258 Pages j Word Index included with this Min-U-Scripte NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I Docket No. 50-424!425-OLA-3 EXH! BIT NO. -- b [

In the rnatter of Georaia Power Co et al.. Voatie Units 1 & 2 Staff Applicant O lntervenor D other

' iden is Received O Rejected Reporter _ k,N U 9508140296 950719 Date 7 h /'ll witness MolbW L-PDR ADOCK 05000424

, O PDR l

e IN TIIE MATI~ER OF: ALLEN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA PORT.R COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 Page 463 validations 1201 and the very detailed 1201 Q: At.d nothing inaccurate or mis-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA documentation,one Write-up on (2n the leading?

AYMISAIETYN CENSWB D Confirmation action response and the 12ii A: And the language is quoted in the W THE MATTER OF, ) aspects (221 that I thought were false in 1221 attachments.

l oocket No. it and a separate 1231 write-up on the LER 1231 Q: And you regard your prefile tes-GEORGIA POWER COMPANY,) Ps OLA 3 .E false in it-3 t tuony and 1241 referring to the language

.i , ) being identical between I251 the COA j "M,",*"** ^'"*"'"'*"' 125l That was what I provided to the NRC and the LER as being accurate and com-

) South.m Nucl..,) as ~pIftI?

cvo,o. Ei.ctne o.n=cm, ) v0tuuE in Page 468 Pl.nt, Und.1.nd 2) ) Page 468 DEPOSmON OF ist the source,some of the source m. for- ni A: I don't believe my prefile tes-ALLEN MOSBAUGH August 24,1994 mation of these 121 allegations in the timony is states that.

• '*"'- summer of 1990. So the complete (31 (31 Q: Let's take a look at your prefile I41 s'U.".c'U*"".tT[ package of allegations I gave the NRC is testimony.Let's look at footnote five on An.at a.=si all 141 included here. So this has some page 11 isi and what it says, so that the sud, A s,.og. ccR.A.621 RPR.cu very detailed 151 information in it. record will be clear (61 on this,is that I 1100YR$N recorded statements made by [71 plaintiff E U E 750 161 Q: let's try to get off to a good start ATLANTA. GEORGIA 303N now [71 in terms of trying to answer the V gtle pr ject vice-president Ken

1. " McCoy 181 and GPC,s setuor vice presi-question that I 181 asked, and if you want Page 464 to add additional material,191 just let tne ' * "'M '

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL dCmonstrating that they were aware lioi On e,.n.w o ,,.. Po , co,ng.ny. know. that prior statements related to the ss."w[PInU P'onUt ree-i nde. pW@ mbb pdk h rehaMty M Im k WM gmmn 2300 N St, t. N W timony n 11 that you provided to the sul> were materially false and that I 21 they w nington. o c. 20037 committee, did you p2: identify for the intentionally reiterated these same false NLAleENE[a subcommittee that there was a 1:31 dis- 03) statements when filing the licensing T,outma s no . tinction in the language that we are all event report, n41 (LER), to the comnus-s200 NesonsBank Pl.a. talking 04) about, the 18,19 language sion 30 days after the site area psi emer-N 6MgQ,St, between the COA and the usi LER? gency had occurred.

On i,.n.w m. U S Nuci.m 061 A: And in the prefile testimonyin 1871 961 Now,I used the term identical.You R 9 *'

• attachment three is the COA language used n71 the term there these sme false C R u.s. Nuci , R.gulMo,y Commemon and m usi attachment, they are botn in statements. Aren t nel you here referring Ome. ot ts. o.a. .i Coun attachment threc is the n91 LER ianguage to the statements in the COA and 091 g5g,m(PA ,

and my discussion of the falseness ofI20) then the statement in the LER?

Roewm.. u.,vi.no 20:s2 both languages. 1201 A: It says they reiterated the same Dag *,* ',aQ 120 0: So is it your answer to my ques- false (20 statements,and the documents xonnmann a coi.emic tion that (221 it's not pointed out in your have the same false 1221 statements with 517 Flo,io. Av.nu.. N W prefile, typed prefile (231 testimony to the respect to stating that there were 1231 no w n.ngton. o c. 2000' subcommittee, but if you were to 1241 problems or failures on any of these

^'*C"',oo, read all the attachments to it,you could starts, as I (241 quoted, as was quoted discern I251 that that was the case;is that before.

Page 465 e rrect? [2sl In addition,it was the intent and it is ni (The reading and signing of the 121 deposition by the witness was Page 467 Page 469 reserved.) ni A: I didn't see anything in the prefile ni the stated intent under the sworn 13 ALLEN MOSBAUGH, 121 testimony detailing that. The details testimony of the 121 people that signed 141 having been previously duly sworn, are in the 131 attachment, and I guess I both of these correspondences and 131 was examined and 151 testified as foi, would also add that the si prefile tes- the people that reviewed both of these gows timony,I filed to address hatassments ist si correspondences that it was their in-and intimidation within the nuclear in- tent that these ist statements conveyed isi CONTINUED EXAMINATION dustry and my 16l experiences of that. the same information or intended 161 to ni BY MR. BLAKE:

171 So that was the subject of this hearing, convey the same information to the 181 Q: Mr.Mosbaugh,when we bruke off ist the subject of my oral testimony, and NRC.

last 194 night,1 asked whether or not you the subject of 191 the prefile testimony, pl So Georgia Power people that signed would take an noi opportunity to review The subject that I was asked noi to speak the tal document and reviewed and ap-your prefile testimony before oil the about was not my allegations on the n n proved the document 191 agree with that.

Senate Subcomnuttee and determine specif c LER or COA to NRC. noi Q: Isn't the testimony that you're Itzt That became a small part of the referring nu to from these individuals y ti at u i dg d o ei that they intended to add 02: this to Senate Subcommittee that there was a whole p31 presentation and,like I said, the details of that 041 are contained in clarify it.

distinction in nei the language between the LER and the COA letter of ps: April the attachment. 03:A: No.

9th. Have you had a chance to do that? nsi Q: Insofar as it was just a small por- 1:41 Q: To make it - it is not?

061 A: Yeah,I have had a chance to look tion of n61 your presentation, you still ost A: The stated testimony is that they over n?1 this package, and in addition to would think that they 971 deserved to ti61 intended those statements in the the prefile nei testimony here, this in. have accurate mformation and cond COA about the start n:1 count,the start cludes all the detail of what n91 I plete Insi accurate information? count statement, they intended that usi pmvided the NRC with the write-ups of 1891 A: That's correct. to convey the same information to the

., . .. - ,,-n --_ . _ .

AREN MOSBAUGII IN TIIE MATTER OF:

V 1. 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWF.R COMPANY NRC in both 091 the COA and the I.ER. n91 Q: (By Mr. Blake) Written up or ar- lisi A: I believe for that entire period of That's the testimony I'm (201 referring to, ticulated (201 or intimated or in any other time, n91 it's been Kenny Stokes.I believe ini O I understand that their testimony way advanced by you 1211 prior to this Kenny Stokes had I20l the diesel respon-1221 the COA was that they didn't deposition? sibility,I think, pretty much from 12 1the ruze there was a (231 problem,they felt 122: MR. KOHN: Other than to his coun. beginmng.

like that was accurate 1241 information sel. ;22i Q: So these people reported to you they were providing,and when later 125i 123: MR. BLAKE: Right. I don't ask, as a 1231 administratively. Had you had train-questioned about problems that had oc. 1241 general matter, about his com. ing or had you 1241 ever worked with curred, they munications with (251 you. diesels yourself)

Page 470 Page 472 (29 A I M never been a quem en-gineer on the s lii introduced that language into it in tilTHEWITNESS: 1 think over time I Page 474 order to try to 12: rectify that problem have 121 had some discussions with 01 and clarify it for the reader,131 didn't personnel about 131 that theory. I.ike I ni diesels. I had been involved in some they? said,they had that 141 theory before I did. other plants 121 and test programs at 141 A: And they said that that language 151 Q: (By Mr. Blake) So you indicated other plants where the 131 preoperation-did not Isi change and that it was merely that you 161 thought it was a significant al test and system type engineers conveying the same 161 information, or material addition,171 but you didn't w rked 141 for me, and that included They said that, think it was important enough to tal engineers that worked on 151 the diesels.

171Q: And do you think that the intro, point out to the Senate in the prefile 161 So in the course of that work history, duction of ist that language about com. testimony, is 19: that correct, other than (71 you know,I had that scope under my prehensive test program was 19: just in. it could be - responsibility. si I wasn't the system en-significant, immaterial? gineer on the diesels.They 191 reported 001 A: I have answered that before.The purpose li:1 of this testimony was to up to me through a supervisor and then noi A: No. As I have stated before,I think to not me as preoperational tesang, su-nit they added it there so that they could discuss my :xperiences as a n21 whistle blower and discuss harassment and n31 perintendent, and liti then later up saY the same n2l thinE but to add an intimidatio' t* through a supervisor to an engineering undefined phrase to muck it up 101 so n21 superintendent to me.

that they could argue it after the fact. 1:41 In the c ourse of that,I touched on a nsi number of allegations including n31 Q: How would you characterize 041 They intended it to read the same, be delusion valves and n61 other things that y ur state of nel knowledge of the the usi same, appear the same;but they are unrelated. In the details,it n71 con- diesels as of the time of the site nsi area wanted to allow n61 themselves tains all the information in terms of an emergency?

not allegation on the COA and the LER, n6: A: Well,I was knowledgeable about l act an nt got ght the n71 diesels and some of their operat-including the n91 quoted language that I um G: Tlu.s is a theory that you have gave to the NRC initially. ing history, but I not was not a systerr come to I 91 fairly recently, isn't it, the engineer and by no means would I n91 g g,s go back to the time of the conspirac,y to muck it [201 up by the s te 90 area em rgency.Let's start there- say an expert on Vogtle's diesels. 1 introductionof these wonis?Thatis,I120 1201 I have an engineering background.1 have never heard it articulated before 1221 Up until that time, what had been have 120 received SRO systems training this 1221 deposition, your 1231 experience with or involve- which includes systems (221 and diesel p31 A: I have certainly been able to ment with, knowledge of p41 diesel gen-systems. I do have a fairly extensive (23i clarify it uit since we have conducted crators and their operating patterns or background in aspects of fluid flow, discovery, but I would add t2si that it is usi reliability statistics. Starting where aspects of 941 thermodynamics, and part of the theories that I have heard y u want up those types of areas that relate 251 to my Page 471 Page 473 engineering capabilities to analyze cer-

"I ""*" " "'

ni the NRC's Criminal Investigation Page 475 Division, the 12i Office of Investigation, PI A: Starting in 1984,1 became respon.

articulate as well. sible 131 for the system engineers who at ni kinds of problems which would in-that time were 141 functioning as test clude humidity and izi dew point and

@ I Wought we were talking about engineers, and that mcluded the isi en-your 141 articulation. llave you articu- fluid flow aspects.

gineers that tested the diesels. 131Q: In the course of that six-year Lated that before this ist deposition?

161 MR, KOHN: Other than to his coun-161 S beginning in that time frame,the period, ni did you have occasion to g p' 171 systern engineers and test engmeers focus on the diesels or the 151 diesels that were 181 preoperationally testing, reliability,the diesels

• operability among 171 MR. BLAKE: Sure, doing the scope of testing 191 known as 161 your various responsibilities?

i:1THEWITNESS: I don't miieve that preoperational testing, reported to me 17 A: Not specifically. I think the site th t ion has been written up that way that and noi continued to report to me from area ist emergency obviously focussed I can not recall 12. the allegations, but i 1984 up to the time nu of the site area the rnaximum attention 191 on the diesels would need lui to :'eview all of those emergency. and the diesel failure and the diesel not allegations to be 021 absolutely sure. 021 Once the plant eas operational, reliability. From the beginning the in-p31 I have been able to focus on that those I:31 engineers were formally called dustry has nu had some focus on Trans-

h 04) better since we have taken the system engineers. So nel the diesel sys- America Delaval diesels n21 because of u..,cimony and usi since we have specifi. tem engineer reported to me from the problems experienced in the industry i cally heard from the n61 Georgia Power n51 time that unit one got its license up and n31 established an owners group.

witnesses that they view the 971 verbal to the time of 961 the site area emergen- n41 So there were certain industry presentation, the CO/. letter, and the psi eY. problems nst that were focussed on in LER to convey the same information. n71 Q: Who was that person? the construction and in the 0 61 54ne din . TMoe d74 min.T t.hAde Ttunwv DUDnn'rTNC TW (And's Rin.RQ70

IN TIIE MA' ITER OF: AlTEN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Yol. 3, August 24,1994 preoperational testing period that were fera license on one plant an SRO license li2i told that before they made the generally 971 the issues of the owners on nst one plant to another, presentation on April n3i 9th, gmup and there were some uni very n61 So it would be inappropriate to as- 04 Q: You never knew priorto April 9th detailed documents, some specific m- sume n?) that just because I had a cer- that psi they were going to make such a spections n91 that the plants were doing tification, that I nel would have SRO presentation, or did 061 you?

with TransAmerica Delaval (20 diesels authority at Vogtle. I guess I would (191 in71 A: I may have.1 can't recall when I related to cracking and problems that also add that what I had was a certifica- first nsi knew that. lf I was told about it ,

had 12ii been experienced, and I know tion and not (201 a license, and there is a in the time frame 1i91 before April 9th,1 ,

the system engmeer 122 that,s been difference. don't believe that I was aware 120 of I working on those. anything before,like that week before 2 Q: On March 28, 1990 when you l 123l So that was an overall industry-wide talked about (22 one of the diesels being April 12n 9th. l 1241 concern and in panicular of Trans- operable,it's the same (231 tape that we j America Delaval 1251 dicscis, but I don t 122 That would have been the time frame have referred to before, the (.41 that 1231 management may have made it i beheve up until the time of transcript,did you believe that the diesel known and they probably 1241 wouldn't i Page 476 was 1251 operable? have made it known just to me. They l Page 478 may1251have madeit known to a number 1 ni the site area emergency that there ofpeopge,  ;

was any special I2: focus on the V1 Forget whether or not you were i reliability of the Vogtle diesels duc 131 to qualified (21 to specif;cally make that Page 480 problems that were occurring that were declaration, nl Q: As of April 9th, based on what you ,

unique at 141 Vogtle;but that all changed 13i A: I'm reporting the status of the now 121 recall your state of knowledge i when the site area ist emergency oc- diesel as ni determined by operations was,is there any 131 reason you believe, l curred. personnel. would have believed at that ni point that  !

161 Q: Had you had any questions in your isi Q: Did you question that? the plant shouldn't restart? I mind pi about the reliability of those 151 A: At that point in time?

diesels or the ist adequacy of the control 61 A: Did I (Iuestion their determina-system of the diesels? tion? g,i Q: Yes.

19] A: Up to that point in time I had not pl Q: Yes.lfaving received SRO tmining, p1 A: At that point in time, I guess I poi reviewed that.Like I say,I don't recall 181 having been SRO certified, did you hadn't Isi put together the basis for any nii events occurring that would quesuon whether 191 or not the diesel which the plant should [91 restart,and I have caused us to do 021 that. was operable when you heard this 001 was not asked to participate in 001 put-declaration made by operations? ting that basis together.

n31 Perhaps some problem with that was that n41 some of the problems that were ini A: No,I didn't question that. Ini So I guess I would say I probably occurring with the 051 diesels even n 21 Q: Let me turn to the next events.We lacked n2l adequate information to j before the site area emergency weren't have p31 talked a lot about the April 9th make that determination. I v31 wasn't '

061 being properly recognized by opera- scenario, but I n41 still have a couple of asked to participate in that process.

tions. questions.Were you aware usi prior to 04 Q: Are you aware to; lay of any n?) So there were, I think, some inade. April 9th that the company intended to knowledge that usi you had on April 9th quacies usi to recognize that the diesels seek n61 authorization to operate the that would have caused you to n61 op- i were having problems n91 before the Vogtle plant? pose a restart of the plant?

site area emergency. n71 A: To restart? 07: A: I can't remember anything.Like 1 i201 Q: The training about the SRO 120 nai Q: Yes, said, uni a lot of the facts that support responsibilities which you indicated n91 A: I may have been told that.I don't that or suppon my 091 current belief that that you had,122 you previously have have i201 an independent memory as to the plant was not ready to be I201 restart-indicated that you weren't SRO 1231 exactly when I may have 12n been told ed are based on mfornr. ton that I licensed and, therefore, weren't in a that, but it's obvious that at some point learned I2u after that point in time.

position to 1241 determine whether or 1221in time, management would want to IzziQ: As of April 9th,did these system not the diescis were operable.1251 Do restart the plant. 1231 engineers responsible for diesel test-you recall that? ing still 1241 report to you?

g23, a: ye3, Page 477 1251 A: Well, no.There were some chan-1241 A: Sometime in that time frame I ni A: That's correct, may have (251 been told by management ges made that they were going to seek Page 481 121 Q: What was the difference between obtaining (31 a license and the degree of Page 479 pi in their reporting that occurred short-training and instruction ni that you ly after the (21 time of the site area emer-received on SRO responsibilines that ni a restart.

gency, and what changed (31 was that a would ist distinguish one being able to 121 Q: What was your title at that point?

critique leader was assigned to be 141 make that 161 determination and one not? 131 A: Acting assistant general manager, responsible and control the testing of p1 A: I was SRO certified on a boiling plant 141 support. the dicscis 151 and to contml the testing water 181 reactor by the General Electric tsiQ: But you don't recall ever having to determine mot cause.161 That was who operates a 191 simulator at Tulsa or been in 161 a conversation or in any meet. Kent Holmes, and Mr. Skip Kitchens as-operated a simulator at Tulsa, poi Ok- ings in which it was p1 discussed that the signed p1 Mr. Holmes that responsibility, lahoma. company was going to seek 181 restart? tai Mr. Holmes,in that capacity, reported n u You do not have the authority within 191 A: No.1 think I may have been, but I to (91 Mr. Bockhold, and the engineers the n21 nuclear industry to transfer your can't noi recall right now a specific that were doing the poi testing were license in,m a BWR 931 to a PWR and meeting or a time about tul that, but it under their normal line of rul respon-you don't have the authority to n41 trans- would be logical that I may have been sibility at that time reporting up to me.

m.,._..- ...., ,, n - .._. -

ALLE MOSBAUGII IN THE MA' ITER OF:

Vol. 3, Augttst 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY v21 For the purposes of the restart test- Kitchens' directive was in order to take ship n21 through you with regard to ing i:31 and the specific response to the you out of n21 the route? diesel testing?

site area nel emergency, the diesel test- 03: A: Well, it partially accomplished 03) A: Well, I would think that Mr.

ir was directed t( be v" controlled that. Kitchens or, n41 perhaps, Mr. Bockhold.

. ugh Mr. Bockhod .o Mr. Kent Hol- n41 Q: Did you think that was an intent I'm speculating about that, p51 but, you mes. n61 He was assigned as critique in what 051 it was they were doing? know,the people he reported to and n61 committee chairman to I 71 control the apparently Mr. Kitchens said that he as-testing, the restart testing of the psi 961 A: I have no firsthand knowledge as to n i intent. I can only observe the signed Ken. 071 Mr. Bockhold was the diesel. one that directed Holmes to be nel li91 So that changed the reporting taoi responsible to control the testing of the nel Q: Why didn't you raise that with diesel. 091 So obviously Mr. Bockhold relationship that existed in the normal anybody,1191 if you felt disenfanchised line 120 management. In addition, Mr. played a role in that.

r if y u thought it was 901 wrong?

Ken Burr,who was a p2: corporate per- 201 Q: Weren't you later added to the son that reported to Mr. Louis Ward,1231 12ii A: Well,when you have been raising critique pil team?

came to the site to assist the engineers some 1221 issues and you feel that you ,, g with the p41 testing. have been discriminated 1231 against, I '

guess the effect on the personnelis an yes.

psi In addition, a contract engineer, Mr. 941 effect of suppressing them. 1231 Q: And in that role,did you not have Page 482 ps! You figure well, I will niisc some an 124l opportumty to oversee, par-m re ticipate in, get the 1251 results of diesel ni Chennault, was hired by Mr. Burr to testing?

come and assist pi with the testing of the Page 484 diesel, and in addition,I 131 believe,a Mr. Page 486 ni issues, they will call me a complainer Dave Lizenby of Southern came to the and they will vi attempt to use this ni A: Well,I'm trying to think of what ni site,so some additional corporate per- against me. time si frame that occurred in.It seems sonnel and Isi people in contract to them 131 Once you feel the pressure of to have been 131 sometime later,and Mr.

came down that had 161 different report- management 91 or that management is Bockhold stated at that time 91 that he ing chains and were the people that 171 trying to do that to you, it isi has a was doing that,he didn't just add me,he were myolved m the testing of the chilling effect on you. Isi added all managers.

161 Q: Did you feel that this created any 161 Q: Yes.

isi Q: Did you feel you had been son m of safety concern,this disruption 171 A: So it was a situation where all the relieved of 191 responsibilities over the of the normallai management chain? isi managers were added on to the criti-diesel that you had had noi prior to the 19i A: I didn't think about it in those que team.

site area emergenc)?

terms- 191 I believe it was at the time that the not

%: In some respects,I think my nor-mal line nzi management had been 01 Q: As a normal matter when you critique report was coming out,and the thought uit things were being done m- purpose Mr. n ii Bockhold stated of what usurped in a couple of 931 respects.Mr. that was was to implement n2l correc-Kent Holmes was an individual that in appropriately or wrcmgly, n21 did you feel it was your responsibility to raise n31 tive actions that the entique team was v41 the active capacity worked for me, li31 recommending.

yet Mr. Kitchens, usi thmugh Mr. Bock- that?

hold,had seen fit to assign him as n61 the 041 A: Yeah, and like I said, I did, but 041 These were the longer or inter-critique leader, when usi you start, when management mediate usi term corrective actions.

starts taking actions usi against you and That action, in some ti61 respects, dis-n71 In addition, then, Mr. Bockhold then you perceive a management n71 rupted the conduct of the critique team directed uni Mr. Holmes to control the attitude against you, it has a chilling testing of the diesel,and n91 Mr.Holtnes 071 because there was a loss of con-c#cct n nal y u. tinuity with the nel original members in that capacity reported to Mr. pol Bock-hold.So there were several management 091 Q: Have you ever raised this iten. that had made up the critique team.

actions pil and edicts that disrupted with 12oi management? 091 Q: Did you think that the Holmes poi what had been the normal 921 line pii A: This item being? responsibility and his reporting chain, management function. p2l Q: This item being the change in the that there 1211, was anything inap-p31 Q: Did you point this out to anyone p3: reporting relationships concerning pr ate about it or that it 1221 didn't or g41 complain about it? diesel testing, p41 Have you ever ques- -

tioned management about their usi in. p31 A: Yeah,there were some problems 931 A: No,1 did not point this out.At this with it, poi and Mr. Holmes expressed tentions?

Page 483 Page 485 s me f those concerns. I 12sl think on one occasion, the diesel got tested ni point in time I had also begun to feel ni A: Well,in the discovery pmcess,we without that 121 management was starting to dis- made gi it a point to ask questions about criminate against me 131 because of my that because we ist didn't know, for ex, Page 487 having made prior allegations to the HI ample, who would assign Mr. 91 Holmes. p1 Mr. Holmes' knowledge and kind ofin NRC. 151 So I guess my full knowledge of these violation of an al understanding that ist it seemed almost like kind of a pat- 161 changes has only developed since we they had with the NRC relative to 13) the tern,161 a continuation up thmugh the have had an 171 opportunity to do more quarantine and the preservation of root Tagement actions 171 against me to discovery, cause I41 evidence.The dieselwas tested.

jass me in cenain activities. tai Q: Who do you think was involved in The NRC didn't 151 know about it.

ist C: Did you feelthat this critique team this 191 determination to take you out of 161 They weren't expectir.g the test and, 191 eppmach and Holmes having been the chain and to noi have Holmes report- in 171 addition, they changed out pans.

appointed to oversee not the diesel test- ing directly to Bockhold rather nii than So these changes tai of reponing ing and reporting to Bockhold by titi having the normal reporting relation- relationship and the conflicting l9l inter-Psoe 4R7. Pnoe 4R7 Min-IT.heinde RROtIN RFDORTWG TW f404) R% RQ70

IN TIIE MA' ITER oft AI1 EN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 est of outage and operations and criti- 171 A: Well,I was going over the things I diesel problems that could titi be con-que,I liot think, had some problems. did 181 that I feel notified management tinuing safety problems with the diesel.

tulQ: And you think that incident that the basis for 191 restart prmided for n2l Q: And those particularly related to NRC was wrong or inaccurate, air tal quality?

would have 1:21 been avoided if diesel testing had still continued p31 to report i nol lf the basis for your requesting restart 04: A: Yes.

to you? till is wrong, then maybe you shouldn't isi Q: And whether or not they would be granted 1:21 restart.After that in April, gjp*

li41 A: I don't know the answer to that. late April,I think in3t it was the end of I'm tisi just saying that a change in nor- I71 8-mal reporting 1 61 relationships has the April,the 30th is when Isent 1:41 another memo statmg that another basis for res- usi Q: Let me continue,then.Did you go capability of causing a 071 disruption of tart. psi the statements to the NRC about to the 1:91 company and say that?

control' the diesel start 1:61 count reliability had 12oi A: I had already gone to the com-lisi Q: Is that what you attribute that li91 been inaccurate. At that 1 71 point, how- pany about 1211 those concerns in April particular incident to- ever, the plant had already been nel re- 10th or lith and April 30th.

120i A: I haven't been able to look into started. 122: Q: You had raised with the company that 12ll incident m enough detail to ti91 Q: I still haven't heard the answer to questions (231 about whether or not in-draw an exact izzi conclusion.I know t he my 12oi question. formation it had provided was 1241 ac-incident happened,and I:23i knowthere (2i MR.KOHN: Could you restate the curate.

were pmblems with who was m charge. 122 question? I251 Had you discussed with the com- 1 1241Q: You have mdicated that as of 1231 Q: (By Mr. Blake) My question is did pany April 9th,1251 you didn t have enough there 1241 come a time when you felt the mformation to oppose a Pa9e 492 plant should not be 1251 operating, not i i whether or not you thought that Page 488 did there come a time when you felt equated with whether 121 or not the i Page 490 plant could operate safely? l ni request to restart the Vogtle plant.Did there come til a time when you had lii some information that had been (31 A: I discussed with the company the enough information so that you i31 felt provided to the NRC 121 was inaccurate. 14 technicalaspectsof thattelatedtothe the plant should not operate? Did there come a time when you 131 air quality 151 concerns, that bad air 141 A: Well,on the 9th or 10th of AprilI became concerned about whether or quality can result in 161 cormsion, mois-sent ist a memo to Mr.Bockhold,my then not the plant 141 could be safely ture, and that there are small 171 orifices supersisor, stating ici that the phrase in operated? in the control system and they can be 181 the confirmation of action letter ri Isi MR. KOHN: Are you starting with the affected, et cetera.

which requested restart fmm the 9th, i61 April '90 time frame? 191 Q: Who do you think in the company just a day isi before,within a day or two pl MR. BLAKE: I'm starting with April 001 understood that you believed the after that was the 191 presentation that 9th tal where he said he didn't have plant was not nil could not be operated i was made and the confirmation of 1:01 knowledge,191 didn't have any reason to at that point safely?

action letter was issued,I sent a memo oppose restart on lioi April 9th. 1:21 A: I discussed those things with Mr.

to my 911 general manager statmg that nii MR.KOHN: I object to the form of p3: Bockhold. l one of the bases 021 requesting restart in the n2; question, because it ignores ti41 Q: And do you think that Mr. Bock-events occurring v31 before April 9th, hold usi understood that your position r se - fth air ualit[ e ng isfa was the plant coulttn't ti61 be operated 4 tory, was nei not true and said that the v41 MR. BLAKE: What?

• • '" #C*"*" '* " "* IE **

statements rnade in the n si confirmation nsi MR. KOHN: I will withdrawit.I think of action letter about air quality 061 n6 you're trying to focus on the diesel liti A: I think Mr. flockhold dismissed being satisfactory was, that it was n71 generator issue. Is that my under- the air usi quality concern and didn t probably not ti71 satisfactory, and at- standing? take it seriously.

tached some documentation and a Ital psi MR. BLAKE: Yes,I am. n910: Do you think that he understood review of air quality measurements to it. that your 1201 position was that the plant li91 THE WITNESS: I would say that the couldn't be operated I2u safely because 19: So that did two things,that put him 120i time that I arranged to meet with the of air quality?

on (201 notice that that was a false,inac- Office 120 of Investigations, I think, curate statement I211in the confirmation 1221 k Tm not me I ever saWo you dat pmbably was the 1221 time that I had at I231 the point in time that I made that of action letter and,in 1221 addition, the reached the conclusion that 123: the discussion,that 1241 I had drawn the con-bases which had no concern to the NRC problems and the basis on which the 1241 123: about air quality had some inac- c us n at the plant couldn t 1251 be restart had been requested were suffi- operated safely. I think I just told you curate statements in 124: it and that,in- cient 125 that the plant shouldn't have deed, air quality had been 1251 unsatisfac- that been restarted.

tory. Page 493 Pa9e 489 lit the point in time that I kind of 01 Q: Oly Mr. Blake)This was in the July reached that state 121 of mind was in mid vi Q: My question was did there come a 1990121 time frame,is that the interview June' time - you're talking 131 about?

(,i g And my question then was did you 12 A: Ilut I didn't in that letter,you know, 14 A: I think it was probablyin theJune, discuss 141 that with anybody at the com-131 state, you know, we should prevent mid tsiJune 1990 time frame, pany?

restart or til something like that, but it 161Q: So by mid June 1990, you had Isi A: Well,bymidJuneIhadfiledalabor certainly was one of the 151 bases that reached the ni position that it might be 161 case against the company. By mid restart had been sold on. unsafe to operate the tai plant? June,and I can't ri remember, June, July, 1610: What is the answer to my ques- 191 A: The plant pmbably hadn't been but in that time frame, I was 181 fully tion? restarted noi and that there were some working with the NRC because I didn't

- - .. _ _ .,- ...n mn.<~- . . . - . - .

1 AtI1E$ MOSilAUGII IN TIIE MA' ITER OF:

V:L 3 August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY believe 191 the company had been Isi A: On April 30th I sent a memo to my aware that it was pi forwarded to cor-responsive to me. general (91 manager stating that there porate in the mid May time?

noi Q: Is the answer to my question no? were inaccuracies in the 1101 April 9th Isl A: Yes, atut in fact,I believe there is ,

letter and in the ER of 4/19. (91 other evidence that indicates that l' : I had some discussions with the relative to the poi blue folders and stuff.

coinpany nai people tha:I had concerns nilQ: And your general manager sent  ;

about the reliability of usi 'he diesels and y u a note 021 back to look into this,in p:: Q: What did you do after mid May? i essence?

that there were technical lssues and n4 12 A: Well,after a period of time when that I was working with the NRC at that 03 A:11e sent me a note back to get it 031 seemed as ifit had gone into a black point. with,and I 041 had a discussion with him, hole in 1:41 corporate,I talked to some ns: I informed the company of those as well, to get with the psi people in people,I think I may psi have talked to things in n61 June, what a think I recall perauons and he pretty much meant Mr. Aufdenkampe,I may have talked to was the June, July tirne n71 frame, the Jinuny 06: Paul Cash because Cash had 061 people in his group. I seem m recall l time frame after which I stated I had usi been involved m the 4/9 it71 letter talking to it71 Mr.Odom.

come to that conclusion. originally. '

nel I recall Mr.Odom talking to Mr. Bailey 091 Q: I Will say the question one more val So he did send that memo back,and ti91 about why it wasn't submitted yet, time, poi and I would like to have the then I n9 did work onit and get it to the asking when are poi you going to submit answer to my question, pu if you can. lf PRB and revised- it. I think now I'm maybe into pil the  !

you can't answer, that's fine, too. poiQ: And the time imme that the PRB carlyJune time frame. After it became p2l My question is did you say to anyone approved (2n revision was what? apparent (221 that it had stalled -  !

in p31 the cornpany that you felt it was 122; A: Well, I had a meeting with the p31 Q: When was that?

unsafe to operate p41 the plant because general p31 manager. The note came p41 A: Well, I'm thinking, I guess I con-of air quality concerns when you psi back, seemed like the first 04) couple of sidered psi a reasonable time a week or apparently reached that determination days of May, maybe May 2nd.I got with so that some action in about the psi Cash shortly after that, got with my t technical Page 498 Page 494 I should have been taken, but by the pl midJune 1990 time fmme? Page 496 time we got to ni the end of May and ,

pl If I have mischaracterized what you ni support manager. carlyJune,it had apparently ni stalled.  ;

said,131 tell me that. lf you can't answer plI believe he worked on a draft maybe ni So I recall discussions with Mr.Odom  !

, the question,0: tell me that, but that's on al May 4th.It seems like it went to and 15l discussion with,I think he was on i

. the question that I would ist like to have the PRB on the 017th,8th,9th time the phone with (61 Mr. Bailey.

an answer to. frame, and it was forwarded to (si cor- m Q: What was Mr.Odom's position?

r *: I can't recall that I specifically potute and I know it was in corporate by si A: IIe was one of the supervisors in td m to the company a statement the 15th 161 of May.

the NSAC 191 department that handles all .

like you said, that it :si was unsafe to pl Q: liow do you know it was in cor- the NRC correspondence poi for the site i opente the plant,but I did state to t91 the porate by 181 the 15th of May?

nce ns ad and works for Mr. Aufdenkampe at

{pany 7 my 9 te 191 A: By a log that's kept. NSAC. pu lie ,is an NSAC supesvisor, I believe, was his p21 position.

)

point had taken my nu concerns to the 1:01 Q: And then you indicated that you NRC. pushed nil this topic. Ilow were you n31 Q: So this was a person who was two  !

doing that? levels 041 below you? j 021 Q: We are talking about the midJune time 1:31 frame.The next piece of cor. n2i A: Well, considering that it was the psi A: Well, Mr. Aufdenkampe reported j respondence from the n41 company to n 31 correction of false information to the to me,and n6 I think he reported to Mr. '

the NRC was at the end ofJune, June usi NRC,it 041 should have had very high Aufdenkampe.

29th. What was your knowledge or in. priority, but instead usi after the 15th of uti Q: So what does that make him.one volvement in usi that piece of cor. May,we didn't hear back anytning- level psi below you, by your parlance?

respondence, knowledge about it 07) 06: Q: We is who? 991 A: I guess he is two.

before it went ou' or involvement in it? 071 A: We is me and the technical sup- poiQ: Two levels below you, so you pri A: Well,I was the one that brought port nei personnel. went to a pu person two levels below up with 091 my rnanagement,I believe I 1i91Q: Were you reading the logs on a you and asked what had p2: happened was the one that first poi brought up daily poi basis to know that it went to to it?

with my management the belief that the corporate on May 15th izu or have you p31 A: I believe I asked Mr. Auf-pu LER 90M was incorrect, and I just since determmed that? denkampe, too, p4 maybe not on the ,

the P B 2 an p21 A: Well,probably in that time frame, same day but in this time perio:1. Usi I l ot t sen th u recall making a number of inquiries on sent to corporate. Then it was never I p31 pr bably knew, due to my daily i discussions with the p41 technical different forwarded v41 to the NRC.

manager and so forth,about the status. Page499 usi So then I pushed to get it sent out.it ,

psi Q: Who is the technical status you ni dates.

Page 495 are ni took an excessive period of time t la Q: Of these two people, Auf- i Page 497 denkampe and al Odond get it sent out 121 and then finally it was

' sed some more and scnt 01 out on til referring to? M1 A: I may have asked Webb.

,, .-,e 29th. 12 A: Mr. Aufdenkampe and, perhaps, 151 Q: What is Webb's titic?  !

HIC: 1.ct's go back through each of people ni under him. At this point my 161 A: You said two levels below me,let  !

those ist steps.You initially pointed out knowledge is based on Hi the log. me m clarify your statement,they were the need to 161 management to revise the 151Q: But you believe that in the May two levels below isi me, when I would 1.ER,and what time frame m was that? time 161 frame, you would have been have had the responsibility;but as 191 you j

. p ,o , 4 o4 . p. m. 4 00 us .n c ~.2 nonwe nrnnn rwe we unn on on*n i

Ik TIIE MA' ITER OF: ALLEN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, Augtsst 24,1994 should know,by May 10th or lith,I was ital Q: Is that what you just inferred? this tied to the isi filing of your labor i relieved not of all resp (msibility.So I was case?-

1:21 A: Yes.

no longer in int management at that . 19l A: I don't recall the exact date,and I 1 point. H31 Q: I,m not trying to put words in said poi before I can't say ifit was tied to y ur 041 m uth. I m just trying to deter- the labor case oil or to my continuing pai Q: So they no longer were two levels niine fmm you what osi your thoughts below usiyou but they would have been inq iries.

or ideas are.

two levels below you? 112) MR.LAMBERSKl: You don't recall usi A: It could have been fmm my con- the I:3l exact date of your labor case,you i n41 A: They would have been two levels tinuing is7l inquiries,but aboutJune 8th, I below me 05: when I had the respon- said?

sibility that I held before May 06110th or n41 THE WITNESS: No,the exact date of l lith, but after the 15th, which is the [ late t t yla r ase a 1 ,19 an it seems like that was,the LER had been insi when I first became aware that a <

time 071 frame we are talking about, I dead (201 acmss the revision or forward, complete 06l rewrite was desired.

had no supervisory psi responsibility. ing the revision by Izu corporate had 071 Q: (By Mr.Blake) We may have two 1:91 Q: Now, you were on Mr. Webb. been dead for about three weeks. things psi going here. One is you said What was Mr.120i Webb's title? there was a lot more 1 91 activity that -

(22: Like I say, you have to understand, seemed to have been prompted by the <

. in: A: He was an NSAC engineer. this 1231 is not just an ordinary revision to 1201 filing of your labor case?

1221 Q: And who did he report to? an LER.This is (241 a revision to correct previous false information. 12:1 A: Right.

123 A: I think he reported to Mr.Odom 125)Q: And what do you mean by it 1221 Q: Hadn't been much activity,much

] at that 941 time.

seemed to interest,1231 much involvement, much

1251 Q: So he was below Mr.Odom? acuon, and then after you p41 filed the '

?

Page 500 Page 502 labor case, there seemed to be a lot of j l 91 trigger a lot of action? 1251 activity.

01 A: Yes.

{ 121 Q: And what did these people say to pi A: Well, it seemed like after that Page 504 ,

j you when 131 you inquired? point,I(31 became aware of two things- in Then you said one of these actions.ui ,

ni A: Seemed like Mr.Webb at one point One was that corporate 14 was now activities, was a determination by cor-said ist that he had inquired himself, he requesting a complete rewrite to the porate to 13 completely rewrite the L.ER, had wondered the loi same thing, why LER- that that was a delaying ut tactic. I was i nothing had happened to it. So it m isi They were not going to just correct asking whether or not that was ist l

! seemed like he had similar concerns. the 161 false information and write a let- prompted by or related to,in your view, isi He had told him it was sitting on a ter and correct it (71 with the NRC.They the filing 161 of your labor complaint.

m A: And I'm speculating that it may l shelf 191 in corporate. Mr. Odom indi. wanted a complete rewrite.

! cated to me, my poi recollection is,that 181 Q: Had they had a different view cor. have 181 been. I don't have recollection

! nothing had been done with nn it. ponte,191 before that date, to your in my head of each 19: of these dates and knowledge? when I first became aware that a noi 02 It seemed like he had a conversation c mplete rewrite was going to occur.

i with v31 Mr. Bailey and asked when it 001 A: There was no plan to do a corn-I was going to be 041 submitted,and Mr. plete lui rewrite until six months later,a n H So I don't have a set of dates written Bailey said it wasn't going to be usi major update to 021 update corrective 02 down there, but my recollection submitted until,it seemed like he iden- actions and so forth. Since this n31 ad. from what happened 031 in that time tified the usi day that the IIT was going dressed the site area emergency and period is that three weeks or so went n 41 ,

2 to make the presentation v71 to the com- since n41 corrective actions, there were by and nothing had happened.The feed-mission on this Vogtle site area vai emer- some longer term psi corrective actions. back to me was usi that the document j gency, which seemed like it was a our plan had been that there 061 would was receiving no attention in 061 cor- l l Thursday or a li91 Friday and it seemed be a subsequent rewrite that updated porate and sitting on a shelf.

like that date is maybe June 120: 8th or the NRC 071 on the status of those inter- 071That seemed strange to me,given the thereabouts. mediate and longer term pai corrective net importance of the revision, and it  !

j pu Q: So you made these inquiries in actions. seemed strange to 991 other people,  !

late May,122i is that the time frume? 091 Q: And you believe that the filing of such as Mr.Webb, who said he had poi 1231 A: late May,carlyJune. your 120i tabor complaint prompted the never seen that happen before.

I 941Q: And then what happened c mp ny to change its 120 mind and pu Q: What do you attribute that to i require a complete rewrite of the LER as now?

4 throughout the psi next three weeks or

' 122: soon as possible? [22i A: It appears that they didn't want to l the bulk ofJune?

931 A: No,I believe that the decision at 1231 expose, they didn't want to correct Page 501 it.They didn't 1241 want to go to the NRC that 04 point in time to do a complete 01 A: Well,it seemed like it was about rewrite instead of to psi promptly cor. and tell the NRC about the psi air.

June 1218th that my labor case was filed, rect the false statements in the LER was Pa9e 505

, and things became (31 more active after i that. Page 503 nlQ: And theyis?

141 Q: I don't understand what you mean in a delaying tactic. 121 A: Personnel in corporate.Since I'm by 151 that, niQ: And who do you attribute this n t in 131 corporate, I would be hard.

161 A: Well,it seemed at that point some delaying 131 tactic to? pressed to know, but why Hi the LER to i

I motion (71 staned to occur with the LER Hi A: My recollection is that a high level 151 promptly dealt with in open and revision.

c ist person in corporate Mr Hairston- honest communication 161 and attention ,

iniQ: Which you wanted that. to detailand no detailis too small,m that 3

your19 labor case, tied to the filing161 of Q: And Mr. Hairston, you believe,in- it doesn't make a difference;in that 181 '

001 A: There could be a relationship. stituted m this delaying tactic.Now,was atmosphere,and given the requirements m.m . _ . . . . . , . ",,n,.. . . . ._ .  !

hinN'MOSBAUGII IN TIIE MA' ITER OF:

VL 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

- of 10 CFR 19:50.9,it does not make sense 171 A: I would need to look at the blue the full scope of 171 infortnation and can that it would have sat noi on a shelf for folder 181 and see. put all this together and, you isi know, i three weeks. 19 Q: What was the time fmme? understands it in context. I believe the i 1: llut it's your belief that that was pol A: They were drafted inJune. 191 company didn't want to, and the in-a 02: result of the decision,that is,to tent of the noi companies was that they us was aher your complaint put it off,it 03) wasn't simply somebody ini not make waves on these luiissues until was filed uzi and the sort of activity that the critical NRC activities had n21 oc-ignoring it or forgetting 1:41 about it, y u're talking about v31 would seem to somebodyin corporate,somebody in tisi curred.

!, have been prompted by your labor n41 management? 1:31 That meluded the return to opem-complaint) usi A: Let's callit an intentional delay, ti n n41 peri d up through the IIT, the lisi A: I would want to look at the blue issuance the IIT nsi report, and the (i71 Q: And this action, subsequent ac- folder n61 A large number of the drafts * " of the IIT report to the n61 tion by us) Mr. liairston requiring a com- were after my labor it71 case was filed. $* 3 ;on.

plete rewrite was 091 nother step or You know,there were six or seven nei another method of inacntionally (201 different draft cover !ctters. I:7: In that period of time they didn't delaying the submittalof this? n91 Q: You're not sure today? want nel m make waves by admitting

- tail A: I'm speculating again, but I have por A: I would want to look at the blue the (221 belief that it was a contmuing c te it o t in t idocu folder. pil I don't keep all that many ments that they obtained restart on,and 4 ( elaying tactic. dates in my head. that(21 included this LER, and that re-p31 Q: And is it your view that the com- g2, g. So you believe that the company lates back to what I u21 mentioned pany felt p41 that NRC wouldn't learn members, 1231 people in corporate yesterday about, you know, once you're a

about this correction or 1251 wouldn't management, intentionally were pil up, p31 you're up and if you're down,you ,

learn about the inaccuracy in the LER deferring correcting the information in can be held down.

until the LEC and usi one of the actions taken 941 Q: There has been testimony that Page 506 specifically for that as a calls were usi made to NRC in the May ni this LER revision was filed? Page 508 time frume by Mr.liairston pi A: I believe that the company's initial ni delaying tactic was Mr. IIairston's Page 510 plan 13) was to file the correction in such determination to ni completely rewrite the LER? pi and Mr.McCoy.Do you believe those a manner that 141 they wculdn't learn of calls did n t ni take place?

, it and it wouldn't be ist specifically 131 A: What I said was there were two flagged even after they filed the 161 things 141 that happened in theJune time 131 A: Well, from the testimony that we j revised LER. frame that delayed isi the submittal of 141 obtained, for example, from Mr. l

And whose theory was this or that LER, and the complete rewrite 161 IIairston and now I isi will address first decision and the determination to do a hisJune call, Mr.IIairston's 161 testimony  ;

! %ose motive ini or intent was this? about hisJune callis not particularly 171 '

quality til assurance audit were the two

- ' 191 A: Well,theoriginalLERdraft,Irecall, things that I started ist referring to car- credible because he led us to believe poi there were sevetul cover letters and tier, and led the tal NRC to believe in various

the original oti cover letters weren't 191 Q

And your belief is that those two filings that that call was 19] to infortn Mr.

even gomg to flag the error. Ettieter of false statements in the LER actions 901 were taken as pan of a plan 921 The LER that was going to go along not and his actions and so forth when,an to defer the submittal n11 of this cor.

with usi those cover letters was going to rected information to the NRC? fact, it Ini appears to me that M r.

restate the diesel n4i start data in terms "# " C*"#' # ## U*I

• zi A: Yes,as Eart of a plan to delaF and about a fir: emergency condition at of valid parameters from which psi no " " "

comparison could have been made by P " Plant n31 Ilatch on that call.

co y rhp at ti s the NRC to 061 those numbers and the and violations that they knew usi might n41 lie claims to have made an earlier call earlier numbers. The LER 971 revision M in psi May Aftes I read Mr. Ebneter's normally m the course of business goes affidavit about 06) what Mr. Ebneter un-up usi to AEOD, and without a cover 061 Q: And do you believe that NRC,you believe 071 that that plan,to be success- derstood to be the content of Mr. n71 letterflagging that 091 there was an error liairston's call, Mr. Ebneter, in his af-and with the body of it being poi apples ful,would regmre that nei the company fidavit, does usi not state that he was believe the NRC wouldn't learn about i and oranges to the original submittal,I ever told that the numbers 091 were 1 12 1 think it's reasonable to think that the 09: inaccuracy or the need for the gg-nobodyin the p21 NRC would have iden. correction to the poiinaccuracy,untilit tified the change. received the LER revision,12ii correct? 1201 lie states that Mr. liairston notified j azi A: Not strictly. him 12il that he was doing an audit of the p31 Q: Because you think the NRC, d d

[,],e

~

I when it gets a 941 revised LER,it doesn't p31 Q: Well, correct me, then.

f or r i on th compare the initial one with 951 the 1241 A: I think if you know how the NRC revision would be filed.

revision? does 951, business, and certainly the p41 So I think there is some question Page 507 company's executives about psi the content of what M r.

VI A: Even if they compared it, they Page 509 liairston discussed on his couldn't ni have told anything.The en- vi have a long experience in knowing p ,9* 333

/ t date was different 131 and the LER how the NRC does 121 business,that what s . was being drufted along with that 141 is significant is flagging this 131 informa- ni calls,and based on the affidavits from cover letter had switched to some valid tion to the high Icvels and the decision Mr.Ebneter.12i it does not appear that Mr.

terminology. ni makers. Ebneter was told that 131 false statements 151Q: What were the dates of these 151 If some of this information is known had been made.

drafts that 161 you're referring to? to 161 the lower level, not everybody has ni Q: What about Mr.McCoy's calls?

Pnoe 406. Pape 411 win.it.hei ++ ttw(wN nUpouTrve. Tvc (4n4T R%.Ro to

IN THE MNITER OF: ALLEN MOSHAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 isi A: I'm having a little trouble remem- high level managers at the NRC (41 and Page 515 bering I61 what we learned fmm Mr. mentioned the topic but only a portion ni letters from Mr. Webb, and we had McCoy,s calls.1 guess I (71 would want to of the 151 topic, and then subsequently review some documentation,because at some discussiws 121 about him and he you put in the LER 161 makmg the actual told me how Mr.Hairston was (31 chang-isi this time I am not remembering what correction, the lower levels of FI the ing them,and that was unusual.

I learned about !91 Mr. McCoy's call. I NRC,and then what happens?

would want to look at that tioi before I 141 I think he thought it was unusual that isi A: I think the way they were going t 151 all of a sudden the highest level per-respomM to that. handle 191 this change which resulted in son, the senior 16: vice-president was on Q: You carher indicated that be- the filing of the noi labor case, the nserting himself into letter 171 drafting.

cause the n21 company had a sophisti- making of the allegatinos to NRC,liti the cated understanding of how NRC 031 knowledge that I was working with the ist Q: I think you m. dicated earlier you functions, that it might be that they NRC,if nzi not the knowledge but the thought 191 th,s i was quite an unusual would get away 04) with providing, strong belief that I was n31 working with c rrecuon to the LEC, [101 that it was deferring correction to the LEC and (15) the NRC,I think that changed the way correcting inaccurate mformation?

then even putting in information in the v41 they were going to handle it and that li:1 A: It was very unusual and it should LER,it usi might not be understood or then osi ultimately it was handled with have U21 been immediately addressed surface or have the 07) impact on NRC a cover letter that 0 61 specifically instead of delayed for 031 months.

ifit was done in a certain way. flagged the errors. n4 Q: And when you looked at this nei A: I think that's fairly correct. n71 I think in the beginning when you draft more psi than one draft or one n9: Q: Do you think that telephone calls look at n81 the blue file and the series of draft.

by M r. !2ol liairston to Mr. Ebneter, by Mr. letters and cover n91 letters in the blue n61 A: Several drafts.

McCoy to Mr. r2:1 Brockman or these file,it appeared that the way 1201 it was I71 Q: You saw several drahs in the late level of management calls on the (221 being handled kept changing. June pai time frame?

topic of whether or not the information 1211 Q: So they changed once you filed n91 A: Uh-huh.

was accurate (23) would be consistent labo dh with such a sophisticated [241 approach 1201Q: And what was your reaction to by the company to try to submerge th,s i

[e to un rs d hat you 3 er '# ',

working with tne NRC,to use your ter-1251 correction? minology,1241 and then they altered their (2n A: That they contained false m. for-

! Page 512 game plan? mation. [22) wnmg reasons, differing reasons, contradictory 123 reasons,

, niA: Yes. 1251 A: I think it affected the process. I reasons that weren't true for the error.

j l2lQ: And howis that? think (24i Q: And what did you do with that r2si t31 A: Well, one, another aspect that 1 Page 514 information?

observed 141 at Plant Vogtle was.you used Iit the filing of my labor case affected the Pa9e 516 i the word 151 sophisticated.

[6] Q: Yes.If Tm wnmg,just Correct me. p Cess. N M M.I bN 1 Mdd N MM l'm 171 really just trying to understand 121 Q: And in the latter part ofJune did later 121 meetings in the Plant Review B ard when the letter,131 the final cover your position, you 131 have any involvement in or knowledge about what the 141 company letter was being finalized. I 14) voiced

18 A: Well, I will use the terminology rm not a member at that point.

that was 19 used at Plant Vogtle, getting planned to say in its revision to the LEC?

l g,m sitting on the side lines.

the NRC in bed with noi us. ist A: Well,Ihadbeenremovedfromthe 161 Q: So you attended a plant review i liil What this meant was making contact Plant I61 Review Board which was in- meeting ri when at least one of these with nei the NRC, discussing an issue volved in obvmusly the LER 171 and LER drafts was considered?

with them, and the way n31 this can be revision at that time; but I did have 181 done improperly is to only discuss part occasion to sit in on some PRB meetings, tal A: One of the later drafts.

p 41 of the information with them and get 191 So in that respect I had some not 191 Q: And you voiced what objections?

an agreement or insi understanding. nvolvement.1 believe I expressed some not A: Yeah.What we are talking about n6l Then if it becomes a problem later,it concerns nu about the letter.the cover is un documented on tape recording.it n?! puts the NRC in a more difficult letter that was being n21 submitted. would be useful,021 perhaps,to review position to take a osi firm stance in that, for me to review that p31 portion of opposition because the licensee comes in3i Q: You were shown a draft of the cover n41 letter by - that tape recording rather than relying

' (191 back and said Well, remember, We n41 on memory solely, called you on that. psi A: I acquired one.I can't recall how, insi Q: What do you recall was the reac-  !

1201 Q: And is this the way you think this but n61 it s something that I could have tion of p61 the Plant Review Board to I was 1211 all part of a grand plan by g tten from any of it71 the people that your objections?

management.3 used to work for me,ifI asked them ps:

for it. 1871 A: Well, the bottom line reaction i 122 A: I'm not sure this was a grand plan, was that a nel number of the members but 1231 these were some known operat. n91 Q: Aufdenkampe.those people who seemed to agree with me,and 091 sorne i ing methodologies. were on the 1201 PRB? of these people weren't members. It  !

1241 Q: And did you think that this was Izu A: People at NSAC or PRB secretary. seemed 120 like on this occasion, it  ;

one 125 occasion when these p21 Q: What would the time frame have seemed like Mr. Majors was tan on the phone,was added to the conversation.

methodologies were employed? been?

Page 513 1221 Mr. Majors had just been recently 123i v31 A: This was toward the end ofJune assigned this revision at corporate. He ni A: It may have been. when the 1241 f' mal drafts were coming out' was brought 1241 m cold and had no prior 121Q: So the company, high levels of knowledge, which didn't (251 help. Mr.

management 13i of the company called (251 I recall getting a number of the cover Greene,it seems like, was chairing the a_..~..., .. .

o q .y . . . .. . . . .

k

- ALI.EN MOSBAUGli IN TIIE MA~ ITER OF: i Vol 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Page 517 that the sections psi weren't changed tions, and I voiced them directly and the true reasons for the errors through the pl Plui meeting, and he hadn't been involved either. Page 519 Page 521  !

le had been in SRO training and then 1:I weren't clearly stated, accurately tu company channel, and when the on 151 shift.So he didn't have any invol- stated in the (21 cover letter and the document was issued (21 without correc-  :

vement or 141 knowledge. So when I cover letter was sent out that 131 way and tions,I took them to the NRC.

mised wme of the concerns,15) it Georgia Power has received violations 131 Q: So once you started working with seemed like other people seemed to on it 01 now. the ni Office of Investigations, you had agree with me,161 but the end result was 151 Q: And you were upset before that? a different 151 approach about problem that corrections weren't made 171 and 16i A: I was upset diaring that meeting solving or differences that 161 you had the draft cover letter was sent out with within the company?

because I (71 saw this document going some ini false statements for which Geor-gia Power has now 191 been issued viola' forward and going to be 181 submitted to 171 A: You mentioned the quality con-

" "' I

the NRC with inaccurate information in cern. At tai that point I had conch:ded i 191 it and incomplete infcrmation in it. that that vehicle at that 191 point in tirne poiQ: So you tuised your objections, noi Q: Information that you didn't agree would be ineffective.

you felt la ti some PRB individuals agreed with you at that time in 02 that meeting?

with, pil but how do you reach the poi I had done the first step,I voiced this inaccurate,because you n21 didn't agree au directly through the responsible 05 A: Yeah. with it? group and voiced my uzi concerns by n4iQ: And then what happened? Did p31 A: NRC has issued violations to state my participation,and when that wasn't i the PRB vote ps) on it, accept it? Were that1:41it was inaccurate orincomplete. 03 effective,I took these additional al-you there? ~ usi Q: I understand that as of 1994, but leg ti ns t n41 the Office of Investiga-06i A: I can't recallthe actualvote if the tions that I was workmg psi with.

as 061 of-071 aClual Vote Was taken when I was n71 A: So they agreed with my feelings 961Q: Did you have any more involve-there or taken at a lisi subsequent meet

• that I usi had at that time. ment og play 071 any other role m the ing.The best thing to do would be 091 to finalization and submittal of pal theJune look at the transcript to decide that. I91 Q: llut it was your feelings,3uur dif- 29 letter?

ference 120 with what was bemg said poi I recall that Mr. Greene said he heard that led you to be upset? 091 A: It seemed to me that not too long pu all he needed to hear.1 took that to after poi that meeting, the letter was pu A: was upset that we were gm.ng signed out. I think pu Mr. Hairston mean - I was 1221 fairly upset.I think you ahead and p21 providing inaccurate and

' can tell in my voice of p31 the recording "#d that !#"#

• incomplete information to 1231 the NRC. I at that time that I was upset. He 941 I thought that was wmng. 122i MR. BLAKE: We can stop there and Amissed my concerns and said I have .. . we 123 will carry on from there.We will trd allI psi need to hearor something !241 Q: And was your voicmg your views take ten p41 minutes.

• 'h"'#"# in the usi PRB yourvehicle that you used in order to inject 1251(A recess was taken.)

Page 518 Page 522 Page SM ni Q: Do PRB meetings commonly have ni Q: (By Mr. Blake) Mr. Mosbaugh, you attendees 121 other than I RB members?

11 that opinion into the compai.y's determination of tai what to send? 121 indicated just before we broke that by

13i A

I think there is one member that is this point in 131 time,you had lost faith m not a pi voting member or one repre- (31 A: Yes.I did that by my comments in the effectiveness of the ni quality con-sentative that s not a isi voting member the 14l PRB which was fairly direct,and cerns program,and that may have been that attends them all which.I think,1611s a d i mak e ons,

, g a 151 reason why you didn't carry your quality assurunce. difference with the 161 PRB on then at I? There are other nonvoting members I71 Q: Had you ever had prior disagree- this point where you had taken that 17 ments with tai PRB actions. route earlier?

that 181 attend. So it's not unusual that there wuuld be 191 some participants in 19: A: A couple- tal A: Yeah.

PRB meetings other than the poi defined noi Q: On those occasions did the PRB [91 Q: Is that correct?

voting members. take an lui action that you didn't agree with. ci A: That's correct. You mentioned

nu Q How did you happen to be at the .g.g ;, f meetmg? 021 A

Yes. mal sequence or n21 pattern of raising n21 A: I think Ilearned about it through n3iQ: And did you do anything about concerns.

some psi personnel that used to work that? 031The policyis that,and I guess the 041 for me and I kind of v41 invited myself to 04 A: Yes. requirement is that we can raise con-

• *# # "E cerns on a psi variety of different mat-lisi Q: On those occasions?

list Q: Then you voiced obj.ections, Mr. ters and if an individual n61 chose to raise Greene, p6i in essence,said I have heard usi A: I filed a quality concern.

an issue just with the NRC, that n71 all I need to, and you 071 were upset at 971 Q: And on this occasion, did you - would be a fine method of doing so,too.

that point. What were you upset nai 981 A: And I talked to my management. pal There is a number of different ways

• ' to 091 handle it and I think it's up to 091 Q: And on this occasion.did you also li9l A: I was upset before that point.Mr. follow 120i those steps by filing a quality individuals to (201 choose what methods

'i Majors, who was working on this concern or talking 12u with your they want to use at any point in pu time.

2cifically for Mr.120 Hairston m cor- management? p2 Q: What was your problem with the porate, was on the phone, too. quality 1231 concerns program?

122 A: I was already working with the 122l Q: Was he upset, too? NRC I231 Department of Investigations. I (241 A: Well,my problem wasn't with the p3:A: He seemed to agree with some of had decided that 04: that was the ap- psi program. My problem was with the my ta41 statements.but the end result was propriate place to take my psi allega- manner in which Pcce 417. pwe 472 Ma n.it.Sceinem nonwN uppnnTWC Wr' (4nd e=M.uo'Yo

IN TIIE MATIT.R OF: ATITN MOSHAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 Page 523 other than your concern I2si raised b- Page 527 pi the one quality concern that I filed y u that was handled in such a manner? til nyestigators with inaccurate infor-was handled. Page 525 mation about who 12) was on the phone pl Q: So did you think that the pragram ni A: That it was handled by the whole call?

was all i31 right but somehow it was not 12) organization.1 don't know. Mr. Lyons, 131 A: I provided them with what I operatmg, not being 141 properly for a period 131 of time, reported to me remembered as 14i to who was on the employed for your concerns? and I can't recall other 141 concerns call.

Isl A: lt was usurped for my concern where he told me that this had hap- tsi Q: Say that again. I'm sorry.

because the 161 person that would nor- pened or isi I was told where the whole mally mvestigate the concern. [7] since organization was handling 161 it, no, fmm ici A: I provided them as to what I my concern was taken away f. rom that the period of time that I had (71 involve- remembered I7! as to who was on the g-normal 181 process, ment with quality concerns.

191 Q: Did you tell anybody that you felt 1810: So that we go along basically in a tal This wasn't a question that they had you noi were being discriminated 191 chronological fashion here today. I 191 p sed to me and said go out and against here in your use of oil the want to refer 001 you to your interview research this or vol give me the oppor-employee concerns program? by the Office of ini Investigations on tunity to go research this and ask ini July 19th,1990.Do you have a n2l copy er peopt n e he best,ansu ,

a2i A: I expressed concerns about the handling 031 of my quality concern at of that transcript. gg some point m time. I v41 think I dis- p3: A: Not with me.

cussed that with the NRC- n31I did this from my memory that I had 041(Discussion ensued off the record.) 041 contemporaneous with the time I -

nsi Q: Anybody at the company? nsi MR. BLAKE: for the record, we will was asked this psi question, n6l A: I think I may have discussed that ask 061 that this be identified as Exhibit n610: And your memory turns out not with 071 Mr. Bockhold, and I may have 9 with the 071 same nomenclature that to have v71 been perfect?

discussed that with Lee psi Glen,but I'm we identified the usi others.

having trouble remembering exactly ""' * #

n91 (Mosbaugh Exhibit DG-9 was who 09 I discussed that with. I know I marked (201 for identification.) l191 Q: Do you think other people's raised that as an 1201 issue at some point. *#* "* " I #

E# ##I' #8'*"/#*'""

Izu Q: (By Mr. Blake) This is the inves-120 Q: Do you recallwhetheror not you tigative I22i interview of A11cn Mosbaugh * * *#

izzi indicated to them that you felt you conducted in July 1990,1231 starting ap. 120 A: I believe that's true,but an effort, were being 1231 discriminated against parently at 7:30 p.m.and conducted by a (221 good faith effort by a big organiza-here, that it was being used 1241 in a (24i Mr. Larry Robinson and others. Let tion, given some (231 time, should be different way for you than for others? rne refer you to I2si the tmnscript of that much better than the instantaneous I241 l 1251 A: I didn't feel that, and I don't feel interview at page 225. memory of one individual.

that 12510: Did you review the tapes before Pg Sn you had Page 524 I vi At tMs point in the transcript,and take ni waY' I feel that the concern I sub- Page 528 pi your time in reviewing the preceding mitted, not izi necessarily because it was pages, whatever 131 it takes for you to ni this interview in July of 1990?

my ^overn, but that 13i concern was confirm that this is the case 1 ni believe han. a different way than con- A: N >'

that you are talking about a telephone cerns 3, would normally be handled. 151 conference which took place on April 131 Q: Referring to the next page of the isi I was teld by Mr. Ilockhoid, I found 19th. [41 transcnpt,226,at the top of that page ,

out 161 that Mr.Bockhold took that con- . there is a Isi question about Mr. McCoy '

ici At line six, beginning at h.ne stx on 171 breaking away and calling 161 Ken Brock-cern away from the i71 individual whose that page, you respond to a question by man.When do you now believe that that job it was to investigate the talconcerns. ne of the Islinvestigators as to who was I was told that by that individual. g.1 McCoy call took place, that is, prior i N dinthe19: conference callonthe to, during, tai after call A? Where do you 191 Q: WI10 i5 that individuaP- other end,and you state.in noi the room place it in time?

not A: lly Mr. Lyons. Mr. Lyons told me is Aufdenkampe and myself Also on the that Mr. ini Bockhold took it away from nu phone is Bockhold, Bailey, I thiruc 191 A: At this point in time I don't, not him. Then I was told at lizi some point Stringfellow, n2i McCoy, and later,I don't having poi listened to the tape, I don't that my concern was being handled by know how much later, p31 Hairston. remember Mr. McCoy lin brea MO the n31 organization as a whole.

• 041 That was the basis for your stating i 041 Q: Who were you told that by? that usi Mr. Bailey was on the phone? n2l What I remember at this time, having j

tisi A: Ithink Mr.Bockhold said that.The n61 A: Mymemoryofthattimeastowh N(ip n came ak a i omci u6i concern was handled by the whole was on uti the call, and that may have me of Mr.McCoy's call.So that's what usi organization. That uti isn't the or that mcluded memory of not usi only listen- 1 remember at this point in time.1 don't l wasn't the purpose of the quality psi ing on the call, but it may have included at this n61 point in time remember Mr. I 091 memory of discussions with Auf-concern program,that it be handled by McCoy breaking away. I line n9 management or management m denkampe or I2ol something.

general. 12u I would note that at the time I

" I" # * * ""

l when that nsi call took place?

1201 The quality concern program was set recalled 1221 those people,I didn't recall up Izu that it be handled by a specific Mr. Shipman who I now 1231 believe 09i A: Mr. McCoy's call to Mr. Brock-  ;

department, namely,1221 the quality con- definitely to have been on the call.I (241 man? '

cern department. didn't recall him. (20 Q: Yes.

u3iQ: And do you know of any other 1251 Q: So in July of 1990, you provided pu A: I believe it took place before call concern I241 raised by any other person the NRC B in I221 my nomenclature.

..-.-..-..."n - . _ , . . _ _ .

'All.EN'MOSBAUGH IN THE MA' ITER OF:

V2L 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY 931C: You think it' was before the con- p31 A: No, I certainly wouldn't have 1231 If I was asked that kind of question versation? done that. and 1241 did the research on it and got the i

124:A: Before call B. 12410: So you believe it to be inaccurate, LER which was 1251 dated and to fonh,I but 1251 you don't believe that that means could have gotten a better and Q: Before call B?

that you were Page 533 Page 529 01 A: As I use that nomenclature.

Page 531 ni more accurate answer that would tu either lying or misrepresenting when have probably121 mdicated the 19th, but ni Q: During the course of call A,as you you said it? this was done in a live, (3) contem-use 131 that nomenclature? poraneous fashun and was done several m hths 141 later and I was off by one day.

ni A: I haven't been able to determine p "",Y no A o co ig that. tsi Q: Iooking at transcript page 250, m, back into the 141 conversation separately 151 Q: Mr. Mosbaugh, I'm going to ask than learning about that isj from Mr. 161 particular the answer that you pro-you to 161 take a k>ok .it a transcript Shipman. vide in the middle (71 of that page,Imes excerpt from tape number 17169.It was seven through 19,is it your talview today one of the attachments to our earlier 181 [ng that there is a time limit on correcting 191 e tl$at on w r h p onef in rmati n t the NRC.

proposed stipulations, which I think you the whole tai thing.ls it your belief today have a copy 19l of- tioi A: Yes.-

that you were on the 191 phone for the pol The stipulation was number 77. I entire conference call A? nu Q: Is that a two-day time limit by would n u like to ask you to look at 77-B noi A: No,Ibelieve that ienteredthe sul virtue of n2150.9?

and the supporting 02i transcript for that conference call A after it had begun. 03: A: 50.9 states that significant infor-being from tape 69, transcript in3i pages mation 04lilas to 1)e reported to the NRC

' eight through 11, and see whether or 1:2l Q: Do you believe that because the tapes n31 that we have been provided within two days,and nst that,s based on not that nel refreshes your memory on a requirement that I believe was in 961 Pick up in the middle of n41 that call is when the McCoI'Brockman usi conver. -

that the bisis for your beliep- effect at this time; and I haven't looked i

sation may have taken place relative to at the n71 current requirement, but at call nst A: Yes.

this time I believe that insi was the re-n6iA: n61 Q: Or do you have an independent quirement.

. 971 MR. KOHN: What documem do you i 71 recollection? 091Q: So if you were answering that i

want uni him to look at? 081 A: I also have an independent recol- same I201 question now today that was

n91 MR. LAMBERSKl

The stipulation. lection 09) of coming into Mr. put to you inJuly of1211 1990,this answer Aufdenkampe's office when the 1201 call would be different?

12o:MR. KOHN: The stipulation? was already in progress.

122i A: Well, no. This answer is entirely MR BLAKE: It's 77-B, and I will p21 pu Q: Do you believe that you could 1231 correct, because the statement here t rovide you a copy of the tonscript p31 have Ini participated in any portions of is LER revisions 94i do not have a due

excerpt. that can which are 1231 not taped? date on it, probably should be psi now, 94

THE WITNESS: All right, I have 125 941 A: I have no recollection of that. but my statement that there was no time ,

r i stipulation 77-B and the ff*** l s Q- ng a the bonom of the same Page 534 89* 63 til that you're required to submit a Page 532 ni Q: (By Mr Blake) And your answeris? y revision to an LER pi is a true statement.

I" ## ~~ "

pi A: This doesn't refresh my memory  ; g hs c cre'nce y efer 13 There is no time frame requirement of Mr.131 McCoy, of when Mr. McCoy to it as taking place 13l on the 18th and to 141 submit a revision to the LER.There broke away or came back m (41 the call. that the LER was sigr.ed out the next 141 is a ist requirement in the initial submit-My memory as of now is that I didn t ist day, which would have been the 19th, tal for 30 days.161 There is no require-learn about that from Mr. McCoy but I Do you see tsi that language at the bot. ment.to my knowledge,on 171 revisions.

learned about toi that from Mr. Shipman. isi Now, the separate issue is correcting

, tom of 226?

171 I may have incorrectly stated here 6 A: Yes' or 191 identifying to the NRC significant McCoy lal instead of Shipman, but my information, and 901 the identifying to best belief at this time 191is that Ilearned 171 Q: Is that inaccumte or wrong? the NRC of significant (in information is l of Mr. McCoy's call from Mr. not Ship- ial A: The big conversation with the required to be done within two days n2l ,

man. higher t91 level executives occurred on by a call to the regional administrator. 1 liu Q: On the assumption that this is an the 19th,is my current not knowledge. That call n3l doesn't constitute an LER  !

1:21 accurate rendition of what is stated pH Q: So is this information inaccurate revision.So that's a 041 separate require-by you on that n31 tape, you would say ment and can be handled differently usi ]

that 921 you provided to the NRC? ,

that you were inaccurate in what n41 you p31 A: The date of the 18th is incorrect. than an LER. j were reportmg here? It's n41 the 19th. n61 Georgia Power didn't need to submit v31 A: I may have said McCoy instead of an n71 LER revision to meet its obliga-usi Q: Did you intend to provide them n61 Shipman.1 can't say at this pomt,but tions on accuracy of nei information. It inaccurate n61information? could have satisfied those 09 obliga-it doesn't 071 refresh my memory that McCoy came back on the phone usi and 07: A: No,I didn't remember the date tions by calling and informing the it I learned that independently from that usi precisely. regional poi administrator of that sig-

..at 1 91 rather than from Mr. Shipman. 1891 Q: Looking at transcript -- nificant information,120 namely, the 901 C: Do you have any reason to (201 A: I would like to add again that my error and the correction to the error by believe today 120 that you might have pu statements are as accun:te as I p21 phone.

intended to mislead people or p2: lie recalled them at the p2 time I did the 1231 My statement after that is that, but I l when you said this? interview. 941 think there certainly is a timeliness '

Paoc 429 Pnoe 434 Min-tiacrinte itROWN RFPORTTNG INC. (404) R76-R479

-. _ =. _ . . _ . _ - _ . . . -. . _ _ _ ._ - .

1 IN TIIE MATTER OF: AI.I.EN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 requirement in 125 correcting inac- -

1251 A: I recall definitely those letters in for you to have said that you believed I

curate information provided to the Page 537 1251 that there had been prior conversa-Page 535 tions about the ggg9gg, i til NRC that a licensee is obligated to (21 Q: Let me go back to one of the car-

, timely correct,121 and my statement lier 131 transcript pages that we talked til introduction of the language on com-there is referring to the isi correction about 226.Think 141in terms of whether prehensive test (21 program, that that requirements of 50.9. or not your answers would be the isi conspiracy had been a subject of ist dis-  ;

ni Q: Is that what you were referring to same today as they were in July of 1990. cussions before the telephone con-in isiJuly of 1990? Read,if161 you would, lines four through ference that we ni had recorded, and

! 161 A: I can't say if I was specifically 171 13 that it,was implemented in that isi con-referring to that in '90. I may have, be- *#"*" " I#

171 A: All right' w rds and the 161 agreement to mclude s cause I had tel been distributed a memo earlier in,I believe, 1988191 about 50.9' isi Q: Is the portion of the transcript them.That,I had understood.

fr m the 19l tape recording that you're i71 A: That's correct.

but in addition to the requirement,a lioi referring to here the poi ponion of th nuclear professional, upon finding out 181 Q: But I clearly understood you that ini significant inaccurate informa- transcnpt or die ponion oMie tape ini that Just becomes so imponant in terms yesterday to 191 tell me that you felt with

! tion had been supplied n21 to the NRC regard to their view that 0 01 they l and,in this case,information that was n31 t71 ed by t e ex ! ge i3 be w uldn't admit that they understood e

j used to obtain a restart, would immeds- the ini information was false which was Mr. Hairston and Mr.McCoy?

4 ately correct 1:41 that. represented by this I:21 exchange, the n41 MR. KOHN: I obj.ect. Mr. Blake, I tisi n51 They wouldn't sit on it, regardless of disputed exchange, to have been v31 believe, is miaharacterizing the hatched, to have been conceived, to 161 the two-day time frame. I think it's something that n71 somebody would witness, n61 prior tesumony. have been 04i implemented all in the

$ want to do immediately. I can recall nel 071 MR BLAKE: We can certainly course of this exchange of usi words.

' other managers that I worked for that straighten nel that out.1 hadn't intended to do that, 161 Now, did I misunderstand? Do you when we had an n91 issue like that,that believe n?1 there was prior conversation was what they did. n9 THEWITNESS: Are you referring to between these uni individuals about this

! 1201 They immediately grabbed the the poi disputed portion? topic,as well? ,

phone and un immediately called a 12

1 MR. BLAKE: YCS. {391 A: I believe that in the disputed por- l responsible person in the NRC I221 and 92iTHEWITNESS: So your question is tion of1201 tape 58,that those individuals  ;

said hey, w r screwed up here,I got this _ discussed how they pu were going to, i

1231 number. 931 MR. BLAKE: Let's straighten out Mr. further discussed how they were going

{

941 I remember Mr. Paul Rice talking p41 Kohn's problem first, because we 1221 to handle the situation of intention- 4

about psi how he handled such situa- talked a lot (251 about this yesterday.Cer, ally making the 1231 false statement.

tions.1 remember Mr. tainly I hadn't p41 Q: But you believe that they had dis-l Page 536 "8' "

Page 538 ni Bellatny talking about situations that age se ni intended to misrepresent what I un-he had been I2: involved with. Their derstood vi you to have said. ni A: Well,I believe,and I stated yester-actions were to do it the same 131 day, not day t2i that I believe there to have been to wait two, three, four months. 31 Q: (By Mr. Blake) I thought we had 4

agreed ni after we talked som Nt 6t pri r discussion i31 about introducing ni Q: Wouldn't your view today be, if there and then was tsi hatched the con- the fuzzy words.

you were tsi asked this question, that spiracy about to disavow and to 161 testify 141 Q: Yes.

1 that should have been 161 corrected in that they hadn't understood that the (71 two days by virtue of 50.9 or is that 171 ist A: Into the LER.

information was false,and that was what l not your view today? 161 Q: I understood that from yesterday, was on the tai minds of those people in j 181 A: Yeah,that's my view, your view at the time that 191 exchange but (71 what I didn t understand -

2 19:Q: So if you were asked this question took place. isi A: AndIviewthatasbeingpartof the today, noi it would be a different answer noi A: I think my testimony was that it I " ' "

than there is an ini obligation to provide vil culminated with this exchange.

[RC d R t d e at timely resp (mses,it would be? known false information.

021 Q: All right. So you think that they Ini Q: But the idea that they would take 02:A: 1 m focussed more on that, you 1:31 discussed prior to this conversation, .

know, n31 having reviewed it as part of the 021 position that they didn,t know it prior to this v41 exchange that they was false, which n31 is what 1 -

this case.The NRC 041 issued the viola- would take the position that they psi tions against Georgia Power against fisi didn't know that the information was li41 A: The way they would handle -

that specific regulation. I think that's false? 051 Q: Let me just finish so we don't talk focussed n61 attention on that regulation 961 together at the same time.

more so than back at n71 this point in n61 A: I think I said that the action of 071 intentionally submitting false informa- n71 The idea that they wcre going to tak e ume.

tion in this nel LER occurred over the the insi position that they wouldn't uni Q: Is that what brought 50.9 to your course of that day and li91 culminated admit that they knew the 091 informa-091 attention? with the discussion in the disputed poi tion was false, which is what I under-1201 A: No.What first brought 50.9 to my portion, and it was completed by the stood I2ol you to get out of this distuted I

pu attention was when the regulation filing of the 12n underlying documenta- exchange.1 had not 90 understood the was pmmulgated p21 and when the ini- tion. subject of prior conversations p21 be-tial letters came out about its 1231 inter- 921 Q: You see,I did misunderstand,be. tween them in your view.

l pretation. cause 11231 understood in our conversa- 1231 A: My viewis that discussion is what 1241 Q: In 1988? tions yesterday, in your 941 deposition, it 1241 is. It's a recommendation by the a

ALI.EN MOSBAUGH IN TIIE MA* ITER OF:

Vol 3, Atigust 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY lower people to psi Mr.Hairston how to this portion of p3t the tape to include Mr. 941 A: I guess leading up to that was the handle the situation at hand, McCoy saying let me explain,1241 I will psi operational safety inspection which pg.Su testify to that and Mr. Shipman saying psi began the disavow) -

Page 545 and in that I mean the intentional making of this pi false statement. Page 543 ni beginning of August for tavo weeks.In 131 Since I wasn't party, present, and 141 ni A: My independent recollection, the course of(21 that period of time,the corporate,I am speculating based on my having not I21 listened to the tapes, was NRC -

review of 151 the circumstances and my I recalled Mr. Ilairston 131 asking about 131 Q: Let me just stop just for a moment, best belief. the start situation. I'm 141 not asking you about your com-161 Q: And you believe that that topic munications with 151 counsel, but I want ni I recall Mr. McCoy saying something had been 171 previously discussed by about isi testifying. I recall Mr. Shipman to ask you whether or not you're 161 these individuals and was ist simply saying something 16 like or saying dis _ aware that you're not free to discuss being confirmed in the disputed lan- avow. That's what I have an (71 inde, answers to 171 questions with counsel in guage? pendent recollection of. the course of a is deposition.

19i A: Iwouldn't know that.1would have 181 Q: The recollection is, you're saying 19: MR.KOHN: Excuse me.

no noi way to know the previous discus- now 191 that in July of 1990, this tes- pol MR, BLAKE: I want to ask him sion,if there had lui been any. It may timony was based on 001 your recollec- whether lui or not he is aware that he is have been it may not have been. 021 tion of what was said, not based on any not free to n2l discuss his responses to There is no way I can say that, tini review or listening to the tape my questions in the 03 course of a H3: Q: Is this language which you refer recordings of what n21 was said? deposition.

to in 94rjuly 1990 as I heard a voice say n3: A: That's correct. I didn't listen to ti41 MR. KOHN: Well, he ha;n't.

the1:41 tape recordings in prepamtion usi MR. BLAKE: He hasn't, okay. That's I u I did 't tch t i 61 o f r tM tesumony.

the phone, what was being said,is this n61 Sne.

the same litt language which yesterda n51 Q: So you didn't have a view inJuly 071 Q: (Ily Mr. Illake) There have been you characterized as being usi relativel'y of 1990 961 on whether or not it was no pai communications,is what you're clear and capable of interpretation, difficult to determine what n71 was saying, between you n91 and counsel more n91 capable than other portions of bemg said in this ponion of the tape? about my questions to you in the course the transcript? nel A: No,Iwouldn't have hadthatview. 901 of this deposition?

p4 A: I think you are somewhat 90 mis- (191 Q: Let me shift now to the end of pu A: I don't know what you're talking characterizing what I said. August. pol There was another com_ about. 921 l'm not turning over and mi Q: Well, please straighten that out. munication,is the next step in 90 the saymg -

scenario,to the NRC. 1231 Q: I know that,because I can see you

,1 A: First of all,I will say that some 941 ponions of this are clear.of the disputed p21 Let me ask you what,if any,your role here, p4: but we take breaks and I just section psi are clear.Some portions are p31 was orinvolvement in knowledge of want to know that you psi understood not as clear. the p41 communication sent to the NRC that ground rule and have abided by it.

Page 542 at the end of August. Page 546 usi MR. K*.WN: Ernie,it's Eve to 1:00. ni A: The requirement, again, you're ni What I did say yesterday is that when we vi asked the Georgia Power wit- trying to ni ask me ifI was discussing the Page 544 nesses about the disputed 131 section,the responses?

respome we got was I don't remember, tu Are we going to start on that? We i3j 0: yes, I ni cim't hear,I can't identify that that's might just ni take a lunch break, in A: To questions during the course of me, 131 MR. BLAKE: That's fine with me. the 151 deposition?

Ist We got a big zero.What I said was that Let's t41 make it a little shorter,if we can,

,,, g y,3' 161 when we played portions of the and 15: let's try to stick to it.Why don't transcripts which ri were equally as we say 161 at 20 after. t71 A: I mean I have on the breaks, and inaudible or not that clear,let me 181 he Mike and isiI had lunch together.So we ni(A luncheon recess was taken.)

clear on that, that were no clearer than 81 Q: (Ily Mr.Illake) When we broke for 191 Q: Of course,and I,m not asking you.

this,191 other people seemed to hear it lunch,191 I had asked you about your

• N"* ' " * " ' "* I " ## ""

• involvement in, knowledge not of the noi Other people when hearing the por- August, end of August comnmnication to '**# 8 I" *** U U C "** "" "

tions on that were relatively clear like the nii NRC' Ican't

"' 'be""* b"I

• C***1" *I done is for him to assist you m portions are here nzi said hey, that's great, this really brings it back,931 this n21 A: YoWre refening to the end of n31 responding to questions that I pose really refreshes my memory. August 031 commumcations to the NRC to you in the nei course of the deposi-

• ' " ' ' * *^ ""'*"" !i n,and the answerto that nsiquestion poi So it seems a little sttunge to me that usi Q: I'm referring to the August 30 n61 is no,1 take it.That's what Mr. Kohn was psi all the people,when we get around ,

to discussing 06 this section, have no c mmunication. 061 saymg.

recollection.It doesn't n71 bring it back, 071 A: Right, which corrects the April 071 MR. KOHN: That's correct. In fact, They can't hear it.They can't nei identify 9th usi letter. we usi didn't even mention the August emselves, and that seems very dif- 091 Q: I don't know how you're going to 30 091 commumcanon.

. rent n91 than the testimony we have poi characterize it. It's not always clear poi MR. BLAKE: That's correct.1 just pu gotten from other people poi in other that my 90 characterization would be wanted to be sure that that had been the sections. the same as yours,but I'm p21 just asking 1221 ground rule and you understood it.

pu Q: InJuly of 1990 at the time of this about that communication, your p31 in- 931THE WITNESS: You're saying inat pai interview by Ol. did you understand . volvement in it,your panicipation. 941 because you introduced that ques-pesce 441. Pwe 446 Min.if.C ecinn RWOW7N MUponTTVC, TNr (/an.iT R'76.RQ'74

IN TIIE MA' ITER OF: ALI.EN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 tion before 1251 the break. ls that what management.So l am hearing from other Page 551 you're getting at? people ni about language in the letter and he Page 547 Page 549 was directing 12i our suggesting to the til what's going on. members that the language not 131 be al MR. 0 LAKE: Yes That's what " ' "

prompted 121 it now and I wanted to be s e that s been 131 the case throughout tai Q: Who were these people?

13l A: In general,the people that used t

• ]"and lf t eposi ton, work I41 for me, m I viewed that and another member of 14j MR. KOHN: I'm not sure that's been the 161 staff viewed that as a little bit 151 Q: That would be? improper because I?: the PRB was sup-the (si case n he other witnesses that 6 A: That would be people like Horton posed to advise Mr.Bockhold rather tsi than have Mr.Bockhold steer the PRB.

and I71 Aufdenkampe and the people in I?I MR. BLAKE: It's certainly true of Mr. the NSAC group, the ist people that are 19: Mr. Aufdenkampe was an individual ini Mosbaugh,is that what you're saying? on the PRB,those people. that tion was having those feelings about 19: MR. KOHN: Yes, but I'm not sure that 1910: Who was on the PRB that used to Mr.Bockhold's oil participation, not it's been true of the licensee- work for noi you? n21 At any rate.the Horton list was added, nu MR.BLAKE: I'm sorry to have n2l Itu A: Aufdenkampe and Horton, the psi The letter was eventually appmved interrupted you. secretary. by the PRB and 041 sent out to the NRC n3 Q: (By Mr. Blake) August 30, you n2 Q: So it was those people that you on the 30th of August,and that us) was were 041 starting to talk about OSL were u3i hearing from? pretty much my involvement and psi A: Right. In early August for two nei A: Right,and we had meetings with knowledge about n61 it.

weeks, n6i NRC sent a team to the site to all the psi managers.So that was the rest 1871 Q: Your involvement was that you do an opetutional n? safety inspection- of George Bockhold's 961 staff, recall oni attending one PRB meeting at oni in the course of the issues reviewed n71 So a revision was initiated, and least in which Mr. 991 Bockhold par-by n91 the team, they were looking at toward usi the end of August aletter,this ticipated in a way which you regarded I issues of inaccurate (201 information and was being revised ti91 by a letter, a letter as I2ol inappropriate and you think Mr.

false statements in the confirmation 12:1 Aufdenkampe did, as 120 well, that is, went to the PRB to revise the 12o 4/9/90 of action response and the LER for regarded it as inappropriate. Is I221 that correspondence,and it stated a reason 4/19/90 LER and, (221 I think, the first for 1211 the error,and it gave the numbers the summary of your involvement.

revision to the LER and were 123l asking that would have 1221 been correct at that I231 A: Yeah.I will say I felt he was steer- ,

questions about the revision of the LER time. ing 1241 the PRB. l 4

and (241 so forth. 1231 It had a chart in it that listed all,in 1241 1251 Q: And what did you do about your

!291 We held meetings about those issues this revision they were going to include views?

and a complete I2si listing of all the starts, of Page 552 all the diesel Page 548 ni A: And by August 30th I was com-Page 550 municating 121 with the NRC about my ni there were interviews conducted in that period of 121 time.In that period of ni starts. views, and I believe in the 131 course of time, some of the questions 13l that the 121 So the PRB met with that, and I at. the time I communicated my views l NRC brought up with management was tended,131 I sat in, invited myself to a about ni what had gone on with that j letter with the NRC, but tsi i can t why ni haven't you corrected the con- couple, at least one ni PRB meeting,it firmation of action ist letter response, may have been more, where the draft isi remember exactly when.

the 4/9/90 response,why haven't 161 you was being reviewed by the PRB. 1610: Do you think you felt it was 171 corrected that. iol I remember that Mike Honon,in the inappmpriate how Mr. Dockhold was ivi So I think there was some NRC insis- 171 course of that, wanted to take it upon njectmg himself 181 into the process?

tance ini that a correction to the 4/9 himself to ini make sure that the lists,the 191 A: I think it was somewhat inap-letter be issued.So t9 based on the NRC's attachment to the 191 letter was absolute. propriate.

insistance, the company then got not to ly acctuate. I remember him 001 telling nol Q: And do you think it hun the i work on a revision, and I think at that me how he had worked until 3:00 a.m. process?

point the n u correction that's now over in the lui morning about reviewing the lui A: Mr. Bockhold kept saying that if four months old, it's n21 been four logs and getting this n21 list right.

months since it was issued, and I think this is ii21 how Birmingham wants the

, p31 So he brought the list back, and at letter, this is the way we n31 ought to 03l the NRC thought that it was atxmt the 041 same time Mr. Bockhold was have the letter, statement to that effect.

time that 041 something be issued. sitting in on some of usi these PRB meet- vil I think it prevented the members usi Q: Mr. Mosbaugh, are you going to ings then, too. some of the freedom us) that they might get around nel to answenng my ques- 061 Q: Some of the PRB meetings that have otherwise used in drafting the n61 tion? you were n71 attending or the one that letter independently of the ones at Bir-07: A: I'm trying to give you the back- you attencied? mingham.

gmund 081 about my involvement in it nst A: I can't recall ifI attended just one n71 Q: And did you mention this to because that was some of 091 my earlier or 091 maybe two.1 know Mr.Bockhold anyone in the nal management of Geor-involvement. was in one PRB I201 meeting that I at. gia Power?

poi Q: I haven't heard you refer in one tended when the 8/30 letter was 120 991 A: I don't think I brought that up 90 sentence, phrase, or word to your being reviewed. In that meeting Mr. with 120i anybody in Georgia Power at itwolvement yet. Bockhold p2 started to insert himscif that time. At that Izu point the NRC,I had 1221 A: Well,I heard about what I'm tell. some what into the p31 process. signed an agreement with them 1221 to be ing you p31 from my involvement,and so 1241 It was a little bit like he had done in a confidentialinformant,and I was voic-some people started - l241 also,1 would usi some earlier PRB meetings.The PRB ing my p31 concerns about Georgia add at that point I am out of line psi was talking Power to the NRC.

' A1.LEN MOSHAUGli IN TIIE MA' ITER OF:

Vol. 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

[241Q: Did you feel that signing the Page 555 125 nine through 13.Do you recognize agreement 1,251 with the NRC to become this document, a confidential informant lii Q: What were examples of that pos-turing 121itself agrinst you? Page 557 Page 553 I:1 Mr.Mosbaugh?

(31 A: The removal of me from my 141 m somehow inhibited you (mm being responsibilities,the removal of me from pi A: Yes. It's a portion of the 2.206 131 l able to misc 121 concerns within Georgia the Plant ist Review Board, the state- petition that Mr. Hobby and I submitted.

Power or to point out where 131 you felt ments made to me by 161 management 1410: Inoking at the bottom of page problems were occurring? about not supporting the directed i:1 nine 151 carrying over to the top of page 141 A: No,it didn'tinhibit me fromraising resolution of the company, those kinds ten, the sentence 161 reading on Apnl is anything internally,but at that point it of things. 19th,1990, Mr. Mosbaugh had 171 in-had become 16 my choice to raise the Isl Q: All of which you attribute to your formed SONOPCO's senior vice-presi-concerns I had through the in NRC. (9) position as a whistle blower? dent, Mr. George 181 Hairston, that the IsiQ: Did you feel at that point any (101 A: Yes. diesel had suffered trips and 191 failures.

obligation 191 to your employer, Georgia What's your basis for that statement?

Power,to point out liol problems. ill Q: Rather than a substantive rejec- ,

tion,that 1:21 they just didn't accept your lio A: My basis for that statement is the I till A: I had attempted to do that all viewp int conversations that I had on April along, and lizi by that point I had been 19th with Mr. n21 Stringfellow and Mr.

relieved of all my 1:3i responsibilities, list A: YesJheconcemswerenottaken Shipman and the word that had 031 1:41 seriously by the company. come back of the statements of Mr. Ship-andIwas removed frominvolvement 1:41 in most safety related kinds of activities. tisi Q: Why did you go to the PRB meet- man that he I 41 was going to immedi-ing? ately go down, he andJack tisi Stringfel-list I felt that my conununication of my ti61 concerns with the NRC met all my 1161 A: To find out what the company low were going to go down and talk to obligations,lin including my obligations was going to Ii71 do about - this had Mr.1161 Hairston about what I had just I within the company, begun amund the time of the Ital site informed him about fin and then the tis Q: Because you felt that if your con- area emergency,and I felt false informa- feedback from SONOPCO that Mr. ,

cerns (19: were correct or regarded as tion li91 had been provided,I had given Hairston inni and McCoy and Mr. Mc-y management memos,120 tried to get Donald were reviewing or ti91 believed l important, they would be 1201 provided ,

t corrected,tried to get LER 12:1 correc- that a material false statement had been 1 back to the company and there wouki 120i made and then the subsequent ac.

he a pii cure of the pmblems? tions issued.

122i I was following through on what I tions on call A.

122i A: No,I felt that because that was a had 1231 begun many months before and l2ti That told me that what I had begun, crated 1231 option within the company that p21 the communications had oc-noticy, that if an usi individual felt that trying to learn for 1241 myself how the company was going to complete the 1251 curred and the 1231 communication loop concerns would be best 1251 ad_

corrections of these false statements. had been completed.

utessed via his communication with the NRC, that Page 556 1241 Q: Are you referring to the discus-sion which 1251 appears on tape 57 be-Page 554 til Q: So t was being done in order for 4 tween you and Aufdenkampe?

til that was part of the company policy. you to 121 determme what the company Page 558 piQ: Is it your view now that the was doing rather than to 131 try to pro-i problems 131 which you did not point out vide input or to make an accumte 141 til A: I j,ust referred to conversations to company management 141 but pointed submittal to the NRC? that are 121 contained on both 57 and 58.

out to the NRC could well have been 151 tsi A: At that point I was no longer a PRB 131 Q: Do you think that this is an ac- .

i acted upon earlier by the company, as- 161 member. I was obtaining information curate 141 statement? j suming that toi they were right,that your as to what the 171 company was doing 151 A: Yes. j views were right, which 1171 don't want and wanted to follow up on what I ist 161 Q: That on April 19th, you informed to dispute,1 don't know one way or the had begun and wanted to provide that Mr.171 Hairston that the diesel had suf-181 other? evidence to the 191 NRC as I had begun fered trips and ist failures?

_19i A: At that time I had lost confidence to do at that point in time.

191 A: I just described the communica-in the not company's resolving these 001 Q: Let's go to what I will regard as tion chain 1 01 that occurred up to Mr.

concerns without NRC t uiinvolvement. the 101 next step which was the 2.206 Hairston that had begun with ini me and it21 So I will supplement, to give you a petition filed in 1:21 September of 1990. Mr. Aufdenkampe and how the confir-more 1:31 complete answer as to what usi (Mosbaugh Exhibit DG-10 was mation lui communication loop had you just asked.What I n41 had observed marked 041 for identification.) been completed and came back li31 to the company response to be was to psi insiQ:(By Mr. Blake) We have marked me, posture itself agamst me as opposed t for the 061 record at this deposition this 141 Q: Looking at the next sentence,tisi i taking the n61 kind of corrective actions document which is n71 entitled Request nonetheless, later that day, Mr. Hairston i that I thought (in appropriate. for Proceedings and Imposition of usi signed the n61 LER after he had been nel So because of that,I don't think the Civil Penalties for improperly Transfer- advised that the information on stated li9) company would have, of its own, ring Control l:9: of Georgia Power therein contained false information.

resolved these 9 01 better or more Company's Licenses to the SONOPCO What's nel the false information that promptly. 120l Project and for the Unsafe and Im- you're referring to ti91 there?

i Q: So you don't think the company proper Operation of 12:1 Georgia Power pol A: False information about the start

. that p2 point would have taken sug- Company Licensed Facilities. count pii statements.

, gestions fium you? 1221 The document that we distributed U21 Q: Assuming that Mr. Hairston was 1231 A: At that point the company had and made p31 an exhibit is just an ex- informed 1231 as a result of your conver-been 1241 dismissing my concerns and cerpt from that entitled '. 'I Document, sation with Mr. Shipman 1241 and Mr.

posturing itself against 1251 me. It includes the first page and then pages Stringfellow.is that your position?

pwe 444. pwe 44R ut n.v t.Sceine stunurw us:pourtNc. TNr' (4na R76.Rovo

IN TIIE MA' ITER OF: ALLEN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 12si A: I discussed that with Shipnun and < age 561 in revising the LER 1251 that had some evil motive even though there had been Page 559 ill advising the 1.ER?

Page 563 121 A: Those are my bases because if 10 Stringfellow, there (31 wasn't something intentional lii conversations with the NRC by the 12 Q: Assuming that they subsequently going on here, SONOPCO I41 personnel Aufdenkampe 121 residents or McCoy to discussed 131 that with Mr.llairston, was would have done it timely.The fact that Ilrockman?

that before or after the (41 cornprehen- ist they didn't do it timely indicates to 131 A: Yes.

sive test prognm language was intro- me that there 161 is some motive in- i4i Q: Ilow can it be to any avail? Ilow duced? volved. could 151 deferring it result in some suc-isi A: I believe that they discussed that in in addition, as I stated to you before, cessful hiding of it 161 if these conversa-with 161 Mr. IIairston before the com- 181 when I questioned this with Mr. tions of the topic had already been in prehensive test progmm in language Odom and I believe, I91 as i stated before, discussed?

was introduced. he called Mr.11ailey and Mr. noillailey, isi A: Ilecause I believe that the corn-181 Q: And certainly your questions this was earlyin the week stated that n11 munications 191 that occurred were par-about the 191 accuracy of the language well,he thought that they were going to tial and were not being not formally ad-was before that language vol was put in? assign the 02l LER revision out after the mitted to by the company,and the com-June 8th meeting or the 101 day of the pany tui did not want to formally admit nu A: That's correct. June 8th meetmg,that,s part of my basis that they had gotten 021 restart under a n2)Q: And do you have reason to n41 for linking it up with that meeting. false premise until these critical 031 believe that 101 Mr. Itairston might not usi Also,Mr.Ilailey,who is the corpomte meetings were over.

have believed that the lui introduction n6; licensing manager, stated his per- n41 Q: Do you now include Mr. Auf-of that language cured whatever the 051 sonal inclination n?1 that we should not denkampe in the usi circle ofindividuals pmblem was, assuming that he heard issue the revised LER until the nai IIT who had this sophisticated n61 view of about the n61 problem at all? reports,I think,was the words he used. how to do business with the NRC?

071 A: Yes,I do.! have reason to believe That's li91 on documented tape record-nel that - let me start over.1 believe Mr. ing.

na A: I do not know what M r.

Aufdenkampe's usi conununication Hairston li91 did not believe that that I201 Q: Do you hold that view that be- with the NRC was. I believe I recall n91 mtroduction cured the 120i problem. cause it 12H wasn't sent in expeditiously, him saying that he talked to the resident, 120 Q: llecause you.in fact, believed that it was, therefore, p2: being intentionally but i 1201 don't know what that was or he p21 understood the problem and just delayed, do you hold that view v31 even the extent of that 12n communication.

put that 1231 introductory language in today even though Mr. Aufdenkampe p2: A number of these communications there so that he would be vil able to told you in utlJune of '90 that tirockman have 1231 been held out both to the NRC, argue about whether or not it was 951 had been told about the 125 inaccurate to OI, through sworn 941 testimony as inaccurate? information that phone call by Mr. being, you know, as meeting the usi re-McCoy? quirements of open and honest com-Page 560 Page 562 munication and ni A: No,because I believe Mr.Hairston 111 A: I question the extent of the gi Page564 stated ni to us that it was his intent that the infornution 131 contained in the 4/9 communications of the Georgia Power ni promptly informing the NRC; but comnmnication conveyed the same ni personnel that 131 they have claimed when we have delved I21 into the actual infornution,the LER conveyed the same with the NRC. An individual could ni call communication and the content of the information ist as the 4/9 phrase con- the NRC about this and state things like, 131 communication and looked at it from veyed. I believe Mr. Hairston 161 con. and I151 have heard the company use the what was at received on the other end, sidered those to be conveying the same words well, you know 161 we had it hasn't been as Isi advertised by Georgia in information to the NRC. problems coming out of maintenance or Power.

tal Q: Looking at page 11, small F, what things in like that. 161 Q: Let me go toJ on page 12.The first is your 191 basis for that statement? Ist You know,like when we had to prime rl part of J reads the review of the the 191 fuel lines.The NRC may well have performance 18: records of diesel gener-noi A: I think we reviewed this before or have uti gone over the facts up to this understood and noi accepted that, you ator will demonstrate that it 191 was un-before, but my basis n21 for that state- know, a failure like that was tut some- reliable.Do you see that portion?

ment is, first,that it took way too ini long thing that they could dismiss and live noi A: Yes. I would like to review the since the revision was issued to get any- with, n21 okay- whole lui statement. All right.

thing 041 out. 113l1 believe that some of these 041 com- n21 Q: Was it your view,then,in Septem-psi Second, that seemed strange to me munications were like that.They were ber of n311990 that the diesel generator and it n61 seemed strange to other partial 051 c mmunicati ns n t telling was unreliable?

people that were normally n71 involved the whole story,not n6i telling that there v41 A: Yes,I believe that there were psi in the processing of LER's.1 have already are problems with diesel tnps on n71 s gnificant reliability problems.1 believe Calcon switches, which would have usi covered how I think it should have that by 06) September,the diesel had not been of such li91 importance that it mised some psi eyebrows. only experienced its un failures during should have been handled (20i immedi. n91 Q: Are you aware that Mr. Auf- the site area emergency but nei ex-ately, that it shouldn't have got routine denkampe had poi discussed this topic perienced failures after the site area 90 priority but it should have gotten top with the NRC residents? emergency n91 when it supposedly had and expedited 921 priority. 90 A: Mr. Aufdenkampe had some dis. been fixed.

931 Q: I agree with all that you're saying. cussions with I22: the residents. I recall pol Q: Are you talking about the May My 941 only question to you is what is him saying that. time frame?

the basis for your psi statement that p31 Q: My point is do you think that still pu A: Right. Then it experienced SONOPCO intentionally delayed there 1241 would be an intentional delay failures in 122: July due to other causes,

ALLEN MOSilAUGli IN TIIE MATTER OF:

Vol 3, Atsgust 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY and then it experienced (231 failures in Mosbaugh. I beheve it to be 12ii dated (22 A: I went over the dates and times of August due to electrical causes. So 1241 May 15th,'91. two (231 specific failures of the B diesel there were a - and then it was recog- I22: It's handwritten on the version that genemtor, gave I241 him the date, the

• ed that some 125) of the earlier failures we 1231 handed out.This is just an excerpt time, and apparent reason. I 1251 une-

.in't even been caught by from that 12si affidavit which includes quivocally stated to him that contrary to Page 565 pages one and then 131251 through 18 the ni the opentors and weren't properly and 24. Page 569 logged. Page 567 pi statements contained in the IIR. be-121 So by that point in time the dicsci was ni MR.KOHN: On the last page is a 121 cause the IIR (21 that we were talking about said that no problems or (31 131 having problems due to three,at ! cast different date, three 141 separate causes, one relating to failures had occurred and contrary to 13i THE WITNESS: On the copy it shows the diesel isi pneunutic system, one **' E*** * "" " * * * * ***

May 14114th and May 23rd' two 1-B diesel failures, relating to the electrical 161 system, and another one relating to the starting 17] I'l MR. BLAKE: That's right. The docu- is Q: You believe today that statement system;that the records were not wholly ment 16 reflects those dates on the last to be 161 accurate, the count or charac-adequate as 94 to how extensive the page. I (7) don't know whose handwrit- terization of what's (71 recorded in that failures were because operators 191 had ing at is on the 181 first page m the top tape recording on April 19?

failed to log failures, and by September, nght.

Y M I bdieve Mr. Shipman the poi diesel was demonstrating a mul- l910: (By Mr. Blak Do you know what believed 191 it,too, because his response titude of problems. the date not of th;a document was, Mr.

was how the world did tiol this get ini Q: Do you think that your view of Mosbaugh? through the PRB and something about I the diesel 02: generators were unreli- nil A: These dates on the back are my think rul this statement just need.s to be able, had been arrived at in 031 about the p21 handwriting. stricken.So he n2i must have the same September 1990 time frame? n31 MR. KOHN: If my recollection serves understanding.

nei A: Only by September had all those me poi right,the 5/14/91 date was a fax n31 Q: I'm only asking about your state-problems usi come to light, date. I'm psi trying to recall. ! think that ment here 04i and whether or not you V61 Q: Prior to that you had not reached nuybe - regard it as an accurate usi charac-that n71 same view? 061 MR.BLAKE: I don't think there is terization of what,in fact, was stated on any n?i confusion about what this docu- 061 April 19th?

lisi A: Well, the problems mounted up and n91 problems that weren't known ment is,in any pai event. n7j A: Yes.

initially, we became poi aware of over 091 MR. KOHN: No- psi Q: And I don't think that Mr. Ship-the summer. So by that time the a:1 poi Q: (By Mr. Blake) Inok at pages 14 man has n91 expressed any view on the

>blems were mounting up with the and 15 nilin this package.You recognize accuracy of this poi characterization?

mesel. this document, Mr. p21 Mosbaugh? pii A: No, but that was a communica-p21 Q: So you didn't have that same view v31 A: Yes. tion I had p2l with him, and I conununi-in p31 April correct? We talked about cate smnething and he v31 responded 41 Q: Focus particularly on the lan_ back mdicating an acknowledgment guage at the psi top of page l 5,that same p4l A: Well,m.Aprit ir had demonstrated and 941 understanding of what I had paragraph that follows and tm problems.It had failed during the site communicated.

area Page 568 (251 Q: What about the next statement,I Page 566 pl carries over.This is all a matter of tape also recorded pi conversation;is it not,what m emergency and the company was, Page570 4 thought that it had al fixed the problems y u're refening to ut here?  !

but by May it was apparent that 131 they 141 A: What I m refernng to is docu- conversations ul later that day in which hadn't fixed the problems. mented on isi tape recorded conversa^

my concern over the false [31 statement tions.

til Q: So was it in May that you arnved contained in the LER was relayed to Mr.

at the isi siew that the diesels were 161 Q: Is it true that over the phone you i+i Bockhold, Mr. McCoy, and M r.

unreliable? told m Mr.Shipnun that the statements Hairston.What ist subsequent telephone W A: I'm not sure i flag a particular in the LER were not tai true? conversations are you referring 161 to point in m time, but by the end of the i91 A: That's correct. there that you participated in?

summer,there were ist definitely serious pol Q: And you believe that that's what m A: Well,by the time of the conversa-questions about its reliability i91 by the the tai transcript of that tape recording tion,isi the word had come back that my end of the summer because of all these reflects? concern over the i91 false statement had noi different problems that surfaced, n21 A: I think my statement in the been relayed up the chain of noi com-iniQ: Let's shift to a memotundum in transcript n31 says something about if mand and that word had come back that support of n2) sumnury judgment that anybody said there weren't n41 Mr.McCoy, ini Mr. Hairston, and Mr. Mc-Donald were reviewing,I n2l believed

)

you provided in the Department n31 of problems or failures,then that's just not labor proceeding in May of '91. I'm true, usi referring to the 18 and 19 start there was a nuterial false statement had trying to go not along chronologically so count. n31 been made and they were reviewing that we can understand what usi your it now.

n610: And the next statement, you 7tc of knowledge was. believe to be n?! true and supported by n41 So it was my view that the entire usi si (Mosbaugh Exhibit DG 11 was the tape recording,I went uni over the nunagement chain at that point knew marked 971 for identification.) dates of diesel failures with him and n9] ad it. )

08 Q: (By Mr.Blake) We have marked as unequivocally stated that, contrary to v61Q: Do you believe this to be an ac- I our n91 next exhibit, number 11, a docu- the 1201 statements contained in the LER, curate 1 71 statement of what occurred j ment entitled pol Affidavit of Allen L. the diesel had uti failed twice? on April 19,1990? I poor 46% . paoe 470 u la.it.s e A a n nunw nrunnTwc Tw 61na an6. novo  !

IN TIIE MA' ITER OF: AIIEN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 nei A: Well,1 would say with respect to conspiracy or discussion v61 to generate j tape recordings insi that I had made and 09: including Mr. Ilockhold here, based that language and insert it into the n?1 tape recordings that I retained 061 that on my current poi knowledge, nuybe statement in order to fuzz up? contained these conversations, the the group that my concern about 12 1 list A: He nuy have been.Since I wasn't originals n?i were with the NRC.

false statement was related to was Mr. in is91 corporate,I would have no direct tisiI had nude some copies of ponions McCoy,122i Hairston,and Mcdonald was way of knowing poi that, but I do know of li91 those recordings, and I had sent the feedback that I got 1231 back. that he was identified as part Ini of the those to my poi counsel. I believe that 1241 Then it was after that that Mr.Ilock- group that believed a false statement there were some other, in 12ii fact, hold, ust Mr. McCoy, and Mr. Hairston had (221 been made and that they were paging through this, there were some became involved in the discussing and that 1231 they were other 122l dates that were not quite cor-

• reviewing then. it was after that that 1241 rect because I hadn't p3) done a - didn't Page 571 the action on call A occurred. have all the tape recordings to do 1241 a ni call which was referred to as call A. 1251 Q: This discussion in which this ap. complete review from.

ul Q: So you believe this is an accumte proach 1251 Q: What is the answer to my ques-131 statement of what occurred on April tion?

Page 573 19th. if you 141 change Mr. Ilockhold to Page 575 read Mr. Mcdonald? I:1 was conceived and then subsequently tsi A: Maybe "was" should say "had implemented in 121 call A, then, took vi A: I did this from my recollections.

been.- place after your concerns were 131 trans- pi Q: You did it from your recollections mitted to Mr.Hairston and before call A, of(31 what occurred on April 19th,1990, 161 Q: You think it is an accurate: state- 141 that,s what you believe. but without 14i having reviewed tape ment if 171 you change was to had been recordings from April 19th of isi 90, and change llockhold to ial McDonaldp isi A: I believe so.

161 Q: And sometime during that period correct?

i9i A: Yeah, I think that nuy clarify it.

Like noi I said, based on the knowledge of time,171 these individuals got together 161 A: Uh-huh.

I have now and the i ni review that I have and decided how te tal insert this lan- 171 Q: Is that similar to the explanation of done of tapes and so forth,it n21 was the guage, what langusge would be 191 in' the 18i language on the preceding page l group of McCoy, llairston, and Mc. sened and how to eccomplish it, and 14 which says in 191 paragraph 27,I and Donald that n31 I got the feedback that that was nolimplemerted in call A;is that another member of my staff, who noi 1 my concern had gone up to n4i this correct? would guess to be Aufdenkampe but I group rather than this group including ini A: Again, this is speculation and don't know, vil you can confirm that.

Mr. nsi llockhold. theory 021 that this is what happened.I relayed this information to n21 SONOP-n6: Q: Were you a party to a telephone wasn't in corporate,1 31 but this is a CO personnel on more than one oc-v71 conversation in which your concern speculation in theory. casion in or v3i about April 17th and l over the accuracy uni of statements in ivi Q: Do you see a distinction between 18th,1990?

the LER was relayed to Mr. Mcdonald 091 ' cur psi speculation in theory and the n41 A: Yeah,that was the date that I was or Mr. McCoy or Mr. Hairston or Mr. .tatement which li61 appears in this just insi talking about.

Ilockhold? Jocumem which is I also n71 par- nel Q: That is, you regard today that as po A: No. ticipated m subsequent telephone con- an n71 inaccurate statement because you versati ns nailater that dayin which my attribute it to the usi fact that you had au Q: What does the sentence mean? concern over the false It91 staternent not reviewed the tapes of what n91 oc-p2l A: In the later conversations that I contained in the LER was related to Mr. curred in April 1990 since April 1990, p3: participated m m the end of the day poi llockhold, Mr. McCoy, and Mr- and you put were going just on your

- I'm sorry,1241 participated in later that IIairston? memory of what had occurred, pu day,my concerns over the psi false state- pii A: Well, at the time that,I have indi- which was faulty.

ments, I'm saying had been relayed to cated p21 how I think, based on my cur-f-

921 A: I was going on a memory, and 1

' rent knowledge,this p31 should be more think I v31 recall this in or about lan-Page 572 correctly worded. At the time I P41 wrote guage in here because of 941 my certain-ni Mcdonald, Mr. McCoy, and Mr. this, I didn't know everything that I ty or knowing that there would be some l know usi today. psi uncertainty. I believe that having Hairston.

pi That is saying that by the time we got Page 574 reviewed the on 131 to what I described as call A, my 01 Q: At the time you wrote this, you Page 576 concerns had gone ni up the manage- believed 121 you had been involved in a ni tapes and having transcripts and ment chain to the top.lly the time we 151 telephone conversation 131 late in the things like that 12i now that more than got to the point of call A, we already day on April 19th in which your concern one occasion occurred on April 13119th, discussed 161 what I believe happened ni over the false statement contained in 1990' '

on call A as a result of my 171 concerns the LER was tsi related to Messrs.liock- Hi Q: S thatstatementshouldreadnow, going up to the top. hold,McCoy,and Hairston?

you 151 believe I and another member of isi Q: And that which happened on call 161 A: I believe this was correct at the my staff and is that 161 Aufdenkampe  !

A as a 191 result of your concerns going time 117 wTote it.1 didn't wnte this with you're referring to?

up to the top was? a thorough isi review of tape recordings.

noi A: Was that they added the words to 191 Q: You wrote this in May of '91 based fuzz up lui the language but intended to on not your recollection of what had 181 Q: Relayed this information to keep the same language 021 that had occurred in April of ini '90 without SONOPCO 191 personnel on more than been submitted before and went ahead having reviewed the tape recordings of one occasion on April 19th, pol 1990?

and int issued the LER out that way. n2l tne April 19th in the interim? Ini A: Uh huh.

n4l Q: And is it your view that Mr. Mc- p31 A: Well,at this point in time the NRC 021 Q: And the more than one occasion l Donald usi also was im*olved in this was n41in possession of the originals of would u3i refer to your conversation l

4 AI.I.E5 MOSBAUGli IN TIIE MATTER OF:  ;

, Vol 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY with Shipnun and your n41 conversation tional, it might have nc been careless pol A: Yes,sometime inJune.

with Stringfellow? disregard? Are you able to n21 distinguish nil Q: Look on the second page,if you psia: Well, there were two kind of between those two terms now? I don't would. 02i There is a paragraph near the 7arate n61 conversations with Mr. I:31 understand the humor in that. bottom that states Mr. n31 Hairston, the

.tingfellow interrupted by a n71 conver- 1:41 A: Those are legal terms.1 believe senior vice-president nuclear, had i:41 sation with Mr.Odom. they usi are legal terms.1 know that was enumerable indicators and apparently 4

pelIn each portion of that conversation, what Mr.Roggy,061 when I had a conver- direct itsi knowledge that the iMorma-I the 091 information was relayed and sation about this with Mr. Roggy, n71 he tion presented to him was v61 suspect,if then was acknowledged by poi Mr. said only lawyers could make those, dis- not outright false, before he signed the Stringfellow.Then he had another con. tinguish 081 between those two. 071 LER.

versation 12 1 between me and Mr. Ship- Ii91 I don't consider myself an expert on nel Tell me what the basis is for your ii91 m'n and Mr. Stringfellow, [221 then, oc- the 120: legal ramifications of those staternent that M r. Ilairston had cuved after those conversations. definitions, but they Inn are into a clas- enumerable I201 indicators and what 1231Q. Is it Shipman and Stringfellow sification that I know is considered (22 those were.

who are 1241 the SONOPCO personnel wrongdoing- I2ii A: Well,he apparently had been told that you're referring to here? (231 Q: So today whatever your back. the I221 information that I had provided 1251 A: Yes. ground [241 whatever the amount of time to Mr. Stringfellow p31 and to Mr. Ship-

, is that you have spent 1251 on this topic man from my conversations with them Page 577 or thinking about those words, you are 1241 and Aufdenkampe's conversations ni Q: Turn to page 16, if you would, p g 379

@ me and Gem.

paragraph ui 33, 1251 Q: And we are agreed that that con-ni unable to distinguish between the versation, al(Discussion ensued off the record.) words careless pl disregard and the j

. 14 Q: Oly Mr.Illake) Do you believe the word intentional? Page 581 j first 151 sentence in paragraph 33 to be lit if it took place, would have con- I 131 A: No.Fromalegaistandpoint,Idon't mrect? I4 think I have enough knowledge to do cerned the language 121 before the m, cor-ion A: At this point in time I do not recall that, poration of the words comprehensive 131 l

the 171 nature and extent of my conver-

[510: I can't, of course, ask you for a * *** E*N"*

sation with Mr. Larry ist Robinson the legal 161 conclusion because Mr. Kohn 14i A: I believe that's correct, first week ofJune of 1990. will jump up and (71 rightfully say you tsi Q: What were the other enumerable 191 I recall contacting him. I believe that can't ask about legal isi conclusions. I'm 161 indicators?

poi my counsel may have contacted him, just asking for your common 191 under- ri A: I'm sure that the discussions that I

but I really at f ut this point in time can't standing of those two words,those two had tai with Mr. Stringfellow and Mr.

call what we discussed- noi expressions and whether or not you Shipman, we talked 191 about a number i n21 Q

Do you think it is accurate in that can distinguish Int between them? of specifics.We talked about the noi COA i by usiJune of 1990 you had reached an n2: A: I have a conunon understanding, and we talked about the dates and times opinion that Georgia n41 Power inten- but I H31 don't think they are that black of the nii failures.

tionally submitted false information to and white,The I:41 reason I say that is in n21 We talked about this having been n31 nst the NRC,the COAL and the LER? this industry if somebody usi chooses presented to Ebneter already. So I am

pol A

My recollection is that by the not to go verify something that might be sure that Mr. n41 Stringfellow and/or

June time n?i frame of 1990,I believe not considered careless disregard, but Shipman went down and relayed usi

that the submitting of the psi informa- the choice, the n?i decision of making that same information to Mr. Hairston.

tion and the LER and the COA was either that choice might be willful. n61 Mr. Hairston obviously,I believe that at 091 the level - it was at a level of usi i don't think there is a black and n?i conununication linked up when it wnmgdoing which 12al ts termed by the white n91 distinguishing between those occurred because Mr. nsi Hairston came l NRC as being careless disregard or vil terms, and I think 12oi really only an back on to the call, call A. He 09 starts i intentional,

nyestigation can draw that pu con- asking about trips. i p21 I know I had discussions in that time clusion* poi So the conununication link occurred i 4 1231 fiume with Mr. Robinson when 1 met p21 Q

Let me ask you to look at the next to him vil and he knew that before the with Mr. Robinson pit about what those  !

9 31 document in the sequence. LER was signed. That's p2i where he meant and what it took to be usi clas- chronological sequence of 941 docu- should have gotten his direct sified one or the other. Ily that point in ments, a document entitled Georgia knowledge 931 from. In addition, the time. Power /SONOPCO usi 2.206 petition word came back to the site 941 that Page 578 response is filled with lies which 1 McCoy, Hairston, and Mcdonald m that was my feeling, that this was in Page 580 believed that the 1251 April 9th statement an area of 121, wmngdoing which, you ni believe would have been submitted 4

know,I think it takes an t3i investigation nJune of'91.pi We can mark this as the Page 582 to draw those conclusions of being 141 next exhibit. ni Since on call A, the managers got pl willful or careless disregard. together and specifically stated Bock-3 ( os augh Exhibit DG 12 was 151 I know Mr. Robinson and I had 161 marked 141 for identification.)

hold and McCoy,131 McCoy stated you conversations about that. I believe at ought to use the same thing that 141 you Nut the pl same time frame, I had a 151 Q: Oly Mr. Blake) Do you recognize used in your presentation, George.

anversation with Mr. Roggy lei about this 161 document?

151 So right then and there it was decided 1

those same issues where we used those Pl A: Yes. to I61 use the same thing that had been terms. 181 Q: And would it have been dated in in the COA. Mr. [71 Hairston has since 191 Q: At that point you hadn't yet deter- June of 191 '91, to the best of your then stated that he considers tai these to mined noi whether or not it was inten- knowledge? be the same.So he knew or should have ne av . uw s:e? w ao.vts  :.

• nonwrv nrnnovevc vvc r/in/a e%eo7o

i

' l IN TIIE MATTER OF: ALLEN MOSBAUGII  ;

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, Atigust 24,1994 191 known that it Was false before he were the ones that 191 I was telling them gives a beginning lion point in time and ,

it has an ending point in time, titi there  :

signed the LER. about.

tioi Q: In their logs being? has been this many,(indicating).

1:01 Q: Were the enumerable indicators and the liil apparently direct knowledge inii A: Some of their notes, so forth, Mr. Inzi Then it either has a separate sentence  ;

all of those items, the 1121 miormation I:21 Shipman's notes, Mr.McCoy's notes, or131 comma.then it says no problems which may have been provided to him or failures have I:41 occurred during any you know,those I 31 types of notes.

by li31 Shipman and/or Stringfellow, is f these stops. That's the lisi verbage Q The missig link W Mt Mov that's in there and that's the verbage that that your view? baugh, is usi whether they had some (161 Mr. Hairston signed out.

1:41 A: Yes. reason to believe that the Ii61 number of starts after those failures weren't 18 or :71Q: So your understanding or your lisi Q: Any other enumerable indicators belief is, fisi let me just take Mr.McCoy, or Ii6: apparently direct knowledge? ii7119, that number. That's what's miss-that Mr. McCoy li91 understood on April 1i71 A: This is speculation on my part, in8a -

9th and again on April 19th when (201 but ! rist think there is some possibility lial A: That,s not the missing link, be- these were submitted, that 18 or 19 i d

that lists of diesel 1i91 starts existed cause the li91 April 9th correspondence sta ts,those 12 1 numbers that were util- l within corporate organization at this 1201 and the drafts of the LER's I201 refer as ized, described every start 1221 from pomt in time, the starting point to the date of the site March 20th until April 9th,and that they (2:1 area emergency. had (231 all been successful and there 12 t i Mr. Cash's list, for example, had been ini given to Mr.Dyrd by this point in time. 1221 These people's mind set,if you look hadn't been any 1241 failures?

So I think 1231 it's altogether possible that at 1231 the statements they made,was that 125: MR. KOHN: I object that you are as-the start list may 1241 have been incor. they were just 1241 going to use the nun kin 8 3 porated, but that's a speculation on I2sl bers from the April 9th (251 presentation which never was based on the Page 587 my part.That's another potential source.

Page 585 Ill him to state what Mr. McCoy under-Page 583 stood I

n Q: Is that what you have in mind here lit c mprehensive test prognim.

121 Q: Ilut is it clear to you that Mr. 121 MR. BLAKE: His belief to what Mr.13:

when (21 you were talking about ap- McCoy understood, yes.

i parently direct knowledge 131 or Hairston,131 Mr. McCoy believed that what was being stated was l41 every I41THEWITNESS: Well,I speculate that enumerable indicators? 151 that's what Mr. McCoy thought be- I diesel start since March 20th,1990 has til A: No.I believe when I wrote this,I cause I guess 161 he reviewed and must was 151 referring to the information that been ist consecutive and they now num_

ber 18 to 19,is that 161 what you think have approved of that 17! verbage in the should have been 161 provided to him by 4/9 letter.I think they felt ist that on 4/19  ;

J Mr. Stringfellow and Mr.17 Shipman. I that they were saying?

it would be safe to say the same 191 thmg i want to add one other thing to that,181  !?i A: They knew what the confirmation because they knew that well,if we had

< too, of action isi letter of 4/9 said. They liot said that before, then there could i reviewed it and signed 191 it.

(91 I keep, you know, we keep talking g g g  ;

about lion as if the only flow of com- 1101 They know what it said, and the additional starts since 1:21 then.

munication to corporate is liti coming group of n tithemand the group ofthem e se h nd from me, and that's not the case.There was n21 an extensive flow of com.

at that point in time n21 doesn't include Mr. Hairston, but when the group 931

, 'fIe ,

, d e selves usi back in time to 4/9.When you munication coming from many 1:31 discussed that, Mr. Shipman, Mr. McCoy, '

read the tiet transcript of tape 58, that's a

people on-site to corporate.not just me. Mr. n41 liockhold, they discussed using ggy g t e numbers from the lisi 4/9 presenta- use those numbers,18 and usi 19,18 and v4i So Mr.Hairston,for example,and Mr.

nsi McCoy and all these people par. 19 had no relationship to the 4/19 n91 j

ticipated in staff ti61 meetings, par- 06l They didn't discuss using a set of it71 count,no relationship.

ticipated m mornmg calls. numbers that only started after the com-

! 1201 Q: (By, Mr. filake) Now, I think we prehensive usi test program-n71 The knowledge on-site as diesel .

can 1211 remove that by just talking now

failures n81 occurred live in March and n91 Their directive was to use the nun about April 9th, for (221 example, and so forth, these people 1

91 had some bers t2ol from the 4/9 presentation,to use what you belief to have been the 1231 direct knowledge of all these things 1201 the 18 and 19. So 1211 what was in their understandings of the people. I because of their direct involvement in mind was not as you describe.1221What  !

was in their mind was using the numbers 124 Do you think on April 9th that Mr.

the121 day-to-day site operations. McCoy 1251 was unaware of any that 1231 were part of the 4/9 basis' problems with the diesel or any 1221 So it.s not as tf the only source of 1231 information that Mr. Ilairston or Mr. 1241 Q: Let's go back to the 4/9 basis.Do y u 1251 believe that Mr. Hairston, Mr. Page 588 i McCoy or any of1241 these people would l have woutd only have come from me t2si McCoy, believed and til failures with the diesel since April, or come from Mr. Aufdenkampe. Page 586 since March 12i 20? On April 9 was he Page 584 Iti understood that the numbers 18 and dee a rob en ris t he 19 described 12 every start of the diesel diesel?

liiQ: Do you have any knowledge that since March 20?

in any ofi2i those conferences,there was some sort of running 131 account of num- 131 A: That's what it says. knew or 151 should have known that bers of consecutive total starts 141 similar ni Q: And that they knew better be- there were problems and 161 failures of to what you might see at a plant site cause they tsi also knew there had been the diesel.

about tsi number of days without an failures and that's what 161 the evil was)- I71 Q: And do you believe,therefore,that accident or something like 161 that, *

[7] A: The 4/91etterconsistsof,ifIrecall, he tai just allowed that language to go in 171 A: No.butintheirlogs,theyhavelogs ist two sentences.It says there has been knowing that 191 there had been of 181 specific trips and failures which this many 191 starts since the event.So it problems?

l

A1.LE5 MOSilAUGII IN TIIE MNITER OF:

Vol. 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

, poi A: I'm speculating. said before. At that point in time they 191 I?:(Discussion ensued off the record.) l ini Q: Yes. had submitted the 4/9 letter. 181 Q: (By Mr. Illake) Turn to page eight, o i They had made the verbal presenta- Mr.191 Mosbaugh.

"n A: About what he did.We triedto n31 l

<estigate that area in the course of tion ini with the 18 and 19 numbers to tiol A: (Witness complies with the re-discovery and 041 since we were unable NRC.The NRC had n21 those numbers m quest ofini counsel.)

to find out how it got in there usi and their head.That was what was n31 before 021 Q: At the top of page eight there is Mr. McCoy and many others said they them, and they felt safe on the 19th of the 031 statement Mr.Mosbaugh left with couldn't 061 identify whoever verified i:41 showing them the same numbers the understanding 041 that the false that statement, again and that would usi not raise statement would be struck. This usi n71 So I gues5 I would say at some level Yb 5 P "iC I I-T refers to what period of time?

of nel wrongdoing,Mr.McCoy must have 961 Q: And do you Just totally dismiss the usi A: AfterItoldMr.Shipmanaboutthe allowed that li91 statement to be ag> na assenions,I win use for your benent, li71 certain dates and times offailures,Mr.

proved without verification, (201 per- assertions pal by any of these people that Shipman usi made a comment that he haps, knowmg that it was uncorrected. }he introduction of the n91 term follow' thought he just needed to get Ii9) this mg the comprehensive test program statement stricken. I think those were 911 Q: As of April 9th, weren,t NRC per- was poi mear.t to describe a period of sonnel, 1221 wasn't there common his pol words, and maybe it would be time after March 2012i and not until best if we look at tape 12:157 transcript.

knowledge among nunagement and 1231 which the start or the count of 1221 suc-

! people involved with the diesel that cessful starts was meant to occur?

122i Q: The period -

there had been 1261 some problems as- ;23i A: Ilut he talks about getting the sociated with diesel after March 20,1251 1231 A: Yes*

statement 1241 stricken,and asked me ifI 4 after the dayof the event,that there had 941 Q: You just totally distniss that? think my information is usi good and I b.een some 12si A: I dismiss that assertion because in tell him that it's the best information Page 589 those Page 593

01 subsequent problem starts? Wasn't Page 591 til there is, and I believe he makes

that common vi knowledge? Vi very same people that testified under another comment pi about getting those 131 A

Well, common knowledge within oath to us vi that they intended to con- statements stricken.

-! Georgia ni Power, yeah, I think it was vey the same information.131 I will fur- 131 So I'm left with the impression that ni common knowledge within ist Georgia ther add that those people have had that's the action that's going on.

Power, with Georgia Power nunage. great ni difficulty in defining, since they tsi Q: So the period of time that you're ment. can't define the Isi term comprehensive toi referring to here is at the end of your

]

test pmgant how can they have 661 had conversation 17: on April 19th with Mr.

161 Q: liut not known by NRC personnel? ,

4 this understandmg of how it made any Shipman in which you 181 discussed your j A: It may have been known by some 171 difference. view of whether or not the LER draft 191 NRC inj personnel. 181 Q: I guess you would agree with me was accumte?

191 Q: liut you believe that Mr. McCoy that it's 191 a big difference between your noi A: Yes' 1 and Mr. noi llockhold or Mr. Hairston, all view of why they nol inserted it and their

' of whom thought they no could get not having an adequate or ini common nu Q: And you, at the end of that con-away with saying there hadn't been any understanding of what the words meant versation 021 with Mr. Shipman,left that n2l problems since March 20th wnh the conversation with the p31 under-when n zi they did insert it? There is quite diesel? a difference p3r between those two standing that what you regarded as a 031 A: I think they were a little worried theories or explanations for what nel false 041 statement would be stricken or about nel getting away with it. I think they were doing,isn't there? struck.

i that's why they made psi some contact usi A: That's why I said in my mind, usi A: Yes.

with the NRC and tried to get the NRC there is usi not such a fine line, there is 061 Q: And did you subsequently come usi somewhat in bed with them and not such a black and 07: white dif. to p71 understand on April 19th that that maybe told them, you 071 know, well, ference between careless disregard and would not occur?

there were some problems when we nel willfulness because the choice of nei A: Yeah.On call A,the conversation first usi were priming the lines and some something to one n91 person can appear n91 occurred where they were rephras-of that kind of1891 discussion,but not any to be careless disregard, but that poi ing that section poiinstead of striking it, complete and accurate poi discussion. choice may have been intentional. and I heard Mr. McCoy state pu how l pu Q:liut you think that these in- pu Q: Clearly under your theory, they wanted to say the same, use the i dividuals pai believed that the number though, there a2i was an evil intent by same 1221 information that you used in 18 and 19 represented the p31 total num- the insertion of the language? your, to llockhold, that p31 you used in her of starts since March 20? 123l A: There was an intent of wrongdo- y ur April 9th presentation.

, p41 A: As of- ing. 941 So it indicated to me at that point that

' usi Q: As of April 9th, p41 Q: Presumably we could agree that 12si they were keeping it in and then Mr. -

wrungdoing 1251 is evil and,therefore,it's Stringfellow Page 590 probably an evil Page 594 ni A: That's what they signed out.That's ni appeared to be taking that down as Page 592 what 121the COA that they signed out - they were saying 121 it.Then later on,Mr.

- Q: And they went forward with that " I ** * "I'3 Shipman read the final 131 vertuge to me ame ici belief or with that same under. pi MR. KOHN: We can agree on this side- at some point on call 11. I standing on Aprilisi 19th? 131 Are we in agreement with that?

ni Q: In the course of call A when you ici A: Yeah, believing that ' there had 141 MR. BLAKE: That intended 151 understood them, that it was no been some m more, but they felt safe wrongdoing is Isi evil? longer likely to be 161 the case that the saying the same thing that ist they had 161 MR. KOHN: Yes. information would be stricken or 171 pone cao , penc co.1 us .n.c ~.2.e nonwrv nunnn rwe we unn a-4 onwn

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

IN TIIE MA' ITER OF: allen MOSBAUGII ,

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 struck, did it occur to you to speak up at i41 A: No,not at all.That was what I was house. I thought it was strange, but i 161 ,

. that ini point when Mr. McCoy was on sent isi off to do, and I did that. At the went out to do what I was requested to J

the phone, when Mr.191 liairston was on time I did that,161 this other call was do.

the phone, when all these people who simultaneously occurnng. I m guess I 171Q: Andinthecourseof thiscallwhen 001 may or may not have received the finished my task a little early, earlier tai the Isi comprehensive test program lan-information were on lill the phone? than the point in time that that other call guage was introduced.191 what was yotar ozi A: Well. it was - had (91 finished- y ew after the introduction of that lio; '

v31 Q: And sayto them exactly what you OiS since I was a floor below in the language about the potential accuracy had 041 tried to provide indirectly? Did u ti building in Mr.Swartzwelder's office, of the LER pil with that language m-i that occur to you, inst that thought? and since Mr.02i Aufdenkampe soffice, sened?

who was a friend of mine,had list been 02 A: Well, by the time that language 06 A: It dida,t occur to me because a longer term friend of mire, his office what 07 appeared to me to be happen- was 1:31 introduced, the people on the

, was on 041 the floor above,I just stopped call had stated their 941 intent. I could ing is Mr. McCoy and Mr. pal 150ckhold by Mr. Aufdenkampe's 05) office. tell from the statements on the psi call f

h 09:f I sar thin et the !i61 What I discovered was this call was the intent of what the people, how the in 1i71 progress. people 1:61 were wording it.

before,let'a use izoi the numbers that you had in your 4/9 presentation, mi and 081 Q: Did you regard it somehow as, 071They were wordingit to be the same when they said that,they had all at that inur role, ti91 being inappropriate, that as psi the 4/9 letter. That's consistent point 1221 acknowledged or the word is,it could have been (201 improper for with what we have 091 heard as of this had already come back to me 1231 that you to have spoken up? date, but from strictly a verbage (20) they had acknowledged the 4/9 presen- 12:1 A: Mr. Shipman knew that call was standpoint and just looking at the words, tation was 1241 false. going to 1221 occur,and I believe this was the words (2n added a new undefined 1251 Mr. Shipman had acknowledged that. a planned call, and I (231 hadn't been point, and so to me looking 1221 only at Mr.*

inf rmed of it. Like I said,I kind of (24l the words an 1 not at what the people stumbled into it. were 1231 intending, I needed to define Page595 1251 Q: Are you implying that you were what the compehensive (241 test pro-  ;

pl Stringfellow had acknowledged that, being cut gram was.

It had come 121 back to me that Mr. Page 597 1251 Q: Is it fairto say that P raised a doubt McCoy, Mr. Hairston, and Mr.131 Mc-Donald believed that to be true. iii ut ofit? You had been sent off to do Page 599

. another tzi chore and then they arranged 14 At that later time on call A when they this call? Vi in your mind about whether or not isi stated let's use,you ought to use those this might not (21 have cured the prob-131 A: I'm speculating ainut that,but that

, numbers,161 George, you know, you Iem?

ought to use the numbers fmm (71 the is a ni possible speculation.

151 Q: And Mr. Shipman might have been 131 A: I pess I wouid say that at t1iat 4/9 presentation, at that point it ap- point in 141 time,I guess I wasn,t smart peared to isi me that they were know. the 161 instigator of this attempt to cut yots out of this 171 call? enough or cognizant 151 enough to un-

ingly going to put the same 191 informa. derstand all the possible ramifications 161

]

tion back in as they knew at that point isi A: Mr. Shipman is the person that had isoi been incorrect in the 4/9 presen- gave me 19 the assignment to arrange an j tation. interview with a blue poi collar plant

[t n vil Q: And so it wasn't wonhwhile to equipment operator. Equipment lui m I just looked a it from the verbage Isi point out 921 to them to insure that they operators didn't work for me. They standpoint, and I needed to find the had the information that usi you thought weren't people I v21 normally would comprehensive i91 test program. So my it was false? interface with, but I went off to do 031 thoughts at that point turned 001 to that this task, definition. My subsequent conversa.

941 A: These were the top people in the

' 04 Q: Did it strike you as strange at the tions tut after that are focussed on that company. definition.

times i Q: WI t did you regard your role as is A: Yes,I did. 1,i21 Q: So is it fair so say that the v31 introduction of that language raised a ti71 A: I wasn't supposed to be on that I61 Q: And did you say so to him? doubt in your 1:41 mind whether or not call. 971 A: No.I said yes, sir,I will do the best it cured the problem?

pel Q: Why is that? I81 I can do. Usi A: Theintroductionof thatlanguage Ii91 A: Well,I didn't know that call was i9 Q: Did you have it in your mind at kept me 961 from being able to,looking going poi to take place. I stumbled into that 1201 point that you might be being only at the words,the 071 verbage,it kept that call.and I had mi been sent off to sent off to do this 120 while something me from being able to prove it was us s do something else at that point in 1221 else went on, false.

time, [221 A: No,I didn't.I did believe it was (231 091 Q: If the words hadn't been intro-l231 Q: You had been sent off to do that? strange that these people are union duced, if (201 they intended to just go pc pl , there 1241 was a possibility I forward with the language 120 as you 1241 A: I had been sent off to get an inter- would have to contact them at I25thome,

• • t t blue collar worker that saw it in the draft without the introduc-They didn't work for me.They probably tion I221 of that language,would you have

3 .t Page 598 spoken up?

age 596 01wouldn't have known me from Adam. [231 MR. KOHN: I object. It calls for 1241 pi to get an interview between him and They worked for 12: Skip Kitchens. speculation, but the witness may Mr. llairston. (3) They worked for Mr. Swanzwelder, answer.

12: Q: And you opted not to do that but Mr. 91 Cash, and down the operations 1251THEWITNESS: I guess the reason rather 13 to participate in this call? chain, not the suppon 151 side of the whyI

-._.______ ._... ~.m . . . _ . .

1

. \

ALLEN MOSIIAUGII IN TIIE MA' ITER OF- '

Vol. 3, Atigust 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY l Page 600 Page 602 (23 A: I think Shipman, yeah, the same thing v41 because I would say that he and ni didn,t speak up was because I ob- til Q: I am, and I mean it to be the same Stringfellow are the (251 same because med the ut intent of the people to be ni question, but I will repeat it again* Tm saying that's how that information

.emulgating a (31 known false state- 131 You believe that as of April 19th,Mr.

141 liairston knew, realized, knew that p ,9 g ment,and these were peopic ni a good number of levels higher than me in the there weren't 18 isi or 19 consecutive ni got to the other three.

Isi organization. successful starts after the couple 16i of 121 MR. KOHN: Is this a reasonable time failures, assuming that he was apprised 131 for a short break?

loi If the wording hadn't been changed #

and r71 I had the perception that the mtent was to Isi promulgate a false state-

[ C[" "I'd;"p ni MR. BLAKE: Let me just finish up this I'I '""#"*'

ment, I don't believe 191 I would have Stringfellow about) '

i61 Q: (By Mr.Blake) On the same page, spoken up in those circumstances (toi 191 A: I hate to intercede, but you have page 171 cight,in the last paragraph of probably either just because I guess it used noi the term successful starts again text at the bottom. ist it appears that the which is not a term ini used m any of would lui have been a feel of intimida. first sentence, Allen Mosbaugh 191 ar-tion given the 021 circumstances. this correspondence. rived late for the 4/19/90 PRB and n31 Q: (By Mr.Blake) Is it your view that I:21 Q: Well, what was the terminology? missed the lior discussion of LER 9406 as un of April 19th, the people in cor- p31 A: I don't want that to muck up our and, as such, did not vote tal on it. Do porate knew that psi there were not 18 n41 communication. you still believe that to be an accurate or 19 successful, consecutive 061 suc- psi Q: I didn't intend that it muck up our n21 statemem?

cessful starts after the failures which n61 communication. n31 A: I abstained from voting; yes.

you had n71 pointed out, that is, they n H Q: Were you present for the discus-knew better than that. 71 A: I believe that IIairston knew that there usi was not a string of 18 or 19 sion of usi the LER?

nas A: Will you ask that (pestion again. consecutive starts n9i between 3/20 and nel A: No. I came in late on it.1 came in n91 Q: I will try to do it in some bites, so 4/9- 1871 sometime.1 think part of a discussion poi there is no doubt.You point out to poi Q: At any point in time? was going on,ust but I arrived and i don't

. Shipnun that vil there are some failures " * " " " " "" #

that occurred and you point p2l out the 94 A ^ 3"Y - or in what ponion of it I arrived but 901 dates, and you believe that Shipman (221 Q: During that interval. I missed the beginning of it or some went on p3: and pointed out the same p3l A: At any point in time in that inter, earlier portion p u ofit and because l was information, all of it, to 941 IIairston?

~

not there for the discussion pai and I had val.

not done a review of it,I felt 931 uncom-usi A: And/or Stringfellow. 9410: That he knew that there weren,t? fortable voting on it and l abstained from Page 601 1251 A: Right,and that knowledge is how v41 voting.

and why psi Q: There had been a prior PRB meet-ni Q: Shipnun and/or Stringfellow ing in Pa9e 603 pointed this piinformation and allof this infornution our to m liairston.So,there- Page 605 ni he knew or believed that the 4/9 fore, you believe that liairston ni was letter contained a vi nuterial false state- ni which a draft of this LER was dis-aware that there were a couple of ment. cussed on the day pl before?

failures, two 151 failures which occurred 131 Q: And he obtained that knowledge al A: I believe there had been a PRB

. on the dates which you had 16i specified? on the ni 19th, you believe, by virtue of meeting on ni the 18th in which an ri A: And that liairston knew at that your having passed ist your information earlier draft was reviewed. ,

point in ini time that a statement like the on to Stringfellow and Shipnun? isiQ: And was there a vote at that meet- l one in the 4/9191 presentation =vas a false 161 A: I couldn't say when he first ob- ing in ist which you voted to accept it?

statement because of there noi not being l tained it, pl but I believe that the com' 17l A: I don't know if there was a vote at 18 or 19 consecutive starts. munication came in first isi on the 19th that 181 meeting or if we just took cond nu Q: That's myimpression.You believe from Stringfellow and Shipman. ments at that 191 meeting. I don't recall if that n2l Ilairston realized on April 19th (91 Q: And if I ask the same question there was a vote.The noi PRB meeting that there were not 113118 or 19 starts about Mr. not McCoy, would I have the minutes would best reflect if a vote was after those couple of failures,it41 assum- same answer? nu taken at that meeting.

ing that they were identified to him and nu A: I would say the same, n21 I recall a discussion at the early 031 g(*$"

• " N""" "" #

n2l Q: That is,that he realized that there meeting,and I recallindividuals making comments on n41 tt, PRB practice would

' ~

p61 A: That there wasn't an 18 or 19 n31 weren't 18 or 19 consecutive starts in the interval 041 of time or any period, he to review something and psi ifit was consecutive n:1 string between 3/20 and felt that the comments were minimal,a that letter date,4/9. any portion of the interval usi of time between March 20,and Apnl 9th? li61 document might be approved with usi Q: Yes, you believe that? c mmentsandif the n:1 comments were nei A: Yes- more extensive,then it would just be usi il91 A: I believe that. 07)Q: And the same thing would be true brought back to the PRB. I remember poi Q: That there weren't, in other of Mr.nel Bockhold? comments being [191 made on the 18th.

ords,18 or pu 19 starts after failures n91 A: The word came back about poi Q: And in the PRB meeting on the

,hich could have been p21 included in McCoy,11airston, poi and Mcdonald. So 19th when pu you walked into it, this vhatever his understanding was of the that's the scope of people that I pu was the subject of p2l discussion, the v31 comprehensive test program? ascribe that to. LER?

pu A: Now you're throwing com- p21Q: What about Shipman, where do p31 A: Reviewing that portion of the prehensive test usi program in. you put him? tape,I 941 think,would best indicate that.

l n~.., can n~, Knr m n c _% non,- --no - - u.an n-enn-n

I TIIE MA' ITER OF: AI.T.EN MOSBAUGli GEORGIA POWER COMPANY vol 3, August 24,1994 My independent 12si knowledge is that to look at a transcript, the transcript 1231 Stringfellow and later Mr. Shipman when I walked in,1 walked in in sections. I think that's my independent about.

Page 606 1241 recollection. 1231 Let me add one other thing.1 believe 12si Q: Ilut you have indicated this was 1241 the vote on that day also included lii the middle of discussion. the comments about 1251 that section. So I I2: Q: Do you recall any of the other believe the way the PRB works, Pa9e 608 topics 131 that were on the PRil meeting Page 610 agenda on April 19? til single.this was a huge item to you,this gi A: fromindependent recollection? might have 121 been the single largest vi approval with conunents,I believe it item that the PRil was 13 considering at was voted on 121 and approved with a tsi Q: Yes. that point. comment to do further review or 131 161 A: No, I don't have independent ni A: I think this was probably the most verification of the diesel start count recollection I?! of other topics.1 believe ist important item on the agenda, phrases. I 141 believe it was approved there would have been,I 181 mean there with comments.

161 Q: And do you recall being asked would have been. A review of transcript whether or (7) not you wanted to vote ist Q: The LER included language which

[91 S8,1 think,Would allow us to see what and declining? you felt 161 so strongly was false that you topics were poi discussed when I was m A I think somebody stated to me subsequently right 17) after that and went

1. "* and talked with Bill Shipman 181 about it, something 19) like, you know, because I o ti Q: Do you recall that there were any arrived in the middle of not it, do you urged that it be carried on to the highest topics nzi before the PRB at that point want to vote and I said something like I 19 levels of management, but you that were more n31 important to you rernained mute m the noi PRB meeting ini probably should abstain.So that's the than the LER and its accuracy? way it was n2l conducted. and elected not to vote on it?

04l A: This probably was the most int 931 Q: Was your basis for abstaining that ini A: Thatlanguage,ifIrecall.it was n21 portant osi document we were review- you v41 had not been a participant in all approved with comments. So the com-ing at that time. the conversation? pletion of the usi approval was the usi Q: So why was it that you didn't take res luti n f that portion of the n4llan-psi A: That was part of my basis,and the a role 07) in the discussion on the LER other n61 part of my basis is that I just. N"'E and its accurucy? my recollection is I 71 that just prior to usi Q: So you were content not to say nai A: Well,Ibelieve there wasan action this PRB meeting I was attending nei a anything n61 to the group, the PRB '

item ovi on the table or as part of the quality assurance audit exit on the site gmup,about yourviews it71 because you PRil to be looking at (2ni the start count area 091 cmergency,which was another understood that they were provmg at usi statement because there had been an (211 very important (201 meeting. only if it was subsequently amended or evolution of that. subsequently li91 subject to a check? l

[21: The quality assurunce department 122i Mr. Aufdenkampe and his group,who was 1221 issuing its report and findings on I2oi A: I didn't know the extent of the 120 conversation and discussion that had l worked 1231 for me, were working on the site area 1231 emergency. I believe I that.1 had been taking a I241 role because was in that meeting before (24: this,and occurred before p21 1 came into the you have to remember the LER at that I had not had adequate time to review meetmg.

Usi point in time is essentially due.So the this 12si latest drah of the LER and had I23l This may well have all been dis-LER, the not participated in cussed in 1241 the meeting.Since I wasn't Page 607 Page 609 Wem h dat and W dnce 1 Mn1 pan  ;

ticipate in discussion of other  !

ni the full PRB discussion, and there ni way an LER is normally processed is it's hatched by pi the site in the first two Page 611 were a number of Izi other issues in this weeks of the 30 days. and 131 this is just LER.1 guess it was eight 131 pages long. 91 pages and other areas,1 felt it was not a general rule, it's handled by ni cor- ni! was working and continued to work appropriate (2i to vote on it.1 proceeded.

porate in the latter period of time. with isi my staff and with the corporate out of the meeting, to 131 continue to  !

isi This transfer of responsibility occurs staff about the 161 start count numbers work on the accuracy of those sections 161 from the site to corporate and ob- during the rest of the day. 141 with Mr. Aufdenkampe.

viously at the end 171 of the 30 days,the 171 So the rest of the members of the 151 Q: Was it your view that the discus-resp <msibility has to be with ini cor- board tai who had been there for the sion 161 which you had missed might well parate because only corporate is going meeting, which included,191 I believe, have answered 171 questions that you to sign it 19i out or in the last day or tw Mr. Aufdenkampe, were more than had about the accuracy of the Isi lan-of this 30-day pol period. capable poi of reviewing the LER. guage,that's why these individuals -

no I was taking an active role in the uti Q: Did the LER that the PRB (91 A: I didn't know what was discussed I review H21 of this because on the 18th reviewed that n21 day include the lan. while I poi was gone. I didn't need to and 19th,1 was involved 031in these calls guage which you believe to be n31 false, take all the PRB nil members' time to with the corporate people about the n41 which you shortly before or shortly bring me up to speed.

Start count. after had n41 talked with flill Shipman n21 The PRB works as a body and only a i psi Q: When did your arrival at the PRB about who would be carrying usi on to quorum n31 is required to vote and ap- l meeting it61 take place relative to your George Hairston about, was this the prove and the PRB members n41 are all I conversation with Mr. n? Shipman, same n6ilanguage? qualified members and I believe Mr. nsi before,after? n71 A: From that day on the 19th, I Aufdenkampe, I believe Mr. Auf- '

08: A: The transcripts of the day ot> believe that nel that LER contains lan. denkampe was present n61 at the PRB viously will 991 document that. I think guage like since the event. I n91 think it who was my direct report that was my independent recollection (201 is that contains the 20 times each statement working 071 on this for me through his the PRB meeting on the 19th occurred and (201 yes, I believe that's the same NSAC department.

before 120 my conversation with Mr. language that after 120 that meeting, Mr. nai Q: I can understand the partimen-Shipman.but to be sure,I (221 would want Aufdenkampe and I called Mr.1221 tary n91 apptuach and your sensitivity

-- _.- ----..- . . . - ...n .-- ..-. .

' ALI.EN MOSBAUGII - IN TIIE MKITER OF:

Val,3, AuguM 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY about taking people's (2o1 times on might want to get it 201 in,take that into 12 1 A: I believe it was common  !

potentially on less imponant items, but account. knowledge,1 1221 won't say common on 12 1 this one - 1211 MR. KOHN: You couldn't say that knowledge but since Mr.Hairston,1231in v A: Well, Mr. Illake, I think it would with a 122: straight face, though, Ernie. my belief, was involved,in the submis-

,. ave 1231 been inappropriate for me to ' " ' # ' # '* ** ***

• 1231(Discussion ensued off the record.) original LER, then Mr.1251 Hairston vote on a document that 1241I did not feel  ;

I had thoroughly reviewed and to vote I24I IUY Atr. lake) Okay, Mr. Mos- should have known what the error was ini on a document that I had not par- baugh,let,s 1251 shift,if we can, to your yet ticipated in the respuse to Geomia Page 616 Page 612 agesu tu it seems to me that the error here was m we s t Request fodocuments attributed to 121 record keeping prac-ni discussion. I believe that is what which you I21 provided on June 2nd of would have been 121 inappropriate. tices.

93- 13; In addition, I was starting to say that I 131 Q: And what I'm reauyasking was did 131 Let me pr vide you with a copy both 141 think it was conunon knowledge that it 141 occur to you at that time to say hey, 141 the interrogatories and the look,I think tsi this nuy have a material as far as Mr. isi Hairston and personnel m response. If we could 151 mark this as corporate was concerned,161 that there false statement in it,161 This might be Exhibit 13 which is comprised of two I61 whollyinaccurate.Can somebody tell171 was a personnel error, at least this was me why you are content with this lan- mmenjs, actuauy, Geomia Power m part of what they appeared to be Company s first m set ofinterrogatories aware of,I'm not 181 saymg that was the guage?  :

to Allen L.Mosbaugh served tal on the cause of the errors in the LER 19) or the '

isi A: And that's exactly what Mr. Auf- 30th of April 1993. COA,but that was being bantered about denkampe 191 and I did within a fairly 191 (Mosbaugh Exhibit DG-13A was as a 1:01 cause at the same time.

peo I t at h d res nsi litya marked noi for identification.) ini This document states that the reason j point in time for finalizing the LER. D83 MR. BLAKE: And Intervenor's for 1:21 the error was record keeping Response 021 to the first Request for practices.1 had 031 contested that at the 0z1 Q: Did it occur to you to say that to time Mr.Hairston had been n41 involved Documents by Georgia n5i Power Com. ,

your usi peers, your bretheren m the pany which I believe to have been n41 with this LER and because of his '

PRB?

datedJune 2nd,1993, firsthand lisi involvement, he should 041 A: No,it didn't, and I believe,like I have known better.He should 061 have lisi stated earlier, that it was a conunent usi (Mosbaugh Exhibit DG-13B was nurked it61 for identification.)

known that record keeping practices that was part n6 of the approval to go were not nil the cause. 1 do that after the meeting. t 71 Q: (By Mr. Blake) Mr. Mosbaugh, let me usi direct y ur attention t page 21 ist Q: The fact that you were contesting I vi MR. BLAKE: Let's take a break. of your response. ti91 Read,if you would' Mr.(191 Hairston's or anyone else's view tiel(A recess was taken.) the first paragraph under number 1201 of what the cause (201 of error was four, submission of false mformation in wouldn't make it an intentional or 1211 ti91 MR,BARTH: At the last prehearing knowing false statement or false infor-l201 conference, your brother stated that the cover 12:1 letter accompanying the mation, would 122) it?

you12:1 intended to file a comment on revision to the LER. Are 1221 you on page ,

the licensee's 122: response to the NOV. 21? 1231 A: I believe that his direct - he had Do you stillintend to 1251 and,if so,can p31 A: I was hoping I could look at the 1241 direct involvement m this LER. He you give us some idea of when 1241 to question 1241 and get reoriented here. was one of the 1251 people that I believe expect it? * * * * * * ' " ** * * " "

[251 MR. KOHN: What page?

usi MR. KOHN: Yes, we intend to.I have Page 615 page 613 til that they put in it was false before it pl MR. BLAKE: Page 21. went out, ni and I think it's consistent I vi not figured out what our schedule vi MR. KOHN: I think that's a ai subsec- with my belief that the 131 initial LER was was. tion. I don't think that's actually a ni intentionally put out false; that (41 Mr.

pl MR. BARTH: Without looking at our response. Hairston ascribing the cause in the i3: legal authority to examine it, since I 151 MR. BLAKE: This is within the revision 151 that he put out to record have 141 not told you that,we do want to response 161 to 12. keeping practices 161 indicates that he look at this tsi thing and pay close atten-(71 MR. KOHN: Okay.We were reading 181 inld have kmwn tilat dat was m not

""I "- interrogatory number four.

the correct cause.

Ist MR. KOHN: Once we finish up with '"I D" *"#EI ' #***

• I?) discovery here, we will be able to 19:THEWITNESS: I am oriented in the Mr.191 Hairston, on April 19th,'did not O i domment. know that the poi statement they were focus our tal attention.

lui Q: (By Mr.Blake) Have ym read that making was false -

191 So that should be at the end of today " ""

- 001 Is there a particular time line that was j'u cP liti MR. KOHN: Of course, we don't ac-cept n21 that, but for your question, we pit better suited for the NRC? Obviously

-the1:21 sooner the better, n31 A: No,let me read it. All right, will _

101 MR.BARTH: People are reviewing 041 Q: Is it y ur view today that that,do 031 MR. BLAKE: I suspect you will agree i

the nel licensee's response now and as you lisi still hold that view today as 041 with me that there is some record 9c i as they 051 get everything they indicated in that usi paragraph? evidence to usi support that.

.ced to review, the n61 faster it's going n;l A: Yes. 06 MR.KOHN: Not from my position, to go- nei Q: And what is your basis for believ. there 071isn't,but ga ahead.

n7 MR.BLAKE: I have heard that the ing that 119 Mr. Hairston knew that the nei Q: (By Mr. Blake) If you accept that NRC usi is likely to beat their deadline cover letter contained 120 false informa- Mr. n91 Hairston did not realize on April and may be 09: done next week.So you tion concerning the cause of the error? 19th, did not (201 intend to put out false pen An. pen,An u s .vt.c ~ .a. m nonwrv nunnn rrvc mr n~n Any a

. , l All.EN MOSBAUGII IN TIIE MNITER OF:

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 i

informationin the LER,did un not know ' to use on April 30 all un available and 081 A: When you say logs,are you refer- l that he was,then could you accept that compiled so that Air. Cash could have p2i ring to n91 control log? <

the u21 cause might have been improper used them? poi Q: That's one of them, yes.

record keeping rather u31 than person- 1231 A: I don't specifically know the un A:Just the control log?

nel error or whatever you believe to be answer to u41 that as to the state of u41 the proper cause? 1221 Q: No,any logs which are used in u31 compilation of the records.usiThe data iA o, I don't accept that record heets, the diesel data sheets may not P "K

[oci l' el f

usi A: Normally management doesn't 1 Page 618 Page 620 use those l ni practices could under any cir- ni all been available at that point in time, Page 622 l cumstance be the cause al of the error but I 12i don't know that.I do know that in the LER or its predecessor; no, I 131 ifI had provided 131 my- ifI had chosen nii gs,but better practices with respect don't. to use only the records that 141 Mr. Cash to record ul keeping by the operators

, al I can't accept record keeping prac- did use,I would still have been able to w uld be an improvement.

l tices.151 You're asking me to speculate tsi make an accurate and conservative 131 Q: And you think that the record staning from a 161 staning point that I statement. keeping 141 such as it was in early April don't believe. So this 171 logical process g,1 Q: That is, by use of only the control 1990 regarding past 151 performance of gets fairly twisted. I don't 181 believe room 171 log? the diesel played no role in people,s 161 record keeping practices played any 19) understanding of the accuracy of the I,i p yg-significant role in the errors that oc. numbers that pi they were reporting to curred. 191 Q: You would have arrived at the the NRC on April 9th and then 181 on

, noi Q: Do you understand the basis for same result u i that you did on April 30? April 19th?

Georgia no Power's having said that nu A: I would have been able to make 19 A: It played no role in the accuracy record keeping pmctices n2l was the an n2l accurate statement and conserva- of the noi statements that were made on ,

root cause of this problem? Do you n31 tive statement to the p31 NRC relative to the 9th and the 19th ini because of the i

, understand what they have articulated the numbers of stans. methods and the reasons for n2l incor- I as the root n41 cause and why? v41 Q: What would that number have poration of the. numbers and the state-been? ments, n91 A: I understand what they have ar.

ticulated n61 and do not agree with it u si A: I would need to review those logs 1831Q: Refer on the next page in your because they continue to 071 point out at this noi point to answer your question. response v41 to item lettered C at the top record keeping practices associated n71 Q: Have you ever done that exer- of page 22.Referrm.g usi to the question, with pai the records that were never 3 as well,that was being responded noi to there,do you still believe that to be your used-pai A: I have looked at the control log n7: position) 9 91 So record keeping practices as- from 991 that period of time.I have also sociated not with the records that were psi A. I believe it is accurate, and I will looked at the list 120i that hir. Cash com-never used or accessed un for this can't 091 state that my response there is rela-piled from the controllog,and in un the be a reason. course of hir. Cash's deposition, we tive to learning poi about the approved u21 Q: If the combination of records had or seeing the final draft of the un June asked hir. u21 Cash to do that. 29th, 90 lener.1 believe I saw or became d

been 931 available to Jinuny Paul Cash .

1231 The information was there. All of the u2i aware of that a few days after it was completed and u4i available as they u41 problems and failures were logged, i were to you by April 30th, do you usi signed out. '

think tha't it is possible he might not

""' " * "

• v31 Q: What are the specific incidents have provided

' * *I *E"?""" * "** * "I " you're u41 referring to there?

619 951 A: Well.theincidentistheJune29th, ni the same information he ni resulted in making an accurate but '90 provided on or about ui April'7th? conservative ut statement to the NRC- Page 623 ist A: No. i31 Q: Do you believe,if the record keep- til letter containing an inaccurate state-i4 MR. KOHN: First,I have to object, isi *# "* * "I * " * * " " * ' ' " # # ' '"'

[##of c$s'i tenc ndi t te f because exactly the information that htr. timeliness of compilation of these kinds # N" #" P #

Cash vi provided,hir. Cash testified that ecan e awam huch incident.

of i61 data, that it would be an improve-he provided pl the right number and ment to pl management's ongoing 1410: Is this response meant to convey that Air.llockhold didn't Isi use the num- knowledge of diesel operation? you ist learned about the contents of the her. June 29,199016i letter a few days after 19:So I can't,utdes5 you Want to state pol yU p Q stion? it Was submitted?

what you believe htr. Cash provided and 191 Q: Sure. Do you believe that if there p1 A: Yeah,the final approved content, i n u starting that as the foundation,I don't were not improvements in the consisten- right.

cy of information in n il the logs,the way l n2: think the witness can answer be. 810: Let me go now to your hearing cause I don't insi think the testimony is in which operators make notations n21 testimony 191 to the Senate committee.1 consistent between nel your witnesses, about diesel starts, for example, and if compilation 03 of data regarding diesel have already provided pol you with a psi Q: Oly $1r. tilake) When you copy of a transcript of your testimony.

provided your 061informathn on April starts were to be done in a 941 more hQ w danM m%wWM u M Wh4, 30 to hir. Ilockhold, did you use it71 a f usi carly April 1990, that it would number of different records? n21 Q: Yes.Let me refer you to pages 53 provide more 061 reliable information and n3154,specifically at the top of page usi A: Yes I did' on an ongoing basis to 071 management 54, lines three 04i and four,if you would 901 Q: And were the combination of about how the diesels had been operat- take a second and read that insi in con-records that poi were available for you ing? text.

_ _ _ _ _ . , . - _ _ m - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

' ALLEN'MOSBAUGII IN TIIE MA' ITER OF:

Vol. 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY n61 A: All right. n61 Then they additionally had said that (171 A: I have just recently gotten - I'm n71 Q: Can you describe to me what you if 971 they had known cenain things,it sorry, usi part of where the information ,

meant by, nel and certainly these state. would have caused usi them to look into of materiality comes ti91 from the NRC is

-ats are the core of the li9t basis of the these areas funher. If they had n91 in the NRC's response to 1201 inter-weision? looked into these areas further, they rogatories that we submitted.

poi A: The diesel start statements, w uld have (20: looked into continuing pu it seems to me that there are some specifically 12 1 the statements in the Calcon switch pmblems; and I I211 p21 statements maybe m the OI report or believe ultimately would have delved in the notice 1231 of violation about the confirmation of action letter 1221 about int the root I221 cause deeperandif they the diesel starts. effect of false statements on 1241 the reached the point where I231 they NRC's actions.

[231 Q: Those are the statements that are thought the root cause had been ade-(24 referred to, and what do you mean I2si Q: So it's a combination of NRC's quately uti provided, they surely would ##' ""#8 by are the core of 951 the basis of the have never given 1251 permission to res-decision? tan, Page 628 Page 624 Ps 626 ni to your imemgatMes, b G repon, and the 121 notice of violation language?

pl A: I believe that probably the most p1 important aspect of the NRC's decision niMR.KOHN: I would like to make a (31 A: Those are the sources that I can small 121 belated clarification objectmn recall 141 at the moment, to allow 131 restart of the plant after the site area emergency 141 was the status or to y ur 131 question, focussing on the tsiQ: And when you read those, you diesel start ni language.

their perception of the reliable (si status interpreted 16 them as a basis for an NRC of the diesel generator,and so I consider is! The record indicates that Mr. Mos- position that had they 171 received what 161 the dieselto be at the core of the NRC, baugh 161 indicated that the diesel error you regard as accurate information on the 171 perception of the diesel reliability statement was r71 also materially false isi April 9th,they would not have restart-status to he at tai the core of their and that is something 181 that was not ed, they would 191 not have allowed res-decision. included in the last question. tart of the Vogtle plant?

19) They considered other things, but i 191 Q: (By M r. Blake) Taking your not A: The basis for my speculation) l think 001 that was probably the most counsel's noi suggestion to heart, Mr. g,3 g ye3' l important thing because nil if the diesel Mosbaugh, would you agree p 11 that that had not failed, there would never have language,too,would have to have been n21 A: As to what the NRC would do?

n21 been a site area emergency declared. n21 changed? n31 Q: Yes.

03 Q: So you believe that the state. 931 A: Well, it should never have been v41 A: Yeah, I consider this part of the ments about 041 there being 18 or 19 submitted n41 the way it was. basis psi for that. Like I say, the basis cuccessful starts and there psi being no psi Q: And is it your view today that, wouldn't end 06i there. I think what I oblems or failures to have been the knowing 06i all that we know and recall some of those 07: statements core 061 of the basis for the NRC's deter- describing it accurately to the 071 NRC saying is that if we had known, we mination to allow V71 Vogtle to restart,is on Apnl 9th, that the NRC would not would usi have looked further.

that what you mean to infer psi here? have usi allowed restart? n91 What I'm saying is,therefore, pan of ti91 A: I think I said the NRC's percep- 09: A: Yes, that is my opinion, and I (20) that process would have been look-tion of1201 the reliability of the diesel was believe (201 that is the opinion of the NRC ing further and [2n finding more. I'm at the core of the 9u NRC's basis for because I believe ini they considered saying that that would have (22i ultimate-restart decision. these items to be material to their (221 ly resulted in no decision for restart, a 1221 Q: And in taking in kind of all that decision. 1231 decision against restart at that point we know D31 today and altering the lan- **'*"'

l 933 o. Do you understand their state- )

guage to make it accurate, 941 what 941 Q: Let me ask you to look at the next 1 ment that 941 these items were material psi document chronologically which is

would those numbers be? to mean if they had usi received dif-1251 Let's assume that we were to write ferent information, that it would have your response to I" Page 627

1. 9* ,

Page 625 91 the second set of interrogatories i ni altered their determination? provided by 91 Georgia Power.We will j at that same letter to the NRC,make the 121 A: Yes,that it may have altered their mark these as 14,and it's 13: actually two same p1 presentation, oral presentation on the 9th, the same 131 COA letter on I31 determination, that's correct. documents.

the 9th of April,but change the 141 num- 141 Q: May have, but in your view, it 141The first is Georgia Power Company's bers to, in fact, be those numbers of would 151 have? 151 Second Set ofInterrogatories and Re-consecutive 15 starts priorto April 9th at quest for 161 Dommems to AHen Mos-161 A: You're asking me to speculate baugh served on the 26th of171 July 1993 whatever point in time 161 they staned about what I7: the NRC would do.

which I think we could agree would and the second is your response,Mr.181 181 Q: Yes,I am. Mosbaugh, entitled Intervenor's have 17: been around March 23rd, cor,

rect me if I am wrong, so tai that the l91 A

I believe if the NRC knew all of the Response to the 191 Second Set ofInter-presentation would have been wholly 191 001 relevant facts, that they would not rogatories of Georgia Power not Com-accurate. Is that what you would have have given n n permission to restart and pany served on August Ilth,1993.

had the noilanguage read? that includes the facts 02 that water n n(Mosbaugh Exhibits DG-14A and DG-

'i A: The NRC has stated their view of poured out of trip lines and all those 931 14B n21 were marked for identification.)

kinds of things that we now know today.

.ae vai materiality, if you will, of the n31 Q: (By Mr. Blake) Let me ask you to diesel start lisi statements, and I think 04) Q: And is that what you read from take a n41 look at page eight of your they expressed it fairly 041 well, that if the NRC nsi notice of violation or other response. For purposes psi of my ques-they had known.one they said it was ps! information? Where do 061 you read tion,I don't think you will need to look material to their restan decision. this? Where do you get this impression? oci at the question or do a lot of sur-

_22*EN

• P *"*" M"** " """"P T " "***

IN TriE idA~ ITER OF: AI.T.F.N 310SBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 rounding 971 research. Let me just ask Cash'sinstructionn71fmmMr.Ilockhold l gia Power 061 personnel regarding air you the question. as being to just get the good lial stuft? ^ quality.Do you recall Iri that?

nelin your response there,5 F,which 091 n91 A: I recall that he asked me some- usi A: Oh,about finding water?

appears on page eight, you refer to an thing about 1201 what I knew or what I g9, a: ye3, instruction 1201 Cash received from might know about Cash's tal instruc.

George llockhold,just get the 12 1 good tions,and he nude mention to me that (20i A: It wasn't about air quality. It was ini about finding water.

stuff.What's the basis for that? his 1221 understanding was that Mr. Cash's (221 A: The basis of that is I was repeating instructions were 1231 just get the good 1221 Q: 1 put it in the air quality camp what p31 I remembered as a statement stuff or a phrase like that. because I231 that's what the significance made to me by Mr. Iarry tai Robinson is f finding water,1241 isn't it?

ini l had not heard that,that that was his about when he was asking me some (251 instructions. Like I say, since I I251 A: No. Finding wateris significant in questions 125 about Cash's instructions, reviewed Mr. and and that was what I Page 634 Page 632 Page 630 til of itself "I

ni remember Mr. Robinson to have said ructi ns ere or i e ust get t e 121 Q: Was the source of the water that or asked me 121 about, was Mr. Cash, you was (31 being discussed or concerned successful starts. You asked i3) for the know that Mr. Cash has been 131 m- context. I guess I assume Mr. Robinson something other than al air?

structed to,he had used these words or Isl A: The source was humidity.

141 meant that the good stuff was a phrase 141 fike this. synonymous with isi successful starts. I 1610: Out of the air?

tsi So that's my basis for that. IIaving at think good stuff was a (61 different - it's .

161 this time reviewed Mr. Cash's OI tes- I71 A: From the air from the compres-not a defined term. I would call (71 that s rs, but lei the significance is not air timony,I don't 171 believe this phrase as slang more or less, but I think Mr. Robin, quoted here is something that twl Mr. son 181 had that in mind.That's not good qu lity.The 191 significance is water and Cash indicated as his instructions,and I communication. I 191 think it's slang. U*** MW"***

191 believe in actuality, it's just get the oi Q: Was this a conversation that you nii & So in the last two days we have successful noi stans mstead of the had with pil Mr. Robinson which you discussed n21 at least two instances spreads. where Mr. Robinson was the I 31 source gathered this information?

nil Q: So do you believe this to be inac. of mformation for you. Could you curate, 02: A: Yeah,and I can't recall when that describe n41 to me or characterize for n31 ccurred,but he had asked me about me how much infornution psi you have 021 A: Ibelieveitisinaccurate,butit was Cash s n41 instructions, and this was a received from Mr. Robinson over the last n3i what I knew at the time or believed c mment that I lisi recalled. n61 year, not provided to but received at the time from n41 Mr. Robinson to have been the instruction. nsi Obviously Mr. n61Q: Do you recall receiving similar from.

Cash's testimony would have been the types of n71 characterizations from Mr. n71 A: Generally Mr. Robinson has asked nel best place to get the source of that R binson? me nsl qtastions.1 believe the comment information in which I eventually got pai A: Of a slang nature? he made to me ti91 about the finding of access to. 0910: Of any nature, characterizations water or personnel being asked pol usi MR. BLAKE: Were you intending to of poi conversations between Georgia about water was when I took my allega-(19i supplement this, Mr. Kohn? Power employees, pii characterizations ti n to Mr. I2ii Robinson abot t the find- l of submittals by Georgia Power to 1221 ing of water as documented in p21 the poi MR. KOHN: We were intending to NRC, characterizations of anything that i tape recording.

review pil responses,I mean there has been a lot of new u2i nuterial from all we might p31 refer to as factual evidence 1231 So that was how we came to discuss sides and I don't know what 931 the in this case? the ini finding of water and the parties,1 think there was a conversation ini A: This was a little different.Mr. Usi knowledge that the tape usi recording lui with the licensing board where all Robinson normally wouldn't use that indicates of Mr.Ilurr and Mr.Chennault the usi parties agreed to review every- kind of term. Page 635 thing and til and Mr. Stokes, of the water pouring pag. 633 i Page 631 out of the trip 121 line. So that was the m supplement. ni l'm a little unclear about charac- po nt in time that I had a (31 discussion

" "" n eve I can ten m pl That's my recollection. I don't know r I 'b ke I 131if that's on the time line anywhere,but provided hi i ornutiot I" '"" * ' '* '# '**

edis uss d " " #

the ni parties have agreed to do that at 141 what ! provided him,but M r. Robinson E* I"#

a date 151 certain, would not 151 generally comment on or 16l At times I have talked to Mr. Robinson ici MR.BLAKE: llad you had an inten- provide what you're 16i describing as 171 about issues on a daily basis, and I tion to n supplement this particular characterizations. have had a lot tai of contact wnh Mr.

one> Robinson because of the (9i submitting m Q: Yesterday you described M r. of allegations and the discussion of noi isi MR. KOHN: I haven,t read these 191 Robinson as 181 the source of some infor' those allegations in concurrence with responses in about a y ear now. nution you had about some (91 recent him, and it's ini been very extensive.

not MR. BLAKE: So the answer is interviews of Georgia Power people.Do 021 Q: Is your inability to characterize probably ini no? you noi remember that?

the 0 31 information that you have n2l MR. KOHN: The answer is that we ini A: No, I'm not sure what you're received from Mr. Robinson n41 today, have lui to read them all after we finish referring v2l to. received over the last year, because it's our nel discovery and see where we p310: Yesterday you described Mr. nsi been so extensive, you just aren't stand. Robinson as not having been the source able to do it 061 now, or would you say psi Q: (Ily Mr.111ake) What was the con- of some information to you usi about these are the only two facts n71 you have text of usi Mr. Robinson's describing Mr. questions which had been put to Geor- ever heard from Larry Robins (m? What

' AI.I.F.N MOSBAUGli IN TIIE MA' ITER OF:

Vcl 3, Augmt 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY I is nzi the problem or what is the irnbility perhaps, to what he had obtained in 01 munications which have 1171 been over to do it? testimony. a period of four years and ask for any lisi -

1:9A: Well,if you have had that many li91 So I would have reviewed that tes. other item in a period of four years with

onversations,I don't know what it timony (2o1 with him and,like I say, at a lot of fi91 communications going on, i., ut with 12 l that many conversations, times in the last 12u couple of months,I that taxes my memory, it just becomes very 1221 difficult, called him sometimes daily,1221 provid- I201 I believe in the course of responding -

(231 I have been discussing these topics ing him that information. Generally he to[2:1 some of these interrogatories, we with 12ei Mr. Robinson for four years,and does (231 not provide information back described some of (221 my conversations to try to -I mean (251if you were to ask to me, and generally (24 those calls are m an mterval with M r. Robinson, [231 and me the same miestion as to for the purpose of my feeding him 1251 I think that's provided in one of these information. [241 interrogatory sets.

Page 636 Page 638 (2sl At that tirne I think I did the same ,

lii information I received from rny wife, thing til On a few occasions he has asked me I would have (21 the same difficulty. some 121 additional questions. I guess Page 640 (siI might be able to rememberthe most these are two (3) examples, the one: you ni because a similar question had been 141 recent conversations, but what infor- reentioned about the water, and 141 I asked about (21 conununications with rnation ! 151 received frou. my wife, I be? vc that occurred when I contacted Mr. Robinson, and I scratched my 131 couldn't even answer that 161 question. Mr. si Robinson about the tape segment head and tried to remember as much as ,

17 Q: I would understand that and, abo.it finding water 161 in the trip lines I could that 141 was responsive to that frankly,it tai never had occurred to me and this one here came from,it (71 seems question, and I believe it ist was in one to find some analogy 191 between conver. to me this comes from a year or more of these documents.

sations between you and your wife and ago, my Isi recollection of Cash's instruc-tions.

16 At this point I'm having trouble (71 tio you and I.arry Robinson. remembering what was provided in that nil I'm just trying to understand what 1910: So is your characterization which response from ist independent recollec-  !

the n21 nature is of the discussions be. I asked noi carlier for 3lou to give me tion. I guess including what 191 was ,

tween you and Mr 1:31 Robinson which about the amount ofliti information Mr. responded to you before,that's as much .

have been other than Mr. Robinson n41 Robinson has passed along to you Itzi as I can tioi remember here.

asking you questions as an OI inves. that it's infrequent? nti Q: So you don't rememberanyother tigator. 031 A: My contacts with Mr. Robinson n21 information that you received from usi What I'm getting out of this, and I are n41 generally because I call him to Mr. Robinson?

would not appreciate it if.you would give him uslinformation and that s been n3i A: Not in addition to what might be correct the impression I n7 have,that vey frequent aher n61 late, but any con-tacts with him are generally to give li7 in that nel other, in that response. I

c have been discussions where Mr. , remernber that instance, tu,m inf rmation.

ii.i Robinson passes on to you a good si Q: On the same thing, page,look at deal of information n9: and it's difficult 081 Q: Has he ever called you to pass on g*

for you to characterize it 12al because it 091 infortnation to you?

has been so extensive,as extensive,for poi A: He has called me to return try OI n71 report and seeing how Mr. Robin-pu example.as have been conversations calls, but tal called me to pass on mfor-with your wife 921 over the last year. mation,he has called me p2l to ask me a son questions nel witnesses,it often ap-pears he provides them 091 with infor-p3i A: I think that's an improper 941 question, perhaps.To pass on p31 infor-mation and, for instance, plays 1201 por-characterization. When I call Mr. Robin. mation, that s not something tha: I can tions of the tape or I know this is on the son.it's psi usually because I have a new recall 941 that would normally happen. 12 1 tape, what's your response to that.

piece ofinformation' Normally I call Mr. psi Robinson and sometimes he has returned my calls. 122i So I have a difficult time with your Page 637 1231 line of questioning inasmuch as it Page 639 seems Mr. 941 Mosbaugh was expressing ni but let me give you an example, ni Q: What is the answer to my ques- that with respect to psi one thing that vi As we have donc depositions over the tion? was in the course of <

last 131 two months, when we did a '

pi A: The communication was generally Page 641 deposition and I heard ni testimony of from me 131 to him. It's very difficult in Georgia Power witnesses that I thought "I " "**'"* " "" "

[s] were relevant to tny allegations, I the course of as ni much communica- about did you ni know anphing about tion as I recall to remember it all- Cash just wanting to get t31 rhe. good stuff would from time ist to time call Mr.

Robinson and say I want to let you 171 15l O: Mr. M sbaugh, it,s otwious that or something like that, know what was testified to today by this you.re 161 struggling to try to recall or t ni So I have a hard time trying to ist witness tai about this issue, and I would try to give me an 171 answer to the ques-tion,but take your time. differentiate in my own mind how Mr.

p:ss t hat information 191 on to Mr. Robin- Mosbaugh 161 is supposed to find out son, and I would in my mind go noi 181 A: I can t recall occasions where he what is being 171 volunteered to him or thtuugh the various witnesses we did called 19' - ; *o pass on information, but what's in a question. iai i really think that that day and nil pmvide that to him. I have uCulty not because I have the questions and answers 191 are very talked to him on many occasions,as I H 11 vague on that.

n21 I prtwided to him, you know, what I n31 thought were key things. In some previ usly described.

noi So I have a general note I wanted to ts they were n41 things that I knew n21Q: Do you recall at this pomt any uti make on that point.1 think that just

.. titd not resolved in his 01 nsi inves. other 03 pieces of information which n21 looking at my understanding of how tigation, but I felt we had gotten an Mr. Robinson has given n41 you? I don't Mr. n31 Robinson questions people, it answer 06) to, maybe a missing link or understand the smirk or the humor, would be an n41 impossible position for something like that or n71 maybe a dif- usi A: There is no humor,it's just that any of the witnesses nst to say what ferent story, a contradictory story, nel when n6 you ask questions about com- information did Mr. Robinson n61 volun-  !

non , D.A. p2ne Ali ses .vt.c, : nunwrv usmnn nvc svc unn own como

IN TIIE MATITR OF: ALLEN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 teer to you because even during the 971 diesel on the poi 22nd and on the 23rd ti91 MR. KOHN: Mr. Mosbaugh needs to course of the 01 interview - at particulartimes is what I12:1provided, go to 120i the restroorn.

poi MR. BLAKE: I think, with all due 09: and that information made the dmft 1221 pai MR. BLAKE: I only have one more in respect to your observation,that the 1201 inaccurate and made the final language 1221 this document,if you can hang on .or discussions that Mr. Mosbaugh is inaccurate. one 1231 more.

describing 90 between Mr. Robinson ,23 Q: Your answer in 6B is referring, p4i Q: fBy Mr.Blake) Let's go to page 14.

and himand the p2 relationship that has however, vil to discussions that you had 1251 looking at C-2 at the bottom of page existed and does I231 presently exist be- before this language was psiinserted? 14.1 don't tween Mr.Mosbaugh and Mr.941 Robin- Page 644 Page 646 son is quite different from on the psi record OI interviews by Mr. Robinson of 01 A: That's correct,but the information al think you need to look at a lot of other other 12i conveyed to those people is ap- documents 121in order to understand my plicable to both and 13i that information question. First, do you 131 believe that Page 642 demonstrates the statement as being 141 statement that appears in C-2 still ni pl GPC pers(mnel, remarkably different. inaccumte. today?

121 MR. KOHN: I would agree because I isi Q: Would your answer be the same ist A: I guess I would like to know what 131 don't believe Mr. Robinson is capable with regard I61 to F on the next page, the 161 response is to.

of 01 having discussions with Georgia page nine, that is, the p1 discussions on pig. Forget the yes portion and just Power people ist without their attorneys April 19th, the phone conversations 181 take the 181 statement by itself.1 think it and formal things. I 161 mean Mr. Robin- in which you participated wherein Ship stands alone, son doesn't have that problem r1 with man and 191 Stringfellow were told that 191 A: Yes,1 belic.ve that's correct.

Mr. Mosbaugh. the language equivalent voi of this con-stituted a material false statement was pol Q: Now, we have talked a lot about W MR.BLAKE: I don't understand the 191 point of that comment. Illi the draft language? who was ini on the call and who wasn't.

lui A: The language that is equivalent to We have talked a fair 02 amount about poi MR. KOHN: You said that the ini who knew or who should have known.

rehtionship is different, because Mr.02 this 03i is the confirmation of action 931 Just tell me now what you mean M( sbaugh is the source and Mr. Mos- letter. I view that Ii41 the information, that the language in the final LER inst and there by everyone.

baugh is 031 providing information.

the confirmation of action letter are it41 A: I mean everybody,let me explam 9 41 Georgia Power Company is not it in psi general terms, providing usi information particularly equivalent 06) language and were in-that I'm aware of, u6i It certainly doesn't tended to be equivalent. 061 Q: Okay.

seem to be volunteering 071 informa- 07 So I had conversations on the 19th 971 A: Everybody having line resp <m-tion. with uni Mr. Shipman and Stringfellow sibility for 981 that document and its 081 Q: (By Mr.Blake) Focussing on 6-11 at about the confirmation 09: of action lan- accuracy and its verification ti9i that par-the 091 bottom of page eight, will you guage, and I view that as being poi ticipated in that call,I believe those poi read, as well, the 1201 interrogatory to equivalent to the final language put in people knew or should have known, which you are responding. the LER. So pit that's what I mean by had an obligation vil to know those equivalent to this. facts.

911 A: (Witness complies with the re-quest of 921 counsel.) [221 Q: Go to page ten, response to inter- p2l Hy name, since Mr. liairston signed r gatory 93 number seven. What was the p31 document, it would be Mr.

931 Q: Do you still agree that that's an 941 y ur r le in the preparation 941 of this llairston, M r. M cCoy, M r. pii Shipma n.M r.

appropriate answer,a correct answer to the usiinterrogatory?

IcVision? Bailey if he was involved, Mr. psi usi A: We have discussed that before, Stringfellow.and because Mr.Bockhold Page 643 but my participated pl A: Yes.The information about the 111 Page 647 Page 645 p1 diesel trips, dates, and times that I provided is 131 the information that 91 role was that after April 30th when I piin the phrasing of the development of demonstmted that the draft 91 that was notified my 12 general manager that the the section 91 that was later determined in existence at that time was inaccurate confirmation of action i31 letter and the to contain a false 131 statement,I include Isi and that same information, those LER contained a false statement, I p1 Mr.Bockhold, Mr. Aufdenkampe, pl and same trips, dates, 161 and time subsequently worked on getting a myself. Let me try to work it from the demonstrates that the final language is revision to the 151 LER. other Isl direction now. l r71inaccumte, as well 16l I got Mr. Aufdenkampe who worked 161 Q: Mr. Ward, Mr. Rushton are some i m This question is with respect to the m for me n at the time to use his NSAC names that n have appeared, i language, the final language, but those department to draft a W revision,and we ini A: 1 include Mr. Rushton because Mr.

partic dtr 901 trips make the final lan- got that revision process through 191 the Rushton m was in line responsibility for guage inaccurate as well as vi! the draft plant review board and we sent it to that letter. Mr. 901 Ward was outside the language inaccurate. corporate poi by May 15th. line responsibility.

tul Q: So although the interrogatory up Q: And were you involved in the up Q: So you don't include him? There referred to 051 the final language as it version of U21 the letter, the version of was some p21 question whether or not appeared in the LER which 041 included the document which was usi provided he was on the call,but 03l assuming he subsequent to this test program md to the corporate office by May 15th? was on the call, you still would not 041 your 951 answer referred to discussions 941 A: I was involved in it in that I include him in this? I you had of draft 961 language which did reviewed 951 it and I think to some de- usi A: Well, I would include him, be-not include those words, you 071 still gree worked with Mr.06l Aufdenkampe cause 1961 believe he did know because believe it to be responsive? or his people on it. I participated in 971 Mr. Burr worked for him 07: and was usi A: No.You are mischaracterizing it. the PRB review of it, yes.Can we take a communicating. My statement was The 99linformation is the trips of the 1 B restroom usi break? knew or im should have known.

__ _ .___ _..- ... ,,. m ._,

I i

ALLEN MOSHAUGII IN TIIE MATTER OF-Vol. 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY i l

1:91 Q: Okay. into April, and it seemed hke it started with Mr. Shipman and poi Mr. Stringfel- l 90: A: I believe he did know.Therefore, 12:1 with entries that began about the low the fact that there had been ini l for p l that, seven people,I guess that's time of the site 1221 area emergency. problem starts? '

ybody.I'm pai not including the two 1231 l'm not sure exactly what Mr. p21 A: It was either the list or informa- '

p .$ timers over in Mr. p31 Kochery's p41 purpose was for the list, tion p31 from the list, and when I spoke  ;

Aufdenkampe's office. why he had prepared it.I usi believe that to Mr. Shipman,I 941 know I gave him a l 941 Q: You're not including them? he had prepared it from, he or Mr. specific date and time and a 951 reason j psi A: I'm not including - my view is I Page 650 for some 1-11 diesel failures. I recall that don't ni Stokes had prepared it from the Page 652 Page 648 opemtions logs or (21 from their involve- ni I had obtained that information fmm 9 really consider Mr.Webb or Mr.Wil- ment in the actual testing.131That's most what I am vi terming the Kochery list.

liams to be on p1 the call because of the of what I remember about the Kochery 13i Q: You have indicated that you recall brevity of their walking in 131 and out. 141 list-the 141 list enumented the two diesci 141 MR. BLAKE: Okay,let's take a break. 151 Q: Do you know what prompted the problems which you Isi raised with Ship-generation isi of the Kochery list? man and Stringfellow on the 19th.161 Did 151(A recess was taken.) [71 A: I don't recall the reason why it also indicate the diesel problem on the 161 Q: Oly Mr. tilake) Mr. Mosbaugh, let Kochery or 181 Stokes or whoever 24d i?

me turn [7 now to the transcript of your prepared it started preparing it 191 but it inteniew by Ol in ini November of l 993. ivi A: I can't recall that. I don't recall ist seems like I believe they prepared it mising that with Mr. Shipman, but i can't and let me ask that a copy of that 191 related not to the occurrence of the site recall 191 that being on the list or not on transcript be marked as Exhibit 15. area emergency. the list. ,

noi (Mosbaugh Exhibit DG-15 was niiQ: Could it have been because the poi Additionally,I can't recallifit was ini  !

marked n11 for identification.) diesel 921 start log was not up to date and listed on the list but not listed as a trip, i n21 Q: Oly Mr. tilake) This is a 195 page they wanted v31 information to be nzi perhaps. I just can't recall that from j v31 tmnscript dated November 4th,1993 brought up to date from Marcn n4i13th. his list.

of an interview v41 conducted by the 1990?

Office ofInvestigations of Allen nsi Mos- 03 Q: Is t possible that's because the ps: A: I wouldn't think so, the reason list 041 stopped on the 23rd?

baugh. The front page on the exhibit being is 961 that what Mr. Kochery or Mr.

,my rec Hecu.on is made h indicates H61 that it began at 10:15 a.m. Stokes would have n71 wanted to update nu A:

You have seen this li71 document before. the diesel start log would have nei been **"I "'I I"* AE'5I' Mr. Mosbaugh? for the purposes of classifying starts as n71 Q: And what did you do with the list?

Om A: Yes, valid n91 or invalid, and the list that I uni A: Well,I had used the list for that 3: Focussing on page 34,which we remember didn't 901 contain sufficient basis ti91 and had the specific informa-could do poiit in sevent different places, information for Mr. Stokes or Mr. 90 tion of the trip which I poi conveyed to but this is just one pilinstance,you refer Kochery to do those classifications. Mr. Shipman, as I talked about, there,at lines ten through 16,921 to the 1221 So I don't think that it would have 90 At the same time,Mr. Aufdenkampe Kochery list. Mr. Mosbaugh, descnbe to been pu an interim or something to had Mr. p21 Odom going to the control me 931 the Kochery list. supplant the valid, p41 norwalid start in- logs and developing a pu list,and to my v4 A: I was refreshing my memory with formation because I don't believe 951 recollection toward the very end of 941 the page psi you referred me to. Paul when I saw it, the infonnation there the day on the 19th, and I believe Kochery provided me a list wouldn't have probably after psi the LER was signed Page 649 Page 651 out,they came back with a list, ni that he, my mrtnory is that he in allowed me to determine valid or Page653 prepared it or Mr. pi Stokes had invalid starts. I 121 don't think it would ni and I don't remember if they had prepared it for him.It was a 131 handwrit. have allowed them to determine in valid gotten every start ni at that point, ten list consisting of sevent pages. or invalid starts, tu 1 know they were trying to find some 1411 think it had some pages,the list that 141 Q: liow did you come by the at starts, and they had said something ist I remember was for II, and he may Kochery list? that they hadn't ist gotten all the starts have had some pages mi for A and some 151 A: I went to Pau! Kochery's office yet, but it seems like at the 161 very end pages for !!, but I think I was mainly n and was 161 talking to him, and I don't { of the day,theycame back with alist out looking at pages that related to the 15 knowifI asked him a m question in that i m of the control that they had obtained, diesel. It tai was handwritten. It had a area and he showed me a list that tai he control ist log,s.

date and,I think, a 191 time, and a brief had. 191 Then I also on that da or maybe the comment about what had occurred on 191 Q: And did you make a copy ofit then next voi day, I had n ationed to Gus 001 that start, for not yourself? Wdliams who was in the ini office next nii it was pretty n.uch one line per start. O n A: I can't recall exactly what I did,if to Aufdenkampe's office,whetherornot p21 It seemed like it started sometime in I n21 took it and made a copy or if he n21 he had controllogs,and he indicated March, early ny in March, as far as the gave me his list or nu ifI took - I don't that he did usi have the control logs.

listing.I specifically I'41 rememberit con- recall how I got a copy or nei exactly taining entries on March 22nd and nst 041 So after that point in time,I used the what I did with it but I know I obtained psi control logs and got some other

-d that were the b" sis for my supply- nu those 1-11 diesel start trip failure in-that n6 informatk.n to Mr. Shipman, documents to develop 061 the list that I formation from 061 his listing. I think eventually put together on the n?! 30th, 117: Q: On the 19th of april? maybe - well, we can call it 971 a log, So at that point in time the usefulness of pri A: On the 19th of April. It seemed but it was his listing of starts. nai the Kochery list,there wasn't any use like it 991 contained information that nel Q: And it was this Kochery list that andIdon't 991 know what has happened went, start information por that went you n91 were relying on when you mised to it since that time, to a poi copy or n . r,4e n vca wa- vtc s. unnwv nu nnn crec vec nnn e-r,on=n

Ik TIIE MATTER OF: ALI.EN MOSBAUGli GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 information that I had to take fmm that 12ii A: When I got the document, yeah, 901 Q: You think that Mr. Shipman had ,

, 1211 list. the (221 statement in the document about available 12ii to him the Kochery list?

I2ai When I developed the final list,1 had the air quality and 1231 the diesel starts (22 A: I don't know.It's possible that he ,

1231 used the source documents,the con- were the two things that jumped 1241 out (231 did. It's possible that he was discuss-trol log and (241 diesel log sheets, I think at me. I began an effort to work on air ing 1241 information he had obtained ,

the diesel log, the data 951 sheets, and quality psi first. without having the list. >

1 the control log. Page 656 (251 Q: You don't have a recollection of i Page 654 ill Q: By the 19th, you were more con- what the ni So when I used information after that, vinced that 12i the information was inac. Page 658 i 121 would use source information. curate? vi date was for final data on the Kochery "

131 Q: Incidentally, while you're raising 131 A: Yes. list that you (21 saw?

that ni topic, how would you charac- 141Q: That had been provided to the 131 A: My only recollection is that I terize that task which (si you ac- NRC? believe it ni went into April,and I don't complished by April 30 of getting a list ist A: Yes, have a recollection of Isi the exact end that 161 you were confident about, easy, date of that list.

. difficult, somewhere m in between? 161 Q: And you were able to get a list that Oth h ch des b as a em Wat you m indcad W Wat M5 je ti s r aracte z t on man may have had a copy tal of the 191 A: Well,it had been my decision to difficulty)'

so-called Kochery list?

I use all poi the available information that 19 A: The list that I was - the purpos 9

I had rather than, nu for example, just of the poi list that I prepared for April ,1 A: Or he had information about the the control log. I also worked on n21 it 30th was to put my no rnanagement on * -

! mostly at home rather than at work, notice of the false stmement being p2l uti Q: Do you think,therefore,that Mr.

d nude.So yeah that's correct.1 was able Shipman 1:21 had avadable to him a list i

n31 Q

Did you j.ust take the logs home? of starts that went p31 through April to do it31 that by April 30th.

l 941 A: I took some copies of some logs v41 Q: flow much time do you think you 13th?

home, usi made some copies. I would invested usi in obtaining the documents 041 A: I don't know.

say the task was of n61 average difficulty. and then in compiling the usi infornu-I didn't consider the task uvi extremely usi Q: Is that what your testimony is tion)- here.>

1 difficult.  !

071 A: I can only give you a very crude n61 A: I think my testimony is and my pai There were difficulties to the extent estimate pai since that's something I 1

' 091 that I had to get contr il logs, some- belief n?) currently is that he may have, worked on over four years n91 ago. but I don't know. He pai was referring to I bod) that 120: routinely wosked in opera- definitely less than eight hours total.

tions, you know, and had pu logs. something. He could have had it or n91 201 Q: Looking at page 34, your state- he could have just had information 122 First I had to get control logs, but I ment there 12H at lines ten through 16 about it.

v31 found those with Mr. Williams, and would reflect that you 1221 believed the he had a couple v41 of books of them. 901 Q: Is this based on your review of the Kochery list went through April 13th, tape 12H or a transcript of the tape of The enly difficulty with control psi logs p31 correct?

is that I had to look through nuybe 50 language) ,

pages or 124i A: I need to read this tmnscript sec- 921 A: This discussion,yes,it is.

Page 655 s rt o t 1231 Q: And discussion that you're talking about 1241 took place on April 18th?

2 ni whatever the appropriate number of Page 657 pages was, psi A: I want to look at the transcript.It al The data sheets 1 got from Mr. Stokes ni previ us page. h appears to start on Page 659 page 29 so 112i need to read for a little 131 and I think he maintained the log bit here.Okay,1 have 131 read those docu. ut seems like it was the 18th or the 19th.

mfornution there, ni too. In addition, Mr.121 Robinson and I were looking at a ments now.

part of my effort was not just,Isi like ! transcript when we 131 discussed this. It l said,I chose to use all the information 141 Q: 4,as it your testimony,then,to the 151 Office of Investigations that your seemed to me more like it was on ni the J and 16i cross compare and cross refer. 19th mther than the 18th. It seems like  !

i ence. recollection was 161 that the Kochery list went through April 13th? that ist was on the 19th.

m So part of my effort was to identify tal 161 We may want to look at tapes 57 and which information was in one log but m A: Ithink mytestimonywasthatlwas 58 to m allow me to determine that not in another 191 log.So by doing that,I made the task more poi difficult than tai reviewing a transcript which I recall was,I think 191 it's on tape 57 or some-

,, 3 ,

g thing, that Mr. Shipman made poi the time that this interview 19i occurred.Mr.

crely taking one log and getting nu Mosbaugh'let me return ifI can to a not i infornution' comment aboot a list that went through '

the 13th 00 of April. document that we talked about earlier n21 At any tute,I would say it was an 031 but only in a 90 very general way, and average difficulty task. It wasn't ex. n21 That's what I was talking about when that's one of the memoranda 1:21 from tremely 04l difficult. Like I say,I know I I usi discussed with 01 the 13th of April you to Mr. Kohn,this one dated 4/12/94 1 worked on it at usi home. Since I have date was based 04 on Mr. Shipman's n31 entitled The Real Cause,The Diesel four kids at home, time is 061 scarce, comments about the list that he psi said 1.A Failure, n71 Q: You realize or you believed that a n41 Focussing on the first paraguph of false nal statement was subnutted on ]n i 6 t rou te t f pri -

, this osi document, what is the sig.

April 9th,and you 991 realized that some. n71 Q: Do you believe that Mr. Shipman nificance of the statement n61 that the time shortly tfter April 9th, poi correct, was nai referring to the Kochery list? carly morning of 3/20/90 was a cool ,

regarding the number of diesel starts? n91 A: I thought that was possible,yes, one.

F. - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ - - - - -

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

4 All.E MOSHAUGH IN TIIE MA' ITER OF: ,

Vol. 3, AuguM 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY n?1 A: It was,it was one of the coolest 061 Q: Do you know what the air n 41 So small lines are going to be affected uni mornings of the month, receiver tank n7; p: essure was when the usi more rapidly than the large receiver.

Ii91 Q: What is tte significance of that to system was operating? nel Q: Is it your view that the water

+ poi discussion? nei A: Just normally operates at 220 to which n?! caused a problem in the con-12o A: Well,if you have air that has high 240 PSI I 91 tunge in the air receiver. trol airlines got there Inui by virtue of the

! 122l humidity in it,then it has a high dew 120 Q: And what about the normal pres- dew point being reached in those p91 i point. sure in the I2il control air system? lines and moisture in those lines and air in those 12o1 lines precipitating out rather

! Iz31 If it's environment,the ambient air in n21 A: I have testified to this previously. than water getting 120 into the lines, for 124 the diesel room were to be cooled it I231 is regulated at approximately 60 example. fmm water which 1221 existed I down due to the I251 ventilation system PSI. m the air receiver.,

4 drawing in cool outside air,then 124 0: Anddidyoutakeintoaccountthe 123: A: I believe that is the most likely (241 !

Page 660 1251 difference m, the pressures when you '

scenario for the creation of water in the talked about trip 12s1 lines.

its condensation could occur inside of the lines that 121 had high humidity in Page 662 Page 664 ,

j them. VI what the dew point would have been ni Q: What's your understanding of 4

131 Q: So the signincance - for the control 121 air? how the air 121 is supplied to the sensors i 14i A: The condensation inside of those 131 A: I'm aware of the effect of pressure on the diesel?

lines ist would create water within the on 14: relative humidity and dew point, 131 A: From the receiver through the pneumatic system which 161 any good and Fm aware that tsi the dew point at logic board 141 to the trip lines to the l j engineer knows would cause senous 60 PSI is a lower dew point than 161 the sensor.

1 problems i7: with a pneunutic control dew point at 240 PSI. 151 Q: Is tsupplied onlywhennecessary,

system. 17 Q

Do you know about how much that 161 is, when you try to start the diesel l ini Q: So the significance is that the 191 lower? or is it 171 supplied at all times?

i tempenture in the diesel room on the 81 A: h's approximately 30 degrees 191 ini A: I believe there is different condi-

• morning of pol 3/20/90 was cool? Fahrenheit. The use of a zygometric tions 191 based on different trip lines. In I nu A: Well, there is two aspects to that chart can 001 determine that. it is not a addition, the noi presence of leakage 3

being v2l cool.Hecause of the way that completely constant lui function, but would effect that and the -

s the ventilation n31 system is oriented in you can go into a humidity rygometric lui Q: The so-called .006 orinces or i the diesel room, there is a 041 definite lizi chart, go to the different lines of orifice n2l that play an important role in '

potentiality for local cooling as opposed pressure and i:31 determine the change your theory,is it ii31 your understanding no to just the bulk room tempenture. in dew point- that the air supply to the n41 sensors

]

041Q: Would you agree with me that passes through the .006 orifice?

The air is down inward into the ,

humidity in 051 the airwould precipitate nst A: Under some conditions of open-

)

i building 071 under normal ventilation through sets of large uni louvers in the out, in other words, the n61 dew point tion, I n61 believe that I will be, I am walls.These louvers are oriented in 091 would be reached a good deal smyner m looking at that area, n71 and I believe the such a way that local blasts of outside air the n?i air receiver tank than in the statements or understandings psi ex-comes 12u1 in, so there could be, say, spot control airlines? pressed in this document,I am going to cooling unrelated 120 to those louvers. lini A: No. clarify n91 and correct those because I n91 Q: You wouldn't?

have a better izoi understanding of the i 122So Ithink this possibly has an impact i

on 12u causing dew to form within the " " "

120 A: No' having obtained a schenutic of it pneumatic control 1241 system. I don't through the 1221 discovery process.

want to link it just to the bulk (251 room 12u Q: Do you think it nught be reached temperature. That's my clarification or at the 1221 same time? 12u Q: So it might be that the theory that l

my 1231 A: The air receiver tank is a large you 1241 have outlined in this document, tank I2ti with considerable thermal mass you will be amending 12sl or supplement-Page 661 ing?

! as compared to small (251 three-eighths ni point. inch lines, pag ses

Izi Q

What's your basis for stating that Page 663 ni A: As I study the logic diagram,1real-

the Isi dew points were probably in the ize 121 that I may want to clarify some 80 degree Fahrenheit ni range? Therefore, you have to take into ac-count 121 the heat transfer and the rated st

tments1 made tu here because of my isi A: Well, the dew points that were of cooling of a tu small line, which initial review of that.It does 141 not affect taken and int measured on 3/29 were in would be fairly rapid as compared ni to in a general way or m any general way the 80 degree range- the mte of cooling of a very large tank. 15) the basic theory.

I?: I believe those dew points were the 161 MR. BLAKE: I'm going to stop now I?1 151 In addition to that, you have to take data ini taken closest to the time of the 16l into account the aspects of mass trans-because I have pmmised Mr. Barth to site area emergency t91 on 3/20. The leave an ini hour and a half for him to ask 4

fer within the 171 tank because the tank questi ns, and 191 it,s about 6:30. If he

values are only taken routinely once a is holding a very large volume Isi of air not month. So the closest data is, I as opposed to a tiny small line, does not take that nel time, then I wiIl believe,the dau nn from 3/29. have an opportunity to lui return to th,s i i 191 It,s similar to taking a temperature not with you.Thank you, Mr. n21 Mosbaugh. l Q: So it,s an assumption that the measurement. A therrwmeter, you UM i

. 9 data nu would also have applied on would use a very lui tiny dot device, I 3/20? bulb so that its conditions i tzi equilibrate n41 BY MR. B ARTH.

n41 A: That's my best engineering judg. rapidly as opposed to a very large item usiQ: Mr. Mosbaugh, I will ask you l j ment, that insi that would be the most nu which would only change its condi- sevent n61 questions to follow up Mr. I appropriate data to apply, tions s ery slowly. Blake's.

psce 64n .1%e 644 nonwv nennn rrve w2 .vt.co w.m tve (4ng o=M on n

IN TIIE MATTER OP: AII FN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 n71 If I mischaracterize what you say, 061 Q: On March 20,1990,were you the n71 MR. KOHN: I'm not going to object ,

please psi correct me. I think you tes. acting n71 general manager? to insi him at swering, but I will pose an -

tified that Mr.11airston 119: in 1990 sub- 08 A: No. objection ti91 that discovery with j rnitted papers to the NRC which he respect t remedy has not 1201 been  ;

knew poi contained false information:is n91Q: When were you acting genemi begun and we have not deposed Mr.i2u l

• • "^8 '

Woodard or Mr.Beasley on this area.So that correct?

12 i : Never. with p21 that.1 will allow him to answer.

tan A: If you're referring to the 4/9/90 letter 1221 and the LER,are you referring 12u Q: Were you acting as assistant 123j THE WITNESS: I don't fully know 1241  ;

to others? general (221 manager? enough about Mr.Woodard to be com- )

1231 A: Of plant support,yes. fortable 1251 answering your question.  :

last Q: I think either he did or he didn't.

1341 Regardless of what the letters may 1241 Q: And when was this time period, Page 670 '

- be, is it your (251 testimony that Mr. sir?

ni Q: Oly Mr. Barth) Could you answer liairston submitted information to 125 A: I was made acting general the 121 question with regard to Mr.Beas- i Page 666 manager or ley who is now 13] genemi manager of ,

1 fu NRC in 1990 which you knew con. Page 668 the plant?  :

tained false 121 information? ni acting assistant general manager, 14] A: I have difficulty answering with plant support, in 121 approximately respect 151 to Mr. Beasley, also, because 131 A: Yes,that is my testimony.

March of 1989 and held that position 13] there isn't an issue 161 that involves Mr.

ni(Discussion ensued off the record.) until approximately May 10th of 1990. Beasley that we have not done 17 dis- ,

15 Q: Oly Mr.11arth) Sir,do you consider ni Q: You had another assistant general c very on that would help me in reach- l that16: Mr.Hairston,because of the sub- 151 manager, Mr.Greene;is that correct?

• 8 "" 3 * ' ""8** '

• I "' 9 "**" "'

mission of false I?! information to the 191 S I find it difficult to answer the noi !

NRC, so lacks character that he tai 161 A: Mr. Greene assumed the role of assistant m general manager, P tant sup-question with respect to Mr.Beasley,as should not be permitted to engage in wc!!, o u because of not having done the a

activities 19 related to Atomic Energy Act  ! in approximately May tal 10th of '

deposition or n21 discovery with him.

191Q: Do you feel that the lack of in- p3 Q: Do you feel that the Vogtle facility  ;

poi A: Yes,because of the - nel should not be permitted to operate j tegrPy noi and character ascended nil MR. KOHN: Do you want him to - I above Mr. Hairston in the nu corpora- at the present psi time under the people n2l don't know how you want him to tion? who are now operatmg m at?

answer the p3i question,just as a yes? n21 A: Yes,1 do. n6 A: Yes,I feel it should not continue

{

p4: MR. BAR TH: Most of the questions,1 to be n71 operated under the manage- ,

am usi entitled to yes or no, but at the 1:31 Q: Do you feel that Mr. Mcdonald ment structure that now nel exists. <

same time usi he is entitled to explain an lacked n41 character so as to not be li91 Q: Do you feel that the Nuclear I answer. If he n71 wishes to explain an t rthy to operate a psi nuclear Regulatory 1201 Commission has failed in Y'

answer, I certainly nni would not its operations to protect (zu the public prohibit him from doing so. ii61 A

Yes,I do, health and safety by permitting the 1221 '

j il9THEWITNESS: Yes, because of the I:710: Did that extend above,does your Vogtle facility to operate at the present 120 multiple submittals and the pattern opinion nei extend above Mr. Mcdonald time?

of (2n submitting false information and to the president of the n91 corporation p31 A

I understand that the NRC is still then 122i proceeding to continue to at the time? in the 1241 process of making decisions cover up and not be p31 candid with the poi MR. KOHN: For clarification, the pH on these issues.So I usi beheve the NRC ,

NRC about admitting errors pu and president of SONOPCO, we might con- has failed in the extent that i resching the problem. siderto be p21 Mr.Farley orthe president Page 671 1251 Q

Oly Mr. Barth) Going again back of Georgia p3: Power?

to 1990, 124: MR.BARTH: 1 don't know where til think they should have been more SONOPCO 125) came from. timely,but I would p) reserve opinion on page 667 that until the Nuclear Regulatory 131 in is it your opinion that Mr. McCoy is Page 669 Commission completes what has been a 1

i tainted by the 121 lack of good character lii MR. KOHN: Are you looking at a 1990 lengthy ni investigation and makes a to the extent that he should 13: not be 121 time frame,I guess? determination and if, once 151 they do 2

permitted to engage in activities subject 131 MR. BARTH: In March of 1990.there that,I hope they do the right thing and to nithe Atomic Energy Act? was ni no SONOPCO. I 161 guess I would only say I could only '

isi A: Yes, because of similar response 151 Q: Oly Mr.11arth) Could you answer hope that it had m been a little faster.1 that 1161 gave for Mr. Hairston. the 16) question? resene judgment until they isi make 171 Q: I would then take Mr. Bockhold,

• m MR. KOHN: You're referring to the 181 19: Q: At a minimum would the right who was ini the plant manager at the president of Georgia Power? l time,and ask you the same 191 questions- 191 MR. B ARTH: Yes-

1. * "* E * * " " * "

does he so lack character that he should Mr. McCoy from engaging in ny the tipi not be permitted to engage in ac- poiTHEWITNESS: I think my answer present activities which they do? ,

- tivities regulated nu by the Nuclear w uld nu be yes, n21 A: At this point you're asking my Regulatory Commission? ii21 Q: (By Mr. Barth) Mr. Mcdonald has opinion n3: about remedy,what I guess tizi A: Yes. n w been 031 replaced by Mr.Woodard is being referred to as 041 remedy. I and Mr.Bockhold has been 041 replaced believe there should be management usi 101Q: You were the acting general by Mr.Beasley.Is it yourview that Mr.insi changes. I believe there should be a manager at 041 the time;is tliat correct. Beasleyand Mr.Woodard are also tainted change, a 061 program instituted to sirr with this usi culture of lack of good change a culture that i 1 71 believe ex. >

nst A: No. character? isted and continues to exist.

m_._... ...-<on ~ - - . - .

'A1LEN MOSHAUGH IN TIIE MATTER OF:

Vol 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY usi Q: The question was in direct rela- usi Mr. Iturr was either holding or had Mr. Kohn the real cause n71 of diesel 1-A tion to 09 Mr. Hairston and Mr.McCoy next 06i to him a jar partially filled with failure, characterize that as stating usi <

to whom you already tzoi testified lacked fluid that im appeared to be water,and that your view is that water in the lines cF meter, we played a tape relative usi to the con- caused the ti91 problems of the

12. .: I believe that part of the manage. versation that occurred in that setting. switches?

ment p21 changes should include their ti91 Q: Could you briefly summarize the 1201 A: Not necessarilyof the switches. A removal (mm their 1231 current authority thrust of 1201 that tape, sir? pu proper characterization of my over Plant Vogtle. I2u A: The thrust of the tape was when theory is that water 122; formed by con-12410: Three times. sir,you responded to I saw the 1221 jar of fluid,I asked what's densation within the diesel pneumatic usi questions from Mr.lllake to the effect that, or something to 1231 that effect, 1231 system, pneumauc control system that Mr. where did that come from. caused a variety of 1241 malfunctions in-ciuding the failures during the site 1251 Page 672 1241 Mr. Burr stated that it had poured out,

"'## ***#E*"'I' 1251 and it was further clarified that it had 01 Chennault saw, quotes, water poured poured out Page 676 out of the trip pi lines, close quote. Is that a reasonable 131 characterization of Page 674 l Q: Did it cause corrosion in the Cal-your testimony? 01 of a trip line, meaning a diesel ici A: Not exactly. My references there pneumatic trip 121 line, t y ae a" "

are to Isl a portion of the transcript n n o 13j 1 think words were,say,out of the end the materials of the Calcon ist sensors where Mr. Ilurr and Mr.161 Chennault ni of it. I think Mr. Chennault had been would be genetully corrosion resistant discuss he pouring of water out of a trip the one who ist added out of the trip m line, and based on Mr. Chennault s to 161 water.

lines as to the origin of 161 where it had contribution to ini the conversation, I poured out. mQFmm your own personal infer that he was there and knew 191 knowledge there ist was corrosion of m Q: And in response to questions from the sensors) about it or saw it. your ist counsel, did Mr. Burr not testify poi Q: Do you recall the piece of tape 191 A: Since most of the components are he did not recall 191 this? .

W ICC3 3 se e o e e h Ilu i c i t2l 1 a ed in the room with a jar or a glass of n3 1 il Q: When your counsel deposed Mr. wouldn't be corrosion in them.

water? Stokes, did lizi not Mr. Stokes also testify 02 Q: The question is do you know of l g' he did not recall this? your own 03) personal knowledge if in3t A: I believe that's true, there was corrosion in the I 41 Calcon usiQ: You do not recall playing the sensor switches) t- - that liot son of a tape at the deposi. I 41 Q: Does Mr.Chennault recall this at '

alp- H51 A: My only knowledge about cor-t of Kenneth Burr?

ust A: We didn,t depose Mr.Chennault. rosion within n61 a Calcon sensor is ob-

07) A: No,l'm sorry.1 thought you were tained from NUREG 1410.

nei talking about - li610: Do you have any other informa- im MR. BARTH: Counsel.could you ask li91 Q: Should I try the question again, t n di hli out tell you whether your usi witness to answer the question?

sir pai A: I,m not sure if Mr.Ilurr or Stokes n91 MR. KOHN: He answered it. He said poi A: Yes. I20i that he has no knowledge otherthan 12:1 Q: Did you attend the deposition of

• • • • " '***"I" "' * * ' what's in 12n NUREG 1410.

Kenneth pal Burr? pm Do you kmm of anyone who 122i MR. BARTH: Thank you for that.

questioned Mr. I2n Chennault and told p5 A: Yes,I did. p31 Q: (By Mr. Ilarth) Does the NRC you the results of his 122 questioning in pii Q: Did you play a tape at that deposi- this regard? analysis pii agree with your theory that tion? p31 A: Yes.Mr. Robinson indicated to me water caused the usi pmNems?

[251 A: We played one or more tapes at that 1241 he was going to question Mr. Page 677 that Chennault.That is an 1251 additional fact ni MR.KOHN: Can you identify which Page 673 I am aware of. NRC pi analysis?

Page 675 13 MR. B ARTH: Any.

in deposition.

pl Q: Did one of those tapes contain a ni Q: Did he tell you the results of his (21 HI Q: (By Mr. Barth) Did the NRC passage 131in which Mr. Burr walked into question to Mr.Chennault? analysis ist after the accident on the 20th a room in which Hi Mr.Chennault was 131 A: I can't recall that he told me the ni of March support your 161 theory that results. there was water in the h,nes?

present and Mr. Burr walked into Isl the room and said he had a glass or water or niQ: Is this piece of tape part of what m A: I can -

a jar 16i of water. Do you recall playing t61 cominces you that there was water 181 MR.KOHN: I are you referring to that piece of tape? in pneumatic m lincs which caused the NUREG 1911410?

n A: I would like to clanfy your isi char. problem with the Calcon tal switches? noi THE WITNESS: I consider the NRC's acterization of the situation.We did play 191 A: It's part ofit,and the testimony of n u analysis to be that which is contained a 191 tape relative to the situation you're not additional witnesses is an additional in 02: NUREG 1410. However, that describing. pn1 However, Mr. Burr was in part of it, nit because despite the fact analysis is a 031 melding of the NRC's s' mom, he didn't walk nu into the that those three witnesses n21 denied analysis as obtained 041 from Georgia a .n. having found water in the trip lines, Power plus whatever analysis nst they tizi Mr. Stokes was in the room on the other 031 witnesses acknowledged their added to that.It doesn't state in the n61 phone n31 and Mr.Chennault was sitting memory that water was nei found. NRC analysis.

into the roc:n. I v41 walked into the psi Q: Would it be proper for me to char- 071It states the licensee conclusion.1 usi room. acterize ti61 your Aprd 12,1994 note to believe it states the licensee has con-4 lboe677.thoe67'T i Min.Y TA nin++ Runuw urnouvrw. Tw' (/sn.O R76.R070

i' l

. l IN TIIE MA'lTER OF: Af I EN MOSHAUGII l GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 l ciuded ti91 or something to that effect summer of 1990. I sent (201 additional ti?j A: I guess I lack sufficient under-that the most 1201 probable cause is im- documentation to Mr. Robinson.1 recall standing usi of decline to prosecute.1 ,

proper intermittent 1211 operation of the 12 1 I sent additional allegations to Mr. know they dropped the 09: case,to use i Calcon switch.That does (22 not agree Robinson, more lay terminology.

with my analysis, and I believe (23 that 122l So I would say the sum and substance 1201Q: And some five months later in statement of the licensee's most f241 of 1231 the information I gave to Mr. July, you pil testified before the U.S.

probable conclusion is incorrect. Robinson is not 1241 limited to the two 01 Senate committee on 122: Erwironment *

int Q

Oly Mr. Banh) Are you aware of interviews. Health Works, Exhibit No.8,and on page the 1251 It's those interviews plus documen. 123: ten you stated after the accident. I

]

Page 678 tation was able to 1241 record evidence demonstrating that tnanagement had 125:

ni conclusion of the manufacturer of the Page 680 engaged in criminal conspiracy to con- '

switches,Izi sensors? ni plus allegations that I have given him ceal 13 A

I'm not aware that the manufac. over the 121 course of time.

Page 682 i turer of 141 the switches,the Calcon cor- 131 Q: Did you tell him what telephone potation, did an ist analysis which con- calls had 141 been made and did you ask 01 safety-related information pertaining cluded anything about the diesel 161 him questions about those Isi telephone to the site 121 area emergency and inten-failure during the site area emergency. calls? tionally submitted materialist false state-g71 Q: Taking you back'to Ken Burr's I61 A: What telephone calls had been ments to the NRC with respect ro the deposition,is; do you recall that Mr. Burr made when? site 141 area emergency, testified that there 191 were regular meet- til Q: During March and April 1990. Isl I just ask your eva!uation.Isn't that 161 ings every day in which the events not presumptious, after the Depanment of were discussed and at which the NRC Yes' I discussed communications dut Md I91 occurred in tMt time fmme. Justice has 171 not found the same view?

noi MR. KOHN: Were you referring to ist A: No,because the statement says Ii91 on A: I know from his deposition and the ou conference calls in tapes 57 and documented evidence that showed a imm nzi events occurring at the time crimid noi c nspiracy. I gave that 59')

that there were n31 frequent meetmgs evidence to the NRC.

4 with the NRC and a whole variety n41of p2l MR. BARTH: I haven,t an answer.

• N mu at e ene Georgia Power people. usi Q: Oly Mr. llarth) Have you read, Mr. g eri tf

, pe .e usiQ: Did you attend those meetings, 941 Robinson s 01 report?

, the psi Department ofJustice, and that sir? nsi A: Yes,I have- process occurred for 941 a period of time n61 A: I attended some, probably not all 061 Q: And do you agree with it? untilit was dropped.

that n7

many, but I attended some meet- usi I don't know all the grounds for it 07: A: I guess basically I do. However,I ings with the !!T team usi or members.

nei believe in some areas, the 01 repon being n61 dmpped, but that says to me n91 Q: Do you recall discussmg does not go far (191 enough in detail. that the Criminal n71 Investigation pmblems with 12ni the diesel genetutors I201 Q: Do you think that it is,with its [2n Division of the NRC thought, didn't ust '

at those meetings? think it was presumtious, that it had exhibits, persuasive?

(2n A: Yes, problems that were dis- inv Ived a n91 criminal conspiracy or 122: A: Yes cussed with 1221 the IIT team. they wouldn't have forwarded 1201 it to I

1231 Q: Is it correct that you worked 1231% Do you think that an educated the Department ofjustice.

closely 124 with Mr. Robinson,the NRC person with 124 a normal intelligence would be persuaded that the 1251 con- 12n Q: Are you aware that the group in I investigator,in 125) developing his inves- the NRC 1221 called, for lack of a better tigation?

5 " reached by Mr. Robinson are ct? M Vogtle (231 Coordinating Group, Page 679 did not arrive at a conclusion [241 that Page 681 criminality was involved, are you aware ni A: No, I wouldn,t say so. When you 01 A: I would think so. of 1251 this?

say 121 developing his mvestigation,you l21Q: You are aware that the 01 inves-mean like writing 131 his report? Page 683 1410: No. Did you suggest areas for him ni A: No, that's not, that wouldn't be to 151 investigate.

rtm t t f Jt ce ni the exactly 121 my understanding.The reason resiew;are you not?

ist A: I gave Mr. Robinson allegations. I for that is that 1131 thought that wrongdo-gave 171 Mr. Robins (m testimony.

isi A: At that point in time, yes. ing,which I guess to me equates n! with ini Q: Is the sum and substance of the 191 161 Q: You're aware that the matter was criminality, included.1 will use the term infornution you gave to Mr. Robins <m resiewed (?) by a grand jury in Atlanta, ist careless disregard and it is my percep-contained in not your allegations and in Georgia;are you not? tion and maybe ici l'm incorrect that your two depositions? Not ou deposi- tai A: Yes,I am. careless disregard is what the !?) coor-tions, examinations under oath. 191 Q: You are aware that on March 31, dinatmg group found.

. 02: A: I gave Mr. Robinson allegations at 1993, pol Sally Yates wrote a letter that 181 Now, maybe I'm misunderstanding my n3: first meeting before my first 01 the Department of nu Justice had the NRC's 191 structure and level of viola-interview,I had a 041 lengthy discussion declined to prosecute the case? tions, but -

with him where Iinformed hira of n'>i a n21 A: I am not aware of the date.1 know poi Q: Is it not true that the 01 investiga-lot of things and gave him documenta- that p31 the Department of Justice's in- tion on came to the conclusion that tion that's a n61 meeting that occurred in volvement ended with n41 respect to the Georgia Power personnel 021 intention-mid June of 1990. case. ally and deliberatly lied to the NRC?

1871It wasn't untilaboutjuly,it seems like 951 Q: Are you aware that the Depart- n3 A: Yes, it's my understanding that osi the 17th or 18th that we did a formal ment of n61 Justice declined to the 01 nei made those kinds of state-interview. I n91 sent,in the course of the prosecute? ments.

-..--.....,,n . -,_. ..

AI LEN MOSBAUGII IN TIIE MA~ ITER OF:

Vol 3, August 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Inst Q: And you have testified that that tion of pai the group is not of any inter. 1211 Q: Do you have any kind of an idea report oss is persuasive.Did the Vogtle est.The n91 group's opinion is ofinterest. how long 1221 each one of these tapes Coordinating Group's ici report reach I don't care 1201 who is on that.I'm asking last? Were these hour tapes i231 or two

'same conclusion, sir? was the group's I2ii view reasonable, hours)

. . A

No.it did not. i22 MR. KOHN: Well,I object. 124i A: They were not a!!,1 don't believe n910: And, therefore,is it proper to as- 123: MR.BARTH: Do you still maintain they 1251 were all recorded at the same sume 120i that these people simply can- that 1241 he nuy not answer that ques- speed.but the not understand the ini report or are tion? Page 688 misguided?

125i MR. KOHN: If you want him to main- lii majority of them were recorded at the 1221 MR. KOHN: l'rn going to object to tain speed where 121 they would have ap-i the (231 question inasmuch as you're as- proximately a maximum of one hour 13l king the 1241 witness to speculate as to Pane 686 on a side.

i the knowledge and (25: involvement of ni a response as to the group's the coordinating gmup. 141 Q: Is that two hours a tape?

reasonableness,121 then he needs to know the identity of the 131 group. 151 A: A maximum of two hours a tape if Pa9e 684 they 161 were recorded -

oi Discovery has been pending for many !41 You have failed to provide that Isi g 12l months for the NRC to provide that mf rmation to date.lf you will provide 13; inf'ormation, am1 I belicve tile judge it tel now in your question,I will allow l81 - -

the m witness to answer' September? 9/7/90, does 19l that com-entered 14i an order requiring the . port with your memory?

responses to be Isi filed. 1"I MR. B ARTH: Are you instructing him nm m m answer >. not A: No,my memory was that the first 1611nasmuch as you are just asking the 171 tape was lui made in february, not witness to speculate,I find the question n,oi MR. KOHN: March, at tai this time to be improper, vide lui the m,formation I,m asking heyou to pro-needs to j answer.

g 19:Q: Oly Mr. Ilarth) Could you answer 31 approximately?

the noi question, please? 121 MR. B ARTH: Answer the question.

no MR. KOHN: Could you restate the n3 MR. KOHN: Mr. Mosbaugh,if the oil September usi of 1990.

n21 question, please? coordinating group consisted of in-dividuals psi who were incompetent, 61 Q: Mr. filake questioned you about n310: Oly Mr. Ilarth) Do you find that this very t ri briefly at the last deposition.

i the view v41 of the Vogtle Coordinating would that affect your 961 answer?

Could you start the pai tape recorder Group is unreasonable? Im MR.BARTH: I'm conducting the nel with your hands outside of your pocket usi A: I don't agree with - I don't agree deposition, not you. Under the regula- 09l or would you have to reach in? Could "h n61 the view of the Vogtte Coor. tions 091 you are permitted to object and you tell me t2nt the mechanics of how

! .ating Group in its in report.I believe state your 1201 objections and that's all. this worked?

that the coordinating group has nai been I'm not here to (2n argue, Mr. Kohn. If you want to instruct him (221 not t 12n A: I would start the tape recorder by too tax in its viewing of these violations, answer, instruct him not to answer. having 1221 my hand inside my pocket, and n91 I believe the Vogtle Coordinating Gnmp did not use f201 all of the factual 1231 I will be glad to take it to the judge im & W yuu turn the tape on and on basi 3 that's in the 01 report. 124t ifl have to.You have }uur choice,but "*i"N' * *' "" ## ' "E ***

t as to eliminate what I2si you thought was 90 I additionally believe that I hope that I,m 1251 not here to argue.Ilesides,1 don.t just not relevant or garbage?

i 1221 the members of the Vogtle Coor i have dinating Group will123i use the addition ~ ! Page687 al facts that have been obtained 1241 ni A: Generally not, but I couldn't give through these depositions to take a ni much time.It's a rather simple ques- you an 12i absolute answer in that regard.

second look. tion, I21 was the group s conclusion Generally I tried 131 to get the segment 2 usi Q: You already testified, sir, that a reasonable. of the conversation that I was ni record-

13i MR. KOHN

I will restate my ni objec- ing in its full context.

Page 685 9

tion.The witness can amwer. ist So generally I would, if I knew 161 ni reasonable and intelligent person ist THE WITNESS: I disagree with the i61 beforehand that I wanted to record a

would come to the vi same conclusion group's view,and in light of what I know, particular m conversation, I would at-as the OI report. So I didn't ask 13; you i m believe the group based its view on tempt to initiate it at the ial beginning of the question since the Vogtle Coordinat' some tai information that has now been

ing Group ni did not come to that con- the conversation or when I entered the shown to be (9) incorrect. 191 conversation and would not ter-noi So because of those factors 1 believe minate it until I left 001 or until the 151 MR. KOHN: First,l obj.ect because the conversation ended.

lui at this time the group's view and 161 coordinating group is not a person. conclusion n2l is not reasonable to me, ini llowever, sometimes if I was not n Group think is a very different thing. At the time the 03: Vogtle Coordmating recording n2: and a conversation struck int and we do not know who the coor- Group made their view,I v41 didn't and up,if you will,then I v3 would need to dinating group 191 is. So I'm going to perhaps they didn't know as much psi initiate tape recording of the 041 conver-instruct the witness not not to answer. as I know. sation that I was interested in recording.

lut MR. BARTH: You are wetlaware that n6 Q: Oly Mr.11arth) Cculd I take you psi Q: Did you initiate conversations in

• 021 court cases are quite clear that back to im when you began making order n6; to record them if you knew a should 031 not - tapes, When did you start par making there was a topic that im should be n4: MR.KOHN; If you can tell us who these tapes, Mr. Mosbaugh? recorded?

the 091 coordinating group is. 991 A: I believe the first tape recording nel A: No,I generally went about doing

06) MR. B ARTH: If you will be quiet,I n71 that I (201 made at Plant Vogtle was in my n91 business as a manager the way I will continue, Mr. Kohn. The composi. February of 1990. normally did which.tzolin manv records, i>, And.i>,m.6en uso nc- nonww nennn rwe we m a n o'M on-a

IN TIIE MNITER OF: ALLEN MOSBAUGII ,

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 I did business by walking around 120 and 120 Q: Do you recall the numbersJimmy 12410: Is this any more than a layman's meeting with my people and talking to Paul Cash lati gave him) 1251 observation,or do you have any kind my (221 people. 1221 A: I believe Mr. Cash said he gave of strong 1231 That was a little bit of my manage. him 271231 and 22 or 23. Page 694 ment 1241 style,was to drop in to people's 1241 Q: Did you attend the deposition of offices. So I 125 contmued the same Mr. ps1 Bockhold, str? I factualindication that this is true?

management style. (21 A: I am in the process of reviewing Pa9e692 Page 690 the 13) information and data that I ob- ,

til A: Yes. tained through 141 discovery which in-010: Were any NRC persons present 121 Q: Did your counselask Mr.Bockhold cludes the rnaintenance work order ist during these 121 taping sessions, and I the 13 number of starts that were given list provided by Georgia Power and the exclude the tape session you 131 had with him byJimmy Paul 14 Cash? information I 161 have been able to obtain the NRC inspector in his office. 151 A: I think he did. about diesel problems and m failures, 141 A: Yes, there were some meetings and I have already noted a degree of gai

"* ""de that I isi recorded where NRC personnel were present. So the 161 answer is yes,

[ p [3 og g h I nd c rrelation,a fairly good degree of cor-relation.

fc1 m Q: Were there many of those meet- 191 Q: Will you tell us what the Pearson d' (91 esti ings) ' Product noi Moment is?

001 Q: I am done with the facts. Now I pu A: No,I cannot do that, gai MR. KOHN: I object.That has nothing would uit like your personal opinion.

191 to do with - can >ou tie this mto Knowing these people.121 which one of lizi Q: I thought you just said there is a diesel ont generators, Mr. Barth? I m not these people was telling the truth? good 031 degree of correlation. Would aware of any nn such meeting that had you tell us what it 1:41 is?

ti31 A: Mr. Cash is telling the truth,in my ,

anything to do with n21 diesel geners 41 opinion. Mr. Bockhold had already ps: A: You have asked for a technical n61 i arors.Can you tell me how it usi ties in.

put 18 and 19 nsi down on the slide statistical quantification.

nel MR.BARTH: No, but I think you before Mr. Cash brought him back (161 have 05 made an excellent suggestion it71 Q: That's what correlation is. You the list with his totals of 22 or 23 and 27 said n91 it's a good correlation and I'tn and I appreciate n61 it. I would like to ""

rephrase the question,li71 but you have 'E#Stivel)*- simply using your n91 own words.Tell us usi Q: Tlus is speculative, so please really helped me out. what the good correlation is (201 Pearson don t ti91 object, Mr. Kohn. Where on Product Moment is?

nei Q: (By Mr.Barth) On any of the mat- earth did Mr. Cash get 120i this 18 and 19 ters n91 relating to reporting of starts of t2il A: I have not reached the point in fi Rure fiorn) -

my 1221 evaluation to do a statistical diesel generators (201 after March 20, when you taped were NRC personnel 12u A: lie didn't. analysis.What i1231 have noted in terms pu present? 1221 Q: Where did Mr. Bockhold get this of correlation is that dunng 1241 the figure 1231 from? periods of days of high dew point,it has p2: A: Will you rephrase or restate that? been usi coincident with the days on I p31 didn't listen to the conditions again. 124i A: Mr.11ockhold got it between him and Mr. psi Burr,in my opinion. which the diesels 9410: You have heard it from both your counsel 12si and me. At any of the taping Page 693 Page 695 sessions which tu Q: During the course of the OI tal in experience problems.

Page 691 investigation, did you also have meet- 121 Q: Have you worked out a correla- ,

"N don m 6 m you have an impesh ni regarded the diesel generator start "

from looking at the data?

141 A:$*t . "is' the director of the Office matter or the f 21 reporting of it, the LER, i the April 9 meeting,the [31 April 9 letter. 4 ho 141 A: I have not done any statistical l Of ist Investigations? '

were NRC personnel present? mlysis 151 at this time.

141 A: Well,I believe at meetings - I it was a man by the n g- 61 Q: Could I refer you to the executive 1s1 Q: At tapings. """"* * "N " #

Isi A: I don't recall meetin8 Ben lia}es do you remember 181 that document ist A: I had a conversation with the resi- during 191 the OSI inspection, which you provided to Mike Collins?

aent m mspector of where I discussed noi Q: OI investigations-with him my concerns int about LER and 191 A: I rernember the document you're diesel statements that I taped, and I 191 nii A: I.m sorry. I may have looking poi at.The executive summary recall that when the OSI team in August misunderstood. n2l Mr. Ben llayes came of diesel operability is n u not my docu-exited,I noi recall recording that meet- t my house and met with me 031 durmg ment.That's a document that Georgia n zi ing the course of the 01 investigation Power prepared by that title.What you l hich,of n41 course, spanned a number have is my p31 write-up about that. l tutb: Were there any others, Mr. Mos-

" Y#* I41 Q: I believe there is a figure for 1989 i baugh)kVhen diesel generator starts n1 : This oris the house in Georgia? for usi Vogtle Unit I and Vogtle Unit 2 of n21A:

the LER n3i or COA issues were dis- 061 A: My residence m Georgia, that's .006 and for 1990 n61 of .08. Are these j c rrect. correct, sir? -

cussed, that's the question?

nelQ: You attended the deposition of D73 0 You testified in response to a v71 A: Those are - the .08 number was  !

question nel by Mr. Blake it s been an Jimmy Paul psi Cash,did you not? not on (181 the chart in the executive histoncal fact that when n91 the dew summary Vogtle diesel n91 operability, U61 A: Yes. point was high, the*e were problems but the .08 number was the numbertold n71Q: Your counsel asked Mr. Cash with the 1201 diesets. Do you recall this poi to me by the performance engineer what start nei numbers he gave Mr. Bock- and do I accurately 120 chatucterize it? that maintains 12u that data as of April, hold. Do you recall that? p2 A: For the period of time that I have p21 Q: Well,it may have been my lack of n9 A: Yes,I do. 1231 reviewed,that's correct. 931 attention to you and Mr. Blake. but cmn .m m on-,,mr m- n-n-s - . . . . . - . -

' ALI.EN MOSBAUGH IN TIIE MNITER OF:

V1. 3, August 24,1996 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY could you tell 941 me what the .08 rep- I think it's an 1241 annual 12 months 90: A: If they knew to ask for it or ,

resents? rather than a rolling 12 months. wanted to nii ask for it, they most cer. '

usi A: .08 represents the fraction of a (251 Q: Can you rnake any sort of tainly could.1 would like p2l to make an r le, reasonable addinonal statement with respect to the p31 last response,if I could.

Page 696 Page 698 ni the fraction of one at which time the vi scientific conclusions with three -

dicsci is 12: unavailable for service, _ tnonths of data.

12i A: I think you can.I believe this svas P **# ""

13 Q: What period of time does the .08 Page 700 cover? 131 noted in the testimony with Mr.Wil.

Ilams,in 1987 01 there is only six months ni the authority to access information at 14 A: Those data are prepared on a year. f data.It had umped up ist more than to-date ist basis, and I think I was not J the plant in ni no way alleviates the an rder of magnitude from .006 to .08. responsibility of the people 131 at the cicar at the time as to 161 whether that's a 12 month rolling average or a [7112- 16: Even though it isn't a whole year,I 171 plant for providing accurate and com-month annual average.My best recollec, think it's something that should be - plete 141 information to the NRC.

that is ini flagging a trend. Isi So in no wayis Mr.Bockhold's action tion is lui that it is on a 12-month annual average. So it 191 would represent that 1911.ike I say,I note that .08,1 believe 001 of 161 not providing complete informa-data to date in 1990,but I not would want Mr. Williams said, did not include the tional alleviated by 171 the fact that the to look at the combinations to be sure failures of In: the site area emergency. NRC has those powers.

nit about that. So I think i* is I:21 indicating a significant Ini Q: Thank you. That's well under-02: Q: Do you recallyour counselasking departure. stood.Have 191 you seen the response by Mr. 03: Webb about this figure? 031 Q: Are you talking in terms of statis- Georgia Power Company to poithe NOV, v4l A: No.To help you out,I believe he tics or n4 talking in terms of a layman's their responses datedJuly 31,1994? I n n looking at it? show you the front cover.Have you seen asked itsi Mr. Williams about it.

nsi A: I'm talking in terms of a layman this?

061 Q: Thank you,you're right.So you do rather usi than a statistical evaluation, n2l A: I have just recently seen that, 07 rememberthat? tistical n71 evaluation could pri A: Yes, sir, p31 Q: Have you read any parts of it?

be e 1891 Q* Do you recall M r. Williams' lisi Q: I think there was,it is my impres-a er P "s0

,n mi t9 t I resp (mse. sion n91 from the questions your counsel was asking that poi there was a feeling or read it in 061 detail-poi A: Yeah, he acknowledged that that was the un data at that point in time for that Mr.Hockhold was trying to 12 1 hide n71 Q: I would like to read you a sen-the 1990 data from public revelation at tence and nai ask for your comment.The 1000 ea t e.Is that a reasonable assump. sen nce is age fn e 9 f th Reply

,  : And did he not testify tha: the .08 p31 represented three months of data for 1990 which 941 would make it an arith- 03: A: I don't know about public revela. 901 One of the reasons that the BEGP metic average of the three psi months? tion, but 941 I think he knew it looked general pu manager tasked the unit su-bad. It was something usi that would perintendent to review the (221 logs and Page 697 count the number of DG starts was due raise eyebmws and have to be ex-ni A: I think it's a year-to-date figure,and plained m 931 the absence of the single source I pi think,like I said, my best beliefis that p,g,39p en@eedng st ppon m M nan W it's I31 year-to-date based on the year based on data s nects or DG's. Do you psi 1990' niifit was put on that chart;and becam e understand what he said?

ofit pllooking bad,it would have to be ni So if that's correct,it would have been explained to the 131 NRC, and he choce Page 701 ni the value year-to-date for January, to not include it in that chart. pl A: Not e::actly. I would like to read February, and 16i March. Also from Mr. that.

Williams' testimony,I believe 171 that the 1410: From your working in the plant and your isi knowledge of the plant,is 121 Q: I will provide it for you, sir,to read

.08 was stated to not include the failures in) of the site area emergency, there any data m that 161 facility that the 131 it.

" btain ysimply plwalking ni A: I have read that sentence now.

191 Q:Just to make it clear,it would not n an pi n be a noi difficult mathematical exercise 151 Q: On April 9,what was yourposiuon to determine what ini the averages were ist A: I don't know how to answer that with 161 the plant, sir in, even though you question. have answered 171 many times before?

forJanuary, February, and March 1:21to March 20,1990 to 15 ring it down to.08 (91 Q: That's a good answer.To the best tai A: Doyouhaveaquestionaboutthis?

from .006 031 from the preceding year? Of 001 your knowledge, does the NRC have the ability to nu obtain any infor. 191 Q: Yes.

n41 A: I don't believe that,ifit's correct tnation it wants from the plant? noi A: My position on April 9th,1990,I n51 that it's year-to-date basis, I don't was the nu acting assistant general believe that neithe data from 1989,then, n2l A: I believe the NRC has a right to access v3l any information they want at manager, plant support.

would play a role in the 0711990 data.If it was a rolling average,it would. the plant.1 believe n41 probably the nai Q: Did you ha,*e any working NRC's biggest problem in doing that is relationship usi with the diesel gener-pai Q: And you don't know which it is? nst there is so much m, formanon and ator log which is stated m n4 that sen-4: My best recollection at this point, there is relatively n61 so few NRC people tence?

, I uni saw year-to-date on that as an to look. nsi A: The system engineer maintained asterisk note at the 124 bottom,I think it n71Q: And if Mr. Bockhold wanted to a log n61 called the diesel generator start says YTD. play cutesy ps) and not show 1990 data, log,and that n?) engineer worked under 1221 My best recollection, having noted is it not true that the NRC 091 could find my organization. Is that the usi relation-that. u31 is that that stimulates to me that that data simply by asking for it? ship you're looking for?

Ume 606. Daane '701 Min.YT.helnde RWAW'N DTipOWTTNC TWC (dadT R"76.RO"70

t IN TIIE MATTER OF: ALLEN MOSBAUG11 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol 3, August 24,1994 ti91 Q: Were you aware on April 9 that ti91 So as long as the log was brot ght up agreed to those tapes.Could you tell me that log 1201 was not up to date? to 1201 date at the time that a statement usi why you asked us to do it twice?

120 A: I don't believe I was aware, of valid diesel ini failures in the last 991 MR. KOHN: The witness didn't hundred was being made in a (221 docu- prepare (20l those files. We would be (221 Q: In your normal course of duties, ment being prepared, then the log met happy to discuss (2ii that when I get would (231 you be aware on a day-to< lay its (231 mtended purpose. back to Washington.

basis whether that log 1241 was up to datep f 2tl The need to have the document up 122iTHE WITNESS: No, I can't tell you to date 1251 each and every day would be 1231 that.

ps: A: No,not generally.

unnecessary unless on 1241 MR. KOHN: If there is something Page 702 Page 704 you (251 would like to discuss about that ni Q: Because I don't know, where was ni that day,information was being com. for that log 12 kept? I'm talking physically. piled from it for (21 the purposes of stat- Page 706 131 A: The log that the dicsci system en- ing number of failures in the 131 last I:1 clarification,just give me a call. Char-gineer 141 kept was a summary log that hundred. les' he kept at his desk.It 151 was a summary 141 It would have concerned me if I had tabulation.The data came to him when .d known ist the log had been out of date 161 the operators filled out data sheets and used because if 16l that were true,

[#[d EE ed the d sco e uests and sent them 171 to him.He kept his log, N*

• and his log was not a ist source log.It was then inaccurate information could be 171 NRC prior to their bemr. ided,#" *g*

obtained or could be given, but I didn't a summary log based on the data 191 view that ist log as something,and I don't 151 A: I believe we have discussed them, sheets being sent to him? view that log right 191 now as something but I [6] wouldn t say that I approved or noi A: And he kept that log at his desk. that requires an absolute live time poi reviewed and 171 approved. I have had updating as long as the individua! using s me discussion about those ist issues, nil Q: 4,as his desk in a closed office but I wouldn't say I have reviewed them and the 021 office had a door? it is aware nu of ts status.

f 931 A: IIis desk was in a bull pen area D.21 Q: I was just called upon to make a  !

where 1,i41,probably 30 or 40 engineers side i i comment, that sort of was a D W h N W M W',

had their,it was in a lisi cubicle kind of -

tape recordings with NRC n21 personnel office in a bull pen kind of area on 06 I:41 A: I would like to make another excluding in regard to the diese! 031 the third floor of the service buildmg. comment usi about the statement since generator issue?

071 Q: In your position at the time,you we are reviewing that (161 statement in had a insi great deal of responsibility. As that response.That statement dida t 071 D41 0-a matter of course n91 did you check to ntake any sense to me. Mr. Dockhold s usiQ: After the tape recordings were see if these kinds of logs were up 12ol to assignment to pai Mr. Cash was not re- turned n61 over to the NRC, it is my date) lated to that log or its status. understanding th::t the NRC n71 had I2u A: No,I would not normally do that, 091 Q: Thank you for the suggestion. transcripts of these tapes made;is that no' Were y u (201 present when Mr. Bock- usi correct hold gave his instructions to 120 Mr. Cash ti91 A: That's correct.

1221 Q: The next is an opinion question, **ke t h * '"""')

Would p31 you e::pect the general (201 Q: Did you and Lori Robinson go i 1221 A: No,1 was not. over a I2u number of those transcnpts manager would check that log 12 i on a daily basis? 1231 Q: Did Mr. Bockhold tell you what and make handwritten 1221 notes as to 1251 A: No. his l2tiinstructions to Mr. Cash were? who the voices were and fill in voices usi A: Yes, he did, in the course of I231 and words?

Page 703 99 A: Yes,I did.

deposition.

pl O: Do you have any idea how Mr. Page 705 (2si Q: I have seen a number of l Bockhold pi knew as of April 9 that that transcripts with I log was not up to date? 01 Q: Thank you. You had no prior knowledge p1 from Mr. Dockhold as to Page 707 t31 A: No,I don't-what he instructed Mr. Cash 13 to do,is al handwriting on it.ls some of that your ni Q: Did Mr. Bockhold ever discuss that correct, prior to the deposition? handwriting pl or did you and Ms. Robin-with you 151 that the log isn t up to date, ' In A: No. son both handwrite on them?

Allen, get that thing 161 up to date?

i Q: DidJimmy Paul ever tell you prior (31 A: I made notations as to voice ni 171 A: Not that I can remember. to his 161 deposition what he was in- identifications and corrections as I lis-tal Q: If you had known that that tog was structed to do? tened to isi transcripts with Mr. Robin-not up 191 to date,would you have taken pl A: Yeah, he had some conversation son and Mr. Craig at a 161 time. I had a measures to see that poi it was up to with me 181 about what he did. I can't copy. I believe there were other 17 date? recallif he was telling 191 me what he did copies that Mr. Robinson had. I know I nu A: The need for this log to be up to as opposed to what his instructions pol wmte on 181 mine.

date tut was for the purpose of meeting were.He may not have said his instruc- 191 He may have written on his.1 think I NRC requirements 03: relative to report- tions.lic Iut may have just said what he poi recall him writing on his.So I suspect ing the number of valid failures n41in the did, there lui exists transcripts with mine last hundred diesel starts. n21Q Your second request for admis. and his.1 am not sure 02I that Mr.Craig usi So reports like that were reported in sions to the 031 staff requests that the at a time didn't write on some of the n31 a n61 special report to the NRC. Such staff admit the truth and 041 accuracy of transcripts, too.

special reports,we n?1 would make,and 01 Exhibit 36,and the collateral psi mat- 041 Q: In response to a question from Mr.

I believe sometimes we would meet usi ter.Those are your tapes number 57 and Blake, psi you stated that you had ex-those special reports via the LER subnut- 58. (161 Your counsel, Georgia Power perience with diesel n61 generators; is tals. counsel, and counsel for nii NRC have that correct sir?

._.....,,.n _ . _ , . . _ .

ALI. fin MOSISAUGli IN TIIE MA' ITER OF:

Vol. 3, Augte:t 24,1994 GEORGIA POWER COMPA1W 071 A: In the course of my work history problems,and 071 that kind of activity; us!Q: Did you ever yourself see any in nel nuclear power,1 have had contact but I never had the usi assignment as a water come ti61 out of the pneunutic and had 091 supervisory experience diesel system engineer and I would n91 lines to the sensors?

r -r engineers that had 120 diesel gener- not have had a lot of so-called handson n 1 A: No,I didn't. 1 t responsibilities.In the course of pli experience; poi though I have donc I training I have had some systems train- nelQ: Did you ever } ourself see anY walk-downs of the diesels and 12n cer- pmena Om water r watenapor in I

ing which 921 included diesel gener- tainly have crawled around them, been ators, but - in the 1221 field with them running and the pneumatic lines leading poi to the with them testing and p3) being tested senson.

931 Q: I don't wish to interrer.t. I do not .

121 A: Not in the lines. I saw the p.ar of 1

wish (241 to limit you to nuct' ear power; by the engineers.  ;

fluid p2l that was ascribed to have come any of your work usi experience. 941 Q: Are you certain that Mr. ut the imes.

l i

Page 708 Iloardman had the usi diesels running at the time) '

p31 Q: Except for your observations '

vi A: In my other professional work ex- about dew v41 point and Mr.Ilurr's jar of perience, pi I have not had experience Page 710 water, do you have any psi other facts with diesel generators.I131 do own some ni A: Mr.Iloardman was responsible for which would lead you to the conclusion diesel engmes. -

Page 712 ni Q: Is it correct for me to assume that vi Q: Construction. ni that water was in the lines leading to

'8 (31 A: Construction activities. My ni the Calcon al sensors?

rr eito t tt 6 you la at hc responsibilities were overthe preopera- 131 A: Yes,the testimony of some of the Vogtle facility? tional ist testing activities, and yes, my

, ni witnesses that we have deposed.

p1 A: No.1 worked at other facilities, recollection is that I61 the diesels were 1s10: Could you help my bad mernory 18: Q: Could you tell me their names, sir? operational. I believe we had the r1 nd te inc ni w sse

)

19) A: I worked at the Zinuner Nuclear {coperational testing 90, 95 percent Power noi Plant. Pat tai Mcdonald, some witnesses were, nil Q: Was the generutor operating at Q Co ldyouiden@ me yenfm me' let me say, tentative 191 in their recollec-si de time in which you were mem the Zimmer n21 plant when you were there!

g ;g y tions.They said that they may not have seen water so I will mclude those. I .

'N#I5 03:A: I believe that - believe nii Mr. Holmes was one of those nil A: I was at Zimmer in the time fmme witnesses, n4 Q: It,s never operuted, of n2: 1977,approximately,to 1984. n2: I believe Mr. Charles Corsey, main-usi A: Excuse me. n31 Q: Can you recall when those diesel tenance n31 superintendent having Q: The Zimmer has never operated, nel generators were tested for responsibility over the v41 diesels, was perability? an individual that said he remembered no A: Yeah, I know, but the plant's equipment uni was in a fairly advanced 051 A: No, I can't. The Zimmer plant usi that, state of pt copemtional n91 readiness and went 06 through more than one 061 Q: During your stayat the Vogtle site, I believe that included the diesel poi preoperationaltest program n71because can n7: you tell me how many times you generator. of its construction problems,and I can't saw Mr. Mcdonald nel on-site in the n81 recall- diesel room?

pii I had responsibility over the same area p2l like system engineers and 091 Q: Did you have experience with n91 A: I can't recall that i ever did.Just preopemtional test p31 engineers. I diesels at poi another nuclear facility? I to poi make sure we are not miscom-believe at the time that Zimmer was p4; believe you used the pil plural when I municating here, these pii people are shut down,let's say the preoperational asked you abot* cxpenence. people that said they knew of the p21 testing was usi almost 90 percent com- p;i A: I didn't have a resp (msibility at occurrence of water within the system.

plete. any 1231 other facility other than Vogtle I'm not p31 saying they testified that they Page 709 and Zimmer that pu involved activities saw it first hand. p41 I hope we are clear over the diesels. on that.

9si Q: At the Vogtle facility,I understand i Q: I assume with the sapienty of

> r 12 ei c It e dies I g -

h crators. Did you put (31 your hands on it, take it apan, help put it 141 together? Page 711 Page 713 151 A: No. ni you had supervisory responsibility. ni counsel, you followed up and asked Did you ever ni help to handson ex. Mr. Mcdonald who ni he told you saw toi Q: I want to know what kind of ex. water. Who did Mcdonald say told (31 pertise you FI have had with a diesel amine the diesel at the Vogtle 131 facility?

generator. I will allow you tai to develop ni A: Yes,1have.1have crawledoverthe him he saw water in the lines?

that for me. Isi diesel and been very up close and nl A: I'm not sure Mr. Mcdonald,I don't personal with the 161 Vogtle diesel.1 have recall isi Mr. Mcdonald's response to 19i A: I would not have hadthe handson poi experience with the diesels. Like I done a field walk-down and ri probably that question if he was i6 asked.  ;

said. I have no had some systems train. spent a good bit of time in the diesel Fl Q: Good answer. Do you recall Mr. I ing, diesel generators as part 021 of my room tel reviewing the typing layouts Holmes 181 telling you who told him he systems training and SRO kind of train. and the equipment,and 19: I have been saw water in the lines?

present a number of times during diese? 19 A: No.1 believe if he was asked that, not testing and diesel nms, he noi said he couldn't recali. He was

~, llecause I supervised the engineers that (141 were testing diesels and en- vil Q

Did you help remove the Calcon tentative about his nii resp (mse.

gineers that had the psi system respon. sensors n21 for examination afterthe site n21Q: Do you recall who Mr. Corsey .

sibilities with diesels, I would be 06i emergency on March n3120,1990? said told 931 him he saw water in the i involved in diesel generator issues, no A: No,1 didn't. lines?

pene ins . p%ne 71

• win.vt.ce ,w e nonww wennwrwc we rann e%enno l

IN TIIE MATTER OF: ALLEN MOSBAUGII GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Vol. 3, August 24,1994 n4) A: I believe he was asked that,and I half that per page rate. 09 Incidental " *8' ", ,, ,,,'," ,,"* g7"'d ***

dont usi think he could remember direct expenses of production may be Page No _ tine No __shouid m.d wherc hc had obtained that ti61informa- 1201 added to either party where ap- Aad the re**oa 'o tha chaase '*

tion from. niicable. "**'***"'"'"*'""""'**"

s please tumish same m typewritmg annemed to this n71(Discussion ensued off the record.) 12ii Our customary appearance fee will d==dioa-nel Q: Gy Mr.Barth)Mr.Mosbaugh, time be cigrged to (221 the party taking this S.orn ia and oubsenbesEN has n91 run out for me, but if you would deposition. m,s me __.av of .i9g .

like to amplify any (20i of your responses NOTARMBUC (23 This,the 25th day of August,1994. uy comm .on o.pi,.s ine day oe to me,I would like you to feel 1211 free JUDYJ. BRAGG, CCR-A-521 (25i My com- 199 _

to do so unless your counsel closes it mission expires on the down on 1221 time. I do not want any impression that we are 1231 trying to shut you off from saying what you feel you 9th day of December,1994.

r241 should say.

125) A: I don't have any further response Page 717 to your DEPOSITION OF ALLEN MOSBAUGtVJJB i do h.,.by c.tity mai s n... ,.ad an p,9 quotim propounded to ,ne and ali an. m ni questions. 9'ven by rne on the 24th day of August.1994. laken before Judy J Bragg, and that I21 MR. BARTH: Then I have no further __ y Th.,e .e no chen,a noi.d.

131 questions. I do appreciate your ap- 2) The re-ma changa ve nied Pursuant to Rule 30 (7)(e) of the Federal Rules pearing 14l hcre, ,, e,,,, p,,c,,,,, ,ng,or the orticial code of isi MR. KOHN: This concludes Mr.161 Geesia Annowed ea i 30<.L botn ot .h ch r.ad in Mosbaugh's deposition. Thank you, ri ''""Y'"*"'"*'"""*"b*"****'*"""

de. to man. shaii be .nier.d upon th.

gentlemen. depoonion.. .im . swomen, or me ,.-ns ini(Deposition concluded at 8XX) p.m.) 8'aa '* "*"*8 'a*"' ^cco'omo'v. 'a *** =' you m etiecimo corrections. pieas. use tne iorm beion Page 715 Page No _Une No . ,_should road.

INDEX TO EXHIBITS And the <*ason for the change .

Mosbaugh Page No_Lme No _should read Enhibel Dennption Page And the reanon for the change es 00-9 Invesugative interv.. Page No _,,_Lme No _should read hi&/90. Allen Mosbaugh 625 And the 'eason for the change is DG 10 Aequeel for Pleadmgs and Page No ,,_ _Lme No _, _should read j

imposition of Civil Penaltes $56 And the reason for the change .

DG 11 Atledavit of Page No ,, Lme No __ ,should read )

Alien L Mosbaugh 666 And the reason tw ihe change is DG-12 Document. Moanaugh to NRC '

submined wet sao Page 718 DG 13A Intervonor s Response to First DEPOSITION OF ALLEN MOSBAUG4JJB Requesi for Documents by GPC 814 Page No _,,_Line No .,__should read And the reason tof the change .

DG-130 GPC s Forst Interrogatories to Alien L Mosbaugh 614 Page No _Une No _should read And the reason for the change is DG 14A GPC's Second Intertogatones to Allen L Mosbaugh 629 Page No __Une No _should read.

DG 14B Intervenor s Response lo Second And me mam tw me change .

l Intermgatorwe by GPC 62, Page No _Lme No _,,,_should read And the reason for the change is i DG 15 investigative interve..

11/4/93 Allen Mosbaugh 648 Page No __,.Line No _should read I (Origmal Exhibits OG 9 mrough DG t5 have been ^^d '"' '*" the change is f attached to the ongmai transcnpt ) Page No __ Lme No ,,_should read And the reason for the change .

Page 716 Page No ,Lme No _should read ni STATE OF GEORGIA: Page No _ Lme No ,_should read

^^8 '** ***a "ha chan9*

• COUNTY OF FULTON:

13 I hereby certify that the foregoing 141 DEPOSITION OF ALLEN uOsBAuGWJJB tmnscript was reported,as stated in the p.,e No __._tme No _snoo,, ,e ,

caption, ist and the questions and And the reason tor tho chango es answers thereto were reduced 161 to * *S'

• L '"* * ***u'd *a typewriting under my direction:that the ^l'[No' **"un'". * "'" * *id,oad pl foregoing pages 463 through 715 rep- And the e.a.on to, the chang. .

resent a true, mi complete, and correct Page No .,,,,_ une No _,,should road. l And the reason for the change is j transcript of the evidence 191 given tipon p.,e No _.,_une No _,noo,, ,,,,

said hearing and I further certify that not And th. reason to, the ch.nge ..

I am not of kin or counsel to the parties Page No _Lme No _shouid read in the nu case;am not in the employ of 7,d, *'No "'"" t'", [* *"*"L*,,, ,,,,

counsel for any of n21 said parties; nor And th. n tor m. chang. .

am I in anywise interested in the n31 Nge No ,_Une No _should read result of said case, ^""***'""'****"'"'**

n41 Disclosure Pursuant to O.C.G.A.9 Page 720 3 .

DEPOSITION OF ALLEN MOSBAUGWJJB 8 (d): usi The party taking this deposi- p.,eNo.__,_tme N,,, .noo,,,,,,

tion will receive f161 the original and one And me ee-n va me change .

copy based on our standard and n:1 cus. Page No _._Lme No _ _should read tomary per page charges. Copics to ((No _'""o,e l""*"'* *,,, ,,,,

other parties usi will be furmshed at one And me .on to m. hang. . i em m. . mmm.ww.,e e. e r i a n n=r aa a . . . - . - -

• l