ML20127P676
| ML20127P676 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 06/17/1982 |
| From: | Schuh J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17215B062 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-83-161, FOIA-83-A-9 NUDOCS 8505240051 | |
| Download: ML20127P676 (18) | |
Text
r-m_.
E-VAUGHN INDEX # 49 APPEAL APPENDIX f 345 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of:
Interview of John H. Schuh Docket No.
~
Location:
Pages:
Date:
June 17, 1982 8505240051 841024 PDR FOIA BER NABEB3-A-9 PDR TAYLOE ASSOCIATES Court Reporters 1625 i Street. N %. Smte ION Washinston. D C. 20006 (202);U.3950 var n-g,
e-
~
x 1
lEITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
3
.4 5
6 7
Interview of John H. Schuh 8
9 June 17, 1982 10 Palo Verde Nuclear Station 11 i
i 12 t
13 - j 14 i; Investigators:
E.
J.
Power
!l
'j Owen Shackleton 15 l
16 l
I 17 18 i
i 19 I
20 l I!
21 I
22 23 24 l
i:
l l
25 l
l h'
e
2 s
P3ggggplygg l
2 INVESTIGATOR:
This is an interview of Mr. John H. Schuh, last name is spelled S-c-h-u-h.
Mr. Schuh is an 3
4 Electrician presently working for Bechtel Power Corporation 5
at Unit No. 1, the Palo Verde Nuclear Generation Station.
6 Present to conduct-this interview from the NRC 7
is E. J. Power and myself, O. C. Sh'ackleton, Investigators 8
assigned'from Region V.
8 Mr. Schuh, do we h' ave your permission to tape 10 record this interview?
11 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, you do.
12 INVESTIGATOR:
Thank you.
13 (Pause. )
14 INVESTIGATOR:
John, the first issue that was 15 brought to our attention was termination cards.
And what 16 the allegation was was that some of the foremen, when termina-17 tion cards are lost, or don't turn up for one reason or 18 another and a second card is then issued, have you ever had 18 that experience where you've had a card lost?
MR. SCHUH:
No, that'was -- not to my knowledge.
I understood that, talk from other guys, that it happened 21 22 ~
before engineer.
That's all I --
INVESTIGATOR:
You haven't had that experience 23 24 since you --
n 25 MR. SCHUH:
No, I haven't.
-i
.c 3
1 INVESTIGATOR:
Okay.
2 MR. - SCHUH:
Not'to my knowledge.
3 INVESTIGATOR:
I have to ask you the next question
'4-because it's one of the things that' evolved out of this.
5 Have you ever been asked to sign a termination card for work 6
that you did not perform?
7_
- MR. SCHUH:
Yes,-I have.
It was something where 8
.they hadn't got a signature on the card, and I didn't sign 8
the. card for the reason that I didn't make the crimp and that, 10 you'know, well, who knows if the guy's crimping tool was jdroppedoranythinglikethat.
So, yes, I have been asked 11 i
12 that.
ll INVESTIGATOR:
What was the -- results of that?.
13
~
'l MR. SCHUH:
It was given back to the foreman and 14 15 as far as I know, I couldn't tell you.
16 INVESTIGATOR:
What foreman was it?
II MR. SCHUH:
It happene'd to be' Joe Sandival.(?)
i 18 INVESTIGATOR:
Joe Sandival.
And how long ago?
19 MR. SCHUH:
I'd say about eight months.
It could N
be a little longer; don't --
21 INVESTIGATOR:
(Simultaneous discussion).
'That's why I told you at the beginning when I asked you questions, 22 23 -
that we don' t expect you to be able to recall perfectly.
24 Do you remember what system it may have related to' MR. SCHUH:
No, I don't.
To tell you the truth, 25
m.
4
.l-4' 1
I backed off as soon.as I could and, you know,.let them know
. 2 right away I didn't want.no part of it.
~3 INVESTIGATOR:
Do you know if it was a safety-4 related system?
5 MR. SCHUH:'
I couldn't tell you.
6 INVESTIGATOR:
Okay.
7 MR. SCHUH:
All I knew wa's it was presented to me 8
in my --
9 INVESTIGATOR:
What building was it in?
Do you 10 remember that?
11 MR. SCHUH: Turbine.
12 INVESTIGATOR:
In the turbine building.
13 MR. SCHUH:
Uh-huh.
- i 14
[
INVESTIGATOR:
Chances are most systems in there 15 are not safety-related.
16 INVESTIGATOR:
Did he ask you to do it (inaudible)?
17 MR. SCHUH:
No, he asked.
Yes.
18 INVESTIGATOR:
There wasn't any pressure?
19 MR. SCHUH:
No.
I think it was brought down from 20 supervision, and they were in trouble on something, and --
21 no way I'd do that.
22 INVESTIGATOR:
You don't know the disposition of 23 that specific termination?
24 MR. SCHUH:
No, I couldn't really tell you.
25 Because I backed out of it (inaudible).
They might have took i:
rr i
5 1
other steps.
2 INVESTIGATOR:
Do you know whether or not it was a 3
frequent occurrence? They lost cards --
4 MR. SCHUH:
To tell you the truth --
5 INVESTIGATOR:
-- any?
6 MR. SCHUH:
-- No, and it wasn't.
That was one 7
time that it happened to me and I, you know, you'd have to 8
have the other guys speak for themselves.
i 9
INVESTIGATOR:
I realize that.
5 10 MR. SCHUH:
But from what I've heard from other 1
guys, no, it didn't sound like it was frequent, at all.
11 12 I
INVESTIGATOR:
We have also received some indica-13 tions that when it-does occur, in some cases they may be l asked to go back and re-terminate it; or in other cases they. l 14 15 l say, go look at it and if you think based upon your experience i
16 as an electrician it'-s an adequate and satisfactory workman-17 ship, then sign it, this type solution.
So the re ' s a --
18 MR. SCHUH:
That's right.
19 INVESTIGATOR:
(Inaudible).
So you're not aware l of anybody else being placed in a similar type situation?
20 21 MR. SCHUH:
No, I'm not.
22 INVESTIGATOR:
Do you know whether or not it's f
23 against your procedures?
24 MR. SCllOH:
Yes, I would say that it was against i
l 25 l our procedures.
That's mainly why I turned against it right I
I i
h 1
u
m V
l 1
off'the bat. ;It's something that I definitely don't believe l
2 in,'and I don't see why i~t can't be handled differently.
1 I
'3 INVESTIGATOR:
Have you ever heard of other guys --
i f
4 MR. SCHUH:
You already, asked, c
i-Oh, I already asked.
I'm sorry.
5 INVESTIGATOR:
6 MR. SCHUH:
I think the way it.was presented to i:
I 7
Eme is like you said, to check out and due to being a qualified l-8 journeyman, check.out and see if it looked good, and -- but I 9
still didn't want to interfere in it because it was not my
{ work,andI--
[
10 11 INVESTIGATOR:
While we're on it, we may ask c
12 questions that may tend to consider one thing wrong and one 13 thing right, and that's not the purpose -- what you just said.
14 -
MR. SCHUE:
I don't know what was right (inaudible)L l
15 INVESTIGATOR:
Right.
16 MR. SCHUH:
-- we had electrical engineers t
17 (inaudible).
18 INVESTIGATOR:
Even though we may infer right or 19 wrong, I, don't mean for you to go back to the foreman and 20 say Hey, you know, the NRC doesn' t like that.
They may not.
l 21 MR. SCHUH:
No.
I won't even say it's the right i
procedure or wrong. procedure, because some of the tuff handed 22 23 down by supervision and engineering -- well that's, I'm just 24 telling you that atmosphere I take out of the whole 25 (inaudible).
l
[
-na-
'I 7
e g
1 (Speakers _off mikes, inaudible.)
2-
' INVESTIGATOR:
John, the next issue is. splicing-
~
3 a quality class safety-related cable.. We have an allegation
~
4 that some cable that was damaged.by welding slag or hadn't
~
5 been covered by a welding blanket, and rather than de-terminat 6
it and pull it, a shrink tube kit was used.and the damaged
.7 area was covered up; other cables were pulled'over so it 8
couldn't be seen, and they went on about their business.
9 Have you ever known any situation like that?
10 MR. SCHUH:
This has not~ happened to my knowledge.
11 Now let me tell you this, -
-(inaudible) I'd say a year in 12 that.round -- you know, it could have happened before my time:
13 I couldn't tell you.
Not to my knowledge and n,ot since I've 14 been on the crew.
15 INVESTIGATOR:
You (inaudible). basically?
l 16 MR. SCHUH:
Yes.
I come from a terminating crew, 17 Joe Sandival's to the high voltage.
18 INVESTIGATOR:
Can you splice a quality class?
19 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, I can.
20 INVESTIGATOR:
I mean, are you authorized on the 21 site to do it?
I didn't mean from your technical performance.
L 22 but if it's required, procedurally can you' splice a quality 23 class cable?
Or what would be the circumstances in which 24 you (inaudible).
Under what circumstances can you do --
25 MR. SCHUH:
As far as terminations on --
l l
pqm
- s.
8 1
INVESTIGATOR:
Not terminations; a splice now.
2 MR. SCHUH:
No', no you can't.
That, I've never 3
done it and I've heard that they don't do it.
4-INVESTIGATOR:
That's what I'm interested in.
5 MR. SCHUH:
Okay.
6 Don't try to stump me, because I --
7 INVESTIGATOR:
Oh, no, no, no.
We're not --
8 (Simultaneous discussion. )
9 INVESTIGATOR:
Any* question that you don't under-10
' stand; we're not electricians, we're investigators.
We're 11 not attempting to put you in a position to say Hey, you just-12 (inaudible).
I want to make sure that you understand the 13 question so that we understand your answer.
14 MR. SCIlUH:
Okay, what I know of, I've never done 15 one and I've heard that they don't.
So we'll put it that way.
16 INVESTIGATOR:
Do you know whether or not that's 17 procedurally wrong; where it's in writing that you don't splic 18 19 MR. SCHUH:
No.
I couldn't state my view on that.
20 INVESTIGATOR:
You've'never had access to the 21 L. procedures --
22 MR. SCHUH:
Right.
23 INVESTIGATOR:
John, the last subject has to 24 do with following cable de-termination procedures.
We have 25 allegations that some of the men doing terminations have done
y 9
I the termination and they just bought off by QC, and they go 2
off to do some other work 'and-then eventually'they.get back 12
^
3
_the-same area to do,some work and they find the terminations 4
that-they've done before have been de-terminated by somebody-5 and been-re-terminated and maybe done not as neatly as had
~
6 been.done originally by the craft, and may not even be done 7
properly.
And there's no documentation _nor was there any QC 8
involved.
9-And the allegation we have is it's being done by 10 Startup.
Have you had-any experiences like that?
11 MR. SCHUH:
I haven't actually seen, but there was 12 an instance that came up -- I couldn't tell you how far back 13
-- that Startup had done something like that thr,ough human 14 error.
One thing through the other, steps weren't taken but they were -- I know they jumped on it and they corrected 100 15 16 percent, you know, what it should have been and jumped on 17 Startup for doing it.
Like I.said, this is, you know, we're 18 all human, and something like that's going to come up.through 19 all these years of terminating.
20 INVESTIGATOR: What we're really concerned about, 21 is it a continuing problem?
22 MR. SCHUH:
No.
23 INVESTIGATOR:
You haven't had that experience.
24 MR. SCHUH:
No.
I can definitely say no.
2$
INVESTIGATOR:
The next subject matter addresses
v
+
10 1
the use of a type of insulation material used on high voltage 2
terminations, and what I'm referring to is that we have infor-3 mation that in effect that there was a problem here for a 4
while, they were.using a product called Scotch Fill.
And 5
because of the high temperatures that we experience out here 6
in the desert climate, the stuff was melting, and a lot of it 7
was running out of the terminations.
And so they changed and 8
went to 130 C.
Is that --
8 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, this did happen.
And to my 10 knowledge, I think they took and went over every~ single one 11 of them joints, or anything that was made up of that, and 12 I know I've done a lot; re-wrapped and took off the stuff.
13 And so that would be up to engineering, depending if it was 14 fulfilled as far as -- covered the whole job, I am sure it 15 was.
16 INVESTIGATOR:
Did you do some of the ret,rofit on f
1:
safety-related?
17 l
18 MR. SCHUH:
No.
19 INVESTIGATOR:
The next issue, John, relates to l
3}
a situation where -- (end of recording side).
21 6aideA MR. SCHUH:
-- at first, but now the engineers 22 were letting us use a spacer bolt in there as far as making 23 it up (inaudible).
24 INVESTIGATOR:
What do you do now, specifically?
25 You used to put a bolt --
t a
---_.-____-_____-_________-_-_____c w
11 n
l' MR. SCHUH:.Well, now they're-letting us do that.
t-
. Before it was-just one hole without a-(inaudible).
~
iV 2
E t
. INVESTIGATOR:
Did you wrap it then, or what?
):'
3 i
p
- 4 MR. SCHUH:
Yes.. Yes, we went through the wrap E
with specs and the tape and so forth, put on a motorfkit.
I
-5 It depends on.what kit they want' you to use.and what circum-s.
7
. stances are involved.
'8 INVESTIGATOR:
Okay.
The next question relates to-i l
9 QC inspectors.
In your opinion, the QC people that come and i
inspect your. work, John, do you feel they are doing an 10 l'
.11 adequate job, that they appear to be adequately trained?
i 12 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, I do.
I feel that they are i
adequately trained, but I also feel that in every form.of
.13 l-14 life, whether you go priests, electricians, you people, you've 15
'got better and you've got worse.
And that's all I'll say-16
- on that.
l.
i 17 '
INVESTIGATOR:
Did you have skillful people on I
i-18 that?
19 INVESTIGATOR:
But overall, basically they're 20 doing an adequate job as far as the check on --
p l-i-
21 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, as far as -- yes, I feel th'at way.
I M
INVESTIGATOR:
Have you ever had'any experience, h
John, where you've observed or heard o' where QC inspectors l-23 l:
24 have been intimidated by construction management; foremen, 1
gps, superintendent where an example would be where a QC M
l-l-
l
'l o
Or
~
12 1
' felt that something should be red tagged and a foreman tells 2
him not to hang it, and so he doesn't.
3 MR. SCIIUH : No, that's not --
4 INVESTIGATOR:
Why I'm asking you, do you feel 5
QC is allowed to do their job freely here?
6 MR. SCHUH:
Carries their authority?
7 INVESTIGATOR:
Yes.
8 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, I do.
9 INVESTIGATOR:
Have'you done any high pot testing?
10 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, I have.
11 INVESTIGATOR:
One of the problems that has been 12 brought to our attention is that some of the lines have been 13 high potted more than one time.
Have you ever seen any H il excessive high pot testing?
6 15 MR. SCHUH:
That I have ever done; no, and to my 16 knowledge, I fec I haven't seen one over twice that,has 17 been done.
If something comes up, liks if we have a direct 18 line from the pc 31 and you've got to label (inaudible) come 19 up and hook your line up, something like that; well of course you're going to have to shut the' baby down and start it over 20 21 again, but that's about what I'm talking about as far as 22 having to be done more than once.
23 INVESTIGATOR:
John, do you have any installations 24 where you brought -- I guess it has to be through a conduit; 25 a termination into a box where you use O rings; Vou know they I
r sl l
L
y 13 I
have a fitting at the top, and have an O ring
,. to 2
give it integrity from water?
3
.. MR. SCHUH:
Right.
OZ terminators?-
O INVESTIGATOR:
I don't know what they call them.
5 MR. SCHUH:
Uh-huh.
6 INVESTIGATOR:
You've done some'of those?
7 MR. SCHUH:
I've done one.
8 INVESTIGATOR:
Okay.
8 MR. SCHUH:
I got on the crew a little later, they 10 were doing quite a bit of them.
11 INVESTIGATOR:
Have you always had the O rings you 12 needed, or -- you only did one.
Did you have an O ring for 13 that one occasion?
14 MR. SCHUH:
Yes, we did.
INVESTIGATOR:
Did you ever hear any discussi5n 15 16 amongst the craftsmen"that there were times when they didn't 17' have O rings?
18 MR. SCHUH:
.N o.
I always thought that it was --
I' we had to take one out one time in a turbine; they had to saw it in half and different things like that.
They had it -- due 21 to the Three Mile Island change, they had to take this baby 22 out.
We had to saw that in half and as far as moisture fill or anything else, I was ver/ impressed the way that,'you know, 23 24 device functioned.
Very impressive.
INVESTIGATOR:
The allegation was that there was w _
14 0 :: ' -*'
- 1 a period of about six months when there were no O rings 2
available and some installations -- they were told to keep on 3
going.
And we're trying to find out of that's true.
4 MR. SCHUH:
Not that I.know of.
5 INVESTIGATOR:
Have-you ever observed or heard of 6
a situation where they're doing. core drilling to make a pene -
7 tration in the wall to run another pipe, conduit.or cable, 8
and theyive hit an existing conduit and done damage to it?
l MR. SCHUH:
No, I haven't.
8 10 INVESTIGATOR:
And the last item, John, is not 11 '
having anything to do directly with your craft, but with a 12 problem that we face all over in the country, and that is 13 your opinion or' observations or knowledge of the use of 14 controlled drugs on the site.
What I'm talking about specifi-15 cally is use of marijuana, amphetamines, hashish, cocaine.
16 We know we've got it here because we' ave had substantial 17 information given to us, but we're trying to determine how 18 big a problem we have.
Have you observed it or known of it, 19 or --?
8 MR. SCHUH:
I would say like you.
I would say 21 it's probably out here, but I haven't seen none of it.
The 1
22 use of it -- you know, I never deal with the stuff and I 23 don't see anybody in the crews or anything else.
But that's 24 l
not-saying it's not here.
I 25 INVESTIGATOR:
I understand.
Have y6u smelled pot l
L-
Se 15 I
smoke when you were working, or --
2 MR. SCHUH:
Yea, you'll pick up fumes of it.
It's 3
not at other'-- the job has slacked down, you don't ever see 4
it anymore, you know.
But yes, I think it's apparent that 5
it's out here.
6 INVESTIGATOR:
John, is there any situation out 7
here or hardware or procedure relating to safety-related 8
equipment that you think that our Commission, the NRC, ought 8
to give attention to that you feel is not being properly 10 addressed?
11 MR. SCHUH:
No, I really don't.
I feel the 12 people have the time and time to get the material and the 13 men have the time to put it in, and I think everything is 14 pretty qualified work here, and it runs pretty smooth.
15 INVESTIGATOR:
You've answered my next question.
16 Apparently you feel satisfied with the work you've observed?
If MR. SCHUH:
I do. 'You know, I don't -- you give a 18 man a certain amount of time, and you have the check by 18 engineering staff, you have the check by QC; I don't see 20 really any fault in it, you know, as far as poor craftsman-21 ship putting it in.
.I don't see how -- because if somebody H
sees a bad run of pipe, usually the next day somebody is out 23 straightening it up even if it's nothing to do with* safety 24 or anything, just to keep the crafts.
You know, we're having 25 a hard time battlina non-union now, and I'm sure I feel like
16
.c 1
a'hundred others.of us; all's we got is our qualification 2
to show, you know, and our skilled labor.
That's the way 3
I feel.
4 INVESTIGATOR:
Gene, do you have any additional 5
questions?
6 INVESTIGATOR:
Nope. I just wdht to know if you 7
know a couple guys.
Do you know a Mike Ostad -- is it Mike 8
Ostad?
9 INVESTIGATOR:
Mike Ostaff?
~
10 INVES,TIGATOR:
That may 'e.
I don't know if b
11 that's the correct pronunciation.
12 MR. SCHUH:
He might be a -- if it's who I'm lthinkingof,he'sawirepourforeman.
13 I
l INVESTIGATOR:
A wire pour foreman?
14 il 15 3 MR. SCHCH:
Yes, now I think his name's Oswalt.
M INVESTIGATOR:
Oswalt?
17 MR. SCHUH:
Yea, now I might be, you knew --
16 INVESTIGATOR:
No, that's all right.
19 MR. SCHUH:
There's a ton of guys out there.
20 INVESTIGATOR:
Yes.
I'think there are 900-some 21 electricians.
22 INVESTIGATOR:
Yes, there's a slew of them out thert 23 How about a Jim Williams?
24 MR. SCHUH:
No, I don't.
OS INVESTIGATOR:
Jerry Stewart.
i a
7-17'
,4, 1:
M R'.
SCHUH:
No, I don't know.
2
. INVESTIGATOR:
Okay'.-
-3 I'll terminate this interview now, and we thank
- 4..
you very much, John.
The time is now approximately 12:53 p.m.
'5 6
7
-8 9
10 11 12 j.
13 14 I
15 _
16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24
. 25.