ML20134E773
Text
-.
TROUTMAN, SANDERS, LOCKERMAN & ASHMORE O m,. s et]
AT T O R N C Y s AT LAW cAwo6sn susLotwo, suite seco J
rar psacavast statst, m.s.
JOwn LANDtnsas ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-seso waitse o osatet oias aumece j
moeiese sooo soa.ese.sema ca.....,..
v.................
- 7FUE May 12, 1992 f
Mr. Bruno Uryc, Jr.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323
Dear Mr. Uryc:
On behalf of my clients, Mr. Robert E. Neal and Mr. Roy S.
Whitaker, I enclose herewith the transcripts of their May 7, 1992 OI interviews.
Both Mr. Neal and Mr. Whitaker have reviewed their respective transcripts and have made pen and ink corrections as they deemed necessary.
If you have any questions
.concerning this matter, please call me at the above-listed telephone number.
ery u
John Lamberski Enclosures j
JL:jaf A
Lf 9611040092 960027 PDR FOIA KOHN95-211 PDR l
i
(,
CORRECTED. COPY i
bb M 3[ft-Page 1 BEFORE THE i
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of:
)
j
)
INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW OF
)
)
ROBERT EARL NEAL
)
age ceference Room sdainistration Building Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Waynesboro, Georgia Thursday, May 7, 1992 The above-entitled matter convened for INVESTIGATIVE.TNTERVIEW, pursuant to notice at 11:09 a.m.
6 APPEARAiM:ES:
On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear.Reaulatory C-insions LARRY R. ROBINSON, Investigator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comunission Office of Investigations suite 2900, 101 Marietta Tower Atlanta, Georgia 30303
.-and-BRIAN R. BONSER, Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Waynesboro, Georgia on behalf of the Witness:
JOHN LAMBERSKI, Attorney Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman & Ashmore 1400 Candler Building 127 Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia t
4 0
J Page 2 1
PROCEEDINGS l
2 MR. ROBINSON:
For the record, this is an interview 1
3 of -- is it Robert Neal?
4 MR. NEAL:
Robert Neal, yes, sir.
5 MR. ROBINSON:
Employee of Georgia Power Company at l
6 the Vogtle Electric Gsnerating Plant.
7 It's Thursday, May 7, 1992, it's 11:09 a.m.
j 8
Present at the interview are Mr. Neal, Mr. Brian i
9 Bonser, the Senior Resident Inspector of NRC at Plant Vogtle, 10 Investigator Larry L. Robinson of the Office of
{
11 Investigations of NRC, Region II, and Mr. John Lamberski of 12 the firm of Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman & Ashmore, who to my 13 understanding represents both you as an individual, Mr. Neal, t
i 14 today and Georgia Power Company, as a corporation.
15 MR. NEAL:
Yes, sir.
16 MR. ROBINSON:
Do you have any problems, Mr. Neal, i
17 with Mr. Lamberski's representation of both you and the 18 company?
j 19 MR. NEAL:
No, sir, I do not.
[
20 MR. ROBINSON:
- Okay, i
21 Mr. Lamberski, why don't you briefly state the 22 nature of your representation here today.
23 MR. IAMBERSKI I think you correctly stated it.
24 I'm here representing both Georgia Power Company as.a 25 corporation and Mr. Neal personally.
J
..:.=..-
~- - -
i..
4 i
1*
i i
i Page 3 5
1 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
Mr. Neal, do you have any 2
ebjections to being sworn to your testimony?
i I
3 MR. NEAL:
No, sir, I do not.
1 l
4 MR. ROBINSON:
Will you please stand and raise your i
i 5
right hand?
j 6
Whereupon, 7
ROBERT EARL NEAL i
8 appeared as a witness herein, and havJng been first duly 4
9 sworn, was examined ar.d testified as follcws:
l i
10 EIAMINATION l
11
-BY MR. ROBINSON:
i l
12 Q
Please state your full name for the record.
(
13 A
Robert Earl Neal.
14 Q
And what is your current job title here at Plant 15 Vogtle?
16 A
I'm an Instruments and Controls Foreman.
i
(
17 Q
And what was your job on January 28, 19927 j
18 A
Instruments and Controls Foreman.
19 Q
How long have you been an employee of Georgia 20 Power?
21 A
Seventeen years.
f 22 Q
How long have you been here at the Vogtle site?
23.
A Since 'R3.
i 24 Q
Eas l't all been pretty much in the IEC area?
25
'A Yes, sir.
i, e
a
i Page 4 j
1 Q
What I would like for you -- what we are going to 2
talk about today, Mr. Neal, is an event that occurred back on 3
January 28 of 1992, when two instrument and control 4
4 technicians, J.D. Davis and I guess it's Murcel Wilkins?
5 A
Marcel Wilkins.
i 6
Q Marcel Wilkins -- were conducting a surveillance l
7 procedure involving -- what was the system, Brian?
8 MR. BONSER:
It's my understanding it was an ACOT l
4 9
procedure on --
10 MR.* LAMBERSKI:
That's A-C-O-T, all caps.
)
11 MR. ROBINSON:
Which stands for?
12 MR. BONSER:
Analog channel operational test.
(
13 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
I 14 MR. BONSER:
And it was on this loop.
i-15 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay, for the record, "this loop" is 16 loop number IT-431, the title of the test'is the Delta T, 17 TAVG Loop 3 Protection channel Number 3.
i 18 BY MR. ROBINSON:
19 Q
What TAVG stand for, Mr. --
\\
20 A
T average.
21 Q
T average, I see.
1 22.
Are you familiar with the circumstances of what I'm 23 talking about here?
t 24 A
Yes,' sir, I an.
25 Q
In your own words, would you please tell me if you
\\
l 1-i i
~
Page 5 1
became involved in this analog channel operational test in 1
2 any way?
3 A
Yes, sir, I was notified by Mr. Davis that we had a J
4 bistable that was out of tolerance, was not within our 5
expected limit, high or low.
I went out and examined this,
}
6 exantined his setup, verified that the value he had on the k
7 sheet was ccusing out of the rack, notified him to write a DC 8
card, notified Mr. Marcel to get a QC inspector, and when i
9 everybody was together have them go in and make adjustments l
10 to bring our bistable back into tolerance by procedure.
j 3
11 Q
Okay.
Are the technicians required to call you in j
12 when they find an out-of-tolerance situation?
('
13 A
Yes, sir, they are by procedure.
It's in'our 14 procedure that if they find an out-of-tolerance, they have to 4
j 15 notify me before they can touch it.
16 Q
I see.
Is there a specific procedure that your
'l.
e 17 technicians are supposed to follow to do this calibration or 18 reset?
i 19 A
By the procedure they were doing, when it comes to
{
j-20 the part that we have an out-of-tolerance and we have to make j
21 adjustments, procedure notifies them to get the 23300 22 procedure, field calibration procedure, to work along with i
23 them to make their adjustments to get the bistable back in.
l 24.
O So they should have known -- did they know what 25 procedure.they needed to use at that time?
-(
3 h
e 4
e,
Page 6 1
A To my best recollection, yes, sir.
2 Q
Had they been trained in the use of that procedure?
i 3
A Yes, sir.
4 Q
Did you tell them to use that procedure?
1 j
5 A
No, sir, I did not tell them to use that procedure.
6 Q
Okay.
Did you assume that they knew to use that 7
calibration procedure?
l 8
A Yes, sir.
j Okay.
When they -- did they call you on the phone j
9 Q
i 10 and notify you of the out-of-tolerance situation?
dM 11 A
Yes, sir, I was in the g at the time and they 2
12 were in the control room.
(
13 Q
Who was it -- which of the two was it that called i
j 14 you?
15 A
I believe it was J.D. Davis that called.
16
'O Okay, and what did he tell you?
/Memae i
17 A
Be said we've got a value that is outVo,orar,*-n a bistable 18 and it's going to have to be adjusted.
I said all righ, a'
19 I'll be out there in a second.
20 Q
And do any of these documents that you see before 21 you here reflect the values that they found as far as an out-1 j
22 of-tolerance situation?
23 A
Yes, sir.
This data sheet here --
24 Q
All right, let the record reflect that he's talking 25 about the Analog Channel Test Data Sheet for loop number IT-1 t
l
J 4
.1 Page 7 1
431 that we described earlise.~.~Dkay, go ahead.
2 A
All right, this value here in the as-found section
[
3 is the value that they had obtained.
i 4
Q Let the record reflect that he is pointing to the 5
value 4.130 that is on the 10th line down, headed ITL/431H 6
extinguished in the as-found column.
Sorry we've got to do 7
that.
1 j
8 A
That's all right.
One thing I would like to back 9
up and correct.
You asked me a question about did I tell 10 them to use the procedure.
Were you inquiring about the 11 23300 procedure or this procedure?
12 Q
I was inquiring about the full calibration I
13 procedure required to --
14 A
I instructed them to make adjustments by procedure, 15 which by this procedure it instructs them to get t.he 23300.
1 16 Q
Okay.
l l
17 A
And you have a copy of that.
l 18 Q
Okay, when you say 'this procedure" you were 4
1 19 pointing to a test data sheet --
1 20 A
I as talking about procedure 24812-1.
t i
21 Q
Right.
I'll now show you pages I guess 65 and 66 22 of procedure 24812-1.
Is that the procedura you're referring 1
23 to?
24 A
Yes, sir, that is the procedure I?m referring to.
i 25 Q
Okay.
All right, go ahead with your explanation.
1 a
.f
Page 8 1
The 4.130 figure was the as-found figure?
.2 A
Yes, sir.
3 Q
And it was out of tolerance?
4 A
It was out of tolerance.
We have a high/ low limit 5
on the ACOT data sheet here that you can see that the 6
expected value is 3.994, low limit of 3.894, high limit of 7
4.094.
8 Q
I see.
9 A
Therefore the 4.130 as found value is outside of 10 the expected and high/ low limits, it is unacceptable.
11 Q
All right.
Did you stay there and see what they 12 did to correct this situation?
(
13 A
No, sir, I did not.
14 Q
How long appror kately would you say you were with i
15 thee and verified that you had an out-of-tolerance situation?
16 A
I was with them a good 20 minu,tes waiting on QC to 17 arrive and making sure that everybody was notified, the SS as i
i 18 well as the Osos.
And once QC arrived -- there's limited j
19 space where this work is to be done, I excused airyself to l
20 allow the gentlemen and the QC to do their job.
I went l
21 around front and talked with the SS and the OSOS in the i
22 horseshoe.
)
l 23 Q
Do you remember who the QC gentleman was?
24 A
Mr. Roy Whitaker.
i 25 Q
So to your-knowledge, Mr. Whitaker observed the --
1 i
i
__=..
4 i
1 Page 9
'I whatever your Isc technicians did to correct the out-of-2 tolerance situation?
i j
3 A
Yes, sir.
i 4
Q Is that a requirement for him to stay there and 5
observe that?
6 A
His requirement is to assure that the as-left data 7
is within tolerance.
8 Q
I see.
j 9
A And everything is right there where they're making l
10 the adjustments and the meters that he needs to look at.
i 4
11 MR. IAMBERSKIs You might want to explain what as-12 left data means.
(
13 BY MR. ROBINSON:
14 Q
As-left data is evidently once you make your 15 adjustments, you take another reading, is that correct?
t 16 A
Yes, sir.
The final reading that you walk away and 17 leave it in the cabinet for these bistables.
18 Q
Does the IEC tech take that reading or does the QC i
19 guy take that reading?
20 A
EC takes the reading, N also verifies.
4 21 He's looking at the same meter that the IEC tech is looking s
l 22 at.
23 Q
Okay.
And I guess since it's a hold point, the QC 24 guy.should probably stay there and observe the procedure or -
j 25.
- excuse me -- could the QC guy leave and then come back and
(-
I o
i
.a =
4
)*
Page 10 1
just get an as-left reading and still be doing his job?
4 2
A No, sir.
3 Q
He couldn't.
Okay.
So the as-left reading was 4
3.990, which was apparently within tolerance.
i 5
A Yes, sir.
6 Q
What else happened within that day or the next day l
7 regarding this particular resetting of the calibration, to 3
8 your knowledge?
9 A
To my knowledge, I was questioned the next even'ing 10 upon arrival as to what'did' Marcel and J.D. do and I told l
11 them the same thi.mg that I told you and showed them data l
12 sheet for the supposed correction.
f I.
13 Q
Okay.
Let the record reflect that we're now 14 talking about a document entitled Data Sheet 37, Procedure 15 Number 24812-1, apparently dated 1/28/92, reviewed by R.E.
l 16 Neal, performed by -- can you identify that?
l l
17 A
Marcel Wilkins.
l 18 Q
-- Marcel Wilkins and approved by -.
I 19
.A Mark Seymour.
i i
20 Q
-- Mark Seymour.
What -- who is Mark Seymour?
21 A.
Mark Seymour is a supervisor in IEC Department.
4-22 Q
And what connection does this Data Sheet 37 have 23 with the Analog Channel Operational Test Data Sheet that we 24 described earlier?
25 A
The histable that was adjusted to get the as-left
(
4
1 Page 11 1
&m 1
Yalue of -
3,yyn
}
2 Q.
Right, 3.990.
3 A
This Data Sheet 37 is where they should have went 4
to make that adjustment to bring this value down so that the 5
and result here is what we were after.
6 Q
I'm a little confused, are you saying that the as-
)
i j
7 found and the as-left numbers on the Data Sheet 37 should 4
8 have corresponded with the as-found and as-left numbers on --
l 9
A No, sir.
l 10 Q
Okay, explain that.
4 t
)
11 A
No, sir, I'm not.
The as-found, as-left data on, l
j 12 Data Sheet 37 is on a 0 to 10 system.
i 13 Q
Okay.
harA %d /
j i
14 A
That system is converted for the ACOTfto a 1 to 5 M nr 15 system.
i 16 MR. BONSER:
Those are volts DC, right?
t 17 THE WITNESS:
Volts, DC.
i i
18 BY MR. ROBINSON:
19 Q
Okay.
So is it just a straight 2-to-1 ratiot j
20 A
Fairly close to it, but there's nothing just j
21 straight.
22 Q
Is there a calculation that is required to compare 23 Data Sheet Number 37 or are the figures that are handwritten 24 in there actually measured figures?
25 A
They are measured figures.
4 1
e g
9
)
Page 12 1
Q Are they measured at the same points?
2' A
No, thes are measured on the NAL-2 card that is in 3
this slot in the rack.
V#
1 4
Q Okay.
l 5
A These arc measured at a different location l
6 that is set up in the front part of the procedure.
i 1
7 Q
All right.
pys.no w h **J:st+4' Myw 8
A TheseVare end-resultvcards.af' going through the n
l 9
loop at various points to get -- it's like a train, you've I
10 got the engine and caboose and you've got different cars in (xm enod rem =W Ly kan susrat) Atksns.
l 11 between, and this is one of the cars in between the engine v
i Asn 12 and caboose, this is the figures you would get off the 13 caboose.
j As M
- 1 14 Q
Okay, when you're talking about the fine & figures i
i 15 coming off the caboose, let the record reflect that he's 16 talking about an Analog channal Operational Test Data Sheet i
17 1.
And the document we identified as Data sheet 37, is that
)
18 the engine?
19 A
That'd be the cars in the middle.
20 Q
And the correlation should be -- between these two t
21 I
should be basically 2-to-1, not necessarily exactly?
{
22 A
Right.
If you'll notice that 7.13 is virtually i
23 three-quarters of a 10 volt scale, 3.9 is three-quarters of a 24.
1-to-5 scale.
i
~
25 MR. BONSER: What I wanted to ask was, this is the
+_w I
i.
1 l
J L
1 Page 13 1
sheet where they should have made the adjustments?
2 THE WITNESS:
Yes, sir.
i 1
3 MR. BONSER:
In that part of the procedure.
Which i
4 procedure is this from?
5 THE WITNESS:
This is from the Delta T, your delta 6
T loop is 158 pages, calibration as well as just the ACOT.
7 The ACOT portion only covers a small section in the front.
i 8
When you do your 18-month calibration, you have a long-drawed 4
i i-9 t
out process. All that's also covered under the same i
10 procedure.
But if you have to makin individual card i
11 adjustments, we're required to go to that to tell us which
$b*h [ [t, 12 and that being the 23300 procedure.
E 13 MR. BOMSER:
Okay, so when you do that procedure, i
14 you use this sheet here?
15 THE WITNESS:
I will use this sheet, yes, sir.
16 MR.' ROBINSON:
"This sheet" being Data Sheet 377 i-17 THE WITNESS:
37, 4
18 MR. BONSER:
So they used Data Sheet 37 to make the f
19 adjustments 7 20 THE WITNESS:
That is the sheet they should have 21 used.
l 22 MR. BONSER:
Should have used, okay.
4 23.
BY MR. ROBINSON:
i 24 Q
And what in fact happened, to your knowledge?
25 A
From what I have been told, they did not go to this e
1 2
~
Page 14 1
section of the procedure, did not use the 23300 procedure.
2 They made adjustments on the bistable at the front part of 3
the loop here that we're reading, or the end part of the 4
loop, excuse me.
5 Q
And so are you saying that to your knowledge that 6
the filled in numbers on Data Sheet 37 are not taken from 7
readings, that they're just --
8 A
That is what I'm being told.
S Q
-- put in there.
Okay.
Approximately what time of 10 day on January 28 would you have signed this Data Sheet 37 as 11 a reviewer?
12 A
Somewhere between the time of 6:00 a.m. and 7:00
(
13 a.m.
j 14 Q
Would that have been kind of at the time you would 15 be going off shift?
4 16 A
That was at the end of my shift, yes, sir.
i 17 Q
And is your signing of these sheets a routine part s
18 of your end-shift administrative requirement?
15 A
Yes, sir, it is.
I 20 Q
Okay.
i 21 A
I have to review the data that has been placed on 22 them and ensure that it is within the high/ low limits and 23 expected value and approve it or send it back to the field.
24
.Q Okay.
Are all of the handwritten figures on this 25 particular sheet done without readings, to your suspicion or
(
l, i.,
Page 15 1
knowledge, or just some of them?
2 A
(No response.)
3 Q
Do you understand the question?
4 A
No, sir, explain that a little more.
5 Q
I have eight handwritten numbers on this data 6
sheet.
Of those eight numbers, to your knowledge, how many 7
of them were written without taking actual readings?
8 A
Okay. To my knowledge now, all eight numbers were -
9 10 Q
I see.
11 A
-- wrote in.
12 Q
In the process of reviewing this Data Sheet 37, do 13 you compare it to the -- did you compare it to the Analog 14 Channel Operational Test Data Sheet?
15 A
Yes, sir, I do.
You'll notice that on line 3 and 4 16 of Data Sheet 37, there has been a different value between 17 the as-found and as-left.
It is a difference between 7.262 18 and 7.132 for output 2 and 7.143 to 7.013.
That value is a 19 smell adjustment down, which I took it as being what brought 20 the value down into the expected value off the ACOT data Wo+ rs.
21 sheet from'4.130 to 3.9 22 Q
I see.
So in your review and comparison of the two 23 sheets, w aything appeared as it should be.
24 A
Yes, inir.
4 25 Q
Okay, were you aware at the time --
i
4 Page 16 1
A No, sir.
2 Q
I'll finish my question -- were you aware at the 3
time that these figures had not come from readings and had 4
just been placed in there?
5 A
No, sir, I was not.
6 Q
Okay.
To your knowledge, how was it discovered 7
that these readings were not bona fide readings?
And I'm 8
referring to the readings on Data Sheet 37.
9 A
To my knowledge, the day shift, either the 28th or 10 the 29th, went out and made the actual field' check and 11 adjusted -- made the proper adjustments per a work order, and 12 I do not remember the number right off the top of my head.
I 13 But we have a copy of it.
And that's when I was notified 14 that these numbers were not true numbers and that was my 15 first recollection,of those numbers not.being valid numbers.
16 Q
Why would the' day shift have gone out and redone 17 the procedure?
18 A
The alarms -- a alarm started coming in on the i
{
19 delta T loop that this histable triggers.
i 20 Q
Okay.
21 A
That alarm started coming in and out during day 1
22 shift operation on the day shift of the 28th.
They went out g
23 with a recorder, plugged into different points, checked 4
24 different values and then started -- that started suspicion i -
25 of something not being right.
L l
4 s
i.
Page 17 l
1 Q
Okay.
1
}
2 A
And that started the investigation into looking 3
into different things and they Yfewingpackagesbecause 1
4 they knew I had just -- my technicians had just performed l
5 this loop and this was the loop that was giving us problees.
6 They immediately pulled up the old data and started comparing i
is 7
to what was now in the field.
i 8
Q When you say they were doing an investigation, do j
9 you know who was doing that investigation?
l 10 A
The -- Scott Haemond*is the supervisor that was in i
j 11 charge and the actual foreman and technicians, I'm not real l
12 sure.
I believe if you contact them, they could let you know I
13 more on that.
i 14 Q
Okay.
15 MR. BONSER:
Do you know anything about one l
16 procedure having not been revised correctly?
It was --
17 something had come up about there had been a recent reviston 1
l 18 of the procedure and one of the sheets had been revised and l
19 one of the data sheets had not been revised.
Could you 1
20 explain that?
Because I think that was probably the reason l
21 behind a lot of this happening.
22 THE WITNESS:
My knowledge is procedure 24812 had 23 just recently been revised with new values in our expected, 24 high/ low limit for several of the bistables, due to the new
.25 fuel that we're now using.
This particular bistable values
(
)
l 5
Page 18 i
l 1
were missed in the review and readying --
)
2 MR. BONSER:
That's the ACOT e?
i 3
THE WITNESS:
That's the AC procedure, a portion
{
i i
4 that they had failed to catch the wrong values in.
In the bsmsmsta 7km V
5 calibration part of it, there was the correct values and 6
that's what got the whole thing.
The calibration part was l
7 correct, but that was not the section at the time h M*,,.
8 us were using the ACOT portion.
If the correct 9
values were there, would have -- there would have been no 10 problem because they would have been right into the values 11 that we needed. Do you follow what I'm saying?
This should have been this value or fairly close to it witge high/Jow j-12
(
13 limit.
And that now has been corrected.
j 14 BY MR. ROBINSON:
15 Q
With respect to the Analog Channel Operational Test j
4 16 Data Sheet, do you have any reason to 'elieve that the as-b i
~
17 left figure was not a correct figure?
j 18 A
No, sir.
That is what got us -- the alarms coming i
19 in is the value was lowered to this, which brought it closer l
j 20 to the alarm point and the new fuel made us now peak up and 21 go into this portion because it was lower than what was 22 originally there.
I 23 Q
So you're saying that the high limit in the new 24 situation should have been or was in fact lower than 3.990?
25
'A I'm confused about what you're asking now.
c.
4
l-
)
\\
n Page 19 l
1 Q
You're saying that the 3.990 figure on your ACOT 2
Test Data sheet --
3 A
Yes, sir.
1 4
Q
-- in the as-left column, that value was too close 5
to the point that would be causing alama to go off, is that
(
6 correct?
3 7
A Yes, sir.
8 Q
So it needed to be set lower?
i 9
A No, higher.
f 10 Q
Needed to be set higher, I see.
11 A
It needed to be set where it was found.
.j e
,s m 12 0
1 see.
}
AWryky 4 y,pu,,;/s4
(
13 A
If we had the proper values here#and here? we would tsta.Muns A 2
14 have never made an adjustment here! "e E [ything would have i
15 been fine, there would have been no problem.
16 Q
I see.
l 17 A
And
,owered the value, brought it closer to the j
18 actual trip setting, based on these values.
4 19 Q
Oh, okay. So the printed hi'gh limits and low limits 1
20 on your data sheet were not what they should have been at by n 21 that time g... doing that.
j 22 A
Yes, sir, that is correct.
23 Q
So that ended up causing
,o make an adjustment 24 thatt g ally shouldn't have made.
l 25 A
Should never have touched.
(
4
_ _ _ __ _ _. _ _._ ~ __. - _ _.__- _
f a
i j
Page 20 j
1 MR. BONSER:
So what you're saying is the as-found 2
reading was the right reading in fact.
3 THE WITNESS:
Was a true, valid, good reading.
4 MR. BONSER:
And if they had gone to Data Sheet 37 i
5 and actually done these adjustments according to this 6
procedure, they would have ended up again with the 4.130.
i 7
THE WITNESS:
Yes, sir, that they would have.
i 8
BY MR. ROBINSON:
f 9
'Q It's my understanding, and maybe you're going to f
10 have to correct me if I'm wrong, i4' they would have conducted l
11 a test and obtained the 4.130 reading and they would have 12 recognized that 4.130 was within tolerance -- okay?
i 13 A
Yes, sir.
14 Q
-- they wouldn't have done any adjustment.
1 i
15 A
No adjustments would have been made.
i l
16 Q
Okay, so moving over here to Data Sheet 37 --
j 17 A
Would have never been done.
{
18 Q.
That one wouldn't even have been done.
19 A
Would never have been done.
20 Q
So the only reason you do Data Sheet 37 is when you 21 need to make adjustments.
t 22 A
Yes, sir.
23 Q
Oh, okay, I see.
We've probably talked in general i
24 about a lot of the. questions -- I'm going to ask you a list 25 of very specific questions that the NRC Enforcement people
(
i c
4 3
i Page 21 I
want answered.
We may have talked in general about these i
]
2 questions and 'it may be a repetition in some cases, but I'm f
'3 just going to read the questions to you verbatim.
If you 4
understand it, just give me an answer to the question.
If i
5 you've already answered it, just go ahead and answer it i
6 again.
j 7
A Okay.
i 1
1 8
Q What information was given to you by the j
i 9
responsible IEC technicians during the conduct of the f
10 surveillance on tho' RPS instrumentation on January 28, 19927
~
l 11 MR. IAMBERSKI:
Do you understand the question, j
)
l 12 Bob?
j I
13 THE WITNESS:
I didn't understand that at all.
14 BY MR. ROBINSON:
l 15 Q
Okay, when they called you -- when they first t
16 notified you that there was an out-of-tolerance.
From that i
l 17 point to the end of your shift, what communications did you l
l 18 have with those individuals -- what did they tell you?
19
^ A As I stated earlier, they contacted me, I went to 20_
the control room, observed the reading, checked out the setup 21 and then initiated a DC card, which the ss determined was not i
22 necessary, I had them call QC and instructed them to go in 23 and make the appropriate adjustments as necessary, i
24 Q
Okay, that's what you told them to do.
I'm kind of l
25 interested in what they told you, any communication they gave
- k.
l 4
1 Page 22
\\
1 to you.. Was there any indication to you that -- to the 2
effect that, "to do a recalibration on this thing is going to 3
take too long, can we just f.eset these things per the ACOT 4
procedure" -- was there any conversation like that?
4 yfyedeu+hatnSI'WwkfWe k'1+I~'
\\
j 5
A Yes, sir,4and my statement was get everybody that's
)
6 got to get together and let's do what we've got to do.
7 Q
Okay.
So they suggested resetting _the points using 8
an ACOT procedure as opposed to the full calibration 9
procedure I guess in 233007
]
l 10 A
They asked did we want to make the adjustments by 4
11 this.
I said we make the adjustments by the way procedure 12 tells us.
13 Q
Okay.
1 l
14 A
That includes this procedure as well as the 23300.
f l
15 Q
Okay, so it is permissible for them to make some L
16 adjustments per the ACOT procedure?
j 17 A
Per ACOT, wherein they take values only, there is j
18 no adjustmente in ACOT.
19 Q
Right, okay.
20 A
I mean we make adjustments with our test equipment 21 to obtain values, but we do not tweak anything in the rack.
22-Q Yeah, the ACOT procedure is a test procedure.
If 23 things are found out of tolerance, you go to the 23300 24 procedure to make the calibrations.
25 A
Yes, sir.
l C
4 k
+
l Page 23 l
1 Q
Okay.
2 MR. IAMBERSKI Point of clarification.
i 3
MR. ROBINSON:
Sure.
I l
f 4
MR. IAMBERSKI:
The ACOT procedure does direct the i
5 technician to go to 23300 to do the calibration, so indirectly maybe it does instruct them to do the calibration.
6 l
7 BY MR. ROBINSON:
8 Q
I see.
But no place does it allow them to use the 9
test configuration setup to do'the calibration as such, j
i
+
10 right?
i 11 A
I would have to go through the procedure and read 12 it again and compare.
I can't answer that one right off the
(
13 top of my head.
14 Q
Okay.
15 MR. BONSER:
But ACOTs are not used to make 16 adjustments.
17 THE WITNESS:
No, sir.
18 MR. BONSER:
You have to go to a different 19 procedure to make the adjustments.
20 THE WITNESS:
Procedure tells you right here that 21 if yg
-found values under ACOT are not acceptable, to go 22 to the appropriate 23300 and section of the card.
23 MR. BONSER:
And that is done throughout I&C, is my 24 understanding, you do not make adjustments in ACOTs, you go 25 to a cal procedure --
4 1
Page 24 1
THE WITNESS:
You go to the cal portion of the 2
procedure along with your field cal for the cards.
3 BY MR. ROBINSON:
4-4 Q
Is it your understanding today, that they did not j
5 go to that procedure?
1 6
A Yes, sir, to my understanding today.
I 7
Q How do you know that?
i j
8 A
Both gentlemen have confessed to this and both 9
gentlemen have been disciplined and I have been notified 10 about this myself.
~
4 11 Q
Did they confess to you?
j 12 A
They have confessed to me, yes, sir, after the i
d i
13 fact, but not until I had returned off of a seven-day off i
14 stretch.
All this happened right prior to our seven-day off e
15 stretch and I found out all the real details after I returned 16 off of the seven-day off stretch.
17 MR. IAMBERSKIs So your understanding is that you 18 weren't the first one that they told.
19 THE WITNESS:
No, I'm not.
20 BY MR. ROBINSON:
1 21 Q
Do you think it might have been Mr. Hansond?
22 A
I believe Mr. Hammond was the very first one.
23 Q
Okay.
j-24 A
Thathadquestionga they had told.
25 0
All right.
Again, we've gone over this basically,
(
I I
I s
l l
Page 25 1
but I'm going to repeat this question again.
It's my I
I 2
understanding that on the day in question, you got a call i
3 from -- you think it was Mr. Davis --
l 4
A Yes, sir.
i 5
Q Be said he found the loop out of tolerance or words 6
to that effect.
You went to the site, there was some type of l
7 indication, and you tell me whether it was Mr. Davis or Mr.
i 8
Wilkins that, at least to my understanding, that they reset 9
these points without going through the full calibration i
1 2
10 procedure.
Was there some kind of suggestion to do that?
3 11 A
Not to my knowledge, no, sir.
12 Q
Okay, so you just verified that it was out of s
j 13 tolerance and told them to get the QC guy and take the 14 appropriate procedural actions necessary to get the thing
{
i 15 calibrated.
J 16 A
Yes, sir.
17 Q
Did they have any comments to those instructions?
j 18 A
They just say you know it'll take time, I said well
.j t
19 it'll take time.
- i l
l 20 Q
Okay.
Who was it that said that, both of them or
]
21 just one of them?
i 4
I 22 A
I don't remember exactly which one said it.
I l
l l
23 r-br the stater ' was made.
2 4 '-
Q About how long a time does it take to do that i
s 25 calibration?
j i
1 i
i
4 Page 26 i
A The full delta T calibration or just this histable 2
card that we're talking about?
3 Q
Just the calibration that they were going to be 4
required to do per procedure.
5 A
It would take approvinately an hour.
6 Q
Okay.
Was there, to your knowledge, any particular 7
nrgency to get that condition corrected on anybody's part?
8 A
The urgency only was that we were getting close to 9
and of shift and trying'to get all racks cleared up for
~ 10 operations and get out.
They don't like to do turnovers with e
i 11 loops in partial trip setups and while we're in this, we're 1
l 12 in.a partial trip.
13
-Q How close were you to the end of your shift?
4 l-
-14 A
Within I believe -- I'm not sure, I'd have to get i
j 15 the data sheet to find out the time, but I believe all this 16 wais happening between 4' 30 and 6:00, which our shift ends at 17 7:00.
Operation shifts ends at 5:30 -- well they start their l-18-turnover at 5630.
i 19 Q
Okay.
To your knowledge, other than the fact that 20 it was close to the end of the shift, was there any other
'21 sense of urgency to get this condition corrected?
l 22 A
No, sir.
j 23 Q
Okay.
Was there any other conversation between you i
24 and Davis and Wilkins at that time, before you left to let j;
25 them do the procedure?
t m
-U-m.
m---
l 3*
i i
i Page 27 1
A Just general talk, nothing in particular that I i
2 have any recollection of.
i j
3 Q
Nothing that you can recall pertaining to what they i
4 were going to do to correct that situation?
i 5
A As far as specific instructions as to exactly what 6
to do, no, sir, I did not make any.
7 Q
No, I kind of meant any conversation from thee as i.
j 8
to what they were going to do.
l 9
A Other than =mking adjustments what I assumed was by l
10 procedure, I didn't catch onto anything other than that.
11 Q
Okay.
When you left, you didn't have the feeling l
12 that they were going to shortcut the calibration procedure in j
13 any way?
14 A
No, sir, I did not.
15 Q
Okay.
Next question -.did you review the j
16 procedure that had been accomplished, in detail, and direct 17 the actions of the IEC technicians to correct the identified 18 deficiency?
Do you understand that?
i 19
-MR. LAMBERSK1:
What procedure are we talking i
20 about?
21-MR. ROBINSON:
I guess the procedure that had in 22 fact been used by the Isc techs to recalibrate the equipment.
i-23 MR. LAMBERSKI What correction are we talking 4
24 about?
Because as Brian has mentioned earlier, that 25 procedure was revised improperly a: the time the ACOT was l
4
Page 28 1
performed and then it was later corrected.
So are we talking 2
about..that correction?
3 MR. ROBINSON:
Well to my understanding it's the 4
values, the high and low values, that on the data sheet were 5
the things that were incorrect.
6 BY MR. ROBINSON:
7 Q
Was the procedure itself to do the calibration of 8
that particular piece of equipsont changed in any way?
9 A
As far as the normal steps to obtain those values, 10 no.
11 MR. BONSER:
I think what is being asked here is 12 not did Mr. Neal review the words in the procedure, because 13 the words on what to do I think were the sama as they had 14 always been.
15 THE WITNESS:
They always had been.
16 MR. BONSER:
I thinir what we're referring to here 17 is did you review in detail all these numbers on all these i
18 data sheets and in what depth did you review t. hem.
19 MR. LAMBERSKI Okay, let's take them one step at a l
20 time.
That's the first question.
21 MR. BONSER:
I thiak that's what's really being 22 asked, because the words -- you already know what the words i
23 say and they know what the words say and they've been the 24 same'for awhile.
"' 5 THE WITNESS 6 For quite awhile.
- (
1.
e f
I l
Page 29 1
MR. BONSER:
Yeah.
nvlsavl 2
THE WITNESS:
The procedure had been g shortly.
3 We looked at the values that were here.
Without scaling 4
sheets and sitting down and doing scalings, we have no way of 1
5 knowing that these numbers are not the expected numbers that 6
we ne A to find in the field.
7 MR. ROBINSON:
Let the record reflect he's talking 8
about the numbers that actually are typed on the ACOT Test 9
Data Sheet as being the expected and low and high limit 10 nuntiers.
11 THE WITNESS:
Like I said, without scaling sheets, 12 I have no way of knowing that this is not the correct value.
13 All I have is that this is the correct rev of this procedure.
14 MR. ROBINSON:
Let the record reflect he's showing 15 Revision 16 -- pointing to Revision 16.
~ 16 MR. BONSER:
Now you do verify that you have the 4
i-17 right revision of the procedure before you go out to the job.
t l
18 THE WITNESS:
Before you go out to the job, yeah.
19 That's the only thing that I have -- I have to ensure that I 20 have the right rev of the procedure before I go to the field j
21 and I have to assume my values are correct.
l 22 BY MR. ROBINSON:
23 Q
so are you saying that you did in fact closely 24 eraufne the as-expected and high and low figures and compare 25 them to the entered figures on the data sheets?
(
i 4
l-t
1
^
~
Page 30 1
A Yes, sir, I did.
i 1
2 Q
And also Data Sheet 377 I-Yes, sir,wAen I reJew=/ thah AAck af Ed ofmy3AM,24vua I-3 A
4 Q
Okay.
Correct me -- as far as directing the 5
actions of the IEC technicians, it's asy understanding that 6
you told them to do what is needed to do by procedure to 7
correct the situation.
8 A
Yes, sir.
9 Q
And then you left the area, the QC guy had come and i
l 10 you left the area and went back to your office, iis that l
11 correct?
12 A
No, sir.
13 Q
where did you go?
l 14 A
I went around to the front of the control room.
I 15 Q
Okay.
j 16 A
And was in the horseshoe area with the SS and OSOS.
{
17 Q
Okay.
Have you ever had any similar activities l
18 from -- experienced any similar activities frosa Davis and
?
19 Wilkins with respect to not following procedures and entering l
20 false data on data sheets?
21 A
No, sir.
22 Q
Did you notify operations personnel that the 23 equipment did not meet the procedure requirements and would 24 be aligned in accordance with the prescribed procedure?
25 A
Yes, sir.
(
i 4
1*
4 1
)i Page 31 i
1 Q
What action did you take when you became aware or 2
were notified that the IEC technicians had not performed the j
3 procedure as required?
J 4
A When I --
)
5 Q
When you became aware.
l eten% deMb M 6
A When I became awareVthe discipline action was
)i 7
already instated on the technicians themselves.
)
8 Q
It had already happened.
You were off for a week 1
9
'and --
10 g4 It had already happened.
When I returned end-wesse% e l
N1 ir.fer-f cf.i. t -- voing es, the disciplinary action 11 i
12 was already being taken.
i I
13 MR. LhMBERSKI Well let's back up and make sure 14 this is clear.
When did you notify operations?
f 15 THE WITNESS:
When J.D.'took the DC card around to 16 the front to get them to assign a number and they said it was 17 not a deficiency, that our procedures allowed us to make the 18 correction, they were aware that we had an out-of-tolerance l
19 bistable.
20 MR. LhMBERSKI Okay, the question was just with 21 respect to the out-of-tolerance condition?
4 22 MR. ROBINSON:
Well that was a different question I i
'23 guess in a different context.
24 MR. LhMBERSKI Could you please re-ask that 25 question? _I'm afraid it might have been misunderstood.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _l 4
Page 32 1
MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
i 2
BY MR. ROBINSON:
3 Q
Did you notify the operations personnel that the 4
equipment did not meet the procedure requirements and would 5
be aligned in accordance with the prescribed procedure?
l j
6 A
The answer to that is still yes, sir", the DC card 1
j 7
was generated, we had QC coming and we made adjustments.
\\
8 MR. IAMBERSKI:
And your understanding of what that l
4 9
means -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- is that you're to 10 notify operationis when the as-found condition of the bistable l
11 in question is out of tolerance with the values on the data 12 sheet.
l
(
13 THE WITNESS:
Yes, sir.
14 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
i 15 BY MR. ROBINSON:
16 Q
Did you in fact tell the operations people that 17 your technicians are going to align this piece of equipment 18 in accordance with procedure or did you just tall them that 19 it's going to be corrected?
4 20 A
I really didn't tell them either.
They told me
]
21 that the DC card was not necessary, that the procedure 22 allowed for the correction and that we had everything under
+eM % e SIC 94 $ 4 m M r come 23 control.
I-sped that's what I eene around to make sure you MoGM41.
AeGa.p.
24 understood.
25 Q
Okay.
And now the next question that -- I guess
(
1
d b-Page 33 1
this is at a different point in time and we've already gone l
2 over it, but we'll go over it again.
When you found out that 1
j 3
the IEC technicians had not performed the procedure that you i
4 had expected them to perform, what did you do?
And I believe 5
you earlier said that disciplinary action had already been 6
taken on these two IEC technicians and you had been returning 7
from like a week off or --
s 8
A Seven-day off stretch.
l 9
Q
-- seven-day off stretch.
Did you take any action 10 in addition to the disciplinary action that had been taken?
1 l
11 Did you talk to them or lecture them or school them or 1
12 anything?
j 13 A
No, sir, I did not.
Once the disciplinary action 14 is taken, and it was implemented from Mr. Shipman and all j
15 here, there was no action that I could take, or no action 16 necessary for me to take.
I discussed my dissatisfaction j
17 with them, but that was all.
k 18 Q
Okay.
19 A
I had no legal -- or no action that I personally i
20 could be taking against them.
i
{
21 Q
What was their reaction to that when you discussed 22 your dissatisfaction with them?
23 A
They were very upset with theirselves, they still
-24 are. They were'very apologetic and --
t 25 Q
Okay.
So they didn't think that they had done
(
ll' l
(
\\.
l
]
Page 34 1
okay, they knew that they had done something wrong.
i l
2 A
They definitely knew that this was not what should 3
have been done.
4 l
4 Q
I believe you said earlier that you did not 5
physically observe the actions that they took to recalibrate i
1 6
the equipment, is that correct?
?
7
.A That is correct, I did not observe those actions.
8 Q
so the only review that really you did of this l
9 procedure was your review of the data sheets, is that l
10 correct?
i 11 A
Yes, sir, the loop being reinstated, I have to do vartticek'n s u 12 the independentvon that, and that is also on the last two l
WJMS-i 13 sheets of this package.
I wnf0rk w W 14 Q
You had to do the independentvon that?
i 15 A
Yes, sir, as far as verifying the bistables were j
16 flipped back'in and the system was put back to normal.
i 17 Q
So you physically went out and verified that.
18 A
That's the reason I stayed in the control room v
}
19 around the front of the horseshoe.
i 20 Q
Okay.
21 A
I have to be separated by time and distance.
22 Q
All right.
When you say you have to be separated 23 by time and distance --
a 24 A
For an independent verification, j
25 MR. BONSER:
Weren't you surprised that they got
~(
4 i
i
.,.m
i' Page 35 1
done so fast?
2 THE WITNESS:
Not really, not with the small amount 3
that had to be adjusted.
I mean it's just a matter of i
l 4
tweaking a screw.
j 5
MR. BONSER:
Because you had said earlier that it 6
would take about an hour to do it.
I don't know how long you 7
were in the control room --
4 8
THE WITNESS:
I don't have a recollection of l
9 exactly how long I was around front waiting on them to' 10 finish.
You know, I was called, we went out, I went around 11 front, they called me back sometime later and we closed out 12 the package.
Exact times that this took this and this took 4
13 that, I don't have.
14 BY MR. ROBINSON:
15 Q
We're not asking for exact times.
About how long 16 was it, half an hour, 45 minutes, 15 minutes, an hour and'a 17 half?
18 A
It wasn't an hour and a half, it was a good 35-45 i
)
19 minut,es.
20 Q
Is there any way that you can tell whether or not 21 MR. Wilkins and Mr. Davis have done this type of thing 22 before?
23 A
No, sir, nothing other than, you know --
J 24 Q
Well go ahead, what were you going to say?
25 A
Just knowing the men and the way they've already
(
i
!l.
i I
l Page 36 5
[
1 worked. This.was a total shock.
},
2 Q.
These are good men?
3 A
Very good men.
1 i
4 Q
Have always done things according to procedure?
5 A
Yes, sir.
4 6
Q Have you ever had situations where you were close 7
to the end of the shift before and they had to do something l
8 that took them past shift?
i 9
A Yes, sir, we've worked over.
i 10 Q
If the alarms had not started coming in as a result 4
11 of the 3.990 being too close to the limit, this probably J
l 12 wouldn't have been discovered, would it?
(
13 A
Until -- well not for awhile.
The ACOT is 14 performed I believe once a month, but unless someone actually
~15 recognized that we had wrong numbers, it could have been 3
j 16 there for awhile.
i l
17 Q
so if -- I mean, once these values are set, are 18 recalibrated, in your experience, how much would they change 19 between ACOTs?
l 20 A
They would drift maybe a few millivolts at the
[
21 most, you know.
The way these left the 3.990 it could be 22 3.89 -- excuse me, 3.989 or 3.991, you know, minute drift at 23 the most.
)
-24 Q
so as long as the same data sheets with the i
25 expected values, if they would have been used the next month, o
e
4 1
Page 37 i
i the same -- there wouldn't apparently have been anything 1
2 wrong,.with those readings.
3 A
There would have been no problem the nart month 4
with the 3.990 reading that would have been taken.
5 Q
All right.
You wouldn't have expected your review
]
6 of these document to have in itself identified that problem, 7
would you?-
j 8
A Not that I can see, we had a minute change between 9
the as-found/as-left on tho' Data Sheet 37 which should have 10
- correlated with the change on the as-found/as-left on the l
j 11 ACOT Data Sheet.
~
1' 12 Q
And in your review, it did correlate, is that
(
13 correct?
14 A
It appeared to be exactly what we needed.
A 15 Q
Do you actually remember comparing those two?
{
16 A
Yes, sir.
17 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
I don't have any other t-IS-questions.
Brian, do you have any other questions that you J
j.
19 want to ask?
I 20 MR. BONSER:
No.
21 MR. ROBINSON:
Is there any other comments, Mr.
22 Neal, that you'd like to make to clarify or add anything to 23 this situation, to wrap it up, any final comments?
24 THE WITNESS:
Not at this time.
i 25 MR. ROBINSON:
And if you want to, feel free to --
l l
i 1
i
. := :=w
- - - ~ ~-
i Page 38 1
1 we can take a break if you want to discuss with Mr. Lamberski s
1-2 and come back -- would you like to do that?
i i
3 THE WITNESS:
If you don't mind.
4 MR. ROBINSON:
It's now 12:0S and we'll take a five 1
5 minute break.
f 6
(A short recess was taken.)
i i
7 MR. ROBINSON:
It's now 12:20 p.m. and we're back 8
on the record.
9 I'll repeat my question.
Mr. Neal, are there any
)
i 10 final comments that you'd like to make to' clarify or sum up 11 your testimony here today?
12 THE WITNESS:
Yes, sir.
I believe I made the
(
13 statement that I had learned after the seven-day off stretch l
14 about the total incident.
I learned during the seven-day off 15 stretch but I was not back on site and did not see Mr. Davis 16 or anyone else until'after the seven-day off stretch.
I got 17 all the details after I returnv*, but I was made aware that i
i 18 there was a problem during my seven-day off stretch.
3 19 BY MR. ROBINSON:
l 20 Q
And it was after you returned that you kind of i
{
21
. expressed your' displeasure to the -- or disappointment to the 1
22 23 A-Disappointment, yes, sir.
Also, after I had
}
24 returned, their discipline had also been instated, as far as
]:
25 their.DML.
k i
l
i e
i j
Page 39 1
Q DML meaning?
2 A..
Decision-making leave.
l 3
Q I see, okay.
Is that decision-making leave with 4
pay?
i 5
A I believe so, yes, sir -- in fact I know so, yes, l
6 sir.
l 7
Q Any other comments?
j 8
A I had no reason up to this point to have ever 9
suspected J.D. or Mr. Wilkins to have done something like 10 this.
My instructions to them I thought was clear and I had 11 no reason to suspect this until, you know, the discovery of L
12 it.
(
13 Q
Okay, how long have they been working for you?
i 14 A
They started working for me right after Christmas, 15 I believe, right at the first of January.
We had a crew 16 shuffle and they were brought in -- I believe that was the 17 time frame that it was.
4 18 Q
The first of January of this year?
19 A
Yes, the first of January of this year.
j 4
l 20 Q
So they had just been working for you for about a 21 month when this happened.
1 22 A
Yes.
l 23 Q
Bad you had any experience with their work before 24 or known them?
4 25 A
I had worked them on different occasions just here I
(
J 4
I a
m,
Page 40 and theregsubstituting for a foreman on vacation or 1
2 something on this order.
And just general knowledge of them frm kik 3
vin the shop and around, and had never heard of any problem or erose.
4 seen anything that would have made me question their work.
5 Q
Okay. Do you have any idea how long they've been 6
out here on site, working out here on site?
I can ask then 7
that.
8 A~
I don't have that knowledge right off the top of my 9
head.
10 Q
Okay, but they were just under your direct 11 consistent supervision for about a month?
12 A
About a month when this happened, yes, sir.
(
13 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay, I have no further questions.
14 You gave your testimony voluntarily and freely here today, 15 didn't you, Mr. Neal?
16 THE WITNESS:
Yes, sir. '
i 17 MR. ROBINSON:
And no pressure or coercion was put 18 on you to testify?
i 19 THE WITNESS:
No, sir.
20 MR. ROBINSON:
Unless anyone has any other 21 questions, it's now 12:23 and the interview is completed.
I 22 Thank.you very much for your cooperation.
23 THE WITNESS:
Thank you.
24 (Whereupon, the interview was concluded at 12:23 j
25 p.m.)
(
I' l
[
l l
A.
1 Page 41 i
i i
CERTIFICATE j
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comunission in the matter of:
Name Interview of Robert E No f
Docket Number Place:
Vogtle Nuclear Generating Plant, Waynesboro, GA l
Date:
May 7, 1992 i
l were held as herein appears, and that this is tho' original l
transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear i
Regulatory Casumission taken stenographically by me and, fI thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under my direction, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
'Y =
l WILLIAM L. WARREN j.
Official Reporter j
Ann Riley & Associates i
1 i
)
I 4
,7 o
^
Page 1 s
BEFORE THE U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONNISSION 1
In the Matter of:
)
1
)
INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW OF
)
1
)
i ROY WHITAKER
)
Mm j
Conference Room Administration Building i
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant l
Waynesboro. Georgia l
Thursday, Nay 7, 1992 The above-entitled matter convened for INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW, pursuant to notice at 5:13 p.m.
APPEARANCES:
J j
On behmif of the U.S. Welem__r _"_asalatory C--
insions IARRY R. ROBINSON, Investigator j
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3
Office of Investigations i
Suite 2900, 101 Marietta Tower j
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 1
and-t BRIAN BONSER, Senior ReJident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulato'.y Commission Vogtle Electric Generating Plant i
Waynesboro, Georgia On behalf of tha Witness:
4 JOHN LANBERSKI, Attorney Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman & Ashmore 1400 Candler Building 127 Peachtree Street l
Atlanta, Georgia b
l e
i Page 19 r
f 1
Q Ok:y.
And none of your responsibility -- this is a 2
repeat question I guess.
None of your responsibilities as a i
3 QC inspector are to observe a partial procedure and make sure 4
that procedure was done the way it's supposed to be de. 7 5
A It's just -- for this instance, it's just to verify j
6 the as-left readings.
7 Q
Yeah, but I'm not talking about that instance.
I'm s
8 l
9 A
well what --
10 Q
-- talking about at any point in time, as a QC 11 inspector, are you required to go out and observe a procedure 12 that may be a number of steps and then sign off as verifying 13 that that procedure was performed correctly?
14 MR. LAMBERSKI:
That those steps that he observed 15 were performed correctly?
16 MR. ROBINSON:
Yeah.
17 THE WITNESS:
I don't know exactly what you mean.
18 BY MR. ROBINSON:
19 Q
Eave you ever done that?
20 A
What are you talking about?
21 Q
Let's say -- let's take for example a calibration 22 procedure.
23 A
All right.
24 Q
I know that you've already told me that you've 25 never gone and observed a calibration procedure.
But let's
(
i t
l i
i Page 20
)
I take some other unidentified procedure that has a number of
\\
2 steps that need to be performed.
1 3
A Before the QC hold point?
i 4
Q We're not even going to -- yeah, let's say before
-5 the QC hold point.
6 A
Mo, we don't have to watch them.
7 Q
Okay.
You have never done that as part of your 1
i 8
job, to observe that the steps of a procedure up to a hold 1
l 9
point were performed properly?
10 A
I can't say I've never done that.
We're not 11 required to do that.
12 Q
Why would you have done it?
13 A
We just got -- they would call us before they would 14 get to a hold point'and we got there before they actually got 15 to it.
16 Q
Oh.
So it was just a matter of timing?
17 A
Yes.
18 Q
They weren't calling you to observe that?
19 A
No, they weren't.
20 Q
You just get to a hold point and observe the 21 conditions at that hold point?
22 A
Yes.
23 Q
>Okay.
You were aware when they first called you 24 and told you that they had had an out-of-tolerance reading, 25 that they were going to have to do something to get that
i f
l Page 21 l
1 reading back'into tolerance, weren't you?
2 A
Well they're supposed to make those adjustments --
i 3
or they can make those adjustments before we get there and 4
then they call us.
And since they called -- I mean, I knew l
Wed DW f-Mb i
5 something -- you know, they were out at one time or another.
6 Q
And you knew that they were probably doing 4
7 something to get it back in before your observation of the 8
hold point?
l 9
A Or should have already done it, yes.
10 Q
Okay.
11 Do you have any questions, Brian?
l 12 MR. BONSER:
No.
(
13 MR. ROBINSON:
I don't think I have any more i
14 questions.
Do you have any other final comuments that you l
15 want to make regarding the nature or the scope of this
(
16 interview that you think might clarify anything with respect l
17 to this particular situation, the January 28th calibration?
l 18 THE WITNESS:
Could I take a break?
[
19 MR. ROBINSON:
Sure.
It's now 5:44.
Let's take a j-20 five minute break and you can discuss it with your attorney.
i.
21 (A short recess was taken.)
i 22 MR.. ROBINSON:
It is now 5:51 and we're back on the 23 record.
l 24 BY MR. ROBINSOII:
- 25 Q
Mr. Whitaker, before I ask you the question I asked I
9 i
e e
i-r n
1 l
1 l
Page 22 1
you before we left about any final comments, I've got one or I
2 a series of final questions.
I'll show you this document Ij 3
that's entitled Analog Channel Operational Test Data Sheet i
1 4
One again and ask you, are you fairly certain it was a test I
5 data sheet number one and those numbers that we quoted that
]
j 6
you verified when you went there?
7 A
Yes, I did verify *. hose.
I 8
Q Okay.
I'm now going to show you a document 9
entitled Data sheet 37, which is further identified as being 10 associated with VEGP Procedure.24812-1, Revision 16, page l
11 number 138 of 158 and ask yor if you've ever seen that 12 document?
l t
13 A
Not really.
I mean, I saw it when somebody showed 14 it to me probably several weeks later.
15 Q
Okay.
You didn't see it at the time you were 16 called to verify the as-left reading, is that correct?
17 A
Mo, I didn't.
18 Q
Okay.
If you will notice -- and I don't know 19 whether you noticed this at the time you signed off on this 1
{
20 checklist that the steps in the procedure coming down to your 21 QC hold point that you signed off, which is paragraph l
22 4.3.38.18, all refer to readings on data sheet 37.
Yet, you l
23 don't recall -- all you did was look at a meter and compare 24-that to the readings on data sheet one, right?
l 25 A
That's right.
That's -- what they had hooked up
~.m e,
-.m e- ~ <
w
4 e
I j
Page 23 l
1
-was for the ACOT.
~
f 2
Q And that's what they should -- and yet, at this 3
point in the procedure in the area of paragraph 4.3.3818, l
4 we're in kind of a calibration portion of the procedure.
5 MR. IAMBERSKI Be careful, Larry.
]
l 6
MR. ROBINSON:
Go ahead.
j i
7 MR. IAMBERSKI 18 is after the calibration.
I l
8 MR. ROBINSON:
That's correct, but the data that is
{
9 generated by this calibration is put on test sheet 37 rather 10 than test sheet one.
1 l
11 THE WITNESS:
Out of the 4.3.38 section.
l 12 MR. ROBINSON:
Right.
13 THE WITNESS:
Right.
j 14 BY MR. ROBINSON:
i 15 Q
So why did you initial this hold' point off without i
i 16 seeing a completed test sheet 377 17 A
Becausg the card calibration that they perform j
AG7 J.4 sket i 4.sfais 18 changes /
readingshomeandthisistheloopthatthJ.sul ns w arI I verified these g 7 19 operate by and these are the bistables.
4 20 readings here to verify that the card was calibrated.
4 21 Q
Okay.
So --
22 MR.. IAMBERSKI:
I_think what Roy's saying is, he's 23 not required to, Larry.
24 MR. ROBINSON:
I'm just --
25 MR. IAMBERSKI:
Don't let as put words in your i
\\
i 4
9
l' Page 24 4
l 1
mouth, Roy.
Is that correct?
i i
l 2
THE WITNESS:
We're required to ve ytpa ge j
t card was calibrated and these readingsy-II-4Lsignify that the 3
ps 4
card was calibrated.
5 BY MR. ROBINSON:
6 Q
so even though the steps in the procedure
\\
l 7
lasnediately proceeding your hold point that you signed off j
8 talked about readings that would have been entered on test 9
sheet 37.
Did that enter your mind'at all?
]
i 10 A
Like I said, this is a point where they notify us that' they have some readings outg of $/erage,
h Al-f2 11 I
12 Q
That's correct.
i 13 A
They performed the calibration and then they 3
l 14 notified us.
And when I got down there, the ACOT was hooked JA <b.t1 15 up.
And if you verify the ACOT, and if it was right og.hece,
- 'd '"
16 the card should have been calibrated right.
i 17 Q
Okay.
18 Brian, help me with this.
19 If you've in this -- in the 4.3.38 section of the 20 procedure, are you in the ACOT7 21 A
In that section, no, you're not.
22 Q
So test sheet data one is from the ACOT section, 23 right?
24 A
Yes,'it is.
25 Q
Data sheet number 37 is from this -- we'll call it
=..=-:,-
l-i
!i~
i Page 25 1
for lack of a better word calibration section of the l-2 procedure, is that correct?
3 A
For that card, yes.
I 4
Q Okay.
I mean, do you -- seeing what you see now,
]
l 5
do you feel that you probably should have looked at a test 1
l 6
sheet 377 1
1 7
A Knowing everything that I know now about what went i
8 on?
i j
9 Q
Yes.
i j
10 A
Yes, but I didn't know all of that then.
l 11 Q
Okay.
Did you think that the IEC technicians maybe l
12 have pulled a little wool over your eyes by showing you this I
13 data and having you sign off for this QC hold point?
14 A
It -- well like I said, I go by this for the ACOT, 15 and if these readings were right, I assumed everything oise 16 was right.
There was a discrepancy in the procedure.
That's l
17 why the readings weren't right.
l i
18 Q
It maker me wonder why they wouldn't.-- is there a i
j 19 hold point at the end of the ACOT?
l 20 A
I'd have to look at that procedure.
I don't know.
l 21 MR. BONSER:
I don't think there is.
We would have E
22 to go through.the. procedure.
.I'm not knowledgeable enough 23 with the procedure.
J 24 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
l 25 MR. BONSER:
In this section of the procedure,
)-
i i
Page 26 j
1 4.3.38, there are as-left verifications.
That's what I asked' i
j 2
you about earlier because you verified as-lefts in an ACOT i
j 3
section when you should have verified -- it appears to me j
4 that you should have verified the as-lefts in this 4.3.38 1
5 section.
I'm trying to understand why you became confused.
6 It appears that you were verifying ACOT numbers when you 7
should have been verifying numbers in this section, the j
l j
8 4.3.38 section of the procedure.
1 l
9 THE WITNESS:
The verification we make is supposed 10 to verify the calibration when it's performed and it was l'
11 good.
l 12 MR. BONSER:
That would have been on data sheet 37.
i 13 THE WITNESS:
Well these readings here on data i
j 14
' sheet one would signify that the calibration was done and it 15 was right.
I 16 MR. BONSER:
Well they're not the same readings.
17 THE WITNESS:
I know, but this -- the calibrations i
18 they make to get these readings directly affects these j
19 readings here and it would have come out with these readings 20 if the procedure was right at the time.
21 BY MR. ROBINSON:
i 22 Q
. That was one of my questions.
Was the fact that 23 you weren't looking at a test sheet 37 in your mind when you 24 were doing this hold point verification?
25 A
They weren't hooked up when I got there to take the
\\
1 Page 27 1
readings for data sheet 37.
They had it set back up to do 2
the ACOT.
3 Q
Right.
And I guess obviously -- so the question --
4 the answer -- you're saying your answer to the reason why you 5
signed off in the 4.3.38 section, rather than in the ACOT 6
section, is that in your mind the calibration had been done.
7 So it didn't make any difference as long as you verified an 8
in-tolerance as-left reading in the ACOT section, there would 9
have been an in-tolerance as-left reading in the 37 section?
10 A
Yes.
11 Q
Did that thought go through your mind at that time?
12 A
Which thought's that?
13 Q
The thought that if the as-left reading in the ACOT 14 section was within tolerance, then if they would have 15 produced a data sheet 37, that as-left reading would have 16 been in tolerance.
Did that go through your mind at the 17 time?
i 18 A
It should have been in tolerance if they perform 4 l
19 that section.
20 0
I don't know whether you understand my question or i
j 21 not.
Did you think when you were signing this off that you 22 should have looked at a test sheet 377 23 A
Not if I can verify it here on the ACOT.
24 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay, I don't have'any other 25 questions.
Do you have any final comments that you want to I
i 4
4 e
4 4
j-1 Page 28 i
j 1
make to clarify the situation?
i 2
MR. LAMBERSKI:
Do you ra - har now what we talked j
j 3
about, Roy?
i
~
4 THE WITNESS:
I think so.
5 MR. LAMBERSKI:
Okay, go ahead.
l 4, 5197~ dU'II~I s, 4
6 THE WITNESS:
The M point of sign off there is l
--.:^~'
7 to signify that -- or that's where they called me and said j
8 they had a place where QC needed to be notified to go down l
9 and watch the as-left readings.
When I got there, I verified 10 that the card did perform its funct. ion by the ACOT here.
11 That's what I'm required to do, to verify the procedure l
12 readings here are correct.
1 l
13 MR. LAMBERSKI:
Let the record reflect he's j
14 pointing to data sheet one, page 92 of the ee&e46ee.
4'-7-1A 15 procedure.
4 l
16 MR. ROBINSON:
All right.
17 THE WITNESS:
If I had of known that they didn't 18 get acceptable readings for this data sheet here and they l
19 didn't follow the procedure, my job is to stop them and I
i l
20 correct the problem.
I had no idea that they went way out of l
l 21 bounds or whatever they done.
i 22 BY MR. ROBINSON:
1 1
- 23 Q
When Davis or Wilkins kind of showed you where in l
24 the procedure you were to sign off, did it ring a bell to you 25 at all that you were out of the ACOT portion of the 4 :
f.
Page 29 1
procedure?
i 2
A Yes, that's where they -- like I said, only where 3
they notify me is when they come to a point that they had to 4
calibrate a card.
i j
5 Q
So you -- you knew that the sign off portion like 1
6 paragraph 4.3.38 section was out of the ACOT procedure when 4
7 you signed it off?
l 8
A It's all in the same procedure.
The --
9 Q
well we're going to call test sheet one the ACOT 10 procedure and we're going to call the area of paragraph 11 4.3.38 the calibration procedure -- section of the procedure.
12 Is there no distinction in actuality in your mind between
(
13 those two sections?
14 A
I know the purpose of our job is to go down and 15 verify that the calibration was performed and the readings 16 they get are right.
And like I said, this is directly tied 17 to this one here, the calibration.
If these readings would i
18 have been -- were right by the TCP they done, the temporary i
19 change procedure, they would never have got these readings to 20 start off with.
21' MR. ROBINSON:
John, can you explain to him what j
22 I'm trying to.ask him?
Do you understand what I'm trying to 23 ask him?
24 MR. IAMBERSKI I'm not sure I do, Larry.
'25 MR. ROBINSON:
Do you see a distinction in the i
i I
l 1
l Page 30 1
portions, the sections of the procedure between when you're
- i' 2
in an ACOT, when you're doing a test, and when you're l
3 calibrating the equipment?
4 MR. IAMBERSKI I think I understand that, Larry, j
f I
5 and the way you explained it, I don't think is the case.
i 6
Maybe Brian can help me, too.
i 7
MR. PONSER:
Well if you get into this section of j
E the procedure, you verify your as-left in this section of the 9
procedure.
You don't verify them in a different section of l
l 10 the procedure in the ACOT section.
That's the point I think l
11 we're trying to make here.
You don't go to another section -
1
{
12
- back to another section of the procedure to verify your f
13 ACOT reading.
You stay in the same section of the procedure 14 to verify those readings.
So he authorised them -- this hold 1
15 point here to proceed and the next step over here is to 16-verify your as-left readings on data sheet 37.
Well for some l
17 reason, they jumped back over to this data sheet one and 18 that's what we're haviry, a hard time understanding, how to i
19 resolve the balance ietween verifying readings ou a data l
20 sheet one when you should have been on a data sheet 37.
And 21 he signed off and it's above and below and there are points 22 here also that should have been signed off by the QC, even i
j 23 though I know -- I realise it was marked NA.
But it should 24 have not been marked MA if you were going to complete that 25
.section of the procedure.
If you started in the procedure, 4
(
j'.
i 4
i j
Page 31 1
j 1
either you complete it or you have to back out of it and sign '
i i
2 off that you backed out of it and I have no indication that 3
they ever backed out of it here.
So one would have to assume 3
j 4
that you were going to complete the procedure rather than 5
just sign off one stap of the procedure, because there are 6
two more QC sign offs in here to verify the as-lefts.
That's 7
the point of confusion.
8 MR. TJutBERSKIt' Number ona, as I understand it,
)
9 this is not a checklist for QC sign offs.
It's signed off by 10 the technicians.
Number two, as I understand it, the only 11 thing Roy has done here was to confirm that he had been skyt 1 3. 'sv.fr 59 12 notified at this point where there is a hold point,ADF, QC fA s4 r Y. T.Tr. gro s-r-,g E
13 hold point.
I recognise that at says QC tified as well, 4
l 14 but I don't see any QC hold point here in the procedures.
So i
15 I don't understand this sheet, except for that one point, step % 3 3 T.15 c
48, T-f-74 16 l.
4 17 BY MR. ROBINSON:
18 Q
But all any question is, is there a distinction in l
l 19 your mind between what they're doing to arrive at the data on 4
j.
20 test sheet one and what they're doing to arrive at the data 21 on test sheet 37, or is there a distinction 7 l
22 A
Let me see if I've got this straight.
23 Q
Go ahead.
l l
24 A
If we can verify the readings here -- they made 25 adjustments here and we can verify them here and they are
I Page 32 I
directly tied together, then I can verify this for the as-l 2
left readings to confirm that this was correct over here.
3 Q
Did that thought process enter your mind when you 4
signed your initials then?
l 5
A To verify that the card was good based on the Ac0T7 6
Q No.
That if you had seen fae test sheet 37, it t
l 7
would have correlated to the test sheet one.
Did the thought 8
of a test sheet 37 oven enter your mind when you signed off f
9 here?
i 1
10 A
No, it didn't.
Like I said, they didn't have it e.Chr.h,ed hookeduptoperform,p'r i g p had it hooked up to 11 12 perform the ACOT when I got there and they said this card was j
Q a rs**s Alts) f-II 4L i
13 out/ I mean, we have to take their word on what was out J M' e' d.tu.coyz 14 because they could do several things and not get notified.
15 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
I don't think we're going to 3
'16 get anywhere.
Any other coements?
17 MR. IAMBERSKI:
Yeah.
I want to restind him of 'what 18 we talked about so long ago.
19 MR. ROBINSON:
Let the record reflect that Mr.
20 Bonser is leaving the interview.
21 THE WITNESS:
I would like to say that I fulfilled 22 my responsibility as a QC. inspector to make sure that card 23 was calibrated based on the data we had at the time in the 24 approved procedure.
25 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
i
)
1.
l Page 33 l
1 THE WITNESS:
And that I gave them authorisation to l
2 go ahead with the procedure, which I have to or they can't.
i 3
MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
4 4
THE WITNESS:
Like I said, if I had of known that i
5 they didn't perform 37c I'm supposed -- or data sheet 37, I'm
?
j 6
supposed to stop them and, you know, make sure they follow 7
the procedure to get the acceptable readings.
Like I said, l
8 they had acceptable readings here and I had no reason to 9
doubt it.
10 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
Had you ever been called for 11 a hold point at that point in that procedure before?
You 12 don't know or...
(
13 THE WITNESS:
I don't know.
14 MR. ROBINSON:
How many times a day do you called 15 out for hold points?
16 THE WITNESS:
I average four times or five times a 17 day.
18 MR. ROBINSON:
Okay.
19 THE WITNESS:
I mean, if you'll look, there is 20 probably a thousand procedures.
It's hard to say which ones 21 I've gone out on.
22 MR.. ROBINSON:
All right.
I don't have any 23 additional questions.
You've provided your testimony here 24 voluntarily today, didn't you?
25, THE WITNESS:
Yes, I did.
t-vr
Page 34 1
MR. ROBINSON:
There was no pressure or coercion 2
put on you to testify here today?
3 THE WITNESS:
No, there wasn't.
4 MR. ROBINSON:
I thank you for your cooperation.
5 It's now 6:09 and this interview is terminated.
Thank yov.,
6 Mr. Whitaker.
7 (whereupon, the interview was concluded at 6:09 j
8 p.m.)
9 10 1
11 12 I
l 13 14 15 16 17 l
18 i
19 20 21 22 23 d
24 25
. - - = *
- y P'agba @ 35 CERTIPICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the U. s. Nuclear Regulatory Comunission in the matter of:
Names Interview of Roy Whitaker Docket Number Place:
Vogtle Nuclear Generating Plant, Waynesboro, WL Date:
May 7, 1992 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken stenographically by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under my direction, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
.seau.2.A =
WILLIAN L. WARREN i
Official Reporter Ann Riley & Associates i
li (
I
,