ML20197J270
| ML20197J270 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/05/1997 |
| From: | Farley M NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197H509 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-97-365 NUDOCS 9801020131 | |
| Download: ML20197J270 (79) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ -_ 1 2 WITED STATFS Ur REC 2 3 fr.1CLE;/r; 7FJ.2El'URf 2*m1RSION 5 OFFICE OF INVESTIGhT.1DNS 6 INTEK/IEW 7 - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - -X S IN THE MATTER OF: : 9 INTERVIEW OF : Docket No. 10 E. JAMES MASSEY : (not assigned) 11 12 - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - ~X 13 Wednesday, June 5, 1996 14 15 Law Office of David Gibson ( 16 10 Park Place 17 Brattleboro, Vermont 18 19 20 The above-entitled interview was conducted at 21 9:08 a.m. 22 BEFORE: 23 RICHARD MATAFAS, Investigator 24 25 26 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. ( (202) 234-4433 o EXHIBIT e $ l UK5ENO. 1-90-00-. g3gg j ggpgp3gg{g) 9001020131 971225 3, gl 3 ; PDR FOIA >l 55 0 l 6 HICKEY 97-365 PDR ^
.)
l 2 1 3HDEX 2 WITNESS: PAGE: Examination of James Massey 3
.3 4 By_Mr. Matakas 5
6 7 EXH" BITS: 8 None 9 10 11 12 13 14
- 15 16 17 28 19 20
-21 ,
22 23 24 25 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. L { * (202) 234-4433
3 1 EBRCEEDlB93 2 (9:08 a.m.) ( 3 MR. KATAKAS: Today is Wednesday June 5, 1996 4 and the time is 9:08 a.m. My name is Richard Matakas, I'm 5 a special agent with the NRC's Office of Investigations. 6 This will be an interview of Mr. James Massey, regarding 7 allegations that he raised with his management regarding 8 the Vermont Yankee Advanced Off-Gas System. 9 Also present is Mr. David Gibson, Esq. 10 Mr. Gibson, would you please state your full 11 name, the name of your law firm and provide us with your 12 purpose and in what capacity you are here today. 13 MR. GIBSON: My name is David Alan Gibson. 14 Alan is A-L-A-N. The name of my office is Gibson Law 15 Office. My capacity is as attorney for Edwin James Massey, 16 the deponent. 17 MR. MATAKAS: Okay. Mr. Gibson, do you 18 represent any other party in this matter? 19 MR. GIBSON: No, I don't. 20 MR. MATAKAS: Mr. Massey, do you wish to have 21 Mr. Gibson represent you during this interview today? 22 MR. MASSEY: Yes, I do. 23 MR. MATAKAS: Okay. 24 John, would you introduce yourself, please? 25 MR. CALVERT: My name is John Calvert. I'm a Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433
5 i , i 1 having been first duly sworn, was cin e$ as a witness ( 2 herein, was examined, and testified upo.e his oath as follows: 3 4 EXAMINATION OF EDWIN JAMES MASSEY 5 BY MR. MATAKAS: 6 0 Jim, could we have your full name, please? I 7 A. My name is Edwin James Massey. # l 8 Q E-D-W-I-N? ! 9 A That's correct. 10 Q M-A-S-S-E-Y? 11 A That's correct. 12 Q And your date and place of birth? 13 A 14 Q And your Social Security number? 25 A 16 O And your home address? 17 A (1.
]{
18
~
l - . ., l I 19 Q Okay. And what is the zip code there, for your 20 post office box? ! 21 A @ ! 22 Q s .s _ 23 A That's correct. 24 ._ Q And what is your home telephone number? ]{ 25 A . Neal R. Gross & Co. , Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 v. 1
6
. . . 1 -Q And what'is the' area code?-
2.- A /.
' b
- 31
.Q- :And what-is..your formal education?
- n '
4 A- It's.a long one. LI'went.into the service when L 5- I was seventeen, I-got out of-ninth grade._ From there,-in
'6_ the service I got my GED and took. service courses and -
7 requested courses from my high school. When I got'out of. 1 8' the service, I went to Patterson Prep-and I took classes d 9 from I believe it was.CSI, I did two years of algebra in , 10 six months.
- 11. From there, I went to Fairleigh Dickinson 12 University, at night, and-just an awful lot of home 13- studying. My education, in a hurry, I was a field engineer 14 for Federal Pacific Electric Company, for switch gear.
i
.( 15 -Q Okay, wl'll e get into-that. But-did you get a 16 degree from Fairleigh Dickinson?
17 A No, I did not. 18 - Q How many years of college did you complete? 19 A I don't know.
-20 Q Okay.
21 A Maybe fifty credits. 22 O What was your emphasis, your major and_your
- 23 minor?
24 "-* A Electrical' engineering. 25 0- Okay. .You mentioned you were in the military? Neal-R. Gross % Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. ,
~( (202) 234-4433 i
-,--,w w -- ..-y,- , . - - -,-.-r - - - - -
~ -- 7 1 A Yes, I was. ( 2 O From when to when? 3 A Prom 1956 to 1960, I was a radioman. 4 Q In the Navy? 5 A That's correct. I went six months to radic 6 school. 7 Q And then I'd like you to give us, since you got 8 out of the Navy, your work history in general. Just who 9 you worked for and approximate dates? 10 A Okay. From 1960 till 1964, I worked for 11 Federal Pacific Electric Company. I started off as a wireman and I became foreman of the test department. And 12 13 then from there, I went and became a field engineer, on 14 switch gear and transformers. I quit that job in '64. 15 I went to work for United Housing Foundation, 16 they had at the time, I believe, six power plants. And I 17 became electrical control engineer over six power plantc. 18 After that they put up another power plant, it was called 19 Co-Op City, it held sixty thousand people. And I acted as 20 liaison for the owners, construction and designers, to take 21 out bad circuits before they were put into the plant. When 22 the plant was completed, I became the assistant plant 23 manager. 28 I resigned, well, we were putting up another 25 plant, called Twin Pines, and I was going to be plant Neal R. Gloso & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433 i
8 i 1 manager of that plant. 'lluf orturat Qr, 'the political conflicts that they 'oao in NN Yar.k adj ut the time, the ( 2 conpany ended up se~lling T.be p'J Wat. ak a) . And Since I 3 4 couldn' t start up annt.her power plant., 7 figured I might as 5 well come back up t o Vermont . 6 I resigned, and They off ered .te t:.e position of 7 plant manager and I refused. And 1 came back to Vermont, 8 didn't have a job-- 9 0 What year was that that you quit? 10 A 19 74 I believe. 11 O Okay. 12 A Okay. 13 I started up, for a short period of time, my 14 own electrical business, called JM Electric. I then -- I ( 15 got divorced and things just went down hill. 16 I then went ahead and I called a few friends up 17 in New York City and I asked them, would they get me an 18 int e rview? I had three interviews in one day; I got all 19 three jobs. 20 I took a job with the power plant. 21 O Which one was that? 22 A Pardon? 23 Q Which power plant? 24 A It was called, gee, it was in Manhattan. I 25 think it was Amalgamated Housing, I'm not sure. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433 i
9 Is that the company also? . 2 Q l A That-was part of the company. , 2 ( And they-had a lot of switch gear they were 3 blems. 1 4 having trouble with, a lot of undergroundlong cableit pro ; l So, they asked me to look it over and asked how l S' So, I looked it over and !, 6 would take me- to clean it.up. It, in fact, took me ! 7' told them it would take me one year. 8 8 ' eleven months and two weeks. j i I then left there, I was commuting every l 9 because I still had a place here.- : 10-weekend back-to' Vermont, I still j 11= I left there, came back to Vermont after a year. i I was either too
'12 couldn't find a job in Vermont, k to be i
13' qualified -- and all I wanted to do was go to wor , ! 14 honest with you. d And'I'went to work, I was getting the Hartfor I ? (- 15 and I seen a job in combustion engineering. So, I 16 Courant, 17 went to work for Combustion Engineering. < Q What year? 18 ~ A
'77 maybe?
19. And I was only there about three or four months 20- l for an 21
-and there was a job _in the Hartford Courant-I had applied for
.22 electrical engineer, for Vermont Yankee. h y told me I l 23 the position _and three' days later, or so, t e _
l
.I
-24 had the position. [
Q So,.you started with Vermont Yankee-- 25_ : r INeal R. Gross & Co., Inc. l Washington, D.C. i (202) 234-4433 I C: !
+
10 1 A As an electrical engineer in t:ne engineering ( 2 department. 3 0 In what year? 4 A 1978, in fact, it was my birthday, May 8th, cf 5 1978. 6 0 What is your current statu.s with Vermont 7 Yankee? 8 A Right now, I'm a senior electrical engineer, in 9 the project engineering group. 10 0 okay. 11 A Dut as a whole, I'm not sure what my position , 12 ir. 13 ) What is going on right now between you and 14 Vermont Yankee? 15 A Right now, I'm out in the warehouse, with a 16 computer that doesn't worx. I'm given no jobs to do. I'm 17 actually helping any engineer that needs help and that's 18 what I'm doing. Right now, I'm helping Paul stello review 19 a design. And it's on switch gears, so he knows I'm 20 probably better at it than he is. Not that I am better 21 than Paul Stello, though, that's not what I'm trying to 22 say. 23 0 You've had an opportunity to review the NRC 24 inspection report that I sent you? 23 A Yes, I have. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (. (202) 234-4433
i f 31 I i
-1 Q Do you have any , comment er .js there anything
( 2 3-that you want to take issue with, cry axything you have a question on?
~
, 3 t
4 - A- I t ' s .a compl ete 2 d e. l i. 5~ Q Specifically? A- -Well, I haven't looked at it in a week, But [j
.6- ,
- 7. they have items in there, for instance, they just did the 8- prints to make-it more'like their'way.- That's a lie. -l 9 Vermont Yankee actually rewired - they tell so many lies 10 they forget their lies, I think.
11 They rewired the panel in 1982; now 12 why would they go ahead.and rewire it again,.to make it 4 13 more like their system?. It started off as CVI prints, ; 14 okay? Vermont Yankee rewired that panel, because they 15 couldn't put in the design by Dave McElwee, in 1982, and it j
- 16 was PAR 8216, and it was called AOG power split.
17 When.1 went to Dave McElwee, it was me and j 18 Warren Chandler at the time, who worked for New England i 19 Power Service company. We said, there are so many wiring ( 20 errors in here it doesn't match the prints. He was smart l 21 enough then to cancel the design and have it completely. , I 22 wire checked. ~And the prints then showed up under YNSD 23 prints. So, they wouldn't be rewiring _the panel just to t 24 make it~their way.- 25 As far as my safety concerns-went,. lies again, i
-Neal-R. Gross & Co., Inc.
-Washington, D.C. ,
._(' (202) 234-4433 l e\~
^ l
-1 a .- --.-.:.. . - . - . - . - - - . - . . - - . . . - , . _ -._,,.-.w..-.. - , . . _ . _ .. _ .. _
13 1 In the vecy beginning, I did have a safety concern that the ( 2 job couldn't be done safely, not a safety concern per se, 3 that I knew there was something wrong. And I knew this 4 because in 1982, and whether it was becauzu it was Dave 5 McElwee's job I'm not sule. 6 0 llow do you spell McElwee, before we get any 7 further, 8 A I believe it is M-- 9 MR. GIBSON: I believe it is M-C, capital E-L-10 W-E-E. 11 MR. MATAKAS: Okay. I2 Go ahead, I'm sorry. 13 A M-C-E-L-W-E-E, Right. 14 Around 1982, there was all kinds of complaints 15 with AOG. At that time t here I was construction 16 supervisor. 17 BY MR. MATAKAS: 28 0 Who? 19 A Construction suptrvisor. 20 0 Who made the complaint? 21 A Everybody, I&C-- 22 O Well, who specifically? 23 A Bob Selby, from I&C, it was just-- 24 0 What was his complaint, specifically? 25 A One of them was, even when they would shut off Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433
13 l 1 a power supply, they would still get shocked. That's one l ( 2 of them that stands out. There was a lot of people who 3 knew there was problems with AOG. 4 0 Who are these people? i 5 A Bill Wittmer. 6 0 W-I-T-M-O-R-E7 7 A W-I-T-T-M-E-R. 8 O And what did he ka>w? 9 A He knew that there were complaints all over the lo place, that I wasn't the only one that was concerned. 11 O I understand. But what specific information 12 does he have that would indicate a problem with the off-gas 13 system? What was his complaint, is what I'm getting at. 14 A Well, I don't think it was a specific 15 comp.'.aint, okay, other than AOG has almost, I believe it 16 has knocked Vermont Yankee off line once or twice. It has 17 come close a few times., And just in general, and 18 basically, that's the way I had it, in general that there 19 was just a lot of design errors, wiring errors and print 20 errors. 21 O okay. And we are going to get into that in 22 more detail, specifically your involvement and your 23 interaction with individuals, with regards to the off-gas 24 system. But getting back to the inspection report, what 25 specific part of that inspection report, if you could quote heal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C. (202) 234-4433 t
14 1 from it, that you believe is inaccurate in some way? Don' t get me wrong, John, okay? You couldn't i A ( 2 if nobody was going 3 have put out any different of a report 4 to tell you the truth. 1 don't -- could we take a break now for a 5 6 minute? Absolutely. The time is 9:25 and 7 MR. MATAKAS: 8 we are going to take a break so Mr. Massey can have an 9 opportunity to review the inspection report. (Whereupon, there was a short 10 recess.) 11 The time is 9:26. We are back on 12 MR. MATAKAS: 13 the record, 14 BY MR. MATAKAS: I had a 15 O Mr. Massey, we had a conversation, I 16 conversation with Mr. Gibson, and I informed him that so that you could 17 would send you this inspection report review it, because we wanted to know if you had any issues 18 19 with the inspection report. over. So, you've had an opportunity to look it 20 issues do you have with that 21 And I want to ask you what You mentioned earlier, you said that 22 inspection report. 23 it's all lies, and that sort of-- I 24 A It basically is, as far as the AOG system. 25 don't blame the inspector because I don't believe he was Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C
15 1 given the truth and I take full exception to Vermont Yankee's letter, DVY96-17, that I'll co nment later on. ( 2 The inspection report, where it said -- the 3 4 first page, and I'm looking at the AOG section, where That it said, I declined to be interviewed by the inspector. 5 is true, but however, I didn't decline, I told them to 6 7 speak to my lawyer. I believe I don't believe VY gave you my name, 8 as I spoke to you, 9 you got my name from Harold Eichenholz, 10 how did you get my name and you told me it was from Harol 11 Eichenholz. O Well, that's where I got it but I didn't have 12 that's not -. 13 anything to do with the inspection report, What I'm talking about, Mr. Massey, is the-- 14 I'll get there. ( 15 A the specifications, It says that you looked at 16 And 17 the drawings and the modifications and mem7randums. 18 what I'd like to ask John-- 0 Well, first-- 19 Wait a mis,ute. A -if I can - . 20 MR. MASSEY: Did you read any of my 22 22 memorandums, John? MR. CALVERT: Yes. 23 MR. MASSEY: A whole folder, like I've got 24 25 right here? Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C_
~
L 1 MR. CALVERT: I didn't get a whole folder, no. ( 2 MR..MASSEY: Okay. -I've got quite a few- l memorandums and I'll bet you Vermont Yankee never showed
~
3' j 4 you those, and you'll have a chance to review them. 5 A The evaluation, it says here, arrived at the ; 5 appropriate conclusions and showed that neither the 7 function of any safety related systems would be degraded, I i 8 nor would the margin of safety be degraded as defined in j 9 -the technical specifications for the AOG system. I, =in 10 fact, do have safety related problems with AOG. And in ! 11 fact, I-do believe it's degraded.- 12 What I found in the_very beginning of AOG, was that we had instrument AC, which is safety class, was mixed 13 14 with wires from -- there is nine power supplies in AOG and {_. . 15. At was mixed up with those power supplies. In other words, 16 they were using one wire from a safety class system to 17 another wire that was NNS. I brought this up many times. 18 BY MR. MATAKAS: 19 Q NNS? 20 A Non-nuclear safety. 21 O Okay. . 22 A And'I told him about the dangers of it. I 23 first found two' areas where they were' mixed up. I wrote a i 24 letter June 6th, stating this-- T
'25' O June 6th of what year?
Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. [ Washington, D.C.
- .' C-[.
(202)-234-4433
- .- . . . -. . -a . - . - - - . . - - . - . - . . . ... - . . _ . . . . . - -. .
17 1 A 1994, it would be. And you wrote the letter :c. whom? (' 2 3 O A It would have went to, certainly to my boss, my The copy is here, 4 boss' boss, and Pelletier, at a minimum. 5 and you people are more than welcome to copies of all that 6 I have. 7 Q And your boss was Mr. Corbett? that's correct, 8 A At the time it was Mr. Corbett, 9 he still is. 10 (Pause) 11 A I also took exception to the review of modification planning. They wanted to improve the 12 operation of AOG. And then they decided in 1995 and '96, 13 You'll find that they 14 to do little smaller separate tasks. even scheduled anything for AOG. ( 15 haven't 16 The engineer on the job which I was project Lou Casey couldn't 17 manager of, his name was Lou Casey. And I'm not 18 read prints, he couldn't read schematics. As an 19 trying to say anything about Lou Casey as a man. Lou Casey was on the job 20 engineer, he was inappropriate. since 1991. When I first heard that AOG, my boss then was 21 Dave Phillips. And I kept reminding them that I knew about 22 23 the wiring in AOG because I had checked it out in 1982. 24 And I was worried when it got to be 1994 and nobody was 25 raising a question about design errors and wiring errors in Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C l l 1 l
18 1 1- AOG, (; 2 0 :Is that contrary to what is stated in the 3 inspection report? 4 A I guess so,s in a way. I 5 Q specifically, could.you tell me how? 6- A Oh, I don't know. j Let's-just go on because I've got to get j 7 i e through this. 9 In the next section it says, performed field , 10 verifications as'the as-built wiring, revised the AOG- l 11 control panel drawings. As I.said before, these drawings . 12 were revised in 1982. They said they, the original 13' drawings were difficult to read. Well, they didn't have 14' original drawings, they already had YNSD drawings. ( 15 Q YNSD? 16 A Yankee Nuclear Service Department, Division.
- 17. So, why would they tell you that they are going 18; .in and revising the drawings to make them more like their ,
19 -way, John, when they already revised them in 1982? It was 20 just to throw you off the ball park. 21 That's what happens when they start lying; they 22' lie so many times they can't remember their own lies. 123 Here is another example. An example of some of j 24 the wiring problems was that some of the neutral wires were
'25 connected ~from'different power supplies than the hot wires.
( Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. [
/: Washington; D.C. :
(j- (202) 234-4433 , t
' f.
._-_._a - _ _ . . _ - ~ . . _ _ , . . . _ - . .,._,,,_._._L.__-.... . . _ . . _ . , - .. . . . - ,
........,-,.,,,._.,,,,...j
i 19 j 1 This was viewed by the licensec as a cend3 tion that could ( 2 cause erratic operation of the instrunent.
~
This is further f 3 discussed in section on status of the modifications. j 4- Gentlemen, this is my safety concern right 5 here. I found four areas, and I don't know how many more f 6 there are, where they_were using a wire from a non-nuclear _ 7 safety power supply, and taking a wire from a safety class :
- 8. power supply. The problem is a direction of. fault 9 currents. 'The National Electric Code, NEC, has developed
- 10 and devoted an awful lot of time to ground wires. Their. 11 last revision that they put out was basically, almost {
~1 2- entirely devoted to grounding. There are more houses ,
13 burned down in the United States, and plants, because of incorrect grounding or neutral wires. And everybody thinks 14 ( 15 it's so unimpoltant. 16 Well, everyone thinks it is so 17- unimportant, well, it is not unimportant. It's the la direction of fault currents. And now that the NRC is here, , 19 I suggest that you have your best engineers look into it. 20 0 Was that concern-- 21 A That concern is right here. ; 0 Okay, but it has to do with essentially fires, ' 4
-23 .is what'you're talking about?
12 4 ; . A- Fires,, shorts, you name it.
-25 In fact,-my. case in court is going to be, I'm Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc, j '
' Washington, D.C.
(202) 234-4433 l
-...,--x,w .+.u . . , , . , , , . .-...-...,,r.-,,n.w,--m-.-, _.-y,--- ..-m,.<,- y r e-
30 1 going to take this little old neutra) wire, and then I'm (, 2 going to connect it to an NNS supp'ly thht .it's connected 3 to. And what I'm gcing to do is'I'm goasg to short it out, 4 as we get shorts every day. That panel will not know that 5 it has a fault, okay, and that NNS supply circuit breaker 6 is not going to operate. I'm going to heat up that wire to 7 the point it's going to glow. I'll start a fire in the 8 control room, simulated, start a file in the cable vault, 9 and one in AOG. And this gentlemen, I advise you to really 10 look into. 11 I'll go on from there because that is my -- and 12 I don't know how many areas are still left in AOG because 13 they wouldn't completely wire check it.
'4 (Pause)
( 15 A The licensee stated that the functionality of 16 the system was not hampered by these discrepancies. Is 17 that why Bob Selby would get a short? He would think that 18 he would go ahead and shut something off and he would still 19 get Lhocked? We weren't hampered by these discrepancies? 20 We were definitely hampered by these discrepancies. 21 These and many more. 22 You have got here, change the level control 23 pumping system for the AOG condensate drain tank. 24 0 What page are you reading from now? 25 A There is no page number on it, it's item Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. f- (202) 234-4433 l
81 l f 1 number 2.- 3 2 O okay. l ( i 3 A This mod never took place, j i m 4 Q Would ycu state it again-because I didn't ! s S understand what you said? g t 6 A Change the level control in pumping system for j t 7 the AOG condensate drain tank. Tank 304 1. This is an [ 8 interfacing system to the AOG that is used in normal. ! operations. That is one of the mods that was supposed to 9 i 10 take place. Unfortunately, when I realized Lou Casey ! 11- couldn't read prints, I asked him to tell-me how the drain , 12 tank level system worked. Lou Casey explained it and he l 13- also explained it in a memo, it's VYI35/92, on how the j 1 14 drain tank works. . ( 15- Since Lou Casey couldn't read prints, he had to 16- try to get this information from somebody else. And I 17 asked him to explain it to me and he said, when the level : 18 went'down, it would shut off by a low level switch. And 19 when the tank was full, the pump would automatically turn f 1 It's ; 20 on from a high level switch. This is not correct. t 21 wrong, the circuit is wrong, but it's incorrect. There is ; 22 one level switch, okay, it's a low level switch. It 23 operates a relay. This relay both turns the pump on and i 24 off. The high level switch, the only thing it does.is ring- -; 25 an alarm, it_doesn't turn'anything on automatically. l Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. ;
. Washington, D.C. :
/\. -
(202) 234-4433 , e
. .)
'l
-, ~ ~ . _ . ..,..-._.,.,_._../__,;,...,,--_.....,......,_.,,,..--,..-.,_.___.L.~,.-,_.
- ..-.....,.,,.~,,,,,.-,L.m , . . , . . -
i i i 32 j r a 1.13n level, you have And in fact, if ysu get 1 t it in 2 to manually turn it on, by hand, y o rar.'t pu - ( automatic. Because there Js an 2nterlock between pump A 1 l 3
-f So, if pump A is running, pump B cannot run 4 and pump B. l This is-why they keep -!
5 unless you put it on by hand.
~
In fact, l burning the pump out, year after year _after year. 6 d another- f I 7 in the year before we did that design they_burne t
]
8 one out. d he has got a ; _Because the operator goas ahea , 9 10 high level, he' turns it on by hand and ff. he thinks So, it it's g ; i 11-to automatically shut off'and it doesn't shut o t l l 12 stays on, it runs the tank out of water, and you've go l i' ~ And the minute you run it' 13 porcelain seals in those pumps. i there goes the porcelain seals. 14 outoof water, bingo, l They have changed these pumps so many times. 15
~
do 16 It costs six thousand dollars every time they have to re 17 it-and they just did it during the last outage. l of ,
-During normal plant operation, a low leve ,
18- , There were astances when the tank 19 condensate 11s produced. as, to was pumped dry, which the licensee found the root w 20 And it wasn't; the ! ' 21-be a regulating control valve failure. 6 failure is, what happens - . There-is a memo in hereThere from : 1 22 I&C, that tells you that the regulator worked fine. l j 23 is nothing wrong with that regulator down there, i
.24-O Okay. One minute. 4 25' :i Inc.
Neal R. Gross & Cos, l Washington, D.C. . (202) 234-4433 .;
-[~--1 I
.I-v I
_ . _ . _ _ - ..m._.._..- -, . - - - . _ , _ , _ . - . , . _ ,
23 1 MR .. MATAYA5x 1 f :t t4e re a n. ar.y:hing, any point 2 you want to stop and get a n.s : ! the n 50 uments, let me 3 know. I'm talking to John 4 A I'll have to look . 2.t ouc': nem.
; 5 O That's all right, that a all right .
i 6 Go on, if you want. 7 MR. CALVERT: Yeah, I'd rather get the whole 8 thing because I'm going to have to look at them to get 9 this - . 10 MR. MASSEY: Do you mind if we just take a 11 break? My mouth is so dry. 12 MR. MATAYAS: Absolutely. Any time ou want to 13 take a break. 14 MR. MASSEY: Thank you. 15 Have you got anything to sip on? 16 MR. MATAKAS: Before we take a break, the time 17 is 9:42, we'll take a break. 18 (Whereupon, there was a short 19 recess.) 20 MR. PATAYAS : The time is 9:50, we are back on 21 the record. 22 BY MR. MATAKAS: 23 O Jim, you've had additional time to look over 24 the inspection reports. If you would continue. 25 A This one has a page number, it's page 4, okay, Nsal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C ~ (202) 234-4433 i
?
84 j > 1 of the AOG sect.f on. Where -it talt.r Alect 'the document and ! ( 2 3-design basis was perf .rma$ en depth of the desigt -analysis anf Tne irrxive_ engineering Thh et indicated by the { 4 participation in site walk-downs. In fact, it was so : 5_ The design analysia stu.vL , 6 bad that it was in the middle of summer and they still i 7 didn't know whether or not, on the condensate drain tank, 8 whether or not the water would. flash over into steam, if 9 they gave a direct suction to the condenser. :
'10 Q Well, did they find this in a walk-down?
11 A No. They didn't find it, they were still doing ! 12- design analysis,-okay?_ They claimed that the design came l 13- in,-I believe, to Vermont Yankee, July 5th. And there I'll have.to agree that the paperwork came in. Because-you put l 14 15 something down on paper, all that is, is this is what I'd 16 like to do, The design really comes in as how you put it s 17 out on the prints. That's where the real design is, I ; 18 could put anything on paper and say, gee, I want to 19 ' construct this. But unless you see all the documentation 20 and the work that goes into it, that's the design, anybody l 21 can put anything on paper. , 22 O How does that relate to your comment that the 12 3 ' walk-down-stinks? , 24 A Well, the design analysis. and actually.there , 25 was no_ design: analysis. We were arguing over that design Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. I Washington, D.C.
- (3 (202) 234-4433
.\
._2 . __- .. . . , -. .- , - . _ _ _ _ , , _ _ _ , _ .._,-._- _ -.. ,._, . - . . . , .
35 l d it 1 right up until the very end, unt 3 3 f ir. ell y they cance e 2 around the 20th of October. ( 0 199--? 3 A '94. 4 If we had a well prepared design, do you think 5 6 we would be going through all these problems? 0 Is there anything specifically, about that 7 where there may be a 8 design analysis, that you can tell 9 problem that we should know about? Lou Casey couldn't A Yes. The drain tank, okay? 10 In fact, till the very, very end, right up 11 read a print. Not one 12 to the very end, he never marked up one print. he job 13 print was ever marked up by Lou Casey and he was on t 34 since 1991 you gentlemen, I And if you don't believe me, 15 drill 16 understand, have interviewed Rick Reuther; next time, 17 him. do you know? last name, 0 How do you spell that 18 Would you like to give it your MR. MASSEY: 19 20 best shot, Dave? MR. GIBSON: Which was it? 21 A Reuther. I think it is R-E-U-T-H-E-R. 22 23 BY MR. MATAKAS: . o okay. 24 A Rick Reuther was the man I had assigned to me 25 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C
26 1 who was an electrician; I gucu br, riew .us the title of (o- 2 field engineer, who is a gooo e t'y the way. 3 I take exceptim te ttina .ste ement, the 4 licensee performed a detailed point tt point walk-down and 5 verification of the 950 panel, as bv.1t drawings, and found 6 only one minor difference which was corrected on the 7 drawings. 8 Whoever told you that, John, lied right through 9 his teeth. When they first initiated the AOG job and I was 10 put on it, I complained that I already knew about the 11 prints. Because I had Milton Stone, which is M-I-L-T-0-N 12 S-T-0-N-E, and another gentleman on the job called Fete 13 Linnus, L-I-N-N-U-S. Both of these gentlemen are from New 14 England Power Service Company. 15 In approximately 1982, because I heard about 16 all the problems w.th AOG, I put a crew on it towards the 17 end of the outage. We were on it for approximately two 18 weeks. We didn't go up to the 950 panel, we concentrated 19 our efforts in AOG. Within a short period of time, we 20 found that nothing matched the drawings. Unfortunately, 21 before we could go much further, Jim Pelletier asked me 22 what I doing, I told him, and he told me to stop, that it 23 wasn't budgeted. And so, he was my boss at the time, and I 24 stopped. 25 0 Is there a memo on that one, or anything? Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C' (202) 234-4433
37 1 A No there is not but-- 5 2 O E-mail? ( A No. We didn't have e-mail at'the time.. . , 3 i 4 Q This.was 19827 ! 5 A Give or take. Milton Stone is retired now, but I'm sure you 6 f Pete Linnus still works for New England , 7 could get to him. da
> 8 Power Service company, and he would be an honest man an 3 9 bright man.
still, licensee You said, on here, on page 4, I 10 ' 11 performed a detailed point to point walk down on the If I 12 verifications and you only found ene minor difference. 1 fix up one area where the AOG power , 13 you had to just 14 supplies went to the. instrument AC, you would take that on relay, since it's daisy-chained, there would be two wires : 15 So, they would ; 16 on there that you would have to change. j that's two errors; you 17 have to take those two wires off, from, 18 would have to take the two wires off where they e-me 19 that's four errors, okay? You d have to take the wires off 20 to where it went to, that's six errors. Now, you still have to connect the right wires 21 l
- 22 up. If you just did those and you didn't do anything else, 23 you would end up with approximately thirty-two errors, not ,
24 one minor difference. That-panel, by the way, should have been
- 25 W Inc, Neal R. Gross & Co.,
Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433
- C-. :
E
, ,, , , .------r , . , - , ..,---.e, . , . . . . , ,o , , - - -,wy-, - - ,.,--~,,,-,-.~,m, _,.,,y,9-.,rw yy,,.,---r-,., y,,vcm. ,%-,wa- e
38 : I 1 perfect because in-1982, I didn't-do it.-1'had New England j i Power service company, and I didn't have the time, so it
]( 2 _
.3 was-the_ engineering department that hired Mercury to go j 6
4 ahead and check the panel-out and bring the prints up to
.5 date.
6 Q And what_ happened? :
)
7 A- Pardon? l r 8 Q And what happened? Did Mercury do that? l
-9 A Mercury did it. However, I'll be very honest _
10 with you, I didn't use Mercury because they were l
'11 -unqualified.at the time. And I'm not saying they are 12 today,-I'm saying, at that particular time, electrically, ;
13 Mercury was unqualified. And I didn't have the time to do j 14 it with New England Power Service Company, 15 To make mutters worse, when I told them about- j 16 the problems about he wiring they-- 17 0 Who is they? 18 A Pat Coroett. 1 19 Well, he says, you go ahead and give me an 20 indication of what is wrong. So, I did, I actually took ; 21 the prints that Mercury had already done in 1982, okay, and 22 I found seventy-four discrepancies in six prints. I have a 23 list of those seventy-four discrepancies right here if 24 anybody would like to see them. Most of them were minor, 25 okay.- I still didn't know there was a Lafety concern Neal R. Gross &-Co., Inc. Washington, D.C, c (202) 234 4433
.._-,..m._._. . , . . _ _ . . . _ . _ . .__.;_,_u._.____.. .c...-._ . . . . _
-- .~ --.= . _ ._-. _- - . . - . . . _ . -
29 l i there, other than being able to perform the job safely. i i (Pause) ( 2 3 A It says here, and I've got it marked in yellow, ' [ i 4 .this indicated good performance ofEtl.e overall drawing ! 5 review process. The only one who was doing the overall i t 6 review process was me. There isn't one Vermont Yankee l 7 engineer who has ever looked at the AoG prints, from the ! i
~
8- time I started with the project until today. Not one. No .; 9 matter how many times I went up with my complaints. 10- It says here, none of-the discrepancies - 11 affected proper functioning. Well, just from what I_ told j 12 you before, if you have one wire from one power supply, and 13 one wire from another power supply and you shut it off and- ;
-14 you are still getting shocked, I would say it stops proper
( 15 functioning. 16 I.take exception to the status of modification, j i 17 and it goes on to page 5. The modification package skips l 18- scheduled milestones, that's true, it did skip scheduled 19 milestones, but . t skipped it because we didn't have an . 20 engineer on the job who understood AOG at all, never mind 21 that understood the prints, f 22 In October, I was asked to go ahead and reduce ; 23 _the design to what could be safely implemented. With , t 24 that-- - 25- Q october of-what year? i! Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. (4 Washington,. D.C. (1 (202) 234-4433 , 1
- i k
e4- , -,-nd.---, ,n ,. --. .--~..,---,,w -
, , , . , , - ~ . , - - . . , - . , ,,c.~+._.,,_.....s._,,
1 30 I I 1 A It was around October 20th-- ! (P , 1 Q of? { 3 A --1994. This was after eight months or so of f i 4 arguing. So, we decided that the only thing we could do l 5 was we had to completely wire-check AOG. [ i 6 Q And who is we? i 7 A We being Vermont Yankee. l 8 0 I mean, you said that you agreed, we agreed; 9 who agreed, people have to agree? , 10 A oh, yeah. Well, the people I had discussed 11 this with were Rick Reuther, who was from, I guess they are l
}
12 called Fischback now. Lou Casey was in on it. And -- but j 13 basically, it was mostly my decision. And then we would > 14 do, after we got done, we knew we had so much trouble with . i f,_ 15 the drain tank and it would be an easy fix. So, we thought
~
16 we would do the mechanical fixes to Aoc because they would 17 interfere with any of the electrical. We would completely , i 18 wire check AoG and hopefully get the design errors that we 19 had seen in there _ut, if we could. And we would fix the i 20 drain tank. 21 The design was changed. Lou Casey wrote the 22 design and we went over it, modified it, but it was 23 submitted. It was PORC'd. And then I proceeded with the . 24 I&T. ! t 25- 0 The I&T? Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. l Washington, D.C. J (202) 234-4433
...,e or ..s.--,n,,..,v,. < - . . . ,-.,-...-,r.w <e~..-r--,--..-,--wv .- , - - - - - ~ - . . - - - - . . - - < - ~ - - - -
t
-31 i
1 -A Instrument and test procedure.- Because we still didn't have prints, even 2 ( though he redid the design,Ehe still couldn't mark up a 3 l print. Eventually, I had to get Rick Reuther to mark up ; 4-5 the print, and all it was was on the drain tank. + hile. l 6 I guess we can end that one for a l 7 (Panse) The A This one here is a misleading sta.tement. 8 . 9 inspector noticed that the 950 panel wiring, where the
- 10 neutral wires were from different power supplies, and the t II hot wires, was changed as a task during the 1995 refueling That's true, however it is very misleading, i 12 outage.
j because they didn't let you know about the dangers that 13 in AOG. 14 already existed and may still exist MR. COOK: Can you clarify the dangers you are (, 15 ! 16 . alking about there is still other-- ' MR. MASSEY: The problem is, I found four, 17 i 18 okay? And these I could find and I felt pretty sure they But 19- existed. These I was able to find from the prints. and l 20 because they didn't completely wire check it, Rick Reuther and I did eight ; 21 everything was wrong - . None ; 22 control cubicles, okay, while the plant was on-line. 23 of the eight control cubicles down in AOG -- because we i 24
- would get one shut off at a time -- agreed with the !
25 . existing prints; at all. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. ' Washington, D.C. ,
-f (202) 234-4433 ,
.( '
E
----,,-,zv ..~ ?, e,, .,bm, ,- v-y,-. --~yyvw +--r-..,v. - - , - , - -- - , -
- - ~ - .. .. - .-.. . . . . - - . .-.- .-. .
33 ; t i If you took a . lock at the print on the 1 j recombiner,. it couldn't even work that way, schematic w (* 2 3 When we did the recombiner cubicle, we found that y in fact- -] i h 4 it wasn't even wired that way, it was wired anot er wa ,ll 5 You could actually get the recombiner to. work but it sti 6 was designed incorrectly; l MR.-COOK: So, from about 1995-- 7 MR. MASSEY: This was from 1994. 8 In 1994, there was some 9 MR. COOK: lo modifications and corrections made to internal wiring? '
-No,-all we were doing was wire l MR. MASSEY:
11 I 12 checking, Bill. MR. COOK Just wire checking? 13 > Just wire checking, we weren't MR. MASSEY: 14 15 changing anything. in there, in , MR. COOK: Are there memos on that , 16 17 your package? MR. MASSEY: I'm not sure if there is or not. 18 I don't like writing 19 I wasn't really into memo writing. 20 memos-- 21 BY MR MATAKAS: , Well, how did you document what you-found so it 22 O , p 23 could be corrected? We made up 2 brand : 24 A. Oh, I put it en a print. As e matter of fact, I have copies of all the 25L 'new print. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202). 234-4433 CE
33 1 old prints and all the new prints, at my house. b (Pause) ( 2 I don't know why they canceled the job out, , 3 A
- Some 4 okay. And I'm on page 7, under management oversight.
5 time in January-- 6 0 January of what year? The 1&T was PORC'd, 7 A This would be 1995. Prior to 8 everything was done, we were ready to proceed.- for l 9 that, I had put in for vacation for hunting season, 10 eAghteen years I had never missed a hunting season; they denied my vacation. Because they didn't think that the 11 My old boss came down and says, bring it f 12 design was ready. I 13 up, I said, I still don't have marked up prints. 14 0 Who was your boss at that time? 15 A Pat Corbett. 16 And like I said, Lou Casey couldn't read a t So, he told me to bring it 17 print, never mind mark one up. ' 18 to PORC, and I said I would not, because the prints were 19 not marked up yet. He said, right in front of Bill 20 Wittmer, I quote "take it to PORC, no one looks at the 21 prints anyway." And I said, I refuse, and I refused to. 22 He then said, listen, we have to be politically correct 23 and I told him that all I wanted to do was be correct. 7 24 That was stated in front of Bill Wittmer-- 25 Q Jmd what was wrong about bringing it up without Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C.
-(f (202) 234-4433
.( ,
b
-44 ~ + . - - - - , ~y, + , , - , .nc ----w- re mys ee& .w -- . - . > - g - y 3
34 1 the prints? Because you don't have -- a piece of paper (, 2 A h 3 doesn't give you the design, what is marked up on t e Okay? 4 prints is a desig-Does PORC require the prints? 5 O a design, you should have prints A Yes. You want 6 All a piece of paper is is a conceptual 7 with the design. to have it on idea, it has nothing to do with -- you've got 8 9 paper. Could the prints have been done at some later 10 0 ineer take 11 time, with the design -- could a competent eng a later date? 12 the design and mark up the prints at a later A Yes, you could mark up the prints at 2? something you would normally do. 14 date. However, it's not they not only 15 Because wnen somebody is reviewing a design, but then they go 16 take the conceptual design piece of paper, So, I know none 17 to the prints to see how you designed it. I ever had as a construction supervisor 18 of my men that I don't know of 19 would ever review a design without prints. would do likewise. 20 any other engineer that No engineering or I take exception to page 8. 21 five years, that the 22 maintenance indications in the last that 23 AOG system functionally was impaired in such manner Find out how many times they 24 led to degrading conditions. Every time they went in to 25 changed that condensate pump. Inc. Neal R. Gross & Co., Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433
-{-.
35 And everybody in the I&C 1 ADG, it was a chore for I&C. ( 2 3 department hated AOG. in fact, when I had Rick Reuther, I had found the seventy-four discrepancies on those six prints. 5 Because we wantea to try to get rid of some of the some of them didn't matter 6 discrepancies and we knew that them up in the 950 panel. While he was 7 that much, I put f those 8 trying to go through the prints to get rid of some o 9 discrepancies a lug came out of,.a wire came out of a lug, which is a 10 Bill. Okay? And it shut off the 516 valve, 11 valve I believe that comes out of air ejector. God bless them, was able to go 12 Fortunately, operations, or we would have 13 ahead and put the other 516 valve on, d.,,.: 0, EQ,l\ 14 been . They have had trouble with AOG as long as I've 15 16 been there and I've been there eighteen years. 17 The rest of your report, John, is excellent. What we would like to do is get 18 MR. MATAKAS: documents that you have, after this 19 copies of all pertinent copy 20 over today, would it be possible to take them back, 21 everything, and send them all back Fedex? I have, MR. MASSEY: I'll copy everything that 22 I 23 eventhing that I have, you guys can have a copy of. 24 don't have anything in here and everything I've got, 25 Vermont Yankee has. Neal R. Grose - Co., ' Inc. washington. D.C. (202) 234 4433 C_
36 Would it be possible to for us MR. MATAKAS: 1 f hours and then to, I mean, we can copy this in a matter o ( 2 3 Fedex everything back to you; would that be Asokay? long as I MR. MASSEY: That would be fine. 4 understand? 5 know -- it's all I've got, MR. MATAKAS: I undarstand. 6 I take a hundred percent objection MR. MASSEY: 7 Vermont Yanket's 8 to Vermont Yankee's letter to the NRC. 9 letter, DVY96-17. 10 BY MR. MATAKAS: is dated? 11 0 This is the letter that Dated February 26, 1996, and it's referenceo in 12 A 9603. 13 your inspection report, 14 0 It's referenced on the cover letter? A It's referenced on the cover letter and it's ( 15 referenced in a couple of other areas. The very next page 16 17 it is referenced again. And what is the sum and substance of your 18 O 19 objection to that? Well, if I recall, they are saying I didn' t 20 A I did. 21 have a safety concern and that's a lie; O Well, we're going to get to that. 22 Do you want to go through there now or? 23 A into exactly O No, because we are goins to get 24 25 those things. Inc. Neal R. Gross & Co., Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C' _ - _ _ __ ~ " - - " - - - - - - - , _ _ _ _ _ -_.__m _ _ %
37 1 A Okay, So, why don't we move ahead and move on from ( 2 Q 3 the inspection report. 4 Jim, when did you first get involved as the 5 project manager for the modifications to the off-gae 6 system? 7 A Either January, February, or March, of 1994. 8 Probably February, I guess. 9 O Then who reported to you and who did you report 10 to? A I reported to Pat Corbett. And at the time, 11 12 nobody reported to me, since the reorganization. 13 O But later on, you mentioned two engineers that 14 you had working for you? 15 A Well, no. They had a YNSD engineer, called Lou 16 Casey. He was responsible for the design. I had an 17 electrician working for me, Rick Reuther, who usually 18 functioned as an assistant superintendent, during the 19 outage. But at that particular time, when I was first 20 assigned, nobody worked for me. 21 O Was there anyone else that was parallel to you 22 and had a different responsibility, or overlapping 23 responsibilities, regarding this system? 24 A No. 25 Q Initially, what was your involvement and what Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433
.. . ~ .. . - . . - - . -. . - . . ~ . . - - .- . . . . - - - -
0 38'
~ 1' Lwere your- respons.i't.idif tles,. regarding that system? -
.) :2 A- -I - was ' t. hen - projec'1 ananager, chay, at- the AOG.
U 3- And from.the.very'beginning, 'I did.xnise concerns-- No. What I'm interest:ed in is what were you 4 Q 5- told to do and what were your responshbjlities to get that
.6 done?
7 A My responsibilities, at that time, was to 8 ensure that the design got done, okay, and that it was
- 9. ready, okay?- And that, in fact, it was implemented, during 10 the outage of 1995.
11 Q Do you believe that you were discriminated 12 against, as a result of your involvement in the off-gas 13 syster odifications? 14 A Absolutely.
~
15 Q And specifically, what discriminatory acts were
- 6 16 taken against you?
17 THE WITNESS: Dave, do you think we ought to 18 bring up what started this? 19- 14R . MATAKAS: Do you want to take a break on 20 this? 21 THE WITNESS: What really brought this about, I 22 think, and, you know. 23 MR. GIBSON: I don't think we need to take a
.24 break.
25 MR. MATAKAS: Okay. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. f Washington, D.C.
; j (202) 234-4433 i..
I - -
.n . , . _ -
39 1 A To get into this and this is why we think that it occurred, Vermont Yankee had reconstructed their (- 2 3 gatehouse, modified their gatehouse. The constructor that 4 did it contracted with Loney Construction Company. 5 BY MR. MATAKAS: 6 Q L-O-? 7 A L-O-N-E-Y. Okay? And during the course of 8 that, I had a -- I was construction supervisor at the time, 9 however, I didn't have the gatehouse. They requested that 10 I have an electrical man look at the prints, okay, 11 electrical. I gave it to Mike Tessier, that's 12 T-E-S-S-I-E-R. Mike complained. I could hear him 13 complaining terribly. 14 So, I went in there and I said, what's the ( 15 matter, Mike? And he said, 'This is terrible, Jim.' I 16 said, well, give it to me. I'm faster at going through 17 specs than Mike would be, okay? Not that I'm a better man. 18 He's an excellent engineer. It's just that I'm used to 19 going through specifications. 20 So, I took the specifications and the prints 21 and I spent about six hours. It was the worst design I had 22 ever seen. It was not ready to go out for bid. Nobody 23 could -- nobody could do it, nobody. There wasn't a 24 contractor in the world, other than God, that could have 25 done that job. I shipped it back to Mike and I told him, I Neal R. Gross % Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C 1202) 234-4433
r 40-1L :says, I;want:to comment on that1 job,yspecifically._'So, he ( 2: Edid;the best job he could. I then took'Lthe design.- I wrote six pages.of 3 16 comments up._ In there,-._I~said that the job is not ready to ,
-5 go;out for any type of bid. That-it was. going to take a-6 lot longsr-to do the job. This job, I estimated to bc
- 7. -about a hundred and ten day l job. It took-them overia year.
8 And it's going to. cost: Vermont Yankee a lot more money.
- 9. Q .Are you talking gatehouse,-security gatehouse?
10- A' That's what I'm talking about. 11 _Q And who did the design? 12 A- It was an outside contractor and I can't 13 remember the name. 14 0 It wasn't this Loney? l (1 No, no. ( 15- A 16 Q The:' were just bidding.on --? 17 A They were just bidding. 18 .Unfortunately, before it even went for in-house 19 review, they had already sent it out for bids. The specs 20 didn't even match the prints, _ I mean, it was so bad. So, 21 all of this was written down. I forgot about it. They 22 started the job in February. And I don't remember the
- 23' year. In the summer, they're still on the job. I seen Jim 24' 'Loney.out in the parking lot and.I said, how's the. job' 25- -going,1 Jim? -And-.he just reiterated that this was the worst-Neal R.~ Gross & Co., Inc.
- - [' -Washington,- D.C.
3(- (202) 234-4433 _ _ _ _ . < , -5.
- a. - - - _. .,,,,,,,w,: ,% ..m.. ~ 4- ,
41 ,
-li job he has;evet been on. He said nothing is working..out.- -i
- '2 -
Q- .Could'you give us an approxinate time-period? l 3 A -That would be probably around June. 4 Q Of? 1 5 A- Of when the gatehouse was going on. _ Whatever 6- year that was. I would say '92. And I told Jim, I said, 7 gee, that's funny. I says I commented on that job, Jimmy. 8 I thought they would have fixed it up. I mean, I had no
- 9. idea that nobody did anything. That ended it. It was ,
, , 10 about a'five second conversation. 11- I never heard nothing, until the winter, of 12 1994. I got a call at night time. It was from Jim Loney. 13 'And Jim asked, would I go speak to his lawyer. And I told 14- him, no, I'm sorry, Jim, I'could not do that. He says, Well. I don't want to get you in trouble. He said, I'll 15 16 subpoena you. I said,- subpoena me. I said, you can't get 17 me in trouble cause you subpoenaed me. 18 Sure enough,-two days later, I got a call from ~ 19 Vermont Yankee's lawyer. They want me up at the corporate 20 -headquarters. I go up to the corporate headquarters. And: ' 21 it was with Dale Hochenberry. And they had their lawyer 22 there and I explained to him just what I explained to you. 23 That everything that I said to you just now, I had told my "24 flawyer, okay, even about the conversation in the parking 25- ' lot . -
.Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.
- (:- Washington, D.C. ( (202) 234-4433 ~ 4
.g g ,y,9% . - . . y
. . . .~ .- - - - .- _ .. . . ._ . .
42- ,
.1' He wanted to;know why7I was a lateLeall up.-
2; -And I said I-- 3: Q What? You were what? 41 A 'A lats call'up. -He said I wasLlate. . I guess j everybody else had taken their depositions. I said,.I have 5 l
. 6- no idea. I said, the only thing-I know is Jim said he 7! 'didn't want to get-me in trouble. So, I-hate to say this 8 about lawyers with my lawyer sitting here, but that lawyer 9 tried to do everything but come right out and tell me to t 10 lie. ;
11 He didn't come out and tell me to lie. .But he 12 went around every other way to tell me to lie. okay? And : 13 -there's not a doubt in my mind. I finally told him I will 14 not lie for Vermont Yankee; I will not lie for Jim Massey ( 15 .and I will not lie for Jim Loney. I told him that all the 16 documentation is sitting down there at Vermont Yankee. I 17 didn't know at that time, but, boy, it must have hit a 18 nerve. And so, I left there. 19 Q Now, this is right before you.got the 20- assignment for the off-gas system? 21 -A Same time frame. 22 O Okay. March, January?
- 23. A Yeah, whatever. So, after a few. days had went 24 by, I. called Dale Hochenberry up. I said, listen, I want 25- -to get.this. deposition-over with. I mean, it's on my mind.
Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433
'. f;; ,
. - -. . _ = - . . - - ~.- .- .-
-43 ,
.t
' 1' And hetsaid,'Because of you, Jimmy e had to settle. Dale-l F 2 Hochenberry did not say that with any malice.- Apparently, e _
3 what had happened was they had come1doan, they_had.went
~
'4: through_-the files, okay? And:they took out_the~
3
-5 documentation. ,
6 After the it was like I'couldn't walk ~and 7 chew gum at_ Vermont Yankee. After all the jobs I did for 8 them and completing them properly, all:t!.a designs I had-9= implemented at Vermont-Yankee, all of a sudden I;couldn't 10 do anything right. From there on in, my boss fought me at
-11 every. turn. No matter how bad I told him the prints _were, 12 the whole history of it, it was like I would be talking to ,
'13 that wall.
14 Q Do you believe that all -- everything that has
- 15. happened to you is a-result of that event?
16 A I do believe it, yes. 17 Q What has been taken against you? What actions
-18 -have been taken against you?-
- 19 A Well, not only would I not get the necessary.
20 help that I kept requesting, and that's documented, I 21 think-- 22 O For the off-gas system?
. 23 -A For the off-gas system. I needed a couple good 24~ engineers. AroundiJune, after-I wrote that memo, Pat 25' .Corbett put_ Pat 1McKenney, who's a-VY engineer, and George 1
Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. 1- Washington, D.C.
- (202) 234-4433
, ,- g -. , n .- r s -.--.m. - - - -4 , - - = - - , -- v
_. _. - - . . - . . _ _ - - . - . . . ._ _ _ _ . . . - _ _ _ . . ~ . . . ~_.. 4 44 lt : iHengt le to' review the' project,Lto;see;what: I was saying l or not true; ( 12 was trv 3F Q And-this'is June of?- 14 A 1994'.- , , ff Q This was after the EDCR came out? 6? A' Yes. Well, no, because the EDCR-didn't hit 7 Vermont Yankee until July. But this was, you know,-during 8: the'same time period. Of course, neither one of these guys 9 looked at the prints. I hate to say it, I'm not sure'they s l o -- could read them. 11 Q. These were Vermont Yankee engineers? 1 02 A One was Vermont Yankee,-George Hengerle.
- :13 George Hengerle,'by the way, was the engineer on the 14 gatehouse.
l -15f Q And the other was whom? 16 A Pat McKenney, 17 Q Okay. .
~18 A So, now I got an engineer that was on the 19 gatehouse, okay?- And I got Pat McKenney, who is the only 20 engineer. Dave Phillips'was acting supervisor, at the
-21 time. EI was construction supervisor. And he was complaining to me that my engineers were making them look
~
1!2 23 : bad, because we were commenting on what we call PDCR's.- 24 Land those1are plant: design change requests. Those are 25 -designs thatsare done by in-house. engineering. Neal R. Gross'& Co., Inc.
-- () Washington, D.C.
\f (202) 234-4433
._,n,-, , _ . ., ,s , y. - . - . .nn.. --
i 45 l 1 Q Okay, who was complair.ing on P. hat, now? Dave Phillips. ( 2 A 3 0 Now, he was complaining that Hengerle and 4 McKenney and yourself were commenting on-- 5 A No. He was complaining that my men, my b 6 engineers, at the time, I was construction supervisor, at 7 the time, okay, was making his men look bad, because of the 8 comments we were putting on the PDCR's. Q And you say your men. Are you talking about 9 10 your electrical crew? A I had electrical engineers. I had Dave 11 12 Hallonquist that used to work for me, Mike Tessier. Those 13 were in-house pecple. And, plus I would have outside 14 contract engineers. I think my comment was, I told him to 15 get yourself better engineers. But Dave and I get along 16 pretty good and I says, okay. I said, I'll make a deal with you. I said, my 17 I says, 18 men are tired of fixing up Pat McKenney's designs, And I said, you 19 I'll get my men to lay off your PDCR's. 20 don't get me to put another c. rummy design in there from Pat 21 McKenney. And I said, I don't care how you do it, even if With that, I went over and 22 you have to design it yourself. Get your 23 I told my men, listen, let's not kill these guys. 24 concerns taken care of and you can put in there, you know, 25 put five or six comments down, but you don't have to fill Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433
46 1 up six pages of them, and then put conments are resolved. Y 2 Just make sure you resolve the ccaments. {L 3 never did get a bad 3 And you know what? But these are the two guys 4 design again from Pat McKenney. 5 that are now going to investigate whether or not AOG can be 6 done properly, or can even be done. And not one of them, 7 not one of them looked at the prints. 8 O Getting back to how we got into this 9 discussion, is what discriminatory acts were taken against 10 you? 11 A Not only that, then, -- well, I told you about 12 my vacation. 13 O That was in what year? 14 A That was '94. Hunting season '94 would have been? ( 15 Q 16 A November. 17 How do you go *hrough what discrimination-- 18 0 Well, did you receive a bad appraisal? 19 A Oh, yeah. First of all, I was told by Pat 20 Corbett that Bernie Buteau would like to discuss AOG. 21 O Bernie Buteau is whom? 22 A He was, at the time, engineering director. 23 O Okay. During what time period? And don't ask me the date of this. And 24 A 1994. so, I went up there and we were discussing AOG. And 25 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C
--- ]
l 47-- l forty
-I probably,-the meeting _took? place prribiray inkyabout.
2- i minutes. = And-.when we get- done; BA:ne :kham says, o a ,-
- Give- a copy to en and give.me a copy and 3 - make up-la. copy, f
T 4;; ILwant a copy for his file. 1 Q-zCopy of wh at? I
.5^
A Of the meeting that had just taken place. 6 ig -l
~7 didn't even know the hell -- wrore theEvery helltime arewe
~
you com n from? I said, what the hell do you mean? 8 something in myJfile, 9 have a. meeting, you're going to put , Bernie asked me, he.says, Do you know 10 from the meeting? l Jim? I said,-yeah,:to discuss the what you're up here for, 11 He said, No, this is a disciplinary 12 problems in AOG.
-13 . meeting.
I guess with that, I called-him a son of a ' 14 I said, you at least should inform me that-it's 15 bitch. I said, prior to me
- 16 going to be a disciplinary meeting,
, They didn't even follow their own 17 coming in here, I says. rid of that They since_then, by the way, got 18 procedures. Vermont Yankee is very good at 19- disciplinary procedure. That is now gone. And more of the 2 20 covering their tracks. because of it's-gone,
'21 -guys.in from Vermont Yankee figures
'that meeting.
They've now replaced it with a guideline. 22
-Well, how--
23 0 Next, I was I'll keep going. 24 A_. Wait a minute. 25- kick 6d off the job. Inc. Neal R. Gross & Co., . Washington, D.C. y (202) 234-4433 1
~-
.w'.'Em n, .--,-r. ,m. -, - E A ,, , - - . ,-,o n , . - - + . - . -e e -
48-1 'Q. Well, first of all, this disciplinary; meeting, ;
'2' I mean, it hasn't sounded like a disciplinary meeting, up ,
3 -till he called it'a disciplinary meeting.
~~
'4 How-did he discipline you?
S' A. 'They didn't.- I'll:tell you what--' ; 6: O Did he: say something?: 7 A No. - Basically, all we were doing is discussing 8 it. And'I was telling him, licten, I got all-these 9 concerns and nobody's addressing them. Okay? I had no
- 10' ' idea.
11 Q This is Buteau? 12 A Yeah. 13- O How does Buteau -- and Corbett reports to 14 Buteau? (. 15 A Well, did at the time, yes.
-16 Q How does that relate back to the gatehouse?
17 A Well, it doesn't. But somehow, we figure that 18 -the Vermont Yankee then lost that case, okay? I estimate 19 that it probably was in the neighborhood of around a 20- million' dollars. I know Jim-Loney got around a quarter 21 million. I think his lawyer got someplace in the
-22 neighborhood of twenty-five thousand. And they had to pay 23 all'of Jim--Loney's subs So, you're probably looking at a 24' million' dollars.
25- -O_ I understand that, but what.I'm trying to get Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.
~
Washington, D.C.
. (-- - . -- (202) 234-4433
- . .- . . - . _ . - - . ~ . - - - .- - - . -
49~ .
.1! at is,'for'some reason, was-the'initiat design a resultiof-2 -; incompetence on the part 4f.Corbett andEButeau and that's:
3' Jwhylthey're trying to get back'at?yac now1- ;
'A No.--What-had'nappened was - I was= going to 5 lget to this. I was -- I was threatened, okay, with my job.
.6 They-said_after the reorganization that I probably wouldn't-7- have a job. -
,- :8 Q- -When was that and who said it? 9- A That was Pat Corbett and it was during my s 10- review? 11- Q In? . 12 A Uh, February, 1995. Bernie was there and . 13 -' Bernie also threatened me. He said he wanted to reiterate 14 what Pat Corbett had iust said, that after the 15 reorganization, which was coming right up, I probably 16 wouldn't have a job. And you have got to temember, I had 17 --- already been kicked off the job, you know. And then, after IB everything was done, the job was canceled anyway. 19 Q When were you kicked off the job? You said
- 20 this was February, of?
21 A Uh, I would say - . 22 Q February, of '9S, you had the meeting. R23 A Yeah,. January.
- 24- (T So,1 January--
- 25. DA- ;I:was kicked off the, job. And-by that time, we
?
Neal R. Gross &:Co., Inc. < (-- Washington, D.C. KL 1(202) 234-4433 + J - .4
~ - , - ~ _. -
. . , - - .v-r
50 1 . were just about done. Everything was PORC'd, the key was PORC'd, everything. There was no reason to cancel that ( 2 3 job. 4 0 Well, what reasons were they giving you for, 5 you probably wouldn't have a job after the reorganization? 6 What was their-- 7 A Because I didn't handle this job, they said. 8 O The off-gas system. 9 A That's right. 10 0 But you believe that it had to do with the 11 gatehouse incident? 12 A Well, to go further, afte* that, they asked me 13 if I had any comments. And normally, I would have a 14 comment, but I knew if I opened my mouth, I probably I told them, no , that my k 15 wouldn't be able to shut up. 16 comment would be forthcoming. With that, I went out and I 17 got a hold cf Dave Gibson. After that, I come to find out { 18 that everybody that had taken the deposition, when Jim 19 Loney's lawyer asked for documents on the gatehouse, they 20 lied and they told him it was shredded, okay? That was 21 taken under oath. 22 O Who lied? 23 A You'll have to go ahead and get their lawyers 24 to find that out. 25 O Well, you-- Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433 1
.. __ > __. - - _ . _. .- _.m _. -
0 51' :
-- li 'A; -1 Just know.they.M ed 2 was. told they_-lied. -;
l
'MR. MASSEY: ' Dave,, you run dnt:trject here, if -
.(r: '2-
'3 you'd like..
4 'BY MR. MATAKAS: ,
.5 O All lm' askirg is you. kuavr who the they were; .
Does' it relate to Corbett or 'Buteau? Because I'm trying to 6 7 understand why these'two individuals would take an~ adverse
-8' ~ action against you, because of this--
- 9. A Well, I think.it didn't come from Bernie, or
-- 10 -Pat. I think it came from either Gary Wiegand, or Jim
'll Pelletier. All they were doing was following orders.
12 Unfortunately, not a man would stand up.
- 13. O Did anyone else that was involved in the 14 modification of the off-gas system receive in type of 15 similar treatment?
16 A No. 17 O And you believe that was a result of this s 18 ogatehouse, that there was trickle down effect to Corbett 19 and-Buteau to get rid of you? 20 A Yes. And make a case. And I think they , 21 probably'did, probably, an excellent job. 4 322 O I'm going to have to ask you a couple of things
~
here. Because I know what some of their positions are 23?
;241 going to be. .And it may be embarrassing, but I'm going to 25 have-to ask these questions of you.
Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. 4 i Washington, D.C. 1 (202) 234-4433
52 1 A Sure. ( 2 O What's going to be their pt,sition, as to why 3 these adverse actions were taken against you? 4 A Probably the 'same thing they did put in my 5 review, that I was unqualified, okay, and I cou'dn't .' handle 6 the AOG job. 7 - 0 What's unrealistic with their positic.T? l 8 A Pardon? l 9 Q What's unrealistic with their position? 10 A Uh, my past performance, okay? The engineers 11 that have worked for me, worked with me, know my ability. 12 O So, you received a bad performance appraisal 13 sometime, circa 19957 14 A Yes. , 15 0 What were your performance appraisals, prior to 16 that time? 17 A Better than average. 18 O And what type of scale do they use? 19 A They used a scale from one to ten. 20 21 22 e 23 _. 24 _A @) 25 0 --if I ask for your performance appraisals. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433 e
. - - . . _ . _ . _ . . _. . _ . ~ . _ . - . . __. _ __ . _ _ . _ -_ - . ._ __
. 53
-l
- 1'- Andldo I haveiyour' permission u ;ge.1 ym;u. performance l t
2 - appraisals?- (
- 3. A You got permission te -J oo't in'my record, at the 4 Vermont-Yankee. All my- performance appraisals are there, 5- or anything1else you gentlemen so want to see. ;
6 MR. MATAKAS: Dave, I could probably use a two
-7' liner to get that.
i 8- MR. GIBSON: Sure.
-9 BY MR. MATAKAS:
' 10 Q On or about March 29th of this year, did you
.. i 11 . contact Don Reid by telephone?
- 12. A .Yes, I have.
13 O And what was the purpose of that phone call? 14 A I-wanted to get -- since I spoke _to Don a_ Number f E15 number of times - I'll have to try to go. ahead. 16 one is I wanted to get out of this mess I was in. 17 0 And what do you mean by that? 18 A Well, when did you people contact me? 19' MR. MATAKAS: Why don't we go off the record , 20 'here. The time is 10:40. We'll go off the record for a 12 1 couple of minutes. 22 (Whereupon, there was a brief-23 recess.) 24 - MR. MATAKAS: The time is now 10:41. We're 25 back on the record. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. J 7 Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433
-,.-s -,. ~----_,-,w4e .y--.. --.c -e, 9
. - __-__.m _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - . _ . _ _ _ _ - . . _ _ _ _ . _ _. _
54-f1 -BYLMR. MATAKASt-The first' telephone call that'I'made to_you was ([ 2 Q - , 3- on or about March 7th. .And then, there'.s a series of i 4 contacts after that. 15' A Then, I'm'not sure when I spoke to Don Reid 6 before, but I'm pretty'sure that.it was -- I wanted to get- - e 7- 'out of the mess that I felt I was in. I(certainly didn't 8 want to speak to the.NRC. It was the NRC that contacted 9- me. Through all of this, which has been.two years, I did t 10 not one time attempt to contact the NRC. 11 No-offense, but -- we appreciate the job the 12 NRC does, but a lot of times, we know when a carrot is 13 being-dangled over here and you always seem to catch the
- 14. carrot. There's-a pound of problems of there in the corner 15- and you don't catch those.
16 O Did you threaten Mr. Reid? Did you threaten to 17 go to the NRC, if Vermont Yankee did not settle an early 18 retirement package for you? 19 A No , I did not. We had already submitted -- 20 Dave Gibson had submitted this, at-least six months 21 earlier. In fact, probably earlier than that, okay, that I 22 was, yes, taking Vermont Yankee to court. And that, if you 23 want to settle, settle. There's two things I wanted. The 24_ only thing I did put down on paper-and I spokeito Jay 25' ;Thayer about?is I wanted my early retirement package and I i Neal R. Gross & Co.,- Inc.
- ( Washington, D.C.
- (202) 234-4433
, (~ -
55 1 wanted my safety concerne corrected, okay?- ( 2' This isn't the only safety concern I have. .And-3 they said, well, if we decide on something, that'll take 4 care-of your safety-concerns.- -They did come up with an 5- offer. Okay? And I refused it. Jay Thayer, by_the way, 6_ has offered me any job that I would like at Vermont Yankee. 7 That's out of his mouth, okay? 8 I told him I don't want a job ever at Vermont-9 Yankee, or any other company. I said everything that I've 10 _ever believed in and fought for, all my life, I said 11 Vermont Yankee took it and squashed it. I said you think 12- I'll ever work for any other damn company the rest of my 1
-13 life? Forget it. That was the end of our conversation,
- 14 other than he asked me, would I consider another price,
-(
s 15 other than the one.they offered, that I would accept. And
.16 that was the last conversation I had with Jay Thayer. And 17 that was about a month ago.
18 Q But you didn't threaten Reid with a-- 19 A No, I never. 20 0 What was.the purpose of that phone call, then? 21 A The only purpose of it was I wanted to get out 3 22 of this mess I was;in. Can you get me out? Early 23 retirement and get me the hell out of here. I mean, it 24 _almost goes against my grain to talk to you people. It 25- isn'tlhow I was brought-up,.you know, running -- I'd just
.. Neal R. Gross & Co.. Inc.
Washington, D.C. c(-
- (202) 234-4433
4 56' I rather take them to court. i Between 1992 and'1994,. the off-gas system
~
2 Q- being:- l
-3
- engineering design change request,.(EDCR 94-402),;was that? f developed. Did'you have any input into 4
No, I did not. However, I did -- Dave 5 A the time, was my boss. I did mention to Dave , 6; Phillips, at I_did Phillips about the condition of the AOG print.
-7 And this subject was probably-8 mention it to Lou Casey.
Because I brought up by me at least four or five times. : 9
. was' concerned, because it seemed like nobody was looking 10
' 11 the prints. O Did you bring it up to the engineers that-- 12 A It was Lou Casey it was mentioned to and it was 13 s i 14 mentioned to-Dave Phillips. O They were doing EDC, (EDCR 94-402)? 15 Lou Casey was doing the EDCR, that's correct. 16 A 17 And Dave Phillips was my boss, at the time. 18 O And you brought - Verbally, not, you know. 19 A That's correct. a in March, of 1994, 0 It's my understanding that 12-0 (EDCR 94-402) to management; do 21~ meeting was held to present 22; .you recall that meeting? A If it was the meeting where we went into Bob 23 24- Wanczyk's office,_the one that we were presenting the And when we 25 design to, Lou Casey presented the' design. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C.
; [(. (202)- 234-4433 f
J
+ -, e u w , -
n oc 6 ,w - -
57 I had 1 were done, even though pat Corbett already knew that 2 all kinds of wiring concerns and design concerns with AOG, ( nobody was going to mention a word about the wiring. 3 4 At that meeting there, there was about eight And I brought 5 people there, including the plant manager. since 6 up about the total concerns I had and why I had them, 7 1982, when I had looked through it. And I said, nobody is 8 looking at the prints here and I have a concern, yes. 9 O In sum and substance, was your concern 10 expressed as the wiring does not match the design, or did 11 you go into the specific detail? A No, no. The wiring just -- I had the concerns 12 that the prints were wrong. There was wiring errors in it 13 14 and there was design errors in it. Did you go into any specifics? ( 15 Q 16 A I may have mentioned the recombiner. By that time, I probably would have known about the recombiner. I 17 the drain tank, okay, that 18 probably would have known about 19 was not designed properly. 20 Q But do you recall if you specifically 21 mentioned - 22 A But I can't specifically say I even said that, 23 to be honest with you. 24 0 Who else, by name, was at that meeting? Pat Corbett. I know Bob Wanczyk was there. 25 A Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C
.. _ _ _m_ . _ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - . _ . . . ._ _
58 c. 1 0: :Was_Casey;there? , Lou _Casey was there. His boss was'probably_ 4 l( S2 A-3 there, Roger Vibert. There were a number of people there, j 4 I'm sure_either Terry Watson or Mike Watson would have been 5 -there. And I-really can't remember-- 6- Q. Who was the highest. ranking management J 7 representative? 8 A Would have been Bob Wanczyk, plant manager.
.9 And.I know he was there.
10 .Q Did you-express concern over the safety and 11 effectiveness of attempting to implement the design with'
.12 the existing drawing errors?
13 A That's correct. 14- Q And what did you mean by that? 15 A Exactly'what you said. In the beginning, I had 16 a concern about being able to implement all these wiring i 17 changes, okay, when we had so many print errors, wiring
-18 errors and design errors that already existed. And if you 19' don't know how it's wired, you know, it's_not like 20 mechanical. If you don't knew how it's put together, you 21- can't just take a wire off and attach a wire here and start 22- changing things.
*23 0 Were you concerned someone was going to get 24 hurt?.
~
Mi A' I was concerned, number one, somebody could get
~
Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. 1{:.. (202) 234-4433 i;
-. ,, ,n -- , a .,
59 l' -hurt. But,. number'two is that we may start taking this 2 thing. apart, okay, and not be able to. start it back up
-3 again. Okay? It was just littered with errors, -I mean, 4 any engineer that'would look at these prints could tell, 5 hey, cut it.. And at that time there, I didn't have a- ;
6 safety concern, per se. I didn't know that AOG, at that 7 time there, was wired into power instrument AC. I-didn't. 8 have that type of concern. 9 Q - Was.there anybody, or a group of people at that 10- meeting who supported your concerns? 11 A Uh , I can't remember what meeting it,was,
- but I 12 know Terry Watson who used to be a head of IMC,4 {lhe is now 13 head of maintenance, talked about all the errors and
.. 14 problems they had with AOG and it's about time they're b 15 going to fix it up and get it squared away. Yes, he 16 supported me. But I'm not sure that was the same meeting.
17 But if not, it was another meeting that took place shortly 18 thereafter. 19 0 Were wiring and print corrections initially 20 factored into the modification? 21 A No, it was not. They were going to go ahead. 22- And they said they were going to put the prints - . In the 23 very beginning, it-was not, okay? But they were going to 24 clean up the prints, as best they could. And I think that 25 was-factored'in. Some minor print alterations, certainly, i Neal:R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C.
~(. 7 (202) 234-4433
. _ . . , _ _ . . _ -.. _ _. ~ . . _ . _ _ _... _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ . . _ . _ _ . -
1 160
' ~
l' nothing major. --And:I'.11 leave lit at that.. - 2- Q: But what 1 want to get now ds 'now were your 3 - concerns: addressed?/ were thereEtwo eng1Tieers .that were
- 4- assigned to. review your-concerns;and-male a-recommendation, 5 as-to the viability of. completing the project,'as-6L originally intended?:
7 A That's correct. 8 Q And who were the-two engineers? 9' A They were George Hengerle,. as I said before,: he
- 10 : was on the gatehouse job. And Pat McKenney.
11- Q So, that's that discussion we had about them 12- earlier? 13 .A - That's right. And neither one of them world , 14 spend the time-to look at the prints. All'they did was do-
'what their boss-wanted them to do.
~
15 11 6 : C It's.my understanding _that, in June- 1994, 17' these' two engineers issued a : report, which concluded that 18 *the project could continue, with some minor adjustments to 19 address the waaring and print issues. 20 Who was.that? Are you aware of.that, first of 21 all? . 22 A I'm aware of their-memo that they put out, i
' 23- that's correct.
24- Q- Is this-a fair assessment, their memo? 125 - Ai No, it'slnot, because-they never looked at the 1
-Neal Ri Gross-& Co., Inc. -
Washington, D.C. . [. (202) 234-4433 L( .
>m-- _-a_. w w s'~ , .e- --M r v 4 *- *- 1 + y ' s*v-* *
- . - - - ~. .. . ~.
61 i 1- prints. If you don't look~at therprints, how do you know
'2 if the job can be done,.or can't be done.
_[L 3- Q What did they _look at., essentially? 4 A Nothing._ They. talked to me and they talked to - 5 Lou Casey, okay?-- But to_be honest with you,-I'm'not a good
~6- . talker and Lou Casey_is probably ten times better than I ,
7 am. ,But a]l it took was a man -- a good engineer, one good 8' _ engineer to take'a look at those prints for two or three 9 days and he would know exactly what I was talking about. , 10 0 Did you have any subsequent discussions with 11 Corbett, about the continuation of the project, as 12 recommended by these two engineers? 13 A Yes. 14 O And what-- (- 15 A I wrote a memo. I don't know what comes in 16 order here, okay? I do remember I wrote a memo June 6th. 17 And this went to Pelletier, Bernie, you name it. I think I 18- sent it to everybody, including Bob Wanczyk, about that I 19 had a safety concern about AOG power supplies being mixed 20- with. instrument AC. At that time, I only knew of two 21 areas. But the job-then should have been stopped and, 12 2 - certainly, taken a loss at.
'My boss was pretty. hot with me.
~
23 That was Pat 24 Corbett. So, he wrote a memo,-about.three or four days 25 after that. And he had me sign it.
- Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.
L : -Washington, D.C. L - (202) 234-4433
,,- ,- ~ . , . . ~ . . - , . ,
~.-_ . ~ . _ . - .._. _ . . . _ . _ . . _ . _ _.._ .-_ -
62 1- :Q, 'Was this documenting his expect.arions of what ' 1
- he thought .you.should be dcurp wir.b th5x xystem?
l 'i L2 3- A Well,:what he wanted to do was kind of wash my . 4 = memo out,1okay?; He~had me conwent on_it. I commented on that memo four times, o 5
- 15. O In writing?
/7 - A- I got copies of it-here.
8 Q So,'it was in writing? 9 A Yes. And he didn't want to change it. And he 10 wanted me to keep continuing with the prints. So, I signed 11 it, as the damn fool I am, you know. You see, at this
.12 stage of the game, I still don't know anybody is after me, 13 Rich,:okay? Shortly thereafter, I found two other areas,
- 14. while continuing with the prints.
15 Q Before we leave that document, did you indicate 16 to Corbett that you would proceed with the directed course, 17 despite your-- 18 A Yes. 19 O Despite.your concerns? 20 A That's right. I would do anything that -. 21 Q And your objection-- 22 A You know, I'm a good employee. I'll.do 23 anything my boss wants me to do, within reason. 24- O' And up to-this point, your concerns were 25- -exactly'what?
-Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.
Washington, D.C. f-l: (202) 234-4433 -- NT
l 63 1 A Now, my concerns were two. I not only had a ( 2 concern that we couldn't do the job saf ely, but I also had 3 a safety concern. 4 0 Okay. You' re talking about do the job saf ely, 5 you're talking about physical safety? 6 A That's right. And be able to start it back up 7 again, because of the way the prints were. 8 Q And the safety concern, at this time, is what? 9 A My safety concern ther was you had power supplies mixed up, okay, which is extremely dangerous. And 10 11 if you get in a fault. it's a direction of four currents 12 and instrument AC, which is safety class, wouldn't even 13 know it had a fault. 14 0 And you expressed that to whom, when? 15 A Pat Corbett and I expressed it in the memo of 16 June 6. 17 O And that memo went to the world-- 16 A That's right. 19 0 --that's the one you're talking about? 20 A And then, he come along and quieted my memo 21 down, okay? And that was about three days later and I got 22 the comments that I put here, but he still wouldn't change 23 it and I initialed it. It was still in June, now. I 24 located ts other places, where instrument AC and AOG power 25 supplies were mixed up. I brought these up to Pat Corbett. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C - (202) 234-4433
64 1 I was up to Pat Corbett dails. 'I nean, I was 2 in that mance face daily,, teT11ng h2m abvri the problems I And I told hin, ..cu J Enma ac orbr:r areas. I said, 3 had. 4 Pat, I said, we gcr to stop this damn job. I don't know 5 how many times I said that. 1 to2d him Lou Casey can't 6 read the prints. He didn' t even know how the drain tank 7 works and that's one of the jobs we have to fix up. It was 8 so bad, he couldn't even order out a level switch, okay? 9 Pick Reuther and I had to give him the numbe:: of the level 10 switch to orier out. 11 lie was going to get a transducer. And if 12 anybody here knows anything about a transducer, we needed 13 two transducers. One to go from pressure to milliamps and 14 the cther one to go from milliamps to pressure. He was ( 15 going to order out one transducer, thinking it could go
\
16 both ways. I mean, I was up to Corbett daily. 17 And when you start asking people at Vermont 18 Yankee, is Jim Massey the type of guy to sit there and keep 19 his damn mouth shut when there is something wrona, I am not 20 that type of individual. 21 O It's my understanding that a modification 22 package was given to you, on or about July 5, 1994, with an 23 expectation that it would be finalized and epproved by 24 September 15, 1994; is that correct? 25 A That's correct. Neal R. Groes & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 ("
. _ . ~ . . . _ . _ _ _ -. _ _ . - . _ _ . _ _ ... _ _ _ .. _ .m ___. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __. m . _ . _ _ .
65 e ! 'l Q Was-'that.a renu 3t of it'he mmr fnat Corbett had l t 2 you sign? In ot.be_r wurds., wt"ro ,gehrg tv do it this way-- 3 .A ch, 1 -- 1 captt remember tyn, okay? You 4 know, I do remember that it did rame mp dm July. Like 1 5 maid, it was just a shel).- It had nothing. When I tell. ; r
-you tue- man never put anything on a print , not one thing 6;
7 was ever put on a print by him, in four years. , t e Q And this package was from whom, again? 9 A From Lou Casey. i i
-10 Q Exactly what was expected of you, during that f e
11 -time period? l 12 A I think, to inform management on how the job ] 4 13 was proceeding, okay, which I think I did. Couple times in 4 14 writing, okay, one time, we had -- probably not as eften i
.15 Las I sh ' have, okay, but we had something like a couple l 16 hundred wiring errors-that we already had. My job was to 17 inform management how the job-was proceeding, okay? And I 18 think I did that-daily.
19 Q- And who did you have working for you, at that 20 time? , i 21 -A The only one I had was Rick Reuther.
. t 22 Q And exactly what were you doing? l 23 -A -At that time-there, going back to the middle of j 24 May, we had a meeting in Pat Corbett's office. He wanted 25 to go. ahead..and put the prints-on CAD, okay, the:950 Ne01'R. Gross & Co., Inc.- !
L Washington, D.C. l L(J
\ (202)-234-4433 ;
L i
~ ?
I J r-. 6, , -
. , ,- --c,s. ..#. . , . . . , . , _ . . . . . , _ .r_.. . . . , . . . _ . ~ . . . , _ . . ._,,,._,,...-.,........~.,,,,,h
66 prints, the pane] prant, .Aud at R.o ihme'.nere, I already 1 even :ead.r print, never mind ( 2 realized that bou Ca9ei ear 3 copy one. 4 So, 3 didn't want tc do the CAD prints, in the 5 beginning. I wanted to do the Cht> punts at the end of the 6 job. I mean, why take prints and copy them, when the Why 7 prints you're copying are already wrong to begin with. 8 would I want to put those on CAD? But no, they wanted them 9 on CAD. So, everybody's against me. 10 I said, okay, I'll have Fischbach put them on 11 CAD, cause then I can control it. His six prints, okay, 12 it's tops, a three week job, tops. He made those six 13 prints into something like fourteen prints. He started off 14 in May. We didn't finish. In September, we still were not 15 done with those damn CAD prints. 16 0 And was that part of the modification? 17 A I suppose you could say yes, it was. But it 18 should have been done after the job and not prior to the 19 job. Now, here I am, four months later. So, I'm asking, 20 what the hell is going on here. So, Rick says, Gee, Jim, 21 he says, every time I give him prints to go copy, he brings 22 them back and he's got other mistakes in them. I mean, 23 here I am, a :.ree week job -- and Corbett knows all about 24 this, okay, cause I was up to Corbett every day. And four 25 months later, I'm still not done with six stinking prints? Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C. (202) 234-4433
. .- _ ..-_--_______..m______ _ ____._ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
67 -! 1- O_ -Is there anything in that package that you (. . 2 refused to do? 1 3 - A No. r 4 Q 'Is.there things that you didn't get done, for i
- . 5 one reason or another?
6 A There's a lot we_didn't get done, We didn't ; get anything done. 7 k 4
~8' Q What do-you mean by that? <
- i 9 A Well, they-- .
10 Q What-didn't you get done? ;
-11 A- Well, I was kicked off the job, but we didn't-- 1 Well, that was later, though. I'm' talking 12 Q 13 about-- l 14 A We didn't -- we had, finally, we had got those L 15 six prints onto CAD, okay? They were in, I would say, 16 fairly good shape, okay. They did wire check again, for 17 -- -the second time, to 950 panel. And that was it. That was ,
18 the only thing that was done. I
- What wasn't done that was supposed to be done?
. 19. Q 4
20 A Well-- 1 21 Q All I'm trying to get a feel for is, if we go . 22 talk to them-- 12 3 - A --a lot of things. The drain tank,_the oil 24' control _was not done. The. ruptured disk was not done. We had some. air lines that-were supposed to be moved and they
. 25- r
.1 Neal R. Gross.& Co., Inc .
- ~(; Washington, D.C. *
\. (202)-234-4433 r
h J
.5
+
. , . - - . . , - . . . - _.+.4._, . .---,__,-._,-,..,--..w-~w -
.. .. , , . , , , ,< w ,w,-,.n_ew_.-..,
,.,.1, .
vm ,,
~~~ _ 6B i 1 weren't done. cf the wdification package? And th2 s w'as ra rt ( 2 3 O A Yes, yes. And why weren' t -- in your view, why weren't 4 O 5 they done? Nothing was ready. There's no moves in here. 6 A If you 7 I told you before, he never nark.ed up a print. don't mark up a print, how t.be hell can I do the design, 8 done. There's 9 okay? The mechanical parts of it wer en' t 10 memos in here, going all the way up to December, of 1994, Now, how the he12 can I go ahead and do a 11 12 design and get it done, when I got YNSD up there, doing the mechanical end, okay? And they haven' t even got the 13 calculations done yet. It's impossible. But yet, they'll 14 the design up in July 5th. 15 say, well, we brought 16 0 I imagine this isn't the first job at vermont 17 Yankee that never got done. 18 A It's the first job that I've been on that's 19 never gotten done. 0 That is neither here nor there, the fact that 20 21 it didn't get done, do you think that those actions that fall back to the problem you 22 were taken against you, again, 23 had with, if you will, blowing the whistle on the gatehouse 24 job? 25 A Yeah, yeah. Neal R. Gross & Co. , Inc. l Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C
-- -- --- -. - _ _ _ ' ~"- -~_m.__
69 Q I mean, really. this has nothing to do with it? 1 A I think what happened is they just then did ( 2 They just kept 3 everything they could do to make me fail. And it's not 4 hindering me. They wouldn't listen to me. don't care how good of a man you hard to make a man feel, . 5 I could 6 are, okay, if five of his good men got together, No matter how good of a man 7 fail, Bill, right over there. 8 he may be. O A lot of this information I got is, you know, 9 I'm sure you're 10 they did do an internal investigation. 1994, did you On or about November 15, 11 aware of that. 12 receive a written notice of unacceptable job performanr3, in off-gas system modification? 13 based on your involvement we had a little earlier, J4 Is that the conversation that ( 15 regarding Corbett? A That may have been the one where they brought 16 17 me up for a disciplinary. IB Q Corbett and Buteau? 19 A Yes. 0 And then, you responded to that? 20 A Yes and my response will be in there. 21 O When you say there, you have a package of 22 23 documents? A I have a package and I'm referring to the 24 25 documents. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 C
' 70 1 Q On ttr about November :*,, 1995, did you receive 2 from Corbett specific expectatione for completion of the 3 revised project? 4 A I don't know. But if I did, it would be in the 5 files. 6 0 on December 22, 1994, the off-gas system 7 revised project was removed f rom the 1995 outage work list, 8 for failure to make project completion dates; is that 9 correct? 10 A Ilowever, you got to remember, it was them that 11 changed the project over in October. In other words, if 12 this was something they had worked on, since 1991, Lou 13 Casey, okay, the end of October is when we decided what we 14 could do safely. 15 So now, I got two or three months to So ahead 16 and put the whole damn ball of wax together. I was ahead 17 of schedule, as far as I was concerned. I mean, here it is 18 in December. In January, we had the i rf key PORC' d . I 19 wrote a memo, by the way, when they canceled this job. And 20 specifically, there are about four memos in there that 21 raise the safety concerns. And Vermont Yankee never did 22 nothing. 23 O Then, on February 7, 1995, you met with Corbett
, 24 and were removed from the project?
25 A Yeah, whenever I was. By that time, I knew -- Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. ( Washington, D.C. (202) 234-4433 1
71 1 I knew they were after me. It took me abraut -- well, Bill l 2 Wittmer recognized it around June. or July. And he said, 3 Massey, I think they're after you. 4 Q Did anybody-- 5 A Me, being naive, wouldn't even believe 6 something like that. It wasn't until around the end of the 7 summer that I said, oh, my God, they're blowing my job all 8 apart here. 9 0 Did you ever get any feedback, or any inkling 10 back, from anyone, that related the actions that were being 11 taken against you back to the gs.tehouse involvement? 12 A No. 13 0 Is there anything else th*.t you would like to 14 state, before ve close down today? We'll probably be ( lb talking again, but I think we'll digest what we have, for 16 now. 17 A Could we take a break, for a minute? 18 MR. MATAKAS: Yes, absolutely. 19 The time is 11:05. We'll go ahead and take a 20 break. 21 (Whereupon, there was a brief 22 recess.) 23 MR. MATAKAS: The time is 11:10. We're back on 24 the record. We took a short break. 25 When we were on the break, we agreed that Bill Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. washington, D.C. C, _ (202) 234-4433
12
- 1. Cook will take custody of Mr.. Masseyfs ti'le. per agreement
,l( 2 with Mr. Gibson, and one way cr t.he _ other, we'll get 3 copies. Either make it Jonal]y, est Fedex it back to King 4 of prussia and copy it. So, we' JJ go f rom there. 5 BY MR.- MATAKAS: 6 Q Jim, I'd lir.e to ask you, is there any 3 7 other --? l 8 A Yeah, there are a couple of things I would like 9 you to do, okay? These were tha people, in 1982 , that were ~ .
- 10 checking AOG for me. One man's name was Milton Stone, 11 who's now retired and works for New England Power Service l l 12 - Company, a-highly respected gentleman. ;
I r l- 13 Another one is Pete Linnus. j 14 Q Spell that. 15 A L-I-N-N-U-S. Who works for New England Power. 16 Service company and is still there. Another respected ? P 17 gentleman. 4 18 I would like you to interview some men, okay, 19 that can speak of my ability and my honesty. ; 20 Q First of all, these two people here, what do { t 21 you expect? What information do you expect from these 22- people? l 23 A' Well, if you want, you can interview them. I
- 24 .They'll tell you what type.of shape -- they didn't do the 950Epanel. Down in AOG, just in AOG, what type of' shape
.25' ;
Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. r Washington, D.C.
- (1 i
.- ( (202) 234-4433 t 1 b
,.,.um r+- , . .- -,eg w:.sy- ,s.w,-4 e,%..-e ..n,.,m- o,.,,,re,,.,,,-e -
wr,.w,- ,y--wi.. -m er - -e----r-----a cw--
k 73 ) i
>1 it's in. . ]
( 2 0 -And that's in regard to the viring? l t , 3 A Yes. i
- 4 In fact, while I was preliminary, all of these ,
' i I 5 were brought up.. Like I said, I found so many poor i
j 6 discrepancies on six prints that were already done by f 7- Mercury. There were seventeen discrepancies on one print, i
?*
terminal box J200. There was twenty-four discrepancies in s , 8 ! r 9 terminal box-J300,- Eighteen discrepancies on one print, , 10 terminal box J100. There were so many discrepancies. l 1 11 And I constantly brought this up to_my boss. i 12 You can't -- you can't do a dcaign, with this many l 13 discrepancies. And I-don't know, unless we check these-14' -interconnecting wires, how many more you got out there. , (- 15 But the people I'd like you to interview would be Dave l Hallonquist, who used to work for me, at one time. 16 4 17 Q Spell it, please?
- L 18 A H-A-L-L-O-N-0 U-I-S-T. He now works for the 19 operations department. Mike Tessier, T-E-S-S-I-E-R, who is ,
20 an electrical engineer, r,t Vermont Yat,kee. Jim Staggs, 1 21 S-T-A-G-G S, who's an electrical engineer, at Vermont 22 Yankee. Paul Stello, S-T-E-L-L-0, who's an electrical i 23- engineer, at Vermont Yankee. Jim Calcherra, 24- C-A-L-C-H-E-R-R-A, who's a mechanical. engineer, at Vermont
-25 . Yankee. Dave Phillips, P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S, who's also an Neal R. Grose & Co., .Inc. !
Washington, D.C. l (202) 234-4433 i f f
74 f 1 electrical engineer, at Vermont Yankee. I think you ought to int erview Bill Wittmer, ( 2 3 okay? He had part of that trailer, wnere I was doing AoG, 4 okay. There's at least two schematics he looked at and 5 both of them were wrong. And it's Bill Wittmer that also 6 many times had stated, everybody knows about the lousy 7 wiring job they did on AOG. 8 Rick Reuther, of course, you've aircady Bob Selby, 9 aviewed him. I suggest you drill him.
-- B Y. Pete Bradle, B-R-A-D-L-E.
10 S-E-L -- I'm not sure He worked 11 He worked for me for about four or five years. Fuller Construction Company. These guys were either lead 12 13 engineers, or they were the superintendent. 14 The other name is Bob Lammer, L-A-M-M-E-R. 15 He's either with Fuller Construction Company, or with UEGC, 16 which is now Raytheon Engineers, I believe. And Bob Arther, A-R-T-H-E-R. You can interview a lot of people. I 17 18 These are a few names I'll give you that can attest to my And would, 19 ability and my honesty and my integrity, okay. 20 if I had -- I knew of a problem, would I be telling 21 management every single day. 22 When my lawyer sent a letter of f to Vermont 23 Yankee and he said in that letter that we thought that it 24 was in regards -- I was being punished and it was in It was the gatehouse 25 regards, possibly, to another job. Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C-(202) 234-4433
75 1 job. Within two days, I got a call from John Orris, who'c 2 the head of human resources. John Orris told me, Don't { 3 worry about your job, Jim. Don't worry about nothing. 4 We'll find it half your problem and half our fault. 5 I said, wait a minute. He had, by the way, had 6 said this at least six times to me. And every time he said 7 it, I said, it's not my fault. I haven't done anything 8 wrong. They went ahead and they did the investigation. 9 And, in essence, }ou know what they came up with? And this 10 is how it was explained to me, is tnat, number one, I 11 didn't communicate my concerns to management. 12 Q And who is this, telling you this? 13 A Thie was the investigative team. This would be 14 Greg Merrick, Don Reid, okay? That I didn't communicate it ( 15 adequately. And, two, management didn't handle it. Sure 16 enough, half my fault, half their fault. 17 Q Did you get that in writing, or did they just 18 give you that verbally? 19 A Oh, no. Basically, that's in writing. But 20 that's the gist of it. So, I said to them, listen, either 21 I communicated it and they didn't handle it properly, or I 22 didn't communicate it, in which case they couldn't have 23 handled it. I mean, it didn't even make any sense to me. 24 But at this stage of the game, I believe the ball got 25 rolling in such a way that, now, nobody knew how to stop Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. DB2) 234-4433
76 1 it. liobody had control of this bk12. Tad to be honest ( 2 with you, nobody wanted to touch at. 3 Oh, by the way, since then, after the 4 reorganization, they got rid of Pelletier. They shoved him 5 down around Boston way. I, since then, had another call 6 from John Wallace. I don't know what the hell we were 7 talking about. But he says, You know, he says, because of 8 you, this whole organization change came about, this big 9 sweep. 10 The next thing you knew, Wiegand was ret'. ring. 11 And he always said he wasn't going to retire. Pelletier 12 has now moved. Bernie Buteau doesn't have a job. Well, I 13 guess he's going to have a job under -- he hasn't got his 14 old job. Let's put it that way. All because of me? Well, 15 what the hell did I do right or wrong? 16 MR. MATAKAS: Bill, do you have any questions? 17 MR. COOK: No, I don't. Thank you. 18 MR. MATAKAS: John? 19 MR. CALVERT: Yeah, I have. But it's mainly on 20 the AOG and I'm going to have to read the material that he 21 has. 22 MR. MATAKAS: Okay. 23 David, is there anything you'd like to say, 24 before we close? 25 MR, GIBSON: I don't know whether you have any Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. ( . (202) 234-4433
77 1 interest in viewing the prints that Jim has. But I don't ( 2 know whether any exist anywhere else, or not. Yeah, I have all the old prints, 3 MR. MASSEY: 4 And I also have the new prints. MR. MATAKAS: That will be up to John. I 5 6 wouldn't know the print. 7 MR. CALVERT: Yeah, I would like to see those. 8 MR. GIBSON: As far as I know, there aren't 9 do you know if they have copies of what you have at Vermont 10 Yankee? 11 MR. MASSEY: Yes, they would have to keep -- 12 they have to keep the copies of the old prints and, also, 13 the new prints, okay? They're quite extensive for AOG. 14 But, yes, we could get copies there. John, or -- You know, 15 I like looking at mine, because it shows where I had 16 actually went through it. You know, I got them all marked 17 up. 18 MR. CALVERT: The ones at Vermont Yankee 19 wouldn't have those markings', 20 MR. GIBSON: No, thay wouldn't have those. 21 MR. MATAKAS: Anything else? 22 MR. GIBSON: I would like to say one thing. 23 MR. MATAKAS: Go ahead, but you're going to be 24 next. 25 MR. GIBSON: I'm just assuming we're gcing to Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C-(202) 234-4433 l
78 1 get a copy of this... when it's transcribed, .and Jim can look ( 2 at it, to make sure- - 3 MR. MATAKAS. We'give you an opportunity to go 4 over the transcript, but I can't give you a copy, until all 5 investigation is done. 6 MR. GIBSON: At that point, would we receive a 7 copy? 8 MR. MATAVAS : Yes. 9 MR. MASSEY: Oh, I want to say one thing and 1 10 want to say it fo; the record. Somebody wrote a letter to 11 The Reformer, okay? I just want to say, I swear to God, it 12 was not me. If I'm going to send a letter any place, I'm 13 going to sign it. If I'm man enough to send it, I'm man 14 enough to sign it. 15 MR. MATAKAS: Anything else, Mr. Massey? 16 MR. MASSEY: No. 17 MR. MATAKAS: Have I made any threats directed le towards you today? 19 MR. MASSEY: You have not. 20 MR. MATAKAS: Have I made you any promises? 21 MR. MASSEY: No. 22 MR. MATAKAS: Okay. The time is 11:20 a.m. 23 This will conclude the interview. 24 (Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the 25 interview was concluded. ) Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Washington, D.C. C (202) 234-4433 k -
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached s ( proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of: Name of Proceeding: Interview of James 14ascey Docket Number: (None assigned) Place of Proceeding: Drattleboro, Vermont were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof, for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me, and thereafter
' reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the reporting company, and that thet'ranscrjpt is p true and
,/
accurate record of the forgg[ing proce.$1ns. (
/
'l<d $Y V teartip Offici
,Farley
,/ Reporter U
/
/
V C& cl4ALN Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.
+ ch v Washington, D.C.
C. (202) 234-4433
une vo ou ov i wa ass . arm 2 amn . o INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD (PAGE 4) Case No.: 1 96 005 faciltry: VERMDN1~ YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STFim NYES) Case Agent: TEATOR Priority: H)G6 Subject / Allegation: ALLEGED DEFICIENCIEL JN THE VW3 UFFf2AS SYSTEM AND DISCRIMINATION ArAINST ENGINEERING 9'ERSONNEL WHO ATTEMPTED TO CORRECT THE DEFJCIENCIES BY Ut0DENTIFIED PLANT MANAGEMENT .
~
~
Honthly Status Reoort: 02/28/97: Writing reports of intervier, conducted during late January 1997. Status: FWP ECD: 04/97. j 03/31/97: Com)leted a portion of inter . Unable to aerform additional N wor ( due to efforts on Cas which is a ligher priority investigation. ECD will change a end o next reporting period. Status: FVP ECD: 04/97. 04/30/97: Began to draft Re . of ti . Work on other higher priority investigations has impeded completion of this investigation and necessicates clanging the ECD to June. Status: RID ECD: 06/97. 05/31/97: Report submitted to F00 for review. Status: RID ECD: 06/97. 06/30/97: Case was closed (unsubstantiated) on June 18, 1997, and issued on Nne 23,1997.
.w Informatian in this ret:d w:s deltted in acccrdaace with the Freedom of Inferrnation Act,exernptions T F0IA-7 7- h Y Closed: 06/18/97 Issued: 06/23/97 Referral: Actior): U NOTTOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WITHOUT 01 APP 80Vdl LIMITED DISTRIBUTION
.- h\ !
l
LIMITED LOSURE QRIBUTION .- NOT FOR PUBLIC D
, INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD (PAGE 3)
Case No.: 1 96 005 Facility VERHONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER l Sl ATION f VYNPD Case Agent: TEATOR Pr'ority. 1 HIGH Subject / Allegation: ALLEGED DEFICIENCIES IN THE NYNPS '0FFGAS SYSTEM AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINR ENGINEERING PER50NNEL WHO ATTEMPTED TO CORRECT THE DEFIC 1ENCJES SY VNIDENTIFIED PLANT MANAGEMENT
~
Honthly Status Report: 06/30/96: Per the June 26, 1996, prioritization meeting, this case is being upgraded to a high priority. The alleger was interviewed on' June 5, 1996, by 01:RI and the RI technical staff. A copy of the transcribed interview was provided to the RI staff for technical evaluation. OI arovided a memorandum and a copy of the transcribed interview to the legional Counsel to review and make a determination whether the alleger's complaint is within the scope of 10 CFR 50.7 (" Employee protection"). Additional investigative efforts will be put on hold
>ending a response from Regional Counsel. Status: PEN ECD-Jnscheduled.
07/31/96: 01 did not get a definitive response from Regional Counsel regarding the aforementioned memorandum. Accordingly, GI provided a memorandum and a copy of the transcribed interview to OGC. On July 23, 1996, 0GC responded advising that there was sufficient information provided by the alleger linking his concerns regarding the offgas system to his alleged negative performance appraisal. Investigation to continue. Status: FWP ECD: 11/96. 08/31/96: No activity due to acting F0D responsibilities. Due to the case agent's retirement in September 1996, this investigation is being reassigned to S/A Logan. Status: FWP ECD: 11/96. 09/30/96: Alleger sent a 41 page letter to H. Eichenholz (NRC Region I Project n ineer). N new ctivity because of other high priority cases abI
./ Status: FWP ECD: 11/96.
10/31/96: No activity on this case due to other high priority case @ - Status: PEN ECD: Unscheduled. 11/30/96: No activity on this case due to other high priority case O Case transferred to S/A Teator this rep & ting period. Stat 4s;.. PEN ECD: l'nscheduled. 12/31/96: Served a subpoena on licensee for personnel records. Interviewed 9 witnesses and obtained additional records from the licensee and witnesses. Status: FWP ECD: 04/97. 01/31/97: Interviewed 13 witnesses and obtained additional records from the licensee. Recontacted alleger (with his attorney present) and affected the alleger's review of transcript. Status: FWP ECD: 04/97. O 1Y LIMITED DISTRIBUTION .. NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WITHOUT 01 /DPR0iAL a
;URE
- LIMITED 01. 'lBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISC
- f.
- ItJVESTIGATION STATUS PECORD 1 96 005 facility: VERMONT , W iE IJVCLEAR POWER Case No.: .% PS)
STATIDS Allegation No.- Rl-95 A 0222 Case Agent; MATAKAS 50-271 Date Opened: 02/12/96 Docket No.- Source of Allegation: ALLEGER (A) Notified by: VITO (OAC) Priority: NORMAL Category: lH Case Code: RP Subject / Allegation: ALLEGED DEFICIENCIES IN THE VYNPS OFFGAS SYSTEM AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ENGINEERING PERSONNEL WHO ATTEMPTED TO CORRECT THE DEFICIENCIES BY UNIDENTIFIED PLANT MANAGEMENT Remarks: Monthly Stalus Report: Page 2 D2/?9/96: 0] has received /reviened the licensee's investigation andStatus: this matter will be repaneled in Region I during March 1996. FWP ECD (90 days): 05/96. 03/31/96: The potential discrimin6 tion victim was identified and contacted during this reporting period. To date, he has declined to confirm or deny that discrimination was an 15:ue related to the time that he Numerous attempts was the offgas system project manager at VYNPS. to schedule an interview with the individual, through his attorney. have been unsuccessful during the reporting period. The individual has been given until April 5.1996, to contact 01 (if he has a FWP legitimate complaint) or this matter will be closed. Status: ECD (90 days): 05/96. 04/30/96: During this reporting period the Offgas System Project Manager's (OSPM) attorney contacted 01 and stated that the CSPM now wanted to talk with 01. Through coordination with the Division of Reactor Safety (DRS) and the'0SPM's attorney. it was decided that both 01 and a representative of DRS would interview the OSPM after he had a chance to review the DRS inspection report concerning tte Vermont Yankee offgas system. The interview is pending the OSPM's review of the inspection report and his contacting 01 through his attorney. Status: FWP ECD (90 days): 05/96. 05/31/96: Interview of alleger scheduled for June 5.1996 Status: FWP ECD: 11/96. LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WITHOUT 01 APPROV
. LIM 11ED D1 IBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC OlSC URE INVESTIGd10N STATUS PECORD Case No.- 1 96-005 Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STAT 10.1(VYNPS)
Allegation No. Rl-95 A 0222 Case Agent: MATAKAS Docket No. 50 271 Date Opened: 02/12/96 Source of Allegation: ALLEGER (A) Notified by: V110 (OAC) Priority: NORMAL Cateoory: IH Case Code: RP S"' sect / Allegation: ALLEGED DEFICIENCIES IN THE VYNPS OFFGAS SYSTEM AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ENGINEERING PERSONNEL WHO ATTEMPTED TO CORRECT THE DEFICIENCIES BY UNIDENTIFIED PLANT MANAGEMENT k larks:
~
Monthly 5tatus Report : 92L12/96 On January 3. 1996. Region I paneled an anonymous allegation that was provided to the NRC by the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution. Inc. (NECNP). In substance, the allegation concerns the following:
- The VYNPS offgas system has been allowed to deteriorate and 15 discharging illegal amounts of radioactivity:
- Planned refurbishment of the system was canceled and those engineers who spoke out against the cancellation were " punished" and had a " bad report" inserted in their personnel file:
- The offgas system was recently declared "out of operation" because the monitoring equipment was out of calibration: and
- The Yankee Atomic Vice President is aware of the above problems but won't act.
At the panel it was understood that the matter was already under review by the licensee, and thus, the decision to refer it to the licensee for investigation and have 01 review the final report. The formal NRC referral to the licensee took place on February 9, 1996. On the same date, the Regional Administrator and Ol:RI F00 discussed the opening of an investigative file to more formally provide for 01 tracking and review of the licensee's efforts in this matter. Status: FWP ECD (90 days): 05/96.
; u L!M11ED DIST !BuTION -- N]T FOR PUBLIC DISCLO5URE c1THOUT 01 A; PROVAL l
c \ EXHIBIT 2
. . ; J . .e 1
.( ic c,.: . :
.1 L ..u0,5 14
. : ; rasca el information '
FC:A 87-M 9)\;
\
Cr.4e No. 1 96 005 Exhibit 2 l
, LIMITED STRIBUTION NOT FOR PUBLiG U 10Mi l INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD (PAGE 3)
Case No.: 1 96 005 f ace tty YERHETANKEE NUCLEAR POWER SikT10V D4NPS) (' PriorNy: HIGH Case A9ent: TEATOR Subject / Allegation: ALLEGED DEFICIENCIES IN THE VfNPS OFFGAS SYSTEM AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ENGINEERING PERSONNEL WHO A TO CORRECT Tile DEFICIENCIES BY UNIDENTIFIED PLANT M Honthly Status Reoort: 06/30/96: Per the June 26, 1996, prioritization meeting, this case is being upgraded to a high priority. The alleger was interviewedon June 5, 1996, by 01:RI and the RI technical staff. A copy of the transcribed interview was provided to the RI staff for technical evaluation. OI provided a memorandum and a copy of the transcribed interview to the Regional Counsel to review and make a determination whether the alleger's com protection"). plaint is within the scope of 10 CFR 50.7 ("Em xnding a res Status: PEN ECO:
'Jnscheduled. ponse from Regional Counsel.
07/31/96: 01 did not get a definitive response from Regional Counsel regarding the aforementioned memorandum. Accordingly. OI provided a memorandum and a copy of the transcribed interview to OGC., On July 23, 1996, OGC responded advising that there was sufficient information provided by the offgas system to his the alleger linking alleged negative his concerns nrformance regardinfnvestigation appraisal. to L.itinue. (- Status: FWP EC): 11/96. 08/31/96: No activity due to acting F00 responsibilities. Due to the case agent's retirement in September 1996, this invest'gation is being I reassigned to S/A Logan. Status: FWP ECD: 11/96. 09/30/96:. Alleger sent a 41 page letter to H. Eichenholz (NRC Region I Project o b o activity because of other high priority cases I i 4
, Status: FWP ECD: 11/96.
10/31/96:
~
on this case due to other high priority case .7-NoactivitfN Status: P ECO: Unschetiuled. 11/30/96: No activity on this case due to other high priority case .d b Case transferred to S/A Teator this reporting period. S atus: N ECO: Unscheduled. r-- l 12/31/%: Served a subpoena on licensee for personnel records. Interviewed 9 witnesses and obtained additional records from the licensee and witnesses. Status: FWP ECD: 04/97. 01/31/97: Interviewed 13 witnesses and obtained additional records from the licensee. Recontacted alleger (with his attorney present) and effected the alleger's review of transcript. Status: FWP ECO: 04/R7. EXHlBIT cV {. PAGE / 0F / PAGE(S) CASENO s 1 ,96-005~
~
(IMI1TD DISTRIBUTION - NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WITHOUT O
t i EXHIBIT 2B . t.
.t.iornMica in thb rard was de!:ted
!n acec: Jar.ce with tot freedom of Informallo.n j
r' A Case No. 1 96 005 Exhibit 2 8 s
fgw e/ LJ bb 2 /., ju -
- 2. o .,
VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR. POWER CORPORATION -- ur m T EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW Employee Name: E. James Massev Position
Title:
Senior Electrical Encineer
. ,s SECTION 1 - UNIVERSAL JOB ELEMENTS Rate the employee on each of the follcwing competencies which are common to all exempt positions at Vermont Yankee. Use a scale of i to 10, with 10 indicating superior performance and below 5 unsatisfactory.
- 1. JOB KNOWLEDGE - Has technical knowledge and skills required for success in the job; stays apprised of new developments in the profession and industry.
Comment: Q I Rating ? ._ . h buthas adecuate crocedure technicalisich knowledge knowledee unacceotable. Jim did not stav acorised of crocedure chances and in some cases was not aware of crocedural recuirements that had been in olace for many years.
- 2. PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION - Sets objectives and priorities deadlines, I appropriately; monitors progress and meets anticipating and responding to changing conditions as needed.
Rating h Comment: Oreanized but frecuentiv didn't meet deadlines or acerceriatelFmonitor Drogress. Deadlines related to the AOG oroiect were not met
- 3. QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF WORK - Consistently produces work that is accurate, thorough, complete and in expected quantity.
p Rating h Comment: Work cuantity is well below averace, and lr cuality did not consistently meet ( EXHIBIT CASENO- 1-96-005- PAGE / 10F_Io_PAGE(S) pnb
M Cedural recuirements
- 4. DECISION MAKING - Makes timely decisions, using cecd
~
j udgemen,t , and takes responsibility for them. db Rating a Coment : Decimien makinc is adecuate but has reem for imerovement .
- 5. PROBLEM SOLVING - Demonstrates flexibility, initigtive and innovation, while making etfective use of Tesources.
Originates actions rather than responds to events. Rating j Coment : 48 Not cenerally flexible, not alwava effective 1v used resources were Develops and maintains effective working
- 6. TEAMNORK -
relationships throuohout the Company. Rating $ Comment: work well with others as N Doesn't evidenced by necative feedback free (- several others that Jim interfaced with Presents ideas clearly, Lccurately and
- 7. COMMUNICATION -
persuasively, both orally and in writing.
'4I C Rating M Coment :
Oral communication is adecuate, written skills are lackino and, to comeensate, Jim cenerally relies on others fer written comunication
- 8. MANAGEMENT OF OTEERS (for supervisory positicns only) -
Demonstrates leadership. Recognizes, develops, effectively evaluates and rewards good performance Provides counseling. Supports and communicates Company goals and thrpartment objectives. Promotes safety. Rating N/A Coment : N/A Average of all ratings for this section: (Use whole umber only)
'b EX IT O PAGE 07./,0_.PAGEIS) l
i SECTION 2 - ACIIEVEMDIT OF GOALS What were the two best areas of performance over the past year? { Jim was responsible for a design change
- 1) The which job was insta*. led an oil successfully burner in the North Warehouse. ;
completed and closed out,
- 2) Jim actively sought out information to resolve discrepancies related to the Advanced Off Gas (AOG) system. He arianged obtain required for walkdowns to and conducted various information. ,
r
- 4
'e individual goals How set atsuccessful was the emp?loyee at schieving th the last appraisal
. l
- 1) Manage activities related to AOG Improvements such that they are of high te m ical quality and appropriately prepared for outage impleme ;ation in accordance with the established budget and schedule.
Assessment: Jim didn't meet this goal. E/amples as follows: ,
- The design was approved aignificantly behind design was schedult. The the established delivered by YNSD to Vernor. on 7/31/94 yet end of was ready for approval util the not
(-
- November.
When the design was delivwed te the EE&C Manager for approval it was fcund to be incomplete and in an unacceptable condition. Some activities had not been ecmpleted in accordance with procedural requirements.
- Significant contractor resources were assigned
- to the project yet the resources were not pursuit of offectively utilized in Installation Procedure completion.
I
- The A0G project was dropped from the outage work scope when it was considered to be not adequately prepared for implementation in the upcoming outage.
- 2) Effectively manage an aggressive workload. This is it tended ents as to encompass being flexible to shif t to different assi required requesting additional work when it can reasonably be accommodated and providing meaningful recommendations for alternate scheduling or sequencing options which may be available to accommodate emergent work.
l Assessment: Jim did not manage an aggressive workload and was l not successful in shifting to and completing other i assignments. Jim wcs primarily dedicated to the AOG l( project and had contractor resources essign# to l' \ . EXyBIT c'-b t PAGE b 5F[_PAGE(S)
~. g , .- .- , . ,
assist him. When other assignments were made they were generally not aggressively pursued by Jim and, cases, resulted in the .. work being C' in several (examples, SCRAM Test Pane; assigned elsewhere PDCR, Vernon Megawatt meter circuitry) . Continuously acnieve and enhance procedursl ecmpliance by
- 3) contributing to the improvement of procedure quality and by ,
constant reference and use of the applicable procedures. ! several occasions, Jim was not On at least Assessment: knowledgeable of some basic procedure requirements he was performing. J saw no governing work thatevidence of him taking any initiative he to tontribut to the improvement of procedura quality, yet, complained abouu the content of procedures when the A0G Design and I&T were found to havethe aspects which governing in accordance with were not procedures. How successfully did the employee contribute to meeting department and Company goals during the rating period? Assessment: I am not aware of any significant contributiens that were made in meeting department or Company gesls. Rating for Goal Achievements (Use whole number only)
.] {
SECTION 3 ARIAS FOR DEVELOPMENT What are two areas where performance, regardless of how goed it presently is, could be improved. As identified previously, there are numerous areas where performance did not meet expectations work (procedure quality and intowledge quantity,& adherence, meeting deadlines, It is my~ assessment resource utilization and communication).have the' skills and abilities pre that Jim does not required to fulfill the position. What will happen in the future to address the areas for developmen" managers sh r above? Note: if training needs are identified, 1 ensure that the appropriate training is sought and scheduled. EXH IT $ $ PAGE I)FkPAGE(S)
~
l Since it has been concluded that Jim does not have the skills and abilities to fulfill the position the following action plan has been established: _. (.
- Jim recently expressed interest inwas a position in the Department and this pursued as a Maintenance Manager met with potential resolution. The EE&C Maintenance managt.nent in an attempt to locate a position for Jim. The Maintenance Department wa9 not interested at this time.
- Jim has been removed from the A0G Project but will be allowed to stay in the EE&C Department and . will be lessor comp 1exity and assigned alternate duties of importance. If proficiency is demenstrated and an appropr$ ate position exists after the Engineering reorganization, placement will be considered, however, termination of employment may be necessary if performance is unsatisf actory and/or a suitable position doesn't exist.
- During this time period Jim will be expected te positively contribute to the Department and Company objectives and not bad mouth or otherwise undermine Management.
( SECTION 4 - OVERALL RATING Assign an overall rating to this employee's performance. The rating should be a whole number derived by averaging the ratings in sections 1 and 2. A summary statement may be included in this section. , overall Rating / }b Jim was not a successful project manager and does not have the skills to perform many of the other functions routinely performed by the department. e Next steps: Print the form, sign it and obtain next higher level management approval before presenting to the employee. .Obtain employee signature and send the original form to Human Resources. Employee's signature does not necessarily mean agreement with content of documentation but does indicate Performance Review r.cok C. - place.
, EXHIBIT
/, - PAGE d 6FhPAGE(S)
~ g
.o.
[4244% 2 - 2 9 - 98~ ( Date Employe[Signaturey
- L S / h ,!4 (
Supervisor Signature Date / w 2 n fi$ Next MadKfement 3 Level Signature Date
~ .)
If the employee wishes to comment on any aspect of the evaluation, he or she may do so in this space. Additional pages may be attached if necessary. (cmn,eWO ~ 4)l// Sc-R 4 p / c c m s a c~ I J r EXHlalT PAGEdOnhPAGE(S)
c e EXHIBIT 3
.:.; . ,:,,is j b g\
res,. 4 7-JL 6 p V\ Case No. 1 96 005 Exhibit 3
NRC ADVISEMENT ON IDENTITY PROTECTION Concerned citizens in the past may have incorrectly assumed the NRC can and C will proted their identities under all circumstances. Therefore, this advisement is provided to clarify the degree of protection which can be afforded to a concerned citizen making an allegation: (I) In resolving technical issues, the NRC in protecting your identity intends to take all reasonable efforts to not disclose your identity to any organization, individual outside the NRC, or the public unless:
/ You clearly indicate no objection to being identified;
/ Disclosure is necessary to ensure public health and safety;
/ Disclosure is necessary to inform Congress, State or Federal Agencies in the furtherance of HRC responsibilities.under law or public trust; or
/ You take actions that are inconsistent with and override the purpose of protecting your identity.
(2) For allegations involving wrongdoing. your identity MAY BE disclosed
. a,t the NRC's discretion in order to pursue the invastigation.
(3) You should understand that you are not considered a confidential source unless you request such confidentiality and it has been ( formally granted in writing. (4) If your allegation is that you have in some maner been discriminated against for having raised safety concerns, it is impractical to investigate such an allegation without using your name. Therefore, for allegations of harassment and intimidation, th9 NRC WILL disclose your identity during the NRC investigation. If you request that your name be kept confidential, the NRC will normally not investigate your allegation of discrimination. (5) Information provided under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) will, to the extent consistent with the Act, be purged of names and other potential identifiers. I [- bah , fully understand the degree of protection of my i entity as exp ined in this document. Date: $ ~ f f (
' l (Concerned Citizen)
Witness: .. '. v v v
)v /%_
DRAFT (4-13-95) 1
C t EXHIBIT 5 i-
<a C, ' .
..- . . .. i a . . c. O.;sd
'#, f t;CCJ3 CI if;l0f aldlioll q
i'* i ;C l4.!!i li.. A
- .: >:.s .;;ata '1 C _ V r y ,, 91-365
-Case No. 1 96 005 Exhibit 5
_ . _ . _ _ _}}