ML20198K805
| ML20198K805 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 05/30/1986 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#286-445 OL, NUDOCS 8606040139 | |
| Download: ML20198K805 (123) | |
Text
- - - - - - - - -
OitlGiNAL O
Uh11ED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 50-456 OL 50-457 OL COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Station, Units 1 & 2)
EVIDENTIARY HEARING O
,' V i
LOCATION:
MARKHAM, ILLINOIS PAGES: 2457-2578 i
l l
DATE:
FRIDAY, MAY 30, 1986 0
/
/
d O
ace-FEDERAL REPORTERS, LNC.
C)fictil Retorters 444 North CapitolStreet Washington, D.C. 20C01 ho[ $po!K $5000056 NATION % ICE COV3 ACE
2457
/
/
1 2
UN TED ST ATES OF AMERICA
~
3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
$EFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD L
5 j
__________________x 6
, In the Matter of :
7,
g%,
(Braidwood Station, Units 1 9
and 2)
~\\
___2______________x 10 s
'/-
)
11 ' '-.
p l
Circuit Court of Cook County Sixth Municipal District
(
12 16501 S.
Ke dz ie Pa rkw ay,
v
\\
Markham, Illinois 60426
)
13
+
14 Friday, May 30, 1986.
l 15 The hearing in the above-entitled matter reconvened l
16 at 9 : 00 A.
M.
c' 17 BEFORE:
i '18 s
JUDG E HERS ET G ROSSMAN, Chai rman
., ' 19 Atomic Cu2 0ty and Licensing Board U:
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 20 Washington,,D.
C.
]1 t
21
.q, n
JUDG E R.TCH ARD F.
COL E,
- Member, t
g Atomic' Saf ety and Licensing Board 22
',. U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission s
i Washington, D.
C.
l 23 JUDG E' A.
DIXON CALLIH AN, Membe r, 24 Atomic. Saf ety and Licensing Board U., S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission y) 25 Washingt6n, D.
C.
l s
I f \\
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
. {
Geneva, Illincis 60134 5
N (312) 232-0262
+
w
2458 Ov 1
APPE ARANCES :
2 On behalf of the Applicant :
3 MICH AEL I.
MILL ER, ESQ.
JOSEPH GALLO, ESQ.
4 EL EN A Z. KEZ EL IS, ESQ.
Isham, Lincoln & Beale l
5 Three First National P1az a Chicago, Illinois 60602 6
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory 7
Commission Staf f :
8 STU ART TREBY, ESQ.
EL AINE I.
CHAN, ESQ.
9 GREGORY AL AN B ERRY, ESQ.
U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 7335 Old Georgetown Road B ethesda, Maryland 20014 11 On behalf of the Intervenors:
p 12 RT ERT GUILD, ESQ.
l
()
TIMOTHY WRIGHT, ESQ.
I 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 l
23 l
24 l
OV 25 Sonntaa Reoor tino S erv ice, Ltd.
Gedev a',
Illidois 60134
)
(312) 232-0262 I
2459 O
1 EXHIBIT INDEX Marked Received 2
Intervenors' Exhibit No. 33-A 2472 2473 3
Intervenors' Exhibits No. 33 2473 4
WITNESS INDEX 5
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) 6 BY MR. GUILD:
2474 7
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. BERRY:
2475 8
BOARD EXAMINATION 9
BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
2516 10 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE COLE:
2517 11 BOARD EXAMINATION 12 BY JUDGE CALLIHAN:
2521 13 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
2525 14 BOARD EXAMINATION 15 BY JUDGE CALLIHAN:
2525 16 REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MILLER:
2527 17 18 19 20 21 i
22 23 24 O
25 Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
2460 o,
1 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
Okay.
We are back in 2
ses sion, and Mr. Seese is still on the stand.
3 We had some discussion about Int erv enor s' Exhibit 4
33 for identification, and the parties were going to 5
attempt to arrive at some agreement on that.
6 Mr. Miller.
7 MR. MILL ER :
Your Honor, I have identified, I 8
believ e, four pages that I would ask be given some sort 9
of a protected status, and I can identify them by number 10 on the record and then ask the Board and the parties to 11 read them.
I think the reasons f or my request will 12 become apparent.
gsO 13 If we are going to discuss the specific words, I 14 would ask that we go off the record briefly so that we 15 don' t have a problem with this transcript; but the first 16 page --
17 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
Let me ask you this:
H ave 18 you discussed this with Mr. Guild?
19 MR. MILL ER :
I h av e, indeed; and while he 20 agrees with respect to one page, he did not agree with 21 respect to the others.
22 MR. GUILD:
Let me j ust state, Mr. Chai rman, 23 that Mr. Miller brought these to my attention two 24 minutes bef ore we reconvened this morning, and I stated
()
25 that position as a tentative position.
Sonntaa Reoortina S erv ice. Ltd.
Ge5ev a, Illi5ois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 2461 0
1 But I think, aside f rom going word f or word, which 2
I am f ully prepared to do, I do have a more general 3
position on Mr. Miller 's r equest, if I could be heard on 4
th at.
5 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Sur e.
6 MR. GUILD:
It seems to me that the 7
inf ormation f alls into two general ca tegories, 8
inf ormation that is intemperate language.
I think that 9
is generally what all four of the items reflect, 10 indelicate language, some directed at subordinates and 11 some directed at superiors -- in one instance, at a 12 superior.
13 As to the instance involving the superior, I don' t 14 have any problem with -- the Board may choose protecting 15 that, although I think the issuance of a protective 16 order for this type of inf ormation is inappropriate.
17 The protective order makes sense when it is a 18 question of somebody who is powerless being a victim of 19 potential retaliatory treatment by someone who is 20 pow erf ul.
21 In this case we are talking about the powerf ul, the 22 management of the company, being protected against their 23 own work f orce.
That doesn' t make any sense to me.
24 That is f undamental.
()
25 In the instance where it's a derogatory remark e
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2462
(
1 about a superior, that is not particularly germane, 2
although I think it is relevant because it reflects 3
someone adverse to that supervisor.
4 As to the other three incidents which appear to be 5
directed toward subordinates, toward Quality Control 6
Inspe ctor s, I do, as a matter of principle, obj ect to I
7 the notion of shielding management f rom their own work l
8 force when management chooses to use language and 9
characteriz ations that reflect, I think, accurately 10 those managers' attitudes, opinions and supervisory 11 approaches, if you will, towards those inspectors.
-~s 12 So I oppose, on a general basis, shielding f rom i
13 disclosure to those inspectors or the general public in 14 this record.
15 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
Let's not conf use two 16 things, though.
One is not putting it on the record, 17 and the second thing is making it public; that is, if 18 it's on the record, having it under some sort of 19 protective order.
20 MR. GUILD :
Yes, sir.
21 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
And so, you know, I w ant 22 to --
23 MR. GUILD :
I understand your point.
24 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
I don' t w ant to get too
()
25 fuzzy on the two items.
Sonntag Reporti ng Service. Ltd.
G enev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2463 O
1 MR. GUILD:
I understand your point.
2 My point is I assume all of it will be of record.
3 Some of it will be of non-public character, at least the 4
position that I am assuming Mr. Miller to be advocating, 5
although he hasn' t told us what f orm of protection he is 6
assuming, but assuming that's what he wants, record 7
tr eatment if it's r elevant, but protection f rom public 8
disclosur e.
9 I oppose sealing the record as to statements made 10 by -- attributed to managers regarding subordinates, and 11 I have no -- I simply don' t take a position one way or
-)
the other on a matter involving a superior.
12 s_/
13 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Let me ask you, by the way :
14 Are you going to be examining the witness on these three 15 pages that do contain denigrating remarks about persons 16 underneath him in the chain of command?
17 MR. GUILD:
No.
I intend to, if my motion to 18 have the exhibit received in evidence -- I intend to 19 rely on it in evidence.
20 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
W ell, I think that we have 21 the authority and the precedent to put matters that 22 might create some enbarrassment in the company's 23 ordinary functions under protective order and have those 24 pages put in camera.
()
25 MR. GUILD :
I don' t disagree with that as a Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2464 O
1 general principle, Judge, although let's j ust reflect on 2
it by example.
3 Let's take the incident where Mr. Saklak said that, 4
"If beating were legal, you would be dead. "
That 5
certainly is a very, very derogatory renark and reflects 6
very adversely not only on Mr. Saklak but, you know, on 7
management at Comstock.
8 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Yes, but the point is:
What 9
is the purpose of having that publicized in the company?
10 I understand the purpose for having that in the 11 record her e --
12 MR. GUILD:
W ell, si r, be ca use --
13 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
-- and having the parties 14 able to draw on that and the Board to know that.
15 MR. GUILD:
I think there are two points.
16 First, I think the -- that's -- take that example.
I 17 have never heard any suggestion that that language 18 should be protected.
That is a matter of public record.
19 The NRC heard about it.
20 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
It's alreaQ/ on public 21 record.
22 MR. GUILD:
Exa ctly.
23 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
So ther e isn' t any question 24 about that.
()
25 MR. GUILD :
Ther e isn' t.
Sonntag Repor ti ng Servien, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2465 CE) 1 But using that statement as an example, which I 2
think is really indistinguishable f rom the statements 3
that Mr. Miller is targeting her e, but f or the f act that 4
that is already public, one, I think that employees of 5
L.
K.
Comstock are in no less privileged a posture than 6
any member of the general public to know what this 7
Agency's business is and to know how their employer does 8
or does not meet regulatory requirements by way of 9
maintaining a QA program that meets those requirements.
10 Tw o, it seems to me that there is a very real 11 phenomenon here where we are talking about harassment 12 and intimidation, where knowledge of these f acts on the 13 part of those inspectors may, indeed, enhance their 14 willingness to speak f reely and to come forward with 15 their own evidence that is important to this Board's 16 determina tion.
17 I think this Board recognized that phenomenon when 18 you weighed the protective order that we sought f or 19 completely diff erent reasons; that sealing this 20 inf ormation may be inhibiting of the willingness of 21 others to come f orward, because they may not know that 22 their experience is shared by others.
23 That is a point that the Board should weigh very 24 caref ully.
When you seal this record, indeed, Mr.
()
25 Miller may be af f ected; ther e may be a detrimental Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2466 1
eff ect on management relations.
2 How ev er, you have to weigh that on the potential 3
detrimental ef fect of depriving potential witnesses of 4
potential inf ormation that may be of significance in 5
enhancing their presentation of evidence to this Board.
6 MR. MILL ER :
Your Honor, I am really quite 7
disabused by Mr. Guild's arguments.
8 The analogy to Mr. Saklak's threat to Mr. Snyder 9
simply doesn' t exist.
That was a threat made directly 10 to a QC Inspector.
It was investigated thoroughly; and, 11 certainly, as Mr. Guild suggested, I have never 12 suggested that somehow should be shielded f rom public 13 di sclosur e.
14 This document and the observations that are in it 15 are Mr. Seese's notes of meetings; and I believe that 16 all of us who have had occasion to discuss other 17 colleagues, our subordinates or our superiors, in a 18 meeting where not everyone is present have used language 19 that, if it w er e w ritten down, would be -- and later 20 brought to our attention -- could be embarrassing.
21 I have no obj ection to the use of this inf ormation 22 in this proceeding.
Mr. Guild can argue f rom it as he 23 sees fit or examine the witness about it, and the Board 24 can take such a confidence as it sees fit.
()
25 I don' t understand that the purpose of this Sonntac R eno r ti n a S erv i ce. Ltd.
Gedev a', 111i5ois 60134 (312) 232-0262
=_.-
2467
(
1 proceeding is to somehow vindicate the public's right to 2
know the intimate details of what goes on in Comstock's s
3 mana gement.
4 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
Okay.
5 Let me ask you this:
So f ar it has not been under 6
protective order, and Mr. Guild has been f ree to discuss i
7 the matters contained in this diagr.
8 I take it you are not contemplating putting him 9
under protective order with regard to discussing these 10 matters; you are only talking about a very limited 11 protective order, where those four pages will be removed 12 from this document and kept in camera so that they are 13 not in the public document room, without any further 14 prohibitions or inhibitions on a party, except to the 15 extent that they shouldn' t be reproducing those pages 16 and disseminating those pages.
17 But as f ar as discussing the contents, that's 18 already out of the bag; and I don' t think you are 19 contemplating any further restriction that way, are you, 20 Mr. Miller?
21 MR. ' MLLL ER :
I am not, although I must say, 22 if there would be a press conf erence held in which this 23 was characteriz ed, I would regard that as inconsistent 24 with the spirit of any protective order that the Board
()
25 would issue.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2468 1
JUDG E GROSSMAN :
I think the Board would also 2
consider that to be inconsistent, if we were to remove 3
these pages.
4 I am thinking in terms of Mr. Guild discussing with 5
potential witnesses the f act that they might want to 6
testify here and saying, "W ell, perhaps so-and-so isn' t 7
quite as" -- well, I don' t know what word to use, but 8
using those matters to persuade other witnesses to 9
testify.
10 MR. MILL ER :
I don' t have any obj ection to 11 that.
12 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Okay.
13 Does Staf f wish to be heard on this?
14 MR. BERRY:
Just briefly, your Honor.
15 In principle, Staf f doesn' t obj ect to Applicant's 16 proposal.
It seems to Staff that in its consideration 17 we should weigh whether the probative value outweighs 18 the prej udicial ef f ect.
19 It sounds like what Applicant has in mind is j ust a 20 limited nondisclosure of this, of these materials of the 21 diary; and under the circumstances, we could live with 22 Mr. Miller 's proposal.
23 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Okay.
The Board's ruling is 24 that we will j ust remove the four pages, mark them with
()
25 a separate Intervenor nwmber and admit it in camera.
Ronntag Reporti ng Servi co, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2469 1
MR. MILLER :
I am sor ry.
I misspoke.
There 2
really are only three.
3 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Only three pages, okay.
4 That makes our problem even that much simpler.
5 MR. GUILD:
Mr. Chairman, for the record, I 6
would ask that the Board off the record or in camera 7
review the specific portions that Mr. Miller proposes.
8 I know what they are, but I don' t think the Board 9
knows and has made a decision about that.
10 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Could you tell us the pages?
11 I cut you of f bef ore you could.
12 MR. MILL ER :
That's Page 117 -- I am sor ry.
73
(_/
13 I am talking about the number in the upper right-hand 14 corner.
15 117,123 and 124.
16 MR. GUILD:
And they are not whole, full 17 pages, are they ?
18 MR. MILLER :
W ell, actually, Mr. Guild has a 19 point.
We could really redact j ust a part of them.
20 MR. GUILD:
I certainly would ask that,be the 21 case, Mr. Chairman.
22 There is certainly other inf ormation on that 23 particular page that is significant and doesn' t have the 24 character at all of what Mr. Fuller has represented to
()
25 me is obj ectionable.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2470 (m
(_)
1 MR. MILL ER :
Yes, I agree.
We could redact a 2
portion of it.
3 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Fine.
Why don' t we do that 4
on Document 33, Int ervenors' Exhibit 33 ; but, 5
nev erthel ess, put the f ull page in in the f urther 6
document.
7 MR. GUILD:
I guess what I am asking, Mr.
8 Chai rman, is that the Board consider specifically the 9
part that Mr. Miller believes obj ectionable --
i 10 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Yes.
11 MR. GUILD :
-- as the basis f or your ruling.
12 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
On Page 117, what is the --
13 MR. MILL ER:
They are numbered paragraphs 4-A 14 and 5-A.
15 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
And on 1237 16 MR. MILL ER :
It, I guess, would be the first 17 full paragraph, the one that starts, "I talked to. "
18 MR. GUILD:
Mr. Chairman, on that point, it 19 seems to me that there is only one word in that 20 paragraph that I understand Mr. Miller to take as 21 obj ectionable within the spirit of his request f or 22 protection.
23 I would ask that only that one word be redacted.
24 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
It seems to me that
(')
25 everybody has heard that word a f ew times in yesterday's Sonntag Reporting _ Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2471 O
1 session off the record, so we know which word you are 2
talking about.
3 Now, on Page 124 --
4 MR. MILLER:
It's really the top three lines 5
on that page, sir, not the last sentence.
6 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
And the last sentence ?
7 MR. MILLER:
No.
It's the last sentence of 8
that carry-over paragraph f rom the preceding page.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Okay, fine.
10 Why don' t we excise those f ew portions f rom 117, i
]
11 Paragraphs 4-A and 5-A; on Page 123, the third wor d on 12 Line 11; and on Page 124, the first three lines af ter l
13 the date bef ore we get to Paragraph 5-D.
14 Those will be excised.
15 MR. GUILD:
Mr. Chai rman --
16 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
And those complete pages 17 then, without having anything deleted -- did I say 18
" excised" or " exercised"?
19 (Laughter.)
20 Fi ne.
Mr. Guild.
21 MR. GUILD:
With ref erence to Page 124, I 22 believe the first phrase is the end of a sentence 23 beginning on the preceding page.
24 MR. MILL ER :
Yes, I agree.
It's really the
()
25 sentence that begins with the word "Seltmann" that I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2472
)
+
1 wish to have excised on Page 124 -- or protected.
2 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
In other words, you want to 3
leave the first f our words in there?
4 MR. MILLER :
Yes, "If we f roze wages,"
5 correct.
6 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Okay, fine.
l, 7
Now we will go off the record and see what the 8
mechanics are with the reporter.
9 (There followed a discussion outside the 10 recor d. )
11 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
Back on the record.
12 MR. GUILD:
Can we mark that as 33-A?
O 13 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Okay, we can mark that as 14 33-A.
15 (The document was thereupon marked 16 Int ervenors' Exhibit No. 33-A f or 17 identification as of the 30th day of May, 18 1986.)
19 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Fine.
We will then delete 20 those portions that have just been discussed f rom 21 Int erv enor s' Exhibit 33.
22 We will take those complete pages, Pages 117,123 23 and 124, put them together in another exhibit marked f or 24 identification as Intervenors' Exhibit 33-A; and that
()
25 Exhibit 33-A will be kept in camera, not kept with the Sonntag_ Reporting service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2473
[ ')
v 1
public record.
I believe we have the mechanics f or 2
doing that.
3 At this time we will admit both exhibits, 4
Int erv enor s' Exhibit 33 and Intervenors' Exhibit 33-A, 5
which will be kept under those conditions.
6 (Int ervenor s' Exhibits Nos. 33 and 33-A 7
for identification were thereupon 8
received in evidence as Intervenors' 9
Exhibits Nos. 33 and 33-A. )
10 MR. MILL ER :
The Reporter will take care of 11 all the exorcism?
12 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
Yes, the Reporter will take 13 care of all of that per these instructions.
14 MR. BERRY :
Mr. Chairman, just one f urther 15 point of clarification about the ef f ect of this ruling.
16 We are going to put the pages that we have been 17 discussing in camera, their separate exhibit.
18 Does the ruling extend to prohibiting questions 19 about the subject matters to witnesses other than Mr.
20 Seese?
21 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
No.
We haven' t prohibited 22 any use of this other than to reproduce this exhibit f or 23 the purpose of -- for dissemination to anyone; but you 24 can question on it and you can discuss this.
()
25 MR... ERRY :
Thank you.
B Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l l
l l
2474 l
l O
1 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Now we are back to the --
2 Just a moment.
3 Was there something said on the record?
4 MR. GALLO:
No.
I asked how long he was 5
going to go with Mr. Seese.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN :
Let's go off the record.
7 (There followed a discussion outside the l
8 recor d. )
9 JUDG E G ROSSMAN :
Okay.
We are back on the 10 record.
11 Mr. Guild, did you want to continue or do you want 12 to state what you are going to do now?
O 13 MR. GUILD:
Maybe I could j ust state it and 14 have it stated for the record.
15 CROSS EXAMINATION 16 (Continued) 17 BY MR. GUILD:
18 Q
Mr. Seese, I understand that you have taken steps to 19 identify the Nonconf ormance Report that reflects the 20 updated Quality Control Inspector re-verification 21 program ?
22 A
That's correct.
23 0
Can you j ust state f or the record the status of that 24 effort?
()
25 A
Yes.
I spoke to Mr. DeWald last evening.
He is having Sonntag Reporting Settice, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
f 2475 4 ()
1 it reproduced this morning and is going to try to have 2
it sent here by courier.
)
3 MR. GUILD:
My intention, Mr. Chai rman, at 4
the Board's pleasure, is that I would pass the witness i
j 5
at this point and rely on Exhibits 33 and 33-A as 6
documents in evidence, subj ect to f urther questioning of 7
Mr. Seese on the sole remaining subj ect, which would be j
8 that document when it's available.
l 9
I understand it to be available later in the i
10 mor ning.
11 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Is there any obj ection, Mr.
12 Miller?
13 MR. MILL ER :
Oh, no, sir.
l 14 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Any obj ection, Mr. Berry ?
1 15 MR. BERRY:
No, your Honor.
j l
16 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Okay.
l 17 Mr. Berry, you may proceed with your Cross 18 Examina tion.
I 19 CROSS EXAMINATION 20 BY MR. BERRY:
21 Q
Mr. Seese, I would like to direct your attention to 22 Seese 3, an attachment to your exhibit, your prefiled 23 testimony, and, in particular, the memorandum f rom t
{
24 yourself to Mr. DeWald dated August 28, 1984, which is
()
25 Bates Stamp No. 2032.
I i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
t i
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 1
2476 1
Mr. Seese, what prompted you to write this 2
memor andum?
3 A
The warning that was issued to Mr. Seeders on the 17th.
4 As a result, Mr. Seeders turned in a memo to Mr.
5 DeWald the morning of the 20th.
Mr. DeWald then called 6
Mr. Seltmann, myself and Mr. Saklak together and asked 7
us to document any facts that we know pertaining to the 8
meeting where the warning was issued.
9 So this was a representation of my notes as to what 10 transpired during the meeting with Mr. Seeders on the 11 27 th.
12 0
I notice in the memorandum that you state that you tried O.
13 to contact Mr. Paserba to get his approval prior to 14 issuing the warning to Mr. Seese.
15 Is that customary?
16 A
I wanted to be ca ref ul.
Mr. DeWald was off on one day, 17 and I went in to at least discuss it with one of our 18 corporate people bef ore we stepped into it.
19 It was j ust more a -- there was no reason to compel 20 me to do that, but I j ust f elt having additional 21 management input was something I wanted to do.
22 I didn' t want it to appear that Irv took of f one 23 day and we were j umping in.
I j ust f elt more 24 comfortable if I could have talked with Mr. Paser ba.
] ()
25 It was not necessary.
He wasn' t available.
We Sonntaa Renortina Service. Ltd.
G e5ev a',
11115ois 60134 (312) 232-0262
r 2477 O
1 couldn' t get ahold of him, so we proceeded with what we 2
felt was the correct action.
3 Q
Why didn' t Mr. Saklak issue the warning?
4 A
We wanted to have -- the policy that had been created by 5
Mr. DeWald was that we didn' t want the individual 6
supervisors issuing warnings.
7 We wanted to show that there was additional 8
management attention being given to these matters; and 9
so since Mr. DeWald was off site, it would have been my 10 responsibility to handle this item, so he would through 11 me.
12 Q
Do you know when that policy was ef f ective?
13 A
To the best of my knowledge, it's always been a standing 14 rule with Irv, so that would have been f rom the time he 15 came in August of '83.
16 It was not a corporate policy.
It was j ust an 17 understanding that we have with our manager, that he 18 wanted to be involved and aware of any warnings being 19 issued.
20 0
Why precisely did Mr. Saklak want you to reprimand Mr.
21 Seeders?
22 A
It was a series of events brought to a head this morning 23 by, I guess -- Mr. Saklak had approached Mr. Seeders 24 with some requests, and he f elt that he was being given
()
25 disrespect by Mr. Seeders.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2478 O
1 Q
Did you talk to Mr. Seeders before you issued the 2
reprimand?
3 A
I talked briefly with Mr. Seeders.
4 He had requested that I -- he had given me a series 5
of other names that he wanted me to talk to; and, as a 6
result of Mr. Seeders' r eq uest, I did take the time to 7
talk to the other individuals.
8 0
The warning itself that you issued -- the watning wasn' t 9
issued because of -- for the reason that Mr. Saklak 10 approached you initially, was it?
11 A
No, sir, it wasn' t.
12 From our discussions with the other inspectors, we 13 felt that they did attest that John had worked on his 14 hands that morning, so the warning was issued based not 15 only on that warning but more so on the f act that -- in 16 fact, I think we made it rather clear to him it was 17 because of a general problem that we were having and not 18 just as a result of the morning's incident.
19 Q
Mr. Seese, this is initially Mr. Saklak who approached 20 you and asked you to issue Mr. Seeders a warning f or 21 certain conduct; correct?
22 A
Correct.
23 0
And Mr. Seeders was aware that Mr. Saklak wanted a i
24 warning issued against him for that conduct; is that i ()
25 correct?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2479 O
G 1
A That is correct.
2 In f act, Mr. Saklak wanted a three-day suspension, 3
which is what his recommendation was.
4 0
But ultimately the warning that was issued was f or 5
matters not related to the matter for which the 6
reprimand was initially requested; isn' t that true?
7 A
That is correct.
8 0
Did you give any consideration, you know, as to what l
9 ef f ect that could have on Mr. Seeders' morale and -- I l
10 will be more specific.
11 In a sense, Mr. Saklak brought a charge against Mr.
12 Seeders.
You looked into that charge and you decided 13 not to issue a reprimand f or that, but you issued a l
14 reprimand f or something else.
15 Couldn' t this appear to Mr. Seeders that management 16 was determined to issue a reprimand?
17 A
As the memo that you ref erence f rom August 20th -- as I 18 state in there, that we at the initial out point of the 19 meeting did emphasize to Mr. Seeders that it wasn' t a 20 result of that morning's incident; however, it was a 21 result of that attitude that his situation was 22 wor se ni ng.
23 We tried to stress to John what we wanted to 24 achieve was to have him correct that attitude; we wanted
()
25 him to stay with the company and j ust correct the i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2480 1
attitude problem that we found unacceptable.
2 We made a point -- we tried to make this warning to 3
Mr. Seeders a very positive and not a negative.
We did 4
take into consideration his morale.
5 Q
Let's look at the warning.
That would be Attachment 6
2-C, Seese 3, Bates Stamp No. Pages 2028.
7 On Page 2 of the warning, where you cite the 8
example of the type of conduct, substandard work, for 9
which Mr. Seeders was being reprimand, you cite as one 10 particular that Mr. Seeders used f oul language in a 11 training class that he was giving.
12 A
That's correct.
13 Q
Did Mr. Saklak ever use foul language?
14 A
Yes, he did.
15 Q
Was Mr. Saklak warned or issued a warning f or using f oul 16 language ?
17 A
On occasion he was.
18 Q
Were those warnings -- was it a written warning?
l 19 A
The incident with Franco Rolan was a written warning, l
4 20 yes.
21 Excuse me.
That was more -- it wasn' t really foul 22 language.
It was j ust inappropriate language.
23 Q
The way you use "f oul language" in the document that we 24 are discussing, has Mr. Saklak ever used language that
()
25 you would regard as "f oul" as that term is used in Mr.
Sonntag_ Reporting _Servico, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
n 2481 0
1 Seeders' warning?
2 A
In the case of Mr. Seeders' warning, the f oul language 3
was used in a training class.
4 To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Saklak never used 5
foul 1a: guage in a training class.
6 Q
That wasn' t pr acisely my question.
7 My question was:
Had you ever heard Mr. Saklak use 8
foul language?
l 9
A Cer tainly.
l 10 Q
And was he ever -- was he ever issued a warning f or 11 that?
12 A
No.
'O 13 0
QC Inspectors were aware that Mr. Saklak used f oul 14 language on occasion, weren' t they ?
15 A
Yes.
16 Q
When Mr. Seeders used f oul language, that was, in part, 17 cited as one of the reasons f or reprimand?
18 A
That's correct.
19 Q
Did you give any consideration to what eff ect that cou1d 20 have on the morale of the inspector work f orce?
21 MR. MILLER:
Your Honor, I am going to 22 obj ect.
23 I don't know that the morale of the inspector work 24 force is really in issue here.
The issue is harassment O
25
-- or a11eged harassment and intimidation.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois (0134 (312) 232-0262
2482 l
l
(}
l l
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Well, it's more than that.
l 2
That's part of what has some relevance, but Mr. Ber ry 's l
3 questions are going to the diff erence in treatment l
4 between Mr. Seeders and Mr. Saklak f or comparable 5
of f enses.
l 6
Is that correct, Mr. Berry ?
l 7
MR. BERRY:
Yes, it is, your Honor.
l 8
JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Okay.
Proceed.
9 Was there a pending question?
1 10 MR. BERRY:
No.
I belie /e the witness l
11 answered.
l 12 (The question was thereupon read by the 13 Reporter.)
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Yes, there is a pending 15 question, Mr. Seese.
j Could you answer it, pl ease ?
16 17 A
No, I did not, be ca use, in my estimation, the use of 18 foul language in a training -- from a man conducting the 19 training class was a serious off ense.
20 Mr. Seeders was conducting the training class in 21 question, and I f elt that the person giving the training 22 conducting himself in that manner in the training class 23 just did not show proper attention to the training that 24 was being given.
()
25 It was j ust an attitude that we didn' t encourage, Sonntag_ Reporting _ service, _ Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2483 O
1 support or accept.
2 BY MR. BERRY:
3 Q
Be more specific.
[
4 What was the foul language?
Did Mr. Seeders just 5
swear?
6 A
The inf ormation I was given was that he used foul 7
language.
I f ollowed Mr. Saklak's complaint up by 8
talking with our Training Coordinator, Jef f Dominic, and 9
Mr. Dominic's words were f oul language.
The exact words I can' t testify to, Mr. ' Berry.
10 11 0
You did not observe the incident; is that correct?
12 A
No, sir, I did not.
13 0
Who did you rely on the basis of -- as the source for 14 this inf ormation?
15 A
The source for my inf ormation was Mr. Sakl ak, the 16 supervisor, who was present; and Mr. Jef f Dominic, the 17 Training Coordinator, who was also present.
18 Q
When did Mr. Saklak bring this to your attention, this 19 particular incident?
20 A
The first that I was made aware of it was the warning on 21 the 17th of August when we were -- when Rick presented 22 this warning.
23 0
You didn' t know and Mr. Saklak had never brought this 24 incident to your attention until the day that he was
()
25 asking you to reprimand Mr. Seeders f or this other Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 1111noic 60134 (312) 232-0262
2484 1
matter that you subsequently did not issue the reprimand 2
for?
3 A
That is correct.
4 0
You also cite as an example Mr. Seeders' poor conduct, 5
stipulation; that at a lead meeting held on August 7, 6
1984, L.
Phillips stipulated that Mr. -- that his 7
directives to Mr. Seeders were not being f ollowed; he 8
was having a hard time motivating John.
9 A
Yes, sir.
That inf ormation was conveyed to me by Mr.
10 Sakl ak.
11 Q
Did you discuss this with Mr. Phillips?
12 A
I can' t find any record that I did talk to Mr. Phillips, 13 so I would have to say no at this time, Mr. Berry.
14 0
Did you ask Mr. Seeders his side of this story?
15 A
Yes.
At one point in the day before we issued the 16 warning, I briefly spoke with John, and at that point he 17 gave me some names that he wanted me to talk to.
18 As f ar as the exact reading of the warning and all 19 of the items, that was discussed with John at the time 20 we issued the warning that af ternoon; no prior 21 discussion.
22 Q
Per haps I' m not being clear, and I apologize.
23 Did you ask Mr. Seeders if he was f ollowing Mr.
24 Phillips' directives?
()
25 A
Okay.
Maybe this would answer your question more Sonntilg_ Reporting _ service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
~
2485
(
1 cl early.
2 We read each of these charges to Mr. Seeders and 3
gave him an opportunity to respond at the time of the 4
warni ng.
5 I had no prior discussion with John on this item,
.C though.
He would not have had a prior opportunity to 7
give comment.
It was only at the time the warning was 8
being issued that we. solicited his comment.
9
'O Another, cxample you cite in the warning is during the 10 discussion with Mr. Saklak and Mr. Seltmann, that Mr.
11 Seeders " denied knowing anything about the full scope of 12 g-wot,k that needed to be done. "
V) 13
" Full scope of work" -- which work items are we 14 talking about -- or are you talking about there?
15 A
That would be'in relationship to the research of the I
16 calibration file listed above.
~
17 Q
And I take it Mr. Seeders indicated to you that he 18' didn' t know that he was to do a 100 percent inspection?
19 A
As I recall at this time of the warning, John had no 20 comment on that specific item.
His comments that he did
$1 make were at 'the end and were more of a generic nature.
22 He didn' t respond to the specific items, so John 23 would have made no statement about not understanding the 24 100 percent.
()
25 0
When you say, " John denied knowing anything about the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312),
23220262 l
~
\\
2486
)
O 1
full scope of work that.needed to be done," what is the 2
basis f or that statement?
3 A
Okay.
That statement ref ers to during the -- he had 4
been given an assignment; and during the discussion with 5
Saklak and Seltmann, he then came back and denied 6
knowing what the full scope of the assignment was.
7 This is not a, documentation of Mr. Seeders' 8
comments at the time of the meeting.
This is part of 9
the j ustification f or the warning, that even though Mr.
l 10 Seltmann and Mr. Saklak f elt they explained the I
11 situation to him, Mr. Seeders at that time denied i
12 knowing the full scope.
So this is part of the warning 13 and not John's comments.
14 His comments are documented in my memo of August 15 20th that you talked about first.
16 Q
In the next paragraph, the last sentence in the 17 paragraph says, " John proceeded to comment in a negative i
18 direction to R.
Saklak and other inspectors in the 19 room."
20 What was the basis f or your inf ormation expressed 21 in that comment? Who told you about that?
22 A
The discussion was something that I also observed as f ar 1
23 as his comments on working the Saturday.
24 There is another exhibit with my testimony that is O
25 a memo that was written by John Seeders that has a Snnntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2487 O
V 1
comment on f rom Mr. Saklak and also has a comment on 2
from myself.
3 0
And the --
4 A
John disagreed with Saklak's decision not to have him 5
work on Saturday, and what he did was post this memo 6
around the office.
7 He would direct people's attention, say ing, "Look, 8
ny supervisor won' t let me work," which is type of a 9
negative approach.
10 0
Is that what you mean by " commenting in a negative 11 direction"?
12 A
That's cor rect.
O 13 0
Discussing that overtime, Mr. Saklak's denial of Mr.
14 Seeders' request f or overtime, what was the practice in 15 August of 1984?
16 Did the QC Inspectors have to request in writing 17 permission to work on. Saturday?
18 A
No, sir.
19 Normally, the supervisor of that area would know 20 what overtime was needed, and he would turn in a request 21
- that, "I need Inspector A to do this, Inspector B to do 22 that."
23 Tip only time that request would be made is if an 24 inspector is not scheduled and he wanted to work, he may
()
25 ask the supervisor, "Is there another area that I could l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2488 O
1 be assigned?"
2 Q
Wasn' t Mr. Seeders working -- still working on the 3
calibration record review at this time?
4 A
Mr. Berry, I couldn' t say with certainty whether he was 5
or not.
6 0
Is that your recollection today or at the time did you 7
know whether he was or not, at the time of the 8
reprimand?
9 A
At the time of the reprimand, I relied on Mr. Seltmann 10 and Mr. Saklak, because they were much closer to that 11 situa tion.
12 So I discussed that portion of the warning with O
13 them and I relied on their judgment, because it was, 14 frankly -- Rick is a supervisor of Mr. Seeders, and Bob 15 is the one who would have been handling the audit 16 response.
It was their area of responsibility.
17 0
If Mr. Saklak were still assigned to complete the 18 calibration records review -- excuse me; Mr. Seeders 19 were assigned to still work on the calibration records 20 review, wouldn' t that be a reason -- wouldn' t-that be 21 suf ficient reason to-work overtime?
22 A
Yes.
I would think if there was a deadline, Mr. Seeders 23 could have worked overtime on that, yes.
24 Q
Mr. Saklak was aware of Mr. Seeders' assignment on the
()
25 calibration records review proj ect, wasn' t he?
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2489 O
1 A
He would have had to have been, yes.
2 Q
So if Mr. Seeders asked Mr. Saklak f or permission to 3
work overtime and Mr. Saklak requested him to put it in 4
writing, the j ustification f or it, would it not be 5
unreasonable for Mr. Seeders to f eel that Mr. Saklak was 6
unnecessarily putting him through the paces?
7 A
If the two had an understanding of that, yes, I could 8
understand the feeling.
9 But, Mr. Ber ry, the memo that we are discussing was 10 merely a request by Saklak to "tell me what you want to 11 do"; and I would think that if Mr. Seeders had that 12 work, the easiest thing to do would have been to 13 respo nd, "Her e is what I want to do. "
14 Instead, what he did was bring the memo in to me 15 and said, "Her e is what the supervisor said.
Do you 16 agree with it?
I want your answer in writing. "
17 What I did on the 16th, which was prior even to the 18 warning, " Read Mr. Saklak's request and j ust tell him 19 what you would work on";' and I f elt the supervisor had 20 every right to ask a man what he would work on on 21 overtime on Saturday.
22 Based on that, I did concur.
23 Q
Mr. Seese, if we concur that Mr. Seeders was still 24 continuing his work on the calibration records review,
()
25 that Mr. Saklak was aware that he was working -- that he Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2490 0
1 was assigned to this proj ect, and I believe other 2
witnesses have testified that a response was due to 3
Commonwealth Edison the following week, August the 24 th, 4
and Mr. Seeders asked Mr. Saklak f or permission to work 5
overtime, would it not be unreasonable for Mr. Seeders 6
to assume that Mr. Saklak knew the reason wry he wanted 7
to work overtime and now the request to put it in 8
writing was an unnecessary hassle that Mr. Saklak was 9
putting Mr. Seeders through?
10 A
Yes, he could assume that, yes.
11 0
Would he have been unreasonable in making that 12 assumption if all the f acts that I have recounted to you O
13 are correct?
14 A
No, I would not think so.
15 Q
When the r equest f or overtime was denied, that was af ter 16 the warning had been issued?
17 A
No, sir.
That was prior.
That was on the 16 th.
The 18
. warning was issued on the 17th.
19 0
Mr. Seese, are you f amiliar with the circumstances 20 leading to the revocation of Mr. Martin's welding 21 certifica tion?
22 A
I was not at Braidwood, but I am aware of the 23 ci rcumstances, yes.
24 0
Was Mr. Martin fired?
()
25 A
No, sir.
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2491 1
Q He was assigned to the vault?
2 A
That's correct.
3 0
Is that, in essence,' a demotion of sorts?
4 A
No, sir.
5 He had salary, title -- all that stays the same, 6
and it was work that we had to get done; so no, it would 7
not be considered a demotion.
8 0
Well, if his certifications hadn' t been withdrawn, would 9
he have been assigned to record clerk in the vault?
10 A
It wasn' t merely a clerical assignment.
It was work 11 that had to be done.
12 But I could not say that Rick would have been 7-)
U 13 assigned.
Somebody would have had to do that work among 14 the inspection work.
15 0
And Mr. Martin was assigned only because he was unable 16 or not permitted to perf orm inspections in the field; 17 isn' t that correct?
18 A
That is correct.
19 Q
Did you ever consider the ef f ect on Mr. Martin's morale 20 of this change in his duties?
21 A
As I said, I wasn' t there when it initially happened, 22 but I did come to Braidwood.
That was under my scope.
23 Mr. Martin did work with me.
24 On several occasions I did stress to him the
()
25 importance of this work and why we needed him to do it, Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2492 O
1 trying to help his morale.
2 Q
Mr. Seeders was transf erred out of the Calibration 3
Department ?
4 A
Yes, sir.
5 Q
Wasn' t this also, in a sense, a demotion?
6 A
The -- as I understand -- I was not at the meeting where 7
it was presented to John where he was going.
But it was 8
at an equal salary to the Engineering Department and the 9
work on RWR's is an important assignment within the 10 Engineering Department, so I wouldn' t characteriz e it as 11 a demotion.
12 Q
You also wouldn' t characteriz e it as a promotion, would 13 you?
14 A
No, si r.
15 0
In fact, Mr. Seeders had a choice:
he could either 16 accept this transf er or be terminated; isn' t that true?
17 A
That's correct.
18 Q
Do you know if any consideration was given to the ef f ect 19 on Mr. Seeders' morale by -- as a consequence of the 20 change in his duties f rom calibration inspector in the 21 QC Department to an engineering clerk?
22 MR. MILL ER :
Your Honor, again, I will 23 interpose an obj ection to the question.
24 Whether it had to do with morale as opposed to
()
25 harassment and intimidation as to the ef fect on work Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinoic 60134 (312) 232-0262
2493 O
1 practices or the effect on work practices of others I 2
think is simply irrelevant.
3 MR. BERRY:
Your Honor.
4 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Yes.
5 MR. BERRY :
I believe in the witness's 6
testimony in connection with Mr. Puckett -- in 7
connection with Mr. Puckett, the witness has testified 8
that the reason Mr. Puckett wasn' t off ered a Level II 9
position was because it's a demotion and the consequent 10 decrease in salary would have such an effect on his 11 morale that it would af f ect his work and, conseq uently,
12 the decision was made not to off er him the position.
13 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Overr uled.
Continue.
14 Is the question pending?
15 MR. MILL ER :
Yes.
16 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
Please answer that, Mr.
17 Seese.
18 A
The decision to off er John a j ob in Engineering I think 19 was a consideration in itself as opposed to termination, 20 Mr. Berry.
21 No, we did not say, " Sending John to Engineering --
22 how is that going to af fect his morale," no.
23 BY MR. BERRY:
24 Q
I believe Mr. Worthington -- he was also demoted, wasn' t
()
25 he, f rom the existing QC Manager to a QC supervisor?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2494 1
A That is correct.
2 Q
Did you consider the effect of that demotion on his 3
morale?
4 A
I was on vacation when that entire change transpired, so 5
I was not involved with any of those discussions.
6 Q
Do you know it anyone from Comstock considered the 7
effect of a demotion on the morale of Mr. Worthington?
8 A
No, sir, I couldn't testify to that.
9 I don't know of any.
10 Q
Mr. DeWald, his responsibilities have been diminished 11 somewhat, also, haven't they?
-)
There has been a change in the organization, yes.
32 A
V 13 Q
He doesn't have as much responsibility as he had before 14 that change, does he?
15 A
No.
16 Q
Do you think anybody has ever considered the effect on 17 his morale of the change in his responsibilities?
18 A
I was not aware.
I am not in any meetings where-anybody 19 brought that up; but I think the reasons for the change 20 was explained to everybody, that it was just the point 21 in the job we had reached.
We had reached the turnover 22 stage, we had reached licensing concerns, where Bob 23 Seltmann had more prior knowledge and so we reached a 24 point in the job where it was logical to put a QA j
()
25 Manager in over the QC Manager.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2495 O
1 Irv still maintains responsibility for the QC 2
organization.
3 0
Well, Mr. Seese, why then was the effect on Mr.
4 Puckett's morale so important?
5 A
The part of your testimony -- err, my testimony that you 6
are referring to -- the only involvement that.I had with 7
Mr. Puckett's termination was the morning of the 8
te rmination.
9 I was called to Mr. DeWald's office.
At that point 10 I was told there were two options being considered.
One 11 was termination; the second was to downgrade Mr. Puckett 12 f rom a Level 3 at a rate of $18.00 an hour, to a Level 2 13 at the rate of $12 an hour.
14 My comment was that such a change -- such a drastic 15 change -- in both title and in salary would create a 16 very negative effect on Mr. Puckett; and I didn't feel 17 he could contribute fully to the organization.
18 That was the whole basis for my opinion.
Whether 19 that was what -- whether that was given any 20 consideration in the decision to terminate Mr. Puckett, 21 I don't know.
It was merely my opinion of the 22 situation.
23 O
And you expressed that opinion to Mr. DeWald?
24 A
Yes, I did.
()
25 Q
I believe Mr. DeWald has testified that Mr. Puckett Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2496 O
1 wasn't offered the Level 2 position for precisely the 2
reasons you just stated.
3 Do you know how much Mr. Puckett had -- do you know 4
what Mr. Puckett's previous salary was at the job that 5
he had before he came to work for Comstock?
6 A
No, sir, I did not.
7 Q
How much was he making at Comstock?
8 A
$18.00 per hour.
9 Q
Would you accept my statement that Mr. Puckett was --
10
$18.00 was the -- strike that.
Let me begin again, 11 please.
12
$18.00 per hour projected over a year is roughly 13 about $35,000; does that sound correct?
14 A
That's correct; and he would have the option of 15 time-and-a-half for his overtime, yes, sir.
16 Q
Are you aware that Mr. Puckett was making over $40,000 a 17 year in his previous position?
18 A
No, I wasn't.
19 Q
I understand it's your belief that Mr. Puckett's work 20 performance could be affected by the demotion.
21 Did you suggest to Mr. DeWald that he, at least, 22 ask Mr. Puckett whether he would be willing to accept a 23 demotion?
24 A
No, sir, I did not.
()
25 Q
Did you know that Mr. Puckett had discussed a number of Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2497 O
1 his concerns -- and by " concerns" I mean some of the 2
concerns expressed in his August 22nd memo -- to other 3
QC Inspectors at the site?
4 No, sir, I was not aware of that.
5 Q
Do you know if Mr. DeWald knew that?
6 A
No, sir, I couldn't testify to that.
J 7
0 If you had known that Mr. Puckett had communicated some 8
of his concerns, including, you know, his concern that 9
work on the A-446 to A-36 welding should be stopped, if 10 he communicated that to other QC Inspectors, would that 11 have affected your recommendation not to offer him the g
12 option of a Level 2 position?
U 13 A
No, sir, that would have had no bearing.
14 0
You wouldn't have given any consideration as to the 15 perception on the QC work force, you know, of Mr.
16 Puckett's departure or any connection in their mind 17 between his departure and his concerns?
18 A
No.
My recommendation was strictly based on the fact 19 that a decision was made to either do Option A, 20 terminate, or, B, offer the reduction; and my comments 21 were based strictly on that knowledge.
22 MR. BERRY:
Mr. Chairman, can I ask for a 23 recess?
24 Now is an appropriate time for a five-minute break.
()
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
That's fine.
Why don't we Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2498 h
1 take a ten-minute recess.
4 2
(WHEREUPON a recess was had, af ter which 3
the proceedings resumed as follows:)
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Back on the record.
5 BY MR. BERRY:
6 Q
Mr. Seese, your testimony is that you began or started 7
keeping the status records, the weekly status reports, 8
in May of 1984?
9 A
That is correct.
10 0
The QC work force, did they know in May of 1984 that you 11 were maintaining these status reports?
12 A
There was a -- when a decision was made to add the extra 13 QC Manager or Assistant QC Manager, there was a general 14 meeting with the work force and it was explained to them
~
15 what my new role was going to be, which included the 16 status keeping, yes.
17 Q
In your testimony you state that in October, October of 18 1984, you began posting the reports on the bulletin 19 board?
20 A
That is correct.
21-Q What prompted that?
22 A
We had used a similar tracking system while I was a QC 23 supervisor at the Perry site; and from the beginning of 24 the backlog project that we had there, we posted the O
25 caeres.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2499 O
%J l
We had great success in making the inspectors 2
feeling part of, "Here is our goal, here is why we need 3
to reach it," and it had a real positive effect on 4
morale by letting them see what we were tracking, 5
letting them see their progress, letting them see the 6
goals were realistic for them to achieve; and it really 7
became -- instead of a management effort to get a 8
project done, it became a group team ef fort.
It had a 9
real positive effect.
10 We were hoping for the same results here at 11 Braidwood.
12 In addition, some of the inspectors had expressed iO 13 concerns as to what was in the status report, that it 14 was pinpointing individual productivity; and we felt by 15 posting it on the bulletin board it would be open for 16 everyone to see that no names were there, it was 17 tracking discipline or group progress.
18 Q
You had another meeting with the work force to explain 19 or to reaffirm to them the purpose of the status report 20 was not to track individual production?
21 A
Yes, sir, every Friday.
In 90 percent of the cases, I 22 would say, anyway, we had general meetings with the QC 23 Inspectors.
24 During those meetings we went over changes, pending
(')
25 sodits, anything of that type; and one of the -- usually Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2500 1
I had a point to comment in the meeting and I would 2
explain, "Here is what we are doing.
We are putting it 3
on the bulletin board for you."
4 So, yes, they were made aware of it.
5 0
In light of the fact that six months later the number of 6
QC Inspectors complained to the NRC that these status 7
reports were being used to track the individual 8
production, do you think that you were effective in 9
communicating the purposes of these reports to the 10 inspectors back in October?
11 A
Quite hone.stly, I believe the majority of the complaints 12 in March about the status reports were related to the 13 Union negotiating, organizing effort and that certain 14 individuals were looking for reasons to criticize 15 management.
16 I felt that the inspectors understood what the 17 reports were for, but they had their reasons for trying 18 to say they didn't.
19 I think it was real clear to the inspectors what we 20 were doing with it.
21 Q
Do you recall, Mr. Seese -- I believe you testified 22 yesterday that -- strike that.
23 Are you familiar with Mr. Herschel Stout?
24 A
Yes, sir, I am.
()
25 Q
And he was reprimanded for excessive absenteeism and Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2501 O
1 poor work performance?
2 A
That's correct.
3 Q
I believe in that, in his reprimand, it indicated that 4
he had only performed.1.58 inspections per day; is that 5
correct?
6 A
That's correct.
7 Q
Do you know how that number was computed?
8 A
Yes, sir.
I reviewed that warning and found the basis 9
for those computations were the status report turned in 10 by Mr. Stout himself on a daily basis to Mr. Saklak.
11 Q
And it was these status reports that inspectors like Mr.
12 Stout would turn in, were forwarded to their leads, 13 which were then passed on to the supervisor and then 14 passed on to you to compile your status report; is that 15 correct?
16 A
The --
17 Q
And that is the sequence, wasn't it?
18 A
Yes.
The lead would take the individual inspector's 19 status report, he would attach a summary report; and I 20 based my reports on the lead's summary report.
21 Q
The question to you -- I am sorry.
22 Did you complete your answer?
23 A
On those, some of the leads didn't give me the 24 individual reports.
()
25 On those cases where I did get them, I did maintain Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2502 0
1 them on file; but my primary interest, Mr. Berry, was in 2
the summary report for that group.
3 Q
When Mr. Saklak was --
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Mr. Seese, please don't go 5
beyond what the question asks you.
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q
Mr. Seese, Mr. Stout's reprimand includes in that 8
package, does it not, status reports, Mr. Stout's status 9
reports?
10 A
Yes, it does.
11 Q
And those status reports were, in part, the basis for 12 the reprimand he received, wasn't it?
gs d
13 A
That's correct.
14 Q
These were the same status reports that you would rely, 15 in part, on in completing and compiling your status 16 report, wasn't it?
17 A
Yes.
18 Q
And that was the same status report that you had 19 indicated to the QC Inspectors would not be used to 20 measure their individual production, wasn't it?
21 A
I was representing to the inspectors that my status 22 reports were not being used for any quotas.
23 0
Well, did you also represent to them that -- I mean, you 24 are -- as a member of management, did you also represent
()
25 to them that QC supervisors' status reports wouldn't be Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2503
(~h V
1 used to track individual production?
2 A
Yes, sir; and to the best of my knowledge, they weren't 3
being used.
4 Q
So when Mr. Stout -- well, Mr. Stout was reprimanded.
5 He sees his reprimand, and the status reports that 6
he has been filling out, that he has been assured aren't 7
being used to track individual production, now find 8
themselves in his reprimand.
9 Is it unreasonable for him to think, "Well, these 10 status reports are being used to track production"?
11 A
No, sir, no, sir.
12 Q
No, it's not unreasonable for him to think that?
gg O
13 A
That's correct, it would not be unreasonable.
14 Q
Do you know if Mr. Stout communicated with other QC 15 Inspectors at Braidwood about his reprimand?
16 A
No, sir, I do not know that.
17 0
If he had communicated, if he had told other inspectors 18 that status reports were being used to track individual 19 production, because the reprimand he received included i
20 that, and based on that information, in part, the 21 inspectors went to the'NRC, do you still say that or 22 it's still your testimony that it was because of the 23 Union and they didn't have a reasonable basis for 24 believing that the status reports were, in part, being
()
25 used to track production?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2504 r3U 1
A I can understand, Mr. Berry, their confusion and where 2
they might get that impression, yes.
3 When I speak of the status reports, I am speaking 4
to the reports I issued.
5 I was not aware that the status reports were 6
attached to Mr. Stout's warning until I was into 7
preparing my testimony, and that mention come up when I 8
went and pulled the warning.
It was at that time that I 9
saw the status reports attached.
10 0
Well, after -- and this was in March.
I believe Mr.
11 Stout's reprimand was March 18, 1985; correct?
12 A
I could not testify to the date.
13 Q
Fine.
It was prior to the time that the NRC inspectors 14 complained -- strike that -- that the Comstock 15 inspectors complained to the NRC, wasn't it?
16 A
I really don't know the date; but -- I couldn't testify 17 on that, no.
18 MR. BERRY:
Off the record.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Yes, let'c go off the i
20 record, Mr. Berry.
21 (There followed a discussion outside the 22 record.)
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Back on the record.
24 Mr. Berry, if you wish to show the witness a
()
25 document, please do so.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
= - - _.
2505
(
l BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q
Mr. Seese, I place before you a document as Attachment 3
2-C, DeWald 4, attachment to Mr. DeWald's testimony, and 4
it's entitled, " Engineering Employee Warning Record, 5
Comstock Engineering, Incorporated."
6 Could you peruse that document and confirm for us i
7 or not if this is the same document, the reprimand that i
8 we have been discussing?
9 A
Yes, sir, it is.
10 Q
What is the date on that document?
j 11 A
3-19-85.
12 Q
And.that, in fact, preceded the inspectors' -- the L. K.
13 Comstock inspectors' -- visit to the NRC on March 29th, 14 did it not?
15 A
Yes, sir, it did.
16 Q
Look at the last question, quality control, the Quality 17 First investigation.
18 Investigators that examined some of the 19 allegations, concerns of the Comstock's QC Inspectors, l
j 20 they looked into this concern of production pressure and 21 the use of status reports, did they not?
22 A
Yes, sir, they did.
23 Q
They made a recommendation to Comstock on this subject, 24 also, did they not?
()
25 A
Yes, they did, i
Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2506
/ w)
\\.
1 MR. BERRY:
If counsel could provide the 2
witness a copy of Intervenor Exhibit 22.
3 BY MR. BERRY:
4 0
I would direct your attention to Page 2 of Intervenors' 5
Exhibit 22 toward the latter part of the page, 6
Recommendation No. 6.
7 This appeard to reflect a recommendation from 8
Quality First that -- I will read it.
"Its quality 9
control management" -- and that is LKC Comstock 10 management -
"should identify methods for better 11 communication between LKC management and QC Inspectors.
12 As an example, the purpose of the daily status report 13 has, apparently, not been properly communicated."
14 Do you agree with that observation?
15 A
No, sir, I felt we were explaining what it was being 16 used for.
17 Q
Further, "An inspector should be made aware what the 18 report is tracking," and it goes on and describes the
-19 purpose of the report.
20 Did you adopt that recommendation?
21 A
Yes, we did, sir.
22 Q
How did you implement that recommendation?
23 A
We had training meetings with the inspectors who were 24 already on site and we also incorporated a discussion of
()
25 the status report as part of the QA lecture given to all Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2507 C&
1 new employees.
We would actually show them copies of 2
the report, what the charts were used for.
3 So we trained the old employees and also made it a 4
part of training for all new employees coming in.
5 0
When was that training?
6 A
I don't have the training --
7 O
Strike that.
8 When was the initial meeting held?
9 A
I don't have the training records, but I would --
10 0
I am sorry.
I thought I understood that you had them 11 there at-the meeting, another meeting with the QC 12 Inspectors, to explain, to reaf firm or re-explain the 13 purpose of the status reports.
14 A
But there was a training class specifically as a result 15 of this recommendation.
16 I don't have the exact dates, but it would have 17 been very shortly af ter the letter came f rom Mr.
18 Shamblin.
19 0
Well, since that time and subsequent to the training 20 class, have you received any other complaints regarding 21 the use of the status reports as a vehicle for tracking j
22 production or any concern that it's being used in a 23 manner other than explained in Paragraph 6 of Intervenor 24 Exhibit 227
()
25 A
No, sir, I have not.
i Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
1 Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2508 1
Q Recommendation 7, " Quality control management should 2
review the need for new personal skills training, QC 3
management supervisors."
4 Has that recommendation been implemented?
5 A
Yes, sir, it has.
6 Q
Would you describe for us how it was implemented?
7 A
Yes, sir.
Commonwealth Edison established a training 8
class.
They brought an inspector in; and it was a 9
five-day training class where half of the management 10 team, both QC, Engineering and Construction attended a 11 morning session.
The other half would attend an 12 afternoon session, and it lasted for five days.
13 Q
Mr. Saklak never got to take that course, did he?
14 A
No, sir.
15 Q
Do you think he would have benefited from that course?
16 A
I think we all benefited.
It was a well-conducted 17 course.
18 Certainly, he would have, also.
19 MR. BERRY:
Thank you.
That is all.
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
By the way, Mr. Guild, did 21 you have access to the original of Intervenors' Exhibit 22 33, so that you could examine what was expurgated in the 23 version that we have here?
24 MR. GUILD:
I did not.
()
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Oh, you did not?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2509 O
1 MR. GUILD:
No.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
So you don't know whether 3
any of the portions that are blanked out are relevant to 4
this proceeding?
5 MR. GUILD:
I do not.
6 MR. MILLER:
Your Honor, if there is some 7
question in the Board's mind, we would be happy to make 8
the original document available to the Board.
9 I represent to the Board that the items that were 10 taken out relate to activities totally removed from 11 Braidwood or in which there was privileged -- what would 12 be privileged -- communications between Mr. Seese and s
13 Comstock counsel, that is a recordation of those sorts 14 of meetings; and there may have been one or two that 15 involved wholly personal matters with respect to Mr.
16 Seese, having, again, nothing to do with Braidwood.
17 But if the Board wishes to examine it, we would 18 certainly make it available.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
I prefer you maybe offered 20 to allow Mr. Guild and Mr. Berry or Mr. Treby to look at 21 that.
22 MR. MILLER:
If I do that, to the extent that 23 they are privileged communications, I have waived the 24 privilege on behalf of Comstock.
()
25 I am not Comstock's counsel and I can't do that.
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2510 1
MR. GUILD:
Well, Mr. Chairman, Page 146 2
appears to be an example of the latter class of 3
information, just from the preceding text.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
An example of what, Mr.
5 Guild?
6 It looks to me as though it discusses a training 7
session, which could not --
8 MR. GUILD:
" Training session, Tom Trumble, 9
manager, administration, Glenn Smith, complaint," et 10 cetera.
11 Mr. Smith, apparently, is the lawyer for Comstock.
12 From the context it appears to follow directly on the 13 heels of the 3-29 complaints by the 24 inspectors to the 14 NRC.
Mr. Smith, I am informed, is a lawyer for 15 bomstock.
16 Now, I don't know what -- I can't say that Mr.
17 Miller hasn't asserted a privileged ground for this 18 excerpt -- this deletion on an informal basis.
I know 19 it's not been identified.
There has been no objection 20 on the privilege as to this portion.
21 But from the context I can't say that it's not,
22 relevant and I can't say, frankly, that it's privileged, 23 given the fact that it's Mr. Seese's record of the 24 conversation.
It's not the lawyer's record of what was
()
25 said to a client or a lawyer's work product.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 2511 1
MR. MILLER:
I don't assert a work ~ product 2
privilege.
I believe -- and I don't have a perfect 3
4 recollection of each of the passages that were redacted.
5 I believe that the ones which were redacted because 6
of privilege involved Mr. Seese's notes where either i
7 legal advice was sought or received and he recorded it.
i 8
He is the Assistant QC Managek at the level where 4.
the advice was being given.
He was, certainly, the 9
10 client; and it was on that basis that the material was 11 withheld.
12 As I say, I am perfectly happy to submit our 13 judgment as to the existence of attorney-client 14 privilege for the-Board to review.
We will go on and we 15 will make it available to Mr. Guild and Mr. Treby.
16 But I don't believe that I can just waive the 17 privilege on behalf of Comstock -- certainly, they are 18 not my client -- without a ruling by the Board that the 19 privilege has somehow been claimed improperly.
20 I must say that Mr. Guild up until just now has t
21 really never questioned the basis on which those items 22 were expurgated.
I 23 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
How does the Staff feel 24 about that, Mr. Berry or Mr. Treby?
) ()
25 MR. TREBY:
We have accepted the Applicant's i
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2512 O
1 representation that these were matters as he has 2
described them and have not sought to see that excluded 3
material.
4 With regard to his other comment, that if the Board 5
wishes to look at it, then decide itself whether or not I
i 6
they were properly deleted, it's been my experience that 7
that procedure has been used in the past.
8 For example, in a proceeding involving the proposed 9
Baley site a number of years ago, there was some 10 question about deletions of documents and they were 11 provided to the Board when there was a dispute amongst 7-12 the parties.
V) 13 I am not clear -- it's not clear to me that, in 14 fact, there is a dispute amongst the parties.
[
15 From the staff's side, we have not requested to see 16 this deleted material, so there is no dispute with us.
17 It's unclear to me whether Mr. Guild is seeking to 18 see that material or not.
19 MR. GUILD:
I think that as to the portions 20 that are certainly non-Braidwood related, I certainly 21 will accept counsel's representations as to those facts.
22 As to the latter class of information, it really 23 does call for a judgment and not simply a question of 24 fact.
It's not a question of Mr. Miller'n factual z
()
25 representation, it's a question of judgment.
Sonntaq Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2513 i
1 I was responding to the Board question about 2
, whether o'r not I had seen all of those and I hadn't.
~
3 Whether it's relevant I can't say.
It would
\\
4 tcertainly suit this party to have th'ose matters that are 5'
claimed to be privileged submitted to the Board for
~
6 Board perusal.
7'i It is ibis party's desire that the document be J
8' available in complete form to the Board.
As stated, we 9
believe that the context is critical to understanding 10 the specific entries that are contained in that l
11; document.
12 So I would ask that the Board examine the portions l
13 that are claimed to be withheld on the grounds of 1
14 privilege.
t 15 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Well, I raise the topic, and l
l 16 I know the adage, " Fools rushing in where angels fear to l
17 tread," so I am a little hesitant to do that.
I t
18 It appears, on the other hand, that no party would l
l 19 feel prejudiced if I did see that; but I don't think we 20 will decide at this point that we do want to see that.
21' I was hopeful that the discussion would result in 22 an offer by Mr. Miller to let the other attorneys see 23 it, if:that wculd not be considered a waiver of 24 privilege; and we are willing to make such a ruling, so l
h 25 it's possible for the parties to get togeth'er on that; Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l
,f
~ Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) - 232-0262
2514 O
1 but we are not going to go any further on that now.
2 MR. GUILD:
Mr. Chairman, if it's possible 3
for a party who would have no interest otherwise to have 4
the material produced to state for the record that I 5
would not treat such a disclosure as a waiver of 6
privilege on the part of the party or the client or Mr.
7 Smith, the attorney who is not present with us, and 8
would maintain in confidence the information that is 9
contained in there, if that would cure the problem of 10 disclosure to counsel, I would be more than happy to 11 make that stipulation.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
I take it, Mr. Treby, you 13 would be willing to make that stipulation, too; is that 14 correct?
15 MR. TREBY:
Yes, sir.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
We are not taking any 17 action.
The Board isn't taking any action on that now; 18 and, hopefully, the parties will reach some agreement on 19 it.
f 20 MR. GALLO:
Judge Grossman, for the record, I 21 am not sure that, despite the stipulation, the waiver 22 wouldn't occur by operation of law, nonetheless; so I 23 don't think the stipulation is useful.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
You mean if the -- well, I
()
25 am assuming that if the parties informally were to agree Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
4 2515 O
1 on this and we would issue an order compelling such a 2
limited disclosure, I can't see how there could be any 3
waiver on that.
4 MR. GALLO:
I don't think it would be 5
effective as to third parties, your Honor.
6 I think the waiver -- the Board order, the 7
stipulation, would not be effective as to third parties 8
who might claim for other reasons that the privilege had 9
been waived in this proceeding.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
If you are compelled to do 11 this under a Board order?
I don't see that personally.
12 I don't believe that that could be the rule anywhere.
p3
\\/
13 MR. GALLO:
I believe it would if we 14 acquiesced in the position, yes.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
If you acquiesced to that.
16 MR. MILLER:
In any event, there is some 17 difficulty, in that our firm, Isham, Lincoln & Beale, 18 does not represent Comstock.
19 I asserted the privilege on behalf of Comstock 20 after talking with its counsel and I really would have 21 to get back to Mr. Smith; and, pe rhaps, he -- it may be 22 that he doesn't feel strongly about this and would be 23 willing to simply waive the privilege; but that was not 24 his position raised, and I must communicate with him in O
25 any event.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2516 O
V 1
MR. GUILD:
Mr. Chairman, might I just ask if 2
I am correct when I identified Page 146 of the exhibit 3
as a portion to which Mr. Miller asserts a privilege?
4 MR. MILLER:
I think that's probably one of 5
them.
6 I must say that my recollection of the original 7
document -- I haven't reviewed it for some months now 8
and I think Mr. Guild is right -- but without looking at 9
the original, I really couldn't be sure, but I think he 10 is probably right.
That's one of them.
There are 11 others.
r^
12 BOARD EXAMINATION
(_S
)
13 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN 14 Q
Mr. Seese, was Mr. Saklak taking that training course 15 that Mr. Seeders was giving at the time that he 16 allegedly used that foul language?
17 A
Your Honor, I can't say that he was taking it.
I know 18 he was in the room to witness it.
Whether he was 19 scheduled to be in the class or was just there because 20 he was the supervisor, I couldn't testify to that.
21 Mr. Saklak did say he was physically in the room.
22 O
You don't know that he was there?
You say that he said 23 to you that he was there?
24 A
Yes; and the Training Coordinator, Mr. Dominic,
()
25 confirmed that he was there.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 2517
)
1 O
I notice that when you responded to Mr. Berry's 2
questions on the status reports that were referred to in 3
Mr. Stout's reprimand, that you on two or three 4
occasions said that -- and I quote -
"My status 5
reports," unquote, the emphasis on "my," were not used 6
with regard to individual inspectors.
7 Isn't that correct that you did emphasize the "my"?
8 A
Yes, sir, I did.
9 0
I take it that was to distinguish your reports from the 10 original reports that the QC Inspectors or their leads 11 prepared; is that correct?
12 A
That's correct.
13 0
So you were not representing at all that those 14 individual QC Inspector's reports or their lead's 15 reports could not have been used against the individual 16 inspectors?
17 A
That's correct.
18 BOARD EXAMINATION 19 BY JUDGE COLE 20 Q
Mr. Seese, following the same line of questions that 21 Judge Grossman asked you about, I am looking at Page 10 22 of your testimony, Question 9 and Answer 9, concerning 23 the use of the reports that you posted.
24 Sir, to your knowledge, were the daily ntatus
()
25 reports used by you or anyone else that you know of to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2518 (3
V 1
monitor and/or show the progress of individual 2
inspectors in addition to or other than the case of Mr.
3 Herschel Stout?
4 A
No, sir.
That's the only case that I am aware of.
5 0
All right, sir.
At the top of Page 11 you refer to --
6 in response to Question 10, you described the flow of 7
these status reports; and I believe your answer 8
indicates that the individual inspectors, each 9
inspector, turned their reports in to Mr. Saklak; and 10 then in the rest of that paragraph you indicate that 11 these were transferred into a summary report prepared by 12 each Lead Inspector.
v 13 What was the travel route of these daily status 14 reports?
15 Did they go from Saklak to then the Lead Inspector 16 and he then, the Lead Inspector, propared a summary and 17 then to you or did the each individual inspector give it 18 to his lead and then give it to Saklak and then you or 19 what?
20 A
As I understand it, it went from the individual 21 inspector to the lead, the lead would put his summary, 22 turn those over to Mr. Saklak and he would give them to 23 myself or the secretary in my department that received 24 them.
()
25 0
All right, sir.
So that in response to Question 10, the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2519 O
1 second sentence of your answer there, doesn't indicate 2
that, does it?
3 So it's not by each inspector; it's by each Lead 4
Inspector?
5 A
Right.
The second sentence of Answer 10, those figures 6
were transferred into a summary report prepared by each 7
Lead Inspector.
8 Q
That's the third sentence.
9 A
Okay.
What I was trying to say there, your Honor, was 10 that the sheets that appear in Mr. Stout's warning were 11 the individual sheets prepared by Mr. Stout.
It was not r^s 12 the summary report that I would deal with.
\\-)
13 I was not aware that those individual status sheets 14 became a part of Mr. Stout's warning until the time I 15 researched my answer to this question.
16 O
That wasn't my question.
I t'hought we had handled that 17 subject.
18 A
Okay.
19 Q
But your second sentence says, in response to Answer 10, 20 "The figures listed by Mr. Saklak came from a daily 21 status report completed by each inspector and turned in 22 to him."
23 A
What I intended to state here was turned in to him 24 through the lead.
(,N) 25 That's the way it happened.
)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2520 OO 1
Q All right, sir.
Okay.
I now understand your sentence.
2 Thank you.
3 Going back to Page 10, you indicate in response to 4
Question 9, "The reports that you posted showed the 5
goals and progress of inspection groups and not the 6
progress of individual inspectors."
7 How la'rge were some of these?
How large were these 8
inspection groups?
Were some of them small?
9 A
I would say the smallest would be probably seven 10 inspectors.
11 C
All right.
In Attachment 2-C, Seese 1, that is to your 12 testimony, Mr. Seese, there is a backlog documentation f~)s
\\m' 13 completion schedule, which is, I guess, something 14 separate from the status reports but it does summarize 15 progress.
16 I noticed on that that the number of inspectors 17 associated with this kind of work is either one in most 18 instances and a maximum of three in only one instance.
19 A
Yes, sir.
The reference to the number of inspectors 20 here was to show that with the schedule, we were going 21 to start out with one inspector.
We found out we 22 weren't completing as we wanted to, so we were 23 increasing it to three inspectors.
24 It was intended to represent the number of people
()
25 being devoted to this project, separate from the groups Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2521 O) 1 that we discussed earlier.
2 Q
All right, sir.
But as to these groups, if reports on 3
progress in these groups, it would be, in effect, the 4
progress of that individual inspector, wouldn't it?
5 A
Certainly, when you are dealing with one or two people, 6
yes.
7 Q
And you are not referring to this kind of inspection 8
activity in your description of the inspection groups 9
and in your response to Question 9?
10 A
That's correct.
11 JUDGE COLE:
All right, sir.
Thank you.
12 BOARD EXAMINATION gS
%)
13 BY JUDGE CALLIHAN 14 Q
Coming back to status reports for a moment, Mr. Seese, 15 you have said that no individual was identified on 16 status report.
17 I believe the reporting was by discipline, was it 18 not?
19 A
Yes.
20 Q
Do you have any idea how, based on, perhaps, the number 21 of individuals in a particular discipline, following on 22 the question just asked -- do you have any idea how 23 individuals might glean from that report by discipline 24 any concept that a monthly report might somehow be
()
25 designating the inspectors themselves?
Sonntac Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illincis 60134 (312) 232-0262
2522
)
1 Let me phrase that differently and put it more 2
generally.
3 Do you have any idea of a method whereby individual 4
inspectors, either through the disciplines which I have 5
just alluded to, how the individual inspectors might 6
have gotten this concept that those reports could be 7
interpreted as -- or from those reports there could be 8
extracted information relating to a particular 9
inspector?
10 A
Yes, I can understand their concern, yes.
11 Q
But how would they get that idea?
r3 12 A
Well, the inspector knew that he was turning in an U
13 individual sheet to management; and then he sees, f or 14 example, a chart on welding.
15 He might well say that, " Gee, there are seven 16 welding inspectors turned in.
Simply divide the numbers 17 by seven and that is going to show what the average 18 person is doing," but you would have to take into 19 account the different types of welding inspections; but 20 I can understand how an inspector might become 21 concerned, yes.
22 Q
To go to the extreme, if there were one inspector in a 23 particular discipline, then there it is right in front 24 of him.
()
25 If there were two, then your process of averaging Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2523
/'T U
1 would certainly be easy and, similarly, for others.
2 Do you think some scheme as that might have given 3
rise to this feeling or belief, if it were that strong, 4
among individual inspectors that they were being -- that 5
their work was being disclosed, or lack of work?
6 A
I have never had an inspector come to me or anyone give 7
me a reason to believe that was happening.
8 0
So you don't know how this belief of quota, if I may so 9
characterize it, got down into the troops, so to speak, 10 that the information from your status report might have 11 been interpreted that way?
12 A
No, I don't know of any way.
13 0
Where did these individual reports -- obviously, the 14 compilation, your report, as you characterize it, has to 15 come f rom the performance of each individual.
16 Where in this chain, which -- as I understand from 17 your remarks earlier, the lead compiled the performance 18 of his inspectors, that came up to the supervisor and 19 was summarized and it came to you.
20 Is'that the correct sequence?
21 A
No, sir.
22 0
I apologize.
I know Dr. Cole asked you the same I
question.
23 i
24 A
No, sir.
The individual inspector completed the first I) 25 sheet.
He gave that to his lead.
Then he compiled a Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
/
2524
}
1 summary for his group, what his discipline did.
2 Q
I am sorry.
I left the bottom line out.
3 Where in this chain did information which could be 1
4 used to identify the performance of a particular 5
individual -- where did that information stop?
6 Obviously, by the time you put out your report, the 7
identity, allegedly, at any rate, had disappeared; but i
8 where, in what step, of the sequence that you just 9
recited did the individual identification stop?
10 A
In many cases, when I got the lead's status report, the 11 individual sheets were attached to the back of it.
4 12 So if one were to think that I was trying to track 13 the individual sheets, they were available to me in some 14 cases.
i 15 In some cases the lead kept them and only gave me
'16 his summary report.
17 So I do have in my possession some individual i
18 sheets.
In some cases all I have are the leads' 19 reports.
i 20 So it worked both ways.
All I was concerned with 21 was the summary report, and as long as I got that I was i
22 happy.
23 If a lead happened to attach his four or five 24 people's to the back of it and he gave that to me, I put
()
25 it in the file but I didn't use it for my reports.
I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 i
(312) 232-0262
2525 1
So there were some cases where I got each 2
individual sheet.
There were many cases where all I got 3
was the lead's report.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Are you changing your 5
testimony now, Mr. Seese?
6 THE WITNESS:
No, sir.
7 BOARD EXAMINATION 8
BY JUDGE GROSSMAN 9
Q My recollection is you indicated the procedure was when 10 a summary was made either by a lead or by Mr. Saklak, 11 everything that went to them was attached to that 12 summary and went further on.
13 N ow, is my recollection incorrect as to your answer 14 on that?
15 A
No, sir.
Some of the -- in some cases all I got was the 16 summa ry report.
In other cases I got everything from 17 that lead attached behind his summary report.
18 If I gave you the wrong impression, I am sorry; but 19 that's the way it worked.
20 JUDGE CALLIHAN:
Are you finished?
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Yes.
22 BOARD EXAMINATION 23 BY JUDGE CALLIHAN 24 0
Did the individual inspectors know, at least in some
()
25 cases, the details that they bad prepared themselves Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2526 O
1 came up to your office?
2 A
Yes, definitely.
We made no secret of that.
3 0
Well, I think we have kind of beaten that one.
4 I have just one other item.
5 In one of your attachments -- and I think you 6
needn't look at it necessarily -- there is a memo from, 7
I gqess, Mr. DeWald.
It has to do with Mr. Seeders' 8
affair.
I guess it's the August 20, 1984, memo.
9 Just for my curiosity, there is a comment that I am 10 sure you can make about the expression, quote, " John 11 Seeders had work in his hand."
12 What did you mean by that?
13 A
That morning Mr. Saklak, one of his complaints was that 14 when he went up and confronted John, he wasn't doing 15 anything.
16 When I talked to the individual inspectors that 17 John had asked me to talk with, they testified that John 18 did have work in his hands.
19 Q
By " work in hand," you mean he has an assignment?
20 A
He has papers in his hands.
21 Q
And he is going ahead with his job.
That's what I 22 wanted.
23 A
Yes.
24 JUDGE CALLIHAN:
Thank you very much.
That's 25 all.
1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2527 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Mr. Miller, Redirect?
2 MR. MILLER:
Yes, sir.
I am trying to 3
ascertain whether or not yesterday's testimony is 4
consistent with the answer the witness just gave you; 5
but I --
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Let's take a few minutes and 7
you can --
8 MR. MILLER:
Well, I am prepared to proceed.
9 I think maybe Ms. Kezelis will do me a favor and see if 10 she can locate it for me.
11 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 12 BY MR. MILLER:
O l
13 0
Mr. Seese, do you have a copy of your diary, Exhibit 33?
14 A
Yes, sir.
15 Q
I would like to first direct your attention to numbered 16 Page 97.
It's actually the second page of the exhibit.
17 Under the heading -- or the entry 10-21-83, there 18 is a reference to a meeting.
19 I believe that you previously identified on the 20 record all the' participants in the meeting except Mr.
21 Gardner.
22 Can you state for the record by whom Mr. Gardner 23 was employed and what his position was in October of 24 1983?
h ()
25 A
Yes.
Mr. Gardner was employed by Comstock Engineering
)
I Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
~
60134 Geneva, Illinois (312) 232-0262
2528 m
. U 1
as the Central Regional Manager of QA/QC Services.
2 Q
There are six different points made following the 3
identity of the people at the meeting.
4 Turning first to Point a, it says, " Age group too 5
young."
6 What age group was being referred to, sir?
7 A
It was the age group of the QC Inspectors.
8 Q
Do you recall who made that comment?
9 A
Mr. Saklak.
10 Q
"They are more interested in money than benefits."
11 Again, who is the "they" referring to as you
,q 12 understood it?
LJ 13 A
QC Inspectors.
14 Q
Item b,
" Inspectors feel that the last batch of new 15 hires are very poor."
16 Can you recall who made that comment?
17 A
Mr. Saklak.
18 0
The words, "very poor," what did you understand that to 19 mean?
20 A
That the inspectors were not pleased with the quality of i
21 the new inspectors coming in.
22 O
Item c,
" Employees absent without pay should be let go 23 per other inspectors."
24 Do you recall who made that comment?
()
25 A
Mr. Saklak.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2529 1
O What did you understand the source of his information 2
was?
3 A
Rick was complaining -- or stating that other inspectors 4
were very upset that people were being allowed to miss 5
time and nothing was being done to them.
6 The other inspectors told Rick they felt the 7
company should take a stand.
8 MR. GUILD:
Objection, objection.
9 Mr. Seese is competent to testify, perhaps, to what 10 Mr. Saklak told him.
11 Now it's a double compound hearsay, what someone 12 told Mr. Saklak as if it were a fact.
s) 13 MR. MILLER:
My question, to which he was 14 responding, was what was his understanding of the source 15 of Mr. Saklak's comment, and I believe he was responsive 16 to my question.
17 MR. GUILD:
The response of the witness was 18 not so framed.
19 It was the inspectors told Mr. Saklak, and he has 20 no basis for stating that.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Yes.
Mr. Seese, if you will 22 answer the questions that are posed to you, perhaps we 23 won't have any objections.
24 A
(Contin uing. )
Well, in this case, Mr. Saklak was
()
25 stating that it was brought to his attention that other Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2530 O
1 inspectors were upset over people being allowed to miss 2
time and not having reprimands issued.
3 BY MR. MILLER:
4 0
Okay.
Item d, "Per diem verses regular salary bitch 5
with inspectors."
6 Again, who was the source of that comment?
7 A
Mr. Saklak.
8 Q
Could you describe your understanding of that comment?
9 A
Yes.
There were several inspectors at the Braidwood 10 site, according to Mr. Saklak, that were on per diem in 11 excess, over and above their salary; and there was -- he 12 was voicing that some inspectors had talked to him that 13 this was unfair, some people were getting per diem, some 14 weren't.
15 0
Item e, "Need to have more management training."
16 Who is the person who made that comment?
17 A
I couldn't say positively.
I would believe that was Mr.
18 Saklak; and the reason I say that, Mr. Miller, is that 19 Mr. Seltmann and Mr. DeWald and I were relatively new to 20 the site, and Rick, having had the experience, was 21 giving a list of things that had been brought to his 22 attention or concerns that he felt were pertinent.
23 0
What did you understand him to be referring to in terms j
24 of management training?
()
25 MR. GUILD:
Objection.
The witness is not a
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2531 O
J l
competent to even state that "him" was Mr. Saklak.
2 He has stated an explanation for the context, I 3
suppose; but he is simply incompetent to now state what 4
he said having preceded with a statement that he wasn't 5
sure who said it.
6 MR. MILLER:
Well, I think the witness can 7
explain what he understood the words " management 8
training" to mean.
He may be able to without recalling 9
with absolute precision who made the comment.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
The witness can answer.
You 11 have heard the discussion.
12 73 Please try to answer responsively.
V 13 A
The reference to management training was that -- asking 14 for instructions on what actions needed to be taken to 15 issue warnings, that type of direction, as I remember 16 it.
17 BY MR. MILLER:
18 Q
I take it that Item f, "Marino stresses the need to get 19 things happening now," is as stated by Mr. Marino?
20 A
That's correct.
21 Q
What did you understand the things that were to be 22 happening now referred to?
23 A
Por example, if procedures needed to be revised, changes 24 needed to be made within the organization, don't sit
()
25 down and hesitate; you know, get right into it.
Start Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2532 OV 1
A Yes, it does.
2 O
" Stresses the importance of the status reports.
Include 3
NCR/ICR and assure that they are routed through" -- is 4
that "Tanya"?
5 A
Yes.
6 0
Who is Tanya, or whom?
l 7
A Tanya Rolan was one of the QC secretaries who received 8
the status report.
9 At that time she was doing the plotting of the 10 inspections completed verses what had to be done.
11 Q
Do you have any further recollection, as you sit here 12 today, Mr. Seese, as to the words that Mr. Saklak used 13 with the leads when he, as you characterized it, 14 stressed the importance of the status reports?
15 A
He was stressing at this meeting the need for getting 16 them turned in -- getting them turned in accurately, so 17 that we would be taking credit for the accomplishments 18 that we were going to be accounting for the NCR's and 19 ICR's that were being closed.
20 0
Why was that inclusion of the NCR's and ICR's being 21 closed a. statistic of interest?
22 A
It was work that had to be done.
There were a number of 23 Nonconformance Reports in QC to close and ICR's, and it 24 was -- we needed to know that they were being worked off t( )
25 and closed.
Sonntag RepSrting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- -. - - _ - ~.
i 2533
(
1 Q
Sir, on Page 99, there is a numbered item 2.
2 I take it that this occurred, also, on October 24, i
3 1983; is that correct?
I 4
A Yes.
4 I
5 Q
All right.
First of all, what was Mr. H. T.
6 Washington's position with Comstock at that time?
7 A
He was assigned to Quality Control Department at 8
Braidwood doing a document review role.
9 0
Was he a Level 2 Inspector?
i i
10 A
He was not certified at Braidwood.
11 Q
Had you known Mr. Washington prior to the time you came 12 to Braidwood?
o
]
13 A
Yes, I did..
I had hired Mr. Washington at the Perry
]
14 site and he had worked with me there prior to his
)
15 transfer to Braidwood.
i 16 Q
Could you describe for the Board your understanding of 17 the personal problems that Mr. Washington communicated 18 to you on that day?
19 A
Yes.
He relatively -- within a week or two of our 20 hiring him at Perry, his wife had had a child, and they 21 were located in Dothan, Alabama.
She was extremely 22 close with her family; therefore, would not relocate 23 with Harold.
24 The only time he got to see his wife and children
] ()
25 was when he had vacation time, and he felt that was a i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
-,_ _,-_ _ _. ~
i 2534 (m-1 real hardship.
2 He wanted to go back and see his family, but he had 3
exhausted his approved time.
4 Q
Did he make any request with respect to additional time 5
off or anything of that nature?
6 A
He had asked if it would be possible to do something to i
7 get him some time to go home, and I agreed at that point 8
to talk to Mr. Gardener.
9 Q
And what was Mr. Gardener's response to the request?
10 A
I spoke with Mr. Gardener the same afternoon, and he 11 agreed to meet with Irv and see if there was something 1
12 he could do to get Harold extra time, and I believe they 13 did give him a weekend.
14 0
All right, sir.
15 How long after October -- is Mr. Washington still 16 employed?
17 A
No, sir.
He left approximately March of 1984, I would 18 believe.
19 Q
Did you speak to him when he resigned?
20 Did he resign or was he fired?
21 A
He resigned to accept a job in Dothan, Alabama, so he 22 had the opportunity to return home.
23 0
All right, sir.
24 On the next page, Page 100, Item No. 4,
" Effective l ()
25 10-26-83 all QC will be on 5 ten's and an eight."
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2535
(~)
V i
1 Would you just for the record state what that 2
means?
3 A
Yes.
That means that everybody was being put on a 58 4
hour workweek; 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> a day Monday through Friday and 5
8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> on Saturday.
6 0
All right, sir.
7 Further down on that page under numbered item 4 8
there is a small c, "Need to have Rick look at time 9
spent on in-process weld inspections."
10 First of all, could you describe what Mr. Saklak's 11 assignment was in terms of looking at the time spent on
/~3 12 in-process weld inspections?
U 13 A
Yes, sir.
I had -- having been the QC supervisor at 14 Perry, I had the people doing the in-process weld 15 inspection working for me there.
16 The in-process in this case refers to once each 17 quarter our inspector would monitor a welder in the 18 field actually doing the weld, assuring that he was 19 using the proper technique, correct weld rod.
20 At Perry it had been a lot less complicated 21 situation.
The inspectors would go out and do the 22 in-process and also at the same time do additional weld 23 inspections.
24 I was made aware that wasn't happening at
()
25 Braidwood, and I was asking Rick to look into it and see I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
=.
2536
()
1 if -- and he came back and explained that it was a more 2
complex system here and, in fact, it did take that 3
amount of time.
4 Q
That what took that amount of time?
5 A
The in-process weld inspection was correctly -.it did 6
take a full-time person to do it.
7 Q
After Mr. Saklak reported to you, what change, if any, 8
was there in the way in which in-process weld 9
inspections were conducted?
10 A
None whatsoever.
11 0
Then on the next page, sir, under the date 10-28-83, I 12 believe it states, "7:20 A. M.
Meet with those assigned 13 to the vault to review what's expected of them.
Meeting 14 conducted by Bruce Brown.
I emphasized a good quality 15 review and not just large quantities of review."
16 First of all, could you tell us who at this point 17 in time were assigned to the vault and what their job 18 assignment was?
19 A
Yes.
This group was Bruce Brown, who was the lead at 20 the time, and he had several inspectors:
Mike Walker, I 21 know, as being one of them; Sally Byer at that time was 22 a clerk, later became an inspector; and Jan Labue was I
23 another member of that group; and they were doing a 24 document review function.
()
25 0
All right, sir.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2537
(
1 On the next page, Page 102, the numbered item 3 on 2
that page, " General meeting with all inspectors advising 3
them that the NRC is going to be auditing Comstock.
I 4
told them to be completely honest, answer questions 5
directly but don't ramble on and lead them to other 6
findings."
7 Sir, I would like to focus on the words, "but don't 8
ramble on and lead them to other findings."
9 Are those the precise words you used in your 10 comments to the inspectors?
11 A
If not exact, they would be the general, yes.
12 0
What were you attempting to convey to the inspectors by 13 those words?
14 A
We were trying to -- I was trying to stress to them that 15 when they were asked a question, be completely honest, 16 but by rambling on and maybe volunteering information 17 that was not pertinent to that case could cause 18 confusion on the part of the NRC auditor, might lead him 19 to a false finding or concern that when you sit down and 20 analyzed it really was no problem in the first place.
21 So what we were trying to say is too much 22 information could cause a problem.
Just be completely 23 factual, answer what they wanted to know.
24 0
Down at the bottom of the page under the -- I think
()
25 it's, again, a No. 1 and circled, 8:00 o' clock A. M.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
~
2538
(
l under the date November 1,1983, states, " Meet with Tom 2
Dunbar on his lack of working overtime, plus what seems 3
to be a negative attitude.
Stress the good work he did 4
at Cook, plus the positive reports from Seltmann on his 5
Fermi work.
Need the same effort here.
Tom agrees to 6
work Saturdays, plus days he does not have school.
His 7
school is on Tuesday and Thursday evening."
8 First of all, in what capacity was Mr. Dunbar 9
employed at Braidwood?
10 A
He was a Level 2 Welding Inspector, 11 0
Had you known Mr. Dunbar prior to the time that you came 12 to Braidwood?
O 13 A
Yes.
He had worked for me while I was the manager of i
j 14 the D. C. Cook site.
15 0
All right, sir.
16 How did it come to your attention that Mr. Dunbar 17 had been requested to work overtime but, apparently, was i
18 not doing so?
19 A
Mr. Saklak had made some comments about this Inspector 20 Dunbar doesn't seem to be willing to work overtime.
He 21 doesn't seem to be putting the effort forward.
i 22 0
All right, sir.
23 The sentence goes on, "Plus what seems to be a 24 negative attitude."
l ()
25 What was your understanding of a negative attitude i
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 2.12-0262 i
l 2539 I
($)
1 that Mr. Dunbar exhibited?
l 2
A one of the concerns Mr. Saklak addressed was that Mr.
3 Dunbar had a girl friend working in one of the l
4 departments in engineering.
He would find Tom down in l
l 5
that area not working, not working on anything work l
6 related but visiting.
7 His concern was that he was just not putting the 8
effort forward to go out and do the inspections.
He was 9
more concerned with visiting.
10 0
After this meeting that you had with Mr. Dunbar, did he, 11 in fact, work overtime when requested to do so?
12 A
Oh, yes.
I 13 The only times he didn't was the nights he had 14 school.
15 0
Did you have any further complaints from Mr. Saklak 16 regarding Mr. Dunbar's work habits?
l l
17 A
No, sir, I did not.
18 0
Is Mr. Dunbar still employed?'
19 A
Yes, he is.
He is now transferred as a field engineer 20 for Comstock at Braidwood, but he is still employed.
21 0
When was he transferred as field engineer?
22 A
Approximately three or four months ago.
[.
23 0
How did the transfer come about?
24 A
Tom had requested to become involved with the
()
25 engineering group.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
2540
(~%
C/
1 He really did -- his main concern was becoming a 2
member of the Union; and he had taken an assignment with 3
us back at D. C. Cook.
4 At the time BESTCO had come in, he came back in a 5
management role assisting me, and at the point where 6
that assistance was going to be up, the only alternative 7
was to go back to BESTCO and come in as a Union member.
8 He requested to stay with Comstock and requested a 9
transferred to engineering, if they had something to fit 10 in, 11 At the time we had an opening as a field engineer, g-12 which Mr. Dunbar had the qualifications for.
(~)s 13 Q
So Mr. Dunbar's employment at Braidwood has not been 14 continuous from November of 1983 to now?
15 A
No.
There was about a -- at the time BESTCO come in --
16 shortly before that, at the time the Union was l
17 recognized, he took another assignment back at D. C.
~
18 Cook again and then he returned back to Braidwood some 19 months later.
20 Q
Do you know the reason that he took the assignment at D.
21 C. Cook?
22 A
It was a job that Comstock had up there.
He was l
23 familiar with the plant and he requested -- again, he 24 requested that opportunity.
()
25 0
All right, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2541 O
1 On Page 103, at the bottom of the page, under 2
November 3, 1983, there is a meeting with -- presumably 3
with both Commonwealth Edison and Comstock employees; 4.
correct?
5 A
Correct.
6 0
All right.
The statement in the last two lines cf that 7
page is, "NRC wants to issue a stop work order due to 8
backlog of inspections."
9 Do you recall who at the meeting made such a 1
-10 statement?
1 11 A
What this statement dealt with was a rumor that we had 12 received --
O MR. GUILD:
Objection.
13 14 The witness really needsi to be responsive to the 15 questions that are asked.
16 MR. MILLER:
My question was who.
17 A
(Continuing;)-
I am sorry.
18 Nobody at the meeting brought up that statement.
19 BY MR. MILLER:
20 0
I see.
21 So this is not at statement that was made at the 22 meeting?
This is your own understanding of the 23 situation outside, from-facts outside the meeting?
12 4 A
That's correct.
()
25 0
From what source did you believe that the NRC wanted to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2542 0
1 issue a stop work order due to a backlog of inspections?
l 2
A A statement had come from one of the inspectors, who --
3 I don't remember which one it was -- came to us and said 4
that he had heard or had conversations with Mr. Love and 5
he felt they were concerned with the size of the 6
backlog; that, perhaps, current work should stop until 7
the backlog of inspections were caught up.
8 Q
And you identified Mr. Love in your preceding answer.
9 Who is Mr. Love?
10 A
Ray Love was one of the NRC inspectors on site at the 11 time for this audit.
12 He previously had served as a Quality Control l
13 Manager for Comstock at Perry and had -- at that point, 14 several of our inspectors had werked for him, so he did I
15 have some contact with some of the inspectors.
16 Q
Had you worked with him at Perry?
17 A
No, sir.
He was there prior to my arrival.
18 Q
On the next page, Page 104, again, this is a meeting in l
19 which both the Comstock and Commonwealth Edison 20 employees were present.
Item D says, "Doug Brown enters 21 the meeting at 1:15."
22 First of all, by whom was Mr. Brown employed?
23 A
Mr. Brown was an employee of Commonwealth Edison Quality 24 Assurance.
().
25 0
"He questions whether or not people quit due to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2543 O
1 harassment.
This question was asked by the NRC."
2 First of all, did he identify -- that is, did Mr.
3 Brown identify the NRC Inspector who asked the question?
4 A
No, sir, he did not.
3 5
Q Now, under that Entry D, there are two kind of subitems, 6
" Vault program and why, present manpower" -- what is 7
that last word, sir?
8 A
" Story."
9 Q
What relationship, if any, did those two subitems have 10 to a question of whether or not people quit due to 11 harassment?
12 A
They were unrelated.
13 Q
Do you recall whether anybody answered Mr. Brown's 14 question?
15 A
There was some exchange, some discussion; but as to what 16 was said and by whom, I don't know.
l 17 Q
In your presence, was any response to that question ever 18 made to representatives of the Nuclear Regulatory 19 Commission?
20 A
There was a -- no, sir.
21 There was a discussion followed up later on in.that 22 meeting, but not to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
23 Whether Mr. Brown responded, I don't know.
24 Q
At the bottom of Page 104, there is a bullet and
()
25 statement, " Utility becomes increasingly uneasy because Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2544 O
1 backlog was not" -- could you read the rest of that, 2
sir?
l 3
A "Because backlog was not in context with reports," or 4
was not correct with reports.
5 Q
Backing up to all of Item E on that page, it starts out, 6
"Wallace lays down how the story will be told."
7 What does that mean?
8 A
Mr. Wallace was trying to organize how the -- how our 9
presentation to the NRC would take place as far as who 10 would speak first and when each -- leading into each 11 group and their opportunity to speak, and these go down.
12 Q
Are these comments that are attributed -- or 13 attributable to Mr. Wallace or did somebody else say 14 them?
15 A
No.
They would -- Mr. Wallace -- we were together 16 formulating how the story was going to be presented, so 17 I can't say that each one of these was Mr. Wallace's 18 statement.
19 It was -- Mr. Brown might say, "Well, this happened 20 and it should_go in here."
21 You see, there was a discussion as to how the 22 events -- it was a mutual between all parties.
23 Q
All right, sir.
24 A
And Mike just chaired the group and said, "Well, then we
()
25 should talk about this one first, this one second," just Ronntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2545
()
1 as a form of organizing the meeting.
2 0
The points that are made under E2 which continue onto 3
Page 105, are they essentially chronological?
4 A
Yes.
5 0
At the top of Page 105 there is the entry, " August of 6
'83.
Tie in Irv's arrival and Perry tracking system.
7 Use overlays."
8 What is the reference to Perry tracking system?
9 A
We had -- Comstock had had a similar backlog problem at 10 Perry, and in conjunction with our corporate people, we 11 had come up with a tracking system, a plan for working g-12 this backlog off.
That included some charts and some V) 13 tracking methods, both written reports and those posted 14 on a bulletin board.
15 What we wanted to do was show how we were going to 16 use the Perry tracking system to track and monitor the 17 completion of our backlog; and we had some overlays and 18 charts made of the tracking method that we were going to 19 present.
20 0
This was going to be, as far as you know, presented to 21 the NRC?
22 A
That's correct.
23 Q
All right.
About. halfway down the page, it says, 24
" Address why inspectors left."
It says, "2 to Zimmer, O
25 ee
-- whee is thee word 2 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2546 O
1 A
"Malasia," I believe.
2 0
"three to southwest Texan."
3 Now, at this point in time, at this meeting, was 4
there discussion as to why these inspectors left?
5 A
It was a -- yes, it was discussed.
It was due to salary 6
considerations.
7 Q
All right.
Continuing on in that same meeting, it 8
states, "The entire backlog effort will be complete by 9
May, 1984."
10 Do you recall who said that, if anyone?
11 A
Yes.
That would have been a statement -- an estimation 12 by Irv DeWald as to when we were going to complete our fs 13 backlog.
14 0
And this entire meeting -- well, what did you understand 15 the purpose of this entire meeting to be?
16 A
Wo were going to make a presentation to the NRC, and the l
17 purpose of this meeting was to discuss the order of 18 events, who was going to. discuss what, how we were going.
19 to approach our discussion.
20 0
All right, sir.
21 Am I correct that on November -- according to these 22 notes that you took, that on November 4, 1983, there was 23 an NRC exit meeting that you attended; correct?
24 A
That's correct.
()
25 Q
And that would be your recounting of that meeting that Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2547
(')T 1
begins at the top of Page 106; correct?
2 A
That's correct.
3 Q
And that, for example, about six or seven lines down on 4
Page 106, where there is a reference to Love, that's a 5
reference to Mr. Ray Love; is that correct?
6 A
That's right.
7 Q
And the comments that follow are those that are 8
attributed to Mr. Love?
9 A
That's correct.
10 Q
Now, let's turn to Page 107, under Item D10.
That 11 states, I believe, " Concern if Comstock" -
"of Comstock 12 QC not being able to keep" -- probably the word "up"
(-)
(/
13 should be in there -
" keep up with craf t."
14 Can you tell from your notes or can you recall who 15 made that statement at the exit meeting?
16 A
Yes.
As I recall and appears from the notes, also, that 17 Mr. Love made that statement.
18 Q
Then a statement under the Entry Dll, " Backlog of 19 inspections seem overwhelming."
20 Who, to your recollection or from your notes, could 21 you tell, made that statement?
22 A
That would have been Mr. Love, also.
23 Q
All right.
Now, then, on the next page, 108, there is a 24 4 and a circle.
()
25 This is still on November 4, 1983; is that correct?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2543 1
A Yes.
2 0
The entry that follows the No.
4, was that during or 3
after the NRC exit meeting?
4 A
It would have been after the meeting.
5 0
The entry reads, "Since CECO, Wallace and Marcus, would 6
not permit us to discuss the backlog of inspections 7
prior to August 1, 1983, during our presentation to the 8
NRC, Irv requested that he and I meet with Doug Brown 9
and Sommerfield to review the subject on Monday, 10 11-7-83.
Brown agrees to meet on Monday 11-7-83.
Brown 11 agrees to meet on Monday after the audit entrance 12 meeting."
q'u 13 Now, first of all, I think that you have -- at the 14 NRC exit meeting, were there comments made by you or Mr.
15 DeWald in response to any of the NRC observations?
16 A
There was a portion of that meeting where Comstock, Mr.
17 DeWald, spoke.
18 Q
Are those responses reflected in your notes at all?
19 A
No, no, sir.
20 Q
Do you have any recollection of what, if anything, Mr.
21 DeWald said in response to Mr. Love's observation that 22 the backlog inspections seem overwhelming?
23 A
Yes.
Mr. DeWald had overlays that would have showed the 24 backlog of inspections, a tentative schedule on how we G(_j 25 were going to complete them, when they would estimate Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2549 O
1 when they were going to be done.
2 What he had was the Perry charts made into overlays 3
so he could present them to the group.
4 0
What, if anything, was said about the number of 5
inspections per inspector or any production quotas or 6
goals from the NRC at that point?
7 A
Nothing was said about that.
8 Q
To your recollection, was there any discussion about the 9
number of Quality Control Inspectors that were employed 10 by.Comstock at Braidwood?
11 A
Yes.
There was a discussion that we had been authorized 12 additional manpower and that they would be coming in and 13 would be trained and certified.
14 Q
Now, returning to Page 108 and the entry that I read, 15 did you understand -- were you ever informed by Mr.
16 Wallace or Mr. Marcus as to the reason why you were 17 not -- well, let me strike that question and start over 18 again.
19 Did you or Mr. DeWald desire to discuss with the 20 NRC the backlog of inspections at Braidwood prior to 21 August 1, 1983?
22 A
Irv and I discussed with Mike, "We have these figures.
23 Do we want to present them?"
24 As a result of that statement, Mike said, "What are
()
25 these figures?
What do you mean?"
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2550 1
We explained that there were a number of 2
installation reports that may require inspections.
3 However, we had found that there was some duplic'ates.
4 Some of the installation reports were non-safety, so we 5
had this number of installation reports, but we didn't 6
know how many actual inspections were involved because 7
we hadn't gone through, taken out the non-safety, we 8
hadn't taken out the duplicates.
9 So it was, "Yes, we have this amount, but we are 10 not really sure what it is."
11 It was a very poor -- we had a very poor handle on 12 the situation at the time.
13 Q
All right, sir.
14 What was the decision with respect to telling the 15 NRC about that situation?
16 A
Mr. Wallace, frankly, suggested, "Wouldn't we be more 17 comfortable going back, doing our homework, refining the 18 counts, finding out what we actually had before we 19 presented it," and at that point both Irv and I agreed, 20
" es, we would be much more comfortable in being able to 21 say, 'Here is exactly what we have,'" and we decided to 22 take that option.
23 Q
All right, sir.
24 So what presentation, if any, was made to the NRC
()
25 with respect to the extent of the Comstock backlog in Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2551
(
1 the NRC exit meeting?
2 A
As far as this unknown backlog, we didn't discuss that.
3 We discussed the backlog of current inspections that we 4
were aware of.
We discussed the backlog of document 5
review that had to be done; those that we had the hard, 6
fast figures for that were involved in the Perry 7
tracking system.
8 This unknown situation did not come up at all 9
during the course of the meeting.
10 0
All right, sir, 11 Going back to the entry on Page 108, you wanted to 12 meet with Doug Brown and Sommerfield.
fS V
13 Mr. Brown, Mr. Doug Brown, has been identified in 14 the record.
15 Who was Mr. Sommerfield at that point?
15 A
Tom Sommerfield, I believe, was the QA Superintendent 17 for Commonwealth Edison?
18 Q
Now, on this, we are still, I think, on November 4, 19 1983, Item 5 on Page 108, " Hold general meeting with the 20 QC Inspectors."
1 21 That all took place on the same day as the NRC 1
22 exit?
23 A
Yes, it did.
24 0
"To review a, NRC audit."
()
25 Can you recall:
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2552 r~%
U 1
Did you hold that general meeting with all the QC 2
Inspectors?
3 A
It would be conducted jointly by Irv, myself and Mr.
4 Saklak.
5 Q
Okay.
I take it Items a through d are the topics that 6
were discussed with the Inspectors?
7 A
That's correct.
8 Q
The first one was the NRC audit.
9 To what audit were you referring?
10 A
We were just' referring to the exit meeting that we had 11 just had with them that morning, and we were advising 12 the Comstock personnel what came out of the meeting, 13 what concerns they had, generally what transpired at the 14 meeting.
15 Q
All right.
What discussion, if any, was there of Mr.
16 Love's concerns with respect to backlog?
17 A
We would have explained to the inspectors that --
18 MR. GUILD:
Objection.
19 It is really speculative if the witness is really 20 saying, "We would have."
21 If the witness knows, he should state.
If the 22 witness doesn't know, has no recall and can't answer the 23 question, that should be reflected in his answer.
24 MR. MILLER:
Yes.
O
(_/
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
That is correct, Mr. Seese.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2553 O
\\/
1 A
(Continuing.)
We shared with the inspectors the charts 2
that we had presented to the NRC and our explanation for 3
resolving the backlog situation.
4 BY MR. MILLER:
5 Q
The next topic that was discussed with them is 6
identified as, " Additional manpower."
7 What, if anything, was stated with respect to 8
additional manpower?
9 A
We explained to the inspectors that we had been 10 authorized to hire additional people and that we were 11 going to have a recruiting effort to hire them and they 12 would be seeing them coming in in the near future.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Excuse me.
14 Do we have a definition in the record of what an 15 exit interview is?
16 MR. MILLER:
I don't think we do, your Honor.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Could you indicate what an 18 exit interview is, Mr. Seese?
19 THE WITNESS:
Yes.
In this context, when the 20 NRC completed their inspection, they would hold an exit 21 interview.
They would sit down with the parties and go 22 over their concerns, what their findings were, after 23 they completed their inspection.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Thank you.
()
25 BY MR. MILLER:
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2554
("T U
1 Q
Subparagraph c, " Fill out check sheets /ICR's in field."
2 Could you describe what that refers to, please?
3 A
Yes.
We were instructing the inspectors that when they 4
completed their inspections -- and each inspection had a 5
checklist designed for them to document their 6
inspection.
The checklist was set up by the items in 7
the procedure the inspector was to look at during the 8
course of his inspection.
9 It was set up in such a way that it would tell you, 10 for example, " Welding, is there undercut?"
There would 11 be a block to mark for accept, reject or not applicable.
f^)
12 So it was set up for a guide for the inspectors, V
13 telling them exactly what to look during the course of 14 their inspections.
15 We were instructing them, " Don't complete your 16 inspection and come back to the office and do your paper 17 work.
Use the check sheet as it was intended; as you 18 complete that inspection, as a reminder to look at each 19 of these items and complete it in the field, so if you 20 had any question, you were right there at the item that 21 you were inspecting."
22 You wouldn't come back to the office and say, " Gee, 23 I don't remember what this was," and then you have got 24 to go back out to the field.
()
25 So we were asking them to complete their paper Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 2555 I
O 1
work; if there was a reject, to complete the ICR in the 2
field while they were at the area location of their 3
inspections, so everything was fresh and readily 4
available for them.
5 0
All right.
Item d, "Get out of office at" -- what is 6
that next word?
7 A
" Reasonable time."
8 0
What does that refer to?
9 A
There was a laxity on the part of the inspectors as far 10 as when they left the office.
They would come in, have 11 coffee in the morning.
There would be a slowness l
t 12 leaving the office.
1 (s-)
13 Our concern was that Commonwealth Edison had 14 authorized us to hire additional people.
We also wanted 15 to be able to defend the principle that those we had 16 were also being efficiently used; that we weren't asking 17 for people and then allowing people to set around the 18 office drinking coffee.
19 So we were asking them to come in in the morning, 20 get the paper work together and go to the field.
21 Q
On the next page, Page 109, Mr. Seese, the date is
(
22 November 15, 1983, numbered item 2.
" Meet with Irv, 23 Rick and all leads to review need for better job 24 performance.
l
()
25 First of all, whose better job performance was l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2556
(
1 being reviewed?
2 A
That of the QC Inspectors.
3 0
In what way was there a need for better job performance 4
by the inspectors?
et-5 A
Again, we were going back to the slowness in the morning 6
to leave the office; the fact that you could count on 7
the same people coming in 45 minutes to an hour before 8
the start of lunch; those same people would be coming in 9
early for quitting time.
10 We were trying to stress that we needed everybody 11 to pitch in and do a fair day's work; to be in the field 3
12 inspecting, following through on their assignments.
g/
\\_
13 Q
Under the date November 16, 1983, there is the 14 statement, " Attend meetings on Braidwood story in the 15 4th floor start up building.
Mike Wallace presents 16 general review."
17 What Braidwood story were you referring to, sir?
18 A
Mr. Wallace on occasion -- and this happened to be one 19 of them -- would assemble the different contract 20 personnel and let them know the status of the project; 21 the high points, that this had been achieved.
22 I believe at this meeting he discussed the progress 23 of the Byron licensing.
24 So he just gave a general Commonwealth Edison
()
25 overview of what was happening at the Braidwood site, Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2557 O
1 the progress we made, the goals we needed, what lay 2
ahead of us.
3 Q
All right, sir.
4 How many of these meetings do you recall attending 5
since you have been employed at Braidwood?
6 A
I would say that there were two to three that I can 7
recall.
8 Q
Did Mr. Wallace ask for any commitments from any 9
contractors at this meeting?
10 A
No, sir.
It was a presentation of where we were at, 11 what the goals were, what we accomplished already.
12 It was more a -- these tended to be more a pat on l
13 the back from Mike, saying, "Here is what we have 14 accomplished.
We need to carry forward with that kind 15 of a spirit."
16 Q
All right, sir.
17 I would like you to now turn to Page 113.
18 About halfway down the page there is a 2 in a 19 circle, and it says, " Meeting at 420 P. M. with i
20 Seeders /DeWald/Seese on the following."
21 Seeders is John Seeders; correct?
22 A
That's correct.
23 Q
Now, the numbered item a is as follows -- perhaps you 24 ought to read it into the record, sir?
()
25 A
" Item a.
Pre check marks on calibration forms.
Seeders i
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2558 O) 1 said he stopped practice at the time of Rick Martin 2
training class.
Irv asks why he didn't" -
"why didn't 3
he make an effort to correct these documents.
Seeders
~
4 argues that the pre check mark was an officewide 4
5 practice."
6 0
All right.
Now, there is a reference to pre check mark.
7 What is that a reference to?
8 A
During a General Office Audit conducted September, 1983, 9
through October, 1983, they had identified that one of 10 the inspectors, Rick Martin, had completed the check 11 marks on an inspection form marked acceptable, 12 photocopied that form and then added unique hanger i
13 numbers, identifying inspections that were done.
14 So, in fact, you would have an inspection report 15 with an item inspected listed in original writing but 16 the fact that the items were accepted were photocopied, 17 and that was a practice that we found unacceptable at 18 that time.
So that was the reference to pre check 19 marks.
20 Q
All right, sir.
21 Did you find any of those pre check marks, as you 22 have described them, on calibration points?
23 A
Yes, sir.
Some time in -- earlier in. November, right 24 around -- right shortly before the Thanksgiving period,
- ()
25 we had discovered some records in the vault, that I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2559 O
1 believe was brought to our attention by Bruce Brown at 2
that time, that calibration records did, in fact, have 3
photocopied entries; and we were discussing this with 4
John, if he was aware of them, why he didn't make an 5
effort to get those corrected.
6 Q
All right, sir.
7 Can you state approximately how many calibration 8
records were, in fact, photocopied?
9 A
No, not without some research, sir.
I couldn't give the 10 numbers.
11 Q
When was Mr. Martin's training class conducted that is 7-12 referred to in this paragraph?
13 A
It would have been during the period of that General 14 Office Audit, so it would have been between the period 15 of late September,
'83, and very early October,
'83.
16 Q
The next paragraph, would you read that into the record?
17 A
Yes.
Paragraph b, "Irv asks for a doctor's excuse.
18 Seeders said that this is harassment.
He reported off 19 each day as required by company policy.
Irv replies 20 that this policy was applied to Brad Robbins."
21 Q
All right.
Now, why was Mr. DeWald asking Mr. Seeders 22 for a doctor's excuse?
23 A
When we had discovered the photocopied entries on the 24 calibration records, Mr. Seeders was not in that day.
()
25 Mr. DeWald had asked -- and we had an audit -- a I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2560 (s
1 Commonwealth Edison audit -- scheduled that was going to 2
come in, and we were concerned that the audit would, 3
again, pick up this deficiency; that we hadn't corrected i
4 it; again, meaning that they had found this in other 5
documentation.
6 So Mr. DeWald asked me to contact Mr. Seeders at 7
home and see if, in fact, he was going to be able to 8
come in to' work so we could get these records corrected 9
as permitted by our prc;adure; and I had made an effort 10 to contact Mr. Seeders on many occasions during that day 11 and that, I believe, ran into Thanksgiving day, which
,r S 12 was the next day, and I believe the Friday after that,
(_)
13 trying to get ahold of Mr. Seeders.
14 Q
Now, there are pages following -- there are three pages 15 114 that are copied in this exhibit.
16 On the second page marked Page 114 there is a 17 little note that is sideways.
It has the words, " John 18 Seeders," and then what appears to be a telephone 19 number.
20 Again, is that in your handwriting?
21 A
Yes, sir, it is.
22 0
And what does this little note reflect?
23 A
It was a listing of the times that I had tried to call 24 John at his home in an attempt to make arrangements for
()
25 him to come in and correct this documentation.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2561
-(J 1
Q And then on the third page it's marked 115.
2 Is that the back of the little note -- I am sorry.
3 It's marked Page 114.
It's the third Page 114 in 4
sequence.
5 A
That was the back side of the note, yes.
6 What this was, I had a yellow sticky pad stapled to 7
the page in the notebook, and it was just stretched out 8
and photocopied over that page.
9 Q
That is, you attempted to contact Mr. Seeders on each of 10 the occasions that are recorded on that little note?
11 A
That is correct; and that's what caused Irv and I to 12 have the concern that he really wasn't sick; that, in
~
13 fact, what he was doing was his sick time to lead into 14 his vacation, which was scheduled the week after 15 Thanksgiving.
16 So Irv issued a letter stating the policy would be 17 that if you are off sick three days in a row, you would 18 have to have a doctor's excuse; and we were asking Mr.
19 Seeders to provide that doctor's excuse.
20 0
You say Mr. DeWald issued a letter.
21 Was that before or after this meeting with Mr.
22 Seeders?
23 A
It would have been before the meeting with Mr. Seeders.
24 Q
Now, then, Mr. Seeders is recorded as saying that he
()
25 reported off each day as required by company policy.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2562 O
1 What does that mean, sir?
2 A
Company policy says that you will report off to your 3
supervisor.
4 What Mr. Seeders -- he claimed that he was calling 5
in, and we would get a report from an inspector and not 6
from any of the supervisors, so if John was calling in, I
7 he was just talking to one of the inspectors to give us 8
the message that he was off.
9 Q
All right, sir.
10 Did those messages come to you, Mr. Seese; that is, 11 the message that he was off?
12 A
No.
We had to go out and ask if anybody had gotten a gg V
13 call in this case.
14 Q
Now, "Irv replies that this policy was applied to Brad 15 Robbins."
16 Who is Brad Robbins?
17 A
Brad Robbins was another QC Inspector at Braidwood; that 18 he had been off over three days and that he had -- he 19 also was required to bring in a doctor's excuse.
20 Q
Now, I skipped over a sentence.
" Seeders says this is 21 harassment."
22 What is the harassment that is referred to?
23 A
The fact that we were requesting him to bring in the 24 doctor's excuse.
()
25 0
So what response -- then the sentence is, "Irv replies."
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
_= _
2563 pV 1
What was the response that was made, to your 2
recollection, to Mr. Seeders claiming that this was 3
harassment?
4 A
Yes.
When John said this was harassment, Mr. DeWald 5
said this wasn't harassment.
This was the same policy 6
applied to Brad Robbins.
7 Q
Subparagraph c, " Seeders argues that he is trying to act 8
professional but he is not being treated that way."
9 What did you understand Mr. Seeders' comment about 10 trying to act professional to mean?
11 A
John was stating that he felt in his mind that he was 12 trying to act professional as an employee but he didn't 13 feel the company was treating him that way as a result j
14 of this meeting.
15 Q
Asking him for a doctor's excuse?
1 16 A
That's correct, questioning his time off.
17 0
I see.
18 Subparagraph d says, " Warning written by Irv 19 DeWald, concurred by myself"; is that correct?
20 A
That's correct.
21 0
What was the reason, if you recall, stated in the 22 warning?
Why was the warning issued?
23 A
The warning was issued based on -- it was based as a 24 result of these incidents as to what block had been
(')
25 checked in the work performance.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2564 1
I would have to see the warning.
I don't recall at 2
this point.
3 Q
All right.
Then on Page 114, Subparagraphs e and f also 4
reflect further facts relating to the issuance of this 5
warning; is that correct?
6 A
That's correct.
7 0
It says, " Attached note documents the times I attempted 8
to reach Mr. Seeders by phone."
F, "Mr. Seeders signed 9
the warning."
10 Continuing on Page 114, dated December 9,1983, the 11 numbered item 8 down towards the bottom of the page, 12
" Rick talks about blueprint crib and better drawing 13 control.
Meeting on Monday.
Saklak, Brown, DeWald, 14 Seese."
15 First of all, who is the Rick that is referred to 16 there?
17 A
Rick Saklak.
18 Q
All right.
What was your understanding of the blueprint 19 crib that is referred to?
20 A
There was an inspection station located out in the 21 field.
It was a wired-in area where there were some 22 benches where the inspectors sat, and in that crib was 23 blueprints used by the QC Inspectors.
24 So Rick was referring to that print station.
()
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Let's take a five-minute Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2565 mU 1
break.
2 MR. MILLER:
Well, it was my understanding 3
that the Board was only going -- are we going to go past 4
12:30?
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Five minutes, ten minutes 6
past.
7 JUDGE COLE:
How much more time do you have?
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
You are not going to finish 9
now?
10 MR. MILLER:
No.
Mr. Guild simply introduced 11 this without any explanation; and I have an obligation rw 12 to --
U 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
No, no, absolutely.
You 14 have to do that.
There is no question about that.
15 JUDGE COLE:
In any event, we are taking a 16 five-minute recess.
17 (Laughter.)
18 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had, 19 after which the hearing was resumed as 20 follows:)
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Back on the record.
22 MR. MILLER:
Thank you.
23 BY MR. MILLER:
24 O
Mr. Seese, we were on Page 114 still.
()
25 You identified what the blueprint crib refers to.
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 i
(312) 232-0262
2566 O
1 Then the statement says, " Rick talks about, among other 2
things, better drawing control."
3 What was Mr. Saklak's statement with respect to 4
better drawing control?
5 A
He was looking for a method to get the revisions --
6 correct revisions -- out to the field.
7 We had a problem where it was open to the 8
inspectors.
They would not necessarily follow in proper 9
order, so the next person needing that print would have 10 to search for it instead it being in numeric order.
11 So what he was looking for was some way to better 12 organize that system, where the drawings were more 13 retrievable to the inspectors.
14 Q
And then the reference to a meeting on Monday and that 15 entry is -- is that going to be a follow-up meeting, if 16 you will?
17 A
Yes, that was intended to be a follow-up to discuss this 18 specific area.
19 Q
Just calling your attention a little bit higher in the 20 page, where the words say, " Effective Monday.
- Bruce, 21 mechanical supe rvisor. "
22 Who is the Bruce that is referred to?
23 A
Bruce Brown.
24 0
What responsibilities did Mr. Brown have effective the
(')
25 Monday after December 9, 1983?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2567 O
1 A
He was going to handle the mechanical area, which took 2
in welding configuration; and then Rick would be 3
handling the electrical work, which would be the balance 4
of the inspection area.
5 0
And then there is a third individual, who is that?
6 A
Brian Baronowski would be then replacing Bruce in the 7
vault as the lead in the vault area.
8 0
Was he a lead or a supervisor?
9 A
Brian Baronowski would have been a lead.
10 Q
So at this point in time there were two supervisors of 11 inspectors assigned?
^s 12 A
That is correct.
(b 13 Q
For how long following December of 1983 was the division 14 between Mr. Brown and Mr. Saklak as reflected on these 15 notes adhered to?
16 A
Until approximately February or March of '84.
17 0
Then what happened?
18 A
Then we went back to the concept where Rick Saklak was 19 the only supervisor of inspectors.
20 0
What happened to Mr. Brown in February or March of '84?
21 A
He became -- he went back into the inspection ranks.
22 0
Why was that?
23 A
We had been -- I had the feeling that we needed a second i
24 supervisor.
()
25 We got Commonwealth Edison's approval but failed to Sonntac Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2568 O
1 clear it through our corporate personnel; and our 2
corporate people felt strongly at that point they wanted 3
to have a one-supervisor concept.
4 So it was decided that would be Rick.
5 Q
All right, sir.
On Page 115, right under the entry for 6
December 14, 1983, a meeting 12:50 P. M. with Jan Labue, 7
H. Washington, Mike Walker, on CEA document review.
8 "It appears that all parties are reviewing the same 9
except HTW may be over conservative."
10 Were you present at this meeting with Ms. Labue, 11 Mr. Washington, Mr. Walker?
12 A
Yes, sir, I was, (ss i
)
13 0
Was there anyone else besides the four of you present at 14 that meeting?
15 A
No, sir.
16 0
What was the purpose of that meeting?
17 A
We wanted to assure -- at that point we were approaching 18 completion of the original document review; and we were j
19 coming down to CEA's being the larger area.
20 So we were assigning Jan Labue, Harold Washington 21 and Mike Walker to review CEA's and we wanted to assure 22 that each individual was reviewing in the same manner, 23 that they didn't have their own styles and, therefore, 24 you would end up with ditterent results.
()
25 We wanted to make sure that everybody was reviewing Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2569 O
1 in the same -- that is at the -- had the same thought 2
pattern.
3 Q
I take it the initials "HTW" refer to Mr. Washington?
4 A
Yes, they do.
5 0
What is meant by the words "over conservative"?
6 A
Both Ms. Labue and Mr. Walker were certified on the 7
Braidwood site and, therefore, had a more -- had a 8
c]earer understanding of'some of the procedu'al r
9 requirements.
10 Harold did not have -- was not certified at the l
11 Braidwood site and, therefore, he tended to be a little l
,m 12 more conservative in his approaches, because he didn't
~
13 know some of the proper interpretations.
l l
14 He had not been certified at Braidwood.
f l
15 Q
What, if anything, was d6ne following this meeting with 16 respect to Mr. Washington?
17 A
By having him work along with the certified inspectors, 18 then we felt that he would bdgin to gain some of the 19 needed understani' rag and confidence.
20 There fete qt: stions he had and concerns.
He now 21 had people t.nat had held certification that was right s
~
22 there wit-h him, so we felt that would just be better for 23 him.
l 24 Q
Okay.
On the next page, Page 116, under the entry a5, I t
O 25 take it that this is a carry-6ver from your entry of a
\\
Sonntaa Rep 6rting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2570 0
1 Staf f meeting that was held on December 28, 1983; 2
correct?
(
3 A
That's correct.
4 0
All right.
a5 states, " Rick complains that he has to 5
spoon feed Franco and can't have him in charge of 6
anything."
7 First of all, who is Rick?
8 A
Rick Saklak.
(
9 Q
Who is Franco?
10 A
Franco Rolan, one of the QC Inspectors.
11 0
What did you understand Mr. Saklak to be complaining
(~\\
12 about when he stated that he has to spoon feed Franco I
kj 13 Rolan?
14 A
Rick was -- his point was that he had to lead Franco 15 each step of the way.
You couldn't -- he was not the 16 type of a Lead Inspector that you could give an 17 assignment, he would follow through on his own i
18 initiative.
l l
19 You had to lead him each step of the way.
20 Q
At this point in time, was Mr. Rolan a Lead Inspector?,
21 A
Yes.
He was the lead of the equipment area.
22 0
All right, sir.
The statement goes on, "He can't leave 23 him in charge of anything."
24 What did you understand that to refer to?
()
25 A
Rick's point there was you had to look at everything Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2571 o
U 1
that he completed to make sure it was being done the way 2
you wanted it to be.
3 You couldn't trust his judgment and complete any of 4
the actions on his own.
I 5
0 What response, if any, to Mr. Saklak's observations 6
about Mr. Rolan were made at this meeting?
7 A
There are none listed.
There was no change in Franco's j
8 position.
9 So I would feel that it was just, "We will try to 10 work with him," the direction he was given, 11 Q
Item a9 on Page 116, " Bill Baxter, if you take him to g
12 the field, he knows how to inspect the weld but he can't m
13 find the hanger on his own.
Give one final test today 14 and evaluate. - Two hangers."
15 Who is Mr. Baxter?
l 16 A
Bill Baxter was a QC Inspector in the process of being
)
17 certified.
He was not a certified inspector; he was in 18 training.
19 Q
All right.
Who made this observation about Mr. Baxter, 20 if you recall?
21 A
It would have been made by Bruce Brown, who would have 22 been in charge of that area of inspection.
23 MR. GUILD:
Again, Mr. Chairman, I object.
24 The witness needs to state directly whether he 25 recalls or doesn't recall.
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2572 O
1 A
(Continuing.)
By referring back to who was in the 2
meeting, knowing who Mr. Baxter worked for, the 3
statement would have been made by Mr. Brown.
4 MR. CALLIHAN:
You have got an objection.
5 MR. MILLER:
Mr. Chairman, there is an 6
objection.
7 The witness, apparently, has no direct recollection 8
of who made the statement but is able to reconstruct 9
from his knowledge of who was at the meeting who the 10 statement would have come f rom.
11 MR. GUILD:
The answer was, "It would have
?
12 been so and so," and my objection was that the witness 13 is simply speculating.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Does the witness know who 15 made the statement?
i 16 THE WITNESS:
Yes, sir.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Who made the statement?
18 THE WITNESS:
Bruce Brown.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Mr. Guild, sometimes it's 20 just a mannerism:
The witness talks in the subjunctive 21 when he really means the past tense.
22 BY MR. MILLER:
23 Q
All right, sir.
I would like to now turn -- continuing 24 on Page 116 to the meeting that took place on December O
25 29, 1983.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2573 1
I take it that the individuals listed there after 2
Mr. Brown were the individuals who were Lead Inspectors 3
at that point in time; correct?
4 A
That is correct.
5 Q
Now, there the first statement is, 1-A,
" Paper work in 6
equipment and welding are all f---ed up.
If people 7
can't conform to paper work requirements, bring them in 8
for a warning.
Irv continues to explain the importance 9
of getting the equipment file straightened out.
Irv 10 complains about welding people standing around 11 bullshitting.
Irv mentions if Baxter can't cut the n
12 mustered, get me a written report and I will get rid of g
(_
13 him."
14 First of all, are all the statements in that 15 Paragraph la attributable to Mr. DeWald?
16 A
Yes, they are.
17 Q
What paper work in the equipment and welding area was 18 Mr. DeWald referring to in the first sentence?
19 A
The inspection checklists.
20 Q
Do you know how Mr. DeWald became aware of the 21 deficiencies in paper work in the equipment welding 22 area?
23 A
Mr. Baronowski, who would have been in charge of the 24 vault, had to review that paper work as it was turned es
(_)
25 in; and he would have voiced a concern with the large Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2574 O
1 number of corrections that had to be made.
2 0
The next sentence, "If people can't conform to the paper 3
work requirements," what people were referred to as far 4
as you know?
5 A
QC Inspectors.
6 Q
All right.
"Irv continues to explain the importance of 7
getting the equipment file straightened out," what t
8 equipment file was Mr. DeWald referring to as best you 9
kn ow?
10 A
In the QC records vault there was a file for each piece 11 of equipment that had all the documentation for that 12 piece of equipment in it.
13 He wanted to get that file organized t'o where the 14 electrical inspections, the welding inspections for that l
15 piece of equipment would all be in the same file, so if 16 you had a question on the piece of equipment, it would 17 all be in one area.
18 Q
All right, sir.
Dropping down to the last sentence on 19 that page, "Irv mentions if Baxter can't cut the 20 mustered," and so forth.
21 Which Baxter was Mr. DeWald referring to, if you 22 know?
23 A
Bill Baxter, the QC Inspector.
24 Q
Is Mr. Baxter still employed at the Braidwood site?
()
25 A
No, sir.
He quit.
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2575 1
(
i 1
Q When?
2 A
It would have been February or March of 1984.
3 0
Was he ever certified as a Level 2?
4 A
Yes, he was certified as a Level 2 Weld Inspector.
5 0
All right.
Next on Page 117, item -- I guess it's 3A, 6
"Irv wants the QC US surveillance moving, especially 7
welding."
8 Again, the Irv is Mr. DeWald, I take it?
9 A
Yes, it is.
10 Q
Could you explain to us what Mr. DeWald was referring to 11 as you understood it in this meeting?
3 12 A
Yes.
The QC US surveillance dealt with a unit concept 7
13 overview-type inspection performed via the CECO QA 14 group; and they would go out into an area and document 15 what they found as concerns or problems, issue a report 16 to Comstock.
17 Irv was making a point that we now needed to get 18 moving on answering those reports, getting answers back 19 to the Quality Assurance Department, and he was 20 directing that he needed some of the inspection force to 21 start working on these items.
22 0
The next sentence under Item 4A, "He wants Hutson and 23 Tom Smith out inspecting US items."
24.
First of all, who is the "he," Mr. DeWald?
()
25' A
Mr. DeWald, yes.
Sonntag ReDortina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2576 O
1 Q
Would you identify Mr. Hutson and Mr. Tom Smith then for 2
us?
3 A
Yes, Jeff Hutson and Tom Smith were two Level 2 Weld 4
Inspectors for Comstock.
5 0
And the reference to the "US" is a reference to the Unit 6
Concept Inspections?
7 A
That's correct.
8 Q
Prior to this time, had Mr. Hutson and Mr. Smith been 9
assigned to inspecting Unit Concept Inspection items?
10 A
Yes, they were; and IV was concerned with the timeliness 11 of their responses.
12 Q
For how long a time prior to this meeting on December (g
'~
13 29th had Mr. Hutson and Mr. Smith been --
14 A
I can't testify as to how long.
I don't know that.
15 0
All right.
Then there is a sentence that follows, 16 without reading it into the record.
17 What did you understand, the import of that 18 sentence by Mr. DeWald?
19 A
You would have had to understand the tone of the 20 meeting.
It was Irv and I sitting down with the 21 supervisors and the leads, and it was not a formal 22 management talking to the leads.
It was more intended 23 to be a group participation.
24 There was some language used that was -- you know, l
25 you would use a statement like that, everybody would Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2577 O
1 laugh and know it was just a dialogue of that type of an 2
informal meeting.
3 But what he was getting across to the lead of those 4
particular gentlemen was, "Get them out in the field 5
inspecting.
Get them moving.
Get them out of the
'6 office."
7 0
Did anyone at that meeting indicate that Mr. Hutson and 8
Mr. Smith had, in fact, been spending time in the office 9
rather than inspecting?
10 A
The reason the subject come up was that one of the leads i
11 had expressed that they had a concern with getting them 12 out of the office, getting them involved in the 0
13 operations.
14 That's what -- when Irv first brought up the unit j
15-concept surveillance not moving promptly, then the lead 16 of that area would have brought up the fact, "These 17 guys, I have trouble getting them out of the office."
18 0
Who was the lead for the unit concept area?
19 A
I couldn't tell you exactly which one of these leads 20 were.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
I think now is a good time 22 to break.
23 So we will recess until 9:00 o' clock on Tuesday, 24 next Tuesday, same place.
()
25 (WHEREU PON, the hearing of the Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
2578 O
1 above-entitled matter was continued to 2
the 3rd day of June, 1986, at the hour of 3
9:00 A. M.)
4 5
6 7
8 9
10
]
11 12 17 l
k 13 14 j
15 16 17 18 4
19 l
20 21 1
22 4
23 24
- O 25 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
..-.,,_--,---..___-.---,-.-,n_
CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER O
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the matter of:
NAME OF PROCEEDING:
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Station, Units 1 & 2) c DOCKET NO.:
MARKHAM, ILLINOIS DATE:
FRIDAY, MAY 30, 1986 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
(sigt)
J J&
(TYPED)
GLENN SONNTAG Official Reporter ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
Reporter's Affiliation O