ML20203E912
| ML20203E912 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 07/24/1986 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#386-171 OL, NUDOCS 8607300014 | |
| Download: ML20203E912 (250) | |
Text
(~) UlN11EU STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO:
BRAIDWOOD STATION 50-456/457-OL UNITS 1 42 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (EVIDENTIARY HEARING)
O LOCATION: JOLIET, ILLINOIS PAGES: 8630 - 8931 DATE: THURSDAY, JULY 24, 1986 rR.0/ To d
//Pl- // .
DI ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
O officialReporters U '
8607300014 G60724 PDR ADOCK 0500 6 Was o C 20001 NATIONWTDE COVERACE
~. -- -. -- . . - . . - - -
1
)l+' '(
8630
' 1.,' l O -
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA G v . ;
2 NUCLEAR REGUL' ATORY COMMISSION
- 3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD d'
4 .
~ ~
_ i In the Matter of: :
6 : Docket No. 50-456 OL .'
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY : 50-457 OL
. 7 :
(Braidwood Station, Units 1 :
8 and 2) :
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _x 9
j 10 _
Pages 8630 - 8931 11 College of St. Francis
!, 5001 North Wilcox Street l () 12 Joliet, Illinois 60435 ,
13 Thursday, July 24, 1986.,,,
~
/
- 14
, The hearing in the above-entitled matter reconvened 15 at 9:00 A. M.
l 16
! 17 BEFORE:
i
! 18 JUDGE HERBERT GROSSMAN, Chairman i Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 19 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. '
l 20
, JUDGE RICR ARD F. COLE, Member,
! '21 -
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear' Regulatory Commission
- 22 Washington, D. C.
23 JUDGE A. DIXON CALLIHAN, Member, -
1 Atomic Safety knd Licensing Board l >74 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Washington, D. C. _
j 25 l APPEARANCES: .
! i Sonntaa Reporting Service, Ltd.
j Geneva, Illinois 6013f ~-
l . - _ _ ~ _ _ _._ _ _ __
(312) 232-0262 _. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
8631 1
On behalf of the Applicant:
2 MICH AEL I. MILLER, ESQ.
3 JOSEPH GALLO, ESQ.
ELENA 2. KEZELIS, ESQ.
4 Isham, Lincoln & Beale Three First National PJaza l 5 Chicago, Illinois 60602 6 On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff '
7 ELAINE I. CH AN, ESQ.
8 GREGORY ALAN BERRY, ESQ.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9 7335 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland 20014 10 On behalf of the Intervenors:
- 11 ROBERT GUILD, ESQ.
()
12 13 14 ,
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 i 22 23
(:) 25 i
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _.
I 8632 O
1 EXHIBIT ' INDEX Marked Received 2 Intervenors' Exhibit No. 70 8636 8679 3
TESTIMONY OF ROBERT DUANE HUNTER 4
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) 5 BY MR. GUILD: 8635 6 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 8685 7
BOARD EXAMINATION 8 BY JUDGE COLE: 8687 9 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE CALLIHAN: 8693 10 BOARD EXAMINATION 11 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 8701
() 12 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE COLE: 8702 13 BOARD EXAMINATION 14 BY JUDGE CALLIBAN: 8703 15 CROSS EXAMINATION l BY MR. GALLO: 8704 6
16 BOARD EXAMINATION 17 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 8892 1
18 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE GROSSMAN 8897 19 20 21 l
- 22 23 l
([) 25 Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262_ - _ _ __ _ _ _ _
8633 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The hearing is reconvened.
2 This is the 43rd day of hearing.
3 I was delaying somewhat because I wanted to make 4 available to the parties copies of the OI investigation 5 of the other matter, which is somewhat relevant to this 6 case. l 7 It involves an inspector who is currently being
! 8 examined, though not right now. He's partially been 9 examined -- I don't care to mention the name -- on an 10 incident that occurred some time ago.
11 I wanted to make that -- as far as I can see, my
() 12 understanding is that the alleger never requested l 13 confidentiality and that there are no reasons to l
i 14 withhold that report.
15 The only . reason that it has been withheld until now 16 is that OI has not completed all the red tape that it 17 has to. If we waited for that, I think we wouldn't have 18 had that report for another month or so.
19 I think you ought to have it, for whatever it's 20 worth, before you conclude your examination of that l
21 person.
22 Now, the Xeroxing didn't get both sides of the 23 report. I'm not sure we still have both sides. Let me 24 see.
l 25 I'm handing counsel for each of the parties a copy Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
[ - --
(312) 232-0262
8634 4
1 of that report. The last page is not attached.
2 (Indicating.)
3 Why don't we take a recess for about seven or eight 4 minutes now while counsel peruse the document.
5 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had, after which 6 the proceedings were resumed as follows:)
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We' re back in session.
8 '
Off the record Mr. Miller asked me whether there 9 were any restrictions on the information in this report.
10 As far as I understand again, the alleger did not 11 request confidentiality.
() 12 13 The Office of Investigations has completed its
~
field investigation and, therefore, does not consider 14 that dissemination of this information publicly would 15 have any effec.t on the investigation, which is already 16 completed, so that the parties are free to use the 17 inf ormation whichever way they want.
18 Furthermore, apparently the subject of the 19 investigation was known to the company management, which l
l 20 was interviewed.
21 I wanted to get this report to you as quickly as 22 possible, since counsel may wish to study it before they 23 complete their examination. I guess they'll have at 24 least the luncheon break to do that.
O 25 So we might just as well go on to the witness we Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
i Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
8635 O
1 have here, unless there are any preliminary matters.
2 I want to remind the witness that you remain sworn, 3 and we'll continue with your examination.
4 Mr. Guild?
5 MR. GUILD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
6 DIRECT EXAMINATION 7 (Continued) 8 BY MR. CUILD:
9 Q Mr. Hunter, when we concluded yesterday, we were 10 discussing the circumstances of your termination from 11 BESTCO under Comstock supervision at Braidwood.
() 12 13 I had asked you a series of questions about a letter that you wrote to Mr. Skidmore and a field review 14 of the questioned hangers that you performed yourself.
15 A Yes, sir.
16 Q Did you subsequently write a letter to the Quality First 17 organization?
18 A Yes, I did.
19 MR. GUILD: Let me ask you to look at a 20 document that appears to be that letter. It's a 21 two-page typewritten document with your signature on the 22 second page, identified on the first page "To: Quality 23 First."
l l 24 Mr. Chairman, I'd ask that this document be marked O 25 for identification as Intervenors' Exhibit 70.
l Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _
8636 O
1 (The document was thereupon marked 2 Intervenors' Exhibit No. 70 for 3 identification as of July 24, 1986.)
4 BY MR. GUILD:
5 Q Mr. Bunter, is this a copy of the letter that you wrote 6 to Quality First?
7 A Yes, it appears to be.
8 Q On the third line of the first page, it refers to a date 9 of March 26, 1986, and " exit interview."
10 Did you have an exit interview when you were 11 terminated?
(} 12 13 A
0 Yes, I did.
And what happened in that exit interview?
14 A I informed Mr. -- I believe the f ellow's name was Mr.
15 Peterson that.I would give him a letter about my 16 termination.
17 0 Okay.
'18 Was this a gentleman who identified himself as a 19 Quality First representative?
20 A Yes, he was.
21 0 This was af ter you had been informed that you were 22 terminated?
23 A It was at the time of it, yes.
24 0 Okay.
O 25 And then subsequently you prepared this letter and Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8637 O
1 sent it to Quality First?
2 A Yes, I did.
3 0 Can you recall when you sent the letter?
4 A I'm pretty sure it was probably mailed on March the 26th
$ from my home.
6 0 You drove to your home in Missouri?
7 A Yes, I did, on the 26th -- or 25th, whatever day it was.
~
8 0 okay.
9 Well, if your exit interview was the 26th, you went 10 home that day?
11 A That's correct.
() 12 13 Q
A As soon as you got home, you sent the letter?
That's true.
14 Q Now, under Paragraph No. 2 in the letter, the first 15 page, ,you have. the title " Harassment / Intimidation. " You 16 make the statement, "Was this not a way to get back at 17 the people who had given a deposition to the 18 Intervenors, BPI, and NRC people, as well as being a 19 personality clash between Mr. Tony Simile and myself."
20 Now, with respect to Mr. Simile, would you describe 21 your relationship with him, please?
22 A I wouldn' t say that it was f riendly. I'd say it was 23 sort of at a distance.
24 O Mr. Simile was the Level III General Supervisor?
O 25 A That is correct.
i l
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
i Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _ - -
8638 O
1 Q All right.
2 And he supervised the welding inspection 3 activities, including your own?
4 A That is correct.
5 0 Why do you state that your relationship was not friendly ,
6 with Mr. Simile?
i 7 A Well, the date I can't recall offhand.
8 Mr. Simile observed me reading a newspaper up on 9 . Elevation 461.
10 I received a written warning f rom -- signed by Mr.
11 Irv DeWald, and that was approximately three months
() 12 af ter Mr. Simile had arrived at the jobsite.
13 I don't think our relations improved af ter that at 14 all.
15 0 All right.
16 Now, as I unders't and your testimony, Mr. Simile 17 observed you reading a newspaper; is that correct?
18 A That's correct.
19 0 Okay.
20 Did you see Mr. Simile while you were reading the 21 newspaper?
22 A Oh, yes, I did.
23 Q Did Mr. Simile say something to you at the time?
24 A He said nothing.
O 25 Q Did he give you any indication, at the time that you Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8639 O
1 were reading the newspaper and he observed you reading 2 the newspaper, that he thought that was improper 3 behavior on your part?
4 A He did not say a word.
5 Q Did you -- how did you learn that you had been 6 reprimanded for this incident?
7 A Well, I was informed to report over to Irv DeWald's 8 office at 5:00 o' clock on that date.
9 Q All right.
10 What did Mr. DeWald say to you at that time?
11 A Mr. DeWald did most of the talking.
l () 12 He said -- he said, "You know that's against policy," and I said, "I'm sure it is."
i 13 l
14 I explained to him that one of the fellows -- one 15 of the other inspectors was sitting at the table doing 16 his Form 19's, and I was done with mine and I was 17 waiting for us both to go to 463 elevation.
18 0 All right.
19 A Mr. Irv DeWald -- he realized that I -- I mean, he knew l 20 that I always read the paper one hour before work time 21 every morning.
22 It was just some article that I was re-reading or 23 something. It wasn't that I was sitting down, going 24 through the paper page by page.
25 0 All right.
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l i .
8640 l 1 I understand f rom your previous testimony that you 2 had not ever been criticized for lack of productivity on i 3 the job.
l 4 A That's true.
5 0 In fact, you understood that your productivity rates
! 6 were among the highest -- is that right?
7 A I think so.
8 0 -- smong "ald inspectors.
l
! 9 Now, at your deposition you were shown a document 10 that bears a date of April 15, 1985, and it's signed by 11 Mr.'DeWald.
(} 12 13 (Indicating.)
It is addressed to the "R. D. Hunter file."
14 A That's true. That is the letter.
15 0 You remember seeing that at your deposition?
16 It was shown to you at your deposition?
17 A Yes, it was shown to me, yes.
j 18 0 Had Mr. DeWald showed you that memo at the time that he l 19 reprimanded you about this incident?
20 A No, he didn't.
21 0 The first time you saw it was at your deposition?
l 22 A That's right, that's true.
23 0 Did Simile have any contact 'with you about this matter 24 face to face?
O 25 A No, he didn't, as fat -- up until we went in and talked l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
8641 O
1 to Mr. Irv DeWald.
2 Q Was Mr. Simile there then?
3 A Yes, he was there.
4 Q It was apparent at that point, I gather, that Simile, 5 who had seen you reading the newspaper, was the one who 6 initiated the action involved?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Did he say anything at that time?
9 A Yes. He said he observed me reading a newspaper on 10 Elevation 461.
11 Q Did you dispute that you had done that?
() 12 13 A No, I did not dispute it.
Okay.
Q 14 And that would have occurred -- the date on the 15 memo, again, is April of ' 85, and it refers to -- it 16 doesn't refer to another date.
l 17 Was it approximately April of '85 --
18 A Yes, it was.
19 0 -- when this occurred?
20 A Yes.
! 21 Q Did you have any other contact with Mr. Simile that l
22 forms a basis for your observation that you and he were
! 23 not on f riendly terms?
24 A Well, naturally, different projects that I worked on, O 25 different special projects I worked on, I'd have to see l
Sonntac Reporting Service, Ltd.
j Geneva, Illinois 60134 j}) -0262
8642 0
1 him about certain things. Sometimes Mr. Simile would be 2 very cooperative, and sometimes he would be very 3 distant.
4 In other words, sometimes he would give me the 5 answer right off of what -- what the problems were or 6 what we should do about the problems. Sometimes he 7 would put it off a day or two or three days.
8 I don't know whether he was actually looking for 9 information hisself or what. But anyway, that's the way 10 it worked.
! 11 Q Is it your opinion he was wrong about putting off for a
() 12 f ew day s --
There was nothing wrong as far as that goes, except that 13 A 14 I felt that he was just delaying the answer that he 15 should give me.
16 0 That was your impression at the time?
17 A That was the impression that I --
18 Q All right.
19 That Simile was putting you off; is that what i 20 you're saying?
l i 21 A Yes, that's correct.
l 22 0 Okay.
1 23 Do I understand that your view was that he could 24 have answered you at the time or more quickly?
25 A Well, I -- I felt that he -- that he could have or Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8643 o
U 1 should have.
2 0 All right, sir.
3 Do you know a man named Worley Puckett?
4 A Yes, I know Worley Puckett.
5 Q Did you know Mr. Puckett during the period May to August 6 of '84, when he was hired on as the Level III Weld 7 Inspector?
8 A I believe I did, yes.
9 Q And did you become aware of the circumstances of Mr.
10 Puckett's departure f rom the site?
11 A Well, my understanding was -- I never seen anything in
() 12 13 writing or anything like that -- that Mr. Puckett wasn't qualified f or the job.
l 14 0 All right.
15 That was what you understood f rom whom?
16 A That was what I understood f rom the scuttlebutt, yes.
17 Q And had you ever heard or understood that Mr. Puckett 18 had claimed that his termination was in retaliation for 19 having raised safety or quality concerns about the 20 welding program?
21 A Well, that was the rumor that was floating around, that 22 that was one of the problems: that he caused too many 23 problems or too many waves.
24 Q All right.
D
'# 25 And had you had any personal knowledge of Mr.
Sonntac Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _
8644 O
1 Puckett raising those concerns?
2 Did Puckett ever speak to you about concerns in the 3 welding program?
4 A Yes. At one time I believe Mr. Worley Puckett put a 5 stop-work order on, and at that time I was working with 6 a young man by the name of John Miner.
7 I know that John Miner signed the work ticket -- I 8 mean, the hold ticket.
9 0 The NCR?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Okay.
(} 12 13 A Did Miner discuss that matter with you?
We were both working in the f ab shop area at the time, 14 so naturally it was discussed, yes.
15 0 All right.
16 And did Miner in substance communicate that this 17 was a matter that Mr. Puckett had raised, the NCR that 18 he signed?
19 A Well, I'm -- I'm sure that Mr. Miner mentioned that or 20 Mr. Puckett told me that they had problems with testing 21 procedures of welders and things like that, yes.
22 0 All right, sir.
23 Do you know specifically what the subject was of 24 this NCR?
O 25 A No. I did not read the -- I did not read the NCR report Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 . .-
8645 O
1 on it.
2 0 All right.
3 Did you understand that af ter Mr. Puckett's 4 departure f rom the site, af ter his termination, that he 5 brought a complaint with the U. S. Department of Labor, 6 alleging retaliatory discharge?
7 A Yes. We heard that on the jobsite.
8 0 All right.
l 9 And did you hear that Mr. Puckett won his 10 Department of Labor complaint against the government?
1 11 A Yes, I believe -- I believe I also heard that.
1
() 12 13 0
A Was that also commonly discussed among the inspectors?
Yes, it was, yes, l
14 0 Was the allegation that Mr. Puckett had been fired in 15 retaliation for raising these concerns about the welding 16 program commonly discussed among the QC Inspectors?
17 A Well, yes, it was.
18 Q All right.
19 Now, did you ever have any occasion to discuss this l 20 n.atter or bring up this subject in front of Mr. Simile?
l 21 A Probably no more than just a normal conversation about 22 what happened to old Worley Puckett.
23 0 Did you make any such statement in front of Mr. Simile I
24 about Mr. Puckett?
O 25 A Oh, I probably said he was a good old boy and that he Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8646 O
1 seemed to know what he was doing.
2 Q Did you express any opinion in front of Mr. Simile about 3 the cause for Mr. Puckett's termination?
4 A Well, we probably -- I probably brought it up; that 5 Worley caused too many waves, you know, things like 6 that; they'll get you.
7 I'm sure I said something on that order.
8 Q To Mr. Simile?
9 A At one time, yes.
10 Q Did Mr. Simile say anything back?
11 A Right offhand I can't remember him making any reply, no.
(} 12 13 MR. GUILD:
JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Mr. Chairman?
I think perhaps the witness 14 ought to explain that statement he just made in the 15 colloquial lan.guage.
16 MR. GUILD: Okay.
( 17 If I'm understanding the Chairman's observation, 18 you used the terms you "might have" or you "probably 19 did."
20 Mr. Chai rman, is that your --
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No. I meant what he said l
l 22 about " calling it too many ways. "
23 MR. GUILD: Okay, fine.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think he ought to explain 25 what that means.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8647 O
1 BY MR. GUILD:
2 Q First, you used the term " making too many waves" or the 3 colloquial expression --
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is that what he said; 5 " making too many waves"?
6 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's fine. You don' t have 8 to explain that.
9 BY MR. GUILD:
10 0 Is your recall today that you made such a statement to 11 Mr. Simile?
() 12 13 A The date?
No, I cannot remember the ddte.
l 14 Q Not the date, but is it your testimony today that you 15 remember havin.g made such a statement, in front of Mr.
- 16 Simile, about Mr. Puckett?
17 A I'm sure that he was present when that statement was 18 made by myself.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We understand the witness 20 does say "I'm sure that something happened" and "I 21 believe," when apparently he is testifying that 22 something actually happened.
23 MR. GUILD: To the best of his recall.
l 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: If you can clarify it, fine, C:) 25 but it's very dif ficult to get people to change their Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8648
(:)
1 mannerisms --
2 THE WITNESS: That's true.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- when they are testifying.
4 They may do it for a few minutes, but then they lapse 5 back into their old way of expressing themselves.
6 MR. GUILD: Fine, Mr. Chairman.
7 BY MR. GUILD:
8 0 All right.
9 So you and Mr. Simile, at least f rom the point of 10 this newspaper-reading incident, had less than a cordial 11 relationship; is that a fair understanding?
() 12 13 A I'd say that was a f air -- a f air statement.
Okay.
0 14 And did -- do .you have any opinion about how Mr.
15 Simile felt, based on your contact with him?
16 Did he like you?
17 A That I couldn't tell you.
18 Whether he liked me or not by his expression, no.
19 0 By his expression, you would say that you don' t think he 20 did; is that your statement?
21 A That is correct.
22 0 Now, did you know a man named John Seeders?
23 A Yes, I believe I did.
24 O All right.
O 25 And did you know Mr. Seeders in his capacity as the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8649 O
1 Level II calibrations inspector at Comstock?
2 A Yes.
3 0 And he worked in the same office with you for a time?
s 4 A In the same room, yes.
5 0 Until his transf er to Engineering --
6 A That's correct.
7 0 -- in October of '847 8 A That is correct.
9 0 Were you aware of any relationship between Mr. Seeders 10 and Mr. Saklak shortly before Mr. Seeders' transfer?
11 A Let's just say that the relationship wasn' t good.
() 12 13 O And did you observe Seeders and Saklak interacting in that period of time?
- 14 A Yes, I did.
1 15 0 What was the nature of that interaction that you l 16 observed?
1 17 A Sort of hostile.
18 0 Were you aware of a letter that Mr. Seeders wrote to Mr.
( 19 DeWald, the NRC and others?
l 20 A Yes, as I understand, and I probably read the letter at 21 one time.
22 O It was dated August 17, 1984.
23 Did you read it at about the time of the date it 24 was written?
O 25 A Yes, at approximately that time, right.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8650 0
1 0 Can you recall what the source was?
2 Did you get a copy of the letter from someone?
3 A No, I didn' t get a copy.
4 There was probably a copy floating around, and all 5 the QC people handed it from one guy to the next guy and 6 they all read it.
7 Q Was it a common subject of discussion at that time among 8 the inspectors?
9 A Yes, it was.
10 Q Did you understand that Mr. Seeders was transferred to 11 the Engineering Department?
() 12 .A Yes, I think so.
13 Q And did you understand that Mr. Seeders maintained that 14 that transfer was retaliation -- was in retaliation for 15 having written this letter?
- 16 A That is correct.
17 0 Was that discussed among the inspectors?
18 A Oh, yes, yes.
19 Q Now, in March of 1985, did you have occasion to visit 20 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission resident inspector's 21 office?
22 A Yes.
23 0 And can you describe the circumstances under which you
- 24 went over to the NRC, Mr. Hunter?
25 A I believe on the prior day, Mr. Saklak and Mr. Snyder i
Sonntao Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8651 O
1 had a few words in an area in which I was working.
2 0 You were physically present in the --
3 A I was physically present --
4 0 -- in the general area?
l 5 A -- when this happened, yes.
6 0 All right, sir.
7 A The next morning, which -- the f ollowing morning, I was 8 in the field doing inspection, weld inspection. When I 9 come in at noon, why, someone said, "We're going over to 10 the NRC. We' re going to do something about Saklak. "
11 I don' t r.emember who told me that or anything, but
() 12 13 anyway it was a group. Some 24 or 25 people went over there at the noon hour to talk to two representatives 14 f rom the NRC.
15 0 All right, si r..
16 N ow , did you relate to your fellow inspectors that 17 you had been present during the Snyder-Saklak run-in the 18 day before? Did you tell the others --
19 A Did I inform the other inspectors?
l 20 0 Yes.
21 A Well, I'm sure it was common knowledge to whoever was 22 working in that area.
23 0 And you were invited to go to the NRC --
24 A Yes.
O 25 0 -- to deal with the Saklak matter; is that right?
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8652 O
1 A That's correct.
2 0 Well, let me ask the question more neutrally.
3 Why did you go to the NRC?
4 A Well, I think I f elt like -- my opinion was that most of 5 the other inspectors felt that they had a fellow that 6 was trying to intimidate and harass fellow inspectors.
7 Q All right, sir.
8 You went to the NRC at the noon meeting, then?
9 A That's correct.
10 0 How far in advance of the noon meeting did you learn of 11 the intention of the inspectors to go over to the NRC?
I don' t think until I come in 'for lunchtime.
(} 12 13 A
Q Was it more than an hour before you went?
i 14 A Oh, I think it wasn't nearly an hour; maybe 10 or 15 15 minutes, at the most.
16 Q Did you have any prior knowledge or information that 17 there was a plan to go over to the NRC on that day?
18 A I hadn't heard of any, no.
19 0 Okay.
20 You heard just as you came in for lunch?
21 A That's correct.
22 MR. GUILD: Excuse me a moment, Mr. Chairman.
23 BY MR. GUILD:
, 24 Q All right.
O 25 I'm going to show you a document, Mr. Hunter. It's i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 .. . - _ _ - _ _ _ _ .-
8653 O '
1 Intervenors' Exhibit 42-A. It's an in-camera document.
2 There are names that appear in this document, and the 3 names have been deleted f rom the public copy of this 4 document.
5 (Indicating.)
6 Mr. Hunter, it's an April 5,1985, memo, and the 7 record reflects that it was prepared to summarize the t
8 concerns of the inspectors who went over at that noon 9 hour.
10 Bave you ever seen this memo before?
11 Your version would not have had the brachets around
() 12 it. It probably would have had the names, if you have 13 seen it.
14 A Yes, I believe I have seen this before.
15 0 Can you recall when you first saw it?
16 A Offhand the date, no.
17 Q Was it sent to you by the NRC?
18 A That I couldn't say.
19 O Do you recall having been shown it at your deposition?
l 20 A I think that is where I'first saw it.
i 21 Q All right.
22 Now, your name appears in the document. Let me i
! 23 show you Page 3.
i 24 (Indicating.)
25 I'm indicating to the witness --
Sonntac Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8654
~
l A Right.
2 Q Do you recall making a statement in substance to the 3 effect that is indicated in the statement by your name?
4 A Yes, that is a statement I made.
5 Q The statement reads, "More than a little bit of 6 intimidation by more than one supervisor." The context 7 is talking about Saklak.
8 Are you referring to more than one supervisor 9 besides Mr. Saklak? Is that your reference?
10 A That's my reference, yes, 11 Q Do you recall making any other statements to the NRC at
() 12 that lunch-hour meeting?
I don't recall making any other statement.
13 A Not offhand.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm not sure we identified 15 for the record that you' re showing him Intervenors' 16 Exhibit 42-A.
l 17 MR. GUILD: Indeed it is 42-A, Mr. Chairman.
18 I apologize.
( 19 BY MR. GUILD:
i All right.
20 Q 21 Further down the page there is an indication by an inspector, whose name I won't mention for the record, 22 23 and the indication reads -- this is Page 3 - " Inspector 24 productivity overrides the quality of the inspection,"
l O 25 parentheses, "(At that point a show of hands was done.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _.
8655 O
1 The resident inspectors indicated that the Comstock 2 inspectors agreed 100 percent with that statement)," end 3 of parentheses.
4 Do you recall a statement being made to that 5 effect?
6 A Yes, I believe I did.
7 Q Do you recall a show of hands?
8 A Yes, I do.
9 O Did you raise your hand?
10 A I'm sure I did, yes.
11 Q Did you agree with the statement that was made by the I
12 inspector before the show of hands?
/)
13 A At that time, yes, I did.
14 0 And why did you agree with that?
15 A That was another one of those programs they said they 16 had to get done by a certain date in order to retain the l 17 job.
18 In other words, if you didn't have a certain amount 19 of work accomplished by a certain date, then Com Ed 20 would get rid of Comstock.
l 21 Q All right.
22 Did you ever hear the expression " pushing numbers"?
23 A I've heard of that expression, yes.
1 24 0 In what context have you heard that expression used?
O 25 A Well, in other words, you had to have a certain amount Sonntac Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8656 O
1 of inspection work done in order to justify the people 2 on the j ob.
3 0 Did that expression apply to the work of QC Inspectors?
4 A It shouldn't.
5 0 Well, did it apply, in your experience, with management 6 using that concept, " pushing numbers," in relation to QC 7 Inspector work?
8 A I'm sure at one time it happened, yes.
9 0 Well, shortly af ter this meeting with the NRC on March 10 29, 1985, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Saklak was removed f rom the 11 site.
() 12 Are you aware of that f act?
13 A Yes, I was.
14 0 All right.
15 Now, did .the removal of Mr. Saklak eliminate all 16 the problems at Comstock?
17 A Not at that time, no.
18 0 And did it help?
19 A I'm sure it helped.
20 0 What other problems were -- remained af ter Mr. Saklak's 21 departure?
22 A Well, I would state for probably 30 to 60 days, things 23 pretty well quieted down. In other words, there was no 24 hoopla, you know, about, "You've got to get this done.
25 You've got to get that done."
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8657 O
1 That only lasted for a short period of time. Then 2 we went right back to the same way it was: that you had 3 to get a certain amount done in order to retain the job 4 and all that.
5 Q Did they go back to pushing numbers, management?
6 A I don't know if you'd want to call it " pushing numbers,"
7 but they were pushing, yes.
8 0 Okay.
9 Now, Mr. Bunter, would you describe yourself as a 10 union man?
11 A Yes, I would describe myself as a union man.
() 12 13 My first local was probably in 1955.
All right, sir.
0 14 And you've worked on a number of union jobs since 15 then?
l 16 A Yes, pretty well the last 35 years.
17 0 Were you a supporter of the efforts to organize the job l
l 18 at Comstock? .
19 A Oh, yes.
20 Q And why did you support organizing the job at Comstock, 21 Mr. Hunter?
i 22 A I felt that any man should be representative -- I mean, 23 should be represented when he goes before someone who f14 accuses him of doing a certain thing.
O 25 0 All right.
i Sonntac Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- e 8658 a..
1 A In other'"words, it was for the QC Inspectors' 2 protection. ,
3 0 Hpw about at Comstock? _ _
4 What, if anything, at Comstock was a basis for your -
5 supporting the efforts to organize the job there?
6 A I had seen p.few people terminated, a f ew people 7 harassed and a f ew people intimidated with no way of 8 representing;the,irselves. -
9 0 All. . righ t. '
10 < "When yo's say " representation" or " representing,"
11 what difference would it make whether the 3ob was' 12 organire,d yy -- represented by a union, had a collective
{i 13 bafhsining agreement, on,that score, on the score of 14 beiEg tepresented?
15 A You usually have a steward, who is called in for any 16 inf raction that the management says that a QC person has 17 performed.
18 'In other words, he had been represented by his 19 local or_ his union as f ar as grievance procedurer and 20 things like that.
l 21 0 You have a shop steward; .is that what you' re referring 22 to? <
23 A Yes -- well, yes, a shop steward.
! 24 Q And the shop steward's f unction in part .is to represent i
25- members of the bargaining unit in disputes with Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinoih 66134 (312) 232-0262 _ _ _
8659 O
1 management? i 2 A That's true.
3 0 And that's pursuant to a grievance procedure that you'd 4 have under a union contract?
5 A That's right.
6 Q Now, focusing on Comstock at Braidwood, what role, if 7 any, did disputes about pay have in supporting your --
8 as a basis for your support for organizing the job?
9 A Well, I don' t think 'it had a whole lot to do with -- the 10 pay wasn't really the primary reason for us to organize.
11 That wasn' t the primary reason.
(} 12 13 It was more for representation than -- than it was for pay.
l 14 Q All right, sir.
15 Well, were there any disputes about the pay system 16 that they had at Comstock?
17 A Oh, yes.
18 When I arrived at the jobsite, I don't think any 19 inspector was probably drawing over $10 an hour, maybe 20 nine and a half, something like that.
21 Mr. Marino come down and informed them how it would 22 be. I believe it was sometime maybe in early '84.
23 Q That was the April, '84, time when he came in to talk?
l l 24 A I'm sure it was early '85.
O 25 Anyway, he laid out a little pay scale that was Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 1 8660
~
O -
1 going to be followed; and the same day he was there, 2 some inspectors gone from $7 to $14 an hour because they 3 had been on the jobsite for some two or three years and 4 had acquired some eight or ten, five or six 5 certifications in different disciplines.
6 O So they automatically got this 50-cent-per-hour 7 increment --
- 8 A Yes, they did, yes, they did.
9 Q -- for each additional certification?
10 A Right.
11 Q How, if at all, did the union contract change that
() 12 A
situation?
Well, when the union contract come in and -- and Com'Ed 13 14 bought it, it started out -- started everybody out at 15 .
two or three different levels. I think it was three 16 levels when they started, from about $14 and some odd 17 cents to $16.82 or something on that order.
1B Q All right.
19 And when you -- when the union contract was entered 20 into between the company and the local, did you, in 21 fact, get a grievance procedure?
22 A Not with Comstock, no.
23 0 With BESTCO?
24 A I believe it -- the way I understand it, BESTCO was to O 25 furnish the Quality Control people.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8661 0
1 Q The question I asked, Mr. Hunter, was whether or not 2 there was a grievance procedure entered into, as part of 3 the union contract, af ter the contract was entered into.
4 Do you know?
5 A A grievance committee?
6 0 A grievance procedure.
7 Did you have a grievance procedure?
8 A Oh, yes, we had a grievance procedure.
9 0 Did you, in f act, get a shop stewaril who could do the 10 representation?
11 A Yes, we did.
(} 12 13 0
A Who was that shop steward?
Larry Bossong.
14 0 Mr. Bossong was the shop steward -- he is the shop 15 steward?
16 A That's right.
17 Q N ow , what role, if any, did the union play -- or the 1
1 18 union sentiment play in the decision to go to the NRC in i
19 March of 1985?
20 A I don't think the union sentiment had anything at all to l
21 do with the visit to NRC on that date.
22 0 All right, sir.
23 Was your management at Comstock aware that you were 24 concerned about Mr. Saklak's supervisory style, if I can 25 use that term?
Sonntao Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8662 0
1 A Oh, I'm sure they were, yes.
2 Q Do you believe your management identified you as one of 3 the 24 inspectors that went over to the NRC in March of 4 1985?
5 A Oh, I'm sure they did, yes.
6 Q And why do you -- why do you reach that conclusion?
7 A Oh, nothing -- nothing concrete as f ar as anything being 8 documented about who went over and who didn't, but I'm 9 sure that management knowed thie people that went over.
10 0 Well, why do you think they identified you as one of 11 those persons, Mr. Hunter, if they didn' t -- if you' ve l
() 12 13 never seen a document to that effect?
What, in your opinion, is the basis for that l
14 belief?
l 15 A Offhand, like I say, I -- I cannot state that I ever 16 seen a document, saying that I was one of the persons 17 that went over, that management had in their hands.
18 Q Right.
19 A I can' t say that, but --
20 0 But -- go ahead. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt 21 you.
22 A But I'm sure in my own mind that they realized the ones 23 that actually went over, because they even have people 24 in their supervision today that went over with us. So I O 25 do know that they knowed who went over.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i l
l 8663 l
( ;
1 Q All right, sir.
2 Who in supervision today went over with you?
3 A Joe Hii is one that I can recall offhand because Joe and l 4 I went over together.
5 0 All right.
6 Was Mr. Hii a union man?
7 A Not as far as I know. He doesn't belong to Local 306, 8 no.
9 Q He is a supervisor today?
10 A That's true, yes.
11 Q Do you know why Mr. Hii went over in March of 19857
() 12 13 A I'm sure he felt, like the rest of us, that something had to be done about Mr. Saklak, his overbearing 14 personality, his boisterous remarks.
15 He would holler at a person, things like that. In 16 fact, I even heard him holler at Joe Hii myself.
17 0 And is it your belief that Mr. Hii and perhaps other 18 representatives of supervision witnessed who all the 24 l
l 19 were and could have reported to management that you were 20 among them?
21 A I -- I don' t know that Joe ever reported who was over 22 there or not, but he could have, yes.
23 0 And were there any other representatives -- any other 1
24 supervisors or present supervisors that went over?
l O 25 A The name I cannot recall, but I'm sure that there was Sonntaa Reportina S.qtylce, Ltd. .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i l
l 8664 A
v 1 one other.
2 0 At least one other besides Mr. Hii?
3 A I'm sure there was.
4 Q Besides having actual present-day supervisors at this 5 March 29,1985, meeting to observe you and others who 6 were present, did your course of dealings with 7 management at Comstock lead you to conclude that they 8 identified you one way or the other as a source of 9 complaints or a troublemaker or anything to that effect?
10 A Well, I don' t know whether they considered me as a 11 troublemaker or not, but they probably did because they
() 12 13 know that I would speak up; give them my side, at least.
They could give me theirs, but I'd also give them 14 mine.
15 0 All right, si r..
16 Now, let's go back to your letter to Quality First, 17 identified as Intervenors' Exhibit 70, again back to 18 Paragraph No. 2, " Harassment / Intimidation."
19 I asked you about your contact with Mr. Simile in 20 the past.
21 In this particular instance, now -- the 22 circumstances that led to your termination involving 23 these painted welds -- you've described that the PTL --
24 the young PTL overinspector mistakenly thought you were O 25 inspecting these vendor welds that were painted?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8665 O
1 A That's true.
2 Q And you brought to his attention that you were only 3 inspecting the field or attachment welds; is that right?
4 A That's correct.
5 0 Now, what, if any, contact did Mr. Simile have with the 6 -- with these events?
7 What involvement did Mr. Simile have?
8 A The first involvement I don' t know about.
9 I just -- on approximately the 21st -- I'd say it 10 was on the 21st -- I was -- I received word that Mr.
11 Simile wanted me to stay in and not do any more
(} 12 inspections.
I questioned at the time what it was all about.
13 14 Someone said, "You have been looking at the welds 15 through paint." I think maybe my Lead told me that.
16 Q Brian Murphy?
17 A Yes, I believe Brian said it. That was the allegation 18 that had been made.
19 O All right.
I 20 A The day that me and Mr. Simile went out to the plant 21 with a PTL Level III -- I don' t know what date that was.
22 Anyway, we went through them; and I explained the way we 23 did it, the way the inspections was made.
24 I also informed him that there was some time lapse l
C) 25 between the time I actually turned in my inspection form Sonntaa Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 ,
8666 O
1 and the day that the PTL man did his overview 2 inspection.
3 I took him to certain areas and especially along L 4 wall, down on 10, 11, 12 wall, and explained to him that 5 the core hole people were drilling core holes; 6 therefore, there would be a lot of dust, debris, 7 concrete dust, et cetera, on the hangers so that it 8 doesn't matter whether they had been looked at 10 9 minutes before or not.
10 I admitted that I probably should have done a 11 better job of cleaning them with my wire brush, and we went back over to the office with Mr.. Simile. He said,
{} 12 13 "Well, just hold up for a while." This was a day or two 14 before I was terminated.
15 Q All right.
16 Did you ever -- did Mr. Simile ever ask you whether 17 or not you had inspected welds through paint?
18 A I believo he did.
^
19 0 And what did you say to him?
20 A I told him that I never looked at an attachment weld 21 through paint in my life.
l 22 0 All right.
23 What was Simile's response to that?
24 A Oh, I don't know whether he actually did respond to it 25 or not in words.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 23 2
- - . -_ -___ - -- - - - - . -.- - -__-0262 . . _ . . - - . - . - - - - - - _
8667 O
1 0 Did he make a gesture or give you any other indication 2 of a response?
3 A A physical gesture, I couldn't say.
4 Q All right.
5 Did he follow up your position at all, that you 6 know of? Did he --
7 A Yes, I believe he did.
8 Q What --
9 A I believe -- I believe there was a letter written f rom 10 Mr. Simile, written to -- I don' t know if it was 11 Comstock, Com Ed or who.
(} 12 13 Q
A How did you learn of that?
I don't think I seen the letter until af ter I was 14 terminated --
15 0 AllC right.
/
16 A -- and the letter -- I cannot remember who sent it to 17 me.
18 Q All right.
19 Well, for the record, Mr. Hunter, a number of l
20 records were obtained through discovery from Applicant, 21 from amonwealth Edison Company.
22 I forwarded to you a packet of documents concerning 23 your termination.
l 24 A That's where I seen it, then.
O 25 0 And that letter, among other documents, you saw only Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8668 O
1 because I sent them to you?
2 A That is correct.
3 Q Included among them is a letter f rom Mr. Simile not to 4 you about the incident?
5 A That's correct.
6 Q But you didn't see the Simile letter before you were 7 terminated?
, 8 A No, I never --
l 9 0 Well, what, then, was the basis for your statement that 10 your termination may have been in part "a personality 11 clash between Mr. Tony Simile and myself," other than
(} 12 13 what you've said so far?
MR. GALLO: Objection; asked and answered.
! 14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: He said "other than what you 15 said."
16 Now , I believe he answered it completely; but if 17 there's anything further that you haven't said, would 18 you tell us?
19 MR. GUILD: I apologize for the inartful 20 question, but that's really what I meant to ask.
21 BY MR. GUILD:
22 Q was there anything, other than what you've said so f ar, 23 that was the basis for your statement in your Quality 24 First letter that this termination may in part have been O 25 a product of a personality clash between Tony Simile and Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 23 2
__. ----- -0262 . .__
l 1
8669 1 yourself?
2 A No. I would say that was the major reason, was just a 3 personality clash.
4 Q All right, sir.
5 Now, the other portion, the first portion, of that 6 Paragraph 2 is the statement where you say, "Was this 7 not a way to get back at the people who had given a i
8 deposition to the Intervenors, BPI, and the NRC people."
9 Well, now, you, in fact, at the time you were 10 terminated, had the year before gone over to the NRC; 11 correct?
() 12 13 A
Q That's correct.
And you, in f act, had had your deposition taken under 14 subpoena from Commonwealth Edison Company on two 15 occasions prior to your termination?
16 A That is correct.
17 Q Now, why do you believe, as you state in this letter, 18 Mr. Hunter, that your termination may have been a way of 19 getting back at you for having made th'e statements to 20 the NRC and having given that deposition testimony?
21 A Well, my -- my personal feeling was that, "He's a 22 troublemaker. He's going to give us problems down the 23 road, so why should we put up with him?"
24 0 That is your belief?
O 25 A That was my personal belief.
Sonntac Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8670 0
1 0 That's your belief as to the opinion of management at 2 Comstock?
3 A That is correct.
4 Q All right.
t 5 And is it your belief that that's what motivated 6 their action in terminating you?
7 A That's my belief, yes.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: You' re saying that's what 9 you believe Comstock management thought?
10 THE WITNESS: My personal belief, yes.
11 BY MR. GUILD:
12 O Now, on the second page of your Quality First letter,
{
13 Mr. Eunter, under item 5, Paragraph 5, you stated, "My 14 concern: If my integrity is in question, then I have 15 but one recourse," and you go on.
16 Now, did you understand that your integrity was 17 being questioned --
18 A Yes.
19 0 -- in this incident?
20 All right.
21 You, in fact, were being accused of having violated 22 a procedure, correct?
23 A That's correct.
24 0 I assume, since you said that you never did inspect O 25 welds through paint, attachment or field welds through Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8671 O
V 1 paint, that they weren't believing you when you said 2 that?
3 A That's correct.
4 Q So your integrity was being questioned also because they 5 thought you were telling a lie or speaking untruthfully?
6 A That's right.
7 0 All right, sir.
8 Now, you go on to say that if your integrity was 9 being questioned, that you "will request -- no, I will 10 demand -- a complete reinspection of all my documented 11 inspections f rom the date I was first certified at
{} 12 13 Braidwood, December 22, 1983, to March 26, 1986.
"I will require the total number of inspectio'ns, 14 total number of welds, total number of accepted and 15 total number rejected."
l 16 All right, sir.
17 Is it an accurate understanding that since you 18 thought your integrity was being questioned in the i 19 painted-weld incident, that you believed Edison should l
i 20 be consistent and question the integrity of all your 21 inspections?
22 A That's true.
i i
23 0 You sent this letter to Quality First.
24 Did you ever hear f rom them?
25 A Yes. I -- I received a couple of phone calls from l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8672 0
1 Quality First, maybe three different times, since March 2 the 26th.
3 0 All right.
4 And who did you hear f rom, if you can recall?
5 A I believe the man's name was Mr. Peterson.
6 0 Was he the same fellow that you had your exit interview 7 with?
l 8 A Yes, he was.
9 Q And what in substance did Mr. Peterson or the person 10 from Quality First who talked to you by phone say?
11 A Well, he said that all allegations had been looked into
() 12 13 and they had been verified, et cetera.
What do you mean, "they had been verified"?
0 14 A Well --
! 15 0 They didn' t agree with you, did they?
16 A No, not altogether.
l 17 0 By " verified," they had --
18 A They had looked into them.
19 0 -- looked into them?
20 A Right.
21 Q All right, sir.
22 What, if anything, did they say?
l 23 This Mr. Peterson or whoever the Edison Quality 24 representative was -- what, if anything, did they say in O 25 response to your request in Paragraph 5 on the second l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 I (312) 232-0262 _- . - - - - -.
8673 O
1 page; that is, a reinspection of your weld inspections 2 from the time you came on-site?
3 A Offhand I don't know the exact words he said, but he 4 didn't believe that would be necessary.
5 Q All right.
6 A That was the impression -- I mean, the subject matter 7 that we discussed about.
8 Q All right.
9 Do you -- whit in substance did the gentleman state 10 as a basis for not following your request to reinspect 11 your past work?
(} 12 13 A I don' t believe he ever give me an answer on that.
But in substance you understood that they were not going Q
i 14 to --
15 A That's right.
l 16 0 -- go out and reinspect your work?
17 A That's the way I understood it, yes.
18 Q What in substance, if anything, did they tell you about 19 your allegation that you were fired in retaliation for 20 having given a deposition in this proceeding and given a 21 statement to the NRC in March of '857 22 A On the firing, they said that the welds had been looked 23 at; some welds were painted, some welds were rusty and 24 so forth.
l 25 As far as the allegation about my going to NRC in i
Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 __
8674 O
1 '84 --
2 Q '85?
3 A --
'85 or the deposition that I gave, they said there 4 was no basis whatsoever of that being either held 5 against me or anything.
! 6 0 Did they -- did the man f rom Quality First give you any 7 indication of how he reached that conclusion?
8 A No, I don't believe he told me how he reached that 9 conclusion.
10 Q Did he tell you whether he ever interviewed anyone else 11 to determine that?
(} 12 13 A Be told me the people that he had interviewed about --
about the situation.
14 He give me a list of their names, but I don't have 15 them with me.
- 16 0 All right.
17 Did he interview anybody about -- well, were the 18 people he interviewed people who were connected with the 19 allegations about inspecting welds through paint?
20 A Oh, yes, I'm sure they were.
21 0 All right.
I 22 Did he interview anybody about the allegation that i
23 management was retaliating against you for having given 24 a deposition and having complained to the NRC?
O 25 A That I cannot say, whether he give me any names about Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8675 O
1 those type of people or not.
2 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, at this time I 3 would move the admission of Intervenors' Exhibit 70 into 4 evidence.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Any objection?
6 MR. GALLO: Yes.
7 I would object to the admission of Exhibit 70 i 8 beyond Paragraphs -- the introductory -- beyond the 9 introductory statement and Paragraphs 1, 2 and 5.
10 The Board has already ruled that the contention as 11 admitted is limited to the basis for Mr. Hunter's
{}
12 termination. The paragraph dealing with training, et 13 cetera, is an extrinsic matter, as well as Paragraph 4.
f 14 Therefore, consistent with the Board's ruling, 15 those two paragraphs shouldn't be admitted.
16 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I don' t know of any t
17 basis for excising portions of documents. In fact, the 18 document has been authenticated. In fact, it's what the f
19 witness testified he autnored and sent to Quality First.
20 I have not inquired into the subjects that Mr.
! 21 Gallo deems objectionable, because they are, while 22 important, collateral to the issues that are in dispute 23 at this time in this proceeding.
24 But I don't believe there's any basis for excluding 25 those portions of the document.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8676 O
1 MR. GALLO: Is Mr. Guild stipulating that his 2 findings will not include any reference to the two 3 paragraphs I've identified?
4 If 'that's the case, then I'll withdraw the 5 objection.
6 MR. GUILD: Well, it's not a question of 7 making reference.
8 Certainly I acknowledge the Board's prior rulings 9 as to the scope of the contention. I'm bound by that 10 and I don't think I can expand that by what I refer to 11 in my findings.
{}
12 Mr. Gallo, the f act of the matter is we' re not 13 pursuing litigation on the fact of favoritism, the buddy 14 system, drugs on the job, et cetera.
15 If I make. reference to those in my findings, I'm 16 sure I'll hear back from Commonwealth Edison Company 17 that those findings are --
18 MR. GALLO: On the basis of that, the 19 material is irrelevant and immaterial. It should not be 20 included in the record.
21 There's an admission f ron. counsel, based on his l 22 explanation, that they' re irrelevant and immaterial.
23 Now he's trying to suggest that they ought to be 24 admitted on some assurance that they' re not really going O 25 to be important to his case; that in any event, if he 1
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8677 l
O !
1 does rely on them, he's sure that counsel for the 2 Applicant will point out the shortcomings.
3 That's not a basis to counteract an objection to -- /
4 MR. GUILD: I don't have to prove that every 5 word is relevant, Mr. Chairman.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's true; he doesn't have <
7 to prove that every word is relevant.
8 You've gotten a stipulation from him with regard to 9 Paragraph 4, at least, so that's not a problem.
10 My recollection is that there was some examination 11 with regard to Paragraph 3, at least the first paragraph 12 within Paragraph 3.
j 13 MR. GUILD: I'd be happy to establish a
- 14 foundation on Paragraph 3, Mr. Chairman.
15 Training indeed has become -- has been an issue in
]
l 16 this case. Of course, Applicant opens the door by 17 presenting testimony from their witnesses that training 18 is adequate and is what we should rely upon to assure 19 ourselves that inspectors effectively do their job 20 because they are trained to do their job.
21 Mr. Hunter takes the position, both in his live 22 testimony and in his letter, that training is 23 inadequate.
24 I don't mean to make that a subject of inquiry from ,
O 25 this witness, but I don't concede that that's not a Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8678 O
1 relevant matter in this case. It was put in issue by i 2 Applicant.
i 3 As to the reference to the NCIG-01 Visual 4 Inspection Standards, there's already testimony about 5 that. There's no need to duplicate it by having the -
6 witness go through again why he made reference to it.
7 Be's already testified why he referred to that in an 8 earlier document.
i 9 In short, it seems to me that the document itself 10 has been demonstrably shown to be relevant. The fact
< 11 that there may be, in addition, some extraneous matter
{} 12
'13 in it does not make the document itself inadmissible.
JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, that's true, and I f
l 14 think there are some relevant items in Paragraph 3.
! 15 So we'll . overrule the objection.
- 16 Does Staff have a position on this?
i 17 MR. BERRY: The Chairman's ruling appears to
! 18 be consistent with a number of the rulings that the l 19 Chairman has made throughout.
20 On that basis the Staff doesn't object.
I l 21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
! 22 Definitely there's nothing in Paragraph 4 that we 23 will consider, but in Paragraph 3 there are some
! 24 matters. You have your cross examination, Mr. Gallo,
, O 25 and you can examine on any of those matters if you wish.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
r- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- _ -----------------
I 8679 i
- 1 So we'll admit Intervenors' Exhibit No. 70.
2 (Intervenors' Exhibit No. 70 for 3 identification was thereupon received in 4 evidence as Intervenors' Exhibit No. 70
! 5 in evidence.)
6 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I have one other 7 matter.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: While you' re looking for 9 that, Mr. Guild --
10 MR. GUILD: Yes?
i 11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- there was some mention
! 12 yesterday of a PTL evaluation of Mr. Hunter's
[}
13 examinations, inspections, in which there was a rate 14 mentioned.
15 Is there .such a document indicating a rate of j 16 accurate inspections performed by Mr. Hunter?
17 MR. GUILD: There is indeed. I've only seen I
18 one page of a computer printout that appears to bear, 19 among other numbers, the 99.25-percent figure that the 20 witness testified to.
j 21 I'm not in a position to authenticate the document i
l 22 or have any idea what it means, so I don't offer it and 23 didn't bring it forward.
24 I understand that Applicant, in some later part of 25 this case -- perhaps on rebuttal -- may be presenting Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
s 86 80 O
1 evidence on the PTL overview generally and may be able 2 to explain how they derived those numbers. Perhaps they 3 may also offer the document on their cross examination 4 of the witness.
5 But aside f rom the witness' understanding of what 6 his proficiency level was, it's not this party's 7 intention to press that matter and offer the document.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is there such a document, by
! 9 the way, Mr. Gallo, that you can confirm?
t 10 MR. GALLO: I don't know whether there's such l
1 11 a document or not, your Honor.
() 12 MR. GUILD: I'd be happy to show counsel my 13 copy.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, if neither counsel is i 15 interested in offering it, I suppose they know more 16 about the relevancy of that document than I do, so I'll 1
17 just let it rest.
18 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, at this time I 19 would ask the Board to take official notice of a filing 20 in this proceeding. In particular, it's an Applicant's 21 filing on Motion for Summary Disposition with respect to 22 Subcontention 9(a), a contention that's been 23 subsequently dismissed f rom the proceeding by order of 24 the Commission and which is no longer in issue, of i l
O 25 course.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8681 O
1 But 9(a), the contention itself, reads as follows:
2 "127 safety-related structural steel fillet welds 3 were painted prior to acceptance of the work, and the 4 welds were subsequently visually inspected for 5 acceptance, with 79 accepted in the painted condition.
6 In addition, visual weld inspections were not performed 7 on saf ety-related full penetration welds," et cetera. ,
8 The first portion is the relevant portion, and that i
9 is the 127 painted welds.
l 10 In support of Applicant's Motion for Summary i J
11 Disposition on the matter, they submitted an affidavit re a a
- 1r ar O 12 or a= i ia atiri a a f 13 Pittsburgh Testing Laboratories.
14 On Page 3 of that affidavit, Mr. Forest answers the i i 15 question posed to him as follows on Page 2: "Please i l
16 describe the scope and results of that investigation."
l 17 Answer: "May,1984, an NRC inspector was examining 18 documents in the PTL vault at Braidwood in connection 19 with an unrelated matter." ,
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Could you go a little 21 slower, please?
22 We still have to have it taken down.
23 MR. GUILD: "While reviewing documents, the 24 inspector found a Visual Weld Inspection Report that had [
25 a notation on the bottom stating," quote, "' inspected Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd. !
Geneva, Illinois 60134 !
(312) 232-0262 . . .
.__ . --. . _ . -~ _ -_ __ _
86 82 O
, 1 through paint per CECO QA,'" unquote.
2 "This inspection report related to a visual 3 inspection of structural steel fillet welds that had 4 been installed by Napoleon Construction Company. The 5 subject weld inspection had been completed in 1980."
6 The affidavit continues -- and I've omitted 7 portions -- on Page 4, the same answer, Mr. Forest 4 8 again:
9 "I also requested that a search be made of our 10 files to determine whether there was any further 11 documentation concerning the reported direction to PTL i
(} 12 13 from Licensee's QA to inspect these welds through paint.
"No documentation of this reported direction was l
14 found, nor were we able to find any documentation l 15 explaining why. the direction was reportedly given."
- 16 Mr. Chairman, I ask that the Board take notice of l 17 Applicant's filing in that report and the Forest 1
18 affidavit in that respect.
I 19 It bears on the Hunter termination matter and 20 represents an admission by Applicant that indeed 21 Commonwealth Edison Company Quality Assurance at one 22 time authorized the inspection of welds through paint.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I take it you want
, 24 that as a contrast to the treatment af forded Mr. Hunter l C:) 25 for the allegation that he inspected through paint?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
86 83 i
1 MR. GUILD: In part, that's true, Mr..
2 Chairman; that for some yet-unexplained reason, 3 Applicant authorized the inspection of welds through-4 paint.
I 5 I would submit there's no evidence that they fired 6 anybody associated with the f acts involved in 7 Subcontention 9(a), the inspections of welds through 8 paint.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Of course, the difference in 10 the dates is -- 8 11 MR. GUILD: Indeed, Mr. Chairman, but --
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: One is 1980, and we' re
/)
13 dealing with a 1986 item here.
14 I don't want to go into the arguments now, but I
. 15 would think that the connection is somewhat tenuous.
16 MR. GUILD: Well, the dates are indeed i 17 disparate, but the fact of the matter remains that this
)
18 is a position that the company defended in a filing in I l
i 19 guess it's 1986.
20 I mean, the company was certainly not taking the l 21 position in 1986, in their summary disposition filing, 22 that this is a firing offense when they responded to 23 thic Board.
1 24 By the way, the Board's ruling was indeed to reject O 25 the Motion for Summary Disposition, and one of the l __
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 86 84 1 Board's inquiries was why Commonwealth Edison authorized i
2 the practice.
3 I believe that, of course, is relevant to the 4 Hunter matter.
! 5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I would expect that i
6 you'd make a formal objection to that, Mr. Gallo, but I 7 think we'll take notice and let it in for what it's 8 worth. I don' t think it's worth that much.
9 MR. GALLO: Well, I don' t think the Board i
10 ought to -- if the Board really believes that that's the i 11 case, then it shouldn't take notice at all.
12 I guess my position is that I agree with the
(])
13 Chairman's characterization of the presentation made by 14 Mr. Guild.
l 15 Having had no notice that he intended to seek 16 official notice of this pleading, I would ask the 17 opportunity to go back and look at the affidavit and the 18 pleading and then present an objection to the offer.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. We'll reserve ruling, 20 then, on that.
21 You can certainly, when you' re presented with a 22 request for the Board to take official notice, have some 23 time to object to such.
24 So we'll reserve ruling, and you can come back at l
25 some later time and indicate your position.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
8685 O
1 Any problem with that, Mr. Berry?
'l 2 MR. BERRY: No, no, your Honor.
3 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, that concI.udes my 4 examination of Mr. Hunter.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I have a few 6 questions before Mr. Gallo's turn.
7 BOARD EXAMINATION 8 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
I 9 0 I believe, Mr. Hunter, that you indicated that Mr.
s 10 Puckett was knowledgeable about welding?
11 A Yes, I did.
(f 12 13 O What was your feeling about Mr. Puckett's competence during the period before he was fired and you heard all
'14 sorts of scuttlebutt?
15 A I thought he was very competent in all matters.
16 0 Did you believe that his knowledge of welding itself was 17 an asset with regard to his position as a Level III or 18 acting Level III Inspector?
19 A Yes, I did.
20 Q Did you have any -- do you have any opinion with regard j 21 to Mr. Simile's knowledge of welding?
22 A Yes. I'm sure he's very knowledgeable.
l 23 0 You believe he is knowledgeable --
24 A Yes, I do.
O 25 0 -- about welding?
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
> v
, a 8686
[ -,
1 A Yes, I do. ;
2 Q Fine
5 You indicated that there was hostilAty between M:.
4 Saklak and Mr. Seeders.
5 Did you observe Mr.' Seeders acting hostile to Mr.
Saklak?
6 7 A Mr. Seeders did have a temper; I'll say that.
8 We all sat in one room approximately half this j 9 size. In other words, all the QC Inspectors at one time 10 sat in a room about half this size, so you couldn't keep U 11 frota observing what was going on.
() 12 0 A
.You said Mr. Seeders had a temper?
Oh, I'm sure that Mr. Secders did have a temper, yes.
13 14 ! O So you heard Mr. Seeders shouting at Mr. Saklak?
- 15 A No. I don't think I heard Mr., John Seeders raise his 16 voict. to 'Mr. Saklah, as f ar as that goes.
17 0 But you heard Mr. Saklak raise his voice to Mr. Seeders?
10 A Oh, yes.
19 0 Well, how do you know that Mr. Seeders had a temper?
20 A Well, his face would turn red, you know, and you could 21 tell from his expression that the man was holding things 22 back. You could tell that he wanted to explode.
I.
23 0 You mean when Mr. Saklak was loud and aggressive towards i
i 24 Mr. Seeders, you could determine that Mr. Seeders' .
25 facial expression changed?
, I
\ i
!~
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 6DT34 (312) 232-0262
~. __ _ _.- _ ._. __ _ .. . . _ . -
86 87 a
O 1 A Yes, it would change, yes.
2 Q Now, I believe you indicated that management was aware 3 of the Saklak problem at the time you went to the NRC.
4 Did you mean that management was aware of this 5 problem before you went to the NRC or only because of 4
6 your going to the NRC?
7 A No; before, because I'm pretty sure that Mr. Irv DeWald 8 had had several talks with Mr. Saklak.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I have no further 10 questions.
11 BOARD EXAMINATION 12 BY JUDGE COLE:
13 0 Mr. Hunter, yesterday you indicated that Mr. DeWald and 14 Mr. Martin used the same welder's stamp, a J stamp?
j 15 A I believe that.is correct.
16 0 In some of the work that you did in reinspecting some l 17 welds, you had occasion to come across that welder's 18 stamp, and that's how you found out they had the same l 19 stemp?
20 A The only reason that you knew who had the stamp at the 21 time was looking at the inspection form and seeing the 22 date, right.
23 Q If they had the same weld inspector's stamp, could you 24 tell who inspected the weld out in the field?
( 25 A No, you couldn't, no, no way.
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l l
8688 O
1 Q It's only by the paperwork that you had with you that 2 you could determine which inspector --
3 A That is --
4 0 -- had inspected the weld?
5 A That is correct: the date on the inspection, and we 6 have a list of when the hammer was issued to certain 7 inspectors.
8 In other words, if it had been Mr. Irv DeWald's 9 hammer in 1980, it might not have been Mr. Martin's 10 hammer until 1982.
11 Q All right, sir. Thank you.
(} 12 13 In response to several questions concerning the inspection of painted welds, you responded that, "I have 14 never looked at an attachment weld through paint in my 15 lif e," and I believe you said that a couple of times.
'16 A I believe so.
17 0 Earlier you testified -- I believe it was yesterday --
18 that there were three kinds of welds: vendor welds, fab 19 shop welds and field welds.
20 A Correct.
21 Q In respect to your answer about inspection of welds in 22 the field, you did not state " field welds"; you always l 23 used the term " attachment welds. "
24 N ow , my question, sir, is: Are all field welds 25 attachment welds?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 86 89 l O
1 A No, they' re not.
2 Q All right, sir. -
3 So that in your inspection out in the field, could 4 you also say that you did not inspect any field welds 5 through paint?
6 A What I -- what I intended to say and what I wanted to 7 say was that field welds could be considered welds that 8 was made in the field on a fab shop table. They could 9 also be considered f ab shop welds if they had the FS 10 stamp on them.
11 The way they traced the fab shop welds when I first i 12 arrived at that job -- it was very haphazard. In other 13 words, you didn't know whether it was actually built in 14 the fab shop or in the -- in the jobsite. The unique 15 number didn't come into effect until probably '84, maybe 16 early '85.
17 So really you couldn't tell whether the shop -- the ,
18 welds had been done -- the hanger had been done in the 19 fab shop or in the field. That's what I was trying to 20 ,
say.
21 0 So what would you do in a case like that?
22 A Anytime it had an FS on it, the welds was already 23 painted, period. It doesn' t matter where they painted 24 them. They painted them either in the f ab shop or af ter 25 they arrived over there.
l
! Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8690 0
1 But there should have been an inspection report 2 written on all the f ab shop welds. They called it a 3 220. It was like the old inspection f orms. It really 4 didn't give you the amount of welds or the welder, 5 except on the 220 form.
6 0 well, sir, when you' re going out in the field to inspect 7 a hanger, what were you supposed to inspect?
8 A If we' re talking about the AVO program, the AVO program 9 was actually started bef ore the Rev. A Rev. O drawings.
10 That was the walkdown that S & L done. All the 11 welds were weld-mapped, indicated by -- on the -- on the
(} 12 13 drawing.
Before that, it was only asked to do whatever the 14 AVO called for. In other words, if it just called for 15 the hanger, you done the hanger. If it called for 16 hanger and brace, you done them all.
17 0 I'm still confused, sir.
I 18 You' re given a hanger to inspect.
19 A Right.
20 0 It's not a vendor-produced hanger.
21 If it's not a vendor-produced hanger, it has a lot 22 of field welds on it.
23 The field welds are of two types, one of which is 24 the attachment, the physical attachment to the 25 structure --
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8691 O
1 A Right.
2 Q -- you' re hanging it to.
3 The others are the connections for the different 4 components of the --
5 A That's true.
6 0 -- hanger.
7 What did you actually inspect on that hanger?
~8 A Like I tried to explain, it called for different things.
9 In other words, in a lot of places it just called 10 for very few things to be inspected. Sometimes it 11 called f or the whole complete hanger. It's just
(} 12 13 according to what it called for, is what I'm trying to say.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: May I ask a question -- oh, 15 that's okay.
16 BY JUDGE COLE:
l 17 0 So in your -- in the program where you were accused of 18 inspecting through paint --
19 A Right.
20 0 -- what were you supposed to inspect?
21 A Like I told you, on the Rev. A Rev. O's, you looked at 22 everything that was on that drawing.
23 Otherwise, before -- before that Rev. A Rev. O',s 24 come out, we looked at everything it called for.
O 25 0 Well, you had both --
Sonntao Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 . - _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ --
8692 0
1 A You had --
2 JUDGE COLE: You have to wait until I finish 3 my question or the Reporter won' t get it.
4 BY JUDGE COLE:
5 0 In the program where you were accused of inspecting 6 through paint --
7 A Right.
8 Q -- what kind of inspections did you have to make there?
9 Did you have the Rev. A Rev. O drawings or did you 10 have -- what did you have?
11 A The 13 that I was accused of -- I think they were all
{} 12 13 Q probably the Rev. A Rev. O drawings, right.
All right, sir.
14 And the Rev. A Rev. O drawings -- how did you know 15 what to inspect?
16 A That was a complete inspection.
17 Q A complete inspection?
18 A A complete inspection, right.
19 0 All right, sir.
20 Now, in that program you stated that you did not 21 inspect any attachment welds through paint?
22 A That is correct.
23 Q What about the other welds?
24 A I would say -- and I think I said it to start with -- I 25 never made a judgment call that I didn't feel satisfied Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8693 O
1 that I actually could visually inspect a structurally 2 sound weld.
3 0 Whether it's through paint or not?
4 A Whether it was through debris, paint, rust or what.
5 I never made that judgment that I couldn't satisfy 6 myself that I actually knowed whether the weld was --
7 met the criterj a. i 8 Q All right, sir.
9 But the question is: Did you inspect those welds 10 through paint?
11 A Not to my knowledge.
{} 12 13 O
A Not just the attachment welds; all the welds.
Not'to my knowledge.
l 14 JUDGE COLE: All right, sir. Thank you.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Did you have any questions?
16 JUDGE CALLIBAN: Yes.
17 BOARD EXAMINATION 18 BY JUDGE CALLIHAN:
19 Q Coming back to this matter of designation, can you tell 20 us just simply what an attachment weld is?
21 A It is the --
22 0 What's attached to what? What holds up what?
23 A It's usually the flags attached to -- either to a beam, 24 a plate or something that holds the hanger. It's O 25 usually called the flags. That's usually what we call Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8694 1 the attachment welds. That is the weld that actually 2 hangs -- holds the hanger.
3 0 That's obviously a field weld?
4 A That is absolutely a field weld, right.
5 0 Yesterday there was discussion of a document which, for 6 the record, was designated Intervenors' Exhibit 67, but 7 I'll describe it to you.
8 It's, as I understand it, a list of your review of 9 a number of hangers,13 or 14, that you made, a review 10 that you made following some discussion or allegation in 11 which you indicated that some of the hangers and the
{}
12 13 numbers of welds associated with those hangers were or were not painted.
14 A That's correct.
15 Q From that description, can you identify what I'm talking 16 about?
17 A Yes, I do.
18 Q All right.
19 Now, relative to your review leading to this 20 document, Intervenors' Exhibit 67, what did you believe 21 to be the history of these welds?
22 Were they made years ago and inspected?
23 Tell us what you think about them.
24 A Some of those were old, old hangers. Some of them had
( O 25 probably been up since 1980 or before.
Sonntaq Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134-(312) 232-0262
8695 O
1 Some of them had had a half a dozen inspections 2 probably pulled on them during the years. In other 3 words, the stamp that I used wouldn' t be the only stamp 4 that was on those, by no means.
5 I think the 13 that you are looking at there in 6 front of you are hangers that was on Elevation 383 -- at 7 least, most of them, if I recall correct.
8 0 And sometime shortly af ter -- presumably shortly af ter 9 the welds were made, they were inspected by somebody?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Were those inspectors or was any one of those inspectors l
(} 12 13 that looked at these dozen or so cases that you cite identified?
(
14 Was their number on the weld?
15 A Oh, yes, yes.
l 16 0 Was that number designation painted over?
17 A Sometimes, sure; a lot of times.
18 Q Now, what do you mean by "sometimes"?
19 When would it not be?
20 A Well, like I say, if it had been done probably in the
! 21 last month to three months before the paint crew had I
22 come by, it might still be visible as f ar as just a --
l 23 just a stamp. We also --
l 24 0 I suppose --
0 25 A Pardon me, sir.
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8696 O
1 Q I'm sorry.
2 A We also used a black felt mark pen or a black felt 3 marker on areas of Unistrut, cable pan, anything that 4 was less than a quarter of an inch in thickness.
5 So it doesn't necessarily have to be a stamp on the 6 hanger.
7 Q The felt tip pen produced a mark in lieu of or instead 8 of an imprint of a hammer?
9 A That is correct, on certain things.
10 Q Is that the general practice?
11 A I think so on thin stuff or material that the' indcntation would be too -- too much for the load.
(} 12 That's probably related to my next question, but I'll 13 0 14 ask it anyhow. ,
15 .
Suppose you've got a fillet weld of a couple of 16 base materials.
17 Where do you put the hammer mark?
18 A Within two inches -- within two inches of the weldment.
19 Q It may be on either piece?
20 A Approximately, yes. It's possible.
21 Q It may be on either piece?
22 A Yes.
23 Q But not on the weld itself?
24 A Not on the weld itself.
O 25 0 So the painting may or may not reach out the two inches?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8697 O
1 A That's true.
2 0 I see.
3 Is it your belief that these welds were made, as 4 you say, maybe years ago and were inspected, were marked 5 one way or another and then were painted?
6 A They were painted at all different times. Some of them 7 probably had three or four different coats of paint on 8 th em.
9 0 Well, continue, please, with your scenario here.
10 These were made years ago or marked, presumably, 11 and were painted.
l
{} 12 13 A N ow , how did you get into it?
All right. This was an AVO program, and an AVO, like I 14 say, was just a little directive saying that they needed 15 a new inspection form in the vault.
16 I believe maybe the Engineering Department or 17 someplace -- or someone had gone through the vault to 18 see what had actually been done about these five-19 hundred-and-a-few AVO's that they had at the time, if 20 I'm not mistaken.
l 21 Anyway, we were directed that we had to either find 22 a valid inspection form for them in the vault or 23 reinspection -- or reinspect them. This was the program 24 I was working on.
25 Like I say, some of the hangers had been up for f
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 8698 1 years. Some of them had just been real recent hangers.
2 Some of them had been painted years ago.
3 Af ter you inspected one, you tied a blue ribbon on 4 it, and that meant that the paint crew could come by and 5 repaint it or do whatever they wanted to. The person 6 who did the inspection was the fellow that triggered the 7 paint crew to tell them whether to repaint it or not.
8 The inspector also had what they called a paint 9 removal log. You entered anything that you couldn't 10 visually inspect in the paint log. The electricians had 11 so many people going along and cleaning up these hangers 12 or these welds.
13 Usually the paint remover would only take the 14 attachment welds, unless you specified that he take all 15 the welds to clean them up.
16 So actually it was a breakdown in the program as 17 far as weld clean-up, weld painting and stuff like that.
18 Q Well, on your sheet you pick a particular hanger, and i
19 you've noted in a few cases that they were painted.
20 A That's correct, on that date.
21 0 On --
22 A March the 25th.
23 0 -- whatever the date was, yes.
24 Are these items or welds that you had -- you O 25 yourself had previously inspected?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8699 O
1 A Many of them were, yes, many of them were; some vendors, 2 some' fab shop.
3 I don' t think it lists the -- the total breakdown 4 there.
5 Q Is it your positicn that af ter your previous inspection 6 -
" previous" meaning previous to the time you made this 7 list in March, '86 -- the painting occurred?
8 A I'd say it's very possible.
9 Q But at any rate, when you went back on the 25th of 10 March, this is what you found?
11 A That is what I found, right.
(} 12 13 O And then I understand f rom your general statement that when you first made these inspections or previously made 14 these inspections, previous to the 25th of March, they 15 were not painted? ,
16 A They met the criteria that a fellow could physically 17 examine them.
18 Q And you did it?
19 A I did.
20 Q So I repeat: Your position is that in these instances 21 where you were allegedly inspecting through paint, they 22 had been so recently painted that the earlier inspection 23 by you was proper?
24 A I think so, yes.
l 25 0 In a number of instances even this morning, in response l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8700 1 to some questions by Mr. Guild about your opinion of 2 procedures and so forth, you rather frequently said, 1
3 "Yes. At that time that was my belief."
4 Now, am I referring to a matter of style in your 5 response? If you believed it in March of 1986, do you 6 stilt believe it now?
7 Did you do that unconsciously?
8 A Yes -- no, I don' t think I did it unconsciously. I 9 think that's still my belief, yes.
10 0 So we can interpret your remarks, colloquial though they 11 may be, as your continuing belief of validity of this
[} 12 13 A and that --
Yes, that is correct.
~
l 14 0 -- generally speaking?
I
- 15 A Yes.
16 Q Also, in the immediate past, in response to some of Dr.
17 Cole's questions, you said you inspected, quote, "what l 18 it called for," unquote.
19 A That's correct.
20 0 What is "it"?
21 A Okay. Let's just say, like I tried to explain to him, 22 the area that we worked there -- a good many of those 23 are braced hangers.
24 Prior to the Rev. A-Rev. O-S & L walkdown drawings, l
l
() 25 if it called for the hanger, we did the hanger. If it Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8701 0
1 called f or the bracing, we did the bracing.
2 0 "It" is the drawing?
l 3 A "It" is the unit that we were inspecting.
I 4 0 When you say "what it called for" --
l 5 A That is your AVO.
l 6 0 What is an AVO?
7 A An AVO was just a -- a trigger f rom the craf t saying 8 that they couldn't install a hanger in a certain 9 location or it had to be moved or it had to be modified 10 in order for other crafts, piping or other crafts, to 11 work, you know.
{} 12 13 O
A Is this a piece of paper?
So this -- yes. All it was was just a piece of paper --
14 you might say it was a short Speed Memo -- telling' the 15 craf t what they had to do.
16 Q Was it a mark on the drawing?
17 A No, no, there were no marks on the drawing.
18 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Thank you. That's all.
19 BOARD EXAMINATION
- 20 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN
21 Q Do I understand correctly, Mr. Hunter, that on this 22 Exhibit 67, where you indicate " vendor painted," you' re I 23 ref erring to welds that you weren't required to inspect?
24 A That is correct.
O 25 0 And when you say " painted," those are welds that you Sonntao Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8702 O
1 were required to inspect but which you indicate in your 2 testimony had not been painted at the time you inspected 3 them?
4 A That is correct.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay, fine.
6 Mr. Gallo?
i 7 MR. GALLO: May I suggest 10 minutes?
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine. Let's take a 9 10-minute break.
10 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had, after which 11 the proceedings were resumed as follows:)
{} 12 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
JUDGE COLE:
Back on the record.
Before you get started, Mr.
14 Gallo, I just have one question I wanted to ask Mr.
15 Hunter.
16 BOARD EXAMINATION 17 BY JUDGE COLE:
18 Q Mr. Hunter, I believe you indicated that there are 19 conditions under which you would find it acceptable or 20 permissible to inspect a weld that has been painted.
21 Is that correct, sir?
22 A My answer to you was that all welds that I looked at was 23 visibly inspectable when I looked at them. There was --
24 Q Does that mean, sir, that there are --
25 A That means that the paint might not be completely Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8703 0
1 removed by whoever was removing it, either by the 2 inspector, myself, or by the paint-remove crew.
3 0 All right, sir.
4 So would any weld that could be described as a 5 " painted weld" fit into that category as inspectable?
6 A Oh, I'm sure that a lot of the welds had been painted; 7 I' ll -- I' ll say that.
8 But what I'm saying is that the paint had either 9 been removed sufficiently by the paint-remove crew or by 10 myself that I felt comfortable of making a judgment 11 call.
[} 12 13 JUDGE COLE:
JUDGE CALLIHAN:
All right, sir. Thank you.
Let's pursue that just a 14 little bit.
15 THE WITNESS: All right, yes, sir.
16 BOARD EXAMINATION 17 BY JUDGE CALLIHAN:
18 0 Suppose there were a weld and it was really painted.
19 N ow , could that at any time be inspectable by you 20 through the paint without some degree of removal?
21 A I don't think that I ever looked at a weld that was so l
22 heavily painted that I couldn't make an honest 23 assessment or judgment on it.
l l 24 0 I don't challenge that, but you' re not quite answering
) 25 my question. I'll rephrase it, perhaps, if I can.
l l
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 8704
)
1 Bere is a weld. It's been inspected perhaps --
2 yes, it's been inspected. Along comes a painter and he 3 paints it, and you come back to reinspect it.
4 Is it possible, without any further action by 5 anybody, for you to inspect that weld as it is now 6 freshly painted?
7 A I don't think I have accepted one that way, no.
8 Q But is it possible for you to do so?
9 A No. If it is completely painted where you cannot see 10 the toes of the weld or where you cannot see the surf ace 11 of the weld for cracks or anything like that, it's not
{} 12 13 possible.
JUDGE CALLIHAN: All right. Thank you.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo.
15 CROSS EXAMINATION 16 BY MR. GALLO:
l 17 0 Mr. Hunter, I believe you testified that when you came 18 aboard Comstock in October of '83, you had had 19 considerable weld experience prior to that time; is that 20 correct?
21 A That's correct.
22 O This was for some period of years, both as a welder and 23 as an inspector of welds?
24 A That is correct.
25 0 And were you aware of the practice generally that before Sonntag Repartina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8705 O
U 1 welds are to be inspected, they have to be cleaned 2 sufficiently so that you can look for various potential 3 defects in the welds?
4 A That is correct.
5 Q You were f amiliar with that?
6 A Yes.
7 Q okay.
8 That's generally -- would you agree that's one of 9 the first principles of weld inspection?
10 A That is true.
11 0 You mentioned in your testimony yesterday that Mr.
12 DeWald had asked you to inspect some of the inspection
)
13 work performed by Mr. Martin.
14 Do you recall that?
15 A That is correct.
16 Q Do you recall the occasion that caused Mr. DeWald to ask 17 you to conduct this inspection?
18 A Well, I believe that young Rick Martin had lost his 19 stamp during this time as far as a weld inspector, and 20 they were re-evaluating him to see whether he actually l
21 had the knowledge to make a judgment call.
I 22 Q Do you remember approximately when this was?
23 A Well, I am sure it was either early '84 -- early ' 84.
24 0 You believe it was early 1984?
25 A Yes.
l L__ Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8706 O
1 Q And did you -- I believe you testified you did go out 2 and look at some of Mr. Martin's welds.
3 A I accompanied Mr. Martin on more than one occasion, yes.
4 0 Well, did you inspect these welds, at Mr. DeWald's 5 request, with Mr. Martin or by yourceif?
6 A Both with Mr. Martin and by myself, yes.
7 Q How many occasions were there when you undertook this 8 inspection?
9 A I would say more than one. I -- I -- probably less than 10 12, but more than one.
11 Q Do you recall over what period of time you conducted 12 these inspections?
l 13 A Probably over a one-wee'k period.
14 0 A one-week period.
15 Sometimes you went alone, and sometimes you went l
16 with Mr. Martin --
17 A That's correct.
18 0 -- is that it?
19 Do you recall how many hangers you looked at?
20 A Anywhere f rom one to 12, like I say.
21 Q And were these hangers that had been inspected by Mr.
22 Martin?
23 A Yes, they had.
14 0 You could see Mr. Martin's stamp on the -- near the 25 welds --
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8707 O
L A Yes.
2 0 -- near the hangers?
3 A Yes, on or near the welds, right.
4 Q I believe you testified that, based on your review, you 5 thought that he was buying off, to use your words, on 6 some rough welds.
7 Do you recall that testimony?
8 A .I probably used that term, yes.
9 0 Can you explain to me what you meant by " buying off on 10 rough welds"?
11 A Some of the profiles as f ar as overlap or -- or underrun
{} 12 13 on fillet welds and things like that that didn't meet the criteria that we were using.
14 Q So these were, in your opinion, rejectable welds, then?
15 A They were, according to the criteria that we was 16 inspecting to, yes.
l 17 0 Well, they had -- they had a visual -- a defect that was 18 discernible by visual inspection?
19 A That's true.
20 Q Now, did you notice these problems with Mr. Martin's 21 welds at any time when he was present?
22 A Oh, yes. I -- I had pointed it out to him.
23 0 You pointed it out to him.
24 Do you recall what his response was when you 25 pointed it out to him?
l Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134
, (312) 232-0262
8708 1 A Well, his response at that time I -- I can' t call -~-
2 recall word for word, but that was the way he was told 3 to do it.
4 0 All right.
5 Now, can you identify for me better what defects 6 you noted in Mr. Martin's welds?
7 A What defects?
8 Q Yes, what defects.
9 A I would say probably undercut and underrun was one of 10 his biggest problems.
11 Q Now, what is underrun?
12 A Underrun is a weld not being to size in certain areas of 13 the weld.
14 In other words, if it called for a quarter-inch 15 weld two inches long and the weld was a quarter-inch but 16 only -- or three-quarter inches long and the remainder 17 of the weld, especially on thin material and things like 18 that, dropped down to an eighth-inch weld or 19 three-sixteenths weld or whatever, that's called 20 " underrun."
21 0 The weld size was too small?
22 A The weld size.
23 0 Do you recall any other attributes that you noted during 24 these inspections?
l 25 A Well, as f ar as --
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8709 O
- 1 Q I mean, other attributes that you believed were defects 2 that you had noted in the welds inspected by Martin but 3 that he hadn't identified.
4 A I don' t recall any -- any cracks or anything like that 5 that would be a -- an NCR, as far as that goes.
6 It's only -- only def ects that the craf t could 7 correct.
8 0 Now, did Mr. Martin tell you that the welds you 9 identified as suffering f rom an underrun condition --
10 that he had been taught or told to do it that way?
'll A I don' t know that Mr. Martin ever told me that that's 12 the way he had been taught.
[}
13 I don' t know whether Mr. Martin knowed how to use a 14 fillet gauge when I come on the job or not.
15 0 Well, what is your testimony, then; he said he didn't 16 know how to do the inspection or that he was told to do 17 it that way?
18 A I would say both.
19 Q All right. I'll repeat my question, then.
20 When you pointed out a weld to him that had a 21 defect in it for underrun, did he say that that was l
l 22 attributable to the f act that that's how he was told to 23 d o --
24 A Yes.
O 25 0 -- the inspection?
l Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8710 l 1 A That is true.
2 Q He told you that?
3 A Mr. Martin.
4 0 Yes.
5 And what was the problem with undercut?
6 A Undercut?
7 Q Yes.
8 A An excessive amount of undercut.
9 Q And when you were doing the inspection of the Martin 10 welds and saw an example of undercut which he had 11 accepted and not noted, what criteria were you using to l
12 determine that undercut existed?
13 A The procedures give a limitation on the amount of 14 undercut according to the thickness of the base metal or 15 the thickness of the attachment metal.
16 Q Now, what limitation were you using during this l 17 inspection?
l 18 A We were using the current one, whatever was current in 19 that procedure.
20 0 Well, what was it?
21 A That I cannot recall --
22 O You don't recall?
23 A -- what procedure it was, even.
24 0 You don't recall what the acceptable tolerance was for 25 undercut at the time of your inspection?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8711 O
1 A No, I do not.
2 Q Did you point out the undercut examples to Mr. Martin?
3 A Oh, yes, I'm sure I did.
4 Q Do you recall that he offered any explanation with 5 respect to them?
6 A He acknowledged that there was undercut.
7 Q Did he explain the -- did he attempt to explain how he 8 had not identified the undercut in his initial 9 inspection?
10 A At this time I don't remember whether he explained it or 11 not.
() 12 Q You don't recall?
! 13 A I don't recall it.
14 0 So he didn' t -- you don't recall at this time whether he 15 attributed it .to what he was taught or told by Comscock 16 QC management?
17 A That is -- that is correct.
l 18 Q Now, do you have a recollection as to how many of these 19 def ective welds that you uncovered during this one-week l
20 inspection of the Martin hangers?
21 A Not offhand. I do not remember, 22 Q Do you recall whether or not -- it was your testimony, t 23 in answer to my question, that these were rejectable 24 conditions that you had identified; isn't that correct?
25 A Many of them were, yes, many of them were.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _ _
8712 0
1 Q Did you write any NCR's with respect to -- or ICR's with 2 respect to these particular welds?
3 A I'm sure, if it was a reinspection, I did.
4 0 Well, did you -- do you recall generating an ICR at the 5 time that you saw a Martin weld that he had inspected 6 that was rejectable because of undercut?
7 A Offhand I don' t remember any certain one, but I'm sure I l
8 did.
9 0 You can't remember any certain one, but it's your 10 feeling that you must have done it --
11 A Yes, I'm sure I did.
12 0 -- is that your present recollection?
(]) .
13 A My present recollection.
14 Q How about -- do you recall whether or not you wrote any 15 NCR's on these. same areas with respect to undercut or 16 underrun?
17 A Undercut or -- or underrun was not an NCR deficiency.
18 The deficiency for an NCR on welding was a cracked 19 or a -- well, it didn' t meet the -- in other words, it 20 could be the wrong filler material or something like 21 that. That was the criteria for writing an NCR.
22 0 So you didn't issue any NCR's in this area?
23 A Not as far as I can remember, no.
24 0 Okay.
25 But you believe you must have issued ICR's to cover Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 __ _ -
8713 O
1 the defects that you had noted?
2 A I'm sure if it was a review program, I did, yes. .
3 Q And these ICR's would be dated sometime in early 1984 4 and have your signature on them?
5 A I'm sure they do.
6 Q Did Mr. Martin -- on the occasions when he was with you, 7 did he issue any ICR's with respect to the defects that 8 you had found?
9 A That I had found?
10 0 Yes.
11 A Offhand I can't recall.
f
() 12 0 You don't recall?
13 A I can't recall. -
14 Q Is it possible he did?
15 A It's possible he did, yes.
16 Q It was your inspection, though, wasn' t it?
17 A He was -- yes. He was doing an inspection hisself at 18 the time.
19 Q Now, wait a minute.
20 You and Martin are out looking at the 21 Martin-inspected welds at DeWald's request.
22 Wasn't that your job: to conduct that inspection 23 at that time?
24 A It was my -- it was my job to do an overview of Rick 25 Martin's inspections, yes.
Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l __
(312) 232-0262 _
t.
i 8714
()' ,r'. 'l l'
! l Q All right.
2 And so you were - the overview was in the nature 3 of a reinspection, wasn't it?
4 A Yes, you could call it a reinspection overview.
5 0 Was it -- was your overview any diff erent. than any 6 reinspection that you might conduct of any weld?
7 A Ohi yes, I'm sure it was. _
8 Q You' re sure it was different?
9 A Somewhat different, right.
10 0 What was different about it?
11 - A He was actually looking for def ects. . Instead of looking h}{} 12 at a weld to buy it, he was actually looking to see that i I l3 he had made any mistakes as f ar as calling a rejectable 14 item.
~
15 0 Isn' t that the. s'ame thing' that you do when you look at a 16 weld f or the first tic'e to see whethir or not it's 17 QC-acceptable?
t 18 A A QC Inspector looks at a weld to make sure that there 19 is nothing that doesn' t meec the criteria that he's 20 inspecting.to.
21 Q And inn't that the same baseline you used to reinspect 22 the Martin walds?
23 A Yes. You were looking for any rejectable item.
24 0 Based on the criteria that you sould use for inspection?
O 25 A Based on the criteria that he incpected to.
p Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
i Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262 -
8715 O
1 You remember that on or about this time, we had a 2 changing of the criteria, as f ar as inspection, about 3 every -- it seemed to me like about every 30 days.
4 So you had to use the criteria that the man had 5 inspected to in order to call -- to make a judgment.
6 Q All right.
7 So it's your testimony that when you did your 8 overview of the Martin welds, you used the inspection 9 criteria that were applicable at the time that Martin 10 did his inspections?
11 A That is correct.
I
() 12 Q All right.
13 And when you conducted an inspection or a 14 reinspection of a hanger -- welds on a hanger, you used 15 the applicable criteria that was in effect at the time 16 of your inspection; is that correct?
17 A Anytime you do an inspection, you use the criteria that 18 was in effect at the dait that you do the inspection.
19 Q But other than '.he off er:t("a dates of the different 20 criteria, basically you' re looking for the same sort of 21 defects; isn' t that right?
22 A That is correct.
23 Q All right.
- 24 So it would be f air to say that your overview of 25 the Martin welds was in the nature of a reinspection?
Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
t Geneva, Illinois 60134 l ._
(312) 232-0262 . _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _
8716 O
1 A That is correct.
2 Q All right. So when you went out to conduct this 3 reinspection, it was essentially your job.
4 Was it your responsibility to issue any ICR's that 5 might be appropriate to be issued?
6 A Yes, if that was my assigned inspection, yes.
7 Q And it was your assigned inspection, wasn't it?
8 A Usually.
9 Q I'm talking about the Martin welds that you reinspected.
10 That was your assigned job, wasn't it?
11 A Right.
() 12 Q And then you would have l'ssued any ICR's if you deemed 13 it appropriate; right?
14 A Any -- any ICR that I wrote was issued by myself. Any 15 inspection that I did completely and the ICR was 16 written, it was written by myself.
17 Q And was that the case in the reinspections that you 18 performed when Mr. Martin accompanied you to look at 19 welds that he had previously inspected?
20 A I'm sure it was, yes.
21 Q Do you recall how many ICR's you wrote on the Martin 22 reinspection activity?
23 A I cannot tell you offhand.
24 Q All right.
25 But you do recall writing some?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
8717 1
O 1 A I'm sure that I did.
2 Q You' re sure that you did?
3 A I'm sure that I did.
4 Q Do you recall ever taking action, subsequent to the' time 5 that these ICR's were written, to close them out?
6 A I don't think that I' ever closed out an ICR before the 7 date that me and Rick Martin went to the field.
t l 8 Q That's before the date you went to the field. But I'm 9 talking about af ter you went to the field with Martin, 10 you generated an ICR based on your reinspection of his 11 work.
[ () 12 Do you. recall ever being involved in a closeout of 13 those ICR's?
14 A Oh, I closed out many ICR's, but the person who wrote 15 the ICR -- I couldn' t say that I -- any one person -- I 16 couldn' t say that I closed them out.
17 Q But the ICR I'm talking about is the one you wrote based 18 on your reinspection of the Martin work.
19 Do you recall closing out any of those ICR's?
20 A I'm sure -- I'm sure that I did. I closed out many of 21 my own ICR's, yep.
22 Q Do you recall closing out one of those?
23 How did you go about closing out one of these ICR's 24 that you had issued af ter you had reinspected the Martin 25 work?
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
- 8718
(:)
i 1 A You make a reinspection of it, a complete -- whatever ,
I 2 the problem was on the ICR, you go out and see that it 3 has been corrected by craft.
4 If it's been corrected by craf t, you indicate on a 5 new Form 19 that all items checked acceptable.
6 Q And did you do that with respect to the ICR's you closed 7 out based on your reinspection of the Martin work?
8 A I'm sure I did.
9 Q Now, af ter you completed your reinspection activity of 10 the Martin work and had issued your ICR's, what action, 11 if any, did you take in reporting any further the
() 12 results of this information that you had gathered?
13 A As far as documenting anything, I don't think there was 14 ever anything documented. It was just a word-of-mouth 15 deal to Mr. Irv DeWald.
16 Q But you had documented it through the ICR's; isn't that 17 correct?
18 A That's true.
19 0 Did you fill out a Form 19 with respect to all the 20 inspections that you had conducted of the Martin work?
21 A The only ones that I filled out a Form 19 was probably 22 the rejectable ones that had been issued an ICR on.
23 That was the only 19's that I would even have thought 4
24 about filling out.
)
25 Q Well, if you found a weld that Martin had previously 1
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
._ J 312(_23 2-0 26 2
1 8719 O
V 1 inspected and you agreed it was acceptable, he had found 2 it was acceptable and then you did not issue a new Form 3 19; is that correct?
4 A No. Nothing -- nothing was done about that.
5 Q All right.
6 But the o'nly document would be a Form 19 and an ICR 7 that you issued on welds that you found defective during 8 your Martin --
9 A That's correct.
10 0 -- weld inspection activity?
11 Now, you say you discussed the matter with Mr.
() 12 DeWald; is that correct?
13 A I'm sure I did.
14 Q Did you seek him out or did he come and find you and 15 want to know the results?
16 Do you recall which way --
17 A I'm sure Mr. DeWald come to me. I didn't ever go to 18 him.
19 Q He came to you?
l 20 A Oh, yes.
I 21 Q was this -- do you recall approximately when this might 22 have occurred?
23 A Early '84.
24 Q Do you recall how long af ter you had completed your 25 reinspection of the Martin work that he had sought you Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 .-
8720 O
1 out?
2 A It was probably the same week.
3 Q The same week.
4 Do you think it was before you had closed out the 5 ICR's or after?
6 A I'm sure it was before.
7 Q Before.
8 And what did he ask you? What do you recall he 9 asked you?
f 10 A He asked me about whether the man was knowledgeable 11 enough to make a judgment on visual inspection-.
() 12 0 And what did you tell him?
13 A I told him he was weak in some points.
14 Q What points did you tell him he was weak in?
15 A Offhand I don'.t remember what all I told him.
16 0 Just that he was weak in some points?
17 A Yes.
18 O And you don't recall what matters you brought to his 19 attention?
20 You don't recall what weaknesses you brought to his 21 attention?
22 A Not offhand I don't.
23 0 And was your opinion that you just testified to based on 24 the amount of or number of welds that you had 25 reinspected and f ound rej ectable items in?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8721 0
1 A The question?
2 Q Yes. Let me rephrase that.
3 You told DeWald that you thought that Martin had 4 some weaknesses in his inspection qualification.
5 I'm asking: Was that opinion based on the number 6 and type of defects that you had noted of the Martin 7 welds in the field?
8 A Yes, I'm sure it was.
9 0 Was there any other basis at that time?
10 A None whatsoever.
11 0 Okay. ,
() 12 And what was DeWald's reaction to your advice?
13 A I don't know what Mr. DeWald said to me in exact words, 14 but his indication was that he realized that Rick was 15 lacking in some areas as f ar as being competent in -- as 16 a weld inspector, Level II Weld Inspector.
17 Q Did DeWald identify the areas that he thought that Mr.
18 Martin was short in?
l l
19 A At this time I don't remember whether he made any 20 comment about that or not.
21 0 You don' t -know what areas -- you don' t recall what areas 22 he identified?
23 A I don't.
l 24 0 But you do recall that he --
25 A Yes, he did.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) . ,23 2 -0 26 2_ . . _ . .
8722 0
1 0 -- seemed to agree with your judgment?
2 A Yes, he did.
3 Q Do you recall whether, at the time of this reinspection 4 of the Martin work, Mr. Martin was a Level I or a Level 5 II Inspector?
6 A I believe he had a Level II.
7 Q And was it the Level II certifications that had been 8 suspended at about the time in question; that is, early 9 1984?
10 A I believe that is -- I believe that is correct, yes, 11 Q I believe you testified, in answer to Mr. Guild's 12 questions yerterday, that you didn't believe that Martin
(])
13 was consistent in his inspections.
14 Do you recall that?
15 A That was one -- that was one of his problems.
16 0 Now, what do you mean by that?
17 A In other words, one time he would catch undercut or 18 underrun or cold lap or whatever it was; the next time l
19 he wouldn't.
20 On one weld he would do a good job; the next weld 21 maybe had the same problem, and he would miss it.
i 22 0 But you don't recall exactly how many welds of Martin's 23 that you reinspected; is that right?
- 24 A Offhand I do not remember.
25 0 Was it more than 1007 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 n
87 23 0
1 A The number of hangers, like I told you, would run 2 anywhere from one to 12. The number of welds I cannot l 3 recall right now.
4 It could be a -- it could have been a small hanger 5 or it could have been a large hanger that had 100 welds 6 on it. It could have been a hanger that had only eight 7 welds.
8 Q So you' re telling me, based on your present 9 recollection, that your reinspection of the Martin work 10 might have been one hanger; it could have been 12 11 hangers --
() 12 A That's true. I'd say --
13 0 -- or anything in between?
14 A That's true.
t 15 0 So you don't recall how many welds were involved?
16 A I don't recall how many welds was involved.
I 17 0 I believe you testified yesterday that it was your 18 understanding that Mr. Martin had been trained by Mr.
19 DeWald; is that --
20 A That is correct. That is the understanding that the QC 21 Department had.
22 0 Now, did you learn this f rom Mr. DeWald directly?
23 A No, I don' t think f rom Mr. DeWald, no.
24 0 Did you learn this f rom Mr. Martin?
25 A I'm sure it was Mr. Martin.
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8724 O
1 Q And he explained to you, did he, that Mr. DeWald had 2 been one of the people training him?
3 A Yes, I believe he mentioned that.
4 Q Did he say whether or not -- did he differentiate 5 between whether DeWald trained him for his Level I 6 certification or Level II certification?
7 A No, he didn' t -- he didn' t dif f erentiate against that.
8 0 Are you aware of whether DeWald trained him on one or 9 the other or both?
10 A Offhand, I don't know which one or both. My knowledge 11 -- I just don' t know what he trained him in.
() 12 Q This is just based on what Martin told you?
13 A Right, what I was told.
14 Q You never looked at the training records of Mr. Martin?
15 A I never seen the training manual, no, or the " training 16 book," they call it.
17 0 The book that had Mr. Martin's training information and 18 records in it?
! 19 A Right. I never seen that.
l l 20 Q Now, you had indicated that on these occasions that you l
21 were out with Mr. Martin in the field during the 22 reinspection, you explained certain matters to him.
23 I think you' ve testified that you explained to Mr.
fg 24 Martin something about the f ace and the toe of the weld
\,J 25 and what they looked like.
I i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd, i Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
8725 1 Do you recall that testimony? l 2 A Yes, I do.
3 0 You explained to him about the legs of a fillet weld?
4 A Right.
5 Q You told him what a rod crater was, as I recall.
6 A That's correct.
7 Q You explained that to him?
8 A That's correct.
9 0 So you were essentially conducting a training program of 10 your own at the time, is that correct, informal though 11 it may have been? ,
() 12 A Informally, yes, for several reasons: Mr. Martin had 13 never been a welder in his life. He didn' t realize what l
14 the problems were that the welders have when they' re 15 making field welds or -- or any type of welds.
16 Q Now, let's see if we can ref resh your memory on the 17 number of hangers you looked at.
18 I think you testified, in answer to my question, 19 that you thought the reinspection activity on Martin's i
20 work lasted about a week.
21 A Over a period, I said, of about a week, right.
22 0 All right.
23 When -- did you do this reinspection work all at 24 once or did you just do it periodically --
25 A I'd say --
l l
l Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. 87 26 O
1 Q -- like a day one week, a day another week?
2 How did it work?
3 A Yes, it was just random.
4 In other words, I might be with Rick for an hour or 5 something like that. I might be looking at an overview 6 of Rick's work for two hours today and then my next 7 assignment, something else.
! 8 So it was a random review, as f ar as that goes.
9 Q So you were reinspecting the work at the same time you 10 were doing your weld inspection assignments yourself?
11 A I believe that is correct.
() 12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, now, I think the 13 record is a little cloudier than when you started,
- 14 because I don't know whether the witness is saying he 15 did about a week's work --
16 THE WITNESS: I --
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- on the Martin evaluation 18 over a longer period, or whether he did some work all 19 during one week.
20 Now, which is it?
21 THE WITNESS: Some work over about one week's 22 period of overview.
i 23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: So you only looked at it for 24 one week, and you did considerably less than a week's 25 work on it?
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _ _ _ - . - -
4 8727 C) 1 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes.
I 2 MR. GALLO: I must say that wasn' t my l 3 understanding. Let's try to get that clear.
4 BY MR. GALLO:
i 5 Q Did you do all the work in one week's time or did you do 6 approximately one week's work over a number of weeks?
7 A No, it did not take a week to do the work.
- 8 I think I said over a period of about one week. I 1
9 think that's what I testified to: that this review I 10 did on Rick Martin lasted about a week, but I had other 11 assignments during the week.
12 Do you recall whether or not, when you picked up on the
(]) Q 13 Martin reinspection, you returned to the same hanger or 14 did you go to different hangers?
15 A Oh, we went to.different hangers. ,
i i
16 0 So your estimate of one to 12 hangers has to be more 17 than one that you reinspected?
18 A I would say it was more than one, but I would , pay up to 19 probably 12.
20 Q All right.
21 I think you testified that you had looked at some 22 old inspection reports at the time that inspection 23 documents were being written on the basis of grid 24 references.
O 25 Do you recall that?
l l Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312). 232-0262 __ . - . _ - - _ - _ - . - _ -
8728 1 A Yes, Form 91's, correct.
2 0 I believe you were asked whether or not you had seen any 3 inspection reports which showed more than 500 welds, 4 Do you recall that?
5 A Yes, I do.
6 0 And I believe you testified that you had.
7 A I think so.
8 Q Now, os you recall whose inspection reports they were?
9 A Usually they were either Irv DeWald's or an inspector by 10 the name of Parker and maybe one other. I believe his 11 name was Kast.
() 12 0 And what was the occasion that caused you to come across 13 these inspection reports?
14 A This was part of the program that they had, trying to 15 document hangers that was installed prior to a certain 16 date. In other words, it was a special program they had 17 going.
18 Q So this was part of the document review program that was 19 going on?
20 A Yes, I believe that is what it was called, one of the 21 audits. ,
22 0 Was it essentially a reinspection -- a document 23 reinspection program?
24 A That's true.
25 0 And did you work in that program yourself?
L Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8729 O
1 A Yes, I did.
2 Q Were you assigned to the vault to do this program?
3 A I was assigned as a field inspector who had to use the 4 vault for documentation and f or information, yes.
5 Q Well, did you do your work with the documents at the 6 vault or did you do your work out in the field?
7 A The question?
8 Q Yes.
9 Did you do your work on this document reinspection 10 program at the vault or out in the field?
11 A Both.
l () 12 0 What took you out to the field?
13 A If something triggered us that there was no legitimate 14 or no valid inspection form on certain hangers or-15 something like. that, then we had to check and see if 16 that hanger was still in the field or something like 17 that.
18 You could do that two different ways, but usually l
19 we did a walkdown to see if the hanger was still in 20 place and things like that.
21 Q This was not a weld inspection, I take it?
22 A Not unless there was no inspection form that could be 23 validated that it had been done.
24 0 Well, was your purpose merely to go out to the field and 25 verify that the hanger was still there or was there some Sonntao Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
_ _ ~ __ _.
l 8730 1 I
(:) !
I greater purpose? l l
i 2 A I think this was a twofold inspection that we were 3 doing: We were verifying that the welds had actually 4 been accepted by a Level II Inspector and --
5 0 Let me stop you there.
6 You were doing that on the basis of reviewing the 7 documents; is that correct?
8 A That's true.
9 Q All right. Go ahead. +
10 A And we was also verifying that the hanger in question 11 was actually still in service or still in the plant.
12 We were also doing this to justify that the number
(])
13 of welds that the Form 91 or whatever it was inspected 14 to was actually correct.
15 In other words, it was actually not only a document 16 review, but it was also a physical review of it.
17 Q So you were one of the inspectors that went out to the j 18 field to verify that the hanger was still there.
1 19 Did you then count the number of welds in the grid 20 area of interest?
i 21 A We counted the number of welds on the hanger that we was 22 actually trying to verify, not the number of welds in l
! 23 the grid.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me. I hear mention O 25 of a Form 91.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8731 1 Is that a Form 19 that you're referring to?
2 THE WITNESS: That is a Form 19 that Comstock 3 uses.
4 Form 91 was the one that the previous contractor 5 had used.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
7 BY MR. GALLO:
8 0 So a contractor by the name of Ernst used the Form 91?
9 A I believe that's correct.
10 0 Comstock uses a Form 19?
11 A That's correct.
() 12 0 They're both checklists?
l 13 A They' re both checklists.
14 0 All right.
15 So what would you do with that information?
16 You went out and verified the hanger was.there and 17 verified the number of welds.
18 What did you do with that information?
19 A What did we do with it?
l 20 Q Yes.
i 21 A We checked in the vault to see if there had been a valid 22 inspection checklist signed off after a certain date.
23 If there had been a valid checklist signed off a 24 certain date by a certified inspector, it was considered 1
O 25 good.
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 I (312) 232-0262
8732
}
1 0 You gathered information in the field so you could 2 attempt to determine whether documentation that was 3 already in the vault was acceptable or not?
4 A Yes. It was just matching paper.
5 Q It was one mechanism that was used?
6 A They were trying to figure out a tracking system to 7 verify that the welds had actually been inspected, l 8 that's correct.
9 Q All right.
10 Now, I think you testified yesterday that you i
11 hadn' t -- you had never seen a form 91 or a -- strike 12 that.
l (]) '
13 I believe you testified that you had never seen a 14 checklist signed by Mr. DeWald that had 1,000 or more l 15 welds on it. ,
i 16 A I never seen that myself.
17 Q I think you testified, however, that you had talked to I 18 someone who had seen it.
19 A I'd say it was common knowledge that there was one l 20 there, yes.
21 Q It was common knowledge.
22 Now, did you talk to someone --
23 A Oh, yes.
24 0 -- and did that person say they had seen it?
O 25 A Oh, yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. . - . _ . m . .__ m . . . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _
8733 1 Q Do you recall who that person was?
2 A I recall several people that said they seen it.
3 O And who were these people?
4 A Terry Gorman was one.
5 Q Gorman?
6 A Terry Gorman.
7 I believe young Jeff Hutson said he had seen it.
8 The other young man -- I can't even think of his name 9 today, but anyway he was in this -- he was in this 10 program we were doing.
11 Q Gorman, Hutson and the third person were in the same
() 12 document review program you were?
i, 13 A The same program that I was working in, right.
I 14 Q And is it your understanding that Gorman, Hutson or this
! 15 third person came across this checklist during their doc 16 review activity?
17 A Right, when they were -- when they were pulling the 18 documents f rom the vault.
19 Q Did you have a position in the vault?
20 Did you work right alongside these people?
21 A No. I did not -- I was not a vault person.
22 0 I see.
23 But you had occasion to be at the vault?
24 A Oh, yes.
l 25 0 You don't recall either Mr. Gorman or Hutson or the Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8734 O
1 third person ever coming up to you and saying, "Take a 2 look at this checklist. It looks like DeWald did 1,000 3 or more welds"?
4 A I'm sure I only heard about it. Like I say, I never 5 seen it.
6 0 Was it your understanding, from the individuals you --
7 who discussed the matter with you, that the inspection 8 checklist signed by DeWald was based on using the grid 9 system that we have discussed earlier?
10 A Yes.
11 Q So that the -- although all the welds were shown on the
() 12 checklist as being reported on one day, they may have j 13 been inspected, in fact, over one or more days?
14 A That is my understanding that that was their contention, 15 yes.
16 0 It was your understanding that it was on more than one 17 day that -- the inspection results came f rom more than 18 one day's inspection?
19 Is that your understanding?
20 A That was my understanding. That's what the person who 21 signed the X amount of welds on a -- it was over a 22 period of time.
23 Q But that the inspections had been conducted over a 24 period of time?
25 A Yes, that he had inspected them over a period of time.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- . . : = . = . .
l 8735 <
O 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
2 How did you understand this?
3 Did someone tell you this?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes. Offhand I believe -- I 5 be11 eve Mr. -- maybe Mr. DeWald himself said that this 6 was the way it was done back in '79, '80, whenever --
7 whenever it was done; that you might inspect a group or 8 X amount of hangers and then make one checklist, and all 9 welds was listed as being inspected on the date that he 10 signed the inspection.
11 BY MR. GALLO:
O 12 0 You reca11 Mr. oe a1e makine that exp1anaelon2 13 A I believe Mr. DeWa1d made that statement, yes.
14 0 Did he make it to you alone or were there other 15 inspectors --
t 16 A No. I'm sure there were --
17 0 You've got to let me finish my question, Mr. Hunter.
I 18 Did he make that explanation to you alone or were 19 there other inspectors present?
20 A I'm sure there were other -- other inspectors present.
21 0 Do you recall whether or not he made the explanation 22 you've testified to at one of these weekly meetings that 23 he might have held?
24 A No, it wasn' t at a weekly meeting, no.
I 25 0 It wasn't at one of the weekly meetings.
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312)___232-0.262__ _ _ _,._ ,_ _ _ _ _ _
8736 1
1 Do you recall the occasion that caused him to make l 2 the explanation?
3 A I'm sure that one of the inspectors questioned the 4 amount of welds that was inspected on that day, yes.
5 Q Did he -- was the -- do you recall where -- when he made 6 the explanation, where were you and the other 7 inspectors?
l 8 Were you in the office?
9 A I'm pretty sure we were in what they call the QC room 10 group -- or group room; either one.
11 0 So there were you and other inspectors?
O 12 A ves, there were.
13 0 Do you have any recollection of how many inspectors?
14 A There could have been anywhere f rom three or four to 15 half a dozen; maybe even eight or ten.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Before Mr. DeWald made this 17 statement, what was the understanding of the inspectors?
18 THE WITNESS: What we were trying to 19 establish was the number of welds on hangers, on -- on 20 individual hangers. There might be, say, 41 hangers on l
l 21 this one inspection and maybe, say, 482 welds or 22 something like that.
23 What we were trying to verify was how we could tell 24 the number of welds that had been inspected on any one 25 hanger. In other words, what we were trying to say is, Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8737 CE) 1 "If the hanger has 24 welds, was all 24 welds inspected 2 on that hanger in that grid?"
3 In other words, you might -- to get back to my 4 earlier statement, when I made a physical inspection in 5 the field of a number of welds in a grid, I might come i
6 up with -- on the same amount of hangers, if he had 7 four-hundred-and-some-odd, I might come up with 800, in 8 other words.
9 So we couldn't really tell what welds had been 10 inspected by just looking at the inspection that they 11 had done. That was what it was all about.
! 12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, didn' t they put the
(])
13 number of welds down that had been inspected on the Form l
14 917 15 ,
THE WITNESS: That's true. There might be --
16 they might say 424 welds. Like I say, there might be 41 17 hangers.
18 When we physically inspected them in the field, 19 then we might come up with a third more, a half more, 20 whatever, you know,100-percent more or whatever.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, what was the 1
22 explanation?
l 23 THE WITNESS: I don't think I ever heard an I
24 explanation f or that.
(:) 25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Now, how did the question l
{
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _ ___ _- _. - _ _
l l
8738
(
l come up as to over what period of time those hangers 2 would have been inspected? )
3 THE WITNESS: I'm sure that probably our ;
4 Lead, whoever was the Lead in the group, asked Mr.
5 DeWald how he arrived at the number of welds and the 6 number of hangers on a certain date on this inspection.
7 Then is when he explained that the inspection was 8 probably done over a period of time and the -- and the 9 inspection checklist was signed off on -- on just one 10 date.
11 J0DGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
() 12 BY MR. GALLO:
13 0 So it was in connection with the document review that 14 this question was put to Dewald and the explanation you 15 testified to was given; is that correct?
16 A That's correct, that is correct.
17 0 Now, did -- is it your testimony that you went out to 18 the field, as a part of your job in this document review 19 reinspection, and verified whether or not certain 20 hangers were still installed and then counted the welds?
1 l
21 A That is correct.
22 0 Then you went back into the -- into the vault area and 23 began to match up your results against what was reported 24 on the Ernst inspection reports; right?
O 25 A That is correct.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8739 l
(
1 Q And you were able to match up hangers; is that correct?
2 A Yes.
3 Q And then when you compared the number of welds for that 4 hanger, you found that your count was different than 5 what was shown on the Form 91?
6 A Yes, to some extent, that is correct.
7 Q Well, was it as large as a 100-percent discrepancy or 8 was i t --
9 A I don't think we ever found a 100-percent discrepancy, 10 but we did find a 50-percent discrepancy on the number 11 of welds.
() 12 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, excuse me.
I 13 As I recall, the witness' last testimony was not 14 limited just to the Ernst Form 91, but he was speaking i 15 of Mr. DeWald's past work himself, which would include, 16 of course, Comstock Form 19's.
17 BY MR. GUILD:
j 18 0 I'll modify my question accordingly. I didn't mean to 19 limit your answer to just Form 91's but to the 20 inspection checklists that you were reviewing as a part 21 of your document review.
22 I take it you were looking at both Form 91's from i 23 Ernst and Form 19's f rom L. K. Comstock; is that 24 correct?
O 25 A It was just a period of time. There was probably more Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8740 1 than one program going.
2 In other words, maybe one program just dealt with 3 the Form 91's, and maybe one program dealt with Form 4 19's after a certain date.
5 Q Well, the reinspection that you were involved with --
6 did that involve both Form 91's and Form 19',a or did it 7 just address Form 91's?
8 A If it was an overriding one in the time period, it 9 addressed both'.
10 But if it was just, say, from 1978 to 1980, that 11 was Form 91's. From '80 on, it was Form 19's.
() 12 0 I understand that, but what I'm trying to find out is:
When you did your work in the document review, were 13 14 you focusing on reinspection of documents for just Form 15 91's or both Form 91's and Form 19's?
16 A I believe it was Form 91's on one program and Form 19's 17 on the other program.
18 0 You worked on both programs?
19 A I'm -- I'm sure I did.
20 0 All right. Let's get back to my question.
21 You had counted -- you had identified and verified 22 the existence of certain hangers, and you went back and 23 tried to compare those results with the checklists that 24 you were working on in the vault area.
O 25 You found that the hanger numbers listed on the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- p 8741 1 checklists did not match the same number of welds that 2 you had counted; is that correct?
3 A Yes, we found that.
4 0 And do you have an understanding of why that discrepancy j 5 existed?
6 A I have no idea why.
7 Q Did the checklists that were in the vault that you were ,
8 looking at -- did they have the number of welds listed 9 by hanger or was it just the total number of welds?
10 A The total number, if I'm not mistaken.
11 0 The total number of welds by hanger or for all the' l
() 12 hangers on the list?
13 A The total number of welds per grid.
14 Q Per grid.
15 So it was.a number of hangers?
16 A That's correct.
17 0 The total on the checklist, the total number of welds on l
l 18 the checklist, represented a number of hangers?
19 A That's correct.
20 0 But the information you got f rom the field was for just l 21 one hanger or was it for all the hangers on the same 22 checklist?
23 A Oh, no.
24 If you went to the field to check out one of the 25 reports that they had signed, one of the checklists they Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _.
/
, .c 8742 p..
(~
V) l had signed, you wanted to check the number of hangers on I
2 ,
that checklist against the number of hangers that were i still in the field and the number of welds in the field 4 against 'the number of welds that was -- that was on the l 5 checklist. -
, i 6 Q All right, sir.
V And was a discrepancy --
8 A We found'aome discrepancies, yes.
l, .
-9 Q Is the discrepancy in' the weld count that you found
-10' attributable perhaps to the fact that at the time that 11
} ,
you went out in_.the field to verify hangers and count 12 welds, that some of the hangers that originally had been
[])
13 inspected no longer were present?
14 A That happened, yes.
- 15 0 That happened?
j 16 A That happened, yes.
17 'O Now, Mr. Guild asked you some questions about --
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
l l 19 Were there instances in which, when you went out to 20 the field, you found that there were more welds that you 21 counted.than had been counted originally?
22 THE WITNESS: That is true.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
24 TH E WITN ESS :- But one of the reasons that l
O 2'S could have happened was modification of hangers.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
1 (312) 232-0262
8743 O
1 In other words, like I say, from '78 to the time 2 that this review was being done or this check was being 3 done, hangers could have been modified for the simple 4 reason that they had to move it for other equipment, one 5 thing or another.
6 In other words, S & L may have made a design change 7 f rom the time the welds was p'ut down on the number of 8 grid -- I mean, the welds on the grid was put on and the .
9 time that we went out and actually physically observed ,
10 these hangers again.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: So that welds could have
() 12 been added; is that what you' re saying?
Welds could have been added; 13 THE WITNESS:
14 they could have been subtracted.
15 BY MR. GALLO:
16 0 Now, I believe you testified yesterday that during one l l 17 of these regular meetings that DeWald held, he had made 18 the point that -- and I don't want to mischaracterize 19 your testimony; if I do, I want you to correct me --
20 DeWald made the point that Comstock was in danger of 21 losing the contract, or words to that effect.
22 A He made that -- words to that effect on more than one 23 occasion.
24 Q Do you recall what he said?
l () 25 A Word for word I do not recall it.
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (212) 232-0262
8744 O
1 0 Well, did he say -- did he say it as bluntly as I put 2 its that Comstock is in danger of losing the contract; 3 that CECO is going to do something?
4 A I'm sure that on more than one occasion he put it that 5 bluntly.
6 0 You recall him saying --
7 A I'm sure he said that on more than one occasion, yes.
8 Q And what were the circumstances that he made such a 9 statement?
,, 10 What caused him to make the statement?
11 A We probably had so many special projects going at the 12 time, and Commonwealth Edison was pushing him for a --
(])
13 for a completion date on certain projects in order for, l
14 I guess, commonwealth Edison to plan their strategy or 15 plan their construction strategy.
- 16. So, therefore, they wanted a certain amount of work 17 completed by a certain date.
18 Q I believe you testified yesterday that at these general 19 meetings, that DeWald said something to the effect that, 20 "If we want to keep the contract, we have to get the job 21 done" --
22 A That's correct.
l 23 0 -- or words to that effect?
24 A That's correct.
O 25 Q But now today you recall him saying it more bluntly than Sonnta_g Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8745 O
1 that?
2 You recall him saying that Comstock was in danger 3 of losing the contract because of various reasons; is 4 that correct?
5 A My statement is that Mr. DeWald made the forceful 6 statement that if we didn't get a certain amount done, 7 that Commonwealth -- Comstock would lose the contract, 8 yes.
9 0 Now, what did Mr. DeWald indicate to you that Edison was 10 expecting to be done?
11 A Edison was expecting a certain audit to be completed by 12 a certain date.
(])
13 Q Do you reca'll what the subject matter of the audit was?
14 A These were all special projects we were working on.
15 No, I do not.
16 0 You don't recall.
17 Was it an audit or reinspection activity?
18 A It was probably an audit.
19 Q Did you and the OC Inspectors conduct audits?
20 A No, we did not.
l 21 0 So Mr. DeWald was indicating that if these audits l
22 weren't completed by whatever date Edison expected, 23 Comstock was in danger of Icsing the contract?
24 A That was the understanding, yes.
O 25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 .
8746 O
1 Are you talking now about an audit being completed 2 or the reinspection because of the audit being 3 completed?
4 THE WITNESS: The reinspection, the cause of 5 the audit.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And you' re talking about 7 more than one reinspection program, are you?
8 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes. We had several --
9 several special projects going at the same time.
10 BY MR. GALLO:
11 0 So it was the reinspections that had to be completed?
() 12 A Oh, yes.
13 0 All right.
14 And do you recall what reinspection activity that 15 Mr. DeWald was, focusing on?
16 A There were a number of them; not any one that I recall 17 as such. They was all given priorities.
18 0 So you recall him -- you recall very clearly him stating 19 that Comstock might lose the contract, but you don' t 20 recall in connection with what reinspection activity?
21 A The reinspection activity that he was talking about at 22 the time I do not recall.
23 0 What was your understanding of the purpose of the DeWald 24 statement?
() 25 A What was the purpose?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinoic 60134 (312) 232-0262 __ . - .
8747 O
1 0 Why did he make that point?
2 What was your understanding of why he made that 3 point?
4 A The question again?
5 Q Yes.
6 What was your understanding as to why DeWald told l
7 you and the other inspectors --
8 A Well, my understanding -- ,
9 0 -- that Comstock was in danger of losing the contract?
10 A My understanding is that was what Mr. DeWald felt that 11 he actually had to do in order to keep Comstock on the l
12 job.
(])
13 Q How did that information affect your work?
14 A Offhand I would say it didn't affect mine.
15 0 And why not?
16 A I usually tried to do an honest day's work for an honest 17 day's pay.
- 18 Q So you didn' t f eel --
19 A I felt no pressure. .
20 0 You felt no pressure by virtue of that statement?
21 A That's true.
22 0 Was it your belief that Mr. DeWald was attempting to 23 pressure you by making that statement?
24 A Me necessarily?
O 25 No.
l l
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 l - . - .
(312) 232-0262
8748 J
l Q Not you?
2 A Not me.
3 Q Why do you say "not me necessarily"?
4 A I am pretty sure that I had more than one conversation 5 with Mr. DeWald, and he was well satisfied with the 6 number of inspections, the number of work -- the amount 7 of work that I accomplished.
8 Q Do you think that Mr. DeWald was -- had other inspectors 9 in mind at the time he made this statement?
10 A Well, my personal opinion is that, yes, he did.
11 0 Do you know whether or not -- whether or not the 12 statements that you attributed to Mr. DeWald affected
({}
13 the other inspectors' work?
14 A Oh, I'm sure some of them it did.
15 0 And what is the basis for your certainty on that?
- 16 A Certain people at that time could be intimidated.
l 17 Certain people could be cowed, if you want to call it l
i 18 that way, into doing more.
19 Q And do you have some notion as to who you mean by these 20 "certain people"?
l l
21 A I do, but I will not answer.
22 0 Well, I'm about to ask you that.
l 23 Who did you feel was intimidated or cowed by 1
24 DeWald's statements about losing the contract?
- C) 25 A One of them was -- the first one was probably young Rick l
I l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8749 l O i 1
1 Martin, if you want the names. Another one was named --
2 a young man by the name of Walker. There were a couple 3 other boys, but I don't even remember the names.
4 They usually wasn' t weld inspectors. They were 5 usually electrical inspectors or equipment inspectors or 6 something like that.
7 0 That's all you can recall?
8 A I would say there was maybe up to a half a dozen that 9 was affected, yes.
10 Q Now, of this half a dozen, how many were QC Inspectors?
11 A That's what I'm talking about: a half a dozen OC 12 Inspectors.
(])
13 Q A half a dozen QC Inspectors.
14 Well, you mentioned Mr. Martin, and I know he's a 15 QC Inspector.
16 Was Mr. Walker a QC Inspector?
17 A Yes, he is. ,
18 0 Who were the other four?
19 A Young men that I -- I can't recall their names.
20 I've been gone there for some four months on a l
l 21 different deal, and I can't even remember my own boss' 22 name now.
t 23 0 You're sure you don't remember?
l l 24 A I don' t remember.
O 25 0 Are all four --
Sonntao Reportino Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 i
c -
(312) 232-0262
8750
(
1 A I -- I would know them if I saw them in the f ace, but 2 their names I can't recall.
3 0 You can see them?
4 A I can see them, but I can't recall their names.
5 Q Can you see them in your mind?
6 Can you count four of them?
7 A I don't know.
8 Q You don't know if there were four?
9 A I can see them, yes.
10 0 As you see them, do you see four different f aces or six 11 different faces?
12 A Four to six different people I said could be cowed.
({}
13 Q Well, we' re trying now to identify the other four.
14 We' ve identify two: Mr. Martin and Mr. Walker.
15 You've testified that you can visualize in your 16 mind the f aces of these other inspectors.
17 A Right.
18 Q What I'm asking you is whether you' re visualizing four 19 faces or some --
20 A I said four.
l 21 MR. GUILD: You didn't ask him to visualize 22 Mr. Martin and Mr. Walker, because he's already 23 identified them, Mr. Gallo, so I guess he has four 24 others in mind.
O 25 MR. GALLO: Are you helping him testify Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
87 51 0
1 today?
2 MR. GUILD: Yes, because I think you' re 3 hitting him about the head and shoulders on this.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Let's not leave it 5 ambiguous.
6 You mean four in addition to Mr. Martin?
7 THE WITNESS: That's correct. I said four to l 8 six, and I mean six total.
9 BY MR. GALLO:
10 Q Were they all young people, to your recollection?
11 A Yes. Most of them were under 30 years old, maybe under 12 25 years old.
(])
13 Q Do you remember the time that DeWald made these 14 statements, when that occurred?
15 A Over a period of time, I would say, from early '84 to 16 late '84, maybe even on up into '85; but I would say 17 f rom early ' 84 to late ' 84.
18 Q Now, were all the inspectors -- strike that.
19 You' ve identified -- you' ve testified that there 20 were six people that you believe were intimidated and 21 cowed by the --
22 A I said "could be."
23 Q Oh, "could be"?
l 24 A I said "could be."
O 25 0 I see.
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8752 ;
O 1 I thought your previous testimony was that they 2 were intimidated and cowed.
-3 It's now "could be"?
4 A I don't think I ever said that they were. I said that 5 they "could be. "
6 Q "Could be," all right.
, 7 You're not certain?
8 A I'm not certain what you -- what you --
l 9 0 You' re not certain that they were cowed and intimidated 10 by the DeWald statement; is that your testimony?
11 A I have no way of proving that they were.
12 0 In your own mind, are you certain that --
(])
13 A In my own mind, I was certain, yes.
14 Q Now, what was the basis for your certainty that Mr.
15 Walker was intimidated and cowed by the DeWald 16 statements?
17 A Be increased -- increased his productivity over a period 18 of time. He was more attentive to his work. I'm sure
, 19 that he give it an extra effort for a while.
20 0 So based on Mr. Walker's increased productivity and the 21 fact that he was more attentive to his work, you 22 concluded that he was intimidated and cowed by the 23 DeWald statement about losing the contract; is that it?
24 A Yes, in general conversations that was carried on among I ( 25 the QC Inspectors, yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. . . . . . --.~.. - - . - .
l l
l 87 53 1
(
1 Q Is it possible that Mr. DeWald, in making the statement, 2 was trying to get some of the inspectors who weren't 3 really doing as much work as they should have been, as l
4 much work as you were doing, to do better? '
5 Is that possible?
6 A I'm sure that was part of it, yes.
7 0 Is it possible that that indeed was what effect Mr.
8 Walker experienced: that he was encouraged and urged by 9 DeWald to bring his work level up to, say, the same 10 level that you had achieved?
11 A I don't know whether -- whether that was his motivation
() 12 or not.
13 Q Well, is it possible -- do you know whether or not Mr.
14 Walker had an inspection record as good as you've 15 testified for yourself here in the last two days?
16 A I don't know what his record was.
17 Q Do you know whether or not he was as productive as you 18 were in terms of the number of hangers per day on the 19 average?
20 A I don't believe he was.
21 Q I'm sorry?
22 A My personal opinion is that I don' t believe he was.
23 Q He wasn't.
24 Was he as attentive as you were?
25 A How do you mean that, sir?
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8754 O
1 Q Well, you used the word that you believed Mr. Walker was 2 more " attentive" in his inspection work after he had 3 heard the DeWald statement about losing the contract.
4 What did you mean by that term?
5 A I mean that he didn't kill as much time unnecessarily as 6 he had previously.
7 0 I see.
l l
8 You mean that he was -- you had observed him 9 wasting time in the past?
10 A I wouldn' t call it " wasting. "
11 I would just say that he wasn' t hitting -- hitting 12 the nail on the head all the time.
(])
13 0 Well, what was he doing when he wasn't hitting the nail 14 on the head?
15 A Well, there's .a lot of things that a person can do in QC 16 to kill time.
l 17 0 So he was killing time?
l 18 A I'd say that he was killing time.
19 0 What do you understand " killing time" to mean? What do 20 you understand that term to mean?
21 Was it just an idle waste of time? Is that what l 22 " killing time" means?
23 A I' d say that, yes.
24 0 So prior to the DeWald statements on the potential of l
(
() 25 losing the contract with Edison, you had observed Mr.
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _. -. _-- _ _ _ _ - _ . - .
8755 O
1 Walker killing time; is that correct?
2 A I would say that -- that he didn' t hit it eight hours a 3 day, yes.
4 O And after the DeWald statement about losing the 5 contract, he seemed to be more attentive and did better?
6 A I'd say that he improved his work habits.
7 Q What about -- did you ever talk to Mr. Walker directly 8 about his work habits?
9 A Oh, yes. I worked in the same group with Mr. Walker on 10 more than one occasion.
11 Even though he wasn't a weld inspector, me and him 12 worked on a couple of special projects where he did
(])
13 either the equipment junction boxes or whatever it was 14 that he was certified in.
15 0 Walker didn't.do weld inspections, but he did other QC 16 inspection activity?
17 A That's true, that's true.
18 Q Did you have occasion to comment and give advice to Mr.
19 Walker about his work habits?
20 A Me give advice?
21 0 Yes.
22 A No, I didn't give him any advice about what he should t
23 do.
24 0 Did you ever give any advice to him that he should avoid O 25 killing so much time and get more productive in his i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l l
8756 O
1 work?
2 ~A I can't say that I ever said anything like that to him.
3 Q Now, did Mr. Walker -- do you recall Mr. Walker ever 4 indicating to you that he was in any way affected by the 5 statements made by DeWald about losing the contract?
6 A I probably heard him say in general terms, boy, he'd 7 sure hate to lose this job; he didn't know where he'd 8 find another one, or something like that.
9 0 So he was kind of pulling together as a part of the team 10 to make sure that everybody kept their job?
11 A I think that's correct.
12 MR. GALLO: I'm going to continue the same
(])
13 line, only with other inspectors. It would be a good 14 place to take a break.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's fine.
16 I do want to excuse the witness for lunch now, and 17 I do want to have one or two minutes with just counsel 18 here.
19 So we'll reconvene at 1:15. We'll expect you back, l 20 Mr. Hunter.
21 THE WITNESS: All right.
22 (Witness excused.)
l 23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Now, Mr. Gallo, do we have a l
24 factual question as to whether Mr. Hunter actually did a
() 25 re-evaluation of Mr. Martin's work?
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8757
(
1 MR. GALLO: You might have to ask that 2 question of Mr. Guild. He's the one that introduced the 3 point.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Oh, okay.
5 So we don' t know whether he actually did 6 re-evaluate Mr. Martin's work; is that correct?
7 MR. GALLO: Well, the witness' testimony is 8 that he did.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, are you questioning 10 that aspect of his testimony?
11 MR. GALLO: Yes, yes.
() 12 I wanted to see what his answers were in connection 13 ' certainly -- certainly in connection with the cross 14 examination that's yet to come of Mr. Martin.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Oh, okay, fine. ,
16 I just want to make sure that that was actually in 17 dispute and we weren't going into collateral matters 18 again.
19 MR. GALLO: Well, I do not know if it's a 20 collateral matter.
21 All I know is this: The problem was -- the matter 22 was raised for the first time by Mr. Guild. I find that 23 this witness' explanations and testimony are very hard l 24 to understand and it's necessary to go over the matter
( in order to get a clear understanding.
25 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262_ _ . _ _ _ , _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - - _ ~
8758
)
1 The purpose of my questioning on the Martin matter i 2 was to get a clear understanding so we could see what 3 develops when Mr. Martin takes the stand.
4 JUDGE GROSSNEN: Okay, because when Mr.
5 Martin comes on, I was going to suggest that will 6 resolve it. If there is a question, you certainly can 7 do what you' re doing.
8 My concern is that when you start asking him about 9 ICR's, whether he wrote them -- undoubtedly he f eels if 10 there was something discrepant about the welds, he 11 should have written an ICR -- that we' re not getting him
() 12 in a position where even though we don't have a dispute
! 13 as to the f acts that are material, we' re going to get l
14 him into a credibility bind and then start another l
15 examination with regard to that. -
16 I don't think that's proper, and I've said that in 17 the past.
18 But if we actually do have a factual dispute as to 19 whether he re-evaluated Martin and he then discussed it 20 with Mr. DeWald, then I think it's fine to go ahead on 21 this line of questioning.
22 Do you follow what I'm saying, Mr. Gallo?
23 MR. GALLO: Yes, I follow you, but I think 24 it's proper on rebuttal, for example, for Mr. DeWald to 25 be called and testify whether or not he requested Mr.
Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8759 O
1 Bunter to undertake the reinspection of the Martin work.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
3 If there's a dispute, that's fine. I'm saying 4 there's nothing wrong with it.
5 I just want to make sure that we don't get 6 sidetracked into creating a credibility problem only for 7 that sake and not because of anything that's in dispute 8 that's material.
9 Okay, fine. Why don't we adjourn until 1:15.
10 (WBEREUPON, the hearing was continued to 11 the hour of 1:00 o' clock P. M.)
() 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 l
19 20 21 22 23 C:)
25 Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8760 l
(1) 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 ,
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4
__________________x 5 :
In the Matter of: :
6 : Docket No. 50-456 OL COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY : 50-457 OL 7 :
l (Braidwood Station, Units 1 :
8 and 2) :
__________________X 9
s 10 Met pursuant to recess.
11 Thursday, July 24, 1986.
1:15 P. M.
- 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN
- Are we ready to go?
14 MR. GALLO: o Yes, sir.
15 . JUDGE.GROSSMAN: Okay. We are back in ,
- 16 session.
17 Mr. Gallo, please continue.
18 BY MR. GALLO:
19 Q Mr. Hunter, I had asked you questions just prior to the 20 lunch recess about your understanding with respect to 21 Mr. Walker being intimidated and cowed by the DeWald 22 statements about losing the contract; and the other QC 23 Inspector that you identified that you believe was 24 similarly -- was cowed and intimidated, I should say, 25 was Mr. Martin.
nnnntag Repnrei ng nervien. Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134
- (312) 232-0262
~P 8761
(
1 Can you explain to me your basis for that 2 understanding as to Mr. Martin? '
3 A No more so than just a general feeling and conversations -
4 that I had with Mr. Martin.
5 Q All right. Let's take the general feeling.
6 Can you describe for me how your general feeling 7 caused you to believe that Mr. Martin was intimidated I
8 and cowed by the DeWald statements about losing the 9 contract?
10 A Well, yes. I am pretty sure that Mr. Martin made the 11 remarks to me or in the general conversation that he 12 thought that maybe they were out to terminate him or to
(])
13 relieve him of his duties; and they did relieve him of 14 his duties as a Weld Inspector.
15 Q Can you explain,for me how you connect up a statement ,
! 16 from Mr. Martin that he thought that they -- meaning 17 what, QC management?
18 A Management.
19 Q -- that QC management was out to terminate him and to l 20 get him, so to speak?
21 How do'you connect up that conversation with your 22 judgment that he was intimidated and cowed by the 23 statement from DeWald about losing the contract?
24 A Mr. Martin was the type of a young man that really was O 25 not forceful as far as his expressions go as to how he Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l .
8762 l
O 1 feels about certain things.
2 But if you are around a' person any amount of time, 3 I think you can draw your own conclusions of some of his 4 thoughts, some of his trains -- thought trains about 5 what was happening to him.
6 Q Well, did his statements to you about QC management 7 wanting to terminate him or to get him have anything at 8 all to do with the DeWald statements about losing the
- 9 contract?
10 A Question?
11 Q Yes.
l 12 You testified that Martin had told you that he 13 believed that Comstock QC management was, I believe your l 14 words were, out to get him and pull his certifications i 15 and terminate him.
16 I am asking this: Based on your understanding, did 17 that particular subject that Martin conveyed to you have ,
18 anything at all to do with the DeWald statements about 19 losing the contract?
20 A I am sure it did.
21 Q What was your --
22 A Maybe not directly but indirectly it did.
23 Q Well, what was your understanding as to how it 24 indirectly connected up with the DeWald statements?
25 A I believe they assigned Mr. Martin for a period of time l
l Sonntaa Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 J3121 232-p262
, l 8763 O
1 -- I don't know the exact number of days or anything 2 like that -- to jobs that really had nothing whatsoever-3 to do with his certifications, if he even had a 4 certification -- I don't know -- at the time. '
5 0 Well, the time we are talking about, I thought, was 6 early 1984, late 1984; is that correct?
7 A Early 1984, right.
8 I am not for sure that Rick even had another 9 certification of any kind.
10 0 Then he wouldn't have been doing QC inspections at that 11 time, would he?
12 No. It was just.-- it was just what we call a clerk.
(]) A 13 In other words, it had nothing whatsoever to do 14 with signing documents.
15 O So at the time that DeWald made the statements.at these 16 regular meetings about Comstock potentially losing the 17 contract, it's your understanding that Martin's duties 18 were those of -- the same as a clerk, because his 19 certifications had been pulled; is that correct?
20 A That's correct.
21 Q Now, do you have any understanding of how Martin's work 22 was affected by DeWald's statements concerning losing 23 the contract?
24 A I have no recollection of whether it affected him as far O 25 as his daily work or not.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 8764
(
1 Q You don't know?
2 A I really don't know.
3 Q But you still believe that he was intimidated and cowed 4 by the DeWald statements, nevertheless?
5 A Yes, I really do.
6 Q It's a little hard to ask you specific questions about 7 the other four inspectors that you believe were cowed f 8 and intimidated, because we can't -- we don't know who 9 they are.
10 Bas the luncheon recess refreshed your memory in 11 any way?
12 A I still don't remember their names.
(])
13 Q Do you --
14 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, that is a statement 15 that counsel is making.
16 I don't think it establishes as a fact that, aside 17 from recalling the names of the individuals, that the l
18 witness has no further knowledge on the subject.
19 That is simply counsel's position.
20 MR. GALLO: No, no. I don't intend to 21 indicate that.
22 What I intended --
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The record speaks for itself 24 as to what the witness testified to.
O 25 MR. GALLO: Right.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8765 O
1 The thrust of my question was that h,e couldn't 2 recall the names; that was the thrust of my question.
3 BY MR. GALLO:
4 Q And you can't recall their names now; is that it?
5 A I cannot recall their names.
6 Q But you can envision the people themselves?
7 A I can.
8 Q Do you recall talking to any of them about the DeWald 9 statement in terms-of losing the contract?
10 A Yes. It was a general -- a general feeling among the 11 inspectors.
12 Some of them felt that Irv was trying to load them
({}
13 down. Some of them felt that they wasn't going to do a 14 bit more inspections than what they had been doing and 15 some of them felt that -- well, like I say, some of them 16 felt, "Well, we can pick it up a little bit."
17 Q But my question is addressed to the four, whose names 18 you can't recall.
19 Can you recall talking to any of these four about l
l 20 the DeWald statement?
21 A Just in general conversation, yes.
22 Q You talked to them specifically.
23 Did you ask --
24 A No specifics, no.
O 25 Q You did not talk to them in specific terms?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8766
(
1 A In specific terms, no.
2 Q What you have testified to is that -- would it be fair 3 to characterize your understanding of the inspectors' 4 reaction was that of through shop talk?
5 A Some positive and some negative, yes.
6 Q You say some of the inspectors -- it was shop talk that 7 some of the inspectors -- thought they could turn to and 8 do better.
9 That's one part of your answer; is that correct?
10 A I would say there was a few, that that was a general 11 feeling of them, yes.
12 And some inspectors felt that they were trying -- that
(]) Q 13 Mr. DeWald was trying -- to overload them and they 14 refused to be overloaded; is that your testimony?
15 A That is correct.
16 Q There was a third segment, and I have forgotten now what l
17 you said with respect to them.
l 18 Do you recall?
l 19 A Yes.
20 I am pretty sure I said that some of the inspectors 21 said, " Hey, we are carrying our share of the load. Why 22 should we carry somebody else's?"
23 0 I see. And they didn't carry somebody else's?
24 A That I don't have any idea, whether they did or not.
O 25 Q Do you recall any inspectors' names that fell in this l sonneag nopnreing servica_ r+ a .
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
l l
8767
(
l last category?
2 A Mine.
3 Q You felt that way?
4 A Yes, I felt that way.
5 O So you didn't increase your productivity to pick up the 6 slack from others?
7 A I am sure I didn't.
8 Q You just kept working at your --
9 A My pace.
10 Q -- at your normal pace?
11 A Yes.
() 12 Q Was it your understanding when DeWald made these 13 statements about potentially losing the contract, that 14 he was attempting to manage the work schedule of the 15 various inspectors to have them all reach a certain 16 level of productivity?
17 A As far as understanding it that way, I didn't understand 18 it that way.
19 I understood it that Mr. DeWald said that we had to 20 accomplish a certain amount of work in order to keep the 21 contract. That was his statement.
22 Q Well, if some of the inspectors -- strike that.
23 Do you have an opinion as to whether or not the 24 objectives that Mr. DeWald was interested in O 25 accomplishing were, in fact, accomplished?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 8768
( ,
1 A That I couldn't tell you.
2 Q You don't know?
3 A No. I couldn't.
4 Q Did Comstock, to your knowledge, lose the contract?
5 A No, they did not lose the contract.
6 I think they have -- they got an extension on the 7 program that we were working. I know they did that on 8 more than one occasion.
9 Q All right. Let's talk a little bit about the 10 certifications that you had.
11 I believe it was your testimony that within a short 12 time af ter you came aboard Comstock in '83 -- was it May
(])
13 of '83?
14 A No; October the 31st.
15 0 -- October of '83, within a short time thereafter, you 16 became certified as a Weld Inspector?
17 A That's true.
18 Q Were you also certified at that time in configurations?
l 19 A No, I was not.
l 20 Q All right. Then some months later you became certified 21 in receiving; is that correct?
22 A That's correct.
23 Q All right. And when you were -- when Comstock's --
24 strike that.
(:) 25 When Comstock's approach to a method of pay changed l
Sonntac ReDortino Service. Ltd.
~
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l !
8769 l
() '
1 and tied hourly wage to certifications, you were 2 interested in getting a third certification;.is that 3 correct?
4 A For monetary purposes, yes.
5 Q Is that when you trained for configuration?
6 A No, I don't think so.
7 When I trained for configurations, I don't know how
.I 8 many months had passed but several months had passed 9 from the time I first applied for certification of 10 another discipline.
11 Q You applied for certification and it was some months 12 later after that that you began to train for
(])
13 configurations? ,
14 A That's correct.
15 Q Did you complete your training for configurations?
16 A I completed my training, yes. ,
l .
17 Q I believe it was your testimony that you took your l
18 practical for configurations? -
19 A I took a practical, a practical.
20 Q Do you know whether or not you passed the practical? 1 l 21 A That I couldn't tell you.
22 Q In any event, the test results were disallowed because l
23 no Supervisor was present?
24 A That's correct.
l O 25 0 What was your understanding as to the need for a Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l if ,
_J ,
~
8770
/
1 Supervisor being present?
2' ( A I was given no direct answer of why a Supervisor had to 3 be accompanying me, because the particular configuration s
4 ,
we was doing, I pointed it out to._ start with.
5 . It was'a reject, and everybody was using the same 6
unit as a rejectable criteria.
7 Q Are you aware that at one point there was no need for a 8 Supervisor to be present for these practical tests?
9 A Oh, yes; oh, yes. Only 'they told me the week prior tc.
10 when I took my practical, that was when it changed.
11 - ! I didn't know it at the time I took my practical.
~
O 12 Q. So there was a change in the procedures, the Comstock 13 procedures, that required a Supervisor to be present 14 when the practical was taken about one week before you 15 took yours?
16 A I don't know whether it was.a procedure or a memo or 17 what, but there was some type of directive.
18 0 There was a requirement for the Supervisor to be
, 15 present?
?
20 A That's'what I understand, that's what I understand.
1 21 Q We are talking .over one another again. We are going to
! i
! .02 nave to be' careful again.
23 Let me restate the question.
24 There was'a requirement that a Supervisor be 25 present and this requirement was put in force about a Sonnt ag Reporting Service; Ltd, Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8771 1 week before you took your practical?
2 A Yes, that is the way I understand it.
3 Q Okay. And after you took your practical, you found out 4 that -- you found out about it and the practical was 5 disallowed?
6 A That is correct.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
8 Did they tell you about this when they told you it 9 was disallowed or did you know about this before they 10 disallowed it?
11 THE WITNESS: No, I had no idea that a
()
12 Supervisor had to be with me when I took my practical.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But I am asking you:
14 Did you subsequently find out about it only when 15 they told you that you flunked, that they couldn't 16 accept your practical?
17 THE WITNESS: That's when I found out about 18 it myself.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Did you see any memo or 1
i 20 anything written that indicated that?
21 THE WITNESS: Not prior to this, no.
22 ,
JUDGE GROSSMAN: At the time they told you, 23 did they show you some memo?
24 THE WITNESS: I can't recall, offhand, of
() 25 ever seeing anything at that time.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
,5 8772
.O 1 BY MR. GALLO:
2 Q Now, do you remember who it was that told you that your 3r practical couldn't count?
i 4 A A young man that had only been on the jobsite 5 approximately three to six months, and today I can't 6 even recall his name.
7 He only stayed a few days after this all happened.
8 Q Okay. Well, I take it that you were displeased by the 9 fact that they wouldn't count -- that Comstock wouldn't 10 count -- your practical; is that correct?
11 A Yes, that is correct.
() 12 Q Did you take it up with your weld Supervisor? Did you 13 complain to your weld Supervisor about it?
14 A I think I probably made the comments, "Well, that's j 15 pretty good. I, found the' rejectable unit and everybody l
16 'is taking their practical on that same unit. How come I 17 am not allowed to," or something on that order.
18 Q Now, did you ask your Supervisor -- strike that.
19 Do you recall who the Supervisor was that you 20 talked to, that you just had the conversation with?
21 A I am pretty sure that Mr. Tony Simile was one of the 22 pe rsons.
23 Q You discussed it with Simile?
24 A I am pretty sure that the matter come up, yes.
25 Q Did you ask him to accept your practical, nevertheless?
l Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8773 O
1 A No, I never.
2' Q What did Simile respond to you? What did he say to you 3 after you complained about it?
4 A Well, if it was Mr. Simile that I complained to, I am 5 sure that they told me that there was a procedure now or 6 a memo or something that a Supervisor had to accompany a 7 QC person for his practical in the field.
8 Q Whoever it was, just indicated --
9 A Whoever, right.
10 Q -- it was just your bad luck that you got caught by this 11 thing?
12 A I don't know whether it was my bad luck or what.
(])
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think Mr. Gallo is asking 14 you whether he said something to the effect that it was 15 just your bad luck?
16 THE WITNESS: (No response.)
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is that what your question 18 was?
19 MR. GALLO: Yes.
20 THE WITNESS: I don't recall him saying 21 anything like that, no.
22 BY MR. GALLO:
23 Q Well, did you discuss the matter subsequently with Mr.
F 24 DeWald?
O 25 A I don't think the subject ever come up with me and Mr.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232
. . . --- -_. _ -_ .- - ._-_ ._._.-0262.
8774 O
1 DeWald.
2 Q Did you undertake to take the practical a second time?
3 A No. I said forget it.
4 Q Did Comstock -- did Simile or some other Supervisor at 5 Comstock -- say to you you were prohibited f rom taking 6 it a second time?
7 A No, no one ever told me.
8 Q You just decided yourself not to take it again?
9 A That's correct.
10 0 Why is that?
11 A I felt that after I discovered the defect on the hanger, 12 everyone else -- I don't know how many but more than one
(])
13 -- had taken their reject practical on it.
14 That if I wasn't allowed to take my practical after 15 discovering it doing the weld inspection that I was 16 doing, then why should I?
17 0 What is your understanding as to why the requirement was 18 initiated for a Supervisor being present at the time of 19 the practical test?
20 A Question?
21 Q Yes.
22 What was your understanding as to the reason why
( 23 suddenly a Supervisor was required to be present during 24 the taking of a practical test?
O 25 A I am sure that some inspectors had helped other Ronntag Reporting Aervice. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
1 (312) 232-0262 i
8775 O
1 inspectors pass their practical in more than one 2 discipline, whether it was welding, configuration, cable 3 pull or anything else.
4 So they figured that if someone wasn't for sure, 5 they would go to another inspector and he would 6 straighten them out.
7 Q So Comstock QC management was worried about cheating on 8 the practical?
9 A I am sure that was their -- that was their --
10 Q As I understand your testimony, you got mad that they 11 wouldn't trust you and, therefore, you wouldn't take it
.O 12 aeain2 13 A I didn't say I got mad. I said I wouldn't take it.
14 Q All right. I am sorry.
15 And why wouldn't you take it again?
16 A I felt that if they didn't have enough confidence in me l 17 to go out in the field and make a judgment, then why 18 should I take someone with me?
19 Q So you felt that they didn't trust you; is that it?
20 A I wouldn't say I felt they didn't trust me.
21 I just said that I felt they didn't have enough 22 confidence in me to make a judgment.
23 0 Well, was your judgment being questioned by this at all?
24 A This I don't know.
25 0 Well, did they simply say that you needed to have the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8776 O
1 supervisor there with you and he wasn't and, therefore, 2 it didn't count?
3 Did they criticize your inspection in any other 4 way?
5 A No, no criticism was ever given.
6 Q Do you feel or do you believe they were questioning your 7 judgment by simply insisting that the procedure be 8 complied with?
9 A I don't know what their feeling was.
10 'O You didn't discuss this with --
11 A I didn't discuss it with anyone.
12 You just didn't suddenly decide that if they didn't
(]) Q 13 trust you, the heck with it, you weren't going to take 14 it again?
15 A I felt that if they didn't think enough of my integrity 16 to trust me to go out and look at a hanger that I looked 17 at before and called to their attention, then why should 18 I do it again.
19 Q You just got even by not taking the test over?
20 A I never took the test again.
21 Q And you took the economic penalty that went with it?
22 A That's true.
23 0 On the question of -- do you recall some questions that 24 Mr. Guild asked you yesterday about Mr. DeWald and his 25 discussing with the inspectors the need of a Remarks Sonntag Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l i'
8777
(
l Section on the checklist?
2 A Yes, I recall that.
3 Q As I understand it, this was -- this subject was --
, 4 discussed at one of Mr. DeWald's general meetings in 5 front of all the or a number of QC Inspectors?
6 A I believe that is correct.
7 Q Were you present at that time?
8 A Yes, I was.
9 Q Were you present when the topic was first raised by Mr.
10 DeWald?
11 A I am sure I was at the meeting, yes.
() 12 Q All right. Can you explain to me your understanding of 13 what Mr.'DeWald said at the first meeting on this 14 subject?
15 A I believe Mr. DeWald made the remarks or indicated that 16 there was no reason to do all the writing in the Remarks 17 Section, because the head of the or the top of the Form 18 19 took care of the hanger, the drawing you used, the 19 Rev you used.
l 20 In other words, he said that there was enough 21 information that we shouldn't have to worry about the 22 remarks. If it was acceptable or if it was rejectable, 23 it was marked that way.
24 If it was rejectable, it was an ICR. If it was l (:) 25 acceptable, it went to the vault, anyway.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8778
(
1 Q All right. Now, do you recall how he conveyed that 2 message at the first meeting?
3 Was it a matter for discussion or was he enforcing 4 it as a directive?
5 A I believe someone called the attention that they needed 6 to add certain things or should they add certain things i
7 to their inspection; and that was the way the subject 8 was raised, whether you should add certain remarks or 9 whether you shouldn't.
10 Mr. DeWald's reply was, in effect, "Why should you 11 if you have all the information on your inspection list; 12 and if it's acceptable or rejectable, it stands on its l
(])
13 own?"
14 Q What was the nature of the remarks that the inspector, 15 the person asking the question, was referring to?
i 16 A Offhand, I can't recall the exact, whether it was about 17 a drawing, whether it was about Revs on the drawing or 18 what.
19 But, anyway, at the time we were doing backlog 20 inspection only. That was before Mr. Simile arrived on 21 the job and changed over to an in-process type 22 inspection. Everything was backlog.
23 And it could be backlog anywhere from -- in other 24 words, the WR's could have been completed anywhere f rom i () 25 30 days to three years ahead of time; and whenever you Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
, 8779
(
l started to do your research, the drawing Revs, S & L 2 drawing Revs, might have gone through a half a dozen Rev 3 changes, maybe even more.
4 The question was raised about: Are you -- are we 5 going to inspect to the Rev that this was installed to 6 or are we going to inspect to the current Rev?
7 That's how the Remarks Section, as far as 8 enlargement, come about.
9 Q All right. Let's -- all right. Let's get back to my 10 question.
11 You don't recall just exactly what the comments
() 12 were that the questioner asked Mr. DeWald that should or 13 should not be included in the Remarks Section; that's 14 your present testimony?
15 A At this time I don't remember what the matter was.
16 Q What was the -- I am sorry. Are you finished?
17 A Yes.
18 Q What was the next step in this sequence?
19 We have got DeWald answering the question at the 20 first meeting. What happened next?
21 A I would say that within two weeks we had a new Form 19 22 Rev come out and the Remarks Section was added back to a 23 standard size or to an enlarger size.
24 Q At the time of the first meeting with DeWald and the 25 individual asked this question -- by the way, was the l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8780 l
l h>
1 individual a QC Inspector?
2 A Oh, yes.
3 Q All right. At the time a QC Inspector asked this 4 ,
question, was there a Remarks Section on the Form 19 at 5 that time?
6 A A very small space was allowed for remarks, very small.
7 Q A small space that was allowed for remarks.
8 Do you recall whether that space that you are 9 referring to had been on the checklist for some time or 10 was it a recent change?
11 A In a period of approximately 12 months, we went through 12 about seven or eight different Rev changes or form
(])
13 changes on the Form 19.
14 There was always a section for remarks, I believe, 15 on all Form 19's. Sizes varied.
I 16 Q Well, do you have any recollection as to any one time 17 when the size of the Remarks Section was smaller or 18 larger than'its predecessor checklist?
19 A Oh, yes. When Mr. DeWald made these remarks, the Form 20 19 had been revised and the Remarks Section cut way back 21 down.
22 0 And this had been done some time previous to the DeWald 23 discussion at the regular meeting?
24 A At approximately the same time.
(:) 25 0 Oh, all right. Let me get this straight now.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8781 1 So at about the time of the regular meeting with 2 the QC Inspectors, where the QC Inspector asked DeWald 3 about the kind of information that should go in the 4 Remarks Section, at that time the Form 19 already had a 5 reduced-size Remarks Section; is that correct?
6 A Well, offhand, I don't remember just exactly the date 7 that the Form 19 had been reduced as far as remarks on 8 it.
9 So -- but I would say at that time that Mr. DeWald 10 made the remarks, the Form 19 Remarks Section had been 11 reduced.
12 Do you recall whether it had been reduced prior to the
(]) Q 13 subject being discussed at the meeting or after?
14 A That I cannot -- that I cannot tell you.
15 Q You don't recall?
16 A I don't recall.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Wait, wait. I am not sure 18 this answer is the same as we just got.
19 I thought you were just saying at the time this was l 20 discussed by Mr. DeWald, he had already or someone had 21 already reduced the size of the Remarks Section and this 22 then came up at the meeting.
23 Is that so or don't you recall?
24 THE WITNESS: At that time it had probably O 25 been reduced when we had that one meeting that I am l
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 8782 O .
1 talking about where Mr. DeWald stated that there was no 2 reason for it to -- you didn't have to put anything down 3 there; the form pretty well stood on its own.
4 So it probably had been reduced prior to that 5 Friday afternoon meeting.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But you are not sure?
7 THE WITNESS: I am not sure, no, what date it f 8 was.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And it could have been done 10 shortly after the meeting?
11 THE WITNESS: That's correct, it could have 2 12 been.
13 MR. GALLO: May I have a moment?
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure, 15 BY MR. GALLO: ,
16 0 I am going to show you a copy of a checklist. It i
17 actually shows an inspection of a cable, a cable pan 18 hanger. The checklist is dated December 7,1985.
19 I am only using it for a frame of reference.
20 MR GUILD: Mr. Gallo, could you just read 21 the revision number on the bottom of the form and the 22 date?
23 MR. GALLO: Revision J, October 18, 1985.
24 MR. GUILD: Thank you.
O 25 BY MR. GALLO:
Sonntag Reporting Service _, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8783 O
1 Q This copy of the checklist shows four lines for remarks; 2 is that correct, Mr. Hunter?'
3 A That is correct.
4 Q Now, with reference to this, this checklist and the four 5 lines for remarks, when you said that the checklist had 6 the reduced Remarks Section, how many lines did it have 7 then?
8 Did it have four, more than four, less than four?
9 A I think -- I think less than four.
10 Q Do you recall how many it had?
11 A I think it had two, offhand.
O 12 Q 1e hed two2 13 A Yes.
14 Q Now, was this subject discussed a second time at one of
. 15 Mr. DeWald's regular meetings?
, 16 A Yes, it was. More than once, I will say that.
17 Q What was the -- can you tell me your understanding of 18 what the discussion was the second time?
, 19 A I am sure -- maybe even the first meeting, I am pretty 20 sure -- that Mr. DeWald agreed that -- whenever we told 21 him what the problems were as far as the Revs and 22 everything, he agreed that the next Rev on the 23 inspection form the section would be put back in for 24 remarks.
O 25 0 So now you explained in one of them, in answers to my Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8784 O
1 questions, something about this drawing revision problem 2 that, frankly, I didn't quite understand clearly.
3 What was there about the changing revisions, the S 4 & L drawings, that required more lines in the Remarks 5 Section, if at all?
6 A Okay. Notation of any change from the time the unit or 7 the hanger had been installed and the time it was 8 inspected. In other words, the hanger might have been 9 installed on Rev A and the inspection might have been 4 , 10 done on B, C or something like that.
11 As far as the criteria, it could have just been 12 changed during that time as far as what the hanger
(])
i 13 consisted of.
14 Q All of this 'information, the drawing revision numbers 15 and the inspection criteria and the information that you 16 have just described, did that have to be recorded in the 17 Remarks Section? .
18 A Not necessarily in the Remarks Section, no.
19 0 Well, what was there about the various revisions to the 20 drawings and the other information that you have just i 21 testified to that required more space in the Remarks 22 Section?
l 23 A Some -- some of them -- let's just put it this way:
\
24 If it was installed to Rev A and you come back and O 25 inspect it to Rev C, that had to be noted on the form in i
snnnenn nonnreine nervice. r.e a .
Ge5eva', Illi5ois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1
. 8785 A
, %-)
i 1 some place.
2 You might have had more than one drawing used, so 3 it did take space to make sure that the next person that 4 looked at that Form 19 realized what the inspector had 5 done.
6 In other words, it was actually just documented 7 information that not the first person, maybe, or the 8 second person, so whoever done the auditing would
! 9 understand what the inspector had done.
10 Q So this information had to be recorded on the checklist?
11 A It had to be recorded someplace.
(][ 12 Q And was that normally recorded in the Remarks Section?
l 13 A Over the two-and-a-half years, they would -- I have seen
, 14 it required to be documented in the head of the 15 inspection list, on the side of the inspection list, on 9
16 the remarks sections, just according to what the little 17 memo they put out", where they wanted the information.
18 Q And at the regular meeting that you have described that
- 19 Mr. DeWald held where this subject was discussed, did 20 some of the inspectors complain that this was -- strike 21 that.
22 Did some of the inspectors suggest that the most 23 appropriate place to put this information was in the 24 Remarks Section?
O 25 A I am sure that someone suggested it, yes.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8786
(
l Q Did that same inspector or other inspectors complain 2 that the present Remarks Section, consisting of two
~
3 lines, just wasn't enough room?
4 A I don't think I ever heard anyone complain that that 5 wasn't enough or --
6 0 State that it wasn't enough?
7 A Yes, I have heard several inspectors say that that 8 wasn't enough to document the information.
- 9 Q They told that to DeWald?
10 A Yes.
11 Q At the regular meeting?
(} 12 A That's true.
And is it your testimony that in response to that 13 Q 14 complaint from the various -- from the inspectors, that 15 DeWald thereafter issued a further revision to the 1
16 checklist providing for more space in the Remarks 17 Section?
! 18 A I am pretty sure that Mr. DeWald had a revision made on 19 the checklist, yes.
20 Q Do you recall whether at that time it went from two to l
21 four lines?
22 A I don't know how many lines it went to of the next Rev.
23 I don't know.
24 Q But it was more than two lines?
O 25 A It was more than two lines.
snnntag nepnreing service, r.ta _
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
p 8787 1 Q Do you recall when -- strike that.
2 Was the checklist revision with the expanded 3 Remarks Section issued shortly after the subject was 4 discussed at the regular meeting?
5 A That's true.
6 Q How did you get along with Mr. Saklak?
7 A Very well as far as person to person. I never had any 8 run-ins with Mr. Saklak.
9 Q Not even when he assigned you to elevation 4637 10 A Oh, no, no.
I 11 Q I believe it was your testimony yesterday that you 12 thought that, perhaps, you were bein.g harassed or
(]}
- l 13 intimidated by Mr. Saklak by that assignment.
l l
14 Am I remembering your testimony correctly?
15 A I believe I stated that he just probably wanted to see a 16 fat man run up and down the ladder.
17 Q And did he tell you that?
18 A Oh, no, not in so many words.
19 Q This was just your speculation as to what his motivation 20 was?
21 A I don't know what his motivation was.
l 22 O You don't know, all right.
23 Were you in the habit of from time to time teasing
! 24 Mr. Saklak?
, ( 25 A No more so than I would any other employee or any other l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8788 O
1 person.
2 Q But you did tease Mr. Saklak?
3 A Oh, I am pretty sure I said if he got up in time to tie 4 his shoes and put on his clothes before he come to work.
5 Q Did he come to work in a semi state of dress from time 6 to time?
7 A Usually every morning, that's correct.
8 Q Shoes untied?
9 A Yes.
10 0 Shirt not tucked in his pants?
11 A Sometimes not even on.
12 Q And you took the occasien to sometimes tease him about 13 it; is that it?
14 A I would probably say. I wouldn't say that I actually 15 teased him.
16 I would actually make the comments, " Hey, when are 17 you going to get up in time to put on your clothes?"
18 0 Isn't that a kind of a teasing?
19 A Yes, I guess, if you would want to call it that.
20 0 What would you call it?
l 21 A I would just ask him the question.
I 22 0 Were you seriously interested in the answer?
23 A No, not really.
24 Q How did he react to your questioning him from time to l
() 25 time as to why he didn't get up in time to get fully I
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
.a 8789 O
- 1 dressed? How did he react to that?
2 A How did he react?
1 3 Q Yes.
4 A Oh, he made it in plenty of time. Oh, he was up to 6:45 5 this morning, work at 7:00 o' clock, things like that.
i 6 Q Did he get mad at you about it?
7 A No, I wouldn't say that he got mad, no.
l l 8 Q Did he shout or curse at you because of that?
t 9 A No.
l 10 Q He didn't lose his temper?
! 11 A He never cursed or hollered at me in his life.
'12 Q But he took your questioning in good spirit, would you l (]}
l 13 say?
I 14 A I think so.
15 Q Was it in that spirit that you are suggesting that maybe 16 he wanted to see a fat man climb the ladder?
17 A Probably, that's true.
18 Q I think you testified yesterday that you believed that 19 Mr. Saklak gave Mr. Martin a hard time?
20 A Yes, he did.
21 Q Did you ever personally witness that?
22 A Like I say, when I first come to that jobsite, there was 23 probably -- there was approximately 25 inspectors. That 24 included weld inspectors, electrical inspectors and so
' O 25 forth.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
]
8790 O
j 1 We all sat in the same room. Mr. Saklak also sat 2 in the same room, so you couldn't have keeped from 3 observing things that went on during the day.
4 Q Do you recall a particular encounter between Mr. Saklak 5 and Mr. Martin?
6 A No, no more than Mr. Saklak would raise his voice to Mr.
7 Martin, because, like I say, Mr. Martin was the type of i 8 person that was very quiet. He didn't come on strong or 9 anything like that.
10 Q Yes. But did you observe a particular encounter between 11 Saklak and Martin?
12 A A particular counter?
(]} *
) 13 Q Encounter, yes.
14 A Not that I can recall, I mean.
15 Q You say that - .
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
17 Do you mean you never saw any encounters or you 18 can't pick out one in particular?
19 THE WITNESS: I can't pick out any one in 20 particular, right.
21 BY MR. GALLO:
22 Q Well, is it your testimony that you can recall a number 23 of encounters but you can't identify any?
24 A Not on a certain date or anything like that, no.
l l
() 25 Q But can you recall a particular time when Martin and <
l Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
r 8791 1 Saklak got into an argument?
2 A I don't think Mr. Martin ever argued with Mr. Saklak.
3 Q All right. Can you recall any time when Saklak got in 4 an argument with Mr. Martin?
5 A A specific date or a specific matter, no, I cannot, 6 because I don't recall that.
7 Q All right. Can you recall the subject of any argument 8 that Saklak might have had with Martin?
~
9 A Subject matter?
10 Q Yes.
11 A No, I do not.
12 Q You don't recall?
13 A Yes.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
15 THE WITNESS: Yes.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Do you recall that there 17 were encounters and you just don't know what date they 12 were? Is that what you are saying?
, 19 THE WITNESS: What I am saying is that I have 20 actually heard Mr. Saklak raise his voice to Mr. Martin 21 about certain things.
22 Today I don't recall what those things were but it 23 did happen. That's what I am trying to say.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I am just trying to 25 get what you are saying correct on the transcript.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8792
,O V
1 THE WITNESS: Right. I realize that.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Because it could have been 3 construed as your saying you don't recall any such thing 4 happening.
5 You do recall them happening; you just don't recall 6 the dates or the subject matter; is that it?
7 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
l 8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
9 BY MR. GALLO:
10 Q Do you recall whether it was more than one occurrence?
11 A On more than one occurrence?
12 Q Yes.
13 A I am sure there were.
14 Q Did you ever discuss the matter with Mr. Martin?
15 A With Mr. Martin?
16 Q Yes.
17 A No more than just general conversation.
18 0 Was this one on one with Mr. Martin or just general l
19 conversation in with the other inspectors?
20 A It was usually a general conversation with a group.
21 Q I see. You described Mr. Martin's demeanor as quiet?
22 A Yes, he was.
23 Q Now, were you aware that Mr. Martin got into --
24 initiated a shouting match with Mr. Joe Hii over a i O 25 training matter?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8793 1 A At one time I remember hearing that story.
2 I didn't see it happen or anything like that, but I 3 did hear the story.
4 Q You did hear that?
5 A I heard the story.
6 0 Would you consider that to be out of character with your 7 notion that he had a quiet demeanor?
8 A Yes, I am pretty sure that was out of character for him.
9 Q Are you aware of an incident involving Mr. Franco Rolan 10 and Mr. Martin, where Mr. Martin punched Mr. Rolan in 11 the face?
12 A I believe Mr. Martin got so fed up with him that that's
(])
13 what happened, yes.
14 Q He punched him in the face?
15 A That's what I understand. I did not see.
16 0 That's your understanding?
17 A That's what I understand.
18 Q Is that inconsistent -- strike that.
19 Do you have any reason to not believe that that 20 occurred?
21 A I have no reason to believe it did or no reason to 22 believe it didn't.
23 Like I say, I just heard the rumor that it 24 happened.
() 25 Q But that was your understanding?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8794 1 A That's what I understood.
- 2 Q Is that conduct consistent with your characterization of 3 Mr. Martin as quiet, his demeanor is quiet?
4 A As I have stated, Mr. Martin has a quiet demeanor.
5 I think he could be provoked, that something could 6 provoke him to do things like that, yes.
7 Q So Mr. Hii was able to provoke him once and Mr. Franco l 8 Rolan was able to provoke him once?
9 A Well, that's the way I understand it. I never seen it 10 happen, but that's what I understand.
! 11 Q So Mr. Martin had a temper, just like you and I do, I 12 suppose?
(])
13 A Well; I am sure he does.
14 Q Let's talk about Mr. Peterson.
15 As I recall, you worked on a project, what I 16 believe you testified to as a special project, with Mr.
l, 17 Peterson.
18 You were both doing weld inspections; is that 19 correct?
20 A That's correct.
21 Q Can you indicate for me, again, the nature of the 22 special project?
23 A They were -- at one time there were some 32 special 24 projects going. The one you are talking about I have no
() 25 idea.
l l
Monntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8795 O
d 1 I probably worked with Mr. Peterson on more.than 2 ,
one, just one special project.
3 0 Was it a reinspection activity?
4 A I am sure it was, or a backlog, one or the other.
5 Q Were you and Mr. Peterson inspecting welds --
6 A Yes.
7 Q -- on cable pan hangers?
8 A I believe it was cable pans and cable pan hangers.
9 Q Now, what was the condition of the welds that you 10 inspected at this time on these particular cable pans 11 and cable pan hangers?
(} ~12 A Many of the weldments didn't meet the criteria that they 13 should have been installed to. ,
14 In other words, a lot of the welds were short in 15 length, maybe they wasn't even to the size specified on 16 the drawings and things like that.
17 Q Yes. My question was too vague.
18 Did you find -- strike that.
19 When you went out in the field to look at a hanger 20 as a part of this program and look at the welds, were 21 the welds clean and ready to be inspected?
22 A Not unless we run a paint walkdown on them.
23 If the paint walkdown had been taken care of, the 24 welds were pretty well cleaned when we got to the field.
l
() 25 Q Now, tell me about this paint walkdown.
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8796 1 Do the QC Inspectors do that?
2 A QC Inspectors did it, right.
3 0 They would go look at these hangers and the welds on 4 them for the presence of paint?
5 A That's correct.
6 0 If they found paint or thought that the hangers were --
7 the welds, rather, on the hangers were excessively 8 dirty, they would -- what would they do next?
9 A Went into a log and the log was given to construction 10 and construction assigned so many people to clean welds.
11 This walkdown, I should say, wasn't done by Weld 12 Inspectors. It was did by another section of QC people.
(]}
i 14 A That's correct.
15 Q They were other. QC people?
16 A That's true.
17 Q Now, when you went out, did you and Mr. Peterson go out 18 to the field together?
i 19 A Oh, some days.
20 0 Did you ever inspect the same hanger together?
21 A Offhand, I can't say that we did.
22 0 You inspected different hangers?
23 A Maybe on the same run, yes, the same run. Maybe I would 24 have one hanger and he would have the next.
O 25 0 Well, when you went out to do your inspections on the l
Ronntag Reporti ng Snrvice . Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- T, f
8797 O
i 1 occasions you were with Mr. Peterson, can you recall 2 what the conversation of the welds were in terms of 3 being clean for purposes of your inspection?
4 A You found them in all conditions. You found them that 5 was cleaned, some that wasn't cleaned, some in ,between.
6 Q I see. Did you ever encounter any welds where the paint 7 had not been removed?
f 8 A Do I what?
- 9 Q During this inspection that you conducted, did you ever 10 run across any welds that had not had the paint removed 11 yet?
t 12 A Oh, yes. ,
13 0 What did you do at that point? .,
14 A You added them to another paint list, that they had to j 15 come by and clean up. ,
16 Q Now, did you continue? Did you do your inspections?
17 A This was a continuous operation.
18 Q Did you do your inspection nevertheless or did'you hold ;
19 up?
20 A You held off.
21 Q Until it was clean?
22 A Until it was cleaned for visual inspection. -
23 Q All right. And that was because, as we, I think, agreed i 24 earlier this morning, one of the first principles of O 25 weld inspections is that they should be clean enough for Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- -_=_
4 4' lt5< ,
8798 4
, s '<
1 purposes of achieving a satisfactory inspection?
i2 A A satisfactory visual inspection, right.
I 3 Q All right. So when you went out to do your inspections,
, 4 you, indeed, did encounter some welds that had paint en e- / _ .,.
5' ~-'
them and had to,ba -- you had to mark them for cleaning 6 purposes?- "
i 7 A That's true. \
l '
l 8 Q If.you ever, encountered-any that were too dirty to 9 inspect and they had to be cleaned, you marked'them also
~ ,.; ,
10 i for cleanin,g purposes?
~
11 A Oh, yes. /
12 Q Did you e'ver undertake to clean them yourself?
j 13 A Oh, yes. Every Weld Inspector carries his littl=
l 14 $ two-inch brugh, steel brush. Usually you carry a pick 15 -
of: some type. You ,stry so much equipment with you to 16 do a visus.1 neld inspection.
17 Q Do you use the pick to clean'off dirt or paint?
18 A Whate'v,er it is from, slag, whatever it is.
19 ,
If it's surface slag, you can pick it off to make 20 , sure iti's not embedded slag. \
21 Q So you use the pick to knock off surface slag.
22 Would you use it --
23 A You can, I say.
L; 24 Q You can. Kould you use it f.or purposes of cleaning O 25 paint off the weld?
, Ronntag Reporti ng Ma rvi ce , Ltd. _,
Geneva, Illinois 60134
. . (312) 232-0262 !
8799 O
1 A Not to any great extent, your pick, no.
2 Q How about your wire brush?
3 A Yes, you use your wire brush to clean up a weld.
4 Q Would you use it to take paint off the weld?
5 A Certain areas, certain sections, certain times, yes.
6 Q Can you explain to me under what conditions you would do 7 that?
8 A Okay. The condition that you would use your own steel 9 brush would be whereby maybe the power brush that the 10 craft was using didn't completely clean up 12-0 weld or 11 something like that.
12 You maybe want to hit it three or four times to
(])
13 make sure it had complete fusion, no undercut, no 14 overlap or anything like that. That would be when you 15 would use your own brush.
16 Q You would use your own brush to touch up after the 17 person had already cleaned the weld for you?
18 ,A You could do it that way, yes.
i l 19 Q Did you ever use your own brush to just clean the weld 20 of f from the beginning?
, 21 A I probably have in my time, yes, I probably have.
22 Q Did you -- instead of marking it for cleaning by some 23 other person, you just cleaned it yourself?
24 A To my satisfaction, yes, I am pretty sure I have.
O 25 0 And I am talking about a situation where the weld is Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8800 O
1 painted and you just undertake to clean the paint off 2 with your little wire brush and then inspect it.
3 A Let's just put it this way: Let's just take that there 4 is 12 or 15 welds th'at you had to inspect and maybe he 5 got 13, 14 or 15 of them and you decided rather than tie 6 a cleanup flag on it, a cleanup ribbon, that you would 7 go ahead and clean up the one yourself and make the 8 inspection.
9 That way you could close out your Form 19 and it 10 would be counted as an inspection for you that day.
11 Q So your testimony is that if the cleanup crew had missed one, you would use it to -- you would use your little l (]) ~12 13 wire brush to -- clean that one so you could close out 14 your inspection? ,
l 15 A I said you could.
16 Q Well, did you ever do that?
i 17 A I have done it. I have done it myself, yes.
18 Q Have you ever encountered a hanger and the welds on the 19 hanger were all painted?
l 20 Have you ever undertaken to clean all the welds on 21 the hanger in those circumstances with your wire brush?
22 A I don't recall ever doing that.
23 Q You would tie a ribbon and mark that one for clean up?
24 A Yes.
25 Q Now, I think you testified yesterday -- yesterday you I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8801 l
) l 1 testified that on the average you were able to inspect l 2 something like five hangers a day?
3 A That's correct.
4 Q Were you able to do that at the time you were inspecting 5 these hangers with Mr. Peterson?
6 A Yes. That was on, like I say, a cable pan deal. They 7 were wanting to pull cable, so we were working pretty 8 steady on that.
9 I am sure that everyone was carrying their fair 10 share on that reinspection or audit, whatever you want 11 to call it.
(]) 12 0 And you were able to carry your fair share --
13 A I think so, yes.
14 0 -- of about five hangers?
15 A Five hangers plus a day, right. .
16 Q Now, I think you testified, however, that Mr. Peterson 17 had problems because he didn't find the welds that he 18 was inspecting sufficiently clean for inspection 19 purposes.
l 20 Am I recalling your testimony correctly?
21 A I don't remember saying that.
22 O You don't recall --
23 A I remember saying that -- the reason Mr. Peterson wasn't gS 24 getting his fair share or getting a certain amount is
~
25 because he was having to clean them, no, I don't l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 I __
(312) 232-0262
8802 O
1 remember saying that.
I 2 O No, that wasn't my question.
3 Do you remember Mr. Peterson complaining that he 4 had --
5 A Oh, yes.
6 0 -- that he had problems with his weld inspection because 7 they weren't clean enough for that purpose?
8 A That is correct.
9 Q What is your understanding of what Mr. Peterson did when 10 he encountered a situation like that?
, 11 A I am pretty sure --
12 Did he clean it himself?
l
(]} Q 13 A No. I am pretty sure that Mr. Peterson relogged it on 14 the paint removal log.
15 Q Did he have a little wire brush?
l 16 A I am sure he did.
17 Q Do you have an understanding that he took his little 18 wire brush and tried to clean off areas that had, 19 perhaps, been missed by persons who cleaned up the weld?
20 A I am certain that he did at certain times clean them.
21 O You are sure he did?
22 A I am sure he did.
23 Q Do you know on what -- he told you that he had done 24 that, did he?
O 25 Did Mr. Peterson tell you that he had used his Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 8803 O
1 brush to try to clean up some of these welds?
2 A I can't remember him ever making that statement, " Hey, I 3 used my brush to clean a certain weld." I can't ever 4 remember him saying that to me.
5 Q Did you ever see him do it?
6 A I am pretty sure I seen him do it.
7 Q You saw him do it?
8 A Like I say, we were working the same area, the same 9 project.
10 Q Do you have an understanding of why he didn't use his 11 brush to clean up these welds he was having trouble with
() 12 and he was tagging?
13 A I have no idea why he didn't.
14 Q Did you ever look at those welds yourself to see whether 15 or not they were sufficiently clean for an effective
- 16 inspection?
17 A I don't think I ever went behind a welder, unless I was 18 asked to, looking at his welds, no.
19 0 I don't mean going behind a welder. I am talking about 20 Mr. Peterson.
l 21 A I am talking about the QC man who done the weld l
i 22 inspection. I don't think I ever second guessed any QC 23 man.
24 0 Did he ever say to you, "R. D., come over here and look 1
25 at this? These guys were supposed to have cleaned these Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illiiiois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8804 O
1 welds and look at how bad a job they did"?
2 A I am sure he made remarks relating to that.
3 Maybe I would be on one hanger and him on the next 4 one and I am pretty sure, he would ask, " Hey, is yours 5 clean," and I would say either yes or no.
6 And he might h' ave said some things, what you 7 referred to as, " Bey, come over and look at these." He 8 probably said things like that.
9 Q Do you recall going over and looking?
10 A I am sure I did. I don't recall it.
11 Q Do you recall those conditions, what the conditions of 12 those welds were, that you looked at?
(])
I 13 A Do I recall?
14 Q Yes.
I 15 Were they -- how dirty were they?
\
16 A That I don't know, what percentage you would call it.
17 0 Well, were they clean enough -- were they so dirty that 18 you couldn't conduct your inspection; do you recall any 19 of that?
20 A I would put it this way: They were probably on the 21 borderline of whether you could make a judgment of 22 whether the welds met the criteria or not.
23 Q They were on the borderline?
24 A I would say they would be borderline before Mr. Peterson 25 would reject one.
Annntag Reporting Service Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
(
. 8805 O
1 Q So if you took your little brush and cleaned then up, 2 would that not then make them inspectable?
3 A It could have, it could have been. I --
4 Q Mr. Peterson didn't do that, at least on the ones he 5 showed you?
6 A As far as I know, I don't know whether he did or not.
7 Q You didn't see him do it on the ones he showed you?
8 A I didn't see him, no.
9 Q He instead tagged it for clean up?
10 A He would usually log it.
I 11 Q During the questioning on this subject, I think you first mentioned the topic of galvanized --
(]) ~12 13 A Galvanox.
14 Q Is that a --
15 A Brand name.
16 Q A brand n'ame for a paint?
17 A That's correct.
18 Q Is it used to paint galvanized material?
19 A That's what it's used on, galvanized material.
20 0 What kind of material -- is a cable pan made of 21 galvanized material?
22 A Yes, it is.
23 0 So you use this Galvanox to paint the cable pan?
24 A To paint the welds af ter it had been made, yes.
25 0 And is the color of this paint gray?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (1} 0262
_ - _ _ _ _7
6 8806 P
O
- 1 A It's gray.
2 Q Is that paint ever used to paint welds on hangers?
3 A Not on tube steel as far as I know.
4 On unistrut on hangers, yes.
5 Q So if it was -- if the hanger was -- made of unistrut, 6 it would be painted with Galvanox; is that correct?
7 A If it's all galvanized, yes.
8 Q And if it was -- if the hanger was -- fabricated from 9 tube steel, it would be painted, that is the welds would 10 be painted, with a different kind of* paint?
11 A That is correct.
() 12 O What kind of paint is that?
13 A A brown paint, and I don't know what the name is that 14 they are using out there, but it's a brown paint.
15 Q So it is easily. distinguishable between the two, because
, 16 one is gray and one is brown?
l
! 17 A That's true.
18 Q When you were conducting these inspections of the cable 19 pan and cable pan hangers with Mr. Peterson and the 1
20 other inspectors, did you ever encounter any Galvanox 21 paint out in the field?
! 22 A In the field?
23 0 Yes, on these hangers, on the welds that you were 24 inspecting.
l 25 A Oh, yes, yes.
l Sonntaa Renortina Service. Ltd.
{ Ge5eva', Illi5ois 60134 (312) 232-0262 .
3807 CE) .
1 Q Is that the paint that was being cleaned off for j 2 inspection purposes? ,
e
)
3 A That's true, that's correct.
4 Q I thought you indicated yesterday that at one point you'~
5 were instructed -- you and the other inspectors were 6 instructed -- to not worry about the Galvanox.
7 Do you recall that?
8 A Yes, I think so.
9 Q What were the circumstances that led to that 10 instruction?
11 A It was early '84 and they said that -- the directive --
12 I don't know whether it was ever put into procedure or
(])
13 whether it was in a speed memo or what.
14 But, anyway, they said if it met the criteria, no 15 cracks, no -- I.mean no lack of fusion or anything like 16 that, that the weld met the criteria.
17 Q What were you supposed to do then?
! 18 A I guess you was suppose to write them up that the weld 19 was in place and it was acceptable.
20 Q This was a memo or some directive.
21 Can you remember which it was?
22 A Offhand, I don't know whether it was in the procedures 23 or whether it was a memo or what it had to do with; but i
24 it was on one of the special projects.
O 25 Q But it was documented in some form?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8808 O
1 A I am sure it was, yes.
2 Q Well, who issued this document?
3 A Usually at that time we had no one there except Irv 4 DeWald or Larry Seese'. So it would have been one of 5 those.
1 6 Q One of those two individuals?
7 A I would say yes.
8 Q And let me understand, again, what the document told you 9 to do.
10 Did it suggest that you did not have to clean off 11 the Galvanox before inspection?
12 A If I am not mistaken, it said that if it met the
(]}
13 criteria, no cracks, no under' cut, no lack of fusion then 14 on certain areas, it was acceptable. That's the way I 15 remember the memo.
16 Q Now, those are -- fusion, undercut and cracks are --
17 three attributes on your inspection checklist?
18 A Right.
19 0 It was your understanding or was it your understanding 20 of this (.irective that you were supposed to ignore the 21 other attributes during your inspection?
22 A The three attributes that you are talking about, the 23 cracks was the NCR automatic; lack of fusion, the weld i 24 had to be replaced.
O 25 The weld profile had nothing whatsoever to do with Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8809 O
1 whether the weld was acceptable or rejectable on the 2 cable pan.
3 In other words, some of them was too large. Some 4 of them was in excess of three times the required weld 5 size; but what I am saying is if it met the criteria 6 that we was inspecting to, especially with those three 7 items that I mentioned, then it was an acceptable weld.
8 Q Well, is it your understanding of this documentation 9 that you were supposed to conduct an inspection for the 10 other attributes as well, that is porosity and slag --
11 A Oh, yes.
'12 -- and arc strikes and all the other items on the i
(]) 0 i
i 13 checklist?
l 14 A Yes, that is true.
15 JUDGE.GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
16 I understood the question to be: According to this 17 memo, were you supposed to do that?
18 Is that what you are saying, you were under this 19 memo?
20 THE WITNESS: The memo specified that you l
21 could look at these pan welds, eighth-inch pan welds 22 mostly, eighth-inch fillet welds; and as long as they 23 met the criteria and they didn't have any visible 24 cracks, any visible lack of fusion and met the other O 25 criteria on the checklist, they were acceptable. That's Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
.. . .. - - - - .-. .... ~ . - . -- .. .. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8810 0
1 what I am saying.
2 This'only lasted for a very short time, a period of 3 less than 30 days; maybe even less than that.
4 BY MR. GALLO:
5 Q You mean this written directive was rescinded?
l ,
6 A That's true. They issued them and rescinded them about 7 every other day out there.
8 Q Now, you were supposed to -- this written directive 9 indicated that you were supposed to -- conduct an 10 inspection of all the checklist items and all the 11 various attributes on the Form 19 checklist; is that 12 correct?
({)
13 A That's true.
14 0 Well, let me ask you directly:
15 Was it your understand!.ng of this written directive 16 that you were to conduct your inspection without first 17 cleaning off the Galvanox?
l 18 A Did we what? s 19 Q Was it your understanding of this written directive that 20 you as a QC Inspector were to conduct your inspection of 21 these welds without first cleaning off the Galvanox?
22 A I believe Mr. Irv DeWald said if you could take your 23 two-inch brush, make su';e there was no cracks or no lack
- 24 of fusion, then you could accept it. You could look at 25 it.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
~ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
. - . _ _ . ._ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . _ _ ~ . _ _ .
- 8811 1 Q So that the -- well, is the answer to my question, 2 therefore, that you understood this directive -- strike 3 that.
4 You just said that Mr. DeWald indicated that to 5 you?
6 A I believe he made that.
7 Q Now, is this based on the reading of the written 8 directive or some other communication?
9 A I would say it was some other form.
10 In other words, the -- whoever was running the 11 project probably went to Irv and told him that there was l () 12 too much delay on getting the welds cleaned up for us to 13 do the inspection.
14 Q Who would that be or who might that have been?
15 A I don't even remember.who was running that program at 16 that time.
17 Q You don't remember? ,
18 A Offhand, no.
19 Q Do you know, in fact, whoever was running it had this 20 conversation with DeWald?
21 A I probably was there, yes.
22 0 Well, do you know that it occurred?
23 A Do I know?
24 Q Yes. l 25 A I don't have it documented, no.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 )
(312) 232-0262 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l
8812
(
\
1 Q Well, do you recall that it occurred?
2 A I recall it happening.
3 Q Were you present during the meeting?
4 A I am sure I was.
5 Q And did this person who was telling DeWald that say 6 there was too much delay in the inspection because the 7 welds weren't getting cleaned fast enough; is that your 8 testimony?
9 A That's the -- that was the gist of the subject, yes.
10 Q What was DeWald's response to that?
11 A If a fellow can make a valid visual inspection by using 12 his brush or his material that he was using to clean it
(])
13 up with, then it was acceptable.
14 Q So DeWald was saying that if you took your little wire 15 brush and cleaned off the dirt or the Calvanox 16 sufficiently so that you could make an adequate visual 17 inspection, that should be done?
18 A That should be done.
19 Q Was he suggesting that it should be done if you couldn't 20 clean it off adequately?
21 A No, he never made that suggestion.
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I am sorry. The area is not 23 clear to me.
- 24 MR. GALLO: Well, I am not finished, but feel 25 free.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 __
8813
() i l
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's fine, if you are l
2 going to clarify it. I just don't want it left in this 3 state.
4 '
MR. GALLO: I am not sure that it's the same 5 clarification that you are seeking, but I will try.
6 BY MR. GALLO:
7 Q What is the connection between this conversation between 8 your Supervisor, yourself and DeWald and the written 9 document that indicated that if you could determine that 10 there was no undercut, fusion or cracks, it was 11 acceptable?
() 12 A Well, what I am trying to say is if you could take your 13 two-inch brush, verify that there was no cracks, no lack l
14 of fusion, no undercut or whatever it was -- it doesn't 15 matter if they were painted -- and you could verify that 16 the weld was structurally there, you could buy it.
17 You didn't have to have a power brush to-take the 18 paint off. That's what I am trying to say.
19 Q You also had to verify the other attributes?
20 A That's true.
21 Q Did your Supervisor and yourself seek clarification from l
22 DeWald?
Were you seeking clarification about the 23 written directive?
- 24 A Yes, about how much of the paint had to be removed j 25 before you could make an inspection.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8814
)
1 Q So you and your Supervisor had some sort of question 2 about the written directive and you took it to DeWald 3 for clarification? ,
4 A I think that's correct.
5 Q And it's your testimony that he told you if you can get 6 it clean enough with your little wire brush so you can 7 take an adequate inspection, you should do that?
i' 8 A You should continue to inspect, right.
9 Q But you didn't understand him to be indicating that if 10 you couldn't get it clean enough, you should go ahead 11 and inspect it, anyway?
()
l 12 A Oh, no, no.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me, now.
l 14 Let me understand if this directive told you 15 specifically only to look for certain attributes.
i 16 Is that what it told you?
17 THE WITNESS: No. I am sorry if I mislead 18 you.
19 What the directive said is it didn't matter if 20 Galvanox was on the welds. If you could clean it up 21 sufficiently to make a valid inspection, then you could 22 do so. You didn't --
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That is --
24 THE WITNESS: You didn't have to put it on a O 25 paint list or anything like that.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8815 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: In other words, if you could 2 clean it up so that you could check all the attributes 3 that you had to check --
4 THE WITNESS: Right.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- you should go ahead and 6 inspect it?
7 THE WITNESS: Right.
l 8 What the memo was referring to, if you had enough 9 of the paint off to make sure that there were no cracks, 10 if you had enough of the paint off the toes to make sure
.11 that you had fusion, things of that order, that was what 12 the directive was.
(])
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Now, was there anything 14 improper about that or is there any question about that?
15 THE WITNESS: There was no question to us.
16 We just wanted to know if you could actually inspect by 17 taking the paint off yourself rather than -- at this 18 time rather than wait for the paint cleanup crew. That 19 was what the directive was all about.
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Now, did you want to -- did 21 you and the other QC Inspectors want to -- clean it 22 yourself or yourselves without waiting for the paint 23 crew? Is that why you went to Mr. DeWald?
24 THE WITNESS: That was one of these hot O 25 projects that had to be done at a certain time in order Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l _
(312) 232-0262 __
)
8816 O
1 for construction to pull cable through a certain amount 2 of pan area in a certain time.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, now, were you then 4 going to Mr. DeWald to find out whether you would be 5 entitled to clean the paint off yourself or were you 6 going to Mr. DeWald to complain about having to clean 7 the paint off or neither of those?
8 THE WITNESS: Maybe neither and maybe both.
9 (Laughter.)
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I don't know. I am 11 asking you. I am trying to understand what the problem
]
12 was.
13 THE WITNESS: What I am trying to say is, 14 naturally, our lead was wanting us to accomplish a 15 certain amount of work where the craft could go ahead 16 and pull cable.
17 If we were willing to, that is if the QC Inspector 18 was willing to do his own cleanup, that was fine and 19 dandy. If he wasn't, that was another thing.
20 That wcs what the memo was all put out about.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: So you were just going to 22 Mr. DeWald to get a clarification?
23 THE WITNESS: That's true.
l 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Now, was anyone complaining i C:) 25 about having to do it one way rather than the other?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l l
8817 O
1 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes. We had inspectors 2 that complained about having to do their own cleanup.
3 We had inspectors said, "Well, you know, why should 4 we clean up? That's the craft's job. If they would 5 have left it alone to start with, we wouldn't have had 6 this problem," and all of that.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. But let's also get it 8 clear, that neither the directive nor what Mr. DeWald 9 told you suggested that you ought not to inspect for 10 some of the attributes that you think you were required 11 to inspect for?
() 12 THE WITNESS: No.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is that right?
14 THE WITNESS: You had to complete the 15 checklist, whatever it called for,.that's true.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No one was suggesting 17 otherwise?
18 THE WITNESS: No one suggested otherwise.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
20 BY MR. GALLO:
21 Q During the same time when you were inspecting with Mr.
22 Peterson, did you ever complain to your Supervisor or 23 anyone else about the fact that the welds you were l 24 inspecting weren't adequately cleaned?
f CE) Oh, I am sure I did, yes.
25 A Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8818 1
0 1 Q Who did you complain to?
2 A Usually your lead.
3 Q Did you complain to your lead?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And what was your lead's reaction to that?
6 A Put it on the paint list again.
7 Q And mark it. Why were you complaining?
8 A They probably wasn't adequately cleaned or maybe not all 9 welds that related to the inspection that you was doing 10 was clean.
11 A lot of times, with a cable pan hanger, if it was 12 braced, there would be four welds instead of two; and
(]) '
13 maybe they would have the two welds clean and two 14 wouldn't be. That happened quite often.
15 Q This wouldn't be any skin of f your nose, you would flag l 16 it for cleaning and what difference does it maybe?
17 A You maybe get to climb down the same run for 50 or 60 18 feet on your hands and knees or on your belly.
19 Q Therefore, it was inconvenient to do this?
20 A That's true. Any time you have to go back to make an 21 inspection, it was inconvenience.
22 Q That was the basis for your complaints?
23 A Well, I would -- I would say that was one of them, yes.
24 Q But do you know whether or not Mr. Peterson had that 25 kind of problem, where he suddenly came across some Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8819 O
1 welds that weren't adequately cleaned and they were in 2 an awkward location requiring a lot of climbing or ,
3 crawling? l 1
4 Did he ever encounter that circumstanca and tell 5 you about it, do you recall?
6 A I am sure he encountered it and I am sure he told me 7 about a certain hanger in a certain place, "I have got 8 to go back tomorrow or the next day and get it again."
9 Yes, that happened.
10 Q Do you know in those instances there whether he flagged 11 them for clean up or cleaned them himself with the wire 12 brush?
(]) '
13 A That I couldn't tell you, which he did.
14 Q All right. Mr. Guild asked you a few questions about 15 daily status reports. I am not clear as to exactly what 16 your testimony was.
17 Did you yourself ever fill out a daily status 18 report?
19 A Yes, I did.
20 Q Now, what do you mean? What was your understanding of 21 the term, " Daily status report"?
22 A Daily status report is a report that is actually work 23 that you accomplished during that day.
24 Q Is that a report -- do you recall the form number of the O 25 status report?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
- Geneva, Illinois 60134 1 - _ - . J 3 27 232-0262 _ _ _- ,-
i 8820 0
1 A Offhand, I do not recall the number.
2 Q Is it different than the list?
3 A Oh, yes.
4 Q It's different than the checklist?
5 A Yes.
6 0 It represents what, a compilation of the total number of l
7 welds and hangers inspected that day?
8 A That's true.
9 Q Do you recall what the form was called?
10 A No. I am sure that I have it but I don't remember what 11 it's called.
12 What did you do with the status report?
(]) O 13 A Status report really usually went from the or 14 whoever was filling out the status report to vn. of the l
15 Supervisors, whoever is in charge of that group.
I 16 So you filled out the status report first yourself?
Q 17 A If I was required to, yes.
18 0 Under what circumstances were you required to fill ,out 19 the status report?
20 A If I was working a certain project by myself or maybe --
l 21 I would say for myself, if I was working a certain l 22 project by myself, then I filled out the status report.
i
! 23 Today the leads take care of all the statuses.
- 24 Q I see, I see. So today the leads write the status 25 reports?
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8921 O
1 A That's correct.
2 Q But at the time you are referring to, the individual 3 Welder Inspectors did it if they were working by 4 themselves?
5 A If he was working a special project or something.
6 Q Do you recall when this was, approximately, that you are 7 referring to?
8 A Probably early to mid '84, from early to mid '84.
9 Q In the cases where you filled out the status report, did 10 you give them to the lead?
11 A I give them to whoever was supervising that project,
(]) 12 whether it was the lead or whether it was actually the 13 Supe rvis or .
14 Q Do you know what was done with the information on the 15 status reports?.
16 A I am not for sure how it was used.
17 It could have been used in several dif ferent ways.
1 18 It could have been used by the amo^unt of work that the 19 department was accomplishing.
20 It could have been used for construction as far as 21 how far or how close we were to being caught up with the l
22 inspections. It could hav.e been used several different t
23 ways.
1 24 Q This is your own understanding of how it could have been 1
0 25 used?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8822 O
1 A That's the way I understand it could have been used.
2 Q Do you know, in fact, how it was used?
3 A No, I don't. I have never followed it through. I don't 4 know.
5 Q Do you know whether or not the status report information 6 was used to be able to -- as a basis for criticizing
^
7 inspectors, that they weren't doing enough work?
8 A I heard the rumor that it had happened; but as far as
=
9 personal knowledge, I never heard -- I mean, I never saw 10 it done.
11 Q You had heard that rumor?
12 A I heard that rumor. -
, (])
13 Q Do you recall in connection with whom?
14 A Yes, with a young man by the name of Herschel Stout.
15 Q Herschel Stout., Is any person younger than yourself a i 16 young man, Mr. Hunter?
17 A A few.
18 Q And it was in his connection.
19 Did you ever hear about it in connection with 20 anybody else besides Mr. Stout?
21 A I am sure I have. Names I cannot recall, but I do know 22 that Herschel and I talked about it one time.
23 Q What did Mr. Stout tell you about his situation?
24 A He said that they was complaining that he wasn't getting O 25 enough inspections done on a shift or on a workday.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8823
() '
1 Q And do you know or did he tell you or do you recall what 2 he told you, if he did, about how many inspections he 3 was getting done on a shift?
4 A No, I don't think he ever mentioned a number as far as 5 daily inspections. I don't think I ever heard Herschel 6 say whether he was doing one or whether he was doing 20.
7 I don't think I have heard that.
8 Q Did you have any understanding of how many he did? Was 9 there shop talk on the matter?
10 A Oh, I am sure there was shop talk; but it was just all 11 shop talk, whether the man done one today; and there was
{} 12 lots of inspectors that did one a day or there were a 13 lot of inspectors that would do eight or 10 or 12 or 14 whatever it was.
15 Q Do you know if Mr. Stout at the time was approaching 16 your average of five hangers a day?
17 A At the time I couldn't tell you how many Mr. Stout was 18 doing.
19 Q You don't know?
20 A I don't have any firsthand knowledge, no.
21 MR. GALLO: May I have a moment?
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure.
l 23 BY MR. GALLO:
24 Q Have you ever heard of the number of either hanger or O 25 junction box inspections attributable to Mr. Stout as b
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232 0262
8824 1 being one or one-and-a-half a day? Have you ever heard 2 that?
3 A I cannot ever say that I ever heard that number used, 4 no.
5 Q What did you learn from Mr. Stout chat caused you to 6 think that the status report information was being used 7 to gauge how much work he was doing? -
8 A Since Mr. Stout was also a Missouri boy, I had occasion 9 to either ride home with him or him ride home with me en 10 more than one occasion -- I would say two or three --
11 and we talked about a lot of different things.
() 12 Mr. Stout one Friday told me that Mr. DeWald had 13 had him in and talked to him about the amount of 14 inspection he was doing.
15 0 So Mr. Stout explained to you the meeting that he had 16 with Mr. DeWald about improving the amount of l
l 17 inspections that he was doing per day? 3 18 A I believe in our conversation he mentioned that Mr.
19 DeWald or the Supervisor, whoever he was talking to,
- 20 expected him to get more than what he was doing.
21 Q How did, if he did, Mr. Stout tie the status report 22 information into that?
23 A The amount of work that he put in, like I say, was on 24 the status report.
25 The status report went to his Supervisor, and the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 . _ _ . . . _ . --. . - - .
l 8825 O
1 Supervisor took the amount of work off and passed it on 2 to management.
3 0 It was based on that that they determined how much work '
4 Mr. Stout had done?
J' 5 A I believe that is correct. .
6 Q Have you ever inspected junction boxes yourself?'
7 A Have I ever inspected junction boxes?
8 Q Yes.
9 A The mountings of junction boxes, yes.
10 Q What type of inspection certification is required to do 11 that? ,
12 A On the connection, the junction box connection, /just a
(]) '
- 13 weld inspection. ;
1 14 Q A weld inspection?
l 15 A Weld Inspector,,right.
l 16 Q Do you know whether Mr. Stout was certified as a Weld 17 Inspector? -
18 A Yes, he was. He was CWI. ?
19 Q Do you know whether he was inspecting welds on junction.
20 box mountings? ,
! 21 A At the time?
l 22 Q Or during the course that you were riding with him in 23 the car pool and at the time that he was --
24 A Yes, I believe.
O 25 0 Wait.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l h r
T 8826 i
t
. I ,' /
1 -- and at ?.he time he was the subject of the 2 ~ criticism by Mr. DeWald?
1 3 A 3es, I belie,ve that is corrept.
4 Q Do you have any opinion as to whether or not 5 one-and-a-half junction boxes -- strike that.
t 6 Do-you have any opinion as to whether or not
/
7 3 .
completing inspection on welds for one-and-a-half 8 junction boxes is a lot or a few? Do you have any
\ 9 opinion on that?
10 A My opinion is that for some junction boxes it would 11 probably take you all day to get to see all the welds, 12 because you have so many hidden welds that you use a
(])
13 mirror on,s you wouldn't eben use a bore scope on or 14 anything, because junction boxes are usually mounted l$ close to a wall, close to the floor or close to a I
(. 16 ceiling.
! 17 Therefore,it'snotjustlikewalkinguptoa[-
A ,
l t
18 hanger and making a visible inspection.
19 Q Do you recall whether or'not Mr. Stout was performing 20 visual weid inspections on hangers at the time of his 21 criticism by Mr. DeWald?,
- y
! 22 A That -- I' don't know what Mr. Stout was actually working 23 on when'M'r. DeWald talked 0to him.
24 Q Do you have an' opinion as to whether or not visual weld I
l
( 25 inspection of one-and-a-half hangers a day is a very
' Sonntac Recortino Se rv ice . Ltd.
I Geneva', Illinois 60134 <
l (312) 232-0262 i
. _ _ - . . _ . = _ - . _ - - . .._ - - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - __ . _ _
8827 O
1 substantial amount of inspections?
2 A Like I said, it's according to where the hanger is 3 mounted, whether it's on the floor, whether it's on the 4 wall or on the ceiling and how hard the hidden welds 5 would be to get to to look at.
6 0 These are on hangers now.
7 A On hangers?
8 0 Yes, welds on hangers.
9 A On hangers my opinion is that it would take a big, big 10 hanger to only get one hanger a day.
11 Q It would have to be an awful big hanger?
(]) 12 A Itwouldhavetobeanawful'highanger,withalotof 13 welds, 140 welds, in that' area, in order to take a 14 workday to look at, probably.
15 Q Because on the average you are able to do five plus 16 hangers a day?
17 A On the average myself?.
18 Q Yes.
19 A I probably averaged that, yes.
20 Q So if you only did one-and-a-half hangers, it would be 21 something, perhaps, to question about?
22 A These I have done, maybe one, one-and-a-half.
23 Q If a QC Inspector on the average continued to show 24 one-and-a-half hangers a day, that is completed weld l 25 inspections on one-and-a-half hangers a day, in your l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8828 O
1 judgment, would that be something to inquire about if 2 you were a Supervisor?
3 A If I was a Supervisor?
4 Q Yes.
5 A I would want to know what the problems were, of course.
6 But as far as a fellow doing one or one-and-a-half 7 a day, he might be working hangers that was almost 8' inaccessible to get to. In other words, he might have 9 ,/ to have scaffold built.
10 There is a'million and one things that can come up 11 for a QC Inspector. He might have to have scaffolding.
12 He might have to have platform. He might have to have a
(])
- 13 lot of things built for him before he could get to see 14 one weld.
15 Q But in your own. inspection activity, don't you have to 16 have scaffolding erected from time to time?
17 A Oh, yes.
18 Q Don't you encounter hidden welds and other difficulties 19 in your hanger inspections?
20 A I have had, yes.
21 Q But, nevertheless, you are able to average about --
22 A I said average.
23 0 -- about five or more a day?
24 A I said that was my average, yes.
O 25 Q So that means on the days that you were only able to do Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8829 O
1 one or one-and-a-half hangers, you must on other days be 2 doing many more than five hangers to average it out?
3 A I could have. I could have done more.
4 Q And if you were a Weld Inspector and you observed an 5 inspector only doing one-and-a-half inspections or 6 one-and-a-half hangers per day over a period of-time, it 7 might cause you to inquire; is that true?
8 A I would say inquire, yes. ,
9 Q Would you inquire as to whether this person was killing 10 time or not doing as much work as he should?
11 A I would probably ask him was craft furnishing him his
(]) 12 scaffolding.
13 He might have been working in an area where they 14 would only put up one scaffold a day for him.
15 Like I say, there could be a lot of things for the
. 16 reason why an inspector wouldn't check but one hanger a f
17 day.
l 18 Q There are a lot of or a number of legitimate 19 explanations?
i l 20 A Yes.
l 21 Q All right. But one other explanation would be that he 22 was killing time?
l 23 A I don't know whether a man would kill time.
l l 24 Q It could be one plausible explanation?
l 25 A It could be one possible answer, yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8830
)
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Did you want to take a break l 2 now, Mr. Gallo?
3 MR. GALLO: It might be a good time for our 4 usual break.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All right. We will take ten 6 minutes.
7 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had, 8 after which the hearing'was resumed as 9 follows:)
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Back in session.
11 Mr. Gallo.
12 BY MR. GALLO:
s 13 Q Mr. Hunter, at the time that you and Mr. -- no, strike 14 that.
15 You say that Mr. Stout was a Missouri boy, I think 16 you called him?
- 17 A That is correct.
18 Q So you and he became friends?
19 A Well, we rode to work together a time or two.
l 20 Q Did you ever conduct field inspections in the same crew 21 with Mr. Stout?
! 22 A Offhand, I can't remember working in the same group with 23 Mr. Stout, no.
24 Q Did you ever encounter him out in the field --
O 25 A Yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8831 1 Q -- during your inspection activity?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Did you and he ever discuss the time the Union !
4 activities and the organizing that was going on?
5 A Not while we was in the field at any time.
6 Q Not while you were in the field at any time?
7 A Not, no.
8 Q You didn't kill any time when you were out in the field; 9 you did your inspections?
10 A I killed my part of the time, yes.
11 Q You mentioned yesterday -- and I believe even today --
12 when there were some questions asked of you by Mr. Guild
(])
13 about or involving the term " shopped around"?
14 A That's correct.
15 0 I believe that was something about taking a checklist 16 and shopping around to see if you could get someone to
! 17 buy it off.
l 18 Am I remembering that correctly?
1 l 19 A That's correct.
20 0 Who was doing this?
21 A The last six months or a year or whatever it was, a 22 vault manager by the name of --
23 Q Bowers? -
l l 24 A Yes, Bowers, Mr. Bowers.
25 Q To your knowledge, was anyone else doing this shopping Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8832
()
1 around?
2 A Not to my knowledge. That is within the last 12 months 3 that I was employed there. l 4 Q I am asking you with respect to your entire tenure at 5 Comstock: Did anybody indulge in this practice that you 6 call shopping around?
- 7 A Not that I can recall anyone ever.
i 8 Q Just Mr. Bowers?
9 A That's the only one that I know personally did it.
~
10 Q How about Mr. Saklak?
11 A I can't ever remember Mr. Saklak making that request 12 except to try to get someone to sign an inspection form
(])
i 13 that he wasn't certified to.
14 Q He would have an inspection form, you mean a checklist, 15 Form 19?
16 A Checklist, right.
17 Q What would be the occasion that he would have it and he 18 was looking for someone to be signing it?
19 A That would be Mr. Saklak's?
20 Q Saklak, yes.
21 A Mr. Saklak was a Supervisor over more than one group.
I 22 In other words, even though he wasn't certified in that 23 discipline, Mr. Saklak was Acting Supervisor.
i 24 Therefore, he couldn't Level 2 a lot of things, so l ( 25 he would try to get someone to Level 2 something, l
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8833 O
1 whereby it could be put into or placed into the vault.
2 Q Well, who did the inspection that Mr. Saklak was trying 3 to get accepted by a Level 2?
4 A Different inspectors.
5 Q Other inspectors?
6 A Other inspectors than myself, yes.
7 Q Well, I guess I don't understand. Maybe you can clarify i 8 it for me.
9 Why wouldn't Mr. Saklak simply go back to the 10 original inspector and have him sign the checklist?
11 A He cannot Level 2 his own inspection.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: He is talking about once
(])
13 having done the work?
14 THE WITNESS: A Level 2 could have done the 15 work.
16 BY MR. GALLO:
17 Q But they had to be reviewed by a Level 2 Inspector?
18 A They had to be reviewed, that's correct.
19 Q All right. I see, I uee. Let me see if I understand 20 this.
21 A QC Inspector, whether it be a Level 1 or 2, would 22 actually do the inspection --
l 23 A That's correct.
24 0 -- and check off the inspection results on the O 25 checklist, sign and date it?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
3 8834 O
1 A That's correct.
2 0 Then the document, the checklist, had to be reviewed for 3 completeness by another QC Inspector?
4 A By a Level 2 or 3.
5 Q A Level 2 or 3 and one that was certified in --
6 A That discipline.
7 Q -- in that discipline?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Mr. Saklak would, on occasion, take that kind of
, 10 checklist that needed a review by a Level 2 or a Level 3 11 Inspector for completeness to some qualified individual 12 and ask him to review it for him?
(])
13 A That is correct.
14 Q Then he would ask that same person to sign it, 15 certifying the completeness of the document?
16 A That is correct.
17 0 Is that practice called shopping around?
i 18 A Well, it would be on Mr. Saklak's part, because Mr.
19 Saklak might have an inspection that was done a year, 20 two years, three years prior to the time that he was 21 trying to get it signed off.
22 So there could have been several things happened in i 23 between the time that the checklist was issued and the l
24 time that he was trying to get it Level 2.
O 25 0 Was this passage of time -- let's take your example.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8835 l
)
() l 1 Does this passage of time in any way make review of 2 the document for completeness improper?
3 A For completion?
4 Q Yes.
5 A Not necessarily for completion, but you --
6 Q Completeness, completeness.
7 I am sorry. Let me ask you the question again.
l 8 I thought it was your testimony that the review by 9 the second Level 2 or the Level 3 was for purposes of 10 determining that the checklist had been filled out 11 completely?
O 12 A That is true.
13 Q That is true, all right.
14 You then testified that in some instances Saklak 15 might'have the checklist that was dated and inspected, 16 the results reported on the checklist by an inspector as l 17 much as 12 months prior to the time that he was looking 18 around for somebody to review it?
I 19 A That's probably true.
20 0 My question to you is: Let's take that situation.
21 A All right.
22 Q Would it have been improper for Saklak to seek out a 23 Level 2 or a Level 3 to have the inspection checklist 24 reviewed for completeness at that time?
O 25 A Well, it would be, because many different Revs, many Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8836 l
} -
1 different changes that might have happened from the time l 2 that inspection was issued until he was trying to get it 3 verified that that was complete.
4 Q Well, the drawing revisions and the procedures used for 5 the inspection would have been those at the time of the 6 inspection; isn't that correct?
7 A Wouldn't what?
8 Q The drawing revisions and the procedures used by the 9 inspector would have been whatever those were that 10 existed at the time of the inspector's inspection; 11 correct?
12 A That is correct.
(])
13 Q All right. And if I understand the purpose of review, 14 the Level 2 or Level 3 simply makes sure that all the 15 boxes are filled in and the signature is there and the 16 document is datad; isn't that correct?
17 A That is correct. g 18 However, if that inspector wasn't still on the job, 19 would you feel like that you should sign off his work, 20 whether he was still on the job or not?
l 21 Q Well, do you understand the function of the reviewer 22 inspector to be signing off for the original ' tapector's 23 work?
24 Isn't he just certifying to completeness of the O 25 documents?
Sonntag Reporting Service. led.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8837 O
i 1 A He is certifying it was completed.
2 Q And he is not certifying that the inspection is as 3 indicated by the first inspector, is he?
4 A He is not saying that, no.
, 5 Q He is simply saying, "I looked at the document and it's 6 complete and, therefore, I am signing it"; right?
7 That's what the reviewer --
8 A That's what the reviewer is supposed to do, yes.
7 9 0 What difference does it make if he makes that review the 10 day after the checklist is dated or a year later?
11 A What difference does it make?
Q 12 Q Yes.
13 A As far as the paper work, none whatsoever.
14 Q None whatsoever.
15 What difference does it make to the inspector?
16 A What difference does it make to the inspector?
f i .17 Q Right.
18 A That fellow that is doing the Level 2, how can he verify 19 that that guy actually did it if the fellow is not on 20 the job anymore?
21 There were all kind of questions asked about that.
l l 22 Q Was the -- let me ask you this question:
23 When you conduct an inspection and fill out the 24 checklist and date it, now, what procedure do you follow 25 to get the document reviewed?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
8838 O
1 A Usually someone with the same discipline, if you are 4
2 working in the same area, they review your inspection to 3 make sure that all blocks are checked, all drawings are 4 correct and then they sign it off.
i 5 If not, your lead today -- when I left there, the 6 leads was taking care of all the reviewing.
7 Q So when you indicated today, at the time in '86 and the 8 early part of '86, you would turn in the number of 9 checklists at the end of the day and you and the other
-10 inspectors would turn them in to your lead and the lead 11 would then review them for completeness?
12 A That's correct.
(])
13 0 Would he do it that same day or would he take some time
, 14 before he did it?
15 A Oh, no. All checklists that went in had to be reviewed 16 the same day.
l 17 If the dates were different, then it was a void 18 checklist.
19 Q I see. It had to be reviewed the same day.
20 The --
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
l ,
23 JUDGE GROSSHAN: The Level 2 reviewer of the 24 checklist, is he also certifying that the person who 15 signed it as the original inspector actually did the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8839 4
O 1 inspection?
2 THE WITNESS: He is only verifying that the i i 3 checklist has been completely filled out and he has to 4 be in the same discipline or certified in the same 5 discipline.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And he is not verifying that 7 the person who signed it actually did sign them?
8 THE WITNESS: Oh, no. There was -- there was I
9 the --
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, then, what would be i 11 improper about someone who Mr. Saklak went to to sign 12 off as a Level 2 reviewer signing off as a Level 2
({}
13 reviewer even if the original inspection had been 12 14 months ago? Is there anything wrong with that?
t i
- 15 THE WITNESS
- If the man was a Level 2 that
- 16 filled out the checklist, that was possiblo he could do l 17 that.
18 If it was a Level 1, he had to have'a Level 2 sign 19 with him; and a lot of those documents at one time was 20 signed by Level l's is what I am trying to say.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And in a case in which it i 22 was signed by a Level 1, is a Level 2 who signs it along 23 with him verifying that the Level 1 was the one who 24 actually did the inspection?
O 25 THE WITNESS: I believe that the procedure Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8840 0
1 called for that any Level 1 had to be verified by a
- 2 Level 2 in order to close out a checklist.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Are you saying now that Mr.
I 4 Saklak was asking people to sign a's a Level 2 as though 5 he had been present when the Level I had done the 6 inspection?
7 THE WITNESS: I believe that happened, I
( 8 believe that happened.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I am not trying to put words i 10 in your mouth. I am just trying to find out if that's 11 what you consider to have been improper about what Mr.
12 Saklak was doing cc, if not, was there anything
(]) ,
13 improper?
14 Is that the thing that you were claiming was 1
. 15 imprope r?
16 THE WITNESS: Yes, that is the way I 17 understood it.
18 Mr. Saklak did his shopping around. He would try 19 to get someone else to verify that the Level 1 had 20 actually done the inspection.
21 BY MR. GALLO:
22 Q As I understand your testimony now, if there was a 23 checklist that showed the inspection results of a Level 24 2 Inspector and the inspection, the date, shown on the i 25 checklist was 12 months prior to the time that Mr.
l Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
I l
8841 )
1
() I 1 Saklak was looking for somebody to review it, it was 2 acceptable under those circumstances for him to get a 3 certified Level 2 or Level 3 in the same area and have 4 that review done?
5 A That's correct.
6 Q And that was acceptable?
7 A That's correct.
8 Q There was nothing wrong with that?
9 A Nothing wrong whatsoever.
10 Q Even though there was a-12 month interval?
11 A You have probably heard about the rat holing of WIR's 12 and Hanger Installation Reports and things like that on
(])
13 that job.
14 When I come there in October of '83, it was nothing 15 to find so many HIR's or whatever it was stuffed away 16 someplace that somebody didn't want to do because it was 17 hard to get to or something like that.
18 So a lot of this old paper work was just being 19 caught up with. In other words, what I am trying to say 20 is there was a tremendous backlog of all types of 21 backlogged material.
22 Q I am sure Mr. Guild will have a suitable question to go 23 with your answer about rat holing when he gets you back 24 as a witness.
( 25 MR. GUILD: Mr. Gallo, I think you are i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8842 O
1 certainly entitled to pursue that one, if you would 2 like.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I don't think it was 4 invited.
5 BY MR. GALLO:
6 Q So if we got a situation where there is this 12-month 7 interval and the initial inspector is a Level 2, the 8 reviewing inspector certified as a Level 2 in the same '
9 area could sign it without any problem?
10 A That's correct.
11 Q Nothing improper?
4 12 A Nothing improper about it. 1
(~ }
13 Q It's your testimony, however, on the other hand, if the 14 initial inspector was a Level 1 and this 12-month 15 interval occurred, it would be improper for a Level 2 -
16 certified in the same area to review the document and 17 sign off on it?
18 A I believe that is in the procedure.
19 0 It's your understanding that the procedure in effect at 20 the time Saklak was doing this -- this would be in early 21 '84, would it?
i 22 A '83, '84.
l 23 0 '83, '84?
24 A Yes.
l 25 Q Can you give me a little better --
1 Rnnntag Reporting Eervice Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8843 O
1 A In that time period.
2 Q Well, was it -- what time period in '837 3 A The last of '83, after I arrived at the jobsite.
4 Q So it had to be after October of '837
- 5 A Right, it had to be after October.
6 Q And early '84?
7 A xight.
8 Q The procedure in effect at that time required that -- at 9 least your understanding of it required that if the 10 inspection was done by a Level 1, one of the reviewing 11 inspector's functions was to verify that the Level 1 12 had, in fact, done the inspection?
! (])
13 A That's correct.
14 Q And in the case that we have been using as a 15 hypothetical circumstance, there was a 12-month 16 interval, the reviewing inspector wouldn't be able to do 17 that?
2 18 A Usually the Level 1 wasn't still on the jobsite or there
,' 19 would be some problems why the Level 2 wouldn't want to i
20 verify it, yes.
21 Q All right.
22 A There would be some problem.
23 Q Now, to your knowledge, did other inspectors have this 24 understanding of the procedure that you have just O 25 testified to?
Sonntag Reportir.g Service, Ltd.
c Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 ,s
8844 1 A That a Level 2 had to verify the Level 17 2 Q Yes.
3 A Yes, I am pretty sure that all QC Inspectors did.
4 Q All. Now, do you recall a circumstance where Saklak had 5 a checklist signed by a Level 1 Inspector that was
)
6 vintage by months or weeks, it was old by a number of
\
l 7 months or a number of weeks and he was trying to get t
8 somebody -- shopping around for someone to review it and 9 sign off on it?
i 10 A A specific one?
11 Q Yes'.
12 A I do not recall any specific one. It was more than one;
(])
13 but as far as what they related to', I don't have any 14 recollection.
15 Q How do you know -- ,
l 16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think we have a 17 communication problem here and we have had it before.
18 You do recall that there were these instances but 19 you don't recall the date, is that it, or the specifics 20 of it but you recall that there were specific instances 21 of this?
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
23 As I told you before, we all set in a small room, 24 approximately half this size, and you couldn't keep from 25 -- in other words, most of us was probably three feet Sonntaa Renortino Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8845 O
V '
1 apart, so you couldn't keep from observing certain i
2 things that went on during the day or during the time; 3 but it was hard for me to say what day it was or what it 4 pertained to, because I do not have my notes anymore.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. You see, when Mr.
6 Gallo asks you a question as to whether you recall this 7 specifically, he is not asking you at that point for the 8 date and the actual specifics. He is asking you whether 9 you recall specific instances of this happening.
10 So if you do, you ought to say yes, you do; but 11 then for the next question you ought to tell him you 12 don't know the date and the specifics.
(]}
13 But when you say you don't recall specific 14 instances, that means that you don't recall that 15 actually happening.
i 16 I just want to get it clear on the record what you 17 actually mean on that.
18 I am not trying to put words in your mouth; but if i
19 you recall that these incidents actually happened but 20 just not the date and the specifics of it, that's what 21 you ought to say.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
24 BY MR. GALLO:
l O 25 Q Now, these incidents that you recall where Saklak was l
l .
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8846 A
\-)
1 shopping around, how do you know that they all didn't 2 involve checklists involving Level 2 Inspectors?
's A I don't know. I don't know that they all pertained to 4 checklists. It might have been other items that Mr.
5 Saklak was trying to get documented.
6 Q You mean by other items, items other than checklists 7 that Mr. Saklak was seeking to get bought off on?
8 A *I would say they could have been.
9 Q Could have been?
10 A They could have been.
11 O Well, let's just focus on the checklists for the time 12 being.
(]}
13 A All right.
14 Q How do you know that when he was shopping around to get 15 Level 2 review of a checklist, that they all didn't 16 involve checklists done by Level 2 Inspectors?
l 17 A I seen -- I seen where some Level l's had did the 18 checklist myself.
19 0 You saw a checklist?
20 A I saw a checklist.
) 21 Q And it was signed by a Level 17 22 A By a Level 1 at the time that he signed it.
23 Q Did that same checklist have a signature for reviewer on 24 it as well?
O 25 A It had the space for a reviewer, yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8847
() -
1 Q But no signature was there? l 2 A No signatures.
- 3 Q So you know that a checklist in that condition existed, 4 because you saw it yourself?
5 A I saw it myself.
6 Q All right. But how do you know that the checklist that 7 Saklak was carrying around or shopping around with 8 simply were all Level 2 inspected checklists and 9 consistent with the procedure he was limiting his 10 shopping around to just inspections done by Level 2's?
11 A Okay. At one time we were given a list of inspectors 12 that had been on that jobsite, when they become a Level
(])
13 1, when they become a Level 2.
14 The easiest way to check it -- and you had to do 15 this all the time when you,was running review -- was to 16 check the date that the inspection form was written and 17 the date that they made the Level 2, the date they were
. 18 given a Level 2 certification.
I 19 That is the way that the inspectors kept up with --
i 20 0 I don't think you understand my question.
21 How do you know yourself that when Saklak was f 22 shopping around looking for a Level 2 reviewer to sign
! 23 off on the checklist, that in each and every case the 24 inspectors on those checklists were all Level 2 0 25 Inspectors?
l
( Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134
- (312) 232-0262
8848 1 A All you had to do was look at the' dates and check your 2 list to see when that guy made the Level 2. ,
3 Q Well, didn't the checklist itself indicate whether or 4 not the original inspector was a Level 1 or a Level 27 5 A Usually it indicated whether he was a Level 1 or a Level 6 2, that's true.
7 Q So that if Saklak is carrying one of these checklists in l
l 8 his hand, if you had occasion to look at it, you could 9 see whether it was a Level 2 Inspector or a Level 1 10 Inspector?
11 A That's true.
() 12 O How do you know that he didn't have checklists in his 13 hands at all times when he was shopping around that were 14 all just Level 2's?
15 A I seen some of them. He asked me to sign some of them 16 even.
17 Q I see. He brought some of these checklists over to you 18 for you to review?
1 19 A That's true.
20 Q Do you recall whether or not the original inspectors 21 were Level l's or Level 2's on these checklists?
22 A I am sure that I had both.
23 Q You had both?
l 24 A I am s.ure that I did.
O 25 0 What action did you take?
l Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232 0262
8849 O
1 A I believe on all Level l's that we couldn't verify that 2 the Level 2 had certified that had done the inspection, 4
3 I believe that was then added to their reinspection 4 program.
5 0 All right. What action did you take with respect to a 6 checklist that Saklak brought to you for review purposes 7 and the inspection had been done by a Level 2 Inspector?
8 A I am sure that that was signed off.
9 Q You reviewed it and signed off on it?
10 A Signed off if all checks were completed.
11 Q And if he brought a different checklist that was signed
(~) 12 off by a Level 1, what action did you take in that v
13 circumstance?
14 A If it had been verified by a Level 2, we went off and 15 reviewed it and,it was good.
16 0 How would it have been verified by a Level 2?
17 A Two names, the fellow that did the inspection and the 18 fellow that actually verified that the Level 1 had did 19 the inspection.
! 20 0 I am confused now, because I thought that the 21 verification was done by the Level 2 that did the 22 reviewing of the checklist.
23 A All Level l's had to be verified that thay actually had 24 did the inspection, so that way you had two names
()
I l 25 usually on an inspection form.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8850 O
1 Q Were there three names on the form, one the name of a 2 Level 1, the name of a Level 2 Inspector who verified 3 that he did the inspection and, finally, the reviewing 4 inspector? ,
5 A I think some o5 them you will find three names on them.
6 Q Sometimes the Level 2 performed functions and sometimes
- 7 different people did it?
8 A I believe that is correct.
9 Q Now, it's your testimony that when Saklak brought you a 10 checklist to review for completeness, it didn't, 11 obviously, have the signature on it for review QC 12 Inspector; correct?
(])
13 A If it had been reviewed, he didn't bring it to me.
14 Q All right, all right. You are right. A stupid 15 question.
- 16 But then you looked to see if the inspector who did l
l 17 the inspection was a Level 1; and if he was, you looked 18 to see if there was another signature verifying that he 19 was the -- that he had done the inspection; is that i 20 correct?
21 A Verifying the date that the Level I had did the 22 inspection, that the Level 2 had witnessed it or 23 verified that the Level 1 had did the inspection.
g 24 Q How did that kind of verification -- how was that kind 25 of verification documented on the checklist?
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8851 1 Were there words that said, "I hereby verify that 2 Mr. Level 1 Inspector had conducted thJs inspection on 3 thus and so date," and a signature?
4 A No, I do not think so.
j 5 I think it's usually signed right under it.
6 Q So just two signatures?
7 A Two signatures and two dates.
i 8 Q And it was just the understanding that the second 9 signature was the verification?
10 A Two signatures and two dates and you looked at the 11- second signature to make sure he was a Level 2 in the
- O 12 same discipline.
! 13 We had more problems. The problems were that Mr.
! 14 Saklak was trying to --
'15 Q Now, wait a minute. Let's stick with this checklist l 16 problem.
17 We have got the Level 1 Inspector who signed it and 18 dated it?
19 A Right.
20 Q Now, the verification, it was your testimony, had to be i 21 on the same date?
22 A It had to be by a Level 2 in the same discipline on ths.
23 same day, and that was the problem.
24 The Level 2 Inspector on many of them wasn't in the 25 same discipline. In other words, he wasn't certified in l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8852 i
O .
1 the same area.
2 Q So then the Level 2 who was verifying the Level 1 would 3 -- and his signature would appear and it would be the 4 same date?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Now, if the date of the Level 1 inspection was not the 7 same as the date appearing after the verifying 1
8 inspector's name, then you knew there was a problem; 9 right? It was unacceptable?
10 A You would have to research it to see if the Level 1 was 11 working under the supervision of that inspector at that O 2 eime.
l 13 Q Well, wouldn't you have a procedure violation?
14 I thought you told me that the procedure required i 15 that the verification take place the same day as the 16 inspection. m 17 A I said that was what was happening now.
18 It all -- I believe, at least what I intended to 19 say was that the last year-and-a-half, since Tony Simile 20 arrived at the jobsite, all inspection forms and all 21 review had to be approximately the same time.
22 0 All right. What about your testimony about early on, 23 that Level l's had to be -- had to have their 24 inspections verified and the verification had to take O 25 place on the same day.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8853 i
O 1 Am I confused on that? It didn't have to take 2 place on the same day?
3 A I said the same day. They might have had -- in other 4 words, if an inspector, Level 1, had been doing 5 inspection on Friday, it might be a Monday date before
! 6 the Level 2 got around to signing his papers, in other 7 words; but it had to be in the same general time period.
8 Q I see. So the Level 2 would' sign and the dates didn't
- 9 have to be the same and generally it was in the same 10 time period?
11 A I don't know what the procedure said, but usually it was Q 12 in the same time period.
13 Q Now, how did you know whether or not the -- strike that.
14 Do you have any understanding as to why a Level 2 15 Inspector would. verify the signature of the Level 1 and 16 not also go on and complete the checklist for review ,
17 purposes for completeness?
18 A I have no idea, but my idea was that usually the fellow 1
19 that did that was a person who didn't have that cert. ,
20 In other words, he wasn't certified in that discipline.
21 ,
O I see, I see. So you think maybe that he didn't 22 complete the review signature line because he was not
. 23 certified in the discipline and that was a requirement?
24 A I think that happened.
25 0 Well, it's true that was a requirement, that the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
s 1
N '
i 8854 i (
)
1 revieher had to be certified in' the same discipline; 2 corrcct? -
3 A That's; true.
~
4 Q - But the Level 2 who did the verification, did he have to 5 be pertified in the same discipline?
6 A In order for him to sign for a Level 1, he was supposed l 7 to be in the same discipline.
I .
8 Q In order to verify that the Level 1 had done the ,
9 inspection, he had to be in the same discipline?
10 A He was required to be, yes.
11 0 So when Saklak brought you this checklist that had a
([) 12 Level 1 and signature and a second signature, ho4 did 13 'you yourself determine that the Level 2 who was 14 verifying for the Level 1 was certified in the right 15 '
discipline?
16 A One time we were issued a QC certification sheet. That 17 give you the date they were certified, what discipline 18 they was certified in and so forth. N 19 That's the sheet that QC Department ustally relied l
20 on.
21 0 So you referred to this sheet; and if the'. fellow -- if
\
22 you were able to determine that the fellow was not
! 23 certified, then I guess that meant he wasn't a proper 24 verifier for the Level l?
O' 25 A That's correct. g Sonntac deoortino Service. Ltd.
~
O Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8855 O
1 Q What did you tell Mr. Saklak in that circumstance?
2 A I usually said, "This would have to be reinspected 3 because the paper work doesn't match or the verification 4 of the QC personnel doesn't match."
5 Q What would he do on that occasion? Would he take it and 6 mark it up for reinspection?
7 A I never seen him, but I am sure that that happened 8 sometimes.
9 Q Well, do you know that it didn't happen?
10 A I do know that it didn't happen sometimes.
11 Q All right. What happened in those circumstances?
12 A He would take it to the next inspector and see if he
(])
13 couldn't get him to buy it off.
14 0 So this was the kind of shopping around that you were 15 talking about?
16 A That is what we are talking about.
17 Q In a circumstance where Saklak brought you a checklist 18 that had no signature of verification, just simply the 19 Level 1 signature, what action did you take at this 20 time?
21 A I think that automatically went back to a reinspection 22 list that we had.
23 We would go out and verify, in other words, 24 reinspect it.
O 25 Q Did all of those go for reinspection or did Saklak Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8856 O
1 continue to shop around on some of those, too?
2 A I don't know whether he continued to shop around for 3 those or not.
4 The ones that I do know that Mr. Saklak was trying 5 to shop around for was Level 2 Inspectors that wasn't in 6 the same discipline that the Level 1 were.
7 Q All right. And it's your testimony that there was a 8 procedure that required, first of all, that the Level 1 9 signature -- that the inspection performed by the Level 10 1 be verified and required that that verification be 11 done by a QC Inspector Level 2 that is certified in the 12
(]) same discipline?
13 A That is correct.
14 Q Now, do you recall just -- and this was a procedure in 15 existence, it was your understanding, in late '83, early 16 '84; is that correct?
17 A That is correct.
18 0 If I understand your earlier testimony, Saklak would 19 seek out people like yourself to do the -- to complete 20 the review of these checklists because he himself wasn't 21 certified?
22 A He himself wasn't certified.
23 Q Do you know whether or not he understood the procedure 24 that you are referring to?
1*
O 25 A Well, I am sure he did, since he was a Supervisor.
Ronntag Re, nnrti ng Aprvi co Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
8857 O
1 Q But he wasn't certified in the area. That suggested 2 maybe he wasn't aware of that procedure?
3 A No. I am sure Mr. Saklak had to read the procedures 4 before.
5 Q So did you take occasion to explain to him about the 6 existence of this procedure that --
7 A Oh, I am sure it was brought to his attention, maybe not 8 by myself but by someone.
9 0 Well, when you refused to sign off and complete the 10 review on a checklist he brought you because a Level 2 11 who was verifying the Level 1 wasn't certified properly, 12 did you explain to him the basis for that?
(]) '
13 A Yes, yes. We would usually sit down and say, "That 14 fellow wasn't even certified from that discipline."
15 , O So you would explain to him that the procedure required 16 it?
17 A I am sure we did, yes, sir.
18 Q And that that was why you just couldn't do what he 19 wanted?
20 A That's correct.
21 Q And it's your testimony that in some of those instances, 22 he had such a checklist reinspected, that is the welds 23 covered by the checklist reinspected; in some instances 24 he went to somebody else to try to get somebody else to O 25 sign off on it?
l I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8858 O
1 A I believe that is correct.
2 Q Do you ever recall Mr. Saklak being successful in the 3 instance I am referring to?
4 A I never seen anyone sign one that had been refused by 5 another inspector, I will say that.
6 0 You don't recall him being --
7 A I never seen another inspector sign one.
8 Q Do you ever recall him being successful in getting the 9 procedure you referred to violated by whoever it was he 10 sought out in the first instance to conduct the 11 inspections?
12 A I don't think I ever seen a QC Inspector violate a
(])
13 known, written procedure.
14 Q So the inspectors pretty much complied with the 15 procedure that you referred to and towed the line on; is 16 that your testimony?
17 A I believe -- I believe that they did.
18 Q But, nevertheless, Saklak persisted in trying to -- in 19 shopping around seeing if he couldn't get somebody to 20 buy off on it?
21 A That's true.
22 Q But it's your testimony that he was unsuccessful?
23 A I said that I never saw anyone.
'24 Q All right. With that modification.
O 25 MR. GUILD: It's only a modification to your Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
! (312) 232-0262
8859 0 .
1 question.
2 It's not a modification to the witness's answers.
3 They have been consistent.
4 MR. GALLO: No. It's a modification to my 5 question.
6 BY,MR. GALLO:
7 Q Now, if you are mistaken -- and I want to emphasize 8 that.
9 If you are mistaken about what you presently 10 believe the procedure to provide, that is let's assume 11 that the procedure that was in effect at the time that
() 12 Saklak was shopping around didn't require ver'ification 13 by a Level 2 that the Level 1 had, indeed, conducted the 14 inspection -- let's assume that.
15 In that circumstance then would Saklak have been 16 doing anything improper?
17 MR. GUILD: Objection.
18 Mr. Chairman, we can excuse the witness and have a 19 debate on this subject; but I would submit that on this 20 point Mr. Gallo either has to substantiate the 1
21 assumption that he poses or that he should be prevented 22 from posing a question for which there is no basis.
l l 23 This is a matter -- the Level 1 issue, the question 24 of what the procedure required and what Applicant 25 acknowledged the procedure required is a matter -- of Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. l Geneva, Illinois 60134 I (312) 232-0262 l
I 8860 I 1
1 record in this proceeding; and I believe the state of 2 the record is inconsistent with the question posed.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, Mr. Gallo is just 4 searching to find out, if I understand it, whether there 5 is anything else improper or that's the only thing that 6 is improper; and I think he is entitled to do it.
7 MR. GUILD: That's not what I heard, Mr.
8 Chairman.
9 What I heard was the witness has clearly stated 10 what his understanding of the procedure is.
11 Now counsel has said, "Let's assume your 12 understanding is incorrect and then let me pose this
(])
13 question." That 's improper.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: It's a legitimate question. '
15 Overruled. ,
16 Why don't we have the Reporter repeat the question?
17 (The question was thereupon read by the 18 Reporter.)
19 MR. GALLO: (Indicating.)
20 A If that was the procedure at the time, Mr. Saklak 21 wouldn't have been breaking any procedures, i 22 I don't know whether he would have been doing
(
23 anything improper or not, but he wouldn't have been j fs 24 breaking any procedure.
! \
l 25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But, now, Mr. Gallo, did you Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8861 1 intend to say the procedure at the time Mr. Saklak was 2 shopping around or the procedure at the time the 3 inspector had had his inspection verified by a Level 2 4 in --
5 MR. GALLO: No. It was the latter.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- in another certification.
7 MR. GALLO: Yes. The --
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think you better ask 9 another question if that is what you intended.
10 MR. GALLO: Let me -- yes, let me ask.
11 BY MR. GALLO:
l () 12 0 ' Mr. Hunter, the procedure that you were referring to 13 that required Level 1 verification that existed in late 14 '83 or early '84, was that the one -- was that the 15 procedure that was being applied to the checklist that 16 Saklak was shopping around with?
17 A I believe it was.
18 0 Well, as I think you have indicated in some instances, 19 the original inspections were some months old; isn't 20 that true?
21 The original Level 1 inspections had been completed 22 as much as a year previously?
23 A I would say beforehand, and it could have been up to a 24 year or more, yes.
25 Q And was the same procedure in effect that was in i
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8862 0
1 existence in '83, '84?
2 A I never read the procedure as far as going back to when 3 the inspection was done.
4 Q So at the time that Saklak was shopping around, were you 5 and the other inspectors applying the procedure for 6 verification that existed at that time or the procedure 7 that existed at the time the Level 1 signed the 8 checklist?
9 A We were using the current procedure the day that they 10 asked you to sign it or to review it. That's the 11 procedure that you used.
-12 0 That was the procedure you used and that was appropriate
(])
13 to use the current procedure?
14 A You was using current procedures.
15 0 And that is a procedure, you understood, that required 16 the Level 2 verification of a Level l?
17 A That is correct.
18 Q Do you know -- perhaps you have answered this question.
19 If so, I apologize.
20 Do you know whether the procedure that existed at 21 the time of a 12-month old Level 1 inspection also 22 required verification?
23 A The Rev that the procedure was on when the inspection 24 was done and the Rev that was used for the verification 25 could have changed. I do not know.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8863 1 Q At least in some instances it must' have been the same, 2 because there were verification signatures -- strike 3 that. Let me ask that question.
4 You recall at the time Saklak was shopping around 5 that there were checklists that had a Level 1 6 Inspector's signature and also a verification 7 inspector's signature; is that correct?
8 A That's correct.
9 Q Now, do you recall whether those particular checklists 10 were 12 months old or older?
11 A They were valid, and they could have been 12 months or 12 older.
('}
13 Q They could have been?
14 A They could have been.
15 0 They could have been in the '83, '84 time frame as well?
16 A They could have been in the ' 83, '84 time.
17 Q That would suggest to the extent that a checklist
)
18 existed with both a Level 1 signature and a verification 19 signature, that was as much as 12 months old, that that l
20 would indicate that, perhaps, the procedure must have I
21 required verification at that time as well?
22 A I don't know what it required.
23 .I didn't read the procedure that was written --
24 Q All right.
O 25 A -- at the time of the inspection.
, Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8864 1 Q Do you draw any inference from the fact that a 12-month 2 old checklist has both a verification signature and the 3 Level 1 signature as to what the procedure requires?
4 MR. GUILD: Objection, Mr. Chairman.
5 Really, the inference is irrelevant.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sustained.
7 BY MR. GALLO:
8 Q Now, let me ask you this --
9 A The --
10 MR. GALLO: The question that was objected to 11 is sustained, so it's a new question.
() 12 THE WITNESS:
Yes.
13 BY MR. GALLO:
14 Q At the time that Saklak was shopping around, you and the 15 other inspectors used the procedure that was in force 16 and effect chen?
17 A That is correct.
18 Q All right. Then I will ask the same question.
19 Is your understanding of that procedure that it 20 required verification of the Level 1 inspections, the 21 procedure that was in force?
22 A Level 1 required the Level 2.
l, 23 Q And if you were -- if the procedure in question did not ,
- 24 require Level 1 verification, was Saklak doing anything 25 wrong?
I I
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8865 O
1 A If it did not require?
2 Q Yes.
3 A A Level 1 you said?
4 Q No.
5 If the procedure in question, the one that was in 6 force in '"3, '84, did not require verification by a 7 Level 2 of the Level l's inspection, was Saklak doing l 8 anything wrong when he was shopping around?
9 A If it did not require it, he was doing nothing wrong.
10 Q Let's turn to Mr. Bowers. I believe you said Mr. Bowers 11 was shopping around.
12 A Mr. Dick Bowers, that's correct.
(])
13 Q He was the m;an in charge of the vault? ,
14 A Vault Manager.
15 Q In what way was.Mr. Bowers shopping around?
16 A At this time period I was working the AVO program. The 17 AVO program was a program that required reinspections of 18 field changes -- of what we considered field changes --
19 on hangers.
20 -
Also, at about the same time we were checking the 21 number of welds on grid.
22 If Mr. Bowers come up with a hanger that was listed 23 on a grid and the hanger lists 44 welds -- I mean, if 24 the hanger was 44 welds and he could go to a piece of
()
25 paper of any kind and come up with a document that said Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8866 1 certain welds was inspected on certain dates, it 2 wouldn't give the number of welds that was inspected, he 3 would still want you to buy that hanger off.
4 In other words, this was on part of the S & L 5 .
walkdown deal.
6 Q Now, was this activity part of the document reinspection 7 program?
8 A Document review, document reinspection program.
9 Q What was it that -- was Mr. Bowers in charge of this 10 activity?
11 A He was in charge of the vault.
12 Q Be was in charge of the vault.
(])
13 What work pertinent to the document reinspection 14 activity was going on in the vault?
15 A We had people in the vault that was reviewing old 16 documents from '78 up to, I would say, mid '82 and maybe 17 even later and seeing if they could match up the paper 18 work in the vault with what was required in order to say 19 that you had a valid inspection report on a certain 20 hanger or certain weldment.
21 0 So they were taking these old inspection reports and 22 trying to validate them?
23 A That is correct.
24 Q And how would they do that?
O 25 A (No response.)
Ronntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8867
( l l
1 Q Just give me an example.
2 A Okay. Let's say that they have a box of old reports, 3 old inspection reports in the vault. They would take 4 that box down. Maybe it hadn't been looked at for three 5 or four years.
6 They would go through the old box and see if they 7 come up with a hanger that matched the hanger on the 8 grid number.
9 If they could pull an inspection out that matched 10 the numbers on the grid, then they thought that they had 11 a valid inspection. If there was no changes, no 12 modifications or anything like that from the time it was
(]}
13 did until the present time, they called it a valid 14 inspection.
15 Q All right. So they took this checklist that had been in 16 this box for some time and they compared -- they 17 compared the information on the checklist to what?
18' A There were several different things.
19 I believe PTL at one time did an overview on some l 20 of this stuff. They not only used PTL material, they l
21 also used anything that looked like it might pertain to l
22 that area.
23 Q Did they look at the ICR file?
24 A ICR file?
O 25 0 Yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8868 1 A Not unless there was an ICR been written on it.
2 Q What other material did they look at, drawing and 3 installation reports?
4 A Drawings and installation reports?
5 Q Yes.
6 A Oh, yes. The installation report was always checked.
7 Q What information on the installation report was
! 8 pertinent to determining the validity of the checklist?
9 A The date that the unit or the hanger had been installed, 10 the welder who did the installation of the hanger, the 11 foreman of the area.
l 12 You got a good bit of information off the Hanger
(]}
l 13 Installation Report.
14 Q What information was there on the drawings that might 15 have been used for the inspection?
16 A The drawings from the time that I am talking about could 17 have changed, the Revs could have changed from A to B 18 plumb down to maybe Z, Y or anything, so there could 19 have been a drawing change.
20 There could have been anywhere from one to 100 21 changes on that one drawing that this hanger was in.
22 Q So do you mean to tell me that the review of these 23 drawings wasn't helpful in determining the validity of 24 the checklists that were being reviewed?
O 25 A The only thing that the drawings were there to tell you l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 8869 O
1 was whether the hanger was still in the same place that 2 it was when it was installed.
3 Q And in that circumstance, was this when you would go out 4 in the field to verify the hanger existence and count 5 the number of welds?
6 A That's true.
7 0 So a document reviewer was taking one of these 8 checklists in question, he wasn't certain whether the 9 inspection was valid or not and was attempting to 10 validate it by comparing it against installation reports 11 and other documents that might somehow reflect and give l
12 information validating the checklist?
l
(])
l 13 A That's correct.
l 14 0 That is correct.
15 Did you ever do that yourself?
16 A Yes, I have.
17 Q Did you do that in connection with the document 18 reinspection program?
I 19 A Yeah, I believe that's when I did it, yes.
20 Q And you were working under Mr. Bowers at that time?
l 21 A No, I did not work under Mr. Bowers.
22 O Is that because you didn't work in the vault yourself?
23 A Well, I am sure that was the reason, yes.
l l 24 Q All right. Who was your Supervisor on that activity, as
( 25 you recall?
l l
1 l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8870 0
1 A I am pretty sure that I both worked under a boy by the 2 name of Bryant Murphy and also a man by the name of John 3 Walters and also a man by the name of -- I don't know at 4 the time. Maybe Rick -- I mean, maybe Klatchko, Mark 5 Klatchko, I believe.
6 Q Klatchko?
7 A Klatchko.
l 8 0 Were there people -- were there inspectors -- working in l
9 the vault that were also doing this comparison work for 10 the document reinspection program?
11 A Yes. Our group had so many people that worked the
(} 22 vault.
l 13 Q Did any of those people work for Mr. Bowers?
l 14 A No, they didn't work directly under him.
l 15 Q They didn't work directly under him?
16 A No.
1
! 17 Q Did Mr. Bowers have any connection with the document 18 reinspection program other than just running tne vault?
j 19 A Question?
l 20 Q Yes. ,
21 Did Mr. Bowers have any assignment, any work 22 assigned to him, in the document reinspection program or 23 was he just involved because he ran the vault?
24 A He was involved because he ran the vault and made sure O 25 that all documents that come into the vault was I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8871 l
O 1 complete.
2 In other words, he did review the documentation l
3 that was completed before he filed it.
4 Q So if you or one of the other QC Inspectors had made a 5 comparison of one of these questionable checklists from 6 an old inspection and, to your satisfaction, had decided 7 that you had enough information to validate that 8 inspection checklist, you would turn that and the 9 information in to the vault and Mr. Bowers; is that 10 correct?
t 11 A That is the area at work, yes.
12 0 or did you give the results of your comparison to your
[} '
13 Supe rvisor? Which was it?
14 A Oh, yes, everything always went to your Supervisor 15 first.
16 Q Then did the Supervisor give it to Mr. Bowers?
17 A I believe they had a system that worked that way, yes.
18 Q Fine. Now, under what circumstances then under the 19 system that you described did Mr. Bowers go shopping 20 around?
21 A Okay. A very simple one was he would have an inspection 22 report that said that hanger so and so had 38 welds on 23 it.
24 You went back to check all your documentation and O 25 you couldn't find anything except the grid that had 41 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 j (312) 232-0262
8872 0
1 hangers on it and had 482 welds.
2 So there was no way of tying the inspection report 3 down to the hanger itself.
4 0 What did you do in that circumstance?
5 A Usually we were asked to reinspect it or to verify that 6 the hanger did exist and the hanger did have so many 7 welds on.
8 0 So if you -- if you were directed - if you decided to 9 re-inspect this, that was the end of it; is that right?
10 A We didn' t decide whether we would re-inspect it. If it 11 didn' t match all the documentation, it was an automatic Q 12 re-inspe ction.
13 Q Aut omatic.
14 And how did you evidence that, did you issue an 15 ICR?
16 A Do what?
17 Q Did you issue an ICR?
18 A I believe we had an ICR issued on that, if I am not l
19 mistaken.
20 The number I cannot -- I can' t recall off hand; but 21 we did an ICR on this.
22 Q I want to be clear on this.
23 If you, your sel f, under the document re-inspection 24 program, was attenpting to match up the inf ormation f rom O 25 the installation report and other evidence that you had Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva. Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8873 ,
i 1 collected through your research, with the inf ormation on 2 this questionable, indeterminate checklist, if you w ere 3 not satisfied that you could verify it and validate it, 4 did you rej ect it at that point and write an ICR or did 5 you do something diff erent?
6 A I believe it automatically become an NCR.
7 Q For that particular checklist?
8 A I believe that -- I believe we issued NCR's, ri ght.
9 Q And would you, as the inspector, issue the NCR?
10 A Yes, if you was going to -- you would only indicate NCR 11 number on your checklist.
Q 12 Q I see.
13 Was there a generic or generaliz ed -
14 A It's a generic NCR, right.
15 If you f ound a checklist that j ust didn' t measure 16 up to your review, you j ust simply mark that the NCR is 17 generaliz e<l. I believe that's correct. I believe that 18 is the way we did it.
19 Q All right.
20 isow, in that circumstance. how did Mr. Bowers get 21 into the act then?
22 A He would come around and he said, "H er e, here is" -
23 "here is the paperwork f or this one. Her e is the 24 paperwork f or that one, and here is the paperwork f or O 25 this one."
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
i Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 8874 l
O 1 Maybe it might have the same hanger number, but it 2 wouldn' t be any other way that you could check to see if 3 it actually was that hanger; in other words, the 4 numbering system at B raidwood was such that you could 5 have the same hanger number on diff erent floors, a doz en 6 diff erent places; so if you didn' t have all the r
7 inf ormation of the correct location, you could not l
8 verify, and a lot of them would in that area.
l 9 Q All right.
10 I guess what I am still puzzled about and not 11 understanding is that you would write the NCR number on Q 12 this checklist?
! 13 A I believe that's the way we did it. I am 'not --
14 Q Well, I don' t want you to testify to that if -- are you 15 having second . thoughts on your recollection?
16 Do you think you might have done it some different l 17 wg?
18 A I cannot recall just exactly how we took care of that 19 situation.
20 Q You identified it as not being adequate in some way?
21 A We -- we did identify it, yes.
22 Q And did you then ref er that documentation to your -- and 23 the checklist to your -- supervisor?
24 A To my Lead, yes.
O 25 0 Your Lead.
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8875 O
1 What did he do with it?
2 A He usually took it hisself, went -- people that was 3 working in the vault and said, "See if you can come up 4 with any more documents that will match this" "if 5 it's a questionable inspection" "see if you can match 6 this with any other document that's in the vault. "
7 0 I see.
8 So that af ter you had done your comparison work as 9 best you could on the inf ormation you could collect 10 through your research, and you decided it was a 11 rej ectable checklist, it was then taken by the Lead to Q 12 the vault for a further research effort to see if some 13 additional inf ormation might not be uncovered; is that 14 it?
15 A Many times that happened, yes.
16 0 And then the people working in the vault under Mr.
17 Bwers would undertake to do this, would they?
18 A Yes, oh, yes, they would pull more files.
19 Q And on occasion, would they find more inf ormation with 20 respect to a matter that you had researched in the first 21 instance ?
22 A Oh, it happened, yes, si r, it happened.
23 0 And then would Mr. Bowers take that new inf ormation and 24 bring it to you and ask you to evaluate it?
O 25 A I don' t know whether that ever happened or not.
Annnta c R enor ti n o S erv ice. Ltd.
Gedev a', Illi6ois 60134 I (312) 232-0262
8876 O
1 I can' t say that. .
2 If -- if -- us ually, if -- the vault people that 3 was assigned to the program, if they found additional 4 documents, we worked it f rom thm. we didn' t ask Mr.
5 Bowers or anything like that.
6 Q So the individual that was assigned to work in the vault 7 would seek you out and ask you about --
8 A Yes.
9 Q -- whether -- would he ask you whether or not the new 10 inf ormation was sufficient f or you to buy-of f on it?
11 A Yes. I have had that happen, yes.
who had the final say, you or the person in the vault, 1
0 2 13 Q
as to whether or not you would buy-off on it?
l 14 A Always the inspector that's doing the inspection has the
! 15 final say whether he will accept it or rej ect any 16 inspe ction.
17 Q And in the case you described, where you had rej ected it 18 initially, your Lead took it to the vault and they were 19 looking f or more inf ormation, you were the inspector in 20 that circumstance?
21 A I was the inspector.
22 Q Oh, okay.
23 Do you recall a circumstance when the individual l 24 from the vault brought you new inf ormation and you f ound O 25 it acceptable?
i Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8877 I ()
1 A ch, yes, that happened.
2 Q And then you signed off on it?
3- A I went ahead and completed the inspection and signed it 4 off, yes.
5 Q Do you recall a situation where the person f rom the 6 vault brought you inf ormation that you didn' t think was 7 sufficient to change your mind?
8 A That happened.
9 Q What happened to that particular checklist and the 10 inf ormation at that point?
11 A Usually we did a re-inspection of the hanger in the 12 field.
(]}
13 Q I see.
14 There was no f urther research or review done at I
15 this point? .
16 A Not as f ar as I know.
17 Q Did Mr. Bowers get involved in this kind of activity?
- 18 A Oh, he was involved every day, and in all the activity, 19 yes.
20 Q Well, was he shopping around trying to persuade you to 21 change your position, based on the inf ormation that the 22 weld person had brought to you -- I am sorry -- the 23 vault person had brought to you?
24 A The question?
l O 25 Q Yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8878 O
1 You see, my problem is, you have been describing 2 how this document review process works, and I think I 3 understand it. I think your testimony has been clear; 4 but what I don' t understand is how Mr. Bowers got into 5 the act to do any shopping around.
6 A Oh, yes.
7 Okay. Mr. Bow ers -- like I say, he reviewed all 8 the documents that was filed in the -- in the vault.
9 That was his j ob.
10 If Mr. Bowers come across something that we 11 rej ected, he might bring it back to you and say, "H ey ,
12 on so-and-so hanger this is it, " you know. You would Q ask him how he knowed that was the hanger. He might go 13 14 and pull the PTL overview sheet, what they called the 15 PTL review and bring it to you and say, "It's got 41 16 hangers and this is listed. "
17 Now, the 41 hangers might say 418 welds or 482 18 welds.
19 The hanger that was in question had, say , 3 8 welds.
l 20 How do you know that the inspection was pulled and 21 that he did the 38 welds on them?
22 Q I understand that point. You have made that a couple of 23 times.
24 But if, in the instance where you had rej ected a O 25 particular checklist because the inf ormation was Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva. Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8879 O
1 insuf ficient, you told me it went to the Lead, and then 2 the Lead brought it to the vault, and one of the people 3 assigned to the document re-inspection program did 4 further research?
5 A That's true.
6 Q Did the inf ormation flow through Mr. Basers at this 7 time?
8 A He was involved in the location of documents.
9 Q Yes.
10 I mean, because he was in charge of the vault?
11 A He also was in charge of looking f or lost docanents or Q 12 misplaced dectrt nts.
13 Q And is it your understanding that he assisted these 14 re-inspection doc reviewers in looking f or further 15 evidence and inf ormation?
16 A Yes, he did.
17 Q So that he kind of worked with him to try and find 18 additional intorn.ation?
l 19 A That's correct.
20 Q Do you recall any circumstance when -- when Mr. Bowerc 21 and the person in the vault who was looking f or 22 additional inf ormation on something that -- on a 23 checklist you had rej ected -- did he ever come out and 24 try to persuade you that he had f ound new inf ormation 25 and that it was adequate?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8880 O
1 MR. GUILD: Perhaps a stipulation might be 2 appropriate on some of this material.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Pardon?
4 MR. GUILD: I don' t think it's a contest.
5 I said perhaps a stipulation might be appropriate 6 on some of this material.
7 I don' t believe there is any contest or dispute; 8 and it seems to me the witness' answers have been 9 abundantly forthright.
10 I really don' t understand.
11 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : I don' t agree with that, Mr.
(} 12 Guil d. ,
13 I don' t understand where the shopping around comes 14 in, either; but I also have a problem as to where this l
15 whole subj ect . fits into the proceeding: and I can' t 16 blame Mr. Gallo f or this, because he is only cross 17 examining on something that was opened up on direct.
18 I don' t really think, then, that it' s r el ev ant.
19 I hesitated to say anything, because Mr. Gallo is 20 entitled to cross examine on what was opened up; but I 21 really don' t think that it has any place, and maybe we i
22 have gone into it long enough for something that's not 23 in the proceeding or shouldn' t be in.
24 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I submit that, of O 25 course, when Mr. Saklak or Mr. Bowers tries to shop
( Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8881 O
1 around f rom one inspector to the other to get than to 2 perf orm their quality control inspection f unction, that, 3 indeed, is relevant.
4 It implicitly represents a pressure by a supervisor 5 on a QC Inspector to, in essence, speed up the work or 6 expedite the process in a way that may, indeed, be 7 improper; but, let's f ace it, Mr. Chairman, we spent 10 8 minutes on this subj ect and we have been going at it now 9 for an hour.
10 Now, perhaps if Mr. Gallo would like a recess f or 11 the day to get his papers together or, perhaps --
N o.
Q 12 JUDG E GROSSMAN :
13 MR. GUILD: - or perhaps if there is a 14 stipulation.
15 JUDG E GROSSMAN : No, no, Mr. Guild, I don' t l 16 think that's f air.
17 I think Mr. Gallo has been shopping around to find 18 out what the shopping around is we are talking about; 19 and I will tell you, I don' t understand it, either, 20 because it seems, from what the witness is saying, that 21 once it went to someone, he either accepted it or 22 rej ected it, and if he rej ected it, that was the end of l
23 the matter, or it went back to the people in the vault, 24 and they came up with mor e inf ormation, but if it didn' t O 25 satisfy the criteria, they would still rej ect it.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8882 1 . MRk GUILD: I heard him say to the contrary, 2 Mr. Chairman, that then the individual, Mr. Bwers, in 3 this last hour's worth of examination, would go to 4 another inspector and ask that other inspector. That' s 5 hw we got into the whole mess in the first place.
6 If the questions were asked directly, you knm, "Is 7 that your testimony, that Bwers went to the second 8 inspector, is that what you mean by ' shopping around,'"
9 I think the record will reflect abundantly clearly 10 that's what the witness is saying, 11 But if you go off on all of these divergent Q 12 tangents, pursuing every possible f act, you will leave l 13 us all in quite a thicket, and we are all nw quite 14 muddled.
15 I think Mr. Gallo lef t enough room for the witness 16 to say that on a number of occasions, and the witness 17 didn' t say that. He said that yesterday to me, Mr.
18 Chai rman, and I think clearly, and I think he said it 19 several times today that I heard already. The record 20 will speak f or itself. I am j ust suggesting that, 21 perhaps, the whole collateral subj ect, divergent matter, 22 not the subj ect matters itself, but the pursuit of 23 detail ad infinitum, has no point.
24 JUDG E GROSSMAN : W ell --
O 25 MR. GALLO: I don' t -- do I need to -- I Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8883 O
1 learned - the only thing I learned in law school was 2 not to argue when it was going my way.
3 Do I need to add anything to that?
4 I don' t agree with much of what Mr. Guild said.
5 If you want to hear argument. I will be glad to 6 off er it.
7 JUDG E GROSSMAN : N o. Why don' t you j ust 8 proceed in the questioning. Mr. Gallo.
9 MR. GALLO: I won' t ask the question be read 10 back. I will try to reconstruct.
11 BY MR. GALLO:
12 Q I think we were at the point that, again, I had 13 indicated I didn' t understand how Mr. Bwers had fit 14 into the document review process, so that he could 15 indulge in shopping around; and --
16 MR. GUILD: Again, Mr. Chairman -- excuse me 17 - but that was the point where we obj ected, and the 18 obj ection was, when he asked the question, "How did Mr.
19 Bwers fit in? " he's asked that three or four times 20 now.
21 JUDG E GROSSMAN : N o, I don' t believe so. I 22 think the witness said he only fits in -- the obj ection 23 is overruled.
24 Mr. Gallo, you may continue with that question.
O 25 BY MR. GALLO:
! Sonntac Reportina Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8884 O
1 Q And we were at the point of, I believe, that it was your
- 2 -- you w re beginning to tell me that, on occasion, Mr.
3 Bowers assisted these docanent reviewers in the vault in 4 looking f or new inf ormation.
5 Is that correct?
6 A That is correct.
7 Q All right.
8 Now, is it -- is it your testimony that in 9 connection with assisting these individuals, that Mr.
10 Bowers also participated in the discussion between the 11 document reviewer and the inspector on :thether or not 12 new evidence or new inf ormation was now adequate to
(])
13 validate the inspection --
14 A That's correct.
15 Q -- report?
16 A That's correct.
17 Q Did he ever do it to one of your inspections?
18 A To mine, yes, he has.
19 Q And he came out with the -- with the individual -- the l
20 doc reviewers as well?
21 A I am sure he had him with him, yes.
22 0 And he showed you this new inf ormation; and what 6.id he 23 say to you on this?
24 A He probably asked questions, "Is this the" - "Is this O 25 the correct location? Is this the correct hanger Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8885 1
0 1 number?" things of that order.
2 0 Oh, was he seeking clarification of inf ormation that you 3 had already uncovered?
4 A I am sure that he was.
5 0 All right.
6 Well, did he ever undertake to persuade you that 7 the new inf ormation that had been uncovered by either
( 8 himself or the doc reviewer should carry the day and you 9 could buy-off on that particular inspection report?
10 A As f ar as buy-off ?
11 Q Yes.
] 12 A He said it was acceptable. I didn' t say anything about 13 buy-of f. He said this -- this -- this was documented 14 and it was verifiable and it could go to the vault. I 15 have heard him say that.
16 0 And so, ther ef or e, the inf ormation was enough so that 17 you could accept the inspection instead of rej ecting it?
l l 18 A Maybe not myself, but that the vault could accept it as 19 a very --
20 Q All right.
21 A So that it was acceptable for purposes of logging the 22 document in the vault as f ar as documentation.
23 Q It was complete f or that purpose?
24 A That is correct.
O 25 0 Well, but it was not necessarily suf ficiently complete l
Sonnta g Repor t!_ ng Aerv i ce. Ltd.
60134 Genev a, Illinois (312) 232-0262
8886 O
1 for purposes of your buying off on it; is that your 2 testimony ?
3 A What I am saying is maybe he -- he said that the 4 documentation was such that we didn' t have to worry 5 about doing a re-inspection on a certain hanger.
6 0 What reason did he offer for that assertion?
7 A That it was -- that it was documented on so many 8 diff erent documents, like PTL cover sheet -- PTL 9 overview sheets, old grid inspections or so f orth.
10 Q Now, was he -- and he sometimes advanced this 11 proposition to you with respect to inspection reports 12 that you had rej ected?
O 13 A Yes.
14 Q And they had been recycled through the vault to search 15 for more inf ormation?
16 A That's true.
17 Q Then he came back to you and said, "This ought to be 18 enough f or you to accept the inspection"?
19 A Yes. He said, "This is verified. "
20 Q Did you agree with him on occasion?
21 A Sometimes I did and sometimes I didn' t.
22 Q All right.
l I 23 On the occasion when you didn' t agree with him, 24 what happened?
O 25 A Sometimes he passed it along to the Lead or to another Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8887 O
1 inspector and said, "Can you" - "Can you verify that 2 this is the smne?"
3 Q So that's what you meant by " shopping around"?
4 A That's correct.
5 Q He would -- you would turn it down, turn down the off er 6 of additional inf ormation, he would take it to another 7 inspector or your Lead, and what would he ask?
8 Let's take it one at a time.
9 What would he ask the Lead to do?
10 A He would ask the Lead, say, "Is this enough 11 docenentation that we don' t have to do a re-inspection 12 or review of it?"
({}
13 Q What would the Lead do?
14 A That I don' t know.
15 Q What was your . understanding as to why Mr. Bowers went to l 16 the Lead?
17 A Why did he go to the Lead?
18 0 Yes.
19 A He I am sure that he f elt that he had the -- the 20 documents in the vault to take. care of the questions.
l 21 Q Was he tq(ing to get you overruled?
l l 22 A I wouldn' t say that he was trying to get me overruled, i
23 no.
l 24 Q Was he trying to get the Lead to substitute his l
() 25 signature for yours?
i Sonntac ReDortino Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l I
8888 l
O 1 A His signature for mine?
2 O Yes; the Lead's signature for yours.
3 A I don' t think he ever asked a Lead to do that, no. )
4 Q Well, do you think he was trying to persuade ,the Lead to 5 buy-off when you wouldn' t?
6 A I am sure he was.
7 Q How would the Lead do that?
8 A Hw can the Lead do that?
9 Q Yes.
10 A I don' t know whether they ever did or not.
11 Q You don' t know whether or not they did; but --
fQ 12 13 the Lead do that?
JUDG E GROSSMAN : The question was: Hw would 14 THE WITNESS: How would the Lead do that if he 15 was a mind to?
16 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Yes.
17 A If he was a mind to, he could probably say, "Yes, that" 18 - "that's y erifiable. We don' t have to re-inspect it. "
19 BY MR. GALLO:
20 Q He would say that.
21 Then w ho --
22 A I say, he could say that. I didn' t say I did say that.
23 0 That's right.
24 And I guess -- are you aware of any circumstances O 25 or when that did happen?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8889 0 .
1 A When that -- when the Lead told him that?
2 0 Yes.
3 A N o. I -- I never heard a Lead tell him that.
4 Q Let's go back to the assumpt; ion.
l 5 Let's assume that the Lead did that. He was of a 6 mind to accept the explanation by Mr. Bowers, and he was 7 prepared to buy-off on the inspection checklist that you 8 had Iej ected f or inadequate inf ormation.
9 What would - what would he do in that 10 ci rcumstance ?
11 Would he sign off himself or would he take it up Q 12 with you?
13 A I don' t think he ever took it up with me. No, I don' t 14 think I ever had that happen.
15 Q You never had .that happen?
16 A I don' t think I ever had that happen.
17 Q We are talking hypothetically.
18 A I know.
19 Q What procedure would be followed?
20 Would he normally just do it himself or wcald he 21 still insist that the inspector record -- namely, you --
22 had to be the one that bought off on it?
23 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, obj ection.
)
24 You can only put a hypothetical so f ar.
O 25 The witness said it never happened, so y ou can' t Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8890 O
1 speculate on how it would happen since it didn' t.
2 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Well, Mr. Guild, are y ou 3 prepared to stipulate that it never happened?
4 MR. GUILD: No, sir; I am simply saying 5 that's the witness' testimony.
6 JUDG E GROSSMAN : W ell --
7 MR. GUILD: W ell, I won' t f orce-feed the l
l 8 witness anything on that.
9 JUDG E GROSSMAN.: The obj ection is overruled.
10 THE WITNESS: The question?
11 MR. GALLO: Yes.
() 12 BY MR. GALLO:
13 Q The question is:
14 Assuming it did happen, how would the Lead buy-off i 15 at that point? .
16 Let's assume the Lead --
17 A He might --
18 Q And - go ahead.
19 A He might assign it to another inspector who is in the 20 group. He might say, 94ould you run your" - "your l
21 research again on this to see if you can come up with 22 the same answer that Mr. Bowers posed to us?"
23 0 He might have another inspector evaluate the 24 inf ormation?
O 25 A That's true.
Sonntac Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8891 O
1 Q Might he return it to you in case you were the original 2 inspector ?
3 A They might.
4 Q Is it possible that he might j ust simply sign off 5 himself?
6 A I don' t think -- I don' t think that ever happened.
7 0 why are you so certain about that?
8 A Unless the -- let's put it this way:
9 Unless the Lead, or whoever was in charge of the 10 program, unless they did the research theirself, and was 11 satisfied that all the documents did correspond, I do n' t 12 think any Lead ever bought anything like that off.
(])
13 Q But you have some doubt in your mind whether the Lead 14 would take the time to do the research himself?
15 A I -- that -- that I don' t know. Some of them would, 16 some of them wouldn' t.
17 Q But if the Lead did do the research, he could sign off 18 himself ?
19 A He could, yes.
20 0 What you' re really saying is that -- well, strike that, i
21 So when Bowers was shopping around, it's your i
l 22 testimony that, at least when he went to the Lead, the 23 Lead would satisfy himself one way or the other, with 24 having f urther research perf ormed, whether it was done O 25 himself or somebody else?
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8892 O .
1 A That is correct.
2 0 You don' t believe that the Lead would simply accept 3 Bow er s' word? l 4 A I don' t -- I don' t think that ever happened.
5 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Excuse me.
6 BOARD EXAMINATION 7 BY JUDG E GROSSMAN :
8 Q Once it has come to you in the first instance. wasn' t 9 your name on the file now so that the Lead couldn' t go 10 to anyone else?
11 A Oh, no, that wasn' t the way it worked.
12 Q Oh, okay.
13 A Like I say, they might bring you a grid inspection of X 14 number of hangers. You was trying match up some of the 15 old paperwork .that was in the vault with the hanger i 16 number that was on the grid inspection f orm.
17 In other words, some of these hanger numbers had 18 been changed, hanger numbers changed, some of them had 19 been deleted and so f orth; so what they were trying to l 20 do, they were trying to verify that they actually had a 21 verifiable inspection in the vault.
l l 22 Q Okay. Now, I believe you indicated bef ore -- and maybe 23 that isn' t a correct recollection of mine -- that if 24 they got it to you in the first instance and you O 25 determine that the inf ormation was not all there to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
~ . . - _ . _
8893 O
1 verify that, that you would then add it to an NCR or 2 write it up in some way.
3 Is that correct?
4 A I believe that's correct.
5 Q Well, once that was done, wouldn' t -- wouldn' t your name 6 be on the file so that they couldn' t then buy it to 7 another inspector to shop around?
8 A If you had - if you had did a Form 19, an inspection 9 report, and it had the unique NCR number, it also would 1
10 have your name on it, that is correct.
11 Q Well, then, there wouldn' t be any rom in that case for 12 them to shop around?
13 A Oh, yes.
14 Anyone can close-out an NCR or an ICR.
15 Q I see. .
16 So there was room for the to shop around f or 17 someone else, a second time, and ask that he disposition 18 that or he take the initial step in dispositioning that 1
l 19 by saying that now the inf ormation is there to verify 20 that?
21 A And get it -- right, that is correct.
, 22 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : Okay.
i 23 BY MR. GALLO:
24 Q Now, we have been covering the shopping around that you O 25 testified to that Bowers did in conj unction with a Lead Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232 0262
8894 O
1 inspe ctor.
2 I believe it's your testimony that he also shopped 3 around with other inspectors and, in particular, if he 4 brought you inf ormation which you red ected and still 5 felt that a particular checklist was not verified, did 6 he, on occasion, go shopping around to another inspector 7 to try to get him to accept it?
8 A I am sure that that happened, yes.
9 Q Now, this is with respect to a matter that you had 10 reviewed in the first instance and rej ected?
11 A I am sure that happened, yes.
12 All right.
l (]) Q 13 And Mr. Bowers then took it to this other inspector 14 and asked him -- what did Mr. Bowers ask the inspector?
15 A Usually say, "I believe there was enough inf ormation 16 that this can be verified, in the vault, and we can l 17 document it and place it in the vault. " That was alwayr, 18 -- that was his j ob, to place documentation in the 19 vault.
20 0 But at this point, now, he was trying to get the second 21 inspector to do something you wouldn' t do.
22 Is that your testimony?
23 A Something that I didn' t do or some other inspector 24 didn' t do, yes.
() 25 0 No, no -- well, all right.
l Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8895 O
1 But something that you wouldn' t do?
2 A Something that I wouldn' t do.
3 Q In other words, you had decided that the inf ormation 4 that Bwers brought to you wasn't enough, and you still 5 were going to rej ect the checklist, because you weren' t 6 satisfied with the verification inf ormation, and it' s --
7 is it your testimony that, in that circumstance, on 8 occasion, Bwers would go to another inspector and get 9 him to accept it, since you had already told him that 10 you wouldn' t do it?
11 A I have seen him go to other inspectors and try to get 12 them to accept it.
l 13 Q Try to get them to accept this?
14 A That's what I said.
15 Q And he would go to another inspector and present him 16 with the inf ormation and try to persuade that inspector 17 to accept it?
18 A I -- that is correct.
i 19 Q Nw, clarify for me, in that circumstance, the inspector 20 would knw that he hadn' t done the initial comparison 21 work, the initial research; isn' t that correct? The 22 second inspector would knw that.
- 23 A The second inspector?
24 Q Yes.
O 25 A Be would usually have the research inf ormation that had l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232 0262
8896 O
1 been gathered in this package, yes.
2 Q And it would - and I guess, under the Board's 3 questioning, it may or may not indicate that you were 4 the original inspector?
5 A That -- that is true.
6 Q But, wouldn' t that second inspector know that if Bwers 7 brought him the inf ormation, that some other inspector 8 had looked at this material already?
9 A Not necessarily.
10 0 Wasn' t it well known that the only time Bowers got into 11 the act, when -- when inf ormation was originally 12 determined by c QC Inspector to be inadequate, to verify
{ 13 a checklist?
14 A Was that the only time that he got involved?
15 Q Yes, wasn' t it well known?
16 A That was one of the times that Mr. Bowers got involved, 17 yes.
18 Q Your testimony is that he also got involved with 19 shopping around at other times, or am I misstating your 20 testimony ?
21 A I don' t believe I said that.
22 Q Okay.
23 Well, what did you mean when you said that Mr.
I 24 Bowers was involved at other times?
O 25 A At other times?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8897 O
1 Q Yes.
2 A You mean in the program? That's what I was talking 3 about.
4 0 You are referring to the program?
5 A We was talking about the program.
6 Q All right.
7 A O th er --
8 Q And - go ahead. I' m sor ry.
9 A Other times in the program, like I say, not only he 10 would be directing the vault people to pull certain 11 material, he would be working with the people from our 12 group to make sure that we was on the correct elevation;
{])
13 and, in other words, a lot of our people were sitting 14 down there to the vault and they had to depend upon Mr.
15 Bow er s' vault . crew in order to pull the material.
16 Q But --
17 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Excuse me.
- 18 BOARD EXhMINATION 19 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN 20 0 I think the question is
21 When would Mr. Bowers go to comeone with this 22 packet of inf ormation, other than when he was shopping 23 around, in the case of a first inspector not wishing to 24 sign off on that?
I
() 25 A I don' t believe Mr. Bowers ever come to another Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8898 ;
() l 1 inspect or. He might have come to the Lead with other 2 material, but I don' t think he ever come to a QC 3 inspe ctor, and with a package.
4 Q Okay. So he would only go to the Lead to get the Lead 5 to shop around; is that what you are saying?
6 A N o. What I am saying is that if you was assigned a 7 certain package -- in other words, they come out in 8 packages.
9 Q Yes.
10 A If you was assigned to certain package, Mr. Bowers 11 knowed what you was assigned, he had a record of the 12 hangers and the documentation that you were looking at.
{])
13 Q Yes.
14 A So that's the way he knowed what you were doing.
15 Q Well, I understand you --
16 A The question --
17 0 I understood you to say that Mr. Bowers, if you were 18 brought additional inf ormation by the clerk, and you 19 were not satisfied, that Mr. Bowers would then take that 20 packet and bring it to someone else; but you are saying 21 he didn' t bring it to another inspector, he would only 22 bring that to the Lead?
23 A I knmi that he brought it to the Lead.
24 As f ar as the other inspector, him going directly O 25 to another inspector, I can' t say that I ever seen him l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232 0262
8899 O
1 do it; but I do -- I have seen other inspectors with 2 material that another inspector had started with.
3 I don' t know whether Mr. Bowers went to the man and 4 said, " Hey, we need this, " or whether the -- I don' t 5 think the Lead did, as far as that goes. As f ar as I --
1 \
6 I never saw a Lead do that.
7 So it was always Mr. Bowers who changed the 8 material that you had gathered to another inspector, as 9 far as I know.
10 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay.
11 BY MR. GALLO:
So you recall Mr. Bowers going to a Lead inspector with
(} 12 Q 13 material that had initially been turned down by the 14 inspector ?
15 A Right.
16 0 You don' t know, of your own knowledge, whether or not 17 Mr. Bowers did the same thing with respect to other QC 18 Inspectors?
19 A I never seen him do it.
20 0 All right.
21 But you did see QC Inspectors have in their 22 possession f rom time to time the information that had 23 been researched or developed by another QC Inspector?
24 A That is correct.
O 25 Q Did you draw the inf erence f rom that that, ther ef or e, Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8900
() :
1 Mr. Baters must have been shopping around with respect l 2 to those inspectors?
3 A I didn' t draw any conclusion. I seen him do it.
4 Q You seen him do what?
5 A Take other -- other inspectors' inf ormation that the 6 vault crew had come up with.
7 Q And he took other inspectors' inf ormation that the vault 8 crew had come up with and what did he do with it?
9 A What did what?
10 0 What did Mr. Bowers do with it?
11 A He turned off and said, "I believe this is what we are 12 looking f or. " He said, "I believe this will verify that
[]}
13 certain hangers had been looked at, certain gates.
14 Q Who was he telling that to?
( 15 A He was telling it to the QC inspector that he was 16 talking to.
17 0 And was this inf ormation that -- was this the original 18 QC Inspector or a second QC inspector?
19 A Usually it was the second inspector.
20 Q And you think he was shopping around at that time?
21 A That's what I call shopping around.
22 Q Okay. Now, the -- I guess it's your testimony now that 23 you did see Mr. Bavers shopping around, with respect to 24 inspection checklists, to a second inspector, not the O 25 Lead now, but to another inspector?
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Genev a, Illinois 60134
8901 4
G LJ 1 A I seen Mr. Bwers give other inspectors material that 2 had been gathered, that he said would verify -- the l 3 reason -- the reason -- I don' t knw why be give it to 4 him, but he said would verify that this was the correct 5 hanger, correct location.
6 Q Are you sure they weren' t the inspector in the first 7 place and that he was j ust giving them additional I
8 inf ormation f or their consideration?
9 A I am sure of it.
10 Q That they were not the inspector?
11 A That they were not.
12 Q But he was giving a second inspector, a different 13 inspector -- ,
14 A A diff erent inspector.
l 15 Q - a diff erent inspector this inf ormation.
16 Do you knw whether or not that inspector might 17 have j ust been on that j ob f or the first inspection --
18 inspector, I am sor ry .
19 A I have no idea. I didn' t assign work.
20 Q All right.
21 So that -- do you knw that, in f act, Mr. Bwers 22 was trying to persuade that second inspector, that is, 23 the inspector that was looking at inf ormation that had 24 initially been looked at by a first inspector?
O 25 A I do n' t --
I
- Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
j Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8902 O
1 Q Do you know that he was trying to persuade that second 2 inspector to accept that first inspector's work?
3 A I don' t know whether Mr. Bowers was trying to persuade 4 him or not.
5 Q Then you j ust must -- you j ust inf erred f rom the act of 6 giving him that information that had originally been in 7 the possession of another inspector, the fact that you 8 thought he was shopping around?
l 9 A That's what I call shopping around.
10 Q- Now, when you were involved in the -- in the document 11 re-inspection program, you have testified at long last 12 as how you have checked out the validity of the
[{}
13 checklists that were assigned to you.
14 Did you also try to review AVO's, avoid verbal 15 order documents?
16 A At this -- I think that was two diff erent programs.
17 Q That was two diff erent programs?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Okay.
20 A One j ust preceded the other one.
l 21 Q So at the time that you were r eviewing Avo's, that was a 22 diff erent activity from your document review activity?
23 A I believe it was. It could have been a combined 24 program.
O 25 Q You j ust don' t recall?
4 i
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8903 O
1 A I don' t recall.
2 Q All right.
3 Let's talk about the AVO program.
4 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Do you want to take a recess 5 for a f ew minutes?
6 MR. GALLO: W ell, I think we might get into 7 this new line, and it will probably take us up to until 8 5 : 00 o' clock. I don' t think I am going to finish.
9 JUDG E GROSSMAN : That's fine.
10 MR. GALLO: Unless somebody would like to 11 take five minutes.
12 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Does the witness need a
( 13 break? 14 THE WITNESS: N o, I am fine. 15 MR..GALLO: He's tougher than all of us. 16 BY MR. GALLO: 17 Q Now, Mr. Guild asked you a number of questions about the 18 AVO progran, and I would like to -- 19 JUDGE GROSSMAN Excuse me. 20 There are people who want a break, so we will take 21 five minutes. 22 MR. GUILD: I was going to install a little 23 white flag here on the Intervernors' tabl e, j udge, and 24 ask f or that. O 25 MR. G ALLO: We will get the flagpole for Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 8904 O 1 tomorrow. 2 MR. GUILD: Thanks. 3 (Whereupon a recess was had, af ter which ( l 4 the hearing resmed as f ollows:) 5 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Ready, Mr. Guild? 6 MR. GALLO: Yes. 7 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, could I have a i 8 moment with the witness bef ore Mr. Gallo continues? 9 I understand he has a personal conflict. He wanted 10 it brought to the -- brought it to the attention of my 11 associate. - 12 (Whereupon a recess was had, af ter which the hearing resumed as f ollows:) 13 i 14 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Back in session. 15 MR. , GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I apoligiz e for 16 interrupting Counsel's examination, but the witness 17 inf ormed me off the record that he has a personal work 18 conflict that he wants to inf orm the Board and parties 19 of; and, perhaps on the basis of that information, some 20 scheduling decision ought to be made. 21 Perhaps if I can j ust ask Mr. Hunter if he would 22 state what his obligations are in the next couple of 23 days, pl ease. 24 THE WITNESS: Since I was employed by U. S. O 25 Telecom this month, and I was assigned f rom the Region 3 Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 ' (312) 232-0262
8905 O 1 soffice out of Kansas City to the eastern office out of 2 New York, I was asked to be at Cleveland today. 3 I inf ormed my supervisor in New York yesterday that 4 the procedures was taking longer than we expected, and I 5 couldn' t be there bef ore Monday morning. 6 Now, he agreed that -- that if I was there first 7 thing Monday morning, it would be all right. 8 I do have business at home to take care of before I 9 go to Cleveland. 10 JUDG E GROSSMAN : What does that have to do 11 with our scheduling? 12 Does that mean tomorrow you can' t be here? 13 THE WITNESS: I should be home tonight. l 14 JUDG E GROSSMAN: Okay. j 15 We will j ust have to put Mr. Hunter off then until 16 he can come back. 17 When would you be able to return here? 18 THE WITNESS: Only on a Monday or on a Friday, 19 when I am flying f rom St. Louis to Cleveland or to New 20 York. 21 JUDG E GROSSMAN: Well, we will have to -- 22 MR. GALLO: Well, we are only going until 23 11:00 o' clock tomorrow, l 24 Do you understand that, Mr. Hunter? O 25 THE WITNESS: Do what, si r? l l Sonntaa Reoortina Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8906 O 1 MR. GELO: The hearing is only scheduled to 2 last until 11:00. 3 THE WITNESS: N o, I hadn' t heard that. 4 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay. So you -- well, could 5 you be here until 11:00? 6 THE WITNESS: I can stay until noon tomorrow, 7 yes. 8 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay. We are going to start 9 at 8 :00 o' clock and go to 11:00. 10 THE WITNESS: I can stay until noon. 11 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay. Mr. Gallo, proceed 12 then. I 13 BY MR. GELO: 14 Q I have your deposition here. This is the one that you 15 took on -- that was taken, rather, on January 28th, and 16 one of the answers to the question -- 17 MR. GUILD: Could I have a page ref erence, 18 please ? l 19 MR. GELO: It appears on Page 39. 20 MR. GUILD: Thank you. 21 BY MR. GELO: 22 Q And the question is, "You said that was one of then. 23 "Are you aware of any others?" And you say in your 24 response, "J ust a moment. I wouldn' t say that they 25 actually put it to you, 'Let's accept this inspection or Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. j Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l - - - - - - _. - - - -_._-. -
8907 O 1 let's don' t accept tbis inspection, ' but what they do do 2 -- I will be honest honest with you -- they will tell 3 you, 'Look at this when you r eview it. ' If you don' t 4 accept it, they will take it down to the next inspector 5 and let him look at it and see if he will buy it; in 6 other words, it makes three or four stops before they 7 either get it bought or don' t get it bought. " 8 You recall that testimony? 9 A Yes. I made that statement. 10 0 Is that -- does that testimony describe the shopping 11 around that you j ust testified to? 12 A That's what I ref erred to, yes. [} 13 0 And is this the shopping around by Bowers or Saklak? 14 A That -- I don' t know what period that was taken f rom. 15 Q Would you like to take the time to look at the 16 surrounding inf ormation so that you could answer that 17 question? 18 Take your time. 19 I think, if I can be of assistance to you. 20 A All right. 21 Q It starts right about in here. This is the area that 22 you had to climb the ladder to. Her e. It starts right 23 her e, I believe. 24 (Indica ting. ) O 25 MR. GUILD: Where are you indicating, Sonntag Renorting Service, Ltd. _ Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 1
i 8908 i () 1 Counselor ? 2 MR. GALLO: Indicating Page 38, in the middle l 3 of the page. 4 A I am sure that this was referred to Mr. Saklak. 5 BY MR. GALLO: 6 Q This ref erred to him. 7 So this ref erence that you had on Page 39 referred 8 to Mr. Saklak? 9 A I am sure it does, yes, si r. 10 Q The shopping around done by Mr. Saklak? 11 A Yes. 12 {} 13 Q And you recall that the -- your testimony now on Page 57, on Page 57, and said, "O That was j ust" - "that's 14 just this one special proj ect? A" -- I am sor ry. I 15 misstated myself. 16 Let me start again. 17 On Page 57, the question, "Okay. And when you said 18 that papers were passed around f rom one inspector to 19 another inspector to another inspectcr, this is daring 20 the course of this ongoing effort to see if I documentation matches? 21 22 "A That's true, that's true. 23 "O Is it -- it is not -- and correct me if I am 24 wrong -- it is not a request f or or an attempt to have O 25 one inspector okay something that another inspector may Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinoi s 60134 (312) 232-0262
8909 O 1 have rej ected, is it? 2 "A I am sur e it's not. " 3 Now, can you recall, are you also talking about the 4 subj ect of shopping around in this testimony? 5 A I believe I am. 6 Q Do you recall in this testimony whether you were 7 ref erring to the shopping around by Bowers or not? 8 A I believe this is still bef ore Mr. Bowers' time. 9 Q So you believe you are talking about Mr. Saklak' s 10 shopping around? l 11 A Mr. Saklak or other supervisors, yes. . {} 12 0 Well, on Page 57 it refers to -- the question ref ers to going f rom one inspector to another inspector during the 13 14 course of this ongoing effort to see if documentation 15 matches. 16 Did that -- naybe you want to read the prior two 17 pages to see if it's not the document review program. 18 A I believe it says that, it is stated it is the document l l 19 review program. 20 0 It is the document review program? 21 A I believe it is the document review program we are 22 talking about. 23 0 And then, when you were ref erring to Page 57, to the 24 shopping around, who did you have in mind with respect O 25 to the shopping around on Page 577 sonntag nepnrei ng servi ce. Lea. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8910 O 1 A I don' t knw whether we were talking about Mr. Bwers or 2 who at the time. I don' t think it -- 3 Q All right. 4 A I don' t think she asked. 5 Q Do you recall nw who you had in mind when you made the 6 statement? 7 A Off hand, I -- I don' t knw who we were talking about, 8 no. 9 MR. GALLO: Could I have a moment, please ? 10 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Sure. 11 (There follwed a discussion 12 outside the record.) 13 MR. GALLO: Well, let me ask you the' question 14 that was asked to you on Page 57. l 15 MR. , GUILD: Well, Mr. Chairman, you knm, you 16 can' t exactly do that. 17 MR. GALLO: Well, I guess counsel ought to 18 wait until I ask the question bef ore he obj ects. 19 MR. GUILD: You j ust indicated what you are 20 ref erring to, Counsel; and the f act of the matter is -- l l 21 JUDG E GROSSMAN : But he's going to put that 22 question in the context he's going to describe nm, and 23 I don' t think there is anything wrong with that. 24 MR. GUILD: Fine. 25 If he puts in a proper context, I have no Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232 -0262. - , . - .
8911 () 1 obj ection. Just simply out of the blue, the question is 2 meaningless. 3 BY MR. GALLO: 4 Q Mr. Hunter, do you believe that Mr. -- the shopping 5 around that you have described with respect to Mr. 6 Bow er s, that you have testified to here today, was an 7 attempt by Mr. Bowers to have one inspector okay 8 something that another inspector may have rej ected; is 9 that your belief ? 10 A My belief is that Mr. Bowers was trying to get material 11 put in the vault that one inspector wouldn' t buy. (} 12 If he could get another inspector to buy, it was 13 just that much better off for him. 14 Q All right. 15 But was he -- was he trying to -- was he attempting i 16 to have one inspector buy-off on something that another 17 inspector may have rej ected? 18 A I couldn' t tell you what he was attempting to do. l 19 0 Well, you don' t know the answer to that question? 20 A I don' t know the answer. 21 MR. GUILD: He answered the question directly, l 22 and counsel is simply not entitled to ask him again 23 because he didn' t like the answer. 24 MR. G ALLO: I think the witness has answered O 25 the question. i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8912 O 1 MR. GUILD: The first time he asked him -- 2 JUDG E GROSSMAN : I believe he answered it 3 both times, Mr. Guild. 4 MR. GALLO: Yes. 5 MR. GUILD: The record will speak f or itself. 6 Mr. Chairman. I believe. 7 MR. GALLO: Does counsel have to continue to 8 get the last word on this matter, Mr. Chairman? 9 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Mr. Guild, I know it's late 10 in the day. Once a ruling is made, that's it. 11 MR. GUILD: Well, sir. I wasn' t even given an opportunity to make my obj ection; so let's -- Mr. Gallo {} 12 13 may be testy on this point, but the f act of the matter, l
; 14 when he simply asks a question that he didn' t -- that he l
l 15 has in deposition, he asked it again and gets an answer l 16 this time, he doesn' t like the answer this time, he 17 can' t ask it again. It's improper; and he did ask it 18 again, and I move that it be stricken. 19 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay, That's denied. 20 I am not sure that the witness indicated that he 21 was answering the same question on deposition. I think 22 the problem was he said he wasn't answering that 23 question; so -- l 24 MR. GALLO: And I asked a diff erent question. ' () 25 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : That's fine. Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
8913 o l O 1 We will leave the record the way it is right now. 2 MR. GALLO: W ell, in order to save Mr. Guild 3 from a contempt citation, I suggest that we recess for 4 the evening, whereupon I am going to start on a new 5 subj ect and hopef ully we will attempt to finish my cross 6 by the time that we have to recess tomorrow. 7 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate -- 8 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : Well, that's not the end of 9 it, Mr. Gallo. 10 I hope we do better than that, because Mr. Berry 11 goes af ter that, and he may not have very much on this, Q 12 I don' t know. 13 MR. BERRY: N o. 14 JUDG E GROSSMAN : But then Mr. Guild has 15 another chance, and so -- 16 MR. GALLO: If the Board wishes, I will push 17 ahead. l 18 MR. GUILD: All I am asking, Mr. Chairman, { first, is that Mr. Gallo ref rain f rom harassing me any 19 20 further so that I don' t f eel the need to respond to his 21 aside, and I will try to restrain myself as well; but on 22 this -- and on the merits of this point, the witness is l 23 not being paid accept his witness f ee to be here. He' s 24 currently employed by Comstock, he has other employment. O 25 This was hard f or him to get here; and I really hope we Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 ( 312). 232-0262
8914 O 1 can get him done by 11:00 tomorrow. 2 If it's necessary for Mr. Gallo to press on, to 3 have assurances that that will be the case, I would ask 4 that he press on. 5 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Mr. Gallo, I know you would 6 be better organized tamorrow, but I am af raid that -- 7 MR. GALLO: I am prepared to go f orward. 8 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay. Why don' t we go 9 f orw ard. 10 BY MR. G ALLO: 11 Q Let's turn our attention now to the AVO program that you (} 12 have testified to in answer to a f ew questions by Mr. Guild, and, indeed, in answer to a couple of questions 13 , [ 14 by nyself. 15 As I understand it, the AVO stands f or " avoid 16 verbal orders"; is that correct? l 17 A I believe that is correct. 18 Q Now, what was the program itself? I mean, what was the l 19 probica that was generated by the uce or the 20 implementation of this program, as you understand it? 21 A What was the problem? 22 Q Yes. 23 A Usually, the problems were that when a construction 24 superintendent, or whoever issued the memo, the speed O 25 memo to craf t or -- or to the Engineering Department, I i Sonntaa Raporting Serv ice, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _. - __- -__ - _ _ _ _ _ . ._._ - _ _-_ - . . _ _ _ - _ - ~ _
8915 O 1 guess, to Sargent & Lundy, they made a change on the 2 drawings, prior to him issuing this speed memo, a lot of 3 these hangers had been inspected, and the documentation 4 was already in the vault. , 5 So, theref ore, prior to a certain date, I believe 1 6 it's in 1983, all -- all AVO's had to be reevaluated 7 for -- to see whether the documentation in the vault was 8 valid. 9 Sometimes there were no change in the -- in the 10 AVO' s, simply hanger vertical was cut off or anything 11 could happen as f ar as that goes. l 12 But at one time, they said the AVO program -- AVO's l
] 13 didn' t mean a thing, and then they come along and l 14 somebody caught them on an audit and said they have to 15 be verified.
16 So that was the purpose of the AVO program. I 17 Q All right. I 18 So that the -- is my understanding correct that the 19 AV O, or cpcod meno that you ref er to, you really mean 20 the same thing when you use the term, " speed memo, " l 21 don' t you? l 22 A I believe I used the term " speed memo. " f l 23 I am sure that we could get a copy of an AVO if you 24 want to look at it. O 25 Q But when you use the term, " speed memo, " you are i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
.c .-
8916 O 1 ref erring to the AVO itself, aren' t you? 2 A I believe that is correct. 3 Q My understanding is that the AVO or speed memo was used 4 as an instruction to effect the modification of an 5 existing hanger; is that correct? 6 A That is correct. 7 Q And it was an instruction issued by -- well, let me ask 8 you: 9 Who issued the instruction? 10 A I believe it was the construction superintendent, 11 usually, that issued this. 12 Q Who was the recipient of instruction? [} 13 A I am pretty sure that it went to Sargent & Lundy as well 14 as Comstock. 15 Q Who at Comstock received the AVO? 16 A Who received it? 17 0 Yes. 18 A I am pretty sure it was the OC Manager, whoever it was i 19 at the time. i 20 0 Well, how was -- how was the modification, in f act, 21 performed? 22 Wasn' t the document used to tell the craf t that -- 23 that the modification of a particular hanger should be 24 effected? O 25 A To tell the craf t? Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd. I Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8917 1 Q Yes. 2 A Yes, it did. It told the craf t what to do. 3 Q So it was the vehicle for conveying the instruction to 4 the eraf t? 5 A That is correct. It was j ust a vehicle. 6 Q And your understanding is that a copy also went to 7 Comstock QC7 8 A I believe it did, yes. 9 0 You believe that a copy was also sent to Sargent & 10 Lundy ? 11 A Yes, so they could make the design change on the 12 drawings. s 13 0 And as a result, I think you testified yesterday that 14 the use of these AV0's, that the documentation was j ust 15 unclear and there was a real question as to the adequacy 16 of what was done; is, that a fair statement? 17 A That's correct. 18 Q And was there a question not -- there was a question 19 about the adequacy of the QC inspections themselves; is 20 that corcect? 21 A Whether they was valid or not, af ter the change had been 22 made that AVO required, yes. 23 Q Was there also a question as to the whether or not the l 24 hanger, as installed, met the specifications established O 25 by Sargent & Lundy ? I i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8918 O 1 A As installed af ter the modification? 2 Q Yes. 3 A .I don' t think there was ever a question whether it met 4 the criteria that Sargent & Lundy had designed the plan 5 for , no. 6 Q Did Comstock, to your knowledge, have assurance that the 7 hangers that were modified, as a result of the AVO l 8 program, were consistent with the requirements of the S l 9 & L specification? 10 A That I do not know whether they ever had that assurance 11 or not. 12 0 All right. ({} 13 Now, you had mentioned yesterday, I think, some 14 drawing revisions, Rev. O and Rev. A. 15 Do you recall that testimony? 16 A Yes. l 17 Q It's my understanding that Sargent & Lundy generated 18 Rev. 0; is that correct? 19 A I believe that is correct. 20 Q And that Rev. O was essentially a drawing of various 21 hangers that were the subj ect of the AVO program, and 22 that the Revision O was developed by Sargent & Lundy for 23 the purpose of establishing just what the specification 24 requirements f or those hangers were, per the drawings; I () 25 is that correct? Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8919
- O 1 A I believe that is correct.
2 Q All right. i 3 Now, when I use the ref erence, "Rev. O, " is that 4 zero or the letter 0, which is it? 5 A The Letter O. 6 Q Rev. letter 0; and does that have any special meaning, 7 does it? For example, the next revision was A, and that { 8 seems strange to me. 9 What is the relation between Rev. O and Rev. A? j 10 A I don' t believe that that's the way it worked. 11 Q can you explain? g 12 A I am not sure what the O designated; but they did have a 13 - on the same unit, same hanger, it come out as A, B, c l 14 and D, even though Sargent & Lundy had already walked -- 1 l 15 did the walkdown once and the welcknent or the weld 16 mapping had already been done. 17 Q The drawing developed by Sargent & Lundy depicted 18 hangers that were the subj ect of the AVO program, that 19 should also meet the S & L specs, were all spelled out 20 and depicted on a drawing called Rev. 0; is that 21 cor rect ? 22 A I believe that's correct. 23 Q Do you know what the -- what use was made of the Rev. O 24 drawing developed by Sargent & Lundy? O 25 A Oh, yes. Af ter the Rev. O drawings come out, you Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _ _ ~ _ . . _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ . . --
8920 1 () 1 ref erred to the drawings. In other words, usually just 2 a single hanger with all plates, all steel's in place l 3 and all weldments in place, and they were already mapped l 4 by a configuration person. 5 Q Wasn' t Rev. O used as a basis for a walkdown to 6 determine whether or not the as-built condition of these 7 hangers was the same as shown on Rev. 07 8 A Do what, sir? 9 Q Weren' t the Rev. O drawings developed by Sargent & Lundy j 10 used as a part of a walkdown conducted by Comstock to 11 determine whether the as-built condition of the hangers 12 was the same as shown on Rev. O? {}} 13 A I believe there was a program whereby that Comstock 14 furnished the QC inspector and also Sargent & Lundy 1 15 furnished the . people to go along and make sure that the 1 16 hangers were drawed up to the as-built conditions. 17 Q So it's your inf ormation and understanding that a 18 walkdown did occur? 19 A It did occur, yes. 20 0 And the as-built condition during the walkdown was 21 compared against the Rev. O drawings; is that correct? 22 A They were the same as Rev. O drawings, if I am not 23 mistaken. 24 Q What was the purpose of the walkdown? O 25 Wasn' t it to check out whether or not they were the Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8921 0 1 same? 2 A I believe the walkdown preceded the new drawings, if I 3 am not mastaken. 4 Q All right. 5 What, to your knowledge, caused Revision A to be 6 dev elop( d? 7 A That was the first -- first drawing to come out on the 8 Rev. A, Rev. O drawings. 9 Q Do you understand that, as a result of the walkdown, . 10 that there, in some instances at least, was determined 11 that some of the hangers did not conf orm with what was (} 12 shown on the Rev. O drawings? 13 A I believe that is correct. 14 Q And do you have an understanding as to what happened at 15 that point? 16 A I believe they were -- at that point I believe we was l 17 issued another rev. called, Rev. B or Rev. C, that 18 showed the actual hangers it was in the plant. I 19 0 Let me see if I can ref resh your mcmory on that. 20 Did you know whether or not the Rev. O drawings 21 were marked to show the as-built condition that was 22 observed in the field that was diff erent than what was 23 shown originally on the Rev. O? 24 A Other than the original drawings? O 25 Q On the Rev. O, th e R ev . O' s, and sent back to S & L for Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8922 . O 1 further evaluation. 2 A I don' t know that that happened. I really don' t know 3 whether they sent them back or vhat was done. 4 Q All right. 5 Do you know whether that, as a result of this 6 walkdown, that caused Sargent & Lundy to issue at that 7 point the drawings that indicated the as-built 8 conditions of the hangers in question? 9 A Yes, I believe that -- that was the reason that Sargent 10 & Lundy issued the drawings. I 11 Q And were those drawings reflecting the as-built 12 conditions of the hangers in question? 13 Were those referred to as Rev. A drawings? 14 A I believe that is correct. 15 Q Now, if there was any problem with, respect to the 16 adequacies of the configuration of these hangers and 17 their compliance with S & L specifications at the time. 18 would you agree that this walkdown process that you and l 19 I have been discuccing, would eccentially solve that ! 20 problem? 21 A If there was any discrepancy -- l 22 Q Yes. 23 A -- between the drawings that S & L -- 24 0 Any discrepancy between the installed hangers and the S O 25 & L specification, that this walkdown process would have Sonntaa Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8923 O 1 remedied that situation? 2 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I obj ect to this. 3 The question is clearly beyond the scope of any matter 4 brought up. 5 The AVO program and the witness' knowledge of it 6 may be r elevant, maybe. 7 But the witness' understanding of what the S & L 8 walkdown was or was not and what it established or what 9 it didn' t establish, simply is f ar beyond the scope of 10 anything that's relevant to this proceeding. 11 The witness testified only about what he knows, - 12 which is weld inspection and documentation work under {]) 13 the AVO program. 14 He's not a configurations inspector; and if 15 Appli. cant f eels the need to demonstrate the adequacies 16 of S & L's walkdown, he should put their own witnesses 17 to do that. It's not within the scope of Mr. Hunter's 18 experience and it's irrelevant. 19 MR. GALLO: Well, the status and perspective 20 of Rev. O drawings and Rev. A drawings is, indeed, 21 relevant to the inspections conducted by Mr. Hunter. 22 The purpose of my question is not to attempt to 23 validate through this witness the adequacies of the S & 24 L activity, but, rather. to establish his understanding O 25 of what the purpose of that activity was. EQ nntag RLporting Service. Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8924 O 1 MR. GUILD: I would ask that counsel -- 2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Of what the purpose of -- of 3 the activity that he participated in? 4 MR. GALLO: No. The purpose of the walkdown, 5 in terms of solving any hanger configuration problems ' 6 that might have existed as a result of the AVO program. , 7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, is he competent to 8 discuss that? 9 MR. GALLO: W ell, I am asking what his 10 understanding on that point is. 11 MR. GUILD: For what purpose? 12 MR. GALLO: Well, we will allow it to go on [} 13 for a little while; so we will get an answer to that 14 question and, perhaps, one or two others; but let's not linger on matters that really aren't within the witness' 15
- 16 competence.
17 MR. GALLO: Do you have the question, Mr. 18 Hunter? 19 THE WITNESS: What? l 20 MR. G ALLO: You don' t have the question? 21 Do you need the question repJated? 22 THE WITNESS: Yes, I need the question 23 repeated. 24 BY MR. GALLO: 25 0 All right. My question was: Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva. Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 L_-_--_.--
i 8925 1 Is it your understanding that the purpose of 'the i 2 walkdown that we have been discussing in the privi.., 3 testimony, was to reconcile any deviations or 4 non-conf ormances with S & L specs f or these hangers as 5 compared to their as-built condition? 6 A I believe that is correct. 7 Q All right. i 8 But that activity didn' t take care of any weld 9 probl ems, I think -- 10 A No, none whatsoever. 11 Q All right. 12 Now, 'how were the weld problems that you had Q 13 mentioned that some of the inspection reports that had 14 been developed 'under the AVO program were not validated, 15 I take it they were indetermined as to their validity; l 16 would that be a f air characteriz ation? 17 A You mean the checklist of inspections? 18 Q Yes. 19 A Yes, because some of the hangers maybe had been moved 6 20 inches, maybe had been moved 10 inches, maybe had been 21 redesigned, re -- changed in siz e; theref ore, many of l 22 the welds had been deleted, some added, so f or th. That i 23 was why the S & L and QC people did the walkdown and did 24 the weld mapping of f it. O 25 0 How was the inspection problem that you have just l Sonntaa ReDortina Service, Ltd. l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8926
)
1 testified to, that is, the weld inspection problem, 2 addressed as a part of this program? 3 A If it bad been any changes as f ar as weldment, or 4 anything like that. done on the AVO, then a new 5 inspection was perf ormed. 6 Q All right. 7 And that was the part of the program that you were 8 involved in; is that correct? 9 A The looking at the welds, yes. 10 0 All right. 11 Do you know how it was determined whether or not a 12 particular checklist for a weld inspection that was []} 13 perf ormed during a -- the AVO program was legitimate or 14 not? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Would you explain? 17 A If the -- if there had been no change in -- in the weld 18 -- wel dment, or anything like that, and there had been l 19 -- if it had been no change in the weldment, the hanger 20 was still valid, the inspection was still valid. 23 Q Now , the AVO directed some sort of modification to the 22 hanger; isn' t that correct? 23 A That's correct. 24 Q And what was unknown is whether or not the inspection of O 25 that hanger took into account the modification or not; Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva. Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 , _=_-
'i 8927 O 1 isn' t that correct? 2 A The question? 3 Q, Yes. What was uncertain about any particular inspection 4 5 report on that same hanger was whether or not it had - 6 when it was done it had also been done at the time prior
! 7 to the installation of the modification or whether it 8 had been done af terwards; isn' t that correct?
9 A That is the problem, yes. 10 Q If the inspection had been done af ter the modification 11 was made, per the AVO, then the inspection was I i 12 considered to be valid; is that correct? 13 A That's corract. 14 Q But if the inspection was done before the AVO, the 15 modification took place in accordance with the AVO, then 16 the inspection was not considered valid, was it?
! 17 A If it changed any welkent, any welkent location, any 18 wel&ent siz e, it wasn' t valid.
i 19 If it j ust had been something like cutting three 20 inches of vertical hanger off, whereby the next pan or 21 the next hanger could be installed, then it was still i 22 valid. I 23 0 All right. 24 Now, who made this determination? Wasn' t it made O 25 by -- well, let me ask you that question. Ennntaa Renorti na service. Ltd. Ge5ev a, Illi5ois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8928 O V 1 Who made the determination whether or not these 2 inspections were valid? 3 Who made this document comparison that we have been 4 talking about here? What organization? I don' t mean 5 what person. What organization? 6 A What organization? 7 Q Yes. 8 A I am pretty sure it was the engineers f or Comstock. 9 Q So it was Comstock Engineering that made the comparison 10 of the documentation and determined whether or not the 11 inspection was valid; is that correct? 12 A I believe that is correct. {^) 13 0 And if they determined that the inspection was invalid, 14 what action did they take? 15 A They asked f or a new inspection. 16 Q Did they issue an inspection request? i 17 A Yes, I believe it was a called an inspection request. 18 Q And were those inspection requests sent to the Ouality 19 Control Department at Comstock? i 20 A I believe that's correct. 21 Q And were these -- were these inspection requests the 22 subj ect of your inspection activity in the early part of 23 19867 i 24 A Early part of 1986. yes, they were. 25 0 Including up through March of 19867 Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a. Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8929 O 1 A Including March,1986. 2 Q One question -- no, strike that. 3 MR. GALLO: Judge Grossman, unless we are 4 going to push on f or some considerable amount of time, I 5 would like to break at thiu point. 6 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay. But I hope overnight 7 you can decide you are not going to -- that we can 8 compress what you have lef t into a short time. 9 MR. GALLO: Well, I will attempt to do that. 10 It depends on the answers I get. 11 As the Board may guess, I am hitting - I am now
- 12 arriving at the area involving Mr. Hunter's termination, 13 and I think that's beginning to reach the pinnacle of my 14 cross.
15 JUDG E GROSSMAN : We will finally reach the l 16 important matters. ! 17 Okay. We will adj ourn until 8:00 o' clock tomorrow, 1 4 18 and w e go f rom 8 : 00 to 11: 00. 19 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman. 20 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : Oh, I' m sor ry. 21 The witness is excused; but we have another matter j l 22 that Mr. Berry wishes to pursue. 23 So we will see you at 8 :00 o' clock then. 24 Yes. 25 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, the question has l Sonntag_ Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I f 8930 (v~T 1 arisen among authorities regarding the scope of the 2 reach of the Board's sequestration order that issued in 3 the f,irst weeks of the proceeding. 4 As I read and understand the order, I don' t believe 5 that the Staf f -- Staf f witness -- strike that -- Mr. 6 Schulz, who is scheduled to be a witness f or the 7 Intervenor I don' t believe that the Staff is prohibited 8 in terms of the Board's ruling f rom disclosing a 9 transcript of Mr. Seeders' testimony to Mr. Schulz . 10 And I had indicated to the Applicant and the 11 Intervenors that unless they had some obj ection to that, 12 that I propose to provide Mr. Schulz a copy of Mr. i []} 13 Seeders' testimony. 14 Applicant indicated that they did not, and Mr. 15 Guild indicated that -- that -- well, Mr. Guild did not 16 agree to that or has not agreed to that. 17 MR. GUILD: Mr. Guild indicated that you 18 would agree to give me overnight to consider the matter, 19 Mr. Berry, and I would appreciate it if you would give 20 me overnight to do that. 4 21 MR. B ERRY: Fine. 22 My understand is that I would give it to you over 23 the luncheon recess; but if overnight is no problem -- 24 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay. O 25 Happily, we will have it resolved without the ) _. Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
8931 O V 1 Board's intervention tomorrow. 2 So we will adj ourn until 8:00 o' clock tomorrow 3 mor ning. 4 (WHEREU PON, at the hour of 5:05 o' clock 5 P. M. , the hearing of the above-entitled 6 matter was continued to the 25th day of 7 July, at the hour of 8 :00 o' clock A. M.) 8 9 10 , 11 O . 13 14 15 16 17 ! 18 19 20 ! 21 22 23 24 25 l l Sonntag_ Reporting service. Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 - (312) 232-0262
NO PAGE NUMBER CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the matter of: NAME OF PROCEEDING: BRAIDWOOD STATION UNITS 1 62 COM510NWEALTil EDISON C051PANY (EVIDENTIARY llEARING) DOCKET NO.: 50-456/457-OL PLACE: JOLIET, ILLINOIS DATE: TilURSD AY , , JULY 24, 1986 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (siat) _ /' (TYPED)' Glenn L. Sonntag Official Reporter Reporter's Af fili ation
^
v}}