ML20204J898
| ML20204J898 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/10/1985 |
| From: | Scinto J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Hayes B NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20204J857 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-799 NUDOCS 8608110228 | |
| Download: ML20204J898 (10) | |
Text
_ue,.RIEUTICN:
SAirecy ESchristenbury JLieberman 1
1 VNoonan V7B'r'cwn, Reg. IV 0/C file JFS chron file January 10, 1985 Note to:
Ben B. Hayes From:
Joseph F. Scinto Deputy Chief Hearing Counsel
SUBJECT:
ALLEGATION OF IMPROPER DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION BY OI INVESTIGATOR - DEPOSITION OF EVERT MOUSEP During the January 5, 1985 deposition of Mr. Evert Mouser, a former QC inspector at Comanche Peak, Mr. Houser alleged that Mr. Donald Driskill of your office improperly disclosed confidential information to the Appli-cants.
See Tr. 22,936-939, 23,090-100.
Copies of these pages of Mr.
Mouser's transcript are attached.
Complete copies of the transcript for Mr. Mouser's January 3 and 5, 1985 deposition will be transmitted to you in the near future.
Joseph F. Scinto Deputy Chief Hearing Counsel
Attachment:
As stated Tv1A-es-wy 8600110228 860006 PDR FOIA GARDE 85-799 PDR m
- 0 ELD
- 0EXD_4 _ _ _ _N
.:___________:kScin<;o___. ____ ______:____________.____________.____________.___________
- GSMizunofmb :
- 1/10/85
- 1
/85
~
0 22936 1
O When you had your ccnversation with Mr. Driskill 2
in November of '83, did -- was it a recorded conversation?
~
3
.Did someone transcribe it in some way?
Or tape it?
4 A
No, it was not It was just between him and 5
myself.
6 O
Did you feel comfortable in answering all the 7
questions that he asked you without any reservation?
8 A
Well, I knew Mr. Driskill and I was hesitant to 9
talk to the gentlemen.
10 0
Why is that?
11 A
I don't trust the gentlemen.
12 Q
Trusc in what sense?
13 A
That he was 'doing the job - that.he was hired to l'4 do.
15 0
Were you concerned that --
16 JUDGE BLOCH:
I'm sorry.
What did that mean?
17 THE WITNESS:
That he was indeed an investigator 18 and that, indeed, from prior experience with the man, that 19 what you told to him in confidence did indeed not stay in l
20 confidence.
I 21 BY MR. ROISMAN:
22 Q
And had you had an experience like that with him l
l 23 before?
l l
24 A
Yes, I did.
i 25 0
would you recount it for us, please?
I I
p+
,,,m y
---w--y w
,y---
5ge,-g w-e.--
-p-v
,r
,-.-v
=rwwe--pp er vem---+--yewy y
va-w-.gygy-me-.--
v-y---
- - ---z.3.-gy w
---rv
'21578.0 22937
- 3RT 1
A It was when I was in the design change authority 2
group up on the hill, wo. king with some other gentlemen, 3
who were -- two other gentlemen and myself, that talked to 4
.Mr. Driskill during an audit that they did on the site.
5 And some of what the one gentleman brought up was 6
questioned a few days later by the supervisor.
7 0
You mean somebody from the plant raised 8
questions about a subject that this man had mentioned as-9 far as you and'he knew, only to the NRC investigator?
10 A
Yes.
And then also at that meeting one of the 11 gentlemen -- I should say after the meeting, one of the 12 gentlemen said that Mr. Driskill'had been talk -- had 13 talked to many of the inspectors on-site at different
~
14 times and that -- like I.say, this is hearsay from this 15 gentleman -- and that the information that they talked 16 about was immediately general information of the utility.
17 And being an NRC man, that was not supposed to be the way 18 it was.
What you told them in confidence was to be kept 19 in confidence.
20 Q
Do yau think that was fairly common knowledge 21 among the people that you had contact with at Comanche 22 Peak?
That is, that if you told something to Mr. Driskill 23 you should expect that it would ultimately get to the 24 company?
25 A
It wasn't so much to Mr. Driskill.
It was told --
..-,y--.m
,.,.y,,y-,--..~,_y_
,m_
,,__._._y,__
,,..,_-__..-._______-,,m.,.
,-,,, - -._ _~...
21575.0 22939 3RT 1
O In your job in the design change area, did you 2
have occasion to come in contact with lots of different 3
inspectors from different disciplines?
4 A
Yes, I did.
Like I say, we are all a f amily.
5 We knew each other from different jobs.
I worked with 6
them in Idaho, Washington, places like this.
7 Q
When you say "we" you are now talking about QC 8
inspectors as the "we"?
9 A
Yes.
10 JUDGE BLOCH:
With respect to the people who J
11 worked with you when you were the supervisor, you told us 12 that all but three of them had spoken to the NRC.
Did you 13 have any feeling from what they told the NRC at that time 14 that their confidences were not kept?
15 THE WITNESS: $I think the inspectors felt that 16 the reason why the -- the feelings management had was 17 because of the information that was getting back to them 18 through a source, which they all tabbed as being the NRC 19 man.
20 Like I say, these are all feelings and thoughts from 21 these inspectors.
22
.MR.
ROISMAN:
I have no further questions at 23 this time.
24 EXAMINATION 25 BY JUDGE BLOCH:
e
1 l
0 23090
?
i 4
"1 3Y MF. TRISY:
0 Mr. Meuser, I would like to take you back to the 3
1983 interview, I believe it was in November, with 4
Mr. Driskill, when you were at the Midland size.
5 A
Yes.
6 Q
I think you've previously testified that the 7
trip report matter was not his principal purpose for 8
interviewing at that time, but rather it came up rather 9
casually during the int erview; is that correct?
10 A
I seem to recall that; yes.
11 O
Have I properly characterized your testimony?
12 A
I felt as though -- I ' Jot this feeling from him i
13 that ~he was there more in the D,unham case, but he did not 14 tell me specifically it was for' the Dunham case.
15 Q
Okay.
And when he discussed the trip report, s
16 did he show you a copy of it?
17 A
I don't recall seeing it; no.
18 Q
Did he indicate how he had come to know about 19 the trip report?
20 A
No.
I don't think he told me how he did come to 21 know about it; no.
22 O
Did he indicate in any way that he was l 33 conducting any investigation with regard to the trip 24 report?
l 25 A
No, he did not.
At least I don't recall it.
,---y.-
4
_.,._-...,.-_.7
.~, _ _.., _,,
.r
.. + _- _-.-
~.
,11'575.0 23091 SRT 1
Q Well, what, if anything, do you recall about the 2
cenversation between you and him, about the trip report?
4 3
A That it did exist and he made indication that he --
4 I think he asked me:
Do you know of the Lipinski trip 5
report?
I told him yes, I did.
6 Q
And was that the end of the conversation?
Did
)
7 he ask you -- well, was that the end of the conversation?
8 A
I don't recall much more than that; no.
1 9
Q You don't recall whether he asked you how you 10 became aware of the trip report?
11 A
No, I don't.
12, Q
And he didn't indicate in any way how he had 13 become ' aware of it?,
14 A
No, he did not say anything about that.
15 Q
With regard to the discussions you and he had s
16 about the Dunham matter, did he ask you whether you wanted 17 any confidentiality with regard to those matters?
18 A
I don't recall him saying anything about that:
19 no.
20 Q
Did you request any confidentiality?
l 21 A
No, I don't think I did.
I don't recall.
s 22 Q
Do you recall signing any document with regard 23 to the question of confidentiality?
24 A
No, I don't.
I don't recall anything like that.
25 Q
In the course of his discussing the Dunham e
21578.0 23093 3RT 1
A Yes, he was.
2 C
Did Mr. Ambrose have anything to do with the 3
Dunham matter, as it related to the Department of Labor?,
4 A
Not to my knowledge; no.
5 Q
Do you think there was any -- we51, at the time, 6
do you recall any concern that Mr. Ambrose' name was
- 7 mentioned to you?
8 A
No, I don't.
9 Q
Had You ever had any other discussions with 10 Mr. Driskill?
11 A
I had talked to him at the plant if you mean 12 that?
13 Q
Yes.
14 A
I talked to him down at Comanche Peak.
15 Q
Eow many times had you talked to him down at s
16 Comanche Peak?
17 A
It was not so much myself.
I was in with a 18 group of three of us that talked to him.
There was one 19 gentleman that did all the talking.
And that was the one i
20 time he came -- or, I guess twice he came up there.
Two l
\\
j 21 days in a row, I should say.
22 O
And what was the subject matter of that 23 discussion?
24 A
The subject matter of that discussion centered 25 around the design change documents we were working on.
o 21576.2 23095
'*- BRT 1
Q Do you know whether the other two people who 2
were with you recuested confidentiality in your hearing?
3 A
That I don't have any way of knowing.
4 Q
Did you observe them signing any documents?
5 A
do, I did not.
6 Q
And during that conversation you provided 7
Mr. Driskill with whatever information the three of you 8
had to provide to him?
9 A
Yes.
10 Q
During that conversation, did he raise any 11 information that he had heard on that subject from any 12 other people at the Comanche Peak site?
13 A.
. I don't think he did.
I don't recall anything.
14 Q
Did you have any or do you have any reason, to 15 believe that any of the information that you or the two s
i 16 other people gave him became known to other persons?
17 A
By talking with other inspectors and by talking 18 to this other gentleman who was with us, the third man in 19 the group, he said that some of the things that he had l
20 thoughts -- was in the as-built group, I had nothing to do l
21 with the as-built group -- some of the things that he had 22 brought to Mr. Driskill's attention were, indeed, brought 23 to management personnel's attention also.
I 24 Q
But was that the same information that occurred 25 during your meeting with Mr. Driskill?
t
---,.-.,.,----,,,,-,-,,.,,-n,
.,, - - _ _.., _ _ _ _ ~ _
r-51'5CE.C 23097 3RT 1
any passage of money.
~
2 BY MR. TREBY:
3 O
When Mr. Driskill discussed that matter with.you, 4
did he indicate that there had been an investigation done 5
by the NRC's Office of Investigation?
6 A
Yes, he did.
He indicated that there had been a 7
very thorough investigation done and that, indeed, the NRC 8
had -- was giving them a penalty, and that Mr. Williams 9
had, indeed, s,igned an affidavit indicating intimidation.
10 Q
Did he indicate that during the course of this 11 investigation they had spoken to QC inspectors?
12 A
Yes, he did.
13 O
Did he give you any idea of how many QC 14 ins,pectors they had spoken to?
15 A
No, he did not.
16 Q
Did he indicate that -- whether it was one or 17 two or a larger number than that?
18 A
I took it that it was a large number.
19 Q
Given that information, do you find it 20 surprising that'QC inspectors at -- in the coatings 21 department, indicated they had had conversations with the 22 NRC?
23 A
I feel that they did.
24 O
Do you know whether those conversations related 25 tc that investigation or related to other discussions they 1
D
,,215 8.0 23099 3RT 1
The same thing -- basically the same thing : told -- you P
2 know -- that we talked about.
3 O
And did you have any further conversations with 4
Mr. Watkins?
5 A
No.
I did not have any conversations with 6
Mr. Watkins but there was a gentleman from Mr. Watkins' 7
firm called and told me that, I guess it's after -- this 8
is after I talked to you.
And told me that they were 9
still looking for some.-- for a lawyer.
And at that time 10 I indicated that I had selected Mr. Sims.
11 Q
Did you ever'have any conversations with 12 Mr. Gallo?
13 A
No.
I never met the man be f ore.
14 MR. GALLO:
Yesterday.
15 THE WITNESS:
Excuse me; Thursday.
s 16 BY MR. TREBY:
17 Q
Did you have any conversations with Ms. Garde or 18 Mr. Roisman after that -- after you selected Mr. Sims as 19 your attorney?
20 A
I think Mr. Roisman placed a couple of calls to 21 my house but I was not there.
And I don't recall having 22 any conversations with Ms. Garde.
If I did, I probably 23 indicated to her to talk to my lawyer also.
1 24 O
There was an indication that a transcript was 25 sent to you by Ms. Garde?
i
..s
Government Accountability Project IS$5 Connecticut Avenue N.W. Suite 202 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 232-8550
- Itillie Garde Director, Environmental Whistleblower Clinic December 3, 1985 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
~
t.O ;u...
g..
Director Office of Administration
[f)fg.fg /)ff Nuclear Regulatory Commission Cb #d /d -6 ~8J Washington,'D.C.
20555 To Whom It May Concern:
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C.
9552, the Government Accountability Project (" GAP")
requests copies of any and all agency records and information, including but not limited to notes, letters, memoranda, drafts, minutes, diaries, logs, calendars, tapes, transcripts, summaries, interview reports, procedures, instructions, engineering analyses, drawings, files, graphs, charts, maps, photographs, agreements, handwritten notes, studies, data sheets, notebooks, books, t e l e p h o n e.tte s s a g e s, computations, voice recordings, computer runoffs, any other data compilations, interim and/or final reports, status reports, and any and all other records developed by the harrassment and intimidation pa,nel report issued November 4,
1985.
This request includes all agency records as defined in 10 C.F.R. 99.3a(b) and the NRC Manual, Appendix 0211, Parts 1.A.2 and A.3 (approved October 8, 1980) whether they currently e:cist in the NRC official, " working", investigative or other files, or at any other location, including private residences.
If any recorde as defined in 10 C.F.R. $9.3a(b) and the NRC Manual, supra, and covered by this request have been destroyed and/or removed after this request, please provide all surrounding records, including but not limited to a list of all records which have been or are destroyed and/or removed, a description of the action (s) taken relevant to, generated in connection with, and/or issued in order to implement the action (s).
b%Q
s'..
. GAP requests that tees be waived, because " finding the information can be considered as primarily benefitting the general public," 5 U.S.C.
552(a)(4)(a).
GAP is a non-profit, non-partisan public interest organization concerned with honest and open government.
Through public outreach, the Project promotes whistleblowers as agents of government accountability.
Through its Citizens Clinic, GAP offers assistance to local public interest and citizens groups seeking to ensure the health and safety of their communities.
The Citizens Clinic is currently assisting several citizens groups, local governments and intervenors in Tennessee concerning the construction of the Watts Bar nuclear power plant.
We are requesting the above information as part of an ongoing monitoring project on the adequacy of Region II and the NRC's efforts to protect public safety and health at nuclear power plants.
For any documents or portions that you deny due to a specific FOIA exemption, please provide an index itemizing and describing the documents or portions of documents withheld.
The index should provide a detailed justification of your grounds for claiming each axemption, explaining why each exemption is relevant to the document or portion of the document withheld.
This index is required under Vaughn v.
Rosen (I), 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974).
We look forward to your response to this request within ten days.
Sincerely, LC Billie Pirner Garde Director Environmental Whistleblower Clinic