ML20206R817
| ML20206R817 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1986 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#386-912 OL, NUDOCS 8607070231 | |
| Download: ML20206R817 (148) | |
Text
ORGAq
-O UN11ED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 50-456 OL 50-457 OL COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Station, Units 1 & 2)
O LOCATION:
JOLIET, ILLINOIS PAGES: 5974-6121 DATE:
FRIDAY, JUNE 27, 1986 o/
0' i ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
OfficialReporters 444 North Capitol Street Washington, D.C. 20001 ADocx 0500g'7,H>
0606; 1
a607070231 ri09 NATIONWIDE COVERACE l
5974 1
l UNITED STATE" OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
]
3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _x 5
- 1 In the Matter of
]
6
- Docket No. 50-456 OL i
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY 50-457 OL 7
(Braidwood Station, Units 1 j
8 and 2) l
~
_x 9
10 College of St. Francis j
500 North Wilcox Street
]
11 Joliet, Illinois 60435
)I 12 Friday, June 27, 1986.
I(
13 i
The hearing in the above-entitled matter reconvened
]
14 i
at 8:30 A.
M.
j 15 4
16 BEFORE:
17 JUDGE HERBERT GROSSMAN, Chairman 1
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board i
18 U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
19 JUDGE RICH ARD F.
COLE, Member, 20 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
-l 21 Washington, D.
C.
22 JUDGE A. DIXON CALLIHAN, Member, i
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 23 U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4
j Washington, D.
C.
24 j
APPEARANCES:
) ()
25 On behalf of the Applicants i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 11T1301 r 60174 a
(312) 232-0262
5975 O
1 MICHAEL I. MILLER, ESQ.
2 EL EN A Z. KEZELIS, ESQ.
Isham, Lincoln & Beale 3
Three First National Plaza l
Chicago, Illinois 60602 4
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory 5
Commission Staff:
l 6
ELAINE I.
CHAN, ESQ.
GREGORY ALAN BERRY, ESQ.
7 U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7335 Old Georgetown Road 8
Bethesda, Maryland 20014 9
On behalf of the Intervenors:
1 10 ROBERT GUILD, ESQ.
Il 12 0
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(^)
25 l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 50134 (312) 232-0262 6.
5976 O
1 TESTIMONY OF DEAN LAVERN PETERSON (Continued) 2 CROSS EXAMINATION 3
BY MR. GUILD:
5979 4
BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
6045 5
CROSS EXAMINATION 6
BY MS. CH AN :
6056 7
BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE COLE:
6059 8
BOARD EXAMINATION 9
BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
6061 10 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE COLE:
6065 11 BOARD EXAMINATION
(}
12 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
6066 13 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDG E CALLIH AN :
6067 14 BOARD EXAMINATION 15 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
6072 16 BOARD EXtMINATION BY JUDCL GROSSMAN:
6075 17 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 18 BY MS. KEZELIS:
6076 19 BOARD EXAMINATION BY JUDGE GROSSMAN:
6109 20 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 21 (Continuing.)
BY MS. KEZELIS:
6110 22 J
RECROSS EXAMINATION 23 BY MR. GUILD:
6111 24
()
25 Sonntag-Reporting Service,_Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5977
'O 1
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
The hearing is reconvened.
2 This is the 30th day of hearing.
3 I'd like to reiterate what I told you yesterday, 4
Mr. Peterson, with regard -- and I don't think I j
5 elaborated enough -- with regard to any possible 6
liability for libel or slander.
7 You' re here under subpoena, and you' re required to 8
testify under oath completely; so if any question is j
9 asked of you, including your personal opinion, you 10 cannot be held liable for giving us a complete opinion 11 as long as you are truthfully answering.
i 12 So please bear that in mind.
We want a complete
- O 13 answer.
We do not want a circumspect answer.
i l
14 THE WITNESS:
Okay.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Now, with that in mind, j
16 there was one question asked yesterday a number of l
17 times, and I'm not sure we got your complete answer --
18 perhaps we did -- and that was your meaning to that 19 phrase that you used before the NRC with regard to 20 having blinders on.
]
j 21 I don't know if you recall your answers yesterday l
22 on that; but if you do and you' re satisfied that you 1
{
23 gave a complete answer, that's fine.
i j
24 But if you wish to give us another answer right now 1
j 25 which constitutes your complete answer as to what you i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134
{
(312) 232-0262
5978 m
k_)
1 meant by that phrase, we'd certainly like to hear it.
2 Do you understand?
3 THE WITNESS:
Yes.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Okay, fine.
5 MS. CHAN:
Your Honor, perhaps the witness 6
would like to see the transcript to see what he actually 7
said.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Okay, fine.
9 Starting here, but it's lengthy.
You went on for-a 10 few pages.
11 (Indicating.)
12 MR. MILLER:
Your Honor, which page are you O
13 at?
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
I'm referring the witness to 15 the questions and answers starting on 5925.
16 MR. GUILD:
Is there an extra copy of the 17 transcript I might look on, Judge?
18 MS. CH AN :
Here.
19 (Indicating.)
20 MR. GUILD:
Thank you.
21 THE WITNESS:
I think I pretty much said it.
22 Like I had stated yesterday, although I had -- I 23 have to add that nobody had actually ever said that to 24 me.
I'm just going on my own personal opinion.
(])
25 It was just a phrase I used to describe the type of Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 1
5979 O
l 1
attitude that I felt they had.
2 JUDGE COLE:
But that response is also 3
contained in the transcript immediately following your 4
-- your answer on 5926; right?
I 5
JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Okay.
I just want to make 6-sure that --
1 THE WITNESS:
Yes.
I was reading what I was 7
1 8
saying there, what I said yesterday, i
9 JUDGE GROSSPEN:
Okay.
1 10 If that's a complete answer, if those are complete t
11 answers that you gave yesterday, that's fine.
12 THF WITNESS:
To me, yeah, because the I()
13 management never did say, you know, "Just do what we j
14 hand you, and don't worry about anything else."
They 15 never actually said anything to me like that.
1 16 It was just an opinion that I felt from their 17 attitudes.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Okay.
That's fine..
19 Now, Mr. Guild will begin his examination.
20 MR. GUILD:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
21 CROSS EXAMINATION 22 BY MR. GUILD:
23 Q
Mr. Peterson, on this same point, I believe you've 24 previously testified that on occasion you and other.
(}
25 inspectors,-to your knowledge, brought concerns to i
(
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
.(312) 232-0262 7
5980 1
Comstock management about various things that you 2
encountered in the course of your work.
3 One example I think you've given is your 4
observation of poor past inspection and documentation 5
practices; the large number of welds on a single report, 6
for example.
7 You raised concerns about that subject to 8
management, did you not?
9 A
Yes, I did.
4 10 Q
All right.
11 And I think you stated that in part the answer you 12 got back f rom your management was that you shouldn't be 13 concerned about those kinds of things because they had, 14 in fact, passed audits in the past; they had gotten past 15 audits; correct?
16 A
Correct, which was kind of hard to argue against, that 17 they passed CECO QA audits and they passed NRC audits.
18 So in a way, when they argued that point, it kind 19 of made you feel like, well, "Who am I to say this now?"
20 0
Mr. Saklak, among others, made that point to you, did he 21 not?
22 A
The main point Saklak made was, "We'll catch it during 23 walkdown."
24 That phrase came up quite often.
(}
25 Q
That's the second point.
I want to address that as Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Ueneva, Illinois eulse (312) 232-0262
_ ~ _ _
5981 O
I well.
2 But did management generally -- perhaps not Mr.
3 Saklak specifically, but others in management state to 4
you that these concerns that you and others raised were 5
concerns that had, in effect, not been raised by the 6
NRC, by CECO or by Comstock in their auditing of the 7
company?
8 A
Correct.
9 Q
All right.
10 And for that reason, among others, you shouldn't be 11 worried about it; if it passed their audits, why should 12 you be concerned?
O 13 A
Correct.
14 0
All right.
15 And then in addition, Mr. Saklak specifically --
16 and I stated that Mr. Saklak -- I gather Mr. Saklak was 17 not unique in saying that these problems would be caught 18 in walkdown?
19 A
That was a common phrase used by -- in fact, I heard it 20 so much I told them, "Well, we're-going to have a 21 five-year walkdown, I guess."
22 O
Now, what is "walkdown" that you're referring to?
23 A
It's basically a reinspection of pretty much everything i
24 that's out in the plant, all the hangers, all the --
({}
25 walk down all the conduit, make sure they're properly Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5982
^
()
1 secured, make sure junction boxes are properly secured, 2
that sort of thing.
3 0
This is a walkdown prior to final turnover of the T
4 systems to the client?
5 A
Yes.
6 0
A walkdown is not a replication of the entire previous 7
inspection process, is it?
I 8
A Well, no, I shouldn't say that.
To my knowledge, it's 9
not 100 percent reinspection.
10 0
And you don't do a complete, say, visual weld inspection 11 of all the welds on these -- all of the components 12 during this walkdown inspection, do you?
O 13 A
Exactly what goes on there I'm not -- I.really can't 14 answer that.
15 0
Have you worked in the walkdown inspection --
16 A
Not in an actual walkdown before turnaround, no.
17 0
But whatever the specifics of that walkdown are or will 18 be at Comstock at Braidwood, management made common 19 reference to the walkdown as a device that would catch 20 whatever problems you were bringing to their attention?
21 A
Yes.
22 0
Mr. Saklak specifically made reference to walkdown when 23 you -- I think you described earlier showing him -- that 24 you held up a sheaf of the old inspection documentation
(}
25 from the vault and said you were. troubled by these past Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, lilinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5983 O
1 practices -- he said, in effect, " Don' t worry about it.
2 It will get caught in walkdown"?
3 A
Yes.
4 Q
I believe in the course of your examination yesterday, 5
you identified the fact that you observed large numbers 6
of welds documented on single inspection reports, 7
checklists, associated with more than one inspector who 8
had perf ormed visual weld inspection in the earlier days 9
of the project; right?
10 A
Yes.
11 0
I think you mentioned Mr. DeWald as one of those 12 inspectors; correct?
13 A
Yes.
14 Q
And wasn't Rick Martin also one of those inspectors?
15 You know Mr. Martin?
16 A
Yes, I know who you're talking about.
17 Offhand I can't really say.
I believe I did -- I 18 can say I probably did see some of those reports with 19 his name on them.
j 20 Q
Do you recall saying previously that you saw Mr.
21 Martin's reports, Mr. DeWald's reports and Mr. Mike 22 Kast's reports?
23 You identified those three former weld inspectors 24 who did weld inspection in the early days of the
(])
25 project?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l
5984 O
1 A
Well, I can' t really point them out.
2 I remember Irv DeWald because of the fact that he 3
was manager at the time, and that's why it stuck in my 4
head.
5 As far as other inspectors, while I was working in 6
other projects, we had gone through, you know, thousands 7
and thousands of reports and seen many, many different 8
names; so it's hard for me to pick out of my head now a 9
year later as to exactly what names I did see on what 10 reports.
11 Q
All right.
12 Do you recall stating previously -- I believe in O
13 your deposition -- that in the course of doing work in 14 the field on old' inspections, you encountered -- or 15 perhaps on new configuration inspections -- you 16 encountered Mr. Martin's work quite f requently?
17 A
Yes, I did.
18 0
All right.
19 And you recall that you saw -- that you could 20 identify it ac Mr. Martin's work because his stamp was 21 on the welds?
22 A
Correct.
23 Q
All right.
24 And I understand that's because a weld inspector
(}
25 uses a unique hammer to impress his unique identifying Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois culas (312) 232-0262
5985 1
mark or number on the work that he has just inspected?
2 A
Correct.
3 0
And you saw Mr. Martin's quite commonly?
4 A
Yes.
5 0
I believe I recall you saying in your deposition that it 6
was amazing how much work in the field reflected Mr.
7 Martin's inspection, in terms of the volume of 8
inspection work associated with his stamp; correct?
9 A
Yes.
10 0
Does that refresh your recall now that Mr. Martin was 11 indeed one of the inspectors who did early inspection --
12 weld inspection work at the time Mr. DeWald and perhaps O
13 Mr. Kast was also working?
14 A
To my knowledge, to the best of my knowledge, he was 15 doing work at the same time.
That statement wasn't 16 based on what I had seen in the paperwork.
17 0
All right.
18 A
It was merely based on what I had seen out in the plant.
19 0
Based on seeing the stamps?
20 A
Right.
21 0
All right.
22 And Mr. Martin, of course, is still an inspector at 23 Comstock; you' re aware of that, aren't you?
24 A
Yes.
(}
25 0
He's no longer a weld inspector, but he performs other Sonntag Reporting Service,, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois oulae (312) 232-0262
5986
}
1 Level II duties; correct?
2 A
I have no idea.
I no longer work under Comstock.
3 0
When you left Comstock, Mr. Martin was still there?
4 A
Yes.
5 0
And performing other QC duties, to your knowledge?
6 A
I don't know what he was doing.
7 0
Fine.
8 You had an opportunity to -- why don't you explain 9
to me, if you could, briefly, what were the circuits in 10 which you encountered Mr. Martin's stamp, his weld 11 inspection work in the field?
12 A
g-Just merely by going out into the plant and doing my own
())
13 inspections.
14 Upon a lot of the inspection work we were doing on 15 the cable pan weld project, I was able to see a lot of 16 his stamps out in the plant on various components.
17 0
All right.
18 Did you see them on cable pan hanger welds?
19 A
(No response.)
20 0
What sort of components?
21 A
Of f hand I can ' t say.
22 I believe I saw them on conduit hanger welds and 23 cable pan hanger welds.
24 As f ar as cable pan hanger welds, I -- offhand I
(]}
25 can't say.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois eviae (312) 232-0262
5987 O
1 Q
I may have missed you there.
2 You saw them on cable pan welds?
3 A
Yes.
4 Q
But you're not sure about cable pan hanger welds?
5 A
Not positive, no.
6 Q
But you do recall on conduit welds?
7 A
Yes.
8 0
Conduit hangers, I should say.
9 A
Yes.
10 0
were you at any time called to reinspect Mr. Martin's 11 work?
12 A
There was, while I was there at the beginning of my O
13 employment with Comstock, a Rick Martin reinspection 14 program going on.
15 0
Is that what the common reference was to it?
16 A
To the best of my knowledge.
I wasn' t involved in that.
17 Q
You say the Rick Martin -
"a Rick Martin reinspection 18 program."
19 Was that the common title of the program referred 20 to by the inspectors?
21 A
Yes.
22 O
was that the title that management used for the program?
23 A
I have no idea.
24 0
And what was the nature of that program, if you know?
(}
25 A
I believe they had to do a certain percentage of Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva,-Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5988
()
1 reinspection of his work.
2 0
That is, weld inspection?
3 A
Yes.
4 0
All right.
5 Do you know whether that was a unique program for 6
Mr. Martin or whether that was a part of the Quality 7
Control Inspector reinspection program at Comstock?
8 A
To the best of my knowledge, I believe it was just 9
specifically for Rick Martin.
10 0
Are you aware of there being a program that's referred
~
11 to as the Quality control Inspcctor reinspection 12 program?
.g 13 A
Yes.
14 0
Okay.
15 Am I understanding correctly that generally looks 16 at early inspection work by -- looks at the work of 17 early inspectors during the first 90 days of their 18 inspection activity on-site on a sampling basis?
19 A
I believe so, yes.
20 0
Okay.
21 Mr. Martin would fall within the scope of that 22 program; correct?
23 A
I would only have to assume that he did, but the 24 inspection that I'm talking about is a separate deal
(}
25 f rom that.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois euise (312) 232-0262
5989
()
1 0
Separate?
2 A
Yes.
3 0
Okay, all righ t.
4 And you personally were not a part of the Rick 5
Martin reinspection program?
6 A
I don't believe I was, no.
7 0
All right.
8 Did you understand, either f rom others or on the 9
basis of your own personal observation, that there were 10 instances involving Mr. Martin's prior inspection work 11 where it was determined that welds that were, in fact, g~
evidencing rejectable conditions, rejectable 12 V
13 indications, pursuant to the program's requirements at 14 the time Mr. Martin perf ormed his inspections, were 15 nonetheless accepted by Mr. Martin?
16 A
Well, that's a -- see, the thing about what you're 17 saying is -- it's a statement I really don' t know if I 18 care to answer because of the fact that a weld 19 inspection -- you know, one guy could look at a weld and 20 say, "This is acceptable."
21 It could be a borderline case, and somebody could 22 come along and say, "Well, no.
It's rejectable."
23 I'm sure I've done weld inspections that possibly 24 somebody else could look at and say possibly, "I don't
(}
25 feel this is acceptable," and they might feel it's a l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5990 0
1 borderline case and reject it.
2 0
You're reluctant to substitute your professional 3
judgment for Mr. Martin's?
4 A
Yes.
5 0
Are you aware that a conclusion was reached by others --
6 by management, by this reinspection program -- if it did 7
reach this conclusion -- that Mr. Martin had indeed 8
accepted questionable work?
9 A
The percentage of what he had accepted and what was 10 later rejected under the reinspection program -- I have 11 no idea what that was at all.
12 0
Yes.
gs.
\\-)
13 A
If it had been a high percentage, I would only have to 14 assume that they would have went ahead and reinspected 15 more of his work.
16 0
All right.
17 You don't know that for a fact?
18 A
Correct.
19 0
Miss Kezelis -- I take it back.
20 Mr. Hef ter took your deposition on March 4,1986.
21 At Transcript 22 he asked you the following question:
22 "O
Are you aware of any instance in which 23 any pressure was ever brought on any 24 Comstock QC Inspector to sacrifice
()
25 quality for production or cost I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262 l
5991 t')
NJ l
considerations?
2 "A
Now that I've started to think back on 3
all this, the main instance I can think 4
of in that case, and I'd like to state 5
clearly that I'm talking hearsay, would 6
be the instance of Rick Martin.
7 "Q
What do you know about Rick Martin?
8 "A
From what I've been told he was 9
originally one of the first welding 10 inspectors they had.
At one time, he was 11 the only welding inspector they had.
12 There is a whole story there. "
(,)
13 Then you start to relate it.
14 Do you recall giving that answer --
15 A
Yes.
16 0
-- so far?
17 Now I'm at Transcript 23:
18 "There is a situation where I 19 honestly believe that their main goal was 20 to get him to go out and accept as much 21 work as he could as quickly as he could.
22 It was simply a case of being 23 undermanned.
And I think, in some cases 24
-- this is not meant as any personal
(}
25 reflection towards Rick" --
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 5992 (2) 1 You mean Mr. Martin there?
j 2
A Yes.
j 3
0 It continues:
4
"-- but I think in certain cases, 5
undermanned and undertrained.
~
6 "Q
What do you know about the situation with 7
Rick Martin that leads you to believe i:
8 that he was ever pressured to sacrifice
)
9 quality for production or cost 4
10 considerations?
11 "A
Well, they had -- at one time -- an 12 overview project going on of welding and O
13 I know that the amount of work that he 14 did in that plant is amazing.
It's 15 almost incredible.
Almost anyplace you 16 go in that plant you can see his stamps tl 17 there, that they use for showing that he 18 inspected it and accepted it.
19 "Just f rom seeing his stamps -- I 20 worked with some overview projects and we l
21 came across his stamp quite often, not 22 just in that but in other areas, also.
23 So it's - " interrupted.
24 "O
So you know that Mr. Martin was doing a
,()
25 lot of work?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 o
5993
(s-)
l 1
"A Yes.-
2 "O
What is it that leads you to say that he 3
was pressured to sacrifice quality for 4
production or cost considerations?
5 "A
Well, I hate to go outright and say 6
quality, maybe mostly as a cost 7
consideration, to get him to keep up to 8
the craft and not to get too far behind.
9 I'm certain they didn't want him to go 10 too far behind, because of the fact they 11 would get pressure from the NRC."
4 12 Then there's a question.
I'm going to skip it O
13 because it's a long one.
It's at Page 24.
14 You continue, Line 18:
15 "A
I would never say he actually did" --
16 sacrifice quality.
17 "I don't think that he ever did sacrifice 18 quality.
I just think the underlining 19 tone" -
" underlining tone was there that 20 when you give a person the amount of work 21 they gave him -- as f ar as what I could 22 tell f rom _what he told me now -- that i
23 somebody that wants" --
24 MR. MILLER:
Mr. Guild, you didn't read that
()
25 correctly.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5994 1
MS. KEZELIS:
And you've made a few such 2
changes in the transcript.
3 MR. GUILD:
The transcript will reflect --
4 the deposition transcript will reflect the testimony of 5
the witness.
I apologize if I --
6 MS. KEZELIS:
Let me interpose an additional 7
objection, and that is as to --
8 JUDGE GROSSFaN:
Please talk to the Board and 9
not to Mr. Guild.
j 10 MS. KEZELIS:
I'm not sure what Mr. Guild is 11 doing with all this.
12 It certainly doesn't appear at this point to be O
13 impeachment, because there has been no question 14 presented to the witness that would constitute 15 thereaf ter impeachment f rom the deposition.
16 If it's ref reshing recollection, then perhaps Mr.
17 Guild ought to let the witness take.a look at the 18 document in particular, because he's not reading it 19 entirely accurately.
i 20 MR. GUILD:
I'm reading it the best I can, 1
21 Judge, and I don't mean to misstate it.
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Mr. Guild, reading that does 23 not constitute evidence; and so when we come to the 24 point in which it's offered in some way, either by the
(]}
25 witness affirming those statements or saying he's Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5995
(
l refreshed and he can give his statements now -- when we 2
get to that point, then we'll make a ruling.
3 But right now Mr. Guild is entitled to read it to 4
him, and he had asked him some preliminary questions --
5 some questions on there in which there wasn't a complete 6
response.
7 MS. KEZELIS:
I don't believe, your Honor, 8
that anything in the record today will reflect any 9
questioning f rom Mr. Guild to the witness regarding 10 pressure to any Comstock QC Inspector to sacrifice 11 quality for production or cost considerations.
12 MR. GUILD:
Mr. Chairman, we've been --
> O 13 MS. KEZELIS:
That's what the deposition is 14 dealing with.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
This is all intertwined with 16 the questions about Mr. Martin.
17 We overrule the objection, and Mr. Guild can 18 continue reading that.
Then he will use it as 19 appropriate or we'll have some ruling to the contrary.
20 MR. GUILD:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
21 BY MR. GUILD:
22 0
I'm going to go back and read the question that I j
23 skipped just so we'll have it complete without dispute 24
-- I'd be happy to let you examine your answers, too --
(])
25 so all the room can hear what was asked and answered.
1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5996 O
1 I'm reading it publishing the document, Mr. Peterson.
2 Page 24 of the transcript, the question at Line 11 3
-- this is the one I skipped by Mr. Hefter, now:
4 "O
I'm trying to determine what you based 5
your statement on before that Rick Martin 6
was subjected to pressure to sacrifice 7
quality for production or cost 8
considerations.
So far you've told me 9
that you know Rick Martin did a lot of.
10 work in the plant.
Do you know any other 11 facts that would support the statement 12 that he was pressured, at some time, to O
13 sacrifice quality for production or cost 14 considerations?"
15 Now, again, Mr. Peterson, your answer, Line 18:
16 "A
I would never say that he actually did.
17 I don't think he ever did sacrifice 18 quality.
I just think the underlining 19 tone was there that when you-give a
.20 person the amount of work that they gave 21 him -- as far as what I could tell from 22 what he" -
"f rom what was told to me now 23
-- that somebody that wants to do a good 24 job and keep in the good graces with the
({}.
25 company would obviously work as hard as Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois culae (312) 232-0262
5997 O
1 they could or, in some cases, run as hard 2
as they could.
3 "And I'm not saying that Rick, 4
himself, sacrificed quality because of 5
that.
I guess my main worry is that 6
possibly quality could suffer because of 7
that -- because of that kind of attitude 8
by management to hurry up and get it 9
done.
There is the chance" -
"that 10 chance that quality can suff er.
11 "I'm certainly not saying quality did 12 suffer."
O 13 Now, let me give you an opportunity -- I believe 14 that was a long, long quotation; but beginning at Page 15 22, if you'd like to take an opportunity, Mr. Peterson, 16 to examine that series of questions and answers, please 17 do so.
18 A
I pretty much remember this as being f airly accurate as 19 far as what I said.
20 0
All right.
21 Now, if I asked you today the same questions that 22 Mr. Hef ter asked you at the time that I just read, 23 Transcript 22 and following pages, would your answers 24 today be the same?
(J~T 25 A
Yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5998
()
1 MS. KEZELIS:
Your Honor, once again, the 2
manner in which Mr. Guild read the deposition transcript 3
was not entirely accurate.
He did make some changes in 4
the words.
It may have been inadvertent but, 5
nevertheless, was not accurate.
6 Now the witness is testifying that that would be 7
the way in which the witness was answering the 8
questions.
9 Secondly, it would make much more sense for Mr.
10 Guild to ask those questions and determine what Mr.
11 Peterson's answers are today.
He didn't do that.
i 12 Thirdly, I have problems with the possibility that O
13 Mr. Guild may be using what he just read in the 14 deposition transcript as findings of fact, when those 15 questions were not physically put to Mr. Peterson to 16 determine what his testimony would be today.
17 If he's using this as a shorthand way of 18 designating deposition testimony for purposes of the 19 record in this proceeding, then that changes the rules 20 significantly.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Well, my recollection is 22 that Mr. Guild asked some questions about Mr. Martin, 23 and the witness was not fully responsive to the 24 questions.
Mr. Guild read him the deposition and asked
({}
25 him whether those answers were accurate.
He said yes.
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illi~nci s - 60134 (312) 232-0262
- - - ~
5999
(
1 If you are at -- Mr. Peterson, if you were asked 2
the same questions today, would your answers be the same 3
today?
4 THE WITNESS:
Yes.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
If there's a question 'about 6
misreading of the questions by Mr. Guild, the witness i
7 has read the -- looked at the transcript, and he's 8
vouching for his answers in the transcript being 9
accurate with regard to the questions asked there.
10 You can certainly point out to us -- I don't think 11 we want to have Mr. Guild read it again.
12 MS. KEZELIS:
No, I don' t think so.
(
13 (Laughter.)
14 MR. GUILD:
I'm a terrible reader, Judge.
15 I would be more than happy to have bound into the 16 transcript at this point the accurate transcript -- not 17 my reading of it -- of the deposition of Mr. Peterson at 18 the points referred to so that there -- we can eliminate 19 any dispute about the accuracy of my -- my 20 sight-reading.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Why don' t we do that?
22 Tell us where you started, and I will give the 23 Reporter the transcript of the deposition and she can 24 then have this -- these pages bound into the current
,]}
(
25 transcript.
I (Document follows.)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
s 22 1
A Offhand, no.
s 2
Q Are you aware of any pressure brought upon any 3
Comstock QC inspector to approve deficient work?
4 A
No.
5 Q
Are you aware of any instance in which pressure was 6
trought on any Comstock QC inspector to sacrifice quality for 7
production and cost considerations, or to knowingly violate 8
established quality procedures?
9 A
No.
10 MR. WRIGHT:
No to which one?
I think there were 11 two questions.
12 MR. HEFTER:
I'll break them up, if you like.
[
13 BY MR. HEFTER:
4 14 Q
Are you aware of any instance in which any pressure i
15 was ever brought on any Comstock QC inspector to sacrifice i
16 quality for production or cost considerations?
17 A
Now thnt I've started to think back on all this, the 18 main instance I could think of in that case, and I'd like to 19 state clearly that I'm talking hearsay, would be the instance 20 of Rick Martin.
21 Q
What do you know about Rick Martin?
22 A
From what I've been told he was originally one of I
f
'r-w' r=
'~
23 1
the first welding inspectors they had.
At one time, he was (xs-) 2 the only welding inspector they had.
There is a whole story 3
there.
4 There is a situation there where I honestly believe 5
that their main goal was to get him to go out and accept as 6
much work as he could as quickly as he could.
It was simply a 7
case of being undermanned.
And I think, in some cases -- this 8
is not meant as any personal reflection towards Rick -- but I 9
think in certain cases, undermanned and undertrained.
10 Q
What do you know about the situation with Rick 11 Martin that leads you to believe that he was ever pressured to 12 sacrifice quality for production or cost considerations?
{
13 A
Well, they had -- at one time -- an overview project 14 going on of welding and I know that the amount of work that he i
15 did in that plant is amazing.
It's almost incredible.
Almost 16 anyplace you go in that plant you can see his stamps there, 17 that they use for showing that he inspected it and accepted 18 it.
~-
19 Just from seeing his stamps -- I worked with some i
20 overview projects and we come across his stamp quite often, 21 not just in that but in other areas also.
So it's --
22 Q
so you know that Rick Martin was doing a lot of l
())
24 1
work?
4 c
2 A
Yes.
4 3
Q What is it that leads you to say that he was 4
. pressured to sacrifice quality for production or cost 5
considerations?
1 6
A Well, I hate to go outright and say quality, maybe i
l 7
nostly as a cost consideration, to get him to keep up to the 8
craft and not get too far behind.
I'm sure they didn't want j
j 9
him to get too far behind, because of the fact they would get 10 pressure from the NRC.
11 Q
I'm trying to determine what you based your j
12 statement on before that Rick Martin was subjected to pressure
(
13 to sacrifice quality for production or cost considerations.
14 So far you've told me that you know Rick Martin did a lot of I
15 work in the plant.
Do you know any other facts that would 16 support the statement that he was pressured, at some time, to j
17 sacrifice quality for production or cost considerations?
18 A
I would never say that he actually did.
I don't l
19 think that he ever did sacrifice quality.
I just think the i
i l
20 underlining tone was there that when you give a person the 21 amount of work that they gave him -- as far as what I could 22 tell from what was told to me now -- that somebody that wants O.
4
)
i i
)
-l
25 1
to do a good job and keep in the good graces with the company O2 would obviously work as hard as they could or, in some cases, 3
run as hard as they could.
4 And I'm not saying that Rick, himself, sacrificed 5
quality because of that.
I guess my main worry is that 6
possibly quality could suffer because of that -- because of 7
that kind of attitude by management to hurry up and get it 8
done.
There is that chance that quality can suffer.
9 I'm certainly not saying quality did suffer.
10 Q
How do you know that there was the attitude by 11 management that Martin should hurry up and get it done?
Did 12 you talk to someone from management about that?
( ),
13 A
No, never management.
14 Q
Who did you talk to?
15 A
Just different inspectors who had been in the 16 overview project.
Different inspectors who came in shortly 17 after Rick did.
It was just more or less.the word was out 18 that he had more work than he could handle and was more or 19 less told to get the work done.
20 Q
So really all that you know about the Martin 21 situation is what you've heard from rumor around the. plant, is 22 that right?
0;
6000 1
MR. GUILD:
Yes, sir.
2 It begins at Transcript 22.
The first question 3
read by Mr. Hefter begins at Line 14.
4 I read extending through Page 25 of the transcript, 5
the answer ending on Line 9.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
And that is the transcript 7
of Mr. Peterson taken -- the deposition taken on March 8
4, 1986.
9 MS. KEZELIS:
What were the last lines, 10 again, please, the specific lines?
11 MR. GUILD:
25, Line 9.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Line 9.
C:)
13 MS. KEZELIS:
And on what page did you begin, 14 Mr. Guild?
15 MR. GUILD:
22.
16 MS. KEZELIS:
Line 14?
17 MR. GUILD:
Yes.
18 May I continue, Mr. Chai rman?
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Yes, you may proceed, Mr..
20 Guild.
21 BY MR. GUILD:
22 Q
Mr. Peterson, on the basis of your understanding and 23 observation of this past weld inspection report -- past 24 weld inspection work, Mr. Martin's among others, did you
(}
25 not form the opinion that "it was obvious that. not much i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illino1 M tT134 (312) 232-0262
6001 0
1 training had gone into some of the inspectors" who did 2
work at that time?
3 A
I believe I did make that statement, yes.
4 0
And that such -- and that it was not much -- it was not 5
obvious that -- strike that.
Excuse me.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Excuse me.
7 Is that your opinion?
8 Had you formed that opinion, sir?
9 THE WITNESS:
(No response.)
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
You just said now you made 11 that statement.
12 THE WITNESS:
Yes.
O 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
I just want to make sure 14 that this is or was your opinion at the time you made 15 the statement.
16 TH E WITN ESS :
Yes, it was my opinion at the 17 time I made the statement.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Fine.
19 BY MR. GUILD:
20 0
And that training or lack of training was evidence 0 in 21 the respect that inspectors -- it was evidenced, quote 22
-- this is your deposition again, Page 26, Line 21 --
4 23 "as f ar as checking to see that the hangers and other 24 components they were checking were installed exactly per
(}
25 detail.
And by 'per detail' I mean according to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6002 0
1 current, or then current, drawings and specifications"?
2 Is that the sense in which you reached the 3
conclusion that there was an obvious lack of training of 4
those old inspectors?
5 A
I'd hate to use the word " obvious."
It's just that I 6
had seen some instances where I felt that, according to 7
current details --
8 Q
Then-current details?
9 A
Well, the current details at the time I had seen the 10 items.
I 11
-- that they did not exactly match the details.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Mr. Guild, would you please 13 ask him questions now without referring to the 14 deposition --
15 MR. GUILD:
Fine.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
-- unless you run into 17 trouble with the answers?
18 MR. GUILD:
Fine, Judge.
c.
19 BY MR. GUILD:
20 Q
Your conclusion, on the basis of observation, Mr.
21 Peterson, was that it was not clear that the work that 22 had been accepted by these old we2d inspectors was 23 indeed work that had been properly installed pec design?
24 A
Could you repeat that questicn ag.ain, please?
)
j j
()
25 0
Sure.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
i Geneva, 111incts 60134 i
(312) 232-0262
6003 O
1 The conclusion you reached regarding the work of 2
these old inspectors -- Mr. Martin among others, 3
including Mr. DeWald -- was that it was not clear that 4
the work that they had accepted was indeed installed per 5
design?
6 A
With the few of them that I had ran into and looked at, 7
yes.
8 0
Now, you expressed the opinion, at the time of your 9
deposition and again' today, that that in part was 10 accounted f or by the f act that welding inspection was 11 undermanned and undertrained at the time they were doing 12 this work, in your opinion; correct?
()
13 A
It's just my opinion based on assumptions f rom what I
~
14 have heard of the way things were run in the past.
t 15 0
Well, you heard, among other things, that for a time Mr.
16 Martin was the only weld inspector?
17 A
Correct.
18 0
And were you also aware that Mr. Martin had been -
19 trained, perhaps undertrained, by Mr. Irv DeWald?
20 A
Correct.
21 Q
Now, did you have occasion to -- did you know Mr. Martin 22 at the time you worked for Comstock and later BESTCO?
l 23 A
Yes.
24 0
Okay.
- (}
25 And you knew, of course, Mr. Saklak; you had Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- - - - ~.,-- -
6004 1
previously said so?
2 A
Yes.
3 Q
Did you have occasion at all to ever observe Mr. Saklak 4
and Mr. Martin interact?
5 A
No.
6 Q
Did you ever understand, if not through observation, 7
that Mr. Saklak had been belligerent or abusive towards 8
Mr. Martin?
9 A
From what I had seen of Saklak's behavior, that was just 10 normal behavior for him.
j 11 As far as exact individuals that he used that 12 against, that type of behavior with, I can' t pinpoint O
13 anybody at this moment.
14 0
Okay.
15 So you don' t know of any specifics or you aren't 16 aware of any specifics involving Mr. Martin and Mr.
17 Saklak?
18 A
Nothing that I can think of at the moment.
19 Q
But you were aware generally that Mr. Saklak behaved in 20 an abusive and belligerent manner to all inspectors, 21 generally?
22 A
There was an occasion that he did once in a while behave 23 like that, yee.
24 0
Okay.
(}
25 You expressed the opinion that Mr. Martin evidenced Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i l
6005
(
1
-- Mr. Martin's weld inspection activity evidenced an 2
example of someone who was subject to pressure.
3 Do you know whether or not Mr. Martin's weld 4
inspection practices also evidenced harassment and 5
intimidation by Mr. Saklak?
6 A
I have no way of knowing that.
7 0
counsel for Applicant showed you a copy of a portion of 8
Intervenors' Exhibit 18.
This was the Yanketis 9
1,166-weld inspection checklist and associated 10 documents.
11 First attached to that checklist, Mr. Peterson, 12 there is a December 14,
'84, handwritten letter of two
'. ()
13 pages, from an inspector named Dan Asmussen, to Ken 14 Worthington, his supervisor at the time.
15 (Indicating.)
16 Were you aware of such a complaint by Mr. Asmussen 17 and others to management at about the time it was made 18 in December of '84?
19 A
Offhand I can't recall right now.
20 0
All right.
21 Did you become aware of such a complaint later on 22 before you were asked about it yesterday?
23 THE WITNESS:
Could I read this?
24 MR. GUILD:
Please do.
(])
25 TH E WITN ESS :
Maybe that will ref resh my Sonntag Reporting ~ Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6006 4
O 1
memory.
2 MR. GUILD:
Please do.
Take your time.
3 A
I wasn' t aware of this letter previously, to my 4
knowledge, although af ter reading it, I must say that I 5
wholeheartedly agree with it.
6 BY MR. GUILD:
7 0
All right.
8 Mr. Asmussen's complaint in December,
'84, 9
reflects, in essence, the same complaint that you made 10 to Mr. Saklak, does it not, regarding the adequacy of 11 past inspection practices?
12 A
Well, I believe his complaint is due to the fact that he O
13 found it hard to believe that so many welds could have 14 been inspected and -- and none of them rejected on the 15 review project, okay.
16 I wasn't saying that at all.
I was merely saying 17 that I felt like -- felt.that the type of paperwork, the 18 old forms, were not -- would not give you an accurate 19 description of what was done during the inspection.
4 20 0
If you take Mr. Asmussen's letter, as I did, to read 21 that the attached Yanketis report is merely an example, 22 "Mr.
Asmussen's complaint" taken to mean that he was 23 concerned about past inspection work and inspection 24 documentation at least in the respect of questioning the
(}
25 documentation at the time, his complaint was very much Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 111iE01s e v.La s (312) 232-0262
6007 1
like your own, was it not?
2 A
I don't know if I can agree with that.
3 His -- like I stated, his -- I think his feelings 4
are that during review, he had found that some of the 5
hangers that were accepted before by the Comstock 6
personnel and accepted by PTL personnel -- that he now 7
come to find many discrepancies among them at a later 8
date.
9 0
Okay.
10 A
So he is actually stating that the -- more or less that 11 the inspections being done were not an accurate 12 reflection.
O 13 My -- my statements before were just simply the 14 fact that I did not feel that these forms were very good 15 for --
16 (Indicating.)
17 0
You're holding up the PTL cover sheet.
You have one 18 document among the group exhibit in your hand.
19 Is that the PTL cover sheet you're referring to?
20 A
Yes.
21 0
The transmittal from Comstock to PTL?
22 A
Yes.
23 0
Let me break it down, th en.
24 You stated generally that you, having read Mr.
(}
25 Asmussen's complaint, agree wholeheartedly; correct?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinoi s 60134 (312) 232-0262
6008 O
1 A
I would say that I --
2 MS. KEZELIS:
Objection.
I don't think 3
that's precisely what he said.
4 BY MR. GUILD:
5 Q
Do you agree?
6 I don't mean to mischaracterize --
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Excuse me.
8 I heard him say that, "whol eh ea r tedly. "
9 MS. KEZELIS:
I may have misunderstood the 10 question.
11 I do believe the witness testified that he couldn't 12 agree entirely with Mr. Guild's interpretation of the
>O 13 Asmussen letter.
14 BY MR. GUILD:
15 Q
Do you agree with the Asmussen letter, having read it?
16 A
Based on previous experiences, I -- I would have no 17 choice but to agree with this.
18 0
Okay.
19 Breaking it down, Mr. Asmussen uses as an example 20 the Yanketis checklist, and I think he -- he states that 21 he finds the zero percent reject rate, the 100 percent 22 acceptance rate, reflected on the 1,166 welds as 23 unreasonable, an unreasonably high level of 24 acceptability.
()
25 Do you agree with that?
i i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
i I
Geneva, lilinois 00174 (312) 232-0262
i 6009
()
1 A
Are you saying:
Would I come to the same conclusion 2
that Dan did?
3 0
Yes.
4 Would you, having looked at the paper, agree that 5
looking at 1,166 welds all found acceptable on a single 6
checklist -- that reflects an unreasonably high 7
acceptance rate, given your knowledge and experience?
8 A
I would say that would be rare, yes.
9 0
Okay.
10 A
1 would be very pleased myself if I had done, over the 11 course of time,1,100 welds and they had zero rejection 12 rate; and I'm sure that my own reinspection probably O
13 wouldn't even reflect that.
14 Q
Have you ever, to your knowledge, inspected continuously 15 as many as 1,000 welds and found not a single rejectable 16 indication?
17 A
Oh, no.
18 Q
Have you ever inspected 100 welds and found not a single 19 rejectable indication?
20 A
Yes.
21 Q
All right.
22 Can you identify what the nature of that type of 23 work was?
24 A
As far as that, I would have to say -- now that I'm
( 25 working for Newberg, I guess I'd have to separate what Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 6010 1 you were saying. 2 If I was looking at the older welds that were being 3 done, the chances are -- would be fairly slim that I 4 would be able to do 100 without finding a rej ect. 5 0 Older Comstock welds? 6 A Yes. 7 If I'm looking at newer current work being done, it 8 would be very easy to find 100 acceptable welds. 9 0 Okay. 10 " Current work" of whose? 11 A Of the craf t electricians, welders. 12 O At Newberg? O 13 A Newberg and Comstock. 14 0 All right. 15 Mr. Asmussen's concerns appeared to have been 16 heightened because the work that Mr. Yanketis inspected 17 was subject to a PTL overview, and that found 18 indications that apparently Mr. Asmussen did not; 19 correct? 20 A I may have misunderstood you. 21 0 Okay. Perhaps I'm.not being clear. 22 There's a PTL overview -- 23 A Right. 24 0 -- inspection reflected in that package of documents, is (]) 25 there not? Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinors 60lt4 (312) 232-0262
6011 0 1 A Yes. I believe in his letter here, he's stating that it 2 had a zero rejection rate. 3 0 Mr. Asmussen -- Mr. Yanketis found a zero reject rate; 4 he signs off 1,166 welds; right? 5 A Bight. 6 0 Look at the last page of that exhibit. 7 Don't you see there the results of a PTL 8 overinspection that reflects on one or more of the 9 hangers, among the 1,166 welds, a number of rejectable 10 indications? 11 Look at the last page of the document, I believe. 12 A The last page is a Comstock Form 19. O 13 0 Okay. 14 Is that document an overinspection? 15 A It would be a -- probably a reinspection of Hanger 23. 16 0 One of the hangers among the hangers that were included 17 in Mr. Yanketis' original inspection? 18 A I can' t answer that. 19 0 I think you'll find -- if you look at that hanger number 20 and look at the PTL cover sheet, you'll find that. 21 A We have various hangers out there that have the same 22 number. 23 Q So you just can't tell, because the hangers don't have 24 unique numbers? () 25 A Right. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6012 Q) 1 0 Okay, all right, sir. 2 The complaint is made that -- by Mr. Asmussen abcut 3 poor past documentation practices and the unreasonably 4 high acceptance rate in the Yanketis report. He sends 5 this complaint to Mr. Worthington, and it gets up the 6 chain of command to Mr. DeWald. 7 If you'll look at the second page of the exhibit, 8 you'll see a Read and Reply -- 9 MS. KEZELIS: Third page, Mr. Guild. 10 MR. GUILD: Third page. Sorry. 11 BY MR. GUILD: 12 0 -- a Read and Reply Memo f rom Worthington to DeWald, O 13 with DeWald's reply at the bottom. 14 (Indicating.) 15 Do you see that? 16 A Yes. 17 0 All right. 18 Now, take a moment and read Mr. DeWald's reply to 19 Mr. Worthington, which appears to represent Mr. DeWald's 20 disposition of Mr. Asmussen's concerns. 21 A Okay. I 22 Q Does Mr. DeWald say there that the problems, if any, 23 will get caught, in essence? 24 A I believe Mr. DeWald is stating that any problems with (]) 25 the people doing the Phase 2 reinspection program that Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Ueneva, 1111nois cu144 (312) 232-0262
6013 1 occur -- that they should be reinspected. 2 I believe Ken Worthington was trying to tell the 3 inspector that any problems that they have that they 4 come across -- that one of the many reinspection 5 programs will handle those -- 6 0 All right. 7 A -- and should bring up any actual concerns that -- that 8 he himself might have, Dan Asmussen. 9 0 All right. 10 Worthington says, "The inspector reinspection 11 review" -- 12 A " Program." O 13 Q Excuse me. 14 "will catch some of these problems"; right? 15 A "BCAP and the cable pan walkdown." 16 Q "BCAP and the cable pan walkdown." 17 He goes on to state, "Each of these programs will 18 check the validity of all" -- and it's his emphasis, 19 underlined "all" - "all inspections performed on this 20 site." 21 Now, isn't that answer to Mr. Asmussen consistent 22 with your understanding that Comstock was essentially 23 telling inspectors, including you, to work with blinders 24 on? (} 25 A Yes, I guess you could say that. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
6014 w 1 Q Now, at the time you made your complaint to Mr. Saklak 2 about the quality of past documentation practices and he 3 made the remarks about audits not having questioned 4 these practices and walkdown catching it ultimately, 5 were you aware then that Mr. DeWald had himself 6 performed work as a weld inspector where he had 7 documented large numbers of welds on single inspection 8 reports? 9 A I'm not sure if at that time I had looked at one of 10 those reports. i 11 All I can say is that during my employment with 12 Comstock, I had had an occasion to see a report with O 13 many welds on it done by Irv DeWald in a day. 14 As f ar as the actual time, I -- I have no idea. 15 0 Well, would you agree that it -became -- it was common 16 knowledge or common belief among the inspectors f rom Day 17 1 when you got on the site that Mr. DeWald had done 18 1,000 welds on a single inspection report? 19 Had you heard that? 20 A I can't say "from Day 1." 21 I know it was sometime af ter my employment with 22 them. I 23 Q Early on in your employment? l 24 A (No response.) (} 25 Q Perhaps you hadn't seen the documents yourself. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geny a, il1iTioTM0174 (312) 232-0262 i
t a 6015 mU 1 A I can' t really recall. We had worked in so many 2 different types of programs, it's hard to sort out after 3 a year and a half later. ~.4 0 Mr. Asmussen, in addition to expressing his concerns, 5 recommends -- and I quote f rom the last page of his 6 letter - "We recognize our responsibility to bring our 7 concerns to management's attention. We also feel that 8 this situation deserves immediate management 9 inv estigati on. " 10 Does it surprise you, Mr. Peterson, in light of the 11 fact that Mr. DeWald's own work as a weld inspector is 12 implicated in these very concerns, past inspection O 13 practices, that Mr. DeWald, in fact, took no action to 14 immediately investigate Mr. Asmussen's concerns? 15 MS. KEZELIS: Objection to the question. 16 A I don' t know if I agree with that. 17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I don't know what relevance 18 this has nor do I think the witness can give any 19 probative evidence here. 20 You seem to be arguing your brief here. 21 MR. GUILD: If that's the Chair's view, 22 that's fine. I believe the witness was -- 23 JUDGE GEOSSMAN: And including the prior 24 questions -- or question on _whether something written (} 25 here is consistent with the witness' statement -- I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
y 6016 () j 1 mean, if you think it is, we'll hear about it when you l 2 propose your findings. 3 But I don' t see any probative value to having the 4 witness say the document is consistent with what he said 4 5 before. 6 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chai rman, it seems to me, 7 first, that the Board has elicited consistently -- and I i 8 think all the parties have -- opinion evidence from 1 i 9 those who have factual bases for expressing opinions. 10 These inspectors obviously are being asked to express ) 11 opinions. 1 12 I think that one of the key observations that Mr.
- (:)
13 Peterson made is the observation the Chairman raised i l 14 this morning, and that is what is meant by this 15 characterization of "Comstock asking us to work with 16 blinders on." 17 It's my position that I should be able to elicit i 18 from this witness an elaboration of. what his opinion is 19 on that subject. 20 That's the point of this line of questioning: to j 21 flesh out what his opinion is and to ask whether or not, 22 in his opinion, certain facts that are also in this i 23 record evidencing concerns and complaints by other 1 24 inspectors are consistent with his general opinion that 3 () 25 Comstock management asked its inspectors to work with I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illincts 60174 i (312) 232-0262
t 6017 1 blinders on. 2 I don' t think that's argumentative, Mr. Chairman. 3 I do think it's of value. 4 If the Chairman disagrees with that view, then I'll 5 certainly move on. 6 It seems to me that it's appropriate for a witness 7 who expresses general conclusions and opinion evidence 8 about Comstock management to be asked to evaluate facts 9 for consistency with that opinion. 10 MS. KEZELIS: Your Honor -- 11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Guild -- I'm sorry. 12 MS. KEZELIS: In addition, with any legal O 13 arguments which Mr. Guild is attempting to nake in the 14 form of phrasing his questions, I'd like the record to 15 reflect that Mr. Guild has removed the document from the 16 witness' ta bl e. The witness doesn't have an opportunity 17 to review again precisely what Mr. DeWald's instructions 18 were. i 19 I don't think that that's an appropriate way to 20 examine the witness about a document that Mr. Guild 21 mischaracterizes, f 22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, Miss Kezelis, to that i 23 extent, you can certainly ask Mr. Guild to show the 24 document again. You don't have to object. () 25 MS. KEZELIS: I request that he do so. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, illiTIcis b0134 (312) 232-0262
6018 CE) 1 That's a condition to the manner in which Mr. Guild 2 himself is asking his questions. 1 3 MR. GUILD: Before we go any further on the 4 record, let me give Mr. Peterscn back the document so 5 counsel will not f eel tempted again to suggest that the 6 witness doesn' t have a full opportunity to review 7 whatever I submit as a basis for a question. 8 (Indicating.) 9 He certainly has a f ree opportunity -- and has had 10 -- to review the document. 11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. 12 Mr. Guild is saying now that he is trying to pin O 13 the witness down on his meaning of the phrase " working i 14 with blinders on," and that is the purpose of this line 15 of questioning. 16 Do I understand that correctly, Mr. Guild? 17 MR. GUILD: Correct, Mr. Chairman. 18 JUDGE GROSSFEN: Is there a pending question 19 now? 20 I believe there was one that was objected to, and i 21 I'd like to hear the question. i 22 But, Miss Kezelis, I don' t want to cut you off. 23 Do you have anything further? 3 24 MS. KEZELIS: The only additional point I'd (]) 25 like to make, Judge Grossman, is that the witness has l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6019 (). i I already testified he hasn' t seen this document prior to 2 yesterday's examination. 3 His testimony -- or his statement to the NRC 4 regarding working with blinders on was made in March of 5 1985. i 6 He didn't have any knowledge of this in March of 7 1985, and I think the only thing that's probative f rom a 4 8 factual witness is as to what his opinion was and the 9 basis for that opinion during that time period, March of 10 1985. 11 JUDGE GROSSMAN : Well, I don't think that j 12 it's pertinent as to whether he saw the document before. I 13 I don't think Mr. Guild ~is suggesting that the document 14 led him to make that statement to the NRC. 15 Mr. Guild is using this to suggest certain meanings 16 to his phrase " working with blinders on" and, to an j 17 extent, is leading him. The question is whether it's l 18 appropriate to lead him. 19 For one, if the witness has answered fully and 20 unambiguously to what he meant by that phrase, I would 21 think that perhaps it is inappropriate. 22 But I don't believe that my -- at least, my reading 23 of what he said doesn't lead me to that conclusion. 24 N ow, how far he can be led is a subjective opinion, 1 () 25 and I'd like to hear that question again so we know t Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. 3 Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6020 1 () 1 whether it's appropriate for the purpose that I think is 2 proper. 3 MS. KEZELIS: I understand, Judge. 4 But I believe that the witness has also testified 5 he wasn't aware of the substance reported in this 6 document; without regard to the document itself, he 4 7 wasn' t aware of Mr. Asmussen's concerns in March of 8
- ., either, and wasn' t aware of them until yesterday.
i 9 JUDGE GROSSPSN : Right, okay. That's 10 understood, and I include in the f act that not only did 11 not the document lead him to say that to the NRC, but 12 nor did the substance contained in the document lead him O 13 to say that. 14 But we' re only concerncd now with probing his 15 meaning of the phrase " working with blinders on," and 16 that's the only reason' why the question would be proper, i 17 if it is. 18 I know the Reporter is going to have a hard time 19 finding that question by now, but I believe there is a 20 pending question, and we'd like to have it reread. 21 (The record was thereupon read by the 22 Reporter.) 23 THE WITNESS: Can I say something now? 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: You continue with your () 25 objection? Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, strinoi r 60lT4 (312) 232-0262 )
6021 a 1 MS. KEZELIS: Yes, Judge Grossman. 2 JUDGE GROSSMAN : That's your choice. 3 I'll sustain the objection. 4 MR. GUILD: All right, sir. 5 BY MR. GUILD: 6 0 Let us turn to another subject, Mr. Peterson, and that 7 is the subject of your witnessing the incident between 8 Mr. Saklak and Mike Mustered. 9 Do you recall that incident? 10 A Yes. 11 Q All right. 12 Now, I believe your observation of the incident was ) 13 to the effect that after the exchange went back and i i 14 forth between Mr. Mustered and Mr. Saklak for several 15 rounds, Mr. Saklak finally got very angry and started 16 shaking his finger at Mr. Mustered and gesticulating and 17 repeating over and over again words to the effect, " Sign j 18 off the ICR"? 19 A " Sign it off, sign it off." 20 0 " Sign it off." That's it. 21 And that's about as plain a reflection of an order 22 by a supervisor to an inspector as you can get, isn't 23 it? 24 A Yes. (} 25 0 You observed and have testified that Mr. Mustered on 1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
6022 0 1 that occasion, of course, did not do as Mr. Saklak 2 directed and ordered him to do? 3 A Yes. 4 0 And as you said, he basically said, "Well, Rick, if you 5 want to sign off, that's your responsibility as a 6 supervisor." Saklak said, "You know I'm not certified." 7 Mustered said, "I rest my case," and walked away? 8 A Correct. 9 0 All right. 10 N ow, I take it f rom your testimony that you 11 interpreted what you observed f rom Mr. Saklak as 12 improper conduct by a supervisor? O 13 A Definitely. 14 0 All right. 15 And in what respects, in your opinion, was it 16 improper conduct? 17 A Well, the fact he was acting totally outside the program 18 as a whole. 19 If you find -- you know, I'm not sure exactly what 20 discrepancy Mike had found. 21 0 Sure. 22 A Just going on my own experiences, if I had found a 23 discrepancy where something in the plant didn't match i 24 the detail drawings and wasn' t acceptable by procedure, (]) 25 if I came across something like that and I wrote it up Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, 11tinoi r 60174 I (312) 232-0262 ~, _
i 6023 () 1 and Engineering was going to disposition it, use as is - i 2 or cut an ECN on it -- 3 Q Engineering Change Notice? 4 A Yes. 5 -- then it's obvious that. they have to do that j 6 before you can sign off the ICR. i t 7 You can't sign it off on an inspections document 8 just based on verbal -- verbal words, you know, just 9 because somebody said, "I had.a meeting, and we' re going l 10 to take care of it. Don' t worry about it. " 11 There's just no way you can sign off a document i 12 because of that. You have to have something in writing. r l() i 13 0 So it's your opinion, then, that Mr. Saklak's order to i j 14 Mr. Mustered reprosented a violation of the Comstock QA 15 program and procedures, signing off the ICR without the i 16 appropriate Engineering disposition or whatever other i l 17 disposition was called for in writing? 4 18 A That is my opinion, yes. j 19 0 All right, sir. j 20 And in addition, of course,.you observed that Mr. j 21 Saklak was very loud and threatening and -- I think l 22 you've used the word generally to describe Mr. Saklak -- { 23 " belligerent" toward Mr. Mustered? f i l 24 A Yes. () 25 Q All right. l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, I111nois 60134 j (312) 232-0262
mm_ 6024 b u 1 And do you believe that was also -- that conduct by 2 Mr. Saklak was also improper behavior by a supervisor 3 because of the character of his interaction; the 4 belligerency, for example? 5 A Do I believe that that is wrong to behave like that as a 6 supervisor? 7 0 Yes. 4 8 A Is that what you' re saying? 9 Q Yes. 10 A Yes. 11 Q Those are two things that I'm characterizing as distinct 12 improprieties: one, asking the man to do something O 13 inconsistent with the program and procedures; and, two, 14 doing it in a belligerent and abusive way. 4 15 Do those two aspects reflect your opinion on the 16 impropriety of Mr. Saklak's conduct that you observed? 17 A I believe I already answered that. 18 0 They do; is that right? 19 A Yes. 20 0 What I'm going for is: Is there anything else about the 21 conduct that, in your opinion, was improper, or do those 22 two facto cover it? e 23 A I believe it's already been pretty well covered. j 24 0 Fine. (]) 25 Ilad you had an opportunity to work around Mr. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, 1111nci's 60174 (312) 232-0262
6025 1 Mustered before that occasion? 2 A Very little before that. 3 Afterwards I have. 4 0 Okay. i 5 Af terwards in the capacity as both weld inspectors? 6 A Yes. 7 At one time I was working underneath Mike. Mike 8 was my Lead at one time. 9 Q Is Mr. Mustered a capable inspector, in your opinion? 10 A I believe he is, yes. 11 Q And is he -- is he someone who, as he did in this 12 particular instance, resists -- sticks by his guns? O 13 I guess that's the point I want to make. 14 Does he do that consistently, in your opinion -- 15 Mr. Mustered? 16 A As far as I know, yes. 17 If what you're saying is could he be easily 18 intimidated, I would say no, he cannot be easily 19 intimidated. 5 20 0 Right. That's the point, yes. 21 Do you know whether or not other inspectors, all 22 other inspectors at Comstock -- say, for example, Rick 23 Martin, just as an example -- are equally resistant, as l 24 compared to Mr. Mustered, to intimidation? () 25 A I really hate to make personality comparisons like that. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6026 l
- O 1
Q Yes. 2 A You know, you work with so many different people and so j 3 many different personalities, it's hard to sort them all i 4
- out, i
5 I don' t think I can really give an accurate l 6 description. 7 Is it possible that there are other inspectors, aside 8 f rom Mr. Martin, who might be less resistant to i 9 intimidation than Mr. Mustered, in your opinion? 10 A It's possible. 11 I think it's just a f act in life: Anytime you work i I 12 with any group of people, you' re going to have some that 4 13 are a little less resistant to intimidation than others. l t I 14 0 You thought it was wrong enough -- what you observed of ] 15 Mr. Saklak's behavior on that occasion with Mr. Mustered 16 -- to make a point of saying to Mr. Mustered that you } 17 thought so and that you would stick by him if he wanted 18 to do something about it? 19 A Correct. 1 20 0 All right. 21 The others who were present -- some of the others 22 -- or perhaps one of the others you said appeared to 1 l 23 take it less seriously; is that fair? 24 A Yes. I() 25 Q Can you identify again for the record who the others Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Ill'ino17--60114 i I (312) 232-0262
-~ 6027 I were that you recall being present at the time? 2 A 1 belie /e I did that yesterday. 3 0 Yes. I apologize. 4 I could look it up in the transcript, bat do you 5 remember offhand the three gentlemen? 6 Mr. Lechner -- is he one? 7 A Yes. 8 0 And Mr. Tuite? 9 A Mr. Bob Tuite and David Soberski. 10 O Thank you. 11 What positions do those gentlemen hold with 12 Comstock -- or did they told at that time? O 13 A At that time they were Leads. 14 Q They were all three Leadc? 15 A Yes. 16 JUDGE GEOSSMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Peterson. 17 You seem very reluctant to testify today. 18 Is there anything disturbing you? 19 THE WITNESS: No. I --- 20 JUDGE GF.0SSNAN: It seems that there's a lot 21 of hesitation before each answer. 22 I do want you to think about your answers; but if 23 there's anything inhibiting you from testifying, I'd 24 like to hear about it. (]} 25 TH E WITN ESS : No, not at all. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneya, Illinois ~ 5(TI'J r' - ~~~~ ~ ~ (312) 232-0262
A 6028 t' ? j l JUDGE GROSSMAN: Oh, okay. 2 THE WITNESS:' I just want to be careful that, I 3 you know -- 4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. We want you to be 5 careful. I must have misunderstood, then. 6 THE WITNESS: Because especially since 7 they're reading statements back, I just want to make i j 8 sure that what I say is accurate. -1 ) 9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's fine. j J 10 BY MR. GUILD: l 11 Q Do you know whether any of those three gentlemen who. 1 12 also witnessed the incident between Mr. Saklak and Mr. j 13 Mustered took any action to complain about Saklak's j 14 conduct? j 15 A I have no idea. l 16 Q In your opinion, Mr. Peterson, was.Saklak's conduct -- 17 and by that I mean his temper, his belligerence toward r 18 inspectors, his conduct at least as-you witnessed it in j 19 the one instance, ordering an inspector to violate a 1 j 20 procedure -- was Saklak's conduct known generally to -- 4 21 among inspectors on the. site? e j 22 A I believe so, yes. 1 1 23 0 Was Saklak's conduct in that regard known, in your i 24 opinion, to Comstock management, other management? j () 25 A I believe so, yes. l i ) Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. j Geneva, Illinois 60134 q (312) 232-0262 i______..________._________._._,_.__._..--.___
6029 1 0 You think Mr. DeWald knew about Saklak's conduct? 2 A I believe so, yes. 3 Q Do you-know whether or not -- well, strike that. 4 Do you believe that Commonwealth Edison' Company was 5 aware of Mr. Saklak's conduct? 6 A I don't really feel I can answer that. 7 Q You just don't know? 8 A Right. 9 Q Do you believe that other Comstock management was aware 10 of Saklak's behavior, aside from Mr. DeWald? 11 Let me be specific. 12 Mr. Seltmann, for example?- 13 A As far as Mr. Seltmann, I have no idea. 14 0 Okay. 15 How-about Mr. Seese? Do you know whether he.was-16 aware of Saklak's conduct? 17 A Being in his position as assistant manager at the time, 18 I would have to assume that he did know of the behavior. 19 Q Okay, all right. 20 How about Comstock off-site management; say, Mr. 21 Marino, Mr. Paserba? Do you believe.they were aware of 22 Saklak's conduct? 23 A I -- I can't answer that. I don't know. 24 0 You just don't know? () 25 A Right. sonntag Reporting service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312)1232-0262
6030 rr() 1 Q Okay. 2 Let's turn to the instance that you described to 3 the NRC, the occasion where you were working on this 4 cable -- make sure i characterize it right -- cable pan 5 weld reinspection program; is that right? 6 A Yes. 7 0 Who else worked with you on that program; can you 8 recall? 9 A I was working under David Soberski, who was my Lead. 10 There were various different people under that. 11 Q Who else was doing visual inspection of welds as part of p 12 that program, if you know? G 13 A For a period of time, there was Herschel Stout, Bob 14 Patey. I'm not positive, but I think Mike Blake. 15 O How many all together, do you recall, inspectors? 16 A I would guess at various times six, seven different 17 people were in and out of that project. 18 Q All right. 19 A Oh, and at a later time, cable pan welds, Dan Asmussen, 20 too. 21 Q Dan Asmussen? 22 A Yes. 23 Q How about at the time that you had your meeting that 24 Messrs. Worthington -- I'm sorry. I forget the other () 25 gentleman's name. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6031 ~ (v) 1 A John Walters. 2 0 -- and Mr. Walters criticized you about your level of 3 production: 4 Can you recall who else was doing the same type of 5 work you were doing, the visual inspection of welds. 6 A I couldn't really give an accurate description of that 7 because, you know, people were getting transferred in 8 and out of the different areas, s o -- 9 Q All right. 1G Are you aware of there being any document -- a 11 roster, a memo, a document that would refresh your ('] 12 recollection as to who the other weld inspectors were at / 13 the time that you were doing the weld inspection and 14 were called in by Worthington and John -- I keep 15 forgetting his name -- John Walters? 16 Excuse me. 17 A Boy, to the best of my knowledge, I don't remember ever 18 writing a memo or there being a memo about that 19 incident. 20 Q Okay. 21 No, no, not about the incident. 22 What I'm trying to say is: 23 If there's some other piece of paper or document 24 that would refresh your recollection about who all ('s (_) 25 participated, what other inspectors were part of that sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6032 (3 %) 1 program at that time. 2 Can you think of any such document that would 3 refresh your recollection? 4 A Not offhand, no. 5 Q Did your Lead, Mr. Soberski, prepare the status reports 6 that you referred to that would show what you -- strike 7 that. 8 Did your Lead, Mr. Soberski, collect the status 9 reports, the individual daily status reports, from the 10 inspectors, including yourself, who were working with 11 you on that program? T 12 A I believe at one time he did, and then they split it up b 13 where John Walters was heading strictly the welding 14 area -- 15 0 Okay. 16 A -- and then John Walters took in the -- the status 17 reports. 18 Q Whoever was the Lead at the time did, in fact, collect 19 the status reports from each of the inspectors on a 20 daily basis? 21 A Yes. That was their job. 22 0 Were you aware of whether at the time they used this 23 transmittal form to summarize the work by all of the 24 inspectors under their supervision? () 25 A (No response. ) Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6033 7'T V 1 Q Do you know what I'm speaking of? 2 A I believe so, yes. 3 Q Such a document, then, would reflect -- documents, 4 plural, would reflect who did the welding work along 5 with you at the time, wouldn't they? 6 A Well, we each had a page by ourselves. 7 Q Right. 8 A They weren't -- I don't really see what you're getting 9 at. 10 Q There are daily status reports that would reflect who 11 did the weld inspection work under this program at the 12 same time you did, aren't there? 13 A Oh, yes. 14 0 Okay. 15 Now, as I recall -- let me see if I can get the 16 facts straight here -- you had been doing reinspection 17 work of these cable pan welds -- 18 A Yes. 19 0 -- correct? 20 What's the nature of the welds that you were 21 reinspecting? What's a typical detail that you would be 22 looking at? 23 A It's not very complicated. A typical detail is what 24 they call a 9A Detail. It's a two-inch weld, one on A(_) 25 each side of the pan, connecting the cable pan to the 4 Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6034 (~% %.) I horizontal member of the hanger. 2 Q Where is the horizontal member with respect to the pan? 3 A Underneath the pan. 4 0 And the welds are on the bottom of the pan? 5 A Yes, on the bottom of the pan connecting the -- the 6 member to the pan. 7 0 All right. 8 And what type of horizontal member are we talking 9 about? 10 A It would be either Unistrut or tube steel, 11 Q What kind of welds are we talking about? (~% 12 A Eighth-inch fillet welds, s) m 13 Q Are they fillet or are they flare bevel groove welds? 14 A Well, if they were connected to tube steel, they would 15 be flare bevel. If they were on the Unistrut, they 16 would be fillet. 17 Q Were you looking at both types? 18 A Yes. 19 Q They had been erected and final visual inspected, had 20 they not? 21 A Most of them had been. 22 The reason with the program that_ Dave soberski had 23 taken over was to ensure traceability to all the cable 24 pan welds out in the plant. () 25 The whole thing was pretty much a mess when Dave l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6035 O 1 had taken it over. 2 What they wanted was a complete list of all cable 3 pan welds by cable pan node marker -- 4 Q N-O-D-E? 5 A
- Yes, N-O-D-E.
6 -- and they wanted to be able to know exactly which 7 ones had been accepted and which ones had been rejected. 8 That was the whole -- so what we were doing was going 9 through the old paperwork, deciding what we felt was 10 accurate paperwork or traceable work to what was out in i 11 the field, accepting'that as quality paperwork, and what 12 we didn't feel was accurate, we would put on a list for {} 13 reinspection. 14 Q Now, were these hanger welds or just.the cable pan 15 ~ welds? 16 A Cable pan welds. 17 Q All right. 18 The hanger welds would be separate? 19 A That was a separate program, yes. 20 Q Now, so the cable pans were, in fact, already installed 21 and final accepted -- visual accepted; correct? 22 A Many of them that we had looked at, yes. 23 Q All right. 24 And to that extent, they had been visually () 25 inspected, presumably in an unpainted condition, and Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6036 1 then painted after final visual? 2 A Yes. 3 Q All right. 4 And when you then had to go back out and inspect a 5 painted weld, the fact that they were painted 6 necessitated the removal of the paint that you've 7 testified about? 8 A Yes. 9 And they set up a crew of people to remove paint 10 from the welds, 11 0 These were craftsmen? /~ 12 A Yes. U} 13 Q And you've previously testified about the problems you 14 encountered in ensuring that the paint was completely 15 removed to permit you to perform an accurate and 16 effective visual inspection? 17 A Yes. 18 Q All right. 19 And as I understood, you found paint in the toe of 20 the welds -- 21 A Yes. 22 0 -- principally? 23 That's a crack or a crevice perhaps that runs along 24 one edge of the weld between the weld metal and the m i ' _) 25 component on which the weld is deposited? ( Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6037 7 \\._) 1 A Well, the toe of the weld is right at the edge of the 2 base metal and the edge of the weld. 3 Q All right. 4 If the weld is -- from a cross section is a 5 triangle, it would be the point of the triangle on 6 either leg? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And that's a point where the weld -- where the paint 9 could collect because there might be a crevice there? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Okay. (~ '] 12 You had to inspect what I'm going to call a (s 13 crevice? 14 A Yes. 15 The area that we're speaking of is an area that you 16 typically find undercut in, and in order to inspect it 17 for undercut as far as depth, all the paint had to be 18 removed. 19 0 Okay, all right. 20 Now, with that background, you did this work for a 21 period of time before Worthington and -- I've got a 22 mental block here -- John Walters called you in; right? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Can you recall how long you had been doing this /~T ( ) 25 particular program before they called you in the first Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6038 /^)i (- 1 time? 2 A Offhand, I'd have to say a month to two months. 3 Q So quite some time? 4 A I'm not -- probably, yes. 5 Q So they had an opportunity to review your production 6 through the daily status reports over a period of time 7 before they called you in the first time? 8 A Yes. It wasn't like I had just, you know, started doing 9 that for two or three days and then they called me in. 10 Q Fine. 11 Now, as I understand it, you say -- you stated to 12 Miss Kezelis that you had brought to their attention on 13 several occasions the fact that you were finding 14 inadequate paint removal when you went to the field? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And had you brought that to their attention before they 17 brought you in to criticize you about your production? 18 A I believe so. 19 Q Okay. 20 And what did they do or say when you brought it to 21 their attention on those occasions before they called 22 you in about your production? 23 A Before they called me in -- 24 Q Right. O 25 A -- o r -- Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6039 r~C 1 Q Before they called you in, you said to them, in effect, 2 "I'm finding problems with paint on the welds. I'm 3 going to inspect." 4 And what did they say or do? 5 A To the best of my knowledge, I would have to say that 6 they probably told me that they would look into it and, 7 you know, ask the people that were removing the paint to 8 try and get some more of the paint out of the toe of the 9 weld. 10 Q And you mentioned this to them several times before they 11 called you in on the occasion that you've testified to? <"s 12 A Once, maybe twice. I'm not sure. N 13 0 All right. They called you in and said what you've 14 described, and you, I understood, responded by telling 15 them again one more time that you were encountering 16 welds in a painted condition, and the time it took you 17 to clean the welds that had not been previously cleaned 18 effectively accounted for your level of production? 19 A Yes. 20 Q All right. 21 And, again, what was their response at that 22 particular time to your statements about the paint 23 condition you found? 24 A I believe John Walters had stated that he didn't feel f')s t,_ that there was that much of a problem with the paint 25 Sonntao Reportino Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6040 O 1 remaining on the welds and something to the extent that 2 he didn't think it would take that long to clean off 3 what little bit of paint might have been left on the 4 welds. 5 0 All right. 6 Now, do you recall.that subsequent to that meeting, i I 7 you, in fact, changed your inspection documentation 8 practices and started recording on your daily status 9 report the welds that you found to be in a painted 10 condition and passing them over and not cleaning them 11 yourself? 12 A Yes. 13 Q All right. 14 And do you recall that on one occasion, a 15 particular day, you documented between 15 and 20 welds 16 that you encountered that were in a painted condition on 17 one of your status reports? 18 A The actual number of welds would be greater as far as -- b 19 Q Hangers, then. 20 A Yeah, yes. 21 Q So there would be a hanger -- each' inspection is shown-22 on your status report as a component? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And the component may have multiple welds? () 25 A Yes. 1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 .( 312) 232-0262
6041 1 Q All right. It's the welds that were painted, not the 2 component -- 3 A Right. 4 0 -- or the welds that were in question? 5 So there may have been more than 1 weld painted, 6 but you show between 15 and 20 components on a daily 7 status report that you found painted welds on? 8 A Yes. 9 0 All right. 10 And on that same status report, you documented that 11 you had performed, in addition to those 15 or 20 3 12 inspections where you couldn't complete the inspection, (V 13 approximately 5 inspections that you actually did 14 complete? 15 A There were approximately five I did complete. 16 I didn't do any inspection at all on the ones that 17 were painted. 18 Q Right. 19 What I mean to say is: 20 You did the research, you got your paperwork 21 together, you went to the field, you did that much of an 22 inspection, and then you found the welds in a painted 23 condition? 24 A Well, as far as that program, there was very little (A) 25 research because they had a complete list already. Sonntag Reporting Service _, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 i
6042 O 1 Q Fine. 2 You did whatever preliminary work you had to do to 3 get to the field and see the painted condition? 4 A Yes. 5 Q I don't mean to suggest that you completed your 6 inspection. 7 So you had a status report, then, that showed 15 to 8 20 welds in a painted condition -- or 15 to 20' 9 components -- excuse me -- with welds in a painted 10 condition, and then 5 components that you actually 11 completed inspections on. 12 Do you recall now that.Walters and/or Worthington-13 called you in another time and discussed that particular 14 report with you? 15 A Yes, they did. 16 Q Okay. 17 And that was a meeting after the. meeting in which 18 they chewed you out about your production rate, the 19 first meeting you've testified to? 20 A I don't really want to say they chewed me out-the-first 21 time. 22 Q My words. I'm sorry. 3 23 A They merely pointed out to me they couldn't warrant 24 overtime for the amount of work I was doing. () 25 0 There was'then a second meeting; right? 1 1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6043 ( l A There was a second meeting, yes. 2 Q And that was when they discussed this particular status 3 report that I've just described? 4 A The one with the 15 to 20 components? 5 Q Yes. 6 A Yes. 7 Q They did chew you out at that time, didn't they? 8 A Well, yeah; I guess you could say that, yeah. 9 0 Okay. 10 A They were upset. 11 0 Why were they upset? What did they say that led you to 3 12 conclude that they were upset? {^J ~ 13 A I can't remember the words exactly offhand. 14 I just know that from the tone of their voices, 15 they were upset; mo're or less said, you know, "What is 16 this? What are you trying to do here now? What is 17 this?" 18 I just explained to them that I wasn't going to 19 look at any more welds with paint on them. 20 Q Okay. 21 A I should clarify that. I wasn't going to spend any more 22 time cleaning welds. 23 Q Right. 24 You didn't look at the welds? (')s 25 A I was just going to pass them up; but I was at least q_ i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
P 6044 + i I 1 going to put down to show that I had gone to that area i i 2 and show that they were painted so-they could send the 3 l'ist back out to have them redone as far as paint taken i i 4 off. 5 I also believe at that time I was. working on i 6 another project at the same time, the riser collar i 7 project. I think I had that listed on the status at the i j 8 same time. l 9 So I explained to them that if they were still i { 10 worried about the amount of work I was doing, that they i 11 should either take me off the riser collar project to i i 12 work full-time in-the cable pan or take me off the cable 13 pan project to work full-time on the riser project. 14 Q You asked to be transferred, in effect? 15 A' Well, I believe they were in charge of both projects.. 16 I'm not -- no. I'm sorry. I-don't think they had the-i 17 riser collar _ project. 18 I just asked them'that I do one or the other, ] 19 because it was obvious they -- they wanted more of the 20 cable pan welds done. l 21 Q You used the word " transfer" in your. deposition when you l ] 22 were describing these events. 23 Is that what you meant by transfer: Take you off 24 one or the other? () 25 A Yeah, yes. [ Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (_ 312) 232-0262 4 J
6045 v 1 Q Okay. 2 And did they do that? 3 A Shortly after that, I was -- I'm not sure exactly what 4 the period of time was. I think it was just a week or 5 two -- I was transferred to the in-process inspection 6 area, which -- 7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Which -- 8 A (Continuing.) -- which was by my choice. 9 They asked me -- I had a meeting with Tony simile 10 and -- he had called me in and stated that Ken 11 Worthington wasn't exactly pleased with my work and 12 asked if I would like to go into the in-process area. I 13 told him that that would make me very happy; that it was 14 an area that I wanted to get into anyway. 15 So then they transferred me to that other area. 16 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman? 17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me. 18 I don't think we got an answer to what the nature 19 of the complaint was in that second meeting in which the 20 witness indicated that he was basically chewed out. 21 MR. GUILD: All right. 22 BOARD EXAMINATION 23 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 24 Q Could you tell us what the nature of their complaint was () 25 at that meeting? Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6046 %-) 1 A Of John Walters' and Ken Worthington's complaint? 2 O Yes. 3 0 It was rather confusing to me because I -- you know, I 4 got fairly upset at the time, too, because I told them, 5 "Well, first you complain because I'm not getting the 6 numbers." So then I decided that I would not bother 7 spending the time to take the paint off the welds, and 8 then they were complaining because I was writing down 9 welds that -- that I felt still had paint on them. 10 It was like I felt I was in a no-win situation, 11 kind of a Catch-22, where on one hand they say -- /~ 12 they're upset because I'm not getting work done, and U' 13 then they're upset because I documented that I had gone 14 out and looked at all these welds that did have paint on 15 them. 16 So I can't -- I don't really know how to answer 17 that. I don't know what was going on in their heads 18 because I couldn't figure it out, either. 19 Q Well, did it have anything to do with numbers, also, in 20 that second meeting, their complaint? 21 MS. KEZELIS: Judge Grossman, productivity? 22 THE WITNESS: As far as the amount of 23 inspections that I had actually done? 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I don't know. I'm asking 25 you. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6047 8) 1 I don't think you've -- 2, A See, I don't know, either. They called me in and shoved 3 the sheet in front of my face and said, "What is this? 4 What are you doing here?" 5 I explained to them I thought it was 6 self-explanatory on the sheet because I had marked 7 everything clearly as welds still having paint on it. 8 There really wasn't much to the meeting, because I 9 guess I was on a different level than they were at 10 because they weren't understanding what I was trying to 11 give -- to say to them. 12 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 13 Q So you really don't have any understanding as to what 14 they were complaining about, then? 15 A Correct; because, to me, it was fairly clear as to what 16 I was -- what I was saying on the status sheet, and why 17 they couldn't understand the problems I was having, you 18 know, was beyond me. 19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Miss Kezelis, did you have 20 an objection to something -- 21 MS. KEZELIS: No. 22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- because I'm trying to get 23 a complete answer, and I'm not sure that it is? 24 Continue, Mr. Guild. () 25 BY MR. GUILD: Sonntaa Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6048 1-Q Mr. Peterson, you understand that they were dissatisfied 2 with the way you had completed this status report in 3 some respects? 4 A Yes. 5 0 And their dissatisfaction, in some respects, went to the 6 manner in which you had listed the welds you found in a 7 painted condition but not inspected those welds? 8 A Apparently so. 9 Q They didn't say anything explicitly to that effect, but 10 that's what you concluded? 11 A Yes. 12 Q All right. 13 Now, at that second meeting, did either Mr. Walters 14 or Mr. Worthington then state that they had been to the 15 field and observed some of-the welds, perhaps some of 16 the 15 or 20 listed on this status report, and arrived 17 at the opinion themselves that they weren't too bad or 18 in that painted a condition or words to that effect? 19 A I believe Mr. Walters did say something to that effect. 20 Q All right. 21 There wasn't that much paint on the welds that he 22 observed? 23 A Yes. 24 But I would like to state that I don't-think he was () 25 insinuating that I could go' ahead and inspect them, but Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6049 (~'i s L 1 probably insinuating that it wouldn't have taken me long 2 to clean the welds off. 3 Q Did he say what he meant -- one way or the other, what 4 he meant when he said there wasn't that much paint? ~ 5 A No, he didn't say one way or the other. 6 Q Now, just to be clear, was,it that occasion, that second 7 meeting, where Walters or Worthington stated that they 1 8 had been to the field and actually looked at some of the 9 welds that you found to be in a painted condition? 10 Did they do that also at the first meeting? 11 I think your testimony earlier was that reflecting j 12 only a single meeting. 13 Do you recall? 14 A When I testified yesterday, I had -- I hadn't even 15 thought of the second meeting. 16 Q Right. 17 A I might have even testified that he had said something 18 about looking at the welds for paint at that time -- 19 Q Yeah. 20 A -- during the first meeting. 21 Thinking back on it now, I believe he made that 22 comment on the second meeting, that he had taken the 23 list I had -- 24 Q
- Right, (m) 25 A
-- where I had stated there was painted welds and went Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6050 'd 1 out and looked at some of them. 2 0 Because it was only in that second meeting where you 3 actually had given documentation to Worthington and 4 Walters of a specific component that you said you found 5 had paint on it for them to go out and look at it? 6 A Right. Up to that time, I was taking the time to clean 7 the welds off and going on to the next inspection.. 8 Q Later, then, when you met with Mr. Simile and discussed 9 being transferred to the in-process weld inspection and 10 Simile stated that he understood that Mr. Worthington 11 was dissatisfied with your work, did you understand that (') 12 that dissatisfaction related back to the dissatisfaction 4 U 13 he expressed at the second meeting? i 14 A I'm sure it did, yes. 15 Q Did you understand, also, that that dissatisfaction 16 related to the first meeting and his expressions -- 17 his -- Worthington and Walters' concerns that you 18 weren't making enough production? 19 A I would have to assume that, yes. 20 Q Now, do you know how you got assigned work during this 21 cable pan weld reinspection program? 22 A As I had stated before, there were groups of people -- 23 and at one point I was among them -- that would go 24 through the old paperwork, decide which was traceable, o) (_ 25 which was not. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6051 7L.) 1 The ones that they felt weren't traceable, they 2 would see to it that they were reinspected. 3 Q All right. 4 I'm really thinking more mechanically. 5 When you came in at the beginning of a shift and 6 you were supposed to go out and look at particular cable 7 pan components and welds thereon, how did you get your 8 assignments? 9 A They were handed out by the Lead. 10 Q Did he give you a list of hangers to go look at -- cable 11 pans? (S 12 A They would give you a hanger number and then a cable pan U 13 node. 14 Q He gave you some reference to the specific welds that he 15 wanted you to go look at? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Okay. 18 And do you know whether or not he, your Lead, Mr. 19 Soberski, or Mr. Walters, when he was your Lead -- were 20 you the only one that was given welds that were in a 21 painted condition? Did he single you out to do welds in 22 a painted condition? 23 A Oh, I'm -- I'm sure I wasn't singled out for that, no. 24 Q As far as you know, were you just randomly given work () 25 from the universe of work that had to be done? Sonntag neporting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 6052 V 1 A Right, that's the way it's done. 2 There were times when I handed work out to guys, 3 too, and it was just more or less you'd try to get 4 everything on one drawing and give it to one guy and 5 everything on one drawing and give it to another guy. 6 Q But you weren't being singled out to look at specific 7 work that had more paint on it than anybody else's? 8 A No; not to my knowledge, no. 9 Q But I think you stated that you were singled out by your 10 supervision for your practice of taking as much time as 11 you did to clean the paint that you found on the toes of r~s 12 these welds? U 13 A (No response.) 14 Q As far as you know, you were the only one -- 15 A I don't know if I said I was singled out. I may have 16 merely taken a longer time to take the paint out of the 17 welds than, say, the other fellows that were trying to 18 clean theirs. 19 Just like anything, some guys are going to take a 20 little longer than others. 21 Q Are you aware of them bringing anybody else in from this 22 crew that you were working with on the cable pan weld 23 program and chewing them out about -- my words, not 24 yours -- and criticizing them about their production Q,m 25 rates? Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6053 1 A I know at one time Ken Worthington called a group of us 2 in for a meeting, and I -- boy, like I say, this was a 3 while ago. 4 Q Okay. 5 A The only instance I can think of would maybe have been-6 that meeting; and I believe they were talking about the-7 amount of work that was being done. 8 The way they more or less put it was, "What can we 9 do to increase the amount of work that's being done?" 10 0 That was for the whole group? 11 A Yeah. 12 At that time we all expressed a feeling that, you 13 know, "We need" -- I believe, "We need a better job of j 14 getting the welds cleaned." 15 Q What I mean to say is: e j 16 Are you aware of any of the other individuals on i i 17 the project being singled out, as you were, because i 18 their average production rates per day were lower than 19 the group's as a whole? f 20 A Not that I know of, no. 1 21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Anytime, Mr. Guild. 22 MR. GUILD: I'm almost complete, Mr. 23 Chairman. 24 BY MR. GUILD: 4 () 25 Q So you're aware that other people on the project were' t i sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6054 /~'s () 1 encountering similar conditions to you? You had heard 2 other complaints from other people about incomplete 3 paint removal? 4 A I believe so, yes. 5 Q Let's see. I'm going to take back your Mr. Asmussen 6 complaint, Intervenors' Exhibit 18, 7 (Indicating.) 8 Now, in Intervenors' Exhibit 18, Ken Worthington 9 states -- I'll be happy to share the document with you 10 again -- reading, "I explained that the inspector reinspectionprohram, BCAP and the cable pan walkdown 11 12 are all planned for the Braidwood site. Each of these 13 programs will check the validity of all inspections 14 performed on this site." 15 Now, you agree, don't you, Mr. Peterson, that 16 literally that is not a correct statement; that those 17 three programs do not, in fact, check 100 percent of all 18 the work on the site? 19 A I can't answer that. 20 Q Do you know whether or not, for example, the inspector 21 reinspection program checks 100 percent of the 22 inspectors' work? 23 A To the best of my knowledge, I believe it's just a i 24 certain percentage of the work. () 25 Q It's a sample, isn't it? Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
~. . ~ -... 6055 i 1 l l 1 A Yes. 3 2 0 -All right. i i i 3 Now, the BCAP program, it's only a.nample, isn't 4 it, as well? i 5 A That -- that I have no idea. ? 6 Q All right. 7 And the cable pan walkdown, as you've already 8 stated, as far as you know, it doesn't involve a 1 '9 complete visual reinspection of ea~ch of the welds that's 10 on those cable pans? [ i 11 A Cable pan weld walkdown or cable pan hanger walkdown? 12 O Well, let's be clear. I 13 Mr. Worthington just refers to it as a cable pan i i 14 walkdown. i i 15 Do you know whether or not any walkdown covere all I-16 of the -- reinspects all of the welds, a complete visual i 17 reinspection, 100 percent? 18 A I do not know that, no. I I 19 Q All right. 20 Do you know whether or not, within the course of 21 your work, Mr. DeWald's weld inspections of -- when he q 22 was a Level II have all been 100 percent reinspected? 23 A I have no idea. 24 Q Do you know whether or not Mr. Yanketis' weld a (). 25 inspections have all been 100 percent reinspected? Sonntaa ReDortina Service,-Ltd. ~ t j Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) ~ 232-0262 4 .-....-.,-..,.w.,y,p~,e., ..y-,,,--,w,, g.4,. ,.~.,_-.m.,pr.,,g,.,,v.99.-,-p--y--y.----.,-c.,,,%.9 r- ,,,,--e.. w-m., -,-,--,,,ye,-
( 605G O 2 1 A I have no idsa. 2 0 How about Mr. Martin's? Do you know whether Mr. 3 Martin's weld inspections have all been 100 percent 4 reinspected? 5 A I have no idea. 6 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions. 7 .I 8 Thank you. 9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. We'll take a 10 10-minute recess. 11 We have a transcript from yesterday that counsel 5 12 should review to see which parts are confidential. 13 (Indicating.) 14 (WHEREUFON, a recess was had, af ter which 15 the hearing was recumed as follows:) 16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We're back in session. 17 Miss Chan? 18 CROSS EXAMINATION 19 BY MS. CHAN: 20 Q Mr. Peterson, I'd like to draw your attention back to 21 your testimony about seeing Mr. Martin's stamps on 22 numerous welds indicating that he had inspected welds 23 throughout the plant. 24 A Okay. () 25 Q I'd like to ask you: Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6057 R.) 1 Do you know when Mr. Martin began inspections at 2 the Braidwood site? 3 A No, I do not. 4 Q Do you know if he worked a lot of overtime? 5 A I have no idea. 6 Q Do you know in which areas he was certified? 7 A Just welding, as far as I know. 8 0 I'd like to go on to another subject now. 9 You had spoken about working with blinders on, and 10 Mr. Guild went into an examination about that statement 11 that you had made. ,e - 12 I'd like to ask you about your conclusions about 13 past inspection practices. 14 You mentioned that the -- based on your inspections 15 or review of some welds in the plant, that you did not 16 believe that they were per detail or the current 17 drawings and inspections; is that correct? 18 A Correct. 19 Q In drawing that conclusion, were you basing that on 20 comparing the existing welds with current drawings and 21 using current inspection procedures? 22 A Yes. 23 Q You're aware, are you not, that the procedures are 24 revised from time to time to improve them? () 25 A Oh, yes, definitely. Sonntag Reportina Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6058 () 1 1 Q And that inspections are generally done according to the 2 . procedures that are in place at the time of the-3 inspection? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Did you have any occasion to-review the procedures that 6 might have been in effect when those. existing welds were 7 performed? 8 A No, I did not. -l 9 0 Would'this suggest that perhaps the earlier inspection 10 findings would differ if current ~ inspection procedures 11 were used to review -- to inspect them? 12 A Possibly, yes. 13 Q Are you aware that drawings and specifications also 14 change over time? 15 A Yes, I am. 16 Q So you are aware that the drawings currently in the 17 files are not necessarily the same as those in_the 18 original -- or not necessarily the.same as the 19 originals? 20 A I'm-aware of that possibility, yes. 21 Q So in your view, 'if one were:to inspect ~old welds' using-22 current drawings and current procedures, that it might 23 be something like comparing apples and oranges? 24 A There's that possibility,~yes. () 25 JUDGE COLE: Excuse me. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 s (312). 232-0262 i
1 6059 ( ~ l I'm concerned here. Could I interject a couple of 2 questions.here? 3 MS. CHAN: Surely. 4-BOARD EXAMINATION i 5 BY JUDGE COLE: ~! 6 Q In response to a question about using recent drawings 7 and comparing it with old welds, I guess my confusion is 8 I would think that the drawings that would be contained 9 for you to see would reflect what's out in the field, 10 as-built drawings, so I don't understand how, when you 11 say compare a new drawing with an old weld, it's 12 supposed to reflect what's done in the field. 1 13 Where would there be a difference? 14 A My understanding of her question was that there's a 15 possibility that the details-might have been ' revved and 16 subsequently changed in'their detail, such as length of 17 weld, size of weld or type of component to that. 18 Marb' at a later date, the newer Rev. wouldn't 19 refior-, >r that same detail, what the old detail was 20 put in at that time of the old Rev. 21 Q All right, sir. 22 So you're talking.about a similar-type 23 installation -- i 24 A Yes. ) () 25 0 -- put in later, compared to -- compared to what,-sir? -l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134-(312) 232-0262 =
6060 (~'i (,/ 1 I mean, we don't have newer drawings for an exact 2 installation that reflects -- does not reflect what's in 3 the field, do we, or do we? 4 A There are many -- items are always being revved and 5 changed, possibly maybe member sizes of a certain 6 conduit hanger. 7 Like just to give an example, maybe they're 8 changing a 4-by-3 tube steel to a 4-by-4 tube steel, 9 things like that. 10 Whereas in the old -- the old Rev., maybe a 4-by-3 11 tube steel was acceptable. However, in the new Rev., (-) they might have gone to a 4-by-4. 12 s._- 13 Q All right, sir. 14 So you're talking about the typical installation 15 details, the way they would do it today, and a drawing 16 that would reflect current-day practice were they to 17 build it today? 18 A Yes. 19 0 Well, I'm confused. 20 We're not talking about, then, as-built drawings 21 that supposedly reflect what's actually in the plant? 22 A No. 23 JUDGE COLE: All right. Thank you. 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me. () 25 I'm not sure I understand that. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
~..- -- -6061 O t 1 BOARD EXAMINATION 2 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 4 3 Q Shouldn't the current drawings -- shouldn't -- excuse 4 me. 5 .Shouldn't the welds that you see in the field i 6 conform to the current drawings? 7 A The new welds that are put in, yes. 8 The old welds that are put in that were accepted at 9 that time would reflect an acceptable condition to the 10 Rev. done at that time of the inspection. i 11 Q Are you talking about the weld procedure or the drawings 12 of the item that you're inspecting or reinspecting? i 13 A Both. 14 Q Well, just with regard to the drawings, shouldn't the 15 current welds -- shouldn't the welds reflect the i 16 current -- be reflected in.the current drawings? 17 Regardless of what the drawings were:when the welds were 1 18 installed, shouldn't the welds that are present'be 19 reflected in the current drawings? l 20 A Not necessarily, not as far as -- there are certain 21 installations they may have cut an ECN on it for just i ~ 22 that installation or made a special detail for just that 23 installation. 24 So that's why my. interpretation of what she was () 25 getting at was possibly at that time something I was l Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 { (312) 232-0262
6062 1 looking at was done under a separate ECN or done under a 2 different detail at that time. 3 Q What's an ECN now? 4 A Engineering Change Notice. 5 Q Well, wouldn't that change notice be reflected in the 6 current drawing? 7 A It should be, yes.. 8 Sometimes they issue ECN's on specific hangers. 9 Q Well, when they do tb 4t, wouldn't they bring the drawing 10 up-to-date -- or shouldn't they or'shouldn't that -- 11 A Yes, for that specific hanger they will; but you might 12 have 1,000 hangers out there of basically the same type 13 of detail. I 14 See, what I'm saying: 15 You might have an ECN cut on, say, a hanger 1 on a 16 certain drawing -- 17 Q Yes. 18 A -- to more or less accept it as it is back in, let's 19
- say,
'78. 20 I might come along in '86, which is what I think 21 she's saying, with current drawings and maybe happen to 22 look at it, think, "Well, gee, this doesn't match the 23 detail-that I'm looking at right now." However, there 24 might be a special detail just for that hanger. () 25 0 Well, that would be included in the package, wouldn't Sonntag-Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
6063 ( l it? The ECN, when you're reinspecting that hanger, 2 wouldn't that be part of the current drawing for it? 3 A Okay. Well, we're talking if I went out to inspect that 4 certain hanger? 5 Q Yes. 6 A Okay. When I had made that statement, I'm merely 7 talking about things I had seen, other than the things 8 that I was working on at the time, that I didn't feel 9 represented possibly the current criteria. 10 I'm not saying I went out to do a specific hanger 11 and it didn't meet the current design details. r-12 O Okay. ()g i 13 Well, let's talk about one that you didn't go out I 14 to inspect and you saw. 15 Wouldn't the current drawing for that other hanger 16 reflect -- or shouldn't it reflect what was out in the i 17 field, the actual weld?- 18 A In most cases, it should, yes, but not in all. 19 Q Okay. 20 In what case wouldn't it -- shouldn't'it? 21 A If there was a specific detail, more or less an as built i 22 of that hanger done at that time. 23 0 In other words, something in the hanger that didn't 24 conform to the origina1' drawing for which there~was an-() 25 ECN that said, " Accept as built"? 7 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6064 1 A Yes. 2 Q And that wouldn't become part of the package including 3 the drawing? 4 A For that specific hanger, yes, it would. 5 0 Well, then, what hanger would --- 6 A I'm merely saying if I.happan to be working next to a1 7 hanger -- say I've got two hangers that are the same 8 . type of detail, supposedly, and I happen to. notice that 9 one has a different component size than the other, that 10 there is the possibility for that other one that I'm not 11 actually inspecting that they have as built that. 12 0 I don't want to take too much time on this,.but I 13 would -- I understand your answer, then, to be -- well, 14 I don't know. I can't say what your answer is, because 15 if we're talking about the second hanger'that you are 16 not sent out in the field to inspect, I would assume 17 that the drawing for that second hanger ought to reflect 18 what is current -- what the' condition - 'or what the 19 configuration of that weld is at this current ~ time. 20 Now,.is that -- 21 A Yes. 22 0 -- not the case? 23 A That's correct. 24 Q That is the case? () 25 And I assume that you were. talking about those Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134-(312) 232-0262 .l
6065 v 1 other welds in which the current drawing did not conform 2 to what was out in the field. 3 Is that so, even though it should? 4 A Well, yes, I guess what I'm not -- not getting through 5 is that there are certain as-built hangers out there 6 that, although they might be a detail TS2, there might 7 be a certain change to that detail for that specific 8 hanger. 9 0 And what is the -- 10 A If I happened to be working on one next to it and I see 11 that doesn't -- it's obviously made to be a TS2 but it 12 doesn't exactly match the TS2 details, you know, that 13 would stick in my mind. 14 But it doesn't necessarily mean that there isn't an 15 as built on it. 16 BOARD EXAMINATION 17 BY JUDGE COLE: 18 Q And there's not necessarily anything wrong with that? 19 A Correct. 20 Q And you should have a plan someplace in the file that 21 identifies exactly the way that particular hanger is 22 built and approved? 23 A Correct. 24 Q So are you saying -- is there anything that you see that () 25 is inconsistent or wrong with having different kinds of Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6066 O N/ 1 hangers, providing they were built in accordance with 2 the plans at that time and as-built plans of those 3 hangers exist somewhere in the files? 4 A Right, I've got no problem with that. That's -- I agree 5 with what you're saying there. 6 BOARD EXAMINATION 7 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 8 Q Well, I have no problem with that, either. 9 However, I thought you were talking about hangers 10 in which the drawings, including the as-built 11 engineering change, didn't conform to what was out in 12 the field. (v-} 13 A No, no, no. 14 Q You're not referring to that? 15 A I had merely made a statement that-in my work out in the 16 plant, I had seen certain hangers out there, other than 17 the ones I was working on, that didn't seem to match the 18 details, the current details. 19 Then I was further clarifying, after her question, 20 that there's a possibility that those hangers that I had 21 looked at could have been an as-built condition. 22 0 Okay. 23 MS. CHAN: Your Honor, perhaps I can clear it 24 up. () 25 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6067 I) s-1 Q In other words, you didn't look at the drawings for 2 those second hangers; is that it? 3 A Right, right. 4 Q If you had, then the drawings should conform to the way 5 the hangers were actually built? 6 A I would hope so, yes. 7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. 8 BOARD EXAMINATION 9 BY JUDGE CALLIHAN: 10 0 Let me try to clarify what I think I've heard with a 11 simple-minded case and maybe an extreme cace. S 12 There's a weld made a number of years ago. At that L'~J 13 time it was accepted. 14 In the meantime, due to some review, that weld is 15 suspect and is part of the reinspection program. 16 Also in the meantime, there's been some change in 17 the size of weld or some attribute of it, and that 18 change is reflected in current drawings. 19 The reinspection program -- the suspicion in the 20 reinspection program demands a reinspection, so you go 21 back out now X years later, with your new drawings, and 22 you find that the weld does not match curr.ent drawings. 23 What do you do? 24 A I would write it up. G (_j 25 0 This may be beyond your knowledge, but what would the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6068 ,n LN 1 contractor do? What would Comstock do, for example? 2 Would they go back and rebuild it now to current 3 drawings even though it were accepted earlier? 4 A It would depend on what -- what I was writing up. 5 If I was writing up a weld defect, something in the 6 welding itself that I thought was bad, they would 7 merely -- they would repair it. 8 If there was something in the detail like component 9 size or component length, type, there's a possibility 10 that they would rework the item or accept as is. 11 Q Well, in my terminology, and I think in the jargon of 12 the trade, that's a retrofit. 13 That's going back now and changing something that 14 was acceptable at the time of its first preparation to 15 conform to today's concept. 16 A Right. 17 Q And this looks like something that could go on forever. 18 But do you think that in the simple-minded case 19 that I have chosen, that there would be a redoing 20 because of today's design? 21 This may be beyond your knowledge, I realize, but 22 have you got an opinion on it? 23 A I've heard of situations where they realize later on, 24 after things have been accepted, that they had a certain n ') 25 problem with maybe certain components, and then they had (_ Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
=. 6069 lC t 1 to go back and maybe redo the items. 2 I think where we're getting confused here is I t 3 wasn't necessarily saying that-things that I inspected i 4 were not per detail and were already accepted. i 5 It was things that -- I was out in the plant and j j 6 maybe. happened to be standing by another component that 1 7 I didn't feel it looked like they were inspected i 8 according to-the current details. I 9 I'm not saying I actually went out there and 10 inspected that item. I 11 Q Well, I was trying to -- 12 A Perhaps I had originally made a statement which was j 13 conjecture, and maybe I shouldn't have said it, but -- 14 Q I was trying to take a simple-minded case for 15 illustration, and I'm still not sure. 16 A You're right what you're saying there. If I'm actually 17 going out to inspect the item, yes,-I agree with you j 18 now. d 19 0 Would you write it up? 20 A I would either write an ICR or an NCR. 21 Q You'd say that it was not acceptable today? [ i 22 A Yes. 23 Q Even though it had been properly done and it had been I 24 accepted at the time it was -- the weld was' performed? !() 25 A Right. !i Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd. j Geneva, Illinois 60134 j (312) 232-0262 1 f
6070 ('T %) 1 Q And then you're not quite sure what happens after that, 2 after your writing it up today? 3 A That would depend on Engineering and how they would 4 choose to disposition the writeup. 5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Miss Chan? 6 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Thank you. 7 BY MS. CHAN: 8 Q Mr. Peterson, not to beat a dead horse, but when you 9 would see something in the course of your inspections -- 10 let's say an adjacent weld that looked different from 11 the one you were looking at but on -- you would -- it 12 looked different from the one you were looking at but 13 you thought that it should look the same -- did you -- 14 what did you do about it? 15 A If it wasn't per the detail that I was looking at on 16 something else, I didn't do anything. 17 0 In your opinion, is it your responsibility to do 18 something about such an observation? 19 A That's quite a broad statement. It depends with what's 20 wrong with the item. 21 If I happen to run across a weld that I wasn't 22 assigned to look at and I noticed it had a crack or a 23 major defect in it, then, of course, I would bring it to 24 somebody's attention. () 25 If it's a matter of how the item is built and Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6071 O LJ l component size, length of weld, things like that, I 2 could go out in that plant and I could get lost forever 3 on that kind of stuff. 4 You know, it's just there's so many different 5 things out there, a lot of as builts, things like that, 6 that -- you know, you see things like that -- there just 7 doesn't -- there just isn't time to go into everything 8 that you stumble upon. 9 Q Well, putting aside any weld that might have a major 10 visible defect that would naturally have to be reported, 11 but if you just saw a difference that might -- you might (~S 12 attribute in your mind was because of different drawings s i v 13 or dif ferent procedures at the time that weld was 14 installed, you wouldn't do anything; is that correct? 15 A Correct. That's where you would hope that the overview 16 projects would take care of that. 17 Q And is that what you had in mind when you said that you 18 were instructed to work with blinders on; that you would 19 focus your attention on the weld you were inspecting? 20 A I can't really say. I don't -- I don't think so. That 21 specific type of instance, I don't know. I -- 22 Q That wasn't what you had in mind when you mentioned 23 working wit a blinders: That you'd just look -- focus 24 /our attention on the weld you were looking at, and
- ()
25 unless you saw some glaring defect in an adjoining weld, Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6072 O 1 that you would concentrate on what you were doing? 2 A I imagine at the time there's a possibility that I was 3 thinking that. 4 BOARD EXAMINATION 5 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 6 Q That that might have been one of the things that you 7 were thinking of or that was the only -- 8 A That could have been -- that could have been one of the 9 things I was thinking of at the time. 10 BY MS. CHAN: 11 Q Did anyone ever tell you not to report any defects that 12 you might see in an adjoining weld? 13 A Never. 14 Q I believe you testified that when you had a meeting with 15 Mr. Walters and -- Messrs. Walters and Worthington, that 16 you had defended your position about noting painted 17 welds on status reports. 18 Is it -- is my understanding correct that you noted 19 the paint on the welds but you didn't do.the inspection 20 at that time? 21 A Correct. 22 Q Are inspectors generally responsible for cleaning the 23 paint off the welds? 24 A Generally, no. () 25 Q Did anything that Mr. Walters or Worthington say or do Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 4 (312) 232-0262
6073 1 suggest that they expect you to -- expected you to clean 2 the welds and do the inspections in the same amount of 3 time it took you just to note the paint and not inspect 4 it? 5 A I can't really make that comparison. I have -- I have 6 no idea. 7 0 There wasn't anything they said or did that suggested 8 they had that expectation of you? 9 A I believe not. 10 Q I'd like to draw your attention now to the NRC report 11 which reflects the conclusions of the NRC investigation, i 12 which you testified you provided information to Mr. 13 Neisler and that you received a copy of the report in 14 the mail. 15 For the record, it's Inspection Report No. 8521 and 16 8522, dated November -- the cover letter is dated 17 November 4, 1985. 18 I'd like to ask you whether or not you agree with 19 the general conclusions of the NRC investigation. 20 I'll read you the sentence that I'm referring to: 21 On Page 25 of that report, "The NRC" -- 22 J UDGE GROSSMAN: I take it you're reading 23 this in just for his conclusions? 24 MS. CilAN: Just for his conclusions. () 25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: You don't expect that the Sonntaa Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6074 (n (_) 1 conclusion in the report will be accepted as any 2 evidence later? 3 MS. CHAN: No. I just want to determine 4 whether he agreed with the findings. 5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: You just want his opinion? 6 MS. CHAN: Yes. 7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. 8 BY MS. CHAN: 9 0 "The problems between LKC management and the QC 10 Inspectors generally stemmed from a lack of 11 communication between management and employees and the 12 bullying tactics of one QC Supervisor who was removed 13 from the construction site." 14 Do you agree with that general conclusion of the 15 Staff investigation? 16 A I agree with what they're saying there. , 17 I think maybe it was a little more involved than 18 just that. 19 You know, what I'm saying is I hate to -- it sounds i 20 like they're trying to put all the blame on Rick Saklak, 21 and I don't agree with that. 22 Q Perhaps I can read the first part of the sentence again. 23 "The problems between LKC management" -- 24 MR. GUILD: Objection. The question has been () 25 asked and answered. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6075 1 You don't get to ask it again and try to get a 2 different answer. 3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Besides, we heard a lot of 4 testimony yesterday that indicates that that was only 5 part of the problem, too. 6 Isn't that correct? Mr. DeWald was a prominent 7 part of the problem, in your opinion; is that correct? 8 THE WITNESS: Correct. 9 MS. CHAN: The conclusion -- the part I was 10 going to read just says that -- 11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Was about management, and 12 you included Mr. DeWald. 13 MS. CHAN: -- lack of communication between l 14 management and employees, and not limiting it to Mr. I 15 Saklak, s o -- 16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think the witness has 17 answered it; and I think if you read yesterday's 18 transcript, he mentioned more than just a lack of 19 communication between Mr. DeWald and the inspectors. 20 MS. CHAN: Thank you. 21 I have no further questions for Mr. Peterson. 22 BOARD EXAMINATION 23 BY JUDGE GROSSMAN: 24 Q Mr. Peterson, if you were inspecting a component in the () 25 field that was right next to a similar component -- that Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6076 R. V 1 is, similar to with regard to every aspect except for 2 the welding -- wouldn't you form some opinion as to 3 whether the welding ought to be the same? 4 A Possibly, yes. 5 0 Wouldn't you expect that the welding would be the same 6 on a'similar component? 7 A Yes, you would. 8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Miss Kezelis? 9 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 10 BY MS. KEZELIS: i 11 Q When you observed a component similar to that one which 1
- (-}
you were in the process of inspecting that might have 12 v 13 some dissimilar features, you didn't physically have the 14 drawings or any ECN's that would be referencing that 15 particular component; isn't that correct? 16 A Correct. 17 Q All right. 18 Accordingly, you wouldn't know, standing there and 19 performing the inspection on another component, whether 20 the one that was both similar and dissimilar was in any 21 respect inadequate or not in conformance with the 22 specifications for that component; isn't that correct? l 23 A Correct. 24 Q Okay. () 25 Mr. Guild asked you a series of questions regarding Sonntag Reporting Service Ltd. f Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6077 1 what you perceived to be poor past documentation 2 practices. 3 Do you recall that subject, Mr. Peterson? 4 A Yes. 5 0 All right. 6 And one of your answers to Mr. Guild was that 7 management said that they had passed audits and that 8 they shouldn't worry about it; is that correct? 9 A Correct. 10 0 All right. 11 Did Mr. DeWald ever make that statement to you in 12 your presence? 13 A Not that I can remember right now. 14 Q Did Mr. Seltmann ever make a statement along that line 15 to you or in your presence? 16 A No. 17 The only people I can remember making those 18 statements would be probably Rick Saklak and Larry 19 Seese. 20 Q Do you recall the circumstances in which Mr. Seese made 21 that kind of a statement to you or in your presence? 22 A Offhand, no. 23 Q Do you recall what it was that Mr. Seese had said that 24 Comstock had passed an audit on? () 25 A Well, their -- their point was mostly that up until Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6078 O 1 then, pretty much everything that had been done prior to 2 what we' re looking at had already passed audits. 3 Q All right. 4 Now, when you' re saying "thei r, " I' m tq(ing to have 5 you be more specific as to who particularly you recall 6 hearing making statements to that ef fect. 7 Now, let's f ocus on Mr. Seese. 8 You understood Mr. Seese's point to be that 9 Comstock had passed an audit on past wot.,- is that 10 cor rect ? 11 A Correct. 12 Q All right. {} 13 What aspect of work was he ref erring to, if you 14 recall ? 15 A Exactly -- I believe it was on the cable pan hangers. 16 Q Did you have any personal knowledge as to the -- the 17 type of audit or whose audit it was that Mr. Seese was 18 ref erring to? 19 A I can only assume he was talking about CECO Q A and NRC. 20 0 Do you recall anything else that Mr. Seese might have 21 said to you with respect to comstock's success on an 22 audit or audits regarding the cable pans? 23 A Nothing specific right now. I can' t think of anything. 24 Q Did you have any reason to believe that Mr. Seese wasn' t (O _/ 25 being truthf ul when he said Comstock had passed an audit Sonntag Reporting Service,_Ltd; Geneva, 1111noin 60134 (312) 232-0262
6079 O 1 or audits regarding cable pans? 2 A N o, I have no reason to believe that. 3 0 You recall Mr. Saklak making a statement or statements 4 4 to that ef f ect ; is that cor rect ? 5 A Correct. 6 Q Do you know or can you tell us, as you sit here today, 7 what the audit or audits involved that Mr. Saklak had i 8 ref erred to? 9 A Just as in Mr. Seese, I would have to assume CECO Q A and 10 NRC, since they are the ones who do all the auditing of 11 our work. (} 12 Q What about the subj ect of the audit or audits that Mr. 13 Saklak might have been referring to? 14 Do you recall what those might have been? 15 A Probably cable pan hangers. 16 Q Do you have any reason to believe that Mr. Saklak wasn' t 17 being truthf ul when he said that Comstock had passed 18 audits f rom -- 19 A I have no reason to believe that. 20 0 All right. 21 Those are the only individuals in management that 22 you recall making statements along those lines; is that 23 cor r ect ? 24 A As f ar as I can remember right now, yes. () 25 Q All right. hnnhag n por_ ting _.Serxica,_LtrL e Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6080 ( l Let's turn to the topic of Mr. Rick Martin for a 2 manent. 3 I believe you had testified, in response to some 4 questions f rom Mr. Guild and in response to some 5 questions concerning your deposition testimony in 6 Chicago back in March, that you would agree with the 7 manner in which you had answered those questions today 8 if those questions were asked of you again; is that 9 correct? 10 A Correct. 11 Q All right. 12 Let me ask you this: Do you recall ever speaking {} 13 to Mr. Martin about whether he had f elt pressured during 14 his earlier anployment by Comstock? 15 A I don' t -- I don' t believe I ever spoke to him about 16 that subj ect. 17 Q All right. 18 Do you have any knowledge as -- either personally 19 or by rumor or shoptalk, as to how long Mr. Martin was 20 the only welding inspector? 21 A I really couldn' t give -- I would be j ust like picking a 22 number out of a hat if I was to guess that. 23 Q All right. 24 Now, you came on Comstock -- came on Comstock's () 25 payroll for Braidwood in 1983; is that correct? Sonntag-Repos-ti-ng-Service -Ltd. r Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 i
6081 I) 1 A Yes, December of 1983. 2 Q Do you have any knowledge as to how long or how many 3 years Mr. Martin had been inspecting f or Comstock at 4 Braidwood bef ore you arrived? - 5 A My guess would be right.around three years. 6 Q And on what do you base ' that guess, si r? i 7 A Mostly on the f act that -- of maybe docunents I had seen 1 8 that had -- you know, from years previous that he was 9 th er e. i 10 Plus f rom the simple f act that we were told that he I 11 was one of the original inspectors, it was obvious he 1[} 12 had to be there awhile. l 13 Q Your understanding that he was an original inspector -- 14 that was with respect to Comstock? 15 A Yes. l 16 Q What is your understanding of when Comstock came 17 on-site? 18 A It was right af ter when Ernst was kicked off-site, which ] 19 -- I' m not exactly sur e what y ear. It would have to be i ] 20 in the late '70s, I would think. i 1 j 21 Q Your understanding is that Mr. Martin became a QC 22 Inspector thereaf ter or sometime af tet Comstock came on? f 23 A Yes. l 24 Q Did Mr. Martin ever tell you that he f elt pressured to () 25 sacrifice quality for production during his early years i Sonntag Repor ting Settisag_Ltd. l Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
~_ ._~ i 6082 ^O 1 of anployment f or Comstock? 2 A No, he did not. 3 Q Did he ever _ tell.you that he f elt pressured to take into i 4 consideration cost' considerations during the course of 5 his early years of inspection? 1 6 A No, he did not. f 7 Q All right. i 8 Mr. Martin is not certified - or was not certified i j 9 in welding inspections as of the time you lef t the i 10 Comstock work assignment; isn' t that correct? l 11 A I rea11y don' t know. They pulled his certs in and out - t 12 quite of ten, so -I have no idea when he was certified and j 13 when he wasn' t. 14 Q Let's focus specifical1y on his welding certifications, 15 all right? 16 You understand that Mr. Martin's welding 1 j 17 certifications were pulled? 18 A I be11 eve, to my knowledge, they were pulled twice. j 19 Q All right. 20 Do you reca11 when the last time was-that they were 21 pulled? 22 A I can' t give an accurate account of that. f 23 Q Let' a put it in terms of your anp1oyment f or Comstock at 24 Braidwood as of December,1983,_ when Mr. Martin was no
- O 25 1oneer verf ormine any weidine inspections, isn' t that I
Sanntag Reparting Service: LtA-l Genova, Illinoia 60134 (312) 232-0262
6083 t' k 1 cor rect ? 4 2 A I believe at that time he was not certified. 3 Q Did you ever see him perf orm weld inspections thereaf ter 4 up until you switched over to Newberg in December of 5 '85? 6 A I think sometime af ter I was employed there, he 7 eventually did get his certs back. How ev er, I do n' t 8 think they had him doing any weld inspections -- 9 Q All right. 10 A -- to the beat of my knowledge. 11 Q All right. 12 {} You did sometime thereaf ter see him perf orming 13 inspections other than welding; isn' t that correct? 4 14 A Inspections other than welding? 15 Q Yes, si r. 16 A Most of the time that I had seen him, he was involved in 17 work in the vault or in the office. 18 Q All right. You haven' t answered my question. 19 A So as f ar as what he was certified in, if he was liko 20 doing conduit or cable pan or anything like that, I have 21 no idea, i 22 0 But you never saw him perf orm a weld inspection in the 23 field, did you? 24 A No, I did not. () 25 Q All right. j Sonntag Repor ting _ Service,_Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 6084 () 1 And you have no personal knowledge as to at what 2 point he might have received or reattained 3 certifications in the Level II area af ter they had been 4 pulled; is that correct? 5 A The exact dates, no. 6 Q And you have no personal knowledge about when his 7 welding certifications were pulled, do you? 8 A No. All I know is supposedly they were palled twice. i 9 Q Okay. 10 Do you have any personal knowledge or have you ever 11 heard by rumor or shoptalk the reason f or Mr. Martin's [} 12 certifications in welding being pulled? 13 A I believe -- this is f rom shoptalk, now -- that one of 14 the reasons was of a high -- very high PTL rej ection 15 rate. 16 0 Okay. 17 And "PTL" is Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory? t 18 A Yes. 19 Q And that was one of the reasons, did y ou say ? l 20 A Yes. t 21 Q Do you recall what other reasons you had heard? 22 A As f ar -- I believe that was one of the reasons f or one t 23 of the times they pulled his certs. 24 The other time I can' t remember of f hand right now. I () 25 0 Were you aware that during the time period that Mr. S^nntag-Rep ^rting Service,--Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6085 c N_)5 1 Martin performed inspections in the welding area out in 2 the field, that some of the QC Inspectors had a practice 3 of letting welders repair def ective welds on the spot? 4 A At the time Rick was doing inspections? 5 0 Yes, si r. 6 A I have no idea. 7 0 You' re not aware, then, are you, that the NRC had f ound 8 an item of noncompliance for that? 9 A I was not aware that have. 10 0 Assuming those f acts to be true, would it surprise you 11 nearly as much as it might have bef ore -- with respect 12 to Intervenors' Exhibit 18, for example, reflecting {} 13 acceptance rates of a large number of welds -- that no 14 rej ection rates might have been noted in a particular 15 inspection report? 16 A That really -- I don' t -- I don' t really see how that 17 would have anything to do with it, because irregardless 18 of whether they have it fixed or not, they' re still 19 saying it's acceptable af ter the f act. 20 0 I'm representing to you that at one point in time, the 21 NRC determined that Comstock incorrectly permitted 22 welders to repair defective welds and that that was not 23 always documented and was f ound to be an item of 24 noncompliance for the NRC. , () 25 A Okay. Eonntag_Itepor ti ng serv ice,_Ltd. I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
\\ 6086 1 Q Assuming that f act, it wouldn' t surprise you nearly as 2 much to see checklists containing all acceptable weldW; 3 isn' t that correct ? 4 A Okay. I' m sor ry. I see what you' re getting at. 5 Correct. I agree. 6 MR. GUILD: Does counsel have a foundation 7 for the f act that she krpothesizes that? 8 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Yes, I assume you do have a 9 foundation f or that. 10 MS. KEZ EL IS : Yes. Mr. DeWald's testimony I 11 believe addresses that particular topic previously in 12 this record. (} 13 MR. GUILD: His prefiled testimony, Counsel? 14 MS. KEZ ELIS : No; his cross examination, Mr. 15 Guil d. 16 MR. GUILD: Does counsel perhaps have a 17 ref erence to an inspection report? 18 MS. KEZ ELIS : Not at the present time. I 19 apologiz e. 20 MR. MILL ER : 8407. 21 MS. KEZ EL IS : It's Inspection Report 8407. 22 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : Well, Mr. Peterson, would 23 you expect that, even under that situation, that 24 def ective welds -- that you would expect among 1,000 or O 25 more weds med logisticany be reene in adu to have Sonntag-Rep ^r ting Service,--Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6087 O 1 them treated as acceptable in one inspection report? 2 THE WITNESS: It would -- it would be pretty 3 tough, because with that amount of welds, you' re talking 4 about a f air amount of hangers. Unless a guy has a 5 welder following him all over the place, it would be a 6 little difficult. 7 BY MS. KEZ ELIS: 8 Q Mr. Peterson, have you ever found 1,000 or more welds in 9 a row to be rej ectable during the course of your 10 inspection? 11 A Every one of 1,000 looked at? 12 Q Yes, si r. "} 13 A No. 14 JUDG E GROSSMAN : By the way, I hope that 15 wasn' t based on my question, because that wasn' t my 16 question. 17 MS. KEZ ELIS : W ell, I'll be honest, Judge 18 Grossman: It was based in part on your question. I may 19 not have understood it, but it was based in part on your 20 question. 21 (Laughter. ) 22 BY MS. KEZ ELIS : 23 Q Do you have any personal knowledge, Mr. Peterson, of who 24 comprised Mr. Martin's management at Comstock during his () 25 early years of employment? Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 2
6088 O 1 A N o, I do not. 2 0 In response to a question f rom Mr. Guild which was 3 phrased in, I believe, the f ollowing f ashion -- the 4 ref erence in it was Mr. Martin being trained, perhaps 5 under trained, by Mr. DeWald. 6 Do you recall a question to that eff ect by Mt. 7 Guild? 8 A something to that ef fect, yes. 9 0 All right. 10 Does the f act that Mr. Martin's welding 11 certifications were pulled have any effect on your 12 opinion as to Mr. Martin's capability or his inability (} 13 to -- strike that. 14 Does that have any ef fect on your opinion as to Mr. 15 Martin's capabilities as an inspector? 16 A I'm sure it has somewhat. I think it's only natural. 17 0 All right. 18 What is that, please ? Can you specify it? 19 A As f ar as my opinion of him as an inspector? 20 0 Yes, sir; in light of the f act that his welding 21 certifications had been pulled -- have been pulled. 22 A W ell, something like that -- I think the record kind of 23 speaks f or itself, doesn' t it? 24 I -- I hate to give a personal opinion. I didn' t () 25 actually look at his inspections. Sonntag Reporting Serviceg Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6089 O 1 MS. KEZ ELIS : May I have that 1ast portion of 2 the answer read by the Reporter back, please? 3 (The answer was thereupon read 4 by the r epor ter. ) 5 BY MS. KEZ ELIS : 6 0 Mr. Guild asked you as well a number of questions 7 regarding Mr. Saklak; and I believe you testified that 8 Mr. Saklak was well-known f or his conduct or -- you may 9 not have used " demeanor," but I'll use the word 10 " demeanor"; is that correct? 11 A Yes. 12 0 Okay. 13 Nev erthel ess, the only exchanges or incidents that 14 you can recall regarding Mr. Saklak were that with Mr. 15 Muster ed, is that correct, and -- 16 A That's the only one I can recall fresh in my mind with 17 an exact incident. 18 I' ve seen him with other inspectors -- 19 Q Okay. 20 A -- acting maybe belligerent; but, you know, I never took 21 notes and j otted it down. 22 0 I understand that some of these things have taken place 23 some time ago. 24 I believe you testified yesterday that you couldn' t O 25 reca11 any other specific incidenes at this time, isn' t sonntag nennrei ng service, r ea. Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
6090 O 1 that correct? 2 A Right. 3 Q Fi ne. 4 In connection with the observations that you did 5 have an opportunity to make of Mr. Saklak, did you ever 6 have an opportunity to observe him when he was calm, 7 collected and responding to a question of a QC 8 Inspe ctor, in that type of f ashion? 9 A Oh, yeah. I mean, he wasn' t always yelling and 10 shouting. I mean, nobody can exist like that; but, 11 sure, there were times when he could be livable and, you 12 k now, be a decent person. {} 13 0 Okay. 14 And it's true, is it not, that QC Inspectors, as 15 you observed them, would occasionally approach Mr. 16 Saklak, for example, about areas in which he was 17 certified in; isn' t that correct ? 18 A They would ask him questions. 19 Now, as f ar as I knew, he wasn' t certified in any 20 areas. 21 Q Okay. All right. 22 You have -- it is your understanding that Mr. 23 Saklak was not certified in any area of inspection? 24 A I -- I believe so. () 25 Q On what do you base that belief, Mr. Peterson? Sonntag Reporting Service; Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6091 O v 1 A On the f act that everybody had said that he was not 2 certified under any of the programs that -- under any of 3 the things that he was over. 4 0 You' re not aware, for example, then, that Mr. Saklak was 5 certified in concrete expansion anchors, are you? 6 A No. 7 Q All right. 8 And you' re not aware, are you, Mr. Peterson, that 9 Mr. Saklak was certified in cable pulling? 10 A I' m not aware of that. 11 Q All right. {} 12 And you' re not aware that Mr. Saklak was certified 13 in any areas; is that your testimony? 14 A Correct. 15 0 All right. 16 Then let me rephrase the question I had asked you 17 ea rlier, Mr. Peterson, and that is this: 18 During those observations which you did have an 19 opportunity to make of Mr. Saklak answering questions 20 that QC Inspectors posed to him, was it your observation 21 as w ell that Mr. Saklak could capably answer such 22 questions? 23 A Pocsibly, yes. 24 Q Did you ever have an opportunity to ask him any (_)g 25 questions? Sonntaa Reporting. Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 6092 l( l A W ell, I' m sur e I did. 2 Q Did you come away every single time believing Mr. Saklak 3 hadn' t helped you at all? 4 A Oh, no. 5 Q All right. 6 In other words, then, it's true, is it not, that 7 there were situations you personally experienced when 8 Mr. Saklak could and did answer questions you had 9 calmly, capably and competently; isn' t that correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And you observed the same type of exchanges between Mr. [} Saklak and other inspectors; isn' t"that correct? 12 13 A Yes. 14 Q All right. 15 Continuing with Mr. Sakl ak, Mr. Guild also asked 16 you, in effect, where you would rate Mr. Mustered in 17 comparison to other of the QC Inspectors in terms of Mr. 18 Mustered's character as one of sticking to his guns. 19 Do you recall those words? 20 A Yes. 21 Q All right. 22 And Mr. Guild attempted to have you determine 23 whether or not Mr. Mustered.was more or less capable 24 than others of sticking to his guns? () 25 A Yes. Sann*eg Reperting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6093 O 1 Q Do you recall that? 2 Okay. 3 You testified that it's true that some people are 4 more resistant than others? 5 A Right. 6 Q Okay. 7 And that that's going to be true in any group of 8 human beings; isn' t that correct? 9 A Right. 10 0 During the course of your work f or Comstock at 11 Braidwood, you had an opportunity to observe your fellow {) inspectors both individually and in any exchanges that 12 13 they had with Mr. Saklak or may have had with Mr. Saklak 14 that you can' t specifically recall at this time; is that 15 cor r ect ? 16 A Yes. 17 Q All right. 18 Based on your observations during those three or so 19 -- two or so years, were you aware of any individual l 20 that you f elt would succumb -- by " individual" I mean 21 any fellow QC Inspector, certified QC Inspector -- who 22 would succumb to any pressure f rom Mr. Saklak to violate i 23 either an NRC regulation or any aspect of Comstock's 24 Quality Assurance Program? () 25 A None at all. Son nta g R epor ti n g Rerv i ce, Lt d. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6094 ) 1 Q Okay. I 2 You seem f airly confident of that answer. 3 Why is that? l 4 A I j ust have -- there j ust -- I have no reason to believe 4 5 that anybody would succumb to any of the harassment that 6 was given. 7 Our maj or concern, when the 24 of us went over to 8 the NRC, was j ust to point out to them that, you know, 9 "You've got a situation here where you could possibly 10 have intimidation affecting quality. " 11 You know, I wasn' t -- my reason f or going there {]} 12 wasn' t saying that, "It is af fecting quality. " 13 It was j ust that, you know, "You' ve reached a 14 situation here where you' re getting up to a very 15 dangerous point here. Let's nip it in the bud now and 16 get rid of it. " 17 0 Let me ask you the follow-up question, which is: You 18 never did obse.ve anyone succanbing to any pressure f rom 19 Mr. Saklak ?. 20 A Correct. 21 Q You had no reason to believe that anybody had? 22 A Correct. 23 Q That was the reason wby all of you went to the NRCe was 24 to ensure that it never would happen -- () 25 A Correct. Cnnn&nn D ann e F 4 n n C arty 4 en TbA Gedea Il15nois 6U134-~ v (312) 232-0262
6095 O 1 Q -- in the f uture? 2 All ri ght. 3 The topics of the f act that you had been a Lead at 4 some time or another during your work f or comstock at 5 Braidwood also came up during examination by Mr. Guild, 6 and again the. topic of what you would do with status 7 reports that you collected while you were a Lead came 8 up. 9 I believe the record is a little unclear. 10 My understanding yesterday, during the course of 11 . your testimony, Mr. Peterson, was that you would . {} summarize the status reports handed in to you on some 12 13 master log or a log f orm of some sort and hand that in 14 to one of Mr. Seese's clerks; is that correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q All right. 17 Are these what were also referred to today as 18 transmittal forms or are we talking about -- 19 A I don' t remember calling them " transmittal forms." 20 0 You may not have. I'm not sure whether that statement 21 came up or not. MI notes weflect that they were called 22 'transmi ttcl forms. " 23 And what I believe you testified to, Mr. Peterson, 24 is that there was an individual sheet f or each () 25 inspector. l Sonntag Repor ting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 1
6096 '() 1 Do you recall any statements along those lines? 2 A Okay. We were each given status sheets to fill out f or 3 what we had done that day. 4 At the end of the day, they were handed in to the 5 Lead; and the Lead would more or less compile everything 6 onto one other sheet as f ar as all the work that was 7 done and then turn it in to the clerk so she could. keep 8 an accurate record of what work had been done. 9 Q That one other sheet is what we will call the " log,"' 10 okay ? 11 A Okay. {~} 12 0 That log merely calculated the total amounts of 13 inspections perf ormed by the group of inspectors f or 14 whom an individual was Lead as a whole; isn' t that 15 correct? 16 A Yes. l 17 Q All right. 18 When you were a Lead, did you hand in the status 19 sheets as well or no? 20 A As far as the status sheets, I think we j ust kept them t 21 in a three-ring binder. 22 O Okay. 23 So you,, when you were a Lead, would personally hand l 24 in j ust the log that you would compile f rom the status () 25 sheets that had been handed in to you; is that correct? l l SonnFag Reporting Service; Ltd; Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
6097 O 1 A I'm trying to remember now. 2 0 Okay. 3 A I think what I did was -- I think I handed in the status 4 shcets also, but I made copies of them and j ust kept 5 them in a three-ring binder for guys in case they had to 6 go back and look at what they had done previously. 7 Q Why would somebody need to go back -- 8 A As f ar as who I turned in the sheets to, I can' t 9 remember. 10 Q All right. 11 Would the sheets have been turned in separately {} from the log or would they have been turned in together 12 13 while you were a Lead and were performing that task? 14 A I' m sor ry. I don' t remember. 15 Q You don' t renember ? 16 A I don' t recall. I' m sor ry. 17 Q Did you ever have occasion to approach your agn Lead and 18 ask if you could look at one of your old status reports 19 again? 20 A If I had, it would have been no problem. 21 Q Now, let's turn to the topic of Mr. Walters and Mr. 22 Worthington and the two incidents that you described 23 today where you had discussions with them about paint on 24 the weldb. t O) (_ 25 In response to a question f rom Miss Chan, I believe Sonntag Repor ting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6098 O V 1 you testified that it was not the general practice of QC 2 Inspectors to clean welds that were painted; is that 3 cor rect ? 4 A Correct. 5 Q All right. 6 Nevertheless, you testified yesterday, did you not, 7 Mr. Peterson, that you had a wire brush and a pick with 8 you whenever you were performing these inspections; 9 isn' t that correct? 10 A Correct. 11 Q Now, the purpose of the pick and the brush I assume (} 12 would be to clean paint off those welds; isn' t that 13 cor r ect ? 14 A W ell, not j ust paint. 15 You know, a lot of times, just f rom being in the 16 pl ant, you' re going to get -- dust and dirt or whatever 17 will collect on the weld. The main purpose of the brush 18 was j ust to get a good cleaning of it. 19 Q All right. 20 But you were able to use that pick and that 21 brush -- 22 A Yes. 23 0 -- to clean of f the paint that you saw remaining; is l 24 that correct? () 25 A Yes. 1 Cnn nh n n D ann r b 4 n n Caru4ca_ T. b A Geneha il15nois 60134 ~ (312) 232-0262
6099 ) 1 Q To the best of your knowledge, did other inspectors at 2 that timo also have wire brushes and picks with them 3 when they were perf orming such inspections? 4 A Ye s. 5 Q Af ter the second meeting that you had with Mr. Walters 6 and Mr. Worthington, you testified today that 7 approximately one to two weeks passed bef ore Mr. Simile 8 had a meeting with you and transf erred you into the 9 in process weld inspection area; is that correct? 10 A Yes. 11 It could have been less; it could have been more. {} 12 I really don' t remember. 13 Q All right. 14 That, as you testified bef ore, is an area that you 15 wanted to get into; is that correct? 16 A Yes. I was -- I was pleased to hear that they were -- 17 they wanted to put me in there, yes. 18 0 Okay. 19 In between those two time periods, the last meeting 20 that you had with Mr. Walters and Mr. Worthington and 21 then the meeting that you had with Mr. Simile, did you 22 continue to perform inspections in that area? ^ 23 A I was doing cable pan inspections and had started 24 working on the riser collar proj ect, al so. () 25 0 Okay. Sonntag Reporti ng Service. Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6100 1 And with respect to the cable pan inspections that 2 you perf ormed during that interim period, did the manner 3 in which you conducted those inspections change in any 4 respect based on the second meeting that you and Mr. 5 Walters and Mr. Worthington had? 6 A Did my inspections change based on the second meeting 7 with them? 8 Q Yes, sir. 9 A No. Everything stayed the same. 10 Q All right. I j ust wanted to make sure, because today we 11 have two meetings. Yesterday we only had one. 12 A Right. 13 MR. GUILD: Well, Counsel, you shouldn' t 14 suggest that the witness was being somehow 15 unf or thcoming, because the two meetings are indeed 16 documented clearly in the deposition. The witness isn' t 17 changing his answer f rom yesterday. 18 MS. KEZ ELIS : No, I'm not suggesting that the 19 witness is. 20 I' m suggesting that the witness' recollection was 21 ref reshed or at least probed a little bit f urther by Mr. 22 Guild's exanination todcy. I'm not meaning tc suggest 23 anything other than that. l 24 BY MS. KEZ ELIS: () 25 Q I j ust want to make cure that the entirety of the record l l l l cm .. - o mm. 4 - c..., 4 -. ta ~~~~5enesa!'iiiinois-~isi34-~~ (312) 232-0262
6101 O 1 is clear as to whether or not what Mr. Walters or Mr. 2 Worthington might have said to you would have any impact 3 on the manner in which you continued to perform your 4 inspections. 5 I believe the answer to that is "no"; is that 6 correct? 7 A No. 8 0 There was no effect, fine. 9 You also testified that Mr. Simile said to you that 10 Mr. Worthington hadn' t been or wasn' t happy with your 11 work, or words to that effect? 12 A Something to that effect, yes. {} 13 Q All right. 14 Do you recall whether, in f act, Mr. Worthington 15 might have said to you specifically that he wasn' t happy ' 16 with your attitude, rather than with your work? 17 A I believe that on the second meeting with Walters. and 18 Worthington, Walters had said he f elt I had an attitude 19 problem. 20 Q All right. 21 A As f ar as I can recall now, I don' t recall Worthington 22 having said that to me. 23 Q But you believe now Mr. Walters may have cade a 24 ref erence to your attitude at the second meeting? () 25 A I believe so, yes. Sonntag Repor ting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
6102 O 1 Q And did you understand that reference to your attitude 2 to be that you had identified 15 or 20 components with 3 painted welds, but that you had not taken any steps -to 4 remove the paint and thereaf ter inspect those particular 5 welds ? 6 A I can only assume that, yes. 7 Q All right. 8 Did he give you any reason to believe that he was 9 ref erring to anything other than that? 10 A No. l 11 Q All right. []} And when you testified or explained to us that you 12 13 went ahead and documented those inspections -- or the 14 inspections that you would have performed but f or the 15 paint on the welds of those components, that you went 16 ahead and performed other inspections instead that day. 17 It was your intention, was it not, to merely make 18 it crystal clear to your supervisors that there was 19 paint on those welds and that you couldn' t inspect them 20 in that condition without f urther work; is that correct? 21 A Correct. t 22 Q Okay. 23 Now, Mr. Worthington was your supervisor; is that 24 correct? () 25 A Yes. m.m~ Uene a Ill nois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6103 O 1 Q All right. 2 And it was Mr. Walters who was your Lead; is that 3 correct? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Okay. 6 Did Mr. Walters continue to be your Lead thereaf ter 7 or no? 8 A No. When I was transf erred to the in-process area, then 9 Mike Mustered was my Lead. 10 0 All right. 11 Did Mr. Worthington continue to be your supervisor? 12 A No. 13 Q All right. 14 A Tony Simile was my supervisor af ter that. 15 Q Did you have occasion to work under Mr. Worthington 16 again thereaf ter? 17 A No. It was sometime af ter that that he lef t, and I 18 should stand corrected there. 19 When I lef t f or the in-process -- I don' t know if 20 it makes a diff erence -- but Mike Mustered was my Lead 21 and Daryl Landers was my supervisor, not Tony Simile. 22 0 In fact, Mr. Peterson, Mr. Worthington was demoted 23 sometime af ter that second meeting that you had, wasn' t l 24 he? () 25 A I believe -- I don' t know if it was a demotion or change Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 i
6104 ) 1 in title that was a nice way of making a demotion or 2 what, but I believe there was a change in title in him 3 -- or with him, and then shortly af ter that, he was 4 transf err ed. 5 0 Transf erred away from Braidwood entirely -- 6 A 'Yes. 7 0 -- isn' t that cor rect? 8 What did you understand his change in title. to be 9 af ter that? 10 Af ter that demotion or change in title, what did 11 you understand it to be? ' {} 12 A (No response.) 13 0 Let me withdraw that one and try it again. 14 What did you understand his change in title to be, 15 if you recall? 16 A I really don' t recall. I didn' t pay too much attention 17 to it. 18 0 All right. 19 Nev er thel eas, tef ore his transf er or demetion and 20 change in title, as you testified, Mr. Worthington 21 called a group meeting; ar.d my understanding is that 22 that group consisted of all of you who were performing 23 inspections in that area; is that correct? 24 A Yes. () 25 0 And you stated to us earlier today that Mr. Worthington Sonntag Reperting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
6105 0 1 called you all in and asked, *What can we do to increase 2 the amount of work you' re doing, " or, "What can we do to 3 assist you in your productivity," or words to that 4 effect. 5 Do you recall that? 6 A Yes. 7 0 Okay. 8 What did you understand the "we" to be ref erring 9 to? 10 A ' lim and John Walters. 11 Q Okay. (} 12 And did you observe any difference in the 13 cleanliness of the welds af ter you and the others had 14 made that suggestion to him at your meeting? 15 A No. 16 0 Ycu did not observe any whatsoever? 17 A None that I can remember of f hand, no. 18 Q All right. 19 How did they respond, during the course of that 20 meeting, to your suggestion? 21 A (No response.) 22 0 What did you observe? 23 A I don' t remember. l 24 I don' t think there was, you know, toc much of a () 25 res ponse. It was j ust -- they were j ust asking if there Sonntag Reptrting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6106 r , ( l was anything they could do to help us increase what we 2 wer e getting done, and I think one of the things that we 3 said was paint removal. 4 There might have been other things. I -- I really ~5 don' t remember. 6 0 Okay. 7 What was your understanding as to how much control 8 Mr. Worthington or Mr. Walters would have over the craf t 9 that were in the process of cleaning the welds? 10 A As f ar as control, they don' t really have control over 11 th em. 12 They could possibly ask them to do a little bit 13 better job of cleaning the welds or use a flashlight to 14 look at them when they get done. 15 Q Do you have any reason to believe that they didn' t ask 16 the craf t -- af ter the meeting ask the craf t to try to 17 do a little bit better j ob in cleaning the welds? 18 A I have no knowledge one.way or the other. 19 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Well, Miss Kez elis, how long 20 do you expect -- f 21 MS. KEZ ELIS 4 I hav e aboat f our more i 22 questions. 23 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : I take it you' re going to j i 24 hav e -- O 2s Ma. GUIto= very 11mited, Judee.
- 1. hege we Sonntag Rep ^rting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois C0134 (312) 232-0262
6107 i () 1 can -- if we have a f ew more minutes, we can get Mr. 2 Peterson done and out of here. I' m not sure how tight 3 the Board's schedule is. 4 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : Miss Kez elis, continue. 5 MS. KEZ ELIS : Thank you. 6 BY MS. KEZ ELIS : 7 Q Let me -- Mr. Guild asked you a number of questions, as 8 had I, about Intervenors' Exhibit No.18 and in 9 particular the speed memo to Mr. DeWald f rom Mr. 10 Worthington, dated December 18, 1984, and then your 11 understanding of the statements made in Mr. 12
- {}
Worthington's Speedy Memo. 13 Now, let me ask you to review for a few moments, 14 Mr. Peterson, Mr. DeWald's response to Mr. Worthington's 15 Speedy Memo to him regarding the Asmussen concerns in 16 Exhibit 18. 17 A Ny interpretation of Mr. DeWald's response is that if 18 Dan Asmussen or any other Phase 2 inspector runs across 19 any questionable itens or anything that they feel should 20 be inspected, that they should go ahead and reinspect 21 the item. 22 0 All right. 23 And that would constitute, would it not, some 1 24 action on Mr. Asmussen's request that something be done () 25 about that type of an inspection report; isn' t that i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 c.s-g w 4 T e
- -e
-'r-- - - ~ - ~ < +--e ~ -e-e+-- + - - - --e r1--aw
6108 O 1 correct? 2 A Yes. My interpretation is that Mr. DeWald is saying, 3 "If you have a question with any item, go ahead and 4 inspect it." 5 Q All right. 6 And, in f act, it's true, is it not, that you 7 testified in your deposition, in March of this year in 8 Chicago, that massive reinspections were underway at 9 Comstock; isn' t that correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q All right. {} And you also testified at your deposition that if 12 13 there were any quality problems, those massive 14 reinspections, of which you were aware, would have 15 caught them; isn' t that correct? 16 A I would think so, yes. 17 Q Having j ust had an opportunity to review Mr. DeWald's 18 direction to Mr. Asmussen about reinspecting any 19 questionable installation that he might identify in his 20 document review, that reflects, does it not, something 21 180 degrees diff erent f rom Comstock's impression that 22 you received that you all should be working with 23 blinders on? 24 A Yes. () 25 MS. KEZ ELIS : All right. I have no f urther Sdnntag Reporting Serviceg Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 ~3..
i 6109 O 1 questions. 2 BOARD EXAMINATION 3 BY JUDG E GROSSMAN : 4 Q Okay. 5 Just getting back to the question raised by Miss 6 Chan with regard to similar components, were there 7 occasions in which you saw similar components in the 8 fiel d, similar to the one on which you were working, in 9 which the welding did not conf orm to the standards on 10 which you were -- on which -- which you were applying to 11 the component that you were inspecting? 12 A I believe there's probably a f ew times that, yes, that {} 13 was correct. 14 Q Were those occasions in which you took no action? 15 A Yes. 16 0 Was that because of your opinion of what management 17 wanted you to do? 18 A Basically it was because anytime we had found anything 19 with previous work, we were j ust basically always told, 20 "We'll catch it during walkdown. " 21 So, you know, you can only approach them so many 22 times bef ore you say, you know, the heck with it. 23 Q Now, ref erring back to that question that Miss Kezelis 24 asked you another question on -- my original question () 25 ref erred to a substantial amount of def ects snong 1,000. Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6110 O 1 Do you recall which question I'm ref erring to now? 2 A Where she asked if I had ever found 1,000 rej ectable 3 welds in a row ? 4 Q Yes. The question, of course, ref erred to def ects among 5 1,000, but let's j ust give you an example. 6 Would you consider that if there were 20 def ective 7 welds among 1,000, that logistica11y it would be 8 feasible for the inspector to await a redoing of those 9 20 welds before he completed his inspection report? 10 A Out of 1,000? 11 Q Yes. 12 A I would think it would be rather difficult. [} 13 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Okay. 14 Do you have any -- 15 MS. KEZ ELIS : If I may have one follow-up 16 question to what you j ust asked -- 17 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Certainly, while we' re on 18 those topics. 19 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 20 (Continuing. ) 21 BY MS. KEZ ELIS : 22 Q Now, Mr. Peterson, let me represent to you that during 23 the time period in which 1,000 or more welds might be 24 documented on a single inspection report, there is () 25 testimony in this record that the manner in which those 'l Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6111 1 0 1 inspections were performed was significantly different 2 from the manner in which you performed your own 3 inspections f or Comstock at B raidwood. 4 That is, that an inspector would carry with him a 5 notebook and would write down what he saw and would 6 document the results of his inspections in a notebook; 7 and only upon conclusion of a number of days' worth of 8 inspections, for example, would he document his findings 9 on a single inspection report and sign it with one 10 single date, all right? 11 Now, keeping that in mind and keeping in mind as [^} well Judge Grossman's question of whether it would be 12 13 possible to have a welder repair 20 or so welds out of 14 1,000 during the course of that several days' worth of 15 inspection work, would your answer be different? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And what would your answer be then? 18 A I would say then, if it was over a course of days and 19 days, that it would be definitely possible that the 20 inspector had them fixed. 21-MS. KEZ ELIS : Thank you. 22 .JUDG E GROSSMAN : Mr. Guild? 23 RECROSS EXAMINATION 24 BY MR. GUILD: () 25 Q Your belief is that proper practice is to docmnent Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd; Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6112 ( 1 rej ectable conditions when you find them? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Now, let's return to this one point about your 4 observation of field conditions by early weld 5 inspectors, Mr. Martin among others. 6 I gather that your general answer is you don' t know 7 whether or not design requirements became more stringent 8 over time at Comstock so that a comparable detail that 9 you were inspecting would be to a more stringent design 10 requirement than the detail to which, say, Mr. Martin's 11 early work was inspected? 12 A Right. I have no way of knowing that. () 13 Q And that related to things like weld size and weld 14 length, among others, for example; correct? 15 A Correct. 4 16 0 All right. 17 I' m going to shcw you a document that's 18 Int erv enors' Exhibit 20, Mr. Peterson. This is an NCR 19 that's numbered 1827. It's signed by Mr. Seese, and 20 I'll represent to you that it reflects, as of February 21 20, 1984, the then results of the inspector reinspection 22 program, all right? 23 Now, I show you several attachments. They have a 24 Bates stamp number on them. The last digit is 3541 and i () 25 following pages. Take a moment and look at those. l can n& m n D ann r & 4 n n caru4ca_ T.F A Ueneva, Ili nois 60134 l -~~ (312) 232-0262
6113 O 1 (Indicating. ) 2 Do they appear to be seven pages there of lists of 3 deficiencies, with the heading " Rick Martin" at the top 4 of the page? 5 A Yes. 6 0 All right, si r. 7 Now, if those are taken as deficiencies identified 8 in Mr. Martin's inspection work pursuant to the 9 inspector reinspection program -- at least, as of 10 Februa ry 20, 1984 -- looking down those lists of 11 rej ectable conditions -- deficiencies -- excuse me -- {) would you agree with me that -- I'm looking at the first 12 13 page of Mr. Martin's list, the first item, " slag, arc 14 strike, undercut" -- slag, arc strike and undercut are 15 rej ectable indications in welds that have always been 16 rej ectable at Comstock, haven' t they ? 17 A Not necessarily. It depends on the extent of slag and 18 undercut. 19 At one time you were not allowed to have any 20 spatter or arc strikes. You were allowed a certain .21 amount of slag and undercut. 22 You still are allowed a certain amount of slag and 23 undercut. Now we are allowed to have a certain amount - 24 of arc strikes and spatter. () 25' Q Are the acceptance criteria now more or less stringent Sonntaa Recortino Service. Ltd. Gebeva, 11115ois 60134 l l (312) 232-0262 l
6114 O 1 with respect to slag, undercut and arc strikes than they 2 were at the time Mr. Martin was probably doing his work 3 back in, say, '79, '80, '81? 4 A I don' t know what he was doing his work under then. I 5 can' t answer that. 6 Q You don' t know whether they were more or less stringent 7 then than now? 8 A I have no idea. 9 Q All right. 10 Do you know whether or not slag, arc strikes and 11 undercut were conditions, at the time that Mr. Martin 12 did his work, that he should have identified and [} 13 documented when he observed them in welds? 14 A If they were rej ectable, of course. 15 Q All right. 16 A If they were r ej ectable, yes. 17 0 If they were rej ectable, he should have noted them, 18 obviously ? 19 A Yes. 20 0 If they were not rej ectable, might they have required 21 evaluation? 22 A Well, that would be his j ob to evaluate them at the 23' time. 24 Q Would that evaluation be required to be documented under () 25 the program, as you understand it? l l Sonntag Reporting Ser'? ice; Ltd. l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262 i
6115 O 1 A As f ar as listing that they did have acceptable slag or 2 arc strike? 3 0 Yes, for example. 4 A No, you did not have to list that. 5 Q He would have to evaluate them but not list them? 6 A Right. 7 Look at the old f orms. They didn' t even ask. It 8 was a blank check. A guy could pretty much put anything 9 he wanted. 10 Q Yes, but 1,166 welds on a single inspection report -- 11 it's pretty hard to list all the slag that you find on 12 those welds, isn' t it? {} 13 A Right. That isn' t and has never been a requirement 14 anyway. If the weld is acceptable, you merely mark it 15 as such. 16 It has never been a requirement to write down 17 " acceptable but does contain slag, arc strikes" or 18 whatev er. 19 Q Okay. 20 But if the slag was of a character to be 21 rej ectable, then that f act, the identification of 22 rej ectable slag, would be documented on inspection 23 reports? 24 A Yes. () 25 Q Let's take it that -- let's take it, then, that the Sonntag Reporting Service,. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 =
l 6116 1 conditions that are reflected in this exhibit, NCR 1827, j 2 indeed reflect field conditions that were observed at 3 the time of this reinspection, all right? 4 Someone went to the field and identified, with 5 respect to these components that Mr. Martin had 6 previously inspected, conditions of alag and arc strike 7 and undercut f or that first hanger. 8 A Right. 9 Q And let's take it that those deficiencies in this NCR 10 reflected, at least at the time that the reinspection 11 was perf ormed of Mr. Martin's work, whatever standard 12 {) they were reinspecting to, Mr. Martin f ailed to identify 13 those rej ectable indications. 14 Is that consistent with your understanding of the 15 program, the reinspection program? 16 A Could you state that again as f ar as that last part 17 there? 18 Q I' ll try. 19 They went back and looked at old inspectors' past 20 work under this reinspection program, all right? 21 A U h-huh. 22 0 They evaluated that old inspectors' work according to 23 acceptance criteria, and that acceptance criteria 24 reflected that the condition shown on this first () 25 component on the listing of deficiencies -- slag, arc Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 6117 r~s , O 1 strikes and undercut -- was indeed a rej ectable 2 condition. 3 A Yes. 4 Q Have you got that much? 5 Now, is that consistent with your understanding of 6 how that program was conducted? 7 A I believe so. 8 I really didn' t have much of an understanding. All i 9 I knew was that a certain percentage of his stuff was 10 being reinspected. 11 Q My point is, Mr. Peterson: If you' re going to do a [} reinspection of someone's past work and you wrote " slag, 12 13 arc strike and undercut" by that work, do you take that 14 indication in the remarks section of this NCR to be 15 indicative of the f act that the reinspector determined 16 that those were rej ectable conditions -- 17 A Yes. 18 Q rej ectable slag? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And at the very least, they were rej ectable slag, arc 21 strikes and undercut according to the standards applied 22 by the reinspector? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Now, my question is: When you were out in the field and () 25 observing these multiple circumstances where Mr. 1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6118 O 1 Martin's welding work was evident, by his stamp, do you 2 know whether or not there were any welds that evidenced 3 rej ectable slag, arc strikes and undercut associated 4 with Mr. Martin's stamp? 5 A I had seen some welds of his that if I was to inspect 6 them, I would not have accepted them. 7 Q All right. 8 According to your understanding of the 9 th en-cur r ent, at the time you saw them -- + 10 A Yes. 11 Q -- then-current standards ? 12 A Yes. (} 13 Q All right. i 14 And f or the same reason that you stated earlier -- 15 that is, your understanding of management's repeated 16 lack of interest about f ollowing up on these old 17 inspection. questions and statements that walkdown would 18 find it -- I take it you didn' t report that, either? 19 MS. KEZ ELIS : Obj ection to the form of the 20 question. 21 I don' t think that f airly characteriz es the 22 testimony of this witness so f ar. l 23 MR. GUILD: The witness is capable of l 24 answering the question as it was asked, I think. () 25 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Overruled. l Renneag Reporting Service; Ltd. l Genev a, Illinois 60134 - ( 312) 232-0262 _ -.~. _ _ _
l l 1 6119 O 1 You can answer. 2 THE WITNESS: Could you ask that again, 3 pl ease ? 4 MR. GUILD: I' ll try. 5 BY MR. GUILD: 6 Q I take it that having observed conditions in Mr. 7 Martin's weld work that you, applying your current 8 standards, would have found rej ectable for slag, 9 undercut, arc strikes, for example, you didn' t report 10 that condition and you didn' t do so in part because you 11 had previously raised concerns about past work to 12 (} management and they had said, " Don' t wor ry about it. 13 The walkdowns will catch it"? 14 A Correct. 15 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Miss Kez elis, are you going 16 to have any redirect? 17 MS. KEZ ELIS : Not so f ar, Judge Grossman. 18 BY MR. GUILD: 19 Q You carry a pick and a wire brush with you to remove 20 alag f rom on or around the weld zone, do you not? 21 A Yes. 22 0 You might use it to remove paint, but typically craf t 23 remove the paint to prepare the weld, if it needs 24 remov al, bef ore you inspect it? () 25 A Yes. I Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Genev a, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 ,.g p m .g_-- -n
- t
+ 'r
6120 1 0 That's specifically what you use the pick f or, is it 2 not: to remove small amounts of slag inclusion? 3 A Yes. 4 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Mr. Guild, how much longer 5 do you have? 6 MR. GUILD: Very brief, Judge. 7 BY MR. GUILD: 8 Q Have you ever followed a practice of allowing welders to 9 repair rej ectable conditions on the spot, without 10 docmaenting your identification of the rej ectable 11 condition? 12 A There may have been an instance or two when you' re {} 13 working in process that there might be a slight slag 14 that they could make a little bit cleaner -- it's j ust a 15 coating; all they have to do is chip it off -- or 16 possibly a slight undercut that we didn' t f eel was maybe i 17 borderline. 18 If a guy is standing right there, you might say, 19 "W ell, could you possibly put in another pass here and-20 fix this?" 21 Q That's the purpose of doing the in-process: to allow 22 those very minor, easily-correctable conditions to be 23 corrected when the welder is still there? 24 A Just the minor ones, correct. () 25 Q Prior to you doing in process inspection, when you did Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
6121 1 1 postweld inspection, did you ever allow the welder to 2 come back and correct a rej ectable condition without 3 rej ecting that rej ectable condition? 4 A No. 5 MR. GUILD: No f urther questions. 6 MS. KEZ ELIS : No questions. 7 JUDG E G ROSSMAN : Thank you very much. You' re 8 excused. 9 Thank you f or testifying. 10 (Witness excused.) 11 JUDG E GROSSMAN : We'll recess until 9:00 12 o' clock on Tuesday morning. {} 13 MS. KEZ ELIS : And the direction to the 14 witness -- 15 JUDG E GROSSMAN : Oh, yes. 16 Please do not discuss your testimony with anyone. 17 THE WITNESS: Okay. 18 (WHER EU PON, at the hour of 11:50 A. M., 19 the hearing was continued to Tuesday, the 20 1st day of July,1986, at the hour of 21 9: 00 o' clock A. M.) 22 23 24 l C) 25 1 Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd. Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 i
CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER O This is to certify that the attached proceedings. before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the matter of: NAME OF PROCEEDING: COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Station, Units 1 & 2) DOCKET NO.: 50-456 OL; 50-457 OL PLACE: JOLIET, ILLINOIS O DATE: FRIDAY, JUNE 27, 1986 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (sigt) ~ (TYPED) h GLENN SONNTAG Official Reporter ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. Reporter's Affiliation O . _..,}}