ML20210Q026
| ML20210Q026 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 04/24/1986 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Holmes G MHB TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-690 NUDOCS 8605130583 | |
| Download: ML20210Q026 (1) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:tdt 4b pmr ug'o, 8 ~, UNITED STATES 8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L j WASHINGTON,0. C. 205SS
\...../
APR 2 41986 Mr. Gregory A. Holmes MHB Technical Associates 1723 Hamilton Avenue, Suite K IN RESPONSE REFER San Jose, CA 95125 TO F0IA-85-690
Dear Mr. Holmes:
This is in response to your letter dated October 10, 1985, in which you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (F0IA), that the previously withheld portions of the January 21, January 27, and February 5, 1982, Commission meeting transcripts regarding Diablo Canyon be released. The requested information 'is being placed in the NRC Public Document Room located at 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555, in file folder F01A-85-690 j in your name. Sincerely, i Donnie H. Grimsley, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration esosiaosea e60424 PDR FOIA HOLMESBs-690 PDR
@E6 O
, 7- - _
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION msmaron.o.c. mas March 15. 1982 4 ColeISSION DETERMINATION REGARDING PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER THE n GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE ACT OF-E'i l t '
. . - ..w.,
~
f O
- Transcript of Comission Discussion of Region V Report on Diablo Canyon Thursday, January 21, 1982 be l J nt to 10 CFR 9.108(c) and 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5), the Comission has ned that the attached portions of the subject transcript should !
leased to the public. The remaining portions of the transcript l bein9 withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5) ' tad below: l i ) ine through Page/Line Exemotion l w . t
/12 56/ 21 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5) i $
i - I' . 1 1 5. j e.
. i!
. UEL . CHILK s
Secretary of e Comission j i e
?
- v g. d'
<f2 W. .
4.
i...., _
...e
,3. _ . . _ . . _ _ _ ___;___._____._____.___.______.__
Z YI '
- g.M ",%
e d ubTt sTnt 7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j . wasnaarom. o.c.ansas j L .
,/ d o,.<* March 15, 1982 9 areas or ws ggensTAny 1
?
COMMISSION DETERMINATION REGARDING PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER THE GOVERNMENT IN INE SUNSHINE ACT OF:
.. . w .. ,
d Transcript of Comnission Discussion of Diablo Canyon Recort - 1 Wednesday, January 27, 1982 O' i m Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.108(c) and 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5), the Cannission has ; determined that the attached portions of the subject transcript should ' be released to the public. The remaining portions of the transcript are being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5), as
) noted below:
Page/Line through Pace /Line Examotion
~
19/16 23/25 10CFR9.104(a)(5) 25/22 29/25 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5) 40/25 42/18 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5) 43/8 47/17 10 CFR 9.104 a)(5) 53/5 53/18 10 CFR 9.104 a)(5) 55/2 56/6 10 CFR 9.104 a)(5) l 57/17~ 60/9 10CFR9.104(a)(5) SAMUEL J. C LX Secretary of the ission T \ < a
.. Q C:
3 h
#"% Yl d E d shA
;! ** Z NUCl. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'y .. I wasumaron. o.c.ansas l
S mcpp r' o,,<* e-
,,,enopTua March 15, 1982 .
sacasTA"Y i I CONiISSION DETERMINATION REGARDING PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER THE , GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE ACT OF: 1
.. ..w, Transcriot of Comission Discussion of Phase I of Diablo Canyon Recort Fricay, Feoruary 5, 1982 Pursuant to 10 CR 9.108(c) and 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5), the Cannission has -
detemined that the attached portions of the subject transcript should be released to the public. The remaining portions of the transcript are h being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5) as noted below: Page/Line throuch Page/Line Exemption 9/6 20/21 39/6 10 CFR 9.104(a)(5) 41 /1 7 10 CFR 9.104 a 47/22 49/20 10 CFR 9.104 a
. u. J CHILX N
Secretary of e conmission h
\
o ..
4~/ u . auC ~A2 RhdTOE! COMCSSICN O
/
( COMMISSION MEETING
!.:: the 20 - cf: CLOSED MEETING - EXEMPTION 5 DISCUSSION OF REGION V REPORT ON DIABLO CANYON
\
( C;wr January 21, 1982 'pAGzg:. 1 - 173
,g . Washington, D. C. .
gfj$Q UPf ALDEDL%Y !* REPORTI.TG F .. ( 400 vi_yd d-A Ave.., S.W. W'*hg-- , C. C. 20024
'Talaphc=e :- (202) 554-2345 l
55 1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, tha t is l 4 2 higinificant, because he was one of the two who thought i l
~
3 the PGEE statement -- 4 MR. FAULKENBERRY: We asked a question in a 5 broad term, and when you go back and really look at the 6 details of his statement, he does not differentiate 7 between Cloud, Maneatis and Norton. 8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa And in any case, this 9 is the characterization of the various PGEE employees. 10 It 's up to us to decide whether Cloud was misleading us 11 or not. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I gather that most of 13 the questioning of Cloud was done by Faulkenberry and 14 Shackleton -- or Fa ulkenberry, I guess. Wa s it your 5 15 impression that he was being evasive? 16 MR. FAULKENBERRY: No. I can only just give 17 you my impression, but I did not get the impression that 18 he was being evasive. 19 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN04 Who are you speaking of? 20 MR. FAULKENBERRY: Dr. Cloud. 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: How about Shackleton? 22 MR. EHACKLETON: I concur. He did not appear 23 to be evasive t o us. We interviewed him three different 24 times. 25 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Did snybody appear to i ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 654 2345
1 be evasive? 2 g MR. FAULKENBERRY: I would have to answer that i '
. 3 question no. Ihere were certain people's testimony I 4 think wa s less clea r than other people's, and whether it 5 was a " confusion" in their ability to recall or whether 6 it was being evasive, I really don't know. But there 7 were maybe two interviews that you could put into that 8 category.
9 COMFISSIONER GILINSKYs Which were? 10 MR. FAULKENBERRYs Rocca's, and possibly Hoch 11 and possibly Don Brand. 12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Hoch and Rocca's 13 testimony is pretty important, I think, on this issue. 14 MR. FAULTENBERRYs I think so, yes. 3 15 CHAIEMAN PALLADIN0s And you said you got a 16 little feeling that they migh t have been evasive? 17 MR. FAULKENBERRYs I don't want to say that. 18 I think Rocca is probably the one in the most question. 19 N ow , whether he was being evasive or whether he had 20 problems in recalling the details of what happened and 21 he was stumbling, I really don't know. 22 MR. ENGLEKENs Mr. Rocca, who recognized Mr. 23 Norton's statements on pages 216 and 217 of the 24 transcript to be misleading, in his sworn testimony 25 stated that he did not see any inaccuracy in Dr. Cloud's ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
7 ,_ _ .
'. $/
~<
'\
9 - OfTW ' weczz.xa nGuz. Aeon coxicss:Os B l
~
. . l
, COMMISSION MEETING In h h d: CLOSED MEETING - EXEMPTION 5 DISCUSSION OF DIABLO CANYON REPORT !
l l
*l n.m.: January 27, 1982 pgggg., 1 - 68 , i 2
AT: Washington, D. C. !!
' I'
- a. I l
l 6 i i
.w-9
,~
l i
. ;i ma%Y
- REPORn.YG l S-400 V1 yd da Ave., S.W. Washing.==, D. C. 20024
( Talaphc=a: (202) 554-2345 l l
..- _, . .- _.4 ., _,.m .
'. ' \
19 l 1 C0ENISSIONER ROBERTS: That is not exactly 2 *answering the question the Chairman asked. g
~
3 RR. DIRCKS: In a var it does. This report i 4 probably will show that Cloud made changes in the report 5 but the reasons for the changes were technically 8 explainable. , 7 CONNISSIONER AREARNE: And supportable? 8 , BR. DIRCKSa Explainable and supportable. In 9 that sense I gather you would follow to a conclusion 10 that. the independence of Cloud .has not been affected. l 11 ER. DENTON: I think that addresses the 1 12 question of did prior editorial control get exercised by , 13 the company over Cloud and that seems to be coming out l ( 14 that the answer is negative based on the initial look at
; 18that.
14 CHAIRMAd PALLADIN0s What evidence do we have 17 to say that we should not continue Cloud as an eligible is candidate for independent audit? 19 C0HNISSIONER BRADFORDs Well, it is less a 20 satter I should think of his independence than of his 21 fundamental credibility. My concern is less whether he 22 is independent than what we make of the fact that he sat 23 the~re in the room while Norton made that statement and 24 took no steps to correct it. - 2s The problem I really have with him is as to d l ALotASON A&ORTING COWANY,WC, I, 400 VIRONA AVE. S.W. WASHWGToN, D.C. 20014 (202 464 2344 I k, . ____________._.___________.__.____.___i____.___
- , . . . . . . . _i. . . _ . . . . . . _ _ .
20 1 1 1 his future believabilty rather than whether he was 2] independent because it is not clear to se that he had t'o
- f. 3 be independent as of that point in time.
! 4 I guess I would also want to know not just 5 whether the changes that were made all had technical 6 justification but whether there were areas in which PGCE 7 urged on him changes that were more cosmetic in nature 8 and he declined to make them or whether that just wasn't { e part of the traffic at all. 10 It is one thing if he made all the changes j
- 11 that were urged and they were all technically justified )
12.and that is all to the good. It is I suppose better if 13 they urged other types of changes on him as well and he i j 14 declined to make those. 2 15 EB. DIRCKSs I don't think we know the answer l 16 to that one. What they have done I guess or will
' ~
17 complete in this report is looking at a11 the textual 18 changes to see what has been- changed and what was the to basis for the change. 20 CHAIRHAN PALLADIN04 Peter, if the question is 21 credibility, and I agree that that is an important 22 question, should we arrange to have Cloud here so that 23 ve have our own opportunity to determine the i 24 circumstances behind the statement that rsises questions .j 25 on this credibility?
. l l
. l l ALoansON MPORDNG COMPANY, pec, 400 VIAGNA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 884 2348 l
.o . ..... . . . . . _ _ . . . . . .
e . 21 1 COHNISSIONER BRADFORD* That is a possibility, 2 oe. I just hadn't thought about it. That might be a ', g- 3Igood idea. - 1 I s . 4 CHAIRHAN PALLADINOa Credibility casts !
. \
5: aspersions on his integrity. ) 1 6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes. I understand , 7 what you are saying.
~
8 CHAIRHAN PALLADIN0s I have a feeling that if s we were going t' hat route we would want to be' satisfied 10 that we had a sound . basis for any decision we make. 11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, good sense 12 also. It seems to se that if you decide that he had an 13 obligation to inform as that he had given draf ts to the ( 14 company then that makes it very difficult to continue 16 with Cloud as an aligible independent reviewer. 16 I say this as one who thought of well of his
~ ^
17 up to then and didn't feel that his various associations is with the company, before disqualified him. to CHAIRHAN,PALLADINOs What do others feel? 20 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS: Vell, I am not
'21 convinced in my own sind that he had that obligation.
22 CHAIRHAN PALLADINOs Had what obligation? 23 COEHISSIONER ROBERTSa Had the obligation to 24 report to the NRC that- he had prepared a draf t.
, 25 COMBISSIONER GILINSKYs Well, I did put it in ALDEASON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VtMO!NIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (203 664 2346
- - , - , - . . ,_ m
*., 's *
~
22 1 the form of a question. 2 COHNISSIONER ROBERTS: I beg your pardon? .
~
r- 3 COMBISSIONER GILINSKY: .I did put it in the i 4 form of a question. 5 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS: I understand. 6 COHNISSIONER GILINSKYa I believe he did. . 7 ER. DENTON: He displayed on a, number of 8 occasions an insensitivity to our concern about this 9 area. Now whether that is enough to disqualify him I 10 think is the' judgment that you are trying to re'ach today. 11 In the very first meeting he made a statement 12 about what the purpose of his review was and Dick 13 directed him there. I think he had said he was to prove ( 14 the plant was . safe. I 15 ER. DeYOUNGs I think he said that I hope we 16 will not find any problems in our review. 17 ER.DhETON: That came into some discussion 18 about was that his roie, you know, to prove it was 19 s af e . Then at the second meeting we asked a question 20 about reports and. .that was- the first instance. If he 21 had answered that there are draf t rdports available and 22 we will provide .these to all parties then in the future 23 there would have never been any question. i
. . 24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, there might have l 25 been a question. In fact, I think that is an important .
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGToM. D.C. 20024 (208 664 2348 l
, i
)
23 ! 1 point. I understand what you are saying, that if he had 2 made it clear it; would have been, you know, on the tabit
. r~. 3 and certainly the, question of credibility or his honesty
\ . .
. 4 or good sense won'id not have been at issue. .
. 5 The mee' ting was over whether he was -doing a 6 reasonable job and whether he ought to be an~ independent .
7 reviewer. It seems to me that had'the company said 8 straight out that we of course had draf t rep' orts 9 circulating, this would have raised's lot.of eyebrows 10 and one might have inquired and said, well, that is 11 okay. In the future handle it a little differently or 12 whatever, or at least inform us vhen you do it. , 13 But we might also have said for one or another
. 14 reasons perhaps because others would have made a great i
15 stink about it and there would have been a great plat
~
16 outside of this agency that we miqht have decided that a . . . .- . 17 he wasn ' t th e righ t guy. Certainly from their point of 18 view it may well have appeared that way. .
. 19 So I think it isn't just a matter of, you 20 know, that it really didn't matter to them one way or 21 the other or they might have said this or they might 22 have said that, or they forgot. You know, it is 23 understandab3 ) that they would be a littie reluctant to 24 say, well, you know, we have had these things because .
25 who knows what your reaction would have been. 9 ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIAGINIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 564 2348
~
- . . l 25 1 CH AIRH AN P ALLADINO4 One at a time.
~
2, COMEISSIONER AHEARNEs When I read the
- e. .
3 transcript of the meeting ---
'l 4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa I thought I was the 5one.
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: --- I don't see the . 7 message that you people are drawing out of it. 8 CDHEISSIONER GILINSKY "You people" includes 9 who now? 10 COMMISSIONER.AHEARNE: That includes you and 11 Harold a aokent ago. I do not see reading through that 12 that was the focus of the meeting. So I can't reach 13 that same level of conclusion. (s.. 14 I admit that when I first read the extracted,
- 15 just those short portions of the transcript, yes, it was 16 very disturbing. But when I read the whole meeting 17 transcript and when I read the interviews I don't come 16 away with that same view.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO John, are you saying that 20 ve need more. information before you address this? 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: No. I am not. 22 CHAIREAN PALLADIN0s Information such that you 23 have no question about the credibility of Cloud? 24 COHEISSIONER AHEARNEa Let me get back to your . 25 earlier question. Frankly, bringing Cloud in and asking ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGIN!A AVE 3.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 200:4 (202) 554 2344
26 l 1 1 1 him questions certainly for myself isn't going to lead ! r 2 se to have any higher or lower opinion of him. If it is'
, 3 a question of having the media see that the NRC is 4 questioning this guy to vet him or in some way to ensure 5,that his credibility is unquestionable, then that is a 6 separate issue and. I wouldn 't want to do it. That is a ,
7 separate question. 8 _As far as his credibility, I do not see that 9 what has happened so f ar as removing his from 10 eligibility on thi's list and I will avait the final 11 recommendation that comes f rom the staff on whether or I 12 not he and these other people are eligible. 13 CHAIRHAN PALLADINO: Do you think his
- k. 14 eligibility in your mind would be influenced by waiting 15 for segment two of the report?
16 COHEISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, clearly if it i
~- . . I 17 turned out to be negative, yes. 1 18 CHAIBHAN PALLADINO: Well, regardless of which 19 var it goes, if apparently it is going to be negative ---
20 COHEISSIONER AHEARNEs No, positive. . 21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOs I as sorry. It depends 22 on what you mean by negative and positive. l 23 (Laughter.) l l 24 COMBISSIONER AHEARNE: From what I have heard . 1 25 at least their initial reactica is that it is not going ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY.INC, 400 VIRGINIA Ava, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2344 4
27 1 to say that he was influenced. So therefore I would sar 2'th'at that kind of a. finding would lead me to continue to
. a. . .
e 3 feel that at the soment I see nothing wrong with him in A . l
. 4 that position. But .that means that he is 'just eligible 5 on that 1 st.
We had agree'd-that we would hear comments from 4 7 the outside and. ve would evaluate those comments and
. 8 then get the staff's recommendation and then we'would s
. 9 reach a judgment'. All I am saying is what I have seen 10 so far doesn't in my ,aind remove him from that. list of 11 eligiblity.
l 12 I will point out that, on the one hand, we 13 have these instances which Harold picked off and, on the 14 other hand, we have his draft report which, as Harold g , 15 also pointed out, he has already found a number of 16 additional problems. So'it isn't as though the work ! 17 that he has done so far has been a whitewash. - 18 CHAIBRAN: PAL 1ADIN04 Bell, I think I expressed 19 last time that I hadn't seen evidence that would enable 20 se to remove his from the eligibility list. I was just 21' trying to draw ut the questions to make sure that
' ag'whatever basis we were going to use for the decision on 23 the point at this time, that all that information was 24 available. . -
25 , COHNISSIONER BRADFORDa It seems to se in a ALDEASON MPoRTING COMPANY, MC. 400 VIRONA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (2023 864 2348
.s.. ,
i'., - 1 28 e - 1 var we have come at the question backwards. Tha t is, 2{yoit almost have to decide the ' material false statement i j -
. 3 question first at least if credibility if part'of the i (. .
i 4 issue and then decide whether Cloud's role in it, if i j 5 there vais one, is sufficiently troublesome. i t- S If it turns out that the Commission doesn 't . 7 feel there is a materia'l f alse statement then there is 8 hardly an issue left. If the Consission does feel there 4 ) 9 is a.asterial false statement and t'at h Cloud
- 10 participated by omission then you would at least have to 11 have a fairly clear. explanation of why' that doesn't l
l 12 remove his 'from the list. -
)
i 1 13 I would suggest we take a crack at the l' j A. 14 material f also statement question before closing on the ! 15 Cloud issue once and for all. . l 16 CHAIREAR PA1LADINO: Hell, the ma terial f alse
- a
) .
- 17 statement question has several aspects to it. There
- 18 vere false statements made. In my opinion anyhow I f 18 think they appear material, but that doesn't necessarily 20 say that they were material enough to want to take any l
21 particular action. Now, I haven't fathosed all that a
- 22 aspect of it in my own mind.
; 23 CONNISSIONER BRADFORD: No, that is right. It ,
J l j 24 is possible to conclude that there was a material false , $ 23 sta' tement and that Cloud's role in it was negligible and - I i f i l AtoansON ROORTWG COWANY. WC. 400 WRONA AVa S.W., WA8Mm0 TON. 0.C. 20034 (303 884-2348 - e
! er--,--.. , _ __---,.e,_r-,.-,.-r---y.<---mww.-.--rw---.e--- - - -.-------e-.-r,--,. ,-.---k,,-,wc-,r.-----,v- ~ .--,.---..,,.--i,mw---. . . _ _
, - . , , - , ....m . . . .... . . . ... . . . . _ . _ ,, , . .. ,
.' 29
~
1 therefore that he. stays on the list. fit is even i possible I suppose to conclude that his. cole in it was
., -r 3 not negligible but.that it wasn't large enough.to remove r .
. 4 his from the list at this time. - .
5 All I am suggesting is that it seems more 6 ord erly to ' decide the material f alse statement issue and , 7 then sort out the Cloud role than to decide the Cloud 8 role first and the material f alse statement question
- e second.
10 CHAIBEAN PALLADINO: Bell', under the material 11 false statement I think there was certainly the f alse 12 statement by Norton. I have forgotten the other man's 13 name.
- T. .
14 ER. DeTOUNGs Hanettis. 15 C51AIREAN PALLADINO4 Hanea tis . Eliminating 16 the questica of whether they did i't knowingly or not, 17 they were f alse statements and I think they had the I 18 capacity to influence some action we took. There appeared to be by omission a false
. . Is
)
20 indication on the part of Cloud. First of all, he 21 omitted the fact that he had issued a draf t and that 22 th.ere were comments. Then he also ande a statement tha t 23 he said was in response to the final report rather than i 24 the draf t report. I think those are the ma.1or points 25 that we have to address with regard to cloud. ALDERSON RtPORDNQ COMPANY,ING, 400 VIRONA avl 3,W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 884 2348
, - - - - - - <-,,n ,)_.,,__ , . - - _ . , , . , , ,r_,,,,.., -- , , - , , , - - , , , , - ,,
.. . l l
.. 50 l
. 1 1 'CHAIRHAN PALLADINO: Or are you concluding e .
2;that.it wasn't serious enough to pursue it? , f-. 3 CONNIS'SIONER AREARNE: I guess in my limited
\ ~
4 experience with this terminology here I had seen that 5 there ver's gradations. :I' thought material false 6 statement was yes or no. , 7 CHAIRHAN PALLADINOs Then the second question 8 isa You can have a material f also statement; yes or 9 no? Then I:think the gradations come in when you want 10 to decide what to do about it. 11 COHEISSIONER ANEARNEs To me I must admit that 12 material f alse statement as a phrase is still. kind of 13 fuzzy. It doesn't have crystal clarity so that I can ( 14 look at something and say yes or no on it. In general 15 sy' impression here is that I would not reach the level
~
18 that this is a material f alse statement. 17 About the most I would have gone to is writing to letters of censure, if you would like, to --- 1e CONHISSIONER GILINSKYs Well, let's see, why? 20 CHAIRHAK PALLADINO: That is where the 21 gradation comes in, what you do about it.' l 22 .CONNISSIONER GILINSKY Do you think it is an i 23 immaterial f also statement or do you think it is a l 24 material f alse statement? ; l 26 COHNISSIONER AREARNE: First, I would have ALDEA$oN REPORTING COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRONA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON 0.C. 20024 (203 884 2348 ,
, i i
_,_...;,,,. ~ . . , m
. , , . , , , , _ 7._ .
.. ._7...-_ . ,
s, 1 felt that Er. Norton ,should get one because I' don't
- 2 ShEnk he prepared himself adequately for representing ,
- f. - 3 the company. Second,, I would have sent.such letters to
(
. 4 Roce,a and Hoch who . vere the two people who said that, SI gee, they knew' something was wrong there and they 'didn't
~
8 speak up. Then I would have sent somethiag to Brand and , 7 to Oe chairman of the board of PGCE saying that they 8 have to get across the message to their" company that if - 9 people. know something is incorrectly being stated that 10 they.have got to speak up. *
. ,11
. COREISSIONER GILINSKYs Let's see, so you are 12 saying it was incorrect. .
13 CORNISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, clearly there c (.' . 14 were two people in that meeting from the investigation
) 15 who felt there was something said that was aisleading.
16 CORNISSIONER GILINSKYa You are saying that 17 their statements were not wrong. 18 00EMISSIONER AHEARNE6 I as saying that there 19 vere two people in the meeting, according to the 20 investigation, who felt that those statements were 21 misleading. 22 ,CORRISSIONER GILINSKYa You are going to come 23 down on the two guys 'who gave some semblance of honesty.
, 24 CORNISSIONER AHEARNEs They were the ones who .
25 said that they knew something was wrong. I as tracking ALDEASON AEPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINEA AVE $.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (208 884 2348 v+< r - - . - - - . _ _ _ .,----------,.----.,e -e- __e.----wm
42 l 1 to Dick's point on the previous meeting that he gets the ! 2 sense that the attitude in this company is to not have . j i ! y, 3 people be forthcoming. So I would come down on those i
\
4 two aspects and that is why I would go to the chairman 5 of the board and to Brand who is the hea'd of engineering. 6 But I also, frankly, based upon the materials . 7 that came out in the questioning of Norton, I would s . 8 conclude if he is going to represent the company that he
~
'S ought to do a better job at preparing for it.
10 COREISSIONER GILINSKYs Would you also write 11 to the senior partners of his fira? 12 CORNISSIONER AHEARNE: No. 13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDa Of which he is one. i :
-\ 14 (Laughter.)
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: John, when you go through
. 16 that transcript you do have statements that are false.
17 Norton made a statement that is f alse. Whether he knew ! 18 about it or not it was a falso statement.
- 19 Now I took time to go through the TEPC0
, 20 decision and it,ssened to h'ave pretty good sense about i 21 it and it would convince me that this was a material l 22 f also statement. These two sentences aren' t quite 23 right, but I come down to whether there was a anterial 4 24 f alse statement. Now the question is what do I do about . j 25it. As I say, I have trouble deciding yet where to go i i ALDEASON REPORTING COMPAN'f,INc. 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20024 (202) 584 2348 f i
43 1 on that.
~~
22 The' staff I gather says, and don't let as put '
...,- 4 words is your mouth, but I an implying that you believe
( 4 we ought to take action on a civil penalty in this 8 regards is that right?
- 8. MR. DeYOUNGs Do you want my view?
~
7 CHAIREAR PALLADINO: Yes. 8 NR. DeIOUNG4 Hy view is that we should get 9 the attention of the company in some way. You have . 10 alternatives to review and we would like your advice on 11 it. 12 One is that we could talk to the chief of the a 13 board of directors or some high company officials and (, 14 set it that way. : Another way to get it we think is the j 4 16 civil penalty. But there are various ways to get it. 16 CHAIREAN PAL 1ADINOs There is also the var 17 that Commissioner Ahearne indicated, to write letters of 18 censure. It would accomplish the same thing. 19 ER. DeYOUNG: It could. 20 CONNISSIONER GILINSKY: 'I was a lii.i.le puzzled
.v . -
21 by John's typroach because I understood you to be 22 saying, John, that you didn't think the responses were 23 f alse. ' Am I wrong? l 24 COHNISSIONER AHEARNE: You and I have spent, s . 25 as I. recall, many hours debating what f also means. So
\
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY.INC, 400 VIRGINtA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 584-2344 3 -- . - - -
- 44 1 let us not go back into that long story. l 2a COEMISSIONER GILINSKI I have a pretty clear,
~
.. ' ' 3 idea what f alse is.
\
4 C0HEISSIONER AHEARNEs What I as saying is 5 that I believe that the people who didn't act the way 6 that I believe they should have acted were Norton, Rocca ,
.7 and Hoch. I believe that what it reflects, and this is
. I 8 not. based upon the interviews but it is based more on 9 what Dick said last week, that it would track with the 10 pattern of a company that does not encourage its people 11 to be forthcoming. That is why I would then move be7ond 12 that and also go to the chairman of the board and to 13 Brand.
(._ 14 COHEISSIONER GILINSKY Did you mean the 15 present when you said the chairman of the board? 16 COHHISSIONER AHEARNE: No, the chairman of the 17 board. 18 CHAIBHAN PALLADINOs Vait a minute, what was 19 your conclusion with regard to Norton? 20 COHNIgSIONERAREARNEa I felt that Worton did . 21 not prepare himself adequately for representing the 22 company. He was the lead person here. 23 COH5ISSIONER GILINSKYs When he speaks the 24 company speaks. . , 25 COHEISSIONER AHEABNE: That is right. Here is ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRG4NEA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C.20024 (202) 554 2344 1 J
_ - . _ _ _ . . . - . . . _ . , _ , ~. , 45 1 a guy 'I felt, at least based upon the investigation, l' 2 [that.he didn't prepare himself adequately. He was oct ,,
~
- s. J3 there very willingly.to volunteer lots of information 7
3, . . 4
- 4 which essentially he didn't do.
5 - CH IRMAN PALLADINO: It was based on a 6 question th'at he raised on ' Sunday evening where he asked , 7 was a report submitted.
. 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: If you ask my opinion, 9 ay' opinion is that ~I find it astonishing that as
'10 skillful a lawyer as he .is, and I have seen him in 11 operation, who is very probing in asking lots of 12 questions, and who has been experienced working with 13 utilities for years would make that one throw-away k 14 question and take ,that. answer and then build all this on l
~
l , 15 it. 16 CHAIR 5AN PALLADIN0's But nevertheless what he 17 said was false. He was representing the company and I 18 believe the statement vas material. Now that doesn't 19 tell ne where I will come down. t 20 CONNISS,IONER ROBERTS: I pretty well agree j 21 with John except I 'have some problems about sending
^
221etters to individuals. I mean if we are going to 23 admonish the licensee, that is who we should admonish. 24 I personally have some problems about picking out the . 25 individuals. Go to the chairman of the board or the CEO
~
m.oe.asON REPORTING COMPANY.WC. 400 VWIGNA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (203 564-2348 1 *
. .~ .
- 46 1 'whichever.
Let me understand, 2[' COHNISSIONER GILINSKYa 8 Tom. Are you saying .that they did not aisiend .us? k* 4 I as saying that it is COHNISSIONER ROBERTS 5 not clear 'to me, based on what .ve have been presented 6 with, that they made the material f alse statement. ,
.7 . COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs, Again, because it is 8 not material .or because it is not false.?
9 CORHISSIONER ROBERTS: I think those are two 10 different issues. 11 'COHEISSIONER GILINSKYs That is what I am 12 asking.you, how do you come out on this? l 13 COMMISSIONER ROBERTSs I am not sure how ! ( !
\ 14 material it is.
15 COHEISSIONER GILINSKYs But do you think it 16 was true, Norton's statement? 17 COHH'ISSIONER ROBERT'Ss Well, I don't think 18 Norton made a true statement. 19 CONHISSIONER GILINSKT Did he make a false 20 statement?
.w-21 CONHISSIONER ROBERTSs I think he did but I
~
22 think you have to understand the context in which it was 23 ande. 24 Yictor, you are not going to dissuade me. I
- 9 25 hav' e . not determined ---
ALDEASON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. 400 VWlGINtA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202 $$4 2348
.. ,' =
i -
. . a7 1 C0HEISSIONER GILINSKY: I an . inst try'ing to e - .
2.uhderstand how you coming out on this. . l
- S' COEHISSI.ONER' ROBERTS:
I as coming out that it (, . '
- 4 is. not clear to as that there was a material f alse .
i 5 statement made. . , 6' CORRISSIONER GILINSKYs Because it wasn't . 7 material. When Norton speaks the company speaks. Those 8 are our rules. , 9 COHEISSIONER BR'ADFORDs And indeed their 10 rules, too. 11 CHAIRHAN PALLADINOs Well, where we stand is 12 the staff anyhov feels that there was.a material f alse
~
13 statement and that they would propose, at least Dick .
/
*( .
~14 DeYoung would like to get attention, and one way that
- -15 might get sttention is a civil penalty but you are not 16 recommending the civil penaltys is tha't correct?
17 NR. DeYOUNGs That is correct. 18 COHNISSIONER BRADFORD Dick, can I ask it
. ~
19 another way. Sunposing that this vere a run-of-the-mill - 20 case, that the decision since it is severity level three 21 were with you and not with us, would you impose a civil 22 penalty? 25 ER. DeYOUNGs It night come out that we would 24 propose notice of violation without the civil penalty. 25 But it depends and you have to look at each case. I As.cansoN REPoRTWG COMPANY WC. 400 VWIGINIA AVa.S.W.WA$HWGTON 0.C. 20024 (2023 564 2346 ,
,P . . .
. . 53
. . . . 1
- 1 transcript all that you people are reading into 'it . inst ;
2 doesn't come out. ,
,_ ~ 3 COH5ISSIONER.GILINSKYa Well then why'do,you -
- g. .
g~ ' 4 vant to censure anybody? . . 5 COHEISSIONER AHEARNEs As I explained already, 6'I felt Norton ill prepared himself and two' of the people . 7 mentioned in the transcript didn't speak up about
*- 8 s'osething they knaw was ' misleading. . . r e CONHISSIONER GILINSKY: We don't censure 10 lawyers --- ' -
- 11. COBHISSIONER ROBERTS: Wait a. minute, didn't 12 ve c. ensure the lawyers in ---
"13 ER. BICKVITs (Steppin - phonetic)(7)
( 14 COREISSIONER BRADFORDs Not for being ill "g% 1'5 prepared though. 16 - (Laughter.) 17 COHEISSIONER BOBERTS: Veli, but the statement is was we vill censure lawyers. is COHEISSIONER GILINSKY Wait a sinute, you 20 didn't let me fin,ish thz sentence. 21 (Laughter.) 22 COMMISSIONER AHEABNE: You didn't let me 23 finish what I was saying either.
/ 24 (Laughter.) ,
25 COHNISSIONEB GILINSKTs Why don't we stop ALDEASON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. 400 vtRGINIA AVL 3.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 564 2344
,- .. -_.-,..-..7% . . - , . ,_ 7,_,,,._, ., , ,,r,_____,,,_y,,,.- . , . , , , _ , . . , _ . g ,., . . , . . , _ , , , , _ , , , _ - _ , , _ , ,
1 55 1 management more on track in what they ou g ht 2, to be doing.
- COMMISSIONER GILINSKY What I was going to k 3 say before was that we don't censure lawyers for being 4 ill prepared for meetings in Bethesda .
That is a 5 different thing than in a proceeding or some thi ng else. 8 But the censure, the two people, as much as I 7 depore the fact that the two PGEE people who fl e t that 8 the statement was misleading did not come u p and mention 9 it to their superiors, it seems to be a lot more. serious 10 than people who knew the facts such as Br and and were it more responsible did not speak up. These two guys 12 suffered from a little bit of honesty and they weren't 13 stro.ng enough to pursue it. (_ But to single them out it 14 seems to me to turn the whole thing on it 15 s head. You know, the course you are on, John, is 18 really just to invite' everyone to lie t o us. 17 COMEISSIONER AHEARNE: You are sayidg then 18 that you don't believe the other peopl e who said that 19 they didn't think it was misleading . 20 them. You don't believe
.aw 21 CONMISSIONER GILINSKY No, I don't.
22 COHHISSIONER BRADFORD: Or even if I did I j 23 think particularly in Cloud's case, and thi s is what I 24 find most troublesome about him, there is j , ust somehov a ! 25 higher degree of duty to understand what is . l ! at play than i ALDERSON REPORUNG COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINtA AVE,3.W., WASHINGTON
, . . D C 2002
56 1 he demonstrated even assuming that he was telling .the 2jtesth when he says that he thought what was being - 3 discussed was a final report. If he had any sensitivity I 4 to the issue at all, and now independence does come into 5 it, then I think there is a level of dumbness that has 8 to get penalized, too. ,l ' I will try not to make
.7 COHNISSIONER AHEARNEs j 8 this point again because eith'er I am wrong or it is not i 9 being understood. A lot of the discussion today would j 10 lead me to conclude that we are talking about a November l
113rd meeting and the subject was are there d raf t reports 12 or what type of report is being written and when is it 13 going to be submitted. Maybe those few who were at the 14 setting unf erstood that was the topic. That is not what , 15 the. transcript comes across as. 16 COMMISSIONER GILIISKYa You are making' a < 17 distinction between a draf t report and a repbrt? i 18 COHEISSIONER AHEARNEs It is a side point as l 19 f ar as I can tell embedded in this. 20 COMMISSIONER BR&DFORDs One of the reasons , 21 though that it takes up so small a space in the 22 transcript was that Harold got what he thought was a
- 23 conclusive answer to his question. The reason that that j : 24 point wasn't discussed any further was that Harold was .;
, l l 25 told that there was nothing there to discuss. So that ! i I l ALDER $oN REPORTING CQMPANY.INC. ! 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (20:0 554-2346
57 1 instead I of a five-page discussion it is a two-page
~
2 ; discussion. e . 'S . CORRISSIONER AHEARNE: Except that it is t' 4 silaost 500 pages into the transcript that the issue 5fcomes np. 6 COEHISSIONER BRADFORDa I am not saying it is 7 the major point. I think it is an important one. But 8 you know when you look at Commission meetings here they 9 vander some. 10f (Laughter.) 11 C0HNISSIONER BRADFORDa But the Consission 12 assumes that when it asks the staff for information on 13 any particular point in the course of those vanderings (-. 14 that it is getting an accurate answer and that if some g 15 of the people at the table have aisgivings they will 16 speak up on that.
- ~
'17 CH AIRH AN P ALL ADIN0's Well, I wonder if I might
-18 comment . I haye been thinking. about your letter to 19 censure Rocca and Hoch. What bothers me was that those 20 are two people that had the courage, even though it was 2'1 belated courage to come and tell the truth. If we 22 ' censure them what worries ne is we censure the 23 tru h-sayers in a sense. I know they should have told 24 the story sooner, but I as afraid if we begin to censure .
25 them we are going to send signals out that, boy, if you ALDERSoN REPORT'.NG COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRGINtA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (203 564-2346 l ~ s s lI .
. u .
58 1 stick your neck out and say, yes, I think we should have 2 done thus and so, you are going to get censured and the .
. 3hooplewhoanyhavenottoldthetruthgetawayfree.
4 That is what worries me. 5 I would like to encourage forthcoming honesty 6 and I an afraid that might discourage it. Now I am not
.7 speaking to any other part of your censure procedure 8 except for those two.
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKI I must say that I to agree with that. 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Then you must have 12 concluded. that some of those people who responded have ! 13 perjured themselves. ( A 14 CHAIRHAN PALLADINOs I admit to the possibli.tr 15 that that may be. 2 16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think it has to be 17 more than that because you said 'we are censuring those 18 people who told the truth. I think that has to carry 19 with it the conclusion that there are others who lied. 20 CHAIRHAN PALLADINOs No, it doesn 't 21 necessarily carry'ihat. At least here are two people 22 and ther told the truth and they get censured. I didn't 23 imply that other people necessarily lied. 24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Herbe it is my 25 inf erence because you are using th e wo rd "tru th . " I i ALDEASON AEPORTING COMPANY.INC.
. 400 VIAGINtA AVEL. S.W. WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
- .. . -= .. .
59 1 would be censuring tihe tvo people who said that they j 2 believed that there were statements that were aisleading.
~
3 CHAIRHAN PALLADINO Let me say it the other (~, , What I want to do is encourage' people to'be 4 var.around. 5 forthcoming and speak-out. . . 6- COMBISSIONEN AHEARNE: Right, . absolutely. I 7 agree with you. 8 CHAIRHAN PALLADINO: If we send a signal out
~
9 that when we do that they are going to get siapped 10 down --- , 11 CORRISSIONER AHEARNE: If I concluded that a i 12 group of people knew it was aisleading and 'they are the 13 only ones who admitted it, then I would come out where ( , 14 you came out. Where I had come out is that there were
~
'15 only two who believed it was misleading. and I accepted 16 that. .
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY What you are telling 18 everybody out there is to stick to the party line .and 19 they will be okay. .
.20 CHAIRHAN PALLADINO: I was not trying to make 21 a 1udgment about the others. I do think we want to 22 encourage people to be forthcoming.
23 COHNISSIONER AHEARNE: Absolutely. I 24 certainly agree with that. , s _. 25 CHAIRMAN P ALLADINO: I say will that letter l l ALesasoN AEPORDNG COMPANY, MC, i 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHMGToN, D.C. 20024 (203 564-2345 I ' I .. .. l . .__
O V
~
60 1 help in tha t direction, and 2-; - I say, gee, I. don 't it will i
. COHEISSIONER BR ADFORD: It really isn't an
( 3 either/or situation. There is the possibility of an 4 unacceptable level of negligence in h ere. In fact,'I
~5 think John suggested that that really is wh at is going 6 on in Norton's case.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. . 8 COMBISSIONER BRADFORDa For me I see at least 9 that . possibility in Cloud's case. ! 10 CORBISSIONER CILINSKY: I want to amend my 11 response to John and say at least that I d on't believe 12 some of them anyway when I said that th ey didn't think 13 it was misleading. 14 I did want to say something about the fact 15 that these exchanges didn't take a lot of time. Norton 16 responded very forcefully. He said, you know, I resent 17 this line of questioning." I was tliere and, you know, I 18 don 't resember if he banged the table, but it was a very 19 forceful and indignant response, you kno w, who do roa 20 think we are? What sort of people do you think we are? 21 We don't do the e sorts of things. I told you that you 22 were going to get it at the same time I d 23 o or we do. I certainly walked away thinking, well , you 24 know, they just decided that that is the w ay they are 25 going to do it and they are annoyed. . In fact, I have to ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON DC 20024 (202) 554 2348 -
m .l _ _ . - - _- _ =&L :=dL_ _
- g, \
d O e g-' _t' l
.. x. f-)!y
-u ..
. ,+-a.- < _ _ _ _
h'
- g s:,
~
l
= ,,
se e
% ,U p=pm _ r _
- l h /-
l _ f__"" '
; j-was , j ,w r-#l p .-a $l
- l _ _ w; r uV w w Y m.
- - :j __-
gl 3.
,i -- -
.w- g -
4 W _- meesq-m 2, um 1 y: t l
- q. i 70 .
i
- g. y ,
( '
"$ f
. ,, A ,. , j'.l m:vi.'
~
)
1
,N- r "'
3 ) g, i .-; o
.3 ,,
- i .g!
a _ F4
! 3. o m.$ ?y N
aa_ana-a .- yy y 3;
9 y 1 final, whatever, and was, because I asked the question where 2 is the report on the previous day or two and was told it would 3 be prepared in a week or two. I guess I assumed whoever was, 4 answering my question was using the definition of ' report' I was. 5 In all probability they weren't," Mr. Norton said.
$ 6 I believe the information obtained from Mr. Norton R
$ 7 during the November 3 meeting constitutes a material false
) 8 statement. The fact that the statement was false is confirmed d
c; 9 by Mr. Norton during the investigation. [3 10 The fact that reviewer independence was a matter of E 11 concern in the reverification program that was .being discussed 5 k j 12 on November 3, I believe this makes this statement a material 3 13 false statement. The statement by Mr. Norton had the capability 5 a e E 14 to influence the NRC staf.f with ' regard to the matter of ? Y g 15 independence. m j 16 During the November 3 meeting Dr. Cloud indicated as 17 that the report being prepared would be available in about a he {i: 18 week or two during the investigation held by NRC. Dr. Cloud I9 indicated that was . referring to the report that he would n 3 20 ultimately be turning into PG&E. 21 He said that when he made a statement at the November , 22 3 meeting his thoughts and words were directed toward the 23 final draf t report or final report that he was under pressure 24 to complete for PG&E for their submittal to the NRC. ,
! l 25 While this is a reasonable answer, there is still the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY INC.' l
10 s
~
1 question of why Dr. Cloud did not speak out when Mr. Norton 2 made his statement about not having received the report. It . 3 certainly would have been helpful if Dr. Cloud had verified 4 which report was being discussed, the final report or some 5 intermediate drafts. This clarification would have been g 9 3 6 particularly useful when Mr. Norton indicated: "The report i tself 7 hasn't been prepared. If you want a copy of before we get it, M j 8 fine, or simultaneously. It is an independent consultant, you d q 9 know, and I don't know how we can show you more than to give z h 10 you the reports as they are being prepared." That is a quote E 11 of Mr. Norton. h m p 12 Although it would have been helpful if Dr. Cloud had E 13 clarified Mr. Norton's statement about not having received a E 14 the report from R. L. Cloud Associates, Dr. Cloud stated to g 15 an NRC investigator that he felt Mr. Norton was referring to j 16 the final report. Under these circumstances I can see how m 17 Dr. Cloud could decide that there was nothing to clarify. k 18 Having decided that PG&E made a material false A 19 { statement, the next: question to be settled at least in my mind l 20 is what its significance is in judging the severity of the 21 material false statement. 22 I feel that the significance of the material false 23 , statement in this situation is much less than the m6gnitude of 24 significance in other enforcement actions, for example, the i 25 significance o'f false statements in North Anna. This lesser l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. l
- 11 I significance is important in judging the severity of action to 2 be taken by HRC.
3 It is also my feeling that the cooperation and for.th-4 rightness of the PG&E representatives in the NRC investigation e 5 are mitigating circurastances in this situation. l 6 As a result of these findings I believe that the 7 following actions should be taken with regard to Phase I of 8 the NRC investigation: 0 6 9 1. PG&E should be given a notice of violation for i h 10 a material false state' ment without a fine. As part of this
- 11 notification top PG&E officials should be asked to meet with g
g 12 senior NRC staff to outline steps to be taken,to avoid situations 5 13 such as developed out of the November 3 meeting and to review 7 l$ 14 procedures for handling the independent audits for the Diablo 2 15 Canyon plant. E j 16 2. R. L. Cloud Associates should not be eliminated w t' 17 as an eligible independent consultant as a result of Phase 1 E k 18 of the investigation of the November 3 meeting. It is not my 5 intent here to judge-whether or not R. L. Cloud should be {e 19 20 selected to be the independent reviewer based on staff criteria, 21 but rather than R. L. Cloud Associates should not be eliminated 22 as an eligible contender at this time on the basis of Phase I 23 of the _NRC investigation. 24 I should add that I gave thought to other matters l 25 related to this. First of all, the testimony taken during the l i i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. l
~- c-- - - w-- , - - , , - , ,
12 i , I investigation was sworn testimony and unless we have some basis 2 to indicate that there was perjury involved, there is a presumptio , 3 that$what they were saying was their honest opinions. . 4 Secondly, during our meeting on January 21st there j 5 were questions raised by I believe Commissioner Ahearne, e g 6 particularly as to whether or not the people responding were 7 evasive and, according to transcripts, the responders, particularl y X g 8 Mr. Faulkenberry, I believe, and Shackelton, that they did not d ci 9 get the impression that people were being evasive. z 10 Now perhaps I should be a little more clear because E E II there were slightly different versions, depending on'the person 3 g 12 being spoken to. 13 So that is where it looks like to me we should come e E I4 down and I would be interested in any comments either on this Y g 15 or on other views. a: 16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: On your last point, as I a[ v5 I7 remembered what Faulkenberry said was , no they weren't with h a:
$5 18 possibly two exceptions, or one or two exceptions, i:
g I9 CHAIRMAN P&LLADINO: Well, if you would like, I could c 20 read to you from the transcript. 21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I don't know whether that is 22 necessary, but I was going to ask him if he could elaborate 23 ' because I think the exceptions were, in fact, I thought Hoch 24 and Rocca. Am I wrong. 25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Yes. No, I don't mean you are ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
13 I wrong, but, yes , there were differences. 2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Did he think they were being 3 precise or unclear? I-think he said something like that. D.i d 4 he feel they were playing it down or playing it up? 5 Do you get the sense of my question? Do you hear me, l 6 Bobby? 7 MR. FAULKENBERRY: Yes, Commissioner Gilinsky. This M
$ 8 is Bob Faulkenberry. My feeling with regard to the two possible d
9 exceptions which you are talking about which would be Rocca 10 and Hoch is that there is no way that we could really actually
=
$ II determine whether they were trying to be evasive or whether they f3 12 were just having a difficult time in recalling the details of 5 13 the conversations that took place.
m e a g 14 My own subjective opinion would be in Rocca's case a 15 that he was having a great deal of difficulty in trying to j 16 recall the details that transpired. However, I muld not want
.5 I7 to discount that there is a possibility that he may be being ha
{I: 18 somewhat evasive. 19 COMMISSIONE-R GILINSKY: But the sense of that is g n 20 what, that he is suggesting that he had conversations that he 21 didn't have, or that he is being imprecise that conversations 22 that he did in fact have? Did I say that right? 23 MR. hAULKENBERRY: If I gave Mr. Rocca the benefit of 24 the doubt, I would say that he was having difficulty in recalling 25 the details of what transpired. , i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. !
I
- 14 1 If you will recall, we interviewed him a month or l 2 possibly two months af ter the meeting, about a little over a 3 monih I guess, and we were quizzing him with regard to detajls 4 of conversations that he had had at lunch wi th Mr. B rand , on 5 the airplane with Mr. Herrera and Mr. Tressler, and there was a
$ 6 difference in the statements made by Brand, Tressler and Rocca K
$ 7 with regard to these conversations. -
M j 8 I don't really know how to give you any more factual e q 9 information, Commissioner Gilinsky, other than that my opinion z h 10 would lean towards the side that Rocca was just having difficulty
- 11
$ in recalling the details.
t g 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Let me ask you something else. c 13 I am sorry, did you want to pursue that point, Joe? E 14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: No. I wanted to get back to the 15 point, the one I was talking about looking at the question of j 16 evasiveness. I was talking particularly about R. L. Cloud. e g 17 At the meeting on the 21st Commissioner Ahearne asked, "I a k 18 gather that most of the questioning of Dr. Cloud was done by h 19 g Faulkenberry and Shackelton or Faulkenberry I guess. Was it n 20 your impression that he was being evasive? Mr. Faulkenberry 21 replied, according to the transcript, "No. I can only just 22 give you my impression, but I did not get the impression that 23 he was being evasive." I asked "Who are you speaking of? 24 Mr..Faulkenberry said "Dr. Cloud." Commissioner Ahearne 1 25 asked "How about Shackelton?" Mr. Shackelton replied: "I 9 l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
15 I concur. He did not appear to be evasive to us. We interviewed 2 him three different times." 3 Then Commissioner Bradford asked "Did anybody appear 4 to be evasive?" and that'is when we got into the questions with e 5 regard to Rocca and Hoch. A n j 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, on the subject of 7 Mr. Cloud, in a couple of letters to the Commission today M
] 8 intervenors raised the, at least one of them came today, raised a
d 9 the issue of Cloud's statement about whether the reverification i h 10 program was his idea or if PG&E had some involvement in it. I E [m 11 was reminded that that in f act was the thing that upset either a p 12 Hoch or Rocca, I can't remember, Hock I think --- E 13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Hoch is right. l$ 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: --- at the meeting. In fact, 2 15 it was one of the things that led him to go to Brand and that E g 16 is something Brand did remember talking to him about. e p 17 Did you ever, and this is to Bobby Faulkenberry again, 5 k 18 did you ever pursue the question of whether that was a correct 5 { 19 statement? , . , . n 20 MR. FAULKENBERRY: The conversations that you are 21 relating to would be Rocca was the one who was concerned in his 22 testimony about Cloud's statement and he went to Brand and 23 discussed it with him and Brand in his testimony also recalled 24 Rocca talking to him about it at the lunch break. 25 i As to the statement made by Cloud at the November the I e
~
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
. 16 I 3rd meeting, I was there, I heard Cloud's statement, the 2 statement was not misleading to me and I was fully aware of the 3 interplay with regard to the program plan that had transpired 4 between PG&E, the NRC and Dr. Cloud. I think that was general g5 information known by quite a number of people in the Commission.
6 I was fully aware of Mr. Brand's testimony with regard 7 to Rocca's reacting to Cloud's statement. I was fully aware { 8 of what Brand stated and told Rocca, that he himself did not U fI feel that the Commission was misled in that because they knew 10 the details of the development of the program plan. II How I and other people in the Regional Office and I 12 ( think in the Commission, I personally did not consider any of S j 13 that to be of significance with relation to the investigation. = E I4 I did not think it impacted upon the independence issue and 15 I really don't think it makes much difference who develops the I0 program plan since the requirement is for it to be submitted hI m to the Commission for review and for our approval. k 18 So I felt like that probably the more input from = 19 g various people the be~tter program plan that we would have. But 0 the bottom line is that I did not consider this to be significant I at all. 22 Any other questions? CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0:
, (No response.)
24 Peter, you had distributed some CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: thoughts on this decision and maybe you would like to highlight i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. l
' 17 I wha t you submitted.
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, they aren't very 3 different from yours to which in fact they respond. I just 4 said that I agreed with you regarding the material false 5 statement and that I agreed with the proposition that Cloud's l 6 name needn't be taken off the list at.this point, although all 7 uf the things being equal he probably would not be my choice K
] 8 as the consultant if there is someone else available, but it d
d 9 doesn't have to be made at this point in time. E. 10 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: That is a decision that we will h
=
II have to make later. s g 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I did say that I would go 5 f13 m beyond what you had proposed in the sense that I would impose y le 14 a civil penalty based at least as much on the failure of PG&E 15 to corr'ect the material false statement in the month or so after l as 16 it came to light. I7 It seems to me that given there were people in the hu { 18 company who were concerned about it, just elementary prudence P I' would have involved making a correction before in fact the 20 matter did come out a month later. That set of events seems 21 to me to be serious enough to merit a penalty and a fairly 22 substantial one. 23 ; CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Well, I gave some thought to that. 24 I was of course focusing on Mr'. Norton and it is my impression l 25 that Mr. Norton didn't know of these drafts until it was called ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
~__ i
. 18 I
to his attention. 2 C0MISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, I agree. 3 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: So he would not have had the. 4 opportunity to correct the statement, but perhaps some of the 5
$ others would have.
n g 6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That is the point. The 7 machinery just seemed to have been, from our point of view, j 8 unacceptable. You had individuals within the company, Hoch 6 and especially Rocca, who did feel that the statement had been 10 misleading. They discussed it with others and for varying E
' reasons the others decided that nothing needed to be done about ,E g 12 it. No one ever called to Norton's attention tha't it was wrong.
S 13 j No one ever asked him whether he would have stood behind the statements if he had known what the real set of events were. The sort of internal discussions that should have brought the problem to the surface and resolved it in the form of a letter or a communication from PG&E to us simply didn't take place. There were those who felt that they should have. There 19 g were those within the.. company with whom they discussed it and yet it just didn't happen. I CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: I gather from the testimony that Mr. Rocca was convinced that it was not a material false statement 3 somewhere along the line. I don't recall the whole trail of the testimony. Hoch basically said that he'had no excuse for not ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
19 I bringing it up. 2 I was attaching it to the two princ.ipals. One was 3 whether Cloud was misleading or whether Mr. Norton was misleading. 4 They were the principal spokesmen and I focused on those, g 5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: In Cloud's case the point seems g? 6 to me to be a different one. I just think that prudence on his 7 part, given that he knew the set of events and was sitting there M
] 8 listening to Norton, should have inclined him in the same e
c; 9 direction that Ferbish said later that it would have inclined E 10 him, namely, to make a' correction so there was no possibility 11 of misunderstanding. m y 12 I still have difficulty, though I agree with your 5 a 13 point that you h. ave to have some hard evidence to actually 5 m 14 disbelieve someone, I have difficulty taking entirely seriously 15 that Cloud propositioned that all that was under discussion was j 16 his final report. e f a 17 Given that the context was whether or not he was {P 18 independent, it seems to me that you would have to be deliberately
^
19 obtuse not to reali.ze-that draf t reports matter a lot more than 20 final reports when it comes to establishing independence. 21 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Well if one accepts that he was 22 so intent on getting the report out and thinking only of the 23 final report, then his answer would appear reasonable. 24 COMitISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, my position is that I i 25l wouldn't find Cloud, as I say, that Cloud had made a material l N l 1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.' !
1 20 1 false statement. I can't even find that he wilfully participated 2 in a later failure to correct it. 3 I can find that within PG&E as a company there were 4 those who did consider it a material false statement and either e 5 didn't push hard enough or had their concern shunted aside. A a j 6 Cloud who was a consultant to PG&E, it seemed to me, 7 had the knowledge and the opportunity to make the correction. X g 8 While I can't say that he wilfully didn't do it, I can say that d d 9 it seems to me to have been negligent on his part not to have. i-h 10 It all to me adds up to the fact that whatever the E la 11 individual sets of motives within PG&E, the net result is that p 12 the company as an entity made a material false statement and E 13 didn't correct it when it should have and could have. l 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: There is a difference here. 15 Cloud doesn't speak for the company and Norton does. g 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, let's see, Cloud was e d 17 at the meeting as an employee of the company. It is not that 5 he doesn't speak for them, and maybe employee is the wrong word. { 18 ; E g 19 He is at the meeting as a consultant to the company and it seems n 20 to me not to be unfair to charge the company with omissions on 21 his part in terms of follow-up conduct. 22 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Any comments? John. 23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, I have several. 24 I think that this ends up establishing a precedent 25 for what we would mean by material false statement, the direction ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. c --
39 i
\
I appended to. I just want them publicly known. 2 (Laughter.) 3 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: 4 I guess the next question is having 'a three to two vote on identifying the material false ' statement, what do we want to do about it? O
-- I I feel quite strongly that we should not be putting a civil penalty on this.
k I think that the people that confirmed d the material false statement,
' particularly Norton did not have 10 the opportunity to make a corrective action because he didn't iii II get to know about it except through vehicles that were established
} by the NRC.
I do think that there as cooperation..in the kI e d 13 investigation and that has some mitigating circumstances . So I 3 would come down on no civil penalty. li! C0ftMISSIONER GILINSKY: 2 15 I must say I would attach g a civil penalty, although I wouldn't press the point if a majority I of the Commissioners don't agree. k 18 It seems to me that the company can't subdivide itself 19 in such a way that the person who speaks doesn't know and the g person who knows and has e got some other excuse, we aren 't charging individuals, we are charging the company. The company knew. The people who knew were right there and they had an obligation to inform us correctly. So I regard this as extremely serious. They had the top brass of the company, 24 the president hiding behind the pillar there. (Laughter.) ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
- . 40 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: The president was there and 2 other vice presidents were there and they misinformed us and I thin k 3 on an important point. I 4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Well, getting specific as to
]
e 5 who misinformed --- E g 6 COMMISS10iiER GILINSKY: R Well, what I am saying is the
$ 7 company cannot escape responsibility by putting forward a person M
8
$ who doesn't know the facts. They misinformed him, d
d 9 i CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Well, I agree, and I was giving h 10 z the notice of violation'to the company. 11
@ COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: In a way that is even the a
y 12 5 point John is making, though I think he focuses on a slightly 13 different set of events, that is, if the company structured
! 14 itself in such a way that its spokesman could be someone who was U
15 inadequately prepared to speak for it on the issues to which it j 16 was responding. e g 17 E CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Do you wish to abstain on this M 18 or do you wish to speak? s 19 h n (Laughter.) - 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I would not vote for a civil 21 penalty. 22 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: You would n,ot vote for a civil 23 penalty. 24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That is right. 6 25 i CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Tom? j i l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. !
1
. . ] 41 I
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS: I would not vote for a civil l 2 penalty., 3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, as I said in my memd, 4 I would. I also said I would not press the point, especially 5 j if it winds up driving you over to the other side on the notice c< g 6 of violation. E h7 (Laughter.) 8 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: I tried to do this as conscientious ly d and as objectively as I knew how. I poured over it for quite a 0 10 E few hours. So I was not trying to say which side I yas on
=
h except to call the shots as I thought they should be called c k' in my mind. d 13 g Vic? E 14 , S COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, I would come out for E 2 15 . . g a civil penalty, yes. CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Well, I gather we have three p 17 w votes for no civil penalty and we would send a notice of violation. a:
$ 18
- I think we have another question to answer, and that g is should Cloud Assoifa~tes ---
0 COMMISSIONER GILINKSY: Well, you know, before we get 21 to that we were talking about you had another item in your 22 proposal which was some interacti6n with the company. CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Oh, in my proposal I had that this 24 order should call for a meeting with the top officials, as it i did, for example, in a more recent one, except that I think in ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
47
- I horse slipped and he went out and helped him up and he says, 2 that is once. He went on a little more and the horse slipped 3 again, hat is twice. Then the horse slipped again and he said, 4 that is three times, and he shot him. Then the wife started to 5 get all upset and said why did you kill the horse? He says, g
9 { 6 that is once. 7 (Laughter.) M [ 8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Let me propose that the meeting d a 9 be held with the staff. I am not wedded to the words in this 10 proposal. I do think that,we have to address this issue and 11 make sure that something is done about correcting their approach. it 12 I do intend to capture what Dick DeYoung has said', to get to 5 13 other matters of management intention and would propose that the g l
!il 14 staff do it.
15 Is there a ressonable concurrence to that? j 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes. es l m 17 (Other Commissioners gave no audible response.) { 18 (Mr. Dircks at t51s point returns to the Commissioners' s i: 19 h n table.) - 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: You just missed being the man. 21 (Laughter.) 22 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Should R.'L. Cloud be eliminated 23 as an elfgfble independent consultant as a result of the Phase . 24 I of- the NRC investigation of the November 3 ' meeting? I would 25 g propose that he not b'e eliminated as an eligible independent h l i 6
'l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. l
. 48 I consultant as a result of that investigation.
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Given where I came out I had 3 no problem with that. 4 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS: I have no problem with that. e 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It is not obvious to me, given d lR 6 where the other three of you came out, that you would have no 8 7 problem. M
$ 8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: I had no problem with that.
O d 9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: As I indicated in my memo, I i h 10 would in fact at this point be uncasy about.having Cloud wind E j 11 up as the independent verifier, but I don't know enough about 3 y 12 the alternatives to strike him from the list. I gather there are E 13 now other questions about his past relationship with PG&E and h 14 how much of it he has disclosed, but they aren't part of our l
$ I
{e 15 Phase I. l j 16 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Yes. As I said, at least it is ! e 6 17 not my intent to judge whether or not he should be selected at , E '
=
M 18 this time. I am not trying to make that judgment. We are going U g 19 to have other things,to consider in t' hat judgment. n 20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: The one thing that I would want 21 to avoid is saying that in a way that appeared to give a ringing 22 endorsement. I would just say that we took no action with 23 regard to who is on the list. We didn't pick anybody and didn't
\
24 eliminate anybody. 25 COMi.11SSIONER AHEARNE: That is equivalent for the I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
- 49 I time being to leaving him on the list.
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That is right. I don't have 3 a problem with doing that. 4 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0: Otherwise, I would have to add g 5 that I haven't made up my mind in the end. c'
] 6 So we are proposing not to take action on eliminating 7 anyone from the list of contending consultants.at this time.
A j 8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Let me just say for myself d c; 9 that I feel that he did have an obligation to tell us at that 2 10 meeting that his draft 'was circulated to PG&E. I regard that li: 11
$ as a severe liability in going forward with him.
is l3 12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Are you saying you want to vote 5 13 a: to eliminate? l 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, I gather there is not f 15 any sort of majority sentiment to deal with it. So I think j 16 rather than confirm him I guess it would be best not to deal i v5 17 h with it. a: Ci 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, for myself obviously I ; k 19 g am prepared to deal with it. I just don't come out the same 20 place. 21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Well, I think that concludes our 22 action on Phase I. We do have the Phase II report. I have read ls 23 everything through "C". I have read most of "0" and have paged 24 through all of "E". I have paged through all of it, but I 25 did read everything through "C" and mus t of "D" and paged through i l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. -{ .}}