ML20211K641
| ML20211K641 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 06/24/1986 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#386-853 OL, NUDOCS 8606300202 | |
| Download: ML20211K641 (222) | |
Text
W ORG,NAL O UN11ED STATES i 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: 5290 - 5512 DATE: TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1986 78.0/Ofl febuV)) hrI f0 MS4h // Z/-//
ace-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
O Official Reporters 444 North Capitol Street Washington, D.C. 20001 8606300202 860624 6 (202)347-3700 PDR ADOCK 0500 NATIONWIDE COVERAGE z _ m
t 5290 O '
3 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4
-- L--- - - L - L lx 5 :
In the Matter of: :
6 : Docket No. 50-456 OL COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY : 50-457 OL 7 :
(Braidwood Station, Units 1 :
- 8 and 2) :
-- ------------x
- 9
- 10 College of St. Francis 500 North Wilcox Street i 11 Joliet, Illinois 60435
~
12 Tuesday, June 24, 1986.
13
, The hearing in the above-entitled matter reconvened
- 14 at 9:00 A. M.
15 16 BEFORE:
17 JUDGE HERBERT GROSSMAN, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 18 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
- 19 JUDGE RICHARD F. COLE, Member, j 20 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board i U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission * ,
, 21 Washington, D. C.
i 22 JUDGE A. DIXON CALLIH AN, Member, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board i 23 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
24 APPEARANCES:
l n V
25 On behalf of the Applicant:
l Sonntag Reporting Service, , Ltd.
ueneva, A1Ainois ouza, (312) 232-0262
5291
(
l MICHAEL I. MILLER, ESQ.
2 JOSEPH GALLO, ESQ.
ELEN A Z . KEZELIS, ESQ.
3 Isham, Lincoln & Beale Three First National Plaza 4 Chicago, Illinois 60602 5 On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff:
6 ELAINE I. CH AN , ESQ.
7 GREGORY ALAN BERRY, ESQ.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8 7335 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland 20014 9
On behalf of the Intervenors:
10 ROBERT GUILD, ESQ.
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ,
21 22 23 24 25 CE)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois eu144 (312) 232-0262
5292 ,
l I
($)
1 EXHIBIT INDEX Marked Received l 2 Applicant's Exhibits Nos. 43 through 47 5313 5357 3
Applicant's Exhibit No. 48 5329 5357 4
Applicant's Exhibit No. 49 5335 5
Applicant's Exhibit No. 50 5358 6
Applicant's Exhibit No. 51 5362 7
Applicant's Exhibit No. 52 5390 8
Applicant's Exhibit No. 53 5391 9
Applicant's Exhibit No. 54 5393 10 Applicant's Exhibit No. 55 5395 11 Applicant's Exhibit No. 56 5441 12 O 13 Applicant's Exhibit No. 57 5501 WITNESS INDEX 14 TESTIMONY OF WORLEY 0. PUCKETT 15 CROSS EXAMINATION 16 BY MR. MILLER: 5294 ,
17 18 19 l 20 21 22 23 24
()
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
uenev a, AAAAnois oviae (312) 232-0262 L
5293 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The hearing is reconvened.
2 This is the 27th day of hearing.
3 Do we have any preliminary matters until wn call 4 the next witness?
5 (No response.)
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No?
7 In that case, Mr. Miller, would you call your next 8 witness?
9 MR. MILLER: Thank you, your Honor. I call 10 Mr. Worley O. Puckett.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Puckett, would you 12 please rise and raise your right hand?
O N> 13 (The witness was thereupon duly sworn.)
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Please be seated.
15 Before you begin, I understand, Mr. Puckett, that 16 your daughter is intensive care and that you are under a 17 lot of stress at this time.
i i
18 If at any time you think you can't continue, we 19 will postponc it and have you com'e back sc=c ether time.
20 But I understand that you'd like to begin at this 21 time and see if you can carry it through; is that 22 correct, sir?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
25 Mr. Miller?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
5294 O
1 MR. MILLER: Mr. Puckett, we've met before.
2 My name is Mike Miller. I'm one of the attorneys for 3 Commonwealth Edison Company.
4 Just following up on what the Chairman said, if at 5 any time you want a break for whatever reason, please 6 indicate and we'll just stop at that point in time.
7 WORLEY 0. PUCKETT 8 called as an adverse witness by the Applicant herein, having 9 been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
10 CROSS EXAMINATION 11 BY MR. MILLER:
12 Q Would you state your name for the record, please?
13 A My name is Worley O. Puckett.
14 Q What is your current address, sir?
l 15 A 3672 Spring Grove Road, Bethel, Ohio.
16 Q Mr. Puckett, are you currently employed?
17 A . No, sir, I am not.
18 Q Since your employment was terminated by Comstock in late 19 August,1984, have you been c=picyed?
20 A No, sir, other than menial tasks.
21 Q All right.
22 Mr. Puckett, I'm going to place before you a 23 document that's in evidence as Intervenors' Exhibit 26.
24 (Indicating.)
25 I want to ask you, sir, first of all: Did you Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AA11nols ouAas (312) 232-0262 \
5295 O
1 prepare that resume?
2 A Yes, sir, I did.
3 Q Did you have any assistance in putting it together or is
< i 4 it -- did you do it yourself?
4 5 A I wrote it myself, and I had it typed.
6 Q Mr. Puckett, you were employed at the Zimmer nuclear 7 power plant by Kaiser Engineers, were you not, for a i
j 8 period of time?
4 9 A Yes, sir.
) 10 0 That employment terminated sometime in early 1984; 11 correct?
12 A January of '84.
) 13 0 Was this resume prepared shortly af ter your employment 14 terminated at the Zimmer plant?
15 A Parts of the resume was rewritten.
16 Q All right.
17 At some point in the spring of 1984, you and your
! 18 son-in-law understood that there were positions 19 available as Level II Welu Inspectors for Comatuck at 20 the Braidwood f acility, did you not?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 Q And the two of you traveled to Braidwood to interview
, 23 for that position of a Level II Weld Inspector; correct?
24 A Yes, sir.
Okay.
{} 25 0 i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l .--_. .- -
5296 i
O
\~)
1 And you were interviewed by Mr. DeWald, Mr. Marino, 4 2 Mr. Paserba and Mr. Vogt; correct?
3 A I was interviewed by Mr. DeWald. Mr. Paserba and Mr.
4 Marino was on-site. At that time I had not met Mr.
5 Vogt.
- 6 Q Were you interviewed by anyone else, besides Mr. DeWald, 7 Mr. Marino and Mr. Paserba?
4 8 A' No, sir.
9 0 The entire interview process lasted approximately 30 l 10 minutes; is that correct?
f 11 A Yes, sir.
i 12 Q All right.
13 At that point in time during the interview, you 14 presented your resume to Mr. DeWald, did you not?
l 15 A Yes, sir.
16 Q And to the best of your recollection, he read it over 17 while the interview was being conducted?
18 A Pardon me, sir?
19 0 I'm sorry.
- 20 Did he look it over while you were in the room, l 21 while you were being interviewed?
22 A Yes.
23 Q All right.
24 And the information on the resume was accurate and
, 25 correct, to the best of your knowledge, at the time that t
I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 11Ainois ouAag (312) 232-0262
. ~ _ . _ - . - - . - ... - . - __ _ _ . - _. - - . - .. _ . - - _ - . - - ...-_ - , - - - .__ - -
- 5297 1 you presented it to Mr. DeWald; correct?
1
- 2 A Yes, sir.
3 Q Now, during the course ~of the interview, you learned, l
f 4 did you not, that Comstock had not had a Level III Weld 5 Inspector at the Braidwood facility prior to the time 6 that you were being interviewed for that position?
7 Correct?
8 A Not a Level III acting as a Level III.
9 Q All right.
i 10 Mr. DeWald and Mr. Seese were, in fact, certified 11 as Level III Weld Inspectors; that's correct, isn't it?
, 12 A That is my understanding.
4 i 13 Q Yes.
J
) 14 But when you say " acting as a Level III," they had j 15 supervisory responsibility overall of Comstock's quality i 16 control inspection activities; isn't that correct?
17 A- Yes, sir.
18 Q And you understood that they were not, as you say,
! 19 acting as a Level III with respect to weld inspection
, 20 activity; right?
l l 21 A Yes, sir.
22 Q Would you describe for the Board what you understood at f
23 that time your responsibilities as a Level III Weld 24 Inspector would be?
Well, as a Level III Weld Inspector, I would be working l
{} 25 A Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois eulse (312) 232-0262 I_-.____._
?
5298 (2) 1 directly with the Level II Weld Inspectors and Level l 2 I's, and I would be basically responsible for all the 3 weld-related activities that affected the Braidwood 4 project inasmuch as the corapany that I'd be working
, 5 with.
6 0 In other words, everything within Comstock's scope of 7 work as far as welding was concerned?
8 A Yes.
. 9 Q Did you understand, from your conversation with Mr.
10 DeWald at this initial interview, that you would be 11 responsible for the review of welding procedures?
12 A Yes, sir, after I had been qualified as a Level III.
13 0 And that you would also be responsible for welder l
14 qualification records?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And in addition, you would be asked f rom time to time to 17 assist Level II and Level I Inspectors when they had to l 18 make a judgment call, as it were, on the acceptability 19 of a specific weld?
20 A Yes, sir.
l 21 Q Were there any other tasks that you understood you were 22 to be performing as a Level III Weld Inspector at i 23 Comstock?
24 A Basically, no. That just about covered what I would be 1
25 doing.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ORDEV5, lAAAD015 OUAJ9 (312) 232-0262 l
5299 O
1 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, looking at your resume, is it correct 2 that prior to the time that you were employed by i 3 Comstock at Braidwood, your employment in the civilian 4 nuclear power industry had been only at the Zimmer 5 plant? Is that correct?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 Q All right.
8 And you had started as a Senior Mechanical Quality 9 Assurance Inspector; is that right?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q And in that capacity, among other things, you performed 12 the functions of a Level II Weld Inspector; right?
13 A Yes, sir.
14 Q And you continued in that capacity when you were made a 15 Lead Mechanical Quality Assurance Inspector; correct?
16 A Yes, sir.
17 Q That is, your certification at that point in time was as 18 a Level II Weld Inspector; correct?
l 19 A I was a Level II Mechanical Quality Assurance Inspector, i
20 yes.
l 21 Q All yight.
22 As Kaiser did its certifications at Zimmer, did 23 that include the performance of inspections that at 24 Comstock were within the scope of a Level II Weld 25 Inspector?
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5300 )
l l
()
1 A Would you repeat that, please?
2 Q Yes, sir.
3 I understand that at different facilities, the way 4 certifications are arranged is not always the same.
5 My question is whether your certification as a 6 Mechanical Quality Assurance Inspector at Zimmer 7 included the tasks of weld inspection that would have 8 been within the scope of a Level II Weld Inspector for 9 Comstock at Braidwood.
10 A Yes, I would think so, yes.
l'1 Q All right.
1 i
12 That is, you performed visual weld inspection & at 13 the Zimmer f acility; correct?
14 A Visual inspections, penetrant inspections and mag i
15 particle inspections.
16 Q At the Zimmer facility, the inspections that you i 17 performed included ASME code work for the mechanical l
18 scope of work at Zimmer, did they not?
i 19 A ASME, AWS and ANSI B-3.11.
I 20 0 The AWS code that was in effect at Zimmer when you were 21 a Senior Mechanical Quality Assurance Inspector and a 22 Lead Mechanical Quality Assurance Inspector was the AWS 23 D1.1 code; correct?
24 A Yes, sir.
25 0 Now, in March,1978, you became the Chief Weld Engineer Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois cu1Je (312) 232-0262 i
5301
(
l 1 at the Zimmer f acility, did you not? :
2 A Yes, sir.
3 Q At that point in time, did you become certified as a 4 Level III Inspector?
i 5 A No, sir.
i ,
6 Weld Engineering at the Zimmer project was in i
- 7 Construction. It was a separate group of people from ,
i
, 8 the Quality Assurance people at Zimmer.
i i l 9 Q And as Chief Weld Engineer, however, you were, in f act, ,
10 responsible for developing procedures for qualifying l
11 welds and for qualifying welders, were you not?
- 12 A Yes, sir.
13 Q And that was in connection with both ASME code work and i
14 AWS Dl.1 work, was it not? i 15 A Yes, sir.
- 16 Q Can you describe briefly the scope of the welding ;
! 17 activities that took. place at Zimmer that were within t
- 18 Kaiser's scope of work?
t i 19 A All of the welding was in the scope c: Kaiser's work. ,
1
! 20 They were responsible for all the electrical, all j 21 the pipe fitting, the ironworkers, the boilermakers, the 22 millwrights and the carpenters.
I 23 Q Is it correct to say that your responsibility for 24 developing procedures, for qualifying welds and for l
25 qualifying. welders was -- that you spent more of your -
I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AAAAnois ouAa=
(312) 232-0262
5 5302 l l $
i 1 time on ASME work than on AWS work?
2 A No, sir.
3 Q Was it about even or did you spend more tim 7 on AWS?
4 A Well, I would -- I would not be able to say which I f i 5 spent the most time on.
i 6 Q Okay.
i 7 Now, you held the position as Chief Weld Engineer 8 at Zimmer until a man named Manf red Goedecke was hired
- 9 by Kaiser Engineers; isn't that correct? l l t
! 10 A Yes, sir.
l 11 Q All right. l 1 12 And Mr. Goedecke was employed sometime in October, i
! 13 1981; is that correct? '
1 i
14 A Somewhere in that area, yes, sir.
15 Q Do you recall what Mr. Goedecke's title was when he was 4
16 hired? ,
i j 17 A Weld Manager.
18 Q All right.
i 19 Mr. Goedecke was, in fact, your superior when he i
- 20 was hired in for that job; right?
21 A Yes, sir. '
l
! 22 0 All right.
1 23 You held the title -- continued to hold the title
! 24 of Chief Weld Engineer for approximately six months t
25 af ter Mr. Goedecke was hired; isn't that right?
l
{ Sonntag Reporting Service, , Ltd.
< ueneva, AAArnors ovAag (312) 232-0262 ,
5303 O
1 A Approximately that, sir.
2 Q And sometime in March or April of 1982, a man named John 3 Flaherty was hired; isn't that correct? l 4 A Yes, sir.
5 0 And what was Mr. Flaherty's title, if you recall? .
6 A He was going to be the Project Weld Engineer.
7 Q All right. l 8 And when Mr. Flaherty was hired as the Project Weld 9 Engineer, was your title changed? ,
10 A Yes, sir.
t 11 I would like to explain this, if I might.
~
12 Q Surely. ,
13 A When Mr. Flaherty came in, I had been requesting to go 14 to some seminars. For the period of time that I had 15 been the Chief Weld Engineer at Zimmer, I had done so 16 with four weld engineering assistants and a clerk 17 typist.
18 After Mr. Goedecke came there, in the first year 19 that he was there, we had hired approximately 26 weld 20 engineers, we had approximately 18 weld engineering 21 assistants and 10 or 12 clerk typists to fill this.
22 I had been requesting that I get some seminars, so 23 Mr. Goedecke said that he would give me a lateral move 24 across the board and free me up from the daily workloads 25 there so I could attend some of these seminars.
I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 :
5304 O
O 1 Q All right.
2 And so Mr. Flaherty, when he was hired in 3 approximately March or April of 1982, took over the 4 responsibility, under Mr. Goedecke's overall management, 5 for developing peccedures for qualifying welds and for 6 qualifying welders; isn't that right?
7 A He was Mr. Goedecke's assistant. He worked on all 8 phases of the work there at Zimmer.
9 However, we did have a couple of engineers, Mr.
10 Paul Evans and a Mr. Dan Yoog, that was responsible for 11 writing the procedures.
12 The engineers that we had -- they were split up in f
( 13 different places. They had an engineer that was in 14 charge of the weld rod issue shack, and he had 15 assistants working for him. We had weld engineers that 16 was in charge of the weld test lab, that had assistants 17 working for him. Then we had weld engineers that was in 18 charge of Nonconformance Reports, and he had other 19 engineers that were working for him.
i 20 Q All right.
21 It is correct, though, that once Mr. Flaherty took 22 responsibility for developing the weld procedures and 23 the welder qualification procedures, that you personally 24 had no responsibility for those activities?
25 A For the weld procedures per se.
s.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois cu144 e (312) 232-0262 *
.- --_. - , m--m-w,,e,- , .- . - , - . . . - , . - . .
5305
! () '
1 I was mostly in charge of the documentation, that
]
! 2 we had copies of all the KE-1 forms, which was our weld j 3 installation papers, and KE-1A forms, which was our weld I
4 repair papers on file.
5 At this point in the project, there was numerous 6 people in the document research that were trying to find ,
7 the information, and they would come to Weld 8 Engineering.
) 9 I was probably more familiar with the paperwork i
10 there than anyone else, so I more or less handled this 11 and taking care of the welders' qualifications and the 12 test facility.
j 13 Q So you continued, at that point in time, to be 1
l 14 responsible for the document review activities that 15 you've just described and for welder qualification; l
I 16 correct?
l 17 A Yes, si r --
18 Q All right.
19 A -- under the direction of Mr. Goedecke.
20 Q All right.
21 At that point in time, did you report to Mr.
j 22 Goedecke through Mr. Flaherty?
l 23 A Yes, sir. When Mr. Flaherty was there, I would always 24 go through him to Mr. Goedecke.
25 0 All right.
)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd._
ueneva, 1111nois aulag (312) 232-0262
5306
()
1 Now, you continued in this position of -- and at 2 that point in time, you continued with the title of 3 Project Weld Engineer; correct?
4 A I think in the personnel office they had it listed as 5 Chief Weld Engineer.
6 Q All right.
7 But was your --
8 A But it was -- Mr. Flaherty at this time had the title of 9 Project Weld Engineer.
10 Q All right.
11 Well, your resume, Mr. Puckett, indicates that at 12 some point in time, your title was changed.
13 A Yes.
14 At one -- one point in time, it was Project Weld 15 Engineer. I had been considered Chief Weld Engineer for 16 most of the time that I was there.
I 17 Af ter Mr. Goedecke come aboard, he had the title of 18 Project Weld Manager; and my title would be the Project 19 Weld Engineer up until such time that Mr. Flaherty came 20 aboard. ,
21 Q All right.
22 And once Mr. Flaherty came aboard in March or April 23 of 1982, was your title changed?
24 A To Senior Weld Engineer.
25 Q That's not a title that appears on your resume, is it?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5307 i
e 1 A No. Most of the engineers that we had there, both those 2 with degrees and those without, were Senior Weld ,
3' Engineers.
l 4 Q All right, i 5 Now, there came a time when your responsibilities l 6 were changed again, were they not?
7 You became the Lead Historical Weld Engineer?
8 A Yes, sir.
! 9 Q And that also was at some point in 1982; isn't that i
! 10 correct? .
11 A Yes, sir,.
l 12 Q All right.
13 And as the Lead Historical Weld Engineer, your i 14 responsibilities really were to serve as a resource for 15 data entry clerks who were compiling a computerized data
~
l 16 base of weld inspection reports and welder qualification 17 records; isn't that right?
c 18 A Well, we wrote procedures, and we were going to start a 19 computer data base and take all of the weld-related l
20 quality documentation that had been made on the Zimmer l 21 project -- we were going to input this into a computer 22 data base.
- 23 Yes. This was a completely new program that we 24 thought would be very helpf ul.
! 25 Q All right.
i
! Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 501J4 l (312) 232-0262
_ _ - . -_. -= _ - _ - . - - . . - - _ . .-.
1 4 5308 l
l($)
1 I think you said in your previous answer that "we 2 wrote procedures."
3 Did you personally write the procedures?
4 A I helped with the writing of the procedures, yes.
5 Q And who was the person who actually wrote the
! 6 procedures, besides yourself?
7 A Well, the man that had the final say over the procedure 3
8 was a gentleman that they hired in, named Mike 9 Butterworth.
10 0 What was Mr. Butterworth's title?
11 A I don't know that he had one other than weld engineer.
12 Q All right.
13 So in your capacity as Lead Historical Weld i
14 Engineer, you reported to Mr. Butterworth; correct?
! 15 A Yes.
16 Q Am I correct that you also served as a resource to the 17 data entry clerks as they were transferring these 18 documents into the computerized data base?
19 A Not only the data entry clerks, but I also was consulted 20 by Mr. Butterworth and the other gentleman f rom CG&E 21 that was working with the computer data base, as this 22 was a new one.
23 As I said before, I was probably the most familiar 24 person on-site at that time with the -- all the 25 different types of documentation and how they were O
s Sonntag Reporting Servicer,Ltd.
. ueneva, AAArnors ouAa,
[ (312) 232-0262 1 . . -- . .
h 1
5309
() filed, as I was the one that set up the filing system 1
2 for the weld installation cards, all the weld repair 3 cards and all of the weld rod withdrawal forms and the 4 welders' qualification records.
5 Q So that if a data entry clerk or Mr. Butterworth had 6 some question about the way in which a particular 7 document -- say, a welder qualification record -- was 8 filled out, they'd c,ome to you; and based on your 9 recollection of the events that took place while you
, 10 were Chief Weld Engineer, you'd interpret the document 11 for them so that they could make the appropriate entries 12 into the computer data base; correct?
13 A Well, it just seemed to appear that I could find those
- 14 documents that no one else could find.
15 I had set up the filing system for them, so I knew 4
i 16 -
best how to retrieve these documents where it was 17 necessary.
18 In sc=e cases it preved that I had the only copy of 19 the documents on the site; that the other copies had 20 been lost -- ,
21 Q I see.
l 22 A -- from the vault.
1 23 Q And you spent full-time as Lead Historical Weld 24 Engineer?
25 A Until the plant was shut down.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
__- , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ , _ ~
l 5310
!O 1 Q All right.
2 And that was for approximately two years; is that 3 right?
i 4 A No, sir.
5 From the time -- it was approximately three months 6 from the time that we had started to input this 7 information into a computer data base until they closed S the project, j 9 It was an incomplete job to this point. We hadn't 10 completed the inrut.
f 11 Q Well, Mr. Puckett --
12 MR. MILLER: Could I have just one second, 4
13 please, your Honor?
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure.
15 BY MR. MILLER:
16 Q Mr. Puckett, as Lead Historical Weld Engineer, it is
- j. 17 correct, is it not, that you had no responsibility for le weld procedures or: for welder qualification procedures?
l 19 A Af ter that point, no, sir, unless it was to come up with 20 some backup paperwork regarding these weld procedures.
21 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, at your deposition, you testified that 22 you were Lead Historical Weld Engineer from 23 approximately mid 1983 to January, 1984.
24 Is that testimony accurate, sir;?
25 A I don't recall the exact dates when they closed the l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 66134 l (312) 232-0262 l
'5311 0
1 project in January of '84.
2 During that period of time, I had been the Project 3 Weld Engineer, just a Senior Weld Engineer, and the Lead 4 Bistorical Weld Engineer. It was just a positicn chaage i
5 and a job title change that went with it.
6 Q But it is correct that once Mr. Flaherty was hired in 7 March or April of 1982, that you had no responsibility J l
8 for the weld procedures?
9 A For the weld procedurec themselves, no, sir.
10 MR. MILL $R: All right.
11 Now, Mr. Puckett, I'd like to show you a series of 12 documents that I'm going to ask the Reporter to mark as 13 exhibits. s 14 I'd like the Reporter to mark as Applicant's 15 Exhibit --
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think 43. '
17 MR. MILLER: Yes, thank you.
~18 -- 43 an Employee Performance Appraisal and 19 Development Plan for Mr. Puckett. The, performance 20 period is indicated in the upper right-hand corner as 21 being f rom July 1,1980, to May 1,1981. ,
22 As Applicant's Exhibit 44 --
23 MR. GUILD: 43?
24 MR. MILLER: 43 is the --
25 MR. GUILD: First one?
O Sonntag Reporting Servicer Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois eu J.3 4 '
(312) 232-0262
_ . _ 1_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,.-
5312 P 1 MR. MILLER : -- the first one.
2 44 is a memorandum from Mr. Goedecke to an .
3 individual named Geri, G-E-R-I, Keegan, dated October 4 29, 1981.
5 The next is a Performance Evaluation f rom Kaiser 6 Engineers. The performance period is October 5,1981, 7 to April 15, 1982, and that would be Exhibit 46, I 8 believe -- 45.
9 As Applicant's Exhibit 46, a memorandum f rom Mr.
10 Goedecke to an individual named Don Biller, dated April 11 20, 1982.
12 And as Applicant's Exhibit 47, a Performance 13 Evaluation for Mr. Puckett for the period April 15, 14 1982, to April 1,1983.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
16 Are they all in this one package here?
17 (Indicating.)
18 MR. MILLER: Yes, they are. They should be 19 in the same order.
20 I apologize. There was some confusion as to 21 whether it was going to be a group exhibit or separate 22 exhibits.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Miss Reporter, could you 24 read us back the exhibits and the description, please?
25 (The record was thereupon read by the O
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5313 O Reporter.)'
1 2 (The documents were thereupon marked 3 Applicant's Exhibits Nos. 43 through 47 '
4 for identification as of June 24, 1986.)
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
. 6 MR. MILLER : Thank you.
7 BY MR. MILLER:
8 Q Mr. Puckett, turning first to Applicant's Exhibit 43, 9 can we agree that this is a periodic employee 10 performance appraisal that was conducted of your 11 performance at the Zimmer site by your superior at 12 Kaiser Engineering?
13 A Yes, sir. He was a construction superintendent.
14 Q And that's Mr. Sandlin, whose signature appears in the 15 lower left-hand corner?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Did Mr. Sandlin, to your knowledge, have any background 18 or experience in welding?
19 A I'm not at all sure.
20 I know that he was the construction superintendent 21 of the project. '
22 Q That was the individual to whom you reported as Chief 23 Welding Engineer?
24 A Yes.
25 Q And it was Mr. Sandlin's evaluation that you had a "very O
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5314 O
1 good knowledge of work in present assignment" -- in your 2 present assignment as Chief Welding Engineer; correct?
3 A Yes, sir. !
4 Q You signed that employee performance appraisal in the ;
5 lower right-hand corner, and that indicated that you l 6 concurred with the evaluation; right? !
7 A Yes, sir --
8 Q All right.
9 A -- that I had read and understood the evaluation.
10 Q Okay.
11 Turning next to Applicant's Exhibit 44, first of 12 all, did you see a ccpy of this document, which called
( 13 for a 10 percent salary increase, on or about the date 14 that it bears, which is October 29, 19817 15 A I don't recall seeing it.
16 Q All right.
17 In any event, at this point in time, Mr. Goedecke 18 had become Project Welding Manager; is that correct?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q All right.
21 In connection with this increase in your pay, Mr.
22 Puckett, was there any performance evaluation conducted 23 by Mr. Goedecke?
24 A There was' a performance evaluation conducted. I'm not 25 sure whether it was prior to this or af ter, but there O
Sonntag Reporting Service, _ Ltd.
ueneva, A111nois oviae (312) 232-0262
5315 O
1 was a perf ormance evaluation.
2 0 Mr. Goedecke, on October 29, 1981, was almost brand-new 3 to the site, wasn't he?
4 A Well, I'm not really sure. I can' t remember just 5 exactly how long he had been there.
6 I can' t remember these dates. It's been a long 7 time.
8 0 I understand.
9 Mr. Puckett, it became apparent to you very 10 quickly, did it not, when Mr. Goedecke came on-site, 11 that he was, in f act, a highly knowledgeable and expert 12 weld engineer?
13 A Yes, sir, very much so.
I 14 Q And that he had an extensive knowledge of the welding 15 codes and the way in which procedures, weld procedures 16 and welder qualification procedures, ought to be devised 17 or constructed; correct?
18 A Yes, sir.
19 Q And you and 10:. Goedecke really had quite a cordial 20 professional relationship throughout your tenure at the 21 Zimmer plant while he was there as well; isn't that 22 right?
23 A Yes.
24 Q All right.
25 Now, turning to Applicant's Exhibit 45 -- Mr.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5316 O
1 Goedecke, in his deposition, testified that this was tne 2 first performance appraisal that he conducted of you.
l 3 Do you believe that that is correct: that this 4 was, in fact, the first performance appraisal conducted 5 by Mr. Goedecke?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 Q All right.
8 And on this document, your position and title is 9 indicated as Project Engineer / Superintendent; correct?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q All right.
~
12 Now, Mr. Goedecke filled out the typed portion of
) 13 the evaluation and then discussed it with you, didn' t 14 he?
15 A Yes, sir, he did.
16 Q All right.
17 And on the first page under " Performance 18 Categories" -- it's obliterated by a hole, but I believe 19 it's Performance Category 2, " knowledge of work," he 20 filled out the box' that said "needs improvement," and 21 then the " comments" section says "see (1) above."
22 Do you recall discussing that specific evaluation 23 of your knowledge of the work with Mr. Goedecke?
24 A Yes, sir. That's what prompted Exhibit 46.
25 0 And, in fact, initially you disagreed with Mr.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _ _
ueneva, 1111nois oulae (312) 232-0262
5317 O
1 Goedecke's evaluation, did you not?
2 A Yes, sir, I did. )
3 Q All right.
4 And then Mr. Goedecke wrote the document that's 5 been marked as Applicant's Exhibit 46, and you then 6 signed Applicant's Exhibit 45, stating that, "I concur 7 with my evaluation"; correct?
- 8 A I signed the document saying that I had read and 9 understood my evaluation.
10 0 Well, look in the box on the second page of Applicant's 11 Exhibit 45 that says " employee's comments. "
12 It does, in fact, state, does it not, that you 13 concur with the evaluation?
14 A Which block is this, sir?
15 0 The very last block on the page, Mr. Puckett, 16 " employee's comments."
t 17 A Yes.
l t
18 You might note there that, as I said, it's so I'll 19 have the opportunity to attend seminars.
20 Q At that point in time, it was Mr. Goedecke's evaluation 21 that your major development need was to learn the proper 22 application of codes and standards in the construction 23 of nuclear power plants; correct?
24 A Yes, sir.
25 Q And you agreed with that evaluation; correct?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l
5318 j
1 A I didn't particularly agree with the evaluation. I 2 signed it so I could attend the seminars.
3 0 I see.
4 In other words, you had to sign this or you would 5 not have been allowed --
6 A Can I explain something, please?
7 Q Pardon me?
8 A Can I explain something, please?
9 0 Certainly.
10 A It was during this period of time -- it was in the later 11 stages of the project at Zimmer, and they were doing a 12 complete change-out of personnel. They were hiring in 13 all the document reviewers. They were beefing up the 14 QC/QA program there and, of course, the Weld Engineer 15 Depar tment, as I said.
16 At this time Mr. Goedecke had been doing a lot of 17 interviewing and hiring of weld engineers, and it came 18 from a protty good source to me that Mr. Goedecke had 19 confided in someone that he had given me a lateral move 20 across the board so he could hire John Flaherty into the 21 position that I was presently holding.
22 Mr. Flaherty had come to the jobsite for an 23 interview. Mr. Goedecke had worked for him -- worked 24 with Mr. Flaherty previously and was very knowledgeable, 25 as he should be.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, Illinois aulae (312) 232-0262
5319 O
1 At this time Mr. Goedecke was trying to change the 2 program around, rewrite the procedures and things of 3 this nature; and he was trying to gather around him all 4 of the good people that he could get, and that is as it 5 should be.
6 But it is my understanding that Mr. Flaherty's 7 interview with him had the condition that he would hire 8 on if he would be second in command to Mr. Goedecke.
9 Mr. Goedecke's words to me was, "Worley, I'm going 10 to give you a lateral move across the board and f ree you 11 up f rom the construction and the work so you can attend 12 these seminars that you've been requesting. "
13 Q Well, isn't it a f act that it was Mr. Goedecke's plan to 14 have you attend those seminars? Isn't that right?
15 A He went along with it. He agreed with it. I had been 16 requesting the seminars.
17 Q I see.
18 In f act, you would agree that Mr. Goedecke was more 19 knowledgeable than you about the proper application of 20 codes and standards in the construction of nuclear power 21 plants; right?
22 A Yes, sir.
23 Q And Mr. Flaherty was also more knowledgeable than you in 24 s the proper application of codes and standards in the 25 construction of nuclear power plants?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5320 O
1 A I really didn't know that much about Mr. Flaherty, and I l
2 didn't have a whole lot of dealings.with him; but he did ,
3 seem qualified for the position that he was in.
4 Q And one of the reasons that you were going to take these 1
5 seminars was so that you would learn the proper 6 application of codes and standards in the construction 7 of nuclear power plants; right?
8 A Everyone should want to continue to learn.
9 MR. MILL ER : Answer my question, please, Mr.
10 Puckett.
11 MR. GUILD: I think he did, Mr. Chairman.
12 MR. MILLER: I don't believe so.
13 May I have the question reread?
14 A (Continuing.) I wanted to learn more.
15 MR. MILLER: Excuse me, Mr. Puckett.
16 Would you read the question and the witness' 17 answer?
l
- 18 (The record was thereupon read by the j 19 Reporter.)
l 20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I think he's n7w 21 answered the question.
l 22 BY MR. MILLER :
23 Q And you wanted to learn more because -- in Mr.
24 Goedecke's view, at least -- you did not know enough 25 about the codes'and standards so that you were able to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1112nois ouAas (312) 232-0262 i
. _ = . ~ . , _ . _ _ _ . , _ _ - . , , , _ . , _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . , _ _ . , _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . . , _ _ _ , _ _ _ . . , , _ . _ . . . _ . . . , _ . _ . . _ . _ , _ _ , , . _ _ , . . . _ _ _ .
5321 i
(
1 properly apply them in the construction of nuclear power ;
2 plants; correct?
3 A That may have been his opinion.
4 But for the three years prior to him getting there, 5 I was the only weld engineer on the project; and I had 6 handled the job and got the work done with myse,1f, three 7 engineering assistants and an engineering clerk typist, 8 the same job that he hired 21 weld engineers,18 9 assistants and 17 or 18 clerk typists to do.
- 10 0 And when Mr. Goedecke showed you this evaluation, 11 Applicant's Exhibit 45, you told him all of these 12 things, reminded him of all these f acts and told him you 13 weren't going to sign it; isn't that right?
14 A I told him that I did not agree with the evaluation and 15 I didn't want to sign it.
16 That prompted Exhibit 46.
l l 17 Q And, in fact, Mr. Goedecke, on the second page of 18 Applicant's Exhibit 46, says that he has " deemed it 19 necessary to laterally shif t Mr. Puckett out of the 20 position as Project Welding Engineer," correct, just as 21 you testified?
22 THE WITNESS: It's been a long time since 23 I've seen this. I'd like to reread it if I might, 24 please.
25 MR. MILLER: Please take your time and look Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, Illinois culae (312) 232-0262
5322 0
'l it over.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, Mr. Miller, the letter 3 speaks for itself. I think he's already stated what the 4 situation was. I don't see what more you can get f rom 5 this.
6 Are you expecting an answer to your question?
7 MR. MILLER: Well, he asked to read it, and, 8 your Honor, I do have a very few more questions on the 9 document.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: There was a pending 11 question, but I thought his answer was already given, so 12 I'm asking if you're still expecting an answer.
() 13 MR. MILLER: No. I'll withdraw the pending 14 question.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
16 BY MR. MILL ER :
17 Q Have you read it now, Mr. Puckett?
18 A Yes, sir.
j 19 Q Okay.
l 20 Did Mr. Goedecke show you this document -- that is, 21 Applicant's Exhibit 46 -- af ter you had taken exception 22 to his comments on your performance evaluation, Exhibit 23 45?
24 A Yes, sir. ,
25 Q And on the basis of the statements made in Applicant's l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. ,
ueneva, 11Alnois oulae (312) 232-0262
i 5323 r
O 1 Exhibit 46, you then signed the perf ormance evaluation; 2 correct?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 Q Now, did you believe that the statements, clarifying 5 statements, made by Mr. Goedecke in this memorandum, 6 Applicant's Exhibit 46, were an accurate depiction of 7 your situation?
8 A In most parts, yes, sir.
9 Q What parts did you disagree with, sir?
10 A Well, I didn't really disagree with any particular part 11 of it. There was parts of it that I didn' t fully agree 12 with.
() 13 Q Could you point those out to us? ,
14 A Well, in Note 2, he said, "Mr. Puckett, because of his 15 extensive workload that he has handled since 1979, has 16 not been able to keep up with the state of the art. "
17 I guess he is talking about changes to the codes 18 and things of this nature. We were working with one 19 particular code book, and the changes that come out 20 thereaf ter -- in f act, we never had access to the' code ;
21 books.
l 22 Q I see.
1 23 What code book was that, sir?
24 A The ASME and the AWS codes, basically.
25 0 And do you recall which version of the AWS code was in O
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 1
5324 O
1 effect at Zimmer while you were the Chief Weld Engineer?
2 A I do not remember the year at this time, no, I don't.
3 0 Okay.
4 Do you remember whether it was before or af ter 5 1975?
6 A Well, I got there in 1975, and it was prior to '75.
7 Q And that was the code book that was in use throughout 8 your tenure --
9 A Yes.
10 0 -- at Zimmer?
11 Okay.
12 Is there anything else that you don't fully agree
( 13 with on this document, Applicant's Exhibit 46?
14 A I haven't really looked at it that close, but at the 15 time, I got an opportunity to read the document.
16 He was the supervisor, so whether I did or didn't 17 agree with it at that time wouldn't have made a lot of 18 difference.
i 19 0 Wel1~, do you remember telling him, at the time, that you l 20 disagreed with any specific portion?
i 21 A I told him that I disagreed when he made out the first 22 evaluation; and, of course, then af ter the Exhibit 46, 23 we come to the next evaluation, which was 47.
24 Q Yes, sir.
25 But af ter he made out the -- this memorandum, Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, 111inois cul3e (312) 232-0262
5325 O
1 Applicant's Exhibit 46 -- that is, Mr. Goedecke prepared 2 it -- did you -- do you recall telling him that you 3 disagreed with any of the observations?
4 A No, sir, not at this time I do not.
5 Q Now, let's turn to Applicant's Exhibit 47, and this was 6 approximately a year later af ter the evaluation.
7 Your title is shown as Senior Engineer; correct?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 0 All right.
10 And Mr. Goedecke is really quite complimentary of 11 the way in which you've responded to the observations i
12 that he made in the preceding performance evaluation;
( 13 correct?
14 A There's quite a diff erence in the change.
15 0 Yes.
16 And he refers to the continuing education course 17 that you took, which gave you five continuing education
, 18 units of credit?
19 A A seminar, yes, sir.
l 20 Q Now, under " major development needs," Mr. Goedecke 21 states, "Mr. Puckett needs to reassume a supervisory 22 position in the Welding Department. "
23 Now, Mr. Puckett, as of April or May of 1983, I 24 take it that you did not have a supervisory position in 25 the Welding Department, did you?
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
4 UEDEVA, 1111nU15 OU1J9 (312) 232-0262
5326 O
1 A At this point, no, sir, I did not supervise any 2 particular department.
3 Q All right, sir.
4 And was it at this point in time that your duties 5 as Lead Historical Weld Engineer began to be a part of
! 6 your job responsibilities?
7 A It was in that area of time, yes.
8 Q All right. ,
9 And there are, of course, no further evaluations, 10 because .the Zimmer project was terminated before the 11 next evaluation period would come around; correct?
~
12 A Yes, sir.
13 Q Between the time of this evaluation, Applicant's Exhibit l 14 47, and the termination of the Zimmer project, did you 15 have the opportunity to reassume a supervisory position?
, 16 A Well, not per se in charge of any particular department.
)
17 I worked closely with all the departments as the 1
18 engineer working with the documents -- I'm not thinking 19 too clear today; you'll have to forgive me -- Bistorical 20 Weld Engineer, because at the time there was a lot of 1
21 work going on concerned with NR's and document research l
22 and the paperwork, and I was probably more f amiliar with 23 this than anybody else.
24 I was working basically with -- with the people l 25 that were writing the procedures, with the people that O
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5327 l O
1 were evaluating the Nonconformance Reports, with the 2 people that was qualifying the welders as well as with 3 all the people they had doing the input f rom all of this 4 documentation into the computer data base.
5 Q Mr. Goedecke, at his deposition, stated, Mr. Puckett, 6 that your memory bank was excellent and that you had a 7 very good knowledge of the history of the welding 8 activities at the Zimmer plant.
9 Would you agree with that characterization?
10 A Pretty much so, sir. I created a lot of those 11 documents.
12 Q All right.
( 13 And it was on that basis that he relied on you in 14 this Lead Historical Weld Engineer position; is that 15 also accurate?
j 16 A Yes, sir.
17 Q Now, Mr. Goedecke -- I beg your pardon.
18 Mr. Puckett, your 1982 performance evaluation,
- 19 Applicant's Exhibit 45, states that Mr. Goedecke planned l
20 to have you attend seminars, and I think you've already l
l 21 testified that you did, in fact, attend such a seminar; 22 isn' t that right?
23 A Yes, sir.
24 Q Do you recall how many hours of course work that seminar
! 25 involved?
()
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois ou144 (312) 232-0262
5328 O 1 A Well, there was one seminar that lasted f or three days, 2 and there was another one I think that lasted -- it was 3 for four days.
]
4 Q All right.
5 A It's amazing what you can acquire in three and four days 1
6 over a year's evaluation, isn't it?
7 Q And do you recall the title of the seminar that was held 8 for three days?
9 A One of them was in Orlando, Florida, and it had to do 10 with boilers and pressure vessels.
11 Q Do you recall what --
12 A I don't, off the top of my head, remember the -- the 1
, () 13 titles of the seminars.
14 Q Yes.
15 Did the one having to do with boilers and pressure 16 vessels deal with the welding activities for those l
17 components?
18 A Not per se with the welding of those.
i 19 It mostly showed failures that had occurred in l 20 pressure vessels and boilers and how these were detected 21 and how repairs were made, things of this nature.
22 Q All right. '
l 23 I take,it, then, it was more a course oriented 1 24 towards metallurgy than welding; is that correct?
l 25 A Yes, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
- ueneva, AAAAnois ovias (312) 232-0262
- m. ,ei9. w.,,,p,,.--y .-- . . -
. ,-,y,:y.,n,- ,,,-...,--,y,*,-.--,,,.._-,
.- .-,,_,-s S --__ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
5329
. O Now, the course -- the seminar that you attended f or 1 Q 2 four days -- do you remember the subject of that 3 seminar?
4 A Off the top of my head, I don't, sir.
5 0 All right.
6 Was that one that was conducted by the Metals 7 Engineering Institute?
8 A It may have been. It was here in Chicago.
9 MR. MILLER: Let me see if I can give you 10 some assistance.
11 I'd like the Reporter to mark as Applicant's 12 Exhibit 48 for identification a group of documents --
()
13 THE WITNESS: No, si r. Once I've seen the 14 documents, if that is those --
15 MR. MILLER: Let me get.them marked and then 16 we can discuss them, Mr. Puckett.
17 THE WITNESS: Okay.
18 MR. MILLER : The first page bears the words 19 " Metals Engineering Institute, Course 36, Test 5," and 20 the last page is a certificate of completion for Mr.
21 Puckett in the metallurgical course entitled " Welding 22 Inspection and Quality Control. "
23 (The document was thereupon marked 24 Applicant's Exhibit No. 48 for 25 identification as of June 24, 1986.) '
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 ,
(312) 232-0262
5330 0 MR. GUILD: Did you have it marked?
1 2 MR. MILLER: Yes. It's Applicant's Exhibit 3 48.
~
4 BY MR. MILLER:
5 Q Mr. Puckett, we've marked for identification Applicant's 6 Exhibit 48.
7 My first question to you is: Are these documents 8 that you filled out or were otherwise created in 9 connection with either one of the seminars that you --
10 A No, sir.
11 0 Okay.
12 Now let's go back to the four-day seminar that you 13 recall attending, you think, in Chicago.
14 Do you have any recollection of what that seminar i
15 involved?
16 A I can' t remember at this time.
17 Q Do you remember the name of the organization that 18 conducted the seminar?
19 A No, I do not.
20 Q All right.
21 Now let's turn to Applicant's Exhibit 48.
22 Can you tell me, first of all: That's your name in 23 your handwriting that appears in the upper lef t-hand 24 corner of the first page; is that correct?
25 A Yes, sir.
t Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1AAlnois ouAas (312) 232-0262
5331 l
l
() 1 Q I'll represent to you that these are all the documents l
2 that relate to this Metals Engineering Institute course 3 that you produced to me in response to a subpoena at 4 your deposition --
5 A Yes.
6 0 .-- and I notice it begins with Test 5.
i 7 I can assume that there were Tests 1 through 4 as 8 well; correct?
9 A Yes, sir, there would have been, yes, sir.
10 Q All right.
11 Now, can you tell me what these tests and the last 12 document, the certificate of completion -- what activity 13 they deal with?
! 14 A Ask the question again, sir.
i 15 Q How did you come to fill out these tests?
16 A Oh, Mr. Goedecke sponsored the course himself and taught i 17 and monitored the course.
18 Be was a member of the ANS committee, and that's 19 who sponsors the Metals Engineering Institute. All of 20 the Weld Engineering Department, all of the clerks, all 21 of the engineering assistants and all of the engineers 22 took this same course.
23 Q All right.
24 I take it that th,is is the course that -- well, 25 let's go back to Applicant's Exhibit 47 for just a O
i j Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois OU144 (312) 232-0262
5332 1 second. We may be able to refresh your recollection as 2 to the four-day seminar. That's the performance 3 appraisal for the period April 15, '82, to April 1, 4 1983.
5 At the top of the second page, there's an 6 indication that you attended a seminar on maintenance 7 welding in nuclear construction.
8 Is that the --
9 A Yes, sir.
10 0 Is that the four-day seminar?
11 A It may have been, yes.
12 0 And then the other seminar --
( 13 A It was sponsored by AWS -- I think it was sponsored by 14 the AWS.
15 Q Now, it is the course that Mr. Goedecke taught under the 16 auspices of AWS, the Metals Engineering Institute, that -
17 led to your getting five continuing education units for 18 satisf actory completion of the course; correct?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q All right.
21 Now, it's a fact, isn't it, that of the documents 22 that we have in this group, it is only Test No. 7, which 23 is about four pages into the Exhibit 48, that deals with 24 AWS code questions; correct? :
25 A It was my understanding that the whole course dealt with Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AAAinuis ovAae (312) 232-0262
5333 O
1 AWS.
2 I haven't read these questions here. If I might --
3 - MR. MILLER: Surely.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, the documents speak 5 for themselves, and I can see in Test 8 that it deals
- 6 with AWS.
7 A (Continuing.) All of the records reflect that it is 8 AWS.
S BY MR. MILLER: -
10 Q Well, there are other codes referenced as well as AWS;
] 11 isn't that right? I 12 A There very well could be.
O. 13 Q When you were interviewed by Mr. DeWald in May of 1984, i
14 did you discuss with him the performance appraisals that
, 15 you had received from Mr. Goedecke?
15 A They were not asked for. I didn't discuss them at that 17 time.
18 Q All right.
19 So you never told Mr. DeWald that Mr. Goedecke, at 20 one of the performance appraisals, said that you needed i 21 to learn the proper applications of codes and standards 22 in the construction of nuclear power plants?
23 A No, I did not.
24 Q And did you tell Mr. DeWald that at the conclusion of 25 the Zimmer project, you had not been in a supervisory l O
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60144 (312) 232-0262 ,
l 5334 O
- 1 position for approximately nine -- at least nine months?
2 A I had presented my resume to Mr. DeWald. He read the 3 resume, and I answered the questions -- and, evidently, 4 as he wanted them answered.
5 The other stuff didn't come up.. I never brought 6 anything up. I hadn't even considered it or thought 7 about it.
8 Q I see.
9 You never volunteered the information?
10 A No.
11 Q Okay.
12 Did you' discuss the course that you took with
( 13 American Metals Institute -- I'm sorry; Metals 14 Engineering Institute and American Welding Society?
15 A It was a part of the resume, a package that I had made 16 up not only reflecting the f act that I had had this, but 17 other courses that I had attended and the seminars.
18 Q It's also correct, is it not, that in your activities as 19 a Lead Mechanical Quality Assurance Inspector and a 20 Senior Quality Assurance Mechanical Inspector at the 21 Zimmer facility, you had never actually conducted 22 inspections within the electrical scope of work?
23 A We had an Electrical Department on its own. The only 24 dealings with the Electrical was to qualify their 25 welders to do the welding.
O
(,~ = ' Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
- 7 eneva, uJ.TnTrs euLs4 (312) 232-0262
5335 O
1 Q And you didn't tell Mr. DeWald that your actual weld 2 inspection experience at Zimmer had not included the 3 electrical scope of work?
4 A My resume said that I was a mechanical inspector, and it 5 never mentioned anything about electrical one way or the 6 other.
7 I don't recall if the question was asked or not, if 8 I had worked in electrical before.
s 9 Q But in any event, you don't recall volunteering the 10 inf ormation that you never worked --
11 A I had no reason to.-
12 MR. MILLER: Now, I'd like the Reporter to 13 mark as Applicant's Exhibit 49 for identification a
- 14 document which is an inspection report of the United l 15 States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
16 The cover letter bears the date March 25, 1983, and 17 it is addressed to Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company.
18 Attached to it is a notice of violation and 1
19 Inspection Report 8210.
20 (the document was thereupon marked l
21 Applicant's Exhibit No. 49 for 22 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
23 BY MR. MILLER:
24 Q Mr. Puckett, you've seen this document before today, 25 have you not?
l
(
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _
j ueneva, 1111nols ou Aa e (312) 232-0262
5336 O '
Yes, sir.
1 A 2 0 The notice of violation, which begins on the fourth page 3 of the exhibit, has a number of items of noncompliance 4 and violations identified, and I'd like to call your
- 5 attention first to Item No. 1.b. in the notice of 6 violation.
7 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, before counsel goes 8 further, the question preceding was, "Have you seen this 9 bef ore," and he said yes, 10 I do recall, in fact, that the witness was shown 11 the document at his depositi6n when Mr. Miller
~
12 questioned him about it.
l 13 For 'the record, since I may have an objection 14 further, I would ask that counsel establish when the 15 witness saw the document if other than at the 16 deposition.
! 17 MR. MILLER: I'll be happy to do that.
.l i 18 BY MR. MILLER:
I 19 Q Prior to the time your deposition was taken by me, Mr.
20 Puckett, had you seen this document before?
21 A I don't really recall seeing the document prior to the 22 depo sition.
23 However, I do recall some of the items that are I 24 listed in here.
p 25 Q All right.
! U Sonntag Reporting Service, _ Ltd.
- ueneva, AAAinois ouAag (312) 232-0262
5337 O
1 And I'm really going to examine you about the -
2 events themselves, rather than the document.
3 A As best I can recall. This happened quite some time 4 ago.
3 5 Q Certainly.
6 Item 1.b. refers to qualification records for 7 approximately 32 welders having been rewritten and that 8 that is one of two examples which led to a Severity 9 Level III violation.
10 If we turn to Page 30, Mr. Puckett, of the 11 inspection report, which is attached to the notice of 12 violation, if we look at the second full paragraph on 13 that page, there is again a reference to the rewriting ,
14 of approximately 32 welder qualification records.
15 Do you see that?
16 A Which paragraph are we talking about now?
17 Q It's the one that begins with the word "results" on Page l 18 30.
19 Do you see that?
20 A Yes, sir.
21 Q All right.
l 22 There is a reference also in that paragraph to the 23 fact that it was the H. J. Kaiser Project Weld Engineer 24 and an H. J. Kaiser Mechanical / Piping Level III QA 25 Engineer who were responsible for rewriting those 32 l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 ,
(312) 232-0262
l 5338 l
(
1 welder qualification records.
2 A Yes, sir.
3 0 It's a fact, is it not, that you are the Project Weld 4 Engineer that's referred te in that paragraph?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 However, I was under the direction of Manfred 7 Goedecke, and he requested t'aat this be done.
8 0 All right. .
9 Now, th en , turning to -- back to the notice of 10 violation, Item 2.a. on Page 3 of the notice of 11 violation, the statement is made, "The method employed 12 by the B. J. Kaiser Project Weld Engineer for verifying O 13 that a welder used a specific process to maintain 14 current qualification status," paren, "(a welder showing 15 his old qualification card and an old weld rod issue 16 slip would be given a new card)," close paren, "was not 17 commensurate with applicable code requirements."
18 Again, you are the Project Weld Engineer that 19 issued that card; isn't that right?
20 A Yes, sir, in the presence of NRC.
21 0 Yes, sir.
22 And as a result of having done so, the NRC 23 inspector who witnessed you doing it wrote it up as one 24 example of a Severity Level IV violation; correct?
25 A Yes, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois oulas (312) 232-0262
g 5339 O
1 A Nonconformancs Report was initiated. It was 2 dispositioned; and to 'tlie best of my knowledge, the
, ~
3 disposition was acceptable.
4 Q All right. ,
5 Mr. Puckett, when you were interviewed by Mr.
6 DeWald at Comstock in the spring of 1S84, did you 7 disclose to them that your activ1' ties specifically had 8 contributed to the imposition.of a Severity Level III 9 ' and a Severity Level IV item of noncompliance while you 10 were the Project Weld Engineer at Zimmer?
11 A No, sir.
12 Q Nobody asked; right?
13 A , No, sir.
14 Q You didn't volunteer?
15 A Mo, sir, I did not. .
16- I mean, you know,:the subject never came up about 17 that. The thinf3s that he was talking about_ was what we 18' -- what I answered to.
19 , ' MR. MILLER : All right.
l 20 .How, then, Mr. Puckett, let's go back to your 21 resum e..
22 THE WITNESS: Could I explain how this
~
l , 23 ' happened? ,
24 MR. MILLER: Well, I'm happy to have you do 25 it, but I'd like to continue with my examination for I
! Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l GMreva, 111inois 60134 (312) 232-0262
f
,. 5340 O
1 just a moment. ,
I 2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Right. .
I 3 Mr. Puckett, you just really ought to answer the 4 questions directly --
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. Thank you.
,. 6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- unless if you think an 7 answer is incomplete, you can add to it to make it 8 complete.
9 But I believe in this case you've completed your 10 answer and you're just going on to something further.
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
12 BY MR. MILLER:
13 Q Mr. Puckett, let's go back to your resume, Intervenors' 14 Exhibit 26 in evidence.
15 Under your " summary of qualifications," Lead 16 Historical Weld Engineer, you state that you were --
17 well, it says " supervisor for compiling information from i
18 historical weld documentation for input into computer 19 data base."
20 MR. GUILD: Where are you looking, Counsel?
21 MR. MILL ER : Under " summary of 22 qualifications" on the first page.
23 BY MR. MILLER :
24 Q No dates are given as to when those qualifications were 25 attained in that paragraph; right?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5341 O
1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q Then as Project Weld Engineer / Chief Weld Engineer under 3 " summary of qualifications," you indicate that your 4 responsibilities include "the supervision of the Weld 5 Engineering Department, writing and qualifying 6 procedures for welding and post weld heat in accordance 7 with ASME Section IX, ANS Dl.1 and ANSI B-3.11, 8 compiling and maintaining welder qualification records 9 on 471 craft welders."
10 And again, no date is given as to when you had 11 those responsibilities; right?
12 A Yes, sir.
13 Q Then we drop down, do we not, to September -- under 14 " experience," the dates September, 1975, to present.
15 You state in the second sentence there that your 16 present responsibilities include "the initiating and 17 writing of procedures and supervising of the input of 18 historical weld documentation into a computer data base 19 at the William H. Zimmer nuclear power plant."
20 Now, it's a fact, isn't it, Mr. Puckett, that as of 21 the conclusion of your time at the Zimmer plant and for 22 at least nine months prior to then, you had had no 23 responsibility for the initiating and writing of 24 procedures?
25 A No, sir, that isn't so.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
. ueneva, AAAinois aulas (312) 232-0262
5342 O
1 We had to write a procedure to document how we were 2 going to accumulate this data and how it was to be input 3 into the comput'er data base. That is the " procedures" 4 that I was referring to. ,
5 0 Oh, I see.
6 So that when the words "present responsibilities -
- 7 include the initiating and writing of procedures," it's 8 the initiating and writing of procedures that would 9 transfer material from hard copy into this computer data 10 base; right?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 Q Now, you understood, did you not, that Comstock was
( 13 looking for a Level III Weld Inspector to take control 14 of the weld program, including the welding procedures 15 and the welder qualification procedures; right?
16 A When I went to Braidwood, it was my understanding that 17 they needed Quality Assurance Inspectors.
18 When I got there, Mr. DeWald, after looking at my 19 resume and af ter interviewing me, said that he had a 20 position open for a Level III and that I would be the 21 man to fill this position.
22 Q And that's because Mr. DeWald believed that you had 23 responsibilities including the initiating and writing of 24 weld procedures; isn't that right?
25 MR. GUILD: Objection.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5343 l
O 1 THE NOTARY: I didn't hear the beginning of 2 the answer. l 3 MR. GUILD: The question is objected to.
4 Obviously the witness can't speculate on what Mr.
5 DeWald believed. He can testify, as he has, to what
, 6 information he knows was given to Mr. DeWald when he 7 asked, not what Mr. DeWald believed.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's correct. The 9 objection is sustained. I believe the witness has 10 answered every question that he could answer.
11 BY MR. MILLER :
12 Q Well, Mr. Puckett, you understood from Mr. DeWald during
() 13 the course of the interview, didn't you, that they were 14 looking for someone to take control of the welding 15 program, ' including welding procedures and welder 16 qualification procedures; correct?
17 A Yes, sir. This was explained; that they needed a person 18 to fill in the position as Level III and that he would i
19 be responsible for those weld-related activities for i 20 Comstock Engineering.
21 Q And Mr. DeWald said to you, on the basis of reading your 22 resume, that you appeared to be the man that had the 4 23 qualifications for the job; right?
24 A Yes, sir, to review his procedures and to point out 25 those things that required changing.
) ,
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. ~ .. . -
5344 1 Q And you never told him that the sentence that reads, 2 "Present responsibilities include the initiating and ;
l 3 writing of procedures," didn't deal with weld procedures 4 at all, did you?
5 MR. GUILD: Asked and answered, Mr. Chairman.
6 Obj ection.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes. I believe the sentence
~
8 speaks for itself, and I really have my own problem 9 finding anything misleading in the sentence.
10 Mr. Puckett did this resume before the interview, I 11 heard, so it seems as though you're suggesting things 12 that aren't so.
() 13 The resume wasn't written in response to the 14 interview with Mr. DeWald, and I think, you know, you've 15 gotten as much as you can out of what you've asked.
16 I don't see how the witness can speculate what was 17 in Mr. DeWald's mind.
18 MR. MILLER: Mr. DeWald has already testified 19 what was in his mind, your Honor, and I believe -- I 20 have just one more question -- one or two more questions 21 on this.
22 BY MR. MILLER :
23 Q Did you understand, Mr. Puckett, that Comstock at 24 Braidwood had any program for transferring hard copy 25 inf ormation f rom the -- into a computerized data base?
- Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AAAinois ovAag (312) 232-0262
5345 1 A The question was: Did Comstock have this program?
2 Q Yes.
3 A To the best of my knowledge, they did not.
1 4 Q And did you say anything to Mr. DeWald that would lead 5 him to believe that the words " initiating and writing of 6 procedures" were, in fact, limited to the initiating and i
7 writing of procedures for the input of historical weld 8 documentation into a computer data base?
9 MR. GUILD: Objection; asked and answered and 10 beaten to death, 11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sustained.
12 MR. MILLER : Your Honor, I don't believe I've I 13 gotten an answer to that question.
14 It seems to me that the examination of many of 15 Applicant's witnesses has proceeded at some length with
, 16 respect to key issues; that counsel has been permitted 17 to probe and to come at an issue so that there is 18 absolutely no misunderstanding as to what the witness' 19 position is.
20 Now, there has been an issue raised in this l
l 21 proceeding by Mr. Guild as to whether or not Mr.
22 Puckett's qualifications were properly presented to 23 Comstock.
24 MR. GUILD: I beg your pardon, Counsel.
25 MR. MILL ER : In fact, he examined Mr. DeWald Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois oviae (312) 232-0262
. _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ . . -_-. ___._.. _ ____... _ __ _ _ ._ _-~ _ _ __ _
5346
)
1 on that very issue.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Miller, you're just 3 being argumentative here, not just with the Board but 4 with the witness.
5 We have the sentence here. It reads for itself.
6 If there's something misleading in the sentence, I think 7 you've gotten our attention to it and we'll have to 8 decide if there is.
9 But now you' re taking part of the sentence and 10 asking him to consider it in i, solation. I don't think 11 that it's a fair question. I think whatever your 12 question has in it that requires a response has already O. 13 been responded to. ,,,
- 14 Why don' t we take a ten-minute break?
15 MR. MILLER : Let me just ask one final 16 question, if I may.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm sorry.
18 BY MR. MILLER:
l 19 Q Mr. Puckett, was this resume written to apply for a 20 Level III job or just generally to describe your 21 qualifications as a person experienced in welding and 22 welding inspection?
23 MR. GUILD: He's answered the question, Mr.
24 Chai rman. It clearly has been asked and answered. If 25 he wants to save that for argument, he should argue that O
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AAAAnvis ovia, j (312) 232-0262 t
l._. . _ . . _ - . _ . . _ _.._ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ , _ . _ _ _ _ _ , , _ _ . . , _ . _ _ _ . _
5347 I O
1 point.
2 But the witness has been fully responsive when 3 asked how and why he prepared the resume, under what 4 time sequence, when he was aware of the Level III 5 position --
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: My understanding of the i 7 witness is that he applied for a Level II position.
8 Is your answer going to change?
9 THE WITNESS: No, sir. I was just looking l
10 ' for a job at the time that I applied.
11 I did not know what jobs would be available, other 12 than it was for a QC Inspector. Once I got there, they 13 said they had the Level III position and that, according l 14 to my resume, I could fill that position.
l 15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's my 16 unde standing. That's fine.
17 MR. MILL ER :- Why don't we take a break?
l 18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine. Let's take a 19 ten-minute break.
l 20 ,
(WHEREUPON, a recess was had, after which 21 the proceedings were resumed as follows:)
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We're back in session.
23 Mr. Miller, you may continue.
24 _
MR. MILLER : Thank you.
25 Your Honor, before I resume my examination of Mr.
l i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5348 1 Puckett, I'd like to move into evidence Applicant's 2 Exhibits 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 and 48.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Any objection?
4 MR. GUILD: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman.
5 Obviously Mr. Puckett is capable and competent to 6 testify about facts that are within his knowledge, and 7 he's done so in response to Mr. Miller's questions.
8 We do object, however, to receiving the documents 9 that appear to be prepared by someone else, 43 through 10 47, that are in the nature generally of performance 11 evaluations, on the grounds that those documents are l 12 classic hearsay.
13 They were prepared by someone else. The someone 14 else is not available for examination.
15 Obviously Mr. Miller can use them, as he has, as
! 16 aids in cross examination as to the substance, but we
( 17 would object to receiving those documents to prove the 18 truthfulness of the substance of the matters that are 19 contained in those documents.
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, why wouldn't these be 21 business records that are admissible as such?
22 MR. GUILD: Then they have to sponsor someone 23 who can certainly testify as to how they perform
, 24 performance evaluations and they were performed in due l
25 course, meeting our requirements of the business records l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 501J4 l
(312) 232-0262 i
. , _ . - . - . . . - . - . . . . ,--._._--.......,-,._--.-.._..,,..._--,.._._,,-,_,..,,.._._,,.-..-...v. ,.-- ,-,-ee, , , . - < . . -
5349 O
1 exception.
2 They ' re not, obviously. We have only the subject 3 of the evaluation. We don't have the preparers of the 4 evaluations to stand cross examination.
5 Even as a business record, Mr. Chairman, the 6 custodian of those records must stand cross examination 7 as to the regularity with which the documents were i
8 prepared.
, 9 MR. MILL ER : Your Honor, I might just add, as 10 a further basis for introduction of these documents, 11 with the exception of Applicant's Exhibit 43, that all 12 of the remaining documents' were authenticated during Mr.
, 13 Goedecke's deposition. Indeed, they all bear a l 14 deposition exhibit number in the upper margin of each of 15 these' exhibits.
16 Mr. Goedecke, as the author, both authenticated i 17 them and testified as to their contents. Some months i
18 ago -- I think it was months ago now -- we sent to both 19 the Staff and Intervenors our suggested portions of the l
20 Goedecke deposition for inclusion in the evidentiary l
l 21 record of this proceeding.
22 It is my recollection, although I could be wrong, l 23 that those portions of the transcript which authenticate 24 these documents are included in the designations of the 25 deposition that we prepared.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 0U144 (312) 232-0262 1
5350
() 1 MR. GUILD:
Mr. Chairman, the latter point --
2 this may just be a reflection of my lapse of memory, but 3 I don't recall ever seeing such a designation.
l 4 I've been waiting with baited breath for the 5 promised designation of the portions of the Goedecke 6 deposition so that I could make my objections to it.
7 If it's been filed, I apologize, but it hasn't been 8 brought to my attention by my office.
9 I would like an opportunity, of course, to address 10 whatever designations Mr. Miller might desire f rom that 11 document.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is Mr. Goedecke the person 13 who is out of the country?
14 MR. GUILD: He's the man that they brought 15 back f rom West Germany for his deposition and now say 16 he's unavailable to testify on the merits.
- 17 MR. MILLER : I will tell you, your Honor,
{ 18 that we are attempting to locate Mr. Goedecke, because I 19 think it would be useful for the Board to see him in 20 pe r son.
21 So far we have not been able to locate him either 22 at his address and telephone numbers in West Germany nor 23 at his last e'mployer in the United States. We're 24 continuing to try, and I'm going to keep the Board and 25 the parties advised of this.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AAA2nute ouAas (312) 232-0262
5351 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'll tell you, Mr. Guild, I 2 have some trouble why you want to keep these out anyway, 3 but let me refer to the business records portion of the 4 rules anyway.
5 MR. GUILD: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman.
6 Mr. Chairman, I guess on the merits I just have to 7 stand by my position as protecting my client's interest.
~
8 I do object to them.
9 I don't obviously quarrel with the witness' 10 testimony or his explanation of what the documents may 11 mean; but to the extent they're being offered to prove 12 the content, I do think that it's not only my 13 prerogative to object to them but it's -- it is my 14 obligation.
15 I do believe that Mr. -- if Mr. Miller wants to 16 offer Mr. Goedecke's evaluation, he has to offer Mr.
17 Goedecke and not simply a piece of paper reflecting the 18 unpresent author's opinion evidence.
, 19 These are obviously opinion-evidence documents.
20 They' re not simply showing that Mr. Puckett was present 21 at a particular job for a particular time. They're 22 controverted facts.
23 MR. MILLER : They represent his superior's 24 evaluabion of him.
25 MR. GUILD: Indeed they do, and they're
)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 50134 (312) 232-0262
5352 l
I
()
i 1 opinion evidence; so they really are the kind of 2 evidence that ought to be subject to cross examination 3 classically.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: How about the document 5 marked Applicant's Exhibit 437 6 That's Mr. Sandlin's evaluation.
7 Have you attempted to get Mr. Sandlin to --
8 MR. MILL ER: We have not.
9 Really, these documents -- I will also represent to 10 the Board that all of the documents except for the ,
11 Applicant's Exhibits 45 and 46 -- that is, the 12 evaluation for the period October 5, '81, through April
'O 13 15,
'82, and the memorandum dated April 20, 1982 -- were 14 produced by Mr. Puckett in response to a subpoena.
15 So I really don't quite understand the basis for 16 the objection.
17 I think that it is clear -- and if not, I would ask 18 for an opportunity to briefly examine Mr. Puckett 19 further regarding these documents -- that these come ,
20 within the business records exception.
21 MR. GUILD: It's not an authenticity 22 question, Mr. Chairman. I accept counsel's 23 representations. I'm not standing by a technical 24 obj ection to authenticity.
25 It's a question of what they mean, and they will be Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AAginoza ouAas (312) 232-0262
5353 l
1 obviously the basis for argumentation and findings by 2 Applicant as to what they mean as to the substance.
3 To the extent that they want to go beyond examining 4 the witness on the documents, I believe they are 5 obligated to present the authors.
6 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, Staff has no 7 objection to the receipt of these documents.
8 I would note that technically Intervenors is 9 possibly right. The only question would be an 10 authenticity question.
11 Under the business records exception generally 12 under the Federal Rules of Evidence, it does require 13 that the document be sponsored by a witness who has 14 personal knowledge of the business filing system; that 15 he removed the document from a particular file; that 16 it's the right file; and that the witness recognizes the 17 exhibit as the document that was removed f rom the file.
18 Apparently this is not being disputed here.
19 In the absence of that, laying the f oundation for 20 the introduction of the document, if that is laid, then 21 the document would come in; and the Board, the 22- decision-maker, would attach whatever weight the 23 document is worth.
24 I suspect in the absence of the author of the
{} 25 document, that's a matter for the decision-maker to make Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5354 O
1 of how helpful or what weight should be attached to that !
2 document in the absence of not having that witness 3 testify.
4 But it's not f atal to the introduction and the 5 receipt of that document that the author of the document 6 is not there.
7 So I would think it's just a matter for the 8 proponent of the document, something for him to consider 9 as to whether he should have the author there to bolster 10 the weight of that document.
11 But it's not necessary. There's no legal 12 requirement that he has to.
13 But as far as -- on the motion itself to introduce 14 the documents, the Staff doesn't object to that.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
16 We are referring to Rule 8036 of the Federal Rules 17 of Evidence?
18 MR. BERRY: Yes.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
20 Why don't we just hold off further argument for a 1
21 few seconds?
22 MR. GUILD: Okay.
23 MR. BERRY: Your Honor --
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes?
25 MR. BERRY: -- if it may help the Board, I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _
ueneva, 1111nols oulag l (312) 232-0262
5355 O
1 have in my possession a book, " Evidentiary Foundations,"
2 and it establishes the foundations for the introduction 3 of this type of a business record document.
4 If the Board would like to view it, I'd be happy to 5 share it with them.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Let's just take a few 7 minutes now and let me read 8036 again, and perhaps I'll 8 want to refer to that.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Miller, are we going to 10 have an offer of parts of the deposition --
11 MR. MILLER: Yes.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- which will determine --
13 which will address the underlying basis for these 14 evaluations by Mr. Goedecke?
15 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
16 I -- first of all, I see that Mr. Goedecke informed 17 us at the deposition that Mr. Sandlin is deceased, but l 18 he did identify him as his predecessor at the Zimmer 19 facility -- as did Mr. Puckett -- as the individual who 20 performed these evaluations.
21 Mr. Goedecke then went on at Pages 77 and 78, for 22 example, to describe the circumstances under which he 23 prepared the document that's now Applicant's Exhibit 45 24 for identification, and he discussed in some detail the 25 basis for his evaluation and the manner in which it was
, O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 4
(312) 232-0262
5356 i i O
1 conducted.
2 I believe -- although I can't find it very quickly 3 -- that Mr. Guild may well have cross-examined Mr.
4 Goedecke on those very documents.
5 But I believe that that satisfies the foundation 6 basis. ,
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The Board's ruling is that 8 we will allow these documents in as business records.
9 To the extent that Mr. Sandlin is not available to 10 be examined'with regard to his evaluation, that 11 evaluation will necessarily have less weight than if we 12 did have him here. As to how much weight, it's hard to 13 say right now.
14 Certainly the only other principal with regard to 15 -
these documents, other than Sandlin and Goedecke, is Mr.
16 Puckett. He'll be here for his explanation of the basis 17 for these documents, and so it will be up to counsel to 18 elicit his testimony with regard to the documents.
19 So these statements stand for themselves, and we 20 will allow -- and I might point out that we apparently 21 have no problem with authentication of the documents or, 22 as far as I can see, the fact that these are kept in the 23 ordinary course of business.
24 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chai rman -- f 25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But to the extent that O
Sonntag Reporting Service, _ Ltd. _
ueneva, 11Ainois ouAag (312) 232-0262
5357 O
1 they' re evaluative documents, the fact that we don' t 2 have the person here to be examined on his evaluation 3 necessarily reduces the weight of the documents 4 th emselves.
5 So that's the Board's ruling, and they' re received 6 into evidence.
7 (Applicant's Exhibits Nos. 43 through '4 8 8 for identification was thereupon received
! 9 in evidence as Applicant's Exhibits Nos.
10 43 through 48 in evidence.)
11 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chai rman, I did not object to 12 Applicant's Exhibit 48, which obviously was prepared by
( 13 Mr. Puckett; and he's capable of sponsoring that'. That 14 was the Metals Engineering Institute tests and 15 certificate of completion.
i 16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
17 Let me point out to the Reporter that Applicant's
- 18 Exhibit 49 for identification was not included in this 19 group, t
20 MR. MILLER : I made no offer.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Right.
! 22 Mr. Miller?
l 23 MR. MILLER: Thank you.
24 BY MR. MILL ER:
I 25 Q Mr. Puckett, at the conclusion of your interview with i (E)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 1111nois cu144 (312) 232-0262
5358 O
1 Mr. DeWald, Mr. Paserba and Mr. Marino, you were, in 2 fact, offered the position of a Level III Weld Inspector 3 for Comstock at Braidwood; correct?
4 A Yes, sir.
5 Q And you told them that you wanted to think it over, talk 6 it over with your wife, and that you'd get back to them 7 within a few days; right?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 Q And within that few days, you called up and accepted the 10 position, did you not?
11 A Yes, sir, I did.
12 O Now, you reported for work at Braidwood approximately 13 May 29, 1984; correct?
14 A Yes, sir.
15 0 And I take it you were greeted by Mr. DeWald.
16 Did he describe any further what would be expected j 17 of you in your position as a Level III Weld Inspector?
18 A Not at this time, no, sir; just the required reading and 19 the preparations for the qualifications.
20 MR. MILLER: I'd like the Reporter to mark as 21 Applicant's Exhibit 50 a document that in L. K. Comatock
! 22 & Company Form No. 58. It is a required reading i
23 familiarization log for Mr. Puckett and has as the date 24 started, at the top of the first page, May 29, 1984.
I 25 (The document was thereupon marked
, O Sonntag Reporting Servico, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I l
5359 )
I
< l O .
1 Applicant's Exhibit No. 50 for 2 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
l 3 BY MR. MILLER:
- l 1 4 Q Mr. Puckett, I show you a document that'.s been. marked 5 Applicant's Exhibit 50 for identification and ask if i 6 you've seen that document before today.
I 7 A Yes, I have.
s j 8 Q Okay.
9 And that, in fact, is the f amiliarization log which 10 indicates that you read the various documents that are 4 11 identified in the lef t-hand margin; correct?
12 A Yes, sir.
13 Q That is, in fact, your signature that appears on various l 14 pages of this document; right?
15 A Yes, sir.
i 16 Q The date that appears under the major column at the top, i 17 " Trainee" -- does that indicate the date on which you 18 began or ended your reading of the particular document?
l 19 A The date on the lef t was the date that I had read the i
20 document.
I 21 The date over on the right I think is the date that 22 Mr. Hunter signed the document.
) 23 Q What was Mr. -- what was the purpose of Mr. Hunter's i
^
24 signature, as you understood it? ,
25 A It was just policy there that they verify that I had Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 5360 i
I
(
j 1 read these documents.
2 Q All right, si r.
I- 3 And you understood at this time, did you not, that :
1 4 your function at Comstock was to identify any problems i
5 in the weld program and take steps to solve them; right?
I 6 A Well, yes, sir.
7 I was to identify these problems. They had a QA 8 Department there that made the changes to the 9 procedures.
10 Q Did you understand that you were to have any role in l 11 suggesting changes in procedures to the QA Department?
i 12 A Yes, sir.
13 O All right.
t
- 14 So that was -- I'm sorry. That's what I really 1
l 15 meant by " solving problems. "
l 16 After you identified one, you would make 17 recommendations about the manner in which the problem
(
18 should be solved; correct?
19 A Yes, sir.
I 20 Q Now, it's correct, is it not, that in at least the 21 initial stages of identifying any problems, you had some l 22 assistance f rom other sources, other than your own 23 review of the procedures and records; isn't that right?
24 A Would you rephrase -- ask the question over again?
25 Q Well, I don' t mean to -- in f act, shortly after you O
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, Illinois ovAag (312) 232-0262
i __ -
5361
(
1 arrived, Mr. DeWald gave you a copy of a document that's
- 2 been received in evidence as Applicant's Exhibit 1.
- 3 (Indicating.)
l 4 Why don't you just take a mihuta and look at t. hat, 5 Mr. Goedecke -- Mr. Puckett; l's sorry. ,
6 Mr. Puckett, I'm not going to ask you any questions. ,
7 on the details of the document. I just want to know, 8 having looked at it as f ar as you have, whether you 9 recall that this is a document that you were given 10 shortly af ter you arrived at the Braidwood site.
- 11 A At some point af ter I arrived, I did get a copy of this 12 document.
13 I don't remember exactly how it was that I got it.
14 I think Mr. DeWald may have given me a copy of thig 4
15 document.
16 0 Do you recall that it was within a few weeks af ter you ;
17 arrived at Braidwood?
i 18 A Yes, sir. '
i 19 Q Okay, i 20 Now, this document, in fact, discusses some 21 problems that had previously been identified with 22 respect to the Comstock welding program; correct?
23 A Yes, sir.
24 Q All right.
s 25 And in addition to this document, you were
)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 5362 I ()
1 informed, were you not, that the NRC Staff had conducted 2 an inspection which had identified some discrepancies in 3 the weld rod filler metal documentation?
4 A Yes, sir.
4 l 5 Q Okay.
6 So in that sense, you had a headstart in terms of -
, 7 the identification of some of the problems with the 8 welding program at the Braidwood site; correct?
9 A Yes, sir.
10 Q And it was Mr. DeWald who told you about the NRC ,
11 concerns with the weld rod filler metal program; 12 correct?
~
13 A Yes, sir. '
14 MR. MILLER: I'd like the Reporter to mark as ,
15 Applicant's Exhibit 51 a document that bears a cover.
16 letter dated November 21, 1985, f rom J. J. Harrison of i 17 the NRC to Commonwealth Edison Company; and attached to 4
18 it is a notice of violation and Inspection Report 8509 19 on the Braidwood docket.
20 g (The document was thereupon marked 21 Applicant's Exhibit No. 51 for 22 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
23 BY MR. MILLER :
i 24 0 Mr. Puckett, I show you a document that's been marked as 25 Applicant's Exhibit 50 for identification.
l >
5 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
uennva, AAAAnuta ovAag i
, (312) 232-0262 ,
5363 O
1 (Indica ting. )
> 2 I'm correct, am I not, that the first time you saw ,
3 this document was at your deposition that was conducted 4 in Chicago last fall?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 MR. GUILD: 51, you mean, Counsel?
7 JUDGE GROSSPEN: Were you talking about the 8 familiarization log or are we talking about --
i 9 MR. MILLER : I beg your pardon. This is 10 Applicant's Exhibit 51. I apologize for the numbering 11 system.
12 This will be Applicant's Exhibi't 51.
13 (Indicating.)
14 BY MR. MILLER:
15 Q Mr. Puckett, I'm sorry. Let me just repeat the question 16 for the record, 17 The first time you saw the document that's been 18 marked as Applicant's Exhibit 51 was at your deposition 19 in Chicago; is that correct?
20 A Yes, it is.
21 Q And this purports to be a review by the Nuclear
~
22 Regulatory Commission of allegations that you made 23 regarding the Comstock welding program at Braidwood; -
l 24 correct?
l 25 A Yes, sir.
1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
5364 O
1 Q All right.
2 A good deal of the balance of my examination is 3 going to involve the allegations that you made, and I'd 4 like for you to state whether or not the allegations 5 that are recorded in Applicant's Exhibit 51 are, in 6 fact, all of the allegations that,you identified during 7 the course of your employment by Comstock at Braidwood.
8 A Pretty much so. .
9 In reading this -- again, it was at my last
,- 10 deposition when I read this, and I haven't seen it j 11 since.
12 But in reading it, the allegations that I had made 13 are addressed here.
j 14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, Mr. Miller, let me 15 suggest that you just question on a particular 16 allegation, and the witness will then have some 17 opportunity to read the entire report and see if he 18 recalls that these constitute all of the allegations --
19 MR. MILLER: Okay.
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- at some later time af ter 21 he's had a chance to f amiliarize himself with the 22 document.
23 MR. MILLER: I think that's a good 24 suggestion, your Honor, and I'll follow it. ;
l Let's turn first to the allegation that is set
{) 25 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, IAAinois oviae (312) 232-0262
5365 O
1 forth at Page 3 of Applicant's Exhibit 51.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We' re talking about numbered 3 .
Page 3 to the report that's included in Applicant's 4 Exhibit 517 5 MR. MILLER: Yes.
6 BY MR. MILLER :
7 0 Is that allegation which is identified as Allegation 8 2.a. an accurate characterization of your concern 9 regarding the welding of A446 material to A36 material?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, turning back to Exhibit 50, which is 12 the required reading list, it indicates that you read 13 for the first time Section 4.3.3, Revision C, May 30, 14 1984; correct?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Now, it's also correct, is it not, that you were 17 responsible for a change in Procedure 4.3.3 in early 18 July? Isn't that right?
l 19 A I don't renember exactly when it was, but I did make 20 recommendations for changes in the procedures.
l 21 Q All right, sir.
22 Let me show you documents that are in evidence as 23 Applicant's Exhibit 10 and Applicant's Exhibit 23. They 24 are Procedures 4.3.3, Revision C, which is Applicant's 25 Exhibit 10, and 4.3.3, Revision D, which is Applicant's i
{)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 L
5366
+
l 4 i
!() l 1 Exhibit 23.
2 (Indicating.)
l 3 Mr. Puckett, if you would look at the second and 4 third pages of Applicant's Exhibit 10, Revision C, there 4
5 are certain comments there f rom Sargent & Lundy.
l 6 Do you see those?
7 A Yes, sir.
i 8 Q All right.
9 Those comments have a date on them of June 6,1984.
10 Did you see those Sargent & Lundy comments on or l 11 shortly af ter June 6th of 19847 12 A No, sir.
l 13 Q When was the first time you saw those comments?
! 14 A Well, actually, the first time I can recall seeing the 15 comments is when I was going through some paperwork last 16 night with Mr. Guild.
17 Q I see.
I i 18 Well, calling your attention to Procedure --
l 19 Sargent & Lundy Comment E on the second page, it refers
! 20 to Attachments 01, 02, 03 and 04.
21 If we turn -- well, first of all, I'd like you to 22 turn to those attachments, please.
23 Now, there is on, Attachment 0 itself and f
j 24 Attachments 01, 02, 03 and 04 a weld symbol in the 25 diagram that's found on each page, is there not?
i i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
}
Geneva, Illinuiu 60134 (312) 232-0262 L - .. - . - _ .. -_.______ _ __ ___ _ _ - _ _ _ - . . . _ . . - . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5367
() , , -
1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q And could you tell us what' weld symbol -- what is the 3 weld that that symbol' represents?
4 A It's a flare bevel. It represents a flare bevel.
5 Q All right.
6 Sometime af ter June 6th, Mr. Puckett, were you 7 asked to resolve certain comments that Sargent & Lundy 8 had made regarding that -- these particular attachments, 9 Attachments 01, 02, 03 and 04?
10 A No, sir, I don't recall that happening.
11 I recall that in reviewing the procedure, I had 12 seen that they had a rejectable procedure in the manual; 13 and it was at my suggestion to Irv DeWald that we 14 started to change to this.
15 Q All right.
16 Would you turn, Mr. Puckett, to Applicant's Exhibit 17 23 in evidence?
18 And again would you turn to Attachment O?
19 Are you there?
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q Okay.
22 And the weld symbol, Applicant's Exhibit 23, with 23 respect to Attachment 0 is different than the weld 24 symbol in Attachment 0 in Applicant's Exhibit 10; 25 correct?
)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
5368 O
1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q What weld does that symbol represent in Applicant's 3 Exhibit 237 4 A A fillet weld, sir.
5 0 All right.
6 And in addition, there is a change in the position 7 shown of the welding in Attachment 0; isn't that right?
8 That is -- let me be a little bit more precise.
9 Applicant's Exhibit 10, Revision C, shows that the 10 position of the welding is 1G, 2G, 3G and 4G; correct?
11 A Yes, sir, the difference being between a groove weld and 12 a fillet weld.
13 Q In fact, you made the changes f rom a groove weld to a 14 fillet weld on the procedure and initialed it and dated 15 it July 5, 1984; correct?
16 A Yes, sir.
17 Q You did the same thing f or Attachments 01, 02, 03 and 18 04; right?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q So that no later than July 5, 1984, you had specifically 21 examined Attachment O to Procedure 4.3.3 and had 22 identified --
23 A No, sir.
24 Q -- a problem; is that correct?
25 A These papers that I initiated here were submitted to the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois oulae (312) 232-0262
5369 l
, (
1 independent agency for a reinspection as a fillet weld 2 versus a flare bevel weld.
3 Some of these documents were lost. Two of them 4 ended up in an S & L file, which I finally traced down.
5 The other two ended up in the vault.
6 It was af ter the initiation of the Nonconformance 7 Report on the A446 to A36 material that these documents 8 reappeared.
9 Q Well, my only question, Mr. Puckett, was: No later than 10 July 5, 1984, you had occasion to review Attachment O to 11 Weld Procedure 4.3.3; correct?
12 A I had reviewed it. I had resubmitted it to the O 13 independent agent for testing. '
14 0 And you made the changes that appeared to you to be 15 appropriate to properly qualify the procedure; correct?
16 A Yes, I did.
17 0 All right.
18 And at that time you did not identify that the 19 procedure did not qualify the welding of A446 to A36 20 material, in your opinion; right?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, in order to weld in accordance with 23 the AWS code, the particular joint that is being welded j 24 must be qualified; isn't that right?
25 A Yes, sir.
{)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5370 0
1 Q And the AWS provides that procedures can be prequalified 2 under the code; isn't that right?
3 A Yes, sir -- materials.
4 0 Well, it's not just materials.
5 A Yes, materials and procedures.
6 0' And the joint detail itself can be prequalified; right?
7 A Yes, in some cases, yes.
8 Q And would you agree that in order to be prequalified, 9 that a procedure must comply in all respects with the 10 code, including the base metals that are to be joined by 11 the weld? Right?
12 A Yes, sir.
O 13 Q And that the procedure should either directly or by 14 reference indicate the materials that are to be joined 15 by the welding procedure?
16 A Yes, sir.
17 Q Now, there are, in f act, sections of the AWS code D1.1 18 which list the materials that are prequalified; isn't 19 that right?
20 A Yes, sir.
21 Q All right.
22 I'd like to show you a document that's been 23 received as Applicant's Exhibit No.14, which is the AWS 24 D1.1-1975 edition.
{} 25 (Indicating. )
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nols oulae (312) 232-0262
l l
5371 I l
()
1 Can we agree that it is Sections 8.2 and 10.2 of 2 the AWS code which list the materials that are 3 prequalified under the code?
4 A Yes, sir.
. 5 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I believe counsel 6 has ref erred to D1.3 by that number.
7 MR. MILLER: Did I do that?
, 8 I didn' t intend to do that. It's D1.1-1975 --
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Wait. Which exhibit?
10 You ref erred us to Applicant's Exhibit 14, which is 11 D1.3.
12 MR. MILLER : I'm sorry. I must have the O 13 wrong number on that.
14 Mr. Puckett, does that exhibit --
15 TH E WITN ESS : This one has Exhibit No.14, 16 and this is D1.1-75.
17 JUDGE COLE: Applicant's Exhibit 12 is the 18 Dl.1.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's correct.
! 20 MR. MILLER: That is the exhibit I intended 21 to ref er to, and I'll change that, your Honor.
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That apparently is the 23 exhibit -- well, no. I don' t want to say anything, 24 because I don' t want what you handed him.
25 BY MR. MILL ER :
[}
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5372 0
1 0 Can we agree that the document I've handed you is the 2 AWS D1.1-75 edition?
3 A It's a copy of it, sir.
4 MR. MILLER: Okay. I apologize for the 5 confusion.
6 THE WITNESS: D1.1-7 5 -- it's the same.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I see, okay.
8 You just have an extra cover sheet on the one you 9 handed the witness and the ones -- other than the one I 10 have here.
11 MR. MILL ER : Your Honor, I'm going to make 12 every effort to get a printed copy without any marks on O 13 it for the Board. Our Xeroxed copies are not very 14 useful, frankly, and -- but let me continue.
15 BY MR. MILLER:
16 Q All right.
17 Will you look at the AWS D1.1-1975 code?
18 It is correct, is it not, Mr. Puckett, that 19 Sections 8.2 and 10.2 list the materials that are i
l 20 -
prequalified? Correct?
21 A Yes, sir. ,
22 Q And if we look at those sections, we find that both A36 23 and A500 are prequalified materials, and A446 is not 24 listed at all; correct? l
{) 25 A Yes, si r.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nols oviae 1 (312) 232-0262 l
5373 O
1 Q Since A446 is not listed as a prequalified material, in 2 order to qualify the welding of that material under AWS 3 D 1.1-197 5, a special qualification test would be 4 required; right?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 Q And that's, in fact, what Attachment O to Comstock 7 Procedure 4.3.3 purported to demonstrate, wasn't it?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 Q That is, a qualification test for the joining of A446 to 10 A500 material?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 Q And there was also an Attachment H --
t C) 13 A Yes, sir.
14 Q -- which -- you' ve got to let me finish my question, Mr.
15 Puckett.
16 There is also'an Attachment H, which purported to 17 qualify the welding of A446 to A500 material; right?
18 A Yes, sir.
19 Q All right. -
20 And it is a f act, then, that a joint of two 21 materials, one being A446 and A500, was properly 1
22 qualified under Comstock Procedure 4.3.37 23 A To an extent, yes, sir.
l 24 Q Well, subject to the changes that you've identified in 25 the weld symbol and the position, it, in fact, qualified
{}
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 i l (312) 232-0262 l
1 ,
5374 O
1 A446 to A500; isn't that right?
2 THE WITNESS : Could I explain this?
3 MR. MILLER: I'd like you to answer my 4 question "yes" or "no," and then you can certainly 5 explain.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No. I don' t think it's f air 7 to ask him that if he indicates that it can't be 8 answered "yes" or "no."
9 He said "to a certain extent," and I guess his 10 answer will give you -- he wants to give a complete 11 answer.
12 MR. MILLER: Well, I want a complete answer, 13 Mr. Puckett.
j 14 BY MR. MILL ER :
15 Q Please tell me to what extent it did not qualify the l 16 welding of A446 to A500.
17 A You can have a procedure that qualifies the procedure, 18 but all the other essential variables has got to be met 19 as well. ;
f 20 Now, on Attachment 0, for how long it was in the 21 procedure prior to me getting to Braidwood, I have no 22 idea; but they had a rejected procedure back there that l 23 could have been used.
24 When the Nonconformance Report was initiated
{) 25 regarding these materials, the A446 to A36, it's not my Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nors ovias
! (312) 232-0262 l . _ - . . - . - . __--__-_ - _ . - - . . - - . _ - _ _ - - - . - _ - - _ - . - _ _ _ , _
5375 O
1 contention that they don't have prequalified materials 2 in AWS D1.1, 3 But at the meeting that I attended, they had a 4 Nonconformance Report that I had recommended be issued, 5 and it was issued -- dispositioned, and they says that 6 they would use Attachment H of this procedure, and 7 Attachment 0 -- if they were qualified, they could use 8 those.
9 Right away I pointed out to them that Attachment 0 10 had not been qualified; that it had been rejected and it 11 had been resubmitted to PTL as a different type of weld 12 and we hadn't received the results on it.
13 Attachment O was in the disposition. They said, 14 "We will use that. "
15 If you will turn to Attachment 0, if you will, 16 please -- I mean, H of this procedure --
17 MR. MILLER : Which procedure would you like 18 us to turn to, Mr. Puckett?
19 THE WITNESS: This is -- well, either copy of 20 the procedure has the same Attachment B in it as it was 21 when I was there.
22 MR. MILL ER : Yes, sir.
23 THE WITNESS: Does everybody have this 24 Attachment H at this point?
25 JUDGE COLE: Not yet.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. . - . - - - - ._ .- .. . _ - _ _ . ~ --- _- . . . . - . - . - -. _..
5376 1 JUDGE CALLIH AN : What's the revision, Mr.
2 Puckett, please?
3 MR. MILLER: I think we should look at 4 Applicant's Exhibit 10, which is Revision C.
5 JUDGb GROSSMAN: I think the trouble is that 6 it's hard to find -- okay. I see. It says " Attachment 7 H1, H2" --
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. That is it.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. -
10 And the page just before that must be Attachment H, 11 is it?
12 MR. MILLER: Yes. It says, "For PQR, see O 13 Attachments H1, H2, H3 and H4," in the lower lef t-hand i
14 corner.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Right, okay.
16 Mr. Puckett, you'll have to go slow for us.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We' re not as f amiliar with 19 this as you are.
20 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chai rman, in the lower middle 21 part of the page, it says " Attachment H," the last line 22 before the box that's horizontal on the page.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. The Board has them.
24 THE WITNESS: So I'll centinue.
25 A (Continuing. ) On the Nonconformance Report, it had
/]}
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 6iil3 4 (312) 232-0262
5377 O
1 first been dispositioned that they would use this 2 Attachment H and Attachment O.
3 I pointed out to them at the time that Attachment O 4 had not been qualified, that it was actually a 5 rejectable procedure; and it was marked through and 6 initialed.
7 They said, "We can still use Attachment H, as it's )
8 A446 to A500. "
9 I objected to using that, based en the fact that 10 right above the drawing and the block, if you will note 11 there, it has "three-eighths minimum size fillet weld. "
l 12 In other words, this procedure is not to be used for a O 13 weld smaller than three-eighths of an inch.
- 14 The welds that was intended to be done, A446 to j 15 A36, in most cases was the weld in the quarter-inch 16 range, below three-eighths, where this procedure would 17 not be suitable.
18 MR. MILL ER : All right.
19 Have you finished your answer?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
21 BY MR. MILLER :
22 Q All right.
23 Now, then, let's f ocus on Attachment H, and let's 24 confine your answer to the question of whether or not
,(]} 25 Attachment H properly qualified a joint with a Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5378 O
1 three-eighths-inch minimum weld size for a fillet weld 2 for joining A446 to A500 material. i 3 A Yes.
4 Q Now , it's also correct, is it not, that -- still looking 5 at Applicant's Exhibit 10, Revision C of the procedure l
6 -- if one goes to Paragraph 3.1.1, the fif th page of the 7 exhibit --
8 MR. GUILD: Could I have the reference again, 9 please, Counsel?
10 MR. MILL ER : 3.3 -- 3.1.1.
11 Are you there, Mr. Puckett?
l 12 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
O 13 BY MR. MILLER :
14 Q And there it states. does it not, for the base metal 15 that, "The steel will comply with the specifications of 16 AWS D1'.1-197 5, Paragraph 8.2 and 10.2, or as specified i 17 by a welding procedure test record"?
18 A Yes, sir.
( 19 Q All right.
20 Now, we've previously established that both A36 and 21 A500 are listed in Sections 8.2 and 10.2 of the AWS 22 code; correct?
23 A Yes, sir.
l 24 0 It's also a fact, is it not, that A36 material has a i
25 minimum yield point of less than 50,000 psi?
{}
1 l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l USHEVa, Illinois 6 134 (312) 232-0262
5379 O
1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q Now, if we turn, in Applicant's Exhibit 12, to Paragraph 3 5.5.1.1 -- that's f ound at Page 45 of the code.
4 A Of the code?
5 0 Yes, sir, the AWS code.
6 A I've got it as Exhibit No. 12, 7 Q Yes. I'm sorry.
8 But that is the AWS code?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Okay. Turn to Page 45.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm sorry; 5.5 --
12 MR. MILLER : 5.5.1.1 on Page 45.
) 13 Are you there?
14 THE WITNESS : Yes.
15 BY MR. MILL ER :
16 Q Okay.
17 That indicates, does it not, that, "The 18 qualification of a welding procedure established with a 19 base metal included in 10.2" --
20 A Yes, sir.
21 Q That's our A446 to A500 welding procedure, Attachment H; 22 correct?
23 That's what it is: It qualified a procedure 24 established with a base metal included in 10.2; right?
25 A Yes, sir.
{)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 601J4 (312) 232-0262
5380 0
1 0 -
"and not listed in 5.5.1.2," which is the very next 2 one -- we can agree that neither A36 nor A500 are listed 3 _in that paragraph; right?
4 A Yes, sir.
5 Q Paragraph 5.5.1 continues, "having a minimum specified 6 yield point less than 50,000 psi" -- and A500 material 7 does, in fact, have such a minimum specified yield 8 point; isn' t that right?
9 'A Yes, sir.
10 0 -
"shall qualify the procedure for welding any other 11 base metal or combination of those base metals included 12 in 10.2 that have a minimum specified yield point equal O 13 to or less than that of the base metal used in the
. 14 test," and that's what A36 has, doesn't it?
1 ,
15 A Yes, sir. This is reference to base metals that are 16 listed in 10.2,'and A446 is not listed in 10.2.
17 Q Mr. Puckett, do you understand --
18 A Yes, sir, I understand.
19 Q -- th a t --
20 A I understand what you' re trying to get to.
l 21 Q It's a fact, is it not, that Part B of Chapter 5 of the 22 AWS code deals specifically with specially qualified 23 procedures, not with prequalified procedures?
24 A Yes, sir.
25 Q Right?
{}
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
53 81 l
()
l 1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q And isn't it a fact that Paragraph 5.5.1.1 specifically 3 validates the welding of A36 to A446 material once you 4 have properly qualified a procedure that shows the weld l 5 of A446 to A500 material?
6 A As long as all the other essential variables are met.
7 Q And that was true with respect to Attachment H; correct?
8 A Attachment H was qualified for a certain size weld.
9 0 Yes, sir; and as long as -- that's right.
10 That was one of the essential variables; right?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 Q And it was properly done in all respects with respect to O 13 Attachment H; right?
! 14 A Yes, sir.
15 However, the welds that they would be doing to 16 Attachment H would exceed th,e essential variables of the 17 procedure --
18 Q Well --
19 A -- as it was for a three-eighths minimum size fillet 20 weld.
21 The welding that was going to be done with 22 Attachment H would exceed this procedure because they 23 w'ere doing quarter-inch fillet welds using this as a 24 ref erence, the amperage -- the amperage range and your 25 voltage range. This could vary with a smaller weld.
{}
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
53 82 i
r O
1 Q Mr. Puckett, let's go back' to Applicant's Exhibit 51, 2 which is the NRC inspection report, Page 3 of the 1 3 inspection report, Allegation 2.a.
4 The allegation does not say anything at all about.
5 the welds in the field exceeding the size limitation in 6 an approved procedure, does it?
l 7 A The way it is written here, it says, "However, a weld i
8 procedure was not available."
9 In my opinion, neither of the'se weld procedures 10 would have qualified a man to do a quarter-inch fillet 11 weld on A446 to A36 or A500 material.
12 Q Mr. Puckett, was the allegation, in essence, that there A
\/ 13 was not a procedure that would qualify the welding of 14 A446 to A36 material or was it not?
15 A This procedure would allow you to weld A446 --
16 Q To A36?
17 A -- to A36 using three-eighths or a larger size weld.
18 0 So let me make certain that I understand this, because 19 this is a key point in this proceeding, Mr. Puckett.
I 20 Within the limitations of the other variables in 21 Attachment H, there was, in fact, in your opinion, a 22 properly qualified procedure which allowed for the
- 23 welding of'A446 to A36 material; correct?
24 A Yes, sir.
i
{) 25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Miller, I hope you' re Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, AAAinois ouAas (312) 232-0262
I l
53 83 l
(
1 not going to use this last answer in your proposed 2 findings without the qualifications that the witness 3 made earlier. I just want to point that out with regard 4 to minimum size.
5 MR. MILLER: I understand the qualifications, 6 your Honor --
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay, fine.
8 MR. MILLER: -- but I also thought I 9 understood the allegation to be that there was not a 10 procedure.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I don't think we ought 12 to argue the brief. I just want to make sure that we 13 don't get a proposed finding that centers in on an 14 answer that's not complete.
15 BY MR. MILL ER :
16 Q Let's go back to Applicant's Exhibit 51, Mr. Puckett, 17 the inspection report.
18 Is it correct that in the allegation as reported by 19 Mr. Schapker, the NRC inspector who investigated this i
20 issue, there were two concerns identified:
21 First, welding A446 material to A36 material; 22 however, a weld procedure was not available; 23 And, secondly, the last sentence of the allegation, 24 "The alleger also identified that the Technique Sheet 0 25 for LKC Weld Procedure 4.3.3 was a reject"?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 0U144 (312) 232-0262
53 84
(
1 A At the time of the Nonconformance Report, yes, sir. 1 2 Q Those were two separate concerns that you were 3 expressing; is that right?
4 A Yes, sir.
5 MR. MILLER: Your Honor, it's seven minutes 6 to 12:00. I'm about to start putting out a lot more 7 documents.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
9 You prefer that we take our luncheon break now?
10 MR. MILLER: Yes. Let me get them in line.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. We'll reconvene at 12 1:00 o' clock.
13 (WHEREU PON, the hearing was continued to
! 14 the hour of 1:00 o' clock P. M.)
15 16 i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 C)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, Illinois culae (312) 232-0262
_ =_ _
l l
5385 l O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The hearing is reconvened.
2 Mr. Miller, please continue.
3 MR. MILLER: Thank you, your Honor.
4 BY MR. MILLER:
5 Q Mr. Puckett, just before the luncheon break, you 6 testified that, with respect to Attachment H to Revision 7 C of Procedure 4.3.3, which is Applicant's Exhibit 10, 8 that the welding of A446 to A36 material was proper
)
9 under AWS Dl.1 1975; correct?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q And was that your opinion as well -- or your position as 12 well in the summer of 1974 when you were an employee of O 13 L. K. Comstock -- 1984?
14 What did I say, 1974?
15 Was that your opinion in 1984?
16 I beg your pardon.
17 A I was concerned with it.
18 You do sometimes get your codes between AWS and the 19 ASME.
20 I was concerned with it; but my primary concern was 21 with what we had in the book.
22 I could not see that the procedures that we had in 23 our book would qualify to do actual welding in the field I
24 using those two base materials.
25 MR. MILLER: Your Honor, I'm confused by the
(]}
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
. (312) 232-0262
l l
5386 l O
1 answer.
2 I'd like a direction to the witness to answer yes 3 or no with an explanation so that we can understand what 4 the -- I'm confused as to --
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: My understanding, from his 6 answers previously, was that the work in the field 7 related to material and, therefore, while the procedures 8 permitted those materials to be joined, it wasn't 9 applicable to what was being done by Comstock at the 10 time.
11 Is that what you are referring to?
12 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
l 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Because the work in the 14 field was less than the three-eighths-l'nch minimum.
15 MR. MILLER: Let's get that one cleared up 16 right away, Mr. Puckett. -
17 BY MR. MILLER:
18 0 In fact, the limitation of three-eighths-inch minimum in 19 Attachment H to Procedure 4.3.3 Revision C is a
! 20 limitation on the size of the weld; isn't that correct?
l l 21 A The limitation of the -- the weld, as it states there, 22 it is for a -- you cannot do a weld smaller than the 23 three-eighths in size.
24 (Indicating.)
25 That is the weld size, not the base material size;
(]) 0 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5387 O
1 right?
2 A No, sir; the base materials.
3 0 Okay. And weld size doesn't refer to weld length, does 4 it?
5 A No, sir.
6 Q It's the amount of weld material that is deposited?
7 A The size of the fillet, yes, sir; the leg of the fillet 8 weld.
9 Q The leg of the fillet weld.
10 Thank you.
11 All right. Mr. Puckett, in the summer of 1984, was 12 it your position that, with respect to Attachment H, O 13 that A36 to A446 material could be welded pursuant to 14 the AWS Code?
15 A For the application that it was being used, no, sir, it 16 was not qualified to do so.
17 Q For which application was that, sir?
18 A Well, sir, if I might explain, when an inspector goes 19 into the field to weld, he don't normally carry a weld 20 procedure with him, nor does the welder in the field 21 that's actually doing the welding.
22 He has a drawing reflecting the size of the weld 23 that he is going to be' inspecting; and he would have 24 nothing to reference to to tell him that, A, even though 25 the papers reference Attachment H as a weld procedure --
(])
Ronntag Reporting Rervice. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5388 O
1 we know we have the weld procedures -- it doesn't 2 reference anywhere on the documentations that the 3 inspector has of the amperage range, the voltage range 4 or the size of the weld that is to be used using that 5 Attachment H procedure.
6 (Indicating.)
7 MR. MILLER: May I have that answer -- were 8 you finished?
9 THE WITNESS: Yes.
10 MR. MILLER: May I have the answer read back, 11 please.
12 You better give me the question, too.
O 13 (The question and the answer to the 14 question were thereupon read by the 15 Reporter.)
16 BY MR. MILLER:
17 Q Mr. Puckett, it's a fact, is it not, that when the 18 welder goes out to weld, he has a drawing that indicates 19 a specific detail that he is to weld; correct?
20 A Yes, sir, reflecting the type and size of weld that he 21 is to make on a component.
22 Q And he also has access -- or at least had access, when 23 you were an employee of Comstock, to the weld procedure, 24 which is maintained by his foreman; correct?
() 25 A Yes, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5389 i
O 1 After I got to Comstock, I set up a required 2 reading list that required that any welder that comes in 3 to qualify to read the procedures that he was going to 4 be welding to in the field and sign this copy of this 5 procedures reflecting that he had read and understood 6 what was in the procedure.
7 Prior to this, this had not been done, and the 8 welder had no access to the procedures.
9 Q In other words, before you came, it's your testimony 10 that the foreman in the field did not have a copy of the 11 procedures to refer to? -
12 A Possibly the foreman in the field did have a copy of the 13 procedure, but it would not be readily available to the 14 welder.
15 I mean, you know, I -- I mean, it's not in -- it 16 isn't something the welder could say, "Well, whst am I 17 to set the machine to for amperage or voltage?"
18 He wouldn't have it there. The foreman may have 19 it.
20 The foreman may have two dozen crews out there 21 somewhere.
l l 22 (Indicating.)
I 23 ' Q But the procedure itself, in fact, set forth the l 24 essential variables of amperage and voltage and so on, 25
(]) didn't they?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
.- ._ =. .. ._ . - . _ ..
5390 O
V 1 A And size of weld, yes, sic, they could. That could be 2 done with that particular procedure.
3 Q And size of the weld.
4 And, again, in the summer of 1984, it's correct, is 5 it not, that.under Attachment H, that it was permissible 6 under the AWS Code for a welder at Comstock at Braidwood 7 to weld A36 to A446 material?
8 A Yes, sir, as long as he did not exceed any of the other 9 essential variables of the procedure.
10 Q Right.
11 And that's -- that's true for all the procedures, 12 isn't it, Mr. Puckett?
CE) 13 A Yes, sir.
i 14 Q He has to stay within all those essential variables no 15 matter what procedure he's using?
4 16 A Yes, sir.
17 MR. MILLER: All right. Now, I'd like the 18 Reporter to mark, as Applicant's Exhibit 52, a
, 19 memorandum from Mr. Puckett to Mr. DeWald dated August 20 9, 1984.
21 (The document was thereupon marked 22 Applicant's Exhibit No. 52 for 23 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
24 BY MR. MILLER:
25 Mr. Puckett, you sent this document to Mr. DeWald on or j (]} Q l
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 .:
(312) 232-0262
5391 o ,
1 about the date it bears; correct?
2 A Yes, sir.
3 Q And in it, you recommended that all welding be stopped 4 that involves welding A36 to A446 materials; correct?
5 A Yes, sir, 6 Q You were aware at that time of Attachment H; correct?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 Q But you didn't except Attachment H from your, 9 recommendation that all welding be stopped involving A36 10 to A446 materials, did you?
11 A What was the last question, sir?
12 Q I said you did not in your memorandum except, O 13 E-X-C-E-P-T, Attachment H from your recommendation that 14 all welding be --
15 A No, sir, I did not.
16 Q -- stopped?
17 MR. MILLER: Okay, all right.
18 I'd like the Reporter to mark, as Applicant's 19 Exhibit 52 -- 53 -- I beg your pardon -- 53, a document 20 dated August 13, 1984, from Mr. Puckett to Mr. DeWald.
21 (Indicating.)
22 (The document was thereupon marked 23 Applicant's Exhibit No. 53 for l 24 identification as of June 24 1986.)
25 BY MR. MILLER:
(])
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
.. ___ - =_ _ , _ - - __ _ _
i 5392 O
1 Q Mr. Puckett, did you send Applicant's -- what's been 2 marked as Applicant's Exhibit 53 for identification to 3 Mr. DeWald on or about the date it bears?
4 A Yes, I sent this to him.
5 Q All right. And there's some reference to stainless 6 steel welding that we'll gc.t to later.
7 But you, again, recommended that all welding of A36 8 to A446 using the E7018 electrode be stopped?
9 A Yes, sir.
10 Q Again, no exception for welding that was performed --
11 A No, sir.
12 0 -- pursuant to Attachment H; correct?
O 13 A Yes, sir.
14 Q And ultimately, as a result of your recommendation, in 15 fact, all welding of A36 to A446, in fact, stopped?
16 A Yes, sir.
17 MR. MILLER: All right. I'd like to Reporter 18 to mark, as Applicant's Exhibit 54, a memorandum from 19 Mr. Rolan to L. K. C. supervision, dated August 17, 20 1984.
21 MR. GUILD: I believe that's already in 22 evidence, counsel.
23 MR. MILLER: It may be. Mr. Guild may be 24 right.
25 It would just'be easier for the parties to follow
(])
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5393 O
1 along.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I thought the other 3 two were in evidence as part of the attachment to either 4 Mr. DeWald's or Mr. Seese's testimony.
5 MR. MILLER: No, they may be; and they are 6 also part of an Intervenor exhibit.
7 Really, this is for --
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I don't have any 9 problem with submitting this as another exhibit --
10 MR. GUILD: I don't, either, Mr. Chairman. '
11 JUDGE GR0SSMAN: -- if it's a portion of the 12 entire exhibit with another marking.
(?) 13 MR. GUILD: I have no objection.
14 (The document was thereupon marked 15 Applicant's Exhibit No. 54 for 16 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
17 BY MR. MILLER: ,
18 Q And Exhibit 54 reflects that, in fact, on your -
19 recommendation, all welding of A36 to A446 material was i
20 stopped; right?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 Q Shortly -- well, on that same date, August 17, 1984, you 23 caused an L. K. C. Non-Conformance Report to be issued; 24 correct?
25 A Yes.
Sonntaa Reportina Service,-Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
I 5394 O
1 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, it's been introduced into evidence as i
2 Intervenors' Exhibit 28, and I show it to you now.
3 (Indicating.)
4 May I see that for just one second, sir?
5 A Yes.
6 (Indicating) 7 MR. MILLER: I'd actually like to mark, as 8 Applicant's Exhibit 55, another copy of what is the 9 first page of the NCR, but the following pages are 10 different than Intervenors' Exhibit 28, and I prefer to 11 conduct my examination on this exhibit.
12 (Indicating.)
( 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm sorry.
14 The pages are different?
15 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. The first page is the 16 same, but the succeeding pages are, in fact, 17 continuations of the NCR and related documents; whereas, 18 Intervenors' Exhibit -- I believe it's 28 -- contains 19 memoranda attached to it and so on.
20 MR. GUILD: Is there another version of the i
21 document?
22 MR. MILLER: Yes. We are getting it 23 momentarily.
24 MR. GUILD: Thanks.
i
{} 25 MR. MILLER: I'm sorry.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5395 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes, sure. That's okay.
2 There are a lot of documents. Just make sure we 3 have the right ones.
4 MR. MILLER: There is the one for marking.
5 (Indicating.)
6 (The document was thereupon marked 7 Applicant's Exhibit No. S'S for 8 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
9 BY MR. MILLER:
10 Q Mr. Puckett, looking at Applicant's Exhibit 55, did 4
11 you -- are those your words at the top under 12 " Description of Non-Conformance"?
() 13 A No, sir, not exactly my words.
14 Another man -- I instructed him that I would like 15 for him to write this Non-Comformance Report.
16 Q That's Mr. Miner?
17 A Yes.
18 Q All right. And did you instruct him as to the substance 19 of what the Non-Comformance Report should say?
20 A An outline of it, yes, sir.
21 Q And after he had written up the Non-Comformance Report, 22 did he show it to you so that he was certain that he had 23 captured the essence of the non-conformance that you 24 wanted to report?
(} 25 A Well, I hadn't -- I hadn't seen it until after he had l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
,,,,_,,,,-,,,,,,,,,,..._,_p% . . , ,
-'ww-- *- ,y , ,.,,,,._,,.wm,y -_
,._ - - ,._._y., _ , . , , . . _ , ,.,-,,_,y.,,,,,,y,_-,,y ,, . , .
1 5396 l
($) 1 1 made it out and -- and a number had been assigned to it.
2 Q Did you --
3 A Possibly had I worded it, I would have worded it 4 somewhat different; but basically it -- it takes in the 5 fact that we had problems with these materials.
6 Q Well, in fact, it goes further than that, doesn't it?
7 It says, "A weld procedure has never been qualified 8 in accordance with AWS Dl.1 1975, Section 5, Part B for 9 these materials."
10 That is, A446 and A36?
11 A Yes, sir, for A36 to A446.
12 They did have the one in there for A446 to A500.
O 13 Q Well, Mr. Puckett, you testified before lunch that at 14 least with respect to --
15 A Yes, sir, they would --
16 0 -- Attachment H, it was proper --
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
18 Mr. Puckett, let Mr. Miller finish his question and 19 then you can respond.
20 THE WITENSS: Yes, sir. I'm sorry 21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Miller.
22 MR. MILLER: All right. Let me make sure 23 I've got the question out.
24 BY MR. MILLER:
25 Q' It is a fact, is it not, that at least with respect to w
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5397 O
1 Attachment H, that the weld procedure qualifying A446 to 2 A500, in fact, qualified A36 to A446?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 Q So that it's -- this statement in the NCR that states, 5 "A weld procedure has never been qualified," and so 6 forth, that is the second sentence of the description of 7 non-comformance, is not completely accurate; right?
8 A And not completely inaccurate.
9 0 Okay. That goes without saying --
10 A Yes, sir, 11 Q -- it is not completely accurate?
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Let's have an explanation of O
\# 13 this.
14 Mr. Puckett, I think we ought to have it said, 15 whatever it is.
16 Why is it somewhat not accurate and somewhat 17 accurate or whatever?
18 THE WITNESS: The procedures that they had in 19 the book at the time had no listing in there f&flecting 20 that they had the A36 material welded to A446 material 21 using the E7018 electrode, and that was what was meant 22 to have been said on the Non-Conformance Report here.
23 He is coming back and saying the code -- if the 24 code will allow the welding of Grade A500 steel to A446, 25 if you have a qualified procedure, would it also be O4 Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5398 O !
1 qualified to weld A36 to A446; and it would, as long as i 2 all the other essential variables of the particular 3 technique sheets to be used are met.
4 And the application for which they were being used, 5 they were not being met.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, let's follow it up.
7 In what respect were they not being met?
8 THE WITNESS: The welding that was being done 9 in the -- in the field -- the drawings that the 10 inspectors was taking into the fields with them 11 reflected to them that they were going to be doing a 12 fillet weld, a three-eighths inch -- or -- pardon me --
13 a three-sixteenths -- a quarter-inch, a 14 three-sixteenths.
15 It says that they would use Attachment H of -- of 16 the procedure.
17 Attachment H of the procedure, they don't readily 18 have it available to consult for all of the little
/
19 details.
20 It has a little footnote in there that a weld 21 smaller than three-eighths of an inch can't be used
- 22 using this attachment.
l 23 So they would be inspecting to this Attachment H 24 when it is not really qualified for the job in which 25 they are doing.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5399 O -
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. So you are saying the 2 fillet welds were smaller than three-eighths of an inch?
3 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
5 JUDGE CALLIHAN: May I ask a question?
I 6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure.
7 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Mr. Puckett, while we're on 8 this subject -- and with apologies to Mr. Miller -- if 9 we were to look at an Attachment H -- and I have 10 Revision C in front of me, but I don't think it makes a 11 great deal of difference. It's still Attachment H.
12 THE WITNESS: I'll find it here in a second.
O 13 Yes, sir.
14 JUDGE CALLIHAN: In the drawing, which, to me, 15 is a -- is two pieces of Unistrut band attached to a 16 hollow tube, hollow rectangular tube --
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
18 JUDGE CALLIHAN: -- are the pieces of Unistrut 19 there back to back?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, I think so, or so it 21 appears in the drawing, yes, sir --
22 JUDGE CALLIHAN: All right.
23 THE WITNESS: -- back to back. .
24 JUDGE CALLIHAN: So the open end or open side I 25 of one of the pieces of Unistrut is in contact with the
({}
sonntag neporting service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5400 O
1 hollow tubing?
2 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
3 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Now, is the weld being 4 discussed here -- let me put it another way.
5 Where in this drawing is the weld that's being 6 discussed, and describe it as best you can in order?
7 And maybe you have a better example than that 8 figure. .
9 THE WITNESS: This particular weld, sir, if I 10 , can get to what you are thinking about -- you may be 11 thinking a flare bevel weld versus a fillet weld.
12 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Right back at the beginning, O 13 I -- I just asked where in the drawing is the weld 14 that's under discussion.
15 THE WITNESS: It's where the attachment is 16 made to the tubing itself.
17 JUDGE CALLIHAN: So it's the open side of the l
18 Unistrut -- ,
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
20 JUDGE CALLIHAN: -- to the tubing?
l l 21 All right, all right.
22 So it's the heavy line that's sort of 30 degrees to
- 23 the horizontal in this figure?
l 24 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
l
{} 25 JUDGE CALLIHAN: All right. And it's a fillet l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l
5401 O
1 weld?
, 2 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
3 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Now, where in that weld --
4 and I have searched for a better figure of a fillet weld 4
5 and I just haven't found one; and if you know where i 6 there's one, well, it will help.
7 But going on what's already been said, where in 8 this weld or along this weld is this three-eighths 9 minimum dimension?
10 THE WITNESS: It's right above the block. It
- 11 has a little change notice there and it's right above 12 the block itself.
O 13 JUDGE CALLIHAN: I'm not talking about the 14 words. I'm still talking about the. figures.
15 THE WITNESS: It does not show it in the 16 figures itself.
17 Possibly it should have, but it does not.
18 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Well, can you tell me:
1 19 Is it a space between the Unistrut and the tubing?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, it is the attachment 21 of the Unistrut to the tubing.
I 22 JUDGE CALLIHAN: And the dimension, then --
23 the gap, if I may use the word, between the open side of 24 the Unistrut and the outside of the tubing should
(} 25 exceed -- well, again, I should put it in the negative.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I
. 5402 i
(
1 I'm sorry. l l
2 How does a three-eighths minimum size fillet weld, 3 the statement, fit into the figure on this Attachment H?
4 Where is that dimension?
5 THE WITNESS: Well, it doesn't show it on the 6 drawing itself. It shows it in the footnote that where 7 the attachment is made, the Unistrut to the pipe, that 8 this particular procedure, when it was qualified, that 9 the weld was three-eighths and above in size; that it 10 was not qualified to be used with a weld smaller than 11 the three-eighths.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think Judge Callihan's O 13 trying to get you to point out in which dimension we get 14 the three-eighths of an inch or greater requirement.
15 Is it the thickness of the weld?
16 I'm not sure that --
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, when you are talking about 18 the size of a fillet weld, it is the intersection 19 from -- from the toe of the weld to its -- the leg of 20 the weld itself. It's --
l 21 JUDGE CALLIHAN: The three-eighths inch or l '
- 22 whatever is related to a dimension of weld material?
(
- 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
! 24 JUDGE CALLIHAN: What dimension of weld l
25 material?
[}
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.'
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5403 i
i 1 THE WITNESS: It is the length of the leg from 2 the center -- from -- from where it is made, the
- 3. attachment, to the base; from the root of the weld to l 4 the furthest edge of the weld across.
5 JUDGE CALLIHAN: So it's a dimension within 6 the weld?
7 THE WITNESS: It is how much of the material I 8 is going to be deposited on the tubing and how much of 9 the material is going to be deposited on the Unistrut.
10 JUDGE CALLIHAN: All right. Just to -- just 11 to clinch it:
12 Has this three-eighths inch got anything to do with O 13 any distance between the Unistrut -- between the 1 14 Unistrut and the outside of the tubing?
15 THE WITNESS: No, sir.
16 JUDGE CALLIHAN: No.
17 Thank you.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: 'Well, for a layman, please l 19 tell me where -- how big the dimension is shown on this 20 drawing that would correspond to the three-eighths inch 21 minimum.
22 THE WITNESS: It isn't reflected on this 23 drawing.
24 If you would go to Attacnment 0, possibly you 25 should -- you would see it as -- as it should be.
(])
i \
Sonntaa Reoortina Service. Ltd.
~
I i Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262 l
-,-.-,--,,_--.m-,_,.m._,-, - , , _ , . ..-_.--%v _m ,.,.,+-,..,_,.__..-,,,,,,,,,,_.,_._.y-,, , _ _y,-, ,, ,,_, , - .w,,.,-. w.- ..._m-_p,
5404 O
1 This is Attachment 23 that I've got. It's the 2 later revision. It's the Rev B, I believe, the one 3 prior to this one. This one came out after.
4 It's the one that has the new Attachment 0 in it.
5 MR. MILLER: That would be Applicant's 6 Exhibit 23.
7 MR. GUILD: It's Revision D as in dog in my 8 copy.
9 MR. MILLER: Revision D.
i- 10 THE WITNESS: Do you have the Attachment O 11 there?
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Are you referring to the
) 13 triangle now? ,
14 THE WITNESS: Yes.
15 If you notice, these drawings are my own drawings ,
i
~
16 that I have here. I was the one that made these 17 drawings.
t 18 And Attachment H should have been made up as I made 19 this one up, reflecting the -- the -- the weld area j 20 there with the type and size of weld that is to be used.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, now, on that triangle, 22 would one of those sides correspond to that 23 ,
three-eighths-inch minimum?
24 THE WITNESS: Your two inch and your 25 two-by-four by one-quarter, that gives you the size of l
/])
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
+
5405 O
1 the materials that's being used there, and'the 2 quarter-inch gives you the size of the fillet weld that 3 is to be used to join these particular materials, this 4 tube -- two-by-four tube, and we are going to join the 5 Unistrut using a quarter-inch fillet weld.
6 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Exactly..
7 So if we may look at the weld for a moment, the i 8 multi-faceted line between the Unistrut and the tube, 9 the three-eighths inch that we've been talking about is 10 a dimension along both the outside of the hollow tube --
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
l 12 JUDGE CALLIHAN: -- and the outside of the 2
O 13 Unistrut?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
15 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Or if I may put it more 16 crudely, if we looked at this weld in cross section,
- 17 then the distance from - .and if we looked at it in
- 18 cross section, we'll see something that's sort of 19 triangular?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
21 JUDGE CALLIHAN: And the length of the two --
22 two equal sides of the triangle -- I beg your pardon --
{ 23 the two legs of the triangle as construed to the 24 hypotenuse, those are the three-eighths-inch dimension?
25 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, each leg should be
(]}
Sonntaa ReDortina Service, Ltd.
- Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5406 1
1 three-eighths of an inch.
2 MR. MILLER: May I just suggest perhaps Mr.
3 Puckett could look at Page 26 of the AWS Code and maybe 4 he could tell the Board whether the pictures in the code 5 would be of -- of help in describing this.
6 It's Applicant's Exhibit 12.
7 THE WITNESS: What page now?
8 MR. MILLER: Page 26, I think, Mr. Puckett.
9 THE WITNESS: It's hard to find page numbers.
10 MR. MILLER: It's up in the upper left-hand 11 corner.
)
12 This is adjacent, .Mr,. Puckett, to Section 3.7 in 13 the standard.
14 THE WITNESS: Okay, 3.7.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I take it now, Mr. Miller, 16 you are pointing to the rounded legs on those fillet 17 welds as corresponding to that dimension?
18 MR. MILLER: Well, let me -- if I might just 19 ask a few questions.
20 BY MR. MILLER:
21 Q Looking at Figure 3.6 on Page 26 of Applicant's Exhibit 22 12, Mr. Puckett, this is, in fact, a -- a -- the figures 23 in, say, the upper left-hand corner are cross sections 24 of the weld as Dr. Callihan asked?
25 A Yes, it is.
(])
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5407 )
O 1 Q And the size of the weld is indicated as the dimensions 2 along the two legs of the triangle formed by the deposit 3 of the weld material that are apparently equal; is that 4 correct?
5 A Yes, the size of the leg reaching onto each of the 6 components.
7 From the root of the weld to the top of the weld, 8 there would be three-eighths. From the root of the weld 9 to the bottom leg across would be three-eighths --
10 0 All right. And when you say --
11 A -- minimum.
,- 12 Q When you say "the root of the weld," that the 90-degree V) 13 angle that's shown?
14 A - Yes, sir.
15 0 okay.
16 JUDGE CALLIHAN: Thank you very much for 17 clarifying it for me.
18 BY MR. MILLER:
19 Q Now, let go back to the question, Mr. Puckett.
20 When you responded to Judge Grossman's question as 21 to whether or not your description of the 22 non-conformance NCR 3099 was wholly accurate or not, you 23 said it was accurate in part and inaccurate in part.
24 And when you were asked to describe the part in 25 which it was accurate, you discussed the way in which
(]')
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5408 l' the procedure was implemented in the field, didn't you?
2 A Yes.
3 Q All right. Is there anything in the description in the 4 non-conformance that refers to the way in which the 5 procedure is implemented in the field?
6 A Yes, sir. In the recommended disposition, it tells them 7 to use Attachment H to do the welding in the field.
8 Q Mr. Puckett, I don't think --
9 A That's what it's referring to.
10 0 I don't think you heard my question. Let me repeat it.
11 Is there anything in the " Description of 12 Non-Conformance" block which refers to improper O 13 implementation of the weld procedure in the field?
14 A No, sir.
15 Q Now, was it your conclusion, as reflected in the NCR 16 3099 prepared by Mr. Miner, that all work previously 17 done to Procedure 4.3.3 using A. S. T. M. A36 to A. S.
18 T. M. A446 is indeterminate?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q And that included any work that was done in accordance 21 with Attachment H; is that right?
22 A With Attachment H or 0, which was rejected at the time 23 the Non-Comformance Report was dispositioned.
24 Q Why was work properly done to Attachment H indeterminate 25 which joined A36 to A446?
(])
Sonntag Reoorting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
4 5409 O
1 A Well, it was my opinion that they may have exceeded the 2 essential variables.
3 Most of the welding that I seen done reflected in 4 the drawings in Attachment H and Attachment O were 5 either to be a quarter-inch or three-sixteenths weld.
6 Q Mr. Puckett, was the reason that you concluded that the 7 work previously done was indeterminate was because, as 8 stated in the description of the non-conformance, that i
9 L. K. C. does not have a procedure to weld those two 10 materials together?
11 A No, sir, they did not have a suitable procedure to make 12 those welds that were being made at the time using the
()
i I
! 13 procedures.
14 They did not have a procedure qualified at the time 15 to make these quarter-inch and three-eighths inches --
16 or welds below three-eighths of an inch in the field, 17 and they were being done.
18 Q Yes, sir.
J.
19 But for welds in excess of three-eighths of an 20 inch, they did have a procedure, didn't they?
21 A Yes, sir.
- 22 Q All right. Nonetheless, you said that all work
- 23 previously done to the procedure was considered 24 indeterminate; right?
l 25 MR. GUILD: Objection.
l
(]}
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
! (312) 232-0262
. - -_- - - _...-.-- .--_~ .-. - .- - _ w - ,_ - - .-_,_ - -
m 5410 O i 1 He didn't say that at all. He said he agreed with I 2 the characterization that work was indeterminate; but 3 that was not his language.
4 It mischaracterizes the witness' testimony.
S MR. MILLER: I'm asking a direct question.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Overruled.
7 Let the witness answer.
8 MR. MILLER: All right. Let's get the 9 question reread, please. -
10 A Yes, sir.
11 MR. MILLER: I need the question back myself.
12 (The question was thereupon read by the O 13 Reporter.)
14 MR. MILLER: Okay.
15 MR. GUILD: Is there a pending question.
16 MR. MILLER: No, there is not.
17 MR. GUILD: Did you withdraw the question?
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No. He answered the 19 question, "Yes, sir."
20 MR. GUILD: Was that the question he was 21 answering?
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Was that the question you 23 were answering?
24 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
25 (Laughter.)
s Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5411 O
1 BY MR. MILLER:
2 Q Mr. Puckett, if -- well, first of all, would you 3 identify for us what variables in Revision C of Weld 4 Procedure Attachment O were improperly qualified?
5 A I'm not sure I understand the question.
6 Q Well, would you turn to Attachment O in Applicant's 7 Exhibit 10, which is Revision C to 4.3.3.
8 A Yes, sir.
9 Q All right. Now, I think you stated earlier that this 10 was a rejected procedure; correct?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 0 All right. First of all, how did you know it was
' O 13 rej ected?
14 A By -- in the required reading that we had, I went 15 through the procedure, an.3 just looking at the different 16 drawings and that -- that they had and everything, so I 17 looked at it, and I was checking the -- the sizes of the 18 weld for microetch, and this particular one, I noted 19 that they were all rejectable and they were in the 20 procedure book.
21 It -- it amazed me. They were there to be used, 22 and it was rejectable for anybody to see.
23 Q All right. What specific variables were rejectable, 24 sir?
() 25 A The microetch -- they were referring to this weld at the Sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5412 CE) 1 time as a flare bevel weld, and it required that they l 2 have a particular size effective throat. I believe at 3 that time it was a one-eight-inch effective throat as 4 reflected in the revision just prior to this. It has --
5 as it was prior to the change, let -- let me get to it 6 here.
7 Yes, they reflected this'as being a flare bevel 8 weld, and that the effective throat would be one-eighth 9 of an inch.
10 This was a copy that I reviewed and looked at.
11 I compared the microetch, which is just above the 12 drawing, the fractions that you see there, that was the 13 size of the microetch that was reflected on the 14 procedure. They were all rejectable.
15 The procedure was in the manual, the QC Inspectors 16 all had copies of it; and had it been assigned to a weld 17 procedure in the field -- that is, a -- a welder's test 18 form -- that the welder -- the work that he~was going to 19 be doing in the field -- I forget what they call it 20 now -- with a traveler, he would not know this, that 21 this procedure was rejected.
22 I caught the fact that it was rejected, and that's i
23 what prompted the change to the procedure over here; 24 that they resubmitted the test as a fillet weld.
25 0 All right, sir.
(])
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5413 O
U 1 Let me -- you will have to understand that I, and 2 without meaning to insult anyone in the room, most of 3 the people who are listening to this are not conversant 4 with welding terminology, and so I'm going to have to 5 ask you to go back and define some terms, please.
6 In the Revision C to the procedure, Applicant's 7 Exhibit 10, and Attachment 0, where is the effective --
8 what is the size of the effective throat that is shown 9 in that document?
10 A This is in Revision C?
11 Q Yes, sir.
12 A That is, the -- the effective throat would be the -- the O 13 distance between the face of the weld and the toe of the 14 weld, or the -- where it intersects with the base 15 material.
16 Q All right. And --
17 MR. GUILD: If I -- I believe the witness is 18 looking at the PQR, which is Attachment 01, and it 19 contains the data he's reading to you.
20 MR. MILLER: I'm with you.
21 BY MR. MILLER:
22 0 Is it Attachment 01 that you are looking at, sir?
23 A Yes.
ll 24 Q I see. Thank you.
25 A Okay. That reflects a drawing, and right above the
(])
sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd_
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5414 O
1 drawing it reflects the samples.
2 This is the way the procedure was -- when I got to 3 Braidwood, it was in use, and it was rejectable for 4 anybody to see; and why it hadn't been seen prior to 5 that or if it was, I was not aware of it.
6 Q All right. Now --
7 A If it was known prior to that time, there was nobody 8 / doing anything about it, and that's what prompted these
~
9 changes.
10 (Indicating.)
i 11 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, let me -- I want to take this step by 12 step.
O 13 I appreciate your trying to tell us the entire 14 history of this in one answer, but it .will assist if we 15 can go at it one issue at a time.
16 The -- on Attachment 01, the effective throat that 17 was recorded from the macro -- microetch --
18 A Yes, sir.
19 Q -- test was three-thirty-seconds of an inch; correct?
20 A Yes, sir.
21 Q Which is less than the one-eighth of an inch requirement 22 for an effective throat for a flare bevel groove weld; 23 correct?
24 A Yes, sir, for that particular flare bevel groove weld.
l
() 25 Q All right. And you say you noticed this when you were
! Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262 i
5415 4
1 doing your procedure work; correct?
2 A Yes, sir.
3 Q All right. And the change that you proposed was to 4 resubmit these welds as fillet welds; correct?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 Q In which case, the three-thirty-seconds inch -- well, 7 let's -- let's look at Attachment 01 on Revision D, 8 Applicant's Exhibit 23.
9 (Indicating.)
10 All right. There is no dimension recorded for the 11 effective throat on that document, is there?
12 A No, sir.
( 13 There is -- they do not gauge these as effective 14 throats. Just the size of the fillet weld on the visual 15 inspection is all that is performed.
16 Q So when it is a fillet weld, the size of the effective 17 throat becomes an unimportant dimension; correction?
18 A There is no effective throat to a fillet weld. I mean, j 19 it's not used in the terminologies.
20 0 Oh, I see.
l 21 A It's only for the flare bevel, for the bevel weld.
22 Q And it was your suggestion, was it not, that rather than 23 go back and redo the weld qualification test to obtain a 24 minimum eighth-inch effective throat, that the l
[} 25 procedure, Attachment o, simply be resubmitted as a l
Sonntag ' Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5416 O
1 fillet weld rather tihan a flare bevel groove weld; 2 correct?
3 A It I might explain this.
4 0 Well, I'm happy to have you --
5 A Well, I mean, I have to explain in order to -- to show 6 you where this is coming from. Okay?
7 Q Okay.
8 A I brought out the fact, to the attention of Mr. DeWald, 9 that this procedure had been rejected and that it had 10 been incorrectly submitted as a flare bevel weld when 11 the procedure that they were calling -- qualifying it 12 for, the procedure that they needed, was to do a fillet ,
13 weld, 14 All the drawings from S & L, when they rejected a 15 weld of this type, was calling it a fillet weld because 16 of the size of the Unistrut.
17 The radius was not so great as to call it a flare i
18 bevel, as they may, if it had a larger radius on it.
19 Q All right, sir.
I 20 A So the drawings were calling it a fillet weld; and it 21 was my suggestion to Mr. DeWald that this may have been 22 submitted as a flare bevel weld when it should have been 23 submitted as a fillet weld.
24 Q So it was your suggestion, then --
l 25 A Yes.
sonntag neporting service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 L
5417 O
1 Q -- that it was incorrectly submitted as a flare bevel 2 weld --
3 A Yes.
4 0 -- and that it might pass muster if the documents were 5 simply resubmitted as fillet welds?
6 A That was what we were going to find out; have an 7 independent agency to tell us if it would meet those 8 requirements.
9 Q And that independent agency would be Sargeant & Lundy; 10 right?
11 A No, sir; Pittsburgh Testing Laboratories.
12 Q I see.
O 13 They had to evaluate the weld as a fillet weld --
- 14 A Yes, sir.
15 0 -- in order to determine whether the procedure was 16 qualified?
17 All right. Now, would you turn, again, to the 18 second and third page of Revision C to Procedure 4.3.3.
l 19 That's Applicant's Exhibit 10.
- 20 A What was the note?
! 21 Q If you will look at the third page of the exhibit.
l 22 A Right.
23 Q Note E, isn't -- isn't Note E the very same ccndition 24 that you have just described for us on the record?
I,
(} 25 A Yes, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
5418 l
l 1 Q All right. Now, it's a fact, is it not, that these are 2 identified as Status 2 Comments by Sargeant & Lundy; 3 correct?
4 Turn to the first page -- turn back one page, Mr.
5 Puckett, the second page of the exhibit.
6 A Yes, sir.
7 Q All right. And from the time that you were at 8 Braidwood, do you have any understanding of what a 9 Status 2 Comment from Sargeant & Lundy meant?
10 A I had not been familiarized with this, no, sir.
11 (Indicating.)
12 0 All right. Well, looking at it just now today, are O 13 you -- you will note that on the bottom of the page, the 14 No. 2 says, " Revise as noted and resubmit. Contractor 15 can proceed based on making revisions noted."
16 A I had not seen this.
17 Q All right. Well, having seen it now -- and there is 18 testimony in the record as to what a Status -- that is, 19 in fact, what a Status 2 Comment means -- does that 20 indicate to you, sir, that the Architect-Engineer had 21 determined that, with respect to using Attachment O 22 during the pendency of this resubmission of the PQR's, 23 that it was satisfactory to them as the 24 Architect-Engineer for the Attachment O to continue to 25 be used?
(}
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5419 O
1 A That's the Architect-Engineer. If he says that's 2 satisfactory with him, I guess that's satisfactory with 3 him; but I wouldn't necessarily agree with it.
4 I don't see where using a rejected procedure on a 5 weld like that would be permissible.
6 Q Well, Sargeant & Lundy had identified these same welds 7 as fillet welds?
8 A They have identified it; and it's -- it's -- as I've i
9 said, you know, this -- I was made aware of this for the 10 first time last night.
11 (Indicating.)
12 Q All right, sir.
O 13 Based on your experience, Mr. Puckett, isn't it 14 ultimately the Architect-Engineer that determines the 15 circumstances under which welding procedures can be used 16 while changes are made to the procedures?
17 A Yes, sir.
t 10 Q All right. And they, in fact, have the ultimate 19 authority to authorize work to go on while those 20 procedures are revised; right?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 Q Andthat'sbecausetheyhave'theengineeringhxpertise, 1
23 and the authority to evaluate those conditions and make 24 a judgment as to whether work should go forward or not
(} 25 while the revisions are made; isn't that right?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5420 O
1 A I really don't know.
2 Q All right.
. 3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Miller.
4 What does the asterisk represent there?
5 MR. MILLER: I can't answer that question, 6 aird I don't -- let me consult with Mr. Simile, if I 7 might, and see whether it was placed on there at some 8 point.
9 MR. GUILD: What is the Chairman referring 10 to, if I might ask?
11 MR. BERRY: Where is the asterisk?
12 MR. MILLER: Is it on everybody's copy?
( 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, no, it is not.
14 JUDGE COLE: Just on his.
15 MR. MILLER: It is on mine, also.
16 You mean this penciled-in asterisk off to the 17 right?
18 MR. GUILD: Off to the right of what?
19 THE WITNESS: It's on my copy.
! 20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes.
l l 21 MR. BERRY: What are you referring to?
22 Is that Exhibit 10?
23 JUDGE COLE: That's Exhibit 10.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Exhibit 10, Mr. Berry.
l
[} 25 (Indicating.)
I sonntaa Reportino Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l
5421
(
l Well- let me just ask the witness one question.
2 Your answers, with regard to Status 2, are -- well, 3 let me ask you:
4 Are your answers, with regard to the questions on 5 Status 2, only based upon your understanding from 6 looking at this document or do you have any other 7 knowledge as to what Status 2 means?
8 THE WITNESS: Only by looking at this 9_ particular document.
10 I don't recall reading anything of Sargeant Lundy's 11 there stating what these different ones was going to be.
, 12 Now, this Status 2, as I see at the bottom -- it O 13 say, " Revise as noted and resubmit. Contractor can 14 proceed based on making revisions noted."
15 The problems that I had, while I was there, is they 16 were using this before these revisions had been made and 17 it had been resubmitted.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I don't know that this 19 witness is the best qualified to explain what Status 2 20 is.
21 Now, let me tell you, from my reading of the face 22 of this document, it appears that all of the other 23 lettered items are suggested changes by which certain i
24 things can be done, but E suggests that this procedure ,
{) 25 is unacceptable; and I would not jump to the conclusion, Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5422
() 1
,1 from reading this document, that anything that's said to l 2 be unacceptable can be used by the contractor in the 3 present state.
4 I'm not offering a conclusion on that. I'm just 5 saying that there are different conclusions that can be 6 drawn from this; and if the witness doesn't have any 7 independent knowledge, I'm not sure that his opinion on 8 the spur of the moment is one that we would necessarily 9 accept.
10 MR. MILLER: Yes. Your Honor, I wish to tell 11 you that we are trying to lay our hands on another 12 document that may provide some further insight into this O 13 issue, and I hope to have it here before we end today.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. And I might also 15 point out that in the context of what I said, the 16 asterisk may be important, because it does single out E 17 from all the rest, and I just don't have any knowledge
/
18 of why that's so.
19 MR. MILLER: All right.
20 BY MR. MILLER:
21 Q Mr. Puckett, you wrote NCR 3099?
22 MR. GUILD: Objection.
23 MR. MILLER: I'm sorry.
24 BY MR. MILLER:
or had it -- Mr. Miner authored it after you told him
{} 25 0 Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
4 5423 O
1 what you wanted in it; correct?
2 A Yes, sir.
3 Q All right. And then the next day, there was a -- a 4 meeting to discuss the disposition of that NCR; right?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 Q All right. You attended, with Mr. Louden and others, 7 who are identified on Intervenors' Exhibit 29 for 8 identification -- let me hand you up a copy, Mr.
9 Puckett.
10 (Indicating) 11 MR. MILLER: Does the Board have it?
12 I have additional copies.
O 13 MR. BERRY: What was the number?
14 MR. MILLER: Intervenors' Exhibit 29.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Intervenors' Exhibit 29?
16 MR. MILLER: Yes.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All right.
18 BY MR. MILLER:
19 Q Now, you had known Mr. Louden from Zimmer, had you not?
20 A Yes, sir.
21 Q And you believed that he was a competent professional as 22 a weld engineer, didn't you?
~
23 A Yes, sir.
24 Q All right. Now, do you recall this meeting that was
(} 25 conducted on August 22, 1984?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5424 1
O LJ l A Yes, sir.
2 Q All right. And the purpose of the meeting was, in fact, 3 to disposition NCR 3099; right?
4 A Yes, sir.
5 Q All right. And also to allow for the revision of the 6 PQR's H and O to add A36 to the existing materials
, 7 present and listed on the PQR's?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 Q Pardon me?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q All right. Well, if, in fact, the qualification of A446 12 to A500 material also qualified A446 to A36 material, as O 13 you previously testified, why was it necessary to add 14 A36 to the PQR's?
15 A So the individual weld inspectors would know that this 16 procedure was also available and could be used using 17 A446 to A36.
18 Q But at that time you knew --
19 A I was aware that on the Attachment H, that you could use 20 it as long as you didn't exceed the size of the fillet 21 weld that was stipulated.
22 0 And once Attachment 0 was properly qualified, you could 23 also use it for Attachment 0; correct?
24 A Yes, sir.
(} 25 0 So, then, there was really no reason, other than just to Sonntaa ReDortina Service, Ltd. ,
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
5425 O
1 make it absolutely crystal clear, to add A36 to the 2 PQR's; right?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 Q All right. Everybody agreed to do it, nonetheless?
5 That's what Item B on Intervenors Exhibit 29 says; 6 right?
7 A I had no comment on that at the time. At the meeting, I 8 had no comment.
9 I was still concerned with the fact'that they --
10 they dispositioned the Non-Conformance Report, that they 11 could still use Attachment H.
12 Q All right. We'll get to that in one second.
13 But -- so you didn't agree with that, that A36 14 should be added -- will be added to the PQR's?
15 A No, that's not what I was saying.
16 I said I didn't agree that the recommendation of 17 the disposition of the Non-Conformance Report should 18 allow them to use Attachment H for the purpose that they 19 were using it for.
20 Q Okay. Well, we'll get to that section of the exhibit in 21 just a second.
22 A Okay. I had no problem with adding A36 to the two 23 procedures.
24 0 And Procedure 4.3.3 was to be ready for review by the
(} 25 review board on the afternoon of August 23rd.
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- - _ - - , = = . _ _
5426 A
k-) -
1 Was that -- was that agreed to at that meeting?
2 A I don't recall.
3 0 Well, what is the review board, sir?
4 A Of course, when you have a procedure and it has been 5 revised, it goes before a review board to see if they 6 have any problems with the wording or the procedure as 7 it's written.
8 Q You were a member of that review board for Comstock 9 procedures, were you not?
10 A No, not at this time. I was still in training.
11 Q Well, did you --
12 A I may have been asked to attend one particular one.
O 13 The man that was responsible for the revisions to 14 the procedures at that time was Mr. Bob Seltmann, who 15 was the QA Manager.
16 0 And, in fact, you did attend the review board meetings?
17 A I attended one, yes.
18 Q The one that was held on August 23, 19847 19 A I don't remember the date.
20 0 Well, do you remember what was discussed?
21 A Yes; the -- the procedure and the Non-Conformance 22 Report.
23 Q Non-Conformance Report 3099?
24 A Yes.
l 25 0 And the revisions to Attachment H and O?
(' )
l l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5427
()
, 1 A Yes.
2 Q All right. Now, the next sentence on Intervenors' 3 Exhibit 29 states, "NCR 3099 to be dispositioned to use 4 PQR H only and that welding is limited to three-eighths 5 inch minimum to eleven-sixteenths inch maximum. Not to 6 include smaller welds."
7 Did somebody say that at the meeting?
8 A I don't recall it being said.
9 0 Well, what did you understand at the meeting the 10 disposition of NCR 3099 was to be?
11 A Well, I would think that the disposition of the NCR 12 was -- this is q quality document, and you wouldn't O 13 necessarily consider this other document --
14 MR. GUILD: Excuse me.
15 This being the NCR?
16 THE WITNESS: The NCR is a quality document.
17 MR. GUILD: All right.
18 MR. MILLER: Applicant's Exhibit 55?
19 THE WITNESS: Right.
20 A (Continuing.) And the NCR had no reference to this 21 other document -- to the document here and tull you 22 there was a limitation on size of the fillets.
23 BY MR. MILLER:
24 Q All right. Well, let's look at the NCR, Mr. Puckett.
(} 25 It's a fact, is it not, that, at the bottom of the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5428 O
1 first page of the NCR, it states, "Per meetings.on 2 8/23/84, field is to continue to weld to Attachment H 2 3 for the weld sizes indicated in Attachment H.
4 Attachment 0 is not to be welded until approved by CECO 5 and Revision D of 4.3.3"? That's what it says, isn't 6 it?
7 A Yes, sir, that's what it says.
8 Q And were you at the meeting on August 23rd where that 9 disposition of the NCR was discussed?
10 A I don't recall this particular portion of it.
11 I recall discussing the portions above that --
12 0 All right. Well, can we --
O 13 A -- because they were made on two separate days.
14 I remember being at the one on 8/22/84.
15 This date here, I'm not sure of the date. It may 16 have been on the 23rd; but I do recall the disposition 17 of the Non-Conformance Report and that I disagreed with 18 it.
! 19 This may have been added to it during the meeting 20 or after the meeting.
21 0 To satisfy your -- the concerns that you raised; 22 correct?
23 A Very possibly so.
24 Then I had accomplished what I had set out to do:
25 Have the procedures revised.
Sonntao Reoortina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5429 O -
1 Q Well, Attachment H wasn't going to be revised except to 2 add A36 to it; right?
3 A Well, I -- yes, to add A36 to it and to limit the size 4 of the fillet weld that you could use it for.
5 Q But that had always been a limitation on Attachment H; 6 isn't that right?
7 A Yes, sir; but very few people were aware of it.
8 Q But that wasn't any flaw in the procedure, was it, Mr.
9 Puckett?
10 That may have been a flaw in implementation; right?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 Q All right. Now, Mr. Puckett, can we agr,ee that the 13 disposition, as shown on this document, after August 23,
\
14 1984, is in accordance with your recommendation?
15 A Pretty much so, yes, sir.
16 Q All right. Now, do you know, Mr. Puckett, what happened 17 when Attachment 0 was -- well, let me ask the question 18 thic way:
19 Based on your experience as a -- in the welding 20 profession, what did you believe would happen when the 21 Attachment 0 weld coupons were resubmitted to Pittsburgh 22 Testing Laboratory not as flare bevel groove welds but 23 as fillet welds?
24 A Well, looking at the welds visually, they looked like a 25 good, sound weld. However, they cut and etched the l
(])
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5430 O
1 welds down there to look at the microstructure of them 2 that you couldn't see by looking -- by just looking at 3 the coupons.
4 Q But based on your experience, it looked pretty good to 5 you, didn't it?
! 6 A Yes, it looked pretty good to me.
7 Q And, in fact, that's -- what happened when PTL finally 8 looked at the Attachment O weld coupons as fillet welds, i
'9 they found then acceptable; right?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q Now, you never suggested, did you, that there should be 12 a separate qualification test for A446 to A36 material?
,O 13 A I may have said something to the effect that I thought 14 that there should be a -- a requalification of the 15 procedure using D1.3 versus Dl.l.
16 Q Yes, sir, we'll get to Dl.1 and Dl.3 in just a second.
17 Now, Mr. Puckett, you've looked at a number of
- 18 different documents here.
19 The first recommendation that you made for stopping l 20 the work was made August 9, 1984; correct?
21 That's Applicant's Exhibit 52.
22 A The first written recommendation.
23 Q I see.
24 Had you made an oral recommendation to anyone prior
() 25 to August 9, 1934?
l sonntag Reporting service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5431
-1 A I had talked to Mr. DeWald prior to that, and explained 2 to him the condition of our procedures, and I told him 3 that it may eventually come to this unless we can make 4 some changes.
5 However, I could not make these changes myself at 6 that time, because I was not qualified and because they 7 had me busy running the test facility and doing my own 8 qualifications.
9 0 Well, how much prior to August 9, 1984, did you first 10 recommend to Mr. DeWald orally that the work be stopped?
11 A I really don't know.
12 You know, it was just a short period prior to that.
O 13 (Indicating.)
14 Q All-right. Now, even from the first time period -- the 15 first time that you made your written recommendation, 16 August 9, 1984, to the -- the work continued for over a 17 week after that until August 17th, when it was finally 18 stopped in accordance with Mr. Rolan's directive; 19 correct?
20 A Yes, sir.
21 Q All right. But you didn't have any concern over the 22 safety significance of the welding that was taking place 23 between those dates, did you?
24 A I don't understand what you are saying.
25 0 Well, you didn't have -- you had no concern over the Sonntag Reoortino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5432
.l 0
1 safety significance of the welding to Attachment O, for 2 example, that was continuing to take place between 3 August 9th and August 17th; isn't that right?
4 MR. GUILD: Objection, objection; leading.
5 The witness should be asked what his opinion was.
6 There's been no evidence to state what his opinion is.
7 Counsel is not entitled the put this word -- or 8 these words into the witness' mouth.
9 MR. MILLER: Well, I represent that I believe J
10 I am, your Honor; and I have a very specific answer in 11 mind, because it is an answer that has been given
]
,12 before.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, if it's an answer 14 that's been given before --
15 MR. MILLER: Not in this proceeding.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. But the point is if 17 the -- if the witness understands the question, it 18 really doesn't matter if it's leading here.
19 We can assume that he's a hostile witness.
20 I'm just not sure that he underctands the question.
i 21 Do you understand the question? -
22 THE WITNESS: No, I'm not -- I'm not exactly 23 sure what he's asking me.
l 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Because the question didn't l
l
() 25 seem any different than the prior one which he indicated Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 5433 l O
1 he didn't understand, so --
2 MR. MILLER: Let me try again.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- there must be something 4 that he doesn't understand about it.
5 BY MR. MILLER:
6 Q Did you have a concern about the safety significance of 7 the welding that was taking place in the field during 8 this interval between August 9th and August 17th?
9 A August 9th being the date when I submitted the first 10 memo?
11 Q Yes, sir.
12 A I was concerned with it, yes.
O 13 Q All right. Mr. Puckett, you were deposed by me on 14 December 6, 1985; isn't that right?
15 A I don't remember the dates.
16 0 Well, I'll help you out.
17 The date.
18 (Indicating.)
19 A Okay.
20 0 All right. And at that deposition, you were sworn to 21 tell the truths correct?
22 A Yes, sir.
23 Q And at Page 110 of the deposition, I asked this question 24 and you gave this answer; is that right:
(} 25 "Mr. Puckett, did you have a concern about the
- Ronntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5434
/
O 1 safety significance of the welding that was taking place 2 in the field during this interval between August 9th and 3 August 17?"
4 And your answer, sir, would you read that into the 5 record, please?
6 A It says, "No, not really. It's just that I knew, being 7 in the position I was in as a Level 3 and as a 8 professional, that there would come a time when I would 9 be accountable for all weld-related activities from the 10 time I was on the site."
11 Q All right. Mr. Puckett, is that answer that you gave in 12 your deposition true?
O 13 A I knew that I would -- well, to put it a different 14 way --
15 MR. MILLER: No, sir. Excuse me.
16 Your Honor, I believe I'm entitled to an answer to 17 the question that I posed to the witness.
18 THE WITNESS: I cannot give a yes or a no 19 answer to that.
20 BY MR. MILLER:
21 Q And you were sworn to tell the truth at your deposition, 22 Mr. Puckett, and when you answered the question, was it 23 true?
24 A I read the answer as stated there.
(} 25 Q And it was true --
Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 5435 O
1 A Okay.
2 0 -- wasn't it?
3 A Right.
4 Q Taank you.
5 MR. GUILD: Now, may the witness finish his 6 answer?
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is that a complete answer d
8 that you gave there?
9 THE WITNESS: No, sir.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All right. Could you 11 complete your answer?
12 A (Continuing.) What I was stating there basically is O 13 that I knew, from the time I went on the site as a Level.
14 3 Weld Inspector, that I was going to be accountable for o
15 all weld-related activities from that time forward; not 16 necessarily would the finger be pointed at me for those
- 17 things that had been done prior to me going on the site 18 as the Level 3.
19 I wasn't as concerned about those things that had 20 been done there prior to me being there as I was about 21 the concerns I would have from this time on.
22 Even though this might have been done wrong in the 23 past, I wanted to make sure that -- during my time 24 there, that the procedures would be right and that the
{} 25 work would be right and in accordance with them.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5436 O
V
- 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN
- Okay. But the question also 2 was with regard to safety significance; and in the 3 deposition, apparently you indicated that you didn't 4 have concerns about safety significance ano here you ,
5 indicated that you did have concern.
6 There is an apparent contradiction.
7 Which is the answer?
8 THE WITNESS: Well, on the first --
9 deposition, I may not have understood the question just 10 exactly. I mean, I might not have taken it the way that 11 he meant it. -
i 12 Of course I've always been concerned with safety.
O 13 I have absolutely nothing to gain by being up here 14 today or any time prior to this.
15 (Indicating.)
16 I'm concerned with safety, whether it be here or 17 anywhere.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. But the question was 19 whether you had any cafety concern with regard to this 20 particular item.
21 THE WITNESS: This item being?
22 MR. MILLER: The fact that there was welding 23 to Attachment O that was taking place in the interval 24 between August 9th and August 17th.
(} 25 THE WITNESS: I do not even know if any Sonntac Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5437 O
1 welding had been done to Attachment O.
2 I just know that the procedure was in the book, and 3 that it couldn't --
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Mr. Puckett, please 5 try to answer the question.
6 We understand a part of your answer that indicates 7 that you were concerned with the procedure being 8 violated.
9 We just don't know your answer as to whether you 10 considered that non-compliance with the procedure, or 11 however we characterize it, had safety significance or 12 whether you didn't believe it had safety significance.
13 Which is the answer?
14 THE WITNESS: Well, of course, I thought that 15 it very well could have safety significance, if the 16 question is put to me in that way.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
18 BY MR. MILLER:
19 Q Mr. Puckett --
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Miller, you can say 21 whatever you want on brief --
22 MR. MILLER: I understand, sir.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- or findings with regard 24 to the differences; but apparently the witness is giving
(} 25 his position as of now, and --
Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
, (312) 232-0262
l 5438 l O
1 MR. MILLER: Right.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
3 BY MR. MILLER:
4 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, it's a fact, isn't it, that what you 5 were really concerned about was that you had been down 6 this road with the NRC at Zimmer and that you knew that 7 eventually they would be coming back to me -- to you, 8 rather, and -- and saying, "Why did you let this 9 happen"; right?
10 A Well, I knew that -- at Zimmer, that we had had this 11 same type of problems that we had there at Braidwood; 12 and at Zimmer, they turned out to be, some of them, O 13 pretty major problems; and as I explained verbally to 14 Mr. DeWald and later through the memos and -- and on to 15 NCR's there, at first I wanted to keep these things 16 in-house, I wanted to identify them and I wanted to take 17 care of them, and --
18 0 You wanted to do that so --
19 MR. GUILD: Excuse me. He hadn't completed 20 his answer, counsel.
21 MR. MILLER: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to 22 interrupt.
23 A (Continuing.) -- and I had run into the same type of 24 problems that we were facing at Zimmer, and they had
(} 25 helped to contribute to the closing of the power plant.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5439 O
V 1 I did not want this to happen at Braidwood. That's 2 why I identified these things.
3 BY MR. MILLER:
4 Q And you also didn't want personally to be responsible 5 for any items of non-compliance at Braidwood as you had 6 been at Zimmer; right?
7 A I was never personally found responsible for any items 8 at Zimmer.
9 Q You didn't want to be identified as the individual who 10 had contributed to the finding of an item of 11 non-compliance at Braidwood as had happened to you at 12 Zim:ners right?
co 13 A It didn't bother me.
14 I still felt pretty good about the Zimmer project 15 and my role there. I thought I done a damn good job.
16 (Indicating.)
17 Q Mr. Puckett, you wanted to protect yourself, didn't you, 18 . from any accusations that the NRC might make with
) 19 respect to the way in which you conducted yourself as a 20 Level 3 Weld Inspector for Comstock at Braidwoed?
l j 21 A I knew that you could be held accountable for things if I 22 they were not done in accordance with the codes and 23 construction -- federal regulations. Yes, I knew that.
l 24 MR. MILLER: Could I have just a minute to l 25 consult?
Sonntaa ReDortina Service, Ltd.
' Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 ,
5440 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure.
2 It's almost time for the break.
3 MR. MILLER: All right.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. We'll take a 10-minute 5 break.
6 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had, after which 7 the hearing was resumed as followss) 8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We're back in session.
9 Mr. Miller.
10 MR. MILLER: Thank you.
11 BY MR. MILLER:
12 0 Mr. Puckett, just one final question with respect to the 13 welding of A36 to A446 material.
14 You testified today that you believe that there was 15 safety significance to the continuation of welding A36 16 to A446 material in the time interval between August 9th 17 and August 17th?
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: He said that there could 3 19 have been safety significance.
20 MR. MILLER: Could have been.
21 BY MR. MILLER:
22 Q Well, do you know whether there was, in fact, any safety
! 23 significance?
24 A I do not know.
{} 25 MR. MILLER: I'd like the Reporter to mark, Sonntaq Reporting Service, Ltd.
t Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5441
(
1 as Applicant's Exhibit 56, a memorandum from Mr. Puckett 2 to Mr. DeWald dated August 22, 1984.
3 This, too, may be a part of an Intervenors' 4 Exhibit, but it's a clean copy.
5 (The document was thereupon marked 6 Applicant's Exhibit No. 56 for 7 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
8 BY MR. MILLER:
9 Q Mr. Puckett, looking at Applicant's Exhibit 56 for 10 identification, did you prepare and send that memorandum 11 to Mr. DeWald on August 22nd?
12 A Yes, sir, as a personal letter.
( 13 ftR. MILLER: I'm sorry.
14 What were the last few words?
15 (The answer was thereupon read by the 16 Reporter.)
17 BY MR. MILLER:
i 18 Q Well, do you intend to differentiate it as a personal 19 letter from, for example, Applicant's Exhibit 52, the 20 speed letter that recommen?ed the stop work that 21 involves welding A36 to A446?
22 A No.
23 This was just to include some additional things.
24 (Indicating.)
(} 25 Q So you didn't regard the circumstances of your sending Sonntag Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5442 O
1 Applicant's Exhibit 56 to Mr. DeWald as any different 2 than any other communication to him in the form of --
3 A Pardon me. I was reading this and --
4 Q I beg your pardon, Mr. Puckett.
5 Go ahead, complete your review of the exhibit.
6 A Now, the question?
7 Q okay. You characterized this as a personal letter.
8 But, in fact, it was intended by you to have the 9 same impact on Mr. DeWald as any of your other written 10 communications to him?
11 A I really didn't know what impact it would have.
12 This one would not require that he give me a O 13 written reply; maybe call me into the office to talk to 14 me.
15 The particular day, I had been by his office 16 several times and he seemed busy.
17 I intended to verbally discuss this with him, and 18 he seemed to be tied up, and I had some other work that 19 I had to do as well, so I wrote this up, and I had one 20 of the secretaries to type it, and give it to -- to Irv 21 DeWald as a -- just as a personal letter between him and 22 I.
23 (Indicating.)
24 Q Now, the date of this is August 22nd, which is the same
{} 25 date that you met with Mr. DeWald, Mr. Gieseker and so Sonntaa Reportinq Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l l
. 5443 )
O 1 on to discuss the disposition of NCR 3099; correct?
2 A It may have been. I don't recall right off the top of 3 my head.
4 0 Well, can we agree that the date on Intervenors' Exhibit 5 29 and the date of this memorandum are the same, August 6 22, 1984?
7 A Yes, it may have been.
8 0 All right.
9 A But I'm not sure if this was prior to the, meeting or 10 after.
11 Q All right.
12 A I mean, when I sent the -- the letter to Irv.
O 13 (Indicating.)
14 0 Your conclusion, stated in the third sentence of the 15 letter, was that in addition to the procedures that you 16 have already recommended stop work on, the stainless 17 procedure, which we'll get to shortly, and A36 to A446, 18 there are at least five other procedures that were i 19 incorrectly qualified; correct?
20 A I said that there was these, yes; that I would consider
! 21 that they were -- at least the qualification would 22 be considered indeterminate.
23 That's later in the letter'that I say that these 24 would be considered indeterminate.
I would consider them indeterminate.
{} 25 Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 5444 ,
I i
i
!O f 1 Q Well, the sentence that you refer to is the one further 2 down that says, "In addition to these procedures"; isn't 3 that right?
! 4 A Yes, sir.
5 Q And you go on to say, "That I can assure you are not 1
6 qualified. There are so many inconsistencies in the j 7 remaining procedures that we are using that I'm sure 1 8 their qualification would be considered indeterminate";
l 9 right? I i
10 A Yes, that's what I said.
! 11 Q So that the five procedures that involve galvanized A.
I 12 S. T. M. A446 were incorrectly qualified and the balance 13 of the procedures, as far as you were concerned on 14 August 22, 1984, have so many inconsistencies that I'm 15 sure their -- that you were sure their qualification 16 would be considered indeterminate; right?
17 A Yes, sir.
18 Q Mr. Puckett, during the time that you were employed at f 19 the Zimmer facility, had you had occasion to perform any i
j 20 inspections in which the weld was made in accordance l 21 with the provisions of AWS D1.3?
, 22 A Yes -- well, I never actually done any inspection on it.
- 23 I know near the end of the project at Braidwood, we 24 had been using AWS Dl.1 for making the weld procedure;
! 25 and once D1.3 came out, we requalified the procedure i.
f Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
- Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
5445
()
1 using the criteria therein.
2 0 I see.
3 And you say this was at the end of the project?
4 A Near the end of the project, yes.
5 0 So that would have been in the year 1983?
6 A '82 or '83. I'm not just exactly sure when the 7 procedure was requalified.
8 Q And do you know when AWS D1.3 was first published?
9 A I think it was in '86 -- pardon me - '76.
10 I'm not really sure exactly when D1.3 was 11 published.
12 Q All right. But, in any event, it wasn't adopted for use
() 13 at the Zimmer site until 1982 or 1983; correct?
14 A It was in the later stages of the project when we were 15 rewriting all of our procedures, both our inspection 16 procedures as well as all of our weld procedures.
17 (Indica ting . )
18 0 All right. And was this procedure revision, that you 19 have just described, at the time when you were the 20 project weld engineer?
21 A Uh-uh, I don't recall exactly what my duties were at the 22 time.
23 0 Do you recall whether or not you personally wrote any 24 weld procedures at Zimmer that involved the
{} 25 qualification of procedures to AWS D1.37 Ronntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 j (312) 232-0262
5446
( ,
1 A No, I never personally wrote the procedure as Zimmer.
2 (Indicating.)
l 3 Q And one of the documents that you read was Sargeant &
4 Lundy specification L2790 at the Braidwood facility;
- 5 correct?
6 A Yes, sir, I read the document. -
7 Q All right. I show you a decument that's been marked and 8 received in evidence as Applicant's Exhibit 16, which 9 is, I represent to you, Sargeant & Lundy Specification 10 L2790 through Amendment 39, which was dated May 14, 11 1984.
12 (Indicating.)
13 Mr. Puckett, can you tell whether that's the 14 version of Sargeant & Lundy Spec L2790 that you reviewed l
15 when you came on site?
16 A It very well may be.
17 As I said before, they had copies of the manuals in 18 Comstock engineering, and they had a copy -- a copy of 19 L2790.
20 I would assume that it would be this same one.
21 Q All right, sir.
22 Applicant's Exhibit 50 indicates that you reviewed 23 the L2790 specification on May 29, 1984; is that 24 correct?
{} 25 A somewhere around that time, yes.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5447 O
1 Q All right.
2 MR. MILLER: Excuse me, your Honor.
3 BY MR. MILLER:
4 Q Mr. Puckett, would you turn to Page 4-3 of Exhibit 16.
5 A 4-3, sir?
6 Q Yes, Page 4-3.
7 Does it have Section 401.18 on that page?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 Q Okay. And is that a page that you recall reviewing when 10 you looked at the specification?
11 A Well, I don't recall at the time of looking at this 12 particular page, but I would assume that I probably did, i
o 13 Q All right.
And it's correcti is it not, that it is the 14 Architect-Engineer's decision to specify the welding 15 code to which procedures are to be qualified? Correct?
16 A Yes.
17 Q All right. Can we agree that in Applicant's Exhibit 16, i 18 Sargeant & Lundy Spec 2790, that 401.18, Page 4-3, gives 19 the contractor, Comstock, the option to qualify welderc 20 either to the A. S. M. E. Code Section 9 or AWS D1.1 or l 21 AWS Dl.3; right?
i 22 A Yes, sir.
23 Q So that it was not mandatory, under that provision,-that 24 welders be qualified to any specific code?
l
{} 25 A Yes, sir.
Sonntaa ReDortina Service, Ltd.
~
i Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
f 5448
(
l Q And then it goes on to refer, in'Section 401.19.1, Field 2 Welding Inspection Requirements, to the requirements of 3 Form 1701.
4 Do you see that?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 , Q All right. Did you have occasion to review Form 1701,
, 7 Mr. Puckett?
8 A I may have, yes. I really don't know.
9 Let me look at it.
10 0 Well, I'm about to give you a copy of it.
11 A Is it in the manual?
12 Q No, sir. It's been marked as a separate exhibit and ,
O 13 received in evidence as Applicant's Exhibit 9.
14 (Indicating.)
15 In looking at the second page of Applicant's 16 Exhibit 9, it states, does it not, that the contractor 17 shall submit to Sargeant & Lundy Procedure --
18 A Which now are you looking at? ,
19 Q I'm sorry. It's Provision 1.2.2 on Page 2 of 20 Applicant's Exhibit 9.
21 And both that provision and Provision 1.2.3 refer 22 only to AWS D1.1; correct?.
23 A This references just to Dl.1, yes.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Miller.
25 Again, my recollection is a little hazy.
{}
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
\
5449 O
1 This is Revision G --
2 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- December 20, 1977?
4 And you are assuming that this was in effect in 5 1984 and asking questions on that basis.
6 I don't know that that isn't the case. It may very 7 well be; but --
8 MR. MILLER: Right.
9 Just a second. We may be able to solve that right 10 on the spot.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And while you are looking at 12 that, similarJy, did we establish that Document A16 was O 13 in effect after May 14, 1984, and that Amendment 40 14 wasn't adopted shortly thereafter?
15 MR. MILLER: I think we can do that, also, 16 your Honor.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay, fine.
18 BY MR. MILLER:
19 Q Let's look, first, Mr. Puckett, at Page 3-5 of 20 Applicant's Exhibit 16, and under the paragraph numbered 21 301.2 --
22 A Now, which exhibit are you looking at again?
23 0 I'm sorry. I'm looking at the Specification 2790, 24 Exhibit 16.
25 All right.
(]} A Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5450 0
1 Q Would you turn to Page 3-5.
2 A Yes, sir.
3 Q Okay. And that indicates, does it not, in Paragraph 4 301.2, that Form 1701-G is a part of Specification 2790 5 as reflected in Exhibit 16?
6 A I will say that that's what it says.
7 Q Okay. And can we agree hhat Form 1701, Revision G, is 8 Applicant's Exhibit 9 that I have placed before you?
9 A If it isn't in this manual, I didn't read it at the time 10 I done the required reading.
11 ,
(Indicating.)
12 Q Yes, sir.
O 13 I don't represent to you that Applicant's Exhibit 14 16 has all the attachments to it; but let me ask the 15 question directly.
16 Do you recall looking at Form 170l?
17 A' I don't recall seeing this form, no.
18 (Indicating.)
19 0 Well, let me now see if I can get the Chairman's other 20 question about the timing of these amendments to 2790 l 21 resolved.
22 MR. MILLER: Your Honor, if you will look at 23 Applicant's Exhibit --
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Exhibit 17?
25 MR. MILLER: -- Exhibit 17, it indicates the
(}
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5451 O
1 next amendment in 18; a further amendment in 19; yet a 2 further amendment.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And 17 indicates that 4 Amendment 40 came-in on July 18th of '84?
5 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
6 I think we will find, if we --
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
8 MR. MILLER: -- look at Amendment 40, that it 9 does not make any changes in any of the provisions that 10 at least for now are deemed pertinent to this 11 proceeding.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's fine.
O 13 That appears to be the case.
14 MR. MILLER: May I continue?
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure.
16 MR. MILLER: I'm sorry.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I just want to say:
18 We'll assume, then, that Applicant's Exhibit 16 was 19 in effect with regard to the questions you are asking 20 during the time that Mr. Puckett was there.
21 MR. MILLER: Okay.
22 BY MR. MILLER:
23 Q Now, can we agree that looking at Specification L2790 24 and Form 1701, it was L. K. Comstock's option as to 25 whether or not to use AWS Dl.1 or AWS Dl.3?
(])
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5452 1
0 1 A Yes.
2 Q And, in fact, if we look at Procedure 4.3.3 that 3 Comstock prepared, the references are to the Sargeant &
4 Lundy Standard Form 1701 and only to the AWS Dl.1 1975 5 Code; correct?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And that's found -- this is the fifth page of 8 Applicant's Exhibit 10 that --
4 9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Exhibit what; 10?
10 MR. MILLER: 10.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The fifth page of Exhibit 10?
12 MR. MILLER: Yes.
4 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And what's the section l
14 number?
15 MR. MILLER: It's Section 1.0, right at the 16 top of the fifth page of the exhibit, Procedure 4.3.3.
l 17 BY MR. MILLER:
- 18 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, there's -- there's nothing in --
l 19 JUDGE COLE: Mr. Miller, I get that as the 20 fourth page of my exhibit.
21 MR. MILLER: I think I may be -- well, I have 22 a cover sheet, two pages of Status 2 Comm'ents, then a 23 further cover sheet to the procedure. .
24 JUDGE COLE: Okay. I have no cover sheet; 25 but I know the page.
(]}
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l l
l
1 5453 ;
1 b) v 1 It's identified as Page 1 of 11 down at the bottom?
2 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
I 3 I must say I'm a little dismayed that everybody 4 seems to have different versions of these exhibits.
5 I don't know who to blame for it.
i 6 BY MR. MILLER:
7 Q Mr. Puckett, turning now just momentarily to the AWS 8 Dl.1 1975 Code itself, there's nothing in there, is 9 there, that states that it is inapplicable to the 10 welding of materials that are less than a certain 11 thickness?
12 A No.
O 13 Q Now, acccept my representation that it's been 14 established by other evidence that the first time the 15 AWS Dl.3 Code was published was 1978.
16 When that occurred, it did not become mandatory to 17 use it, did it?'
18 A No, sir, I don't -- I don't guess that it did.
19 Q It's apparent, from your review of Specification L2790, 20 that Sargeant & Lundy was certainly aware of the i 21 existence of Dl.3, because they refer to it as an option 22 right in the specification; is that right?
23 A Yes.
24- JUDGE GROSSMAN: Was that on 170l?
25 MR. MILLER: No. In Exhibit 16, 2790, at
(]}
Sonntao Reportino Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5454 O
1 Page 4-5.
I 2 I'm sorry. I've given the wrong number. !
l 3 4-3. I beg your pardon.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I just don't know how 5 expert the witness is with regard to this area 6 independent of what he reads here; but I'm not sure that 7 I would read this the way some people may think is 8 obvious, and I just don't think we ought to build too 9 much on that, because I see more than one interpretation 10 of 401.18; and I just don't know that the witness 11 realizes that there can be more than one interpretation g 12 of it.
b 13 MR. MILLER: Well, I -- I fully appreciate i
14 that, Judge Grossman; and, you know, we've all had our 15 noses buried in these documents now for a few weeks, and 16 I'm certain that notwithstanding the time Mr. Puckett 17 may have spent with Mr. Guild last evening, that's he's 18 really been away from these for some time.
19 But my point on these examinations is to try and 20 determine the basis for the allegation so that we can 21 establish, as I think we will be able to do that, the 22 termination of Mr. Puckett's employment was not related 23 to his raising of safety or quality concerns at that 24 time.
25 I fully appreciate that after the passage of some
(]}
Sonntag Reoorting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5455 1
1 years now, that his familiarity -- his immediate 2 familiarity with these documents may not be very great; 3 but I think we have to establish what the basis for his 4 concern was and whether or not it, in fact, represented 5 to him a safety concern.
4 6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. But it seems as 7 though you are now making a lot of his current opinion 8 based only on what he's reading here today or may have 9 read yesterday evening; and I just want to indicate that 10 that is worth just so much to us, and I don't know how 11 probative it is, especially when he reads something and 12 the answer appears obvious from what he's just reading l
()
g 13 now, and I just don't know that that's worth very much 14 to us.
15 BY MR. MILLER:
16 Q Well, I'll inquire as to whether or not, in reaching the 17 conclusions that you expressed in Applicant's Exhibit 18 56, the fact that five procedures were incorrectly 19 qualified and should have been qualified to AWS D1.3 was 20 based on any review of -- of documents at all?
21 A Well, yes; the procedures themself.
22 It was my opinion that when they came out with D1.3 23 as a revision, they are saying that, in D1.1, the 24 criteria there doesn't fully cover.
l j(]} 25 My concern wasn't so much with prior to; but my I
Sonntaa Reoortina Service. Ltd.
~
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 5456 1 recommendation here was just strongly that we requalify 2 these procedures using this criteria. Then there could 3 be no doubt that we were doing it correctly.
4 (Indicating.)
5 0 What do you mean by the word " correctly" as you just 6 used it, Mr. Puckett?
7 A The -- the procedures as I looked at them; and if you 8 would so -- so desire, I can point out something in the 9 procedures that's there now that would be very, very 10 confusing for any inspector or any welder.
11 It's in the procedure itself. It's the i
12 inconsistencies.
O 13 By all rights, when a procedure is written, you 14 should have the body of the procedures and you should 15 have the PQR and the WPS's in the back of it to back up 16 this procedure.
17 You should have one giving you your guidelines and 18 then there should be the additional four that gives you 19 your four different positions and that criteria that was
- 20 used to qualify this procedure.
I 21 You have one procedure that is still in use there 22 that has approximately 14 of these technique sheets in 23 the back giving a QC inspector an option, "If this one i
24 doesn't work, let's use this other one. If it doesn't 25 work, use another one."
(~ }
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
(
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5457 l
($)
1 (Indicating.)
2 There are several of those that are still in the 3 same position.
4 (Indicating.)
5 Q Mr. Puckett, I take it, then, that it is some of the 6 technique sheets in the procedure itself that led you to 7 believe that AWS --
8 A Inconsistencies --
9 Q -- that AWS D.l.3 was the Code which should have 10 governed the qualification of those procedures?
11 A No.
12 O Okay. Then I have misunderstood.
-(]
13 Let's stay away, for the moment, from 14 inconsistencies.
15 A Well, that was part of the exhibit and the reasoning for 16 me writing this.
17 Q Well, I would like to focus solely, though, on your 18 conclusion, as expressed in the third sentence of this 19 document, that there are at least five other procedures 20 that were incorrectly qualified.
21 My question to you really is quite narrow. I would 22 like to know whether you refer to any documents in 23 reaching your conclusion that there were at least five 24 other procedures that were incorrectly qualified.
25 A No, other than the procedures themselves.
(~}
V Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _
ueneva, 1111nols oula+
(312) 232-0262
5458 1 Q Did you refer to AWS D.l.3 in reaching your conclusion 2 in August of 1984 that there were at least five other I
3 procedures that were incorrectly qualified?
4 A I am not sure that I understood that question.
5 Q Well, did you go and look at the AWS D.l.3 Code before 6 you wrote this memorandum to Mr. DeWald, which said
, 7 there are at least five --
8 A I had looked at it, yes. I was aware, yes, pretty much i
l 9 of what it said regarding the welding of A-36 to A-446, i
10 the thinner materials.
11 Q And, in fact, it does specifically apply to those 12 materials, does it not?
13 A Yes.
14 Q You previously testified that you did not believe that 15 it was mandatory that D.l.3 be used; isn't that right? t 16 A I still don't think that it's mandatory that it be used.
17 0 If it's not mandatory that it be used, then why were the 4
18 procedures incorrectly qualified under AWS D.l.3?
19 A They were not necessarily not qualified under D.l.l.
]
20 There was inconsistencies in the procedures.
i 21 They just told me that they weren't qualified, and
- 22 D.l.1 governs the qualification of the procedures at the 23 , time; but there was inconsistencies in the procedures 24 that, in my opinion, made the procedures indeterminate 25 as to whether they were really qualified or not to be
{
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 4
(312) 232-0262 4
5459 1 used.
2 MR. MILLER: Your Honor, may I approach the
- 3. bench for just one second, please?
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Certainly; but my 5 understanding is that the witness is saying, 6 independently of Code 1.3, there were inconsistencies.
7 Is that what you are saying, sir?
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
9 MR. MILLER: Yes, I understand that. '
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay, fine, 11 MR. MILLER: If I might just approach the 12 bench, briefly.
'J 13 (There followed a discussion outside the 14 record.)
15 BY MR. MILLER:
16 Q Mr. Puckett, it's a fact that the inconsistencies would 17 make the procedures' qualification indeterminate under 18 AWS Code D.l.1; isn't that right?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q Let me back up.
21 Can we agree that, with respect to the procedures, 22 you identified two problems in your August 22, 1984, 23 memo:
24 First, that there were at least five procedures
(-
s.-
25 that were incorrectly qualified; and, secondly, that Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111no ls ovias 1 (312) 232-0262 l l
l 5460 I
()
1 there are so many inconsistencies in the remaining 2 procedures that we are using, that you were sure that 3 their qualification would be considered indeterminate?
4 A I am still reading this. Pardon me.
5 Q Okay.
6 A Okay. Now the question.
7 Q Is it correct that in the first paragraph of this 1
8 letter, August 22, 1984, you identified two problems 9 with the Comstock welding procedures:
10 First, that at least five were incorrectly 11 qualified, because they should have been qualified to 12 AWS D.l.3 instead of AWS D.l.l.
13 Is that a separate problem that you were attempting 14 to identify?
15 A They were qualified. Okay? That's all I was concerned 16 with at this time.
17 This was a personal letter and this was voicing my 18 opinion on these other procedures that we were concerned 19 with, that we should qualify them in accordance with 20 D.1.3.
21 That will lead to no doubt that they were properly 22 qualified.
23 Q Well, Mr. Puckett, on August 22, 1984, was it your 24 opinion that there were at least five procedures that 25 were incorrectly qualified because they were qualified Sonntag Reporting Se rvice, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 5461 l
l 1 under ANS D.I.l? '
2 A That they were incorrectly qualified, not necessarily 3 because it was done in accordance with D.l.l.
4 That wasn't the intent.
\
5 Q It wasn't the intent of your letter?
6 A The intent of the letter was an opinionated thing, that 7 we had the inconsistencies in the procedure and that in 8 the procedure -- there was things in there that would 9 make them considered indeterminate and that, in my 10 opinion, they should have never been qualified.
11 I mean, you know, they shouldn't qualify them or 12 keep a qualification under D.l.1 but we should requalify 13 these particular ones involving galvanized steel using 14 the D.1.3 Code.
15 I would assume the purpose for the revisions of the 16 Code and coming out with the Code was because this would 17 be a better method to do it. This was where my concerns 18 were.
19 Where I said that there was procedures there, othet 20 procedures that I did not consider qualified, wasn't 21 meant to suggest that it wasn't in accordance with 22 D.l.l. That wasn't the intent.
23 They were just not qualified because of various 24 other reasons, inconsistencies and such.
~3 25 Q Well, the --
(G .
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 111:nois ou124 (312) 232-0262
5462 l
1 A The whole idea of this letter was to get everybody to 2 stop, rewrite the procedures and get everybody to take a 3 look at what we got; and when we know that everything is 4 correct and everybody is agreed that everything is 5 correct, then we could proceed.
6 That was the whole thing.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Let me see if I can 8 clarify something in my own mind.
9 Were you saying that those procedures were not 10 qualified because they were qualified under ANS D.l.1 or 11 were you saying that they were not properly qualified
, 12 even under AWS D.l.1 and in that they were not properly O 13 qualified under that, they should be re-qualified but i
14 they should be re-qualified under D.l.3?
15 THE WITNESS: That's exactly what I meant, 16 sir.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That latter part, that they 18 weren't correctly qualified under D.l.1 in the first 19 place; is that right?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Since they have to be 4
. 22 re-qualified, they should be re-qualified under D.l.3; 23 is that it?
24 THE WITNESS: That was the intent, yes, sir.
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's my
[y Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5463 i
O
(_)
1 1 understanding of what he is saying. ;
2 Now that -- Mr. Miller.
3 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. May I continue?
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure.
5 BY MR. MILLER:
6 Q What does the sentence mean that says, "The 7 aforementioned procedures were qualified using the 8 criteria of AWS D.l.1 1975 and it should have never been 9 done"?
10 Is that --
11 A I explained what was meant by the letter. Okay?
_ 12 They should have been qualified in accordance'with kl 13 D.l.3 after the D.l.3 had been put out.
14 0 So it's --
15 A Not necessarily, you know, before it was out. They 16 couldn't have very well done it.
17 As you said, the D.1.3 Code didn't come out until 18 '78.
19 What I was saying is there was procedures there, 20 that even though they were qualified in accordance with 21 D.l.1, they were incorrectly qualified. That was what 22 this was meant to convey.
23 Q When you say " incorrectly," we should read for that 24 because of inconsistencies in the procedures, in your
(~'s 25 opinion, they were indeterminate?
kJ Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
veneva, 1111nols 0013e (312) 232-0262
5464 T'N U
1 Q Yes, because of inconsistencies, I would consider some 2 of these procedures as being questionable.
3 Q And since the procedures, in your judgment, were going 4 to have to be re-qualified anyway, well, then, the ones 5 that involved the thin-gauge material should be 6 re-qualified to ANS D.l.3?
7 A Yes.
8 Q If the procedures had not had these, what you referred 9 to as, inconsistencies that make them indeterminate, 10 why, then it would have been perfectly proper, would it 11 not, to have continued to use the procedures as 12 qualified to AWS D.1.l?
k' 13 A Yes.
14 Q So it was because of the inconsistencies that you 15 observed that you recommended that there be a stop work 16 totally of the welding program while these 17 inconsistencies were ironed'out and, also, procedures 18 re-qualified to AWS D.l.3 where that Code fit; correct?
19 A A pe rsonal request, yes, sir.
20 0 Well, I don't understand the " personal."
21 A This letter, as I said, was a personal letter to Irv.
22 O But did you expect him to act on it, Mr. Puckett?
23 A I expected that he would call me into the office and we 24 could discuss it.
25 Q Did you expect Mr. DeWald on the basis of this letter to
{)
Sonntag Reporting Se rvice, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
e s
5465
/~~
b 1 stop the work?
2 A Well, I had already recommended that.
3 On the Nonconformance Report it had been 4 recommended and it had been recommended on the memos.
5 0 Yes; but that was --
6 A But this was in addition.
7 Q This would have --
. 8 A Okay?
9 Q -- shut down all welding at Comstock; right?
10 A Yes. I considered their procedures that bad, and some 11 of them still are.
12 Q So you expected Mr. DeWald to act on this memo?
'h (k J 13 A I didn't say that. I said I expected Mr. DeWald to call l
14 me into the office and discuss it.
15 I had been making suggestions several times before 16 to Mr. DeWald and to Mr. Seltmann that we had these 17 massive problems; and I was just wanting to state -- and 18 I did so in this letter -- that I just wanted to get 19 together and decide where we were at and what we needed 20 to do and get us a line of defense and proceed from 21 there.
22 Q Did you or did you not expect Mr. DeWald on the basis of ,
1 23 this written communication to, as you say, "All weldings 24 be stopped?"
25 A I did not expect that.
)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _
veneva, 1111nois oula4
, (312) 232-0262 l
5466 2
g.
\
1 MR. GUILD: Objection.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sustained.
3 That is the third time and he has already told you 4 what his answer is.
5 BY MR. MILLER:
6 Q Mr. Puckett, getting back to the use of the D.l.1 7 procedure for the -- the Code as qualifying procedures 8 for use with thin-gauge material, did you have any 9 concern over the work that was being done under those 10 procedures because of the use of the AWS D.l.1 Code?
11 A No, sir.
12 Q Mr. Puckett, at your deposition, Page 125,'were you k/ 13 asked this question and did you give thic answer: "Had 14 you raised this overall concern with the application of 15 AWS D.l.1 to this galvanized material" --
16 A Which are you referring to?
17 0 I am sorry. It's at the beginning of Line 2.
18 The question was, "Had you raised this overall 19 concern with the application of AWS D.l.1 to this 20 galvanized material, A-446 material, prior to that,"
21 referring to the memo, Applicant's Exhibit 56.
22 Would you read your answer, please?
23 A I said, "Yes, I had talked to Irv before about it. I 24 asked them why they had qualified that procedure in 25 accordance with D.l.1 with A-446 when A-446 material is
(~w)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l
5467 tm O
1 not listed in D.l.l. It was supposed to have been 2 qualified in accordance with D.l.3.
3 "He told me that S & L was looking into it, that a 4 memo had been sent out to the -- to them quite sometime 5 ago. They were looking for it and hadn't dispositioned 6 it yet, just exactly what they were going to do with 7 it."
8 Q Does the answer continue, sir, one more sentence?
9 A "My concern was work was being done then using these 10 procedures."
11 That's why I recommended the stop work. I wanted 12 that discontinued.
13 0 You wanted the work discontinued because the procedures 14 had been qualified to AWS D.l.1 incorrectly?
15 A No, sir. Because they were -- they list Attachment H
- 16 and O.
17 The Nonconformance Report eventually stopped the 18 work.
19 Q Mr. Puckett, I am afraid that the record is.getting 20 somewhat confused.
21 A You can't -- you come up with something that came up 22 with the other deposition.
23 MR. GUILD: Objection.
24 A (Contin uing . ) As I read it, that particular area --
25 MR. MILLER: I wonder --
s Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l ueneva, 1111nois culde l
( 312', 232-0262 L
. 5468 1 r.
R U
1 A (Con tin uing . ) -- that particular area I had discussed 2 with Irv prior to all of this; and my concern -- this
- 3 was probably before the memos had been written to him 4 -
and probably the NCR; but, ultimately, in order to get 5 the work stopped, the Nonconformance Report had to be
> 6 written.
7 BY MR. MILLER:
8 Q But the Nonconformance Report did not stop all the work 9 with respect to the welding of A-446 thin-gauge 10 material, did it?
11 A No, it did not at that time, no.
e 12 Q And, in fact, that was the purpose of this memo that you i 13 sent to Mr. DeWald?
14 A I told you what my purpose for sending that memo to Mr.
15 DeWald was.
j 16 Q So it wasn't to stop the work; it was just to stimulate
- 17 a conversation; right?
18 A It was just to have him to call me into his office, so 19 we could set down and discuss the problems that we had, 20 because he seemed disinterested otherwise.
21 Q Well, Mr. Puckett, Mr. DeWald had just five days earlier '
22 caused the work to be stopped on welding A-446 to A-36 23 material, hadn't he?
24 A If it was five days before, I don't remember.
25 Q August 17th was the date of Mr. Rolan's --
[)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5469 em 1 A He agreed. When I presented him with certain items, he 2 agreed that work should be stopped, yes.
3 Q And is it your testimony that he was just disinterested 4 in these problems that involved --
5 A I am saying that Mr. DeWald, if you talk to him verbally 6 about a problem that we had, he wanted to 7 "shredge" (sic.) it off or push it on the side burner, 8 just so to speak and not really act on it.
9 It had to be something in writing before it seemed 10 to really get his attention.
11 Q I see. So this was like -- Applicant's Exhibit 56 was 12 like -- hitting a mule over the head with a 2 by 4: You 13 were just doing that when you recommended stopping all 14 the work; right?
15 A No, sir, not necessarily.
16 I really believed the problems they were having 17 didn't only relate to the weld procedures. They were 18 having problems with the inspectors themselves.
19 I was saying, " Hey, everybody has got to get 20 together and talk about this or we are going to have a 21 problem -- really going to have a problem."
22 Q And before you could sit down and talk about it, in your 23 judgment, the work had to be stopped; is that right?
24 A I thought that it should be stopped. I thought that
(~~S 25 they shouldn't be continuing using these procedures that LJ Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nois ou144 (312) 232-0262
5470
~N
{d 1 very well could be unqualified.
2 Q Now, let me just come back and ask one more time, 3 because I am not certain I fully understand, Mr.
4 Puckett.
5 Did the fact that the procedures were qualified to 6 the AWS D.l.1 play any part in your recommendation that 7 the work be stopped?
8 A Not that they were qualified to D.l.1, but the fact that
] 9 they were qualified and they were not acceptable in 4
10 accordance 5iti. the criteria of D.l.l.
11 Q And that's because of the inconsistencies and so on that 12 you have -- .
O
' l 13 A There was inconsistencies in there that would make them 14 inde te rminate .
15 Q Now, let's turn to the procedural inconsistencies that 16 you believed called for stopping the work and let's go 17 back to Applicant's Exhibit 10, which is Revision C of 18 Procedure 4.3.3.
19 THE WITNESS: 4.3.3?
20 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
21 THE WITNESS: Which revision?
22 MR. MILLER: Revision C, Applicant's Exhibit
- 23 10.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Which section of this, Mr.
25 Miller?
{)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 5471 l l
l p,
1 MR. MILLER: Well, I just wanted to'ask Mr.
2 Puckett if he could direct us to a section that conveyed 3 the inconsistencies which made the procedure 4 indeterminate.
5 A At this -- at this time I can't, for the simple reason I 6 can't remember what the problem was at that time.
7 This procedure that I have here seems to be a later 8 revision than what I was looking at earlier.
9 I am trying to find the correct one here.
10 MR. MILLER: Let's see if I can give you some
. 11 help.
12 This is 2.3.
13 THE WITNESS: 4.3.3, I thought I had two 14 copies of this one revision. This is --
15 MR. MILLER: Let's look under here for a 16 second.
17 Here it is, Mr. Puckett.
18 (Indica ting . )
19 THE WITNESS: Okay. Let me see if I can find 20 some of that.
21 Now, would you ask the question again, please?
22 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
23 BY MR. MILLER:
24 Q I would like you to identify the specific provisions of
' (~'s 25 Revision C to Procedure 4.3.3, which, in your opinion, V
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
beneva, 1111aois ou124 (312) 232-0262
l 5472 O
1 contained so many inconsistencies that they would be 2 indeterminate?
3 A Yes, sir. If you could turn to the attachments listed 4 as El through E12, 5 Q All right, sir. Would you describe them for the record, 6 what the inconsistencies are?
7 A This was one that was probably more grossly wrong than 8 some of the others.
9 Now, this is the procedure that they had in the 10 books. This is the procedure that the inspector is to 11 go into the field and inspect the field weld to.
12 You notice the attachment, it says, "El through O 13 E12."
14 If you go to the fourth line from the top of the 15 page, this is the one -- make sure you are looking at 16 the same thing that I am. I don' t see a page numbe r.
I
~
17 But it gives you your material specifications on I
18 the top. It says A. S. T. M. A-36, A-500, Grade B, and 19 it goes on across saying A-501 and A-570.
20 On the fourth line it gives you your position for 21 doing the welding.
22 Has everybody followed that thus far?
23 0 Yes, sir.
24 Is this Attachment El that you are directing this
() 25 to?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5473 l i
1 A Yes, El.
2 Q All right. If you turn over --
3 MR. GUILD: Do you mean E, Mr. Puckett?
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No. I believe he is 5 referring to Attachment E.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, E.
7 MR. MILLER: Did I not say that, E?
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No. You said El.
9 MR. MILLER: I beg your pardon.
10 THE WITNESS: On the page it referenced El 11 through E12 on the bottom left-hand corner.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Right; but that's Attachment
~) 13 E and it's entitled, " Flare bevel groove."
14 MR. MILLER: Just a second. Let ne take a 15 look.
16 THE WITNESS: This is the one that I am 17 looking at, " Flare bevel groove," at the top.
18 MR. MILLER: That is a page that is missing 19 from my copy.
20 I will have to look on with you.
21 A Well, as I explained, this is one of the inconsistencies 22 that I found in the procedure.
23 Basically, when you have a weld procedure, you will 24 end up with your PQR back there reflecting how the
/^^s 25 procedure was qualified.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111nols oulas (312) 232-0262
5474 1
1 You will have your WPS's back there reflecting your l 2 four positions, your flat, your horizontal, your 3 vertical and your overhead.
4 In this particular one, they don't have four. They 5 have 12. They have several that is in the flat 6 position, several that is in the horizontal position and 7 several in the vertical position, which gives an option 8 to the QC. Inspector in the field, " Hey, if he is not 9 meeting the criteria of this flat position, would he be 3
10 meeting the criteria of this flat position? If not that 11 one, do we have another one over here that he might meet
]
12 the criteria of?"
4 13 Some of the other procedures are the same way. The
- 14 one prior to the E, the D, I believe, has eight versus 15 the four that it should have.
16 These are the type of inconsistencies that I was 17 concerned with, f
i' 18 A QC Inspector should not be given an option on 19 these different type things. He should be given a set 20 of instructions to inspect by.
j 21 In the flat position, you have one set of amperage 22 and voltage ranges. In another flat position it gives i 23 you another set of amperage and voltage ranges and they i 24 change the size of the electrodes from time to time and i 25 the amperage and voltage.
w Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5475 O
v 1 BY MR. MILLER:
2 Q Mr. Puckett, it's a fact, is it, that this procedure --
3 A This is something, you know, that I can remember real 4 vividly about the procedures.
5 There was other inconsistencies, too; and without 6 going back and comparing them to the code and re-reading 7 the procedures and reviewing them again, I could 8 probably not just off the top of my head pick out the 9 other inconsistencies that I found.
10 Q Mr. Puckett, is it your testimony that this is -- this 11 procedure is -- used by the Quality Control Inspector
, 12 when inspecting a weld?
13 A This is -- no. This is the procedure that is used for 14 doing the welding.
15 However, the Quality Control Inspector would have 16 to revert to this procedure to see what amperage range 17 and voltage range that the welder is supposed to be 18 welding to and what procedure that he is using.
19 Q Isn't it a fact, Mr. Puckett, that when you were at 20 Braidwood, the Quality Control Inspectors went out and 21 inspected the welds after they had been completed?
22 A Some of these they did. They were doing some postweld 23 inspections.
I 24 But there was welds that they inspected pretty well 25 close to the time that the weld was being done, that is,
(~')
%,j Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, 1111n ois ou144 (312) 232-0262
I 5476 o
U 1 you know, the same day, ongoing work.
2 Q But it was completed when they inspected it, wasn't it?
3 A Well, you don't inspect it until it is completed.
4 Q And so they would never have the opportunity or the 5 requirement to check the essential variables that you 6 have just referred to as being different in this 7 procedure, would they?
8 A Well, not for a particular weld per se that way, no.
9 Q So, in fact, it was not the QC Inspector but the welder 10 that had the choice of which of these WPS's he would use 11 in a particular position; isn't that right?
12 A It could be, yes, sir; but a welder shouldn't be given 13 an option, either.
14 Q Is it correct that each of the weld procedure 15 qualification test records for Attachment E were 16 properly qualified and properly tested, as far as you 17 can tell from the records, by Comstock and approved by 18 Pittsburgh Testing Laboratories?
19 A With what you can see here -- they are pretty illegible 20 -- they very well could have been.
21 Of course, I didn't witness this testing, of 22 course, myself; but my question would be to that: If 23 you have one technique in a flat position that is ;
24 acceptable, why would they go back and qualify two or rg 25 three others using the same materials and things or was
,V I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. j Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
}
5477 a
1 the same coupon submitted more than once?
2 That was a possibility.
3 Q Well, Mr. Puckett --
4 A That was why I considered it indeterminate and not just 5 an out and out rejected procedure.
6 0 on the face of the procedure, the face of each of these 7 weld procedure qualification test reports, the steps 8 necessary to qualify the procedure had been followed as 9 far as you could tell from the face of each of the 10 reports; right?
11 A By looking at the paper work, yes.
12 Q Right. And, therefore, if the welder followed one of ,
13 them or another of them, he would still be in compliance 14 with the procedure, wouldn't he?
15 A Yes, sir.
16 Q And the fact that the essential variables might be 17 dif ferent between two PQR's, weld procedure 18 qualification test reports, would not affect the 19 integrity of the weld, if, in fact, the test report had 20 been properly submitted and properly approved for 21 inclusion in the procedure; isn't that right?
22 A The procedure would be suitable to make a sound weld if 23 the welder was qualified, yes.
24 Q Now, it's also a fact, isn't it, that the example E that 25 you have given us does not involve A-446 material, does Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 1111nois ou144 (312) 232-0262
~
l 5478 (G'b 1 it?
2 A No, sir.
3 0 So this is not the thin-gauge galvanized material that 4 was --
5 A No, sir. As I said before, when I wrote this letter --
6 it's been some time back -- it was pretty clear to my 7 mind at that time; but it's been some time ago.
8 I don't remember right off the top of my head what 9 my concerns was with the others at that time.
10 0 It's also correct that Attachment D refers to A-36 to 11 A-500 B material; isn't that right?
12 A I will look at it "and let you know, bV 13 Yes.
14 Q And, therefore, this Attachment D as well did not 15 involve thin-gauge galvanized material; correct?
16 A No, sir.
17 Q Mr. Puckett, let's try and be a little specific on this.
18 If we look at Attachment El through E12, could you 19 indicate for the Board where there are two welding 20 procedure qualification test records that deal with 21 welding those two materials in the flat position?
22 A What is your question again, sir?
23 Q I think you testified --
24 A Oh, okay. I understand the question now.
25 Let me get back to E again, because I was moving
[
Sonntag Reporting Se rvice, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5479 i\
V 1 along with you on that.
2 Q All right.
3 A Okay. On the fourth line from the top on your series El 4 through E12, you will see there it says, " Flat, 5 horizontal, vertical positions," there.
6 If you move over -- I think it's about the third 7 page over from that -- you have a -- the next page you 8 have a horizontal weld. The following page you have a 9 horizontal weld --
10 0 Is this Attachments El and E2 that each have horizontal 11 welds?
12 A The one that I am looking at now is E3.
O'
'- 13 Q I will have to check with you on that.
14 A I am looking at E3. -
15 Q Yes, sir.
16 Doesn't that say that it's a flat weld?
17 A This says that it's flat.
18 0 Okay. Is there another --
19 A Okay. The next page, E4.
20 Q Yes, sir.
21 A It's also a flat weld.
22 0 What are the differences in the essential variables 23 between those two procedures?
24 A The difference that I can see here is in the square box r m, 25 alongside the drawing. It's got down for your pass
(_J Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _
ueneva, 111tnois oviae (312) 232-0262
5480 1 numbe rs, pass 1, 2 and 3, that they are using one-eighth 2 inch rod and that they are using 110 amps -- 110 amps 3 and 32 volts. -
4 On the next page, this is a flat position, they are 5 using the one-eighth inch rod and they are using 130 6 amps and 25 volts.
7 Q Now, it's correct, is it not, Mr. Puckett, that, again, 8 assuming that the weld procedure qualification test 9 record for Attachment E3 was properly prepared and 10 properly submitted to PTL and that it passed PTL's 11 examination, that a welder who used one-eighth inch rod 12 and set his welding machine at 110 amps and 32 volts
- 13 would produce a satisfactory flat weld; is that correct?
I 14 A He could possibly do so, yes, sir.
15 0 It's more than possibly.
16 If'he was a qualified welder and properly set his f
17 machine, a satisfactory weld would follow, wouldn't it?
18 A Well, that depends on the individual welders.
i 19 You have some welders that would prefer to weld at
} 20 a lower temperature and a slower pace.
l 21 Other welders will cut their machines up and use a 22 higher temperature but use a faster travel speed; and 23 they both could feasibly get a good, sound weld.
! 24 Q Well, in those circumstances, Mr. Puckett, that you just l 25 described, would they be varying the amperes or the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 1
- - - - . - . - ----- _ _ _ - -. . . - . . ~ - - , . . - - .. . . . , , . ,. . - . - - - _ - - - - -
i l
5481 '
O V
1 volts?
2 I think you just said that there are some welders 3 who do it fast and set the temperature up and some do it 4 slower.
5 A Right.
6 And the guidelines that they have here -- like the 7 110 there, if you note below there it be notes a plus or 8 minus 15 amp volt range. In other words, it could vary 9 by 10 -- by 15; but that would still make these 10 completely different.
11 You are giving the man two ranges to weld from.
12 You are saying that you can weld, basically, from 95 to O 13 125 on one page and on the other side it jumps way up, 14 where you are saying you can weld 145 to 125 or 120.
15 Q Yes, sir. ,
16 Assuming that both of these weld qualification test 17 records have been properly prepared and properly 18 submitted for review to PTL and that they passed, 19 regardless of the amperage range that the welder used, a 20 sound weld would result; correct?
21 A Possibly so.
22 Q It's more than possibly, isn't it, Mr. Puckett?
23 That is a fact, isn't it?
24 A Everybody makes mistakes. Not all welders can weld at 25 certain amperage ranges.
[)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
veneva, 1111nois oulas (312) 232-0262
5482 O
1 I mean, if they had one set of rules in here that 2 had been tested and accepted, my question on this when I 3 looked at it the way I did is: If they have a good one 4 that makes a satisfactory weld, why would they even go 5 back and requalify it again, unless there was something 6 wrong with this one?
7 That's why I say that would be, in my opinion, 8 indeterminate. I did not say that it was a good 9 procedure, that everything there might possibly be good; 10 but my question was: With all of these different ones, 11 would it not be considered indeterminate?
12 Q Well, it was at least optional; isn't that right?
13 The welder could use one of two properly qualified 14 weld procedure test records; right?
15 A One of several.
16 Q One of several; right?
17 A Yes, sir. .
18 0 They were all properly qualified?
19 A By looking at the paper work, yes, sir.
20 Q Now, then, what is there then about the procedure 21 itself, putting to one side the welder, perhaps, not 22 being able to weld to the procedure, which is an 23 entirely separate issue -- what is there about the 24 procedure itself that is, therefore, indeterminate?
25 A I don't really recall at this time.
{)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5483 i
v 1 It's been somewhat over two years since I have 2 actually dug into these procedures and compared them 3 against the Code, but at the time it was pretty fresh at 4 mind when I wrote the letter to Irv.
5 Q As you sit here today, Mr. Puckett, do you believe that 6 having more than one properly qualified weld procedure 7 qualification test record for a single position in these 8 attachments renders the weld procedure indeterminate?
9 A Not necessarily, just this, no.
10 0 This was one element; right?
11 A That was one element.
12 0 One element, on the basis on which you recommended in 13 your personal letter to Mr. DeWald that all the work be 14 stopped; correct?
15 A That was one of the bases.
16 0 Would you give me some other elements, please?
1.7 A As I say, I can't remember, you know.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Miller.
19 Is there any place where these items are written 20 down so that you can --
21 MR. MILLER: I am about to try and do that.
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think if you have that, I 23 think it's fair, rather than to ask the witness to look 24 at the procedures and see which are inconsistent.
25 I think you ought to tie him down to what he Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
veneva, Arlinois ovAas (312) 232-0262
5484
,O
' V' 1 contemporaneously indicated'was a problem area and then 2 ask him with regard to each problem area.
3 MR. MILLER: Well, your Honor, I am hearing 4 some things today that I heard for the first time from 5 this witness in terms of what his concerns were and what 6 his position was at the time.
7 MR. GUILD: That's just not true, Mr.
8 Chairman.
9 If Mr. Miller didn't get the answer that he liked 10 today and is surprised by that, it's, perhaps, because 11 he didn't ask the questions effectively on deposition.
12 He had this witness for several days on deposition 13 and had a full opportunity to explore.
14 The witness is being responsive, in my opinion.
15 MR. MILLER: I am not suggesting that the 16 witness isn't being responsive.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I am just concerned about 18 the fact that we are relying on memory that is a few 19 years old.
20 If we can pinpoint each particular item rather than 21 have him search his general memory on the thing, it 22 would be a little fairer to the witness and a little 23 more responsive answers.
24 MR. MILLER: I certainly hope so.
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Do you want to show him
[)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5485 1 something or take a break or whatever you --
2 MR. MILLER: No, no. I would like to 3 continue.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: You want to continue?
5 MR. MILLER: Yes.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's fine.
7 BY MR. MILLER:
8 Q Looking at Applicant's Exhibit 51, Mr. Puckett, which is 9 NRC Inspection Report 8509, there is an Allegation D on 10 Page 6 of the inspection report.
11 The allegation is that, in general, the L. K.
12 Comstock weld procedures are filled with errors and
(~) .
(-) 13 inconsistencies, pren, e.g., decimal fraction conversion 14 tables show 0.750 equals 32/32.
15 A I am thinking that that was in an inspection procedure 16 but I am not at all sure. I don't remember at this 17 time.
18 It's pretty hard for me to totally recall these 19 items now.
20 0 Well, let me see if I can help you, Mr. Puckett, 21 further.
22 The NRC review of this allegation states, "That 23 further discussion with the Alleger," that is you, 24 " disclosed that this allegation was not critical of the 25 weld procedures' adequacy but that clerical errors
(~
v Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
veneva, 1111nois 0v1J4 (312) 232-0262
5486 1 within the procedures needed to be corrected"; is that 2 correct?
3 A In some of these that was the case, in some of these.
4 Q All right. So that they were essentially minor clerical 5 errors that didn't affect the adequacy of the procedures 6 at all?
7 A Some of them, yes.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Miller, why don't we 9 take a ten-minute break now?
10 MR. MILLER: Fine.
11 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had, 12 after which the hearing was resumed as bd 13 follows:)
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Back in session.
15 Mr. Mille r.
16 BY MR. MILLER:
17 Q Mr. Puckett, I think you testified earlier that some 18 welders like to weld hot and others prefer to weld at a 19 cooler temperature.
20 Am I recalling the testimony correctly?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And that, the temperature, is dependent upon the number 23 of amperes that are used in the welding machine; is that 24 correct?
25 A Yes, sir, and the rate of travel.
b(~~s Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5487 l l
1 Q A welder who prefers to weld cool is or may be equally 2 capable of creating a satisfactory weld as one who welds 3 hot; isn't that right?
4 A Possibly so, yes, sir.
5 0 To the extent that there are multiple procedure 6 qualification test records that expand the range within 7 which a satisfactory weld can be made, you have 8 accommodated individual variations in welding technique, 9 haven't you?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q And that's a desirable thing to do, isn't it?
12 A Well, the desirable thing to do is to set one set of
, 13 parameters that you know will work and have these people 14 -- that's why they have the plus or minus 15 amps, for 15' those people that might want to weld a little hotter or 16 those that might want to weld a little colder.
17 Q But if you qualify a wider range by means of more than 18 one qualification test record, you have also expanded 19 the flexibility within which a welder may provide a good 20 weld? ,
21 A You may have, yes.
22 Q Now, you drew our attention to Attachments D and E, Mr.
23 Puckett, as to procedures where there were these 1
24 multiple qualification test records.
25 Are there any attachments that you can direct' us to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 1111nO1S DU1J4 (312) 232-0262
5488 I
V 1 in Applicant's Exhibit 10 that involve the use of 2 thin-gauge galvanized material, where there are multiple 3 qualification records or test records for the same 4 position?
5 A I haven't really looked at it. I would really have to 6 look at it to say.
7 I don't have all the recall right off the top of my 8 head.
9 Q Over the break, Mr. Puckett, had you been able to 10 identify any additional --
11 A I hadn't even thought about anything over the break. I
~
12 was trying to get a little rest.
13 MR. GUILD: Is counsel asking the witness to 14 search through the document now?
15 MR. MILLER: Well, I would like to take the 16 time to do so and determine whether or not there are 17 thin-gauge galvanized material welding procedure 18 qualification test records, where there were multiple 19 test records for the same position that involve 20 thin-gauge galvanized material.
21 MR. GUILD: I guess the point of my raising 22 the question is: The document speaks for itself.
23 Unless this is an exercise to test how quickly the 24 witness can thumb through a document and find something
(~'s 25 in it, perhaps counsel should supply the answer.
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5489 1 MR. MILLER: Well, I don't know, your Honor.
2 What we have is a memorandum dated August 22, 1984, 3 that asserts that procedures are incorrectly qualified.
4 The witness's testimony today is instead of 5 incorrectly qualified, one should read indeterminate and 6 the reason they are indeterminate is that there are, 7 among other things, multiple welding qualification --
8 welding procedure qualification test records for the 9 same position within the same attachment.
10 I believe that it would be useful to the Board to 11 have the witness identify any such that exist.
12 I don't find in this document --
O k- 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, he gave an example of 14 that particular item with regard to Attachments E and El 15 through E12.
16 I don't believe at the time he was focusing on 17 A-446 material.
18 MR. MILLER: Right. That's my question now.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: If there is any with regard
, 20 to A-446?
21 MR. MILLER: Yes.
22 A (Continuing.) I don't recall what other objections I
, 23 may have had at that time on the A-446 to A-36 or A-500.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I believe the witness
( ) 25 indicated that, too, before the break; and the Board Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Ueneva, 1111nols ov144 (312) 232-0262
5490 O
V 1 suggested that you point them out, the specific items; 2 and I believe you were doing that.
3 He is, apparently, somewhat refreshed over the 4 break and so maybe we will get responsive answers to 5 your individual items.
6 BY MR. MILLER:
7 Q Mr. Puckett, have you been able to recall any additional 8 clerical errors that you identified in the weld 9 procedures?
10 A In the weld procedures themselves, I don't at this time 11 remember any of the other things, other than the things 12 that we have already discussed today.
13 Q Mr. Puckett, Allegation B on Page 4 of Applicant's 14 Exhibit 51, which is this inspection report, also refers 15 to certain language inconsistencies that you identified.
16 Would you read that over, please?
17 A Which one is this, again?
18 Q Allegation B.
19 A Oh, B, okay. I thought you said E. I am sorry.
20 , Do you want me to read the allegation itself?
21 Q Why don't you just read the allegation itself, yes.
22 A "The Allege r contends" --
23 Q No, no, not out loud; just to yourself.
24 A Oh, okay.
25 All right, sir. I have read it.
[
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5491 0
1 Q Mr. Puckett, there are two parts to that allegation.
2 One relates to the fact that there was welding of -
3 stainless steel being done, even though there was not a 4 procedure qualified for all positions; correct?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 Q All right. And then you also stated that the language 7 inconsistencies exist within the procedure for stainless 8 steel welding with respect to the inspection techniques; 9 correct?
10 A That was one of the more relevant, yes.
11 0 Which procedure, sir, were you referring to?
12 Was it the inspection procedure or the Stainless 13 Steel Welding Procedure that --
14 A All of the procedures that I was familiar with, the 15 welding procedures, procedures on the inspection, both 16 the welding procedures for carbon steel and the 17 stainless steel and the other procedures that we had 18 also had inconsistencies in them, those dealing with 19 filler material and those dealing with welders' 20 qualifications.
21 Q Let's focus just on the one that is described in 22 Allegation B on Page 4 for one second.
23 I ask you, again: Are the inconsistencies that you 24 identified in that procedure in the procedure for 25 welding stainless steel; or, rather, is it in the i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l ueneva, AAAinois ovias (312) 232-0262
l
. 5492 O
1 inspection procedure itself?
2 A You mean the -- I am not -- I am not sure that I am 3 getting the question that you are asking.
4 Q Well, Mr. Puckett, does looking at Allegation B refresh 5 your recollection that one of the inconsistencies in 6 procedures that you identified was that there was an 7 instruction to use magnetic particle testing on 8 stainless steel welds?
9 A Right.
10 0 All right, sir. And was that one of the language 11 inconsistencies that you had in mind when you wrote your 12 August 22, 1984, memorandum?
13 A I don't remember if that was one of the inconsistencies 14 that I had in mind at that time.
15 I know the fact that the procedure was only 16 qualified in the SG position was one of the 17 inconsistencies.
18 0 Well, it was more than one of the inconsistencies; you 19 referred to it in the very first sentence of Applicant's 20 Exhibit 56 -- I guess it's the second sentence -- where 21 you say, "We have already recommended a stop work on all 22 stainless."
23 A Yes, yes, that was one of the inconsistencies with that 24 particula r procedure.
25 0 I am sorry, Mr. Puckett.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5493 1 What was one of the inconsistencies?
2 A Well, it wasn't inconsistencies per se. It was just the 3 fact that it wasn't -- the procedure wasn't -- qualified 4 to be used in all positions.
5 0 Right. Going on and dropping down on Applicant's' 6 Exhibit 56 to the statement, "In addition to these 7 procedures that I can assure you are not qualified, 8 there are so many inconsistencies in the remaining i 9 procedures that we are using that I am sure their 10 qualification would be considered indeterminate."
11 My question to you, Mr. Puckett, is whether or not 12 the second sentence of Allegation B is one of those O
\J 13 inconsistencies in procedures which led to your 14 conclusion?
15 A Yes, it could very well be, yes.
16 Q All right, sir.
17 A Right, that very well could be.
18 0 All right. Now --
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
20 You don't recall that it was one of the items that 21 you had in mind when you wrote the August 22, 1984, 22 letter?
23 THE WITNESS: It was one of the 24 inconsistencies in the procedures that I was talking
("')
V 25 about, yes, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, tilinois oviae (312) 232-0262 1
5494
(
f 1 BY MR. MILLER:
2 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, I would like, if you would, for you to 3 look at Inspection Procedure 4.3 -- I am sorry --
4 Comstock Procedure 4.3.14. I am not going to mark it 5 just yet.
6 I would like to ask you whether you can find for me 7 in that procedure the inconsistency that is described in 8 Allegation B, that is the instruction to use magnetic 9 partic1.e testing on stainless steel?
t 10 A I don't recall if it was in the actual weld procedure '
11 itself or in the inspection procedure; but I was 12 generalizing on this item when I said procedures, 13 inconsistencies in the procedures.
14 Q Mr. Puckett, again, I am not going to mark this as an 15 exhibit just yet and I am placing before you Revision F 16 to Procedure 4.3.3 and ask if you can point us to where 17 in that inspection procedure there is an instruction to 18 use magnetic particle testing on stainless steel welds.
1 19 THE WITNESS: It will take me a minute to 20 look through this.
21 MR. MILLER: Thank you.
22 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I really don't l
23 think this is proper or a f ruitful examination. ,
1 1 24 JUDGE GROSS!!AN: I am sorry. Pardor.?
25 MR. GUILD: I don't think this is either a
(
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5495 1 proper or fruitful examination.
2 The witness is simply being asked to hunt through a 3 document. He has no independent recall, the record 4 should reflect.
5 I think if counsel simply refers him to the 6 inspection report, it might help to refresh his 7 recollection, since there is some further information in 8 there.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is there a reference to it 10 in the inspection report?
11 MR. GUILD: There is.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAM: What is the reference, Mr.
13 Guild?
14 MR. GUILD: It appears at Page 4, at the 15 bottom and Page 5 under " Conclusion."
16 Page 5, the second paragraph under conclusion 17 explains what, apparently, is the reference that is the 18 point of counsel's question and the Staff's disposition 19 of that.
20 It doesn't cite to a specific paragraph in the 21 procedure but it certainly explains the derivation of 22 this inconsistency allegation.
23 Perhaps the witness's recollection would be 24 refreshed more if he saw the Staff's recitation of what r ^x 25 is there. i
%~,I l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. I ueneva, 1111nols oulas i (312) 232-0262
5496 O
1 MR. MILLER: I would be perfectly happy for 2 him to do that, your Honor; but we are confronted with a 3 situation with a witness who, at this point in time, has 4 no recall of these language inconsistencies or very, 5 ve ry spa rce.
6 Those are the only documents that I know of that 7 might refresh his recollection, so I don't believe it's 8 improper examination for him to point us to the 9 provision in the procedures that are the basis for his 10 claim of inconsistencies.
11 I am as disturbed as anyone at the amount of time 12 that this is taking, but I just don't know any other way 13 to do this.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The point is we are not 15 testing him for memory now.
16 We are testing him with regard to whether the 17 allegations had some merit to them; and if there is some 18 way that we can lead him to the procedure that is 19 referred to, I think we ought to do it.
20 MR. MILLER: Right. He has in front of him, 21 4.3.14.
22 I can't find any reference to stainless steel, 23 testing of stainless steel welds; but, perhaps the 24 witness -- I am not a weld expert.
~N 25 Well, I will say it. I didn't know whether it came from (d A Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5497 O
v 1 an inspection procedure or the actual weld procedures.
2 It's been over two years ago that this allegation 3 was made, you know; and I don't have total recall on 4 just exactly where this was derived from.
5 MR. GUILD: The NRC inspector, at Page 5 of 6 the report, says, quote, "From AWS D.1.1 is a general 7 workmanship requirement for examination of all types of 8 welds," et cetera; and it goes on and explains.
9 There, obviously, is a quote f rom D.1.1 some place 10 that was brought to the NRC inspector's attention. I am 11 not sure whether b( Mr. Puckett or not.
12 It was the basis for this inconsistency concern.
13 MR. MILLER: But the inconsistency is 14 supposed to be in a procedure, and I am trying to 15 determine as best I can where it appears.
16 I have given the witness the Stainless Steel 17 Welding Procedure and I have given him the welding 18 procedure ~.
19 THE WITNESS: It's like I say, I don't know 20 if these were the same procedures that I was looking at 21 during the period of time that I was there.
22 I was looking at what they had in their records.
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Miller, as far as I 24 know, Mr. Puckett didn't write this.
25 This is a --
L Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
vencva, 1111nois culas (312) 232-0262
5498 m
1 MR. MILLER: That is correct. Mr. Schapker i 2 wrote it.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: This is a reference to what 4 Mr. Puckett told him.
5 If he wrote " procedure" and then later referred to 6 something else, such.as AWS D.l.1, I don't think that 7 it's fruitful to have Mr. Puckett search procedures that 8 don't contain these matters that may be contained in AWS 9 D.l.1.
10 Again, we are not having a memory test here. We 11 are trying to see whether there is merit to the 12 allegations he raised at that time.
13 We know what the allegations were at the time.
14 Let's confront him with those allegations and not have 15 him look for other things. -
16 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, I might be able to
- 17 shed some light on this.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Pardon?
19 MR. BERRY: The Staff might be able to shed 20 some light on this, and we can focus on the witness's 21 testimony.
22 I have before me the transcript of the interview 23 that Mr. Puckett had with Mr. Weil of the NRC on 24 September 11, 1984, where he first expressed and 1
25 elaborated on his concerns regarding welding, welding Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 5499 l
C) 1 problems, at Braidwood and later, subsequently, f ollowed i 2 up by the NRC Inspector.
3 Apparently, with respect to the language 4 inconsistencies, there is reflected in the transcript, 5 Pages 18, 17, the following pages of the transcript of 6 that interview, that it appears to be Comstock Procedure 7 4.1.14 that contains the language procedure, 8 inconsistencies in the stainless steel procedure.
9 I believe a copy of this transcript has been made 10 available to the parties in discovery; and if Mr. Miller 11 doesn't have a copy of it, I certainly will make it 12 available or show it to the witness to see if that 13 refreshes his recollection.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's fine. I think we 15 ought to do that.
16 I am sorry. By the way, are you just going to be 17 showing him the transcript in which he mentioned that 18 procedure but not the procedure itself?
19 MR. BERRY: Yes, that would be correct.
20 -
JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Well, I don't think 21 it would serve any purpose.
22 Why don't we go to 4.something.14? What is the 23 number?
24 MR. BERRY: 4.1.14.
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Pardon?
O Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois ou134 (312) 232-0262
5500 O
V 1 MR. BERRY: 4.1.14.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All right. 4.1.14 and, 3 perhaps, that is where the item is.
4 MR. MILLER: Your Honor, I am informed that 5 there is no such procedure at the Braidwood site; and if f 6 one looks at the reference in the Staff document, there 7 is some indication that it may, in fact,Tbe a procedure 8 f rom the Perry site.
9 MR. BERRY: This is what was -- this is what 10 the witness, apparently, indicated to the NRC in his '
11 interview. It's the information that came to the 12 attention of the NRC.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Puckett, you have had I
14 two references, one being to AWS D.l.1 and the other 15 being to provision 4.1.14.
16 So if either of those can help you, please refer to 17 them.
18 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, I have just been 19 advised by Mr. Schapker, who is sitting next to me at 20 counsel table, that it may be Procedure 4.3.14. That 21 may be the procedure that is involved.
22 That l's the procedure noted in the inspection 23 report.
24 THE WITNESS: Well, I have the 4.3.14 25 procedure in f ront of me; and just glancing through it Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5501 O
1 -- I haven't been through it real closely but just 2 glancing through it -- I don't see any note in there 3 that references for the testing on stainless steel; but 4 I don't know at all if this is the procedure that I was 5 actually looking at when I was in Braidwood, if that was 6 the revision.
7 BY MR. MILLER:
8 Q Can we agree that the document that -- and I may as well 9 mark this as Applicant's Exhibit 57 for identification.
10 It's Procedure No. 4.3.14. The revision date is 11 Septembe r 17, 1980.
12 It indicates that it was superseded by Revision A, 13 approved May 28, 1985.
14 (The document was thereupon marked 15 Applicant's Exhibit No. 57 for 16 identification as of June 24, 1986.)
17 BY MR. MILLER:
18 Q Okay. Mr. Puckett, can we agree that, by looking at the 19 cover sheet for what has now been marked as Applicant's 20 Exhibit SK for identification, that that is the 21 procedure that was in effect with respect to stainless 22 steel welding while you were present at the Braidwood 23 site?
24 A I really don't know if this is it or not.
/~'s 25 In looking at this procedure, on the third page of C
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _
veneva, 1111nois oulaa (312) 232-0262
5502 I
v 1 it, the one I am looking at, it looks like there has 2 been some cutting and pasting done here as I see the 3 reference lines underlined here, and there is changes 4 alongside of them.
5 (Indica ting . )
6 I don't know. I don't know if this is the same one 7 I was looking at in the documents that was given me for 8 required reading. I am not sure that this.was the copy 9 or not.
10 What I was referring to here, sir, is all of this 11 looks like it's been cut and taped and re-Xeroxed.
12 (Indicating.)
, 13 0 Well, in that document, Mr. Puckett, do you find any 14 reference to inspection of stainless steel welds?
15 A No, sir, I do not.
16 0 Well, calling your attention to Paragraph 3.1.7 on Page 17 4 of 10 of that document, that r(fers to Procedure 18 4.8.3; correct?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q Now, you spent some time looking at 4.8.3 as well and I 21 think it's fair to say that you haven't found any 22 reference to magnetic particle examination of stainless 23 steel welding in that procedure, either, have you?
24 A No, sir, in just glancing through it, I did not.
25 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, in August of 1984 did you make a list Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5503 1 of these procedural inconsistencies that you believe 2 rendered all the procedures indeterminate?
3 A I may have had a list. I don't remember.
4 You know, .just notes in a notebook or something of 5 this nature.
6 Q But you didn't save them, did you? You didn't save the 7 notebook?
8 A I don't -- I don't know where it would be now.
9 Q Did you ever give the list to Mr. DeWald?
10 A No. I mentioned the things to him verbally and, of 11 course, in memos, the little things that I had found in 12 the procedures.
13 But the list was just a little personal notebook, 14 where, if I was looking at a procedure and I found 15 something in there that I considered a problem, I would 16 make a note of it for'further evaluation.
17 Q Now, Mr. Puckett, do you believe that there was any 18 safety significance to the fact that the procedures that 19 involved galvanized A. S. T. M. A-446 thin-gauge 20 material were qualified to AWS D.1.1, 1975, instead of 21 AWS D.1.3?
22 A No, sir.
23 Q Did you believe that there was any safety significance 24 to the clerical errors that you have discussed, that is 25 the typographical errors, the use of the wrong fractions Sonntag Reporting Se rvice, Ltd._
ueneva, Illinois oulas (312) 232-0262
- 5504 1 and decimals?
2 A Sir, just a minute. The 4.3.14 procedure, could we go 3 back to that?
4 Q Absolutely; but just for the sake of the record, would 5 you answer my pending question?
6 A What was the question again?
7 Q The pending question was:
, 8 Was there any safety significance to the minor 9 clerical errors that you discovered in the procedu'res, 10 the fractions and so forth?
11 A Well, I didn't know. There possibly could have been.
12 That was the records that the QC Inspector was 13 inspecting to; and if they were incorrect, he may do an 14 incorrect inspection in the field. That was my concern.
15 Q So that any typographical error'could have safety 16 significance as far as you know?
17 A It could have possibly, possibly.
18 Q But not as significant in your mind as, for example, the 19 stainless steel weld procedure that wasn't qualified in
. 20 all positions?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 Q Now, you discovered something in Procedure 4.3 --
23 A In the 4.3.14, Note 3.18.4, it said, "Membe rs distorted 24 by welding shall be straightened by mechanical means or j ) 25 by carefully supervised application of a limited amount Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5505 O
1 of localized heat. The temperature of heated areas, as 2 measured by approved methods, shall not exceed 350 3 degrees. Parts to be heated for straightening shall be i 4 substantially free of stress and from external forces, 5 except those stresses resulting f rom mechanical means."
6 Pardon me. I have got the wrong note on you. It's 7 3.18.3.4, " Cracks in welds or base metal: Ascertain the 8 extent of the crack by use of acid etching, magnetic 9 particle inspection or other equally positive means."
10 Now, this is related to stainless steel.
11 Q Thank you.
12 You have located what you regarded as a procedural
.O v 13 inconsistency?
14 A As an inconsistency.
15 Q And'it is the reference to the magnetic particle 16 testing?
17 A On stainless steel, yes, sir.
18 Q Right.
19 A As this procedure deals with the welding of stainless 20 steel.
21 Q Is it appropriate to use acid etching to determine the 22 extent of any crack?
23 A Yes, sir, you could.
24 Q All right. And that would be applicable on stainless 25 steel; right?
)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. _
ueneva, Illinois ovia*
(312) 232-0262
5506 O
1 A You could use that, yes.
2 0 Wouldn't it be immediately apparent to any individual 3 who attempted to use magnetic particle testing on 4 stainless steel that it was an absolutely useless 5 procedure?
6 A It would be apparent.that a note like that shouldn't be 7 here.
8 Q Please answer my question, Mr. Puckett.
9 Wouldn't it be immediately apparent to,anyone using 10 magnetic particle testing on stainless steel, that the 11 procedure, the testing procedure, was useless?
12 A I would -- it was apparent to me.
13 I cannot speak for other inspectors.
14 Q Do you know which organization on the Braidwood site 15 would actua'ly do this nondestructive testing, Comstock 16 or some other organization?
17 A It would probably be Pittsburgh Testing Laboratories, if 18 it were to be done, yes.
19 Q And it's a fact, isn't it, that Pittsburgh Testing 20 Laboratory has its own procedu'res for nondestructive 21 testing of materials, including cracks in stainless 22 steel welds?
l 23 A I really don't know. I don't know if they do or not.
24 0 Was this language inconsistency in this Stainless Steel 25 Welding Procedure a matter of safety significance to Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5507 O
1 you?
2 A Sir, ask that question again.
3 Q I say: Was this language inconsistency in terms of the 4 reference to magnetic particle testing for cracks in 5 stainless steel welds a matter of safety significance to 6 you?
7 A To this particulde thing, no, sir.
8 MR. MILLER: Excuse me, your Honor.
9 BY MR. MILLER:
10 Q Mr. Puckett, another concern that you identified was the 11 welding of stainless steel in the SG position; is that 12 correct?
13 A Sir?
14 Q I am changing subjects on you now to another allegation 15 that you made.
16 A Okay.
17 Q Another matter of concern to you was that stainless 18 steel welding was taking place in the SG position and 19 there was no procedure qualified in that position; is 20 that correct?
21 A No, sir.
22 O Okay.
23 A My allegation was that the procedure was only qualified 24 in the SG position.
25 0 I have got it just backwards.
Sonntag Reporting Se rvice, Ltd.
Ueneva, 1111nois culas (312) 232-0262
5508 O
1 And that~did not qualify welders to perform welding 2 in the 2G position; is that correct?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 Q And that welding in the 2G position was, in fact, taking 5 place; correct?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 Q Now, could you describe for us what the 2G position is?
8 A It would be the horizontal position. That would be with 9 the weld progressing in the horizontal position.
10 0 Is there a provision of the AWS Code that describes the 11 different positions and how one qualifies for them?
12 A Yes.
p'/3 13 Q And if we look at Paragraph 5.2.3.2 -- let's see if I 14 can get a page number for you -- that is the 15 qualification with respect to positions for grooved pipe 16 test welds; correct?
17 A Yes, sir.
18 Q And is that the -- it's on Page 62 of Applicant's 19 Exhibit 12.
20 And it is this Paragraph 5.2.3.2 that applied to 21 the procedure qualification regarding stainless steel 22 welds; right?
23 A This is -- this is referencing a fillet weld.
24 0 5.2.3.2, sir, doesn't it say, " Grooved pipe test weld"?
25 A 5.23.3.2?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5509 C
1 Q No, sir. 5.2.3.2. J 2 A Okay. Let me find it.
3 0 " Grooved pipe test welds."
4 A Okay. " Grooved pipe test welds," okay. I am with you 5 now.
6 Q Mr. Puckett, qualification in the SG position qualifies 7 for flat, vertical and overhead position groove welding; 8 correct? That's what 5.2.3.2 says?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Now, was stainless steel welding a large portion of the 11 Comstock work that you observed -- ;
12 A No, sir.
, 13 0 -- on the site?
14 A No, sir.
15 0 Of that welding, how much of it actually took place in 16 the 2G or horizontal position?
17 A I have no idea how much had taken place since the 18 procedure had been into effect. I have no idea.
19 Q And you were just making a routine, if you will, review 20 of the stainless steel procedure, the one we have marked 21 as Applicant's Exhibit 57, and you determined at that 22 point in time that there was no qualification for the 2G 23 position; is that correct?
24 A Yes, sir.
25 Q At that point in time you recommended to Mr. DeWald that
{}
Sonntag Reporting Se rvice, Ltd.
beneVa, 1111DO15 OU144 (312) 232-0262
5510 l
r~
O) l' all stainless steel welding be stopped; correct?
2 A Well, that along with the other inconcistencies that we 3 had been finding in the procedures.
4 Q I am sorry, Mr. Puckett. What other consistencies are 5 you saying?
6 A It wasn't at the exact time that I found that. I had 7 mentioned it to him verbally and then I went and sent it 8 to him in writing.
9 0 Well, didn't you have a specific concern --
10 A For stopping welding, yes, on the stainless steel, I 11 did. I wanted to stop welding until the procedure was 12 qualified.
7 I
s 13 Q Because, in fact, welding was taking place and there was 14 no procedure that qualified that welding; correct?
15 A In the 2G position.
16 Q All right. And Mr. DeWald was responsive to your 17 request, was he not?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And, in fact, as indicated on Applicant's Exhibit -- I 20 will look on it with you, memorandum to Mr. Rolan, dated 21 August 17, 1984.
22 What number is that?
23 MS. KEZELIS: 54, 24 BY MR. MILLER:
25 Q -- Applicant's Exhibit 54, Mr. Rolan ordered that all
[)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
5511 s
1 stainless steel welding be stopped; correct?
2 A Yes, sir.
3 Q And, Mr. Puckett, was there any NCR initiated prior to 4 the time that work was stopped on the stainless steel 5 welding?
6 A I don't recall if there was or was not.
7 0 Well, there was an NCR, 3099, that was issued 8 contemporaneously with the stopping of work welding A-36 9 to A-446 material; correct?
10 A There may -- yes, I can recall that there was one; but I 11 just don't recall exactly just when it was written.
12 MR. GUILD: I believe the witness was 13 mishearing counsel.
14 Counsel stated "3099," which didn't have anything 15 to do with this subject.
16 MR. MILLER: No.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I believe he is stating that 18 he recalls that an NCR was written with regard to the 19 A-446.
20 Is that right?
21 THE WITNESS: Sir, I am --
22 MR. MILLER: Your Honor, I don't know whether 23 -- I think we ought to resume tomorrow, frankly.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think the witness has been
('N, 25 fatigued f or a little while now, so we might just as
%)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 1111 Dols bU1J4 (312) 232-0262
l l
5512 !
l
, I l
()
I well recess.
2 I take it everyone agrees, Mr. Guild?
3 I know we all want to get this finished this week, 4 and it doesn't look as though that is going to happen.
5 Is that so, Mr. Miller?
6 MR. MILLER: I am going to try very hard to 7 do so.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But I think we want to get 9 as accurate a record as we can, whether or not we have 10 to call Mr. Puckett back again.
11 So why don't we recess until 9:00 o' clock tomorrow.
12 MR. MILLER: Thank you.
13 (WHEREUPON, at the hour of 5:00, p. m. ,
14 the hearing of the above-entitled matter 15 was continued to the 25th day of June, 16 1986, at the hour of 9:00 A. M.)
17 _
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(~T 25
%)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
NO PAGE NUMBER CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the matter of:
NAME OF PROCEEDING: COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Station, Units 1 & 2)
DOCKET NO.: 50-456 OL; 50-457 OL PLACE: JOLIET, ILLINOIS kJ DATE: TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1986 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
(sigt) (2/M/A4 M L U'4 (TYPED) Nancy U. Hopp Official Reporter Reporter's Affiliation l
b i
. - _ - _ . -- _- _. -_ .- - . . _ - _ _ _