ML20214B761
| ML20214B761 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 11/25/1986 |
| From: | Kimble N COMSTOCK ENGINEERING, INC. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OL-I-ROREM-195, NUDOCS 8705200407 | |
| Download: ML20214B761 (82) | |
Text
..
I~
rE r?1 - /f 6
.n
[ NORMAN KIMBLE]
1
'87 'im 12 P7 :51 dk*
C 0 t..
r THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGE e
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMl3310N Oocht No.N.1IM d I5f
- Official (ah. No.
S ta tse matter of % E/O en do
$taff IDt%itFl(D b
~
? chcant RtCIIV:0 M
R[Jgt;[3 htervenot J
.cnt's Offt kntractet 04TL 2ther 4;tness d*
lleporter 1
i eg52gOg{ y3
{g g
Exnigi'3%'Qi?W
.,i 1
1 2
1 3
x 4
Interview of:
5 NORMAN KIMBLE 6
i 7
x i
8 1
9 Braidwood Generating Station 10 Braidwood, Illinois l
11 Monday, September 15, 1986 12 13 The interview commenced at 7:47 o' clock, p.m.,
14 examination by JOSEPH GALLO, ESQUIRE, Isham, Lincoln & Beale, 1
15 Chicago, Illinois.
16 1
17 18 19 20 j
21 22 l
i
s 2
s 1
PROCEEDINGS 2
[7:47 p.m.]
3 Whereupon, 4
NORMAN KIMBLE, 5
who was called for interview, was questioned and responded as 6
follows:
i 7
DR. HULIN:
Let me give you a quick ' introduction pnd 8
overview as to what we are doing here.
We are trying to 9
determine the type of relationship that exists between 10 management and the production department and between t
11 management and the QC inspectors at Comstock.
We are trying 12 to determine if the QC inspectors feel that they have complete 13 freedom to report any concerns that they have.
We are trying 14 to determine if the QC inspectors feel that there are quality 4
15 concerns that have not been addressed by management or the t
t 16 Nuclear Regulatory Commission or what have you.
j 17 Now, before we get into this, we are asking for your 18 cooperation and we would like you to answer your questions and 19 we would like you to answer them candidly.
If you feel you 20 don't want even to have any part of it, then you are free to 21 leave. If you feel there are questions asked that you don't 22 vant to answer, you are free not to answer.
i I
l l
l
s 3
j 1
Now, I cn Chuck Hulin and I an employed as a 2
consultant.
Basically, I an helping Joe Gallo here.
Joe is 3
from the law firm that is representing Ceco in the hearing 4
before the NRC, and I have some fairly general concerns that I l
5 just talked to you about, and Joe has some fairly specific 6
concerns that he will talk about.
7 Mk. GALLO:
I think that pretty much characterizes j
8 and explains the situation.
Basically, our purpose is to, in l
9 interviewing the inspectors, discuss to some extent some of
[
i l
10 the concerns that Greg Archambeault indicated at the NRC I
11 hearings last week.
He had indicated, for example, that some 12 of the other inspectors on the second shift felt the same way f
i 13 he felt; and really a purpose of this interview is to see if 14 that is the case and to try and get a better understanding of l
15 that aspect.
i l
16 MR. MARCUS:
We just introduced ourselves.
l 17 MR. GALLO:
George is with Connonwealth Edison, and 18 basically we have been charged with the responsibility of 19 conducting these interviews.
They are rather informal, and we 20 keep records of then primarily because after you hear number i
21 three, we start to get tired.
i 22 Unless you have any questions, we can start.
,i 9
I l
4 1
MR. KIMBLEt Do ytu w nt Cny cdditicngl c am nt Cn i
2 some of your questions?
Do I transgress, or do you just want 3
se to answer specifically?
4 DR. NULIN:
You may transgress.
I 5
MR. GALLO:
You should feel free to answer the j
6 questions as you see fit.
i 7
DR. HULIN:
So that you are happy with the answer i
I i
a you have given and you are happy with the impression that you 9
have left us with.
10 BY MR. NULIN:
i
.i 11 Q
You are Norm Kimble, K-i-a-b-1-e?
I l
12 A
B-1-e.
j 13 Q
Now long have you been employed by LKc?
I J
14 A
About five years.
4 l
15 Q
In what capacity?
I j
16 A
Termination and cable puller.
i l
17 Q
Are you certified in any other areas?
l 18 A
No.
I was not allowed to train in other areas.
l 19 BY MR. GALLos l
20 Q
Do you always work second shift?
1 21 A
That's it.
Every time I asked for training, I just 22 never got it.
I 2
I
}
i I
t
- =.
_~
1 BY MR. NULINt 2
Q Is this the only site you have worked at?
3 A
Pardon?
4 Q
Is this the only nuclear site you have worked at?
5 A
Yes, this is the only site I've been on.
6 Q
Do you feel that-you have adequate access to 7
supervision to obtain answers to technical questions?
By a
supervision here I mean lead.an'd the supervisor.
9 A
My immediate supervisor?
Yes, I feel free to go to 10 him about questions.
11 Q
Who do you talk to if you have a technical question?
12 A
Generally I don't talk to him too much.
I mean 13 there's not that much that comes up in cable pulling.
It's 14 rather routine.
If I was in terminations, it would be a 15 little bit different, but I'm not in that.
16 Q
so if a question did come up in the middle of a I
17 pull, who would you go to?
18 A
Generally I would go to the lead inspector, and then j
19 if he wasn't around, I would ask the supervisor.
20 Q
And your supervisor is?
j 21 A
Harry Revels.
22 Q
Do you think you have adequate access to talk to 4
i i
J l
-l
6 1
y ur cup 0rvioicn cbrut cdainictrativo matt 0ra d2Oling with 2
aspects of the job other than the immediate cable pulling I
3 inspections?
4 A
No, I wouldn't say so.
I think it's incumbent on 5
their part -- it's a two-way street -- that it's incumbent on 6
good supervision to take hn active interest in the inspectors, 7
whereas in this they seen rather isolated from us.
I'm 8
talking about the higher levels of management, not necessarily 9
the immediate supervisors.
1 10 BY MR. GALLot i
11 Q
Who do you mean, DeWald?
12 A
DeWald.
l l
13 Q
How about saltaann?
14 A
same thing.
15 BY MR. HULIN:
16 Q
simile?
17 A
I mean I just never talk to him unless he --
la sometimes you even see them and they don't acknowledge your 19 presence.
I 20 BY MR. GALlot 21 Q
Who is this you are talking about at this point that 22 you say you never talk to him?
I
7 1
A I tcon thic 10 tho Point, thCt I f001 that th;y 2
should -- that part of management, good management procedure 3
is to take an interest in, devote a certain amount of time to 4
the employees, and they seen and always have been rather 5
isolated.
6 Q
I asked you if your criticism applied to or your i
7 comment applied to DeWald, and you said yest Saltaann, you 8
said yes; and then my colleague asked you about Simile.
Does 9
that also --
l 10 A
Who?
i 11 Q
Simile.
12 A
Simile.
Yes.
13 BY MR. HULIN:
I 14 Q
Does that apply to him, too?
i 15 A
Yes, it would apply to him.
I mean the three men 16 that you have mentioned, I probably haven't had more than a 17 dozen words with them.
18 BY MR. GALLO:
19 Q
In five years?
20 A
In five years.
Well, with Irv, maybe 10 minutes, 15 21 minutes.
Simile, I don't think I have ever, and seltmann, I
[
22 have never talked to him.
i
. __ - _ _ _ ____~
8 1
BY MR. NULIN 2
Q If you had technical questions that neither your 3
lead nor your supervisor gave you an answer that you thought.
4 was adequate, would you feel free then to take it up to middle i
5 management?
6 A
Well, if I felt his answer was adequate, I would i
i 1
7 accept it.
If I didn't, I would carry it further.
I j
8 Q
Who would you carry it further to?
I i
9 A
That's a good question.
It depends upon the nature l
j 10 of the question. I mean say if it was about a particular cable
.l l
11 splice or something, something rather technical, I might 12 contact, I might start reading the code, all information, the 1
13 S&L procedures, I might talk to some electricians that I knew g
i 14 were particularly experienced in this area, I might carry it, 1
4 j
15 I might go in to QA.
so it depends upon the nature of the la problem.
i 17 Q
What I'm trying to get at here is even though you
{
1e have not had much contact with the people, do you have any i
j 19 reluctance to go to somebody away from your immediate j
20 supervisor to get assistance or get answers to questions?
'l 21 A
i Again, they wouldn't be auch available if you're l
22 working the night shift, but if you are on days -- no, I would I
I i
9 1
genOrolly ctick within tho cyctoo.
I wsuld COO no rOCCen net j
2 to.
If I have had concerns, as I have in the past, I have i
3 talked over at the trailer there about concerns I have had.
l i
4 Q
These are quality --
5 A
That was on exit.
t j
6 BY MR. GALID:
i I
7 Q
You mean when Bestco took over from comatock?
s, s
e A
No.
This was when I iaft from -- I have worked here
]
{
9 three times, once for constock, and then I left, and I have f
l 10 worked for Bestco, and now I'm working for GE. So this.was i
l 11 from comatock, t
i 12 Q
I take it you have not had occasion to essentially j
13 ask a technical question any higher than your immediate 14 supervision on second shift?
{
15 A
No.
Going back five years, I'm trying to think.
l
{
16 No.
I mean a lot of things, you must understand, are done i
J 17 informally, also.
I mean if you see an engineer do something l
1e that you know is important, you say, hey, what about this.
so 4
i 19 things are done informally also.
I l
20 Q
It's a little hard to carry it up, isn't it, if you i
l 21 work nights and they work days?
[
):
22 A
Yes, but there is an engineer on, but there isn't i
l l
i i
U
10 i
l' 1
tuch centcet with highor Icyclo of cupervioicn.
fr 2
Q Do the two shifts overlap, the first shift and the 3
3 second shift, at all?
1 4
A Well, at 4:30 we have to usually be out in the j
5 field.
They are starting to pull cable right away.
so you j
{
6 come in at 4:00, and by the time you get through security and i
i j
7 everything, they are pretty well out there.
4 l
s Q
If you wanted to talk to simile, if a problem arose J
9 on Monday on second shift and you couldn't get any real direct 4
10 i
answer from, say, Revels --
3 11 A
Ch, sure, I could arrange an appointment with him.
l 12 Q
The next day, i
I 13 A
Yes.
i t
14 Q
That's is what you would have to do.
You would have 15 to do that.
I l
{
16 A
Yes.
That is what I would do in that case because i
i 17 of the nature of the relationship.
If you get a person that 1.
is coming around frequently and seeing you, you can deal with j
18 j
19 them informally, but whereas the structure of the situation j
20 seems to require that you go through a more formal route.
1
]
21 BY MR. NULIN:
4 l
22 Q
Do you believe there is a layoff list?
1 1
}
l I
11 1
A I hCOrd thor 0 WOO O 1CyOff lict, yC3.
2 Q
Do you.think there is one?
3 A
You mean whether it's put in writing or if there is 4
an informal one?
I think there is probably an informal one, 5
yes, that they will decide who they are going to keep and who
~
6 they are not going to keep. I don't kno,w whether an actual 1
7 list -- I've never see it or talked to anyone that actually l
4 8
has.
9 BY MR. GALID:
10 Q
Who do you think, whether it is written or not, has 11 this list?
l 12 A
could you repeat that?
13 Q
Yes.
Who do you think has the list, whether it is l
14 written or not?
15 A
I would assume it would come from constock.
I don't 16 know.
i 17 BY MR. NULIN:
18 Q
There is going to be a cutback in manpower as Unit 1 19 winds down because it's completed.
]
20 A
I assume.
21 Q
so they have got to cut back on manpower.
22 A
Right.
I i
'l
\\
12 1
l 1
Q Do y u think th3t th ro cro cny p oplo who tre
)
2 likely -- why do you think the people who are likely to be let 3
go first are at the top of the list?
f 4
A Well, for some reason, that they either made some j
5 waves or perhaps they don't have a good attendance record or i
perhaps -- there could be"all kinds of, factors, some
{
6 7
legitimate.
I would say my concern here is a lack of policy, j
4 j
s and this seems to have been, since I have been here with i
l!
i 9
constock, just a lack of policies.
It seems everything is j
10 done' on a certain basis.
If you are a friend, you get this, 11 and if you are not, you're an enemy, how you are classed and 12 how you are perceived by the management.
There isn't policy, 13 for example, of who will get training, who will work a certain 14 shift, when they will be released to another. shift. I think 15 this has gotten them into terrible difficulties affecting j
16 morale because things aren't on a straightforward basis.
1
}
17 Q
So you think,that inspectors that have made waves in l
I 18 the past are likely to be the first ones terminated in the i
19 manpower cutback?
3 20 A
I think if you made enough waves, probably not, but l
1 21 if you just made a number of small waves, that's what they l
22 would --
1 i
i i
i l
4
_ _ =
13 1
BY MR. MARCUS:
2 Q
Why do you think that?
Why do you say that?
What i
3 is the reason that causes you to --
4 A
Well, it might prove an embarrassment.
say if an 5
inspector passed on to the NRC or wherever, the utility might
't 6
be reluctant to put that inspector on a layoff list.
1 7
Q Yes, I hear you say that, but I's. wondering why you j
s are saying that.
Why do you say that?
I mean is there a 4
9 reason, something that would cause you to say that?
)4 10 A
This is a conjecture.
Now you want to know
)
11 why. Well, because I see there seems to be a lack of definite 12 management policies, and when you are dealing with this type s
13 of thing, you don't -- what I'm trying to say, I guess, is I
j 14 that in the absence of firm and fast managerial policies, that l
15 things are done on a basis other than what I personally might l
i is deserve or it might be on some other basis.
a 17 BY MR. GALLO:
1 j
18 Q
Nhat I hear you saying is that on the basis of firs i
{
19 policy, there is room for arbitrary policy.
l 20 A
That's right, exactly.
1 t
l 21 Q
And is it fair to say that based on what you see, 4
1 22 you think that sometimes the policy is executed in an t
i o
14 crbitrary fcchicn?
1 4
2 A
I think they quite possibly are, yes.
There is the i
3 potential to be.
I 4
BY MR. MARCUS:
}
5 Q
Yes.
Well, maybe I can suggest this to you.
You a
l 6
were saying a little earl'ier that you didn't see a policy for i
7 training and for moving people to other shifts, that it seems 8
to be arbitrary.
1 9
A Right.
10 Q
so when we raised.this question about people being 3
{
11 terminated, if you fit it all together, it's the same I
j 12 thing. That would maybe be your basis.
^f 13 A
Yes, that would be on that same basis. It would be 14 arbitrary, and in such cases it might be that this person is 15 perceived as helping us in some way more than another inspector, where another inspector could be doing a perfectly 16 17 good job but there might be a personality conflict or there is 18 just the fact that he is not around, they are not familiar or 19 they don't know him because they are not having the 20 interaction in the office as some other inspector.
i 21 BY MR. HULIN 4
j 22 Q
If you were going to give people instructions for l
l i
i l
J i
15 I
hcw to naintain th31r job hcro, it would be don't make little 2
waves: either go along or make big waves.
3 A
Yes.
i 1
4 Q
And if you go along, you're going to be seen as j
5 helping them; if you make real big waves, they are going to be
~
6 afraid to fire you, but if you make little waves, you are 7
asking for trouble.-
- 0 8
A I have seen inspectors that have gotten into it, i
9 like with John Seeders got into it, and with Saklak, and he
(
10 was removed from QC and put in Engineering, and it seems to me 11 that was unwarranted.
12 BY HR. GALLO:
13 Q
Any other examples come to mind?
14 A
Well, let's take the -- Greg was put on days.
15 Q
How do you view that?
4 l
16 A
I believe that there should be a list.
17 Q
Let me make myself clear.
I assume.from your le comment about Seeders you thought his transfer was unwarranted i
19 because it was against wishes.
l 20 A
No, no, no, not at all. He wanted to go to days.
21 Q
I'm talking about Seeders.
22 A
Ch, Seeders.
This was back with Comstock.
I
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. ~... _. _ _ _ _. _.. _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _
16 4
1 Q
You caid hic tren3for was unwarrcntcd.
2 A
well, I felt so.
I thought he was a good inspector 3
and was doing his job.
Irv wanted to get rid of him, and that l
4 was that, but they didn't want to fire him so they transferred 5
him to Engineering, where I understand he has done a very good 1
6 job.
7 Q
Do you think that was the same circumstance as with j
i 8
Greg?
1 9
A You mean as far as him going to days?
i 10 Q
Yes.
11 A
see, I don't really know with Greg what has all 12 transpired, so I'm at a disadvantage, but yes, I think it 13 certainly had something to do with him going to days.
Now, I 14 heard -- I believe, as Greg told me before, that he was told l
15 by Revels that he was going to be on night shift forever.
I 16 don't know.
Or that he was going to be first on the layoff 17 list.
I believe he told me that.
i 18 BY MR. NULIN:
19 Q
This is kind of puzzling to me because I thought 20 that Greg had applied several times to be moved to the day l
21 shift.
So he finally got moved to the day shift, and there i
22 was some perception that he was being moved to the day shift i
4 i
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - _. - ~ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _., _, -. - - _ _ _. - - _ _ _. _.
i 17
\\
1 to punish him for making waves.
2 A
No.
Not punishing him.
Maybe for keeping a closer 3
eye on him.
4 Q
Okay.
He was being moved there because he made 5
waves, not because he requested the transfer?
6 A
Ch, I believe he requested th9 transfer before, so 1
7 the fact was that he was moved after this time.
Take it for 8
what --
9 BY MR. GALLO:
10 Q
Is there anybody else that you can think of in your 11 five years of experience?
j 12 A
You mean other people that --
13 Q
Other people like seeders and Archambeault.
14 A
Well, it's not only transferring.
It might.be 15 rather subtle things like who gets overtime and who'doesn't, 16 or it might be -- well, there can be other types of things.
I i
17 see it more as a lack of management policies.
Now, whether 18 this is deliberate or just poor management or part of their 19 system to operate in this way, I can't tell.
20 BY MR. MARCUS:
21 Q
Do you think you have been treated fairly as far as 1
22 overtime is concerned, Norm?
Do you have any complaints?
I i
l 1
18 1
A In fivo yctra, for cxtcplo, I hevo nst wsrkCd Cn3 i
2 Sunday out here, and a lot of other people have.
3 BY MR. GALLO.
l 4
Q Is there something special about Sunday?
j 5
A Yes.
On Sunday.
Being asked to work on a Sunday.
4 I
6 Q
I tean is that an' extra special day --
I 7
A It's double time.
8 DR. NULIN:
Double time.
9 BY MR. GALLO:
10 Q
Double time.
I l
11 A
Whereas other people have.
Again, I just have to
]
12 keep going back to there seems to be a lack of management 13 policies that assure an equitable division of rewards.
14 Q
Do you view yourself as a wave creator?
15 A
No, I'm not a wave creator.
I think in the last 16 analysis with any inspector, it's your own personal integrity, s
17 and it's not necessarily the procedures or so forth, it's you 18 having,enough integrity yourself to see that the cable or 19 whatever it is that you are doing is done right, and I put a 20 great deal of emphasis on that.
l 21 Q
This question of the lack of these policies.
In 22 there any recourse for the inspectors through the union?
i r
19 1
A Not that'I know of.
2 Q
Aren't they supposed to --
3 A
For example, I offered to work cne Saturday -- this 4
is some time ago -- and I was put on the list for Saturday, 5
and I was removed from the list to work overtime on Saturday
~
6 on cable pulling, and the 1ead inspector for welding was put 7
on in my place.
Simile did this. I filed a grievance with the a
union it, but they said, you know, you're leaving anyway, so 9
that was it.
But I didn't care so much for myself, but I 10 think it's quite a pr.ecedent that management can pick and 11 choose as they so desired who is going to work on a Saturday 12 and who is going to work on Sunday, but especially when the 13 weld inspector probably has never done an inspection on cable 14 since he got certified, probably, which really has nothing to 15 do with it. I'm saying that it's an arbitrary selection.
16 BY MR. HULIN:
17 Q
How do you get to be a lead inspecter?
18 A
They choose him.
It's not necessarily whether you i
19 are competent or anything, I don't think.
Perhaps if you are 20 perceived as being cooperative.
21 Q
If you wanted to be a lead inspector, would you know 22 how to go about getting it?
,I l
i 1
-=
6 20 1
A I war, a lead inspector a long time ago, on terms, 2
and at that time wasn't paid for being a lead, so you had to 3
perform your own inspections, and there was only two of us 4
doing all the terms, plus --
5 BY MR. GALLO:
6 Q
Is that terminations?
Do you mean terminations?
7 A
Terminations, yes.
8 Q
Go ahead.
9 A
Yes.
I think there should be some basis, again, for 10 11 Q
I interrupted your train of thought.
You said there 12 were two of you at this time.
13 A
Yes.
14 Q
And you weren't getting paid extra for it.
15 A
No.
This was before the system came in that you 16 were going to be paid on certs, and that, in my opinion, did a 17 lot of damage out here because then it boiled down to who was 18 going to'get trained and who wasn't going to get trained. So 19 again, it's back to some people got the opportunity to train 20 in five or six areas, and other people didn't get any.
- Now, 21 in my own case I think the reason was that I was doing a lot 22 of inspections and they more or less seemed to be l
l
21 I
catiofactory, co I vac a producsr, co loavo him in thoro.
2 This is the kind of policy I think was operating.
3 BY MR. HULIN:
4 Q
So far you have identified the possibility of people 5
being high on the layoff list and overtime assignments as 6
being possible areas of mistreatment -- I don't want to use i
7 the word " harassment" -- mistreatment by management.
Is 8
there anything else you can identify for us?
9 A
No. I personally have never been harassed.
I mean I 10 would say that.
11 Q
But are there any other examples like overtime and 12 like this layoff list that might reflect management's 13 treatment of the people?
Arbitrariness is a good word.
14 A
Between shifts -- oh, yeah. I would say it's in the 15 hiring, say, of supervisors.
I have seen supervisors come in 16 here without any background whatsoever, say, in electrical.
17 Their whole experience has been in welding, for example, and, 18 lo and behold, they are made a supervisor over electrical.
19 Why, I don't know.,I'm speaking of Tuite.
I don't know why.
20 Maybe it's because, I've heard, he plays tennis with a certain 21 fellow.
I don't know, see.
22 BY MR. GALLO:
22 1
Q Tuite is --
2 A
He's a supervisor.
3 Q
He is supervisor, cable pulling, right?
4 A
Yeah, and conduit, I think, and so forth.
5 Q
And what is his background?
6 A
All welding.
7 Q
All welding?
And you think he plays tennis with --
8 A
Again, I'm getting back to -- I've always worked,
~
9 the places I've worked, there seemed to have been 10 policies. For example, if there is an opening for a 11 supervisor, why isn't this posted on the board and people can 12 apply for it?
For three years here, all the supervisors were 13 taken from off site.
Saklak was brought in without one day of 14 QC, experience and made supervisor.
He was having some trouble 15 down in Engineering and they wanted to kind of get him out of 16 there, so zip, he comes into QC, Again, jobs for QA, for 17 training director and so forth, people have been brought in 18 who didn't have the background, necessarily.
They.were just 19 brought in, it seemed, on an arbitrary basis.
20 Q
Did you ever convey these points to Comstock 21 management?
i 22 A
No.
I feel this is part of the system and the way l
23
)
1 it operates and it really isn't going to chango. Thio 10 part 2
of it.
3 Q
Are you reluctant to do so?
4 A
Yeah.
I wouldn't feel -- it's a matter of feeling 5
comfortable with the individuals involved.
I wouldn't i
6 necessarily.
Actually, I think it is 1,ncumbent on them to 7
know what good management procedures are.
That's not for me 8
to say.
l 9
Q Do other inspectors feel as you do, in your opinion?
10 A
That's a rather generic question.
I have known 11 many, many inspectors over the --
12 Q
Well, the ones that are on the --
13 A
Right now?
14 O
Right now.
15 A
I really don't know.
I haven't discussed it with 16 them.
It seems that -- well, for example, for selecting lead 17 inspectors, there doesn't seem to be any -- which.would be of 18 most immediate concern to most inspectors -- there doesn't J
19 seem to be any system of why we choose you.
20 Q
Have you voiced these points to Mr. Nemeth?
21 A
No.
22 Q
That's the fellow that you walked in here with, the 1
~
24 1
steward.
2 A
If I sat down and said I see this and that, informal 3
discussions, yes, I have probably mentioned it at some time.
4 Are you saying with the steward?
5 Q
Yes.
6 A
Well, you know, in a BS session, probably.
7 Q
I used to belong to a union, and in my union -- it 8
was railroad telegraphers -- and in my union, assignments were 9
made on a seniority basis.
Layoffs were made on a seniority 10 basis.
All jobs were posted and bid, and those were union 11 requirements, part of the collective bargaining arrangement 12 with the employer.
And if they weren't there, I suppose there 13 was a lot of room for arbitrary decision-making.
j 14 A
Yes.
I also teach courses for college and I teach 15 out at General Motors, their electricians, and on the board 16 there they have a list for every man for overtime, every hour, 17 how many hours he has got and so on, and that goes on that 18 basis.
19 Q
I'm curious as to whether you kind of push for 20 change within the union.
It seems to me it would be a 21 perf.ectly acceptable subject for the union to get into these 22 matters.
i
,__.,_n
_,_,,,-_-3 y.
,y..
.--__y,n,
%e.
-._ww,
25 1
A Wall, cvidently that's the don 1 they have ccmo up 2
with.
I don't know the inner workings of the union.
I don't 3
think that --
4 Q
You are a member, aren't you?
5 A
Yes, I'm a member, but we have very little voice, 6
you must realize.
Our stewards are appointed.
Nothing is 7
elected, and we don't have that many meetings.
It's not a 8
real viable union, let's say.
It's in receivership or 9
something.
Since you mention that, that would be a 10 counterforce to it. I asked George one time -- this was before 11 my grievance -- and I said: They can choose anyone they want 12 for overtime?
He said: Yes, that's part of the deal.
13 Q
What do you get to do besides pay your duas?
14 A
That's another thing.
15 BY MR. HULIN:
16 Q
Your point of contact with the production people, 17 LKc, would probably be through the craft foremen.
18 A
Right.
19 Q
Do you think there is an acceptable professional 20 relationship between QC inspectors and the craft foremen?
21 A
Yes, I think so.
I don't see any -- I think that 22 the craft respect the inspector on the basis of their dealing l
l O
m
26 1
and thoir conception of hic knowledge end oxportico.
If you 2
have an efficient, hardworking inspector that knows what he is 3
doing, I think the craft will respect that.
4 Q
Is there kind of an antagonistic relationship 5
between craft foremen and inspectors in that craft foremen 6
want to get --
~
7 A
I haven't found it so, but I believe other 8
inspectors have.
9 Q
You think some inspectors and craft foremen --
10 A
Yes.
I think this is inevitable, on the basis of 11 personalities.
I mean, there are some people that can get 12 along with people and there are other people that have 13 difficulty in their social relationships.
14
'Q You are suggesting then that the fact that they i
15 don't get along is because of their personalities, and not 16 because of a conflict between production and quality?
17 A
To answer to the best of my ability, it could be a 18 factor.
You are asking me to give a yes or no.
It could be a 19 combination of the two.
I think you would have to evaluate it 20 on the terms of each in6ividual inspector.
21 Q
Are there any informal production quotas that crews 22 have to get or are expected to get, number of feet of wire 1
P
~
?
~
I
~
l
\\
27 1
pulled por wack?
2 A
I've heard them talking about it, they have to get 3
so many feet per day; yes, or are supposed to.
4 Q
If you hold them up say by making them vacuum a tray 5
that has some plastic debris in it, is this likely to irritate 6
them, cause conflicts?
~
7 A
If there is something legitimately wrong with a 8
tray, if it is dirty, if there is some glass or something in 9
there, the craft has no basis at all for having any objections 10 to it, if it affects the quality.
The craft has plenty of 11 time to do their work.
There is no excuse for not doing it 12 properly.
13 on the other hand, I was called.
One of the craft 14 asked me to look at a tray that another inspector said was i
15 dirty.
What was in it was a little piece of paper from 16 aspirin or something like that, a cold tablet.
He stopped the i
17 pull on this.
They were saying, is this a legitimate basis.
)
18 I would have to say no.
A little piece of paper like that 19 wouldn't affect the cable or the quality.
20 Q
There are arbitrary decisions?
21 A
Right.
It is the right of the inspector to say 22 that.
How dirty is a tray?
This is a matter of personal 1
e I
l e
1
-_ - _ _... - -. ~,-- -,-
.,_---.n
~--,,___,___,-.n.
28 1
judgmsnt.
It would bo difforGnt for occh insp ctor.
2 Q
One person's dust can be another person's debris?
3 A
Right.
4 BY MR. GALLO:
l 5
Q Do you really believe that?
Do you think that at 6
some point in time, there-is no room for judgment, that all
,7 reasonable people should agree that it is either true or not 9
8 true?
9 A
I don't see why you would want to.
After all, if 10 you find there is some debris in there, that means you are 11 going to have to come back and re-inspect it again.
I can't 12 see where it would be to the advantage of the inspector, 13 unless he had some personal vendetta with a particular foreman 14 or a particular crew.
I suppose that's possible.
15 Q
In the example you posed, a little piece of paper 16 from a cold tablet or something, I take it you didn't think it 17 was of any importance yourself.
t 18 A
No.
To me, that wouldn't be -- in that particular 19 case, I wouldn't have stopped them.
Actually, if you get up 20 there where it was, the inspector could reach in the tray and 21 pull it out.
That's what I would do.
If the tray is dirty, I 22 am not going to be cleaning trays or anything for them.
If I i
b l
1 l
29 1
ese a littlo picco of papsr tharo or comothing, ycu know.
2 Q
Would,you defend that inspector's right to make that 3
call?
4 A
Yes; I do.
If you don't -- again, you are dealing 5
with the personal integrity of the inspector.
If he feels 6
that is important, then I~think he should be able to report 7
it, whether it is right or wrong.
He has to take the l
8 consequences of his judgment, as we all do and should.
9 Q
What would be the consequences?
Would there be any 10 adverse consequences?
There wouldn't be, would there?
11 A
I don't think there was any adverse consequences in j
12 this particular case.
They had to go back and take that piece 13 of paper out.
You know, so what.
14 Q
I guess there is a point we ought to clarify.
Was 15 that particular matter written up, or was it --
16 A
I have no idea whether it was or not.
I didn't 17 follow it.
18 Q
clearly, if the inspector had picked up the piece of 19 paper and dropped it out, it wouldn't have been.
20 A
That would have eliminated it.
It's a very easy 1
21 thing.
Then you get into, well, are you actually doing craft 22 work.
i i
I
,-------r--
--,,,----,----w,-
,v.,-,-
,<,e
--,--.n,,
n,,,-
..,,,,-a
,~,,-,-n--,
,,,7-..
. - -r-w m.,-------,----,,,-er---s-c
30 1
LY DR. HULIN:
2 Q
That was going to be my next question.
3 A
No.
Something like that, no.
You are picking it up 4
to see what it is, so you drop it.
I 5
BY MR. GALLO:
I 6
Q What did you understand when this was brought to 7
your attention by the craft person?
I thought he was 8
complaining about,being held up.
i He just pointed it out to me, he was asking whether 9
A
]
10 that was a firm call.
All I could say was it was a legitimate I
11 call.
I would say that I wouldn't do it myself, but I defend 12 it.
He is dealing with that inspector, I'm not on that crew, 13 you have to deal with him.
14 Q
Since the fellow from the craft or the crew came to l
15 you, that suggests to me that there was some time interval i
that this piece of paper laid there in the tray and nothing 16 i
i 17 was done.
The pull was delayed in the mean time.
Is my 18 assumption right or wrong?
19 A
I don't see the intent of your question.
J 20 Q
I am trying to determine if this particular matter 21 that you have been describing was in fact a problem or was i
j 22 simply something that one inspector noted, picked up and
)
)
i
,,_,_.,y..
_..,____.__.,m.
._c,_m.,.,_,r.____r_.
_r.__,..,
...-_._m
l 31 1
disposed of.
I assume it was not easily disposed of, 2
otherwise you never would have been consulted.
i 3
A No.
In this particular case, and I'll get into 4
specifics, it was with Martin.
Evidently, the inspector of i
5 this crew was thinking that he was calling it too close or 6
this was unjustified.
i 7
Q You don't know whether or not he was right, and that 8
is the discrepancy.
9 A
I have no idea what the disposition of it was.
I'm 10 not really interested, in a sense.
To me, it was minor.
11 BY DR. HULIN:
12 Q
Putting aside for the moment the question about the 13 relationship between QC inspectors and the professionalism of i
14 the relationship between QC inspectors and craft foremen, how i
15 about the relationship between QC inspectors and their 16 supervision, not management, leads and supervisors?
Is that 17 handled on a pretty professional basis?
18 A
I would say so.
I think the craft, if they are 19 displeased with something or a particular inspector, they 20 would let their foreman know and their foreman would let the 21 General Foreman know, and the General Foreman might let the 22 supervisor and inspectors know.
I assume that would be the i
i i
t
~-
32 i
1 case.
I would say that's fine.
2 Q
Do you think your supervision's dealing of such an 3
incident with you would be handled well?
Revels gets a 4
complaint about your holding up production.
How do you think 5
he would handle it?
Firstofall,INouldtell-,theonlytimeIcan 6
A 7
think of recently is we had a foreman -- they had a crew out 8
there that was probably the least productive cable pulling 9
crew they had.
These guys were pretty bad.
To get a cable 4
l 10 from this corner of the room to the other corner of the room j
11 might take an hour.
4 12 The GF got on the crew.
I happened to ask for a 13 document.
It was for the pulling tensions, to make sure that 14 the pulling tension is not exceeded.
The GF came and jumped 15 me.
I tore into the GF.
I told him, hey, this isn't your i
1 16 problem, don't come to me, you have a problem here with the i
17 crew.
18 BY MR. GALLO:
19 Q
The GF is the General Foreman?
?
20 A
Yes.
That was the last I heard, and then I also 21 told my supervisor, and I assume my supervisor went and jumped 22 him.
It really had nothing to do with delaying the craft.
i 4
i e
.--.---nr-,.--,,-,,.-n..,--.-.-n--,--,-,-,---,n.,---n r,,-,..,.
-- - + _,_,
n ne-a r----n,e,
33 4.
1 The cable wasn't pulled until fivo houra lator.
I v20 ccking 2
for the pull cards.
That's what it was.
It wasn't going to l
3 be pulled -- it didn't get pulled for another five hours.
4 Asking for the pull cards, who had them.
It was a new crew, 5
just formed.
I wasn't familiar with who was the lead
~
6 inspector and where the cards were and,so forth.
7 Q
Isn't the foreman supposed to have the pull cards?
8 A
No.
The foreman sends them with the lead man for 9
the pull.
There was a number of cables.
It was a cable pull 10 that went on for days, a we'ek,'something like that.
They were i
11 getting pressure, I assume, hey, let's get this done.
They I
i 12 were looking for perhaps some out, blame the QC inspector.
1 13 Since that time, the crew has been dissolved, four
]
14 of them were laid off.
The problem was taken care of l
15 eventually.
16 BY DR. HULIN:
17 Q
Have you ever attended a Quality First orientation?
l 18 A
Yes.
19 Q
Are you familiar with the Quality First program?
i 20 A
Yes.
21 Q
Could you describe it?
1 1
22 A
I had concerns and I told them what my concerns i
i l
l 4
+
1
34 I
waro, tho trcining cron.
I don't think tho training progrta 2
is anything like what it should be.
I think it's completely l
3 inadequate.
I was telling them the circumstances.
The tests, 4
for example, were not secure.
They were in an office.
A 5
person qualifying for an area is also giving a test to 6
somebody else.
The questions on the test are old and moldy.
7 They have never been updated.
They have never been 8
validated.
There is no reliability studies on them.
1 i
9 The training is not done by the Training 10 Department.
It is done by inspectors.
You are supposed to
)
i 11 train at the same time that you are performing inspections and 12 running around.
I don't think that is a good idea.
13 For example, say a guy has no background with 14 welding and he is trained in cable pulling and terminations, 15 and particularly in terminations, there is no way you can 16 train adequately in 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> with all the different 17 terminations, all the different wiring, all the internal l
18 wiring up in the control room and so forth.
i i
19 Your training period might not even cover that, but i
20 then worse, this person next week is giving instructions to 21 somebody else.
That's the way the system operates.
I think i
22 they could certainly come up with something better, uniform i
l i
i i
j-35 1
1 training; videotapes, a written thing.
2 I brought this up to Quality First.
I told them all 3
this.
They did do some things.
They did see that the exams 4
were locked up.
5 Q
Why do you think the Quality First program was l
6 established?
i I
7 A
To assure quality.
Also, I suppose, I'm sure the utility is interested in be'oming aware of any problems before 8
c i
9 other parties, before they come to trouble.
I think basically 10 it is a good program.
It certainly has its place.
It i
11 certainly has a legitimate function.
12 Q
If you were to describe the program, do you think it 13 is another layer of supervision?
14 BY MR. MARCUS:
15 Q
Before we leave the question, I want to go back to l
16 these tests.
Are you aware that the certification. tests come from a bank of questions, so that the questions aren't the 17 i
18 same?
i 19 A
No.
I'll tell you.
It used to be a 20 question 20 test.
Now it is a 40 question test.
They came out and said, 21 hey, we need 20 more questions, will you write them.
I wrote 22 20 more questions.
Now they take these 40 questions, and i
i l
l
36 1
maybe they have mixed in a few QA questions and so forth.
\\
My point is there should have been a validity study
)
2 3
on this.
Does this test indeed measure competency in 4
inspections.
There are statistical procedures for this.
5 There is reliability studies, to see if the same person on a
~
6 parallel form -- I was going to be a teacher at one time.
7 I am saying this.is all part of a training program, that could have been set up, that would have been far superior 8
9 to whut exists.
10 Q
You are concluding that the training is there but it 11 could be better?
12 A
Yes.
For what they are paying for, the cost, why l
13 not have videotapes or something, a manual.
Why not have a 14 uniform training procedure.
l 15 BY MR. GALLO:
i 16 Q
Do you think the existing system is adequate?
l 17 A
No.
18 DR. HULIN:
What system, the training system?
19 MR. KIMBLE:
The existing training syntam.
I don't 20 feel it is adequate to cover -- as I said, for example, a 21 person that is being trained on terminations, he might never 22 see a coaxial cable, because during the period he is training, i
i a
~-
37 1
it doacn't como up, or a particular splice or something.
Some l
l 2
of these things don't come along very often.
Penetrations and 3
so forth.
4 All of a sudden, he is given it and told, well, you 5
are certified, out you go.
i 6
BY MR. MARCUS:
7 Q
For these rare cases and the question we were 8
talking about earlier, about access to supervision, where you 9
can raise technical questions, so that if the inspector did l
10 have a question, he could raise this technical question.
i 11 A
Certainly.
It,could be that perhaps the person that 12 is the lead -- leads change quite frequently.
He might not 13 even have had experience with that particular thing.
14 What I am saying is you could have had -- if 4
15 Comstock -- I see this as a management problem -- getting a 16 person with experience as a training director rather than just 17 somebody on some other basis, let me put it that way.
18 Q
Do you feel the people that are doing termination 19 inspections are doing an adequate job?
20 A
They could learn it themselves.
They can go to the i
21 craft.
They can go to their supervisor.
I'm not going to 22 criticize what any other inspector does; no.
l e
l
38 1
Q This could be better?
2 A
It certainly could be facilitated; right.
Really, a 3
first class program.
4 BY MR. GALIO:
5 Q
What I hear you saying is the inspectors, at least 6
- in the terminations area, learn their trade, despite the
~
i 7
training.
i 8
A Let's say they supplement the knowledge they get.
9 BY DR. HULIN:
10 Q
Let's go back to the Quality First program.
You 11 sort of see it as another layer of supervision or does it 12 exist outside of the chain of supervision as another avenue 13 that you can use if you have a quality concern?
14 A
I see it as another avenue.
15 Q
Do you feel free to take any quality concerns you 16 have to Quality First?
17 A
Yes.
18 Q
How about the NRC?
19 A
Just frankly, if I went to the NRC about something, 20 I would have documents.
I wouldn't have just what is hearsay 21 or what people think or anything secondhand.
22 Q
If you had this information?
p, 7
_--rm-y p
-r----
+-
n e
r-w 93-m
P
=----*---P
39 1
A Yoc.
I 2
Q Would you feel free to go to the NRC?
I
)
3 A
Yes, if I had something.
4 Q
If you,had the information documented?
5 A
For example, I wouldn't go to the NRC and say, well, 6
I think the training program could be better.
To me, that's 7.
not my function.
If I saw there was a violation or something, 8
or it was wrong, it was misinformation or something, and 3
9 management refused to recognize it or do anything with it, 10 then I would have an objective basis for going.
That's what I 11 feel comfortable with.
12 Q
If you had this documented information, what might 13 keep you from going to NRC7 14 A
Well, I suppose I would be very reluctant if I was 15 told that I was going to be put on a layoff list or something 16 like that, or I wouldn't get any overtime or something else.
17 BY MR. GALLO:
18 Q
Do you think that would happen?
19 A
No; I don't think that would happen.
I think it I
20 might happen, but I wouldn't be told that.
Let's put it that 21 way.
22 BY MR. MARCUS:
i 9
e.my n.,
,p--,.m-
-,,e--
-m
,g-
,_,_,,-.-,-,.,,,_ye ec._,,
40 1
Q Do ycu kn:w of any case where it has happened?
That situation, where the connection has been made between 2
3 reporting something to the NRC and then someone being either 4
terminated or someone not getting overtime?
J 5
A As far as I'm concerned, if you were really l
i
~
6 concerned about some facet of a program., a procedure, or the 7
practice out there, I think there are avenues.
You can make 8
enough -- if you bring it to the attention of enough people, t
9 something will be done about it.
It will be an embarrassment
{
10 if they don't.
It would be foolish on their part.
They are 11 inviting it.
t I
4 12 BY DR. HULIN:
1 13 Q
Do you think Quality First and NRC is responsive to 1
14 concerns brought to them by inspectors?
i 15 A
I don't know how I could answer that in the sense
.16 that I have never gone to the NRC myself.
I've never talked 17 to them except with individual inspectors that have come 18 along.
I i
19 Q
Have you seen any examples where' you thought they i
20 were responding to something that was brought to them?
21 A
Other than what I read in the papers, I would really
{
22 have to think about that, to come up with it.
In that case, i
41 I
what you cre saying, do I know of a particular case with a 2
particular inspector that went to the NRC and said this and 3
this.
4 BY MR. MARCUS:
i f
5 Q
What we are really trying to get at is you have some J
6 i
impressions on things that would happen.
Our concern is why i.
i 7
do you have those impressions, what are the reasons for them.
8 I think you talked earlier about policies.
You can see rather 9
arbitrary things.
We were wondering the same thing in this i
10 case, why would you think something would happen.
i 11 A
t I don't think it is arbitrary.
I think there is a l
)'
i 12 matter concerning the concerns of the inspectors and the terms i
i 13 of morale and having a good relationship with management and 14 so forth.
]
I think that's rather crucial to the inspection 15 process and inspection program.
j 16 i
If we are talking in generalities, that's one 17 thing.
i You might say, well, this isn't in print anywhere.
I la think it's part of the overall program.
It's relevant.
i 19 BY DR. NULIN:
{
20 Q
Do you think that your name would be kept i
21 confidential if you went to Quality First or the NRC with a 22 concern?
]
1 i
j i
l
,--,.----.._,-,--_.---..-..-------,.,--,---------,..n--,.,c,-..
n-
_---.--,,r,---,
42 1
A Wall, I wno walking in tho gato with Grcg.
Ha cold 2
that the very next day after he went to the NRC, that 3
management knew it.
t 4
Q Do you think that would generally happen?
5 A
I just have no basis for answering that.
6 Q
Would that keep you from going to the NRC?
7 A
No.
If I felt strongly enough about something, I 8
would go.
As I said, the thing that I would go to, where I 9
could show that there was a definite violation of the 10 procedures, and not as a matter of company policy or the way i
11 they do things or the way the procedures perhaps are written 12 and so forth.
13 Q
Do you feel you might be terminated if you went to 14 the NRC with documented concerns?
1 j
15 A
No.
I think you might assure your survival in that l
16 case.
It could work both ways.
I think it would be foolish 17 for a company and management, here is somebody that is making 18 a lot of waves and then you terminate them.
They have enough 19 problems on that with Worley Puckett.
I wouldn't think you a
20 would want that again.
21 Q
Have you ever been unable to perform proper 22 inspections because of production pressure?
4
}
1, i
4 4
I 4
l
)
L
43 1
A No.
To my catiofcction, I could parform it.
Thoro 2
are times you have been rushed.
At one time in the past when 3
there was just two of us on terminations, my gosh, you were 4
doing some in-process, maybe two or three of them at one time, 5
and you are running here and there.
You are running your butt i
6 off.
On the other hand, I would say at each stage,'I would 7
say, you stop here and I'll be back before you put the tape 8
on, or I want to see you insert the wire, whatever the case 9
may be.
In that case, I would say, yes, we held them up a 10 little.
It can't be helped.
You can't be a number of places.
11 They shouldn't have this type of situation day after 12 day.
It puts too much pressure on.
13 BY MR. MARCUS:
14 Q
Because of this pressure, have you ever accepted or l
l 15 approved an inspection that you should not have?
16 A
No.
I use the same basis for all of them.
1 17 Q
Because the situation held up the cable pulling, did 18 that affect your relationships with the production people in 19 an adverse way?
j 20 A
sometimes people on a pull that have been held up, 21 they get angry.
I'll go right back at them.
That doesn't 22 particularly bother me.
I'm not going to change what I'm
44 1
going to do.
That's it.
I've had craft ccmo.up later and l
2 apologize to me and say, well, we were trying to get it 3
through, we have all this pressure, I'm sorry, that was 4
unjustified.
5 BY DR. HULIN:
6 Q
Do you know of any inspectiong that were improperly 7
accepted?
8 A
Not personally.
You get this discussion about all 9
these welds that were done in one day and you know there was 10 no possible way to inspect all these.
Not being in that area, 11 I can't go into all the particulars on that.
]1 12 Q
When you are doing your job, have you ever noticed 13 other work, not the cable pull you were inspecting, but 14 something beside it that was clearly in violation of the code?
2 15 A
Yes, but you assume.
Usually, you have your hands I
16 full with what you are doing at the particular time.
At one 17 time -- when I first started, you could see anything in any 18 area, in any area, you could write say an ICR.
Then it came j
19 down to only the areas you were certified in.
I might see 4
20 something and I might tell another inspector that is certified i
21 in that area.
f 22 BY MR. GALLO:
I 1
i
45 1
Q What 10 ths policy n w?
2 A
I don't know.
It's not written down anywhere.
3 Q
What is the practice?
4 A
I assume that is on the individual inspector.
5 BY DR. HULIN:
J 6
Q What is your practice?
7 A
Point it out to another inspector in that area.
8 Q
What would you do when you see something like that?
1 9
A I point it out to somebody in that particular area, i
10 tell them, this is missing over here, get someone that is 11 certified in that area to write an ICR or something.
12 Q
The fact that you might see something that is missing, doesn't that indicate to you that the inspection was 13 i
{
14 improperly accepted some time before then?
15 A
No.
I have no basis.
I might see something.
That 16 might have already been written up.
You have enough with your i
17 own area without getting into other areas.
18 Q
Do you personally have any feelings that costs and j
19 schedules sometimes override quality?
20 A
No.
I wouldn't say that.
I would say from what I 21 gather or what I have been able to observe over the years, i
22 that craft has more time to make an installation.
In fact, I l
)
1 i
l, i
s 1
think if you lookcd around, thcy hsvo two to throo timac ec 2
much time as you will find in private industry for doing the 3
same job.
4 BY MR. GALLO:
5 Q
You don't consider this private industry?
6 A
No.
This is a different animal altogether, in terms 7
of industry standards that they do her's.
On steel mills and 8
so forth, they will sling cable through the air and tie it up 9
with bolts.
They wouldn't put it in a raceway and so forth.
10 I mean the standards here -- as,far as I'm concerned, the 11 quality of work is excellent.
2 12 BY DR. HULIN:
13 Q
On your job, are the inspection instructions 14 sufficiently clear for you to do your job?
15 A
Again, you couldn't cover all possible 16 terminations.
For example, you would start to have a volume 17 this long to cover everything.
You couldn't do it.
You could 18 say there is room to be desired.
(
19 When Irv first started here, I gave hin that as a 20 recommendation, that they should print up a checklist showing l
21 how it is properly filled out for a certain thing.
He asked j
22 my advice when he first came on the job.
The other advice
]
l i
9 i
1 that I gevo him was the rolationship botwocn aantgcm nt and 2
the inspectors, and it has continued.
3 Q
What about the criteria, the procedures, are they 4
sufficiently clear for you to do your job?
5 A
As far as their intent, yes.
6 Q
Even though it might take a volume that thick to lay 7
out all the details, you think you have enough guidance from l
8 the criteria and the procedures to do your work?
9 A
I think it is your business to find out, in a case 10 where you don't know.
You go and find out.
If it isn't 11 spelled out specifically, you ascertain what it should be.
12 Q
We have heard about 4.8.8 and 4.3.8.
Do you know 13 what they refer to?
14
,A Certainly.
15 Q
Could you tell me the difference between them?
)
16 A
one is for the inspection procedure and one is for 17 the installation procedure.
18 Q
Do you see it as part of your job to en'sure that ;ne 19 craft people work to 4.3.87 20 A
It's my job to inspect, not to see that they do, I'm 21 not their foreman.
If they don't do it, it's my job to --
22 Q
That is what I meant.
+
-9 u,,
__,.,,,c
,,%.,,,-m_g
-,, i., --,
y
-,._w y
%9_r,
, s.
48 1
A Yes.
It's not my job to run the crew or anything 2
along that line'.
That is someone else's job.
3 Q
Do you know what the policy is on that?
4 A
What policy?
5 Q
LKC policy on your adherence to 4.8.8 and 4.3.8.
6 A
Can you be more specific?
7 Q
Footage markers on cables are supposed to be 8
consecutive and continuous.
9 A
Right.
10 Q
You are pulling a cable off a roll and you suddenly 11 see that the footage markers are not consecutive and 12 continuous.
What do you do?
13 A
I certainly point this out to the crew, if I notice 14 this.
When this has happened to me, they have scraped that 15 cable and find a portion that is acceptab'le.
We found that 16 one time, two BR numbers on the same cable.
17 Q'
You interpret your job as ensuring not only that the 18 completed cable pull conforms to --
i 19 A
Conforms to the procedure.
i 20 Q
But the installation of the cable conforms to 4.3.87 21 A
You mean if there is a discrepancy?
22 Q
If there is a discrepancy between the work
.~
s 49 1
procedurco and 4.3.8.
2 A
The work procedures are 4.3.8.
3 Q
What is done rather than what should be done.
4 A
If what is done is not to the procedure, you write 5
an ICR on it.
6 Q
Have you ever been instructed,or discouraged from 7
documenting non-conforming conditions?
8 A
No.
I've heard other inspectors have.
9 Q
Can you give me any specifics on that?
10 A
Do you want names?
11 Q
I don't care about the names.
12 A
The inspector was told he was writing too many' 13 ICR's.
14 BY MR. GALLO:
15 Q
Who was that?
16 A
Is this going to involve other -- I would rather 17 have each inspector speak for himself.
18 Q
I guess it would be helpful.
I don't know if we are 19 going to talk to this inspector.
It would be helpful to be 20 prepared to ask that question if he doesn't volunteer it.
21 A
That's a tough question.
I have never personally 21 been discouraged from writing or calling attention to a 1
1 I
- - - - - - - - - ~ -
c
~v
^ ^ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ " * ' ~ ' ' ~ " ~ ~ ~ '
' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ '
50 1
non-conforming ccndition.
When you ask if I have heard about 2
somebody else, yes, I have.
3 Q
Are you reluctant to tell us about that?
4 A
That person was writing too many ICR's and he was 4
5 transferred into another department or another area where he
~
6 wouldn't have the opportunity to write,so many.
7 Q
Was this in the cable pulling area?
8 A
No, the one I have in mind wasn't.
I 9
Q Without being identified, we can't really follow up 10 on it.
11 A
Again, I'm reluctant to speak for other inspectors.
12 There was a history in this particular case of some bad 13 relations, and perhaps this has something to do with it.
14 BY MR. MARCUS:
i j
15 Q
It may not be just for writing too many ICR's, maybe 1
j 16 something else along with it?
17 A
Yes.
This is possible.
That is what the particular 18 inspector told me.
I don't have the background of what all 19 the various relationships are.
It is very complex.
You are l
20 only getting a little piece of it here and a little piece of 21 it there.
I would rather speak to the things that I i
l 22 personally am familiar with.
l
-,, - - - ~ _..
,-------,.w
51 1
BY MR. GALLO:
2 Q
Was it Mr. Snyder?
3 A
No.
I heard that he had some difficulty.
I 4
Q This nameless inspector, you think was transferred l
5 in an area that did not involve the writing of ICR's?
4
~
6 A
I believe he was trained,for a,nother area.
l 7
BY MR. MARCUS:
I a
Q Would he have been in a position to write ICR's in 1
4 9
this other area for which he was trained?
4 10 A
Yes.
11 Q
He could still write them, either area would require f
12 the ' writing of ICR's?
i 13 A
Yes.
For example, there is a lot of broken flex out 14 there.
They are constantly being broken.
It can be there one 15 day.
It's like the cable pans.
They can be clean one day and 16 the next day you come back and they are dirty.
17 The dirt in the cable pans, a lot of it could have 4
18 been eliminated.
There are tamporary covers, which are called j
19 for in the S&L specs.
They never used them.
Lay something i
20 over them.
You pull the cable, you lift it off.
It could l
21 save a lot of grief.
22 Q
This person who you said was transferred because he h
I i
l
. +
52 1
was told ho was writing too tcny ICR'c --
t 2
A Let's say he wrote a great many ICR's and he was 3
transferred.
4 Q
The area he was transferred to, part of his job 5
still would be to write ICR's?
6 A
Yes.
He should write them for any discrepancy he 7
finds.
i i
.i 1
8 Q
It seems that either spot he would be in, he would 9
still write them.
10 A
In some areas, you don't write them.
In cable 11 pulling, there is not that much opportunity for writing 12 ICR's.
It's an in-process type of situation.
When you are 13 looking at installation going back, that might have been done 14 a week or a month ago --
15 BY MR. GALLO:
16 Q
17 A
There is,certainly more opportunity for writing 18 ICA's.
19 Q
Visual weld inspections?
20 A
I wouldn't say visual welding.
That wouldn't change 21 too much unless the paint isn't put on them and there is 22 some rust.
53 1
Q Wall, aren't thara some procedures that have to be 2
written up as an ICR rather than an NCR?
3 A
Well, they have changed the procedure.
I understand i
4 it was very expensive to write NCRs.
They have to be reviewed 1
5 out of house, out of plant, and there is just one document.
6 They don't have any distinction.
7 Q
Don't you understand that if the discrepant weld can a
be repaired and doesn't require engineering, they write an 9
ICR7 l
10 A
I don't want to answer that because I'm not involved.
11 in the area.
12 Q
All right.
13 A
And the practice has undoubtedly changed over the 14 years.
15 Q
Let's talk a little bit about when you went to t
16 Quality First.
When was that?
17 A
That was an exit interview.
18 Q
Exit interview.
And that was when you explained to 19 them about the training situation?
20 A
- Yes, i
21 Q
Do you know what standard the training program at l
22 Comstock is prepared against?
.i
?
54 1
A I accuso, wall, it'o cgsinct whnt'thsy hEvo written 2
in their own procedures.
Now, whether they have taken that 3
from ANSI or not, I don't know.
I have never 4
investigated. But I do know, having had some experience with i
5 other companies and so forth training programs, I know what 6
the basis is on that job.
7 Q
Have you looked at the ANSI standard yourself?
I 8
A Yes, I have.
Well, the only thing I have looked at 9
is that so many hours, 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />, are required, and one hour l
10 lecture and so forth.
Just as a gut feeling, I don't feel
)
l 11 it's adequate.
12 Q
The standard or the program you are talking about?
l l
13 A
The program, and the standard, too.
It's one thing i
l 14 if you have an inspector that has a broad background of ten 15 years in something and he is just picking up the certs in this J
16 area.
Then it's just a matter of documentation, perhaps, in a 17 slightly different procedure.
But if you take someone without I
i 18 any background and move them into an area, then that is a 19 horse of a different color.
l 20 BY MR. MARCUS:
21 Q
So your point is that it's not just the training is
]
22 not adequate; it's the standard that's not adequate.
i i
t e
L
---m---
a w-..,,,,-------m-+,
~n,,--.r,
.re.-,..mw,.-,-...----
ww.
w-n~. -,
n,--
,--.,,_,e
--aww-c.,
55 1
A Yoc.
If thin training tho way it 10 cot up 2
satisfies these standards, I think we could use a change in 3
standards.
If, in fact, this training program is meeting the 4
standards.
I don't know.
5 Q
Do you know what standard, Norm, you are referring 6
to?
Which ANSI standard?
i 7
A No, I don't, offhand.
8 BY MR. GALLO:
9 Q
What did you learn, if anything, from Quality First 10 about what they did about your concerns?,
11 A
I told them the same thing I'm telling you here.
12 Q
What happened?
Did they get back to you?
13 A
As I said, they locked up the tests, and I think --
f 14 I don't know whether this had anything to do with it, but they 15 did get another training director in or they appointed 1
16 somebody, but I don't know if his background was any different i
17 from the previous one.
18 Q
What is your understanding of the Worley Puckett I
19 situation?
20 A
I never talked to Worley, only once, and he just 21 told av -- this was just when he was terminated.
He said that 1
22 he felt that he was terminated unjustly, that he had recourse l
i 1
..,_.-__-..r
,,. -..... ~..- -_...,_,_,..,,
em,7-_._,
_ _. -.. _,, _ - _ _ _ _, _ _,.. _ _ ~,, _ _.., -, _. _,, _,.. _ -,. - _..., _ _. _ _.,,. _..,.. _,. -...,--..-...-,_i
56 b
1 to othcr --
4 2
Q Did you ever discuss his termination with any of e
3 your supervisors?
4 A
No, it was never brought up.
5 Q
What was the shop talk about his termination?
6 A
I understand that there was an NCR he wrote on 7
something and he wanted, in fact, a sto'p work, and constock l
8 didn't want a stop work, so Worley was stopped.
1 9
Q So you believe he was terminated because he was 10 raising safety concerns?
11 A
See, he is in welding.
I didn't have any contact 12 with the man other than just this brief two or three-minute --
13 Q
At least the shop talk was that he had raised 14 questions about stopping work.
15 A
Yes.
I understand from other people that he raised 16 questions about the procedure for certification of welders and I
17 so forth, that these were things he had problems came up at i
l 18 Zimmer.
19 Q
Do you remember when Saklak and Snyder got into it?
J 20 A
Saklak and --
1 i
j 21 Q
Snyder.
Do you remember that occasion?
Remember 22 when all the inspectors went to the NRC?
i i
57 1
A Right.
I wacn't ena of thca. I didn't cycn kncw i
2 they were going.
3 Q
Is that because it happened on days?
4 A
Right.
Well, saklak was trying, I felt, that i
5 probably he was carrying out the policies of management.
This 6
is my personal gut feeling.
I don't see any reasons why he 7
would just go and do this on his own.
4 a
Q If you were on days,iwould you have gone over to the 9
NRC with the rest of the guys?
10 A
I didn't know anything about this. I think it
}
11 perhaps affected more of the welding area.
I don't know.
All 1
j 12 of a sudden it happened.
I didn't know. I wasn't invited.
I 13 wasn't in any of the discussions, if they did indeed take 14 place.
15 Q
You mentioncd that saklak had some trouble with l
16 Engineering.
What was that?
I 17 A
I don't know what his problem was. He told me that 18 Roland wanted to get at'him, or get rid of him.
i 19 Q
Did he tell you why?
i 20 A
No.
He just said that he wasn't getting along down j
21 there, so that they wanted to, you know, they just chose, 22 found another job.
i f
i j
1 i
e
.....~ -.
58 1
.Q Grog Arch 0mbOGult whOn ho toctificd lact wOok 1
mentioned some. problems up in the upper cable spreading room 2
3 that he had observed during a pull?
I 4
A Well, did he?- I don't know.
5 Q
Yes.
I'm telling you he did.
?
]
6 A
You would have to tell me what he said.
i j
7 Q
Yes, I'm telling you that he did.
In particular, he i
I l
8 had noticed some cables that were laying outside the tray, the i
1 minimum bend radius was in violation, there were Kellus grips 9
1 10 that were digging into the cable, and there were some i
11 separation problems.
Were you aware of the circumstance prior 1
12 to me just telling you about it?
I l
13 A
I know there were some cables up there that were i
14 bent, yes, and that there was an NCR written on them. I 15 believe it was covered, this problem. I was under the 16 impression that this problem was already recorded.
17 Q
It was covered by an NCR7 I
]
18 A
Yes, or an ICR, whatever.
1 19 Q
Had you ever been up there yourself inspecting, in i
1 1
j 20 the upper cable spreading roon?
j j
i i
21 A
Yes, I've been up there.
1 j
i 22 Q
Mad you ever observed this condition?
l 4
1 I
--,-....n------.,-r.,,,.,----.-
n,
..,,,..,,,,.,,,,_-w,.,--,-,n_,
n.,,,,-,, m,-
l 59 1
A Yes, there is one cable, I know, with a hold tag on j
2 it, and pointing out -- it seems to me that this problem was l
3 rather common knowledge.
4 Q
I'm trying to find out if it was just one cable or a l
j 5
whole bunch of cables.
l 6
A See, I'm only co'ncerned, during the pull, concerned with the cable I'm doing. If there is a violation of bend 7
j 8
radius or something like that, then that's what I'm -- I 9
haven't got time to go out, generally -- you know, on a pull, 10 you haven't got time.
You just take care of that.
i j
11 Q
Well, if you happen to glance to the side and see a 1
12 violation, what would you do?
13 A
You mean if --
}
14 Q
Yes, you looked around and there you saw something.
i 15 A
Well, I don't perceive that as my job.
That's not 16 part of the program, in this respect.
If they want me to go i
17 through, say go out there and look for all the violations you l
l la can find, then fine, I will do that; but I perceive my job as l
19 cable pulling and restricted to that. Now, it might not be a i
20 bad idea to send somebody out and say, hey, go out there and 1
21 see what you can find.
4 I
22 Q
But while you are pulling cables, what if you see i
l 1
1
--,-,v.,c-,y--,---y-.----.
,,,y.
.v i---m-.,-w--,m--w,=ra-,,,-%yy y---
#we,.,my--.,r,,-
--y-,
- - - - --*-y,- - -, - - - -,-, - - -- - - -w
60 1
1 other ccblos that cro in o ncn-cenforming ccnditicn?
I 2
A I would assume that when those cables were pulled, i
i l
3 that the responsible inspector reported them.
I can't take on l
{
4 this whole plant as my personal responsibility; I just can 5
take on a small area which I perceive as my job.
6 Q'
Well, do you understand that Archambeault, in fact, I
7 attempted to do that?
He was working on a pull out there and 8
he saw these other cables nearby and then sought to write then 9
up.
j 10 A
well, fine.
I don't see what any problem was.
We l
l 11 have discovered in the past, say, segregation problems.
You j
12 are not even around a pull and might have written them up if l
13 you have the time and you see something that is nonconforming, 14 yes.
But what I'm trying to say is that when you are doing a
)
15 particular pull, you have your hands full.
You're jumping 16 around.
It goes pretty fast.
A cable, ten men, and you are l
17 trying to follow the head and on through the pans and so
\\
j 18 forth.
19 Q
It's not clear to me that if you saw a situation i
20 where there appeared to be a violation, no hold tag -- what i
21 would you do?
l l
22 A
Well, I think I would bring that to the attention of I
b i
I I
l I
i 1
. i 61 4
1 co;o rcapanoiblo person, but it is, again, my general 2
impression that that whole problem up there in the spreading 3
room was addressed.
They have a --
4 Q
Even before Archambeault got up there?
5 A
Yes.
This was my general impression.
You hear 6
things.
You are in the office, and you hear an inspector 7
saying I saw this or I saw that, or hey, you can almost see 8
the conductor or something through.
So that was my basis.
9 Q
Are you aware of a disagreement that Archambeault 10 had with Revels and Simile over how to write the NCR on this 11 matter?
12 A
No, I am not involved in that at all.
13 Q
Are you aware of a problem that Archambeault 14 identified in and around the remote shutdown panel involving 15 cable separation?
16 A
No, I'm not familiar with that at all.
17 Q
Have you heard about that one?
18 A
No.
Is this in the 1PLO437 19 Q
Well, I don't know.
I would refer to it as --
20 A
I saw a problem the other day where you have some 21 cables going up the side of a pan, and you have got some that
)
22 are nonsafety and you've got some safety, and there's 12 i
l I
t
. - - - - - -, -. -,, -. - ~.,
_.__,-_.__.,_m,._,
.-w
~,,,,_,---y
,-------------,..m-.
_ = =
62 1
inchos in b0tw00n tho eno cable and the other.
But on the 2
other hand, when you put the pan covers on, this results in 4
3 the discrepancies, and it was reported.
i 4
Now, on a particular cable I watched then pull f
5 through there, it was so trained in the pan that there wasn't 6
a violation, even though every other cable up there had a 7
violation.
I said, well, they trained it so that the distance i
a was greater than 12 inches.
I made those comments on my 9
inspection.
i 10 Q
These cables were in the tray or outside the tray?
i 11 A
They were in the tray, and the nonsafeties were s
12 going up the side.
Now, I don't know if that is the one i
13 Archambeault could be referring to or not.
1 14 Q
How close can the nonsafety cables come to the j
15 cables in the open tray?
16 A
Twelve inches.
The tray is open.
But again, when 17 the pan cover is gone, then it no longer exists because of the 18 enclosure.
i 19 Q
When does the one-inch criterion apply?
20 A
That is usually coming out of -- that's a. free air 21 coming out, I think, of the safety instrumentation cables into i
22 the tray, is where I am most familiar with it.
j i
l i
i
)
I
t 63 a
1 Q
The one-inch space is supposed to be between what 2
items or what objects?
The one-inch space is supposed to 3
divide what objects?
4 A
Well,,it's between different cables of different 5
segregation criteria.
6 Q
Different cablesIsf -- how?
I,n the tray or in free 7.
air or how?
8 A
In the free air, the way they have them come into 9
the tray.
Personally, I don't think I have ever come across 10 one.
11 Q
Have you ever been pulled off what you have been 12 doing and asked to work on a hot pull?
13 A
on a hot pull?
s
)
14 Q
Yes.
i 15 A
I have been changed and put on a pull by a lead.
i
)
16 Q
Taken off whatever you were doing and put on a hot 17 pull?
18 A
No, I don't think I've been taken off one.
19 Q
Reassigned.
Temporarily reassigned.
Interrupted.
l 20 A
Well, interrupted, not once during the pull had 21 started, I don't think.
Now, on a pre-pull, yes.
You do the 22 pre-pull, then all of a sudden Hey, come on, we need you to l
r
i 64
}
v l
1 do thoco cabloc.
You come in on a Saturday or something and 2
somebody doesn't show up, and okay, you take the pull.
3 Q
Have you ever had your paperwork on a particular
?
pull you were writing up, had that exercise interrupted so you 4
i 5
could do a hot pull?
6 A
Off-hand I can'tIracall.
7 Q
Have you ever requested assistance on a pull and not f
8 been able to get it?
9 A
Yes, I would say so.
We didn't have enough 10 inspectors.
But then you can get around this by having them 11 coiled.
f 1
12 Q
Having them do what?
13 A
You have them coil.
In other words, if you are 14 going through several rooms or something and you can't inspect l
)
15 it or you feel that you can't, you have them coil, and you get 16 there and you move on and have them coil for the areas that l
j 17 you can adequately cover.
That's a practica now.
l 18 Q
Now, in this case you describe, why waren't'you a
j 19 given additional help?
i 20 A
Well, I presume that they didn't have enough people i
1 21 there.
It seems to me they have this problem of people being i
22 trained and moved back and forth. They train them, maybe, I i
1 i
i i
65 1
don't know what it.is, to get them a cart, and then they are I
2 gone.
It's a difficult thing because sometimes you have a lot 3
of safeties together.
They could all be pulling safety. Then 4
everyone is occupied.
And another time, you are sitting there 5
and not doing anything, which is the case this evening.
t
~
j 6
Q Were you ever turned down because your lead or l'
7 supervisor didn't think you needed help?
8 A
No.
I would say he says there's nobody to do it, 9
and you accept that and make the provisions.
1 10 Q
Did you ever have occasion to take to Diederich?
Do 11 you know who he is?
12 A
Diederich?
Yes, I talk to him all the time.
13 Q
Have you had occasion to consult with him about some j
14 of your questions you might have during the course of your i
15 cable pulling exercises?
16 A
I feel free to talk to him about anything we do, 17 yes.
I'm not hesitant at all.
In fact, I will go and tell 18 him, hey, we are having a cable pull, because he has to cover 19 or he wants to cover as many as possible, and I'll tell him, 20 I've got one now, come along.
21 Q
Have you ever sought his advice on a matter?
22 A
oh, we have asked about interpretations of things, 1
I i
4 l
t
,_,-nn--,,-n
..~n-,
-, ~ ----
n-- -,
-..-.,-,,_,--,,--.,--_---~..,-,--,,-,--..,-,.~n
,n---
--..,_.-,,-----e_
.n..
~,
66 1
yes.
2 Q
can you give me an example of one?
I 3
A I think I was asking one on -- we do a pre-pull, and 4
the cable might not be pulled for several days.
Well, do you 1
j 5
go back and sign the card for pre-pull again that you do
~
6 another pre-pull?
7 Q
Another inspection?
l 8
A Another inspection. or is it sufficient to just 9
sign it once.
10 Q
What did he tell you?
4 11 A
He said that they would bring that up or it was 12 discussed or something.
]
13 Q
Did you ever get an answer?
l 14 A
I think that particular one is still up there 15 somewhere.
As far as I'm concerned, I think it's best to sign l
16 it again each time you do it.
i 17 Q
Does that mean you inspect twice?
l 18 A
Yes.
Just as I think it's best to do a walkdown 19 twice. I try to do them even before you do your walkdown at i
20 night, maybe the next day do another one because I've seen 1
21 fluorescents broken in the pan in the meantime at night.
i 22 Q
Is there anything in your procedure 4.8.8 that gives l
6 I
. -.. _ _ _ - ~. - -.,. _.. _ _. - - _
.-.-_..._....-_.,.------,,.--.,_.,-.._..._.-,.--,___.....---,.-m
.,,, ~ _,.
67 1
you guidance on how big an interval should be allowed before 2
you consider a second walkdown necessary or a second 3
inspection necessary?
4 A
No, there is no specific advice or requirement.
5 BY MR. MARCUS:
i j
6 Q
This question about signing the cable pull card, is 1
7 that a current issue, one that has just recently come up?
8 A
Yes, this has recently come up, and it has also come 9
up whether it is necessary to sign it at all, because you are
?
10 doing a pre-pull.
Your check sheet reflects the pre-pull.
4 11 BY MR. GALLO:
l 12 Q
He used the term " cable pull card."
Did you mean 13 the card or the checklist?
What were you going to sign, the 14 card or the checklist?
i 15 A
The card.
i 16 Q
I thought the foreman signed the cable pull card.
17 A
They do, to signify that he has gone out and done 18 it, and then you sign it.
19 Q
For what?
What does that mean when you sign it?
20 A
Well, you are getting into things.
This is actually 21 a document, this cable pull card.
22 Q
What is the significance of your signature?
l 4
wew-,.,.es...--.-,.w.,ewr-,
mw-w-.s-e
,ww-*.mer3.--w-.e e
-..-.&-.ewr.w,-------w-,
- .w,-
-= mww.e*
=,we*,
re,e--wr..-,,-w-c.-.
m.--. -,
e--,,
3 w-e
--.e,
.--a,+%---r*w
68 1
A Wall, that'o a good quOcticn.
Thnt'o n:t for to to 2
say.
3 BY MR. MARCUS:
4 Q
That's the point that Mark was saying, that you 5
should resign it..
~
6 A
I don't know if he said you must or didn't.
I think 7
it's a good practica.
8 BY MR. GALLO:
9 Q
When you sign it, what do you think you are vouching 10 for?
11 A
Well, I have reservations on the pull card because, 12 for example, they list conduit.
You might see a ac."
- Well, 13 how do you know which conduit?
It is not required that you go 14 to the prints and trace it to check all the routing..That's 15 done by Engineering.
And it's put in in pencil.
I don't t
2 16 think that's good.
I think it should be in ink, anyway, 17 coming from Engineering.
i 18 Q
Is it fair to say you don't know why you sign the I
19 pull card?
20 A
You are testifying that you walked down.
21 Q
It is the pre-pull walkdown or the --
22 A
You have done this, but you might have walked it l
(
1 1
69 1
down and they haven't cut it yet, cut the cable, but you could 2
still sign the~walkdown, that you have seen everything, it's 3
the proper routing and so forth.
4 Q
Bear with me.
I thought I understood this, but j
5 obviously I don't.
The checklist.
On the first page are a 6
bunch of attributes that have to be chpcked off that are dealt 7
with and addressed during the pre-pull walkdown.
8 A
Right.
I 9
Q And the second page of the checklist are attributes l
10 that have to be addressed during the pull.
11 A
During the pull, right.
12 Q
Now, what I au confused on is what function do you 13 perform that you are vouching for when you sign the cable pull j
14 card?
l 15 A
I interpret it as that you have looked to see that 3
16 the CR, that it is going through the right tray and so on and 1
17 so forth, but also on that first page is cable removal from 18 the real.
Well, I consider that more part of the cable pull j
19 activity.
20 Q
You think you are being asked by signing the card to 21 corroborate the information that is on the card, that is 22 called for on the card?
l
- - - = =
70 i
1 A
Thnt 10 colled fcr en y;ur ch0ak ch t, th:03 it:c3 2
that are pertinent as far as your inspection.
Is there CSCR, i
3 is it all these various factors, the pan is at the right --
l 4
you know, and so forth.
I 5
Q This is information that is on the cable pull card?
s A
No.
The only thlng that is on the cable pull card 1
(
7
-- well, some of the information is.
It's going to be a 1
8 certain wire size and it's going to be a certain segregation, 9
it's going to have a certain routing.
10 Q
You are not telling me that by signing the cable 11 pull card, you are kind of giving a preview of the pre-pull j
12 inspection attributes?
13 A
The advantage of the whole pre-pull, of course, is 14 to become familiar with the routing and how it is going to i
15 go.
If you didn't do the pre-pull, it would be just terrible 16 to go out there.
l 17 Q
Let me take one more run at this.
Now, the foreman 18 takes the cable pull card, and he is supposed to.make sure it 19 has all the right information on it, and he is supposed to t
20 also conduct his own walkdown.
21 A
Right.
l r
22 Q
He does that.
After he does his own walkdown, he l
l t
4 4
1 1
i
71 1
1c ko fcr tho came thing y u cro cuppo:ed to look f r.
2 A
Right.
l l
3 Q
Debris, sharp edges, damage to the pan, all that 4
stuff.
5 A
I hope he does.
1 l
6 Q
But that is what he is supposed to do.
~
7 A
.Yes, but I'm not with him a lot of times.
l 8
Q I understand.
And then he says he did it and he 9
signs it.
10 A
Yeah.
11 Q
Now you are given the card, and you are supposed to 12 sign it.
13 A
Right. I go out and do the same thing.
14 Q
You go out and do the same thing.
But at this point 15 you are using your checklist.
16 A
Yes, I an evaluating, of course, the criteria for 17 the pre-pull.
18 Q
Yes, on your checklist.
You are marking it 19
" accept," " reject," or whatever.
20 A
Yeah.
i 21 Q
So that's the first sheet of the checklist.
22 A
Right.
1
(
72 1
Q And th n wh:n y:u finich, y;u cro halfway done with 2
your checklist.
You have to wait now for the pull.
3 A
Right.
4 Q
Now, you are also asked at this point to also sign 5
the cable pull card?
6 A
I make sure that the foreman signs it, that it is 7
signed, when I do the pre-pull, that his signature is on 8
it and that I have gone through there and have looked at that 9
routing andeall the pertinent factors.
10 Q
Well, you do that regardless of whether you sign the 11 cable pull card; isn't that right?
12 A
Well, yes. You might say it's superfluous.
13 Q
Yes.
That's my point.
14 A
I don't think there is anything wrong with having it 15 superfluous.
It's to be desired.
16 Q
Do you know why they do it?
17 BY MR. MARCUS 18 O
I think that's the way Mark interpreted the 19 requirements.
20 A
I mean if you have another inspector come out and do 21 it and do the rame pull and give it to him, that would be even 22 better.
I mean economics --
i 73 l
1 MR. CALLc:
Woll, wh n y u cold cup:rflutua, I l
2 thought I was missing something prior to that time.
All
)
3 right.
I
]
4 BY MR. MARCUS:
5 Q
I think in this issue there is that feeling, some 6
feeling that it is not required.
Mark,says that the way he 1
7 reads it, it is required, and if the fellows don't want to do' i
i a
it, then they should ask to have their procedure changed.
Is 9
that the issue, the way you see it?
j 10 A
I haven't gotten into that much with Mark, so I, t
11 don't know.
12 BY MR. GALLos J
13 Q
I guess it's not so much, as I see it, not so much 14 as to whether or not it is required.
If it is required, there 15 ought to be an understanding of why it's being done.
At least 4
16 this inspector seems to have some question on that score.
4 17 Do you recall a circumstance involving Bob Tuite and i
is Archambeault over this footage marker problem and he was told 19 that the inspectors inspected against 4.s.s and they didn't i
20 work to 4.3.s?
21 A
I have no information on that at all.
l 22 Q
You probably had a training session on that general i
I i
t i
i
l 74 l.
I cubject?
l 2
A We have had very few training sessions with Tuite.
I 1
l 3-Perhaps I wasn't there.
4 Q
Well, it wouldn't necessarily have been conducted by I
1 5
Tuite, but it would have been on the subject of which 1
6 procedure inspectors worked against.
t l;
7 A
They should be held to the install,ation procedure.
s Q
Yes, you have already indicated that.
okay.
I just I
l a
)
9 wanted to check that point.
l 10 When Archambeault went to the NRC, he had a number i
3 11 of conversations with one of the NRC officials, and one of the l
12 things he said was that -- this is Archambeault talking to the J
i 13 NRC -- that because of Coastock's emphasis on production over 14 quality, Archambeault has heard other inspectors make the 1
l 15 following comments, and there are four comments that are l
l 16 quoted here.
I want to read you them one by one and ask you j
17 to comment with respect to them.
la A
okay.
1 l
19 Q
Now, these comments are supposed to have been made i
I j
20 in the context of showing Coastock's emphasis on production 21 over quality.
The first one ist It gets to the point where j
22 all you want to do is pull wire and that's that.
Have you I
l 1
I I
1 1
t
75 1
cvor hoard that ccam nt?
2 A
No, I. haven't heard that particular one.
Again, I I
c 3 see this as a matter of personal integrity of the 4
inspector. If he goes along with it, then -.
5 Q
Do you understand that comment to suggest that you 6
'just pull the wire and you ignore quality concerns?
i i
/7 A
I think that crews do to the best of their ability 8
try to follow the procedure. I'think sometimes you get a new t
9 man on a crew and he is not quite aware of the procedure, some j
10 aspects of it.
j 11 Q
one of the other points is that Archambeault has i
12 heard other inspectors suggest that: I'm just here for the 13 money; as long as I get paid, I'll sign the papers.
Have you 14 ever heard anything like that?
15 A
No.
If they have an inspector like that, he 1
'16,.
shouldn't be here, j
'17 Q
No one cares.
Have you ever heard anybody suggest i
j 18 that?
1 1
19 A
No one cares.
Is he referring to management or 1
20 referring to inspectors?
3 21 Q
It's not clear. It's not defined.
Let's say it's l
22 referring to the management.
f l
l I
4 i
o 76 1
A No, I haven't.
~
2 Q
How about other inspectors, if we interpret it that 3
way?
4 A
I think another thing you have got to realize is 5
that sometimes it gets pretty hectic out there sometimes.
~
6 There are tensions and so forth, people are tired, they have 7
worked long hours, and they make remarks that perhaps they at 8
another better time they wouldn't make.
9 Q
Okay.
Were you involved in a situation where you 10 were the inspector assigned to a cable pull through the tendon 11 tunnel?
12 A
I have been in there.
I'm familiar with it.
13 Q
Where you found that the conduit was routed 14 incorrectly?
15 A
Yes.
i 16 Q
And you were on a pull?
17 A
Yes.
18 Q
Why don't you tell me about it from that point.
You 19 were on the pull?
20 A
okay.
They were in the pull.
The pipe was marked 21 correctly, and the flex was marked wrong.
22 Q
The pipe was the conduit?
1
77 1
A Yoc.
Tho conduit had tho correct marking on it, and 2
the flex didn't.
)
3 Q
The flex is the cable?
4 A
No, the flex is a flexible portion, usually three 5
feet, going into a box, so the conduit has a number on it, the 6
fler number is written on~with a pencil, a black marker, and 7
we found that it wasn't going through the right flex.
So it 8
was pulled back using the proper parameters that were provided 9
and went through the correct flex, and I don't personally see 10 that that was --
11 Q
Did they switch conduit numbers to straighten that 12 one out?
13 A
Yes.
They switched conduit numbers.
They got an 14 ADI and switched the conduit numbers.
15 Q
Do you recall whether you were rushed on that 16 particular pull?
17 A
That particular pull was a very bad pull. I came 18 into it in the middle.
They made a lead, the fellow that was 19 lead, it was his pull and he had done all the previous work on 20 it, and --
21 Q
Was this person a craft person or an inspector?
22 A
No, this is an inspector.
9
78 1
Q Go ahead.
I'm sorry.
2 A
It was his pull, and then he said, well, I've got so 3
many other things to look at, take the pull.
4 Q
Take it over?
5 A
Take it over.
And I don't like to particularly do 6
that because I had to really scurry.
I was keeping ahead of 7
him, doing the inspections right before their going through.
8 I did not in that case really have sufficient time. I had 9
sufficient time to make sure that they were doing it I
lo properly.
I don't mean to say that.
But a pre-pull should be 11
-- in many ways, it is more important than the pull.
I mean 12 you see where it is going, you have a clear picture of the 13 routing and all the difficulties that you might run into in 14 the boxes and the sizes and so forth.
15 Q
You didn't have that benefit here?
16 A
Pardon?
'l 17 Q
You did not have that benefit here.
18 A
I did the best I could.
19 Q
When that situation happens, do you accept the 20 inspection results of the first inspector or do you have to go 21 back and do it over?
22 A
The problem there was there were portions.
It
)
79 1
involvad a great many cablos. Ha had pulled cons of them, and 1
2 I wasn't conversant with which ones he had pulled and which 3
ones he hadn't, so it was a nasty kind of situation.
4 Q
How did you resolve that problem you just i
5 identified?
You didn't know which ones he had pulled and 6
which ones he hadn't pulled.
i 7
A Well, I just put down what I pulled, watched'.
I 8
documented that.
But in the meantime, I said, hey, we have 9
got these cables, am I going to have to worry about these 10 additional cables here going through there?
11 Q
Did both of you write separate checklists?
12 A
Yes, we both wrote separate checklists.
13 Q
I see.
i 14 A
My only question was I wasn't familiar with which 15 ones he had already done.
16 Q
I understand.
I guess you are aware that 17 Archambeault passed out some questionnaires for various 18 inspectors to fill out if they wanted to?
l 19 A
Yes.
I felt slighted.
I never got one.
I never 20 even heard about it till after.
21 Q
I was going to ask if you filled one out.
I guess 22 you weren't given one to fill out.
1 I
1
80 e
1 A
Na, I didn't know anything about it.
2 Q
Okay.
3 A
I don't spend a great deal of time in the office 4
there.
It's kind of crowdad conditions and there are a number 5
of people that smoke and the air gets kind of bad.
6 BY MR. MARCUS:
7 Q
Where is that office?
1 8
A That's at the south and of the turbine building on 9
426.
10 MR. GALLO:
I don't have any other questions?
Do 11 you have any questions?
12 MR. MARCUS:
No.
13 BY MR. GALLO:
i 14 Q
Do you have anything you would like to add?.
15 A
No.
Just everything I have said I have said to be 16 helpful and it's the best answer I can give.
17 Q
I would lik. you to consider -- you don't have to do 18 it now -- but I would like to have you consider telling us who 19 this inspector was that was transferred for writing too many 20 ICRs because I would like to follow up on it because I can't 21 on the basis of the present status of the information.
So I 22 would like for you to consider and think about it, and if you
- ' ~ ' - - ~
~ ~ ' ' '"'
81 t
1 change your mind, let us know.
2 A
okay.
Maybe I can talk to him.
Maybe he has 3
already talked to you?
4 DR. HULIN:
I will give you a way of making it 5
possible to change your mind.
You can call me collect on that 6
number, and my home number is on the back and you can call me 7
there, or you can call George,Marcus, who is at 2633 here on 8
site.
He will be here.
And we will get the information into 9
the right channels some way if you want to change your mind.
10 MR. GALLO:
I just want to say thank you.
11 DR. HULIN:
Yes.
We appreciate it very much.
12
[Whereupon, at 9:47 p.m. the interview was 13 concluded.]
14 15 16 j
1 17 18 19 20 21 22
-.. -. -.. - -