ML20214M462
| ML20214M462 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 11/19/1986 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#486-1800 OL, NUDOCS 8612030368 | |
| Download: ML20214M462 (233) | |
Text
.
e OMN UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 50-456 OL 50-457 OL COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2) 3 e
LOCATION: CHICAGO, ILLINOIS PAGES: 17326 - 17557 DATE: WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1986 j b 0
\
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
OfficialReporters 444 North Capitol Street - _
Washington, D.C. 20001 (202)347-3700 os t a :e .,1 : .
f'DP /* D N > i ': a ) NATIONWIDE COVERACE
8 17326 m
( )
v 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _X 5 :
In the Matter of: :
6 : Docket No. 50-456 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY : 50-457 7 :
(Braidwood Station, Units 1 :
8 and 2) :
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _X 9
10 Page: 17,326 - 17,557 11 7- s '
United States District Court House
! i 12 Courtroom 1743
\.__./ Chicago, Illinois 60604 13 Wednesday, Novemb3r 19, 1986 14 15 The hearing in the above-entitled matter reconvened 16 at 9:00 A. M.
17 BEFORE:
18 JUDGE HERBERT GROSSMAN, Chairman 19 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 20 Washington, D. C.
21 JUDGE RICHARD F. COLE, Member, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 22 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
23 JUDGE A. DIXON CALLIHAN, Member, 24 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board fN U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
( ) 25 s
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 17327 1 APPEARANCES:
2 On behalf of the Applicant:
3 MICHAEL I. MILLER, ESQ.
PHILIP P. STEPTOE, III, ESQ.
4 JOSEPH GALLO, ESQ.
ELENA Z. KEZELIS, ESQ.
5 Isham, Lincoln & Beale Three First National Plaza 6 Chicago, Illinois 60602 7
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory 8 Commission Staff:
9 GREGORY ALAN BERRY, ESQ.
ELAINE I. CHAN, ESQ.
10 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7335 Old Georgetown Road 11 Bethesda, Maryland 20014 12 On behalf of the Intervenor:
)
13 ROBERT GUILD, ESQ.
14 On behalf of Leonard G. McGregor:
15 JAMES A. GEOCARIS, ESQ.
Jenner & Block 16 One IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(__, 2s Sonntag Reporting Servico. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 i I I
.. i i 17328 l l
1 I 1
i
! l I
i 1 EXHIBIT INDEX Marked Received i
i 2-l Board Exhibit No. 9 17388 17388 l l 3 I l
Applicant's Exhibit No. 185 17483 1 4 l
! .5 l
! 6 ,
f 7 i
! 8 1
1
! 9
. 10 i
! 11 1
!0
{
4 13 l, 14 4
4 15 A
- 16 l 17 i
i 18 i
i 19 I
20 21 22 23 24 25
_. Sonntag Reporting Service _. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. . .~_ __ _ _ __ _ . . __ _ _ _ . - - . - _ _ _ _ . . . . . . _ .
i 17329 1 TESTIMONY OF ROBERT V. LANEY (Continued) 2 I
3 REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. STEPTOE: 17332 3
4 RECROSS EXAMINATION
! 5 BY MR. GUILD: 17343 6 RECROSS EXAMINATION j BY MR. BERRY: 17360 7
RECROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) 8 BY MR. GUILD: 17364
, 9 RECROSS EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY MR. BERRY: 17374 10 l RECROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) l 11 BY MR. GUILD: 17375 l 12 i
t 13 TESTIMONY OF LEONARD GEORGE MC GREGOR
! (Continued) i 14 15 CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY MR. GALLO: 17392 16 17 18 l
19 20 21 l 22 23 l
24 l 25 Sonntag Reporting Service Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17330 O
1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The hearing is reconvened.
2 This is the 92nd day of hearing.
3 Do we have any preliminary matters? ,
4 MR. GUILD: Yes, Mr. Chairman.
5 We would -- Intervenors would request a brief 6 in-camera session to address some matters that we would 7 like to raise on the public record, but out of an 8 abundance of caution, would like to first bring to the 9 Board's attention.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine.
11 Why don't we ask that everyone but trial counsel, 12 then, please. leave the courtroom and they will be 13 notified as soon as we conclude this in-camera session.
14 (Whereupon, an in-camera session was 15 held, af ter which the hearing was 16 resumed, as follows:
17 MR. STEPTOE: Judge Grossman, I have one 18 other preliminary matter.
19 I have been informed that Mr. Seltmann has received 20 a promotion and in early December will be moving to 21 Comstock 's general of fices in Pittsburgh. His new title 22 will be Quality Engineer -- or Quality Assurance 23 Engineer.
24 There have been some preliminary discussions at the i
l 25 site as to what this means in terms of Comstock's site J
[ Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
- (312) 232-0262
17331 O
1 O
, 1 QA/QC organization, and on a preliminary basis, it looks
! 2 like he will not be replaced, and that the QC 3 organization, through Mr. DeWald, will report of f site 4 to Comstock's off-site organization -- I believe it's 5 Mr. Paserba -- and similarly the Comstock QA 6 organization will report off site I think also to Mr.
7 Paserba, and there just won't be anybody at the top of
) 8 that particular pyramid at this site.
9 That's my preliminary information on it.
i 10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Thank you for so informing i 11 us, Mr. Steptoe.
12 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, could I simply 13 inquire who is the senior QA official, then, remaining 14 at site -- on the site for Comstock?
15 MR. STEPTOE: My understanding is it's a Mr.
16 Clarence Hart, but -- I think there may be two people in 17 the QA organization, but at least one of them is Mr.
- 18 Hart.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine. Thank you.
20 Any further preliminary matters before we recall i 21 Mr. Laney to the stand?
22 (No response.)
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Berry.
24 Mr. Laney, please step forward.
25 MR. BERRY: Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Sonntag Reportino Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17332 gm
( )
LJ 1 We understand that Mr. Schapker is enroute to the 2 hearing, and at an appropriate break, if we have time, 3 he'd be available for further in-camera briefing.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine.
5 I believe we were up to Mr. Steptoe's redirect.
6 MR. STEPTOE: Thank you.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: You may proceed, then, Mr.
8 Steptoe.
9 MR. STEPTOE: Thank you, Judge Grossman.
10 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 11 BY MR. STEPTOE:
,~
12 0 Mr. Laney, I think Mr. Derry showed you a document which V) '
13 is entitled Intervenors' Exhibit 23 --
14 A Yes, I recall that.
15 0 -- yesterday.
16 Do you know whether any of the statements in that 17 document are true?
18 A No, I don't.
19 Q Now, Judge Cole asked you a question about Appendix --
20 Attachment B to your testimony, and in particular, he 21 pointed out that the Board examinations, which are 22 listed at the very end of that Attachment B, all relate 23 to Board examinations of Commonwealth Edison or Comstock 24 witnesses, the management witnesses.
25 Do you recall that --
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
17333 I
Q,/
1 A Yes.
2 0 -- that discussion?
3 A Yes, I do.
4 Q Do you know when those transcripts were sent to you?
5 A Yes. It was early June of this year.
6 0 Okay.
7 As of that time, do you know whether any of the QC 8 Inspectors had taken the stand?
9 A No, I don't really know.
10 0 Okay. I think the record reflects that none of them had 11 taken the stand at that point.
O 12 With respect to the deposition abstracts, Mr.
b' 13 Laney, were the depositions themselves sent to you?
14 A Yes.
15 I recognized that the abstracts didn't necessarily 16 reflect either all of the testimony or at least didn't 17 reflect the flavor of it, and I suggested and you did 18 send me what turned out to be a very large box of some 19 20 or so depositions of which these abstracts I had 20 previously received and read.
21 I was a bit overwhelmed by the quantity of that 22 material, and I didn't read it. It was simply more than 23 I had the time to do.
24 I looked through some of them, because I did want 25 to see whether there was anything in the flavor of them l ( _)
i Sonntag Reporting Service. L td .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 17334 j
1 and to get some feel for the depth of the transcripts --
2 or the abstracts, rather, that I had read, but I didn't i read those, frankly. They are still in my office; and 3
4 I'm wondering what I'm going to do with them.
5 0 Do you have an opinion as to whether, by reviewing the 6 abstracts, you missed anything? 1 7 A Well, I'd have to say I surely missed something; but my 8 impression is that the abstracts were pretty carefully 9 prepared, giving page numbers and citing the highlights, 10 asserting the principal facts, and it's my impression i 11 that probably little of a factual nature was missed, but 12 I made no detailed comparison. That's merely an 13 impression.
14 Q Now, Mr. Guild asked you a question at the end of his
- 15 cross examination.
J 16 I think you said that it would be naive to ask the i 17 inspectors whether they had ever let production pressure i i
! 18 and all the other extraordinary problems facing Comstock i
19 affect the quality of their inspections. l f
20 Do you recall saying that?
j 21 A Yes, I do recall saying that.
22 0 And I think you also indicated that his answer was
! 23 likely to be self-serving? l
- 24 A Yes.
l 25 Q And I think you also said that, therefore, you would 4
i Sonatag Reporting Service. L td .
Geneva, Illinois 60134
] (312) 232-0262 >
17335 1 not -- that his answers were entitled to some weight, 2 but you would seek corroboration --
3 A Yes.
4 0 -- for that answer?
5 A Yes.
6 0 In the materials which were sent to you and which you 7 did review, did you find any corroboration for the 8 position that the inspectors had not taken to --
9 A Well, there were a number of examples in the abstracts, 10 and probably some in the other testimonies that I did 11 read and list on my testimony attachment 12 I remember, for example, the case of Mr. Snyder, N
13 who was told, in effect, to tear up or dispose of an ICR 14 when, in his view, it should be sent to engineering, and 15 engineering alone had the right to do that, and he 16 simply refused to do what clearly his supervisor wanted 17 him to do, and it turned out, as a matter of fact, that 18 he was right, and later on I think it was brought out, 19 by referral to some higher member of the QA organization 20 of Comstock, that his stand on this was correct, but it 21 was an example of where he might have buckled under and 22 d id n ' t .
23 Mr. Mustered had a somewhat similar experience. lie 24 had three ICR's and he was told, "A drawing, revised
( 25 drawing, is going to be received any time now that will SQantag RepQrting Service. L td .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 j
17336 U
1 invalidate those, so write them of f, sign them of f, get 2 rid of them," and he, in effect, said, "Well, when I see 3 the drawing. I'll wait until then, because my 4 instructions and my authority doesn't extend to doing 5 this simply on ycur say-so," and he didn't.
6 These are the kinds of actions that you would 7 expect an inspector to carry out, defending, you might 8 say, the basis of his authority.
9 There was a case of Mr. Martin. This was a 10 somewhat different case. He was severely taken to task 11 for some trivial thing, like I think it was the loss of O
5
\ 12 a tape measure. Instead of, you might say, being cowed b 13 by it, he wrote a letter to the common supervisor of him 14 and his immediate supervisor and said, "Get this guy of f
, 15 my back," in effect, again, an example of an inspector 16 that is accustomed to dealing with rough supervisors and 17 with pressure; and they have their own way of handling 18 those things -- that's been my experience -- and those 19 are examples of how it was handled.
20 It was another case of one man -- I guess I don't 21 remember his name -- said he was -- he knew he was in 22 the Pearl Harbor File, and the reason he was in the 23 Pearl Harbor File was because he had, on a number of 24 occasions, bucked up against and refused to do what he
) 25 thought he had -- he was improperly instructed to do, t
Sonntaa Reparting_ Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 232-0262
-- -__ M 23 _ _ _ - _
'. I
?
t s s
's 17337 A ,
4 1 having to do with training, whether there are certain 2 per' sons ready for training, and he refused on the ground i .
3 that in his opinion he wasn't ready. I don't remember 4 the cther details of that. ,
5 But I feel sure that from these examples of the 11 i
- 6 extra abstracts which I read, that there are probably I i
7 others, too, and that in tlie testimony o'f some 20 or 8 more inspectors, that there must be other examples, 9 because these are typical of interactions that take 10 place when an inspector is misdirected. That's been my 11 exper ience , and these examples tend to corroborate it.
Ih 12 0 What exactly do they tend to cooperate, what problems --
i k/
s ,.
13 [ corroborate,whatproblems?
) 14 A N Well, I made the point in my testimony that the 15 pressuree sof the work place are part of the territory, j 16 andthatabus[vesupervisorsarereallynot-anovelty,
! 17 and that inspectors deal with these in their own way 18 s while maintaining the standards of their inspection.
f 19 They have their own ways of coping with these, because l
~'
l 2G these are ' part of the world in which they work, and ,
i 21 these are examples of inspectors dealing with those f 22 things that's been presented in testimony here, and I i
i %
j 23 find then' very believable because they fit with my past 24 -s experience'.
25 Q Now, Judge Grossman asked you a question. I think it's L
, Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17338
' /N 1 at Transcript Page 17311. He said, "If a QC Inspector 2 were of the type that would let production pressures 3 affect the quality of his work, do you think he would be 4 of the type who would likely admit that here, when he's 5 under oath, or not," and your answer was, "No."
4 6 A Yes.
7 Q Let me ack you the converse question. -
8 If a QC Inspector were the type that would not let 9 production pressures affect the quality of his work, do l 10 you have an opinion whether he would be likely to 11 testify truthfully here under oath?
m i i 12 A Yes, I think he would.
V 13 0 Would you expect him to testify truthfully with respect 14 to the naive question -- the answer to the naive 15 question?
16 A Yes, yes, I would.
17 Q Would you expect him to testify truthfully with respect l
{ 18 to other matters?
1 19 A Yes, I would expect him to.
20 Q Now, you said at one point, in response to Mr. Guild, l
21 that you felt that it was a job of the manager to look l
22 through self-serving questions?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And I believe you said that, as a manager, you had 25 several means to do so?
i Sonntaa Reportina Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
4 17339
(^'\
\~-)
1 A Yes.
2 0 I think you've already said that there may be 3 self-serving testimony here in this -- in this -- in 4 these hearings.
5 Do you recall saying that?
6 A If I did, I don't specifically recall it; but I have 7 already, in answer to one of your earlier questions, 8 indicated that were an inspector to be the kind of 9 inspector that would perform improper inspections, would 10 I expect him to acknowledge it here, and I replied no, I 11 wouldn't.
O
! 12 0 Okay.
13 Now, you've been a witness in a number of 14 proceedings, haven't you?
15 A Yes, yes.
16 0 And, of course, you've just had the experience, it's 17 fresh in your recollection, of being a witness here 18 today?
i 19 A Yes.
l 20 Q Do you have an opinion as to the ability of this process 21 to determine the truth even if self-serving statements 22 are made by witnesses?
23 MR. GUILD: Objection, Mr. Chairman.
24 This is all very nice, but really -- Mr. Laney may P
()
25 have a lot of experience in some areas, but he can of fer Sonntag Reporting Servien. Yh d _
Geneva, Illinois 60134 '
(312) 232-0262
17340
,~~
t 6 V
1 no useful opinion to this Board about whether or not the 2 adjudicatory process serves the ends of truth or 3 justice. It's simply irrelevant what this witness 4 thinks on that question.
5 With all due respect to Mr. Laney -- I'm interested 6 in his opinion -- it simply is not relevant and he's not 7 competent to of fer an opinion on that.
8 MR. STEPTOE: Judge Grossman, I think their 9 expert certainly did.
10 MR. GUILD: No, sir.
11 Our expert was cross-examined by these counsel and 12 that was their glib question to our expert that they 13 sought to use as a device to somehow impeach their 14 opinion, because Mr. Miller, as I recall, suggested, 15 with a great deal of indignation, that the implication i <
l 16 of the psychologist's opinion was that we couldn't trust 17 the adjudicatory process. It was his question.
18 Now, just because he got to ask the question 19 once -- it was of f base then -- doesn't mean that tha t 20 gives him the sanction to ask the question of their 21 witness on redirect examination.
( 22 It's simply --
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I don't understand what the l 24 purpose would be of getting the witness' opinion, s
() 25 anyway.
Sonntaa Reportino Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17341 O
1 It seems to me as though the question is asking 2 whether the Board would be capable of rendering a 3 correct decision.
4 Isn't that basically what it means?
5 MR. STEPTOE: Someone in the Board 's position 6 would be capable of rendering a correct decision based 7 on what he knows about this process; and I believe that 8 the Intervenors' expert offered that opinion in his 9 direct testimony, that you can't trust what inspectors 10 say.
11 Then I think -- Judge Grossman, I think your own 12 (A) v question may have left the impression that you were 13 making the same point; that is, you cannot rely on 14 testimony presented to you.
15 Your question was directed at a narrow question.
16 I'd like to rebut that.
l 17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, okay.
18 I don't see what value the testimony has, but I 19 don't see anything objectionable about the witness l
1 i
20 speculating as to whether we would be in a position to 21 determine the truth.
l 22 I understand your question is a lot broader than 23 just accepting someone's statement on face value, so it l
. 24 really isn't applicable to what was asked yesterday, but l /~N k) 25 I have no objection to letting the witness answer for I
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
17342
(
i
\-
I whatever it's wor th.
2 Do you wish to restate it again so we have the 3 answer right after the question in the record?
4 MR. STEPTOE: All right.
5 BY MR. STEPTOE:
6 Q Mr. Laney, you have participated in numerous 7 proceedings, have you not?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Okay.
10 Do you have an opinion as to the ability of this 11 hearing process to determine the truth despite the fact O 12 that some witnesses may give self-serving testimony?
13 A Yes, I do have an opinion on that, and I recognized, 1 14 from the part of the record that I had read and was 1
15 aware of, a wide range of sources of information that 16 are available to a hearing of this kind.
17 I believe that the scope of the information to have 18 available would tend to diminish the -- say the negative 19 value of the specific questions that you referred to; 20 that is to say, I think that the process in entirely 21 capable of overcoming those small and limited 22 inadequacies for testimony, if I catch the point of your 23 question correctly.
24 MR. STEPTOE: Yes.
25 Thank you, Mr. Laney.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17343 O
V 1 That concludes my redirect, 2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Guild.
3 RECROSS EXAMINATION 4 BY MR. GUILD:
5 Q Well, let's see what your experience is, Mr. Laney, on 6 that last score.
7 How many proceedings have you testified in, sir?
8 A This is the fourth, Mr. Guild.
9 0 Let's work backwards now.
10 You testified in Byron?
11 A Yes.
7s
) 12 Q All right.
(G 13 You --
14 A The other two --
15 Q Did you evaluate credibility issues in Byron? Was that 16 the point of your testimony there, sir, to weigh whether 17 or not inspectors' testimony about whether pressure 18 adversely af fected their work could be credited on f ace 19 value?
20 A No.
21 Q It wasn't, wasn't it?
i 22 A That was not the point of the Byron testimony.
23 Q All right, sir.
24 What was the case you testified in before that?
l 25 A The other two I referred to were before the Public l
l Sonntaa Reportina Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17344
(~ >~
V) 1 Utility Commission of the state of Massachusetts.
2 Q Yes.
3 And those are cases where at the behest of the 4 attorney general, you testified about the prudence of 5 decisions to -- whether the Pilgrim Unit 2 should be 6 canceled in one case?
7 A That's correct.
8 Q And I take it that your testimony didn't involve your 9 expressing opinions about whether Quality Control 10 Inspectors there should be credited face value when they 11 denied adverse work performance effects from harassment?
12 A No, that didn't enter into it.
\_-)
13 Q And the other case, the third case, other than this one, 14 was also before the Massachusetts DPU and had to do with 15 the prudence or reasonableness of down time or outage 16 for the Pilgrim unit?
17 A That's correct.
18 Q And I take it the Quality Control Inspectors -- their 19 testimony, performance ef fects on their work, had 20 nothing to do with that case, either?
21 A That's true.
22 Q All right, sir.
I 23 And those, in addition to this case, are the 24 experience that Mr. Steptoe was referring to that's the 1
l g j 25 basis for your opining about the ability of this Board Ronntag Reporting Service. L td .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17345 s
1 to render a decision? That's your testimony, tha t 's 2 your -- that's your background in numerous proceedings; 3 correct?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Now, you cited a number of examples of Quality Control 6 Inspectors standing up to their supervision.
7 You are not suggesting that it was appropriate that 8 the supervision try to pressure them to violate 9 procedures to act inconsistently with their quality 10 mission in the first place, were you?
11 A No, I was not suggesting that.
(> ~s V) 12 13 Q You are not suggesting that Mr. Saklak, for one, was acting normally or reasonably when he tried to get 14 Snyder to void an ICR and threatened physical harm to 15 him if he didn't do so?
16 A No, I don't -- I was not defending that behavior.
l r
17 Q Now, you weren't defending the behavior of the 18 supervisors in the other instances, where they suggested 19 that, in order to get the job done more quickly at less 20 expense, shortcuts be made in violating procedures in 21 order to accomplish that task?
l 22 A No. I was merely using these as examples of rejected 23 pressure and how inspectors can exert themselves and do 24 exert themselves.
t l
(C )j 25 Q Yes.
1 Sonntag Reporting Service Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17346 tm U
1 Well, I me an , it's sort of an ironic position to 2 argue for you, don't you think, Mr. Laney?
3 When all is said and done here, Commonwealth Edison 4 allowed a situation to develop at Braidwood, at L. K.
5 Comstock, where supervisors were engaging in a course of 6 conduct trying to pressure inspectors to violate their 7 principles, to depart from the integrity of Quality 8 Control Inspectors, to violate established procedures.
9 They didn't do so.
10 And you are saying that, in effect, this Board 11 should ignore the fact that Comstock harassed, I 12 intimidated and pressured their inspectors because the I) d 13 inspectors themselves had enough integrity to resist?
14 I mean, isn't that the -- isn't that the short and the 15 long of your advice?
16 MR. STEPTOE: Objection --
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
18 MR. STEPTOE: -- objection.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Overruled, overruled.
20 A I'm not suggesting that the Board ignore any testimony.
21 I'm merely suggesting that it take particular note of 22 the testimony that inspectors understand pressure, they 23 understand abusive supervisors, and they cope with it in 24 their own way, and they don't allow it to undercut the A
( ) 25 quality of their work.
Sonntag Reporting Service Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17347 fi v
1 That has been my experience and that has been, as I 2 cited here, the thrust of several examples that have 3 been testified here.
4 BY MR. GUILD:
5 Q Yes. Let's just be absolutely clear.
6 You are not suggesting that this Board should 7 excuse either Commonwealth Edison Company for condoning 8 or Comstock for performing --
9 A I have --
10 0 -- acts that were in violation of procedures and
, 11 established quality programs?
12 MR. STEPTOE: Objection; lack of foundation 13 A I've seen no evidence --
( 14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm sorry.
15 If there's an objection, it's overruled.
16 A (Continuing.) I've heard no evidence that Commonwealth 17 Edison or Comstock has condoned failure to follow l 18 procedures or has condoned improper conduct in that 19 regard --
l BY MR. GUILD:
20 21 Q Well, you may have missed some.
22 A -- and your question uses that as a premise.
23 Q It does, indeed, Mr. Laney.
24 A And I'm not aware of any such evidence.
i O
l 25 Q Fine.
Sonntag Reoorting Service _. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17348
]
1 So your assumption is there is no such evidence, 2 you have seen none?
3 A I'm not aware of any, that 's correct.
4 0 Indeed, fine.
5 I take it it follows, though, that if there were 6 such evidence, that commonwealth Edison had condoned 7 violations of quality programs -- the quality program, 8 if Comstock had, through its supervisors, tried to 9 pressure inspectors to violate procedures, that this 10 Board, in your opinion, shouldn't condone that?
11 A That's true.
i 12 MR. STEPTOE: The same objection.
.\~-
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The objection would have 14 been overruled had it been made before the answer.
15 I think it was simultaneous.
16 MR. STEPTOE: Okay. I didn't hear the 17 answer.
18 I assume the answer was no?
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Reporter, could you 20 repeat that sequence.
21 MR. GUILD: Just the answer would be fine by 22 me.
23 MR. STEPTOE: Just the answer.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The answer.
25 (The answer was thereupon read by the
(
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17349 1 Reporter.)
2 BY MR. GUILD:
3 Q All right, sir.
4 Now, you are not an industrial psychologist, but 5 from common sense, Mr. Laney, you've agreed that one 6 should be cautious about crediting at face value 7 statements and answers that are self-serving in their i
- 8 character?
9 A Yes, I have.
10 Q All right.
11 And the Board -- the task cf a manager is to see T
12 through those self-serving statements and try to 13 understand that they may be self-serving and to weigh 14 the answers in that light?
15 A I don't understand the question.
, 16 Q Sir, you made the statement, and I think I'm simply 17 restating what I heard you say earlier, and that is, the i
18 task of a manager is to see through that self-serving t
19 statement or answer, a quality control inspector saying,
- 20 "I didn't let pressure affect the quality of my work,"
21 and determine, in light of the context in which that l
22 sta temen t is made, what the truth is?
23 A That is true --
24 Q All right.
25 A -- I did say that.
Sonntag Reporting Service _. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17350 r~s.,
1 Q And you would agree, would you not, that it's the task 2 of this Board to go beyond simply statements made at 3 face value, where those statements may be self-serving, 4 and attempt to determine the truth?
5 A I certainly agree.
6 0 All right.
7 Now, you cited a couple of examples where, inde ed ,
8 inspectors came forward and they said, "Here's a case 9 where I was pressured and I stood up," and that's the 10 sum and substance of Snyder saying to the NRC first and 11 then to this Board, "I stood up to Saklak"? Isn't O 12 that the sum and substance of what Mr. Snyder said?
D) 13 A Well, he provided a detailed accounting of when and 14 where --
15 0 Of course.
16 A -- and how.
17 Q But in sum, he said, "Here's a case where I was 18 pressured but I didn't let it affect my work"?
19 A That's correct.
20 Q "I stood up"?
21 A Yes, sir, l
l 22 O And similarly, you cite the example of Martin, Mr.
l 23 Richard Martin, the tape measure incident, threatened 24 with firing by Saklak. He stood up and went and sought k ) 25 recourse, didn't let -- didn't walk out the door and let l
l I Sonntaa Reportina Service. Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
(312) 232-0262
17351 f.~s 1 Saklak complete the termination papers and fire him?
2 He sought recourse?
3 A That's correct.
4 Q That's standing up?
5 A Yes.
6 Q You remembered that incident, you talked about it?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And you cite the case of Mustered, Mr. Mustered, the QC 9 inspector , refusing to sign off the ICR's where there 10 was a promised action that would take care of them that 11 had not yet been implemented? He said, "Show me the
,~.
( \ 12 papers and then I'll take care of that"?
13 A Yes.
14 Q He stood up?
15 A Yes.
16 Q All right.
17 Your belief is that those are typical of the way QC 18 Inspectors work? That 's what you said , isn't it?
19 A Under those circumstances, yes.
20 Q All right, sir.
l 21 Now, you are not an industrial psychologist, but I 22 want to ask you, as a person with experience and common i 23 sense, Mr. Laney, don't you suspect that those answers 24 by those fine gentlemen, Snyder, Mustered, Martin, tha t 25 they, too, might be self-serving, that they might Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17352 1
g.
I (G
1 reflect selective memory and selective perceptions on 2 their part of the instances where they acted in a way 3 that was consistent with their values, where they stood 4 up to pressure?
5 A Well, I think there's a considerable difference between 6 their response to, "Did you perform your inspections 7 honestly," and how they behaved in these instances, 8 because --
9 Q Let's take these instance, though. That's what I'm 10 asking you about.
11 A In these instances, there were other witnesses to 12 corroborate what happened.
v 13 Q Yes. I'm not quarreling with those being the facts of 14 what happened in those instances, Mr. Laney, but my 15 question is:
16 Don't you think it's possible that, when Snyder, i 17 Martin, Mustered and many others, perhaps, recalled 18 instances where they had been pressured but recalled 19 instances where they had been pressured and resisted, 20 brought those instances to the attention of the 21 authorities, was because those were instances that they 22 recall with clarity as instances where they were proud 23 at having acted consistently with their values, but they l
l 24 might have selective raemories and f ail to account for j 25 instances where, as humans, they, like the rest of us, l
Sonntaa Reportino Service. Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17353 (q
s
)
'O 1 didn't act wholly consistently with their values and may 2 have buckled under pressure?
3 A That doesn't appeal to my sense of human nature. I 4 don't think people change in matters of this kind; that 5 their behavior would be far more consistent than your 6 questioning suggests; that if they did this on Monday, 7 they would also do it on Tuesday.
8 Q Well, but that's not exactly my question.
9 Maybe they did stand up more than once. Maybe they 10 did do the next day the way they did the day that they 11 are telling us about when they stood up to pressure.
[ t 12 My question is:
\ /
13 Don't you recognize the phenomenon, Mr. Laney, from 14 common sense and dealings with human beings, that there 15 may be instances that they have suppressed in the 16 recesses of their psyches, if you will, or that they 17 have very clearly recalled but chosen not to bring to 18 the attention of the authorities, such as this Board, 19 cases where they acted a little less nobly and where, 20 under Richard Saklak's overbearing pressure, they said, 21 "Well, I guess I'll cut a corner here," or, "I did cut 22 the corner here, but I don't want to remember that 23 i,nstance or it's not the case where I'm proudest of 24 myself and, therefore, it's not the case that I will O
() 25 recount for Mr. Laney's benefit"?
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 17354 i
1
! A V
1 A Well, I can't make -- I can't really buy that, Mr.
2 Guild.
3 There's a pattern here in the behavior of these 4 inspectors. In fact, they talked among themselves 5 about, "How do you deal with Saklak."
6 Some people kidded him, some people taunted him, 7 but none of them took him all that seriously, and I 8 think it would not, therefore, be likely that, in other 9 instances of which these would be only a selected few, 10 they behaved dif ferently. Now, this is the way they 11 dealt with Saklak.
i -s .
12 Is it?
, (v) 13 Q
A Inspectors have a way with dealing with abusive 14 superviosrs, and sometimes it's more deliberate and 15 violent than that, but they do deal with it in their own 16 way.
17 0 You certainly are in no position to state, as a matter 18 of fact, Mr. Laney, in spite of your experience, sir, l
19 that there weren't instances where Mr. Snyder, for one, 20 didn't cut a corner in his calibrations work because of 21 pressure from Mr. Saklak, aside from the instance where 22 he stood up to him?
l 23 MR. STEPTOE: Objection; lack of foundation.
, 24 MR. GUILD: There is no foundation required O
k) 25 for a question like that, Mr. Chairman.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 17355 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I agree there isn't.
2 Overruled.
3 BY MR. GUILD:
4 Q You can't state as a fact there weren't cases where Mr.
5 Snyder didn't buckle under to pressure, can you, sir?
6 A Obviously not.
7 Q And you can't state as a fact that there weren't cases 8 where Mr. Mustered, you know, didn't respond by saying, 9 "Well, okay. If it really is coming tomorrow, the paper 10 that will take care of this ICR, and you are my 11 supervisor and are telling me it's coming tomorrow and (L 12 you are my supervisor and you are telling me that you 13 want to clear this ICR because Edison or somebody wants 14 the system turned over or the area work done," that Mr.
15 Mustered didn't succumb to that pressure? You can't 16 state that as a f act, can you?
17 A No.
18 Q And Mr. Martin -- in the case of Mr. Martin, the first 19 case, was he standing up to Saklak or was he simply 20 trying to survive?
21 The case that you cited was a case where Mr. Martin 22 really -- if he wanted to stay employed, the only choice 23 he had was -- the only choices he had was either walk 24 out the door, because Saklak said, "You are out of here, t
1
() 25 you are fired," and was filling out his termination Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17356
%)
1 form, or seek recourse, and he sought recourse in order 2 to keep his job? That's what happened, isn't it, or 3 did that abstract not reflect those set of facts?
4 A No. It reflected that he wrote a letter to, I presume, 5 Mr. Corcoran, although the abstracts didn't say to whom 6 he wrote the letter, but somebody in the supervisory 7 chain above Saklak, and objected to Saklak 's treatment 8 of him.
9 Q But didn't you understand that it was in the face of 10 Saklak telling him that he was fired, tha t it was 11 literally the only recourse that Martin could take, to
/~N
+
12 either succumb and be fired and walk out the door or to b) 13 appeal to higher authority?
14 A I don't think Martin ever believed he would be fired.
15 In fact, he said as much as Saklak, "You are not going 16 to fire me." Right then and there he said that to him, 17 because Saklak threatened firing on other occasions, and 18 he never, never, carried through on that.
I 19 Q That's what you read in the abstracts?
20 A Yes.
l
! 21 Q And your --
22 A It says in the abstracts that he testified here that.
l 23 0 Who is that now?
24 A Martin. Martin said, "You can't fire me. You are not O
()
i 25 going to fire me," and the conversation apparently Sonntag Reporting Servico Ltd.
f t Geneva, Illinois 60134
( (312) 232-0262
17357 v
1 ended, and at that point, Martin decided he would go 2 over his head.
3 Q Your belief was, then, that Martin interpreted Saklak's 4 action as --
5 A A bluff.
6 0 -- a bluff, an idle gesture?
7 A Yes.
8 Q I see, I see.
9 And so you interpret the Martin response as 10 standing up to Saklak and an example where an inspector, 11 under pressure, did not succumb?
('m) 12 A That's right.
(s m/
- 13 Q All right.
14 Well, I take it you can't also, in the case of Mr.
15 Martin, state as a fact, Mr. Laney, that there weren't 16 other cases out there where Richard Martin, in the l
l 17 field, perf orming weld inspections, for example, told l
l 18 that he had to make a certain quota or expected average 19 level of performance of weld inspections -- that Mr.
20 Martin didn't succumb to pressure? You can't state 21 tha t as a f act , can you, sir?
22 A No, I can't.
23 Q Are you aware of Mr. Martin's experience as a Weld l
i 24 Inspector?
- f. (O) 25 A No.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17358 p
1 Q Had you heard that Mr. Martin was found to have 2 inspected extraordinary quantities of welds in short 3 periods of time?
4 A No.
5 Q Had you heard that Mr. Martin's quality of weld 6 inspection was deficient?
7 A No.
8 MR. STEPTOE: Objection; lack of foundation.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, that --
10 BY MR. GUILD:
11 Q Had you heard --
()
v 12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: If that had not been 13 answered, we would have overruled that.
14 BY MR. GUILD:
15 Q Had you heard that Mr. Martin was trained as a Weld 16 Inspector by Mr. Irving DeWald, the present Comstock 17 Quality Control Manager?
18 A No, I was not aware of that.
i 19 Q Had you heard that the belief by other Quality Control 20 Inspectors was that poor Mr. Martin's deficient work was 21 excused because he was trained by Irving DeWald, the 22 Comstock Quality Control Manager?
. 23 A No.
24 MR. STEPTOE: The same objection.
()
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The same ruling.
Sonntaa..Reportino Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17359 (m
1 BY MR. GUILD:
2 Q Do you recognize, Mr. Laney -- your counsel asked you a 3 question about the converse proposition to the 4 proposition put to you by the Chairman, and that was, as 5 stated by your lawyer, "What about people who didn't 6 succumb to pressure? When they came forward and said, 7 'I didn't succumb to pressure,' they said so in the 8 proceeding, under oath, should that testimony be 9 believed," and I think you said, in short, "Yes, it 10 should be"?
11 A Yes, I d id .
A 12 Q All right, sir.
}
13 Do you recognize, sir, that really as a corollary 14 of the proposition you acknowledged earlier -- and that 15 is, a self-serving statement should be viewed more 16 skeptically than a self-critical statement -- do you 17 recognize, sir, that when one makes a statement that is 18 self-serving -- in other words, "On thic occasion, I did 19 good. On this occasion, I did not succumb to 20 pressure" -- that testimony of that character, the 21 self-serving testimony, should be received with more 22 skepticism than testimony that says -- the testimony 23 that involves risk, such as testimony that says, "On 24 this occasion, I did bad. On this occasion, I succumbed
,) 25 to pressure," the latter being more likely to be true
- l Sonntaa Reoortina Service. L td .
~
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
._ . - .- . - . = . - . - . -_ . -. . - _ - . . _ . - - --. . . . - - -
1 17360
, /~'
1 than the former?
2 A If I understand your question, self-serving testimony in.
3 general would be viewed more skeptically than the other 4 kind of testimony; namely, testimony which is 5 self-exculpatory?
i 6 0 Self-critical.
4
! 7 A Yes.
! 8 Thank you.
l' 9 Q You agree with that, sir?
10 A Yes, f
11 MR. GUILD: All right, sir.
r 12 I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
l 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Berry.
i 14 MR. BERRY: Just one, Mr. Laney.
l 15 RECROSS EXAMINATION 1
16 BY MR. BERRY:
l 17 Q Mr. Laney, you stated, in response to a question from i
l 18 Mr. Guild, that it's your belief that QC Inspectors 19 didn't take Mr. Saklak all that seriously.
l 20 Do you recall giving that answer?
21 A Yes, sir.
I l 22 O You are aware, Mr. Laney, that on the morning of March j 23 29, 1985, for example, 6 inspectors, you know, came to l 24 the offices of the NRC Senior Resident Inspectors to 25 complain specifically about Mr. Saklak's conduct?
Sonntaa Reportino Service. Ltd.
j Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17361
,~
\
(V r 1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q Don't you see an inconsistency in those two answers?
i 3 A Perhaps.
4 The basis for my statement that inspectors didn't 5 take him seriously comes from reading the material which 6 I have read in which it became clear that he was 7 recognized as basically a weak supervisor, one who 8 relied on bluster and threats, which frequently were not 9 carried out, and that, you know, you don't get very far i
10 with supervising people before they understand, they see 4
11 through that, just like children do with their parents, 12 and I think they regarded Saklak as a tremendous bother
(
13 and an irritant in their work and in their lives, but 14 they didn't take his threats seriously.
15 However, I think the visit had other sources, of 16 which this was only one. Certainly it was an important 17 one, but I believe also that this was in a period during 18 which there was a hiatus in the approval of the j 19 bargaining contract, there was considerable impatience 20 in the membership about getting the contract approved
?
21 and there had been a particularly severe incident of 22 Saklak's temper the day before --
l 23 0 Mr. Laney --
24 A -- so I think these things tended to culminate in that.
~
t (O ) 25 Q Mr. Laney, did you have an opportunity to read or did i
l Sonntaa Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17362 7
f 1 V
1 your counsel provide you with any documents that were 2 generated by the NRC documenting the March 29th 3 mee tings?
4 A Yes, sir, there were two letters, one of that date and F one of April 4th, I think.
6 0 Do you recall reading in those documents anything that 7 would suggest that the QC Inspectors had concerns 8 related to anything other than Mr. Saklak's behavior or 9 non-working conditions or -- strike that.
10 In particular, do you recall reviewing anything in 11 those documents -- in those materials that were referred
(\
('v; 12 to, that seemed to suggest that the QC inspectors were 13 motivated by anything other than Mr. Saklak's behavior 14 or Mr. DeWald or Comstock management's behavior with 15 respect to the working conditions?
, 16 A Well, is your question, Mr. Berry, as to whether the i
17 occasion for the meeting was anything other than 18 displeasure with Saklak?
19 0 Yes. In particular, the purpose of, the thrust of, the l
l 20 question is:
21 What basis is there in the information in those 22 materials that you reviewed that would suggest that the 23 inspectors were motivated by this what you describe as 24 the hiatus in the bargaining process, by the i
j s ) 25 ratification of the contract? I take it you mean the l
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17363
\
(V 1 union negotiations.
2 What support do you have for that statement?
3 A Well, I'm looking for the part of my testimony in which 4 this matter was discussed.
5 The items that I recall that were mentioned in 6 those two letters, Mr. Berry, that were the only record 7 I know of -- or that I have seen about that meeting 8 certainly mentioned Saklak frequently; they mentioned 9 the presence of unqualified new hires;1 they mentioned 10 the holding of grudges; they mentioned threats of loss 11 of overtime; they mentioned that they had no confidence
(\ 12 in Quality First; they mentioned that engineers used 13 poor judgment in use as is decisions; they mentioned 14 that the management was going through one crisis af ter 15 another; and they mentioned money.
16 0 There is no mention, for example, that maiiagement wasn't
! 17 bargaining in good faith or something --
I 18 A No.
19 0 -- along that line?
- 20 A No, there was no mention of that.
21 I think the bargaining was over at this time, and 22 this was a matter of ratification, wasn't it, tha t they 23 were awaiting or there had been an appeal?
24 MR. BERRY: All r ight.
D
( ) 25 That's all the questions I have, Mr. Laney.
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 ,
(312) 232-0262
17364 (s
1 Thank you.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Steptoe.
3 MR. STEPTOE: I have nothing, Judge Grossman.
4 MR. GUILD: Mr. Guild.
5 RECROSS EXAMINATION 6 (Continued) 7 BY MR. GUILD:
8 Q Well, Mr. Laney, you certainly don't know what the 9 motives were of the 24 or more inspectors who went to 10 the NRC, do you?
11 A No more than I could infer from the letters.
7x 12 Q Yes.
13 And this red herring, if you will, that the union 14 explains it all, may simply be Commonwealth Edison and 15 L. K. Comstock management's perspective on the motives 16 of these inspectors, would it not?
17 MR. STEPTOE: Objection.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes, I'll sustain the 19 objection.
20 Why don't you delete the red herring and ask it 21 again.
22 MR. GUILD: I stand by the characterization, 23 Mr. Chairman. That's my belief. I believe it's an 24 appropriate question to pose on cross examination, but I (O) 25 will rephrase the question.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
\
"* 17365 (m)
%J l BY MR. GUILD:
2 Q The notion that these inspectors were motivated, not by 3 , -what they said to the NRC and what's documented in the 4 memo, not by concerns about quality, not by concerns 5
s
[ ,
about the abusive supervisor, Mr. Saklak, not by 6 $oncerns about inappropriate engineering dispositioning 7
of hardware deficiencies, not by any of the things they i
8 mentioned, but by this nefarious motive to further the 9 interests of the union,. that explanation may simply be 10 Commonwealth Edison Company and L. K. Comstock 11 management's belief as to the motive of these 12 inspectors, not their actual motive?
\./) 13 A I'm not sure I understand your question, if you are 14 asking me a question.
15 0 I am.
16 That>may simply be Edison's belief as to their 17 motive and not their motives?
18 A Well, as I stated to Mr. Berry, sir, the statements made 19 include matters of not only haracsment, but they also 20 include matters of money, matters of management crises, 21 matters of their dissatisfaction with their Quality 22 First --
23 Q You don't need to repeat yourself, Mr. Laney, and I 24 don 't mean to interrupt you unduly.
j (Q) s .-
25 MR. STEPTOE: Judge Grossman, I would like l
l SQDntag Reporting Service. L td . j Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17366
%,/
1 the witness to be able to respond to --
2 MR. GUILD: Well, I am interrupting the 3 witness because it's unresponsive.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Steptoe, what is the 5 benefit of having him repeat the same answer that he 6 gave before? That's all it amounts to.
7 I'm not finding anything wrong with his answer, but 8 it does appear to be just the same answer, and Mr. Guild 9 is asking a different question, s o --
10 MR. STEPTOE: But he wasn't allowed to 11' complete the answer.
(v ) 12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But he had already completed 13 it.
14 Is there anything that you are going to add to that 15 answer on the matters that were mentioned that you 16 hadn't already stated in response to Mr. Berry?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, there was, Judge Grossman.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Oh, okay.
19 THE WITNESS: If I understand Mr. Berry's --
20 Mr. Guild 's question, I believe he's asking me if I 21 accept the point that the occasion for the visit which 22 he attributes to Commonwealth Edison as being caused by 23 a desire to get the contract ratified or by 24 union-related concerns, and I disagree with that.
25 MR. GUILD: No. Let me rephrase the l
l Sonntag ReDorting Service Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17367
\_-
i 1 question, because we're not communicating.
2 THE WITNESS: I thought that was your 3 question, Mr. Guild.
4 MR. GUILD: We're not communicating, Mr.
5 Laney, apparently.
6 BY MR. GUILD:
7 Q Do you know whether or not it's Edison and Comstock 8 management's belief that the inspectors were motivated 9 by an unstated motive to advance the interests of the 10 union?
11 A No, I have no knowledge of what Commonwealth's beliefs m
i 12 about this might be.
-) 13 Q The lawyers for Commonwealth Edison Company didn't 14 suggest that as the company line on this question?
15 A No, sir.
16 Q You never heard that from -- did you glean that from Mr.
17 Shamblin's testimony?
18 You read that, didn't you?
19 A I did read that testimony.
20 Q Yes.
21 And wasn't that Mr. Shamblin's point?
22 A I don't recall, I don't recall.
! 23 Q So you don't recall whether or not you'd been previously i
l 24 informed that that was the company management position i
O L
() 25 about the motives of these inspectors?
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17368 G
1 A I don't know what the company management's position was.
2 I --
3 Q You don't recall whether you've been informed that that 4 was the company's position?
5 A I'm pretty sure I haven't been given any specific 6 information to that effect.
7 Q Yes, sir.
8 Well, it's in Mr. Shamblin's testimony. You read 9 his testimony.
10 Then you would have been informed through that 11 source that that was the position of the company, Ih 12 wouldn't you?
13 A If it's in there, and if I read it, which I have no l 14 recollection of, yes.
15 Q And if Mr. DeWald said that and you read his testimony, i 16 you would have been informed through that source --
17 A Yes, sir.
- 18 0 -- if that was the company's position?
l l 19 A But my reply to Mr. Berry wasn't relying on that.
l 20 0 I understand that, sir.
l 21 But my question is:
l l 22 You would have heard that from that source if you l
- l. 23 had read that testimony? You don't recall at this time 24 if it's --
Dr l
l
() 25 A If it's in there, as you say it is, I would have been l
Sonntag Reporting Service _. L td .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
r l l
l 17369 I
s
/
\v) 1 aware of it.
2 Q That's my question..
3 Let's just assume this, Mr. Laney:
4 If that was not the motives of the Comstock Quality 4
5 Control Inspectors -- that is, to further the interests 6 of the union -- if, in fact, the Comstock Quality 7 Control Inspectors were motivated on the basis of the 8 facts that they stated to the NRC -- those were concerns 9 about quantity versus quality, quality being sacrificed i 10 for quantity, Saklak's abuse, production pressure, i
j 11 unsupported engineering judgments about accepting i .
12 defects as is, et cetera, work quality issues -- if
\ M @t 13 those reflected the motives of the inspectors and yet 14 Commonwealth Edison management and Comstock management 15 mistakenly believed that the motives were otherwise, and 16 that is, that they were explained by this nefarious 17 motive of fur thering the union, and that Comstock 18 management, Edison management, acted on the belief, 19 erroneously that the union advancement was the motive of 20 these inspectors, doesn't that suggest, Mr. Laney, that 21 both Edison and Comstock management completely failed to 22 identify the real problem at L. K. Comstock quality 23 control?
24 A Well, you've laid a premise with a statement of a number 25 of assumptions.
Sonntag Reporting Service _. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17370
(
(
x.
- 1. Q And I asked you to assume those things, sir.
2 And if they are true, doesn't that suggest that 3 both Comstock and Edison simply failed to appreciate and 4 identify the problem?
5 MR. STEPTOE: I object to the question he's 6 asking. It sounds like a hypothetical, but it's not 7 really a hypothetical.
8 I think we ought to make it very clear that that's 9 a hypothetical, because --
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I think it is very clear 11 it's a hypothetical.
12 I think Mr. Guild could have said, "Wouldn't that 1
[V) suggest," rather than, "Doesn't that suggest," but let's 13 14 hear it as, "Wouldn't that suggest."
15 MR. GUILD: Do you want the premise again, 16 Mr. Laney?
17 THE WITNESS: To be sure I understand the i 18 question.
l 19 BY MR. GUILD:
l I
20 0 The premise again is this:
I 21 Edison and Comstock management are wrong. They i 22 assume that the motive of the inspectors was furthering 23 the union, that it was a nefarious motive and it not 24 based on the facts communicated by those inspectors.
I
/ 25 Now, if that were true, sir, that they were wrong l
I l
i Sonntag Reporting Service, L td .
( Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l __ __ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _. _ _ _ _. _ __
17371 1 and that they assumed the motive was as I stated,
.2 wouldn't that suggest, sir, given those assumptions, 3 that Comstock and Edison simply failed to identify the l 4 prcblem that existed?
5 A If -- yes, if -- I agree with that. If they believed 6 that there was only one real motive in that meeting, l 7 which was to advance the cause of the union, then they I
8- would have missed a number of other significant 9 messages --
10- Q All right, sir.
i 11 A -- but there were a number of them.
- 12 O Yes. And you've said those.
t
\
13 Now, sir --
- 14 JUDGE GROSSMAN
- Excuse me.
i 15 I just want to make sure the witness understands i
16 that he went further than the question asked and that 17 there is no misunderstanding.
18 What you are saying now, sir, is that forgetting 4
19 whether this was a hypothetical, there were other 20 concerns other than the union, to your understanding, 7
21 and that if Commonwealth Edison and Comstock didn't d
22 recognize that, then they missed something?
l 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay, f'%
\ -
25 THE WITNESS: That's the point of my reply, Sonntag_ Reporting Service _. Ltd.
Geneva,-Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
m 17372 1 yes, sir.
2 BY MR. GUILD:
3 Q Now, sir, were you aware that, in fact, a number of 4 quality concerns expressed, to paraphrase, " sacrifice i 5 quality for quantity," et cetera, had been expressed by 6 Comstock inspectors, months before the March complaints 7 to the NRC, to the Edison Quality First organization?
8 Were you aware of that?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Were you aware that Commonwealth Edison and Comstock 11 management's position, Edison management at the highest i.
(v ) 12 level, Mr. Maiman, a vice-president of the company, 13 interpreted those complaints as being motivated by an 14 unstated motive to further the interests of the union?
15 A No, I wasn't aware of that.
I 16 0 Were you aware that Edison's management directed, f 17 because of that conclusion, that no investigation be l
18 performed of those complaints until the union labor
! 19 dispute had been resolved, and that, therefore, there 20 was no investigation of those complaints?
21 A No, I was not aware of that.
22 Q Again, sir, if those complaints made to Quality First l
23 were not so motivated -- that is, motivated to advance l 24 the union -- but were motivated by genuine concern about l
- (D)
J 25 the working conditions, the quality concerns that l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17373 O
b 1 reflected in those conditions -- Edison assumed they 2 were motivated by advancing the union -- interest to s
3 advance the union, Edison management was wrong, wouldn't 4 that suggest that Edison management had, again, failed 5 to identify a real problem?
6 A Well, it would have suggested, as I understand your 7 question, that they would have deferred dealing with 8 other problems pending. As taking the basis of your 9 question, that they were unwilling to interject 10 investigations in the midst of a union negotiation.
11 They would -- they would have been deferring, presumably 12 for that reason, looking into these other matters.
13 That's what it suggests to me as I take your
-14 question as a hypothetical question.
15 0 Well, it sounds like you have some more f amiliarity with 16 these facts than your previous answer suggested.
17 Had you heard tha t they had indeed deferred an 18 investigation?
19 A Well, no. You told me that.
20 0 All right, sir.
,t 21 You are simply relying on what I asked you to 22 assune?
23 A Yes.
24 MR. GUILD: Fine. Unders tood , unde rs tood .
25 No further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Sonntag Reporting Service, TJd .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17374
'd 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Berry.
2 MR. BERRY: Just one, Mr. Chairman.
3 RECROSS EXAMINATION 4 (Continued) 5 BY MR. BERRY:
6 0 Mr. Laney, I understand you are not an industrial 7 psychologist, but it's not unusual for people to have 8 more than one motive for taking a particular action, is 9 it?
10 A No, sir, it's not unusual, 11 Q For example, in this case, let's suppose that advancing (N/ ) 12 the union was in the back of some of the inspectors' 13 minds.
14 That wouldn't necessarily detract from the strength 15 of their concern about Mr. Saklak or some of the other 16 matters they brought to the NRC, would it?
! 17 A I agree with that; and I think, in fact, the motives 18 were quite mixed. I think that some inspectors did have 19 union motivation; perhaps some had personal grievances 20 that were very close to the surface that they wanted to 21 voice. Others, I think, went along to see what was
! .22 going to happen because it was interesting; and there 23 was a whole mixture of things.
24 Q Just so we're clear:
25 The same inspector who may have had a motive or an 4
Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17375 v
1 interest in advancing the union may have also had a 2 concern over Mr. Saklak or some safety -- some safety 3 concern or any of the other matters that you alluded to 4 in your earlier answers? A single inspector could have 5 different interests and motives?
- 6 A Yes, I agree with that, Mr. Berry.
7 MR. BERRY: That's all, Mr. Chairman.
! 8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Steptoe.
9 MR. STEPTOE: I have no further questions.
10 MR. GUILD: Indeed, Mr. Chairman.
11 RECROSS EXAMINATION 4 rN 12 (Continued) 13 BY MR. GUILD:
14 Q And, in fact, Mr. Laney, the motive to unionize may 15 itself be a reflection of a perception not just of 16 grievances about pay or benefits, but about grievances 17 involving quality and working conditions and harassment 18 from supervisors?
19 A I really don't know what the motive to unionize was, but 20 I suspect it included some parts of all of those that 21 you mentioned.
22 Q Yes.
23 It may have been a motive to try to achieve some 24 parity -- some power in relation to management that had
(( 25 been overbearing and arbitrary and all powerful?
Sonntag Reporting Service. L td .
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 I
17376 e
t 1 A Might have been, yes, sir.
2 Q And so a motive to advance the union in raising these 3 concerns may have been a motive to redress underlying 4 grievances that were not simply monetary or 5 self-interest related in that respect?
6 A Might have been, yes, sir.
7 MR. GUILD: That's all I have.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Berry.
9 MR. BERRY: Nothing fur ther.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Steptoe.
11 MR. STEPTOE: Nothing fur ther.
) 12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, thank you very much, J
13 Mr. Laney, for testifying.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We appreciate your coming 16 here.
17 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Judge.
18 (Witness excused.)
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: At this point, I believe we 20 will recess until 1:00 o' clock for the regular hearing, 21 and we will have our briefing now with Mr. Schapker. I 22 say we. Staff attorneys and Mr. Schapker before the 23 Board for an in-camera session, a further in-camera 24 session, not part of the other one.
25 Do I have a correct understanding of what you have Sonntag Reporting Service. L td .
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
4 j 17377 l' '
4
{ l in mind, Mr. Berry?
i 2 MR. BERRY: Yes, that's fine.
1 i
- 3 I would only suggest that a brief recess take 4 place.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Oh, yes, certainly.
{
6 We 'll take a 10-minute recess, the n .
}
i
( 7 (WHEREUPON, the hearing was 8 continued to the hour of 1:00 9 o' clock P. M.)
1
!- 10 11 I 12 i
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 l 25 Sonntag Reporting Service. Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 j
w 17378 O(~ >
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4
_ ; _ ; _ ; ; ; ; _ ; ; ; _ _ _ _ _x 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) :
_ _ ; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ; i ; _ _ ; ; _x 9
10 Met pursuant to recess.
11 Wednesday, November 19, 1986.
1:05 P. M.
12 13 14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: We're back in session now.
15 We don't have our witness yet, but, Mr. Steptoe, 16 you have some preliminary matter?
17 MR. STEPTOE: Yes, Judge Grossman.
l 18 At the close of Mr. DelGeorge's cross examination, 19 he was examined with respect to a document which has i
20 been marked as Intervenors' Exhibit 191, which was his l 21 time line of events. It's this document.
22 (Indicating.)
- 23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes.
l 24 JUDGE COLE: Okay.
25 MR. STE PTOE: In the right-hand corner under i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17379 U
1 " miscellaneous personnel matters," the first entry is 2 "INSP increase," and it's shown in late 1982.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes.
4 MR. STEPTOE: At one point on redirect or 5 re-redirect, I asked Mr. DelGeorge whether that related 6 to the increase from 35 percent inspections to 100 7 percent inspections which Comstock undertook, and he 8 said no.
9 He came down off the stand. I spoke to him. He 10 went back and reviewed the testimony. He's come to the 11 conclusion that the answer is yes, that is what he was
(~'N 12 referring to.
13 Now, Mr. De1 George is here. He can affirm that, 14 but it is a mistake and I felt obliged to bring it to 15 your attention.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Mr. DelGeorge, you 17 remain under oath.
, 18 Could you tell us what the answer to that is?
19 MR. DEL GEORGE: Yes, sir.
I 20 The INSP increase refers to the configuration 21 inspection increase from 35 percent to 100 percent that 22 was identified in Mr. DeWald's testimony, which was one 23 of the pieces of evidentiary testimony that I reviewed i 24 in preparing this document.
(v\ 25 I did, as I told my counsel, feel somewhat l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17380 P
1 uncomfortable after Mr. Berry's questions on that point 2 and my own counsel's questions on that point.
3 He and I discussed the matter afterwards, and then 4 I went back and reviewed some of the materials that I
, 5 had originally reviewed in preparing that document, the 6 Intervenors' exhibit that's been made reference to, and 7 have, in fact, refreshed my recollection that that was
! 8 the case.
i 9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's Intervenors' Exhibit 10 191.
11 Mr. Guild, does that bring any further questions up 12 in your mind?
l 13 MR. GUILD: That's satisfactory, Mr.
14 Chairman. I have no questions.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine. Thank you, Mr.
l 16 DelGeorge.
17 Mr. Berry?
18 MR. BERRY: As long as we're discussing l 19 preliminary matters, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to take this 20 opportunity to report back to the Board on a matter the l
l 21 Board Chairman had referred to the Staff.
22 That is, you'll recall that on Wednesday, November 23 5,1986, at Transcript Page 16691, the Board had 24 directed the Staff to verify a statement made by Mr.
l ( 25 Kostal with respect to damping values.
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17381 p
\ )
/
1 The Staff referred this question to NRR, and we've 2 been in contact with an individual by the name of Hans 3 Ashar -- that's A-S-H-A-R -- in NRR.
4 What we've been able to learn from Mr. Ashar is 5 that, by and large, the 7 percent damping value is 6 acceptable for cable pan hangers that are bolted or 7 electrical-type supports that are bolted.
8 However, if they're welded, NRR generally requires 9 additional information to accept that value.
10 I'm informed that the NRC will not accept the 7 11 percent damping value unless additional test data is 12 provided to the Staff for review. To my knowledge, that 13 has not yet been done.
14 I understand that the relevant portions of the FSAR 15 are Sections 3.71 and 3.72.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Steptoe, what would you l
17 like to add to that?
18 MR. STEPTOE: I still am remiss, I guess, in j 19 not providing to the Board the relevant sections of the 1
20 PSAR. I've seen them and I've talked with Sargent &
21 Lundy, but I haven't done enough work to confirm that.
j 22 I believe that the values of 7 percent are included 23 in the sections of the FSAR that I've seen. I don't l
24 have them in mind.
l D 25 I've also looked at the SAR, and it was my I
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134
[
(312) 232-0262
17382 r
U 1 recollection that the Staff had accepted that discussion 2 without much -- without any specific discussion of the 7 3 percent value. They just had a conclusory statement in 4 the FSAR with respect to this subject matter.
5 If the Staff now believes it wants more information 6 on the acceptability of the 7 percent damping value for 7 welded cable pan hangers, obviously Applicant will 8 respond to any requests for information.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I don't think you're 10 in that posture yet.
11 I've looked at the FSAR myself, and my 12 understanding is that the sections that Mr. Berry v} 13 referred to are the correct sections and that there are 14 Tables 1 and 2 to those sections that contain the 15 damping values that are permitted.
16 They appear to follow pretty closely REG GUIDE 1.61 17 and those damping values that are specified in that REG 18 GUIDE.
19 If you have additional or inconsistent evidence to 20 the contrary, we would certainly appreciate that.
21 I am hesitant about offering those tables into 22 evidence until we hear further from you on that. Maybe 23 they are not the appropriate tables.
24 MR. STEPTOE: I have seen a portion of the 25 FSAR, and the 7 percent in it wasn't a table. But I
(
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17383 )
l
~~ ,
V 1 haven't had enough time personally to verify that I've 2 got the right sections.
3 So there may indeed be additional information in 4 the FSAR that you should know about, and I just have to 5 get it to you.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's fine.
7 I see we have our witness here, and so we would now 8 ask that Mr. McGregor come forward. Let's have an 9 arrangement for his attorney to have a seat at counsel 10 table here.
11 MR. BERRY: He can sit here if he wants. Mr.
12 Geocaris is more than welcome to sit at the NRC Staff 13 counsel's table.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, he has so many offers 15 that he's overwhelmed.
16 (Laughter.)
17 MR. GEOCARIS: Where is there room?
18 MS. CH AN : Right there at the end.
19 MR. GEOCARIS: Your Honor, it would be
- 20 appropriate at this time, before retendering Mr.
21 McGregor for cross, to mention that in reviewing his 22 previous transcript, he has one section that he believes 23 ought to be clarified. It involves a lot of documents, f 24 and he's gone back and gotten these dates of memos.
! ) 25 He would like to clarify that under oath, and then 1
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 6U144 (312) 232-0262
17384 v
1 he's ready for cross again.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I was going to 3 suggest that you get the other microphone, which is in 4 better working order, and switch that one off. Switch 5 this one on and the other one off.
6 MR. GEOCARIS: Thank you.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Welcome back, Mr.
8 McGregor.
9 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Let's note for the record 11 that you are personally represented by Mr. Geocaris 12 here, and we'll resume your testimony. You may correct 13 whatever section you wish in your prior testimony.
14 THE WITNESS: All right, sir. Thank you.
15 It's good to be back.
l 16 I do have a number of pages where there is 17 testimony that should be corrected and then some l 18 clarification in an area that was --
l 19 MR. GALLO: May I ask a question, your Honor?
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Certainly. 1 21 MR. GALLO: Are we talking about 22 clarifications to the witness' direct testimony or 23 clarifications to the cross examination that's been done l 24 so far?
l 25 THE WITNESS: This was an area that I think I l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262 L...---..-. -
17385 Q
l probably am guilty of confusing, and it was questions 2 that Mr. Gallo -- I'm sorry -- Mr. Guild had been asking 3 me about meetings that had taken place in January and 4 February, memorandums that were written in January and
, 5 February.
6 All of these memorandums at one time or another 7 have -- they're on record here, but we didn't have them 8 at the time. There was a confusing factor, I think --
9 as I reread the transcript, there was a confusing factor 10 in it.
11 I've just assembled them, and they're available for
~'h 12 review, if anybody wishes to look at them.
(V 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: So apparently, Mr. Gallo, 4
14 these are with regard to examination by Mr. Guild.
15 Is there any objection to that?
16 MR. GALLO: No objection.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine. Why don't we let your 18 counsel handle this, if he wishes, cr can you just 19 narrate?
20 MR. GEOCARIS: Just to give the transcript 21 reference, the transcript reference is on or about Page 22 11704. I think Mr. McGregor can give a brief narration l 23 of the dates that these memos should fit together.
24 THE WITNESS: In this transcript on 11702, 3
) 25 and 4, I was being questioned with regard to the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
17386 1 interference problems between the piping electrical and 2 HVAC systems.
3 I'm sorry, your Honor. I don't know why I'm doing 4 this. There should be a copy in there for each one of 5 you.
6 (Indicating.)
7 I was being questioned on how this came about and 8 how it was relevant to the January memo that Mr. Little 9 had written and our responses to that memo and a 10 follow-up on it.
11 I think about on 11704, at the top of that, I h 12 answered -- it's very confusing, as I say - "and the
[U 13 front page is not -- he wrote that in January 19th --
14 I'm sorry. March 19,1986." There's a confusing factor 15 as to the scenario of events.
16 In the folders that I have passed out, on January 17 the 27th, Mr. Little wrote the memorandum on the 18 resolution of potential piping interferences at 19 Braidwood, the resolution of it with regard to 20 testimony. That has been put together.
) 21 Then on January the 30th, the next one you'll see l 22 is a response from myself back to Mr. Little on the 23 interference problems; also, a copy of Mr. Schulz' 24 answer to the request from Mr. Little on January the 25 30th; and then the -- followed up, then, on 3/19/86.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 j (312) 232-0262 -
17387 v
1 Mr. Little again then came back with a memo to a 2 number of inspectors at Braidwood -- Muffett, Jacobson, 3 Kaufman, Mendez and Kropp -- as to the inspection of the 4 piping and interference problems at Braidwood.
^
5 Those items -- or those documents should clear up 6 if there was a confusion factor in the piping 7 interference problem at Braidwood.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Now, have these documents 9 been distributed to all counsel here?
10 MR. GEOCARIS: Yes, your Honor.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
12 What would you suggest we do; have these admitted 13 as an exhibit, Mr. Guild?
14 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, it appears in part 15 that the documents that Mr. McGregor has distributed may 16 be included as portions of Intervenors' Exhibit 107 in 17 evidence.
18 I can't confirm that they are completely identical, l 19 but the cover of Intervenors' 107 is Mr. Little's March
[
20 19, '86, memorandum to the inspectors. It appears to i
! 21 attach a January 30th memo from Schulz to Little and a 22 January 30th memo from McGregor to Little.
23 Those two January 30th memos are identical to the 24 documents Mr. McGregor has just distributed.
25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I understand that.
(
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17388
\
l 1 What Mr. McGregor is saying now is that this 2 represents a chronology of events. As long as there are 3 no surprises in here, I think perhaps we cught to mark 4 this as a Board exhibit, even though it may repeat other 5 exhibits that are in the record, so that we have the 6 correct chronology as far as Mr. McGregor is concerned.
7 MR. GUILD: That would be satisf actory to 8 Intervenors, Mr. Chairman.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo, is that 10 satisfactory to you?
11 MR. GALLO: No objection.
) 12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Berry?
J 13 MR. BERRY: Marking it as a Board exhibit is 4 14 satisf actory to the Staf f, Mr. Chairman.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Why don't we mark 16 this, then, as Board Exhibit 9 and admit that into 17 evidence.
18 (The document was thereupon marked Board 19 Exhibit No. 9 for identification as of 20 November 19, 1986.)
21 (The document was thereupon received into 22 evidence as Board Exhibit No. 9.)
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Are there any further 24 corrections to the testimony, Mr. McGregor?
25 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. I have flagged a N
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. .. = - _ _ _ . . ..
i 17389 O
1 number of them. They' re mostly typographical errors in 2 the testimony; that's all.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: How do counsel wish to 4 handle that?
5 MR. GALLO: I would suggest that we handle 6 the transcript corrections by written --
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: There's nothing of any j 8 substance there; is that it?
9 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: There are matters of 1
11 substance?
12 THE WITNESS: There is nothing of substance
- \
13 that I know of. It's mostly typographical errors and i 14 dates that probably should be corrected.
)
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Do you have all of that <
16 listed on a sheet that you could --
17 THE WITNESS: I have one copy of it. If it 18 can be Xeroxed, that would be fine.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The problem of handling it >
20 as a transcript correction is that Mr. McGregor is not a
- 21 party. We might just as well have his corrections noted 4
22 right now for the record, because I don't think there's
- 23 any other method of doing it, j 24 Tile WITNESS: I just have marked the pages
! 25 and the line numbers.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. l 1 Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17390 d
1 MR. GEOCARIS: Tell the judge.
2 THE WITNESS: I've just jotted down the pages 3 and the line numbers of the corrections needed.
4 (Indicating.)
5 I guess what I should do is I'll write them up in 6 their entirety and resubmit them, if you wish.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Welle why don' t you write 8 them up and resubmit them to counsel and have them agree 9 on that.
10 THE WITNESS: Okay.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: So we will treat those as 12 corrections of the record and have everyone approve that
! 13 before we take any further steps on that.
14 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, let me just ask 15 this.
16 The typographical corrections are certainly 17 satisfactorily handled that way, but I understood Mr.
18 McGregor to refer to some date corrections.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I heard " dates" in there,
- 20 too, and that gave me some pause, also.
21 I think that's more than typographical, Mr.
22 McGregor.
23 MR. GUILD: Perhaps if we could just ask Mr.
24 McGregor from the stand to note whatever corrections he 25 believes are appropriate that are date corrections at Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17391 b
d 1 this time.
2 THE WITNESS: Okay.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes, right now, if you can.
4 THE WITNESS: Okay.
5 On Page 11048 -- I'm sorry -- 11480, Line -- while 6 we're on that page, we might as well make two 7 corrections. On Line 20 it should read "L. K.
8 Comstock's Quality Assurance" as opposed to "L. K.
9 Comstock's audit assurance."
10 On Line 24 it should read, "That was in late 1982,"
11 not "1983"; 1982 versus 1983.
12 On 11507 there is reference made to a copy of a 13 document, and I think Mr. Guild was saying "that appears 14 on its face, March of '84." On Page 11509, Line 25, 1
15 we're referring to the same document. It says, "Now, 16 sir, in August of 1984, I believe you still were 17 assigned to Braidwood in performing duties as reflected 18 in the assignment of responsibilities, this memo" -- I'm 19 not sure if that's a date correction or not.
20 If we' re talking about the memo, we' re in conflict 21 between the March and August of '84.
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And the correct date is 23 March of '84?
24 THE WITNESS: March of '84, you're right, 25 sir.
's
- Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17392 O
V 1 This is one of the documents that have been 2 admitted to the hearing. On Page 1153 8, Line 18, Mr.
3 Guild says, "Mr. Chairman, I'm going to move to admit 4 Intervenors' 404."
5 I think -- now, if you'll turn to Page 11546, I 6 believe we're referring to the same document again.
7 There on Line 20, it's Exhibit 104. Again, on 11553, we 8 refer to the same document again on Line 22, and again 9 it's Intervenors' 104.
10 So I assume that back on 11538 it should be changed 11 from "404" to "104."
I' 12 JUDGE GkOSSMAN: Okay. That's fine.
\
13 THE WITNESS: And those are all of the date i
14 issues -- dato corrections.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. So we're ready, then, 16 to proceed.
17 Mr. Gallo, I believe you were cross-examining.
18 MR. GALLO: Your Honor, Mr. McGregor was kind 19 enough to make some date corrections, and I think 20 another one is appropriate. I'm going to just follow up 21 and show it to him.
22 By the way, do you happen to have the transcripts i 23 with you from your testimony, the hearing transcripts?
24 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
( 25 CROSS EXAMINATION Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
r-(
17393 O
1 (Continued) 2 BY MR. GALLO:
3 0 can you turn to Page 11831.
4 I believe that I was responsible for this mistake.
5 If you look at Line 15, I asked the question, "Now, I ;
6 believe you have testified that you did have a meeting 7 with Mr. Wallace in the fall of 1984," and then it goes 8 on, "Do you recall this testimony?" "Yes, sir."
9 I believe it should read "the fall of '82."
10 A Yes, sir, you're correct in that.
11 0 Later on where continuing reference is made to the 12 meeting in '84, it should be '82 as well?
~'
13 A Well, in -- I did have a meeting with Mr. Wallace in the 14 fall of '82. However, you continue on and say, "I 15 believe this was the meeting with you and Mr. Schulz."
16 Mr. Schulz was not at Braidwood, and he did not 17 partake in the meeting with Mr. Wallace in '82.
18 However, there could have been a meeting in '84, and 19 then Schulz would have been a party to it.
20 0 Well, I believe the meeting that certainly I was l 21 referring to and I believe that you were referring to 22 was the one that you've just issued a correction on l
l 23 earlier in the testimony; that is, the meeting you l
l 24 attended with Wallace and Saklak shortly after Wallace l ) 25 arrived on-site at Braidwood.
(
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- . . . - - _ . - =_ -
17394 0
1 A No.
2 Q No?
t 3 A No.
4 The Saklak meeting was with Schulz and myself and 5 Wallace, and that would have been in '84.
6 0 That would have been in '847 7 A That would have been in '84.
8 0 All right.
i 9 A Mr. Wallace came to the site in the fall of '82, and at 10 that time he came over to my office and we did have a l
11 meeting then --
12 0 All right.
j 13 A -- in relation to problems.
14 But I think maybe it should stand as is, "'84."
15 0 With that clarification, I think you're correct.
16 A All right, sir.
17 Q Mr. McGregor, can you turn to Transcript Page 11450?
18 MR. GUILD: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
19 Is there another copy of the transcript available 20 that I could follow on with or look over someone's 21 shoulder? '
22 MR. BERRY: Staff will make a copy of the 23 transcript available to you.
24 BY MR. GALLO:
25 Q Page 11450 -- do you have it, Mr. McGregor?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
i 17395 1 A Yes, sir, I do.
2 0 At the top of the page, Mr. Guild is asking you a 3 question.
4 He said, "Is it true that there was, in addition, a 5 proposal that the Level III item of non-compliance be 6 cited against Commonwealth Edison Company for a material 7 false statement with respect to the issue of the 8 installation of mechanical-related safety equipment?"
9 Your answer was, "That is correct."
10 The next question was, "That item of 11 non-compliance, however, was not -- that recommendation 12 was not followed by regional management," and your (V~~')13 answer is, "That's correct."
14 Can you tell me if this was a -- if you yourself 15 had made the recommendation to cite Commonwealth Edison 16 for a material false statement?
17 A No, sir, it was not my recommendation.
18 0 Was it one of the other inspectors'?
19 A No, sir. There were no inspectors at the site at that 20 time.
21 0 Well, I mean, one of the inspectors associated with 22 either 8205 or 8309.
23 A I do believe it was an issue raised by the Enforcement 24 Coordinator within the Region.
O)
( 25 0 Do you know what the basis was for the recommendation?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17396 0
1 A Verbatim, no, I can't remember.
2 Generally it dealt with the FSAR and Commonwealth 3 Edison's statements within the FSAR that certain 4 safety-related systems, I do believe the words were, 5 "were constructed" or "have been constructed" to certain G codes of standards.
7 0 Do you recall whether or not it had to do with the 8 proper definition of what is known as the "NF boundary"?
9 A No, sir, it had nothing to do with the NF boundary.
10 0 It did not?
11 A That's correct.
12 0 Do you know whether or not the recommendation was C
- m. )T 13 presented to the regional management for consideration?
14 A Which?
15 0 That is, the recommendation to cite Edison for a 16 material false statement.
17 Was that recommendation presented to the regional 18 management for consideration?
19 A Yes, 91r, it was.
20 0 Do you recall what the disposition was?
21 A I think it wad probably even submitted to Headquarters, 22 Washington, D.C. -- NRC Headquarters, Washington, D.C.
23 0 Did it ask for an opinion of the nuclear regulation 24 group?
O)
( 25 A I don't know if it asked for an opinion, but I couldn't Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17397 ps b
1 -- I wouldn' t be able to clarify that.
2 0 Do you know what the disposition was?
3 A The issue was stricken f rom the report.
4 0 Do you know why?
5 A No, sir, I don't.
6 0 Isn't it your understanding that the reason it was 7 stricken from the report was because it was felt there 8 was no real problem with the Applicant's FSAR on the 9 issue involved?
10 MR. GUILD: Objection. The witness has 11 already answered the question that he lacks knowledge 12 and is obviously not competent to answer that follow-up
'}
m) 13 question.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, Mr. Gallo is 15 attempting to refresh his recollection. If that does 16 and he can answer that, he certainly ought to.
17 A Well, as I stated before, the FSAR plainly stated that 18 the plant was built to certain conditions under certain 19 codes and certain standards. The evidence that we had 20 found in the 8205 that resulted in a $100,000 penalty 21 would not substantiate those statements in the FSAR.
22 BY MR. GALLO:
23 0 Now, you were one of the inspectors on 8205; isn't that 24 correct?
(O) 25 A Yes, sir, I was.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17398 0
1 0 As I understand your previous testimony, you did not 4
2 make the recommendation that the material false 3 statement be assessed based on the statements in the 4 FSAR?
5 A That's correct.
6 Q Some individual in the Region did?
7 A That's correct.
, 8 0 Who was that, again?
9 A Probably the Enforcement Coordinator.
10 Q The Enforcement Coordinator -- is that Mr. Well?
i 11 A No, sir. Today it's Mr. William Schulz.
12 0 Who was the Enforcement Coordinator at the time that 13 we're talking about?
14 A If my memory serves me correctly, I think he was still 15 the Enforcement Coordinator at that time.
16 0 Mr. Schulz?
17 A Yes, sir.
18 Q Do you know whether or not he was the originator of the 19 notion that there was a material -- potential material 20 false statement involved?
21 A I have no idea.
22 0 You have no idea.
23 Now, let me ask you again: You know it was 24 stricken from the report; is that correct?
1
) 25 I believe I'm fairly characterizing your last Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17399
\~/
1 testimony on that point.
2 A Well, yes -- maybe -- it never appeared in the final 3 report that was issued.
4 0 And what report are you referring to?
5 A 8205.
6 0 All right.
7 So this was a matter that was considered before the 8 final report on 8205 was issued in 1983; is that 9 correct?
10 A Before it was issued to the licensee, correct.
11 Q Yes.
12 And I take it that even though you played a central (V) 13 role in the inspections under 8205, you played no role 14 with respect to this particular issue; is that correct?
15 A You're correct.
16 0 And as you sit here today, you cannot recall the reasons 17 that served to persuade your management to strike the 18 recommendation for a material false statement from the 19 8205 report?
20 A No, sir. I don't know why it was taken out.
21 Q All right.
22 Did you have any basis to agree or disagree with 23 the decision that was made?
24 A No, I don't have a basis to agree or disagree.
25 0 I meant at the time it was stricken from inclusion in Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17400 1 the final report.
2 A Well, the commission had declared -- or had made their 3 final report.
4 To be quite frank with you, I was not aware of it 5 being removed from the final report or that it was even 6 in the final report until I received my copy in the mail 7 some two or three weeks later.
8 0 Do you recall seeing such a recommendation in a draft of 9 the report?
10 A Certainly.
11 Q Do you know who the sponsor of that recommendation was?
I 12 l
U' 13 A Does that ref resh your memory on that point?
No, I don't -- I think we're confused on -- my draft 14 report went to the Region, and from that it was put into 15 its final form.
l 16 In its final form, it did include the statement of 17 a false statement.
I 18 0 All right. Let me see if I have the sequence of events.
19 I'm sorry to interrupt you.
20 A Well, and then f rom there it went -- as I understand it, 1
21 it went to Headquarters for a decision on the false l 22 statement.
23 When that decision was made or who made it or why l
24 they made it, I was never informed; and when the report
, O 25 was issued, it was quite evident that it wasn't in a
()
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
{ (312) 232-0262
17401 f%
b 1 portion of the report.
2 0 All right. I just want to nail down the sequence of 3 events.
4 You originated the initial draft of Inspection 5 Report 8205 and sent it to the Region for review.
6 Am I accurate so far?
7 A Correct.
8 0 Did that draf t have any recommendation for a material 9 false statement in it?
10 I take it it did not.
11 A Did my draft?
12 Q Yes.
13 A No, sir, it did not.
14 0 And then your draft was -- let me use this word --
15 massaged by the Staff at the Region in Glen Ellyn, and j 16 the recommendation for a material false statement was i
17 then included in that draft; is that correct?
18 A Yes, but I don't believe I called it a " draft." It was 19 -- if I recall right, that report was signed by 20 everybody prior to the approval -- or the response from 21 Headquarters.
22 O All right.
23 Now, who made the decision to strike it?
24 Was it Mr. Keppler or someone at Headquarters?
25 A I think I've already answered that, sir: I don't know.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17402 O
1 Q You don't know?
2 A I've already answered it: I don't know who made the 3 decision.
4 0 Well, 8205 was sent out under the letterhead of Mr.
5 Keppler, wasn't it?
6 A Certainly.
7 0 So whose report is 8205?
8 It's his report? Is that an accurate 9 characterization?
10 A Yes.
11 MR. BERRY: At this point, Mr. Chairman, I f 'N 12 would just -- the Staff has made its position clear g
13 before on this entire line of questioning with respect 14 to Staff witnesses. I don't intend to repeat that 15 argument.
16 I would just like to be understood as having my 17 objection, a standing objection, to the inquiry into the 18 internal Staff deliberations and discussions and the 19 decision by which certain actions were taken and things.
20 I don't want to interrupt unduly Mr. Gallo's 21 examination, but I don't want to be understood to have 22 acquiesced and waived any exploration into this whole 23 subject matter.
l 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. We appreciate your l
(~%
(j 25 renewing your objection, which had been overruled in the l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17403 O
b 1 past.
2 Mr. Gallo?
3 BY MR. GALLO:
4 0 One last question on the material false statement issue:
5 Do you know who at Headquarters was solicited for 6 either decision-making or advice by the Region?
7 A I have no idea.
8 0 Do you have the exhibits with you that were introduced 9 into evidence as a part of your testimony?
10 If not, I can be of assistance.
11 A I -- no, sir, I don't.
I'N 12 0 All right. I have a series of questions on Exhibit 99.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Whose exhibit is this?
14 MR. GALLO: This is Intervenors' Exhibit 99.
15 I'm afraid I only have one.
16 BY MR. GALLO:
17 Q Now, Mr. McGregor, you were asked a series of questions 18 by Mr. Guild with respect to Intervenors' Exhibit 99.
19 As I recall your testimony, you testified that you 20 thought that you had contributed to the issuance of the 21 assistance request form that was issued by Mr. Hayes, 22 because you thought that he had -- that you had written 23 him a memorandum asking for assistance to inspect in the 24 areas indicated in the assistance request form.
) 25 Do you recall that testimony?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
1 17404
- o 1 A Yes, sir, I do.
2 Q Now, do you recall whether or not you, in fact, did 3 write a memorandum to Mr. Hayes, asking him to seek 4 assistance from the Region?
5 A Yes, sir, I did.
6 Q Now, look at the second page. It looks as if what we 7 have here is a Xerox of a composite. At the top is a 8 memorandum, and at the bottom is an assistance request 9 form that is signed by Mr. Hayes.
10 Can you help me? Is that a correct assumption on 11 my part?
12 A Yes, sir, that's correct.
13 Q Now, the assistance request form shows Mr. Hayes and Mr.
14 Hinds as the requesters.
15 Who was Mr. Hinds?
16 A Julian Hinds -- and I'm sure that's who they're 17 referring to here -- was the project inspector 18 underneath Mr. Hayes for the Braidwood site.
19 Q Now, if I understand the organization correctly, at the 20 time we're talking about, March 15, 1983, as the 21 Resident Inspector at Braidwood, did you report to Mr.
22 Hayes and Mr. Hinds?
23 A I reported to Mr. Hayes.
24 Q To Mr. Hayes?
25 A Yes, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17405
/ ')
V 1 Q Now, can you help me again? If you look at the 2 right-hand corner of the assistance request form, it 3 says, " Requested completion date: March 30, 1983."
4 If you know, what is meant by that?
5 A On the assistance request form, they' re requesting that 6 the assistance be completed by March 30th of that year, 7 1983.
8 0 Essentially the request for -- does that mean that the 9 actual work be done or that simply people be assigned by 10 that date?
11 A People be assigned to -- D could have -- I think in this 12 case here, It was asking for an inspection to be 13 completed by March 30th, because I think in my testimony 14 before, the requirements in 8205 -- I'm sorry -- the 15 requirements in the -- at that time it was called I 16 believe an Immediate Action Letter.
17 The requirements of the Immediate Action Letter, 18 which was issued sometime in the first part of September 19 of '82, were actions that were required for Commonwealth 20 Edison to complete on safety-related systems.
21 I think my testimony will show that in the latter 22 part of December or in January of '83, Commonwealth 23 Edison had completed their requirements that were 24 outlined in the Immediate Action Letter.
25
( 0 Now, do you recall whether or not Mr. Hayes -- strike Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 17406 l
m J
1 that.
2 Earlier you referred to "D."
3 Is that Mr. Hayes you're referring to?
4 A Yes, sir.
5 0 was that a nickname for him or something?
6 A He never -- he preferred to be called "D," rather than 7 his first name.
8 0 Just the letter "D"?
9 A Just the letter "D," that's correct.
10 And then --
11 Q I don't believe there's a question on the table at the 12 moment.
13 A Well, I was going to continue on with the scenario of 14 what happened up to -- and why the March 30th, if you 15 wish --
l 16 Q No.
17 A Okay.
l 18 Q Let me ask a question to focus it.
19 A Okay.
20 Q Did Mr. Hayes, prior to completing and filling out this 21 assistance request form, diccuco the matter with you?
22 A Yes, on a number of occasions, mainly because I 23 requested of him inspections to be completed to resolve 24 the IAL issue, the Immediate Action Letter issue.
j 1
i 25 0 Now, under the assistance request form, there is a Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17407 p)
\v 1 statement of detail that addresses the very 8205 matter 2 that you've testified to.
3 If I can compare that to the memorandum that was 4 sent to Mr. Little that appears at the top of the page, 5 they seem to have shifted the focus somewhat. You 6 correct me if you disagree with that.
7 But the assistance request form that was -- or the 8 memorandum that transmitted the assistance request form 9 asked for follow-up inspections, first of all, for an 10 evaluation of CECO's QA program and its implementation 11 and effectiveness relative to assuring that site I~ h 12 contractors that perform safety-related work now meet b 13 QA/QC requirements.
14 The second point is the matter involving the 15 installation of mechanical equipment that was addressed 16 in 8205.
17 Did your memorandum to Mr. Hayes ask for assistance 18 to determine and to evaluate CECO's QA program and its 19 site contractors?
< 20 A I believe it did.
21 Q And did Mr. Hayes discuss -- strike that.
22 Would you agree that certainly an evaluation of 23 CECO's QA program and its implementation in relation to 24 its site contractors is a much broader consideration D)
( 25 than the matter of the installation of safety-related i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Ueneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17408
.g_
f
\-
1 equipment under 8205?
2 A Well, I don't have to say that we felt that the reason 3 for the civil penalty and the immediate corrective 4 action were in part mainly due to inadequate Quality 5 Assurance and Quality Assurance programs and 6 instructions.
7 0 I understand that.
8 A So it would only be evident that we would look at the 9 program.
10 0 All right.
11 But you would agree that the evaluation called for
[ \ 12 in Mr. Hayes' memorandum to Mr. Little is really a b 13 broader inquiry than just merely the question of the 14 reinspection of the mechanical equipment flagged under 15 8205?
i 16 Wouldn't you agree with that?
l l 17 A Yes, sir.
18 0 All right.
l l 19 And it's your testimony that your memorandum to Mr.
{
20 Hayes really requested assistance in both areas; is that 21 correct?
22 A That's correct.
23 0 And he discussed this with you prior to going forward 24 with advice -- or requesting assistance from Mr. Little?
25 A I think, if I recall my testimony correctly, it got down l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 .-.- - _ _,
1 17409 O
1 to an urgency point because --
2 Q But he discussed it with you, didn't he?
3 A Let me explain.
4 The time element was going on, and I asked Mr. D.
5 Hayes on a number of occasions for assistance and that, 6 if we didn't get assistance, that I was going to go out 7 and start a reinspection of the program.
8 He said, "No. That's not your job. I'll get us 9 assistance to do it."
10 From that memo that I sent up to him requesting the 11 assistance, he generated the assistance request form to 12 the projects branch.
13 Q Now, what does the term " urgent classification" mean?
14 Is that a term of art used by the Region?
15 MR. GUILD: Where is the reference, Counsel?
l 16 MR. GALLO: It's in the assistance request 17 form.
18 A I don't know in what context -- why D -- what he's 19 actually meaning by saying " urgent classification."
- 20 BY MR. GALLO
21 Q But you understood your request to be an urgent one; is 22 that correct?
23 A Yes, sir, because we had -- we were fast approaching a l
24 year since the Immediate Action Letter was issued, and O)
( 25 nothing had been accomplished to inspect the rework that I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, 1111nois 60134 I i (312) 232-0262 ._ j 1 .- . . - - _ _ _ - _ . _ _ _ - _ _ . . - _ - . _ _ -.-- - - - _ - _ __ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
17410 V
1 Commonwealth Edison had done.
2 0 Now, this was the inspection by the NRC Staff you're 3 referring to?
4 A That's correct.
5 0 Now, let me ask you directly: Why did you feel this 6 sense of urgency?
7 I understand that time had passed, but what was 8 there about that circumstance that made you feel that it 9 was urgent that assistance be brought to bear to inspect 10 in this area?
11 I'm talking now about the installation of 12 saf ety-related equipment.
13 A Well, the Immediate Action Letter required Commonwealth 14 Edison to cease work on all safety-related systems that 15 were affected; that work could not start on those 16 systems until they had completed actions that were 17 required in the Immediate Action Letter.
18 Commonwealth Edison, as I said, in December had 19 completed probably 99 percent of the Immediate Action 20 Letter and then was turning these systems back over to l
21 Construction to continue working.
22 0 Now, the systems you' re ref erring to -- we' re talking l
23 about pumps and tanks and items of what are known as 24 mechanical equipment that's installed by the mechanical l
l b)
( 25 contractor at Braidwood, Phillips Getschow; isn't that l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
1 17411 Q l 1 correct?
2 A We refer -- in -- in 8205, we addressed mainly 3 mechanical components, that's correct.
4 0 And it's tanks and pumps and those kinds of --
5 A Reactor coolant systems, reactor coolant pumps, steam 6 generators, the shutdown pumps, the charging pumps, ISI 7 pumps, essential service water systems.
8 I don't think we should -- we don't have to go into 9 the naming of the systems.
10 0 They' re all detailed in a table --
11 A Yes, sir.
, O
~'
12 0 -- in 8205, aren't they?
13 A Yes, sir.
14 0 Approximately about 235 items?
15 A I think you're correct on that, somewhere in that area.
- 16 Q These are items that had been, for the most part, l
17 purchased from off-site vendors; and it was Getschow's 18 job to take the equipment and properly install it in the t
l 19 right location in the right manner at the Braidwood 20 plant; isn't that correct?
l l 21 A In most caces, yes, sir.
l
- 22 Q And essentially the Quality Assurance program called for
! 23 -- that is, the CECO QA program -- called for the 24 installation of this equipment in accordance with 25 installation procedures.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 1111rois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17412 (m) v 1 I believe when you went out and inspected under 2 8205, you found that there were no installation 3 procedures; is that correct?
4 Essentially these 235 items had been installed 5 without having any installation procedure used to guide 6 the installation of the equipment?
7 A I believe when I arrived on the site, I think Getschow 8 had probably 12 or maybe 15 procedures written; and the 9 majority of them, probably 80 percent, were 10 administrative-type procedures to control mail, 11 drawings, things of that nature.
12 O But there were no procedures for the installation of 13 this equipment, were there?
14 A I think there was a procedure maybe on the steam 15 generators or maybe the reactor coolant pumps. I think 16 there was a procedure, although of the eight steam 17 generators, I think it was used on one.
18 0 Well, didn't you find under 8205 that the equipment, 235 19 items listed in the back of the inspection report, had 20 been installed in a manner without having the required 21 procedures in place; that is, the installation 22 inspection procedures?
23 A I can't recall the exact words in 8205, but that sounds 24 pretty close to being the exact words.
25 0 All right.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 4
(312) 232-0262
17413 1 And under the Immediate Action Letter that you've 2 described earlier, one of the first things that had to 3 be done was the establishment and the formulation of 4 such procedures; that was one of the first steps in the 5 corrective action program, wasn't it?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 0 And that no new equipment was to be installed until 8 those procedures were in place; is that correct?
9 A No new saf ety-related work on -- no new work on the 10 safety-related systems --
11 0 Correct.
(}
%s 12 A -- would continue.
13 0 No new equipment that was saf ety-related equipment was 14 to be installed until those procedures were in place.
15 That was one of the corrective actions; is that 16 correct?
17 A Yes.
18 0 The other corrective action was to go back and reinspect 19 the 235 items to determine whether or not they had been 20 installed properly, and the guide for installation or 21 the guide for that kind of activity was the procedure 22 that was to be developed for future work; isn't that 23 correct?
24 A That's correct.
( 25 0 And by the time of March,1983, when this assistance Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17414 1 request form was formulated by Mr. Hayes, hadn't those 2 procedures, in fact, already been established by 3 Phillips Getschow and reviewed and approved by 4 Commonwealth Edison?
5 A I think a number of them were, yes, sir.
6 Q And that new saf ety-related equipment was being 7 installed by Getschow in accordance with that newly 8 established procedure; isn't that correct?
9 A Yes, sir.
10 0 And that simultaneously isn't it correct that Edison was 11 beginning to re-examine the installed work that you had 12 flagged that had been improperly installed and to l 13 reinspect it against the new procedure?
l 14 A That inspection had been accomplished -- or that l 15 reinspection by the contractor and by the contractor's l
l 16 Quality Control Department and by Commonwealth Edison's 17 Quality Assurance Department had been. completed in the 18 months of September, October, November and December.
I 19 0 Of what year?
l 20 A 1982.
l l
21 0 1982?
l 22 A Yes.
23 0 All right.
24 And so that the Applicant, Commonwealth Edison, and N
25 its contractor, Phillips Getschow, was taking corrective Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17415 (n)
V 1 action in accordance with the findings of 8205 by March 2 of 1983; isn't that correct?
3 A Certainly.
4 0 Now, I don't understand, then -- strike that.
5 And you were, I assume, because you were making 6 these requests to Mr. Hayes, monitoring this activity as 7 a Resident Inspector to determine the progress that was 8 being made with respect to addressing this matter under 9 8205; isn't that correct?
10 A I was monitoring it, yes, to a very limited scope.
11 Q Now, I guess I fail to understand -- I can certainly 12 understand your interest and why it was that you wanted
{~~'}
v 13 to inspect and to conduct what I will call a 14 " confirmatory" inspection, but why the urgency?
15 I just don't understand that.
16 The equipment wasn't going anyplace, was it? The 17 fuel load was many months off, wasn't it?
18 A Well, you're correct in the fuel load. It's years off.
19 However, we' re still talking about safety-related l 20 systems, piping systems that are being connected to 21 these putaps.
22 I don't think we should instill in our minds that 23 we only were looking at a pump. We were looking at the l 24 pump that was in that system. We were looking at the
() 25 entire system.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17416 V'
1 Piping in many cases was hung, and partial welding 2 was in progress. Pipes were -- were completely 3 installed, and yet equipment was not bolted in place or 4 physically installed in place.
5 And so our look at the safety-related issue 6 involves all of the material, whether it be a pipe or 7 pump or whatever.
8 0 Well, I think we can agree that your interest was 9 important; that they were safety-related systems and it 10 was a matter of importance.
11 My only question is: Why the urgency?
12 " Urgent request for assistance," according to Hayes 13 and your understanding, "by March 30, 1983."
14 MR. GEOCARIS: Objection; asked and answered.
15 MR. GALLO: I don't think he answered the 16 question. What he did was explain to me how important 17 the matters were.
18 My question is: Why was there this urgency?
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I understand his 20 answer was that there was piping and other connections 21 being made to that equipment which had not yet been 22 approved as installed properly.
23 MR. GALLO: What does that have to do with
- 24 urgency?
, O Is my understanding correct JUDGE GROSSMAN:
( 25 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 _
17417 1 of your answer?
2 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. I did answer 3 already. I told him we're fast approaching a year since 4 the issuance of 8205, the $100,000 civil penalty on 5 August 29th of 1982. It is now March of 1983, and we're 6 fast approaching one year since that was issued.
7 Commonwealth Edison is now back out there 8 assembling the systems, welding and continuing on with 9 the construction process. No one has looked at, no one 10 has examined, no one has been out to verify that the 11 work that they said was done was, in fact, completed.
i 12 BY MR. GALLO:
13 0 Well, clearly, the NRC was not going to issue them an l 14 operating license until that inspection had been done; 15 isn't that correct?
16 A Well, it's very difficult to --
17 0 Can you answer my question, which is: Clea rly , the 18 NRC --
19 A I don't know, I don't know.
20 0 You don't know?
21 You think that the NRC would have issued an 22 operating license without conducting the inspection 23 confirming the corrective action under 8205? Is that 24 your testimony?
D
( j\ 25 MR. BERRY: Objection.
f l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17418 O
U 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, Mr. Gallo, I think 2 we're being a little argumentative here. I think your 3 question was why was there the urgency, and I think the 4 witness has answered.
5 MR. GALLO: Well, I want to know whether 6 there was an urgency -- whether or not there was an 7 urgency from a safety standpoint. I'm unable to get an 8 answer to that point.
9 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, this is 10 argumentative.
11 If Mr. Gallo wants to argue on brief that all I 'N 12 inspections in the construction phase are non-urgent or 13 non-important because the plant is not going to get an 14 operating license for some time in the future, he should 15 make that argument.
16 But to extract that from this witness is simply a 17 waste of time. It is argumentative. Mr. McGregor has 18 answered the question to the best of his ability, I 19 believe.
20 MR. BERRY: Particularly, Mr. Chairman, since 21 Mr. McGregor is not the author of the document in which 22 the request for urgent classification was made, I just 23 don't think it's f ruitful at this point to try to get 24 anything more f rom the witness.
O)
( 25 I think he's testified as fully as he can, and at i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17419 N
1 this point there's just not that much more to get from 2 the witness.
3 MR. GALLO: Mr. Berry hasn't been listening.
4 The underlying document that supported this --
5 according to this witness' testimony at least, the 6 underlying testimony that supported the assistance 7 request form issued by Mr. Hayes was based on the 8 memorandum written by this witness, who himself l 9 testified that he characterized the request for i 10 assistance as " urgent."
11 Now I'm trying to uncover as to what drove him to O 12 indicate this was a matter of urgency.
t l 13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Well, my 14 understanding is that he answered the question: that l 15 once the equipment was installed, there were safety l
16 systems being connected up to that equipment, and his l
l 17 urgency was that the equipment installation be approved 18 before those safety systems were fully connected up.
19 It seems to me to be --
l 20 MR. GALLO: Let me follow up on that premise.
i 21 If he had been that clear, I think I would have been I
l 22 able to pass on to the next question af ter that point.
23 BY MR. GALLO:
l 24 0 Is that your testimony, Mr. McGregor, as characterized 25 by the judge?
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Ueneva, Illinois 6013 1 (312) 232-0262
17420 w
1 A Yes, sir.
2 0 Okay.
3 Now, isn't it true that Commonwealth Edison was 4 essentially carrying on the work -- that is, the 5 installation of these pipes and connecting them up to 6 these pieces of equipment -- at their own risk?
7 If they had done it incorrectly, as they did the 8 first 235 items, they'd have to do it over, wouldn't 9 they?
10 A I would assume so.
11 Q So is your sense of urgency just that you wanted to 12 protect Commonwealth Edison so that they wouldn't do 13 work in a manner that might be a cause for doing it over 14 again?
15 EP. GEOCARIS: Objection.
16 BY MR. GALLO:
17 0 Is that the sense of your urgency?
18 MR. GEOCARIS: I'm objecting to that question 19 as being argumentative.
20 MR. GALLO: Let me rephrase the question.
21 BY MR. GALLO:
22 0 Was your urgency and the urgency that you conveyed to 23 Mr. Hayes -- was that attributable to a sense that you 24 wanted to protect Commonwealth Edison from having to do 25 rework in case they didn't do it right the second time?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
(
17421 s
1 MR. BERRY: That's argumentative as well, Mr.
2 Chairman.
3 MR. GALLO: I don't know what's argumentative 4 about that question.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, let's also talk about 6 relevance.
7 When we go that f ar, Mr. Gallo, what is relevant as 8 to whether the witness thought that it was urgent that 9 the equipment be checked out before safety systems were 10 attached to it?
11 What further along that..line is relevant to us?
~~h 12 MR. GALLO: I think it's relevant to the (G )
13 proper characterization of the assistance request form, 14 and it's relevant to how Mr. Little might have seen the 15 matter when he received both the assistance request form 16 and the memorandum signed by Mr. Hayes.
17 MR. BERRY: I don't understand how that's an 18 issue, Mr. Chairman.
19 MR. GALLOr Well, I thought that this 20 particular docuue .t wi used by Mr. Guild as one 21 building block to snow that the regional management was 22 uncaring and unsupportive of the Resident Inspectors.
23 Here on its face -- at least, as it appears under 24 Intervenors' No. 99 -- is a request for urgent i 25 assistance; and we've elicited from the witness that he Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- -- ~_ - .-. -- - _ _ . . - . . . . .
17422 O
1 indeed was in concert with that request.
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, Mr. Gallo, we've gone 3 beyond that into territory in which you' re inquiring as 4 to whether the de facto installation of safety systems 5 connected to the equipment in question might have had 6 any influence on the NRC's handling of that equipment 7 installation. I don't think that it's profitable to get 8 into that.
9 I think the witness has indicated that he thought 10 that it would be preferable and perhaps urgent to 11 approve the installation of that equipment before the fT
\s l 12 safety systems were attached and created a new l 13 situation.
14 Now, I don't think it really is any of our 15 business, as far as relevance to this proceeding, as to l whether, in the absence of an inspection at that point, 16 17 some de facto situation was created that might have an 18 ultimate bearing on whether systems were approved that 19 should have been examined earlier.
20 Now, I'm being a little more explicit than you, Mr.
1 21 Gallo, but I think that's ultimately what we're 22 questioning here. I just don't think that it's
! profitable to get into that issue here.
23 24 I think the witness has indicated what was in his
) 25 thinking. If you wish to make any arguments that there l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17423
!O 1 was no urgency and that the installation of all the 2 safety systems would not have meant any difference as 3 far as the ultimate approval of those systems go, you 4 can certainly do that in your brief or in your proposed 5 findings.
6 But I think that's the territory that we're in now.
7 MR. GALLO: All right, your Honor. I'll move 8 slightly to the side and ask a different line on the 9 same issue.
10 BY MR. GALLO:
11 Q Now, Mr. McGregor, you were asked by Mr. Guild whether 12 or not you ever received a response to your request for 13 assistance, and you testified that you didn't know of
- 14 any.
15 Do you recall that testimony?
16 A I think that was my answer.
17 MR. GEOCARIS: Could we have a page 18 reference?
- 19 MR. GALLO
- Transcript Page 11462.
l
- 20 BY MR. GALLO:
21 Q Do you have that page, Mr. McGregor?
22 A Yes, sir, I do.
l 23 0 At the bottom of the page, it says:
l 24 "O Now, what response, if any, was given to 25 your request for assistance that you made N_
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. ,
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17424 f%
i \
V 1 to Mr. Hayes and that he, in turn, 2 transmitted to Mr. Little?
3 "A I don't know of a response.
4 "O Were you provided any additional 5 assistance to effect the evaluation of 6 CECO's QA program, its implementation and 7 effectiveness relative to site 8 contractors performing safety-related 9 work?
10 "A No, sir."
11 Do you see that?
} 12 A Yes, sir, I do.
v Now, did Mr. Hayes ever discuss the matter of the 13 0 14 assistance request, after he sent it off to Mr. Little, 15 with you, to your recollection?
l 16 A I think -- I think it might have been in June or in the 17 early summer months of '83 I went back again to Mr. D.
18 Hayes and asked him if it would be all right if I went 19 out and did an inspection on some indicators to see what 20 type of work Commonwealth Edison had done with relation 21 to the Immediate Action Letter issued with 8205.
22 I don't recall his exact words, but he had no 23 objection to it. I don' t recall the inspection report 24 number; but sometime in the middle of the summer -- I'll i
25 l
O( ) say June or July of '83 -- I did go out and look at I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l' 17425 0
, 1 think maybe 12 pieces of equipment that was supposed to 2 have been completed.
3 I had some items of non-compliance that were issued e
4 with relation to the foundation bolting of equipment.
l 5 It had been, quote, " completed." I'm trying to think of
, 6 the number of Phillips Getschow's installation procedure 7 -- I think it's PG -- PG-8, I believe it is. It was a 8 new procedure written.
9 I confronted the licensee with an issue on the 10 particular piece of equipment -- which had been 11 reinspected, corrected, inspected and signed off by 12 Phillips Getschow Quality Control and also inspected by
(~'}
O 13 Commonwealth Edison's Quality Assurance Department --
l 14 that the mounting bolts met the specifications.
15 Q Mr. McGregor, my question was: Did Mr. Hayes ever call
! 16 you with respect to the assistance request that he sent i
17 on to Mr. Little, after he had sent it to Mr. Little?
18 I don't want what your whole dialogue is. It's not 19 responsive to my question.
20 A My answer is: Yes. We had a conversation --
21 0 On an entirely different subject.
22 Can you answer my question as to whether you had a 23 conversation with Hayes on the assistance request he i
l 24 sent to Little?
25 MR. GEOCARIS: I believe he answered that at i
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 j (312) 232-0262
17426 1 the start.
2 MR. GALLO: He did not.
3 MR. GEOCARIS: He raid yes. You can try 4 again.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Could you reread the answer, 6 please, Miss Reporter.
7 MR. GEOCARIS: I believe it was the beginning 8 of the answer.
9 (The record was thereupon read by the 10 Reporter.)
11 MR. GEOCARIS: I'll withdraw the objection.
T 12 I think he was talking about the subject matter of the 13 request. But Mr. Gallo's question was more pointed, 14 so --
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That was my 16 understanding, too, that he was talking about his 17 follow-up to the work that had to be done. Instead of j 18 responding as to whether he renewed his request for l 19 assistance, he was indicating that he asked to do the l
l 20 job himself and went out to the field.
21 Now, that was my understanding f rom the answer.
l l 22 Am I --
l l 23 THE WITNESS: You're correct.
1 l
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But you're only interested, 25 Mr. Gallo, in the request for assistance?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
(
17427 1 MR. GALLO: That's what the question was. I 2 asked if he talked with Hayes about the request for 3 assistance after it had been sent to Little.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That's fine. We'll 5 direct the witness to answer.
6 A (Continuing.) Certainly, and we discussed it and --
7 BY MR. GALLO:
8 0 Wait a minute. That answers it. Now let me ask another 9 question.
10 A Let me finish.
11 Q Do you want to explain?
~'
12 A Yes.
13 0 Go ahead.
14 A Becauce in our discussion on what was being done with 15 this request for assistance, Mr. D. Hayes had no idea 16 when it would be done or if it was being done or 17 whatever. That's when I asked him could I go out and 18 take a look at it.
19 You know the rest of the story.
! 20 Q Didn't you come to understand that, in fact, at Mr.
l
! 21 Little's initiative, that an inspection activity was 22 being organized for the purpose of satisfying the first j 23 request made in Mr. Hayes' request for assistance; that l
l 24 is, an evaluation of the QA program at Braidwood and the l
1
\n- ) 25 effectiveness of the way the site contractors were l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17428 v
1 implementing it?
2 A I'm not aware that Mr. Little had assembled an 3 inspection force.
4 0 You're aware that an inspection force was being 5 assembled in April and May of 1983 for the purpose of 6 conducting an inspection at Braidwood and, indeed, to 7 implement the evaluation of CECO's QA program at the 8 Braidwood site?
9 A I was never aware of that.
10 0 You were never aware of that?
11 A No, sir.
12 0 Were you aware that six inspectors began a comprehensive 13 inspection of the contractors on-site at Braidwood in 14 June of 1983?
15 A There was a Quality Assurance inspection which resulted i 16 in 8309, and they began an inspection effort in the 17 latter part of June of '83, that's correct.
18 Q So isn't it a fact that the first inspections under 19 Inspection Report 8309 began in the latter part of June, 20 1983?
21 A I don't recall 8309 inspection efforts addressing the --
22 MR. GALLO: No. Just answer my question.
23 Then if you want to make the point that you' re about to 24 make, I'll give you an opportunity.
, 25 MR. GEOCARIS: Can we have it read back?
l ~/
l r
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
T k
17429 1 I think he was trying to answer.
2 (The answer wac thereupon read by the 3 Reporter.)
i 4 MR. GALLO: I interrupted.
5 MR. GEOCARIS: He was trying to answer.
6 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, the problem was Mr.
7 McGregor was asked first, "Didn't, in effect, Little 8 send people out to respond to the assistance request?"
9 Then he changed the question and said, "Didn't 8309 10 start in June?"
11 They are two different questions, and Mr. McGregor i 12 I understood was trying to answer and resolve the 13 contradiction between the thrust of the two questions.
14 MR. GALLO: There's no contradiction on the 15 record.
16 MR. GUILD: There is indeed.
17 MR. GALLO: The only contradiction has been 18 introduced by his comment.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, it seems to me that we 20 were asking about a particular Quality Assurance problem
- 21 that was being addressed in this memo and a request for I
22 assistance with regard to that. If we are on the same 23 Quality Assurance problem, there's no problem with the 24 questions.
(O ) 25 Dut if we've moved to another Quality Assurance Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17430 v
1 problem that was being addressed, then I think we ought 2 to have the record clarified.
3 Mr. Gallo, are we still talking about th'e same 4 Quality Assurance problem?
5 MR. GALLO: We're talking about the 6 assistance request made by Mr. Hayes at the behest of 7 this witness.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And that was --
9 MR. GALLO: As I recall the Board's ruling on 10 the matter of the installation of the saf ety-related 11 mechanical equipment, that particular avenue, the Chair 12 felt, at least in the direction I had been going, had 13 been amply explored.
14 The assistance request had another element to it; 15 that is, that assistance on an urgent basis was 16 requested with respect to an evaluation of the CECO QA 17 program. It's Item No. 1 in Intervenors' 99.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes. That's what I was 19 referring to now. I was going to ask you if 8309 dealt 20 with that same problem, that evaluation of the Quality 21 Assurance program, or whether it dealt with some other 22 Quality Assurance problem.
23 MR. GALLO: I'm trying to establish through 24 this witness that indeed it did; that it dealt with Item 25 1 in Intervenors' 99.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 . _ - _ - . _ -
17431 O
V 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All right. Well, then, 2 continue.
3 BY MR. GALLO:
4 0 My question was -- I'll repeat it at this point -- isn' t 5 it a fact that the first inspections that formed the 6 basis for the Inspection Report 8309 were conducted in 7 June -- the latter part of June,1983?
8 I've got it here.
9 (Indicating.)
10 A Yes. There was a -- there was a Quality Assurance team 11 sent out f rom the Region in June of '83 to do a Quality
('
12 Assurance inspection.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
14 Was the number 8209?
15 MR. GALLO: 8309.
4 16 THE WITNESS: 8309.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All right, fine.
l 18 MR. GALLO: If I misstated it, I apologize.
19 BY MR. GALLO:
20 0 Let me show you the inspection report. Perhaps you have 21 it.
22 (Indicating.)
23 A No.
24 0 Does the cover letter to the inspection report, signed i 25 by Mr. Keppler, show that there were follow-up Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, 1111nois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17432 V
1 inspections in July and August and October of 1983 and
- 2 further inspections in January and February of 1984?
3 A Yes, sir.
I 4 0 And, indeed, weren't six inspectors assigned to the
. 5 project?
6 They're named at the top of Mr. Keppler's lettet.
7 A Yes, sir, they are.
8 0 One of those inspectors is Mr. Schulz?
9 A That's correct.
10 0 Was Mr. Schulz a Resident Inspector by this time?
11 A No, sir, he was not.
12 Q He was part of the regional team at --
13 A That's correct.
14 0 -- Glen Ellyn?
15 Now, if you'd like to look at the inspection 16 report --
17 A Yes, sir, I would.
18 0 -- I'll show it to you.
i 19 (Indicating.)
l 20 Let me tell you what my question is:
l
. 21 Isn't it true that the inspection conducted by 22 those six inspectors were -- constituted a comprehensive 23 evaluation of the principal contractors on-site at 24 Braidwood at tho time; that is, Comstock, Phillips 25 Getschow and the HVAC contractor, Pullman?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17433 1 A Yes, sir.
2 0 And isn't that inspection report that was undertaken in 3 the latter part of June,1983, a response to Mr. Hayes' 4 request for assistance; that is, Item I?
5 A Not necessarily.
6 0 In what way wasn't it?
7 A There -- I think the records would show, if we went back 8 and looked at the modules, that the inspection program 9 which required Quality Assurance inspections to be 10 completed had not been completed.
11 8309 also was addressing a second assistance 12 request form that I had submitted to the Commission with 13 regard to piping problems that we had -- that I had 14 found out at the site.
15 The assistance request was submitted. I had asked 16 Mr. Hayes for the status of it. I was referred back 17 that the request for assistance had been lost and to
! 18 resubmit on the piping problems, and I did.
19 Mr. Schulz brought out with him that second 20 assistance request form to look at the problems in 21 identification of pipes.
22 0 Now, as I understand what you just told me, after the 23 assistance request form sent forward by Hayes in mid 24 March of '83, you generated yet a subsequent assistance 25 request form; is that correct?
l i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
' Geneva, 1111nois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17434 1 A That's correct.
2 0 You sent that to Mr. Hayes?
3 A That's correct.
4 O And that covered what; requests for inspection 5 assistance in the piping area at Braidwood?
6 A Yes, sir, it did.
7 0 And is it your testimony that 8309 was in part a 8 response to that request for assistance?
9 A That's correct, it was.
10 0 All right.
11 And am I right in concluding that the piping area f}
V 12 was work performed by Phillips Getschow?
13 A That's correct.
! 14 0 All right.
15 Now, doesn't that inspection report also contain a 16 substantial amount of coverage to L. K. Comstock as the 17 electrical contractor?
18 A Yes, sir, it does.
19 Q Doesn't it contain an evaluation of various aspects of 20 the L. K. Comstock work, including the installation l
21 procedures of the L. K. Comstock work and their 22 implementation of those procedures?
23 A Yes, sir, it did.
24 0 Isn't that, at least as to L. K. Comstock, the type of 25 evaluation of CECO's QA program and the implementation 1
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
.; Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17435 O
b 1 by Comstock as indicated in Mr. Hayes' letter -- or l 2 assistance request of mid March,1983?
3 A Certainly.
4 0 I'll give you this back.
5 (Indicating.)
6 Doesn't 8309 also contain an evaluation of the work 7 being done by Pullman, the HVAC contractor?
8 A Well, regardless of --
9 Q Doesn't it?
, 10 A Yes, it does.
11 Q And isn't that the kind of evaluation that was called 12 for by Item 1 of Mr. Hayes' letter -- rather, assistance 13 request to Mr. Little in mid March,1983?
14 A Yes, sir.
l 15 Q Can you tell me, Mr. McGregor, at what time -- let me 16 strike that and start again.
I
! 17 At Transcript Page 11628, starting at Line 9, in i
18 answer to I believe one of Mr. Guild's questions, you l 19 say in this answer, "I think the decision that Mr.
20 Little is referring to here is, basically, the request l
21 that the residents made previous to this, that assigned 22 inspectors be -- principal inspectors be assigned to I
! 23 Braidwood to help in the different areas of the i
24 different disciplines that we had comprised in the 20
[ l 25 corrective action programs."
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
f 17436 1 Do you see that testimony, Mr. McGregor?
2 A Yes, sir, I do.
3 0 Can you tell me when it was that -- strike that.
4 Were you one of the residents that requested this 5 assistance?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 0 And it was for the reason to send inspectors from -- is 8 it DRS?
9 A Yes, sir, you're correct.
10 0 These are specialists in various disciplines that the 11 Region has?
12 A They're -- they are inspectors that the Region has 13 assigned to different areas.
14 0 And you requested the assistance in this regard; is that 15 correct?
16 A That's correct.
17 0 To come out and monitor some of these corrective action 18 programs, to do inspections with respect to them?
19 A That's correct.
20 Q Do you remember when that was?
21 A It would have been in the summer, I would say, of 22 probably '84, when Mr. Warnick was the branch chief, 23 because I went directly to Mr. Warnick with a request to 24 give us some assistance in the 20 areas that we 25 considered to be important areas out at Braidwood.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 j
I 17437 V,O 1 0 Now, why did you request the assistance?
2 A That's the normal procedure when an inspector has 3 concerns or uncovers an area where he needs assistance.
4 I was assigned to Braidwood, and we were looking at 5 many, many projects going on. I can't divulge -- or I 6 cannot divide my time such that I can attribute all of 7 it to looking at one area within Phillips Getschow.
8 Problems have been brought up. They've been 9 raised. We need to continue looking at different areas 10 on different fronts. We ask for assistance to help 11 cover some of this.
12 0 So you just didn't have enough hands and time to do it 13 yourself?
14 A Certainly.
15 Q So you needed help for that reason.
16 Did you need any assistance because of any special 17 expertise that existed at the Region that could provide 18 you assistance --
i 19 A No.
20 0 -- with respect to particular matters?
21 A No.
l l 22 O You didn't need any specific -- for example, I 23 understand one of the inspectors, Mr. Calvin Ward --
l 24 that's an inspector that focuses -- who primarily has 25 his area of expertise on weld inspections.
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17438 4
1 Did you need that kind of assistance in connection 2 with any of the corrective action programs?
3 A I don't think we did in welding.
4 Q How about in the electrical area? Did you need any of 5 the expertise of, say, Mr. Mendez, who has a Bachelor of 6 Science degree in electrical engineering?
7 A No, sir.
8 0 You didn't need that.
9 How about the assistance of Mr. Neisler, who has 10 considerable experience, at least according to his 11 resume, with respect to the inspection and investigation 12 of allegations? Did you need that kind of assistance?
13 A We never made -- we never requested assistance in l
l 14 allegations. That was handled totally by the Region.
15 0 So if you had had enough time, you could have done 16 everything essentially yourself --
17 A No.
18 0 -- you and the other residents?
19 A No. We don't do allegations.
20 0 All right.
21 A We simply report them.
22 O Aside f rom the allegations, if you had had enough time, 23 you and the other residents could have done the work 24 yourself; is that your testimony?
25 A I think so.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 17439 l
v 1 Q You didn't need any special expertise f rom the Region?
2 A I don't think so.
3 JUDGE COLE: You don't think that you needed 4 any special expertise?
5 THE WITNESS: If we had enough hours in the 6 day and enough time, no, sir, we didn't.
7 BY MR. GALLO:
8 Q I didn't mean enough time so that you could -- so that 9 one could take course work or other formal education 10 with respect to these matters, 11 A No.
- 12 0 I'm talking about doing your inspections in the normal 13 course of business.
14 Is that the nature of your answer?
15 A Yes, sir.
16 0 I believe you testified at one point that you were the l
l 17 originator of the top 20 corrective action programs.
18 Do you recall that testimony?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 0 Did you mean that literally, that you coined the phrase j 21 and you identified --
! 22 A Yes, sir.
l l 23 0 -- the top 20 --
, 24 A Yes, sir.
l 25 0 -- corrective action programs?
, s Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 4
(312) 232-0262
17440 O
V 1 A Yes, sir. I had a list of 20 issues at Braidwood that 2 we presented to Mr. Warnick.
3 We also presented the same 20 to the CAT team when 4 they came on-site.
5 0 Well, isn't it just the reverse, Mr. McGregor? Didn't 6 Mr. Keshishian and Mr. Schroeder of Commonwealth Edison 7 develop a top 207 I
8 A No, sir.
9 0 Do you know who Mr. Keshishian is?
10 A I certainly do. He was the leader of the CAT team that 11 came out to Braidwood.
12 0 He was the CAT team leader?
13 A Yes, sir.
- 14 0 Isn't it a fact that as the CAT team leader, he had 15 questions with respect to whether or not Commonwealth 16 Edison could handle all the corrective action programs 17 that they were confronted with?
18 A Before he ever came on the site, I had a discussion with 19 his boss, Mr. Robert Heishman, and told him of the 20 20 items I have.
l 21 0 You told Mr. Heishman --
i 22 A That's correct, i
l 23 0 -- that there were 20 corrective --
24 A There were more than 20, but we had a list of them, yes, 25 sir.
I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17441 O
V 1 0 You had a list --
2 A Certainly.
3 0 -- of all the corrective action programs?
4 A Certainly. They came from Commonwealth Edison.
5 0 I see.
6 A But they weren't listed as the top 5 or the top 20 or 7 whatever.
8 Q As a resident, you had a list of all the corrective 9 action programs that were undertaken --
10 A Certainly.
11 0 -- or were going to be undertaken?
12 A Certainly. Most of those programs were initiated by i 13 inspection efforts with the residents.
14 Q Do you understand that the phrase " top 20" is really 20 15 of that total number of inspections?
16 A That's correct.
17 0 And who identified those 20? Did you or Mr. Heishman do 18 it or did Mr. Keshishian do it?
- 19 A I did it.
20 0 You did it?
21 A That's correct.
22 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, if Mr. Gallo is 23 getting ready to pass to a new line of questioning --
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Before Mr. Gallo gets to a 25 new line of questioning, we'll take a recess right now l
l
.i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17442 O
1 for 10 minutes.
2 ( WHER EU PON , a recess was had, after which 3 the proceedings were resumed as follows:)
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo?
5 BY MR. GALLO:
l 6 Q Mr. McGregor, I have here a letter dated April 8, 1985, 7 addressed to Mr. Keppler from Mr. Smith of Commonwealth 8 Edison.
9 (Indicating.)
10 Mr. Smith tells Mr. Keppler that in early March Mr.
11 DelGeorge of Commonwealth Edison talked to Mr. Davis at 12 the Region and agreed to provide an update of the 13 current status of the top 20 corrective action programs.
- 14 I believe attached to that letter is a listing of the 15 top 20 corrective action programs and a characterization 16 of their status.
17 Now, I'm just using this so that it will facilitate j 18 my next question.
19 I think you testified, prior to recess, that you
- 20 had a list of the entire group of corrective action 21 programs that were being conducted by Commonwealth 22 Edison and that from that list you selected the j 23 so-called top 20.
J 24 Is my recollection correct?
l l 25 A That's correct.
s.
I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
, Geneva, Illinois 66134 (312) 232-0262
17443 G
\v]
1 0 can you explain to me the basis by which you picked 2 these 20 out of the entire number of corrective action 3 programs?
4 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I'd just raise a 5 question of relevance.
6 I really don't understand what the importance is of 7 why Mr. McGregor chose these 20. Perhaps if Mr. Gallo 8 could suggest what this is leading up to, it might shed 9 some light on its relevance, but it's not apparent to 10 this counsel.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: If we have a discussion, is 12 that going to inform the witness of anything?
13 MR. GALLO: Yes. We'll have to excuse the l
14 witness.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, why don't we just 16 allow a few more questions on this.
17 I'll overrule the objection.
18 MR. GALLO: All right.
l 19 BY MR. GALLO:
l 20
- 0 Do you have the question?
21 A Why we chose --
i l 22 0 I take it that there were a larger number of corrective 23 action programs.
l l
24 Can you give me an estimate of how many, ;
l 25 approximately?
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Ueneva, Illinois 6U134 l
(312) 232-0262
17444 A
1 A Well, first of all, I think we should characterize the 2 corrective action programs or the " top 20," if we want 3 to refer to them as that.
4 I do believe some of these were not per se a 5 corrective action program initiated by the NRC 6 inspections but were -- I think a number of them were 7 problem areas that were identified by Commonwealth 8 Edison and established in DER's or other forms of 9 written communication on the plant.
10 0 Programs initiated by Edison without the prompting of 11 the Region?
12 A In short, yes. There were a number of those.
13 There was -- Commonwealth Edison kept a computer 14 list of -- actually, I guess it would be more correct to 15 identify them as open items of all natures that have to 16 be resolved.
i 17 Some of them we looked at. Naturally, if you find 18 400 nameplates of the ASME codes in the QA vault and you 19 don't know how they got there or why they're there, that 20 is, in essence, an important item.
21 So to answer your question more quickly and more 22 precisely, there were a number of things that would rise 23 to the top, a requirement for a specific corrective i 24 action to be a little bit more -- maybe the age of it, 25 how long it's been open, was it connected with a l
l
- Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17445 l O
(-J 1 safety-related system.
2 Those things would naturally persist as to which 3 would be more important.
4 0 You had a list of these corrective action programs and 5 open items; right?
6 A Certainly.
7 0 can you estimate for me, based on your recollection, how 8 many?
9 Was it 100 or more than 100?
10 A No, I don't think there were that many. I -- I really i
11 wouldn't want to characterize it; greater than 20.
12 O Greater than 20?
13 A Yes.
14 0 And is my understanding correct that you distilled from 15 that list these 20 that are attached to the Smith
, 16 memorandum?
1 17 A I don't know that what Mr. Smith has here -- they 18 probably are the same as what we were tracking if we i 19 refer to them as the " top 20." But if I recall our 20 sheets that we had listed down, we had listed some 21 number greater than 20.
22 I had referred that list to Mr. Warnick in his 23 office. I'm sure it was in the early summer of '84 or
- 24 '83. We brought it to the attention of Mr. Keppler --
25 I'm sorry -- Mr. Bob !!eishman.
(
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17446
'N 1 I think he made a preinspection visit to the plant 2 sometime before Mr. Keshishian came there. I gave Bob a 3 list of things that we were looking at.
4 0 Well, this list that you gave Heishman -- was it this 5 list of the top 20 that you had developed?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 0 Now, to return to my original question, what was your 8 basis for the selection of the top 20?
9 MR. GUILD: He answered the question already, 10 Mr. Chairman.
11 MR. GALLO: No. He has yet to establish what I' 12 criteria or other bases he used to determine which l 13 inspection or open item he would include on his and
! 14 which one he would not.
15 MR. GUILD: The question was indeed asked.
16 The answer was that some rise to the top; some were more 17 important; some were more dated; some involved 18 safety-related items.
19 That's his answer. He stated it already.
20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I believe his answer -- but j 21 it may not have been clear -- was that he based it on
- 22 what was most important, and he gave examples of what l 23 could have been considered important.
I 24 But I'm not sure that -- that was my understanding 25 of the answer, but it was not fully clear to me that it l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
(
17447 n
U 1 was. So we'll let Mr. McGregor indicate, if that was 2 the answer or if not, what is the answer.
3 A If I understood you correctly, just because -- in this 4 particular instance right here, we have ASME material 5 procurement. That's the first thing we come to.
6 Now, whether that was No.1 on the list or No.19, 7 it really was not relevant. It was a group that we 8 looked at.
9 Whether it was because this material procurement 10 problem was five years cid, if we were.looking at 11 safety-related issues, the second one happens to be the 12 ASME nameplates. Just because it's the second one, I 13 don't know that we said it's the second most important 14 thing at the site.
15 BY MR. GALLO:
16 0 I'm not asking how you ranked them.
17 A Right.
18 0 I asked how you decided which ones to include in the 20 19 and which ones to not.
20 A And I gave you examples of how they were chosen:
21 whether they were associated with safety-zelated 22 systems, how long had this item been identified, how 23 Icng was it being left open, what corrective actions 24 were necessary to close it out.
25 Those are some of the things we were looking at.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17448 O
1 Q Now, in giving this last explanation, you've used the 2 term "we."
3 I thought you had developed the top 20 that we 4 referred to.
5 A Yes, sir. Schulz -- well --
6 0 When you say "we chose them," were you referring to just 7 yourself? That's what you meant: just yourself?
8 A I'm trying to break the habit of saying "I" at the site 9 I'm assigned to, because we refer to "we" as the 10 residents.
11 Q But in this instance, you're talking about yourself?
12 A Yes, sir.
13 Q Did you ever send the list of the top 20, your list of 4
14 the top 20, to Commonwealth Edison or did you just send 15 them to Mr. Heishman?
16 A No. I don't ever recall sending them to Commonwealth 17 Edison.
18 0 Do you recall if the 8205 matter involving the
- 19 installation of the safety-related equipment was ever 20 inspected and closed out by the NRC Staff?
21 A I don't recall. If it was, it would have been late '85.
22 0 Was this after or before you left the Braidwood site?
23 A In the time frame as I was probably leaving or sometime 24 in '85, if it was closed out. I don't know.
I 25 0 All right.
L i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illfhois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
17449 1 I'll ask you some questions on Intervenors' Exhibit 2 100, 3 (Indicating.)
4 Now, if you turn to the transcript at 11470 --
5 MR. BERRY: What page was that?
6 MR. GALLO: 11470.
7 BY MR. GALLO:
8 0 -- there's a question from Mr. Guild at the top of the 9 page. He's referring to Intervenors' Exhibit No. 100.
10 He says, "Do the portions of Mr. Hayes' memo that I 11 have quoted f rom reflect your opinion about your
~'h 12 dealings at the time with Commonwealth Edison Company (V
l 13 and their QA people at Braidwood?"
14 There was a long argument over the propriety of 15 that question, and it's answered on Page 11476 in the l
l 16 middle of the page at Line 15. The answer is, "Yes, 1
l 17 they do."
l j 18 I ask you to just take a minute and refresh your l 19 memory with respect to Mr. Hayes' memorandum to Mr.
1 20 Knopp. I ask if that's still your testimony.
21 A Yes, sir, and my testimony remains as it's stated.
l 22 Q All right.
23 Now, you indicated again at Transcript Page 11469 24 -- I believe I'm quoting it correctly -- that you O
25 thought you wrote a memo discussing some of these
()
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17450 1 problems to Mr. Hayes.
2 Can you remember at this time whether or not you, 3 in fact, did write a memo to Mr. Hayes on this subject?
4 A I think we did, yes.
5 0 when you say "we," you mean yourself?
6 A Yes, I tnink I did.
7 0 Now, looking at Intervenors' 100, in the first 8 paragraph, there is an example concerning the Braidwood 9 HVAC contractor.
10 Do you see it there?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 0 Did you provide that example to Mr. Hayes?
13 A That example actually came out of I think a portion of 14 8309 inspection and the weld control issue at Braidwood 15 -- the HVAC contractor.
16 0 So you didn't provide this example; Mr. Hayes got it 17 from 8309?
I 18 A Mr. Hayes I'm sure got that from Mr. Schulz.
19 0 All right.
20 How about at the bottom of the page? Did you I
21 provide those examples to Mr. Hayes?
22 A Well --
(
l 23 0 Let me limit my question just to the Braidwood --
24 A Okay.
N 25 0 -- just to Braidwood.
()
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 j (312) 232-0262
17451
{
N}J 1 A I think certainly No.1, the mechanical equipment 2 installati on problems.
3 0 Okay. You provided that example. All right.
4 Now, I want to ask you a series of questions about 5 your understanding of your agreement with Mr. Hayes' 6 memorandum to Mr. Knopp.
7 If you look at the very beginning of the 8 memorandum, it says, "We note a changing attitude on the 9 part of CECO personnel towards NRC findings."
10 Had that been your experience at the time of 11 September -- prior to September,1983?
12 A Yes, sir.
13 0 It goes on to say that, "Many, especially in the 14 corporate office, have become very defensive."
15 Had that been your experience prior to September 6, 16 1983?
l 17 A Prior to September 6th, it wasn't as relevant as in the l 18 latter part of September.
l 19 0 What happened in the latter part of September?
l 20 A Well, I mean, when I first got there, I didn ' t -- we 21 didn't -- I didn't receive as much resistance to problem 22 areas as we did encounter later on.
23 0 All right, but let's be clear on this, now.
24 As I understand your testimony, first of all, Hayes N
, I 25 is writing this to Knopp; and it represents apparently Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 t
(312) 232-0262
I i
17452 l DN- /
1 his views based on experience that obviously must have 2 occurred prior to September 6, 1983; is that right?
3 A That's correct.
l 4 0 Now, when you agreed -- or when you answered Mr. Guild's 5 question and indicated that this memorandum represented 6 your views as well, I had assumed that it represented 7 your views in the same time f rame; that is, with respect 8 to events that occurred or may have occurred prior to 9 September 6, 1983.
10 Was I incorrect in that assumption?
11 A No. I'm thinking of the time f rame of probably May --
l~'h 12 from May of '83 on.
U 13 Q All right.
14 And you're bringing that forward past September, 15 1983, or up to September,1983, when Mr. Hayes wrote 16 this memorandum?
17 A No. I would continue it on past that.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm sorry. I didn't hear 19 that last part.
20 Mr. Gallo, if you stand on this side, he'll be i 21 talking towards us somewhat.
22 A (Continuing.) Well, yes, I would continue it on beyond i 23 September 6, 1983.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Oh, okay.
25 BY MR. GALLO:
l l
( )
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 ._-
17453
[
v 1 0 Now, let me ask you again: Had it been your experience 2 during the period May of '83 forward that, at least 3 until -- I take it that you would agree that your 4 experience ended when you lef t the site in '857 5 A Certainly. We were discussing only Braidwood.
6 0 And that would be -- refresh my memory.
7 You left in September?
8 A September 1, 1985.
9 0 All right.
10 So had it been your experience during that time 11 frame that many, especially in the corporate office, had O
V 12 become very defencive?
13 A I wouldn't characterize it as "many" because we normally 14 dealt with only one or two persons within the corporate 15 office --
16 0 So then --
17 A -- the Nuclear Licensing Division, who would respond to 18 our findings. How many people that takes up within the 19 corporate office, I don't know.
20 0 So the Edison Nuclear Licensing Department in the 21 corporate office is what you had in mind?
22 A Yes.
23 0 They had become very defensive; that was your experience 24 in the time frame that we've agreed to; is that correct?
25 A Certainly.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17454 o
I 1 0 Now, in what way had they become defensive?
2 A Usually in the response to an item of non-compliance or 3 a response to problem issues that were identified at the 4 site, their response was to the effect that there really 5 wasn't a problem there.
6 0 And you interpreted that as being defensive?
7 A Well, I think we carried an open item in a situation on 8 the closure of the safety-related battery rooms at 9 Braidwood for probably two and a half years before it 10 was finally completed.
11 Q Because the Licensing Department at Commonwealth Edison l
()v 12 13 disagreed with the Region's position on that point; isn't that right?
14 A I don't think they ever disagreed with the Region's 15 position.
16 0 Well, with the position taken?
17 A With the position taken, correct.
18 0 In the case of your example, in the position taken by 19 you; is that correct?
20 A That's correct.
21 0 obviously, you didn't agree with their position.
22 Did you find their position to be unreasonable?
23 Was it unreasonable to disagree with you, Mr. McGregor?
24 A Well, first of all, it's not my position. We were 25 looking at standards and codes, the National Electric l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 ,
(312) 232-0262
17455 O
U 1 Code requirements that require the batteries to be in a 2 separate room.
3 In this particular case, Commonwealth Edison chose 4 to envelop these batteries in a room that contained --
5 one room nearly as large as this courtroom -- rotating 6 equipment, battery chargers, switch gear rod drive 7 eq uipment.
8 Of course, that then became the battery room or the 9 room that housed the batteries when we did have approved 10 architectural prints that showed that there was a 11 battery room to be designed and built.
12 0 But didn't they -- under Edison's code interpretation, 13 didn't they believe that that was an appropriate design 14 for use in the battery room? Wasn't that their 15 position?
16 A In their position, there was no problem leaving the 17 batteries open to the area that they had.
18 0 And they provided a technical basis for that position, i
l 19 didn't they?
l l 20 A No.
21 0 Well, not one that you agreed with, at least?
l 22 A Well, they could never show that the hydrogen could be 23 removed f rom the area.
24 0 What was the ultimate resolution of that point?
25 A The battery room was designed and built -- was built as l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
~
l
17456
, r V
1 it was designed. The third wall was put in.
2 0 So essentially your point of view prevailed; is that 3 correct?
4 A Not my point of view; the code's point of view.
5 0 Your interpretation of the code prevailed?
6 A That's correct.
7 0 All right.
8 So in this example that you provide, you believe 9 the fact that Edison strongly advocated a contrary 10 position to be an example of them becoming very 11 defensive?
Ih 12 A Will you repeat that? I'm sorry. I wasn't paying O 13 attention.
14 Q Sure.
15 I take it that because Commonwealth Edison
, 16 advocated a contrary position for a period of time and l
l 17 stuck to their guns, you viewed that as essentially an
- 18 unreasonable and a defensive posture by Commonwealth 19 Edison; is that your --
20 MR. GEOCARIS: Objection. It l 21 mischaracterizes the previous answer. His answer was l
22 more than that. It was sticking to a position in the 23 face of an explicit written code. I think there was 24 something else to the answer, too.
) 25 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, overruled.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17457 O
1 You may answer that.
2 A Well, there were many instances, I'm sure. This is just 3 one example that we gave you.
4 The code specifically requires a specific battery 5 room for the batteries. It requires protection for the 6 batteries from earthquake and mechanical damage, and it 7 requires protection from fire. It requires a number of 8 other things.
9 BY MR. GALLO:
10 0 Well, I'm not arguing the merits of their position with 11 you now --
12 A And what they had there --
13 0 -- and I'm not even suggesting that you're wrong.
14 A No.
15 0 I'm just trying to focus as to whether the position 16 offered by Edison simply was a reasonable one.
17 A Let me continue.
18 0 Go ahead.
19 A So we are looking at the installation of a cylinder --
20 or a concrete block wall some approximately 30 feet in 21 length.
22 So we're not looking at a terribly expensive item.
23 We' re not looking at the type of thing that would 24 involve many, many man-hours of labor. We're not N
25 looking at a work effort that would shut down or Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17458 U,
1 interrupt other portions of the plant.
2 So these simple things are put forward, and yet for 3 two years they resist building this simple block wall to 4 encase the batteries in their own room.
5 0 So the fix that you -- the additional walls that you 6 believed were required didn't appear to you to be 7 expensive, didn't seem to take much work to do it, and 8 you just really didn't understand why Edison didn't roll 9 over and just agree to do it?
10 A Well, I don't think they should just roll over, but they 11 committed to building it in the first place.
h 12 t
l (d 13 O
A Under your interpretation?
No, no.
14 I told you they had apprcted architect drawings 15 that showed the battery room there. I think there was 16 about 17 prints that I showed to Mr. Bob Treece, a 17 Sargent & Lundy engineer, as to the requirements of the 18 battery room, and here are the prints that call for the 19 battery room as drawn.
20 Q Didn't Mr. Treece explain to you that notwithstanding 21 that design, it wasn't necessary to implement the design 22 in that fashion and justified to you why it was not 23 necessary; at least, he advanced a justification to you 24 on that score?
25 A No.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17459 O
V 1 Q He didn't? He just listened to you and didn't say 2 anything?
3 A The only thing that we had f rom Commonwealth Edison was 4 no one could explain why that wall wasn't built. We did 5 have a letter that stated that if the NRC didn't have 6 objections to the wall being put up, let's leave it 7 down.
8 That letter came f rom the corporate office.
9 Q You never heard an explanation as to why it wasn't 10 technically needed to install that wall; is that 11 correct?
I T 12 A I'm sure that Commonwealth Edison has written letters 13 and replies back that they felt that the room as it was 14 would afford protection for the batteries; the light 15 fence that was up there would afford mechanical 16 protection. They could have.
17 0 Now, is it fair to say that your agreement with respect 18 to the first statement on the September 6, '83, 19 memorandum to Mr. Hayes -- that is, the changing 20 attitude and the defensiveness of some in the corporate 21 office -- was based on these experiences in terms of 22 arguing these matters, like the battery room matters, 23 with CECO Licensing, CECO representatives on-site at 24 Braidwood?
25 A I don't -- I don't know that it was the CECO Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
t 17460
_s i
1 representatives on-site, 2 I would have to say in all sincerity that we had 3 tremendous cooperation f rom Mr. Cosaro and the 4 construction people on-site.
5 0 All right. Let me --
6 A They recognized them as problems, and it was the 7 response back f rom our inspection reports that were 8 characterized as something other than a problem.
9 Q So your agreement with the statement about the corporate 10 office being defensive stemmed from your experience in 11 reading the responses from CECO Licensing with respect 12 to the inspection reports and other matters raised by
- 13 yourself and other residents at Braidwood?
14 Would that be a fair statement of the basis for 15 your indicating that this statement represents your 16 position as well?
17 A Correct.
18 0 Let's go down the memorandum to the third paragraph. It 19 indicates, "Another changing attitude we have noted 20 concerns CECO's QA organization. They've become very 21 territorial."
22 Now, what do you understand the word " territorial" 23 to mean as it's used in that paragraph?
24 A I -- I don't -- I don't want want to characterize what 25 Mr. Hayes wrote.
i
'Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
F
(
17461
(
V]
1 I don't recall that that was a part of my problems 2 in correspondence to Mr. Hayes.
3 This third paragraph might -- might fit more 4 appropriately to the Byron issue and the QA Department
, 5 up there. I think you're quite well aware -- and 6 probably so is the Board -- of the QA problems up there.
7 0 So the paragraph doesn't, if I understood you, represent 8 your experience at Braidwood during the time frame we've 9 agreed upon; is that correct?
10 A I'm reading in here he's talking about, "The attitude 11 appears to be that once QA has done their program
( 12 audits, then they've done their job."
13 I don't know if I would characterize that as the QA 14 Department at Braidwood.
15 0 Let's turn the page.
16 Finally, Mr. Hayes concludes, " CECO appears to have 17 become very sensitized -- and perhaps oversensitized --
l 18 to their public image, and as a result, they downplay l 19 problems. Facts are not alwayE disclosed. Their own i
t 20 findings as well as responses to NRC findings are 21 frequently slated" -- I suspect that should be 22 " slanted."
23 A Yes.
24 0 -
"in such general terms or mischaracterized," et O}
t 25 cetera, et cetera.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
17462
~%
d 1 was that your experience based on the period of 2 interest that we've agreed to at Braidwood?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 0 Now, let's take this a point at a time.
5 Do you believe that Edison had become very 6 sensitized, perhaps oversensitized, to their public 7 image and, therefore, wanted to downplay problems?
8 A Well, I don't -- I can't speak for Mr. Hayes, but I 9 would have to start a logical thought process as to why 10 would they --
11 0 I'm sorry to interrupt, but my question is not what was
('N
(.
12 in Mr. Hayes' mind.
13 What formulated your basis and experience for 14 agreeing with that?
15 A Well, since our findings are put in the public document 16 room and can be read by anybody at any time, one would 17 have to assume that Commonwealth Edison was sensitive to l 18 what was being printed in the public document room.
i 19 0 I think that's probably right.
l 20 Is that what you had in mind when you agreed with 21 that statement? Is that what you understood that 22 statement to mean?
l 23 A Well, that's one aspect of it.
24 Q Do you have any other example or thought as to what you g j 25 meant when you agreed with that sentence?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17463
(" %
1 A At the moment, no.
2 0 It goes on to say, " Facts are not always fully 3 disclosed."
4 Was that your experience at Braidwood: that facts 5 were not always fully disclosed?
6 I assume the reference is to Edison and the site 7 people.
8 A I suppose that -- that would fit some -- some of the 9 instances, but generally not all of them; or maybe it 10 would be fair to say a few of them, a few of the cases 11 that we had problems with.
12 Q Does any one stick in your rind that you can give me an 13 example of?
14 A Well, I can give you a recent one.
15 0 Well, the time frame of interest that we're talking 16 about is, I thought, by agreement May of 1983 to 17 September of 1983.
18 A I said "and beyond."
19 0 I thought that after you left Braidwood --
20 A Well --
21 0 -- that we're talking here about --
22 A It's still the same time. We're talking about the 23 start-up time frame at Braidwood.
24 Q Do you have an incident in mind --
25 A Yes, sir.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17464 O
V 1 0 -- that fits that time frame?
2 A It certainly does.
3 0 All right. Go ahead.
4 A They had started into the preop -- or start-up program 5 for Braidwood and construction checklists of the 6 diesels. We ran into problems with the inability of the 7 diesels to start and be on line in 10 seconds.
8 The reason for this was the lack of diesel fuel 9 being held in the lines being primed at all times 10 because the day tank was installed at the same level 11 that the diesel engine was, which is contrary to 12 Cooper-Bessemer's manuf acturer's literature and, I guess 13 you could say, normal practice and the requirements of a 14 day tank.
15 Things proceeded even to the point where the test 16 group would go into mechanical starts of the diesel 17 prior to doing an official test of the system. Hence, 18 the diesel would be primed and warmed, and it then would 19 start and load within the 10 seconds.
20 I had great difficulty in assuming that that was 21 the proper way to address the problem.
22 I approached Commonwealth Edison and thought that 23 this was an oversight in Sargent & Lundy's engineering 24 process and that the day tank should be elevated, as
()
, r%
25 they normally are, so that gravity will keep the lines Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17465 1
completely filled until they were called upon to deliver to the injectors. We met an awful lot of resistance to 2
3 that.
I thought I had worked with Commonwealth Edison 4
very closely.
I probably even bent over backwards to do 5
nothing but write an unresolved item in the report to 6
7 get the problem corrected.
0 This was another example of Edison being defensive or 8
the licensee people being defensive 7 9
A Well, I don't know.
10 They've put some type of anti-siphoning -- quote, 11
" anti-siphoning" device on the system, which I'm not so 12 I'm not cc sure is better than Mother Nature's gravity.
13 sure that it's a valid system that will withstand the 14 15 test of time. -
0 This is an example of a disagreement that you had 16 A
Their reluctance to look at a real problem in the 17 >
18 emergency diesel generators and correct it.
Q All right.
19 Instead of apparently making the fix, as you 20 desccibe it, and relying on gravity, they suggested an 21 .
22 alternative approach?
23 A That's correct.
JUDGE GROSSMAN:
Excuse me.
24 e Were you saying they fully disclosed what they wer 25 h
Ltd.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17466 m i 1 doing there?
2 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. I'm not 3 understanding your question.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm not sure whether there 5 was any element of non-disclosure in what you were 6 talking about.
7 Had they fully disclosed to you what they were 8 doing in lieu of raising the tanks?
9 THE WITNESS: Oh, no, no, sir. This 10 anti-siphoning device came to light at the very end of 11 my tour there in '85.
12 BY MR. GALLO:
13 0 So it's the non-disclosure of the existence of the 14 anti-siphoning device that leads you, at least as one 15 example, to agree with the statement here that the facts 16 are not always fully disclosed?
17 The statement I'm referring to is the second 18 sentence.
19 A Well, I think we -- I am taking it in context of the 20 general resistance of Commonwealth Edison, and they were l
21 sensitized to their public image.
22 We also talked about, "Their own findings, as well 23 as responses to NRC findings, are f requently slanted" --
24 " slated" -- and that's where we were -- in such 25 generalized terms or mischaracterized such that it is l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
/ (312) 232-0262
17467 O
()
1 difficult to appreciate the real problem or even 2 conclude that a real problem exists."
3 I just gave you an example of that, but I don't 4 know if you want to characterize it as that a day tank 5 should be elevated as the manuf acturer has requested.
6 lf Commonwealth Edison or their consultant, 7 architect-engineer, decides that an anti-siphoning 8 device is better, so be it.
9 But that problem fostered over quite some time, as 10 I told you. When I questioned them why, they quickly 11 went into mechanical-started diesels prior to that.
12 That's not an answer to the problem.
13 0 It sounds like your discussion of this particular 14 example might fit in with the last sentence about the 15 difficulty of appreciating the real problem or perhaps a 16 mischaracterization.
l 17 But if we take at face value what Mr. Hayes says 18 here when he says, " Facts are not always fully 19 disclosed," that's a pretty serious charge being 20 leveled.
21 Was that -- let me ask you again: Was that your
~
22 experience while you were at Braidwood in the period of 23 interest we've agreed to?
24 A At the spur of the moment here, I can't think of an 25 instance where facts were not fully disclosed.
l l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
(
17468 m
1 MR. GALLO: May I have a moment, your Honor?
- 2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Sure.
3 BY MR. GALLO:
< 4 0 Mr. McGregor, I have a few questions on Intervenors' 5 Exhibits 102 and 103. Here is 102, and here is 103.
6 (Indicating.)
7 Now, I'm initially going to ask you a couple of 8 questions with respect to 102. I'll give you a chance 9 to refresh your memory on both exhibits. Let me know 10 when you're ready.
11 A Go ahead.
12 0 Now, focusing on Exhibit 102 -- this is the memorandum 13 from Mr. Forney to you and Mr. Schulz, dated March 27, 14 1984 -- as I understand your previous testimony, Mr.
15 Forney assigned you to expend 30 or 40 percent of your 16 time on preoperational and start-up activities at 17 Braidwood; is that accurate?
18 A That's correct.
19 0 And the rest of the time was to be devoted to 20 construction activities; that "25/12" refers to 21 construction activities?
22 A Yes, you are correct.
23 Q Now, let me ask you directly: Did you disagree with Mr.
24 Forney's allocation of assignments at this time?
25 A No.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
4 17469 p
G 1 0 Can you explain to me why Forney wrote this memorandum?
2 A No. You'd have to ask Mr. Forney.
3 Q How were you and Mr. Schulz getting along just prior to 4 this time?
5 Were you getting along satisfactorily?
6 A Certainly.
7 Q No arguments over --
8 A No.
9 0 -- who was to do what?
10 A Never.
11 Q What did Mr. Forney have in mind in the second paragraph 12 when he said, "I expect the two of you to work closely 13 and harmoniously and to refer any problems to me that 14 you cannot work out together"?
15 Wasn't he pinpointing the fact that you and Mr.
16 Schulz had some ongoing disagreements over who was to do 17 what duties at Braidwood?
18 A No, never.
19 Q He was not?
20 A No.
21 Q Did you ever discuss with Mr. Forney as to why he 22 included this sentence in his March 27th memorandum?
23 A No. Schulz and I were harmonious in our efforts out 24 there. We might not agree with each other all the time, s.,
25 but that wasn' t cause to bring any complaint.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 17470 (j
i 1 0 You might have disagreements just like the disagreements 2 that you might have had with Edison's Licensing 3 Department --
4 A No.
5 0 -- is that correct?
6 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, I just raise an 7 objection on relevance grounds. Staff does not -- it's I
8 not apparent to the Staff the relevance of the harmony 9 or not between Mr. Schulz and Mr. McGregor and I guess 10 the item -- the matter in contention.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I agree with you, Mr.
(N 12 Berry. The problem is it's been so long since Mr.
13 McGregor was examined by Mr. Guild that I'm a little 14 cautious about ruling something out.
15 But I don't recall any discussion of this in Mr.
16 Guild's examination, either.
17 MR. GALLO: Well, the --
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I just don't want to be 19 inconsistent.
i l
20 MR. GALLO: I understand.
l i l 21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But it does not appear to be 22 relevant to me.
23 MR. GALLO: Well, I don't understand l 24 counsel's objection.
25 At the time that these exhibits were offered and l (V) l i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17471 1 accepted, there was argument over their relevance and 2 whether or not they should be admitted. They were 3 admitted over the objection of both Mr. Treby and
! 4 myself.
5 They were being used by Mr. Guild, at least these 6 two exhibits, to show that essentially this is two 7 building blocks in an effort by the Region to close out 8 Mr. McGregor and Mr. Schulz from working on construction 9 activities.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, assuming that's 11 correct, though, Mr. Berry is objecting to any i 12 suggestion of disagreement between Mr. McGregor and Mr.
l Y 13 Schulz. That doesn't seem to fit in with what the Board 14 did allow.
l 15 MR. GALLO: Well, my understanding is that i
16 both exhibits have been allowed without qualification f 17 and --
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well --
l l 19 MR. GALLO: That sentence is in there. I 20 thought it was proper inquiry.
l l 21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo, if a document is 22 significantly relevant in some part, we don't go and cut 23 out every other part. We just let the document in 24 unless there's some good reason for keeping it out.
I O)
( 25 But that doesn't mean that every part that isn't Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 l ._ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ __ _ _ _._ _ .. _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _. _ . _ _
17472
[ 'h
, \s /
1 relevant in that document is subject to examination.
2 MR. GALLO: Well, I think --
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: The point is if you have 4 something relevant in mind, fine. If not, on its face 5 it doesn't appear relevant to me, and I would agree with 6 Mr. Berry's characterization of it as not being 7 relevant.
8 MR. GALLO: It seems to me to be extremely 9 relevant to show the state of mind of this witness as to 10 his demeanor before the Board when he testified here.
11 The question of whether or not he got along with I
(}
\J 12 Mr. Schulz I think has been put into issue by Mr. Guild.
13 Mr. Guild has pointed out that the Schulz-McGregor team 14 fought against the legions at the Region in terms of 15 trying to maintain their position and integrity.
16 That's the whole theme of Mr. McGregor's direct 17 testimony.
[
l 18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Well, having heard 19 you, Mr. Gallo, it doesn't make any possible l 20 disagreement between Mr. McGregor and Mr. Schulz 21 relevant or fit within the scope of what you just l 22 described.
l 23 So we'll sustain the objection and move on to a l
l 24 different topic.
) 25 MR. BERRY: Before we do that, Mr. Chairman,
%d l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, Illinois 6U134
1 17473 1 I'd just like briefly to note that Staff again has 2 cbjected generally to almost this entire subject matter.
3 I don't want to be understood that simply because 4 this document was admitted over the Staff's objection, 5 that the Staff acquiesces or agrees with any examination
, 6 or any-questioning on the subject matter.
7 We've objected before and, where appropriate, we'll 8 raise objections again.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine. We understood that, 10 Mr. Berry. You weren't waiving your standing objection 3
11 by raising some other point of objection.
12 MR. GALLO: Could you instruct counsel that l 13 he doesn't have to interrupt cross examination on that
( 14 point? That's the second time he's done it.
15 Those arguments were made and the positions 16 sustained when Mr. Guild introduced these exhibits, and 17 it's unnecessary to reiterate it at this point. I'm I 18 permitted to cross-examine to the extent they were 19 allowed by Board ruling. r l
l 20 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Mr. Gallo, he was 21 raising another objection. He was explaining that, by 22 raising that objection, he wasn't waiving his original 23 objection.
24 There had already been an interruption. I don't l ( 25 believe Mr. Berry was attempting to impede your Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
4 Geneva, Illinois 60134
- (312) 232-0262
17474 m
(0 1 examination.
2 Just continue.
3 BY MR. GALLO:
4 O Let's look at Intervenors' Exhibit 103.
5 Now, this is a memorandum dated October 31, 1984, 6 again to you and Mr. Schulz. It's talking about the 7 assignment of responsibilities.
8 As I understand your prior testimony, at this 9 juncture you had been assigned solely with respect to 10 the responsibility of start-up and preoperational 11 testing and other operational activities; is that 12 correct?
13 A Yes, sir, 25/13 and 25/14 activities only.
14 Q Right; and Mr. Schulz has the 25/12 activities with 15 additional assistance from Mr. Gardner and other 16 inspectors from the Division of Reactor Safety; is that 17 correct?
18 A It just says that Bob has the sole responsibility for 19 inspecting MC 25/12 activities and should devote the 20 majority of his time to the 25/12 procedures ongoing 21 activities and lesser effort to past activities.
22 O I had reference to the last paragraph as well.
23 A In the last paragraph, he's reiterating Mr. Gardner's 24 responsibilities on the site as the inspector
() 25 representative who followed the BCAP program.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17475 b(%
1 0 Doesn't he also indicate that 25/12 inspections will be 2 performed by the Division of Reactor Safety personnel?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 0 Now, let me ask you:
5 At the time -- before I ask that question, let me 6 ask you a preliminary question.
7 In the first paragraph, Mr. Forney says, "The 3 above-referenced memorandum provided assignment of 9 responsibilities at the Braidwood site." He's referring 10 to No. 102.
11 A Uh-huh.
IT 12 0 "However, we have commenced a new fiscal year, which b 13 requires modification of these responsibilities."
14 What did you understand Mr. Forney to mean when he 15 said that a new fiscal year required modification of the 16 responsibilities?
17 A I suppose -- I'd have to assume what Mr. Forney meant, 18 and I'm not so sure that that's correct.
19 But I would assume that the fiscal year -- now,
, 20 what he's speaking of in the last memorandum, now we're 21 going to track our man -- our inspection efforts in 22 fiscal man-hours or inspector hours.
l 23 To track these more accurately, we would be l
24 separated so that he could then associate Schulz' l N l ) 25 activities to 25/12 and mine directly to the 25/13 and l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17476
(% )
(O 1 14 programs.
2 0 Did you have occasion to ask Mr. Forney what he meant by 3 that?
4 A No, sir.
5 0 At the time when you received this memorandum, did you 6 disagree with any of the allocation of assignments that 7 were made?
8 A No.
9 0 And, in fact, wouldn't you agree that your assignment in 10 the preoperational and start-up area was kind of a 11 natural, given your background and experience? Wouldn't i
I ') 12 you agree with that.
l l
13 A Partly , yes, sir.
i 14 0 Well, as I recall --
l 15 A It was long overdue. The modules, the 25/13 and 14, i
l 16 were long overdue.
l 17 Commonwealth Edison had already been into the l
18 start-up program in '83, and I was there by myself. In l 19 fact, that's how we got Mr. Schulz down there.
1 20 I requested that I be shifted because I was trying 21 to do construction modules and start-up modules, so that 22 I would be shifted to look at operations and it would 23 then leave room for a Senior Resident in the 24 construction branch. Hence, we could get that filled.
\
( j 25 0 And the Region sent Mr. Schulz down to fill that --
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
(
17477
\v 1 A Correct.
2 0 -- vacancy in the construction area --
3 A Correct.
4 0 -- that you describe?
5 MR. GUILD: Could the Reporter read the last 6 answer back, please.
7 (The record was thereupon read by the 8 Reporter.)
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. McGregor, could you make ,
10 an effort, even though Mr. Gallo is standing on the 11 other side of you --
/N 12 THE WITNESS: Certainly.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- to direct your answers 14 here?
15 THE WITNESS: Certainly.
16 BY MR. GALLO:
17 0 And you were an obvious candidate for the position that
- 18 the Region gave you; that is, that Mr. Forney assigned l
19 you to; is that right?
l 20 You had -- I believe you were a certified shif t 21 supervisor when you were in the Navy?
22 A That's correct.
23 0 Is that an individual who is in charge of operating a 24 power reactor?
O f 25 A That's correct.
, j l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 c (312) 232-0262
17478 m
1 0 And you operated a power reactor at Fort Belvoir; isn't 2 that correct?
3 A That's correct.
4 0 You operated a military power reactor at Sundance, 5 Wyoming; isn't that correct?
6 A That's correct.
7 0 After you got out of the Navy, you put in two years of 8 experience as a lead mechanical start-up engineer at 9 Salem 2; is that correct?
10 A United Engineers, Salem 2, yes, sir.
11 Q And in your early years with the NRC, you were in the
~'
i 12 area of operations as well?
(v} 13 A That's correct.
14 Q So that you were well qualified to perform the position 15 assigned to you by Mr. Forney in Intervenors' 103?
i 16 A Yes, sir.
17 0 would you agree that Mr. Forney was acquainted with your 18 qualifications as well?
19 A Certainly.
20 0 I have a few questions about the meeting that you had 21 with Mr. Wallace. I'm going to try very hard to not 22 confuse the meeting I have in mind with the one that 23 occurred in '84 with you, Schulz and Saklak.
24 I'm talking about the meeting that occurred in late 25 1982. As I understood your testimony, it occurred in Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
k 17479 O
1 late '82.
2 There's testimony on this record that Wallace first 3 came on-site at Braidwood in September,1982; so it must 4 have happened sometime between September and December, 5 1982.
6 Would you agree with that?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 Q Now, I believe it was your testimony that Wallace came 9 to your office and kind of asked you some questions 10 about how things were going at the site and in 11 particular about any problems; is that correct?
12 A That's correct.
'13 Q Did you discuss with him problems that you had 14 identified with respect to L. K. Comstock?
15 A If I recall my testimony, at the time I don't recall any 16 real specifics, you know, mentioning specific problems, 17 although I did relate to Mr. Wallace that I thought the 18 limited inspections or the limited look, evaluation, 19 that I had done within the confines of L. K. Comstock, 20 even though they were quite limited, I felt that there 21 were serious problems or problems in the Quality 22 Assurance Department and that maybe Commonwealth Edison 23 should look into it a little bit deeper. ,
l 24 0 Yes. That was the particular passage that I had in 25 mind.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 L -. . . - . _ - _. - - . . - - . . - - - . _ - . - - . . . - - - -
17480 0
1 What problems did you have in mind when you 2 conveyed this ressage to Mr. Wallace in late '82?
3 A Well, there were an awful lot of documentation problems.
4 I don't know -- I can't remember specific systems or 5 specific hanger numbers or something like that.
6 But there was documentation problems within the QA 7 Department, proper documentation, simply being able to 8 go in and recall the documents. The documents have to 9 be retrievable.
10 There was some problems in that area.
11 0 Did you identify the documentation problems to Wallace j 12 during your meeting with him in late September, '827 13 A No. As I said, I don't think I said anything to Mr.
14 Wallace other than I felt there were some problems 15 within the QA Department and they ought to look at it.
16 0 What other problems, if any, did you have in mind when 17 you talked to Wallace again with respect to the Comstock l
j 18 QA Department?
1 l 19 A I don't think there was anything other than that said.
20 I don't believe there was anything other discussed.
21 Q Did you have any problems in mind with respect to any l 22 niorale problems with respect to the Comstock QC i
23 Inspectors and their relationship with QC management in 24 late September, '82, when you were talking to Wallace?
) 25 A I don't -- I -- I did not -- at that particular time, I Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17481 A
1 hadn't addressed nor was I, quote, " aware" of morale 2 problems within Commonwealth Edison's Quality Assurance 3 Department.
4 MR. GALLO: May I have a moment, your Honor?
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Certainly.
6 BY MR. GALLO:
7 0 Mr. McGregor, did you identify in any way these document 8 problems or these documentation problems to the Region?
9 Did you write Mr. Hayes a memorandum identifying it 10 and requesting assistance on this particular matter?
11 A I don' t recall writing a document. We could have. I
(
12 know we discussed it.
13 He related that there would be electrical 14 inspectors from the Region to come down and look at it.
15 I think -- I think Mr. Love, Ray Love, an inspector in 16 the Region, an electrical inspector, came down and 17 looked at some of the Quality Assurance problems at L.
18 K. Comstock.
l 19 Q Well, did you identify in any of your inspections this l
l 20 particular problem as an open item in the '82-early '83 l
l 21 time f rame?
l 22 A I could have, but I don't rec'all. I don't recall that.
23 Q Now, you indicated that -- I believe that -- in answer i
j 24 to one of my prior questions, that you hadn't identified
() 25 any morale problems at the time, meaning late in 1982; l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17482 0
1 you didn't have those in mind when you were talking to 2 Mr. Wallace and identifying serious problems.
3 Am I recalling your testimony correctly?
4 A That's correct.
5 0 In f act, hadn' t you just completed an -- completed 6 participating in an inspection that dealt specifically 7 with that question: the effectiveness of the QC 8 Inspectors at the Braidwood site?
9 A Yes, I was a member -- carlier I was a member of the CAT 10 team in March of '82, I suppose. ,
11 I interviewed a number of inspectors, Quality I}
Q 12 Assurance -- Quality Control Inspectors at the site.
13 0 All right. Mr. McGregor I'm going to show you excerpts 14 which I will represent are the pertinent excerpts from 15 Inspection Report 8203.
16 It conaists of a cover letter dated July 16, 1982, l 17 and several pages including your assessment of the l
, 18 effectiveness of the QC Inspectors at commonwealth I
I 19 Edison -- I'm sorry -- at the Braidwood site.
20 (Indicating.)
21 MR. GUILD: Does counsel have copies for 22 counsel?
23 MR. GALLO: Yes. I'm going to furnish them.
24 I'd like to mark this as the next Applicant's O)
( 25 exhibit.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17483 1 Dr. Cole, you've been usually.able to tell --
2 JUDGE GROSSMAN: 1 85 .
3 MR. GALLO: 185?
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes.
5 MR. GALLO: I'd like to mark this as
. 6 Applicant's Exhibit 185.
4 7 (The document was thereupon marked 8 Applicant's Exhibit No.185 for 9 identification as of November 19, 1986.)
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's Inspection Report 11 82037
( 12 MR. GALLO: Yes.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All of it or part of it?
14 MR. GALLO: No. It's just some excerpts.
15 If anyone objects or thinks it's necessary, I'll 16 certainly furnish the entire report.
l 17 BY MR. GALLO:
1 18 0 If you would, Mr. McGregor, would you look at the ,
19 excerpts that I have presented to you; Jn particular, 20 the portion beginning with Page 55 and going to the end.
21 Let me know when you're ready. Take your time.
l 22 MR. GALLO: Maybe five minutes would be in l
23 order.
24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: All right. Why don't we?
< 25 I don't want to precipitate any discussions of Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Ueneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17484 0
1 this, but I assume that you have grounds for bringing 2 this document up, Mr. Gallo.
3 MR. GALLO: Yes, sir.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Fine.
5 We'll take five minutes.
6 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had, after which 7 the proceedings were resumed as follows:)
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo, continue, please.
9 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I approached other 10 counsel with the suggestion that Mr. Gallo seems like he 11 has -- off the record.
fN 12 (There followed a discussion outside the 13 record.)
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Back on the record.
15 BY MR. GALLO:
16 0 Have you had a chance, Mr. McGregor, to look at the 17 document I've put in f ront of you, Applicant's 185?
18 A Yes, sir, I have.
19 0 My question is:
20 Did your participation in this inspection report --
21 in particular, the matter that you inspected, QC 22 Inspector effectiveness -- serve as a basis for simply 23 limiting your concerns, when you were talking to Mr.
24 Wallace, to the matter of the documentation problems?
25 A This inspection didn't influence me one way or another Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17485 V
1 with regard to the discussion with Mr. Wallace.
2 0 Now, this report was published in July, 1982; is that 3 correct?
4 A July 16th, yes, sir.
5 0 And you were one of the inspectors that participated in 6 the inspection activity; isn't that correct?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 0 Will you turn to Page 55 of the report. It says 9 " prepared by G. L. McGregor."
10 Is that you?
2 11 A Well, they've switched my initials around, is all.
12 0 It should be "L. G."; right?
13 A It should be "L. G."; that's all.
14 Q Did you prepare this section of the report --
15 A Yes, sir, I did.
16 0 -- including Tables I and II?
17 A Yes, sir, I did.
18 0 And the purpose of your inspection was to inquire into 19 the QC Inspector effectiveness for the QC Inspectors 20 on-site generally?
i 21 A That's correct.
22 Q Did you focus on Comstock as well?
23 A Yes, sir.
24 0 Would you look at Table I, 25 In the next to the last line, it says, "L. K.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17486 f
1 Comstock, electrical. Total inspectors: 20."
2 Does that mean that at the time of your inspection, 3 they had an inventory of 20 QC Inspectors?
4 A Yes, sir, that's correct.
j 5 Q And you interviewed nine of them?
6 A That's correct.
7 Q All right.
8 And you interviewed in total something in the 9 neighborhood of 45 inspectors from all the contractors?
10 A That's correct.
11 Q And you asked -- did you prepare the questions and frame 12 the questions that were asked of these inspectors?
13 A No, sir. They were prepared f rom the Byron inspection.
14 0 You adopted them f rom that inspection report?
15 A I was told to use the same questions that were used at -
16 Byron.
17 0 So you used the same -- the same questions that were 18 used at Byron.
19 Did you disagree with that instruction in any way?
20 A No.
21 MR. GUILD: Sir. The answer is --
22 THE WITNESS: "No."
23 MR. GUILD: The previous answer is "f rom the 24 Byron inspection report."
25 THE WITNESS: I might have said " inspection Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17487 1 report," but it should really be "the Byron inspection,"
2 a previous CAT inspection which was conducted probably 3 in January of the same year.
4 MR. GUILD: Thank you.
5 BY MR. GALLO:
6 0 Did you say "a previous CAT inspection"?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 0 All right.
9 A The Construction Assessment Team was assigned to do an i
10 inspection in Byron I would say in January or February 11 of 1982, and basically the team with some different 12 players came to Braidwood. I was assigned as one of the 13 members of the team.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
15 There haven't been any objections here, but I do 16 want to put the parties on warning that if this is not 17 relevant, the fact that there are no objections and 18 we're allowing the testimony isn't going to allow cross 19 examination on the same matters, if there are objections 20 to it or without objection, if it turns out not to be 1
21 relevant.
22 I just want to put the parties on notice of that.
23 I don' t intend to -- unless someone points out that 24 the morale of the inspectors back in July of 1982 is
) 25 already an issue, I don't expect that we're going to be Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 ,
(312) 232-0262 l- . - - _ - . - _ ._- - . - - -
4 17488 N
1 trying that.
2 But I have no idea what you have in mind, Mr.
3 Gallo; and since there are no objections, I'll assume 4 that there is something relevant here and I'll just let 5 you go ahead.
6 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, I was just getting 7 ready to make that objection, that observation that this 8 does cover a period of at least two years prior to any 9 of the incidents which are included in the Intervenors' 10 harassment contention.
11 On the face of it, it is not apparent -- the
~
12 relevance is not apparent to the Staff of this line of 13 questioning.
I 14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I just don't see 15 anything relevant, Mr. Gallo.
16 I was letting you go ahead because I assumed, 17 without objection, you might have something relevant in 18 mind that the other counsel are aware of.
19 But since there is an objection, let's find out:
20 Is there anything relevant?
21 MR. GALLO: I'm using it in connection with 22 my cross examination of his -- of Mr. McGregor's meeting l
i 23 with Mr. Wallace in late 1982, as to what problems he 24 brought to Mr. Wallace's attention.
l
( 25 The witness said that he thought at the time he Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17489 m
1 wasn't aware of any morale problems, and I wanted to see 2 if the basis for that judgment was this inspection. He 3 just said no.
4 I'm about to ask him why it wasn't, and I intend to 5 introduce it into evidence.
6 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I don't understand that.
7 Is there anything inconsistent in here with the 8 witness' answer that he didn't bring any morale problems 9 to Mr. Wallace's attention?
10 MR. GALLO: Well, if there -- there may well 11 be because of the fact that the witness is about to --
f'~'h' 12 has just indicated to me that it served as no basis for NJ 13 his judgment at the time. I'm about to ask him why not.
14 MR. GUILD: Mr . Chai rman --
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I don't believe that it is 16 relevant to discuss morale problems or the lack of them 17 back in July of 1982.
l 18 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman --
l 19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes?
f l 20 MR. GUILD: -- our position certainly is that 21 there is no artificial time cutoff with respect to 22 problems in the Quality control Department at L. K.
23 Comstock.
( 24 We certainly don't want to be heard to suggest that A
i 1 25 the fact that there is not a specific focus on problems V
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Gen'eVa, 1111nolS 6U134 (312) 232-0262
i 17490 O
, 1 in the 1982 time frame suggests that there were an 2 absence of problems in 1982. j 3 So I agree that the relevance of the line of 4 questioning in specific is not apparent, but it's not on 5 the grounds of the timing of the report that I have 6 problems.
7 I would just submit that we've sought to go far 8 before Mr. DeWald's tenure in this case and believe 9 there's evidence in this record that suggests that one 10 should look before Mr. DeWald's time -- before Mr.
l 11 Saklak's time, perhaps -- at the Comstock Quality i
12 Control Department.
13 I don't think that's necessary to argue that point '
14 right now.
15 My concern really is more limited; that is, to what 16 purpose does Mr. Gallo wish to use this document in 17 cross examination of this witness?
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I understand your 19 position that you would like to go back.
20 But let me ask you, Mr. Guild: Have you raised any 21 questions about QC morale in particular for the period 22 bef ore the one we' re talking about now, which is 23 beginning with Mr. DeWald taking over as QC Manager?
24 MR. GUILD: Well, certainly, Judge.
25 There's evidence, of course, that the -- from even l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
f Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17491 b
'Q l the Applicant on rebuttal very recently that the 2 percentage of inspections increased dramatically -- the 3 coverage of inspections increased dramatically from 35 4 percent to 100 percent. That would have placed an 5 immediate burden upon the QC Department at L. K.
6 Comstock.
7 There's evidence in the record that Mr. DeWald 8 replaced his predecessor, Mr. Corcoran, because Mr.
9 Corcoran was ineffectual in performing his Quality 10 Control duties.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Guild, that doesn't say I"'N 12 anything about a morale problem, which is what I asked 13 you about in particular.
14 HR. GUILD: Yes, sir.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Have you brought forth 16 anything with regard to a morale problem for the period 17 of time in 1982?
4 18 MR. GUILD: I don't think that one can answer 19 that question narrowly.
20 It seems to follow directly that if one is told to 21 increase with the same staff the inspection coverage by 22 three times, that one can infer that morale problems 23 would flow from that task, Mr. Chairman. The answer I 24 guess is yes, if one interprets that in that context.
25 I would not want this Board to limit the scope of Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17492 d
1 consideration of the historic background at L. K.
2 Comstock's Quality Control Department through ruling on 3 Mr. Gallo's cross examination.
4 If the question is whether we raise issues about 5 the effectiveness of Quality Control in the 1982 time 6 frame, the answer is yes, we do.
7 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman --
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. I understand your 9 position, Mr. Guild. You object to these questions i
10 because they're outside the scope of your examination.
11 Is that basically it?
I~ 12 MR. GUILD: That's absolutely true, sir.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: But to the extent that Mr.
14 Gallo would like to go back into 1982, you don't have 15 any objection and, as far as you're concerned, you'll go l 16 right ahead and go back into 1982, also.
! 17 MR. BERRY: Well, the Staff does object to 18 that, Mr. Chai rman.
19 There is a difference between background or 20 information provided in a historical context cri l
21 background and raising or creating a new issue, a l
22 material issue in the case.
l i
23 I believe that it's been decided in this case at 24 this point that it is the rule of the case that we have 25 specific concrete issues that are in controversy here.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
(
17493 O
1 I understand that the Intervenor would have the 2 contention read more narrowly, but I believe that those 3 matters have been addressed and resolved; that what we 4 have are precisely three allegations, if you will.
5 Added to that is the question of production 6 pressure and assignment to menial tasks and things.
7 But we do not have a far-ranging, wide open playing 8 field that allows any party to go back and examine the 9 environment, looking for issues and incidents, from the 10 inception of the Braidwood facility.
11 There are time limits, and I can appreciate the f~'h 12 parties may have a dif f erent view on that. But the fact 1
9 13 is that we have a ruling in this case that there are 14 time limits.
15 I would submit that 1982 is beyond the time limit 16 to which this Board and the parties should concern 17 themselves with.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN : Mr. Gallo, you had something 19 to say?
20 MR. GALLO: We have a cardinal matter here 21 before us that surfaced.
22 Mr. Guild's comment refreshed my memory that, 23 indeed, contrary to what Mr. Berry said in his initial 24 objection and what he's just argued, there is no 25 agreement or Board ruling that limits the inquiry into Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
. . _ _ . . - - . . . . 1
17494
)
d 1 the harassment area in any way in terms of a backward 2 direction.
3 In fact, my colleague just indicated to me that 4 during the cross examination of Mr. DeWald, Mr. Guild 5 was permitted to inquire into inspection practices that 6 existed in 1982.
7 So to the extent that Mr. Berry is suggesting that 8 this contention -- and I've got it right here in front 9 of me -- that was admitted by the Board constrains the 10 inquiry to some date in '83 or some other date, I'm 11 unaware of it.
T 12 It seems to me that if there is such a date, I'd
)
13 like to know what it is so that I can change the 14 orientation of the case that I'm trying to present.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. So it's your 16 position, then -- it's Applicant's position that we do 17 not have any time limit and we ought to be able to go 18 back into 1982; is that correct?
19 MR. MILLER: Just a second.
20 May we consult for one second, please?
21 (Laughter.)
l 22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Certainly.
l j 23 MR. BERRY: I would just note that --
l 24 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Wait, Let's not discuss i
O)
( 25 anything when counsel can' t hear.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
- (312) 232-0262
(
17495 (A) v 1 JUDGE COLE: Mr. Gallo, we're on a short 2 break now. The witness went to get a drink of water.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I don't think we need the 4 witness for -this. Fine.
5 MR. GALLO: Let me make the Applicant's 6 position clear.
7 If there is a Board ruling that no incident prior 8 to the Saklak incident or some point in time when Mr.
9 DeWald came on-site is the cutoff, we certainly don't 10 intend to pursue past that.
11 It was my understanding basically that that wasn't 12 the case, and perhaps it was a misunderstanding based on v
13 the way the questioning has gone over the many witnesses
, 14 in the ninety-odd days of hearings.
15 I do recall that there is a footnote, in the early 16 order of the Board admitting the contention, limiting 17 the inquiry to specific incidents; and perhaps that 18 footnote might serve as a basis.
- 19 But to be candid, I'm unaware of any ruling of this 20 Board that establishes a backward limit. If one exists 21 and it's prior to 1982, I'll recede from my questioning i 22 on this -- with this witness on that point.
l l 23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo, you're not going l
l 24 to get the Board in a position of categorically throwing 25 out anything that goes before a certain date if that 1
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17496 O
O 1 matter has some carry-over into the time frame that 2 we're involved in now.
3 For example, if Mr. DeWald had been selected as QC 4 Manager on the basis of his lack of quality 5 consciousness in a prior period, as may have been 6 pointed out by -- may have been brought up by 7 Intervenors, we're not going to categorically rule out 8 that particular perspective of Mr. DeWald because we're 9 concerned with his actions in the time f rame that we' re 10 involved in now.
11 But that's an entirely -- and I believe that's what 12 Mr. Berry alluded to as having some historical 13 significance as far as the time frame that we're 14 involved in now.
15 MR. GALLO: That seems to be coincident with 16 the Chair's view that prompted this discussion. The 17 Chair had suggested that this matter in 1982 raised a 18 matter that was outside the scope of the legitimate 19 inquiry.
20 I don't understand that to be Mr. Guild's position.
21 MR. GUILD: It is not.
22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: No, it isn't his position, 23 and Mr. Guild is quite happy to go as f ar back as you 24 wish to allow him.
t~)
( 25 We do have some limits as to what we're hearing Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17497 (a
1 here. If this doesn't have any carry-over value to the 2 time frame that is in focus here, we're not going to 3 allow that kind of testimony.
4 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman --
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: And so Mr. Guild has a 6 different objection on the fact that this goes beyond 7 the scope of anything we've heard f rom the witness 8 before on the other examination.
9 If you had called the witness to discuss the 1982 10 time frame, that would be another story.
j 11 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, may we excuse the l
O'
'v 12 witness briefly?
13 I apologize for asking him to leave again, but I'd l
14 like to bring something to the Board's attention and not 15 unduly hamper Mr. Gallo.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. Mr. McGregor --
l l 17 THE WITNESS: Certainly.
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- we'll ask you to take l
l 19 another drink.
l 20 (Witness excused.)
l l 21 MR. BERRY: Just so the Staff's position is I
( 22 clear on this -- I don't want there to be any 1
l 23 misunderstanding -- my understanding is there are time 24 limits.
I 25 The footnote which Mr. Gallo cited is what I had in
\~s Y l
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17498 1 mind when I made the observation that, in admitting the i 2 original contention then, the presiding officer stated
! 3 that the contention is limited to specific instances, 4 specific occurrences.
5 Now, I have not suggested -- and I'm not suggesting 6 now -- that any act, any event or any occurrence that 7 occurred outside of that boundary is irrelevant; but 8 there must be some connection between that event and the 9 matters that are in contention here.
10 Just exploring an issue that happened -- an
'l 11 incident that happened in 1982 for the sake of exploring 12 it because it happened in 1982 does not, in my judgment, 13 connect up to the merits in controversy here.
14 To the extent Mr. Gallo has a purpose in mind that 15 can demonstrate or that shows some elicited testimony or 16 evidence that's relevant to what we're talking about, i 17 what the contention is, the Staff would not object to l
18 that.
l l 19 But if we're just looking into occurrences in 1982 20 for the sake of examining what happened in 1982, I do 21 believe that is beyond -- that is off the playing field.
l 22 MR. GALLO: It seems to me it's directly l
23 relevant to the whole question as to any evidence as to 24 when, if it at all occurred, harassment and intimidation O 25 occurred.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 c3 23 232-02s2
17499 g
1 That inspection report shows that Mr. McGregor 2 conducted the interview of QC inspectors, including 45 3 percent of the Comstock work staff, and found no such 4 problem. It was published in a report in July, 1982. I 5 think that's highly relevant.
6 It seems to me that we can't have it both ways 7 here.
8 If there is some negative inference to be drawn, 9 then we can reach back into '82 or some other time; but 10 if there's a favorable inference to be drawn, as there 11 might be from this material, then for some reason the I~ \ 12 Staff argues this to be excluded. I just don't 13 understand that.
14 MR. GUILD: I agree with Mr. Gallo, Mr.
15 Chairman.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes, Mr. Guild, you may 17 speak.
i 18 MR. GUILD: I agree with Mr. Gallo. I think 19 he should be allowed to argue whatever inferences he l 20 wants to argue f rom this particular document with this i
21 witness. Of course, I draw different inferences.
22 The point is: Are there relevant inferences that I 23 can be drawn? I say there are.
24 What I want to submit -- and I wanted this said
) 25 outside the presence of the witness -- is that the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17500 1 record of this proceeding will reflect that, on 2 deposition, Mr. Keppler was asked directly about this 3 inspection report.
4 "Mr. Keppler, in effect, you didn't find any 5 Quality Assurance problems at Braidwood when you found a 6 team out in 1982, did you? You found them, of course, 7 in the next year and the next year in 8205 and 8309, 8 Why didn't your special team find them in '82?"
9 His answer was, in short, "We didn't do a very good j 10 job of inspection. We've learned from that." That was 11 his answer.
! 12 I think that cuts the other way from the way Mr.
j 13 Gallo wishes to have this evidence cut, but it is 14 relevant.
l 15 It doesn't expand the scope of the contention. It
! 16 does bear on this witness' testimony and, indeed, on why l 17 things were not corrected earlier or found earlier, 18 problems at L. K. Comstock.
19 JUDGE GROSSMAN: It looks to me as though we 20 have Intervenor and Applicant taking the position that 21 events before the 1983 time period, unlimited back as l 22 far as we want to go, are within the scope of this l
l 23 hearing.
l 24 Staff is taking the position that our focus should i
25 be on the issues that have already been identified, with i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
- 2. --
17501
'S
)
1 some allowance for going back to give us the historical 2 perspective when necessary on some situation that 3 continues.
4 I understand that.
5 Have I misstated anyone's position here?
1 6 MR. GALLO: You slightly misstated my 7 position, your Honor -- you have not misstated -- it's 8 not a misstatement; it's just not complete.
9 That is, the basis for my position is my 10 understanding of where these hearings have gone for the 11 last ninety-odd days in terms of the searching inquiry
N 12 (b 13 and the areas that were permitted to be inquired into, including the in-camera area that was recently ruled 14 upon by the Commission.
15 That's a 1983 '82 matter, as I understand it.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I don't want to get i
17 into a discussion of what you may be alluding to, Mr.
I 18 Gallo.
19 (Laughter.)
20 But my understanding of where that fit in was as 21 part of the area that was historical perspective. I l I
l 22 don't want to get any further into that.
l l 23 All I can say is that we appreciate that the l
24 parties have stated their respective positions on how l
) 25 far we have to go, and now we have to make a ruling.
l t
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
i Geneva, Illinois 60134 t
(312) 232-0262
17502
/
^N 1 Our ruling is more limited than the respective general 2 positions stated by the parties.
3 We don't see that this particular issue of morale, 4 during the period of July,1982, has been brought up.
5 It has not been specifically identified. So whatever 6 you are questioning with regard to that we find is not i 7 relevant to ~aat we have in controversy, and we're not
- 8 going to allow that.
9 As to any other matter that relates to a time
- 10 period in 1982, we'll have to make a particular ruling 11 as to whether that relates to what we have in focus here ;
12 as part of the identified issues.
(
13 So we' re ruling out this particular subject of 14 morale in 1982.
15 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, I don't think it's 16 just limited to morale, and that's why I responded to
(
I 17 your question earlier about morale the way I did.
i 18 I think " morale" is too general or too narrow a i
19 characterization. The question la effectiveness of I
l 20 quality control.
l 21 Indeed, there was an inspection done that tested j 22 that question. The results of that inspection, the I
! 23 results that Mr. Gallo is examining, speak for 24 themselves. I think they' re subject to dif f erent 25 inferences, but --
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 I
(312) 232-0262 1-___-_.-..-...----_--
17503 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Guild, I specifically 2 limited our ruling to what we have before us now, and 3 that goes to morale in 1982. That's all that --
4 MR. GALLO: Mr. Chairman --
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- I see in this inspection 6 report that's been brought up, and we' re not allowing 7 that.
8 MR. GALLO: You understand, sir, that Mr.
9 McGregor uses the term " morale" synonymously with 10 " harassment and intimidation"?
11 MR. GUILD: I don't agree with that. I don't 12 think that's been established, Mr. Chairman.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That may well be the case, 14 but I haven't seen specific instances of harassment and i
15 intimidation in July of 1982 or before that brought up 16 to the Board.
17 I just don't understand where this report would fit 18 in the context of the hearing that we have.
! 19 MR. GALLO: Well, we'll accede, of course, to l
20 the Board's ruling. I'll move on to another subject.
l 21 MR. GEOCARIS:' Can I get the witness, your 22 Honor?
23 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes.
l 24 MR. GALLO: Ycur Honor, I assume that the 25 inspection report, Applicant's Exhibit 118, can stand as l
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17504 V
1 an offer of proof --
2 JUDGE COLE: Do you mean 185, Mr. Gallo?
3 MR. GALLO: Yes.
4 -- can stand as an off er of proof on that point?
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: An offer? I hadn't realized 6 that you had offered it in the first place.
7 MR. GALLO: Well, I was going to offer it 8 into evidence, yes, sir.
9 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Since we ruled it out, 10 you're making an offer of proof?
11 MR. GALLO: Yes.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: That's fine. We'll accept 13 that.
14 MR. GUILD: We will support it being received 15 into evidence. We believe it's relevant and admissible.
16 MR. BERRY: You know the Staff's position.
17 (Laughter.)
18 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes, okay.
19 BY MR. GALLO:
I 20 0 Let's talk about the ACRS meetings.
21 THE WITNESS: Are there more questions on this
! 22 report?
f 23 (Indicating.)
24 MR. GALLO: No. I'm sorry.
( 25 After a long discussion, it was decided that there Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 17505 m
)
I would be no more questions on that particular subject, 2 so you can just discard it or put it away. There will 3 be no more questions on that report.
4 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay. That exhibit will 5 travel along with the record --
1 6 MR. GALLO: All right.
7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: -- as an offer of proof.
8 BY MR. GALLO:
9 0 Now, Mr. McGregor, you were examined by Mr. Guild on the j 10 fact that -- actually, it was Intervenors' Exhibit 104.
11 (Indicating.)
/~'h 12 104 is a memorandum that Mr. Schulz wrote. It's 13 dated -- it shows as its subject the ACRS conference of 14 February 7, 1985.
15 In there there is a -- Mr. Schulz complains about 16 not being included as one of the attendees at the full
! 17 committee meeting of the ACRS on February 7,1985; is 18 that correct?
l l 19 A Yes, sir.
20 0 Okay.
21 Now, as I recall your testimony, you joined Mr.
22 Schulz in that complaint.
l 23 Do I recall your testimony correctly?
l 24 A I don't recall my testimony exactly. If I said that he O
25 showed it to me before he -- after he completed it or --
( ,)
l l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17506
,/Le) 1 I don't recall the exact testimony.
2 0 All right. Let me get something here.
3 I have got -- Mr. Guild's examination on the ACRS 4 began at 11528.
5 MR. GUILD: The transcript reference again?
7 MR. GALLO: It's 11530.
8 BY MR. GALLO:
9 0 Maybe I misunderstood your testimony. If so, correct 10 me.
11 If you turn the page to 529, Mr. Guild asks you --
12 first he reads to you from Mr. Schulz' memorandum, 13 Intervenors' 104, and he reads the first two sentences:
l 1
14 "The recent decision not to include the Senior 15 Resident Inspectors at the full committee meeting but 16 include the required presence of the BCAP inspector 17 appears to indicate a continued overemphasis on BCAP in 18 relation to the SRI program, which covers the entire l 19 period of construction."
20 Then he asks you, "Could you describe the 21 circumstances in which you, it appears f rom this memo, 1
l 22 learned of a decision not to include you and Mr. Schulz 23 in the full ACRS committee meeting?"
24 There was an objection. It was overruled.
('s 25 Then you answered on Page 11530: " Basically Bob
()
l i
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17507 O
1 and I were kept totally in the dark with regard to the 2 ACRS conference meeting in Washington, D.C., and at the 3 very last moment -- I would say within a few days of the 4 ACRS meeting -- we found out that we were not selected 5 to be a portion of the Staff that went to Washington."
6 Now, I interpreted f rom that answer -- or 7 understood f rom that answer that you felt that you 8 should have been a member of the team that attended that 9 ACRS meeting in Washington and that you joined in the 10 complaint articulated by Mr. Schulz in Intervenors' 104.
11 Am I right or wrong?
12 A I think in other testimony in here I testified that it 13 was a common practice for the residents or senior i
14 residents to participate in functions of the ACRS, 15 whether it be in full or a subcommittee, and that we 16 were surprised that we were not, in fact, a portion of l
17 the staff that represented Region III in meeting with 18 the ACRS.
19 Mr. Schulz -- when he found out about it, he 20 drafted that up. I'd have to say I'm in agreement with 21 what he drafted up.
22 0 All right.
23 Now, as I understand the meetings that were held by l 24 the ACRS, a subcommittee meeting was held on March 8, 25 1984, in Joliet, Illinois.
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 r
(312) 232-0262
17508 O
1 Do you recall a meeting held at that time?
2 A Yes, sir. ?3 3 0 And did you attend that meeting?
4 A Yes, sir, I did.
5 0 And did Mr. Knopp -- is that how one pronounces his 6 name?
7 A That's correct.
8 0 Did he also attend that meeting?
9 A Yes, sir.
10 0 Were you working for him at that time?
11 A Yes, sir, I was.
12 Q Did he make a presentation to the subcommittee on the 13 question of sun"rarizing Region III's activities with 1
14 respect to Bra'dwood?
t 15 A Yes, he did.
16 0 All right.
( 17 Did you mak1 any presentation at that meeting?
18 A No, sir, I don't believe I did.
l 19 0 All right.
I 20 And then I believe that the subcommittee meeting l 21 continued the next day, to March 9th.
I 22 Do you recall that?
l l 23 A Yes, sir.
l 24 0 And did you attend that meeting?
l 25 A Yes, sir.
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 l (312) 232-0262
17509 js 's ,
%s 1 0 And did you make any presentation at that meeting?
. 2 A No. I was advisory to Mr. Knopp.
3 0 So y:u essentially were there to provide input to Mr.
4 Knopp?
5 A That's correct.
6 0 All right.
7 Then as I understand the sequence of events, on 8 March 16th there was a meeting of the ACRS, a general 9 meeting of the ACRS in Washington.
10 Do you recall that?
11 A March 16th of the same year?
(
(
12 0 Yes. I'm sorry; March 16, 1984, some 10 days after the 13 subcommittee meeting.
14 A Yes, I was aware of it.
15 Q Did you attend that meeting?
16 A I don't think anyone from Region III attended it.
17 0 No one from Region III attended?
18 A I don't think they did.
19 0 All right.
20 Then there was a lapse of time that passed, and it 21 wasn ' t until --
l 22 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Excuse me.
23 We did have the date 1984, March of 1984?
l 24 MR. GALLO: The dates I should be talking 25 about, if I misstated myself, are indeed in 1984. It's l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17510 1")
1 March 8th, March 9th, March 16, 1984.
2 JUDGB GROSSMAN: Oh, okay. This letter here 3 is February 7, 1985.
4 MR. GALLO: I understand that.
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay, fine. I just wanted 6 to make sure that we're all getting the correct dates.
7 MR. GALLO: All right.
8 BY MR. GALLO:
9 0 The next thing that occurred, in terms of ACRS meetings 10 with respect to Braidwood, I believe was on January 11 29th, when the ACRS held another subcommittee meeting, 12 this time in Washington.
13 Do you recall that?
14 MR. GEOCARIS: Could we have the year, 15 please?
! 16 MR. GALLO: Yes: January 29, 1985.
17 MR. GEOCARIS: Thank you.
l 18 A I -- no, I don't.
l 19 BY MR. GALLO:
1 20 0 Well, here is the transcript f rom it. Maybe that will l 21 refresh your memory.
22 (Indicating.)
23 It shows that the meeting was held in Washington on 24 January 29, 1985; and if you go here, it will indicate that you and Mr. Schulz were in attendance.
( ) 25 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinoic 60134 (312) 232-0262
17511 O
b 1 (Indicating.)
2 A Oh, yes, sir, I do recall now. Yes, sir, we did go.
3 Q And was Mr 7 Forney also at that meeting?
4 A I think, yes, sir, he was. I think he was.
5 0 Were you working for Mr. Forney at that time?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 Q Did Mr. Forney make a presentation to the ACRS 8 subcommittee on the inspection activities of Region III 9 with respect to Braidwood?
10 If you'd like to look at the transcript, feel free.
11 A I'm sure he did, but we'll look.
( 12 Yes, sir, he did make a presentation to the 13 committee, 14 0 Was it your function at this particular subcommittee 15 meeting to provide input -- you and Mr. Schulz both to 16 provide input to Mr. Forney?
l 17 A If he desired, sir, yes.
l 18 0 Was that your understanding --
l 19 A Certainly.
20 0 -- as to why you were there?
21 A Certainly.
I 22 Q Now, when this meeting -- just before it ended on 23 Tuesday, January 29, 1985, there's an indication by Dr.
24 Mark of the ACRS that indicates that they'll have to
/" %
25 develop an agenda for the full ACRS committee meeting to i
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
17512 1 be scheduled and held on February 7, 1985.
2 (Indicating.)
3 Does that indicate that?
4 A I don't -- I don't really see where it says that there 5 is going to be --
6 Q (Indicating.)
7 A " Development of agenda for February 7th," okay, all 8 right.
9 0 Does it say that?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q Okay.
12 And if you turn to the next page or two, does that 13 -- the next page -- does that -- keep going. Right 14 here.
15 (Indicating.)
16 Does that appear to be a draf t agenda for the 17 February 7th meeting?
18 A It appears to be one, yes, sir.
19 Q And does it indicate that Region III would make a 20 presentation?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 0 Is there identification of anyone who had been targeted 23 for making that presentation from Region III?
24 A I don' t -- I don' t see one where Region III is --
O)
( 25 0 All right.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17513 p
U 1 A -- where a Region III employee is mentioned.
2 0 Okay.
3 Now, is it -- were you there when -- at that 4 meeting at that point in time when the February 7th ACRS 5 full committee meeting matter was discussed?
6 A No, sir -- I don't recall that, no, sir.
7 0 Well, did you leave the meeting early?
8 A (No response.)
9 0 Let me turn it around: Did you stay the full time at 10 the committee meeting?
11 A I think we all lef t together, if I recall right. We all 12 left the building on Eighth Street and went -- I can 13 recall getting onto the subway and the air flight back.
14 0 This was after the January 29th meeting was completed 15 when you all left?
16 A Yes, sir.
17 0 You just don't recall --
18 A No, I don't recall.
19 0 You just don't recall the February 7th date being 20 mentioned?
21 A No, sir.
22 0 All right.
23 Now, indeed, the full ACRS committee meeting was 24 held on February 7, 1985; and as you've testified, you 25 didn't -- you didn't participate and neither did Mr.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd. -
Geneva, Illinois 6U134 (312) 232-0262
^
1 l
I 17514 1 Schulz.
2 A That's correct.
3 Q Now, do you know whether or not Mr. Forney participated?
4 A I don't think he participated. Ile was -- I think he was 5 there -- ,
6 Q All right.
7 A -- if that answers your question.
8 0 It does.
9 Now, there's a matter here that maybe you can clear 10 up for me.
11 On Page 96 of the transcript, Miss Stevens is 12 speaking, and she's the Project Manager at the NRR.
)
J 13 Isn't that correct? Do you recognize that name?
14 A Yes.
15 0 She's referring to people in attendance. She identifies 16 Mr. Gardner, Mr. Forney and then a' Mr. Ed Freeman. Then 17 later he is identified as Mr. Ed Greenham, 18 G- R- E- E- N- H- A-M .
19 (Indicating.)
20 Is there such a person, either one of those two 21 names, at the Region?
22 A That should have been corrected to "Mr. Ed Greenman."
23 Q Greenman?
24 A Greenman.
25 0 And who is Mr. Greenman?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17515 1 A He is Assistant Director of the Division of Reactor 2 Projects under Mr. Norelius.
3 Q And did Mr. Forney work for him at the time?
4 A Yes, sir.
5 0 And can you tell from the transcript whether Mr.
6 Greenman made the presentation, with respect to the 7 Region III matters, to the full committee?
8 A If my recollection recalls correctly, I think Mr. Forney 9 said that Mr. Greenman did give the entire presentation.
10 Q And was Mr. Forney there to provide any backup or input 11 that Mr. Greenman might want?
12 A I would assume so.
13 MR. GALLO: If I may have a moment to carry 14 all these back to the desk.
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Certainly.
16 B1 MR. GALLO:
17 0 One last follow-up question: With Mr. Greenman and Mr.
18 Forney testifying before the ACRS, in your judgmtant, 19 were the interests of Region III adequately represented 20 at that meeting?
21 A Would you repeat that, please?
22 O Yes.
23 Referring to the February 7th full comniittee 24 meeting where Mr. Greenman made the presentation about 25 Region III matters as they related to Braidwood and Mr.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17516 r-1 Forney being there to provide whatever assistance Mr.
2 Greenman might call for, in your judgment, do you feel 3 that the Region and their interests was adequately 4 represented by, in this instance, Greenman and Forney?
5 MR. GUILD: Objection, Mr. Chairman.
6 Of what relevance is Mr. McGregor's opinion on that 7 question?
8 It's simply not relevant. It's clearly beyond the 9 scope of any questions ask.ed of Mr. McGregor on direct 10 axamination.
11 MR. BERRY: On this score Staff would agree 12 with the Applicant, Mr. Chairman. The relevance is 13 apparent to the Staff, particularly in light of -- I 14 forget the exhibit number, but the document --
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Intervenors' 104?
16 MR. BERRY: Yes.
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Overruled.
18 You may answer the question.
19 A Well, with respect to Mr. Greenman and his position that 20 he holds, I would assume that he could -- or should be 21 able to represent to the ACRS the problems, concerns, 22 whatever was necessary, to the ACRS.
23 BY MR. GALLO:
24 0 And you feel that the representation was adequate?
25 MR. GUILD: Representation of what?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
i 17517 d
I 1 MR. GALLO: Strike that.
2 BY MR. GALLO:
3 0 And did Mr. Forney have a sufficient understanding of 4 the concerns that you and Mr. Schulz had so that if 5 called upon, he could have provided advice and insight 6 to Mr. Greenman?
7 A I don't believe I could speak for Mr. Forney's knowledge 8 of Braidwood.
9 0 Well, knowledge not of Braidwood, but knowledge of the 10 concerns that you and Mr. Schulz had with respect to 11 Braidwood. <
, 12 A He should have knowledge of them, yes.
13 0 Now, let's turn to Mr. Seeders' -- I'm sorry -- your 14 letter to Mr. Warnick and Weil. It's Applicant's 15 Exhibit 72.
l
! 16 (Indicating.)
l l 17 As I recall from prior testimony, Mr. McGregor, 18 this was a rcmorandum that you wrote and draf ted and 19 sent to Mr. Weil and Mr. Warnick based on your telephone l 20 conversation with Mr. Puckett; is that correct?
21 A That's correct.
22 0 Now, on Page 3 of t s exhibit, you indicate that as 23 Senior Resident Inspector, you were recommending that l
24 "NRC request the Construction Assessment Team from l s 25 Headquarters to do a full examination of the electrical l
}
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17518 4
1 contractor, the piping contractor," et cetera.
2 Do you see that?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 0 I believe you testified, in response to one of Mr.
5 Guild's questions, that you never heard back f rom anyone 6 at the Region with respect to that recommendation.
7 Do I recall your testimony correctly?
8 A That's possible. I don't -- I don't know if that's a 9 correct statement, but it's possible.
10 0 Well, as you sit here today, do you recall hearing back 11 from either Mr. Warnick or Mr. Weil about that 12 recommendation?
13 A I don't recall.
14 0 All right.
15 I have Staff Exhibit 7, and Staff Exhibit 7 was 16 written by Mr. Weil. It shows copies being sent to SRI 17 at Braidwood.
18 I understand that to mean Senior Resident 19 Inspectors?
20 A Yes, sir.
I 21 Q And Staff Exhibit 7 is written to Messrs. Norelius and 22 Spessard.
23 In the very last paragraph of the Staff exhibit, 24 Mr. Weil states, "It should be noted that L. G.
25 McGregor's request for a CAT inspection at Braidwood, l
t l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
j Geneva, Illinois 60134 l--.
(312) 232-0262
17519
/~
U.
1 the second to the last paragraph of Enclosure 1" --
2 which I believe is your memorandum that you're holding 3 in your right hand - "is not within the purview of 4 Region III. Investigation compliance specialist" - "on 5 September 4, 1984, McGregor was telephoned and it was
, 6 suggested that he contact the director of DRP on the 7 matter."
8 Now, do you recall -- strike that.
9 Does that paragraph in Staff Exhibit 7 refresh your 10 memory as to whether or not you received a call on the 11 matter of your recommendation of the CAT inspection?
(h 12 A I don't know if I received a call. I do remember l
\'"'/ 13 reading this memorandum from Chuck Weil.
14 Q At about the time the memorandum was written --
15 A Yes.
16 0 -- in September, 1984?
17 A Yes, sir.
~18 Q Did you ever get a call from the director of DRP or his 19 representative?
20 A Well, let me clarify something, sir.
21 It's not written only to Chuck Weil but it's also i
22 written to Mr. Warnick, my boss at the time. In that 23 specific paragraph I am talking to Mr. Warnick.
24 Mr. Chuck Weil, who has no function within our
( 25 department, has taken the issue upon himself to duck the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17520 O
b 1 request, which was not appropriate.
2 It was up to Mr. Warnick to address the issue of 3 the Construction Assessment Team and not Mr. Chuck Weil, 4 the investigator of compliance specialists.
5 Why he wrote that up, I don't know. You'd have to 6 ask him.
7 0 All right.
8 Now, Mr. -- if I understood your last answer, you 9 believe that Weil ducked the request or you meant 10 Warnick ducked the request?
11 A No. Why would Weil say that it is not --
12 Q Isn't it --
13 A It is not within the purview of the Region investigating 14 compliance specialists to address that."
15 We weren't speaking to Mr. Chuck Weil. We were 16 speaking to Mr. R. Warnick. It was his responsibility.
17 0 So Weil should have just minded his own business, 18 essentially?
19 A Well, I should think so.
20 Q Did you ever hear from Mr. Warnick?
21 A I don't recall.
22 Q But you do recall receiving a copy of this memorandum?
23 A Yes, sir.
24 Q Did you follow up with anyone at the Region as a result O(j 25 of reading the Staff Exhibit 7 on the CAT inspection Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17521
,m 1 matter?
2 A There was some discussion.
3 The CAT team, if I recall right, had been scheduled 4 to be at Braidwood during July of that year, July, 1984; 5 maybe June. I'm not sure.
6 But they were scheduled to be there, and they 7 canceled the inspection in July.
8 That's -- I asked then for them to return to the 9 site or to come to the site and follow up on their 10 inspection efforts.
11 0 Right. I'm not quarreling with your recommendation.
/~'h 12 A Well, I'm trying to recall.
N~sl 13 I don't recall any conversation with the Region.
14 Mr. Heishman might have called me from Headquarters, 15 telling me of their scheduling and that they did show up 16 in December, the latter part of December.
17 0 Of 1984?
18 A of 1984.
l 19 But I don't recall discussions with Mr. Warnick or 20 Region III personnel as to a solution to this or even if 21 a solution was necessary.
22 Q Do you recall any discussion with Mr. Heishman himself 23 when -- with respect to his scheduling problems and the 24 fact that he couldn't get out prior to December of 1984 25 to conduct a CAT inspection at Braidwood?
(
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
[ Ueneva, Illinois 60144
, (312) 232-0262 i - - - - .
17522
~ -)
1 A I think I did.
2 0 You think you did?
3 Was this at the same time that you were talking 4 about the top 207 5 A It -- it could have been. I've known Mr. Heishman many 6 years, and it could have been discussed.
7 0 Do you recall whether Heishman indicated that he was 8 aware of your concern on the basis of what you had 9 written in Applicant's Exhibit 72?
10 A No. I did not discuss -- you're talking about this one; 11 right?
12 (Indicating.)
f~'N 0 13 0 Yes. I'm talking about the CAT paragraph, if I can 14 refer to it as such.
15 A I don't believe I discussed Mr. Puckett's issue with Mr.
16 Heishman because of investigations that could be going 17 on in the Region.
18 0 Well, my question was inartfully framed.
19 I really meart: Did Mr. Heishman indicate to you 20 that he was aware of your recommendation that's 21 reflected on the third page of Applicant's Exhibit 72 l 22 with respect to getting the CAT inspection team out l
l 23 there ASAP?
l 24 A I don't -- I don't recall a conversation like that.
25 0 Do you recall him mentioning any such advice that he Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l l
17523 O ,
1 received from the Region?
2 A No, sir. i 3 0 okay.
4 Now, you were asked by Mr. Guild twice whether or 5 not you were ever invited by Mr. Weil to sit on the 6 Allegations Review Board with respect to Mr. Puckett.
7 Do you recall that question?
8 You said no, in answer to that question.
9 Do you recall that testimony?
10 A I believe I do.
11 0 Can you tell me, based on your experience, whether it's 12 the practice for the Allegations Review B03rd to ask the 13 residents to sit as members of that board when they're 14 considering allegations?
15 A Well, I can't speak for other residents; but as long as 16 I've been a resident, which has been since '82, I have 17 never been asked to sit in on the Board -- Allegation 18 Board within Region III with regard to allegations.
l l 19 Q Do you recall any other resident ever being asked?
20 A I've never heard of another resident -- or no resident l
21 has ever told me that he was required to go to the l 22 Region to sit on an Allegation Board.
23 Q As far as you know, it's just not a practice to do that?
24 A As far as I know, it's not a practice, that's correct.
I 25 Q Can you turn to -- let me see -- Transcript 510 -- I'm Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l 17524 i
s i
1 sorry -- 11510.
2 Mr. Guild at this point begins to ask you several 3 questions with respect to Mr. Seeders. I believe you 4 testified that it was your understanding that Seeders 5 was complaining, among other things, about production 6 pressure and that he was doing so, in your judgment, 7 based on the letter that Mr. Seeders wrote on August 17, 8 1984.
! 9 Do you recall that testimony?
10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q Okay.
12 Now, as I recall your testimony, your involvement 13 in the Seeders matter was very limited; is that correct?
l 14 A That's correct.
15 0 Mr. Schulz did the investigation --
16 A That's correct.
17 0 -- the inspection with respect to the matter?
l 18 A That's correct.
19 0 That was his assignment.
20 You just kind of stayed out of it, but you were 21 watching how Mr. Schulz did with respect to the matter, 22 as I recall.
23 A That's correct.
24 0 You were -- did you give him advice?
25 A No, I don't think I did.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
I 17525 0
1 0 You just were kind of just watching how he would perform 2 in this circumstance?
3 A That's true. That's part of -- I was the Lead Senior 4 over him; and if Mr. Forney were ever to ask me, "How is 5 Bob doing," I could respond to him as, "We observed him 6 handle this allegation," or whatever as part of a 7 training program.
8 0 And how did you grade him on this one?
9 A I don't think I did grade him.
10 Q Well --
l 11 A I mean, I thought he did --
'i 12 0 You think he did a satisfactory --
13 A -- an adequate job of handling the allegation.
14 0 All right.
15 The letter that Mr. Seeders wrote suggests that --
16 and I don't have an extra copy for you on this one, but 17 it was your testimony that Mr. Seeders had complained l 18 about production pressure.
19 I was wondering, if I showed you a copy of this, if l
l 20 you could just point to where he made that point.
l 21 (Indicating.)
l 22 Let me let you use my copy while I see if I don't l
23 have another.
l
! 24 MR. GUILD: Is this a reading exercise, Mr.
l O
( 25 Chairman, or what's the point?
l l
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17526
, -~
\v) 1 The evidence speaks for itself. It's in evidence.
2 It's the best evidence of what Mr. Seeders' complaint 3 is.
4 MR. GALLO: All right. Let me see if I can 5 shortcut it.
6 BY MR. GALLO:
1 7 0 Is it fair to say that your judgment about Seeders' 8 complaint about production pressure is based on the 9 August 17th letter?
10 A Well, one of the things -- if you want, I'll read the 11 sentence right now.
12 He says, "On one occasion I was given a QA audit 13 and was told that I had to complete a total review of 14 all my calibration records by a certain date, no matter 15 how I did it, or I would be subject to disciplinary 16 actiona."
17 Now, that is a production pressure.
18 0 Okay.
19 Is that the kind of production -- is that the 20 production pressure you were talking about when you 21 answered Mr. Guild's questior.?
22 A I believe it was, sir.
23 0 All right.
24 Could I have it back?
25 A Certainly.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17527 m
U 1 (Indicating.)
2 0 Thank you.
3 I have Mr. Schulz' inspection report; that is, 4 Inspection Report 84-32/34. This is the report that 5 contains and addresses the Seeders allegation. It's 6 marked there on Page -- on Page 4.
7 (Indicating.)
8 If you turn to where the yellow is, you'll see it.
9 A All right, sir.
10 MR. BERRY: That would be Staff Exhibit 14, 11 not in evidence.
f'} 12 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm sorry, Mr. Berry. I V
13 didn't hear that.
14 MR. BERRY: That inspection report is Staff 15 Exhibit 14, not received in evidence.
16 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Not received?
17 MR. BERRY: No.
i 18 MR. GALLO: You have to keep going to where 19 the yellow is.
l 20 THE WITNESS: Certainly. I was just seeing l
l 21 who --
l 22 MR. GALLO: Oh.
23 THE WITNESS: -- was on signature for this l
24 inspection report.
25 l ) MR. GALLO: I didn't mean to rush you. If Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17528
, t 1 you want to go back and look, feel free.
2 Let me know when you're ready.
1 3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo, are we going to 4 go through the back door here to get something in that 5 we couldn't get in directly?
6 MR. GALLO: I am going to ask him --
t 7 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Let me understand this:
8 Because he was aware of what Mr. Schulz was doing, are i
9 you going to have him, then, endorse Mr. Schulz' 10 opinions?
11 MR. GALLO: Or disendorse them, if that's the 12 case.
h(~'\ 13 MR. GUILD: We object, Mr. Chairman.
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Well, I think our ruling 15 still stands on that. If we're going to have Mr.
i t
16 Schulz' opinion in here, we want Mr. Schulz. That's the 17 reason why the exhibit is not in.
l 18 MR. GALLO: Well, that may be, but we have 19 for the first time -- we don't have Mr. Schulz, but we '
20 have Mr. McGregor, his co-worker at the site who was
! 21 kind of keeping an eye on Mr. Schulz with respect to 22 this one.
23 I believe that's sufficient foundation for him to 24 offer an opinion with respect to what's written in this 25 inspection report, l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
l e
l 17529 r
f~%
- U 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: To offer an opinion as to 2 Mr. Schulz' opinion?
3 No, I don't believe that's the case, Mr. Gallo.
4 If you want to ask him questione directly as to his 5 opinion, then we'll rule on that. But we can rule right 6 at the beginning that his opinion on Mr. Schulz' opinion 7 is not sufficient to get Mr. Schulz' opinion in.
8 So we'll rule that out.
9 MR. GALLO: I'm limiting my question to -- I 10 am not attempting to get Mr. Schulz' opinion into the 11 record. I just want this witness' judgment with respect 12 to the Schulz matter -- assessment.
13 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay.
14 MR. GALLO: It would only be limited for the 15 purpose of only this man's opinion and not Mr. Schulz' 16 opinion.
17 MR. GUILD: Mr. Chairman, we would object.
18 The witness disclaims competence. As Mr. Gallo 19 frames it, he kind of looked over Mr. Schulz.
20 Well, that means he's kind of competent, but that's 21 not enough to express opinion evidence on this subject.
22 It's a material fact in dispute.
23 The witness who formed the opinion and performed 24 the inspection is not available. He's been available to
) 25 be called by Mr. Gallo if Mr. Gallo seeks to call him.
1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17530 V
1 He has not.
2 He can't get it in through this witness.
3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Mr. Gallo, I think if you 4 want to elicit this witness' opinion on the Seeders 5 matter, you have to ask preliminary questions that will 6 establish his competence, and that does not entail 7 giving him Mr. Schulz' report and asking him whether he 8 endorses that opinion.
9 So you may begin by asking him whether he is 10 knowledgeable about Seeders if you wish to get his 11 opinion on Seeders.
) 12 MR. GALLO: Can I have that back, please?
J 13 THE WITNESS: (Indicating.)
14 MR. GALLO: Can I have a moment?
15 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes.
16 BY MR. GALLO:
17 0 Mr. McGregor, I have a few limited questions with 18 respect to the events that occurred on March 29, 1985.
19 First of all, I want to try to get an understanding on 20 one particular point.
21 I believe you testified that after the six 22 inspectors that came to see you and Mr. Schulz in the 23 morning of the 29th -- after they left, you called Mr.
24 Weil -- you and Mr. Schulz called Mr. Weil and briefed 25 him about the matter.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17531 3 1 1 Is that correct?
2 A That's correct.
3 0 And you also subsequently a short time later briefed Mr.
4 Forney?
5 A That's correct.
6 0 And a short time after that, Weil calls back and asks 7 you to set up a conference call between you, himself and 8 the six inspectors; is that correct?
9 A Well, he requested the meeting to see if I could arrange 10 a meeting with the men for a conference call with the 11 Regional Adninistrator. That's what I had thought I 12 heard.
13 0 You thought that he was setting up a conference call 14 with Mr. Keppler?
15 A Yes, sir, because that is what I told the six 16 individuals.
17 Q But Mr. Weil was clear at least on the fact that he 16 wanted to speak to the six inspectors that you had 19 talked to previously that morning?
20 A That's correct.
21 Q All right.
22 Then thereafter you went out to the field to find 23 these gentlenen, and you did. You asked them if they 24 would participate.
( 25 I believe you testified that they indicated they Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17532 0 would, and as you were about to return to the office, 1
2 one of them turned to you and asked, "How many should we 3 bring?"
4 Do you recall that testimony?
5 A 'ihat's correct.
6 0 And you indicated that they should bring whoever wanted 7
to make allegations, as I recall.
8 Do you recall that?
9 A Whoever had concerns in this matter and wished to come 10 over, feel free to come over.
11 Q Now, you testified thereafter that you called Mr. Weil 12 back and told him that the arrangements had been made?
13 A That's correct.
14 Q Did you indicate to him that there might be more than 15 six inspectors that he'd be talking with?
16 A No. I had no idea there would be more than six.
17 0 All rignt.
Now, when the 24 or so inspectors showed up at 18 19 noon, I suppose you were quite eurprised.
20 I think you testified that you didn't have all the 21 chairs you needed for them to sit in your office, so you 22 had to line them up against the wall.
23 Do you recall that testimony? I 24 A Yes, sir, to that effect, yes, sir.
And you kind of held a little session ahead of time, 25 0 h
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
-- g 312y 232y 262
(,
17533 b
'b 1 before the call was placed, to indicate how they should 2 behave in terms of not all talking at once so that the 3 conference call could be useful.
4 Do you recall that?
5 A Yes, sir. ,
6 0 All right.
7 And I believe you testified that the conference 8 with the 24 inspectors, yourself, Mr. Weil and others at 9 the Region lasted somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 to 10 45 minutes? ,
11 A Yes, sir.
(~'} 12 Q Now, do you recall how many of the inspectors spoke?
'~
13 A All of them did.
14 Q All of them spoke?
15 A As we went around the room, yes, sir.
16 0 So that each inspector had something to say?
17 A That's correct.
i 18 0 And I assume necessarily that these conversations i
! 19 between each inspector and the people at the Region were 20 brief, if we were going to cover 24 inspections --
! 21 inspectors in 30 to 45 minutes?
22 A Yes, sir.
23 Each one gave an example of problems that they had 24 in the field or they brought up their point of view.
25 0 And each one gave a specific example and briefly Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
l Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17534
/^N
(
V) 1 described it; is that your recollection?
2 A I -- yes, sir, I think that's true.
3 0 All right.
4 Now, at some point during this meeting, wasn't 5 there a request for a show of hands to determine how 6 many of the inspectors believed that Comstock QC was 7 emphasizing quantity over quality?
8 A There was. I don't recall -- I don't recall if it came 9 from the Region or if it was Mr. Schulz, but the 10 question was asked or words to the effect that, "How 11 many of you feel that quantity is the No.1 issue and IN 12 not quality," or words to that effect.
13 There was a unanimous -- everybody in the room i
14 said, "Yes, yes," and there was no abstentions or 15 denial.
16 0 Well, how was this agreement vocalized? Was it done 17 orally or was there r, showing of hands?
18 A It was done -- well, I recall -- I think -- I know -- I l 19 remember them speaking up.
20 I suppose some of them might have put up their 21 hands -- I don't know -- but I don't recall us asking 22 them to put up their hands for a show of hands or a 23 counting of them.
24 It was a general -- it was a unanimous decision 25 that they all thought that quantity was first over Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17535 d i 1 quality.
2 Q Now, how did the representatives, Mr. Weil and the 3 others at the Region, understand that this was a
- 4 unanimous viewpoint?
5 Because they were obviously on the other end of the 6 phone and they, I assume, were unable to discern that it 7 was a unanimous consent or admission or agreement from 8 these inspectors.
9 A I don't think we asked them if there was anybody that 10 disagreed, although nobody spoke up in disagreement of 11 that.
( 12 I would imagine the people at the Region heard
\v)/ 13 numerous voices or a number of voices saying, "Yes, 14 quantity is demanded over quality."
15 Q Did either you or Mr. Schulz indicate to Mr. Weil or the 16 others at the Region that the advice from the inspectors 17 was unanimous?
18 A We could have in later discussion with the Region after 19 they left. I don't recall. We could have.
20 0 All right.
21 Now, after the 24 inspectors left, I believe you 22 testified that you subsequently placed a call to the 23 Region,- you and tir. Schulz , again to Mr. Weil. Among 24 other things, you requested that the Region send out (v) 25 inspectors the following Monday to take statements.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17536
[
(
l Do you recall that?
2 A Well, yes, but it wasn't with -- we discussed -- after l 3 the inspectors lef t, we discussed with the regional 4 personnel actions that had to be put into effect.
5 0 So there was no subsequent phone call; I was wrong in 6 that respect?
7 A Well, later on during the day, we called back again.
8 Later on that day, we had a call, a telephone call, from 9 Mr. Keppler; and I do know that it was mentioned in the 10 telephone call with Mr. Keppler.
! 11 I would have to assume that it was discussed with fN 12 regional personnel prior to that the necessity to come b 13 out and take statements from the inspectors that were 14 concerned.
15 0 I believe you testified at Transcript 11578, in response 16 to one of Mr. Guild's questions, that after 24 17 inspectors left, that among other things, you and Mr.
l 18 Schulz requested the Region to send regional inspectors 19 out Monday morning to take statements f rom the 20 inspectors.
21 Do you see that?
22 A Okay. We mentioned it there, but we didn't make a 23 specific phone call to request that. It was in 24 conjunction with the conference call that we had with t 25 the inspectors, and we just continued on discussing the Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17537 O
1 problems with Region III.
2 0 Yes. Thank you for that clarification. I was wrong in 3 that respect.
4 Now, wasn't Mr. Forney one of those participants at 5 that time? Wasn't he there with Weil and the others?
6 A I think he was.
7 Q Do you recall Mr. Forney, in response to your suggestion 8 that inspectors be sent to the site on Monday to 9 interview these inspectors, essentially making the 10 assignment to you and Mr. Schulz on the spot to do so?
11 A No, never.
12 0 You don't recall Mr. --
13 A No.
14 0 -- Forney doing that?
15 A Uh-uh.
16 0 Mr. Well, in his testimony, believes that he recollects 17 that Forney did that.
18 A Well, that would be quite contrary to Region III's 19 procedure on allegations.
20 We merely presented the allegation to the Region, 21 and the Region on some occasions assigns an allegation 22 back to the residents to reinspect.
23 I guess it would -- in most cases they -- we might 24 clarify them or categorize them as maybe some simple
() 25 allegations or allegations that could be easily Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17538
( \
V 1 addressed by the resident without an inspecting force or 2 inspectors from OIA or OI or whatever.
3 So it's very -- it's very uncommon. I have never 4 heard that Region III would turn around and specifically 5 say, "You go out and take testimony from inspectors,"
6 because that's really not a resident's function.
7 0 You don't recall Forney Kaking that assignment on that 8 Monday?
9 A No, sir, no.
10 Had he made that assignment, I assure you Schulz 11 and I would be out there Monday morning taking 12 statements.
v 13 0 And indeed you testified that later, when you talked to 14 Mr. Keppler, he had indicated to you that he was going 15 to send out some inspectors?
16 A That's correct, and we said that we thought that was a 17 very good idea.
18 Q Now let's focus on the April 5th memorandum written by l
19 Mr. Weil, which records the -- his understanding of the l
l 20 events and complaints and matters raised by the 24 l
l 21 inspectors on the 29th.
I 22 You recall that document; correct?
23 A I think I do.
24 MR. GALLO: Well, if you don't have it there, 25 I'll get it for you so that you can --
l l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 l
l . _
!3'2L232-0262 -_ _
17539 1 THE WITNESS: Would you, please?
2 MR. GALLO: Sure.
3 Your Honor, I'm showing the witness Intervenors' 4 Exhibit 42; that is, one document of that joint exhibit.
5 It's the April 5th memo written by Mr. Weil to Mr.
6 Norelius, and it's the expurgated version.
7 (Indicating.)
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Is that 42-A?
9 MR. GALLO: 42-A is the in-camera version.
10 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Oh, okay. I thought it was 11 the other way.
12 MR. BERRY: Mr. Chairman, can we go off the N./
13 record just for a second?
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Off the record.
15 (There followed a discussion outside the 16 record.)
17 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Back on the record.
i 18 BY MR. GALLO:
19 0 Isn't that --
1 20 MR. GALLO: Back on the record, Mr. Chairman?
21 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes, we're back on the
( 22 record.
23 BY MR. GALLO:
24 Q Mr. McGregor, isn't that the memorandum written by Weil 25 which documents the matters raised by the inspectors on L
i Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
! Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17540 O
V 1 March 29th during that conference call with the 24 2 inspectors?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 0 I believe you testified that the April 5th memo written 5 by Weil was not accurate because, among other reasons, 6 it was a brief document, three or four pages, attempting 7 to document a 30- to 45-minute conference call.
8 Is that correct?
9 A Well, I think he states in there that -- he has 10 information listed -- that's correct, that's correct.
11 Q Okay.
( 12 Now, if you want to turn to where your testimony on U} 13 that point was, it was Transcript 11610.
14 MR. GALLO: Now, I have the in-camera j 15 exhibit, which I'm going to show the witness and l 16 carefully avoid breaching the confidentiality with 17 respect to it. But the witness needs to have it before 18 him.
19 JUDGE COLE: This is 42-A, Mr. Gallo?
20 MR. GALLO: No. This is NRC Staff Exhibit l 21 16.
i 22 MR. GUILD: What is that, Joe?
23 MR. GALLO: (Indicating.)
{
j 24 BY MR. GALLO:
l 25 Do you have that in f ront of you, sir, Exhibit 16?
l
--) Q Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17541 A
1 A Yes, sir, I do.
2 0 Okay.
3 Now, as I understand this exhibit, it's dated April 4 10th, and you were the author; right?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 0 And it was written to Mr. Weil; am I correct? It shows 7 that?
8 A That's correct.
9 Q And it conveys to Mr. Weil corrections made to the April 10 5, 1985, memorandum that were provided by certain 11 inspectors; is that correct?
12 A That's correct.
13 Q At this time did you indicate to Mr. Weil that you 14 thought that his April 5th memorandum was incomplete in
(
15 any way because it was so brief?
l 16 A No, I did not.
17 Q Did you tell him in any way that some of the quotations l
18 in the April 5th memo were, in your opinion, sketchy?
19 A No, I did not.
20 Q Do you recall that on November 25, 1985, your deposition 21 was taken in this proceeding? Do you recall that?
l l
22 A No, I don't.
23 0 I show you a copy of a transcript and, in particular, 24 Page 220.
( 25 I'm showing it to counsel first.
l l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
t Geneva, Illinois 60134
- - (312) 232-0262
17542 O
V 1 (Indicating.)
2 Do you recall being asked by Mr. Guild whether or 3 not the April 5th memo was accurate and, in particular, 4 whether the inspectors' comments were accurate as 5 recorded in that memorandum?
6 Do you recall Mr. Guild asking you that --
7 A No, sir, I don't.
8 0 -- that question?
9 Let me show you the question. It's at the top of 10 the page. There's a queEtion. This is by Mr. Guild.
11 "O Are you aware of any inaccuracies or
, 12 omissions from the notes of those 13 comments that appear in the April 5th 14 memo?"
15 He's referring to the Weil memo. Then there's a 16 couple of objections. Then the question is restated.
17 "O What I'm driving at: Are those accurate ,
18 notations of the inspectors' comments or 19 are you aware of any inaccuracies?"
20 The answer:
21 "A I'm assuming" -- this is you talking now 22 -
"that the Region took accurate notes, 23 and I don't know of any rear >n why to 24 doubt what the Region has written is not 25 correct."
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 .
17543 O
V 1 Do you recall that testimony now?
2 A Yes.
3 MR. GEOCARIS: Objection; improper 4 impeachment . I don't think that --
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: I'm sorry?
6 MR. GEOCARIS: I don't think we've got 7 inconsistent statements here.
8 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Overruled.
9 MR. GEOCARIS: Accurate, but not complete.
10 That's how I would conform them.
11 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Overruled.
/) 12 MR. GALLO: I understand the objection is 13 overruled?
14 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Yes.
15 BY MR. GALLO:
16 Q Mr. McGregor, isn't that statement, as you testified on 17 your deposition, inconsistent with your testimony in 18 answer to the question from Mr. Guild, "In August of 19 this year that the April 5th memo indeed was not l
20 accurate in that it contained sketchy and incomplete 1
21 material"?
l 22 A In which -- which line are you referring to, sir, on 23 11610? Or what portion of my testimony are you 24 referring to?
( 25 0 Starting at the top of 11610, "Your opinion is, Mr.
1 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
ueneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17544 v\
1 McGregor, that the April 5th memo by Mr. Weil does not l 2 fully and accurately reflect the statement by the l
3 inspectors. That is your testimony, is it not?"
4 Your answer: "I believe I said it didn't. I don't 5 believe it contained all the allegations or all the 6 information that was given during the 45 minutes that 7 the 24 or 26 inspectors were in the office."
8 And then the matter was referred to again. It was 9 referred to again on Page 11584, starting at Line 6 of 10 your testimony. This is the testimony on August 28th.
11 "O The April 5th memo that has been received
(}
%/
12 in evidence as Intervenors' Exhibit 42-A, 13 the in camera document, to your 14 knowledge, does that represent the sole 15 record of the noontime statements by the 16 large group of Comstock inspectors?
17 "A Well, sir, I would have to compare what j 18 is written here with what was -- compared 19 to the six that we took notes on; and I l
20 would hardly say that they are the same.
21 "There are some sketchy quotes in l
22 here and approximately two or three pages l
l 23 and that constitutes about 45 minutes of l 24 allegations by L. K. Comstock l 25 ins pe ctor s . "
l l
l Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
I Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262 -_ ______-
17545 O
1 Now, I read and understood your testimony at this 2 page and also at Page 11610 to be indicating that you 3 believe the Weil memo of April 5th to be in error, 4 incomplete.
5 Am I misunderstanding your testimony?
6 A No. I think you're misunderstanding the situation, Mr.
7 Gallo.
8 The memo that was written on April 5th and is 9 signed by Mr. Charles Weil does not merely mean that he 10 wrote or that he took all of those notes. Those notes 11 could have been a compilation of all of the people that 12 were in the room. We don' t have any idea.
()T
\~~
Those notes, what is written here, we have to 13 14 assume are correct. We have to assume that they' re 15 accurate. We don't have other notes or other 16 information that would rebut that.
17 0 Well, you indeed do, don't you? You have the comments 18 of several inspectors?
l 19 A Please let me continue on.
20 0 All right.
21 A Now we're referring to the corrections that you brought 22 up. These corrections were brought to our attention by l
l 23 one of the individuals, evidently it was Mr. --
24 MR. GUILD: Don't mention the name, sir.
I
) 25 A (Continuing.) And he came into our office and said, Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17546
(
U 1 "This is incorrect." I said, " Fine. Make your 2 correction on that," and he did and he sent it back.
3 MR. GALLO: All right.
4 A (Continuing.) Now, in the memorandum on April 5th on 5 Page 3, there's a statement that says, *Comstock wants 6 us to work with blinders on." That's only one 7 statement. We don't know who made it. We don't know 8 why it was made.
9 I would say that is a sketchy statement. Whether 10 it's accurate or not, I don't know. I have to assume 11 that it is accurate, okay?
12 BY MR. GALLO:
13 0 Let me stop you there, and I'm going to let you 14 continue.
15 When you say that's a sketchy statement, do you 16 mean it was sketchy in terms of what the inspector said
! 17 or sketchy in terms of what Weil wrote?
18 A If you read this, can you -- can you assume anything 19 from that statement?
20 There's nothing there to give you any information 21 as to what the inspector is talking about. If he's 22 talking about with relation to his job, his work, his 23 salary, we don't know.
24 0 All right.
25 A I'm sure there must have been more to that statement Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17547 b
, v i
1 than, "Comstock wants us to put blinders on."
, 2 0 You mean that whatever inspector made that statement 3 elaborated in more detail during the conference call and
- 4 that Weil just neglected to include that information?
5 A I'm not saying Mr. Weil neglected to make the
< 6 contribution.
7 I'm just saying that f rom his notes or the notes 8 that he assembled this from, that is the only accurate 9 description we have. In my opinion, it is not a very 1
10 good representation of the 45 minutes of discussion that
, 11 went on at Braidwood.
12 0 You think more was said on that point, for example?
13 A Most definitely there was.
14 0 And so to that extent, at least, is it your testimony 15 that the April 5th memorandum is inaccurate, incomplete?
16 A If -- if we gave this to 13 members in this room and had 17 it read off, I'm sure the reading of these statements
- 18 would take probably about 10 to 15 minutes. If we 19 assigned 13 people to read these statements, it probably 20 would all be conducted in probably 10 minutes.
21 0 I thought it was your testimony that all 24 inspectors 22 were interviewed.
1 23 A They were, and let's go back and see what Mr. Chuck Weil 24 says.
"The total of Comstock inspectors evently numbered
) 25 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
!' Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17548 s
v 1 24. In the period 12:00 to 12:30 P. M., during the 2 inspector lunch period,13 inspectors were briefly 3 interviewed." That's his statement.
4 Now, I don't know where he got that information 5 from or whether he was given that from some other 6 inspector in the room. It surely didn't come from us.
7 0 So it's your testimony that the 24 inspectors spoke in 8 turn during this 30- to 45-minute period?
9 A It is not -- that's correct. We went around the table, 10 and each one had his turn to speak his concerns.
11 Q And each one made a brief, concise statement with 12 respect to his particular example of a concern?
13 A And in some cases when a person gave his particular 14 problem, a person across the table would say, "Yes, and 15 I was there and I witnessed it" or "I was well aware of 16 the problem" or "I was a party to that conversation."
17 0 All right.
j 18 And did you consider that kind of omission an error 19 with respect to the memo written by Weil?
20 A I don't know if you want to call it an " error." I'm --
21 the Commission didn't have personnel there to take 22 adequate notes.
l 23 0 Aren't you just quarreling that it wasn't a verbatim --
24 A No.
25 0 -- recording here?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 t
(312) 232-0262
i 17549 r%
U 1 A No.
2 But I would -- this is -- evidently it was a 3 serious matter, when I was told that the Regional 4 Administrator would partake in this investigation.
5 0 There's no question it was a serious matter. We're not 6 arguing about that.
7 A We have 26 investigators come into our office --
8 0 24 inspectors?
9 A -- 24 inspectors, which has never been known to happen 10 within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission --
11 0 I understand all that.
12 A -- and --
13 0 We're talking about whether or not the memorandum is 14 accurate.
15 A Certainly.
16 So the precedence that was put on here by the 17 Region -- I would assume that the Region was now ready 18 and they had at least two hours to be prepared for this l 19 conversation and that they had personnel there to take l 20 accurate or complete notes.
l l 21 0 Well, it was your -- you didn' t expect this interview to 22 be the investigation of these concerns, did you?
23 A Even if six people showed up --
24 Q Did you expect this telephone conference to be the 25 inspection of these inspectors' concerns?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 00134 l
(312) 232-0262
17550 O
1 A No, no.
2 0 This was just the kickoff on this matter, wasn't it?
3 There was supposed to be follow-up on it?
4 A There was follow-up Monday morning.
5 0 Indeed, that was what you had recommended; isn't that 6 correct?
7 A That's correct.
8 0 I repeat: Isn't your disagreement with this memorandum 9 that it's just not verbatim?
10 A Well, I wouldn't say " verbatim." I would say that it 11 doesn't contain the discussion that the 26 or the 24 12 individuals presented to them over the telephone.
.3 0 Are you able to recall with any clarity at all --
14 A No, sir.
15 0 -- what elements were not included?
16 A I wouldn't even attempt to go back and try to recollect 17 what each of the 26 inspectors said.
18 0 Now, on the one that you gave me as an example, can you 19 point it out to me again without giving the individual's 20 name?
21 A There's no name assigned to it. It says, "Comstock 22 wants us to keep blinders on."
23 Kind of reading those over, it kind of looks like, l
24 to me, that one inspector took some notes. Mr. Mendez 25 took some notes. Maybe Mr. Cordell Williams took some
(
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17551
)
v 1 Hotes. I don't know.
2 It looks like it's sort of a conglomeration of all 3 of the people that were there, and there was a 4 hodgepodge of inf ormation put down.
5 0 Now, on the example that you have given, I'd like to see 6 if you agree with my understanding.
7 The statement, "Comstock wants us to work with 8 blinders on" -- is that -- it's in the nature -- I agree 9 with you: It's in the nature of a statement like a 10 bullet?
11 A Yeah.
( 12 Q Is it the third bullet of two previous bullets, if I can
\
13 use that phrase --
14 A Yes.
15 0 -- that are attributable to a particular individual?
16 A I don't know. We could assume that it came f rom this 17 individual here.
18 (Indicating.)
19 By the same token, this paragraph and this sentence 20 could have come from some other individual.
21 (Indicating.)
22 O Can't you tell --
23 A No.
24 0 -- by the way the names are blacked out that those three
( 25 statements are attributable to the same inspector?
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17552
(~\
U 1 A No, nor can we assume that this paragraph --
2 (Indicating.)
3 0 Let's focus on this.
4 If we look at Page 2 of the expurgated version, 5 there is a blackout in the left-hand margin. If 6 necessary, I'll get to the in-camera session to show 7 that that's an inspector's name.
8 A I'm sure it is.
9 0 It's blacked out.
10 And tnen to the right are three paragraphs, which 11 I've been calling " bullets." And then -- and the three 12 paragraphs go over to Page 3. Two of the three
('%s'}
13 paragraphs are at the top of Page 3.
14 Then again we have a blacked-out area which I 15 represent to you is again another inspector's name 16 blacked out. There's a statement alongside it.
17 (Indicating.)
18 Isn't it fair to say that those three bullets I've 19 referred to are attributable to one inspector?
20 A It's fair to assume that those three bullets maybe 21 belong to that individual.
22 (Indicating.)
23 These two bullets on the next page could belong to 24 somebody else. That's possible.
25 (Indicating.)
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
17553
[G 1 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Let's go off the record for 2 a second.
3 (There followed a discussion outside the 4 record.)
5 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Back on the record.
6 MR. GALLO: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to 7 nail down this last point before we quit.
8 MR. GEOCARIS: You mean get to the end of a 9 line?
10 MR. GALLO: Yes.
11 MR. STEPTOE: I have no problem with that.
12 JUDGE GROSSMAN : That's fine. I don't know 13 when we went back on the record, but apparently we're 14 on.
15 We've decided off the record that we'll just 16 continue with Mr. McGregor on Friday morning and that 17 Mr. iiiller will conduct the remainder of the Applicant's 18 examination of him.
19 The other parties have agreed, so there were no
! 20 objections to that, except that we'll let Mr. Gallo 21 continue now with this line of questioning.
22 BY MR. GALLO:
23 0 All right. Mr. McGregor, if you'll just bear with us l 24 another few questions.
25 Turning your attention f rom the April 5th memo Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 i (312) 232-0262
17554
/
.J l itself and turning our attention instead to your 2 testimony, did I, in fact, understand your testimony 3 correctly that you were criticizing the April 5th memo 4 as being inaccurate in that it was incomplete in some 5 respects?
6 A I said that it was -- there are some sketchy notes and 7 approximately two or three pages which is supposed to 8 constitute 45 minutes of inspector allegations or 9 discussions at that time.
10 I don't know that I've stated that the April 5th 11 letter was inaccurate or --
l ('
'N 12 0 Well, you seemed to indicate in your deposition that you 13 had no reason to believe it was inaccurate. That's the 14 passage that I reed to you.
15 What is your view today? Is it or isn't it?
16 A I just mentioned to you, sir, that I have no reason to 17 believe that what was written on this memorandum is 18 accurate.
t 19 JUDGE COLE: Inaccurate?
20 MR. GEO CARIS : Inaccurate.
21 MR. GUILD: " Inaccurate" you mean to say, 22 sir.
23 MR. GEOCARIS: Do you want to try that again?
24 MR. GALLO: Maybe the Reporter could read
) 25 back his answer.
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
4 17555 O
1 THE WITNESS: Wait a minute.
2 A (Continuing.) Somebody has taken down some notes, and 3 somebody has put them on a piece of paper. Somebody 4 said that these notes were said by this individual.
5 Now, those are his notes. If he says they' re 6 accurate, so be it. I merely said that the discussion 7 that happened for 45 minutes -- it does not include all 8 of the information that was given. The information that 9 is here could be accurate, but it is not complete.
I 10 MR. GALLO: All right.
I 11 BY MR. GALLO:
12 O So it's your judgment that the Weil letter, then, is 13 incomplete, and incomplete in a substantive way; is that 14 correct?
15 A Based on the 45-minute discussion of the personnel at t
16 the site, I don't believe that the information that was j 17 passed to the inspectors at the Region has been 18 documented in the report.
19 Q And when Mr. Guild asked you on deposition whether or 20 not there were any inaccuracies with respect to what the 21 inspectors had to say, how is it you didn't make this 22 point at that time?
! 23 A I don't think that I -- let me look at my deposition. I 24 don't know if I questioned the accuracy of it.
I 25 Q Do you have the deposition up there?
l s
l I
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134
- (312) 232-0262
i 17556 V
I 1 I guess you don't.
2 MR. GEOCARIS: Can we have a page and line 3 reference, please?
4 MR. GALLO: Yes, Page 213. We went through 5 this already once.
6 MR. GEOCARIS: 213 or 220? 220 or 213?
7 MR. GALLO: Yes, you're right, 220.
/
8 BY MR. GALLO:
9 0 "What I'm driving at: Are those accurate notations in 10 the inspectors' comments or are you aware of any 11 inaccuracies?"
12 So you' re making a distinction between 13 " inaccuracies" and " incomplete"?
14 A And my answer was, "I assume the Region took accurate 15 notes."
16 MR. GEOCARIS: Objection.
17 This isn't inconsistent testimony, based on what 18 we've heard for the last 10 minutes.
19 BY MR. GALLO:
i
< 20 0 You don't consider an incomplete answer to be 21 inaccurate, I take it?
22 Can you answer the question?
23 A Well, I don't know if I would characterize Mr. Weil's l
24 memorandum as being inaccurate. I told you: I don't
! 25 think it's complete.
L/
Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
r I
17557 l
1 MR. GALLO: That's all the questions I have 2 at this time.
. 3 JUDGE GROSSMAN: Okay, fine.
4 We'll adjourn until 10:15 tomorrow morning.
5 (WHEREUPON, at the hour of 6:15 P. M., the 6 hearing of the above-entitled matter was 7 continued to the 20th day of November, 8 1986, at the hour of 10:15 o' clock A. M.)
i 9 10 i
11
( 12 13 14 i
15
- 16 17 I
18 19 2ts i
21 22 23 4
24 Sonntag Reporting Service, Ltd.
Geneva, Illinois 60134 (312) 232-0262
. - - . - . -- ~. - - - - _.
NO PAGE NUMBER CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER I
O This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the UNITED STNTES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COLB1ISSION in the matter of:
! NAME OF PROCEEDING: BRAIDWOOD STATION UNITS 1 4 2 C0hBl0NWEALTil EDISON 11 i
DOCK'ET NO.: 50-456/457-OL PLACE: CilICAGO, ILLINOIS DATE: ,
WE DIESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1986 i
were held as herein appears, and that this is the originai transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Com.ission.
(sigt)
{ (TYPED) f Uf)
I
- Official Reporter Reporter's Affiliation i
h
=
l0
_w.g-m-m
-