ML20244A817: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -
g                                                                                                                                                                    .
              ,;: 1 rg
                          ,_                              s' %
                                                                                                                                                              %$                                                                                                  3
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ''                                                                          y.
4'f                                                                                                                              ''
a
                                                                  +
                                                                                                    ?. ..            .
: 1. - ;. ..
h                                        Y-k          .
m                                                                                                                                                                                            ,
                                                                                ~
J'                                                    +
fd                                                                                                          e                                '
5
                                                                              , ; s ..                                                                ,z M o w ::. - 9 J W                                                ,
                              +.3                                                                                                                >                                                                -
                                    'lbp W#"                                                                                                                                                                              <      a. , . ... :
J TEXA5 UTILITIES ELECTRIC'
('" d_                              .'Ngy*.' -,.          " '                                                      ,.
t                                                      0;*~'@'doMPANY,',. '1'
* f n                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    50-
                            .n gg
                                                                                                                                    ~.
                                                                                                                        .hh comanche Peak Steam El u
b . a. ket No[g' 4              .
s                        g i.Nas
: o. ,                                        ,-                                                            e%S**c1^> Unic*              ..
                                                                                                                                                                                          % 4 M k * .g                                    iM                                M:..
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ;.c                              c-4f                -
WM.F                                        jg                                    35(4'fg
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ?h
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              }.
                                                                                                                                                          "                                                                ,] % g                                        .
k
[4tf                                                                                                                                Di A                                  -
RA SE                                                '
(                                f. #.
m i r,.                                                                        %ug .                                ,g        "
9 n                  :.~              r g ~4 c. p cq                                                "'                                                ~ '. 4 :.              ...
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      .ap Mi f                                                                                                                                                                  f                                                                                                          'E "y>                        ~,., rm;                                                          ,                                              -          ;a
                                    . . , .                                                          . v ,, .
3                                . . .
A ~.
50?[$. p2
                                                                                            .'v~.~.p m ., ~. . ~.
                                                                                                                            . Deposit on of -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ,si ;- Ae                                                          '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              . -            dO4
                        ,4          %...w s.
3 a                ,.. s. . e
                                                                                                                                                .+
                                                                                                                                                              ,t %c ?                  y. .;g .                      e.                    i.''' Wi .1% . .
s..            -                                          ,,5 ?,.k".3,'?,                        R, a
if .g arm ?,e
: t. .    ,a-,
V                                  Kp
                                            .                                                                    a n !+ Q tj ;p                                                      .'i.p      ^p - xg                                  .h~ ,                                      1                                  M' 1
              ,            ,                            w                                        ~r                              .a                            -
a . ,~          r',,-.                          . .r ,; ,
_.          ,                    . ., g., ,  .g              .
                                                                                                    ,. e
                                                                                                      ^-      ,$$} .
                                                                                                                '                                                                                            y;                  ' .si
                ,g
(                                                                                      n                  o.
l-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ?.3 t                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ~
9ox i e                                                                      #
                                                                                                                                                            *+                          u,y.                                                                        .
t                                                                                                                                                      De                                      ,. J                                                              ,
t
                                                                                                                                                                                              ..                    '9-e,-                                                                                                                                                            '
      ,                                                                                                                                                                                                ~G:                                                                                                                                  '
s*            .- ' .
c 'i                            q,g-                                                                                                                                                m i                                                                                    : 3                                                                                                                        ,                                                '
: 2.    -
j                                                              ';
:y n                          -
h M. ' ' in R                                                                                Y .,                                                  '
                                                                                                                                                                                    ?vi A
p, ,
yy                                                              p,.y              -
                                                                                                                                                  <-u eg
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .w b
A
{                        7:9                                                              .l f 4                    .._
g.;
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .;; ~ ..:                                      w                    ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              +
              .s                                                                                                                                                                            -
N w.same
                                                                                                                                                                                                        '                                                                                                                                    b'      '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                          %                                                                                                                  9
[ '89d6120158                                                        89060'E'                                                                                                                                                              *
                        *d PDR                              FOIA n,
                                                                                                                                                                                                    } ; _p,'?[                                                                                        .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ]
I '' *d. !.5 ,:(\ HUGE 04 -407 ,                                                                                PDR g                          ,r,                                  p',                                                                [
                                                    ' mbt '\M $D\(,                                                                                                      "                                            "
E0 4-                              '4I
 
s.
N'.                                                                                                                                                                    . TEE                                                                                                                                                              . j
                                                    ,              W.                                                                :
:.: -                                                                C                  1
                          ...                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                i
                      "~f                              }                                                                          . . ,. y f:,                                  L L                ;
                                                              . k. *,                                        ~~      . -                q:tt gn A                              * ,
: s.
* r,                                            1.w                        . . , ms,            - s                .
                                                                                        . .'h. .; . .h.s . -
                        . u'''              .
h*en n'
                                                                                                                '.                                '',, (a $/O'                                                                    s G-                                                            *
: s. \',' ,',' : .4*/. cg~R
                                                                                      ,e
                                                                                                                                                        ~.yai                                                                      -
g.g                ,
                      ~~.                                                                                                                                                                          ..                                ,a
                .g                                    - .'
                                                                      .. .                                                                                                                    .n                                                                                                                  ,.          :
                    %sf,.'
y:g; ,n;,
                                                                                          ~
8 7 .n      v. .        .
y            -t
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          - - 7,. .
t                                  ^
x%Ak"l1 '                        .a.                        u~
W. : ...
W:rMT                                          A..TEXA5 UTILITIES EI.EbyRICS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        'N
                                                                                                                                                                                                        ~ 9{I .f                          .e ^ 5                  ~ ~'" ' g[h* 5 4                        >                                l'                              I
                                                                    ,                A W "QF.Jogyggy,,    .
                                                                                                                                                              '"-@b-1 '
                              ^
(45 - (
manche ' Peak 5toam El                                                                                                                  b                                        '
                      '                    W&&g                                                      %MS* ****
* U"' cQ h *&                                                                                            fQV                                                            pi                                                                  '
D.                                                '
: s.                                          GMW@ .                                                                                .f 8ehggg(qQ.-ig
                                                                        .-          f:                                                                                                                                                                .
M6                                      ,
Ap. -Ja[                                        '
f        f][fNCAMERAS,g
                                                                                                                                                . k,                                                                IN                                                                            p, a gk
                                                                    ?
u, :                                                                            .Me              , Deposit. o.          ... n  - ;of.r.v ,                                                                                              3 ~. ;~. . ,
                                                  ,y                  -
                                                                                    . .. a .
N.;.;~'
k                      wa.                    =
                    . ,f*,c      , . f, c,m,,.                . i.        ..f y.
* Q.~*,                              '
                                                                                                                                                          .~
s 8
ra.
                                            ' ,.w t :"
w+
                                                                                - .2 *is.n CW4W12
                                                                                                  .wy-
                                                                                                                              ,y'(..
p..
p 3,
pf
                                                                                                                                                                .py -
y7 .
a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            'o f                  l 4                                                                                            _,
s ,:r+ _
v
              ,,,        %                                                    .
* I. .#~              ^ *~* * #1
* v.                                  ,
                                                          ..'b
                    -                                                                                                                                            , 3. .                                                                                                                                          '
w-.                                      ,,                                                                                        ' ,g
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        =.
                                                                                      ,.      ' s1kW4 4-h
* g.y. s.                                                                                                        .                              ; ,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ,            4,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  +'
s;(                    %                                                                                .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      . y g -                                                                ..
L y q;                                              .,,y, 3n                                                                                                                                                                                      .J
    ) llg                        '
U:s..-
: t. t 3
:D i                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ;
t o
1.g                                                                                                  . v i:t e -                                                                                                                  . y 4,      .
E
                                                                                            '["
      *                    "                                                                                                      g                                  .
p 1 l
* Y:''~~
j[,;) i ' * ,.; ,;.y - >;.? s ' ..'
                  ,                                        . . ~                    ,;                x                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      V
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .,          ~x W
                                                                                                                                                                          - Gg i ' '''J
                                                              'L 4                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      *          '
    ][$fj                                                                        3;. m4 r,
                                                                                                                                                                      .. g                                                                                                                                                                      (
M w. ,                          ,
k'890612'0158 890607                                                                                                                                          #
g
:V M d,0j d HUGE 84-487 I          PDR              FOIA PDR-                                                y
                                                                                                                                                                                .. 2 ..
_ , , ,            ,                                  3 ,                                                    ,
y                  -
 
              ,                                ~.:            ,    -.;
1-l I.
mgc.1                                                          IN CAMERA-1
                                                                      -UNITED STATES OF AMERICE 2_
NUCLEAR REGULATORY C OMM I S SI ON.,
                              ~3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY;& LICENSING BOARD-
                              .4 5                ~ ~ ~ - - ~ * * ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~x In the matter of:                                    :
6 7
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC-                          -: -                          '
                                            ' COMPANY, et al.:
: . Docket Nos. 50 2445 4
e                              -
                                                                                                -:'                  50-446:
                                            -(Comanche Peak Steam- Electric-                      :
                              .,              Station, Units 1 and 2).                          :
10 Glen-Rose' Motor Inn-12                                                      Glen Rose,' Texas 13                                                      J u l y. _19, 193 4 14                                                ''
Discovery                            -'
Deposition of:.
15                                                                      (IN. CAMERA).
called for' examination.by counsel fo 16                                                                        the! Applicants.
37            taken before          J.F. Coughlin,.      CourtLReporter,.
18            beginning at 9:05 a.m., pursuant sto agreement.
19 20 21                                                                                        '
          '                                                                                                                        i 22              Applicants'' Discovery Deposition:- Volume I.                                          '
23 1
                            ?a                                                                                                  'l i
23 l                                                                                            -l l
l u
                                                                                                      =        ..._w 9
w.OL__LE----_--.-....
                        - -                          -                                                                              l
 
2 ge-2                                                I                                                                I APPEARANCES:
l 2
On behalf of the Applicants Texas Utilities Electric Company, et al.:
MARK L. DAVIDSON, ESQUIRE l
Bishop, Libermat. Cook, Purcell & Reynolds 5
1200 Seventeenth Street, Northwest
,                                                                      Washington, D.C. 20036 i
6 On. behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff:
GEARY S. MIIUNO, ESQUIRE 8
Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9
Washington, D.C. 20555 to      On behalf of the Witnessf i
II MICHAEL L. SPEKTER, ESQUIRE Suite 1102 1717 K Street, Northwest 12 Washington, D.C. 20006 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
* 21 22                                                                  '
23 24 25
 
7 mgc-3    1 I N D E.XL 2      WITNESS:
i.'
                                          ~~~.                          -EXAMINATION BY:
                  -3  f                                                ' MR . DAVIDSON:-      4    -i
(.                                                                                  U 4                                                                              '
                                                                                                      ]
5 I
        ,          6 7                                                                                      ,
                                                                                                        'I
                                                                                                    . ,l !
8
_E. _X _HD I _B _I _T _S q
9    Applicants' Discovery' Exhibits:                            IDENTIFIED 10      Exhibit No. F-1                                                    14-11 Exhibit No. F-2                                                    36 12      Exhibit No. F-3                                                  .69      'I 13      Exhibit No. F-4                                                    8 9 '-    y.
Id      Exhibit No. F-5                                                    91 15      Exhibit No. F-6                                                    96'-        }.
16      Exhibit No. F-6A                                                191 17      Exhibit No. F-7                                                  198 18      Exhibit No. F-8                                                  233 19      Exhibit No. F-9                                                  303 (Exhibits retained by: Counsel').        .
21 22 23 l
l              2a 25 l
 
f                                        .
4-1 4
1 13 eel 1E1EES 2                Whereupon,                    ,__
t 3
                                                                      ~~~
sterdav.
4      a witnes,s, was called for examination and. .having been 5      previously duly sworn, was examined and testifiedffurther 6      as follows:
7                        MR. DAVIDSON:
                                -          -q Good morning,  ,    ,,    f 8                    since we are starting a new transcript and this
{
9      is a discovery-deposition, would you be good enough to 10        state your full name and address for the record?
11                          THE WITNESS:    Fullname,f 12        The address, I.have no permanent address at this time.        #
13                                  EXAMINATION 14                          BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15                  Q        Where are you currently living, sir?
16                  A      With relatives.
17                Q        Are you currently employed?.
18                A        No, I am not.
19                  Q        Do you have.an outstanding opportunity for 20        employment?                                                        t 21                  A        I have possibilities.
22                  Q        Have you received an indication that you will
* 23          be employed at any time in the near future?
24                  A        I have had offers made to mei 25                  Q        In the nuclear power industry, sir?
    -.--_a--__--_--__--_.____-
: p.                      :.-
                                                                                                            . ~g
                                                                                    '6 4
1 station to receive the phone number for the. CAP, which I-2 had seen on the news and was interested in their' views of 3
not being.against nuclear: power in general, but being against 4
unsafe practices which led.into my: feeling that.:you know,
      ~5      not against nuclear power but against unsafe practices..
6                      So 1. requested from~the reporter.a phone 7      number for a GAP maintaining my~name' anonymous to.htm.                                  After 8      obtaining that;I.was given Billie Garde's phone number-and-9    a reference from' Billie Garde to Ernest Hadley.
10              Q      Now when you say GAP, do you mean Government 11    Accountability Proj ec t ?
12                A      Right.
13              Q      hhen did you see this television; program'that 14 led you to make the telephone call?
15              A        I would say in the first quarter of''84..
16              Q      Could you be more precise with the month 17    perhaps?
18              A      I believe not. There's several times, there 19
            -are incidences where the plant was shown on the television, 20      and to try and pinpoint one, no I probably could not.                                                  -
21                Q      Okay. But the first quarter of 19847 22                A      Right.                                                                                '
23                0      So you spoke -- well, I don't want to restate 2d      your testimony.      You tell us you were referred from Ms. Garde 25      to Mr. Hadley, and you spoke with Mr. Hadley.      And what was
 
7 1pb4                                                                                                  '
1 1
the sum and substance of . that.first conversation?                    J 2                A    Well, there vas basically -- I had explained 3
to Billie Garde the incidences at the plant, which are 4
4 incidences which are covered under the' affidavit. And in.
5 turn, we spoke as far as the incidences with Mr. Hadley at              >
6      a later date.
7 Q    l'm sorry, let me back up. After you-got the a
8 telephone number and you celled, who answered your call'at 9                                                                              i the GAP number that you get from the reporter?        Was it
{
10    Ms. Garde?
11                  A    No. At was not, l
12
* Q    Do you know who answered your phone-call?
13                A    No, I do not.    .I do not have the name. I 14 requeSte'd fYom him Billie Garde's phone number, and he was 15 the one who gave me her phone number.
16 Q    Now wait a minute, I think I'm confused.      You 17    called up someone from GAP?
                                    '8 f
A    Correct,                                          '
19 Q    And you fequested Billie Garde's number.      How 20
{
would you know her name on your first contact?                            l I
21                  A                                                            'I It was shown on the television.                        !
22 Q    I see, so you called up GAP and'said you.                3 23      wanted to speak to Ms. Garde.                                              1 You thought she was associated        !
2d      with GAP.                                                                  1 I
I i
25                  A    Right. 1 knew she was.                                l I
l l
 
8 I
4 1
Q      And he said I'll get the number for.you, or 2  words to that effect?
3              A        Cerrcet.
4
                    -Q      And then you called Ms. Garde.
5              A      Right.
6              Q      Could you now relate the sum and substance 7
of that conversation?
8              A        We hau spoke over various problem areas at 9
the plant, such as outlined in the affidavit.      And I believe 10    there was a I can't remember if she met with me first or it if it was Mr. Hadley who met with me first. I believe it 12    was Mr. Hadley who met with me first.
13              Q      u? you recollect which allegations you revieweil 14 with Ms. Garde in that telephone conversation?
15              A        Yes.
16              Q        Could you tell as which ones you mentioned to 17    her?
18              A The ferroresonant transformer problem, butt to splicing problems, cable separation violatious, the inadequacy 1
20    of procedures, testing procedures. That would be the ones 21 that I remember now.
22              Q      Did you mention to her any allegations with 23 respect to the harassment, intimidation or threatening of 24    you?
25              A        Tes.
I had informed her that the overall view i
                                                                                ]
 
9 1pb6 1
of the job site was that things were incorrect, but that 2
there was really nothing you could do about it.
3 Q    Did you mention to her your disagreement with d
Mr. Powers?
5 MR. SPEKTER:    Objection, I think that's a 6
characterization of what it was.
7 MR. DAVIDSON:    I think that's a fair objection 8    Let me rephrase that.
9 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
to              Q      Did you discuss with her a conversation that 11 you had with Mr. Powers with respect to one of your allegatio 12    of inadequacy?
13              A      During the first telephone conversation?
14 Q      Yes.
15                A      No.
16 Q      Did you discuss with her any of your' allegation 17 regarding a conversation you had, one or more conversations 18 you had with Ivan Vogelsang?
19                                                                                                              I MR. SPEKTER:  Request that counsel be more                                            i 20 specific in relating which conversations.                        This individual l
23 worked at this plant for over a year and        a half, and he might.
22                                                                                                                l have had many, many conversations.      Is there any particular.                                        j 23 conversation that you have in mind?      Or if it is the particula                                      4 2d                                                                                                  -
Conversation that relates'to an incident in which j
25 alleges harassment, I would request that that be made e
s l"
l
 
                                                                                                    .I l,
10          i I
l
_ .c I  clear at this time.                                                  i i
2                  MR. DAViDSON:  I think that is a clarification      j 3  that I can be prepared to adopt the conversations with              I i
4 Mr. Vogelsang to which 1 refer were not the ones where you          l I
5    wished him Happy Birthday or said hello, but rather the o n'e s      j 6    that you described. yesterday in your direct testimony.
j 7                                                                        (
Specifically, those in which you allege'you 8    felt harassed, intimidated and threatened.                        'I i
9                  THE WITNESS:  Okay, you're asking to place 10  dates on these conversations. I had several conversations 11    with Billie Garde and Mr. Hadley to try and pinpoint each 12    conversation. What information was drawn or associated with          !
13    each one is very hard for me.
14 I do know that I spoke with Billie Garde and 1
15 Mr. Hadley about the harassment and intimidation problems.            I 16    dealing with Ivan Vogelsang, Fred Powers, and Ken Luken.      But    2 l
17    to be able to give you an exact telephone conversation that            1 18                                                                          !
was done on -- no, I don't feel I can recollect that good.            !
10                    BY MR. DAVIDSON:
l 20              Q      Well, you have to understand you don't have 21    an obligation to give me the date unless[vou can remember it.        !
22              A      Okay.                                                !
23              Q      I'm just trying to see if you do, and if you          i 24    ' recollect what was said at that particular conversation.              '
25    That is all.
I I
 
11 1pb8
(
1 At the conclusion -- well, you are relating 2
to us the conversation you had with Ms. Garde.                      So you told
                                                                                                      ,a 3    her these things. What did she say'to you?                                            )
4              A    She says that it sounds as if you are having 5
problems'like several other people in -- at the' plant site 6
there, and that they wanted-to set up a more in-depth talk' 7    with me.
8 Q    What did she suggest that you do in terms of 9
getting that in-depth talk together?- Did she propose a date 10    that you get together?                                                              -
i 11                                                                                        i A      I believe so. To give you the exact date, no 12 I don't know what the exact date was that we actually met.
13 I do know that we met at my house, once with Ernest Hadley, 14 once with Billie Garde, and could possibly have been other 15    meetings other than that.                                                            I to              Q      Would you.say at your house?
t Were you'then        j 17    living in Granbury, Texas?                                                          ; ;
18              A      v es, I was, t
19 Q      Can you recollect when that first meeting that 20    you might have had at your home was?                                                        I 21              A      I would believe it was approximately two months t
22 prior to my being terminated, or my voluntary resignation
                      ~
23    from the company.
1 24              Q      When was your voluntary termination from the l
25    company?                                                                                    l
                                                                                              ,1        ;
i j
1 4
 
12 I
                                                                                                                  ! 4 l
1          A      in the neighborhood of April 9th, I believe.
I 2            Q      When you effected the voluntary termination 3  from the company, did you submit a resignation?
4            A      I did.
5            Q      Was that resignation' written?                      I 6          A      Yes, it was.
7            Q      Do you have a copy of that resignation?            f 8          A      I believe so.                                      I g
9          Q      Do you have it with you here today?
10          A      I will have to look.
11                    MR. DAVIDSON:    Off the record.
12                    (Discussion off the record.)
13                    MR. DAVIDSON:    We will go back on the record.
14                    BY MR. DAVIDSJN:
                                                          /
15            Q                    )you have just opened an attache    ;
to  case and taken out a portfolio and removed a document from f
17  it which you've handed to me in response to my previous l
18    question about whether you had a copy of a. written resignation to    that you submitted to effect voluntary termination from your 20    position with the Impell Corporation at. Comanche Peak.
21                    Am I correct in understanding that this is 22    in fact a copy of the document I requested?
23            A      Yes. it is.
24                    MR. DAVIDSON:    Then I would like to ask the i
25    reporter to mark this.
J i
i 1
i
 
1 13                l t
      'ob10 1
3 1
MR. SPEKTER:  May I look at it?                        i i
2                MR. DAVIDSON:  I am sorry. I was under the            i 3 misimpression that you had reviewed the documents.
4                Off the record.
end 1. 5 (Discussion off the record.)                            i 6                                                                      .
7 i
8                                                                          1 l
10 11 l
12
                ,3 j
15 16 17 18                                                                          l 19 20                                                                            ,
21                                                                            ,
1 s                                                                                        a 22 23 2s 25 1
I l
l I
 
al                                                                                                14 5
1 MR. DAVIDSON: -All right..
2 During the period of time when we were 3
off the record it was agreed to' accommodate that rather than mark'and bind into this discovery 5
deposition the document that he-handed me which he has-O' identified as  a copy of the written resignation he submitted to effect voluntary termination from his position at 8
Comanche Peak.that we will. procure.a        p
                                                                                          'hotocopy of.same and-mark that.as'the exhibit-and return to him his copy.
10                                                                      ~
Is that agreeable to you,                    '-
11 THE WITNESS:    -Yes.                      ~'
12 MR. DAVIDSON:    Mr. Spekter?
13                                                                                  '
MR. SPEKTER: . Absolutely.
14 MR. DAVIDSON:      And we have marked-this.
exhibit as Witness F Disc F-1.
16 17 (The document referred to was marked Witness F Disc F-1 18 19 for identification.)
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
20                                        ""          '
Q                    ,
looking now at the document that    '
has been marked for identification as Daic F-1 and I note that it is addressed to the Impell Corporation, 2333 23 Waukegan Road in Bannockburn. Illinois --
24 MR. SPEKTER:      I would object.' I believe-25 the document speaks for itself.
t w_________________          . _ . _ _ _ _ _
 
            '2jon2 li5' t
1 1
If counsel has any questions 1concerning-
:2 the document I request he return'the document and he.can' 3  make them.
d
                                                    -BY MR. DAVIDSON:
5 Q      Is that theladdre.ss.to which'you'sent,this; 6  resignation?
7              A      The resignation'was-not mailed, n.
8 Q      How was it communicated to the-Impell.
m    .
9 Corporation at-2333 Waukengan Road, Bannockburn. Illinois?:        :,
10              A It was communicated by copies'being; 11 produced, one given to Art. London.fone given'directly to-12 Dick Camp and I.believe onefgiven to Tom Miller, 13 Q      So-you'gave three' copies ofjthisLdocument 14  out?    Did you give'it to.anyone.else?      At the time?
15              A      I will not say no~to'that. I aminotisure      l 16    if Ken Luken    received a copy of it or not.
17 Q      You mean you think you may'have given him
                            'B    a copy?
                                                                                                      , -i, 19              A      Correct.
t 20 Q      But you know you gave a copy to Dick Camp?    .;
21 A      Correct.                                                  '
      .                                                                                                    1 22                                                                                j Q        And to Tom Miller?                              ,
23                                                                        I'd i
A      Correct.                                        'h t.
2d Q'      And to Art London?
25              A      Correct.
 
a e a3                                                                                                                                                            16 4
1 Q-      Do-you recollect when you gave this written. resignation to the three1 individuals'that you have 3
now named an'd conceivably also;the fourth.one to Mr. Luken?
AL      'It wouldLbe in the approximateqarea.of the 5
date-listed at the top of the documentation.
6 Q:      Whenfyou sayLthat,;I note that Disc'F                                                                                        #
bears a'date of' March 19. 1984.        When you say approximately 8
it means it could have been before-March:19'or~after.
March 197 10 A        Itfwould have'been-a few days after II March 19.      Or on March 19 . -
12                                                  ~
Q        When you say'a fewLdays after, how many
                                                                            '3 days do you think that might have been?
14 A          Qne or two, possibly three at the most.
15 Depending if a weekend fell in that ' time. frame.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:  Does-anyone have a. calendar available~for --
18 THE WITNESS:    It would have'been!the 22nd or 23rd of March.
20                                                                                                          ,
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
21 Q        I'm sorry. I see that Mr. Spekter has been  ,
good enough to provide it to us, his pocket diary,.which:
23 contains a calendar of 1984, and you have consulted it.
24
                                                                                                    .'              1
                                                                                                    \
25                                                i A      s  Correct..
l e                                                                                                                                                                                    j i
                                                                                                                                                                                      )
                                                                                                                                                                                      )
 
l
  -jon4                                                                  17 Q      ANd we have looksd at March of 1984 to 2
determine what the dates were? And: March 19 on this 3
calendar is listed as Monday; is that correct?
A      Correct.
5 g
                                  -And does' refresh your recollection that you 6
probably delivered thedocument you say on the 23rd cur I
24th, did you say, or 22nd?
8 A        The 22nd.
9 Q      The 22nd or 23rd.
10 A      Correct.
Q      What accounts for the lapse of the four 12 days between the time of the date of txis document, the-I3 dating of this document, and its submission-to the individuals that you have indicat'ed?
15 A      I had the document typed up previous to 16 that and was awaiting information on a j ob employment from another company.
IB Q      Had you been seeking a position elsewhere?
10 A      Yes.
O Q      For how long a period?
21 A      Approximately six to eight months.
22 Q      Did you review this written resignation 23 with anyone prior to its submission to the individuals
        '4 you have-indicated?
25 A      At the_ job site, no.
 
1 en5                                                                        13 l
i 9
1 Q      l don't believe 1 limited my question to 2
just at the j ob site.
3 A      Ukay. My wfre typed up the_ written resignation; therefore she must have looked at it and reviewed it.
6 Q      Did you discuss this retigtotion with 7
anyone?
8 A        Yes.
9 Q      With whom?
10 A        I had informally stated that there was a II possibility of me giving a formal resignation and I believe 12 I had informally stated that at the first.part or the week.-
        '3 Q      To whom, sir?
14 A      1 believe~ to Art London.
Q      Did you discuss with Mr. Ernest Hadley.
Io the possibility of your submitting a resignation at any time?!
17                                                                            i A      Ernest Hadley did know that I had -- was        j going to another job.
19 MR. DAVIDSON:    Will the reporter read back 20 my question?
21 (The' reporter read the record as requested.)
(Discussion off the record.)
23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2d Q        Have you concluded your colloquy with 5
counsel?
 
2jon6 39  __
A    Yes, I have.
2 Q  All right.      Now, you have heard the question 7        ~~
3 a g a in ,(                    you answer it?
fcould d
i A    Yes.
5 Q    Yes what, sir?
6 A    Yes to the question.        The question was had I
I discussed with Ernest Hadley resignation to the company 8
and, yes, I believe so.        I'll leave it at that.
i Q    Fine. And do you recollect when you first to discussed the possibility of your submitting                            a resignation I'
to the company with Mr. Hadley?
IS A    No.
I3 Q    1s there any way we might refresh your recollection?
15 A    No.
16 Q    That date is gone forever?
                        '7 MR. SPEKTER:      I would object to the characterization.        If counsel wishes to ask questions he might refresh his recollection.            He can't state on the O
record is there any way that. I might refresh your 21 recollection.      Certainly we all have ways that our 22 recollections can be refreshed and I think it is an v
improper comment to make chat that date is gone forever.
24 I think that that is improper at this time.                                              l 25 Counsel may proceed with his questioning
 
:20 4  ,<
t but as to his' characterizations. I think that is imp rop e r . :
                                                                                    .MR. DAVIDSON:        'Are.you finshed?
                                                                                                                        ~
MR. SPEKTER:        Certainly.
MR, DAVIDSON: _0kay.
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
6 did you keep or make any notes Q
(                                            '
of your conversations ,or meetings with Mr..Hadley?.
A    No. I did not.
9 Q    Did Mr. Hadley take.any notes or_ keep,any.
10 notes of his conversations.or. meetings wit.h you?'
11.
A    Yes.
12 Q    Did lut ever at any time:show those notes:
13 to you?            >
1s A    No.
15 Q    Did you at any time' prior to the submission.
16 of your resignation discuss the possibility of. making 17 and submitting such a voluntaryctermination with Ms. Billie 18 Carde?
19 A    Yes.
20 Q    You recollect when that might.have been?
21 A    No.
22 Q    When yau discussed-the possibility:of your 2$
making and submitting a resignation with Mr. Hadley..can you 2e ~
tell me what it was that you. discussed with him?
as$
In other.words, relate lto          --
I e
_ ____________.____i__.___.___._ _
                                                                                                                                          'I
 
o
      '2jon8 21'            i 6
I MR. SPEKTER:  I wouJd request counsel Ebe 2
more specific in his questioning.
3 MR. DAVIDSON:  Well, I believe chez witness d
has already frustrated my attempt to get a date, so maybe 5
we can find out at lea.:t what.the sum and substance o ti 6
the c o nv e rs atb n s he had with this. individual were.
7 LY MR.'DAVIDSON:
8 Q      You do remember talking with Mr. .Hadley' 9
about this?
10 A      Yes.
11 Q      What did you and he discuss?
12 A
We discussed that.I had received an-13 employment offer from another company; I would'be accepting 14 that employment offer.
15 Q      Did you discuss anything about the 16 resignation?
17                                                                                    s A      I would say no, as far as the details or                ;.
18 how I was going to resign or anything. no, we did no:
19 discuss details.
l 20 Q      When you first began your discussions with                  -
21 Mr. Hadley did he suggest t h a '; you should resign from the 22 company?
23                                                                                      I A      No, j
2d                                                                                    'i l                              Q      Did he inquire whether you were considering 25 it?
l i
                                                                                                      )
i
                                                                                                      )
i l
--                                                                    _-. -__--_--__-_-_---m
 
1:
ni I
i
* A        No.
Q        When you first discussed your allegations                                -l 3
with Ms. Garde did she saggest that you should resign from the company?
5 A        No.
6 Q        Did you  --
in the course of your I
conversation did the possibility that you night resign I
come up?
A        1 had already informed Billie Garde that 10 I was planning on resigning from the company.
II Q          The very first time you spoke with her?
12 A          I will not specify it was the first time.
I3 It was during our conversations through various time periods.
            'd Q          How many meeetings did you have with 15 Mr. Hadley with respect to the preparation of your 16 afildavit?
I A          I coulon't give you un exact number.
I8 I would sey several, speaking in the neighborhood of 10 possibly five to ten, severai phone conversations.
Able to identify an exact number, no.
21 Q          I see. How many face to face meetings
          "'                                                                                                                                {
with Mr. Hadley?                                                                                                    i i
23 A          One at least, possibly two.
l Q          And you mentioned earlier thet there were                                        !
i 25 drafts of the affidavit.                        How many drafts of this affidavdt 1                                                                                                                        i
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _      __. -      -                                                                          f
 
1
                                                                                                                  'l
'4                                                                                                                  !
23 2jon10                                                              .                  f l
l i
I did you review?                                                      l 2
A      Two.
3 Q      When was the first draft provided t e yau ? '
s A
The exact date 1 couldn't give you.
5 Q      Approximately.
6 A
Approximately two to three months ago.
7 I belleve it was after my voluntary. resignation.from the 8
company.
9 QL    When you say after, do you mean after 10 March 19th or after March 23rd?
II                                                                            f A      After April 9th.                                      !
12 Q      Disc r-1 recites that your last date will            i i
I be Fridcy, April 6.
14 A      Right.
15 Q      Is that accurate?
16 A      Correct.
{
17                                                                        t Q      So then thie reference to April 9 is              I j- j i
18 inaccurate?
10                                                                              ,
20 A      April 9 vs-the beginnig date    at my new job location.
21 Q      1 see.
22 23 A
And then I.know it was after April 9th.              .;
24 Q      On April 9th did you begin a job somewhere else?                                                                    r 25                                                                              !
A    Yes.
l                                                                                                            I'    I l
I i
U__1- _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _                                                                                d
 
                                                                . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ .      . - . - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - ~          ~~
on11 4
1 Q    Where was that, sir?
j 2
A With Stone & Webster Engineering.                                                  i 3
Q How many conversations or meetings did d
you have with Ms. Garde du'ing                            J        the course of the 5
preparation of this affidavit?
6 A    Several.
7 Q      How many telephone conversations?
8 A        In the neighborhood of approrfmately-10 to 9
15.
10                                                                                                                          ;
Q How many face to face meetings?
II A        One to two.
12 i
Q          During the course of these series of 13 telephone conversations and meetings with Ms. Garde did you Id relate to her any alleged incidents of harassment, 15 intimidation and threats?
10 A            Yes.
37 Q
Which incidents did you relate to her?                                            j 18 A
All three of the incidents as previously testified tv.
20 Q              And those would be?                                                                          )
21 A
And in addition to those three, the overall 22                                                                                                                                    (
harassment and intimidation on the job site from day to day.
23 And the three incidents I am speaking of, they are the ones                                                      --
24 one would be with Ivan Vogelsang. Fred Powers and Ken Lucken.
25 Q
During the course of your conversations                                          j t,
l 1
1
 
                                                                                                .-_.7 25                ;-
2jon12        -
1 l
i 3
I
                      'with -- conversations and meetings with Mr., Hadley, did fou.
2 mention to him any of these incidents respecting a'11egations              .(    1 3
                                                                                                    'i of harassment,_intimidatic,n, and threatening?                                  '
4 A      Yes.                                                            )
5 Q      And what incidents did you mention'to                        _;
6 Mr. Hadley?
7 A    .The same as I mentioned to Billie. Garde.                          >
8 l                              Q      The same three?
9 l                              A      Right. And including the day to day                          j
!            10 harasement.
11 end2                                                                                            y 1
12                                                                                      i 13                                                                                    '
                                                                                                  .j l            it j
i 15                                                                                          I i
            '16 4
17 18 l
10                                                                                        j i
20                                                                                          ;
21 i
22
\            23                                                                                          .
24                                                                                          I
                                                                                                    'l  '
25 l
l l
i 6
___.____. _____ _ __ Q
 
26 ab!
T I
1i                      BY Mk. DAVIDSON:
2                Q      I believe you stated that you received two 1
3'      drafts of the affidavit for your review, prior to the l
4      preparation of final one. When you reviewed these. affidavits.
I i  did you then have a meeting or a conversation with either                                    ;
6      Ms. Garde or Mr. Hadley, or did you have a telephone                                          i 7      conversation to allect your comments?
8                                                                                                    !
A      A telephone conversation.
9 Q      Did you mark up the drafts, or did you.merely 10      call in your comments?
11                A      I marked up the drafts and in one case. I 12      believe, I called in my comments.                                                            ;
13                Q      Well, you say you marked up the draft and 14 in one case you called it. Wero there more than two drafts?
15                A      I said approximately two drafts. There might to      have been three drafts, there may have been only two drafts, 17                                                                                                  i Q      Well, perhaps we can find that out.                                        '
H)
            )                                                          /                                            !
IB                        When you received t 'n e first draft.I j
19 did you receive that in person, by hand delivery, or was                                            3 20        that mailed to you?
{        ;
1 21                A      It was mailed to me.                                                      '
i 22                Q      By whom?                                                                            i 23                A      By Ernest Hadley.                                                        j i
2d                Q      Was that draft accompanied by a letter?
l      25                A      Yes.                                                                                >
1 9
i I
 
1 fc31b2.                                                _
27 1                                                                    .i Q      Do you recollect what the letter instructed 7    you to do?-
3 A      Review the draft and make. corrections as      'l i
d necessary.
1 5
Q                    did you retain a copy'of that 6                                ~
draft?
7 A    ~ Yes, I did.
8 Q      Did you-retain a copy of the l e t t e 'r c'f instruction that accompanied it?
H)
A      1.believe I did.
11 Q      Do you'have chose documents with you'today'?
12 A      Possibly.
13 Q      Would you.look for them?~
Id MR. SPEKTER:      I would object at this time.
15 1 think this is wholly irrelevant.      The affidavit-that 36 he has testified to was composed over several drafts, 37                                                                        l The final draft is the only draft that was submitted in            '
18 the prior deposition and was also submitted to Applicant and to the Staff for discovery proceedings.          I-request 20 that it's irrelevant how that came about, to be a final.
21 draft.
22 I believe that if we are in this proceeding, 23 going to look at the proposed drafts of every single document -l 24                                                                            !
that comes out of either Applicant's office, CASE's office, 25 or the witnesses. we would be here until the turn of the i
1 I .'
1
 
l28 13 4
1 century, going through what      --
how people arrived at 2  finally submitting what they have submitted.            And I think' 3-this is a wnolly irrelevant.line of questioning.
4 I've been very, very patient.. letting you 5    go through this.        I wish counsel would make his point and 6
ask him if he believes that he was requested to change'.. things    .
7    by someone'else..      I request that he ask'that.      And.I 8    think-that can be solved L very quickly on~a question basis 9
and not by looking at drafts and looking at.other d'ocuments'.
10 I respectfully request'that this.ma'tter be 11
                                      ~ moved along, if we can. . If-the question is the substance of 12 the document, I think that should be asked. .This is a 13 discovery deposition and'I understand'that,'and I ' m v e ry:-
Id amenable to letting counsel. find whatever information will 15      be helpful to him in this matter.          But I.think that~we're 16 getting way too far afield here and I would object as to 17      the relevancy.
18 MR. DAVIDSON:    Your objection.is certainly 19 noted and I think that while I'm.under no obligation.to.
20 respond, I think I will explain that I think the evolution 21 of this witness's allegations is very significant.
22 MR. SPEKTER:  Perhaps'that could be asked on        '
23      direct question.        And he might answer.
24 MR. DAVIDSON:    1 think the best evidence 25 is going to be these drafts and I think that they're very
_______.______._--_____--_m              - - - - - -
 
k
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              /
129-J fc31b4-3 pertinent.. So if-1,may,'I'd.like you.to produc'e:that r                                                m 2  document, if you have it with ; ynu ,' '                                                                                      I 3
s                                                      J (Pause.)l 4
(Discussiorr off the: record.).
5                                                                                                '
MR. SPEKTER:
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            /has:had:an 6
opportunity to.l'ook through his' briefcase.'for al marked'up-                                                                          .
7    document.
B BY MR. D A'V I D S O N's 9
                                                                                                                                        'Q                              - were you able to;1ocate-the.
10    document?
11 A            N o ', 1-was not.
12
                                                                                                                                        -Q                                          would you~be good'enough'to 13
:.earch your files-at home:for us, so.that we may-have a 3d copy of this document? That'is, the initial and'first 15    draft of your. affidavit?
M                A            Yes.
17 MR. SPEKTER:                        I believe,it?s irrelevant.
18 I would make my objection on that point.
89 BY'MR.'DAVIDSON:
20 Q            And.if you find that. document, will you 21    produce it-to us, sir?-
22              A            Yes.
23 Q            In view of the ecmpressed time frameJunder r                            %,
24 which we areo'p'erating(                                            JeanIaskyoul toffavor:                                                _
25 me by producing that as soon as-possible?
                                                                                                                                                                                              - 4.
I
_        _____ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _                      ___._..c. __          _ _ _ . . . _ _ . _          . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _  _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _      _ _ -      . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
30 b5                                                                                                        l' l
                                                                                                                                          ?
1 MR. SPEKTER:    The witness has answered th6t 2
he'll produce it if he has it.
3 MR. DAVIDSON:    I.will'try and get.a date, 3
4 l                                                                                      I' THE WITNESS:    If I have that document at                    l l
5!    home, I will produce it.
i 6
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
7 Q      When do you tPink it is likely that we would 8
be able to see it?
9                                                                                        }
MR. SPEKTER:  If he ever gets out of here.
10
{
I'm sure he'll be. happy to get home and produce it for you                      ,
11 immediately.
12                                                                                      L BY MR. DAVIDSON:
13 Q      Can we expect it then early next week?                    '
i 14 A      Yes.
15 Q      Fine, then, sir. Thank you.
j lo MR. SPEKTER:  That is if he has it.
17 MR. DAVIDSON:    I don't think I'm going to 18        ask
                                                                  !to produce any document that he doesn't                  ;
14        have.                                                                        l' 20 MR. SPEKTER:    Thank you.
21 MR. DAVIDSON:    I am anxious, though, to have        !,
22 him produce those that he does.
l 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
l-                                  24 Q    .
                                                                                ) you indicate that there was a l                                                              L.              ,
25 second draft of the affi. davit?                                        I l                                                                                                                        !-
1 1
l t
 
e
                                                                                                                          '.4 ( '
sc31b6-31-    ',
i                A      Yes.                                                            .
A 2                Q      How-did you receive.that?'
3-                      MR. SPEKTER:    Objection,: irrelevant.
4                        BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                            /          s 5                  Q-    There is a : question pending, (                                            ~]
6                  A    .The second draft, I believe, was received 7        in'the mail.
e                Q      Did the second draft -- was the second
                ,        draft accompanied i by a cover letter?
60                A      Yes.
31                  Q      From whom was the draft                    --
or by whom wasi 12        the draft sent?
13                  A      Ernest Hadley.
34                Q      And was the signatory to'the cover' letter?
35                A      Yes.                                                                                    i 16    l            Q      What did that cover lett'er ino'truct you to do-i7        or tell you?
is                  A      From recollection. I believe it said to                                              j 19        go ahead and review, or review the changes'that have been 20        made, to be sure that they.were correct end make any-21        further changes, .if necessary.
22                  Q      Between the. time.-- let ge rephrase that.
23                        How much time elapsed between your receipt.                                              1
                                                                                                                              -(
24        of the first draft, in the mail, and_your receipt of the;
                                                                                                                                .i 25        second?
i l
4                                                                                                                                l
                                                                                                                              -1 I
 
l 32            )
31b7 4    j 1
A  l'm not sure.
2                  MR. SPEKTER:  I o b j e c t .. I thini it is
                                                                                                      .i 0  irrelevant.
4                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                              ,e            g 5              Q    I'm sorry, I didn't hear you,(                    !
6              A    I said I am not sure.
7 Q    How long a p(riod do you think alapsed?
8                  ME. SPEKTER: The question has been asked and 9    answerad.
10                  THE WIT 5ESS:  'I aun not pocitive on that.
11 SY MR. DAVID 50N:
12              Q    I understand you're not positive.          I would ~          l 13  like an approximeri amount of time.
Id Mit . SPEKTER: Counsel. I would state again 15  that he's anGwered the question.        he's not positive. If 16  he's not positive, he's not positive.
17 MR. DAVIDSON:    I'm s9rry, Mr. Spekter. I 18    didn't mean to interrupt.
                                                                                              ]
I I' BY MR. DAVIDSON:
20              Q    Did you say a week?        Just a m0 ment ago?    Did 21 I hear you say that when your counsel interrupted?                            I 22              A    I said it aould possibly have been a week.                '
4 23                                                                                  1 but speaking of mail terms and all, I'm not eure of how 24    long it was.
l 25              Q    Could it 1. ave been more than a week?
I l
 
33 fc31b8 i
A      I don't know.
2 Q      Did you retain a copy of this second                                              l-3                                                                                                      i draft?
4 A      I do not believe so.
5 Q    Did you retain a copy of the cover letter?u 6
A      I do not believe so on that either.
7 Q      Would you check your records, to see-8 if you retained a copy?
9 A      Yes.
10 Q      Do you know whether you have.aEcopy with you 11 today?
12 A      I know I do net have a' copy today?
13 Q    How do you know that?
Id A      I did not see it when I was looking through 15 the files.
16
                        -Q      Okay,  Will you check your files at home 17 for us and see if you have a copy of the second draft..                                          .
          'B cf the cover letter?
I' A      Yes.
20 Q      And if you do have such a copy, would yot 21 produce it to us?
22                                                                                                      i-A      Yes.
23 Q    -And can I ask you if you will produce it 24 gy.early neXt week?
25 A    .Yes.
                                                                                                                  }-
i
 
34 b9 4
        -1 Q      Did you ever receive a draft of your 2
affidavit for review in a face to face meeting with either 3  Mr. Hadley or Ms. Garde?
4          A      No.
5          Q      Did you ever review any draft of your 6  affidavit in a face to face meeting with Ms. Garde or 7  Mr. Hadley?
8          A      No.
9 Q      When did you receive a copy of the final 10  affidavit. which you then executed' 11            A      I am not sure of a date.
12          Q      Sometime after the receipt of the second 13  draft?
l 14          A      Correct.
:5          Q      Did you receive the final portion of your 16  affidavit?    Let me rephrase that. How did you receive the' i
17  final version of your affidavit?                                                      i
=
i i
IB          A      Through the mail.
10 Q      Do you know who sent you that final version?
20            A      Yes, Ernest Hadley.
21 Q%      Was the final' version accompanied by'a cover 22  letter?
23            A      Yes.
2d            Q      Could you'tell us what the contents of that 25  cover letter was?
 
fc31b10                                                              35' 1          A      It specified that here is the affidavit 2  and he requested that I have it signed and notarized and 3  sent back.
d' Q      Do you have a copy of that?    Did you retain 5  a copy of that cover letter?
6          A      Yes.
7 Q      Do you have.it here with.you today?
8          A      Yes.                                              t 9
Q      Would you please produce it?
10 (Pause.)
end?      11 12 13 la 15 16 l
17
                                                                                        )
is                                                                        1 I
a                                                                        1
(
20                                                                        !
                                                                                    'l 21                                                                        l 22 23 i
I I                                                                                        I 25 i
i
                                                                        ._ ___._-_-_N
 
J4/1                                                                                                                          3 6 l-s  s 4      .j 1
MR. DAVIDSON:          While we were off the record,                    i 2                                  ')                                                                          i
                                          ,                              was good enough to search his attache case for                      o 3        me. And he produced the original of's note on bond. paper.;
d And I would like to have that document marked-5 for identification as Disc F-2.
6 (The document referred,to was:
7 marked Exhibit Disc F-2 for (XXX                            B e x amin a t ion .~)'
                                                                                                                                          ~
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
10 Q                      And again.'                        to accommodate you, 11 since this is your copy and,1t is an. original -- assuming; 12 that there is no objection.either from'yourl counsel.or.
33 Mr. Mizuno -- what I would. propose to do is.have a photo 1                                      '
Id copy made of this document and have that marked in 15 place of the original and bound into our discovery to            transcript.
17 MR. SPEKTER:          No objection.
18 MR. DAVIDSON:          And I will return.this'to.you l'
for your records.
20 THE WITNESS:          Okay.                                        .
21 MR. DAVIDSON:          Mr. Mizuno, is that acceptable 22 to you?                                                                                        .
23 MR. MIZUNO:          Yes.
24 (Discussion-off the record.)                                              i 25 i
                                                                                                                                                -j l
1 l
1
 
FCjl'6/3.                                                                            7-h, 1
BY MR.-DAVIDSON:
                                                                                            /            -
                                                                                                                                                                  '\
                                                                        ?                  /
Q                    .I would:like to'show you what'has                      i 3
been marked as Disc'F-2'and.as youftf youthavefseen it                          1  "
d        before?'                                                                  .)
5              A    Yes.
6              Q'    Is this the. letter that you in'dicatedr accompanied''
7 the final' version.of your affidavit?
: 1. '
8              A      Yes.
C
                                                                                    -Q    -It does not. bear a'date.                                        i b
to                    Do you recollect.when.you received it?.
11              A    Fo; I don't.'
12              Q    The bodyfof;the note says:        "Here's. revised 13      draft of affidavit."
14 It doesn't indica t e it ''s 't he final versiin.
15 How do you.know'tbat this-is the l'tter)that e                    -l to    accompanied the final version?'
17 It indicates that it is.a' draft.
18              A      From previous memory.-I know.that that. letter 19    accompanied it.
20              Q    In the first draft of'your affidavit.[                          1 b                  '
21 were any of the three incidents that you've related here 22 and referred to here today -- that is. the incident.
23 involving Mr. Powers. the one' involving.Mr. Luken, and: one                              '
24 involving Mr. Vogelsang.. vere iny of~those three-incidents i
25    a part of the first draft?                                                                !
                                                                                                                                                          .        1 f'-
1 l
l e-l
                                                                                                                                                                  'l
 
1 4/3                                                                    3 1
4 1
In other words, were they related in the firet 2'    draft?
3 f
A I thought we had already gone through testimony d
on that.
5 1 would say yes.                                          '
6 Q    Let me  --
let me be clear that you understood            ;
7 my question.
8 Was the incident which you referred to here today, involving Mr. Vogelsang -- and as to which you 10 testified yesterday -- was that incident of harassment.
          'l intimidation, and threatening included within the first i
12 draft of that agreement    --
related and described there?
13 A    Yes..
Id Q    And was that incident  --
namely, the one we 15 are now discussing, which is the incident that you've 36 l
testified to with respect to Mr. Vogelsang -- was that                !
17 related and described in the allegations contained in the i
IB second draft?                                                        '
I*
A    Yes.
20 Q    When did you decide to exclude it from the 21 finsi draft?
22 A    1 did not exclude it.
23 Q    There is a mention of Mr. Vogelsang in the 24 final draft affidavit submitted here?
25              A                                                                      s's Direct mention, no.
e i
_____-___-___-__--w
 
FCjl 4/4                                                                                        39 1
Q    Is there a mention of Mr. Vogelsang?
2        A    No.
3 Q    Is there a mention of a conversation with d
Mr. Vogelsang?
5        A    No.
6        Q    Is there a mention of any conversation with 7  anyone with respect -- strike that.
8              I think that the problem,              y is that 9
there is no reference to cl.at incident at all, is there?
10 Otherwise, we're going to go back and ask.you 11  to point it out.
12 (Pause.)
13        A    There is an indirect reference.
id Well, specify your questions a little bit more 15  plainly.
16              I'm sorry.
Q                    I think they are very plain.
17 Let us see if we can't help you with an 18    agreement.
19 When I ask whether an incident is related in 20 an affidavit, what I mean is -- is the date, time, place, 21    and persons involved, and the sum and substance of the 1
22    conversation    which you say are the basis of harassment, 23 intimidation, and threatening, are they related -- in 24    that affidavit?
l 25          A    Then, I request that you ask that question at    j
,                                                                                                                        i 1
l 1
I
    ,_._______a___  - - - - _ . - - - - - - - - -- -
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          +
                                                                                                                                                                        ' ,.                                              ,                2 40            .c    .
4 the time.
MR. SPEKTER:                  Okay --
MR. DAVIDSON:                  I'thank(.'
If you want your. testimony to be recorded it' can be.                                    But if you want to engage and' dual with counsel and be captious in your responses --
MR. SPEKTER:              I object to' counsel's characterize-
                                                                            ' tion.                                          I want to request a moment to confer with my client-so that he might be'able to answer these questions.
concisely and quickly and hopefully' speed this' matter along.
MR. DAVIDSON:                  I appreciate that.'Mr. Specter.-
I know that on repeated occasions you've had, to regoest an opportunity to instruct your. client on this' matter.                                              I don't know that I really want to' pursue this line so much further. so there may not be                                                                                      need for~this.~
but I'm perfectly prepared to accommodate you if you wish to consult with him.
MR. SPEKTER:              Just for a short second.
(Attorney conference between'Mr. Spekter and
* Witness [
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
* Q                    ')do you wish to change any of'your
!                                                                      testimony now that you've consulted with your counsel?-
A    Yes.
: s. .
9
__  _ _ _                                  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . . . _                                    __          . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ___._.l_ ____________________________________________d
 
l l
t.
FCjl 4/6                                                                  4I l
1 Q      What would you like to change?                  i 2          A      The indications that the incidents of          ;
i 3      harassment and -- harassment, direct incidents with' 4      Ivan Vegelsang and Fred Powers are not actually indicated 5    in the original drafts or final drafts of my affidavit.
                                                        /
6          Q    (          __
                                                                    ) when you first spoke with 7    Mr. Ernest Hadley, did you -- did he represent to you that I
B    he was an attorney?                                          .
9          A      No.                                            l 10            Q      Did you ask him whether he was an attorney?
11          A      Yes.
12            q      What did he say?
13            A      He said no. he was not.
i 14          Q.      Did you pose that same question to              !
15    Ms. Billie Garde?
ll 16          A      Yes.
17          Q      What was her response?                                j 18          A      No, she's net.
s                                        ,
19          Q                    )are you represented by counsel?
jj i
20          A      At these proceedings, yes.
i l 21          Q      Vho is that counsel, sir?                      ''
22          A      Michael Specter.
23          Q      He is your personal attorney?                  l 24          A      No, I don't believe so.      I am not formally        !
i 25    paying him for his services.                                        i I
e
                                                                                                            )
 
ji 4/7                                                                                                                                      42 4
1 Q    Did you ask him to represent you here today?
2 A    Yes.
3 Q    When'did you do that, sir?
                                  'd A    Approximately two to three weeks -- it was'--
5 we're dealing with time frames, and I'm not sure about
                                                                                                            ~
6                                                  right now. There were several conversations through 7
other people.
8 Q    Well, when was the first conversation you had 9
with Mr. Spekter?    And.I'm not asking you what the to substance of the conversation was, only when you had it.
    -                          11 A      1 believe it was Saturday.
12 Q      Saturday -- of this last week?
13 A      Right.
Id Q      But you say you had' conversations through'other 15 peopiet to                                                                  A    Correct.
17 Q    Who were those other people?
18 A    Ernest Hadley, and I believe conversation l'
through Billie Garde.
20 Q      And they said that they would procure an 21 attorney for you?
22 A      Yes.                                                  '
2h Q      To represent you at these proceedings?
24 A      Yes.
25 Q      Do you have representation by counsel -- by any 1
4 I
w--__-_      . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - - _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ -                            _ _ - .
 
4 FCjl 4/8                                                                                '3 l
I  other ceunsel?
2          A  No.
                                                                .3 Q  Are you a witness in any other proceeding?-
d            A  No.
5            Q  Have you authorized'the filing of'a complaint 6    with the, Department'of Labor?
7            A  Yes.
8            Q  Do you wish.to change your answer to my prior-9    question then?,
10 Are you the complainant in any other proceeding?
11            A  First -- okay, you need to-clarify-what:you're-12    considering " proceedings."
13                MR.-SPEKTE'R:                      n in any other-Are you a complaina't 14    proceeding.
15                THE WITNESS:    Yes.
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
17            Q  Could you tell me'what proceedings you:are a IB    complainant in?
19            A  The Department of Labor dispute.
20              Q  Any other proceeding?;
21              A  The proceeding now.
22                  MR. SPEKTER:  I don'tlbelieve-you are a 23      complainant. I believe you are_a witness.
24                  MR. DAVIDSON:    1 agree with Mr. Spekter.~
t '5                THE WITNESS:  All right.
 
4 ji' 6/9 44' 1
MR.'DAVIDSON:              I understand.                              It may be'the 2        term.
3 BY-MR. DAVIDSON:
4 Q        Let's just say are you a participant, toLyour 5
knowledge.-in any other proceeding, other than the one'
                    ~6 here today, in which.you are a witnees- or the one at the        ,
7 Department of Labor which was initiated,by a complaint 8        filed in your name?
                    ~9                  A        No.
10 Q        When did you authorize the filing of a 11 complaint with the Department;of Labor?-
12                A          Approximately a month or two months ago.
13 Q          And when did you first discuss the possibility 14 of filing such a complaint?
15                A          Upon my termination from Stone & Webster 16        Engineering.
17 Q        And with whom did you first discuss this 18        possibility?                                              ,
f 19                  A        Ernie Hadley.                It was either Ernie Hadley or
                                                                                                                                                                            )
20          Billie Garde.              I do not remember'which one. spoke to me 21          first.
22 MR. SPERTER:            I would object to this line of 23 questioning in that it delves into something that has 24 nothing to do with this particular proceeding..and it has 25 nothingtodowith[                                        \e s timony ye s t erday , 'and'
                                                                                  ,]                                                                                        I i
I
 
1 FCjl 6/10 45 t.
1 it has nothing to do with discovery in the Comanche Peak          i 2  case. It is a totally separate proceeding. And for that 3  reason, it's irrelevant to anything that could be gleaned 4  in discovery in this case.
I]
5                And I note my objection for the record.
6                MR. DAVIDSON:  Just to respond to Mr. Spekter's -j 7    problem, do you have a copy of your affidavit?
B Well, no -- let me build a foundation for this, 9
although I think, in a discovery deposition, it's wholly        '
10    proper.
11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
12        Q    Do you know what the sum and substance of your 13  complaint with the Department of Labor is?
14        A    Yes.
15        Q    Whst is it, sir?
16          A    You are asking -- can you rephrase the question 17    or ask --
18                MR. DAVIDSON:  Would you please repeat the 19    question for the witness?
20 (The reporter read the' record as requested.)      ,
21                THE WITNESS:  Let me be sure-I understand your 22    question. When you ask for " sum and substance," are you 23    asking for the reasoning of me filing a complaint with the 24    Department of Labor?
                      ..                            25 l
 
I.                                                                                                                                                            'i L                                                                                                                                                          47j i
l 1
mgc 5-1    1 BY:MR. DAVIDSON:                                            ,
                                                                                                                                                              'j 2          Q    I would like you to read the last complete. sentence) 3      on page 15.
* MR. SPEKTER:    I would note that counsel is 5      testifying.or reading from s document that is-not in 6    evidence and has not been marked _for.this particular,                  l 7    deposition, and I ask that it should be, if you are going 8    to testify from it.
                                                                                    '                  MR. DAVIDSON:    At an appropr.iate time, Mr. Spekter, 10      but right now all I want to do is see if I.can refresh 1 11      the witnesses recollection assto:what his affidavit.said.
12                (              ,when'you complete reading that one 13      sentence, would you look up?
14                  THE WITNESS:    Yes.
15                  BY MR..DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                                                    /
16                  Have you read the sentence (
Q 17            A    Yes, I have.
18                  Am I correct that that relates to a clait-of Q
19      blacklisting?
20            A    Yes, it does..
j 21                  Is that the, claim that you have made at the Q
22      Department of Labor, or at least one of them?
23            A      Yes, it is.
2d                  So therefore when'you gave your previous answer, Q
25      you misspoke?
j
                                                                                                                                          '4k 6
 
48~
                                                                                                                                                                      -4 age 5-2            1 A  Right.                        I was incorrect in my assumption.
2                    Thank you.
Q                                    What other claims did you'make 3          before the Department of Labor', sir?
d A  I believe the claim basically states that it 5        was an unjust termination.
6 Q  What was an unjust termination, sir?'
7                    A  You might repeat the question..'What do,you 8
mean, what was an unjust termination?. My layoff?
9 MR. DAVIDSON:                        Mr. Reporter. . would you be good' 10 enough to read the last two questions, the one that the 11 witness answered, and the one that the witness has now-12 asked for a clarification on?                                  I think, then, if we-do 13        that,i                                    J it will.be clear what we are referring Id        to.
15 (The reporter read the record as requested.)
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
17 Q  Do you understand the question,-sir?
18                  A  My termination from Stone & Webster was'an 19    unjust termination.
20 Q  On-what do you base the assertion that the 1
21      termination was unjust?                                                                      :
22                    A  With no merit, no reasoning.
23 Q  Well, when you say " unjust," do you mean merely 24 that they didn't give you a reason for the termination-25    therefore, you are making a complaint _to the Department of 4
 
s 49-mgc 5-3    1  Labor?  I*a not_sure:I understand yourfanswer.
2          A    They specified.that no jobs were"available.
3    which was totally unjust.on their part.
4        Q    l Unjust or untrue?
5        A      Untrue.
I 6        Q'    In other words.: you believe.that there"were.                  #'
f, 7  jobs available for you?                                                fl 1-8        A    True.
9        Q    Why do you believe they terminated you?
10              MR. SPEKTER:    Objection. You can't characterize:        3
_t 11    what their beliefs were.
12                MR. DAVIDSON:    It would be. hearsay, wouldn't it?
13    I think that is quite permissible in a-discovery 14    deposition.      You were quite right. I would have'made; I
15    that objection in the evidentiary portion.of_the                          f i
16  deposition,-and I would feel that your objection would                    i i
17  be proper there.      However, this is discovery, and I think.          j-g 18    it is admissible.                                                          '
19                Why don't you tellLus what-you believe the'                  !'
20    reasons were?
J 21                MR. SPEKTER:    My objection is noted.                                ,l.
22                THE WITNESS:    I believe that'directly or-
                                                                                                      'l i
i 23    indirectly, information from this job site as to my.                              j 24    continuous questioning of the procedures, of inadequacies,                        !
l 25    followed me to the other job.                                                      j i
l
                                                                                                    -l
                                                                                            't i.
O i
__.___n______ _ _ _ _  -J
 
O
                                                                                                                                                                                                      ,l
                                                                                                                                                                                          -50 4'
      ;c 5-4        1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q  Other.than that possibility, was your performance 3                                                                                                                                                                                  :
at Stone & Webster satisfactory?                                                                                                                                                  '
4 A    Yes.
5 Q    Was their satisfaction with your performance 6
reflected to.you in any way?
7                            A.  .Yes.
8                                How was that,-sir?
Q 9                            A  I was told that I had performed as. expected.
10 Q  But that may not necessarily reflect well on il    you at all,l                                          )But let me just ask a question.
12
                                                  -Who told you that?                                                                                                                                      '
13                          A    One member being -- I'm going to refresh my                                                                                      -
Id memory from a piece of paper I have in my pocket                                                                                                                                    i 15 Hank Zadel.
16 I
MR.'SPEKTER:              He did not look at'his paper.                                                                            I 17 would note that.
18 THE WITNESS:
                                                                                                                      ~
I did not look at my paper.
19 MR. DAVIDSON:                I understand.                                            You.were pulling 20                                                                                                                                                                                          i out your wallet, rather than your attache case.                                                                                                                                      i 21 THE WITNESS:                Correct.
22                                                                                                                                                                                      -!
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23 Q          Do you have.this piece of                                                paper in your wallet?
24                      A          I paintain notes in my wallet about personal 25 people that I remember. ' Hank Zadel is the one I was working                                                                                                                          l l
                                                                                                                                                                                                          -l l
I
                                                                                                                                                                                                        =1 l
L____._. __-            _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _        _c_____.______.._._______..____._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_                      .z a
 
                                                                                                                                      $1' 4                                                                                                                    1 a
under at Stone & Webster and 'nad c9mplimentary -- as 1
1 mgc 5- 5 7
far as my performance.
[l  '
3 Q    The notes that you prepared with respect to d
Mr. Z a riel there are contained on thic paper?
1 5
MR. SPEKTER:    Objection. There is no comment 6
that he prepared any notes in regard to Mr. Zadel.                                                  He 7
simply stated that he had some r.ames written in his 8
vallet. He did not take that wallet completely out in order to obtain that name.        He recalled it while he was 10 la the process of pulling out the wallet, and it's 11 irrelevant, and I request that we move on.
12 BY MR. DAVIDSCN:
e          s                                                                                    ;
13 Q  (              /when .id you prepare the slip of                                                  I Id paper or pote that you were about to remove from your                                                          (
15          pocket?
16 MR. SPEKTER:    Objection. Irrelevant.                                                        j  l 17 THE WITNESS:    I do not know.
18 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
l' Q    You don't know when you prepared it, or you do 20 not remember?
21 A      1 do not remember.
22 Q    Was it during the course of the last week?
23                  A    No, it was not.                                                                                    '
24 Q    Was it prepared while you were at Stone & Webster?
25                  A    Yes, it was.
1
 
                                                                                                    ' 52:
4
      ;e 5-6      i Q      What was the purposerof preparing'the note?
2 A      I just log down the name of,an individual-who 3                                                      '
was my supervisor.so I can renember'that'. individual.                              -'
d Q      Is there anything else on that' note pag'?-  e 5
MR.? SPEKTER: " Objection. Irrelevant..
6 THE' WITNESS:    There is no telling what is written on that page.~
8 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
Q      W e l l ,' I'think perhaps if you produce it to'us, 10 y,iyy  3,,,
II MR. SPEKTER:    I object.
12 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
13 Q      Why don't you produce that document?
Id MR. SPEKTER: I object, and I' request that he 15 not produce .the document.          I think this is ridiculous.                                  o
              'O There is no showing that that document has.any relevance II                                                                                                        f to anything in this proceeding, except that ~it' had a
              '8 name written down of his supervisor, and I am: going to I'
request that he not produce that: document.
20 M R .. DAVIDSON:  Are you' instructing h'im not to.
21 produce the document?
22 MR. SPEKTER:      I fail  to.see'the' relevance 23 of that document, and I am requesting that he not produce l
24 the document on the. basis of that.
25 MR. DAVIDSON:      Well, we'll see ifi we :can connect' i
e l
l 3                                                                                                                ~,    1 i
_ . . _ _ _ _.___            _    ___J
 
                                                                                                                                                    ,        n
                                                                                                                                              +              4
                                                                                                                                                      ~
i L53          i 1;
i s
1 age 5-7        it for you.
2
                                                                                                  'BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                  / ~
                                                                                                                                                                ]-i 3                        q
{              ./have you used that .noteL paper:
d to refresh your. recollection about any of the eve.nts'at                            g 5
                                                                                                                                                                '\
6 Stone 6. Webster?.
                                                                                                                                                              ]
            ,                                                                                A'    No, I.have'not.              '
* 7 Q      Have_you'used it in' connection with'the 8
preparation of'your complaint'to the: Department ~ of ' Labor?:
9 A      No,-I have not.
* 10 Q      Why did you retain the n o t e , - t h e'n , sir?
II A    -I  retaine'd the note to aid me'in' future ^
12 job oyalifications.
13 Q    Did you retain the note also possibly for Id testimony:in' connection with your Department of Labor 15 complaint?
16 A    No, I did noLLkeep it in connection with-37 that.                                                                                '
18 Q    What was the reason you bro'ught it with you 3'
today?
20
                                                                                            .A    It's in my wallet at all times.- It's just              [
21                                                                        '
papers that I have not thrown away.                    i 22 Q    What other information is contained on.that ~            '
23 note?
24 MR. SPEKTER:      Objection. Irrelevant.
25 THE WITNESS:      I am not sure.
1 f
 
t
                                                                                                              $4' l1
                                                                                                                                  .)
4 I
mgc5-8                                    1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q        Would you'take it out, look at it, and then-3          tell me?
d MR. SPEKTER:  Objection. Irrelevant, and 5          I request'that counsel.--
6
                                                                                                  ~
MR. DAVIDSON:    I'm sorry. I think~a 7
foundation has been laid.-
8 MR. SPEKTER:  No foundation has been laid at 9          all.
10 MR. DAVIDSON:  Then I think you'd better-make l
11
                                                !    the instruction on the record that you are denying us.
12 access to note paper that he. prep-sred'in the course of his 13 assignment at Stone & Webster;which relates directly to Id the complaint he made with the Department of Labor, which 15 is refefenced in the affidavit submitted in this 16              proceeding.
17 MR. SPEKTER: HThat's totally-contrary. to the 18 witness' testimony, 19 MR.-DAVIDSON:    Mr. Spekter, I have never 20 challenged your recollection before, except the time when 21 you insisted he didn't use the wo rd " insinuate ,' and we 22                proved that you were mistaken. I don't-like to continue 23 to challenge your recollection and recharacterization of 24 i
the record, but I am afraid your recollection.is once again 2$                faulty.
O
_ - - ___ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - = - - - - - -
 
q 4
55 i,-  i 1
mge 5-9    ''
The witness' testimony is on the record.
2 We don'- have_to debate it.                                                                                    But.it.if, very clear that 3
the connection has been made.
d Now if you wish to                                                                                -
prive' this~ discovery
                                                                                        $f. deposition of access to documents relevant to complair.ts 6
he has made with the Department of Labor with respect 7
to his engagement at Stone &_ Webster and which are 8
referenced as a part of this proceeding in-an affidavit he                                                                                                  .!
submitted here, that is your privilege to make that
                                                                                      'O instruction, but I believe it is a direct thwarting of II legitimate discovery in this case.
12 MR. SPEKTER:                                                                        I think it is not legitimate
                                                                                      '3      discovery. I think-it is harassment.                                                                                    I am gofg to ask.
Id for a few minutes recess so'I can talk to my client about 15 this, and then I will go back on tite record.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                            Fair enough.
37 Mr. Mizuno has a statement.                                                                                    Can we remain
                                                                                    '8 on the record until he makes it?
t!R . MIZUNO:                                                          Well, I guess I'm'under the                                              l 20 representation from counsel -- I understood yesterday 21 that he -- that the incident on page'15' relating to 22 blacklisting was not going to be an incident which would 23 be, I guess, offered as the direct testimony of(
24 Is that still ture?
25                                                                                                                                                                        k MR. SPEKTER:                                                                    It was not offered yesterday-                .
l j
>,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            j i
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _                                          . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ___-- . - - . _ _ _ - _ _ _                                _ _ _ _    ._A
 
56' 4 !
I O
during' direct testimony, and we have not brought it up at-2 this time.
3                                                                          .
VR. DAVIDSON:    Let me make clear to d
Mr. Mizuno..this'is not cross-examination. Were this to 5
be cross, Mr. Spekter would quite properly object and' 6
say,  "Mr. Davidsen, your inquiry.into an incident referred I'
to in thisLaffidavit, which in its entirety.has not been 8
offered into evidence, is not a part of the' direct testimony, and, therefore            Mr. Davidson, are the rules, as<
10 I understand them, you are restricted in yourneross'only II to matters that are part of the; direct and as to those.
12 matters that reflect on the' credibility of the witness."
                                          '3 And I would have to respond that that is correct.
Id However, this is a discovery deposition, 15 and it seems to me that the discovery deposition has a 16 great deal broader latitude.            The latitude'does have  some
                                        '7 outer limit, but I think that to suggest that the limit
                                        '8 is any less than the affidavit that this witness proffered.
                                        "                                                                              I in these proceedings and that was' marked as an exhibit-20 here would be overly restrictive.
21 Therefore, it is an appropriate' question, 22 and I think that the Stone & Webster incident, since it 23 i
forms the basis for one of the allegations m6de in the 2'
!                                              affidavit, therefore perforce is clearly within the scope
                                      ' 25 of proper discovery, and any notes that relate to that I
i i
l l
l
 
57 I
mac 5-11          incident or incidents, it seems to me, are clearly within 2
the proper s' cope of the request for documents pursuant to                                1 l
3  that discovery. And I'think that's what we're doing.here,                                  3 d                                                                                                  I Mr. Mizuno.                                                                                  i 5
But if your concern is that this.will be.                                  i, 6    a matter for the cross, which ultimately will follow the.
7 discovery deposition, I think the answer.is -I'm not' going:
8 to agree right now'to limit myself, but I anticipate that                                    i 9
if I do it, that Mr. Spekter will make an. objection.
10 1
MR. .MIZUNO:      'Well..the Staff was just      --        the il Staff was concerned primarily with the fact that the j
12 Interveners may be s' subsequently offering th'is particular --                            'q 13 MR. DAVIDSON:-      Oh, I'm sorry.                                      j..
Id MR. MIZUNO: -- matter subsequently into their 15    direct t'estimony.                                                                              i If that's the case, then Staff wanted 16 to definitely conduct discovery on that.          But it is more 1
37 for that purpose, rather than.for this.          And at this point,                    <      f 1      i 18                                                                                              '
the Staff doesn't take any position.                                                            l 19                                                                                                    !
MR. SPEKTER:        My position yesterday and my                            i 20 position today is that we ere limiting ourselves and we 21 seek to limit ourselves in these particylar proceedings                                          )
  ~
22                                                                                                    1' to incidents of harassment and intimidation that occurred 23                                                                                                      !
on the-job site while                    was an employee.
14 v
We are not, by that statement, limiting .                                        ;
25 ourselves to saying that no other harassment occurred and,                                      !
l t
                                                                                .___.____.__________________o
 
58 4
ge 5-12    ~1 in fact, are contesting in other proceedings that the
                '2 harassment.is continuing in-nature,:however not'in this-                              ' '
3 proceeding.
d And therefore I feel that this is an-5  1rrelevant line of questioning.
6                MR.'MIZUNO:    We've got'our positions on the 7  record. Let us take:a break.
8                MR. SPEKTER:    We are breaking?
9                MR. DAVIDSON:    We'are_ breaking.-
10 (Brief: recess.)
11 12 13 14 15 16 I?
18 19 20                                                                                                    .j 21
                                                                      .                            a 22 23 l          24 25                                                                                                      j i
i e                                                                                                                a l
I o
                                                                                                                  -i s
m_ . _ __ . _.___._.m-_____.____.m    _
 
IT
* as to I
MR. SPEKTER:    :I'will be pleased to do 2
that. I have in my hand a small. sheet of paper, note paper 3
It is not even 3 by 5.          It is less than that. 2 by 4                  I d
believe.        And on that sheet of paper'amidst other names 5
is the name of Hank Zadel, which is a name'that(
6                            ~
recalled as he was requesting that this paper be              --
excuse 7
me. I'll rephrase'that.
8 This is the name he recalled as he reached for his wallet to obtain the paper so that he might recall to    the name.
Il Mr. Zadel's name is here. However. also 12 a number of other matters are here shich are totally
          '3    unrelated        to this incident. I feel that They are t'o t a l l y I'
irrelevant to this proceeding and I am going to instruct 15 my client not to turn them over. -They have nothing to do 16 with anything here.
17 I will gladly make Mr. Zadel's name on this 18 piece of paper avaialble to counsel so that helcan see that I'
in fact it was there on the name.
20 There are other telephone numbers on here 21 that are    --
and names that are totally unrelst'ed.
22 MR. DAVIDSON:    If counsel will represant 23 to se that there are no names there of individuals or 24 persons which have any information or bearin6.pn either 25
                                    ) tenure at Comanche Peak or his subsequent-b rY S
6
 
a2 60 4
1 employment at Stone & Webster or his complaint to the 2
Department of Labor, a r.d that those individuals, to the best of(              ) knowledge, have no knowledge that 4
might bear on that, on those facts or those pleadings.
5 then I think that we can dispense with that discovery question.
However, I include in that, 8
Ms. Garde. Mr. Hadley or any of the people that worked for 9
GAP or CASE. So, in other words, if there are no names 10 there and no information there or notes there relating to 11 the subj ect of these proceedings, not necessarily j ust                                                I 12                                                                                                              {
your testimony but the subject of these proceedings or the                                              l l
13 subject of the proceedings before the Department of Labor 14                                                                                                              j or your tenure at Stone & Websster, then I think that we can 15 dispense with the request for the document. And I think 16 that I would like to rely on Mr. Spekter's representation 17 as he understands what is there, rather than your own.
18 MR. SPEKTER:  I make the good faith 19 representation that that is my understanding and I submit 20 that to you, the record.
I 21 MR. HAMILTON:  I will just say Ehat if 22 Mr. Spekter is prepared to make that representation and 23 feels he has the information adequate to do so, then I hve 24 no further request for that document.
25 MR. SPEKTER:  I thank counsel for his I
l
 
7 xj
                                                                                        -61                                  j 6jen3
                                                                                                                        -l {
i!  >
I statements on'that matter.      I have discussed this:with my 2
client and I can make that representation.
3                                                                                                              !
EMR . DAVIDSON:    Then it is'more than~
                                                                                                                              )
acceptable to me.
5 MR. SPEKTER:    Thank you. Let's proceed.                                      '
6                                                                                                              ,,
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
i 7
Q    (              have  you-discussed'the: filing
__                                                                                    (
8                                                                                                          -3 of a complaint with the' Department of. Labor with anyone other than Mr. Hadley?                                                                                    l
                                                                                                                          -1 10 A    -Yes.
Il Q        Who are those other individuals?
12 A        Billie Garde, Michael Spekter and'various 1
13 family members.
Id Q      And are you represented by counsel in 15 a proceeding before the Department of Labor?                                                    '
to (Conference between counsel and the-17 witness.)                                                                                                  i 18 THE WITNESS:      I am not sure as to the l'
correct representation at this tioe                -
20 BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                  i    '!
21                                                                                                        i Q      Could you explain your? answer?: I am not-                                                ,
22                                                                                                        -l sure I understand it.                                                                                        I 23 I!
A      Ok'ay. I am not sure as to formally who t                                                                                                                    l 2'                                                                                                        ;'
is representing me in the Department of Labor dispute right 25    ,,,,
{i I
Il
 
63 6j on5 I
Q    Did you-discuss the. complaint-with thia 2
head attorney?
3 A    No, I did not.
d Q
You had no conversations with.him at ~ all?
5 A. No, I did n ot .
6 Q      Did you review a draft'of-any proposed.
7 complaint to be filed with the Department of Labor?
3 A    Yes, I.did.
Q    Who prepared that draft?
10 A    Mr. Hadley.
Il Q      When did you review.that draft for the first 12 gg,,7 13 A
I'm not famioiar with the exact date.
Id Q    What would be your best impression as to 15 when that date was?
16 A
We would be speaking amonth or two ago.        !
17 i
Q Was there more than one draft of the-          '
18 complaint?
I' A      I do not believe so.
20 Q      Just one?    And it was submitted as drafted; 21 is that what you are stating?
22                                                                    l A      1 believe so 23                                                                    5 Q      Do you have a copy of that complaint, sir?
24                                                                    i A      Yes.
25                                                                    i Q      Do you hve it with you?
i 4
l
 
64 sa6 4
1 A      .Yes.
2 Q      Would you please produce it?'
j 3
Q      Removing it from an envelope.that's 4
addressed to you; was that the manner in which you received 5
the copy of the complaint, in an envelope?
6            A      I do not know. I know that I place 7
information in: the envelope. I do not know if it.is the B
correct envelope in which the matter was mailed in.
9 Q      Can I see that, sir?
10 First show it to your counsel.
l 11 But I saw that you extracted the document 12 we requested.plus a cover leter from the manila envelope.
13 Sir, you put that back in your attache 14 case. You..were about to give that to me.
15 A      No. This was not -- it has no relevancy 16 to the question you asked.
j                      Q      Was it enclosed in the same envelope with 18 the complaint of the Department of Labor?
19 A      It was also enclosed; it was in the same 20 briefcase that all my documentation is enclosed in.
21 MR. SPEKTER:    May I see?
22 MR. DAVIDSON:    Would you show that to your 23 counsel?
24                                                                                                                                !
(Witness tenders document to Counsel 25 Spekter.)
l l
                                                                  , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - ^ - - - - - -
 
6jos?                                                              65              '
                                                                                              !I
                                                                                              <J 1
MR. DAVIDSON:  We are on the record, 2
Mr. Reporter.
3
                                                                                                )
(Counsel Spekter peruses document tendered by witness.)
5 (Counsel Spekter tenders dccument 6                                                                        i to Counsel Davidson.)
7 MR. DAVIDSON:  Thank you.
8 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
Q                )your counsel has handed me    a      l 10 document which you reviewed which I take it i ? in response to my earlier request fr you to produce a copy of the 12 complaint filed with the Department of Labor and I note
                    '3 that this document is not signed and is dated June 21, I#
1984. I ask you to take a look at it once again and tell 15 me whether this in fact is a copy of the complaint that                {
                    '6 was actually filed with the Department of Labor, or whether it is a draft?
18                                                                          1 (Document handed to the w itness.)
(Witness peruses document. tendered by 0
Counsel Davidson.)                                                I 21 A
It is a copy of the exact form which was 22                                                                            1 on the computer.
I cannot say that it is the exact copy      '
23 of the original, no, because in fact, as you can defir*.tely 24 tell, it is an original typed form off of a computer type 25 printer which would mean it was a copy of the document l
l t
L.__.-_____
 
18                                                                        66 4
I which was in the memory of the computer.
2 Q      When you say computer, you mean a computer 3
with a word processing program or a word processor?
d A      Correct.
5 Q      So this document was printed out of a 6
memory of a computer?
7 A      Correct.
8 Q      Does that suggest to you and perhaps 9
refresh your recollection as to whether there were earlier to drafts and more than one draft of the complaint as 11 finally submitted in the files?
12 A
I am not familiar with that.
13 Q      No drafts were discussed with you?
Id A      There may have been.
15 Q      I see. So there may have been  drafts?
16 A      Correct.
i 17                                                                          l Q      Is it possible that the document that you 18 handed me is one such draft that was submitted to you for l'
your review?
20 A      No.
I believe that was the final issue.
21 MR. DAVIDSON:    Mr. Reporter, I think we 22 should mark for identification a document that has been 23 the subject    --
J 24 MR. SPEKTER:    I would object to the 25 introduction of this documen..      It is not on stationery,
____.m._
 
Gjeng;                                '                                                    -
67!.        g a
                                                                                                                                        'li  '
1                                                                                                                            ,
it is not signed, there is no indication that it is in 2
fact the. final complaint _or that itois in fact or.
3 whether it.is a-facsimile of'the complaint that.was.
e
                                                            .actually-filed.
5                                                                's MR. DAVIDSON:    1think(-            /-                  :
0 testified as;to'what it is and:we areinot-introducing it 7
because we are not'in-an evidentiary deposition.        WeLare 8
in discovery. All we are-doing.it ma'rking it for' 9
identification so that we'can refer to'it.
10 However, if you have any other objections 11 you and you'are prepared to note,them for the record          --
12 MR. MIZUNO:  If the documents ate not1 going.
13 to be bound into the transcript then.we have been makring 14 a lot of documents in discovery depositions'-- the staff 15 would like to request that that copy:be-made to the staff 16 as well as applicants.
17 MR.-SPEKTER:  Well, initially I'would-like to object to the eciling 'of this particula r document.
19 In any event, it has no bearing-or relevancy to'this 20 particular discovery proceeding because it refers            to a 5
L 21 proceeding completely outside of the s' cope of.the matters                .' ]'
22                                                                                      '
which are pertinent-to this hearing.                                                .
23 MR. DAVIDSON:    Inresponse .co Mr. ;Spekter                ')
24 I would like tovask:-Did you read this document.
25 Mr. Spekter?                                                                          1
_,1 l.'
i
                                                                                                                                  ~
t.
 
n 68 l s10 4
3 MR. SPEKTER:      I have just'briefly readLit 2
this morning.                ,
4 3                                                                                                                  ,
MR. DAVIDSON:        Did you see the first d
sentence of the second' paragraph which says "While 5
employed by'the Impell' Corporation at: Comanche P e a k ,'
6                                    ~l brought                      a series'of violations of Nuclear 7
Regulatory Commission regulations to the attention.of' a
his supervisors and others."
9 And the second sentence.says. and I quote:                        1 10 "As a result of his pursuit of                                                              'N II theseviolations(.          A was subjected to several incidents.of intimidation and 12 harassment" 13 Did you see that on the' document?
Id MR. SPEKTER:              iI did.
15 MR. DAVIDSON:                Does.that satisfy.your to claim of relevance?
17 MR. SPEKTER:                I'stillfeliam. that this' is 38 referring to another incident.-                                                                          l' 19 There are other things mentioned in that 20                                                                                                                                    i letter also.            I believe-that is only one of the areas'that.                                    j 21                                                                                                                  .. <
is covered.
22
                                                                                                        .MR. DAVIDSON: .But you would suggest that                                      l 23 that has some' bearing on the proceedings here today, 24                                                                                                                                    i wouldn't you?
25                                                                                                                                    l MR. SPEKTER:                      It does.                                  .;
                                                                                                                                                                                          )
 
I Jon-I.
                                                                                                                                              !I I
MR. DAVIDSON:    Thank you.
I Could.we'have that marked. Mr. Reporter, 3
as Disc Exhibit 37.
zzxxxxxxx                                            l(The d'ocument' referfed                                              to 5
was marked Disc Exh ib i t ' F-.3' 6
for identification.)
7 MR. DAVIDSON:  Once again              to..' accommodate.
8 we will'_I believe stipulate on the record.
you,                                                                                                                -
all of us, and counsel present, that we can again return:to                                                      ,
                    'O you the ' original of your document and have a photocopy made'
                                                                                    ~
                    'I and mark that as the exhibit for the purpose of this 12 deposition.
end6                                THE WITNESS:    Correct.
14
* 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 6
22                                                                                                                                .,
i 23                                                                                                                                  1 24                                                                                                                    .
25 l                                                                                                                                                    \
    .                                                                                                                                                I i
 
                                                                                                                            ': \ .
70-el 4-      .)
1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
7 7
Q  (              ,j do you know on what date your 3
complaint to the Department of Labor was filed?
d L,                      A'      Just prior to'the.30 day time: limit-from.thec 5
                                                                                                                                ,j
              -time I was notified of the lay-off.
6 Q      When were you notified of the lay-off, to 7
which you+ refer?
8 A      I'm not familiar w'ith the exact date'..
9
                      'Q      Give-me the date that you best recollect.                                                          I 10 (Pause.)-
11 A      We would be talking somewhere'in the 12    neighborhood of the 22nd.
                                                                                                                                  ']
13 Q      22nd of what month.. sir?                                                                        'l
                                                                                                                                  .l Id              A      Of May.
15
                      .Q        So you believe that thefcomplaint was filed.
16 on or before June 21st?
17 (Pavse.)
18 A      In that approximate time period. There is, l'
you know, 30 days right.      And you're going to have to: count-20 up the months, whether there was 31 days in the time period-21 to determine whether or not      --
22 Q      We have a calendar ' here : but my recollection 23 is that May has 31 days.      That's why I said June 21st.
24 Is there any reason sir, to your knowledge, 25 why you filed on June 21st or thereabouts rather than at
* 0
 
71 I.
fc71b2                                                  i l
1 some earlier date?
2              A      We were still questioning information and 3
putting together all the information associated with the 4
clafm and at the beginning we thought      maybe that we would 5
he 30 days from the exact' time of the lay-off and 30' days 6
from the time of. notification. .And to prevent any future 7
arguments on the matter, we did it.30 days from the time 8      of the notification.
9 Q      When you say "ve" in getting together the to      information, who do you mean?
11                A                                                      l Speaking with Mr. Hadley.                      l 12                                                                      l Q      And what information was it that you were      I 13      getting together?
14 A
Just the overall view of what actually had 15      happened on my part.
16 Q        Well, what in particular?  I mean, you could 17 have told him t h a t.. In fact, I think you testified you 18                                                                      I told him that a couple of months ago.
19                A      Well, you have to figure also that I was in 20 the process of moving at the time, too. My time frame, 21 as far as the ability to address this problem, was not 22
                                                                            -- I was not able to automatically go into this.
23 Q        What.other information, besides your recital 24 of your story, were you seeking to put together during this 25 time period with Mr. Hadley?
I
 
72
    >3 1
A    Well, during this time period, we were 2    trying to find out if . I was having problems with other i
i 3    employment.
4 Q      How did you go about obtaining that 5    information?
6              A      Sending out resumes.
7 Q      You mean the purpose for your sending out 1
B certain resumes was to secure information with respect O
to the Department of Labor complaint?                                                      .i
        'O              A      Wrong.
11 Q      Well, that's what my question was. That's 12    why 1 asked you. You told us, and your testimony is, that 13 you and'Mr. Hadley were working on getting together                                          !
14 information with respect to your complaint that was to be 15    filed. And I asked you what information.
16 Now what were you doing? What information                            I-17 p            were you getting together?
l 18              A      Well, my personal step-by-step account of                            '
i 10    what had happened.
20              Q      1s that the only information that you were 21    getting together?
22              A      Yes.
23              Q      Neither you nor he were seeking to interviev 24 individuals as possible witnesses, in connection with the 25    Department of Labor complaint?
I l        l' t
__________.__-.m._-_--
 
73 i
fc71b4                                                                                                                                                            i i
1 (Pause.)
2                          A      Repeat the: question, please?
3                                    MR. DAVIDSON:        Mr. Reporter, would you                    ,
A be good enough to' repeat the question'to the witness?
5-(The reporter read the record as requested.)
6                                    THE WITNESS:      I am going to say'no.
t 7                                    BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                                                          '/*          %
6                          Q    (                )the way you answer that' question.                    '
9                                                                                                    )
suggests to me that you' don't believe that the answer'should]-
10    be no.
l 11                            A      Well, I'm not      --
12                                    MR. SP EKTER:    I object to the characterization.
13                                    MR. DAVIDSON:        It's not'a characterization.            ,
la l'm merely going to say that therefore, could you explain 15 to me why you were reluctant to'say flatly no?
16                                    THE WITNESS:      Well, we were in the process 17 of listing people that could possibly give'information and 18 so we were talking and conversing. but we were not contacting i
19    these people.                                                                                ,
          '                                                                                                                                                                                            1: (
20                                    BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                                      Lj 21                            Q      All right, that is fair enough.          So neithe'r 22 you nor he made any telephone calls or arranged any meetings 23    with any individuals that you think might be witnesses in 24    this upcoming proceeding of the Department of Labor?
25                            A      Now we are speaking' prior to the Department p.
                                                                                                                                                                                                    'l 1
1*
i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ .              . . . . _ _ _ .    ._                _                  __        ___.__m. _
 
74 i
4 I
of Labor filing, correct?
2 Q,    That is correct.-
3 A    Correct. I did'not.
d Q. You did not and he'did not?.
5 A      Right.
6 Q    'Did.you undertake any activityJto elicit.
                              '7 information with respect to.your filing of the complaint' 8
with the Department of Labor?-
9 A    When you.say elicit, can you define that?-
10 Q    Obtain.
II A    Okay. Other than personal information-than' 12    1 had, no.
13 Q      You didn't  --
Id A      N,o w , I cannot speak for Mr. Hadley. . totally, 15 so we're only speaking for myself.
16 Q      Well, he didn't inform you of any efforts
{
17 he was undertaking to verify or document'any of your.
18
                                  . allegations?
I' A    Correct
                                                                                                        'l 20 Q    As far as you know, all the two of youlwere 21                                                      t engaged in was a discussion between yourselves to'obtain                i l
                          ^
22 the facts as you understood, with respect to the Department.
23 of Labor complaint?                                                      I 24                                                                            !
A      Correct. We did not even know if we were              l 25 going to file with the Department of Labor originally.                  l l
l 4
l l
 
75 fc71b6 1
We did not know if we even had grounds for,it. Therefore, 2
we had to review the case. I had to give-information'on 3
what had led up to the situation and so forth, d
Q        When did you decide that you:had a case?'
5            A        I am not-. familiar with the time period.
6 It was during that 30 day time period.
7 Q      .Who made.the determination?'
8            A      I made it, based on information given from 9
Mr. Hadley to me, pertaining to the Department'of Labor.
10  -and how it works. And-I made'the decision.              '
11 Q        No. Did you make the decision that you had 12 a case or did.you make the~ decision to file a complaint?                                                d 13            A      I made a decision to. file the complaint.
14 Q      But who advised' you, if~anyone, that you in 15 fact had a case that ought' to be brought?
16 (Pause.)
17            A      Mr. Hadley was advising me but he was.not 18 tellir6 me to bring the case up.      He was not suggesting I 10 bring the case up. It was totally my decision.
20 MR. DAVIDSON: Would'the' reporter. read back                                      j 21 the question so we can get a responsive ~ answer?-                                              '
t 22 (The reporter read the record las requested?                                  .+
t 23 MR. SPEKTER:
If anyone.
2d THE WITNESS:      Okay, I was advised by: Billie                                  ; )
t 1 25    Garde and Mr. Hadley.                                                                            '        '
i I.
1i i
l I
9                                                                                                                                                                                      .
a i
    - _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - - _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ , .              ._                        _              . _ . _ . . _  _ . _ _ _ _ . . . - _ . - _ - _        .A
 
c.
                                                                                                                              '76.
4 1
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                  '2              Q      ~ Do you recollect when they advised you of 3
their conclusion?
d              A        No, I did'not.
5
                                                                  -Q        Subsequent to the filing of your complaint            _.i 6
with.the Dep.rtment of Labor, have you undertaken. any:
7 efforts to obtain information that would-be relevant to the 8    charges you have now made?~
9 MR. SPEKTER:    Would counsel ~be. specific'in.
10 which charges that he is speaking about?
11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
12              Q        l' refer to the allegations made in'your 13    complaint with the Department of Labor.
:d              A        Will you be more specific. as to'which 15    allegations?    The Department specified blackballing and --
16                    '
Q ithere is a question pending.
17    Will you answer, please?
18              A        Well, then, may we have the      question repeated?j.'
19 MR. DAVIDSON:      We certainly may.
20 (The reporter read the record-as requested.).
21 THE WITNESS:      Yes.
t 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23 Q        And would you describe the efforts that you've 24 undertaken to obtain information with respect to the 25 allegations made in your complaint before the Department'of
 
77 fc71b8 1  Labor?
2            A    We contacted past working associates.        >
3            Q    When you say "we" who do you mean?
4            A  .Me and Mr. Hadley.
5            Q    And when you say past working associates, 6  who have you contacted?
7            A    Larry Howard.
B            Q    Who else?
9            A    That would be it.
to            Q    Well, you used the plural, rather than the 11    singular.
12            A    Okay, then we'll use singular. Past working 13    associate.
14 Q    Did you contact anyone else -who refused 15    to confirm your position?
16            A      No, we did not.
17            Q    Did you make an attempt to contact anyone 18    else?                                                            l l
1 19            A    No, we did not.
1 20              Q    Did Mr. Hadley make any attempt to contact        1 21    anyone else?
22              A    I cannot answer for Mr. Hadley.
23              Q    Did he advise you as to whether he made.any 24 attempts to contact any individuals who might be potential      ;
25 witnesses in your complaint before the Department of Labor?
1 l
l l
l I
 
78    'l lb9                                                                                                      J J
1 A      I do not know at this time.          I cannot                    l 4
2        any.                                                                    remember l 3                        Q      I believe that you may not have heard the 4
question, because your answer was not responsive.                      Will the 5        reporter read it back, please?                                                          l 6
(The reporter read the record as requested.)
7 MR. SPEKTER:        I would submit that he has 8        answered the question, that he does not know.
9 MR. DAVIDSON:        He does not know what Mr.
10        .Hadley said to him?            That's why he's not r e s p o r.s iv e . All 11 I asked you was what Mr. Hadley told you or whether he told 12        you that.
13 THE WITNESS: I do not remember.
14 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15                        Q    Well, the answer is not that you didn't know.
16        The answer is you didn't remember?
17                        A      Correct 18                                                                                            .
Q      But he may have said it then?            He may have to advised you that he did contact other people?                    Isn't that 20        correct?
21                        A      Pos81bly.        I'm not going to try and remember 22 the exact wording of every conversation we've had.                                        i 23                        Q      You are not?        Why is that?      Why do you choose            I 24                                                                                                  i not to remember?                                                                          ,
25                        A      I remember what I can.          But as far as to be                  ;
1 i
i E- -      --- -_        - - - _    _-    ------                                                        1
 
7
                                                                                                                                      .,f
: fc71b10 1
1 able to say that I can remember it, no.
2 Q    That is. understood,-but you are not making 3
a: volitional choice not to remember it, with any decision?.
d A      Correct.
5 Q    You are' going to'do your.very best~, aren't-6 you. .to-give us.all the information.you:have?-
                    '7 A      Correct.
8 Q.      And.ve're not going to-find out later that 9
you have a vivid ~ recollection of things that'you couldn't ML remember today, some months .later from now, are we?'
11'            A          Correct.
12 MR. DAVIDSON: .Thank you.
end7    33 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23                                                                                                          ~i' 24
                                                                                                                                'i 25
                                                                                                                                        .J 5'
l l -.
4 E_________.-_---____=__----_-----  - - - - - -    - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -    ----->
 
80 1
l mn-1                                                                              4 I
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
1                            .        ~s 2
Q w
lyou ;said you sent out several          ;
s                                            ;
3 resumes in connection with the Department of Labor d
complaint. Did I misunderstand you?        Is there some 5
connection in your mind between your sending out resumes 6
and the proceeding that nas been initiated at the Department 7
of Labor?
8 A    No.
9 Q      There is no connection?
10 A    No.
11 Q    Was the sending out of these resumes totally        !
I2 carelated to your Department of Labor complaint?
13 A    Yes.
Id Q    To whom did you send these resumes?
15 MR. SPE%TER:    Obj e-e t i on , irrelevant.
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:      (Resuming) 17 Q                )is it your representation that 1
18 the parties to whom you sent those resumes, the fact of          }
19 their bein; sent and any response you may receive will not 20 become a subj e c t matter or eviilence in the Department of 21 Labor proceeding?
22          A      I do not know if it will or not.                  i 23 Q    Did you send resumes to any nuclear power 2c installation?
25          A    Yes.
 
7
                                                                                        '81]
l 8-2                                                                              :
3 Q    To whom did you send the resume?'                        j 2
MK. SPEKTER:  I am going to object, irrelevant.
3 MR. DAVIDSON:  Mr. Spekter. I wculd suggest l
that you be careful because I have a' suspicion  on the basis 5
of(            ) testimony that he intends to suggest  in 6
this Department of Labor proceeding that his failure to 7
obtain a job was related to his allegations.
8 If that is true and he represents to me now-that that is not going to be in. I think we are going to 10 have a very serious problem and I think since you are not II his counsel in that proceeding at this point, that you 12 should be very circumspect about the representations you 13 are prepared to make particularly if you ultimately do Id become his counsel because I am going to hold you to them.
15 BY MR. DAVIDSUN:  (Resuming) 16 Q    I think,e,
                                                            )you ought to tell'us to 17 whom you sent those resumes.
f 18                                                                            1 A    To the two utility companies in Florida.                  l l'
Q    Could you tell us who they are?    I don't know 20 them.
21 A    Florida Power and Light and Florida Power.
22 Q    Do they both operate nuclear installations?          ,.
23 A    Yee, they do.
24 Q    Are those nuclear installations in the              f!
25                                                                            l construction phase or are they on-line?                                I i
4 i
I m_________.
 
82
                                                                                                                                  ?
A                      They are on-line.
2 Q                    What position did you apply for?
3                                                                                                                    !
A Maintenance support or results engineering.
Q                      Did you confer with Mr. Hadley about the 5
submission of those resumes?
6 A                        No, I did not.
i i
Q                        Did you submit those resumes with a cover letter?
A                          Yes, I did.
10 Q                          Are the resumes that you submitted the s arn e                j II as the one that you had marked yesterday in your direct I
testimony?
I3 A                            Yes, they are.
14 Q                            They.do not vary in any detail?    That is the 15 resume you used for these two application <s you mentioned?
16 A                            That is the resume. There may be as I
    '7 indicated dur.ing that, that we cross out the "present" 18                                                                                                                    I and place in a date there.
Q                              Do you recollect the date on which you 20 submitted your resumes?
    't A                                No, I do not.
22 Q                                Did you do so in person or by mail?
23                                                                                                                                i A                                  Did I do what?
24 Q                                  The resumes that you submitted to these two 25 utilities in Florida, did you submit those to them in person i
e
 
83
                                ' 8-4 1
or did you mail a copy of your resume to them?
2              A    I mailed them.
3 Q    Did you include a cover letter with each of 4
those resumes?
5              A    Yes. 'I did.
6 Q    Did you retain copies of those cover letters?
7              A    No, I did not.
8 Q    Were you respending to an advertisement for 9
personnel by either of those two utilities?-
10              A    No, I.was not.
11 Q    Why did you seek employment of those two 12        utilities?  Let me rephrase that. Why~did you believe that p
13 there was employment available at those.two utilities?
I4              A    There la as a general rule employment available 15 at most nuclear power plants.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:    Please read back the question, 17      Mr. Reportet.
18 (PAUSE.)
19 MR. DAVIDSON:    While we were searching to have 20 the question re-read to you, I note.that you had a colloquy 21 with counsel and 1 think he may have helped you understand 22 that the reason 11 felt your answer was unresponsive is 23 l
the question is, why did you believe or what gave you to 24 understand that there was eeployuent available at'these two 25 specific utilities and you didn't tell me that.      What you l
t
 
W-84 4
I told me was that there is some generalized unfocussed 2
demand in an industry and that is not re          onsive. I 3
think he instructed you to respond to this question and I would ask you to do so.
5 THE WITNESS:        I believed that there was 6
employment possibilities at those power plants.
7 BY MR. DAVIDSCN:        (Resuming) 8 Q      On what did you. base that believe, sir?
            ?
A      Outage considerations at both power plants.
10 Q      What do you mean by thst, sir?
II A
Both power plants are due for an outage say 12 within the year and would possibly by my bel'ief would be' I3 staffing personnel.
14 Q      But you didn't speak with anyone employed at 15 those utilities about employment before you sent your 16 resume?
A      Yes, I did.
18 Q      What did they tell you?
19 A      They said, " Send my resume."
20 Do you know to whom you spoke?
21 A      No.
22 Q      Who did you call?
23 A      The personnel department.
24 Q      At both of those?
25 A      Yes.
i L_________----_------------------------  - - - - - -  --  -    -
 
                                                                                                                                      ,m
                                                                                                                                      ~85[
                                                                                                                                              -i 8-6                                                                                                                                !
I Q  Did you advise Mr. Hadley-that you were 2
going to call                      t' h e m ?
3-A    No, I.did not.
Q    Which of the utilities.did you contact?
5 A
I co'ntac ted bo th Florida Power and Florida Power 6
and Light.                                                                                      '
!                              7 Q    You' called both of them?
8 A    Right.
Q    Do you, recollect when you made'that call?
10 A    No, I do not.
11 Q    Do-you know the name offthe individual t o-- whom 12 you spoke at either of these' plants?
13 A    No, I do not.
Q Would that individual to'the best1of your 15 knowledge be employed in personnel' 16 A    Yes.
I#
Q    Wh'at did you say.in each of'those conversations?
18 A    Requesting possibilities of' employment'and                      ,' -3 what positions they may have available.
20                                                                                                                    !
Q    Did you receive an answer?
21 A
                                                                                        ~
Yes, a very standard answed'that t h'e y ; c o u l d -        .! ,
22                                                                                                            l4 possibly have positions available but_they would;have'to                              see-    id 23                                                                                                            j1 my resume.                                                                                    1 i l-                          24                                                                                                            I!
l Q    So the reason you sent your resume was based on              'l\ ~
i 25 that conversation?
l p
i'
    +
b A-l' u_______________.____________    _ _ _ _ _    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
 
f                                                                                                                                                          86-6
                                                                                                                                                                    .4-1 A                Correct.
2 Q                  And not_for any other1 reason?
3 A.                Correct.
a Q.                Did you. receive a    response:from:eitherLof'Lthe.
5 utilities to which you have just mcde-reference?
6 A                    I received a: response from one.
7 Q                    In what manner was that response transmitted?l 8
A                      A letter.
9 Q                    What did that letterLstate?
10                                                                                  .
                                                                                                                                                                . e.
They stated at this time that they hadino
                                                                                .A 11 y
positions available for my qualifications.
12 Q                        Did you retain a' copy of that letter?-
13 A                        Yes, I did.
14 Q                        Do you have it with you today?
15 A                          Yes.
16 Q                          Would you please produce it?
17 A                          (Witness complying.).
18                                                                              '                                                        l Q
* v I note once again that you are                '
19                                                                                          .''"~-
reaching into your attache case and pulling out yet another:                                                  .,
                                                                                                                                                                          'I '
20 document.
21                                                                                                                          '
(PAUSE.)
22 BY MR. DAVIDSON:        (Resuming) t l'
23 Q
Please show the document to you counsel first, 24                                                                                                                                                    4
                    . 25 f -
i b
A                              (Witness complying.)                      '
i 1
                                                                                                                                                                          .1
                                                                                                                                                                            )
1
  .e b
 
                            '                                      +
8-8 1
(Witness tenders document to Counsel Spekter.)
1 2
MR. SPEKTER:    I am providing with a copy.                                i 3
MR. DAVIDSON:    Counsel, I notice that'you                            .,
d have removed a staple from that' document.      I am going co-5 object. I don't want any document's integrity or the manner-6 in.which it is retainad'in(                  kiles.co;be      't a mp e r e d -
7 with.
t 8
MR. SPEKTER:    I submit for the record'that the                      >
attached to the envelope which it came in.
                                                                                                          ]
10 MR. DAVIDSON:    And also to another piece of Il paper.
12 MR. SPEKTER:    And also to a piece of paper which
                                            /            'ss 13 is a handwritten draft of(                  fequest-for potential Id    employment. Perhaps it is a letter. I think it probably 15    speaks for 'itself.                                                                '
It is a letter which would be the 16 draft perhaps of a cover letter to the utility.
17 MR. DAVIDSON:    Let's restaple them as they were 18 retained in his files so that the document maintains its W
integrity and let's take a look at it.
20 MR  SPEKTER:  The document that was requested,                    ;,
21                                                                                        l I believe the only document that was requested was thel 22 letter from Florida Power Corporation.which states that 23    there were no jobs.
                                                                                                        ')
24 MR. DAVIDSON:    That document. sir, is a part'of'                          l 25 the other two because it has been stapled togetherfand I                          i !
ll 1
l
\                                                                                                          l I
l l
a
                                                                                                        ~1
 
                                                                                                                                                                  '--                          ~88 I
think we are entitled to'that.
2 MR. SPEKTER:    These are three separate.doduments.
3 MR. DAVIDSON:    .If this were ~ s: proceeding,under a
discovery, there would be.a damn good question as to-3 whether there is a violation of Title"18,'Section 1901, 6
I don't believe that counsel has'any right-to' change.the 7
manner in which documents are retained in the file end'I am-8 very disturbed by that.                              ,
MR. SPEKTER:    Counsel, I am certainly not to tampering with. documents and I.wish to make that perfectly II clear for this record.                                                    t 12 MR. DAVIDUON:    I may have misspoken.                  I'just want 13 the document produced-in the manner in which it was retained in/q-            files and I think I am entitled to that and 15 I would like to have the whole document and I would like it to to be stapled so that when we mark it, it retains its I7 integrity.
                                                          '8 MR. SPEKTER:    If you have a stapler, you.may 19 re-staple it.
20 MR. DAVIDSON:    Thank you, sir.        Off the record.
21 (Discussion off the r e c o r d '. )
22 9
23 24                                                                                                                                                i i
25                                                                                                                                              .I I
1 L          _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
                                                                  ,        .,n.w            . , .  -
                                                                                                            .wr.      -
xy.
fe9pbl 1                    MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Reporter. have we nov 2  marked all of the exhibits.
3                    '(Reporter responds.)-
4                      BY MR. DAVIDSON:
5              Q    .[            }youhaveproduced what-is'a 6  three-page.or three-part document, the first page of>which 7- . appears to be a letter from the-Florida Power Corporation.
8  and I ask you whether that is.the letter to'which you're.
9    referring that was a response to one of'your" requests'for.
10      employment?                                                          !
11                A      Yes, it.was.-
12                      MR. DAVIDSON:      .I would like che reporter to 13 mark for identification this document as Disc.          F-4.
14 (The document-referred to'as 15                                          Discovery.F-4 was 16 marked for identification.)
17                          BY MR. DAVIDSON:
18                  Q      Now this letter is from the Florida Power              j 19        Corporation,    which of the u tilities . is owr.ed and . opera t ed 20 by Florida Power Corporation to.which you earlier applied 21          for employment.      You indicated.that.you applied'to Florida-22          ! a ser & Light.
23                    A      There's two separate = corporations in' Florida.
24          Florida Power and Florida Power & Light. Two individually 25          separate corporations.
4
 
              ..x            .                          '-
90 4
1 Q        And this is the Florida Power Corporation 2
not the Florida Power & Light.
3              A        Right.
4 Q        Did you receive a response to your request 5
for employment from the Florida Power & Light?
6              A        No.
7 Q        Did you take any action to pursue that resume 9    that you sent then?
9              A        No, I have not.
to              Q      Did you call anyone from the Florida Power 11    & Light Company about it?
                                                                                        's 12 MR. SPEKTER:      Asked and answered, i3                      fHE WITNESS:      No, I have not, j
14 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
I 15              Q        To your knowledge, has a r.y o n e on your behalf            <
It      made such a telephone call?                                                    l P                A        No, they have not.
18 (Discussion off the record.)
19 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                          ,              -                                                {
20              Q                      ; prior to your employment at s-          .s 21 Comanche Peak as a start-up engineer, what is the entire                      1 22 amornt of time that you were employed in the nuclear power industry As a start-up engineer?
23 24              A        I believe from January to August of      '82.
75 l            Q        Where was that employment, sir?
t a
 
91 l'
      "ob3 1
A              B'echtel Power' Corporation.
2 Q.              I'm sorry,.I didn't hear your response.
3 A.              Bechtel Powei Corporation.
d Q              What plant.was that, sir, di d you work at ?
5                              A              San Onofre Nuclear.-
6                              Q              Sir, we have marked for identification an 7
affidavit submitted in this proceeding.as -- we' marked for 8
identification the affidavit in yesterday's proceeding.                                      But 9
in' order to make these proceedings entirely comprehensible 10    and independent as a discoverydeposition,[                      what-11 I'm' going to do is I'm goingEtoLhave the reporter mark that-12 affidavit yet again. if.I may, with- a Discovery Exhibit ; numbe:
13
                                                    /
And I'm going to ask the reporter.to mark the':
                                                                        ~
Id      affidavit of(        ~
as Disc. F-5.
15 (the document' referred toias' 16 Discovery T-5 was 17 marked'for identification.)
            '18 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
19 Q
_s
                                                                            )we now have marked thLs afficavit 20      as Disc. F-5,                          and I would like you to turn to page 2.            And 21 I would like you to turn to the second or the ' completed                                            '
22      paragraph on page 2.                            I would.like you to read it to yourself.
23 (Witness, reviewing document.)
24 MR. DAVIDSON: 'And when you have finished <
25      look up at me.                                                                                    ,
                                                                                                                          \
h
                      . - _ _ - _ . _ - _ .          -_ _            ____.__-_-___---.-____-__L_.__i-__-.__w
 
  ,                                                                                                ~
: 92:
1 m
4 1
THE WITNESS    Okay.
2                      BY MR'. DAVIDSON:
3              Q      Do you see  the' statement that-you belie 3re.
4 that certain of the. procedures at Comanche Peak are "are 5
not consistent with industry practices,"1do you see'that?--
6            A      .Yes, I do.
7 Q        On what do_you babe.that-statement?
8            A        Previous. experience.
9 Q        When you say previous experience, you refer 10 to your experience as a start-up. engineer with Bechtel 11    Corpora' ion?                                                                          e 12            A        Yes. And previouc experience ~ prior to that.
13 Q        How many, nuclear power plants are there'in-14 the United States, to your knowledge :that        are operating?
15            A        I am unaware of that.
16 Q        You do not know.
17            A        No.
I 1B Q        Do you know how.many utilities operate nuclear-                            I
                                                                                                        'I' 19 power plants under operating licenses with th5.NRC in the 20    United States?
21            A        I would be guessing. I'm not going.to begin                            1 22    to guess how many.
23            Q        The' question is, do you know.                                            -i
!                                                                                                          l 24            A        No.                                                                        .
l 25            Q        Do you know how many nuclear power ~ plants are 1
e-i
______.-.____m.___m__m    ___ m
 
i92-A Oob5 1
currently in. construction phase?
2 A          No, I do not.                                      .:
                                                                                                                                                      'l 3
Q          Do you know how many utilitiesLhave submitted-4 applications for construction permits?
5                    A          No, J do not.
6 MR. SPEKTER:    I'would object tolthe whole111ne, 7
of questioning as irrelevant,-whether he knows;how ma'ny.,
8 the' exact numbersoof plants does not mean.that.he did not-9 know,the general policy in the i nd us t ry '.
t, 10.
MR. DAVIDSON:    I don't believe that'is'tec'essahy 11 to respond to that objection            but I do believe'that he states' 12 what' industry practices are, and . I just want to plumbsthe 13
                                                                          .dapth and' breadth of the Laowledge with which he~ brings-to-14 that assertion.          'And if he doesn't know what.utilitiesEoperate 15 nuclear power plants or how many there are, .and he doesn't' 16 know how many plants are on-line in the United' States, and 17                                                  ~
he doesn't know nhat's being constructed in the United States)                    '
18 I think it bears rather nacerially on his ability to'make                          j
                                                            ~9                                                                                              .
that kind of statement in sworn testimony.                                          I 20 You may'dir, agree.
j 21 Mk. SPEKTER:    I do.
22 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
l 23 Q        t            ')onpage 3 of your affidavit you' 24 make the statement.."This-is'not consistent with my experience 25 in the nuclear industry."            Do you'see that statement?                  'j i
1
                                                                                                                                                              )
I e
i
_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _                _ _ _ _  . . _ .                                    _      , __ ._        .]
 
                  ?      .
a,p                                      '
J-93 9pb6 k
i 1
(Pause.)
2                A  Yes, I do.
3                Q  On what do you base that statement, sir?  What 4    experience?
5              A    Previous experience at the San Onofre Nuclear 6
Power Plant and at the Tennessee Valley Authority Nuclear 7    Power Plant.
8                Q    I'm sorry, you dropped your voice on that.
9              A    Tennessee Valley Authority Nuclear Power Plant.
10              Q    You were employed by the Bechtel Corporation 11 at the San Onofre power plant as a start-up engineer from 12    January 1982 until September of 1982; is that correct?
13                A    Correct.
o 14                                                                          '
Q    You were employed at the TVA Bellefonte                  (
15    Nuclear Power Plant for approximately four months between 16    August 1981 and January 1982; is that correct?
17              A    Correct.
18              Q    Your position there, however was not start-up 19    engineer, was it?
20              A    Correct.
21              Q    What was your position:there?  '
t    <
22              A    Assistant steam generator. operator.
23                                                                          I Q    Thank you. And is that the experience to          i 24    which you refer in terms of stating your experience in the 25    nuclear industry?
l 1l s
 
                                  $1-                    y,.
                                                                                        - w
                                                              ,                96
                                                                                        '4
                  ~1              A      Yes.
i 2            Q      Further down in that paragraph you discuss          1 1
3 what you term, and I quote, " trends within the industry."
4 (Pause.)                                            d 5            A      Are.you. speaking of the paragraph''under that 6    one or still in the paragraph above?
7              Q      We're still in the paragraph =above.  .It is' 8    your affidavit,              )Doyou see that statement .
9    " trend within the industry"? Why-don't you-read through 10 the paragraph again and look up at'me:when.you.have finished?
11 (Witness' reviewing document.)
12              A      Yes, I see it.
13              Q      On what'did you base yoUr assertion-as to s
14
                      " trends within the industry"?                                      ''
1 15              A      Previous experience and information obtained to    from fellow personnel.
17              Q      What information?
18              A      Information told to ae.
19              Q      Information obtained from what fellow 20    personnel?
21 (Pause.)
22              A The numbers would be too numerous to name.
23              Q      Well, what information do you refer to?.
24              A You are speaking of a common knowledge at 25    the plant site.
u    . . . _ _
 
95"              j 9pb8-1
                                                                                                                                                                                                    ' ,t Q                To whatfinformation do you refer when.you 2
say information obtained from fellow employees?'
3              A                The' fact that'other power? plants.do.not. allow-d butt splicing. 'That'other power; plants do not allow craft ~
                                                                                          .5                          ~
personnel to perform' testing;without direct. supervision.
6 and.so on and.so forth.
7 Q                And from whom did you secure this'information?
8 (Pause.)
t 9              A                From fellow workers.
to                Q                Could you p1' ease name them?
11 A                You would:be. talking about John McDowel1~--
12 Jeff' Black - .there would be'several other' start ups."but-13 the names I cannot remember right now.                                '
id Q                Other. start-up engineers.that were' employed 15    with you?                                                                                            '
16                A                Correct.
17 Q                Perhaps we can refresh'your recollection --
                                                                                                                                                                                                        .I 18 Mr. Reporter, do you have the exhibit.that was marked! for 19 identification during the course of the voir dire off 20
                                                                                                        )which was a table of organization of theETUCCO 21
                                                                                                                                                                                                  -l start-up group?                                                                                    1, 22 (Reporter responds-negatively.)-
23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                                          <                                                                                  1 24                                                                                                                    1 Q                              I have here a list of' start-up                                i{
25 L                                                                                              personnel who were employed'at the same time you'were irf the l                                                                                                                                                                                                            I 1
j o                                                                                                                                                                                                            1 l
l 1
_  . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " - ~ - ^ ' ' ' - - '          '
 
_,v                              re      ~
96 4
1
                                        ' start-up group under'the direction of Mr. Camp.        I'm going 2  to ask that this        list of personnel 'ue marked.for identification 3  as Disc. F-6.
    - ~ - ~~                        d (The document referred to as-
                                    -5 Discovery F-6.was 6
marked for identification.)-
7 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
8 Q.
f              )Iwillshowyou    this list now.
9 and I would like to call your attention to the fact that to this is titled . start-up personnel, and it's indicated to 11 be a list of "as of 1/9 84." .That isz January 9. 1984.              '
12-And could you please review that list of 13    personnel?
Id (Witness reviewing document.)
15 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
16 Q        I think you want.to take some care in                  d
                                                                                                                      ?
17 reviewin. each of the names. I don't mean for'you to just 1B flip thr.igh the pages.
19 And when you have completed _your perusal.of 20 that dociment, would you look up at me?
21 (Witness reviewing document.)      i 22                                                                                      !
23 24 25
__m____    _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _
 
  .W  u
                    +oi W'-r e.  ..a .
                    ' 'I ' ' '' ' *,"'              ,
r 10/2                                                                                                    ,
98-1 4
1
                        'the areas, what do you mean?
2                                                                                                    \
A        I cannot account for his experience.                                    I 3
                                                                                                              .f Q        Did review of this list refresh your recollection                    ]
4 as to the people with whom you worked at the time you were 5
at -- employed at' Comanche Peak in the start-up group?.
6                  A        I know several of the names.
7 Q        Now, you earlier testified that the basis.for 8
your assertion about "the trend within the industry" was 9                                                                                                  't predicated on your prior experience at the'two. power plants.
10 You mentioned, then..also from discussions with fellow 11          workers.
12 And you identified for us thatione such worker 13 who gave you information relevant to the " trend within the                      -      i 14 industry" was John Mcdonald.        The second name you gave us 15          was Jeff Black,                                                                            1 l.6 Are we to understand that Mr.' Parker is also 17          one such person?
IB                  A        Yes.                                                                      )'
10!                Q        Are there any other people that you can now i
20 ;          identify who may have had such conversations with you                                      ,
i 21 from uhich you gleaned what you claim to,be information                                  ;{
22                                                                                                    '!
about the " trend within the. industry"?                                                  l s
23 '                A        No.
1 2d Q        Please relate to me the conversation that'you 25 had with John Mcdonald with -- excuse me, I believe.                                        ,
1 l
i
 
q
                .    .g  ..  .
                                            ~4 l,                        *!N' '  ''
* q; ,
                  /
1 I misspoke.        The name that you mentioned is
!          2      John McDowell.
3              A        Correct.
4
                          .Q      Would you please tell me what Mr. McDowell's.
5      experience within the industry is?                                                                  '
6              A        His experience?          I cannot account for'his 7      experience.
                                  .              s 8
Q    (                ')wouldyou please tell_me what 9
Jeff Black's experience within the industry is?
10              A        I am not familiar with his experience.either.
11 Q    .I                  )wouldyou' turn    to page 5 of 12      Dise Exhibit 6.                                                                                    <
13                        Let me direct your attention to the.last g
Id      sentence on that page.                                                                              '
15                        Couid you read that to.yourself and'look'up'st 16      me when you are finished?
17                        (Witness peruses docu ent.)
18              A        Yes.
19 Q        Do you see the phrase in that sentence. " comply-20      with industry practiced?
21              A        Yes, I do.
22                        And what do you --
Q 23                        MR. SPEKTER:        I would note for the record that 24      that's not in quotes in that par icular --
25                        MR. DAVIDSON:          I'm so ry. I think, as~I'have 4
: v. :.,
            - %1 4 y ., ;, A C.Mk*< - - ~ T,=.i H e ~ 4 " ? R                                  =~
W+w^      4 M? -    -'~
l' W diTl ' b.ftY g                                                                      ' '' *
* 5' Wr.'. ~Y&      ' g gg  -- <. Y' 4
1
                                                  ,  done with my previous questions to which you have posed no 2              objection, that I used the quotes only to' indicate that I 3              am quoting from                      pffidavit, and that.this is 4
not my own language, characterization..or interpretation 5                of what it is he has said.
6                            MR. SPEKTER:. Understood.
7                            MR. .DAVIDSON:      And I believe -- by the way, B
[              )please    let us have this agreement .that if I.
9                at any time, misquote you or otherwise misstate wha't it is                            'd to                      that you have proffered in testimony here, that you'll 11                      correct me.
12                                    Do we have that agreement, j
13                                    THE WITNESS:                                                                i We have that agreement.
{
14 MR. DAVIDSON:      Thank you.                                              }'
                                                                                                ~
15 Mr. Spekter,'I invite you to chime in'when you 16                          feel it appropriate to.
17                                      MR. SPEKTER:      My only objection to this comment 18                          is that it seems to be taking matters out of context.
19 I would request that if you wish to quote 20                            something, that the whole portion from whence it's taken 21                            is read.                                                !*
22                                          MR. DAVIDSON:      Well, my question -- which I 23                            think will become apparent -- is that'I just want to know on 24                            what yeu base your assertion about industry practice.
25                                          THE WITNESS:      Past opinion and the opinion of
 
m._,.... .
                                              ? FCjl 10/3                    * -      " " '              -
t                      7  "i -      .
101 1      fellow workers.
2                        BY MR. DAVIDSON:
3                Q      And'when you say "the opinion of fellow workers,"
d        to what workers do you refer?
5                A      I do not'know.                                              .
o I do not remember the exact workers.
7                Q        Do you remember any of the workers'who may have -i-8      had an opinion with' respect to this' matter?
9                A      No, I do' not.
10                  Q      Do you know on what they may have based that 11        opinion?
12                A        No, I do not.
13                  Q    ,
ou testified earlier that you              ,
14 were employed by~the Bechtel Corporation at the San Onofre-                !
15          plant, did you not?                                                        ;
16                  A        Correct.
17                  Q      To your knowledge, does the'Bechtel Corporation          i 1-18        perform services at any other nuclear. installation or                  .T i
19        facility?
i 20                  A        Yes, they do.
21                  Q        Do you know what other nuclear installations or 22          facilities the Bechtel Corporation is engaged either in                            a j
                                                                                                                                                                      ]
23          construction or as a contractor?
24                  A        Yes, I do.                                                        l 1
25                  Q      Would you please name them?                            .i.
i 1
4 I
l
                                                                                                                                                                    .i
 
                                              ~
                                                                                              .M    "9eDP            *, -TK;- n '"Y-                  C . '..                              ~; " ' " ' 7g. : 74 -                        .j FIF46                                            ,                                                                                ' 7 7;- -
1g
    . p..r.
    . .p.        . . .. .
4 A                                                                                                                                    1 1
They?re associated with the Diablo Canyon:and-2                                    Palo Verde, Arizona.          The exact locations of other plants --
3                                    I know that they are arsociated with the South Texas 4                                    1 Proj e c t right now. Other than that, I couldn't give you-5                                      specifics.
6                                            Q        Were you employed at any of these sites by the                                                                              I 7                                      Bechtel Corporation?
8                                            'A          None of the ones that I.'ve.previously listed --
9                                      just recently.
10                                                  Q        Were you employed at any nuclear plant 11 installation or site by the Bechtel Corporation, other than-12                                            the San Onofre plant?
13                                                  A        No.
14 r
Q        Could you turn to page 7 of your' affidavit, 15                                                          i
                                                                                                          ,_/
16 (Pause.)
17 I would like to call your attention to'the is second sentence in the complete paragraph on page 7.                                                                                      .f 19 I'd like you to read it to yourself'and look                                                                              'l 20                                              up at me when you're through.                                                                                                                  )'
1 21
                                                                                                              .(Witness peruses document.)                                                                                            '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ]
22                                                                Have you read it, sir?
                                      - 23                                                            A        Yes, I have.                                                                                                                    l a
24                                                        Q      And that sentence reads:            "It is my experience i
i 25 that the Bechtel Corporation provides such a printout to                                                                                        -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              )
i I
l l
  '                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            I
 
                                              ,((,N
      ,k                        $        .
kbb W-      /+- 1 MNkO              Mr    ' + Mbe'iM C FCjI: 10 /7"                      r?        h"                        '
                                                                                  '      ^
103, 4
1 its STEa at nuclear sites."
7                      On what do you base that statement, sir?
3                A Interaction and conversation between the' sites.
4                Q    When you say " interaction and conversation 5          between the sites," to what.do you mean?
6                A. Such that I have fellow workers who have"gone 7
to other previous sites or that I have talked to at those 8
other sitsa and obtained information-from those'other sites.
9                Q    Do you have personal knowledge of the' employment 10          practices or procedures at the other sites?
11                  A    Bechtel uses generic procedures at their sites..
12 They try and maintain one site similar to-another site.
13 They have certain requirements. 'And calling fromlone site, 14 asking for this computer printout, is common. You can 15            call and say,    "I would like to find out, you know, what.
16 have you done about this item on this punch."-          It is not 17 a punch list; it is a printout type of form.
18                  Q    Have you made such a proffer.
19                  A    Yes, I've talked to different people at the~
20            sites.
21                  Q f'              To all of'the. sites?
22                  A    No.
23                        MR. SPEKTER:      At thie time, I would like to make 24 an objection and note and objection for the record. Noting
                                    ' 25 that it's almost 12:00 o' clock, I've been very patient
 
        .~      .
                    . 5,    -.
: g.        ~        _m.
a ga  p                "
                                                                                                                ''l
.1L10/8                                                                                                104
                                                                                                                '1
                                                                                                                -]  4 1
waiting, as we've'gone through the-affidavit, up to this 2
point, because I believed that, in a good faith representa--
3 tion to counsel, that these matters would be relevant in d
the proceedings at hand.
5 However, it appears to be that we seem to.be                                  j 6
doing here is going through this affidavit:and cataloguing 7    and categorizing the technical matters.      Whereas, the scope 8
of this proceeding, the initial deposition        and these 9
hearings involved allegations of harassment and intimida-10    tion.
11 I would contend at this point that the matters 12 that are being questioned and that the witness is being i
13 called upon to comment on are far in excess of the scope                                      't 14 of both the hearings that are being conducted by means of-15 deposition and also the discovery that is contemplated by 16                                                                                                    i this particular deposition.
17 Yesterday, counsel for the' Applicant and counsel 2
18 for the Staff's remarks and their requests for discovery.                                    .l 19 deposition was based on the fact that counsel had not been                                      1 20 informed on prior occasions of several -- to wit, three 21                                                                                                    !
instances of harassment and intimidation.        And therefore,                                j i
22    a discovery deposition was called for.                                                          $
23 At this point, I think we've gone'far in excess                                  !
t 24 of .- and haven't even actually touched on those particular                                    !
25    instances.
I l
l
 
a ._r.  ..a    .
                                                                  .-  .y ~            w,.gz LM 7 -
                          %t ~ +x .z                          y ,.y. gp e                m. ,.
                                                        .                          ~.          .
: n.        y                                        I kk1dDh.
L.          --
l 1
For that reason,I think-we do needLa ruling 2      at this point from                                                                i-
                                                            -- from the Judge -- on whetherfthis
                                                                                                              'f 3
matter is appropriate for discovery at this point.
4 And I would request that one be held. Since it is 5
near the lunch hour anyway. it might be an appropriate time 6      to conduct one.
1 7                                                                                        '
And Mr. Roisman had indicated that he would 8
      ,                like to be present when we have such a discussion,                                i 1
9 MR. DAVIDSON:        Let me just respond briefly.- And to then I know Mr. Mizuno will want to m4ke a statement.
11 To start with, my understanding is this is a 12 discovery deposition, it's not an evidentiary deposition, 13 so it is in now way limited by the scope of direct.
14 Secondly, I think that to the extent that you          '
15 insisted that technical data and assertions made by
                                            'N 16  ('                        Jas the foundation for the subsequent claim of            ,
17 alleged harassment was an important foundation                        .          l
                                                                  /                                    '
15 N
I believe t ha t ,-              )experienceand i.
19 ability'to state his position and the experience he's'had                        .
20 in making these -- raising these concerns -- is very 21      relevant to the response that he received..
22                              Andf1 think that'it is plain that' all of these 23
                    . matters are therefore relevant.                                                          1 24 I would also add that it was you, sir, who 25 offered this affidavit in evidence, albeit we objected.                          j
      ..                                                                                                        l e
l l                                                                                                                l l
E__- - -----
 
7          _ _ y _. ~. y                        y.      3 10/10                  --            L i - uh                -
: g.                    -l J
4 1
And I would like to further add that a portion 2
of this affidavit has been-submitted by you'into: evidence.
3                                                                                      I I further would point out that'this affidavit f
d was provided to Applicant,as well as Staff, by CASE, the 5
Intervenor, for the express purpose of preparing for the 6    testimony to be elicited'from this witness.
7 It seems to me that it is CASE that has put 8
this affidavit in controversy, it is CASE that has 9
submitted it, it is you who have offered it into evidence            --
10                                                                              !
or portions therefore, and I hardly think that now                        '
11 instructing'the witness to provide no information with 12 respect to the bases for the assertions made in the 13 af fidavit -- and we will certainly get to the technical Id    matter as well    r- is foreclosing discovery on the very 15 matters that you relied upon, as well as those'that 16    surround it.
17 I also think, ? ~,i t e obviously,'that we have 18 the right to explc e , w c '. a r.estimony to see whether it 19 conflicts with any testimony given here today.
20                    And the only way we.can do t h a t' is to examine 21      upon this affidavit.
22 So, 1 cannot believe, sir, that'you have a 23 good faith belief at this time that examining this witness 24 on the affidavit he has submitted in these proceedings is i
1 M      somehow itrelevant.                                                                  i
                                                                                                      'l i
l 6
I
                                                                            ..________u-    -______i
 
vwoo oauvo                .. z .                          :-            .- 5 a_ ~        ;-m w w
                                                                                                    .s                                                                '
y ..            ,,  %        ny.                ' ' '
                                                                                                                                                                                                  ?
                                                                                                                                        .e;                        ' T;
* Nl.f. -y        .
j
                                                                                                                                          .vv y,          y I
MR. SPEKTER:      I believe it is.              I would note-                      j 2
j                                                                                                for the record that the only portions of the. affidavit 3
which have been submitted into evidence in direct testimony d
were pages 10 and 11, I believe, .and page 13, which have 5
not even been touched upon by. counsel and which are the 6
underlying incidents which deal'with the instances of I
y harassment and intimidation which                                - . )h a s endured 8                                                                          '
while an employee.
MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Spekter -you challenged me 30 carlier and objected on the grounds.that'I had takenthings].
II out of context.
12 I take it that when you take them out of I3 context, that is permissible; but when I do so,.that somehowj.
I#
is objectionable.
15 I think that if your feeling is that you get to to pick and choose among his sworn testimony, my anwser 37 is that I am supplying the context that'is required by                          '
{.,
is going through the entire evidence.-
I' MR. SPEKTER:    My point is that we have submitted 20 only a portion of the affidavit and testified on direct 21 from only portions of the affidavit ubich related'to the a
22 incidents of h'rassment'and a                  intimidation, which is the 23 limiting factor in these particular hearings..
24 And I submit that the technical background'which 25                                                                                                            (
forms the bulk of the affidavit is not really proper for.
m                                          .
o
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ - - - _ - - - - - - _ - - - . _ -------- ~ -------                                        --  -              - -            -                    -  - - - ~ ~~~~ ~
 
('
                                                .                                          .,                                      s,.. v- -  w-T!z5                    .~-          3~    05          ** "-
10/12;-
v                                    h                  ' '
10t' 4
1 discovery at this time.
2 MR. DAVIDSON:            And if he were to be mistaken 3
in all of those concerns, impressed them with the assiduity.
d that he testt:ied he did yesterday and made himself a 5                                                                                                                                                  I gadfly over issues-on which he was neither qualified to l
6 speak -- on which he was mistaken - .perahsp that would 7
provide the context in which some of these : alleged instances 8
of harassment; intimidation, and. threatening took place.
9 Therefore, I say to you once again that you 30 cannot strip away that which you choose to have testimony-11 on and eliminate or thwart discovery of the context and 12 foundation, particularly when it is found'within his own 33 sworn testimony offered in these proceedings.
Id Mr. Mizuno, do you have a statement?
15 MR. MIZUNO:          Well, I guess.I-first would lik'e 16 to ask counsel for the Intervenor whether they intend to 37 offer at any point in the-future the remaining portions of 38 Mr. Walter's affidavit?
N MR. SPEKTER: -That is a question that11 can't 20                                                                                                                                                                    i answer at this particular point.                                                                        -
21 MR. DAVIDSON:' You are not prepared to make that 22                                                                                                                                                                    I commitment, are you?
23 L                                                                                                                                            MR. MIZUNO:          On that basis, the Staff would --                                      t 24 because cc usel for Intervenor is unable to make a 25 commitment at this time that they will not be using the i
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          -I i
_ . _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -                                        -    ~ - ~ ~ ' ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ^ ~      ' ~    ~'
 
5              p        -
                                                                                          ,3. . d.  .    -H/p( % Q $ 2/ g '.      .;.J:M.i-g.,
: w. ;os -
FCAL 1(1/13-
[. 3, '      t.
                                                                                                ,,                N                                    1 I
remaining portions of(                          ) affidavit, we believe          .f 2
that discovery on those portions /of the sffidavit is                              \
3 proper.                                                                              !
i d
In addition.
e I will note that the third s
j 5                                                                                          j incident                              testified to yesterday, which which( s.                                                            ]
6
                                                                                                      /
we heard of for the very first time yesterday,'was that 7
a person    --
I believe this was Art London -- told                          j 8
                                                              ,                  fhat if he had enough time to find problems,                        h I
that he had enough time to do work -- to do more work.
10
                                                                                                        ; indicated that he. considered And{-
this to be intimidation because the problem that he was 12 re f erring to., that he identified with those which were l3 contained in his affidavit.
I' The ref ore , I believe that it is entirely
                                                                                                                            /                  N 15 proper to go into the underlying basis for                                      j to belief that -- of what these problems were and why he 17 believed them to be problems.                  And I say that without 18 saying that his affidavit on those matters should be l'
admitted.
20 MR. DAVIDSON:          Mr. Mizuno, once again, you.have 21 made a very cogent point.                And 1 can'do-no more but endorse 23    it.        .
23 And that is, quite clearly, Mr.' Spekter, there 24 was testimony from the witness' direct examination that                                !
25 it was all of these concerns that he was raising with I
4 1
 
zmr
:ca-
                          .c  :.c    . -
                                                        .;- .~ imm. '. - ~
                                                                                            '~  ~
10/14
* 4--
41 2110          ~ -
                                .                                                                                r l
4 I
respect to technical matters that led        t'o.--  and gave him                                  i 2                                                                                                        i reason to understand that the' assertion made by Mr.' London                                        l 3
was a form of harassment, intimidation and threatening for his activities. And these activities'he did say were 5
the ones mentioned in his affidavit.
6 Therefore, it is entirely proper to find out the
            '7 basis for those concerns and their validity and to explore 8
the context.in which they. occurred.
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4                                                          _ _ .
8 4
                                                                          - ______mmm-____-_        __m_._  _-_    -
 
                                                                                                                                                    -~,                e -
M fe.111b+ ,
M*
Y    'I Y "''    ,I          . , ,          _.        $h      " '
                                                                    <                                r              ,    - 1*
Q.'.                        ...
                                                                                                                                                                          ?,
                                                                                                                                    . ~ . ,    n.
1 MR. MIZUNO:        I believe we don't need any.
2 further argument on this point.                  We preserve our objections-3    on the record, d
MR. SPEKTCR:      .I believe that is true, 5
and we can proceed at that point for now.                          I will-hold off e
on my request for the conference with the Judge for;right 7    now.        My objection has been made, ed I think that when we 8
break for lunch, I will confer with Mr. Roisman on that.
9 MR. MIZUNO:        It is now 12 o' clock.                  Are-10 counsel suggesting that we break now, or.that we continue?
11 THE WITNESS:        Let's bt          .k now.
12 MR. DAVIDSON: I would like to leave the 13 question up to the witness.              Do you feel comfortable Id continuing, or would yoa like to break?
15 THE WITNESS:        No, let's break.
16
                                                                                                                                                              /              m.
s!R . DAVIDSON:      Itoldyouearlier(
17 that anytime yi2 wished to break, or that ycv feel tired, 18      or you don 't u Jerstand a question, you just let me know i#
and we'll accor adate you.
20 1R. MIZUNO:      This is still on the record.
21 IR. DAVIDSON:        Yes, it is sir.
22 1R. MIZUNO: .Now counsel -- Mr. Spekter, do 23 you want to ho.1 a conf erence call at the'beginning of 24 when we resume-sur discovery deposition.-because I woul.d like 25 to be able to e intact Mr. Treby, of the fact thst we may be 1
                                                                                                                                                      ~'
mm f
l l
 
                            . q ,,                        y. . " . :    -
v - ~.
: p.      ..                        ~, 3 " *~ "
                              . . .      _.    .%            .      .    ...        + . _                      ,
22                                                                                                  4, I      having a conference call.
2                        MR. SPEKTER:    Yes.
3 HR. MIZUNO:  When we resume the deposition      --
4 MR. SPEKTER:    If there's a concensus that 5
such a call is necessary, then we will have it at that time.
6 And.I've made that representation at this particular point.
7 MR. DAVIDSON:    The question is, is there 8      a consensus?    I'm not sure I understand.        My view is --
9 MR. SPEKTER :  I understand your view.
10 MR. DAVIDSON: The facts are plain that this 11 is clearly within the scope of discovery deposition, albeit 12 might not be within the appropriate scope of cross, which we 13 all understand this is not an evidentiary deposition, it 14      is a discovery deposition.
15 MR. SPEKTER:    Right.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:      I understood Mr. Mizuno to take 17 the deposition likewise, that this was fairly relevant                            i'
:8      inquiry from the Staff's perspective.          So therefore, if there            ;
19 is a concensus on this side of the table is that no call 20      is necessary.      But there has been no reason to believe                        '
21      that this is not proper examination.
22 MR. SPEKTER:    I might clarify that.      When 23 I said concensus, I meant between Mr. Spekter and Tony 24      Roisman.
25 MR. DAVIDSON:      In other words, you would like
 
    .r h.
c111v3.
                                                      'T '    '
1rh w,
                                                                                .TJ' 1
to check with Mr. Roisman about the necessity of -a ' conf erence 2  call at this time?
3                  . MR . SPEKTER:    Yes.
4 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, the only thing that is 5    important here is that Mr. Mizuno wants to know'whether                    I 6
you are committed to that conference call or whether you're 7    going to consider it, because I        believe he wants to have
  ,                8    Mr. Treby present.
9 MR. SPEKTER: I will let Mr..Mizuno know if 10    a conference' call will be made.
11 MR. MIZUNO:    The Staff's position is that 12 unless you are going.to direct the witness not.to anewer.any 13 further questions, then we really can put this off and just 14    consider it in deposition.        We have preserved our objections 15    on the record.
16 MR. SPEKTER:- That's true.        I would just 17 like to confer with Mr. Roisman before we proceed any 18    further.                                                                      1 19                    MR. DAVIDSON:                                                k I think that is your perogative      ,
j 20    Mr. Spekter.
21                    MR. SPEKTER:    Thank~you.
* 1 22                    MR. MIZUNO:      We may. break now.
23                    MR. DAV1DSON:      Break, please.-                            ,
24                                                                                    i (Whereupon, at 12:02 p.m., the teking of the                  ;
a 25 deposition was recessed, to reconvene this same day.)
i e
l l
l
__- __- ..-  D
 
U-        . [.            MQ@i            7E        %  v-;      ~!E
                                                  .,r.
4
:c 12-1            1 AFTERNOON SESSION 2
(1:05 p.m.)
3 Whereupon,
                                                        -r 4
5 resumed the stand and, having been previously duly sworn, 6
was examined and testified further as follows:
7 MR. 3PEKTER:    If: we are ready.to go back'on, 8
I would.make a brief statement for the record.
9 Prior to our recessing for' lunch, I had                    '
10 mentioned that we perhaps were going-to have a conference 11 call with Judge Bloch.      At this time, I;have' spoken with 12 Mr. Roisman. We have decided not to go ahead with'the 13 conference call.
Id All parties have noted their objections.on 15 the record, and we will proceed with the' deposition and to with counsel's questioning, pursuant to the affidavit.
17 MR. DAVIDSON:    Thank you, Mr. Spekter.
18 I would only add that you and'I' spoke also 19 during the break, and I indicated to you that while I 20 thought I had pretty well elaborated upon my' bases for 21 asserting that the matter in discovery was relevant and 22 pertinent, that I might have omitted to state 1 that.those.
23 were:the bases for my good-faith belief as to the 24 propriety of this question, and I. indicated that to you, 25 and you, I believe, indicated to me that          yes, you
____:___ _ . _ _ . .              _                      _            _        __  __________.____._._______________________________w
 
                                                  ~ " { k' _[
                                                        ,      .,      ..      ._ . , _ . . .    . . .      ~      -+--=^          =~    m-        ~~      ~
4,                  .)my .m                              *
:.y. _
mgc 12-2 I          understood that that was my contention. .And with that 2
noted, I would only say that, thank you very much, we li 3                                                                                                              1 will continue with the questioning.
d MR. SPEKTER:            Just for the record, I would 5
note that without having mentioned it every single time.
6 1 believe we can all state that all parties to this                                                  ,
7 proceeding are proceeding on good-faith belief.
8 (Telephonic interruption.)                                                    Il 9                                                                                                              !
MR. DAVIDSON:              Mr. Spekter, thank you for 10 that statement, and I join in it.
II BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                        /                    ~.,
12 Q      (                          ye have had a lencheon break 13 for about an hour, so what I would like to do, if I may, Id is ask the reporter to read back to us                          the exchange, that 15                                                                                                          6 is the question and answer, the two questions and answers, to that preceded the colloquy between Mr. Spekter and myself 4
17 with respect to the relevance of the testimony.
18 And if I could ask you, would you please I'
listen carefully so that we both can get b1..k on train                                            1 20 here and complete that subject.
1 21 A          Yes.                                                                          'i 22 (The reporter read the. record as requested.)
23                                                                                                                  i BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                          I 24                                                                                                                  !
Q        You have just heard the reporter read back                                              j 25 the last questions and answers, and you will recollect.                                          -
l A
                                                                                                                      % .S l
9 1
I
 
                                                          ~
                                                          . @ .9 c; g              1        9%.          dQ"V.-  .
N ~~ ~
                                                                                                                                    . R'' ~      :,{I' T
                                                                                                                                                            -Q-116      .
4 ge-12-3                          1 I think, that you used the' term " generic practices."
2 Do you recollect the use of,that term?
3              A              Yes.
4 Q              What did you mean by that?
5              A              lt 's meant -- " generic" being just as they 6
have generic procedures on the site here. Bechtel has 7
generic home office-procedures which.they.try andfadapt 8
to each one of the individual sites ~that have the basic-9 requirements associated with them, and then they are to    adapted individually f o r - e a ch site.
11 Q              If'they are adapted'to each site'-- well, no              --
12    strike that.
13 I am still not sure I understandtwhat you r        ,
14 meanby" generic,"{                                } Do you mean that there is 15 some sort of core set of procedures that Bechtel'has which 16    .are adapted for each site?
17              A              True.
18              Q              So that they are different from.each site, 19    they differ            from site to site?
20                A              Slightly.
21 Q              Slightly is your characterization.! The 22 question was,-do they differ from site to site?
23                A              Yes.
24                Q              They do.
l 25 How did you come by your. knowledge of the-
 
                                                                                        . , ,  .n
                                                                                                                    .> . ,, :s    . ~ 4i .
y R. ~;.i:, . s. .                                  -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ~~ T .:.U6 M "~
                                                                                              ,                                          q.*.                    > ;i . .
9-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ;a.
4
                                                                                                                                                                                                  .a?
mge 12-4          1 so-called generic core procedures' employed by Bechtel?
2          A                By working with their procedures.
3 Q                Working with their procedures where?
d          A                At San Onofre.
5 Q                So then you were aware of the San Onof re 6    procedures?
7          A                Correct.
                                .                                                                      8 Q                But my question was not how did you become.
9    aware    of any particular site procedures that have been 10      adapted for San Onofre.                          My question was, how did you 11 hecome acquainted with the generic                                          --
that'is, the core 12 of procedures that y e *: testified Bechtel has, which they                                                                              i 13 then subsequently adapt for'each particular site?
14 A                We were informed that the procedures were 15 generated from the generic form of procedures.
16 Q                Who gave you t h a t' information?
17            A                I'm not          --
I do not remember.
18 Q                Do you remember theLcircumstances under 19 which you were imparted that information?-
20            A                No, I do not.
l 21 Q                Do you.know the basis upon which that 22 individual, whom you don't recollect, obtained that 23
                                                                                                          'information?
24              A                No, I do not.
25 (Pause.)
                                                                                                                                      ..      .-_      ...._..          . . . . . ~ .                      - - - . . - - .
    - - - - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - _ __ -                                      ._        - _ _      -    -      _          .. _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ -                    _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - - .--.---__----.L
 
a z..
4
                                    /          s                                                                                  1 ige 12-5 1            Q      f              could you turn to page-4 of 2  Disc F-6, and I would like to call your attention to the-3 last line on that page and the carryover portion.of.that; d
sentence which appears on the'-l cop of page-5.which has 5
three1 additional'words, and I would like you to read'that o
material, that last'line and the' carryover to.page 5, 7
to yourself and look up at me when you are completed.
8 (The witness complies.).
A        I have read'it.
10 Q        And that statement refers'to your, quote, 11
                  " experience  of the way functional' testing is performed 12 at other nuclear plants " close quote?
13          A          Right.
Id Q        And on what do you base that statement,-sir?
15 A        Previous experience at San Onofre Nuclear 16 Power Plant, Bellefonte Nuclear Power Plant, and also at 17 Palo Verde Nuclear Power-Plant.
                                                                                                                                  .)
IB Q        Were you employed at the Palo Verde Nuclear l'
Plant?
20          A        No, I was not.
21 Q        Did you perform any functional tes' ting at 22                ~
the Palo Verde Nuclear Power. Plant?
23          A        No, I did not.
24 Q        When you were at the Bellefonte Nuclear 25 Power Plant, which is owned.by the TVA -- I think you just.
 
W    * 'yg;
                          .        e;..  '.% f ' ?..            i M.-a ?M'-Q                .
                                                                                                                  .47,%)g 119?Q -
                                                                              .  . a f..    .. .      . .-                  .
                                                                                . ga.. .
                                              . .g e                -4 4-  ..                                                4 mgc 12-6        1 made reference to it          --
your job was as an assistant steam 2
generator operator..was it not?.                                                                  i i
3          A              Correct.
d Q              When you say "other. nuclear plants," do-you 5
mean any other than the two at which you worked?:                                                  '
6          A              Yes, but I'm afraid that it may be hearsay-7 or insinuated as hearsay.
      .                      8          q              Why do you think that?                                                  '
9          A              There was information told to me by-fellow 10    employees.                                                                                      I 11 Q              Let me ask you this:            What employees imparted 12 such information to you?
13                                                                                                    i A              I do not remember at this time.
Id                                                                                                    1 Q            And what is the information they impar:ed to                              '
15    you?
16          A              That other power plants did not allow their 17 maintenance or craft personnel to perform: the.testic'.
18 Q              And do you-know the basts on which the                          made 19 those statements?
20            A              On their previous experience.
21                                                              i Q              Do you know what that experience vas?
E              A              1-do not remember at this time.
23                            Did you at any time know?
Q 24            A              I may have.
25                            And you may not have?
Q w                                          .
l' e-____-_-___.        -_-
 
      .., . . ,.m
                                                              ~. rw ,;.~            e    -19Wy      .y
                                                                                                        ' 120
                                                                                                              ~
                                                                                                                ~j '
4 e 12-7        1                                      A      I imagine I knew some of their experience.
2                                      Q      Well, would these individuals who made these 3
statements to you be any, the same as, or any of the people 4
we've already identified as having had such discussions 5                              with you?  That would be Messrs. McDowell, Black, and 6                              Parker.
1 I                7                                      A      If I cannot remember their names, how can I 8
tell you whether it would be any of those people?
9                                        Q      I thought that might jog your recollection.
              'O                                        A      No.
11 Q      If you were to look at a list of the persennel 12 with whom you worked during the time you were at Comanche 13 Peak, do you think that that might call back to you the 14 names of the individuals you had in mind?
15                                        A      No, I do not.
16                                        Q      If you looked at the table of organization 17 of the TUGC0 Start-up Group and the Electrical Test Group 18 to which you were assigned during that period, do you think 1
19 maybe that would call back to you the names of the 20                                individuals with whom you had these conversations?
21                                          A      No, I do not.
22                                          Q      And my statement to you about these other 23 individuals who allegedly gave you information about the 24 practices in other plants, you don't think that they may 25                                  have also covered this issue?
 
        . .p  -A        ". r.      f?W                3'i '    -'      W+%  -
i? y.
t
                                                          .a+-+                              . .'70, r
mge 12-8 1                      MR. SPEKTER:      Asked and answered.
2                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                              1 3
Q      In other words, I asked you'about d
Mr. McDowell and Mr. Parker and Mr. Black, and you said 5    that they had given you some information at'some time in i
6      the past.about what they believed to be the practice in                    j 7      the industry. And I asked you whether this was also a.
I
      .                  a      topic of others' conversations, namely'a function of l
9      testing.
l 10          A        It may have been.
End 12        11 12                                                                                  ~
l.i 13 14 15 16 17 18                                                                                            I
                                                                                                                  'l 19                                                                                            I 20 21                                                                                            l s
22 i
23                                                                                            )
24                                                                                            !
1 25                                                                                            l
                    *                                                *-          . ,, e ene    ,e, e
 
                      . , , . , . , csv1r w    4 -e    -      >                    -    -
M<
3    .        s..-          -- y  -
                                                                                      ~      -
122 1-sn-1 1
i 4
1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:  (Resuming)
                                      ^
2                q                  '}wouldyou  turn.to page five:of your 3      affidavit?
d A        (Witness complying)                                        '
5 Q        I call your attention.in-the middle of-the-6                                                                                  -3 page to a phrase, "In~the normal scheme of tusting."          Do 7      you see it?
8              A        Yes.
9-Q        What do you mean by the normal scheme'of 10      testing?
11                A        I mean in the normal procedure for testing.
12 Q      What normal procedure for testing?
13                A      A test has_sp'ecific requirements;and in order Id to conduct that test, that would be normal ~ scheme of-15      conducting that test.
16 Q      On what do you base your assertion that it'is-17                                                                                      9 normal as. opposed to a typical or abnormal?                                  l 1
18                A                                                                      i I am going to' read the phrase here to ~see what              )
I' context it is in.
20                        Please do.
Q i
21                A        (Witness reviewing document.)
22                        All right. The sentence that it is. enclosed in-          l 23 specifies under normal ~ scheme of testing, craft personnel-24
                    . would carry out the physical testing under the direct                      'l
                                                                                                .:- l
        ' 25 supervision of the STE who is present in the field at the                        I l
l l
I
 
                                                  ~
a .
                            ...sQ          ' -
k                .;    };c      N 5 9 & .E. .                                        x.I ^
u..                        {Q*a[_ .  . . . .    . .        .                                              r23
                                                          . f. ' ~ gxy
                                                                            - ^'
yp"' .. - -
13-2                                                      -
l time of testing.        That is consistent with my previous l                  2 experience and was told to me by other system engineers 3
also and it is consistent with the beliefs of the plant                                                              ,
d                                                                                                                                I here but yet it is not performed in that way.                    ' Upper                                                i a
5 level management says that you should do t h i s ', but when it                                                        l '
6 gets down to the field level.it actually does not. happen.                                                              !
7 Q      You say "your experience."            Do you mean your 8
experience at' San Onofre?
9                                                                                                                              'f A    - Yes.
10                                                                                                                                  l Q      Where you performed the function of an STE7                                                            1 11 A      Correct.
1 12 Q      When you say the experience'of fellon workers, 13 to what experience do you refer?
14 A.      To their experier-- at other. plant sites that 15 they have worked at.                                                                                                      i 16 Q      To what workers do you refer to, sir?
A      I do not remember.
18 Q      What particular plant experiences did they                                                              j 19 relate to you that gave you reason to believe that you                                                                    q 20 could conclude that there was a normal. scheme as you have                                                            li 21 described here?                                                                                                            i 22 A      1 do not remember the exact plant sites at this                                                          '
3 time.      I do know that Palo Verde is another one of the 24 plant sites which craft personnel do not perform testing.                                                            i 25 Q      How do you know that, sir?                                                                                .
    ~.                                                                                  .
i I
 
                          . : .g        n .pq q :-        o 4 . ' ., - .. ~u.    - . . . . . m. :,+% -6      ., 4 :  ,
                                                                                                                .    . r.
                                                                                                        '124-  -+''
                                                                                                                          ?
I A  By speaking with' personnel on that site and-2 from that site.
3 Q  When you say speaking with personnel from that d
site, are these people with whom you became acquainted at 5
San Onofre?
6                A  Yes.
7 Q  Were they~ discussions that you.had with'them 8
held while you were employed at San Onofre?
9 A  Yes.
10 Q  Did you visit the Palo' Verde site?
                                  -11                  A  No, I have'not.
12 Q  Did you ever observe any of the procedures.in 13 practice at the Palo Verde site?
Id A  No, I did not.
15 Q  When you say'that that is the normal. scheme-of 16 testing consistent with the procedures at Comance Peak, what 17    do you mean?
18                A  It is stated by upper level management;that 19 testing shall be performed under the supervision of the'STE. .
20 but yet under several' cases the STE is not presentiduring the 21 testing and in some cases he may not even be on 'the: site 22 during the testing.        If --
23 Q  When~you say --        I am sorry.
24                A'  If you go into the paragraph above that, it 25 specifies a reference in ANSI 45.2.6 which automatically h-
 
                                                                                    ~
                                                                                          ~
y                .; c                    ;;g, Q.                    -  ' '
Is.Q[g;  -
                                                                                                                  ;f        .h 5sj Q- Q me                                  .1 .',
13 4                                                          p.~                                .
y 4
I states that there are certain qualificat' ions for personnel                      ,
2 who perform testing which craft personnel are not eligible                        '
3 for in the fact that-they do not have the background or 4    the knowledge' level for it.
5            Q        When you declared here that it was " stated i
6 by upper level management," what did you mean?                                <
7            A        I mean that I would bring problems to upper level 8
management saying that STE's are not out in the field with.
l''
9 the craft performing the test and the upper level management 10    would'say, "Well, they should be."
11 Q        Would?you identify who in upper _ imrel management 12 made chese statements, when, where and on what basis?
13            A        The person was Dick Camp-and Art London and Id    possibly Tom Miller'was involved in that:and the situation 15 is identified or outlined in the affidavit of an STE who was I 16 not present during the re-testing or functioning of an alarm 17 circuit a'd during tnat re-t sting and.functiortng cables                      i i
18  or wires      ere actually lifte        and rolled in ords* -to cause 89 the alare to function without the approval of'tb STE                        1 20    because o      the fact that the STE was not'there aed thereby 21    he had nc      witnessed any portion of the testing.          I brought 22    it up to      .rt London's attentoon as.to who the STE was and              -!
23 the exact test documentation'that was affected.
24            Q        So that Dick Cam', Art London and Tor:diller 25 are the p ople to whom you r fer when you talk about-upper-e                                '
~ _ _ _ - . _ _ . - - _ . - . - - - _ - _ _ _      . _ - - _ . _
 
                        .,3                                      , , . 744,.~ .wci. . -      -&                  +                      -+.- %                    -9 :
                                                                                                                                                                                                          '-' y 126'
    'S 4
I              level management?
2                        A      Correct.-
3                        Q      It would be your testimony that those three d
individuals concurred in.your view as to.what,the normal 5                  scheme of testing is and should be?
6                        A Those three individuals concurred that: the STE 7
should have been out-during that performance of the testing 8                and.they also concurred that-the STE should be ~ out in the 9
field with the craft personnel during the performance of to                      functional testing which this did fall into the' category of 11                      functional testing.
12                                    MR. DAVIDSON:  Would the reporter please read
                                                                                                                                  /                                N 13                      back the question?- I think you will',                                                          ,that Id                      wasn't responsive to my question.                              ~~                          ~
15 (Whereupon, the reporter read back the previous 16                        question.)
17 MR. DAVIDSON:  Mr. Reporter, it may help when 18 we received an unresponsive answer and I ask.you to re-read-19 the question to omit repeating the unresponsive answer but 20                        merely'to repeat the question so that we can receive the 21                        answer to that particular question.                  I will rest'te                            a  the 22                        question.
23                                        MR..SPEKTER:  I would request that the answer be
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .{
i 24 read, too, to determine whether it is, in fact, unresponsive l
25 I believe in that instance the answer was responsive but I l
  '                                                                                                                                                                                                                      s i
 
q' ' .                    , c. J-    .Q'WL47 '                  ,W ~ ~ % ~ ~          j
                                                                              . . . . .            ..        .. 127          <1 13-6                                                                        gc                                              !
J l
I I                                                                                            1 won't have any opposition to his' answering.it again.                                      )
2                                                                                            '!
BY MR. DAVIDSON:          (Resuming)                                    f 3
Q.                  -
is it your testimony._that eachlof'
                                  '                                  /
those three individuals agreed with you that.or concurred 5
with you    't h a t the normal scheme of testing is as you.              4 6
describe it'in that one' sentence. namely that craft personnel    ~
I will carry out the'' physical testing under the direct l.
  .                              8                                                                                      I:
supervision of an STE who is present.in the. field.'at the                      -o time of the testing, that they agreed that that was the; 10 normal scheme of testing in the nuclear industry?.                                  I A      'Yes, as identified in that one page of the                        ,
I.
12
                                    - affidavit.                                                                        !
13 Q      No, sir.      That is-not my answer, not ~as to what.
l I'
you were searching -- I am sorry, just as to what is the 15 normal scheme of testing.
16 A        1 do not know.        I_did not ask them what the normal II industry standard was.
Is Then they'didn't have a chance to. concur if.you
                                                                                                            ~
Q l'
didn't ask them what their opinion was, did they?-
20 A      Okay. 1.do not know.
21 MR. SPEKTER:. I believe he testified --
22 MR. DAVIDSON:          No.      Counsel.is trying to 23 instruct the witness as to how to be.responsivo. 'You hav'ei 24 tried    it.. I have tried it.          Neither. of us have been 25 particularly successful.              The question was, did-they concur x
1 L.----------.---._-..__:-
 
  ,,- 4 w
                      .,1    ._
                                    .. j ..        .1 ..    ,                :
                                                                        . . r . ; . , ,._ 3 .;              . . .
I'28 '
4 i1 in-your view that this was the normal schemefof testing.'
f          ~%
2  This'is simple English,                      )and 1you'are going-to'be.
3 here aflong time if you'are.not responsive to these questions                            ,
d THE WITNESS:    I do not'know.                                                        !
          .5                      BY MR.;DAVIDSON:. '(Resuming).
6            Q      All right.. So'the. answer is they did not, concur.
7    in your statement?
          '8            A      The answer is I do not know.
9            Q      Did you askLthem?-
10              A      No, I did not.
11                                                                                                            }
So, thereforepgyou have no basis for' suggesting.
Q l
12    that they would concur.
13            A      I misunderstand the question.          Are we t a k'i n g
                                                                                                    ^
                                                                                                                      'j la the question with reference to this one incident or are we 15 taking the question with reference to all other nuclear, l-      16    power plaits? -
1 17              Q      All right. Th a t . i s la legitimate question.
18 You see to be intermixing in here.
A
                                                          ,.          -5 19            Q      Not at all. You see,                  I you have_tried 20 to clothe your rather limited experience in the industry 21 with the axperience of others that you say has~been imparted-22    to you.      You have tried to bolster and verify your responses 23 by resort to other people's knowledge'and not your own.
2a                      MR. SPEKTER:    I object to counsel's' posturing of-25      the record.
1 sh.
i (4
l k'                                                j
 
e    .w ..          .WP    y            , ,W        .,v    ,{ .
                                                                          .    ~~~ ~ g :          .
                                                                                                          .1, g.i 119 '
(        13-8 n
1 MR.JDAVIDSON:      I am sorry.        I am going to explain 2
the question because.he asked for clarification and I am going to explain it to him.        .I don't him to ever'think' d
                      -that I am asking any questions that he doesn't understand.
5 1 am going to explain it.
6 BY MR. DAVIDSON:        (Resuming) 7 Q      That is what you have attempted to do.                        Throughou:
8 your affidavit you have made declarations about industry, 9                                  '
                                                                                                      ~
standards, industry practices, practices;at other nuclear-10 sites and here is'another instance of that.. Here.youchave I'
declared what the. normal scheme of~ testing is xn the industry.
12 namely that craft personnel will carry out the physical test-13 ing under the direct supervision of an STE who is-present in 14 the field at the time of testing.            That is what you'have 15 declared.
16 Now I asked you what your basis for that'was 17 and you said, "Well, it is my experience at' San Onofre."
18 All right, we have heard that.
19                                                                                                            <
I said, "Is there any other basis?"                      You'said,                      ;
o "Well, that is'what I was told by upper management."                          So.then 21 we find out who the upper management who said that this was                                          i 22                                                                                                            \
the normal scheme of testing.        Then you told us that that w a s , . !.
3 Dick Camp. Art London and. Tom Miller.              So I asked you whether 1 24                                                    -
ii' t
they concurred in your view that this war'the normal scheme                                      'i 25 of the industry at which point you gave me a relevant i
  ~
l                                                                                                                            1 t
I                                                                                                                            i l                                                                                                                            l l
l
* _      _ _ _ _ _ _ .            __________________a
 
                                                                ..s e : - - m .u ? ~ - ,          ,w.      e w. .        .u    .
                                                                                                                                    ,.y        ,,
4,  * -Q .          +''                                        .
130-4 1
response that was unresponsive to the question asked.            So 2
3 we repeated it to you and what we found out is after we repeated it to you'that you..in point of fact, never made-l that statement to them or sought their advice on tha t -
5 6'
or sought their concurrence.in your opinion.
7 Therefore,'what we determined was that, in' fact, 8
at-least whether they' hold that. opinion or.not,'they-did;not 9
impart that to you and that was-th'e question.
10 A      I~did confide with-them and question'them as to the usage of STE being present in the field of functional 11 testing at this. site.
12 13 Q      You asked them about this one particular incident, le that is what you brought up to them and that is something that we are going to get.into.
15 16 A
Incidents similar to this in general. LWe went into functional t e s t i".g . I said functional testing as a 17 whole, not functionaA testing, one incident.
9 18 I
Q      I see.
19 20 A
They specified functional testing is to be                      .
super 71 sed by the STE.
21                                                                        '      '
22 Q      Did they indicate to you how that supervision could be undertaken?
23 A
2A It would have to be undertaken with the STE 25 present in the field during the time of the testing.
Q      Would that individual have to be actually
 
                                            " ;5:-          .;            9;        yw.      ,
:- a  m;. _
                                                                                                                          .g;~.  ;    ygg ?;
_    ._          _                                  _ ;              131-13-10 s  .w            , p' ': ,                                  -
I
                                                                      . witnessing the testing bh looking over the shoulder of the 2
craft person?                                                                                                                    '
3          A          Yes.                                                                                                  ^
d Q            That is their view?
5          A            Yes.
6 Q            If they testified that that is not- their view,.                                                        l 7  they would be mistaken?
1
                          .                                      8          A          I would believe so.                                                                                        !
Q          In other words, you:are right and the three of-                                                          ,
10    them are wrong if they.. state that?
11 -
MR. SPEKTER:      Objection.
12 MR. DAVIDSON:        T.think that is-a fair question.
13 MR. SPEKTER:      I don't.
Id                                                                                                                              1 MR. DAVIDSON:        If he wants --                                                                    ;
15 MR. SPEKTER:      He can't testify to what: their                                                        I 16 statements will be or what his conclusions to'their 17 statements will be.
18 MR. DAVIDSON:        I think he can' testify-that if I'
they don't confirm what he now has testified to that they 20    must be mistaken, either that or'he is mistaken.                                                                            I 21                        THE WITNE5,:      I believe that there 'is eve'n 22                                                  ~
possibilities of' start-up' memos which were generated 23 indicating that system test engineers will be present' 24    during functionalitesting.
25
                                                                                        'BY MR. DAVIDSON:        (Resuming) h
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . = _ _ _ _ _ . _ ___ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ .              _      ._.                  _                                  _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ .        _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _
 
e . u.,      . ms    ,3    .. - w n.
: 3                        - -
132 1
                                                                                  ?
I Q      Have you seen those start-up memos?
2        A      Yes. I have.                                    l 3
Q      Do you have copies of those start-up memos?
d A      No, I do not.
S 6
ws      7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19                                                                                  ,
1 l
20                                                                                  i 21 22 23 1      24 25 l
f
_ ._ j
 
                                              ., Q      ;
sa.        [ ~ LQ-M . '%T i          ,    ;~    Y ~M
                                                  . , - .                  _ . . . . . .        -.  .                  133 fc141b1-          e;-
1 BY.MR. DAVIDSON:
2                Q    (~~-                  . turn to page 6 of your' affidavit.
3      And I want you to read, to yourself, the sentence that a
starts with -- only but one word on page 6 and. carries over -;
5      to page.7 and~ concludes the paragraph.
I o
And when'you have completed that, would'you                    _
7      look1up at met i
8                        (Witness peruses document.)                                }
9                A      Okay.
10                Q      That sentence reads."This practicc is-11 also not consistent with my expe11ence.in tha industry, 12      where it is preferred to have one'STE responsible for-13      an entire system."
t 14 When-you s t a t e , "with my experience'in the 15 industry, where.it is preferred", to what 49 you refer?
16    What is the basis for your statement?
17 (Pause.)                                                  I t-t 18                A      I would like-to have you repeat the question-              1 19      one more time.
l.
20                Q      The question was what was your' basis for 21      the statement that you made there?                  -
22                A      For the entire statement,' including the                          R 1
j 23      starting ~from "this practice is also not~ consistent'with-
                                                                                                                                      'l 24      my experience in the industry?"'                                                    '
25                Q      Well, what'I'm really asking.about is what i
i
 
                                          . . n . :.. .n              ~          g a          v. ',
                                                                                          '134 i2 4
1 experience, in i the industry, what preference are we talking, 2    about?
3            A      Previous-. nuclear. power' plant experience,-
                -4    which has already been documented and information'obtained 5    from fellow workers.
6            Q      And when you say "where it'is preferred" do-7 you mean that it's not consistently done, based on your 8    experience elsewhere?
9-(Pause.)
10                    MR. DAVIDSON:        Inould like.the record to 11 indicate that t'here is extensive l pausing between the:
12  questions and the answers.
13                    MR. SPEKTER:      I doubt that's. appropriate-14  representation at all.
15                    MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                              ~
I think it is, in view of the 16 fact that I've heard, on several occasions, Mr. Spekter,                              ;
17  you complain about the length of this examination.                It would 18 be a great deal quicker, if we had one responsive answer                                !
19 and we didn't have these really rather lengthy pauses between 20    the question and the      answer.
21 I don't want to, in any way, inhibit the 22    witness from thinking about his responses, butfif he has'                              l 23 to concoct a response while he's here we're going to take j
24    a long time to get the answers that he needs.
25                      MR. SPEKTER:
l I object.to that characterization.
l                                                                                                          4
                                                                                                          .I k
8 l
r,                                                                          __      _.-________________U
 
9                              ,3 :yrv~;qqp                            3
                            .. -                                                                            1 135 fc141b3 c .;
b.
1 MR. DAVIDSON: Do you have an answer for~us?-
2                  THE WITNESS:  Do you want to repeat the                              l
              .3    question again?                                                                    .i  '
d MR. DAVIDSON:    I'm going to start over je -              ~
5 again and we'll repeat these questicas one by'one (                                ,
6 and there is no possibility.that we'will. leave this room 7
until you answer all the questions.that are appropriat'e i
B or relevant to this discovery examination,.
5 9
MR. SPEKTER:- 1 object. .Counselsis badgering _l' 10    the witnese and I request that he not do so.          The client 11 1s making a good faith attempt at answering the' question.
12 If he does not' understand, he is' stating ~that he'does.not 13 understand and'I would request that counsel be indulgent:
id in his request'that ha be made aware of what : exactly the
                                                                                                          -1 15  questions are?
{
16 MR. DAVIDSON:    I am sorry if I did not appear                        j 17  to be indulgent to                                                                  I' !
the witness.and I.certainly will try to be' {
18                                                                                            I now and in the future.      And.at any time, Mr. Spekter, if you                        d 19 feel that I'm not being so, or you-feel.that the witness 20 is in any way not clear or does not understand the-questions,                            ;
i 21 feel free to voice'that view and help:me explain it.to him.
22 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23              Q      You did' read'the sentence'to-which I gatherJ                          l e
2d                                                                                            i you refer, didyounot,(~                - -
25                                          /                                                  !'
A      Yas,.I did.                                                    s l                                                                                                          '
i i
i s.
 
                                    , , _        .,..,,.y  a;,  -
x-      , .--        -    -
                                                                                                    ~n          ,      .
* 136  5'-
Ib4-4 1
Q          And that is a sentence in your affidavit, 2      to which you're.already sworn?
3                A          Correct.
d Q          Now, you made a statement relative to the 5
practice that is the subject of this sentence, that it is 6      --
and it's a practice apparently of the one you observed:
7 while employed at Comanche Peak. And you say "This is 8
also not consistent with my- experienc e in the industry."
9 And my question is, what experience-do you 10      refer to?
11 A          Previous nuclear power experience.
12 Q        -And that previous power experienceLas the
                                                                        ~
13 start up engineer was gained at'the San.Onofre plant?
14                                                                                4 A          Correct.
                                                                                                                                ]
15 Q          And you say "where it is preferred" is the to      next phrase, is that not right?
                                                                                                                              't 17 A          Yes.                                                )
18 Q          And you say "where it is' preferred" and you          l 19 mean that there is a preference for a different procedure 20      at San Onofre?
21                                                                                  !
A          Yes.
22 Q          But when you say there was a preference,-you-23 mean that it was not always adhered to?                                    i l
24 (Pause.)
l                                          25                A          No,~it was always. adhered to.
l l'                                                                                                                              ,
4 e
 
        ' 4" 7.py .            .,  ... L        '
                                                        >'        e.        . c;? .:V --je.~a3 W y y ~,,    -
: s. ,e                                  .-
                                                                                                -Q-
                                                                                              - . e. 13 7
        .fc141b5                                                    .        -
T1-e i
Q      Well, then what did you mean by "where it 2      is preferred?"
3 A      Well, San Onofre has -- let's take the d
definition of STE . System. Test Engineer, which means he 5
is in charge of a system.      And at San Onofre you had one 6
STE in charge of a system.' Nobody else could work in'that 7
system.without that STE's approval.
8 At Comanche Peak that is not the case.
9 Several people can work within the system of another STE 10 without his knowledge.      It has been done.so several times 31 and thereby forcing the condition that the STE loses'.
12 knowledge of where his system is at the time or the 13                                                                    '
condition of his system.
Id Q      Is there a responsibility, of those'.STEs 15                                                                                    i to coordinate with others?                                                  l 16 A      There is a responsibility, but'it~is not 17 adhered to.
1 18 Q      But if it is not adhered to, that would be l'
because the people involved are not performing the 20                                                                                      i responsibility posed upon them?                                                l 21 A      It is because management is not. enforcing ^
22 the people involved to adhere to it, l
l                          23 l
Q      When you say management is not enforcing it.
L                          2d      what do you mean?
25 A      Supervisory persennel. .                                  .j s
___        _m.___. __.
 
b6 >                                                                                138 J
                                                                                                .f 1
Q      On what dotyou base thit statement?
2                A On the fact that-several times-the incidents.
3 ver6 brought up to supervisory personnel, that somebody else d
is working within somebody else's system without the other 5      person's knowledge.
6 Q      'Did you bring up such. situation?
7 A      Yes.
8 Q      Are they mentioned in your affidavit?
9 A      'Yes, the aux relay rack, which I belteve.is' 10 referenced as a prime example, 11                                                                                                  l Q      Wel, sir. I'we read-this affidavit and what 12 you refer to is the' fact that it is a permanent practice                                      l 13 for others to work-on that, but it says nothing about:whether Id or not people fie,1ded their responsibility to coordinate with 15 others, which you told us is part of the job ~ requirement.
16 So I take it that it isn't mentioned here.                                  .]
17 or are we going to have one of these debates,:as to.what you 18 think is insinuated?
                                                                                                            ')
19                                                                                                      i (Pause.)
* 20                A      .I would have Co read over the proced'ure 21 again to see if it is mentioned in there or not.      You are.
22 requiring me to remember, word for word, the. affidavit.from-                                  j 23 one minute to the other.                                                                      'l 24
                      .Q      1 am not requiring you to remember it word 25                                                                                                    '!'
for word from one minutt to the'other.      I merely point out-1 5J i
_.._mm      . _ . . _ _ _ . -'
 
                                                                                                  ,n
                      . .w x.        .
v-  m . .~      ., ?
                                                                                                        ;i
                          . g-                    -
u,_    Q.p:.
7 g: s=
139
    -141b7
                                /        N I
toyou(                                        '
pthis'is your sworn testimony.              This is 2                      /.
supposed to be your testimony.and your statement.              And you' 1
i 3
stated that you swore to'it.
d Therefore, there is somewhat of'a presumption-j,,
5 here that you are at.least familiar with it.                                f
                  -6                                                                              .: !
A      I am.                                                      l 7
Q      And it's contents.        Why don't you read'the                      ,
paragraph here and see if you mention'any' incidents where
                                                                                  ..        .    .Ii you brought:to the attention of'managemen't<the' failure of to an STE to coordinate with his colleagues with respect'to~ the 11 system, 3
end14      12 13 14                                                                                i i
15 16 17 18 19 q,
20                                                                                          4 21 22 23 24                                                                                          ,
1 25 i
i
_ - . . . _ _ _ - __--___ = _:__.          a
 
Q ,,      r  -w        of          .
:      -    -  =                                    '
5-4 I
(Witness perusing.a document per' instructions 2
from Counsel Davidson.)
3 MR. DAVIDSON:          I'' t h' ink'. we have to go back d
on the r e c. o r d .      You.had some six or seven minutes to 5
discuss that paragraph.                                                                                            4-6 MR. SPEV*ER:        We have had three-' minutes.
7 MR. DAVILSON:          .I'm sorry.
8 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
Q                              have you reviewed that 10 paragraph?
II A            May we'have the question repeated one'' time?-
12 r              ~
Q        ,
I would be able to read to -C.                                                .
                                                                                                                                                -)
13 you the question.--
Id Mr. Reoprter would you read back the' 15 question, please?
16 (The reporter read the record:as requested.)
17 THE WITNESS:          No.
18 BY MR. DAVIDSON.
W Q            It is not there?                                                                                    i 20                                                                                                                                      !
A            No, it is not there.
21                                              g                                      i                                    ,
Q                              do you know__ the professional v            -
22 background and qualifications of Dick Camph.                                                                                    {
23 A            No, I do not.                                                                                      1 24 Q            Do you know whether he is a graduate-25                                                                                                                                      1 engineer?
4 0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _[___.__  - - - - - - - - - - - - - -    -
 
15j ec2 :
141 I
A      'No,  I do not.
2                                                                                  3-Q        Do you believe'him to be?
3 MR. SPEKTER: Objection.'    Asked ~and d
a n s we r'e d . -He stated he doesn't know.
5 MR. DAVIDSON:    Well, I would~like to get his?
6  3,ig,f,                                                                  ,l-7 MR. SPEKTER-    I think his belief is                    ,
8 irrelevant.      He has answered the question.      He: doesn ' thknow.
MR. DAVIDSON:    It is a. discovery depdsition.
10 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
33 What is your belief?
                                                        ~
Q
                  '2 A        I'm act sure'--
13                                                                            '
Q        What is it you.are not sure ' of ?:                  -
I'                                                                                  I' A
He'could possibly hold that position.without-[
II an engineering degree, and maybe he d'oes have'an    ~
                                                                                                  - l-16                                                                                  i.
engineering degree.        I don't know,                                    !
17                                                                                          !
Q        Do you know his professional background as 18 opposed to    his education credentials?-                              : J I'
A        No, I do not.
1 20                                                                                          1 Q        Do.you know whether.he has been employed                        1 21 in the nuclear power indsutry at projects other than-22 Comanche Peak?
A        No, I do not.
24                                                                                        'l Q        Do you know~the educational errdentials,                          l l
25 of Tom Miller?                                                          -
1
                                                                                          +
'k.
                                                                                                            'l
_  =_--
 
    . 1:
142 4
I A      No, I do not.
2
                            -Q      Do  you know whether he hastbeen employed 3
in the nsclear industry prior,to his employment engagement a
at Comanche-Peak?
5 A      NO, I do not, b
                          .Q        Do you know his professional experience?
7 A      Outside of Comanche Peak, no,.I do not.
8                                          .    .
Q      Have you ever asked Mr.. Camp what-his 9
background was?                    ,
10' A      No, I did: not.
11
                          'Q      In these conversations you were having 12 with him with respect to your views a, s to?the proper.
procedures and his views, did you ever ask.htm on'what he la based his opinions?
15 A      No, I didnot.
16 Q      May I ask you to respond-to the same
          ;7 questions with respect to Mr. Mi l.l e r .
18 A      No, I did not.
19 (s    Q      Yoa never asked him?
20 A      I would'like to bring'up t h'a t the -- well --
21                                                        :
Q      You don't have to listen to your counsel 22 when he tries to s top you?
23 A      I didn't even see *the counrel.    'The point-I 24 in fact was no, I was thinking of something, but I wish 25 not to bring it up right now.
1 m
I F.
 
jon4-                                                                                  . ,
143 .;
Q      Well, what were.you thinking?
2                                                                                        -!
A 1 don't even remember now since the argument .                  !
3                                                                                      !
started.
d                                                                                        l Q      What argument?
5 A      Well, your objection.      It automatically 6
confuses or breaks my concentration, with the bickering.1 7
Q      I don't know what'you are referring to.
8 B; rkering. Was there bickering,~ sir?
9                                r No gr .            do you know -- if you want' 10                                                                                      ,
to suggest that'there was bickering. your counsel said II nothing other than he~movedI h'i s han'd to shush you.        And-I        .
12 just pointed out that I didn't think'it was proper 'and to      7 I3                                                                                      4 cut it out now.
Do you characterize that as. bickering?
14 MR. SPEKTER:    I note that:I did not.
15 move my hand.co shush him in any way. ,
16 MR. DAVIDSON:    Unfortunately the record
          'I cannot reflect your hand movement, so I would accept'that.
18 Maybe that.is my characterization, but a hand movement-I' I certainly perceived.
20 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
21 Q      In any event, did you ask Mr. Miller about 22 his professional background or his qualifications?
23 A      No, I did not.
d 24 Q        Would your conversations with Mr. Lukhn --
.        25 well, I will strike that.
5
 
ni;m t> 3                                                                                                ,-
Jl 144.        '' ql 1
t i
                    'I Do you know the educational background of                    ~j
    '              2 H
Mr.HLuken?
3                                                                                            i "A        No,LI do not.
4 Q-          Do youtknow what hisEprofessional-5                                                                                  .
qualifications and ex'eriencelare?
p s                -
                                      =A      No, I do'not.-                          ,
7 Q. Do you know whether he has-been-emp1oyedl
                                                                                      ~
in the nuclear power industry. prior to his current:
                    '                    ^
engagement as a    supervisor of?yourslat-Comanche Peak?'
10 fMR . SPEKTER:    Asked and Snswered.
11 MR. DAVIUSON:    ,No, not wit'h respect  to Mr. Luken.
13 MR. SPEKTER:      He has answered that he 14 doesn't know his background-in any way, shape, or form.
15                                                                                          .l BY.MR. DAVIDSON:
16 Q      In conversations you.had.with Mr. Luken 17 when you express your concerns. based on your experience                          '
18 at Comanche Peak, did      you ask him what his experience was?'
19 A      No. I did not.
20 Q      Do you know the educational credentials of 21                                                              a        c John McDowell?
22 A      No,-I do not.
23 Q-    Do you know the professional-experience of                          'l 24 Mr. McDowell?                                                                            i 25                                                                                                !
A    No, I do not.
                                                                                                              'I 4
i
                                                                                                                  .I J'
d
  .-      ,                                                                                                        I l
o
________.___--____uu__----                    __                                                                ~1
 
:Jon6                                                                                          145 1
Q          Do you know the. educational' credentials 2
of Jeff Black?                                                                        '
3 A            I w6ul'd like to back up.to John-McDowell'.
d                                                                                                k I do n o t' ' r e m e m b e r '. I must say that he did not: tell me'whacE.
l 5                                                                                                i bis background was for we'may not'have spoken;over previous-                              '
6 job sites t h.r t . he had.
I do not remember at this time.
I Q          Do you know the' educational credentials of.
8 Jeff-Black?
(Pause.)
to A
I do not remember at this' time.
11 Q          You knew them at-one time?
12 A'          I believe so.
13                                                                                                  I
                                                                                    -Q          Do you know his professional. experience?
Id (Pause.)
15 A
I know some of his professional experience.
to Q          Would you please tell u- what you ~ k n o w .. o f II Mr. Black's              ofessional experience?c 3
18                                                                                                    l A
I know that Mr. Black d I come from San 19 Onofre Nucle              Power Plant.                                                    1 20 Q          Did you know him at tha>- plant?                  '!
21 A          Briefly.                                                    I 22                                                                                              s Q        Do you know whether he        usLemployedLat any    '
                                                                                                                                                            -l 23 other plant
: sides San Onof re?
4!
If 24                                                                                                    3 A            I.do not know,                                        ?-
25                                                                                                    ,
1 l
Q          Do you.know the educati aal'b'ackground of.
l                                                                                                                                                    t l                                                                                                                                                    II l                          '
                                                                                                                            --                    .!Ii e                                  -
i 4
4
 
        ,                                                                                                                                                                                      146:
4-
                                                                                                                                                                                                            -g I
Mr. Parker?                    Dan Parker?
                                          '2 A
I do know that-he'also-came'from San Ono'fre 3
Nuclear Power Plant.
Q  -Did you know him.at San Onofre?
5 A    No.
6 Q    How did you learn t h a t lue had been at San
                                                                                  'Onofre?
8 A~  When I say that I'did.not.know'him. once-
                                                                                  .he came to Comanche Peak it was brought up that_he.had to worked at San Onofre. You have got to~see that I was II working different shifts.
So-our. interaction'there could 12 have been -- I might have recognized.him by sight. but as I3 far as knowing him, no.
14 Q    Do you know the educational background of 15 Ivan Vogelsang?
16 A    No, I do not.
1 II                                                                                                                                                                                  .I Q    Do you know whether'he is a graduate 18 engineer?
10 A    No, I do not.
20                                                                                                                                                                                      .$
Q    Do you know whether he has-a: degree in 21 engineering of any sort?                                                                    '
22 MR. SPEKTER:
Objection.            Asked'and aasvered.                                    l 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                              '
24                                                                                                                                                                                      i Q    Do you know the postion.that Mr.. Vogelsang, 25                                                                                                                                                                                      i had at the Comanc'he~ Peak stte?                                                                                                          '
i
                                                                                                                                                                                                      'l.
1
_____._..___._._.___.______.___________________.._____.________________m_____._.___j
 
                                                                                . map,,-
v ---; . . . :%
                                                                                  %+
jegg                                    '
                                                                                                  . py'
                                                                                                  ~
147 1
A      Mr. Vogelsang changed positions more than 2
once while I was at the Comanche Peek site.
3                                                                                  i Q      Name each of the positions =that~you -knew d
he held while at Comanche Peak site?
5 A      1 know that he was head of engineering and 6
that he'possibly'-- he was-assistant prior to being the 7
head of engineering.
8 Q      Is it your understanding that a graduate engin,eering degree is required to head up .the engineering M) group?                                                                      i 11                                                                                  !
A        Yes, I would believe so.
12 Q        Do you know the prefessiona11 experience of 13 Mr. Vogelsang?
Id A  . No, I do not, 15 Q      Do you know whether he was employed at any 16 nuclear power plant or project prior to coming to' Comanche 37 Paak?
18 A        No, I do not.
19 Q        Do you know the educational qualifications 20 of Mr. Fred Powers?
21 A        No, I do not.-        -  #
22 Q        Do you know his professional experienes?
23 i        No, I do not.
24 Q        Do you know whether he was employed at any' 25 l
nuclear power plant prior to being engaged at Comanche Peak?
ie
  - ~ . -  - - _ -    _ _ _
 
i 148 4
I A      No, I do not.
2 MR. SPEKTER:    I continually object to the 3
relevancy of the questioning, what the educational d
background was, whether this wintess knew the educational 5
background is irrelevant to this particular discovery 6
proceedings concerning his background and his affidavit 7
and his allegations of harassment and intimidation.
8 And I note my obj ection for the record.
MR. DAVIDSON:    So noted.
10 MR. MIZUNO:    The staff would have a II statement and would respond on the record to preserve our own 12 objection at this time.
I3 Staff believes that that examination by Id the GAP is proper,since,                has indicated that some 15 of these people were the basis for'his conclusion that to thre was an industry practice regarding specific
          '7 procedures or practices, and that therefore it would be
          '8 proper to understand whether[              jh ad any basis for believing these witnesses as to whether they could state 20 that they were qualified to discuss with him the existence 21 of an industry          practice.
22 MR. DAVIDSON:    Thank you, Mr. Mizuno.
23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
24 Q    ,
I call your attention to page 2 25 of your affidavit and do you see the last incomplete t
 
                          ..                              w .-
                                . .. .f;.y, _
                                        .,                                                                                  4Wr
                                                                                  ,g    ,
:p j oo 10-                            ..            -                            -      -
149 r
sentence there which I will read to you?
1 1
2 "The tendency of upper level management 3
is to relax standards" -- do you see that?                                                                ,
4                A            Correct.
5                Q            To whom do you refer to when you say upper 6  level management?
7              A Speaking such as engineering, Ivan Vogelsang                                    '
8  and so on.        Speaking with Dick Camp and Tom Miller.                                                '
9 Q            Do you refer to anyone else when you say 10 upper level management aside from Ivan Vcgelsang, Dick Camp 11 and Tom Miller?
12                A            I believe those would be the prime ones.
13 Q            Well, who are the non prime ones?
14 A            You have upper level managemen't consisting 15 also of Ken Luken and Art London.
16 Q            And when you made this statement you 17 meant to refer also to Mr. Luken and Mr. London?
18              A            Not necessarily.
19 Q            Not necessarily?      You mean you did or did 20  not mean to?                                                  '
21              A Ken Luken and Art London are.not in a                                          .
22  position to relax standards.
23                                                            *~
Q              So therefore you didn't mean to refer to 24 them when you said the tendency of upper level management                                                1 25  is to relax standards?
I l
i j
n 6
 
11-                                                                                            150' a
i
:-)
4 1
A              Correct.
                                                                                                                -. )
2 Q
So that we'should cross off Ken Luken?
3                                                                                              i A.            Right.
4 Q            And wefshould cross off Art Lcndon?'
5                A              All right.
6 Q              Do I understandfthe list now to be only 7
Ivan Vogelsang, Dick. Camp and Tom Miller?
8 A              Correct.
9 Q              And would you state;their tendency. . wha t.
10 do you mean by that?
11 Let us ask what the tendency was with 12 Mr. Vogelsang.
13                A Well, the tendency to relax standards was 14 when I identified ferroresonant' transformer problems 15 or associated type instances'to start with considering 'the                                I 16 implementation, the indications that all of the -- or the 17 hassle that he didn't feel that it was even just to start IB      reporting one.                      '
                                                              /
19 Q              Forgive me [                I don't t'hink I    #
20 understood the response. Perhaps it was too technical for 21      me.                                                                  '
22 When you refer to a perceived tendency                            ;
23 on the part of Mr. Vogelsang, are you saying that you' felt 24 that the way he responded to'you with respect to the 25                                                                                                  1 incident you earlier testified to about transf o'rmers ; is                                  I l
l i
i l'                                                                                                                  l l
V            .
1 u___ _ -_ - _ _ - - . _    -          _ . - _ _      -                        _. _ - - . -  --    -- __ --
 
T                                                    '151 f
jon                                                                                                                                              ,
l I
0 that what jeu are referring to?
g 2
A  9 hat I am -- let'- ask -- or you are 3
asking the question what my.istatement or what my reasoning d
for-upper level' management to relax' standards.                                                        You-are 5
trying to ask me where they relax standards; is'that right?-
6 Q  Not quite. You say you didn't say the I
upper level management..                                          First of all we found out who the 8
upper level management you'are referring to is three-individuals and what I wanted to find out was I guess-to                                                                                                                                      1 maybe you are right.                                          We should do it-by the numbers.
l II i
I The first thing I want to do~is.we have.
n 12
!                                            to find out each incidence that you perceive that-                                                                      -
I3 Mr. Vogelsang relaxed standards and then why youLeoncluded
                                'd l
that there was a tendency on his part, so we will have to 15 do it in two pieces.
                                'O                                                                                                                                        i Would you please list for us each                                    I
                                'I instance or incident in which you perceived Mr. Vogelsang
                                '8 to be relaxing standards?
A  Okay. One, dealing with the;ferroresonant                          i 20 transformer problem that there was no 5055E generated                                                                    l I
21 immediately or within a short period Ef time.'It was                                                                      ,
a 22 dragged out over a long period of-time, thereby what                                                              --    >>
23 it specifically requires that if a condition other than'a.
24 5055E must-be generated.-you have to generate that. ~But 25 it was dragged out over a considerably lengthy time.                                                                            j i
                        . . . .                                                                                                  - ~ ~ -
y                            !
l l
  -  ._-      _ _ _ _              - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _- - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -                    - _ - _ - _ _        ___=________:.
 
152
                                                                                                  ? $
I Q    But you are stating that a 5055E 2
was issued.
3 A    Correct.
d Q    But not quick enough to suit you?
5 A
Well, the thing was that Ivan Vogelsang 6
at.one time said that he would not generate a 5055E. I 7
actually had to force him into generating a 5055E against 8
the ferroresonance transformer problem with the insinuation that if he did not write it TUCCO engineering or TUGC0 to results was prepared to write it.
11 Q    I thought that he was the head of 12 engineering, Mr. Vogelsang.
13 A      He is the head of TUSI engineering. There 14 is a TUGC0 results engineering group under the TUGC0 15 management which I also dealt with during this 16 ferroresonance transformer because I had lost power in 17 persuading engineering to write this 5055E. And I used 18 them as leverage because #they reviewed the documenta tion I'
and the engineer there automatically came up and said this                              !
20                                                                                            ;
is an engineering problem; therefore he needs to write a                                j 21                                                        ;                                    !
5955E on it.
* 22                                                                                            I Q      To whom did you speak in TUCCO engineering?
23 A      It was one of the electrical engineers.                              !
24 I do not remember his name right now.                                                  !
I 25 Q      Now, you mentioned another organization that
                                                                                                    ,i l
l J
 
t              si on                                                                                              153 I
would have issued the 5055E. What was the other organization l?
2                                                                                        I A  TUCCO results engineering.                                          j 3
Q  No. Didn't we just cover that?
8 A    Right.                                                            I 5
Q    I thought there were two organizations on l
6 site thatyou mentioned that you felt would have issued the 7
5055E if you weren't able to convince Mr. Vogelsang.
8 A  No, there was just one.
9 MR. DAVIDSON:      Could I have the record                      i 10 reread to see- whether or not he mentioned another, because I could have sworn I htiard you say that you had told                            ,
12 Mr. Vogelsang that TUGC0 engineering and someone else would                --
13 THE WITNESS:    When I specified TUCCO                          .
I'                                                                                      I engineering I was saying the same thing as TUGC0 results 15 engineering and it is basicaHy the same group.
                      'O MR. DAVIDSON:      Why don't you let me have 17 the record read and I will be clear on the point and I can IB go forward.
l' MR. SPEKTER:    I think he has clarified his 20 answer.
21 MR. DAVIDSON:    I am not for a moment 22 questioning the way in which the witness answered the 23 question. I think it was fine. I am merely trying to make 24 sure that I heard his answer properly.
25 (The reporter read the record as requested.)
_      j          ..            .
                                  .q,                                                      m.
end15
 
154 31 4
1 MR. DAVIDSON:  Thank you, Mr. Reporter.
2 e                      ~s      You've heard the response read back to you, 3
s-
                                        )and you've heard a reference to TUGC0 engineering d
or TUGC0 results.                  That is the basis upon which I thought 5
you mentioned two different organizations.                    But it is your 6
testimony now that TUGC0 results and TUCCO engineering are 7
one and the same organization?
8 THE WITNESS:  Correct.
9 MR. SPEKTER:  That was his testimony before 10    the break also.
11 MR. DAVIDSON:  I think it will satisfy me 12 if I get the answer just from the witness, Mr. Spekter.
13 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
14 Q      All right. Now that was one incident in which 15 you felt that Mr. Vogelsang had relaxed the so-called 16    standards.                Is there any other incident in which you feel 17 that Mr. Vogelsang relaxed the standards?
18                          A Not that I can remember at this time.
19 Q        Is that the basis of your statement that there 20 was a tendency on the part of Mr. Vogelsang to relax standardn ?
21 (Pause.)
22                            A Would you repeat the question one more time?
23 MR. DAVIDSON:    If the reporter would read back 24    the question.
25 (The reporter read the record as requested.)                                    )
 
f* ' '                        _ ,gT 155  ;
i 16pb2
                                                                                                                                        ~i I
1 THE WITNESS:            Yes.                              i l
2                      BY MR. DAVIDSON:
i 3              Q      Would you tell me now about, and would'you-4    detail    for me each instance or incident in which you believei 5    Mr. Camp relaxed standards?
6                      (Pause.)
7              A        I cannot bring any to' memory at this time.
B Q-      Did you have any incident or instances in 9    mind when you wrote this affidavit?                                            '
10              A      Yes.
j 11 Q      This affidavit was. executed on June''27th, 12    wasn't it, sir?
13              A      I believe that is the date of it.
Id              Q      And you say at that time'you had an incident 15 firmly in mind as to when you perceived that Dick Camp 16    relaxed standards; is that correct?
17              A      I said that upper level management relaxed 18    standards.
19              Q      Well, we've already concluded from your 20    testimony you've defined upper' level management to include 21  .Mr. Camp; is that not' correct?
o                                    22              A      Correct.
{
l l
23              Q      Therefore I asked you whether you had an                        )
l 24    incident in mind at the time you executed this affidavit in                      !
                                                                                                /'            -
25    which you perceived that Dick                Camp had relaxed'ntandards.        j I
y                                                                                                            . . -.        ?
m
                                                                                                                .,g                        !
4 I
  - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ______ - __ - _                                  _  __ ._____ _          . - _  - _ _ _ _ -_ _ ______ L
 
156 4 .
1              A          It may not have been individually with Dick.
2      Camp. It might have been a      --
speaking with several people, 3
                .such as -- okay, upper level management was making decisions 4
and was given down to the lower personnel that they were 5      making  decisions'such that they might.even relax the 6
stringency of. tolerance standards.on the piping-moving 7
measurements which were done during hot functional testing.
8    where 60 percent had failure rates.
9 They. figured that they might possibly relax 10 those standards in order to get more equipment passing.
11 Q                      'I don't think I understood your 12      response  --
13              A        What I saying is that upper level management 14      dealing with several people.
15              Q        Well, you've already identified for us whom to    you mean t in this statement, and I'm just trying to find 17 out the instances on which you based your conclusion that 18 there was a tendency on the part of the people you identified 19    to relax standards.
20 Now you say that you don't recollect or you 21      don't know, or you may not mean Dick Camp.          I don't kn o w'.
22              A        That meant instances where I brought to 23    [ Dick Camp. Tom Miller.or.both about butt-splicing, that in                  i 24      the reg guide it says that butt splicing should not be 25      allowed. And the first instance that they would say would                1 I
l l
1 e
 
157 16pb4 1
be, it says, should instead of shall and therefore they were 2                                                                                              !
getting into a technical definition.
3 So, that is what I derived that they were 4
lax in technical standards.                                                            '
5                    All right.
Q                    Let me see if I can understar.d                          ,
6    this. Are you referring to a meeting or a discussion you 7
had with Dick Camp and Tom Miller at the same time?                                    '
8              A      I am referring to several meetings about 9
various items throughout my employment that are so numerous to that I possibly -- it would be impossible for me to remember 11 each individual one.
12 Q      We haven't yet asked you to remember each 13    individual one. So far you hcven't given us any.                                  ,
hl                                          /              ''s What I'm asking you,                            ,  and I think 15 you have to understand, it really isn't sufficient to come                          l 16 in and make a broad global statement the way you have and 17 then, refuse to support it with instances.          It just isn't                  !
18 acceptable testimony, it isn't proper in an affidavit.                              ,
19 You have sworn to this, and we're entitled to I
{
20 find out what the particular factual information that underlay 21    your conclusion.      Now if you had no basis for the conclusion, 22    that is something we will find out.                                                i If you had a reason for i                            4 23    it, we would like to know.      It is part of what discovery 24    is all about.
25                                                                                                  I Now you explained the situation with 6
 
158                J' i
                                                                                                                                                        '4 1
Mr. Vorelsang and you gave us the incident frca.which you
  ~
2 inferred'that he had a tendency to relax standards. And then                                                                          -
3
            .I asked;you for the incident or instances with'Mr. Camp.
4
            -And that is where we sort of got bogged down.
5                    You have  now told me.that maybe Mr. Camp 6
and maybe Mr. . Miller together in conversations with you-7 exhibited this tendency and I want torfind out what those                                                                                        i 8
instances and conversations were. .That's all.
9              A      Together and independently.
i to              Q Well, let's take it by the numbers.                                                              Please 11 provide me with the details and description of each incident                                                                                  '
12 you can recall in which you in' conversations along with 13  Mr. Camp perceived him to be relaxing.a standard.
14            A      Procedural questions of.the inadequacies of.
15 the procedures that were brought to his attention were to  addressed by him as being problems but yet never, corrected.
17            Q      Tell me what procedural questions you refer                                                                                      j 18    to?
19              A      Questions concerning that an STE is allowed 20 l
to perform functional testing and in the XCPEE8, which is 21    a    procedure for functional testinguit makes a statement that                                                          !
22 though energized functional testing-is desirable at the                                                                                            ,
i 23 STE's discretion, he may perform de-energized functional                                                                                            a j
24    testing.                                                                                                                                          '
25                                                                                                                                                        !
This problem was brought to the attention of                                                                                      l I
e 1
4
 
                .                                                                        -m 15" j 16pb6                                                                                          1 1
1 Dick Camp, Art London and Tom Miller several times on the 2      fact that you could have a circuit out in the field'that
_{l 3      could actually have passed. testing'but had never been
:s t
4      energized.                                                                  '
                                                                                            -. i t 5                Q      When you say passed testing, what testing' do 6      you mean?                                                                j l
7                A      I mean it. passed the XCPEE8 procedure.
I a                Q    And is that the procedure for prerequisite'              '
i 9      testing?                                                                  l' l'
10                A      Yes. it is.
I 11                Q      Is that the procedure for preoperational' 12      testing?                                                                  '
13                A-    No, it is not.                                  '
14                Q      Do all system      undergo energized--testing to-            1 15    demonstrate system availability and operability in the                    j 16      preoperational test program?                                                .
17              A      All systems are supposed to.                              b' IB                Q      That is the procedure as you understand it?
19                A      As I indicated to Dick Camp and Tom Miller.
I 20      both, there is cases which could possibly pass'through                            j 21 both procedures without being energize.d. functionally tested.                    {
l 22                Q      When you say both procedures.-do you'mean-                      {
i 23      preoperational as well as prerequisite?
                                                                                                  .l 1
24                A      Yes.
i 25                Q      How would such a system escape the required'                    j
                                                                                                  .i
 
y 1601 V
4 4
1 energized testing that is a part of the preoperational.
f
      -2    test program'proceduref 3                    A With the. note instilled into the'XCPEE8 4
procedure, it allows that STE to perform de-energized functional 5
testing, which means that it will not be energizedf--                                                            .I 6                    Q                Not    prerequisite now, we're talking 7  _preoperational.
8                    A                Okay, I'm leading up.          It has already passed                              )
9 through the prerequisite without being energized, functionally y to  ' tested.
Part.of the preoperational' test procedures during.
11 the writing of those procedures was.to ignore certain items                                                          1 12 of the circuitry, such as you did not have:co check backup 13    ind1cating lights.                        Which means that if.they did not check                                      );
14 those backup indicating lights and there was a possibility.
15 also that they had failed to check them during prerequisite, to    1.e.,
doing the de-energized functional test you could have 17    run through both procedures without performing that energized 18    functional test.
19 Q                  When you say both procedures -- oh, I                                                I 20    understand that. You mean a specific test'for the: operational 21    response of the indication lamps.                                                                        -
22                                                                                                                            i But wouldn't it be obvious during the. testing                                      )
23 of the component operations whether the indication lamps                                                                i 24    worked?                                                                                                                I 25                  A                    Wrong.                                                                              J i
1
 
                                                                                                                - i61'-
16pb8 1            Q    .It would not -- so that if the testimony were 2  that the operation response of indication lamps is'obv'ious.              ,
e L
l 3  during tF* conduct of cortponent operations which are' verified.
4  as subsequent preoperar,ional test program, youwould-disagreef 5  with that.
6            A    Correct. Bccause indication lamps"-- like I            j 7  said, there is backup indication lamps.        The. person operating 8  the equipment could be looking and-testing the equipment i
9  during the pre-op test in the' control room where the other-              I
                                                                                                                        .)
10  indicating lamps could be somewhere totally different out it  in the plant'.
12            Q    You say he could be.
13            A      I'm not saying that every circuit-out there 14  has backup indication lights.
15            Q    So in other words, this is just your 16  speculation that this may occur.
end 16. 17            A    Yes.
l IB 19 1.
20 21                                                      '
l                            .
22 23 1                                                                                                                              i l
24 l                                          25
[
h
                            **wes*
4
 
(. e ..,.            .  :.
                                                                                                                      , 1 162        .c4 L
1 c 17-1                      I Q                        What-other incident.or incidents do you have 2
reference to in which you drew'the conclusion that 3
Mr. Camp had relaxed the standards.                                          '
d A                        (No response.)
5 Q                        Let me strike that. I don't think we' 6
finished with this question.
7 So this was the procedural issue you raised 8
with Mr. Camp?                                                                              !
A                        Yes. And Tom' Miller.
10 Q                        And what -- well, now, we were talking about conversations you had only with Mr. Camp, remember?
12 A                        Do we need to repeat it again-for Tom 13    Miller, too?
Id Q                        Of course.
15 A                        (Laughing.)                                                '
to Q                        Well, no (              I don't think you 37 understand.                    If you are going to make some allegations                      j 18                                                                                                    l about what happened with people and without people,_then l'
we have to do it that way.                    If you say you~had conversations 20 with Mr. Camp alone, then we'll ask about the.ones you                              '
21 had alone.                If you had conversations with Mr. Miller alone.
22 we're going to ask about the ones you had alone with 23 Mr. Miller.                If you had conversations and discussions with 24                                                                                                    l the two of them together, we're going to ask about the ones                                  !
25 you had together.
                                                                                ~
l e
                                                                                                                                                .i
 
163, 1
i age 17-2      3 A        Okay.
2                                                                          I Q        Because what we're trying to do is, we're            i; 3
trying . to put date, place, time ~and circumstances to each-of these incidents, because your affidavit doesn't do that.
5 Instead, your affidavit just takes a big, wide paintbrush, i
1 6
one that I'n not even sure you're competent to wield, 7
and paints the whole plant.-
i B
MR. SPEKTER: I object to your characterization          4 of.the affidavit. Please-just ask your questions..              j) 10 MR. DAVIDSON:    Mr. Spekter, you interrupted.
            "    me.
12 HR. SPEKTER:    I apologize for that.              1 33 MR. DAVIDSON:    Thank you.
                                                                                    .I Id MR..SPEKTER:    But I'm trying to smooth            I 15 things along. I request that we just-proceed with your 16 questions and do away with the characterizations..
17 MR. DAVIDSON:    Well, you're quite right that    !
18                                                                                  1 it isn't entirely. appropriate to characterize the                ,          )
            ''                                                                                  I witness' testimony, but he locked so perplexed as to why          l'I i
                                                                                              'I 20 we were insist,ing on detail and why we wouldn't accept                    ,
                                                                                              )
21 these rather broad and global statemen'ts. And'that's                      ;
22 the reason.                                                                1 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:                  ,
r 24                                                                                ,
Q          Do you understand that,g                                  "
25                                                                                !
A          I understand.
e n
____-___-_---_m
 
164 4
                              '3c 17-3                                1            Q                So would you tell me when this. discussion =
2      of the XCPEE8 procedure occurred with Mr. . Camp?f i
3            'A                I do not"kuow t h'e ---I        do-not remember the                                          ,
4      exact time.                                                                                                            i 5            Q                Well,    what was the approximatestime?                                                    d 6              A                The discussion occurred more than once.
7              Q              When did it occur, on what' occasions?
8            A                Within the last eight months.
l 9              Q                How often during the.last eight months?
10                                (Pause.)
A 11                              I would -- the number of. times, I do not                                                    'l
!                                                                  12      remember at this time.
1 13              Q              It was clearly more than once?
14              A              Yes.
j 15              Q            Was it once a month?
16              A              I would say at least average.
17              Q            Maybe more than that?
18              A              Possibly.
19              Q              So certainly no less than eight times.
20              A            l's not going to say definitely.
21              Q            But it's possible.                                          <
22              A            It's possible it could be ten.
23              Q    ,      So you brought up the same question with 24        Mr. Camp on eight different occasions or about eight 25        different occasions?
l
 
165 1
j mgc 17-4      1                                                                        'I A
1 was informed by Mr. Camp that the possibility 2                                                                          i of revising this procedure at a later date was favorable                )
3                                                                        -)
and that he seen the problem, him and Tom Miller both                  !,
                                                  #                                                                          )
seen the problem, but yet they would also identify.co 5
me, " Don't just give me the problem; give me the answer 6
to the problem at the same time."
7 I would come in with the answer, and my 8
answer would automatically be too time-consuming, too drastic of a change at the time, and so forth, to Q        Well, what I'm trying to get at is your
                                                                                              ~                              l II basis for your assertion that Mr. Camp relaxed the standards.!
12 Now you're saying your brought this procedural question to              l 13 him, and he said -- and it's your testimony now on the Id first occasion that he said, "Well, there may be a problem 15                                                                              i there."  Is that your testimony?
i 16                                                                            l A        Correct.
                                                                                                                              )
I7 Q        And he said, "Why don't you write me up the I8 problem and the solution?"
I' A        Correct.
l                                              20 Q        He asked you to propose a solution?
21 A        Correct.                                                  !
22 Q        Did you do thatt 23 A        Yes.
24 Q        And what did he do with your proposal the 25 first time you brought it to him?
m ___-______. - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
l 166 A
4 age 17-5      1 A                                                                                          'l It never made it to him.                                                              ;
2 Q        Why is that?
3                                                                                                        i A        It made it to him.                                                                    '
I made documentated (sic) d copies of a revised procedure to him. I turned in those 5                                                                                                        !
revised procedures to them..and that's where they sat at 6
from there.
7 Q        Now whea you say you made a proposal to him,                                        i B
did you make this proposal in w'riting?                                                              i 9
A        I revised the procedure as he requested.
J 10 They requested that I revise procedures to show or indicate 11 or correct these problems, and I did.                                                                1 12 Q        When you say "they," whom do you mean?                                                ;
            '3                                                                                                        i A        Tom Miller and Dick Camp.
Id                                                                                                          1 Q        I thought that we were talking about an 15                                                                                                            i occasion when you had a conversation with Mr. Camp alone?                                            l 16                                                                                                            i A        Dick Camp, then.
17 Q        And --                                                                                  i l
18 A        Dick Camp would usually palm these situations 19 down to Tom Miller.
20 l
Q        I'm going to objec, to your use of the word                                            j 21    " palm."
22          A        Well  --
23 Q        You mean that he asked his subordinate to 24 deal with the problem?
25          A        Yes.
_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - - - _ _ - - ~
 
i 167
                                                                                                    \
mgc 17-6 1            Q        Was his subordinate your superior?
2 A        One of my superiors.
3 Q        In fact, he was two rungs up the ladder from d
you, wasn't he?
5 A        Correct.
6 Q        Did you submit your proposal for revision, 7
1 or did you s u bm9. t your suggestion,that the procedures be 8
revised to Mr. London before going to Mr. Camp?
9 A        Yes.
10 Q        What did Mr. London say?
II A        I do not remember at - this time. Basically 12 1
it was a request.from Tom Miller, going directly to Tom 13 Miller.' Mr. London was supposed to review them. He felt Id that it was too drastic of a change too, that they would 15 be locked in, you might sty, to -- well, it was specifically 16 stated that they felt that they would become too closed 17 i
in, that they could possibly be reviewed by QA/QC type 18 surveillance and trapped into a corner where they could I'
not get out by having liberal definitions.
20 Q        Are you stating your perception or are you                --
21 A        l'm stating their statement.
22 Q        Who made that statement?
l        23 A        Art London, for one. Tom Miller, for l
24 another. That they felt that my procedure would lock them 25 in too tight as far as requirements.
l
 
168 4
I mge 17-7                  Q      When they say "too tight," too tight for 2
what?
3 A      Such that they felt like they did not want to leave or lose that possibility of perform 1ng the de-5 energized functional testing.
6 Q        But de-energized functional testing was permissible under the procedures, wasn't it, where it 8
wasn't practical to perform it in the prerec?
A        Uh-huh.
10 Q        And you just wanted to change the procedure II entirely?
12 A      No, we will not say entirely.                    There's 13 certain basic concepts to the functional testing.                      It has to be maintained.'
Q        Whose responsibility is it normally to drart 16 procedures for such tests?
A        At previous job sites, it would be a
          '8 designated group. At Comanche Peak, it was individuals designated within the startup organization.
        'O Q        Was there any review of any procedures by 21 other groups within the TUGC0 organization or TUSI or any 22 of t.h e other organizations on site?
23 A        Yes.
        'a Q        Who reviewed those?
25 A        Startup procedures have to be reviewed by a
 
169 mgc 17-8 1    -QA/QC type.
2 Q        Anyone else?
3            A        I don't remember at this time. There are d
several signatures that have to be done.
5 Q        Can you think of who those other' signatures 6
might belong to?
7 A        I do not remember.
8 Q        But I take it that individual startup 9
engineers don't develop their own procedures.
10 A        Correct.
11 Q        Those procedures are developed through an 12 established program of review.
I3              A        Correct.
3d Q        And would architect engineers be among 15 those who review those procedures?
16 A        I don't know.
17 Q        You don't know?
18 A        No.
I' Q        Were you ever employed by anyone  as a 20 job responsibility to develop criteria from NRC 21 regulatory guides or to develop procedures from 22 commitment letters to the NRC7 23 A        I would say yes until the last part, and 24 1 don't understand the last part.
25 Q        In other words, it's your understanding that l
 
1 170      l I,
J    <
l mgc 17-9      1 you were employed.to draft these criteria and to develop.
2 the procedures for use by San Onofre?
3 A  No, not San Onofre.
d Q  You were employed there as a startup engineer.
5                                                          A  Correct.
I 6
Q  You were employed as.a startup engineer at 7
Comanche Peak, were you not?
8                                                        A  Correct.
9 Q  Yet you believe -- well, do you believe that 10 you were hired at Comanche Peak to develop their procedures 11 for them?
12                                                          A  Yes, I was.
13 Q  l see.
Id                                                          A  Because if you will look back in the 15 previous record, I have written several pre-operational 16 test procedures for startup, and that was part of my duties 17 at the beginning.
IB Q  All right. Now when you came to Mr. Camp l'
with your revised procedure, did you show it first to 20                                                                                                                          i Mr. London before you came to Mr. Camp?
21                                                          A 1 believe I gave Mr. London a copy, Tom 22                                                                                                                          !
l Miller, and I'm not sure if Dick Camp received a copy.                                                            {
l          23                                                                                                                          !
Yes, he did receive a copy.                              I 24                                                                                                                        i Q  Did you give him a copy?                                  '
25                                                          A  Yes.
i l
l 1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - - - - - -            -      - - - - ~  ~ - - - -  --'  ~    ~
 
4 '1                                                                            .A
                                                                                                                      'T. 173 mgc 17-10I              Q      So then you gave all three of the individuals 7  you just named. And did you discuss the proposed revised 3
procedure with any of these three individuals?
d A        Yes.
5 Q        This proposed revised procedure was in 6  writing, was it not?
7 A        Yes.
8 Q        Do you have a copy of it?
A        No, I do not.
10 Q        It was not one of the documents you took 11 with you when you left the plant site?
12          A        I do not know.
13 Q        You don't know whether you took it?
Id          A I do not know if it's in with those documents 15    or not.
16 Q      Would you check for us?
17 A        Which documents are you pertaining to?
18 Q        Have you forgotten what the question was l'
only two sentences back?
20          A        Well, you specified documents that I took 21                                                '
with me when I left the plant site.
  *                                                                          /
22 Q        As I said.                -
23
                                                                              ~
                                                                                                                            '1 A
I never addressed that I cook documents with
                                                                                                                            }l 24 me when I left the plant site.
25 Q        Well, I think the record shows that you 5
e
 
172 3
4 17-11    1 responded that you don't know whether it was among those 2  documents.                                                                          i 3                  Are you stating now --
d MR. SPEKTER:  Please finish, counsel. Excuse 5  me.
6                    BY MR. DAVIDSON:
n 7
Q
[                don't want to bandy with you 8  about this. All I'm asking is, do you have a copy of the                          j 9                                                                                        i proposed revised procedure that you submitted?                                          !
10                  MR. SPEKTER:    And my statement was, now 11 that you're finished, was that there's been no testimony                              j
                                                                                                    \
i 12 that he's taken any documents from the job site or any 13 insinuation that he's taken any documents from the job site.
14 If he has, I would request counsel to ask of 15 him if he did take any documents when he left, and if so,                            !
16                                                                                        I if that is among those documents that he did take.
17 l
MR. DAVIDSON:  Well, first let's ask him if 1
18 he has a copy of the proposed revised procedure.
19 MR. SPEKTER:  His answer was that he did                            l 20    not know  and he's already answered that.
21 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
22 Q          But you have documents in which you could 23    look to see if you have?
24        A          I have papers that belong to me, yes.
25 I
Q          And you could look among those documents,
__-__- - ________ 2
 
                                                                            . .                                    . ,o ~e, _ ..,                        :1 off .
t,
__ ..                                                                                                  -1739!
                                                                                                                                                            .i age 17-121    and y'ou might be able..to find it?.
2        A        If.it is there..                                                                                                          I 3                  Thank you..                And now I would like-to'ask you, Q
                                                                                                                                                          .i
:1 d
will-' you look in'those: documents for us,-and'if you-fin'd 5  i t ,- will you produce'it?.
6        A        Yes.
7 Let's take a short' break here...I would.like 8  to talk to counsel.                                                                                                                        ;
9                  MR. DAVIDSON:                    If you wish a~ break,'
N 10                )you'can have it.                                                                                                    '
11'            /    THE WITNESS:                    Okay.                                                                            -l.
12 (Brief recess.)                                                                                                  ; ,. y End 17  13 14                                                                                                                                              1 k
15 16                                                                                                                                          -I 17 18 19 l            20 i
21                                                                                                                                                l 22 23 24                                                                                                                                                l 25 l
                                                                                                                                                            ~
                                        *      +                          e                                - . . ,
i i
j i 9 1
l
 
174          1 1
ibt i
1 (Off the record at 2:25 p.m.)                      I 2
(Witness conferring with counsel Spekter.)
3 (On the record at 2:49 p.m.)
d MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Spekter. I am going to      j 5      regommence the examination of the witness.        However. because 6
of the frequency and periodicity of the breaks. so that j
7
[            )may consult with you, with res'ect to his 8
answers. I am going to ask that the reporter note the 9    time of taking of each of these breaks.                              -
t 10 BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                  "
                                -            s, il Q    g                )because_there  as kind of a        l u            -
                                                                                      ]
12 lengthy break here, could I please ask yoor indulgence              '
13    and have the reporter read back the last          uestion and        j 14    answer?
15 (The reporter read the ree rd as requested.)
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
17 Q                      )did you take a    documents of any  j IB    kind from the plant s i t e'. when you depart !?
19              A        Yes.
20 Q        Do you know the volume of      [cuments you took 21      with you?
i 22              A        You're talking about the q :n t i ty ?
23                                                                              l Q      That's it.
2d              A      No, 1 do not.
25 Q      Was it enough to fill an e . ire box?
 
                                                                                              . . g.        ,
                                                                                                                            ,      -175      '
fcl81b2                                                                                      '
1 A    No.:it was not.
2              Q    Di d you ask anyone to help you remove-the                  h i'
3    documents from the plant site?
4              A      No, I did not.
l 5-            Q      Did'you borrow'r' vehicle.for'the purpose 6
of moving any of those documents from the plant site?-                .(
7              A      No, I did not.                                                    '
8              Q      Do you.have the documents that you; moved 9      from the plant site, at this time?                                        .
                                                                                                                                                            )
1 10              A      Yes      I do.
11 Q      Would your proposed revised procedure, that 12 you submitted to Messers. Camp, Miller, and London, be 13    among those documents?
14              A                                                              '
I do not know.
15 Q      Would it be among so'me other documents?                I-16              A      1 do not know, 17 Q      But-you will look for it?                              i
                                                                                                                                                    !j 18              A      Yes.
4 19 Q      And if you have it you will produce it?
4 20              A      Yes.
21 Q      And could we ask you to do that'by early,                            l 22      next week?                                                                          '
23              A      Yes.
24                                                                                          !
Q      Thank you.
l 25
(                  )vhen you were hired, for your' 1
4
 
_m 176 SAb3 4
1 position at Comanche Peak, were you provided with a 2  job description?
3            A      No, I do not believe so.                        )
d Q    Wac there a job deceription for your position, 5                                                                    d to your knowledge?
6            A    I believe there is a job description?
7 Q      In written torm?
8            A      1 am not sure.
9 Q      You don't know?                                  j 10 A      I do not remember seeing the job description.
Il Q      But you believe that such exists?
12            A      It is usually customary for sites to have 13                                                                      l a job description.
14 Q    Do you know what job description details 15 as your function, as a startup engineer?
16            A      No, I do not.
17 Q      Getting back to your submission of the            i1 l                                      18 revised, proposed procedure, after you submitted that revised      i l
19 proposed procedure to Messers. Camp, Miller, and London, did 20 you meet with anyone of them to discuss it?
21            A                                                  '
Yes.
l i
22 Q      With whom did you meet?
23            A      I. met with all three at separate times, or 24    possibly together.
25 Q    Did you meet with them on more than one
 
l s
17F            )
i fc181bo i
t                                          occasion, to discuss it?
2                                                      A      Yes.
1 3
Q      To your knowledge, did they forward that                                            .!.
d initial proposal to any other reviewing authorities?                                                    I 5                                                      A      No.
6                                                        Q      They did not?
7                                                        A      Correct.
8                                                        Q      How do you.know?
9                                                        A      I said, you asked to my knowledge.'And I 10                                                  said'to my knowledge, no they did'not.
I 11 Q      All right.                                    Now I asked you how do you know 12                                                _that they didn't send it to have it reviewed?
13                                                          A      I do not know that they did not' send it 14                                                to haya it reviewed.
15                                                          O      So your answer is no, you didn't know that i
16                                                they did not have it reviewed.                                    You don't know whether they.
17                                                had it reviewed?
18 MR. SPEKTER:                                  Objection, his answer' speaks 19                                                for itself. His answer is that he did not know what 20 happened, that he did not know that they did send it forward..
i 21 MR. DAVIDSON:                                  Now, I don't want anybody            .
22                                                  to be misunderstood, bu                                                        hou said no, they did 23                                                  not have it reviewed.
24                                                                  MR. SPEKTER:
1 To the best of-his knowledge.
i                                                ' 25 MR. DAVID S0h's                                Let se. rephrase the question
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  'l
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    \
l i
 
178 b5                                                                                                                                                        l
                                                                                                                                                      ?
I                                                                              ,  !
and see if we get this testimony clear.
2 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
3 Q    [              ,do you know whether your              f d
proposed revised submission was forwarded for further                  l 5
review by any one of the individuals j ust mentioned?                '
6                        A        I do not.                                            '
7 Q        Did you ask them whether it had been?
8 (Pause.)
9 A      No.
10 Q  (                Dyou had more than one conversation 11 with respect to these indivduals about your proposed.
12 revised procedure, is that correct?                                      l
                                                                                                                                                            )
13                                A      Correct.
14 l
Q      In those Conversations, with any one of those          i 15 individuals, did they ever indicate that your proposed 16                        revised procedure had been reviewed by any other authority 17 at the Comanche Peak site?
1B                                  A      No, they did not.
19 Q      And you didn't inquire?
20                                    A                                                                i We were still in the stages of discussing                !
21 with each other, as far as the procedures themselves and they 22 were withholding, or told me they were withholding, sending 23 these procedures on up through the chain, or actually 24 signing them to have them start it through to be placed 25 in the revision process because they did not want to do this              i
 
m-                                                                                                          179 fc181b6 1  at this time. They felt that they would more prefer to 2  do it when Unit 2 started.                                                                                                                          .i 3              Q      Did they ask you, at any time, to make a 4
4    further revision of your proposal?        In.other words. 1'think i 1
5  you testified -- and if l*s wrong, please correct me                                                                                    --
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      'that 6  you made several proposals.        Or did.you only.make one l
7  revised, one proposed revision of the procedure?                                                                                                      '
s            A        During this time period, it was.when Art 9    London specifically identified that.                      If I had= time to io    do or find these additional problems, then I had time to ii    do additional work.      There was several revised points on>thes<
12    Procedures, because I was spending a considerable amount of-13    my time trying to talk to them, to get a copy                                                                              which was 14  mutually agreeable.
l 15            Q        So you were working with them on theproponal?l l
16            A        Correct. And at this time Art fondon                                                                                          '
17  increased my workload and they wanted to put a halt                                                                                          '
l 18    on me continuing on with getting them to sign these i
19    procedures.
5 20              Q        Were you having these discussions, 21    during working hours?                                                                                                  .                        */
                          ,                                      22              A        Yes, I was.                                                                                                                      I 23            Q        Where were these discussions taking place?
24            A        In the office of Dick Camp.1the office of 25    Tom Miller, and the office of Art London.
I 1
: s.                                                                                                                                  I t
 
1 180 b7 4            l 1
Q        How frequently were these discussions?
2            A        When my previous work was completed, 3  approximately once or twice a week.
4 Q        So in other words, you were able to complete 5  your work, the allotted work, for a particular day, in less 6  than a full shift's time?
7            A      Well, considering that this was work that 8  which was possibly assigned to me, which because it had been 9    requested by Dick Camp for me to make these proposals and all    ,
10  then that was considered part of my work also.
11                    But let us put it Q                          --
12            A        So therefore, if I did it once or twice 13  every two weeks, I was still performing additional work.
Id            Q        But you were completing all of your regularly 15  scheduled STE work, were you not, during this time?
16  You didn't fail to complete assignments?
17            A        Not as a -- I completed assignments on 18 time, but I will not say that I.was way ahead on my workload.
19 Q        Well, okay, let's ask another question. Were 20    you behind on your workload?
21            A        No.
22            Q        Were you producing as many reports, inspection                      ;
1 23    documents, and other things where you completed as much work                        l 2d    as your fellow workers?
1 25                                                                                        l l                    A        Yes.
1 i
1 l
___-___________-__L
 
181 fc181b8-1 i          Q        Were some doing more than you?
2            A        Well, nobody at work works the same about 3  every day.
4            Q        Of course not. I just wondered there were:
                                        $  some workers that were doing more than you were doing?-
6            A        Oh, yes.
y            Q        Were there any'that. vere doing less?
8            A        Who were'those individuals?
9                      MR. SPEKTER:  Objection. I think that is to    irrelevant.
11                      MR. DAVIDSON:  I tnink that it has been e
12  brought to examination by(                / He stated that he had 13  completed his other assigned duties when he had these 14 conversations, and I want to find out if that is.:in fact, 15  the case.      And whether he was bearing the same load of-16    responsibility as his fellow workers.
17 And he says that he was, in fact, doing more      '
18 than some of them, so I would like to know who he was doing up    more than  --
20                      MR. SPEKTER:  It is irrelevant to this 21    particular --                                      i
                          .          22                      MR. DAVIDSON:  On the contrary, if you want l                                    23    us to determine whether or not he is telling the truth,.          {
l 24    and whethAr or not that is an accurate statement, whether he was doing less work, then we have to measure him against 25 I
 
182 1'
4 I
hit fellow workers, as he. suggests we do, then I think we've 2
got to know the names of these people, if he knows them.
Ns 3
And I'm going to ask you                              M d                  MR, SPEKTER:  My objection      noted for 5  the record.
6                  MR.'DAVIDSON:
7                  I'll ask you, Q
                                                    )whowere    the 8  individuals that were doing more'than you and who are those 9    that were doing less?
10            A      You have to figure that Lan Thompson was 11 doing more than me and Carl Becker.was doing less than me,                                          i-12                  Anybody else?
Q 13            A    It's very hard ta determine the workload of Id each individuals because of th. simple fact _that.each 15 individual is assigned a group if systems.      As long as that 16 individual can maintain and upisep those systems, then he 17  is performing his job from one    eek to the next.                                                        '
18 One week it wil    be a very slow week, with 19 not much work. And then all of      sudden, the next week, or-20    the very next day, he will be      vered over. So it's very 21                                                        ;                        >
hard --                                                                                                      ,
1 22                    Did that happen                                                                              I
                -Q                        o you?                                                                    I i
23            A    Yes.
J
                                                                                                                    ;l 2d            Q    Did you have son      slow weeks and did you have 25    some days which were, as you s.    ,  caused you to be covered I
i 4
J
 
                  ~
183:
fc181b10~
1  over?
2          A        Yes, at various times. And usually it was                                              .;
3  like a slow day and then a real heavy day.                      You anticipated 4  work loads that you could possibly anticipate.                                                And I had 5  anticipated work loads well in advance, which was quite a o  bit of work.
l 7            Q    .(              ]ksawearlieron the documents thab 8  you had with you    you had a performance evaluation.                                            Did you 9  receive written performance evaluations in the course of time 10  that you were in Comanche Peak?
11          A        I received one written formal performance 12    evaluation which was after my giving notice of termination.                                                  i 13            Q        Did you not receive any other formal written                                                <
t 14  performance evaluations or review any, prior to that time?
15            A        The only written performance evaluation, prior I 16    to that time, was not held as an official evaluation.                                                It-17 was told to me at the time of the evaluation. that it was 18  not going to be an official evaluation.
i.
19            Q        Was it in writing?'
20            A    -Yes, it was.
21            Q      Was it on a performance evaluation form?
22            A      Yes, it was.
23            Q      Did you get an opportunity to review that 24  form?
25            A      Yes, 1 did.
 
184 11 1
Q      Were you given a copy of that form?
2          A      Yes, I was.
3          Q      Do you have a. copy of that form, now?
4          A      I do not, now.
5          Q      You do not have it with you?
6          A      I do not know.
7          Q      Why don't you see if you have it with you, e  and if you do I would like to ask you to please produce it.
o                  (Pause.)
9    to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 l
20 21 22 23 i
24 25                                                                                q l
i 1
                                                                  ----_________---____a
 
185-8 fc19pb1 1 .'
qi 3
THE WITNESS:    The performance evaluations          I 2                                                                      ~i that I believe we are speaking'of right now was the-first.
3  one.                                                        ''
4 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
5              Q    That is correct, sir.
6              A
                                .                                        I do not'have a copy of that one.
7 Q    With you?                                          '
8            A      With me.
9                    Do you have a copy with you in your other Q
10    records?
11              A      I believe so.
12 Q    Would you produce it for us, sir.fearly next-13  week?
14            A      I will try to.
15 Q      Thank you. Did  you receive any other.          '-
16 performance evaluations other than this one that we just            l k
17  discussed?                                                          l 18            A      I've already indicated.to you I received a 19 performance evaluation and my termination or after my 20 notification of termination..
21 Q      Did you receive a copy of this' written.
22    performance evaluation?
23            A      Yes, I did.
24 Q      Do you have a copy of that?
25            A      Yes. I do.                                        t i
4 l
 
186 4-1 Q                Do you have it with you.. sir?
2              A                  Yes, I do.
3                Q                'Would you please produce it?
4 (Pause.)
5                                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                    . /*
6                Q                  I. note.once a g a in .(            ) that you are g
                .7                reaching into your attache case for a document.                      g
                                                                                                                      )  .
8                                  THE WITNESS:      I'm not sure if this copy.is 9        correct in its entirety..
10                                          BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                            4 11 Well, let us see what you've got and then
                                                                            ~
Q 1
12 you can tell me what'you think is missing.
13                        A                  Well, I'm not sure.          I know that"you have  a i
14                copy also.              Can we also look at'your copy?
f.
g 15                        Q              g hhen you take a deposition you to                get to dictate rules.                When you're the witness, you get to 17                answer the questions.
18                          A'                What I'm saying is I-don't know that all the 19                pages are'here with this one.
20                          Q                  1 understand.
21                          A And I would imagine yours has . all the pages.
22                                            MR. DAVIDSON:        Mr.1Spekter, do you wish.to 23                  give your client instructions on this issue?
24                                            MR. SPEKTER:        My client is' producing what~he                  =i' 25                  has.
l i
t l
 
187 19pb3 j .'
1 MR. DAVIDSON:  That'is what I understand him j
                                                                                          /.
2  to be doing.
Will-you hand me that document (                                        .
3 (Witness handing document to Mr. Davidson.)                                      .
4                    MR. DAVIDSON:    Have you seen it. Mr..Spekter?
5                    MR. SPEKTER:  No, I haven't.
6 MR. DAVIDSON: 'Why don't you give it to your t
7    counsel first?
I B
(Witness handing document to Mr. Spekter.)                                      '
9                      MR. SPEKTER:  I have taken a look at the                                      j 10    document.
11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
12            Q                  )you have' handed me a document 13 that consist of a cover page, a page of what appears to be i
14 instructions, and then a form which has been filled out in 15 manuscript labeled confidential, which details the evaluation                                  +
16 results then has -- these pages are not now stapled-although 17  they apparently were at one time.
18 Were they stapled while they were in your 19    possession, 20            A        I would imagine    that at.some time they might I 21    have been. I received them in an envelope.                                                  !
1 22            Q        There is also-a= chart in which certain                                                  !
23    categories have been checked, certain evaluations of current                                            ;
24    abilities to perform the job.      And then there is an-overall                                          j 25    rating. And then there is some comments on area for l
1
                                                  ++
I i
 
188 4
1 development.                    And there are two signatures, one of which 2        1 see                is yours,(                / And the other one'l cannot read.
3 Do you recognize that signature?
4                                A        That should be the signature of Art London.
Q        Do you recognize it to be the signature of 6        Art London?
7                                A        As 1 said, those are poor copies there.
8 MR. DAVIDSON:    They certainly are.
9                                                                                              (
Would it be acceptable to you, Mr. Spekter,          I 10 if we staple the pages of this document together?
l 11 MR. SPEKTER:    Yes, as long as we make copies  1 e
'                                                                                                                                                          i 12 of this and return them to him with the understanding that                              l 13 that will be marked as the other copies have been marked, 14 and that Xerox copy will be returned to him as his own 15 personal copy which he is entitled to keep.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:    We'll do that, Mr. Spekter, 17 unless Mr. Mizuno has a problem.
18 Mr. Reporter, we're going to need to mark 19 that Disc. F-77 20 Mr. Reporter, in the marking of this exhibit 21 was have determined that it is not properly Disc. Exhibit 22        F-7,  because there has not as yet been an F-6 marked. fou e            s 23        may recollect /                                )that during previous testimony 24 that 1 apparently misspoke and called the affidavit F-6 on 25        which we had a series of questions. 1 just want to make l
i l
1
 
4 189                l 1
19pb5                                                                                                                                                !
i I
certain and have on the record-the~ fact that you understood    ;
2 se to be referring to the affidavit'throughout that                7j 3    questioning.
4 THE WITNESS:  You had a document in front of          I 5    you.
I did not.look at whatLthe number was on the. document-            4 o    during your referrals.
                                                                                                                                                                    )
7 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
i 8
Q      You understood we were discussing the affidavit-9              A      Correct. When we were pulling word for word to    out of the affidavit.                                                      1 11 Q      Yes.                                              ;)
12            A      Yes.
13            Q      So you understood that although I often said 14 look at page 4 of Exhibit 6 that you understood we were
                                                                                                                              ~
15 looking at page 4~of the affidavit, even though I actually --
16 it should have been referenced as Exhibit 5.
17 (Pause.)
18 A      I believe so. I know that you were looking            j 19                                                                      .;  .
at an affidavit and you were saying look at page 4, Land I 20  looked at an affidavit. I did not try and keep track'of the 21 numbering system you were using.                                  Ili
                                                                                    ??            Q        So in other words, my reference to.the numbers' I 23 in no way caused you'a problem in answering any of the                      !
_i 24  questions.                                                                    l i-{
25            A      Correct.                                                  i l-4
 
190 4
1 Q      And you understood all'of        my questions?
            ?                                                                                        A      Yes.
3 Q. And you understood your answers?-                            J 4                                                                                          A      Yes.
5 MR. SPEKTER:      And'it's. counsel's understanding    .  .;
6 that the affidavit ~ is Exhibit Number'5. Any reference to 7'                                                      number 6 was just 'a misspeaking at'that time.:
V        1
:j 8                                                                                                                                                              Ll MR. DAVIDSON:      And you u rders tood , Mr. Spekter ,
l 9                                                                                                                                                                1 that I was referring to the affidavit?
10                                                                                                .MR. SPEKTER:                                                .l Yes.
i 11                                                                                                                                                                I MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Mizuno, _you had no                    !
12                                                                                                                                                              -i misunderstanding as to the line of questioning?                                                              !
13 MR. MIZUNO:      No.                                          .
ha                                                                                                                                                                I MR. DAVIDSON:      In order to make certain that              I 15 we don't further confuse the record, what I.would like to do                                                    !
16 is ask that the                              e reporter mark the performance evaluation.                      I s
17                                                sheet, which l produced as Disc. Exhibit F- 6 A ', so-18 there will be no question as to what-the referenceLis._ Is                                                      i' 19                                                that acceptable?
20 MR. SPEKTER:      6A is the one' document of 21                                              several pages?.                                                                            !
22 MR. DAVIDSON:      Right. And will be a document 23 1
consisting of one, two, three, four, five pages.
24 MR. SPEKTER:      Fine.
25
 
191 19pb7 XXX    1 (The document referred to as 2
Discovery F-6A was 3
marked for identification.)
d MR. SPEKTER:      With the understanding that 5
has tendered it to you stating that he does not 6    know if it is a complete document.        It is the one that he 7
has in his possession, and everything that he has in his 8
possession that is in reference to the performance evaluatiot 9
which was given to him just before he left his employment.
10                    MR. DAVIDSON:      Right.
11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
12            Q      Other than the two performance evaluations 13 that were in written form, di d you receive any other feedbaci 14 on the quality of the performance in the performance 15 evaluation of a nature that was not in writing?
16 (Pause.)
17            A      No.
IB            Q      You never received a counseling session of 19    that sort?
20            A      well, you're talking when these incidences 21    occurred, right?    And the harassment..right?      That was a 22    counseling session to me.
23            Q      All righ?., let's see if we can help articulate 24    that. Leaving aside the various incidents as to which you
,                    25 testified, the three incidents of harassment that you testifi l
l          .
1 l
 
192 1
to in your direct testimony, did you receive any counseling 2
sessions with respect to your job performance?
3              A      I believe not.
4 MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Mizuno, I see you are 5    still studying the Exhibit 6A.
6                    MR. SPEKTER:    I would note that since counsel' s 7
made a point of putting pauses on the record that counsel 8
for the Applicant is taking a long pause at this point to 9
look over the document.
10 MR. DAVIDSON:    That document that we had 11 marked is being looked over by Mr. Mizuno, not be me.        I'm 12    looking over some papers.
13 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
14 Q                    do you remember the initial 15 evaluation that you received a copy of which you say you                1 to                                                                            h have or may have or don't have with you today?                          I 17              A      Yes.
1B Q      Do you remember some of the comments made              !
19    there?                                                                  l
                                                                                                                        )
20                A      Not without refreshing my memory from the
{
21    form.                                                                    l 22              Q      You don't remember any of the statements 23    made there?
24              A      No, sir.
25                Q      Do you remember whether there was any suggestion 1
4 I
 
            .                                                                                                                l l
193 19pb9 k
1            A      No, sir. As I indicated, this was an 2
informal evaluation at that time. It was told to me that 3
it was going to be used specifically for -- that it was in 4
a change of supervisory personnel status.
5 Let's see. I believe the person's name                                            --
I.
6 can't even remember it now.      It was who was in charge of 7
these electrical group at the time was transferring the 8
responsibilities over to Art London.
These evaluat' ions were 9
to be used for Art London's purpose-and later on using them to    for a formal evaluation.
11 They were just to give him some background 12 as to the performance during the time period.                        And that 13 specifically, my case is the fact that it was a very short 14    period of three months. And it may even be hard to evaluate 15    me during that time period.
16              Q      Is 1c your testimony that the f orm was preparec, 17 by a supervisor other than Mr. London?
18              A      Yes, it was.
19 Q      Do you recollect who that supervisor was?
20              A I already said that I cannot remember his 21    name, but I know it started with a "C" but I can't remember                                              i 22    exactly what his name was.
23              Q      Might it have been Mr. Chatham?                                                                i 24              A      Yes, it was.
25              Q      How long were you assigned to Mr. Chatham?                                                    1 l
l I
l 4
I
 
1 l
l 194 i
10                                                                                                                                                                  l
                                                                                                                                                                        ? .i 1
A I am not familiar with the time. I do not 1
2 know exactly what date he was transferred out of the group.
3 Q      Well, do you. recollect when Mr. London came 4
in, approximately?
5            A Mr. London was there at all times.
6 Q    When he became head of the group.
7            A      No, I do not remember.
8 Q      Uow soon after you joined the group did you 9
receive what you call this informal evaluation?
10            A      I believe it wae approximately three months.
11 Q      And did  M,r . Chatham at the tire tell you 12 that because you were there such a short period of time it 13 was impossible to make a full and detailed evaluation of you?
14              A      Yes.
15              0      Did he allow you to review the form with him 16    nonetheless?
17              A      Yes.
18 Q      Did he ask you to sign the form?
10              A      Yes.
20 Q      Did you read the form before you signed it?
21                A      Yes, I did.
22 Q      Do you recollect what you agreed to when you          j 23        signed it?
24                A      Ubat do you mean, what I agreed to?
25                  Q      Well, was there a statement there that i
i
 
195 19pb11 1
indicated that you had reviewed the form and that you knew                                        '
2 its contents and understood them?
3              A      Yes.
4                                                                                                      !
Q And did it also indicate that it would be 5
used by the company for salary administration, employment 6    placement and promotion?
7              A      That was not my understanding at the time.
B Q      Was that written on the form to your 9    recollection?
10              A      I'm not sure, I haven't seen the form.
11 MR. SPEKTER:    I would r e '.< i e s t that counsel 12 has a copy of the form that he show it to!                                              that 13 he might refresh his memory.      He's already tes tifie d that 14 his temory is not refreshed at this point.
15 MR. DAVIDSON:    All right.
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
17 Q    f              you gave us Disc. Exhibit 6A did 18    you not?
19              A      Yes, I did.
20              Q      And it's a performance evaluation form used 21    by the EDS Nuclear, is it not?
22              A        Yes, it is.
23              Q        Is this the same form on which the earlier 24    evalutaion was made?
                                                                                                                                                        }
25              A        1 do not know. EDS Nuclear could have rev'ed I
.                                                                                                                                                            l
 
196            I
                                                                                                                  .i
                                                                                                              ?-
1      or changed its
          .                                                form between the time of the first evaluation-2 and the time of the second one.                        I do not know.
3 Q    You do not know . or you don't. remember?        j. ll d                                                                                                .i A
I don't remember what the first form had on            .j 5
it, therefore I.do not know if this form-is identical to o      the other form.
            '7 Q    Looking at this page of the form you've 8
given us from Disc. Exhibit 6A. do you.see below'the area,                                R 9
the development area and it says comments, and below that 10 it has a legend prior and above to the signatures of'both                          ,
11 you and your supervisor.                      Do you see what it says?
i 12                                    A    Yes.                                            i On the form it says, the last evaluations 13 form it said we reviewed this form together and we both Id know the contents will be used in the company in connection-                      ,
15 with salary, administration, employee placement and to      promotion.                                                                        i 17 Q    Does that refresh your recollection as to what.
18      the other form might have said?-
                                                                                                                  .I 10                                    A    No, I don't remember what the other form 20        looked like.
21 Q-    But you're going to'look for your copy.
22                                    A    Yes, I will.                                                i a
23 Q                  I have a document in my-hand here            ).
2d j                    which is a EDS Nuclear performance system performance                                        l 25 evaluation form and it consists of a cover page and a-page.
: 4.                                                                                                              j l
i 1
i
_-___n_-.--._..    --_ - - - - - - - - - - -    -
 
197
      '9pb13 1
of instructions and then a form that is handwritten and 2  filled in by H.J. Chatham with respect to what 3  called confidential and contains five pages. And I would '
4  like to ask you to review the document. And when you finish 5  would you look up at me.
6                  (Counsel handing document to witness.)
end 19. 7                  (Witness reviewing document.)
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 to 17 18 to 20
                                                                                  \
21 22 23 2s 25 l
1 1
1
 
30/1 198
                                                                                                              ?
I MR. DAVIDSON:    I'm not going to ask you, 2                                                                            i' any specific questions at this time on the 3
contents of the document, just whether or not you recognize' d
the form.
5 (Witness peruses document.)
6 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
7 Q    g                do you recognite that form?
                                                                    /
8 A      Yes, I do.
9 MR. DAVIDSON:    Counsel, I would be glad to 10 give it back to you, but I would like to mark it.
Il MR. SPEKTER:    Please do.                          i 12                                                                        l MR. DAVIDSON:    Could we mark this as              f 13                                                                        i Disc Exhibit F-7.
Id (The document referred to was 15 marked Exhibit Disc F-7 for 16                                                                      i identification.)                '
l 17                                                                      l      !
MR. DAVIDSON:    And again, we'll have the        4 18 same understanding about copying and returning the originals l'
if we may.
20 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
21 Q                    is this a copy of the form that 22 you were shown by Mr. Cheatham?
23 A      Yes.
24 Q                    turning again to Discovery Exhibit 25                                                                                i 6-A, would you read the first sentence of the evaluation                  I l
l e
 
FCjl 10/2                                                                                                                  Igg i results on the third page.
2      A              has been under" -- it's very poor
                                                    /    ~
3 reproduction here  -- it says,          has been under my
                                                    ~    '
4 supervision since June 19" --
5            MR. SPEKTER:  I would object to him reading 6 it into the record. I think the document speaks for 7 itself.
8            And I believe  --
9            MR. DAVIDSON:    I didn't actually ask him to 10 read aloud.
11            In fact, what I was going to ask him to do 12 is read it to himself and look up at me when he finished, 13 as we have been doing with almost everything else I've 14 asked him to read.
15            I agree with you, Mr. Spekter, I don't want l              16 him reading documents into the record, either for purposes 17 of testimony or for any other reason, because documents 18 are nut self-proving.
19            But what I'm going to ask him is whether that l
20 sentence refreshed his recollection as to when Mr. London 21 became head of the Electrical Test Group.
l 22            MR. SPEKTER:  Fine.
23            MR. DAVIDSON:    And in fact, nou that I've 24 declared my intention, when you're finished with that 25 sentence, maybe you could tell me whether it refreshes h
: b.                                                          _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
0/3                                                                                    200 1  your recollection.1              )
                                                                      \            <
2                THE WITNESS:  Well, from what it says here, it 3    says June 19 -- I'm not even sure about the date    --
4    possibly 1983.
5                BY MR. DAVIDSON:
6          Q      Could it be any other date?
7          A      I don't know.
8          Q    Let's take a look at the contours of that 9    letter and see if it could be any other date than 1983.
io                Could it be 1986, for example?                      i A                                                          I 11                It could be 1988.
12          Q      It could be?
13          A      I believe it's 1983.
14          Q      In other words, it is stretching your powers to 15    generalize from what exists there in front of you?
16                You think it was 1983?
17          A      Correct.
t is          Q      Did the sentence refresh your recollection as to 19    when it might have been Mr. Locaon took over administration 20    of the Electrical Testing Group and succeeded Mr. Cheatham?
21          A      No, because of the fact that there was a lengthy 22    time period there where they both were theoretically in 23    charge.
24          Q      I think you did not understand my question.
25                I didn't ask you when Mr. London worked with l
l
 
FCj l 10/4 -                                                                            201        .
1 1
                                                                                                                                          ~1 1                                                                    f Mr. Cheatham. I asked you when he took over.
2        A    That's what I'm saying, is I do not remember or        H 3
that does not refresh my memory as to the exact time that        t d                                                                      .I he took over.
5        g    well, if.it doesn't refresh your recollection.            <
6  then it's a recollection obviously that cannot be 7    refreshed.
8 I just thought that by virtue of the fact that 9                                                                  '
he declares here that you' answered -- or came under his 10 supervision on -- in June of 1983, that it would refresh 11 your recollection, that that's when he must have taken 12 over the Electrical Testing CLoup.
13 But if that doesn't, then it doesn't.
Id MR. DAVIDSON:  I merely explained it to him.
15 Mr. Spekter, because the witness has from time to time 16 demonstrated severe difficulty with understanding the 17  simplest questions.
18 MR. SPEKTER:  Well. I object to the reading from l'
the record. The document speaks for itself. as we both              l 20  said.
21 I believe you can ask him: questions based on      p 22                                                                          l the document.                                                          !
23 And if his answer is he doesn't remember.--
2d and if he doesn't remember and if his answers are that        j 25 sometimes two people were in charge of that particular 4
l I1
                                                                                                                                          -i '
l
                                                                                                                                          ..i
 
1 10/5                                                                                            202 I
section, that is his answer.
2                                                                                          l MR. DAVIDSON:    All right.                                                I i
3 MR. SPEKTER:    I believe he would like to speak d
with me for a second.
5 MR. DAVIDSON:    Do you wish a break to consult 6  with counsel, 7
MR. SPEKTER:    Not away from the table.
B THE WITNESS: I've got just one question.
9 MR. DAVIDSON:    Then, you do wish a break?
10 Otherwise, I'm going to ask you a question.
Il MR. SPEKTER:    We wish a break.
12 MR. DAVIDSON:    You can't have it both ways.
13 MR. SPEKTER:    We wish a break.
Id MR. DAVIDSON:    All right.
15 Thank you.
i 16 (Off the record at 3:12 p.m.)                                              ,
17                                                                                            i (Conference between Counsel Spekter and witness.)
18 (Back on the record at 3:29 p.m.)                                          '
l' MR. DAVIDSON:    We are back on the record.
20 Mr. Mizuno, did you have a question?                                              ;
21 MR. MIZUNO:    Yes, I'd like to review I 22    Exhibit F-7.
23                                                                                                    I MR. DAVIDSON:      I'm sorry. You were not given 24 an opportur.ity to look at the document?
l        25 MR. SPEKTER:    I note for the record that that                                    i
 
TCji'10/6 203 I  '
break was less than a minute's duration.-                                                                                                                                          ,
2 MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                                            So noted.
3                                  MR. MIZUNO:                                                                            You canfgo ahead.
4 MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                                          You'have no problem with my.
5 continuing the examination despite the fact that you don't 6        have -- you're engaged in review of the document.
7                                  All right.
8                                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:
9 Q        .
n you have testified about what.you
(                                                            i 10 claim to be three incidents of harassment, intimidation, 11        and threatening.
12                                  Do you-recollect that?
13                    A              Yes.
14 Q              One with Mr. Vogelsang'and one with --
15 Mr. Fred Powers I think it is -- and one with Ken Luken.
16                                  Do you recollect that?.
17                  A                Correct.
1B Q                Could you tell me when the incident occurred 19        with Mr. Vogelsang?
20                  A                I believe that's in the record..
21                  Q                I'm sorry, I just don't recollect.
22 1 don't think you gave us a date, but if'you 23        did --
24                A i
Yes, it was in the record, on the cop of the 25      ' copies of my notes. with the Ivan Vogelsang phone call.
t
  . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .      _.m.___ _ . . _ __ ._.      _        __ . _ _ _ _ _ . __          _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
1 10/7                                                                                                            ,
204 4
1 Q                              Do you recollect what it was?
2 A                              February 8.
                                                                                                    'And I believe it was at 10:45.or 3
some time in that' time. frame.
d Q                            February 8th, 1984?:
5 A                            Correct.
6 Q                          And that was after you had already contacted 7
CAP?
8 A                          That's correct..
9 Already contacted?
H)
Q                        Contacted CAP.
11 A                      Wrong.
12 MR. SPEKTER:                    I would object. I would state 13 that the document itself was a memorandum which was placed l'
into evidence in the original direct testimony and 15 deposition yesterday.                                    That document speaks for itself.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:                      I wasn't asking about the 37 document.                    I was asking about the'date when he had his i
18 alleged incident with Mr. Vogelsang.
I' MR. SPEKTER:                      I believe the' document itself 20 points out when that date was.
21 MR. DAVIDSON:                        I know. But I wante'd his 22 testimony, not what the document said, because, as you just 23 l
pointed out the document speaks for'itself, but it's not 24          proof.
25 1
___________.____________.____._m            _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _      _ . _ . _
 
FCjl 10/8                                                                                              30F H
                                                                                                                      ' ll 1
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q    That was February 8, 19847                            ' l, 3                        A  Yes.
4 Q  What was the date for the alleged incident with 5
Mr. Powers of harassment, intimidation, and threatening?
6                          A  It was prior to tha t . -
7 Q  Yes, but give us the date.
8                          A    I do'not remember the date. I've already 9          previously stated that.
10 Q  Well, can you give us'an approximate date?'
il A  Even though I would be guess at an approximation?
12 Q  Can you tell us what year it occurred?
13                              A  No, because-it'-- it's either '83 or '84 14 Q  All right.
15 Was it towards the tail end of '83?                    '
to                                Or the early part of 1984?
17                            A  Yes, I would say so, t
18 Q  When you say "the tail'end of '83 " would that                I 1'
be December?
20                              A  I would say between the fourth quarter of '83 21 and the first quarter of '84.                    "
22 Q  That's a period of approximately six months.
23 Can you be any more precise than that?
24                              A  'Not without guessing.                            ,
25 Q  When you testified about that incident,                        !
l!
II l1 i
I I
{* -
                                                                                                                            \
                                                                                                                        .)
l
 
  .0/9                                                                                                                    206
                                                              ,                                                                  4 1
do you know that you purported to quote exact 2
words that were said to you, and yet you can't tell us,        l 3
within a period of six months,'what date it occurred on?
d A    Yes. I can by refreshing my memory on 5
documentation which I generated during that time period.
6 I would be able to give you a more in-depth time period 7
there.
8 But since 1 do net have the documentation here 9
with me and have not seen them for several -- for such a 10 long period, I do not have any idea what time.
Il Q    What documents or documentation would you use to 12 refresh your recollection?
13                            A    Such as a start-up interoffice memo identifying Id                    --
that I had generated and written identifying the problem 15 with the cable separations.
16 And if you found the date that that was 17 generated, it would approximately be within a two-week 18 period prior to that, f    {
l'                                                                                            :l Q    All right. Well, that's very helpful,                j 20 Do you have a copy of that memo?                          ,
i 21                              A      I do.not believe so.                ,i                  i 22 Q    Neither here with you today nor at home?                  I 23                              A    Correct.
2A Q    When you say you Vrote a start-up memo, could 25 you explain what you mean by that?
 
TCj i - 10 /10 207 I
l
[
1 A    It was previously stated that I had written a 7      . letter indicating that I had concern with the.
3 inconsistencies between the ES100 specification and d      Reg Guide 1.78 I believe it was.
5            Q    Might it hae been Regulation 1.75?
6            A      It might have.been 1.58. I'm not familiar 7      with the Reg Guide number.
t 3            Q    LNow, when you say a." start-up memo." I think, i
9 in your direct testimony .you testified that it was a memo 10 from the start-up group that would be signed by Mr. Camp 11 but prepared by you; is that correct?
12            A    1 believe that would be the type that it'was.
13 There are several different types, and it could have fallen Id under one of the other categories.
15            Q      All right. Well ._now,  that's one type, namely, lo      a start-up group memo from Mr. Camp reporting on this 17 alleged discrepancy.
18 And then, you say if you find such 2'meno of I'
that type and it's date, we're going to_have at least a 20 two-week approximation of when you had the run-in with 21      Mr. Powers; 1s that correct?            i        '                i
  .                77            A'    Correct.
23            Q    Now, you say it could be of_another type.            'l-i
                                                                                            , 1.
24 So, as to help ur. in searching for that document.
25      what other type could it be?
i
                                                                                                      ]
 
0/11:
                                                                                                                                '308 A'                Well, Start-up; maintains files.-                                  What you're 2
going to have to do isl-- I believe there's about'three                                                                      f 3
different' form letters,'an interoffice memo, a start-up memo, or there's a CMO -- there-are several forms'there.
                &~
Th e r e' 's about three of: them.
6 Q                Can you go a little slower,.                                                        I'm going to take notes about each one.
8 A                Okay.
Q              Now,.there's a. start-up memo.                          That we've 10 discussed, right?
A              R'ight.
12 Q              That's a memo from the start-up group-to 13 someone?
14 A              Correct.
15 Q              All right.
16 Now, there's a -- an interoffice what?
17 A          'An interoffice memo.                                And I'm not sure            --
18 Q            An interoffice memo, 19 A            -- if they call it that.
20 Q            How does that differ from a start-up memo?
21 A            I'm -- I'm not                        --
I have no idea.
;                          Q            Did you ever prepare an interoffice memo?
A            I will not say yes or no.
24 1 could -- I believe I possibly did, but giving an exact one or something,                                    I' don't know.
_________m____.--_--__m
 
FCjl 20/12                                                                                  i
                                                                                                                                                            '209 I
i i
1 Q    Well, I'm not asking for an exact one or 2
something. What I'm asking you is how an interoffice          l 3
memo, in your mind, differs from a start-up memov      and      i d
you say that --
5 A    Well. I believe  --
6 Q    -- you may have prepared one, so you ought to I
know.
8 A      1 believe that the interoffice memo'would be strictly for start-up. I believe that the --
10 Q      Okay.
11 in other words, that is a memorandum that is' 12 circulated within the group --
13 A      Right.
Id Q    --
as opposed to  --
well, why is it called IS
                                                                                                    " interoffice" then?                                            i' 16 A    1 --
I7 Q    Okay.
18 A      l'm not familiar with the organization as far as transferring those papers like that.
20 Q      Okay.
1 21 What's is a CM0?
22 A      i'm not even sure if "CM0" is the correct 23 labeling for it.                                                    !
24 I do know that there is approximately three            l 25 different documentation    which Start-up identifies i
i i
I l
j
 
jl 20/13 210 4
I information on.
2 Q    But what is -- what is your understanding of 3
what a CMO is?
d A    I don't  --
I don't know what it    --
5 Q      I didn't'-- well, you understand I didn't        --
6 1 didn't volunteer the. term.
7 A      The CMO strikes me as that it is'a memo form.
E I do not know what the CMO stands for.
9 Q    That's what I was going to ask you.
10 They use a lot of acronyms    --
you know, letters, 11 alphabets at Comanche Peak.      And unfortunately, you may 12 he familiar with all of them, but I am not.          So, I was 13 going to ask you what does "CMO" stand for?
14 A      l'm not familiar the CMO. I'm not even 15 familiar if it actually is a Start-up form of paperwork.
16 MR. SPEKTER:  I would point out that sometimes 17 the acronyms seem to take over, and they don't even'have 18 any real basis in fact at some point.        They just become 19 acronyms that become words unto themselves.
20 MR. DAVIDSON:    I'm not sure I understand the 21 tenor of your remark, Mike, but so be it.
22 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23 Q    Now that we've investigated the various types of 24 paper that are generated on these issues, do you recollect 25 whether it was a Start-up memo?                                          l l                                                                                                    J l '
i
                                                                                - - - _ - -  --_ a
 
1 FCj l J.0/14                                                                                                          211    1 1
In other words, do you recollect whether it was I
2 a memo that was addressed from the start-up group to 3
someone else --
A A            Yes --
5 Q            --
that you prepared?
6 A              Yes, it would have been addressed from the 7
start-up group to someone else.                                          l 8
Q            And do you recollect to whom it.might have been 9
addressed?
10 A
It would have been addressed to the head of 11 Engineering.
12 Q            Who would be?
l                                                                          13 Now, is this TUGC0 Engineering, or TUCCO Results, 14 as you referred to it?
i 15 l
1 A              It would be TUSI Engineering. And at that time i
'                                                                          16 I am not familiar with who exactly was the head of TUSI
'                                                                          17 Engineering.
l IB Q            You don't think it was Mr. Vogelsang?
19 A            There's even -- you've got to figure there's a 20 buffer office prior to that that all'these go to.                  And.it's 21 the memos may not even have been addressed to Vogelsang; 22 they might have been addressed to even a higher level up.
23 Q            Well, do you know who would be -- do you know 1
I the title or name of this so-called buffer office?                            i 25                                                                                  ^
l A            No, I don't.
l i
I 1
  '                                                                                                                                                            i i
i
 
l' 2.0/15                                                                                                                                                                                    212
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ?
1 Q                  Did we -- was such a buffer office noticed on    --
2 noted on any of the tables of organization that you reviewed?
1 3                                A                    I did not look over -- through that organization.
4 Q                    I think we have that exhibit here, so maybe we 5
can review it and see if you can identify it.
6 MR. DAVIDSON:  Mr. Mizuno, I believe that you 7
now currently hold a copy of that exhibit, which had been
                  )                                                                                            8 marked in voir dire.
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    -213 mgc 21-1                              1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2                q        ,                      )you will. recollect that during I
3        the course.of voir dire                  be marked as Voir: Dire                                        Exhibit d
F-4A a table of. organization of the Engineering / Operations' q
5        interface at the Comanche' Peak site, 6                A          - Correct.
7-                                                                                                                                '
Q            And you had identified that.you-were; 8                                                                                                            ~
associated with that group or' box, indicating on'this chart, under R.                  Camp, who you explained was Dick Camp, 10 the Startup Manager; is that correct?.
II A            Correct.
12 0          Now I see that that Camp line of reporting, 13                                                                                                                                  l reporting line, 1s.directly to J. Merritt, Jr., the                                                                        ; .
14 Assistant Project General-Manager.
15 A          Correct.
16 Q          I don't see any buffer office between'the 17 two.      Is there one nonetheless?                                                                                  l, i
18 A            Yes.            These forms would have been sent, l'
I believe, to M. McBay, the Engineering Manager.
20 Q              That's someone also-under Mr. Merritt's 21 supervision?                                                                                            -
22 A              Correct.                                                                                              <
i 23 Q              But he's not in the same group?                                                                      j 1 24 A              Correct.                                                                                              I 1
25 Q              He's on a different line of reporting, am I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .j.,
 
214
                                                                                                                                  ?
21-2                                                      1 right?
2        A        Correct.
3 Q        And Mr. McBay you've identified as the d
Engineering Manager, who also reports to Mr. Merritt.
5          A        Correct.
6          Q        Would these have been addressed to Mr. Merritt?
7 In other words, would they have gone through Mr. McBay as 8
a buffer office to Merritt, the Assistant Project General 9    Manager?
to          A        l'm not sure. To the best of my 11 regulation (sic) -- to the best of my memory, it was 12 addressed directly to Mr. McBay.
13 Q        Do you know whether Mr. McBay forwarded that 14 to Mr. Merritt?
15          A        I believe Mr. McBay forwards that to the 16 Engineering Group for assignment?
17 Q        I'll get the chart back so I'll know where 18    he's sending it. Can you show me on the chart, 19                                                                /
where he refers it?
20          A        I would imagine that he would send it to one 21 of these three groups here.
22 Q        All right. Now you're referring to groups 23 under Mr. McBay's direction, and there are three.
24          A        Correct.
25          Q        One is called Nuclear Engineering, which is 4
 
215-mgc 21-3      1 indicated on th'is chart,'the manager is an R.      Calder.-
2  Do you know'who that is?'
3          A        No.
d Q      Then-there is another group, G-ampersand-H, 5    New York, under an  R.' Ballard. - Do you know that - group?:
6          A-      That's'Gibbs & Hill, New York.      TheLR.'Ballard 7
1 do not know.
8 Q.      Now when.you say Gibbs & Hill,: New Y'ork, who' 9
is Gibbs & Hill?
10          A        They would-be the architectural' engineers-
            -11 for the nuclear power plant.
12 Q        All right. And inLthis third box >that 13 you pointed to, CP,;I-assume Comanche Peak, Project Id    Engineering.
15          A        Correct.
16 Q        And the manager of'that is listed here as 17    an L. Popplewell'.
18          A Right.
19 Q        Do you know Mr. Popplewell?
20          A        Yes, 1 do.
21 Q        So it's my understanding ~from you that:
22 Mr. McBay would have referred this startup memo that.you 23                                                                                l prepared, albeit for'Mr. Camp's signature, it would.have                  .i 24 1
been forwarded to McBay'and then from him to one~of'these-i 25    three.
                                                                                            'I
                                                                                              'I
_- ____      _ a
 
216 4
mgc 21=4      I A      Correct.
2 Q      Do you know which of these three it might 3
have been referred to?
d A      Probably L. Popplewell.
S Q      To Mr. Popplewell. Why do you think it 6
would have been referred there.
7 A        Now let me define this. This organizational 8
chart may not be the exact one that I knew of at the time 9
at Comanche Peak, and that possibly the names I am labeling to right now would have been the chain of command there, but 11 may not be necessarily true here. It would probably have 12 gone from McBay to Popplewell to Vogelsang.
13 l
Q      Where is Vogelsang?
i            Id A      Vogelsang, I believe, is below Popplewell, 15 l
or at some time during his employment at the site, he 16 was below Popplewell, 17 Q      And what would be the job of the person that 18 Mr. McBay sent this memo to?    Was his job to respond to the 19 memo?
20 A        Yes.
21 Q        Ard to your knowledge, was that memo to which 22 we've referred, which helps us get the timeframe for the 23 incident with Mr. Powers, do you recollect whether or not                                                          ,
24                                                                                                                        !
a response was provided?
25          A        Yes, there was.
j
{
t
 
217' mgc 21-5 1              Q        Do you have any idea as to the time between 2
your memo going forward and the time that you received 3
notice of the response?
A        No, I do not.
5 Q        Have you some idea ~as to what the time might 6
have been?
7 A          I'm not familiar. The documentation flow a
path could take anywhere from a. month to a year and a half.
9 Q        Well, was it a year and a half?                                l to          A          I don't believe it was that long.
11 Q          Could it have been a month?                                  -
12 A'        It could have been possibly, or it'might have 13 been three months.                                                              6
          'id Q        So you just don't remember now.
15 A        I don't. I'm guessing if I tell you                --
16 Q        Then I don't want you to guess.
17 Were you satisfied'that the response was                        i 18 timely?  In other words, to the best of your recollection, l'
when you did get the responae, did you say, "Well, I'm 20
: g. lad that I got the response," or did you say, " Jesus, 21 this took a hell of a long time"?
22 A
Engineering had already given their response 23 to the memo prior to the memo being sent out. We were-24 just documenting it, so that if a future problem' arose to 25 the fact'that Startup couldn't come back and say, "Well, we
 
218 4
tge 21-6      1 told you so."
2 Q        Whose idea was it that this startup memo 3    be written?
d A        Dick Camp.
5 Q        And he asked you to prepare it for his o      signature, you said?
q                                    It went under his signature, and 7
I wanted to ask you, did he ask you to write the memo?
8 Did he ask you to write it for his signature or for your 9      own?
10            A        For his signature.
Il Q        Did you have to submit this startup memo for 12 any other review before Mr. Camp signed it?                                                                                                      6-13          A        Yes.
Id Q        To whom did you have to submit it?
15            A        Art London.
16 Q        Did you do so?
17            A        Yes.
            'B Q        Did you submit it to anybody else besides 19 Art London?
20            A        I believe it went through Ken Luken and 21      Tom Miller.
22                                                                                                                                                                        l Q        So that the                                                        path, if I can for the moment, 23                                                                                                                                            /
of your startup memo that you prepared at Mr. Camp's                                                                                2 24 direction for his signature, first went to your immediate 25      supervisor, who was Art London.
 
219 mgc 21-7      I        A          Uh-huh.
2 Q          It then went to Mr. London's immediate 3
supervisor, who was Ken Luken.      Thereafter, Mr.-Luken-d forwarded it to his immediate supervisor, who was Tom 5
Miller, and 1t finally ended up on the desk of Mr. Camp, 6
the immediate supervisor of Mr. Miller.
7 A          Correct.
8 Q          And the head of the TUGC0 Startup Group.
9 A          Correct.
10 Q          Now if we had a copy of that document, would 11 we be able to see that chain of review, starting with you 12 and then going all the way up to Mr. Camp?
13 A        Yes, you would.
3d Q        How would I see that?
15 A
There would be initials in the bottom lefthand                                      j 16 corner.
17 Q          And in what order would I find those initials?
38 In other words, would yours be the first initials as                                                  )
i l'
the person who prepared it.
20                                                                                                            1 A          Mine would be the first.                                                            I 21 Q          And then I'd    see the initials of Mr. London, 22 Mr. Luken. Mr. Miller, and then 1 would see a signature
{
23 line, I guess, for Mr. Camp, and he'd sign it.
24 A          Correct.
25 Q        And.did I remember correctly that you were                                            I i
l I
 
220
                                                                                                                    ?
I mgc 21e8        going to look for that document and see if you could 2
produce it for us?
3 A        To the best of my recollection, I do not have that document.
5 Q      But you will search for it?
6 A      I will search for it.
I Q        Now with respect to the third incident 8
of harassment and intimidation and threatening to which you've given testimony today, that is the one involving 10 Mr. Luken, when did that occur?
II A        I believe you have that written down on 12 documentation, too, submitted, where my notes were I3 submitted, on file.
Id Q        I understand. But I don't want to have, 15 you know, as Mr. Spekter keeps reminding me -- documents 16 speak for themselves. Documents, as I remind him, are II not evidence, they are not self-proving.      And so we've 18 both agreed that what is relevant, if anything, is your testlmony.
20 MR. SPEKTER:    If you do recall.
21 MR. DAVIDSON:    Yes.
22 THE WITNESS:    I do not recall.
23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
24 Q        Could you recall after having your memory 25 refreshed by  a review of that documentation?
I
 
                                                                                      -221 mgc 21-9    1        A        Yes,'I'could.
2        Q-      lAll right.      Then I think what'I'will do.is,
                ;  I will ask the reporter if he'would be' good enough to f
                                              )he documents'in question. .so that
                                ~
s  provide t                                                        i 5  he can see.if he can refresh his' recollection.
6                  (The. Reporter complies.)
7                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:
I                8-      Q        When you refer'reduto documents that would y
9  refresh your recollection, is the document that you had to  in mind Direct Exhibit.4?
11        A        Y e s ,1 it.is.
12        Q        Is that a copy of a. note that you'made 'about L
13  a conversation you had?
14        A        Yes, it i s ..  'I'd also-like to make referen'ce 15  to a previous statement that I made.            I specified the 16  February 8th date for the Ivan Vogelsang incident, which~
17  is incorrect, right now.
I j              is        Q        How do you know that's incorrect?
19        A        Because after reviewing the document and 20  refreshing,my memory,'I note that I' vro t e - d own'.. t h e          j 21  February 8th dealing with the Ken-Luken. problem, which means.
1 22  that the Ivan Vogelsang had to b'e prior to that..
23        Q        Right.      How much prior to that?                    ,
24        A        I.would have.fto'-- it's'already proven L that              l t
25  my memory is rusty, so I would have to have it refreshed i
i
  ..-                                                                                          {
l o
 
222-
                                                                                                                                                                      -4 ge 21                                          I by the documents that I've'already submitted.
2 MR. SPEKTER:    I.believe the document is 3
                                                                                                  .there, and I' don't think anything has been proven d
concerning your memory'.
5 MR. DAVIDSON:    I was going to hasten to. point
                                      -6 out that that is'right.      I, don't think'that we necessarily.
7 have offered as a matter of proof the unreliability or 8
rustiness of your memory.. The record will show what it shows.
10 I will grant you, you are.not.really II particularly precise about your recollections. .except when 12 there are particular words that you are-anxious to get 13 in the record.
I#
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15 Q        But is there a document here that you think 16 would refresh your recollection as.co the'date on which II you had the incident with.Mr. Vogelsang?
18 A        Yes. That's part of the reasoning of' logging those information (sic) down, so that.you've got- the 20 information there to start with.
21 Q        When did you start keeping these logs?
22 A
The Fred Powers incident was thought-toome 23 as being a one-time deal, no problem. As soon.as the-24 Ivan Vogelsang incident occurred, I said that this is 25 beginning to become too much, and that I logged that down, 4.
 
223 mgc 21-11 1 and also tried to remember as much as pertaining to the                ,f 2
time and place and everything of the Fred Powers incident.
3 Q        Did you ever write down or make any notes d
about the Fred Powers incident? I take it you        --
let me 5  just strike that.
6 I take it from what you're saying that              i 7
initially, because you thought the Fred Powers was an                '
i B
isolated one, you didn't at that time make any record of            '
I 9    it?
j 10          A        That's right.
11 Q        There was no contemporaneous note made.
12          A        Right.
13 Q        Did you make a subsequent note in which 14 you had past recollection recorded?
15          A        Yes, I did.
16 Q        Did you produce that note for us here today?        ,'
17 A        I believe you have it.
18 Q        With respect to Mr. Powers?
19 (Pause.)                                          ,
20 MR. DAVIDSON:    That's right.
21 MR. SPEKTER:    His memory's not so rusty 22    after all.
23 MR. DAVIDSON:    Thank you, Mr. Spekter. I can 24 always Count on you for some help.
25 THE WITNESS:    That actually wasn't submitted,
 
324 4
mgc 21-12 1    though. That was on the back of another.
2                  MR. DAVIDSON:  That's right. That's why 3  I was puzzled. You didn't submit this particular note d  which was on the back of -- it was the obverse side, 5  if you will, of Witness F DX -- that is. Direct Exhibit 3, 6  which was the note that you alleged was made contemporaneous 1y 7  with the Vogelsang incident.      And apparently at the time.
8  of the Vogelsang incident, you then --
9                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:
10        Q        Did you then turn over the page and write 11  what you remembered of the Powers incident; is that it?
12  or did you make that notation even subsequent to that?
13        A        I would have to look at the documentation 14  that you have there to refresh my memory.
15        Q        Okay. I'm going to give it to you. Oh, 16  you want all of these?
l 17        A        Yes.
18        Q        Sure.
19                  MR. DAVIDSON:                just so'the 20    record will reflect it. I have handed you Direct Exhibit 2 21    and Direct Exhibit 3, and have I given you also Direct 22    Exhibit 4?
23                  No. I think only Direct Exhibits 2 and 3, 24                                                                                    I but if you wish. I will also give you Direct Exhibit 4.                          j 25    So now you have all of the notes that were used during                          ,
1 l
j
 
225 mgc 21-13 1      your direct examination.
2 THE WITNESS:  The Ivan Vogelsang incident, 3
Direct Exhibit 2, was a note written at the exact time d
of the conversation.
5 The Ivan Vogelsang incident, Direct Exhibit 3, 6
was written approximately ten minutes after the phone 7
conversation with a little bit more in detail.
8 The back side of Direct Exhibit 3 was dealing 9
with the Fred Powers incident, which was probably written 10 sometime that afternoon or within a day or so fo the first 11    one, 12                                                                                      t BY MR. DAVIDSON:
13 Q        When you say "of the first.one " .you mean                        i i
Id of the time that you wrote the Vogelsang second memo?
15 A        Right.
16 Q        In other words, then sometime later, either 17 that day or the next day, you turned over that page and 18 put down what you remembered of the Powers incident?                            !
W          A        Correct.                                                            !
20 Q        And with respect to Direct Exhibit  4,      which 21 is the notation about the Luken incident?
22                                                                                      l A        It was written directly after the incident.
End 21              23
                                            - 24 25 1
l l
l 4
 
21                                                                      226 4
I BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q      Can you tell us where it was that you 3
decided to use the back of the Vogelsang, the second d
vogelsang note to record your past recollection of the 5
Powers incident?
* 6 A    That was a paper I had in my pocket at 7
the time and I was keeping the information together, the 8
accounts of insinuation on my job. So that would just have l
to be the reasoning for putting it on that paper.
10 Q      Okay. So the three incidents --
well, so we know that one of the incidents to which you made 12 reference, the Vogelsang incidents happened on or about I3 January 25, 1984, or so it is reflected in your note, and Id we know that the third incident occurred on or about 15 February 8,  1982, and we also know that the Powers 16 incident preceded the Vogelsang one, so it was earlier I7 than January 25, 1984 and it occurred sometime subsequent I8 to the startup memorandum that you prepared for Mr. Camp's signature.
20 A      Correct.
21 Q      To the best of your recollection, was 22 the memorandum that you prepared regarding ES100 23 cable separation signed by Mr. Camp?
A      The organization was -- you have got to 25 understand that Dick Camp signed some of these memos, or had i
e
 
13 228              3 l
                                                                                                                                        !      l
                                                                                                                                        '    ?
I though.
2                                                                                    !
Q  It was the practice to have lower case 3                                                                                    i initials indicating the typist of the memorandum?
4 A  I believe so.      Not necessarily the typist.                i 5
Isn't it a clerical type form that you put a gr for                              'l 6
identification of a typerwriter or something similar to 1                                                        7 that.
l
'                                                        8 Q  Are you asking me or are you asking    --
i l
9                                                                                    $
A    I am saying hat that is what those                            i<
1 10 letters might have been.                                                i 11                                                                            l Q  Okay. How about                                    i        !
12                                                                                      I MR. SPEKTER:
I wou3d object to any 13 questions you might ask without looking at the document, or 14 at least looking at the initials an the context.                                  ,
15                                                                                      )
MR. DAVIDSON:      I just want to ask what those                l 16                                                                                      l initials meant to him.      I don't think there is any need for 17 him to look at the document.                                          f          1 '
I 18                                                                                      I MR. SPEKTER:    He is certainly not the only        l          !
19                                                                                      '
person in the world with those initials.                              l 20                                                                          l            ,
BY MR. Dr.V1b 3DN :
21 Q    How about DAL; whose initials are those?
22                                                                                      ;
A    Those possibly would be Art London.
23 Q    Now, we have had this discussion before.      I 2a understand his name to be Art London but you say he has a first name that starts with a "D"?
l 4
u_    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . - _ - - - _ - - - - - -          - - - - -
 
4 jon6                                                                                                                                                                                                                  22 I i
1 A      Yes, I believe so.
* 2 Q      The middle' initial                is'" Art is that.right?
3 A.      I am not familiar with.the. exact                                              --
d                                                                                                                            l Q      How about KLL; who could-that be?
5 A'    KLL7 6
q      yes, 7-                                                                                                                      . !~
A      It could possibly be Ken Luken.                                                                    ,
B Q      A111right, and how about TPM?
                                                                                                              '                                                                                                                              I    4 A
Oh, that's Tom Miller, possibly. .                                                  '
to Q      All right. How'about R. E. Camp; who 11 would that be?
12 A      'That would be1Mr. Camp,LDick Camp.
13 Q      ~And how about this M. R. McBay; is that.
Id                                                                                                                                    i the samee McBay that you earlier identified to'us'as-being 15 the head of engineering, manager for-engineering, who-had                                                        i, 16 the authority over the three departments we discussed, 17 nuclear engineering, Gibbs and Hill, New York, the-18 architect-engineers and Comanche teak project engineering?                                                        ,
l' A        Correct.
20 Q      And you identified Mr. Popplevell as be'ing                                                    {        l 21                                                                                                                                                j the manager of that      group?
22 A      Correct. Now, as I said now, this letter 23 may have been written under a different organization than 24 what you just referenced to.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ;)
25                                                                                                                                                ,
Q      Can I show you the memorandum ve.have been
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  .h 2
t          l a
l
 
s5                                                                                                                                330 t
talking about and ask you whether you recollect having written it?
3 MR. MItDNO:    I'would'ask that'that document-be identified and made a part of the record and bound into the transcript 6
MR. SPEKTER:    I would also join in that 7
request.
MR. DAVIDSON-    I' haven't decided whether I wish to*do so or not.                                        However, if either of you at'the appropriate time, when;it is your examination, wish'to do 11 so you certainly are at liberty-to undertake to conduct 12 your examination in any matter you two see fit.
MR. MIZUNO:    I believe that    --
well, just, 14 a moment.                                    Yes, I think --
MR. DAVIDSON:    I am just. conducting my to examination the way I feel comfortable.
I MR. MIZUNO:    Okay.                                            t 19                                                  j rMR. DAVIDSpN:
Q      g              do you recognize this as a memo o
that you prepared?
21 A        Yes, I do.
22 Q        So that the initial        here are in fact 23 your initials?
24 A        Yes, they-are.
                                                                                                                                                ]
25 Q        Do you see that there are some initials in
                                                                                                              -_- ._____                _  _ - _A
 
jon6 231 manuscript over above.the~ typed-in initials there are'some 2                        '
manuscript' initials above your        ; is that your initials?
3 A:        Yes, it,is.
A Q          Do you recognize anyone else?s initials 5
on here?
6 LA The reproduction lis poor.:but I imagine 7
the one part of mine is Art 1.ondon.
8 Q          And the one after that?
9 A          Ken Luken.
10 Q          1s this signature appear to you to'be Mr. Miller's signature?
A          Yes..it.is.
I3 Q'        Now, you_ wrote this memo.
14 Is this~'the        ,
memorandum we'have been discussing; that'is the startup 15 memorandum regarding the concern you had with' respect to-16 the DES-100 cable separation and the criteria in II Regulatory Guide Section 4.11?
18 A          Reg Guide 1.75.
l Q          I am sorry.  'I have' holding the document 0
upside down.
The NRC Regulatory Guide'l.75?
21                                                                                  .j A          Right.
22 Q          is this the memorandum that    you wrote?        ,
23 A          Yes, it i s ..
2d Q
25 And is that date now refresh your recollection' as to when you had the incident with Mr. Powers?
                                                                                                                          .i.
 
jon?                                                                                                                                                                        2321 I
A      It specifies char December 19 was when 2
the memorandum was written; therefore the incident with 3
Tred Powers was probably within a week's time period from that date.
5 Q      Before or after?'
6 A'      Before.
I 1 might could even refresh it closer than 8
that if need be.
Q        How would you do that,'                                  I to                                                                              \                            .'
A        Looking to see where the 19th fell'on as far as date-wise.
12 MR. DAVIDSON:    All right. Mr. Spekter has 13 been good enough to lend us.his calendar. .Previously.
I' If you feel that would help you pinpoint it even better.
15 let's ask Mike to produce it -- Mr. Spekter to produce it 16 again, and let's look at it.
II MR. SPEKTER:      I would be pleased to do that.
38 This is a 1983 calendar.
I' I would alao request'that since the witness 20 has testified from that document, at this point that a copy 24 he made part of the record.                                      I believe it is appropriate
                                                            ??
that for reference purposes that document now be made and                                                                  !
23 given a number and made part of this deposition.                                                                          ,
24 MR. DAVIDSON:      Once again Mr.'Spekter has 75 read my mind.                                  He is one step ahead of me.
I i
I l
l I
L      _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .                                                            _      _              -.                                            _
 
Son 8-233 1                                                                  s I think now that you have identified it 2
what I would like to ask is that we make a Xerox copy of 3  it, a photocop.v. have it marked appropriately, and re turn d  the original to me.
5 MR. SPEKIER: .That has been today's 6
procedure and no problem.
7 MR. DAVIDSON:  What I would l'ike to do.
8 Mr. Reporter, is I would like to label this document 9                                                                    i Disc Exhibit F-8.
XXXXXX      10 (The document referred to was 11 marked Exhibit Disc F-B 12 13 f or identification.)              I BY MR. DAVIDSON:
14 Q-    Now, have you had a chance to study 15 Mr. Spekter's calendar with respect to 1983 in December?          l.
16 A      Yes, I have.
17 I believe that the date  --
with that document being dated on Monday the 19th, to the 18 best of my recollection -- now, I am not positive. I know        ;
lo that this incident started on a Friday which would mean          ]
l 20 21 that it should be the 16th and also the 16th should be the        !
1 date which I called in NRC Region V.                              j 22 Q    All right.                                        i 23 A
At the very most it is a week's delay 24 behind there, so it would be the week previous to that.            i 25 Q      Well, I am glad we were able to refresh            !
l l
 
1 jonIO-                                                                                                                  235 I
A    Correct.                                                4 2                                                                              1 Q    So you assume you have no reason to'believe 3
that the practice was not followed in this case?
4 A    Well. I received a reply back from            a 5
letter, therefore it must have been forwarded.
6 Q    That'.s good reason for your belief.
7 Did you at any time discuss this memorandum 8
with Mr. Camp?
9 A    Yes.
10 Q    When you raised the subject with him..did II he give evidence that he had seen a copy of it; in other 12 words when you mentioned it to him he didn't say I have 13 never seen a copy of that memo; did he?
14 A    Mr. Camp was one of the ones who had 15 directed me to write the memorandum.          If I remember right to from previous.cestimony. I came in on a Saturday indicating II to Art London and Dick Camp that I had contacted the NRC l
                                                                                'O concerning this problem --
19 Q      I see.
20 A
                                                                                                          -- and we went to his office and at that 21 time they toned me down and reqeusted that I not call the                    i 22 800 number, and at the same time said go ahead and write the 23 memo to start generating -- get it through channels.
24 Q    In other words, they felt that the proper 25 procedure to be followed in raising this question was to l
i
't                                                                                                                                                                  l
____.__________-_-__A
 
jon11 236 4
I write this memorandum and send it forward to the people 2
indicated?.
3 A Correct. That w.s s brought up. That was one of the conditions that they had got mad about as.far 5
as the 'NRC call.
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1
5
______________.____.__m.      _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _
 
lk
                                                                                                      '237 i-231b!
l-                                                                                                I MR. DAVIDSON:  Do you wish to take a break,                              l 2                    L                                                                        .-
3
                                    -~'
THE WITNESS:  No. we will keep going, d
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
5 Q        When you say that Mr.. Camp toned you down, 6
do you mean that you were angry at the time?                          Were: you still 7    angry over the Powers incident?                                                            i B
A        Very much'so.
i y
9 Q      And this was on Saturday,'right?
                                                                                                                  ).
10              A        Right.
Il Q        So you had overnight to think about its and l'
                '12    you were still hot about it?                                                                i i
13              A      .W ell, the definition of hot -- you know, t 18 was still concerned that my job had been insinuated                            bout 15 an incident to which I was truly: correct on.
16 Q        Well, I think only others will be able to 17 tell us you were correct, but which you were truly concerned 1 18    about?                                                                                    '
I' A        An incident which I felt I was truly correct                          )
20 on and which was confirmed to me by the NRC representative.
21 Q        Well, we don't know whether he confirmed it ~                          .
22    or not.. There is no evidence to that fact.'                                          ,
23              A        Okay.
2'              Q        But we do know that you felt.that.you were                            J 25    truly concerned about the incident.        You felt you were 4
 
                                                                                                                                                  <p
                                                                                                                                        ' 2 3'8 lb2.
4 1-raising a legitimate point'.andEyou felt that'Mr. . Powers 2          didn't understand-it. And tha t.-is why you hadi the dispute, 3-because you felt that he was not responding to a-legitimate-4          complaint?
5                    A.      1 felt that Mr. Powers understood the proble m 6            perfectly.
7                      Q      But.you don't know that?
8                    A      1 felt that Mr. Powers did not want to 9
address the problem because.of the fact that the'implementa-10 tion -- the possibility of extended work load and-reinspection 11                of the full. plant.
12                ,          Q      And you wanted'the problem addressed, didn't 13                you?    You wanted an explanation to your perceived ^ conflict 14 betwetn ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 and Mr. Powers 15 did not seem to be prepared to give you that explanation?                    l 16                          A                                                                  l No, Mr. Powers said there was no problem.
17                He just said that ES-100, period. That'is.it. That he had 1
18 final say so and that whatever he said was going to be        it.-        'l 19                  as                                                                          !
far as whether there was s' conflict between those two 20                    procedures.
21 Undoubtedly, they had had_this argument come 22                    up before.
23                              Q      How do you know that, sir?                                1
                                                                                                                                                        .. j 24                              A      It was during the conversations with Fred 25 Powers, that he made the statement that they had had this                -l
                                                                                                                                                        'i i
 
239!
                          'fc231b3-1 argument prior to this and ic was decided by,him and other:-
2    peopleithat -- well, it'was even{during'the phone conversation 3    to Gibbs & Hill, the Gibbs & Hill employee which I believe a  signed a reply.to that memo, which would:furtherfgive you 5  .more information than.my' previous ttstimony .not being able 6-  to identifyEthe person or-recollect the name.
l 7                    - Talking with him on 'the : phone. heJspecified.
L                                            a    that they had had'thatJargument previously'andithat: there 9    was a concern in it, as-far as ES-100 and the Reg Guides to    not corresponding. But that due to the! fact that it was  '
11    going to cause so much more of a workload.fthey felt that
: 12. they -- that they could save money by fighting it in-court' 13  or fighting it.with the NRC if it arose with the NRC.
14            Q      Was that' incorporated in the. response that 15  was prepared to the' statement?
16            A      In writing?
17            Q      Yes.
18            A      No, it was not..
1 19            _Q      You say you called Gibbs &. Hill', New York?
20              A      As soon as I received the reply, I called 21 this person and asked him how can you come up with this1 reply?
22    You know that this is a violation of the_ Reg Guide.              This 23    Person also admitted to me, at that time, that        --
                                                                                                          ' h e >- a l s o 24    admitted to me, at that time, that if they had.it-t-o do all- ~
25    over again-they were relooking at the' documentation over oj
 
240 lb4 4
1 again, that they would go ahead and modify the ES-100.
2 But since, for the fact that the plant had 3
been built to this ES-100 spec and built so long, that they 4
did not want to go into the added cost of having to do 5    reinspection    for this problem.                        They felt that                    --
6 Q      What did the written response tell you?
7              A      Well, it basically gave a flimsy excuse of 8
fire goes up and therefore, the heat would be transmitted 9    upward and not downward.                      And in actuality, you've got to    problems with -- well,              one of the NRC reps concurred with me 11 when I talked to him on the phone, that you're dealing with 12 a possible, probably, hot molten material dripping down on 13 a conduit underneath.
14 Q      But you recollect distinctly that the 15 individual who prepared the response, that you mceived -- a 16    written response              --
stated that it was because fire goes up 17    and not down. And that's why there was no                                              --
18              A Okay, his written response was not worded 19 exactly that way            --
20 Q      Three times you testified it was, i
21              A Well, 1 don't know if it was indicated to me 22 over the phone or actually indicated to me in writing. I                                                    '
23 would have to refresh my memory by looking at the document 24 again, to determine whether it was actually in writing or                                                  j 25 if it was done over a phone conversation.                                                            !
1 i
I
                                                                                                                        .i
 
d
                                                                                                                                                                                    '241 fc231b5 1
Q          .Did you ever see the written. response to
                                                                                                      '2    the startup memo that you wrote?'
3              A              Yes, I did.
4              Q              Do you recollect what was in.it?
5              A              The main portion, that I remember about that 6  memo right now was that it said that there was no: conflict" 7  between_the'ES-100 and Reg' Guide 1. 7 5 '.
8            Q              Now, you testified just a moment ago thct 9  you called --            'I'm sorry.
10              A              I had something that 1 wanted to conclude 11    on this.
12              Q              Please.
13              A              .Okay, that also leads-into additional 14 information, as to when 1 say upper level management 15  relaxing requirements, right?                  Here we're deallng with a 16 situation where upper level management made the decision that 17    since it was            going to cost so much more money to 3o back 18 and reinspect all this that they.were willing to fight NRC 19 on this issue, rather than go to the more' stringent 20    requirement.
21              Q              Who, in upper. level management, told.you that?
22    If anyone.
23              A              .When 1 say -- a Gibbs & Hill' employee..which 24 was at a higher level than me speaking .which was making.
25 decision -- you've got to figure that.he made' recommendations i
d 4
 
242 lb6-
                                                                                                                                                                          ?
I and all and agreed with Ivan Vogelsang and Fred Powers on 2
this issue, right?                                  Which they're all considered to be 3
upper level, you know, as far'as their decision making.
4 So you're dealing with a situation there where 5
they are actually, instead of saying we know -- he did.
6 He said, we know there is a possibility or that it can be 7
interpreted that we're in violation of the Reg Guide 1.75.
B Q      Who said this?
9 A        The Gibbs & Hill.
10 Q        The Gibbs & Hill?          Who is the Gibbs & Hill, 11 sir?
12 A          The person. You would have to refresh my 13        memory.                                    You would have to show me the reply documentation.
14 Q            Are you through with this answer, or do you 15 have more to say?
to                                            A            I am through with it.
17 Q            All right.
l IB Now, I just want to understand.                                                  Art you l'
saying that you had a telephone conversation with someone 20 at Gibbs & Hill in New York, subsequent to your review of                                                                                                l 21 the response provided by that organization?
22 A                Yes.
23 Q                And is it your testimony that you called 24 the person who signed the response, which gave the 25 explanation from Gibbs & Hill?
 
243 Lfc231b7 1
A Now, the responsesletter that you ~ may get 2
:may.be a response  --
I'cannot remembercexactly whether or-3 not the response. letter went'from Gibbs & Hill'to 4
                    - engineering and then engineering rewrote-the letter and' 5
then sent it to start.up. I do not know.
6 Or Ildo not know if engineering ~just. stuck 7
a cover sheet over the Gibbs.&(Hill? document.
B g-      Well,'nowjI want'to'be-clear. .Did'you:ever, 9
See the Gibbs & Hill letter?
10 A      The return' 11 Q      Yes.
12
                                    -(Pause.)
13 A      I believe I did.      I'believe that.itz was.
14 attached with a cover sheet from engineering.
15 Q      All right.
16 Now we identified-Disc Exhibit 8 as being
                                                                            ~
                                                                                        )
17 a memorandum from Mr. Miller, albeit'that you prepared.
18 addressed to Larry -- to L.M.'Popplewell. Is. that-Jcorrec t ?-
19 A      Correct.
20 Q      Now, at the conclusion of the statement of          l 21                                                                      -]
the problem -the last sentence says "startup"reques't            ~!
22                                                                        \
engineering evaluate the situation and respon'd with the-        ]
23 design philosophy that permits the installation of racetay          !
2#                                                                        i as described."    So there was a request for an. explanation.
i                                                                                      j 25                                                                        l as to whether or not there was a conflict?.                        '
i
                                                                                      'l 4
                                                                                      'l i
 
___        ____                                                                      _    --                                            ~
244 131b8 4
1 A      One other thing that might be brought into 2      account here. That was not my original letter.
3                                                            Q    Your original memo?
4                                                            A    Correct. I started off with a much more 5    descriptive issue of the problem, much more -- well, 6    pinpointing the fact that I had already contacted outside 7
sources, you know, talking with Art London, and so forth, 8    and the NRC.                                                  I had already known, in my mind, that there 9    was a problem and in turn I turned this letter over to 10    Art London.
11 And he felt that it as too forceful and 12 in turn, rewrote coming down to a less forceful type meaning.
13                                                          Q        When you say forceful, what do you mean?
14                                                          A        I said specifically, as I feel now, that it 15 is in violation of the Reg Guide and here is just saying 16 that we think it's in violation.
17                                                        Q          And asking for someone to explain?
18                                                        A          Correct.
Io Q          How the two could be reconciled and -- but 20    this was, in fact, what you wanted, though. You wanted 21    to find out what their explanation was, wasn't it?                                                    Isn't 22    that what the purpose of the memo was, to find out the 23    explanation?                                                                                                        l i
24                                                                    Well, you look pu221ed. What was your purpOBe 25    at writing the meno, if not to find out the reason?
 
r-9L%
fc231b9 1              AJ    Tol-identify the problem.
2              QJ    Right.
3              A    Okay, the main reason 'was -- as I had already 4    been told. and informed by NRC, that there was a problem-5    and I am not -- you know -- that there was a problem;there.
6    So in my mind. I feltLth~at there was..a definite problem.
l L-7    By doing this' memo. I addressed the problem'and if the e    company will not correct.the~ problem : what more'can I do?.
9              Q-    We didn't ask you that.                  -We only asked 10    you whether you wanted to highlight your' concern and ask'-                            ~
it for an explanation and that was the purpose of this memo,.
12      wasn't it?    You did highlight your concern?
13              A      True.
14              Q    'And.you asked for an explanation, didn't you?
15              A      Well,'really what I'was trying toiask for 16    was, is corrective action.
17              Q      Do you mean to'tell me that-you were not is    interested in an explanation?. You.were only~ interested                                              in 19    getting your own interpretation accepted?.
20              A      Not necessarily -        1 was.asking for-a "                                          '-
21    legitimate --
22
                                                    ~
Q. Explanation?-
23              A      Explanation.
24                      Fair enough.
Q                      Now 1 note that.the memorandum-25    is' addressed to Mr. Popplewell but we have been talking about 4
1_  _ _ _ _ _ _ ___m______ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
246 lbl0 4
1 a response from Gibbs & Hill.                                      Did Mr. Popplewell provide 2      a response?
3                                                  A I believe that he responded through a cover 4      sheet.
What it was was Larry Popplewell, during the meeting 5
in Dick Camp's office on this issue                                        --
6 Q      There was a meeting?
7                                                  A      What?
8 Q      Go ahead. I'm sorry. Answer the question.
9                                                  A      The meeting on Monday. It was in Dick 10 Camp's office and Larry Popplewell had informed that we 11 could go ahead and send up a memo if we wanted to and that 12 was what Dick Camp had decided that w e would go ahead and do 13 but that Larry Popplewell would just have Gibbs & Hill 14 go ahead and review it and come back with the information on 15      it.
16 Q      Why did Mr. Popplewell -- and to your under-17 standing why did he indicate that he thought Gibbs & Hill 18 should look at it, rather than himself or somebody else?
19 A
Gibbs & Hill is the architectural engineer 20 and if I remember right, Gibbs & Hill created the ES-100 21        specification.
22                                                                                                                        I Q      In other words, it was their responsibility to 23 provide the criterion, the separation criteria, from Reg                                                        1 l
24        Guide 1.75?                                                                                                      i 25                                                  A      Correct.
1 e
 
o
                                    ..        s 247
      'fc231b11 1
Q      And therefore,-he thought that the.best place 2    'to ask'for a response _to'your question would be.the: person 3    who drafted'the original criteria?                                      l 4              A      Not the person who drafted it.
5              Q      The organization, which would beLGibbsi& Hill.
6              A      Okay, 7
Q      Is that right?    Is that your understanding?
8                A      Correct.
9
                                                  'Q    'Did he.say.that?
10              A      Well, he didn''t say'it,~but those_words.
11 Q      But'that's what you understood?
12              A      Right.
13 Q      So then you understood'that this was going 14 to be forwarded to Gibbs & Hill in New York?-
15                A      They'had already_ pinpointed'the exact person 16 they were going to forward it to.          I had al' ready, during.
17 the meeting, identified to them that I haditalked to-somebody 18 different than the person they were talking about. 'And 19 they automatically said, well, we know'of this other person                -!
20 so we're going to forward it to him. He is in understanding 21 with our point of view, basically.
22 Q      Do you know who the response -- do you_know 23 the individual who signed.the' response for Gibbs &1 Hill?                j i
24                A      I've already told .you t h a t - .11 d o n ' t -- I'would  !
                                ?$                                                                                  l have to look at the memo to refresh my memory.                            _l i
i.
I i
i
 
248
:231b12 4
1 Q                                                                Could it have been the project manager at 2
Gibbs & Hill for Comanche Peak?
I just asked you whether thqt 3                                              is possible?
4 A                                                                  Okay, Gibbs & Hill --
5 MR. SPEKTER:  I believe that if he answers 6
a question that he doesn't know who it is.
7 MR. DAVIDSON:  I have the right, Mr. Spekter,.
8 to see if I can refresh his recollection, just as I did 9
earlier when I mentioned a name and he said yes, that's right                                                              .
10 And that's all I'm asking, Mr. Spekter, let's see if we 11 can move this along.
12 THE WITNESS: Gibbs & Hill uses the same format 13 at startup as us. The person necessary, who'does the 14 craft work and the investigation is not the one who signs 15                                              the document.
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
17 Q                                                              1s it your understanding that the Project 18 Manager would sign a response that he didn't agree with?
19                                                        A It is my understanding that it is very 20 easy to have somebody, such as Dick Camp, sign something 21 without him truly knowing exactly what they are signing.
22 It is very easy to handle paperwork in large volumes and 23 to explain between one thing and what's actually being 24 signed or indicated to be totally different.
25 Q                                                          In other words. you think that in preparing
 
i 249 fc231b13 1
a memorandum for him, that he sked you to do, that you 2  could slip something by him?                                                        !
3 (Pause.)                                                        i d                                                                                      i.
A      Well, I'm not -- I don't know how intense l
5 this individual reads his memorandums.                                              :
i 6            Q      You don't know?                                                  f I
7            A      I don't know. I'm not going to make                            ..
8 l
that accusation.
9                    Okay.
Q              What about your ability to slip I
10  something by Mr. Camp?      Do you think you could?        A memorandum 11 he asked you to write, you could slip something by him?
12            A                                                                      '
I don't know.
1 13                    Did you do that?
Q Id            A      No.
15 Q      Do you know anybody who did slip something                    {
16  by Dick Camp?
i 17              A      No.                                                          '
end24  18 19 20 21 22 23                                                                                            ;
24 25 i        j
                                                                                              !        l i
I l
l i
_--._.---_..-_----_.--_--_A
 
1 l
250          '
l 31 A
l 1
BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                    I l
2              Q      Do you remember or recollect who the project 3    manager for Gibbs & Hill might have been at the time?
l 4              A        No, I don't.
f 5              Q        Was  his name R.E. Ballard, which I think was 6    on the table of organization        that we looked at'just a moment 7    that you pointed to?
l                                  8              A      It might be.
l l                                  9              Q      Could that be the individual?      Was he listed to    as such there?
,                                11              A        I don't know.
                                ,12              Q        I'm going to ask you to look at a document 13                    It consists of three pages.      And, you see, it is 14 a copy of a document that is a.three-page letter on the 15      letterhead of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.        And the address is 11 Penn 16      Plaza, New York, New York dated January 23, 1984. It also 17 bears a stamp saying transmitted by telecopier January 23.
18 It is addressed to TUGCO in Glen Rose, Texas, 19    attention J.B. George, vice president project general manager.
1 20      And as you can see it deals with Regulatory Guide 1.75 and 21      ES-100. And it goes on    for three pages, and it is s i g n~e d 22      very truly yours, Gibbs & Hill.        And I can't make out the        '
23      signature, and the printed text reads, Robert E. Ballard, i
24      Jr., project manager.      Do you see that?                            i 25              A      Yes.
i                                                                                                                I l
l                                                                                                                \
 
251-24pb2 l
1 Q      It also indicates that copies were sent                                  to'+-
i
                                                                                                                                          .I 2    and it says, ARMS, B6R site.      Do you know what that is?
3              A      Brown & Root.
d Q      What's ARMS?
5              A ARMS is some kind of documentation center.
6 Q      Documentation center that's maintained.                                  D0' 7    you know what OL means?                                                                                l 8              A      No.
9 Q      Then M. McBay.
10              A      Right.
11 Q        It says TUSI, and then it says IL.                    Do you 12 know what that means?
13                      No.
A I believe it stands for one letter.
14 Q      What about H. Deam. Do you know who that might 15    be?
                                                                                                                                          !s 16            A        No.
l                                                                                                                                        l l
17                                                                                                          !I Q        Then it says, W.I. Vogelsang, TUSI site and                                        I 18 it indicates that was telecopied to him.
i 19            A        Correct.                                                                          '
20              Q        It also indicates a copy to L. Popplevell.
21    TUSI site. Do you see there are th r e e: sets of' initials?
* 22              A      Yes.                                                                              Il 23              Q      In capital letters here, REBa - PNL - SPM, 24 also with handwritten initials.      Do you know any of those 25    individuals?
i k                                                                                      _.  . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _
 
252 x                .
i l
1                                                        A                  .I'm not familiar with the'SPM, but the SPM 2
could:be possibly Sam Martinovich.                                                            Butfto the best o'f my-
:3
                                                                                            . recollection' Sam Martinovich is the. person.who.I talked to
                                                                                    'd regarding --
5 MR. MIZUNO:  -Was the person'you talked-to 6    regarding what?
7 THE WITNESS:      Sam Martinov1ch regarding how they_could justify this letter the way they justified it.
                                                                                                                                                  ~
8 9
And~now if I am remembering the name correctly, which I think to I am, he was also the one that was brought up by them during                                                                  j 11 the meeting in Dick Camp's office that.he would be the one 12 that they would have do the evaluation.
13 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
14 Q                  Now in your affidavit,j i              is'there 15 any mention, any conversation you had%with respeclt                                                            to-16 Mr. Martinovich or anyone.else at Gibbs-& Hill in New York 17 regarding the preparation of this response?
18 MR. SPEKTER:    Which response are we speaking 19      about?
20 MR. DAVIDSON:      The one he'siidentified that 21      was dated January 23, 1984.
22 MR. SPEKTER:    That's something that is not 23        in the record.                                                          I would request that it be copied at this 24 point, a copy be provided for the deposition.
25 MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Spekter, I would appreciate
 
253
                                                                ''pb4 1
your letting me conduct my own examination.      When you have 2    the podium you make whatever rules you like.
3                      BY MR. DAVIDSON:
l 4              Q                    there's a question pending, s
5              A      Will you repeat the question -- if I, interpret 6
the' question you are asking me if there is any information 7    in the affidavit as to the response letter.
8              Q      Well, that wasn't my question.      My question 9
was, is there any mention of the_ telephone conversation that to    you allege that'you had with the Gibbs & Hill New York office!
1 11 of employee therein after you received the response?
12              A      No, there is not    --
I'm going to hold back on l 13    that question    until I do reread the paragraphs 1here.
14 Q      MAy I call your attention,                  to 15 pages 10 and 11 of the affidavit, which by the way was-16    offered into evidence by your counsel.
17 (Witness reviewing document.)-
18 MR. DAVIDSON:    {I'          when you have 19 k
completed reviewing those, would you pie se look up?
20                        THE WITNESS:    The only telephone conversation 21 indicated in this paragraph would be the one ma'de prior _to.
22 the writing of the meno you have, which was to the employee 23 who refused to sign off the DCA because of the violation of 24      the ES-100.
25                      MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Reporter, would you please i
 
256 4 ~
J 1
read back my question?
j 2
(The reporter read the record as requested.)        j 3
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
d                  Q,                                                                    I Now would you please answer the question?
5                A              ~No,-there is'not.
        'o                  Q                            turning once again to cheftwo 7
paragraphs on page 10 regarding your, allegation that there-
        '8 is a conflict ~ between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide'1.75, is-9      there any mention of your having written a. start-up-memo 10 seeking an explanation?
11 A              'No,  there'is not.                                      !
12 Q                Is there any mention in this affidavic of            :
13 your having been.provided with a response co that                start-up 14      memo?
15                  A              No --
16 Q                I haven't finished -- through engineering 17 and from the architect engineer, Gibbs & Hill?
18                A                No, there is not.
19 Q
(                do you have a copy of the1 response 20 that was provided by Gibbs & Hill that was_given to you?
21                                                                                i
              .            A                I do not believe so.
22 Q              You did not retain a copy?
23                A                To the best of my knowledge I did-not.
2d Q                But you may have?
25                A                I don't know.
, -; .                  ______2_--_______.
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ~255 24pb6 1
Q      Would you check your records at home and if 2  .you1were.given a copy would you provide it for us?
3              A      Yes, I will.
4 Q-    Would you.do that early next week?                ,
5              A      Yes.
6                    You mentioned Q                                  that.you'believe 7
that the response that was-provided to.,you was under~a cover 8    sheet, you-called it.
9                A      Yes.
                                                                                                                                                -10                          Q      From Mr. Popplewell.
11                    A      I said it possibly could have been'under a 12            cover sheet. I'm not familiar it is was or not. I'do not 13            remember if it was or not.
14 Q      A moment ago 1 think you made=a more affirmative; 15              statement. In any event, will you look for that cover sheet?
16                        A      Yes  .
17 Q      And if you have that, will you produce it to 18              us?                                                                        l j
i 19                        A      Yes, I will.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ]
20                            Q      Will you do that early next week?                      .l
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  .i          i' I
21                            A      Yes, I will.
l 22 Q      Now, you indicated that you had made.a-23                                                                                    !
telephone call to the NRC on or about December 16 after you      +
I        -
24 had the discussion with Mr. Powers.                                        I 25                              A      Yes, 1 did.
l
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ?
I        ,
I
 
256 4
1 Q      What.was.the reason for that call?
2                    _A        To confirmany questions of.ES-100 being in 3            violation of Reg Guide 1.75.
4                    Q        Who in the NRC did you contact?
f        l 5                    A        At this time I do not remember.
6                      Q      ~Did you know, did you introduce yourself'to.
7 the individual on the other end of the line?
8                      A      Eventually the individual on'the other end 9            of the line I believe did have my name.        At the very beginnin.;
10            I wanted to keep it anonymous.        I do not.know at which time 11            I broke being anonymous.
12 Q      _Did the person on the other end of the line 13            give you.his identity?
14                      A        Yes.
15                      Q        Tell you how you made that call.      Whom did you '
16            call?    Did you pick out a particular individual with the 17 NRC with whom you were acquainted?.                                        i 18                      A      No, I did not. What happened was I had gotten 19            home, it was after 5:00.        The NRC  region  for this area.
20            was closed at the time.        The only one open to possibly answer i
                              - 21 questions that I might have was the NRC region:towards. '
22            California, which was Region V, I believe. ~ANd that's the 23            reasoning for calling Region V.
24 1 was just connected with an electrical 25            engineer.
l I asked for an electrical engineering type. person 1
1
    't
                                                                                                                        ~f 1
  - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ = _ _ _ _ - _ . _ .
 
                                                                                                            ~257 24pb8 1  to ask a questions to.
2              Q    But you don't recollect who that might have 3  been?
4              A    Not right now.
5              Q    Did you at any time raise these matters with 6
the regional office that had charge for this particular 7    proj ect , which would be Region IV?
8              A      No, in order to do that I would have had to 9
call during company time, which considering the amount of 10 conflict and harassment, you might say, that I go t for 11    calling Region V, I felt to try and call NRC during company 12    time would be very bad.
13 Q      Now you just said that you got harassment 14    for calling Region IV      You haven't earlier identified or 15 testified any hararsment for making that call. Are you now to giving us yet another incident that has not previously been 17    testified to?
18              A      l'm saying that 1 was counseled on it, and 19 told that it places the company in bad light and should not 20    be done.
21                      Were Q            those the exact words that were used 22    in that counseling session?
23              A      l'm not going to try and give an exact word 24    for word in a counseling session.
25              Q      Well, could it have been, well, why don't I
 
258 9
4 1
you see whether there is a response from Gibbs & Hill and 2
before you go off half-cocked in calling the NRC with your 3
speculations, could that have been the sum and substance 4
of the conversation?
5              A    No. My reasoning to the question such as 6
that was, I did not call NRC reporting an incident or-7 reporting a failure problem.
I called NRC asking questions.
8 And I believe I might even have kept the first conversation 9
or phone call strictly confidential, which was cotally just 10 on my part doing questioning to see if I was correct in my 11    assumption.
12 Q    You weren't certain    that you were right and 13 you were looking for confirmation?
14 A      Right.
And once I gained confirmation from 15 an authority or a source higher than Gibbs & Hill.
16 Q
Then you weren't prepared to listen to anybody 17    else's explanation?
18              A    No.
I was prepared to identify the problem.
19 Q
But in other words, at that point after hearing 20 from this unidentified engineer from the NRC in Region V, 21 in your view no explanation than agreement with you would 22 have been acceptable, would it?
23              A      No. The specific electrical engineer for 24    NRC also during    the conversation specified that other 25 nuclear power plants had been shut down recently for this 9
 
259 L' 24pb10 l
li i
1 same separation violation. problem, and.that if'they are                                            '
l.
2 building to this specification'that they stand a very good.
* chance of being shut down theirselves.
3                                                                                                              I 4
So'at the time there I was dealing w'ith how-
                    .5 much -- I even specified to Fred Powers'some. time.that?you                                              I 6      were going to sit here with a violation, continue on                                                '
_l' 7
building ~ this plant and possibly spend an excessive amount 8      of money later when the pyoblem actually is encountered.
9                  Q        4                this. gentleman that~you called                        '!
10            from Region V.            Did he indicate to you that he had inspected
                                                                                                                                      =4 11 or reviewed any'of the cable separations at Comanche Peak?
17                        A            No, he did not.
* 13                        Q            So the only basis on which he had to.go in                                .
I 14 response to your question was your assertion a b o u t ---
15                          A            I read him.; He was perfectly familiar with 16 the Reg Guide 1.75 which most NRC personnel.are.
I r'ead him.i. ]
17 portions out of the Reg Guide 1^75 which he understood to l j I
4 18              be that.      I also read him specific inf ormation directly: from.
a I
I 19 the ES-100 which is outlined in my~ affidavit. .                                                          .,
20                                                                                                                              !
And his reply was. yes it is in violation.                                          l 21                                                                                                                              i Q            Is this conversation and the details-the sum                                      J i,
22 and substance which you-just revealed to'us now part of your 23                affidavit?
24                          A            I believe not.
s 25                          Q                            when you received the_ response fron
['              i l
1 i
 
260-4 1
Gibbs & Hill,'New. York did you take it up-with this 2
            . unidentified engineer from Region V7'
    '3 (Pause.).
d A        Repeat that one more time. When I received --
5 MR. DAVIDSON:  Instead of your.trying to 6
repeat it, why don't we ask'the reporter.to - -
7 THE WITNESS:  Let's take a short break here 8
and come back to that particular question'afterwards.
9 MR. DAVIDSON:  I don't follow what you're-10    saying.
11 THE WITNESS:  I would like'to take a break.
12 MR..DAVIDSON:  You want to consult with 13 counsel?
14 THE WITNESS:  No, I would like to take a break, 15 MR. DAVIDSON:  As I told you before,Jany time 16 you want to take a break you can have it.      Go ahead, 17
                  )
18
                  /
THE WITNESS:  Okay..
19
_(Recess -- 4:40 p.m.)
20 21                                                            i
* 22 23 2A 25
 
l jon!                                                                            261 '!
l
                              #25            (4:56 p.m.)
1 l~1 i
4:56p.m.
MR. SPEKTER:  Ue are back on the record                      i l
3 and the reporter is going to read the question that we had ll before the break.                                                          j d
MR. DAVIDSON:  Would you, please,-
                                                                                                                        ;)  '
Mr. Reporter?
i 6
(The reporter read the' record as requested.); [        '
7                                  .
THE WITNESS:    Yes.
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
9
                                                      'Q      Did'you send a copy to this unidentified 10 individual of the written response of Gibson-Hill?
11 A      I do not remember.
12 Q      Do you recollect having taken it up with              ,
13 him?      What is your recollection?                                    ,
14                                                                        -f1 A      Oh, I do know that  I' formally made a report        !
15 on that incident to the Region V NRC representative.
16                                                                            '
Q      Now, this is a formal report?                        g 17 A      I actually indica'ted to him that there-was          l.
l                                      18 a problem, that they had had time to resolve this problem-19 and this was what their answer was to the. problem.
Q      And when you say formal report 21 what  --
t A      Okay. Maybe the word formal would not be 23 correct. Originally 1 indicated to him that I did not want 24 this to go in as a report to him or to be researched.
25 The final one towards the end pone calls was that yes, I              ,
 
263 Ii i
4 I
had received the information back from here and'that                                        I 2
it was inconsistent to what me and him had talked about                                      1 3
then that I was placing a formal complaint at this time.
4 Or I was notifying him of the problem and requesting 5
research into the background of it.
                                                                                                            )
6 Q      Now, did you call anyone in Region IV 7
about the problems since they had jurisdiction of your 8      plant?
9 A      As I indicated earlier, Region IV was 10 always closed by the time I was able to get home to make il those phone calls.
And in some cases Region V was already                                j 12    closed. So I probably had several phone calls where I 13 tried to contact him but he had already left t. h e office 14    in Region V.
15 Q      Did you  ever make a phone call'to Region IV?
16                                                                                                      {
A      No, I did not.                                                              :
17                                                                                                    ]
Q Did it have an answering machine where you                                  i IB could have left a message on at Region IV?                                                      i 19 A
You have got to understand here that I am 20 trying to maintain a certain amount of being anonymous about j
21      this, 22                                                                                                      i Q
Well, you said you had disclosed yourself by                                  l 23      this point.
24                A Well, I believe telling this one person 25 is one thing but to put your name down on an answering i
0
                                                                        ....__..__.._.__..___.________m_
 
  )
jon i                                                                                                                                      262C I
machine that could possibly be reviewed by no telling who 2
and not having the stipulation already addressed to the 3
person you are talking to that you that you do not want your name used in any matter, it would be stupid on my 5
part to do something like that.
6 Q      Did you not think you could mail a 7
writtn complaint to Region IV?
8 A
1 felt that a verbal would be more appropriate, and T m not even sure    --
like you asked a 10 question earlier. I may have maild him documentation II associated with this.
12 Q      You may have mailed Region V?
13 A      Right.
Q      And did it occur to you to mail to 15 Region IV if you were going to mail something, to mail 16 it to Region IV who had jurisdiction over your plant?
A      1 was not talking with Region IV                          .
18 Plus, if you look at it this way, too, there is a certain level of buffer between there, t o'o , that now in order for 0
Region IV or anybody on the site to find out who I am, 21 they have to go through Region V and so therefore therer.
2 is an added buffer there. Or they have to go through this 3
one person and dealing, you know -- keeping strict confidence, you know, I felt that it was easier for me to "5
go through Region V.
 
Jb l n                                                                                263                  ;
                                                                                                      ?
I Q      Did you not believe that your 2
confidentiality would maintained by Region IV        if you 3
asked it be kept in strict confidence?
                                ~
d A
I don't remember if I had the true feeling 5
that it would not be kept in strict confidence. I know 6
that I started explaining the problem with Region V. I 7
continued to explain the' problem to Region V. Towards the 8
end I see no reason to change to Region IV.
9 Q      Was there a resident NRC representative 10 f              at Comanche Peak?
11 A        Yes.
I 12 Q        Did you take this matter up with him?
13 A        No, I did not.
14 Q        Was that because you felt he wouldn't 15 maintain your confidentiality?
16 A      Yes. You are very correct in that. That 17 i            is one of the main reasons.        There was a common belief on IB    board the job site        in  general.
19 Q        Did you have any evidence of it?      That he 20 wouldn't?      Or were you just concerned he might not?
21 A        Concerned that he might not.
22 Q        Were you concerned that Region IV might not?
23 A        Possibly so. I don't know if -- you have 24 got to figure that after my first telephone conversation 25 with Dick Camp -- I mean with Region V -- I talked to Dick h'
 
i
.?
264
  .4                        jon 1
Camp and ene of th e:t s t a t e me n t s he made during that meeting 2
was, as I said, that,-hey, I didn't make it a complaint 3
and I tried to keep my name anonymous and everything, right, and I told him I didn't want my name used.when this 5
subject came across and Dick Camp's reply was that maybe 6
not to these exact words but he indicated that TUCCO I
knows who reports to the NRC.        And I said bey. I told 0
them that I wanted to stay out of this.          He indicated to me that TUGC0 does know who reports to NRC.
10 Well. TUCCO-TUSI, the organization as a 11 general organization, or Comanche Peak as a general.
12 Q      Did he tell you how he knew that?
13 A      No, he did not.
14 Q      Or his basis for stating that?
15 A      No, he.did not.
16 Q      Did you ask him?
17 A      No, I did not.
                                  '8                                                                                  !
Q      You said the reason that you called 19                                                                                  \
Region V initially was because they would be open after                      '!
i 20 you got off work.
21                                                                                    .
A      Correct.                                                    1 22                                                                                    i Q      Wouldn't some of the regions in the East 23 be open before you went to work?                                                '
24 A      Correct. Well, even theree, we are talking              3 25 about seven --                                                                  !
                                                                                                                      'I
                                                                                                                    ~
l I
i
 
n 265    i P
1 Q      Answer the question first ar.d then.give 2
us your explanation.
3 Wouldn't they be open before you went to a
work?    For example',-the region in Washington                          --
the 5
headquartersiin Washington, D.C.
6 A      Well, I would have to sit here and.think 7
that the region in Washington, D.C. 'I believe is two hours 8
shead of us;'em I correct that Washington,                          D.C. is two 9
hours in advance of this time?
10 1 would have to look at a time zone.                            'It 11 is either one or two hours; right?      And we are speaking of 12 me going into work at a 7:00 o' clock time zone or time 13 and most of your personnel in NRC headquarters do not come 14 in until like 8  o' clock, maybe even 9, and I am not familiar 15 with what their start time is. So it was much easier to 16 do it in the afternoon after I got back.
17 MR. SPEKTER:  This line of questioning I 1B believe is dilatory and time-consuming and inappropriate.
19 He has testified that he contacted Region V in California.
20 That is the fact.
21 That is here. And that he has testified to  .
22 Why he did or did not do something else is 23 purely speculation and not relevant to this particular 24 discovery proceeding.
25 MR. DAVIDSON:  Wait a minute, Mr. Spekter.
1
 
1 jan 2661
                                                                                                        '! 1 1                                                                                  !
I am prepared to give a lot of latitude                    '
l 2
to a lot of statements, but what you just said is totally 3
without foundation or merit. What he did and why he did it is exactly what this deposition is all about and why 5
he refused to contact Region IV and why he insisted on 6
dealing over the phone with Region V and why he wouldn't        --
7 MR. SPEKTER:  It is not a matter of f
B refusing --
9 1
MR. DAVIDSON:    Excuse me. You are f                    10 interrupting, Mr. Spekter.      Please don't do that. I have l                    11 always shown you the courtesy to let you complete all of 12 your statements before I spoke and I assume you are going
                    '3 to return that courtesy with respecting my same rights.
All I am saying is that the reason for 15 what he did and the reason why he believed what he 16 believed are highly relevant in this case, and we are I7 dealing with a specific incident which he says created a te circumstnace of harassment dealing with the question and            -
W issue raised in pages 10 an d .ll of the affidavit. And I 20 know that you consider my questions to be relevant because                  !
21                                                                                i we discussed that and I don't think that the;r are dilatory                l 22 because I think that I have done nothing but move forward                            !
23                                                                                        !
in this line of questioning and pursue cach topic as it                              I 24 arose.
25 I did tell you during the break that one of i        !
L L________-._    _                                                _ _      _      . _ _ _    .._________m
 
267 4
the reasons why this was taking as much time as it was was 2
that,                                          ' continues from time to time to lapse into                      ,
3 unresponsiveness and to insist on making irrelevant speeches in response to questions and providing testimony and 5
creating new assertions and new incidents that were not 6
covered in his direct testimony nor in his affidavit nor previously testified to.                                    And I told you that it was 8
my obligation in a discovery deposition to follow his lead and I told you that it was not I who was leading him in 10 this examination, but he was leading me, and that's why                                                        I
      ''                                                                                                                        I I couldn't give you _.a termination date or time.
12                                                                                                                          p Now, if you have a legitimate objection                        l l    13 you know I have every desire that you get it on the record, I'
but I frankly thought that was really out of order and 15 that is the reason I am responding to it in this manner.
I6 MR. SPEKTER:    I believe this line of                        l
      '7 questioning is out of order.
18 MR. DAVIDSON:    Your objection is so noted.
BY.tMR. DAVIDSON:
20 Q
l              janswer the question.pending.
21 A                                  I don!.t believe there was a question 22 pending.                                                                                                      I 23 Q                                                you say you may have mailed some 24 material to Region V but you chose not to mail it to any 25 other region; is that correct?                                                                                >
 
jon                                                                                      263 l
1 A      Correct.
2 Q      Is your conversation with the unidentified 3
engineer in Region V detailed and described in your-d    affidavit?
5              A      No, it is not.
6 Q      Is the subsequent discussion with this 7
                                                    . unidentified engineer about the response provided by 8
Gibson and Hill mentioned in your affidavit?
9              A      No, it is not.
10 Q      Now, you were telling us.(
11 that you discussed the response                          /
you were'trying to 12 determine whether you had provided the respons e      to the 13  unidentified engineer.      Do you remember that?
Id              A      Once again.I did not    --
I don't understand 15 what you are asking.
16 1
Q      I haven't asked anything. I.was asking 17 whether you remember what we previously discussed, but I 18 will have the reporter read back my statement to you.
19 (The reporter read the record as requested.)
20 MR. SPEKTER:    I will ask counsel to            >
                                                                                                                          )
i 21    rephrase the question.                                            '
l                                            22 MR. DAVIDSON:    I think your suggestion is
                                                                                                                          )
23    a good one. Mr. Spekter,                                              l
!                                                                                                                        i 2d BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                                    }'
25 Q      You will recollect that we have been 1
E ________________ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - - -
 
269 4
I discussing whether you had mailed or otherwise provided 2
the Gibson-Hill response to the unidentified engineer at 3
Region V. Do you recollect that?
A    Yes.
5 Q      And my understanding was that you couldn't 6
remember whether you had or had n o t-.
A      Correct.
8 Q      But you did remember that you discussed a response.
10 A      Correct.
11 Q      Would you please tell me what you told gg the Gibson-Hill response was?
13 14 A
I believe I read it to him. I believe I 15                                had the documentation there and I read it to him.
16 That's the end of my  --
I related        to him I believe.
17 18 Q
Why did you call this engineer in Region V          l 19                              and ask him his opinion about the Gibson-Hill response?
A 20                                                    Because it was in conflict to the 21 informationnbenhad given me previously.
22 Q
Andyou wanted to find out what he thought about the response?
23 A        Correct.
24 25 Q        And did h e respond to your qeustion?
A        Yes.                                                I
 
sjon 270 t                                      .
Q      And what it-is that you-allege-that he 2
said?
3 A      1 believe that'-- now  this is whereiche.
s
                                                                                            .le
                          ~ questioning on my part as far as my memory comes in, he-5 could,have poss&bly asked me'for-the documentation to be'            '
6 mailed to him, which I may have done,.and that.is' vague;      .j '
7                                                                        .
in my memoryLif that did occur.
8 1 am saying that it is possible that.that        ]
9 did occur. I believe he had told me, though, that he'would      j_-
10
                          'look into it and get'back with me.-
Q                  did he get back to you?
12 A      No, he did not. I-don't know if he-13 attempted to or not but-I did not receive phone calls-from 1s him.
15 Q      Well, if he had attempted to get'back to 16 you by phone, was there some place he could have.left a 17                                                                      i message?
18 A      My home phone number, but if there was 19 nobody there he would not have been able to leave a 20                                                                      '
message.
21                                                        t I
You had asked him to contact you at.home
                                                                    ~
Q                                                                d 22                                                                      '            i and not at the plant?
j 23 A      Ch, definitely.'                                            ,
24                                                                                    j Q      At the time of these discussions'were you    [:
25                                                                    '''
married?                                                                    .;
l t              i J
l
'                                                                                                        l
 
271
                                                                                                                                  ?
I A    Yes, I was.
2 Q    Were you living with your wife?                                      l 3
A    Yes, I was.
MR. SPEKTER:  Objection.as to the 5
relevancy of the question.
6 MR. DAVIDSON:    Be patient, Mr. Spekter.
I BY MR. DAVIDSON:
8 Q    Was your wife working at the time?
A      No, she was not.
10 Q    Was she a homemaker as the expression II is?  In other words, was she a housewife?
12 A    Yes, she was.
        '3 Q    And if you had been contacted at your home and she was there she could have taken the message for you?
15 A      If she had been there.
      'O Q    And she never gave you any reason to
      '7 believe that she had gotten the message from this
      '8 unidentified engineer?
A    No, she didnot.
20 Q    Do you know whether the unidentified 21 engineer at Region V ever followed up..on the material 22 that you raised with him?
23 A      No, I do not. Unless also that during that 24 time period it might have ran into            --
I am not familiar with 25 the time frame.          I couldn't say.
 
j en.
272-
                                                                                                                                                            . i ..
a 1
Q.      Excuse me if I look'a little puzzled.
                                                                                                                                                ~
2 When you say you'are not-familiar.with the time' frame, whatLare you-referring'to?
                                                                                    -d A
Well...I wonder if.it-was:duringia  very 5
                                                                                          . busy time frame where my wife was busy in outside activities and me personally, too.        And'towards th'e.end of my employment-I had gotten to the. point to where I could 8
have cared, you know, less.
They had just about L beaten me down    you might say.'    I won't say that I did-not care.'because'I 11 still could      but lt was not' pursuing.the violations in the
                                                                                  '?
procedures:as actively as'I had been before.
13 1
14 Normallyl-- if I had been normally pursuing it I am not' returning'my phone call. I would have 15 returned his.
16 Q        Did he know your home address?
17 A
No. I don? t believe he did'know my'home end2                                      5                                        address. I kept that part out, I believe.
19 20 21                                                            '
i 22 23 j
24                                                                                !
:)
I 25
                                                                                                                                                                'I f
1
 
273 lb1 1
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q    Were you, at the time, listed in the 3              Granbury phone book?
4                          A    Yes, I was.
5 Q      You never received any correspondence o
from this unidentified engineer, did you?
7 A      No, I didn't.
8 MR, SPEKTER: That's his answer.
9 MR. DAVIDSON: I asked whether he got a telephone 10                      call. This was whether he got any correspondence, mail.
11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                  '
13                                A      I answered your question.
14 Q      No, you did not, sir.
15                                A      I said no, I did not.
16 Q      I'm sorry. I didn't hear you.                          I guess 17 it was Mr. Spekter's interruption. All right.                          You did not.
18 Did you, at any time, raise your concern or 19 your complaints or your puzzlement over the alleged 20 conflict between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 with 21 anyone else at the NRC, after you failed to get.a respon'se 22 from the unidentified engineer at Region V?                                                              "
23                                A      No, I did not.
24 Q      Did you raise or pursue the issue with 25                      anyone else at all?
I
 
          'fc861b2 1
A      No, I did not -- might I ', at this: time.-
2 refresh.my memoryfbyllooking at the return documentation,-
3  the dating of the return documentation, to see wh'at time 1
                                                                                                        ~
4  frame it_was'actually in?-
5              Q      Let me understand what.your question.is. ?Are 6'  you saying that you want to get a sense of'the time 1where 7
this all occurred, on-thel basis of the-date'indicatedLon 8  the response from'Gibbs & Hill?
9            A      Correct.
to            Q      The letter date was1 January' 23.-1984.
II              A      The. response from Gibbs 6 Hill was January.
12    237          .
13 Q      Right. The . r e s p ons e to your memo'was December Id
: 19. By the way, does it refresh your--recollection of.how 15 long it took~to get a response to your-startup memo?-
16            A      That I don't remember.        I don't-remember when-17  the initial reporting was on the letter.            It may'have been.
18  I don't remember.      I would have to'look back=on the files                .
19  again.
        .                              20              Q      Did you understand the question?
21              A      Yes, you were'asking --
22              Q      Do you remember we talked about how quickly 23 after you wrote your startup memo you got.a response?              And            i 1
2d    you said, well, 1-don't really remember.            It: could be.a month.        l 25    It could be a year and a half.                                                :{
And I said, well, was'it as            .l l
l l
l 8
l l
 
275 33
                                                                                                                ?
I long as a year and a half, and you said no.
2 I said could it have been as short as a 3
month and you said possibly or it could be three months.
4 Now we have a date on a document that you've 5  identified that you wrote, December 19. And we have a date 6~
on a document that purports to be the' response of Gibbs 7  6 Hill, New York, indicating January 23.      And I ask you 8
whether now your recollection is refreshed as to how long 9    that the time period was between the date      or the time when to    you forwarded the startup memo and the time you got a 11    response?
12              A 1 would have to look at the date of the 13 memo, when it was generated. You're saying that January 23rd 14 was the date that I got the response?
15                    No, I said that's t h.
Q                              date on the document.
16            A      Well, what I really wanted to find out is 17 the date when I received the response to the letter.
18            Q      Well, my question was not that.
19            A      Well, you haven't  --
20              Q      In other words, you can't tell -- from those 21 two days -- what the general period of time that elapsed 22 between the time you asked the question and the time you 23    got a response?      You have no recollection?
24              A      1 don't. I'm missing your -- you've gotten 25    me confused at your line of questioning here. I'm not l
l l
 
276
        'fc341'b4 i
1, .
I familiar with what we're' answering here.                                                                '
n                                        .
2              Q'        Do you know.why that is ,l 3
MR. SPEKTER:
(                                          /
I object to your characterize-d    tion as to why it is.        Please.just ask him the question..
5 MR. DAVIDSON:    No..I'm sorry, Mr._                                Spekter.,            q 6
I'm entitled to say what;I want to say. 'If you-want.to                                                        l j
7 interrupt your witness, which you've done from time to timc, 8'  that's fine if he accepts.it'.      -
I. don't. This is my                                              ..,
i 9
examination and I'll conduct it in the proper-manner. with
                                                                                                                                        ]
10 full courtesy and ettiquette to you in full" professionalism 11 at all times and I expect nothing less in return and I 1
i 12    accept nothing else.                                                                                            I e
13
                                              'And you won't cut me off and you won't limit 14 my statements, and-you won't interrupt me.                Because that 15 is simply not proper and you know it.
I                                        i 16 Now as I was going to say,,                                              J TI'll          j 17 tell you why'you seem to be confused.            Yo dre trying to.
18 figure out where I'm going. You're trying to figure'out what 19    the question means. If you'll just answer the question l
20 as asked, it's going to get through real quick.                                                                  i 21 Now I's going to ask the reporte'r to read; 22 that question back to you, or better yet I'm not going to 23 l                        waste the time with that because we are anxious to speed-                                                          .
I i 24    things up..                                                                                                      1 25                        -
what I'm trying to say'to youLis,
                                          \              /
41
  )
['                                                                      _          _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
 
_ _m_
61b5
                                                                                        -877
                                                                                            ?
I you earlier testified that'you didn't recollect howLmuch, 2
time elapsed between'the. time you set forward your-3 startup memo and the time you received.your. response.
4
                      'And we tried to bracket the time. And;you'said.well,      Lit
              - 5 _-
could be one month or'it could be a year and''a half.
6 Now isn't that true? .lsn't-that'what you said ?
7 THE WITNESS:  No,~1 believe y'ou're'taking ~ it 8      out.
I said that it'could'be-one month or it could-be'ai 9
year and a half on normal response time. :And that's what' 10 we were speaking of, not the response time of that one 11        letter. And then you specifically warned me to reply to 12 the response time of that one letter and I specified that 13      it could be one month or possibly three months.
14 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15                  Q      Okay. Now, having1 heard the' dates and seen 16 the documents that constituted the startup memo and the 17 response by Gibbs & Hill, I asked you whether your 18 recollection was refreshed, as to how long a period elapsed 19 between the time of the startup memo and the time you 20      received the response?
21                  A And as I indicated at the beginning of this.
22 I was requesting information off of those memos to refresh 23 my memory as to their dates, again.
24                  Q      We gave you the dates, December 19th was-25                                                                                .i your startup memo. January 23 was the date of the response.                '
r                                                                                              l l .
I 1
I i
i
 
r.
278
      -fc261b6 i
1 A
Well, that is what had me confused earlieri-2 i
was that I believe that you stated that the January 23rd-3 was the date-that the startup memo was generated.
d                                                                            y --
                                                                                                'Q      No, sir. I did not state that.                      ;
5 A      Okay, you're saying that December 23rd was 6
l                                                                                      when the  --
!                                                                          7 Q      December 19th, sir, is the startup memoiyou 8
wrote. That's the date.it bears. -It's been' marked in 9
evidence and marked for identification.
10 It was received on January 23rd.
                                                                                                                ~
A 11 Q      The response was' dated ---
12                    A      January 23rd.
13 Q      I don't.know when you received it.
1d A
Now there is very good ' possibility : tha t it 15 could have taken six weeks'in time' processing. Under the 16 amount'of emphasis that I was placing on this'one article, 17 I would imagine'that it didn't, because.if you will notice 18 that one copy was telecopied to Ivan Vogelsang.
19 Q      That's right.
20                    A Now-just because it was telecopied to              !
21                                                            .
Ivan Vogelsang, Ivan Vogelsang may not'have taken it upon              '
22 himself to transmit'on over to me.
23                                                                                    !
Q      That's right.
24                    A So the actual time I would have received        j 25 the document is still indeterminate.
l l
e
 
3 279 57.
3
                                                                                    ,. 'I  i 1
Q      Well, itJmay be indeterminate but you.see, 2
the questionJI keep asking'you tis whether.kowingLthese 3
dates, you have any recollection that has-been refreshed.
3 I
4 And if 1. understand you' correctly:and we could have stopped 5'
this colliquoy-a long time agoL:and maybe you would like 6
to consult with.your counsel on how toJanswer. questions;11ke              3 7    this.
8 If you.still don't have' any idea when. you 9
received it and still don't have'any idea of the' time.that-              ?
10 elapsed between.the original' memorandum that          was sent up 11 and the response that was r ec e ive d ' b'y :~you , then.the answer    'l 12 is no, Mr. Davidson, even though.I'have seen the dates,            I' 13                                                                              't still do not have any. refreshed recollection as to how much                  1 14    time elapsed.
s 15 And then there can't be any further questions 16 because you don't have any recollection.
17              A      No, I do not have any recollection.
IB              Q      Now answer the question.                                    ;
l 19 Now, you earlier inquired-of me,                          '
L 20 to provide you with the date of the re'sponce'from Gibbs'& }                  l 21 Hill because you felt it would give you some time frame
* 22                                                                                  :
during which you were having the conversations with the                      '
23 Region V unidentified. engineer. Do you remember that?
                                                                                          ]
24              A      { Witness nodding affirmatively.)                          1 i
25                                                                                a Q      Can you tell me why you thought you needed                  '
3 I
e I
i
 
280
      -fc261b8' I                            that information?
: 2.                                      A-  'I-just needed to refresh my memory;cs'to-13 which. time of-the-yearLve were' speaking of exactly,      so I
                                      '4'                          could possibly put-in lineLwhat.was, going on during        :that 5'                          time:' period.
6                                        Q-  :Do you remember,'from your;first 7
conversationLwith'the unidentified. engineer, whether he 8
shared your concern about the conflict?.:And'when I.say 9
shared your concern. I don't necessarily'mean only,th'at'het to                      might have agreed with.-your' interpretation that there.was-11 a' conflict._ but rath'er'that he was;1ikewise in addition .
12 in agreement that this wasEsomething.aboutLwhich'.to have.
some serious concern?
13
                                  '14                                          A    Yes, he did. He-did have. concern'over'it~.
15                                        Q    And did he seem, to you, anxious 1 to get
                                  '16                        to.the bottom of the matter?
17                                        A    I don't know what his p'ersonality is.
                                                                                                                                'I-18 don't understand how to determine.if'he was anxious.
19 Q    'I don't think that's the answer to the 20                    question advanced.
21                                          A    1 do not know.                                      !
22 MR. DAVIDSON:    Mr. Spek'ter?
23 MR. SPEKTER:    Pleasecjust answer the 24                  question.                                                                      o 25                                                                                                  ..
                                                                                                                                          'i
                                                                                                                                          ]
1
                                                                                                                                        .l <
l 1
                                                                                                                                        ~
l 1
 
281 c261b9 4
1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q      Well, what I asked for is did you 3
understand it to be, or take him.to be anxious, to get d
to the bottom of this, based on your impression of what he 5
was saying to you?
6            A        I don't remember, at this time,,1f he was 7
anxious to get to t he bottom:or not.
8 Q      Did you remember, at any time?
9            A      I imagine that I would have known what he 10 was like shortly after the time period.
11 Q      Well, the reason I say that is you've made 12 a statement that he said this is something that's been a I3 problem at all the plants and we'd "have to close down the 14 whole plant. So he must have been concerned?
l            15 A
I did not make that statement.
16 Q      What is it that he said?
17 A
I said he stated that there was another 18 plant or other plants that had been shut down for the 19 same problem.
20 Q      A whole plant was shut down?
21 A      Yes.
22 Q      That would be pretty serious, wouldn't it, 23 Mr. Walter?
24 A      1 don't know how serious it would be, or not.
25 Q      You think that's a slight matter?
l l '4
 
282 fc261b10-A 1
In reference.to'what?s In reference to aufuel
                                                                                            '?
load disaster? .Yes, a shutdown is a' slight matter..
3          .Q          How long would'it.take-to correc t , in your h,                                                                                          4  . view?
5            A        There again .that's questionable', depending ~
6  on-how big the-problem is.
7 Q-        But in other words,'you felt that.a. violation 8
of' Regulatory Guide..that might-result;in shutting'down the 9
plant,'was a matter not of any great concern.to e i t h e r: you 10    or.to Region
: 1.                                                                                                            V_. unidentified engineer?.
11 1 just want to get:a: sense of whether he'was 12 concerned. whether he thottght.that you had a. complaint:that-13 was legitimate, but also that was_one of serious concern.
14            A          I believe he was concerned, as.to -            you've 15 got to' figure the plant;was still in the construction phases.
16  His first question was has      --
and I forget - .which inspectio 2-17 been performed. And 11had to. answer him I don't know..
18 And possibly his concerns there was, well, 19    this inspection -        or supposed inspection -- should find 20    this problem.
21 Q        Do you remember the name of the. inspection to 22    which he referred?
23            A        No, I do not.
24                                                                              I Q        Do you know whether that inspection'has                  '
25    subsequently been performed?'
 
                                                                                                                                          -l 283 1n11 4
1 A      I do not know.
2 Q      And if'it had been performed and no such 3
problem was found, would that be some evidence that no such 4    problem existed?
5              A      No.
6 Q      Particularly in light of the' fact that you 7
made a formal report of its existence?
8              A      No there either.
9 Q      You think that you made a formal report with to the NRC, and then somebody just took it and just threw it 11 in the trashbasked?
i, 12                                                                                                                                  .l MR. SPEKTER:    Objection to'the characterization n                                                          1 I
13 and the conclusion. That's not what he stated or supported 14    by anything that he said.
15 MR. DAVIDSON:    No, he didn't state it and to    that wasn't my question. My question is that here is a 17 serious concern that he has raised. He says he's made a IB formal report of it and it was not pursued. And there were 19 subsequent inspections and I'm asking him what does he think 20 happened, that the matter hasn't otherwise c orne to some 21    attention.
22 MR.SPEKTER:  1 think it's irrelevant what 23    he think has happened.
24 MR. DAVIDSON:    No, I think it's very 25 important because I think it may show that the NRC thought e
 
bl
                                                                                  '284            H l
fc261bl3
_I i    that the Gibbs & Hill response was correct and therefore 2  didn't. pursue it.
3                        MR. SPEKTER:  You can argue _that ~ to the
              -4 court, but-that's not the purpose of thisEdeposition.                      ;
1 5                        BY MR. DAVIDSON:
6              Q        Well, did.you gather anything from the fact 7    that this was not followed up?        In other words, did you            i 8    arrive at any conclusion?-                                            't 9              A        I do.not know. personally, whether this was?        .j .
10    followed up or not.
: 11.              Q        .Not my question.i                  l'didn't ask 12    you whether you knew.        You've'aiready det' ermined you' don't.
13    What I asked you was whether you drew any conclusion about 14 what appears to have been the failure to follow up your 15    fermal. complaint?
i-16              A        In my opinion, I feel'that thereL'is no            i 17    failure to follow up,the' complaint.        I have, by all rights --
18  by me    --
I believe that the complaint or that the paperwork 19  associated with'that is someplace.          Now, as far as how or I
20    where at in the process it'is right now, or whether it was                      I 21 discussed or reviewed or anything, may.be it took him longer 22 to handle his proceedings t h a n fue anticipated and thereby, 23    I've.already moved so he could not return my phone call.
i 24                        You know, when you're dealing with a nuclear 25    power plant, to go three months or something like that, to                      j i
e                                                                                                  i
                                                                  .________-_-_-___A
 
285 313 I
I                      watch paperwork pass through the channels is not unusual.      ;
2                                      (Pause.)                            .
3 1
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 l
i4 15                                                                                        i j
I7 l
18 l
19 20                                                                                          i 21 22                                                                                        1 23 24 25 l
 
286
                                          - fc27pbl 1
MR. M1ZUNO:      I would like to put a question ,
i 2    to Mr. Spekter.
3 MR. DAVIDSON:      We're.off        the record, j
4                                                            - .
i (Discussion _off_the record.)                              ;
i 5-MR. DAVIDSON:      On the record.        Mr. Mizuno.
6 1 noticed that you felt you wanted to make a, statement or 7
otherwise raise an objection to a question.
8                              MR. M1ZUNO:      Yes, I wish to ask Mr. Spekter 9
a question in response to his. response to a1 statement made
                                                                          -10          by you.        And I didn't want to interrupt.-
                                                                                                                                          ~
i' 11                                                                                      e MR. DAVIDSON:      Well, thank you.
12 MR. MIZUNO:      I thought.this would-be an f
13          appropriate time.
Th) I'now understand that. CASE is not
                                                                                                                                                            ~
Id going to- press forward'its theory of its case in-this l
j 15 proceeding that the response or the lack of response by the                  I 16 NRC contributed to the atmosphere of intimidation at                            -
17                                                                                    I Comanche Peak, because if that is true then I would be' 18 inclined to support an objection to this line of ques'tioning 19 regarding the NRCand{                        ) un derstanding.of what 20 the NRC did would.be inappropriate.
21 But if CASE if.is going!to continue, then 22 I feel that it would be proper questioning..although we 23 continue to object to that theory of the case. We don't 2d-believe that.is a proper proceeding.
25 MR. DAVIDSON:      Just to helpLMr. Spekter along
 
387                q i
I l
4 1
in answering.you, I will tell, Mr. Mizuno, that my view is            a l
2                                                                          k that the question that I've directed with respect tk                  {
3
                                                            /
asserted, alleged conversation with some unidentified i    k 4
engineer in Region V I think are relevant to his own 5
assertions that he understood these regulations and it was 6
confirmed in his view that they were inconsistent with the 7    ES-100 procedure.
8 And therefore they relate very directly to 9    his affidavit testimony.      I was not necessarily eliciting 10 his answers in this discovery deposition to determine whether i
11 or not the NRC had been a responsive body, or had fulfilled 12    any of its statutory responsibilities.
13 I was doing it instead to determine what 1
* 14    a c t io n s(g.        took and what~ conversations and activities 15 were a part of his belief and helped him develop his to conclusions and develop the impressions that he then recorded 17 in the affidavit, or in this case, didn't record in the                  !
l                                          18    affidavit.
19 But that was the thrust of my questioning. It 20 was not to elicit any information as to whether or not the l
21    NRC is doing its job or contributing to any alleged ephemeral l
22    amorphous miasma of intimidation.                                        \
I i
23                      MR. MIZUNO:    That's fine. I understand that.
24    counsel.
25                      MR. DAVIDSON:    But if you wish to ask j
{                                                                                                                        l 4
 
288
                                        '7pb3 1
Mr. Spekter about his theory, that's fine.
2 MR. MIZUNO:  I understand the the counsel for 3
Applicants may have had a particular reason for asking.those 4
questions, but apart from your purpose. I heard a. statement 5
by Mr. Spekter regarding how CASE was not concerned-about-6 how -- I ~ can't recall the exact words, but I thought I heard 7
something.to the effect that CASE was not interested or 8
is not. concerned about how the lack of response or the 9
response by NRC may have affected the employee's feelings 10      regarding intimidation and harassment.
11 Perhaps I could have the reporter read back 12      the portion.
13 MR. SPEKTER:    I'm not. familiar with that 14 particular segment of my Comments.      However, I would state 15 that since the matter is pleaded and finished at this point 16 that the testimony stands. I think we are wasting time. I've 17 noted my objections for the record, and at this point, 18 Mr. Mizuno, I am not going to limit or put parameters around 19 CASE's theory of this particular action .
20 MR. MIZUNO:  All right.
21 MR. SPEKTER:  Let us_ proceed.
22 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23 Q    Did you report your subsequent conversations 24 or some conversations you had after the Gibbs & Hill response, 25 did you report your subsequent conversations with the 1
 
289 i
1 unidentified engineer at the NRC to anyone at the - Comanche 2    Peak site?
3~            A        No. Considering the amount of intimidation, d
you might say, that I received --
5 Q        'I might not say that  --
6            A        Well', considering the feeling --
7 MR. SPEKTER:  I would request that he be 8
allowed to continue to answer.
9 MR. DAVIDSON:  Well taken.
10 THE WITNESS:  I felt that it was intimidation.
11 It was restricting me from exercising one of my legal rights 12 by calling NRC and after -- it totall surprised me that to 13 get that much of a intimidation from supervisory personnel-14 for doing it, and after the initial intimidation-such as that      ,
15  1  --
there was no way that I was going to explain to them 16 that I had called these people back again.
17 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
18 Q        Now you say you were intimidated?
19              A        Well, yes. When they come.in and your boss 20 tells you that it places the company in a very bad position 21 because you are calling the NRC      --
22 Q        You so earlier stated that's not what he 23    said. You said it's what you t~sk him to say. That was      your 24    summary.      What did he say?
25              A        Okay. To express word for word from memory, L
 
290
    '7pb5 1
no I can't do that.                                                                                                        I But what he said was, or what I                                                                    j 1
2 interpreted him to be saying, or the words that I felt he 3
phrased it in was that it places the company in a bad                                                                      l 4    position.                                                                                                                  l q
5 (Off the record.)                                                                                          t J
l 6                    MR. DAVIDSON:  Let us.go back on the record.
7 THE WITNESS:  At this time it was specified                                                              ;
8 by Dick Camp-that it places the company in a bad position, 9
me calling NRC or contacting the 800 QA/QC hotline to speak 10    of. And by stating that to me it was my feeling that by 11 placing the company in a bad position that<I could-very well 12    be put in a bad position myself.
13 BY MR..DAVIDSON:
14 Q      When you say place the company in a bad 15 position, what company do you think --
16              A      1mpell Corporation.
17 Q      So it places Impell Corporation in a bad 18    position?
19              A      Yes.
20              Q      Vis-a-vis whom?
21              A      Okay. TUSI Engineering. Okay, I believe that 22 during this conversation Dick Camp said it places them in 23 a bad position, and that might be the time period that I 24 found out that TUSI Engineering was actually paying the 25 paycheck for Impell Corporation, and thereby he was stating l
l
 
291                                        'j 3
: i.                                                                                                                                                    l 4
1 that you go to NRC and you place the company in a bad positio n-2 or in bad light.with the client, which they are working for, 3
And .ir j ust insinuated to me, you know, it                                    i 4
placed the company.in a bad position and now the employee                          '
5  gets placed in a bad position.
6            Q      When you say you were intimidated, what do 7  you mean by that?
{
8            A      Well, intimidated enough that not to make 9
these phone calls to NRC, not to make these phone calls to lo  che 800 hotline. I continued to make.them anyway, but in 11    secrecy.                                                                                            l
                                                                                                                                                      -1 12                                                                                                        I Q      So you were not intimidated enough to stop
                                                                                                                                                        ]
13  making them?                                                                                        1 j
14 (Pause.)
15            A      Well --
16 Q      We have had testimony here that you continued 17 to make calls to the NRC.
18              A      Yes.
IV Q      In effect, you made a formal complaint.
20              A      Right.
21              0      Right.
22              A      Yes.
23              Q      So therefore, if it was intimidation it was 24 unsuccessful because it didn't stop you from doing it.
25              A      Well, it did stop me from using the 800 number.
4
 
292 97pb7 -
                                                                                                                                          *l J
1 Q      .The.800 number would have. connected you with                            l 2    .whom?
3                  A        With the --'an engineering group'that was d
in Dallas / Fort Worth.        I'm not' familiar exactly with who.
: 5.                  Q,        Did.you know who that 800 - =you said an
                                      .6      engineering group.          Was it.your impression that that 7      engineering group was unrelated to TUCCO?
8                  A      .No.
That.is one'of the reasoning that I-9 did not contact the 800 number, even in' secrecy.
                                                                                                    ~
From that 10      point on      I.was intimidated enough to maintain-an anonymous 11      type atmosphere from'there on.
12 Q        You mean you were intimidated into remaining 13      anonymous.-
Id                .A          Right.
15                  Q        But you already stated that in'your.first 16 telephone conversation you. insisted upon anonymity and this-17 is before you' received any feedback as to what Mr. Camp.
18      or what anybody else thought about the call.                  Why did.you 19      want to be anonymous then?
20                    A        When I talked to.the first engineer at NRC 21 and I explained to him-that I mainly wanted.to maintain av 22      certain amount of being anonymous.            And that I did not: vant' 23 my name used. 'And I maintained that throughout the whole l
2d conversation with him that=1 did not want my name'used.                            .But          i
                                                        .                                                                                      1
: j.                                  25      I wanted to be' maintained' anonymous -
l l
u e
i
____:__---.--__-__________-___-__._---______._____. _      _    - _    _      __ _.    -    __._ - _- _ _ - . _ _ _ . --__.i
 
293-9 4
b
: 1' But I also told him;during the first1 phone 2    .
conversation                      that' knowing thesnature of this incident, and 3
being that it' occurred.and everything that if they.rea'lly 4
wanted to find'out who'I was that-they.could.
                                                                                              ~
l l
5                                                      Q    How couldE they'do that?
!                                  '6                                                      -A    'You've.'got to figure'that'if they'.comeson 7
the job site, right,-and say,this they can get_'in a general'-                            .
2 8                      location of who is.the.one.doing[these accusations.
9                                                            Tell me, Q                                                'did you review the 10 response that was provided by Gibbs & Hill in you                                                            --
11                                                        A    No, I have not.
12 Q    Did you read the re s p or.s e that was.given-to 13                        you you say?                        Did you read.it?
14 MR. SPfKTER:      .When, what time frame?'.Put a 15                        time frame on it.
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
17 Q      Which would have been.some time'in the latter 18                        part of January.
10 l
MR. SPEKTER:      That's-not,his testimony.
29                                                                MR. DAVIDSON:        No, that's my question..                                  And l'
21                        my question is:
22                                                                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23                                                          Q    You have testified that you were given a 24 copy of the Gibbs & Hill response which we have identified 1
25 here as Disc. Fxhibit B. and my question to you is, when you                                                                  l i
I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " ^ - ^ ^ ^                        ~ ~ ^ ~ ^ ' ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ' ~ ~ ~ ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
 
l 294 r                                                                                                .)
l
              'pb9 l                              1 were given that response which would have been some time 2        around the end-of January, did you read it?
3                  A      Yes, I did.
4                        Did you understand'it?
Q 5                  A      Yes,-I did.
6                  Q      Did you accept it?-                              i 7                  A      No, I did not.
8                  Q      You felt it was wrong?
9                  A      Yes, I did.
10                  Q      It didn't satisfy you?
11                  A      Correct.
12                  Q      And what was your understanding of what the 13 explanation is that they had between the alleged conflict 14 in the ES-100 and the Regulatory Guide 1.757 15                  A      My alleged conversation was they felt there 16          was no conflict.
17 Q      How did they reconcile the two?
18                  A      To my memory and recollection right now, I'm 10        not familiar. I would have to review the document again.
20                  Q      Did you make any reference.to the response 21 that was received from your start-up memorandum from Gibbs 22          & Hill in your affidavit in which raised this issue?
23                  A      No, I did not.
24                                                                                  I Q      Let me draw your attention to the paragraph              j 25 that starts on page 10 and continues on to page 11 and            i      I l
i l
= _ - _ - - - - - - - - -        - --                                                --  -  -  - --
 
295 10 4
1 starts with. "I am particularly concerned-about the above 27,    2  situation."
3 4
5 6
        -7 8
9 10 11 12 13                              '
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l
l la
 
Joni 296      k
                                #28 1
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q    Do you see that?
3 A        Yes.
A Q  And the next phrase is "If I am corredt in 5
my interpretation of the regulations"---'at the time you 6
made that statement you knew that there were those whoJdid 7                .
not agree with you that you were correct?
8 A
And I aslo knew that there~were those that did agree that I was correct.
10 Q      Who were they?
11 A      NRC.
12 Q      The unidentified engineer who never followed 13 up, to your knowledge, on your allegations?
A Well, I won't go as far to say that he 15 never followed up.
16 Q      To your knowledge?
17 A      To my knowledge, yes.                            I IB i
Q      So that is the other individual but you lo state this in the subjective mood if you are familiar with        i 0                                                                                    l that.
21 A      No, I am not familiar with that.                  .'
22                                                                                          i Q      Well, you say if I am correct.                  -I Will you        j 23 agree with me that that is a statement on your part 2A indicating that you have some doubt as to whether you may          !
25 be right?                                                      l
                                                                                                                                  )
L                                                                      :
i
                                                                                                                                    'l i
a                                                                                                                                  1 1
 
jon2 297 4  1 1
A If you look at this indication-and in the 2
actual technica'l  representation you will deal with it in 3
the fact that you can'have a conduit, a single conduit d
and a single cable and it specifically identifies that 5
there has to be three feet with a separation involved in that 6
conduit out in the open and that cable ---and        the cable.
7-If you look at the fact-that they are 8
allowing one inch separation from the bottom of a ladder                          (
9 tray, which means that you can get that cable to conduit H3 separation to within one inch, you have to come to the Il conclusion that there is violation.        To go anywhere else --
12 you don't even have to have a degree or knowledge in these 13 levels to say that    --
to look at the paperwork and be able Id to tell that there is a conflict there.
15 Q      Let me just respond that you think you M
don't need a degree or any knowledge, but I am afraid that 17 you didn't hear my question because      you didn't answer it 18 and I am going to have to ask the reporter to reread it.
I' (The reporter read the record as requested.)
20 A
The question was if there was some part 21 as to whether I had doubt. I truly feel that there is a 22 violating that exists, but I will not go to the point of 23 making my statement to where there is not anybody that 24 cannot be proven wrong.      So me personally,  .1 feel that 25 there is no doubt in my mind there is a violation.          In my
 
28jon3 298 i
i l
1 mind there is a violation.
2 Q      You are absolutely convinced. But you are 3
prepared to concede that you could be wrong?                          i 4              A                                                          !
I would be foolish not to say that.                '
5    Everybody can be incorrect.
6                    No.
Q            I am not asking you whether everybody 7
can be incorrect. I am saying with respect to'the 8                                                                          h statements contained in your affidavit with respect to the 9
allegation that there is a conflict between ES-100 and 10 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 and the statement that this is 11 therefore a violation of NRC regulations, you state "if I 12 am correct" and I just asked you whether this indicates 13 that you concede, that as convinced as you are and as 14 strongly held as you have held these views and as strong 15 as you pushed it within the organization, that you might 16  be wrong.
17 A      Well, an NRC decision showing that I was 18 wrong would be the final result.
l' Q      But no one else could'tell you you were
    .        20    wrong?
l' 21              A      Not within the organization, because 6f 22 the fact that I feel the organization is definitely biased          '~
23 by the cost' impact on this one decision.                            t 2d Q      If people in theTUGC0 startup group told          ,
25 you you were wrong you wot?dn't agree with them?      You                  '
1 l
_ _______D
 
en4                                                                      '399                        i 4
I wouldn't be persuaded?
2 A      Let me -- if Dick-Camp, Art Londou --                                    '
3                                                                                              ;
Q      No. Answer the question.                                              !
4                                                                                              l A      -- would have thought I was wrong, you                                  I 5                                                                                              l are talking TUGCO startup -- if Dick Camp, Art London 6
and them would have thought I was wrong they would have 7                                                                                              1 1
never sent the letter up.
8
{
Q      Well, that's your conclusion and surmise.
9 The question I asked you is if they told you that you were 10 wrong, anyone in startup        --
11 A      No.
12 Q      -- you wouldn't believe it?
13 A      They didn't tell me that.
14 Q      I didn't ask you that.        I said if you had 15 been told that. You  see,{                you are going to 16                                              '
have to answer the same question over and over again until 17 you are responsive.      Is that clear?
18 A      No, I do not believe that I would have 19 believed them.                                                                              !
20                                                                                                d Q      Okay.      That's the answer.
21 MR. S P ~.KT E R :  Let me answer the' door.
22 MR. DAVIDSON:        Really, you are making this 23 unnecessarily difficult.          I think you are being too clever                          !
24 by half. I think you should talk to your 1qwyer.
25                                                                                                !
MR. SPEKTER:        I object to those comments l
l l
l 4
i
__-_____________-____s
 
i l
2 Bj on5:                                                                      -300
                                                                                                                                          .i i
l i
I                                                                          !
being made. Not.while I was present.                                '
2 MR.- DAVIDSON:- I will make them.ito your' 3                                                                          I face. I said look,:ve are. going to get throughEa lot          '!
                                                                  #                                                                          i quicker'if youlwill respond -- well, Mike,. stand h'ere if-5 you want me to make'it in. front o f '. you .
0 (Discussion.off the record --.;5:45 p.m.)
I (BAck on the record      -
6:30 p.m.)!              l 8                                                                            3
                                                                                        . MR. '~D AVIDSON :  Mr..Spekter, we-have'just    -l
                                                                    -had a chance to reconvene after a break'of close to.an 10 hour and I just want to make certain on the record that II there would be no misunderstanding the remarks-as 12                                                                            l reported both by yourself and myself seem to be heated,
                                                              '3 but I know that did not occur and there was no heat                  -
generated between us.        And I=just' wanted the, record to 15 reflect that.
to As you know, you did=valk to the door          .
to answer it and then I tried to suggest to your witness
                                                              '8 that he be more responsive; he said let's make the comments-        .t I'
when I am not away from the table,-~you returned, I began
        .                                                    20 to make them; I was cut off.
21 But I take it there is no heated exchange 22 between us.
23                                                                          'l i.
MR. SPEKTER:        The exchange was not heated 24                                                                              i but my concern is that you do not give my. witness                      }
25                                                                              i instructions on how to answer a question.                                !
l
 
          . 2n6                                                                                                                                                                      !
                                                                                                                                                                                  \b 301                    ;
i I
i 6    l I
                                                                                    .MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                                1 1 agree with you,                                                          I 2
Mr. Spekter. That is.yourarcsponsibility. That is why' 3
                                                              ;I asked the witness to talk to you'about his response.                                                              l 4
d MR. SPEKTER:      Let us proceed.
5
                                                                                    'MR. DAVIDSON:      I assume during'that hour                                                '
6 that we were off that'you'had a chance,to speak'with.him.
7
                                                                'All right.
: 8.                                                    ~
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
o Q
* g                ,justft'o wrap up-this line. I 10 believe you stated -- and        !fyou      did let us just confirm l'
it and move'on -- you said that you would not.have believed:
12 anyone in'the organization if they had told you you were I3                                                                                                                            .
wrong aboutyour alleged -- the alleged l conflict-between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75.
15 When you said the organization wh'at did
                                      '6 you mean?
37 A      The startup or'anization.
g I8 Q
Would you have believed'a statement from engineering?
20 A
f 21 I believe that if there would have been an overwhelming -- you know, you are going to have to support                                              --
22 you just wouldn't be able to come in and say you are wrong.
23 If there would have been an overwhelming amount of
                          .24 25 information that would have indicated that I was incorrect.
such as possibly NRC rulings on the issues, so on and so                                                                      1 a
1 i
1 1
l
                                                                                                                                                                                    )
L-    a.----------_---~    ~ - - - -
 
                                            .28j on 7; 302 i
forth, yes, I would have'probably believed theLperson'.
2 Q  Okay.. But you wanted an NRC ruling 3
on the issue before you1 relented; isnt' that correct?
4 You.wouldn't. accept the statement of-~the'Gibbs & Hill 1$
                                                                      . whi'ch was an architect-engineer ~ engaged on ' the :proj ec t ?.
6 After all -they.did provide yousdth a three-page 7    instructions.
8                            A  correct.
9 Q  You would mt : accept that?-
10                          A    right.
11
                                                                                            .Q    Thatwas not your view . sufficient for you?-                                          .
12 A    Correct.
13 Q    Now I ask you what would have been 14 sufficient for you short of an NRC ruling.
15                            A 1 don't believe'there would be anything.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:        Thank you.                                                                    t i
17 Off-the record.
IB (Discussion off.the record.)
19 MR. DAVIDSON:      That-is all it takes.
20 Okay. Let's go back on the record.
21                                                                                                                                    ;
(Discussion off the r e c'o r d . )                                                                j 22                                                                                                                                    i MR. DAVIDSON:      All right.                                            Let's go' ahead.        .!
23                                                                                                                                      !
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
i 2'
Q Earlier weihad-discussed the Gibbs & Hill                                                          !
25 I
response to the startup memo that you prepared. Doyou                                                                          l, I
j 1
l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _                  _ _ _ _ . . _      _    __        _    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ ____.___..____ _ __ _ _..__ _ _                  _ ___J
 
m
  ,8-303 4
1 recollect that.I                'j L
2                                      #
A      'Yes..
3 Q      -And I had asked you.to look'at it'but I d
l
(
            .had not had it marked.for identification.            Both Mr. Spekter 5
            'and Mr.-Mizuno had askedome toodo so and.I think now is 6    as good a'timeias any-for me to.do that.
With the<same 7
understanding about replacingEmy' original and providing' 8
              't h a t the' copy be marked for identification for the purpose-9 of this discovery depositionLbe a Xerox:of the one I n o w -:
to    am providing.
Il MR.'SPEKTER:    That's understood.
12                                                                                        !
MR. DAVIDSON:    And with that. understanding 13 I would like to ask the reporter'to ma'rk this as Id Disc Exhibit F-number next.-
15 Is'it 9, sir?    Thank you'.
16 (The document referred to was 37 marked Exh'ibit Disc F-9 for identification.)
to                          BY MR. DAVIDSON:
Q k              earlier you testified that'you had -- at the time that you received the          respons,es --
had
                                                                      ^
an opportunity to read it and I think I asked you-whether you recollected what their explanation for the-conflict was, but I don't recollect having received a.
response.      Did you answer that question?
A      Yes, I did.
1 f
 
              ~
                                                                                                                \
28jon9;                                                                          304 I
Q    And'briefly. . what:was your response?
2 A      I would have'to.look~at the memo, the' 3
response memoLto refresh my memory.
d Q    But'you:have no' current recollection of it      -
                                  -5    now?
6 A      No.
7 Q      Let me ask you this:    Do.you. remember saying 8
to me that you believed that the' response said that,the reason there was no conflict was that-fire goes up,. .not 10 down?
II A      Not necessarily the response indicated in 12 the letter,-but'possibly the response either indicated --
13 I believe I'specified that itLwas either indicated.inLthe l'
letter or.in.the phone conversation with-the Gibbs & Hill-15 personnel.-
16 Q      This is the person'that you called?
                                  '7 A      Right.
                                  '8
                                                -Q      And you.didn't' remember his name?
I' A. No, I believe we had brought;that up..
20 later. The person I called was Sam Martinovitch.
21 Q      And it is your testimony that 22 Mr. Martinovitch said to youLthat fire goes up, not down?-
23 A      Well,-it was. indicated by him~that one.of' 24 the rationalities for part of his decision was seeing that:
25 there was no problem and said-that the heat is going.to.be i____._____.__:._._.______._
 
on10 305 4
i generated upward and rise, where they are speaking of' 2
conduits underneath the tray.
3 Q      But did he say that was the only reason?
4 A      No, he did not.                As I have already 5
indicated, he had other reasons such as that the cost impact 6
of. changing the ES-100 specifications.
7 Q      Did he have other reasons for why he 8
l 9
believed that there was no conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.757 to MR. SPEKTER:                Objection. Qualify that.
11 If he knew he had other reasons.
12 MR. DAVIDSON:                  Well, he said that that was 13 not his only reason. Therefore he is indicating he 14 knows of at least one more. That's all. What is that                      other 15 reason that he mentioned.
16 THE WITNESS:                I have lost track of the 17 questioning here.
18 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
19 20 Q      Let me see if I can do this for you.                  I am going to summarize your testimony.                    I would not only 21 ask you to listen to my questions but also give some 22 thought to your responses and try to keep in mind what you 23 have said.
24 You said, sir, that you talked to 25 Mr. Martinovitch and you asked him why he believed there l
l l                                                                                                                                    1 l  _ _ - _ _ . . _ _ .    . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
28jon11-                                                                              306 I
was no conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75. And 2
you told us that one of the reasons that he offered to 3
you why there was no conflict was because fire travels upward. heat travels up, not down,-and that therefore 5
it' avoids some of the problems otherwise provided for in 6
Reg. Guide 1.75.
7 You say that was one of the reasons. So 8
I asked you what the other reasons he told you were for why he felt there was no conflict between ES-100 and to Reg. Guide 1.75.
end2B                                                II Now, can you please tell us?
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 L-                -
 
307        j i
  - lb1 1
4 j 1
A                To my memory, right now, I cannot recollect 2
that.
3 Q                You don't remember whether he gave you any d
other reasons or you don't remember the reasons he gave you?                  'i 5
A                I remember that he had probably given Le other o
reasons, but I don't remember exactly what they were.
7 Q                Did he ever state to you, as was reported in 8
the letter that we've marked as Disc Exhibit 9, that 9
Regulatory Guide 1.75 has specific criteria for separation 10 between cable trays but has, in fact, no specific criteria 11 providing for separation between conduits and cable trays, 12 which was the issue in ES-100?
13 A                He may have.
Id Q              Did he also indicate to you, sir, that the 15 separation requirements in ES-100 only pertained to those 16 cases where potential hazards are limited to electrically                      I 17                                                                                    1 initiated fires?
18 A              He may have.      I'm not sure of the exact            i l'                                                                                    l conversation.                                                                  '
20 Q            Did he also indicate to you that, in 21 developing the separation details in ES-100, it was 22 recognized that conduits provide a raceway medium that 23 effectively isolates internal events from the external 24 surroundings?
25 A
I'm not familiar with his exact conversation.
t l
J
 
j
                                                                                                            .)
:.1
                                                                                                '30s fc391b2'                                                                              j' i
1 1
You have to' figure that I was looking at that document at 2    the same time, so  theoretically he may not have1 touched on-3 any of thefpoints'which were listed'in that document 4
because he possibly-could have known-that I had that_
5
                                    ' document in front of me.
6            .Q      So he didn't,-    you.didn't think,'or .you 7
may recollect.now,.that he.didn't haveLto tell'you aboet        t 8
these reasons,because.h'  e had already disclosed lthem to you?
9              A      Or.I had already;possibly' read.theimemora'ndum.
10              Q      In any event. Mr. Martinovitch's explanations 11    didn't. satisfy you?
12              A Specifically, when he was justifying ~1t about.    ~
13    the heat to me. You know, you have a formal. reply there.
14    And in his  informal reply. for the~ actual reasoning behind' 15    it, which was.the fact that    --
l 16
..                                          Q      No, I wouldn't. agree with that, if'you-17 were asking for my agreement.
                                                                      .I' don't thinkIthat there~is 18
                                  ~any different reason, other than the one.that is expressedc 10 and signed by Mr. Ballard.- That's your testimony.
20 Are'you suggesting that Mr. Ballard's statement 21 is not the real reason?
22              A What I am willing to'say, that-my bellAf        on.
23 that memo was, that due-to the impact cost-wise, they had 2d to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not'.to 25    change the'ES-100 specifications. And those are the                        '
i i
I
  ,                                                                                                          i w___________m___._.__    _                                                                                    1
 
308 fc291b2 1
You have to figure that I was looking at that document at 2    the same time, so theoretically he'may not have touched on 3    any of the points which were listed in that document 4
because he possibly could have known that I-had that 5  document in front of me.
{
6            Q      So he didn't -- you didn't think, or you 7
may recollect.now, that he didn't have to tell you about                                                                            ,
I B
these reasons because he had already disclosed them to you?
9            A      Or I'had already possibly read the memorandum.
10            Q      In any event. Mr. Martinovitch's explanations 11    didn't satisfy you?
12            A      Specifically, when he was justifying it about~
13    the heat to me. You know, you have a formal reply there.                                                                        1 14 And in his informal reply, for the actual reasoning behind 15    it, which was the fact that  --
{
16            Q      No, I wouldn't agree with that, if you                                                                            -
                                                                                                                                                          .i 17  were asking for my agreement.      I don't think that there is                                                                    !
18 any different reason, other than the one that is expressed                                                                        i i
19    and signed by Mr. Ballard. That's your testimony.                                                                              I 20 Are you suggesting that Mr. Ballard's statemen:
21    is not the real reason?
22            A      What I am willing to say, that my belief                                                                      on 23    that memo was, that due to the                                                                  .-wise,              they had 24 to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not to 25    change the ES-100 specifications.      And those are the                                                                          '
l l
    .                                                                                                                                                          1 u___  _        _                                _            _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                -309 i3 -
4 1
legitimate reasons that' they-thought                                          --
or at least t h'e 2
reasons they thought were legitimate.                                              Now it would be --
3
                                                                                                                                                                .Q      This11s a suspicion on-your part, that d
although this is an explanation .you don't take it to be 5                                                        something that' they believe?                            Is that what you're saying?'
6 MR. .SPEKTER:  I would request that. counsel 7                                                        not put words in'his mouth.
8 MR. DAVIDSON:  'I heard the witness 1say.that 9
he did not.believe that                                  <
response that was. prepared was to the "real reason" why they insistedithat-ES-100 and Reg-
;                                                            11 1.75 could be reconciled. :And I want to find out what 12 is the basis for his assertion that that was not the 13                                                            real reason.
14 THE WITNESS:    My understanding.would be why 15 would he say to me, if he truly' thought that ~ those were 16 legitimate, valid reasons, why woul'd he say to me that 17 if we had it to do all over again and start'right now, yes IB we would modify the ES-100 to have those. add 1tional.                                                                    A 19 limitations in it.
20 MR. DAVIDSON:    You want me to answer your 21                                                          question?                                      One of the reasons why that may have!-- why h'e:
22                                                            might have said that?                                      The answer is ~ that he might not have 23                                                            said it,'                                                I 2d THE WITNESS: I don't think I was asking you 25                                                          a question.                                      I was making a statement that the question.was C_____n_._.__.._              _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _                          _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _              _ . _ . _ _ . _ _    __..___J
 
310        E fc391b4' 1    in my mind'atithe timeL--
                                                -2                    ' BY, MR. r- DAVIDSONi 3                Q.  'Okay, so this is.an impression you' drew?-
4    He'never.. formally ~ told 1you that this.was not the real:
5-  reason?
6              .A    If they give you a documentation which says
                                              '7-this is the reason why we're not'doing11t,~but then on the
                                              -8    other-hand they;tell,you verbally;that if-we had it to do 9
:all.over-again -we would.go ahead and make. modifications.--
10 in my mind.there is onlyJane conclusion I can draw, is,that 11 they are in the wrong and they are trying to. prove'--jwith 12 information or grasping at straws'-- to prove that they 13      are correct.in'it?'
14                Q    In other words, you don't'think'there could 15    be two acceptable ways of doing-it?
16                A Well, I'm not saying -- there is only'one 17 interpretation in the NRC Reg-Guide that'is supposedly right.
18                Q      Are you asking me or are you asking:Mr. Mizuno?.i 19                A What I am saying is that there is'only one-        i
                                                                                                                          )
20 interpretation in'the NRC Reg Guides. 'If'there -- if you 21 have any questions from it, you should ask NRC what"the'ir-  ~
22      ruling is on it.
23                Q    That's your view?                                    4 l
24                A    Yes.                                                1 25                Q      And that's why you wanted an NRC decision'on-      .j
 
                                                                                                                    '311 41 b' S 4
                                'I this?
2 A
I felt there was still a conflict inv o'1v e d .    -
!                              3 Q    _All right.
d
_(                hinyour. affidavit,z- at pages 5
3 through -- carrying-over to page 5,-you makeicertain 6
assertions with respect.to'what you term the practice of:
7                                        ~
allowing. comanche Peak. craft < personnel to perform.certain
                              -8 functional ~ testing.      Is that right?.
A    That's correct.                                              I 1
10 I would like to change      --
just correct _you.
11 You said make the assumption.        I know that to be fact.
12 Q    All right.      I think I said-assertion, not I3 assumption.
Id MR. SPEKTER: The record will reflect'what
                                                                                                                  ~~
15 was said.
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                            '7                                                                                                    i Q    And 1 noticed that in the first incomplete                '
                            '8 paragraph on page 3 that starts "An example of"- "
you say I'
                                                      "An example of this liberal interpretation of commitments -"
20 do you see that?
21 A      Yes.
22 Q      What do you mean by commitments?
23 (Pause.)
24 Do you need some help with that question?
25 A      No, just a minute.      Let me review through here.
(Witness perusing document.)                                    i i
                                                                                                                                      ~l
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ .              ___-______._____m..__          _
 
jon 312 30 I
Q      Have you ever reviewed the commitments 2
undertaken by the organizations constructing the Comanche 3  Peak plant?
d A      Yes. You are talking -- let me make sure-5 we are talking in a correct    --
you are talking about the 6
FSAR commitment?
7 Q      I am talking about the commitments, sir,-
8 that you told me are made to the NRC with respect to.the 9'
codes and programs that will govern the conduct and H) procedures of the construction of the. plant.
II A      Yes, I hve reviewed those.
12 Q      And in your review of that, sir, did you 13 determine whether or not    --
one moment, please -- and in Id your review of that, sir, did you determine whether there 15 was a commitment to ANSI 45.2.6 with respect to 16 construction supplies and support personnel?
17 A      1 am not sure.
18 Q      Did you determine whether there was a 19 commitment made to that specific reference requirement                                  1 j
20                                                                                            i applicable to quality control / quality assurance personnel?                            l 21                                                                                            i A      I am not sure. I would have to review the                          {
22 documentation which would include the FSAR to be able to 23 remember what I had found during the time period.
24 I believe that you will note that I do 25 remember that the ANSI 45.2.6 specifically is titled                                    I i
j e
 
i    jon2 313 4
1 across the top " Requirements For Testing QC Personnel" 2
and so on and so forth.
3 Q      Are you-remembering that or reading that s
from your affidavit?
5 A      No. I am remembering it. I don't even know if it is in the affidavit.      It is. ANSI 45.2.6, 7
specifies that +- its requirements for test personnel in 8
nuclear power sites.
9 Q      Do you have a copy of the specific 10 ANSI Code section to which you refer?
11 A      No, I do not.
12 Q      Did you have a copy at some point in time 13 that you could review?
14 A        Tes, I did.
i 15 Q        I draw your attention to page 4 where you state  "I  feel this practice of allowing staff personnel to 17 perform functional testing without an STE being present 18                                                                                                              'l is not consistent with ANSI 45.2.6. Do you see that?.                                              j 10                                                                                                              ]
A      Yes.
20 Q      When you say you feel that it is not 21 consistent what do you mean?
i 22 A      I mean that ANSI 45.2.6 specifically 23 specifies certain requirements for test personnel and also 24 requires that you maintain records on those test 25 personnel. And the ETG or craft personnel do not fall l
 
30)on3 314 I
within these limitations such that I do not believe their 2  ,
educational background is maintained; I do not believe 3
that their credentials are verified.
Q  When you say you do not believe, on what 5
do you base this belief?                                And we will get back tc                  .s e 6
question you still haven't answered, which*is what you 7
nean by "1 feel this practice is inconsistent."
8 Tell me -- why don't we take them in order.
I still would like an answer.
10 Whatdo you mean by "I feel this practice is II inconsistent"?
12 A  1 do not believe that thispractice is I3 consistent.
14 Q  By stating that you feel that it is 15 inconsistent are you suggesting that you are prepared to 16 accept that you might be wrong and that it might be I#
consistent?
18 A  As I have already stated before, there is 19 always possibility of misinterpretation of a document.
20 Q  And do you feel that is possible in this 21 case?
22 A  It is possible in all cases.
23 Q  In all cases in which you have sworn in i
this affidavit?
25 A  I will not go that far.
 
json4 315 4
1 Q      But it could be possible'in-this particular                                          1 2
case we are now. discussing't 3              A      Yes.
4 Q      Now you say that you believe that certain l
5 educationa1' documentation is not maintained.        On what do
: 6. you base this belief?
7              'A      On asking craft personnel if they have ever 8
had to submit to a background.such as educational and 9
so on and so forth.      I am not, you know -- to go into 10 detail on that. I could not remember.
11 l                                                                                  Q      Do you remember who you spoke with?
12              A      No, I do not.
13 Q      Did you ever examine any of the records 14 to see whether or not these craft personnel had educational 15 background material maintained in the manner that you 16  believe was necessary?
17            A        No, I did not.
18 Q        If there had been no commitment to adhere 19 to ANSI N45.2.6 with respect to construction supply and 20 support personnel, then there would be no inconsistency 21 with the practice you describe A n d '- t h a t requirement, 22    would there?                                                                                            i 23              A        Correct.
24 Could we take a moment, just a brief moment 25    to pause?
4 1
1 l
l
 
30jon5                                                            316 1
MR. DAVIDSON:  You want to break, 2              S 3
                                                      /
THE WITNESS:  Yes.
4 MR. DAVIDSON:  Of course.
5 MR. bAVIDSON:  Let the record rsflect that 6
we are taking a break so/            can consult with 7
counsel.                  ('
8 (Discussion off the record -- 6:51 p.m.)
end30
!                                  10 11 12 13                                                                      f 14 15                                                                      ;
16 17 18 19                                                                      ]
20
                                                                                                        !  I 21 22                                                                      j l                                  23                                                                  I 1
24                                                                  i 25 e
u__  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
 
317 il 4
1 (On the record at 6:54 p.m.)
2                        MR. DAVIDSON:    Let us go back to work.
3 was were talking about your 4
assertions.as to the inconsistency between what you claim 5
to.be the. practice at Comanche Peak of allowing the craft 6
personnel to perform certain functional testing and what I 7
think has been called ANSI 45.2.6.
8 And I have some excerpted language here from 9
that regulation, and I would like to get your view on it      --
10 if I can find it here among my papers      --
l              11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
12 Q                  lI  have been given to understand 13 that ANSI N45.2.6 states, "When a single inspection or 14 test requires implementation by a team or group, personnel 15 not meeting the requirements of this standard may be used l              16 in data taking assignments or in plant or equipment operation.
17                                                                            I pr-ovided they are supervised or overseen by a qualified 18 individual participating in the inspection, examination, or      '
19      test."                                                                i 20 Do those words sound familiar to you as being 21 reflected in ANSI N45.2.6?                                            i 22                  A      Yes, they do.
i 23                  Q      And is this the requirement that you feel 24 is not consistent with the practice at Comanche Peak?                  i 25                  A      Yes, I do. I believe that as  you stated t
i e
l
 
318-
                            '!pb2 1
there,1 supervisory. that they are.being supervised fallsi 2    -into --                                                                ;
3                Q      Do you want me to give you the exact words?
4
                                                                                      .The words are. "They are supervised or overseen by."            ~
Is    a 5    .that'what you wanted me to focus,on?
6 (Pause.).
7                A                                                                ;'
                                                                                                      .Yes.                                                      ''
8                Q      Okay.                                              -
1 9                A                                                              l' 1 believe that-at Comanche Peak;the'suoervisori        ,
10 overseen by is-probably taken very liberal, such'es how
                                                                                                                    ~
q 11 l                                                                                    can you supervise somebody unless you're.out 'in.the' field 12      with them. Well, I'll eliminate the answering to that-13      portion right now.      I j ust -don' t  --
14                                                                              l'i 1
(Witness gesturing.)                                  i .
i 15                      --
I stopped.=-You can go ahead and. question. l    ,
16 Q    No. .I. don't follow what you'reysaying.
17              A                                                          .. !"
I dropped it.      I. feel that is:not something .j 18 we need to go into right now.                                        't        I
                                                                                                                                                              . 1 19                                            .
                                                                                              .Q      It seems to be the focus of your assertion in ' '  'l 20 the paragraph that begins on page 4 of your affidavit and 21    carries over --
l-22                A                                                                      I I will not comment on one section of the                        i 23                                                                                        ;
ANSI 45.2.6 as it indicates without 1ooking at the whole                          !
24    procedure as a whole.                                                            J You take one little portion out of                '!
25                                                                                        i it and try and use it out of context with that procedure.                          I.
i l
i 1
l l
i
 
319 4
1 You have to look -- there are certain stipulations that you 2
have to meet in order to be able to do that. And without
                                                                        '3 looking at the whole procedure you cannot use just one 4                                        paragraph out of it.
5                                                  Q      l understand that you would like to' review 6                                          the entire code,    but my point was only this, you were 7
concerned in your affidavit, and as I understood your B
testimony you raised the point that you did not feel that 9                                        this code section had been complied with.      And you called 10 my attention specifically to the words that you believe 11 required that the craft personnel performing such tests be 12                                            " supervised or overseen by" qualified individual.
13 And my point is, isn't that the sum and substance.
14 of your concern as expressed in the affidavit with respect 15 to the practice that you have drawn our attention          to on to                                          page 4 and going over to page 5.
17                                                          A      I have lost reference to your exact question 18 and what you are exactly asking there. Your question was 19 so long you are confusing me with the length of it.          Can 20 you briefly just come straight to the point as to what your 21                                            question is?
l 22                                                            Q      I think that that was fairly direct. 1 asked 23 you whether that isn't the basis upon which you make the 24 allegation of the practice -- that the practice is inconsistent 25                                            with ANSI 45.2.67
 
320:
i:
11pb4                                                                                                                                                                    i-
:t 1            A          Are you asking-meithat if-the~ paragraph you                              '
2  _ read.previously is the basis for'this: allegation?.
3            Q          That's right... Isn't;that?the basis                        for
                                                                                                ~
4    your assertion that.the practice at; Comanche Peak'is 5    inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.6?
6            A          No,1I can't specify that;one paragraph; 1
7 out of-ANSI ~45.2.6 is the basis for this.                            I specified that 8
ANSI 45.2.6 as a.whole document'is the' basis for this                                        >
i-9    statement.
10-            Q            Do you'have a copy of 4512.6?
11            A            No,LI do not.
12            Q            When you made the statements'in this afi*1 davit 13    did you refas to 45.2.6?'
14              A            1 had reviewed.them during the' time period 15    of the. drafts, the rough drafts for.then--                                                  ,      i le                                                                                                          ]
Q          Well, here is                                                iand, myproblem,f.                                                  1 17 you want me to direct and open. I.will be because it's going j 18    to make this thing go a lot. faster.                  'I  read your affidavit.
19    We all have.      The rece;; is going to have it.                                          '
l 20 Your crap,aint i s, that craft personnel, person                  ,
l 21    who are not qualified as STEs have been' performing certain                              +
1 22    of these tests and you say that they perform certain tests 23 ll.        I 4
without an STE being present.          And that is a quote from                                      l 24      your affidavit at page 5.                                                                            1 1
25              A            Correct.
El i
l 1
i i
i
                                                                                                                                                                                              ]
i
  -_2____--_______._-__________-_-__-__                                                    _-_
 
321 1
4 1
Q    And I'm saying to you, that isn't the section 2  that I read from the ANSI 45.2.6 which requires that there 3
be supervision or that the practice is to be overseen by 4
a qualified person, the one that you base -hat on. And you 5    have not told me what you base it on. You say you don't 6  base it on that.
7              A    No, I'm saying  --
8                    MR. SPEKTER:  I believe that he's answered 9    the question.
10                    MR. DAVIDSON:  I don't think that he has.
11 MR. SPEKTER:  He based it on the whole 12    regulation and not a segment that's taken out of context.
13 And I think that answer should stand and we can move on.
14 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15              Q    Did you ever raise this concern with anyone 16  at Comanche Peak?
17              A      Most definitely.
IB              Q      With whom did you raise it?
19              A      Art London. Tom Miller and Dick Camp.
20              Q      Individually or collectively?
21              A      There's a possibility it could have been both.
22    To my memory, I do not know right now.
23              Q      What did you say to them at the time?
24              A      I told them that I felt that we were 25    inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.6.
 
332' 31pb6 y
1 Q    Did they;give-you a: response to yourcqu'estion?~
2              A    They. felt.that they'did not. fall'under.the-3    requirements of that.-
4                    On:what basis?
Q                        As you understood them.-
                '$              A      I do.n'ot remember thecexact details on that.      !
6              Q      Could it be that'there was no. commitment'on 7      that point?
                '8              A      I don't know. I= don't-know. I do not-9    remember.
10              Q      Could.it also be because they viewed the l
11 manner in which the practice'was. supervised:or overseen - as 12      being adequate.under. ANSI 45.2.67 13              A      Nov'you're asking me to answer for them.
l                                                                                    I Id don't believe that I'can answer what'their beliefs were.
15              Q      No, sir. I asked you what'they' represented 16      to you and what you understood them to mean.      And I  asked 17    you whether  you understood, or.they said to you, or'you 18 understood them to mean that they were in: compliance'with
            '19 ANSI 45.2.6 because of the manner in which such tests were 20      overseen or supervised was sufficient.                                l 21              A      No. I did not believe that.they:were stating i
22    ;to me that they were in compliance.with ANSI'45.2.6.        I 23      believe that they were stating to me that they were not in 24      compliance with ANSI'45.2.6 but that they'were not committed        -l
                                                                                          .q 75      to that and therefore they would not' going to vorry about it.        l
 
323 I
Q            So in'other.words, they explained to you that-                                                                                                      i 2
the reason was that there had been no' commitment'for
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ]
                                .3            construction supplies and support personnel under the FSAR?'                                                                                                              '
4                    A          Well, they felt like'there had been no                                                                                                                j 5            commitment.                                                                                                                                                            Ij 6                      Q        They felt that way or there.was none?
7                      A-        I don't.know if there was none or not.- .To 8          -look through all documentation: dealing with FSAR commitments 9            takes a considerable amount-of time.
10                      Q        Didn't you do so:before you. raised these 11-          points with your superiors?
12                      A        I had researched it partly, but to.be'able 13 to-specifically identify it I would have.to be'looking through-L 14 the FSAR commitments to refresh my memory on that point.
15                      Q      Well, after                they told you that there was no 16            commitment, didn't.you check to see whether their statement 17            was accurate?
is                      A      As time permitted. I do not know if I had 19 enough time or if I researched it thoroughly enough toLfind 20            out if they were totally committed'or not.
21                      Q      When did you first raise this problem with 22            your superiors?
23                      A 1 don't remember the exact time frame'on'that.
24            That one particular problem was a problem noticed.by several 25            other start-up engineers that came on-site. It was not just I
a
_    _            _  _ _ _ _ . =        . . . _ _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ . - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ^ - - -
 
324-
                                      'Sipb8 1
me that-brought that" problem or questioning 1up; 2                Q    How .do you know-that-otherl start-upengineers.[
                                                                                                                              ~
3      on-site raised-that question?.                                              -
r-4                A    They had - .let's see.      They had t'old me s o .'
:s                  Q  ~What were the names of.the' individuals'that
                                                                                                                                  ~
6    told you that they had' raised this' question?            ,
7              .AR l[ believe Dan Parker was.one of them, and '
                                ,                      a      memory.as-far'as the others.I do not remember right now.              >
9                Q  .And-to whom1to Mr. Parker indicate:he had'
                                                                                                        ~
to      '3. sed this question?. Or with whom didfhe! indicate heiraised, 11      this question?                                                            i
                                                                                                                                        .1 12                  A    I do not' remember.-
13                  Q    And when did Mr. Parker tell'you'this?
14              'A      I do not remember.
I 0
15 Do you remember the circumstances surrounding                    .
I 16      his relating this'to you?      Did he initiate'the~ conversation                1 17      or did you?                                                                      j 18                A      I don't remember.
* 19                Q      Do you remember-the-sum and substance of 20      nis conversation with you?-                                                        j end 31.          21                A      1 don't remember.          ,
l  I I
22 23 3b 25 I.
t .
i
 
I 335                        l al l
l .
4 1
BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                          l 2
Q    Did you raise this question about this 3
procedure.with Mr. Camp on more than one occasion?
A A    I believe so.
5 Q    Do you recollect -- or how many occasions?
6 A    No, I do not.
7 Q    Did you raise this question with 8
Mr. Miller on more than one occasion?
9 A    Possibly.
10 Q  .Doyou recollect how many?
11 A    No, I do not.
12 Q    Did you raise this question with 13 Mr. Luken on more than one occasion?
14 A    It could have been possibly brought up 15 during conversations with me and him.
le Q    Could it be on more than one ocasion?
17 A    I don't remember.
18                                                                                J Q    Did you raise this question with 19 Mr. London?
20 A    Yes.                                                        4 21 Q    On more than one occasion?
22 A    Possibly.
l 23 Q    Do you remember how many occasions?
24                                                                                  \
A    No, I do not.                                              'l 25 i
Q    Could you tell me how many times and over                      j I
l
                                                                        ._________---D
 
                                    '32jon3                                                                                                                                                326:
I what period of; time you raised this concern'with your 2
four principal'and.immediate superiors?.
3
                                                              ~A      20) , I'could not give you'an exact number.
4 Q    Give me'an approximate. number.
5
                                                              .A      1 would..be' guessing.                    You know. I'do.not-6  'know.
7 Q. Would it be about -a , dozen times ?-
8 A-    I believe'it would.be less than that.-
9 Q    WouldJ it be .less'than eight?
10 A    ~Possibly.
l 11
                                                            -Q    -But more than a half dozen? -More than six?
12 A      Possibly.
13 Q
(              lhaveyou.everbeenresponsible Id for the harassment, intimidation and threatening.of.any 15 of the personnel at Comanche Peak?
16 (Pause.)
17 A    No.
18 1
Q    Do you remember a disagreement you had with l'
a QC --
20 A    We might take a.short pause here so that                                                                                        -
21                                                                                                                                                    !
l i
my counsel will know what is fixing to:come abo't                                                                                      u as far 22 1
as.the information that you are going to be-requesting 23    here.
24 Q      What makes you think you know what I am 25    going to ask?
                                                                                                                                                                                                        )
                                                                                              - . _ _ _ _ - - - - _ . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ^ ^ - - ' ^ ~ ~              '
 
    .n3 337
                                                                                  ?
I A    Oh, I can see your documentation here.
2 I know --
3 Q    What is it you think I am going to ask?
d A    Well, as I said, I request'--
5 MR. SPEKTER:    Let's take a short break.
6 MR. DAVIDSON:    All right. You want to 7
consult with counsel.
8 (Conference between' Counsel Spekter and witness -- 7:07 p.m.)
to (On the record at 7:10 p.m.)
II BY MR. DAVIDSON:                            't 12 Q    Tell me              what is it you thought 13 I was going to ask.
Id A    I don't remember now. You had led into --
15 what was the last question that you had asked that I had to already previously answered?      Something if I had ever been I7 involved in the intimidation.
I8 Q    I think I said harassment, intimidation or I'
threatening of any QC personnel.
20 A    Harassment and* intimidation or' threatening, 21 that if I had done any harassment, intimidation, or 22 threatening?
23 l                          Q    I don't recollec t that was the question, 24 but if you like I can ask you.
25 A    Well, it is up to you.      It is your I
l l
1 1
e 1
 
        '32jonk.                                                                                                                                              '          ~328 m
7 1 -. questioning.
2                Q    Okay.. Thank' you.
3
                                                                                                                                        .Did you ever have~aniargument with a QC d
inspector regarding.an~NCR7              .
5                'A      Yes.
6
      ;                                                                                                                          -Q-    What was your position in that dispute?-
7                A-    My_ position in that dispute wasothat .the' 8
QC inspector'was' wrong in.his assumptions.
9 Q    When you say wrong in his-assumptions,.he 10        wanted to write up.an NCR,1didn't he?:
11                    A      No.-  He' wanted to prevent me froml performing 12 work and to be exact on'what he wanted.to do I would have.
13 to review all the documentation paperwork associated.
14 Q      Isn't it a.factathat he did not want you 15 to issue what is known as an'SWA'which'is;a startup work-16 authorization and'didn't he insist thatlif you did so he 17 would issue an NCR which is a-nonconforming report?
18                    A      He did not say that he did not want me to 19 issue it because the startup work authorization had already 20 been authorized and. issued. He did not'want me working --
21 Q      Because he believed --
22                        A      -- without an ERN, equipment removal 23              notification.
2d                        Q      I see.
25                        A      Now --
i-e 1
a.
 
329
    >n5 4
I Q    Did he ask you or did he indicate to you 2
that if there was no item removal notice, that is an IRN, 3
per Brown & Root procedures, CPM 6.10-1 that he would write d
you up as an NCR7 5
A    No, he did not.
6 Q    What didhe indicate to you?
7 A    He did not indicate  --
he indicated his 8
feelings but he did not threaten me with an NCR.
Q    Did you get into an altercation with him 10 as to whether or not this was the proper subject of an NCR?
I' A    We got into a discussion over the NCR.
12 Once we did start the work with him being present he did 13 write an NCR and we came into the discussion _over the NCR Id and I requested that we go talk to the supervisor.
15 Q    Was this a mild, calm, quiet discussion?
16 A    I would say that the language volume was I7 elevated by both parties.
18 Q    So it was an argument, wasn't it?
I' A    Not necessarily an argument, because we 20 both had walked up the wrong stairway, even, in our 21 discussion and laughed about'the matter coming back down.
22 So it could have been a heated discussion, but there are 23 differences of opinion. What is difference of opinions 24                                                                                    i but arguments?
25                                                                                    !
Q    But despite the fact that you remonstrated    '
I l                                                                                              ?
I I                                                                                              l l
_________________J
 
~
32 joe 6.
                                                                                  -330J J
l with him in'no uncertain.--fdo you understand thacLword?
2              g-    No,'l-do:not.
3 Q    Well,'letius put' it this'way. If. observers d
came'by and. heard'the-language-you were usinguand'he was.
5
                          .using'and the tone in which'it was.used and'the level and 6
                        . volume-of the-discussion..they[wouldn't,be mistaken if 7
      .                  they thought'there was,~an1 argument in process..would they?-                  .
8                                                                                  i MR. SPEKTER: I.would object.
Itcalls 'forL                l' conjecture that:1sjoutside-of the scope of this.
10 MR.-DAVIDSON:  No, it: calls for.w' hat he.
13 thinks people would have taken from-his personal behavior..
12 MR. SPEKTER:  He doesn't know what people
                    '3 would have taken from anything.
Id                                                                                  t BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15 Q      What would you have taken~if you had$come-
                    '6                                                                                  !
by and heard people arguing in that tone?
17 A-    1 am not sure what tone we were arguing-in.
IB Q      And when he reported that there had been                    ,
l'                                                                                  ,
this argument to his superiors he was mistaken; there was 20 no argument?
21 A    We settled the problem.;
22                                                                                  I' Q      How did you settle it?
23 A      WE vent'up to his supervisor and spokeswith 24 him and at that time his supervisor did not want to write 25 the conconformance report which you have pulled out of your                  ,      q' l
i g.
I 1
                                                                            ..__.. _L---- - ----
 
i n7:
331
                                                                                                                        ?
I file there, a-copy of.                He.did not want to write it.
2 And I told --
3 Q    When you sayihe did not'want to write  --
A      His supervisor did not~want --
5 Q      His supervisor.didn't.think it wasfa proper; 6
NCR7 7
A'      He did not want anJNCR written. 'And I toid
                '8 his supervisor that we needJan NCR to' address his. problem right now.and'get the problem: resolved.                      And therefore it-10
                                  .was:on my decision as muchfas the QCL to.get the1NCR written' II to address the problem-that 1 did not-have-to have.an IIN --
12
                                .the difference of opinion was.that the QC inspector felt, I3 I had to have an IRN; I said that I did not have:to have 14 an IRN to1 operate under my proced'ures; the QC inspector 15 later, by report from the person who. originated the to document which he was thinking heLwas operating under.
I#
agreed with me as that I was correct in my assumption-that 18 I did not need an IRN and thereby I was correct.
I' Q              Did you subsequently speak with Mr. Camp 20 about this incident?
21 A                Yes, I did.
22 Q                You recollect what Mr. Camp said to you?
23 A                  Mr. Camp called me into the. office and 24 questioned the issue; what was going on.                                He specified that.
25 yes, you are correct on a technical matter.                                He also
_______2___.__        _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 
4 j on8:                                                                              Ja6
                            '        explaine'd to me thacLit;was.an alleged harassment, that.I 2
had~ harassed this person, allegedly.
3 1                                                          He got the information. I tol'd.him exactly.
d
                                  'what had gone on and that it was a discussion and 5
possibly that the voices.were elevated and everything, 6
and he stated to me thatyou were right-on the technical 7
matter, you are right in everything that!you'did: the.enly 8
probicm was that maybe you should nor have' elevated          your vnica.- Okay.
H)
But when you are talking,    two  cifferent people-and both;of them'have' elevated ~ voices, and my.
12                                            '
questioning was as what was--the harassment,'to my
                        '3        supervisor.        Ho  did I. harass this person, because I never-I' on-e threatened him, I never once touched him.-I never-15 once insinuated his job or anything, I'never once aid            anv-16 thing; right.          We were just specifically talking over-the
                        '7 matter in question.
                        '8                                                                                  i And my reply --' Oick Camp 's reply to me to was your size harassed him or intimidated him. Which'I 20                                                                                  I feel that I have no control over my size, you know.
2)
Q          None of us do. How tall are you, s
23 A    l    Approximately 6 foot 2.
2d Q          Six two. And how much do you weigh, e-            %                                                            3 25 f or, better yet, how much did.you weigh at the.      i l
                                '~-        _J i
i o
i i
 
in9                                                                                          -333.
4 I
time of this argument?-
2 A      215.
3 Q      215, and~how much dofyou weigh now?
        'd A=  ."220. -
5
(-
Q  {                in your affidavit'- .inLyour-6-                                    '
resume that was      , marked earlier  it says 225.
        '7                                                ~
It is all right. Weonl1 like to' fudge on 8
a' pound or two.      I: con't admit it:myself.
(Laughter.)
10 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
Il
                      'Q      Was that incorrect on your1 resume?
12 MR. SPEKTER:    Perhaps when he wrote his 13 resume.he was 225.        We haven't determined'when the resume Id was written.
15 MR. DAVIDSON:- I don't'vant-to pursue that.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:
17 Q      Do you remember how large this QC inspector 18 was?
I' A      No, I do not.
20 Q      Would you say he was about my size?
21 A      No. I think he was larger than you..
22 Q      So you think that there.is a chance that'I 23 might be intimidated, then, of:you?
24 MR. SPEKTER:      Objection.
25 (Laugther.)-
__________.._____.__._______m___      ___  _
 
                    -jon10                                                                                            >3o.
I N R '. DAVIDSON:- I withdraw ch'at' question.
2
                                                                                                                              ]
I would itRe to indicate, however, that 3
is. enjoying this. questioning as much as se-are and he is laughing.
5 H R '. 5PEKTER:  Because we are laughing 6
                                                    'doesn't mean we are enjoying it.
7 MR. DAVIDSON:      I can.'t. wait to'see when you.
8 express your displeasure, Mr. Spekter.
BY MR. DA    DSON:
10 Q                        1et me draw your actention.to
                                                    .your alfidavit oace again and to the second'incomplece 12 paragraph on that page on page 6.              Do you see that?
                                              '3 A      Yew.
Q        Okay. And this    s a place wnere you'stete 15 your belief that the practice of-allowing t h e 's t a r t'o p to engineer        to work    on Lore then one system with.one 17 startup work authoriestion using only one system number Is 18 a poor management decision.              Do'you see that?
19 A        Yes.
20 There is more in that than what you are        --
21 Q        What more is there?
22 A        Well, the paragraph specifically identifies 23
                                                                                                                              -1
;                                                  aux  ' e'l a y 'r a c k type work, for instance, and under that t r, e r e r
24                                                                                l i                                                                                                                                i is -- you have to understand construction.                Construction 25                                                                                {
has systems broken up.            Okay.
i
  =                                                                                                                              1 i
i
  ..                                                                                                                            L l
 
11 335 4
1 Q    l understand.
2 A    And these systems are turned over to 3
startup in that order.
4 5
6 7
8 9
10                                                          ,
11 12 13 14 15 16 v
17 18 19                                                                ;
i 20 21 22 23                                                                4 i
24 25 i
l l
I 1
                                                                                                                                                                ]
 
r 336'
        ;jon1 j;;
ra33 1                                    .
11
                                                                    -BY'MR. DAVIDSON:
:Q                          did you want i to, repeat ~your answer?
                                                                                                                                .i 4                        .
A          To continue on. the basic substance-here 5
is'that        --
in the statement'is that many systems are e          .
being workediunder_ SWA number and in some cases the-7                            .            .
actual number on the SWA                  .isEnot reflective oflthe' system.
8 being worked on.
                                                                  ~
Q          What do you.mean t h e l S*4A s ? -
10
                                                                    .Are,you ~ stating that.you are;now:
11-                  -
alleging that the system numbers 1that were identified 12 on the SWAs were 'not accurate?
13 A        Yes.                                                      ;'i Q        Is that an allegation that you-have made 15                                                                                                3 here in the affidavit on'the paragraph that begins on                                  '
16 page 6 and concludes on page 7?
17                                                                                                i.
MR. SPEKTER:      1 request that we stop at 18 the conclusion of this answer.
19 THE: WITNESS:      Let's see.      I will have to 20 review the paragraph --
l 2i BY MR. DAVIDSON:
22 Q          As soon as you have completed, why" don't 23 you look up:at me and then.tell me your answer.
2d (Witness continues to peruse document.)                  i 25
: j.                                                      A            Yes, it is stated-on there.-
I'
              ' _.__i__.____...___. __      _ _ _ . _                                                    _    _      ._ _.        ...
 
337-93 1
Q    Would.you'please point to'the statement 2
                                    -in that paragraph ~from which you makenthat assertion?
3 A    It.says that for example-it is common pract1ce at-Comanche Peak to. work on more than one system 5
with one startup work authorization.-          SWA.      And.use only.
6 one. system number.
I                      ~
                                                  .Q    I see. But;-- in other'words it.doesn't-incitlde 8
all the system numbers that'might:be.includedLin the startup' work authorization; is that whatLyour statement is?-
10 A    That-and-it may1not include t h'e , s y s' t e m .
II number at the t'op of the'SWA1may_not even -- may not even
                                                                                          ~ ~
12 be the equipment that was worked on by,the SWA may not 'even
                              '3 be-identified by the system number at the top.
Id For example..I --
15 Q    Complete your. answer if you would like to.
16 MR. SPEKTER:    We will'. recess after-this 17 answer, thn.
18 MR. DAVIDSON:    Mr.-Spekter..you'have                                i 19 interrupted your witness three times.
20 MR. SPEKTER:  Answer him.              3 21 THE WITNESS:  All right.      As I stated 22                                                                                                !
there were several system numbers or systems worked on by                                  {
23 one SWA and that SWA system number may'not have                                            i' 24 corresponded to any of those systems.                                                      I 25                                                                                                i I
l 1
4 -
J l
j
 
                                                                +
JJO 33jon3 1-
                                        .BY;MR.,DAVIDSON:
7 Q --    Then.again-it mayJ;have?
3                                                          '
MR.'SPEKTER:. 'A re. we continuing'one:.more d
question?
5
                                        'MR.
DAVIDSON: ~Well,Ihe'can answer it yes
          .6 or no.
            ?
MR. SPEKTER:      He.will-answersthe way he 8
wants  ~to.
MR. D A VI D SO N ': 'Okay.
10
                                        -THE-WITNESS: .Your question, again :was ---
Il my. reply was that the're would be more than -- that 12 possibly the: syst'em number.on (ba:SWA'would not be 13 reflected in the systems actually worked on,and ycur l'
                  ' question to that was      -'
15
                                      'MR.'DAVIDSON:        I think~we will break',
                  /            %                  . -
16
                \
37 THE WITNESS:
Okay'    .
18 MR. SPEKTER:      ;I agree.
l' (Whereupon, at 7:25 p.m.lthe taking'of 20 the deposition was recessed, to. reconvene at 8: 42 p.m.,
21 this same day.)
22 23 24 25 i
 
I CERTIFICATE OF PROCEEDINGS                                                              4 1
l 2
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the                                        I l
            ! NRC COMMISSION 3
In the matter of:                                                                            i 4
Texas Utilities Electric Company, et al Deposition of Danny Walter                                        '
Date of Proceeding:      Thursday, July 19, 1984 5
Place of Proceeding: Glen Rose, Texas                                                        l 6
I 7
were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript for the file of the Commission.
8 9                                                                                                      l J. F. Coughlin 10 Official Reporter - Typed 11 E
12 v                                        !
13 Official Reporter        -
S igna t u r e l..
la                                                                                                      j i
IS                                                                                                      l 16l i7l 18 19 l
20 i
l 21 1
22 i
23 24 25 TAYLDE ASSOCIATES REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL REPORTERS NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
 
[r                                                                                                                                                                        ?
6
:) ,-
s 221-age 21-9                    1                    A.                .Yes, I.could.
1
                                          .2                    .Q-                ; A11L righ t'.                                          :Then I thinkcwhat I will do is, 3        I will ask the reporter'~if'he would be good enough to.
l                                                                              f 4
provide t{                                                                          khe[ documents in question, so:that.
                                                                              --                                                      i 5-      Lhe can see.if he.can-refresh'his recollection.
6                                          (The Reporter. complies.)
7                                        BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                          '8                    .Q                ,'When you referren-to documents.that would 9        refresh your recollection, is the document ~ that you.had.
10        in mind Direct _ Exhibit 4?-
11                      A                  ~Yes,                            it is.
12                      Q                  Is-that a1 copy of a note that you made about 13          a conversation.you had?
14                      A                  Yes, Lit is.                                              I'd also 'ike.to make reference 15          to a previous statement that I made.                                                                                    'I      specified the 16          February 8th date for the Ivan Vogelsang incident,;which 17          is incorrect, right now.
Is                      Q                    How do you.know that's incorrect?
19                      A                    Because after reviewing the document and' 20          refreshing.my memory, I note that I wrote down the 21          February 8th dealing with the Ken Luken problem, which means 22          that the Ivan Vogelsang had to be prior to that.
23                      Q                  Right.                                              How much prior to that?
24                      A                    I would have to -- it's already. proven ~that 25          my memory is rusty, so I would have to have it refreshed G
_______.____._.___i__._____ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    _ . . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
                                                                                                                                                .__.___2'_._.____,________.._i._m.___.____u________________________
 
r 222 4-ge 31-10      I by the documents that I've already submitted.
2
                                      'MR. SPEKTER:  Ilbelieve the document is 3
there, and I' don't.think anything has been' proven d
                      'concerning your' memory.
5
                                      'MR. DAVIDSON:. I.was going to hasten to point 6
out that that is right.-    I don't think that we necessarily have offered as a matter of proof the unreliability or.
8
                    . rustiness of your memory. The record will show what it shows.
            .30 LI will grant you,~you are not.really II particularly precise about your recollections. except when-                    i 12                                                                                    '!
there are particular words that you are anxious to get I3 in the record.-
14 BY,MR. DAVIDSON:
15 Q        But is there a document here that youJ think 16
                                                                                                  -l would refrech your recollection as to the date on which II you had the incident with Mr. Vogelsang?
18 A        Yes. That's part of the reasoning of logging I'
those information      (sic) down, so that you've got the 20 information there to start with,                                                  i i
23                                                                                          l Q        When did you start keeping.these logs?
22                                                                                          1 A'
The Fred Powers incident was. thought to me 23 as being a one-time deal, no problem.- 'A s soon as'the 24 Ivan Vogelsang incident occurred, I said that this is                            !
i 25
                  -beginning to become too much, and that I logged that down, i
l
                                                                                                  'l i
e
                                                                        ---_._-____-_______A
 
q l
223            I I;
                                                                                                                                        .l1  ,
mgc 21-11 1    and also tried to remember as much as pertaining to the                {)
2 time and place and everything of the Fred Powers incident.
3        Q        Did you ever write down-or make any notes d
about the Fred Powers incident?    I take it you -- let me 1
i 1
5  just strike that.                                                          d i
6 I take it from.what.you're saying that 7  initially, because you thought the Fred Powers was an B
isolated one, you didn't at that time make any rec'ord of          ,
9  it?
10        A        That's right.
11 Q        There was no contemporaneous note made.
12        A        Right.
13 Q        Did you make a subsequent note in which 14 you had past recollection recorded?
15        A        Yes, I did.
16 Q        Did you produce that note for us here today?
17        A                                                          1 I believe you have it.                              ;
IB                  With respect to Mr. Powers?
Q 19 (Pause.)                                            i 20 MR. DAVIDSON:    That's right.
{
21 MR. SPEKTER:  His memory's not so rusty
{
                          .                                    22    after all.
23                                                                                !
MR. DAVIDSON:  Thank you, Mr. Spekter. I can 24 always count on you for some help.                                          I i
25                                                                                i THE WITNESS:  That actually wasn't submitted,              ?
l,
                                                                                                                                                  -i l
i i
i
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _                                                                                    a
 
q 1
224          j l'
mgc 21-12 1          though. That was on the back-of another.
2                  MR. DAVIDSON:      .That's right.  'That's why.            j 3  I was puzzled'.    .You"didn't. submit this particular-note d  which was on the back of -- it was the obverse side, 5  if you will, of Witness.F DX -- that'is, Direct Exhibit 3, 6  which was.the note that you alleged was made contemporaneous 2 y            .
i 7  with the Vogelsang incident.        AndJapparently at 'the-time.      .
8  of the Vogelsang incident. .you then'--
                      '9                  BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                    .{
10        Q          Did you then turn over the page and write                  j 11  what you remembered of the Powe'rs incident; is i that it?                '
12  Or did you make that: notation even - subsequent to that?
13      .A          I would have.to look at.the documentation 14  that you have there to. refresh my memory.
15        Q          Okay. I'm going to give it to you.      Oh, 16  you want all of these?
17        A        Yes.
18        Q          Sure.
19                  MR. DAVIDSON:    .
just'so the 20  record will reflect it, I have handed you Direct Exhibit.2 1
21  and Direct Exhibit 3, and have I given you also Direct                          !
                                                                                                    'I 22  Exhibit 47 l
23                  No. I think only Direct' Exhibits 2 and 3,
:l 24  but if you wish, I will also give you Direct Exhibit 4.                '. l 25  So now you have all of the notes that were used during l
i 4
Q_.__L____-_____._:__
 
1 3
225        ;
                                                                                                                  'l mgc 21-13 1      your direct examination.
i 2
THE WITNESS:  The Ivan Vogelsang incident'                  ,
3 Direct Exhibit 2,.was a note written at the exact time d
of the conversation.
5 The.Ivan Vogelsang incident, Direct Exhibit 3, 6
was written approximately ten minutes after the phone 7
conversation with a little bit more in detail.
8 The back side of Direct Exhibit 3 was dealing 9
with the Fred Powers incident, which was probably written 10 sometime that afternoon or within a day or so fo the first II one.
12 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
33 Q        When you say "of the first one,"    you mean 14 of the time that you wrote the Vogelsang second memo?
15 A        Right.
16 Q        In other words, then sometime later, either 17 that day or the next day, you turned over that page and 18 put down what you remembered of the Powers incident?
19 A        Correct.
20                                                                                                l Q        And with respect to Direct Exhibit  4,  which 21 is the notation about the Luken incident?
22          A        It was written directly after the incident.                                ,
End 21      23 24 25 l'
 
Jon2                                                                              227 I
the authority to sign these memos and also Tom Miller had 2
the authority of signing of memos too.          Their distinction 3
between those two levels of authority was very vague for d
periods of time. So I am not sure if it was Tom Miller 5
or Dick Camp.
6 Possibly if one of those two people would 7
have been out of the office it could have been authority 8
of somebody else.
Q      I would like to show you a document which 10 appears to bear the signature of Tom Miller, which is Il entitled " Texas Utilities Generating Company Office 12 Memoradnum."    It is addressed to L.M. Popplewell.                  It Je 13 dated December 19, 1983, and the subject is ES-100 cable
                                    'd separation. It bears a series of initials in the lower 15 left-hand corner.      The initials being TPM, KLL, DAL, and to all in capitals, and then there is a fifth set of                            ;
                                    '7 initials, lower case gr.
                                    '8                                                                                      )
The document also appears to be cc'd,                            I
                                    ''                                                                                      I that is copied to an R. E. Camp and an M. R. McBav.                                I i
20 I want to ask you a couple of questions 1
21 about those initials and then I am going to show you the                            I i
22 document.                                                                          l
                                                                                                                            \
23 Do you have any knowledge as to who gr                            {
24 would be?                                                                          1 25 l                                                A      No. I would imagine that was the typist,                      !
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .-_._.--_-.-_-_-_-_--a
 
H
            .33                                                                                                                                                                                                            '
228-f
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  -l:
1 though.
2 Q          It was the practice to.have lower case initials indicating the typist of the. memorandum?'
d A            I believe so.-                                                                                                              Not necessarily the typist..
5 Isn't it'a clerical-type form that you put.a gr for 6
identification of a typerwriter or>something,similar to                                                                                                                                      .
that.
8 Q          Are you asking me or are you asking;--
9 A          I am saying hat.that'is what those 10 letters might have been.
11-Q          Okay.                                              How about                                                                                                                      i-12 MR. SPEKTER:                                                                                                      I wouJd object to any 13 questions you might ask-without looking at thel document, or 14 at least looking at the-initials in the context.-
15 MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                                                            I just want to ask what-those-16 initials meant to him.                                                            I don't think there is any need for 17 him to look at the document.
tB                                                                                                                                                                                                            I' MR. SPEKTER:                                                                                                  He is certainly'not the only 19 person in the world with those initials,                                                                                                                                                                I t
20 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
21 Q        How about DAL; whose initials are those?
(                                                              22 A        Those possibly would 've Art London.
23 Q        Now, we have had this discussion before.                                                                                                                                      I 2a understand his name to be Art London but you say he has a 25 first name that starts with a "D"?
l 1
 
Jon6                                                                                                                239 1
j i  4 I
A                              Yes, I believe so.
7 Q                              The middle initial.is " Art is that right?
3 A
I am not familiar with the exact  --
d Q                                How about KLL; who could that be?            1 5
A                                KLL7                                          f' 6                                                                                                  l Q                              Yes.                                          '
7                                                                                                  !
A                                It could possibly be Ken Luken.
B Q                                All right, and how about TPM?
t A                                Oh, that's Tom Miller, possibly.
M)
Q                                All right. How about R. E. Camp; who l'
would that be?
12 A                                That would be Mr. Camp. Dick Camp.
13 Q                                And how about this M. R. McBay; is that Id the samee McBay that you earlier identified to us as beins 15 the head of engineering, manager for engineering, who had                                !
16 the authority over the three departments we discussed, 17 nuclear engineering, Gibbs and Hill, New York, the 18 architect-engineers and Comanche Teak project engineering?                                      l l'
A                                Correct.
20 Q                                And you identified Mr. Popplewell as being  {
21 the manager of that                                group?
22 A                                Correct. Now, as I said now, this' letter          1 23 may have been written under a different organization than 24 what you just referenced to.
I        ;
i 25 Q                                Can I show you the memorandum we have been
                                                                                                                                                              'l i
I i
l
 
n5                                                                                                210 4
1 talking about and ask you whether you recollect having 2
written it?
0 MR. MIZUNO:    I would ask that that A
document be identified and made a part of the record and bound into the transcript.
6 MR. SPEKTER:    I would also join in that 7
request.
8 MR. DAVIDSON:    I haven't decided 'shether 9
I wish to'do so or not. However, if either of you at the    .
10                                                                          l appropriate time, when it is your examination, wish to do      l 11                                                                          !
so you certainly are at liberty to undertake to conduct        i i
67                                                                          1 your examination in any matter you two see fit.                i 13 MR. MIZUNO:  I believe that  --
well, just l                              1A l                                          a moment. Yes, I think --
l                                                            MR. DAVIDSON:    I am just conducting my 16 examination the way I feel comfortable.
17 MR. MIZUNO:    Okay.
18 MR. DAVIDSqN:                                      {
Q                  '
do you recognize this as a memo that you prepared?
l 21                                                                              I A      Yes, I do.                                          '
22 Q      So that the initial        here are in fact      {
23 your initials?
i A      Yes, they are.
25 Q      Do you see that there are some initials in    i e
 
jon6 231 I
I manuscript over above the typed-in initials there are some 2
manuscript initials above your      -; is that your initials?
3 A      Yes, it is.
Q      Do you recognize anyone else's initials 5
on here?
6 A
The reproduction-is poor but I imagine 7
the one part of mine is Art London.
8 Q      And the one after that?
9 A      Ken Luken.
10 Q      Is this signature appear to you to be II Mr. Miller's signature?
12 A      Yes, it is.
13 Q      Now, you wrote this memo. Is this the                              ,
I' memorandum we have been discussing; that is the startup 15 memorandum regarding the concern you had with respect to 16 the DES-100 cable separation and the criteria in 17 Regulatory Guide Section 4.11?
18 A      Reg Guide 1.75.
I' Q        I am sorry. I have holding the document 20 upside down. The NRC Regulatory Guide    1.''?                                        '
21 A        Right.
22 Q        1s this the memorandum that you wrote?
23 A        Yes, it is.
24 Q      And is that date now refresh your recollection 25 I
\
as to when you had the incident with Mr. Powers?
4 0
 
jon7                                                                            232--
4 I
A'    It specifies that. December 19 was-when 2
                                                .the memorandum was written; thereforenthe:' incident'with 3
Fred Powers was.p'robably within a week's time period-from        '
t h a t '' d a t e .
5 Q    Before~or after?
6 A    Before.
7 I might could even refre'sh it. closer than 8
that'if need be.
Q    How would'you do that.
10 A    Looking to see'where the 19th fell on'as II far as date-wis'e.
12 MR. DAVIDSON:      All right. Mr. .Spekter has 33 been good enough to lend us his calendar.              Previously.
I' If you feel that would help you pinpoint it even better.
15 g,ge s ask Mike to produce it -- Mr'.=Spekter to produce it to again, and let's look at it.
MR, SPEKTER:      I would be_ pleased to do that.
18 This is a 1983 calendar.
I' I would also request that since the witness 20 has testified from that document, at this point that a.-copy 21 be made part of the record.              I believe it is appropriate 22 that for reference purposes that document now be~made and 23 given a number and made part of this deposition.
24 MR. DAVIDSON:      Once again Mr.'Spekter has 25 read my mind.          He is one step ahead of me.
 
}
l l                        ~jon8 233 1
I think now that you have identified it 2
what I would like to ask is that we make a Xerox copy of 3
it, a photocopy, have it marked appropriately, a nd ' re tu rn 4    the original to me.
5 MR. SPEKTER:      That has been today's 6  procedure and no problem.
7 MR. .DAVIDSON:    What I would like to d o ,-
8 Mr. Reporter, is I would-like to label,this document 9
Disc Exhibit F-8.
XXXXXX                                          10 (The document referred to was il marked Exhibit Disc F-8 12 13 for identification.)
BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                                      a Q  Now, have you had a chance to study 15 Mr. Spekter's calendar with respect to 1983 in December?
16 A Yes, I have.      I believe thatuthe date --
17 with that document being dated on Monday the 19th, to the 18                                                                                                l best of my recollection -- now, I am not' positive. I know i
19 that this incident started on a Friday which would mean                                    j 20 21 that it should be the 16th and also the 16th should be the                                  j date which I called in NRC Region V.                                                        I i
22 Q  All right.
23 A
At the very most it is a week's delay                                  l j
24                                                                                                '
behind there, so it would be the week previous to that.
25                                                                                                l Q  Well, I am glad we were able to refresh                                I
                                                                                                                                                    -l 4
 
i                                                                                                                                            1 1
                                                                                                                                              -l j o n10,                                                                                                    235  1 1
I A    Correct.
2                                                                    $
Q. So you assume you have no reason to believe 3
that the practice was not followed in this' case?
d A      Well,  I' received a reply back from a S
letter, therefore it must have been forwarded.
6 Q        That'.s good reason for your belief.
7 Did you at any time discuss this memorandum 8
with Mr. Camp?
9 A      Yes.
10 Q      When you raised the subject with him.did II he give evidence that he had seen a copy of it'; in other 12 words when you mentioned it to him he didn't say I have 13 never seen a copy of that memo; did he?
14 A      Mr. Camp was one of the ones who had 15 directed me to write the memorandum.          If I remember right to from previous testimony, I came in on a Saturday indicating II to Art London and Dick Camp'that I had contacted the NRC 18 concerning this problem --
                                                                                                                                              )
                                                                    '                                                                          1 Q      I see.
20 A      --
and we went to his office and at that 21 time they toned me down and reqeusted that I not call the 22 800 number, and at the same time said go ahead and write the 23 memo to start generating -          get it through channels.
24 Q      In other words, they felt that the proper 25                                                                          i procedure to be followed in raising this question was'to            l 1
* 1 1
 
237
                                                                                                                                                              +
231b1 i
1
                                                                                                                                                            -j . j MR. . DAVIDSON:- Do you wish to take'taibreak.              '
i
(            ~~'
3 THE WITNESS:      No..we will keep going'  .                        i d
BY'MR. DAVIDSON:
5 Whengyou.say'that Mr. Camp. toned you down.
Q 6
do you mean. chat;you were angry at the stime? L Were ' y.ou L s till. [
I        angry over the Powersiincident?-                                        -
8                                                                                    r A      .Very much so.
9 Q        And this was on Saturday, right?S 10                A        Right..
11                                                                      '
Q        So you had overnight to this.k about it, and
                                                                                                                                                        . q.
12        you were still-hot aboue it?                                                "
13                A Well, the definition of hot -- you:know,            I-id was still concerned that my job had-been. insinuated -bout 15 an incident to which I-was truly correct on.
                                                                    '6 Q        Well, I'think only others willLbe able to 17
                                                                            .tell us you were correct,        b'u t which you were-truly concerned.;-
18        about?
I' A        An incident which I felt 1.was truly correct 20 on and which was confirmed to me by the NRC repres'entative.
21 Q        -Well, we don't-know whether he confirmed it.
22        or not. There is no' evidence to that: fact.
73                A        Okay.
2d Q        But we do know that you felt that you'were-25        truly concerned about the incident.            Youffelt you were-
                                                                                                                                                                    'l i
i
                                                                                                                                                                    -l
 
238 lb2
                                                                                                      ?
I  raising a legitimate. point and you felt that Mr. Powers 2  didn't understand it. And that is why you had the dispute, 3
because you felt that he was not responding to a legitimate 4  complaint?
5              A    I felt that Mr. Powers understood the proble m o  perfectly.
7              Q    But you don't know that?
8            A    I felt that Mr. Powers did not want to 9
address the problem because of the fact that the implementa-10 tion -- the possibility of extended work load and reinspection 11    of the full plant.
17              Q    And you wanted the problem addressed, didn't 13  you?    You wanted an explanation to yodr perceived conflict 14 between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 and Mr. Powers 15 did not seem to be prepared to give you that explanation?
16              A    No, Mr. Powers said there was no problem.
17  He just said that ES-100, period.      That is it. That he had 18 final say so and that whatever he said was going to be it, lo as far as whether there was a conflict between those two 20    procedures.
21 Undoubtedly, they had had this argument come 22    up before.
23              Q    How do you know that, sir?
24              A    It was during the conversations with Fred 1
25    Powers, that he made the statement that they had had this        ,
l
 
239 fc231b3 1
argument prior to this and it was decided by him and other 2  people that -- well, it was even during the phone conversation 3  to Gibbs & Hill, the Gibbs & Hill employee which I believe 4  signed a reply to that memo, which would further give you 5  more information than my previous testimony, not being able 6  to identify the person or recollect the name.
7                    Talking with him on the phone, he specified a  that they had had that argument previously and that there 9  was a concern in it, as far as ES-100 and the Reg Guides to  not corresponding. But that due to the fact that it was 11    going to cause so much more of a workload, they felt that 12  they  --
that they could save money by fighting it in court 13  or fighting it with the NRC if it arose with the NRC.
                                                                                    ~
14            Q      Was that incorporated in the response that 15  was prepared to the statement?
16            A      In writing?
17            Q      Yes.
18              A      No, it was not.
19              Q      You say you called Gibbs & Hill, New York?
20              A      As soon as I received'the reply, I called 21 this person and asked him how can you come up with this reply ?
22    You know that this is a violation of the Reg Guide.      This 23    person also admitted to me, at that time, that    --
he also 24    admitted to me, at that time, that if they had it to do all 25    over again they were relooking at the documentation over l
 
                                                                                                                        ^
                                                                                                                    . - :=  .
a
                                                                                                              '2'41i
          ,                                                                                                                  1
          -fc231b5.
1              ,Q    Did.. you ~ ever see . the writtien response .t'o ~
2      the st'artup memo that you wrote?
3                A    Yes, I did.;
4              .Q,    .Do you recollect what-was.in:it?,
S.                A    'The main portion, that I rememb'er about that 6
memo'right now was:t'at,it said"that'there?was no conflict
: 7. between the ES-100 and Reg Guide'1.75.
8                Q      Now, you. testified.just a. moment-.ago,that 9      you called - - I'm sorry.
10                A    .I had something that,I wanted to conclude-11      on this.
12                Q      Please.
13                A      Okay.-that also leads'into additional 14 information, as to when I say. upper' level management' T
15      relaxing requirements. right?        Here'we're dealing with'a 16 situation where upper level management made'the. decision that 17 since it was going to cost so.much more' money to.gofback 18 and reinspect all this that.they were willing to fight-NRC 19 on this issue, rather than go to the1more stringent.
                              .20      requirement.
21                Q      Who, in~ upper level management',' told:you that?
22      If anyone.
                            ' 23                A-    When I say -- a Gibbs & Hill. employee, which                      .l 24                                                                                            i' was at a higher level than-me speaking..-which was making 25
                                      -decision -- you've got to. figure that he made recommendations
                                                                                                                            .~ l q
e l
 
243 fc231b7 I
A Now, the response letter that you may get 2
may be a response    --
I cannot remember exactly whether or 3
not the response letter went from Gibbs & Hill to d
engineering and then engineering rewrote the letter and 5
then sent it to start up. I do not know.
6 Or I do not know if engineering just stuck 7
a cover sheet over the Gibbs & Hill document.
8 Q      Well, now I want ~to be clear. Did'you ever 9
see the Gibbs & Hill letter?
10 A      The return?
11 Q      Yes.'
12 (Pause.)
13 A      I believe I did.      I believe that it was 14 attached with a cover sheet from engineering.
15 Q      All right.
16 Now we' identified Disc Exhibit 8, as being 17 a memorandum from Mr. Miller, albeit that you prepared.
18 addressed to Larry -- to L.M. Popplewell.
Is that correct?
19 A      Correct.                                                      1 20 Q      Now, at the conclusion of the statement of 21                                                                                  i the problem, the last sentence says "startup request 22 engineering evaluate the situation and respond with the                        !
23 design philosophy that permits the installation of raceway 24 as described." So there was a request for an explanation                      I 25                                                                                  i as to whether or not there was a conflict?
1 4
i j
j
 
96s
(
fc231b9 t            A      To identify the problem.
2            Q      Right.
j A
3 Okay, the main reason was -- as I had already 4    been told  and informed by NRC, that there was a problem 5    and I am not -- you know -- that there was a problem there.          f 1
6    So in my mind, I felt that there was a definite problem.
7    By doing this memo, I addressed the problem and if the              i 1
8    company will not correct the problem, what more can I do?            !
9            Q      We didn't ask you that. We only asked 10    you whether yom wanted to highlight your concern and ask f
                                                                                                      \
11 for an explanation and that was the purpose of this memo,            l 12    wasn't it?  You did highlight your concern?
13            A      True.
14            Q      And you asked for an explanation, didn't you?
15            A      Well, really what I was trying to ask for 16  was, is corrective action.                                              I 17            Q      Do you mean to tell me that you were not 18    interested in an explanation?    You were only interested in 19 getting your own interpretation accepted?                              i I
20            A Not necessarily -- I was asking for a            '    !
21    legitimate --                                                          I 22            Q      Explanation?
23            A      Explanation.
24            Q      Fair enough. Now I note that the memorandum 25 is addressed to Mr. Popplewell but we have been talking about I
i
\  _ _ _ _ _ _
 
247 fc231b11 1
Q      And therefore, he thought that the best place 2
to ask for a response to your question would be the person 3  who drafted t'he original criteria?
4            A      Not the person who drafted it.
5            Q      The organization, which would be Gibbs & Hill.
6            A      Okay.
7 Q      Is that right?  Is that your understanding?
8            A      Correct.
9 Q      Did he say that?
10            A      Well, he didn't say it, but those words.
11 Q      But that's what you understood 9                -
12            A      Right, f
13                                                                      !
Q      So then you understood that this was going 14 to be forwarded to Gibbs & Hill in New York?
15            A They had already pinpointed the exact person 16    they were going to forward it to.      I had already, during 17 the meeting, identified to them that I had talked to somebody 18 different than the person they were talking about. And 19 they automatically said, well, we know of this other person 20    so we're going to forward it to him.      He is in understanding 21 with our point of view, basically.
22 Q      Do you know who the response    --
do you know 23 the individual who signed the response for Gibbs & Hill?
24            A      l've already told you that I don't    --
I would 25 have to look at the memo to refresh my memory.
i u___________ _ _ _ _ _ .
 
249        '
ifc231b13                                        ,
                                                                                                                                      '1 l
                                                                                                                                        ~!
u l
1
                                              .a memorandum for him, ,that he sked you to'do,.that:you.                                  l I
2  could slip something by him?                                          ..      ~l' 3
( P a u s e'. )
d              A-  LWell. I'm not      --
I don't knowihow intense-      'I'
                                                                                                                            -l
                                                                                                                                      .1 5
this individual reads his' memorandums.                                            !
6                Q    You don't'know?
7                A    I don't'know.        I'm not; going'to.make!                  .
c.
                                          '8                                                                                    _I
                                              'that' accusation.
9                    Okay.
Q                  What'about your ability to slip'    <
l 10 something by Mr. Camp?. Do you think'you could? -~ A memorandum : i 11 he asked you to write, you could slip something'byfhim?
12                A    I don't know.
13                      Did you do'that?
Q
                                                                                                                          ~l Id                A    No.
                                                                                                                        -[
15 Q    Do you know anybody who'did slipfsomething                  l 16  by Dick Camp?
t I
17                A    No.                                                          i d
end24-                18 19
                                                                                                                          -{'
l -~:
2o 21 22 23 24 25 i
______;-_-__L_______---_----------------
 
250 31 4
1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2              Q      Do you remember or recollect who the project 3    manager for Gibbs & Hill might have been at the time?
4              A      No, I don't.
5              Q      Was  his name R.E. Ballard, which I think was 6    on the table of organization      that we looked at just a moment 7    that you pointed to?.
8              A        It might be.
9              Q      Could that be the individual?    Was he listed 10'    as such there?
11              A      I don't know.
      ,12              Q      I'm going to ask you to look at a document 13                    It consists of three pages.      And, you see, it is 14 a copy of a document that is a three-page letter on the 15    letterhead of Gibbs & Hill, Inc.      And the address is 11 Penn                l 16    Plaza, New York, New York dated January 23, 1984          It.also 17 bears a stamp saying transmitted by telecopier January 23.
18 It is addressed to TUCCO in Glen Rose. Texas, 19    attention J.B. George, vice president project general manager, 20      And as you can see it deals with Regulatory Guide 1.75 and                          !,
i 21      ES-100. And it goes on    for three pages, and it is signed                    I 22      very truly yours. Gibbs & Hill.        And I can't make out the 23      signature, and the printed text reads. Robert E. Ballard, Jr., project manager.                                                              i.
24                                  Do you see that?
25              A      Yes.                                                              !
                                                                                  --__----_--A
 
                                                                                                              '251 l24pb2'
                                                                                                                              'l 1
Q        It . also-indicates that copies were sent.to -
                                                                                                                              ~;
                                                                                                                                .5 2
and it says,JARMS, B&R' site. .Do you know what that11s?                    ,
3              'A        Brown & Root.
4 Q.      What's; ARMS?
5                A ARMS is'some: kind of' documentation center.
l 6              -Q        Documentation center that's' maintained.- DO          ,
7    you know what OL means?.
8                A        No.-                                                  ;'
                                              .9              -Q        Then M. McBay.-                                    j 10                A        Right.
11 Q        It says TUSI, and then it says IL.    .Defyou 12 know what that means?
13                A      fN o . 1;believeHit stands for one letter.
14 Q        What about.H. Deam.      Do you know who that might 15      be?
l.
16                A      .No.                                                +
17                                                                              !'
Q        Then it says. W.I. Vogelsang, TUSI site and          I' 18 it indicates that was telecopied to him.
I 19                A        C9treet.
20 Q        It also indicates a copy to L. Popplewell, 21      TUSI site.      Do you see there are three! sets of ' initials? '
                        .                  22                A        Yes.                                                1 S
23                Q        In capital' letters here, REBa -:PNL - SPM, 24 also with handwritten initials. Do you know any-of those                    j 25      individuals?                                                          '
r
 
                                                                                ,    J 252'
                                                                                  ^?
I            A'      I'm not familiar'with the.SPM, butith'e SPM 2
could be possibly Sam.Martinovich. But to the best~of'my.
3 recollection Sam Martinovichgis the persontwho I talked to:
4    regarding:--
5 MR. MIZUNO:    Was the person you talked to l      6    regarding what?-
7 THE WITNESS:    Sam Martinovich regarding how 8
they could justify.this-letter the way they ju'stified it.
9 And now i f .1 am remembering'the name correctly, which'I t h'in k to I am, he was also the one.that was brought up by them during 11 the meeting in Dick Camp's office that.he would be the one 12    that they would have do the evaluation 13 BY.MR. DAVIDSON:
14                                                          s Q      Now in your affidavit,                    is there 15 any mention, any conversation you had with respect to I 16 Mr. Martinovich or'anyone else at'Gibbs.& Hill in New York 17 regarding the preparation of this response?-
18 MR. SPEKTER:    Which response are we : speaking-19    about?
20 MR. DAVIDSON:    The one he's identified ~that 21    was dated January 23, 1984 22 MR. SPEKTER:    That's.something that is not 23    in the record. I would request that it be copied at this                ;
24 point, a copy be provided for the, deposition.
75 MR. DAVIDSON:    Mr. Spekter, I-would. appreciate        d J
 
253'
    ' '= p b 4 1
your letting me. conduct my own examination.        When you have.
2    the podium ~you make whatever rules you like.,
3                    BY MR. DAVIDSON:
1            '
4              Q                    there's a question pending.
                                                    -e A'
5 Will you repeat the question - 'if I interpret;.
6 the question you are asking me if there is any information 7    in the affidavit as to the response letter.
8              Q.      Well..-that wasn't my question. My Jquestion ~
9 was, is there- any mention of the telephone conversation that to    you allege that you had with the Gibbs & Hill New York office!-
11 of employee therein after you received the response?-
12            A        No, there~is not -    I'm going to hold back on 13    that question    until I do reread the paragraphs here.              l 14 Q      MAy I call your attention,                    \ to 15 pages 10 and 11 of:the affidavit, which by the way was 16    offered into evidence by your counsel.
17 (Witness reviewing document.)
18                      MR. DAVIDSON:                  when  you have 19 completed reviewing those, would you ple se look.up?
20                      T~dE WITNESS:    The.only telephone conversation 21 indicated in this paragraph would be the one mAde prior to 22 the writing of the memo you have,'which was.co the employee 23    who refused to sign off the DCA because of the violation of                  '
I 24    the ES-100.
25                      MR. DAVIDSON:      Mr. Reporter, would you please i
l
                                                                                                .=
_  _-____-_-__D
 
256-q I    read back my question?
l
                                                    ?
                                                                          -(The reporter readfthe. record as, requested.)-
                                                                                                                            'f
                                                                                                                            .3 3
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
d Q-    Now,wouldlyou'please answer.the question?-      .'
5              A      .N o , there is not.
6
                                                                  -Q                      titrning once again to the~two 7
                                                        . paragraphs on page 10~regarding your allegation.that there-8 is.a-conflict between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75, is-9 there any mention ~of,your having: written a start-up memo 10        seeking an. explanation?-
11 A      No, there is not.
L12 Q      Is there any mention in this affidavit of 13 your having been provided with a response to that start-up 14        memo?
15                    A      No --
16 Q      I haven't finished'-- through engineering 17 and from the architect engineer, Gibbs & Hill?
18                  A      No, there is not.
19
                                                                .Q
                                                                                      . do you~have a copy of-the. response 20 that was provided by-Cibbs & Hill that was'given tocyou?'
21
* A~
I do not believe so.                '
22 Q      You-did not retain a copy?'
23                      A      To the best of my knowledge I.did not.
2d Q        B9t you may have?
25                      A        I don't know.
 
255 24pb6 1
Q      Would you check your records at home and if 2    you were given a copy would you provide it for us?
3            A      Yes, I will.
4 Q      Would you do that early next week?
5              A      Yes.
6              Q      You mentioned              that you believe 7    that the response that was provided to you was under a cover 8    sheet, you called it.
9            A      Yes.
10            Q      From Mr. Popplewell.
11              A      I said it possibly could have been under a 12    cover sheet. I'm not familiar it is was or not. I do not 13    remember if it was or not.
14 Q      A moment ago I think you made a more affirmative 15    statement. In any event, will you look for that cover sheet?
16            A      Yes  .
17 Q      And if you have that, will you produce it to 18    us?
19              A      Yes, I will.
20              Q      Will you do that early next week?                                i 21              A      Yes, I will.
  .      22              Q      Now, you indicated that you had made a f
23 telephone call to the NRC on or about December 16 after you                      j 24    had the discussion with Mr. Powers.
25              A      Yes, I did.
l 1
 
T~
256 s
4 1
Q      What was the reason for that call?
2            A      To confirm my questions of ES-100 being in
                                                                                      ]
3    violation of Reg Guiae 1.75.
4            Q      Who in the NRC did you contact?
I 5            A      At this time I do not remember.
6            Q      Did you know, did you introduce yourself to 7
the individual on the other end of the line?
8            A        Eventually the individual on the other end 9    of the line I believe did have my name.      At the very beginning to    I wanted to keep it anonymous. I do not know at which time 11    I broke being anonymous.
12            Q      Did the person on the other end of the line 13    give you his identity?
14            A        Yes.
15            Q        Tell you how you made that call. Whom did you' 16    call?  Did you pick out a particular individual with the 17    NRC with whom you were acquainted?
18                    No, I did not.
A                        What happened was I had gotten 19    home, it was after 5:00. The NRC  re,gion  for this area 20    was closed at the time. The only one open to possibly answer 21    questions that I might have was the NRC region towards        '
22    California, which was Region V, I believe.        ANd that's the 23    reasoning for calling Region V.
24                      I was just connected with an electrical 25    engineer. I asked for an electrical engineering type person l
i l
l l
1 l
1
-_-- -                                                                                i
 
257' 24pb8 1
to ask a questions to.
1 2              Q    But.you don't recollect who that might have
                                  -3    been?
4            .A      Not right now.
5              Q      Did you at any. time raise these matters with 6
the regional office that had charge for this particular
                                  '7    project, which would be Region IV?
8              A    No, in order to do that I would have had to 9
call during company time, which considering the amount of to conflict and harassment, you might say, that I go t for 11    calling Region V,    I felt to try and call NRC during company 12    time would be very bad.
13 Q      Now you just said that you got harassment 14      for calling Region IV.      You haven't earlier identified or 15 testified any harassment for making that call. Are you now 16 giving us yet another incident that has not previously been 17    testified to?                                                                        i 18              A      I'm saying that I was counseled on it, and 19 told that it places the company in bad light and should not                          1 l
20      be done.
21                      Were Q              those the exact words that were used                      1 i
22      in that counseling session?
i 23                A      I'm not going to try and give an exact word                        1 24      for word in a counseling session.
1 25                Q      Well, could it have been, well, why don't I
i j
 
259 24pb10 l
l 1
same separation violation problem. and tlat if they are 2
building to this specification that they stand a very good 3    chance of being shut down theirselves.
I 4
So at the time there-I'was dealing with how 5
much -- I even specified to Fred Powers some time that you 6    were going to sit here with a violation, continue on 7
building this plant and possibly spend an excessive amount                    !
i 8    of money later when the        p{oblem actually is encountered.        .f 9              Q                                                                  '
                                                ;                  this gentleman that you called to    from Region V.        Did he indicate to you that he had inspected 11 or reviewed any of the cable separations at Comanche Peak?
12              A            No. he did not, t3              Q            So the only basis on which he had to go in i
14 response to your question was your assertion about            --
15              A            I read him. He was perfectly familiar with      '
16    the Reg Guide 1.75 which most NRC personnel are.              I read him  '
17 portions out of the neg Guide 1.75 which he understood to                !
18    be that. I also read him specific information directly from to    the ES-100 which is outlined in my affidavit.                            i i
l 20 And his reply was, yes it is in violation.
21              Q            Is this conversation and the details the sum 22 and substance which you just revealed to us now part of your 23      affidavit?
24              A          1 believe not.
2$                      f Q                        iwhen    you received the response from l
l'                4 l
 
260 4
i Gibbs & Hill, New York did you take it up with,this 2
unidentified engineer from Region V7 3
(Pause.)
d A    Repeat that one more time. When I received --
5 MR. DAVIDSON:    Instead of your trying to 6
repeat it, why don't.we ask the reporter to    --
7 THE WITNESS:    Let's take a short break here 8
and come back to that particular question afterwards.
9 MA. DAVIDSON:    I don't follow what you're to  saying.
11 THE WITNESS:  I would like to take a break.
12 MR. DAVIDSON:    You want to consult with 13 counsel?
14 THE WITNESS:    No, I would like to take a break, 15 MR. DAVIDSON:    As I told you before, any time to you want to take a break you can have it.      Go ahead,
                  )
tB            )      THE WITNESS:  Okay.                                I1 19                                                                          (
(Recess  --
4: 40 p.m.)                              l 20 21 l
22                                                                          i l
23                                                                          j 24 25 l
1                                                                              i l                                                                                l l
i
 
(
jont                                                                                261 ;
I
                        #25              (4:56 p.a.)                                                                      I l
l                                      '
MR. SPEKTER:  Ue are back on the record 4: 56p.m.
2 and the reporter is going to read the question that we had 3
before the break.
A                                                                                !
MR. DAVIDSON:  Would you, please,                                l Mr. Reporter?                                                              ,5 6
(The reporter read the record as requested.)
7                                                                                    i THE WITNESS:  Yes.
BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                              j 9
Q      Did you send a copy to this unidentified                  !l l    ,
I individual of the written response of Gibson-Hill?
11 A        I do not remember.
12 l
Q      Do you recollect having taken it up with                        j 13                                                                                      d him?      What is your recollection?                                              1 14 A      Oh, I do know that I formally made a report 15                                                                              I on that incident to the Region V NRC representative.                      l 16 i
Q      Now, this is a formal report?                          ! j 17 A      I actually indicated to him that there was              i 18 a problem, that they had had time t o re s o lv e this problem          ;l I
19                                                                            i !
and this was what their answer was to the problem.
20                                                          '
                                                                                                          .      ,          l Q      And when you say formal report                        '
21 what  --
                                                                                                          /      h 22 A        Okay. Maybe the word formal would not be correct. Originally I indicated to him that I did not want 24 this to go in as a report to him or to be researched.
25 The final one towards the end pone calls was that yes, I I
I i
9
 
262 I
had received the information~back from.here and that 2
it was inconsistent to what me and'him ha'd talked about-3 then that I was placing a1 formal complaint: at.this7 time, d
Or'l-was notifying him of the; problem and requesting 5
research into the background.of.it.
6 Q      Now, did youncall anyone in Region IV
                    -7
                            'about the problems;since they. had .j jurisdiction of your 8    ; plant?
9 A      As I indicated earlier, Regionf1V was 10 always closed by the time I was able to get home to make 11      those phone calls. And in some cases Region.V'was already 12    . closed. So I probably had several phone calls where I-13 tried to contact him but he had already'left the office id in Region V.
15 Q      Did you    ever make a phone call to Region IV?
16                A      'No,  I did not i
17 Q      Did it have  an answering machine where'you 18 could have left a message on at Region.IV?
I
                  '19 A
You have.got to understand here-that I am 20 trying to maintain a certain. amount of being anonymous.about 21      this.                                                                        i'
                  '22 Q
Well, you said you had disclosed yourself by          .,
23      this point.                                                                  i 24                .A Well, I believe telling this one person                    ;
25
                          -is one-thing but to put your.name down on an answering i
1 i
                                                                                                      .I l
I l
 
jon 262ot I
machine that could possibly be reviewed by no telling who 2
and not having the stipulation already addressed to the J
3 person you are talking to that you that you do not want your name used in any matter, it would be stupid on my 5
part to do something like that.
6 Q      Did you not think you could mail a writtn complaint to Region IV?
8 A      1 felt that a verbal would be more appropriate, and I m not even sure      --
like you asked a 10 question earlier. I may have maild him documentation II associated with this.                                                                                '
12 Q      You may have mailed Region V?
          '3 A      Right.
Q      And did it occur to you to mail to IS Region IV if you were going to mail something, to mail 16 it to Region IV who had jurisdiction over your plant?
I A      I was not talking with Region IV    .
18 Plus, if you look at it this way, too, there is a certain                                              l 10                                                                                                            i level of buffer between there, too, that now in order for                                              1 I
0 Region IV or anybody on the site to find out who I am.
i 21                                                                                                            1 they have to go through Region V and so therefore there                                                  i is an added buffer there.      Or they have to go through this                                        !
23 one person and dealing, you know      --
keeping strict                                                !
e4 i
confidence, you know, I felt that it was easier for me to                                              i go through Region V.                                                                                i l
l l
l I
 
264 jon I
Camp and one of the: statements he made during that meeting 2
was, as I said, that, hey, I didn't make it a complaint 3
and I tried to keep my name anonymous and everything, right, and I told him I didn't want my name used when this 5
subject came across and Dick Camp's reply was that maybe o
not to these exact words but he indicated that TUCCO knows who reports to the NRC.        And I said hey. I told 8
them that I wanted to stay out of this.        He indicated to 9
me that TUCCO does know who reports to NRC.
10 Well. TUGCO-TUSI, the organization as a 11 general organization. or Comanche Peak as a general.
12 Q      Did he tell you how he knew that?
13 A      N o ., he did not.
14 Q      Or his basis for stating that?
15 A      No, he did not.
16 Q      Did you ask him?
17 A      No, I did not.
18 Q      You said the reason that you called 19 Region V initially was because they would be open after 20 you got off work.
21 A      Correct.
22 Q      Wouldn't some of the regions in the East 23 be open before you went to work?
24 A      Correct. Well, even theree, we are talking 25 about seven --
t
 
joa 266
                                                                                                                                                                                                  'l I
i I am prepared to give a lot of latitude 2
to a lot of statements, but what you just said is totally 3
without foundation or merit.          What he did and why he did d
it is exactly what this deposition is all about and why 5
he refused to contact Region IV and why he insisted on 6
dealing over the phone with Region V and why he wouldn't          --
7 MR. S P EK*f E R :  It is not a matter of i
B refusinge  --
i MR. DAVIDSON:          Excuse me. You are              ,
10-interrupting, Mr. Spekter.            Please don't do that. I have 11 always shown you the courtesy to let you complete all of 12 your statements before I spoke and I assume you are going
                                                                                                                  '3 to return that courtesy with respecting my same rights.
All I am saying is that the reason for 15 what he did and the reason why he believed what he                              )
                                                                                                                  'O                                                                                    i believed are highly relevant in this case, and we are                          i
                                                                                                                '7                                                                                    l dealing with a specific incident which he says created a                        I
                                                                                                                '8 circumstnace of harassment dealing with the question and                        l
                                                                                                                "                                                                                      1 issue raised in pages 10 an d .11 of the affidavit. And 1                      j 20 know that you consider my questions to be relevant because                      3 21                                                                                    !
we discussed t hat and I don't think that they are dilatory 22 because I think that I have done nothing but move forward                        1 23 in this line of questioning and pursue each topic as it i      !
28 arose.
25                                                                              4 I did tell you during the break that one of l
 
267
                                                                                                                                            ?
the reasons why this was taking as much time as it was was 2
that,                    ' continues from time to time to lapse into 3
unresponsiveness and to insist on making irrelevant speeches in response to questions and providing testimony and' 5
creating new assertions and new incidents that were not 6
covered in his direct testimony nor in his affidavit I
nor previously testified to.                      And I told you that it was 8
my obligation in a discovery deposition to follow his lead and I told you that it was not I who was leading him in 10 this examination, but he was leading me, and that's why                            '
I couldn't give you a termination date or time.
i 12 Now, if you have a legitimate obj ec tion              [
13 you know I have every desire that you get it on the record.
but I frankly thought that was really out of order and 15 that is the reason I am responding to it in this manner.
IO MR. SPEKTER:        I believe this line of
                                    '7 questioning is out of order.
18 MR. DAVIDSON:          Your objection is so noted.            I I
BY./MR . . D AVID S ON :
l 20                                                                                                            1 Q                      answer the question.pending.
l                                                              l 21 A  1 d o n .'. t believe there was a question 22 pending.                                                                          i l
23 Q                    you say you may have mailed some material to Region V but you chose not to mail it to any                                  .!
1 25 other region; is that correct?                                                    -
1 i
    *                                                                                                                                  }        !
i 1
 
          ''                                                                                                                                                                                                                      r    O''
          '?j on t
: 263
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            -f 1
A                  Correct.
2 Q                  is your conversation with.the unidentified                                                                                                    ~
                                  '3 engineer in Region V detailed and described in-your d        affidavit?
5                        A                  No, it is not.
i
                                  -6                          Q                  Is the subsequent discussion.with: this
                                '7 unidentified' engineer about the response provided by.
8 Gibson and 11111 mentioned in yourf af fidavit?
9                          A              No, it is_not.
10 Q              Now, you were telling us.',
11                                                                                                                                                                                          /
that you' discussed the; response -- you were trying to-12 determine whether you had provided the respons e ~ to the 13 unidentified engineer.. 'Do you remember that?
Id                          A            Once again I did1not                                                      --
I don't understand 15 what you are asking.
16 Q            I haven't- asked anything.-                                                                                                    I was asking 17 whether you remember what we previously discussed, but. I 1B will have the reporter read back my. statement to you.
19 (The reporter. read theorecord as requested.)
20 MR.'SPEKTER:                          I will ask counsel to-                                                                                                        4 P
21        rephrase the question.                                                                                      '                                                                    '
I'c 22 MR. DAVIDSON:                          I thinkEyour suggestion-is
[                              23        a good one. Mr. Spekter.
2d BY MR. DAVIDSON:                                                                                                                                                      ?
25 Q        You will recollect.that we have[been' 4
4
 
269 4
I discussing whether you had mailed or otherwise provided 2
the Gibson-Hill response to the unidentified engineer at Region V.                  Do you recollect that?
d A          Yes.
5 Q                And my understanding was that you couldn't 6
remember whether you had or had not.
A                Correct.
8 Q                But you did remember that you discussed a 9
response.
10 A                Correct.
11 12 Q                Would you please tell me what you told the Gibson-Hill response was?
13 14 A
1 believe I read it to him. I believe I 15 had the documentation there and I read it to him.
16 That's the end of my    --
I related to him I believe.
17 18 Q            Why did you call this engineer in Region V          {
and ask him his opinion about the Gibson-Hill response?
A 20                                          Because it was in conflict to the 21 informationubetihad given me previously.
22 Q          Andyou wanted to find out what he thought about the response?
23 A          Correct.
24                                                                                                  .
l                                                    25 Q        And did h e respond to your qeustion?                        I A        Yes.                                                  ,
I
 
jon                                                                                        ]
270 1                                                                          .
Q      And what it is that you allege that he 2
said?
f 3
A      1 believe that  --  now, this is where the a
questioning on my part as far as my memory comes in, he 5
could.have possibly asked me for the documentation to be 6
mailed to him, which I may have done, and that is vague              ,
7 in my memory if that did occur.
8 1 am saying that it is possible that that            j 9
did occur. I believe he had told me, though, that he would 10 look into it and get back with me.
                                                          \
Q
(.            ( did.he get back to you?
12 A      No, he did not.      I don't know if he 13 attempted to or not but I did not receive phone calls from 14 him.
15                                                                          ,        ?
Q      Well, if he had attempted to get.back to 16                                                                        ,
you by phone, was there some place he could have left a 17                                                                        i message?
16                                                                                -
A      My home phone number, but if there was 19 nobody there he would not have been able to leave a                            f j
20                                                                        '
message.
21                                                                                    J
                                                                                              }
Q      You had asked him to contact you at home 22
                                                                                              ;          f and not at the plant?
23 A      Oh, definitely.                                              )
24                                                                                    1
                                                                                              !            1 Q      At the time of these discussions were you. l'            1 25 married?
i I
i
--_ --_-- _ --    -                                                                                      i
 
271 i
                                                                                                                                                                            ?
I A    Yes, I was.
2                                                                                                                                          '
Q    Were you living with your wife?
3 A    Yes, I was.
d MR. SPEKTER:    Objection.as to t h'e 5
relevancy of the question.
6 MR. DAVIDSON:            Be patient, Mr. Spekter.
7 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
8 Q        Was your wife working at the time?
A        No,'she was not.
10 Q        Was she a h o m e m a k e'r as the expression is?' In other words, was she a housewife?
12 A          Yes, she was.
I3 Q          And if you had been contacted at your home and she was there she could have taken the message for you?
15 A            If she had been there.
16 Q          And she never gave you any reason to II believe that she had gotten the message from this
                          '8 unidentified engineer?
A            No, she didnot.
20 Q              Do you know whether the unidentified 21 engineer at Region V ever followed up"on the material 22 that you raised with him?
3 A                          No, I do.not.      Unless also that during that 24 time period it might have ran into                                                  --
I am not familiar with 25 the time frame.                            I couldn't say, l
    ,                                                                                                                                                                                i l
 
ye                                +                              ^
                                                                                          '872:
                                                                                              -l 1
Q        Excuse.me?if I look;a.little puzzled.    '
2 When~Lyou sayLyou-are not familiar.with'the time frame.
3 what are1you referring to?
a.
Well'[I-wonderEif-it A            ,
was during.a very 5
busy time' frame lwhere'my7 wife-wasibusy'in outside 6          .
activities and megpersonally,;too.
7-And towards the.end of my employment I h'ad -gotten to the point to wherel.ILeould have cared. yourknow, l'e s s .
9 They had- just about beaten me down, you 10                                                                          _
might-say. _
                                      'I won't say.that I did"not. care,'.becau'seII.-
11 still could, but I was not pursuing ' the viola tions fin: the 12 procedures-as actively as~ILhad been before.
13                                            '
la Normally - .if;I had been:normally-pursuing it I am not return'ingLmy phone call._I'would have 15 returned his.
16                                  ,
Did he.know your'home address?
Q 17 A
No, I donft believe?he didJknow my home end2 5          address.      I kept that part out,-I believe.
to h
20 21                                                                                :)'
                                                                                                  .)
22 23                                                                                    1
                                                                                                ' l, 24                                                                                q 25                                                                      ,            !
1 1
l
            ~
i
 
273 lbl 4
1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2 Q    Were you, at the time, listed in the 3    Cranbury phone-book?
4                        A    Yes, I was.
5 Q      You never received any correspondence 6
from this unidentified engineer, did you?
7                        A      No, I didn't.
8 MR. SPEKTER: That's.his answer.
9 MR. DAVIDSON: I asked whether he got a telephone to    call.            This was whether he got any correspondence, mail.
11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
13                        A                                                          1 I answered your question.
14 f
Q      No, you did not, sir,                                2 i
15                        A      I said no, I did not.
1-6 Q      I'm sorry. I didn't hear you. I guess 17 it was Mr. Spekter's interruption.                All right. You did not.
18 Did you, at any time, raise your concern or 19 your complaints or your puzzlement over the alleged 20 conflict between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 with 21 anyone else at the NRC, after you failed to get a response 22 from the unidentified engineer at Region V?
23                        A      No, I did not.
24 Q      Did you raise or pursue the issue with 25    anyone else at all?
l
 
274" f,c 361b 2 1
                                      'A      No. I did not -- might- I, a t.- this time.
2
                          . refresh my memory by:looking at the. return documentation.
3-  the dating ofLthe return documentation      to see what time 4    frame it was actually in?
5'              Q    Let me understand what your question i s .. Are 6
you sayingfthat you want to get a. sense of the" time where 7    this all occurred, on    the-basis of the'datefindicated on 8    the respo'nse from Gibbs & Hill?
9              A      Correct.
10
                                    .Q      The letter date was January.23, 1984,
                                                          ~
11              A    The response from Gibbs 6 Hill was'Janu'ary 12    237 1
13 Q      Right. The response to'your memo-was! December' id
: 19. By the way, does it refresh your recollection of how-15 long it took to get a response to-your startup memo?.
16              A      That I don't remember. I don't remember when 17 the initial reporting was on the letter..        It may have?been. l 18 I don't remember.      I would have to look 'back on the files 1 19    again.                                                                  ;
l 20 Q      Did you understand the question?
21                A      Yes, you were asking --
22 Q      Do you remember we talked.about'how quickly j
;                  23                                                                              i after you wrote your startup memo'you got s' response? . And-            '
24 you said, well 'I don't really remember.        It could:be a month.-
25                                                                            -i It could be'a year and a half.      And I said, well,'was it as l
1 l'                                                                                                i e
i i
i
 
275 33 4
1 long as a year and a half, and you said no.
2 I said could it have been as short as a month and you said possibly or it could be three months.
3 4
Now we have a date on a document that you've 5  identified that you wrote. December 19. And we have a date o  on a document that purports to be the response of Gib^cs 7
                                                                & Hill, New York, indicat1ng January 23. And I ask you 8
whether now your recollection is refreshed as to how long 9    that the time period was between the date    or the time when 10 you forwarded the startup memo and the time you got a 11    response?
12              A I would have to look at the date of the 13 memo, when it was generated. You're saying that January 23rd 14 was the date that I got the response?
15            Q      No, I said that's the date on the document.
i 16            A      Well, what I really wanted to find out is                              j 17 the date when I received the response to the letter.
1B Q      Well, my question was not that.                                        !
19            A      Well, you haven't  --                                                  j 20              Q      In other words, you can't tell -- from those 21 two days -- what the general period of time that elapsed'                                '
22 between the time you asked the question and the time you 23    got a response?    You have no recollection?
24              A      1 don't. I'm missing your -- you've gotten 25    me confused at your line of questioning here. I'm not
 
fE261b4'.
276]
                                                                                                                                                    .f i
J I    familiar with what we're' answering here.                            #
2              Q      Do you know wh'y that is, 3
MR. SPEKTER:
(            /
I object to your charreteriza--    ,
d    tion as: to why it: is. Please just ask him t h'e queJtion.
5                      MR. DAVIDSON:    No, I'm sorry, Mr.-  Spekter, 6
I'm entitled to say what I want to say. . If you want to:
7 interrupt your witness,.which you've done from time.to time.
8    that's fine if he accepts it.        I don't. This is my-9-
                                                                        -examination and-I'll conduct it'in the proper manner:with to    full courtesy and ettiquette to.you.in f ull professionalism-li at all times and I expect nothing less in return and          I-12    accept nothing else.
33 And you won't: cut me off and you-won't limit Id my statements, and you' won't interrupt me.        Because that 15    is simply not proper and you: know it.
L          'i-16 Now as I was going to.say,              H I'll.
17 tell you why you seem to be confused. .Yo dre trying to 18 figure out where I'm going. You're trying to' figure.out what.
19    the question means.      If you'll just answer the question 20 as asked, it's going to get through real quick.
21 Now I'm going to ask the'reporte'r to. read        i 22 that question back to you, or better yet I'm not' going to 23 waste the time with that because we are anxious to speed            3 2d    things up.                                .
25 what I'm trying to say'to'you is,
                                                                                          \          /
1
 
                                                                                                                                              .277,
: 61b5.
4-1 you earlier' testified that you didn't recollect 'how much 2    time elapsed.between.the" time you" set forward:your                                                                            j 3    startup memo and the; time'you. received yourEresponse.
4 And we tried to b r a c k e t ' t h e i t im'e . - -And you said well..it.
5  Jcould be one ~~ month or it could be a' year.and~a half.
s 6                        Now isn'tithat'true?          Isn't that'what you said ?
7                        THE WITNESS:    'No,    I believe-you're:takinglit 8    out. I said that it could be.one month or it could be-a
                  'o    year and a half on~r.ormal response-time. .And that's what 10    we were speaking of, not the response time ofothat one 11  -letter.      And then you specifically-warned me to reply to 11 2 the response time of that one. letter and I specified that 13    it could be one month or possibly three months.
14
                                          .BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15                        Okay.
Q              Now,~having heard theLdates and'seen 16    the documents that constituted the.startup memo'and: the 17 response by Gibbs &-Hill, I asked you whether your 18 recollection was refreshed, as to how long a period' elapsed 19 between the time of the startup memo and the time ~you-20    received the response?-                                                                                                          -
21                A      And as 1. indicated at the beginning_of this, 22    I was requesting information off of those memos to refresh 23    my memory as to their dates, again.
24                Q        We gave you the dates, December 19th 1vas 7
25 your startup memo. January 23 was the date of the response.
i 4
                                                                                                                                                          'l
 
278 fc261b6 i
1 A      Well, that is what had me confused earlier, 2
was that I believe that you stated that the January 23rd 3
was the date that the startup memo was generated.
d Q      No, sir.      I did not state that.
5 A      Okay, you're saying that December 23rd was 6
when the  --
7 Q      December 19th, sir, is the startup memo you 8
wrote. That's the date it bears.        It's been marked in 9
evidence and marked for identification.
to            A        It was received on January 23rd, 11 Q      The response was dated --
12 A      January 23rd.
13 Q      I d o n '' t know when you received it.
Id A
Now there is very good possibility tha-. it 15 could have taken six weeks in time processing. Under the 16 amount of emphasis that I was placing on this one article, 17 I would imagine that it didn't, because if you will notice 18 that one copy was telecopied to Ivan Vogelsang.
Q        That's right.
20            A        Now just because it was telecopied to            i 21 Ivan Vogelsang, Ivan Vogelsang may not' have taken it'upon 22 himself to transmit on over to me.
23                                                                      ',
Q      That's right, j
24            A So the actual time I would have received        l 25 the document is still indeterminate.
 
279 27 4
                                                                                                      'l Q    . Well,.it may-be indeterminate but you see, 2
the question I' keep'asking you is whethe'r bowing 1these                                '
3
                                                                                                                      . dates, you_have any recollection that has been-refreshed.
d'
                                                                                                                      .And if ..I understand 1you correctly;and we could have' stopped 5                this'colliquoysa long. time ago                                and.maybe'you would like 6
to consult-with your counsel on how to' answer' questions ~1ike 7                this.
8 If you still don't'have any. idea :when: you 9
received it and still don't have any idea.of'the t ime '. t ha t 10 elapsed between the original. memorandum that was sent.up 11 and the response that was received by-you, then the answer-12                      is no    Mr. Davidson, even though I have seen the' dates,~I 13 still do not have any refresh'ed recollection.as to-how'much Id                      time elapsed.:
15 And then there can't' be any further questions 16 because you don't have any recollection.
17                                  A      No, I do not have any recollection.
la                                Q      Now answer the question.
19 Now, you earlier inquired of me,i 20                                                                                                        L        I to provide you with the date of the response'from Gibbs &
21 Hill because you. felt'it would give you some time frame 22 during which you were having the conversations with the 23                        Region V unidentified engineer. 'Do you remember that?
2d                                  A      (Witness nodding affirmatively.)
25 Q      Can you tell me why you thought you needed
 
280 fc261b8 I                  that information?
2                            A    .I just needed-to refresh my memory as to 3
which time of the year we were speaking of exactly, so I 4
could possibly put in line what was going on during that 5                  time period.
6                              Q    Do you remember, from your first 7
conversation with the unidentified engineer, whether he 8                    shared your concern about the conflict?    And when I say 9
shared your concern, I don't necessarily mean only that he-10 might have agreed with your interpretation that there was.
11 a conflict', but rather that he was likewise in addition, 12 in agreement that this was something about which to have 13                    some serious concern?
14                              A    Yes, he did. He did have concern over it.
15                            Q      And did he seem, to you, anxious to get to                    to the bottom of the matter?
17                            A      I don't know what his personality is. I 18                                                                                    i don't understand how to determine if he was anxious.                l 19 Q      I don't think that's the answer to the 20                question advanced.
21                              A                                                    .l I do not know.                                  1 22 MR. DAVIDSON:  Mr. Spekter?
23 MR. SPEKTER:  Please just answer the 24              question.                                                              i 25 l
 
                                                                                                                            '2821, fc261b10 1              A        In. reference to what?    'In" reference 1 t o : a L f u'el .
2    load disaster? . Y e s ,' a shutdown is a slight' matter.-
3:            Q        How long would'it.take to 'correc t, in ' your ?
E 4    view?
5              A        There again,ithat's questionable;-depen' ding:
6    on.how big the problem.is.'                              *~
7              Q.    'But in'other words, youffelt-that_aiviolation 8
of Regulatory Guide, that.might result;in shutting;down1the-9-
plant,- was a matter not,of any great'concernJ to either.you--
10    or to Region'VLunidentified' engineer?
11-I,just:want to getJa sense of.whether heEwas 12 concerned, whether.he thoughtfthat.you hadJa complaint that 13 was legitimate', but also thatLwas one of serious. concern.
14              A        I believe.he was concerned,Jas to -- you've-15 got to figure the plant was still in the construction phases.                        (
16 His'first question.was has -- and.I forget -- which inspectio1' 17 been performed. And I had to answer him I don't know.                                )
18 And~possibly his concerns there was. well,.                        .
J to this inspection -- or supposed inspection'-- sh'ould find 20    this problem.
1 4
21 QL      Do'you remember the name of;theMinspection t ol 22    which he referred?                                                            '
23              A        No, I do not.
s 24                                                                                            1 Do you know whether that inspection-has Q                                                                          i 25    subsequently been' performed?                                        '              'Id i
l J
i I
                                                                                                                                                  ~!
 
284-fc261bl2 i
I that the'Gibbs & Hill. response was correct and therefore 2    -didn't pursue: it.
3                            MR. SPEKTER:  You can argue that to the' 4  . court, but~ that's not theLpurpose of'this deposition.                                3 5                            BY MR. DAVIDSON:
6                  Q        Well, did you gather anythingEfrom'the fact 7    that this was not followed up?            In otherLwords, did you.
1
                                            . arrive at'any conclusion?
8 j;
9                  A        I dolnot knows personally. . whether'this 'as        w 10      followed up or not, ii                Q          Not my question.4            -
I didn't ask
                                                                                              ~
12    you whether you knew'.          You've already' determined you don't.
13      Wbst I asked.you was whether you drew any conclusion about ta what appears to'have been the failure-to-follow up your 15      formal complaint?
16                  A          In my opinion. I feel that there11s no I have. by.all rights -I 17      failure to follow up the complaint.
18      by me  --
I believe that the complaint or that the paperwork.
19    associated with that is someplace.              Now, as f'ar as how or 20      where at in the process it.is right now, Lor whether it was
                                                                                                                              . l-21      discussed or reviewed or anything. .maybe=it took him longer. i-t                -
i i
22 to handle his proceedings than he' anticipated'and thereby, 23      I've already moved so he could not return my. phone call..                                '
24-                            You know, when'you're dealing with.'a nuclear 25      power plant, to go three months or something like that, to                                      i 6 ..
i D
6 l
l i
 
285 al3 4
i    watch paperwork pass through the channels is not unusual.
I 2                                          (Pause.)            .
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 to 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l
e
 
886 fc27pb1                                                                                            l i
I 1                                                                                    i MR. M1ZUNO:    I would like to put a question 2      to Mr. Spekter.
3 MR. DAVIDSON:    We're off  the record.
d                                                                                  i (Discussion off the record.)                                ;
5 MR. DAVIDSON:    On the record. Mr. Mizuno, 6
I noticed that you felt you wanted to make a statement or i
7 otherwise raise an objection to a question.                                  !
8 MR. MIZUNO:    Yes, I wish to ask Mr. Spekter 9
a question in response to his response to a statement made 10      by you. And I didn't want to interrupt.
Il MR. DAVIDSON:    Well, thank you.
12 MR. MIZUNO:    I thought this would be an 13        appropriate time.
Do I'now understand that' CASE is not                ;
14 going to press forward its theory of its case in this                      i 15                                                                                  !
proceeding that the response or the lack of response by the                l; 16 NRC contributed to the atmosphere of Intimidation at                      !
17 Comanche Peak, because if that is true then I would be      -
                                                                                                                  )
i l i
18                                                                                  !I inclined to support an objection to this line of questioning !
19 regarding theNRCand(                  )
understanding of what                    !
20 the NRC did would be inappropriate.
21 But if CASE if is going: to continue, then                        l 22 1 feel that it would be proper questioning, although we 23 continue to object to that theory of the case.        We don't 24 believe that is a proper proceeding.
25 MR. DAVIDSON:    Just to help Mr. Spekter along
 
4 287 l
4 i
1 in answering you, I will tell, Mr. Mizuno, that my view is 2
that the question that I've directed with respect tk 3
                    /
asserted, alleged conversation with some unidentified 4
engineer in Region V I think are relevant to his own 5
assertions that he understood these regulations and-it was 6
confirmed in his view that they were inconsistent with the 7    ES-100 procedure.
8 And therefore they relate very directly to 9    his affidavit testimony.      I was not necessarily eliciting to    his answers ~ in this discovery deposition to determine whether 11 or not the NRC had been a responsive body, or had fulfilled 12    any of its statutory responsibilities.
13 I was doing it instead to determine what 14    actions (g              took and what' conversa tions and activities 15 were a part of his belief and helped him develop his to conclusions and develop the impressions that he then recorded 17 in the affidavit, or in this case, didn't record in the 18    affidavit.
19 But that was the thrust of my questioning.              It 20 was not to elicit any information as to whether or not the 21 NRC is doing its job or contributing to any alleged ephemeral 22    amorphous miasma of intimidation.
23                        MR. MIZUNO:  That's fine. I understand that, 2d    counsel.
25                        MR. DAVIDSON:  But if you wish to ask l
1 P
 
288
                      '7pb3 1
Mr. Spekter about his theory, that's fine.
2                  _MR. MIZUNO:  I understand the the counsel'for 3
Applicants may have had a particular reason for asking those.
4 questions, but apart from your purpose. I heard a statement 5
by Mr. Spekter regarding how CASE was.not concerned about.
6 how -- I can't-recall the exact words, but I thought .I    heard 7
something to the effect that CASE was not . interested or 8
is not concerned about how the lack of response or the 9
response by NRC may have affected the employee's feelings to    regarding intimidation and harassment.
11 Perhaps I could have the reporter read back 12    the portion.
13 MR. SPEKTER:  I'm not familiar with that 14 particular segment of my comments. However, I would state 15 that since the matter is pleaded and. finished at this point to that the testimony stands. I think we are wasting time. I've 17 noted my objections for the record, and at this p o'i n t ,
18 Mr. Mizuno. I am not going to-limit or put parameters around 19 CASE's theory.of this particular action .
20 MR. MIZUNO:  All right.
21 MR. SPEKTER:  Let us proceed.
22 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23 Q      Did you report your subsequent conversations 24 or some conversations you hadLafter the Gibbs &, Hill response    ,
25 did you report your subsequent conversations with the
 
290
                                                            '7pb5 1
no I can't do that. But what he said was, or'what I 2
interpreted him to be saying, or the words that I-felt he.
3    phrased it in was that 'ti  places the company in a bad 4    position.
5 (Off the record.)
6                  MR. DAVIDSON:    Let us go back on the record.
7 THE WITNES3:    At this time'it was specified 8
by Dick Camp thatLit places the company in-a bad position, 9    me calling NRC.or contacting the 800 QA/QC hotline to speak to    of.
And by stating that to me it was my feeling that.by 11 placing the company in a bad position that I could very well 12    be put in a bad position'myself.
13 BY-MR. DAVIDSON:
14 Q    When you say place the company in a bad 15    position, what company do you think --
16              A    Impell Corporation.
17 Q    So it places Impell Corporation in a bad 18    position?
19              A    Yes.
20 Q    Vis-a-vis whom?
21              A    Okay. TUSI Engineering. Okay, I believe that 22 during this conversation Dick Camp said it places them in          i I
23 a bad position, and that might be the time period that I 24                                                                        i found out that TUSI Engineering was actually paying the
                                                                      '25 paycheck for Impell Corporation, and thereby he was stating I
1                                                                                                                                                  :
                                                                                                                                                  )
4
 
292'
                                                    '7pb7 I                        .Q    The 800 number would have1 connected you~with 2    whom?
3                          A    With'the --'an; engineering group that'was d    in Dallas / Fort Worth.            I'm not-familiar exactly with who.
5                          Q. Did youlknow who that. 800 - -you said an-6    engineering group..            Was it your impression that'that 7    engineering ~ group wa's unrelated to~TUGCO?
8                          AL :No. -That.is one:ofithe reasoningLthat-I-9-  -did not contact the 800 number.ceven in secrecy.)lFrom that 10 pointr on I was" intimidated enough'to. maintain an; anonymous:              ,
11    type atmosphere:from there on.                                  <
12 Q    You mean you were. intimidated into. remaining 13    anonymous.
Id                          A  1Right.
15 Q    But.you already:: stated:that in your first 16 telephor.e conversation you insisted upon anonymity and th1s 17 is before you received any feedback as'to what Mr.                Camp 18    or what anybody else thought-about the call.-                Why did.you 19  want to be anonymous then?
20                            A    When I talked to the first e:gineer at NRC' 21    and I explained to him that I.mainly1w*ntedi to maintain a 22    certain amount of being anonymous.                And that I'did not-want 23    my name used.              And I maintained'that throughout L the~whole 2d conversation with'him that'I did not.want my name used.-                  But 1
25    1. wanted to be maintained anonymous.
4 4
_ _ - - - - - _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - - - _ - -                - - - - - - - -                                                          ]
 
                                                                                                                            ]
1 293
          $                                                                                                                i 1                                                                  l But I also told him during the first phone    1 2    conversation  that knowing the nature of this incident, and f
3 being that it occurred and everything that if they really 4    wanted to find out'who I was that they could.                    i l
5            Q      How could they do that?
6              A      You've got to figure.that if they come on 7    the job site, right, and say this they can get'in a general 8    location of who is the one doing these accusations.
9            Q      Tell me,                did you review the 10 response that was provided by Gibbs & Hill in you --
11            A      No, I have not.
12            Q      Did you read the response that was given to 13    you you say?  Did you read it?
14 MR. SPEKTER:    When, what time frame?    Put a s
15    time frame on it.
16                    BY MR. DAVIDSON:
* 17 Q      Which would have been some time in the latter 18    part of January.
i 19 MR. SPEKTER:    That's not his testimony.      I 20                      MR. DAVIDSON:    No, that's my question. And 21    my question is:
22                      BY MR. DAVIDSON:
23              Q      You have testified that you were given a 24 copy of the Gibbs & Hill response which we have identified 25    here as Disc. Exhibit 8,    and my question to you is, when you 1
 
294
                          'pb9 i  were given that response which would have been some time 2    around the end of January, did you read'it?
3                              A  Yes, I did.
4                                Did you understand'it?
Q 5                              A  Yes, I did.
6                              Q. Did you accept it?
7                              A  No, I did not.
8                              Q  You felt it was wrong?
9                              A  Yes, I did.
10                              Q  It didn't satisfy you?
11                              A  Correct.
12                              Q  And what was'your understanding of what the 13 explanation is that they had between-the alleged conflict 14 in the ES-100 and the Regulatory Guide 1.75?
15                              A  My alleged conversation was they felt'there 16    was no conflict.
17 Q  How did they reconcile the two?
18                              A  To my memory and. recollection right now, I'm 19    not familiar.                I would have to review the document again.
20                              Q  Did you make any reference to the-response 21 that was received from your start-up memorandum from Gibbs 22
                                                                                      & Hill in your affidavit in which raised this issue?
23                              A  No, I did.not.
24 Q  Let me draw your attention'to the paragraph 25 that starts on page 10 and continues on to page 11 and-                                ''
 
Joni 296
                      #28 1
BY MR. DAVIDSON:
7 Q      Do you see that?
3 A        Yes.
A Q    And the next phrase is "If I am corredt in 5
my interpretation of the regulations"--- at the tine you 6
made that statement you knew that there were those who did I
not agree with you that you were correct?
8 A
And I aslo knew that there were those that did agree that 1 was correct.
1 10 Q      Who were they?
11 A      NRC.
Q      The unidentified engineer who'never followed 13 up, to your knowledge, on your allegations?
14 A
Well, I won't go as far to say that he 15 never followed up.
16 Q      To your knowledge?
17 A      To my knowledge, yes.
18 Q      So that is the other individual but you 19 state this in the subjective mood if,you are familiar with 20 that.
21 A      No, I am not familiar with that.
22 Q      Well, you say if I am correct. Will you 23 agree with me that that is a statement on your part 2a indicating that you have some doubt as to whether you may be right?
l l                                                                                                      q
 
L)  ,
28jon3 398
                                                                                                                        !1 Il Ii 1
mind there is a violation.
2 Q'    You are absolutely convinced. 'But you are 3
prepared to concede that you.could be wrong?
4 A      I would be foolish not to say that.                '
5    Everybody can be incorrect.
6 Q      No.
I am not asking you whether everybody.    '
7 can be incorrect.      I am saying with respect to the 6
statements contcined in your affidavit with respect to the          1 9
allegation that there is a conflict-between ES-100 and to and Regulatory Guide 1.75 and the statement that this is 11 therefore a violation of NRC regulations, you state "if I 12 am correct" and.I.just asked you whether this indicates 13 that you concede, that as convinced as you are and as 14 strongly held as you have held these views and as strong 15 as you pushed it within the organization, that you might to    be wrong.
17 A
Well,~an NRC decision showing that I was        '
1B wrong would be the final result.
19                                                                                \
Q      But no one else could tell you you were                  i
    .                                  20    wrong?
21
                                                                                                                }';
A Not within the organization, because 6f        '
22                                                                                  )
the fact that I feel the organization is definitely biased        ,.j 23 by the cost impact on this one decision.                          i 1 2d Q      If people in theTUGC0 startup group told      {f 25                                                                                  i you you were wrong you wouldn't agree with them? You I
i l
l I
 
                      .sub                                                                                                                                    ''
1 wouldn't be persuaded?
2 A      Let me -- if Dick Camp, Art London              --
3 Q      No.          Answer the question.
a A      --
would have thought I was wrong, you 5
are talking TUCCO startup -- if Dick Camp, Art London' 6
and them would have thought I was wrong they would have 7
never sent the letter up.
8 Q      Vell, that's your conclusion and surmise.
o The question I asked you is if they told'you that you were 10 wrong, anyone in startup                        --
11 A      No.
12
                                                                                                                                                                    'j Q      --
you wouldn't believe'it?
13 A.      They didn't tell me that.
la Q      I didn't ask you that.              I said if;you had 15 been told that.                  You lo see.(                    you are going to have to answer the same question over and over again until 1/
you are responsive.                    Is that clear?                                  i 18 A      No, I do not believe that I would have                          i 19 believed them.
20
                                                                                                                                                                            \
Q      Okay.          That's the answer.                                l 21                                                                                                                          1 MR. SPEKTER:          Let me answer the' door.
22 MR. DAVIDSON:          Really, you are making this 23 l
unnecessarily difficult.                          I think you are being too clever 2a by half.                                                                                        \
I think you should talk to your 1qwyer.                                ;
25                                                                                                                ,
MR. SPEKTER:          I object to those comments i
l 4
l
.                                                                                                                                                                          I l
l
 
                                                                                                                    - - - - - ' -                ~
38jon5-                                                                                                                                        I300T I
being made. 'Not while I-was.present.                                                                                        !(
i 2
[MR. DAVIDSON:      I'will make them to youri 3
face.                  I'said look, we are going-to,get through.a. lot quicker if-you will respond - 'well. . Mike : stand here if.
5 y,,.want me to.make-it.in. front of you.
6 (Discussion off the record --'5:45.p.m.)
I (BAck on the record - 6:30 p m.)
8 M R '. DAVIDSON!  Mr. Spekter, we have'just had'a chance to reconvene after'a break of close'to an
                                            'O hour and I j ust 'want to' make cer tain on'. t he - record . tha t
                                            'I                                                    '
there would be no mi s u n d'e r's t a n d i n g the. remarks as 12 reported both'by yourself'and myself seem t o' b e ~ . he a t e d . .
                                          '3                                            '
b'ut I know that'did not occur and there was no. heat.
generated between u s '.                    'And'I..just' wanted;the record to 15 reflect that.
                                          'O As you know, you did walk to'the-door
                                          'I to answer it and-then I.tried'to suggest to'your witness 18 that he be more responsive; he said.let's make the comments' when I am not away from the table, you returned, I began 20 to make them; I was cu* off.
21 But I take it there is no heated. exchange 22 between us.
23 MR..SPEKTER:      The: exchange'was not heate'd''
24 but 'my concern is'that you do not give my witness 25 instructions on how to answer a question.
a b
 
1 in6 301
                                                                                                                    ?
I MR. DAVIDSON:  I agree with you.
2 Mr. Spekter. That is your responsibility. That is why 3
I asked the witness to talk to you abvut his response.
d MR. SPEKTER:    Let us proceed.
5 MR. DAVIDSON:    I assume during that hour 6
that we were off that you'had a chance to speak with him.
7 All right.
8 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
Q  .
just to wrap up this line, I IO believe you stated        -- and!fyou  did let us just confirm U
it and move on    --
you said that you would not have believed 12 anyone in the organization if they had told you you were
        '3                                                                                                        ,
wrong aboutyour alleged -- che alleged conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75.
15 When you said the organization what did              I 16                                                                                                              l you mean?                                                                      l 17                                                                                                                l A      The startup org'anization.
        '8 Q      Would you have believed a statement from engineering?
20 A
I believe that if there would have been an              i 21 overwhelming -- you know, you are going to have'to support              --
22 you just wouldn't be able to come in and say you are wrong.                        !
23 If there would have been an overwhelming amount of 24 25 information that would have indicated that I was incorrect.
such as possibly NRC rulings on the issues, so on and so                          ,
{
              , _ _ - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - - - -                      ~
 
  - 28jon?
302 1
forth, yes, I would have probably believed the person.
2 Q      Okay. But you wanted an NRC ruling 3
on the issue before you relented; isnt' that correct?
4 You wouldn't accept the statement of the Gibbs & Hill 5
whi'ch was an architect-engineer engaged on the project?
6 After all, they did provide y o u wi t h a three-page 7    instructions.
8                A      Correct.
9 Q      You would mt accept that?
10                A      right.
11 Q      Thatwas not your vie- sufficient for you?
12              A      Correct.
13 Q      Now I ask you what would have been 14 sufficient for you short of an NRC ruling.
15                A I don't believe there would be anything.
16 MR. DAVIDSON:    Thank you.
17 Off the record.
IB (Discussion off the record.)
19 MR. DAVIDSON:    That is all it takes.
20 Okay. Let's go back on the record.
21 (Discussion off the r e c'o r d . )
22 MR. DAVIDSON:    All right.      Let's go ahead.
23 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
2d Q      Earlier we had discussed the Gibbs & Hill 25 response to the startup memo that you prepared. Doyou J
i l
a l
 
8
                                                                                                                      ,303                                                l
: 4. .
I                                        t recollect that,j                                  \
t                  i 2                                                          '
A              'Yes.
3
                                                ;Q              And I had asked..you~t'o look at it~ but I                                                                j d
had not had it marked-for identification.                                      Both Mr. Spekter 5
and Mr. Mizuno had asked me to do so and I think now is.
6 as good a1 time as'any for me'to do that.                                    With the same 7-understanding 1about replacing my original and-providing 8
that the copy be marked for identification for.the purpose 9
of this discovery deposition be a Xerox of.the one I now.                                                                        '
10 am providing.
11 MR. SPEKTER:                    That's understood.
32 MR. DAVIDSON:                    And with:thatl understanding 13 I would like.to ask the reporter to ma'rk this as 14 Dise Exhibit F-number next.
15 Is it 9, sir?- Thank'you.
16 (The document referred to was 17 marked Exh'ibit Dise F-9 for identification.)
19                                          BY MR. DAVIDSON:
20                            Q k                (  earlier'you testified that you
                                                                              }
had -- at_the time that you received the responses -- had-an opportunity to read it and I think I asked you-whether.you recollected what their explanation for the-conflict was, but I don't recollect having received a-response.              Did you answer that question?                                                                                              l
                                                                                                                                            ?
A              Yes, I did.
 
i j
28jon9~                                                                                                      304-ll
                                                                                                                        'i i
1 Q    And briefly, what was your response?
2 A      I would have to look at the memo, the.
3 response memo to refresh my memory.                                                                  2 s
Q    But-you have no current recollection of it 5
now?
6 A    No.
7 Q    Let me ask you this:    Do you. remember.saying 8
to me that you believed that the response said that.the reason there was no conflict was that fire goes up, not to down?
II A      Not necessarily the response indicated in 12 the letter, but possibly the response either indicated                                        --
I3 I believe I specified that it was either indicated in the Id letter or in the p' hone conversation with the Gibbs & Hill 15 personnel.
16 Q      This is the person that you called?
I7 A      Right.
18 Q      And you didn't remember his name?
19 A
No, I believe we had brought that up 20 later. The person I called was Sam Martinovitch.
21 Q      And it is your testimony that 22 Mr. Martinovitch said to you that fire goes up, not down?
23 A      Well, it was indicated by him that one of                                            i 24 the rationalities for part of his decision was seeing that 25                                                                                                        !
there was no problem and said that the heat is going to be                                        ;
i i
i
 
28jon11                                                                  306 l
l I
I was no conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75.      And        1 2
you told us that one of the reasons-that'he offered to            q 3
you why there was no' conflict was because fire travels upward, heat travels up    .not down,'~and that therefore 5
it avoids some of-the problems otherwise provided.for in 6
Reg. Guide-1.75.
7 You say that was one of the reasons. So 8
I asked you what the other reasons he told'you were for why he felt there was no conflict between ES-100 and 10 Reg. Guide 1.75.
end28        II Now, can you please tell us?
12 13 14 15 16 is i
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1
f.
 
                                                                                                                                                ~302
                                                                      .fc291b2                                                                        '
I You~have to figure'that I was-looking at.that document-at'-
2  the same time, so theoretically he may.not'have touched on 3
any of the points which were listed'in.that ~ document.
d because.he possibly'could have known that:I had that.
5    documentLin' front of me.
6 So-he didn't - :youndidn't.think, 'orlyou Q
7    may' recollect  now  that he didn't ^have to tell you about
:8 these reasons because he had{already disclosed them to'you?
9            A      Or.I had already=possibly read'the memorandum.
10            Q      In any event, Mr.'Martinovitch's explanations-11    didn't satisfy you?
12            A Specifically, when he was justifying itLabout 13    the heat to-me. You.knou, you have a' formal; reply:there-.
14 And in his informal reply,-for the actual' reasoning behind 15    it, which was the fact that    --
16 Q      No, I wouldn't agree with that,.if you 17    were asking for my agreement.      I don't think that there is-18 any different reason, otherJthansthe one that is expressed 19    and signed by Mr. Ballard.      That's'your testimony.
20 Are you suggesting that.Mr. Ballard's statement.
21 is not the real reason?
22 A.      What I am willing to say, that my belief- on 23 that memo was, that'due7to the impact. cost-wise,xthey had 24 to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not to-25    change the ES-100 specifications.
And those are the d
i i
1 i
 
308-fc291b2
(~
1 You'have to: figure that 'I'was looking at[that document at-                  l t,
2    the same time, so theoretically'he.may'not.have touched on
                        ,3 any of the points'which were listed;intthat. doc'ument 4
because'helpossibly.could have known thatEI had that' 1'
5    document inEfront of1me.                                '
1 6                Q      So-he didn't --Jyou didn't think,Jor you 7
may' recollect now,.that he didn't have to tellfyou about j.
8 these reasons because' he had already: disclosed' them to you?
9 A      Or.I-had already possibly. read.the memorandum.
10                Q    .In a n y. . e v e n t , Mr. Martinovitch's explanations'i 11                                                                                      !
didn't satisfy.you?
12                A      Specifically ,when he was justifying.it about' 13    the heat to'me.    ;You know, you have'a formal reply there'.
:14 And in his informal reply.'for the actual. reasoning ~ behind.                  {
15    it, which was the faccethat'--                                                  i-16                    .No, Q            I wouldn't. agree with that, if you 17      were asking for my agreement.          I don't'think'th'at t'here is 18 any-different reason, other than the one that~is. expressed i-19    and signed by Mr. Ballard.        That's your testimony.                      L 20 Are you' suggesting that Mr. Ballard's statemen; 21                                                      ~*
is not the real reason?
22                A      What I am.willing to say, that my1 belief                  on d 23      that memo was,-that'due to the                      .:-wis e , - t hey. ha d 2d to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not to, 25      change the ES-100 specifications.          And those are the s
1
 
309
  >3 4
1 legitimate reasons that they thought    --
or at least the          -
l 2
reasons they thought were legitimate.      Now it would be --
3 Q      This is a suspicion on your part, that d
although this is an explanation, you don't take it to be 5
something that they believe?    Is that what you're saying?
6 MR. SPEKTER:  I would request that counsel 7
not put words in his mouth.
8 MR. DAVIDSON:  I heard the witness say that 9
he did not believe that the response that was prepared was to the "real reason" why they insisted that ES-100 and Reg 11 1.75 could be reconciled. And I want to find out what 12 is the basis for his assertion that that was not the 13    real reason.
14 THE WITNESS:    My understanding would be why 15 would he say to me, if he truly thought that those were 16 legitimate, valid reasons, why would he say to me that                                  \
17 if we had it to do all over again and start right now, yes                              k 18 we would modify the ES-100 to have those additional                                      l 19                                                                        I                  !
limitations in it.                                                  I
                                                                                                    )
20 MR. DAVIDSON:  You want me to answer your 21    question?    One of the reasons why that may have:-- why h'e 1
22    might have said that?      The answer is that he might not have                          l 23    said it,                I 24 THE WITNESS: I don't thick I was asking you 25    a question. I was making a statement that the question was      !
9 1
0
_______________i____i
 
                                                                                                                            -3102 fc291b4:
1    in my mind'at the time    --
2                    BY MR. DAVIDSON:
3            -Q. Okay, s'o : this is'an" impression you' drew?
4 He never. formally told ~:you that this was notothe.real' 5    reason?-
6      '
                                'A.    'If~they give.y.ou aldocumentation which says 7
this is the reason.why we're not.doing:it', but then on the 8
other hand they:tell you verbally,thatc_if weshad,?it to do 9
                    'all over again,'we would go ahead and'make modifications,-
10 in~my. mind there is only one conclusion I'can draw, isothat 11 they'are in'the wrong;and they are-trying to prove'-- with                                                  '
12 information or grasping at' straws -- to~ prove.that-they.
13    are correct'in it?
14              Q    In other words..you don't.think-th're                                                e    could-15  be two acceptable. ways of doing it?'
16              A Well, I'm not saying -- there is only one' 17 interpretation in the NRC. Reg l Guide'that is supposedly-right.
18              Q    Are you.asking me or_are you:asking Mr.-Mizuno?!
to              A What 1 am saying is that'therefis only one 20    interpretation in the NRC Reg Guides.                                              If there      --
if you 21 have any questions-from it .you should ask NRC what their-22    ruling is on it 23              Q    That's your view?
24              A    Yes.
l                                                                                                                                        1 25              Q      And that's'why you wanted an NRC decision                                                      on i
I l
l l
l l
4
 
312 lb5 I
i this?                                                              i 2
l A
I felt there was still a conflict involved.
3 Q  All right.
d
(              hinyouraffidavit,  at pages S
3 through -- carrying    over to page 5, you make certain 6
assertions with respect to what you term the practice of 7
allowing Comanche Peak craft personnel to perform certain 8
functional testing. Is that'right?
9 A    That's correct.
10 I would like to change -- just correct you.
U You said make the assumption. I know that to be fact.
12 Q    All right. I think I said assertion, not 13 assumption.
                                'd MR. SPEKTER: The record vill reflect what 15 was said.
16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
l l
                                '7 Q    And I noticed that in the first incomplete              I 18 paragraph on page 3,    that starts "An example of-"                      i you say          )
I' "An example of this liberal interpretation of commitments      -- "        J 20 do you see that?
21 A    y,,,
22                                                                        l Q    What do you mean by commitments?
23 (Pause.)
l                              24 Do you need some help with that question?
25              -
A No, just a minute. -Let me review through here.
(Witness perusing document.)
 
r jon
                                                                        '312.
30                                                                              ,
l i
l 1
Q      Have you ever reviewed the commitments
              .2 undertaken by the organizations constructing the Comanche 3    Peak plant?
d A    Yes. You are talking -- let me make sure 5
we are talking.in a correct -- you are talking about the        .
6 FSAR commitment?
7 Q      I am talking about the commitments, sir, 8
that you told me are made to the NRC with respect to the 1
9 codes and programs that will govern the conduct and to procedures of the construction of the. plant.
11 A      Yes, I hve reviewed those.
12 Q    And in your review of that, sir, did you 13 determine whether or not -- one moment, please    --
and in Id your review of that, sir, did you determine whether there 3
15 was a commitment to ANSI 45.2.6 with respect to 16 construction supplies and support personnel?
17 A      I am not sure.                                    I la Q      Did you determine whether there was a 19 commitment made to that specific ~ reference requirement 20                                                                        i applicable to quality control / quality assurance personnel?    J 21 A      I am not sure. I would have to review the 22 documentation which would include the FSAR to be able to 23 remember what I had found during the time period.                  I 24 I believe that you will note that I do 25 remember that the ANSI 45.2.6 specifically is titled              '
l 4
 
f 30jon3 314 I
within these limitations such that I do not believe their 2    ,
educational background is main',ained; I do not believe 3
that their credentials are verified.
Q    When you say you do not believe, on what 5
do you base this belief?      And we will get back to the 6
question you still haven't answered, which'is what you mean by "1 feel this practice is inconsistent."
8 Tell me -- why don't we take them in order.
I still would like an answer.
10 Whatdo you mean by "I feel this practice is II inconsistent"?
12 ll A    I do not believe that thispractice is 13 consistent.
Q    By stating that you feel that it is 15 inconsistent are you suggesting that you are prepared to 16 accept that you might be wrong and that it might be
                                            '7 consistent?
;                                          18 A      As I have already stated before,              'ere is 19 always possibility of misinterpretation of a document.
20
;                                                              Q      And do you feel that is possible in this 21 case?
2 A      It is possible in all cases.
23 Q      In all cases in which you have sworn in this affidavit?
    % ,                                    25 A      I will not go that far.
 
30jon5                                                            316 1
MR. DAVIDSON:  You want to break, 2              3 3
                                    /
T!!E WITNESS: Yes.
4 MR. DAVIDSON:  Of course.
5 MR. bAVIDSON:  Let the record rsflect that 6
I we are taking a break sa            can consult with 7                              k.
counsel.
8 (Discussion off the record -- 6:51 p.m.)
end30 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1.7 19 20 i
21 22 23                                                                                                  I 2d                                                                                                  l i
25
 
317-il 4
1 (On the record at 6:54 p.m.)
2                      MR. DAVIDSON:  Let us go back to work.
3 was were talking about.your 4
assertions as to the inconsistency between what you claim 5
to be the practice at Comanche Peak of allowing the craft 6
personnel to perform certain functional testing and what I
                                                                                    'i 7
think has been called ANSI 45.2.6.
8 And I have some excerpted language here.from 9
that regulation, and I would like to get your view on it  --
10 if I can find it here among my papers    --
11 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
12 Q                    I have been given to understand 13 that ANSI N45.2.6 states. "When a single inspection or 14 test requires implementation by a team or group, personnel 15 not meeting the requirements of this standard may be used 16 in data taking assignments or in plant or equipment operation  ,
17 provided they are supervised or overseen by a qualified 18 individual participating in the inspection., examination, or '
19      test."
20 Do those words sound familiar to you as being 21 reflected in ANSI N45.2.67 22                A      Yes. they do.
23 Q      And is this the requirement that-you feel 24 is not consistent with the practice at Comanche Peak?
25                A      Yes, 1 do. I believe that as  you stated 9
 
318-
              ~ '
                          'pb2-1 there, supervisory, that they are being supervised falls 2                              in t o: --                                                                                          'L 3                                                      Q    -Do you want me          to give.you'thefexact-words?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ~{
d                              The words are                  "They areJsupervised or overseen-by.".                  Is-          ,
5                              that what you, wanted me.to focus'on?
i 6
                                                                                                                                                                      ' ('P a u s e . )
7                                                      A'    Yes.
8 Q    Okay.
9                                                        A 1 believe that at Comanche Peak the supervisors 10 overseen by is probably taken very liberal, suchLas how 11 can you supervise somebody unless you're out:in the' field 12                                with them.                    Well, I'll eliminate the answering to that-13                              portion right now.                          I just don't --
14                                                                                                                                    }
(Witness gesturing.)                                              +
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .j, 15
                                                                                                                                                                    -- I stopped.        You can'go ahead and question.                        '
16 Q    No,-I don't follow what you're saying.                                .
17 I 'd'ropped ,it.
A I feel that is not something.                  {,
18 we need to go into right now.                                                                            1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      . 'i lt seems to be the focus of your: assertion'in '!
19                                                                                        .
Q                                                              .
20                                                                                                                                      .l.
the paragraph that begins on page 4 of your affidavit-and 21 carries over.--
22                                                              A I will not comment on one section of the 23 ANSI 45.2.6 as it indicates without-looking at the whole 24                              procedure as a'whole.                                You take one little portion out.of 25 it and try and use it out of context with that procedure.                                        ~
M &
O
 
319 4
1 You have to look -- there are certain stipulations that you 2
have to meet in order to be able to do that. And without 3
looking at the whole procedure you cannot use just one 4                                                        paragraph out of it.
5                                                                    Q      I understand that you would like to review 6                                                        the entire code,      but my point was only this, you were 7
concerned in your affidavit, and as I understood your 8
testimony you raised the point that you did not feel that 9
this code section had been complied with. And you called 10 my attention specifically to the words that you believe 11 required that the craft personnel performing such tests be 12
                                                                    " supervised or overseen by" qualified individual.
13 And my point is, isn't that the sum and substa 1ce 14 of your concern as expressed in the affidavit with respect 15 to the practice that you have drawn our attention to on 16 page 4 and going over to page 5.
17                                                                          A 1 have lost reference to your exact question 18 and what you are exactly asking there. Your question was 19 so long you are confusing me with the length of it.                                      Can 20 you briefly just come straight to the point as to what your 21                                                  question is?
22                                                                          Q      I think that that was fairly direct.                        I asked 23 you whether that isn't the basis upon which you make the 24                                                allegation of the practice                    --
that the practice is inconsistent 25                                              with ANSI 45.2.6?
4
 
320 11pb4                                                                                                            l 1            A Are you asking me that if the paragraph you 2
read previously is the basis for this allegation?
                                      .        3              Q    That's right. Isn't that the basis    for 4
your assertion that the practice at Comanche Peak is                      I 5    inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.67 6              A      No, I can't specify that one paragraph 7
out of ANSI 45.2.6 is the basis for this. I specified  that 8
ANSI 45.2.6 as a whole document is the basis for this                  i 9    statement.
10                Q    Do you have a copy of 45.2.6?
11                A      No, I do not.
12                Q      When you r.ade the statements in this affidavit 13      did you refer to 45.2.6?
14 I had reviewed them during the time period 4
A 15        of the drafts, the rough drafts for the --
le                Q    Well, here is my problem,f              iand 17 you want me to direct and open, I will be because it's going        i 18      to make this thing go a lot faster.      I read your affidavit.
10      We all have. The record is going to have it.
20 Your complaint is that craft personnel, persons l
21 who are not qualified as STEs have been performing certain        '
1 22        of these tests and you say that they perform certain tests        ;
23        without an STE being present. And that is a quote from l                                      24        your affidavit at page 5.
25                A      Correct.
 
[                                                              321 4
l 1
Q    And I'm saying to you, that isn't the section 2    that I read from the ANSI 45.2.6 which requires that there 3
be supervision or that the practice is to be overseen by 4
a qualified person, the one that you base that on.      And you 5    have not told me what you base it on.      You say you don't 6    base it on that.
7                A    No. I'm saying --
8                      MR. SPEKIER:  I believe that he's answered 9      the question.
10                      MR. DAVIDSON:  I don't think that he has.
11 MR. SPEKTER:  He based it on the whole 12 regulation and not a segment that's taken out of context.
13 And I think that answer should stand and we can move on.
14 BY MR. DAVIDSON:
15                Q      Did you ever raise this concern with anyone 16      at Comanche Peak?
17                A      Most definitely.
18                Q      With whom did you raise it?
19                A      Art London. Tom Miller and Dick Camp.
20                Q      Individually or collectively?
21                A      There's a possibility it could have been both.,
22      To my memory, I do not know right now.
23                Q      What did you say to them at the time?
24                A      I told them that I felt that we were 25      inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.6.
 
322                                                !
31pb6                                                                                                                                                                                                  '
I Q    Did they~give'you a response to'your question?'
2                        A      .They: felt that they did not fall under the'                                                                                    i 3          requirements of that.
4 Q        On-what basis?                        As'you understood-them.
5                      A          I do not' remember the exact details on that.                                                                                    >
6                    Q            Could it ~be that there was no commitment-on
                                          '7          that point?
8                  A              I don't know.                        I don't'know.. .I'do'not:
9          remember.
to                    Q              Could-it also be because~th'ey viewedLehe 11 manner in which:the practice was ~ supervised or overseen as.
12          being adequate under ANSI 45.2.6?-
13                    A            Now you're asking me to answer.for them.-                                                                      I 14 don't believe that.I can answer what1 their beliefs were.
15                    Q              No, sir.                        I asked you what they represented to          to you and what you understood them to mean.                                                          And I              asked-17          you whether            you understood, or they said to you, or you 18 understood them'to mean that they were.in c'ompliance with                                                                                                j 19                                                                                                                                                                      I ANSI 45.2.6 because of the manner in which such tests were 20          overseen or supervised was' sufficient.
21                    A              No, I did not believe                              t. hat.they;were st'ating 22          to me that they were in compliance with ANSI 45.2.6.                                                                          I' 23          believe that they were stating to me that' they were not in, 24            compliance with ANSI 45.2.6 but that they were not committed ~
25            to that and therefore they_would not going to worry about it.
A 8
_ ___________._______1.___________________.___________..___    . _ _ . _        _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _._          _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.___.______.____.___.________i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _
 
:j 323 x
1
                                                                                                                  -Q      So in'other words, they explained.to you that}}

Revision as of 02:28, 13 October 2021

Partially Withheld Transcript of 840719 in Camera Discovery Deposition in Glen Rose,Tx.Pp 1-338
ML20244A817
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 07/19/1984
From:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
Shared Package
ML20097F079 List:
References
FOIA-84-487 NUDOCS 8906120158
Download: ML20244A817 (438)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - g . 

             ,;: 1 rg
                         ,_                              s' %
                                                                                                                                                              %$                                                                                                  3
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             y.

4'f a 

                                                                 +
                                                                                                    ?. ..            .
1. - ;. ..

h Y-k . m , 

                                                                               ~

J' + fd e ' 5 

                                                                              , ; s ..                                                                 ,z M o w ::. - 9 J W                                                ,
                              +.3                                                                                                                 >                                                                 -
                                    'lbp W#"                                                                                                                                                                              <       a. , . ... :

J TEXA5 UTILITIES ELECTRIC' ('" d_ .'Ngy*.' -,. " ' ,. t 0;*~'@'doMPANY,',. '1'

  • f n 50-
                            .n gg
                                                                                                                                   ~.
                                                                                                                       .hh comanche Peak Steam El u

b . a. ket No[g' 4 . s g i.Nas

o. , ,- e%S**c1^> Unic* ..
                                                                                                                                                                                         % 4 M k * .g                                     iM                                M:..
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ;.c                               c-4f                -

WM.F jg 35(4'fg 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ?h
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              }.
                                                                                                                                                         "                                                                 ,] % g                                        .

k [4tf Di A - RA SE ' ( f. #. m i r,. %ug . ,g " 9 n  :.~ r g ~4 c. p cq "' ~ '. 4 :. ... 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      .ap Mi f                                                                                                                                                                   f                                                                                                          'E "y>                        ~,., rm;                                                          ,                                               -           ;a
                                   . . , .                                                          . v ,, .

3 . . . A ~. 50?[$. p2 

                                                                                            .'v~.~.p m ., ~. . ~.
                                                                                                                           . Deposit on of -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ,si ;- Ae                                                          '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             . -             dO4
                        ,4          %...w s.

3 a ,.. s. . e 

                                                                                                                                                .+
                                                                                                                                                              ,t %c ?                  y. .;g .                      e.                     i. Wi .1% . .

s.. - ,,5 ?,.k".3,'?, R, a if .g arm ?,e

t. . ,a-,

V Kp 

                                           .                                                                     a n !+ Q tj ;p                                                      .'i.p      ^p - xg                                   .h~ ,                                      1                                   M' 1
              ,            ,                             w                                         ~r                              .a                            -

a . ,~ r',,-. . .r ,; , _. , . ., g., , .g . 

                                                                                                   ,. e
                                                                                                      ^-       ,$$} .
                                                                                                               '                                                                                            y;                   ' .si
                ,g

( n o. l- 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ?.3 t                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ~

9ox i e # 

                                                                                                                                                            *+                           u,y.                                                                         .

t De ,. J , t 

                                                                                                                                                                                             ..                    '9-e,-                                                                                                                                                             '
     ,                                                                                                                                                                                                 ~G:                                                                                                                                   '

s* .- ' . c 'i q,g- m i  : 3 , '

2. -

j ';

y n -

h M. ' ' in R Y ., ' 

                                                                                                                                                                                    ?vi A

p, , yy p,.y - 

                                                                                                                                                 <-u eg
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       .w b

A { 7:9 .l f 4 .._ g.; 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .;; ~ ..:                                      w                     ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             +
             .s                                                                                                                                                                            -

N w.same 

                                                                                                                                                                                                       '                                                                                                                                     b'       '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                          %                                                                                                                   9

[ '89d6120158 89060'E' * 

                        *d PDR                              FOIA n,
                                                                                                                                                                                                   } ; _p,'?[                                                                                         .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ]

I *d. !.5 ,:(\ HUGE 04 -407 , PDR g ,r, p', [ 

                                                   ' mbt '\M $D\(,                                                                                                      "                                             "

E0 4- '4I

s. N'. . TEE . j 

                                                   ,              W.                                                                :
.: - C 1
                         ...                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 i
                      "~f                               }                                                                          . . ,. y f:,                                  L L                 ;
                                                              . k. *,                                         ~~      . -                 q:tt gn A                              * ,
s.
  • r, 1.w . . , ms, - s .
                                                                                       . .'h. .; . .h.s . -
                       . u              .

h*en n' 

                                                                                                                '.                                 ,, (a $/O'                                                                     s G-                                                            *
s. \',' ,',' : .4*/. cg~R
                                                                                     ,e
                                                                                                                                                       ~.yai                                                                      -

g.g , 

                     ~~.                                                                                                                                                                          ..                                ,a
                .g                                     - .'
                                                                     .. .                                                                                                                    .n                                                                                                                  ,.           :
                   %sf,.'

y:g; ,n;, 

                                                                                          ~

8 7 .n v. . . y -t 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         - - 7,. .

t ^ x%Ak"l1 ' .a. u~ W. : ... W:rMT A..TEXA5 UTILITIES EI.EbyRICS 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       'N
                                                                                                                                                                                                        ~ 9{I .f                          .e ^ 5                   ~ ~'" ' g[h* 5 4                        >                                l'                              I
                                                                   ,                A W "QF.Jogyggy,,     .
                                                                                                                                                              '"-@b-1 '
                              ^

(45 - ( manche ' Peak 5toam El b ' 

                      '                    W&&g                                                       %MS* ****
  • U"' cQ h *& fQV pi '

D. '

s. GMW@ . .f 8ehggg(qQ.-ig
                                                                        .-           f:                                                                                                                                                                .

M6 , Ap. -Ja[ ' f f][fNCAMERAS,g 

                                                                                                                                               . k,                                                                 IN                                                                            p, a gk
                                                                   ?

u, : .Me , Deposit. o. ... n - ;of.r.v , 3 ~. ;~. . , 

                                                  ,y                  -
                                                                                    . .. a .

N.;.;~' k wa. = 

                    . ,f*,c       , . f, c,m,,.                . i.         ..f y.
  • Q.~*, '
                                                                                                                                                          .~

s 8 ra. 

                                           ' ,.w t :"

w+ 

                                                                               - .2 *is.n CW4W12
                                                                                                 .wy-
                                                                                                                             ,y'(..

p.. p 3, pf 

                                                                                                                                                                .py -

y7 . a 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           'o f                  l 4                                                                                             _,

s ,:r+ _ v 

             ,,,         %                                                    .
  • I. .#~ ^ *~* * #1
  • v. ,
                                                          ..'b
                   -                                                                                                                                            , 3. .                                                                                                                                          '

w-. ,, ' ,g 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        =.
                                                                                      ,.      ' s1kW4 4-h
  • g.y. s. .  ; ,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ,             4,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  +'

s;(  % . 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      . y g -                                                                 ..

L y q; .,,y, 3n .J 

   ) llg                        '

U:s..-

t. t 3
D i  ;

t o 1.g . v i:t e - . y 4, . E 

                                                                                            '["
     *                    "                                                                                                      g                                   .

p 1 l

  • Y:~~

j[,;) i ' * ,.; ,;.y - >;.? s ' ..' 

                 ,                                         . . ~                     ,;                 x                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       V
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .,           ~x W
                                                                                                                                                                          - Gg i ' J
                                                             'L 4                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       *           '
   ][$fj                                                                         3;. m4 r,
                                                                                                                                                                     .. g                                                                                                                                                                      (

M w. , , k'890612'0158 890607 # g

V M d,0j d HUGE 84-487 I PDR FOIA PDR- y
                                                                                                                                                                                .. 2 ..

_ , , , , 3 , , y - 

              ,                                 ~.:             ,    -.;

1-l I. mgc.1 IN CAMERA-1 

                                                                     -UNITED STATES OF AMERICE 2_

NUCLEAR REGULATORY C OMM I S SI ON., 

                              ~3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY;& LICENSING BOARD-
                              .4 5                ~ ~ ~ - - ~ * * ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~x In the matter of:                                    :

6 7 TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC- -: - ' 

                                           ' COMPANY, et al.:
. Docket Nos. 50 2445 4

e - 

                                                                                               -:'                   50-446:
                                           -(Comanche Peak Steam- Electric-                      :
                             .,               Station, Units 1 and 2).                           :

10 Glen-Rose' Motor Inn-12 Glen Rose,' Texas 13 J u l y. _19, 193 4 14 Discovery -' Deposition of:. 15 (IN. CAMERA). called for' examination.by counsel fo 16 the! Applicants. 37 taken before J.F. Coughlin,. CourtLReporter,. 18 beginning at 9:05 a.m., pursuant sto agreement. 19 20 21 ' 

         '                                                                                                                         i 22              Applicants Discovery Deposition:- Volume I.                                           '

23 1 

                           ?a                                                                                                  'l i

23 l -l l l u 

                                                                                                     =         ..._w 9

w.OL__LE----_--.-.... 

                       - -                          -                                                                               l

2 ge-2 I I APPEARANCES: l 2 On behalf of the Applicants Texas Utilities Electric Company, et al.: MARK L. DAVIDSON, ESQUIRE l Bishop, Libermat. Cook, Purcell & Reynolds 5 1200 Seventeenth Street, Northwest , Washington, D.C. 20036 i 6 On. behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff: GEARY S. MIIUNO, ESQUIRE 8 Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9 Washington, D.C. 20555 to On behalf of the Witnessf i II MICHAEL L. SPEKTER, ESQUIRE Suite 1102 1717 K Street, Northwest 12 Washington, D.C. 20006 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

  • 21 22 '

23 24 25

7 mgc-3 1 I N D E.XL 2 WITNESS: i.' 

                                         ~~~.                          -EXAMINATION BY:
                 -3  f                                                 ' MR . DAVIDSON:-      4     -i

(. U 4 ' 

                                                                                                     ]

5 I 

       ,          6 7                                                                                      ,
                                                                                                       'I
                                                                                                    . ,l !

8 _E. _X _HD I _B _I _T _S q 9 Applicants' Discovery' Exhibits: IDENTIFIED 10 Exhibit No. F-1 14-11 Exhibit No. F-2 36 12 Exhibit No. F-3 .69 'I 13 Exhibit No. F-4 8 9 '- y. Id Exhibit No. F-5 91 15 Exhibit No. F-6 96'- }. 16 Exhibit No. F-6A 191 17 Exhibit No. F-7 198 18 Exhibit No. F-8 233 19 Exhibit No. F-9 303 (Exhibits retained by: Counsel'). . 21 22 23 l l 2a 25 l

f . 4-1 4 1 13 eel 1E1EES 2 Whereupon, ,__ t 3 

                                                                     ~~~

sterdav. 4 a witnes,s, was called for examination and. .having been 5 previously duly sworn, was examined and testifiedffurther 6 as follows: 7 MR. DAVIDSON: 

                               -           -q Good morning,  ,    ,,    f 8                     since we are starting a new transcript and this

{ 9 is a discovery-deposition, would you be good enough to 10 state your full name and address for the record? 11 THE WITNESS: Fullname,f 12 The address, I.have no permanent address at this time. # 13 EXAMINATION 14 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q Where are you currently living, sir? 16 A With relatives. 17 Q Are you currently employed?. 18 A No, I am not. 19 Q Do you have.an outstanding opportunity for 20 employment? t 21 A I have possibilities. 22 Q Have you received an indication that you will

  • 23 be employed at any time in the near future?

24 A I have had offers made to mei 25 Q In the nuclear power industry, sir? 

   -.--_a--__--_--__--_.____-
p.  :.-
                                                                                                            . ~g
                                                                                   '6 4

1 station to receive the phone number for the. CAP, which I-2 had seen on the news and was interested in their' views of 3 not being.against nuclear: power in general, but being against 4 unsafe practices which led.into my: feeling that.:you know, 

      ~5      not against nuclear power but against unsafe practices..

6 So 1. requested from~the reporter.a phone 7 number for a GAP maintaining my~name' anonymous to.htm. After 8 obtaining that;I.was given Billie Garde's phone number-and-9 a reference from' Billie Garde to Ernest Hadley. 10 Q Now when you say GAP, do you mean Government 11 Accountability Proj ec t ? 12 A Right. 13 Q hhen did you see this television; program'that 14 led you to make the telephone call? 15 A I would say in the first quarter of84.. 16 Q Could you be more precise with the month 17 perhaps? 18 A I believe not. There's several times, there 19 

           -are incidences where the plant was shown on the television, 20      and to try and pinpoint one, no I probably could not.                                                   -

21 Q Okay. But the first quarter of 19847 22 A Right. ' 23 0 So you spoke -- well, I don't want to restate 2d your testimony. You tell us you were referred from Ms. Garde 25 to Mr. Hadley, and you spoke with Mr. Hadley. And what was

7 1pb4 ' 1 1 the sum and substance of . that.first conversation? J 2 A Well, there vas basically -- I had explained 3 to Billie Garde the incidences at the plant, which are 4 4 incidences which are covered under the' affidavit. And in. 5 turn, we spoke as far as the incidences with Mr. Hadley at > 6 a later date. 7 Q l'm sorry, let me back up. After you-got the a 8 telephone number and you celled, who answered your call'at 9 i the GAP number that you get from the reporter? Was it { 10 Ms. Garde? 11 A No. At was not, l 12

  • Q Do you know who answered your phone-call?

13 A No, I do not. .I do not have the name. I 14 requeSte'd fYom him Billie Garde's phone number, and he was 15 the one who gave me her phone number. 16 Q Now wait a minute, I think I'm confused. You 17 called up someone from GAP? 

                                   '8 f

A Correct, ' 19 Q And you fequested Billie Garde's number. How 20 { would you know her name on your first contact? l I 21 A 'I It was shown on the television.  ! 22 Q I see, so you called up GAP and'said you. 3 23 wanted to speak to Ms. Garde. 1 You thought she was associated  ! 2d with GAP. 1 I I i 25 A Right. 1 knew she was. l I l l

8 I 4 1 Q And he said I'll get the number for.you, or 2 words to that effect? 3 A Cerrcet. 4 

                   -Q       And then you called Ms. Garde.

5 A Right. 6 Q Could you now relate the sum and substance 7 of that conversation? 8 A We hau spoke over various problem areas at 9 the plant, such as outlined in the affidavit. And I believe 10 there was a I can't remember if she met with me first or it if it was Mr. Hadley who met with me first. I believe it 12 was Mr. Hadley who met with me first. 13 Q u? you recollect which allegations you revieweil 14 with Ms. Garde in that telephone conversation? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Could you tell as which ones you mentioned to 17 her? 18 A The ferroresonant transformer problem, butt to splicing problems, cable separation violatious, the inadequacy 1 20 of procedures, testing procedures. That would be the ones 21 that I remember now. 22 Q Did you mention to her any allegations with 23 respect to the harassment, intimidation or threatening of 24 you? 25 A Tes. I had informed her that the overall view i 

                                                                               ]

9 1pb6 1 of the job site was that things were incorrect, but that 2 there was really nothing you could do about it. 3 Q Did you mention to her your disagreement with d Mr. Powers? 5 MR. SPEKTER: Objection, I think that's a 6 characterization of what it was. 7 MR. DAVIDSON: I think that's a fair objection 8 Let me rephrase that. 9 BY MR. DAVIDSON: to Q Did you discuss with her a conversation that 11 you had with Mr. Powers with respect to one of your allegatio 12 of inadequacy? 13 A During the first telephone conversation? 14 Q Yes. 15 A No. 16 Q Did you discuss with her any of your' allegation 17 regarding a conversation you had, one or more conversations 18 you had with Ivan Vogelsang? 19 I MR. SPEKTER: Request that counsel be more i 20 specific in relating which conversations. This individual l 23 worked at this plant for over a year and a half, and he might. 22 l have had many, many conversations. Is there any particular. j 23 conversation that you have in mind? Or if it is the particula 4 2d - Conversation that relates'to an incident in which j 25 alleges harassment, I would request that that be made e s l" l 

                                                                                                    .I l,

10 i I l _ .c I clear at this time. i i 2 MR. DAViDSON: I think that is a clarification j 3 that I can be prepared to adopt the conversations with I i 4 Mr. Vogelsang to which 1 refer were not the ones where you l I 5 wished him Happy Birthday or said hello, but rather the o n'e s j 6 that you described. yesterday in your direct testimony. j 7 ( Specifically, those in which you allege'you 8 felt harassed, intimidated and threatened. 'I i 9 THE WITNESS: Okay, you're asking to place 10 dates on these conversations. I had several conversations 11 with Billie Garde and Mr. Hadley to try and pinpoint each 12 conversation. What information was drawn or associated with  ! 13 each one is very hard for me. 14 I do know that I spoke with Billie Garde and 1 15 Mr. Hadley about the harassment and intimidation problems. I 16 dealing with Ivan Vogelsang, Fred Powers, and Ken Luken. But 2 l 17 to be able to give you an exact telephone conversation that 1 18  ! was done on -- no, I don't feel I can recollect that good.  ! 10 BY MR. DAVIDSON: l 20 Q Well, you have to understand you don't have 21 an obligation to give me the date unless[vou can remember it.  ! 22 A Okay.  ! 23 Q I'm just trying to see if you do, and if you i 24 ' recollect what was said at that particular conversation. ' 25 That is all. I I

11 1pb8 ( 1 At the conclusion -- well, you are relating 2 to us the conversation you had with Ms. Garde. So you told 

                                                                                                     ,a 3    her these things. What did she say'to you?                                            )

4 A She says that it sounds as if you are having 5 problems'like several other people in -- at the' plant site 6 there, and that they wanted-to set up a more in-depth talk' 7 with me. 8 Q What did she suggest that you do in terms of 9 getting that in-depth talk together?- Did she propose a date 10 that you get together? - i 11 i A I believe so. To give you the exact date, no 12 I don't know what the exact date was that we actually met. 13 I do know that we met at my house, once with Ernest Hadley, 14 once with Billie Garde, and could possibly have been other 15 meetings other than that. I to Q Would you.say at your house? t Were you'then j 17 living in Granbury, Texas?  ; ; 18 A v es, I was, t 19 Q Can you recollect when that first meeting that 20 you might have had at your home was? I 21 A I would believe it was approximately two months t 22 prior to my being terminated, or my voluntary resignation 

                      ~

23 from the company. 1 24 Q When was your voluntary termination from the l 25 company? l 

                                                                                             ,1        ;

i j 1 4

12 I 

                                                                                                                  ! 4 l

1 A in the neighborhood of April 9th, I believe. I 2 Q When you effected the voluntary termination 3 from the company, did you submit a resignation? 4 A I did. 5 Q Was that resignation' written? I 6 A Yes, it was. 7 Q Do you have a copy of that resignation? f 8 A I believe so. I g 9 Q Do you have it with you here today? 10 A I will have to look. 11 MR. DAVIDSON: Off the record. 12 (Discussion off the record.) 13 MR. DAVIDSON: We will go back on the record. 14 BY MR. DAVIDSJN: 

                                                          /

15 Q )you have just opened an attache  ; to case and taken out a portfolio and removed a document from f 17 it which you've handed to me in response to my previous l 18 question about whether you had a copy of a. written resignation to that you submitted to effect voluntary termination from your 20 position with the Impell Corporation at. Comanche Peak. 21 Am I correct in understanding that this is 22 in fact a copy of the document I requested? 23 A Yes. it is. 24 MR. DAVIDSON: Then I would like to ask the i 25 reporter to mark this. J i i 1 i

1 13 l t 

      'ob10 1

3 1 MR. SPEKTER: May I look at it? i i 2 MR. DAVIDSON: I am sorry. I was under the i 3 misimpression that you had reviewed the documents. 4 Off the record. end 1. 5 (Discussion off the record.) i 6 . 7 i 8 1 l 10 11 l 12 

               ,3 j

15 16 17 18 l 19 20 , 21 , 1 s a 22 23 2s 25 1 I l l I

al 14 5 1 MR. DAVIDSON: -All right.. 2 During the period of time when we were 3 off the record it was agreed to' accommodate that rather than mark'and bind into this discovery 5 deposition the document that he-handed me which he has-O' identified as a copy of the written resignation he submitted to effect voluntary termination from his position at 8 Comanche Peak.that we will. procure.a p 

                                                                                         'hotocopy of.same and-mark that.as'the exhibit-and return to him his copy.

10 ~ Is that agreeable to you, '- 11 THE WITNESS: -Yes. ~' 12 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter? 13 ' MR. SPEKTER: . Absolutely. 14 MR. DAVIDSON: And we have marked-this. exhibit as Witness F Disc F-1. 16 17 (The document referred to was marked Witness F Disc F-1 18 19 for identification.) BY MR. DAVIDSON: 20 "" ' Q , looking now at the document that ' has been marked for identification as Daic F-1 and I note that it is addressed to the Impell Corporation, 2333 23 Waukegan Road in Bannockburn. Illinois -- 24 MR. SPEKTER: I would object.' I believe-25 the document speaks for itself. t w_________________ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ 

           '2jon2 li5' t

1 1 If counsel has any questions 1concerning-

2 the document I request he return'the document and he.can' 3 make them.

d 

                                                   -BY MR. DAVIDSON:

5 Q Is that theladdre.ss.to which'you'sent,this; 6 resignation? 7 A The resignation'was-not mailed, n. 8 Q How was it communicated to the-Impell. m . 9 Corporation at-2333 Waukengan Road, Bannockburn. Illinois?:  :, 10 A It was communicated by copies'being; 11 produced, one given to Art. London.fone given'directly to-12 Dick Camp and I.believe onefgiven to Tom Miller, 13 Q So-you'gave three' copies ofjthisLdocument 14 out? Did you give'it to.anyone.else? At the time? 15 A I will not say no~to'that. I aminotisure l 16 if Ken Luken received a copy of it or not. 17 Q You mean you think you may'have given him 

                           'B    a copy?
                                                                                                     , -i, 19              A       Correct.

t 20 Q But you know you gave a copy to Dick Camp? .; 21 A Correct. ' 

     .                                                                                                     1 22                                                                                 j Q        And to Tom Miller?                              ,

23 I'd i A Correct. 'h t. 2d Q' And to Art London? 25 A Correct.

a e a3 16 4 1 Q- Do-you recollect when you gave this written. resignation to the three1 individuals'that you have 3 now named an'd conceivably also;the fourth.one to Mr. Luken? AL 'It wouldLbe in the approximateqarea.of the 5 date-listed at the top of the documentation. 6 Q: Whenfyou sayLthat,;I note that Disc'F # bears a'date of' March 19. 1984. When you say approximately 8 it means it could have been before-March:19'or~after. March 197 10 A Itfwould have'been-a few days after II March 19. Or on March 19 . - 12 ~ Q When you say'a fewLdays after, how many 

                                                                            '3 days do you think that might have been?

14 A Qne or two, possibly three at the most. 15 Depending if a weekend fell in that ' time. frame. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: Does-anyone have a. calendar available~for -- 18 THE WITNESS: It would have'been!the 22nd or 23rd of March. 20 , BY MR. DAVIDSON: 21 Q I'm sorry. I see that Mr. Spekter has been , good enough to provide it to us, his pocket diary,.which: 23 contains a calendar of 1984, and you have consulted it. 24 

                                                                                                    .'              1
                                                                                                   \

25 i A s Correct.. l e j i 

                                                                                                                                                                                      )
                                                                                                                                                                                      )

l 

 -jon4                                                                   17 Q       ANd we have looksd at March of 1984 to 2

determine what the dates were? And: March 19 on this 3 calendar is listed as Monday; is that correct? A Correct. 5 g 

                                 -And does' refresh your recollection that you 6

probably delivered thedocument you say on the 23rd cur I 24th, did you say, or 22nd? 8 A The 22nd. 9 Q The 22nd or 23rd. 10 A Correct. Q What accounts for the lapse of the four 12 days between the time of the date of txis document, the-I3 dating of this document, and its submission-to the individuals that you have indicat'ed? 15 A I had the document typed up previous to 16 that and was awaiting information on a j ob employment from another company. IB Q Had you been seeking a position elsewhere? 10 A Yes. O Q For how long a period? 21 A Approximately six to eight months. 22 Q Did you review this written resignation 23 with anyone prior to its submission to the individuals 

       '4 you have-indicated?

25 A At the_ job site, no.

1 en5 13 l i 9 1 Q l don't believe 1 limited my question to 2 just at the j ob site. 3 A Ukay. My wfre typed up the_ written resignation; therefore she must have looked at it and reviewed it. 6 Q Did you discuss this retigtotion with 7 anyone? 8 A Yes. 9 Q With whom? 10 A I had informally stated that there was a II possibility of me giving a formal resignation and I believe 12 I had informally stated that at the first.part or the week.- 

       '3 Q       To whom, sir?

14 A 1 believe~ to Art London. Q Did you discuss with Mr. Ernest Hadley. Io the possibility of your submitting a resignation at any time?! 17 i A Ernest Hadley did know that I had -- was j going to another job. 19 MR. DAVIDSON: Will the reporter read back 20 my question? 21 (The' reporter read the record as requested.) (Discussion off the record.) 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2d Q Have you concluded your colloquy with 5 counsel?

2jon6 39 __ A Yes, I have. 2 Q All right. Now, you have heard the question 7 ~~ 3 a g a in ,( you answer it? fcould d i A Yes. 5 Q Yes what, sir? 6 A Yes to the question. The question was had I I discussed with Ernest Hadley resignation to the company 8 and, yes, I believe so. I'll leave it at that. i Q Fine. And do you recollect when you first to discussed the possibility of your submitting a resignation I' to the company with Mr. Hadley? IS A No. I3 Q 1s there any way we might refresh your recollection? 15 A No. 16 Q That date is gone forever? 

                       '7 MR. SPEKTER:      I would object to the characterization.         If counsel wishes to ask questions he might refresh his recollection.            He can't state on the O

record is there any way that. I might refresh your 21 recollection. Certainly we all have ways that our 22 recollections can be refreshed and I think it is an v improper comment to make chat that date is gone forever. 24 I think that that is improper at this time. l 25 Counsel may proceed with his questioning

20 4 ,<

t but as to his' characterizations. I think that is imp rop e r . : 

                                                                                   .MR. DAVIDSON:        'Are.you finshed?
                                                                                                                        ~

MR. SPEKTER: Certainly. MR, DAVIDSON: _0kay. BY MR. DAVIDSON: 6 did you keep or make any notes Q ( ' of your conversations ,or meetings with Mr..Hadley?. A No. I did not. 9 Q Did Mr. Hadley take.any notes or_ keep,any. 10 notes of his conversations.or. meetings wit.h you?' 11. A Yes. 12 Q Did lut ever at any time:show those notes: 13 to you? > 1s A No. 15 Q Did you at any time' prior to the submission. 16 of your resignation discuss the possibility of. making 17 and submitting such a voluntaryctermination with Ms. Billie 18 Carde? 19 A Yes. 20 Q You recollect when that might.have been? 21 A No. 22 Q When yau discussed-the possibility:of your 2$ making and submitting a resignation with Mr. Hadley..can you 2e ~ tell me what it was that you. discussed with him? as$ In other.words, relate lto -- I e _ ____________.____i__.___.___._ _ 

                                                                                                                                         'I

o 

     '2jon8 21'             i 6

I MR. SPEKTER: I wouJd request counsel Ebe 2 more specific in his questioning. 3 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, I believe chez witness d has already frustrated my attempt to get a date, so maybe 5 we can find out at lea.:t what.the sum and substance o ti 6 the c o nv e rs atb n s he had with this. individual were. 7 LY MR.'DAVIDSON: 8 Q You do remember talking with Mr. .Hadley' 9 about this? 10 A Yes. 11 Q What did you and he discuss? 12 A We discussed that.I had received an-13 employment offer from another company; I would'be accepting 14 that employment offer. 15 Q Did you discuss anything about the 16 resignation? 17 s A I would say no, as far as the details or  ;. 18 how I was going to resign or anything. no, we did no: 19 discuss details. l 20 Q When you first began your discussions with - 21 Mr. Hadley did he suggest t h a '; you should resign from the 22 company? 23 I A No, j 2d 'i l Q Did he inquire whether you were considering 25 it? l i 

                                                                                                     )

i 

                                                                                                     )

i l 

--                                                                    _-. -__--_--__-_-_---m

1: ni I i

  • A No.

Q When you first discussed your allegations -l 3 with Ms. Garde did she saggest that you should resign from the company? 5 A No. 6 Q Did you -- in the course of your I conversation did the possibility that you night resign I come up? A 1 had already informed Billie Garde that 10 I was planning on resigning from the company. II Q The very first time you spoke with her? 12 A I will not specify it was the first time. I3 It was during our conversations through various time periods. 

            'd Q          How many meeetings did you have with 15 Mr. Hadley with respect to the preparation of your 16 afildavit?

I A I coulon't give you un exact number. I8 I would sey several, speaking in the neighborhood of 10 possibly five to ten, severai phone conversations. Able to identify an exact number, no. 21 Q I see. How many face to face meetings 

          "'                                                                                                                                {

with Mr. Hadley? i i 23 A One at least, possibly two. l Q And you mentioned earlier thet there were  ! i 25 drafts of the affidavit. How many drafts of this affidavdt 1 i _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ __. - - f

1 

                                                                                                                 'l

'4  ! 23 2jon10 . f l l i I did you review? l 2 A Two. 3 Q When was the first draft provided t e yau ? ' s A The exact date 1 couldn't give you. 5 Q Approximately. 6 A Approximately two to three months ago. 7 I belleve it was after my voluntary. resignation.from the 8 company. 9 QL When you say after, do you mean after 10 March 19th or after March 23rd? II f A After April 9th.  ! 12 Q Disc r-1 recites that your last date will i i I be Fridcy, April 6. 14 A Right. 15 Q Is that accurate? 16 A Correct. { 17 t Q So then thie reference to April 9 is I j- j i 18 inaccurate? 10 , 20 A April 9 vs-the beginnig date at my new job location. 21 Q 1 see. 22 23 A And then I.know it was after April 9th. .; 24 Q On April 9th did you begin a job somewhere else? r 25  ! A Yes. l I' I l I i U__1- _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ d 

                                                               . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ .      . - . - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - ~          ~~

on11 4 1 Q Where was that, sir? j 2 A With Stone & Webster Engineering. i 3 Q How many conversations or meetings did d you have with Ms. Garde du'ing J the course of the 5 preparation of this affidavit? 6 A Several. 7 Q How many telephone conversations? 8 A In the neighborhood of approrfmately-10 to 9 15. 10  ; Q How many face to face meetings? II A One to two. 12 i Q During the course of these series of 13 telephone conversations and meetings with Ms. Garde did you Id relate to her any alleged incidents of harassment, 15 intimidation and threats? 10 A Yes. 37 Q Which incidents did you relate to her? j 18 A All three of the incidents as previously testified tv. 20 Q And those would be? ) 21 A And in addition to those three, the overall 22 ( harassment and intimidation on the job site from day to day. 23 And the three incidents I am speaking of, they are the ones -- 24 one would be with Ivan Vogelsang. Fred Powers and Ken Lucken. 25 Q During the course of your conversations j t, l 1 1 

                                                                                               .-_.7 25                ;-

2jon12 - 1 l i 3 I 

                     'with -- conversations and meetings with Mr., Hadley, did fou.

2 mention to him any of these incidents respecting a'11egations .( 1 3 

                                                                                                    'i of harassment,_intimidatic,n, and threatening?                                  '

4 A Yes. ) 5 Q And what incidents did you mention'to _; 6 Mr. Hadley? 7 A .The same as I mentioned to Billie. Garde. > 8 l Q The same three? 9 l A Right. And including the day to day j ! 10 harasement. 11 end2 y 1 12 i 13 ' 

                                                                                                  .j l             it j

i 15 I i 

            '16 4

17 18 l 10 j i 20  ; 21 i 22 \ 23 . 24 I 

                                                                                                    'l   '

25 l l l i 6 ___.____. _____ _ __ Q

26 ab! T I 1i BY Mk. DAVIDSON: 2 Q I believe you stated that you received two 1 3' drafts of the affidavit for your review, prior to the l 4 preparation of final one. When you reviewed these. affidavits. I i did you then have a meeting or a conversation with either  ; 6 Ms. Garde or Mr. Hadley, or did you have a telephone i 7 conversation to allect your comments? 8  ! A A telephone conversation. 9 Q Did you mark up the drafts, or did you.merely 10 call in your comments? 11 A I marked up the drafts and in one case. I 12 believe, I called in my comments.  ; 13 Q Well, you say you marked up the draft and 14 in one case you called it. Wero there more than two drafts? 15 A I said approximately two drafts. There might to have been three drafts, there may have been only two drafts, 17 i Q Well, perhaps we can find that out. ' H) 

            )                                                           /                                            !

IB When you received t 'n e first draft.I j 19 did you receive that in person, by hand delivery, or was 3 20 that mailed to you? {  ; 1 21 A It was mailed to me. ' i 22 Q By whom? i 23 A By Ernest Hadley. j i 2d Q Was that draft accompanied by a letter? l 25 A Yes. > 1 9 i I

1 fc31b2. _ 27 1 .i Q Do you recollect what the letter instructed 7 you to do?- 3 A Review the draft and make. corrections as 'l i d necessary. 1 5 Q did you retain a copy'of that 6 ~ draft? 7 A ~ Yes, I did. 8 Q Did you-retain a copy of the l e t t e 'r c'f instruction that accompanied it? H) A 1.believe I did. 11 Q Do you'have chose documents with you'today'? 12 A Possibly. 13 Q Would you.look for them?~ Id MR. SPEKTER: I would object at this time. 15 1 think this is wholly irrelevant. The affidavit-that 36 he has testified to was composed over several drafts, 37 l The final draft is the only draft that was submitted in ' 18 the prior deposition and was also submitted to Applicant and to the Staff for discovery proceedings. I-request 20 that it's irrelevant how that came about, to be a final. 21 draft. 22 I believe that if we are in this proceeding, 23 going to look at the proposed drafts of every single document -l 24  ! that comes out of either Applicant's office, CASE's office, 25 or the witnesses. we would be here until the turn of the i 1 I .' 1

l28 13 4 1 century, going through what -- how people arrived at 2 finally submitting what they have submitted. And I think' 3-this is a wnolly irrelevant.line of questioning. 4 I've been very, very patient.. letting you 5 go through this. I wish counsel would make his point and 6 ask him if he believes that he was requested to change'.. things . 7 by someone'else.. I request that he ask'that. And.I 8 think-that can be solved L very quickly on~a question basis 9 and not by looking at drafts and looking at.other d'ocuments'. 10 I respectfully request'that this.ma'tter be 11 

                                     ~ moved along, if we can. . If-the question is the substance of 12 the document, I think that should be asked. .This is a 13 discovery deposition and'I understand'that,'and I ' m v e ry:-

Id amenable to letting counsel. find whatever information will 15 be helpful to him in this matter. But I.think that~we're 16 getting way too far afield here and I would object as to 17 the relevancy. 18 MR. DAVIDSON: Your objection.is certainly 19 noted and I think that while I'm.under no obligation.to. 20 respond, I think I will explain that I think the evolution 21 of this witness's allegations is very significant. 22 MR. SPEKTER: Perhaps'that could be asked on ' 23 direct question. And he might answer. 24 MR. DAVIDSON: 1 think the best evidence 25 is going to be these drafts and I think that they're very _______.______._--_____--_m - - - - - -

k 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             /

129-J fc31b4-3 pertinent.. So if-1,may,'I'd.like you.to produc'e:that r m 2 document, if you have it with ; ynu ,' ' I 3 s J (Pause.)l 4 (Discussiorr off the: record.). 5 ' MR. SPEKTER: 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                            /has:had:an 6

opportunity to.l'ook through his' briefcase.'for al marked'up- . 7 document. B BY MR. D A'V I D S O N's 9 

                                                                                                                                       'Q                              - were you able to;1ocate-the.

10 document? 11 A N o ', 1-was not. 12 

                                                                                                                                       -Q                                           would you~be good'enough'to 13
.earch your files-at home:for us, so.that we may-have a 3d copy of this document? That'is, the initial and'first 15 draft of your. affidavit?

M A Yes. 17 MR. SPEKTER: I believe,it?s irrelevant. 18 I would make my objection on that point. 89 BY'MR.'DAVIDSON: 20 Q And.if you find that. document, will you 21 produce it-to us, sir?- 22 A Yes. 23 Q In view of the ecmpressed time frameJunder r  %, 24 which we areo'p'erating( JeanIaskyoul toffavor: _ 25 me by producing that as soon as-possible? 

                                                                                                                                                                                             - 4.

I _ _____ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ ___._..c. __ _ _ _ . . . _ _ . _ . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

30 b5 l' l 

                                                                                                                                         ?

1 MR. SPEKTER: The witness has answered th6t 2 he'll produce it if he has it. 3 MR. DAVIDSON: I.will'try and get.a date, 3 4 l I' THE WITNESS: If I have that document at l l 5! home, I will produce it. i 6 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 7 Q When do you tPink it is likely that we would 8 be able to see it? 9 } MR. SPEKTER: If he ever gets out of here. 10 { I'm sure he'll be. happy to get home and produce it for you , 11 immediately. 12 L BY MR. DAVIDSON: 13 Q Can we expect it then early next week? ' i 14 A Yes. 15 Q Fine, then, sir. Thank you. j lo MR. SPEKTER: That is if he has it. 17 MR. DAVIDSON: I don't think I'm going to 18 ask 

                                                                  !to produce any document that he doesn't                   ;

14 have. l' 20 MR. SPEKTER: Thank you. 21 MR. DAVIDSON: I am anxious, though, to have  !, 22 him produce those that he does. l 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: l- 24 Q . 

                                                                               ) you indicate that there was a l                                                               L.              ,

25 second draft of the affi. davit? I l  !- 1 1 l t

e 

                                                                                                                          '.4 ( '

sc31b6-31- ', i A Yes. . A 2 Q How-did you receive.that?' 3- MR. SPEKTER: Objection,: irrelevant. 4 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                                                                            /          s 5                  Q-     There is a : question pending, (                                             ~]

6 A .The second draft, I believe, was received 7 in'the mail. e Q Did the second draft -- was the second 

                ,        draft accompanied i by a cover letter?

60 A Yes. 31 Q From whom was the draft -- or by whom wasi 12 the draft sent? 13 A Ernest Hadley. 34 Q And was the signatory to'the cover' letter? 35 A Yes. i 16 l Q What did that cover lett'er ino'truct you to do-i7 or tell you? is A From recollection. I believe it said to j 19 go ahead and review, or review the changes'that have been 20 made, to be sure that they.were correct end make any-21 further changes, .if necessary. 22 Q Between the. time.-- let ge rephrase that. 23 How much time elapsed between your receipt. 1 

                                                                                                                              -(

24 of the first draft, in the mail, and_your receipt of the; 

                                                                                                                               .i 25         second?

i l 4 l 

                                                                                                                              -1 I

l 32 ) 31b7 4 j 1 A l'm not sure. 2 MR. SPEKTER: I o b j e c t .. I thini it is 

                                                                                                     .i 0   irrelevant.

4 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                                             ,e            g 5              Q    I'm sorry, I didn't hear you,(                     !

6 A I said I am not sure. 7 Q How long a p(riod do you think alapsed? 8 ME. SPEKTER: The question has been asked and 9 answerad. 10 THE WIT 5ESS: 'I aun not pocitive on that. 11 SY MR. DAVID 50N: 12 Q I understand you're not positive. I would ~ l 13 like an approximeri amount of time. Id Mit . SPEKTER: Counsel. I would state again 15 that he's anGwered the question. he's not positive. If 16 he's not positive, he's not positive. 17 MR. DAVIDSON: I'm s9rry, Mr. Spekter. I 18 didn't mean to interrupt. 

                                                                                              ]

I I' BY MR. DAVIDSON: 20 Q Did you say a week? Just a m0 ment ago? Did 21 I hear you say that when your counsel interrupted? I 22 A I said it aould possibly have been a week. ' 4 23 1 but speaking of mail terms and all, I'm not eure of how 24 long it was. l 25 Q Could it 1. ave been more than a week? I l

33 fc31b8 i A I don't know. 2 Q Did you retain a copy of this second l-3 i draft? 4 A I do not believe so. 5 Q Did you retain a copy of the cover letter?u 6 A I do not believe so on that either. 7 Q Would you check your records, to see-8 if you retained a copy? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Do you know whether you have.aEcopy with you 11 today? 12 A I know I do net have a' copy today? 13 Q How do you know that? Id A I did not see it when I was looking through 15 the files. 16 

                        -Q      Okay,   Will you check your files at home 17 for us and see if you have a copy of the second draft..                                           .
          'B cf the cover letter?

I' A Yes. 20 Q And if you do have such a copy, would yot 21 produce it to us? 22 i-A Yes. 23 Q -And can I ask you if you will produce it 24 gy.early neXt week? 25 A .Yes. 

                                                                                                                  }-

i

34 b9 4 

        -1 Q      Did you ever receive a draft of your 2

affidavit for review in a face to face meeting with either 3 Mr. Hadley or Ms. Garde? 4 A No. 5 Q Did you ever review any draft of your 6 affidavit in a face to face meeting with Ms. Garde or 7 Mr. Hadley? 8 A No. 9 Q When did you receive a copy of the final 10 affidavit. which you then executed' 11 A I am not sure of a date. 12 Q Sometime after the receipt of the second 13 draft? l 14 A Correct.

5 Q Did you receive the final portion of your 16 affidavit? Let me rephrase that. How did you receive the' i

17 final version of your affidavit? i = i i IB A Through the mail. 10 Q Do you know who sent you that final version? 20 A Yes, Ernest Hadley. 21 Q% Was the final' version accompanied by'a cover 22 letter? 23 A Yes. 2d Q Could you'tell us what the contents of that 25 cover letter was?

fc31b10 35' 1 A It specified that here is the affidavit 2 and he requested that I have it signed and notarized and 3 sent back. d' Q Do you have a copy of that? Did you retain 5 a copy of that cover letter? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Do you have.it here with.you today? 8 A Yes. t 9 Q Would you please produce it? 10 (Pause.) end? 11 12 13 la 15 16 l 17 

                                                                                       )

is 1 I a 1 ( 20  ! 

                                                                                   'l 21                                                                         l 22 23 i

I I I 25 i i 

                                                                        ._ ___._-_-_N

J4/1 3 6 l-s s 4 .j 1 MR. DAVIDSON: While we were off the record, i 2 ') i 

                                          ,                               was good enough to search his attache case for                       o 3         me. And he produced the original of's note on bond. paper.;

d And I would like to have that document marked-5 for identification as Disc F-2. 6 (The document referred,to was: 7 marked Exhibit Disc F-2 for (XXX B e x amin a t ion .~)' 

                                                                                                                                         ~

BY MR. DAVIDSON: 10 Q And again.' to accommodate you, 11 since this is your copy and,1t is an. original -- assuming; 12 that there is no objection.either from'yourl counsel.or. 33 Mr. Mizuno -- what I would. propose to do is.have a photo 1 ' Id copy made of this document and have that marked in 15 place of the original and bound into our discovery to transcript. 17 MR. SPEKTER: No objection. 18 MR. DAVIDSON: And I will return.this'to.you l' for your records. 20 THE WITNESS: Okay. . 21 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Mizuno, is that acceptable 22 to you? . 23 MR. MIZUNO: Yes. 24 (Discussion-off the record.) i 25 i 

                                                                                                                                               -j l

1 l 1

FCjl'6/3. 7-h, 1 BY MR.-DAVIDSON: 

                                                                                            /            -
                                                                                                                                                                 '\
                                                                       ?                  /

Q .I would:like to'show you what'has i 3 been marked as Disc'F-2'and.as youftf youthavefseen it 1 " d before?' .) 5 A Yes. 6 Q' Is this the. letter that you in'dicatedr accompanied 7 the final' version.of your affidavit?

1. '

8 A Yes. C 

                                                                                    -Q     -It does not. bear a'date.                                         i b

to Do you recollect.when.you received it?. 11 A Fo; I don't.' 12 Q The bodyfof;the note says: "Here's. revised 13 draft of affidavit." 14 It doesn't indica t e it s 't he final versiin. 15 How do you.know'tbat this-is the l'tter)that e -l to accompanied the final version?' 17 It indicates that it is.a' draft. 18 A From previous memory.-I know.that that. letter 19 accompanied it. 20 Q In the first draft of'your affidavit.[ 1 b ' 21 were any of the three incidents that you've related here 22 and referred to here today -- that is. the incident. 23 involving Mr. Powers. the one' involving.Mr. Luken, and: one ' 24 involving Mr. Vogelsang.. vere iny of~those three-incidents i 25 a part of the first draft?  ! 

                                                                                                                                                          .         1 f'-

1 l l e-l 

                                                                                                                                                                  'l

1 4/3 3 1 4 1 In other words, were they related in the firet 2' draft? 3 f A I thought we had already gone through testimony d on that. 5 1 would say yes. ' 6 Q Let me -- let me be clear that you understood  ; 7 my question. 8 Was the incident which you referred to here today, involving Mr. Vogelsang -- and as to which you 10 testified yesterday -- was that incident of harassment. 

          'l intimidation, and threatening included within the first i

12 draft of that agreement -- related and described there? 13 A Yes.. Id Q And was that incident -- namely, the one we 15 are now discussing, which is the incident that you've 36 l testified to with respect to Mr. Vogelsang -- was that  ! 17 related and described in the allegations contained in the i IB second draft? ' I* A Yes. 20 Q When did you decide to exclude it from the 21 finsi draft? 22 A 1 did not exclude it. 23 Q There is a mention of Mr. Vogelsang in the 24 final draft affidavit submitted here? 25 A s's Direct mention, no. e i _____-___-___-__--w

FCjl 4/4 39 1 Q Is there a mention of Mr. Vogelsang? 2 A No. 3 Q Is there a mention of a conversation with d Mr. Vogelsang? 5 A No. 6 Q Is there a mention of any conversation with 7 anyone with respect -- strike that. 8 I think that the problem, y is that 9 there is no reference to cl.at incident at all, is there? 10 Otherwise, we're going to go back and ask.you 11 to point it out. 12 (Pause.) 13 A There is an indirect reference. id Well, specify your questions a little bit more 15 plainly. 16 I'm sorry. Q I think they are very plain. 17 Let us see if we can't help you with an 18 agreement. 19 When I ask whether an incident is related in 20 an affidavit, what I mean is -- is the date, time, place, 21 and persons involved, and the sum and substance of the 1 22 conversation which you say are the basis of harassment, 23 intimidation, and threatening, are they related -- in 24 that affidavit? l 25 A Then, I request that you ask that question at j , i 1 l 1 I 

   ,_._______a___  - - - - _ . - - - - - - - - -- -

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         +
                                                                                                                                                                       ' ,.                                              ,                 2 40             .c    .

4 the time. MR. SPEKTER: Okay -- MR. DAVIDSON: I'thank(.' If you want your. testimony to be recorded it' can be. But if you want to engage and' dual with counsel and be captious in your responses -- MR. SPEKTER: I object to' counsel's characterize- 

                                                                           ' tion.                                           I want to request a moment to confer with my client-so that he might be'able to answer these questions.

concisely and quickly and hopefully' speed this' matter along. MR. DAVIDSON: I appreciate that.'Mr. Specter.- I know that on repeated occasions you've had, to regoest an opportunity to instruct your. client on this' matter. I don't know that I really want to' pursue this line so much further. so there may not be need for~this.~ but I'm perfectly prepared to accommodate you if you wish to consult with him. MR. SPEKTER: Just for a short second. (Attorney conference between'Mr. Spekter and

  • Witness [

BY MR. DAVIDSON:

  • Q ')do you wish to change any of'your

! testimony now that you've consulted with your counsel?- A Yes.

s. .

9 __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . . . _ __ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ___._.l_ ____________________________________________d

l l t. FCjl 4/6 4I l 1 Q What would you like to change? i 2 A The indications that the incidents of  ; i 3 harassment and -- harassment, direct incidents with' 4 Ivan Vegelsang and Fred Powers are not actually indicated 5 in the original drafts or final drafts of my affidavit. 

                                                       /

6 Q ( __ 

                                                                   ) when you first spoke with 7    Mr. Ernest Hadley, did you -- did he represent to you that I

B he was an attorney? . 9 A No. l 10 Q Did you ask him whether he was an attorney? 11 A Yes. 12 q What did he say? 13 A He said no. he was not. i 14 Q. Did you pose that same question to  ! 15 Ms. Billie Garde? ll 16 A Yes. 17 Q What was her response? j 18 A No, she's net. s , 19 Q )are you represented by counsel? jj i 20 A At these proceedings, yes. i l 21 Q Vho is that counsel, sir? 22 A Michael Specter. 23 Q He is your personal attorney? l 24 A No, I don't believe so. I am not formally  ! i 25 paying him for his services. i I e 

                                                                                                            )

ji 4/7 42 4 1 Q Did you ask him to represent you here today? 2 A Yes. 3 Q When'did you do that, sir? 

                                 'd A     Approximately two to three weeks -- it was'--

5 we're dealing with time frames, and I'm not sure about 

                                                                                                           ~

6 right now. There were several conversations through 7 other people. 8 Q Well, when was the first conversation you had 9 with Mr. Spekter? And.I'm not asking you what the to substance of the conversation was, only when you had it. 

    -                          11 A      1 believe it was Saturday.

12 Q Saturday -- of this last week? 13 A Right. Id Q But you say you had' conversations through'other 15 peopiet to A Correct. 17 Q Who were those other people? 18 A Ernest Hadley, and I believe conversation l' through Billie Garde. 20 Q And they said that they would procure an 21 attorney for you? 22 A Yes. ' 2h Q To represent you at these proceedings? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Do you have representation by counsel -- by any 1 4 I w--__-_ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - - _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ - .

4 FCjl 4/8 '3 l I other ceunsel? 2 A No. 

                                                                .3 Q  Are you a witness in any other proceeding?-

d A No. 5 Q Have you authorized'the filing of'a complaint 6 with the, Department'of Labor? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Do you wish.to change your answer to my prior-9 question then?, 10 Are you the complainant in any other proceeding? 11 A First -- okay, you need to-clarify-what:you're-12 considering " proceedings." 13 MR.-SPEKTE'R: n in any other-Are you a complaina't 14 proceeding. 15 THE WITNESS: Yes. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 17 Q Could you tell me'what proceedings you:are a IB complainant in? 19 A The Department of Labor dispute. 20 Q Any other proceeding?; 21 A The proceeding now. 22 MR. SPEKTER: I don'tlbelieve-you are a 23 complainant. I believe you are_a witness. 24 MR. DAVIDSON: 1 agree with Mr. Spekter.~ t '5 THE WITNESS: All right.

4 ji' 6/9 44' 1 MR.'DAVIDSON: I understand. It may be'the 2 term. 3 BY-MR. DAVIDSON: 4 Q Let's just say are you a participant, toLyour 5 knowledge.-in any other proceeding, other than the one' 

                    ~6 here today, in which.you are a witnees- or the one at the        ,

7 Department of Labor which was initiated,by a complaint 8 filed in your name? 

                   ~9                  A         No.

10 Q When did you authorize the filing of a 11 complaint with the Department;of Labor?- 12 A Approximately a month or two months ago. 13 Q And when did you first discuss the possibility 14 of filing such a complaint? 15 A Upon my termination from Stone & Webster 16 Engineering. 17 Q And with whom did you first discuss this 18 possibility? , f 19 A Ernie Hadley. It was either Ernie Hadley or 

                                                                                                                                                                            )

20 Billie Garde. I do not remember'which one. spoke to me 21 first. 22 MR. SPERTER: I would object to this line of 23 questioning in that it delves into something that has 24 nothing to do with this particular proceeding..and it has 25 nothingtodowith[ \e s timony ye s t erday , 'and' 

                                                                                  ,]                                                                                        I i

I

1 FCjl 6/10 45 t. 1 it has nothing to do with discovery in the Comanche Peak i 2 case. It is a totally separate proceeding. And for that 3 reason, it's irrelevant to anything that could be gleaned 4 in discovery in this case. I] 5 And I note my objection for the record. 6 MR. DAVIDSON: Just to respond to Mr. Spekter's -j 7 problem, do you have a copy of your affidavit? B Well, no -- let me build a foundation for this, 9 although I think, in a discovery deposition, it's wholly ' 10 proper. 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 12 Q Do you know what the sum and substance of your 13 complaint with the Department of Labor is? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Whst is it, sir? 16 A You are asking -- can you rephrase the question 17 or ask -- 18 MR. DAVIDSON: Would you please repeat the 19 question for the witness? 20 (The reporter read the' record as requested.) , 21 THE WITNESS: Let me be sure-I understand your 22 question. When you ask for " sum and substance," are you 23 asking for the reasoning of me filing a complaint with the 24 Department of Labor? 

                     ..                             25 l

I. 'i L 47j i l 1 mgc 5-1 1 BY:MR. DAVIDSON: , 

                                                                                                                                                             'j 2           Q     I would like you to read the last complete. sentence) 3      on page 15.
  • MR. SPEKTER: I would note that counsel is 5 testifying.or reading from s document that is-not in 6 evidence and has not been marked _for.this particular, l 7 deposition, and I ask that it should be, if you are going 8 to testify from it.
                                                                                   '                  MR. DAVIDSON:     At an appropr.iate time, Mr. Spekter, 10      but right now all I want to do is see if I.can refresh 1 11      the witnesses recollection assto:what his affidavit.said.

12 ( ,when'you complete reading that one 13 sentence, would you look up? 14 THE WITNESS: Yes. 15 BY MR..DAVIDSON: 

                                                                                                                                    /

16 Have you read the sentence ( Q 17 A Yes, I have. 18 Am I correct that that relates to a clait-of Q 19 blacklisting? 20 A Yes, it does.. j 21 Is that the, claim that you have made at the Q 22 Department of Labor, or at least one of them? 23 A Yes, it is. 2d So therefore when'you gave your previous answer, Q 25 you misspoke? j 

                                                                                                                                          '4k 6

48~ 

                                                                                                                                                                     -4 age 5-2             1 A  Right.                        I was incorrect in my assumption.

2 Thank you. Q What other claims did you'make 3 before the Department of Labor', sir? d A I believe the claim basically states that it 5 was an unjust termination. 6 Q What was an unjust termination, sir?' 7 A You might repeat the question..'What do,you 8 mean, what was an unjust termination?. My layoff? 9 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Reporter. . would you be good' 10 enough to read the last two questions, the one that the 11 witness answered, and the one that the witness has now-12 asked for a clarification on? I think, then, if we-do 13 that,i J it will.be clear what we are referring Id to. 15 (The reporter read the record as requested.) 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 17 Q Do you understand the question,-sir? 18 A My termination from Stone & Webster was'an 19 unjust termination. 20 Q On-what do you base the assertion that the 1 21 termination was unjust?  : 22 A With no merit, no reasoning. 23 Q Well, when you say " unjust," do you mean merely 24 that they didn't give you a reason for the termination-25 therefore, you are making a complaint _to the Department of 4

s 49-mgc 5-3 1 Labor? I*a not_sure:I understand yourfanswer. 2 A They specified.that no jobs were"available. 3 which was totally unjust.on their part. 4 Q l Unjust or untrue? 5 A Untrue. I 6 Q' In other words.: you believe.that there"were. #' f, 7 jobs available for you? fl 1-8 A True. 9 Q Why do you believe they terminated you? 10 MR. SPEKTER: Objection. You can't characterize: 3 _t 11 what their beliefs were. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: It would be. hearsay, wouldn't it? 13 I think that is quite permissible in a-discovery 14 deposition. You were quite right. I would have'made; I 15 that objection in the evidentiary portion.of_the f i 16 deposition,-and I would feel that your objection would i i 17 be proper there. However, this is discovery, and I think. j-g 18 it is admissible. ' 19 Why don't you tellLus what-you believe the'  !' 20 reasons were? J 21 MR. SPEKTER: My objection is noted. ,l. 22 THE WITNESS: I believe that'directly or- 

                                                                                                     'l i

i 23 indirectly, information from this job site as to my. j 24 continuous questioning of the procedures, of inadequacies,  ! l 25 followed me to the other job. j i l 

                                                                                                   -l
                                                                                            't i.

O i __.___n______ _ _ _ _ -J

O 

                                                                                                                                                                                                      ,l
                                                                                                                                                                                         -50 4'
      ;c 5-4        1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:

2 Q Other.than that possibility, was your performance 3  : at Stone & Webster satisfactory? ' 4 A Yes. 5 Q Was their satisfaction with your performance 6 reflected to.you in any way? 7 A. .Yes. 8 How was that,-sir? Q 9 A I was told that I had performed as. expected. 10 Q But that may not necessarily reflect well on il you at all,l )But let me just ask a question. 12 

                                                  -Who told you that?                                                                                                                                      '

13 A One member being -- I'm going to refresh my - Id memory from a piece of paper I have in my pocket i 15 Hank Zadel. 16 I MR.'SPEKTER: He did not look at'his paper. I 17 would note that. 18 THE WITNESS: 

                                                                                                                      ~

I did not look at my paper. 19 MR. DAVIDSON: I understand. You.were pulling 20 i out your wallet, rather than your attache case. i 21 THE WITNESS: Correct. 22 -! BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q Do you have.this piece of paper in your wallet? 24 A I paintain notes in my wallet about personal 25 people that I remember. ' Hank Zadel is the one I was working l l 

                                                                                                                                                                                                         -l l

I 

                                                                                                                                                                                                        =1 l

L____._. __- _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _c_____.______.._._______..____._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .z a 

                                                                                                                                     $1' 4                                                                                                                     1 a

under at Stone & Webster and 'nad c9mplimentary -- as 1 1 mgc 5- 5 7 far as my performance. [l ' 3 Q The notes that you prepared with respect to d Mr. Z a riel there are contained on thic paper? 1 5 MR. SPEKTER: Objection. There is no comment 6 that he prepared any notes in regard to Mr. Zadel. He 7 simply stated that he had some r.ames written in his 8 vallet. He did not take that wallet completely out in order to obtain that name. He recalled it while he was 10 la the process of pulling out the wallet, and it's 11 irrelevant, and I request that we move on. 12 BY MR. DAVIDSCN: e s  ; 13 Q ( /when .id you prepare the slip of I Id paper or pote that you were about to remove from your ( 15 pocket? 16 MR. SPEKTER: Objection. Irrelevant. j l 17 THE WITNESS: I do not know. 18 BY MR. DAVIDSON: l' Q You don't know when you prepared it, or you do 20 not remember? 21 A 1 do not remember. 22 Q Was it during the course of the last week? 23 A No, it was not. ' 24 Q Was it prepared while you were at Stone & Webster? 25 A Yes, it was. 1 

                                                                                                    ' 52:

4 

      ;e 5-6      i Q      What was the purposerof preparing'the note?

2 A I just log down the name of,an individual-who 3 ' was my supervisor.so I can renember'that'. individual. -' d Q Is there anything else on that' note pag'?- e 5 MR.? SPEKTER: " Objection. Irrelevant.. 6 THE' WITNESS: There is no telling what is written on that page.~ 8 BY MR. DAVIDSON: Q W e l l ,' I'think perhaps if you produce it to'us, 10 y,iyy 3,,, II MR. SPEKTER: I object. 12 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 13 Q Why don't you produce that document? Id MR. SPEKTER: I object, and I' request that he 15 not produce .the document. I think this is ridiculous. o 

              'O There is no showing that that document has.any relevance II                                                                                                         f to anything in this proceeding, except that ~it' had a
              '8 name written down of his supervisor, and I am: going to I'

request that he not produce that: document. 20 M R .. DAVIDSON: Are you' instructing h'im not to. 21 produce the document? 22 MR. SPEKTER: I fail to.see'the' relevance 23 of that document, and I am requesting that he not produce l 24 the document on the. basis of that. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, we'll see ifi we :can connect' i e l l 3 ~, 1 i _ . . _ _ _ _.___ _ ___J 

                                                                                                                                                    ,         n
                                                                                                                                              +               4
                                                                                                                                                      ~

i L53 i 1; i s 1 age 5-7 it for you. 2 

                                                                                                  'BY MR. DAVIDSON:
                                                                                                  / ~
                                                                                                                                                               ]-i 3                        q

{ ./have you used that .noteL paper: d to refresh your. recollection about any of the eve.nts'at g 5 

                                                                                                                                                                '\

6 Stone 6. Webster?. 

                                                                                                                                                              ]
           ,                                                                                 A'    No, I.have'not.              '
  • 7 Q Have_you'used it in' connection with'the 8

preparation of'your complaint'to the: Department ~ of ' Labor?: 9 A No,-I have not.

  • 10 Q Why did you retain the n o t e , - t h e'n , sir?

II A -I retaine'd the note to aid me'in' future ^ 12 job oyalifications. 13 Q Did you retain the note also possibly for Id testimony:in' connection with your Department of Labor 15 complaint? 16 A No, I did noLLkeep it in connection with-37 that. ' 18 Q What was the reason you bro'ught it with you 3' today? 20 

                                                                                           .A     It's in my wallet at all times.- It's just               [

21 ' papers that I have not thrown away. i 22 Q What other information is contained on.that ~ ' 23 note? 24 MR. SPEKTER: Objection. Irrelevant. 25 THE WITNESS: I am not sure. 1 f

t 

                                                                                                              $4' l1
                                                                                                                                 .)

4 I mgc5-8 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q Would you'take it out, look at it, and then-3 tell me? d MR. SPEKTER: Objection. Irrelevant, and 5 I request'that counsel.-- 6 

                                                                                                  ~

MR. DAVIDSON: I'm sorry. I think~a 7 foundation has been laid.- 8 MR. SPEKTER: No foundation has been laid at 9 all. 10 MR. DAVIDSON: Then I think you'd better-make l 11 

                                               !     the instruction on the record that you are denying us.

12 access to note paper that he. prep-sred'in the course of his 13 assignment at Stone & Webster;which relates directly to Id the complaint he made with the Department of Labor, which 15 is refefenced in the affidavit submitted in this 16 proceeding. 17 MR. SPEKTER: HThat's totally-contrary. to the 18 witness' testimony, 19 MR.-DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter, I have never 20 challenged your recollection before, except the time when 21 you insisted he didn't use the wo rd " insinuate ,' and we 22 proved that you were mistaken. I don't-like to continue 23 to challenge your recollection and recharacterization of 24 i the record, but I am afraid your recollection.is once again 2$ faulty. O _ - - ___ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - = - - - - - -

q 4 55 i,- i 1 mge 5-9 The witness' testimony is on the record. 2 We don'- have_to debate it. But.it.if, very clear that 3 the connection has been made. d Now if you wish to - prive' this~ discovery 

                                                                                        $f. deposition of access to documents relevant to complair.ts 6

he has made with the Department of Labor with respect 7 to his engagement at Stone &_ Webster and which are 8 referenced as a part of this proceeding in-an affidavit he .! submitted here, that is your privilege to make that 

                                                                                      'O instruction, but I believe it is a direct thwarting of II legitimate discovery in this case.

12 MR. SPEKTER: I think it is not legitimate 

                                                                                     '3      discovery. I think-it is harassment.                                                                                    I am gofg to ask.

Id for a few minutes recess so'I can talk to my client about 15 this, and then I will go back on tite record. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: Fair enough. 37 Mr. Mizuno has a statement. Can we remain 

                                                                                    '8 on the record until he makes it?

t!R . MIZUNO: Well, I guess I'm'under the l 20 representation from counsel -- I understood yesterday 21 that he -- that the incident on page'15' relating to 22 blacklisting was not going to be an incident which would 23 be, I guess, offered as the direct testimony of( 24 Is that still ture? 25 k MR. SPEKTER: It was not offered yesterday- . l j >, j i - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ___-- . - - . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._A

56' 4 ! I O during' direct testimony, and we have not brought it up at-2 this time. 3 . VR. DAVIDSON: Let me make clear to d Mr. Mizuno..this'is not cross-examination. Were this to 5 be cross, Mr. Spekter would quite properly object and' 6 say, "Mr. Davidsen, your inquiry.into an incident referred I' to in thisLaffidavit, which in its entirety.has not been 8 offered into evidence, is not a part of the' direct testimony, and, therefore Mr. Davidson, are the rules, as< 10 I understand them, you are restricted in yourneross'only II to matters that are part of the; direct and as to those. 12 matters that reflect on the' credibility of the witness." 

                                         '3 And I would have to respond that that is correct.

Id However, this is a discovery deposition, 15 and it seems to me that the discovery deposition has a 16 great deal broader latitude. The latitude'does have some 

                                        '7 outer limit, but I think that to suggest that the limit
                                        '8 is any less than the affidavit that this witness proffered.
                                        "                                                                               I in these proceedings and that was' marked as an exhibit-20 here would be overly restrictive.

21 Therefore, it is an appropriate' question, 22 and I think that the Stone & Webster incident, since it 23 i forms the basis for one of the allegations m6de in the 2' ! affidavit, therefore perforce is clearly within the scope 

                                     ' 25 of proper discovery, and any notes that relate to that I

i i l l l

57 I mac 5-11 incident or incidents, it seems to me, are clearly within 2 the proper s' cope of the request for documents pursuant to 1 l 3 that discovery. And I'think that's what we're doing.here, 3 d I Mr. Mizuno. i 5 But if your concern is that this.will be. i, 6 a matter for the cross, which ultimately will follow the. 7 discovery deposition, I think the answer.is -I'm not' going: 8 to agree right now'to limit myself, but I anticipate that i 9 if I do it, that Mr. Spekter will make an. objection. 10 1 MR. .MIZUNO: 'Well..the Staff was just -- the il Staff was concerned primarily with the fact that the j 12 Interveners may be s' subsequently offering th'is particular -- 'q 13 MR. DAVIDSON:- Oh, I'm sorry. j.. Id MR. MIZUNO: -- matter subsequently into their 15 direct t'estimony. i If that's the case, then Staff wanted 16 to definitely conduct discovery on that. But it is more 1 37 for that purpose, rather than.for this. And at this point, < f 1 i 18 ' the Staff doesn't take any position. l 19  ! MR. SPEKTER: My position yesterday and my i 20 position today is that we ere limiting ourselves and we 21 seek to limit ourselves in these particylar proceedings ) 

 ~

22 1' to incidents of harassment and intimidation that occurred 23  ! on the-job site while was an employee. 14 v We are not, by that statement, limiting .  ; 25 ourselves to saying that no other harassment occurred and,  ! l t 

                                                                               .___.____.__________________o

58 4 ge 5-12 ~1 in fact, are contesting in other proceedings that the 

               '2 harassment.is continuing in-nature,:however not'in this-                               ' '

3 proceeding. d And therefore I feel that this is an-5 1rrelevant line of questioning. 6 MR.'MIZUNO: We've got'our positions on the 7 record. Let us take:a break. 8 MR. SPEKTER: We are breaking? 9 MR. DAVIDSON: We'are_ breaking.- 10 (Brief: recess.) 11 12 13 14 15 16 I? 18 19 20 .j 21 

                                                                     .                             a 22 23 l           24 25                                                                                                       j i

i e a l I o 

                                                                                                                  -i s

m_ . _ __ . _.___._.m-_____.____.m _

IT

  • as to I

MR. SPEKTER: :I'will be pleased to do 2 that. I have in my hand a small. sheet of paper, note paper 3 It is not even 3 by 5. It is less than that. 2 by 4 I d believe. And on that sheet of paper'amidst other names 5 is the name of Hank Zadel, which is a name'that( 6 ~ recalled as he was requesting that this paper be -- excuse 7 me. I'll rephrase'that. 8 This is the name he recalled as he reached for his wallet to obtain the paper so that he might recall to the name. Il Mr. Zadel's name is here. However. also 12 a number of other matters are here shich are totally 

         '3     unrelated         to this incident. I feel that They are t'o t a l l y I'

irrelevant to this proceeding and I am going to instruct 15 my client not to turn them over. -They have nothing to do 16 with anything here. 17 I will gladly make Mr. Zadel's name on this 18 piece of paper avaialble to counsel so that helcan see that I' in fact it was there on the name. 20 There are other telephone numbers on here 21 that are -- and names that are totally unrelst'ed. 22 MR. DAVIDSON: If counsel will represant 23 to se that there are no names there of individuals or 24 persons which have any information or bearin6.pn either 25 

                                   ) tenure at Comanche Peak or his subsequent-b rY S

6

a2 60 4 1 employment at Stone & Webster or his complaint to the 2 Department of Labor, a r.d that those individuals, to the best of( ) knowledge, have no knowledge that 4 might bear on that, on those facts or those pleadings. 5 then I think that we can dispense with that discovery question. However, I include in that, 8 Ms. Garde. Mr. Hadley or any of the people that worked for 9 GAP or CASE. So, in other words, if there are no names 10 there and no information there or notes there relating to 11 the subj ect of these proceedings, not necessarily j ust I 12 { your testimony but the subject of these proceedings or the l l 13 subject of the proceedings before the Department of Labor 14 j or your tenure at Stone & Websster, then I think that we can 15 dispense with the request for the document. And I think 16 that I would like to rely on Mr. Spekter's representation 17 as he understands what is there, rather than your own. 18 MR. SPEKTER: I make the good faith 19 representation that that is my understanding and I submit 20 that to you, the record. I 21 MR. HAMILTON: I will just say Ehat if 22 Mr. Spekter is prepared to make that representation and 23 feels he has the information adequate to do so, then I hve 24 no further request for that document. 25 MR. SPEKTER: I thank counsel for his I l

7 xj 

                                                                                       -61                                   j 6jen3
                                                                                                                        -l {

i! > I statements on'that matter. I have discussed this:with my 2 client and I can make that representation. 3  ! EMR . DAVIDSON: Then it is'more than~ 

                                                                                                                              )

acceptable to me. 5 MR. SPEKTER: Thank you. Let's proceed. ' 6 ,, BY MR. DAVIDSON: i 7 Q ( have you-discussed'the: filing __ ( 8 -3 of a complaint with the' Department of. Labor with anyone other than Mr. Hadley? l 

                                                                                                                          -1 10 A     -Yes.

Il Q Who are those other individuals? 12 A Billie Garde, Michael Spekter and'various 1 13 family members. Id Q And are you represented by counsel in 15 a proceeding before the Department of Labor? ' to (Conference between counsel and the-17 witness.) i 18 THE WITNESS: I am not sure as to the l' correct representation at this tioe - 20 BY MR. DAVIDSON: i '! 21 i Q Could you explain your? answer?: I am not- , 22 -l sure I understand it. I 23 I! A Ok'ay. I am not sure as to formally who t l 2'  ;' is representing me in the Department of Labor dispute right 25 ,,,, {i I Il

63 6j on5 I Q Did you-discuss the. complaint-with thia 2 head attorney? 3 A No, I did not. d Q You had no conversations with.him at ~ all? 5 A. No, I did n ot . 6 Q Did you review a draft'of-any proposed. 7 complaint to be filed with the Department of Labor? 3 A Yes, I.did. Q Who prepared that draft? 10 A Mr. Hadley. Il Q When did you review.that draft for the first 12 gg,,7 13 A I'm not famioiar with the exact date. Id Q What would be your best impression as to 15 when that date was? 16 A We would be speaking amonth or two ago.  ! 17 i Q Was there more than one draft of the- ' 18 complaint? I' A I do not believe so. 20 Q Just one? And it was submitted as drafted; 21 is that what you are stating? 22 l A 1 believe so 23 5 Q Do you have a copy of that complaint, sir? 24 i A Yes. 25 i Q Do you hve it with you? i 4 l

64 sa6 4 1 A .Yes. 2 Q Would you please produce it?' j 3 Q Removing it from an envelope.that's 4 addressed to you; was that the manner in which you received 5 the copy of the complaint, in an envelope? 6 A I do not know. I know that I place 7 information in: the envelope. I do not know if it.is the B correct envelope in which the matter was mailed in. 9 Q Can I see that, sir? 10 First show it to your counsel. l 11 But I saw that you extracted the document 12 we requested.plus a cover leter from the manila envelope. 13 Sir, you put that back in your attache 14 case. You..were about to give that to me. 15 A No. This was not -- it has no relevancy 16 to the question you asked. j Q Was it enclosed in the same envelope with 18 the complaint of the Department of Labor? 19 A It was also enclosed; it was in the same 20 briefcase that all my documentation is enclosed in. 21 MR. SPEKTER: May I see? 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Would you show that to your 23 counsel? 24  ! (Witness tenders document to Counsel 25 Spekter.) l l 

                                                                  , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - ^ - - - - - -

6jos? 65 ' 

                                                                                              !I
                                                                                              <J 1

MR. DAVIDSON: We are on the record, 2 Mr. Reporter. 3 

                                                                                                )

(Counsel Spekter peruses document tendered by witness.) 5 (Counsel Spekter tenders dccument 6 i to Counsel Davidson.) 7 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you. 8 BY MR. DAVIDSON: Q )your counsel has handed me a l 10 document which you reviewed which I take it i ? in response to my earlier request fr you to produce a copy of the 12 complaint filed with the Department of Labor and I note 

                    '3 that this document is not signed and is dated June 21, I#

1984. I ask you to take a look at it once again and tell 15 me whether this in fact is a copy of the complaint that { 

                    '6 was actually filed with the Department of Labor, or whether it is a draft?

18 1 (Document handed to the w itness.) (Witness peruses document. tendered by 0 Counsel Davidson.) I 21 A It is a copy of the exact form which was 22 1 on the computer. I cannot say that it is the exact copy ' 23 of the original, no, because in fact, as you can defir*.tely 24 tell, it is an original typed form off of a computer type 25 printer which would mean it was a copy of the document l l t L.__.-_____

18 66 4 I which was in the memory of the computer. 2 Q When you say computer, you mean a computer 3 with a word processing program or a word processor? d A Correct. 5 Q So this document was printed out of a 6 memory of a computer? 7 A Correct. 8 Q Does that suggest to you and perhaps 9 refresh your recollection as to whether there were earlier to drafts and more than one draft of the complaint as 11 finally submitted in the files? 12 A I am not familiar with that. 13 Q No drafts were discussed with you? Id A There may have been. 15 Q I see. So there may have been drafts? 16 A Correct. i 17 l Q Is it possible that the document that you 18 handed me is one such draft that was submitted to you for l' your review? 20 A No. I believe that was the final issue. 21 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Reporter, I think we 22 should mark for identification a document that has been 23 the subject -- J 24 MR. SPEKTER: I would object to the 25 introduction of this documen.. It is not on stationery, ____.m._

Gjeng; ' - 67!. g a 

                                                                                                                                        'li   '

1 , it is not signed, there is no indication that it is in 2 fact the. final complaint _or that itois in fact or. 3 whether it.is a-facsimile of'the complaint that.was. e 

                                                            .actually-filed.

5 's MR. DAVIDSON: 1think(- /-  : 0 testified as;to'what it is and:we areinot-introducing it 7 because we are not'in-an evidentiary deposition. WeLare 8 in discovery. All we are-doing.it ma'rking it for' 9 identification so that we'can refer to'it. 10 However, if you have any other objections 11 you and you'are prepared to note,them for the record -- 12 MR. MIZUNO: If the documents ate not1 going. 13 to be bound into the transcript then.we have been makring 14 a lot of documents in discovery depositions'-- the staff 15 would like to request that that copy:be-made to the staff 16 as well as applicants. 17 MR.-SPEKTER: Well, initially I'would-like to object to the eciling 'of this particula r document. 19 In any event, it has no bearing-or relevancy to'this 20 particular discovery proceeding because it refers to a 5 L 21 proceeding completely outside of the s' cope of.the matters .' ]' 22 ' which are pertinent-to this hearing. . 23 MR. DAVIDSON: Inresponse .co Mr. ;Spekter ') 24 I would like tovask:-Did you read this document. 25 Mr. Spekter? 1 _,1 l.' i 

                                                                                                                                  ~

t.

n 68 l s10 4 3 MR. SPEKTER: I have just'briefly readLit 2 this morning. , 4 3 , MR. DAVIDSON: Did you see the first d sentence of the second' paragraph which says "While 5 employed by'the Impell' Corporation at: Comanche P e a k ,' 6 ~l brought a series'of violations of Nuclear 7 Regulatory Commission regulations to the attention.of' a his supervisors and others." 9 And the second sentence.says. and I quote: 1 10 "As a result of his pursuit of 'N II theseviolations(. A was subjected to several incidents.of intimidation and 12 harassment" 13 Did you see that on the' document? Id MR. SPEKTER: iI did. 15 MR. DAVIDSON: Does.that satisfy.your to claim of relevance? 17 MR. SPEKTER: I'stillfeliam. that this' is 38 referring to another incident.- l' 19 There are other things mentioned in that 20 i letter also. I believe-that is only one of the areas'that. j 21 .. < is covered. 22 

                                                                                                        .MR. DAVIDSON: .But you would suggest that                                      l 23 that has some' bearing on the proceedings here today, 24                                                                                                                                     i wouldn't you?

25 l MR. SPEKTER: It does. .; 

                                                                                                                                                                                         )

I Jon-I. 

                                                                                                                                             !I I

MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you. I Could.we'have that marked. Mr. Reporter, 3 as Disc Exhibit 37. zzxxxxxxx l(The d'ocument' referfed to 5 was marked Disc Exh ib i t ' F-.3' 6 for identification.) 7 MR. DAVIDSON: Once again to..' accommodate. 8 we will'_I believe stipulate on the record. you, - all of us, and counsel present, that we can again return:to , 

                   'O you the ' original of your document and have a photocopy made'
                                                                                   ~
                   'I and mark that as the exhibit for the purpose of this 12 deposition.

end6 THE WITNESS: Correct. 14

  • 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 6

22 ., i 23 1 24 . 25 l \ 

   .                                                                                                                                                 I i

                                                                                                                            ': \ .

70-el 4- .) 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 7 7 Q ( ,j do you know on what date your 3 complaint to the Department of Labor was filed? d L, A' Just prior to'the.30 day time: limit-from.thec 5 

                                                                                                                                ,j
              -time I was notified of the lay-off.

6 Q When were you notified of the lay-off, to 7 which you+ refer? 8 A I'm not familiar w'ith the exact date'.. 9 

                      'Q       Give-me the date that you best recollect.                                                           I 10 (Pause.)-

11 A We would be talking somewhere'in the 12 neighborhood of the 22nd. 

                                                                                                                                 ']

13 Q 22nd of what month.. sir? 'l 

                                                                                                                                 .l Id              A       Of May.

15 

                     .Q        So you believe that thefcomplaint was filed.

16 on or before June 21st? 17 (Pavse.) 18 A In that approximate time period. There is, l' you know, 30 days right. And you're going to have to: count-20 up the months, whether there was 31 days in the time period-21 to determine whether or not -- 22 Q We have a calendar ' here : but my recollection 23 is that May has 31 days. That's why I said June 21st. 24 Is there any reason sir, to your knowledge, 25 why you filed on June 21st or thereabouts rather than at

  • 0

71 I. fc71b2 i l 1 some earlier date? 2 A We were still questioning information and 3 putting together all the information associated with the 4 clafm and at the beginning we thought maybe that we would 5 he 30 days from the exact' time of the lay-off and 30' days 6 from the time of. notification. .And to prevent any future 7 arguments on the matter, we did it.30 days from the time 8 of the notification. 9 Q When you say "ve" in getting together the to information, who do you mean? 11 A l Speaking with Mr. Hadley. l 12 l Q And what information was it that you were I 13 getting together? 14 A Just the overall view of what actually had 15 happened on my part. 16 Q Well, what in particular? I mean, you could 17 have told him t h a t.. In fact, I think you testified you 18 I told him that a couple of months ago. 19 A Well, you have to figure also that I was in 20 the process of moving at the time, too. My time frame, 21 as far as the ability to address this problem, was not 22 

                                                                           -- I was not able to automatically go into this.

23 Q What.other information, besides your recital 24 of your story, were you seeking to put together during this 25 time period with Mr. Hadley? I

72 

   >3 1

A Well, during this time period, we were 2 trying to find out if . I was having problems with other i i 3 employment. 4 Q How did you go about obtaining that 5 information? 6 A Sending out resumes. 7 Q You mean the purpose for your sending out 1 B certain resumes was to secure information with respect O to the Department of Labor complaint? .i 

       'O              A       Wrong.

11 Q Well, that's what my question was. That's 12 why 1 asked you. You told us, and your testimony is, that 13 you and'Mr. Hadley were working on getting together  ! 14 information with respect to your complaint that was to be 15 filed. And I asked you what information. 16 Now what were you doing? What information I-17 p were you getting together? l 18 A Well, my personal step-by-step account of ' i 10 what had happened. 20 Q 1s that the only information that you were 21 getting together? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Neither you nor he were seeking to interviev 24 individuals as possible witnesses, in connection with the 25 Department of Labor complaint? I l l' t __________.__-.m._-_--

73 i fc71b4 i i 1 (Pause.) 2 A Repeat the: question, please? 3 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Reporter, would you , A be good enough to' repeat the question'to the witness? 5-(The reporter read the record as requested.) 6 THE WITNESS: I am going to say'no. t 7 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                                                                                                          '/*          %

6 Q ( )the way you answer that' question. ' 9 ) suggests to me that you' don't believe that the answer'should]- 10 be no. l 11 A Well, I'm not -- 12 MR. SP EKTER: I object to the characterization. 13 MR. DAVIDSON: It's not'a characterization. , la l'm merely going to say that therefore, could you explain 15 to me why you were reluctant to'say flatly no? 16 THE WITNESS: Well, we were in the process 17 of listing people that could possibly give'information and 18 so we were talking and conversing. but we were not contacting i 19 these people. , 

          '                                                                                                                                                                                            1: (

20 BY MR. DAVIDSON: Lj 21 Q All right, that is fair enough. So neithe'r 22 you nor he made any telephone calls or arranged any meetings 23 with any individuals that you think might be witnesses in 24 this upcoming proceeding of the Department of Labor? 25 A Now we are speaking' prior to the Department p. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                    'l 1

1* i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . . . _ _ _ . ._ _ __ ___.__m. _

74 i 4 I of Labor filing, correct? 2 Q, That is correct.- 3 A Correct. I did'not. d Q. You did not and he'did not?. 5 A Right. 6 Q 'Did.you undertake any activityJto elicit. 

                             '7 information with respect to.your filing of the complaint' 8

with the Department of Labor?- 9 A When you.say elicit, can you define that?- 10 Q Obtain. II A Okay. Other than personal information-than' 12 1 had, no. 13 Q You didn't -- Id A N,o w , I cannot speak for Mr. Hadley. . totally, 15 so we're only speaking for myself. 16 Q Well, he didn't inform you of any efforts { 17 he was undertaking to verify or document'any of your. 18 

                                 . allegations?

I' A Correct 

                                                                                                       'l 20 Q     As far as you know, all the two of youlwere 21                                                       t engaged in was a discussion between yourselves to'obtain                 i l
                         ^

22 the facts as you understood, with respect to the Department. 23 of Labor complaint? I 24  ! A Correct. We did not even know if we were l 25 going to file with the Department of Labor originally. l l l 4 l l

75 fc71b6 1 We did not know if we even had grounds for,it. Therefore, 2 we had to review the case. I had to give-information'on 3 what had led up to the situation and so forth, d Q When did you decide that you:had a case?' 5 A I am not-. familiar with the time period. 6 It was during that 30 day time period. 7 Q .Who made.the determination?' 8 A I made it, based on information given from 9 Mr. Hadley to me, pertaining to the Department'of Labor. 10 -and how it works. And-I made'the decision. ' 11 Q No. Did you make the decision that you had 12 a case or did.you make the~ decision to file a complaint? d 13 A I made a decision to. file the complaint. 14 Q But who advised' you, if~anyone, that you in 15 fact had a case that ought' to be brought? 16 (Pause.) 17 A Mr. Hadley was advising me but he was.not 18 tellir6 me to bring the case up. He was not suggesting I 10 bring the case up. It was totally my decision. 20 MR. DAVIDSON: Would'the' reporter. read back j 21 the question so we can get a responsive ~ answer?- ' t 22 (The reporter read the record las requested? .+ t 23 MR. SPEKTER: If anyone. 2d THE WITNESS: Okay, I was advised by: Billie  ; ) t 1 25 Garde and Mr. Hadley. ' ' i I. 1i i l I 9 . a i 

    - _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - - _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ , .              ._                        _              . _ . _ . . _   _ . _ _ _ _ . . . - _ . - _ - _        .A

c. 

                                                                                                                             '76.

4 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                  '2               Q       ~ Do you recollect when they advised you of 3

their conclusion? d A No, I did'not. 5 

                                                                  -Q         Subsequent to the filing of your complaint             _.i 6

with.the Dep.rtment of Labor, have you undertaken. any: 7 efforts to obtain information that would-be relevant to the 8 charges you have now made?~ 9 MR. SPEKTER: Would counsel ~be. specific'in. 10 which charges that he is speaking about? 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 12 Q l' refer to the allegations made in'your 13 complaint with the Department of Labor.

d A Will you be more specific. as to'which 15 allegations? The Department specified blackballing and --

16 ' Q ithere is a question pending. 17 Will you answer, please? 18 A Well, then, may we have the question repeated?j.' 19 MR. DAVIDSON: We certainly may. 20 (The reporter read the record-as requested.). 21 THE WITNESS: Yes. t 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q And would you describe the efforts that you've 24 undertaken to obtain information with respect to the 25 allegations made in your complaint before the Department'of

77 fc71b8 1 Labor? 2 A We contacted past working associates. > 3 Q When you say "we" who do you mean? 4 A .Me and Mr. Hadley. 5 Q And when you say past working associates, 6 who have you contacted? 7 A Larry Howard. B Q Who else? 9 A That would be it. to Q Well, you used the plural, rather than the 11 singular. 12 A Okay, then we'll use singular. Past working 13 associate. 14 Q Did you contact anyone else -who refused 15 to confirm your position? 16 A No, we did not. 17 Q Did you make an attempt to contact anyone 18 else? l l 1 19 A No, we did not. 1 20 Q Did Mr. Hadley make any attempt to contact 1 21 anyone else? 22 A I cannot answer for Mr. Hadley. 23 Q Did he advise you as to whether he made.any 24 attempts to contact any individuals who might be potential  ; 25 witnesses in your complaint before the Department of Labor? 1 l l l l I

78 'l lb9 J J 1 A I do not know at this time. I cannot l 4 2 any. remember l 3 Q I believe that you may not have heard the 4 question, because your answer was not responsive. Will the 5 reporter read it back, please? l 6 (The reporter read the record as requested.) 7 MR. SPEKTER: I would submit that he has 8 answered the question, that he does not know. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: He does not know what Mr. 10 .Hadley said to him? That's why he's not r e s p o r.s iv e . All 11 I asked you was what Mr. Hadley told you or whether he told 12 you that. 13 THE WITNESS: I do not remember. 14 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q Well, the answer is not that you didn't know. 16 The answer is you didn't remember? 17 A Correct 18 . Q But he may have said it then? He may have to advised you that he did contact other people? Isn't that 20 correct? 21 A Pos81bly. I'm not going to try and remember 22 the exact wording of every conversation we've had. i 23 Q You are not? Why is that? Why do you choose I 24 i not to remember? , 25 A I remember what I can. But as far as to be  ; 1 i i E- - --- -_ - - - _ _- ------ 1

7 

                                                                                                                                     .,f
fc71b10 1

1 able to say that I can remember it, no. 2 Q That is. understood,-but you are not making 3 a: volitional choice not to remember it, with any decision?. d A Correct. 5 Q You are' going to'do your.very best~, aren't-6 you. .to-give us.all the information.you:have?- 

                    '7 A       Correct.

8 Q. And.ve're not going to-find out later that 9 you have a vivid ~ recollection of things that'you couldn't ML remember today, some months .later from now, are we?' 11' A Correct. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: .Thank you. end7 33 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~i' 24 

                                                                                                                               'i 25
                                                                                                                                        .J 5'

l l -. 4 E_________.-_---____=__----_----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----->

80 1 l mn-1 4 I BY MR. DAVIDSON: 1 . ~s 2 Q w lyou ;said you sent out several  ; s  ; 3 resumes in connection with the Department of Labor d complaint. Did I misunderstand you? Is there some 5 connection in your mind between your sending out resumes 6 and the proceeding that nas been initiated at the Department 7 of Labor? 8 A No. 9 Q There is no connection? 10 A No. 11 Q Was the sending out of these resumes totally  ! I2 carelated to your Department of Labor complaint? 13 A Yes. Id Q To whom did you send these resumes? 15 MR. SPE%TER: Obj e-e t i on , irrelevant. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: (Resuming) 17 Q )is it your representation that 1 18 the parties to whom you sent those resumes, the fact of } 19 their bein; sent and any response you may receive will not 20 become a subj e c t matter or eviilence in the Department of 21 Labor proceeding? 22 A I do not know if it will or not. i 23 Q Did you send resumes to any nuclear power 2c installation? 25 A Yes.

7 

                                                                                        '81]

l 8-2  : 3 Q To whom did you send the resume?' j 2 MK. SPEKTER: I am going to object, irrelevant. 3 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter. I wculd suggest l that you be careful because I have a' suspicion on the basis 5 of( ) testimony that he intends to suggest in 6 this Department of Labor proceeding that his failure to 7 obtain a job was related to his allegations. 8 If that is true and he represents to me now-that that is not going to be in. I think we are going to 10 have a very serious problem and I think since you are not II his counsel in that proceeding at this point, that you 12 should be very circumspect about the representations you 13 are prepared to make particularly if you ultimately do Id become his counsel because I am going to hold you to them. 15 BY MR. DAVIDSUN: (Resuming) 16 Q I think,e, 

                                                           )you ought to tell'us to 17 whom you sent those resumes.

f 18 1 A To the two utility companies in Florida. l l' Q Could you tell us who they are? I don't know 20 them. 21 A Florida Power and Light and Florida Power. 22 Q Do they both operate nuclear installations? ,. 23 A Yee, they do. 24 Q Are those nuclear installations in the f! 25 l construction phase or are they on-line? I i 4 i I m_________.

82 

                                                                                                                                  ?

A They are on-line. 2 Q What position did you apply for? 3  ! A Maintenance support or results engineering. Q Did you confer with Mr. Hadley about the 5 submission of those resumes? 6 A No, I did not. i i Q Did you submit those resumes with a cover letter? A Yes, I did. 10 Q Are the resumes that you submitted the s arn e j II as the one that you had marked yesterday in your direct I testimony? I3 A Yes, they are. 14 Q They.do not vary in any detail? That is the 15 resume you used for these two application attached to the envelope which it came in. 

                                                                                                         ]

10 MR. DAVIDSON: And also to another piece of Il paper. 12 MR. SPEKTER: And also to a piece of paper which 

                                            /            'ss 13 is a handwritten draft of(                  fequest-for potential Id     employment. Perhaps it is a letter. I think it probably 15     speaks for 'itself.                                                                '

It is a letter which would be the 16 draft perhaps of a cover letter to the utility. 17 MR. DAVIDSON: Let's restaple them as they were 18 retained in his files so that the document maintains its W integrity and let's take a look at it. 20 MR SPEKTER: The document that was requested,  ;, 21 l I believe the only document that was requested was thel 22 letter from Florida Power Corporation.which states that 23 there were no jobs. 

                                                                                                        ')

24 MR. DAVIDSON: That document. sir, is a part'of' l 25 the other two because it has been stapled togetherfand I i ! ll 1 l \ l I l l a 

                                                                                                        ~1

                                                                                                                                                                 '--                           ~88 I

think we are entitled to'that. 2 MR. SPEKTER: These are three separate.doduments. 3 MR. DAVIDSON: .If this were ~ s: proceeding,under a discovery, there would be.a damn good question as to-3 whether there is a violation of Title"18,'Section 1901, 6 I don't believe that counsel has'any right-to' change.the 7 manner in which documents are retained in the file end'I am-8 very disturbed by that. , MR. SPEKTER: Counsel, I am certainly not to tampering with. documents and I.wish to make that perfectly II clear for this record. t 12 MR. DAVIDUON: I may have misspoken. I'just want 13 the document produced-in the manner in which it was retained in/q- files and I think I am entitled to that and 15 I would like to have the whole document and I would like it to to be stapled so that when we mark it, it retains its I7 integrity. 

                                                          '8 MR. SPEKTER:     If you have a stapler, you.may 19 re-staple it.

20 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you, sir. Off the record. 21 (Discussion off the r e c o r d '. ) 22 9 23 24 i i 25 .I I 1 L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

                                                                  ,         .,n.w             . , .   -
                                                                                                            .wr.       -

xy. fe9pbl 1 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Reporter. have we nov 2 marked all of the exhibits. 3 '(Reporter responds.)- 4 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 5 Q .[ }youhaveproduced what-is'a 6 three-page.or three-part document, the first page of>which 7- . appears to be a letter from the-Florida Power Corporation. 8 and I ask you whether that is.the letter to'which you're. 9 referring that was a response to one of'your" requests'for. 10 employment?  ! 11 A Yes, it.was.- 12 MR. DAVIDSON: .I would like che reporter to 13 mark for identification this document as Disc. F-4. 14 (The document-referred to'as 15 Discovery.F-4 was 16 marked for identification.) 17 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 18 Q Now this letter is from the Florida Power j 19 Corporation, which of the u tilities . is owr.ed and . opera t ed 20 by Florida Power Corporation to.which you earlier applied 21 for employment. You indicated.that.you applied'to Florida-22  ! a ser & Light. 23 A There's two separate = corporations in' Florida. 24 Florida Power and Florida Power & Light. Two individually 25 separate corporations. 4 

              ..x            .                           '-

90 4 1 Q And this is the Florida Power Corporation 2 not the Florida Power & Light. 3 A Right. 4 Q Did you receive a response to your request 5 for employment from the Florida Power & Light? 6 A No. 7 Q Did you take any action to pursue that resume 9 that you sent then? 9 A No, I have not. to Q Did you call anyone from the Florida Power 11 & Light Company about it? 

                                                                                        's 12 MR. SPEKTER:      Asked and answered, i3                       fHE WITNESS:      No, I have not, j

14 BY MR. DAVIDSON: I 15 Q To your knowledge, has a r.y o n e on your behalf < It made such a telephone call? l P A No, they have not. 18 (Discussion off the record.) 19 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                         ,              -                                                 {

20 Q  ; prior to your employment at s- .s 21 Comanche Peak as a start-up engineer, what is the entire 1 22 amornt of time that you were employed in the nuclear power industry As a start-up engineer? 23 24 A I believe from January to August of '82. 75 l Q Where was that employment, sir? t a

91 l' 

     "ob3 1

A B'echtel Power' Corporation. 2 Q. I'm sorry,.I didn't hear your response. 3 A. Bechtel Powei Corporation. d Q What plant.was that, sir, di d you work at ? 5 A San Onofre Nuclear.- 6 Q Sir, we have marked for identification an 7 affidavit submitted in this proceeding.as -- we' marked for 8 identification the affidavit in yesterday's proceeding. But 9 in' order to make these proceedings entirely comprehensible 10 and independent as a discoverydeposition,[ what-11 I'm' going to do is I'm goingEtoLhave the reporter mark that-12 affidavit yet again. if.I may, with- a Discovery Exhibit ; numbe: 13 

                                                    /

And I'm going to ask the reporter.to mark the': 

                                                                       ~

Id affidavit of( ~ as Disc. F-5. 15 (the document' referred toias' 16 Discovery T-5 was 17 marked'for identification.) 

           '18 BY MR. DAVIDSON:

19 Q _s 

                                                                            )we now have marked thLs afficavit 20       as Disc. F-5,                          and I would like you to turn to page 2.             And 21 I would like you to turn to the second or the ' completed                                            '

22 paragraph on page 2. I would.like you to read it to yourself. 23 (Witness, reviewing document.) 24 MR. DAVIDSON: 'And when you have finished < 25 look up at me. , 

                                                                                                                         \

h 

                      . - _ _ - _ . _ - _ .          -_ _             ____.__-_-___---.-____-__L_.__i-__-.__w

  ,                                                                                                ~
92:

1 m 4 1 THE WITNESS Okay. 2 BY MR'. DAVIDSON: 3 Q Do you see the' statement that-you belie 3re. 4 that certain of the. procedures at Comanche Peak are "are 5 not consistent with industry practices,"1do you see'that?-- 6 A .Yes, I do. 7 Q On what do_you babe.that-statement? 8 A Previous. experience. 9 Q When you say previous experience, you refer 10 to your experience as a start-up. engineer with Bechtel 11 Corpora' ion? e 12 A Yes. And previouc experience ~ prior to that. 13 Q How many, nuclear power plants are there'in-14 the United States, to your knowledge :that are operating? 15 A I am unaware of that. 16 Q You do not know. 17 A No. I 1B Q Do you know how.many utilities operate nuclear- I 

                                                                                                       'I' 19 power plants under operating licenses with th5.NRC in the 20    United States?

21 A I would be guessing. I'm not going.to begin 1 22 to guess how many. 23 Q The' question is, do you know. -i ! l 24 A No. . l 25 Q Do you know how many nuclear power ~ plants are 1 e-i ______.-.____m.___m__m ___ m

i92-A Oob5 1 currently in. construction phase? 2 A No, I do not. .: 

                                                                                                                                                      'l 3

Q Do you know how many utilitiesLhave submitted-4 applications for construction permits? 5 A No, J do not. 6 MR. SPEKTER: I'would object tolthe whole111ne, 7 of questioning as irrelevant,-whether he knows;how ma'ny., 8 the' exact numbersoof plants does not mean.that.he did not-9 know,the general policy in the i nd us t ry '. t, 10. MR. DAVIDSON: I don't believe that'is'tec'essahy 11 to respond to that objection but I do believe'that he states' 12 what' industry practices are, and . I just want to plumbsthe 13 

                                                                         .dapth and' breadth of the Laowledge with which he~ brings-to-14 that assertion.          'And if he doesn't know what.utilitiesEoperate 15 nuclear power plants or how many there are, .and he doesn't' 16 know how many plants are on-line in the United' States, and 17                                                  ~

he doesn't know nhat's being constructed in the United States) ' 18 I think it bears rather nacerially on his ability to'make j 

                                                            ~9                                                                                               .

that kind of statement in sworn testimony. I 20 You may'dir, agree. j 21 Mk. SPEKTER: I do. 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: l 23 Q t ')onpage 3 of your affidavit you' 24 make the statement.."This-is'not consistent with my experience 25 in the nuclear industry." Do you'see that statement? 'j i 1 

                                                                                                                                                              )

I e i _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ , __ ._ .] 

                  ?      .

a,p ' J-93 9pb6 k i 1 (Pause.) 2 A Yes, I do. 3 Q On what do you base that statement, sir? What 4 experience? 5 A Previous experience at the San Onofre Nuclear 6 Power Plant and at the Tennessee Valley Authority Nuclear 7 Power Plant. 8 Q I'm sorry, you dropped your voice on that. 9 A Tennessee Valley Authority Nuclear Power Plant. 10 Q You were employed by the Bechtel Corporation 11 at the San Onofre power plant as a start-up engineer from 12 January 1982 until September of 1982; is that correct? 13 A Correct. o 14 ' Q You were employed at the TVA Bellefonte ( 15 Nuclear Power Plant for approximately four months between 16 August 1981 and January 1982; is that correct? 17 A Correct. 18 Q Your position there, however was not start-up 19 engineer, was it? 20 A Correct. 21 Q What was your position:there? ' t < 22 A Assistant steam generator. operator. 23 I Q Thank you. And is that the experience to i 24 which you refer in terms of stating your experience in the 25 nuclear industry? l 1l s 

                                  $1-                     y,.
                                                                                       - w
                                                              ,                 96
                                                                                        '4
                 ~1              A      Yes.

i 2 Q Further down in that paragraph you discuss 1 1 3 what you term, and I quote, " trends within the industry." 4 (Pause.) d 5 A Are.you. speaking of the paragraphunder that 6 one or still in the paragraph above? 7 Q We're still in the paragraph =above. .It is' 8 your affidavit, )Doyou see that statement . 9 " trend within the industry"? Why-don't you-read through 10 the paragraph again and look up at'me:when.you.have finished? 11 (Witness' reviewing document.) 12 A Yes, I see it. 13 Q On what'did you base yoUr assertion-as to s 14 

                      " trends within the industry"?

1 15 A Previous experience and information obtained to from fellow personnel. 17 Q What information? 18 A Information told to ae. 19 Q Information obtained from what fellow 20 personnel? 21 (Pause.) 22 A The numbers would be too numerous to name. 23 Q Well, what information do you refer to?. 24 A You are speaking of a common knowledge at 25 the plant site. u . . . _ _

95" j 9pb8-1 

                                                                                                                                                                                                    ' ,t Q                To whatfinformation do you refer when.you 2

say information obtained from fellow employees?' 3 A The' fact that'other power? plants.do.not. allow-d butt splicing. 'That'other power; plants do not allow craft ~ 

                                                                                          .5                          ~

personnel to perform' testing;without direct. supervision. 6 and.so on and.so forth. 7 Q And from whom did you secure this'information? 8 (Pause.) t 9 A From fellow workers. to Q Could you p1' ease name them? 11 A You would:be. talking about John McDowel1~-- 12 Jeff' Black - .there would be'several other' start ups."but-13 the names I cannot remember right now. ' id Q Other. start-up engineers.that were' employed 15 with you? ' 16 A Correct. 17 Q Perhaps we can refresh'your recollection -- 

                                                                                                                                                                                                        .I 18 Mr. Reporter, do you have the exhibit.that was marked! for 19 identification during the course of the voir dire off 20
                                                                                                        )which was a table of organization of theETUCCO 21
                                                                                                                                                                                                 -l start-up group?                                                                                    1, 22 (Reporter responds-negatively.)-

23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                                                                                         <                                                                                   1 24                                                                                                                    1 Q                               I have here a list of' start-up                                i{

25 L personnel who were employed'at the same time you'were irf the l I 1 j o 1 l l 1 _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " - ~ - ^ ' ' ' - - ' '

_,v re ~ 96 4 1 

                                        ' start-up group under'the direction of Mr. Camp.         I'm going 2   to ask that this        list of personnel 'ue marked.for identification 3   as Disc. F-6.
    - ~ - ~~                        d (The document referred to as-
                                   -5 Discovery F-6.was 6

marked for identification.)- 7 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 8 Q. f )Iwillshowyou this list now. 9 and I would like to call your attention to the fact that to this is titled . start-up personnel, and it's indicated to 11 be a list of "as of 1/9 84." .That isz January 9. 1984. ' 12-And could you please review that list of 13 personnel? Id (Witness reviewing document.) 15 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 16 Q I think you want.to take some care in d 

                                                                                                                     ?

17 reviewin. each of the names. I don't mean for'you to just 1B flip thr.igh the pages. 19 And when you have completed _your perusal.of 20 that dociment, would you look up at me? 21 (Witness reviewing document.) i 22  ! 23 24 25 __m____ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ 

 .W   u
                   +oi W'-r e.   ..a .
                    ' 'I ' '  ' *,"'              ,

r 10/2 , 98-1 4 1 

                       'the areas, what do you mean?

2 \ A I cannot account for his experience. I 3 

                                                                                                              .f Q         Did review of this list refresh your recollection                    ]

4 as to the people with whom you worked at the time you were 5 at -- employed at' Comanche Peak in the start-up group?. 6 A I know several of the names. 7 Q Now, you earlier testified that the basis.for 8 your assertion about "the trend within the industry" was 9 't predicated on your prior experience at the'two. power plants. 10 You mentioned, then..also from discussions with fellow 11 workers. 12 And you identified for us thatione such worker 13 who gave you information relevant to the " trend within the - i 14 industry" was John Mcdonald. The second name you gave us 15 was Jeff Black, 1 l.6 Are we to understand that Mr.' Parker is also 17 one such person? IB A Yes. )' 10! Q Are there any other people that you can now i 20 ; identify who may have had such conversations with you , i 21 from uhich you gleaned what you claim to,be information  ;{ 22 '! about the " trend within the. industry"? l s 23 ' A No. 1 2d Q Please relate to me the conversation that'you 25 had with John Mcdonald with -- excuse me, I believe. , 1 l i

q 

               .    .g  ..  .
                                           ~4 l,                         *!N' '
  • q; ,
                  /

1 I misspoke. The name that you mentioned is ! 2 John McDowell. 3 A Correct. 4 

                         .Q       Would you please tell me what Mr. McDowell's.

5 experience within the industry is? ' 6 A His experience? I cannot account for'his 7 experience. 

                                  .              s 8

Q ( ')wouldyou please tell_me what 9 Jeff Black's experience within the industry is? 10 A I am not familiar with his experience.either. 11 Q .I )wouldyou' turn to page 5 of 12 Dise Exhibit 6. < 13 Let me direct your attention to the.last g Id sentence on that page. ' 15 Couid you read that to.yourself and'look'up'st 16 me when you are finished? 17 (Witness peruses docu ent.) 18 A Yes. 19 Q Do you see the phrase in that sentence. " comply-20 with industry practiced? 21 A Yes, I do. 22 And what do you -- Q 23 MR. SPEKTER: I would note for the record that 24 that's not in quotes in that par icular -- 25 MR. DAVIDSON: I'm so ry. I think, as~I'have 4

v. :.,
           - %1 4 y ., ;, A C.Mk*< - - ~ T,=.i H e ~ 4 " ? R                                  =~

W+w^ 4 M? - -'~ l' W diTl ' b.ftY g ' *

  • 5' Wr.'. ~Y& ' g gg -- <. Y' 4

1 

                                                  ,   done with my previous questions to which you have posed no 2              objection, that I used the quotes only to' indicate that I 3              am quoting from                       pffidavit, and that.this is 4

not my own language, characterization..or interpretation 5 of what it is he has said. 6 MR. SPEKTER:. Understood. 7 MR. .DAVIDSON: And I believe -- by the way, B [ )please let us have this agreement .that if I. 9 at any time, misquote you or otherwise misstate wha't it is 'd to that you have proffered in testimony here, that you'll 11 correct me. 12 Do we have that agreement, j 13 THE WITNESS: i We have that agreement. { 14 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you. }' 

                                                                                               ~

15 Mr. Spekter,'I invite you to chime in'when you 16 feel it appropriate to. 17 MR. SPEKTER: My only objection to this comment 18 is that it seems to be taking matters out of context. 19 I would request that if you wish to quote 20 something, that the whole portion from whence it's taken 21 is read.  !* 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, my question -- which I 23 think will become apparent -- is that'I just want to know on 24 what yeu base your assertion about industry practice. 25 THE WITNESS: Past opinion and the opinion of

m._,.... . 

                                              ? FCjl 10/3                     * -      " " '              -

t 7 "i - . 101 1 fellow workers. 2 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 3 Q And'when you say "the opinion of fellow workers," d to what workers do you refer? 5 A I do not'know. . o I do not remember the exact workers. 7 Q Do you remember any of the workers'who may have -i-8 had an opinion with' respect to this' matter? 9 A No, I do' not. 10 Q Do you know on what they may have based that 11 opinion? 12 A No, I do not. 13 Q , ou testified earlier that you , 14 were employed by~the Bechtel Corporation at the San Onofre-  ! 15 plant, did you not?  ; 16 A Correct. 17 Q To your knowledge, does the'Bechtel Corporation i 1-18 perform services at any other nuclear. installation or .T i 19 facility? i 20 A Yes, they do. 21 Q Do you know what other nuclear installations or 22 facilities the Bechtel Corporation is engaged either in a j 

                                                                                                                                                                     ]

23 construction or as a contractor? 24 A Yes, I do. l 1 25 Q Would you please name them? .i. i 1 4 I l 

                                                                                                                                                                   .i

                                             ~
                                                                                             .M    "9eDP             *, -TK;- n '"Y-                   C . '..                               ~; " ' " ' 7g. : 74 -                         .j FIF46                                            ,                                                                                ' 7 7;- -

1g 

   . p..r.
   . .p.         . . .. .

4 A 1 1 They?re associated with the Diablo Canyon:and-2 Palo Verde, Arizona. The exact locations of other plants -- 3 I know that they are arsociated with the South Texas 4 1 Proj e c t right now. Other than that, I couldn't give you-5 specifics. 6 Q Were you employed at any of these sites by the I 7 Bechtel Corporation? 8 'A None of the ones that I.'ve.previously listed -- 9 just recently. 10 Q Were you employed at any nuclear plant 11 installation or site by the Bechtel Corporation, other than-12 the San Onofre plant? 13 A No. 14 r Q Could you turn to page 7 of your' affidavit, 15 i 

                                                                                                          ,_/

16 (Pause.) 17 I would like to call your attention to'the is second sentence in the complete paragraph on page 7. .f 19 I'd like you to read it to yourself'and look 'l 20 up at me when you're through. )' 1 21 

                                                                                                             .(Witness peruses document.)                                                                                             '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ]

22 Have you read it, sir? 

                                     - 23                                                            A        Yes, I have.                                                                                                                    l a

24 Q And that sentence reads: "It is my experience i i 25 that the Bechtel Corporation provides such a printout to - 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              )

i I l l 

 '                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             I

                                             ,((,N
      ,k                        $         .

kbb W- /+- 1 MNkO Mr ' + Mbe'iM C FCjI: 10 /7" r? h" ' 

                                                                                 '       ^

103, 4 1 its STEa at nuclear sites." 7 On what do you base that statement, sir? 3 A Interaction and conversation between the' sites. 4 Q When you say " interaction and conversation 5 between the sites," to what.do you mean? 6 A. Such that I have fellow workers who have"gone 7 to other previous sites or that I have talked to at those 8 other sitsa and obtained information-from those'other sites. 9 Q Do you have personal knowledge of the' employment 10 practices or procedures at the other sites? 11 A Bechtel uses generic procedures at their sites.. 12 They try and maintain one site similar to-another site. 13 They have certain requirements. 'And calling fromlone site, 14 asking for this computer printout, is common. You can 15 call and say, "I would like to find out, you know, what. 16 have you done about this item on this punch."- It is not 17 a punch list; it is a printout type of form. 18 Q Have you made such a proffer. 19 A Yes, I've talked to different people at the~ 20 sites. 21 Q f' To all of'the. sites? 22 A No. 23 MR. SPEKTER: At thie time, I would like to make 24 an objection and note and objection for the record. Noting 

                                   ' 25 that it's almost 12:00 o' clock, I've been very patient

        .~      .
                   . 5,    -.
g. ~ _m.

a ga p " 

                                                                                                               l

.1L10/8 104 

                                                                                                               '1
                                                                                                               -]  4 1

waiting, as we've'gone through the-affidavit, up to this 2 point, because I believed that, in a good faith representa-- 3 tion to counsel, that these matters would be relevant in d the proceedings at hand. 5 However, it appears to be that we seem to.be j 6 doing here is going through this affidavit:and cataloguing 7 and categorizing the technical matters. Whereas, the scope 8 of this proceeding, the initial deposition and these 9 hearings involved allegations of harassment and intimida-10 tion. 11 I would contend at this point that the matters 12 that are being questioned and that the witness is being i 13 called upon to comment on are far in excess of the scope 't 14 of both the hearings that are being conducted by means of-15 deposition and also the discovery that is contemplated by 16 i this particular deposition. 17 Yesterday, counsel for the' Applicant and counsel 2 18 for the Staff's remarks and their requests for discovery. .l 19 deposition was based on the fact that counsel had not been 1 20 informed on prior occasions of several -- to wit, three 21  ! instances of harassment and intimidation. And therefore, j i 22 a discovery deposition was called for. $ 23 At this point, I think we've gone'far in excess  ! t 24 of .- and haven't even actually touched on those particular  ! 25 instances. I l l

a ._r. ..a . 

                                                                 .-   .y ~            w,.gz LM 7 -
                          %t ~ +x .z                          y ,.y. gp e                 m. ,.
                                                        .                           ~.           .
n. y I kk1dDh.

L. -- l 1 For that reason,I think-we do needLa ruling 2 at this point from i- 

                                                           -- from the Judge -- on whetherfthis
                                                                                                             'f 3

matter is appropriate for discovery at this point. 4 And I would request that one be held. Since it is 5 near the lunch hour anyway. it might be an appropriate time 6 to conduct one. 1 7 ' And Mr. Roisman had indicated that he would 8 

      ,                 like to be present when we have such a discussion,                                i 1

9 MR. DAVIDSON: Let me just respond briefly.- And to then I know Mr. Mizuno will want to m4ke a statement. 11 To start with, my understanding is this is a 12 discovery deposition, it's not an evidentiary deposition, 13 so it is in now way limited by the scope of direct. 14 Secondly, I think that to the extent that you ' 15 insisted that technical data and assertions made by 

                                            'N 16   ('                        Jas the foundation for the subsequent claim of            ,

17 alleged harassment was an important foundation . l 

                                                                  /                                     '

15 N I believe t ha t ,- )experienceand i. 19 ability'to state his position and the experience he's'had . 20 in making these -- raising these concerns -- is very 21 relevant to the response that he received.. 22 Andf1 think that'it is plain that' all of these 23 

                    . matters are therefore relevant.                                                          1 24 I would also add that it was you, sir, who 25 offered this affidavit in evidence, albeit we objected.                          j
      ..                                                                                                        l e

l l l l E__- - -----

7 _ _ y _. ~. y y. 3 10/10 -- L i - uh -

g. -l J

4 1 And I would like to further add that a portion 2 of this affidavit has been-submitted by you'into: evidence. 3 I I further would point out that'this affidavit f d was provided to Applicant,as well as Staff, by CASE, the 5 Intervenor, for the express purpose of preparing for the 6 testimony to be elicited'from this witness. 7 It seems to me that it is CASE that has put 8 this affidavit in controversy, it is CASE that has 9 submitted it, it is you who have offered it into evidence -- 10  ! or portions therefore, and I hardly think that now ' 11 instructing'the witness to provide no information with 12 respect to the bases for the assertions made in the 13 af fidavit -- and we will certainly get to the technical Id matter as well r- is foreclosing discovery on the very 15 matters that you relied upon, as well as those'that 16 surround it. 17 I also think, ? ~,i t e obviously,'that we have 18 the right to explc e , w c '. a r.estimony to see whether it 19 conflicts with any testimony given here today. 20 And the only way we.can do t h a t' is to examine 21 upon this affidavit. 22 So, 1 cannot believe, sir, that'you have a 23 good faith belief at this time that examining this witness 24 on the affidavit he has submitted in these proceedings is i 1 M somehow itrelevant. i 

                                                                                                     'l i

l 6 I 

                                                                            ..________u-    -______i

vwoo oauvo .. z .  :- .- 5 a_ ~  ;-m w w 

                                                                                                   .s                                                                '

y .. ,,  % ny. ' ' ' 

                                                                                                                                                                                                 ?
                                                                                                                                       .e;                         ' T;
  • Nl.f. -y .

j 

                                                                                                                                         .vv y,          y I

MR. SPEKTER: I believe it is. I would note- j 2 j for the record that the only portions of the. affidavit 3 which have been submitted into evidence in direct testimony d were pages 10 and 11, I believe, .and page 13, which have 5 not even been touched upon by. counsel and which are the 6 underlying incidents which deal'with the instances of I y harassment and intimidation which - . )h a s endured 8 ' while an employee. MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter -you challenged me 30 carlier and objected on the grounds.that'I had takenthings]. II out of context. 12 I take it that when you take them out of I3 context, that is permissible; but when I do so,.that somehowj. I# is objectionable. 15 I think that if your feeling is that you get to to pick and choose among his sworn testimony, my anwser 37 is that I am supplying the context that'is required by ' {., is going through the entire evidence.- I' MR. SPEKTER: My point is that we have submitted 20 only a portion of the affidavit and testified on direct 21 from only portions of the affidavit ubich related'to the a 22 incidents of h'rassment'and a intimidation, which is the 23 limiting factor in these particular hearings.. 24 And I submit that the technical background'which 25 ( forms the bulk of the affidavit is not really proper for. m . o _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ - - - _ - - - - - - _ - - - . _ -------- ~ ------- -- - - - - - - - - ~ ~~~~ ~

(' 

                                               .                                          .,                                       s,.. v- -   w-T!z5                     .~-          3~     05          ** "-

10/12;- v h ' ' 10t' 4 1 discovery at this time. 2 MR. DAVIDSON: And if he were to be mistaken 3 in all of those concerns, impressed them with the assiduity. d that he testt:ied he did yesterday and made himself a 5 I gadfly over issues-on which he was neither qualified to l 6 speak -- on which he was mistaken - .perahsp that would 7 provide the context in which some of these : alleged instances 8 of harassment; intimidation, and. threatening took place. 9 Therefore, I say to you once again that you 30 cannot strip away that which you choose to have testimony-11 on and eliminate or thwart discovery of the context and 12 foundation, particularly when it is found'within his own 33 sworn testimony offered in these proceedings. Id Mr. Mizuno, do you have a statement? 15 MR. MIZUNO: Well, I guess.I-first would lik'e 16 to ask counsel for the Intervenor whether they intend to 37 offer at any point in the-future the remaining portions of 38 Mr. Walter's affidavit? N MR. SPEKTER: -That is a question that11 can't 20 i answer at this particular point. - 21 MR. DAVIDSON:' You are not prepared to make that 22 I commitment, are you? 23 L MR. MIZUNO: On that basis, the Staff would -- t 24 because cc usel for Intervenor is unable to make a 25 commitment at this time that they will not be using the i 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         -I i

_ . _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ~ ~ ' ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ^ ~ ' ~ ~'

5 p - 

                                                                                         ,3. . d.  .     -H/p( % Q $ 2/ g '.       .;.J:M.i-g.,
w. ;os -

FCAL 1(1/13- [. 3, ' t. 

                                                                                               ,,                N                                     1 I

remaining portions of( ) affidavit, we believe .f 2 that discovery on those portions /of the sffidavit is \ 3 proper.  ! i d In addition. e I will note that the third s j 5 j incident testified to yesterday, which which( s. ] 6 

                                                                                                     /

we heard of for the very first time yesterday,'was that 7 a person -- I believe this was Art London -- told j 8 

                                                              ,                  fhat if he had enough time to find problems,                        h I

that he had enough time to do work -- to do more work. 10 

                                                                                                        ; indicated that he. considered And{-

this to be intimidation because the problem that he was 12 re f erring to., that he identified with those which were l3 contained in his affidavit. I' The ref ore , I believe that it is entirely 

                                                                                                                            /                   N 15 proper to go into the underlying basis for                                       j to belief that -- of what these problems were and why he 17 believed them to be problems.                  And I say that without 18 saying that his affidavit on those matters should be l'

admitted. 20 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Mizuno, once again, you.have 21 made a very cogent point. And 1 can'do-no more but endorse 23 it. . 23 And that is, quite clearly, Mr.' Spekter, there 24 was testimony from the witness' direct examination that  ! 25 it was all of these concerns that he was raising with I 4 1

zmr

ca-
                          .c  :.c     . -
                                                       .;- .~ imm. '. - ~
                                                                                            '~   ~

10/14

  • 4--

41 2110 ~ - 

                               .                                                                                r l

4 I respect to technical matters that led t'o.-- and gave him i 2 i reason to understand that the' assertion made by Mr.' London l 3 was a form of harassment, intimidation and threatening for his activities. And these activities'he did say were 5 the ones mentioned in his affidavit. 6 Therefore, it is entirely proper to find out the 

           '7 basis for those concerns and their validity and to explore 8

the context.in which they. occurred. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 _ _ . 8 4 

                                                                         - ______mmm-____-_        __m_._   _-_     -

                                                                                                                                                    -~,                 e -

M fe.111b+ , M* Y 'I Y " ,I . , , _. $h " ' 

                                                                    <                                r               ,    - 1*

Q.'. ... 

                                                                                                                                                                          ?,
                                                                                                                                    . ~ . ,     n.

1 MR. MIZUNO: I believe we don't need any. 2 further argument on this point. We preserve our objections-3 on the record, d MR. SPEKTCR: .I believe that is true, 5 and we can proceed at that point for now. I will-hold off e on my request for the conference with the Judge for;right 7 now. My objection has been made, ed I think that when we 8 break for lunch, I will confer with Mr. Roisman on that. 9 MR. MIZUNO: It is now 12 o' clock. Are-10 counsel suggesting that we break now, or.that we continue? 11 THE WITNESS: Let's bt .k now. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: I would like to leave the 13 question up to the witness. Do you feel comfortable Id continuing, or would yoa like to break? 15 THE WITNESS: No, let's break. 16 

                                                                                                                                                              /              m.

s!R . DAVIDSON: Itoldyouearlier( 17 that anytime yi2 wished to break, or that ycv feel tired, 18 or you don 't u Jerstand a question, you just let me know i# and we'll accor adate you. 20 1R. MIZUNO: This is still on the record. 21 IR. DAVIDSON: Yes, it is sir. 22 1R. MIZUNO: .Now counsel -- Mr. Spekter, do 23 you want to ho.1 a conf erence call at the'beginning of 24 when we resume-sur discovery deposition.-because I woul.d like 25 to be able to e intact Mr. Treby, of the fact thst we may be 1 

                                                                                                                                                      ~'

mm f l l 

                            . q ,,                         y. . " . :    -

v - ~.

p. .. ~, 3 " *~ "
                              . . .       _.    .%            .       .    ...         + . _                      ,

22 4, I having a conference call. 2 MR. SPEKTER: Yes. 3 HR. MIZUNO: When we resume the deposition -- 4 MR. SPEKTER: If there's a concensus that 5 such a call is necessary, then we will have it at that time. 6 And.I've made that representation at this particular point. 7 MR. DAVIDSON: The question is, is there 8 a consensus? I'm not sure I understand. My view is -- 9 MR. SPEKTER : I understand your view. 10 MR. DAVIDSON: The facts are plain that this 11 is clearly within the scope of discovery deposition, albeit 12 might not be within the appropriate scope of cross, which we 13 all understand this is not an evidentiary deposition, it 14 is a discovery deposition. 15 MR. SPEKTER: Right. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: I understood Mr. Mizuno to take 17 the deposition likewise, that this was fairly relevant i'

8 inquiry from the Staff's perspective. So therefore, if there  ;

19 is a concensus on this side of the table is that no call 20 is necessary. But there has been no reason to believe ' 21 that this is not proper examination. 22 MR. SPEKTER: I might clarify that. When 23 I said concensus, I meant between Mr. Spekter and Tony 24 Roisman. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: In other words, you would like 

   .r h.

c111v3. 

                                                      'T '    '

1rh w, 

                                                                                .TJ' 1

to check with Mr. Roisman about the necessity of -a ' conf erence 2 call at this time? 3 . MR . SPEKTER: Yes. 4 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, the only thing that is 5 important here is that Mr. Mizuno wants to know'whether I 6 you are committed to that conference call or whether you're 7 going to consider it, because I believe he wants to have 

 ,                 8    Mr. Treby present.

9 MR. SPEKTER: I will let Mr..Mizuno know if 10 a conference' call will be made. 11 MR. MIZUNO: The Staff's position is that 12 unless you are going.to direct the witness not.to anewer.any 13 further questions, then we really can put this off and just 14 consider it in deposition. We have preserved our objections 15 on the record. 16 MR. SPEKTER:- That's true. I would just 17 like to confer with Mr. Roisman before we proceed any 18 further. 1 19 MR. DAVIDSON: k I think that is your perogative , j 20 Mr. Spekter. 21 MR. SPEKTER: Thank~you.

  • 1 22 MR. MIZUNO: We may. break now.

23 MR. DAV1DSON: Break, please.- , 24 i (Whereupon, at 12:02 p.m., the teking of the  ; a 25 deposition was recessed, to reconvene this same day.) i e l l l __- __- ..- D

U- . [. MQ@i 7E  % v-; ~!E 

                                                  .,r.

4

c 12-1 1 AFTERNOON SESSION 2

(1:05 p.m.) 3 Whereupon, 

                                                        -r 4

5 resumed the stand and, having been previously duly sworn, 6 was examined and testified further as follows: 7 MR. 3PEKTER: If: we are ready.to go back'on, 8 I would.make a brief statement for the record. 9 Prior to our recessing for' lunch, I had ' 10 mentioned that we perhaps were going-to have a conference 11 call with Judge Bloch. At this time, I;have' spoken with 12 Mr. Roisman. We have decided not to go ahead with'the 13 conference call. Id All parties have noted their objections.on 15 the record, and we will proceed with the' deposition and to with counsel's questioning, pursuant to the affidavit. 17 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you, Mr. Spekter. 18 I would only add that you and'I' spoke also 19 during the break, and I indicated to you that while I 20 thought I had pretty well elaborated upon my' bases for 21 asserting that the matter in discovery was relevant and 22 pertinent, that I might have omitted to state 1 that.those. 23 were:the bases for my good-faith belief as to the 24 propriety of this question, and I. indicated that to you, 25 and you, I believe, indicated to me that yes, you ____:___ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ __ __________.____._._______________________________w 

                                                  ~ " { k' _[
                                                        ,      .,      ..       ._ . , _ . . .    . . .      ~      -+--=^          =~     m-        ~~       ~

4, .)my .m *

.y. _

mgc 12-2 I understood that that was my contention. .And with that 2 noted, I would only say that, thank you very much, we li 3 1 will continue with the questioning. d MR. SPEKTER: Just for the record, I would 5 note that without having mentioned it every single time. 6 1 believe we can all state that all parties to this , 7 proceeding are proceeding on good-faith belief. 8 (Telephonic interruption.) Il 9  ! MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter, thank you for 10 that statement, and I join in it. II BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                                                       /                     ~.,

12 Q ( ye have had a lencheon break 13 for about an hour, so what I would like to do, if I may, Id is ask the reporter to read back to us the exchange, that 15 6 is the question and answer, the two questions and answers, to that preceded the colloquy between Mr. Spekter and myself 4 17 with respect to the relevance of the testimony. 18 And if I could ask you, would you please I' listen carefully so that we both can get b1..k on train 1 20 here and complete that subject. 1 21 A Yes. 'i 22 (The reporter read the. record as requested.) 23 i BY MR. DAVIDSON: I 24  ! Q You have just heard the reporter read back j 25 the last questions and answers, and you will recollect. - l A 

                                                                                                                      % .S l

9 1 I 

                                                          ~
                                                         . @ .9 c; g               1         9%.           dQ"V.-  .

N ~~ ~ 

                                                                                                                                   . R ~       :,{I' T
                                                                                                                                                            -Q-116       .

4 ge-12-3 1 I think, that you used the' term " generic practices." 2 Do you recollect the use of,that term? 3 A Yes. 4 Q What did you mean by that? 5 A lt 's meant -- " generic" being just as they 6 have generic procedures on the site here. Bechtel has 7 generic home office-procedures which.they.try andfadapt 8 to each one of the individual sites ~that have the basic-9 requirements associated with them, and then they are to adapted individually f o r - e a ch site. 11 Q If'they are adapted'to each site'-- well, no -- 12 strike that. 13 I am still not sure I understandtwhat you r , 14 meanby" generic,"{ } Do you mean that there is 15 some sort of core set of procedures that Bechtel'has which 16 .are adapted for each site? 17 A True. 18 Q So that they are different from.each site, 19 they differ from site to site? 20 A Slightly. 21 Q Slightly is your characterization.! The 22 question was,-do they differ from site to site? 23 A Yes. 24 Q They do. l 25 How did you come by your. knowledge of the- 

                                                                                        . , ,   .n
                                                                                                                   .> . ,, :s    . ~ 4i .

y R. ~;.i:, . s. . - 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ~~ T .:.U6 M "~
                                                                                              ,                                          q.*.                     > ;i . .

9- 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ;a.

4 

                                                                                                                                                                                                 .a?

mge 12-4 1 so-called generic core procedures' employed by Bechtel? 2 A By working with their procedures. 3 Q Working with their procedures where? d A At San Onofre. 5 Q So then you were aware of the San Onof re 6 procedures? 7 A Correct. 

                               .                                                                      8 Q                But my question was not how did you become.

9 aware of any particular site procedures that have been 10 adapted for San Onofre. My question was, how did you 11 hecome acquainted with the generic -- that'is, the core 12 of procedures that y e *: testified Bechtel has, which they i 13 then subsequently adapt for'each particular site? 14 A We were informed that the procedures were 15 generated from the generic form of procedures. 16 Q Who gave you t h a t' information? 17 A I'm not -- I do not remember. 18 Q Do you remember theLcircumstances under 19 which you were imparted that information?- 20 A No, I do not. l 21 Q Do you.know the basis upon which that 22 individual, whom you don't recollect, obtained that 23 

                                                                                                         'information?

24 A No, I do not. 25 (Pause.) 

                                                                                                                                      ..       .-_      ...._..           . . . . . ~ .                      - - - . . - - .
   - - - - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - _ __ -                                       ._         - _ _      -    -      _           .. _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ -                    _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - - .--.---__----.L

a z.. 4 

                                   /          s                                                                                   1 ige 12-5 1             Q      f               could you turn to page-4 of 2   Disc F-6, and I would like to call your attention to the-3 last line on that page and the carryover portion.of.that; d

sentence which appears on the'-l cop of page-5.which has 5 three1 additional'words, and I would like you to read'that o material, that last'line and the' carryover to.page 5, 7 to yourself and look up at me when you are completed. 8 (The witness complies.). A I have read'it. 10 Q And that statement refers'to your, quote, 11 

                  " experience   of the way functional' testing is performed 12 at other nuclear plants " close quote?

13 A Right. Id Q And on what do you base that statement,-sir? 15 A Previous experience at San Onofre Nuclear 16 Power Plant, Bellefonte Nuclear Power Plant, and also at 17 Palo Verde Nuclear Power-Plant. 

                                                                                                                                 .)

IB Q Were you employed at the Palo Verde Nuclear l' Plant? 20 A No, I was not. 21 Q Did you perform any functional tes' ting at 22 ~ the Palo Verde Nuclear Power. Plant? 23 A No, I did not. 24 Q When you were at the Bellefonte Nuclear 25 Power Plant, which is owned.by the TVA -- I think you just.

W * 'yg; 

                         .         e;..   '.% f ' ?..            i M.-a ?M'-Q                 .
                                                                                                                 .47,%)g 119?Q -
                                                                             .  . a f..    .. .      . .-                  .
                                                                               . ga.. .
                                              . .g e                -4 4-   ..                                                 4 mgc 12-6        1 made reference to it          --

your job was as an assistant steam 2 generator operator..was it not?. i i 3 A Correct. d Q When you say "other. nuclear plants," do-you 5 mean any other than the two at which you worked?: ' 6 A Yes, but I'm afraid that it may be hearsay-7 or insinuated as hearsay. 

      .                      8           q              Why do you think that?                                                  '

9 A There was information told to me by-fellow 10 employees. I 11 Q Let me ask you this: What employees imparted 12 such information to you? 13 i A I do not remember at this time. Id 1 Q And what is the information they impar:ed to ' 15 you? 16 A That other power plants did not allow their 17 maintenance or craft personnel to perform: the.testic'. 18 Q And do you-know the basts on which the made 19 those statements? 20 A On their previous experience. 21 i Q Do you know what that experience vas? E A 1-do not remember at this time. 23 Did you at any time know? Q 24 A I may have. 25 And you may not have? Q w . l' e-____-_-___. -_- 

      .., . . ,.m
                                                              ~. rw ,;.~            e    -19Wy      .y
                                                                                                       ' 120
                                                                                                             ~
                                                                                                               ~j '

4 e 12-7 1 A I imagine I knew some of their experience. 2 Q Well, would these individuals who made these 3 statements to you be any, the same as, or any of the people 4 we've already identified as having had such discussions 5 with you? That would be Messrs. McDowell, Black, and 6 Parker. 1 I 7 A If I cannot remember their names, how can I 8 tell you whether it would be any of those people? 9 Q I thought that might jog your recollection. 

              'O                                        A       No.

11 Q If you were to look at a list of the persennel 12 with whom you worked during the time you were at Comanche 13 Peak, do you think that that might call back to you the 14 names of the individuals you had in mind? 15 A No, I do not. 16 Q If you looked at the table of organization 17 of the TUGC0 Start-up Group and the Electrical Test Group 18 to which you were assigned during that period, do you think 1 19 maybe that would call back to you the names of the 20 individuals with whom you had these conversations? 21 A No, I do not. 22 Q And my statement to you about these other 23 individuals who allegedly gave you information about the 24 practices in other plants, you don't think that they may 25 have also covered this issue? 

       . .p   -A         ". r.       f?W                 3'i '     -'       W+%  -

i? y. t 

                                                         .a+-+                              . .'70, r

mge 12-8 1 MR. SPEKTER: Asked and answered. 2 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 1 3 Q In other words, I asked you'about d Mr. McDowell and Mr. Parker and Mr. Black, and you said 5 that they had given you some information at'some time in i 6 the past.about what they believed to be the practice in j 7 the industry. And I asked you whether this was also a. I 

     .                  a      topic of others' conversations, namely'a function of l

9 testing. l 10 A It may have been. End 12 11 12 ~ l.i 13 14 15 16 17 18 I 

                                                                                                                 'l 19                                                                                            I 20 21                                                                                            l s

22 i 23 ) 24  ! 1 25 l 

                    *                                                 *-           . ,, e ene    ,e, e

                     . , , . , . , csv1r w     4 -e     -       >                    -    -

M< 3 . s..- -- y - 

                                                                                     ~       -

122 1-sn-1 1 i 4 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: (Resuming) 

                                      ^

2 q '}wouldyou turn.to page five:of your 3 affidavit? d A (Witness complying) ' 5 Q I call your attention.in-the middle of-the-6 -3 page to a phrase, "In~the normal scheme of tusting." Do 7 you see it? 8 A Yes. 9-Q What do you mean by the normal scheme'of 10 testing? 11 A I mean in the normal procedure for testing. 12 Q What normal procedure for testing? 13 A A test has_sp'ecific requirements;and in order Id to conduct that test, that would be normal ~ scheme of-15 conducting that test. 16 Q On what do you base your assertion that it'is-17 9 normal as. opposed to a typical or abnormal? l 1 18 A i I am going to' read the phrase here to ~see what ) I' context it is in. 20 Please do. Q i 21 A (Witness reviewing document.) 22 All right. The sentence that it is. enclosed in- l 23 specifies under normal ~ scheme of testing, craft personnel-24 

                   . would carry out the physical testing under the direct                       'l
                                                                                                .:- l
        ' 25 supervision of the STE who is present in the field at the                        I l

l l I 

                                                 ~

a . 

                           ...sQ           ' -

k .; };c N 5 9 & .E. . x.I ^ u.. {Q*a[_ . . . . . . . . r23 

                                                         . f. ' ~ gxy
                                                                           - ^'

yp"' .. - - 13-2 - l time of testing. That is consistent with my previous l 2 experience and was told to me by other system engineers 3 also and it is consistent with the beliefs of the plant , d I here but yet it is not performed in that way. ' Upper i a 5 level management says that you should do t h i s ', but when it l ' 6 gets down to the field level.it actually does not. happen.  ! 7 Q You say "your experience." Do you mean your 8 experience at' San Onofre? 9 'f A - Yes. 10 l Q Where you performed the function of an STE7 1 11 A Correct. 1 12 Q When you say the experience'of fellon workers, 13 to what experience do you refer? 14 A. To their experier-- at other. plant sites that 15 they have worked at. i 16 Q To what workers do you refer to, sir? A I do not remember. 18 Q What particular plant experiences did they j 19 relate to you that gave you reason to believe that you q 20 could conclude that there was a normal. scheme as you have li 21 described here? i 22 A 1 do not remember the exact plant sites at this ' 3 time. I do know that Palo Verde is another one of the 24 plant sites which craft personnel do not perform testing. i 25 Q How do you know that, sir? . 

    ~.                                                                                  .

i I 

                         . : .g        n .pq q :-        o 4 . ' ., - .. ~u.     - . . . . . m. :,+% -6       ., 4 :   ,
                                                                                                                .    . r.
                                                                                                        '124-   -+
                                                                                                                         ?

I A By speaking with' personnel on that site and-2 from that site. 3 Q When you say speaking with personnel from that d site, are these people with whom you became acquainted at 5 San Onofre? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Were they~ discussions that you.had with'them 8 held while you were employed at San Onofre? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Did you visit the Palo' Verde site? 

                                 -11                  A   No, I have'not.

12 Q Did you ever observe any of the procedures.in 13 practice at the Palo Verde site? Id A No, I did not. 15 Q When you say'that that is the normal. scheme-of 16 testing consistent with the procedures at Comance Peak, what 17 do you mean? 18 A It is stated by upper level management;that 19 testing shall be performed under the supervision of the'STE. . 20 but yet under several' cases the STE is not presentiduring the 21 testing and in some cases he may not even be on 'the: site 22 during the testing. If -- 23 Q When~you say -- I am sorry. 24 A' If you go into the paragraph above that, it 25 specifies a reference in ANSI 45.2.6 which automatically h- 

                                                                                    ~
                                                                                          ~

y .; c  ;;g, Q. - ' ' Is.Q[g; - 

                                                                                                                  ;f         .h 5sj Q- Q me                                  .1 .',

13 4 p.~ . y 4 I states that there are certain qualificat' ions for personnel , 2 who perform testing which craft personnel are not eligible ' 3 for in the fact that-they do not have the background or 4 the knowledge' level for it. 5 Q When you declared here that it was " stated i 6 by upper level management," what did you mean? < 7 A I mean that I would bring problems to upper level 8 management saying that STE's are not out in the field with. l 9 the craft performing the test and the upper level management 10 would'say, "Well, they should be." 11 Q Would?you identify who in upper _ imrel management 12 made chese statements, when, where and on what basis? 13 A The person was Dick Camp-and Art London and Id possibly Tom Miller'was involved in that:and the situation 15 is identified or outlined in the affidavit of an STE who was I 16 not present during the re-testing or functioning of an alarm 17 circuit a'd during tnat re-t sting and.functiortng cables i i 18 or wires ere actually lifte and rolled in ords* -to cause 89 the alare to function without the approval of'tb STE 1 20 because o the fact that the STE was not'there aed thereby 21 he had nc witnessed any portion of the testing. I brought 22 it up to .rt London's attentoon as.to who the STE was and -! 23 the exact test documentation'that was affected. 24 Q So that Dick Cam', Art London and Tor:diller 25 are the p ople to whom you r fer when you talk about-upper-e ' ~ _ _ _ - . _ _ . - - _ . - . - - - _ - _ _ _ . _ - - _ . _ 

                        .,3                                       , , . 744,.~ .wci. . -       -&                  +                       -+.- %                    -9 :
                                                                                                                                                                                                          '-' y 126'
   'S 4

I level management? 2 A Correct.- 3 Q It would be your testimony that those three d individuals concurred in.your view as to.what,the normal 5 scheme of testing is and should be? 6 A Those three individuals concurred that: the STE 7 should have been out-during that performance of the testing 8 and.they also concurred that-the STE should be ~ out in the 9 field with the craft personnel during the performance of to functional testing which this did fall into the' category of 11 functional testing. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: Would the reporter please read 

                                                                                                                                 /                                N 13                       back the question?- I think you will',                                                           ,that Id                       wasn't responsive to my question.                               ~~                           ~

15 (Whereupon, the reporter read back the previous 16 question.) 17 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Reporter, it may help when 18 we received an unresponsive answer and I ask.you to re-read-19 the question to omit repeating the unresponsive answer but 20 merely'to repeat the question so that we can receive the 21 answer to that particular question. I will rest'te a the 22 question. 23 MR..SPEKTER: I would request that the answer be 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       .{

i 24 read, too, to determine whether it is, in fact, unresponsive l 25 I believe in that instance the answer was responsive but I l 

 '                                                                                                                                                                                                                       s i

q' ' . , c. J- .Q'WL47 ' ,W ~ ~ % ~ ~ j 

                                                                              . . . . .            ..        .. 127           <1 13-6                                                                         gc                                              !

J l I I 1 won't have any opposition to his' answering.it again. ) 2 '! BY MR. DAVIDSON: (Resuming) f 3 Q. - is it your testimony._that eachlof' 

                                 '                                   /

those three individuals agreed with you that.or concurred 5 with you 't h a t the normal scheme of testing is as you. 4 6 describe it'in that one' sentence. namely that craft personnel ~ I will carry out the physical testing under the direct l. 

  .                              8                                                                                       I:

supervision of an STE who is present.in the. field.'at the -o time of the testing, that they agreed that that was the; 10 normal scheme of testing in the nuclear industry?. I A 'Yes, as identified in that one page of the , I. 12 

                                    - affidavit.                                                                         !

13 Q No, sir. That is-not my answer, not ~as to what. l I' you were searching -- I am sorry, just as to what is the 15 normal scheme of testing. 16 A 1 do not know. I_did not ask them what the normal II industry standard was. Is Then they'didn't have a chance to. concur if.you 

                                                                                                           ~

Q l' didn't ask them what their opinion was, did they?- 20 A Okay. 1.do not know. 21 MR. SPEKTER:. I believe he testified -- 22 MR. DAVIDSON: No. Counsel.is trying to 23 instruct the witness as to how to be.responsivo. 'You hav'ei 24 tried it.. I have tried it. Neither. of us have been 25 particularly successful. The question was, did-they concur x 1 L.----------.---._-..__:- 

  ,,- 4 w
                     .,1    ._
                                    .. j ..         .1 ..    ,                :
                                                                       . . r . ; . , ,._ 3 .;               . . .

I'28 ' 4 i1 in-your view that this was the normal schemefof testing.' f ~% 2 This'is simple English, )and 1you'are going-to'be. 3 here aflong time if you'are.not responsive to these questions , d THE WITNESS: I do not'know.  ! 

         .5                      BY MR.;DAVIDSON:. '(Resuming).

6 Q All right.. So'the. answer is they did not, concur. 7 in your statement? 

          '8             A      The answer is I do not know.

9 Q Did you askLthem?- 10 A No, I did not. 11 } So, thereforepgyou have no basis for' suggesting. Q l 12 that they would concur. 13 A I misunderstand the question. Are we t a k'i n g 

                                                                                                   ^
                                                                                                                      'j la the question with reference to this one incident or are we 15 taking the question with reference to all other nuclear, l-       16    power plaits? -

1 17 Q All right. Th a t . i s la legitimate question. 18 You see to be intermixing in here. A 

                                                          ,.          -5 19             Q       Not at all. You see,                   I you have_tried 20 to clothe your rather limited experience in the industry 21 with the axperience of others that you say has~been imparted-22     to you.      You have tried to bolster and verify your responses 23 by resort to other people's knowledge'and not your own.

2a MR. SPEKTER: I object to counsel's' posturing of-25 the record. 1 sh. i (4 l k' j

e .w .. .WP y , ,W .,v ,{ . 

                                                                         .     ~~~ ~ g :          .
                                                                                                         .1, g.i 119 '

( 13-8 n 1 MR.JDAVIDSON: I am sorry. I am going to explain 2 the question because.he asked for clarification and I am going to explain it to him. .I don't him to ever'think' d 

                      -that I am asking any questions that he doesn't understand.

5 1 am going to explain it. 6 BY MR. DAVIDSON: (Resuming) 7 Q That is what you have attempted to do. Throughou: 8 your affidavit you have made declarations about industry, 9 ' 

                                                                                                      ~

standards, industry practices, practices;at other nuclear-10 sites and here is'another instance of that.. Here.youchave I' declared what the. normal scheme of~ testing is xn the industry. 12 namely that craft personnel will carry out the physical test-13 ing under the direct supervision of an STE who is-present in 14 the field at the time of testing. That is what you'have 15 declared. 16 Now I asked you what your basis for that'was 17 and you said, "Well, it is my experience at' San Onofre." 18 All right, we have heard that. 19 < I said, "Is there any other basis?" You'said,  ; o "Well, that is'what I was told by upper management." So.then 21 we find out who the upper management who said that this was i 22 \ the normal scheme of testing. Then you told us that that w a s , . !. 3 Dick Camp. Art London and. Tom Miller. So I asked you whether 1 24 - ii' t they concurred in your view that this war'the normal scheme 'i 25 of the industry at which point you gave me a relevant i 

 ~

l 1 t I i l l l l

  • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . __________________a
                                                                ..s e : - - m .u ? ~ - ,          ,w.      e w. .         .u    .
                                                                                                                                   ,.y        ,,

4, * -Q . + . 130-4 1 response that was unresponsive to the question asked. So 2 3 we repeated it to you and what we found out is after we repeated it to you'that you..in point of fact, never made-l that statement to them or sought their advice on tha t - 5 6' or sought their concurrence.in your opinion. 7 Therefore,'what we determined was that, in' fact, 8 at-least whether they' hold that. opinion or.not,'they-did;not 9 impart that to you and that was-th'e question. 10 A I~did confide with-them and question'them as to the usage of STE being present in the field of functional 11 testing at this. site. 12 13 Q You asked them about this one particular incident, le that is what you brought up to them and that is something that we are going to get.into. 15 16 A Incidents similar to this in general. LWe went into functional t e s t i".g . I said functional testing as a 17 whole, not functionaA testing, one incident. 9 18 I Q I see. 19 20 A They specified functional testing is to be . super 71 sed by the STE. 21 ' ' 22 Q Did they indicate to you how that supervision could be undertaken? 23 A 2A It would have to be undertaken with the STE 25 present in the field during the time of the testing. Q Would that individual have to be actually 

                                           " ;5:-          .;             9;        yw.       ,
- a m;. _
                                                                                                                         .g;~.  ;     ygg ?;

_ ._ _ _ ; 131-13-10 s .w , p' ': , - I 

                                                                     . witnessing the testing bh looking over the shoulder of the 2

craft person? ' 3 A Yes. ^ d Q That is their view? 5 A Yes. 6 Q If they testified that that is not- their view,. l 7 they would be mistaken? 1 

                          .                                      8           A           I would believe so.                                                                                        !

Q In other words, you:are right and the three of- , 10 them are wrong if they.. state that? 11 - MR. SPEKTER: Objection. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: T.think that is-a fair question. 13 MR. SPEKTER: I don't. Id 1 MR. DAVIDSON: If he wants --  ; 15 MR. SPEKTER: He can't testify to what: their I 16 statements will be or what his conclusions to'their 17 statements will be. 18 MR. DAVIDSON: I think he can' testify-that if I' they don't confirm what he now has testified to that they 20 must be mistaken, either that or'he is mistaken. I 21 THE WITNE5,: I believe that there 'is eve'n 22 ~ possibilities of' start-up' memos which were generated 23 indicating that system test engineers will be present' 24 during functionalitesting. 25 

                                                                                       'BY MR. DAVIDSON:         (Resuming) h

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . = _ _ _ _ _ . _ ___ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ ._. _ _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _

e . u., . ms ,3 .. - w n.

3 - -

132 1 

                                                                                  ?

I Q Have you seen those start-up memos? 2 A Yes. I have. l 3 Q Do you have copies of those start-up memos? d A No, I do not. S 6 ws 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 , 1 l 20 i 21 22 23 1 24 25 l f _ ._ j 

                                              ., Q       ;

sa. [ ~ LQ-M . '%T i ,  ;~ Y ~M 

                                                 . , - .                   _ . . . . . .         -.   .                  133 fc141b1-           e;-

1 BY.MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q (~~- . turn to page 6 of your' affidavit. 3 And I want you to read, to yourself, the sentence that a starts with -- only but one word on page 6 and. carries over -; 5 to page.7 and~ concludes the paragraph. I o And when'you have completed that, would'you _ 7 look1up at met i 8 (Witness peruses document.) } 9 A Okay. 10 Q That sentence reads."This practicc is-11 also not consistent with my expe11ence.in tha industry, 12 where it is preferred to have one'STE responsible for-13 an entire system." t 14 When-you s t a t e , "with my experience'in the 15 industry, where.it is preferred", to what 49 you refer? 16 What is the basis for your statement? 17 (Pause.) I t-t 18 A I would like-to have you repeat the question- 1 19 one more time. l. 20 Q The question was what was your' basis for 21 the statement that you made there? - 22 A For the entire statement,' including the R 1 j 23 starting ~from "this practice is also not~ consistent'with- 

                                                                                                                                     'l 24      my experience in the industry?"'                                                     '

25 Q Well, what'I'm really asking.about is what i i 

                                          . . n . :.. .n              ~           g a           v. ',
                                                                                          '134 i2 4

1 experience, in i the industry, what preference are we talking, 2 about? 3 A Previous-. nuclear. power' plant experience,- 

               -4    which has already been documented and information'obtained 5    from fellow workers.

6 Q And when you say "where it'is preferred" do-7 you mean that it's not consistently done, based on your 8 experience elsewhere? 9-(Pause.) 10 MR. DAVIDSON: Inould like.the record to 11 indicate that t'here is extensive l pausing between the: 12 questions and the answers. 13 MR. SPEKTER: I doubt that's. appropriate-14 representation at all. 15 MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                                             ~

I think it is, in view of the 16 fact that I've heard, on several occasions, Mr. Spekter,  ; 17 you complain about the length of this examination. It would 18 be a great deal quicker, if we had one responsive answer  ! 19 and we didn't have these really rather lengthy pauses between 20 the question and the answer. 21 I don't want to, in any way, inhibit the 22 witness from thinking about his responses, butfif he has' l 23 to concoct a response while he's here we're going to take j 24 a long time to get the answers that he needs. 25 MR. SPEKTER: l I object.to that characterization. l 4 

                                                                                                          .I k

8 l r, __ _.-________________U

9 ,3 :yrv~;qqp 3 

                           .. -                                                                            1 135 fc141b3 c .;

b. 1 MR. DAVIDSON: Do you have an answer for~us?- 2 THE WITNESS: Do you want to repeat the l 

              .3    question again?                                                                     .i  '

d MR. DAVIDSON: I'm going to start over je - ~ 5 again and we'll repeat these questicas one by'one ( , 6 and there is no possibility.that we'will. leave this room 7 until you answer all the questions.that are appropriat'e i B or relevant to this discovery examination,. 5 9 MR. SPEKTER:- 1 object. .Counselsis badgering _l' 10 the witnese and I request that he not do so. The client 11 1s making a good faith attempt at answering the' question. 12 If he does not' understand, he is' stating ~that he'does.not 13 understand and'I would request that counsel be indulgent: id in his request'that ha be made aware of what : exactly the 

                                                                                                         -1 15   questions are?

{ 16 MR. DAVIDSON: I am sorry if I did not appear j 17 to be indulgent to I' ! the witness.and I.certainly will try to be' { 18 I now and in the future. And.at any time, Mr. Spekter, if you d 19 feel that I'm not being so, or you-feel.that the witness 20 is in any way not clear or does not understand the-questions,  ; i 21 feel free to voice'that view and help:me explain it.to him. 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q You did' read'the sentence'to-which I gatherJ l e 2d i you refer, didyounot,(~ - - 25 /  !' A Yas,.I did. s l ' i i i s. 

                                   , , _         .,..,,.y   a;,   -

x- , .-- - - 

                                                                                                    ~n          ,      .
  • 136 5'-

Ib4-4 1 Q And that is a sentence in your affidavit, 2 to which you're.already sworn? 3 A Correct. d Q Now, you made a statement relative to the 5 practice that is the subject of this sentence, that it is 6 -- and it's a practice apparently of the one you observed: 7 while employed at Comanche Peak. And you say "This is 8 also not consistent with my- experienc e in the industry." 9 And my question is, what experience-do you 10 refer to? 11 A Previous nuclear power experience. 12 Q -And that previous power experienceLas the 

                                                                       ~

13 start up engineer was gained at'the San.Onofre plant? 14 4 A Correct. 

                                                                                                                               ]

15 Q And you say "where it is preferred" is the to next phrase, is that not right? 

                                                                                                                             't 17 A          Yes.                                                 )

18 Q And you say "where it is' preferred" and you l 19 mean that there is a preference for a different procedure 20 at San Onofre? 21  ! A Yes. 22 Q But when you say there was a preference,-you-23 mean that it was not always adhered to? i l 24 (Pause.) l 25 A No,~it was always. adhered to. l l' , 4 e 

        ' 4" 7.py .             .,  ... L        '
                                                       >'        e.         . c;? .:V --je.~a3 W y y ~,,    -
s. ,e .-
                                                                                                -Q-
                                                                                              - . e. 13 7
       .fc141b5                                                    .        -

T1-e i Q Well, then what did you mean by "where it 2 is preferred?" 3 A Well, San Onofre has -- let's take the d definition of STE . System. Test Engineer, which means he 5 is in charge of a system. And at San Onofre you had one 6 STE in charge of a system.' Nobody else could work in'that 7 system.without that STE's approval. 8 At Comanche Peak that is not the case. 9 Several people can work within the system of another STE 10 without his knowledge. It has been done.so several times 31 and thereby forcing the condition that the STE loses'. 12 knowledge of where his system is at the time or the 13 ' condition of his system. Id Q Is there a responsibility, of those'.STEs 15 i to coordinate with others? l 16 A There is a responsibility, but'it~is not 17 adhered to. 1 18 Q But if it is not adhered to, that would be l' because the people involved are not performing the 20 i responsibility posed upon them? l 21 A It is because management is not. enforcing ^ 22 the people involved to adhere to it, l l 23 l Q When you say management is not enforcing it. L 2d what do you mean? 25 A Supervisory persennel. . .j s ___ _m.___. __.

b6 > 138 J 

                                                                                               .f 1

Q On what dotyou base thit statement? 2 A On the fact that-several times-the incidents. 3 ver6 brought up to supervisory personnel, that somebody else d is working within somebody else's system without the other 5 person's knowledge. 6 Q 'Did you bring up such. situation? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Are they mentioned in your affidavit? 9 A 'Yes, the aux relay rack, which I belteve.is' 10 referenced as a prime example, 11 l Q Wel, sir. I'we read-this affidavit and what 12 you refer to is the' fact that it is a permanent practice l 13 for others to work-on that, but it says nothing about:whether Id or not people fie,1ded their responsibility to coordinate with 15 others, which you told us is part of the job ~ requirement. 16 So I take it that it isn't mentioned here. .] 17 or are we going to have one of these debates,:as to.what you 18 think is insinuated? 

                                                                                                           ')

19 i (Pause.)

  • 20 A .I would have Co read over the proced'ure 21 again to see if it is mentioned in there or not. You are.

22 requiring me to remember, word for word, the. affidavit.from- j 23 one minute to the other. 'l 24 

                      .Q       1 am not requiring you to remember it word 25                                                                                                     '!'

for word from one minutt to the'other. I merely point out-1 5J i _.._mm . _ . . _ _ _ . -' 

                                                                                                 ,n
                      . .w x.        .

v- m . .~ ., ? 

                                                                                                        ;i
                          . g-                    -

u,_ Q.p:. 7 g: s= 139 

    -141b7
                                /        N I

toyou( ' pthis'is your sworn testimony. This is 2 /. supposed to be your testimony.and your statement. And you' 1 i 3 stated that you swore to'it. d Therefore, there is somewhat of'a presumption-j,, 5 here that you are at.least familiar with it. f 

                 -6                                                                              .: !

A I am. l 7 Q And it's contents. Why don't you read'the , paragraph here and see if you mention'any' incidents where 

                                                                                 ..        .     .Ii you brought:to the attention of'managemen't<the' failure of to an STE to coordinate with his colleagues with respect'to~ the 11 system, 3

end14 12 13 14 i i 15 16 17 18 19 q, 20 4 21 22 23 24 , 1 25 i i _ - . . . _ _ _ - __--___ = _:__. a

Q ,, r -w of .

- - = '

5-4 I (Witness perusing.a document per' instructions 2 from Counsel Davidson.) 3 MR. DAVIDSON: I t h' ink'. we have to go back d on the r e c. o r d . You.had some six or seven minutes to 5 discuss that paragraph. 4-6 MR. SPEV*ER: We have had three-' minutes. 7 MR. DAVILSON: .I'm sorry. 8 BY MR. DAVIDSON: Q have you reviewed that 10 paragraph? II A May we'have the question repeated one time?- 12 r ~ Q , I would be able to read to -C. . 

                                                                                                                                                -)

13 you the question.-- Id Mr. Reoprter would you read back the' 15 question, please? 16 (The reporter read the record:as requested.) 17 THE WITNESS: No. 18 BY MR. DAVIDSON. W Q It is not there? i 20  ! A No, it is not there. 21 g i , Q do you know__ the professional v - 22 background and qualifications of Dick Camph. { 23 A No, I do not. 1 24 Q Do you know whether he is a graduate-25 1 engineer? 4 0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _[___.__ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

15j ec2 : 141 I A 'No, I do not. 2 3-Q Do you believe'him to be? 3 MR. SPEKTER: Objection.' Asked ~and d a n s we r'e d . -He stated he doesn't know. 5 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, I would~like to get his? 6 3,ig,f, ,l-7 MR. SPEKTER- I think his belief is , 8 irrelevant. He has answered the question. He: doesn ' thknow. MR. DAVIDSON: It is a. discovery depdsition. 10 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 33 What is your belief? 

                                                        ~

Q 

                  '2 A         I'm act sure'--

13 ' Q What is it you.are not sure ' of ?: - I' I' A He'could possibly hold that position.without-[ II an engineering degree, and maybe he d'oes have'an ~ 

                                                                                                 - l-16                                                                                  i.

engineering degree. I don't know,  ! 17  ! Q Do you know his professional background as 18 opposed to his education credentials?-  : J I' A No, I do not. 1 20 1 Q Do.you know whether.he has been employed 1 21 in the nuclear power indsutry at projects other than-22 Comanche Peak? A No, I do not. 24 'l Q Do you know~the educational errdentials, l l 25 of Tom Miller? - 1 

                                                                                          +

'k. 

                                                                                                            'l

_ =_-- 

    . 1:

142 4 I A No, I do not. 2 

                           -Q       Do  you know whether he hastbeen employed 3

in the nsclear industry prior,to his employment engagement a at Comanche-Peak? 5 A NO, I do not, b 

                         .Q        Do you know his professional experience?

7 A Outside of Comanche Peak, no,.I do not. 8 . . Q Have you ever asked Mr.. Camp what-his 9 background was? , 10' A No, I did: not. 11 

                          'Q       In these conversations you were having 12 with him with respect to your views a, s to?the proper.

procedures and his views, did you ever ask.htm on'what he la based his opinions? 15 A No, I didnot. 16 Q May I ask you to respond-to the same 

          ;7 questions with respect to Mr. Mi l.l e r .

18 A No, I did not. 19 (s Q Yoa never asked him? 20 A I would'like to bring'up t h'a t the -- well -- 21  : Q You don't have to listen to your counsel 22 when he tries to s top you? 23 A I didn't even see *the counrel. 'The point-I 24 in fact was no, I was thinking of something, but I wish 25 not to bring it up right now. 1 m I F.

jon4- . , 143 .; Q Well, what were.you thinking? 2 -! A 1 don't even remember now since the argument .  ! 3  ! started. d l Q What argument? 5 A Well, your objection. It automatically 6 confuses or breaks my concentration, with the bickering.1 7 Q I don't know what'you are referring to. 8 B; rkering. Was there bickering,~ sir? 9 r No gr . do you know -- if you want' 10 , to suggest that'there was bickering. your counsel said II nothing other than he~movedI h'i s han'd to shush you. And-I . 12 just pointed out that I didn't think'it was proper 'and to 7 I3 4 cut it out now. Do you characterize that as. bickering? 14 MR. SPEKTER: I note that:I did not. 15 move my hand.co shush him in any way. , 16 MR. DAVIDSON: Unfortunately the record 

          'I cannot reflect your hand movement, so I would accept'that.

18 Maybe that.is my characterization, but a hand movement-I' I certainly perceived. 20 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 21 Q In any event, did you ask Mr. Miller about 22 his professional background or his qualifications? 23 A No, I did not. d 24 Q Would your conversations with Mr. Lukhn -- . 25 well, I will strike that. 5

ni;m t> 3 ,- Jl 144. ql 1 t i 

                   'I Do you know the educational background of                     ~j
    '               2 H

Mr.HLuken? 3 i "A No,LI do not. 4 Q- Do youtknow what hisEprofessional-5 . qualifications and ex'eriencelare? p s - 

                                     =A      No, I do'not.-                          ,

7 Q. Do you know whether he has-been-emp1oyedl 

                                                                                      ~

in the nuclear power industry. prior to his current: 

                   '                    ^

engagement as a supervisor of?yourslat-Comanche Peak?' 10 fMR . SPEKTER: Asked and Snswered. 11 MR. DAVIUSON: ,No, not wit'h respect to Mr. Luken. 13 MR. SPEKTER: He has answered that he 14 doesn't know his background-in any way, shape, or form. 15 .l BY.MR. DAVIDSON: 16 Q In conversations you.had.with Mr. Luken 17 when you express your concerns. based on your experience ' 18 at Comanche Peak, did you ask him what his experience was?' 19 A No. I did not. 20 Q Do you know the educational credentials of 21 a c John McDowell? 22 A No,-I do not. 23 Q- Do you know the professional-experience of 'l 24 Mr. McDowell? i 25  ! A No, I do not. 

                                                                                                              'I 4

i 

                                                                                                                 .I J'

d 

 .-      ,                                                                                                        I l

o ________.___--____uu__---- __ ~1

Jon6 145 1

Q Do you know the. educational' credentials 2 of Jeff Black? ' 3 A I w6ul'd like to back up.to John-McDowell'. d k I do n o t' ' r e m e m b e r '. I must say that he did not: tell me'whacE. l 5 i bis background was for we'may not'have spoken;over previous- ' 6 job sites t h.r t . he had. I do not remember at this time. I Q Do you know the' educational credentials of. 8 Jeff-Black? (Pause.) to A I do not remember at this' time. 11 Q You knew them at-one time? 12 A' I believe so. 13 I 

                                                                                   -Q           Do you know his professional. experience?

Id (Pause.) 15 A I know some of his professional experience. to Q Would you please tell u- what you ~ k n o w .. o f II Mr. Black's ofessional experience?c 3 18 l A I know that Mr. Black d I come from San 19 Onofre Nucle Power Plant. 1 20 Q Did you know him at tha>- plant? '! 21 A Briefly. I 22 s Q Do you know whether he usLemployedLat any ' 

                                                                                                                                                           -l 23 other plant
sides San Onof re?

4! If 24 3 A I.do not know,  ?- 25 , 1 l Q Do you.know the educati aal'b'ackground of. l t l II l ' 

                                                                                                                            --                     .!Ii e                                   -

i 4 4 

        ,                                                                                                                                                                                      146:

4- 

                                                                                                                                                                                                           -g I

Mr. Parker? Dan Parker? 

                                          '2 A

I do know that-he'also-came'from San Ono'fre 3 Nuclear Power Plant. Q -Did you know him.at San Onofre? 5 A No. 6 Q How did you learn t h a t lue had been at San 

                                                                                 'Onofre?

8 A~ When I say that I'did.not.know'him. once- 

                                                                                 .he came to Comanche Peak it was brought up that_he.had to worked at San Onofre. You have got to~see that I was II working different shifts.

So-our. interaction'there could 12 have been -- I might have recognized.him by sight. but as I3 far as knowing him, no. 14 Q Do you know the educational background of 15 Ivan Vogelsang? 16 A No, I do not. 1 II .I Q Do you know whether'he is a graduate 18 engineer? 10 A No, I do not. 20 .$ Q Do you know whether he has-a: degree in 21 engineering of any sort? ' 22 MR. SPEKTER: Objection. Asked'and aasvered. l 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: ' 24 i Q Do you know the postion.that Mr.. Vogelsang, 25 i had at the Comanc'he~ Peak stte? ' i 

                                                                                                                                                                                                     'l.

1 _____._..___._._.___.______.___________________.._____.________________m_____._.___j 

                                                                               . map,,-

v ---; . . . :% 

                                                                                 %+

jegg ' 

                                                                                                 . py'
                                                                                                 ~

147 1 A Mr. Vogelsang changed positions more than 2 once while I was at the Comanche Peek site. 3 i Q Name each of the positions =that~you -knew d he held while at Comanche Peak site? 5 A 1 know that he was head of engineering and 6 that he'possibly'-- he was-assistant prior to being the 7 head of engineering. 8 Q Is it your understanding that a graduate engin,eering degree is required to head up .the engineering M) group? i 11  ! A Yes, I would believe so. 12 Q Do you know the prefessiona11 experience of 13 Mr. Vogelsang? Id A . No, I do not, 15 Q Do you know whether he was employed at any 16 nuclear power plant or project prior to coming to' Comanche 37 Paak? 18 A No, I do not. 19 Q Do you know the educational qualifications 20 of Mr. Fred Powers? 21 A No, I do not.- - # 22 Q Do you know his professional experienes? 23 i No, I do not. 24 Q Do you know whether he was employed at any' 25 l nuclear power plant prior to being engaged at Comanche Peak? ie 

 - ~ . -   - - _ -     _ _ _

i 148 4 I A No, I do not. 2 MR. SPEKTER: I continually object to the 3 relevancy of the questioning, what the educational d background was, whether this wintess knew the educational 5 background is irrelevant to this particular discovery 6 proceedings concerning his background and his affidavit 7 and his allegations of harassment and intimidation. 8 And I note my obj ection for the record. MR. DAVIDSON: So noted. 10 MR. MIZUNO: The staff would have a II statement and would respond on the record to preserve our own 12 objection at this time. I3 Staff believes that that examination by Id the GAP is proper,since, has indicated that some 15 of these people were the basis for'his conclusion that to thre was an industry practice regarding specific 

          '7 procedures or practices, and that therefore it would be
          '8 proper to understand whether[              jh ad any basis for believing these witnesses as to whether they could state 20 that they were qualified to discuss with him the existence 21 of an industry          practice.

22 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you, Mr. Mizuno. 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 24 Q , I call your attention to page 2 25 of your affidavit and do you see the last incomplete t 

                          ..                              w .-
                               . .. .f;.y, _
                                       .,                                                                                  4Wr
                                                                                 ,g     ,
p j oo 10- .. - - -

149 r sentence there which I will read to you? 1 1 2 "The tendency of upper level management 3 is to relax standards" -- do you see that? , 4 A Correct. 5 Q To whom do you refer to when you say upper 6 level management? 7 A Speaking such as engineering, Ivan Vogelsang ' 8 and so on. Speaking with Dick Camp and Tom Miller. ' 9 Q Do you refer to anyone else when you say 10 upper level management aside from Ivan Vcgelsang, Dick Camp 11 and Tom Miller? 12 A I believe those would be the prime ones. 13 Q Well, who are the non prime ones? 14 A You have upper level managemen't consisting 15 also of Ken Luken and Art London. 16 Q And when you made this statement you 17 meant to refer also to Mr. Luken and Mr. London? 18 A Not necessarily. 19 Q Not necessarily? You mean you did or did 20 not mean to? ' 21 A Ken Luken and Art London are.not in a . 22 position to relax standards. 23 *~ Q So therefore you didn't mean to refer to 24 them when you said the tendency of upper level management 1 25 is to relax standards? I l i j n 6

11- 150' a i

-)

4 1 A Correct. 

                                                                                                               -. )

2 Q So that we'should cross off Ken Luken? 3 i A. Right. 4 Q And wefshould cross off Art Lcndon?' 5 A All right. 6 Q Do I understandfthe list now to be only 7 Ivan Vogelsang, Dick. Camp and Tom Miller? 8 A Correct. 9 Q And would you state;their tendency. . wha t. 10 do you mean by that? 11 Let us ask what the tendency was with 12 Mr. Vogelsang. 13 A Well, the tendency to relax standards was 14 when I identified ferroresonant' transformer problems 15 or associated type instances'to start with considering 'the I 16 implementation, the indications that all of the -- or the 17 hassle that he didn't feel that it was even just to start IB reporting one. ' 

                                                              /

19 Q Forgive me [ I don't t'hink I # 20 understood the response. Perhaps it was too technical for 21 me. ' 22 When you refer to a perceived tendency  ; 23 on the part of Mr. Vogelsang, are you saying that you' felt 24 that the way he responded to'you with respect to the 25 1 incident you earlier testified to about transf o'rmers ; is I l l i i l' l l V . 1 u___ _ -_ - _ _ - - . _ - _ . - _ _ - _. _ - - . - -- -- __ --

T '151 f jon , l I 0 that what jeu are referring to? g 2 A 9 hat I am -- let'- ask -- or you are 3 asking the question what my.istatement or what my reasoning d for-upper level' management to relax' standards. You-are 5 trying to ask me where they relax standards; is'that right?- 6 Q Not quite. You say you didn't say the I upper level management.. First of all we found out who the 8 upper level management you'are referring to is three-individuals and what I wanted to find out was I guess-to 1 maybe you are right. We should do it-by the numbers. l II i I The first thing I want to do~is.we have. n 12 ! to find out each incidence that you perceive that- - I3 Mr. Vogelsang relaxed standards and then why youLeoncluded 

                                'd l

that there was a tendency on his part, so we will have to 15 do it in two pieces. 

                                'O                                                                                                                                         i Would you please list for us each                                     I
                                'I instance or incident in which you perceived Mr. Vogelsang
                                '8 to be relaxing standards?

A Okay. One, dealing with the;ferroresonant i 20 transformer problem that there was no 5055E generated l I 21 immediately or within a short period Ef time.'It was , a 22 dragged out over a long period of-time, thereby what -- >> 23 it specifically requires that if a condition other than'a. 24 5055E must-be generated.-you have to generate that. ~But 25 it was dragged out over a considerably lengthy time. j i 

                        . . . .                                                                                                   - ~ ~ -

y  ! l l 

  -   ._-       _ _ _ _               - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _- - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -                    - _ - _ - _ _         ___=________:.

152 

                                                                                                 ? $

I Q But you are stating that a 5055E 2 was issued. 3 A Correct. d Q But not quick enough to suit you? 5 A Well, the thing was that Ivan Vogelsang 6 at.one time said that he would not generate a 5055E. I 7 actually had to force him into generating a 5055E against 8 the ferroresonance transformer problem with the insinuation that if he did not write it TUCCO engineering or TUGC0 to results was prepared to write it. 11 Q I thought that he was the head of 12 engineering, Mr. Vogelsang. 13 A He is the head of TUSI engineering. There 14 is a TUGC0 results engineering group under the TUGC0 15 management which I also dealt with during this 16 ferroresonance transformer because I had lost power in 17 persuading engineering to write this 5055E. And I used 18 them as leverage because #they reviewed the documenta tion I' and the engineer there automatically came up and said this  ! 20  ; is an engineering problem; therefore he needs to write a j 21  ;  ! 5955E on it.

  • 22 I Q To whom did you speak in TUCCO engineering?

23 A It was one of the electrical engineers.  ! 24 I do not remember his name right now.  ! I 25 Q Now, you mentioned another organization that 

                                                                                                   ,i l

l J

t si on 153 I would have issued the 5055E. What was the other organization l? 2 I A TUCCO results engineering. j 3 Q No. Didn't we just cover that? 8 A Right. I 5 Q I thought there were two organizations on l 6 site thatyou mentioned that you felt would have issued the 7 5055E if you weren't able to convince Mr. Vogelsang. 8 A No, there was just one. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: Could I have the record i 10 reread to see- whether or not he mentioned another, because I could have sworn I htiard you say that you had told , 12 Mr. Vogelsang that TUGC0 engineering and someone else would -- 13 THE WITNESS: When I specified TUCCO . I' I engineering I was saying the same thing as TUGC0 results 15 engineering and it is basicaHy the same group. 

                     'O MR. DAVIDSON:      Why don't you let me have 17 the record read and I will be clear on the point and I can IB go forward.

l' MR. SPEKTER: I think he has clarified his 20 answer. 21 MR. DAVIDSON: I am not for a moment 22 questioning the way in which the witness answered the 23 question. I think it was fine. I am merely trying to make 24 sure that I heard his answer properly. 25 (The reporter read the record as requested.) _ j .. . 

                                  .q,                                                      m.

end15

154 31 4 1 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you, Mr. Reporter. 2 e ~s You've heard the response read back to you, 3 s- 

                                       )and you've heard a reference to TUGC0 engineering d

or TUGC0 results. That is the basis upon which I thought 5 you mentioned two different organizations. But it is your 6 testimony now that TUGC0 results and TUCCO engineering are 7 one and the same organization? 8 THE WITNESS: Correct. 9 MR. SPEKTER: That was his testimony before 10 the break also. 11 MR. DAVIDSON: I think it will satisfy me 12 if I get the answer just from the witness, Mr. Spekter. 13 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 14 Q All right. Now that was one incident in which 15 you felt that Mr. Vogelsang had relaxed the so-called 16 standards. Is there any other incident in which you feel 17 that Mr. Vogelsang relaxed the standards? 18 A Not that I can remember at this time. 19 Q Is that the basis of your statement that there 20 was a tendency on the part of Mr. Vogelsang to relax standardn ? 21 (Pause.) 22 A Would you repeat the question one more time? 23 MR. DAVIDSON: If the reporter would read back 24 the question. 25 (The reporter read the record as requested.) )

f* ' ' _ ,gT 155  ; i 16pb2 

                                                                                                                                        ~i I

1 THE WITNESS: Yes. i l 2 BY MR. DAVIDSON: i 3 Q Would you tell me now about, and would'you-4 detail for me each instance or incident in which you believei 5 Mr. Camp relaxed standards? 6 (Pause.) 7 A I cannot bring any to' memory at this time. B Q- Did you have any incident or instances in 9 mind when you wrote this affidavit? ' 10 A Yes. j 11 Q This affidavit was. executed on June27th, 12 wasn't it, sir? 13 A I believe that is the date of it. Id Q And you say at that time'you had an incident 15 firmly in mind as to when you perceived that Dick Camp 16 relaxed standards; is that correct? 17 A I said that upper level management relaxed 18 standards. 19 Q Well, we've already concluded from your 20 testimony you've defined upper' level management to include 21 .Mr. Camp; is that not' correct? o 22 A Correct. { l l 23 Q Therefore I asked you whether you had an ) l 24 incident in mind at the time you executed this affidavit in  ! 

                                                                                                /'             -

25 which you perceived that Dick Camp had relaxed'ntandards. j I y . . -.  ? m 

                                                                                                               .,g                         !

4 I 

 - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ______ - __ - _                                  _  __ ._____ _           . - _   - _ _ _ _ -_ _ ______ L

156 4 . 1 A It may not have been individually with Dick. 2 Camp. It might have been a -- speaking with several people, 3 

               .such as -- okay, upper level management was making decisions 4

and was given down to the lower personnel that they were 5 making decisions'such that they might.even relax the 6 stringency of. tolerance standards.on the piping-moving 7 measurements which were done during hot functional testing. 8 where 60 percent had failure rates. 9 They. figured that they might possibly relax 10 those standards in order to get more equipment passing. 11 Q 'I don't think I understood your 12 response -- 13 A What I saying is that upper level management 14 dealing with several people. 15 Q Well, you've already identified for us whom to you mean t in this statement, and I'm just trying to find 17 out the instances on which you based your conclusion that 18 there was a tendency on the part of the people you identified 19 to relax standards. 20 Now you say that you don't recollect or you 21 don't know, or you may not mean Dick Camp. I don't kn o w'. 22 A That meant instances where I brought to 23 [ Dick Camp. Tom Miller.or.both about butt-splicing, that in i 24 the reg guide it says that butt splicing should not be 25 allowed. And the first instance that they would say would 1 I l l 1 e

157 16pb4 1 be, it says, should instead of shall and therefore they were 2  ! getting into a technical definition. 3 So, that is what I derived that they were 4 lax in technical standards. ' 5 All right. Q Let me see if I can understar.d , 6 this. Are you referring to a meeting or a discussion you 7 had with Dick Camp and Tom Miller at the same time? ' 8 A I am referring to several meetings about 9 various items throughout my employment that are so numerous to that I possibly -- it would be impossible for me to remember 11 each individual one. 12 Q We haven't yet asked you to remember each 13 individual one. So far you hcven't given us any. , hl / s What I'm asking you, , and I think 15 you have to understand, it really isn't sufficient to come l 16 in and make a broad global statement the way you have and 17 then, refuse to support it with instances. It just isn't  ! 18 acceptable testimony, it isn't proper in an affidavit. , 19 You have sworn to this, and we're entitled to I { 20 find out what the particular factual information that underlay 21 your conclusion. Now if you had no basis for the conclusion, 22 that is something we will find out. i If you had a reason for i 4 23 it, we would like to know. It is part of what discovery 24 is all about. 25 I Now you explained the situation with 6

158 J' i 

                                                                                                                                                       '4 1

Mr. Vorelsang and you gave us the incident frca.which you 

 ~

2 inferred'that he had a tendency to relax standards. And then - 3 

            .I asked;you for the incident or instances with'Mr. Camp.

4 

            -And that is where we sort of got bogged down.

5 You have now told me.that maybe Mr. Camp 6 and maybe Mr. . Miller together in conversations with you-7 exhibited this tendency and I want torfind out what those i 8 instances and conversations were. .That's all. 9 A Together and independently. i to Q Well, let's take it by the numbers. Please 11 provide me with the details and description of each incident ' 12 you can recall in which you in' conversations along with 13 Mr. Camp perceived him to be relaxing.a standard. 14 A Procedural questions of.the inadequacies of. 15 the procedures that were brought to his attention were to addressed by him as being problems but yet never, corrected. 17 Q Tell me what procedural questions you refer j 18 to? 19 A Questions concerning that an STE is allowed 20 l to perform functional testing and in the XCPEE8, which is 21 a procedure for functional testinguit makes a statement that  ! 22 though energized functional testing-is desirable at the , i 23 STE's discretion, he may perform de-energized functional a j 24 testing. ' 25  ! This problem was brought to the attention of l I e 1 4 

                .                                                                        -m 15" j 16pb6                                                                                          1 1

1 Dick Camp, Art London and Tom Miller several times on the 2 fact that you could have a circuit out in the field'that _{l 3 could actually have passed. testing'but had never been

s t

4 energized. ' 

                                                                                            -. i t 5                Q      When you say passed testing, what testing' do 6      you mean?                                                                 j l

7 A I mean it. passed the XCPEE8 procedure. I a Q And is that the procedure for prerequisite' ' i 9 testing? l' l' 10 A Yes. it is. I 11 Q Is that the procedure for preoperational' 12 testing? ' 13 A- No, it is not. ' 14 Q Do all system undergo energized--testing to- 1 15 demonstrate system availability and operability in the j 16 preoperational test program? . 17 A All systems are supposed to. b' IB Q That is the procedure as you understand it? 19 A As I indicated to Dick Camp and Tom Miller. I 20 both, there is cases which could possibly pass'through j 21 both procedures without being energize.d. functionally tested. { l 22 Q When you say both procedures.-do you'mean- { i 23 preoperational as well as prerequisite? 

                                                                                                 .l 1

24 A Yes. i 25 Q How would such a system escape the required' j 

                                                                                                  .i

y 1601 V 4 4 1 energized testing that is a part of the preoperational. f 

      -2     test program'proceduref 3                    A With the. note instilled into the'XCPEE8 4

procedure, it allows that STE to perform de-energized functional 5 testing, which means that it will not be energizedf-- .I 6 Q Not prerequisite now, we're talking 7 _preoperational. 8 A Okay, I'm leading up. It has already passed ) 9 through the prerequisite without being energized, functionally y to ' tested. Part.of the preoperational' test procedures during. 11 the writing of those procedures was.to ignore certain items 1 12 of the circuitry, such as you did not have:co check backup 13 ind1cating lights. Which means that if.they did not check ); 14 those backup indicating lights and there was a possibility. 15 also that they had failed to check them during prerequisite, to 1.e., doing the de-energized functional test you could have 17 run through both procedures without performing that energized 18 functional test. 19 Q When you say both procedures -- oh, I I 20 understand that. You mean a specific test'for the: operational 21 response of the indication lamps. - 22 i But wouldn't it be obvious during the. testing ) 23 of the component operations whether the indication lamps i 24 worked? I 25 A Wrong. J i 1 

                                                                                                                - i61'-

16pb8 1 Q .It would not -- so that if the testimony were 2 that the operation response of indication lamps is'obv'ious. , e L l 3 during tF* conduct of cortponent operations which are' verified. 4 as subsequent preoperar,ional test program, youwould-disagreef 5 with that. 6 A Correct. Bccause indication lamps"-- like I j 7 said, there is backup indication lamps. The. person operating 8 the equipment could be looking and-testing the equipment i 9 during the pre-op test in the' control room where the other- I 

                                                                                                                       .)

10 indicating lamps could be somewhere totally different out it in the plant'. 12 Q You say he could be. 13 A I'm not saying that every circuit-out there 14 has backup indication lights. 15 Q So in other words, this is just your 16 speculation that this may occur. end 16. 17 A Yes. l IB 19 1. 20 21 ' l . 22 23 1 i l 24 l 25 [ h 

                            **wes*

4

(. e ..,. .  :. 

                                                                                                                      , 1 162         .c4 L

1 c 17-1 I Q What-other incident.or incidents do you have 2 reference to in which you drew'the conclusion that 3 Mr. Camp had relaxed the standards. ' d A (No response.) 5 Q Let me strike that. I don't think we' 6 finished with this question. 7 So this was the procedural issue you raised 8 with Mr. Camp?  ! A Yes. And Tom' Miller. 10 Q And what -- well, now, we were talking about conversations you had only with Mr. Camp, remember? 12 A Do we need to repeat it again-for Tom 13 Miller, too? Id Q Of course. 15 A (Laughing.) ' to Q Well, no ( I don't think you 37 understand. If you are going to make some allegations j 18 l about what happened with people and without people,_then l' we have to do it that way. If you say you~had conversations 20 with Mr. Camp alone, then we'll ask about the.ones you ' 21 had alone. If you had conversations with Mr. Miller alone. 22 we're going to ask about the ones you had alone with 23 Mr. Miller. If you had conversations and discussions with 24 l the two of them together, we're going to ask about the ones  ! 25 you had together. 

                                                                                ~

l e 

                                                                                                                                               .i

163, 1 i age 17-2 3 A Okay. 2 I Q Because what we're trying to do is, we're i; 3 trying . to put date, place, time ~and circumstances to each-of these incidents, because your affidavit doesn't do that. 5 Instead, your affidavit just takes a big, wide paintbrush, i 1 6 one that I'n not even sure you're competent to wield, 7 and paints the whole plant.- i B MR. SPEKTER: I object to your characterization 4 of.the affidavit. Please-just ask your questions.. j) 10 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter, you interrupted. 

           "     me.

12 HR. SPEKTER: I apologize for that. 1 33 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you. 

                                                                                    .I Id MR..SPEKTER:    But I'm trying to smooth            I 15 things along. I request that we just-proceed with your 16 questions and do away with the characterizations..

17 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, you're quite right that  ! 18 1 it isn't entirely. appropriate to characterize the , ) 

                                                                                             I witness' testimony, but he locked so perplexed as to why           l'I i
                                                                                             'I 20 we were insist,ing on detail and why we wouldn't accept                    ,
                                                                                             )

21 these rather broad and global statemen'ts. And'that's  ; 22 the reason. 1 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: , r 24 , Q Do you understand that,g " 25  ! A I understand. e n ____-___-_---_m

164 4 

                             '3c 17-3                                 1             Q                 So would you tell me when this. discussion =

2 of the XCPEE8 procedure occurred with Mr. . Camp?f i 3 'A I do not"kuow t h'e ---I do-not remember the , 4 exact time. i 5 Q Well, what was the approximatestime? d 6 A The discussion occurred more than once. 7 Q When did it occur, on what' occasions? 8 A Within the last eight months. l 9 Q How often during the.last eight months? 10 (Pause.) A 11 I would -- the number of. times, I do not 'l ! 12 remember at this time. 1 13 Q It was clearly more than once? 14 A Yes. j 15 Q Was it once a month? 16 A I would say at least average. 17 Q Maybe more than that? 18 A Possibly. 19 Q So certainly no less than eight times. 20 A l's not going to say definitely. 21 Q But it's possible. < 22 A It's possible it could be ten. 23 Q , So you brought up the same question with 24 Mr. Camp on eight different occasions or about eight 25 different occasions? l

165 1 j mgc 17-4 1 'I A 1 was informed by Mr. Camp that the possibility 2 i of revising this procedure at a later date was favorable ) 3 -) and that he seen the problem, him and Tom Miller both  !, 

                                                  #                                                                           )

seen the problem, but yet they would also identify.co 5 me, " Don't just give me the problem; give me the answer 6 to the problem at the same time." 7 I would come in with the answer, and my 8 answer would automatically be too time-consuming, too drastic of a change at the time, and so forth, to Q Well, what I'm trying to get at is your 

                                                                                              ~                               l II basis for your assertion that Mr. Camp relaxed the standards.!

12 Now you're saying your brought this procedural question to l 13 him, and he said -- and it's your testimony now on the Id first occasion that he said, "Well, there may be a problem 15 i there." Is that your testimony? i 16 l A Correct. 

                                                                                                                              )

I7 Q And he said, "Why don't you write me up the I8 problem and the solution?" I' A Correct. l 20 Q He asked you to propose a solution? 21 A Correct.  ! 22 Q Did you do thatt 23 A Yes. 24 Q And what did he do with your proposal the 25 first time you brought it to him? m ___-______. - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

l 166 A 4 age 17-5 1 A 'l It never made it to him.  ; 2 Q Why is that? 3 i A It made it to him. ' I made documentated (sic) d copies of a revised procedure to him. I turned in those 5  ! revised procedures to them..and that's where they sat at 6 from there. 7 Q Now whea you say you made a proposal to him, i B did you make this proposal in w'riting? i 9 A I revised the procedure as he requested. J 10 They requested that I revise procedures to show or indicate 11 or correct these problems, and I did. 1 12 Q When you say "they," whom do you mean?  ; 

            '3                                                                                                         i A        Tom Miller and Dick Camp.

Id 1 Q I thought that we were talking about an 15 i occasion when you had a conversation with Mr. Camp alone? l 16 i A Dick Camp, then. 17 Q And -- i l 18 A Dick Camp would usually palm these situations 19 down to Tom Miller. 20 l Q I'm going to objec, to your use of the word j 21 " palm." 22 A Well -- 23 Q You mean that he asked his subordinate to 24 deal with the problem? 25 A Yes. _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - - - _ _ - - ~

i 167 

                                                                                                   \

mgc 17-6 1 Q Was his subordinate your superior? 2 A One of my superiors. 3 Q In fact, he was two rungs up the ladder from d you, wasn't he? 5 A Correct. 6 Q Did you submit your proposal for revision, 7 1 or did you s u bm9. t your suggestion,that the procedures be 8 revised to Mr. London before going to Mr. Camp? 9 A Yes. 10 Q What did Mr. London say? II A I do not remember at - this time. Basically 12 1 it was a request.from Tom Miller, going directly to Tom 13 Miller.' Mr. London was supposed to review them. He felt Id that it was too drastic of a change too, that they would 15 be locked in, you might sty, to -- well, it was specifically 16 stated that they felt that they would become too closed 17 i in, that they could possibly be reviewed by QA/QC type 18 surveillance and trapped into a corner where they could I' not get out by having liberal definitions. 20 Q Are you stating your perception or are you -- 21 A l'm stating their statement. 22 Q Who made that statement? l 23 A Art London, for one. Tom Miller, for l 24 another. That they felt that my procedure would lock them 25 in too tight as far as requirements. l

168 4 I mge 17-7 Q When they say "too tight," too tight for 2 what? 3 A Such that they felt like they did not want to leave or lose that possibility of perform 1ng the de-5 energized functional testing. 6 Q But de-energized functional testing was permissible under the procedures, wasn't it, where it 8 wasn't practical to perform it in the prerec? A Uh-huh. 10 Q And you just wanted to change the procedure II entirely? 12 A No, we will not say entirely. There's 13 certain basic concepts to the functional testing. It has to be maintained.' Q Whose responsibility is it normally to drart 16 procedures for such tests? A At previous job sites, it would be a 

         '8 designated group. At Comanche Peak, it was individuals designated within the startup organization.
        'O Q        Was there any review of any procedures by 21 other groups within the TUGC0 organization or TUSI or any 22 of t.h e other organizations on site?

23 A Yes. 

       'a Q        Who reviewed those?

25 A Startup procedures have to be reviewed by a

169 mgc 17-8 1 -QA/QC type. 2 Q Anyone else? 3 A I don't remember at this time. There are d several signatures that have to be done. 5 Q Can you think of who those other' signatures 6 might belong to? 7 A I do not remember. 8 Q But I take it that individual startup 9 engineers don't develop their own procedures. 10 A Correct. 11 Q Those procedures are developed through an 12 established program of review. I3 A Correct. 3d Q And would architect engineers be among 15 those who review those procedures? 16 A I don't know. 17 Q You don't know? 18 A No. I' Q Were you ever employed by anyone as a 20 job responsibility to develop criteria from NRC 21 regulatory guides or to develop procedures from 22 commitment letters to the NRC7 23 A I would say yes until the last part, and 24 1 don't understand the last part. 25 Q In other words, it's your understanding that l

1 170 l I, J < l mgc 17-9 1 you were employed.to draft these criteria and to develop. 2 the procedures for use by San Onofre? 3 A No, not San Onofre. d Q You were employed there as a startup engineer. 5 A Correct. I 6 Q You were employed as.a startup engineer at 7 Comanche Peak, were you not? 8 A Correct. 9 Q Yet you believe -- well, do you believe that 10 you were hired at Comanche Peak to develop their procedures 11 for them? 12 A Yes, I was. 13 Q l see. Id A Because if you will look back in the 15 previous record, I have written several pre-operational 16 test procedures for startup, and that was part of my duties 17 at the beginning. IB Q All right. Now when you came to Mr. Camp l' with your revised procedure, did you show it first to 20 i Mr. London before you came to Mr. Camp? 21 A 1 believe I gave Mr. London a copy, Tom 22  ! l Miller, and I'm not sure if Dick Camp received a copy. { l 23  ! Yes, he did receive a copy. I 24 i Q Did you give him a copy? ' 25 A Yes. i l l 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - --' ~ ~

4 '1 .A 

                                                                                                                      'T. 173 mgc 17-10I               Q       So then you gave all three of the individuals 7   you just named. And did you discuss the proposed revised 3

procedure with any of these three individuals? d A Yes. 5 Q This proposed revised procedure was in 6 writing, was it not? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Do you have a copy of it? A No, I do not. 10 Q It was not one of the documents you took 11 with you when you left the plant site? 12 A I do not know. 13 Q You don't know whether you took it? Id A I do not know if it's in with those documents 15 or not. 16 Q Would you check for us? 17 A Which documents are you pertaining to? 18 Q Have you forgotten what the question was l' only two sentences back? 20 A Well, you specified documents that I took 21 ' with me when I left the plant site. 

 *                                                                          /

22 Q As I said. - 23 

                                                                              ~
                                                                                                                            '1 A

I never addressed that I cook documents with 

                                                                                                                            }l 24 me when I left the plant site.

25 Q Well, I think the record shows that you 5 e

172 3 4 17-11 1 responded that you don't know whether it was among those 2 documents. i 3 Are you stating now -- d MR. SPEKTER: Please finish, counsel. Excuse 5 me. 6 BY MR. DAVIDSON: n 7 Q [ don't want to bandy with you 8 about this. All I'm asking is, do you have a copy of the j 9 i proposed revised procedure that you submitted?  ! 10 MR. SPEKTER: And my statement was, now 11 that you're finished, was that there's been no testimony j 

                                                                                                    \

i 12 that he's taken any documents from the job site or any 13 insinuation that he's taken any documents from the job site. 14 If he has, I would request counsel to ask of 15 him if he did take any documents when he left, and if so,  ! 16 I if that is among those documents that he did take. 17 l MR. DAVIDSON: Well, first let's ask him if 1 18 he has a copy of the proposed revised procedure. 19 MR. SPEKTER: His answer was that he did l 20 not know and he's already answered that. 21 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 22 Q But you have documents in which you could 23 look to see if you have? 24 A I have papers that belong to me, yes. 25 I Q And you could look among those documents, __-__- - ________ 2 

                                                                            . .                                     . ,o ~e, _ ..,                         :1 off .

t, __ .. -1739! 

                                                                                                                                                           .i age 17-121    and y'ou might be able..to find it?.

2 A If.it is there.. I 3 Thank you.. And now I would like-to'ask you, Q 

                                                                                                                                                          .i
1 d

will-' you look in'those: documents for us,-and'if you-fin'd 5 i t ,- will you produce'it?. 6 A Yes. 7 Let's take a short' break here...I would.like 8 to talk to counsel.  ; 9 MR. DAVIDSON: If you wish a~ break,' N 10 )you'can have it. ' 11' / THE WITNESS: Okay. -l. 12 (Brief recess.)  ; ,. y End 17 13 14 1 k 15 16 -I 17 18 19 l 20 i 21 l 22 23 24 l 25 l 

                                                                                                                                                            ~
                                       *       +                          e                                 - . . ,

i i j i 9 1 l

174 1 1 ibt i 1 (Off the record at 2:25 p.m.) I 2 (Witness conferring with counsel Spekter.) 3 (On the record at 2:49 p.m.) d MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter. I am going to j 5 regommence the examination of the witness. However. because 6 of the frequency and periodicity of the breaks. so that j 7 [ )may consult with you, with res'ect to his 8 answers. I am going to ask that the reporter note the 9 time of taking of each of these breaks. - t 10 BY MR. DAVIDSON: " 

                                -             s, il Q    g                 )because_there   as kind of a        l u             -
                                                                                     ]

12 lengthy break here, could I please ask yoor indulgence ' 13 and have the reporter read back the last uestion and j 14 answer? 15 (The reporter read the ree rd as requested.) 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 17 Q )did you take a documents of any j IB kind from the plant s i t e'. when you depart !? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Do you know the volume of [cuments you took 21 with you? i 22 A You're talking about the q :n t i ty ? 23 l Q That's it. 2d A No, 1 do not. 25 Q Was it enough to fill an e . ire box? 

                                                                                              . . g.         ,
                                                                                                                           ,       -175       '

fcl81b2 ' 1 A No.:it was not. 2 Q Di d you ask anyone to help you remove-the h i' 3 documents from the plant site? 4 A No, I did not. l 5- Q Did'you borrow'r' vehicle.for'the purpose 6 of moving any of those documents from the plant site?- .( 7 A No, I did not. ' 8 Q Do you.have the documents that you; moved 9 from the plant site, at this time? . 

                                                                                                                                                            )

1 10 A Yes I do. 11 Q Would your proposed revised procedure, that 12 you submitted to Messers. Camp, Miller, and London, be 13 among those documents? 14 A ' I do not know. 15 Q Would it be among so'me other documents? I-16 A 1 do not know, 17 Q But-you will look for it? i 

                                                                                                                                                    !j 18              A       Yes.

4 19 Q And if you have it you will produce it? 4 20 A Yes. 21 Q And could we ask you to do that'by early, l 22 next week? ' 23 A Yes. 24  ! Q Thank you. l 25 ( )vhen you were hired, for your' 1 4

_m 176 SAb3 4 1 position at Comanche Peak, were you provided with a 2 job description? 3 A No, I do not believe so. ) d Q Wac there a job deceription for your position, 5 d to your knowledge? 6 A I believe there is a job description? 7 Q In written torm? 8 A 1 am not sure. 9 Q You don't know? j 10 A I do not remember seeing the job description. Il Q But you believe that such exists? 12 A It is usually customary for sites to have 13 l a job description. 14 Q Do you know what job description details 15 as your function, as a startup engineer? 16 A No, I do not. 17 Q Getting back to your submission of the i1 l 18 revised, proposed procedure, after you submitted that revised i l 19 proposed procedure to Messers. Camp, Miller, and London, did 20 you meet with anyone of them to discuss it? 21 A ' Yes. l i 22 Q With whom did you meet? 23 A I. met with all three at separate times, or 24 possibly together. 25 Q Did you meet with them on more than one

l s 17F ) i fc181bo i t occasion, to discuss it? 2 A Yes. 1 3 Q To your knowledge, did they forward that .!. d initial proposal to any other reviewing authorities? I 5 A No. 6 Q They did not? 7 A Correct. 8 Q How do you.know? 9 A I said, you asked to my knowledge.'And I 10 said'to my knowledge, no they did'not. I 11 Q All right. Now I asked you how do you know 12 _that they didn't send it to have it reviewed? 13 A I do not know that they did not' send it 14 to haya it reviewed. 15 O So your answer is no, you didn't know that i 16 they did not have it reviewed. You don't know whether they. 17 had it reviewed? 18 MR. SPEKTER: Objection, his answer' speaks 19 for itself. His answer is that he did not know what 20 happened, that he did not know that they did send it forward.. i 21 MR. DAVIDSON: Now, I don't want anybody . 22 to be misunderstood, bu hou said no, they did 23 not have it reviewed. 24 MR. SPEKTER: 1 To the best of-his knowledge. i ' 25 MR. DAVID S0h's Let se. rephrase the question 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  'l
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    \

l i

178 b5 l 

                                                                                                                                                      ?

I ,  ! and see if we get this testimony clear. 2 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 3 Q [ ,do you know whether your f d proposed revised submission was forwarded for further l 5 review by any one of the individuals j ust mentioned? ' 6 A I do not. ' 7 Q Did you ask them whether it had been? 8 (Pause.) 9 A No. 10 Q ( Dyou had more than one conversation 11 with respect to these indivduals about your proposed. 12 revised procedure, is that correct? l 

                                                                                                                                                           )

13 A Correct. 14 l Q In those Conversations, with any one of those i 15 individuals, did they ever indicate that your proposed 16 revised procedure had been reviewed by any other authority 17 at the Comanche Peak site? 1B A No, they did not. 19 Q And you didn't inquire? 20 A i We were still in the stages of discussing  ! 21 with each other, as far as the procedures themselves and they 22 were withholding, or told me they were withholding, sending 23 these procedures on up through the chain, or actually 24 signing them to have them start it through to be placed 25 in the revision process because they did not want to do this i

m- 179 fc181b6 1 at this time. They felt that they would more prefer to 2 do it when Unit 2 started. .i 3 Q Did they ask you, at any time, to make a 4 4 further revision of your proposal? In.other words. 1'think i 1 5 you testified -- and if l*s wrong, please correct me -- 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      'that 6   you made several proposals.        Or did.you only.make one l

7 revised, one proposed revision of the procedure? ' s A During this time period, it was.when Art 9 London specifically identified that. If I had= time to io do or find these additional problems, then I had time to ii do additional work. There was several revised points on>thes< 12 Procedures, because I was spending a considerable amount of-13 my time trying to talk to them, to get a copy which was 14 mutually agreeable. l 15 Q So you were working with them on theproponal?l l 16 A Correct. And at this time Art fondon ' 17 increased my workload and they wanted to put a halt ' l 18 on me continuing on with getting them to sign these i 19 procedures. 5 20 Q Were you having these discussions, 21 during working hours? . */ 

                         ,                                       22              A        Yes, I was.                                                                                                                       I 23             Q         Where were these discussions taking place?

24 A In the office of Dick Camp.1the office of 25 Tom Miller, and the office of Art London. I 1

s. I t

1 180 b7 4 l 1 Q How frequently were these discussions? 2 A When my previous work was completed, 3 approximately once or twice a week. 4 Q So in other words, you were able to complete 5 your work, the allotted work, for a particular day, in less 6 than a full shift's time? 7 A Well, considering that this was work that 8 which was possibly assigned to me, which because it had been 9 requested by Dick Camp for me to make these proposals and all , 10 then that was considered part of my work also. 11 But let us put it Q -- 12 A So therefore, if I did it once or twice 13 every two weeks, I was still performing additional work. Id Q But you were completing all of your regularly 15 scheduled STE work, were you not, during this time? 16 You didn't fail to complete assignments? 17 A Not as a -- I completed assignments on 18 time, but I will not say that I.was way ahead on my workload. 19 Q Well, okay, let's ask another question. Were 20 you behind on your workload? 21 A No. 22 Q Were you producing as many reports, inspection  ; 1 23 documents, and other things where you completed as much work l 2d as your fellow workers? 1 25 l l A Yes. 1 i 1 l ___-___________-__L

181 fc181b8-1 i Q Were some doing more than you? 2 A Well, nobody at work works the same about 3 every day. 4 Q Of course not. I just wondered there were: 

                                       $   some workers that were doing more than you were doing?-

6 A Oh, yes. y Q Were there any'that. vere doing less? 8 A Who were'those individuals? 9 MR. SPEKTER: Objection. I think that is to irrelevant. 11 MR. DAVIDSON: I tnink that it has been e 12 brought to examination by( / He stated that he had 13 completed his other assigned duties when he had these 14 conversations, and I want to find out if that is.:in fact, 15 the case. And whether he was bearing the same load of-16 responsibility as his fellow workers. 17 And he says that he was, in fact, doing more ' 18 than some of them, so I would like to know who he was doing up more than -- 20 MR. SPEKTER: It is irrelevant to this 21 particular -- i 

                         .          22                      MR. DAVIDSON:   On the contrary, if you want l                                    23    us to determine whether or not he is telling the truth,.           {

l 24 and whethAr or not that is an accurate statement, whether he was doing less work, then we have to measure him against 25 I

182 1' 4 I hit fellow workers, as he. suggests we do, then I think we've 2 got to know the names of these people, if he knows them. Ns 3 And I'm going to ask you M d MR, SPEKTER: My objection noted for 5 the record. 6 MR.'DAVIDSON: 7 I'll ask you, Q 

                                                    )whowere     the 8   individuals that were doing more'than you and who are those 9    that were doing less?

10 A You have to figure that Lan Thompson was 11 doing more than me and Carl Becker.was doing less than me, i-12 Anybody else? Q 13 A It's very hard ta determine the workload of Id each individuals because of th. simple fact _that.each 15 individual is assigned a group if systems. As long as that 16 individual can maintain and upisep those systems, then he 17 is performing his job from one eek to the next. ' 18 One week it wil be a very slow week, with 19 not much work. And then all of sudden, the next week, or-20 the very next day, he will be vered over. So it's very 21  ; > hard -- , 1 22 Did that happen I 

                -Q                         o you?                                                                     I i

23 A Yes. J 

                                                                                                                   ;l 2d             Q     Did you have son      slow weeks and did you have 25    some days which were, as you s.    ,  caused you to be covered I

i 4 J 

                 ~

183: fc181b10~ 1 over? 2 A Yes, at various times. And usually it was .; 3 like a slow day and then a real heavy day. You anticipated 4 work loads that you could possibly anticipate. And I had 5 anticipated work loads well in advance, which was quite a o bit of work. l 7 Q .( ]ksawearlieron the documents thab 8 you had with you you had a performance evaluation. Did you 9 receive written performance evaluations in the course of time 10 that you were in Comanche Peak? 11 A I received one written formal performance 12 evaluation which was after my giving notice of termination. i 13 Q Did you not receive any other formal written < t 14 performance evaluations or review any, prior to that time? 15 A The only written performance evaluation, prior I 16 to that time, was not held as an official evaluation. It-17 was told to me at the time of the evaluation. that it was 18 not going to be an official evaluation. i. 19 Q Was it in writing?' 20 A -Yes, it was. 21 Q Was it on a performance evaluation form? 22 A Yes, it was. 23 Q Did you get an opportunity to review that 24 form? 25 A Yes, 1 did.

184 11 1 Q Were you given a copy of that form? 2 A Yes, I was. 3 Q Do you have a. copy of that form, now? 4 A I do not, now. 5 Q You do not have it with you? 6 A I do not know. 7 Q Why don't you see if you have it with you, e and if you do I would like to ask you to please produce it. o (Pause.) 9 to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 l 20 21 22 23 i 24 25 q l i 1 

                                                                  ----_________---____a

185-8 fc19pb1 1 .' qi 3 THE WITNESS: The performance evaluations I 2 ~i that I believe we are speaking'of right now was the-first. 3 one. 4 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 5 Q That is correct, sir. 6 A 

                               .                                         I do not'have a copy of that one.

7 Q With you? ' 8 A With me. 9 Do you have a copy with you in your other Q 10 records? 11 A I believe so. 12 Q Would you produce it for us, sir.fearly next-13 week? 14 A I will try to. 15 Q Thank you. Did you receive any other. '- 16 performance evaluations other than this one that we just l k 17 discussed? l 18 A I've already indicated.to you I received a 19 performance evaluation and my termination or after my 20 notification of termination.. 21 Q Did you receive a copy of this' written. 22 performance evaluation? 23 A Yes, I did. 24 Q Do you have a copy of that? 25 A Yes. I do. t i 4 l

186 4-1 Q Do you have it with you.. sir? 2 A Yes, I do. 3 Q 'Would you please produce it? 4 (Pause.) 5 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 

                                                                                    . /*

6 Q I. note.once a g a in .( ) that you are g 

               .7                reaching into your attache case for a document.                      g
                                                                                                                      )   .

8 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure if this copy.is 9 correct in its entirety.. 10 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 4 11 Well, let us see what you've got and then 

                                                                            ~

Q 1 12 you can tell me what'you think is missing. 13 A Well, I'm not sure. I know that"you have a i 14 copy also. Can we also look at'your copy? f. g 15 Q g hhen you take a deposition you to get to dictate rules. When you're the witness, you get to 17 answer the questions. 18 A' What I'm saying is I-don't know that all the 19 pages are'here with this one. 20 Q 1 understand. 21 A And I would imagine yours has . all the pages. 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr.1Spekter, do you wish.to 23 give your client instructions on this issue? 24 MR. SPEKTER: My client is' producing what~he =i' 25 has. l i t l

187 19pb3 j .' 1 MR. DAVIDSON: That'is what I understand him j 

                                                                                         /.

2 to be doing. Will-you hand me that document ( . 3 (Witness handing document to Mr. Davidson.) . 4 MR. DAVIDSON: Have you seen it. Mr..Spekter? 5 MR. SPEKTER: No, I haven't. 6 MR. DAVIDSON: 'Why don't you give it to your t 7 counsel first? I B (Witness handing document to Mr. Spekter.) ' 9 MR. SPEKTER: I have taken a look at the j 10 document. 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 12 Q )you have' handed me a document 13 that consist of a cover page, a page of what appears to be i 14 instructions, and then a form which has been filled out in 15 manuscript labeled confidential, which details the evaluation + 16 results then has -- these pages are not now stapled-although 17 they apparently were at one time. 18 Were they stapled while they were in your 19 possession, 20 A I would imagine that at.some time they might I 21 have been. I received them in an envelope.  ! 1 22 Q There is also-a= chart in which certain  ! 23 categories have been checked, certain evaluations of current  ; 24 abilities to perform the job. And then there is an-overall j 25 rating. And then there is some comments on area for l 1 

                                                  ++

I i

188 4 1 development. And there are two signatures, one of which 2 1 see is yours,( / And the other one'l cannot read. 3 Do you recognize that signature? 4 A That should be the signature of Art London. Q Do you recognize it to be the signature of 6 Art London? 7 A As 1 said, those are poor copies there. 8 MR. DAVIDSON: They certainly are. 9 ( Would it be acceptable to you, Mr. Spekter, I 10 if we staple the pages of this document together? l 11 MR. SPEKTER: Yes, as long as we make copies 1 e 

'                                                                                                                                                          i 12 of this and return them to him with the understanding that                               l 13 that will be marked as the other copies have been marked, 14 and that Xerox copy will be returned to him as his own 15 personal copy which he is entitled to keep.

16 MR. DAVIDSON: We'll do that, Mr. Spekter, 17 unless Mr. Mizuno has a problem. 18 Mr. Reporter, we're going to need to mark 19 that Disc. F-77 20 Mr. Reporter, in the marking of this exhibit 21 was have determined that it is not properly Disc. Exhibit 22 F-7, because there has not as yet been an F-6 marked. fou e s 23 may recollect / )that during previous testimony 24 that 1 apparently misspoke and called the affidavit F-6 on 25 which we had a series of questions. 1 just want to make l i l 1

4 189 l 1 19pb5  ! i I certain and have on the record-the~ fact that you understood  ; 2 se to be referring to the affidavit'throughout that 7j 3 questioning. 4 THE WITNESS: You had a document in front of I 5 you. I did not.look at whatLthe number was on the. document- 4 o during your referrals. 

                                                                                                                                                                   )

7 BY MR. DAVIDSON: i 8 Q You understood we were discussing the affidavit-9 A Correct. When we were pulling word for word to out of the affidavit. 1 11 Q Yes.  ;) 12 A Yes. 13 Q So you understood that although I often said 14 look at page 4 of Exhibit 6 that you understood we were 

                                                                                                                              ~

15 looking at page 4~of the affidavit, even though I actually -- 16 it should have been referenced as Exhibit 5. 17 (Pause.) 18 A I believe so. I know that you were looking j 19 .; . at an affidavit and you were saying look at page 4, Land I 20 looked at an affidavit. I did not try and keep track'of the 21 numbering system you were using. Ili 

                                                                                   ??             Q        So in other words, my reference to.the numbers' I 23 in no way caused you'a problem in answering any of the                       !

_i 24 questions. l i-{ 25 A Correct. i l-4

190 4 1 Q And you understood all'of my questions? 

           ?                                                                                         A      Yes.

3 Q. And you understood your answers?- J 4 A Yes. 5 MR. SPEKTER: And'it's. counsel's understanding . .; 6 that the affidavit ~ is Exhibit Number'5. Any reference to 7' number 6 was just 'a misspeaking at'that time.: V 1

j 8 Ll MR. DAVIDSON: And you u rders tood , Mr. Spekter ,

l 9 1 that I was referring to the affidavit? 10 .MR. SPEKTER: .l Yes. i 11 I MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Mizuno, _you had no  ! 12 -i misunderstanding as to the line of questioning?  ! 13 MR. MIZUNO: No. . ha I MR. DAVIDSON: In order to make certain that I 15 we don't further confuse the record, what I.would like to do  ! 16 is ask that the e reporter mark the performance evaluation. I s 17 sheet, which l produced as Disc. Exhibit F- 6 A ', so-18 there will be no question as to what-the referenceLis._ Is i' 19 that acceptable? 20 MR. SPEKTER: 6A is the one' document of 21 several pages?.  ! 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Right. And will be a document 23 1 consisting of one, two, three, four, five pages. 24 MR. SPEKTER: Fine. 25

191 19pb7 XXX 1 (The document referred to as 2 Discovery F-6A was 3 marked for identification.) d MR. SPEKTER: With the understanding that 5 has tendered it to you stating that he does not 6 know if it is a complete document. It is the one that he 7 has in his possession, and everything that he has in his 8 possession that is in reference to the performance evaluatiot 9 which was given to him just before he left his employment. 10 MR. DAVIDSON: Right. 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 12 Q Other than the two performance evaluations 13 that were in written form, di d you receive any other feedbaci 14 on the quality of the performance in the performance 15 evaluation of a nature that was not in writing? 16 (Pause.) 17 A No. IB Q You never received a counseling session of 19 that sort? 20 A well, you're talking when these incidences 21 occurred, right? And the harassment..right? That was a 22 counseling session to me. 23 Q All righ?., let's see if we can help articulate 24 that. Leaving aside the various incidents as to which you , 25 testified, the three incidents of harassment that you testifi l l . 1 l

192 1 to in your direct testimony, did you receive any counseling 2 sessions with respect to your job performance? 3 A I believe not. 4 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Mizuno, I see you are 5 still studying the Exhibit 6A. 6 MR. SPEKTER: I would note that since counsel' s 7 made a point of putting pauses on the record that counsel 8 for the Applicant is taking a long pause at this point to 9 look over the document. 10 MR. DAVIDSON: That document that we had 11 marked is being looked over by Mr. Mizuno, not be me. I'm 12 looking over some papers. 13 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 14 Q do you remember the initial 15 evaluation that you received a copy of which you say you 1 to h have or may have or don't have with you today? I 17 A Yes. 1B Q Do you remember some of the comments made  ! 19 there? l 

                                                                                                                       )

20 A Not without refreshing my memory from the { 21 form. l 22 Q You don't remember any of the statements 23 made there? 24 A No, sir. 25 Q Do you remember whether there was any suggestion 1 4 I 

            .                                                                                                                l l

193 19pb9 k 1 A No, sir. As I indicated, this was an 2 informal evaluation at that time. It was told to me that 3 it was going to be used specifically for -- that it was in 4 a change of supervisory personnel status. 5 Let's see. I believe the person's name -- I. 6 can't even remember it now. It was who was in charge of 7 these electrical group at the time was transferring the 8 responsibilities over to Art London. These evaluat' ions were 9 to be used for Art London's purpose-and later on using them to for a formal evaluation. 11 They were just to give him some background 12 as to the performance during the time period. And that 13 specifically, my case is the fact that it was a very short 14 period of three months. And it may even be hard to evaluate 15 me during that time period. 16 Q Is 1c your testimony that the f orm was preparec, 17 by a supervisor other than Mr. London? 18 A Yes, it was. 19 Q Do you recollect who that supervisor was? 20 A I already said that I cannot remember his 21 name, but I know it started with a "C" but I can't remember i 22 exactly what his name was. 23 Q Might it have been Mr. Chatham? i 24 A Yes, it was. 25 Q How long were you assigned to Mr. Chatham? 1 l l I l 4 I

1 l l 194 i 10 l 

                                                                                                                                                                        ? .i 1

A I am not familiar with the time. I do not 1 2 know exactly what date he was transferred out of the group. 3 Q Well, do you. recollect when Mr. London came 4 in, approximately? 5 A Mr. London was there at all times. 6 Q When he became head of the group. 7 A No, I do not remember. 8 Q Uow soon after you joined the group did you 9 receive what you call this informal evaluation? 10 A I believe it wae approximately three months. 11 Q And did M,r . Chatham at the tire tell you 12 that because you were there such a short period of time it 13 was impossible to make a full and detailed evaluation of you? 14 A Yes. 15 0 Did he allow you to review the form with him 16 nonetheless? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Did he ask you to sign the form? 10 A Yes. 20 Q Did you read the form before you signed it? 21 A Yes, I did. 22 Q Do you recollect what you agreed to when you j 23 signed it? 24 A Ubat do you mean, what I agreed to? 25 Q Well, was there a statement there that i i

195 19pb11 1 indicated that you had reviewed the form and that you knew ' 2 its contents and understood them? 3 A Yes. 4  ! Q And did it also indicate that it would be 5 used by the company for salary administration, employment 6 placement and promotion? 7 A That was not my understanding at the time. B Q Was that written on the form to your 9 recollection? 10 A I'm not sure, I haven't seen the form. 11 MR. SPEKTER: I would r e '.< i e s t that counsel 12 has a copy of the form that he show it to! that 13 he might refresh his memory. He's already tes tifie d that 14 his temory is not refreshed at this point. 15 MR. DAVIDSON: All right. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 17 Q f you gave us Disc. Exhibit 6A did 18 you not? 19 A Yes, I did. 20 Q And it's a performance evaluation form used 21 by the EDS Nuclear, is it not? 22 A Yes, it is. 23 Q Is this the same form on which the earlier 24 evalutaion was made? 

                                                                                                                                                       }

25 A 1 do not know. EDS Nuclear could have rev'ed I . l

196 I 

                                                                                                                 .i
                                                                                                              ?-

1 or changed its 

         .                                                 form between the time of the first evaluation-2 and the time of the second one.                        I do not know.

3 Q You do not know . or you don't. remember? j. ll d .i A I don't remember what the first form had on .j 5 it, therefore I.do not know if this form-is identical to o the other form. 

            '7 Q    Looking at this page of the form you've 8

given us from Disc. Exhibit 6A. do you.see below'the area, R 9 the development area and it says comments, and below that 10 it has a legend prior and above to the signatures of'both , 11 you and your supervisor. Do you see what it says? i 12 A Yes. i On the form it says, the last evaluations 13 form it said we reviewed this form together and we both Id know the contents will be used in the company in connection- , 15 with salary, administration, employee placement and to promotion. i 17 Q Does that refresh your recollection as to what. 18 the other form might have said?- 

                                                                                                                 .I 10                                    A     No, I don't remember what the other form 20        looked like.

21 Q- But you're going to'look for your copy. 22 A Yes, I will. i a 23 Q I have a document in my-hand here ). 2d j which is a EDS Nuclear performance system performance l 25 evaluation form and it consists of a cover page and a-page.

4. j l

i 1 i _-___n_-.--._.. --_ - - - - - - - - - - - -

197 

      '9pb13 1

of instructions and then a form that is handwritten and 2 filled in by H.J. Chatham with respect to what 3 called confidential and contains five pages. And I would ' 4 like to ask you to review the document. And when you finish 5 would you look up at me. 6 (Counsel handing document to witness.) end 19. 7 (Witness reviewing document.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 to 17 18 to 20 

                                                                                  \

21 22 23 2s 25 l 1 1 1

30/1 198 

                                                                                                              ?

I MR. DAVIDSON: I'm not going to ask you, 2 i' any specific questions at this time on the 3 contents of the document, just whether or not you recognize' d the form. 5 (Witness peruses document.) 6 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 7 Q g do you recognite that form? 

                                                                   /

8 A Yes, I do. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: Counsel, I would be glad to 10 give it back to you, but I would like to mark it. Il MR. SPEKTER: Please do. i 12 l MR. DAVIDSON: Could we mark this as f 13 i Disc Exhibit F-7. Id (The document referred to was 15 marked Exhibit Disc F-7 for 16 i identification.) ' l 17 l  ! MR. DAVIDSON: And again, we'll have the 4 18 same understanding about copying and returning the originals l' if we may. 20 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 21 Q is this a copy of the form that 22 you were shown by Mr. Cheatham? 23 A Yes. 24 Q turning again to Discovery Exhibit 25 i 6-A, would you read the first sentence of the evaluation I l l e

FCjl 10/2 Igg i results on the third page. 2 A has been under" -- it's very poor 

                                                    /    ~

3 reproduction here -- it says, has been under my 

                                                    ~    '

4 supervision since June 19" -- 5 MR. SPEKTER: I would object to him reading 6 it into the record. I think the document speaks for 7 itself. 8 And I believe -- 9 MR. DAVIDSON: I didn't actually ask him to 10 read aloud. 11 In fact, what I was going to ask him to do 12 is read it to himself and look up at me when he finished, 13 as we have been doing with almost everything else I've 14 asked him to read. 15 I agree with you, Mr. Spekter, I don't want l 16 him reading documents into the record, either for purposes 17 of testimony or for any other reason, because documents 18 are nut self-proving. 19 But what I'm going to ask him is whether that l 20 sentence refreshed his recollection as to when Mr. London 21 became head of the Electrical Test Group. l 22 MR. SPEKTER: Fine. 23 MR. DAVIDSON: And in fact, nou that I've 24 declared my intention, when you're finished with that 25 sentence, maybe you could tell me whether it refreshes h

b. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

0/3 200 1 your recollection.1 ) 

                                                                     \             <

2 THE WITNESS: Well, from what it says here, it 3 says June 19 -- I'm not even sure about the date -- 4 possibly 1983. 5 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 6 Q Could it be any other date? 7 A I don't know. 8 Q Let's take a look at the contours of that 9 letter and see if it could be any other date than 1983. io Could it be 1986, for example? i A I 11 It could be 1988. 12 Q It could be? 13 A I believe it's 1983. 14 Q In other words, it is stretching your powers to 15 generalize from what exists there in front of you? 16 You think it was 1983? 17 A Correct. t is Q Did the sentence refresh your recollection as to 19 when it might have been Mr. Locaon took over administration 20 of the Electrical Testing Group and succeeded Mr. Cheatham? 21 A No, because of the fact that there was a lengthy 22 time period there where they both were theoretically in 23 charge. 24 Q I think you did not understand my question. 25 I didn't ask you when Mr. London worked with l l

FCj l 10/4 - 201 . 1 1 

                                                                                                                                          ~1 1                                                                    f Mr. Cheatham. I asked you when he took over.

2 A That's what I'm saying, is I do not remember or H 3 that does not refresh my memory as to the exact time that t d .I he took over. 5 g well, if.it doesn't refresh your recollection. < 6 then it's a recollection obviously that cannot be 7 refreshed. 8 I just thought that by virtue of the fact that 9 ' he declares here that you' answered -- or came under his 10 supervision on -- in June of 1983, that it would refresh 11 your recollection, that that's when he must have taken 12 over the Electrical Testing CLoup. 13 But if that doesn't, then it doesn't. Id MR. DAVIDSON: I merely explained it to him. 15 Mr. Spekter, because the witness has from time to time 16 demonstrated severe difficulty with understanding the 17 simplest questions. 18 MR. SPEKTER: Well. I object to the reading from l' the record. The document speaks for itself. as we both l 20 said. 21 I believe you can ask him: questions based on p 22 l the document.  ! 23 And if his answer is he doesn't remember.-- 2d and if he doesn't remember and if his answers are that j 25 sometimes two people were in charge of that particular 4 l I1 

                                                                                                                                          -i '

l 

                                                                                                                                         ..i

1 10/5 202 I section, that is his answer. 2 l MR. DAVIDSON: All right. I i 3 MR. SPEKTER: I believe he would like to speak d with me for a second. 5 MR. DAVIDSON: Do you wish a break to consult 6 with counsel, 7 MR. SPEKTER: Not away from the table. B THE WITNESS: I've got just one question. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: Then, you do wish a break? 10 Otherwise, I'm going to ask you a question. Il MR. SPEKTER: We wish a break. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: You can't have it both ways. 13 MR. SPEKTER: We wish a break. Id MR. DAVIDSON: All right. 15 Thank you. i 16 (Off the record at 3:12 p.m.) , 17 i (Conference between Counsel Spekter and witness.) 18 (Back on the record at 3:29 p.m.) ' l' MR. DAVIDSON: We are back on the record. 20 Mr. Mizuno, did you have a question?  ; 21 MR. MIZUNO: Yes, I'd like to review I 22 Exhibit F-7. 23 I MR. DAVIDSON: I'm sorry. You were not given 24 an opportur.ity to look at the document? l 25 MR. SPEKTER: I note for the record that that i

TCji'10/6 203 I ' break was less than a minute's duration.- , 2 MR. DAVIDSON: So noted. 3 MR. MIZUNO: You canfgo ahead. 4 MR. DAVIDSON: You'have no problem with my. 5 continuing the examination despite the fact that you don't 6 have -- you're engaged in review of the document. 7 All right. 8 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 9 Q . n you have testified about what.you ( i 10 claim to be three incidents of harassment, intimidation, 11 and threatening. 12 Do you-recollect that? 13 A Yes. 14 Q One with Mr. Vogelsang'and one with -- 15 Mr. Fred Powers I think it is -- and one with Ken Luken. 16 Do you recollect that?. 17 A Correct. 1B Q Could you tell me when the incident occurred 19 with Mr. Vogelsang? 20 A I believe that's in the record.. 21 Q I'm sorry, I just don't recollect. 22 1 don't think you gave us a date, but if'you 23 did -- 24 A i Yes, it was in the record, on the cop of the 25 ' copies of my notes. with the Ivan Vogelsang phone call. t 

 . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .       _.m.___ _ . . _ __ ._.      _        __ . _ _ _ _ _ . __          _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

1 10/7 , 204 4 1 Q Do you recollect what it was? 2 A February 8. 

                                                                                                   'And I believe it was at 10:45.or 3

some time in that' time. frame. d Q February 8th, 1984?: 5 A Correct. 6 Q And that was after you had already contacted 7 CAP? 8 A That's correct.. 9 Already contacted? H) Q Contacted CAP. 11 A Wrong. 12 MR. SPEKTER: I would object. I would state 13 that the document itself was a memorandum which was placed l' into evidence in the original direct testimony and 15 deposition yesterday. That document speaks for itself. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: I wasn't asking about the 37 document. I was asking about the'date when he had his i 18 alleged incident with Mr. Vogelsang. I' MR. SPEKTER: I believe the' document itself 20 points out when that date was. 21 MR. DAVIDSON: I know. But I wante'd his 22 testimony, not what the document said, because, as you just 23 l pointed out the document speaks for'itself, but it's not 24 proof. 25 1 ___________.____________.____._m _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _

FCjl 10/8 30F H 

                                                                                                                      ' ll 1

BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q That was February 8, 19847 ' l, 3 A Yes. 4 Q What was the date for the alleged incident with 5 Mr. Powers of harassment, intimidation, and threatening? 6 A It was prior to tha t . - 7 Q Yes, but give us the date. 8 A I do'not remember the date. I've already 9 previously stated that. 10 Q Well, can you give us'an approximate date?' il A Even though I would be guess at an approximation? 12 Q Can you tell us what year it occurred? 13 A No, because-it'-- it's either '83 or '84 14 Q All right. 15 Was it towards the tail end of '83? ' to Or the early part of 1984? 17 A Yes, I would say so, t 18 Q When you say "the tail'end of '83 " would that I 1' be December? 20 A I would say between the fourth quarter of '83 21 and the first quarter of '84. " 22 Q That's a period of approximately six months. 23 Can you be any more precise than that? 24 A 'Not without guessing. , 25 Q When you testified about that incident,  ! l! II l1 i I I {* - 

                                                                                                                            \
                                                                                                                       .)

l 

 .0/9                                                                                                                     206
                                                              ,                                                                   4 1

do you know that you purported to quote exact 2 words that were said to you, and yet you can't tell us, l 3 within a period of six months,'what date it occurred on? d A Yes. I can by refreshing my memory on 5 documentation which I generated during that time period. 6 I would be able to give you a more in-depth time period 7 there. 8 But since 1 do net have the documentation here 9 with me and have not seen them for several -- for such a 10 long period, I do not have any idea what time. Il Q What documents or documentation would you use to 12 refresh your recollection? 13 A Such as a start-up interoffice memo identifying Id -- that I had generated and written identifying the problem 15 with the cable separations. 16 And if you found the date that that was 17 generated, it would approximately be within a two-week 18 period prior to that, f { l' :l Q All right. Well, that's very helpful, j 20 Do you have a copy of that memo? , i 21 A I do.not believe so. ,i i 22 Q Neither here with you today nor at home? I 23 A Correct. 2A Q When you say you Vrote a start-up memo, could 25 you explain what you mean by that?

TCj i - 10 /10 207 I l [ 1 A It was previously stated that I had written a 7 . letter indicating that I had concern with the. 3 inconsistencies between the ES100 specification and d Reg Guide 1.78 I believe it was. 5 Q Might it hae been Regulation 1.75? 6 A It might have.been 1.58. I'm not familiar 7 with the Reg Guide number. t 3 Q LNow, when you say a." start-up memo." I think, i 9 in your direct testimony .you testified that it was a memo 10 from the start-up group that would be signed by Mr. Camp 11 but prepared by you; is that correct? 12 A 1 believe that would be the type that it'was. 13 There are several different types, and it could have fallen Id under one of the other categories. 15 Q All right. Well ._now, that's one type, namely, lo a start-up group memo from Mr. Camp reporting on this 17 alleged discrepancy. 18 And then, you say if you find such 2'meno of I' that type and it's date, we're going to_have at least a 20 two-week approximation of when you had the run-in with 21 Mr. Powers; 1s that correct? i ' i 

 .                77             A'    Correct.

23 Q Now, you say it could be of_another type. 'l-i 

                                                                                            , 1.

24 So, as to help ur. in searching for that document. 25 what other type could it be? i 

                                                                                                     ]

0/11: 

                                                                                                                               '308 A'                Well, Start-up; maintains files.-                                   What you're 2

going to have to do isl-- I believe there's about'three f 3 different' form letters,'an interoffice memo, a start-up memo, or there's a CMO -- there-are several forms'there. 

               &~

Th e r e' 's about three of: them. 6 Q Can you go a little slower,. I'm going to take notes about each one. 8 A Okay. Q Now,.there's a. start-up memo. That we've 10 discussed, right? A R'ight. 12 Q That's a memo from the start-up group-to 13 someone? 14 A Correct. 15 Q All right. 16 Now, there's a -- an interoffice what? 17 A 'An interoffice memo. And I'm not sure -- 18 Q An interoffice memo, 19 A -- if they call it that. 20 Q How does that differ from a start-up memo? 21 A I'm -- I'm not -- I have no idea.

Q Did you ever prepare an interoffice memo?

A I will not say yes or no. 24 1 could -- I believe I possibly did, but giving an exact one or something, I' don't know. _________m____.--_--__m

FCjl 20/12 i 

                                                                                                                                                           '209 I

i i 1 Q Well, I'm not asking for an exact one or 2 something. What I'm asking you is how an interoffice l 3 memo, in your mind, differs from a start-up memov and i d you say that -- 5 A Well. I believe -- 6 Q -- you may have prepared one, so you ought to I know. 8 A 1 believe that the interoffice memo'would be strictly for start-up. I believe that the -- 10 Q Okay. 11 in other words, that is a memorandum that is' 12 circulated within the group -- 13 A Right. Id Q -- as opposed to -- well, why is it called IS 

                                                                                                   " interoffice" then?                                             i' 16 A     1 --

I7 Q Okay. 18 A l'm not familiar with the organization as far as transferring those papers like that. 20 Q Okay. 1 21 What's is a CM0? 22 A i'm not even sure if "CM0" is the correct 23 labeling for it.  ! 24 I do know that there is approximately three l 25 different documentation which Start-up identifies i i i I l j

jl 20/13 210 4 I information on. 2 Q But what is -- what is your understanding of 3 what a CMO is? d A I don't -- I don't know what it -- 5 Q I didn't'-- well, you understand I didn't -- 6 1 didn't volunteer the. term. 7 A The CMO strikes me as that it is'a memo form. E I do not know what the CMO stands for. 9 Q That's what I was going to ask you. 10 They use a lot of acronyms -- you know, letters, 11 alphabets at Comanche Peak. And unfortunately, you may 12 he familiar with all of them, but I am not. So, I was 13 going to ask you what does "CMO" stand for? 14 A l'm not familiar the CMO. I'm not even 15 familiar if it actually is a Start-up form of paperwork. 16 MR. SPEKTER: I would point out that sometimes 17 the acronyms seem to take over, and they don't even'have 18 any real basis in fact at some point. They just become 19 acronyms that become words unto themselves. 20 MR. DAVIDSON: I'm not sure I understand the 21 tenor of your remark, Mike, but so be it. 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q Now that we've investigated the various types of 24 paper that are generated on these issues, do you recollect 25 whether it was a Start-up memo? l l J l ' i 

                                                                                - - - _ - -   --_ a

1 FCj l J.0/14 211 1 1 In other words, do you recollect whether it was I 2 a memo that was addressed from the start-up group to 3 someone else -- A A Yes -- 5 Q -- that you prepared? 6 A Yes, it would have been addressed from the 7 start-up group to someone else. l 8 Q And do you recollect to whom it.might have been 9 addressed? 10 A It would have been addressed to the head of 11 Engineering. 12 Q Who would be? l 13 Now, is this TUGC0 Engineering, or TUCCO Results, 14 as you referred to it? i 15 l 1 A It would be TUSI Engineering. And at that time i ' 16 I am not familiar with who exactly was the head of TUSI ' 17 Engineering. l IB Q You don't think it was Mr. Vogelsang? 19 A There's even -- you've got to figure there's a 20 buffer office prior to that that all'these go to. And.it's 21 the memos may not even have been addressed to Vogelsang; 22 they might have been addressed to even a higher level up. 23 Q Well, do you know who would be -- do you know 1 I the title or name of this so-called buffer office? i 25 ^ l A No, I don't. l i I 1 

 '                                                                                                                                                            i i

i

l' 2.0/15 212 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ?

1 Q Did we -- was such a buffer office noticed on -- 2 noted on any of the tables of organization that you reviewed? 1 3 A I did not look over -- through that organization. 4 Q I think we have that exhibit here, so maybe we 5 can review it and see if you can identify it. 6 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Mizuno, I believe that you 7 now currently hold a copy of that exhibit, which had been 

                 )                                                                                            8 marked in voir dire.

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   -213 mgc 21-1                              1 BY MR. DAVIDSON:

2 q , )you will. recollect that during I 3 the course.of voir dire be marked as Voir: Dire Exhibit d F-4A a table of. organization of the Engineering / Operations' q 5 interface at the Comanche' Peak site, 6 A - Correct. 7- ' Q And you had identified that.you-were; 8 ~ associated with that group or' box, indicating on'this chart, under R. Camp, who you explained was Dick Camp, 10 the Startup Manager; is that correct?. II A Correct. 12 0 Now I see that that Camp line of reporting, 13 l reporting line, 1s.directly to J. Merritt, Jr., the  ; . 14 Assistant Project General-Manager. 15 A Correct. 16 Q I don't see any buffer office between'the 17 two. Is there one nonetheless? l, i 18 A Yes. These forms would have been sent, l' I believe, to M. McBay, the Engineering Manager. 20 Q That's someone also-under Mr. Merritt's 21 supervision? - 22 A Correct. < i 23 Q But he's not in the same group? j 1 24 A Correct. I 1 25 Q He's on a different line of reporting, am I 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .j.,

214 

                                                                                                                                 ?

21-2 1 right? 2 A Correct. 3 Q And Mr. McBay you've identified as the d Engineering Manager, who also reports to Mr. Merritt. 5 A Correct. 6 Q Would these have been addressed to Mr. Merritt? 7 In other words, would they have gone through Mr. McBay as 8 a buffer office to Merritt, the Assistant Project General 9 Manager? to A l'm not sure. To the best of my 11 regulation (sic) -- to the best of my memory, it was 12 addressed directly to Mr. McBay. 13 Q Do you know whether Mr. McBay forwarded that 14 to Mr. Merritt? 15 A I believe Mr. McBay forwards that to the 16 Engineering Group for assignment? 17 Q I'll get the chart back so I'll know where 18 he's sending it. Can you show me on the chart, 19 / where he refers it? 20 A I would imagine that he would send it to one 21 of these three groups here. 22 Q All right. Now you're referring to groups 23 under Mr. McBay's direction, and there are three. 24 A Correct. 25 Q One is called Nuclear Engineering, which is 4

215-mgc 21-3 1 indicated on th'is chart,'the manager is an R. Calder.- 2 Do you know'who that is?' 3 A No. d Q Then-there is another group, G-ampersand-H, 5 New York, under an R.' Ballard. - Do you know that - group?: 6 A- That's'Gibbs & Hill, New York. TheLR.'Ballard 7 1 do not know. 8 Q. Now when.you say Gibbs & Hill,: New Y'ork, who' 9 is Gibbs & Hill? 10 A They would-be the architectural' engineers- 

            -11 for the nuclear power plant.

12 Q All right. And inLthis third box >that 13 you pointed to, CP,;I-assume Comanche Peak, Project Id Engineering. 15 A Correct. 16 Q And the manager of'that is listed here as 17 an L. Popplewell'. 18 A Right. 19 Q Do you know Mr. Popplewell? 20 A Yes, 1 do. 21 Q So it's my understanding ~from you that: 22 Mr. McBay would have referred this startup memo that.you 23 l prepared, albeit for'Mr. Camp's signature, it would.have .i 24 1 been forwarded to McBay'and then from him to one~of'these-i 25 three. 

                                                                                           'I
                                                                                             'I

_- ____ _ a

216 4 mgc 21=4 I A Correct. 2 Q Do you know which of these three it might 3 have been referred to? d A Probably L. Popplewell. S Q To Mr. Popplewell. Why do you think it 6 would have been referred there. 7 A Now let me define this. This organizational 8 chart may not be the exact one that I knew of at the time 9 at Comanche Peak, and that possibly the names I am labeling to right now would have been the chain of command there, but 11 may not be necessarily true here. It would probably have 12 gone from McBay to Popplewell to Vogelsang. 13 l Q Where is Vogelsang? i Id A Vogelsang, I believe, is below Popplewell, 15 l or at some time during his employment at the site, he 16 was below Popplewell, 17 Q And what would be the job of the person that 18 Mr. McBay sent this memo to? Was his job to respond to the 19 memo? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Ard to your knowledge, was that memo to which 22 we've referred, which helps us get the timeframe for the 23 incident with Mr. Powers, do you recollect whether or not , 24  ! a response was provided? 25 A Yes, there was. j { t

217' mgc 21-5 1 Q Do you have any idea as to the time between 2 your memo going forward and the time that you received 3 notice of the response? A No, I do not. 5 Q Have you some idea ~as to what the time might 6 have been? 7 A I'm not familiar. The documentation flow a path could take anywhere from a. month to a year and a half. 9 Q Well, was it a year and a half? l to A I don't believe it was that long. 11 Q Could it have been a month? - 12 A' It could have been possibly, or it'might have 13 been three months. 6 

         'id Q         So you just don't remember now.

15 A I don't. I'm guessing if I tell you -- 16 Q Then I don't want you to guess. 17 Were you satisfied'that the response was i 18 timely? In other words, to the best of your recollection, l' when you did get the responae, did you say, "Well, I'm 20

g. lad that I got the response," or did you say, " Jesus, 21 this took a hell of a long time"?

22 A Engineering had already given their response 23 to the memo prior to the memo being sent out. We were-24 just documenting it, so that if a future problem' arose to 25 the fact'that Startup couldn't come back and say, "Well, we

218 4 tge 21-6 1 told you so." 2 Q Whose idea was it that this startup memo 3 be written? d A Dick Camp. 5 Q And he asked you to prepare it for his o signature, you said? q It went under his signature, and 7 I wanted to ask you, did he ask you to write the memo? 8 Did he ask you to write it for his signature or for your 9 own? 10 A For his signature. Il Q Did you have to submit this startup memo for 12 any other review before Mr. Camp signed it? 6-13 A Yes. Id Q To whom did you have to submit it? 15 A Art London. 16 Q Did you do so? 17 A Yes. 

           'B Q         Did you submit it to anybody else besides 19 Art London?

20 A I believe it went through Ken Luken and 21 Tom Miller. 22 l Q So that the path, if I can for the moment, 23 / of your startup memo that you prepared at Mr. Camp's 2 24 direction for his signature, first went to your immediate 25 supervisor, who was Art London.

219 mgc 21-7 I A Uh-huh. 2 Q It then went to Mr. London's immediate 3 supervisor, who was Ken Luken. Thereafter, Mr.-Luken-d forwarded it to his immediate supervisor, who was Tom 5 Miller, and 1t finally ended up on the desk of Mr. Camp, 6 the immediate supervisor of Mr. Miller. 7 A Correct. 8 Q And the head of the TUGC0 Startup Group. 9 A Correct. 10 Q Now if we had a copy of that document, would 11 we be able to see that chain of review, starting with you 12 and then going all the way up to Mr. Camp? 13 A Yes, you would. 3d Q How would I see that? 15 A There would be initials in the bottom lefthand j 16 corner. 17 Q And in what order would I find those initials? 38 In other words, would yours be the first initials as ) i l' the person who prepared it. 20 1 A Mine would be the first. I 21 Q And then I'd see the initials of Mr. London, 22 Mr. Luken. Mr. Miller, and then 1 would see a signature { 23 line, I guess, for Mr. Camp, and he'd sign it. 24 A Correct. 25 Q And.did I remember correctly that you were I i l I

220 

                                                                                                                   ?

I mgc 21e8 going to look for that document and see if you could 2 produce it for us? 3 A To the best of my recollection, I do not have that document. 5 Q But you will search for it? 6 A I will search for it. I Q Now with respect to the third incident 8 of harassment and intimidation and threatening to which you've given testimony today, that is the one involving 10 Mr. Luken, when did that occur? II A I believe you have that written down on 12 documentation, too, submitted, where my notes were I3 submitted, on file. Id Q I understand. But I don't want to have, 15 you know, as Mr. Spekter keeps reminding me -- documents 16 speak for themselves. Documents, as I remind him, are II not evidence, they are not self-proving. And so we've 18 both agreed that what is relevant, if anything, is your testlmony. 20 MR. SPEKTER: If you do recall. 21 MR. DAVIDSON: Yes. 22 THE WITNESS: I do not recall. 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 24 Q Could you recall after having your memory 25 refreshed by a review of that documentation? I 

                                                                                      -221 mgc 21-9    1        A        Yes,'I'could.

2 Q- lAll right. Then I think what'I'will do.is, 

                ;   I will ask the reporter if he'would be' good enough to f
                                              )he documents'in question. .so that
                                ~

s provide t i 5 he can see.if he can refresh his' recollection. 6 (The. Reporter complies.) 7 BY MR. DAVIDSON: I 8- Q When you refer'reduto documents that would y 9 refresh your recollection, is the document that you had to in mind Direct Exhibit.4? 11 A Y e s ,1 it.is. 12 Q Is that a copy of a. note that you'made 'about L 13 a conversation you had? 14 A Yes, it i s .. 'I'd also-like to make referen'ce 15 to a previous statement that I made. I specified the 16 February 8th date for the Ivan Vogelsang incident, which~ 17 is incorrect, right now. I j is Q How do you know that's incorrect? 19 A Because after reviewing the document and 20 refreshing,my memory,'I note that I' vro t e - d own'.. t h e j 21 February 8th dealing with the Ken-Luken. problem, which means. 1 22 that the Ivan Vogelsang had to b'e prior to that.. 23 Q Right. How much prior to that? , 24 A I.would have.fto'-- it's'already proven L that l t 25 my memory is rusty, so I would have to have it refreshed i i 

 ..-                                                                                           {

l o

222- 

                                                                                                                                                                     -4 ge 21                                          I by the documents that I've'already submitted.

2 MR. SPEKTER: I.believe the document is 3 

                                                                                                 .there, and I' don't think anything has been proven d

concerning your memory'. 5 MR. DAVIDSON: I was going to hasten to. point 

                                     -6 out that that is'right.      I, don't think'that we necessarily.

7 have offered as a matter of proof the unreliability or 8 rustiness of your memory.. The record will show what it shows. 10 I will grant you, you are.not.really II particularly precise about your recollections. .except when 12 there are particular words that you are-anxious to get 13 in the record. I# BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q But is there a document here that you think 16 would refresh your recollection as.co the'date on which II you had the incident with.Mr. Vogelsang? 18 A Yes. That's part of the reasoning of' logging those information (sic) down, so that.you've got- the 20 information there to start with. 21 Q When did you start keeping these logs? 22 A The Fred Powers incident was thought-toome 23 as being a one-time deal, no problem. As soon.as the-24 Ivan Vogelsang incident occurred, I said that this is 25 beginning to become too much, and that I logged that down, 4.

223 mgc 21-11 1 and also tried to remember as much as pertaining to the ,f 2 time and place and everything of the Fred Powers incident. 3 Q Did you ever write down or make any notes d about the Fred Powers incident? I take it you -- let me 5 just strike that. 6 I take it from what you're saying that i 7 initially, because you thought the Fred Powers was an ' i B isolated one, you didn't at that time make any record of ' I 9 it? j 10 A That's right. 11 Q There was no contemporaneous note made. 12 A Right. 13 Q Did you make a subsequent note in which 14 you had past recollection recorded? 15 A Yes, I did. 16 Q Did you produce that note for us here today? ,' 17 A I believe you have it. 18 Q With respect to Mr. Powers? 19 (Pause.) , 20 MR. DAVIDSON: That's right. 21 MR. SPEKTER: His memory's not so rusty 22 after all. 23 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you, Mr. Spekter. I can 24 always Count on you for some help. 25 THE WITNESS: That actually wasn't submitted,

324 4 mgc 21-12 1 though. That was on the back of another. 2 MR. DAVIDSON: That's right. That's why 3 I was puzzled. You didn't submit this particular note d which was on the back of -- it was the obverse side, 5 if you will, of Witness F DX -- that is. Direct Exhibit 3, 6 which was the note that you alleged was made contemporaneous 1y 7 with the Vogelsang incident. And apparently at the time. 8 of the Vogelsang incident, you then -- 9 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 10 Q Did you then turn over the page and write 11 what you remembered of the Powers incident; is that it? 12 or did you make that notation even subsequent to that? 13 A I would have to look at the documentation 14 that you have there to refresh my memory. 15 Q Okay. I'm going to give it to you. Oh, 16 you want all of these? l 17 A Yes. 18 Q Sure. 19 MR. DAVIDSON: just so'the 20 record will reflect it. I have handed you Direct Exhibit 2 21 and Direct Exhibit 3, and have I given you also Direct 22 Exhibit 4? 23 No. I think only Direct Exhibits 2 and 3, 24 I but if you wish. I will also give you Direct Exhibit 4. j 25 So now you have all of the notes that were used during , 1 l j

225 mgc 21-13 1 your direct examination. 2 THE WITNESS: The Ivan Vogelsang incident, 3 Direct Exhibit 2, was a note written at the exact time d of the conversation. 5 The Ivan Vogelsang incident, Direct Exhibit 3, 6 was written approximately ten minutes after the phone 7 conversation with a little bit more in detail. 8 The back side of Direct Exhibit 3 was dealing 9 with the Fred Powers incident, which was probably written 10 sometime that afternoon or within a day or so fo the first 11 one, 12 t BY MR. DAVIDSON: 13 Q When you say "of the first.one " .you mean i i Id of the time that you wrote the Vogelsang second memo? 15 A Right. 16 Q In other words, then sometime later, either 17 that day or the next day, you turned over that page and 18 put down what you remembered of the Powers incident?  ! W A Correct.  ! 20 Q And with respect to Direct Exhibit 4, which 21 is the notation about the Luken incident? 22 l A It was written directly after the incident. End 21 23 

                                           - 24 25 1

l l l 4

21 226 4 I BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q Can you tell us where it was that you 3 decided to use the back of the Vogelsang, the second d vogelsang note to record your past recollection of the 5 Powers incident?

  • 6 A That was a paper I had in my pocket at 7

the time and I was keeping the information together, the 8 accounts of insinuation on my job. So that would just have l to be the reasoning for putting it on that paper. 10 Q Okay. So the three incidents -- well, so we know that one of the incidents to which you made 12 reference, the Vogelsang incidents happened on or about I3 January 25, 1984, or so it is reflected in your note, and Id we know that the third incident occurred on or about 15 February 8, 1982, and we also know that the Powers 16 incident preceded the Vogelsang one, so it was earlier I7 than January 25, 1984 and it occurred sometime subsequent I8 to the startup memorandum that you prepared for Mr. Camp's signature. 20 A Correct. 21 Q To the best of your recollection, was 22 the memorandum that you prepared regarding ES100 23 cable separation signed by Mr. Camp? A The organization was -- you have got to 25 understand that Dick Camp signed some of these memos, or had i e

13 228 3 l 

                                                                                                                                       !       l
                                                                                                                                       '     ?

I though. 2  ! Q It was the practice to have lower case 3 i initials indicating the typist of the memorandum? 4 A I believe so. Not necessarily the typist. i 5 Isn't it a clerical type form that you put a gr for 'l 6 identification of a typerwriter or something similar to 1 7 that. l ' 8 Q Are you asking me or are you asking -- i l 9 $ A I am saying hat that is what those i< 1 10 letters might have been. i 11 l Q Okay. How about i  ! 12 I MR. SPEKTER: I wou3d object to any 13 questions you might ask without looking at the document, or 14 at least looking at the initials an the context. , 15 ) MR. DAVIDSON: I just want to ask what those l 16 l initials meant to him. I don't think there is any need for 17 him to look at the document. f 1 ' I 18 I MR. SPEKTER: He is certainly not the only l  ! 19 ' person in the world with those initials. l 20 l , BY MR. Dr.V1b 3DN : 21 Q How about DAL; whose initials are those? 22  ; A Those possibly would be Art London. 23 Q Now, we have had this discussion before. I 2a understand his name to be Art London but you say he has a first name that starts with a "D"? l 4 u_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . - _ - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - -

4 jon6 22 I i 1 A Yes, I believe so.

  • 2 Q The middle' initial is'" Art is that.right?

3 A. I am not familiar with.the. exact -- d l Q How about KLL; who could-that be? 5 A' KLL7 6 q yes, 7- . !~ A It could possibly be Ken Luken. , B Q A111right, and how about TPM? 

                                                                                                              '                                                                                                                              I     4 A

Oh, that's Tom Miller, possibly. . ' to Q All right. How'about R. E. Camp; who 11 would that be? 12 A 'That would be1Mr. Camp,LDick Camp. 13 Q ~And how about this M. R. McBay; is that. Id i the samee McBay that you earlier identified to'us'as-being 15 the head of engineering, manager for-engineering, who-had i, 16 the authority over the three departments we discussed, 17 nuclear engineering, Gibbs and Hill, New York, the-18 architect-engineers and Comanche teak project engineering? , l' A Correct. 20 Q And you identified Mr. Popplevell as be'ing { l 21 j the manager of that group? 22 A Correct. Now, as I said now, this letter 23 may have been written under a different organization than 24 what you just referenced to. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ;)

25 , Q Can I show you the memorandum ve.have been 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  .h 2

t l a l

s5 330 t talking about and ask you whether you recollect having written it? 3 MR. MItDNO: I'would'ask that'that document-be identified and made a part of the record and bound into the transcript 6 MR. SPEKTER: I would also join in that 7 request. MR. DAVIDSON- I' haven't decided whether I wish to*do so or not. However, if either of you at'the appropriate time, when;it is your examination, wish'to do 11 so you certainly are at liberty-to undertake to conduct 12 your examination in any matter you two see fit. MR. MIZUNO: I believe that -- well, just, 14 a moment. Yes, I think -- MR. DAVIDSON: I am just. conducting my to examination the way I feel comfortable. I MR. MIZUNO: Okay. t 19 j rMR. DAVIDSpN: Q g do you recognize this as a memo o that you prepared? 21 A Yes, I do. 22 Q So that the initial here are in fact 23 your initials? 24 A Yes, they-are. 

                                                                                                                                                ]

25 Q Do you see that there are some initials in 

                                                                                                             -_- ._____                _   _ - _A

jon6 231 manuscript over above.the~ typed-in initials there are'some 2 ' manuscript' initials above your  ; is that your initials? 3 A: Yes, it,is. A Q Do you recognize anyone else?s initials 5 on here? 6 LA The reproduction lis poor.:but I imagine 7 the one part of mine is Art 1.ondon. 8 Q And the one after that? 9 A Ken Luken. 10 Q 1s this signature appear to you to'be Mr. Miller's signature? A Yes..it.is. I3 Q' Now, you_ wrote this memo. 14 Is this~'the , memorandum we'have been discussing; that'is the startup 15 memorandum regarding the concern you had with' respect to-16 the DES-100 cable separation and the criteria in II Regulatory Guide Section 4.11? 18 A Reg Guide 1.75. l Q I am sorry. 'I have' holding the document 0 upside down. The NRC Regulatory Guide'l.75? 21 .j A Right. 22 Q is this the memorandum that you wrote? , 23 A Yes, it i s .. 2d Q 25 And is that date now refresh your recollection' as to when you had the incident with Mr. Powers? 

                                                                                                                          .i.

jon? 2321 I A It specifies char December 19 was when 2 the memorandum was written; therefore the incident with 3 Tred Powers was probably within a week's time period from that date. 5 Q Before or after?' 6 A' Before. I 1 might could even refresh it closer than 8 that if need be. Q How would you do that,' I to \ .' A Looking to see where the 19th fell'on as far as date-wise. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: All right. Mr. Spekter has 13 been good enough to lend us.his calendar. .Previously. I' If you feel that would help you pinpoint it even better. 15 let's ask Mike to produce it -- Mr. Spekter to produce it 16 again, and let's look at it. II MR. SPEKTER: I would be pleased to do that. 38 This is a 1983 calendar. I' I would alao request'that since the witness 20 has testified from that document, at this point that a copy 24 he made part of the record. I believe it is appropriate 

                                                           ??

that for reference purposes that document now be made and  ! 23 given a number and made part of this deposition. , 24 MR. DAVIDSON: Once again Mr.'Spekter has 75 read my mind. He is one step ahead of me. I i I l l I L _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ -. _

Son 8-233 1 s I think now that you have identified it 2 what I would like to ask is that we make a Xerox copy of 3 it, a photocop.v. have it marked appropriately, and re turn d the original to me. 5 MR. SPEKIER: .That has been today's 6 procedure and no problem. 7 MR. DAVIDSON: What I would l'ike to do. 8 Mr. Reporter, is I would like to label this document 9 i Disc Exhibit F-8. XXXXXX 10 (The document referred to was 11 marked Exhibit Disc F-B 12 13 f or identification.) I BY MR. DAVIDSON: 14 Q- Now, have you had a chance to study 15 Mr. Spekter's calendar with respect to 1983 in December? l. 16 A Yes, I have. 17 I believe that the date -- with that document being dated on Monday the 19th, to the 18 best of my recollection -- now, I am not positive. I know  ; lo that this incident started on a Friday which would mean ] l 20 21 that it should be the 16th and also the 16th should be the  ! 1 date which I called in NRC Region V. j 22 Q All right. i 23 A At the very most it is a week's delay 24 behind there, so it would be the week previous to that. i 25 Q Well, I am glad we were able to refresh  ! l l

1 jonIO- 235 I A Correct. 4 2 1 Q So you assume you have no reason to'believe 3 that the practice was not followed in this case? 4 A Well. I received a reply back from a 5 letter, therefore it must have been forwarded. 6 Q That'.s good reason for your belief. 7 Did you at any time discuss this memorandum 8 with Mr. Camp? 9 A Yes. 10 Q When you raised the subject with him..did II he give evidence that he had seen a copy of it; in other 12 words when you mentioned it to him he didn't say I have 13 never seen a copy of that memo; did he? 14 A Mr. Camp was one of the ones who had 15 directed me to write the memorandum. If I remember right to from previous.cestimony. I came in on a Saturday indicating II to Art London and Dick Camp that I had contacted the NRC l 

                                                                                'O concerning this problem --

19 Q I see. 20 A 

                                                                                                         -- and we went to his office and at that 21 time they toned me down and reqeusted that I not call the                    i 22 800 number, and at the same time said go ahead and write the 23 memo to start generating -- get it through channels.

24 Q In other words, they felt that the proper 25 procedure to be followed in raising this question was to l i 't l ____.__________-_-__A

jon11 236 4 I write this memorandum and send it forward to the people 2 indicated?. 3 A Correct. That w.s s brought up. That was one of the conditions that they had got mad about as.far 5 as the 'NRC call. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 5 ______________.____.__m. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _

lk 

                                                                                                      '237 i-231b!

l- I MR. DAVIDSON: Do you wish to take a break, l 2 L .- 3 

                                    -~'

THE WITNESS: No. we will keep going, d BY MR. DAVIDSON: 5 Q When you say that Mr.. Camp toned you down, 6 do you mean that you were angry at the time? Were: you still 7 angry over the Powers incident? i B A Very much'so. i y 9 Q And this was on Saturday,'right? 

                                                                                                                 ).

10 A Right. Il Q So you had overnight to think about its and l' 

                '12    you were still hot about it?                                                                i i

13 A .W ell, the definition of hot -- you know, t 18 was still concerned that my job had been insinuated bout 15 an incident to which I was truly: correct on. 16 Q Well, I think only others will be able to 17 tell us you were correct, but which you were truly concerned 1 18 about? ' I' A An incident which I felt I was truly correct ) 20 on and which was confirmed to me by the NRC representative. 21 Q Well, we don't know whether he confirmed it ~ . 22 or not.. There is no evidence to that fact.' , 23 A Okay. 2' Q But we do know that you felt.that.you were J 25 truly concerned about the incident. You felt you were 4

- a l s o 24 admitted to me, at that time, that if they had.it-t-o do all- ~ 25 over again-they were relooking at the' documentation over oj 240 lb4 4 1 again, that they would go ahead and modify the ES-100. 2 But since, for the fact that the plant had 3 been built to this ES-100 spec and built so long, that they 4 did not want to go into the added cost of having to do 5 reinspection for this problem. They felt that -- 6 Q What did the written response tell you? 7 A Well, it basically gave a flimsy excuse of 8 fire goes up and therefore, the heat would be transmitted 9 upward and not downward. And in actuality, you've got to problems with -- well, one of the NRC reps concurred with me 11 when I talked to him on the phone, that you're dealing with 12 a possible, probably, hot molten material dripping down on 13 a conduit underneath. 14 Q But you recollect distinctly that the 15 individual who prepared the response, that you mceived -- a 16 written response -- stated that it was because fire goes up 17 and not down. And that's why there was no -- 18 A Okay, his written response was not worded 19 exactly that way -- 20 Q Three times you testified it was, i 21 A Well, 1 don't know if it was indicated to me 22 over the phone or actually indicated to me in writing. I ' 23 would have to refresh my memory by looking at the document 24 again, to determine whether it was actually in writing or j 25 if it was done over a phone conversation.  ! 1 i I .i d '241 fc231b5 1 Q .Did you ever see the written. response to '2 the startup memo that you wrote?' 3 A Yes, I did. 4 Q Do you recollect what was in.it? 5 A The main portion, that I remember about that 6 memo right now was that it said that there was no: conflict" 7 between_the'ES-100 and Reg' Guide 1. 7 5 '. 8 Q Now, you testified just a moment ago thct 9 you called -- 'I'm sorry. 10 A I had something that 1 wanted to conclude 11 on this. 12 Q Please. 13 A .Okay, that also leads-into additional 14 information, as to when 1 say upper level management 15 relaxing requirements, right? Here we're deallng with a 16 situation where upper level management made the decision that 17 since it was going to cost so much more money to 3o back 18 and reinspect all this that they.were willing to fight NRC 19 on this issue, rather than go to the more' stringent 20 requirement. 21 Q Who, in upper. level management, told.you that? 22 If anyone. 23 A .When 1 say -- a Gibbs & Hill' employee..which 24 was at a higher level than me speaking .which was making. 25 decision -- you've got to figure that.he made' recommendations i d 4 242 lb6-  ? I and all and agreed with Ivan Vogelsang and Fred Powers on 2 this issue, right? Which they're all considered to be 3 upper level, you know, as far'as their decision making. 4 So you're dealing with a situation there where 5 they are actually, instead of saying we know -- he did. 6 He said, we know there is a possibility or that it can be 7 interpreted that we're in violation of the Reg Guide 1.75. B Q Who said this? 9 A The Gibbs & Hill. 10 Q The Gibbs & Hill? Who is the Gibbs & Hill, 11 sir? 12 A The person. You would have to refresh my 13 memory. You would have to show me the reply documentation. 14 Q Are you through with this answer, or do you 15 have more to say? to A I am through with it. 17 Q All right. l IB Now, I just want to understand. Art you l' saying that you had a telephone conversation with someone 20 at Gibbs & Hill in New York, subsequent to your review of l 21 the response provided by that organization? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And is it your testimony that you called 24 the person who signed the response, which gave the 25 explanation from Gibbs & Hill? 243 Lfc231b7 1 A Now, the responsesletter that you ~ may get 2

may.be a response --

I'cannot remembercexactly whether or-3 not the response. letter went'from Gibbs & Hill'to 4 - engineering and then engineering rewrote-the letter and' 5 then sent it to start.up. I do not know. 6 Or Ildo not know if engineering ~just. stuck 7 a cover sheet over the Gibbs.&(Hill? document. B g- Well,'nowjI want'to'be-clear. .Did'you:ever, 9 See the Gibbs & Hill letter? 10 A The return' 11 Q Yes. 12 -(Pause.) 13 A I believe I did. I'believe that.itz was. 14 attached with a cover sheet from engineering. 15 Q All right. 16 Now we identified-Disc Exhibit 8 as being ~ ) 17 a memorandum from Mr. Miller, albeit'that you prepared. 18 addressed to Larry -- to L.M.'Popplewell. Is. that-Jcorrec t ?- 19 A Correct. 20 Q Now, at the conclusion of the statement of l 21 -] the problem -the last sentence says "startup"reques't ~! 22 \ engineering evaluate the situation and respon'd with the- ] 23 design philosophy that permits the installation of racetay  ! 2# i as described." So there was a request for an. explanation. i j 25 l as to whether or not there was a conflict?. ' i 'l 4 'l i ___ ____ _ -- ~ 244 131b8 4 1 A One other thing that might be brought into 2 account here. That was not my original letter. 3 Q Your original memo? 4 A Correct. I started off with a much more 5 descriptive issue of the problem, much more -- well, 6 pinpointing the fact that I had already contacted outside 7 sources, you know, talking with Art London, and so forth, 8 and the NRC. I had already known, in my mind, that there 9 was a problem and in turn I turned this letter over to 10 Art London. 11 And he felt that it as too forceful and 12 in turn, rewrote coming down to a less forceful type meaning. 13 Q When you say forceful, what do you mean? 14 A I said specifically, as I feel now, that it 15 is in violation of the Reg Guide and here is just saying 16 that we think it's in violation. 17 Q And asking for someone to explain? 18 A Correct. Io Q How the two could be reconciled and -- but 20 this was, in fact, what you wanted, though. You wanted 21 to find out what their explanation was, wasn't it? Isn't 22 that what the purpose of the memo was, to find out the 23 explanation? l i 24 Well, you look pu221ed. What was your purpOBe 25 at writing the meno, if not to find out the reason? r-9L% fc231b9 1 AJ Tol-identify the problem. 2 QJ Right. 3 A Okay, the main reason 'was -- as I had already 4 been told. and informed by NRC, that there was a problem-5 and I am not -- you know -- that there was a problem;there. 6 So in my mind. I feltLth~at there was..a definite problem. l L-7 By doing this' memo. I addressed the problem'and if the e company will not correct.the~ problem : what more'can I do?. 9 Q- We didn't ask you that. -We only asked 10 you whether you wanted to highlight your' concern and ask'- ~ it for an explanation and that was the purpose of this memo,. 12 wasn't it? You did highlight your concern? 13 A True. 14 Q 'And.you asked for an explanation, didn't you? 15 A Well,'really what I'was trying toiask for 16 was, is corrective action. 17 Q Do you mean to'tell me that-you were not is interested in an explanation?. You.were only~ interested in 19 getting your own interpretation accepted?. 20 A Not necessarily - 1 was.asking for-a " '- 21 legitimate -- 22 ~ Q. Explanation?- 23 A Explanation. 24 Fair enough. Q Now 1 note that.the memorandum-25 is' addressed to Mr. Popplewell but we have been talking about 4 1_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___m______ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 246 lbl0 4 1 a response from Gibbs & Hill. Did Mr. Popplewell provide 2 a response? 3 A I believe that he responded through a cover 4 sheet. What it was was Larry Popplewell, during the meeting 5 in Dick Camp's office on this issue -- 6 Q There was a meeting? 7 A What? 8 Q Go ahead. I'm sorry. Answer the question. 9 A The meeting on Monday. It was in Dick 10 Camp's office and Larry Popplewell had informed that we 11 could go ahead and send up a memo if we wanted to and that 12 was what Dick Camp had decided that w e would go ahead and do 13 but that Larry Popplewell would just have Gibbs & Hill 14 go ahead and review it and come back with the information on 15 it. 16 Q Why did Mr. Popplewell -- and to your under-17 standing why did he indicate that he thought Gibbs & Hill 18 should look at it, rather than himself or somebody else? 19 A Gibbs & Hill is the architectural engineer 20 and if I remember right, Gibbs & Hill created the ES-100 21 specification. 22 I Q In other words, it was their responsibility to 23 provide the criterion, the separation criteria, from Reg 1 l 24 Guide 1.75? i 25 A Correct. 1 e o .. s 247 'fc231b11 1 Q And therefore,-he thought that the.best place 2 'to ask'for a response _to'your question would be.the: person 3 who drafted'the original criteria? l 4 A Not the person who drafted it. 5 Q The organization, which would beLGibbsi& Hill. 6 A Okay, 7 Q Is that right? Is that your understanding? 8 A Correct. 9 'Q 'Did he.say.that? 10 A Well, he didnt say'it,~but those_words. 11 Q But'that's what you understood? 12 A Right. 13 Q So then you understood'that this was going 14 to be forwarded to Gibbs & Hill in New York?- 15 A They'had already_ pinpointed'the exact person 16 they were going to forward it to. I had al' ready, during. 17 the meeting, identified to them that I haditalked to-somebody 18 different than the person they were talking about. 'And 19 they automatically said, well, we know'of this other person -! 20 so we're going to forward it to him. He is in understanding 21 with our point of view, basically. 22 Q Do you know who the response -- do you_know 23 the individual who signed.the' response for Gibbs &1 Hill? j i 24 A I've already told .you t h a t - .11 d o n ' t -- I'would  !  ?$ l have to look at the memo to refresh my memory. _l i i. I i i 248

231b12 4

1 Q Could it have been the project manager at 2 Gibbs & Hill for Comanche Peak? I just asked you whether thqt 3 is possible? 4 A Okay, Gibbs & Hill -- 5 MR. SPEKTER: I believe that if he answers 6 a question that he doesn't know who it is. 7 MR. DAVIDSON: I have the right, Mr. Spekter,. 8 to see if I can refresh his recollection, just as I did 9 earlier when I mentioned a name and he said yes, that's right . 10 And that's all I'm asking, Mr. Spekter, let's see if we 11 can move this along. 12 THE WITNESS: Gibbs & Hill uses the same format 13 at startup as us. The person necessary, who'does the 14 craft work and the investigation is not the one who signs 15 the document. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 17 Q 1s it your understanding that the Project 18 Manager would sign a response that he didn't agree with? 19 A It is my understanding that it is very 20 easy to have somebody, such as Dick Camp, sign something 21 without him truly knowing exactly what they are signing. 22 It is very easy to handle paperwork in large volumes and 23 to explain between one thing and what's actually being 24 signed or indicated to be totally different. 25 Q In other words. you think that in preparing i 249 fc231b13 1 a memorandum for him, that he sked you to do, that you 2 could slip something by him?  ! 3 (Pause.) i d i. A Well, I'm not -- I don't know how intense l 5 this individual reads his memorandums.  : i 6 Q You don't know? f I 7 A I don't know. I'm not going to make .. 8 l that accusation. 9 Okay. Q What about your ability to slip I 10 something by Mr. Camp? Do you think you could? A memorandum 11 he asked you to write, you could slip something by him? 12 A ' I don't know. 1 13 Did you do that? Q Id A No. 15 Q Do you know anybody who did slip something { 16 by Dick Camp? i 17 A No. ' end24 18 19 20 21 22 23  ; 24 25 i j  ! l i I l l i _--._.---_..-_----_.--_--_A 1 l 250 ' l 31 A l 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: I l 2 Q Do you remember or recollect who the project 3 manager for Gibbs & Hill might have been at the time? l 4 A No, I don't. f 5 Q Was his name R.E. Ballard, which I think was 6 on the table of organization that we looked at'just a moment 7 that you pointed to? l 8 A It might be. l l 9 Q Could that be the individual? Was he listed to as such there? , 11 A I don't know. ,12 Q I'm going to ask you to look at a document 13 It consists of three pages. And, you see, it is 14 a copy of a document that is a.three-page letter on the 15 letterhead of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. And the address is 11 Penn 16 Plaza, New York, New York dated January 23, 1984. It also 17 bears a stamp saying transmitted by telecopier January 23. 18 It is addressed to TUGCO in Glen Rose, Texas, 19 attention J.B. George, vice president project general manager. 1 20 And as you can see it deals with Regulatory Guide 1.75 and 21 ES-100. And it goes on for three pages, and it is s i g n~e d 22 very truly yours, Gibbs & Hill. And I can't make out the ' 23 signature, and the printed text reads, Robert E. Ballard, i 24 Jr., project manager. Do you see that? i 25 A Yes. i I l l \ 251-24pb2 l 1 Q It also indicates that copies were sent to'+- i .I 2 and it says, ARMS, B6R site. Do you know what that is? 3 A Brown & Root. d Q What's ARMS? 5 A ARMS is some kind of documentation center. 6 Q Documentation center that's maintained. D0' 7 you know what OL means? l 8 A No. 9 Q Then M. McBay. 10 A Right. 11 Q It says TUSI, and then it says IL. Do you 12 know what that means? 13 No. A I believe it stands for one letter. 14 Q What about H. Deam. Do you know who that might 15 be? !s 16 A No. l l l 17 !I Q Then it says, W.I. Vogelsang, TUSI site and I 18 it indicates that was telecopied to him. i 19 A Correct. ' 20 Q It also indicates a copy to L. Popplevell. 21 TUSI site. Do you see there are th r e e: sets of' initials?

  • 22 A Yes. Il 23 Q In capital letters here, REBa - PNL - SPM, 24 also with handwritten initials. Do you know any of those 25 individuals?

i k _. . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ 252 x . i l 1 A .I'm not familiar with the'SPM, but the SPM 2 could:be possibly Sam Martinovich. Butfto the best o'f my-

3

. recollection' Sam Martinovich is the. person.who.I talked to 'd regarding -- 5 MR. MIZUNO: -Was the person'you talked-to 6 regarding what? 7 THE WITNESS: Sam Martinov1ch regarding how they_could justify this letter the way they justified it. ~ 8 9 And~now if I am remembering the name correctly, which I think to I am, he was also the one that was brought up by them during j 11 the meeting in Dick Camp's office that.he would be the one 12 that they would have do the evaluation. 13 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 14 Q Now in your affidavit,j i is'there 15 any mention, any conversation you had%with respeclt to-16 Mr. Martinovich or anyone.else at Gibbs-& Hill in New York 17 regarding the preparation of this response? 18 MR. SPEKTER: Which response are we speaking 19 about? 20 MR. DAVIDSON: The one he'siidentified that 21 was dated January 23, 1984. 22 MR. SPEKTER: That's something that is not 23 in the record. I would request that it be copied at this 24 point, a copy be provided for the deposition. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter, I would appreciate 253 pb4 1 your letting me conduct my own examination. When you have 2 the podium you make whatever rules you like. 3 BY MR. DAVIDSON: l 4 Q there's a question pending, s 5 A Will you repeat the question -- if I, interpret 6 the' question you are asking me if there is any information 7 in the affidavit as to the response letter. 8 Q Well, that wasn't my question. My question 9 was, is there any mention of the_ telephone conversation that to you allege that'you had with the Gibbs & Hill New York office! 1 11 of employee therein after you received the response? 12 A No, there is not -- I'm going to hold back on l 13 that question until I do reread the paragraphs 1here. 14 Q MAy I call your attention, to 15 pages 10 and 11 of the affidavit, which by the way was-16 offered into evidence by your counsel. 17 (Witness reviewing document.)- 18 MR. DAVIDSON: {I' when you have 19 k completed reviewing those, would you pie se look up? 20 THE WITNESS: The only telephone conversation 21 indicated in this paragraph would be the one ma'de prior _to. 22 the writing of the meno you have, which was to the employee 23 who refused to sign off the DCA because of the violation of 24 the ES-100. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Reporter, would you please i 256 4 ~ J 1 read back my question? j 2 (The reporter read the record as requested.) j 3 BY MR. DAVIDSON: d Q, I Now would you please answer the question? 5 A ~No,-there is'not. 'o Q turning once again to cheftwo 7 paragraphs on page 10 regarding your, allegation that there- '8 is a conflict ~ between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide'1.75, is-9 there any mention of your having written a. start-up-memo 10 seeking an explanation? 11 A 'No, there'is not.  ! 12 Q Is there any mention in this affidavic of  : 13 your having been.provided with a response co that start-up 14 memo? 15 A No -- 16 Q I haven't finished -- through engineering 17 and from the architect engineer, Gibbs & Hill? 18 A No, there is not. 19 Q ( do you have a copy of the1 response 20 that was provided by Gibbs & Hill that was_given to you? 21 i . A I do not believe so. 22 Q You did not retain a copy? 23 A To the best of my knowledge I did-not. 2d Q But you may have? 25 A I don't know. , -; . ______2_--_______. ~255 24pb6 1 Q Would you check your records at home and if 2 .you1were.given a copy would you provide it for us? 3 A Yes, I will. 4 Q- Would you.do that early next week? , 5 A Yes. 6 You mentioned Q that.you'believe 7 that the response that was-provided to.,you was under~a cover 8 sheet, you-called it. 9 A Yes. -10 Q From Mr. Popplewell. 11 A I said it possibly could have been'under a 12 cover sheet. I'm not familiar it is was or not. I'do not 13 remember if it was or not. 14 Q A moment ago 1 think you made=a more affirmative; 15 statement. In any event, will you look for that cover sheet? 16 A Yes . 17 Q And if you have that, will you produce it to 18 us? l j i 19 A Yes, I will. ] 20 Q Will you do that early next week? .l .i i' I 21 A Yes, I will. l 22 Q Now, you indicated that you had made.a-23  ! telephone call to the NRC on or about December 16 after you + I - 24 had the discussion with Mr. Powers. I 25 A Yes, 1 did. l  ?  ? I , I 256 4 1 Q What.was.the reason for that call? 2 _A To confirmany questions of.ES-100 being in 3 violation of Reg Guide 1.75. 4 Q Who in the NRC did you contact? f l 5 A At this time I do not remember. 6 Q ~Did you know, did you introduce yourself'to. 7 the individual on the other end of the line? 8 A Eventually the individual on'the other end 9 of the line I believe did have my name. At the very beginnin.; 10 I wanted to keep it anonymous. I do not.know at which time 11 I broke being anonymous. 12 Q _Did the person on the other end of the line 13 give you.his identity? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Tell you how you made that call. Whom did you ' 16 call? Did you pick out a particular individual with the 17 NRC with whom you were acquainted?. i 18 A No, I did not. What happened was I had gotten 19 home, it was after 5:00. The NRC region for this area. 20 was closed at the time. The only one open to possibly answer i - 21 questions that I might have was the NRC region:towards. ' 22 California, which was Region V, I believe. ~ANd that's the 23 reasoning for calling Region V. 24 1 was just connected with an electrical 25 engineer. l I asked for an electrical engineering type. person 1 1 't ~f 1 - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ = _ _ _ _ - _ . _ . ~257 24pb8 1 to ask a questions to. 2 Q But you don't recollect who that might have 3 been? 4 A Not right now. 5 Q Did you at any time raise these matters with 6 the regional office that had charge for this particular 7 proj ect , which would be Region IV? 8 A No, in order to do that I would have had to 9 call during company time, which considering the amount of 10 conflict and harassment, you might say, that I go t for 11 calling Region V, I felt to try and call NRC during company 12 time would be very bad. 13 Q Now you just said that you got harassment 14 for calling Region IV You haven't earlier identified or 15 testified any hararsment for making that call. Are you now to giving us yet another incident that has not previously been 17 testified to? 18 A l'm saying that 1 was counseled on it, and 19 told that it places the company in bad light and should not 20 be done. 21 Were Q those the exact words that were used 22 in that counseling session? 23 A l'm not going to try and give an exact word 24 for word in a counseling session. 25 Q Well, could it have been, well, why don't I 258 9 4 1 you see whether there is a response from Gibbs & Hill and 2 before you go off half-cocked in calling the NRC with your 3 speculations, could that have been the sum and substance 4 of the conversation? 5 A No. My reasoning to the question such as 6 that was, I did not call NRC reporting an incident or-7 reporting a failure problem. I called NRC asking questions. 8 And I believe I might even have kept the first conversation 9 or phone call strictly confidential, which was cotally just 10 on my part doing questioning to see if I was correct in my 11 assumption. 12 Q You weren't certain that you were right and 13 you were looking for confirmation? 14 A Right. And once I gained confirmation from 15 an authority or a source higher than Gibbs & Hill. 16 Q Then you weren't prepared to listen to anybody 17 else's explanation? 18 A No. I was prepared to identify the problem. 19 Q But in other words, at that point after hearing 20 from this unidentified engineer from the NRC in Region V, 21 in your view no explanation than agreement with you would 22 have been acceptable, would it? 23 A No. The specific electrical engineer for 24 NRC also during the conversation specified that other 25 nuclear power plants had been shut down recently for this 9 259 L' 24pb10 l li i 1 same separation violation. problem, and.that if'they are ' l. 2 building to this specification'that they stand a very good.

  • chance of being shut down theirselves.

3 I 4 So'at the time there I was dealing w'ith how- .5 much -- I even specified to Fred Powers'some. time.that?you I 6 were going to sit here with a violation, continue on ' _l' 7 building ~ this plant and possibly spend an excessive amount 8 of money later when the pyoblem actually is encountered. 9 Q 4 this. gentleman that~you called '! 10 from Region V. Did he indicate to you that he had inspected =4 11 or reviewed any'of the cable separations at Comanche Peak? 17 A No, he did not.

  • 13 Q So the only basis on which he had to.go in .

I 14 response to your question was your assertion a b o u t --- 15 A I read him.; He was perfectly familiar with 16 the Reg Guide 1.75 which most NRC personnel.are. I r'ead him.i. ] 17 portions out of the Reg Guide 1^75 which he understood to l j I 4 18 be that. I also read him specific inf ormation directly: from. a I I 19 the ES-100 which is outlined in my~ affidavit. . ., 20  ! And his reply was. yes it is in violation. l 21 i Q Is this conversation and the details-the sum J i, 22 and substance which you-just revealed to'us now part of your 23 affidavit? 24 A I believe not. s 25 Q when you received the_ response fron [' i l 1 i 260-4 1 Gibbs & Hill,'New. York did you take it up-with this 2 . unidentified engineer from Region V7' '3 (Pause.). d A Repeat that one more time. When I received -- 5 MR. DAVIDSON: Instead of your.trying to 6 repeat it, why don't we ask'the reporter.to - - 7 THE WITNESS: Let's take a short break here 8 and come back to that particular question'afterwards. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: I don't follow what you're-10 saying. 11 THE WITNESS: I would like'to take a break. 12 MR..DAVIDSON: You want to consult with 13 counsel? 14 THE WITNESS: No, I would like to take a break, 15 MR. DAVIDSON: As I told you before,Jany time 16 you want to take a break you can have it. Go ahead, 17 ) 18 / THE WITNESS: Okay.. 19 _(Recess -- 4:40 p.m.) 20 21 i

  • 22 23 2A 25

l jon! 261 '! l #25 (4:56 p.m.) 1 l~1 i 4:56p.m. MR. SPEKTER: Ue are back on the record i l 3 and the reporter is going to read the question that we had ll before the break. j d MR. DAVIDSON: Would you, please,-  ;) ' Mr. Reporter? i 6 (The reporter read the' record as requested.); [ ' 7 . THE WITNESS: Yes. BY MR. DAVIDSON: 9 'Q Did'you send a copy to this unidentified 10 individual of the written response of Gibson-Hill? 11 A I do not remember. 12 Q Do you recollect having taken it up with , 13 him? What is your recollection? , 14 -f1 A Oh, I do know that I' formally made a report  ! 15 on that incident to the Region V NRC representative. 16 ' Q Now, this is a formal report? g 17 A I actually indica'ted to him that there-was l. l 18 a problem, that they had had time to resolve this problem-19 and this was what their answer was to the. problem. Q And when you say formal report 21 what -- t A Okay. Maybe the word formal would not be 23 correct. Originally 1 indicated to him that I did not want 24 this to go in as a report to him or to be researched. 25 The final one towards the end pone calls was that yes, I , 263 Ii i 4 I had received the information back from here and'that I 2 it was inconsistent to what me and him had talked about 1 3 then that I was placing a formal complaint at this time. 4 Or I was notifying him of the problem and requesting 5 research into the background of it. ) 6 Q Now, did you call anyone in Region IV 7 about the problems since they had jurisdiction of your 8 plant? 9 A As I indicated earlier, Region IV was 10 always closed by the time I was able to get home to make il those phone calls. And in some cases Region V was already j 12 closed. So I probably had several phone calls where I 13 tried to contact him but he had already left t. h e office 14 in Region V. 15 Q Did you ever make a phone call'to Region IV? 16 { A No, I did not.  : 17 ] Q Did it have an answering machine where you i IB could have left a message on at Region IV? i 19 A You have got to understand here that I am 20 trying to maintain a certain amount of being anonymous about j 21 this, 22 i Q Well, you said you had disclosed yourself by l 23 this point. 24 A Well, I believe telling this one person 25 is one thing but to put your name down on an answering i 0 ....__..__.._.__..___.________m_ ) jon i 262C I machine that could possibly be reviewed by no telling who 2 and not having the stipulation already addressed to the 3 person you are talking to that you that you do not want your name used in any matter, it would be stupid on my 5 part to do something like that. 6 Q Did you not think you could mail a 7 writtn complaint to Region IV? 8 A 1 felt that a verbal would be more appropriate, and T m not even sure -- like you asked a 10 question earlier. I may have maild him documentation II associated with this. 12 Q You may have mailed Region V? 13 A Right. Q And did it occur to you to mail to 15 Region IV if you were going to mail something, to mail 16 it to Region IV who had jurisdiction over your plant? A 1 was not talking with Region IV . 18 Plus, if you look at it this way, too, there is a certain level of buffer between there, t o'o , that now in order for 0 Region IV or anybody on the site to find out who I am, 21 they have to go through Region V and so therefore therer. 2 is an added buffer there. Or they have to go through this 3 one person and dealing, you know -- keeping strict confidence, you know, I felt that it was easier for me to "5 go through Region V. Jb l n 263  ;  ? I Q Did you not believe that your 2 confidentiality would maintained by Region IV if you 3 asked it be kept in strict confidence? ~ d A I don't remember if I had the true feeling 5 that it would not be kept in strict confidence. I know 6 that I started explaining the problem with Region V. I 7 continued to explain the' problem to Region V. Towards the 8 end I see no reason to change to Region IV. 9 Q Was there a resident NRC representative 10 f at Comanche Peak? 11 A Yes. I 12 Q Did you take this matter up with him? 13 A No, I did not. 14 Q Was that because you felt he wouldn't 15 maintain your confidentiality? 16 A Yes. You are very correct in that. That 17 i is one of the main reasons. There was a common belief on IB board the job site in general. 19 Q Did you have any evidence of it? That he 20 wouldn't? Or were you just concerned he might not? 21 A Concerned that he might not. 22 Q Were you concerned that Region IV might not? 23 A Possibly so. I don't know if -- you have 24 got to figure that after my first telephone conversation 25 with Dick Camp -- I mean with Region V -- I talked to Dick h' i .? 264 .4 jon 1 Camp and ene of th e:t s t a t e me n t s he made during that meeting 2 was, as I said, that,-hey, I didn't make it a complaint 3 and I tried to keep my name anonymous and everything, right, and I told him I didn't want my name used.when this 5 subject came across and Dick Camp's reply was that maybe 6 not to these exact words but he indicated that TUCCO I knows who reports to the NRC. And I said bey. I told 0 them that I wanted to stay out of this. He indicated to me that TUGC0 does know who reports to NRC. 10 Well. TUCCO-TUSI, the organization as a 11 general organization, or Comanche Peak as a general. 12 Q Did he tell you how he knew that? 13 A No, he did not. 14 Q Or his basis for stating that? 15 A No, he.did not. 16 Q Did you ask him? 17 A No, I did not. '8  ! Q You said the reason that you called 19 \ Region V initially was because they would be open after '! i 20 you got off work. 21 . A Correct. 1 22 i Q Wouldn't some of the regions in the East 23 be open before you went to work? ' 24 A Correct. Well, even theree, we are talking 3 25 about seven --  ! 'I ~ l I i n 265 i P 1 Q Answer the question first ar.d then.give 2 us your explanation. 3 Wouldn't they be open before you went to a work? For example',-the region in Washington -- the 5 headquartersiin Washington, D.C. 6 A Well, I would have to sit here and.think 7 that the region in Washington, D.C. 'I believe is two hours 8 shead of us;'em I correct that Washington, D.C. is two 9 hours in advance of this time? 10 1 would have to look at a time zone. 'It 11 is either one or two hours; right? And we are speaking of 12 me going into work at a 7:00 o' clock time zone or time 13 and most of your personnel in NRC headquarters do not come 14 in until like 8 o' clock, maybe even 9, and I am not familiar 15 with what their start time is. So it was much easier to 16 do it in the afternoon after I got back. 17 MR. SPEKTER: This line of questioning I 1B believe is dilatory and time-consuming and inappropriate. 19 He has testified that he contacted Region V in California. 20 That is the fact. 21 That is here. And that he has testified to . 22 Why he did or did not do something else is 23 purely speculation and not relevant to this particular 24 discovery proceeding. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: Wait a minute, Mr. Spekter. 1 1 jan 2661 '! 1 1  ! I am prepared to give a lot of latitude ' l 2 to a lot of statements, but what you just said is totally 3 without foundation or merit. What he did and why he did it is exactly what this deposition is all about and why 5 he refused to contact Region IV and why he insisted on 6 dealing over the phone with Region V and why he wouldn't -- 7 MR. SPEKTER: It is not a matter of f B refusing -- 9 1 MR. DAVIDSON: Excuse me. You are f 10 interrupting, Mr. Spekter. Please don't do that. I have l 11 always shown you the courtesy to let you complete all of 12 your statements before I spoke and I assume you are going '3 to return that courtesy with respecting my same rights. All I am saying is that the reason for 15 what he did and the reason why he believed what he 16 believed are highly relevant in this case, and we are I7 dealing with a specific incident which he says created a te circumstnace of harassment dealing with the question and - W issue raised in pages 10 an d .ll of the affidavit. And I 20 know that you consider my questions to be relevant because  ! 21 i we discussed that and I don't think that the;r are dilatory l 22 because I think that I have done nothing but move forward  ! 23  ! in this line of questioning and pursue cach topic as it I 24 arose. 25 I did tell you during the break that one of i  ! L L________-._ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ .._________m 267 4 the reasons why this was taking as much time as it was was 2 that, ' continues from time to time to lapse into , 3 unresponsiveness and to insist on making irrelevant speeches in response to questions and providing testimony and 5 creating new assertions and new incidents that were not 6 covered in his direct testimony nor in his affidavit nor previously testified to. And I told you that it was 8 my obligation in a discovery deposition to follow his lead and I told you that it was not I who was leading him in 10 this examination, but he was leading me, and that's why I I I couldn't give you _.a termination date or time. 12 p Now, if you have a legitimate objection l l 13 you know I have every desire that you get it on the record, I' but I frankly thought that was really out of order and 15 that is the reason I am responding to it in this manner. I6 MR. SPEKTER: I believe this line of l '7 questioning is out of order. 18 MR. DAVIDSON: Your objection is so noted. BY.tMR. DAVIDSON: 20 Q l janswer the question.pending. 21 A I don!.t believe there was a question 22 pending. I 23 Q you say you may have mailed some 24 material to Region V but you chose not to mail it to any 25 other region; is that correct? > jon 263 l 1 A Correct. 2 Q Is your conversation with the unidentified 3 engineer in Region V detailed and described in your-d affidavit? 5 A No, it is not. 6 Q Is the subsequent discussion with this 7 . unidentified engineer about the response provided by 8 Gibson and Hill mentioned in your affidavit? 9 A No, it is not. 10 Q Now, you were telling us.( 11 that you discussed the response / you were'trying to 12 determine whether you had provided the respons e to the 13 unidentified engineer. Do you remember that? Id A Once again.I did not -- I don't understand 15 what you are asking. 16 1 Q I haven't asked anything. I.was asking 17 whether you remember what we previously discussed, but I 18 will have the reporter read back my statement to you. 19 (The reporter read the record as requested.) 20 MR. SPEKTER: I will ask counsel to > ) i 21 rephrase the question. ' l 22 MR. DAVIDSON: I think your suggestion is ) 23 a good one. Mr. Spekter, l ! i 2d BY MR. DAVIDSON: }' 25 Q You will recollect that we have been 1 E ________________ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - - - 269 4 I discussing whether you had mailed or otherwise provided 2 the Gibson-Hill response to the unidentified engineer at 3 Region V. Do you recollect that? A Yes. 5 Q And my understanding was that you couldn't 6 remember whether you had or had n o t-. A Correct. 8 Q But you did remember that you discussed a response. 10 A Correct. 11 Q Would you please tell me what you told gg the Gibson-Hill response was? 13 14 A I believe I read it to him. I believe I 15 had the documentation there and I read it to him. 16 That's the end of my -- I related to him I believe. 17 18 Q Why did you call this engineer in Region V l 19 and ask him his opinion about the Gibson-Hill response? A 20 Because it was in conflict to the 21 informationnbenhad given me previously. 22 Q Andyou wanted to find out what he thought about the response? 23 A Correct. 24 25 Q And did h e respond to your qeustion? A Yes. I sjon 270 t . Q And what it-is that you-allege-that he 2 said? 3 A 1 believe that'-- now this is whereiche. s .le ~ questioning on my part as far as my memory comes in, he-5 could,have poss&bly asked me'for-the documentation to be' ' 6 mailed to him, which I may have done,.and that.is' vague; .j ' 7 . in my memoryLif that did occur. 8 1 am saying that it is possible that.that ] 9 did occur. I believe he had told me, though, that he'would j_- 10 'look into it and get'back with me.- Q did he get back to you? 12 A No, he did not. I-don't know if he-13 attempted to or not but-I did not receive phone calls-from 1s him. 15 Q Well, if he had attempted to get'back to 16 you by phone, was there some place he could have.left a 17 i message? 18 A My home phone number, but if there was 19 nobody there he would not have been able to leave a 20 ' message. 21 t I You had asked him to contact you at.home ~ Q d 22 ' i and not at the plant? j 23 A Ch, definitely.' , 24 j Q At the time of these discussions'were you [: 25 married? .; l t i J l ' l 271  ? I A Yes, I was. 2 Q Were you living with your wife? l 3 A Yes, I was. MR. SPEKTER: Objection.as to the 5 relevancy of the question. 6 MR. DAVIDSON: Be patient, Mr. Spekter. I BY MR. DAVIDSON: 8 Q Was your wife working at the time? A No, she was not. 10 Q Was she a homemaker as the expression II is? In other words, was she a housewife? 12 A Yes, she was. '3 Q And if you had been contacted at your home and she was there she could have taken the message for you? 15 A If she had been there. 'O Q And she never gave you any reason to '7 believe that she had gotten the message from this '8 unidentified engineer? A No, she didnot. 20 Q Do you know whether the unidentified 21 engineer at Region V ever followed up..on the material 22 that you raised with him? 23 A No, I do not. Unless also that during that 24 time period it might have ran into -- I am not familiar with 25 the time frame. I couldn't say. j en. 272- . i .. a 1 Q. Excuse me if I look'a little puzzled. ~ 2 When you say you'are not-familiar.with the time' frame, whatLare you-referring'to? -d A Well...I wonder if.it-was:duringia very 5 . busy time frame where my wife was busy in outside activities and me personally, too. And'towards th'e.end of my employment-I had gotten to the. point to where I could 8 have cared, you know, less. They had just about L beaten me down you might say.' I won't say that I did-not care.'because'I 11 still could but lt was not' pursuing.the violations in the '? procedures:as actively as'I had been before. 13 1 14 Normallyl-- if I had been normally pursuing it I am not' returning'my phone call. I would have 15 returned his. 16 Q Did he know your home address? 17 A No. I don? t believe he did'know my'home end2 5 address. I kept that part out, I believe. 19 20 21 ' i 22 23 j 24  !

)

I 25 'I f 1 273 lb1 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q Were you, at the time, listed in the 3 Granbury phone book? 4 A Yes, I was. 5 Q You never received any correspondence o from this unidentified engineer, did you? 7 A No, I didn't. 8 MR, SPEKTER: That's his answer. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: I asked whether he got a telephone 10 call. This was whether he got any correspondence, mail. 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: ' 13 A I answered your question. 14 Q No, you did not, sir. 15 A I said no, I did not. 16 Q I'm sorry. I didn't hear you. I guess 17 it was Mr. Spekter's interruption. All right. You did not. 18 Did you, at any time, raise your concern or 19 your complaints or your puzzlement over the alleged 20 conflict between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 with 21 anyone else at the NRC, after you failed to get.a respon'se 22 from the unidentified engineer at Region V? " 23 A No, I did not. 24 Q Did you raise or pursue the issue with 25 anyone else at all? I 'fc861b2 1 A No, I did not -- might I ', at this: time.- 2 refresh.my memoryfbyllooking at the return documentation,- 3 the dating of the return documentation, to see wh'at time 1 ~ 4 frame it_was'actually in?- 5 Q Let me understand what.your question.is. ?Are 6' you saying that you want to get a sense of'the time 1where 7 this all occurred, on-thel basis of the-date'indicatedLon 8 the response from'Gibbs & Hill? 9 A Correct. to Q The letter date was1 January' 23.-1984. II A The. response from Gibbs 6 Hill was January. 12 237 . 13 Q Right. The . r e s p ons e to your memo'was December Id

19. By the way, does it refresh your--recollection of.how 15 long it took~to get a response to your-startup memo?-

16 A That I don't remember. I don't-remember when-17 the initial reporting was on the letter. It may'have been. 18 I don't remember. I would have to'look back=on the files . 19 again. . 20 Q Did you understand the question? 21 A Yes, you were'asking -- 22 Q Do you remember we talked about how quickly 23 after you wrote your startup memo you got.a response? And i 1 2d you said, well, 1-don't really remember. It: could be.a month. l 25 It could be a year and a half.  :{ And I said, well, was'it as .l l l l l 8 l l 275 33  ? I long as a year and a half, and you said no. 2 I said could it have been as short as a 3 month and you said possibly or it could be three months. 4 Now we have a date on a document that you've 5 identified that you wrote, December 19. And we have a date 6~ on a document that purports to be the' response of Gibbs 7 6 Hill, New York, indicating January 23. And I ask you 8 whether now your recollection is refreshed as to how long 9 that the time period was between the date or the time when to you forwarded the startup memo and the time you got a 11 response? 12 A 1 would have to look at the date of the 13 memo, when it was generated. You're saying that January 23rd 14 was the date that I got the response? 15 No, I said that's t h. Q date on the document. 16 A Well, what I really wanted to find out is 17 the date when I received the response to the letter. 18 Q Well, my question was not that. 19 A Well, you haven't -- 20 Q In other words, you can't tell -- from those 21 two days -- what the general period of time that elapsed 22 between the time you asked the question and the time you 23 got a response? You have no recollection? 24 A 1 don't. I'm missing your -- you've gotten 25 me confused at your line of questioning here. I'm not l l l 276 'fc341'b4 i 1, . I familiar with what we're' answering here. ' n . 2 Q' Do you know.why that is ,l 3 MR. SPEKTER: ( / I object to your characterize-d tion as to why it is. Please.just ask him the question.. 5 MR. DAVIDSON: No..I'm sorry, Mr._ Spekter., q 6 I'm entitled to say what;I want to say. 'If you-want.to l j 7 interrupt your witness, which you've done from time to timc, 8' that's fine if he accepts.it'. - I. don't. This is my .., i 9 examination and I'll conduct it in the proper-manner. with ] 10 full courtesy and ettiquette to you in full" professionalism 11 at all times and I expect nothing less in return and I 1 i 12 accept nothing else. I e 13 'And you won't cut me off and you won't limit 14 my statements, and-you won't interrupt me. Because that 15 is simply not proper and you know it. I i 16 Now as I was going to say,, J TI'll j 17 tell you why'you seem to be confused. Yo dre trying to. 18 figure out where I'm going. You're trying to figure'out what 19 the question means. If you'll just answer the question l 20 as asked, it's going to get through real quick. i 21 Now I's going to ask the reporte'r to read; 22 that question back to you, or better yet I'm not going to 23 l waste the time with that because we are anxious to speed- . I i 24 things up.. 1 25 - what I'm trying to say'to youLis, \ / 41 ) [' _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _m_ 61b5 -877  ? I you earlier testified that'you didn't recollect howLmuch, 2 time elapsed between'the. time you set forward your-3 startup memo and the time you received.your. response. 4 'And we tried to bracket the time. And;you'said.well, Lit - 5 _- could be one month or'it could be a year anda half. 6 Now isn't that true? .lsn't-that'what you said ? 7 THE WITNESS: No,~1 believe y'ou're'taking ~ it 8 out. I said that it'could'be-one month or it could-be'ai 9 year and a half on normal response time. :And that's what' 10 we were speaking of, not the response time of that one 11 letter. And then you specifically warned me to reply to 12 the response time of that one letter and I specified that 13 it could be one month or possibly three months. 14 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q Okay. Now, having1 heard the' dates and seen 16 the documents that constituted the startup memo and the 17 response by Gibbs & Hill, I asked you whether your 18 recollection was refreshed, as to how long a period elapsed 19 between the time of the startup memo and the time you 20 received the response? 21 A And as I indicated at the beginning of this. 22 I was requesting information off of those memos to refresh 23 my memory as to their dates, again. 24 Q We gave you the dates, December 19th was-25 .i your startup memo. January 23 was the date of the response. ' r l l . I 1 I i i r. 278 -fc261b6 i 1 A Well, that is what had me confused earlieri-2 i was that I believe that you stated that the January 23rd-3 was the date-that the startup memo was generated. d y -- 'Q No, sir. I did not state that.  ; 5 A Okay, you're saying that December 23rd was 6 l when the -- ! 7 Q December 19th, sir, is the startup memoiyou 8 wrote. That's the date.it bears. -It's been' marked in 9 evidence and marked for identification. 10 It was received on January 23rd. ~ A 11 Q The response was' dated --- 12 A January 23rd. 13 Q I don't.know when you received it. 1d A Now there is very good ' possibility : tha t it 15 could have taken six weeks'in time' processing. Under the 16 amount'of emphasis that I was placing on this'one article, 17 I would imagine'that it didn't, because.if you will notice 18 that one copy was telecopied to Ivan Vogelsang. 19 Q That's right. 20 A Now-just because it was telecopied to  ! 21 . Ivan Vogelsang, Ivan Vogelsang may not'have taken it upon ' 22 himself to transmit'on over to me. 23  ! Q That's right. 24 A So the actual time I would have received j 25 the document is still indeterminate. l l e 3 279 57. 3 ,. 'I i 1 Q Well, itJmay be indeterminate but you.see, 2 the questionJI keep asking'you tis whether.kowingLthese 3 dates, you have any recollection that has-been refreshed. 3 I 4 And if 1. understand you' correctly:and we could have stopped 5' this colliquoy-a long time agoL:and maybe you would like 6 to consult with.your counsel on how toJanswer. questions;11ke 3 7 this. 8 If you.still don't have' any idea when. you 9 received it and still don't have'any idea of the' time.that-  ? 10 elapsed between.the original' memorandum that was sent up 11 and the response that was r ec e ive d ' b'y :~you , then.the answer 'l 12 is no, Mr. Davidson, even though.I'have seen the dates, I' 13 't still do not have any. refreshed recollection as to how much 1 14 time elapsed. s 15 And then there can't be any further questions 16 because you don't have any recollection. 17 A No, I do not have any recollection. IB Q Now answer the question.  ; l 19 Now, you earlier inquired-of me, ' L 20 to provide you with the date of the re'sponce'from Gibbs'& } l 21 Hill because you felt it would give you some time frame

  • 22  :

during which you were having the conversations with the ' 23 Region V unidentified. engineer. Do you remember that? ] 24 A { Witness nodding affirmatively.) 1 i 25 a Q Can you tell me why you thought you needed ' 3 I e I i 280 -fc261b8' I that information?

2. A- 'I-just needed to refresh my memory;cs'to-13 which. time of-the-yearLve were' speaking of exactly, so I

'4' could possibly put-in lineLwhat.was, going on during :that 5' time:' period. 6 Q- :Do you remember,'from your;first 7 conversationLwith'the unidentified. engineer, whether he 8 shared your concern about the conflict?.:And'when I.say 9 shared your concern. I don't necessarily'mean only,th'at'het to might have agreed with.-your' interpretation that there.was-11 a' conflict._ but rath'er'that he was;1ikewise in addition . 12 in agreement that this wasEsomething.aboutLwhich'.to have. some serious concern? 13 '14 A Yes, he did. He-did have. concern'over'it~. 15 Q And did he seem, to you, anxious 1 to get '16 to.the bottom of the matter? 17 A I don't know what his p'ersonality is. 'I-18 don't understand how to determine.if'he was anxious. 19 Q 'I don't think that's the answer to the 20 question advanced. 21 A 1 do not know.  ! 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spek'ter? 23 MR. SPEKTER: Pleasecjust answer the 24 question. o 25 .. 'i ] 1 .l < l 1 ~ l 1 281 c261b9 4 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q Well, what I asked for is did you 3 understand it to be, or take him.to be anxious, to get d to the bottom of this, based on your impression of what he 5 was saying to you? 6 A I don't remember, at this time,,1f he was 7 anxious to get to t he bottom:or not. 8 Q Did you remember, at any time? 9 A I imagine that I would have known what he 10 was like shortly after the time period. 11 Q Well, the reason I say that is you've made 12 a statement that he said this is something that's been a I3 problem at all the plants and we'd "have to close down the 14 whole plant. So he must have been concerned? l 15 A I did not make that statement. 16 Q What is it that he said? 17 A I said he stated that there was another 18 plant or other plants that had been shut down for the 19 same problem. 20 Q A whole plant was shut down? 21 A Yes. 22 Q That would be pretty serious, wouldn't it, 23 Mr. Walter? 24 A 1 don't know how serious it would be, or not. 25 Q You think that's a slight matter? l l '4 282 fc261b10-A 1 In reference.to'what?s In reference to aufuel '? load disaster? .Yes, a shutdown is a' slight matter.. 3 .Q How long would'it.take-to correc t , in your h, 4 . view? 5 A There again .that's questionable', depending ~ 6 on-how big the-problem is. 7 Q- But in other words,'you felt that.a. violation 8 of' Regulatory Guide..that might-result;in shutting'down the 9 plant,'was a matter not of any great concern.to e i t h e r: you 10 or.to Region

1. V_. unidentified engineer?.

11 1 just want to get:a: sense of whether he'was 12 concerned. whether he thottght.that you had a. complaint:that-13 was legitimate, but also that was_one of serious concern. 14 A I believe he was concerned, as.to - you've 15 got to' figure the plant;was still in the construction phases. 16 His first question was has -- and I forget - .which inspectio 2-17 been performed. And 11had to. answer him I don't know.. 18 And possibly his concerns there was, well, 19 this inspection - or supposed inspection -- should find 20 this problem. 21 Q Do you remember the name of the. inspection to 22 which he referred? 23 A No, I do not. 24 I Q Do you know whether that inspection'has ' 25 subsequently been performed?' -l 283 1n11 4 1 A I do not know. 2 Q And if'it had been performed and no such 3 problem was found, would that be some evidence that no such 4 problem existed? 5 A No. 6 Q Particularly in light of the' fact that you 7 made a formal report of its existence? 8 A No there either. 9 Q You think that you made a formal report with to the NRC, and then somebody just took it and just threw it 11 in the trashbasked? i, 12 .l MR. SPEKTER: Objection to'the characterization n 1 I 13 and the conclusion. That's not what he stated or supported 14 by anything that he said. 15 MR. DAVIDSON: No, he didn't state it and to that wasn't my question. My question is that here is a 17 serious concern that he has raised. He says he's made a IB formal report of it and it was not pursued. And there were 19 subsequent inspections and I'm asking him what does he think 20 happened, that the matter hasn't otherwise c orne to some 21 attention. 22 MR.SPEKTER: 1 think it's irrelevant what 23 he think has happened. 24 MR. DAVIDSON: No, I think it's very 25 important because I think it may show that the NRC thought e bl '284 H l fc261bl3 _I i that the Gibbs & Hill response was correct and therefore 2 didn't. pursue it. 3 MR. SPEKTER: You can argue _that ~ to the -4 court, but-that's not the purpose of thisEdeposition.  ; 1 5 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 6 Q Well, did.you gather anything from the fact 7 that this was not followed up? In other words, did you i 8 arrive at any conclusion?- 't 9 A I do.not know. personally, whether this was? .j . 10 followed up or not.

11. Q .Not my question.i l'didn't ask 12 you whether you knew. You've'aiready det' ermined you' don't.

13 What I asked you was whether you drew any conclusion about 14 what appears to have been the failure to follow up your 15 fermal. complaint? i-16 A In my opinion, I feel'that thereL'is no i 17 failure to follow up,the' complaint. I have, by all rights -- 18 by me -- I believe that the complaint or that the paperwork 19 associated with'that is someplace. Now, as far as how or I 20 where at in the process it'is right now, or whether it was I 21 discussed or reviewed or anything, may.be it took him longer 22 to handle his proceedings t h a n fue anticipated and thereby, 23 I've.already moved so he could not return my phone call. i 24 You know, when you're dealing with a nuclear 25 power plant, to go three months or something like that, to j i e i .________-_-_-___A 285 313 I I watch paperwork pass through the channels is not unusual.  ; 2 (Pause.) . 3 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 l i4 15 i j I7 l 18 l 19 20 i 21 22 1 23 24 25 l 286 - fc27pbl 1 MR. M1ZUNO: I would like to put a question , i 2 to Mr. Spekter. 3 MR. DAVIDSON: We're.off the record, j 4 - . i (Discussion _off_the record.)  ; i 5-MR. DAVIDSON: On the record. Mr. Mizuno. 6 1 noticed that you felt you wanted to make a, statement or 7 otherwise raise an objection to a question. 8 MR. M1ZUNO: Yes, I wish to ask Mr. Spekter 9 a question in response to his. response to a1 statement made -10 by you. And I didn't want to interrupt.- ~ i' 11 e MR. DAVIDSON: Well, thank you. 12 MR. MIZUNO: I thought.this would-be an f 13 appropriate time. Th) I'now understand that. CASE is not ~ Id going to- press forward'its theory of its case in-this l j 15 proceeding that the response or the lack of response by the I 16 NRC contributed to the atmosphere of intimidation at - 17 I Comanche Peak, because if that is true then I would be' 18 inclined to support an objection to this line of ques'tioning 19 regarding the NRCand{ ) un derstanding.of what 20 the NRC did would.be inappropriate. 21 But if CASE if.is going!to continue, then 22 I feel that it would be proper questioning..although we 23 continue to object to that theory of the case. We don't 2d-believe that.is a proper proceeding. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: Just to helpLMr. Spekter along 387 q i I l 4 1 in answering.you, I will tell, Mr. Mizuno, that my view is a l 2 k that the question that I've directed with respect tk { 3 / asserted, alleged conversation with some unidentified i k 4 engineer in Region V I think are relevant to his own 5 assertions that he understood these regulations and it was 6 confirmed in his view that they were inconsistent with the 7 ES-100 procedure. 8 And therefore they relate very directly to 9 his affidavit testimony. I was not necessarily eliciting 10 his answers in this discovery deposition to determine whether i 11 or not the NRC had been a responsive body, or had fulfilled 12 any of its statutory responsibilities. 13 I was doing it instead to determine what 1

  • 14 a c t io n s(g. took and what~ conversations and activities 15 were a part of his belief and helped him develop his to conclusions and develop the impressions that he then recorded 17 in the affidavit, or in this case, didn't record in the  !

l 18 affidavit. 19 But that was the thrust of my questioning. It 20 was not to elicit any information as to whether or not the l 21 NRC is doing its job or contributing to any alleged ephemeral l 22 amorphous miasma of intimidation. \ I i 23 MR. MIZUNO: That's fine. I understand that. 24 counsel. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: But if you wish to ask j { l 4 288 '7pb3 1 Mr. Spekter about his theory, that's fine. 2 MR. MIZUNO: I understand the the counsel for 3 Applicants may have had a particular reason for asking.those 4 questions, but apart from your purpose. I heard a. statement 5 by Mr. Spekter regarding how CASE was not concerned-about-6 how -- I ~ can't recall the exact words, but I thought I heard 7 something.to the effect that CASE was not interested or 8 is not. concerned about how the lack of response or the 9 response by NRC may have affected the employee's feelings 10 regarding intimidation and harassment. 11 Perhaps I could have the reporter read back 12 the portion. 13 MR. SPEKTER: I'm not. familiar with that 14 particular segment of my Comments. However, I would state 15 that since the matter is pleaded and finished at this point 16 that the testimony stands. I think we are wasting time. I've 17 noted my objections for the record, and at this point, 18 Mr. Mizuno, I am not going to limit or put parameters around 19 CASE's theory of this particular action . 20 MR. MIZUNO: All right. 21 MR. SPEKTER: Let us_ proceed. 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q Did you report your subsequent conversations 24 or some conversations you had after the Gibbs & Hill response, 25 did you report your subsequent conversations with the 1 289 i 1 unidentified engineer at the NRC to anyone at the - Comanche 2 Peak site? 3~ A No. Considering the amount of intimidation, d you might say, that I received -- 5 Q 'I might not say that -- 6 A Well', considering the feeling -- 7 MR. SPEKTER: I would request that he be 8 allowed to continue to answer. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: Well taken. 10 THE WITNESS: I felt that it was intimidation. 11 It was restricting me from exercising one of my legal rights 12 by calling NRC and after -- it totall surprised me that to 13 get that much of a intimidation from supervisory personnel-14 for doing it, and after the initial intimidation-such as that , 15 1 -- there was no way that I was going to explain to them 16 that I had called these people back again. 17 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 18 Q Now you say you were intimidated? 19 A Well, yes. When they come.in and your boss 20 tells you that it places the company in a very bad position 21 because you are calling the NRC -- 22 Q You so earlier stated that's not what he 23 said. You said it's what you t~sk him to say. That was your 24 summary. What did he say? 25 A Okay. To express word for word from memory, L 290 '7pb5 1 no I can't do that. I But what he said was, or what I j 1 2 interpreted him to be saying, or the words that I felt he 3 phrased it in was that it places the company in a bad l 4 position. l q 5 (Off the record.) t J l 6 MR. DAVIDSON: Let us.go back on the record. 7 THE WITNESS: At this time it was specified  ; 8 by Dick Camp-that it places the company in a bad position, 9 me calling NRC or contacting the 800 QA/QC hotline to speak 10 of. And by stating that to me it was my feeling that by 11 placing the company in a bad position that<I could-very well 12 be put in a bad position myself. 13 BY MR..DAVIDSON: 14 Q When you say place the company in a bad 15 position, what company do you think -- 16 A 1mpell Corporation. 17 Q So it places Impell Corporation in a bad 18 position? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Vis-a-vis whom? 21 A Okay. TUSI Engineering. Okay, I believe that 22 during this conversation Dick Camp said it places them in 23 a bad position, and that might be the time period that I 24 found out that TUSI Engineering was actually paying the 25 paycheck for Impell Corporation, and thereby he was stating l l 291 'j 3

i. l 4

1 that you go to NRC and you place the company in a bad positio n-2 or in bad light.with the client, which they are working for, 3 And .ir j ust insinuated to me, you know, it i 4 placed the company.in a bad position and now the employee ' 5 gets placed in a bad position. 6 Q When you say you were intimidated, what do 7 you mean by that? { 8 A Well, intimidated enough that not to make 9 these phone calls to NRC, not to make these phone calls to lo che 800 hotline. I continued to make.them anyway, but in 11 secrecy. l -1 12 I Q So you were not intimidated enough to stop ] 13 making them? 1 j 14 (Pause.) 15 A Well -- 16 Q We have had testimony here that you continued 17 to make calls to the NRC. 18 A Yes. IV Q In effect, you made a formal complaint. 20 A Right. 21 0 Right. 22 A Yes. 23 Q So therefore, if it was intimidation it was 24 unsuccessful because it didn't stop you from doing it. 25 A Well, it did stop me from using the 800 number. 4 292 97pb7 - *l J 1 Q .The.800 number would have. connected you with l 2 .whom? 3 A With the --'an engineering group'that was d in Dallas / Fort Worth. I'm not' familiar exactly with who.

5. Q, Did.you know who that 800 - =you said an

.6 engineering group. Was it.your impression that that 7 engineering group was unrelated to TUCCO? 8 A .No. That.is one'of the reasoning that I-9 did not contact the 800 number, even in' secrecy. ~ From that 10 point on I.was intimidated enough to maintain-an anonymous 11 type atmosphere from'there on. 12 Q You mean you were intimidated into remaining 13 anonymous.- Id .A Right. 15 Q But you already stated that in'your.first 16 telephone conversation you. insisted upon anonymity and this-17 is before you' received any feedback as to what Mr. Camp. 18 or what anybody else thought about the call. Why did.you 19 want to be anonymous then? 20 A When I talked to.the first engineer at NRC 21 and I explained to him-that I mainly wanted.to maintain av 22 certain amount of being anonymous. And that I did not: vant' 23 my name used. 'And I maintained that throughout the whole l 2d conversation with him that=1 did not want my name'used. .But i . 1

j. 25 I wanted to be' maintained' anonymous -

l l u e i ____:__---.--__-__________-___-__._---______._____. _ _ - _ _ __ _. - __._ - _- _ _ - . _ _ _ . --__.i 293-9 4 b

1' But I also told him;during the first1 phone 2 .

conversation that' knowing thesnature of this incident, and 3 being that it' occurred.and everything that if they.rea'lly 4 wanted to find'out who'I was that-they.could. ~ l l 5 Q How couldE they'do that? ! '6 -A 'You've.'got to figure'that'if they'.comeson 7 the job site, right,-and say,this they can get_'in a general'- . 2 8 location of who is.the.one.doing[these accusations. 9 Tell me, Q 'did you review the 10 response that was provided by Gibbs & Hill in you -- 11 A No, I have not. 12 Q Did you read the re s p or.s e that was.given-to 13 you you say? Did you read.it? 14 MR. SPfKTER: .When, what time frame?'.Put a 15 time frame on it. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 17 Q Which would have been.some time'in the latter 18 part of January. 10 l MR. SPEKTER: That's-not,his testimony. 29 MR. DAVIDSON: No, that's my question.. And l' 21 my question is: 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q You have testified that you were given a 24 copy of the Gibbs & Hill response which we have identified 1 25 here as Disc. Fxhibit B. and my question to you is, when you l i I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " ^ - ^ ^ ^ ~ ~ ^ ~ ^ ' ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ' ~ ~ ~ ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l 294 r .) l 'pb9 l 1 were given that response which would have been some time 2 around the end-of January, did you read it? 3 A Yes, I did. 4 Did you understand'it? Q 5 A Yes,-I did. 6 Q Did you accept it?- i 7 A No, I did not. 8 Q You felt it was wrong? 9 A Yes, I did. 10 Q It didn't satisfy you? 11 A Correct. 12 Q And what was your understanding of what the 13 explanation is that they had between the alleged conflict 14 in the ES-100 and the Regulatory Guide 1.757 15 A My alleged conversation was they felt there 16 was no conflict. 17 Q How did they reconcile the two? 18 A To my memory and recollection right now, I'm 10 not familiar. I would have to review the document again. 20 Q Did you make any reference.to the response 21 that was received from your start-up memorandum from Gibbs 22 & Hill in your affidavit in which raised this issue? 23 A No, I did not. 24 I Q Let me draw your attention to the paragraph j 25 that starts on page 10 and continues on to page 11 and i I l i l = _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - -- 295 10 4 1 starts with. "I am particularly concerned-about the above 27, 2 situation." 3 4 5 6 -7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ' 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l l la Joni 296 k #28 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q Do you see that? 3 A Yes. A Q And the next phrase is "If I am corredt in 5 my interpretation of the regulations"---'at the time you 6 made that statement you knew that there were those whoJdid 7 . not agree with you that you were correct? 8 A And I aslo knew that there~were those that did agree that I was correct. 10 Q Who were they? 11 A NRC. 12 Q The unidentified engineer who never followed 13 up, to your knowledge, on your allegations? A Well, I won't go as far to say that he 15 never followed up. 16 Q To your knowledge? 17 A To my knowledge, yes. I IB i Q So that is the other individual but you lo state this in the subjective mood if you are familiar with i 0 l that. 21 A No, I am not familiar with that. .' 22 i Q Well, you say if I am correct. -I Will you j 23 agree with me that that is a statement on your part 2A indicating that you have some doubt as to whether you may  ! 25 be right? l ) L  : i 'l i a 1 1 jon2 297 4 1 1 A If you look at this indication-and in the 2 actual technica'l representation you will deal with it in 3 the fact that you can'have a conduit, a single conduit d and a single cable and it specifically identifies that 5 there has to be three feet with a separation involved in that 6 conduit out in the open and that cable ---and the cable. 7-If you look at the fact-that they are 8 allowing one inch separation from the bottom of a ladder ( 9 tray, which means that you can get that cable to conduit H3 separation to within one inch, you have to come to the Il conclusion that there is violation. To go anywhere else -- 12 you don't even have to have a degree or knowledge in these 13 levels to say that -- to look at the paperwork and be able Id to tell that there is a conflict there. 15 Q Let me just respond that you think you M don't need a degree or any knowledge, but I am afraid that 17 you didn't hear my question because you didn't answer it 18 and I am going to have to ask the reporter to reread it. I' (The reporter read the record as requested.) 20 A The question was if there was some part 21 as to whether I had doubt. I truly feel that there is a 22 violating that exists, but I will not go to the point of 23 making my statement to where there is not anybody that 24 cannot be proven wrong. So me personally, .1 feel that 25 there is no doubt in my mind there is a violation. In my 28jon3 298 i i l 1 mind there is a violation. 2 Q You are absolutely convinced. But you are 3 prepared to concede that you could be wrong? i 4 A  ! I would be foolish not to say that. ' 5 Everybody can be incorrect. 6 No. Q I am not asking you whether everybody 7 can be incorrect. I am saying with respect to'the 8 h statements contained in your affidavit with respect to the 9 allegation that there is a conflict between ES-100 and 10 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 and the statement that this is 11 therefore a violation of NRC regulations, you state "if I 12 am correct" and I just asked you whether this indicates 13 that you concede, that as convinced as you are and as 14 strongly held as you have held these views and as strong 15 as you pushed it within the organization, that you might 16 be wrong. 17 A Well, an NRC decision showing that I was 18 wrong would be the final result. l' Q But no one else could'tell you you were . 20 wrong? l' 21 A Not within the organization, because 6f 22 the fact that I feel the organization is definitely biased '~ 23 by the cost' impact on this one decision. t 2d Q If people in theTUGC0 startup group told , 25 you you were wrong you wot?dn't agree with them? You ' 1 l _ _______D en4 '399 i 4 I wouldn't be persuaded? 2 A Let me -- if Dick-Camp, Art Londou -- ' 3  ; Q No. Answer the question.  ! 4 l A -- would have thought I was wrong, you I 5 l are talking TUGCO startup -- if Dick Camp, Art London 6 and them would have thought I was wrong they would have 7 1 1 never sent the letter up. 8 { Q Well, that's your conclusion and surmise. 9 The question I asked you is if they told you that you were 10 wrong, anyone in startup -- 11 A No. 12 Q -- you wouldn't believe it? 13 A They didn't tell me that. 14 Q I didn't ask you that. I said if you had 15 been told that. You see,{ you are going to 16 ' have to answer the same question over and over again until 17 you are responsive. Is that clear? 18 A No, I do not believe that I would have 19 believed them.  ! 20 d Q Okay. That's the answer. 21 MR. S P ~.KT E R : Let me answer the' door. 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Really, you are making this 23 unnecessarily difficult. I think you are being too clever  ! 24 by half. I think you should talk to your 1qwyer. 25  ! MR. SPEKTER: I object to those comments l l l l 4 i __-_____________-____s i l 2 Bj on5: -300 .i i l i I  ! being made. Not.while I was present. ' 2 MR.- DAVIDSON:- I will make them.ito your' 3 I face. I said look,:ve are. going to get throughEa lot '! # i quicker'if youlwill respond -- well, Mike,. stand h'ere if-5 you want me to make'it in. front o f '. you . 0 (Discussion.off the record --.;5:45 p.m.) I (BAck on the record - 6:30 p.m.)! l 8 3 . MR. '~D AVIDSON : Mr..Spekter, we-have'just -l -had a chance to reconvene after a break'of close to.an 10 hour and I just want to make certain on the record that II there would be no misunderstanding the remarks-as 12 l reported both by yourself and myself seem to be heated, '3 but I know that did not occur and there was no heat - generated between us. And I=just' wanted the, record to 15 reflect that. to As you know, you did=valk to the door . to answer it and then I tried to suggest to your witness '8 that he be more responsive; he said let's make the comments- .t I' when I am not away from the table,-~you returned, I began . 20 to make them; I was cut off. 21 But I take it there is no heated exchange 22 between us. 23 'l i. MR. SPEKTER: The exchange was not heated 24 i but my concern is that you do not give my. witness } 25 i instructions on how to answer a question.  ! l . 2n6  ! \b 301  ; i I i 6 l I .MR. DAVIDSON: 1 1 agree with you, I 2 Mr. Spekter. That is.yourarcsponsibility. That is why' 3 ;I asked the witness to talk to you'about his response. l 4 d MR. SPEKTER: Let us proceed. 5 'MR. DAVIDSON: I assume during'that hour ' 6 that we were off that'you'had a chance,to speak'with.him. 7 'All right.

8. ~

BY MR. DAVIDSON: o Q

  • g ,justft'o wrap up-this line. I 10 believe you stated -- and !fyou did let us just confirm l'

it and move'on -- you said that you would not.have believed: 12 anyone in'the organization if they had told you you were I3 . wrong aboutyour alleged -- the alleged l conflict-between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75. 15 When you said the organization wh'at did '6 you mean? 37 A The startup or'anization. g I8 Q Would you have believed'a statement from engineering? 20 A f 21 I believe that if there would have been an overwhelming -- you know, you are going to have to support -- 22 you just wouldn't be able to come in and say you are wrong. 23 If there would have been an overwhelming amount of .24 25 information that would have indicated that I was incorrect. such as possibly NRC rulings on the issues, so on and so 1 a 1 i 1 1 l ) L- a.----------_---~ ~ - - - - .28j on 7; 302 i forth, yes, I would have'probably believed theLperson'. 2 Q Okay.. But you wanted an NRC ruling 3 on the issue before you1 relented; isnt' that correct? 4 You.wouldn't. accept the statement of-~the'Gibbs & Hill 1$ . whi'ch was an architect-engineer ~ engaged on ' the :proj ec t ?. 6 After all -they.did provide yousdth a three-page 7 instructions. 8 A correct. 9 Q You would mt : accept that?- 10 A right. 11 .Q Thatwas not your view . sufficient for you?- . 12 A Correct. 13 Q Now I ask you what would have been 14 sufficient for you short of an NRC ruling. 15 A 1 don't believe'there would be anything. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you. t i 17 Off-the record. IB (Discussion off.the record.) 19 MR. DAVIDSON: That-is all it takes. 20 Okay. Let's go back on the record. 21  ; (Discussion off the r e c'o r d . ) j 22 i MR. DAVIDSON: All right. Let's go' ahead. .! 23  ! BY MR. DAVIDSON: i 2' Q Earlier weihad-discussed the Gibbs & Hill  ! 25 I response to the startup memo that you prepared. Doyou l, I j 1 l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ ____.___..____ _ __ _ _..__ _ _ _ ___J m ,8-303 4 1 recollect that.I 'j L 2 # A 'Yes.. 3 Q -And I had asked you.to look'at it'but I d l ( .had not had it marked.for identification. Both Mr. Spekter 5 'and Mr.-Mizuno had askedome toodo so and.I think now is 6 as good a'timeias any-for me to.do that. With the<same 7 understanding about replacingEmy' original and providing' 8 't h a t the' copy be marked for identification for the purpose-9 of this discovery depositionLbe a Xerox:of the one I n o w -: to am providing. Il MR.'SPEKTER: That's understood. 12  ! MR. DAVIDSON: And with that. understanding 13 I would like to ask the reporter'to ma'rk this as Id Disc Exhibit F-number next.- 15 Is'it 9, sir? Thank you'. 16 (The document referred to was 37 marked Exh'ibit Disc F-9 for identification.) to BY MR. DAVIDSON: Q k earlier you testified that'you had -- at the time that you received the respons,es -- had ^ an opportunity to read it and I think I asked you-whether you recollected what their explanation for the-conflict was, but I don't recollect having received a. response. Did you answer that question? A Yes, I did. 1 f ~ \ 28jon9; 304 I Q And'briefly. . what:was your response? 2 A I would have'to.look~at the memo, the' 3 response memoLto refresh my memory. d Q But'you:have no' current recollection of it - -5 now? 6 A No. 7 Q Let me ask you this: Do.you. remember saying 8 to me that you believed that the' response said that,the reason there was no conflict was that-fire goes up,. .not 10 down? II A Not necessarily the response indicated in 12 the letter,-but'possibly the response either indicated -- 13 I believe I'specified that itLwas either indicated.inLthe l' letter or.in.the phone conversation with-the Gibbs & Hill-15 personnel.- 16 Q This is the person'that you called? '7 A Right. '8 -Q And you.didn't' remember his name? I' A. No, I believe we had brought;that up.. 20 later. The person I called was Sam Martinovitch. 21 Q And it is your testimony that 22 Mr. Martinovitch said to youLthat fire goes up, not down?- 23 A Well,-it was. indicated by him~that one.of' 24 the rationalities for part of his decision was seeing that: 25 there was no problem and said-that the heat is going.to.be i____._____.__:._._.______._ on10 305 4 i generated upward and rise, where they are speaking of' 2 conduits underneath the tray. 3 Q But did he say that was the only reason? 4 A No, he did not. As I have already 5 indicated, he had other reasons such as that the cost impact 6 of. changing the ES-100 specifications. 7 Q Did he have other reasons for why he 8 l 9 believed that there was no conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.757 to MR. SPEKTER: Objection. Qualify that. 11 If he knew he had other reasons. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, he said that that was 13 not his only reason. Therefore he is indicating he 14 knows of at least one more. That's all. What is that other 15 reason that he mentioned. 16 THE WITNESS: I have lost track of the 17 questioning here. 18 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 19 20 Q Let me see if I can do this for you. I am going to summarize your testimony. I would not only 21 ask you to listen to my questions but also give some 22 thought to your responses and try to keep in mind what you 23 have said. 24 You said, sir, that you talked to 25 Mr. Martinovitch and you asked him why he believed there l l l 1 l _ _ - _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 28jon11- 306 I was no conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75. And 2 you told us that one of the reasons that he offered to 3 you why there was no conflict was because fire travels upward. heat travels up, not down,-and that therefore 5 it' avoids some of the problems otherwise provided for in 6 Reg. Guide 1.75. 7 You say that was one of the reasons. So 8 I asked you what the other reasons he told you were for why he felt there was no conflict between ES-100 and to Reg. Guide 1.75. end2B II Now, can you please tell us? 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 L- - 307 j i - lb1 1 4 j 1 A To my memory, right now, I cannot recollect 2 that. 3 Q You don't remember whether he gave you any d other reasons or you don't remember the reasons he gave you? 'i 5 A I remember that he had probably given Le other o reasons, but I don't remember exactly what they were. 7 Q Did he ever state to you, as was reported in 8 the letter that we've marked as Disc Exhibit 9, that 9 Regulatory Guide 1.75 has specific criteria for separation 10 between cable trays but has, in fact, no specific criteria 11 providing for separation between conduits and cable trays, 12 which was the issue in ES-100? 13 A He may have. Id Q Did he also indicate to you, sir, that the 15 separation requirements in ES-100 only pertained to those 16 cases where potential hazards are limited to electrically I 17 1 initiated fires? 18 A He may have. I'm not sure of the exact i l' l conversation. ' 20 Q Did he also indicate to you that, in 21 developing the separation details in ES-100, it was 22 recognized that conduits provide a raceway medium that 23 effectively isolates internal events from the external 24 surroundings? 25 A I'm not familiar with his exact conversation. t l J j .)

.1

'30s fc391b2' j' i 1 1 You have to' figure that I was looking at that document at 2 the same time, so theoretically he may not have1 touched on-3 any of thefpoints'which were listed'in that document 4 because he possibly-could have known-that I had that_ 5 ' document in front of me. 6 .Q So he didn't,- you.didn't think,'or .you 7 may recollect.now,.that he.didn't haveLto tell'you aboet t 8 these reasons,because.h' e had already disclosed lthem to you? 9 A Or.I had already;possibly' read.theimemora'ndum. 10 Q In any event. Mr. Martinovitch's explanations 11 didn't. satisfy you? 12 A Specifically, when he was justifying ~1t about. ~ 13 the heat to me. You know, you have a formal. reply there. 14 And in his informal reply. for the~ actual reasoning behind' 15 it, which was.the fact that -- l 16 .. Q No, I wouldn't. agree with that, if'you-17 were asking for my agreement. .I' don't thinkIthat there~is 18 ~any different reason, other than the one.that is expressedc 10 and signed by Mr. Ballard.- That's your testimony. 20 Are'you suggesting that Mr. Ballard's statement 21 is not the real reason? 22 A What I am willing to'say, that-my bellAf on. 23 that memo was, that due-to the impact cost-wise, they had 2d to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not'.to 25 change the'ES-100 specifications. And those are the ' i i I , i w___________m___._.__ _ 1 308 fc291b2 1 You have to figure that I was looking at that document at 2 the same time, so theoretically he'may not have touched on 3 any of the points which were listed in that document 4 because he possibly could have known that I-had that 5 document in front of me. { 6 Q So he didn't -- you didn't think, or you 7 may recollect.now, that he didn't have to tell you about , I B these reasons because he had already disclosed them to you? 9 A Or I'had already possibly read the memorandum. 10 Q In any event. Mr. Martinovitch's explanations 11 didn't satisfy you? 12 A Specifically, when he was justifying it about~ 13 the heat to me. You know, you have a formal reply there. 1 14 And in his informal reply, for the actual reasoning behind 15 it, which was the fact that -- { 16 Q No, I wouldn't agree with that, if you - .i 17 were asking for my agreement. I don't think that there is  ! 18 any different reason, other than the one that is expressed i i 19 and signed by Mr. Ballard. That's your testimony. I 20 Are you suggesting that Mr. Ballard's statemen: 21 is not the real reason? 22 A What I am willing to say, that my belief on 23 that memo was, that due to the .-wise, they had 24 to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not to 25 change the ES-100 specifications. And those are the ' l l . 1 u___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -309 i3 - 4 1 legitimate reasons that' they-thought -- or at least t h'e 2 reasons they thought were legitimate. Now it would be -- 3 .Q This11s a suspicion on-your part, that d although this is an explanation .you don't take it to be 5 something that' they believe? Is that what you're saying?' 6 MR. .SPEKTER: I would request that. counsel 7 not put words in'his mouth. 8 MR. DAVIDSON: 'I heard the witness 1say.that 9 he did not.believe that < response that was. prepared was to the "real reason" why they insistedithat-ES-100 and Reg-

11 1.75 could be reconciled.
And I want to find out what 12 is the basis for his assertion that that was not the 13 real reason.

14 THE WITNESS: My understanding.would be why 15 would he say to me, if he truly' thought that ~ those were 16 legitimate, valid reasons, why woul'd he say to me that 17 if we had it to do all over again and start'right now, yes IB we would modify the ES-100 to have those. add 1tional. A 19 limitations in it. 20 MR. DAVIDSON: You want me to answer your 21 question? One of the reasons why that may have!-- why h'e: 22 might have said that? The answer is ~ that he might not have 23 said it,' I 2d THE WITNESS: I don't think I was asking you 25 a question. I was making a statement that the question.was C_____n_._.__.._ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ __..___J 310 E fc391b4' 1 in my mind'atithe timeL-- -2 ' BY, MR. r- DAVIDSONi 3 Q. 'Okay, so this is.an impression you' drew?- 4 He'never.. formally ~ told 1you that this.was not the real: 5- reason? 6 .A If they give you a documentation which says '7-this is the reason why we're not'doing11t,~but then on the -8 other-hand they;tell,you verbally;that if-we had it to do 9

all.over-again -we would.go ahead and make. modifications.--

10 in my mind.there is onlyJane conclusion I can draw, is,that 11 they are in the wrong and they are trying to. prove'--jwith 12 information or grasping at straws'-- to prove that they 13 are correct.in'it?' 14 Q In other words, you don't'think'there could 15 be two acceptable ways of doing-it? 16 A Well, I'm not saying -- there is only'one 17 interpretation in the NRC Reg-Guide that'is supposedly right. 18 Q Are you asking me or are you asking:Mr. Mizuno?.i 19 A What I am saying is that there is'only one- i ) 20 interpretation in'the NRC Reg Guides. 'If'there -- if you 21 have any questions from it, you should ask NRC what"the'ir- ~ 22 ruling is on it. 23 Q That's your view? 4 l 24 A Yes. 1 25 Q And that's why you wanted an NRC decision'on- .j '311 41 b' S 4 'I this? 2 A I felt there was still a conflict inv o'1v e d . - ! 3 Q _All right. d _( hinyour. affidavit,z- at pages 5 3 through -- carrying-over to page 5,-you makeicertain 6 assertions with respect.to'what you term the practice of: 7 ~ allowing. comanche Peak. craft < personnel to perform.certain -8 functional ~ testing. Is that right?. A That's correct. I 1 10 I would like to change -- just correct _you. 11 You said make the assumption. I know that to be fact. 12 Q All right. I think I said-assertion, not I3 assumption. Id MR. SPEKTER: The record will reflect'what ~~ 15 was said. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: '7 i Q And 1 noticed that in the first incomplete ' '8 paragraph on page 3 that starts "An example of"- " you say I' "An example of this liberal interpretation of commitments -" 20 do you see that? 21 A Yes. 22 Q What do you mean by commitments? 23 (Pause.) 24 Do you need some help with that question? 25 A No, just a minute. Let me review through here. (Witness perusing document.) i i ~l _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . ___-______._____m..__ _ jon 312 30 I Q Have you ever reviewed the commitments 2 undertaken by the organizations constructing the Comanche 3 Peak plant? d A Yes. You are talking -- let me make sure-5 we are talking in a correct -- you are talking about the 6 FSAR commitment? 7 Q I am talking about the commitments, sir,- 8 that you told me are made to the NRC with respect to.the 9' codes and programs that will govern the conduct and H) procedures of the construction of the. plant. II A Yes, I hve reviewed those. 12 Q And in your review of that, sir, did you 13 determine whether or not -- one moment, please -- and in Id your review of that, sir, did you determine whether there 15 was a commitment to ANSI 45.2.6 with respect to 16 construction supplies and support personnel? 17 A 1 am not sure. 18 Q Did you determine whether there was a 19 commitment made to that specific reference requirement 1 j 20 i applicable to quality control / quality assurance personnel? l 21 i A I am not sure. I would have to review the { 22 documentation which would include the FSAR to be able to 23 remember what I had found during the time period. 24 I believe that you will note that I do 25 remember that the ANSI 45.2.6 specifically is titled I i j e i jon2 313 4 1 across the top " Requirements For Testing QC Personnel" 2 and so on and so forth. 3 Q Are you-remembering that or reading that s from your affidavit? 5 A No. I am remembering it. I don't even know if it is in the affidavit. It is. ANSI 45.2.6, 7 specifies that +- its requirements for test personnel in 8 nuclear power sites. 9 Q Do you have a copy of the specific 10 ANSI Code section to which you refer? 11 A No, I do not. 12 Q Did you have a copy at some point in time 13 that you could review? 14 A Tes, I did. i 15 Q I draw your attention to page 4 where you state "I feel this practice of allowing staff personnel to 17 perform functional testing without an STE being present 18 'l is not consistent with ANSI 45.2.6. Do you see that?. j 10 ] A Yes. 20 Q When you say you feel that it is not 21 consistent what do you mean? i 22 A I mean that ANSI 45.2.6 specifically 23 specifies certain requirements for test personnel and also 24 requires that you maintain records on those test 25 personnel. And the ETG or craft personnel do not fall l 30)on3 314 I within these limitations such that I do not believe their 2 , educational background is maintained; I do not believe 3 that their credentials are verified. Q When you say you do not believe, on what 5 do you base this belief? And we will get back tc .s e 6 question you still haven't answered, which*is what you 7 nean by "1 feel this practice is inconsistent." 8 Tell me -- why don't we take them in order. I still would like an answer. 10 Whatdo you mean by "I feel this practice is II inconsistent"? 12 A 1 do not believe that thispractice is I3 consistent. 14 Q By stating that you feel that it is 15 inconsistent are you suggesting that you are prepared to 16 accept that you might be wrong and that it might be I# consistent? 18 A As I have already stated before, there is 19 always possibility of misinterpretation of a document. 20 Q And do you feel that is possible in this 21 case? 22 A It is possible in all cases. 23 Q In all cases in which you have sworn in i this affidavit? 25 A I will not go that far. json4 315 4 1 Q But it could be possible'in-this particular 1 2 case we are now. discussing't 3 A Yes. 4 Q Now you say that you believe that certain l 5 educationa1' documentation is not maintained. On what do

6. you base this belief?

7 'A On asking craft personnel if they have ever 8 had to submit to a background.such as educational and 9 so on and so forth. I am not, you know -- to go into 10 detail on that. I could not remember. 11 l Q Do you remember who you spoke with? 12 A No, I do not. 13 Q Did you ever examine any of the records 14 to see whether or not these craft personnel had educational 15 background material maintained in the manner that you 16 believe was necessary? 17 A No, I did not. 18 Q If there had been no commitment to adhere 19 to ANSI N45.2.6 with respect to construction supply and 20 support personnel, then there would be no inconsistency 21 with the practice you describe A n d '- t h a t requirement, 22 would there? i 23 A Correct. 24 Could we take a moment, just a brief moment 25 to pause? 4 1 1 l l 30jon5 316 1 MR. DAVIDSON: You want to break, 2 S 3 / THE WITNESS: Yes. 4 MR. DAVIDSON: Of course. 5 MR. bAVIDSON: Let the record rsflect that 6 we are taking a break so/ can consult with 7 counsel. (' 8 (Discussion off the record -- 6:51 p.m.) end30 ! 10 11 12 13 f 14 15  ; 16 17 18 19 ] 20  ! I 21 22 j l 23 I 1 24 i 25 e u__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 317 il 4 1 (On the record at 6:54 p.m.) 2 MR. DAVIDSON: Let us go back to work. 3 was were talking about your 4 assertions.as to the inconsistency between what you claim 5 to.be the. practice at Comanche Peak of allowing the craft 6 personnel to perform certain functional testing and what I 7 think has been called ANSI 45.2.6. 8 And I have some excerpted language here from 9 that regulation, and I would like to get your view on it -- 10 if I can find it here among my papers -- l 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 12 Q lI have been given to understand 13 that ANSI N45.2.6 states, "When a single inspection or 14 test requires implementation by a team or group, personnel 15 not meeting the requirements of this standard may be used l 16 in data taking assignments or in plant or equipment operation. 17 I pr-ovided they are supervised or overseen by a qualified 18 individual participating in the inspection, examination, or ' 19 test." i 20 Do those words sound familiar to you as being 21 reflected in ANSI N45.2.6? i 22 A Yes, they do. i 23 Q And is this the requirement that you feel 24 is not consistent with the practice at Comanche Peak? i 25 A Yes, I do. I believe that as you stated t i e l 318- '!pb2 1 there,1 supervisory. that they are.being supervised fallsi 2 -into --  ; 3 Q Do you want me to give you the exact words? 4 .The words are. "They are supervised or overseen by." ~ Is a 5 .that'what you wanted me to focus,on? 6 (Pause.). 7 A  ;' .Yes. 8 Q Okay. - 1 9 A l' 1 believe that-at Comanche Peak;the'suoervisori , 10 overseen by is-probably taken very liberal, such'es how ~ q 11 l can you supervise somebody unless you're.out 'in.the' field 12 with them. Well, I'll eliminate the answering to that-13 portion right now. I j ust -don' t -- 14 l'i 1 (Witness gesturing.) i . i 15 -- I stopped.=-You can go ahead and. question. l , 16 Q No. .I. don't follow what you'reysaying. 17 A .. !" I dropped it. I. feel that is:not something .j 18 we need to go into right now. 't I . 1 19 . .Q It seems to be the focus of your assertion in ' ' 'l 20 the paragraph that begins on page 4 of your affidavit and 21 carries over -- l-22 A I I will not comment on one section of the i 23  ; ANSI 45.2.6 as it indicates without 1ooking at the whole  ! 24 procedure as a whole. J You take one little portion out of '! 25 i it and try and use it out of context with that procedure. I. i l i 1 l l i 319 4 1 You have to look -- there are certain stipulations that you 2 have to meet in order to be able to do that. And without '3 looking at the whole procedure you cannot use just one 4 paragraph out of it. 5 Q l understand that you would like to' review 6 the entire code, but my point was only this, you were 7 concerned in your affidavit, and as I understood your B testimony you raised the point that you did not feel that 9 this code section had been complied with. And you called 10 my attention specifically to the words that you believe 11 required that the craft personnel performing such tests be 12 " supervised or overseen by" qualified individual. 13 And my point is, isn't that the sum and substance. 14 of your concern as expressed in the affidavit with respect 15 to the practice that you have drawn our attention to on to page 4 and going over to page 5. 17 A I have lost reference to your exact question 18 and what you are exactly asking there. Your question was 19 so long you are confusing me with the length of it. Can 20 you briefly just come straight to the point as to what your 21 question is? l 22 Q I think that that was fairly direct. 1 asked 23 you whether that isn't the basis upon which you make the 24 allegation of the practice -- that the practice is inconsistent 25 with ANSI 45.2.67 320: i: 11pb4 i-

t 1 A Are you asking-meithat if-the~ paragraph you '

2 _ read.previously is the basis for'this: allegation?. 3 Q That's right... Isn't;that?the basis for ~ 4 your assertion that.the practice at; Comanche Peak'is 5 inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.6? 6 A No,1I can't specify that;one paragraph; 1 7 out of-ANSI ~45.2.6 is the basis for this. I specified that 8 ANSI 45.2.6 as a.whole document'is the' basis for this > i-9 statement. 10- Q Do you'have a copy of 4512.6? 11 A No,LI do not. 12 Q When you made the statements'in this afi*1 davit 13 did you refas to 45.2.6?' 14 A 1 had reviewed.them during the' time period 15 of the. drafts, the rough drafts for.then-- , i le ] Q Well, here is iand, myproblem,f. 1 17 you want me to direct and open. I.will be because it's going j 18 to make this thing go a lot. faster. 'I read your affidavit. 19 We all have. The rece;; is going to have it. ' l 20 Your crap,aint i s, that craft personnel, person , l 21 who are not qualified as STEs have been' performing certain + 1 22 of these tests and you say that they perform certain tests 23 ll. I 4 without an STE being present. And that is a quote from l 24 your affidavit at page 5. 1 1 25 A Correct. El i l 1 i i i ] i -_2____--_______._-__________-_-__-__ _-_ 321 1 4 1 Q And I'm saying to you, that isn't the section 2 that I read from the ANSI 45.2.6 which requires that there 3 be supervision or that the practice is to be overseen by 4 a qualified person, the one that you base -hat on. And you 5 have not told me what you base it on. You say you don't 6 base it on that. 7 A No, I'm saying -- 8 MR. SPEKTER: I believe that he's answered 9 the question. 10 MR. DAVIDSON: I don't think that he has. 11 MR. SPEKTER: He based it on the whole 12 regulation and not a segment that's taken out of context. 13 And I think that answer should stand and we can move on. 14 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q Did you ever raise this concern with anyone 16 at Comanche Peak? 17 A Most definitely. IB Q With whom did you raise it? 19 A Art London. Tom Miller and Dick Camp. 20 Q Individually or collectively? 21 A There's a possibility it could have been both. 22 To my memory, I do not know right now. 23 Q What did you say to them at the time? 24 A I told them that I felt that we were 25 inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.6. 332' 31pb6 y 1 Q Did they;give-you a: response to yourcqu'estion?~ 2 A They. felt.that they'did not. fall'under.the-3 requirements of that.- 4 On:what basis? Q As you understood them.- '$ A I do.n'ot remember thecexact details on that.  ! 6 Q Could it be that'there was no. commitment'on 7 that point? '8 A I don't know. I= don't-know. I do not-9 remember. 10 Q Could.it also be because they viewed the l 11 manner in which the practice'was. supervised:or overseen - as 12 being adequate.under. ANSI 45.2.67 13 A Nov'you're asking me to answer for them. l I Id don't believe that I'can answer what'their beliefs were. 15 Q No, sir. I asked you what'they' represented 16 to you and what you understood them to mean. And I asked 17 you whether you understood, or.they said to you, or'you 18 understood them to mean that they were in: compliance'with '19 ANSI 45.2.6 because of the manner in which such tests were 20 overseen or supervised was sufficient. l 21 A No. I did not believe that.they:were stating i 22 ;to me that they were in compliance.with ANSI'45.2.6. I 23 believe that they were stating to me that they were not in 24 compliance with ANSI'45.2.6 but that they'were not committed -l .q 75 to that and therefore they would not' going to vorry about it. l 323 I Q So in'other.words, they explained to you that- i 2 the reason was that there had been no' commitment'for ] .3 construction supplies and support personnel under the FSAR?' ' 4 A Well, they felt like'there had been no j 5 commitment. Ij 6 Q They felt that way or there.was none? 7 A- I don't.know if there was none or not.- .To 8 -look through all documentation: dealing with FSAR commitments 9 takes a considerable amount-of time. 10 Q Didn't you do so:before you. raised these 11- points with your superiors? 12 A I had researched it partly, but to.be'able 13 to-specifically identify it I would have.to be'looking through-L 14 the FSAR commitments to refresh my memory on that point. 15 Q Well, after they told you that there was no 16 commitment, didn't.you check to see whether their statement 17 was accurate? is A As time permitted. I do not know if I had 19 enough time or if I researched it thoroughly enough toLfind 20 out if they were totally committed'or not. 21 Q When did you first raise this problem with 22 your superiors? 23 A 1 don't remember the exact time frame'on'that. 24 That one particular problem was a problem noticed.by several 25 other start-up engineers that came on-site. It was not just I a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . = . . . _ _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ . - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ^ - - - 324- 'Sipb8 1 me that-brought that" problem or questioning 1up; 2 Q How .do you know-that-otherl start-upengineers.[ ~ 3 on-site raised-that question?. - r-4 A They had - .let's see. They had t'old me s o .'

s Q ~What were the names of.the' individuals'that

~ 6 told you that they had' raised this' question? , 7 .AR l[ believe Dan Parker was.one of them, and ' , a memory.as-far'as the others.I do not remember right now. > 9 Q .And-to whom1to Mr. Parker indicate:he had' ~ to '3. sed this question?. Or with whom didfhe! indicate heiraised, 11 this question? i .1 12 A I do not' remember.- 13 Q And when did Mr. Parker tell'you'this? 14 'A I do not remember. I 0 15 Do you remember the circumstances surrounding . I 16 his relating this'to you? Did he initiate'the~ conversation 1 17 or did you? j 18 A I don't remember.

  • 19 Q Do you remember-the-sum and substance of 20 nis conversation with you?- j end 31. 21 A 1 don't remember. ,

l I I 22 23 3b 25 I. t . i I 335 l al l l . 4 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: l 2 Q Did you raise this question about this 3 procedure.with Mr. Camp on more than one occasion? A A I believe so. 5 Q Do you recollect -- or how many occasions? 6 A No, I do not. 7 Q Did you raise this question with 8 Mr. Miller on more than one occasion? 9 A Possibly. 10 Q .Doyou recollect how many? 11 A No, I do not. 12 Q Did you raise this question with 13 Mr. Luken on more than one occasion? 14 A It could have been possibly brought up 15 during conversations with me and him. le Q Could it be on more than one ocasion? 17 A I don't remember. 18 J Q Did you raise this question with 19 Mr. London? 20 A Yes. 4 21 Q On more than one occasion? 22 A Possibly. l 23 Q Do you remember how many occasions? 24 \ A No, I do not. 'l 25 i Q Could you tell me how many times and over j I l ._________---D '32jon3 326: I what period of; time you raised this concern'with your 2 four principal'and.immediate superiors?. 3 ~A 20) , I'could not give you'an exact number. 4 Q Give me'an approximate. number. 5 .A 1 would..be' guessing. You know. I'do.not-6 'know. 7 Q. Would it be about -a , dozen times ?- 8 A- I believe'it would.be less than that.- 9 Q WouldJ it be .less'than eight? 10 A ~Possibly. l 11 -Q -But more than a half dozen? -More than six? 12 A Possibly. 13 Q ( lhaveyou.everbeenresponsible Id for the harassment, intimidation and threatening.of.any 15 of the personnel at Comanche Peak? 16 (Pause.) 17 A No. 18 1 Q Do you remember a disagreement you had with l' a QC -- 20 A We might take a.short pause here so that - 21  ! l i my counsel will know what is fixing to:come abo't u as far 22 1 as.the information that you are going to be-requesting 23 here. 24 Q What makes you think you know what I am 25 going to ask? ) - . _ _ _ _ - - - - _ . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ^ ^ - - ' ^ ~ ~ ' .n3 337  ? I A Oh, I can see your documentation here. 2 I know -- 3 Q What is it you think I am going to ask? d A Well, as I said, I request'-- 5 MR. SPEKTER: Let's take a short break. 6 MR. DAVIDSON: All right. You want to 7 consult with counsel. 8 (Conference between' Counsel Spekter and witness -- 7:07 p.m.) to (On the record at 7:10 p.m.) II BY MR. DAVIDSON: 't 12 Q Tell me what is it you thought 13 I was going to ask. Id A I don't remember now. You had led into -- 15 what was the last question that you had asked that I had to already previously answered? Something if I had ever been I7 involved in the intimidation. I8 Q I think I said harassment, intimidation or I' threatening of any QC personnel. 20 A Harassment and* intimidation or' threatening, 21 that if I had done any harassment, intimidation, or 22 threatening? 23 l Q I don't recollec t that was the question, 24 but if you like I can ask you. 25 A Well, it is up to you. It is your I l l 1 1 e 1 '32jonk. ' ~328 m 7 1 -. questioning. 2 Q Okay.. Thank' you. 3 .Did you ever have~aniargument with a QC d inspector regarding.an~NCR7 . 5 'A Yes. 6  ; -Q- What was your position in that dispute?- 7 A- My_ position in that dispute wasothat .the' 8 QC inspector'was' wrong in.his assumptions. 9 Q When you say wrong in his-assumptions,.he 10 wanted to write up.an NCR,1didn't he?: 11 A No.- He' wanted to prevent me froml performing 12 work and to be exact on'what he wanted.to do I would have. 13 to review all the documentation paperwork associated. 14 Q Isn't it a.factathat he did not want you 15 to issue what is known as an'SWA'which'is;a startup work-16 authorization and'didn't he insist thatlif you did so he 17 would issue an NCR which is a-nonconforming report? 18 A He did not say that he did not want me to 19 issue it because the startup work authorization had already 20 been authorized and. issued. He did not'want me working -- 21 Q Because he believed -- 22 A -- without an ERN, equipment removal 23 notification. 2d Q I see. 25 A Now -- i-e 1 a. 329 >n5 4 I Q Did he ask you or did he indicate to you 2 that if there was no item removal notice, that is an IRN, 3 per Brown & Root procedures, CPM 6.10-1 that he would write d you up as an NCR7 5 A No, he did not. 6 Q What didhe indicate to you? 7 A He did not indicate -- he indicated his 8 feelings but he did not threaten me with an NCR. Q Did you get into an altercation with him 10 as to whether or not this was the proper subject of an NCR? I' A We got into a discussion over the NCR. 12 Once we did start the work with him being present he did 13 write an NCR and we came into the discussion _over the NCR Id and I requested that we go talk to the supervisor. 15 Q Was this a mild, calm, quiet discussion? 16 A I would say that the language volume was I7 elevated by both parties. 18 Q So it was an argument, wasn't it? I' A Not necessarily an argument, because we 20 both had walked up the wrong stairway, even, in our 21 discussion and laughed about'the matter coming back down. 22 So it could have been a heated discussion, but there are 23 differences of opinion. What is difference of opinions 24 i but arguments? 25  ! Q But despite the fact that you remonstrated ' I l  ? I I l l _________________J ~ 32 joe 6. -330J J l with him in'no uncertain.--fdo you understand thacLword? 2 g- No,'l-do:not. 3 Q Well,'letius put' it this'way. If. observers d came'by and. heard'the-language-you were usinguand'he was. 5 .using'and the tone in which'it was.used and'the level and 6 . volume-of the-discussion..they[wouldn't,be mistaken if 7 . they thought'there was,~an1 argument in process..would they?- . 8 i MR. SPEKTER: I.would object. Itcalls 'forL l' conjecture that:1sjoutside-of the scope of this. 10 MR.-DAVIDSON: No, it: calls for.w' hat he. 13 thinks people would have taken from-his personal behavior.. 12 MR. SPEKTER: He doesn't know what people '3 would have taken from anything. Id t BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q What would you have taken~if you had$come- '6  ! by and heard people arguing in that tone? 17 A- 1 am not sure what tone we were arguing-in. IB Q And when he reported that there had been , l' , this argument to his superiors he was mistaken; there was 20 no argument? 21 A We settled the problem.; 22 I' Q How did you settle it? 23 A WE vent'up to his supervisor and spokeswith 24 him and at that time his supervisor did not want to write 25 the conconformance report which you have pulled out of your , q' l i g. I 1 ..__.. _L---- - ---- i n7: 331  ? I file there, a-copy of. He.did not want to write it. 2 And I told -- 3 Q When you sayihe did not'want to write -- A His supervisor did not~want -- 5 Q His supervisor.didn't.think it wasfa proper; 6 NCR7 7 A' He did not want anJNCR written. 'And I toid '8 his supervisor that we needJan NCR to' address his. problem right now.and'get the problem: resolved. And therefore it-10 .was:on my decision as muchfas the QCL to.get the1NCR written' II to address the problem-that 1 did not-have-to have.an IIN -- 12 .the difference of opinion was.that the QC inspector felt, I3 I had to have an IRN; I said that I did not have:to have 14 an IRN to1 operate under my proced'ures; the QC inspector 15 later, by report from the person who. originated the to document which he was thinking heLwas operating under. I# agreed with me as that I was correct in my assumption-that 18 I did not need an IRN and thereby I was correct. I' Q Did you subsequently speak with Mr. Camp 20 about this incident? 21 A Yes, I did. 22 Q You recollect what Mr. Camp said to you? 23 A Mr. Camp called me into the. office and 24 questioned the issue; what was going on. He specified that. 25 yes, you are correct on a technical matter. He also _______2___.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 j on8: Ja6 ' explaine'd to me thacLit;was.an alleged harassment, that.I 2 had~ harassed this person, allegedly. 3 1 He got the information. I tol'd.him exactly. d 'what had gone on and that it was a discussion and 5 possibly that the voices.were elevated and everything, 6 and he stated to me thatyou were right-on the technical 7 matter, you are right in everything that!you'did: the.enly 8 probicm was that maybe you should nor have' elevated your vnica.- Okay. H) But when you are talking, two cifferent people-and both;of them'have' elevated ~ voices, and my. 12 ' questioning was as what was--the harassment,'to my '3 supervisor. Ho did I. harass this person, because I never-I' on-e threatened him, I never once touched him.-I never-15 once insinuated his job or anything, I'never once aid anv-16 thing; right. We were just specifically talking over-the '7 matter in question. '8 i And my reply --' Oick Camp 's reply to me to was your size harassed him or intimidated him. Which'I 20 I feel that I have no control over my size, you know. 2) Q None of us do. How tall are you, s 23 A l Approximately 6 foot 2. 2d Q Six two. And how much do you weigh, e-  % 3 25 f or, better yet, how much did.you weigh at the. i l '~- _J i i o i i in9 -333. 4 I time of this argument?- 2 A 215. 3 Q 215, and~how much dofyou weigh now? 'd A= ."220. - 5 (- Q { in your affidavit'- .inLyour-6- ' resume that was , marked earlier it says 225. '7 ~ It is all right. Weonl1 like to' fudge on 8 a' pound or two. I: con't admit it:myself. (Laughter.) 10 BY MR. DAVIDSON: Il 'Q Was that incorrect on your1 resume? 12 MR. SPEKTER: Perhaps when he wrote his 13 resume.he was 225. We haven't determined'when the resume Id was written. 15 MR. DAVIDSON:- I don't'vant-to pursue that. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: 17 Q Do you remember how large this QC inspector 18 was? I' A No, I do not. 20 Q Would you say he was about my size? 21 A No. I think he was larger than you.. 22 Q So you think that there.is a chance that'I 23 might be intimidated, then, of:you? 24 MR. SPEKTER: Objection. 25 (Laugther.)- __________.._____.__._______m___ ___ _ -jon10 >3o. I N R '. DAVIDSON:- I withdraw ch'at' question. 2 ] I would itRe to indicate, however, that 3 is. enjoying this. questioning as much as se-are and he is laughing. 5 H R '. 5PEKTER: Because we are laughing 6 'doesn't mean we are enjoying it. 7 MR. DAVIDSON: I can.'t. wait to'see when you. 8 express your displeasure, Mr. Spekter. BY MR. DA DSON: 10 Q 1et me draw your actention.to .your alfidavit oace again and to the second'incomplece 12 paragraph on that page on page 6. Do you see that? '3 A Yew. Q Okay. And this s a place wnere you'stete 15 your belief that the practice of-allowing t h e 's t a r t'o p to engineer to work on Lore then one system with.one 17 startup work authoriestion using only one system number Is 18 a poor management decision. Do'you see that? 19 A Yes. 20 There is more in that than what you are -- 21 Q What more is there? 22 A Well, the paragraph specifically identifies 23 -1

aux ' e'l a y 'r a c k type work, for instance, and under that t r, e r e r

24 l i i is -- you have to understand construction. Construction 25 { has systems broken up. Okay. i = 1 i i .. L l 11 335 4 1 Q l understand. 2 A And these systems are turned over to 3 startup in that order. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 , 11 12 13 14 15 16 v 17 18 19  ; i 20 21 22 23 4 i 24 25 i l l I 1 ] r 336' ;jon1 j;; ra33 1 . 11 -BY'MR. DAVIDSON:

Q did you want i to, repeat ~your answer?

.i 4 . A To continue on. the basic substance-here 5 is'that -- in the statement'is that many systems are e . being workediunder_ SWA number and in some cases the-7 . . actual number on the SWA .isEnot reflective oflthe' system. 8 being worked on. ~ Q What do you.mean t h e l S*4A s ? - 10 .Are,you ~ stating that.you are;now: 11- - alleging that the system numbers 1that were identified 12 on the SWAs were 'not accurate? 13 A Yes.  ;'i Q Is that an allegation that you-have made 15 3 here in the affidavit on'the paragraph that begins on ' 16 page 6 and concludes on page 7? 17 i. MR. SPEKTER: 1 request that we stop at 18 the conclusion of this answer. 19 THE: WITNESS: Let's see. I will have to 20 review the paragraph -- l 2i BY MR. DAVIDSON: 22 Q As soon as you have completed, why" don't 23 you look up:at me and then.tell me your answer. 2d (Witness continues to peruse document.) i 25

j. A Yes, it is stated-on there.-

I' ' _.__i__.____...___. __ _ _ _ . _ _ _ ._ _. ... 337-93 1 Q Would.you'please point to'the statement 2 -in that paragraph ~from which you makenthat assertion? 3 A It.says that for example-it is common pract1ce at-Comanche Peak to. work on more than one system 5 with one startup work authorization.- SWA. And.use only. 6 one. system number. I ~ .Q I see. But;-- in other'words it.doesn't-incitlde 8 all the system numbers that'might:be.includedLin the startup' work authorization; is that whatLyour statement is?- 10 A That-and-it may1not include t h'e , s y s' t e m . II number at the t'op of the'SWA1may_not even -- may not even ~ ~ 12 be the equipment that was worked on by,the SWA may not 'even '3 be-identified by the system number at the top. Id For example..I -- 15 Q Complete your. answer if you would like to. 16 MR. SPEKTER: We will'. recess after-this 17 answer, thn. 18 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr.-Spekter..you'have i 19 interrupted your witness three times. 20 MR. SPEKTER: Answer him. 3 21 THE WITNESS: All right. As I stated 22  ! there were several system numbers or systems worked on by { 23 one SWA and that SWA system number may'not have i' 24 corresponded to any of those systems. I 25 i I l 1 4 - J l j + JJO 33jon3 1- .BY;MR.,DAVIDSON: 7 Q -- Then.again-it mayJ;have? 3 ' MR.'SPEKTER:. 'A re. we continuing'one:.more d question? 5 'MR. DAVIDSON: ~Well,Ihe'can answer it yes .6 or no.  ? MR. SPEKTER: He.will-answersthe way he 8 wants ~to. MR. D A VI D SO N ': 'Okay. 10 -THE-WITNESS: .Your question, again :was --- Il my. reply was that the're would be more than -- that 12 possibly the: syst'em number.on (ba:SWA'would not be 13 reflected in the systems actually worked on,and ycur l' ' question to that was -' 15 'MR.'DAVIDSON: I think~we will break', /  % . - 16 \ 37 THE WITNESS: Okay' . 18 MR. SPEKTER: ;I agree. l' (Whereupon, at 7:25 p.m.lthe taking'of 20 the deposition was recessed, to. reconvene at 8: 42 p.m., 21 this same day.) 22 23 24 25 i I CERTIFICATE OF PROCEEDINGS 4 1 l 2 This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the I l  ! NRC COMMISSION 3 In the matter of: i 4 Texas Utilities Electric Company, et al Deposition of Danny Walter ' Date of Proceeding: Thursday, July 19, 1984 5 Place of Proceeding: Glen Rose, Texas l 6 I 7 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript for the file of the Commission. 8 9 l J. F. Coughlin 10 Official Reporter - Typed 11 E 12 v  ! 13 Official Reporter - S igna t u r e l.. la j i IS l 16l i7l 18 19 l 20 i l 21 1 22 i 23 24 25 TAYLDE ASSOCIATES REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL REPORTERS NORFOLK, VIRGINIA [r  ? 6

) ,-

s 221-age 21-9 1 A. .Yes, I.could. 1 .2 .Q-  ; A11L righ t'. :Then I thinkcwhat I will do is, 3 I will ask the reporter'~if'he would be good enough to. l f 4 provide t{ khe[ documents in question, so:that. -- i 5- Lhe can see.if he.can-refresh'his recollection. 6 (The Reporter. complies.) 7 BY MR. DAVIDSON: '8 .Q ,'When you referren-to documents.that would 9 refresh your recollection, is the document ~ that you.had. 10 in mind Direct _ Exhibit 4?- 11 A ~Yes, it is. 12 Q Is-that a1 copy of a note that you made about 13 a conversation.you had? 14 A Yes, Lit is. I'd also 'ike.to make reference 15 to a previous statement that I made. 'I specified the 16 February 8th date for the Ivan Vogelsang incident,;which 17 is incorrect, right now. Is Q How do you.know that's incorrect? 19 A Because after reviewing the document and' 20 refreshing.my memory, I note that I wrote down the 21 February 8th dealing with the Ken Luken problem, which means 22 that the Ivan Vogelsang had to be prior to that. 23 Q Right. How much prior to that? 24 A I would have to -- it's already. proven ~that 25 my memory is rusty, so I would have to have it refreshed G _______.____._.___i__._____ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ .__.___2'_._.____,________.._i._m.___.____u________________________ r 222 4-ge 31-10 I by the documents that I've already submitted. 2 'MR. SPEKTER: Ilbelieve the document is 3 there, and I' don't.think anything has been' proven d 'concerning your' memory. 5 'MR. DAVIDSON:. I.was going to hasten to point 6 out that that is right.- I don't think that we necessarily have offered as a matter of proof the unreliability or. 8 . rustiness of your memory. The record will show what it shows. .30 LI will grant you,~you are not.really II particularly precise about your recollections. except when- i 12 '! there are particular words that you are anxious to get I3 in the record.- 14 BY,MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q But is there a document here that youJ think 16 -l would refrech your recollection as to the date on which II you had the incident with Mr. Vogelsang? 18 A Yes. That's part of the reasoning of logging I' those information (sic) down, so that you've got the 20 information there to start with, i i 23 l Q When did you start keeping.these logs? 22 1 A' The Fred Powers incident was. thought to me 23 as being a one-time deal, no problem.- 'A s soon as'the 24 Ivan Vogelsang incident occurred, I said that this is  ! i 25 -beginning to become too much, and that I logged that down, i l 'l i e ---_._-____-_______A q l 223 I I; .l1 , mgc 21-11 1 and also tried to remember as much as pertaining to the {) 2 time and place and everything of the Fred Powers incident. 3 Q Did you ever write down-or make any notes d about the Fred Powers incident? I take it you -- let me 1 i 1 5 just strike that. d i 6 I take it from.what.you're saying that 7 initially, because you thought the Fred Powers was an B isolated one, you didn't at that time make any rec'ord of , 9 it? 10 A That's right. 11 Q There was no contemporaneous note made. 12 A Right. 13 Q Did you make a subsequent note in which 14 you had past recollection recorded? 15 A Yes, I did. 16 Q Did you produce that note for us here today? 17 A 1 I believe you have it.  ; IB With respect to Mr. Powers? Q 19 (Pause.) i 20 MR. DAVIDSON: That's right. { 21 MR. SPEKTER: His memory's not so rusty { . 22 after all. 23  ! MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you, Mr. Spekter. I can 24 always count on you for some help. I i 25 i THE WITNESS: That actually wasn't submitted,  ? l, -i l i i i - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ a q 1 224 j l' mgc 21-12 1 though. That was on the back-of another. 2 MR. DAVIDSON: .That's right. 'That's why. j 3 I was puzzled'. .You"didn't. submit this particular-note d which was on the back of -- it was the obverse side, 5 if you will, of Witness.F DX -- that'is, Direct Exhibit 3, 6 which was.the note that you alleged was made contemporaneous 2 y . i 7 with the Vogelsang incident. AndJapparently at 'the-time. . 8 of the Vogelsang incident. .you then'-- '9 BY MR. DAVIDSON: .{ 10 Q Did you then turn over the page and write j 11 what you remembered of the Powe'rs incident; is i that it? ' 12 Or did you make that: notation even - subsequent to that? 13 .A I would have.to look at.the documentation 14 that you have there to. refresh my memory. 15 Q Okay. I'm going to give it to you. Oh, 16 you want all of these? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Sure. 19 MR. DAVIDSON: . just'so the 20 record will reflect it, I have handed you Direct Exhibit.2 1 21 and Direct Exhibit 3, and have I given you also Direct  ! 'I 22 Exhibit 47 l 23 No. I think only Direct' Exhibits 2 and 3,

l 24 but if you wish, I will also give you Direct Exhibit 4. '. l 25 So now you have all of the notes that were used during l

i 4 Q_.__L____-_____._:__ 1 3 225  ; 'l mgc 21-13 1 your direct examination. i 2 THE WITNESS: The Ivan Vogelsang incident' , 3 Direct Exhibit 2,.was a note written at the exact time d of the conversation. 5 The.Ivan Vogelsang incident, Direct Exhibit 3, 6 was written approximately ten minutes after the phone 7 conversation with a little bit more in detail. 8 The back side of Direct Exhibit 3 was dealing 9 with the Fred Powers incident, which was probably written 10 sometime that afternoon or within a day or so fo the first II one. 12 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 33 Q When you say "of the first one," you mean 14 of the time that you wrote the Vogelsang second memo? 15 A Right. 16 Q In other words, then sometime later, either 17 that day or the next day, you turned over that page and 18 put down what you remembered of the Powers incident? 19 A Correct. 20 l Q And with respect to Direct Exhibit 4, which 21 is the notation about the Luken incident? 22 A It was written directly after the incident. , End 21 23 24 25 l' Jon2 227 I the authority to sign these memos and also Tom Miller had 2 the authority of signing of memos too. Their distinction 3 between those two levels of authority was very vague for d periods of time. So I am not sure if it was Tom Miller 5 or Dick Camp. 6 Possibly if one of those two people would 7 have been out of the office it could have been authority 8 of somebody else. Q I would like to show you a document which 10 appears to bear the signature of Tom Miller, which is Il entitled " Texas Utilities Generating Company Office 12 Memoradnum." It is addressed to L.M. Popplewell. It Je 13 dated December 19, 1983, and the subject is ES-100 cable 'd separation. It bears a series of initials in the lower 15 left-hand corner. The initials being TPM, KLL, DAL, and to all in capitals, and then there is a fifth set of  ; '7 initials, lower case gr. '8 ) The document also appears to be cc'd, I I that is copied to an R. E. Camp and an M. R. McBav. I i 20 I want to ask you a couple of questions 1 21 about those initials and then I am going to show you the I i 22 document. l \ 23 Do you have any knowledge as to who gr { 24 would be? 1 25 l A No. I would imagine that was the typist,  ! _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .-_._.--_-.-_-_-_-_--a H .33 ' 228-f -l: 1 though. 2 Q It was the practice to.have lower case initials indicating the typist of the. memorandum?' d A I believe so.- Not necessarily the typist.. 5 Isn't it'a clerical-type form that you put.a gr for 6 identification of a typerwriter or>something,similar to . that. 8 Q Are you asking me or are you asking;-- 9 A I am saying hat.that'is what those 10 letters might have been. 11-Q Okay. How about i-12 MR. SPEKTER: I wouJd object to any 13 questions you might ask-without looking at thel document, or 14 at least looking at the-initials in the context.- 15 MR. DAVIDSON: I just want to ask what-those-16 initials meant to him. I don't think there is any need for 17 him to look at the document. tB I' MR. SPEKTER: He is certainly'not the only 19 person in the world with those initials, I t 20 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 21 Q How about DAL; whose initials are those? ( 22 A Those possibly would 've Art London. 23 Q Now, we have had this discussion before. I 2a understand his name to be Art London but you say he has a 25 first name that starts with a "D"? l 1 Jon6 239 1 j i 4 I A Yes, I believe so. 7 Q The middle initial.is " Art is that right? 3 A I am not familiar with the exact -- d Q How about KLL; who could that be? 1 5 A KLL7 f' 6 l Q Yes. ' 7  ! A It could possibly be Ken Luken. B Q All right, and how about TPM? t A Oh, that's Tom Miller, possibly. M) Q All right. How about R. E. Camp; who l' would that be? 12 A That would be Mr. Camp. Dick Camp. 13 Q And how about this M. R. McBay; is that Id the samee McBay that you earlier identified to us as beins 15 the head of engineering, manager for engineering, who had  ! 16 the authority over the three departments we discussed, 17 nuclear engineering, Gibbs and Hill, New York, the 18 architect-engineers and Comanche Teak project engineering? l l' A Correct. 20 Q And you identified Mr. Popplewell as being { 21 the manager of that group? 22 A Correct. Now, as I said now, this' letter 1 23 may have been written under a different organization than 24 what you just referenced to. I  ; i 25 Q Can I show you the memorandum we have been 'l i I i l n5 210 4 1 talking about and ask you whether you recollect having 2 written it? 0 MR. MIZUNO: I would ask that that A document be identified and made a part of the record and bound into the transcript. 6 MR. SPEKTER: I would also join in that 7 request. 8 MR. DAVIDSON: I haven't decided 'shether 9 I wish to'do so or not. However, if either of you at the . 10 l appropriate time, when it is your examination, wish to do l 11  ! so you certainly are at liberty to undertake to conduct i i 67 1 your examination in any matter you two see fit. i 13 MR. MIZUNO: I believe that -- well, just l 1A l a moment. Yes, I think -- l MR. DAVIDSON: I am just conducting my 16 examination the way I feel comfortable. 17 MR. MIZUNO: Okay. 18 MR. DAVIDSqN: { Q ' do you recognize this as a memo that you prepared? l 21 I A Yes, I do. ' 22 Q So that the initial here are in fact { 23 your initials? i A Yes, they are. 25 Q Do you see that there are some initials in i e jon6 231 I I manuscript over above the typed-in initials there are some 2 manuscript initials above your -; is that your initials? 3 A Yes, it is. Q Do you recognize anyone else's initials 5 on here? 6 A The reproduction-is poor but I imagine 7 the one part of mine is Art London. 8 Q And the one after that? 9 A Ken Luken. 10 Q Is this signature appear to you to be II Mr. Miller's signature? 12 A Yes, it is. 13 Q Now, you wrote this memo. Is this the , I' memorandum we have been discussing; that is the startup 15 memorandum regarding the concern you had with respect to 16 the DES-100 cable separation and the criteria in 17 Regulatory Guide Section 4.11? 18 A Reg Guide 1.75. I' Q I am sorry. I have holding the document 20 upside down. The NRC Regulatory Guide 1.? ' 21 A Right. 22 Q 1s this the memorandum that you wrote? 23 A Yes, it is. 24 Q And is that date now refresh your recollection 25 I \ as to when you had the incident with Mr. Powers? 4 0 jon7 232-- 4 I A' It specifies that. December 19 was-when 2 .the memorandum was written; thereforenthe:' incident'with 3 Fred Powers was.p'robably within a week's time period-from ' t h a t d a t e . 5 Q Before~or after? 6 A Before. 7 I might could even refre'sh it. closer than 8 that'if need be. Q How would'you do that. 10 A Looking to see'where the 19th fell on'as II far as date-wis'e. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: All right. Mr. .Spekter has 33 been good enough to lend us his calendar. Previously. I' If you feel that would help you pinpoint it even better. 15 g,ge s ask Mike to produce it -- Mr'.=Spekter to produce it to again, and let's look at it. MR, SPEKTER: I would be_ pleased to do that. 18 This is a 1983 calendar. I' I would also request that since the witness 20 has testified from that document, at this point that a.-copy 21 be made part of the record. I believe it is appropriate 22 that for reference purposes that document now be~made and 23 given a number and made part of this deposition. 24 MR. DAVIDSON: Once again Mr.'Spekter has 25 read my mind. He is one step ahead of me. } l l ~jon8 233 1 I think now that you have identified it 2 what I would like to ask is that we make a Xerox copy of 3 it, a photocopy, have it marked appropriately, a nd ' re tu rn 4 the original to me. 5 MR. SPEKTER: That has been today's 6 procedure and no problem. 7 MR. .DAVIDSON: What I would like to d o ,- 8 Mr. Reporter, is I would-like to label,this document 9 Disc Exhibit F-8. XXXXXX 10 (The document referred to was il marked Exhibit Disc F-8 12 13 for identification.) BY MR. DAVIDSON: a Q Now, have you had a chance to study 15 Mr. Spekter's calendar with respect to 1983 in December? 16 A Yes, I have. I believe thatuthe date -- 17 with that document being dated on Monday the 19th, to the 18 l best of my recollection -- now, I am not' positive. I know i 19 that this incident started on a Friday which would mean j 20 21 that it should be the 16th and also the 16th should be the j date which I called in NRC Region V. I i 22 Q All right. 23 A At the very most it is a week's delay l j 24 ' behind there, so it would be the week previous to that. 25 l Q Well, I am glad we were able to refresh I -l 4 i 1 1 -l j o n10, 235 1 1 I A Correct. 2 $ Q. So you assume you have no reason to believe 3 that the practice was not followed in this' case? d A Well, I' received a reply back from a S letter, therefore it must have been forwarded. 6 Q That'.s good reason for your belief. 7 Did you at any time discuss this memorandum 8 with Mr. Camp? 9 A Yes. 10 Q When you raised the subject with him.did II he give evidence that he had seen a copy of it'; in other 12 words when you mentioned it to him he didn't say I have 13 never seen a copy of that memo; did he? 14 A Mr. Camp was one of the ones who had 15 directed me to write the memorandum. If I remember right to from previous testimony, I came in on a Saturday indicating II to Art London and Dick Camp'that I had contacted the NRC 18 concerning this problem -- ) ' 1 Q I see. 20 A -- and we went to his office and at that 21 time they toned me down and reqeusted that I not call the 22 800 number, and at the same time said go ahead and write the 23 memo to start generating - get it through channels. 24 Q In other words, they felt that the proper 25 i procedure to be followed in raising this question was'to l 1

  • 1 1

237 + 231b1 i 1 -j . j MR. . DAVIDSON:- Do you wish to take'taibreak. ' i ( ~~' 3 THE WITNESS: No..we will keep going' . i d BY'MR. DAVIDSON: 5 Whengyou.say'that Mr. Camp. toned you down. Q 6 do you mean. chat;you were angry at the stime? L Were ' y.ou L s till. [ I angry over the Powersiincident?- - 8 r A .Very much so. 9 Q And this was on Saturday, right?S 10 A Right.. 11 ' Q So you had overnight to this.k about it, and . q. 12 you were still-hot aboue it? " 13 A Well, the definition of hot -- you:know, I-id was still concerned that my job had-been. insinuated -bout 15 an incident to which I-was truly correct on. '6 Q Well, I'think only others willLbe able to 17 .tell us you were correct, b'u t which you were-truly concerned.;- 18 about? I' A An incident which I felt 1.was truly correct 20 on and which was confirmed to me by the NRC repres'entative. 21 Q -Well, we don't-know whether he confirmed it. 22 or not. There is no' evidence to that: fact. 73 A Okay. 2d Q But we do know that you felt that you'were-25 truly concerned about the incident. Youffelt you were- 'l i i -l 238 lb2  ? I raising a legitimate. point and you felt that Mr. Powers 2 didn't understand it. And that is why you had the dispute, 3 because you felt that he was not responding to a legitimate 4 complaint? 5 A I felt that Mr. Powers understood the proble m o perfectly. 7 Q But you don't know that? 8 A I felt that Mr. Powers did not want to 9 address the problem because of the fact that the implementa-10 tion -- the possibility of extended work load and reinspection 11 of the full plant. 17 Q And you wanted the problem addressed, didn't 13 you? You wanted an explanation to yodr perceived conflict 14 between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 and Mr. Powers 15 did not seem to be prepared to give you that explanation? 16 A No, Mr. Powers said there was no problem. 17 He just said that ES-100, period. That is it. That he had 18 final say so and that whatever he said was going to be it, lo as far as whether there was a conflict between those two 20 procedures. 21 Undoubtedly, they had had this argument come 22 up before. 23 Q How do you know that, sir? 24 A It was during the conversations with Fred 1 25 Powers, that he made the statement that they had had this , l 239 fc231b3 1 argument prior to this and it was decided by him and other 2 people that -- well, it was even during the phone conversation 3 to Gibbs & Hill, the Gibbs & Hill employee which I believe 4 signed a reply to that memo, which would further give you 5 more information than my previous testimony, not being able 6 to identify the person or recollect the name. 7 Talking with him on the phone, he specified a that they had had that argument previously and that there 9 was a concern in it, as far as ES-100 and the Reg Guides to not corresponding. But that due to the fact that it was 11 going to cause so much more of a workload, they felt that 12 they -- that they could save money by fighting it in court 13 or fighting it with the NRC if it arose with the NRC. ~ 14 Q Was that incorporated in the response that 15 was prepared to the statement? 16 A In writing? 17 Q Yes. 18 A No, it was not. 19 Q You say you called Gibbs & Hill, New York? 20 A As soon as I received'the reply, I called 21 this person and asked him how can you come up with this reply ? 22 You know that this is a violation of the Reg Guide. This 23 person also admitted to me, at that time, that -- he also 24 admitted to me, at that time, that if they had it to do all 25 over again they were relooking at the documentation over l ^ . - := . a '2'41i , 1 -fc231b5. 1 ,Q Did.. you ~ ever see . the writtien response .t'o ~ 2 the st'artup memo that you wrote? 3 A Yes, I did.; 4 .Q, .Do you recollect what-was.in:it?, S. A 'The main portion, that I rememb'er about that 6 memo'right now was:t'at,it said"that'there?was no conflict

7. between the ES-100 and Reg Guide'1.75.

8 Q Now, you. testified.just a. moment-.ago,that 9 you called - - I'm sorry. 10 A .I had something that,I wanted to conclude-11 on this. 12 Q Please. 13 A Okay.-that also leads'into additional 14 information, as to when I say. upper' level management' T 15 relaxing requirements. right? Here'we're dealing with'a 16 situation where upper level management made'the. decision that 17 since it was going to cost so.much more' money to.gofback 18 and reinspect all this that.they were willing to fight-NRC 19 on this issue, rather than go to the1more stringent. .20 requirement. 21 Q Who, in~ upper level management',' told:you that? 22 If anyone. ' 23 A- When I say -- a Gibbs & Hill. employee, which .l 24 i' was at a higher level than-me speaking..-which was making 25 -decision -- you've got to. figure that he made recommendations .~ l q e l 243 fc231b7 I A Now, the response letter that you may get 2 may be a response -- I cannot remember exactly whether or 3 not the response letter went from Gibbs & Hill to d engineering and then engineering rewrote the letter and 5 then sent it to start up. I do not know. 6 Or I do not know if engineering just stuck 7 a cover sheet over the Gibbs & Hill document. 8 Q Well, now I want ~to be clear. Did'you ever 9 see the Gibbs & Hill letter? 10 A The return? 11 Q Yes.' 12 (Pause.) 13 A I believe I did. I believe that it was 14 attached with a cover sheet from engineering. 15 Q All right. 16 Now we' identified Disc Exhibit 8, as being 17 a memorandum from Mr. Miller, albeit that you prepared. 18 addressed to Larry -- to L.M. Popplewell. Is that correct? 19 A Correct. 1 20 Q Now, at the conclusion of the statement of 21 i the problem, the last sentence says "startup request 22 engineering evaluate the situation and respond with the  ! 23 design philosophy that permits the installation of raceway 24 as described." So there was a request for an explanation I 25 i as to whether or not there was a conflict? 1 4 i j j 96s ( fc231b9 t A To identify the problem. 2 Q Right. j A 3 Okay, the main reason was -- as I had already 4 been told and informed by NRC, that there was a problem 5 and I am not -- you know -- that there was a problem there. f 1 6 So in my mind, I felt that there was a definite problem. 7 By doing this memo, I addressed the problem and if the i 1 8 company will not correct the problem, what more can I do?  ! 9 Q We didn't ask you that. We only asked 10 you whether yom wanted to highlight your concern and ask f \ 11 for an explanation and that was the purpose of this memo, l 12 wasn't it? You did highlight your concern? 13 A True. 14 Q And you asked for an explanation, didn't you? 15 A Well, really what I was trying to ask for 16 was, is corrective action. I 17 Q Do you mean to tell me that you were not 18 interested in an explanation? You were only interested in 19 getting your own interpretation accepted? i I 20 A Not necessarily -- I was asking for a '  ! 21 legitimate -- I 22 Q Explanation? 23 A Explanation. 24 Q Fair enough. Now I note that the memorandum 25 is addressed to Mr. Popplewell but we have been talking about I i \ _ _ _ _ _ _ 247 fc231b11 1 Q And therefore, he thought that the best place 2 to ask for a response to your question would be the person 3 who drafted t'he original criteria? 4 A Not the person who drafted it. 5 Q The organization, which would be Gibbs & Hill. 6 A Okay. 7 Q Is that right? Is that your understanding? 8 A Correct. 9 Q Did he say that? 10 A Well, he didn't say it, but those words. 11 Q But that's what you understood 9 - 12 A Right, f 13  ! Q So then you understood that this was going 14 to be forwarded to Gibbs & Hill in New York? 15 A They had already pinpointed the exact person 16 they were going to forward it to. I had already, during 17 the meeting, identified to them that I had talked to somebody 18 different than the person they were talking about. And 19 they automatically said, well, we know of this other person 20 so we're going to forward it to him. He is in understanding 21 with our point of view, basically. 22 Q Do you know who the response -- do you know 23 the individual who signed the response for Gibbs & Hill? 24 A l've already told you that I don't -- I would 25 have to look at the memo to refresh my memory. i u___________ _ _ _ _ _ . 249 ' ifc231b13 , '1 l ~! u l 1 .a memorandum for him, ,that he sked you to'do,.that:you. l I 2 could slip something by him? .. ~l' 3 ( P a u s e'. ) d A- LWell. I'm not -- I don't knowihow intense- 'I' -l .1 5 this individual reads his' memorandums.  ! 6 Q You don't'know? 7 A I don't'know. I'm not; going'to.make! . c. '8 _I 'that' accusation. 9 Okay. Q What'about your ability to slip' < l 10 something by Mr. Camp?. Do you think'you could? -~ A memorandum : i 11 he asked you to write, you could slip something'byfhim? 12 A I don't know. 13 Did you do'that? Q ~l Id A No. -[ 15 Q Do you know anybody who'did slipfsomething l 16 by Dick Camp? t I 17 A No. i d end24- 18 19 -{' l -~: 2o 21 22 23 24 25 i ______;-_-__L_______---_---------------- 250 31 4 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q Do you remember or recollect who the project 3 manager for Gibbs & Hill might have been at the time? 4 A No, I don't. 5 Q Was his name R.E. Ballard, which I think was 6 on the table of organization that we looked at just a moment 7 that you pointed to?. 8 A It might be. 9 Q Could that be the individual? Was he listed 10' as such there? 11 A I don't know. ,12 Q I'm going to ask you to look at a document 13 It consists of three pages. And, you see, it is 14 a copy of a document that is a three-page letter on the 15 letterhead of Gibbs & Hill, Inc. And the address is 11 Penn l 16 Plaza, New York, New York dated January 23, 1984 It.also 17 bears a stamp saying transmitted by telecopier January 23. 18 It is addressed to TUCCO in Glen Rose. Texas, 19 attention J.B. George, vice president project general manager, 20 And as you can see it deals with Regulatory Guide 1.75 and  !, i 21 ES-100. And it goes on for three pages, and it is signed I 22 very truly yours. Gibbs & Hill. And I can't make out the 23 signature, and the printed text reads. Robert E. Ballard, Jr., project manager. i. 24 Do you see that? 25 A Yes.  ! --__----_--A '251 l24pb2' 'l 1 Q It . also-indicates that copies were sent.to - ~; .5 2 and it says,JARMS, B&R' site. .Do you know what that11s? , 3 'A Brown & Root. 4 Q. What's; ARMS? 5 A ARMS is'some: kind of' documentation center. l 6 -Q Documentation center that's' maintained.- DO , 7 you know what OL means?. 8 A No.-  ;' .9 -Q Then M. McBay.- j 10 A Right. 11 Q It says TUSI, and then it says IL. .Defyou 12 know what that means? 13 A fN o . 1;believeHit stands for one letter. 14 Q What about.H. Deam. Do you know who that might 15 be? l. 16 A .No. + 17  !' Q Then it says. W.I. Vogelsang, TUSI site and I' 18 it indicates that was telecopied to him. I 19 A C9treet. 20 Q It also indicates a copy to L. Popplewell, 21 TUSI site. Do you see there are three! sets of ' initials? ' . 22 A Yes. 1 S 23 Q In capital' letters here, REBa -:PNL - SPM, 24 also with handwritten initials. Do you know any-of those j 25 individuals? ' r , J 252' ^? I A' I'm not familiar'with the.SPM, butith'e SPM 2 could be possibly Sam.Martinovich. But to the best~of'my. 3 recollection Sam Martinovichgis the persontwho I talked to: 4 regarding:-- 5 MR. MIZUNO: Was the person you talked to l 6 regarding what?- 7 THE WITNESS: Sam Martinovich regarding how 8 they could justify.this-letter the way they ju'stified it. 9 And now i f .1 am remembering'the name correctly, which'I t h'in k to I am, he was also the one.that was brought up by them during 11 the meeting in Dick Camp's office that.he would be the one 12 that they would have do the evaluation 13 BY.MR. DAVIDSON: 14 s Q Now in your affidavit, is there 15 any mention, any conversation you had with respect to I 16 Mr. Martinovich or'anyone else at'Gibbs.& Hill in New York 17 regarding the preparation of this response?- 18 MR. SPEKTER: Which response are we : speaking-19 about? 20 MR. DAVIDSON: The one he's identified ~that 21 was dated January 23, 1984 22 MR. SPEKTER: That's.something that is not 23 in the record. I would request that it be copied at this  ; 24 point, a copy be provided for the, deposition. 75 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter, I-would. appreciate d J 253' ' '= p b 4 1 your letting me. conduct my own examination. When you have. 2 the podium ~you make whatever rules you like., 3 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 1 ' 4 Q there's a question pending. -e A' 5 Will you repeat the question - 'if I interpret;. 6 the question you are asking me if there is any information 7 in the affidavit as to the response letter. 8 Q. Well..-that wasn't my question. My Jquestion ~ 9 was, is there- any mention of the telephone conversation that to you allege that you had with the Gibbs & Hill New York office!- 11 of employee therein after you received the response?- 12 A No, there~is not - I'm going to hold back on 13 that question until I do reread the paragraphs here. l 14 Q MAy I call your attention, \ to 15 pages 10 and 11 of:the affidavit, which by the way was 16 offered into evidence by your counsel. 17 (Witness reviewing document.) 18 MR. DAVIDSON: when you have 19 completed reviewing those, would you ple se look.up? 20 T~dE WITNESS: The.only telephone conversation 21 indicated in this paragraph would be the one mAde prior to 22 the writing of the memo you have,'which was.co the employee 23 who refused to sign off the DCA because of the violation of ' I 24 the ES-100. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Reporter, would you please i l .= _ _-____-_-__D 256-q I read back my question? l  ? -(The reporter readfthe. record as, requested.)- 'f .3 3 BY MR. DAVIDSON: d Q- Now,wouldlyou'please answer.the question?- .' 5 A .N o , there is not. 6 -Q titrning once again to the~two 7 . paragraphs on page 10~regarding your allegation.that there-8 is.a-conflict between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75, is-9 there any mention ~of,your having: written a start-up memo 10 seeking an. explanation?- 11 A No, there is not. L12 Q Is there any mention in this affidavit of 13 your having been provided with a response to that start-up 14 memo? 15 A No -- 16 Q I haven't finished'-- through engineering 17 and from the architect engineer, Gibbs & Hill? 18 A No, there is not. 19 .Q . do you~have a copy of-the. response 20 that was provided by-Cibbs & Hill that was'given tocyou?' 21

  • A~

I do not believe so. ' 22 Q You-did not retain a copy?' 23 A To the best of my knowledge I.did not. 2d Q B9t you may have? 25 A I don't know. 255 24pb6 1 Q Would you check your records at home and if 2 you were given a copy would you provide it for us? 3 A Yes, I will. 4 Q Would you do that early next week? 5 A Yes. 6 Q You mentioned that you believe 7 that the response that was provided to you was under a cover 8 sheet, you called it. 9 A Yes. 10 Q From Mr. Popplewell. 11 A I said it possibly could have been under a 12 cover sheet. I'm not familiar it is was or not. I do not 13 remember if it was or not. 14 Q A moment ago I think you made a more affirmative 15 statement. In any event, will you look for that cover sheet? 16 A Yes . 17 Q And if you have that, will you produce it to 18 us? 19 A Yes, I will. 20 Q Will you do that early next week? i 21 A Yes, I will. . 22 Q Now, you indicated that you had made a f 23 telephone call to the NRC on or about December 16 after you j 24 had the discussion with Mr. Powers. 25 A Yes, I did. l 1 T~ 256 s 4 1 Q What was the reason for that call? 2 A To confirm my questions of ES-100 being in ] 3 violation of Reg Guiae 1.75. 4 Q Who in the NRC did you contact? I 5 A At this time I do not remember. 6 Q Did you know, did you introduce yourself to 7 the individual on the other end of the line? 8 A Eventually the individual on the other end 9 of the line I believe did have my name. At the very beginning to I wanted to keep it anonymous. I do not know at which time 11 I broke being anonymous. 12 Q Did the person on the other end of the line 13 give you his identity? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Tell you how you made that call. Whom did you' 16 call? Did you pick out a particular individual with the 17 NRC with whom you were acquainted? 18 No, I did not. A What happened was I had gotten 19 home, it was after 5:00. The NRC re,gion for this area 20 was closed at the time. The only one open to possibly answer 21 questions that I might have was the NRC region towards ' 22 California, which was Region V, I believe. ANd that's the 23 reasoning for calling Region V. 24 I was just connected with an electrical 25 engineer. I asked for an electrical engineering type person l i l l l 1 l 1 -_-- - i 257' 24pb8 1 to ask a questions to. 1 2 Q But.you don't recollect who that might have -3 been? 4 .A Not right now. 5 Q Did you at any. time raise these matters with 6 the regional office that had charge for this particular '7 project, which would be Region IV? 8 A No, in order to do that I would have had to 9 call during company time, which considering the amount of to conflict and harassment, you might say, that I go t for 11 calling Region V, I felt to try and call NRC during company 12 time would be very bad. 13 Q Now you just said that you got harassment 14 for calling Region IV. You haven't earlier identified or 15 testified any harassment for making that call. Are you now 16 giving us yet another incident that has not previously been 17 testified to? i 18 A I'm saying that I was counseled on it, and 19 told that it places the company in bad light and should not 1 l 20 be done. 21 Were Q those the exact words that were used 1 i 22 in that counseling session? i 23 A I'm not going to try and give an exact word 1 24 for word in a counseling session. 1 25 Q Well, could it have been, well, why don't I i j 259 24pb10 l l 1 same separation violation problem. and tlat if they are 2 building to this specification that they stand a very good 3 chance of being shut down theirselves. I 4 So at the time there-I'was dealing with how 5 much -- I even specified to Fred Powers some time that you 6 were going to sit here with a violation, continue on 7 building this plant and possibly spend an excessive amount  ! i 8 of money later when the p{oblem actually is encountered. .f 9 Q '  ; this gentleman that you called to from Region V. Did he indicate to you that he had inspected 11 or reviewed any of the cable separations at Comanche Peak? 12 A No. he did not, t3 Q So the only basis on which he had to go in i 14 response to your question was your assertion about -- 15 A I read him. He was perfectly familiar with ' 16 the Reg Guide 1.75 which most NRC personnel are. I read him ' 17 portions out of the neg Guide 1.75 which he understood to  ! 18 be that. I also read him specific information directly from to the ES-100 which is outlined in my affidavit. i i l 20 And his reply was, yes it is in violation. 21 Q Is this conversation and the details the sum 22 and substance which you just revealed to us now part of your 23 affidavit? 24 A 1 believe not. 2$ f Q iwhen you received the response from l l' 4 l 260 4 i Gibbs & Hill, New York did you take it up with,this 2 unidentified engineer from Region V7 3 (Pause.) d A Repeat that one more time. When I received -- 5 MR. DAVIDSON: Instead of your trying to 6 repeat it, why don't.we ask the reporter to -- 7 THE WITNESS: Let's take a short break here 8 and come back to that particular question afterwards. 9 MA. DAVIDSON: I don't follow what you're to saying. 11 THE WITNESS: I would like to take a break. 12 MR. DAVIDSON: You want to consult with 13 counsel? 14 THE WITNESS: No, I would like to take a break, 15 MR. DAVIDSON: As I told you before, any time to you want to take a break you can have it. Go ahead, ) tB ) THE WITNESS: Okay. I1 19 ( (Recess -- 4: 40 p.m.) l 20 21 l 22 i l 23 j 24 25 l 1 i l l l i ( jont 261 ; I #25 (4:56 p.a.) I l l ' MR. SPEKTER: Ue are back on the record 4: 56p.m. 2 and the reporter is going to read the question that we had 3 before the break. A  ! MR. DAVIDSON: Would you, please, l Mr. Reporter? ,5 6 (The reporter read the record as requested.) 7 i THE WITNESS: Yes. BY MR. DAVIDSON: j 9 Q Did you send a copy to this unidentified !l l , I individual of the written response of Gibson-Hill? 11 A I do not remember. 12 l Q Do you recollect having taken it up with j 13 d him? What is your recollection? 1 14 A Oh, I do know that I formally made a report 15 I on that incident to the Region V NRC representative. l 16 i Q Now, this is a formal report?  ! j 17 A I actually indicated to him that there was i 18 a problem, that they had had time t o re s o lv e this problem ;l I 19 i ! and this was what their answer was to the problem. 20 ' . , l Q And when you say formal report ' 21 what -- / h 22 A Okay. Maybe the word formal would not be correct. Originally I indicated to him that I did not want 24 this to go in as a report to him or to be researched. 25 The final one towards the end pone calls was that yes, I I I i 9 262 I had received the information~back from.here and that 2 it was inconsistent to what me and'him ha'd talked about-3 then that I was placing a1 formal complaint: at.this7 time, d Or'l-was notifying him of the; problem and requesting 5 research into the background.of.it. 6 Q Now, did youncall anyone in Region IV -7 'about the problems;since they. had .j jurisdiction of your 8  ; plant? 9 A As I indicated earlier, Regionf1V was 10 always closed by the time I was able to get home to make 11 those phone calls. And in some cases Region.V'was already 12 . closed. So I probably had several phone calls where I-13 tried to contact him but he had already'left the office id in Region V. 15 Q Did you ever make a phone call to Region IV? 16 A 'No, I did not i 17 Q Did it have an answering machine where'you 18 could have left a message on at Region.IV? I '19 A You have.got to understand here-that I am 20 trying to maintain a certain. amount of being anonymous.about 21 this. i' '22 Q Well, you said you had disclosed yourself by ., 23 this point. i 24 .A Well, I believe telling this one person  ; 25 -is one-thing but to put your.name down on an answering i 1 i .I l I l jon 262ot I machine that could possibly be reviewed by no telling who 2 and not having the stipulation already addressed to the J 3 person you are talking to that you that you do not want your name used in any matter, it would be stupid on my 5 part to do something like that. 6 Q Did you not think you could mail a writtn complaint to Region IV? 8 A 1 felt that a verbal would be more appropriate, and I m not even sure -- like you asked a 10 question earlier. I may have maild him documentation II associated with this. ' 12 Q You may have mailed Region V? '3 A Right. Q And did it occur to you to mail to IS Region IV if you were going to mail something, to mail 16 it to Region IV who had jurisdiction over your plant? I A I was not talking with Region IV . 18 Plus, if you look at it this way, too, there is a certain l 10 i level of buffer between there, too, that now in order for 1 I 0 Region IV or anybody on the site to find out who I am. i 21 1 they have to go through Region V and so therefore there i is an added buffer there. Or they have to go through this  ! 23 one person and dealing, you know -- keeping strict  ! e4 i confidence, you know, I felt that it was easier for me to i go through Region V. i l l l l I 264 jon I Camp and one of the: statements he made during that meeting 2 was, as I said, that, hey, I didn't make it a complaint 3 and I tried to keep my name anonymous and everything, right, and I told him I didn't want my name used when this 5 subject came across and Dick Camp's reply was that maybe o not to these exact words but he indicated that TUCCO knows who reports to the NRC. And I said hey. I told 8 them that I wanted to stay out of this. He indicated to 9 me that TUCCO does know who reports to NRC. 10 Well. TUGCO-TUSI, the organization as a 11 general organization. or Comanche Peak as a general. 12 Q Did he tell you how he knew that? 13 A N o ., he did not. 14 Q Or his basis for stating that? 15 A No, he did not. 16 Q Did you ask him? 17 A No, I did not. 18 Q You said the reason that you called 19 Region V initially was because they would be open after 20 you got off work. 21 A Correct. 22 Q Wouldn't some of the regions in the East 23 be open before you went to work? 24 A Correct. Well, even theree, we are talking 25 about seven -- t joa 266 'l I i I am prepared to give a lot of latitude 2 to a lot of statements, but what you just said is totally 3 without foundation or merit. What he did and why he did d it is exactly what this deposition is all about and why 5 he refused to contact Region IV and why he insisted on 6 dealing over the phone with Region V and why he wouldn't -- 7 MR. S P EK*f E R : It is not a matter of i B refusinge -- i MR. DAVIDSON: Excuse me. You are , 10-interrupting, Mr. Spekter. Please don't do that. I have 11 always shown you the courtesy to let you complete all of 12 your statements before I spoke and I assume you are going '3 to return that courtesy with respecting my same rights. All I am saying is that the reason for 15 what he did and the reason why he believed what he ) 'O i believed are highly relevant in this case, and we are i '7 l dealing with a specific incident which he says created a I '8 circumstnace of harassment dealing with the question and l " 1 issue raised in pages 10 an d .11 of the affidavit. And 1 j 20 know that you consider my questions to be relevant because 3 21  ! we discussed t hat and I don't think that they are dilatory 22 because I think that I have done nothing but move forward 1 23 in this line of questioning and pursue each topic as it i  ! 28 arose. 25 4 I did tell you during the break that one of l 267  ? the reasons why this was taking as much time as it was was 2 that, ' continues from time to time to lapse into 3 unresponsiveness and to insist on making irrelevant speeches in response to questions and providing testimony and' 5 creating new assertions and new incidents that were not 6 covered in his direct testimony nor in his affidavit I nor previously testified to. And I told you that it was 8 my obligation in a discovery deposition to follow his lead and I told you that it was not I who was leading him in 10 this examination, but he was leading me, and that's why ' I couldn't give you a termination date or time. i 12 Now, if you have a legitimate obj ec tion [ 13 you know I have every desire that you get it on the record. but I frankly thought that was really out of order and 15 that is the reason I am responding to it in this manner. IO MR. SPEKTER: I believe this line of '7 questioning is out of order. 18 MR. DAVIDSON: Your objection is so noted. I I BY./MR . . D AVID S ON : l 20 1 Q answer the question.pending. l l 21 A 1 d o n .'. t believe there was a question 22 pending. i l 23 Q you say you may have mailed some material to Region V but you chose not to mail it to any .! 1 25 other region; is that correct? - 1 i * }  ! i 1 r O '?j on t

263

-f 1 A Correct. 2 Q is your conversation with.the unidentified ~ '3 engineer in Region V detailed and described in-your d affidavit? 5 A No, it is not. i -6 Q Is the subsequent discussion.with: this '7 unidentified' engineer about the response provided by. 8 Gibson and 11111 mentioned in yourf af fidavit? 9 A No, it is_not. 10 Q Now, you were telling us.', 11 / that you' discussed the; response -- you were trying to-12 determine whether you had provided the respons e ~ to the 13 unidentified engineer.. 'Do you remember that? Id A Once again I did1not -- I don't understand 15 what you are asking. 16 Q I haven't- asked anything.- I was asking 17 whether you remember what we previously discussed, but. I 1B will have the reporter read back my. statement to you. 19 (The reporter. read theorecord as requested.) 20 MR.'SPEKTER: I will ask counsel to- 4 P 21 rephrase the question. ' ' I'c 22 MR. DAVIDSON: I thinkEyour suggestion-is [ 23 a good one. Mr. Spekter. 2d BY MR. DAVIDSON:  ? 25 Q You will recollect.that we have[been' 4 4 269 4 I discussing whether you had mailed or otherwise provided 2 the Gibson-Hill response to the unidentified engineer at Region V. Do you recollect that? d A Yes. 5 Q And my understanding was that you couldn't 6 remember whether you had or had not. A Correct. 8 Q But you did remember that you discussed a 9 response. 10 A Correct. 11 12 Q Would you please tell me what you told the Gibson-Hill response was? 13 14 A 1 believe I read it to him. I believe I 15 had the documentation there and I read it to him. 16 That's the end of my -- I related to him I believe. 17 18 Q Why did you call this engineer in Region V { and ask him his opinion about the Gibson-Hill response? A 20 Because it was in conflict to the 21 informationubetihad given me previously. 22 Q Andyou wanted to find out what he thought about the response? 23 A Correct. 24 . l 25 Q And did h e respond to your qeustion? I A Yes. , I jon ] 270 1 . Q And what it is that you allege that he 2 said? f 3 A 1 believe that -- now, this is where the a questioning on my part as far as my memory comes in, he 5 could.have possibly asked me for the documentation to be 6 mailed to him, which I may have done, and that is vague , 7 in my memory if that did occur. 8 1 am saying that it is possible that that j 9 did occur. I believe he had told me, though, that he would 10 look into it and get back with me. \ Q (. ( did.he get back to you? 12 A No, he did not. I don't know if he 13 attempted to or not but I did not receive phone calls from 14 him. 15 ,  ? Q Well, if he had attempted to get.back to 16 , you by phone, was there some place he could have left a 17 i message? 16 - A My home phone number, but if there was 19 nobody there he would not have been able to leave a f j 20 ' message. 21 J } Q You had asked him to contact you at home 22  ; f and not at the plant? 23 A Oh, definitely. ) 24 1  ! 1 Q At the time of these discussions were you. l' 1 25 married? i I i --_ --_-- _ -- - i 271 i  ? I A Yes, I was. 2 ' Q Were you living with your wife? 3 A Yes, I was. d MR. SPEKTER: Objection.as to t h'e 5 relevancy of the question. 6 MR. DAVIDSON: Be patient, Mr. Spekter. 7 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 8 Q Was your wife working at the time? A No,'she was not. 10 Q Was she a h o m e m a k e'r as the expression is?' In other words, was she a housewife? 12 A Yes, she was. I3 Q And if you had been contacted at your home and she was there she could have taken the message for you? 15 A If she had been there. 16 Q And she never gave you any reason to II believe that she had gotten the message from this '8 unidentified engineer? A No, she didnot. 20 Q Do you know whether the unidentified 21 engineer at Region V ever followed up"on the material 22 that you raised with him? 3 A No, I do.not. Unless also that during that 24 time period it might have ran into -- I am not familiar with 25 the time frame. I couldn't say, l , i l ye + ^ '872: -l 1 Q Excuse.me?if I look;a.little puzzled. ' 2 When~Lyou sayLyou-are not familiar.with'the time frame. 3 what are1you referring to? a. Well'[I-wonderEif-it A , was during.a very 5 busy time' frame lwhere'my7 wife-wasibusy'in outside 6 . activities and megpersonally,;too. 7-And towards the.end of my employment I h'ad -gotten to the point to wherel.ILeould have cared. yourknow, l'e s s . 9 They had- just about beaten me down, you 10 _ might-say. _ 'I won't say.that I did"not. care,'.becau'seII.- 11 still could, but I was not pursuing ' the viola tions fin: the 12 procedures-as actively as~ILhad been before. 13 ' la Normally - .if;I had been:normally-pursuing it I am not return'ingLmy phone call._I'would have 15 returned his. 16 , Did he.know your'home address? Q 17 A No, I donft believe?he didJknow my home end2 5 address. I kept that part out,-I believe. to h 20 21  :)' .) 22 23 1 ' l, 24 q 25 ,  ! 1 1 l ~ i 273 lbl 4 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2 Q Were you, at the time, listed in the 3 Cranbury phone-book? 4 A Yes, I was. 5 Q You never received any correspondence 6 from this unidentified engineer, did you? 7 A No, I didn't. 8 MR. SPEKTER: That's.his answer. 9 MR. DAVIDSON: I asked whether he got a telephone to call. This was whether he got any correspondence, mail. 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 13 A 1 I answered your question. 14 f Q No, you did not, sir, 2 i 15 A I said no, I did not. 1-6 Q I'm sorry. I didn't hear you. I guess 17 it was Mr. Spekter's interruption. All right. You did not. 18 Did you, at any time, raise your concern or 19 your complaints or your puzzlement over the alleged 20 conflict between ES-100 and Regulatory Guide 1.75 with 21 anyone else at the NRC, after you failed to get a response 22 from the unidentified engineer at Region V? 23 A No, I did not. 24 Q Did you raise or pursue the issue with 25 anyone else at all? l 274" f,c 361b 2 1 'A No. I did not -- might- I, a t.- this time. 2 . refresh my memory by:looking at the. return documentation. 3- the dating ofLthe return documentation to see what time 4 frame it was actually in? 5' Q Let me understand what your question i s .. Are 6 you sayingfthat you want to get a. sense of the" time where 7 this all occurred, on the-basis of the'datefindicated on 8 the respo'nse from Gibbs & Hill? 9 A Correct. 10 .Q The letter date was January.23, 1984, ~ 11 A The response from Gibbs 6 Hill was'Janu'ary 12 237 1 13 Q Right. The response to'your memo-was! December' id

19. By the way, does it refresh your recollection of how-15 long it took to get a response to-your startup memo?.

16 A That I don't remember. I don't remember when 17 the initial reporting was on the letter.. It may have?been. l 18 I don't remember. I would have to look 'back on the files 1 19 again.  ; l 20 Q Did you understand the question? 21 A Yes, you were asking -- 22 Q Do you remember we talked.about'how quickly j

23 i after you wrote your startup memo'you got s' response? . And- '

24 you said, well 'I don't really remember. It could:be a month.- 25 -i It could be'a year and a half. And I said, well,'was it as l 1 l' i e i i i 275 33 4 1 long as a year and a half, and you said no. 2 I said could it have been as short as a month and you said possibly or it could be three months. 3 4 Now we have a date on a document that you've 5 identified that you wrote. December 19. And we have a date o on a document that purports to be the response of Gib^cs 7 & Hill, New York, indicat1ng January 23. And I ask you 8 whether now your recollection is refreshed as to how long 9 that the time period was between the date or the time when 10 you forwarded the startup memo and the time you got a 11 response? 12 A I would have to look at the date of the 13 memo, when it was generated. You're saying that January 23rd 14 was the date that I got the response? 15 Q No, I said that's the date on the document. i 16 A Well, what I really wanted to find out is j 17 the date when I received the response to the letter. 1B Q Well, my question was not that.  ! 19 A Well, you haven't -- j 20 Q In other words, you can't tell -- from those 21 two days -- what the general period of time that elapsed' ' 22 between the time you asked the question and the time you 23 got a response? You have no recollection? 24 A 1 don't. I'm missing your -- you've gotten 25 me confused at your line of questioning here. I'm not fE261b4'. 276] .f i J I familiar with what we're' answering here. # 2 Q Do you know wh'y that is, 3 MR. SPEKTER: ( / I object to your charreteriza-- , d tion as: to why it: is. Please just ask him t h'e queJtion. 5 MR. DAVIDSON: No, I'm sorry, Mr.- Spekter, 6 I'm entitled to say what I want to say. . If you want to: 7 interrupt your witness,.which you've done from time.to time. 8 that's fine if he accepts it. I don't. This is my-9- -examination and-I'll conduct it'in the proper manner:with to full courtesy and ettiquette to.you.in f ull professionalism-li at all times and I expect nothing less in return and I-12 accept nothing else. 33 And you won't: cut me off and you-won't limit Id my statements, and you' won't interrupt me. Because that 15 is simply not proper and you: know it. L 'i-16 Now as I was going to.say, H I'll. 17 tell you why you seem to be confused. .Yo dre trying to 18 figure out where I'm going. You're trying to' figure.out what. 19 the question means. If you'll just answer the question 20 as asked, it's going to get through real quick. 21 Now I'm going to ask the'reporte'r to. read i 22 that question back to you, or better yet I'm not' going to 23 waste the time with that because we are anxious to speed 3 2d things up. . 25 what I'm trying to say'to'you is, \ / 1 .277,

61b5.

4-1 you earlier' testified that you didn't recollect 'how much 2 time elapsed.between.the" time you" set forward:your j 3 startup memo and the; time'you. received yourEresponse. 4 And we tried to b r a c k e t ' t h e i t im'e . - -And you said well..it. 5 Jcould be one ~~ month or it could be a' year.and~a half. s 6 Now isn'tithat'true? Isn't that'what you said ? 7 THE WITNESS: 'No, I believe-you're:takinglit 8 out. I said that it could be.one month or it could be-a 'o year and a half on~r.ormal response-time. .And that's what 10 we were speaking of, not the response time ofothat one 11 -letter. And then you specifically-warned me to reply to 11 2 the response time of that one. letter and I specified that 13 it could be one month or possibly three months. 14 .BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Okay. Q Now,~having heard theLdates and'seen 16 the documents that constituted the.startup memo'and: the 17 response by Gibbs &-Hill, I asked you whether your 18 recollection was refreshed, as to how long a period' elapsed 19 between the time of the startup memo and the time ~you-20 received the response?- - 21 A And as 1. indicated at the beginning_of this, 22 I was requesting information off of those memos to refresh 23 my memory as to their dates, again. 24 Q We gave you the dates, December 19th 1vas 7 25 your startup memo. January 23 was the date of the response. i 4 'l 278 fc261b6 i 1 A Well, that is what had me confused earlier, 2 was that I believe that you stated that the January 23rd 3 was the date that the startup memo was generated. d Q No, sir. I did not state that. 5 A Okay, you're saying that December 23rd was 6 when the -- 7 Q December 19th, sir, is the startup memo you 8 wrote. That's the date it bears. It's been marked in 9 evidence and marked for identification. to A It was received on January 23rd, 11 Q The response was dated -- 12 A January 23rd. 13 Q I d o n t know when you received it. Id A Now there is very good possibility tha-. it 15 could have taken six weeks in time processing. Under the 16 amount of emphasis that I was placing on this one article, 17 I would imagine that it didn't, because if you will notice 18 that one copy was telecopied to Ivan Vogelsang. Q That's right. 20 A Now just because it was telecopied to i 21 Ivan Vogelsang, Ivan Vogelsang may not' have taken it'upon 22 himself to transmit on over to me. 23 ', Q That's right, j 24 A So the actual time I would have received l 25 the document is still indeterminate. 279 27 4 'l Q . Well,.it may-be indeterminate but you see, 2 the question I' keep'asking you is whethe'r bowing 1these ' 3 . dates, you_have any recollection that has been-refreshed. d' .And if ..I understand 1you correctly;and we could have' stopped 5 this'colliquoysa long. time ago and.maybe'you would like 6 to consult-with your counsel on how to' answer' questions ~1ike 7 this. 8 If you still don't'have any. idea :when: you 9 received it and still don't have any idea.of'the t ime '. t ha t 10 elapsed between the original. memorandum that was sent.up 11 and the response that was received by-you, then the answer-12 is no Mr. Davidson, even though I have seen the' dates,~I 13 still do not have any refresh'ed recollection.as to-how'much Id time elapsed.: 15 And then there can't' be any further questions 16 because you don't have any recollection. 17 A No, I do not have any recollection. la Q Now answer the question. 19 Now, you earlier inquired of me,i 20 L I to provide you with the date of the response'from Gibbs & 21 Hill because you. felt'it would give you some time frame 22 during which you were having the conversations with the 23 Region V unidentified engineer. 'Do you remember that? 2d A (Witness nodding affirmatively.) 25 Q Can you tell me why you thought you needed 280 fc261b8 I that information? 2 A .I just needed-to refresh my memory as to 3 which time of the year we were speaking of exactly, so I 4 could possibly put in line what was going on during that 5 time period. 6 Q Do you remember, from your first 7 conversation with the unidentified engineer, whether he 8 shared your concern about the conflict? And when I say 9 shared your concern, I don't necessarily mean only that he-10 might have agreed with your interpretation that there was. 11 a conflict', but rather that he was likewise in addition, 12 in agreement that this was something about which to have 13 some serious concern? 14 A Yes, he did. He did have concern over it. 15 Q And did he seem, to you, anxious to get to to the bottom of the matter? 17 A I don't know what his personality is. I 18 i don't understand how to determine if he was anxious. l 19 Q I don't think that's the answer to the 20 question advanced. 21 A .l I do not know. 1 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Spekter? 23 MR. SPEKTER: Please just answer the 24 question. i 25 l '2821, fc261b10 1 A In. reference to what? 'In" reference 1 t o : a L f u'el . 2 load disaster? . Y e s ,' a shutdown is a slight' matter.- 3: Q How long would'it.take to 'correc t, in ' your ? E 4 view? 5 A There again,ithat's questionable;-depen' ding: 6 on.how big the problem.is.' *~ 7 Q. 'But in'other words, youffelt-that_aiviolation 8 of Regulatory Guide, that.might result;in shutting;down1the-9- plant,- was a matter not,of any great'concernJ to either.you-- 10 or to Region'VLunidentified' engineer? 11-I,just:want to getJa sense of.whether heEwas 12 concerned, whether.he thoughtfthat.you hadJa complaint that 13 was legitimate', but also thatLwas one of serious. concern. 14 A I believe.he was concerned,Jas to -- you've-15 got to figure the plant was still in the construction phases. ( 16 His'first question.was has -- and.I forget -- which inspectio1' 17 been performed. And I had to answer him I don't know. ) 18 And~possibly his concerns there was. well,. . J to this inspection -- or supposed inspection'-- sh'ould find 20 this problem. 1 4 21 QL Do'you remember the name of;theMinspection t ol 22 which he referred? ' 23 A No, I do not. s 24 1 Do you know whether that inspection-has Q i 25 subsequently been' performed? ' 'Id i l J i I ~! 284-fc261bl2 i I that the'Gibbs & Hill. response was correct and therefore 2 -didn't pursue: it. 3 MR. SPEKTER: You can argue that to the' 4 . court, but~ that's not theLpurpose of'this deposition. 3 5 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 6 Q Well, did you gather anythingEfrom'the fact 7 that this was not followed up? In otherLwords, did you. 1 . arrive at'any conclusion? 8 j; 9 A I dolnot knows personally. . whether'this 'as w 10 followed up or not, ii Q Not my question.4 - I didn't ask ~ 12 you whether you knew'. You've already' determined you don't. 13 Wbst I asked.you was whether you drew any conclusion about ta what appears to'have been the failure-to-follow up your 15 formal complaint? 16 A In my opinion. I feel that there11s no I have. by.all rights -I 17 failure to follow up the complaint. 18 by me -- I believe that the complaint or that the paperwork. 19 associated with that is someplace. Now, as f'ar as how or 20 where at in the process it.is right now, Lor whether it was . l-21 discussed or reviewed or anything. .maybe=it took him longer. i-t - i i 22 to handle his proceedings than he' anticipated'and thereby, 23 I've already moved so he could not return my. phone call.. ' 24- You know, when'you're dealing with.'a nuclear 25 power plant, to go three months or something like that, to i 6 .. i D 6 l l i 285 al3 4 i watch paperwork pass through the channels is not unusual. I 2 (Pause.) . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 to 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l e 886 fc27pb1 l i I 1 i MR. M1ZUNO: I would like to put a question 2 to Mr. Spekter. 3 MR. DAVIDSON: We're off the record. d i (Discussion off the record.)  ; 5 MR. DAVIDSON: On the record. Mr. Mizuno, 6 I noticed that you felt you wanted to make a statement or i 7 otherwise raise an objection to a question.  ! 8 MR. MIZUNO: Yes, I wish to ask Mr. Spekter 9 a question in response to his response to a statement made 10 by you. And I didn't want to interrupt. Il MR. DAVIDSON: Well, thank you. 12 MR. MIZUNO: I thought this would be an 13 appropriate time. Do I'now understand that' CASE is not  ; 14 going to press forward its theory of its case in this i 15  ! proceeding that the response or the lack of response by the l; 16 NRC contributed to the atmosphere of Intimidation at  ! 17 Comanche Peak, because if that is true then I would be - ) i l i 18 !I inclined to support an objection to this line of questioning ! 19 regarding theNRCand( ) understanding of what  ! 20 the NRC did would be inappropriate. 21 But if CASE if is going: to continue, then l 22 1 feel that it would be proper questioning, although we 23 continue to object to that theory of the case. We don't 24 believe that is a proper proceeding. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: Just to help Mr. Spekter along 4 287 l 4 i 1 in answering you, I will tell, Mr. Mizuno, that my view is 2 that the question that I've directed with respect tk 3 / asserted, alleged conversation with some unidentified 4 engineer in Region V I think are relevant to his own 5 assertions that he understood these regulations and-it was 6 confirmed in his view that they were inconsistent with the 7 ES-100 procedure. 8 And therefore they relate very directly to 9 his affidavit testimony. I was not necessarily eliciting to his answers ~ in this discovery deposition to determine whether 11 or not the NRC had been a responsive body, or had fulfilled 12 any of its statutory responsibilities. 13 I was doing it instead to determine what 14 actions (g took and what' conversa tions and activities 15 were a part of his belief and helped him develop his to conclusions and develop the impressions that he then recorded 17 in the affidavit, or in this case, didn't record in the 18 affidavit. 19 But that was the thrust of my questioning. It 20 was not to elicit any information as to whether or not the 21 NRC is doing its job or contributing to any alleged ephemeral 22 amorphous miasma of intimidation. 23 MR. MIZUNO: That's fine. I understand that, 2d counsel. 25 MR. DAVIDSON: But if you wish to ask l 1 P 288 '7pb3 1 Mr. Spekter about his theory, that's fine. 2 _MR. MIZUNO: I understand the the counsel'for 3 Applicants may have had a particular reason for asking those. 4 questions, but apart from your purpose. I heard a statement 5 by Mr. Spekter regarding how CASE was.not concerned about. 6 how -- I can't-recall the exact words, but I thought .I heard 7 something to the effect that CASE was not . interested or 8 is not concerned about how the lack of response or the 9 response by NRC may have affected the employee's feelings to regarding intimidation and harassment. 11 Perhaps I could have the reporter read back 12 the portion. 13 MR. SPEKTER: I'm not familiar with that 14 particular segment of my comments. However, I would state 15 that since the matter is pleaded and. finished at this point to that the testimony stands. I think we are wasting time. I've 17 noted my objections for the record, and at this p o'i n t , 18 Mr. Mizuno. I am not going to-limit or put parameters around 19 CASE's theory.of this particular action . 20 MR. MIZUNO: All right. 21 MR. SPEKTER: Let us proceed. 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q Did you report your subsequent conversations 24 or some conversations you hadLafter the Gibbs &, Hill response , 25 did you report your subsequent conversations with the 290 '7pb5 1 no I can't do that. But what he said was, or'what I 2 interpreted him to be saying, or the words that I-felt he. 3 phrased it in was that 'ti places the company in a bad 4 position. 5 (Off the record.) 6 MR. DAVIDSON: Let us go back on the record. 7 THE WITNES3: At this time'it was specified 8 by Dick Camp thatLit places the company in-a bad position, 9 me calling NRC.or contacting the 800 QA/QC hotline to speak to of. And by stating that to me it was my feeling that.by 11 placing the company in a bad position that I could very well 12 be put in a bad position'myself. 13 BY-MR. DAVIDSON: 14 Q When you say place the company in a bad 15 position, what company do you think -- 16 A Impell Corporation. 17 Q So it places Impell Corporation in a bad 18 position? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Vis-a-vis whom? 21 A Okay. TUSI Engineering. Okay, I believe that 22 during this conversation Dick Camp said it places them in i I 23 a bad position, and that might be the time period that I 24 i found out that TUSI Engineering was actually paying the '25 paycheck for Impell Corporation, and thereby he was stating I 1  : ) 4 292' '7pb7 I .Q The 800 number would have1 connected you~with 2 whom? 3 A With'the --'an; engineering group that'was d in Dallas / Fort Worth. I'm not-familiar exactly with who. 5 Q. Did youlknow who that. 800 - -you said an-6 engineering group.. Was it your impression that'that 7 engineering ~ group wa's unrelated to~TUGCO? 8 AL :No. -That.is one:ofithe reasoningLthat-I-9- -did not contact the 800 number.ceven in secrecy.)lFrom that 10 pointr on I was" intimidated enough'to. maintain an; anonymous: , 11 type atmosphere:from there on. < 12 Q You mean you were. intimidated into. remaining 13 anonymous. Id A 1Right. 15 Q But.you already:: stated:that in your first 16 telephor.e conversation you insisted upon anonymity and th1s 17 is before you received any feedback as'to what Mr. Camp 18 or what anybody else thought-about the call.- Why did.you 19 want to be anonymous then? 20 A When I talked to the first e:gineer at NRC' 21 and I explained to him that I.mainly1w*ntedi to maintain a 22 certain amount of being anonymous. And that I'did not-want 23 my name used. And I maintained'that throughout L the~whole 2d conversation with'him that'I did not.want my name used.- But 1 25 1. wanted to be maintained anonymous. 4 4 _ _ - - - - - _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - ] ] 1 293 $ i 1 l But I also told him during the first phone 1 2 conversation that knowing the nature of this incident, and f 3 being that it occurred and everything that if they really 4 wanted to find out'who I was that they could. i l 5 Q How could they do that? 6 A You've got to figure.that if they come on 7 the job site, right, and say this they can get'in a general 8 location of who is the one doing these accusations. 9 Q Tell me, did you review the 10 response that was provided by Gibbs & Hill in you -- 11 A No, I have not. 12 Q Did you read the response that was given to 13 you you say? Did you read it? 14 MR. SPEKTER: When, what time frame? Put a s 15 time frame on it. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON:

  • 17 Q Which would have been some time in the latter 18 part of January.

i 19 MR. SPEKTER: That's not his testimony. I 20 MR. DAVIDSON: No, that's my question. And 21 my question is: 22 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 23 Q You have testified that you were given a 24 copy of the Gibbs & Hill response which we have identified 25 here as Disc. Exhibit 8, and my question to you is, when you 1 294 'pb9 i were given that response which would have been some time 2 around the end of January, did you read'it? 3 A Yes, I did. 4 Did you understand'it? Q 5 A Yes, I did. 6 Q. Did you accept it? 7 A No, I did not. 8 Q You felt it was wrong? 9 A Yes, I did. 10 Q It didn't satisfy you? 11 A Correct. 12 Q And what was'your understanding of what the 13 explanation is that they had between-the alleged conflict 14 in the ES-100 and the Regulatory Guide 1.75? 15 A My alleged conversation was they felt'there 16 was no conflict. 17 Q How did they reconcile the two? 18 A To my memory and. recollection right now, I'm 19 not familiar. I would have to review the document again. 20 Q Did you make any reference to the-response 21 that was received from your start-up memorandum from Gibbs 22 & Hill in your affidavit in which raised this issue? 23 A No, I did.not. 24 Q Let me draw your attention'to the paragraph 25 that starts on page 10 and continues on to page 11 and- Joni 296 #28 1 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 7 Q Do you see that? 3 A Yes. A Q And the next phrase is "If I am corredt in 5 my interpretation of the regulations"--- at the tine you 6 made that statement you knew that there were those who did I not agree with you that you were correct? 8 A And I aslo knew that there were those that did agree that 1 was correct. 1 10 Q Who were they? 11 A NRC. Q The unidentified engineer who'never followed 13 up, to your knowledge, on your allegations? 14 A Well, I won't go as far to say that he 15 never followed up. 16 Q To your knowledge? 17 A To my knowledge, yes. 18 Q So that is the other individual but you 19 state this in the subjective mood if,you are familiar with 20 that. 21 A No, I am not familiar with that. 22 Q Well, you say if I am correct. Will you 23 agree with me that that is a statement on your part 2a indicating that you have some doubt as to whether you may be right? l l q L) , 28jon3 398 !1 Il Ii 1 mind there is a violation. 2 Q' You are absolutely convinced. 'But you are 3 prepared to concede that you.could be wrong? 4 A I would be foolish not to say that. ' 5 Everybody can be incorrect. 6 Q No. I am not asking you whether everybody. ' 7 can be incorrect. I am saying with respect to the 6 statements contcined in your affidavit with respect to the 1 9 allegation that there is a conflict-between ES-100 and to and Regulatory Guide 1.75 and the statement that this is 11 therefore a violation of NRC regulations, you state "if I 12 am correct" and.I.just asked you whether this indicates 13 that you concede, that as convinced as you are and as 14 strongly held as you have held these views and as strong 15 as you pushed it within the organization, that you might to be wrong. 17 A Well,~an NRC decision showing that I was ' 1B wrong would be the final result. 19 \ Q But no one else could tell you you were i . 20 wrong? 21 }'; A Not within the organization, because 6f ' 22 ) the fact that I feel the organization is definitely biased ,.j 23 by the cost impact on this one decision. i 1 2d Q If people in theTUGC0 startup group told {f 25 i you you were wrong you wouldn't agree with them? You I i l l I .sub 1 wouldn't be persuaded? 2 A Let me -- if Dick Camp, Art London -- 3 Q No. Answer the question. a A -- would have thought I was wrong, you 5 are talking TUCCO startup -- if Dick Camp, Art London' 6 and them would have thought I was wrong they would have 7 never sent the letter up. 8 Q Vell, that's your conclusion and surmise. o The question I asked you is if they told'you that you were 10 wrong, anyone in startup -- 11 A No. 12 'j Q -- you wouldn't believe'it? 13 A. They didn't tell me that. la Q I didn't ask you that. I said if;you had 15 been told that. You lo see.( you are going to have to answer the same question over and over again until 1/ you are responsive. Is that clear? i 18 A No, I do not believe that I would have i 19 believed them. 20 \ Q Okay. That's the answer. l 21 1 MR. SPEKTER: Let me answer the' door. 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Really, you are making this 23 l unnecessarily difficult. I think you are being too clever 2a by half. \ I think you should talk to your 1qwyer.  ; 25 , MR. SPEKTER: I object to those comments i l 4 l . I l l - - - - - ' - ~ 38jon5- I300T I being made. 'Not while I-was.present.  !( i 2 [MR. DAVIDSON: I'will make them to youri 3 face. I'said look, we are going-to,get through.a. lot quicker if-you will respond - 'well. . Mike : stand here if. 5 y,,.want me to.make-it.in. front of you. 6 (Discussion off the record --'5:45.p.m.) I (BAck on the record - 6:30 p m.) 8 M R '. DAVIDSON! Mr. Spekter, we have'just had'a chance to reconvene after'a break of close'to an 'O hour and I j ust 'want to' make cer tain on'. t he - record . tha t 'I ' there would be no mi s u n d'e r's t a n d i n g the. remarks as 12 reported both'by yourself'and myself seem t o' b e ~ . he a t e d . . '3 ' b'ut I know that'did not occur and there was no. heat. generated between u s '. 'And'I..just' wanted;the record to 15 reflect that. 'O As you know, you did walk to'the-door 'I to answer it and-then I.tried'to suggest to'your witness 18 that he be more responsive; he said.let's make the comments' when I am not away from the table, you returned, I began 20 to make them; I was cu* off. 21 But I take it there is no heated. exchange 22 between us. 23 MR..SPEKTER: The: exchange'was not heate'd 24 but 'my concern is'that you do not give my witness 25 instructions on how to answer a question. a b 1 in6 301  ? I MR. DAVIDSON: I agree with you. 2 Mr. Spekter. That is your responsibility. That is why 3 I asked the witness to talk to you abvut his response. d MR. SPEKTER: Let us proceed. 5 MR. DAVIDSON: I assume during that hour 6 that we were off that you'had a chance to speak with him. 7 All right. 8 BY MR. DAVIDSON: Q . just to wrap up this line, I IO believe you stated -- and!fyou did let us just confirm U it and move on -- you said that you would not have believed 12 anyone in the organization if they had told you you were '3 , wrong aboutyour alleged -- che alleged conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75. 15 When you said the organization what did I 16 l you mean? l 17 l A The startup org'anization. '8 Q Would you have believed a statement from engineering? 20 A I believe that if there would have been an i 21 overwhelming -- you know, you are going to have'to support -- 22 you just wouldn't be able to come in and say you are wrong.  ! 23 If there would have been an overwhelming amount of 24 25 information that would have indicated that I was incorrect. such as possibly NRC rulings on the issues, so on and so , { , _ _ - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - - - - ~ - 28jon? 302 1 forth, yes, I would have probably believed the person. 2 Q Okay. But you wanted an NRC ruling 3 on the issue before you relented; isnt' that correct? 4 You wouldn't accept the statement of the Gibbs & Hill 5 whi'ch was an architect-engineer engaged on the project? 6 After all, they did provide y o u wi t h a three-page 7 instructions. 8 A Correct. 9 Q You would mt accept that? 10 A right. 11 Q Thatwas not your vie- sufficient for you? 12 A Correct. 13 Q Now I ask you what would have been 14 sufficient for you short of an NRC ruling. 15 A I don't believe there would be anything. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you. 17 Off the record. IB (Discussion off the record.) 19 MR. DAVIDSON: That is all it takes. 20 Okay. Let's go back on the record. 21 (Discussion off the r e c'o r d . ) 22 MR. DAVIDSON: All right. Let's go ahead. 23 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 2d Q Earlier we had discussed the Gibbs & Hill 25 response to the startup memo that you prepared. Doyou J i l a l 8 ,303 l

4. .

I t recollect that,j \ t i 2 ' A 'Yes. 3 ;Q And I had asked..you~t'o look at it~ but I j d had not had it marked-for identification. Both Mr. Spekter 5 and Mr. Mizuno had asked me to do so and I think now is. 6 as good a1 time as'any for me'to do that. With the same 7-understanding 1about replacing my original and-providing 8 that the copy be marked for identification for.the purpose 9 of this discovery deposition be a Xerox of.the one I now. ' 10 am providing. 11 MR. SPEKTER: That's understood. 32 MR. DAVIDSON: And with:thatl understanding 13 I would like.to ask the reporter to ma'rk this as 14 Dise Exhibit F-number next. 15 Is it 9, sir?- Thank'you. 16 (The document referred to was 17 marked Exh'ibit Dise F-9 for identification.) 19 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 20 Q k ( earlier'you testified that you } had -- at_the time that you received the responses -- had-an opportunity to read it and I think I asked you-whether.you recollected what their explanation for the-conflict was, but I don't recollect having received a-response. Did you answer that question? l  ? A Yes, I did. i j 28jon9~ 304-ll 'i i 1 Q And briefly, what was your response? 2 A I would have to look at the memo, the. 3 response memo to refresh my memory. 2 s Q But-you have no current recollection of it 5 now? 6 A No. 7 Q Let me ask you this: Do you. remember.saying 8 to me that you believed that the response said that.the reason there was no conflict was that fire goes up, not to down? II A Not necessarily the response indicated in 12 the letter, but possibly the response either indicated -- I3 I believe I specified that it was either indicated in the Id letter or in the p' hone conversation with the Gibbs & Hill 15 personnel. 16 Q This is the person that you called? I7 A Right. 18 Q And you didn't remember his name? 19 A No, I believe we had brought that up 20 later. The person I called was Sam Martinovitch. 21 Q And it is your testimony that 22 Mr. Martinovitch said to you that fire goes up, not down? 23 A Well, it was indicated by him that one of i 24 the rationalities for part of his decision was seeing that 25  ! there was no problem and said that the heat is going to be  ; i i i 28jon11 306 l l I I was no conflict between ES-100 and Reg. Guide 1.75. And 1 2 you told us that one of the reasons-that'he offered to q 3 you why there was no' conflict was because fire travels upward, heat travels up .not down,'~and that therefore 5 it avoids some of-the problems otherwise provided.for in 6 Reg. Guide-1.75. 7 You say that was one of the reasons. So 8 I asked you what the other reasons he told'you were for why he felt there was no conflict between ES-100 and 10 Reg. Guide 1.75. end28 II Now, can you please tell us? 12 13 14 15 16 is i 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 f. ~302 .fc291b2 ' I You~have to figure'that I was-looking at.that document-at'- 2 the same time, so theoretically he may.not'have touched on 3 any of the points which were listed'in.that ~ document. d because.he possibly'could have known that:I had that. 5 documentLin' front of me. 6 So-he didn't - :youndidn't.think, 'orlyou Q 7 may' recollect now that he didn't ^have to tell you about

8 these reasons because he had{already disclosed them to'you?

9 A Or.I had already=possibly read'the memorandum. 10 Q In any event, Mr.'Martinovitch's explanations-11 didn't satisfy you? 12 A Specifically, when he was justifying itLabout 13 the heat to-me. You.knou, you have a' formal; reply:there-. 14 And in his informal reply,-for the actual' reasoning behind 15 it, which was the fact that -- 16 Q No, I wouldn't agree with that,.if you 17 were asking for my agreement. I don't think that there is-18 any different reason, otherJthansthe one that is expressed 19 and signed by Mr. Ballard. That's'your testimony. 20 Are you suggesting that.Mr. Ballard's statement. 21 is not the real reason? 22 A. What I am willing to say, that my belief- on 23 that memo was, that'due7to the impact. cost-wise,xthey had 24 to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not to-25 change the ES-100 specifications. And those are the d i i 1 i 308-fc291b2 (~ 1 You'have to: figure that 'I'was looking at[that document at- l t, 2 the same time, so theoretically'he.may'not.have touched on ,3 any of the points'which were listed;intthat. doc'ument 4 because'helpossibly.could have known thatEI had that' 1' 5 document inEfront of1me. ' 1 6 Q So-he didn't --Jyou didn't think,Jor you 7 may' recollect now,.that he didn't have to tellfyou about j. 8 these reasons because' he had already: disclosed' them to you? 9 A Or.I-had already possibly. read.the memorandum. 10 Q .In a n y. . e v e n t , Mr. Martinovitch's explanations'i 11  ! didn't satisfy.you? 12 A Specifically ,when he was justifying.it about' 13 the heat to'me. ;You know, you have'a formal reply there'.

14 And in his informal reply.'for the actual. reasoning ~ behind. {

15 it, which was the faccethat'-- i-16 .No, Q I wouldn't. agree with that, if you 17 were asking for my agreement. I don't'think'th'at t'here is 18 any-different reason, other than the one that~is. expressed i-19 and signed by Mr. Ballard. That's your testimony. L 20 Are you' suggesting that Mr. Ballard's statemen; 21 ~* is not the real reason? 22 A What I am.willing to say, that my1 belief on d 23 that memo was,-that'due to the .:-wis e , - t hey. ha d 2d to give what they thought was legitimate reasons not to, 25 change the ES-100 specifications. And those are the s 1 309 >3 4 1 legitimate reasons that they thought -- or at least the - l 2 reasons they thought were legitimate. Now it would be -- 3 Q This is a suspicion on your part, that d although this is an explanation, you don't take it to be 5 something that they believe? Is that what you're saying? 6 MR. SPEKTER: I would request that counsel 7 not put words in his mouth. 8 MR. DAVIDSON: I heard the witness say that 9 he did not believe that the response that was prepared was to the "real reason" why they insisted that ES-100 and Reg 11 1.75 could be reconciled. And I want to find out what 12 is the basis for his assertion that that was not the 13 real reason. 14 THE WITNESS: My understanding would be why 15 would he say to me, if he truly thought that those were 16 legitimate, valid reasons, why would he say to me that \ 17 if we had it to do all over again and start right now, yes k 18 we would modify the ES-100 to have those additional l 19 I  ! limitations in it. I ) 20 MR. DAVIDSON: You want me to answer your 21 question? One of the reasons why that may have:-- why h'e 1 22 might have said that? The answer is that he might not have l 23 said it, I 24 THE WITNESS: I don't thick I was asking you 25 a question. I was making a statement that the question was  ! 9 1 0 _______________i____i -3102 fc291b4: 1 in my mind'at the time -- 2 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 3 -Q. Okay, s'o : this is'an" impression you' drew? 4 He never. formally told ~:you that this was notothe.real' 5 reason?- 6 ' 'A. 'If~they give.y.ou aldocumentation which says 7 this is the reason.why we're not.doing:it', but then on the 8 other hand they:tell you verbally,thatc_if weshad,?it to do 9 'all over again,'we would go ahead and'make modifications,- 10 in~my. mind there is only one conclusion I'can draw, isothat 11 they'are in'the wrong;and they are-trying to prove'-- with ' 12 information or grasping at' straws -- to~ prove.that-they. 13 are correct'in it? 14 Q In other words..you don't.think-th're e could-15 be two acceptable. ways of doing it?' 16 A Well, I'm not saying -- there is only one' 17 interpretation in the NRC. Reg l Guide'that is supposedly-right. 18 Q Are you.asking me or_are you:asking Mr.-Mizuno?! to A What 1 am saying is that'therefis only one 20 interpretation in the NRC Reg Guides. If there -- if you 21 have any questions-from it .you should ask NRC what their-22 ruling is on it 23 Q That's your view? 24 A Yes. l 1 25 Q And that's'why you wanted an NRC decision on i I l l l l l 4 312 lb5 I i this? i 2 l A I felt there was still a conflict involved. 3 Q All right. d ( hinyouraffidavit, at pages S 3 through -- carrying over to page 5, you make certain 6 assertions with respect to what you term the practice of 7 allowing Comanche Peak craft personnel to perform certain 8 functional testing. Is that'right? 9 A That's correct. 10 I would like to change -- just correct you. U You said make the assumption. I know that to be fact. 12 Q All right. I think I said assertion, not 13 assumption. 'd MR. SPEKTER: The record vill reflect what 15 was said. 16 BY MR. DAVIDSON: l l '7 Q And I noticed that in the first incomplete I 18 paragraph on page 3, that starts "An example of-" i you say ) I' "An example of this liberal interpretation of commitments -- " J 20 do you see that? 21 A y,,, 22 l Q What do you mean by commitments? 23 (Pause.) l 24 Do you need some help with that question? 25 - A No, just a minute. -Let me review through here. (Witness perusing document.) r jon '312. 30 , l i l 1 Q Have you ever reviewed the commitments .2 undertaken by the organizations constructing the Comanche 3 Peak plant? d A Yes. You are talking -- let me make sure 5 we are talking.in a correct -- you are talking about the . 6 FSAR commitment? 7 Q I am talking about the commitments, sir, 8 that you told me are made to the NRC with respect to the 1 9 codes and programs that will govern the conduct and to procedures of the construction of the. plant. 11 A Yes, I hve reviewed those. 12 Q And in your review of that, sir, did you 13 determine whether or not -- one moment, please -- and in Id your review of that, sir, did you determine whether there 3 15 was a commitment to ANSI 45.2.6 with respect to 16 construction supplies and support personnel? 17 A I am not sure. I la Q Did you determine whether there was a 19 commitment made to that specific ~ reference requirement 20 i applicable to quality control / quality assurance personnel? J 21 A I am not sure. I would have to review the 22 documentation which would include the FSAR to be able to 23 remember what I had found during the time period. I 24 I believe that you will note that I do 25 remember that the ANSI 45.2.6 specifically is titled ' l 4 f 30jon3 314 I within these limitations such that I do not believe their 2 , educational background is main',ained; I do not believe 3 that their credentials are verified. Q When you say you do not believe, on what 5 do you base this belief? And we will get back to the 6 question you still haven't answered, which'is what you mean by "1 feel this practice is inconsistent." 8 Tell me -- why don't we take them in order. I still would like an answer. 10 Whatdo you mean by "I feel this practice is II inconsistent"? 12 ll A I do not believe that thispractice is 13 consistent. Q By stating that you feel that it is 15 inconsistent are you suggesting that you are prepared to 16 accept that you might be wrong and that it might be '7 consistent?

18 A As I have already stated before, 'ere is 19 always possibility of misinterpretation of a document.

20

Q And do you feel that is possible in this 21 case?

2 A It is possible in all cases. 23 Q In all cases in which you have sworn in this affidavit?  % , 25 A I will not go that far. 30jon5 316 1 MR. DAVIDSON: You want to break, 2 3 3 / T!!E WITNESS: Yes. 4 MR. DAVIDSON: Of course. 5 MR. bAVIDSON: Let the record rsflect that 6 I we are taking a break sa can consult with 7 k. counsel. 8 (Discussion off the record -- 6:51 p.m.) end30 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1.7 19 20 i 21 22 23 I 2d l i 25 317-il 4 1 (On the record at 6:54 p.m.) 2 MR. DAVIDSON: Let us go back to work. 3 was were talking about.your 4 assertions as to the inconsistency between what you claim 5 to be the practice at Comanche Peak of allowing the craft 6 personnel to perform certain functional testing and what I 'i 7 think has been called ANSI 45.2.6. 8 And I have some excerpted language here.from 9 that regulation, and I would like to get your view on it -- 10 if I can find it here among my papers -- 11 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 12 Q I have been given to understand 13 that ANSI N45.2.6 states. "When a single inspection or 14 test requires implementation by a team or group, personnel 15 not meeting the requirements of this standard may be used 16 in data taking assignments or in plant or equipment operation , 17 provided they are supervised or overseen by a qualified 18 individual participating in the inspection., examination, or ' 19 test." 20 Do those words sound familiar to you as being 21 reflected in ANSI N45.2.67 22 A Yes. they do. 23 Q And is this the requirement that-you feel 24 is not consistent with the practice at Comanche Peak? 25 A Yes, 1 do. I believe that as you stated 9 318- ~ ' 'pb2-1 there, supervisory, that they are being supervised falls 2 in t o: -- 'L 3 Q -Do you want me to give.you'thefexact-words? ~{ d The words are "They areJsupervised or overseen-by.". Is- , 5 that what you, wanted me.to focus'on? i 6 ' ('P a u s e . ) 7 A' Yes. 8 Q Okay. 9 A 1 believe that at Comanche Peak the supervisors 10 overseen by is probably taken very liberal, suchLas how 11 can you supervise somebody unless you're out:in the' field 12 with them. Well, I'll eliminate the answering to that-13 portion right now. I just don't -- 14 } (Witness gesturing.) + .j, 15 -- I stopped. You can'go ahead and question. ' 16 Q No,-I don't follow what you're saying. . 17 I 'd'ropped ,it. A I feel that is not something. {, 18 we need to go into right now. 1 . 'i lt seems to be the focus of your: assertion'in '! 19 . Q . 20 .l. the paragraph that begins on page 4 of your affidavit-and 21 carries over.-- 22 A I will not comment on one section of the 23 ANSI 45.2.6 as it indicates without-looking at the whole 24 procedure as a'whole. You take one little portion out.of 25 it and try and use it out of context with that procedure. ~ M & O 319 4 1 You have to look -- there are certain stipulations that you 2 have to meet in order to be able to do that. And without 3 looking at the whole procedure you cannot use just one 4 paragraph out of it. 5 Q I understand that you would like to review 6 the entire code, but my point was only this, you were 7 concerned in your affidavit, and as I understood your 8 testimony you raised the point that you did not feel that 9 this code section had been complied with. And you called 10 my attention specifically to the words that you believe 11 required that the craft personnel performing such tests be 12 " supervised or overseen by" qualified individual. 13 And my point is, isn't that the sum and substa 1ce 14 of your concern as expressed in the affidavit with respect 15 to the practice that you have drawn our attention to on 16 page 4 and going over to page 5. 17 A 1 have lost reference to your exact question 18 and what you are exactly asking there. Your question was 19 so long you are confusing me with the length of it. Can 20 you briefly just come straight to the point as to what your 21 question is? 22 Q I think that that was fairly direct. I asked 23 you whether that isn't the basis upon which you make the 24 allegation of the practice -- that the practice is inconsistent 25 with ANSI 45.2.6? 4 320 11pb4 l 1 A Are you asking me that if the paragraph you 2 read previously is the basis for this allegation? . 3 Q That's right. Isn't that the basis for 4 your assertion that the practice at Comanche Peak is I 5 inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.67 6 A No, I can't specify that one paragraph 7 out of ANSI 45.2.6 is the basis for this. I specified that 8 ANSI 45.2.6 as a whole document is the basis for this i 9 statement. 10 Q Do you have a copy of 45.2.6? 11 A No, I do not. 12 Q When you r.ade the statements in this affidavit 13 did you refer to 45.2.6? 14 I had reviewed them during the time period 4 A 15 of the drafts, the rough drafts for the -- le Q Well, here is my problem,f iand 17 you want me to direct and open, I will be because it's going i 18 to make this thing go a lot faster. I read your affidavit. 10 We all have. The record is going to have it. 20 Your complaint is that craft personnel, persons l 21 who are not qualified as STEs have been performing certain ' 1 22 of these tests and you say that they perform certain tests  ; 23 without an STE being present. And that is a quote from l 24 your affidavit at page 5. 25 A Correct. [ 321 4 l 1 Q And I'm saying to you, that isn't the section 2 that I read from the ANSI 45.2.6 which requires that there 3 be supervision or that the practice is to be overseen by 4 a qualified person, the one that you base that on. And you 5 have not told me what you base it on. You say you don't 6 base it on that. 7 A No. I'm saying -- 8 MR. SPEKIER: I believe that he's answered 9 the question. 10 MR. DAVIDSON: I don't think that he has. 11 MR. SPEKTER: He based it on the whole 12 regulation and not a segment that's taken out of context. 13 And I think that answer should stand and we can move on. 14 BY MR. DAVIDSON: 15 Q Did you ever raise this concern with anyone 16 at Comanche Peak? 17 A Most definitely. 18 Q With whom did you raise it? 19 A Art London. Tom Miller and Dick Camp. 20 Q Individually or collectively? 21 A There's a possibility it could have been both., 22 To my memory, I do not know right now. 23 Q What did you say to them at the time? 24 A I told them that I felt that we were 25 inconsistent with ANSI 45.2.6. 322  ! 31pb6 ' I Q Did they~give'you a response to'your question?' 2 A .They: felt that they did not fall under the' i 3 requirements of that. 4 Q On-what basis? As'you understood-them. 5 A I do not' remember the exact details on that. > 6 Q Could it ~be that there was no commitment-on '7 that point? 8 A I don't know. I don't'know.. .I'do'not: 9 remember. to Q Could-it also be because~th'ey viewedLehe 11 manner in which:the practice was ~ supervised or overseen as. 12 being adequate under ANSI 45.2.6?- 13 A Now you're asking me to answer.for them.- I 14 don't believe that.I can answer what1 their beliefs were. 15 Q No, sir. I asked you what they represented to to you and what you understood them to mean. And I asked-17 you whether you understood, or they said to you, or you 18 understood them'to mean that they were.in c'ompliance with j 19 I ANSI 45.2.6 because of the manner in which such tests were 20 overseen or supervised was' sufficient. 21 A No, I did not believe t. hat.they;were st'ating 22 to me that they were in compliance with ANSI 45.2.6. I' 23 believe that they were stating to me that' they were not in, 24 compliance with ANSI 45.2.6 but that they were not committed ~ 25 to that and therefore they_would not going to worry about it. A 8 _ ___________._______1.___________________.___________..___ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.___.______.____.___.________i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _

j 323 x

1 -Q So in'other words, they explained.to you that}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20244A817&oldid=3297586"