ML20141J407
| ML20141J407 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 04/23/1986 |
| From: | Johnson G NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Husted C GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP., HUSTED, C.A., PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| References | |
| CON-#286-928 CH, NUDOCS 8604280131 | |
| Download: ML20141J407 (66) | |
Text
, .-
April 23,1986
+'
,, DTED CORRE3gry h .
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UCCx NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 9%
BEFORE TIIE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUD$p g In the Matter of ) ,au QFFID.t-
) UCCni.1j.c -.
. g nr3 GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR ) Docket No. 30J289 (CH)
! )
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station. )
Unit No.1) )
i i NRC STAFF RESPONSES TO MR. IIUSTED'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO NRC STAFF I. INTRODUCTION The NRC Staff hereby series its responses to "Mr. Husted's First l
Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents to the NRC Staff." O l
l l
II. ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES INTERROGATORY 1 Please identify the person answering each of the following Interrc,g-atories and each person who was consulted in the preparation of each answer.
1/ At the prehearing conference of February 19, 1986, the staff agreed to provide discovery responses voluntarily, according to the sched-ule initially agreed upon by the parties, and ratified in the Report and Order of February 17, 1986. Record Transcript at 64-65.
Thus, while 10 C.F.R. 52.720(h)(2)(ii), rather than 10 C.F.R. 52.740(b), applies to interrogatories to the Staff, the Staff has agreed to provide responses to interrogatories as if it were subject to the latter provision. Similarly, without waiving the applicability of 10 C.F.R. 52.741(e), the Staff has agreed to voluntarily respond to document requests not subject to objection on other grounds.
8604280131 860423 PDR ADOCK 05000289 G PDR q
A
RESPONSE
The identity of the persons answering each interrogatory is found in parentheses at the conclusion of each answer, and in the accompanying affidavits. (Dick)
INTERROGATORY 2 Please identify the NRC personnel that proctored or administered the reactor and senior reactor operator examinations given at TMI in April of 1981. As part of your answer, please identify the examination or exami-nations , whether reactor operator-A, reactor operator-B, senior reactor operator-A, or senior reactor operator-B, that each individual proctored.
RESPONSE
The NRC operator licensing examinations of April 21, 1981 through April 24,1981, were administered by Bruce A. Wilson. The examinations i were proctored by Bruce A. Wilson and Ronald E. Maines with some short relief assistance from Francis I. Young. The enclosed schedule, which l
cppears to have been TPIIA Exhibit 88 in the TMI-Restart proceeding, of exams and proctors is a copy of a schedule located in the Office of the Executive Legal Director under the control of George E. Johnson, Counsel for the NRC Staff, Office of the Executive Legal Director. The schedule of exams and proctors is compatible with Mr. Maines' memory of those )
examinations, t
c
v a
The Proctors were:
1981: Bruce A. Wilson , Section Leader, Pressurized Water and Re-search Reactor Section, Operator Licensing Branch, Division of Iluman Factors Safety , Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
i Current: Bruce A. Wilson, Acting Section Leader, Operational Programs l Section, Operations Branch, Division of Reactor Projects. U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100, Atlanta, Georgia 30323; Telephone: 404-331-5542.
1981: Ronald E. Maines, Pressurized Water and Research Reactor Sec-tion , Operator Licensing B ranch , Division of liuman Factors Safety , Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
Current: Ronald E. Maines , Regional Support and Oversight Section , 4 Operator Licensing Branch, Division of Human Factors Technol- ;
ogy, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U. S. Nuclear Regu-latory Commission, AR-5221, Washington, DC 20555; Telephone:
301 492-8246.
1981: Francis I. Young, Resident Inspector, TMI, U. S. Nuclear Reg- J
\
ulatory Commission, P. O. Box 311, Middletown , PA 17057.
A
_4_ ,
Current: Same as above; Telephone: 717-948-1156.
(Maines)
INTERROGATORY 3 With respect to the July 29, 1981 interview of Mr. Husted by NRC Investigators R. Keith Christopher and Raymond H. Smith , did either Christopher or Smith take notes during the interview? If so, please pro-duce these notes. If you are unable to produce any notes that were tak-en, state why you are unable to do so. If notes were taken but are no longer in existence, state what happened to those notes, and state the substance of those notes.
RESPONSE
After reviewing pages 39 and 16 of the Reports of Investigation, dated August 11, 1981 and October 13, 1981, respectively, and a memor-andum from P.G. Christman to John F. Wilson , dated July 29, 1981, Baymond Smith has no present recollection of either the interview he participated in with Charles Husted on July 29, 1981, whether he took notes , or the circumstances surrounding the writing of the Report of Interview . He has conferred with Robert K. Christopher, who informed Mr. Smith that he similarly has no present recollection of these matters.
Mr. Smith has no notes or other documentation that might be used to refresh his recollection independent of the above cited documents. He has conferred with Robert K. Christopher and Mr. Christopher has no notes or other documentation relative to this matter.
As an investigator / inspector, Mr. Smith has conducted approximately 100 interviews per year since 1973. These interviews have ranged from formal documented interviews to less formal oral exchanges. lie does not
A recall anything specific concerning the interview in . question.
Mr. Christopher's duties have required him to conduct a similar number of interviews since 1980. (Smith)
INTERROGATORY 4 With respect to the September 18, 1981 interview of Mr. Husted by NRC Investigator Richard A. Matakas, did Mr. Matakas take notes during the interview? If so, please produce these notes. If you are unable to produce arey notes that were taken, state why you are unable to do so.
If notes were taken but are no longer in existence, state what happened to those notes, and state the substance of those notes. In addition, state whether the notes were in question-and-answer form.
RESPONSE
Richard Matakas, USNRC Investigator, January 1981 to present, did take notes during his September 18, 1981 interview with Charles E.
Ilusted. A copy of said notes is attached to this response. The notes (3 pages) are in his handwriting and the first page of these notes is dated "9-18-81" with his initials, " RAM" next. to the date. To the best of his recollection , within a day or two of the September 18, 1981, interview, Mr. Matakas typed a draft report (based on his notes) and subecquently provided both his notes and draft report to Peter Daci, who at the time was an NhC investigator for the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Bethesda ,. ?!aryland .
The typed draft report is attached to this reponse. The typed draft report is one page, titled: " Charles E. HUSTED, Instructor for License Operator Training." The initials of " RAM" and the date of the interview, "0-18-81," are noted at the top of the page. Mr. Baci was the case agent. Mr. Baci left the NRC a couple of years ago to work for the
Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) in the DC area.
Mr. Matakas' original notes and draft report are being held by George E.
Johnson, Counsel for the NRC staff, Bethesda, Maryland. (Matakas)
INTERROGATORY 5 With respect to the September 25, 1981 interview of P by NRC In-vestigators, identify each NRC Investigatcr present during the interview.
(a) Did any of the Investigators take handwritten or typed notes during the interview?
(b) If so, please produce those notes.
(c) If you are unable to produce any notes that were taken, state why you are unable to do so. If notes were taken but are no longer in existence, state what happened to those notes and state the substance of those notes.
RESPONSE
The identities of investigators present at the September 25, 1981 interview are contained in a draft Memorandum for the Record by Peter Baci, prepared February 20, 1986. A copy of that draft Memorandum is attached to this response. William Ward, U.S. NRC Office of Investiga-tions , testified that he took " fragmentary notes. " See Tr. 25,464.
Mr. Ward recollects taking notes, the substance of which is reflected in his hearing testimony, but has informed the Staff that he no longer has any written records of the interview of September 25, 1981 and his notes were probably disgarded. Handwritten notes, dated 9-25-81, sup-plied by Peter E. Baci, are attached to this response. (Dick, in consul-tation with Mr. Ward.)
W Mr. Smith has no recollection of attending the September 25, 1f#81 interview of P. (Smith)
INTERROGATORY 6 <
Identify the individual that wrote page 39 of former Staff Exhibit Number 26, titled " Report of Investigation: Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1/ Investigation of Alleged Cheating on Operator Licensing Examinations" (Aug. 11, 1981) dealing with the NRC's interview of Mr. Husted, and identify the sources that individual used to compile the information contained in page 39, i.e. , personal recollections, hand-written or typed notes, discussion with other persons or documents or communications of any kind.
71ESPONSE See response to Interrogatory 3. The Staff has been informed by William Ward that neither he nor Edward Gilbert remembers who wrote page 39, or the sources used. (Dick)
INTERROGATORY 7
, Identify the individual that wrote page 16 of former Staff Exhibit Number 27, titled " Report of Investigation: Three Mlle Island Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1/ Investigation of Alleged Cheating on Operator Licensing Examinations" (Oct.13, 1981) dealing with the NRC's interview of Mr. Husted, and identify the source that individual used to compile the information contained in page 16, f_.e., personal recollections, handwritten or typed notes, discussions with other persons or documents or communi-cations of any kind.
RESPONSE
Page 16 of the referenced report was not prepared by Mr. Matakas, but appears to have been prepared from Mr. Matakas' draft report of interview (attached) . Mr. Matakas consulted with Edward Gilbert, who
told him Mr. Gilbert did not remember whether Mr. Baci or Mr. Gilbert prepared page 13. (Matakas) s INTERROGATORY 8 Identify the individual that wrote pages 40-41 of former Staff Exhibit Number 27, titled " Report of Investigation: Three Mile Island Nuclear
- Generating Station, Unit 1/ Investigation of Alleged Improprieties on Oper-ator Licensing Examinations" dealing with the NRC's interview of P, and identify the source that individual used to compile the information con-tained in pages 40-41, i.e. , personal recollection, handwritten or typed notes, discussions with other persons or documents or communications of any kind.
RESPONSE
The identity of the individual who wrote pages 40-41 is contained in Draft Memorandum for the Record, prepared February 20, 1986, by.
Peter E. Baci in connection with this proceeding. See also testimony of William Ward. Tr. 25,417. Mr. Ward has informed the Staff that he .
{
wrote the summary appearing on pages 40-41 primarily from his recollec-tion , with some reliance on fragmentary notes. (Dick , in consultation with Mr. Ward.) Mr. Smith has no recollection concerning the interview with P nor the referenced report. (Smith)
INTERROGATORY 9 Please identify the present address, employer, employment position, and telephone number of each of the following individuals: (1) Richard Matakas; (2) R. Keith Christopher; (3) Raymond H. Smith; (4) William Ward; (5) Peter Baci; and (6) Edward Gilbert.
. 's
RESPONSE
(1) Richard A. Matakas, U.S. N.R.C. , 631 Park Avenue, King of Prussia, PA 19406, 215-337-5338; Senior Investigator.
(2) R. Keith Christopher, U.S. N.R.C. , 631 Park Avenue, King of Prussia, PA 19406, 215-337-5138; Assistant to Regional Administrator.
(3) Raymond H. Smith , U.S. N.R.C., 631 Park Avenue, King of Prussia , PA 19406, 215-337-5392; Emergency Preparedness Specialist.
(4) William Ward, Assistant to the Director, Office of Investigations, U. S . N.R . C . , Washington , D.C . 20555, 301-492-7246.
(5) Peter Baci, Assistant Director, Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Office of Defense Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense , P.O. Box 9290, Alexandria, VA 22304, 703-746-0256.
(6) Edward Gilbert , Operations Officer, Office of Investigations, Washington, DC 20555; 301-497-7246.
l (Dick , in consultation with Messrs. Ward and Staff counsel, who received information from f.fessrs. Smith, Matakas and Baci.)
l l
_ ___ _ _ j
p .
l
-\.
l INTERROGATORY 10 Please state your position on each of the following issues admitted [
for litigation in this proceeding. If you are unable to state your position at this - time, please identify all documents and communications in the i NRC's or your custody or control that relate to each of the following is-sues admitted for litigation in this proceeding. Include each and every fact on which you base your positions on these issues:
p (a) Charles Husted's alleged solicitation of an answer to an exami-nation question from another _ operator during the April 1981 NRC written examination.
(b) The alleged lack of forthrightness of Charles Husted's testimony l
before the Special Master in Metropolitan Edison Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station , Unit No. 1) , Docket =
I No. 50-289, on December 10, 1981 (c) Charles Husted's alleged poor attitude toward the hearing be-fore the Special Master on the cheating incidents.
(d) Mr. Husted's alleged lack of cooperation with NRC investigators during the investigation into cheating on NRC examinations at '
TMI.
(e) What Mr. Ilusted's performance of his responsibilities as a li-l censed operator, instructor of licensed and non-licensed opera-l tor training, supervisor of non-licensed training, and any other ;
position he has held or holds with General Public Utilities Nu- 1 clear, or its predecessor, Metropolitan Edison Company, reflects !
I about Mr. Husted's attitude and integrity. l l (f) With regard to the two contentions of TMIA and the contention of GPU admitted by Report and Order on Initial Prehearing Conference of February 27, 1986, General Public Utilities Nucle-ar, (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1) , Docket No. 50-289(CH), is any remedial action with respect to Mr. Husted required? If you believe that remedial action is l warranted, please state the remedial action.
]
(g) If you believe that remedial action is warranted, please identi-fy, by section and subsection, what NRC statutory or regulato-ry mandate Mr. Husted has violated, and the legal basis for l imposing remedial action.
RESPONSE
(a) The Staff's current position, based on the below-listed available information, is that there is insufficient evidence to conclude that Charles l
l 1- 1 fe'Wf' -
=ruw --w>M-'$=='*ei* -p y --a-+- - - grr my y >-+-w--tae- gw Fev-f6 -w *eww* T--rf'==g-9-CTkw e-vw m 7 7 *t----We*-e-e- -we =9*-N*8'--de ierN=-er- e9W*N'yr"t1'W
Husted solicited an answer to an examination question. Staff Investigatcr William Ward testined in the Restart proceeding that P had admitted to Ward that Ilusted had asked a question. Tr. 25,462-63. However, Ward stated that P described Husted's question as being "somewhat ambiguous",
Tr. 25,316, and more in the nature of an exclamation about a concept, rather than a direct answer to an examination question. Tr. 25,462-65.
Mr. Ward currently has no recollection inconsistent with his prior testimo-ny. NRC investigator Peter Baci : ecollects that P stated that Husted asked a question but it may have been rhetorical in nature. (See, Draft Memorandum for the Record, submitted with the Staff's recponse.)
Husted denied soliciting an answer from P, Tr. 26,937, and P also denied that Ilusted solicited an answer from him. Tr. 26,692. (Dick, in con-junction with Mr. Ward.)
(b) Mr. Husted's tertirnpy on December 10, 1981 before the Special Master contains several sets of contradictor3 or inconsistent statements.
Because such statements created confusion as to what was Mr. Husted's testiraony on the matters addressed, Mr. liusted's answers cannot be said to be " straight to the point," which is how the Staff interprets "forth-right . " However, the Staff <*oes not view Mr. Ilusted's testimony on the whole to have been evasive. (Tr. 26,934, 26,936, 26,941-42; 26,935; 26,944; 26,941, 26,943; 26,929, 26,930, 26,932-933) (Dick)
(c) The Staff's position is that Mr. Husted exhibited a poor attitude at the hearing before the Special Master. The Staff bases its position on the statements of the other parties in their recently submitted discovery responses. Mr. Husted, for example, agrees that his testimony was in-ternally inconsistent , and could have been viewed as flippant .
1 Mr. Husted's Answers to NRC Staff's First Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, at 6. See, also, Mr. Husted's Answers and Objections to TMIA's First Request for Production of Documents and First Interrogatories, at 18-19. Similarly, CPUN notes that "Mr. Husted's an-swers to questions put to him in the hearing before the Special Master sometimes appeared to be flippant," based on contemporaneous observa-tion of l'Ir. Husted. Response of GPU Nuclear Corpora +1on to NRC Staff's First Interrogatories and Ecquest for Production of Documents to GPU Nuclear Corporation, at 3. TMIA also agrees "that Husted exhibited a poor attitude toward the hearing," based, among other things, on his exhibiting "a generally flippant demeanor." TMIA's Answers to NRC Staff's First Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, at
- 3. The Staff believes that the transcript of Mr. Ilusted's testimony is consistent with the above observations. (Dick)
(d) The Staff's position is that the available evidence supports a conclusion that Mr. Husted was somewhat uncooperative in responding to questions posed by NRC Staff Investigators in the July 29, 1981 inter-view, but there is no evidence to conclude that he was uncooperative on the September 19, 1981 interview . The summary of the July 29, 1981 interview contained in Staff Exhibit 26, " Report of Investigation: Three Mile Island Nuclear Generatinrr Station , Unit 1/ Investigation of Alleged Cheating on Operator Licensing Examinations. August 11, 1981, at 39, states that Mr. Ilusted " refused to reveal any specifics of the rumors he had heard or to identify the individuals (if named) who were allegedly implicated." Also the notes of Paul G. Christman , supplied by Mr. Husted in discovery, state that Mr. Ilusted " refused to answer a
f.
3 question about whether he had heard" such rumors. Mr. Husted himself, responding to interrogatories, states he " declined" to answer two ques-tions put to him at the July 29, 1981 interview. Husted Answer to NRC Staff, 8-9. This evidence indicates that Mr. Husted may have been some-l what uncooperative during the July interview.
Richard - A. Matakas has no recollection of Mr. Husted being uncoop-erative with NRC investigators. He bases this solely on his interview with Mr. Husted on September 18, 1981. The notes of Mr. Matakas, as well as the draft and final summary of the September 18, 1981 interview, do not indicate that Mr. Husted was uncooperative in that interview. See attached _ Notes and Draft, and Staff Exhibit 27, " Report of Investigation:
l Three Mile Island Nuclear ' Cenerating Station, Unit 1/ Investigation of Al-l l leged Improprietics on Cperator Licensing Examination," October 13, 1981, i
l at 16. (Dick, Matakas)
(e) See attached Inspection Report , prepared by Donald R.
! !!averkamp, and accompanying affidavit.
i (f) Based on the available information, the Staff does not believe l that remedial action with respect to Mr. Husted is warranted at this time.
As stated in the answers above, Mr. Husted exhibited a poor attitude at l
!- the hearing before tha Special Master and was somewhat uncooperative in l the July 21, 1981 interview with NRC Staff investigators. However, while j Mr. Husted's testimony was internally inconsistent, it was not evasive.
Further, the evidence does not support a finding that Mr. Husted attempt-ed to cheat on the April 24, 1981 NRC SRO examination. None of the foregoing involvement in the cheating investigation and hearings appears n- ,- _ . _.. . - . , _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ . - . _ .
s to have adversely affected Mr. Husted's performance of his duties.
(Dick)
(g) See response to 10(f). (Dick)
INTERROGATORY 11 ,
Identify every witness who will testify at the hearing in this pro-ceeding on your behalf or who has been requested to testify, will be re-quested to testify or is likely to be requested to testify, regardless of whether the nature of the appearance be by summons or voluntary, and further state the subject area and substance upon which each witness is expected to testify.
RESPONSE
- At this time, the NRC Staff has requested Peter E. Baci to testify, and anticipates that Donald R. Ilaverkamp will also testify. The Staff will supplement this response as appropriate. Mr. Baci would testify on his recollection of his September 25, 1981 interview with David C. .Tanes
("P"). Mr. Haverkamp would testify concerning the NRC Inspection Re-port t ? has prepared on the subject of Mr. Husted's performance on the job as 1. bears on his attitude and integrity. (Dick)
III. RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS DOCUMENT REQUESTS Please make available for inspection and copying, at a time and loca-tion to be designated, any and all documents of whatever description identified in your answers to the above Interrogatories. If you maintain ,
that some documents should not be made available for inspection, you l shonid identify the document as to date, title, author, recipient , and subject matter , and explain why such documents are not being made ;
I 1
1g available. In addition, you should identify those persons who have seen the document or who were sent copies of the document.
RESPONSE
All documents identified in the foregoing responses to Interrogatories are either attached or are available as part of the public record on Dock-et No. 50-289 (Restart) or Docket No. 50-289(CII). In order to protect the personal privacy of Mr. Janes, and two other individuals mentioned in
?!r. Daci's notes of the interview with Ptr. Janes on September 25, 1981, Mr. Janes' home address and telephone number, and certain information about the two individuals have been deleted from the copy of Mr. Baci's notes being produced by the Staff. See,10 C.F.R. I 2.790(a)(6).
FOR THE NRC STAFF ,
?
) k Gperg6 E. J@ns r1 Counsel for $R Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 23rd day of April,198G.
i
9tt .l. -
'Aumwam ues.mo I f R'-- : -.
__ M'-%
h*{ ,
W w
-s. .
4 v
h .3 g .
-~
. _w w , , ,
r
= -
4e - -
- Y E 1 s
q c=
W -
g pg -- c
- s=*
t- 4 4 .
,4 C{ ,
w U,,,
cb
~m_ _ -
.r ,
& -t, b, 7 ,
h a
Q ' , n i i 1
S gEoc N
. . .. ....r.-~.~
g a.
2o 4 -
N
.n s -
g e7 ca mno
5 3m -
tu
.qc -
J r-P,, e ' '
'M i M '
. m gb 3 m u .n o 4 : S e. e r yh - L - LNF3d
,3 p + 4 7 0 .
7,
~
gd .
6 F 4
A ,
(4 '~
,0 7. w Fl ,
s s .
. 2 8Q e5 .
,(..
m.,mpp. , ..--.a
...<.w. ~
..,..n.*...
,;. - + .
v; , .. .
+ -
__?.% f D TE: ~ ". ? D Q 5 2 " r e t % + r v b - ~ - : ...
- t. _,
'. . l s>.
~
. j'. : .. ,. .: : .. . ,Ms'u MM;._,& 1
.~ @ . -
l Tuesday, April 21, 1981 - R0 'A' Exam 4 . . . . . .. .
. .. . v . u n. .y4 _. -y 3_
..w+ne.w ,
Smokers- Room .Non-Smokers Room Seat # _ /colicant Seat # Applicant
. 1 T 1 fF 2 2 8[
3 SS 3 X .
4 V 4 Qk s GG s b 6 Q'Q _g (
7 7 , k 8 CC -
-a FR 9 d 9 10 08 10 11 12 h 13 p 14 g Procter: Maines Proctor: Wilson Located at front table Located at front table -
opposite position #2. opposite positions 9 & 10.
Relieved at lunch for Reviewed exam in Newton's about 1/2 hr. by Young (IE). office for about 14 hrs.
Relieved at lunch for about a hourbyYoung(IE).
=. ..
3
\ .
e *..s
-?
[s .
. c,, w -
.,...-,..,,.p.w._..,,.-m..
' . p. 3 :
g
._ - w,
. y.. ., - ~ pu ,.p.,
. .y .g; " . y;y
.s. pJ.y,.g y.,- -->
,,,, . ,,, ,3.. .2,
.3 - . .:...-.,.,,_~,,,.m_
[.'.. - . f' . -
.,.x.=hR T.5._ w .W %. ...m..
. e:+w;;:n.
. g y. . . . , ,.. .
,..J a.13"V b;. 3. ,
a.
..- .~a- . ,- . s.m ., -.. .. ,;m ; .w
. . ,4Qwwa, - ..,,,,_ A ,
- . .. . . . . r. gi.gv
, .. r,,, ... . - . + .- .,. g.t ,
,. w '
'v ,.
Wednesday, April 22, 1981 - SRO 'A'
%,, ; Exam,,,..,,s, _ -. .. . _a m.__.,,_q.>- _
._ . , W.m.m, a ,
- g. ,- . .
...- ~ , -. ...CCh . L : . l
': Smokers Room - I~ - Non-Smokeis ' Room - ...
. Seat # Applicant - -- Sea t # - Applicant i
- 1 1 h -
l 2 2 BE 3 3
[
4- 4 5 5 6
f_f 6 f
7 7 8 CC '8 k[
w 9 d 9 10 10 11 12 [
13 14 Proctor: Maines Proctor: Wilson Tocated at front table Located at front table ,
opposite position #2. opposite positions 9 & 10. '
Reviewed exan in Newton's office for about ils hrs.
r
, , . . ,_,...----.-.-_..--,.-y . - - , _ _ _ - _ _ _ . . _ . . . , , , _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ , . _ , --.-----_.--.,y --.
.'. v - *
..-+* % .. ,a .w e .
, ;s + . am. . . , ...%.,,;.,A,..
.* . - . .. .n .w
-+.. . . <. m .
.y :
wgwh*
8
.,.c s -~.
. h ~. * ,.s..- . be s M- '
.x.
ik
-'- --^ ., ...m.: %'^Y Iw;+- '. ~e.v4*-T9' eh s [~ -
- =rc.
- .y~j w w n ..~g
.g >
-t . .-.
3 <
%;.,y,e,3,5-_.*p2 't .. . . . g, . $
- 8 F;4 Thursday. S ail 23,1981..
y-R0NB N. %..,,:,y,"g. g;._.._g, g4,q
,w.cz ,q7._y..- .ca 3
e; a.=s .* ....
e s m y Smokers h 2.j e m #
'in pr M ._.
. :. Smokers-Room %9y43.,. , . , .
N.
' [. ... Seat i 2' Applicant 3
- Seat #: Applicant ! *'
y -
g.
- ,p. :A. _
j-
/ ...
2.. .T...:,. :-.../..
1 . .
. a . v. 2x . - . - - - . c.
, e:
- 2 -
4 4 k -
5 5 $
6 [' 6 OO 7 7 $
8 8 9 ,QQ 9 l{f O 10 10
( -
11 \A/
12 ()
13 d
14
.C Proctor: Wilson Proctor: Maines Located at position #7.
- Located at front table Reviewed R0 'B' Exam in opposite positions 1 & 2.
fif>'.5 office most of Left training facility for morning. Proctored during HP indoctrination for about.
lunch. Reviewed R0 'A' exam 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. -
in f]6'S office most of (Young (IE) recalls proctoring afternoon. Proctored about la:t the non-smokers room for a portion hour of exam. . of the time Maines was absent.)
.r . .
-; -4 . . .
.s. .
, ; -l. T r *
- e. - 6
. ; a' . _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
~^-
.u. D y:~ u 1 am.,, ,,,
~
- l. ,,,u a~,*~~ ,
1.c y .,. -tg * ; _s
.d .
- a.
y
_4s,,
a x-:- 2 .r" o4 g :. . w.n._
4;;.:.,
m g z.
. . e::u:.
. -. 5 3s ng&,f.[. ,t.wjw'u . . w < . ~ . a. m ,s .-
v.y..c: x. p -: %
Q,. w. 9.e .
33 - : i,
.'~ + :; Q._g... y ".
f, 9. n . y%.
- ". 3-
,~ ;
. = w. . .,,.
. ~ . .. n.
. . . ~. w;g Q-"... ., w. .w x+ -- m
, . e...
Fr'iday,;tApril- 24;r1981W, 4 ROV ~. . y. . 4x es.,.x 9.uy 9^s . .-,w A.; ,.; g j g- _ ,..
,e._ .: c y, .gg..;eez : c..;:,w
.c. .%. .
mD;;p n. . . . =' .
4' . . .
- a . -.. . -n.y.
f .
- 2. w . . . .. .
, . e
.p. -
..-. m - .
- g . . ~ W?M 15W.%45moltdishY., .@ W 't> W M.
2 ;-
. . .~'i$mokers Roim M . R . o. P;.4 4.b..m4 ,c , .
.t..,.
v.y... . ,A .n;- .
- e. .p . : '
,w . . .
- g. ' #A'p\ p 1(cant > . + . . . Seat f . xidW.~ App 11 cant Awe -Q.s.;
^
' Seat #
.'".i ' ' . ,....5.'.
.. ..,e. . 4.'...9 s.... .
I g.. vWg.-, l #,,. . f.
w- .; 3l.e 3,p..;
~ .,' ' l. . h .'. %.:.yp h.
7.. -_s....
,- s
..,,a
.. u cy. .s....
. : 4a , ';g. n. . ._ .
+. . g: ;e. .. :..t - - . h-3 ; .c . .
- g - ,,m. . .. ,, 9 y9 y .
. . , . .. . , . > .- m ;- . -- ;
.; . .,,c t. ;
c t. +
. t *2 ( ;-
i , 3 .
y3 3 - '
. 4 .. y3 ..
4 . . . . . ~ -,., :. ,
<.- I' ' 2h
- ~
5 .
'5 -
. 6 A 6
. 7 7 2 8 8 .
9 9
(
10 -
- 10 .
11 d
. , 12 O g .
14 f .
Proctor: Wilson .
Proctor: Maines
. Located at position #7. Located a'. front table then . opposite sositions 1 & 2.
ReviewedSRO'B',46's SRO 'A' exam in
' Left trairing facility for office. Proctored non- .. rPlant tour from about 11:30 a.m.
smokers room from about until 2:30 p.m.
I:30 p.m. until 3:00 p.m. .
V.
...,i.
- w;.sy ..
. .. ;y- .a. ..
4.
ff .'% .
. - .N' p+%
- x yv.
, . . , ; * , kd /" .
, b . ~
~
.. ..,. W y:- .-
T ';, a.- i ,,~..,. , .
', 2,*..
- ' . , s.' . , ,... . , - ' ** '
c .
N .,
.. .w . u y
-. .4 <-
\ . A gg .-
> n
:eN, ,. ;r. : -n '
e:< . f. -
=
hkf* f.h.';h'-jk .; '
hg%wmq 4-g:W a3
- gn m.%:::::mm }. 1 k neeh, . fbG'i'.r.s,z94 & G[ G Q ';
PM&W$&d;:
?b b$hkR5.$h %.S ;.1.4. M 23%g!#%Msktig '-
?
-s LEDWif:M. .x
y 1gg. . . - . - .. .
.. .a
,"-~--- .# 3 re y n
u :
> ?
1
- 'I _
. . Q . h, ua s, ,,,j;p_ ,q
. ,M ,k d b de .
d I W .7 3 s h 5$U ??i{$ g & [ ' , . ,
L $
.$ $ h. Q; E y g Q -}.; , . .'-
~ FIG -:g,Qk .
T f
EE@fNM@iD%2k$h$%Qyif]w wyr gggggggg '- A f; Ii w.
N %gy
- h,
- - -w w. A s
d 3
(,
+1 ="-
E=
'R
h 4
,,-~
89 ijgs- % m. _ r1y ex q
yw~ay a 7 w .;. >. u ..
- ep
_- M.ki.Q. ,
~
rog( Aa_h a Jf, nn L 't2 &-
.f L.:. pm . -
9 IA2N,
-. y
_ . .~ -/ . .
, . , ;!/.j j,: . . . ' r I ," . - ( _ _ . _ _- ,
-:=yn
~ -
j 93A _
-y.
4 m I.
- e. .
L . . -
l T
_y.Q. 3q.
. a 4C 7
-~
4 y
, / _
)
}
... _ . , , 5 . . 9 e- _ h* -. .g,
/+ M,,, , M ... J S $ $ $ 17 # W' 0, sh.h-ac ' Ify,
-...._y. . ; .c.
- y. . w...ge ,g g.;;. ,. ,.
.p. .
- + mg;q L-15Y'.,'4j 7
w a m u gx:n 3..s nW.nemen 'wh,$ v- N g ~ ..
av g
,z E';$ k GO'% '?
.C'~dhf.? m-
~
RounNG AND TRANSWWAL SUP FEB 2 01986 TO: (Name, o8sce symbol. toom number, Instiets Dete building, Agency /f 1.
M 9 4. A2 N u
2.
3.
4.
5.
Action Fue Ip6te and Retum Approwel For Cleerence /Per Conversation As Requested For Correction Propero Reph Circulate For Your Infosmetion See Me Comment investigste Signature Coordinetton Justih itEMARKS M .AA/f K a sa(o ~ 1
- J
-~
rd -tL; a a - 5>%
4- n.
00 NOT use this form as a RECORD of approvals, concurrences, disposals, esserences, and similar actions FItOM:(N [mbol Agency / Post) Rocca No.-Bldg.
. Phone No.
to48-to2 d OPTIONAt. FORM 41 (Rev. 7-76) v s o . , .. u.. m . u. ni . , rensaYcMlYt.II.aos l
~
'. DRAFT l
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT:
Interview with Shift Supervisor David C. Janes Reference is made to NRC Report of Investigation HQS-81-004, dated October 13, 1981, which addresses alleged improprieties on operator licensing examinations at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station (Unit 1) . During the course of the latter investigation, Mr. David C. Janes, a shift supervisor at TMI-1, was interviewed by NRC Investigators William J. Ward and Peter E.
Baci. The information provided by Janes was reported, in substance, on pages 40 and 41 of the referenced report. The purpose of this memorandum is to expand upon what was reported earlier.
As previously reported, Janes denied providing assistance to anyone during the course of the RO/SRO examinations conducted on April 23 and 24, 1981. Beyond his denial however, Janes vociferously protested the alleged absence of NRC Proctor Bruce Wilson from the examination room. Jane's concern was that Wilson's alleged absence made him vulnerable to any allegation of cheating. While this concern was certainly understandable, the
~
vehemence of Jane's protest struck both interviewing investigators as being somewhat unusual.
It came out during the interview that Janes was alone in the '
examination room with Charles E. Husted, an instructcr for licensed operator trairing. Because of his excessive reaction to Wilsor.'s alleged absence, Janes was told by Mr. Ward that we knew Husted had asked him a question during the examination. In fact we knew no such thing; we merely wanted to see how Janes would react. Janes then acknowledged that Husted had indeed asked a question, but stated that he, Janos, did not answer Husted and that the question may very well have been rhetorical in nature.
Subsequent to returning to NRC HQ, Mr. Ward wrote up the results of the interview as they appear in the referenced report. Prior to writing the report and af ter a discussion with Victor Stello, then Director, OIE,' it was decided that the Husted-Janes matter described above would not be included in the results of interview. This decision was based on the following: the fact that Janes asserted he provided no information to Easted and was not even.sure of the nature of the latter's question; that there was no witness to this alleged event; and that, in the opinion of the investigators, the continuation of the probe would have had a more negative impact on the public health and safety than any benefits which might have been derived from it.
DRAFT
DRAFT With the benefit of hindsight, I would now have included the Husted-Janes matter in the original report; however, I must state for the record that I was not then, nor am I now, aware of any f acts which would establish that Husted cheated or otherwise, sought assistan'ce on the RO/SRO examinations in April 1981.
Peter E. Baci k
l l
l L . .. J
M, ....
/ i a \ i
'p
~c pj t
0Y 7/0' 0 '
m&
' 3 fpa W
~ J Ql)
{%,thK fj
1 W (, e '
_g h' f e or h . v w* -
s'.
I 6&vs*
h y/)
g HW'i P',a Q &)p s',a H ' ' % r. m .p a
/ x ,bn wlgu s' o
\ hh % ,4u7e,'gf _ u.<e.m u,
d&_
\ _.
MM '
&wt2 =
% 2\
rwa f n M L N.
s o,t_ _ a v D . w o t . \ e d- _ /
_s , ,- ~ -
A1o f e c-r 44L_.n_n.fsa/h n , n sn) -.
1 ,\ .
- S_ ,h . . . sO. & i y' .-. _ .. : _ _. _ . .. ..
n _.. . _ __ . . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ . . . _ ..
..h I J & -.-.Jon~ sop 2- []) ope}&srf.Apf'6 --
h ?..
kh(' ;Mcy_..& Jhu.-csws
.,u 435)7> .
- p J w/ & g._p.p a_iv f fAbAc fsy 67&
. .. - .U _. . . . . . q p .cwcu . .d J.. U . m o -..s v - -
ur 1 -MLs. -fj. v- ~bc.A M $
6QC, 4rr ,1J; ..._ q ekJ& chGr.:.
Md. A, . j -f y n o p v -$ a 'bg w WhyD-..&&~da.. -k ? ... A m n L / _ .
jpQ-. ww.Au a & x.<=...
t . . r. >_,. 6. e. ,6w ?>,aw L .fsti. .
WateMV .
'~
ON h/W N/W V we frIbiedfJM'~M gx, i .
3 vaw r M5 & .
mr WVh f h / A n kf ha7n a y /n +
L, >
tu M w wa . .L &qd r JAce th ry~ y EA
//sf m f p pv ~~ -
_g y n eyh l
/ we, i-+9,)%
w
{7 -
a 6 d e w av edf $3 NJ P G
^
&c_ in - ~r6
/
gpp
~%'
oc'1, ri s fsw w
=
^
wsw OkuM ~ p y -
~~
a s
- 9. n c (n .cn ~ /g.s o ,+ 4 J h
e
.- ammm ammmee e+ . - . . . .-.-
'E lano
. ,u s n8+
, u ,L.,
,. f, .
[ // ^
, s M
OH b i go "* f~ 4 i
a o_ .
pg 5 j u-- e~it n
,~
~
g---Qc-gy- h M.j gt-N*
eN e an.-** 6 eme> -h -4 g.gy N
em m - w amme O
++eme m.m amp exame 9
's m f
% 1 CHARLES E. HUSTED f"/1" H 1 INSTRUCTOR FOR LICENSE OPERATOR TRAINING RE-HUSTED WAS 4 INTERVIEWED DUE TO HIS RELUCTANCE to RIFrrrrY ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS DIRECTED AT HIM DURING A PREVIOUS INTERVIEW (SEE FIRST REPORT, PP 39) l MR. HUSTED STATED THAT THE REASON KKXRIRXXXIXJ00DutR FOR HIS RESP 5NSF TO QUESTIONS ASKED OF HIM BY THE NRC ON AN EARLIER DATE WAS BECAUSE HE FELT THAT THE QUESTIONS XXXXXXRIX DIRECTED AT HIM WERE SO BROAD THAT HE JUST COULD NOT GIVE A SPECIFIC i ANSWER.
MR. HUSTED STATED THAT HE DID NOT OBSERVE ANYO!E CHEATING ON THE NRC EXAMS, -
XIXRXXXTR AND NO ONE TOLD HIM THAT THEY (RKKXRXXX PERSONALLY) HAD CHEATED ON THE EXAMS.
MR. HUSTED WAS ASKED TO CLARIFY hMAT HE MEANT BY " UNCONFIRMED HERESAY" IN H'IS PREVIOUS STATEMETT. HE STATED THAT HE DID HEAR ONE COMMZNT MADE DURING THE TIME PERIOD OF THE NRC RO/SRO EXAMS WHERE SOMEONE (HE DID NOT RECALL WHO) SAID THEY SAW SOMEONE F E M R HHEMG PAPEa5 IN THE txAM. HuSTED STATtD HE HEARD THE COMMENT IN THE AREA NEAR THE COFFEE POT AND MEN'S ROOM IN THE TRAILER THAT WAS LOCATED BETWEEN THE TWO CLASSROOMS. HE SAID HE PERSONALLY DID NOT HAVE ANY :D00U00lIIKX KNOWLEDGE REGARDING EITHER REFERENCE MATERIAL OR CRIB SHEE[ BEING TAKEN INTO ThE NRC EXAMS.' HE SAID HE DID NOT KNOW IF THE ABOVE MENTIO!ED COM)T.NT RELATING TO " PASSING PAPERS" WAS BEING DIRECTED AT HIM OR NOTy NWXTrn 11 m 111-1 m-6 KID 000DOEIXX AND HE DID NOT KNOW IF THE PERSON WAS REFERRING TO THE NRC EXAMS OR SOME ODER EXAM.
HUSTED CONCLUDED STATING THAT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY OTIER INFORMATION WHATSOEVER RELATING TO CHEATING ON TIE NRC, RO/SRO, EXAMS..
I I
APR 23 86 15:27 NRC KING OF PRUSSIA P02
\
I'
, ,, g , UNITED 57 Atts f a NUCLLAR REGULATORY COMMisslON
[' 3 e R EolON i
! . sat pAnn AvtNus
- ntNa or emuasi A.ptNNsv6vANIA $9404
%,,,,/ 2 3 APR 1986 Docket No. 50-289 GDU Nuclear Corporation ATTN: Mr. H. D. Hukill Vice President and Director of THI-1 P. O. Box 480 Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Inspection No. 50-289/86-04 This refers to the special safety inspection conducted by Mr. D. Haverktmp of this office on February 25-27, March 5-6 and 12-13, 1986 at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Middletcwn, Pennsylvania of activities authorized by NRC License No. DPR-50.
Areas exarined during this inspectic;r are described in the NRC Regicn I Inspection Report which is enclosed vith this letter. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective euminations of representative records and l interviews with personnel.
l Within the scope of this inspection, no violations were observed.
No reply to this letter is required Your cooperation with us in this matter is appreciated.
Sincerely, a
iarry B. r, hief Projects anch No. 1 Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosure:
NRC Region I Inspection Report Number 50-289/86-04 cc w/ enc 1:
R. J. Toole, Operations and Maintensice Director, TMI-1 C. W. Smyth, Manager, THI-1 Licensing R. J. McGoey, Manager, PWR Licensing G. F. Trowbridge, Esquire TMI-1 Hearing Service List Public Document Room (PDR)
Local Public Document Room (LPDR) l Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
NRC Resident Ins)ector Commonwealth of Jennsylvania m i
APR,23 '86 15:27 NRC KING OF PRUSSIA P03 1
0.5. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l RFGION I Report No. 50-289/86-04 Docket No. 50-289 License No. DPR-50 Priority --
Category C Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation P.O. Box 480 fiiddletown, PA 17057 Facility Name: Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Inspection At: Middletown, Pennsylvania Insoection Conducted: February 25-27, and March 5-6 and 12-13, 1986 Inspectors: __ / aw V /2 3 /Pd D.Haverkarp,ReactorliegingEngineer date Region I Accompanying NRC Personnel: l G. Dick, Project Manager, PWR Project Directorate #6, NRR l l
Approved by: YL 8(e l~ Bl @ h, Chief, Reactor Projects Section date No. IA, Divis*on of Reactor Projects
!_nscection Sum ary: Region-based special safety inspection (38 hours4.398148e-4 days <br />0.0106 hours <br />6.283069e-5 weeks <br />1.4459e-5 months <br />) of performance of a licensee employee. Mr. Charles E. Husted, in support of the NRC staff's preparations for a hearing requested by the employee.
Results: The results of review of Mr. Husted's performance of his respon-
- ,1bilities with CPU Nuclear Corpo .ition and with its predecessor, Metropolitan Edison Company, reflected favorably upon his attitude and professional integrity. I No specific indicators or characte-istics of past poor performance or demeanor -
were identified through personal interviews or a review of the records that should cause Mr. Husted to continue betrag rest-icted from assignment to any posit,1ons with GPU Nuclear Corporation.
t DITAILS
- 1. Persons Contacted C. Adams, Special Projects Assistant, Nuclear Safety Asseesment Department P. Bickford, Instructor, Maintenance Training, 3:I S. Bobsack, Administrator III, Htrnen Resources, Adninistration N. Brcwn, Senior Dnergency Planner, Dnergency Planning D. Galletly, Support Services Supervisor, Training, Btl H. Huhill, Vice President and Director, D!I-1 C. Husted, Special Projects Assistant, Nuclear Safety Assessnent Department B. Leonard, Operator Training Manager, Training, 31I R. Neff, Instructor, Non-licensed Operator Training, Bt!
L. Noll, Shif t Supervisor, WI-1 M. Ross, Plant Operations Director, 311-1 C. fhyth, Supervisor 311-1 Licensing, Technical Functions D. Spath, Instructor, Non-licensed Operator Training, Bf!
R. Zechman, Technical Training Manager, ?!I
- 2. Introduction In early February 1986 the inspector was instructed by Region I managenent to conduct a special inspection of the perfonnance of Mr. 01arles Husted, who had been assigned to various positions at the % ree Mile Island Nuclear Station since 1974. Since Mr. Husted was not in a position where he would interact routinely with NRC personnel, e.nd since as a result the EPC staff did not have an opportunity to observe routinely Mr. Husted's perfonnance, this special inspection was initiated to assist the NRC staff in developing a full record for a hearing that had been requested by Mr. Husted, as ordered by the Cmmission in a Notice of Hearing, issued September 5,1985. In preparation for this inspection, the inspector reviewed the Ommission's Notice of Hearing and various NRC and licensee doctanents and correspondence related to the hearing. In addition, the inspector attended as an observer the initial prehearing conference held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on February 19, 1986.
He Cornission had directed the hearing to consider specifically four issues concerning Mr. Hasted, including his (1) alleged solicitation of an answer to an exam question, (2) lack of forthrightness of his testimony before the Special Master, (3) poor attitude toward the hearing on the cheating incidents, and (4) lack of cooperation with MIC investigators.
During the prehearing conference other factual issues were discussed for potential consideration during the hearing. R ese other issues included:
(5) What does Husted's perfonnance of his responsibilities with GPU reflect about his attitude and integrity?; (6) In light of the answers to (1) through (5), is any rernedial action required with respect to Husted?;
and (7) If renedial action is required, what is it? R ese issues and other rulings regarding the Husted proceeding are described further in the Adninistrative Iaw Judge's (M. Margulies) Report and Order on Initial Prehearing Conference, issued February 27, 1986.
'e 3
R is inspection was limited to developing the staff's record regarding Issue No. 5, "What does Husted's performance of his responsibilities with GPU reflect about his attitude and integrity?" 'Ihe inspection included a review of various personnel records and licensec doctanents regarding the perfonnance of Mr. Ilusted, as well as interviews with various licensee personnel who have worked with Mr. Ilusted, as described in the sections that follow.
- 3. Doctanent Review
'Ihe inspector reviewed ntsnerous letters, menoranda, evaluations and other records regarding Mr. Husted's perfo:mance as an enployee with GFU Nuclear Corporation (GPUNC) and with its predecessor, Metropolitan Edison Canpany. 'Ihe doctanents were maintained in ?!I-1 anployee personnel files, Nuclear Assurance Division files, training department files and operations department files.
Based en his review of the data contained in BfI-1 personnel file records the inspector determined Mr. Hasted's snplo3 ment and license history as shewn in the tables below.
Table 3.1 Met Ed/GPU Hnployment History of C. Ilusted Period Job Classification 2/26/"4 - 5/20/74 Auxiliary Operator "A" - Nuclear (Probationary) 5/20/74 - 8/15/77 Auxiliary Operator "A" htclear 8/15/77 - 11/14/~7 Control Roczn Operator - Nuclear (Probationary) 11/14/77 - 7/10/78 Control Rocrn Operator - Nuclear 7/10/78 - 7/1/82 Achinistrator - Nuclear Technician Training 7/1/82 - 3/14/83 Administrator Senior - Training 2/14/83 - 6/18/84 Supervisor - Non-licensed Operator Training 6/18/84 - Present Engineering Assistant Senior III - Nuclear Table 3.2 - License History of C. Ilusted Operator License No. OP-4741, Docket No. 55-6398, effective 6/23/78 I (DII-1)
Senior Operator License No. SOP-3704 Docket No. 55-6398 effective 7/2/80 (311-1); cold shutdown
-- amended 7/1/81; cold shutdown except hot functional testing
-- amanded 12/9/81; no plant operating limitations l
-- renewal 7/2/82; no plant operating limitations 1
-- terminated 1/8/83; II. Ilukill, GPU, letter to D. Beckham, NRC dated 7/8/83 l
4 he specific doctments reviewed by the inspector are listed below. He inspector's ccrrients and stmmry of inforYnation discussed within each doctment, as . applicable to the performance or attittxte of Mr. Ilusted, follow the listed doctrnent, where appropriate.
311-1 Personnel File Miscellaneous Records Application for Ihiployment for Garles ilusted dated January 15, 1974.
Letter frcn Oarles E. Ifusted (undated) to Mr. E. Zubey Director of Personnel, Met Ed (received January 17, 1974) re: anplo3 ment interview EastJne of Oarles ilusted (undated) received January 18, 1974 by Met Ed NUIT: Restme included the following infortnation.
Previous Dnployment Aug 72 - Present Zausner Food Corporation, New IIolland
- Project Director - R&D Asceptic Production Jan 67 - Aug 72 U.S. Navy /USS Sam Ilouston SS
- t 609 Engineering Watch Supervisor Assistant Irading Machinist Oct 66 - Jan 67 Defoe Shipbuilding Co.
Bay City, Michigan Electrician Sep 65 - Sep 66 Granzo's Standard Service Midland, Michigan Mechanic Interview Report of Mr. Gerles Husted dated February 5, 1974 (report stated possible position: Mechanical Maintenance) l --
Various initial (rnployment records /forTns l
Met Ed letter dated February 19, 1974 frcan E. M. Zubey, Division Director of Personnel to Mr. O arles Ilusted re: offer of snplo3 ment as an Auxiliary Operator "A" - Nuclear
-- ' Metropoli tan Edison Ctrnpany (Met Ed) letter dated August 27, 1974 frce R. C. Arnold, Vice President - Generation and W. M. Creitz, President, to anployees listed on August 30, 1974 re: appreciation for contribution toward D11 Unit No. I emmencerient of ccmnercial I
operation (form letter).
5 Operator License No. OP-4741, Docket No. 55-6398 effective June 23, 1978; licenses Air. Garles E. Ilusted to manipulate control of 'IMI-1.
GPU Nuclear letter dated August 21, 1981 fra R. C. Arnold, Olef Operating Executive, to Mr. Garles E. Ilusted re: re-examination of all those operators who were examined in April 1981.
GPU Nuclear memorandtm dated August 4,19.82 fra Art Brinkmann,11tman Resources Department, to C. E. liusted re: congratulations on prcmo!.lon to position of Actninistrator Senior - Training.
Report of Absence records for 1974 - 1982 Corporate Stress Control Services, Inc. Bnplo3tnent Screening Report dated Nov mber 18, 1982 frce William W. Jenkins, Ph.D., Director, Middletown Office, to Personnel Department, GPU Service Corporation re: Bnployee Reccnmendation for Oarles Ilusted.
'Ihe report stated the following regarding Mr. Ifusted:
xx Acceptable for nuclear plant anplo3tnent at this time.
anployee was, at the time of examination, mentally alert and coherent and without gross aberrant behavior. Our best judgment based upon the infonnation available to us, is that this applicant in acceptable for nuclear plant employment.
Restrne of Oarles Ilusted dated May 7,1984
?UE: Restme included the following information.
Educetion:
Graduated from Midland Iligh School, Midland, Michigan 6/8/66 Navy Nuclear Power Schools 1967 - 1968 Elizabethtcnm College - 27 credits Certificate of Manag ment Program Job-ralated courses:
Auxiliary Operator training program - 9 mo. 1975 Reactor Operator License Training Program - 9 mo. 1978 Sr. Reactor Operator License Training Program - 3 mo.1980 Certificates / Licenses:
Present: N/A Past: Senior Reactor Operator License Reactor Operator License, replaced by SHO license I
l
I '
i l.
( .
~
6 l
Petropolitan Edison Ocripany Btployee Appraisal Reports for Qiaries E. Husted Date of Period of Purpose of Supervisor Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation (Evaluator) 3/28/74 2/26 - 3/27/74 Aux. Oper. "A" - Nuclear N. E. Derks (Probationary) - Eval. 1 Inspector Cmrients: Average (satisfactory) marks; no written ecuments by supervisor.
4/25/74 3/28 - 4/27/74 Aux. Oper. "A" - Nuclear N. E. Derks (Probatfonary) - Eval. 2 Inspector Cortrents: Good marks (improvement since initial evaluation); no wri!!an ecnments by supervisor.
5/17/74 4/28 - 5/17/74 Aux. Oper. "A" - Nuclear N. E. Derks (Probationary) - Eval. 3 Inspector Ocrmients: Good marks (minor improvanent since last evaluation);
Supervisor reecmmended that Husted be taken off probation.
thdated 8/15 - 9/13/77 Control Rm. Oper. - Nuclear L. G. Noll (Probationary) - Eval. 1 Inspector Ocaments: Above avercge to good marks; supervisor stated that Husted met standards of job.
thdated 9/14 - 10/13/77 Control Em. Oper. - Nuclear M. L. Deers (Probationary) - Eval. 2 Inspector Corrients: Good marks (improved since initial evaluation);
Supervisor stated that Husted was progressing well in qualification, no apparent problens.
< dated
. 10/14 - 11/12/77 Control Pr). Oper. - Nuclear M. L. Deers (Probationary) - Eval. 3 l Inspector Camients: Very good marks (improved since Isst evaluation);
Supervisor stated that Husted progressed at abcVe average rate in qualification, reccnmended that Husted be taken off of probation.
l l
7 General Public Utilities Dnployee Performance Evaluations for Charles E. Ilusted_
i Aplroximnte Date of Period of Purpose of Supervisor Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation (Evaluator) 10/20/78 7/10 - 9/30/78 Acknin. - Nuclear F. A. McConnick Technician Trng.
Annual Evaluat*fon Inspector Comnents: Acceptable (slightly below average) marks; Supervisor noted that Ilusted was ccrnpetent overall.
S/13/79 10/1/78 - 8/13/79 Adnin. - Nuclear F. A. McConnick Technician Trng.
Salary Adjustment Inspactor Comnents: Acceptable (slightly above average) marks; Supervisor noted that Ilusted's perfonnance improved noticeably, also noted his development and accanplisirnent_of recent post-accident change modifications training program for 311-2 operators and his logic, sincerity and candid assertiveness.
10/29/70 8/13 - 9/30/79 Adnin. - Nuclear Technician F.A. McConnick Training Annua 1 Eva1 nation Inspector Cmments: Acceptable (slightly above average) marks; Supervisor noted Ilusted's perfomnnee continues to be more than satisfactory, his dedication and pride in work,'and that he worked many extra hours to prepare for T11 operator retraining program.
10/22/80 10/1/79 - 9/30/80 Achin. - Nuclear F. A. McCormick Technician Training (also undated draft evaluation)
Inspector Comnents: Good (high ccrnpetent) marks; Supervisor noted Ifusted was involved and ccznpetent in all areas of operator training, honest and direct in personal interactions.
Draf t evaluation noted that he was a canpetent instructor, also noted his weaknesses in areas of accepting criticism and sticking to a job even if he doesn't like it or in adverse condition (not very tactful)
~
8 Genera 1 Public Uti1itles Bnployee Performance Evaluations for Charles E. Husted (Continued)
Arproximate Date of Period of Purpose of Supervisor Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation (Evaluator) 11/4/81 10/1/80 - 9/30/81 Administrator - Nuclear N. D. Brown (also undated Technician Training draft evaluation) Annual Evaluation Inspector Cmments: Slight downward trend c apared to previous evaluation; Supervisor noted that Ilusted was a empctent instructor on the way to becming an excellent instructor; draf t evaluation noted that adverse conditions of last year had their effect (projected attitude), but this was overc e e by NRC exam preparation, pursuit of college credits and turbine-generator training arrang ments.
6/29/87 10/1/81 - 6/29/82 Administrator - Nuclear N. D. Brown Technician Training Prmotion (review)
Inspector Ca ments: Substantial improvement since last evaluation; Supervisor noted that Ilusted was more effective as an instructor, diligent and professional to prepare for classrom, and showed initiative in empleting courses, also noted that since restart hearings there was noticeable improvement in enthusiasn and inorale.
11/2/82 7/1/82 - 9/30/82 Admin. Senior - Nuclear N. D. Brown Technician Training Annual Evaluation Inspector Conments: Average to good marks overall; Supervisor noted attitude of " quality", positive feedback fr a requalification participation.
3/11/83 10/1/82 - 3/11/83 Admin. Senior - Nuclear N. D. Brown Technician Training Prcanotion (reassign / reclassify)
Inspector Comnents: Good to very good marks overall; Supervisor noted ongoing improvenent in his abilities
f 9
General Public Utilities nnployee Perfomnnee Evaluations for 01arles Husted (Continued)
Appronimate Date of Period of Purpose of Supervisor Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation (Evaluator) 7/13/83 3/14/83 - 7/13/83 Fupervisor - Non-licensed B. Leonard Operator Training Merit Evaluation Inspector Cm ments: Very good to excellent marks overall; Supervisor noted that Husted rapidly took charge, replacment/
retraining programs were effective, classrom perfomance was excellent and attitude was professional.
10/28/83 7/13/83 - 9/30/83 Supervisor - Non-licensed B. Leonard Operator Training Annua 1 Evaluation Inspector Carients: Excellent marks overall; supervisor noted that Husted maintained excellent morale even though SRO license was teminated; good attitude noted by Husted in his aclciowledgement of areas for improv ment.
6/26/84 10/1/E3 - 6/11'/84 Supervisor - Non-licensed 13. Leonard Operator Training (reason not specified)
Inspector Ocmrents: Evaluation not reviend by C. Husted; excellent to outstanding mnrks ovrrall; Supervisor noted that Husted was an excellent example for subordinates, he maintained an excellent attitude; exhibited dedication I
to maintain and improve quality of classrom instruc-tion, had positive attitude and professional approach ,
to training programs, and he maintained high mora!e in l the section. '
10/29/84 6/18/84 - 9/30/84 Engineering Assistant *F.R. Goodard Senior III - Nuclear Annual Evaluation I Inspector Cmments: Good to excellent marks overall; Supervisor noted that Husted was a valuable meber of the 'B11-1 probabilistic risk assesment (PPA) team, showed good progress Icarning risk and reliability analysis techniques, showed very positive enthusiastic 1 attitude about project, and does more than asked.
Hanager Risk Analysis, Technical Functions
10 General Public Utilities Dnployee Performance Evaluations for G arles E. Eusted (Ccntinued)
Approximate Date of Period of Purpose of Supervisor Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation (Evaluator) 10/14/05 10/1/84 - 9/30/85 Engineering Assistant K. R. Goodard Senior III - Nuclear Annua 1 Evaluation Inspector Cocments: Good to excellent riarks overall; Supervisor noted Husted's excellent perfonnance in support of simulator develoITnent (input by D. Boltr)
Instructor Performance Monitoring Reports for Oarles E. Husted Date of Evaluation Lesson Title Evaluator 12/16/S1 Lcw Power Natural Circulation Testing R. Knief Evaluator Carment: Good interaction with trainees 9/8/82 Operating Procedure (OP) 1102-1 R. Harbin Plant Heatup .
Evaluator Carments: Got operators involved, productive lecture, well prepared, good job 9/14/82 OP 1102-1 Plant Heatup S. Newton Evaluator Conment: High professional attitude (good to outstanding marks) 10/11/82 Unit 1 Requalification - Thermo- R. Knief dynamics Problan Session Evaluator Cw ments: Regarding attittxie, noted that Ilusted handled himself well in discussion on quality of NRC exa:n questions, provided reasonable guidance on how to answer vague questions.
3/30/83 Unit 1 Licensed Operator Requalifi- S. Newton cation - Annua 1 Requa1ifIcation Exam Review Evaluator Canments: Good content
11 Instructor Perfomance Monitoring for Qiarles E. Ilusted (Continued)
Date of '
Evaluation Lesson Title Evaluator 4/25/83 Licensed Operator Requalification - B. Leonard thit 1001 (Control Ikxl Drive Mechanism) Mechanical Evaluator Cement : Well presented 5/9/83 Lhit 1 Licensed Requalification GD S. Newton (Control Rod Drive) ?'echanical Evaluator Ca ments: None (good evaluation of instruction, no significant weaknesses) 7/19/83 Auxiliary Operator Requalification S. Newton
- ESAS (Bnergency Safeguards Actuation Syst e)
Evaluator Corments: Outstanding delivery, enthusia n ,
l rnnnerisms (good to outstanding marks) i 11/30/83 Plant Tour Instruction R. Knief i Evaluator Cmrients: All areas satisfactory, very professional attitude
! and demeanor, excellent organization, solid presentation, generated significant student interest 11/30/83 Plant Tours B. Leonard l Evaluator Cmments: Good attitude toward subject and class, good lecture,
! able to convey valuable infomation, one area (questioning students) needs improv ment, a1I other areas satisfactory.
l 3/20/84 Auxiliary Operator Requalification - B. Leonard thit 1 Reactor Protection and Safety l
Systes l
Evaluator Cmments: None l 4/18/84 Syst m Functions (Spent Fuel) J. McAllister Evaluator Cmments: None l
l L
~
12
! Doctments Prepared / Authored by C. Husted Paper for college course Expository Writing (IN 102) dated Decenber 5, 1983 for Professor L. Van Valkenburgh;
Subject:
" Motivation" (9 pages)
Inspector Conment: 'Ihoughtful and intelligently written
-- - Training Content Record for Lessen Plan Title "ATP 1210-1 Reactor 'Ibrbine l Trip" Nunber 11.2.01.210, dated January 12, 1984 Training Content Record for Lesson Plan Title "ATP 1210-2 Loss of Subcooled Margin," Nteber 11.2.01.211 dated January 12, 1984 Inspector Cmment: Lesson plans logical and clearly written Training Department Personnel File Records GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Menorandtsn dated January 8,1981 (incorrectly dated, actual date was January 8, 1982) from R. A. Knief (Manager Plant Training) to C. E. Husted;
Subject:
Tour of 'IMI-1 for Senior Managenent (regarding cmmendation for efforts in conducting tot:r of 311-1 for msnbers of GPU Puclear senior management on January 4,1982; noted Husted's professional manner)
I --
Verious snployee performance evaluations for Garles E. Husted (see conments above)
Miscellaneous correspondence regarding initial and renewal IIcensing applications for C. Husted.
GPU Nuclear Bnployee Performance Evaluation for Qarles E. Husted -
Accountcbilities Review for Supervisor, Non-Licensed Operator Training, dated May 3, 1983.
Nuclear Assurance Division Personnel File Records Various hearing-related and Cmmission briefing / meeting doctanents (docketed correspondence)
Confidential draf t memorandtsn prepared by R. L. Long and R. A. Knief dated August 30, 1982;
Subject:
C. Husted Evaluation (regarding June 4, 1982 meeting between Messrs. Long, Knief and Newton to develop plan of action for ongoing assessment of Husted's attitude and performance as a licensed' operator instructor)
Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Memorandtsn frcm M. J. Ross (Manager, Plant Operations 311-1) to H. D. Hukill (Director, 'IMI-1) dated October 8, 1982;
Subject:
Evaluation of C. Husted (regarding Mr. Husted's performance as an Operator Training Instructor during the period July - Septenber 1982)
4 13 Menorandtra states that Mr. Ilusted presented a more professional and thorough approach to his training participation than he had denonstrated previously, he appears interested and cooperative; no signs of a deterioration in his attitude and his desire as a training instructor.
Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-Of fice Menorandtzn fra R. A. Knief (Manager Plant Training) to R. L. Long (Vice President Nuclear Assurance) and H. D. Hukill (Vice President 'IMI-1) dated October 27, 1982;
Subject:
Ikaluation of C. E. Husted (regarding fomal classrom evaluation on October II, 1982)
Menorandtsn states that Husted handled session in a very professional renner in tems of both technical ability and attitude, also positive attitude in post-cvaluation discussion; during infonnal observations actions and words reinforced classroan observations. 'Ihe author also talked with Husted on October 20, 1982 and October 22, 1982 before and after a session with E. Blake of Shaw Pittman and stated "he (Husted) appreciated and learned frcrn the opportunity to gain a better understanding of the ASLB's perceptions of his attitudes toward training and NRC requirenents."
Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-office Manorandtsn fran S. L. Newton (Operator Training Ivanager) to R. L. Long (Vice President Nuclear Assurance) and H. D. Ifukill (Vice President 311-1) dated October 27, 1982; subject: Evaluation of C. E. Husted (regarding instructor eva1 nations in Septenber and October).
Memarandtsn stated there were no problens pertaining to his (Ifusted's) attitude and daneanor and that he acted in a professional manner. 'Ihe author of the mernorandtzn was present in the classroom area during breaks when Husted was teaching and gave special attention to conversations in Husted's cubicle (work space) and at no time overheard anything out of line.
Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-office Manorandtsn frm M. J. Ross to II. D.
Ifukill dated January 7, 1983; subject: Evaluation of C. Husted (regarding his perfomance during the period October - Decenber 1982).
Mrnorandtsn states that Mr. Husted continues to present a professional and thorough approach to his training participation; he continues to be interested and cooperative; no signs of a deterioriation in his attitude and desire as an instructor.
Operator Training Instructor Qualification Card (BH Training Departrient Attninistrative Manual Procedure No. 6210-ADI-1340.05, Attaclinent 1) for Oarles Husted started Decenber 12, 1982 with following Manager Plant Training (R. A. Knief) certification dated March 22, 1983:
"I have interviewed this instructor and hereby certify that the impor^ance of the instructor's role in affecting student's attitudes and behavior towards rules, regulations and regulatory bodies is understood and that this individual is ready in all respects to cmmence instruction."
14 Inspector emment: Above discussion was coincident ~to Husted's assignment as Supervisor, Non-Licensed Operator Training Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Manorandtrn frcrn M. J.
Ross to H. D. Hukill dated April 13, 1983; subject: Evaluation of C. Husted (regarding performance during the period January -
March 1983)
IWmorandtrn stated the same cmments as the M. J. Ross meriorandtzn dated January 7,1983. 'Ihe author also stated that since Mr. Husted's recent promotion to Supervisor Non-Licensed Training Mr. Ross had riany opporttmities to deal with him on the A.O. (auxiliary operator) Training Program and he has been most cooperative.
Handwritten notes by R. A. Knief dated April 25, 1983 after neeting with S. Newton, E. Frederick and C. Husted re: status of operator training for restart; subject: C. E. Husted Le notes stated that Mr. Husted was observed to be confident in describing programs, take justifiable pride in the quality of the activities included in current and planned A.O. Requal Training cycles, and be concerned about supporting the plant as much as possible (as opposed.to doing what is most convenient for the training department) in moving toward restart.
Dr. Knief discussed approaches for A.O. Requal Training and stated that, overall, he was very pleased with the positive attitude Mr. Husted exhibited toward doing all jobs well and in accordance with applicable rules and regulations.
GPU Nuclear Inter-office Menorandtzn from S. L. Newton to Dr. R.
L. Long dated June 3, 1983; subject: C. E. Husted Evaluation (regarding special evaluations during the period frcm Novenber 1982 to January 1983).
Menorandtzn stated that although there were no fonnal classrocrn evaluations of Mr. Husted during the above period, his performance was still closely evaluated. In Husted's involvenent in the preparation of sections of the written requalification examination he did a superb job. Also noted was his good perfonnance during his simulator requalification training.
Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Memorandtsn frcun M. J.
Ross to H. D. Hukill dated July 18, 1993; subject: Evaluation
. of Mr. C. Husted (regarding perfonnance during the period
, April - June 1983) 4
i 15 Manorandtsu stated the same conments as the M. J. Ross menorand'Jn dated April 13, 1983. In addition the author stated that Mr. Husted seens better versed as an Auxiliary Operator Instructor than a Licensed Operator Instructor, and that he'(Husted) continues to be cooperative and shows great interest in the Auxiliary Operator Program.
GPU Nuclear Intur-Office Menorandtsn from Robert L. Iong (Vice President - Nuclear Assurance) to John Stolz (IEC) dsted
.Decenber 2,1983; subject: GPt.N Evaluation of Mr. ID's Perfonnance (regarding simnary of evaluations conducted).
Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Memorandtzn fran M. J.
P.oss to H. D. Hukill dated December 15, 1983; subject:
Evaluation of Mr. C. Husted (regarding perfonnance during the period July - Novenber 1983)
Manorandtsn stated similar conments as the M. J. Ross msnorandtzn dated July 18, 1983.
Cbnfidential GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Menorandtsn from R. L.
Long (Vice President - Nuclear Assurance) to H. D. Hukill (Vice President & Director 'IMI-1) dated Decenbar 20, 1983; subject:
Special Perfonnance Monitoring of C. E. Husted (regarding intent to discontinue special perfonnance monitoring)
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge letter from D. Bauser to R. L.
Iong (GPU Nuclear) dated January 17, 1984, with draft supplanent to December 20, 1983 mmorandtsn to H. Hukil1 on perfonnance monitoring of Mr. C. E. Ilusted.
-- , Confidential GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Memorandtsn frcan R. L.
Tong to H. D. Hukill dated January 20, 1984; subject: Special Perfonnance Monitoring of C. E. Husted.
Memorandtsn states that the instructor evaluation program pennits continued monitoring of attitude and perfonnance of Mr. Husted.
-- GPU Nuclear Inter-Office Manorandum fram D.P. Leonard (Operator Training Manager) to C.E. Husted dated January 3, 1984; subject:
4 Quality Assurance Shift Engineer Training Program (regarding appreciation for support in inplanenting and presenting training program recently provided for QA Shift Engi eers).
i
- GPU Nuclear memorandtzn fram B. P. Leonard (Operator Training Manager) to C. E. Husted (Supervisor, Non-Licensed Operator Training) dated January 24, 1984; subject: ATOG Training Program (regarding ecmnendation for contributions to Unit 1 1 A'IOG training program) 4
16 GIU Muclear (H. D. Hukill) letter to NRC (J. Stolz) dated March 7, 1984; subject: " Training Observation" (regarding 1983 monitorings of DD perfomance)
CI'J Nuclear memorandtsn from R. N. Whitesel (NSAD Director) to C. E. Husted (Engineering Asst. Sr. III - Nuclear Safety) dated
.luly 18, 1984; subject: Tenporary Assignment to Dil-1 PRA Project (regarding assigment, administration, arrangements and position accountabilities)
Re inspector concluded, based on a revime of the doctsmnts listed above, that Mr. Fusted's perfomance as an snployee of GPU Nuclear Corporation, or its predecessor Metropolitan Edison Cmpany, was maintained at an acceptable or satisfactory level. During most of his enployment, particularly while assigned as an operator instructor or supervisor of instructors, his perfomence appeared to be good to excellent. H e many doctanents regarding Mr. Husted's p(rfomance reflected favorably on his attitude and integrity.
- 4. Personnel Intervimys he inspector interviewed ten GPU Nuclear Corporation anployees who had wrked with Mr. Husted in various supervisor /ecployee/co-worker relationships. We purpose of these interviews was to detemine whether any of these individuals had concerns regarding Mr. Husted's e.ttitude, integrity or forthrightness, based on their observations of his performance and denennor. De questions asked of these individuals are listed in Attachnent A. % e persons interviewed, their Met-Fx!/GPU employment history and infomation regarding their knowledge of and past relationships with Mr. Husted are identified in Table 4.1. Based on these interviews, the inspector detemined the following infomation:
4.1 All but one person was aware of the MRC hearing requested by Mr. Husted. Most of these individuals were made aware of the hearing during conversations generally with co-workers and in sane cases with Mr. Husted. ho individuals had becczne aware of the hearing by reading docket correspondence that had been routed to then. All of these individuals were aware generally of the issues that led to the hearing requested by Mr. Husted.
4.2 None of the individuals had been interviewed either fomally or infonnally interviewed by GPU Nuclear or other organization / person regarding their knowledge of Mr. Husted.
4.3 None of the indivirtuals had ever observed any actions or heard of any incidents (other than the incidents that led to the Husted hearing) that would lead then to believe that Mr. Husted has a bad, negative, indifferent or othenvise improper attitude toward the NRC or toWE rd reactor safety.
17 4.4 % e individuals stated the following opinions of Mr. Husted's current and past attitude toward the hTC.
Mr.' Husted tries to interact professionally with the NRC.
Were was a brief sitznp (following the NRC exam cheating incident) but af terwards there has been a nurked improvement in his overall attitude toward the NRC.
Mr. Ilusted has always denonstrated a positive attitude toward the NRC in the work place.
Mr. Husted is cooperative toward the NRC and does not have a bad attitude.
Mr. Ilusted's attitixie toward the NRC is normal; nothing adverse.
Mr. Husted's attitude toward the NRC is very positive.
Mr. Husted's attitude toward the NRC was not significantly differ nt fran the nonn following the NRC exam cheating incident, although he is more outspoken than most persons.
Mr. Husted's attitude toward the NRC is not negative, but also he is not a fim supporter.
Mr. Ilusted's attitude toward the NRC indicated a natural animesity when he was removed fran the job as supervisor, non-licensed operator training.
Mr. Husted's attitude toward the NRC was not observed.
De inspector detemined that the opinions regarding Mr. Ilusted's attitude toward the NRC were mixed. Although no specific exanples or instances had been identified which indicate Mr. Hustcd had a bad or negative attitude, one individual had mentioned a brief sitznp (follcwed by marked improvenent) and another individual mentioned a " natural animosity" (when renoved frcrn a _ job). Ilowever, the majority opinion was that Mr. Husted had danonstrated an attitude towsrd the NRC that ranged frcrn nonneI to very positive.
4.5 Ee individuals stated the following opinions of Mr. Ilusted's current and past attitude toward reactor safety.
Mr. Easted's attitude toward reactor safety is very good.
Mr. liusted has had a genera 1ly continuing positive attitude toward reactor safety; he has provided constructive critician on lesson plans.
~
18
.Mr. Husted has always had a positive attitude toward reactor safety; he stixlied hard for exams.
l@. Husted has a good attitude toward reactor safety.
Mr. Husted has a very positive attitude toward reactor safety.
Mr. Husted's attitude toward reactor safety is very positive.
One indivioual stated that he had never observed a problan regarding Mr. Husted's attitude toward reactor safety.
Mr. Husted has a good attitude toward reactor safety.
Mr. Husted er.phasized the importance of reactor safety and never downplayed safety.
Mr. Husted's attitude toward reactor safety was not observed.
'Ihe inspector determined that the opinions regarding A*r. Husted's attitude toward reactor safety were consistently favorable; his attitude was described as good or positive to very good or very positive.
4.6 Mr. Husted's professional canpetence as a reactor operator was described as: (1) high knowledge level, (2) worked hard preparing for exams and conscientious on duty (based on limited observation),
or (3) above average (stated by two individuals).
Mr. Husted's overall perfomanet as a reactor operator was described as: (1) above average or (2) no problans noted based on very limited (one week) observation. [One individual stated that Mr. Hested's professional canpetence as an auxiliary operator was excellent and that his overall perfomance as an auxiliary operator was above average].
Seven of the individuals had not observed, or had observed only on a limited basis, Mr. Husted's professional carpetence as a reactor operator; and nine individuals had not observed, or had observed only on a limited basis, Mr. Husted's perfomance as a reactor ,
operator.
'Ihe inspector detemined, based on the limited cannents fran individuals interviewed, that Mr. Husted's professional competence and overall perfomance as an operator were acceptable; no adverse opinions were stated.
4.7 Mr. Husted's professional cornpetence as an instructor was described as:
4
- ,-r a , - v.- -,-= . - . - ------..,.,r, . . ,m - ,n -, - ,. ,,-- -,,-= ,e,. - - - , - -..n---
b -
~
19 extr eely empetent, concerned about presentation getting through to students; detail was thorough, concerned that students understood, priority was given to quality vs. quantity; very e m petent, work done well; very high c epetence:
very competent; very good with systems topics; very good; very e mpetent and knowledgeable; good to excellent; and no ecmnents from one individual (not observed).
?.'.r. Husted's overall performance as an instructor was described as:
thorough, concerned, good; good rapport with class; worked hard on theory lessons (mostly not observed); e very good, among the best at 'IMl; adequately prepared, eager to help students learn; responsive to students needs and questions, very adequate lectures when given advance notice of assigrunent, not happy about unplanned or prept assigments; very good; very thorough; good to excellent; and no cmments frun one individual (not observed).
'Ihe inspector detemined, based on the many positive ccanents fran individuals interviewed, that Mr. Husted's professional canpetence and overall performance as an instructor was very good, or better; no adverse opinions were stated.
20 4.8 Mr. Husted's professional empetence and overall performance as a supervisor of instructors was described as:
very good supervisor, best ever had by the individual; handIed people we1I; good atiinistrator, reliable; perforTned very well, concerned for quality of instruction, used constructive criticism; very good; instructor evaluations were done properly and were constructive; and no ecmnents from four individuals (not observed / limited observation).
He inspector deterTnined, based on the several positive cmments fr a individuals interviewed, that Mr. Husted's professional competence and overall perfcmance as a supervisor of instractors was very good; no adverse opinions were stated.
4.9 None of the individuals was aware of any aberrant behavior displayed by Mr. Husted either on or off the job.
4.10 Four of the individuals had officially evaluated Mr. Ht.sted's per-fortnance. D ese evaluations were for various reasons, including control room operator probationary review, annual performance reviews as an instructor / supervisor of instructors, instructor evaluation monitoring, and special quarterly perforTnance monitoring. De individuals stated that these perforTnance evaluations were generally positive, favorable and e mplimentary. h e inspector reviewed all of these evaluations, and others, as discussed in paragraph 3.
4.11 H e individual's opinions of Mr. Husted's integrity, forthrightness and demeanor were described as:
very trustworthy, mature; very good integrity, forthright, d meanor professional and was maintained steady as he matured in his job (slight improving trend);
norTnal, nothing adverse;
- l. .
j M..
l 21 average, no specific faults or strengths; very analytical and straightforward, average integrity, no problems as an operator, outspoken d eeanor, takes job seriously; honest, seetimes shows bad judgment in what he says in oral discussions; high wtegrity, forthright, on first appearance may appear to be flippant but was truly serious; in any relationship always had good integrity, forthrightness and d eeanor; and high integrity (stated by two individuals).
The inspector detemined, based on the generally positive or favorable cmments frmi individuals interviewed, that Mr. Husted's integrity, forthrightness and deeanor were nomal to very good. A few cmments regarding his demeanor expressed a view that Mr. Husted may be outspoken or unusually candid in his discussions. 'Ihis willingness to express himself freely was perceived differently by the individuals interviewed as either a positive or negative characteristic. None of the individuals stated that this trait adversely affected Mr. Husted's overall perfomance.
4.12 None of the individuals were aware of any perfomance awards or disciplinary actions regarding Mr. Husted, except tho transfer fr a assignment as supervisor of non-licensed operator training due to the stipulation between the licensee and the Cmmonwealth of Pennsylvania.
4.13 Other cmments or opinions regarding Mr. Husted included:
extr eely valuable asset to organization, would like to see him back in training, a real professional; semed very accamodating to training requests fra plant operations personnel; as an operator was one of the better individuals for perfoming on-the-job training; very empetent individual, extreely knowledgeable, reoval was loss to the training department; and
.~ . . - . - -.. . . - . . . . - - .
.g 22
).
cannents fran his supervisors regarding Mr. Husted's
- perfomance as' an instructor were very positive.
Five individuals declined to state any other carments or i opinions. No individuals expressed unfavorable or adverse cccments or opinions regarding Mr. Husted when asked by the inspector at the conclusion of each interview. D e inspector l' detemined, based on the genbrally positive nature of the carments that were offered, .that training department personnel 4
w uld like to have Mr. Husted back as an instructor or supervisor of instructors.
-4.14 h e inspector concluded, based on the results of these interviews, that none of the individuals had concerns regarding Mr. Husted's attitude, integrity or forthrightness. Rather, positive statenent 's
. from these individuals regarding their past observations of Mr. Ilusted's perfomance and dark.anor indicated a consensus opirtion that Mr. Husted was above average, or better, as an operator-instructor and Eupervisor of instructors.
- 5. Conclusion ne inspector concluded, based on a review of doctanents and personnel interviews as described above, that Mr. Husted's perfomance of his responsibilities with GPU Nuclear Corporation and with its predecessor, Metropolitan Edison Canpany, reflected favorably upon his attitude and
. professional integrity. No specific indicators or characteristics of pest poor perfomance or deneanor were identified through personnel interviews or a review of the records that should cause Mr. Husted to continue being restricted fran assigrunent to any positions with GPU ;
Nuclear Corporation.
- 6. Exit Interview During the entrance interview with licensee representatives on i February 25, 1986 and during an interviav with Mr. H. Hukill, Vice i President and Director of W I-1,-during the course of the inspection, the i inspector stated that no exit interview was planned regarding the staff's position on Mr. Husted's perfomance as it reflects on his attitude and integrity, due to the special nature of this inspection and its relationship to a pending hearing requested by Mr. Husted. % e inspector stated, however, that any safety concerns or potential enforcenent matters that may be discovered during the course of this inspection would be identified irmediately to appropriate licensee representatives. No such safety concerns or enforcement matters were identified.
De namnerous doctanents identified in this report were reviewed in GPWC 1 offices. D e inspector received working copies of certain of these P doctsnents as an aid to preparing this report, however, all of the doctanents identified (except for docketed correspondence with the NRC)
I remain in the custody of GPWC.
. P
Table 4.1 - Personnel Interviewed Met-Fxi/GPU Bnployment IIistory IIas Known llusted's Positions Relationship Name Postion/ Title Period Ilusted Since During Time F.nown with Husted Garles D. Adams Shif t Forenan, 'IMI-2 10/75 - 4/80 1976 Auxiliary r. Close co-worker Quality Assurance 4/80 - 7/82 Instr' actor no classes)
Auditor Special Pro ects Assist.
Safety Ihgineer 7/82 - 9/83 NSAD Independent Onsite Safety Review Group Special Projects 9/83 - 3/86 Assistant, Nuclear Safety Assessment Dept.
Pcul S. Bickford Instructor, Non-Licensed 4/81 - 4/83 1981 Licensed Operator Close co-worker Operator Training Instructor Instructor, Maintenance 4/83 - 3/86 Non-Licensed Operator Training Instructor Non-Licensed Hnployee/supv.
SuNalning Nelson D. Brown Auxiliary Q wrator "A"- 7/70 - 6/74 1977 Control Room Operator Personal friend Nuclear Instructor Supv/errpicyae Control Inn. Operator- 6/74 - 6/75 Nuclear Adninistrator - Nuclear 6/75 - 9/80
& Technical Training Licensed 9/80 - 3/83 Supervisor, Operator Training Senior Dnergency 3/83 - 3/86 Planner Donna R. Galletly Clerical Services, 8/74 - 4/78 1978 Instructor Close co-worker Various Departments Sunv., Non-Licensed ,
Clerk Junior ClerkTraininU " 4/78 - 11/79 Operator Training Adninistrativ,e A 11/79 - 3/82 Training Special Projects Assist.
Adninistrative Assist. 3/82 - 4/85 NSAD Operator Training Support Services 4/85 - 3/86 Supervisor, Training Bruce P. Leonard Technical Program 11/11? - 5/83 1982 Licensed Operator Close co-worker Specla1ist. Training Instruetor Operator Training 5/83 - 3/86 Supv., Non-Licensed Supv. /coployee Manager Operator Training _
Robert E. Neff Security Guard 1/77 - 3/78 1978 Control Roan Operator Co-worker At tiliary (% etor, 3/78 - 1/84 Instructor Student 1MI-I Non licensed 1/84 - 3/86 Supervisor, Non-Licensed Bnployee/supv.
Instructor,Trnina.g Operator Operator Training O
e
'Ihble 4.1 - Personnel Interviewed Met-Fxf/GPU Ihployment History
? Ilas Known liusted's Positions Relationship Name Postion/ Title, Period Ikasted Since During Time Known with Husted Iarry G. Noll Auxiliary Operator "A" 10/69 - 11/72 1974 Auxiliary Operator Personal Friend Control Itn. Operator 12/72 - 5/75 Co'1 trol Inn. Operator Supv./suployee Shif t Foranan 6/75 - 6/79 Instructor Ehift Supervisor 7/79 - 3/86 Supv., Non-Licensed Operator Training Michael J. Ross Operator / Instructor 1968 - 1970 1974 Auxiliary Operator Cupv./enployee (Saxton) Control Itn. Operator Co-worker Instructor Shift Supervisor 1970 - 10/79 Supv., Non-Licensed Supv'IMI 10/78 - 3/86 Operator Training 1 Plant Operations, (currently Plant Operations Director, 'IMI-1)
Douglas F. Spath Auxiliary Oper. 'IMI-1 1974 - 3/83 1974 Auxiliary Operator Personal Friend
& 'IMI-2 Instructor Close co-worker Non-1icensed 3/83 - 3/86 Supv., Non-Licensed Drployee/Supv.
Instructor, Operator Training Operator Training Richard W. Zechman Administrator - Nuclear 9/69 - 11/76 1974 Auxiliary Oper. Close co-worker Technician Trng. Control Ilm. Operator Non- 11/76 - 11/77 Instructor Supv. /enployee .
Group Supv, Training Iicensed Supv., Non-Licensed Acting 'Suov. , Training 11/77 - 9/78 Operator Training Supv., IMI Training 9/78 - 8/80 Technician Trng. AEnager 8/80 - 3/86 O
e
A R 23 '86 15:28 NRC KING OF PRUSSIA P05
, Attachment A Page 1 of 2 Pages i
- l Interview with: Date: Time Met Ed/GPU_imployment History Pesition/ Title Years 1
I l
I l
- 1. Are you aware of the NRC hearing requested by Charles Husted?
(If yes, how were you made aware?) I
- 2. Have you been either formally or informally interviewed by GPU Nucinar or other organization / person regarding your knowledge of Mr. Husted?
(If yes, please elaborate.)
- 3. How long have you known Mr. Husted?
4 What positions has Mr. Husted had during the time you have known him?
- 5. Hos would you describe your relationship with Mr. Husted?
l Close personal friend? _
Close co-worker?
Employee /aupervisor?
Professional acquaintancei __
Other?
- 6. Have you ever observed any actions or herrd of any incidents that would lead you to believe Mr. Husted has a bad, negative, indifferent, or similar attitude toward the NRC7 toward reactor safety?
(If yes, please elaborate.)
~ ""
" Me W MNLW P06 -
Attachment A
% 2 Page 2 Cf 2 Pages 7.
How would you describe your opinion of Mr. Husted's current and past attitude toward the NRC7 toward reactor safety? __
8.
How would you describe Mr. Husted's professional competence
{
as a reactor operator? _
. I as an instructor? i as a supervisor of instructora?
9.
How would you describe Mr. Husted's overall performance as a reactor operator? _
f --
as an Instructor?
l l --
as a supervisor of instructors?
I 10.
Areoffyou or theaware job 7 of any aberrant tehavior displayed by Mr. Husted either on (If yes, please elaborate.)
i 11.
Have you ave:r officially evaluated Mr. Husted's performanec7 (If yes, how would you summarire this/thosei evaluation (s), and what were the reasons for your evaluatier.(s)?)
l 12.
What are your opinions of Mr. Eusted's integrity, forthrightness, demeanor 7 l
13.
AreHusted?
Mr. you aware of any performance awards or disciplinary actions regarding (If yes, please elaborate.)
14.
l Do you want to state any other comunants or opinions regarding Mr. Busted?
(If yes, please elaborate.)
l Y
~
~.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE In the Matter of )
)
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR ) Docket No. 50-289 (CH)
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, )
Unit No. 1) )
AFFIDAVIT OF RONALD E. MAINES I, Ronald E. Maines, being duly sworn, depose and state that:
- 1. I am an employee of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC).
My present position is Reactor Engineer in the Operator Licensing Branch, Division of Human Factors Technology within the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. My current address and telephone are: AR-5221, Washington, DC 20555, 301-492-8246. In 1981, I was a Nuclear Operator Examiner in the Operator Licensing Branch. A copy of my professional qualifications is attached.
- 2. I am duly authorized to participate in answering Interrogate.cy 2 of Mr. Husted's First Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents to the NRC Staff, and I hereby certify that the answers given are true to the best of my knowledge. l d n_:--
Ronald E. Maines Regional Support and Oversight Section Division of Human Factors Technology Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Subscribed and sworn to before me this /N day of April,1986.
di' bias &
Notary Public
/lf &
My Commission Expires: 7/fj/$ l l
s
'e PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS Ronald E. Maines Education: BS in Business Administration from The Pennsylvania State University - 1975 Experience: March 1981 - Current Reactor Engineer in the Operator Licensing Branch, Division of Human Factors Technology, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission. Certified Operator Examiner on Babcock & Wilcox and Combustion Engineering power facilities.
Military:
l i
April 1963 - August 1964 Army Ground Nuclear Power Plant Operator Course will a post-graduate instrumentation training course.
September 1964 - February 1967 Shift Supervisor at PM-1 nuclear power plant, Sundance Air Force Station, Sundance, Wyoming.
February 1967 - June 1971 Shift Supervisor and Instrument Technician at research reactor at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
October 1971 - October 1972 Instrument shop supervisor at PM 2A Navy Nuclear Power Plant, McMurdo ,
Station, Antarctica.
t
~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE In the matter of )
)
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR ) Docket No. 50-289 (CH)
! ) ,
! (Threr. Mile Island Nuclear Station, )
Unit No. 1) ) l AFFIDAVIT OF RAYMOND H. SMITH l
l I, Raymond H. Smith, being duly sworn, depose and state that:
- 1. I am an employee of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
My present position is Emergency Preparedness Specialist in the Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards within Region I. My current adJress and telephone number are: 631 Park Avenue, King of Prussia, Pa,19406,(215)-337-5392. In 1981 I was an Investigation Specialist in the Security and Investigation Section of the Safeguards Branch. A copy of my professional qualifications is attached.
- 2. I am duly authorized to participate in answering TMIA's first Request for Production of Documents to the NRC Staff, and I hereby certify that the answers given are true to the best of my knowledge.
)
i i
< a M k
(
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2f g day of April, 1986.
_ Notary Public'
- 0. $ L My Commission Expires: MDN /
l '.
t- ,
t PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF RAYMOND H. SMITH
, OCTOBER 1981 - Present: I am assigned to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory l Commission, Region I, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, 19406. My current assignment is Emergency Preparedness Specialist, Emergency Preparedness' Section, Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards. My responsibilities include the review and inspection of emergency response plans and exercises.
DECEMBER 1968 - OCTOBER 1981: I was assigned as an Investigations Specialist in the Security and Investigation Section of the Safeguards Branch in May, 1973. Prior to that I performed as a Radiation Specialist and as an Acting Chief of the Materials Radiological Protection Section and the Radiation Support Section in the Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch.
Prior to joining the AEC, I was employed at the AEC Hanford Works, Richland, Washington, for 21 years.
The following specific duties and assignments were performed during the periods indicated:
NOVEMBER 1947 - OCTOBER 1949: I was assigned as a safety inspector on the construction of nuclear plants. My responsibilities included the inspection of construction activities, investigation of personnel and vehicle accidents, loss of materials and settlement of insurance claims.
OCTOBER 1949 - MAY 1964: I was assigned to the Health Physics Division and performed the dJties of a Radiation Monitor, Analyst, and Supervisor. These assignments were in Fuel Fabrication Facilities, Reprocessing Plants, Laboratories, and Reactors.
MAY 1964 - OCTOBER 1968: I was assigned to the Radiological Engineering Department as a Health Physics Engineer. My duties included the investigation of radiological incidents, establishing inspection programs, their criteria and guides for program appraisal. I wrote procedures, standards and training programs.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING:
High School Graduate, Houstonia, Missouri - 1940 Central Business College, Sedalia, Missouri - 1941 Attended school courses conducted by the General Electric Company in Health Physics,. Professional Business Management, Technical Report Writing and Human Relations - 1952 to 1962.
APR 23 '86 14:20 NRC KING OF PRUSSIA P03 l
UNITED STATE 5 0F AMERICA
, NUCLEAR REGtlLATORY COMM]SSION BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE In the matter of )
)
GENERAL F'JBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR Decl.et No. 50-289 (CH)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, )
Unit No. 1) ) .
AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD A. MATAKAS I, Richard A. Matakas, being duly sworn, depose and state that:
- 1. I am an employee of the U. S. Nuclear Regelatory Commission (NRC).
My present position is Sen'or Investigator within the Office of Investigations within Reg *on I. My current address and telephone number are: 631 Park Avenue, King of Prussia, Pa,19406, (215)-337-5305. In 1981 I was an Investigator within the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region I. A copy of ry professional qualifications is attached.
- 2. I am duly authorized to participate in answering Mr. Husted's First Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents to the Nuclear Regulatory Commis! on Staf f, and I hereby certify that my answers given to Interrogatories 4, 7 and 10(d) are true to the best of my kncwledge, f ,s , I o
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7,74A day of April, 1986.
AAf a. &I =
IIctary Public
. My Commission Expires: M g #st
+
RICHARD A. MATAKAS Organization: Office of Investigations. 01 Field Office Region I
Title:
Investigator Grade: GS- N N [/-
Birth Date: September 10, 1946 Education: B. S. Political Science, Eastern Michigan University Completed nine hours graduate work in Public Administration, Calden Gate University Experience:
1981 - Present Investigator, Office of Investigations, US NRC - Assignments include directing and planning as well as conducting sensitive and complex investigations of allegations, incidents or accidents at or related to NRC licensed facilities or activities.
1980 - 1981 Special Agent, Naval Investigative Service (NIS) - Assistant Special Agent in charge of the NIS Office, Master Jet Base, Oceana, VA.
Assigned and conducted major criminal investigations, security violation investigations and counter espionage investigations as they related to the Department of the Ntyy.
1978 - 1980 Special Agent, NIS - Representational Special Agent in charge of _
the NIS Office, Fleet Combat Training Center, Atlantic. Maintained one man Naval investigative Service office.
1977 - 1978 Special Agent, NIS - Resident Agent on board the USS Nimitz (CVN-68). Provided investigative service to the U. S. Navy Sixth Fleet (deployed).
1975 - 1977 Special Agent, NIS - Provided investigative service to the Naval Construction Battalion Center, Gulfport, MS.
1973 - 1975 Special Agent, Florida Department of Law Enforcement - Conducted criminal investigations involving organized crime, public official corruption and major felonies outside the expertise and jurisdic-tional limits of local law enforcement.
1969 - 1973 Patrolman,
Dearborn,
MI Police Department - Provided general police patrol duties for two years and was a member of the cities Special Operations Unit (Plain Clothes Felony Squad) for two years.
1966 - 1969 US Army - First Lieutenant, Arti11ary
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE T1IE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE In the Matter of .)
)
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR ) Docket No. 50-289 (CH)
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, )
Unit No.1) )
AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE F. DICK, JR I, George F. Dick, Jr. , being duly sworn, depose and state that:
- 1. I am an employee of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
My present position is Project Manager in PWR Project Directorate #6, Division of PWR Licensing-B within the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. My current address and telephone are: 7920 Norfolk Ave, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 492-8101.
A copy of my professional qualifications is attached.
- 2. I am duly authorized to participrte in answering Mr. Ilusted's First Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents to the NRC Staff, and I hereby certify that my answers given to Interrogatoires 1, 5, 6, 9, 10a, 10b, 10c, 10d,10f,10g, and 11 are true to the best of my knowledge.
.lzH 9.L. d peorge F. Dick, J .'
Subscribed and sworn to before me this/J 4 day of April,1986.
Y Notary Public h~
My Commission Expires: 7[//((
9 o
PROFESSIONAL OUALIFICATIONS OF 9
GEORGE F. DICK JR.
1 I am employed at the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission as a Project Mancger. In that capacity, I manage and participate in the review and evaluation of safety and environmental considerations associated with the design and operation of nuclear power facilities, particularly those licensed for operation. I joined the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in June,198*.
From 1974 to 1982, I was employed by the United States Department of Energy
. and it predecessor agencies as both a Project and Program Manager for several coal liquefication pilot plants. The plants were used to assess the -
applicability of coal liquefication processes for commercialization.
From 1968 to 1974, I was employed by Erxon Research and Engineering Company as a Research Engineer. I participated in the development of Exxon's coal liquefication technology and improvement of selected petroleum refining processes.
From 1962 to 1964, I was employed by the United States Naval Oceanographic Offices ns a Physical Oceanogrenher. I was a member of a section which was tasked with the responsibility of defining basic oceanographic characteristics in specific ocean areas.
I received B.S. and PhD degrees in Chemical Engineering from the University of Maryland in 1962 and 1969, respectively. Additionally, I have taken NRC training courses in the safety analysis, design and operation of commercial ;
r.uclear power reactors.
HPR 23 '86 15:28 NRC KING OF PRUSSIA PO4 UNITED SIAIES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION re BEFORE THE ADri!NISTRAlIVE LAW JUDGE In the Matter of )
)
GENERAL PUBLIC UllLillES NUCLEAR ) Docket ho. 50-289 (CH)
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, ) :
Unit No. 1) )
AFFIDAVIT OF 00NALD R. HA'IERKAMP r
JJ_
I, Dor.ald R. Haverka'np, being CJly sworn, depose and State that:
c r-I. I am an employee of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
My prese,t position is Reactor Licensing Engineer in the Division of Reactor Projects within the Region 1 Offi:e of the NRC. fly curren; address and telephone are:
R.D.1, Ber 422A, Spring City, PA 19475; Bus. (215) 337-5236, 4C Res. (215) 495-5126. In 1981, I was Senior Resident Inspector at Three Mile s <
Island Unit I. A copy of my professional qualifications is attached.
2.
I am duly authorized to participate in answering Mr. Husted's First Interrogatories and Request for Pro:Isetion of Do:umenti, to the NRC Staf f, and I
)
hereby certify that my answer to Interrogatory 10(e) is true to the best of my knowledge. 7, l 1
To )
z 5, wd f s.
Donald R. Haverkamp iubscribed 09d sworn to before me this # . day of April, 1986.
ry Pub 1'ic c 4WA 2 ~ ?v l
sm:c mtw ;..ose.ntwe !
My Commission Expires:_ h?2'"i'j'Q"g'6,iM
i PROFFFRICNAL QUALIFICATIOS of IXNALD R. HAVERKAPP I graduated from the United Stated Naval Academy in 1965 with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Engineering. Following a three-month tenporary duty assigunent with the Submarine Develognent Group Staff in Groton, Connecticut, I empleted the six-month sutmarine officers training course at Groton, the six-month nuclear power school officer course at Vallejo, California, and the six-month DIG prototype qualification progran at West Milton, New York. My additional training included the three-month Polaris Missile officer course at the Guided Missile School, Dam Neck, Virginia.
Stv eight years of military service following the extensive nuclear sutmarine officer training programs included a broad range of supervisory
- responsibilities aboard one conventional and three nuclear submarines. My principal assigrrnents, duties, responsibilities and acceplistments during that period are strrmarized below.
May 1967 - October 1968: Assistant Ehgineer (8 months) and Supply Officer (9 months) aboard the conventional sutmarine USS Panfret (SS-391). As Assistant Engineer, responsible for supervision, maintenance, and operation of all diesel propulsion, electrical and supporting systens. As Smply Officer, responsible for shipboard food service and repair parts manager - t.
Supervised 1 officer and 19 enlisted personnel. Conpleted one xtended deployment and one regular shipyard overhaul. Qualified in Suhnarines.
February 1969 - October 1971: Assistant Weapons Officer (17 months) and Weapons Officer (15 rronths) aboard the Nuclear Polaris sutmarine USS Nathan Hale (SSBN 623 (Blue)). Responsible for supervision, maintenance, and operation of missile and torpedo fire control, launching and supporting mechanical, electrical and electronic systens. Supervised two officer and 37 i' enlisted personnel. Coupleted final phase of shipyard overhaul, post overhaul shakedown trials and four deterrent patrols. Received Meritorious thit Cm mendation Medal. Capleted Basic Engineering Qualification (systems) portion of Engineering Officer of the Watch (12XM) watch station.
October 1971 - November 1973: Main Propulsion Assistant and Acting Engineer Officer (3 months) aboard the nuclear attack sutmarine USS Flasher (SSN 613).
Responsible for supervision, maintenance, and operation of mechanical reactor plant and engine roan systens, including reactor fluid primary systens, main engines, turbine generators and associated secondary systens.
Supervised 21 enlisted personnel. Cmpleted two extended deployments.
Received Navy Achievenent Medal. Qualified as Engineering Officer of tTe watch and as nuclear subrurine Chief Engineer.
4 p -r -r- - -
,,.r,-,-.__ - - . ,._.w.r. - , . _ . , - -. -
_ , . . , - - , , . . , , , - - , , - - - - ,.--.-r--
February 1974 - June 1975: Navigator / Operations Officer aboard the rnaclear attack subnarine USS Billfish (SSN 676). Responsible for supervision, maintenance, and operation of inertial, celestial and radio electronic navigation systens'. Supervised I officer and 16 enlisted personnel.
Coordinated departmental and shipboard training, including nuclear operator training, while in operation and overhaul status. Planned and conducted several extensive developments.
Since August 1975, I have been an enployee of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Region I. Prior to the 311-2 Accident , I was the principal (project) reactor inspector assigned to inspect reactors in operation, including Yankee Rowe, Maine Yankee, and R.E. Ginna (concurrently),
Calvert Clif fs Units 1 and 2, and 'Ihree Mile Island thits 1 and 2.
Following the 311-2 Accident, I was initially involved with the Region I incident response activities at tha regional office. Frcm March 29, 1979 until January 31, 1980, I was assigned to perfonn various functions primarily at the 31I site. My initial dutles were 311-2 shift survei1 lance inspection; liaison support for NRC Ccmnissioners, Congressnen, investigating groups and ccrmissions, and foreign represent atives; providing testimony ior investigations; and, 311-2 reactive site inspectlon. Frcm February 1,1980 until May 29, 1982, I was assigned as the Senior Resident Inspector for 311-1.
Frcrn May 30, 1984, until pr I have been assigned as the Reactor Licensing Engineer, Divisic setor Projects, Region I.
~
l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE In the Matter of )
)
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES ) Docket No. 50-289 (CH) l NUCLEAR )
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, )
Unit No.1) )
~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSES TO MR. HUSTED'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCU-MENTS TO NRC STAFF" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by express mail or, as indicated by an asterisk, by deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 23rd day of April,1986:
- Morton B. Margulies
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Administrative Law Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuc' ear Regulatory Commission Louise Bradford Washington, DC 20555 Three Mile Island A L.rt 1011 Green Street
- Docketing and Service Section Harrisburg, PA 17120 Office of the Secretary i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Michael W. Maupin, Esq. Washington, DC 20555 Maria C. IIensley, Esq.
Ilunton & Williams )
10th Floor 1 707 East Main Street Richmond, VA 23212 Deborah B. Bauser, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge y 1800 M Street, NW I Washington, DC 20036 /' ,- f
/
f WUf &$
G rg .J nson Couns for RC Staff i