ML20215F014

Transcript of 850731 Investigation Interview of H Schmidt in Dallas,Tx.Pp 1-15

ML20215F014
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	07/31/1985
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
To:
Shared Package
ML20214X072	List: ML20214X069 ML20215E902 ML20215E916 ML20215E932 ML20215E945 ML20215E966 ML20215E976 ML20215E984 ML20215E991 ML20215E999 ML20215F005 ML20215F014 ML20215F027 ML20215F054 ML20215F072 ML20215F090 ML20215F099 ML20215F105 ML20215F114 ML20215F125 ML20215F138 ML20215F149 ML20215F171 ML20215F211 ML20215F220 ML20215F234 ML20215F242
References
NUDOCS 8610160052
Download: ML20215F014 (17)

Text

-

= ;--

=---

--+";7-E. . $2 A&-s% '.t-d.':. 21= ..': . 2:?'"i OR G hAL ~

/

UNnED STATES -

NUCLEAR REG'ULATOI(Y CO.MMISSION

.

. . =

i

. IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: - -

UFFICE OF INVESTIGATION  : - 'i INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW MR. HOMER SCHMIDT -

,d,.V8) .

I.ohTION: DALLAS., TEXAS PAGES: 1 - 15 DATE: July 31, 1985

• ~ * =

ee a nT?$ T*

As-FEDERAL REPORir.xS, INC.

.. . Off.:ialReporters

% .5 444 North CapitelStreet 8610160052 860922 Washingtorr, D.C. 20001 PDR ADOCK 05000445 g2g.3g A PDR . EIBIBIT 11 NATIONWIDE COV'ERACE -

c.,,,__.

. = _ . . . . _ _ . -

.l . ::;=,.w,,&;,a.- >n- -. . . eyggaa.za.g.4gg.,~,-gn.

c, ..e. L ,

- - -- ~

a-'~~~--~'---:.

1 1

BEFORE THE -

. 2 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3

-OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION 4

5 - -

6 .

7 -

8 9

INTERVIEW OF 10 HOMER SCHMIDT 11

.l 12

.P. . ..

&s -:-) 14

, 15 16

, 17 18 .

19 20 21 22 REPORTER: Cynthia Clay -

23 DATE: July 31, 1985 e

24

,gy .

25

'N l

. 5 -

( }

8

- ., - . _. - - .,. w . - .c. .. . .. l;,, m A- A m .z a gn ; u . A ~r.c. n - .

- =.- , y z

, y ; n ,+ .

2 1

PRggggDINES ,

2 MR. GRIFFIN: For the record, this is an -

3 interview of Homer Schmidt, S-c-h-m-i-d-t, who is employed 4

by TUGCO? Is that correct?

,MR. SCEMIDT: Yes.

8 "

The location of this Interview

~

. . .. MR. GRIFFIN:

is 2001 Bryan Tower, Dal'las, Texas. The date is July 31, a

1985, and it is 2:28 p.m.

.Present at this interview are Homer Schmidt-

' 10 and his personal represen'tative, Robert Wooldridge. In 11 behalf of the NRC, myself, H. Brooks Griffin.

12 l -

This interview is being transcribed by a .

13 .

court reporter. -

!...} ,.

i 34 s.. o .

Homer, I need you to rise and raise your I 15 l right hand. I want to swear you to the contents of your testimony.

. Whereupon, 18 HOMER SCHMIDT,

~

19 having first been duly sworn to tell the truth, the whole

" truth and nothing but the truth, testified on his oath as 21 follows:

22 EXAMINATION 23

• BY MR. GRIFFIN:

24 Q. Before we start, I want to ask you and Bob 9.' ,

5 '

some questions about the nature of your relationship for ~:h;.,

l ' -

. , - - e 4n _.,-.----,,.,_,vn,-.,,,wa-,,_.n___, _,-_n,_,,_,,__-,_,,-_.,,.,,we . . , _ . , . - , . - , . , . , , , , - ~,

r - --

-- , - _ . _ - , ._.. w - m _ m m . , . . err:2:cs::vc:::.umm 3

1 purposes of this interview.

2 First, let me tell you, Ecmer, that under 3

the NRC policy you have the right to be represented. It 4

can be anybody, it can be a friend or relative or something.

5

,,_Ja. this instance, I presume that you have reque's ted Mr. .

e

, Wooldridge to represent you for purposes of this interview; 7

• is that' correct? .

8 A That's correct.

. 8

. O And you are aware that Mr. Wooldridge repre-10 sents parties other than yourself in consideration of this 11 investigation being performed by the NRC7.

12 A Yes.

13

(.q. . . . . . .

O Are you confident that Mr. Wooldridge is U 14 here representing you rather than the company?

15 A Yes.

16 Q, I'f a conflict were to arise between your 17

.best. interest and Mr. Wooldridge's, have you had any conver-18 .

sations with him as to how this predicament would be ,

18 handled?

20 A

, .. Well, not on that specific kind of a conflict.

21 MR. GRIFFIN: Mr. Wooldridge, if such a 22 conflict as I described were to arise, w'at h would be your 23 course of action?

24 MR. WOOLDRIDGE: I don't know of any conflict

(* 7,.,

25 that would arise between Mr. Schmidt and myself.

m.-. ;;,w.av.a. z + m .,-.__. m .m. m :.m .._. % .g.ue A m .3,cr.g n m agrn e %.w;.ws a.3_.rMJ, N _ T,'J' .

. . ... ... ....s.. . ._. . ... . 7.. . . .. ,. .. . . .. . . . . . .

4 1 -

MR. GRIFFIN: But I'm talking about--

2 ,, -

MR.WOOLDRkDG :

It's a possibility, although

. ,/

3 I do not think it exists, but there's a possibility that 4

there might be a conflict arise between Mr. Schmidt and 5

. oder' parties that I represent, and that matter has been 6

discussed with Mr. Schmidt.

7 MR. GRIFFIN: All right.

l 8

BY MR. GRIFFIN:

8 G Homer, you're presently the Manager, Nuclear .  !

10 Services for TUGCO; is that correct?

11 A Yes.

. 12 . .

O How long have you been in that particular 13 position? . ..

p .

14 A Since about 1977, I believe, or '78.

15 ^2 0 And you've been at TUGCO or a Utility employee 16 for approximately 32 years?

17 A Yes.

18 -

G In your present position-- Let me restate .

18 that.

. 20 We're here today to discuss the 1978 21 Management Analysis Company Report that surfaced in a 22 prudence audit which I think you were involved with.

23 At the time you were conducting this prudence 24 audit, was your title the same as it is now?

25 A. Yes. h.

. _ . . .. , . -n na_. . ____..

g._4. c.

.; q :!;

5

,1 0 Who did you report to at, that time? Who j 2 was your supervisor? -

3 A. Mike Spence.

4 0 Okay. What was your relationship with Lew 5

Fikar at that time?

Did you work together? .

6 L Which time? -

7 4 At the time of the audit. - -

a MR. WOOLDRIDGE: It's going on now; so.you 9

understand, the prudence audit is going ori now.

10 MR. GRIFFIN: It continues?

11 -

MR. WOOLDRIDGE: Yes. It's still--it's in 12 the middle of it.

13 MR. GRIFFIN: Okay.

(O' 14 MR. WOOLDRIDGE: That!'s why-- I'm just 15 '

trying to ciarify it for you.

I 16 MR. GRIFFIN: Well, as you already know, '

" Bob, I'm feeling my way through this.

I don't know what ta

~ Homer does and I' don't know what his relationship is to 18 Fikar. I thought he worked under Fikar.

20 MR. WOOLDRIDGE: Well, he did.

21 MR. GRIFFIN: When Fikar was here.

. 22 .

MR. WOOLDRIDGE: Well, ask him to explain--

23 MR. GRIFFIN: Okay.

24

. M2. WOOLDRIDGE: --what his job title stands

' .~.~

- 25 for. Maybe that will clear it up.

O

! ) .

t.

M b* a * - mw _ . . . W

~ ~

-m _

m h u w - . _ -;. m .u m_. m m _ m m:= n l, '

, s; ys . . .c .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . , .

6 i

BY MR. GRIFFIN:

2 G Would you explain to me'what your-relationshi-is in relation to the prudence audit and Mr. Fikar and the 4

licensing section?

8 A Yes. As manager of Nuclear Services, I,

-8

_ previously reported t;o Fikar until about last September.

7 At.that point then I reported directly to Spence in parallel a

a with Fikar. And my functions changed somewhat; that's when the prudency audit got underway.

'O 4 What was your relationship with Cresap, McCormick and Paget, the consultants?

..-9 '

A They are a consulting firm conducting th*e ,

-l 13 audit for Texas Utilities Electric Company. - s. -.-:4.- #-

l

'- 14 S Did you liave oversight or did you work with ,

t$ese people during the ongoing prudence audit?

1 A. Well, would yo6 repeat that question? I'm I

! 17 not sure I understand....

18 t i G I don't know how to explore these. I know 1 19 the prudence audit is going on. I know you're somehow l

'O involved. The consultant is somehow involved, too. I'm 21 trying to explore what that relationship is, l 22 3, 7,m project director for our company, and 23 I have an interface with Cresap as an outside independent 24 .

l consultant. .

25 '.

, G ,

Are they working for you, then? ~

8 ,

I

i 2,.n-mw ~ . = . v . . -..c.~ .u mme u. ww:-:. m.fw> --: r.w1?11.i.Mw.v80. 'is.'u;ML 7

1 A No, the contract's not with me.

2

, 4 Do you review their work?

.~

3

. A Not so far.

4 0 When did you first become aware of the 3

existence of the 1978 MAC Report?

8

"A As I recall, it was about the second week of 7

May '85, and I don't remember the date.

8 O Could you give me a narrative, explain the 8

series of events that led you to become aware of the 10 existence of it, what you know of your personal knowledge?

A one of the people that was working for me 12 brought it to my attention. -

13 g 4 Who was.that? . .

\h 14 A That was Andy Jones, I believe.

15 G What did Jones tell you?

16 A He said, as I recall, he said, "Here's a

'7 MAC Report that I think you might want to read."

'8 G Did he tell you in what context he thought l'

you should read it? ,

20 _.

A Well, that's not unusual because a lot of I

21 the information we provide to cresap I have reviewed just 22 as project director. So this was one he wasn't sure about.

l 23 l 0 Did Jones think that this was--could have

, . , , some impact on the prudence audit, that it was an item i

25 O  ; that might impact on the prudence audit? .

t 8

• r m

.~ _ a .. . . .a. w .-< o

, 8 1

. A It was in response to a request from'Cresap 2

, for general information about the nature of that report. .

s

' 3 That was one of several.

B .

Did you and Jones have any conversation about 5

the:MAC Report in relation to the Intervenor's 1 80. request?

e '

L Not that I recall.

7 '

g Were you aware at that time that you talked 8

with Jones tha~t there had been a request in 1980 that was in this area?

' 10 L Not specifically.

11 0 Did John provide you--he then provided you 12 with a copy of this MAC Report? - -

13

, , A Yes. Either he or Tom Rose. q -

,4,y.

g . -

14 '

S Did you read the report?

15 A 'Yas. '

16 0 What did you do with it?

17

. A I either gave it to Mr. Wooldridge or I 18 suggested that either Tom or Jones give it to Wooldridge.

19 0 What wts your thinking in providing it to 20 Wooldridge?

21 A I felt he should review it as he does several 22 items that we provide to the auditors, just as a matter of 1

23 course.

24 0 But fo'r what purpose? Why did you think ..

25 he needed to see this particular document? Y.

4

g. I' 4 . .

e-- - . - . - - - - - - - . - - - . - . - , - - . , . . , , . . . . - _ . , . _ . , - - _ - - . - , . . - _ , . , . . - - , . - - - . - . . - . - - - - - ,

3 = .-- , y 3.g. _ . - m;4 93: gig Lwgucg y :.xq' st;.g t,y M Z W [ W-.99.%C:2

~ - . , = .

9 1

A Well, I guess I didn't know whether it would 2

have any relationship to the ongoing licensing proceedings Cr' ~ 3 or not, and I felt like he ought to just review from that 4 -

-standpoint.

5

• 0 Was it also your thinking that it might impact upon the prtidence audit?

7 .

A I don't--well, possibly.

8 .

G So you were just seeking his counsel?

0 A Yes. -

10 .

G Homer, did you work with--were you working 11 with_or for Mr. Fikar back in 1980 when the Intervenor made 12 the request for information in this area? -

13 C3\ A I believe so. .

~

('b N- 14

, G Were,you involved in formulating the 15 Applicant's or TUGCO's response to the Intervenor's request?

16 A Response was formulated under my general 17, guidance and direction.

18 19 G Did you have any input into that response?

. A Not that I recall. I did review it.

20 G Do you solicit input from other Utility 21 employees as to what might be produceable under that request?

22 A Well, normally that kind of--we get a lot 23 24 of requests for discovery, and this was one of many; and p - l- normally our process was that some of the people who worked g-for me would handle that, any request for discovery they'd

g. 8 t

, J .._ _ -

- ~ ~ v= -- w =* M "

.y__. . ; y ..,

..y:a... ..:..:_. . - .- - -

. - ~

w .. . .. - .z. .

~

10 1

5 review it and send it to where they felt they needed to get the answer', ahd get the answer ce piled,-and then I'd 2

3 review the results.

4 4

At the time, did you review the results.of 5

this specific Intervenor request?

a g. g think I did, yes.

7 4 At the time that you were reviewing the a -

Applicant's respons's in 1980, were you aware of the 8

existence of the 1978 MAC Report?. -

" A No, I wasn't.

G Do you recall whether the information pro-12 vided to you that was to be the Applicant's response to the .

1

,.. . 3. ,,Intervenor.'s request, were you aware whether it contained

(.$$.>

1 I" Qy or listed the MAC Report as a reportable item? ,

l 15 A I don't recall whether it did or not.

16

, G Were you involved in any discussions with U

Fikar or any other member of licensing or any other member la of the Utility with reference to whether this 1978 MAC Report should be included in that response?

20

. . . . A I don't recall that I had any conversations 21 about that with anybody, because I wasn't aware of the 22 report to start with, and I don't recall any discussion on 23 it.

24 G When was the first time you became aware .y 2s of the existence of this 1978 MAC Report? ~

,  ! l . .

t

-,w,-,w-v-e-----w------D =-"M**"'-P" ' ' ~ " ' ' * ~ * * ' ' " ' " ' * - ~ ^ ~ ~ ~

7 t

- - . . . - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - .

- g - - ~~ -- - - -- - --

~ - a--- xmum .-_x.t.n u:,a 2.Sv e -

---

~; - -- -

--~~-9--

' 11

. A It was about the second week of Ray '85.

-.- 2 O

Back in '78J ou weren't-aware-- -

3 A No, I wasn't.

4 G --this review was being performed onsite g -

and in corpo' rate headquarters, that MAC-had received this s -

- contract to perform the audit? ,

7 A No. I was not.

8 G When TUGCO's response was forwarded to 9

the ASLB and- the Intervenor in 1980 in response to an 10 Intervenor's discovery request, did you have any kind of 11 sign-off or okay for that response?

12 ,

A I believe I did, yes, which would not have 13 -

f,N, been unusual. ~

- ..- 14 G Okay, I want to ask you to speculate for , ,

15 a minhte. In hindsight, should or woul'd this NAC Report 16 have been sent to you for your review and your' decision 17 18 as to whether it should be included with the discovery request?

19 A I don't rea11y'know. It's difficult to put myself back in that time frame, and not being aware of it, 1 21 l

it's hard for me to speculate in that time frame.

22

, O Do you know who assembled the final list 23 within TUGCo as to what would be produced under this 24

. , - particular request?

<  ; 25 V A I think it was,one of the people who worked a . .

- I . , .

us y

^ n

-- .. .. cm - u w m aw=- - " " ' " * * * '

u..-

^

....... -.<.. .p-; . .- ----.. -.- --- . " " . - - :~ ui - -- -

12

' ~

'for me.

• 2

, G Who was that? -

.. j 3

A Probably John Marshall, and I don't recall 4

any specifics.

5

, ,. S I.et me ask you one more time; at the time

'8 that the Utility was responding to this request, you have-7 no recollection of any discussions in relation to the 1978 '

~

s MAC Report? ~

9 A This was the response in 19807 .

10 0 Yes.

A I quite honestly do not recall any discussion 1

12 about the MAC Report. Was that your question?- -

13 .

S Yes.. 'N

'd (y, t

A I do not recall any discussion about that at i

all.

S What is your relationship at the time-- Well,

.I'll start over. .

Is At the time the MAC Report was discovered 19

. - during the prudence audit, what was your relationship with 20 Jones and Rose?

21 A They both worked for me.

22 4 They were TUGCO employees?

23 A Jones is a TUSI employee, and Rose is a

'24 TUGCO employee. , , ,

25 '

G Do youi know who found the MAC Report, who

.) . I tl l

,,,,__.___--.-ne,----~-r --~~A- - " '

.. g :

n-3 -- , .n ;,  ; p,.3_%.p,q_WF '

13

- ' discovered it? .

2 fj A I don't know for sure.

.N ' 3 MR. GRIFFIN: Let's go off the record for

. 4 a minute.

5 '

, IDiscussion off the record.] .

8

,. MR. GRIFFIN: Back on the record.

BY MR. GRIFFIN:

a O Homer, at the time that TUGCO was assembling 9

the response to the Intervenor's request, Mr. John Marshall 10 worked for you; is that corpect?

11 A Yes, that's correct.

12

., ,, G And I think you testified earlier that to

• t$9h, .....

14 , .the best of your recollection Marshall was responsible - -

Q3-

, for assembling the information that was to be included 16 in the response; is that right?

A That's correct.

17 18

' ...-' O' Homer, other than what we've already discussed

., ,, here, do you know of any meetings or discussions, reviews,

, 20 anything, that reflect upon the Applicant's decision to 21 initially--back in 1980, to withhold the MAC-Report from the:Intervenor's request? or do you have information on 22 any area or topic that I have not asked you about in 23 24 relation to the discovery and the decision to produce the

,f r ., MAC Report? I'm asking you a big question here, just to 25 G,

give,you an opportunity to volunteer any information that a t-

- a de_- .- ___.

. - ....... e.:...-. - . . w-awa- .a i. . r:rMtt- MJ.rN

.r. . . :h.

14 1

might shed some light on the thinking, the reasoning 2 behind failure to produce and the events surrounding a

3 the production of the MAC Report. .

. A Well, in 1980, as I've said, I was, not aware

- -5 that there was a MAC Report, and I was not aware--I do not a .

recall any discussion related to that or anything being 7

withheld.

• a .. .

And the report was discovered, to my knowledge ,

8 the first time I.was aware of it, was in about the second 10 week of May, and it was discovered in compiling some 11 information in res' ponse to questions from the atiditor for

. 12 the prudency audit.

That was my first knowledge of.it. .

13 O And that's the extent of your knowledge on '[. ..

l' the subject? -

n 15 g y,,,

~

16

. .. . O Homer, were yo"u interviewed by Mr. Wooldridge

- 17 l

.- as part of his inquiry into this same--these same concerns?

18 i

A Yes, I was, 18

. . . . G ,

Was your testimony to him, did it encompass j 20 the same areas that I've asked you? .

4 21

.. A Yes, as I recall, essentially the same 22 ~

kind of scope.

23 Hemer, have I threatened you in any manner, 24 offered you any reward in return for this statement? .

-)

j A No.

8 1 ,'

, I h

. . _ . . . . - , = . . . . . .

-- , = a. . u ~u-en& :.mmrnwn ;n , uscazs~ :RQfTs \

1

. 15 1

O Have you given this statement freely and v.oluntarily?

A Yes.

4 S Is there anything further you would care to

~

add to the record? .

~

6 -

. A - No .

y .

• MR. GRIFFIN: All right. I thank you very

. much. -

e' 9

[Whereupon, at 2:55 p.m., the interview 10

• was concluded.]

11 12 13 14 15 r

16 17 18 19

• 21 22 23 24

/ 25 h

m . : . m. ..

-_m. . . . _ _ --

N-n 2

- . :mmr.-~ sos.nu..--~<' -

"~ '~ ~ ' ' -

o

., ,7 ._ ,

. . NO PAGE MbMBER CERTI.FICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER . . -

s -

-~

_/

This is to certify that the attached proceedidgs before the UNITED STiTES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the J

matter of . -

NAME OF PROCEEDING:

OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION . .

INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW .

MR. HOMER SCEMIDT ,

I DOCKET NO.: , ,

PLACE: . DALLAS, TEXAS

~

1. .

• s ',

DATE: . ..

July 31, 1985 4' " *

~ '

were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ,

-- ~~

(sint -),i', L E l .

(TYPEDhCynthia Clay

~

Official Reporter Reporter's Affiliatien i

i Allied Stenotype Reporters 906 Texas Bldg.

Fort Worth, Texas 76.102

- ~

l 1

-. . . _ _ , - , _ . _ _ . . _ _ - _ , _ . _ _ _ . . . _ , , _ . - -. . < ..,,.,__-,_,-,,_...,-.,.__,_,.,,__.,_,e..-. .,,.,,.__.,_.,,c.,.-_r-. _ , . . , . , . _ , . _ . _ . , , . , , . . , _ , _ , _ _ .