ML20199H135
Text
s_____
___.___ms.
.y.
nn unT nisclost gj.,
~__ _
h 2
3 4
5 t
6 7
8
,. t. ;4
,, a
.s
- ,. ;t, 9
- t.,., ;
~'
10 i
11 l
\\
12 NUCLEAR REGULATOR'? CO!!lISSION
" ""' ^' """" ^'i ^"
C.'
14 15 I
16 i
i
!~
17
)
1
...~
18
~
19 i.
i 20 i
21 i
22
'23 f
+
24 s
h e.:
25 Taken by:
Carmen Gooden, CSR, RPR SeptemberJ17,,.:.19 8 4, f
~
8607030157 860623 N'
PDR FOIA CARDE86-A-18 PDR 265-3441
- c nM. e.. ~
~ mn.msw me e-on.a smm n.
. w,.m
. n m a s.- s. w
- e DO NOT DisCtOSE 1
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA O
2 sucz,,,,, cuts,om coms,sszo, 3
TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM 4
5 6
TECHNICAL INTERVIEW 8
9
' Monday, September 17, 1984 Gr'anbury, Texas 10 This' interview was commenced at 8 :00 p.m.
11 12 PRESENT:
9 i3 V
MS. R.'C.
TANG I4 Technical Review Team Staff Nuclear Regulatory Commission 15 Washington, D.
C. 20555 -
16 MR. THOMAS CURRY' Techhical Reviewer 17
- Comanche Peak Technical' Review Team-j 18 MR. HERB'LIVERMORE
. Technical Revie'w Team Staff
,j 19 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
20 WITNESS "Y" g.
~
g
..t 21 22 O
~
I 25 2
~
4
l D0..NOT DISCLO$$
2 I
MS. TANG:
For the. record, this.is an interview of a
Witness "Y" at Granbury, Texas.
The purpose is to provide 3
Witness "Y" an opportunity to make some staterrents regard-4 ing the fuel transfer canal at Comanche Peak.
Present at 3
this interview are Mr. Tom Curry, a Technical Reviewer of 0
the NRC's' Comanche Peak Technical Review Team; myself, R.
I t
C. Tang, aiso with -the NRC; and Mr. Herb Livermore, Group 8
Leader--QA-QC Group Leader, Technical Review Team.
9 You tell us what'you want to say, then we'll ask 10 you' questions later, as you go along.
This will be locked 11 in our safe, sanitized before anybody gets a page.
For I2 instance, Tom, when he goes on to review, he'll get a U i sanitized page.
w 5
16 stainless steel liner in the transfer canal would start to
. be. reworked.
It had been quite inactive for some time, and 17
~
8 18 the Brown and Root quality control organization had been 4
19 responsible for it previous to that.
I began to staff up i
20 and picked up the travelers, the information.on the stain-y v
i 21 less steel liner at that time to review it.,
I found many 22 missing hold points.
I was quite concerned.
I.went to my 23 supervisor, expressed my concerns,to him,.
24 asked him if,he could get up with the Brown and' Root organi-25 zation.
DO NfYT"Bronsm e w.
wswwag
BlNorDmajjjj e
1 I
Now, you thoroughly understand at that time we
, d, 2
had what you call the Brown and Root QA-OC organization 3
which is the ASME organization.
You have the TUGCo non-4 ASME QA-QC organization which'does all inspections for non-5 ASME items, items such'as AWS, IEEE,whakeverstandardsare 6
involved.
i 7
Again, as I informed my supervisor, we had many
~ ~... :
8 missing hold points from what'I could see in documentation.
9 He said he'd get up with who was the Brown 10 and Root' supervisor, and see what we could do.
I was con-11 tacted a few days later, and'a gentleman by the name of s
12
-,ame on to the night shift to assist me to see c
[
P
.g, what he could do to clear up these items.
He basically 14 asked me what I felt he ought to do to clear it up.
I said, 15 "Take care of the hold points that are missing that you can 16 what you can't, let's identify it on a non-conformance and 8
17
, get Engineering evaluation, Quality Engineering concurrence j
18 and we can move on with this thing."
l j
19 He provided a review cycle and basically--I under-I i
20 stand somewhere in this review cycle where he was getting--
l 21 trying to clear up points; we had some allegations that 22 were made at that point, but I won't address that because 23 I really don't have any information that I can give you on s
24 that.
~
25 I understand that during testimony given b'y
. DO NOT Djgl0$R
- ~.-
a
aem e a
a & & 44 6 e a. -&.
.4 g
.m 9uf ra s n W wz r
JM wt ust ;&fA A
4 Sou A aw f h $.
J fes &
M nJ&~
4 y nnn s,
4%
c4X.
& Q
wL v" n
w rLef 4:.
w oAm
/s.
sp 4.
c 1
y%
wm M.
m.- Q
_c L,s < s
- . m
- W Q
u-L.
727-L 4N@
i w%
v.
9
- ~ 'A/6 W
.m-r-
-r.
..r
DO NOT DISCLO$E 4
h 2
tions they kept referring to the fact that all this was 3
basically _
idea and we were only doing what he told us 4
to do; that's incorrect.
They acted on their own on anything 5
that they performed.
6 It took and his group a week, week and-7 a-half or so to revi.ew, to get through with this review 8
cyc15.'6n"the tra'vei'ers anil ti:y to clear up what he could.
?,
9 I was informed that he had cleared.it up, and I was
/
d 10 delivered boxes of travelers, little blue folders, 11 travelers.
12 I took a look at it again.
I really wasn't
.3 satisfied with what I had seen, and I issued a non-14 conformance report, which I have a copy of here.
You'll find that that's co-authored by a gentleman on the day 16 shift by the name of
' The secuence of events
-A i
37 here started approximately the 1st of March', and you'11 l
18 notice the date on that non-conformance is around the 17th i
19 of March.
I basically issued it, said I'd performed a I
i l
i 20 random review of travelers that I had, and I felt that there d
was missing hold points.
What I was doing was identif'ing 21 y
1 i a pr blem for Engineering evaluation and Quality Engineerinc 22 23 concurrence on what they decided to do with it.
I understand in the hearings that Judge Bloch 24 O
e uld not understand why it took 17 days after the first 25 DO NOT DISCLOM!
. - ~
w
~ - -
' ----~~-a----
'^' N'*(WSCLoSi e
1 initial discovery that we're missing hold points for some-2 one to issue a non-conformance report, because thht's the 3
sequence of events; it took that long to get back to my 4
supervision so I could 'take a look at it.
Like I said, I 5
wasn't really satisfied.with it, so I issued a non-c.
6 conformance r'eport.
You'll notice that there's been hold 7
~
tags applied, so basically we were shut down.
We were 8
performing no work at any point in time here.
In this 9
sequence of events we performed no, work on the night shift..
10 No supervisors under my supervision performed any inspections 11 on any part of the' stainless steel liner in the transfer 12 canal, fuel canal, any part of it.
13 g
MR. LIVERMORE:
During this hold time, they had all the:
14 paperwork, had all the paperwork?
]liad all the paperwork. N 13 WITNESS "Y":
16
~
is basically
~right-hand man.
He's a 17
_ I'm sure you've run across him out there.
j 18 It took them from about the 1st of March, first 4j 19 part of March, up until about the 15th or so, and then for i
i 20 me to look at it about the 17th before I could issue the b
21 non-conformance report.
22 I understarid that also in the hearings that it was i
23 stated that, "You know, there's really no problem with this; 24 this;f could accept that; he oU i
25 directed us as to what we should have done."
Well, that's NOIhlbd h
esem e il-A
+
.y Ams.a.mt.h.m.. -
t b t a6 r pgv
/ [y,,
l 3
'wm a
gg g,g g
.)
f, 6
1 the misdirection that I'm talking about.
I didn't direct 4
h 2
anybody.,
works for Brown and Root.
He does his 3
own ' thing.
I made suggestions to him that he clear up his 4
4 hold points and wha't he couldn't, issue a non-conformance 5
on it.
.... \\;
~
l 6
- 35. TANG:
Do you know if that's the first time your 4
1 7
name was mdntioned?
8 WITNESS "Y":
I've been told that the NRC, because
)
9 of these allegations on this same thing, has investigated J
d 10 and had testimony and depositions given out there.
I never j
11 could understand why I wasn't contacted when people kept 12 using my name in those depositions, making statements, "Well m
,g told us what to do; approvedit/
'did this."
' l 14 I never did know that I gave 15 or anybody else any directions.
16 We sat inactive for a couple--another week, 3
l, 17;,
, basically because we had a hold tag on them.
I wouldn't fi 18 proceed until I got some kind of direction from Engineering.
i*
4 4
d 19 After much persistence--these are copies, by the way--from i
20 crafts, I wrote a memo to a~
who is the 21 non-ASME Level Three Quality Engineer responsible.
You'll
.22 see his name on the bottom of that NCR, I
23 basically said this:
would you please leave me l
94 some information on the status of the stainless steel liner O
seam" welds.
The craft is holding off working same until 25 bn v '...,
O%*
T
7
> e. _ __
I seam weld travelers are cleared and abe leh b !, % Eiiks, h
_ L A
2 It's dated /
- I'm still the hold at 3 '!5-83.
3
~You can reitd, answer to me.
4 MR. LIVERMORE:
I checked with 5
MS. TANG:. Do you want to read it for us because you 6
would know--
7 WITNESS "Y":
the[
is what 8
he's saying.
That's all we knew him by.
9 MS. TANG:
Do you want to just read this, and then the 10 reply?
i f
i 11 WITNESS "Y":
' --aga n re err ng to g "would you please leave me some information on the 12 i
C status of the stainless steel liner sean wcld.
Craft is
- ~
v i
14 holding off working same"--basically they were holding off I
S because I wouldn't let them proceed- "until scam weld i
l 16 travelers are cleared and are released."
What I'm talking j~~
17 about " cleared.and released" is I basically had a hold on l
18 them for non-conformance.
r
~
19 Reply:
I checked with
(
m -
w
/
1
=
20 and he writes down here
'and that's l
j.
21 basically who's responsible for the work on the liners,
~
22 the millwright- "and
--he's, I believe, a 23 and he's got down behind him 24 Quality Engineer for the ASME group in parentheses behind 25 him,'giving his title- "and they said that a review was lh ag_'
^
--h--
"d f,p
-Y
%N W +9'gE4
c
% NOT Diger nep
(
I performed,of all travelers, that they had started work on Q,o 2
them,"--that's basically Brown and Root and that's all we're 3
interested in- "and the ones listed on the NCR"--which you'll 4
see on page 2, that's my handwriting on page 2 where I just 5
took a random and said, " Hey, here's a bunch of them"; why 6
I did thati and why I said random is I think I established 7
a trend with that many; as you can see on page 2 I estab-S lished a trend that we did have some problems.
9 MS. TANG:
I want to mention a number.
Identify the 10 NCR for the record.
l 11 WITNESS "Y":
It's NCR--I don't have to look at it; I l
gotitmemorised[
Said "that a review was per-12 formed of all travelers, that they had started work on g
f them, and the ones listed on the MCR are all the travelers 14 i
15 that had a QC hold point missed." The NCR has been revised--
this NCR had a bunch of rev one's--without my knowledge 16 l
3 i.
1.
. to remove the word random in the non-conforming condition.
{
18 MS. TANG:
This is the revision.
I d
19 WITNESS "Y":
No, ma'am, that's the original.
I i
20 MS *. TANG:
A copy of the original.
1 i
gg WITNESS "Y":
The NCR as you would read it is Rev 1 1
22 n w and would say--the word " random" would be removed and 23 it w uld say "a review has been performed."
MS. TANG:
And the date of the note?
g
(
WITNESS "Y":
His answer is dated 3--it looks like it's 25
- t g
- -.~ --
=
.-n
_ _ _, = = _
. - -.a
.D0 NOT D!n6LSsE O
I 3-25-83 also.
You got to remember I wrote this at maybe 2
3 or 4:00 in the morning, and he answered me back the same 3
day.
You'll notice the initials i
.stch the initials 4
that ut down next to the closure there on the 5
1Do they appear to be the same?
\\
6 MR. LIVERMORE:
Yes, the initials ppear to be 7
the same on the NCR as.the note.
l i
8 TWITNESS "Y":
My basic-concern was that possibly some-
~
9
' thing was misdirected.
Mr. Block slidn't understand the 10 delay of so many days.
Now I'm going to tell you the rest
}
11 of the story.
12 Based on the non-conformance, I
13 and I and the[
ad a-heated discussion on the g
14 fact that he would revise an NCR of mine without my knowledge.
15 W
days later the stainless steel liner program was removed!
16 from the night shift, much to my--I felt real happy about i
j 17 that.
I was put directly under the supervision of i
l 18 who was th~
,at that time, and con-19 tinued under his direct supervision until he was removed
! i 20 from his position.
J h
MR. LIVERMORE:
Prior.to that,'what was your chain 21 of command?
Weren't you under anyway but on a--
WITNESS "Y":
Yes, but I was on the night shift, 23 basica11y 'as the night shift supervisor reporting back to 24 N and I fe t quite relieved of'the fact that the liner 23
.' DD ROT DISCLOS@
,r 1
- . n ar
DO NOT D.!SCLOSE I
was going back to the day shift.
I had no Quality Engi-2 neering support on night shift.
I was basically a one-man 3
show:
Quality Engineering, supervision, whatever else had tobedoneknallthedisciplines, anything that was going 4,
5 on.
,[
6 MR. LIVERMORE:
And y,ou.. reported to at that C'
7 time?
8
. WITNESS "Y":
I reported to directly back to 9
.. ~-
10 MR. LIVERMORE:
When you went on days, you went back.
ondaysandyoustillreported[t]
{
j; 12 WITNESS "Y":
Ninety da'ys later I was removed as_
l I3 g
},;
MR. LIVERMORE:
Oh, you were?
NITNESS "Y":
I went to day shift as a[
15 16 Conduit Support Supervisor; 120 days after that I was g--
g7 removed from that supervisory position.
I am presently a 18 MR. LIVERMORE:
So sequence of events after this note, gg i
y u say den you talked wM--who was t.Ms fellow that 20 J
wrote the note here?
g 1
s m
WITNESS "Y":
MR. tivERMORE: w and you.had a heatea discussior.
23 o
, with g ahoue his changing your NCR.
xnd shore 1y after that.tlien, you were relieved of your job,
)
5 DQ ROT DISCLOS$
00 NOT D!SCLOSE' 11 1
WITNESS "Y":
Within 90 days, yes.
That was about gamme 2
'3 MR. LIVERMORE:
Did they give you a reason why?
4 WITNESS "Y":
I don' t want to put the connotation that 5
it would have anything to do with this, no.
Basically I'd 6
been on it for two years.
You've got to remember also that 7
I was involved 'in protective coatings all through that 8
situation, through the NPC investigation where they found--
9 when they had the fine against the' Utility for intimidation.
10 That was strictly done on day shift.
I was told by the 11 NRC basically that my conduct, based on the in.spectors that 12 worked under my supervision at that time, was exemplary, 13 '
professional and carried out with integrity.
I never was 14 actually involved in that.
I
'3
~
MR. LIVEPliORE :
I guess really what I was trying to 16 see was if you felt there was a link--
17
WITNESS "Y":
No, I would not.
I would not give that,
-l 18 no, sir.
l 19 MR. LIVERMORE:
All right.
I had the feeling you were a
20 implying that, but I wanted to ask you direct.
So it had i
21 no link with your argument with 22 WITNESS "Y":
No, sir.
I wouldn' t make that assumptior 23 MR. CURRY:
Let's see if we can clear up a few of the 24 steps that you mentioned here.
First you mentioned that O
the fiEti time ' ou s'aw the~ thavelers they had many missing 25 y
~ pg NOT..DIScLux g
9 m us s
-m
[$
ki 12 I
hold points--
()
2 WITNESS "Y":
Numerous.
3 MR. CURRY:
Numerous; okay.
Then was 4
apparently instructed to try to complete them, whatever.
5 Did you see them again after that?
Did you see them later 6
on?
7 WITNESS "Y":
After he finished, he basically come up 8
and told me it was bogging'down', you'know, getting them
~
9 cleared up.
I went up, asked him what the problem was, 10 and he said, "Well, they're working on them."
He said he 11 didn't think he'd get them done this week, it would probably 12 be the next week, and t.$ien all of a sudden, within that 13 g
Friday evening, he basically told me.it looked like they 14 were going to have them all done.
15 MR. CURRY:
Did you get a chance to look at them after 16 that?
i,-
WITNESS "Y":
No, it was a few days later, three or four 17 i
18 or five days later before I got a chance to sit down and I
19 look at them again; get them all back, get them together--
4 20 MR. CURRY:
When you looked at'them, had the missing d
2 21 hold points been filled in?
~
i 22 WITNESS "Y":
Some of.them had; some of them had not;
~
s.
23 that's why I issued E.he NCR; still missing hold points, o
24 fit-ups'had been. missed,' cleanliness checks left out.
I G
.i 25 just wasn't thoroughly. satisfied with the documentation, so 9
e 88 go
-. c.:
a. w -
-- -=
-=--
EU NUl DISCLOSE 13 I
I thought I'd let Engineering take a look at them, and 13
'W 2
issued a non-conformance.
3 MR. CURRY:
You don't remember what date that was when 4
he basically had finished them and gave you a chance to see 5
them, do you?
6 WITNESS "Y":
No,. I can' t.
It had to be three or four 7
or five days prior to the issuance.of that UCR.
Thatwouldbeabouh 8
MR. CURRY:-
or 9
thereabouts?
10 WITNESS "Y":
I can't iemenber the exact date that it 11 started, when they started--when they gave them to me and 12 when the sequence cf events was going--I really can't get i
l 13 Q
}
a handle on when it exactly started.
~
14 MR. CURRY:
Were you aware of what process they used
- 5 to sign off some of the hold points that had been filled 16 in by the time you got the chance to look at them a second 4
8 17 time?
18 WITNESS "Y":
No.
I could give you an idea what they j
19 used, but I didn't actually see what they were using.
i 20 There were some chips involved, what they call fit-up chips, 5
2 21 or whatever, that I felt at the time were, when I firs't l
1
~
22 looked at them, due to either lack of training or something 23 by the inspectors, were rather sketchy sometimes on how 1
s
~
24 they were made'out,' how the' chips were made out.
I didn't
. l O
\\
25 feel.-real comfortable with them.
How they arrived at what g
O,kn,ywnmV...een 4
e
,,,,. _= a m n L aa -
xLa L
s an,
QQ NOT D: Sci _0SE 14 I
hold points they did clear up, I can' t tell you.- That was 2
between
-he had a couple of inspectors up there 3
working on them with him and a supervisor that was working 4
on t$e'm.. I sent an' inspector up regularly to check their n.
progress--h.is name is
-I sent him up there to 6
see how they were doing, what was' going on, whatever else.
7 At this point in time, I think I ought to tell you that I went in to hoday, had a meeting with him at s
9 approximately 10:00 this morning, and told him the exact--
10 what I just told you.
I told him the sequence of events 11
'here.
I had an obligation to inform the Utility about the
~
12 sequence of events.
I3
' g MR. LIVERMCRE:
What reaction did he give you?
l I4 WITNESS "Y":
He was concerned.
I think he understoodi i
15 a lot of it.
16 MR. LIVERMORE:
Excuse me?
17 WITNESS "Y":
I think he understood what I was telling j
18 him.
He asked me if I had a problem with the disposition aj 19 of the NCR, and I told him no, I did not.
The fact that i
i 20 they were going to do an LP of a vacuum box test, that's i
j 21 Engineering's prerogative to say, "This is what we're going 22' to do, and we're going to accept it based on that."
I'm 23 only a Quality Control Inspector.
I report; I don't get tc 24 engineer.
Whenever Engineering comes back with the dis-25 position, especially based on NDE methods, it's--
D\\SC\\ 056 co mot y
m.
,-m A a i h - h --
' Mwb h
15 I
MS. TANG:
What,were his remarks on the revision to 2
NCR?
3
' WITNESS "Y":
What were his remarks?
4 MS, TANG:.
Or. comments, anything.
e
.g.
5 WITNESS "Y":
He basically went with--I showed him this 6-note,and he basically went with that and said it appears 7
that they did review all of the travelers, so therefore a 8
full review was done and so therefore--I don't understand 9
F.ow could do a review after of the 10 NCR.
was basing his judement on the review prior 11 to the issuance of the MCR.
That's an assumption on my part.
12 MR. CURRY:
This says Unit Two, so I uculd assume from 13 '
g this they reviewed all the travelers for Unit Two.
14 WITNESS "Y":
Which is transfer canal, whatever else, 15 stainless steel liner--
16 MR. CURRY:
How would you interpret this where it t
8 17.
says " acceptability of weld shall be based on vacuum box l
18 and hydrostatic tests"?
That is intended to mean the 5
19 vacuum box tests that were already done.
They're not going i
20 to do additional tests is what I'm saying.
E 21 WITNESS "Y":
It must be.
That would have to be up to E
22 Engineering.
23 MR. CURRY:
Of. course, the hydrostatic test is when the th5.ng is finished.
24 25 WITNESS "Y":
I think that's a misnomer.
I don't know l
i l
DO Wrr nieo! gg
DC NC W CLOSE
~
1e I
how you hydrostatic test--
~
)
2 MR., CURRY:, It's a 1eak test; it's not a hydrostatic 3
test.
t.
4 WITNESS "Y":
I was hoping somebody would pick up on 5
that.
6 MR. LIVERMORE:
Now, the NCR is dated disposition, 7
and this note is dispositioned, signed ~
two 8
days later.
9 MR. CURRY:
Can we have this?.
4 l
10 WITNESS "Y":
I'd rather you didn' t.
I think you can 11 get your own copy out there if you want it.
12 MR. LIVERMORE:
I think it's necessary that we have a 13 copy of this.
14 MS. TANG:
Can we do that?
Phat we can do is on the 5
way out we can make a copy and give it back to ycu.
16 WITNESS "Y":
I can't give you a copy of it.
},--
17 MR. CURRY:
Of course, the words are on the record.
g gg WITNESS "Y":
I'm not making any allegations.
I think l
19 the panel, the review panel, everybody else clearly under-i 20 stands that we had a problem.
I think we identified our i
01 problem and tried to handle it the best way we could.
~
MR. LIVERMORE:
Let me ask you this:
Why did you 22 object to that word "5andom" being taken out?
- Context, 23
- really, r
ust the idea that someone changed your on-site 24 n
25 NCR without talking to you about it?
CD NOT DISCLOSE I
m i m ll g'
e r I
'I P
..................... ~.... _. ~.. -..... -..
p.;
3 CLOSE 17 I
WITNESS "Y":
To me, that's a totally unacceptable 2
thing.
Quality Engineers goes from the inspector's report 3
on non-conformance down, and the non-conforming item belongs 4
to the inspectors and his supervisor which is above, which 5
is what we signed for.
Also, I did not perform a review.
6 MR. CURRY:
I' think. that's' the intient of it.
This 7
says random review, implying that you picked out some of 8
them and this.is what you found; but it also means that if 9
you looked at all of them you'd probably find more.
By 10 changing it, they've said a review and that implies, " Hey, 11 this is all there is "
12 MR. LIVERMORE:
That's what you object to?
13 ;
WITNESS "Y":
Yeah.
I also object to the fact that g
14 Quality Engineers would--I don't know what Rev One says; 15 I don't know if it's got my name on it or what.
I authored 16 Rev Zero and.I. said a random review, and that's exactly what t
a. '.
17.,..
I.did.
{
18 MR. LIVERMORE:
So you're objecting to both aspects
.j 19 of it, really.
I i
20 MS. TANG:
No, two issues actually.
l E
2 21 MR. LIVERMORE:
The fact that thcy revised it without
- r
,22 conferring with you and the other aspect-that they took 23 the word " random" out, therefore implying what you looked 24 at was-the whole works.
O 25 WITNESS "Y": (Nods affirmatively)~ And you can clearly co NOT DISCLDSE
~
7p q~ gr DECWS 123 ig I
see by the notes that I didn't review.
The review was done 2
by the Brown and Root QC, not me; not at any point in time 3
other than the random review, just a cursory lcok at it to 4
see what our problem was and give it back to them for them 5
to do the review.
I did a cursory review to begin with-and
{
6 1
went back.to them for their review so they could ' clear up their item.
It came back to me again, and I did a cursory
~
8 review and issued the NCR.
j 9
MR. CURRY:
Do you want to look at them anymore?
{
10 MR. LIVERMORE:
'No, that's fine.
We can get copies 11 of the NCR's.
~
[
t WITNESS "Y":
I'm going to tell you right now that I L
h served a five year apprenticeship as a steamfitter, and I4 you're going to say to yourself, "Well, what the hell i
15 difference does that make?"
Basically, I was taught crafts-s 16 manship and the pursuit of excellence was a goal, and t
E-I! -
- mediocrity was unacceptable.
Unfortunately, I still have 18 that attitude.
I will make this statement:
I don't believe 4
h that's appreciated in the commercial nuclear industry.
I9 I
As
]
Mr. Curry can testify working for xcellen::e 20 L
21 was a standard, not something to be attained.
It was the l
22 standard, and it was maintained.
23 MR. LIVERMORE:
How long have you been with Comanche 24 Peak?
25 WITNES,S "Y":
Approximately three years.
ell, overall l
, f,f i.IOT t
tr; N.:~ :.acLOSE 19 m
I period of time, I came to work in j
t-h 2
I worked here for approximately six months.
I was right 3
in the middle of the nd I were 4
inspecting together on his problem.
I terminated and went 7
for approximately three to four months, five months, termi-8 nated, and was rehired bacic here 'by BASCO, returned here in 9
~
've been steadily employed since 10 You can take all the names out of this you want, 11 but anybody that reads this is going to know exactly who 12 this is.
e i
13 i MS. TAUG:
We not only take out names but also titles, l
14 where you work, anything that could possibly trace back to
(
15 you.
I 16 WITNESS "Y":
I'm not sitting here making allegations.
i l
5 17 I'm only here trying to give sequence of events, so I don't l
18 feel that I'm--well, this is the first time I really sat a
19 down and have done anything like this in my entire life; but l
I i
20 I feel the sequence of events needs to be understood so t
l 5
1 21 misunderstandings or misdirections are not made in the i
22 hearings.
23 MR. LIVERMORE:
You said that Judge Bloch called you--
l 24 a telephone call?
25 WITNESS "Y":
I' received a phone call from Judge 31och 00 NOT DISCLOSd_
MOT DISCLOSE 7
I from Washington, D.
C.
He identified himself as Judge Bloch (O
o
/
MS. TANG:
What dici you tell him?
What did you two 3
discuss?
4
. WITNESS "Y":
He asked me if I had any information on 5
the stainless steel liner.
I said, "Not necessarily, but 6
g th' ink'I can give you a sequence of events that might help 7
.you understand something a little bit better."
He told me 1 1
% _ n *.',., * ~
g that he was going,to-have somebody contact me so I could
.L 9
give them sequence of events.
10 MS. TMG:
Because over the phone you didn't know 11 whether he was the person--so that's why he contacted us 12 to talk to yt32.
13 WITNESS "Y":
He could have been Joe-Blow for all I
{
14 know.
That's why I wouldn't talk to you until I saw some-15 body's badge.
16 MR. LIVERMORE:
Do you have--in regard to the stainless t
e '
17 li,ners up there, we're talking Unit Two here.
Do you have
{
18 any information on Unit one and the transfer canal at all?
f 19 WITNESS "Y":
No, sir.
That work was performed entirely i
i 20 by Brown and Root so-called ASME Group.
-I had no involve-b i
l 21 ment or even'any real knowledge of it.
22 MR. LIVERMORE:
And your only involvement was Unit Two 23 later on when all of a sudden they said, " Hey, we're going 24 to get back to work on Containment Two, Unit Two.
O l
25 WITNESS "Y":
Right.
~
i.10 NOT DM N
p gun -
21 1
MR. LIVERMORE:
At that time you were with tha ASME--
h 2
WITNESS "Y":
Well, that's part of it.
You got the
. 3 transfer canal and--
4 MR. LIVERMORE:
Do you have any knowledge of any 5
signing signatures after the fact, forgeries, or.anything 6
along that line?
- ,.' f, - >
- ,.
7
- WITNESS "Y" :- No., sir, I do not.
8 MR. CURRY:
Do-you remember which week it was that I ~
9 p ok--that during that week that everything 10 suddenly became much better?
Do you remember which week 11 that was?
You mentioned that he took about a, week--
12 WITNESS "Y":
Somewhere around the first--end of 13 February, first part of :tarch to the 17th.
It had to be l g 14 within that time span.
That's the closest I can nail it i
l for you.
16 MR. CURRY:
I guess that's all I've got.
i
[
!~
17 MS. TANG:
Any questions?
j Ig MR. LIVERMORE:
No, I don't have any further questions.
19 MS. TANG:
Do you have anything else to say?
I 20 WITNESS "Y":
No.
i 21 MS. TANG:
We'll provide you with'our phone numbers.
1 22 If y u decide to contact us again--
23 WITNESS "Y":
I basically give you about all the information I have.
24
'O 25
'MS. TANG:
That will conclude the interview.
00 NOT DISCLOSE t
QC. NCT L.
,1 "'sc 0u I
CERTIFICATE OF PROCEEDINGS' b-2 This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the 3
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4
.I E' MATTER OFE*: COMANCHE PEAK TECI! NIDAL INTERVIEW 6
Monday, September 17, 1984
DATE OF PROCEEDINGS:
'PIACS.;dF,'- PROCEEDINGS :,Granbury, Texas a.
8
,l 9
were held as herein appears, and that this is the original
'10 transcript for the file of the Co= mission.
11 12 Carmen Gooden O
certtstea shortneaa aePorter
/I A
ll jg' 14 q,( & H,, g.,_ j Q' ) Q &,; y
/
/
15 Certified Shcrthand Report,ei-16 i-I--
17:.
18 19
.ii 20 i
-21
'22 DO NOT DISCLOSE 24 n
.U.
25 l
l t
\\
l
./"
l INTERVIEW FORMAT'- FEEDBACK INTERVIEWS 1.
Cover Page
- Interview of Oate: // //V /8 /
Time:
7:od Dd
~
Location:
1 Ff Lt 'o
' Parties present...
f JIM ff4 L.oftS0x),
L./ Wr2 ndA-f _
~_
cnitrm wat,u g q 2.
Proceedings (on th'e record)
"For the record, th'is is an interview of _ for the purpose of pr,oviding feedback regarding Technical Review Team assessment of certain concerns raised about the Comanche Peak facility.
- 2. C. 74eJe BY ;b u t a r E ca. IN TEt t/It o' c eMid "The. location of this interview is "Present at this interview are (names / organizations)"
"As agreed, this interview is being transcribed.
Describe mi:sion of TRT
~
"I wish to clarify details of your employment at Comanche Peak" (Obtain details of employment / qualifications J g 4 m cl
- bTab tM 7
"We spoke with you 'on... and have reviewed your statement (s) of...
Turn over to Technical Reviewer....
~
Mo w.
'- r -
I 2-3.
Conclusion of Proceedings "The results of"our evaluition will be published in'a~ SSER which will be available about January 1,1985" f
"Where appropriate we wil,1 require corrective action by TUGCO."
"Do you have anything further you would like to add for the record?
"=="Have we adequately covered your concerns?
"Do you have additional concerns?"
"Have you given this statement to us today freely and voluntarily?"
... off the record 4
Adminis'trative Guidance
- -Ask if individual wants copy of transcript./ vi.se them that transcript will be part of public record (except for confidential sources, or if l
they request confidentiality).
l 5.
Guidance I
Limit to topic of interest Ask:
W Is this a new issue?
~~
~
Have you provided this to NRC?
4 6
r
1
. 1 I
Did you do it?
Did you see it?
~
Seek: names, dates, locations, documents.
o Be courteous and considerate o.
Be sure individual appreciates the importance of his concern (s) and the staff / technical effort expended to review and evaluate.
o, Be sure individual understands we will require corrective action and that we are dedicated to safety.
When presenting' negative findings-(i.e., when allegations are found to be of no merit), do n'ot tell individuals that they are "wrcng",
ask i the TRT has possibly missed his points....
l emme
- s' o
D s f-YAl DO NOT DISCLOSE Telephone Conversation Record:
10/25/84 Tried to cal 1 ndspokewit[
_ According'
~
to is
~
' He has resigned from CPSES_
currently attending North Texas State University. Thebrother] suggested that we send a letter. All his mail will be picked up cannot guarantee giving
'our message.
R. C. Tang TRT 4
i i
DO NOT DISCLOSE l
FO!A-85 7 p;z
.