ML021760423
| ML021760423 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry, Watts Bar, Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1999 |
| From: | Mcgrath T Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | NRC/OI |
| References | |
| -RFPFR, 2-1998-013, 50-259-CIVP, 50-260-CIVP, 50-296-CIVP, 50-327-CIVP, 50-328-CIVP, 50-390-CIVP, ASLBP 01-791-01-CIVP, EA-99-234, RAS 3933 | |
| Download: ML021760423 (45) | |
Text
2 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 -------------------------- X 4 In the Matter of:
5 INTERVIEW OF 6 THOMAS J. McGRATH Case No. 2-1998-013 7 (CLOSED) 8 -------------------------- X 9 Tennessee Valley Authority 10 Lookout Place Building 11 12th and Chestnut Streets 12 Chattanooga, Tennessee 13 Tuesday, April 20, 1999 14 The above entitled matter came on for interview, 15 pursuant to notice, at 1:16 p.m.
16 BEFORE:
17 DIANA S. BENSON, Investigator 18 19 APPEARANCES:
20 On Behalf of TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY:
21 BRENT R. MARQUAND, Senior Attorney 22 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY 23 400 West Summitt Hill Drive 24 Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036
- 9 (202) 842-0034 PAGE -J OF p /6'PA E(S)
- ][9' 8
2 1 CONTENTS 2 WITNESS EXAMINATION 3 THOMAS J. McGkATH 4 BY MS. BENSON 4 5
6 EXHIBITS 7 NUMBER IDENTIFIED 8 [NONE.]
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
3 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 1:16 p.m.
3 MS. BENSON: On the record. Today's date is April 4 20, 1999. The time now is approximately 1:16 p.m..
5 I'm Special Agent Diana Benson of the NRC Office 6 of Investigations, Atlanta, Georgia and I'll be conducting 7 this interview.
8 During this proceeding which is being recorded for 9 transcription the NRC Office of Investigations will conduct 10 an interview of Mr. Thomas J. McGrath spelling M-c-G-r-a-t 11 h. This interview pertains to 01 Investigation No. 2-1998 12 013.
13 The location of this interview is TVA Lookout 14 Place Building, Chattanooga, Tennessee. Others in 15 attendance at this interview are Court Reporter and Mr.
16 Brent Marquand who is the TVA Office of General Counsel 17 attorney representing both TVA and Mr. McGrath.
18 Mr. McGrath, do you understand that Mr. Marquand 19 is acting in a dual capacity?
20 THE INTERVIEWEE: Yes.
21 MS. BENSON: Okay, and have you asked him to be 22 present with you today?
23 THE INTERVIEWEE: Yes, I have.
24 MS. BENSON: Okay.
25 Whereupon, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
4 1 THOMAS JOSEPH McGRATH, 2 the Interviewee, was called for examinatin and, having been 3 first duly sworn was examined and testified as follows.
4 DIRECT EXAMINATION 5 BY MS. BENSON:
6 Q If you can would you please state your full name?
7 A Thomas J. McGrath.
8 Q And what does J stand for?
9 A Joseph.
10 Q And your date of birth?
11 A .
12 Q And your Social Security number?
13 A 14 Q Prior to going on record I asked you if you would 15 read over Section 1001 of Title 18 of the U.S. Criminal 16 Code. Have you read over that and do you understand it?
17 A Yes, I've read it and I understand it.
18 Q Okay, thank you. Also, I displayed my credentials 19 for you identifying myself. Can you acknowledge that I did 20 this?
21 A Yes, you did.
22 Q Okay, thank you. Can you please provide me with 23 your background employment history here at TVA?
24 A I came to TVA in May of 1987. Since then I have 25 had various jobs in Nuclear Power Program including - I've ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
5 I probably had about ten or twelve so I might miss some but 2 basically I started off with the Watts Bar Plant Project 3 Management and maintenance. Moved to Corporate in 1989.
4 Had jobs in Corporate maintenance. I was the 5 Corporate Maintenance Manager. I moved to becoming the 6 Staff Manager for the head of Nuclear Power at that time.
7 Also, about 1989 I picked up being Chairman of the Nuclear 8 Safety Review Boards. I continued in that position for 9 about eight years.
10 Since then I've done some - I've continued to be 11 on the Boards. I'm no longer the Chairman. For a while I 12 was the Vice Chairman. In addition and parallel to that I 13 went through several other jobs all here in Corporate while 14 maintaining the NSRB job.
15 I was Manager - General Manager over various 16 support areas. First, I had materials and contracts and 17 then I had a -- job that added to that Nuclear Fuels 18 Information Services.
19 In '95 I was given acting assignment to be General 20 Manager of Operations Support because the incumbent in the 21 job had gotten cancer and was quite ill. I continued in 22 that job. He died a few months after that. I continued in 23 that job until after we did a function review in I think it 24 was 1997. That function review essentially it wasn't a -
25 position.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
6 1 Q Un-hum.
2 A Since then I spent a little over a year on a 3 special project I related to terridium* production at 4 Belafont and Watts Bar. Since last summer I have been 5 working with Corporate Business Transformation project where 6 I am now the Project Manager for one of the projects under 7 that.
8 Q Okay, and prior to coming at TVA what were you 9 doing then?
10 A When I got out of college I was in the Navy for 11 five years and then actually switched over to a civilian for 12 a while. Worked for the Navy and for a while the Department 13 of Energy. All of those jobs were in the Naval Reactor's 14 Program starting off with engineer. Finishing off as the 15 Manager of the Field Office at Pugent Sound Naval Shipyard 16 for like the last six years I was there.
17 In 1984 I left there and went to work for Lockheed 18 Ship Building in Seattle. While I was at Lockheed Ship 19 Building I was Director of Quality Assurance, and then I was 20 Director of Program Management. From Lockheed I came to 21 TVA.
22 Q Okay. Prior to going on the record I indicated 23 that what we would be discussing here today was the 1996 DOL 24 discrimination complaint filed by Mr. Fiser against TVA 25 concerning the posting of his Corporate Chemistry position ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
7 1 here in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Are you familiar with that 2 particular complaint?
3 A Yes, I am.
4 Q Can you indicate to me your knowledge of Mr. Gary 5 Fiser? When you first met him, in what capacity you two 6 were working, and what may have occurred like during 1993 7 time frame involving his first DOL complaint. Basically 8 just a history.
9 A The first time I had met him was through Nuclear 10 Safety Review Board Operation activities.
11 ' And what position were you holding at the time?
12 A I was the Chairman.
13 Q Okay.
14 A And as the Chairman with any specific person at 15 the time at the level I was I very limited to dealings. I 16 made a practice from time to time sitting in on meetings 17 with my sub-committees so I would occasionally see him in 18 that.
19 I probably in going to site meetings occasionally 20 saw him in a room full of thirty people there. I don't 21 remember when. He was replaced to Sequoyah a Chemistry 22 Manager I think sometime around 1992. I'm not sure when.
23 From then until 1996 I had no dealings with him 24 except one. There was one case when I was running 25 Operational Readiness Review for Watts Bar. Start up ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
8 1 probably about 1995. My team had asked Corporate Chemistry 2 for some assistance. Ron Grover and Gary Fiser came and 3 provided that assistance. I really didn't personally deal 4 with them. They dealt with a member of the team who was 5 weeding out Chemistry.
6 Subsequent to that then when I took over Operation 7 Support he was in a position in Corporate Chemistry at the 8 time. I was the General Manager of the whole group. I 9 rarely had any dealings with him. My personal way of doing 10 business was to deal with my direct reports so throughout 11 the whole organization I had very little dealings with the 12 individuals lower down in the organization.
13 Q Un-hum.
14 A Probably only talked to him for a few times in the 15 time period that he was under my management.
16 Q Back when you were the Chairman of the NSRB at the 17 Nuclear Safety Review Board during the '92 time frame, early 18 t92 time frame, did the NSRB conduct a review of the -
19 Program at Sequoyah?
21 BY MS. BENSON:
22 Q NSRB.
23 A The NSRB had a RADCON and Chemistry sub-committee.
24 As part of our periodic meetings which would be in that time 25 frame would be three or four a year that particular sub ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
9 1 committee routinely looked at the RADCON and Chemistry 2 programs.
3 I do not recall - while we occasionally would do 4 special reviews I do not recall any special review of RADCON 5 and Chemistry in that time frame.
6 Q Do you recall a list of items that were placed in 7 the Troy by Mr. Fiser concerning the problems in the 8 Chemistry Program at Sequoyah?
9 A I have no knowledge of anything he placed in Troy.
10 Q Would the NSRB have - wouldn't it be -- that they 11 would be made aware of items that had been listed in Troy?
12 Wasn't that kindly done organization wise?
13 A Troy probably had tens of thousands of items in 14 it. NSRB did not routinely review Troy.
15 Q Un-hum.
16 A The matter in which individual sub-committees 17 would pursue items were - it was really at the discretion of 18 the individual sub-committee. The topics they would 19 normally pick would be based upon review of various 20 documents available to NSRB which the Troy -- were not 21 routinely provided. We could have them if we wanted them.
22 Types of things that were available for NRC 23 inspection reports, audits, and other reports at our Nuclear 24 Assurance Organization. Empo reports and nuclear industry 25 experience which frequently gave us topics that we would go ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
10 1 look into.
2 Q Do you remember having a consultant by the name of 3 Tom Peterson conducting a review at Sequoyah Chemistry 4 Program?
5 A Tom Peterson was a member of the NSRB and was a 6 member of the RADCON and Chemistry sub-committee in that 7 time frame.
8 Q And did he conduct any kind of review at Sequoyah 9 regarding any kind of matter during the 192 time frame?
10 A He would have been involved in the routine sub 11 committee activities. I do not recall any special review on 12 his part in that time frame.
13 Q During - as far as any house investigations 14 involving Mr. Fiser during the 1996 Department of Labor 15 complaint were you interviewed by Department of Labor?
16 A In 1996?
17 Q For the 1996?
18 A Yes, the Department of Labor interviewed me.
19 Q Were you interviewed by TVIG?
20 A Yes, I believe so.
21 Q Do you remember discussing a meeting that you had 22 involving Tom Peterson, Mr. McArthur, and Mr. Fiser when you 23 all were discussing the PASS system or the post -- sample 24 system and other items?
25 A Yes.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
II 1 Q Can you discuss - tell me about that meeting?
2 A At our November, 1991 meeting - as I mentioned to 3 you I routinely would stop in at various sub-committees from 4 time to time. I happened to have stopped in on the RADCON 5 Chemistry sub-committee. Then there was a discussion.
6 There had been open action items that NSRB had raised I 7 believe approximately six months previously having to do 8 with the PASS system.
9 I think the issue had to do with the training and 10 the ability to take samples which required time. Also, an 11 issue on potentially on monitored release PASS. The topic 12 of this subject - of discussion when I was in the meeting 13 that I recall was despite this having been an open issue for 14 some time that Sequoyah and Corporate Chemistry had not come 15 to agreement on an answer and we were concerned that this 16 being an open item which had potentially regulatory concerns 17 to it that they were not taking timely action to resolve it.
18 Q Do you ever recall a meeting with the Plant 19 Manager after subsequent to this meeting you had with Gary 20 Fiser concerning the PASS and whatever else was discussed 21 there?
22 A No, I do not.
23 Q Do you ever remember making a comment to Mr.
24 Deacon about he needed to get rid of Mr. Fiser?
25 A No, I do not.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
12 1 Q Do you recall indicating at anytime that you felt 2 Mr. Fiser was a weak Manager?
3 A I do not recall specifically discussing Mr. Fiser.
4 I know we had discussions - that there were discussions 5 relevant to the performance of the Chemistry Department 6 which NSRB and Nuclear Assurance and Empo were all 7 indicating problems with it. That was discussed at that 8 particular NSRB meeting in November of '91. I don't recall 9 what the specific discussion that went on during that 10 meeting was. It's been a long time ago.
11 Q Did you meet with Mr. Deacon following that 12 meeting concerning that meeting or any of these issues?
13 A I do not recall any specific meeting with Deacon.
14 Q And do you recall at any time stating to Bob - Rob 15 Deacon that Fiser was uncooperative and that he needed to be 16 fired?
17 A Absolutely not and I have never in my time at TVA 18 told any Manager that any individual needed to be fired.
19 Q Okay. And I know you indicated this earlier but 20 can you indicate for me the date that you became the Acting 21 Manager of Operation Support?
22 A I think it was October, 1995.
23 Q And what -
24 A Approximately that time.
25 Q Okay, and you were -- Acting Manager at that time, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
13 1 and when did you become the permanent or the Manager of 2 Operation Support?
3 A I remained in an acting capacity to a separate 4 subsequent reorganization eliminated position.
5 Q Which was?
6 A About I think it was May of '97.
7 Q And in your -- or acting role what -- or 8 responsibilities were you given? Were you given those as if 9 you were the Manager?
10 A I had all the responsibilities as though I was the 11 Manager. During the first few months when the prior manager 12 was quite ill but still alive and came to work ever so often 13 I coordinated all the activities with him.
14 Q Okay. Prior to the reorganization in 1996 do you 15 recall and when I'm saying reorganization I'm saying prior 16 to the actual posting of the positions in the Chemistry 17 Department at Corporate do you recall being contacted by 18 anyone or being talked to by anybody regarding transferred 19 Sam Harvey to Sequoyah during this time frame?
20 A No one from Sequoyah ever contacted me. Two 21 individuals had mentioned to me that they understood that 22 there was some desire to move Sam Harvey to Sequoyah. I 23 then had inquired of Ron Grover as to whether anything was 24 going on.
25 He had mentioned to me a desire to transfer him to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
14 1 Sequoyah. As my understanding of the personnel rules that I ___ 2 that could not be done. You could not take a Corporate 3 position and just move a Corporate position to Sequoyah.
4 That would be a change in the job and would 5 require a new job be posted and so it was not possible 6 within the rules to do that.
7 The other concern that I had given that the 8 organization that was coming up and this come up in a time 9 period when they knew that the reorganization was coming was 10 that even if we were to attempt to do that it would have 11 constituted a pre-selection because there were actually 12 three people holding identical positions.
13 If you would have picked one of those three and 14 moved them out of the area you would have been requiring the
- -- 15 other two to compete for the new positions. In fact pre 16 selecting that one individual to have a permanent job so I 17 explained it could not be done, and my concerns as I stated 18 No. 1, it would have been a violation of personnel rules.
19 2, it would have really constituted pre-selection to protect 20 one individual from possible impact of the reorganization.
21 Q Was there any consideration given to advertise 22 that position?
23 A That would have been a decision by Sequoyah. I 24 don't know what they did or didn't do.
25 Q Did - well when you were talking - discussing ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
15 1 who at Human Resources was advising you of these rules? Was Q 2 it Sequoyah Human Resources?
3 A No.
4 Q Or Corporate?
5 A My initial answer that came up was based on my own 6 knowledge but after which I confirmed that with Ed Boyles in 7 the Corporate 8 Q And you indicated that two people told you that 9 there was this rumor that there were attempts. Who were 10 these two people that told you this - about the transfer of 11 Sam Harvey?
12 A One was David Gatches and I think the second one 13 was Wilson McArthur but I'm not positive of that.
14 Q And did Mr. Boyles also when you contacted him 15 about this - did you contact him to ask him about it?
16 A Yes, I did.
17 Q And did he indicate the ways that that position 18 could have been filled?
19 A I'll try to understand your question.
20 Q Okay, you indicated that he said that he couldn't 21 - he couldn't just be transferred down there. Did he tell 22 you how you could have placed him down there if you had so 23 wanted?
24 A I don't recall asking him that.
25 Q Was anybody else - was there interest indicated by ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
16 1 anybody else regarding their own transfer down there like 2 anybody else in Corporate Chemistry? Chandrasekaren or 3 Fiser was any consideration of possibly moving one of them 4 down there or seeing if you could get a position down there 5 for any of them so they wouldn't be bumped out by this 6 reorganization?
7 A (No response.)
8 Q The elimination of one of positions in Corporate?
9 A There was no consideration of that, but you seem 10 to be asking a question like this was part of some plan. It 11 was just a simple request of moving somebody there and I 12 just addressed it as by the rules you cannot just move a 13 Corporate position and take it to the site.
14 I told you my second concern was even if we could 15 have concocted a way to do it it would have constituted pre 16 selection of an individual to avoid them being impacted by 17 the reorganization.
18 Q Un-hum.
19 A Which were two reasons why we didn't think it was 20 something we should do. It just ended at that. There 21 wasn't any more.
22 Q I understand what you're saying but you know I 23 guess what I'm indicating is perhaps another Management 24 approach when you know you're having cut backs and you're 25 looking at you know people you know another Manager's ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
17 1 approach was that you know if we can find jobs for other 2 people let's do that so we've got two different approaches 3 here from Management.
4 I'm asking you if that was a consideration to 5 knowing that there is going to be an elimination there were 6 you making any attempts at helping anybody trying to get 7 another job anywhere else?
8 A I personally did not do that for any position in 9 Operation Support at any time.
10 Q That's fine. Thank you. Involved in this issue 11 about the transfer, possible transfer of Sam Harvey, did you 12 ever indicate to anyone that you wanted Harvey's expertise 13 left at Corporate?
14 A I do not recall any such statement.
15 Q Is it possible? Are you saying you don't 16 remember? That you could have said it, or you did not say 17 it?
18 A I just don't recall any such conversation.
19 Q Okay. Going into the screening panel that was put 20 together for conducting interviews for the Corporate 21 Chemistry positions or RADCON Chemistry, Environmental, 22 whatever positions in '96 who was responsible for selecting 23 the individuals that were going to be on that screening 24 panel?
25 A When we set up the screening panel it was ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
18 1 initially recommended by Wilson McArthur. It was done in 2 consultation with Human Resources, Ed Boyles, and he also 3 talked to me.
4 At the time we were making the selection panel we 5 were aware at the time that by then Mr. Fiser had come to 6 Human Resources and had told them that if we proceeded with 7 the selection he would file the DOL complaint, and we were 8 trying to be very careful on everything we did to make sure 9 that we stayed fully in compliance with all the rules so we 10 fully involved Human Resources in everything we did.
11 Q Okay, so who were the first individuals that was 12 selected to be on the screening panel?
13 A The original screening panel would have been the 14 three RADCON Managers from the three sites. There would 15 have been John Cory from Brown's Ferry. Charles Kent from 16 Sequoyah, and Jack Cox from Watts Bar.
17 Q And whose recommendation was it that these there 18 individuals be the panel members?
19 A I believe that was originally Wilson McArthur's 20 recommendation.
21 Q Do you recall Mr. McArthur asking you or letting 22 you know that Cox had some problems with time constraints 23 for the date that this panel was scheduled for, and that he 24 had also indicated that if he was there he would have 25 selected Fiser, Mr. Fiser? Do you recall this coming up?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
19 1 A Yes.
2 Q Can you tell me about that, please?
3 A Cox had originally committed to be on the panel.
4 He had then subsequently brought up that he would not be 5 able to attend. My recollection is that that was on 6 relatively short notice. A few days to a week time frame 7 from when we were going to have the panel.
8 Wilson had also told me when he brought it up that 9 Cox had made a remark to the effect that it didn't matter if 10 he was there because he had already decided one was Mr.
11 Fiser's position. He also mentioned another position at the 12 time. I don't recall what that was.
13 This Board was going to review I think it was five 14 positions in both RADCON and Chemistry positions. It was at 15 least one other position that he had indicated that he had 16 already made up his mind prior to doing it.
17 We were then faced with what do we do. We could 18 have tried to reschedule but it didn't seem appropriate to 19 reschedule. To put on an individual who had already 20 indicated that he really was not going to follow the process 21 he had already made up his mind who ought to be on it.
22 We had - so in order - and we were talking with 23 Human Resources on this and felt that we should keep the 24 panel with three technical members on it, and we first then 25 attempted to replace him with the Assistant Plant Manager ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
20 1 from Watts Bar but he was not available.
2 We subsequently decided that we could handle 3 someone from Corporate and we selected Rick Rogers. He was 4 the replacement person.
5 Q So when you were discussing - because I know you 6 used the word we several times if you can be a little more 7 specific for me. When you said that we attempted to get the 8 Assistant Plant Manager did you call the Assistant Plant 9 Manager, or who called the Assistant Plant Manager?
10 A I don't specifically remember who made the phone 11 call. The individuals involved in these discussions were 12 myself, Wilson McArthur, and Ed Boyles. I don't remember 13 who made the call to see if the Plant - Assistant Plant 14 Manager was available.
15 Q Was there any attempt to getting Mr. Voeller to 16 stand in for Mr. Cox?
17 A No, Mr. Voeller was the Chemistry Manager. This 18 was a Board to review both Chemistry and RADCON positions.
19 Q So I mean - explain to me your reasoning there 20 because I mean it sounds like you're trying to say something 21 to me but try to be more direct.
22 A Given the spectrum of people who we wanted the 23 Board made up of people with wider Plant knowledge than just 24 a Chemistry Manager so we did not consider going down to a 25 specific Chemistry Manager. We rather looked at going up at ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
21 1 the Plant.
2 When we could not do that we decided to use a 3 Corporate individual who had broad knowledge of Plant 4 Operations and technical issues.
5 Q Un-hum, okay. Did you ever indicate to Mr.
6 McArthur that Mr. Cox should remove himself from the 7 selection panel, or that Mr. Cox should not be on the 8 selection panel because of his previous bias towards Mr.
9 Fiser?
10 A I'm not sure I understand your question because 11 Cox had removed himself from the panel by saying he wasn't 12 available.
13 Q Un-hum.
14 A It was not a question in my mind of asking Cox to 15 remove himself. He had already removed himself.
16 Q Do you - why did he remove himself? Because of 17 the time constraint or because of this statement that he had 18 made that he would be in support of Fiser?
19 A I would have to assume it was the time schedule 20 why he was unable to attend.
21 Q Did you make a statement following that that he 22 shouldn't be on the panel anyway because of his bias towards 23 Mr. Fiser?
24 A As I mentioned answering another question at the 25 time we were to - the alternatives we would place on the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
22 1 Board one would have been reschedule in order to meet Mr.
2 Cox's schedule which I don't know logistically if it would 3 have met those other members and the interviewees, but I 4 felt it would be inappropriate to put someone on a panel who 5 has already expressed that they have made up their mind.
6 Being on one of my panels the expectation is that 7 you will make an objective decision based upon the 8 individual's application and their interview results, and in 9 doing that you have to be able to put aside you know 10 personal knowledge or dealings with the individual because 11 you - most of our panel people know each other, whatever but 12 at that time Cox's statement indicated that he was not 13 willing to do that.
14 Q Did you ask him if he could be unbiased?
15 A I had no discussions with Mr. Cox.
16 Q Did anyone like Mr. McArthur ask him if he could 17 be unbiased?
18 A I don't know.
19 Q Do you - considering Mr. Kent's past attempts to 20 get Harvey transferred to Sequoyah doesn't this appear to 21 you that he might have been biased towards Mr. Harvey?
22 A I don't know that Mr. Kent made any attempts to 23 have him out there. When it was mentioned to me that 24 Sequoyah wanted him I don't even recall Mr. Kent's name 25 being mentioned. I really don't recall if any names got ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
23 1 mentioned.
2 I think my assumption was that it was the Sequoyah 3 Chemistry Manager, but I don't recall Ken's name being 4 specifically mentioned as being the individual trying to do 5 that.
6 Q Were Mr. Cory and Mr. Kent asked whether they 7 could be unbiased towards the two other individuals that 8 were providing them support?
9 A I did not ask them.
10 Q Do you know whether Mr. McArthur asked them?
11 A I don't know.
12 Q Can you please let me know what Mr. Rogers' 13 Chemistry background is?
14 A Mr. Rogers was selected to be on the Board because 15 of his broad general knowledge across the Plant. He had 16 among other jobs the Technical Support Manager at Sequoyah 17 for a number of years which would have involved - included 18 involvement in Chemistry and RADCON issues as they relate to 19 the rest of the -- (cannot hear. Voice drops off.)
20 Q Were you involved in Mr. Fiser's 1993 Department 21 of Labor complaint?
22 A No, I wasn't.
23 Q Were you interviewed in connection with it by the 24 TVA, OIG, anything?
25 A No.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
24 1 Q Another - during one of your statements either 2 with Department of Labor in this investigation or TVA, OIG, 3 or possibly an Affidavit that you gave you indicated that 4 you and Mr. McArthur were trying to make sure that there was 5 no bias against Mr. Fiser based on his previous Department 6 of Labor complaints or settlements, and that you all were 7 going to check with HR to insure the people that were going 8 to be on that Board were not involved in any of those 9 settlements. Do you remember making any of that statement?
10 A I don't specifically remember the statement but I 11 do recall that we asked - the intention was to ask Human 12 Resources as part of this to look at - to insure that we did 13 not have anyone involved in that thing he was intimately 14 involved with the prior complaint.
15 Q Okay.
16 A I was not familiar with the prior complaint. I've 17 never seen any of the documentation or anything on it so I 18 personally have no knowledge of who had or had not been 19 involved.
20 Q And who was supposed to do this check for the 21 Human Resources for you?
22 A My contacts with Human Resources were with Ed 23 Boyles.
24 Q Do you know whether anybody checked with Human 25 Resources to see whether either Mr. Cory, Mr. Rogers, or Mr.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
25 1 Kent had been involved in any of Fiser's past deals or 2 complaints or the current one?
3 A It's my recollection that I asked Human Resources 4 to insure that the people we had involved in this had not 5 been involved. I remember Ed Boyles coming back and saying 6 even though the Human Resource person is only a support to 7 the review - I forgot the individual's name - he changed the 8 Human Resource person because he had been involved in the 9 previous thing.
10 I believe the reviews of the prior issue with the 11 Human' Resources were done by other people who were normally 12 involved with DOL type issues. Like I said my recollection 13 is I asked him to check on that.
14 Q Mr. Boyles, you asked him to check on that?
15 A That's my recollection.
16 Q Do you know that Mr. Kent and Mr. Cory were 17 involved in the past '93 Department of Labor complaint?
18 A No, I had no knowledge.
19 Q Pardon.
20 A No, I do not know that they were involved.
21 Q Okay. What I'd like to do now is discuss with you 22 concerning the rolling over of Mr. McArthur from his RADCON 23 position to the new RADCON Chem position during this 1996 24 reorganization. Can you give me background information 25 concerning that?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
26 1 A When I took over the organization there was an 2 overall RADCHEM Manager. It was an individual in that 3 position I believe in an Acting capacity that I really did 4 not get involved in exactly his status because when I got 5 involved with the organization he was in the process of 6 retiring and leaving.
7 That was a position previously held by Wilson 8 McArthur who at the time was the RADCON Manager. When we 9 proceeded towards the reorganization of Operations Support 10 all of the positions that were being changed were reviewed 11 by HR for their decision as to which ones needed to be 12 posted. Which ones the incumbent could just roll over and 13 stay in.
I 14 The answer they provided back on that particular 15 position is that Wilson McArthur should actually be placed 16 in that position having previously held that position.
17 Q Who specifically told you that?
18 A Ed Boyles.
19 Q Was there any discussion regarding a possible 20 advertising of that position?
21 A Only in the same context of all the positions. We 22 discussed all of the possible positions in which they had 23 come back and I really only remember one and it really was 24 not McArthur's in which I questioned their decision but I 25 went along with their decision on the others.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
27 1 Q The question I really have for you is based upon 2 my interviews with Mr. Boyles and Mr. Easley when the issue 3 came up regarding the advertising or non-advertising of Mr.
4 McArthur's position Mr. Easley has indicated that he advised 5 that that position in fact should be advertised.
6 Mr. Boyles is indicating that you asked him for 7 his opinion on this and he told you something different.
8 That you could roll him over into that position or something 9 to that effect but where the ultimate responsibility lies is 10 with the Manager to decide on how he wants to handle that.
11 According to Mr. Boyles he relied heavily on Mr.
12 Easley to give him advice because Mr. Easley was considered 13 the expert among Human Resources in advertising and posting 14 and waivers. You know all the organizational matters and 15 Mr. Easley is telling me that he advised against it. Just 16 rolling Mr. McArthur over into this, so what we've got right 17 now is this huge conflict between Mr. - what Mr. Easley is 18 saying and what you and Mr. Boyles are saying and you know 19 and other individuals.
20 This can be a very critical question and I asked 21 Mr. McArthur earlier if he would be willing to take a 22 polygraph on this and I'll ask you also if in fact you would 23 take a polygraph regarding this issue in how this decision 24 was made to post or advertise this position.
25 MR. MARQUAND: With respect to that item?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
28 1 MS. BENSON: Well and possible other items that we 2 would go through -
3 MR. MARQUAND: Have you asked Ben Easley if he 4 would be willing to take a polygraph?
5 MS. BENSON: We usually don't do -
6 MR. MARQUAND: I mean it seems the conflict is 7 between Ben Easley and Ed Boyles not between anything Mr.
8 McGrath has said and Ben Easley. He didn't say that Ben 9 Easley told him that.
10 MS. BENSON: First of all we would you know 11 discuss Mr. Easley after other people -- You know if it 12 was shown that other people were being truthful then we 13 would ask Mr. Easley. There is also basically what Mr.
14 Boyles has indicated is - and there are conflicts in 15 testimony but what he has indicated is ultimately you're the 16 one responsible to make the decision based on his advice.
17 Now what his advice was is you know what he is 18 telling me is that you know one thing but maybe what he told 19 other people is something else. Okay, about what was told 20 to you. Okay.
21 If the position wasn't advertised because people 22 were afraid of some kind of action by other people that 23 might be interested in posting for that position it's not to 24 say that Mr. McArthur wasn't qualified for the position nor 25 would he have been selected for it, but according to even ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
29 1 the policy I've read and there are some real issues on the 2 position descriptions and everything else here this is going 3 to be a major area of concern and some investigation.
4 It's basically a decision that is made by you as 5 the Manager. You can be advised but you have made the 6 ultimate decision not to advertise that position.
7 A My understanding at the time was that was Human 8 Resources' decision.
9 Q That's not what Human Resources has told me.
10 A My understanding was that it was their decision 11 when they said this is how it should be done. If I had an 12 option to do something different I didn't understand I had 13 an option to do something different.
14 Q Okay, so you were not told about a way to request 15 a waiver - to have that position not be advertised and 16 request a waiver so Mr. McArthur could be rolled over into 17 that position?
18 A I don't recall any discussion of a waiver.
19 Q Okay, Mr. Boyles never told you that that was a 20 possibility and one possible way of not advertising the 21 position?
22 A As I said I don't recall any discussion of a 23 waiver. I discussed - I recall that the answer back was 24 that the proper action to take on that position would be to 25 place Mr. McArthur in it because he was previously in the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
30 1 position.
2 Q Well what I've gotten so far is that that's not 3 the answer that was given to Mr. Boyles and after Mr. Boyles 4 discussed this with you he came back and said well this is 5 the way we're going to do it?
6 A First, Mr. Boyles never came to me and said I had 7 to advertise the thing. Very early we started off the 8 entire thing from the assumption that would have to 9 advertise all positions.
10 Q And that is the policy?
11 A Okay, and we then went back and looked at all of 12 them throughout all of Operation Support and -- and looking 13 at which positions we needed to advertise or not advertise 14 was a review of all of the various positions.
15 I think I may have asked Mr. Boyles when we 16 started looking at them all did in fact McArthur was in that 17 position previously whether that had any bearing on it or 18 not. That was asked as a question not a desire to get a 19 waiver or change that. I had asked him that because Mr.
20 McArthur had asked me that. I passed that on as a question.
21 Not a request for a waiver.
22 When Human Resources came back with their answer 23 to me the only position I questioned happened to be with one 24 of Steam Generator Manager which was one - that was one 25 where the individual who had previously been in the job had ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
31 1 moved on to another job which included that but had added 2 responsibilities.
3 Even though the work he was doing predominantly 4 still the same -- as explained to me that since his new 5 position had additional duties and we were going essentially 6 back to another position with a different set of duties that 7 was in the PD that we needed to advertise it.
8 That particular one I had questioned because I 9 knew we only had one person in the Company who was actually 10 qualified for the job and it appeared to be an 11 administrative waste of time and effort but they told me 12 that those were the rules and that's how I had to do it.
13 Again, there was no mention of you can go get a 14 waiver so we went ahead and advertised that position but we 15 went through selection process. Only one person applied so 16 the selection process became easy on that one, but that 17 particular one was the only one that I recall any 18 disagreement in what they came back to me with.
19 Q Un-hum.
20 A If Mr. Boyles and Mr. Easley were not in agreement 21 I was not aware of that and Mr. Easley never came and talked 22 to me about that. (Cannot hear this part because of 23 shuffling of papers.)
24 Q So Mr. Easley never indicated to you at anytime 25 that you needed to - that he would recommend advertising ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
32 1 that position?
( 2 A I do not recall him ever saying that to me.
3 Q And the rationale now that you're saying that -
4 meaning Mr. Boyles was that the position didn't need to be 5 advertised because Mr. McArthur had held a position similar 6 to this previously. Not he was in a current position, that 7 current position, but previously to that position. That was 8 the rationale you're saying he made to you?
9 A I think that's what he told me. I don't remember 10 all of it. I didn't go back and get into all of the details 11 of exactly what they -- come to that conclusion. You need 12 to know that we were looking at a large number of position 13 descriptions at the time. A large number of positions. I 14 wasn't personally reviewing the position descriptions. I K~. 15 was relying on them to review them.
16 Q Only when there was questions involved in it like 17 Mr. Gatches, Mr. McArthur's?
18 A Yeah, even then I'm not exactly sure to the degree 19 which I - on those particular ones is -- that would have the 20 position descriptions. (Hard to understand witness with 21 some words.)
22 Q What about the position that Mr. Fiser was having 23 to bid for or that was being advertised his particular 24 position did anyone discuss with you that Mr. Fiser had also 25 previously held a similar position?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
33 1 A In the case of the position that Mr. Fiser had 2 when the new position descriptions were prepared which I 3 personally was not involved in Mr. Fiser had come to HR and 4 indicated that he would submit a DOL complaint if we 5 advertised it. As I understood the concern was the 6 similarity to the position that was involved in his prior 7 settlement. At that time what I asked Human Resources to do 8
9 Q And who in Human Resources?
10 A Ed Boyles.
11 Q Okay.
12 A My dealings with Human Resources in this time 13 frame went through Ed Boyles which was my normal way of 14 dealing with Human Resources.
15 Q Did you ever discuss any of this with Mr. Easley?
16 A As to what did or did not have to be advertised I 17 don't recall that. Easley would come by to see me on 18 miscellaneous HR things once in a while. I don't recall 19 discussions with him on what did or did not require 20 advertising.
21 On this particular one and the Fiser one we asked 22 despite the previous reviews we were coming up with because 23 Mr. Fiser raising this concern a possible conflict with his 24 prior deal on settlement. I know that Ed Boyles got other 25 people in Human Resources involved. Those were involved ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
34 1 with the DOL. I believe they consulted with OGC where they 2 felt it was appropriate to do that.
3 I was told how this was being handled. It even 4 went to our DOL Task Force to look it and relied on them to 5 review all of the rules that existed relative to posting DOL 6 settlements. All of the necessary requirements to make sure 7 that we were fully in compliance with all of the 8 requirements.
9 My own personal experience is that Human Resources 10 approached to advertising positions and they tended to be 11 very concerned and very much wanted to stick to exactly what 12 their rules were.
13 In doing the entire Operation Support area I did 14 not even consider asking for any waivers to the rules for 15 any positions.
16 Q Un-hum, okay, so basically the opinion of Human 17 Resources and all the other people that were involved in 18 reviewing this complaint by Mr. Fiser the ruling was that 19 the position should be advertised?
20 A That's correct.
21 Q I don't think that that's an argument you know by 22 anybody. I think that was a fair ruling. The argument 23 comes in in that you know the argument you used for rolling 24 McArthur over was the same argument that you didn't roll 25 Fiser over into it according to the advice that Mr. Easley ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
35 1 was giving you. That there was no difference -
2 A Mr. Easley - excuse me - Mr. Easley was not giving 3 me any advice. He did not discuss this with me.
4 Q Okay, he never stated that to you?
5 A No, he did not.
6 Q Okay. Did Mr. Grover ever discuss with you or 7 indicate to you or tell you that he was interested in 8 applying for the position that Mr. McArthur or the newly 9 created position of RADCON Chem Manager in 1996?
10 A He may have said something to me but I believe it 11 was well after McArthur had been put in the position.
12 Q You don't recall him coming to you and briefly 13 stating that he would be interested in bidding for that 14 position before your announcement at the Staff meeting that 15 Mr. McArthur was taking that position?
16 A No, I do not recall him coming and telling me 17 that.
18 Q Okay.
19 A I believe that sometime later he indicated he 20 would have been but it was not prior to it.
21 Q And you don't recall that, or are you saying he 22 never came to you?
23 A I believe I can say that he never came to me.
24 Let's go back - I do not recall anytime that he came to me.
25 I do recall that sometime subsequent to that he told me ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
36 1 that.
2 Q And after Mr. McArthur was rolled over into that 3 position or transferred into that position what did Mr.
4 Grover say to you at that point?
5 A I don't remember.
6 Q Did Mr. Boyles ever have a discussion with you 7 regarding any conversations he had with Grover concerning 8 this?
9 A I don't remember.
10 Q Do you know what position the RADCON CHEM position 11 was? Was it PG 11 or PG Senior. Was it promotion for Mr.
12 McArthur to go in there?
13 A I'm not sure. I thought he was already one was a 14 Senior. My recollection was a Senior Manager but I thought 15 he already was a Senior Manager.
16 Q Okay, I think that he and Mr. Grover were both in 17 PG 11 positions if I'm not mistaken.
18 A I don't know. I don't know the answer to that. I 19 really did not go and look at -
20 Q Were you involved in the agreement that was 21 negotiated for Mr. Grover following Mr. McArthur's selection 22 for that position?
23 A That agreement was primarily handled by Phil 24 Reynolds. Phil Reynolds kept me informed of what was going 25 on. I don't remember how I came to know that Grover had an ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
37 1 interest in going to Empo. I don't remember the specifics 2 of how I got to know that.
3 When I did get to know that I think I checked into 4 that and had let Reynolds know about that but as to the 5 specifics of the agreement with him I was not involved in 6 working it out. I was basically told what it was.
7 Q What else were you told about the agreement they 8 had with Mr. Grover?
9 A The only thing I recall is that what precipitated 10 the agreement it was that Mr. Grover had threatened to file 11 an EEO complaint.
12 Q Concerning what?
13 A I'm not sure I ever asked. I recall being told it 14 was an EEO complaint but I'm not sure I specifically asked 15 ever asked what it was about.
16 Q And what else were you told about the agreement?
17 A With respect to what?
18 Q What was the agreement? I mean what were you told 19 that the agreement was with Mr. Grover?
20 A It seems to me I saw a memo that had to do with it 21 which I may have had to concur with. I knew that he was 22 going to Empo on --. I believe that he was being promoted 23 to a Senior Manager while at Empo.
24 I believe there was some agreement to pay certain 25 expenses related to his going down to Empo but I'm not sure.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
38 1 That might not be common for people to go down to Empo.
2 I think it involved signing a -- at some point but 3 I don't remember at what point that was supposed to occur.
4 That's the only parts that I - that's my recollection of 5 what was in the agreement.
6 MS. BENSON: Do you understand this, Mr. Marquand?
7 MR. MARQUAND: No.
8 Q Do you recall ever making any derogatory or 9 negative statements regarding Mr. Fiser after you became the 10 Acting Operations Support Manager, or while you were 11 fulfilling that role in any capacity?
12 A The only issue I had at all with Mr. Fiser's 13 performance was one small item. I don't remember I 14 specifically what was going on at Watts Bar at the time in 15 which I had asked him to report back to me in a couple of 16 days as to how it was working out. He did not do that.
17 I subsequently discussed with Grover that I would 18 have expected him to report back to me like I had asked him 19 to. That's the only thing that I had any problems at all 20 with his job while he was in Operations Support and the only 21 thing that I can think of where I had any sort of a negative 22 comment.
23 Q Did you ever indicate to anyone that you wanted or 24 desired to have Mr. Harvey be the one who was ultimately 25 selected for the remaining Power Chemistry position, a PWR ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
39 1 -?
2 A No, I did not, and I think we even really went out 3 of our way in this one to try to do our best to make sure 4 that the selection and competition was unbiased and that we 5 selected the best candidates in accordance with all rules.
6 MS. BENSON: I think you've basically covered 7 everything for me. Do you have anything?
8 MR. MARQUAND: No.
9 MS. BENSON: Okay, this will conclude the 10 interview. I appreciate your time today. Is there anything 11 more that you would like to ask me, or any other statements 12 that you would like to make?
13 THE INTERVIEWEE: I'd like to go off the record so 14 I can go get a drink of water. Give me a minute to collect 15 my thoughts.
16 MS. BENSON: Okay, the time right now is 2:18 17 p.m..
18 [Discussion off the record.]
19 MS. BENSON: Be going back on the record and the 20 time now is 2:26 p.m.. Okay, go ahead.
21 THE INTERVIEWEE: I really just wanted to wrap up 22 by emphasizing to you that we tried very conscientiously in 23 this thing to insure that we were fair to all the people 24 involved and that we were in compliance with all of the 25 rules that were involved.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
40 1 Until Mr. Fiser had - I mean we started off 2 towards being fair towards everyone. When Mr. Fiser came to 3 HR and raised the question - I mean while he was stating he 4 would submit a DOL complaint he was saying he was as I 5 understood his concern was that we would be violating the 6 terms of his prior DOL settlement.
7 When he brought up this new one was the first that 8 I knew that there was a prior DOL settlement with him so 9 from that time -- said if it involves a prior settlement 10 here we need to make sure that we are totally in compliance ii with all the rules whatever we agreed to before.
12 I discussed that with Ed Boyles. He got the Human 13 Resources, HR people involved. We got OGC involved as 14 appropriate. As I mentioned there was a DOL Task Force 15 which involves the concerns, resolutions staff and we had 16 them involved through all of it watching everything that was 17 being done here to insure that we were fair and that we also 18 did not do anything that in any way deviated from the prior 19 agreement with Mr. Fiser.
20 MS. BENSON: Okay.
21 THE INTERVIEWEE: And I think we stuck to that and 22 came out with what was a fair selection at the end of the 23 process.
24 MS. BENSON: Okay.
25 MR. MARQUAND: Did you know prior to Mr. Fiser ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
41 1 raising that issue with HR that he would file a Department 2 of Labor complaint regarding an alleged breach of his 3 previous DOL case? Before that were you aware that he even 4 had a previous DOL case?
5 THE INTERVIEWEE: I was not aware that he had a 6 previous DOL case until he brought it up as part of coming 7 to HR and telling that his concern was that we were 8 breaching the agreement from his prior case.
9 MS. BENSON: Can I ask him something to clarify 10 that?
11 MR. MARQUAND: Sure.
12 MS. BENSON: Okay. You're saying you weren't 13 aware but I'm going to go back to those interviews 14 previously and yours and Mr. McArthur's attempts were to 15 have a Board of members that were not aware of his past 16 complaints so it seems you know just by stating that in your 17 interview you're acknowledging right there that you had 18 knowledge of his prior complaints or his prior settlement.
19 THE INTERVIEWEE: He made - he brought the concern 20 and indicated that he would submit another one for breach of 21 his agreement on his first one long before we ever got 22 putting together the Board. He made that statement prior to 23 us ever posting the positions.
24 We delayed posting the positions I believe a 25 couple of weeks to allow time for further review to insure ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
42 1 that by posting those positions we were not doing anything 2 in violation of the prior agreement.
3 MR. MARQUAND: The complaint was filed before the 4 Selection Review Board met and they conferred with me prior 5 to us even receiving the Department of Labor complaint.
6 MS. BENSON: Right, I know but there is other 7 issues that were brought up in his DOL complaint besides 8 just the question of the position.
9 MR. MARQUAND: Yeah, the point that I think Tom 10 was addressing was in your earlier questions. One of your 11 earlier questions you asked about an OIG interview referring 12 to his knowledge of complaint of complaints.
13 At the time that the SRB met he had been briefed 14 because of Gary's threat to file a Department of Labor 15 complaint and was told about that threat so at that point 16 and time is when he learned and that was prior to both the 17 posting and the Selection Review Board.
18 MS. BENSON: Okay.
19 MR. MARQUAND: But that's the point and time in 20 which he learned.
21 MS. BENSON: Okay, that's fine.
22 MR. MARQUAND: And having been apprised of Gary's 23 threat Mr. McGrath and everyone else was very careful to 24 elicit advice from all the people who were involved or could 25 offer advice as to the appropriate way to go.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
43 1 MS. BENSON: I don't think that's an argument as 2 far as - you know I don't think we're arguing that it 3 (Cannot understand these words.) I mean that the rules 4 appear that it really was making an effort to do that fairly 5 I don't know that that's necessarily the argument.
6 MR. MARQUAND: The other thing - something else I 7 think may be that - that may be I've seen emphasis on is the 8 question about should there have been a proponent of each of 9 the candidates on the Selection Review Board.
10 I think if you will look at the way Selection 11 Review Boards are constituted throughout TVA Nuclear that 12 that's not ever a consideration. The consideration is how 13 do we post it. How do we put together a fair Selection 14 Review Board and the fact in this case it would have three 15 RADCON Chemistry Managers.
16 Although that looks very symmetrical I think that 17 is probably the exception rather than the rule. The norm is 18 that you will have a primary customer or a peer and a 19 technical -- rule.
20 I don't think you ever see - I think it's very 21 infrequent that you see that sentry that they initially 22 sought to obtain in this case. I think it would have been 23 I'm not aware of that ever happening. Normally, it's very 24 much a different situation.
25 MS. BENSON: And I understand that also. The ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
44 1 point I think that needs to be reviewed is that knowing that 2 he did file a complaint and to insure that it's handled 3 fairly you've got two customers you know that are present on 4 the panel that are kind of almost before or against the 5 person that services them and he you know in his capacity 6 his customer was not present so I mean this is an argument 7 not really for us to decide today.
8 Unless you have any other comments that you would 9 like to add regarding any of your testimony today or 10 anything further you would like to add?
11 THE INTERVIEWEE: I've nothing else to add.
12 MS. BENSON: Any other questions of him?
13 MR. MARQUAND: I do not.
14 MS. BENSON: Was all the information you provided 15 today provided voluntarily and without threat or coercion 16 from the NRC?
17 THE INTERVIEWEE: Yes.
18 MS. BENSON: And we'll conclude the interview.
19 The time now is 2:34 p.m.
20 [Whereupon, at 2:34 p.m., the interview was 21 concluded.]
22 23 24 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REPORTER' S CERTIFICATE I, J.B. SHELTON, reporter, hereby certify that the foregoing transcript consisting of pages is a complete, true, and accurate transcript of the testimony indicated, held on April 20, 1999 in Chattanooga, Tennessee in the Matter of the interview of THOMAS J. McGRATH.
I further certify that this proceeding was recorded by me, and the foregoing transcript has been prepared under my direction.
Date: APRIL 23, 1999 Official Reporter ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD SUITE 1014 1025 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd Washington, D.C. 20036