ML19106A203
| ML19106A203 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/11/2019 |
| From: | NRC/OCIO |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19106A205 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA, NRC-2019-000247 | |
| Download: ML19106A203 (421) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:NRC FORM 464 Part I U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC RESPONSE NUMBER (04-2018) RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF 2019-000531 3 INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST RESPONSE TYPE INTERIM FINAL REQUESTER: DATE: Jason Fagone 04/08/2019 DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED RECORDS: Request: All NRC records between 2011 and the present day (May 9, 2018) involving safety concerns raised by workers at the Hunters Point Shipyard in San Francisco, California. This request includes, but is not limited to, complaints, emails, records of phone calls, faxes, memos, and reports. This request also includes all records related to the interactions of (ctd) PART I. -- INFORMATION RELEASED The NRC has made some, or all, of the requested records publicly available through one or more of the following means: (1) https://www.nrc.gov; (2) public ADAMS, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html; (3) microfiche available in the NRC Public Document Room; or FOIA Online, https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home. Agency records subject to the request are enclosed. Records subject to the request that contain information originated by or of interest to another Federal agency have been referred to that agency (See Part I.D -- Comments) for a disclosure determination and direct response to you. We are continuing to process your request. See Part I.D -- Comments. PART I.A -- FEES You will be billed by NRC for the amount indicated. Since the minimum fee threshold was not met, AMOUNT you will not be charged fees. You will receive a refund for the amount indicated.
$0.00 Due to our delayed response, you will not be Fees waived. charged search and/or duplication fees that would otherwise be applicable to your request.
PART I.B -- INFORMATION NOT LOCATED OR WITHHELD FROM DISCLOSURE We did not locate any agency records responsive to your request. Note: Agencies may treat three discrete categories of law enforcement and national security records as not subject to the FOIA ("exclusions"). See 5 U.S.C. 552(c). This is a standard notification given to all requesters; it should not be taken to mean that any excluded records do, or do not, exist. We have withheld certain information pursuant to the FOIA exemptions described, and for the reasons stated, in Part II. Because this is an interim response to your request, you may not appeal at this time. We will notify you of your right to appeal any of the responses we have issued in response to your request when we issue our final determination. You may appeal this final determination within 90 calendar days of the date of this response. If you submit an appeal by mail, address it to the FOIA Officer, at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T-2 F43, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. You may submit an appeal by e-mail to FOIA.resource@nrc.gov. You may fax an appeal to (301) 415-5130. Or you may submit an appeal through FOIA Online, https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home. Please be sure to include on your submission that it is a FOIA Appeal. PART I.C -- REFERENCES AND POINTS OF CONTACT You have the right to seek assistance from the NRC's FOIA Public Liaison by submitting your inquiry at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ foia/contact-foia.html, or by calling the FOIA Public Liaison at (301) 415-1276. If we have denied your request, you have the right to seek dispute resolution services from the NRC's Public Liaison or the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). To seek dispute resolution services from OGIS, you may e-mail OGIS at ogis@nara.gov, send a fax to (202) 741-5789, or send a letter to: Office of Government Information Services, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 20740-6001. For additional information about OGIS, please visit the OGIS website at https://www.archives.gov/ogis.
NRC FORM 464 Part I U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC RESPONSE NUMBER (04-2018) RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF 2019-000531 3 INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST RESPONSE TYPE INTERIM FINAL PART I.D -- COMMENTS Request
Description:
Request: All NRC records between 2011 and the present day (May 9, 2018) involving safety concerns raised by workers at the Hunters Point Shipyard in San Francisco, California. This request includes, but is not limited to, complaints, emails, records of phone calls, faxes, memos, and reports. This request also includes all records related to the interactions of Susan Andrews and Elbert Bowers with the NRC. Andrews and Bowers are former radiological control experts who worked at the Shipyard, and they have both stated in sworn declarations that they informed the NRC of safety concerns and violations in 2011. Please note: This is the best available copy. The NRC is not providing duplicates. The agency already provided two interim responses to you, this is the third interim response. The responsive records are provided to you in part. We continue to process your request. Signature - Freedom of Information Act Officer or Designee Stephanie A. Blaney Digitally signed by Stephanie A. Blaney Date: 2019.04.08 11:21:32 -04'00'
NRC FORM 464 Part II U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC (04-2018) 2018 000531 RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST DATE: 04/08/2019 PART II.A -- APPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS Records subject to the request are being withheld in their entirety or in part under the FOIA exemption(s) as indicated below (5 U.S.C. 552(b)). Exemption 1: The withheld information is properly classified pursuant to an Executive Order protecting national security information. Exemption 2: The withheld information relates solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of NRC. Exemption 3: The withheld information is specifically exempted from public disclosure by the statute indicated. Sections 141-145 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data (42 U.S.C. 2161-2165). Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Unclassified Safeguards Information (42 U.S.C. 2167). 41 U.S.C. 4702(b), which prohibits the disclosure of contractor proposals, except when incorporated into the contract between the agency and the Other: Exemption 4: The withheld information is a trade secret or confidential commercial or financial information that is being withheld for the reason(s) indicated. The information is considered to be proprietary because it concerns a licensee's or applicant's physical protection or material control and accounting program for special nuclear material pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390(d)(1). The information is considered to be another type of confidential business (proprietary) information. The information was submitted by a foreign source and received in confidence pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390(d)(2). Exemption 5: The withheld information consists of interagency or intraagency records that are normally privileged in civil litigation. Deliberative process privilege. Attorney work product privilege. Attorney-client privilege. Exemption 6: The withheld information from a personnel, medical, or similar file, is exempted from public disclosure because its disclosure would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Exemption 7: The withheld information consists of records compiled for law enforcement purposes and is being withheld for the reason(s) indicated. (A) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with an open enforcement proceeding. (C) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. (D) The information consists of names and other information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to reveal identities of confidential sources. (E) Disclosure would reveal techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or guidelines that could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law. (F) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual. Other: Duplicates PART II.B -- DENYING OFFICIALS In accordance with 10 CFR 9.25(g) and 9.25(h) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations, the official(s) listed below have made the determination to withhold certain information responsive to your request. APPELLATE OFFICIAL DENYING OFFICIAL TITLE/OFFICE RECORDS DENIED EDO SECY Stephanie Blaney FOIA Officer Select Title/Office from drop-down list Select Title/Office from drop-down list Select Title/Office from drop-down list NRC Form 464 Part II (04-2018)
01:RI BLUE CASE FILE CHECKLIST, EFFECTIVE 09/06/2012 Case#: I *-d{) g]- (Jo~ AGENT: _ _ _ _ _ Initials: _ __ Date:- - - IA: .l(b)(7)(C) I. Initials: (b)(7)(C) Date:_ __ AGENT RESPONSIBILITY:
~ ENCASE:
* [ J1Co~pleted Alleger Advisement on Identity Protection Form
* [ ] NCIC Information: Case File Marked with Red Dot
* [ ] Draft NOV that triggered the investigation
* [ ] Completed, Signed and Approved Investigative Plan
/ CLOSED CASE:
* [~ II/Case Notes (Envelope)
* [ ] BC Wipe Audio Interview Files
* [ ] Delete Case Related Material from Computer Drive IA RESPONSIBILITY:
/ OPEN CASE:
* [ vf ARB Meeting Sheets
* [4ning1SR
* [v{Checklist CL9SED CASE:
* "VJ Completed Case Chrons Printout
* [~ nal ISR covering complete case history
* [~ ginal ROI and Exhibits
rBl Case Investigation Status Reports Case Number: L .~--~1~~- _J Facility: j TETRA TECH EC, INC. Mtl'1=h NUMBER ~!HH~H **=r- 1*1~¥Alffl@QIU*IUMl@i;i
~*.(b)(7)(C) 7199 1-2012..002 ~ (7)(C) CLO IN/A CASE INVESTIGATION STATUS REPORTS ISR ENTRY ESTIMAT:1D' STATUS REPORT
- ENTRY APPROVED KEY DATE COMPLETION BY DATE 7199 11/30/2012 11/30/2012 CLO On November 20, (b)(7)(C) NO 2012, 01 contacted Tim MURPHY, Attorney for Tetra Tech (TT) who stated that although TT conducted an internal investigation as to what happened
, between Bert BOWERS, TT
- Radiation Supervisory TT, on January 13, 2011; no written report was produced. MURPHY confirmed to 01 that TT completed an audit report. 01 requested a copy of the audit report. 01 received the TT audit report on November 27, 2012, which was added as an exhibit to the Report of Investigation (ROI).
Case was closed (unsubstantiated) on November 30,
I 2012. (b)(7)(C) 7198 10/31/2012 11/15/2012 RIO A Report of NO Investigation (ROI) draft has been completed and submitted to the FOO for review. Status~ RID ECO: 11/2012. 1 7197 09/30/2012 11/15/2012 RID 01 plans to finish a NO review of testimony I and other records review in October 2012 and finalize a Report of Investigation (ROI) from the previous Case Agent. Status: RID ECO: 11/2012. I 7196 08/31/2012 11/15/2012 RID Due to the need to NO complete the review
' of testimony and other case related records, and completion of the report of
- investigation the ECO.is being extended to November 2012.
Status: RIO ECO: 11/2012. 7195 07/31/2012 08/15/2012 RID During this NO reporting period, an incomplete draft Report of Investigation (ROI) was submitted by
*---* 01:DI ~ A
, I (b)(7)(C) SA l(b)(7)(C) I resigned from the NRC to take a position with another federal agancy. The investigation was transferred to 01:RI SSA!(b)(7)(C) !who will
' begin reviewing the transcripts, and
~
other case related
' information so that
( I he will be able to complete the report of investigation. Upon completing the rAnort, SSA (b)(7)(C) ill submit me report to the SAIC for review and approval. Status:
- RID ECO: 08/2012
' 7194 06/30/2012 08/15/2012 FWP During 'the latter (b)(7)(C) NO half of this reporting period, reporting agent received I transcript of the interviAw d
..,Ith l(b)(7)(C)
I (b)(7)(C) transcript, along r-with a few additional transcripts are currently under review In preparation of drafting the report of Investigation in this matter. Based upon investigative priorities with respect of 01 Case Number 1-2012-001, and the closure process associated therein, the nine month metric wlll
' not be satisfied in this investigation.
The ECO is being extended to July to allow for completion of the report of Investigation. Status: FWP ECD: 07/2012. 7193 05/31/2012 06115/2012 FWP During this NO reporting period, Tetra Tech EC. Inc. (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) I lwas interviewed at his office I (b)(7}(C l
I ( VA. The Interview r recording in this matter has been expedited and it is anticipated that a draft Report of Investigation (ROI) will be written in the immediate furture and that this investigation will be closed during the month of June. Status: FWP ECO: 06/2012. 1 7192 04/30/2012 05/15/2012 FWP During this (b)(7)(C) NO
' reporting period, reporting agent was schedule" tn intl!rviAwl(bl(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) Ion April 18, 2012, in Atlanta, GA1 however, l(b)(7)(C) I invoked
' his right to counsel right before the interview, at which time, the reporting agent talked with Tim MURPHY, Esq.
MURPHY highlighted some potential dates for I which he and l(b)(7)(C) jwere I available, and at this Juncture, efforts are being made to I facilitate the interview of ' (b)(7)(C) I which I is essential to this investigation. This investigation continues pending 1 the interview of l(b)(7)(C) !and any follow-up I investigative I activities required. I
- Status: FWP ECD:
05/2012. I I I 7191 03/31/2012 05/15/2012 FWP During this NO
j reporting period, (b)(7)(C) reporting agent reviewed transcripts from recently conducted interviews as well as continued to coordinate with Tetra Techj(b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) I regarding potential interview dates and times. Reporting agent also had to discuss the potential interview schedule with Tim MURPHY, Esq., Corporate counsel to Tetra Tech EC, Inc. This investigation continues pending the completion of the final interview in this matter with (b)(7)(C) l and subsequent Investigative evaluation. Status: FWP ECD: 05/2012 7190 02/29/2012 03/15/2012 FWP From February 6-10, NO 2012, reporting agent conducted 9 interviews [all. represented by counsel] with members of the management and leadership team at Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Testimony provided by management personnel was fairly consistent, wherein it was confirmed that BOWERS was furloughed In the summer of 2011 after being transferred from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard to
- Alameda. BOWERS
1' was offered subsequent work as 1 recently as the fall of 2011, however, those jobs were In Saudi Arabia and Oak Ridge, TN. BOWERS declined both offers citing a desire to remain in the San Francisco Bay Area. This Investigation continues pending supplemental management
' interviews to be conducted. More specifically, OJ will TAtra T~~ll (b)(7)(D)
I I (b)(7)(C) Iwho is I rocatea m me areater l(b)(7)(D) l(b)(7)(D) rea. ::>>catus: i----- 7189 01/31/2012 03/15/2012 FWP t-"WP ECO: 03/2012. During this reporting period, (b)(7)(C) NO reporting agent received supplemental electronic mail correspondence from alleger Bert BOWERS in regards to updated information received. More specifically, BOWERS advised that he was contacted by Tetra Tech regarding his Interest in another position with the company. This was on the heels of a tentative order being issued against Tetra Tech
! and in BOWERS favor, by the State of California, I
I Department of Labor. Reporting agent intends to travel to California In February to conduct subsequent Interviews with management personnel In this matter. This investigation continues pending further investigative activity/field work. Status: FWP ECD: .7188 12/31/2011 01/15/2012 FWP 03/2012 During this (b)(7)(C) NO reporting period, reporting agent has received supplemental email documentation from Bert BOWERS I regarding his discrimination claim against his former employer: Tetra Tech. While there have been few developments with respect to BOWERS,he I (BOWERS) has provided the reporting agent with information regarding two I former Tetra Tech employees from Hunters Point Naval i Shipyard, who have I I filed discrimination ,1 I claims with the NRC. Susan I ANDREWS and I l(b)(7)(C) lwere both interviewed by the reporting agent in November 2011, I In San Francisco and l~b)~7HC) l respectively, as they were witnesses
( ( I for BOWERS. This investigation continues pending additional investigative field work. Status FWP ECO: 011/2012. I I During this (b)(7)(C) NO 7187 11/30/2011 01/15/2012 FWP reoortlna oeriod, (b)(7)(C) at Hunters t"Olnt r aval Shipyard, a current Tetra Tech EC, Inc. I employee was
- in l(b)(?)(C) l (b)(7)(C) offered info.............
I in support of the job that BOWERS was doing as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO), but
...i;,. :1dvb1e that he (b)(7)(C) as not I
employed there during the time that BOWERS was having significant i I bouts with management. On Wednesday November 16, 2011 , 01 was contacted by Kathy DALEY, Deputy Labor
' co*m missloner with I
the State of California, Department of Labor. DALEY further advised that her office was preparing to issue a I finding against ' Tetra Tech EC, Inc. l
' for the wrongful terminat ion of I
BOWERS. This investigation continues further investigative I efforts. Status: FWP
I ! ECO: 01/2012. I j 7186 10/31/2011 01/15/2012 FWP During this (b)(7)(C) NO reporting period, reporting agent I traveled to San Francisco, CA to conduct initial interviews in this Investigation with alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS,and additional witnesses. BOWERS I previously provided the report.I ng agent with the names of former and current employees working at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HPNS). The employees identified by BOWERS and subsequently interviewed by the reporting agent were individuals who worked for I Tetra Tech EC, Inc (TTI), or one of the I subcontractors to I TTI at HPNS. Six I individuals I (includin9, the alleger) were interviewed during the time periods covering 10/25/11-10/27/11. This investigation continues pending further investigative efforts. Status: FWP ECO: 01/2012 I 7185 10/07/2011 01/15/2012 FWP On January 31 and February 1, 2011, ee*r t BOWERS, former Tetra Tech RSO representative at the Hunter's I Point Naval
Shipyard decommissioning project provided a number of technical concerns and a discrimination
- complaint in electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ, NRC:RIV.
Because Tetra Tech is a Region I (RI) licensee, these concerns were forwarded to the RI Office Allegations Office for disposition. Specifically, BOWERS alleged that he experienced a hostile work environment and discrimination after raising radiological concerns to include the need for improved and timely , communications related to radiological controls In the field at Hunters Point. BOWERS claims to have been repeatedly berated r Tech raising his concerns. BOW~- -.... clalmed that the (b)(7)(C) told him that his , safety concerns
- seemed to be based on the fact that his
[BOWERS] name
- was listed on the 1
NRC license and that he!(b)(7)1C) I
' could arrange to have it removed. BOWERS claims that when he informed thellfil] of his obligation to resolve issues at the site or begin steps to inform the
' NRC, the!(b)(7)(C) I ordered him to pack up his office and to get off of the site immediately. On April 1, 2011, was the last day that BOWERS performed work for Tetra Tech, but he was paid for accumulated overtime, sick and annual leave until August 1, 2011.
These concerns were discussed during a March 16, 2011, NRC:RI Allegation Review Board (ARB). The ARB, to include Regional Counsel determined that BOWERS had articulated a prima facie case of discrimination and that BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 investigate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and Tetra Tech mediated on August 17, 2001, but did not
' reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for investigation. On October 5, 2011, Region I Field Office
I ( ( r l(b)(7)(C) spokewnn I BOWERS who confinned that ADR mediation had failed and that he desired that 01 investigate his discrimination concern. Potential Violations Include 10 CFR 30.7 (Employee protection) and 10 CFR 30.10 (Deliberate misconduct). The Statute of LimitaUons tolls on April 1, 2016 . Status: FWP ECO (90 days): 01/2012.
OFFICIAG *-;E ONLY
- 01 INVESTIGATION INFOR{ TION INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD l(b)(7)(C)
Facility: TETRA TECH EC, INC. Case Agent Case Number: 1-2012-002 Date Opened: 10/07/201 1 Docket Number(s): 03038199 ECD: Priority: High Case Code: Materials/Ind ustrlal Status: Case is closed Primary Alleg Source: (A} Alleger Allegation Number(s): Rl-2011-A-0019 Subject/Allegation: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN Monthly Status Report: 10/0712011 On January 31 and February 1, 2011 , Bert BOWERS, former Tetra Tech RSO representative at the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard decommissioning project provided a number of technical concerns and a discrimination complaint in electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ, NRC:RIV. Because Tetra Tech is a Region I (RI) licensee, these concerns were forwarded to the RI Office Allegations Office for disposition. Specifically, BOWERS alleged that he experienced a hostile work environment and discrimination after raising radiological concerns to include the need for improved and timely communications related to radiological controls in the field at Hunters Point. BOWERS claims to have been repeatedly berated by a Tetra Tech (b)(7)(CJ (the last instance occurring in th~ nce of the Tetra Tee (b)(7)(C) 1 his concerns. BOWERS claimed that th [/'l old him that his safety concerns seeme based on the fact that his [BOWERS) na s listed on the NRC lic m I nd that h~(b)(7)(C) could arrange to have It removed. BOWERS claims that when~ ic; ormed th 1 f his obligation to resolve issues at the site or begin steps to inform the NRC, th ic rdered hi ack up his office and to get off of the site immediately. On April 1, 2011 , was the las ay that BOWERS performed work for Tetra Tech, but he was paid for accumulated overtime, sick and annual leave until August 1, 2011. These concerns were discussed during a March 16, 2011 , NRC:RI Allegation Review Board (ARB). The ARB, to include Regional Counsel determined that BOWERS had articulated a prime facie case of discrimination and that BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 investigate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and Tetra Tech mediated on August 17, 2001 , but did not reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for investigation. On October 5, 2011, Region I Field Office!(b)(?)(C) ~poke with BOWERS who confirmed that ADR mediation had failed and that he desired that 01 investigate his discrimination concern. Potential Violations include 10 CFR 30. 7 (Employee protection) and 10 CFR 30.10 (Deliberate misconduct). The Statute of Limitations tolls on April 1, 2016. Status: FWP ECO (90 days): Q1/2012. 10131/2011 During this reporting period, reporting agent traveled to San Francisco, CA to conduct Initial Interviews in this investigation with alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS, and additional witnesses. BOWERS previously provided the reporting agent with the names of former and current employees working at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HPNS). The employees identified by BOWERS and subsequently Interviewed by the reporting agent were individuals who worked for Tetra Tech EC, Inc (TII), or one of the subcontractors to TII at HPNS. Six individuals (Including the atleger) were interviewed during the time periods covering 10/25/11-10127/11 . This investigation continues pending further investigative efforts. Status: FWP ECO: 01/2.012 11/3012011 During this reporting period, (b)(7)(C) Shipyard, a current Tetra Te... ch:--: e-=c-, :- ln-c.- em
- p-:-lo_y_e_e_w_a_s-:-in-:-te-rv
""'i,...
e-wed..,..,.. in~ b"""'=" 7'"'"C
~ :.;.,*.l(b)(7)(C) bffered information in f the Job that BOWERS was doing as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO), but did advise that he (b)(7)(C) was not employed there during the time that BOWERS was having significant bouts with management. On Wednesday November 16, 201 1, 01 was contacted by Kathy DALEY, Deputy Labor Commissioner wi1h the State of California, Department of Labor. DALEY further advised that her office was preparing to Issue a finding against Tetra Tech EC, Inc. for the wrongful termination ot BOWERS. This investigation continues further investigative efforts. Status: FWP ECO: 0112012.
06/18/2013 9:18:47 AM OFFICIAL USE ONLY - 01 IN'JESTIGATION INFORMATION Page 1
OFFICIA~ "E ONLY - Cl INVESTIGATION INFO~,.. TION INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD Facility: TETRA TECH EC, INC. Case Agent ._!(b_)(_7).;.. (C.:..
) _ _ _ _ __.
Case Number: 1-2012-002 Date Opened; 10/07/2011 12131/2011 During this reporting period, reporting agent has received supplemental email documentation from Bert BOVVERS regarding his discrimination claim against his former employer: Tetra Tech. While there have been few developments with respect to BOWERS, he (BOWERS) has provided the reporting agent with inform~tion regarding two former Tetra Tech employees from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, who have filed discrimination claims with the NRC. Susan ANDREWS b7C ere both interviewed by the reporting agent in November 2011 , In San Francisco and (b)(7)(C) respectively, as they were witnesses for BOWERS. This investigation continues pending additional investigative field work. Status FWP ECD: 01/2012. 01/31/2012 During this reporting period, reporting agent received supplemental electronic mall correspondence from alleger Bert BOWERS in regards to updated information received. More specifically, BOWERS advised that he was contacted by Tetra Tech regarding his interest in another position with the company. This was on the heels of a tentative order being issued against Tetra Tech and in BOVVERS favor, by the State of California, Department of labor. Reporting agent intends to travel to California in February to conduct subsequent interviews with management personnel in this matter. This investigation continues pending further investigative activity/field work. Status: FWP ECO: 03/2012 02129/2012 From February 6-10, 2012, reporting agent conducted 9 interviews [all represented by counsel] with members of the management and leadership team at Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Testimony provided by management personnel was fairly consistent, wherein it was confirmed that BOWERS was furloughed in the summer of 2011 after being transferred from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard to Alameda. BOWERS was offered subsequent work as recently as the fall of 2011, however, those jobs were in Saudi Arabia and Oak Ridge, TN. BOWERS declined both offers citing a desire to remain in the San Francisco Bay Area. This investigation continues pending su lemental mana ement interviews to be conducted. More specifically, 01 will interview Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C) who is located in the greate1(b)(7)(C) !area. Status: FWP E 03/31/2012 During this reporting period, reporting agent reviewed transcri ts from recently conducted interviews as well as continued to coordinate with Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C) regardlng potential interview dates and times. Reporting agent also had to discuss t e po en 1a tn erv1ew schedule with Tim MURPHY, Esq., Corporate counsel to Tetra Tech EC, Inc. This investigation continues pending the completion of the final interview in this matter with!(b)(7)(C) Iand subsequent investigative evaluation. Status: FWP ECO: 05/2012 04/30/2012 During this reporting period, re ortin a ent w;:is scheduled to Interview (b)(l )(C) on~ r,xixCJ jl~rbxixc) l however, (b)(7)(C) invoked his right to counsel ng e ore t e interview, at which time, the reportin a ent talked wit in'I MURPHY, Esq. MURPHY highlighted some potential dates for which he and (b)(7)(C) were available, and at this juncture, efforts are being made to facilitate the interview o b 7 c which is essential to this investigation. This investigation continues pending the interview o (b)(7)(C) and any follow-up investigative activities required. Status: FWP ECO: 05/2012. 05131/2.012 During this reporting period, Tetra Tech EC, Inc. !(b)(?)(C) !was interviewed at his office inJ(b)(7)(C) lThe interview recording in this matter has been expedited and it is anticipated that a draftepon of lnV stigatlon (ROI) will be written in the immediate furture and that this, investigation will be closed during the month of June. Status: FWP ECD: 06/2012. 06130/2012 During the latter half of this re ortin eriod, reporting agent received transcript of the interview conducted with (b)(7)(C) transcript, alo*ng With a few additional transcripts are currently under review n prepara 10n o ra ing the report of Investigation in this matter. Based upon investigative priorities with respect of 01 Case Number 1-2012-001 , and the closure process associated therein, the nine month metric will not be satisfied in this investigation. The ECO Is being extended to July to allow for comple1ion of the report of investigation. Status: FWP ECO: 07/2012. 06/18/2013 9:18:47 AM OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION Page 2
OFFICIA~" -:e ONLY* 0 1INVl:STIGATION INFOR( TION INVESTIGATION ST ATUS RECORD l(b)(7)(C) Facility: TETRA TECH EC, INC. Case Agent: Case Number. 1-2012-002 Date Opened: 10/07/2011 07/31/2012 During this re orting period, an Incomplete draft Report of Investigation (ROI) was submitted by former 7 01.RI SAUb}(_}(C} !from to take a position with another federal agancy. The investigation was transferred to 0 1:RI SSA (b)(7)(C) ho will begin reviewing the transcripts, and other case related in~
- so that he will be able to complete the report of investigation. Upon completing the report, SSA (b)(7)(C) will submit the report to the SAIC for review and approval. Status: RID ECO:
08/2012 08/31/2012 Due to the need to complete the review of testimony and other case related records, and completion of the report of Investigation the ECO Is being extended to November 2012. Status: RID ECD: 11/2012. 09/30/2012 0 1plans to finish a review of testimony and other records review in October 2012 and finalize a Report of Investigation (ROI) from the previous Case Agent. Status: RIO ECO: 1112012. 10/31/2012 A Report of Investigation (ROI) draft has been completed and submitted to the )~fl or review. Status: RID ECO: 11/2012. 11/30/2012 On November 20, 2012 , 01 contacted Tim MURPHY, Attorney for Tetra Tech (TT) who stated that although TT conducted an internal investiiiation as to what happened between Bert BOWERS, TI Radiation Supervisory Personnel and!(b)(7_Cl l TT, on January 13, 2011 ; no written report was produced. MURPHY confirmed to 0 1that TT completed an audit report. 01 requested a copy of the audit report. 01 received the TT audit report on November 27, 2012, which was added as an exhibit to the Report of Investigation (ROI). Case was closed (unsubstantiated) on November 30, 2012. Completion Date: 11/30/2012 Total Staff Hours: 433.0 Issue Date: Months Open: 14.0 DOJ Actlon(s): DOJ Referral Date: 01 Violation(s): Statue of Limitations Date: 04/01/2016 06/18/2013 9:18:47 AM OFFICIAL USE ONLY
- 01 IN\'ESTIGATION INFORMATION Page 3
OFFICIAL ( ~~ONLY* 01 INVESTIGATION INFORq' "'ION CASE CHRONOLOGY TETRA TECH EC, INC. Case Agent !(b)(7)(C) Facility: Case Number. 1-2012-002 Date Opened: 10/07/2011 Date Activity 10/10/2011 Reporting agent attempted to contact alleger Bert BOWERS via both email and telephone. leaving messages through both mechanisms. Contact was initiated by the reporting agent in an effort to schedule the alleger interview in this matter. 10/14/2011 On Wednesday October 12, 2011, reporting agent received a return call and email from alleger Bert BOWERS, who confirmed to meeting with the reporting agent for the purpose of initial interview on Wednesday October 26, 2011, in Redwood City, CA. 10/3112011 Between the time periods covering 10/25/11 and 10/27/11, reporting agent interviewed alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS, along with five other individuals who are currently or were previously employed at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, by either Tetra Tech EC, Inc. (TT) or a subcontractor ton. 11107/2011 On Tuesday November 1, 2011, reportln a ent interviewed former Tectra iech !(b)(l)(C)
!(b)(7):c) [Hunters Point Naval Shipyard) (b)(7)(C) in !(b)(7)(C) I L--------'
11121/2011 On Wednesday evening November 16, 2011, reporting agent received a voice mail message from State of California, Deputy Labor Commissioner Kathy DALEY. DALEY advised that her office was investigating the matter of wrongful termination filed by Elbert "Bert" BOWERS, former Radiation Safety Officer at Tetra Tech EC, INC. DALEY further advised of some safety concerns which she had and some critical information~he desired to share with the NRC. Reporting agent forwarded the voicemail message to the R b ) who, In turn, sent it to the appropriate technical staff personnel and Office of Regional Counsel, rther review. This investigation continues. 12/19/2011 ~ e v iewed chrons. (b)(7) 0211712012 (C) eviewed case chrons - SA needs to update chrons 02/28/2012 From February 6-10, 2012, reporting agent conducted 9 interviews with members of the management and leadership team at Tetra Tech EC, Inc. The Interviews were held In conjunction with parallel
- interviews also performed by the State of California, Department of Labor, at their facility ln downtown San Francisco, CA. Interviews were conducted separately, which accounts for such the extended period of time utlllzed for the interviews, and were in the presence of Tetra Tech legal counsel Tim MURPHY, Esq. from the Law firm of FISHER, PHILLIPS, LLP. Testimony provided by management personnel was fairly consistent, wherein it was confirmed that BOWERS was furloughed in the summer of 2011 after being transferred from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard to Alameda. BOWERS was offered subsequent work as recently as the fall of 2011, however, those jobs were in Saudi Arabia and Oak Ridge, TN.
BOWERS declined both offers citing a desire to remain in the San Francisco Bay Area. This investigation continues pending supplemental management Interviews. (b)(7) 03/30/2012 SA needs to update chrons. (C) eview 03/30/2012 Reporting agent reached contacted Tetra Tech!(b)(l)(C) !who agreed to be interviewed.!(b)(7)(CI !did advise of his desire to have counsel and indicated that his attorney would call the reporting agent with perspective interview dates. This investigation continues pending further investigative efforts. 04/09/2012 Reporting agent has contact Tetra Tec~(b)(l)(C) !approximately three times since March f 30, 2012, however messages were left twice with no subsequent return received by 0 1to date. Reporting agent intends to ootijlct prevjously Interviewed Individuals within the Tetra Tech Management Chal_n, In an effort to locate~b)(7)1,C) !of Nuclear Services. This investigation continues. 04/30/2012 1~~?) ~evlewed. 06/18/201310:32:47 AM OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIG.ATION INFORMAIION Page 1
1 OFFICIAL( " C ONLY
- 01 INVESTIGATION INFOR~ TIOt-.L
. CASE CHRONOLOGY Facility: TETRA TECH EC, INC.
Case Number: 1-2012-002 051301201~ eviewed 06/29/2012 Interview transcript ofl(b)(7}(C) lwas recently received and will be reviewed on today. Based upon Investigative case priorities (particularly, the closing ROI and process associated with case No. 1-2012-001), reporting agent did not satisfy the nine month metric regarding this case. Reporting agent is also awaiting additional documentation from the legal representatives for Tetra Tech, as supplemental dooomentation has been requested. A draft ROI will be prepared upon complete review of all subsequent transcripts and documentation. 06/'2912012 ll~~(C ~eviewed 08/01/2012 Closing ROI has been submitted to SSAl(b)(l)(C) !tor editorial review and amendements where neoessary. 09/11/2012 10/18/2012 /~?)eviewed case chrons and did case review with SA. Rewritten/revised ROi is about to be submitted AIC for review. 11120/2012 TC: nm MURPHY, Attorney for Tetra Tech (D), stated that although (TI) conducted an internal investigation as to whether or not Bert BOWERS resigned; no written report was produced. MURPHY added that an audit was conducted which resulted in a written report. 01 requested the audit written report. 11126/2012 TC: Tim MURPHY, 01 again requested that he provide ITs audit report to 01. 11/27/2012 MURPHY provided a copy of the TT audit report to 01. Case Agent added the audit report to the ROI and submitted same for closure. 06/18/201310:32:47 AM OFFICIAL use ONLY - Cl INVESTIGATION INFORMATION P,age2
-OFFICIAL,' . '"'E ONLY 01 IN\'ESTIGATION INFORr* TION-CASE CHRONOLOGY Case Agent: l(b)(7)(C)
Facility: GINNA Case Number: 1-2012-001 Date Opened: 10/07/2011 Date 11/07/2011 ~~tl;~~sday November 3, 2011, reporting agent interviewed alleger!(b)(?)(C) !at his residence in !(b)<z)(C} Iprovided a detailed account as to the allegations which were provided to the-NRC previously. According to (b}(7)(C) had a history of being inattentive (sleeping} while on post on night shift at GINNA. On Frida ov r 4 2011 re orting agent interviewed former Wackenhut b 71 c
- b 7 C b7c reviously worked at the GINNA Nuclear Stati f re (b)(?)(C) corroborated the statements provided by (b)(7)1C) in that, (b)(?)(C) had a history of sleeping while on post at GINNA.
12/1912011 )~f) reviewed chrons. 02/17/2012 )~J' ) reviewed case chrons - SA needs to update chrons 02/28/2012 On or about February 22, 2012, reporting agent contacted G4S Security Management personnel at GINNA in an effort to identify availability for Interviews with Management personnel. Reporting .agent is currently negotiating potential meeting dates at this time with management, although there could be some altertatlons to the schedule based upon the intervention of corporate counsel. This investigation continues. 03/3012012 SA needs to update case chron~ review. 03130/2012 On March 27 and 28, 2012, reporting agent conducted Interviews with security management personnel from G4S, at the N.E. GINNA Nuclear Power Plant in Ontario, NY. Interviews were conducted with G4S l(b)(7)(C) !G4Sl/b)~\/C\ land l(b)(?)(C) ~
!(b)(7)(C) liormer G4S !_b)(7)(C) . as a(so interviewed regarding er knowledge of the alleged Inattentiveness In this matter. This Investigation 04/3arlOIZ [~::::n::.:I:::~:::::::::::**efforts 05/30/2012 Imteviewed - Case agent needs to update chrons 06/06/2012 Required field work has been completed in this matter and draft ROI is currently being prepared by the reporting agent at this time.
06/29/2012 Closing ROI has appropriately edited and reviewed by 01:RI Management, and this investigation is scheduled to be closed in the immediate future. 06129/2012 case closed ~ reviewed Page 1 06/18/2013 10:32:22 AM OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 IN\'ESTIGATION INFORMATION
(b)(7)(C} From: Sent: To: Cc: pate .sewa 1. dol.gov
Subject:
Re: (no subject) l(b)(?)(C) Regarding the referenced phone conversation Just completed, this response confirms my request that 01 investigate the discrimination complaint of record. Information related to the corresponding USDOL Investigator involved with the complaint is as follows: Sewali K. Patel Regional Investigator U.S. Department of Labor/OSHA 90 7th Street, Suite 18100 San Francisco, CA 94103 Tel: (415) 625-2538 Fax; (415) 625-2534 E-mail: patel.sewalLk@dol.gov In parallel,, should the need for additional Information or feedback becomes necessary, feel free to contact me using any of the options that follow. Your promptness as reflected in your timely effort to contact me is appreciated, In a message dated 10/5/20111 :17:14 P.M. Pacific DaylightTime,_!'b-)(TJ_(_c_
) _ _ _ _ __,~ rites:
Mr. Bowers - During our telephone discussion a few minutes ago, you requested that 01 investigate your discrimination complaint. Please confirm that and also provide me the name of the USDOL Investigator in a return email. Thank you, l(b)(l)(CJ USNRC, Office of Investigations Region I 475 Allendale Rd. King of Prussia, PA 19406 [O]!(b)(7)(C) 1
(b)(7)(C) From: Ghasemian, Shahram Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 9:33 AM To: R1ALLEGATION RESO ,...U_R_C__E_ _...., Cc: Ghasemian, Shahram; (b)(7)(C) Traci L. Morse
Subject:
Rl-2011-A-0019 (adr era ech In this case, the parties mediated on 8/17/2011 but did not reach a settlement. However, it seems that they wanted to continue negotiations because they asked whether we (the NRC) would pay for another round of mediations. I declined that request mainly because of the cost but gave the parties several weeks to work on their own to see if they can reach a settlement. We gave them until the end of September. Since no settlement was reached and there was no status from the parties, Cornell will be notifying the parties that we are closing the ADR case file and returning it to the region for investigation. So, given this background, it may be worthwhHe for 0 1to contact the alleger first before we open a case to see what the alleger wants. For all I know, they may still be working on settling it on their own. Thanks Shahram Shahram Ghasemian Nuclear Reg1:,1latory Commission 301.415.3591 ' s t£J'ltl.R. 10/s/11 0tJ~c..f it I)0t. ufhJ,:r T\\ uJJti.Sn ('1'°)1'Yf Ad (b)(7)(C) I I
. (b)(7)(C)
(b)(7)(C) I 1
Johnson, Sharon From: Ghasemian, Shahram Sent: Wednesday, June 01 1 2011 6:11 PM To: Wilson, Ernest; Urban, Richard Cc: Johnson, Sharon; McFadden, John
Subject:
Re: Rf-2011-A-0019 (Tetra-Tech Cl) Ernie - thanks for the follow uo and update. If he wants cornell, is he going to call cornell or should cornell call him? If he is waiting for a call, oould you email me his contact number. Thanks Shahram Ghasemian Nuclear Re ufatory Commission (b)(7)(C) c 301.415.3591 w From: Wilson, Ernest To: Urban, Richard
- Cc: Johnson, Sharon; McFadden, John; Ghasemian, Shahram Sent: Wed Jun 0117:56:42 2011
Subject:
RI-2011-A-0019 (Tetra-Tech CI)
- Rick, As you requested, I spoke with the subject from 5: 15 to 5:40 PM on Wed , June 1, 2011 . He had j ust come from a meeting at a restaurant with "2 upper level management", i.e. an HR Rep. and a safety expert. He said something about it was a first meeting from the Tetra-Tech Employee Hotline complaint he made. He is trying to exhaust all of his avenues before engaging NRC (01) ("that was the way he was taught and brought up in the indust_ry," i.e., that you try to resolve issues internally. I got the impression that he thought he had to do all these things before engaging 01. I explained to him the process and that Cornell was an avenue for him to take although he was not obligated to go that route and we (01) could start an investigation now (I told him that leads tend to dry up the longer he waits to decide on 01). He thought he had to next go to Cornell to "stay in pr.ocess." I explained to him that his thought was wrong and that it was completely his option and right to choose 01 or to attempt to mediate thru Cornell. He authorized me to tell you that his next call on this matter is to Cornell to try the final mediation option. He said there is a possibility that Tetra-Tech will choose not to mediate with him. I explained to him the many scenarios we have had with the employees and employers in the early ADR process. I also further explained the difference between DOUOSHA (making a person whole) and the NRC/01 because he commented about being limited to 180 days.
Ern 1
J McFadden, .John From: R4ALLEGATION Resource " Sent: Wednesday, Fehr'ua,y-23, 2011 3:09 PM To: McFadden,* John .
Subject:
**SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL** *Attachments: 11021_aEPR.do.c; 11021 receipt form.pdf Jack:
Just checking my voicemaiJ, he.re is the receipt form and ARB record !unsigned) for the case at Hunter's Point, concerning Tetra.Tech. Than~s, Judith
~
~ ;Co
~ a-* /2-1
~1~.s/cH?11
' 5,' Jt?/
1
Page _ _ of _ _ licensee l~entffied* X
- If marked no need est of Alleger Information Emall Address: (b)(7)(C)
L.__ _ _ _ _ _ ...J-- - - - - - - Mailing Address: Employer: Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Occupation: Health Physicist Twin Oaks I, Suite 309 5700 Lake Wright Drive Norfolk, VA 23502 Relationship to Facility: Licensee ~mpk>y.e~ (co~tra~tor) .uncter the RASO approved decommissioning plan and
~emedlatlon project af Huntet's Point. San Francisco, Califomta. *
- For "Relationship", select: Licensee Employee; Former Licensee Employee; Contractor Employee; Former Contractor Employee; Private Citizen; News Media; Special Interest Group; Other Federal Agency; .State Agency; Municipal Government; Fed/Stale/Local Govt Employee; 01 Confidential Source; IG Confidential Source; Other (describe).
1 :.::.15.0NCERNEDJNDIVIDUAL CORRESPON:C)EN:OE MeT-1\fQ.O *ANO*TJMI: ..* TIME
- 10:00 ! am f- AM or PM Telephone X \ W'if W>.:\.'.*.'. *:.. .~~~)(:~ Postal S~rvice 0
Other/Specific Requests/Comments: LICENSEE INFORMATION REQUEST & *INDIVIDUAL !DliNTITY PROTECTION Explain that if the concerns are discussed with or Information is requested*from the licensee, that alleger's identity will not be revealed. This contact is necess~ry for the.NRC to conduct our independent evaluation for the concerns. If the concerns are an agreementstate issue or the Jurisdiction of another agency, explain that we will transfer the ___ _cancem to the appm.prlataag.ency, and If the allegec agrees, we will provide tbe..allege~iciei:itity..foi:.follow.up~ - - . ---- 7.., ~- - YES - X
- No Oo-es tHe Cl OBJECT to the NRC requesting *information from the licensee to support our evaluation? *
/ ' _ YES _!_" No Does the individual OBJECT to the reJease of tneir identity? Explain that in certain situati.ons (such as discrimination cases), their identity will need to be released in order.for the NRC to obtain specific and related informatior-i from the licensee.
ALLEGATION
SUMMARY
ProVide a shott*sunimary or keywords/topics/subject (for large number of 90ncems) for the allegation's contents below. This summary is to provide an overview or quick reference in allegab'on tracking reports: * . The Tetra Tech EC RSO ~presentative at the at-Hunter's Point decommissioning and remediation project experienced a "hostile work enxirorJment" when raising safety concerns and addressing subsequent need for Improved and timely communications related to radlological*controls in the field. The site RSO feels there Is a poor safety culture In terms of managem~nt communication and management.support associated with site RSO authority. The site RSO felt threatened when the !(b)(7)(C) !stated; *your safety concerns seem to be based on the fact
.that your name is on the license, I can arrange to have it removed.*
RSC.EIPT*'M ETHOD- HOW RECEIVED
. Cell :ret~phonel _L_ Inspection _ _ In-Person _ _ Letter Email Fax Licensee Other Method/Comments:
FACILITY Facility Name: Tetra Tech EC, Inc. LocatlorvAddress: Twin Oaks I, Suite 309 5700 Lake Wright Drive Docket(s)/Ucense #: 030-38199/29.:31396-01 Norfolk, VA . 23502 Additional Contact Information: OSHA: 1-800-321-0SHA Regional Offices: htto://www.osha.gov/html/RAmap.html DOL Main Call Center Number: 1-866-4-USA-DOL
- Monday - Friday 8 am to 6 pm {http://Www.dol.gov)
Discrimination/Wage - Back Pay Issues: 1-866-487-9243
{ ' ij~i~,s!.~a!e ._ 30 Di!l!~ zo Da~s 90 0 ;:ivs 120,Davs
' . ~..~ ~-"!~ffif.' .
, *.. ,. k .**, .* .,\ .
J :* :. *
. 3/4/2011 4/13/2011 5/3/2011 6/2/2011.'
Purpose of this ARB: lnitlatARB Basis for a Subseqµent AR6: Does the Cl **pBJECT to the NRC requesting information from the lic~nsee to support our evaluatipn? If any of the following inhibiting factors apply, this allegation shall not be submitted to the licensee for investigation or review.
- X Information cannot be released in sufficient detail to the licensee without compromising the identity of the alleger or' confidential source.
X The llcensee could compromise an Investigation or lnspectio_ n because of knowledge gained from.the discussions. X The allegation is made against the licensee's ma!lagement or those parties who would normally receive and address the alle ation. The basis of the allegation Is Information received from a Federal or State agency that does not approve of .the information X being released. X The licensee's allegation trend, quality.of response(s), problem identification and resoiutior.r, and/or cycle review results are such that the NRC should indepe,ndentl evaluate the concem(s). The NRC evaluation would be more timely and efficient - there is an ongoing or upcoming inspection which could evaluate the concern or a similar/same concern is already being evaluated by the NRC.
- Significant public/Commissi~n interest warrants independent assessment of concem(s).
The alleger has taken the concem(s} to the licensee with unsatisfactqry results. JWeaver LHanson JThompson !Chairman Approval: II Date: i
t * ( Decommissioning 0 1 Case No.: 4-20XX-OXX
*RX Code or Functional Area:
Materials Health Ph sics Concern:
<Aconcern is one or two sentences.)
The Tetra Tech EC, RSO representative at the Hunter's Point decommissioning project, experienced a "hostile work environment" when raising safety concerns and addressing subsequent need for improved and timely communications related to radiological controls in the field. The site R_ SO feels there is a poor radiologic safety culture in terms of management communication and management supp__ort associated with site RSO authority. The site RSO described the construction management's progressively eroding recognition/backing of its NRC license and acknowledgement of the authority/l~vel of respect associated with t e RS and RSO representatives-and authorized users. The site RSO felt threatened when the (bJ(?)(C) tated; *"your safety concerns seem to be based on the fact that your name is on the license, I can arrange to have it removed." The site RSO has.since *been re-assigned to the Alameda decommissionin ro*ect. Concern Background. Supporting Information. & Comments The Cl has submitted a total of sevente*en (17)-e-mails to RIV pertaining to his concerns and response initiated by site _and corporate management. The s_ite RSO has been removed fr.om the site a~d managem*ent has been g<::1ing through his files. l(ccoroir':i'9*-t 6 th~'C*l ,*'N'RC reqlilirred records.,have* be-en ~ compro~ised and are* being destroyed." .' Regulatory Requirement *fil ** e owt
- c..*'....* .,....,.il!li:*~=-=i.-.;....=~~--"'....__..,;:;:..,..;,J-" *~~~~:"$~~:.=t.~
Potential! , 10CFR Part 20 and /or rocedural violations Describe the concern's safety significance.
.Check each uestion as a licable to this concern.
X Is it a.declaration, statement, or assertion of impropriety or-Inadequacy? ls there a pot~ntial deficiency? Is the impropriety or inadequacy associated with NRC regulated activities or policy (e.g. SCWE)? Is the validity of the i~sue unknown?
*Technical Staff Recommendation(s)
Date Recommended Action Assigned Branch Planned Date Accepted . ARB Date ARB Decision s Assl ned to Planned Date ACES to contact Re*gion I Allegation concemirig jurisdiction and ACES 02116111 ACES to send acknowled ement letter to alle er.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE, REGION I 2100 RENAISSAN CE BLVD. KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-2745 (b)(7)(C) December 4 , 2012 MEMORANDUM TO : William M. Dean, Regional Administrator Region I FROM: !(b)(?)(C) l Special Agent in Charge Office of Investigations Field Office, Region I SUBJECT HUNTERS POINT NAVAL SHIPYARD: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN (CASE NO. 1-2012-002/ALLEGATION NO. Rl-201 1-A-0019) Enclosed, for whatever action you deem appropriate, is the Office of Investigations (01) Report of Investigation concerning the above matter. Please note that documents may have been gathered during the course of the investigation that are not included in either the report or the exhibits. This additional documentation would be maintained in the 01 case file and available for the staff's review upon request. Neither this memorandum nor the report may be released outside the NRC without the permission of the Director, 01. Please ensure that any internal office distribution of this report is controlled and limited only to those with a need to know and that they are aware of the sensitivity of its contents. Treat as "Official Use Only - 01 Investigation Information."
Enclosures:
report w/exhibits cc w/end: R. Zimmerman, OE cc w/o encl: M. Spencer, Acting OGC M. Satorius, FSME
CASE NO. 1-2012-002 United States Nuclear Reaulatory Commission Report of Investigation HUNTERS POINT NAVAL SHIPYARD: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVING RIASED A SAFETY CONCERN Office of Investigations Reported by 01:RI
I OFFICIAL u*se: ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
Title:
HUNTERS POINT NAVAL SHIPYARD DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN licensee: Case No.: 1-2012-002 Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Report Date: November 30, 2012 1000 The American Road Morris Plains, NJ 07950 Control Office: 01:RI Docket No.: 03038199 Status: CLOSED Allegation No.: Rl-201 1-A-0019 Reported by: (b)(7)(CI (b)(7)(C) Senior Special Agent '-------...,1 Special Agent in Charge
,ce .,,......,.,
o....,..,,,., nv..,e. .,=s.,,.,_ 1gations Office of lnVestigations Field Office, Region I Field Office, Region I Participating Personnel: r XlXCJ v. I former Special Agent Office of Investigations Field Office, Region I WARNING 1"i""'-1-1..11SSEMINATE, PLACE IN THE PUBLIC DOCUME R DISCUSS TH S OF THIS REP . STIGATION OUTSIDE NRC WITHOUT AUTHO PROVING OFFICIAL OF THIS REPQBI.-U ORIZED DISCLOSURE T IN ADVERSE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION AND/OR CRIMINAL PROSECU . OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
( OFFICIAL USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION SYNOPSIS This investigation was initiated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Investigations (01), Region I, on October 7, 2011 , to determine whether a former Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)/RSO representative (RSOR), Tetra Tech EC Inc. (TT), working at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HPNSY), .decommissioning facility, was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns. Based upon the evidence developed during the investigation, 01:RI did not conclude that a former RSO/RSOR, TT, HPNSY, was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns. AGENT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVE Case No. 1-2012-002 1 OFFICIAL USE ONLY m GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
( OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY NOT F OUT APPROVAL OF CIAL AGENT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVESTIGA Case No. 1-2012-002 2 OFFICIAL USE ONLY GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
( OFFICIAL USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION TABLE OF CONTENTS SYNOPSIS ................................................................................................................................. 1 TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE .................... ..... ........................................ .......................... .............. 5 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ................................... .................................................................. 7 DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION............. ........... ............... ............................................................ 9 Applicable Regulations ....... .... ......................................................................................... 9 Purpose of Investigation ............ ...................................................................................... 9 Background ..................................................................................................................... 9 Allegation: Discrimination Against a Former Radiation Safety Officer for Having Raised a Safety Concern..................................................................... ......... 10 Agent's Analysis of the Evidence .. ................................................................................. 17 Conclusion ...................................... ........ .................................... ........................... ....... 18 LIST OF EXHIBITS ................................................................................................................... 19 ENT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVES C ase No. 1-201 2-002 3 OFFICIAL USE ONLY - Of INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY Case No. 1-2012-002 4 OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
-OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE Exhibits (b)(7)(C)________ ____. Tetra Tech EC, Inc. (TT) ..................................................... . 12 ANDREWS, Susan V., Senior Health Physicist, Acute World Solutions (AWS) ......................... 13 l(b)(7)(Cl In ....................... ........... 14 l(b_ )(?_J(c_) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __,I n .............1s BOWERS, Elbert G., Former RSO/RSOR, TI ........................ ................................................. . 16 (b)(7)(C)
!New World Technologies (NWT) .............. 17 (b)(7)(C)
(b)(?)(C) IHunters Pein t Naval Shipyard (HPNSY), TT ........ 18 (b)(7)(C) le & T Labs (CTL ) ...................................................... 19 CTL ......................................................................................... 20 (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) n ........................................................... 21 NWT..............................,........................ 22 (b)(7)(C) I HPNSY, TI.. .................. ..................................... 23
- =.
- r;::;;
)(7::=.
)(C;:: ) =============:::;------JI TI************* ..................................... 24 l(b)(7)(C) ITT...............................................................,25 l("'""
b)('""' l)(,,...C}. . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - , 1TI ................................26 I.~~ In .............................................................. 21
- 1(b:)(7:)(C:):::::::::::::::::::::::~:::;-ITI ____.....,................................................................. 28 OUT APPROVAL OF NT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVEST Case No. 1-2012-002 5 OF-F-ICl,A,L use ONLY - 01 INVESTIGATION INFOR~.ATION
( OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY Case No. 1-2012-002 6 OFFICIAL USE ONLY GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
( OFFICIAL USE ONLY - GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE "Statement of Events In the Vicinit of Bert BOWERS' Office on Janua 13, 2011," dated
.January 17, 2011 (Exhibit 3). (b)(7)(C) , HPNSY, wrote: "Bert [BOWERS] went int (b)(7)(C) o ice gave aver a resignation and said that he was going to call the NRC" and h (b)(?)(C) also provided the chronology of events which occurred on January 13, 2011 , between ert "Bert" BOWERS, RSO/RSOR, HPNSY, and other members of TT supervision/management:
Memorandum from (b)(?)(C) TT, to (b)(7)(C) Assignment o Bert to ae ay , x 1 1
- This document captured some of the concerns which (b)(?)(C) had with BOWERS' Job performance and additional details regardjnq ~n argument between ERS, other TT employees and (b)(7)(CJ
!(b)(7)(C) jrr, that occurred at The Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HP ~:o:iv~ . -on_ o_r -a.-o-u.,.... t the morning of January 13, 2011; Memorandum to BOWERS, subj: "Temporary Assignment to Radiological EMAC Projects at Former NAS Alameda in Alameda, California," dated February 1, 2011 (Exhibit 5). This document detailed the temporary reassignment of BOWERS to the Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda; BOWERS' Performance Appraisal, dated December 4, 2009 (Exhibit 6). This document detailed a review of BOWERS' performance during the 2008-2009 rating year. The associated appraisal ranges from a scale of 1-5 (1 being the best). BOWERS ostensibly received an average rating of 3 in most categorical performance areas: BOWERS' ~;tnatl.Ce..~PPraisal, dated November 24, 2010 (Exhibit 7). This evaluation was provided b (b)(7)(C) for 2009-2010 rating year. BOWERS ostensibly average a rating of 3 in most categor ca ance areas; "Memo to File," subj: "Pertormance A raisal for Bert BOWERS for Year 2011," dated November 21 , 201 1 (Exhibit 8). (b)(7)(C) documented that BOWERS did not receive a performance appraisal for the 2010-2011 rating year, and had been non-responsive to attempts at communication by TT management. This memorandum also captures that BOWERS was offered an assignment as the RSO Representative on the Al Kharj Project in Saudi Arabia, however, BOWERS declined;
- E-mail messages to TT Staff Personnel from !(b)(l)(C) !Advising of Concurrence to Backfill Trenches in Work Areas, Which Was Radiologically Cleared, dated January 6, 2011 (Exhibit 9). The e-mail messages encompassed within these documents identify that the trenches in the associated work areas had been radiologically cleared by Radiological Affairs Support Organization (RASO), the regulating authority for the U.S. Navy; CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVESTI C ase No. 1-:2012-002 7 OFFICIAL USE O~JlY 01 INVESTIGATIO~J INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONL'Y - 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMA I ION (b)(?)(C) (b)(7)(C) E-mail messages between nd BOWERS, subj voice message to BOWERS, dated December 30, 2011 , dated December 30, 2011 , and Janu 012 (Exhibit 10). The e-mail messages encompassed within these documents captur (b)(?)(C) addressing the possibility of acquiring alternative work assignments for BOWE w1 subsidiary companies of TT. The e-mail chain also identifies BOWERS' lack of interest in any positions located outside of the San Francisco Bay area; E-mail from John H. SCOTT, Scott Law Firm, Legal Counsel for BOWERS, to Timothy MURPHY, Legal Counsel for TT, dated September 2, 2011 (Exhibit 11). SCOTT wrote that BOWERS was employed and was only interested in Job opportunities with TT within the San Francisco Bay area and specifically was not interested in a position in Saudi Arabia; NRG Safety Inspection Report and Compliance Inspection, dated April 29, 2011 (Exhibit 29). This inspection was conducte~(b)(7)(C) I Division of Nuclear Materials Safety (DNMS), at HPNSY, on March 29-31 , 2011 . The inspection resulted in one, non-cited violation; specifically "During a training session, a very low activity radium button check source was left unsecured in an unrestricted area during a lunch break for a training session on March 18, 2010 ... ."; and TT "Radiation Safety Annual Audit Report," surveillance dates January 18-21 , 2011 (Exhibit 30). TT conducted an annual radiation safety audit at the HPNSY. On page 5 of 26, several deficiencies were noted including: "Send in 4th Quarter dosimetry .... >>; "Move exempt quantity radioactive sources from the RSOR office, and store in source storage locker.... "; and "Provide documentation to compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301 based on 2010 dosimetry results, and weekly RCA surveys." Also, on pages 15 and 16, it was noted BOWERS did not want to return to the site (HPNSY) "because he feels intimidated. This feelin of intimidation stems from an argument involving the RSOR RS] and (b)(7J(C) et al.], followed by a subsequent argument with the (b)(?)(CJ and (b)(7)(C) on January 13, 2 011 .. .." Additionally, it was no e
- at B was reass1gne o ano er TT work location (NAS Alameda) to allow time for the investigation into what happened between BOWERS and TT staff on January 13, 2011 , and to avoid "further escalation."
NOT FOR PUBLIC T IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVESTI Case No. 1-2012-002 8 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION A pplicable Regulations 10 CFR 30.7: Employee protection (2011 -2012 Editions) 10 CFR 30.10(a)(1): Deliberate misconduct (2011-2012 Er;:litions) Purpose of Investigation This investigation was initiated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Investigations (01), Region I, on October 7, 2011, to determine whether BOWERS working at the HPNSY decommissioning facility, was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns (Exhibit 1).
Background
On January 31 and February 1, 201 1, BOWERS provided a number of technical concerns and a discrimination complaint in electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ, NRC:RIV. Because TI is a Region I (RI) licensee, these concerns were forwarded to the RI Allegations Office for disposltion. Specifically, BOWERS alleged that he experienced a hostile work environment and discrimination after raising radiological concerns to include the need for improved and timely communications related to radiological controls in the field at Hunters Point. BOWERS claimed to have been re eatedly berated by a TT1.1.(b..(7~ (,.;.: C)- : - - - : - - - - - - ~ - - - = = = - r . ~ ~ - - - - - - - . (b)(7)(C) (the last instance occurring in the presence of the TT (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) for raising his co,ncems. BOWERS claimed that nt:-::1ii(b;:;,)(71 7)'t"o':T".:'1"= 1m::""I'l:~ a~ his safety concerns seemed to be based on the fact that his (BOWERS) na s listed on the NRC license and that he (b)(7)(C) could arrange to have it removed. BOWERS claims that when he informed the o 1s o ligation to resolve issues at the site or begin steps to inform the NRC, the~ordered him to pack up his office and to get off of the site immediately. April 1, 2011 , was the last day that BOWERS performed work for TI, but he was paid for accumulated overtime, sick and annual leave until August 1, 2011 . These concerns were discussed during a March 16. 2011 , and May 16, 2011, NRC:RI Allegation Review Board (ARB). The ARB, to include Regional Counsel, determined that BOWERS had articulated a prima facie case of discrimination and that BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 investigate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and TI mediated on August 17, 2001, but did not reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for investigation (Rl-2011-A-0019). On October 5, 2011, Region I Special Agent in Charge !(b)(?)(C) ~poke with BOWERS who confirmed that ADR mediation had failed and that he desired that 01 investigate his discrimination concern (Exhibit 2). sPE
~;~~~~: ,~~BLIC D1$CL0$1 lRE VVITM~ =~VAL OF CHARGE, OFFICE OF 1 ( TNs,REGIO: 1 Case No. 1-2012-002 9 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 lf)JVESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION Allegation: Discrimination Against a Former Radiation Safety Officer for Having Raised a Safety Concern A gent's Summary of the Evidence Sworn Interview of Elbert "Bert Bowers" (Exhibit 16) On October 26, 2011, BOWERS was interviewed by 01:RI in Redwood City, CA, at which time, he provided detailed inf9.rmation regarding his claim of discrimination. BOWERS advised that he began employment with TT as the RSO on April 1, 2009. BOWERS further advised that prior to becoming an employee of TT, he was on site at the HPNSY since 2002, as an employee of New World Technologies (NWT). According to BOWERS, he began his employment in the nuclear industry in 1978 and has served in various positions over the years, such as an As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) engineer, Health Physicist Engineer IV and Training Instructor. BOWERS stated that he has worked at a number of facilities throughout the country to include Vermont Yankee, Palo Verde, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site and Treasure Island. BOWERS indicated that he has completed all American National Standards Institute (ANSI) 18-1 and 3.1 Qualiflcations and trainings (pp. 4, 8-9, 12, and 13). BOWERS acknowledged that during his tenure at HPNSY, he has served as both the RSO and the RSOR, responsible for insuring regulatory license compliance. Prior to being hired by n, BOWERS also served as the Project Manager for NWT at HPNSY. When BOWERS was initially hired by TT, he was actually listed as the Corporate RSO on their (TI) NRC Materials License. TT also maintained reporting responsibilities to both the NRC and the RASO, a component of the U.S. Navy. In or about the summer of 2009, TT hired !(b)(7)(C) !to serve as the!(b){71{C) I at which time, BOWERS was designated as the RSOR for HPNSY (pp. 14, 16, and 26). It was the testimony of BOWERS that on or about January 13, 2011 , he met with the field supervisors who work for him regarding the results of his drive-down from the previous evening when the Pacific Gas & Electric worke
- D area with no technician. BOWE:RS laid fbe s, meo(isors 1 later identified as (b)(7)(C) and
!(b)(l )(C) that if someone was sc e u e o wor a er . ours in an area efined on the HRA as n im acted area," he needed to know about it. According to BOWERS, it was at that time that (b)(7)(C) rebutted his (BOWERS) statement, by saying that the area was cleared already, thus it did not re uire the resence of a RAD Technjcjan BOWEJS stated that the discussion with the )\ l J intensified at which time 1(=>)(7)(C) _ got involved, however, he (b)(7)(C) agreed with l(b)(7)(C) Iciting that the area in question was not a RAD area an I a een c eared (pp. 85-88). BOWERS identified a feeling of betrayal following the incident with!(b)(?)(C) !and the field supervisors. BOWERS stated th'a t he followed !(b)(7)(C) !i his office and told him that he needed his !(b)(7)(C) Isupport. BOWERS testified that (b)(7)(C) told him that he appeared to be concerned with things because his name was on the license and that it could be
~ ~~~~~TPUBLIC SP!='. I 1
OISCI OSI IRE /'JITI I~ IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INV
= ~ ~ L OF ~
I : ; , REGI~ I Case No. 1-2012-002 10 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
( OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION arranged to have him removed from the license. BOWERS stated that he felt threatened and asked !(b)(7)('.::) !if he wanted his (BOWERS) resignation, at which time,!(b)(7)(C) I made some inappropriate statements, subsequently kicking BOWER offsi e. BOWERS advised that he then threatened to go to the NRC, at which time, (b)(?)(C) told him that he could call but not from HPNSY (pp. 89-90). When questioned regarding any previous disciplinary issues, BOWERS identified that he did not have any, although he was the subject of a self-reporting by TI during an NRC inspection in the spring of 2011. BOWERS advised that he traditionally conducted RAD protection training and in the course of doing so, he accidentally left a radium button in a jar on the conference room table, while he went to lunch. BOWERS further advised that TI reported the aforementioned incident to the NRC. BOWERS was initially placed on paid administrative leave while an internal investigation was conducted as to the argument which ensued on the morning of January 13, 2011 . In April 2011, BOWERS was subsequently transferred to NAS Alameda to serve in an administrative radiation oversight capacity. BOWERS stated that his work at Alameda concluded in the summer of 2011 , at which time he was required to take his vacation and other forms of leave, before being placed on furlough (pp. 68-71 and 74). Protected Activity BOWERS advised 01 that his radiological safety concerns that are germane to his discrimination complaint were: (1) his observation during an evening drive down check of craft workers onsite in what he believed to be a RAD area without the presence of a RAD technician, (2) his observation of a water cooler in an area denoted with RAD postings, and (3) generators/e ui ment being left out overnight. BOWERS raised the aforementioned safety concerns to (b)(7)(C) and to TT management (Exhibit 16, pp. 39-49). Management Knowledge (b)(7)(C) said that BOWERS never raised safety concerns to him. (b)(?)(C) also said that he visited and met with BOWERS approximately three to four times . BOWERS talked about his work but never mentioned that he had safety concerns. (b)(?)(C) said he onl became aware of BOWERS' concerns post the argument between BOWERS µ,I\ and
!(b)(7)(C) I on January 13, 2011 (Exhibit 15, pp. 28-31 ).
!(b)(7)(C) !acknowledged that BOWERS raised what he
,-l (b--
)17)-(C-) --1 believed to be minor issues in nature such as a water cooler being found slightly Inside the rope of an RCA.
(b)(7)(C) a nuclear engineer by training with more than 24 *years experience in the industry e as oug the issues/concerns which BOWERS was raising were not legitimate concerns, which required immediate action; however, he instructed BOWERS to correct the issues as to remain in compliance and identify the issues to the staff at the morning safety meetings (Exhibit 12, pp. 8, 9 , and 22-25). Case No. 1-2012-002 11 OFFICIAL USE Of"fLY OI INVESTIOATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION !(b)(7)(C) !testified that BOWERS did raise radiation safety concerns to him; however, there were never issues that were not corrected. !(b)(?)(C) !advised that BOWERS would often com lain about things that he thought were over the top such as signage. According to (b)(7)(C) BOWERS wanted to put up paper RAD postings as opposed to metal signs, throughout the site which would obviously fade and wear due to weather conditions; however, BOWERS advised !(b)(7)(C) !that he better identify if the technicians on site were switching the signs as required. (b)(?)(C) tso recalled ~OWERS adyjfiing him of the incident with the generator being le ou ovem1g . According to Jb)(7)(C) it wasn't uncommon to have that occur with the generators, and hm advjsed B° ]ERS to reiterate to the staff to pick all equipment up at the end of the work day. i b)(?)(C) _ advised that the generator was indeed picked up and placed in one of the buildings behind lock and key (Exhibit 18, pp. 26-29). TI, HPNSY, !(b)(?)(C) l estified that the water cooler was approximately six Inches from the rope line and it was in that particular position due to it being close to a stock ile. (b)(7)(C) said the aforementioned concern was raised by BOWERS. According to (b)(7)(C) e issue was remedied when the water cooler was taken out of that area (Exhibit 25, p. 20). (b)(7)(C) HPNSY, TT, stated that BOWERS preferred to deal with (b)(?)(C) 1rect y an never rea y came to speak to me. !(b)(7J(C) tthinks that BOWERS was safety oriented but "I never really saw him leave his office a whole lot" (Exhibit 24. pp. 14-17). Adverse Act(s ) BOWERS beljeves that he was discriminated against by TT management for being asked by !(b)(7)(C) I to resign from hjs position and he was ultimately placed on a furlough b,y n. BOWERS testified tha~(b)(7J(C) ltold him that he appeared to be concerned with things the license. BOWERS stated that he fr because his name was on the license and that it could be arran ed to have him removed from (BOWERS) resignation, at which time, (b)(l)(C) threatened and asked (b)(?)(C) I if he wanted his made some mappropna e statements, subsequently kicking BOWERS offsite on J~nuary 13. 2011. BOWERS advised that he then threatened to go to the NRC, at which time,} b)(?)(C) I told him that he could call but not from HPNSY. In April 2011, BOWERS was subsequently transferred to NAS Alameda to serve in an administrative radiation oversight capacity; working on procedures. BOWERS stated that his work at NAS Alameda concluded in the summer of 2011 . at which time he was required to take his vacation and other forms of leave, before being placed on furlough by TT (Exhibit 16, pp. 68-71, 74, 89-90, and 94-101). On January 13, 2011, BOWERS left HPNSY and was thereafter placed on administrative leave with pay. On February 1, 2011, BOWERS. was reassigned to a temporary assignment at NAS Alameda (Exhibit 5). Upon completion of the aforementioned assignment at NAS Alameda, BOWERS was forced to exhaust his paid vacation time, before being placed on furlough status. Case No. 1-2012-002 12 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 IN'v'ESTIOATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION Nexus: Was BOWERS Discriminated Against for Having Raised Safety Concerns? !(b)(l)(C) !said that BOWERS informed him that he (BOWERS) had been conducting his daily drive-~own when he observed craft level employees working in what he believed to be a RAD area. i b)(7)(C) Isubsequently advised BOWERS to bring the issue up the following morning (January 13, 2011) at the 6:30 a.m. morning meeting. !(b)(7)(C) !stated that BOWERS missed the morning meeting and went to the wrong conference room despite the morning meetings being held in the same conference room for approximately the last three or four years (Exhibit 18, pp. 41-4.4). (b)(7)(C) believed that he (BOWERS) was upset because he (BOWERS) felt th,~ .....,_.... did not su oirt him i11 an exchan e/argument between BOWERS an )i,~c, (b)(7)(C) and ossibly .___, (b)(7)(C) __. concerning a possible RCA area on January 13, 2011 . (b)(7)(C) intervene an ,o everyone to settle down and o back to work in an effort to diffuse th~ sWdatjon. lo hjs testimony to 01:RI, (b)(7)(C) stated that he also agreed with thef.6k (c> !upon his intervention into the conversa 10n, citing that the area In uestion had already been radiologically cleared . It was also the testimony of (b)(7)(C) that BO~ERS then followed him into his office and offered his BOWERS) resignation. a w 1c t ime he l(b)(7)(C) I accepted. Accordin t (b)(7)(C) BOWERS said: "well, without your support, then I'm resigning." (b)(7)(C) immediately accepted BOWERS' resignation and instructed BOWERS to get his things and go (leave the site/HPNSY) (Exhibit 18 1 pp. 45-47 and 57-61; and Exhibit 9).
!(b)(?)(C) Iadvised 01 that he and otherf mt; 6 1
!were discussing an issue on January 131 2011 , wherein BOWERS bel1evea th~ area 1n question was a RCA area and he and the othe~16~nccJ I knew the area had been previously cleared. !(b)(7)(C) !added that he chastised BOWERS for spending too much time in his office and if he (BOWERS) had spent more time in the field he would have known the RCA was clear. llb)(7)/Cl !said that BOWERS subse uentl went into!(b)(7)(C) Ioffice. !(b)(?)(C) !proceeded to stand outside (b)(7)(C) office door because he thought BbWERS may claim that he!(b)(7)(C) !had threatened ERS. !(b)(7)(C) I said that he overheard BOWE~$ making a statement "that he [BOWERS] could not - - he could no longer go on workin at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard if he wasn't respected,,.,when he's saying thls~'s yelling at (bJ(7)(C) I will give you my resignation right now and call the NRC. ~ said, fine I accep resi nation but you're not calling the NRC from here. You go call them from your own phone .... " (b)(7)(C) opined that BOWERS was not discriminated against for raising safety concerns by ts (BOWERS') management (Exhibit 21 , pp. 24-25, 33-39, and 47; Exhibit 3; and Exhibit 9).
ln:7'ro'i"'\- - - - - , .,,..,......,...__,...-.,,...--,---..............-.....J TI, testified that BOWERS complained to the "big time," rei he called them out for supposed safety violations, which
....w_e-re- n"""'
ot,....a__,..u_a...y....,vlolations. (b)(7)(C) estified that BOWERS thought that people were coming out of a particular RAD area, which they were not. !(b)(7)(C) !indicated to 01 that the area in Case No 1-2012-002 13 OFFICIAL USE ONLY GI INVESTIGATION l~JFORMATION
( OFFICIAL USE ONLY - Of 1~4VESTIGATION INFORMATION question was cleared , which BOWERS should have known as RSOR (Exhibit 27, pp. 24 and 25; and Exhibit 9).
!(b)(l )(C) !stated that an internal inquiry conducted by !(b)(?)(C) !could not come to a conclusive
*n ith respect to the uestion whether or not BOWERS offered his resignation to (b)(?)(C) or (b)(l)(C) requested that BOWERS resign from hjs posjtjor with TI and HPNSY and the tone of that conversation between BOWERS and l(b)(l)(C) j(Exhibit 15,
- p. 49).
!(b)(l)(C) !testified that when he and !(b)(7)(C) !interviewed BOWERS he (b)(l)(C) asked BOWERS if he realized that the area on Crisp Road, which is where the workers we*re after ~,...,.ur,aa.t s was already cleared radiologically or what is known as "down-posted." According to (b)(?)(C) BOWERS said t
- wasn't down-posted because he RS} had not sent the final clearance paperwork to (b)(?)(C) to have it signed off on. (b)(?)(C) stated that BOWERS interpretation of the clearance process was incorrect at whjc~ time BOWE *
- ated to him that it was his (BOWERS) desire to start having!(b)(?)(C) j sign off on it. (b)(?)(C) indicated that BOWERS was unaware that ttie Crisp Road area had been down-posted, although he should have known because he was copied on the email notification which identified the down-posting of that area (Exhibit 15, pp. 43 and 44; and Exhibit 9).
j
!!b)(l)(C) and l(b)(?)(C) !asked BOWERS to return to work durin the initial eriod in which he was placed on administrati e following the argument wit ( and !(b)(?)(C) !at HPNSY. (b)(?)(C) said that BOWERS felt threatened and uncom ortable with returning, although he (BOWERS) was asked to return so that he could assist management in addressing and resolving safety issues that he BOWERS had raised (Exhibit 15, pp. 32, 33, and 38-40; and Exhibit 12, pp. 49 and 59-62).
After the January 13, 2011 , argument between BOWERS and staff !(b)(?)(CJ l et al.), I !(b)(l)(C) said an internal investigation was conducted by TI and "we>> made a determination to remove BOWERS from HPNSY based upon the personality conflicts and BOWERS' own statements at how uncomfortable he was on site at HPNSY, due largely, to a great deal of t ension between BOWERS and other personnel. l(b)(l)(C) !also became aware of BOWERS' job performance deficiencies such as not attending the daily morning meetings, spending too much time in the office and not enough time in the field and poor interactions with other TI employees.!(b)(l)(C) !said the decision was made to offer BOWERS a_,! <6~ x7_xc.,...1,---__,...,......________, temporary position (no pay cut) at NAS Alameda (Exhibit 15, pp. 52-55, 63, and 72-75). AGENT'S NOTE: On November 20, 2012, 01 contacted Timothy MURPHY, legal counsel for TI supra, and he advised that although TI nducted an internal investi ation as to what happened between BOWERS ( ~ *~ 1 staff and (b)(?)(Cl on January 13, 2011 ; TI did n,ot pro uce a art. . MURPHY a de t at TI management decided that even if BOWERS resigned from his position; it wasn't BOWERS intent to resign even though BOWERS was APPROVAL OF SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVES Case No. 1-2012-002 14 OFFlmAL USE ONLY 01 INVE:STIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMA I ION subsequently reassigned to a temporary position at NAS Alameda. MURPHY added that TI produced an audit report which he provided to 01 (Exhibit 30). !(b)(l)(C) !commented that TI is a project based organization and as TT wins a new contract n needs to staff up and converselY'. when projects come to an end TT must reduce staff, i.e., furlough and lay off employees. (b)(7)!C) said that BOWERS was placed into a furlough status because: "We didn't want to lay him off or return him [to HPNSY] for fear of retaliation. Of course, we've got a retaliation complaint anyway. And so we put him on a furlough status, he doesn't get ad but he's allowed to continue his benefits provided he pays his employee share ... " (b)(l)(C) sta ed when TT was awarded a new contract in Saudi Arabia, TT offered a position )\ ' o BOWERS; however, BOWERS declined TT's offer. According to was rn armed by 801/1/ERS that he BOWERS) was only interested in employment opportunities in the San Francisco Bay area. (b 7}(C) denied any knowledge of any TI employees who held grudges ~nd/or had any animus toward BOWERS fqr having raised safety concerns. asked by 01 if he believed BOWERS was discriminated for raising safety concerns, (b)(l)(C) replied: "Absolutely not" (Exhibit 15, pp. 16-18, 52, 53, 57-62, and 67*71 ; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 1O; and Exhibit 11). (b)(7)(C) said that BOWERS "was removed from the ro*ect at Hunters Point.. ..* - - , - - - ~~ w ~a__s_a_w__a_, re of BOWERS claims that (b)(7)(C) asked BOWERS to resign whereas (b)(7)(C) claims that BOWERS resigned from his TT position at HPNSY at his own behest/volition. (b)(7)(CJ added that BOWERS was temporary reassigned to work at the NAS Alameda and after approximately eight weeks the dredging operations ended "we [IT management] took him off that project.. .. " !(b)(7)(C) !also added that BOWERS was offered a position in Saudi Arabia, Tennessee, and a sh term osition in Michigan, and BOWERS declined all of those employment opportunities. (b)(7)(C) said that he and TT management tried to find a position for BOWERS but BOWERS was not going back to work for TI at HPNSY because TT's workers at HPNSY did not have any respect for BOWERS. (b)(7)(C) pined that BOWERS was not discriminated against for raising safety concerns to his S') management (Exhibit 12, pp. 28, 29, 35, 41 and 49; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 10; and Exhibit 11). (b)(7)(C) s ated that when he (b):7J(C) was first hired by TT BOWERS was very - .........--..-....is (b)(7)(C) transition. (b)(7)(C) aid in contrast to the above, he (b)(7)(C) noticed t a ERS had some 1 ,cu y interacting with "other health physics supervisors" and !(b)(7J(C) tNas experiencing some job performance issues with BOWERS such as BOWERS' lack of involvement with attending meetings, and s endin too much time in the office vice the field. As part of B_QWERS' performance appraisal (b)(7)(C) ttempted to solicit feedback from employees who worked with BO
- 2010 an a rou le getting any kind of positive feedback on Bert [BOWERS] ... ." (b)(l )(C) acknowledged that he should have done a better job in documenting Job performance issues with BOWERS (Exhibit 12, pp. 20.22, 27-28, 30-35, 53, and 54; Exhibit 4; and Exhibits 6-8).
!Cb)(l)(C) I TI, HPNSY, said that he was told by !(b)(l)(C) !that BOWERS offered his resignation to!(b)(7)(C) l l!b)(7}(C) p pined that BOWERS was not retaliated Case No. 1-2012*002 15 OFFICIAL USE ONbY 01 IN\/i;ESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION against by TT management for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 14, pp. 15, 16, 19, 26, 30, 31 , 37-42, and 51). !(b)(7)(C) !testified that he found BOWERS to be more interested in having an "I gotcha" type of mentality, wherein, he (BOWERS) thrived off of tripping people up or catching them in potential mistakes (Exhibit 14, p. 30).
!(bJ(?)(C) Irr. HPNSY 1 testified that not only did BOWERS employ a "gotcha" attitude; he (BOWERS) also observed violations or potential violations and failed to fix them, in an effort to photograph the problems and then complain to management (Exhibit 28, pp. 25-35, 40, and 40-52).
learned from either!(b)(?)(C) lor!(b)(?)(C) ~hat "he [BOWERS] just quit. He left site
....,..,...............,,...... !(b)(?)(C) Iwas unaware of any information that BOWERS was discriminated and/or retaliated against for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 24, pp. 15-17).
l.(b)(?)(C) being "condescending to people." According t (b)(?)(C} IHP _ ........................~ tated that BOWERS had a way of he vast majority of employees who worked underneath BOWERS at NWT and TT oun t 1n uriating, i.e., BOWERS being condescendin . (b)(?)(C) opined that BOWERS was not good at his job (RSO/RSOR) at HPNSY. (bl(?)(C) asserted that BOWERS was not out in the field very much which he needed to be In order to be effective as an RS0R. !(b)(7)(C) !does not think that BOWERS was retaliated against by TT management for raising radiological safety concerns associated with TI's work at HPNSY (Exhibit 23, pp. 17-28), Former NWT (b)(?)(C) orked directly for BOWERS when he served as Nie NWT Project Manager. (b)(?)(C) advised that BOWERS was very adamant and stern about safety and he took it very serious y. (b)(?)(C) opined that BOWERS was discriminated against by TT management for ra,stng sa e y concerns but offered no evidence to support her view (Exhibit 17, pp. 10, 11, 17, and 18).
!(b)(7)(C) !C&T labs (CTL), HPNSY, believed that BOWERS was retaliated against by 11 management for engaging in NRC PA; however, he acknowledged that he had no firsthand information/evidence that BOWERS was discriminated against (Exhibit 19, pp. 12-16). !(b)(?)(C) !CTL, said that BOWERS had told her that he raised a safety concern (NFI) to his management and it was not well received, !(b)(?)(CJ !was unable to provide any additional relevant information to 01 concerning this investigation (Exhibit 20, pp. 13-19). !(b)(?)(C) 1 NWT, was not working at HPNSY and was gone approximately six months before BOWERS. (b)(?)(C) ffered no substantive information to 01 about BOWERS and/or this investigation (Ex 1 1t , pp. 20 and 21).
C ase No. 1-2012-002 16 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIOATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION (b)(?)(C) TI, served as the !(b)(?)(C) (b)(?)(CJ for TI at HPNSY. b 7 c new w en BOWERS worke._d,..,t"'"" r N~wr,..._- a....t-~ o"""' HP . !(bl(7)(C) !thinks that he (b)(l)(C) left the site to go to work at another site for TI before BOWERS started working for . (bl(l)(C) said that he and BOWERS are friends and he learned of BOWERS discrimination concerns with IT after the fact and acknowledged that he !(b)(7)(C) !was only aware of BOWERS' version of the events and not TI's, i.e., that BOWERS was discriminated against for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 26, pp. 6 and 15-22). Susan ANDREWS, former SR HP, AWS (subcontractor for IT), HPNSY, opined that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety concerns to TI management. ANDREWS offered no direct evidence to 01 that supported her opinion that BOWERS was retallated against for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 13, pp. 21-32 and 36). A gent's Analysis of the Evidence BOWERS claims that he was discriminated against by Tetra Tech management for engaging in NRC PA; specifically he asserted that he was asked to resign from his position as RSO/RSOR at HPNSY by!(b)(?)(C) Ifor raising concerns about postings, unlocked gates in RCAs and items left out in and/or near RCAs. BOWERS claimed thad(b)(7]C) !specifically requested his resignation after a heated exchange (an argument) on January 13, 2011 , and as a result he [BOWERS] was re-assigned as radiation supervisor (a temporary position and no loss of pay) at the NAS Alameda . BOWERS was subsequently furloughed by IT from his position at NAS Alameda on April 1, 2011 . ~ ~ - - - . . . :c:.:.:la:.:.:, ims that he observed BOWERS,!(b)(?)(C) bnd othe~(bxtm I (b)(7)(C) and possibty!(b)(7)(C) !in a heated discussion and requested that they go back to work on anuary 13, 2011 . According to !(b)(7)(CJ !BOWERS followed him into his (b)(7)(C) I office and suggested that he!(b)(7J(C) !should support him. Although l Jb){7JIC) Iacknowledged that an argument ensued between them !(b)(?)(C) BOWERS ; it was BOWERS who voluntarily resigned his position as RSO at HNPSY. As a
!and result, (b)(7)(C) immediately accepted BOWERS' resi nation and asked BOWERS to get his things and leave the work area/premises. Additional! (b)(7)(C) claims that he overheard BOWERS stating that he resigned. 01 understands that (b)(7)(C) was engaged in an argument with BOWERS; however, absent any information to the contrary, 01 has no reason to question his (b)(?)(C) eracity. lo Oi's yjew, rased u on the reponderance of the evidence, i.e., t e tes ,many of both!(b)(?)(C) _and (b)(7)(C) BOWERS, whether he intended to do so or not, eff~ctively resigned from his position as RSO/RSOR at HPNSY. 01 takes this view even if BOWERS made the decision to resign as RSO/RSOR in the "heat of the moment."
Notwithstanding the controversy surrounding whether or not BOWERS offered a verbal resignation to!(b)(7)(Cl I 01 believes that it was IT's management righUprerogative to remove BOWERS from HPNSY, largely based upon the arguments which took place on the morning of January 13, 2011 , work performance of BOWERS and BOWERS own statement(s) Case No. 1-2012-002 17 Q FFICIAL USE ONLY GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION that he was uncomfortable in returning to work at HPNSY. BOWERS was subsequently placed on administrative leave (with pay), before his February 1, 2011, reassignment to the NAS, Alameda. BOWERS' temporary assignment at Alameda lasted a few months (until April 1, 201 1) before he was instructed by TT management to utilize his (BOWERS') paid vacation time, as he was not working on an active project at that point in time. According to l(b)(7)(C) Iand (b)(7)(C) TT attempted to assign BOWERS additional work assignments following NAS Alame a, however1 BOWERS declined. Most notably, BOWERS was offered a position as the RSOR for a project in Saudi Arabia, in addition to an assignment in Michigan. BOWERS declined TT's employment offers, as well as stifled discussions regarding potential job offers from IT to work in Oak Ridge, TN. Documentary evidence obtained during this investigation disclosed that BOWERS' attorney; John SCOTT declined offers on his client's behalf citing that he (BOWERS) would only consider work assignments in the San Francisco Bay area. Despite IT management's failure to adequately document alleged deficiencies with BOWERS' job performance in 2009 and 2010, 01 contends that a major factor why BOWERS was not allowed by TI management to resume his duties at HPNSY was based upon personality conflicts between BOWERS and his colleagues, and management's decision to place him on an assignment, which would not be as combative or tenuous. BOWERS' position at NAS Alameda was clearly a temporary position and TI offered other positions to BOWERS which he refused to accept; a decision presumably solely made by BOWERS. 01 also contends that if TI management wanted to discriminate/retaliate against BOWERS why did n management offer BOWERS a position at NAS Alameda and/or anywhere else with the organization. Thus, 0 1does not believe that BOWERS was discriminated for raising safety concerns to TI management. 0 1thinks that it's important to note that BOWERS was extremely concerned about the craft employees working in a RAD area, when the fact of the matter was that the area had previously been down-posted, and BOWERS was on the email distribution list documenting that action, thus, he should have been aware of that fact. BOWERS' misunderstanding of so~;t.J?i~A that 1 he should have been aware of, led to the argument s between BOWERS and the(' ' r lt'NCJ jand subsequently BOWERS and (b)(7)(C) .___ _ __, Conclusion Based upon the evidence developed during the investigation, 01:RI did not conclude that BOWERS was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns. CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVESTI Case No. 1-2012-002 18 OFFICI/\L USE ONLY '01 INVESTISATION INFO~MATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Description 1 Investigation Status Record, dated October 7, 2011 (1 page). 2 Allegation Review Board Summary and Allegation Receipt Report, multiple dates (9 pages). 3 "Statement of Events In the Vicinity of Bert BOWERS' Office on January 13, 2011 ," dated January 17, 2011(2 pages). 4 Memorandum froni!(b)(7)(C) (b)(?)(C) TT, to!(b)(?)(C) (b)(?)(C) 1 SU ~: "Futur'e
-,-A:-s-s'ig-
- "'" nm
- en --=t- o...,,.
f -= B,.... e....,...... rtB""' O,...,W
'""E
..R
- s- -
to-,A ...,-u-da..,.te
""'P..,S - a.....
May 12, 2011 (2 pages). 5 Memorandum to BOWERS, subj: "Temporary Assignment to Radiological EMAC Projects at former NAS Alameda in Alameda, California," dated February 1, 2011 (5 pages). 6 BOWERS' Performance Appraisal, dated December 4, 2009 (6 pages). 7 BOWERS' Performance Appraisal, dated November 24, 2010 (6 pages). 8 "Memo to File," subj: "Performance Appraisal for Bert BOWERS for Year 2011," dated November 21, 2011 (1 page). 9 E-mail messages to TT Staff Personnel from !(b)(?)(C)1 I
!(b)(?)(C) !Advising of Concurrence to Backfill Trenches in Work Areas, Which Was Radiologically Cleared, dated January 6, 2011 (4 paQeS).
10 E-mail messages between (b)(?)(C) nd BOWERS, subj: (b)(?)(C) voice message to BOWERS dated December 11 , dated December 11, and January 4, 2012 (2 pages). 11 E-mail from John H. SCOTT, Scott Law Firm, Legal Counsel for BOWERS, to Timothy MURPHY, Legal Counsel for TI, dated September 2, 2011 (1 page). 12 Transcribed Interview 011 J(b)(?)(C) Idated. May 24, 2012 (66 pages). 13 Transcribed Interview of ANDREWS, dated October 26, 2011 (40 pages),
- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCl OSI IRE WITI I ~ = L OF SP CIAL AGENT IN CHARGE. OFFICE OF INV I , REGION I Case No. 1-2012-002 19 OFFICIAL HS~ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION 14 Transcribed Interview o~(b)(?)(C) Idated February 9, 2012 (52 pages). 15 Transcribed Interview o (b)(?)(C) dated February 9, 2012 (77 pages). 16 Transcribed Interview of BOWERS, dated October 26, 2011 (114 pages). (b)(7)(C) 17 Transcribed Interview ofL...-_ ___,j dated October 25, 2011 (34 pages). 18 Transcribed Interview of!(b)(?)(C) !dated February 9, 2012 (92 pages). 19 Transcribed Interview ot!(b)(?)(C) Idated October 27, 2011 (17 pages). 20 Transcrihed Interview ot!(b)(?)(C) Idated October 27, 2011 (21 pages). 21
. J(b)(7)(C)
Transcribed Interview 011 Idated February 7, 2012 (63 pages). 22 Transcribed lriterview o (b)(?)(C) dated October 26, 2011 (33 pages). 23 Transcribed Interview o~(b)(?)(C) !dated February 9, 2012 (41 pages). 24 Transcribed Interview of !(b)(?J(C) !dated February 8, 2012 (25 pages). Transcribed Interview of (b)(?)(C) 25 26
==__,
Transcribed Interview of (b)(7)(C) dated February 7, 2012 (39 pages). dated November 1, 2011 (24 pages). 27 Transcribed Interview o (b)(?)(C) dated February 8, 2012 (34 pages). 28 Transcribed Interview of (b)(l)(C) dated February 7, 2012 (52 pages). 29 NRC Safety Inspection Report and Compliance Inspection, dated April 29, 2011 (2 pages). 30 TI "Radiation Safety Annual Audit Report," surveillance dates January 18-21 , 2011 (26 pages). NT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVESTIGA Case No. 1-2012-002 20 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL USE ONLY - QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION NAC ADVISEMENT ON IDENTITY PROTECTION This advisement is provided to clarify the degree of protection which can be afforded by the NRC to a concerned citizen making an allegation: In reSQlving technical issues, the NRC in protecting your identity Intends to take all reasonable efforts to not disclose your Identity to any organization, Individual outside the NAC, or the public unless:
- You have clearly indicated no objection to being identified.
- Disclosure is necessary because of an overriding safety issue.
- Disclosure is necessary pursuant to an order of a court or NAC adjudicatory authority or to inform Congress or State or Federal agencies in furtherance of NAC responsibilities under law or public trust.
- Disclosure is necessary in furtherance of a wrongdoing investigation, including an investigation of harassment and intimidation (H&I) allegations.
- Disclosure is necessary*to support l1l hearing on an enforcement matter.
- You take actions that are inconsistent with and override the purpose of protecting your identity.
If your allegation is that you have been discriminated against for having raised safety concerns, the NRC will normally disclose your identity during an NAC investigation if you are the victim of the discrimination. For allegations involving other wrongdoing (e.g., record falsification or other conduct in violation of NRC regulatory requirements), your identity may be disclosed at the NAC's discretion in order to pursue the investigation. Information provided under the Freedom of Information Act (~OIA) will, to the extent consistent with that act, be purged of names and other potential identifiers; however, disclosures may be necessary under this act. I --= Gi-=
' -::..:~=:..........:&=-~
- TSa.w
=--==:....t___:;_
?/1>_ _ _ ___, fully understand the degree of protection of my identity as explained in this document Date:/2 .~G, /
(b)(7)(C) I UI:)~ (Concerned Citizen) Witness:..L...---------r,,.,.,.,,,..,.,.,...---..,..__ _ _ __ l(b)(7)(C) I OFFICIAL USE ONLY - Of INVESTIGATION INFORMATION
NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS INVESTIGATIVE PLAN CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 TITLE / FACILITY: H & I/ Hunters Point Naval Shipyard ALLEGATION: The Cl formerly served as the Radiation Safety Officer {RSO) and RSO, Representative (RSOR) for Tetra Tech EC, Inc., the primary contractor at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Decommissioning site in San Francisco, CA has alleged that he was removed from HPNSY for raising safety concerns to management. SUBJECTS: Elbert "Bert" BOWERS (Alleger) POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS: 10 CFR 50.7 (Employee Protection) 10 CFR 50.5 (Deliberate Misconduct) INVESTIGATIVE ISSUES: Was RSO Bert BOWERS terminated for raising safety concerns at the HPNSY? INVESTIGATIVE STEPS: -Interview Cl. - Interview members of management. - Interview other officers with a knowledge of the safety concern and subsequent reporting thereof. -Obtain CR and other system generated documents associated with the issues reported by Cl. -Interview officers who may have also reported safety corncerns or been involved in an equitable way. -Obtain internal audit report as well as NRC safety inspection report (b)(7)(C) Prepared by:
,o z1,j11 Special gen (b)(7)(C) Date Field Office Director Date
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION CASE CHRONOLOGY I AGENT: l(b)(7)(C) CASENO.: 1-2012-002 1 OPENED: 10/07/2011 I DATE ITEM ACTIVITY 10/10/2011 1 Reporting agent attempted to contact alleger Bert BOWERS yja both email and telephone, leaving messages through both mechanisms. Contact was initiated by the reporting agent in an effort to schedule the alleger interview in this matter. 10/14/2011 1 On Wednesday October 12, 2011, reporting agent received a return call and email from alleger Bert BOWERS, who confirmed to meeting with the reporting agent for the purpose of initial interview on Wednesday October 26, 2011, in Redwood City, CA. J0/31/2011 I Between the time periods covering 10/25/11 and ! 0/27/11, reporting agent interviewed alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS, along with five other individuals who are currently or were previously employed at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, by either Tetra Tech EC, Inc. (TT) or a subcontractor to IT. 11/07/2011 l On Tuesday November 1, 2011, reporting agent interviewed former Tectra Tech l(b)(?)(C) J(b)(?)(C) Hunters Point Naval Shipyard)!(b)(7)(C) Im I 11/21/2011 1 Oo Wednesday evening November 16,201 l j reporting~agent received a voice mail message from State of California, Deputy Labor Commissioner Kathy DALEY. DALEY advised that her office was investigating the matter of wrongful termination filed by Elbert "Bert" BOWERS, former Radiation Safety Officer at Tetra Tech EC, INC. DALEY further advised of some safety concerns which she had and some critical information that she desired to share with the NRC. Reporting agent forwarded the voicemail message to the RI m who, in turn, sent it to the appropriate technical staff personnel and Office of Regional Counsel, for further review. This investigation continues. 12/19/2011 ]
- (b)(7) lQL__ rev1ewe
. d hr c ons.
(b)(7) 02/17/2012 1 (C) reviewed case chrons - SA needs to update chroiis 02/28/2012 From February 6-l 0, 2012, reporting agent conducted 9 interviews with members of the management and leadership team at Tetra Tech EC, Inc. The interviews were held in conj unction with parallel interviews also performed by the State of OFFICIAL USE ONLY* OI INYESTIGATION INFORMATION
OFFICIAL b.,::ri ONLY OI INVESTIGATION INFORMA.TJON CASE CHRONOLOGY CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 OPENED: 10/07/2011 I AGENT: l(b)(l)(C) I DATE ITEM ACTIVITY 02/28/2012 California, Department of Labor, at their facility in downtown Sao Francisco, CA. Interviews were conducted separately, which accounts for such the extended period of time utilized for the interviews, and were in the presence of Tetra Tech legal counsel Tim MURPHY, Esq. from the Law firm of FISHER, PIID..LIPS, LLP Testimony provided by management personnel was fairly consistent, wherein it was con:finned that BOWERS was furloughed in the summer of 2011 after being transferred from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard to Alameda. BOWERS was offered subsequent work as recently as the fall of 2011, however , those jobs were in Saudi Arabia and Oak Ridge, TN. BOWERS declined both offers citing a desire to remain in the San Francisco Bay Area. This investigation continues pending supplemental management interviews. 03/30/2012 1 SA needs to update chrons.
~ review 03/30/2012 2 Reporting agent reached contacted Tetra Tech!(b)(?)(C)
!(b)(?)(C) !who agreed to be interviewed. !(b)(7)(C)
I
!did advise of his desire to have counsel and indicated that his attorney would call the reporting agent with perspective interview dates. This investigation continues pending further investigative efforts.
04/09/2012 1 Reporting agent has contact Tetra Tech!(b)(?)(C) b.pprox.imately three times since March 30, 2012, however messages were left twice with no subsequent return received by 01 to date. Reporting agent intends to contact previously interviewed individuals within the Tetra Tech Management Chain, in an effort to locate !(b)(?)(C) ! This investigation continues. 04/30/2012 l ~ eviewed. 05/30/2012 1 On May 24, 2012, reporting agent interview Tetra Tech EC, INC.!(b)(7)(C} I l(b)(7)(C) l at his office 4(b )(?)(C) (b)(7)(C) Iwas BOWERS'!(b)(?)(C) w'ing his tenure of employment with Tetra Tech at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. (b)(7) 05/30/2012 2 (C) reviewed OFFICIAL USE ONLY OI INVESTIGATION JNFORMATION
OFFICIAL U-,,..,, ONL'f - 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMAtlON CASE CHRONOLOGY CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 I OPENED : 10/07/2011 I AGENT: l(b)(7)(C) I DATE ITEM ACTMTY 06/29/2012 1 Interview transcript of!(b)(7)(C) !was recently received and will be reviewed on today. Based upon investigative case priorities (particularly, the closing ROI and process associated with case No. 1-2012-001), reporting agent did not satisfy the nine month metric regarding this case. Reporting agent is also awaiting additional documentation from the legal representatives for Tetra Tech, as supplemental documentation has been requested. A draft ROI will be prepared upon complete review of all subsequent transcripts and documentation. (b)(7) 06/29/2012 2 (C) eviewed 08/01/2012 I Closing ROI has been submitted to ss~ (ti)(?)(C) Ifor editorial review and amendements where necessary. 09/11/2012 1 I 10/18/2012 1 ~ eviewed case chroos and did case review witb SA. Rewritteoirevised ROi is ut to be submitted to SAIC for review. 1 l/20/2012 I TC: Tim MURPHYi Attorney for Tetra Tech (TT), stated that although (TT) conducted an internal investigation as to whether or not Bert BOWERS resigned; no written report was produced. MURPHY added that an audit was conducted which resuhed in a written report. QI requested the audit written report. 11/26/2012 1 TC: Tim MURPHY, OI again requested that he provide TT's audit report to OI. 11/27/2012 1 MURPHY provided a copy of the TT audit report to 01. Case Agent added the audit report to the ROI and submitted same for closure. OFFICIAi. USE OJ!JLY OI INVESTIGATIOJS ffi:FORMUIO~
( STATE OF CALIFORNIA Edmund G. Brown Jr., Governor DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT RETALIATION COMP~INT INVESTfGATION UNIT 455 Golden Gate Avenue, 1oth Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Fax :(415)703-4130 October 20, 2011 Tetra Tech Ee, Inc. 1230 Columbia Suite 750 San Diego, CA 92101 Re: State Case No. 23564-SFRCI; Bowers v Tetra Tech
Dear Respondent:
The above-named Complainant filed a complaint with this Division alleging he/she suffered unlawful retaliation in violation of Labor Code section(s): 6310. A copy of Complainant's declaration is enclosed for your information. A conference may be scheduled in connection with subject case. A hearing is run.usually conducted as part of the investigation Please provide documents and a list of witnesses you wish to submit in support of your response. Any and all evidence, documents, position statements, and witness lists should be prepared in duplicate and submitted to me at the above address by November 7, 2011. Witness lists should include the witness' name, address, telephone number and a short statement describing the information the witness may provide. It is important that you provide all evidence and supporting documents that you wish to be part of the record as the decision may be based on the evidence and supporting documents in the file. A copy of the information you submit may be provided to Complainant for response. In your response, please identify the legal entity (owner) for the business and specify the name and address of the person authorized to accept legal service ~provide a copy of your corporate registration or business license. Very truly yours,
~~ZJ~
Catherine Daly Deputy Labor Commissioner RCl_7 RSP LTR
- 'd f . d . d T T
- 24. Please prOVI e a copy o warnings an repriman s etra ec issue h . d l(b)(?)(C) relating to health, safety, or retaliation. ....__ _ _ _ ____.
- 25. Please list all Tetra Tech employees, or other cont.act employees, at the Hunters Point worksite for the two year proceeding and following Bowers termination with discipline issues similar to those leading to Bowers' termination. Identify these employees by name, title, discipline issue, and action taken.
- 26. Please list all Tetra Tech employees, or other contact employees, at the Hunters Point work site terminated in the two years preceding and following Bowers' termination. Please identify these employees by name, title, hire date, and issue leading to termination.
- 27. Please provide a copy ofTetra Tech's written discharge policies.
- 28. Please provide a copy ofTetra Tech's grievance procedures.
- 29. Please provide a list ofall employees who have work-eel at any time under decision makers
!(b)(7)(C) ~ uring Bowers employment with Tetra Tech Please identify them by name, title, hire date, and current employment status.
- 30. Please provide a list of all persons involved in making the specific decisions to which Bowers complains. State each person by job title and responsibility as it related the issues Bowers raised.
- 31. Please provide a copy of Tetra Tech's business license or other incorporation documents.
- 23654 Supplemental Questions to RSP Tetra Tech, EC.docx
(
- u. Please explain what, if any, discipline Tetra Tech issued Bowers for his verbal outburst against Bowers.
- 12. Please provide an organizational chart showing reporting relationships during Bowers' employment tenure with Tetra Tech at Hunters Point.
- 13. Please provide an organizational chart showing reporting relationships post Bowers' employment tenure with Tetra Tech at Hunters Point.
- 14. Please identify management personnel at Tetra Tech to whom Bowers brought safety violations complaints at the Hunters Point worksite.
- 15. Please identify all governmental entity safety violations issued against Tetra Tech at the Hunter's Point worksite in the two years proceeding and following Bowers' termination.
Please list the date, description, fines imposed, remedies ordered, and your compliance with those remedies and fines.
- 16. Please name all known employees and individuals who complained about health or safety concerns at the Hunters Point for the two year proceeding and following Bowers' termination. Please list by name, title, complaint date, issue involved, and current employment status (if employees).
- 17. Please provide a copy of Tetra Tech's safety procedures at the Hunters Point worksite.
- 18. Where were these safety procedures listed? Who was supposed to provide training? How often was this training provided
- 19. Please provide a copy of Bowers perfonnance evaluation for each year he worked for Tetra Tech. *
- 20. Please provide a copy of warnings and reprimands that Tetra Tech's Industry Inc has issued to Bowers.
- 21. l(b)(7)(C)
Please provide a copy of warnings and reprimands Tetra Tech issued ' - - - - - - . . 1 relating I to health, safety, or retaliation.
.d
- 22. Please proV1 ea copy o f wanungs . and repnman
. ds T etra ..,.
-' ech issue
. d l(b)(l)(C) relating to health, safety, or retaliation.
- 23. Please provide a copy of warnings and reprimands Tetra Tech issued l(b)(?)(C) health, safety, or retaliation.
Irelating to >3654 Supplrmtntal Questions io RSP Ttltra Ttc:h, EC.doC'JC Pagt ,;a of3
( STATE OF CALIFORNIA Arnold Schwarzenegger, Gooemor DEPARTMENT OF INDUSI'RIAL RELATIONS DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT Retaliation Complaint Investigation Unit 455 Golden Gate Ave, 10tb Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Tel: (415) 703-4841 Fax: (415) 703-4130 cdaly@dir.ca.gov October 20, 2011 Supplemental Questions Re: State Case 23564: Bowers v Tetra Tech EC, Inc.
- 1. Please respond to Bowers' allegation Tetra Tech EC ("Tetra Tech") managers allowed laborers to work with radiological mat~rials without adequate supervision.
- 2. Please respond to Bowers' allegation Tetra Tech managers deliberately cut his hours so he could not perform all the required safety inspections.
- 3. Please respond to Bowers' allegation Tetra Tech managers deliberately added a morning meeting to schedule so he could not perform all the required evening safety inspections.
4 . Please explain why Tetra Tech did not consult with Bowers in his Radiation Safety Officer Representative (RSOR) role before agreeing to Navy's cutbacks in the RSOR position.
- 5. Please identify who replaced Bowers on the NRC issued license at Hunters Point. Please also provide the replacement's certification and training
- 6. Please provide the two most recent Memorandum of Understandings ("MOl.r) Tetra Tech signed with the United States Navy ("Navyj regarding Hunters Point.
- 7. Please respond to allegations the recent MOUs regarding Hunters Point Tetra Tech signed with the Navy guarantees Tetra Tech a bonus if it finishes the project early.
f 8 . Please explain why b)(7)(C) !and other Radiation Protection Field Supervisors believe laborers could work iii Parcel E near the 'Triangle Area' and the RSY4" wit h radiological materials without supervision from an authorized user listed on the NRC license.
- 9. Please explain why!(bi(?)(C) !did not cut offl...'b-)(?-)(_C_) _ _ __,,verbal assault of Bowers.
- 10. Please explain why!(b)(7)(C) !terminated and escorted Bowers offsite after (b)(?)(C) verbally assaulted Bowers.
- i3654 Supp/emtnca/ Questions to RSP Tetra Tech, EC.docx Page, o!J
( STATE OF CALIFORNIA Arnold Schwar..enegger, Governor DEPARlMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DIVISION OF LABOR SfANDARDS ENFORCEMENT Retaliation Complaint InvestigaHon Unit 455 Golden Gate Ave, 10th Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Tel: (415) 703-4841 Fax: (415) 703-4130 cdaly@dir.ca.gov October 20, 2011 By E-Mail (PDF) Timothy Murphy, Partner Fisher & Phillips, LLP One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2340 San Francisco, CA 94m Re: Bowers v Tetra Tech EC, Inc. State Case 23564-SFRCI
Dear Mr. Murphy:
I write to inform you Bert Bowers filed a Division ofLabor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) retaliation complaint alleging Tetra Tech, EC ("Tetra Tech i violated Labor Codes §§1102.5 and 6310 by improperly reducing his duties and eveotuaUy wrongfully terminating him. Specifically Bowers alleged Tetra Tech's supervisors purposely (t) reduced bis hours to prevent his safety oversight of the work site; (2) hid from him their improper use of laborers to perform tasks not under the supervision of RAD Field Supervisors; and (3) verbally assaulted him, and essentially threw him offsite, when he confronted the supe.rvisors about these and other potentially illegal practices. The DLSE will add the Labor Code §uo2.5 violation because prior to his termination Bowers attended a DI.SE s onsored conference with Tetra Tech supervisors present to support his former coworker (b)(?)(C) I enclose a copy of Bower's declaration for your review, our form letter, and a pamphlet explaining the procedures we follow when investigating such claims. J also include a set of supplemental questions for you to answer. I will need your evidence, documents, position statement. supplementa1 responses and witness list by November 7, 2ou. As part of your response, please identify the legal entity {owner) for the business and the person authorized to accept legal service. Sincerely,
~ :-.ly s oer peputy Labor Commissioner Retaliation Complaint Unit
( 2:D MEMORANDUM Pl 7/;J)II (b-)(7-)(C_) _ _ _ __,~etraTech,._l To:._l (b_
)(7_)(C_*) ______________---1 From: Bert Bowers. Tetra Tech, RacHatlon SlfetyOfflc:er Representative- Hunters Point Date: January 18, 2m1
Subject:
HIIIJWi pq1nt$blllllwJI fflPSI, Illa JG EC (MCI blPII J.Mdkll MP 1P PDYMY 13. 2011
!(b )(7)(C) *bdbi (RSql} IP PIA Offlci I Yatl 1ft Prplect In reference 1D the subject line above-and as requested during our dtscusslons earlier on Monday, January 1,., to foUow is a detalled summary ofewnts as ttaey unfolded January 12* -13111*
As always, feel free tD contact me ifaddllional Information orfeedbact-is needed. Reprds, 02:J____......_ Bert Bowers, Radiation Safety Offk:er Reprcsentalive lbXlXC) ; r )();(C) tMain: 415.671.1990/ Moblle: ...l(b-)(7-)(C-) _ _ _ _...... .... _ Pase1of7
( STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DMSION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT Give a written statement answering each of the questions in the space provided*below. After answering these questions, if you wish, you may also attach additional sheets to provide a more detailed description of the circumstances of the retaliatory act.
- 1. Protected activity (What did you do that caused your employer to retaliate against you?)
While retained by Tetra Tech EC, Inc from March 30, 2009 to present, I oversee licensed and regulatory mandated tasks so as to confinn continued compliance with criteria as detailed in 10CFR20, *s1andards for Protection against Radiation*. A series of declining compHance trends - as reoenUy Identified and attached - present potential regulatory deficiencies specific to the reliable and continued safety of the project employees, 1he public, and the environment _..._~_.., . . Jan 12, 2011 Date Of pruW\iU.U activity: - - -- - -
- 2. Employer knowledge (How did your employer know you engaged in a protected activity?)
lnltlaUy by way of verbal notification, &-malls, foUow-up attempts based on concems voiced by others (present and past project employees voicing concerns. Navy/State/City representatives po&lng regulatory based questions, etc). Jan 12, 2011 Date ofemployer knowledge: - - -- - - -
- 3. Adverse action (What did your employer do to you betause you engaged in a protected activity?)
In performing duties associated with the vested role of Project Radiation Safety Officer Representative (e.g., addressin the rlor de s communication deficiencies related to
==~~=~:':~~e after attacks which the (b)(7)(C) threatened me (said he could arrange to hav
= ~ ~ : , ~ a t e r - ............. .. .... ............... . .... ......... .......(b)(7)(C)_
Radiation ~ ~ c e r Representative), then foUowed by profanely ordering me to pa~ my office and get off his project (reference attacnment initially provided direct reportf b)(71(C) ~- _...i Jan 13, 2011 Date o f adverse ....on: - - - - -- - I certify under penalty of perjury. wtder 1he laws of the State ofCalifornia. that 1he foregoing is true and comet EXECUTED ON, July 13, 2011 AT San .Francisco, CALIFORNIA SIGNATURE
~ *8 ~
DLSl!20S (REV. 1112010). Rl!TAUATION COMPLAINTIENGUSH
..jk* RETALIATION COMl -..AINT ( Bowers. El>ert G (Bert) './ I I lSEX WHl!ltl! YOU WOllDDJPDIPl'EUH1'11WI ABOYli Hunters Point Naval Shipyard 200 Fasher Ave. San Francisco, CA 941'
$54.27 I hour PD WEIIIC 50 NIA NIA IFYIS-UAT&
Ukety Aug '1~ (b)(7)(C) OIJi>t~~~?f,!185~ Yes No YII
'YOU tlCITU'Y"YOIB.Dff\.oYl!ll.O' ~ T O l ' l l . z A Q.\1111 WDIITHII! NAME AND-rm..110tr1'1!UON (b)(7)(C)
July 13, 2011 initial verbal; (b)(7)(C) 18.2011/documented
-Tetra Tech EC, ~ 1(b)(?)(C) !Hunter& Pl (Initially) l1!MJ!DY Ae'YOO IEl!EIMG mllOIJGR111S Reinstatement oft) Hunters Point RSOR position, 2) lost CTOTTWOP/OT wages; related remedies as provided by law.
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (800) 432-115'6 ext 5222 NAME ES DUl!lOS (RBV. I lfJIOIO)
Mr. Bert Bowers Rl-2011-A-0019 (b)(7)(C)
Subject:
Concerns You Raised to the NRC Regarding Tetra Tech EC, Incorporated
Dear Mr. Bowers:
This letter pertains to nine concerns that you raised to the NRC in your electronic mail messages to Mr. Rick Munoz of our Region IV office on January 31 and February 1, 2011, regarding Tetra Tech EC, Incorporated. You expressed concerns related to health physics practi'ces and alleged discrimination at the Hunters Point Decommissioning Project. ln addition to the information you provided us on those dates, you provided additional information to us in various telephone discussions With Region I staff, electronic mail messages, and a large binder of information that you mailed to us on April 26, 2011 . Based on that information, we have revised your concerns as described in Enclosure 1. We have addressed and responded to eight of your nine concerns as noted in Enclosure 1. We note that you have signed an agreement to mediate via Alternative Dispute resolution (ADR) with Tetra Tech regarding your discrimination concern (Concern 1). The NRC will continue to monitor your discrimination concern. Should you have any additional questions, or if the NRC can be of further assistance in this matter, please call me or one of my associates toll-free via the NRC Safety Hotline at 1-800-432-1156, extension 5222. Sincerely, Richard J. Urban Senior Allegation Coordinator
Enclosure:
As Stated CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
'l "'- 2 O 1 2 }.t O O 2 *-
Mr. Bert Bowers 2 Rl-2011-A-0019 Distribution: Allegation File No. Rl-2011-A-0019 DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ORA\ALLEG\STATUS\20110019st1.docx To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: *c* = Coov without attachment/enclosure "E" = Coov with attachment/enclosure "N" = No coov OFFICE DNMS:DLB I ORA:SAC l I l I NAME J Joustra R Urban DATE I /2011 I /2011 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
ENCL0SURE1 Rl-2011-A-0019 Concern 1: You asserted that you experienced a hostile work environment and discrimination after raising radiological safety concerns and addressing the subsequent need for improved and tim~ly communications related to radiological controls in the field at Hunters *
- You stated that you were repeatedly berated by one of the Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C)
!(b)(7)(C) kthe last instance occurring in the presence of the Tetra Te .._c_,.h................--------1 during a field supervisory staff meeting. You also stated that the (b)(7)(C) told you that your safety concerns seemed to be based on the fact that your name was listed on the license and that he could arrange to have it removed; later upon advising him of your obligation to
- 1) resolve the issues at hand or 2) begin steps to inform the NRC, he ordered you to pack up your office and to get off the project site immediately.
Introduction for Concerns 2 - 9 The NRC performed an inspection at Tetra Tech EC, Inc.. Hunters Point Shipyard, from March 29 - 31, 2011. The results of this Inspection are documented in Inspection Report 03038199/2011002, which was issued on April 29, 2011. The cover letter and inspection report is available for review on the NRC Website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html; (ADAMS); the referenced documents can be found with a Web-based ADAMS search, using the advar:,ced search feature with accession numbers ML111230127 and ML111230163 under document properties. Concern 2: You asserted that a Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) sign appeared intentionally t urned down (i.e., not visible) in a "Parcel E" area (also referenced in Concern 3) that required the signage. NRC Assessment The inspector observed many posted areas during the inspection. The inspector did not see any RCA signs that were turned down in areas that required the signage. All areas appeared to be properly posted. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that signage was properly posted in required areas. Concern 3: You asserted that on multiple occasions a water station was set up inside a "Parcel E" RCA without following proper protocol. 1 EXHIBIT 3 0 -*** PAGE.....3._ OF J..? : *-
ENCLOSURE 1 Rl-2011-A-0019 NRC Assessment As part of the inspector's tour of the work areas at Hunter's Point, several water stations set up in the field were observed. The inspector did not see any water stations inside any RCA areas. In addition, the inspector reviewed incident reports and found none indicating any incidents in which a water station was improperly set up. The inspector also reviewed the controlling procedure describing how to set up a water station; it was found to be adequate. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that all water stations were properly set up and none were found in any RCAs. Concern 4: You asserted that vehicles leaving the RCA after normal working hours may not have followed the proper procedures for egress. NRC Assessment The inspector reviewed the procedure for vehicles leaving an RCA and it was found to adequately describe what was required. The inspector also observed several vehicles leaving RCAs. The procedure was followed every time. The inspector also interviewed personnel working the egress points as to their knowledge of the egress procedure. All personnel appeared to understand their responsibilities. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that vehicles were leaving RCAs according to procedure. Concern 5: You asserted that licensed activities were being performed past 4 pm and that there may not have been an Authorized User present to oversee this decommissioning work on January 12, 2011. NRC Assessment The inspector questioned personnel regarding after hours work activities. The inspector was told that this usually involves non-licensed work areas and is not a frequent occurrence. In addition, personnel were aware that an Authorized User is required to be onsite for any work after hours, and In addition, the RSO representative is on hand. 2
ENCL0SURE1 Rl-2011-A-0019 NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that licensee personnel understood the requirements for licensed work conducted after hours. Concern 6: You asserted that the perimeter fence appeared breached and would not have been able to limit or control access. NRC Assessment The inspector noted that the area is large and borders a residential neighborhood. The RSO representative does, at a minimum, a daily fence integrity check. Breaches that have qeen observed are repaired that day. The inspector did not observe any breaches in the perimeter fence during the course of the inspection. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC confirmed that there have been breaches in the perimeter fence, but the NRC was unable to identify any improprieties or inadequacies associated with NRC-regulated activities. The licensee appears to act in a timely fashion to assess and rep.air any breaches in the perimeter fence." Concern 7: You asserted that a survey of a locker was not adequate because the interior was not wipe-tested. NRC Assessment The inspector confirmed that the locker in question was in an office area. It did not contain any radioactive material. It appears the licensee opened the locker to remove NRC license related documents and secure them in another location. No wipe test was required. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that a survey of the locker in question was not required. Concern 8: You asserted that required radiation safety records may be compromised and/or destroyed beeause the records, which had been kept under lock and key in the site RSO's office as of January 23, 2011, were accessible due to the locks having been broken and/or removed. 3
ENCLOSURE 1 Rl-2011-A-0019 NRC Assessment The inspector was provided all required radiation safety records that that were requested. The inspector determined that the records were secured with the appropriate level of control and access. NRC Conclusion Based.on the above, the NRC concluded that required radiation records were properly stored and controlled. Concern 9: You asserted that the emergency/off-hours contact list contained your telephone number even though you were no longer working at the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard. NRC Assessment The inspector found that the RCA area signs contained outdated emergency and off hours contact information. This was brought to the attention of the licensee at the exit meeting on March 31, 2011 . All of the signs were corrected with ti e correct contact information by April 4, 2011, per an email from the licensee*~ (b)(?)(C) .NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC confirmed that RCA signs contained out dated emergency/off-hours contact information, but we were unable to identify any improprieties or inadequacies associated with NRC-regulated activities. 4
r" ,,** 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-20l1):052 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I AUeger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: IL.. 7 (b-)( -)(C_) _ _ _ ___, Date: Friday February 7, 2012 Location: State of Ca1ifornia Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: ,9 ~ \S-..QM End Time: , 3 ', VS: £ "-1
- 1. In what capacity are you currently employed with Tetra -Tech?
['°'" I
,~
- 3. How Jon~ have you been emn)aved wirb IT2
- 4. Where were you employed prior to TT?
2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
.. 1,' 2
- 5. Ir, what capacity were you employed with your previous employer?
- 6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally worked in?
b)(l )(C)
, . vv.nat 1s your expenence m me Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry? rx 7XC) r fy<*
- 8. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT?
- 9. and or certifications d
- 10. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? . 0 Ot- ~ " \. I Q:,1..(.-{- C'- (/ o()J U ~ ,l.,Jj of' v-J~+ t~ fltQu,rtJ
- 11 . Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often?
\I ,t:::> . ~ L,o,.r-11' ]:)u41-1 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
- t * *,
3
- 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns ?
S?l£.Lk iv Mc-c,...803 or $~~L6d.:$. 'f U ~ ()..r(.., '\lsc
- 8\vt..--~cc.~s.s ~ -Z.. 1 ~Sl-c.P5
- 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how tp write a CR)?
- 14. What is the TT policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns? I.\- *ls (Sn.C~vr~. s °'~ i...S ~ 1- c~
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
~ l:,.
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? ~ 'l) ,
- 17. When layoffs occur, how is it determined whlch employees are laid off and which are retained? .
\}J l {A-. CA-"-~ 1 ~ ~(._ O'A. ~ Af>*
j e.A-5;;..,.,,.;~;...__......i.....;...;.,_-----'---,L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - b C) b p-l(b)(l)(C) 2-2011*052 n / Hunters Point H & I
4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
'l i, s
- 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members Of management to Corporate? -:"'\.
u tpU°'a --~ I
- I\C\
O"'- (J *
-r""1...-
s<:,.J ~" , "'\ '.i., A or>
~ S~~~ C,O"',lif I\* :I.. S5 v.(.h ~l ~Co.n-kd, b.J<LS (Pr<-of ~ ~JV'<-dl,(/"t-tl1,
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert,, BOWERS?
i~).
- 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him?
- 22. Under what circumstances did ou initially have contact with BOWERS?
(b)(7)(C) t\-s~ (b)(7):C) -to~ au
~e).~ ())er fV\,6 J"( -
r,*"L
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
e..r.t-- ~Afr"\ 'J- Cl-~ ...Ll'.(/0 lvt.J. CL£ ~{.,, 6 ~J,tJ) 1_ ,
~'(
~: ~1(7XC) 1.5 C,l,\(Y'(.,,-v ~ L- (b)-(7)-(C)_ _ _ I*
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)?
'/0* ) A-5 IA~ ~ kW-:rLt-.n~uf t?r ~
~v '{ t) .
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
i ~t.6 - l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
s
- 26. If so, what was done ? J
-~.\- w 0-S (;or,{. v-\{_ '
- 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? \\} D
- 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA?
/
- 29. Who determined that BOWERS would be b.._.t"?
- 30. Do you know why BOWERS was Lai~ tiff!
--~~*
- 31. Can TI employees report safety concerns to the NRC ? and is that explained in the training?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
6
- 32. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?
- 33. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?
tJ 0
- 34. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his layoff?
{'J 0
- 35. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upo~ in a favorable light/ . . ( _
µD{-..D ot ~ h~ D l,vblS L~ ~e..t~ Gow'*1;
- 36. Does TI follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate
- 37. How does 1T identify perfonnance concerns to it's employees?
~\.,~l .,) \ + \)4
- 38. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some fonn of notice?
"5 0 ~ ~vn--
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TTI Hunters Point H & I
r" ** 7
- 39. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
~D
- 40. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? !(b)(7)(C) l c:,.,.-J hl..__ WO;:) So~~
L-tb ~.\- :r ~0 ~ c ;. 41 . Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr. BOWERS?
- 42. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?
- 43. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly? ~ vrL ~rv'C>~..S ~ e.,£.
- 44. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP?
- 45. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
tJ 0 l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
.. 8
- 46. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? L~ if'~ lt4X- Jo---L ~ " " j s "- ~
~*
- 47. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
- 48. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
- 49. Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? f'..J O t- 5 <..At...- -Jtc, vJ ~~ h r-c.+c '1
~ \'\JU Glac...r5 ~f<l,,
- 50. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed? "{ {7) ,
51 . Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection? f'..) L?K ~ ~~c""'lwt1
- 52. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base?
2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
.. . 9
- 53. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TI management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?
rf
- 54. Have you ever raised any safe~ lated issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? N i) <
- 55. Were you subject to J\ ad;rse action as a result of raising your safety related concern?
- 56. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
vt tJ
- 57. Are TI employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
- 58. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site?
- 59. Are there any other employees who might have more intricate knowledge of this situatio~ that you would recommend we talk to?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 n / Hunters Point H & I
- .. ... 1 , .
10
- 60. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS?
NO
- 61. Is*there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of lnvestiga tions Investigative interview Questions Case Numbel': 1-2012-002 Interviewee: !(b)(?)(C) I RSO, Tetra Tech EC, INC. 1569 Lake Wright Dr. Norfolk, VA Date: May 24, 2012 Start Time: d: :.).$ End T i m e : - - - - - - - I. I-Ii '2"' x>n have vou soled as th ~
't'..Jfor TI?
- 2. Were vou emoloved with 'IT orior to this current oosition if so in what capacity?
(b)(71(C)
- 3. H~ you been employed with Tf?
L_J
- 4. rior to TI and in what ca acity?
5.
- 6. What has our rofessional back ound traditionally consisted of!
tbXlXCJ
- 7. What are (b)(7)(C)
- 8. Wbat are your official requirements/ Responsibilities under the license?
(b)(7)(C)
r )(>)(CJ
- 9. W11at type of trainings have you received aod what type of certifications do you hold for your C ~
are you responsible for prov iding training to employees in the area of,,..
.RA ,,.,;,D n/safety? ~ {,.S . ~ t l(b)(7)(C) Iw"-. ,(__ e1)(C) ~ W"V\.P,I ~ 11. Is tbat done in person and by whom?
r )(7)(C) I
- 12. I low often is this training conducted?
A+Ll45+ A" f\vl-" LL I.
- 13. Are all employees required to complete training wherejn they are orientated on what nuclear safety concerns are? ~ t,S, ,
- 14. Are all employees trained on how to report safety related concerns?
~e5 l 5. Are employees granted protection from reprisal if they raise safety related concerns?
- 16. If an employee raises safety related concerns, how is it documented by management, and what is the proceeding process?
0 \ \J> SL I} SI A-viL) /fj
- 17. How are employees supposed to raise safety related concerns? What mechanisms are in place?
Z1P Sl rr.Si s~.pc..rvc.St,r, ~!_ h c~ v '1 l"JOhC( * .
- 18. Is the procedure for repo1t ing safety concerns and the fact that employees will receive immunity/
protection from reprisal, captured in an employee handbook or procedural manual?
- 19. When layoffs occur how is it determined which employees are laid off and which are retained?
110W 'M,~i B,t,~lt.. )i"D<<A"S ht, t~ve *
- 20. Is it encouraged for employees to raise safety related concerns to management, and by what mechanism is that done? '\ t)
('
3 2 l . How do management personne.l document these notifications/ safety concerns raised by subordinate employees? Is it done at just the site level or is it also ran up the corporate chain of command? *}M ( l , ~ 'i._ CoJ~
- 22. When did ou become acquainted with Bert Bowers and under what circumstances?
(bXJXCt W\...tA. LL C(.l ,..,.. L 1V l+P ~ ~ t-c..Nl UAfs {~..u (./J w °'5 (Z 5 D t;"' L , le.,,,. f"<-, J- /2. Solt °" J', k., 23 . Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
~ 0 vJ wj LJ t7rk.{) ~ (b)(?)(C) ~ ~ q:'._ft.- M"(J' ) HP.
- 24. What kind of employee was BOWERS?
~.\-- ~\6~ I ~ (/4)t.tS "'-~' ~rul . , ~ Lu&+- '-/'ti< "-( wts.5 Tk-rt._ '-<_
v-)o, .S ~~::3 l "'--\-o \~S ~_u L,O 1-H- o+t-t....r ~ 5 ..-, .p uv, & (J(LS *
- 25. Was BOWERS responsible for training you in any way or getting you up to speed when you took over? \. -{,)
- 0~ !H~ C 'l) d) S d(__ 'f-rc'A / ~/ "' W t tJ-(
1 ,+/-;Jb:~~ems myou, so wn,J
- J 26.
_'l u mse sa e
, 0 . . . ~ t.,IJut._.
1t f'A , .-,()r. wa /.<.r c ooL<f..r rtJ "'J w t~}" f>o-.J...., (1 p RC/J -
- 27. If yes, what actions did you take upon ~ ceivin~ the infonnation?
'2-o Io , r>osh ~_,- o tJ 6 t'
Jlj l..D (3if-l- to ~GL<f(. I S..Sv'l' j e, ' : 0 o h S4:fc_/u
~':, l
- 28. Were you ever advised by other managers at TT, that BOWERS raised safety related concerns to to tbem? If so whom and when?
(00
- 29. Were you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related concerns? Were d1ey nuclear safety or more OSHA related?
fh0t14tt- 05/Aa, (su ~ ()ol- Lljil- 5o.Fc..-fit C0ttc~
- 30. Can TT employees report safety related concerns directly to the NRC or to RASSO (Dept. of Navy)? / ~s .
31 _ Are employees required to first discuss their issues with IT Management before going to external entitites? ND [bXl )(C)
- 32. When BOWERS worked for you did you write his annual performance appraisals?
KbX' XCJ r )(J)(C)
- r. -
4
- 33. What were his appraisals like?
- 34. What emploY,ment action was levera~d against BO~EJlS J!..Od wh7? * * \JA \ ~ ,. _ -* f 12,(r~ ~ H,() rn.J WWftP'l<) ;, o. At,A-1"\(J) t Cl, * ~ LO 11 1
(IVV'--' II
.J ~s I-tJ Sl\."!l I (> ~ ~ \. I) i {.. +-- f"'\ l e,<A. ~ct,./
- 35. Who made the determ(nation to take action against BOWERS?
tr l(b)(7)(C) \} t,_3v) \,,~ 6 . W~ perlonnance issues with BOWERS, leading up to the action taken again~ him
- *. . 1~ 3 7. Was BOWERS advised of the performance issues and was th tation associated
\~ ~"* -.1 therewith'? Nl) . b t,-\- +- ~ U. . l OI O (b)(l)(C)~ LJ ~ (, d hcS \l' *- ~ - h Bol,f,lt/5 e~ 38. Did site management there at HP ever identify to ~ou thjlt BOWERS was a tr(!uble maker ad was not looked upon in a favorable light? t+L-- ~ [.A__ .R,..eJ> u. ~f.~ () C- J<-z "'-tJ ~
+n-,.l.:--\ ro ~ 0+1--V.s v f
- N oe,o~"\ ~o. ( A hn> ~~ N lt.- ti "'fS
.39!~~:RS<l~velop a reputation as a complainer? '
v\ {,,-_.S . ~ OM~lac.N-(J fHJo.-ut "'o+- __s ef'h*'J e,...c:,..,.6 "- ftS{'-lt-f
- 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or any other form of progressive discipline?
ND
- 41. Are you aware of any other employees there at HP which raised safety concerns and were later laid off? f\J ()
- 42. Do you know if an internal investigation was conducted by TT with respect to the issues BOWERS raised? v{ t_s ,
- 43. What is the requirement for radiation surveys being conducted at HP?
- jh(,l\- ~ Oi.< G,e- s ~ c.,J ~t ( bx~ h j RA-~ ~
- 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was retaliated against for raising safety related concerns?
No
- 45. Have there been problems on site at HP regarding postings being utilized accordingly and '
adhered to? 5 0 v'V\oL ~ ~-hr-<.,Ll 6v. t N b+t, ~j Pr-t Ill I""- f-
- 46. Are corners being cut by construction employees and others at HP as it relates to conducting RAD Surveys? Did BOWERS bring this up to you? N ()
M ~L. a ~~ /f'*ft_ C4fu- n,"'<,./s ~ W,;_ 5
!Ju.-~ oJ{.fi'- ll 1 "ot Co """"""vv',
- 47. Are employees ensuring the safe keeping and operation of all equipment and work related materials in what are thought to be RAD Areas?
- 48. Was there pressure placed on jobs by construction personnel to get things done quickly even at the expense of RAD Protection? NO{- p,.-.\- ~ C)l,f).M~-l_... (t {:- (l A-D
~
- 49. Did so\v~~eputation *,'g~k)e':fo'ithe rules?, if so how did tha/ ir1pact his interaction with personnel on site? 1\-\"1~ n) ,9-L- ().., ShvkiV- 6.,-.r- h, tS
~~f(/~°tlfh\, ().f"\. ~ t..v- \l.,,) A
- 50. Were you privy to any conversations with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns
*~~tocae,e~s*~~*f-r ~ ~ t.J<Jl--3 <.,+l-1'.:) .L, V ~I ~ -
- 51. How often did you travel to HP?
rx1xq
- 52. Are IT Employees abiding by RAD Protection guidelines?
~ -t.S
- 53. Were you ever instructed by TT management above you to NOT document BOWERS concerns when he raised them to you/ ~ O
- 54. Wliy was BOWERS removed from pie HP Site? ,
"'(W... cv:s v.~* 't\"l N>J ~ .. tt,
- 55. Is there anything else you'd like to add?
,_ f)oc))u 5 LUe,v, 1 *Rt\~lu ~
'L~ \-o ~ . tJrLl-
-- \.\Jas~ '+ Wrt ~ :i-"
µ ~('\ 'f'J t'\'\, 1\-fJ rs .
~t\ J 12.1 t tJ C, r lpnOi\ le) ~ J fVl {tA ~ 1 fJo f , f-w ~.5 0v-- ~Pll h,-'"1 0 "
~ 8~_5
~ 'bowif..> was ~ I~ ~ ~sM (J,, t-l'Jvf,'\I t,,i/w--iJ 5 ~ !J()-1.) b (~ O'\ ~ {. 1-t_
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 April 21, 2014 Sewali K. Patel Regional Investigator U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration 90 7th Street, Suite 18100 San Francisco, CA 94103
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (01) CLOSED CASES
Dear Ms. Patel:
You recently requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Investigation (OI) provide you with the 01 Reports of Investigations (ROI) and investigative exhibits corresponding with the Region I (RI) allegation numbers as follows: Rl-2011-A-0019 (01 Case No. *-2-012.002} Rl-2011-A-0113 (01 Case No. 1-2012-019) Rl-2012-A-0022 (01 Case No. 1-2012-037) The RI allegation numbers have been completed by 0 1:RI and the ROls and exhibits are enclosed for your review in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG) and U.S. Department of Labor (DO~). dated September 9, 1998, NRC and DOL may share information and records. Also, as a reminder the following caveat warning is applicable to all 01 investigative materials: DO NOT DISSEMINATE, PLACE IN THE PUBLIC DOCUMENT ROOM, OR DISCUSS THE CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OUTSIDE NRC WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF THE APPROVING OFFICIAL OF THIS REPORT. UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE MAY RESULT IN ADVERSE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION AND/OR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION We look forward to working with you on future requests and should you have any questions regarding the documentation provided, please contact me at (301 ) 415-3486. (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) em Office of Investigations
Enclosures:
As Stated
PO! . ISSUANCE REVIEW ROUTINt ,LIP CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 RECEIVED AT Ol:HQ:._ _.:.:. 1/=9/2=0..:..::13' ---- (b)(7)(C) (b)(7J(C) OPERATIONS OFFICER REVIEW: ___!:::::::::::""""""1...,..,--i. DATE: .L...-------lc;,-_p-g
- Z : 71CER RECOMMENDATIOtt
_ _ Copy of Post Issuance Review to Field _ _ Return to Field for Further Action/Issue Corrected Copy of Report _ _ Forward to Deputy Director Forward to Director Comments: G:IPOSTRVW_RPT.doc
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I 2100 RENAISSANCE BLVD. KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-2745 OFFICIAL BUSINESS
,- 2-,012 -- ()O(_
f I CL 0 () o Tc_~
( 1 U.S. Nuclear Regul.atory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: ~,..~-)(7-)(C~)- - - - - - - - - - - - - . Date: Thursday February 9, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: ~ :;) \.() ~ ?5-t" End Time: ,3 ~ S"\ \>""l P J f
- 1. In what capacity are you cun-ently employed with Tetra -Tech?
r )(?)(C)
- 2. How lon have you been in your current position?
(b)(l)(C)
- 3. How long have you been employed with TI?
r~
- 4. Where were you employed prior to TT?
l(b)(?)(C) 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 2 I
- 5. In what capacity w.ere you employed with your previous employer?
r (lXC)
- 6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally Worked in? rXJXC)
(1,)(1:(C)
- 7. What is your experience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the indus~ ... r_,x_c_) _________________________________.
l~"
- 8. What are~"*duties aod resooosibilities 11ader vnnr current rnJe wjth JI? C C ft
- 9. What type of training ~d or cert1fications do you hold with respect to your current job description?
,Jo fl_A--D tntL~~ ~(µ~ 6~ 0.1,
- 10. Have you been trained on, ordo you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns?
l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
3 11 . Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often? '{ l .> .
- 12. What me~u.u.:.,U.1.J..:...u..:.c.L.l...1,Q,1,,1.i.c;reby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns ?
(b)(7)(C) - ,5CA~ (b)(7)(C - Qt
~.s t4'-S [\.p~ -
- 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? "{ --t...-:> .
- 14. What is the TI policy regarding in r:gards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
~ t,j
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly?
- 17. When layoffs occur, how is i1 determined which employees are laid off and whlch are
(_()(7) _ / 0
* .,, retained?
e.il;,e,5 ~ruf.f- ,, l.).f\* o t-1 rH-.>L,-t- lu8o,r ~rt.e.--t.-.-i--w rr)
\-\P - C. C Y ' ~ ( . , . ~
~ ro 0~F-r ,... t ~5L N;,t +-,if\
1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
( 4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
- 19. How do management pers0IU1el at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? .Y~(:>~c.>-.> O"'- ~i~CA.\-to-.. ~ o..b&,-S L
,ys V c;l-c) ¥ ~J.l5 / t--K: .
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert Bert" BOWERS?
- 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him?
r;xq
~ er what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
~"'"\<J~.S NQ..c..... L\ C(.,f\b~~ r<<-r oF ~ Jo~ . "W)_ \Sv~) '-'~J l,oS,+- ~~flt-~+ 0~ ~.tb s~,110c)rS.
y, '.)C ~'"' tC.k- ~ ri l, e,e.v--~ l "'5 S\ 'bl ~ °'.Ckxo-L ft t,IO WOV-F
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)?
\ /l~
l(b)(7)(Cj 1- 2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
(
.5
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
ND t-J {... D F S u~~c;..,<....., ~e....<+- <bfb"'cJ hk- _r-.s.5U-eS V f ~(oc:,cJ ;:~ SL~ "'-S. RS, particularly, those that led to 0 v--"\ . .2D \ \
- EI.<' L \. -<..,(t I
- 27. If so, what was done ? (b)(7)(C) iu..\- \JU~\\~ (<.,lStj~ *
- 28. Did a verbal or physical altercation occur and if so, please outlin~e~th~a!cL- t filoJoo:.a. cro
.i. i.~e~?---------.
\I V 'b 4A. L ~"' Bu+- _,}. e (7)(C) I.
- 29. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? ~ 0. r )(l)(C) Is ~ o--.\-- f\ \ 0 t Or -\, AA~J L
\A)\~ ~o~ ~Cl~t)
\ ,. ht<\.A.
I f
- 30. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA?
r b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 6
- 31. Was Bert somewhat of a tom in your side because he was very active and appeared to notice a number of deficiencies and brought them to your attention regarding the construction personnel, not ope~atinJ appropriately from a RAD perspective?
NO* L~ r.,u-+) t.Jf.,VU- LL-f+~*S ~ C t ' ~
- 32. Who determined that BOWERS would be no longer be working at HP ?
\)v-\- ~ *1,_0 W~ 1,-c._ ~.e-S\j~~ ~ ~ fFbJe.tl-*
- 33. Do you know why BOWERS was T1&Mb ed?
- 34. Did you have a grudge against BOWERS in any war NO , ~ w~rlXCl . ~c
\>t.,'z>O N.
- 35. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training?
- 36. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?
l(b)(?)(C) 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
7
- 37. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?
NV
- 38. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his T111 1ier~
ND*
- 39. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable* tight? fr -u:._.h L-A t,.J O
- rrt- FcA,,-t- Llk. ou+ (j)aS , '
0
.11!-1'
~:s ~ . ~-U--\- frvc,\c)t.c} \ ~ Tivhnl~'- \}t~p""'s-,a,t,htj
~~ '-\- ,!jO -n 'l"\cr-nt4 ,.-..A.~ 6.5' , {)I' COA ~. COl L( 5
- 40. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate
- 41. How does TT identify ., performance concerns to it's employees?
~~v.5,ttl_S. ,\)~~~ w~) pc l,(..ll'Y'~-k-J. f(f5 ~
.--, /
.\:)-u'\-'~ (>U-TI.(" M'-"({_ *
- 42. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice?
tJ 0
- 43. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 8
- 44. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off?
NV
- 45. Do you know if an investigation was conducted re ardin the issues raised b Mr.
BOWERS? l(b)(7)(C) I {--- ___________ (b)(7)(C)
- 46. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?
- 47. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly?
- 48. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP?
- ~ cx-c.- wW11 Q1Ac,y--t-Lvzr ~ +- VV\d\~l1's
-..!IAC....0..-y'\,'-~ -t- ou~C>,--__, SL.t.C~s
- 49. Ase comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
fv D SO. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock tbe equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? 1 -2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & t l(b)(7)(C)
( 9
- 51. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
~l,~. Cor~~ Psts*o bolb RC\~ 0 , ,0 RC. *
- 52. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
- 53. Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to proce~ure? -1\) U
- 54. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?
- 55. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?
- 56. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base?
\~-e...r~ wou\ J. ~ V,~-\-S 0""' ~ j IL ..... ..S b~Slde_
0~ ~~' ~~ vv.t *
- 57. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?
5 '<- 0.. \.\ c) \)U'\) l tMJ . l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
10
- 58. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details?
l.-\_~) ..
- 59. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result ofraising your safety related concern?
rvo
- 60. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
~/v5>
61 . Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
- 62. How would you respond to the allegation that HPjs a nuclear site being run like a construction site? R ;-- c~~t-,w;ha-A fJ-ltp h) tAo--k L II\
uric.~- {ONL- :Uots~ ' t - ~-P ~l)~
- 63. Were you ever instructed by management to not docwnent or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS?
No
- 64. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I !(b)(7)(C)
( 11
- 65. Did Bert BOWERS engage in protected activity by raising safety related concerns and was ultimately punished by the company for it?
l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
I
,t . ( (
1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Offic.e Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: !,__ (b_
)(7_)(C_) _ ____.
Date: Friday February 7, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Go]den Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq.
- 1. In what capacity are you currently employed with Tetra Tech?
L*° I
- 2. How lon have ou been in our current osition?
)(Cl
- 3. How lon have ou been em lo ed with TT?
b)()XCJ
- 4. Where were vou emnloved nrior to TT?
(bXJXC) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(l)(C)
( 2
- 5. In what capacity were you employed with your previous employer?
- 6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally worked in?
- 7. What is your experience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry? \b',<.7XC>
- 8. What are yo'¥ duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT?
(b)(7i(C)
- 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job descriptio1: D:J 1
- fv O GV-\-' S
- 10. Were you responsible for any oversight, inspection or even visit activities there onsite at iitiP?
11 . Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? ~~ . ~0--""" \.\,.lw- W t¥-. 1o ~ ~ 20 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
- 12. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often? 'YCS .
- 13. What mechanism is used whereby e!Ilployees can raise safety concerns? ~ e.A- <- ,
M ~ ~o +o o ~ C--v"'\.r104,u-&, ~~ ,
~ {2-~"-\- .5 c:,..~ht_ ~~SvG-S ,
- Su..~ M ~ {......( C:(µ"\ fl..~
l
- 14. ls training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how to write a CR)?
~OC-<.,,(.'"'r ,,u...+- So~
t<r-Urt(). g"'\&~
- l:, cf--~ ~ l Hvt..vuu-;
~ ~~ So.~ .J:. s ..s"'...e-5 er<... vU 60 lt,..u;1 "
- 15. What is the TT policy regarding Whistle-blowing in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?
*3 :.\- '~ & cc, ~ e.J +o tc-v*5 L S O ft-~ C<Y'u.,,r""':r 0--..J ~ ~ ~ro ~ ~.
- 16. Aie employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
- 17. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? 13l\,1:, (, c.i{,~ S0 iu-o ~(.,l~~ ... *
~~ ~ ~~ t\"'t.t. - l,D Sl11>$
- 18. When layoffs occur, how is it determined whicil employees are laid off and which are retained? (!,~ .fst)(,k, ::l-1'"\ r~<~j l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
4
- 19. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
- 20. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? /
- 21. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert" BOWERS?
q ~) '
- 22. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him?
\i~ ~ w"-vi. h~ / el)(C) I B~~ hj,~ lt*w'"-
iowus If'-\(Av,~wtd \,-,.,~I
- 23. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
/
- 24. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
0{.( f}-f*t\~;, :J~
- l.1 LAJe,t.S ~v-<1 ~f ~+- Fl- ~
-\-v?) fv\()- ~ +,*~ ~~~_j °'6(1 ~ \-\ R- \~ 5u -l <;.
- 25. Did you have confidence in bis abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)?
~~t!..... - ?, 0 ~ J:> 1-b" +~ l)) ~ c.,.J 00 ~ 0~ {)/'i -LA -J..<-c__
~ 'f,i t.Al) fV"ol LfLc.O tO lll'}'C&t ({_D 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
5
- 26. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
yt:;- \3ou.Jvs R.cu<;;J f,<{_ ~ c k - ~ w~s ~ (N~L~ (\-r:W *~ove-5 \))1.}<.. fJ() f-t? 'J A-vet~L ~ Tk CL/tl.C(__ lAJ05 £)£-f"aW so~ ~_s f'V violct-.-hO'\ *
- 27. If so, what was done ?
- 28. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safoty related issues wi°th them, if so who?
- 29. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA?
tJ Ot-- ~Cift....
- 30. Who determined that BOWERS would be Laid,.::o:.:: ff;..,;?: . . - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
pt> w<r..s WO:.::S ~&tt{T*<.c) , L-r _(?)-(C)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
- 31. Do you know why BOWERS was L!t!e e
\-\ L ~.b ~ .])\Sr>~ w ( (b)(?)(C)
L-----------------
- 32. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC ? and is that explained in the training? ~ -{,,S . .I..-,{-- l S pOS lc...J, 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
( 6
- 33. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?
- 34. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?
NO
- 35. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his~cgff.2
- 36. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light/ ~ a
- 37. Does IT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate
µ 0\--J vr< ~
- 38. How does IT identify performance concerns to it's employees?
"-\-t~ \. . ~ E" o l""'+t "" ,.
- 39. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some fonn of notice?
\JU~
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 7
- 40. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
~(A-- ~<<i-41 . Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off?
y.1>o you know if an investigation was conducteq regarding the issues raised by Mr. BOWERS?
- 43. Do you believe that BOWERS W8$ discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?
- 44. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly?
- 45. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP?
E~l~-u_s po..s-r~'"':)S w ~ , &.r\--~ Corrtc+-
~ . ~ ~~o f.,{,~t1 vB (ll.:f--atl"VS
- 46. Are corners being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
,WC ~ N u Cur N...r5 6u '1. ~+*
~GU ~ S ~u- l,\~SL ~/'L fc> SLArcl~
w vJ(t,t 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
8 4 7. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for IT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to Jock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? for f-t-{__ MO .)"\-- ~+- \}{,.,) .
- 48. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
C.,o~ur;t-<- f<-b o t ~~CL<:.., I\J ""1 \\.1:A-~ ~r-t9 v)~ .s~ ~O\-\--
- 49. Was there often pressure placed on the j ob assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
~1) ~ a v e you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according lo procedure?
51 . Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed? '\J\ 'v~
- 52. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?
rJ 0
- 53. If so was that well received amongst the general TI employee base?
2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
( 9
- 54. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safetyJn rns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?
0
- 55. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? \J) {,. 5 ,
- 56. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern?
- 57. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
- 58. Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
- 59. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site?
- 60. Are there any other employees who might have more intricate .knowledge of this situation, that you would recommend we talk to?
- 61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees, and particularly, BOWERS?
(\) ~ l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
10
- 62. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
(_6 .. wh~+ .:p () \/ Ol.l kncJ"w. M Ovt--t- Pr-ri :I .SJ" ve.. f..-f:p ~ (~ '
~(}~ ' om te_ u)~u,.; l)o cu.~+5 ri?)~ V'- .J oF-F--<, ce WV{., .fj/10l<} p ~W{. ~ ~~ (
1',J_jL " &4* Do i ov1. kt ArJ v,,..Ju-&t,..J i"5 or=- ?,o...iu-5 AS\<. J
-12) g~ {~()o/{ el ~ Ll te.,""S(_ ~
,J o+- f!svv o-re._ .
2-2011-052 l(b)(7)(C) TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 1 l3ov-J"° ':_ I f ~ t,ovtzS ( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: !(b)(l)(C) I Date: Thursday February 9, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time:- - - - - - - - End Time: S, 6 I P M -{-> Gt-
- 1. ln what capacity arc you currently employed with Tetra -Tech?
r )(7)(C)
- 2. How long have you been in your current position?
e JXC) I
- 3. How looo bave vau been erouJaved wjth II2 r@Q r~,
- 4. Where were you employed prior to TT?
l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
2
- 5. In what capacity were you employed with your previous employer?
- 6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally 10 1 worked in? " ,l( c)
- 7. What is your experience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry? [""'
------------------------...J
- 8. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT?
(b)(7)(C)
- 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job description?
I0. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? J) _Q V\ ~ 1-2012-002 IT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 3
- 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, ifso by whom and how often? 'v\, ..e..,~. ~"V.c.t. L ~o_o, o\.olJ lcc. l
(.}__ e.H"'{6k.r;.. (b)(7)(C}
- 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns?
~ O .\-o ':>4.P<<-V ,,s l) J'~ 1
\~ ~ \-\o\-ll ""<.., rJ (le_
- 1.,.l)L,b - . r I ,
-1,(\ (,\ J.v-A- 2- I ~ s Lt e.s frlr""i f U< 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? ~ {,. ( .
- 14. What is the TI policy in regards to an employees' ability raising safety related concerns?
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly?
- 17. When layoffs occur, how is it determined which employees are laid off and which are retained? ~ ~ - ,
f\-fV' -\ J... ll"'~u+ '5. LS(f(""' f,. .e&PQ'\.Si-6 (b)(7)(C) _ (b)(7)(C)
~~ u)cr\: ~ - +~ro-r~s
~ (b)(l)(C) '"'° ~ fl~ ,b lth'( ._______.
~ fV'\~ C{ ~~ J)et-0,lY\.
l(bl(ll(CI 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
- 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members f
O managementtocorporat~.
?
u~~J ,
~ O"'- .\--4_ Su-t.tn.AS~S
~ C <.Y""P\cA.- v-...~
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert Bert" BOWERS?
- 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him?
['°
- 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS? .
\) l 5lt--e.-J- \-W ~L-H...:j 4\- ,Pf2>6t.u- ~e,J ' w ,: B~
l).)a_) N WT/ Ri5o *
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
A:, :!:--<"*"'-i ~L'--v\ - vVl;1 t9 ot> J.
- 8 OvW:S :) .,,.;. ~ @
~ W ~ i ~ 16 'i /J!.L
~
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO),,.:.?______,
\vl- \) G) Up W) ~ tc +"4-. pot.~ ~ * ~{_ t- (b)(?)(C)
~ck,J CW"\ ~~h()M-z~. L------1 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
5
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
1'J o . ~-e_,, (b)(7)(C) v~ s1.+ ~ 5 l k.. E4 . J - :, (V'. t,-.vl.~ . {::> c.7v-1-v:$ ( \ , ' t , ~ fvl l.n f,en.t!.d ~~
- 26. Please tell me about the issues raised to you by BOWERS, particularly, those that led to the argument between he and the ri(7)(C)
- I '
Date, time, , etc?
- 27. If so, what was done ?
- 28. Did a verbal or physical altercation occur and if so, please outline that for me?
,.r {J-~ L-
- 29. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who?
NO
- 30. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA?
l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & I
6
- 31. Who detennined that BOWERS would be no longer be working at HP ?
l(b)(~(C) I
- 32. Do you know why BOWERS was Ttansferred?
- 33. Did you have a grudge against BOWERS in any way?.
r',.J ~ ~ Vvt.) ~ f>tu.J </lli..,
- 34. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC ? and is that explained in the training?
- 35. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?
- 36. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?
ND r b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
7
- 37. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his 1'Mt§ft!1? 1
~ uJ<-t--~'tjh ~ N<tc (\'\u-J.1'l-~
~""' s ~~ ,*,
- 38. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light? ~ o\:- ~~ ~ t_ (.() CL 5 Ol ~ k
\!'Y'O-kl-<', Su t- L0u-.:> Lovld-J c.t+- L,{.'l ?uvo-r& l '1 .
- 39. Does TI follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate ' _ l i)tP-tr-DS ()('\ ~ - {k_+. ~ ~ to r'Y_s UI"\ Ov'f.4'U U,
- 40. How does IT identify performance concerns to it's employees?
~ J '~S O\'\ L ~Sv-l-.
- 41. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice?
100
- 42. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
- 43. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off?
l(b}(7)(C) 1*2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 8
- 44. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr.
80\VERS?
- 45. What was the extent of the investigation?
., f">f{A)'u~li GU\J\l>'vu- 1(
- 46. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?
- 47. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly?
- 48. What is the requirement for the conduction ofradiation surveys at HP?
- 49. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
- 50. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
QL (b)(?)(C) I I AJ R_ c__ I
/ltA So 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(?j(C)
{ ( 9
- 51. Was there often.pressure placed on the job ;:issignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
0o
- 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?
- 53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?
Re.-r v...l.v.-\iCv"\. o..~ A- o h .ck.'-c.r fo.r lcA.D fvp~K-
- 54. If so was that well received amongst the general IT employee base?
\00\- Su<L,
- 55. What was discussed regarding in management meetings regarding Bert's safety issues and his subsequent employment , following his verbal resignation? ._
0\ ~\." 6 \.~5 ~ - \ - ~ Ou f-- ~ ,(b)(7)(C) ~O l +-
-- ~tt...()"fV~ ,L-D *.S vtPDc;i.f..e.p
- 56. What is TI policy on receipt of verbal resignations from , employees?
- 57. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details?
l(b)(7)(C) TI/ Hunters Point H & I
10
- 58. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern?
- 59. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
5'te, c (th+-*
- 60. Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
- 61. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site? \.\--l w O u (n 116 L S 14 "9 n ,SvJ" f\) ~ C. 5evd ,JD ,
- 62. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees, and particularly, BOWERS?
- 63. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
- 64. Did Bert BOWERS engage in protected activity by raising safety related concerns and was ultimately punished by the company for it?
l(b)(7)(C) 1*2012*,0 02 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
11
- 65. Talk to me about the '4ly that you all went through BOWERS' old office?
.66. What was the purpose or rationale?
- 67. What is the companies legal obligation if any regarding his things, and any expectation of privacy in his work space?
- 68. What items were found in his office and subsequently shreaded?
\.) W vJ o"'\c.k ~t.c.cr~S ~ RA-\,) TtG<.!j f {rsv-o-l Rt. L,o,rJ.. ~ .
- 69. Why weren't the performance concerns with Bert Documented?
No~~ v..rl-l(b)(7)(C) TI/ Hunters Point H & I
1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Aneger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: l(b)(?)(C) j Date: Wednesday February 8, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building
- 455 Golden Ga1e Ave.
San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy~ E~q. Start Time: \ '* I O p~ .St End Time: ' -- l\) QW'\. PS t'
- 1. In what capacity are you currently employed with Tetra -Tech?
l(b)(7)(C) r~*
- 2. How long have you been in your current position?
I
- 3. How long have you been employed with TT?
C
- 4. Where were you employed prior to IT?
rm l(b)(?)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 2
- 5. In what ca acity were you employed with your previous employer?
)r,)(C)
- 6. 1s your pro ess1ona cons1s en o , w at areas have you traditionally worked in? r
""""xc:")""_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.,r;.....__ ___,
x7""
- 7. %at is your experience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry? ... r _j/_c_)-------------------------.....1
- 8. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT?
11e,1111c1 I
- 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job description? lb)(l )(C)
- 10. Have you be'en trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? (,)
- I :) ,
I<-. te,,i l J w J<J\:f) T'rU l" h. j . 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
( 3
- 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often? "-
~ -l_.> .
- 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns?
Th\~<rO ~ S~Sor-. ~\So haj ~5Lt<A5
- 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? 1 t,,S
- 14. What is the TI policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly?
- 17. When layoffa occur, how is it determined which employees are laid off and which are retained?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
- 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? DJ) ev _ , c
--" --- u-..> o""" ~ , ssl>-(_. s\~pl(_ .z:. srv-L:
0-rl... co--rt.e.,k.J. L ~ c . ,d-d-~ on S .. +( -
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert" BOWERS?*
21.r~:,wdo you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you frrst have contact with him?
- 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
l--.)t)\- ~oc-'"hC-u.~\,'\ ~"'vc)\,vl.d' j)\!JI"\ '+ l,tcwL OftcCl. ~
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? ld D ("\ ' +
~ \u._~ L CA._ C,~ ~ l ckt,c.r(._ O+- w l.o +- e,v'_o.S ..LJll'I c) c) l \I ,
l,--. ~V~ fo.s, k °' * )~ &.,+1-t,.r ie..,e,t.Ji"'ylH1 vJ c ~ (b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 5
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
E\) ~ ~P.rv\ S """'°' \.l 6-tu~,
- 26. If so, what was done ?
LDJJ-t-0 :{,A" ~c.x--~u~~ ~Gk~~ Lo5 ,
- 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who?
('Jo
- 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would b.,., e:,,::
O~S_H_A?_ _ _ _ _ _____,
,?>tr--r-0 Mwo"'**\'~ ~+- tv [___' )(-C) _ _ _ ____.
- 29. As the safety, did you have a lot ofinteraction with Bert regarding the nature of bis complaints/issues?
JO. Did you find him to be active in the area of QA/QC in that he wanted to continuously ensure that his he was in compliance and that employees were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspective? 3-Majl ~~ ~0.\--, Su + e:, v+- 'f') {,,vif llri (9fYtGf_ . 31 . Who determined that BOWERS would be l.aid=e'ff? , ~L \,-v~ £A- @M+. l(b)(7)(C) I or L-1 (:i)_(?)_(cJ_ _ _ _ _ _ . .J!-fv ~ h ~l'--- (b,....
)(7-)(C_) _ __
2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
6
- 32. Do you know why BOWERS wasJ.aid tJf'f?
0 t\.A ~ L'\) - t\ R..-0 C<Oi-: ~ ~ Pr--rb ~v---t'" 6-h.J " ~
~"u-\--=*"
(b)(7)(C)
- 33. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training?
- 34. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?
- 35. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for rais"ing nuclear safety concerns?
µo
- 36. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his la!*gfF.
(\J()
- 37. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a :favorable light? ~ l) l(b)(l)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 7
- 38. Does IT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate "l t--5 .
- 39. How does IT identify perfonnance concerns to it's employees?
Sf>e.a~l~ ~ ~(~Lt<<-
- 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice?
N o \- SL.JC - 41 . Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so ple~e elaborat,e?
µ0 -\- 5~.
- 42. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off?
- 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr.
BOWERS? Be, \.., L (., \I L- .SO* l(b)(l)(C) 0..t..S.-1-,"' ,J 1-\t.<
- 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?
r )(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 8
- 45. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all.radiation postings being utilized accordingly? \ ' \ , P\ c.,al . \ . ~ _ w h.t e,t,.{-Lr
- 46. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP?
- L ("\ t O~llf'~
- Ol)..~o, ~
- ~c... CX'\~ \).) ~ &-,..~Loqu.,_s l,,taJL W~ C/'f'll/,\_.*
- Q\..l~\"\ ~wll> uS
- 47. Are comers fieing cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
- 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done?
- 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
'i 0 . fJ fL L lvvs .L,.t'\. -}4_
- f> e1v, +-- *
- 50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
51 . Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 Tr/ Hunters Point H & I
( ( 9
- 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?
- 53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection~,
1 r<l,gq3~ "'0 i-- " lk ~Y) y .s:.-n'\/o l l/~ -e,,.n~ ~
- 54. If so was that well received amongst the general IT employee base?
- 55. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with IT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?
- 56. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? '1,e,,) ,
- 57. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern?
- 58. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 10
- 59. Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
- 60. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site?
61 . Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS?*
- 62. ls there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
u.So.kl ~ N..- w ~ S rL* 1-w, 1~~.....i........:S~ ~::.:=
* ::..........:::..::.:..:.l.l~~J.L.J..._....J..
~
- Ted
- (0 ~ ~ ' t=:)c..{)U l e,.,-..£L.- ~ ~ v Ll ~
"'5 b ~ c, t'<',\ ~-\-o tJ l ) G DJNfA.;; e,+c,.
L 't,<rS ~s SL.
<lv>>l<>r 0;i' vJ t-Jt.J WMJ G_u..,,,L,{).OO~
(b)(7)(C)
,L~p0r-+s ~
( 7 CJ (b)(7)(C)
,,.... r )ll)(C) I e,0o.~ Al&D Le...+ 30.
~J~ l.Pt,o,-.,,-s :=no, ':"J . 5<AJ~ s / ~o-;"'6 f- pvC t<t 1 tOO'L ~- frd-~ (}6 v, l)J-\=:J-. ~ 5?~ LP '-I 6 .
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case Type: H & I Case Agent: S/A (b)(?)(C) Facility/Site: Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Decommissioning Project Interviewee: !(b)(7)(C) I Date: November 1, 2011 Witness Interview Questions
Background
- 1. Are you currently employed, if so by whom?
- 2. In what capacity / title are you currently employed?
. r )(IXC)
- 3. How long have you been with your current emplo~fer? .__ _ _ _ __.
- 4. Have you held any other positions other than the a bove identified with your current employer? pJ D
- 5. What are vm1c duties aoci cesoonsibiiities under your cucreot oositjnn?
l(b)(7)(C)
- 6. Whom were you employed with prior to your current employer?
- 7. In what capacity?
- 10. Why did you leave Tectra rech? . . ,. . ,.*,, *"
11 . What type of trai('ling .h.ave yo.u reqe_ivf;tp ~ii'!~:~ ~~9,0ming employed in the industry? 12 What tvoe of iod11slot~orofessiooal cectificatiaos do vo11 bald? !
- 13. By whom did you receive that training? *"'
.5 \-\"t'.- Alt t s.s I RtH:) JI. -\-re,\ I M "J
J~(~ a 7 did vo11 reooct ta? I
- 17. Did you have any subordinate employees?
- 18. ~,1 (b)(7)(C)
~2>ft7/1"'
gp 1c1es an proce ur~were yoU'~ 1 e y . t GM 3 gs L/)1m7 [(11-P ()P- l3n9*"l~~
*< )
- 19. What were Tectra Tech's (TI) responsibilities as a condition of the license?
- 70a;J wHJ m,o """LtC,t,r-S{i
- 20. What was the safety culture there at Hunter's Point?
VV\-\ 6+.ci't'")~
- 18.Did 'TT promote a safety conscious work environment. if so , how?
ttt.- \6ll,, e,:Jt!, 6 O * ,,
- 21. Did you receive training on how to report *safet°y related concerns, if so. who adm1nistere d the training
. . ?. r Y'xt>
L - - - - - - - - - - - --=- - - - - - - - . . . . . . 1
- 22. Was it acceptable at TI to report safety concerns to Mngt. Did it seem like a welcomed and encourag~d practice?
- 23. Are you aware of Bert Bowera, evE:r raisirig safety concerns to management?
- 24. How did you become aware of Mr. Bowers raising safety concerns?
- 25. Did Bowers tell you directly that he reported his safety concerns to management, If so when? N o.\- 0 v-.ti-- .
- 26. Did he ever raise his safety concerns to management in your presence? If so, to whom within the management chain did he raise concerns to?
- 27. Did anyone. from management.ever .. . . . ' discus~.Bqw~rs'
, * ... , .. ,. .. ., ' .~aising
. safety
. related concerns with
. NO . . .
you? If so, wh~t was tt,E;i content of those conversations?
- 28. Do you believe that Bowers was retaliated against
. ' * ~ ' . * * ' ~ I* * * '
for .r.ai~ing I* . . \ ' ~. '. safety. related issues? If so
~~ .
- 29. Are you aware if Bowers took hi~ .co.ncern~ to,.any other entities ~µtside TI? If so whom?
- 30. When personnel action _was taken again~t Bowers, what did management cite as the reason?
31 . Were you interviewed by anyone from management or another entity within TT regarding your knowledge of Bowers' concerns?
- 32. Are you aware of any other employees who were potentially retaliated against for raising safety related issues? ~ 0
- 33. D~ 'd ou ever raise any safety related*issues, if so what happened?
- t,'), ~ () R-t~~lGl'MON
- 34. Do ou believe that Bowers had valid safety (~lated concerns?
~, {.,..S
- 35. Do you have 'any first- hand knowledge that the personnel action levied against bowers was based on his whistleblowing activity?
/JO
- 36. From your understanding would there have been any major issues with TT just having bowers name removed from the license?
- 37. What kind of employee wa$ eowers? What kind of reputation did he have?
(:?Ol)))
- 38. How long did you work with Bowers?
el)(C) 1 .
- 39. Did you find Bowers complaints valid?
Filename: !(b)(?)(C) !interview questions Directory: H:\NRC-01 Template: C:\Users\Hotel Guest\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Templates\Normal.dotm
Title:
Subject:
Author: dly1 Keywords: Comments: Creation Date: 11/2/2011 7:47:00 AM Change Number: 2 Last Saved On: 11/2/2011 7:47:00 AM Last Saved By: !(b)(7)(C) I Total Editing Time: O Minutes Last Printed On: 11/1/2011 3:58:00 PM As of Last Complete Printing Number of Pages: 3 Number of Words:499 (approx.) Number of Characters: 2,846 (approx.)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnVN11ptlon Number: _ . *- - Date of Interview: _ _ __ Full Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - Employer: - - - - - - - - - - Titte: - - - - - - - - - - - Wortc Telephone Number: _ _ _ __ Length of Employment _ _ _ __ Employer'sAddress: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Home Address: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Home Telephone Number: _ _ _ __ Cellular Telephone Number: _ _ _ __ Social Security Number: _ _ Sex: Male _ _ Female _ _ Race: _ _ __ Date of Birth: _ _ _ _ _ __ , _ __ Place of Birth: _ _ _ _ _ __
(b)(7)(C) Xl)(CJ bow{){':> t"olJ) k,.- k {UIS?,) .$&1.f<..,*1 IP O< 1-lJ vJ 1& ~ !.___
""""' _ ___.I
(b)(7)(CI ' l(O)(l)(GJ (b)(lXC) (b)(7)(C) fl (b)(7)(Cr \ : c J I/J /J U C ~ $~"'5-/--n-; I
~L A-vtlwt-~u_ ~--r-,')
(b)(?)(C)
1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: .... l(b_)(7_)(C_) _ _ _...... Date: Thursday J;sbmazy 9, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: n\Y:l, .\\M, \?5 t End Time: \d ~-\J ~M {?Sr I. In what capacity are you currently employed with Tetra -Tech? l(b)(7)(C) I 2.
- 3. How long have you been employed with TT?
I"
- 4. Where were you employed prior to TT?
[ "" I l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
2
- 5. were ou em lo ed with our revious em lo er?
worked m_:-rq
- 6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally I
- 7. What is your ex erience in the Nuclear lndust the industry? 'X l
)(7)(C) ace vm,c duties and resooosibiJities uodet vm1r current role wjth I I?
- 8. rWhat
- 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job description?
D b-\ ..Sh, ~\:j (_.Q..r+1-f=. ccethc>-" 0~ne,~ +- CCA.w"\.l? u-~ t0lv'.-( J o"'
\.;\,\~~ ivt,t~.s~.t:s (_ Co.Lt 6rtt-1irr. + (lefaz_0
- 10. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? ~ ~ 1 l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
3
- 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often? i ,t,5, . "T"f1:> .per -,Jt,,)
1 :._ f..t'J . 1SiSlt,.
- 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns?
t-~l.~_Uh ~ . <Luw---r h> ""'1.j~, ~e.t.- i:>o~ ~ ~
- 2,P..sL,~~ 6ur.Jao-+o ~~ CArJ \+t.. f~~ ~~<-
- 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees inst~cted on how to write a CR)? '{ .e.,._s . t-\-L ~ > Q.v+- ~ Lu..-,.A{.M.C,l~ Cc,.rc)~c t,\:--c.. *
- 14. What is the TI policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns? -~ \tcAJL A- /io.FF\ t. 1 Ft,-, 1,lp O L,/p5 Qlt '::)
\ V( N.,J.. :r. r.. .
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
"'"'~ 60 OJ~ -\-W-~-rotc.&1.°' *" R~Fut.nc..-L. ~
~Q..c_ ~oc u . . ~ ,.\- ~
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly?
- 17. When layoffs occur, how is it determined which employees are laid off and which are .
~
retained? \)6vq,lL'4
. £<.;\ ~"Jl~. ~ ,(3 4 .DivCf~lh-" *-l LY°' ok,\,L se.A-
- 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(?)(C)
( 4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
y-c,,_s
- 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corpora~e? L., t'.i> c,l.A; ~
1 FiovJ -f"'rv'6hovf-lorf~ vlc.1i~.
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert" BOWERS?
- 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and wh~n did you first have contact with him? ,.,,. (b"""
)(?'""'
)(C,,....
) ---,
E>ow<...rS> ~u.s wo-rkJ i) ,+r P-i w~*. l{., ~ Pv0t
~ _ .N\ ~ r XJXC) 1
- 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
6ovX<~ u)Q-..S ~so rl>c tJuJ Wcr{J *
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
to~~\ ct;_,.. u- w ~u cl'.::> \.D ' " ' c ) ~ ~:; ~ ou-i- "6 ~ let'"~ 5 f ~ A\ o-\- cR- -\--\~ I- \...:,--5 0 FFt c.. ( . V°'
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)?
y,.t\~c). *
,\ \A-t, i) lbri 1-!- ~vL a h ~ -\-t~l OV\.. l)l.rt- S~.
f\..JO... ~-.A- ~ \
-A- ~ () vJ-{.( ~ ~ ~ ~
C'-rv\ 1-2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
s
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
~ ~ ~ la'- (::> F- ~\...o+v .s .
- 26. If so, what was done ?
Lv~ ~wU> ~aLi-!4 :c,~~v'-(/S j ~ ~ ntrt- ~lw~S
)>OC.u~~-
- 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who?
- 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety relatoo issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? t,.J \'.) ,\-- ~t I {LA-_b \!S~
t>owv~ "'-u-J. ~.s.svts w~ ~ So.Fe-bf
- c.,~~~ T~e_
StA"~ Dol))f"\ * µos-t ~ ~o~wh""' ~ ~<--) *
- 29. As tWCb>oxq Iwhat have you done differently than that of Bert BOWERS? .
(bx_, XC)
- 30. Did you find lum to be active in the area of QA/QC in that he wanted to continuously ensure that his he was in compliance and that employees were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspective? N D, D if-\ \)) 0 ~ ~ ' 1 I__ a o\-c..J"""-.
\"\~{..,I/
\SowU:S- r\t.- \...-e..,~ ~~ B0w0 ,__ ______
- 31. Who determined that BOWERS would be no longer be working at HP,..;?_ _ _ _ _ ____,
(b)(7J(c) ....,.._.....
~Ole- ...l- h+c) I,..\-. (1<M1u- .5 p,(_p jk-t- \ . £Vow,, D il5(j f\ ,f-CM,\,\ ~ I\) R_(._ , (b)(7)(C) "e..v-J ~_s ~ ~ (b=)(7~)(C_) _.....,.._ _...
1-2012-002 n Hunters Poin H & I (b)(7)(C)
6
- 32. Do you know why BOWERS was T-ransferred?
- u.., k Nl,J
*w~~ s ~ .-\-?) ~tA)A-- tJAtfuL 1)1r s~hd'\ * ,,,._ S,-rr--
~ n ~ \W ~..A- wu-..) s ~ ~ cJJ"-dt-- ~'1 Co,-..DtAGk..J ~v<.St6uhV"I ,
- 33. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training? '1 {,,-~
- 34. Do Tr employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns? -V..) ~ \lA.("Z) ~ h ~ ._r_)(7-)(C-) - - - - - - - - - - - - '
(b)(7)(C)
- 35. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?
- 36. Did you have any discussions with BOWE~S following his L:aesfe1-?
\ft>, ~ W!NL- rvvt.-SS~ :I c, r ("'\-l,f>5 ':J t>t,._sew, * ~ \
l_,o~.:;, * ""~ L-01~ -t"o ~ 0 o.- ~bovu ~ fx 4,s
- 37. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light?
f\} 0 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
7
- 38. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate
'-1 U , ('.) o\- -\oo f\'lcn,L\ ~ Lf ~+- o~~ * ~ h,,1v,(_
\t<.A~ts .l-"' ~let.C.-L ~ ~ 1"t) \1\-v~'vL ~h~cl... .
- 39. How does TT identify performance concerns to it's employees?
~l\vt'4 L c \J (.( \ lA Ci\. h v") ~t- ~ ou- -n.,c...,hA, cal Ltad. pa>vi&l S
- 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice?
~ o:t- ~+- ~~\ ~ ~c.rL or.
- 41. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
tJ 0
- 42. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off?
~o
- 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr.
BowERs? "I J..,.S. l'b)(7)(C) I 9,;s "c J c c,~t,tc.AJ. ~.x.JAe,:,,
- 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns? ND
- 45. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being.utilized accordingly? Ni c._. 'fo\r'IJ ND ~~ \U1f>05h t)-l ,
iu-t-CoM-pl.4,~ ~+-k wwri't-- ( ' ~ ~~*---. 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I "-! 7 (b_H _HC_) _ ___,
8
- 46. What is the requirement for the conduction ofradiation surveys at HP?
U)U.,~\~ '5>
'(V\ ( ) r " ~ \.. ~\ I ~
b,- ~'°'~'4 \.\,~ '~ 4 7. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
- 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TI on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done?
D V\,{_ -::L\'"\vlc>-~ t- w l Pr(" 8~c..r~ W~c-t.. w~ ovA-~'CK.- ~ R-~to-~ ~ "
- 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
~t'\vi,~ l l li , I . A \ ~ ll 1 .
\WLvt,_. ~ .._s Lt~*
- 50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
NO 5 I. Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? (\- \-VW ~CMJ-l...-- ~~ O...v<?).S S h,,-5 t'>~~- l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & I
9
- 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work envirorunent? And are these things stressed? \.( {., ) .
- 53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?
*tJ D*
- 54. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base?
- 55. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?
f\.) 0
- 56. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? "1 t _) _
- 57. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern?
~o
- 58. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
.SuFf'\vu.--r ~ ~ :." ~0 c\f" +~<bV\~
- 59. Are TI employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
it.S* ~ ~~~ . l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
10
- 60. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site? 1"'~\.. - ~ ~ \s {._. e,t ~ ~ \~ ~ 'J ~t-(:)'iaJ..~~~
- 61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS?
- 62. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
- 63. Did Bert BOWERS engage in protected activity by raising safety related concerns and was ultimately punished by the company for it?
l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C) Interviewee: ....._ (b)(l)(C) _ _ _ _ _ _ ____J Date: Wednesday February 8, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Collllsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: ~: L\ 0 f M p'yf End Time: ,3 *.) \ ~ ""' P St"
- 1. In what capacity are you currently employed with Tetra -Tech?
0 l(b)(7)(C) '
- 2. How long have you been in your current position?
- 3. How long have you been employed with TT?
r XJXC)
- 4. Where were you employed prior to TT?
['"' l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
2
- 5. In what capacity were you employed with your previous employer?
r}(l)(C} 1.
- 6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally I-(b}(J)(C) worked in?
I l)(C) (b)(IJl,v}
- 7. Wl;lat 1s")'our ex~erience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry?
- 8. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT? I (b)(7):c)
- 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job description? .._ l l~o,
- 10. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? ,,
~ ~
- yower ~ l""..\- \+? -\-<a:"~
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hu.nters Point H & I
3
- 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often?
~ l,) .
- 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns 7
- C,o.. \ \ MCf'4jU-.S +- ~u p....S LAf> 'tl> ~"5 o ( 1v Z f\C( .. dt Cor~'
- &-,\.,Le,_ 0-GS ~ D Cl W~ ~ i)O~ ;'k,e.-._,+- /
- 13. ls training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? * , . .,- 1 rv() ~ ~ \.Al '- ,.
- 14. What is the TI policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly?
Yt,5 *. 1-~ S rt-l {nJ,1"~
- 17. When layoffs occur, how is it determined which employees are. laid off and which are retained? M Of \ ~ \ s .J)r'-\f\ ~ -, r-'
J \-0 , vL, cf>u-t-- f\O +- _g vre__ ~ ~os (.__ Dtus.,~ ft<e-{Y\~ 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
- 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or Js it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? b}U'v\ ~ ~ 3 Oti::> v.f 'TV u.cp#""a.<t-(_
kso ~
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert BOWERS?
21 . How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you :first have contact with him?
\::>ooJv-..S wo-S o-+- H-P vJ h~ )
"'-L ~L-.I.""' .J,,oos-~
- 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
['~'
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
to MP""1-v\ 3 """I .,,,+--- l\l uJ vJO<"" l J , 1!1f-c 'W os ""' oeftcel,-J
~ {f..5 0 \A * /'
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)?
f\.) 0 {-- a.+- ~ M -<b. l) l D{\ , ""'- ~ ~ llA\A(_)f\ ~ +ifMC,(_ wl~t/V""'\* l (b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I .
( s
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
, \I t,S . '0 . ~ O'"'L._s o F-f- \
l ..\-- Ot-J *
- 26. If so, what was done ?
\A) lA.fA u.,, <-1 W\ ~-<""a,\\.; ~ " ' ~\J G- ~o .
- 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who?
~ ~"' I ~St-fvC,+t ~V\ VV\~ ('. MOCL ~ Ctnv\ o+-V:
~ e you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were
("' Nuclear Safety lssµes or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA?
~ s the safety, did you have a lot of interaction with Bert regarding the nature of his complaints/issues?
- 30. Did you find him to be active in the area of QA/QC in that be wanted to continuously ensure that his he was in compliance and that employees were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspective? - . . . IJ ,
'\ t'\.L ~<'.) vc l~ 17 I)~ <>"vs
- 31. Who determined that BOWERS wquld be I.aid er 7 t--) o+- 6 v,c.- o-+- ~ ~s 5-kt.--t"tA-..S l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
6
- 33. Can Tr employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training?
- 34. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?
- 35. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for rais'ing nuclear safety concerns?
- 36. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his la3 .w?
..[)OvJtrS UJvS 0"' ~:-k, ~ +- LA)crk - 6VJ.-
W"'-F-nrf0 +- () I.),.~ {?(Y) iJ. l(b)(l )(C) I 1(3;;'{./- ~~'cl
~ L w (.,(, s >'"\ 't t- trvo-d'- CV,~. GJV\.; >
3 7. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light? 1'J '() l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
7
- 38. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate
\~0-\-\- '\)~ ~uot&AJ- W ' ~ ~+.
- 39. How does TT identify performance concerns to it's employees?
'-\ t-(.,<"'L'{ ftr.t=c~c.e... ~\~a-lS *
- 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice?
- 41. Bad BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
- 42. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off?
{:' c'
- 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr.
BOWERS? C,or~IJ("V,.\-{_. O ll;). O(!Ut.- Mer('\~ ,Wv-_s Co('\ ~ kJ--_
') ~- bo:Ju-..s C.a.ll{J .\-4..-"'1 0 ........_.- - - - - - - -
- 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated agamst for raising safety related concerns?
NO r )(7)(C) 2 -2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 8
- 45. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly? ,J O t0 0 ~
- I "5 (V\Q3 C) (L_
- 46. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP?
~ u-t-- U){..()c l V\ ; M ~ ~ D(A.,Ltf ~lAl'l/'4f f\tQ~l~ - 0V'l, ~ t . _
- 47. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
- 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for IT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done?
- 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
- 50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at IT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
rJ 0
- 51. Have you observed or witnessed incjdents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
9
- 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?
- 53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?
00
- 54. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base?
- 55. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please *elaborate?
- 56. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details?
y~.:s ~
- 57. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern?
- 58. Do you feel that the Radi~tion Protection program at HP is sufficient?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
10
- 59. Are 1T employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
- 60. How would you respond to the alleg8rtion that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site?
r <9Y)b-k'v.:~*°""' c5 1k W \ fuDtolvu ' z C4.(_ un~
- 61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS?
- 62. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: ._!(b_H7l_(c_) _ _ ___. Date: Friday February 7, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Mwphy, Esq. Start Time: ...5 *, lSl I\.-\ End Time: _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 1.
- 2. Hf , ~~ng have you been in your cr nt position?
r~*
- 3. How long have you been employed with IT?
I
- 4. Where were you employed prior to TT?
2-2011-052 l(b)(?)(C) TI/ Hunters Point H & I
2
- 5. Jn What capacity were you emp)nved wjth YOJJT DteYiOJJS eomlmrei r XJXCJ -
- 6. What is your professional back ound consistent of what areas have worked in? xixq
- 7. What is your experience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry?
- 8. What are your duties and responsibilities wider vour current role with T""'?
(b)(l)(C)
- 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current iob description? r )':"il(C) ~
(b)(l)(\;1 I0. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered N uolear Safety issues/concerns? .'1 e..,,_s . _ y J./_)
- 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often?
2-2011-052 l(b)(7)(0) TT/ Hunters Point H & I
3
- 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nucle.ar safety concerns? / J.
.J_~ -t..J, cAt. l'1 C..,O" \-t-L~+- S ~ UVd C)(t r ~, oJ ()A ti;> \---<.-L:r C.,cr ~\.ru ~()'"'- c5 ~, ~ <Y'- tv t+-"P ~~
- 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how to write a CR)?
- 14. What is the IT policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns? Vu-y ~C,oU"b.t:) e_J .
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? \;/ ~ ,
- 17. When layoffs occur, how is it determined whicb employees are laid off and which are retained? N04-3:)tr{,tA-\~ ~~+-- off ~f-- p~
~\,ll- Jf l~ Sosc.J o~ t~~
l(b)(l)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
~.tS
- 19. How do management personnel at Hwiters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? - *i \A I\ V {) ~ ~~ ~..........
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert" BOWERS?
*~~~~~~,and when did you first have contact with him?
fivt-f- ~ t.~,hv-J~ ~ ficrl(,-;_,. _ A-f\'1'~: c9- (.X) ~-
- 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
f,<(r -\- WC>-~ Rs o 'R-
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
l)oe..s.(\ 1+- lta.J e__ 0~ e,t.. bou"' *+ zj o .Lv\ ~'_ F,d!J
')V\V~,
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)?
N O .. ~o WU':> - 1s (,uf'\ r--n>r\kh-znae.
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
~o 2-2011-052 l(b)(7)(C)
TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 5
- 26. If so, what was done ?
- 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who?
fjO
- 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA?
- 29. Who determined that BOWERS would be Jadiiff-!?"
EowV.3 ~tU>Y"\ *+ ~~ lu\ci Of:f-7 'ft~, lAu
- 30. Do you know why BOWERS w a s ~
~{.; ~ 'l'O+ \._o.1.J) O~t
- 31. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC ? and is that explained in the training?
l(b)(7)(C) TT/ Hunters Point H & I
6
- 32. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?
- 33. Was BOWERS. retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?
- 34. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his layoff?
r,Jo
- 35. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light/
~o
- 36. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate
- 37. How does TT identify performance concerns to ifs employees?
C. ov.-~s~,w 8'--\ \~,C4k- .sup.>].~~~ b.Jo\. ~ w,v~~
- 38. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or receiived some form of notice?
2-2011-052 n / Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
7
- 39. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
- 40. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? ~ ()
- 41. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr.
BOWERS?
- 42. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns? J\.)'()
- 43. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly? \J 'L~ , '3~+-* ~ O +- fV\.qJ oA ,
- 44. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP?
~
- 45. Are corners being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys?
~ t>
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
( 8
- 46. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? f>ro () ~
- 47. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
tt.5 ( ~ e,'"t ~MJL <-j
- 48. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
f\J D
- 49. Have you observed oi' witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? N (J
- 50. Does HP operate .under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?
- 51. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?
'\l iL S
- 52. If so was that weU received amongst the general TT employee base?
2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
( 9
- 53. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?
- 54. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details?
related concern?
- 56. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
l)t>--J O'f\ D S (A~l ~L lu-"t
- 57. Are TI employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
\)t5
- 58. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site?
- 59. Are there any other employees who might have more intricate knowledge of this situation, that you would recommend we talk to?
2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C)
( 10
- 60. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS?
f'JO
- 61. ls there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052. TT/ Hunters Point H & I
1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ofInvestigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: HO I 1 : - Case
Title:
Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: !(b_....)(?_)(C_) _ ___. Date: Wednesday February 8, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: 1C) *-5~ A--'- End Time: \ \ '-\..\$ f:4
- 1. In what capacity are you cl:lf[ently employed with Tetra -Tech?
r )(?)(C) 2.
- 3. How long have you been employed with TI?
["'
- 4. Ll"'"'" vou emnlnved nrinr tn II" l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
2 S. In what capacity were you employed with your previous employer? /
- 6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally worked in Cbx1xc)
- 7. What is your experience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry? :1>),:1xcJ
- 8. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT?
l(b)(?)(C)
- 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job description? l',D lb'i: iJx rnr:c>
er - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- 10. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns?
~ (\? (y~ (2.,U,bt+/-s 10 ~t ~ . ~ ~<J, M.) {(SO jL ._Sv,~ f-t)
¥\I.JV\ tf\ ~ s~L,- ~ I l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
3
- 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often?
if.b . D""'-1 c.:s ~+
\flW'-~'"'~,
~"'° leJ<..J ~ ~ L
- 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns ?
- 5M~\<t.\~~ 1 (R ~~tS o--J o( fOrttOy>~
(t(f.l')
.:r...J t-'Lf' ~.fO<S C-c.t.M.. 7_,eA""o Ly'\CtcJt,..\-:5 r r~ ~~ .
- 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e.,
are employees instructed on how to write a CR)?
~ t..s, 1 ~ro\J t Mb IS"\ s a f t.,.*'t r,wrc(j -u,
- 14. What is the TT policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?
- 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues?
- 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? 'vl Z-.S
- 17. When layoffs occur, how is it detennined which employees are laid off and which are retained?
l(b)(7)(C) 2* 2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
4
- 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done?
- 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? \)Q.Re._r.J) \ " ~ \. ~Sue__ .,, I+ Co vv!.!)
5 0 Be ~..A r-J v~ -\7; <n ~*
- 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert" BOWERS?
21 . How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him? A { Fo+- \-.-..I ~ vJ ,.1,t,... ~u-+- Wk.-. k ~ '" W'tl fLSo
- 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS?
- 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as?
Be-.rT ~C>.b ~ t)1*-G,l,U ~J \ ~ (f..~lft-\-\ o~ ~ ~t ~ \,A)\,~ 'h'-5 Co-vJ~~t.u 6o+-~ oA- tJ{W W0t-\rb ~ ~h?A.-1-u:;.\,
- 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)?
rJ O * /~L<-T uJuSA't- ~ +'4.- 'Fie..-!J) ~h l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
5
- 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details?
~o
- 26. If so, what was done ?
- 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who?
tJ 0
- 28. Are you aware of the narure of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? "
0
,~ ~~c) ~.\:- 1:,~ ~ iJj ~ L<)!.('L- vi"'~ ,~~
- 29. As the F'KcJ l did you have a lot of interaction with Bert regarding the nature of his complaints/issues? , . I \ 0*
* ~o+- Sc ~u.~- ~ s ~ -.w.- ~
- W?-
- 30. Did you find him to be active in the area of QA/QC in that he wanted to continuously ensure that his he was in compliance and that employees were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspective?
\-\c -\-r,0 31 . Who detennined that BOWERS would be Laid off?
~(}w(..r.S 1S <:S nGL c~/Ov/ '(.f_J 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l(b)(7)(C) j
6 T~f=t...<'r<..J
- 32. Do you know why BOWERS was ~ * .
8,:.rT h.(:4J Cl. ~ - ~u ~ r.t.u-- ~-t w L f,,.. , o ~ s-fw::f:- . bV~ _6Jrvv ~ploJ~ W J f\J o fZ.o._iJ 1,oto31 C,a. (_ ~US""'-.-lL~vc;,i.*l
~ ~ ww A-,Ul,W~ C,,llwtJ, ,~ ~ DF-r- ()A.. S~F-:f--
- 33. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training?
- 34. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns? vi ~ _J -
- 35. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?
- 36. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his J~eff?
pv-sv~u..,i \~ Jo+. A Lo-:5 w) 8~ . R~ ~ .Be.r+, ~ .s u sW' hw>.!!:9 LV'c..tl .
- 37. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light? \-0 ()
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 n / Hunters Point H & I
7
- 38. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate
'{~,
- 39. How does TT identify performance concerns to it's employees?
7~ll::: fv ~ t ~ .uL. 'i=-rs+- *
- 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice?
~o
- 41. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?
- 42. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid oft?
tJ O .
- 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr.
BOWERS? - 't'": n~ n j_ ,~ tte-, 1',,Ul .S l-J - Ot'- ..i.-- ~.S ~ T._
\ 1 11 L,(TV')~c;;n 't
/ \ ___ _
WOu\_D ~L-- ~~ ~ z..\-.
- 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?
l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
( 8
- 45. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly? ~0 f\-t-r'<- h~vt... l)lt,<A. J- S~ ~ x:_..rt- ~ ~+.,~~
~(.A,+- ..L.,-\-' _s 13~ tc,.<<(.(.;~ .
- 46. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP?
- <I-"' t (9 '""" ~ ,
--o ~~o\~"'\
_.. \,l)~l'-\ ~u~1 O L ~ ~CJ.\*
- 47. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction ofradiation surveys?
1\Jo
- 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TI on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the con~lusion of the day, and is thatbeingdone? \,/'lS 1 Qsu+-. fitl,~~ (7"'~t"'-\~ WW(...
a, . .J w ""~ (.;{ p fer tJof L() e,,tc '-;, LAP.
- 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often?
~-G~ * ~-LU>\.-l"'\. M~o ru~cJ,c :1>crt--h~
- 50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TI by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety?
51 Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? l(b)(7)(C) n / Hunters Point H & I
9
- 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?
- 53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?
,J c) .
- 54. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base?
- 55. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?
rJ 0
- 56. Have you ever raised any safety*related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details?
""' ~) '
- 57. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result ofraising your safety related concern?
tJ L3 OI ~ u+- J)f_') ti- (A r )(J)(C) I
~r)~
(J)"(C
")~---------'-----.1
- 58. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?
0{_ l-5 -- t JC l '(A~A ~ _ LO~ j)O"~j, l(b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I
10
- 59. Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?
- 60. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site? k) ,Dr-.._5 .
- 61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS?
- 62. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time?
r )(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case Type: H & I Case Agent: S/A (b)(?)(C) Facility/Site: Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Decommissioning Project Interviewee: !(b)(7)(C) I Date: October 25, 2011 Witness Interview Questions
Background
1. 2.
- 4. Have you held any other positions other than the above identified with your current employer?
- 7. When did you begin your employment in the Nuclear Industry?
rx,xb I
- 8. Why did you leave Tectra Tech?
9.f ~at tvne of tcajnjnn have YQI I CACffliYed Sire becoming employed in the industry?
- 10. ~ who~ di%'OU receive that training?
J ~ I~ tD--.0U-S
- 11. What is your professional background, i.e.- laborer, electrician, etc?
- 12. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current position?
(
- 13. What were your duties and responsibilities during your tenure of employment with Tectra Tech?
- 14. Who did you report to? [>{ ~ * ;,l 4 J ~ f l,"t(_ -,:J w-( *
- 15. Did you have any direct reports?, if so please identify? '~
UO
- 16. What policies and procedures were you guided by?
- 17. What were Tectra Tech's (TI) responsibilities as a condition of the license?
VWt tr\..vS ~Mt t.J
- 18. Whst as the safety ~ulture there at Hunter's Pointf (b)(l )(C)
_5c.l: -1W 1.&,J G '=>T ef" ~ 6 s(-. .____ _ _---,.::-:-~-........ 18.Did TI pr mote a safety conscious work environment, if so , how? r b)(l)(C) I s(,l~,,c, 19. Did you receive training on how to report safety related concerns, if so, who ~ r-~u -*/. administered the training?
&::;;f r -- *-
"")20. Was it acceptable at TT to report safety concerns to Mngt. Did it seem like a welcomed tn~1ncouraged practice?
~ { .e) ~ ; ; y o u aware of Bert Bowers ever raising safety concerns to management'/~~ ~ _ ~ 2 2 . H~~ou become aware of Mr. Bowers raising safety concerns? ¥i ~LJ 23. Did Bowers tell you directly that he reported his safety concerns to management, if so W\ 5~- 1 when? DCC* 'l&!O. 5'-t Lif4- ~,-; /',)Ov* /)[jvJtrJ ~
\ vol"24. Did he ever raise his safety concerns to management in your presence? If so, to whom within the management chain did he raise concerns to?
- 25. Did anyone from management ever discuss Bowers' raising safety related concerns with you? If so, what was the content of those conversations?
J..-)b
- 26. Do you believe t7t Bowers was retaliated against for raising safety related issues? If so why? v{j1<.$
- 27. Are you aware if Bowers took his concerns to any other entities outside TT? If so whom?
- 28. When personnel action was taken against Bowers, what did management cite as the reason?
- 29. Were you interviewed by anyone from management or another er.itity within TT regarding your knowledge of Bowers' concerns?
- 30. Are you aware of any other employees who were potentially retaliated against for raising safety related issues?
- 31. Did you ever raise any safety related issues, if so what happened?
- 32. Do you believe that Bowers had valid safety related concerns?
- 33. Do you have any first- hand knowledge that the personnel action levied against bowers was based on his whistleblowing activity?
- 34. From your understanding would there have been any major issues with TI just having bowers name removed from the license?
- 35. What kind of employee was Bowers? What kind of reputation did he have?
- 36. How long did you work with Bowers?
- 37. Did you find Bowers complaints valid?
(b)(?)(C) r,,,c, 1) {
~ l"'l(C)
= I 3.
r"
~) r l(b)(7!C)
~ la) ~l(..N :r..,J I-) "'<-kw- --\-lt°'I-U"'-'s~ 6 tV\.l.L.-[.__ x1x-c> _ ____,
- f' ..be_ to M ..A +- C Ir,~ ,6,~ (o-r- fc r:s+- :J./ 3 V ,J \:; u h *L-,h s /-!6-t-~ I
'iJ /1.irl..- Wt>~ f,v, ,,-,r') I~ D , -------
(b)(?)(C)
~,r- \-t v "'lrv-_s f -t * ~1., ~ ;:___ +t.______,
iD\
) J\.uJ (ll'( () r k.J I tv t'i( -__
(b)(?)(C) .,.._f_t(S _ 1- _ /\J - ~- -11 M~o£~~~~s.. / I
; I I~*,i) JJ O +.--e11 -.. ,1 , lWt Fe, ..J,
;s i!) A-N Nvt 4. L ']:,r'\ - Suv, ~l- +r°t:.{ l VI)
- (b)(l )(C)
E~\j.p~+Dp~ Find r1" ~f~-f f'-lOVl"::5 tJ~ ~
~ c N , ~ 'DL~
& Ji..tf-
. w(/V)
~,t,...cc.
- .__l (b)(',:,11 7)(C-) ---JL
. ==-
'/_,;\ . .-- *~~~ ~ w-L
~ 0 .
~o (b)(7)(C) r l(7)(C) c::s >
,, (b)(7)(C)
(b)(7)(C)
riS <:::) a 1
~
- \~
<c:>
0
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of*Investigations Personal -H istory Form lnveatlgatlon Number: _/_".' ,I.PL it - lJ()a.,_ Full Name: - = ---------,----------___J Employer. 72 6;-A k I,4 Ea
.J.l- ---------1-- - - - -
(b)(7)(C)
Title:
Wori< Telephone Number;...,:,.;;;;::===::::;-- Length of Employment J lC'xc>
'---...J L
Employer's Address: -)t) ~ ~o:c:- (b)(7J(C) Home Address:
,____ _~ (b)~(7)~(C!"'" ) -------..-------.------___J Home Telephone Number.
""--r.:-
(b=)(7=)(C~) -------J Cellular Telephone Number: .......__ _ _ _ _ _ _....... Social Security Number: _---- __. Sex: Male _ _ Female (b)(7)(C) Race: .l
..___ _-;(:::::;: b)(7
- )(;C)
- ,_L_
Date of Birth: ~ ~----------'-- (bJ(7J(Cl Place of Birth:
( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal Hlstorv Form Investigation Numbw: _L_. e#0 1>
- Oo ~
Date of Interview: I)_ 11., l- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -,- - - (b)(7)(C) Full Name: . Employer: '\'e J(,4 ~& EC I
Title:
_ l (b)(7)(C) Wom~T~;r,e-p-ho~ne 0 __N_u_m_be r.l~(~~,:C
~)====:::::::!:====~,
Length of Employment J_:x_'x_ c5 _ _ _ _ _,_ , Employer's Address: Sh , (b)(7)(C) Home Address: --- -::::=======!1!!111!!!!~~~====~=---------. (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Number""""=======--- , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' Social Security Number: - - --- Sex: Male a' Female _ _ Race: ._! (b)-(7)_,c_J _ _ L Date of Birth: (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) I I Place of Birth: C.1"'\c.\\ l (b)(7)(C) - .
U.S;. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of *Investigations Personal *H istory Form lnveatlgatlon Number: _ __ _ _ _ __ J F-el W1L Date of Interview: Full Name:_ l(b)(?)(C) l
, - - - - - - - , - - - - -....,. c --,,o. - - - - - - -.
Empl r: (b)(?)(C) TlUe:
- - - - - - - - - - t(b)(7)(C)
Work Telephone Numb
~ ~ ---~---
Length of Employment -.....- - . - - - -- Employer's Addre;::;ss:=,;:...,,,....._ _ _...Ci_ 7 _f:_;_c:..
.....,.l_.1-_ ........_ """"""'.......- S......:...;;:~;...:;t'.=......ll.l.C::~A...:(~ ..:..)"--1..-1-..i...;:;2 (b)(7)(C)
Home Address: Home Telephone Number: _+ff-f'+----- Cellular Telephone Number: :'6<>11.c! eh Jt atJ~ Social Security NumbBr: _ _ Race: Date of Birth: (bJ(?)(CJ t (b-:-:,:
)(7);:-;::
(C:':"'"
) -------.,__---J Place of Birth:
E "".'4 1 L *..
( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form Investigation Number:~-~ - Q02 Date of lntefiew* (b)(7)(C) z./q /17 l Full Name:
'------..-\- - - ---=--------'
Employrc Te:bc01 Tee h F e i.nc. Titte: (b)(7)(C)
-'-------:::::=====: (b)(7)(C) 1
- : : !: L=----__,
(bX ' XC) Work Telephone Number: Length of Employment: r )(O)(CJ I r Jlt}(CJ Employers Address: r )(7)(C) Home Address: (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Number Soclat Security Number. - - - - -- Sex: Mate Race: Female _ _ (b)(7)(C) 1/ (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - . . . . . -- (b)(7)(CJ Place of Birth: E: t,.,\ ~, l : l
( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnvntlgatlon Number: - ' -- Q Q I 3.
- ooa.
Date of Interview:
. l(b)(7)(C) u~ \)'-
Full Name:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ---- Employer: T ~ L?t:: H E c__ (b)(7XC)
Title:
'----------m--------'--, Work Telephone Number:
-~-)(-) ______ ___,
Length of Employment - ----.--- - Employer's Address;::.:,,: ..:;::::====~==\-l._="'===:::::=:=======~=t::CA-::;:;;:::=::::f:::::!~~ (b)(7)(C)
,'L. -
Home Address: (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Numbe SociaI Security Number: - - - - -- Sex: Male Female _ _ Race: l'---....,-.::=-----------. (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: ~ ~:---,.._ _ _ _ _ _ _...J (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth,::..=~~~~====='--------. ,:: l(b)(l)(C) ' - {'\'\G\ ,\.. ":
( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations 1n!:!!~~!!!!1~t~z,f~r:2-Date of Interview: f!D - J l, - I I Full Name: 5.u& A::n {. ) 1-*rfj j n i A Employer: _,,fM
........&,_,1__S__________ _
Tltle: '.Qr @ Work Telephone Number: .__ _ _ _ _ __l(b)(7)(C) Length of Employment ~f t..1( 5 , J oJ- '/JP.5, a(j> S ~ Employer's Address: Home Address: l(b)(7)(C) I L - - -"""1ILl (b)rn' (7)(;;,:; C)- - - - - - , _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--J Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Number ..__ ______ __. Soclal Security Number: _ _ Sex: Male _ _ Female v Racetl(7l(C) I (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: ..__ _ _ _ _ _ __ _.....___ Place of Birth: ,_ ___________ (b)(7)(C)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnwettgatton Number: _ I* 1)-o, J. - t/)~ Date of Interview: AA V \ -- 2a ll\ l (b)(7)(C) Full Name: L ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ , Tltte: Work Telephone Number. ......., ______ (b)(7)(C) Length of Employment _ _ _ __ , Employer's Addr..:*=sa::=-=========================::::;-- - - - - - l (bJ(7)(C) I Home Address: L------------------'-- - - - - -- (bl(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Numbe ~ r:!::::::::======:;---"
- l(b)(7)(C)
Social Security Number: --------..1 L... Sex: Male )0 Female (b)(7)(C) Race: L------r;; (b'.)(7
":'7"~)(C,:-:--
) _.._____ _ _ _ _ _- - - ,
Date of 8111h: -.,.,(b)(7)(C)
. ,. , , ,.,., .,. .- --------___J Place of Birth: L.___ _ _ _ _ _____.
( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnV'Ntfgatton Numbs: _ ._ _ _ _ __ Dat~ of Interview: IO -,;J. 7- t I 1 M (7)(C) Full Name: b:::::;;:::;;:::========;.--------1--- x,xcJ Employe::r:~.~=====:::;-'- - - - -
Title:
J . (b)(7)(C) Work Telephone Number: (b)(7)(C)
-l(bXJ,..
XCJ l Ce. I \
.....,1 Length of Employment - x..lo!i xCJ_ _ _ _ _..___ _ _ _ _ _ __,I r
- .i.....-------------"'-------,
Employer's Addre~ss~: Home Address: J
~~)
L----======~----------.....1 l Home Telephone Number: L - - - - - - - - l (b)(7)(C) Cellufar Telephone Number: SG..V'\1 :f Social Security Number: _ _ Sex: Male . / FemaJe _ _ Race: _ J(b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: J.l(b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: 1L.._ _ _ _ _......
( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnVNtfgaUon Number: _ .- *-- Date ot Interview. 'o ~ a , - I J (b)(7)(C) Full Name: t
,1.,,:"""'
' xc.,.,...
Employer:~:=c*====~- - - - - - ~ l(b)(7)(C) TJtte: ~- - - -..J-- - - - - - - - - Work Telephone Number: r JX C} Length of Emptoyme.,J - ~-,)(c*>_ _ __ ____. Employer's Address: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - HomeAddress: l(b)(7)(C) L ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .J-- - - - - - - Home Telephone Number: -======--. (b)(7)(C) Cellular Telephone Number: Social Securtty Number: _ _ l L..------J Sex; Male _ _ Female v l(b)(7)(C) I Race: .......__===':=!==------------,. (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: -:s... ----------- (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiss_ion Office of Investigations Personal History Fo rm lnvatlgatlon Number: ==.- - - - - - Full Nam
Title:
Home Address: k'Tr.:'_:c"m"1(b)(7)(C) Home Telephone u Cellular Telephone Numbe Social Security Number. _ _ Sex: Male ~ Female (b)(7)(C) Race: '=--=-=-- (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: r,;:' (b);;t,.,.,.._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __,__ _ _ _ _ _ _- - , E""I\\ *~ *.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnveatlgatlon Number: _J__- J. o t) - DQ fi:. Data of Interview: O:Lvorf - 1.1.. Nam~e=;. ,l-i ~----......-----------===-- (b)(7)(C) Full x1)(c> [ Employ~e:!:::::::.;;~~~~~===. - - - Tltle: l.(b)(7)(C)
...!:::c:-=======~~======---
Work Telephone NumberJ'"::l!l'!xI:Jl!""'~---.....----- Length of Employment ._..F_.._. . . . =~ Emptoyer'sAddress: /./f//V~ ~/A/r -,,q/./ ~ C D U (b)(7)(C) Home Address: - ---"""""P.!!"!'!!!'!'~-------t----==::::::===:::------ (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone N u m b e r : " = = = = = =- - - ' Social Security Number: - Sex: Male ){ Female (b)(7)(C) Race: . l
=====;1(:b)( :::::::
7)(~C):::::::::::::::....__ _ _ _ _ _ __,
;::::;::=======:;----
Date of Birth: l(b)(7J(C) Place of Birth: .__ _ _ _ _ _ ____ l E\.M4 l l *# l(b)(7)(C)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnveatlgatlon Number: _L~ ,a: 0 IJ. - 0 0 a Date of Interview: J.. '2 o I :7. l(b)(7)(C) Full Name:,'-*_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____, - - - -- - Employer: ::::te... +/- ro... =re c h
- l(b)(7)(C)
Title:
I
' l(b)(7)(C)
Work Telephone Number:
....,..,,,;~ ======::::::;----'
1 Length of Employmen~"-Gx-'xc_>_ _ _ _.....,~ Employer's Addr~ iLt,_....c,~..:-...i.....~~J.---',;Q;;,.:..;:;;.._-"""...i.....i-"'----""""""""'-.a...- - - - - - - - , (b)(7)(C) Home Address: (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Number: ~ 4 ~ Social Security Number: - - - - __ Sex: Male V--- Frmale
~ )(7)(C)
Race: "----~= (b)(7)(C)
=-------------.
Date of Birth: -;:i......_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____, (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: L__ _ _ _ _ _ _J --
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnveatlgatlon Number: -I-- J. o, l:: * /JcJ '1. g - /2-Date of Interview: ~ - t; J (b)(?J(C) Full Name: ....._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____, L Employer. ----~-zrn...A u___~
...............____.-P-_:_e........ ___$'-=--L-(b)(7)(C)
- - ,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____J
Title:
(b)(7)(C) Work Telephone Numbe=r==I!:-- )( l(C ) Length of Employment Employe(s Address::,.,,..;::;::;::::=::====~==~=2~=~=====~ ~==',.~/..~_-' ;;, 1-,:....-., (b)(7)(C) Home Address: - <L----4:::7= (b)(7)(C)
-------1---------------J Home Telephone Number:
Cellular Telephone Number: _ _ _ _ __ SoclaJ Security Number: - - --* _ _ Sex: Male ..~ Female (b)(7)(C) Race: - " - -==-...r,;--:=: - - - - - . . . _ - - , (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: --.::=====~~!!!!!!!:~~~ Place of Birth: j,__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ (b)(7)(C)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnveetlgatlon Numa.: _ . *- - Date of lnterew: (b)(7)(C) ~ (1,_, (\ Jc '.J (\ ~ \ Full Name: !:=:=======::::::;"---------,.-,.. Employer: fL-'-ixc_i _ _ _ _ _ ____.It-_ _
Title:
Work Telephone Number. - - -- - - Length of Employment - - - - - - Employer's Add~~ess~: - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . (b)(7)(C) Home Address: l L------------------------ Q l (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: - -------- (b)(7)(C) Cellular Telephone Num"""-L - - - - - - - - - - - . (b)(7)(C) Soclal Security Number. (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: Place of Birth:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal Histo ry Form lnveetlptlon Number: _ _* *- -
/20---=-/.:.../_ _ _ _ _ _ __,
Date of lntel,lll"ma1""...._ _L.:.;; (b)(7)(C)
/ /J.
- ,L,..
l/..;;J-
.;_....;5;;....
-.L..-
I FuHName: .=;;;;;:;;;===-============::::!.----_.::.---- 1,x1xC> 1 Em1p*~~-
' (b)(7)(C)
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , - - = = =r bX7)(C) = = = = - - - - - - - - - - - - - :~ Titte: ._
'------------------J Work Telephone Number. L.( '6 -
*-======:. . . . .,; . . . . ,
Length of Employment:~ r
. ..;;::rx=')(=C)= = = = = = = ! . . , _ - - - - - - - - - - ,
XlXC) I Employer's Add;.!re~ss::!,;:~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , . , . . l(b)(7)(C) I Home Address:t . . - - ~ = = = =:!!!!!!=!!!!!!!!~~~-=======- Home Telephone Numbe (b)(7)(C) Cellular Telephone Numl:>er: 1,:a::::=======-- - - - - ' Social Security Number: _ _ Sex: Male __....-- Fama~ (b)(7)(C) Race: ====i':!"!':'~, (b)(7)(C) L_-----------, Date of Birth: Place of Birth:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form lnVNtlptfon Number: _ _ -- - Date of Interview: /CY *Z62 * /) Full Name: b 6ed- ~ > s;,.....; & , ,,'i'f'ZC
~ Z.::c.... c=-c..
employer: TIiie, 4.L--J.,~ s~,- C}.(+i,:,,, -/L.l.,n£~t ~ ) Work Telephone Number: YI~ 5/L/- 27c.? Length of Employment - 2 /Z. ....,,../ Employer'sAddress: 2..~ *h-'-~ ./L,-.. ~ +;:a-.e.L.H:.o (fl 9Yl2'/ (b)(7)(C) Home Address: ...___ _1i.:iii:v,:;-- - - - - - , - - - - - - - - -- ...J (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: L...r-.,..,,...------.....1, Cellular Telephone Number: r::-:-::::~ - - - - - . . . . . . . . J Social Security Number: Sex: Male ~ Female l(b)(7)(C) Race: .___ I ___,.(--, b)(""'" 7)(C.,,.,..
)- - - - - - - - -
Date of Birth: _ Place of Birth:
( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Case Number: 1-2012-002 (b)(7)(C) Case Type: H & I Case Agent: S/ Facility/Site: Hunters Point Nayal Shipyar ecommissioning Project Interviewee: Bert Bowers Date: October 26, 2011 Alleger Interview Questions
Background
- 1. Are you currently employed, if so by whom?{) tJ ~ Lo~~~ w f Te, t-,~ ll.<- k.
2 . In what'capacity / title are you currently employed? ~~,1~ 3 . How long have you been with your current employer?
- 4. Have you held any other positions other than the above identified with your current
~ employer?~ '<.!'5 . ti) /fv.-03 po,"'-f.* p<f'u1o1.L.5
- 5. Whom were you employed with prior to your current employer?
{e.y ;UCw L~v t w
~lc) n~ ht./
6 . In what capacity?
&d,1t 1--1°"" .5~1-f o.tf.*1lc./ i?.e-f *
- 7. When did you begin your employment in the Nuclel Industry? Ift> S-(_ *
/0,755 - ocon-l(__A)l,{c~ - ~~ \tp s 1~e..,. o.t- ""
8 . What type of training have you received since beco ing employed in the industry?
,/f-* By whom did you receive that training?
I fo-.1.Q... What is your professional background*, i.e.- laborer, electrician, etc? 11 . What are your duties and responsibilities under your current position?
, eMS~ l\(..,(r.<:.t..- r-<...~'-4.~,,"""'~~.)
- 12. What were your duties and responsibilities during your tenure of employment with Tectra Tech?
~ ~ ruJok* ~ *
- vJ (y I-\ 0 (N \}Jv<\, V fx_.\- \J V .
( D ~ CW\~
..s~
- f) .r\ 5 J-c. . 8-1-5 orts?, if so please identify? (v\o...C k ,LL (-f
- 15. What policies and proced~res were you guide((. by?
l, t.~.sc!. + l+ R.A l N 1nJ4\_ ~vt..* ~
- 16. What were your Individual requirements under the license for which your name was under?
- 17. What were Tectra Tech's responsibilities as a condition of the llcense?
Protected Activity / Management Knowledge
- 18. Did you
- Tectra Tech management? If so who, and when? (b)(l)(C)
- 19. What was your sa e j-C..v~L
- 20. Where is your safety related concern captured procedurally?
21 . How did m<jtnagement respond to you raising your safety concern? I) \v,.) V\' oh (; ..c. ..c;
- 22. Wa'1cr~ition report or equivelant written regarding your concern, if so by whom?
- 23. Was there any documentation of your safety related concern?
V1 >\)
- 24. Did you have the ability to document your concerns in some form or another?
f\J oL- 1<-,.{o. \\~
- 25. Had this Issue been raised by any other Tectra Tech employees, if so what happened?
- 26. Did you take your concerns to anyone,outside your employer (i:e.- the Navy), if so who, when and in what form? 'i'l~
- I.,{)~ S ~ C~(. C;,t>J ~ La. K_ 101 D*
((A.5 o -
- 27. What is your understanding of Tectra Tech' s company policy regarding whistleblowing/
raising safety related concerns/
- 28. Does Tectra Tech operate on the principals of safety first? 1o. I ( loo\i:: 91 ~\.c-.l* ,o*v'I f 'v 6 * \1)..r 5 "--k.,-\y l.""'-P lay U_.S
- 29. Was it made clear to TT employees that they had the right and even responsibility to raise safety related concerns without fear of retaliation? V\. 'l. J
- 30. Was any training provided by TT with respect to how to raise safety related issues and the process by which those issues would be addressed?
,I 31 . Was an investigation/inquiry conducted regarding your concerns and if so by whom at TT?
Adverse Action Cs)
- 32. What do you believe was the adverse action taken against you?
- 33. When was this action taken?
- 34. Were you ever demoted or given a lesser job, prior to termination proceedings?
- 35. What did management provide as the reason for personnel action taken against you?
- 36. Did you ever receive a reduction in pay?
- 37. Did anyone within the TT management hierarchy ever identify to you either officially or unofficially that the personnel action levied against you had anything to do with you raising safety related issues?
- 38. What was the impact of you raising your safety concerns, on TT?
. Are aware of any other employees having been retaliated against for raising safety concerns, if so whom?
- 40. Was an internal investigation gone by TT or any other entity regarding your termination?
41 . Do you currently have any other open complaints, i.e.- DOL or State of California? If so Identify?
- 42. Do you know if TT management discussed your safety concerns and subsequent termination with any other employees? If so whom/
- 43. Is there anything additional that you would like to add to the record at this time?
(b)(7)(C) w (As ~ FlrN"\u- ~I\~~ TT- ~~ ~ +v1J h,~
U .S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form 01 Case Number / - l::_D I 2.. - t5D::). Date of Jnterview:;=._;:~:::t::h='l:t1/::'J= Q_====--- -- - - - - - - -- - (b)(7)(C). Full Name: l. Current Employer: rxnil, Employer Address: r l!'l)(C> (b)(l)(C) I Work Phone: Mobile Phone: Home Phone: Home Address: Title/Posjtion: (blCll(C) Length of Employment: Sex: Male ,/ Female Race: l(b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth:_ Place of Birth: _ Email Address: _ i; :,)~ () ~ (C)~ ---------------------.c===-------, _ Education:
EXHIBIT 1 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 1
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD l(b)(7)(C) Facility: TETRA TECH EC, INC. Case Agent: Case Number: 1-2012-002 Date Opened: 10/07/2011 Docket Number(s): 03038199 ECO: 08/2012 Priority: High Case Type: Materials/ Industrial Status: Report In Draft Primary Alleg Source: Aileger Allegation Number(s): Rl-2011-A-0019 SubjecVAllegation: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN Monthly Status Report: 10/07/2011: On January 31 and February 1, 2011, Bert BOWERS, former Tetra Tech RSO representative at the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard decommissioning project provided a number of technical concerns and a discrimination complaint In electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ, NRC:RIV. Because Tetra Tech is a Region I (RI) licensee, these concerns wete forwarded to the RI Office Allegations Office for disposition. Specifically, BOWERS alleged that he experienced a hostile work environment and discrimination after raising radiological concerns to Include the need for improved and timely communications related to radlological *controls in the field at Hunters Point. BOWERS claims to have been repeatedly berated by a Tetra Tech
- -~ = ,,.-- - -...,.,.,.,,,,..- ,-- -""'the last instance occurring in the presence of the Tetra or raising his concerns. BOWERS claimed that the0 told hirnP)(7)(C) that h*'r.1s;"".s;;--;a~e:;;;tk,"";
y c:;;o:;.n;:: ce ;;:;r ~~-'-ed to be based on the fact that his [BOWERS] name was listed on the NRC license and that he (b)(7)(C) uld arrange to have it removed. BOWERS claims (b)(7)(C) that .when he. inform er--,, S O 1gation to resolve issues at the site or begin steps to Inform the NRC, th (b)(7) :>~d him to pack up his office and to get off of the site immediately On April 1, 2011, w last day that BOWERS performed work for Tetra Tech, but he was paid for accumulated overtime, sick and annual leave until August 1, 2011 . These concerns were discussed during a March 16, 201 1, NRC:R I Allegation Review Board (ARB). The ARB, to Include Regional Counsel determined that BOWERS had articulated a prima facle case of discrimination and that BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 investigate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and Tetra Tech mediated on August 17, 2001 , but did not reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for investigation.
~
On October 5, 2011, Region I l(b)(7)(C) confirmed that ADR mediation had failed and that he desired t at 01 Investigate his spoke with BOWERS who discrimination concern. Potential Violations Include 10 CFR 30.7 (Employee protection) and 10 CFR 30.10 (Deliberate misconduct). The Statute of Limitations tolls on April 1, 2016. Status: FWP ECO (90 days): 01/2012. Completion Date: Total Staff Hours: 374.5 Issue Date: Months Open: 9.9 DOJ Action(s): DOJ Referral Date: 01 Violation(s): Harassment and Intimidation_ No Result Statute of Limitations Date: 04/01/2016 EXHIBIT I PAGE' I 0-F ___,,__
, - PAGE(S) 08/ 15/2012 4:32:11 PM Page#1 OFFICIAL USE ONL'l - 01 IN.V ESTIGATION INFOKMATION
EXHIBIT 2 Case No. 1-2012..002 Exhibit 2
C:\Documents and Settings\dly1 \Local Set tings\ Temporary Internet Files \ Content.Outlook\ KH4AVY01\20110019rcv.docx Page 1 of 4 Allegation Receipt Report (Use also for Staff Suspected Wrongdping - SSW) Date Received : 01 /31/2011, 02/01/2011, 02/02/2011 Allegation No. Rl-2011-A-0019 Received via: Emails (13) on 01/31/2011, emails (3) on 02/01 /2011 , email ( 1) on 02/02/2011 , and phone ( 1) on 02/02/2011 Employee Receiving Allegation/SSW: Rick Munoz, Materials HP, RIV Source of information: licensee employee Alleger Name: *Elbert "Burt" Bowers Home Address:
- Radiation Safety Officer Representative, Tetra Tech EC Hunters Point Naval Shipyard 200 Fisher Avenue San Francisco, CA 94124 Alternate Phone: City/State/Zip:
Direct: Mobile Alleger's Employer: era ec C, Inc. Alleger's Position/Title: "Site RSO Representative 1000 The American Road Morris Plains, NJ 07950 Personal Email: l(b)(7)(C)
- d CA Site RSO is licensee employee (contractor) under the RASO-approved decommissioning
- : : ron project at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, San Francisco,
- Do not comple e tnes I t r issues Facility: Tetra Tec h EC Inc.at Hunters Point Docket No. or License No.: 030-38199/29-31396-01 Naval Shipyard Is it a declaration, statement, or assertion of Impropriety or inadequacy? Yes Is the impropriety or inadequacy associated with NRC regulated activities? Yes Is the validity of the issue unknown? Yes If NO to any of the above questions, the issue is not an allegation and should be handled by other appropriate methods (e .g. as a request for information, public responsiveness matter, or an OSHA referral).
Is there a potential immediate safety significant issue that requires an Ad-Hoc ARB? Paneled by (If so, immediately inform your management and the Allegations Office) RIV on 02/25 & 03/02/2011 Was alleger informed of NRC identity protection policy? Yes If H&I was alleged, was alleger informed of DOL rights? Yes Did they raise the issue to their management and/or ECP? Yes Does the alleger object to having their issue(s) forwarded to the licensee? No Does the alleger object to release of their identity? No Provide alleger's verbatim response to this question: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Was confidentiality requested? No Was confidentiality initially granted? N/A Individual Granting Confidentiality:
C:\Documents and Settings\dly1 \ Local Set tings \ Temporary Int ernet Files \ Content.Outlook\ KH4AVY01 \ 2 0 110 0 19r cv.doc x Page 2 of 4 Allegation/SSW Summary: (Summarize each concern - provide additional detail on next page if necessary) (1) The Tetra Tech Site Radiation Safety Officer (SRSO) at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard decommissioning and remediation project experienced a "hostile work environment" and ultimately discrimination after raising safety concerns and identifying the subsequent need for improved and timely communications related to radiological controls in the field on January 13, 2011 in a meeting. (2) There have been a number of radiological safety concerns identified which are indicative of a poor radiologic safety culture in terms of management communication and management support associated with SRSO's authority. Functional Area: Decommissioning Materials Discipline For Each Concern (place concern no(s). in the box provided): [1 , 3] Discrimination [2, 4 J Health Physics [1, 2] Safety Culture [2] Training/qualification [4] Wrongdoing [) Other* Detailed Description of AJlegation/SSW (if necessary): (1) The Tetra Tech Site Radiation Safety Officer (SRSO) at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard decommissioning and remediation project experienced a whostile work environment and ultimately discrimination after raising safety concerns and identifying the subsequent need for improved and timely communications related to radiological controls in the field on January 13, 2011 in a meeting. 11 11
<':I l(b)(?)(C) .,A~ao.ua.JO£..'.LJ....2Clll.l-..at.aJQD.1::ax.i.a;l* ately 0637 hours, Site RSO met with threE'r *
(b)(?)(C) e Site RSO's office to convey the expe~c"""t_ ati.,..,._o_n_ o.,,.. ft,.,..h_e_u_r-g...... en """c- y_a_n_d~ - - nd RSOR communication of any activity in or near impacted areas that extend beyond regu**'"a ""r~ o""'u""'r~s o a"""" ow~ or assessment of the need for confirming the presence of an Authorized User and to convey that the same expectation be conveyed to the RAD field technicians;!(b)(7J(Cl I interrupt the Site RSO's discussion and proceed to loudly and profanely disagrye aod state Jbrt it was the utility corridor crew the night before and that situation had been cleared; at that point! (b)(?)(C) _appeared in the office doorway and said "You know, it seems your biggest concern has to do with your name being on the license *.... I can arrange to have it removed." On January 13, 2011. at approximately 0642 hours, the Site RSO we ffice and asked him if he realized that the Site RSO was now obligated to notify the NRC (b)(7)(C) espon ed that the Site RSO should not have allowed the situation which just occurred between the 1te and therx1)(c i I to have disintegrated to such a level and the Site RSO could just go ahead and do what ffie S1te RSO thought s/he need to do and said "call the NRC or whoever but while ou're at it cu can also ack u the s t in our office and et the h I off m ro*ec ." (b)(7)(C) ere present in the conference room just outside (b)(7)(C) ffice when this occurred; at approximately 0647, the Site RSO left the site after quickly shutting down and storing a computer and moving a box of unused dosimetry from the Site RSO's cabinet and placing it under the Site RSO's desk. On January 13, 2! 1 a~appmxlm:elv 0647 baprs, t e Site RSO from an offsite overlook of the HPS portion of Parcel E called (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) and informed him of the situation in an abbreviated fashion and calleater rom a res,ence to provide a e I ed account. After being removed from duties at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, the RSO was temporarily reassigned to the Alameda decommissioning project (Naval Shipyard) after engaging in protected activity on January 12 and 13, 2011 . After the incident where, after nonnal working hours and after dark, Shaw Environmental work crews were discovered in two vehicles exiting a fenced off area of an impacted area (RCA and no RAD representative was present to determine whether appropriate egress protocols yvere followed , the (b)(7)(C) flew out to the site and berated the site RSO during the field supervisory staff meeting before the morning tailgate ~riefing. EXHIBIT -L. PAGE_5.:=: 0-F_ -5
,-_- = PA-GE(S)
C:\Documents and Settings\dly1 \ Local Settings \Temporary Internet Fil es \Content. Outlook\KH4AVY01\20110019rcv. docx Page 3 of 4 Note: Cl email dated 02/02/2011 to NRG RIV indicated that Cl is reporting back to Hunters Point to re-
~.t~~nsure on-going RAD program controls and integrity but was informed by a HPS RAD
- - - - ..::.th~at as of the morning of 02/02/2011 , a new posting on the RSO board identified""'! (b"""
)(?""')(""""
c)- - - , as the (b)(7)(C) ith a backdated effective date of 01 18, 2011 (2) There have been a number of radiological safety concerns identified which are indicative of a poor radiologic safety culture in tenns of management communication and management support associated with SRSO's authority. Construction management has demonstrated progressively eroding recognition/backing of Its NRC license and progressively eroding acknowledgement of the authority/level of respect associated with the SRSO, RSO representatives, and authorized users and hesitant willingness to allow radiation protection personnel to perform/carry out expected license-driven responsibilities unimpeded and without consequence; this sends the wrong message to those who perform tasks In the field. Examples provided of a poor radiologic safety culture included a reduction in the SRSO's work schedule, lack of implementation of appropriate egress protocols for egress from impacted areas, water stations set up in impacted area without safety office approval, not enough time for SRSO training of workers, controls inadequate to prevent vandals from stealing copper cable on site, and numerous breaches of property fence/RCA perimeter boundary. On January 12, 2011 J{bll7l{Cl Iinformed Site RSO that RSOR function's weekly hours were being reduced from 50 to 45; RSOR felt that this reduction was specifically aimed at the RSOR function and was not an across-the organization reduction; Site RSO questioned how to ensure continued "llcense-drlven" obligations like "end-of-shift" drive through the site for integrity checks after the field staff has left for the day, under such a new allotment of weekly hours and nine-hour days and new requirement to begin attending the 6 :30 am daily meetings. On January 12, 2011 at 1650 hours, Site RSO performed "end-of-shift" drive through the site for integrity checks and at 1720 hours discovered field laborers In two TfEC project pick-up trucks exiting Parcel E RSY4 sector through the gate; Site RSO proceeded to TtEC managem~,'rlH~f'i'ecs aad disjvered that there was no "Authorized User" on TtEC's *
- he and that all had left for the day; Site RSO proceeded t (b)(7)(C) ffice and informed him of the laborers leaving an impacted area while no " u z , (b)(7)(C) suggested that the SO-hour work week may be needed after all.
Breaches of the RCA perimeter boundary at property fence were found during RAD integrity field checks. After normal working hours and after dark, Shaw Environmental work crews were discovered in two vehicles exiting a fenced off area of an impacted area (RCA); the RSO was not present to determine whether appropriate egress protocols were followed. On two occasions. a water station was set up inside an RCA without safety office approval which was contrary to procedure; on one occasion in November 2010, the RCA signs were deliberately turned down by someone; a water station was set up on another occasion in Parcel E in January 2011 . The Site RSO was not given enough time to adequately train workers. Vandals were found on-site stealing copper cable in the impacted shore line area (RCA). After January 13, 2011 , RSO office cabinet and drawers were breached. Management has been going through the SRSO's files; recor.ds required to be maintained by the NRC license have been compromised/left uncontrolled and are being destroyed. The alleger submitted a copy of a memorandu,µ...~.iJ.1.1:w.i..J......i..J.1.1J1.1.1,s;;;~~int Shipyard (HPS), Tetra Tech EC (TtEC) Events Leading up to January 13, 2011 (b)(7)(C) * *
- Representative RSOR to Pack OfficeNacate roJect) to t to Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C) ated January 18, 2011 which detailed e summary o events as t January 12-13, 2011 .
tndjyjduals ~amed P,X*)(C) EXHIBIT ____,::l._ _ (b)(i)(C) pr,p.r:._ _3 . OF 2L.PA.GE(S)
C:\Documents and Settings\dly1 \Local Settings \ Temp orar y Internet Fil es \Con t en t . Ou tloo k\KH4AVY01\20110019 r cv. docx Page 4 of 4 (b)(7)(C) I Tetra T ecn(bl(7)(C) I
~b)()XC)
Contractor - Contractor - Contractor - (b)(J)(C) I b)ll)(C) I (b)(7)(C) l\bXl Xq I I Tetra Tech's l(b)(7)(C) I The!(b)(l )(C) ~ as contacted by telephone and memorandum dated January 18, 201 1. A total of 17 emails, some with attachments including photographs, were submitted by the Cl to NRC RIV; these emails pertained to the concerns which were raised by the Cl and the response initiated by site and corporate management. This allegation (RIV-2011 -A-0021) was paneled by RIV on 02/16/11 and 02/28/11 and was transferred to Rl's jurisdiction via the latter panel and acknowledgemenVclosure letter dated 03/02/11 (no enclosure listing concerns was provided in the latter letter). From Tetra Tech letter dated October 18. 2010 to NRC RI, "The potential radioisotopes of concern are primarily Ra:226: Cs--137, and*Sr; 90; a total of less than 500 millicuries total for Ra-226 and Cs-137 is a realistic conservative estimate for total activity based on previous survey results.** Cl email dated 02/02/2011 to NRG RIV indicated that Cl is reporting back to Hunters Point,,..to...,.,,.re,....*- - - - . establish/ensure on-going RAD program controls and integrity but was informed b a HPS as of the morning of 02/02/2011 , a new posting on the RSO board identified (b)(7)(C) l(b)(7)(C) r ith a backdated effective date of 01 18, 2011 fi"*> s the l(o)(l)(C) Ir that
G:\ora\alleg\panel\20110019arb1 .docx ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEW ED AND APPROVED BY THE ARB CHAIR AHegatlon No.: Rl-2011-A-0019 Branch Chief (AOC): Joustra Site/Facility: Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Acknowledged: Yes ARB Date: March 16, 2011 Confidentiality Granted: No Concern(s) Discussed: DISCRIMINATION CONCERN: The concerned individual {Cl) experienced a "hostile work environment" when raising safety concerns and addressing subsequent need for improved and timely communications related to radiolog ical controls in the field at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. Examptes~i(b)(7)(C) I
- Thef l:;tated to the Cl that his safety concerns seem to be based on the fact that his name is on the license, the l(b)(7)(C) jinformed the Cl that he can arrange to have the Cl's name removed. * *
- The!(b)(7)(C) I informed the C l to pack his office and leave the site.
SAFETY CONCERNS:
- 1. Radiological Controlled Area signs were turned down (i.e., not visible) in areas that required the sign-age.
- 2. A water station was setup inside the RCA without following proper protocol.
- 3. Vehicles leaving the RCA after normal working hours may not have followed the proper procedures for egress.
- 4. On 1/ 12/2011 , work was being done past 4PM and there may not have been an Authorized User present to oversee this decommissioning work.
- 5. Cl identified ~A;~!:::::1~9 6 . Cl informedr 1m(c!
conditions at the Hunters Point site.
~j~bout an inadequate survey of a locker.(interiorwas not wipe tested).
- 7. Cl stated th r I citation safety records may be compromised and/or destroyed because he kept these records under lock and key in his office at the site, but when he returned to the site on 1/23/2011 ,
he noticed that the locks were broken and/or removed and the records were accessible.
- 8. After being removed from site, the Cl's telephone numbers remained on the emergency/off-hours contact list.
Adverse Actions: r (7)(C) ~
- The Cl was berated by the during a field supervisory staff meeting
- The Cl was removed from,s duties at unter's Point and re-assigned to another site.
Does a lleger object to providing concerns to the licensee via an RFI? N/A ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD ATTE NDEES C h ~on Acting Branch C hief: Hammann SAC: Urban 0 1: ~ RI Counsel: Farrar Others: Masnyk-Bailey, McFadden, Nicholson DISPOSITION ACTIONS
- 1. Regional Counsel has determined that a prima facie case exists.
Responsible Person: Farrar ECO: Closure Documentation: Completed: 3/16/2011 EXHIBIT ~ 5-
~.GE__~ - O-F....... _ -
PA-GE(S}
G:\ora\alleg\panel\20110019arb1 .docx
- 2. Send status letter to alleger providing enclosure. Provide ADR and DOL rights.
Responsible Person: SAC ECO: 3/23/2011 Closure Documentation: Completed:
- 3. DNMS to conduct inspection at Hunter's Point to address the eight (8) safety concerns (last week of March 2011 ).
Responsible Person: Joustra/Orysia Masnyk-Bailey ECO: 4/29/2011 Closure Documentation: Completed:
- 4. Repanel, if necessary (based on inspection findings to determine if chilling effect letter is needed or if add'I 01 assistance is needed); Otherwise provide draft closeout letter to SAC for safety concerns; if
_possible provide status of discrimination concern. Re~ponsible Person: SAC ECO: 5/30/2011 Closure Documentation: Completed: SAFETY CONCERN: Discrimination for raising safety concerns - may result in chilling environment PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION: High RATIONALE USED TO DEFER 01 DISCRIMINATION CASE: ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION: (Only applies to wrongdoing & discrimination issues that are under investigation by 01/DOUDOJ) What is the potential violation and regulatory requirement? 10 CFR 30.10 When did the potential violation occur? January 2011 timeframe NOTES: DISTRIBUTION: Panel Attendees, Regional Counsel, 01, Responsible Persons
~
EXHIBIT:;;-c;-
?AGE __u,__ OF .__ \ __PAGE(S)
Page 1 of 2 G:\ora\alleg\panel\20110019arb2.docx ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ARB CHAIR Allegation No.: Rl-2011-A-0019 Branch Chief (AOC): Joustra Site/Facility: Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Acknowledged: Yes ARB Date: May 25, 2011 Confidentiality Granted: No Concern(s) Discussed:
- 1. Review of additional information provided by alleger on 04/26/2011 in 3 ring binder . Security Category: N/A No specific additional concern was identified after reviewing the additional information provided by the alleger. There is a generalized concern about the adequacy of the radiological control program but no new specific examples are provided.
Does alleger object to providing concerns to the licensee via an RFI? [N/AJ ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD AlTENDEES bMl l(C) Chair: Lorson Branch Chief: Joustra SAC: Urban Others: Masnyk-Bailey, McFadden, Nicholson, Dwyer, Seeley r 01:" - - - - ' RI Counsel: DISPOSITION METHOD (See Attached RFI Worksheet, If Applicable) NIA _ __ RFI _ __ Inspection or Investigation Both DISPOSITION ACTIONS
- 1. Send status letter to alleger providing enclosure closing all previous concerns 1 throug h 8 in attached notes reviewed during Inspection and conditionally closing the additional generalized non-specific concern. DNMS did provide enclosure to SAC on 05/ 16/2011 Responsible Person: Joustra ECO: 5/31/2011 Closure Documentation: Completed:
- 2. Based on inspection results do not recommend a chilling effect letter at this time, however if H&I is identified we will need to repanel.
Responsible Person: Joustra ECD: TBD Closure Documentation: Completed: SAFETY CONCERN: PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION: RATIONALE USED TO DEFER 01 DISCRIMINATION CASE: ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION: (Only applies to wrongdoing & discrimination issues that are under investigation by 01/DOUDOJ) What is the potential violation and regulatory requirement? When did the potential violation occur? EXHIBIT __ J___ PAGE-+. OF --~-_PAGE(S}
Page 2 of2 NOTES: This is the second set of concerns from the same Cl on the same allegation regarding working conditions at Hunter's point, CA. The first set of concerns was discussed at the ARB held on Mar<;;h 16, 2011. The concerns discussed at that time were:
- 1. Radiological Controlled Area signs were turned down (i.e., not visible) in areas that required the signage.
- 2. A water station was setup inside the RCA without following proper protocol.
- 3. Vehicles leaving the RCA after normal working hours may not have followed the proper procedures for egress.
4 . On 1/12/2011, work was being done past 4PM and there may not have been an Authorized User present to oversee this decommissioning work.
- 5. Cl identified fence breach conditions at the Hunters Point site.
6 . Cl informed!(b)(7)(C) !about an Inadequate survey of a locker (interior was not wipe tested). 7 . Cl stated that required radiation safety records may be compromised and/or destroyed because he kept these records under lock and key in his office at the site, but when he returned to the site on 1/23/2011 , he noticed that the locks were broken and/or removed and the records were accessible.
- 8. After being removed from site, the Cl's telephone numbers remained on the emergency/off-hours contact list.
Generalized concern from additional information provided by alleger on 04/26/2011 as follows: Inadequate end-of-day RAD integrity field checks by supervisors. Tetra Tech states in their written procedures supervisors are to walk around the restricted area(s) at the end of each work day to ensure all barriers and controls (including but not limited to, signs, postings, locks, chains, gates, etc .. . ) are established to discourage/deter unauthorized access after routine working hours. The concerned individual (Cl) alleges procedures were not being followed by field supervisors at th~ end of the day in conducting adequate field checks. There is an ongoing discrimination issue. DISTRIBUTION: Panel Attendees, Regional Counsel, 01, Responsible Persons EXHIBIT :).... PAGE_L OF ~ --PAGE(S)
C: \ Document s a nd Se ttin g s \dlyl\Local Settin gs\Temporary Internet Files \ Con tent.Out l ook \ KH4AVY0 1 \ 20110019a rb3 (2) .docx ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ARB CHAIR Allegation No.: R l-2011-A-0019 Branch Chief (AOC): Ferdas Site/Facility: Hunters Point- T etra Tech Acknowledged: Yes ARB Date: February 1, 2012 Confidentiality Granted: No Issue discussed: Review of 01 transcript (01 Case No. 1- 2012-002) from interview with Cl to determine if any new con cerns were identified. Does alleger object to RFI to the license&? N/A ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD ATTENDEES D)( l( l Chair: Dlorson Branch Chief: M. Roberts SAC: RUrban 01: RI Counsel: KFarrar Others: Hammann/Nicholson, J. McFadden, D. Holody, A. Turilin DISPOSITION METHOD (See Attached RFI Worksheet} Inspection/Technical Review DISPOSITION.ACTIONS (List actions for processing and closure. Note resp onsible person(s), form of action closure document(s), and estimated completion dates.)
- 1) No new concerns were identified . 0 1Case is still open.
Responsible Person: Ferdas ECO: 2/1/ 12 Closure Documentation: ARB Form Completed: 2/1/12
- 2) Continue 0 1 Investigation 1-2012-002.
l(b)(7)(C) Responsible Person: ,__ _....., ECO: 3/30/2012 Closure Documentation: Completed: SAFETY CONCERN: see previous panel fonn PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION: see previous panel fonn RATIONALE USED TO DEFER 01 DISCRIMINATION CASE: see previous panel form ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION: see previous panel form NOTES: T he Cl's original concerns included wrongful termination. 01 conducted an interview with the Cl and DNMS 8 4 performed a review of the 01 transcript to determine if any new concerns were identified. DISTRIBUTION: Panel Attendees, Regional Counsel, 01, Responsible Persons
EXHIBIT 3 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 3
(b)(7)(C) I
.~ ~-\ +-l t (b)(7)(C)
Statement of Events In the Vicinity of Bert Bowers' Office I
, 011 January 13, 2011
- 1. What is the issue of concern that Bert Bowers conununicated to the HP Supervisors, as you undentood it? The- ~. d<. -t='\ l \ Q. \ c!:> rt.~ c~~ S\' RJ.., DI/er +i m.e..
Wo.5 b {~ W0>r\<e.A +he. nt~~-\ o+ , ... 13~'2.ol\.
- 2. Did you agree with Mr. Bowers' stated issue of concem. Why or why not?
No. Tne. AreA. c!) ~ 4-h.e.. b ~ + \ ,\ <!>f\. c::.i-~s~ ~ . hc:....s ~~so Ct>T\ ~w-renc.e. ~ r ~ \ ~ w A.:tt Iltl. T\-J b Are.o... ~ ~ rwt- ~S\ed.
\.\e.. !>-\.~\e.J. we. neo.d.eJ ~e~~\~+or~ c.one-urrence o.rtA ~~ we. c\.lJ t¥>.\- \-i.oJJe. i -\- .
,...~2 O 1 2 ..~ 0 0 2
'"'"'l !Q EXHIBIT 3 r.e(S)
?AGE_}__ OF _2:_PA~
3 .. As detailed as possible, provide the sequence of events that you pe1*sonally witnessed from the time that Mr. Bowers initiated a meeting of the HP Supervisors until he left the site that morning.
\~\ E.ve.rd-- Be.r\. Q , ~ ~ l (b)(7)(C) I-\--o CP ~
+o h ~ $
O.f'+\c.~ (01o~O) .
~nd. Even+ .. \,er+ le.+- "'-S Kn.ol4.> f\.\4t.:\- on .\,~ rz.H~ <O-t '3"°"" , ~ ~
~r~r5 ~n ~ ~ r'eA ( w >..111.a C.r\ ~\>~*) ~\,~~ J.:J not h~~~ ~~~.\-e':)
D!>n C.'-"-rr e.C\c.e... 3rd. ~\ten.\: - Ste.lfe. \e:\* Bert 'Kno'-'.) 4-h4.\ n.e. wet.S no-\- c::eirre.t:.. +h-4,+ + we. 1-v>..d. RP\~D C..01"\c.urre.n.ce.. 4~ E\/ent (bJ(l)(C) 4.\~o \c:.\- ~~ ~w th.~+ \-\e w~ m 'is--k.~ei\ 4-h~A- ~\\ "~ wt.. \~ (-r\'~t Ra. WC...!> LleA.n. C.ol'\~~ ; on.. ~ o..:c\ nt>t l"\(:AA. ~ 5 I./, -to tef~5er,.\- +h.e. T e.+rci.. T e.G:.h. \k.e.l"\:'.Se., 5+r1 E \CS\* (bl(ll(C) ca,..rn.e. ~ n o..nJ \e.t E>e,-+ Kno'-' ~a.. t- h.e
~6 +~ one Wl-\.o ~ }kor~-z.ed t"'-e. <:!>Vc!r+\ rne +c,, ~ ~~
+
+, l\ on. C, ~ ~~ ~ - o..rt~ t\AA.+ t ~ ~ C ' 1 c.on.s-h-t..l<=*-~e\\.
t..,~ E."eci~ - ~ \e,\- !(bJ(7)(Cl ! *Know ~t 'n.e... W4.~ no~ ~rr\~,.mecl
-th.a...+ we... ~ ~\n.S, ~ he!- ~ I
\ n.~ ......._2:) u)c21t-\(, :b)(7)(C) 1 -+"'- Evllt+-- ~ ~ _s~v!~ ~~ea .:,u~ c+ tS~,+.s c!l-\+t C-e.
~4- +o h.~.s ei+~tce.. ._____,
g *H--. tven~ ~ (b)(7J(C) I wo.\\c'.d. *~ \(_ ,n+o ~ oHt~ ~ \e.t-h~rn Knou.!) , + he. ~e,'-1.\t:l.. ~o ~ +\l\.e Ar'\ "r-~t-\.. rrteet-,nc::t5 he- ~~\o{ ho..ve.. s ~ \/~s ~oh . "...)
~ E.\lef"'l\-.-Berf u.lent , n~o l(b)(?)(C) lot:+:~c.e. ~\fe...e.... "e..r~J re.S ,~n"4-~oh
°'-nA ~~ J. --\-t...o..\ he. ~!:> ~ \ rt~ ~ CA. l \ .,- k ~ ~L .
'O~-f;.vc.rt.\- -I \e..Ft +t>, t k At"\.. -:54e.~ m~~+t~ EXHlSlT 3 PAGE /h OF ~.PAGE(S)
EXHIBIT 4 Case No. 1-2012..002 Exhibit4
[I t] TEIRA TECH FW INC Memorandum Date: May 12, 2011 To: r )(7)(C) From: RE: Future Assignment of Bert Bowers to HPS fu January 2011, you and l released Bert Bowers from the Hunters Point Shipyard (HPS) project the l(bX,J(C) This outburst stx:mmed from Bert not know~r
*as a result of an outburst that occurred between Bert Bowers, the Radfological Supervisors, and I a work area had been down posted and~oved for backfill, and Bert's need to go th (b)(7) to ask the status of the work area. Tue~ked Bert to attend the next morning me g with the Radiological Supervisors to discuss 1t. The outburst occurred shortly after this morning meeting ended.
Bert had informed us that he felt threatened at HPS, was uncomfortable being on site, and that he was concerned about a "culture of safety" that he felt jeopardized our NRC license. We agreed to assign Bert to Alameda, where an additional RSOR level person was needed during the 24/7 dredging operations occurring at Alameda, knowing this was a short tenn assignment at Alameda. We informed Bert that we would conduct a thorough investigation, and upon completion, }et him know the outcome and our decision. With regards to Bert's feeling 1hreatened,!(b)(?)(C) !apologized to him for the outburst and misunderstanding between the two ofthem, and Bert accepted that apology. We d i s c u ~' s discomfort at the site with him on several occasions in January, and after receiving XCJ apology, I w~ under the impression that Bert's concerns were reduced. However, our investigation indicated there was definitely a lack of trust and confidence in Bert by bot!} the!(b)(l)(C) land the Radiological Supervisors. This is concerning, since that lack of teamwork and trust will significantly limit Bert's effectiveness in the RSOR position. You and I interviewed the Radiological Supervisors at the site, *and learned that they were all aware that the area in question by Bert had clearly been down posted. They all pointed to the daily 6:30 AM momingplanning meeting and status board as the sources of information for areas that were down posted. I find it concerning that an RSOR lac mplete knowledge of areas that are posted or down posted, and that an RSOR is going to th /~t o find out this information. The RSOR is there to support o ~ a n d should be keeping i~f) ormed, not the other way around. EXHIBIT ___:. L\_ 1 ~ 2 0 1 2 ~. 0 0 2 PAGE_L OF __k._.PAGE(S)
Bert made several allegations about work at HPS being non-compliant with our NRC license, and repeatedly expressed concerns that work was not being conducted appropriately. However, when questioned and during our site tour, Bert was never able to point to any specific item that was non-compliant. You led a detailed investigation into our NRC license compliance at HPS, and identified multiple findings. All nine findings were a direct result of Bert not performing his RSOR functions.
- You then requested that the NRC accelerate their planned inspection schedule at HPS. The NRC conducted an audit with you in Virginia for overall license compliance and an audit in April at the HPS site. Toe only finding from this audit was a non-citation finding rel~ted to Bert leaving a radiation source unattended in a conference room following a training session. During our conference call with Bert this afternoon, he admitted that he left this source on the conference room, and that his action was improper.
Your investigation and that of the NRC revealed serious deficiencies in Bert's performance while serv~g as the RSOR at HPS. Our discussions with site personnel also revealed siga.ificant deficiencies in Bert's supervisory style. With your approval, 1 recommend that Bert not be returned to HPS as the RSOR, or any other project site as an RSOR. I -recommend you provide very specific guidance and direction to Bert that will focus on improving his performance. I also recommend that you only assign him to non-RSOR positions until you see demonstrated improvements in his performance. We should continue to look for non-RSOR opportunities where Bert can further develop. You assigned !(b)(7)(C) !as the !(b)(l)(C) !during this time period. ,(bl(: (: ) ~ as instrumental in helping address the findings you identified in your investigation, comp e mg the 2010 TLD summary, completin training of Radiological Supervisors, and providing support during the NRC inspection. (b)(?)(C) was also instrumental in addressing a surprise inspection by OSHA related to an anonymous complaint about lack of radiological trainin and records that resulted in no OSHA citation. With your approval, l recommend assigning (b)(l)(C) as the long-tenn (b)(7)(C) for our HPS work.
~)17XCI Approved: _ _ _ 1 ...- - - - - - - - - - - - - --=!.- - - - - - - - - - - - -,
l(b)(7)(C) l(b-)(7-)(-C)_ _ _ _ _ ___,~
.... etra Tech EC EXH1BIT ~L\__
2 PM,E_2 OF -z:_ .?AGE(S)
EXHIBIT 5 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 5
I
-~ TETRA TECH EC, fNC.
lntem11I Memorandum February 1, 2011 TO: Bert Bowers- LOCATION: Six Mile, SC EE#: 519950 FROM: Human Resources LOCATION: Morris Plains, NJ
SUBJECT:
Temporary Assignment to Radlologlcal EMAC Projects at Fonner NAS Alameda In Alameda, Callfornla This letter wHI confirm your temporary assignment to the NAVFAC SW RadloJogicaJ EMAC CTOs 3, 5 , and 6 effective January 25, 2011 . Your assignment Is expected to last through March 15, 2011. At the end of your assignment or completion of the project, whichever comes first, the provisions of this letter will no longer apply. Please be advised that this temporary assignment may have an effect on your medical benefits if you are currently enrolled In an HMO. To find out what changes, if any, wtll Impact you, please caJI your Human Resources Representative. You can discuss what options will be available for you at your new location. Because you are in the same geograph,cal area and your aaslgnment haa been ongoing for a period exceeding 12 months, all expeneN associated wtth your aaalgnment aa deflr:,ed In thla letter will be considered taxable Income and .wm be subject to all withholding. A. "TAXES Your tax withholdings may change as a result of this assignment. An employee's state of residency and taxation may be affected by various factors, including a change in assignment from temporary to indefinite. Therefore, State Tax Regulations require TtEC to review the state tax laws for the state in which you work and the state in which you have residency, i.e. your home address of record with 1he company and to withhold/report accordingty. It is the employee' s responsibility to'file the necessary tax forms required In the state where he/she works, resides, or both. You may wish to consult a tax accountant in order to determine how this will affect you. E><HIBIT PAGE I s 0-F--..:s=
- PA- :.
-GE(S)
Bert Bowers February 1, 2011 Page2
- a. LODGING and PER DIEM Commencing October 29, 2010 you will receive an all inclusive Per Diem (meats and incidentals) of $61 per calendar day. You will also be reimbursed tor actual lodging costs not to exceed $89 per calendar day. Lodging in excess of $89/day, including all taxes, will be at your own expense.
This per diem will be paid through the completion of your assignment. Reimbursement for lodging wUI be based on actual expenses. R~celpts are required tor all expenditures. The employee will make arrangements to stay at a lodging location of his/her choice as long as the lodging expenses are within 1he above guidelines. As an alternative, you may request that the company establish a Purchase Order for lodging, which wlll be paid directly .by the company. You will .b e responsible for signing any lease or hotel agreements. You will also be responsible for any damage you cause. Some facilities In the area may have a lower negotiated rate with TIEC that the employee can take advantage of If he or sh~ desires to stay at one of these faclllties. In no event will expenses above the current per diem rate tor lodging be reimbursed. Per Diem does not apply if you are on leave of absence (with the exception of medical leave) or are granted days .off without pay. Per Diem Is reduced to 75% ($45.75) of the meals and ll'lcidental e)_CJ)enses rate on travel days to and from the site. Per Diem is not allowed when you are on home rotations {see below), vacation, or other non-work related activities. If you make a business trip to a home office, meetings, or other work related a~tMties. you will be reimbursed for the trip in accordance with our CAL procedure for travel and expenses.
- c. HOME ROTATIONS The lowest available roundtrlp airfare ticket {not to exceed coach) wlll be .provided for the purpose of home visitation once per month. Alternate means of transportation for home visitation, i.e., personal car, train, bus etc., are subject to approval of your Department Manager and the Project Manager. Such visits *should be coordinated with the Project Team and your Project Manager. Travel time Js not chargeable against the project. If an alternate means of transportation Js utilized, reimbursement will be made for actual transportation expenses tor bus or train tares, or-the established mileage rate for personal car. The costs of attemate means of transportation should not exceed 1hat cost of the lowest available airfare for the intended day of travel (not to exceed coach) and receipts are required tot reimbursement, i.e** bus ticket, train ticket etc, (with the exception bf travel by personal car).
Additionally, actual and reasonable costs up to $50.00 will be reimbursed on each home ,i.,. ,,a visit to assist the employee with ground transportation. The $50.00 reimbursement does not apply when using your personal vehicle as transportation for your home visit. E)(HIErr _S>_--= PAGE-2:... OF _s:=_?AGE(S_;
Bert Bowers February 1, 2011 Page3 O. MOVING OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS It at the end of the assignment you are not assigned to another project under the tenns o1 a new assignment letter, you.will be authorized a one-way retum shipment by commerciaJ mover of 2,000 pounds of household goods and personal effects from your current location to your *home. This Includes packing. crating, unpacking and 1he actual cost of all risk insurance by commercial mover. You should contact your *Human Resources Representative to discuss arrangements for moving your personal effects. Additional poundage over the above stated limit will be charged to you. E. MISCELLANEOUS By accepting 1his assignment, you also agree to work 1he project hour.5 established at your assigned looation,*whlch are expected to be Monday through Friday, 45 hours per week. It Is recognized that circumstances may arise 1hat will require 1hat you work additional hours. If so, compensation will nQt be made for work hours exceeding 45 hours per week unless approved in advance by the Project Manager. Expense Account Fonns should be submitted by at least the end of each week or whatever is customary at your assigned location. All other reimbursements {i.e., Per Diem) wfll be honored following the incurrence. Your Project Manager will provide the charge codes that will be applicable to your wages and expenses. The applicable charge numbers are expected to vary during the course of your assJgnmentbased c;m CTO and task. Please feel free to cohtact your Human Resources Representative if you require additional Information or have questions concerning any of the above. We would like to take this opportunity to wish you much success on your new assignment This letter is a statement o1 the Intentions and policies of the company as they relate to your assignment. It should not be considered by you as a contract nor as a commitment to maintain you at the assigned location for any particular duration. This letter Is subject to modtflcatlon In the event of changes In 1he business needs of the company or its clients. However, it cannot be modified or amended without the prior written authorization of your Department Head/Project Manager and the Morris Plains, NJ Human Resources Department. F. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND QUALITY At TIEC we have a strong commitment to Health & Safety as demonstrated In our communications, pollcles, proc<<Jures and project record. You haw a part In the suet:e1111 of our program. You have the responsibility to work In a safe, healthful, and compl/11nt manner. All employees are required to report-all Incidents to their (9 supervisor, no matter how minor, lncludlng: EXHiSIT 5
?AGE__~ --. O-F__,5,....,.--PA-,GE(S)
Bert Bowers February 1, 2011 Page4
- unt1t1fe work pn,ctlc:es or condltlona
- sny work-related Injury or IUnea,
- property or vehicle damage lnclde~ and
- spll,. or mlea8tlll; Prior to your 11,rtval on .site, you must provide the 1ollowlng document* to the Sit*
Safety 'Reprnentatlw:
- 1. ~hr HAZWOPER Training Certificate
- 2. Current 8-hr HAZWOPER Refre*her Training Certfflcate (tf 40-hr certificate Is greater than 1 yur old) 3, Current phyaical approving work on a Hazardous Wa8t8 alte
- 4. Coples of other training certtflcatea approprlate*to the work, *uch as:
DOT HM-128F, Wast. Management, Losa Control Leaderahlp, Defeneive Driving, OSHA 10-hr ConlltrUctton Safety, OSHA 30-hr Construction Safety, etc... You will not be reimbursed tor trawl or allowed to start charging the prolet:t until copln of thn§ document, '"' provided. or In addition, all employees have a responsibility to make suggestions raise concerns to their supervisor or to Environmental Safety and Quality (ESQ) personnel to help improve the effectiveness of our program.
Bert Bowers February 1, 2011 Page5 (b)(7)(C) 11,~n1c1
~I 7..)-..,/'l..o I l Date z /J /(1
~- Date Employee (b)(l)(C)
February 1, 2011 Date cc: AP Payroll EXHlfl1T 5 PAGES_ OF __:;?.__PAGE(S}
EXHIBIT 6 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 6
,.' ,* r Bowers, Elbert [-n:) TETRA TECH FULL TIME TETRA: TECH-EC,IHC., PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FORM Employee Name : Bowers, Elbert Employee Number: 626099 Period Frcm : 3131/08 Parl9d*To: 10/31/09 PURPOSE: To enhance e~yea performance and development byserilfng" o vehicle lo: (e) Estebllsh and Communicate the perfo,m1111Ce e,cpectallona of an employ.a; {b) OlacuS11.end-documenl performance In ntlrion to prevlolllly establllhed perfomnince goals a,Jd atandarda; end. (c) ldenti_ty ~* employee'* ,t,englhs and a,eea for lrnprovement*end u,esa the empjoyeei1 ~ perfomsance. FREQUENCY: Perlorm.nce teedbac:11 ahould be p,owded. lo eeeh employee on an ongoing bnlL Perfonnanca should be formally dllcuned and documianted on en IMUal bealll a a minimum. For dnlgoatad managament*level employHa wno.e goals ore closely tied lo lh* Company's 8MUal goals, the petfOffl'lence appraisal wit be CDmpletad on a ~rrdar yur basis. For lhoaa amJlk)ye* not me.ellng )>ertonnance expecllllona, a docl.lm9nled appralslll tlfld dlseusslon ehoukl occu, more fmiuantly. PREPARATION: The followin9 llems should be adc"9Hed In p,eperlng the parfomlence-apprelsal fonn.
. SollcJl Input of other p,oject, molrbr and client parllOl'lnel In a ,DD5illon lo know how Iha amplO)'N h11 pertonned for the period .
. Review the empl oyee's prograsa toward the ac:c:ompli8hm*nt ol provlou1ty eeatgned 90els and how Iha employee has met defined role reGponsibillllell.
. Con1ider all performance. categories to detennlna which have most cont.r1buted lo lhe-employea.'a eccompll1hllleflts(alrenglhs) end which have been the
. Consider tu1ure goale and role r96PonaibUIII.. for the next performance period.
. Provide Iha employae with lh* ~mployee, P~r11tlon for Petformanc:e Appralsar lnalrucllon lthee11or hlslher preparetion for Iha p r - .
, Review and dlSCUBS the appraisal with Iha epprelsefs aupe,vtaor prior to meeting wtih tho employee.
Communicate Iha raUng 1cale and the dncrtpUon of each ratJng to yaur employee before lnltlallng the parlormance llf)Pralaol meoUng. GOAL ACHIEVEMENT: Review end documen* perlonnance against the goals/role e,iper;tatlons HI for the previous poriod. A statement or col)y ofprior year goal must ba inciuded. Explain In detail where performance either exceeded or did not meet goal/role eicpectallona and rate. each goal accomphhmenl RATING SCALE AND DESCRIPTION: 1
- Outstanding: Employee hu clearly and conalstenlly parlomied outstanding accompllshmanta In this 81'98 which exceed axpecteUons. Award ol lhls rating requiru en exam~* Within the context ot Iha parlormanca appraisal 2
- Exceeds Expecl8Uons: Employee's perl'onnanca ofton sull)88seslelCCeeds aJCpaeteUons for Iha roles and respons1111nuas assigned to the employee.
Taira Tech EC.Inc. Proprietary lntotmallon 1
,I Bowera, Elbert 3
- Meew Expectations: Employee performs Ill a level which Is expected for the podion and conalstemly meets the role end responsibilities esslgned lo Iha employee.
- 4. Below Expect!!!l!!!!( Needs Improvement): Employ.a performance In this 11n111 ls nol conslslffltly meeting expedal!Dn$ lo, the role and rasponslbllllet aalgned to the employee. Al 11111H !he employee may mNt the expectations, however ,the employee doea nal conalstendy perform at the level required.
The employee ,.qu1,es further de\lelopment In 1hla area to meet the current role raquifemenll. 5
- Unsatisfactory Performance: Empk)yff perfonnance la rarely meet..g the expectations for the mle *lid responalbllltlea aaalgned lo 1he employee. The employee requlraa a performance Improvement plan and perfonnance Improvement goala, In lhla aree. Award of this rallnQ requl,e1 an example o1 the noted pe,fonnllln<* short/al. We 1111:emmend a performence lmprov*ment plan.
f>ERFOftMANCE CATEGORIES: Rate Net\ Performance c11ego,y Wllll f60'1td to how k did or did not c:onlribul9 lo meatlng goal and Jar role requlrem1t11la.(Nole provided rating acala.~ Every cetago,y will not neceHllrily epply ta each emplo¥ae, end eccordlngly,
- cat*gary not hied may be added for an employ** In ~ ptoVlded.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: The Overal pedonnance eYelUation *ec:11on 1, far Iha apprelHr to wnta a alalemant that reflect. hblher Ollenl) aNeNment ol the e1119loyea'1 pllfformance for the period. THERE IS NO OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING. lalues lo be GOmldlfed In preparing Ha statement era:
- Goal and role accomplahmenl
- Parformanea probl""', wamln91 end Ume fnlma* to lmprova*
. Slr9nglh1 and areas for poaltlonfresponslbillty growth.
- Development plans to be nlab!WI In goell Mdlon.
Expt.natlon c:J eny *g~ raling AHO any"1" raUng* . Suparvllor laval ot ..U.l*cllon with employee perfonminn. NEW GOALS: Establish goals far th, next performance period; flnalt.ration ol lheH 90818 requlrea Input end dlscuulon with the applllaer'a aupervlaor and wiU, lhe employee. For new employee,, goals should be developed and documented wilh the thraa months of hire dale. StGNATURES: The apl)llliHr and ei, appralael's supervisor must *lgn end date Iha completad eppralsal after the d!Kulafon with th* emptoyaa hn occwred. The amployn muat algn and data the lonn Indicating only that the dllcusslon has ocamed. EmployN comments about lh, appralaal - optional. COPIES: AR employees ~uld be given a copy of !heir new goala, and If they wish, a copy at the signad appniilal form. Tetni Tech EC,lnc. Proprietary lnformatlan 2
Bowers, Elbert From: 3131,08 To: 10/31/09 State or attach a copy of the goals and /or role requirements established for the employee since the last formal performance review. Review and Indicate progress made toward achieving each of the goals and rate each goal(1- outstanding, 2-exceea expectations 3- meets expectations, 4- below expectatlMs, 5- unsatisfactory performance). Make sure description Indicates which of the attached goals Is referenced. Add sheets where required. Telra Tech EC,lm;. Prop,fetary lnlormellon mpr to 3 PAGE-3-OF J2.._PAGE(S)
8owets, Elber1 Rate each listed performance category, and any you add, as foDows: (1) Oulstandlng,(2) Exceeds Expectations !3) Meet Expectations, (4) Below Expectatlons(needs Improvement) (5) Unsatisfactory Performance. Rating of either a *1 or *5* reauirn. addltlonaI d ocumen tatlon QuaDIY . Produce.*-'* comd.al and UHNI wo,i(. 3 Quant IV* Pnxlueea the ldMne ol work needed. 2 Com._.__...* Has the skill lru*la. and knCJWledoe renuilad lot th* oolilton. 3 Compllanc.
- Adherea, lmplarn1111t, *enc:OURges. fadillltee and ~ enwonmema~ gOllemmental end ottler oomplat,ce ~ - 2 and rea.tlrements.
EHS
- Meeta, M!fotcet e n d - ~ n c : a with end adher* ID con,orele Envlroomenlal na-nt 8
~~4 c11an1 aaf~erMnt end pollullon end loM prevention goall, MS1 and EHS and -
3 Initiative* Ylt'llllnolv n1um* reaoawlblltv end I s ~ lor D41ffl)rmanc;e. 2 Veraadllv
- HandJea a wrt. tv ol ,. .........iblltlea 111\d edenlti IO,,_ end dltterent e...in.v.-ts wlll!out dllllcul!v. 2 lnnavatlon. o.....iom or1......i or uni,,.,. Idella mefloda and aoiutlons to dlfflc:ult .....,1119ma and duatlore. 3 Rallebllltv* Meelll lob raaulraments auch es dUe delN eul"""'*'* llltendance end .....e1,..- . 3 Communlc:ellon
- Benda elfec:IIYe wibal and written /l'MISH9411, gives and reee1Y11s feedbeck, 1nd llslent IO Olhen In e -v that promotea 2 wotldno rellllllrllhl oa.
Ta-l'k/Coop9nltlon * ~ ~ woridng relallonehlpa With lndilllduals and 9IO'IP' IUCh lhet they wllllngly lnlaiad wllh him/her 3 and nwet ,e,...all for work and . Client SaUelacllon
- NegollatH and meela reuoneble axtemel end Internet ctlent requ. .t encl *tabllehe, postillYe bu11n- relallanshlpa 3 for current and fu11n ***a,unenta.
Plann
- Plena oraanizas and man- all phaa. ol _,IQIW'nll'lla m_.,.. own tlm9 etr.cclvelv. 3 Leederahfi
- Accoinpftlltl. . perfarmanca expectation* wllh and through cowo,kera a,d IUbordlnMN In a Wfl'/ that employs direct~ 3 aat~o. In uence. dllooatlon end emolovH daValoomenL Ekldgal/ContlOI
- AcconlpllhN goals wtltt. o,,e,,atlng within budgetary c:onattalnll and melnlalnfng the epptoprta1,a level of contact and 3 folc,w.up to aNU,e aca,m-"--~ - ~
Equal Employment Cll)por1unhy
- 8vpporta company pollc:IN, fair employment pracllcas ud l;qual Employment OpportunllytAfflrmelva :,
Action ......... Re.ume Unrillta
- Ha nmwlad 1ha Merkaano S.rilcel 0 . - - . t with an urvlallld l"Nume wllh the.,.., 12 IIIOl'llha. 3
~~;,. -.*:: :::-':"N-~"t... ;,,_~ u ,.~ -...- ~~~- S"&>.*Js~~ -M -~
Ouanllty
- '", .. QVE'AALl:."L
'" ......., * . "I"'
Heh* taken on Iha RSO po1lllon and 1upervtaor of all Red opwallona at HPS with !Mllmal, end,'at llmes, no guldarice, ea he had a 3 month -.Ind with no Nllltanca ltom SIJnAMlllon. Coinptence Ha hH.ahown tu 1fdls In m
. the TtEC NRC lcanae al HPS.
lnllilliYe He ha ate DOM! In to fix alluatlona et HPS Co""""' and Alameda. Vanallity He hN been able 1o adluat orloltllea 10 bnt Ill nee, ,-c1s. Communlc:8don He 1$ edelll at DNIV!dlno auc:clnc:1 accurate wrfltMI and otal comnu,lcallor11 lnalde end outalde ol TIEC. Bert hn dona an excepllonll Job n ltallf*\g In lo lffd lhe HPS radlologk:el team. Dw1ng thll period, he aded u lhe Hnklf HP parfOflnel wllh no 1upeM81on lrom above,
- Iha Corporate Haallh Phyalca Manegar had taken on .,olhe, job. He had to elap 1ft lo p,OYlde **iltanca et othw p,oJeci.
auch u Concord and Lowry lo HC:llla publlc ralatlona wl!tJ lh* client. He II
- highly lllledfve communicator, and prloritiz. . laakl qvlddy, and efftclenlly to eMure the moat lrnport9nl WDril Ml completed to u,e hlghaat 1tandarda. He hH btlafl partlcullriy effeclllNI In enauq ragUlaloty comp11anc:e ~h ,...pec;t to lha TIEC NRC llcenae.
B e,t Is a hlghly vaklad member of the Health Phyalca ta11T1. Ten Tech EC.Inc. Proprietary lnformlllloo 4
1 . .~... IndicateJhe goab*tO .be ~t>U~_ d- ~rid thEI'. ~.~ ;,~nJ8:fOI tfJalrcoµ1~tk>n. Md sftee~ where-.rtlq\(1$1*..:GQ"alJ.fall,ih1o three Cate*gotres~ TASK GOALS! pro)actand role reqµirements~*. _ IMPROVEMEl'tT GOAL.~ perfotf1lilrt~!mprov.e~-untreq!lir.eef: DEVELOPMENT GOALS:. t>r:aoarallon for future essfa nments; TASKOOALS 2 TASKGO'Al.5 2010 ESQGOALS: Dev,'9J, ' "' Q'f.fralninglbrt~ l<,..~*C4)1JJ0111le pro~ruiradlallon tundamenlala. lor tiil!II* mmitlngt enii-tefreshel: trainings.,.
- 4 DE.VELOPMENT'GOALS 2'010
.P~~IIMI ~ ~$uJ.WY.~ f'or1,$mla(s*P.olnl s 11~ey.. . 2010
, .,.. ""O~ *- .*. '"""*',~-...~~~~~~.~;"~. ,
* ~ .~ ;__i. ;.:r-f~-..+.* -ti-+; . *.~ ~ f
- J'* *~ *c -*r ~*~ ~ *
.f~-~ - o+' ~~:.~ . ,!-lfl *~ ,..,-~ ~ ;i.*. ~ 4...,-.:.c/Q~~~~k~ **I~
~ 4t"' '\ ~...... ~ ~ i" d * * *¥ ,/,f7V~*- ~i.{:.f- <-"';r:*,~- -tr/~- ,.-~':J'.;
*W o*~i+* ~ r~~,k_J .1,~*. -e~1u4c°1 .i. M.*/ zi~~ .~.fPY-
~ ,.-v'7l SIGNATURE DATe, APPRAISER'~ NAME(PL.EASE Pl;tlNT) SIGNATURE DATE APPRAISER'S SUPERVISOR'.SNAME(PLEASE..PRINT)* SIGNATU.RE DATE Tetra. Tech ECJi'la.
PtoprletlUy lnfot;mallon: 5
..r Bowers, Elbert You have been prowled with the Jnalrucllon llheet lo preparing tor your pertormanc. appraisal Interview scheduled tor - - - - - - - - - - CompleUnf lhla preparation the9t II not e requirement. but an opportunlly tor )'OU lo organize your lhoughll and Identity laalM9 lhat )IOU would Ilka to addreA durfnv lhe lnteMeW. You may wish IO pRMCle It lo your 1uperllaor !or consldemlon prior to yo,r periormanee eppnilsel ~ Thia pr9parallon lheet dou not have lo be 8Ubmltted lo your aupe,vltor end wll not become pert ol any pennenenl Ille u en officel pe,formance eppra!NI document. You detennned how you want lo use ii du!fflg the p,oc:e5s. i,, p,.paring for you, pe,tonnanea apprtlnl lnt1rvlew, you may went lo conuder the following:
. - *
- your perfollnence against *t yea,'s goal9 or role 1xpec:tetlons;
. ldenllfy nlW goR Of role PpeclatJOlll lor the comng yaar;
. commenl on petfo,m- dllllallllH, obstacles or cons118lnt1 lhet you may haw experienced;
- Review lhe ,ating acell(wllh deacrtpllons) Which wlll be appli.t to each performance cetego,y on your epp,alael.
RA.TINO SCALE: 1- OUlstendl/)lr Emptoyn hN clearly encl conslat.ntly perlormed outawldlng accompllshmenta In 1h19 area which exceed axpeclaUons. Awetd d 1h11 rating raqulrN an example within the context of Iii. peffonnence app,alatL
- 2* Exceed! Expecl8tJor!: Employee'* performance on.n , u ~ d s exp1dallons for the roln and rHponslblilln ILMlgned lo the employ.e.
- 3. Meets Expectations: Employee perform, et* lave! wtllch Is expected for lhe position end conlletsnll)l mffhl lhe role and ra1ponslbUillel eHlgned lo the emplo)lee.
4
- Below ExpectaUoN( Needs lmp,ovament): Employ9e perlonnenca In lhla.,.. le not c:analaMftll)I meeting expectations for lhe role and responslblllhs as1lgned lo the employee. Al llmes lhe employee may meal the expectations, howew, ,t,e employee dole not contlalently perform el lhe ~ required.
Th* employee requlier. funher development In this arae lo meet Iha Wlfenl role n,qulrementa. 6 - Unsebtado,y Perloml*nce: Employee perlormanc* la rarely mN4ln; the *xpectdons ror tie role end respon&iblltlQ aalgned lo lhe employ9e. The employee requlrn
- performanc:e lmp,ovement plan end ~rfonnance lmp,owmenl goala, In this wee. Award of lhla '1lllng reqUlrea *n eJCMnP1e ol the noted performance shortfall. We Ncommend
- performence lmprovemenl p&an.
Ten Tech EC.Inc:. Proprietary lnlomletlon 6 EXHIElT lP PAGEJL OF JL.PAGE(S)
EXHIBIT 7 Case No. 1~2012-002 Exhibit 7
['"'ft:) TETRA TECH FUl.l TIME TETRA TECH EC,INC., PERFORMAHCE APPRAISAL FORM Employee H.,,.: Bewwl, EIHft Employee .Nlfflbet: S21089 Petlod FNlm : 10/111>8 Period To : lll30NO PURPOSE: To enhlnce employee ~ and dewlGpn,enl ~ UNtng N a Y111rio1a ID: (e) Ealabllsh and Corrmunlcala the ~ lllrp<<W' .,. ol an wplo,-; (b) Obculs
- daclJll*lt per1ormance In ralalloft lo ~ Ulllbllehad parfa- pla a,d alanclatds; and.
(c) ldenlll~ ... amploye_.* attenglhs and - l o , ~ a n d - lhe eniployee's _,., .,.,.,,__ FREQUENCY: P91fo-- laedb9cll ahoUld be pcvYidecl lo Nc:h efflPio',tee on an ~ o balla. Perfonnance lhould be lannallydllcuued and docllmenl.cl on -annual heals *
- mlnin'Alm. F<< dealgnllld ~ t lwel empioye.. wi- goela - doRly 11ft lo Iha Company's ennual goals. u. periarrnance app,allal wll ba C0111pleled on* calend,ryea, bGsla. For lhon employees not -.Ung pe,bmance toepeddo,.,
- doc:umanlad epp,elllll a,ld ._.Ion *hould-- hquenlly.
PREPARATION: TIie followtng I i - snovkl be addt9INd In Pfepadng Iha performance eppiwlul Ian**
- Saldi Input of oOMI pNljad, matrix and dlenl pe,sonMI In a padlorl ID tcnaw hen¥ Iha amplo),ae bN pertonnad for lhe ~ -
.
- R.vl- Iha employee._ pn,gtMa joWenl t h e ~ of praYiollllly aulgnad gom end how Iha *,nplc>yN t.a 11191 delined 1111a NIIJIPGnslbllilla.
- Coneider ell p*ufomance cetago,ta IO delannlne which hwe most C011111buted to the employee'* *~hmanla(annglha) and v.t1ldl how bNn lhe
; ConsldeffUlln goela endn>le ruponalllllln far Ill* Mlllparformance ps,lod.
- Proi4do Ille -playee wllh lhe "Emplo)'ae PJ.,,.,.ean for P ~ Af)pl8/NI" lnslNdlon shffl far blalhw p,apwalkll'l 1ar tie proc;na.
- Rwi9w end dl&euu the eppraiaal \Wllh the aJll)llliul'a UipeM90I" prior la metl!lng 1ritJ the 9fflJIM119L
, Commualcele Iha rallng-le end the clNCripdon of Nch nilincl IO your e m ~ bet01'11 lnlllallnO Iha perfarrnanc:9 appcwlsll mNllng.
Gcw. ACHIEVEMENT: RevlaW and ~ I pe,fonnanc:o against tho goolslrole upactations set for Int pnmow period. A 1te111Mnl ar copy afprlor y.ar goal mu.I be lndudecl ElrplM! In alell wt-. p e ~ ellbar exceeded or cld nat m e a l ~ ~ n s and rate ACll gaal aocornpliatwnri RATING SCALE NfO DESCRIPTION: 1 - OUbtandnQ; Effll*lree '- dwty and CDl1llslenlly pe,1ormed CIWd4lndng eccompbmlerlta In Ihle- w1a1en allCNd eapec;taUana. Award al lhl* rating requna an -pl* wMl*l 111* cantul of the pe,lonnance appraisal TeiRI Tac:h EC,lnc. PNlptlelll,Y lnfarmelion 1
3
- Mae1a Eltf!!d!lions: E ~ perbn-a at* IMIY,filch l a ~ for the pcll'llllon M d ~ mnls ui. rollt Md respo111lb1111N aalgMd lo lhe *eraplc,yN.
4
- Balow l!Jpeda~ Nnda am,._,-,!): EnlplorM ~ In 11111 aru I& not canllstenlly ll'welllg ~ tor Iha l01e and r*pcnlblfllN IIIIIIIDMd loh ~ J u lrnea 1119 ~ *may IQel " - expeculnN, hOMWr ,lhe emplo)1ee dNs no1*~ p o r t o n n
- 1ha IINal nqlllri,d. TI.- ernplosllM raqulne lllril* dawlaplllelll 111 . . .,.. lo IIIMI V. cumnt role ,....._...
- 5. u, 11C hc:by Performance: &iployee ,.r<a,mance II niNIIV *m..a,, Iha axpectetlolls tor lhao rda aind rnpond:RIIM N89* lo it.. ..,.ia,...
T h e ~ *ll*N
- pe.b**ice impRMwt plan and pesfoml111a ~ goala. In lllia ..-lvlMrd ollhia,.ing ~ 1r1 . - , , . al lh* naiad patann- lhda&. We .._ . . . perfamlance ~ plan.
PERFORMANCE C4T£80RIE9: ~ eedl P ~ - *c.1egory-4ill na*d lo how ll did er did nDl canllbN ID ,,.a11ng goal and~nil* reqUlremena.(Ncupnwlded rllllngllCale.). Evaiy i:mgo,ywll not.--tly..,... toeec:h araplDYN. and~.* Clltle!01Ynot llledinayllle .Mded lor** ~ - In llpllCII pnlYldacl. . . .
'.OVERALL PERFORMNCE EVALUATION: Tba ~ Ptlfo,rnance e\'911.!lllon Ndlon 11 tor Iha appraiser ta wne a .._nt9*..n.c. hlllh*
owrall a11111 man1 of Iha ~.. .-1an1111ice tor Iha period. THEA£ IS NO OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING. mu. to 119 CDDaldand In pMP811nt~a1aufflanl- .
- Gaal encl role -..pliltlmenl.
- P e ~ Pft)blelN, wamlngl Ind time,,.... lolnlp,DIIL
- Sv.nghand-forpca~llllllfllh. -
- D-iopm.ni plMll 10 be Nlabl&h In goelnadon.
. Elcplanalon ot *nii "S' r9dno ANO any"1° nitlnt,
- S\Jparvla<<IWal OI N~Ofl win unployN petformlncL NEW 8<>>.LS: Eslabllall goela fof Ila nalll po,f-nca period; Dnalluton al lhaN goall requa... Input and claounlon With the l!pplalHr'S wl*\'ll(lr and wlh 0. amployae. F~ new ell'lpioyNS. goill 1hould be dwaloplld and documen1lld with th* lhfee monllla ol l*'tt date.
SIGNATURES: T~ eppraller and ..,. appralufa ai,pemaar mual "9* "1id data Iha c:omptalect9PPflliAI llllar Iha diacllfflan wtti Iha esaploywa ha occ:urrocL The ...'*11" rnuel IIIGft and dale I!*~ lndlcalng odlf that Iha d1Ku11klr1 h* occuned: Emplc:,yee -,menla llbDIII Che appralul - opUoneL .
,*I'/ lm~~fiit~~J.R'm~M ~ ~r~4t\f,,rWif.lW~~I Flanl! 11111/08 Ta: l/30NO State or attach a copy of the phi and /Of( role requirements established for lhe empl0'/98 since the lalll formal pe,tormance IIIYiew. Review and Indicate progresa made lowald achieving each ofh goala and rate each goal(1
- outstanding. 2- exceea expectallons 3- meets expedaUons, 4- bek>w expectations. ~ unsallafactoty pe,fonnance).
Make suJe description lndlcale1 which of the attached goals 18 referenced. ('ldd sheet& wheRl requltad. TASK GMl..8 Manage lhe HP staff al Hunters Polnl to meet radk>loglc:al ramedlalan 3 su,vey mllaSk>nea. 2 TASK GOALS Manage lhe NRC llcenae at Hulllets Point lo matntart compliance. 3 INo NRC . . _ IAI* ~ been ,alHd by elhlMI ,...,..l&ICL 3 l!SQ Gcw.a Develop series of ltainlnglbr1efing* to c:over corporate 3 p,oc:edures/radlatlon fla'ldamentala for tailgate meetk'igs and ratrasher traln~a. 4 O~~ TIIMllleNRRPT- :, 6 DEVB.OPMENT GOALS Prepare one Final Status Survey Report for* Hunters Point SUrvey. :, EXHtBlT___.]_ _ PAGE_!L OF -1.t_PAGE(S)
~a,e,t
~11i!.~~1*:- ~it&~WiS~~I Rate each lstad.perfonnlmce catego,y, and eny yoo add, as folows: (1) OU'8tandlng.(2) Exoaects E>ciiecwtlone {S) Meet Expectallona, (4) Below Expectatb,s(needa improvement) (5) Unsallsfaetcxy Pefforma,oe. Rating d .elther a *1 ot "6* re es add docuMnlatlon.* *
- 2 3
a 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3
*a
~
, . v.r.*"'
Mr. a-- hn led b HNllhP.hyltca lean Ill Hl#ltlN Polr!t 8hlpyanl ~ He hN eneur.d lhe TIEC MAC ac.nee 15 IIINUlnad 111 * ~ IPhb,, and hu GOON!lrwlad *taff to - l h
- t ~ y radlallon aalety ~tlon*.,. c:onduclad prapa,iy. Atldltlonelly, he hH coaninalecl lnllnln9 and clD9fnMy for-" parfclrmad b y ~ enlll* undel' O. um11r*o1 ... TehTedl bu.wlda radialaglcal *uppa,t oonlrad, * -
- N coordinlllll1g ct,-nga lo the Mernalalldum al ~ c i n e for 1111 COWIIGbw-'*- al HP8.
T.tia Tedi EC.Inc. Prap,tell,y 1"'°""8tlclft
Indicate the goals to be established and the Ume frame for lhelr completion. Add sheets where required. Goals tall into three Categories: TASK GOALS: project and role requirements: IMPROVEMENt GOALS: performance Improvement required; DEVELOPMENT GOALS: orenarallon for futlft asslCJnm8nta. TASK GOALS Mahlmn Ille NRC llcelse el HPS lo echleYe conllllued c o m ~ 2011 2 TASK GOALS o..,.iop
- 1-.clwble ......clah. . Of dalebaM to lnc:k penannal IIXpOaUfll . _ . by 2.011
- -period Md llledrn9 let&
3 esc DeYelop * . . . . . ot llalnlng br1** baaed on changeS lo Corpcnla Raf.,_ utnry 2011 pfflCedura chang-. I have '9Vlewed tt\Ja spP'9lsal and discussed the contents with my supervisor. My signature below Indicates lhal I have been edvbed ~f my perlormance status ..,.--,,_
~kcJ b:(~.~-n 2cZ.2 ) ;/./C, /CJ EMPLOYEE'S NAME(PlEASE PRINT) SIGNATURE e DATE
- -1.
' (-b)-(7)-(C-) -----J-------.r){7)(CJ ......_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___J APPRAISER'S NAME(PLEASE PRINT) SIGNATURE DATE APPRAISER'S SU~ERVISOR'SNAME(PLEASE PRINT) SIGNATURE DATE Tetra Tcdl EC.Irle.
Proprietary lnlormellon s
I 1* Ycu h.,,. been. pnwtdecl
- h i!lullC:iloa
.. llieet to ptepedno .far)OIM' p...l l -f w*
.* app,allallnlarvlewachediad far //. / ~ ./C)
I. Complellng 1h11 pt9perallail allatt ls nal * ~ I l l , bll 811 cippo,tl#!Ay far )\'lU ID arganiZa )'Ullr llaougl* and ~ 15111911! Iha J'Ollwauld Ilea to addrNs dUltng I l l e ~ - You mw,wflh ID pn,vlda l-lo )'air " ' ~.tar ~ l l a n pdorlo ~ peifonnance appraisal~ Toll p,eparalbuhaet cloes not te¥e to'be aubmllled lo )'lltlt lllpeMW anCS (1111 ftlll become PIii app,a!NI ~ Y< IBowera, Bert: P"""
Subject:
FW: HPS Data - Parcel UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 187 (T003) Team, We have received concurrence from the RASO to backfill Trench Unit No. 187. Trench Unit No. 187 (TU187) is located in Work Area #16 of Parcel UC3. It ls 757 square meters in area (8148.28 square feet) and 376 linear feet in length. Engineers have estimated that a total of 759 cubic yards of soil will be needed to backfill this trench unit. The backfill soil proposed for TU187 is as follows: Total RASO Trench Work ES IR Estimated Adjusted Remediated Estimated Cleared Unit Area Unit# Site Yards3 Yards3 Yards3 Yards3 Backfill 187 UC3 0307 00 324 243 2 241 17-Nov-10 16 0309 00 300 225 7 218 17-Nov-10 0318 00 140 105 0 105 25-0ct-10 Total 764 573 9 564 Imported Mills Peninsula Hospital soil will be utilized for additional cubic yardage (esL 195 yd 3 ) given the project requirement for a final compacted soil layer. Please keep the Data Group informed on a daily basis as to the actual quantity used in backfilling the t rench and the quantity left over to be used in a different t rench unit in the future if appllcable. Thank you, l______.. (b)(7)(C) ,.,i,+1~....r...;....u.wu..ll.M.l.----'-...i.i,:U,.1.Ji...., 415.671.1990 I Fax: 415.671.1995 I Cell: IO Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc . I Hunters Point Shipyard 2840 Adams Ave. I San Diego, CA 92116 I www.ioenvironmental . com PLEASE NOTE: This message, including any attachments, may include confidential and/or inside information . Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful . I f you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete i t from your system.
~ Think Green - Not every email needs to be printed. -----Original Message-----
From: !(b)(7)(C) Sent: Thursda 06 2011 7:15 AM To: (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) 1:a2012~002
!(b)(7HI L , _ . . , . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
Cc : !(b)~(C)
!(b)(7)(C)
SubJec : RE: HPS Data - Parcel UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 187 (T003) l(b)(7)(C) I have reviewed the Survey Unit 187 Project Report. I concur with backfilling the trench .
!(b)(7)(C) r (7)(C)
Yorktown Naval Weapons Station r '(7)(C) I HPS Data* Parcel UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 187 ( T003 ) Attached for your review is the Internal Draft Survey Unit 187 Project Report and Attachments 1 through s, 7, and 8. Attachment 6 is QA data and is not available at this time. We would like concurrence to backfill the trench. l(b)(7)(C) D .;;. ir~e=.J:Ca.! t :..:.
- .J.l(:..;
b),;_ (7);.;. (C_ ) _ _ _ _ _ _..1.l~ 1 M1,:;1
-.i .i.."u .,
' 415.671.1990 I Fax : 415.671.1995 I Cell: Ll (b-)(-7 )-( C_) _ _ _ ___,
(b)(7)(C) _ l(b)(7)(C) 200 South Virginia St , Suite 800 I Reno, NV 89501 I www.radsvcs.com PLEASE NOTE : This message, including any attachments, may include confidential and/ or inside information . Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohi bited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient , please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. P Think Green - Not every email needs to be printed. EXHl>IT 9 2 Pf--OE~ OF -3:!-PAGE-(S)
(b)(7)(C) From: l(b)(7)(C) I Sent: _T..;.h..;. u.;,. rs;..;d...;a.:. y.:.. Ja ;;;.n..;.u;;..;a;;;.r~y 0-6.:.. 2 .;...;. 011__;,1...;
- 0;..;9_ P_ M
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___, r )(:}(C) To: r )(l)(CJ !Bowers, Bert; J ; ' Subjec t: FW: HPS Data - Parcel UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 190 (T003) Team, We have received concurrence from the RASO to backfill Trench Unit No. 190. Trench Unit No. 190 (TU190) is located in Work Area #16 of Parcel UC3. It is 580 square meters in area (6243.07 square feet) and 250 linear feet in length. Engineers have estimated that a total of 635 cubic yards of soil will be needed to backfill this trench unit. The backfill soil proposed forTU190 is as follows: Total RASO Trench Work ES IR Estimated Adjusted Remediated Estimated Cleared Unit Area Unit# Site Yards3 Yards3 Yards3 Yards 3 Backfill 190 UC3 0312 00 300 225 1 224 17-Nov-10 16 0317 00 300 225 0 225 25-0ct-10 Total 600 450 1 449 Imported Mills Peninsula Hospital soil will be utilized for additional cubic yardage (est. 186 yd 3) given the project requirement for a final compacted soil layer. Please keep the Data Group informed on a daily basis as to the actual quantity used in backfilling the trench and the quantity left over to be used in a different trench unit in the future if applicable. Thank you, (b)(7)(C) _D _i_r_e_c_t _: ~(~b)_(~~(C_)______....__M _a_i __, n: 415 .671 . 1990 I Fax : 415 . 671.1995 I Cell: l~ ( b-)U
- l(_c _) _____ ,
(b)(7)(C) IO Environmental & Infrastructure, I nc. I Hunters Point Shipyard 2840 Adams Ave. I San Diego, CA 92116 I www. ioenvironmental . com PLEASE NOTE : This message, including any attachments, may include confidential and/ or inside information. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlaw-ful. I f you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete i t from your system. ra Think Green - Not every email needs to be printed.
-----Original Message---- -
From: 1.. f b_)(_7)_(C_) _ _ _ _ _ _ ___,,,,__,.......,....,._.,.......,, .,,,......,,.,.,..---------------------------' Sent: ~hursday , J anuary 06 1 2011 1:05 PM .....JJ~o!.i*.J!~ l(b)(7)(C) {b:1.l/7 1,!.L)(!..!aC:.1.. l ________________________________________ rJ 1
l\~,Cc:'1) I'.-r-)(-7)-(C-)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
!{b)(7)(
Subject:
RE: HPS Data - Parcel UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 190 (T003) !(b)(7)(C) I have reviewed the Survey Unit 190 Project Report. I concur with backfilling the trench. j(b)(7)(C) l(b)(7)(C) Yorktown Nayal Weaoons Station l(b)(7)(Cl l arce ewer Trench Unit 190 (T003) Attached for your review is the Internal Draft Survey Unit 190 Project Report and Attachments 1 through s, 7, and 8. Attachment 6 is QA data and is not available at this time. We would like concurrence to backfil l the trench. l(b)(7)(C) Direct: I~(b_)(_~_(C_) _ ___,I I l (b)(7)(C) Main: 415.671.1990 I Fax: 41S.671.199S I Cell: ~ - - - - - - - ' l(b)(7)(C) l(b)(7)(C) 200 South Virginia St . Suite 800 I Reno, NV 89501 I www.radsvcs.com PLEASE NOTE : This message, including any attachments, may include confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system . P Think Green - Not every email needs to be printed. 2
EXHIBIT 10 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 10
From:!(b)(7)(C) sent: Wednesday, Jan uary 04, 2012 3:14 PM To: Bowers, ee _rt___....
Subject:
RE:!lbl(7l(Cl !voice message to B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 hrs.... Bert, Just to be clear, are you interested in possible opportunities with Tt HEl, and should l explore those further? Or, do you want to remain in the Bay Area, so the opportunity with HEI is not of interest to you? If you're Interested, I'll start discussions with Tt HEI about vou and the the capabilities vou can bring to them to see if there's a fit. Thanks, l(b)(7)(C) I From: Bowers, Bert 5en~t:iilednesday. January 04, 2012 2:17 PM To: I bll7 Cl I
Subject:
RE: (b)(7)(Cl voice message to B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 hrs.... (b)(7)(C) Many thanks for your response. While not yet "aware of a specific current opportunity" in the San Francisco Bay Area unique to my original Tetra Tech assignment, I remain optimistic that such a role will eventually surface. In that regard - and due to ongoing regulatory and investigative activities still ongoing specific to that assignment, current needs are to remain in the San Francisco area so as t o be readily available to support related processes and obligations. In the interim, Tetra Tech's commitment to "find a suitable position" for me is appreciated and accepted with positive anticipation. Regards, Bert From: !(b)(l)(C) Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 7:34 AM To: Bowers, B...e..... rt___....
Subject:
RE : !(b)(7)(C) ~oice message t o B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 hrs.... Bert, I'm following up on the voicemail I left you last week, and your e-mail reply below. I am not aware of a specific current opportunity in Tetra Tech for EXHJSIT It> 1
'"-~r:_LOF L PAGE($)
which you would be suited. However, HEI is a Tetra Tech subsidiary based in Oak Ridge, TN that is heavily involved in DOE projects. HEl's primary locations are Oak Ridge, Portsmouth,OH, and Paducah. KY. Please let me know if you are interested in p*otential opportunities with Tetra Tech HEI. If you are, I will contact their management to pursue possible opportunities for you. We want to find a suitable position for you . Thanks. l(b)(7)(C)
,___~voice message to B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 hrs....
l(b)(7)(C) ! In reference to the subject line above, I am In receipt of your message. Regarding "possible opportunities" as was referred to, I would respectfully submit that any corresponding proposal(s) be placed in writing. Strong consideration will be given to whatever is conveyed. This recommended approach should avoid any misunderstandings.
"Happy Holidays and many thanksL JI look forward to hearing from you.
Bert Bowers
EXHIBIT 11 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 11
From: Murphy, Timothy ftmurphy@laborlawyers.com1 Sant: Thursda , Jul 19, 2012 2 :17 PM To:
Subject:
co s Message Declining the Saudi Arabia Position: September 2, 2011 Donrich, I looked again and found a copy of an email from John Scott declining the Tetra Tech offer of a position for Bowers In Saudi Arabia. His email indicates he was "currently employed" in the Bay Area and not interested in leaving. Please let me know If you have any further questions.
- Regards, Tim
> From: "John H. Scott" <john@scottlawfirm.net<mailto:john@scottlawfirm.net>> > Date: September 2, 2011 4:17:39 PM PDT > To: "Murphy, Timothy" <tmurphy@laborlawyers.com<mailto:tmurphy@laborlawyers.com>>
Subject:
Bert Bowers >Tim, > Bert is presently employed in the Bay Area and is not interested in leaving. He would seriously consider a job offer in the Bay Area but is not interested in a job in Saudi Arabia. Thank you for thinking of him. > John H. Scott > Scott Law Firm > 1388 Sutter Street, #715 > San Francisco, CA 94109 > Direct: 415.561.9601 > Fax: 415.561 .9609 > john@scottlawfirm.net<mailto:john@scottlawfirm.net> > www.scottlawfirm.net<http://www.scottlawfirm.net> EXH18IT 1\ PAGE+ OF _L.PAC~(S) 1
EXHIBIT 12 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 12
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + + 4 OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS 5 INTERVIEW 6 --- -- ------ - - - ------ -- -- - ---- -x 7 IN THE MATTER OF : 8 INTERVIEW OF or Case No . 9 l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012 - 002 10 (CLOSED) 11 - --- ----- -- -- ------ -- ---- --- --x 12 Thursday, May 24, 2012 13 14 15 Tetra Tech EC, Inc . 16 17 18 19 The above-entitled interview was c onducted 20 a t 2:25 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. 21 22 BEFORE: 23 l ___________. (b)(7)(C) Special Agent ,___ 24 25 EXHIBIT ( )- PAGE_l_ OF JiYiAGE( NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 On Behalf of the Interviewee . Other Individuals 3 Involved in t he Case and Tetra Tech EC, Inc. : 4 TIMOTHY J. MURPHY , ESQ. (via telecon) 5 Managing Partner 6 of: Fisher & Phillips, LLP 7 One Embarcadero Center 8 Suite 2340 9 San Francisco, CA 94111-3712 10 (4 15 ) 490 -9011 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
3 l P R O C E E D I N G S 2 {2 :25 p.m.) 3 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(G) ~ Today' S date is 4 Thursday, May 24~h, 2012. The time is currently 2:25 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. For the record, this is an 6 interview of l(b)(l)(C) Iwho is employed 7 with Tetra Tech EC, Inc. We are at !(b)(l )(G) 8 office at _ rI:X,xc> And the zip code here in ... 1 r_x_xc_) _ _ _ _ _ _ ___, l 9 lbXll(C) 10 I am ._ l(b)(7)(C) I __________. a Special Agent with 11 the Office of Investigations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 12 Commission, Region I Field Office in King of Prussia, 1.3 Pennsylvania. Also present via teleconference from his 14 office in San Francisco, California is legal counsel 15 to l(b)(7)(C) ! today, Mr. Timothy Murphy of the law 16 firm of Fisher Pillips. I will give Mr. Murphy an 17 opportunity to introduce himself to the record 18 shortly. 19 The subject of this interview today is to 20 discuss NRC OI Case Number 1-2012-002 and concerns 21 Tetra Tech former RSO, Radiation Safety Officer 22 representative at Hunters Point, Elbert Bowers, goes 23 by the name Bert Bowers, who has filed claims of 24 discrimination against Tetra Tech upon raising safety-25 related concerns. That will be the balance of our NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
4 1 discussion here this afternoon. 2 I want to first tell you that I'm a 3 Special Agent with the United States Government . Under 4 Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001, the 5 false statement provision. And what it essentially 6 says, if you knowingly and willingly make any false, 7 fictitious, or fraudulent statements or 8 representations and provide false information you can 9 be subject to prosecution under 18 USC Section 1001 10 which is a felony punishable by a sentence of up to 11 five years confinement and a $250,000 fine. 12 That's not a threat in any way . That's 13 just to say as a U.S. Federal Agent and as a 14 representative of the NRC it's imperative that you be 15 honest and forthright with us here today. 16 !_(b_J( 7_l(_ c )________ __.b Sure . 17 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay . And Mr. Murphy 18 has previously been apprized of this with the other 19 interviews we've done in this matter. 20 Okay. If you could please raise your right 21 hand . 22 Do you swear that the testimony you' re 23 about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and 24 nothing but the truth, so help you God? 25 l~-~~~~~~~~I= (b)(l)(C) Yes, I do. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 2 ~ 3 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
5 l SPECIAL AGENT .__ __ (b)(7)(C) _, Thank you. Please 2 state your full name for the record, spell your last 3 name. (b)(7)(C) I l (b)(7)(C) 4 l...._ _ _ _ _ _ __, : It's ...- - - - - - - - - - - - ' 5 l(b_)(7_)(C_l _ _____.! as
.... in ....
l(b_
)(7_)(c_J _ _ _ _ ___.l.
6 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) !: Okay. I have a couple 7 of questions for you regarding your representation 8 here today . Is Mr. Murphy representing you personally 9 for the purpose of today's interview? 10 ....
!(b_)(7_J(C_J_ _ _ _ _.I: Yes.
11 SPECIAL AGENT !{b)(7)(C) !: Does your employer 12 r equire you to have an attorney present when being 13 i nterviewed by NRC OI? 14 'b-)(7-)(-cJ__________......!:
~l No .
SPECIAL AGENT ~!(b~)(-l)-(C_J___,!: Were you ever 15 16 thr eatened with adverse action if you did not request 17 corporate counsel here today? 18 r_ _)(-7)(-C)____________.l: No. 19 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did either corporate 20 counsel or a company representative instruct or 21 suggest to you how you should respond to the line of 22 questioning here today by OI? 23 ~l(b_H7l_(c_J_ _ _ _ ...J!: No. 24 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= Will the presence of 25 Mr. Murphy hinder your testimony in any way? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com
6 1 _l(b-)(D_(_C)~~~~__.I: No . 2 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Do you understand 3 that you have the right to a private interview with me 4 at a time of your convenience? 5 _!(b-)(7-)(-CJ~ ~~~~~I: Yes. 6 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Thank you. Okay. Mr. 7 Murphy, some attorney questions for you. 8 Are you acting as the personal 7 9 representative for ~l(b-)(- )-(C-)~~~~~~ for the purpose o f 10 today's interview? l l MR. ~URPHY: Yes, I am . 12 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Could you please 13 introduce yourself and your firm for the record . 14 MR. MURPHY: T. J. Murphy, law firm of 15 Fisher & Phillips. And my office is located at One 16 Embarcadero Center, Suite 2 050, San Francisco, 17 California. 18 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : And, Mr. Murphy, have 19 you deemed there to be any conflict with your
. l(b)(7)(C) 20 representation for ~~~~~~~---' here today?
21 MR. MURPHY: No. 22 l(b)(7)(C) I SPECIAL AGEN~,__~__, : Should you determi ne 23 that there is any conflict between your representation 24 0 f ~(b)(7)(C) and also Tetra Tech , what is your 25 course of action? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 2000~3701 www.nealrgross.com
7 1 MR. MURPHY: I will follow the Rules of 2 Professional Conduct as set out by the Administrative 3 - - well , by the Supreme Court of the State of 4 California in resolving any conflict, should one 5 arise. 6 SPECIAL AGENT E : ~l Okay. Thank you, sir. (b)(7)(C) I 7 l Okay. ~ * - - - - - - - ' ~ how long have you served as the B !(b)(7)(C) ~ ere at Tetra Tech? 9 l.....(b_ _ _ _ ___,I:
)(7)(C) Well, I've been employed 10 here for about rr xci
~ 7xi!"l'x'"c"_
l i _ _ __._ _ _ _ _ l I guess the -- I've been 11 on the license ._-----.=====::::;----1 I believe . 12 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. And in what 13 other position were you employed prior to -- 14 ~l(b_J(_ 7)c_c_J ________ ---'!: Well, my official position 15 is the ~l(b-)(-7)-(C_) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____J~ 16
- SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) I: Oh.
17 l-*-------J= (b)(7)(C) I Okay. So, on our NRC 18 license there is a position called a ~l(b_)(_7)_ (c_) _ _ _ _ _ _~ 19 _l(b_J(_7)_(c_J _ _~I, and in order for me t o get on that I had to 20 go and submit paperwork and all that, so that took a - 21 - there was a little bit of delay from the time that 22 I came in on the job until I got put o n the license as 23 the l(b)(7)(C) 1. 24 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) l Okay. With whom were 25 you previously employed prior to Tetra Tech and in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
8 1 what capacity? l(b)(7)(C) was a l(b)(7)(C) 2 I 3 ~l (b_)(n _ (_C)______________ ___,! at the r _x,x_r_, _________________________.
~
X1XC) 4 I 5 6 rX7XC) L J for I think maybe L - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . J
- That's in r )(lXC) 7 7 SPECIAL AGENT Ll(b_H_)_(c_i....Jr._ ~_1)(_C)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - I 8 ..._)(_7l_(c_) _ _ _ _ _..J!: Yes. Correct. Did you want
!(b 9 all my history, or just 10 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) No, that's good.
11 l.________________I: (b)(7)(C) Okay. 12 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(?)(C) !: When did you begin 13 working in the nuclear industry? 14 l(b_)(_7l_
.. (c_) _ _ _ _ _...ii: E':J, I guess. I started
[i"'b""X*"x"'c"i------'----i----
'" liGxlxci 15 working in the as a
"'r"X7"""'x"c>
16 (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT :
- Civilian?
18 .... l(b-)(7-)(C_) _ _ _ _ . . ,I ; Yes. Correct. Civil 19 Service. (b)(7)(C) 20 SPECIAL AGENT : So, your professional 21 background has essentially been all in engineering, 22 radiation I l (b)(7)(C) 23 ~-________.F Yes, engineering and health 24 physics, yes. (b)(7)(C) d 25 SPECIAL AGENT : An you're a degreed NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
9 L..l (b_ )(7)_(c_) _ _ _ _ ____.!? 1 l :::;;;==========-I:_ r _h_ a _v_e_ I If XJXC) (b)(7)(C) 2 L. in heal th
)())(C) 3 physics . My ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____. was in electrical
[ 4 engineering. (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT Okay . So, what are 6 your duties and responsibilities under y o ur current 7 P osition as a l.....___ _ _ _ ______. (b)(7)(C) ~ 7 8 l(b-)(- )-(C_) _ _ _ _
... ___.!= There' s a number of things.
(b)(7)(C) 9 First of all, I'm involved in l(b)(7)(C) 10 l(b)(7)(C) 11 12 lL----------1I I'm sure they probably went (b)(7)(C) into thi s 13 but the vast ma j ority of what we do is cleanups of 14 radiological contaminated areas, !(b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) 15 l(b)(7)(C) 16 17 As far as the l(b)(?)(C)
--------------~
18 l(b)(7)(C) 19 20 lL-------------------------_J*I And we (b)(7)(C) 21 have an RSOR representative at each site since I can' t 22 be everywhere at once . (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT : And what are your 24 requirements by the license because you're the 25 L!(b-)(7 _)_(c_J _ _ _ ____,J~ so what does that entail? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea!rgross.com
10 1 l...._ _ _ _ _ _ ____.:I (b)(7)(C) Well, that's going to
, l(b)(7)(C) 2 require that ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-..J (b)(7)(G) 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 Although on our sites technically we 10 wouldn't really be required to have people monitored 11 for external exposure because we have plenty of 12 documentation that we' re less than 100 millirem a 13 year . . l(b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) 14 15 16 17 j,_ (b_) r_H c_) __________________________ --..JI __ 18 11')17)(C) 19 l(b)(7)(C) That's kind of it in a 20 21 nutshell . 22 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)r)(C) ~ Okay. What type of 23 trainings have you received and what type of 24 certifications do you hold for your current position?
-1,
)(J)(C) 25 !_'b_
) m_(c_i ________ I'm a _
[ NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgoss.com
11 1 so I had to get -- that involved getting 2 recommendations, experience, and testing for that. I'm
~
1 3 l'm also a ~r_ *_~ _) ______. 4 I've had a number of different 5 NRC courses, including like the NRC inspection course, 6 the NRC material licensing course. I've had some 7 moisture density training, aome industrial radiography 8 training . In my previous position working at L Jwe - D b ll(Cl 9 - what oes for the is essential ly acts as b)( CJ 10 sort of a mini - NRC for th
- 11. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Right, for the LJ 12 l(b)(7)(C)
I: Right . 13 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : What does RASO stand 1.4 for? 15 16 Support Office. l(b)(7)(C) L r-~---"
)(7)(C) b 17 SPECIAL AGENT ....__ _ __, :
(b)(l)(C) o k ay . And t h at: was -- 18 19
- when you worked there that was here I. .
(b-)(7-)(C_) _ _ _ _ _,!: Yes, in you're r"" correct . 20 (b)(7)(C) 21 SPECIAL AGENT ....__ _ __.: But there is a rep, 22 if I'm to understand this correctly, on all the sites 23 such as Hunters Point, a decommissioning site. There's 24 a RASO office ther e on site, or there's a 25 representative? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
l2 1 ... )(-7)(_C_) _ _ _ _____.1 = r_ Well, for somebody from 2 Tetra Tech, there will be a radiation safety officer 3 representative. 4 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) : Right. 5 l.__________,=I Somebody (b)(7)(C) like Bert who's 6 always there. (b)(7)(C) 7 SPECIAL AGENT ..__~: Right. 8 .... l(b_)(7_)(C _) _ _ _ _____.~ RASO wil 1 come out 7XCl 9 periodically, somewhat (b)(7)(C) 10 11 I SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l )(C) !: I
- Okay .
mean, a l ot of times D l...._ _ _ __. with lbX7l(C) 12 RASO because we' re going - - 13 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) !: Do the - - 14 l....________,=I (b)(l)(C) Yes, we' re going to work on 15 issues together. We want to go and look at this 16 particular site, how are we going to handle it, all 17 that. So, a lot of times 18 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) RASO is actually here 19 locally in elX Q
'r======---
1(b)(7)(C) Right. Correct, but they 20 21 fly out. (b)(7)(C) 22 SPECIAL AGENT : Okay. So, you are 23 you said you' re responsible for ._!'b-)(_7l_(c_) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _...J 24 .... l(b-)(7-)(C_) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' ~ 25 l...._ _ _ _ _ ___.:I Correct. (b)(7)(C) I mean, typically, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
13 1 I'm not the one who's actually doing it, but I ' l l put 2 l
~ )Cl)(C) it together and ~-----~ : he RSOR --
I (b)(7)(C) 3 SPECIAL AGENT L----': So, the RSORs are the 4 ones that actually initiate, facilitate the training 5 on site? 6 l~--------__,= (b)(7)(C) I Correct . Correct. 7 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C} I= And how often is that 8 training conducted? 9 l....~b}(7)(C)
-------~= I It depends . We have at 10 least annually we have training. What we do right now 1.1 at Hunters Point, we have five to ten-minute training 12 additionally every day to strengthen rad contacts on 13 their fundame ntals and everything . So, i t's a minimum 14 of annually but we try to do a whole lot more above 15 and beyond.
(b)(7)(C) 16 SPECIAL AGENT And are all employees 17 on site required to complete training wherein they are 18 oriented on what a nuclear safety concern is? Are they 19 trained to know what's nuclear safety and what ' s not, 20 kind of decipher the difference? 21 ._! 7 ( b_) (_ )_ (c _) ___________,~ Right. We go and provide 22 them information on the NRC Form 3, and that info, so 23 if they have a concern about something that we prefer 24 that they go and bring it up to the supervisor, and 25 let us work it internally, but by all means they have NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~3701 www.nealrgross.com
14 1 every right to go to the NRC and make a complaint or 2 allegation.
- l(b)a)(C) I
- 3 SPECIAL AGENT : But are they being 4 trained to know the difference between the two, this 5 is a safety concern and this isn't. This is probably -
6 - or even to know what's nuclear safety-related. 7 l~-~~~~~~__.I: (b)(7)(C) Well, yes. 8 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) What's OSHA, what's 9 Occupational Safety Related? Do you think the guys on 10 s i te there have a pretty good meter on what's what? l(b)(7)(C) Yes, I think so. I mean, we 11 I= 12 -- because one of our main things is well, here's an 13 RCA. If it's posted as a Radiologically Controlled 14 Area that's where we might have something that we can 15 have contamination or an external dose hazard. So, if 16 you're going to be going in there, you have to have 17 training, and you have to have a TLD . And you have to 18 get surveyed on your way out. 19 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Right. 20 l.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--1:I (b)(7)(C) So, they're all aware of 21 t hat, yes .
~
22 SPECIAL AGENTL__J: Are employees granted 23 protection from reprisal if they raise safety-related 24 concerns? 25 l. . ________,I= (b)(7)(C) Yes. Again, they' re trained NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
15 1 that they can notify the NRC if they want. (b)(7)(C) 2 SPECIAL AGENT Is that frowned upon, 3 though? 4 l...._ _ _ _ _ _ __.:I (b)(7)(C) No. I mean, there's all 5 sorts of ways that you can bring up any internal 6 stuff. You grab your supervisors, you can use ZIP 7 slips, you can notify 8 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Are ZIP slips like 9 anonymous tips you throw in a box and somebody looks 10 at them? Are they in the computer system? What are ZIP 11 slips? 12 l.___ (b)(7)(C) _ _ _ _ ___.: I It's a computer -- well, I 13 believe you can hard copy them, too, but there's a 14 c omputer system way to go and load them in there. I'm 15 not sure whether you have the option of being 16 anonymous on it or not. I'd have to go look at it. 17 But, I mean, generally you want to go and say who you 18 are so somebody can follow - up. So, like well, what did 19 you see, what was your current 20 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Right . 21 l....- - - - - - - ~:I (b)(7)(C) So we can fix it . 22 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ~ Okay. If an employee 23 raises a safety-related concern how is it documented 24 by management and what does the procedure and process 25 consist of? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE,, N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
16 1 l (b)(7)(C) I
....________,= We 11 , i t depends on what it 2 is. I mean, it could be documented through a 3 deficiency notice from the QA Department . It could be 4 documented through a ZIP slip . It could be if it's the 5 results of like I periodically do audits and 6 document those, so if it's a result of an audit, it 7 could be in my annual audit . Any one of those 8 mechanisms really. And it depends on the level of the 9 severity, or whatever, as well.
10 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) l Okay. What --
,(b-)(7)- (C- ) - - - - - ,
11
---------------'. Right .
(b)(7)(C) 12 SPECIAL AGENT .___--': Are there -- do you 13 guys use - - it's typical in then nuclear world, 14 condition reports, CRs? l(b)(7)(C) 15 Well, that's deficiency I= 16 notices is what we call them . (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT You call them 18 deficiency notices. 19 .... l(b_)(7_)(C_) _ _ _ __,!: Yes. 20 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= Can any employee 21 generate those? Can any employee go on in the computer 22 system and generate a deficiency notice, like in the 23 nuclear world --
~l(b_)(7_l(_c )________ ___s.L Right.
24 25 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) ~ -- you know, Rps, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS ANO TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
17 1 laborers, the guys can have access to go in on a 2 terminal, log in and write a CR if they see something. 3 l...._ _ _ _ _ _ ___,;I (b)(7)(C) Right . No, I mean, our 4 parallel I guess would really be like the ZI? slip 5 situation. 6 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Now, you said the 7 employees are supposed to raise the concerns through 8 the use of ZIP slips, going to their supervisor, 9 deficiency notice. These are all 10 l.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.JI: (b)(7)(C) Yes. And, also, on the 11 radiation safety side, I mean, we train them such that 12 now if they don't get a satisfactory answer from their 13 supervisor, that they' re supposed to go to the RSOR . 14 If they don't get a satisfactory answer from that 15 person, to contact me. Everybody should have the 16 RSOR' s and my phone number in their log books . And the 17 same thing, if I don't give them a satisfactory 18 answer, please call the NRC. (b)(7)(G) 19 SPECIAL AGENT ..._ _ __, : When layoffs occur, 20 how is i t determined which employees are laid off and 21 which are retained? 22 ... l(b_)r _ i_,c_i _ _ _ _ __.l: I think a lot of it has to 23 do or has been recently how many billable hours they 24 have, because we've had management layoffs primarily fb)(JXC) 25 since I've been here, and I'm on my . l NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neatrgross.com
18 l supervisor/boss. 2 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : And does that work 3 the same for employees, non-management employees? 4 l...._ _ _ _ _ _ __.:I (b)(7)(C) Yes, I would think it would 5 work the same way. I mean, that and I think people are 6 going to look at your relative value as far as how 7 your performance appraisals have been and the feedback 8 from other people. Again, I I m just kind of 9 speculating. (b)(7)(C) lO SPECIAL AGENT When did you become 11 acquainted with Bert Bowers and under what 12 circumstance? (b)(7)(C) I 13 14 started l
-*_________,, = It was right before I working at Tetra Tech. I came out for 15 essentially an interview with some of the people out 16 there at the project, so I met him around that time.
17 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : So, that was 18 7 r _)(- )_(c_, _ _ _ _ ___.I= It was about
~ L r _x '_xC
_) _ _ _ _ _ ~~ 19 ago . SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) ~ 20 Okay, SOL _ J - - 21 .l(. _______________,:l LJ b)(l)(C) ~ c probably like e J)(C) 22 something like that, beginning Of L___J fwxc>l. maybe. 23 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) !: And at the time you 24 met him, what position was he in? 25 l(b)(7)(C) _______________ I
-J: At the time he was the RSO NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgrOSS.CO!'n
19 1 on the Tetra Tech license, and he was -- but kind of 2 serving as the RSOR on site, as well. 3 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) !: Now, was that a 4 common thing to be the RSO and the RSOR on site . Was 5 he kind of doing a fill-in role? 6 l(b)(7)(C) L . . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ I
..J : He was kind of doing a 7 fill-in role because he got hired on and then the 8 person I replaced, _,
(b-)(_7 l_ ( c_) _ _ _ _..... I, I think just left
~lXC) I, maybe__________,r ater or something like that. So, in 9
r 10 the meantime they had to go and have somebody fill the 11 RSO position while they were looking for a replacement 12 for (b)(7)(C)
- 13 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ~ Okay. Do you know how 14 long he filled in that position before you got here?
15 l(b)(7)(C) LI want to say he was maybe 16 working maybe four months before I got there . (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT Okay. 18 l-*--------= (b)(7)(C) I But he was actually 19 technically on the license as the RSO for a few months 20 after that, like I said, when I put in my application. 21 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: So, when you 22 initially came on was he working for you at that time? 23 Was he - - he was still on the license as the RSO, you 24 were transitioning. 25 l._ (b_)(7_)(_c )_ _ _ _ ---J!: Right. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
20 (b)(7)(C)
- 1. SPECIAL AGENT So, he was kind of 2 helping you get acclimat ed.
3 ..._l1_1)_1c_i -----------'!: Right, right, right . Yes.
!fb 4 And the way it's set u p , I mean, everybody is ass i gned 5 to projects so l ike he works for me, and at the time 6 he worked for ...
7 l(b-)(- l_ (c_) -----------"i who was the 7
! (b)( )(C) l(b)(7)(C) 7 8 SPECIAL AGENT On the site .
9 l----------------~=Right (b)(7)(C) I . So, like all of the 10 heal th physics supervisors c ome out of like the Rad 11 Department pool of people, and then when they ' re on 12 t hei r project t hey' re essentially wo rki ng f or t he 13 proj ect manager . 14 SPECIAL AGENT ...._ _ (b)(?)(C) __, Right. What kind of 15 employee was Bowers? 16 ~l (b_J(_7)_ (C_) ----------~~ Well, when I first s c arted ] 7 off he was helpful when I was transitioni ng, but the - 18 - I guess probably the last year he was there they 19 kind o f had some difficulty because he seemed to be 20 getting into sort o f issues with the other health 21 physics supervisors . And L.. )(7)--(C-)------------....J' had r- some 22 issues with him not get ting involved in the day-to - day 23 rad decisions. Let's see, I t hink i t was about October 24 of 2010, whenever we were doing our performance 25 appraisals for the year, one of the things I do is NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~ 701 www.nealrgross.com
21 1 solicit feedback from the people that everybody works 2 with, and I was having trouble getting any kind of 3 positive feedback on Bert. So, we had a conversation, 4 ~l (b_)(7_)(_c)______________________________________ ~!about well, 5 could we maybe get somebody else in the RSOR position. 6 Would that be possible? Is there some kind of 7 education or something that Bert had that put him 8 above and beyond everybody else, and I said not 9 really. We could switch it up . You know, try something 10 different, and kind of debated it back and forth. And 11 he sai d well, shoul d we maybe put something in his 12 performance appraisal to go and say you have to be at 13 these meetings or whatever, like the 6:30 supervisor 14 meeting . And ~ said no, that's a little -- I don't 15 know, like a little heavy-handed or something, so we 16 kind of left it a little nebulous, said we'll talk 17 about it later, and that probably wasn't a great idea. 18 And the next day I called Bert and said hey, look, the 19 way you ' re perceived at the site is not getting 20 involved in some of the things that are going on. Like 21 we're trying to -- at the time, we were trying to get 22 the onsite analytical laboratory on line and get them 23 certified under the DOD eLab, and said I think it 24 would help if you got involved in that. And he kind of 25 wasn't happy about that, said I've got too much other NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
22 1 stuff to do . And I said well, you know, just between 2 you and me, within the company they're always looking J for who's producing and contributing, and it doesn't 4 help you not getting involved like that. So, we had a 5 little bit of an issue. {b){7)(C) 6 SPECIAL AGENT Was Bowers 7 responsible for training -- did he train you and kind 8 of get you up to speed when you took over? 9 L! 7 (b_l{_ l_{C_l __________ _.l I mean, he pointed me out 10 where certain projects were at and everything like 11 that, yes. (b)(7)(C} 12 SPECIAL AGENT : And he conducted the 13 RSOR training on site for t he staff? 14 ~l (b_)(n_ (_c )________ __.!: Between him and I bel ieve 7 15 Ll(b-)(- )-(C_l ___________________________.j did the tra ining at that 16 time. (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT Did Bowers raise 18 safety concerns to you? l(b)(7)(C) 19 Yes, they were -- a lot of 20 them were kind of minor in nature. You know, hey, we 21 found this, the water cooler was i nside this RCA 22 boundary which wasn't roped, so things like that . I'd 23 say hey, look, go to the 7:00 meeting. Make sure that 24 everybody is aware of where it's supposed to be, go 25 and see if you can figure out how it got put there, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE, N.W, (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
23 1 things like that . (b)(7)(C) 2 SPECIAL AGENT So, more 3 specifically, what issues did he raise, and when you 4 recall him raising them? And this is kind of 5 significant from a time line perspective, as best you 6 can remember, or was this an all the time thing? 7 (b)(7)(C) I l~-~~~~~~~~= It was a periodic thing. 1 8 mean, like I said, I can't remember anything that he 9 brought to me that was like oh, my goodness, this is 10 a serious problem that we have to stop work right now 11 and retrain people. 12 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) So, you said the 13 water cooler was inside a boundary of an RCA. Do you 14 recall when that issue happened? 15 l~(b_)(7_l(_ci__________ ~I: It was probably two years 16 ago, something like that. (b)(?)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT Okay, roughly 2010? l(b)(7)(C) Right. Yes, and there would 18 I= 19 be things like well, hey, signs were down. (b)(7)(C) 20 SPECIAL AGENT Postings. 21 l(b)(7)(C) I: Right. Again, that's just 22 something that -- you know, a day-to-day thing that 23 the RCTs were supposed to be keeping their eyes on and 24 taking care of, and putting up . If you see it -- 25 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) ~ Are those things that NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 200()5.3701 www.nealrgross.com
24 1 -- are those issues that warrant work stoppages? 2 ~! (b_)(7_)(_C)~ ~ ~ ~ - - - ' !: No . No . 3 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) : Did you document i t 4 when he brought it up to you? 5 l~-~~~~~~~_,lI (b)(7)(C) I can't say that I did, 6 because like I said, those were all pretty mi~or in 7 nature . And other than -- I mean, not written, but I 8 mean verbally say 9 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : So, what actions did 10 you take when you received the information from Bert? 7 11 _! (b_)(_ )_(c_)~~~~~~'= I gave him direction to go 12 and bring it up at the 7:00 safety meeting, to go make 13 sure that the water coolers aren't set inside the 14 boundaries, and to go and see if he can track down 1.5 who's in charge of putting those materials out, see if 16 you could personally talk to the person. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Were you ever advised 18 by other managers at Tetra Tech that Bowers raised 19 safety- related concerns to them? If so, when and who? 20 Anybody else in management ever say yes, Bert came to 21 me and raised this issue? 22 l-.~~~~~~~__.:I (b)(7)(C) No, I don' t think so. 23 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : And would you say 24 that his issues were legitimate nuclear safety issues, 25 or were they more on the OSHA side of the house, or NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
25 l was it a mixture? l(b)(7)(C) I would say, if anything, 2 3 it might lean towards OSHA. Bue, I mean, a lot of them 4 I don't even think were really legitimate safety 5 concerns. I mean, like signs fall down, people have to 6 put them back up. We're in a windy environment. I 7 mean, things happen. That's why we had Rad contacts on 8 site all the time to take care of those things. To me, 9 an issue is rea l ly when somebody does something that 10 could lead to an unsafe act or condition, or somebody 11 on purpose goes against training, thi ngs of that 12 nature.
~
13 SPECIAL AGENT [____J: And are employees at 14 Tetra Tech as it relates to safety concerns, are 15 employees encouraged to also go to RASO? 16 ~! (b_Jm _ (_C_
) ________ __,!: They can. I guess in my 17 view, chey're not really in our licensing chain.
18 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : NRC more so is than 19 RASO. 20 l~-~~~~~~~~I=Right . (b)(7)(C) Exactly, because , I 21 mean, RASO is really in this particular instance, 22 that branch of RASO is really the technical advisor 23 for the Navy as far as did we take enough samples or 24 whatever to clear this area? So, I mean, there's 25 certainly no problem with anybody talking to RASO if NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
26 1 they wanted to. I just don't think that they're in the 2 particular chain from the person up through supervisor 3 through r )(*XCl o the NRC . (b)(7)(C) 4 SPECIAL AGENT : Now, are employees 5 required to first discuss their issues with Tetra Tech 6 management before going to any external entities? l (b)(7)(C) 7 I: No, they're not required 8 to. Like I said, we say we'd sure like it because that 9 gives us an opportunity to go to try to correct any 10 deficient conditions before going outside. 11 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) : When Bowers worked 12 for you, you wrote his ~r_m_ci-----------------------------' 13 ~'(b-)(-7)(-C)- - - - - - - - - - ' j: Yes . 14 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C} : For what years? l(b)(7)(C) 15 It was for 2009 and 2010 . 16 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?}(C) And do you recall 17 what those -- how he graded out? 18 l....--------------'I: (b)(7)(C) Yes. He did a lot better in 19 2009, in 2010 I guess he got mostly threes except for r Xt)(CJ two for 20 like, I think like probably a 21 pointing out safety stuff. Because like I said, he 22 seemed to make a - - to highlight even small stuff. 23 SPECIAL AGENT ~: What's the scale? 24 l(b)(7)(C) I: Like a one to five. 25 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= One to five, one NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
27 1 being? 2 l---------~= (b)(7)(C) I good. Being 3 SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7){C) I= Being the best. 4 _! (b-)(7-)(c_i ______ ___.!: Yes. (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT Five being the worst . (b)(7)(C) 6 ~ - - - - - - _ _ ,: Right. 7 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So, in 2009 did he 8 get a lot of fives, fours? 9 l.__________,:I (b)(7)(C) He got like more fours and 10 stuff, yes . 11 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did he receive a - - 12 do you recall him getting a bonus for his 13 performance? l(b-)(7) - (-C)- - - - - , 14 ....- - - - - - - - ': Yes, but as a smaller 15 percentage than others. (b)(7)(C) 16 SPECIAL AGENT : Than other HPs? 17 l_...________,FI (b)(7)(C) Yes, than other HPs . Yes. I 18 19 Because rl(7l(ci L.----------.....J supervisors were doing a better overall job, I guess. at the time, the other 20 SPECIAL AGENT LJ Did he get a bonus in 21 2010, as well? 22 l__________,I: Yes, (b)(l)(C) well, 2009, 2010. Yes, 23 he got something both years. IITTfflITT SPECIALAGENT L.____J Okay. So, on his 2010 24 25 appraisal, this is the year you're saying you guys had NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
28 1 problems with h im. Did you identify those problems in 2 3 l~ - - - - - - - - ~I: No, (b)(7)(C) I did not. Admittedly, 4 I should have documented stuff better. I mean, I told 5 him he needed to get more involved in the day-to-day 6 production survey stuff, and the lab . And, 7 unfortunately, I probably tend to be too soft of a 8 (b)(7)(C) 9 SPECIAL AGENT : So, for al l intents 10 and purposes, he had fair to good performance 11 appraisals . 12 l(b)(l)(C) I: Yes
- 13 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : Where in both years 14 he got a bonus.
15 l~--~~~~~~~I: (b)(7)(C) Right. 16 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : A performance bonus 17 of some sort. Okay. What employment action was later 18 leveraged against Bowers and why? He ended up finally 19 things kind of fizzled out, was he what actually-- 20 - was he terminated, was he laid off, was he 21 furloughed? 22 l....- - - - - - - ~:I No. (b)(7)(C) He was removed from the 23 project at Hunters Point, and then we had him at the 24 Alameda project, I want to say like eight weeks. And 25 then when the three-shift coverage for the dredging NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D .C . 20005-3101 www.nealrgross.com
29 1 operations ended, we took him off that project, and 2 while we were looking for other work, we gave him like 3 an opportunity to work in the Saudi al Karish job, 4 which he didn't want to do that. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) In Saudi Arabia. 5 6 (b)(7)(C) l~-~~~~~~-J I: Correct . Right. And we 7 there was another very short-term like safety job I 8 think -- (b)(7)(C) 9 SPECIAL AGENT L-~---' Was that the one in 10 Oak Ridge? 11 l--~~~~~~~J
~b)(7)(C) I: Well, Michigan.
SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Michigan. 12 13 l(b)(7)(C) I: And he wasn't interested in 14 t hat one. And then l(b)(7)(C) lhad talked to him at Oak Ridge 15 about the Oak Ridge thing, and apparently he didn't 16 want to do that either . 17 SPECIAL AGENT '- l(b)(7)(C)__,I:
- _ So, why was he 18 removed from the Hunters Point project?
19 l(b)(7)(C)
--~~~~~~~J:
I Because he went and - - I 20 guess the way we kind of viewed i t was he instigated 21 an argument with health physics supervisors, and for 22 the l(b)(7)(C) ! that was kind of the straw that 23 broke the camelrs back, I guess. Because i t was a 24 little bit of a microcosm of what the problem with 25 Bert was with not getting involved with day-to-day NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~701 www.nealrgross.com
30 1 operations because he had been asked to go and show up 2 at the 6:30 meeting, so instead of going and bringing 3 up problems that he saw at his end of the day drive 4 down, he could get involved in the act~al planning of 5 events with the other health physics supervisors. So, 6 if somebody was going to bring up something that for 7 some reason would not be safe, Bert could interject 8 and say that's a bad idea. We're not going to do that, 9 o r whatever. But he showed up and - - I guess he showed 10 resistance on coming i n for those earlier meetings 11 because that was going to take away from his end of 12 the day drive down. 13 SPECIAL AGENT Was the end of the 14 day drive down part of in his job description? 15 l(b)(7)(C) I: No, it's not (b)(7)(C) 16 SPECIAL AGENT : Or was that k i nd of 17 an ancillary thing he created? 18 l....._ _ _ _ ___,:I (b)(7)(C) Yes. (b)(7)(C) 19 SPECIAL AGENT How did that drive 20 down come 21 l (b)(7)(C)
....._ _ _ _ _ _ _...J:
I It' s something he 1 iked to 22 do. I mean, it's a good (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT Practice. 24 !(b)(?J(C) j: Yes, it's a good practice 25 to go and check at the end of the day. I mean, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
31 1 personally, I think it's a little bit better to go out 2 there during the middle of the day so you can observe 3 things as they're going on, so you can catch people 4 being good and say like, you know, keep on doing 5 things this way, or I see you <;loing this. Let's go and 6 tighten this up, and opposed to going at the end of 7 the day where you don't have people around, you don't 8 have context for what's gone on. 9 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Do you know what he 10 was looking for by going at the end of the day when 11 the employees were gone? 12 l_________..,= (b)(7)(C) I Yes . He said he was looking 13 for things like, you know, signs being down, which 14 again we already -- at the time we still have l(b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) 15 and Susan Andrews doing that like every week 16 anyway, so it wasn't like that wasn't covered. But I 17 guess he's looking also for gates being locked and 18 things like that. So, it's not a bad thing to do. It's 19 certainly not in his job description, certainly not 20 mandatory, certainly not something I said you have to 21 do this every day.
~
SPECIAL AGENT l________J Right . So, was r (7)(C) 1 22 l(b)(7)(C) ultimately made the 23 the one who 24 determination to cut him off the project at Hunters 25 Point? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
32 1 l~--------~= (b)(7)(C) I Correct. SPECIAL AGENT . l(b)(7)(C) I: Okay And that was 2 3 because he just was - - he felt that he was unhappy 4 with Bert, or it was because of the argumenc that 5 started after the morning meeting? 6 l~--------~fL (b)(7)(C) Right. He was already on 7 edge . I mean, we talked in October I think it was, 8 like could we switch it up? Like what we are going to 9 do about Bert 10 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : This is October of? 11
""l (b""""
)(7")(=
"'c )_ _ _ _ _ I: Of 2010.
12 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7')(CJ I: 2010 . 13 1:~:H:n(:c): :::::::::L Right. Right. Right. So, a 14 couple of months before January when the incident 15 happened. So, t here was already -- 16 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C)
- Tension .
(b)(7)(C) I= 17 _ . tension there. And I l 18 think that t h is was kind of the straw that broke the 19 camel's back. (b)(7)(C) 20 SPECIAL AGENT ,___ __, Okay . And he got into 21 it with who? 22 ._l (b-)(7-)(C-) _ _ _ _ _,I: Well, based on the 23 interviews I had, he -- I guess I ' l l try to start at 24 the beginning, but from what Bert then said, l(b)(l)(C) ~ ad 25 come in the night before to talk to him about how his NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
33 1 hours were going to be reduced because we're going 2 from a cost-reimbursable contract to a fixed price 3 contracc so we had to kind of shrink hours. And Bert 4 wasn't really happy about that , and then he said -- he s went out and did his drive down and at the time he saw 6 people coming out of an RCA without any rad 7 supervision there. So, he went and came back and told (b)(7)(C) and then I guess 8 (b)(?)(C) said talk to the 9 supervisors the next day about that. 10 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) The next morning. I 11 l (b)(7)(C)
.__________,= And I should say one thing 12 that a little bit bothers me about this is that if 13 Bert really thought that somebody was coming out of 14 a radiologically controlled area, as a rad safety 15 professional what he spould have done at that point 16 was say a l l you guys coming out of there , you know, 17 stop . I've got to go get an instrument to go and frisk 18 you because you might be tracking out contamination 19 all over the place, and also like get some background 20 on what were you guys doing, were you digging? I need 21 to know what's going on.
22 SPECIAL AGENT EJ: Figure out what's 23 going on. 24 l...._ _ _ _ _ ___,I: Yes, (b)(7)(C) because this might be 25 a big situation, you know. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
34 1 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : From what Bert told 2 you, did he do that? 3 !. . 7 (b_)( _)(_c)_ _ _ _ ___.!: No, no. From what: Bert told 4 me, he said he like asked them like well, what are you 5 guys doing here? It was like well, we' re working 6 overtime, and we're going. And then they left, so he (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) 7 werit and told , and said get the supervisors. 8 And then the next day Bert showed up for the 6 : 3 0 9 supervisors meeting, but he went to the wrong location 10 because he's never gone before . And then he went and 11 grabbed the supervisors to go and tell them that hey, 12 there wasn't somebody with an authorized user, one 13 of the health physics supervisors on site, so that 14 would have been an NRC violation in his mind. And then 15 I forget who , it might have been l(b)(l)(C) pr ....._(b)(7)(C) ~ said 16 well, what area are you talking about? (b)(?)(C) r )(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT I* 18 l(b)(l)(C) I: l(b)(7)(C) 1. 19 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Or l(b)(7)(C) I. 20 l(b)(l)(C) I:l(b)(7)(C) l correct. And 21 then said show me on the map. And it was the UC-3 22 corridor , and they went and I guess all the 23 supervisors said that's already - - that area has 24 already been cleared. We already have all of our 25 samples back . We already have surveys back. We got NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234--4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
35 l approval from RASO to go and backfill. 2 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) So, that area had 3 been released . 4 l_...__ _ _ _ ___,I: (b)(7)(C) Right. Right. Right . 5 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. 6 ...
!(b_)(_
7)(_C_) _ _ _ _ __,!: So, that's essentially just 7 putting dirt back in a hole, and anybody can do that. 8 And we have reams of documentation to back that up. 9 But at this point, I guess, Bert got a little irate 10 and said like I knew you'd say that. So, an argument 11 continued, and then I guess ~ showed up after he 12 heard the commotion and said what's going on here? And 13 I think Bert described well, hey, somebody wasn't here 14 when they were backfilling over here in UC-3. And (b){l){C) 15 said well, wait a minute, that area has already been 16 cleared. Let's break this meeting up, or whatever. And 17 then I think there was some more arguing in the hall
. (b){7)(C) 18 or something. And then went over to his office, 19 and then Bert fol lowed in afterwards and said he 20 wasn' t supporting him, and like depending on whose 21 version, either Bert said he was going to quit, or 22 said do you want me to quit? And I'll never know who 23 said what.
(b)(7){C) (b)(7) 24 SPECIAL AGENT : Right . So' (C) never 25 admitted to wanting Bert to tell him -- Bert to quit, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
36 1 or telling him that he would take his resignation? 2
!(b)(l )(C) l: Yes. I mean, l(b)(l)(C) Isaid that 3 Bert said he was going to quit and ~ said fine, you 4 know, go ahead and quit.
(b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ __. : Go ahead and quit. 6 l___________.:I (b)(7)(C) Do whatever. And then Bert 7 said something about calling the NRC, and then ,__ __ (b)(7)(C) 8 said something like call whoever you want but you're 9 not doing it from my phone, or the project' s phone, or 10 something like that. (b)(7)(C) 11 SPECIAL AGENT : So, was Bert aware of 12 the performance problems you were having with him? 13 l---------J:I Yes, (b)(?)(C) only -- 14 SPECIAL AGENT E:J: I know you didn' t 15 document i t . 16 l__- - - - - - ~:I (b)(7)(C) Right. 17 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) I know that didn't, 18 so he didn't sign anything, there were no annotations 19 in his appraisal. Did you verbalize the concerns to 20 him? 21 r.__ )(-7)-(C_J _ _ _ _ __.I: Yes. No, I verbalized them. 22 I definitely verbalized them to him. I mean, he was 23 aware -- 24 SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: On how many 25 occasions, regularly? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D,C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
37 1 l (b)(7)(C) I
~-~~~~~~~~= Two phone cons I had with 2 him, the first one was around October, and the second 3 one was around when he signed his performance 4 appraisal around December.
5 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Of 2010 . 6 l~-~~~~~~~~I= (b)(7)(C) Yes. Or maybe i t was the 7 end of November. But whenever his -- it was a coupl e 8 of days I think after he signed it, whenever . 9 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?J(C) Okay. Did site 10 management there at Hunters Point identify to you that 11 Bowers was a trouble maker and he wasn't looked upon 12 in a favorable l ight? 13 l~-~~~~~~~--'=I (b)(7)(C) Well, yes, that he was n ' t 11 looked upon -- I mean, he had a reputation of I guess 15 trying to catch other people in like gotcha kind of 16 situations, as opposed to being proactive, like I said 17 getting involved with the planning stages of things. 18 I mean, when I came on to site to go and investigate 19 wha t happened, I was having trouble finding anybody 20 could really say much nice about him, unfortunately. 21 And I mean not just management, but rad contaccs and 22 other workers. 23 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) !: Did he have a 24 reputation as somewhat of a cbmplainer? 25 l~-~~~~~~~---'I= (b)(7)(C) Yes, definitely. I mean, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
38 1 from the time I got there he kind of had a thing that 2 he didn't get enough respect, or that I guess he 3 didn't like !(!i)(?)(C) ! management style, or whatever. (b)(?)(C) 4 SPECIAL AGENT : Had Bowers ever been 5 placed on a PIP or any other form of progressive 6 discipline? 7 l__(b)(7)(C)
~~~~~~_,:
I No . No. 8 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(T)(C) : Are you aware of any 9 other employees at Hunters Point that raised safety-10 related concerns and were later laid off or let go? l(b)(7)(C) 11 I: No. 12 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= You said you 13 conducted the inte rna l investigation when Bowers 14 raised his issues . 15 l(b)(7)(C) I: Right. 16 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= Did you end up 17 producing a report of all your findings and so forth? 18 l~-~~~~~~~-'I: (b)(7)(C) Yes. Well, I had a tech 19 memo that I wrote saying that from the documentation 20 that area was already cleared, so it was no longer-- 21 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Okay. I'm going to -- 22 - that will be one of the documents I ' l l need to get 23 from you guys. 24 MR. MURPHY: Yes. I' 11 talk tol(b)(7)(C) land see 25 exac tly what document he's talking about. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
39 1 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay, not a problem. 2 MR. MURPHY: Okay. 3 l~-~~~~~~~-'=I (b)(7)(C) It's just a one-page 4 document basically saying 5 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Did you highlight who 6 you interviewed and what the disclosure of those 7 interviews were? 8 l~-~~~~~~---JI: (b)(7)(C) I'd have to go look at it. 9 I don't know that I did. (b)(7)(C) 10 SPECIAL AGENT .__~__. You could take a look 11 at it . 12 l~-~~~~~~--lI: (b)(7)(C) I mean, I could tell you l(b)(7)(C) 13 the primarily, I got the information 14 who runs the database, and f rom l(b)(7)(C) Iwho is 15 the l(b)(7)(C)
! for that area to go and look at t he 16 emails generated given approvals from RASO to go 17 backfill.
18 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Okay. And what' s the 19 requirement at Hunters Point for rad surveys for 20 employees to complete , like if they're in an area and 21 they have to always survey out, they survey sometimes, 22 do they have to use a particular device? What 's the 23 - if there is an overarching rad protect.ion concept or 24 requirement? 7 25 ~l' b-)(_)(_c)__________.....i!: Right . If anybody is NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
40 l leaving an RCA they'll have a rad contact survey them 2 out with a frisker, a Ludlum 23, well, the 44 9 3 detector. (b)(7)(C) 4 SPECIAL AGENT So, do you always 5 have a rad HP tech there at the entry and exit point 6 of those areas posted there to get everybody coming in 7 and out? 8 l--~~~~~~__,= (b)(7)(C) I Correct, if it's st.ill a 9 radiologically controlled area. 10 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) Okay. 11 l--~~~~~~~~I= (b)(7)(C) If it's not anymore, then 12 we wouldn't. 13 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. 14 _,(b-)(-l )-(C-) ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ , ! = I mean, it's 15 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Al l the techs that 16 you have, are they kind of - - are they certified rad 17 and HP techs , or do you have laborers or somebody else 18 doing that job of frisking people and running surveys? 19 l (b)(?)(C) !: I mean, we have technicians 20 who are trained. 21 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C)
- Trained .
22 l. . (b-)(7-)(C_J _ _ _ _ ...,!: Right . 23 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) Okay. Because 24 everybody has been HPRP trained. 25 _!(b-)(_7J_(c_) ~~~~~-'~ Right. We give them some NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea!rgross.com
41 1 training. I mean, there's not like a certificate 2 saying this person 3 SPECIAL AGENT .__ __ (b)(7)(C) _. You complete -- 4 l~----------';I (b)(7)(C) Right. 5 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Do you believe that 6 Bowers was retaliated against for raising safety-7 related concerns? 8 ... l(b-)(-7)(-Cl_ _ _ _ __,!= No. 9 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) !: Have there been 10 problems on site at Hunters Point regarding postings 11 being utili zed and adhered to, the rad posti ngs? Has 12 there been a p r oblem with the fact that those are up 13 and that people are abiding by them? 14 l(b)(7)(C) !: I mean, there are pro babl y 15 i nstances where somebody did not go and pay at t ention 16 t o them, but i t 's not something that was prevalent. 17 You kno w, unfortunately we dea l with human beings and 18 no t everybody always plays by the rules , so I c an't 19 say 10 0 perc ent of the time . 20 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Are corners being cut 21 by constructi on empl oyees and others at Hunters Point 22 as it relates to conducting rad surveys? 23 l----------J:
~
(b)(7)(C) I No . I mean -- 24 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Did Bowers bring that 25 up to you? Yes, I mean, essentially, is Hunters Point NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D .C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
42 1 operating purely as a construct ion site, and kind of 2 ignoring the rad component and the rad requirements? 3 l...._ _ _ _ _ _ __,:I No. (b)(7)(C) I mean, in fact, that* s 4 one of the things that we have so many steps, checks 5 in place before somebody can backfill. I mean, that's 6 the whole thing. We have a data management base. I 7 mean, if in my investigation I found out that we 8 didn't have the samples to prove that we had an area 9 cleared, and that we didn't have RASO concurrence to 10 backfill, I mean, we would have had a b i g situation 11 and l woul d have said Bert is absolutely right, but 12 that's not the situation. (b)(7)(C) 13 SPECIAL AGENT Are employees 14 insuring t he safekeeping of all equipment in work-15 related areas and material where rad - - in rad 16 concentrated areas? I believe we heard some testimony, 17 and i t was raised that other equipment had been left 18 out, a gate had been left open one night in a rad 19 area. Is that common? Have those issues been 20 addressed? 21 l (b)(7)(C) I
....- - - - - - - - - - - l : I don' t know that it ' s 22 common. I mean, sometimes we have like copper miners 23 or something will go and cut locks and go into areas 24 after hours. But, again, I wouldn't say it's common.
25 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) Was there pressure NEAL A. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
43 1 placed on jobs by construction personnel to get things 2 done quickly at the expense of rad protection? 7 3 ~l(b-)(_ )_(c_J----------~I: Not at the expense of rad 4 protection, no. Obviously, the efficiency of the 5 project is important to go get things done as quickly 6 and safely as possible. 7 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) : Did Bowers develop a 8 reputation as a stickler for the rules? And, if so, 9 did that impact his interaction with personnel on 10 site? 11 l----------------~ (b)(7)(C) l Well, he appeared to be a 12 stickler for his own interpretation of rules, which 13 was very flexible, you know, depending on the 14 s i tuation. I mean, a classic example is when I came to 15 do the investigation, he'd get upset by okay, we had 16 this water cooler slightly inside this boundary. And 17 then I go into his cabinet and he's got radioactive 18 sources right next to food. 19 SPECIAL AGENT~ : Was that the cesium, 20 the issue with the cesium button in a jar? 21 l~-----------------'I: (b)(7)(C) Well, that was actually a 22 radium button in a jar. 23 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) : Radium. 24 !
~(b_)(_
7
)_(c_)----------~I: But that was something 25 that was separate. This was when I came to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
44 l invest igate what went on. I also did like a 100 2 percent audit of everything. 3 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) What monch was chat? 4 What month and year was that? 5 l (b)(?)(C) I was January of 2011.
~------------: That 6 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : 2011.
7 ._!(b_)(_ 7)(_C_) _ _ _ _ __,l Right. So, the week after 8 this incident happened, because I had to figure out 9 what happened, who was in the right, who was in the 10 wrong. And I wanted to make sure that there wasn't 11 anything else wrong. But he had that radium button 12 source and some other check sources -- 13 SPECIAL AGENT {b)(?)(C) : Wasn' t he using those 14 for training and 15 l...________,=I Yes. (b)(7)(C) He was using the 16 radium button source for training . I mean, there's not 17 a problem with having the sources. I mean, that's 18 fine. (b)(7)(C) 19 SPECIAL AGENT : Okay . 20 l.__________,fI (b)(7)(C) It's just - - it's not good 21 l~ - - - - - - - - - - 'Ipractice (b){?)(C) to have them by food. 22 SPECIAL AGENTl(b)(?)(C) ~ Right. 23 l~ - - - - - - - - - ':I (b)(7)(C) The same reason that you 24 don't want to go and have water in a RCA. 25 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: Right. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
45 1 l--~~~~~~~~:I (b)(7)(C) So, it's just a little 2 it's hard for me to reconcile saying like you guys 3 are being al 1 bad because you've got this thing 4 slightly inside this boundary, but it's okay for me to s have radioactive sources next to food. (b)(7)(C) 6 SPECIAL AGENT : Next to food. Right. 7 l(b)(7)(C) !: So, that' s where it was a 8 little hard for me to marry those two together. SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= Now, was that the 10 issue you self-reported to the NRC, was his -- because 11 I believe an inspection was done and the only thing 12 that came up was a self-reported identification by you 13 all. 14 l--~~~~~~~~:I Right.That was the radium (b)(7)(C) 15 button source. That was probably like nine months 16 before that. He left it out in the main conference 17 room during lunch, so that got identified as a 18 deficiency notice, and so we self-identified that to 19 the NRC. The issue about having sources in the same 20 locker as his food, that was one of my findings during 21 the audit so, I mean, that -- I guess you could say 22 chat's self-identified, but that's not something that 23 the NRC wrote in their inspection report. 24 SPECIAL AGENT ~ Now, was that t:urned 25 in - - was that self-reported by you all because you NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE** N.W. (202) 234-4-433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
46 1 guys were kind of at odds with Bert, and because it 2 was Bert that this occurred with? Would it have been - 3 - if it was another employee would it still have been 4 reported? 5 l~-~~~~~~~JI: (b)(7)(C) Oh, yes. Yes, certainly it 6 would have been reported . It had nothing to do with 7 who it was, nothing like that . If I would have done 8 it, I would have gotten a deficiency notice, as well. 9 I mean, yes. I don't think it's the end of the world. 10 I mean, he was very sorry for having d one it. (b)(7)(C) 11 SPECIAL AGENT : Was there any adverse 12 act ion placed o r leveraged against him because of this 13 issue with the button? 14 ~l (b_)(_7)_ ( c_) __________ ~l:__ N_o~ . No, absolutely not. 15 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Were you privy to any 16 conversations with management, with Tetra Tech 17 management regarding Bowers' safety concerns and his 18 vocal nature regarding safety? Did management have a 19 call and say look, this -- we've got to do something 20 about t his guy because he's just -- were you ever in
- 21. any of those conversations, did you have access to 22 some of that knowledge?
23 l~-~~~~~~~-'I= (b)(7)(C) No. I mean, like I said, 24 the only thing was that he had a reputation for going 25 and doing gotcha type stuff in his drive downs. And NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com
47 1 making maybe a mountain out of a molehi l l. And he also 2 had a reputation for not getting involved on the front 3 on how projects were going to be worked out. So, I (b)(7)(C) 4 mean - - because, I guess, even earlier had asked 5 him if he could move his office so he would be over on 6 the same side of the trailer as where l___....I (b)(l)(C) and (b)(7)(C) 7 and he are, because - - 8 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) L-r _)(-7)(_C_
) --...I' and r '(l)(C) 9 10 ~'
7 (b_)( _)(C _ J_ _ _ _ ~l: Right. So, t hat -- because 11 a lot of t i mes the project things are sort of fluid o r 12 whatever, so i f a problem comes up -- 13 SPECIAL AGENT You can go right 14 t here . 15 l.....-------....1=I (b)(7)(C) Just g o right there and 16 let's - - typically, !(b)(l)(C) !grabs people and brings them l7 in the office, so he was hoping that well, hey, if 18 Bert were over there i n that same vicinity, there 19 would be a natural inclination like kind of second i n 20 t he off ice t o get involved. And Bert resisted that 21 because he said he needed to be the public relations 22 l(b)(7)(C) I guy for _______~ because he was difficul t to deal 23 with with other people. So, Bert 24 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) Who is ~l (b-)(7J_(c_)_ _ ~!? 25 l 1-(b)(7)(C) I He's the lab director for NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
48 1 the gamma spec lab . So, Bert had a tendency to sort of 2 have an excuse for changing anything, didn't want to 3 change his office, didn'c want to change the drive 4 down. It's sort of like it's my way . I know the way, 5 the only way how to do it, and everybody else 6 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Stand back . 7 ._l (b)-(7)-(C)- - - - - - ' I : needed to stand back. a Yes .
~
9 SPECIAL AGENT L___j= How often did you 1.0 travel out to Hunters Point? 11 l(b_)(_7)_(c_) _ _ _ _ _
... -1I= Probably once every six 12 weeks.
13 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: Are Tetra Tech 14 employees out at Hunters Point embodied by rad 15 protection guidelines? l(b)(7)(C) Yes. Yes.
- l. 6 (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT Were you ever 18 instructed by Tetra Tech management to not document 19 Bowers' concerns when he raised them to you?
20 l'---------~= (b)(7)(C) I Absolutely not. I mean, if 21 anything, Tetra Tech actually looks more favorably to 22 go and report anything that you see amiss. I mean, 23 they like to see people bringing up issues. 24 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Do you know what the 25 current status what Bowers' current employment NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
49 1 status is with the company? 2 ~-K_rn_c_1 ~~~~~~ As far as I know he's still 3 an employee of the company, and if we find work Lha t 4 he has the knowledge, skills, and ability to do and he 5 wants to go take the position, he'd be able to take 6 the position. Thus far, he's chosen not to. Again, 7 when I went out there to go and investigate , I tried 8 to figure out how can we use him somewhere, and he 9 basically said he's not accepting anything other than 10 working at Hunters Point, and ~!(b_)(_7)_(c_1~~~~~~_,! got to 11 g o . And I' m l ike, you know (b)(7)(C) 12 SPECIAL AGENT Was there any 13 consideration of sending h im back to Hunters Poi nt? 7 14 ( b-J(_ 1_
'~ (c_1~~~~~~': Well, we had talked about 15 it, but only very briefly because in my estimation i t 16 would have been a very bad idea, because like I said, 17 he didn't have any respect of the workers there. I 18 mean, he even refused to go and help in the 19 investigation . I mean, he came in and talked to me for 20 about an hour when we went to the site, and then I 21 explained that like, well, on the surface what I'm 22 hearing is, I haven't had a chance to look at the 23 paperwork but this area has already been cleared, and 24 I don't see any RCA postings on it . And he said well, 25 you know, you can understand where I'd ~e confused NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neatrgross.com
50 l because of the fencing, because the fencing is still 2 up, because for safety, because you don't want to let 3 somebody walk in -- 4 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Right . I 5 l_,__(b)(7)(C) _______,F -- and fa ll into a 12-foot 6 ditch. 7 SPECIAL AGENT E : ]: And it's still posted 8 as a rad area. 9 l_,__(b)(7)(C) I It was not. 10 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) l So, the fence was up 11 but there was no posting oh it. 12 l(b)(7)(C) I
-~- - - - - - ~: Correct. Correct.
13 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. Now, there was 14 a ll these problems with postings often blowing off 15 because of the wi nd, and this and that . So, was it 16 conceivable to bel i eve that he would struggle to 17 differentiate the two because that's a common theme 18 there? l(b)(7)(C) No, because again we have 19 20 like one of those areas, we have a sign like every 30 21 feet. 22 SPECIAL AGENT _ ___,: Okay. l(b)(7)(C) So, that would -- you'd 23 24 have to have -- I mean, we're talking probably 80 25 signs would have to fall off. And, again, we have NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHiNGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 wwW.nealrgross.com
51 1 technicians who are going on a weekly basis going to 2 each area, going sign, sign, sign, sign , so 3 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Is there a checkl ist 4 that they have to turn in and state that they checked 5 all the - - 6 ...
!(b_J(_ 7l (_c _
) ____ __,! : They send me a weekly Excel 7 spreadsheet with the initials of the person who a checked that particular area.
(b)(7)(C) 9 SPECIAL AGENT ,__~--s- Okay. 1.0 l....(b)(7)(C)
~~~~~~--J :
I so , t h ere , s a -- and t h ere 11 may be even an actual chec klist. There ' s also a board, 12 a status board on the inside of the front side of the 13 o f fice where they have the RCAs and everything mapped 14 off. So, again, this is what's a little weird to me. 15 If Bert's doing a drive down every day and he's 16 checking the postings, then he should be aware that 17 there's been a change in the postings . (b)(7)(C) 18 SPECIAL AGENT : Right . 19 l....~~~~~~~-'I: And if something was there (b)(7)(C) 20 and it had 80 signs on one day and the next day 21 there's none, that would have been the time for me to 22 go like why did we de-post that? (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT Right. 24 l'--~~~~~~~-':I (b)(7)(C) So, that's a lit t le weird 25 that he wouldn't even have picked up on that NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgmss.com
52 l previously . (b)(7)(C) 2 SPECIAL AGENT Now, is it ever 3 disseminated amongst all the employees about the 4 posting changes? Does that occur in the morning 5 meetings, does that occur to be an email to everybody? 6 How does that - - when an area is cleared and you're 7 moving on, and there's been matriculation of things, 8 are all those things discussed in a particular format? 9 l(b)(7)(C) I
~-~~~~~~~~ : Well, they're annotated on 10 that status board. I can't swear that it's like always 11 brought up in a safety meeting, but I think generally 12 speaking it's brought up that there's a change. And 13 there's also an understanding from people that when 14 somebody says we got approval from RASO to backfill, 15 we' 11 be backfilling over in this area, everybody k i nd 16 of understands that that means that the area has been 17 cleared .
18 l SPECIAL AGENT ~.~~~ Now, (b)(7)(C) a lot of this 19 woul d be talked about at the safety meetings that Bert 20 wasn ' t going to , or was going to? 21 l~-~~~~~~~---':I (b)(7)(C) Well, he wasn't - - he 22 definitely wasn't going to the 6:30 supervisor 23 meeting. 24 SPECIAL AGENT ~ Right. 25 l(b)(7)(C) I: And from what I understand NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
53 1 maybe he was going 50 percent of the time, the 7:00 2 safety meeting, which is where all of the -- 3 ocpECIAL AGENT ,__ (b){l)(C) _ __. : S o, t h e supervisors* 4 meet first at 6:30 and then at 7:00 I 5 l_,__~~~~~~ (b)(l)(C)
~ Right.
(b){7)(C) 6 SPECIAL AGENT So, they meet at 7 6: 3 O, get their heads together and make sure everybody 8 is on the same page, and at 7:00 they disseminate the 9 information to the employees for the day. 10 l~-~~~~~~--'=I (b)(7)(C) Correct. Right. (b}(7)(C) ll SPECIAL AGENT So, Bert about 50 12 percent of t he time went to the 7:00 meeting, hardly 13 ever went to the management meeti ng. 14 ._! 7l (_c)_ _ _ _ (b_)(_ ___,!: From what I understand now 15 he absolutely never went. 16 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. And was that in 17 his job description to attend those meetings? Was it 18 written in there, do you know? 19 l~-~~~~~~~~=I (b)(7)(C) No, it was not in the job 20 description. It's one of those things I would have 21 expected him to have done. You know, because again 22 that's where you come up with the plan of the day, and 23 if in Bert's mind he ought to be involved in every rad 24 decision and everything, that would be one of the main 25 focal points where you can be involved in that. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3101 www.nealrgross.com
54 (b)(?)(C) 1 SPECIAL AGENT '---__,- And you conveyed that 2 to him that you wanted him to start going?
~
3 l(b)(?)(C) No, I di d not. I was nol (b)(?)(C) 4 aware that he was not going . It was who brought 5 it up I think the day before the blowup was that, you 6 know, hey, I need you to start going to the 6 :30 7 supervisor meetings. Because, again, talking to (b)(?)(C) 8 and !(b)(?)(C) L what was happening - - I guess I should 9 back up a little bit. 10 All right. Again, since we're on a fixed 11 price project, we only have a certain amount of 12 technicians or whatever . 13 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) l Right . 14 !(b_ ci_ _ _ ____,!: So ,
... )(?)_(_ on a day- to - day job
. l(b)(7)(C) I 15 tasking, _ trnight need three technicians for doing 16 his trench work, and ..._ __
(b)(7)(C) _, might need two or three
- l. 7 technicians for doing something at building.
(b)(7)(C) 18 SPECIAL AGENT : Right . 19 l(b)(7)(C)
~--------Jf And at the time Bert might 20 need one or two technicians to survey materials and 21 equipment, or some t hing like that. So, that's the time 22 to kind of go hey, I need somebody from your crew or 23 whatever.
(b)(?)(C) 24 SPECIAL AGENT : Right. 25 l~--------~I= So, (b)(?)(C) the supervisors were NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORT ERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE ., N.W . (202) 234-4433 WASH INGTON, D .C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
55 1 having their planning done and saying we l l, I've got 2 my crews and everything. Then they'd send people off 3 to start their jobs, and then Bert would like send an 4 email like at 8:00 saying well, I need two of your 5 technicians for doing something for base wide . So, 6 that was becoming a problem because you can't just-- 7 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) ~ Yes, it was throwing 8 things off. 9 l~-~~~~~~~~I: (b)(7)(C) Right, because we already 10 had a meeting to plan stuff, and now you're saying I 11 can't do whatever we were going to do. So, that's what 12 led to that. Like I said, i t wasn't something I had 13 ever asked like, you know, are you going to these 14 meetings? Because I just assumed 15 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Assumed that he was. 7
~l(b-)(_ )_
(c_i~~~~~~I= I assumed that he was. I 16 17 mean, it's a p rudent thing to do. He's a supervisor 18 also . 19 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : And nobody else from 20 Tetra Tech management had said hey, you know, Bert is 21 not - - sending emails today, we need - - maybe he 22 should come to meetings to talk to him? 23 l--~~~~~~~~=I (b)(7)(C) No, no o y b d no. I wish 24 that something more direct like that -- I mean, people 25 had like said some things like well, Bert is not NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
56 1 involved or whatever, but it's not like they were 2 looking to get him involved, you know, to a certain 3 extent . 4 SPECIAL AGENT . l(b)(7)(C) When you guys 5 switched from a cost - reimbursable to a fixed cost, did 6 chat subsequently result in Bert losing some money? 7 Was he no longer getting as many hours? 8 .... l'b-)(7-)(C_) _ _ _ _ ___JI: Well, from what I 9 understand, initially Bert was going to go back I 10 think maybe from 50 hours a week to 45. SPECIAL AGENT . l(b)(7)(C) I.: Right. 11 12 l(b)(7)(C)
~.~~~~~~~~=
I Which is stil l overcime, 13 but then I guess - - I think that it worked out that as 14 long as Bert took a certain number of weeks of 15 vacation that it was still going to be pretty close to 16 whatever he was doi ng before. (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ __,: Did it -- was there 18 any inference that he began to make mountains out of 19 molehills and so forth after this happened with the 20 contract and his hours getting cut? Was there any 21 correlation to that? 22 l (b)(7)(C)
~.~~~~~~~~=
I Well, I mean, in that - - I 23 mean, to me it kind of seems like from Bert 's own 24 testimony I. when l(b)(7)(C) said hey, I'm going to have to cut 25 your hours that i t seems to me that Bert went out on NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
57 1 a drive down almost intent on finding something to 2 say-- 3 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : This is why I need to 4 be here for the other hours. 5 ~b_H_7)_ (c_)-------------~ Exactly. So, if I weren't 6 here, we would have been in this big problem. So, 7 that's why I need to do this . And, again, I think one 8 of the things that's a little frustrating to me, there 9 are ways that this could have been worked out . He 10 still could have done a drive down. He still could 11 have gone to the 6: 30 meeting and had a slightly 12 shortened drive down or something like that. 13 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Right. 14 l~-----------------1I So, (b)(7)(C) there are ways around 15 this, so I don't know, it's a little frustrating to 16 me . (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT : So, was that how he 18 got out of the morning meetings by saying that I need 19 to start later so that I can do the drive downs and 20 not exceed the hours? l(b)(7)(C) Yes. See, I don't know that 21 22 anything was ever verbalized or discussed with 23 anybody, but I -- you know, I think that's probably 24 what he thought in his mind . And, again, that's just 25 me taking a guess. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 wwW.nealrgross.com
58 1 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Do you believe that 2 he was - - at any point he became a target for the 3 construction personnel and so forth on site, and other 4 even HPRP folks once he began to bring those issues 5 up, what he thought were big issues? Did he kind of 6 become a target at that point? 7 l(b)(7J(C) I: No . He again, he worked 8 there for New World Technology for a long time before 9 that, and from what I understand he was essentially 10 the Human Resources guy, so he was in charge of hiring 11 and firing people. (b)(7)(C) 12 SPECIAL AGENT .__ __.: Right. 13 "- °-)(7)
- (-C)_ _ _ _ ___,!: So' there was a lot of bad 14 blood from that, so I don't know that -- I mean, a lot 15 of these technicians had been working there for a good 16 many years, so there are some issues from I guess he 17 kept files on people on what they were doing after 18 hours, like whether they were drinking or some thing 19 like that, so there was that kind of tension.
SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) Okay. A couple of 20 21 closing comments. Actually, Mr. Murphy, do you have 22 anything? 23 MR. MURPHY: I just want to make sure that 24 we are going to provide you with what you wanted. And (b)(7)(C) 25 wen h as talking about - - NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.neafrgross.com
59 1 l (b)(7)(C) _.__~~~~~~~-' : Yes, I I have like it's a 2 one-page memo basi cally saying I looked at, you know, 3 things, the email records, and the survey records that 4 that part icular work area had been down posted. So, I 5 can get you a copy of that. 6 MR. MURPHY: I just wanted to make sure we 7 had that nailed down . (b)(7)(C) 8 SPECIAL AGENT ,__~~ Okay. Yes, you guys 9 can coordinate and then you can get that over to me 10 electronically or hard mail, either way. 11 MR. MURPHY: The only other thing that I 7 12 think is relevant, if I might, is that _l(b-)(- )-(C_l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 13 was involved in a drive around the job s i te with Mr . 14 Bowers following when he went out to Hunters Point . 15 l(bJ(l)(C)
~.~~~~~~~~ :
I y es, ac t ua 11 y, there ' s a 16 couple of things. If you don't mind me kind of 17 explaining. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) No, let's discuss 18 19 those things. 20 l~-~~~~~~~-'fI (b)(7)(C) When I initially went out, 21 because I think this incident happened maybe on a 22 Thursday, and I flew out Sunday to go and investigate 23 it. You know, after that initial looking at the area 24 and saying like well, you know, I've got to go check 25 the records but it looks kind of odd . I don't see any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISIJ\ND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
60 1 postings, and he kind of said okay, well, you could 2 see where I'd be confused. At that point, you know, I 3 said can you go and write down your recollection of 4 events and everything, because that's important 5 because I'm doing that to everybody . You know, l(:i)(?)(C) 6 got to do it, the supervisor' s got to do it and 7 everything . He said well, I don't feel comfortable 8 doing it here because I feel intimidated, so can I go 9 home. I said okay , you know, that's fine, whatever. 10 And it took him more than two days to go and finish 11 his events . And meanwhile, you know, he like refused 12 to come i n when I'm trying to go and investigate if 13 there's anything else going on. I asked h i m point 14 blank -- SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So, he stayed home 15 16 for the two days . 17 !(b_)(7)
.... _)_ _ _ ____,! =
_(c Yes. Well, he actually 18 stayed home for Monday, Tuesday, WednesdayJ and 19 Thursday he came in again for another hour, because I 20 said I'm trying to do an audit and I can't find the 21 TLD records. I can't find the inventory records, you 22 know. Help me out here. And then when he was there, I 23 said, you know, can you tell me any other issues, 24 because if there are, I've got to know about them, and 25 we've got to figure out what we've got to do. And he NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
61 1 said, you know, there aren't any other issues . I 2 wouldn't do that to you. 3 So, this is where it's a little bit 4 frustrating for me because at the one hand I'm 5 inferring that there's - - he's saying there's all 6 sorts of stuff that was brought up that somehow we 7 brushed under the rug, but I'm getting time to go and 8 actually have document on the record. And if for some 9 reason I didn't document stuff on the front end, let's 10 fix it now. And I kind of got resistance. 11 And in the audit, I mean, there were a 12 number of things that he wasn't doing that he could 13 have done better, too. (b)(7)(C) 14 SPECIAL AGENT Can we get a copy of 15 that audit, as well? 16 l.(b)(7)(C) I,.
- Yes. Sure.
SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(?)(C) !: Okay. Yesr Tim, L_J ~ 17 18 said that he could provide t hat, as well . So, I'll 19 look to get a copy of that audit from you all, also. 20 MR. MURPHY: And that's the self-audit in 21 which we - - in which you made the nine findings. 22 Correct, ~ ?
""'l (b...,
)(7 )(-C)- - - - - 1.
23 ~.~~~~~~~~f Right. Correct . 24 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) ~ Okay. So, the drive 25 down, you guys did the drive down together. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 2000~3701 www.nealrgross.com
62 I l (b)(7l(C) 1 ~-~~~~~~___.~ Well, yes . And this was 2 actually - - well, at that point since he had somewhere 3 else to go because he was going to go talk to a lawyer 4 or something, he couldn't do it that day. ~ - - - - - - ' l (b)(7)(CI 5 and I came out again I think the week after that 6 maybe, so we could talk to him. And, again, I'm still 7 trying to get the TLD records from him. And (b)(?)(C) and 8 I took him on a drive down of the site saying well, 9 you know, like point out all the things that are wrong 10 that we needed to fix. 11 SPECIAL AGENT r )(n(C) I= That you see, that 12 you talked about. 13 l...._ _ _ _ _ ___,I: (b)(7)(C) Right . And he - - we went on 14 the drive down and he pointed out things well, like 15 once I found this gate open like six years ago, or 16 once I found an unlocked generator over here. So, I 17 mean, he brought up -- he gave us a history of what he 18 had found in the past, but none of those items was i t 19 something that well, somebody was blatantly on purpose 20 1 ike not doing something, or we had prevented somebody 21 from doing a safe thing. It was. just that sometimes 22 people - - you know, when you' re there for eight years, 23 somebody forgets to go and lock something, or they 24 don't verify they locked it, or whatever. So , there 25 wasn't anything that he could point out that was -- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, 0.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.oom
63 1 that we're not doing right. 2 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l){C) !: Was there any 3 documentation of that drive down after you guys 4 completed it? Did you write something up, or notes 5 taken -- I 6 l (b)(7)(C)
~----------' :No . No, we didn't. I mean, 7 I did at the time like a scrap paper kind of thing, 8 but not anything I held on to.
9 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Do you know if (b)(?)(C) (b)(7)(C) 10 ._ _ ___, had taken any special notes or anything after the 11 drive down? 12 !._ (b_){7) _(_c)_ _ _ _ _ _,l: I don' t think he did 13 either. I mean, he was driving . (b)(7)(C) 14 SPECIAL AGENT Oh. 15 l__ ________,I: (b)(7)(C) And I think this was 16 actually on a -- we were on the way to lunch together, 17 I think, so again it wasn't -- (b)(7J(C) 18 SPECIAL AGENT How long did that 19 drive down last? 20 l~ - - - - - - - - ~:I I (b)(7){C) want to say a half hour, 21 45 minutes. (b)(7)(C) 22 SPECIAL AGENT Okay. L I mean, we pretty much l....________,f {b){7)(C) 23 24 drove -- 25 SPECIAL AGENT l{b)(7)(C) I = The entire -- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 200~701 www.nealrgross.com
64 1 l(b)(7)(C) I
~-~~~~~~___,= Yes, the entire site . And, 2 again, we're just trying to find to what extent are 3 the problems that we have to go and fix. And, again, 4 it wasn't anything that hey, at this time something is s wrong. It's 1 ike I found these things in the past .
6 And, again, those things will be found . 7 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) And all the past 8 things could you - - were you able to go back and 9 attach that to a report or some form of documentation 10 from his previous reportings? 11 l(b)(l)(C) I: No, because again a lot of 12 them happened when he was with New World and 13 everything. I don't even know if (b)(7)(C) 14 SPECIAL AGENT You weren't there. 15 Okay . 16 I: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(CJ Okay. Anything else, 17 18 Mr . Murphy? 19 MR. MURPHY: That's it. 20 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. A couple of
'-------I 21 closing questions. Have I threatened you in any manner 22 in exchange for your testimony?
23 ~'
' b-)(-7)-(C_) ~~~~~.....JI: No.
24 SPECIAL AGENTl(b)(7)(C) Have I offered you 25 any reward in exchange for your testimony? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
65 1 _l (b_H_ n (_C_
) ________ __.I= No.
2 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) !: Has i t been given 3 freely and voluntarily? 4 l--~~~~~~~~=I Yes . (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT Okay. The time is 6 currently 3:47 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. This 7 interview is concluded. 8 MR. MURPHY : Perhaps you might say -- I 9 don't believe that you covered the ability at some 10 point for the witness perhaps to review a transcript 11 of what he said? (b)(7)(C) 12 SPECIAL AGENT : Okay . Actually, we're 13 going to remain on the record. Mr. Murphy has 14 identified covering the witness' ability to review his ]5
- j(b)(7)(C) I transcript. -~~~~~~~~' we do make available the 16 opportunity to review the transcript. At the 17 conclusion of our investigative activities there will 18 be an opportunity for you to do that. You'll have an 19 opportunity to come out and proctor, it will probably 20 be multiple individuals, witnesses being able to look 21 over their transcript at one time, or there's also, 22 obviously, after-the-fact, the Freedom of Information 23 Act request . But we have obliged ourselves to make it 24 available, your transcript, upon completion of our 25 activities.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
66 I 1 l (b)(l)(C)
--~~~~~~~: Okay.
2 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)r)(c) !: Okay. Good to go? 3 MR. MURPHY: Yes. 4 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Mr. Murphy? 5 MR . MURPHY: Yes . 6 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) : You' re okay? 7 MR. MURPHY : I'm fine . 8 SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ (b)(l)(C)____, : Okay . All right . The 9 time is now 3:49 p.m. The interview is concluded . 10 ( INTERVIEW CONCLUDED . ) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in t he matter of : Name of Proceeding: Interview o f l(b}(7)(C) Dock et Number: 1-2012-002 Location : [" were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and, thereafter reduced to typewritin g by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the c.ranscript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings as recorded on tape(s) provided by the NRC . (b)(7)(C) 1ranscriber Neal R. r oss & Co. , Inc. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
EXHIBIT 13 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 13
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + + 4 OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS 5 INTERVIEW 6 ------------------- -- --- - -----x 7 IN THE MATTER OF: 8 INTERVIEW OF
- OI Case No .
9 SUSAN VIRGINIA ANDREWS 1-2012 -002 10 (CLOSED) 11 --------- - ------- ---- ----- - ---x 12 Wednesday, October 26, 2011 13 14 Susan Andrew's Residence 15 16 17 18 The above-entitled interview was cor:ducted 19 at 7:28 p.m. Pacific Standard Time. 20 BEFORE: (b)(7)(C) 21 22 Special Agent . l 23 24 EXHIBIT I :> q PAGE_L OF __ QPt* nFI(F-} NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~701 www.nealrgross.com
2 1 P-R-0-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 7:28 p.m . (b)(7)(C) 3 SPEC . AGENT Today's date is 4 Wednesday, October 26, 2011; the time is currently 5 7: 28 p . rn. Pacific Standard Time. For the record, this 6 is an interview of Susan Virginia Andrews, who is 7 currently employed with AWS, a subcontractor to Tetra 8 Tech, at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in San 9 Francisco, California. The location of this interview (b)(?)(C) 10 is the residence of Ms. Andrews, at 11 that's l-----------' (b)(7)(C) separate word, (b)(7)(C) 12 r. _)(-7)-(C_) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .JI . I am (b)(?)(C) a 13 special agent with the Office of Investigations, U.S. 14 Nuclear Regulatory commission, Region I Field Office 15 in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. 16 The content of our interview this evening 17 is to discuss allegations and claims made by former 18 RSO, Radiation Safety Officer at Hunters Point, Mr. 19 Bert Bowers, who has made claims of discrimination 20 against Tetra Tech based upon his raising safety 21 concerns, and subsequently being furloughed or 22 terminated from employment. This involves OI case 23 number 1-2012-002 . Ms . Andrews, I must first inform 24 you that the NRC strictly prohibits the recording of 25 this interview by any parties other than the NRC or NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
3 1 its designee . Having said that, are you recording or 2 transmitting this interview in any way? 3 MS. ANDREWS: No. 4 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= Please raise your 5 right hand . Do you swear that the testimony you are 6 about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and 7 nothing but the truth, so help you God? 8 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, I do. 9 SPEC . AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= Thank you . Please 10 state your full name for the record, and spell your 11 last name. 12 MS. ANDREWS: Susan Andrews, A-N-D-R -E-W-13 s. 14 SPEC . AGENT .__ __ (b)(7)(C) _. Okay, and you are 15 currently employed as a Senior HP, health physicist 16 with AWS? 17 MS. ANDREWS: Yes . 18 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l )(C) How 1 ong have you been 19 in that position? 20 MS . ANDREWS: I've been at Hunters Point 21 for six years, plus a couple of months. (b)(7)(C) 22 SPEC. AGENT Okay, and where were 23 you before that? 24 MS. ANDREWS: I worked at Neil stone 25 (phonetic) Nuclear, HP, or no, I was a junior HP at NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
4 l the Neilstone Nuclear Power Plant. I was at Gonay 2 (phonetic) before that--boy, you're going back some 3 time. 4 SPEC. AGENT l(b){7)(C) ~ Okay. 5 MS. ANDREWS: So I work refueling. (b)(7)(C) 6 SPEC. AGENT Okay. 7 MS. ANDREWS: And before that, I worked 8 nine months at Oak Ridge for BNFL, and then just power 9 plants. 7 10 SPEC . AGENT (b)( )(C) How much time do you 11 have in the nuclear industry all together? 12 MS. ANDREWS: Nine years plus . 13 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) And what kind of 14 training have you received and qualifications to get 15 you to the point to be a Senior HP? 16 MS . ANDREWS : I just kind of was a 17 laborer, and started in two nuclear plants, and 18 somebody said I should call Bartlett. SPEC . AGENT (b)(7)(C) Okay. 19 20 MS. ANDREWS: And so they put me on as a 21 junior deconner, and I took the RAD test that they 22 give, and their tra.ining at Peach Bottom and- - a 23 nuclear power plant there; you're probably familiar 24 with that. Okay. And from there, I just--they just 25 kept employing me until they sent me to Oak Ridge on NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
5 1 a junior job, and then from there on, my next two jobs 2 at Gonay and Neilstone were Junior HP jobs, and then 3 I was hired out here at Hunters Point Shipyard. 7 4 SPEC. AGENT (b)( )(C) Okay . And you were 5 hired here as a Senior? 6 MS. ANDREWS: No . 7 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) You were hired as a 8 Junior? 9 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. 10 SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay, you became a 11 Senior while you were out at - -what did you have to do 12 to transition from a Junior to a Senior? Or 13 (inaudible 4:28)? 14 MS . ANDREWS: Well, they have RAD tests 15 they give every year, and I only worked a couple of 16 months as a Junior, and I got--! think it was only one 17 month--and I got into the lab for New World, and I've 18 worked in there for four years. And they were 19 downsizing, and somebody from the lab, they needed to 20 downsize one employee out of the lab, so they asked if 21 anybody wanted to go to the field, and they told me 22 what I'd be doing in the field was basically kind of 23 what I did in the lab, paperwork and stuff, and that's 24 what they still needed done, but they needed somebody 25 to move out of the lab. So I said okay, I'll do it . NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
6 1 And--but at the same pay, and the lab pay was 2 identical to Senior pay. (b)(7)(C) 3 SPEC. AGENT
--- Okay .
4 MS. ANDREWS: So, but when they moved me 5 out, they titled me a Senior. And I've been out there 6 in the field over two years now . 7 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. That's two 8 years. And you arrived here in 2006 at Hunters Point? 9 MS. ANDREWS: 2005. Yes, June 28th . (b)(7)(C) 10 SPEC. AGENT Now, when you came 11 out, i t was--you came out as a New World employee, 12 correct? 13 MS . ANDREWS: Yes. 14 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. 15 MS. ANDREWS: As a Junior. No barking. (b)(7)(C) Hi SPEC. AGENT He wants to be on the 17 record. 18 MS. ANDREWS: Well we have another puppy 19 next door, and she probably senses her when I don't 20 sense. 21 SPEC. AGENT . l (b)(7)(C) I: So you came out as a 22 Junior? 23 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b){7)(C) 24 SPEC. AGENT With New World; New 25 World was taking--was New World--well, from my NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2~701 www.nealrgross.com
7 l understanding of it, New World was then-- 2 MS. ANDREWS: They had the license. (b)(7)(C) 3 SPEC . AGENT - - they had the 4 license, and then Tetra Tech got their own license, 5 and New World, the New World employees were either 6 brought on . or they left at that point; is that 7 correct? 8 MS . ANDREWS: Yes, they were all offered 9 a job . (b)(7)(C) 10 SPEC. AGENT When did that license 11 switch happen? Last- - 12 MS. ANDREWS: Last year. (b)(7)(C) 13 SPEC. AGENT - -last year? 14 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) 15 SPEC . AGENT 2010? 16 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) 17 SPEC. AGENT Okay. Let's go--okay, 18 I got a little bit about your background. What --tell 19 me what are your responsibilities as a Senior HP? 20 MS. ANDREWS: Mine, I'm down at the site, 21 so I do incoming and outgoing surveys on al 1 the 22 equipment or, you know, thing that comes in or leaves 23 the site. I can--I man a gate if I need to make sure 24 an RCA or RMA is controlled . I do weekl y, monthly, \, quarterly routine surveys of buildings and walk-25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
8 1 arounds, make sure nothing comes out of the 2 perimeters. I do a lot of paperwork f o r them, and I 3 do job coverage for outside contractors. When they 4 come in, I ' 11 fol low them around and make sure they go 5 in the RAD, that they've had their RAD orientation, 6 and ass i gned on an RWP and that they are all fitted 7 out and- - 8 SPEC . AGENT ~ L___J : RWP being a 9 radiological work permit? 10 MS. ANDREWS: Yes . 11 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. 12 MS. ANDREWS: Oh, I'm sorry. 13 SPEC. AGENT l(b}(7)(C) !: That's okay. 14 MS. ANDREWS: And get them into a n area 15 and get them out of the area safely. 16 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ~ Okay. 17 MS. ANDREWS: You know, that they don't 18 bring any contamination out with them. 19 SPEC . AGENT !(b)(l )(C) ~ So are all employees, 20 contractors, employees, everybody, when they come on 21 site there at Hunters Point, is everybody given an 22 orientation relative to HP practices and principles 23 and is everybody notified of their responsibilities in 24 terms of how they conduc t themselves in the facility, 25 in and around the facility-- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com
9 l MS. ANDREWS: Yes. 2 SPEC. AGENT _ l(b)(7)(C)
- -regarding HP 3 practices?
4 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, if they're going near 5 a RAD area, oh yes, they all have to go throug h RAD 6 orientation. (b)(7)(C) 7 SPEC. AGENT ..._~~ Do they have a test, 8 is there an examination associated with i t at the end, 9 the conclusion of the orientation? 10 MS. ANDREWS: I don't know. 11 SPEC. AGENT !(b)(7)(C) ! Okay, so you just know 12 they have to take the--how long is that training? 13 MS. ANDREWS: Depends on who's giving it 14 and if they're long-winded or if they've got a busy 15 day, maybe an hour. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay, an hour . Is 16 17 that sufficient? In your opinion? 18 MS. ANDREWS: Well a lot of people were 19 re -quals, you know what I-- SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) Re-quals? 20 21 MS . ANDREWS: Yes. 22 SPEC. AGENT D: They've done i t before 23 somewhere else? 24 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, well they've been on 25 our site before. Like-- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N .W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 wWW.nealrgross.com
10 l SPEC . AGENT ~ : Okay. 2 MS. ANDREWS: - -like Kleinfelder' s 3 (phonetic) coming in, and a lot of people have been 4 there, but t hey have to be refreshed . (b)(7)(C) 5 SPEC . AGENT Is Kleinfelder a 6 contractor? 7 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. Yes. So they'll all 8 come in and be refreshed on it , so. Uh-huh. (b)(7)(C) 9 SPEC. AGENT Okay. Who do you 10 report to now? 11 MS . ANDREWS: l(b)(7)(C) 1. 12 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ~ Okay, and what i s his 13 position? 14 MS. ANDREWS: He's in charge Of .l '.b)(7)(C) I 15 (b-)(7_)(_c)_ _ _
'-! __,l and he's also the!(b)(?)(C) 1.
r::-l (b':"':'
)(7:::"':
)(~ C).::::==::;1--;:l (b=)(7)::(=C)= = = ~ -
16 And then he fills in for _______~when _______~ 17 gone, and he' s t he (b)(?)(C) * (b)(7)(C) l 18 19 l(b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT r That's . 20 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. 21 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(l)(C) ~ Okay. 22 MS. ANDREWS: He also ~l
'b-)(-7)-( c_i _ _ _ _ _ ~
23 (b)(7)(C) l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-;::::::=!........ I down there, too . (b)(7)(C) 24 SPEC . AGENT Okay. Power grading 25 and-- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~?01 www.nealrgross.com
ll l MS. ANDREWS: Yes, he sees that it's done 2 right. Yes, he watches that. (b){7)(C) 3 SPEC. AGENT Okay, did anybody-- 4 MS. ANDREWS : He's got a lot of hats. (b)(7)(C) 5 SPEC. AGENT --did anyone, do you 6 have any report--employees that report to you? 7 MS
- ANDREWS : No .
(b)(7)(C) 8 SPEC. AGENT ,._~__, Okay. What are the 9 policies and procedures, if there is a piece of 10 legislation so to speak, that you guys at Tetra Tech 11 are guided by? What's the bible for you, so to speak? 12 Is it--is it a Naval, is it Navy documents, i s it t he 13 NRC license, what is kind of the governing document 14 for you? 15 MS. ANDREWS: The NRC license . 16 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) It's the NRC license? 17 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. 18 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay . Do you know 19 what that license specifies in terms of what--have you 20 ever viewed the license or looked at it from a content 21 perspective in terms of your job , and where it. fits in 22 the license? 23 MS. ANDREWS: The CFR-20 you're talking 24 about? (b)(7)(C) 25 SPEC. AGENT Well, the license NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neairgross.com
12 1 itself is aligned with--I'll say that the license and 2 the CFRs are aligned, so do you know what, from a 3 radiation perspective, what does the license say about 4 how you are to respond to things from an RP 5 perspective, and an HP perspective? Does the license 6 say that you are insure that all persons and equipment 7 are scanned or surveyed? Is there anything in 8 particular in that license from a documenta t ion 9 perspective that ties you to- - what ties you t o i t? 10 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. 11 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. And what does 12 it--what is your requirement by the license? Is it to 13 insure that everything's safe, is it to - -kind of give 14 me a rundown of what--from your knowledge -- 15 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, we ' re to keep the RAD 16 contained in a safe environment so that it doesn't 17 spread out to the community . Is that what you're-- 18 SPEC . AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ~ Right. Well yes, I 19 just wanted to get--and does the license tell you guys 20 how you' re supposed to do that, or is there some other 21 policy that--company policy that says you're supposed 22 to do it by keeping things under lock and key, by 23 having surveys done once a day , or whatever the rules 24 are? 25 MS . ANDREWS : No, that--it sets the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
13 l guidelines for everything, and then procedures come 2 out of those guidelines pertaining to the site. 3 SPEC . AGENT (b)(J)(C) Okay. And those 4 procedures are Tetra Tech company procedures? 5 MS . ANDREWS: Yes. 6 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l )(C) : Okay. That's what I 7 wanted to know . 8 MS. ANDREWS: Okay. Okay. 9 SPEC. AGENT ~ : That's what I was 10 getting at. I didn't mean to ask you in a too 11 convoluted manner. 12 MS
- ANDREWS : No I I Just didn, t know. No' 13 y o u're fine; I just--sometimes I don't know where 14 people are coming at.
15 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) !: What was the safety 16 culture at Tetra Tech? What's the safety--well what 17 is the--(inaudible 13:14) what's the safety culture 18 like? Is it heavily promoted, is it encouraged, is it 19 one of those things that it's put on paper, but nobody 20 really means what they say? 21 MS . ANDREWS : Yes, you got it. 22 SPEC . AGENT (b)(J)(C) So, it' s something 23 that-- 24 MS . ANDREWS: Yes, we have a lot of-- AGENT (b)(J)(C)
--it's formally 25 SPEC.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. {202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20~3701 www.nealrgross.com
14 1 required-- 2 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) 3 SPEC. AGENT --but it's not really 4 5 MS. ANDREWS: But as soon as you're over 6 with the 7:00 meeting in the morning, where they do 7 the safety briefing, then it's push, push, push . You 8 knowr don 1 t speed, don't speed, but hurry, hurry, 9 hurry. 10 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) l When you say- - 11 MS . ANDREWS: You better be-- 12 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) - -when you say speed- - 13 MS. ANDREWS: We have a speed limit. We 14 have a speed limit on site, just a little tiny thing , 15 you know . 16 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) Speed limit in terms 17 of your work or driving a car? 18 MS . ANDREWS : Driving a car. Just a speed 19 limit, like you' re used to. And then it I s all at once 20 hurry up up here. Hurry down here. Hurry, you know, 21 and it's like-- 22 SPEC. AGENT ~ : Why is there such a 23 push for everything? 24 MS . ANDREWS : There shouldn't be, but 25 there is. They want to get the job pushed faster and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
15 1 faster, and sometimes people in such a hurry to 2 please, we're trying to please them so much, that we 3 hurry. They have accidents and- - 4 SPEC . AGENT l(b)(l)(C) L Okay- - 5 MS. ANDREWS: Okay, the other day. You' re 6 never supposed to drive a JLG without somebody in 7 front of you guiding you. 8 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) What's a JLG? 9 MS. ANDREWS: A man lift. 10 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l )(C) : Okay . 11 MS. ANDREWS: Okay, and -- 12 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) !: Wi t hout a spot;ter? 13 MS. ANDREWS: Right. 14 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Right. 15 MS. ANDREWS: And they wanted it hurr i edly 16 to get t o the other end of the site. So nobody was 17 available; everybody else had something else to do -- .18 SPEC. AGENT El= Somebody was driving 19 i t with no spotter. 20 MS. ANDREWS: So they just--yes. So they 21 just drove across site without a spotter, and we're 22 like okay . (b)(7)(C) 23 SPEC. AGENT That's- -that's 24 problematic. Okay. Yes, that's bad. So there's a 25 push to get things done fast; is that by the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
16 1 construction--is that construction folks, is that the 2 HP leadership -- 3 MS. ANDREWS: That's not the HPs . 4 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) It's not the HPs? 5 MS. ANDREWS: We're all complaining about 6 it . 7 SPEC. AGENT .__ __... (b)(7)(C) Okay, so it ' s the 8 construction people which, from a practical 9 standpoint, many of which haven' t worked in the 10 nuclear industry, they' re construction people; they ' re 11 not - - 12 MS. ANDREWS: Right, yes . (b)(7)(C) 13 SPEC . AGENT --they're not nuc l ear 14 f o lks or industry personnel, so they just see getting 15 a ditch dug as quick as possible, and moving on, or 16 whatever the construction project is? Okay . 17 MS. ANDREWS: Now you' 11 have the younger , 18 the younger HPs are in there, that this is the onl y 19 place maybe they've ever worked. 20 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) !: So they don ' t know any 21 better? 22 MS . ANDREWS: Right, this is the only 23 culture they know, so they' re in a hurry mode of hurry 24 and scan, hurry get out, you know, hurry , hurry, you 25 know, it's lunchtime, let's go. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
17 1 SPEC. AGENT .__ __ (b)(7)(C)
...., Okay.
2 MS. ANDREWS: Just like the other day, I 3 was sitting and watching them work down a thing, and 4 was waiting on something, and I had to stop and pull 5 off the side of the road, and here comes !!b)(7)(C) 6 l(b)(7)(C)
! out of his area, and the tech is--the tech 7 never even frisked him out, because you just don't do 8 that to .__ __
(b)(7)(C) ___. because he's just corning along, and 9 you don't need to frisk him. Okay, so the radiation 10 he didn't (inaudible 16:13), and that just was a 11 previously contaminated area. But now the kid frisked 12 everybody else out, the other--the laborers that come 13 along later, and I sat there for a good while. You (b)(7)(C) know, they all stopped, but was talk ing, and he 15 just kept on walking out. And the guy intimidates 1.6 people that you're not going to say hey, you know, 17 come back here until I frisk you. You just not-- 18 you're just beat up by him, that's all. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) And he was corning out 19 20 of a contaminated area? 21 MS. ANDREWS: An RCA/RMA that--they had 22 just knocked a hood down; he was working too fast or 23 something, you probably can figure it out . I was in 24 the office, I just heard the radio transmissions, and 25 a hood that comes out of that glass building I pointed NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
18 1 at down there, and a lot of stuff come out, and it 2 was--they got it all supposedly cleaned up. But that 3 had just happened, and right along there, they' re 4 digging up that asphalt, and underneath that asphalt, 5 according to the history of the site, it's pretty well 6 polluted with whatever they put out there, so it's got 7 to be taken up easy. So al 1 they were doing was 8 digging up the asphalt, and for some reason, they tore 9 down, knocked down this hood. And so that whole area, 10 it flies, you know, it doesn't j ust like l and r i ght 11 where it's supposed to. So you know, you've got to be 12 careful coming out of the re . (b)(7)(C) 13 SPEC. AGENT .....__ __. And he--and at that 14
. l(b)(7)(C) I point, ~-~~~~~~~~ was not frisked; he didn't scan, 15 he--nothing?
16 MS . ANDREWS: No. No. It was- - 17 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) No, he d i dn' t--no hand 18 and foot device? 19 MS. ANDREWS: No . No. 20 SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) Nothing? 21 MS. ANDREWS: Huh- uh . 22 SPEC. AGENT ....._ _ (b)(7)(C) __,, So he could have been 23 hot for all intents and purposes when he left -- 24 MS . ANDREWS : Yes . He could have tracked 25 it right out o nto the--I mean, that's the idea of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W, {202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
19 1 having RAD control there. 2 SPEC . AGENTl(b)(l )(C) ~ Right. Who was the 3 RAD tech? l (b)(7)(C) 4 MS . ANDREWS : . And I think 5 he's a ~ r~ _&_c_>_ ___.I or he came in as a (inaudible 10:14 > , 6 well I don' t know what people get paid, you know, but 7 they tell us when they're promoted; it's none of your 8 business, you know. But he came in as a {inaudible 9 18: 22). (b)(7)(C) 10 SPEC. AGENT _
...._ __, (Inaudible 18:23)?
11 MS. ANDREWS: I t's, they get on the back 12 of a, like a lawnmover thing, you know, riding 13 lawnmower, and they have the detectors all down and 14 they come across the ground, and they drive a little 15 pack on a pad, and the 2350, you know, scan that whole 16 area. So thatis why he came in, to run one of those, X) 17 but now he's working a gate, and he might be a 18 I don't know what he is. He might be a bX xC> or all 19 I know. I don't know what they--how or when people-- (b){7)(C) 20 SPEC. AGENT And you said you heard 21 all this over radio traffic? 22 MS. ANDREWS: No, I sat there and watched 23 that. (b)(7)(C) 24 SPEC. AGENT Oh, you watched it? (b)(7)(C) 25 MS. ANDREWS: I watched walk out . NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
20 1 I couldn't believe it. 2 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: And what day was this? 3 MS. ANDREWS: Well , let me look. Last 4 week . 5 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) As best you can 6 remember. 7 MS. ANDREWS: Las t week; it wasn't this 8 week, it was this last week. I mean as long as l sat 9 there for waiting on-- 10 SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) Day, was this during 11 day shift? 12 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. Oh yes. 13 SPEC. AGENT E]: Okay. Okay. I'll 14 move on. I just needed to get all those details, 15 because I have to take this information back with me. 16 Okay . Did Tetra Tech provide training to employees on 17 how to report safety concerns, safety r elated issues? 18 Was there a training wherein they had someone say hey, 19 if you want to report a safety issue, you're not 20 comfortable with something, you can write a condition 21 report; you can annotate it in the database; you can 22 call this person; you can leave an anonymous note in 23 a box; whatever the mechanisms were, were you all 24 trained on how to report safety issues? 25 MS. ANDREWS: I don't know if you call it NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
21 1 trained; I know in the morning meeting, they bring it 2 up that if we have any issues, there's an 800 number 3 you can call. (b)(7)(C) 4 SPEC. AGENT So there's a platform? 5 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) And they put it out 6 7 there? 8 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, and then the other day 9 a while back, l(b)(7)(C) Icomes out to a meeting; 10 somebody made that 800 phone call, and he came out and 11 said "I'd appreciate it if you come. talk to me first, 12 and here's my cards. 11 And he handed out his card, 13 told everybody to call him instead of calling the BOO 14 number. Well, I tell you what, I got a feeling i t was 15 the laborers, because I kind of heard some 16 scuttl ebutt. but these people have been trying to 17 talk. They won't listen, so you've got to take it up 18 a notch. (b)(7)(C) 19 SPEC. AGENT : Okay. 20 MS. ANDREWS: Would you like a thing of 21 water? 22 SPEC . AGENT!(b)(?)(C) L No, I'm fine . Thank 23 you. Okay. Are you ,aware of Bert Bowers, former RSC, 24 raising safety concerns to management? 25 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, whenever there was a NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGT ON. O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
22 1 concern he, you know, because I'd go to hirn-- (b)(7)(C) 2 SPEC. AGENT Were they safety-3 related? 4 MS . ANDREWS: Safety? 5 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(l)(C) I= Right. Were they 6 nuclear safety issues or were they general complaints 7 about just things that may not have had a safety 8 significance? 9 MS. ANDREWS: No, Bert- - 10 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(l)(C) I*. They were safety 11 issues? 12 MS. ANDREWS: Bert- - yes. 13 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(l)(C) !: Okay And did you 14 witness him go to management? Did you ever witness 15 him go l (b)(l)(C) I to ________, or anyone in the leadership 16 regarding his safety issues? 17 MS. ANDREWS: I never saw him go to h i m, 18 but I know that if I had a concern about something, 19 Bert would figure it out and come back, and i t was 20 pretty well resolved. 21 SPEC. AGENT .__ __ (b)(7)(C) _, Did you ever see any 22 condition reports written by Bert on certain safety 23 related issues, or issues that you felt were safety-24 related issues? Did you have access or opportunity to 25 view any CRs? Do you guys write condition reports NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
23 1 here? Discrepancy reports? Maybe you call them-- 2 MS. ANDREWS: No, I don't- - no I wouldn't 3 see something written against somebody like that. SPEC
- AGENT (b)(l )(C) Right. Well, if it's 4
5 a general, not necessarily pointing any one person out 6 or throwing anyone under the bus, but a safety concern 7 that, you know, was very - - 8 MS. ANDREWS: Like lessons learned? 9 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(l)(C) I= Okay, is that what you 10 guys call it here? Lessons learned? 11 MS. ANDREWS: I would call it that. (b)(7)(C) 12 SPEC. AGENT Is that a database 13 that everybody has access to? 14 MS. ANDREWS: No, but when we would have 15 our yearly training with Bert, Bert would bring up 16 issues of past t hings- - 17 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) That came up . 18 MS. ANDREWS: - -yes, and he'd go like we 19 don' t do it that way, everybody understands, you know. 20 And he had the platform to speak, Bert did. 21 SPEC. AGENT l(b)r)(C) I: Did he ever tell you 22 directly that he reported saf ety concerns to 23 management? Did he come to you and say hey, you know, 24 I reported this or this, and it's being received in 25 whatever type of way? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
24 1 MS. ANDREWS: If I had a concern, I took 2 it to him, and he had to go to somebody higher up, he 3 would tell me he did, yes. (b)(7)(C) 4 SPEC. AGENT And did he ever tell 5 you that he took his own concerns to management on 6 whatever the issue was? 7 MS. ANDREWS: We were having a real rough 8 time with posting out there , and the guys not posting 9 after they were locking their gates up, and him and I 10 were just running all over trying to post this place 11 back up before we left at night for a period of time . 12 And I was kind of getting a little weary of it, and he 13 was definitely weary of it, and so he- - yes, he brought 14 it up to management; he came out to the 7:00 meeting 15 and tried to talk, please post your areas, you know, 16 we can't have this; if somebody walks on site, you 17 know, we're in violation, and-- (b)(7)(C) 18 SPEC. AGENT Is that how- - there 19 were issues that it was going on pretty regularl y, and 20 t hey were leaving doors unlocked, generators out-- 21 MS. ANDREWS : Yes. (b)(7)(C) 22 SPEC. AGENT -- without putting 23 equipment up-- 24 MS . ANDREWS : Yes. 25 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 2.3 4-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.neairgross.com
25 1 MS . ANDREWS: Yes.
~
2 SPEC. AGENT L____J: Okay. 3 MS. ANDREWS : Oh yes. And I even went to 4 the techs, trying to be polite and say hey, on my way 5 out, you know, I stopped, fixed your gate, locked your 6 gate, whatever- -you know, re-posted your gate; please 7 do this, you know, don't--and this--I hate t~ keep 8 bringing the poor kid's name up, b ut it was basically 9 .---------..J.Iarea . l.(b)(7)(C) l(b)(7)(C) I
-*_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___, area is - -you 10 have to watch that--him.
ll SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: Okay. 12 MS . ANDREWS: I just had to fix a p osting 13 a couple of weeks ago. I was like dumbfounded; I said 14 how did this all get messed up? And-- 15 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ~ Do you k now wh o in . 16 particular that Bert took his issues to? Did he go to 17 the same person al l the time? Who did he address his 18 concerns with? 19 MS. ANDREWS: Well, he would have taken it 20 up I to r_ _)(-?)-( c_, _ _ _ _ _...... once (b)(?)(C) was there. When Bert 21 was with New World, he would have taken it up the line 22 through New World. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPEC. AGENT So he never took it to 24 1...l (b-)(7)
- (C
_ )_ _---1~ 25 MS. ANDREWS : See, he was just kind of-- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
26 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPEC . AGENT He never took it-- 2 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, he'd go over and talk
~
3 toL_J . 4 SPEC. AGENT Okay . s MS . ANDREWS : You know, I thought they got 6 along pretty good. 7 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay . Did anyone from 8 management ever discuss with you the fact that Bert 9 raised safety issues? 10 MS . ANDREWS: No. ll SPEC . AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ~ Okay. Do you believe 12 that Bert was retaliated against for raising safety 13 issues? 14 MS . ANDREWS: Yes . 15 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Okay, now why do you 16 think that? 17 MS . ANDREWS: Well, we couldn't keep that 18 end of the area posted correctly , and all at once, 19 this was when chey were going- -and they would just-- 20 all at once, we'd be like why did you take those 21 postings down? The laborers would go they were told 22 to take the postings down. And when we told--why did 23 we survey it out? When was this released? You know, 24 so right there in that period of time was a real bad 25 time that things were getting moved around-- (inaudible NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
27
- 1. 26:41 ) site, we're supposed to de-post that and keep
, l(b)(7)(C) 2 track of the RCA/RMAs. That's my Job and .__ _ _ _ _ _...J 3 job to keep track of all this . They were moving 4 fences, doing everything; we' re going like what's 5 going on here? And we go to Bert and say what's going 6 on, or ... 7 l(b-)(- )(_c_) ________ ~I and what's going on, and okay, 7 just make the maps like they've moved it. It's okay, 8 it's okay Well, did somebody survey i t out? I don't 9 know those answers; I was just told to do my job. And 10 so -- but it was pretty bad out in that Parcel E area.
- 11. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) So this is al l going 12 on in Parcel E, is the--
13 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. 14 SPEC . AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: - -the primary area of 15 c oncern? 16 MS. ANDREWS : Yes, and now i t ' s C, because 17 l(b)(?)(C) tha t 's where '-*--------~ working now . I 18 SPEC. AGENT .___ _ ___. (b)(7)(C) It was Parcel E , and 19 now it's C. Okay. 20 MS. ANDREWS: See, you have kind of two 21 RAD supervisors out there in charge of the working 22 stuff like that. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPEC. AGENT And who's that? 24 MS . ANDREWS : ~l(b-)(-7)-(c_i ________ ~I and ... l'D_)r_i(_C_) __~ 25 ... ) _ ____.I* r _w_)(_C_ NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com
28 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPEC. AGENT Those are the two RAD? (b)(7)(C) 2 MS . ANDREWS : Yes, yes. And 3 l~*----_Jgroup (b)(7)(C) I is totally different-- SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) I 8 1
. t --- or (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) 4 5 MS. ANDREWS: ..1(-b)(-l)-(C_l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _....,jl I 6 think.
7 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l )(C) ... r _)(-7)-(C-) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___.h 8 MS. ANDREWS: Uh - huh. And his group move 9 right along, and he doesn't push them, he just works 10 them; he doesn't intimidate them, he talks to them 11 politely, and when you come up around their area, you 12 know daggone well it's all going to be posted right; 13 you're not going to have any issues; you're not goi ng 14 to see people not - -you' re not going t.o see anybody 15 come out of an area that hasn't been fri s)ced and 16 looked over and everything else upside down. You just 17 aren't. going to see that when you see his group I l (b)(l)(C) 18 working. But ~ * - - - - ~~ roup is--he's forward, he's 19 loud, he's push, push, push, do, do , do; and these 20 p e ople are j ust like--and-- (b)(7)(C) 21 SPEC. AGENT How many people work 22 for him? 23 MS . ANDREWS: RAD wise, he usually only 24 has maybe three RAD techs under him, but he watches 25 over the laborers, too. So he stands there and kind NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS ANO TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
29 l of directs the whole show. And ._ l(b)(7)(C) ________, does too, I 2 but he directs it, and everybody works calmly, safely; 3 I mean extremely organi zed . It's just night and day. (b)(7)(C) 4 SPEC. AGENT Okay. Do you know if s Bert took his concerns to any other entities outside 6 of Tetra Tech before everything went down, or before 7 things got bad, do you know if he went to the Navy or 8 if he went to anyone else to report- - 9 MS. ANDREWS : Before he got asked to 10 leave?
~
11 SPEC. AGENT 1._J: Yes, before-- 12 MS. ANDREWS: No, I would say that Bert (b)(7)(G) 13 only talked to his upline -- 14 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. 15 MS. ANDREWS: If he had a problem. I was 16 floored, they told me he was sick. I thought he was 17 sick for a couple of days. (b--
)(7-)(-G)- .
18 SPEC. AGENT Do you know what 19 management said was the reason for getting rid cf him? 20 MS. ANDREWS : They never said. I was told 21 by .__ __ (b)(7)(C) _, that he thought he was sick. (b)(7)(C) 22 SPEC . AGENT Okay . 23 MS. ANDREWS: He said "So you just answer 24 to me now, and send your reports to me; just send them 25 to me . 11 And I thought okay, wow, what' s wrong with NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
30 l Bert? 2 SPEC. AGENT ~ Now, when you worked 3 for Bert, did you know him to be very safety-4 conscious? 5 MS. ANDREWS: Oh yes. (b)(7)(C) 6 SPEC. AGENT And detail-oriented 7 relative to the rules and the procedures? 8 MS. ANDREWS: Oh yes. (b)(7)(C) 9 SPEC. AGENT Did he take i t pretty 10 seriously that his name on the license, the NRC 11 license- - 12 MS . ANDREWS: Oh yes . (b)(7)(C) 13 SPEC. AGENT --as the RSO? Was 14 that a big thing to him? 15 MS. ANDREWS: That was- - yes. That's very 16 important. 17 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did you ever overhear 18 any conversation by anyone in management at Tetra Tech l9 telling Bert that they would just take his name off 20 the license, and-- 21 MS. ANDREWS: No, I never overheard that. 22 SPEC. AGENT,___ __ (b)(7)(C) _,, Okay. Were you ever 23 interviewed by anyone at Tetra Tech regarding Bert's 24 issues that he may have raised, and then his 25 subsequent termination? Did they ever do an internal NEAL A. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N .W . (202} 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
31 1 investigation and ask employees-- 2 MS. ANDREWS: No. They don't talk to me 3 about Bert. The only thing that was ever saio to me 7 4 about Bert, ~l(b-)(- )-(C_l _ _ _ _ _ _~l came up to me a couple of 5 days after, you know, we obviously knew he wasn't 6 there, because they were shredding his stuff, and I 7
. l(b)(7)(C) was--tears in my eyes--but ~ - - - - - ~looked at me, I I
8 was at the printer or copier and he says You okay? 11 9 And I said "Yes, I'll be okay." And he says "Do you 10 think you can work for r.__)(_7)_(C_) _ _ __.I? II And I went like 11 I ' l l give it my best shot. And that's as much as I 12 knew of anything like that. That's all the more words 13 that l(b)(7)(C) I had. 14 SPEC. AGENT ___ (b)(?)(C) _, You said they were 15 shredding his things out of his 0ffice? 16 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. 17 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Out of Bert's office? (b)(7)(C) I 18 MS . ANDREWS: l Yes. ~._ _ _ _ _ _ __.F as just 19 sitting there shredding stuff . I walked in, I went 20 like whoa . She's just shredding, I went like well, 21 okey doke. They broke into his cabinets and 22 everything. He had depleted sources in there that he 23 that he used for like training purposes and stuff that 24 was given to him . I did a survey on them all the 25 time, but-- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
32 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPEC . AGENT On the depleted 2 sources-- 3 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, jueit-- (b)(7)(C) 4 SPEC . AGENT - -that he used for 5 training? 6 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, just-- 7 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I= Was that the button 8 and--was one a button, and- - 9 MS . ANDREWS : And there was some like 10 orange Fiestaware. 1.1 SPEC. AGENT !(b)(l)(C) !: Fiestaware? 12 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, just, it was all in a 13 little suitcase, like attache case type thing, in his 14 cupboard there . And you know, I ' d a 1 ways make sure i t 15 was right there, and it was-- 16 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) So those things had 17 been surveyed and were clean; they were okay? 18 MS
- ANDREWS : Yes. And they had that 19 cupboard open; they broke the l ocks, they didn't even 20 ask him for his keys so they could just open something 21 up. They--and he still was on the license. He--
22 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C)
- Right.
23 MS. ANDREWS: --he was still like supposed 24 to be there, and they're breaking into his stuff, and 25 then shredding files. What files they were shredding, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
33 1 I don't know, but they were just shredding . For days 2 they were shredding. (b)(7)(C) 3 SPEC. AGENT Are you aware of any 4 other employees who were potentially retaliated 5 against for raising safety-related issues? 6 MS . ANDREWS : Yes. (b)(7)(C) 7 SPEC. AGENT .._~___. Who else? l(b)(7)(C) Holy 8 MS . ANDREWS : 9 tamole, you don't think every ain't scared about 10 saying something now, they just let him--told him go. 11 I mean-- 12 SPEC. AGENT Do you know wha t: 13 happened in particular? Do you have any more - - a 14 direct knowledge of what happened with l(b)(7)(C) I?
)(C )
15 MS . ANDREWS: (b)(l )(C) and I were pretty (b)(7)(C) 16 He didn't have much respect for . . __ _ _ _ _....1 17 and you know, at that particular time, you know, 18 Bert's in charge, and he has supervisors that are to
~ was going And L___J 19 be doing what he tells them to do.
20 out having laborers, untrained people, go out and do 21 our sampling in the field, and no Senior around, no 22 supervision around, they'd just--she'd give them .a 23 list and say go collect this many samples, whatever, (b)(7) 24 and (C) couldn' t stand it any longer. You know, there 25 she goes again, sending the laborers out, and there's NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
34 1 no Senior overseeing them; they're not even Juniors, 2 they're not nothing; they're laborers. And-- 3 SPEC. AGENT (b)(?}(C) Right 4 MS. ANDREWS: --so he was trying to tell 5 supervisors there she goes again, and he called her 6 kind of a name, and then he was frustrated, because 7 there's nothing you can do about this lady. 8 SPEC. AGENT E:]: So he did call h.er the 9 name? 10 MS. ANDREWS: Well, I didn't hear i t, but 11 they say he did. 12 SPEC . AGENT Okay. I know what 13 that is, you don't have to repeat it. 14 MS. ANDREWS : Well, sometimes in the 15 dictionary, she might fall under that name. 16 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l )(C) Yes, that's certainly 17 outside of what I know-- 18 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, but she 1 s getting paid 19 a Senior wage 1 (inaudible 3 5 : 1 7) a Senior job, and al 1 20 she did was go out and tell laborers to go out and 21 sample--
~
22 SPEC. AGENT L__J= Right, she wasn't 23 doing them herself? 24 MS. ANDREWS: She wasn't even overseeing 25 them. She left. She'd meet them at the gate and tell NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISlAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
35 l them to go do their job, and off . 2 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) !: But laborers shouldn't 3 be doing samples anyway . 4 MS. ANDREWS: No . No, that's not in our 5 procedure at all. (b)(7J(C) 6 SPEC. AGENT So there's another 7 procedural issue and nuance with laborers doi ng surveys. 8 9 MS. ANDREWS: l (b)(7)(C) Thanks to ~-~~~~~~* I (b)(7)(C) 10 SPEC. AGENT Policy calls - -your 11 procedures cal l for you to have RP-trained personnel 12 conducting all surveys; correct? 13 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, that's correct. (b)(7)(C) 14 SPEC . AGENT Okay. Did you ever 15 raise any safety issues? 16 MS. ANDREWS: Yes . To Bert; I always went 17 to Bert. (b)(7)(C) 18 SPEC . AGENT You always went to 19 Bert, and he'd pass them up the--he came back with an 20 a n swer for you one way or the other? 21 MS . ANDREWS: Yes, yes, he al ways resolved 22 my little issues. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPEC . AGENT ..._~__, Okay . MS. ANDREWS:
~
Except the L___J one . We 24 25 can't seem to get around that girl. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.oealrgross.com
36
~
1 SPEC. AGENT L ____J Right. And how long 2 had you worked for Bert? 3 MS . ANDREWS: Ever since I got out here. 4 Six, seven years. 5 SPEC. AGENT (b)(J)(C) Six years ago? 6 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, he was New World RSO; 7 he had so many hats on then. He was project manager 8 and back and forth and, but-- SPEC. AGENT (b)(J)(C) And he had a prett y 9 10 good reputation? 11 MS. ANDREWS: Oh yes . 12 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) He was pretty 13 credible ? 14 MS . ANDREWS: Yes. 15 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. 16 MS . ANDREWS : I mean i f you - -yo u m:j..ght 17 talk to some people that will dispute tha t , but if you 18 dig deep enough into them, you'll kind of figure out 19 that they were doing poor RAD practices. 20 SPEC . AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: Right. 21 MS. ANDREWS: You know what I mean? And 22 they wanted to do i t their way, and it wasn't the 23 procedural way . (b)(7)(C) 24 SPEC. AGENT ...._ _ __. What's the benefit of-25 -why were, or why have all these corners been cut? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.oom
37 1 What's the significance? What's the benefit to Tetra 2 Tech for cutting it, to cut those corners? 3 MS . ANDREWS: Well I think they're on a 4 fixed contract now, you know, money's fixed. So it's 5 the push to get it done, and-- (b)(7)(C) 6 SPEC. AGENT So you can move on to 7 the next thing? 8 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) 9 SPEC. AGENT You're not billing 10 hourly anymore, you're flat rate essentially? ll. MS. ANDREWS: Right. Yes. (b)(7)(C) 12 SPEC . AGENT Okay. If you could 13 bill it hourly, you could take your time; now it's a 14 thing where they want to get in, get i t done, so they 15 can go to what's next? 16 MS. ANDREWS: Right. Yes . That's the ]. 7 only way they're going to make money. (b)(7)(C) 18 SPEC. AGENT Okay. Okay. I have 19 a couple of closing questions for you. Have I 20 threatened you in any manner in exchange for your 21 testimony? 22 MS. ANDREWS: Oh no . 23 SPEC. AGENT (b)(l )(C) Have I offered you any 24 reward in exchange for your testimony? 25 MS . ANDREWS : No. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
38 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPEC. AGENT Has it been given 2 freely and voluntarily? 3 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, it has . 4 SPEC. AGENTl(b)(7)(C) Is there anything else 5 you'd lik~ to add to the record at this time? 6 MS. ANDREWS: Should I? 7 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(7)(C) ' Well, that's certainly 8 up to you, if there was anything that we have not 9 ta l ked about or have not captured. 10 MS. ANDREWS: Well on this little 7 11 rec o rder , we d i dn't record how ~!'b_H_l_(c_J__~l intimidated me 12 when I first got there . Should that be on there? 13 SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) You certainly- -yes. 14 You talked about- - 15 MS. ANDREWS: When I f i rst got here, I was l6 only here a couple, maybe a week, and I was in J. 7 (b)(7)(C) l~----------' I group at metal debris brief, in BR, and he 10 pulled me aside with a witness, and said-- 19 SPEC. AGENT ~ : Who was the witness? 20 MS . ANDREWS : You know, man, I can't 21 remember that gentleman's name, but he got tired of 22 23 i t , and he r )(J)(C) LJl, and went whatever . to f" 24 25 SPEC. MS. AGENT (b)(?)(C) ANDREWS: r*'"' Point, yes. I what was his NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. (202} 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
39 1 l(b)(7)(C) I name? ~----__, would know; I don't remember . (b)(7)(C) 2 SPEC . AGENT Okay, that's fine. 3 MS . ANDREWS! Didn't know him that well 4 for that long, because I went into the lab. 5 SPEC. AGENT l(b)(l)(C) L Right. 6 MS . ANDREWS: And then he left, because he 7 couldn't put up with it any longer , !(b)(l )(C) on him. 8 But anyhow, ....___ (b)(7)(C) _.pulled me over to the side, told me 9 if I had a problem with *cuss words, which he shared a 10 few of them with me, that he - -how he spoke, and how he 11 was, i f I had a problem with that, then I needed to 12 leave his group, you know. And - -but he told me then 13 that I was just put in h i s group, nobody else wanted 14 me, and so I would lose my job. If I couldn't work 15 for him, I couldn't work at Bunters Point Shipyard . 16 So I said okay. And then I tried to fi gure out how to 17 get away from him. And I started doing the porta-18 monitor, they started a porta- monitor up there, and so 19 l~==::;--------1
.(b)(7)(C) I(phonetic) let me do that, and then (b)(7)(C) 20 ...._ _
(b)(?)(C) decided he'd like to have my ski lls into tr.e lab. 21 So I bumped right into the lab, and I stayed there 22 protected by them. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPEC. AGENT So you- - that' s how 24 you've been able to get away from him? 25 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, that's how I got away NEAL R. GROSS COUR'T REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C . 20005-3701 www.nealrg~.com
40 1 l (b)(7)(C) I from ~ - - - - - - - - ~* (b)(7)(C) 2 SPEC. AGENT ....._ _ __, And you're--just for 3 clarification, are you reporting to him now? 4 MS . ANDREWS : No . (b)(7)(C) 5 SPEC . AGENT ...__ __, No? Okay. Got you . 6 MS
- ANDREWS : The only time I come
.f (b)(7)(C) 7 remotely close to having to report to him is l.
8 ..._ __ _., l(b)(l)(C) I and_,...__ _ _ _ __, are both off the same day. 9 SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. 10 MS. ANDREWS: And then we walk rice paper, l l you know. (b)(7)(C) 12 SPEC. AGENT Okay . 13 MS. ANDREWS: I really try to get along 14 with him; he just, you know. So I just--he lays low; 15 I lay low. (b)(7)(C) 16 SPEC. AGENT Okay . 17 [End of tape] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of : Name of Proceeding: Interview of Susan Andrews Docket Number: 1 - 2012-002 Location: San Francisco, California were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Uni t ed States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings as recorded on tape(s) provi ded by the NRC. Official Transcriber Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com
EXHIBIT 14 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 14
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + + 4 OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS 5 INTERVIEW 6 ------------- - ----------------x 7 IN THE MATTER OF: 8 INTERVIEW OF or Case No. l(b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 9 10 (CLOSED) 11 ------------------------------x 12 Thursday, February 9, 2012 13 14 State of California Office Bullding 15 455 Golden Gate Avenue 16 San Francisco, California 94102 17 18 The above-entitled interview was conducted 19 at 11:12 a.m. 20 21 BEFORE: l_________ (b)(7)(C) 22 Special Agent ...., 23 24 ECHIBrr l 'l,\ 25 PAGE__L OF ~PAG .(S) ~ 1-~ 2 12;1t oo2 ~ NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N .W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealfgross.com
2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of the Interviewee , Tetra Tech , 3 and other individuals involved in the investig ation: 4 TIMOTHY J. MURPHY, ESQ . 5 Managing Partner 6 of: Fisher & Phillips, LLP 7 One Embarcadero Center 8 Suite 2340 9 San Francisco, CA 941 1 1 - 3712 10 (4 1 5 ) 490-9011 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
3 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 11:12 a.m .
~
3 SPECIAL AGENT L___j Today's date is 4 Thursday, February 9, 2012 . Time is currently 11:12 5 a.m. Pacific Standard Time . 6 For the record, this is an interview of 7 l (b)(7)(C) who is employed with Tetra Tech EC, a lnc. at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in San 9 Francisco, California . 10 The location of this interview is the 11 State of California Office Building, the 10th Floor, 12 Department of Labor at 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San 13 Francisco, Ca1ifornia 9410 2 . 14 1 am l.... (b-)(7-)(-C)___________,It a special agent with 15 the NRC Office of Investigations, Region I Field 16 Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. 17 Also present is Mr. Tim Murphy, Esquire, 18 who is legal counsel today for ~-~~~~~~ here this l (b)(7)(C) I 19 morning. 20 We are here to discuss issues pertaining 21 to NRC or Case No. 1-2012-002. And that is in regard 22 to former radiation safety officer representative 23 Elbert, he goes by the name Bert, Bowers who was 24 previously employed at Hunters Point with Tetra Tech 25 and was subsequently transferred and/or subject to NEAL .R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
4
,1. some form of adverse action and has made claims of 2 discrimination based upon his raising safety-related 3 concerns, That will be the balance of our discussion 4 here this morning.
5 I want to first advise you that the NRC 6 strictly prohibits the recording or transmitting of 7 this interview by any parties other than the NRC or 8 its designee . Having said that, are you recording or 9 transmitting this in any way? lO !(b)(l)(C) !: No, sir. (b)(7)(C) 11 SPECIAL AGENT Are you I Mr. Murphy? 1.2 MR. MORPHY: I am not. 13 SPECIAL AGENT Secondarily I t he NRC 14 wants to make i t known that under 18 U.S . C . 1001 which 15 is essential ly known as the false statement provision 16 that it is relevant and germane to our level of 17 dialogue here today. That is to say if you knowingly I 18 and wi llfully make any false, fict itious , or 19 fraudulent statements or representations and provide 20 false information you could be subject to prosecution 21 under Title 18 United States Code Section 1001 which 22 is a felony punishable by a sentence of up to five years in confinement and a $250,000 fine. That is not 24 a threat. That is just to say that I'm a federal 25 agent and if you tell me something and I find out it's NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000!>-3701 www.nealrgross.com
5 not true, we're going to have a problem. l (b)(7)(C) I 2 3 problems. l
. . . _ _ _ ___.: Understood. We won't have any (b)(7)(C) 4 SPECIAL AGENT .______. Please raise your 5 right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're 6 about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and 7 nothing but the truth so help you God?
8 ~l (b_)(7_)(_ c )______ ~!: Yes, sir. I do. 9 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Please state your 10 full name for the record and spell your last name? l(b)(7)(C) 11 Last name 12 is spelled l~'b-)(7)_(_c)_______, 13 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)
- Is Attorney Murphy 14 representing you personally for the purpose of today's 15 interview?
!(b)(7)(C) Yes, he is.
16 17 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) Does your employer 18 require you to have an attorney present when you are 19 interviewed by the NRC OI? l (b)(7)(C) 20 . No, sir. 21 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Were you threatened 22 in any way with adverse action if you did not elect to 23 have corporate counsel here today? 24 l(b)(7)(C)
~------~
I No, sir. 25 SPECIAL AGENTl(b)(?)(C) Did either corporate NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
6 1 counsel or a company representative instruct or 2 suggest to you how you should respond to the line of 3 questions presented by OI this morning? 4 l~-------J= (b)(7)(C) I No, sir. 5 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) ~ Will Mr. Murphy's 6 presence hinder your testimony in any way? l(b)(7)(C) 7 No, sir. 8 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) L Do you understand 9 that you have a right to a private interview with me 10 at a time of your convenience? 11 l~------~t,I (b)(7)(C) Yes, sir. I do. (b)(7)(C) l2 SPECIAL AGENT Thank you . Mr. 13 Murphy, could you please introduce yourself for the 14 record? 15 MR . MURPHY: My name is Timothy J. Murphy. 16 I'm a partner in the law of Fisher & Phillips located 17 here in San Francisco, California and we are counsel 18 for Tetra Tech EC, Inc. in the NRC matter which you 19 have previously identified. 20 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : And are you acting 2l. as a personal representative for ... r _)(-l)-(C_) _ ___.l f or today' S 22 interview? 23 MR. MURPHY: I am. 24 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Should you determine 25 that there's any conflict of interest as you are also NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neatrgross.com
7 1 counsel to Tetra Tech what would be your course of 2 action? 3 MR . MURPHY : The course of action that I 4 would follow would be to follow the rules of 5 professional conduct of lawyers that practice in the 6 State of California. And generally, that is that when 7 there is a conflict of i nterest that arises between 8 two people that you represent, you identify the 9 conflict of interest to the .individuals and under 10 certain circumstances after you fully explain that 11 conflict to them they can waive that conflict in 12 wri ting and you can continue to represent both and 13 t ha t would fall within the rules of professional 14 conduct . (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) 15 SPECIAL AGENT Thank you. (b)(7)(C) 16 in what capacity are you employed with Tetra 17 Tech? l(b)(7)(C) I ' m a l(b)(7)(C) 18 19 of record. 20 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)r)(C) I= How long have you 21 been in your current position? l(b)(7)(C) 22 Al most ... r _'\7-XC
-) _ ____. I'd say ~
r )(lXC) 23 (b)(7)(C) 24 SPECIAL AGENT How long have you 25 been employed with Tetra Tech? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
8 1 _r_ )(7-)(C _)_ _ _......,I rX(XC) (b)(7)(C) 2 SPECIAL AGENT What was your 3 previous assignment at Tetra Tech prior to this? l(b)(7)(C) J(b)(l )(C) 4 I was a 1 5 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Prior to Tetra Tech 6 where were you employed? 7 _l ( b_) ( 7_)(C _ )_ _ __,!: Radiologically? My last job 8 Wa S . n ~ ~1l!'c1
- l. L,__~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__. working I
X' XC> 9 for 10 SPECIAL AGENT-~~--' r l(J)(C) So before -- aft er 11 that posit i on and before Tetra Tech you did something 12 n on- r ad i ation? 13 ' (C)_ _......,I :
-(b)-(7)- Non- r ad, yes . I had a
)( )
14 15 i nt o t hat. (b)(7)(C) 16 SPECIAL AGENT And when you were at
; n l(b)(J)(Cl 17 t h e site ... _ in 18 what position, what kind of capacit y were you in?
19 ._l (b_)(7_)(_ C)_ ____,~ e1xc1 20 (b)(7)(C) 21 SPECIAL AGENT Wha t is your 22 professional background consisting of? What have you 23 typically done? Have you been in radiation most of 24 your pro fessional career, construction? What h as it 25 been? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
9 l l (b)(7)(C)
- - - - - - - ~:
I I started off in staffing. I 2 r XlXC> did so well in that I got to go ana ___________. in r )PXC) 3 During that time I was looking rX>XC) I found a large DOE presence out 4 for 5 there, starting staffing radiation protection 6 technologists. Saw that they made great money, more 7 c.han I was making. So I made a jump. From that 8 point I I started off in the r 7KC') 1b)( 'l(C) '--------=rb ;:;;X;lX:;;C)======:::::::~ 9 in 1 _ which was _ 10 That was a L J (phonetic) job do ing 11 source recovery and from there I went ba*ck to 12 Did a e1xc, ror rx'lxc> and
'------;;;rb;;:;l(:;;; ,x;;
b= ~ -..... 13 was on the road jumping job to job to job , _ 14 r________.I a Xll(C) 11 over. J.5 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : So your experience 16 in the nuclear industry dates back about how long? 17 l.8 l(b)(7)(C) I would say D to present, (b)(7)(C) 19 SPECIAL AGENT What are your duties 20 and responsibilities in your current role? 21 L..l (b-)(7-J(C_) _ _ ___.I : I am the (b)(7)(C)
._P. (b--
)(7--)(C-) _ _ ___,
22 _j(b_H7_l(_c)_ __.!under -'b-)(_ I (c_) _ _ _ _ __, who
?J_ I is the .___ _ _ _ _ ___.
23 l(b)(7)(C)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'to him and the Hunters I
24 Point Quality Control Department. (b)(?)(C) 25 SPECIAL AGENT In addition to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
10 l(b)(7)(C) l do you have a 2 responsibility for corrective action to those issues 3 of noncompliance? l(b)(7)(C) 4 Yes, sir. I do. 5 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Do you hold any 6 certifications currently for the job for which you are 7 in? 8 l (b)(7)(C)
~-~~~~~~=
I Certifications? I have lots 9 of training certifications, yes. 10 8 PECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) That's site stuff. 11 Is there any national certifications? 12 _!(b_)(7_)(C_) _ _ _.!: No, this wasn't site stuff. 13 There's some national stuff, too. Shipping, DOT 14 shipping . That just fell out of being current though. 15 Nationally recognized by Ortech (phonetic) and 16 Canberra (phonetic) as being trained along with Ludlum 17 (phonetic) Instruments. (b)(7)(C) 18 SPECIAL AGENT Ortech, what is 19 Ortech? 20 l(b)(7)(C)
--~~~~.....:
I They make gamma spec systems . 21 And so does Canberra, along with Ludlum Measurements 22 and that training was certified in calibration and 23 repair . (b)(7)(C) 24 SPECIAL AGENT ~ - - - ' So is it fair to say 25 that with your experience, both with these various NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005--3701 www.nealrgross.com
11 1 certs you have and in the field, that: you have a 2 pretty good awareness of what a nuclear safety concern 3 is? 4 l....~b)(])(C) _ _ _ ___,: I I wou ld l 1.' k e to t h 1.n
' k so , yes.
5 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : Hope so at this 6 point. l(b)(7)(C) 7 Yes. 8 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: To that same extent, 9 are the employees trained and *oriented on what issues 10 are considered nuclear safety concerns, do the 11 employees also know? 12 l...._ _ _ ___,~I (b)(7)(C) Yes. We train per NUREG-1556. (b)(7)(C) 13 SPECIAL AGENT What mechanism is 14 used whereby employees can raise nuclear safety 15 concerns? 16 l.________,I: (b)(7)(C) Al l the employees during our 17 annual rad brief are shown the NRC boards. They are 18 also given a line of communication by a card I make 19 that has all of the management's phone numbers, the 20 rad safety phone number, health and safety's phone 21 number. They are informed that we are in Region 1 22 King of Prussia and they are described where the 23 boards are at. We have two NRC boards on site . One 24 resides in a building where a lot of those craft folks 25 take breaks. The other one is up in the main office NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrg-oss.com
12 l building where the management type hangs out.
~
2 SPECIAL AGENT L____J So if an employee 3 has a safety concern, they see something, they can 4 obviously -- they can go to the NRC. 5 !(b)(?){C) !: They are informed in training 6 please start with us. 7 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: Because you're B management. 9 ~l(b_)r_)(_c)~~--'!: Start with me . If you don't 10 think I'm doing a good job, please contact (b)(?)(C) 7 11 ~'(b_l(7_)(C_)~~~~l who is the ~l 'b-)( _l(_c)~~~~--'~ If he fa ils to 12 satisfy you, please call the NRC. (b)(7)(C) 1.3 SPECIAL AGENT Is there a way that 14 employees can raise those issues anonymously or can 15 they fil l out -- in the power plant world, they call 16 i t a condition report. 17 ....
!(b_)(7_)(C_) _ _....,!: Yes .
18 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)r)(C) !: Do you guys have an 19 equitable form such as a condition report that can be 20 filled out by an employee and sent in without -- sent 21 in anonymously? 22 l~-- - - - ~:I (b)(7)(C) Yes, we do. That's called the 23 ZIP slip. (b)(?)(C) 24 SPECIAL AGENT Okay. And is that 25 a hard copy document or is that in a database? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
13 l _!(b-)(_~_(c_)----___.! : That is a hard copy document 2 that goes to database. (b)(7)(C) 3 SPECIAL AGENT Who does the ZIP 4 slip go to? 5 _,(b_)(7_)(C_) _ _ _ l l(b)(7)(C) 1. 6 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So they go t o him 7 and he transfers i t into the system? 8 l.~---------l (b){7)(C) He puts it into our database 9 and what that does is it recognizes all the managers 10 who that reporL would be value to and from there a 11 report is generated and sent ouL to said managers for 12 their reaction and/or repair of said problem. 13 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Is it possible that 14 he d o esn't put that information out? It can kind of 15 stop at him? l{b)(7)(C) 16 No. 17 SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) L Conceivably? 18 l~-----------Jl {b)(~(C) No, l get them. I still get 19 them to this day. My name is included on t he ZIP 20 slip, I get them . And I'm forced to do something. {b)(7)(C) 21 SPECIAL AGENT ,___ ___. And is that by 22 procedure that if you're included, if your name is 23 included in any way that you also are required to get 24 a copy? 25 ....
!(b_ )(?_)(C_) --...J!: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS ANO TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
14 1 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : Is training provided 2 to employees with regard to the use of that mechanism, J ZIP slips and how they can report things up? Are they 4 trained on that or informed about that ? l(b)(?)(C) 5 They are trained and I 6 actually ... r_l()-XC_>_ ___.I the phone numbers r:==J* That is 7 something . r Xll(C) I It's a laminated card bui l t 8 for ruggedness out in the field. The ZIP slips we 9 discuss. Those are in envelopes by the state boards 10 or the state hiring information. 11 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) I: And what's Tetra 12 Tech policy regarding employees' ability to raise 13 safety concerns? How does that work? Are they 14 allowed to do it? i 15 l~-(b)(7)(C)
~~~~~~ Oh, yes .
16 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) It occurs. Are they 17 protected once they do i t? 18 l.(b)(7)(C) We pay them to do it. We 19 actually have a raffle and the more of these ZIP slips 20 t hat are turned in, we enter those names into a hat, 21 if you wi ll, for a raffle. We love ZIP slips~ It's 22 even though some of the issues brought. up may be 23 very minor, those could turn into major obstacles 24 later . 25 SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ (b)(7)(C) __. And employees, are NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
15 1 they also advised of the fact that they are protected 2 once they raise a safety concern? Do they get 3 apprised on the concept of protected activity o nce 4 they raise a concern, they can't be retaliated against 5 and they should not be treated in any disparate way? l(b)(7)(C) 6 We go over that and we 7 actually have an NRC published document that we hang 8 on our NRC boards to inform them as well . 9 SPECIAL AGENT ___ (b)(7)(C) _. Is that also 10 outlined in the handbook or procedural guide? 11 -(b)
'-(7)-(CJ_ _ _.I : There i s a yellow handbook 12 that all our employees get. And yes, it is outlined 13 in t hat .
(b)(7)(C) 14 SPECIAL AGENT When layoffs occur, .15 how is it determined which employees are laid o£f and 16 whi c h are retained? 17 ... r _)(l_)(_C)_ _ _ . .,1 : Usually by funding, our 18 c l ient's funding. 19 SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) I: So the funding 20 predicates that somebody has got to go, but how is it 21 determined who is going to go? 22 ... r _)(7- )(-C)_ _ _......I= Well, starting at che top 23 recently Jle had a situation where our base-wide 24 funding was reduced . It was reduced significantly. 25 So we had to get rid of two technicians in that group . NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com
16 1 From there we looked at who was in the kit ty and those 2 who made a better, all rounded tool were kept. When 3 you are limited to the amount of tools in your tool 4 box, you cry to find the one that can do che most jobs 5 and -- 6 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) ~ Most di verse skill 7 sets stay? 8 l~ - - - - - - ~:I (b)(7)(C) Exactly. 9 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Most comprehensive 10 skill sets stay? 11 l__ _ _ ___,I: (b)(7)(C) Exactly. 12 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(G) Those who can only 13 do one thing really good probably had to go? 14 l~ - - - - - - ~I: (bl(7)(C) Correct. 15 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) When someone raises 16 a safety concern via ZIP slips per se, and management 17 takes ic in, they do the intake process, is it -- does 18 it stop at the site level or can i t - - or is it always 19 run up the chain or does it depend on the issue? 20 r~ -)(-7)-(C-) ---~I: These ZIP slips are ni ce 21 because there's no way to cap on who gets the report. 22 It flows throughout the entire company with regards to 23 our management layers. 24 S PEC IAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So it's not a deal 25 where it could just -- it comes t l O. (b)(7)(C) as I've NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
17 1 heard him referred to .
~
l(b)(l)(C) l(b)(l)(C) 2 I love (b)(7)(C) to l(b)(7)(C) 3 SPECIAL AGENT It comes 4 desk and he says I don't want to deal with this, 5 put this over here and it never goes anywhere. That's 6 not really possible? 7 l--~~~~__,:I (b)(l)(C) No, he enters those into the 8 system and they go to all the PZMs {phonetic). The 9 PZMs are the decision makers within each group, within lO a given expertise. 11 SPECIAL AGENT l__J ~ Okay. S ome b o d y i' s l2 going to see it . l(b)(7)(C) 13 So the site managers get it 14 and it goes out to the PZMs. In the past, the 15 president has received these. So I don't know at what 16 level they start filtering for him, but these things ]7 get out quick and the phone starts ringing 18 immediately. (b)(7)(C) 19 SPECIAL AGENT ._.____. Do you know Elbert 20 Bowers? r_ _)(7-)(-C)_ _ _.....1: Yes . 21 22 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(l)(C) How do you know Mr. 23 Bowers and when did you first have contact with him? 24 l(b)(l)(C)
--~~~~~~:
I Mr . Bowers has worked out at 25 Hunters Point for various groups and what was the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D ,C. 20005-3701 www.nealr:gross.com
18 1 second part to your question, I'm sorry? 2 SPECIAL AGENT~ When did you first 3 mP-et him o r have contact with him? 4 l(b)(7)(C) I met him probably within ffiJ 5 t l>)(l)(C) l 6 SPECIAL AGENT EJ : So that was r )(l )(C) l(b)(7)(C) Yes. 7 8 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) And under what I= 9 circumstances did you initially have contact with him? 10 Did you work for him? Was it just passing, you met 11 h i m as you came on the job? Did you have a lot of 12 i nteraction with him? 13 !(b)(7)(C) He was the radiation safety 14 officer for New World Technologies. That was the 15 lic ense we were operating under at the time. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) So his name was on 16 17 the license? l(b)(7)(C) 18 As the -- I don't know if his 19 name was on the l icense, but I know that the company 20 had made him the RSO at some time and had put that on 21 a letter to file and had it hung up on their NRC 22 board. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT .__~___. So currently, you're 24 the ( (Cb))(?) Is your name on the 1 1.cense
. or is . i. t 25 l...__~~~~~~~Iname on the (b)(7)(C)
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com (202) 234-4433
19 1 l(b-)(7-)(C_J_ _ ___.I: l(b)(l)(C) Iname is on the 2 license as thel(b)m(c) ~n d I am listed on a letter to file (b)(7)(C) 3 as t he or Hunters Point. 4 SPECIAL AGENT ~ r x_i_~C-) _______.
- Which is ...
~r"e"'
x;~xc,:""
) ---------.
5 ~ - - - - - - - - - ~ l was with Bert. l(b)(?)(C) 6 Correct. 7 SPECIAL AGEN~ (b)(?)(C) At one point he was 8 on the license? l(b)(?)(C) 9 At one point he was on the 10 license. Yes, sir. (b)(7)(C) 11 SPECIAL AGENT : We're going to get 12 back to that at some point. What kind of employee 13 would you describe Bowers as? I want an honest l 4. assessment . l!:> _l (b)-(7)-(C)_ _ _.I: A complainer who would do 16 nothing about his complaints. He would not -- if 17 there was something he saw in the field that was 18 incorrect, he wouldn't come and instruct me to go fix 19 it. I would be shown photographic evidence of said 20 issue and it was almost as if there was supposed to be 21 a celebration that we got them. 22 SPECIAL AGENT ~ So as an RSO and 23 RSOR, he was in both positions, what was he required 24 to do if he saw a safety issue? Was he required to 25 not report it? Was he required to fix it, then report NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com (202) 234-4433
20 J_ it? What was he required -- becau se i t sound s like 2 you're saying all he did whe n he saw issues was just 3 raise them and never fix them? I 4 l (b)(7)(C)
....-----..Jt Yes. I don't know what he was 5 supposed to do, but I know what I am currently doing.
6 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(J)(C) And my assumption is 7 that the duties are probably fairly consistent with 8 what he was supposed to do as the RSOR ana ... r _x ,_xc_s _ _ ____. r )(°i)(C) 9 10 l (b)(7)(C) l Correct. 11 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(J)(C) Unless the job 12 description has changed a lot. I don't know if that's 13 happened. 14 r_ _)'7-)(-C)_ _ _.....I= Bert and I are two very 15 different indivlduals. We operate very differently. 16 I like to get into my work . I like to be out into the 17 field. He spent a lot of time in his office. 18 SPECIAL AGENTl(b)(7)(C) I But under the scope 19 and direction of the job you do now, if you see things 20 in .t h e field -- 21 .... l(b-)(7)-(C-) _ _ ....,l Yes . 22 SPECIAL AGENT ._ l(b)(7)(C) ____..... -- as Bert did, a re 23 you required to report those things? l (b)(7)(C) 24 Yes, I am. (b)(7)(C) 25 SPECIAL AGENT Are you required to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealfgross.com
21 1 fix them or ensure that - - or delegate someone to fix 2 chem? 3 l_(b_H7_)(C _l ______,~ Yes, I am. (b)(7)(C) 4 SPECIAL AGENT Bert was seeing 5 thi ngs in t he field and he brought them up, but you're 6 saying he wasn't delegating the repair of those 7 issues. 8 r_ )-(7)-(C)_ __.L No, sir. He was not. 9 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)r)(C) I= Did you have 10 c onfidence in his abilities as the RSO? 11 j(b)(7)(C) !: No . (b)(7)(C) 12 SPECIAL AGENT Why not? 13 _!
' b- )(_~ _(c_i ____ __.!: He didn' t have a whole l ot of 14 fie l d time on dirt j obs . He went into everything with 15 a power plant mentality and that wasn't the case. Out 16 at Hunters Point we were remediating soil that 17 c ontains I wo u l d say I ' l l give you a cap of around 2.5 18 or 3 picocuries per gram of radium. The reason we are 19 remediating that soil is solely because it was brought 20 i n, it was an import that was brought in from a long, 21 long time ago . No one cared about picocuries back 22 then . So most of the material we're handling is less 23 t han 2.S ' picocuri es radium. We do get strontium hits 24 from time to time, but everything is in the picocurie 25 per gram range with the exception of devices that we NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2QOOS.3701 www.nealr9'oss.oom
22 1 find . Then we're talking about microcuries . 2 I don't believe his actions were 3 commensurate with the activity we had on site. 4 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Now have you ever 5 worked at a power plant? 6 l(b)(7)(C)
~-~~~~~~ :
I No, sir. . 7 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : So what was the 8 difference in his approach? You said he had a power 9 plant mentality and that I s not really transferrable to 10 what you all do. What was his approach? 11 l(b)(7)(C)
- ~~~~~~ =
~
I His approach was almost as if 12 i t was fuel on site and there was not. Now we still 13 have to take the rad components seriously, but a t no 14 time have we been working with material that could 15 have (a) given the public a dose of more than 100 16 millirem a year. All of my -- 17 SPECIAL AGENT 1(b)(7)(C) !: Below public limits . 18 ~'
'b-)(-l)(_c )_ ----~': Yes. And all of my dosimetry 19 within the past year has been zero reports, no dose.
20 Before that we were using land hour (phonetic) that 21 could report down to one millirem. At that time we 22 had a lot of onesies and twosies, but nothing over ten 23 millirem ever. (b)(7)(C) 24 SPECIAL AGENT So very, very low 25 doses . NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 2000&-3701 www.nealrgross.com
23 l r_
... )(-7)(_C_) _ _ _....1: Very low dose . Ve r y low 2 activity, yes.
(b)(7)(C) 3 SPECIAL AGENT Bowers raised 4 safety-related con c e rns to you? 5 l (b)(7)(C)
'-------~=
I Did he? 6 SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ _...., Yes . 7 l._________,:I (b)(7)(C) I saw a lot of photos . 8 SPECIAL AGENT ___ (b)(7)(C) _. Elab orate on that. 9 l.__ _ _ _ _ _J:I
~b)(7)(C) Well, for instance, there was 10 a time when Mr . Bowers was out on his radiological 11 i ntegrity dri v e down. And he had observed a water 12 b r eak station that someone had put right inside of an 1.3 RCA . Now this was an a r ea that was not delineated 14 wi th rope . It was delineated with T posts and a 15 p ost i ng every 50 feet. Well, because the lack of that i6 rope someone had accidentally put that break station int o an RCA. He had observed that on his drive down 18 and he had taken a photo.
19 He came back and showed me t he photo. I 20 asked h i m if he had righted the situation. He said 21 no . At that point, I just assumed the responsibility 22 and went out and pulled that station that weighed no 23 more than 25 pounds 24 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(7)(C) I: The water cooler , 25 righ t? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
24
.... )(7-)(-C)_ _ _......I=
r_ Yes . On to the appropriate l 2 side and hit it with a frisker to make sure there was 3 no contamination. We went on with life. We made a 4 deficiency notice of that and went on. (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT .__ ____. Was that the only 6 incident that s t icks out in your mind? 7 .... l(b-)(7-)(C-) _ _..... I: There were some that were 8 brought up t o day during our earlier meeting, but there 9 was an incident where we had been doing a 10 characterization of some drums that had radium dials 11 and devices. And the Navy wanted each and every one 12 of those devices characterized. We brought in an 13 outside contractor who had a gamma spec system and hit 14 eac h one up and characterized. 15 We had some t ime away from that job 16 because we had found UXO (phonetic) and we had to stop 17 and bring in a UXO expert and once we had done that, 18 we went back to work . On about the second or third 19 day of going back to work, we opened up our source 20 room where we kept all our drums and we noticed a 21 seventh drum. We only had six drums. One drum was 22 for strontium devices. The rest were for radium 23 devi ces. I now had a seventh drum with sources in it . 24 I questioned how that could have happened 25 and turned that over to the quality department because NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
25 1 I figured at that time someone had gotten into that 2 building and done that . And there were only four 3 people at that time who knew the combination into that 4 building. (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT How was that 6 situation managed? How was it adjudicated? (b)(7)(C) l-~~~~__.: I I filed a complaint with (b)(7)(C) 7 l ___ (b)(7)(C) 8 .__ _. with Quality Control. I alerted (b)(l )(C) 9 l(b)(7)(C) and informed !(b)(7)(C) ! l(b)(7)(C) 10 l(b)(7)(C) 11 (b)(7)(C) 12 SPECIAL AGENT And was an 13 investigation or an inquiry conducted as to how that 14 seventh drum was the source -- got in there? 15 l(b)(7)(C) Yes, sir . An investigation I= 16 was conducted. (b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT L...----' What was the final 18 determination? 19 r_ i_(7)-(C)_ _ _,= There was no determinati on 20 made . (b)(7)(C) 21 SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ __, Who were the other 22 people that had access to the code? You said four 23 people knew the code . 24 l(b)(7)(C) I= Yes. Myself, l(b)(7J(C) I, and then 25 I had l(b)(7)(C) l and l(b)(7)(C) I* I can NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
26 1 spel~ the last name for you. I t 's a tough one. _ l(b)(7)(C) 2 l--~~~~~~I* (b)(7)(C) And myself. (b)(7)(C) 3 SPECIAL AGENT And was this an 4 issue t hat Bert subsequently raise, that seventh drum? 5 ..... l'b-)(7)-(C_l _ ___,!: No
- 6 SPECIAL AGEN~ L-~~~ :
__J(b)(7)(C) I Who discovered the 7 additional drum? 8 _r_ )(7-)(C-) _ _....,~ l(b)(7)(C) Iwhen we went in 9 to start our characterization backup. 10 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) So the seventh drum, 11 was it surveyed accordingly and locked or put where i t 12 was supposed to be? 13 ... l(b-)(7-)(C_) _ _ I: It was in the room where we 1.4 kept all the drums, containing the devices. That 15 inner room was locked and then the outer room was 16 locked as well, the outer building was locked as well. 1.7 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : And all appropriate 18 reports were made on that issue? 1.9 l--~~~~__,I=
~b)(7)(C) y es, yes .
20 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) So when Bert brought 21 things up to you, were they always documented? Did 22 you always document them? 23 l~-~~~~~~:I (b)(7)(C) No. He typically stepped in 24 and would document first, almost even before 25 investigating. Photos would immediately be taken. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
1 SPECIAL AGENT r~(C) 1 Was he emailing 27 2 these photos to anybody? 3 l....______,:I (b)(7)(C) I never got them. I got shown 4 snippets here and there. In fact, today on our 5 earlier talk I saw photos for the first time that 6 involved me. (b)(7)(C) 7 SPEC:AL AGENT Were you ever 8 advised by other members of management of Tetra Tech 9 that Bowers caised safety issues with them? 10 l(b-)(7-)(C_) _ ___,!:
.... No .
(b.,.,,
)(7~)(~
C)--, 11 SPECIAL AGENT The nature of 12 Bowers' safety concerns, were they all rad-related 13 issues? 14 r _)(-7)-(C-) _ _ __.l No. 15 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) What were some of 16 the other t hings he raised? 17 ._! (b_)(7) _(C_) _ _ _,j: In some previous photos from 18 today, I mean I ' ve just dis covered this, but I guess 19 he had some issues with trench safety, possibly. 20 SPECIAL AGENT j(b)(l)(C) !: Anything else? 21 l (b)(7)(C) !: These were random photos , but 22 stuff such as caution tape being down, but the area 23 where the caution tape was hung, it didn't need to be 24 so I don't know whac you would call that. 25 .... l<b)_(7)_(c)_ _ _....I = I think he wants to know NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N .W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
28 1 whether at the time he raised the issues, not the 2 photographs. Oh 3 l ~~~~-F (b)(7)(C) L
, no.
4 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : At the time 5 l(b)(?)(C) !: No, I ' m sorry. l(b)(7)(C) 6 SPECIAL AGENT And even with 7 respect to when he did raise the issues, were some of a t hese more -- were they industrial safety issues or 9 was i t a combination between the radiation stuff and 10 maybe OSHA stuff?
!(b)(7)(C) 11 1 would say most of it was 12 radi ation , but from time to time you would get an 13 industrlal hygiene issue or an OSHA issue , yeah, not 14 often.
15 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : w.,., h,,,. a,,,,,t,__ __Jli,------' 16 r. .x_,_~ _>_________.I than Bowers did as the 17 !(b)(l)(C) Everything. Everything. 18 First thing, the dosimetry logs were completely found 19 not in good shape. They were simply photocopies of 20 TLDs that had come in from the TLD supplier, sometimes 21 with names written on them . Sometimes there was a TLD 22 log, but they were never complete. So when ... r _)(-7)-(C-) - - - - J X7XCJ 23 24 wich hard copy backup. 25 Another thing I do is my training runs a NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
29 l lot longer ~r_ xi_~_)------......1 I try to provide more details 2 thac are site specific versus general rad. I want to 3 make sure all of our folks are informed as to the 4 conditions of our site that our l icense is covering. 5 On top of that r...x_,_xCJ- ---------------------1' probabl y I would 6 say 40 percent of my time is spent ~----------------------J r')()XC) 7 Bowers' time was probably 10 percent or less. 8 I also believe in an open door policy 9 where anyone with concerns can come by, voice 10 opinions. If it's something that requires more 11 investigating, we do it or else we'll pull out a 12 procedure or a work document to satisfy questions. AGENT (b){l)(Cl not 13 SPECIAL Did Bert 14 maintain an open door policy? 15 (Pause.) 16 l(b)(?)(C) I= I don' t think he did. 17 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) Why is that? 7 18 (b_)(_ )_
~' (c_) ------~~ The craft folks had a lot of 19 r adiologic al questions When l.....-------------------------'
(b)(7)(C) 20 And I don't feel that they had a place they could go 21 because Bert was only interested in the folks he could 22 manage which would be rad folks. He wasn't really 23 open to the craft asking questions and unfortunately 24 they were the ones who do a lot of our work and need 25 to have questions answered. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
30 1 I've come across instances where dosimetry 2 was lost or missed, but I found no arrears report, no 3 investigation report done as to why that dosimetry was 4 missing. (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT That's supposed to 6 be accounted for? 7 l~-~~~~--I= (b)(7)(C) Yes, sir. 8 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Did you find Bert to 9 be active to the point that he was really concerned 10 with compliance and employees operating in a safe 11 manner radiologically? l(b)(7)(C) 12 No. I found him more 13 interested in get ting evidence to say II I gotcha. 11 And 14 using that as a political stronghold on the site. (b)(7)(C) 15 SPECIAL AGENT Who determined that 16 Bowers would no longer be working at Hunters Point?
!(b)(?)(C) Bowers.
17 (b)(7)(C) 18 SPECIAL AGENT Bowers determined 19 that he would no longer be working at Hunters Point? 20 ~l(b_)r_)_(c_J~~~~I= From what I understand, yes. (b)(7)(C) 21 SPECIAL AGENT Where did you hear 22 that? (b)(7)(C) 23 .... r )_(7)-(C)_ _...... 1: I heard that he -- him and l(b)(7)(C) 24 had gotten into an argument over a 25 difference and that Mr . Bowers said "I'm going to have NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISL.AND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
31 1 to resign and call the NRC" 2 SPECIAL AGENT E::]: Where did you hear 3 that? l (b)(7)(C) 4 r_ _)(7_)(_C)_ _ __.I= From . l(b)(7)(C) 5 (b)(7)(C) l(b)(7)(C) ~ 6 SPECIAL AGENT . ir l(b)(l)(C) !: Yes. ,__ _ _ __. 7 8 (Pause.) (b)(7)(C) 9 SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ _, So what was or do 10 you even know what the actual deal was with Bert's 11 employment? Was he transferred? Was he put on 12 administrative leave? What was the nature -- 13 l~------~=
~b)(7)(C) I After the argument?
14 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)
- Yes.
15 r_ _)(?-)(-C)_ _ __.1: I believe that he was 16 repositioned at Alameda Naval Air Station. 17 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) Was that because of 18 the argument? l(b)(7)(C) 19 No. He had stepped down from 20 his position at Hunters Point and was still an 21 employee. No one had done anything. I mean this was 22 Bert's move and from what I understand they placed him 23 over there while this investigation was being done. (b)(7)(C) 24 SPECIAL AGENT Did he go over there 25 to be the RSO? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
32 1 No . 2 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) What was he? l(b)(7)(C) 3 There was already an RSO over 4 there . I think they were having him track s?me costs 5 or do something administrative. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Tetra Tech 6 SPECIAL Do 7 employees also have a respons ibility to notify the 8 Navy as i t relates to safety-related concerns? 9 ~l (b_)(7_)(C_)~ ~ - - ' !: Yes. 10 SPECIAL AGENT {b)(?)(C) How is that done? 11 What's t he mechanism? I know you said with the NRC J..2 there is the NRC cards, the notification is available, 13 how to reach the NRC personnel. Is it the same thing 14 with the Navy? 15 ... r _)(7-'(-CJ_ _ _.....I= That is done through two 16 channels . One is done through the project manager and 17 one would be the RSO from the level that I see. (b)(?)(C) 18 SPECIAL AGENT Who is the project 19 manager? (b){?)(C) 20 (b)(7)(C) 21 SPECI AL AGENT Was Bowers 22 retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear 23 safety concerns? 24 ~l (b_)(?_)(C _) _ _ __,!: No . 25 SPECIAL AGENT L] Did you have any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202} 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
33 1 discussions with Bowers following his departure from 2 the site? 3 l-------Jl (b)(7)(C) Yes ,....,.---. (b)(7)(C) 4 SPECIAL AGENT What did the 5 discussion consist of? l(b)(7)(C) I was told to get with him 6 I= 7 over the dosimetry issue . We had dosimetry logs that 8 were not in good shape and through ...__ _ _ _ _ ___, he l(b)(7)(C) I 9 would set up meetings for Bert and I to get together 10 r*w,xci and ~--------~ if you will. I 11 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) And did that occur? 12 _l (b-)(7-)(C_) _ _ _ !: Yes. (b)(7)(C) 13 SPECIAL AGENT How did that process 14 go? 15 l~------~~i
'.b)(7)(C)
It was uncomfortable . 16 SPECIAL AGENT ~ Why was that?
"""l (b.,.,.,
)(7,..,.
)(C.,..)- - - - - . ,
17 . : Because all the man had for 18 records was photocopies and some makeshift logs and 19 when I looked at the logs and l ooked at the 20 photocopies of the TLDs, we still didn't have enough 21 information to reference to make an issue log. So at 22 that point ~ r -~_xq _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___J 23 24 25 r>!1XCJ
~-------~ osimetry 1
b had on record for current. in the past to employees we still And I wasn't real happy NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
34 I
~~
1 ~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ because as an RSO that is 2 your job, that is your domain and he was not doing it . (b)(7)(C) 3 SPECIAL AGENT Did site management. 4 ever identify to you that Bowers was a trouble maker 5 or wasn't looked upon in a favorable light? l(b)(7)(C) 6 No. (b)(7)(C) 7 SPECIAL AGENT Does Tetra Tech a follow a progressive discipline policy? 9 l~------~I: (b)(7)(C) Progressive -- I haven't been JO disciplined. (b)(7)(C) 11 SPECIAL AGENT . _ _ ___. Have you see anybody 12 else disciplined and in the manner in whic h they've 13 been disciplined? Generally, if you get in trouble 14 for something the first time, you get a warning. And 15 then it goes to written and then it goes to verbal, 16 written, and then 17 l~-_ _ _ ___,:I (b)(7)(C) I've seen lots of warnings and 18 log book entries made. I have not seen anyone perform 19 a write-up on anyone else for disciplinary action. (b)(7)(C) 20 SPECIAL AGENT Okay . Is that 21 because management just is oblivious or avoiding these 22 things or because the environment there is one that 23 you all just take corrective action, move forward and 24 operate efficiently? 25 l_.__ _ _ ____.:I (b)(l)(C) You got part of it there. In NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W, (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
35 1 the end, we try to document what we've done wrong. 2 Put that in a deficiency log, have a corrective action 3 in place to try to prevent whatever happened from 4 happening again and go on from there. 5 But also -- what was that question again? 6 I want to make sure I'm answering this right. (b)(7)(C) 7 SPECIAL AGENT Relative to 8 progressive discipline. l(b)(7)(C) Progressive discipline, 9 10 everyone is pretty good in the fact that once they've 11 been warned on something, not to do it again . We 12 don't have too many repeat offenders. For instance, 13 if you miss a sign out on my RWP log, you take a day 14 off. And that may sound harsh to some, but I would 15 like to remind them that _r_x,_xc_>____________________,~ ho had 16 co take a day off . 17 In o rder to achieve compliance we had to 18 start putting rules down and so far it's done nothing 19 but help the program in the way that we might have one 20 or two individuals a month miss a sign out, whereas 21 under the Bowers regime I was told to fill in the 22 blanks by him. L So .(b-X7-){C)--------------------------------___Jlt. 0 23 the worker where it ought to be versus the 24 responsibility falling on middle management to make 25 things look good. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .. N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
36 1 SPECIAL AGENT I:::]: Okay. And when you LX7)(C) and Bert was RSO, it was not 2 worked as a 3 that way? l(b)(7)(C) 4 No. I= (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT Was progressive discipline when the "'t_ JbXl)(C)
...___________..,1 Lnd you were 6
7 r...bXl_XC_>_ _..,I and he was the RSO, was that even an issue 8 then? r _)(7_,,_c)_ _ _.....I:
... No . There was no -- I've 9
10 never been disciplined by Mr. Bowers. Company-wide, 11 the only discipline that we would be able to offer 12 would be internally within our company. Most of the 13 technicians that work for us are subcontracted, so I 14 haven't seen anyone be disciplined at Hunters Point. ]5 Has it happened in the past? Yes. But I was not 16 privy to it. I haven't seen such action go down. 17 SPECIAL AGEN'l' ~ : How does Tetra Tech 18 identify performance concerns to ics employees? Say 19 you got an issue with somebody in the work they're 20 performing. How would you convey that? Is it in 21 writing. Is it a conference call with somebody? How 22 does that go about? r _)(7-)(_ c,_ _ _....,!: Well, you have a yearly 23 24 evaluation that your technical lead will provide to 25 you. Our technical lead or my technical lead right NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
37 i S l(b)(7)(C) 1 now A couple months back I got 1* 2 t ime to sit down with him and go through the 3 evaluation. I was asked if I had any questions. I 4 stated no and I signed the evaluation and we're good 5 for another year. (b)(7)(C) 6 SPECIAL AGENT Had Bowers ever been 7 placed on a Performance Improvement Plan as far as you 8 know? 9 l(b)(7)(C)
~-~~~~----1 :
I Not that I'm aware of. (b)(7)(C) 10 SPECIAL AGENT Had Bowers been 11 subject to progressive discipline in any way? 12 l~-~~~~---I= No. (b)(7)(C) No. Not that I'm aware 13 o f. 14 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(CJ : Were there any other 15 employees that raised safety-related concerns who were 16 invari ably laid off, transferred, or subject to 17 adv erse action? 18 l--~~~~~~I: (b)(7)(C) Not that I'm aware of, no. 19 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) You said an 20 invest igation was conducted relative to Mr . Bowers 21 raising issues and then resigning? 22 l~-~~~~___.I: (b){7)(C) Yes. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT Do you know who 24 conducted the investigation? (b)(7)(C) 25 l(b)(?)(C) I believe that was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000&-3701 www.nealrgross.oom
38 1 r_
... )(-7)-(C-) ------J'* with some of the on-site 2 investigation that happened, but that was mainly 3 headed up by r_ I
... )(-l )(_C_) _ _.... and l(b)(?)(C) 1-4 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) !: Do you believe that 5 Bowers was discriminated against for raising those 6 safety concerns?
l(b)-(7)-(C)_ _.....,!:
.... No.
7 8 S PECIAL AGENT l(bJ(7)(C) I: Have you ever had 9 any problems on the site as it relates to radiation 10 p o stings? 11 l..._ _ _ ____.I: (b)(7)(C) Mr. Bowers J. o ved his postings. 12 Problems. The NRC has been out twice . They have 13 found n o probl ems with our postings . Has Mr. Bowers 14 brought up i ssues with our postings? Yes. 15 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) What were his 16 i ssues? 17 l________,:I (b)(7)(C/ Oh, his i ssues with postings, 16 i f someone accidentally backed a dump t ruck i nt o one 19 and bent the T post that was holding the post i ng down, 20 he would get angry. He would want a photo taken and 21 then he would run around to a l l management showing 22 what happened and he stated that no one respected the 23 rad component and that no one respected him because a 24 sign was bent . I
- l. .---------------...1 on posting areas ,
(b)())(C) 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
39 1 types of postings in areas. I bel ieve the others 2 probably have as well . (b)(7)(C) 3 SPECIAL AGENT Is there a 4 requirement for the amount of s u rveys that shoul d b e 5 conducted? Is it once a week, once a day? Is it 6 survey and all ingoing equipment and outgoing 7 equipment? What's the survey requiremenc? 8 '(b)
-_(7)_(c_) _ _ _,!: We have various types of 9 surveys. We have weeklies , monthlies. We've even got 10 some biannual i es and we have a routine that is put in 11 wri t ing t hat shows what needs to be surveyed . It's an 12 Exc el spreadsheet and a technician goes and performs 13 a routine survey. Not o n ly will they type in their 14 ini tials that they've done it, but the surveys go to 15 t he base-wide rad supervi sor as well . He verifies 16 that al l the weekly surveys, monthly surveys, or 17 biannual s are done and there we go.
18 The routine of those surveys was put 19 together by l'...b-)(_ 7 (c_) _ _ _ ____.! and
)_ l(b)(7)(C) ! based upon the 20 activity of the site 21 SPECIAL AGENT r )(7)(C) ~ Are corners being 22 cut as it relates to proper conduction of the 23 radiation surveys?
24 l....._ _ ____,Fl (b)(7)(C) No . (b)(7)(C) 25 SPECIAL AGENT Are empl oyees NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
40 1 ensuring the safekeeping of all work-related areas and 2 equipment? I mean for example, if you have some 3 employees that go out to a portion of the site and 4 they take out they take a Bobcat out there and 5 tools, are those tools, are they being locked up at 6 the end of the night or being surveyed appropriately 7 and put back? Are all things being managed like they 8 should? 9 l(b)(7)(C) l They're being surveyed out in 10 most cases. Sometimes we leave the heavy equipment 11 behind in an area because that would require a pretty 12 extensive survey. But as for hand tools and stuff 13 like that, we're going to hit them up at the control 14 point. If it's something that 's leaving site and we 15 would be doing an outgoing survey on it, throughout 16 the week we probably generate somewhere between oh, 17 I'm going to" say 8 and 12 incoming or outgoing 18 surveys. We do have those in our database. They are 19 assigned either a designator EO for equipment outgoing 20 or EI, equipment ingoing . L.r_x_~c_>________----JI rJC'XCJ And yes, L.-----------' a copy of those under a 10g sheet . 21 22 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) I= And I got 23 information that there was an issue that Bowers may 24 have raised abouc an area not being chained up at the 25 end of the night or the chain supposedly blocking off NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~701 WWW .nealrgross.com
41
- 1. the area, c h at equipment had been left ouc by some of 2 the craft staff?
3 l(b)(7)(C)
~- ~~~~~=
I Yes. 4 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Would you care to speak to that? 6 5
"'""l (b)-=(7)-(C)_ _ _ _ l Sure. We discussed it a 7 little earlier with regards to the combination locks.
8 Bert wanted everything locked up and I did, too. ~ 9 I put in a combination that 10 isn't already being used on site. We have general 11 combinations to get you in the buildings. Another set 12 to get you into work areas. This was something I came 13 up with myself because I wanted access to be very 14 l i mited. I gave the RSOR at that time the combination 15 because he should have access to radioactive materia l . 16 The thing that got me is he sent in a 17 crew, a team t o go investigate this area that I was 18 worki ng in and no one was under an RWP when they did 19 it . (b)(7)(C) 20 SPECIAL AGENT So there was no 21 radiological work permi t for that area? 22 l(b)(7)(C) L There was a radiological work 23 permi t. He was the one that requested the RWP, yet he 24 never signed on to the log sheet that he would follow 25 the rules. I have it with me if you care to see it. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
42 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPECIAL AGENT Yes, I' 11 tak e a 2 look at that at the conclusion . 3 l.________,:I (b)(?)(C) Okay. 4 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) I: But overal 1, 5 employees were, areas were being secured accordingly? 6 - - - - - - ~:I l-~b)(7)(C) Yes, a generator was left out 7 one night. The photo I saw today, it was quite a 8 story that was attached to it. We simply -- we were 9 given a generator to run our operation. That way we 10 could start early in the morning, we go right in, and 11 go to work. We had requested a pickup of said 12 generator. 'b-)(_7)_(c_) _ _ _ _ _ _..,lcrew
...l comes by and picks up 13 all the commodities that we use and it was simply 14 forgotten that night. My crew didn't stick around 15 long enough to watch i t be picked up. We dropped the 16 ball o n that.
(b)(7)(C) 17 SPECIAL AGENT Was a deficiency 18 report written? l(b)(7)(C) 19 I would have to ask ~ 20 l.___ _ _---Jon (b)(7)(C) I that. Because we typically, when it comes 21 to property, you have to have $500 in damage and it 22 wasn't stolen. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT It was just left 24 out. 25 l(b)(7)(C) So there was no damage. It NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
44 1 l- - - - - - - ~:I (b){7)(C) Not that I've seen, no. (b)(7)(C) 2 SPECIAL AGENT Have you witnessed 3 or observed incidents wherein radiation surveys were 4 not adequately done, either done incorrectly, or not 5 done at all? l(b)(7)(C) 6 I've seen a few that have 7 crossed my desk where they've been done incorrectly. (b)(?)(C) 8 SPECIAL AGENT How have the 9 c orrections been managed towards those particular 10 inc i dents? 11 l--------Jl (b)(?)(C) Are we talking about~r_ 6 x,_x_ _ ___, 12 rxlXC'>
~---------'or I b ac k
- int e h d ay
?
SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Well, let's do both. 13 14 ... r_ )'7-)(-C)_ _ __,I= Okay. Same building, 271. 15 The crew that Bert had assembled to go in and 16 investigate whac I was doing or do routine survey, 17 whatever they claim they were doing (b)(?)(C) 18 SPECIAL AGENT Who was on that 19 team? 20 l...._ _ _ _ __,:I (b)(7)(C) Susan Andrews and that was I 21 l(b)(7)(C) al so ....- - - - - - - - ~ ~ And they were instructed by 22 Bowers to go do whatever he instructed them to do. 23 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Was that under the 24 guidelines and the auspices of his duties to instruct 25 them to go in and conduct that? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASl-jlNGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
45 l(b)(7)(C) l L Certainly . 2 SPECIAL AGENT ._ r x_7~_ _>_~ Okay. 3 l-*______,=I
'.b)(7)(C)
But once aga in , they didn't go 4 in under an RWP. (b)(7)(C) 5 SPECIAL AGENT Okay. And that is 6 against procedure ? 7 .... l(b)-(7)-(C_) __ __.I : That is strictly against 8 procedure . (b)(7)(C) 9 SPECIAL AGENT Okay . So he had 10 them go in 11 ....)(7_l(_c)_ ___,!: He had them go in. l'b- He claimed 12 i t was for purposes of rout i nes wh ich was fine*. They 13 also went i n and d i d dose rates on these drums . 14 When the report go t to me, it was quite 15 apparent that someone didn't know how to use an ion 16 chamber. And ._f&x_i_ xc_i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___.! this is 17 all wrong. r_ ~ XCJ my technicians do the survey . 18 Thank you very much . Because they had been using ion 19 chambers every day during the characterization process 20 of those 2800 devices. 21 SPECI AL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Okay. And so that 22 was when Bert was the RSO? 23 ._ r _)(? - )(_c J_ _ _ ___,j: Yes, sir . (b)(7)(C) 24 SPECIAL AGENT In terms of since 25 l....- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I (b)(7)(C) when have you seen NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHING;f'ON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
46 l instances where people have employees have 2 incorrectly conducted the surveys? 3 l(b)(7)(C) I= Oh, I I ve seen situations wher e 4 on our surveys, on our outgoing, we will actually take 5 a physical picture of the equipmen t that has the 6 outgoing and then we will place smear locations on 7 t.hat photo . I've seen instances where I go through 8 and one or two of the smear locati ons might be 9 missing. One, two, three, wait, where's four? 10 There's nothing in the special notes saying four was 11 inside the cav (phone~ic) of a piece of equipment or 12 something like that. So I will reject those and say 13 we need to have a complete and full report here . 14 SPECIAL AGENT l(b)(?)(C) I: Okay. Does Tetra 15 Tech at Hunters Poinc work under the assumption of a 16 safety conscious work environment? 17 l~.~~~~~~ (b)(7)(C) I: Yes. Absou 1 t e l y. 18 SPECIAL AGENT elxc, I= Did Bowers develop 19 a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety and 20 protection? 21 .... l(b-)(7)-(C_) _ _ _,!: He developed an image for 22 something, but I wouldn't say that would be it. That 23 would be quite honorary. No, he did not portray the 24 image of radiation s afety. He portrayed the image of 25 wanting to control production through radiation NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
47 l safety, yet the radiation safety he was requiring was 2 no t commensurate with the activity of the materials we 3 have at the site. (b)(7)(C) 4 SPECIAL AGENT Which goes back to 5 that whole ideology of treating it like a power plant? 6 ______,I: l_.__(b)(7)(C) Yes, sir. 7 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l )(C) Okay. (b)(7)(C) I 8 l
* - - - - - -~ I hope I answered that clearly 9 for you.
(b)(7)(C) 10 SPECIAL AGENT I think so. Were 11 you privy to any c onversati ons or meetings with Tetra 12 Tech management regarding Bowers' safety concerns and 13 his status of employment? l(b)(7)(C) I: No . 14 15 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Have you ever raised 16 safety-related issues during the tenure of employment 17 at Hunters Point and Tetra Tech? 18 l~------~= (b)(7)(C) I Yes. 19 SPECIAL AGENT -j(b-)r-)(-C)~ I: Were you subject to 20 any adverse act as a result of raising those safety 21 concerns? l(b)(7)(C) 22 No, sir. I= (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT Were your safety 24 concerns addressed accordingly? 25 l(b)(7)(C) I: Yes, they were. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
48 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPECIAL AGENT Do you f e el that the 2 radiation protection program at Hunters Point is 3 sufficient? l(b)(7)(C) 4 I feel it is sufficient for 5 the activity we have out at Hunters Point. And I 6 b elieve it's improving. (b)(7)(C) 7 SPECIAL AGENT L . . . - - . . . J And are employees 8 effectively abiding by the RP program? 9 r )(l)(C) I: I'm sorry? (b)(7)(C) 10 SPECIAL AGENT Are employees 11 effectively abiding by the radiation protection 12 program? 13 l-------~ (b)(7)(C) I= Yes, they're trying, yes. (b)(7)(C) 14 SPECIAL AGENT You say they' re 15 trying. Is that to say they haven't always? 16 l-------~fI (b)(7)(C) There have been lapses in the 17 past on certain things but there wasn't enough 18 involvement by the past radiation safety officer to 19 correct them . ._ r J(7XCl _________________ I
----1 and ~
Rrnxci1 20 lC XCJ And if I see 21 something I try to get all eyes and ears present and 22 come up with ideas on fixing it. (b)(7)(C) 23 SPECIAL AGENT Does that lend to 24 the fact that maybe there were things going on that 25 were never even addressed because he didn ' t s ee them? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
49 1 l~-------= (b)(7)(C) I I believe so, yes . 2 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : And is i t to assume 3 to some extent that the craft employees didn't have 4 the knowledge to really know? Or did they have 5 questions? Because in the beginning we talked about 6 most employees should know what a nuclear safety -- l(b)(7)(C) 7 Right, right. (b)(?)(C) 8 SPECIAL AGENT ._ _ __. But then you also 10 9 you got on as the._ __I mentioned that the craft employees had questions and (b)(7)(C) 11 l~------~= Correct. (b)(?)(C) 12 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) So were there just 13 kind of some gray area items that were going on in the 14 field and they didn'L know how to address them? 15 l(b)(?)(C) I= l think there migh t have been 16 things going on out in the field and when he did come 17 out of his office and did see something, instead of 18 trying to correct it, he was on a fact-finding 19 mission, i .e . , the camera. Hence, the water break 20 station we talked about. That could have been right 21 then and there pulled to the right side of the RCA and 22 repaired. And then the following day at the morning 23 meeting, the kickoff safety meeting that we have at 7 24 o'clock should have been addressed with the entire 25 crew. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
50 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPECIAL AGENT And that wasn'c? 2 l~-------'l (b)(7)(C) Thac was not done. 3 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) He just took the 4 pictures and came in and said hey, this is what I saw. 5 ~l (b-)(?_)(_C)____ __,!: Yes, sir . 6 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : How would you 7 respond to the statemen t that Hunters Point is a 8 n uclear s i te being run like a construction site? If 9 someone said that to you, what would be your response? 10 ..... l(b)-(7)-(C)_ _ __.l I would say the person that 11 made t hat cal l is uneducated as to the condi t i ons of 12 the site. (b)(7)(C) 13 SPECIAL AGENT Okay . I'm 14 li steni ng . 15 ... r _)(7-)(C _) _ _.... I: I would say that is a rather 16 ignorant statement. And the reason I woul d say that 17 is I've had a lot o f involvement from our friends at 18 the NRC and I've gone through one inspection wit~,__ (b)(7)(C) 19 l (b)(7)(C) I a coupl e weeks back. I went through an 20 L - - - - - - - ' l(b)(7)(Ci aud i t wi th I (phonetic)L__ ~ ___J It was a very 21 thorou gh audi t, the most t horough audit I've ever been 22 involved i n. And t hey seem to think we have a pretty 23 good program . They pointed out some areas that were 24 weaker and would like to see improvement and they also 25 had a l ready seen proof that corrective actions were NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.* N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, o_c , 20005~3701 www.nealrgross.com
51 1 being taken on chose weaknesses. That's how I feel. 2 SPECIAL AGENT r:::::]: Were you ever 3 i nstructed by management to not document or write up 4 safety-related issues by employees? 5 l~ (b-) (l-)(-C)____ __,!: Never. 6 SPECIAL AGENT r'm:6 l Did Bert Bowers 7 engage in protected activity by raising safety-related 8 concerns and was ultimately punished by the company? 9 .... l{b-)(7)-(C_ ) __ !: No
- 10 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C)
Mr. Murphy? 11 MR. MURPHY: Nothing. Thank you. 12 SPECIAL AGENT ~ : I have a couple of 13 closing comments and remarks. Have I threatened you 14 in any manner in exchange for your testimony? 15 l~-------'~I (b)(7)(C) No, sir. 16 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Have I offered you 17 any reward in exchange for your testimony? 18 l~ - - - - - - -:I (b)(7)(C) No, sir. 19 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Has it been given 20 freely and voluntarily? l 2l 22 l '.b)(7)(C)
~-----___.t SPECIAL AGENT Yes, sir.
(b)(?)(C) Anything else you 23 would like to add to the record at this time? 24 l...._____,=I
'.b)(7)(C)
I would like to show you those 25 documents that we discussed earlier. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W, (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
52 (b)(7)(C) 1 SPECIAL AGENT We can do that l(b)(7)(C) 2 offline. For the record, ! will provide some 3 documents that were referenced earlier such as the 4 audit report, correct? 5 l(b)(7)(C)
~-~~~~~~:
I The audit report and the RWP 6 that covered the work done in Building 271. 7 SPECIAL AGENTE ]: Those items will be 8 reviewed and provided at a later date and time. 9 The time is now 12:17 p.m . , Pacific 10 Standard Time. This interview is concluded. 11 (Whereupon, at 12:17 p.m . , the interview 12 was concluded.) 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of: Name of Proceeding: Interview of l(b)(7)(C) Docket Number: 1 -2012- 002 Locacion: San Francisco, California were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me o r under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings as recorded on tape(s) provided by the NRC. (b)(7)(C) Official Transcriber Neal R . Gross & Co . , Inc. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS ANO TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealr9ross. com
EXHIBIT 15 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 15}}