ML20095D621
| ML20095D621 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/19/1984 |
| From: | Calicutt J, Jerrica Johnson, Liford K BROWN & ROOT, INC. (SUBS. OF HALLIBURTON CO.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20095D591 | List: |
| References | |
| OL-2, NUDOCS 8408230413 | |
| Download: ML20095D621 (79) | |
Text
_-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
1 1 UNITED-STATES OF AMERICA tlUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O 2 BSFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY & L IC E N S IllG BOARD
., . y c} 5^ UL*n
' ,T . D . O ~
3,; ,f 3 IN ' TiiE MATTER OF .) ;, ,;. p _, ; -[g,
)
4 TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC ) DOCKET 11 0 S .
(COM A tlCH E PEAK STEAM
)
)
50-44 f)g yRQ-6 ELECTRIC' STATION, UNITS ) p~ _
J 1 AND 2) ) ;
7 it l' TUG .? :) 19s<;;. L5 tocano s l' 8 g' L;ancnwcr Aj LLcuaq ej
/ /
9 - /
PREFILED TESTIMONY OF ~
b __'
10 KENNETH LIFORD JOHN R. JOHNSON 11 JAMES W. CALICUTT AUGUST 19, 1984 12 O
14 1 15 16 17 PREFILED TESTIMONY OF KENNETH LIFORD, JOHN R.
18 JOHNSON and JAMES W. CALICUTT, taken on the 19th day 19 of August, 1984, in the above-stylod and numbered 20 cause, at Glen Rose Motor Inn located at Highway 67 21 & FM Road 201, in the City of Glen Rose, County of
^
22 Somorvell and State of Texas, before Janet E.
23 Schaffer, a Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for
-24 .the Stato of Texas.
O 25 8408230413 840821 PDR ADOCK 05000 T
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
n___,- w - .-. - _ - . . . .. - . . -
- . , . . . . . ~ . . . -.n._..._ . . .. e
~ .. *
.2~
t.
a: p 7 .
- _ _- m3 ~ '~'4 y N
- .
J ;* :. :; _ !
.j; _ ,
_1 i
- i. A P P E A R A. N C E S t'
.y
.gi ^
2' Af
,, ' BISHOP, LIBERMAN, COOK,-DPURCELL'&-BEYNOLDS
- 11.gl;. "
Attorneys'at . Law.
s.c
- 3 '- -1200 Seventeenth street,.
N.W.
JWashington, D.C.. :20036.
- 4-J BY s- 1 Mark L '. Davidson, Esq.
m -
~5
_ q '
u APPEARING FORiAPPLICANTS
~. ~ ' '
^
', 6- q , 4
- e )<, . _
, - ; 7. ' o n .
- , il* '
- g;
, - 4 e~ : :9 ,
s .
Llo- .
a 11; ,
se. .
y 7
,12 ~. ,
7 ,
, .s sj .
, 7 ^. .
13 ,
- _t .
4 . - - ,
114 s +
.A.+ .
l-'g :- *
.15 '
~ '
., .> .,- m - >
c m ,. .. ,
-" .M '
- - 16 , y _
i
- 1 5
~ 17 s .
- , .e 18 ' , -
\ '
7 l19 . l ;
- Y 'at 20!
.?
/* - .,r 2 [. * ;
- y. '
4 c" : 2 2 - -' '
s _ . -
~9 .a. >
' I23' ,
- .a ,
- y. _
24, > .
, . , ,i
~(m_.
~ i 1
). ,
H; t
.25 s '
-.e ,
k 2 i
-> - "J m -FUDERAL COURT REPORTER _S ,
3 1 P R O C E E D I H G S
(]h 2 MR. DAVIDSON: My name is Mark L.
3 Davidson. I am a member of the firm of Bishop, 4 Liberman,. Cook, Purcell & Reynolds, counsel for the
-5 Applicant in these prococdings. I om accompanied 6 here'today by Mr. Ken Liford, Mr. Jamon Calicutt and 7 Mr. John R. Johnson for the purpano of taking those 8 gentlemen's direct testimony and preparing the same 9 for profiling pursuant to a procedure ordered by the 10 Atomic Safety Licensing Board.
11 Ms. Reporter, would you please swear in 12 theno witnesses, who would appear here today as a 13 panol, so we may begin their direct examination by 14 way of this deposition.
15 K E N N E Til LIFORD, 16 J O II N R. JOHNSON and 17 JAMES W. CALICUTT, 18 the witnessen hereinbefore named, being first duly 19 cautioned and sworn to testify the truth, the wholo 20 truth and nothing but the truth, tentified on their 21 oaths as follows:
22 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Liford, for the 23 record, would you please state your full name, 24 current employer and the capacity in which you are
,O 25 currently employed PEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
4 1 MR. LIFORD: Kenneth Liford, Brown &
() 2 Root, assistant general cuperintendent.
3 MR. DAVIDSON: And would you please 4 describe or relate to us-your work history at 5 Comanche Peak and the date you were hired there-6 until the present?
7 MR. LIFORD: I was hired January '78.
8 I was hired in as a piping uaperintendent. I was 9 the piping superintendent until a year and-a-half, 10 plus or minus. Went to assistant general 11 superintendent then, and am still in that capacity.
12 MR. DAVIDSOti As a piping 13 superintendent, Mr. Litord, what were your 14 responsibilities?
15 MR. LIFORD Piping, welding, hangers 16 and insulation.
17 MR. DAVIDSON: And as a piping 18 superintendent during the period January '70 until 19 approximately a year and-a-half ago, about how many 20 individuals did you supervise?
21 MR. LIFORD: From 1100 to 1400.
22 MR. DAVIDSON: How many individuals 23 directly reported to you, and what were their titles 24 or capacities?
O 25 MR. LIFORD: At the peak when we had
____.___ F E D E R A L_____C O U R T _ R E P O R T E R S
- m
.5a y, -~ 3, ,
, [1) ,
' ' 4 _;
f .$
?? .
.1 x
s
,'y ,
- ~ .
- z. ,
^ ~
f" J1J taeumost people out th e r e , I . liad : a pp r o x im a t'e ly. s i x '
,9 - -
2( ^ ' superintendents reporting to me.
k4J -
,- . -3 MR..DAVIDSON: And after you.became ~
s
~
4- assistant general superintend'ent, how"m'any po' ogle 5 r'eported directly to you?
6- MR. LIFORD: That'was when I was
.p i '7 referring to.
8 MR. DAVIDSON- I'm sorry.- I believe ,
9 my. question was when you-were piping-superintendent, 10 how many people did you have directly reporting to 11 you'and what were-their capacities?
a-12- MR. LIFORD: I had about 1100 people
/~ . 13 work'ing.for me. Out of'that, I had one s_ . .
14_ s u p e r i n t e n d e n t 'a n d several general foremen and 4
15 - foremen reporting to me. ,
x 16 MR. DAVIDSON: I believe it's your:
1 17 testimony that subsequently you were promoted to-18 assistant general superintendent and you.had six
~
19 su'perintendents reporting to you? ,
,2 0 ' MR. LIFORD: Appro'ximately, yes. ,
'21 MR. DAVIDSON: And how many. people
- 22. were under your general supervision at that time?
'23 MR. LIFORD: Ranged from l'100 to 1400.-
24 MR. DAVIDSON: :Hr.'Calicutt, would you r
25 please tell us, for the record," your full name, your e
-t u ._ . . ..
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
M u.- - : _ _ _ n u _ _- . . .
6 1 current employer, current capacity in which you are (h 2 so employed.
3 MR. CALICUTTI James Walter Calicutt.
4 Work for Brown & Root as a general mechanical 5 superintendent.
6 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Calicutt, would you 7 please relate'your work history at Comanche Peak 8 from the dato you were hired on to the present, 9 detailing also for us your responsibilities during 10 that period.
11 MR. CALICUTT: I have been over all 12 mechanical activities since I've been there.
13 MR. DAVIDSON: Has your position 14 changed since you were hired at Comanche Peak?
15 HR. CALICUTT: No.
16 MR. DAVIDSON: When was that, sir?
17 MR. CALICUTT: May of 1978.
18' MR. DAVIDSON: And in the capacity an 19 general mechanical superintendent, how many people 20 did you supervise?
21 MR. CALICUTT I have two assistant --
22 at one time I had two asnistant s u p e r i n t.e nd e n t s and 23 one nuperintendent reporting directly to me.
24 MR. DAVIDSON: And how many people O 25 overall were you responsibic for?
. PEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
+ '
7 1 MR. CALICUTT: At the peak, between 14
() 2 and 15 men.
3 HR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Johnson, would you 4 please stato, for the record, your full name, 5 curront employer and the capacity in which you are 6 employed currently.
7 MR. JOHNSON: John Ronald Johnson, 8 Drown & Root, and superintendent.
9 MR. DAVIDSOKt In what area, sir?
10 MR. JOHNSOHI Superintendent of civil 11 and mechanical in Reactor Humber 2.
12 HR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Johnson, would you 13 please tell us when you were first hired to work at
}
14 Comancho Peak, and would you relato thereafter your 15 subsequent work history, including any promotions or 16 changes in responsibilities that you may have had? :
17 MR. JOHNSON: June 1975 I hired in as 18 a carpenter. Approximately two weeks later I was 19 lp f, sent up to carpenter foreman. Six months later ;3(i;y p .g .
20 general foreman, Building Department. Approximately Ij., .[.f(':
,,4 y.y.-
21 six months after that, assistant superintendent fkhh p ( - ). ,
22 Civil Department. Probably six months after that, ff d 23 building superintendent, night shift.
I'dkT About a year L . 4j s
24 and-a-half after that I was put on days as a hanger 'Mjy) i, 4 e'.
25 superintendont; about three years and nine montha of If t,4l
- N g..,..
- N ,1
. : -f ,, '
? .yr
_________ _ F E D E D A t, _C00RT_ REPORTERS e 02
8 1 that. Then 2 went to Reactor Number 1 Task Force,
() 2 craft superintendent, ten months. Now present.
3 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Liford, is there a f
4 policy in effect dt Comanche Peak regarding the 5 manner in which construction personnel are to relate 6 to QC/QA personnel?
7 MR. LIFORDt 70s.
0 MR. DAVIDSON: What in your
.=
=
9 understanding of the policies, sir?
o 10 MR. LIFORD: The policy between 7 11 construction and Quality Control on the project is -
P 12 simple working relationship to where each group does a 13 their specific job. There is no harassing, 14 intimidating, threatening from one' group to the E 15 other.
V e 16 HR. DAVIDSON: When you say there is h 17 no harassing, intimidating and threatening between
= 18 one group and another, do you mean that it in tho 19 policy that craft are not to engage in that kind of I
20 conduct with QC/QA torsonnel? ,
t-21 MR. L1 FORD: Yes.
t 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Explain to me what you 23 understood the policy in that regard to be.
E .
! 24 MR. LIFORD Construction personnel M
[
() 25 are not allowed to harass, intimidate or throaton 5
b FEDERAL COURT REPORTERG
9 1 Quality control personnel.
() 2 MR. DAVIDSON: WhLt happens if they do, 3 sir? What is the policy on that?
4 HR. LIFORD: They are terminated.
5 MR. DAVIDSON: Is thoro any policy of 6 which you are aware that is in effect at Comancho 7 Peak regarding the manner in which disagreements 8 between craft personnel, QC/QA personnel should be 9 handled?
10 MR. LIFORD: Yes. Any time a 11 disagreement between construction and OC or QA 12 personnel occurs, than it is taken to the next 13 immediate supervisor until it is resolved.
)
14 MR. DAVIDSON Now, when did you first '
15 become aware of these policies, Mr. Liford?
16 MR. LIFORD: Became aware of the 17 policies prior to coming to Comanche Peak.
18 MR. DAVIDSON llo w is that, sir?
19 HR. LIFORD I worked on a nuclear 20 power station in Wilmington, tiorth Carolina. The /
21 policies are the same.
22 MR. DAVIDSON: llow do you know the 23 policios are the samo?
24 MR. h1 FORD: Both projects wore Brown 0 25 6. Root construction, and Brown & Root's policies are FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
10 1 the name.
l()' 2 MR. DAVIDSONI When were you first 3 made aware of these policies, sir?
4 MR. LIFORD Upon indoctrination into S Drunswick Steam Electric Station.
6 MR. DAVIDSON: About what date was 7 that?
8 MR. LIFORD Approximately '76 9 MR. DAVIDSON: When you were hired in 10 January 1978 as pipe superintendent at Comanche Peak, .ffhl N ." '
11 did anyone reemphasize, remind you of the Brown & . ~ ; .; -
12 Root policies that you have just mentioned? ',l,-
. O. L
' s. ~
'j
. ,}
13 MR. LIFORD U. D. Douglas, who in .
14 project manager, and Doug Frankum, who was assistant Y,~.
a' 15 project manager, discussed the policies and the -[
16 problems prior to me going to work. }I )-
c.x 17 MR. DAVIDSON: When you say they ly? :. . ' .-
la discussed the policies, do you mean the policies of 9 . . .'.
19 Brown & Root with respect to the manner in which y ' ~.e $,-
20 craft people should treat QC/QA personnel and how ]7?.'?
f' ' ' . ~ ', . '
21 craft individuals should resolve differences of -#
NO.
22 opinion with QC/QA personnol? ',f' '}
ws 23 MR. LIFORD: Yes. And other policies, y ,,-(
g _. y; . '
24 job'policios. Did O 25 MR. DAVIDSON! Were these discussions '3+4 -
, /yl, s.
,f ,
,4 ' .rL
.s-m, FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS -___ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - -
,.I '[f
, . . . . . .. . , . - . , . . . , m.. ., . . . . , -
[- 11 3r W
1 that you had with Mr. Douglas and Mr. Frankum part -
() 2 of your indoctrination?
e 3 MR. LIFORD: Yes. 1_
4 MR. DAVIDSON: How were they ;
5 administered to you? In other words, under what 6 circumstances did these discussions occur?' ";
~
7 MR. LIFORD: When I came on site and 8 was called to a meeting with Mr. Frankum and Mr.
9 Douglas, we sat and discussed policies, procedures s_
d 10 and problems in the area that I was to be over. '
i-11 11R.-DAVIDSON: When you say problems -
in the area that you were to supervise, what do you E 12 13 mean? ,-
14 HR. LIFORD: Problems of -- in the -;
, 15 manner like engineering problems, OA/0C problems, --
16 construction problems; just loose run of all types A r
17 of problems that they were aware of in the ?
18 department that I was taking over. I 19 MR. DAVIDSON: What'QC/QA problems did 20 Mr. Douglas and Mr. Frankum discuss with you? a
,t-21' MR. LIFORD: Procedural p:oblems.
m 22 MR. DAVIDSON: Could you amplify on ~
5 23 that for me?
l 24 MR. LIFORD: There wore, when I first c)' 25 came here, several procedural type problems [_
d FEDERAL COURT REPORTE1tS
12 1 concerning QA/QC procedure and a construction
() 2 procedure that did not say the same thing. Part of 3 my task was to get a correlation between the 4 construction procedures and the Quality control' 5 proceduros so everybody was operating with the same 6 words in each specific procedure.
7 HR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Liford, after you 8 received this indoctrination, did you make any 9 effort to communicate the policies that you had been 10 reminded of by Messrs. Frankum and Douglas to those 11 individuals who were to be your subordinates in the 12 department that you were going to supervise?
13 MR. LIFORD: Yes.
14 HR. DAVIDSON Would you please 15 describe thoso efforts.
~
16 MR. LIFORD After approximately three 17 wecks on the job site reviewing procedures, la reviewing the craft production, number of NCR's that 19 they were getting, the delivery of material, 20 everything, I called a meeting with everyone that 21 worked for me on a supervisory capacity and went 22 cver all the aspects of the job, including the 23 policies for the site concerning Quality Control and - -
24 QA/QC, engineering and craft.
O 25 MR. DAVIDSON: And at that meeting you
___________ F E D E R A L COURT REPORTERS
13 1
1 emphasized that the harassment, intimidation or
() 2 threatening of QA/QC personnel would not be 3 tolerated and disagreements were to bo-handled in a 4 professional manner, and where thoy could not be 5 resolved in the field, they should be taken up to 6 supervisors?
7 HR. LIFORD: Yes 8 HR. DAVIDSON: At any time subsequent 9 to that meeting did you undertake to reinforce or 10 reiterate the policies of which you were aware 11 regarding relationship with QC/QA by craft personnel 12 among your subordinates?
q) 13 HR. LIFORD: The answer to your 14 question is yes. I have always dealt with anybody 15 working for me to the point that --
of conveying to 16 them the way the job was to be run and how they were 17 to conduct theirself when dealing with QA/QC.
18 HR. DAVIDSON: Now, when you say that 19 you have always attempted to emphasize those 20 policies and explain them to your subordinates, when 21 you were pipe superintendent you were supervising 22 general foremen and foremen; in that correct?
23 HR. LIFORD: Yes.
24 HR. DAVIDSON: Are you saying that you O 25 undertook, at meetings or in discussions, to s
DEf4L C_QURy PCPORTEPS
14 1 emphasize to these general foremen and foremen what
() 2 the policios were for dealing with QA/QC personnel?
3 MR. LIFORD: Yes.
4 HR. DAVIDSON: Did you make any effort 5 to communicate these policies to people below the 6 level of general foreman and foreman?
7 HR. LIFORD: Yes.
8 MR. DAVIDSON: What efforts did you 9 make?
10 MR. LIFORD Any time that we have a 11 meeting with supervicors, within approximately two 12 days after the meeting I usually go out into the l 13 field and talk to the fitters, welders, helpers to 14 find out has the word of the policy.been transmitted 15 down to that level.
16 MR. DAVIDSOrt Mr. Calicutt, when were I 17 you first made aware of any policies regarding the 16 way in which it was expected at Comanche peak t h'a t craft and QC/QA personnel.would relate to each other?
19 20 MR. CALICUTTI uhen I was hired on.
21 HR. D AV I D S O ti s And what policies were i 22 erplained to you at that time?
23 MR. CALICUTTI All Brown & Root 24 policies.
O 25 HR. DAVIDSOtit Were any policion F
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
15 1 specifically regarding the manner in which craft was.
() '2 to treat QC/QA personnel and deal with disagreements 3 with them discussed with you?
4 MR. CALICUTT: Yes, they were.
5 MR. DAVIDSON: Could you tell us what 6 those policies wero?
7 MR. CALICUTT: I was told that dealing 8 with QA/QC would be handled in a professional manner.
9 If they had disagreements, it would be brought up to 10 the letter until it was solved.
11 MR. DAVIDSON: Was any mention made as 12 to whether or not it was appropriate to fight or 13 argue with QC/QA, or otherwise harass, intimidate or
{}
14 threaton such individuals?
15 MR. CALICUTT That was a no-no.
16 There wcs to be none of that.
17 MR. DAVIDSON: When you say that was a 18 no-no and there was to be none of that, what do you 19' mean?
20 MR. CALICUTT I mean that you would i 21 be terminated.
22 HR. DAVIDSON: And that was made clear 23 to you, sir?
24 MR. CALICUTTt Yes, it was.. ,
1 25 MR. DAVIDSON: And who made thcse
_ . . _ ____ PCDERAL_C_00RT__ REPORTERS
16 1 policies clear tc, you, and explained them to you,
() 2 when you hired on at the Peak?
3 MR. CALICUTT Mr. U. D. Douglas and 4 Doug~Frankum.
5 MR. DAVIDSON: In what cases or 6 circumstances did they explain that?
7 MR. CALICUTT: As I was being informod 8 of my duties when I got to Comanche Peak.
9 MR. DAVIDSON: At that time they took 10 the occasion to explain those policies to you?
11 MR. CALICUTTt Yes, they did.
12 MR. DAVIDSON: Subsequent to your 13 meeting with Messrs. Douglas and Frankum at which 14 they explained the policion that were in force 15 regarding the manner in which craft would deal with 16 QC/QA personnel, did you personally make any effort 17 to see to it that those policies, as you understood 18 them, were communicated to your subordinates?
19 MR. CALICUTTt Yes, I did.
20 MR. DAVIDSONs What efforts did you j 21 make, sir, to communicate the policies on dealing 22 'with QA/0C personnel?
23 MR. CALICUTTs I had meetings with 24 superintendents under me.
O 25 MR. DAVIDsOn Sir, when you say l , _
PEDERAL COURT HEPORTERS
,..' 17
/
' r,
_1 "mcetings," did jou meGn that you had more than onc
/ , , , .
jk) 2 _such meeting wl?tn'the individuals who were l
l- 3 subordinate tosyob?
l -
4 MR. CALICUTTs Yow.
S NR. DAVIDSOP How often or now 6 f r e q u e n t l y' G'i f. you hold ((uch meetings?
7 HR. CALICUTT A out once a month.
8 MR. DAVIDSON Nore,thjcp mootings 9 solely to #1scuss the proper relationship between 10 craft and QA/0C personnel, or were other subjects 11 disbusned?
12 HR. CALICUTT Other subjects would be 13 oiscunned.
14 -
MR. DAVIDSON: Did you also include in 15 those discussions, however, mention of the policies 16 regarding the relationship betw4cn craft personnel 17 and OC/OA7 16 HR. CALICUTTI Quite frequently.
19 - - MR. DAVIDSONS Other than having 20 m c o t,i n g s with the superintendants who reported to 21 you at which you communicated the policies regarding 22 the day in which craft would deal with OC/0A 23 personnel, did you make any effort to see to it that 24 those individuals communicated'that policy down to O ' 25 the craft porconnel they supervisod?
/
T C D E P. M . C O U u'l REPOR7!)DS
m _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ______ . . _ _ _ . _ . _ ._
18 __
1 MR. CALICUTT3 Yes. When I was in the
. hh 2 field, I would ask foremen, general foremen, crafts 3 people if they had been made aware of that.
4 HR. DAVIDSOHs You would specifically ,
5 ask them that question?
6 HR. CALICUTT Yes.
7 HR. DAVIDSON: And woro you convinced, 8 based on these discussion and question sessions that 9 you had with various craft personnel, that the 10 mossage was being communicated?
11 HR. CALICUTT Yes.
12 HR. DAVIDSOH3 Do you know whether, as 13 part of the indoctrination program at the Peak for _
14 all new employees, any discussions are had or 15 mention madoyof policion that are in forco regarding 16 the proper relationship between craft personnel and 17 QA/QC7 18 HR. CALICUTT: I believe it's in tho =_
1 19 indoctrination.
20 HR. DAVIDSON: So thorofore, all 21 employoun receive thin information when they're ..
22 employed and then roccive it again through 23 communication by their superiora?
24 HR. CALICUTTI That's correct.
O 25 HR. DAVIDSout Both at the time they .
-- ._. - . - . . - . . ~ .
, 19
-s .
k ' ,
4 A
'. 1 - a r e.. h i r e d and: subsequently, just as you did with
. c.
(f your;subordin,ates? '.+2 A ,
' 3 MR. CALICUJT: Yes.
. 4 'MR.'DAVIDSONs; ,M,r$-Johnson,.when you
- 5; were hired on at the Peak, were you made aware off 4
- 6. 'the existence of any policies with. regard to the f7 - manner l'n which craft were to relate to QC/QA
~ person'nal?
9 ,
MR. JOHNSON: No. ,
. J0 1 MR. DAVIDSON: Were you eveh made '
t .,
11 aware xof such. policies?. . s _~ ~ >
, s
,a ,, ; w il2 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.' Y ' ' C
- q. 13 MR. .DAVIDSONt W h e n . w e r e y y'o u' 'f i r s't V ,
14 madelaware'.of them?' .
tl y ,
15 e .MR. JOHNSON - It would be the latter ,
16 part of 1979,1around November.
.a 17 - MR. DAVIDSON:. How is it that you were 18 f'irst made. aware of: these policies when yo'u.were i , %,..
" , ,e %
- .s -
.y 19 first' hired:on,-air? '
~
21: programs and Latuff, I was' involved with;non-Q i
~
22 buildings' ands temporary sites'and things like tnat.- .
t s And. then wheneverEit came time for me to be moved.
23 W ',
- 24. down to:. hole; that's,when I was indoctrinated on
-;(\,.
^
. .s m
, , -25 , policies with QC.- ,
+1 Y
.,N,, I a _ , - . .. :.FEDERNL$ COURT _ REPORTERS _ -
' ~
20 9 'k '
- l. MR. DAVIOSON: If-I understand you
.-q k ~
~
.$ ). 2 ; correctly,.Mr. Johnson, : wha t you're saying is that
- i. .
, , 3- .your i n itial employment at thel Peak did not-involve
.4 what'is kn'o'wn as Q-related equipment or jobs, and 5 that thefwork you did was not subject to: inspection
-s ,
y-
'C6 by QC/QA personnel?
~
c 7 'MR.- JOHNSON: That's right.
. 8 MR. DAVID' SON: And therefore, you were
-9 not indoctrinated >to craft QC personnel because it 10 was not related to your job function?
- 11 ~ MR. JOHNSON: That's correct.
12 MR. DAVIDSON: Now,; subsequent to'that ij t 13 -time you were' hired as - a carpenter,'you were ~ +
k /l 14 transferred 1to areas that?youiwould be employed in u
- 15.. workson. safety-related equipment,,that was-Q
~
- s 16 --
equipment,fand that-you would.thereafter.have to
.- 17 relate [toLQA/QC per'sonnel? ,
'18 MR. JOHNSON: I think I understand s
'19 you'r ques t io n .
^
Yes,'that's it.
r 20 MR. DAVIDSON: And at the time' that-
~ .21 yo'u werc ~ assigned to the power block in a 0 ' a r e a',
1 %22 that is the time that you were given.. indoctrination 23 >
'in'to the pol'icies -of BrownM - Roct' with respec t to 24' -the? manner in wh'ich :,v a f t p e r s o n n el were to relate q.
\ i
, y ,
25' to-QC/QA personnel? , ,
e
- ' s '
.~ , . .
~
i ~ '
FEDER AL ~ COURT..-REPORTERS
4 21 s
1 MR. ,10HNSON: That's right.
(h 2 MR. DAVIDSON: What indoctrination 3 were you given?
4 MR. JOHNSON: Mr. Raymond lie b e r t was 5 my general foreman at the time. He had a meeting 6 with me and told mu how the QC program worked and 7 how we were supposed to deal with'those people.
8 MR. DAVIDSON: What did he tell you 9 specifically about the way in which you were to deal 10 with QC/QA people?
11 MR. JOi!NSON: Tha'_ if we had a problem 12 arise that could not be handled between myself and 13 the QC inspector, that I was then to inform him of 14 the problem and to' handle my part of.it with 15 professionalism, not to get boisterous or no cursing, 16 so forth like that, and that he would take it up 17 with the QC lead inspectors.
18 MR. DAVIDSON: Did he tell you whether 19' there was any po.licy regarding the harassment, 20 intimidation or threatening of QC/QA personnel by ..
2 1' craft?
4 22 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
23 NR. DAVIDSONf What did he tell you,
, 24 sir?
O 25 MR. JOHNSON: 11 0 ,1d me at the time FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
22 1 there would be no harassment of OC, b e c a u s e.. i f it
,x .
fm.) ~ 2; was, it wouldnbe' subject to' termination.'
3 MR.-DAVIDSONt' At.-any time subsequent
- 4 to your conversation with Mr. Hebertsregarding these 5~ policies,.wcro you reminded.or told once a g a i n L a b o u t'.
6 the existence of these policies'at Comanche Peak?
'7 MR. JOHNSON ' =Yes.
8 4t R . DAVIDSON: Could you relate' to us 9- what those timesfor occasions 1were when that policy 10 .was reemphasized.to:you?
11 MR. JOHNSON: I cannot relate no 12 special-time as far as work with1Raymond was e -
13 concerned, except that duringithe time installing 14 anchor bolts, hilti bolts, things'like that,.that 15 the procedures, q'ualitywise and QC-wise, would be'
~
16 some differences of' opinion. And we would discuss 17 .- w h a t : w e n t on in the~ field, and aga'in;he would tell 18 meimake sure that you don't mistreat or harass the
-19 QC people.
20 HR. DAVIDSON: When youfsay "he," do
- 21. .you mean Mr. Hebert?
222- MR. JOHNSON ' Right.
- .~ - 23
- MR.'DAVIDSCC
- Did any of your7other 24- supervisors remind you or reemphasize this policy?
' MR.: JOHNSON: Yes,-sir.
25 -
?
FEDERAL < COURT; REPORTERS
_.y . . _ -
_ . , .~ . . ,
, - . , . ~ _ , . = . -_
- : g y, ' M -
_ . 423
- s
,. .g m
lw, -
y 'l .
MR. DAVIDSON: Who,were they, sir?' ~,3 .q n
.t g James Calicutt, Hal?
1 //.. . .
,2. t.
em.
MR. JOHNSON:
4 k4fo ' . 3.. L G o o d's o n , Hal Lawford',1Doug Frankum.
.J..
.q _ ,. .
-Q% y 4- W: - 'MR; DAVIDSON: -Subsequent =to the; time-
'y ' y * ;
,youl: began, working for.Mr. Hebert).at. one. time or
_ -5 -
they} remind youjof the. policies.
.6 Lanother did
+-_' . ,
a
- ';7 ; regarding7QC pers'onnel?- ,
s;e >
ji ,
j 8~ ,
MR..J0HNSON ' Prior.to working.._with, .
9 % Hebert? ,
d 4 , . . )
' 10 . + -MR." DAVIDSON: Subsequent.p- '
^ ' ~
., ' 11)
~
M R'. 2 JOHNSON: _Nes.
~
s -
a m .
~
+1 ' 12 - ; MR. DAV.IDSON N Do-you! remember'on. .
_g:e a
.3 .a + + ., se,,
' in( , . ~ ;13- whichcoccasions these, individuals reminded..youior.: ; ,,
~
U4: 0 - m , .
reemphasi zed ' the . pol.icles ?in~: ef f ect r ega rd I ng l the' .
' l14" -
- g c . , c i 1 ! 15. p o l'i c i e s ) o'f' Q A / Q C p_ersonnil? ,
- > . ~ , . . .
I s
. . g . b e . M'R . ~ JOHNSON:f Theto'nlyjspecialftimee,Il 3
16-.,
' i ,
- f. -
ne, a +
P .
' + .., .
A_ . p
- _ J ;wil7 .
remember would betthe: time;I wa"s called -in : to :Mr. .
L r,
^
e -
< ,, H
[ .
^
{. 18 -Frankum's; office ~about theJintimidation Ehargel '
(
- y . : - .
s c .
i19*.
.aga'i n s t ; Edd i e : N i e'd e ck e'n'
~,
o and Cha rles ' Reevesi an'd? ;Mik e' ~ -
m 3
' .e
. i. V - ,
'N.
~
I20L Hundly. . , ,
4 L21
. d M'R'. D AVI D! ION : So the s e' ?we r e ",i n cid e ri't s.
N .; ,- - (;z -
-, . ;c ,
7 y , ,- . _, , < .wa
- , t% <22 ;
in whichrallegations=were,made-tha't you;migh'tfhave.C,7~
+
y 1.s 3 .
tviolatedlthenpolicies.of ihich you were. aware!,~ and "-
E
^ N. ; :: 2 3 -
%w '
~
, > s n
. ~
y a v.
?Mr., Frankum : wssjd iscus sing ithoise incidents..with2Lyou' w
~
- 24 y ,
y: ,
[ ,[ .
g G; y
[A4 (('l 125 %
gand reminde,d lyou- o f ' the , policies and' a s ked".you E f o r;.g
. ~
~
. r; y . -
,. 'i: '- - i
- *sy '
'yo '.
.g ,
i s
_ Jm % . -
E h i :[ %J
' ^
J u- FEDERAL C'0 0 R T z R E P O R T E R S- . - JA
(
- u.c -
4; ,
- ~ -
~ , . 24;
- .=2'.
, .g .; .
y .,
T CR- 1:- you'r'responselwith. respect to'the claims 1that were ^
4 4 -
made against1you?-
Xf- -3 ,
y-_
>2--
Fy L , _3 MR.t. JOHNSON: That's right.> '-
c . .
I
- 4 MR. DAVIDSON: 'Did'Mr!. Calicutt.ever ~
- ~, >
5 _. 'reemphasi.,ze or1 reiterate to you-any,of the policies-l, 6- on howlto deal withJQA/QC personneliand how:to
~
.7! resolve differences with'them? _
__8 "I MR. JOHNSON: Yes.
9 7
MR.'DAVIDSON:' O'n-what. occasion.did ,
10 Mr. Calicutt?do'that?
- 'll, .MR.. JOHNSON:- Whenever.we,.had l'2 superintendents' meeting up there, he would;callius -
t 7%- 13' together and talk to us' abou_t job p r o b l e m s - a n'd o s o 3 0 1 41 .forth, a nd'., d u r i ng ~.the course of)the conversatio'n,y-
'15- ' we ' d4 be; remiinded ~ of how1we'was-supposed.to' carry on:
q16 ;our: business.
17 MR. D A V I D S O N 's- Mr.. Johnson',?did you'
.y * ,
.h 18 ever,-communicate or-make=any effort to communicate ,
3
-19 -these policies regarding the treatment of'OA/QC>
m v ,
20 personnol,fas.you understood them, to your. .
subordinates _and thejcraftjpeople y$u. supervised?-
c 21L
~
2 2-- MR. J O H N S O N s.' Yes, s i r . ;_
s.
.23' , , i MR. DAVIDSON: What efforts, sir, did
- . , 24: . y o u in a k e ? . _
C' '
4 2S . MR. JOHNSON *L'We;would have m e e t i n g s--
8 m l _f , f
^
. .. _.L. .b . -= -
FEDERALLCOURTEREPORTERS _ _ _.
~
- y. - . ,
25-
- 4 7
1 'in'my office with the general foreman; sometimes.
4 ^i . general-foremen and'fo'romen. And then after that
_j 2-
~
C ~3
'was done, to make a. followup,. talk to the people.in; 4: the fields and see i f they had the word.- ,
- 5- , MR.-DAVIDSON ~ M r . - L i f o r d ', did you e
l E.
ihave any occasion to implement ~the policies about a .6- .
_7 . which you've testified here today?
8' MR. LIFORD: 'Yes. <
9- MR. DAVIDSON21 .,Did you~ have,any.
10 . occasion to implement or,give effect'to the policy >
~
11 you have described in which it is 'a termination 12 offense to harass,'intimiGate or threaten a QC/0A
, , i 13 person?' .
c qj:
I ,
3 14 'MR.'LIFORD Yes.
15 MR. DAV,IDSON: Would you please-16 - describe those incidents or those occasions on.which
~
i 17 you gave implementation to ,that policy?
18 MR..LIFORD: .From the time I come on -
I
" y. . 19 _ site until now, I. havenhad to' terminate three 20 . employees for threatening QC l'spectors. n j' Ji 12 1 .MR.f D AVIDSON:' .When you say three 22 employees, you mean.three-craftfemp'loyees? ,
123 - MR.~LIFORD: Yes;
.. 2: 4 " MR. DAVIDSON: Who-were-under your
- yM - .
~- ( !
- " 251 ,superv'i nion? <
-1
, 4 .
FEDERAL COURT' REPORTERS ,
._7 J1 ,
E
- 2 6' ,
3, $,ilNM7 g ~
'J .,
s n
s ,. >
- t. x ,
^'
j , p
,3s5 ,
, s . -1 m.. , .
C y en .,- .
. '. ~ _ , .
e :1 c 1 .M R . t L I F O R D s'
- Yes. :i' .
+
- g. * ~ '
e v ' . _ [* A ,
i,": E,f s 1,
S 2j u -- M R . DAVIDSON -
e Could you tell7us, abou t'
, - ( q.
' g <'
- 3 7 , i e s c h ' o f ( t h o's e
- li n c i d e n t al w h e r e you were required to o .-,
s a .
.. y . , .. . .
4
' ca . -
"4 ' terminate craft personnel for, harassing, . ,
a% , , .' ,. _
2 45; , intimidatings.orlotherwise threatening aIQC in'spector?
,o #
- g f /V 6 v
> . M R .~ L'I F,O R D ' -As:far,as ~givingfspecific v -
2 -
71 .bacNground'oniesch one,,no., The:last one-- ' e' '
, 1' ,.
.s -
. . - . "- u
=
.8 - 'MRi DAVIDSONs- -First,'how?many such m~ -
- p. ,
a n -
Y :p "
y, Loccasions ?were' there,c sir ?.
1 .
.v n ,
- 10. , M R '. LIFORD:. Three.. T, h e' last occasio'n 6
- 6 ~ .. ;g (115 -was: ~ strictly la't$reat 6y construction hand'aga' ins't f a
y 12- bodily h~ arm of 'a ' Quality control inspector.. .The; k 6therftwo yere similar, but[Incan't,;remem$er t h'e '
l'3 w
[ ~ f 7a, 14 s d e t a l' l's. o f them. " -
MR.'DAVIDSON: 1Nhen you.s'ayyyouican?lt 15 -
'e y ,
. .f .. , >. s ~' ~ < ..
~ , ,. ,1 6
- , ; remember the,detailst areJ;you saying s ' tha t .you "ca'ano t Ng? ,
c
[
, 3 itemember the+ names.of?theTeraft i n d i v i d u a l s w h o's;J y o u' 1
, , ); 17 ' ,
- p. m
~
. .' - r
" ~ < .: . . . .: ~
~
E18 : 2.te rmina t,ed - f or o v i ola tion of;the. policies?
s y ..; , s s m' ..a ,,# . ,
i, .f E 19: ,6 ,
.MR.- LIFORD t. ~ I: .don't.; No, I can't. O q .u , x f 20' E MR.: DAVIDSON: Dolyou remember"the;
~
+
v
- $, y; .
~
- s 22- ;was involved? '
cc:s t- - ~
g-
- . 4 wf p., $23- ,
. MR.'LIFORD: 'No..
p; y ~
^
.e -
s l 2 4 '~
r . ..
MR.sDAVIDSONL Can you~ remember wh'o
- thel:su pe r i n tend e n tl o f the crafts employee: that you ,"
i ;
L
[ 2 5 .e
. 1-m,": ,
n ;_ .
l - ", ,s g , .n ,
"#(
~
.a g4 , 4 ,
a% -
M', ,g] ' ; .c p"- ' w '4 ~
~F E D E R A L ..C.,O.U.R. T ' R E P O R T E R S -
. ~ - . . .-..-u. .- ,
~
- p _ , .
27
+ .
.T
.f e
(t c ,
l' told'me-about, was?- , ,,
an . _
Nij 2 ,' 'MR.lLIFORDs.. Vaguely, yos. .Two'iof 3 them : wor k'ed for Gary Cox who was'=the superintendent:
, 4 ..' forone~at~the time. .
"l 5: MR. DAVIDSON: In what discipline, sir? -l 6l MR. LIFORD: _I n piping. The last one 7 I:believe was Gene [Everson. '
8- MR. DAVIDSON Was he a superintendent-
~9 also, sir? .
. 10 MR. LIFORD ' Ho was also a piping 11 superintendent. .
[ '12 ., MR.,DAVIDSON . When,*1f you r e c o l~l e c't ,"
V% 13' .did-Mr. Everson;come,t'o you regaridEng-the. problem -
9 ..
~
, 14 that yo.u. ultimately resolvediby-terminating aDeraft 15 person?
M R '. LIFORD: .Mr. Eversonfdid-not have.
~
4 s16
,n 17:
the opportunity to come'toine first. .
D' ~
.18 HR'. DAVIDSON: .--Inlother!words, youi 1 19 became' aware of the incident 1not through Mr.bkversonc 20 who reported to you, but'through some"other mean's?
a- 121' MR. LIFORDs.- The superintendentzover I22 theEQuality, Control-inspector came to m'e.
~
.F
~
f 23' r lMR. DAVIDSON 'Do you ~ r e m e m b e r._ w h o
.2[41 that_was,-sir?- - -
)~ -
.'~-
n.s 2 5 ' M R .- LIFORD: I'm guessing, but';I think
,r- ,
pm y:_ <
=FEDERALJCOURT REPORTERS -
,, - ,_ . ., .~ wy~ -- - ~ ~ ~m n - -
V:qgN s '- ,
- .r' 3 , ,
- p ,
28 l' C
4p'k p .
t f!' y.
- 4. g f ~f , t ,
. E. ! e _
' pw ,
y
~
< " - , (ff.,- ' ~iU ,2 -
C
<L7,.
- f
+ *vn #
a,
+ '
p" A: '
Ll il t: 'wasVBobC81ever.
w 4,.d 4 % .-7
, - ]
>{ ,, < c .s -
r 1 , r25 ' ,
.;(f ' ' , M R ~. DAVIDSON: 'AndEwhat did Mr.-Siever 4 ,
%g % 3.m -
3 -o >
NN 4., 'I3T, [telliyoY7: ,, - .
9 fg .i, r
, a '- ,
n ,
^
"m, ,
F4 7 o MR..LIFORD: He'explainfed wha t : had. ~
.. a. o. -
,c ,.
v
~ :s . > . ~
- w. , 5( y Jhappened per":his inspector'sJview of the situatlon.
ny "y 1 ,
MR.<DAVIDSON:: :When youimay "what. had. +
4,; -6 s - '
a .:, .
1, - .
. . , ~
, ,- 1 t
lhappe.nedj.. ;do you remembe'r~what it was!heLtold..you?.- " '
a m-
%7[ -
m ,
' 4
- ; ; g= W 1. M R ... L I F O R D : There,was.ai 4 se:
-Y e s". -
r., "ac%. ,
~ . ,
dis'yagreement , over "over ! theFinterpre ta t' ion'ro f L a g~ , ,
v,- r.9e, w ._.
i p
),, ,
g.- .
J10 , -
procedure.
cons tr uc t ion ~ h'and: g o t .'i r a t e % a nd - ,
, . v 5 m
.threatene'd toJwhoop the QC_in,spector'!s6 ass a
, . o -- .- .4 . ?',_.
^ ~
s ? fili #
q ,. .p-
, . ; . . . #. , ,_ u ,
- b + i. 21 2 , MR. DAVIDSON
- So .f rom' wha t Mr.
- Siever:
T, .
YW; q
, y told /1yo'u,)had i there been~a violation (of-two policies)
~
W i ' M'. (13 A f. n =
> =
% '. n
~
, !b
- first,fthe wayjin which to resolveran agreemen,tiwith
. ~ .
7% : 14' Li
,4.j.f ,
. 1, . . c lQClppers'on,,which wasJto dake 'it 1to :a : supervisor f 15 Y*
- L:@
.3 m- -
- e ,
s
,2 ~
g cz-
. the:, QC inspector,Kandi
- rather than'.to dispute it.,.ith
- c cl6 w
, m --
'f' , - 4 ,
e >-L) -
R , ' :.17; 4 ithie'second# one ; wa si th'a't i he Clos t' i hia ntempe r Ja nd _ made s 79 ,
p ; ,
4 7
[g
" 4 L. .
k '
- 18.1
^
-a" threat? >
%. ' ^'
Jm .$
, f. , , . .
7 <
4 : 1.91 x .. ,
'MR. LIFORD: 'Yes.. .;
.4
(- ,' ,. '
w; w . ,
J20 ? +
MR. D AV I DSO N .[ Whia tih d i d fy o uld'o a f t e r '. ' N o
xe c
z _m 1215 ,L.Mr.'Siever; told you J- tha t "thi s . ind i_vid ual, whoseiname. 1 re xwu
~ &,
'y- ..,? - ~, --, ,-
M . qsg . ,t i t h'i s .1t'ime you -can' t4 remember,-had a p p a r e n t'l'y
- y. .
a - n +
W - '
-y . .. _' -
_j -
,. 7, , M 23 ; viola ted = these two policies?!3 >
4%:L h 4 s(l{
hf- '
L,*
O. '* , 324 ' M ~
MR. LIFORD8- . A s ^a , n o r m a l > r u n E o f ~ e v e n t's .
- qN -
'o c -y ,
Lxp ~ x n
,v g o
,c .: , x
- w. 12 5 4 ton"any11,nstance concerning any iisagreements,-both.
- - - . u ,.
- t * ~ ,
e,m
-e ' - "
J- -
. v. - .
1
. y y,
,a! 4 m , 7fi '
N ',1
@nW y J t 1:P i
~
J FEDERAL COURT' REPORTERS > n -
' ~
, , . 29 l
g li parties:were-called in, in this particular caso, to.
< j' "'} . . . . 4 Af .2_ , . my office with both myself..and ~ the Quality Control'
. ~ ,-3' superintendent and the two -i n'd i v id u a l s _ in volved .- We .
[. :4- interviewed both-of them-separately, both'of ther 5 .together, dismissed both of ther. back to the field,
.61 then-made a determinat' ion as to what had to happen, 7' who was wrong -and who was right.
8 MR. DAVIDSON: Did you consult.with 7cr ,
9 Thave Mr.-Everson present, who was the immediate 10 superior of the craft' -person involved, as you now
+
1 1.. remember?
12 'MR. LIFORD: Yes. I'did consult wi~th.
?'N . 13 Mr. Everson on the situation. .,_' .
N_/ - '
' ' 14 >' MR. DAVIDSON: Was he-present.at.any 15 - of'these interviews t h'a t you had with the craft.
i s ,
16 person involved ~ and- with lthe'-QCL' inspector?
t-r MR.'LIFORD:.
[
_ .17 No, he:was not.= .
i 18c.
HR. DAVIDSON: Afterayou concluded the 19' interviews that you-and'Mr. .Siever. held jointly lwith
'." l20 . th e s e.~- i nd i v i d u a l's , il s that when you consulted.Mr. ,
~21 Everson? f
'22 I HR. LIFORD.: 'That is'right. -
i %-
'~
~23 MR. DAVIDSON:- And what d id' y ou .-s ay f to '
J ~
24 Mr. Everson?
- ~
l f~% ,
.' ~~ '
- $5 MR. LIFORD: We went over the. .
9
.I i e i'lP:'
_ ._ _ FEDERAL COURT-REPORTERS
. 2 - ~. A 30' -
] .
- 1. -
i l 2.-
4' .. . .
interview,withJboth parties with-Mr. Everson and
.a. V 11
( -.. .+
(). . 2: told:'h a what'my.[ decision was as to the outcome.
3' . , . a ~ iM R . DAVIDSON: And.what was-your
'4 decision, Mr.- Liford?
5- MR. LIFORD: To terminate my-employe'e. ..
- 6. NR. DAVIDSONt' The craft person?
- t ~
7 -
MR. LIFORD: The. craft-person.
t 8 MR. DAVIDSONS- Because he had violated s '9c the establ'ished policies?.
10: MR. LIFORD Yes.
, 3 111 J MR. DAVIDSON: Did you communicate-
.a 12 this.to the craft person?. ,
, 4 , ,
[.qj '
13 MR. LIFORD Yes.- .
!14 MR. DAVIDSON: >-How did you to:that,<
15 fair?
', ,' t s
- ' 16 .MR. LIFORD When'the decision was
, 17 i m ade',: -I ' ca lled ; the superintendent and th'e craft ,
1
^(^.,
~
+
'18 'perso'n' into mycoffice,-told the craft individual
_ 19. what!was going to happen and why;it was going ~to- ,'
- 4 ,
4
, 12 0 happen. ,
,g , 21. '
MR.-DAVIDSON When you-say/.why it was
- ~
'2 2 ~ i g o i ng L t'o happen, what'did"youLtell-him?-
l f23 MR.,LIFORD: He was wrong. 'That was 7 '
24u th'e na'in thing I' wanted to convey to-him,-was'the. -
- m.
e
- y 4 ~
(' / -
'25 f ac ts ; th a t he wasuwrong. I wanted him'to' understand t
~ '
'l ;
- ~
. ,, , . FEDERAL CO_URT-REPORTERS ,
l 4 &
~
?
.Mu
~
l l' that he was wrong'and why'he was wrong.
j~ y (f 2 ~MR. DAVIDSON: Well, why was he-wrong, 3- <
Mr.]Lifnrd,'in your view?
4 >
MR. LIFORD: He violated the
,5 procedures, the policies, a$d he let his t e m p e'r rule 6 -wher-he shouldcnot have.
7 MR. DAVIDSON: How long after the-
^
.-8 incident _with the,QC inspector occurre'd -- that~is,
'9 after'this craft person apparently made a threat to; how long a f,t e r thatidid the
~
10 the QC inspector --
3 Lil interviews that'you had-with him occur?-
s
~
~ "
-12 MR . ' LI'FO RD : That day'. ,
j 13' MR. DAVIDSON: And'how long'after the~
'\ 14 interview ~s that' you and1Mr. Siever conductod ywiNh' 7
- 15. ~ th'e craft.:and QC inspector involved 'd'id you;make
~
16 yo"ur determination >to terminate that employee?
~
17s MR. LIFORD: Same day.
r 11 8_ MR.-DAVIDSON: And how-long after you=
'19 made'? tha t decision was that employee t'erminated?
c20 MR. LIFORD: The same day.
g c- ' 21 - MR. 'D AVIDSO!!! Now, Mr .- L i f o rd , f fjoi~ng, ',
- 2 2. back to the other-incident or incidents'thateyou ,
23, recall,'that in the two' employees that you recollect.
j 24 . worked'for Mr.. Gary Cox, can you give us similar ,
4 3
'd ~2 5. background information,.as you have now, with. -
+ l >
,. k ' ,
E' ' YEDERAL .. COURT REPORTERS-
,-o _ , . , ., =. ,- - ~-. . . - - ~. . -
- - .u ,
-~,
r
~:n ., ,
M. ~
+
, _ ,. 32_
PJ s 1-
~ g" ~
5i, g.
my-lf ,
.; - s x
sg 3+ . ,
1 ~ . - .'R .*,.. ~
4
%, , ;1:
,e 1respectEto:how tho'se. matters wero.handledh .. . _ , .
1 4 ., ,,
( d, '. ,12, ~
MR. LIFORDt. ~I cannot give'you'any 1 -
~
p2 3; -details b"ecause ~of the time span from"when 1t ,
/
y >,
-1' 4~ . hap'pened t.oJnow.
a - <
DAVIDSON:
.5 - ~>
'M R'. How long-ago did t h e' '
~; .a x.
~
6 . Incidents 3with Cox'siemployees occur'?- -" ,
.n
.7 !
MR. LIFOR$t -Somewhere between threes ,
..q w "
y
~
-and five years.- y 8;
, v 4
- f. f9 MR'. DAVIDSON: S'omewhere b e t w e e n 't h r e e:. .
m 3 ~i~ 10 ; -t ^ ~ and?five --years ago? "
xy, '
n , ,
11}: ~ .. a,MR. LIFORD: .Yes.
m " +
'3 : 12i - > -
- MR. DAVIDSO'N 'Whht about'~ thel :
L s ,a .
( 3 %
gN #13 ' ' incidents in.volving Mr. Everson's employeet howilong-4.J O - a ; -
a; . - s
,14
- ' s ,; "a g o' "d i d thatEhappen?T 7 ' 4
.+
r a i. 115' c6 MR. LIFORD - Approximately two' years., ,
My + +
7
[16L M ' MR. DAVIDSON: 'About'two years _ago.. ,
O.7 - , " ,
a f :17 Otherithan these three71ncidents inswhich you gave. -
f-[% . s
. ". 'E_, ..
to'the policyrfor/ dealing-Cwith'QC/QA .
+ < 18r " implementation
- s
, ~
3 4 i
~
19f ~ Vpersonnel,1were you# involved o'r ivarelof any other' t
n 4',
- w. .
e
( <s
.. incidents;- where ' that . policyf was givon implement'stion?
4 i , . ,. ,. 1 .
~
< -20' , .
e
/And. I/mean_ sp,ecificallyf the* policy 'against harassing',1
~
/ J21- l , .
fintimidatingyand threatening 1QA/QCipersonnel.
[_ j 22l C . . , .
-Y ^ -t Y ( y
' > 2 31 .
-s- ' MR. LIFORDt? Yes. The policy -- well,_ -
- . , ? ,
L -
flat meybeck up a step.
4 2
24- During the' course of eventse 7%m E. ; ..
isince;I~have~.been on site, weghave had'an ongo'ing
/25 - -
~ '
- 4
. s .
-k f
-jf p, -- -
M 2u w y, 'i- ygogkAL-COURT' REPORTERS. -
- 4
.= - -
4
,2; -
- 33 fu J ~
s c -
, 1 training program' training:' craft personnel i n t'o their
(). 2 procedures.and'anf revisions thereto. During-almost-
- 3 all ' training sessions, this subject'is broug'ht up s
4 when it'comes to the section,in.the procedure'.tha~t
~
I" LS is. appropriate for this, s
6 - '
MR. DAVIDSON: When~ you you'say "this-
'7. s u b j e c t , " sh) you mean the_ policy.that disagreements 8 . with.QC/QA personnel are to.be dealt with in a
~
. '9 : professional manner, and if theyLcannotube; dealt
' 10 with in'the= field, they should go up.in.-the chain of
- 11. command and.the f a c t '- tha t there will be'no
. - 12 ' toleration of' harassment,~ intimidation and
./h 1^
13 threateningnof"QA/QC personnel? ,,
14 MR. LIFORD: Yes.
J .
15 'M R . DAVIDSON: X think, however, my
,16 _ question was directed'at,something else. :What I was 4
- 17 asking about, Mr. Liford, was, were you involved in >
~
18 or aware of any-other incidents'where theEp'olicy l g' . 19' aga' inst ha r a s sing , ..-in timida ti ngi a nd threatening
'20 QA/QC, personnel was implemented b y t'e r m'i n a t i o n of.
s
~ 21' the_ craft person accused of doing that or otherwise?
- 22f MR. LIFORD: The only other instance' .
}
? ' 23 that-I can think of_right now is the one concerning 24 Mr. Johnson and the allegation against.htm of a;
).
- 25 l harassing or trying to intimidate QC.
E '
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
c -
34 l' MR. DAVIDSON: All right. You were 2 not involved in the resciution of that issue, were 3 you?
4 MR. LIFORD Yes.
p 5 MR. D AVI DS 0 fi t Yes, you were or you 6 wore not?
7 MR. LIFORD Yes, I was.
8 MR. D A V I D S O ll - Well, after Mr. Johnson 9 has had an opportunity to tell us about it, perhaps 10 we can have you supply some additional detail.
11 With' respect to the policy for the k
12 resolution of-disagreements between craft and QA/QC
~
- 13. personnel, werc you involved in the implementation
%r 14 of that policy?. In other words, did anyone at any.
15 time, any subor'dinate of yours, bring to your 16' attention a disagreement between craft and QA/QC 17 personnel that had proceeded up the chain of command 18 and brought to you for resolution in ace'ordance with 19 that policy?
20 MR. LIFORD Talking in terms of other 21, than the three that I have discussod? Reask the 22 , question shorter.
2'3 MR. DAVIDSON: Well, Mr. Liford, what 24 I'm getting at in,-you told un how you gave
- 25. . implementation to the policy that prohibits the Lig . _ FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
. , - . . 7
.h. n a,
- ; s *
~
3 5> -
~ ~:-
- - % l? ,g e
< -. . n ,
. s '.' . 'i' .'
^ '
a,^ -2., $ r g
- r "
, s "*- a p_ ,
+1
,l h a r a s s m e n t',.l i n t i m i d $ t i o n a n d threatening _Af~QC/QAI 6j,, , '. n-
- 1 >
s- _ . 3 g' , id When it was (brouigh'ti to /your Tattention-s . .. -
y ' }; y # 7(
3 .
{ personnel.
2
, ,~ -
Tjb ; , . . F. r. , :'
'3 thatisome three~individua'Is shad.. engaged-in.that
- t c . ,
- _2 % . . .
g fprohibited" conduct,,you made~-inquiry, you dealt,.with
~
, :< 41 i.
+ n *
- the'(ma tter - and you ' terminated'them.
~
y ,
- ";5- >,
]m' " . _
. , s S61[ -
( MR. LIFORD - Yes.
, ~
y - 7_. ' MR. DAVIDSON: c S o ~. t h e r e f o r e , you. .
,pA'- 7 g 8 /u derstoo'd the-policy; they understood'the policy.
9;, LYo61gave effact;to the policy [.you" implemented th'e' '
%. w 72' - . ilo po'licy. d- -
y s. .
- ,,*s - x >
11 ,
Now, you also told us in your testimony.
g+ - ,.
A ~
, d2l 1 heres/today tha t "in _ add i tion t.to' the; policy-that h.
~
,[ prohibit's harassmenti intimidation and threatening?
13: }
P -i .
~c
.~ . . .
.~
.. .s.
4 .14' '
'ofLQA/QC ~ personnel, there isfalso-a? policy;or .
h _
v e 7 pro'cedure - for d ea'li ng; .wi t h ' d i sa g re eme n t s lbe twe en
~
..15%
- i
- .
<./ k.E 16 .. craft and QA/QCipersonnel. --
You've told usUthat
.- a ,- f p 17 where craft =cannotiresolve-'a difference of: opinion
.. 'o: - .
I >
[18: with.QCfor-QA personne1'in the field,L that instead <
y, ' L19 J
of. arguing with QC/QA., personnel, they are to i take ,
b.,ib
- 2 04 tihe matter up with their superior,c their_ supervisor, o z:, - >
f .
- 21; who would attempt to resolve it, and this' matter" -
~
122 , proceeds'up I the chain of command'until resolved.
v + -
' ~
~2 '3 .
'My., question to'you, sir, was, were you.ever
, . .. x .
q< . .
y ," ', 24a linvolved~in-any situation-where such:a' problem.was JA D ,-
2 5'.-
i brought.up ,the chai'n of~ command to you and you were 3.
' . 's_ ~
a --., I - > _
.i 5
, v... . - ,
,$ _'- d >
f , _
p't - ,- , -
FEDERAL -COURT REPORTERS -
. m
g- - _ ~ .- -_- .
36 s, .
, .lf ' required to resolve the dispute and,.therefore, you -
- r~
- (j were'g'iving implementation,..you were giving of[ect,
^ ~
2-
.'. ;3 to o the J po l i cy-: you spoke of?
4 - MR.,LIFORD: Yes.
A 5 MR. DAVIDSON: Would yo'u please 6 ' describe those' incidents, as,best.you recollect them, 7 in_which you.gave-effect to the policy we've-just
- 8 discussed.
9 MR. LIFORD: On almost any major 10 revision of a procedure, and effect'ively on minor
~ ~
11 revisio,ns.tofprocedures,'there is an agreement'on 12 the: interpretation of that procedure.- . When these r
y ,
'13- disagreements'on' the interpretStion of--a pr oced u r e' -- -
.or:when my people run in'to those' disagreements,-they
~14 '
15 bring! them to me.
li5 ' -
MR. DAVIDSON: TheyLalways bring them
] .17 to you?
They don't resolvo'those differences o 11 8 ,
themselves? ,
119' '
MR. L'I F O R D : In,most cases wher'e'there.
22 0 .is a' disagreement over an. interpretation;and ,it1cannot i '21 'be solvedyor' agreed'uponiby QC or the craft
~ ~
'22'
, personnel, the combination'of=the two, it has ~to_bo q l23 brought up to the' quality.' engineers, the Quality 24 Control supervisors and the-craft 1 supervisors'to sit 7l 25 down;and discuss-the words written into the ~a ~
{. '# - ; .
A f
a
.%f Y FEDERAL' COURT REPORTERS-
_ )-y .
^
,, 4 37
[._ .
t , ,
i s s l-
~
.1: procodures.sofeverybody,can interpret the-procedure Gc
- 2. ' t h e ' s a:n e' w a y . '
hf
,y
, $3 MR. DAVIDSON: And is it your t .
4 experience, b'ased onwh'at you've justirelated, that
'S ~most cra.ftxpersonnel understand the manner in'!wh'ich 6' .they are to. deal with QC/QA and how they are'to i 7. resolve differences'or report differences to th'eir 3
8 supe'riors?
9 MR. LIFORD: Yes.
t
- 10 HR. DAVIDSON . Do your subordinates t-11 ;also give implementation to.this policy?
e y
12 MR..LIFORD ' Ye s , .~they Edo.
(V 13. MR. DAVIDSON:" Mr. .Calicutt, you have L./ ~
14 .t'stified e here to the existence of two. policies with s
p .
H 15. .r e g a.r d to the relationship between craft-and QC/QA
- 16 personnel, the first being1that harassment, 1
17 intimidation or_ threatening'of QC/QA personnel by -
18 .c r a f tt will not be' tolerated, that-it is a '
19- termination offense; the second policy being'that-20 craft personnel'are to behave ~professionallyEin
-21 dealing.with!QC/QA, and :should they have a H22 disagreement with O'C/QA personnel, they are not to 23 fkght'with; personnel.' ~about it, but to take it u p_. t o .
24 their supervisors and it rises up.the chain of l.,,l
-25 command until it is properly resolved; is_that
/
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
~
y .- _ _
' - 38. -
4 4
4 1 . 1 ,,
1 . correct?-
rz
(_) 2 MR. CALICUTT Yes.
3' -
MR. DAVIDSON: With regard'to t'h a t fho
-4 Ifirst' pol' icy, the ~ one involving the problem.of 5- - harassment,. intimidation and threatening, have you. ,
- 6 - ever been. involved.inthe implementation of: th'a t
~
jj - f7 policy;^that is, carrying it out and giving it
'8 effect?
r . .
,9- MR.:CALICUTTs. .That'directly involved, 1
[b no.' But. I ' knew of the;three cases that it. happened.
s L , l11' . '
s 'HR. DAVIDSON: When you say the three
' cases;that had happened, .to what do you refer,1Mr.
~
12-
/m.r<
13 ~ Calicutt?
+; y j. d' 11 4 MR. CALICUTTs'..The three cases Mr.
':-. . l ~
~
- 15. Liford-talkediabout.
, ' s ,
16- MR. DAVIDSOt13. Did Mr,'Liford report.
- t. . .,
717 - hisLaction, with respect =to'the threeEindividual's -
^
,[ c18
~
reportod here, to you as a respo'naibility of your: _
< . - c19 -subordinate? _
- 20 MR.~CALICUTTs.- Yes, he did.. .
21'
~
MR.' DAVIDSON: Was he required to do
.e
( , i so, o r i- s e c u r e 1 y'o u r' a p p r o v a l for his action?
- t. , s 22- _
A" 233 MR.'CALICUTTs .Not for approval.
~
24 o
- 'MR. DAVIDSON: Bu't'he'was ..
25l appropri'ately required to inform you?;
t
+- 4' ._- __
- F E D E R A L - C O U,R T- R E P O R T E R S_ , _
7,__
._ ,.m_,-
39
.c .,
1
~ l' MR.~CALICUTT Correct.
-,S- w.
(,) "2-MR. DAVIDSON: But'he~did notErequire .-
~
f f3 Tyour approval.in order to-terminate them?.
Q br ~ -
"-' 1 MR. CALICUTT': No,.he didn't.
j4 '
- m. .
'5 -
^
, M R .- DAVIDSON: Did you express to'hlm E
'6L lanylopinion as to-his' action?'
7 ,
_MR; CALICUTT: We talked a b' o u t ' i t ', yes.
8 -
MR. DAVIDSON- Did you agree with Mr. .
t.
9- Liford's action?
10 .MR. CALICUTT: Yes, I did. ,
-11 MR. DAVIDSON: Did.you:think he -
~", 12. handled th'e matter properly?
3- -
b y 'T :13 - MR.=CALICUTT: Yes, I did.
'~
Ash , ,
And in accordance;with-
~
14 MR. DAVIDSON .
4 ,
, ,15 ' Lthe procedures'and policies atLComanche Peak?
^
\ [ - 16 MR. CALICUTT That's correct.
17 MR.-DAVIDSON:. . O t h e'r. th a n i t h'es e - t h r e e '
^
L
' :18 incidents of which.Mr..Liford made you aware, were.
19- .you1 personally involved'in ~ the implementation-of 20 that policy?
/21 HR. CALICUTT 'Not to termination 22 . offense, no. .
c
~
Were you involved in.
~
, . '23- MR; DAVIDSON: -J
.ctUV ,, 24 any-matters in:which the allegation at hand was:
l '
\ i. s 25 , craft: harassment or intimidation'or threatening of l
)
i '
f7fVDERAL, COURT REPORTERS . --
.i
. . ~ - -
= ~ . - .
. 7. - % -
q -
, f4 o j
, n . .
i5 .,
- ^ ' ' ~
a w , y ,
, . ' _ ' - il j Q A/Q C z. pe is o n n e l ?-
.+ ,
Lh,.,.
627 ' MR. CALICUTT In'Mr. Johnson's' case ~.
O _
_)3- MR.,DAVIDSON: You mean in resolving
, y .
.~ _
4; -certain allegations /made against Mr'.' Johnson?
m ,
c, ,
L[. 5 MR. CALICUTT2 Y e s . .-. .
-m .. ..
, il. ..
~
"6" -
.MR.. . DAVIDSON: Other than that matter e
'j ,- .
=7 on which we'may have re'ceived L s' o me::f of your testimonic c- - ;-
~
8 after=Mr.-Johnson has spoken, were'you invElved in
y ;9 any'other such inc'ide ts?_ ,
10' MR. CALICUTTI- There'were two l'1 incidents.that I can recall was' 6rought to my -
[t I12 = ' attention. Me, George Tanley and Mr. Bob Siever --;
[ -
-[
b ' 13i MR. c,DAVI DSON t - I'm sorry,"sirio -I '
Q
.n OC -14 -don't think I-- h e a r d you? - ,'
I3, 115' MR..CALICUTTs'/There were<two ~ ~
}
^
16- incidents that;I chn recall was brought to' my o
E
' :17; : attention. Me,. George Tanley and, Bob'Siever --
- 18; ,
- M R,'. .D A V I D S O N < Werebinvolved: in wh'at,. -
-r .. .
~
~..
, ll19 " ~ sir?> -s ,
g 20 '
THR. CALICUTTI Where it was brought to
~
l.- :21 s- m y l'e v e l . . -
q-
- g. .
~
l_ y, 12 2 r
_. *MR.'DAVIDSON: An i n c i d e n t Li'n v o l v i n g -
Ls g _
Q-7-
- c. .~
23 c
_ a'll e g'ed .ha ra s smen t1 --i n t im id a t i on , or~ threatening by a 24 craft ~~to QA/QC personnel?
i J 1*
! . . j^ i
~
-25 MR.' CALICUTTt- -Yes.
L l: g_:7. -
j L.
. . W4 5-2 FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS --
n , s- , +
41-
'l MR. DAVIDSON. Was'this merely a
,U, 2' ,
~
disagreement'between a craft' person --
. 4 3 MR. CALICUTT - 'This was merely<a
[ 4~ disagreement.
' f5 ": I MR. DAVIDSON: Lei me then ask you ,
^
3 - J6 , questions about that.: With' respect to the second.
d- 7 policy about which = you ' ve .testifi'ed -here today;
. -8 1 namely the policy that governed the manner in which-9; ccraft were to deal with . disagreemen ts? t i th -QA/QC
- 10 personnel, namely~not to attempt >to resolve them 11 themselves but ^ to :take - them' forward up the' chain o f'
~
12 '
commands,,were.you ever-involved'in the.-resolution
, - l,-m '13 ofisuch a disagreement?
~ %'; - a 14' MR. CALICUTTI- Y e's . ,;
~
~
,, 15 , MR. DAVIDSON:' -Would you please' state A
16- ithe circumstances. . .
.. 17 MR. CALICUTTI. Mr. George'Tanley.came I
~ 18 - to me when we' started' installing snubbers and told:
- 19 me he was having problems with QC . - I approached Mr.
s a ~
d 20; Bob'Siever.- We met,in my officeLand got the problem NE w- . .
+ --
~*
T[ 21 resolved.
~
22l -MR. DAVIDSON: Now, who was Mr.; George 23 Tanley at the time?
I- .
24 . .MR. CALICUTT Boilermaker,~ millwright i . . .o .
h- I f25 superintendent.
L .- -
t s b
', - _ _ FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS >
N , =r ;-
- -- - - ' .-- =
, ' . a.3- .
l42:
- /
2~- ,
w( -
g.
~
. ~ -
+
- g, z e- ;
, li" IMR'. DAVIDSON: IAndi Bob Siever?t
- 'r ..
. ;. -m fg)' f ,
' ~
, .,y r
f 2'
- M R . '.. C A L I C U T T -
QC. superintendent.-
gd/x , 3c .
MR.. DAVIDSON: And it's your te s tiimo ny
- s. , ,,
/
y-4 that-(there was a' disagreement $e' tween the craft and. ,
j " - -QC personnel regarding the-installation'of certain .
.' l6f isnubbers? m.
,k[ ' _
a 7 . . . . MR. CALICUTTI Yes.
'8; .MR. DAVIDSON' And that'craftXhadt N
_9
-reportedsthis to their foreman or superintendent, '
, g
- 10' George Tanley? -
7 ,
- ,.* t
,L*
MR. CALICUTTs' Yes. id Lil k -f l -
' M R .- DAVIDSON s -And the matter was,
~
127 - -
-e J. 7 J .
J/ .1 3 ' ul.timately broughtLup to 3you.. f or- resolution?. i
[^l%
- x -
14 ; MR. : CALICUTT . -t Yes.
~
, , 1
_3. - ~
MR.:DAVIDSON y ' And - how did y.o u "g o .
'15 '
W :p
-t '
- 16 ':about; resolving it? '
,c -
17 <
MRs[CALICUTT Had.Mr. Siever.and
? . .
v:, ,
18 Tan ey ,in my-office.
c '.19-
- MR.-DAVIDSON - Do;you recal1~ what
.. _ i 37
, '20/ exactly'the disagreementIwas?: + .
/- .. 3 .
R k
grm ,
< l .
' M R .-f D A V I D S O N : ,Can"yousthink>of any V 2 21~ ,
y : 4 2 3. ,q .other' occasions';in which'the-matter was brought'!to
- 24c ) your ' a t t$en ti.on Iwhich required-resolution of.f thei ,-
y}v '
aM1 ~ 125- < disagreement between-craft and QC/QA personnel?'
3 ~r' r : _
, av ,
.w
- r; , ,
?
' ~*
b -
- .' FED ER AL;ICOU_RT REPORTERS -
v ,
<- - -- - ^~; >;; 7 s -- - m -
g' .. .. 'q ;L: ;4 3
. w -< ,
1 - - ,
s
. :y '. . v:
s . .
+
s 'lH MR. CALICUTT Y e s . .' On a stainless
~
- 9 m
())
i su'hp. Mr."Tanley brought me a welding problem.
~
2 Mr. .
y..
wh *
(u .
e , , '3 L a w r e n c e ,.: ' M r . Tanley and-me got'that straightened-
- ' s a. *
.4 :. o u t . - !
. c- y I' ; , .
5 t MR. DAVIDSON:. Let me just backtrack-a .
- p. -
~6 bit.- :When?did the snubbers incident occur, if' you- f 7; recollect? .
.8 , MR. .CALICUTTI. Approximately two years j
9 ago. .
~ "
.10 '. -
MR.,DAVIDSON:
.~.
- Wha _t about the One .
11
? involving istainles's steelcsuhps?
12 .
- MR..CALICUTT2+ ,
Between two, two
~
~ '
- p. 13- cand-a-half y e a r s.-- a g o . -4 q :
~ '
L' l' 4 :.
MR.-DAVIDSON: '
All right.
. N o w , ; M'r .
, Tanley .ag'aini brought :td n your t a tteintion a problem
~
.15 1
..c. _,
. j. 3-
. f' > (' fl 6 - t where zhis* craft employee's were having a difference
.of.op in ionMoh disagreement with'QC/QA' regarding il7 ,
..m
- 18 !- -
- inspedtions"of welds;Eis tih a t _ yo u'r testimony? 1
'19 MR. CALICUTTt: Dyes. 1 ,
im ~.-
~
20' N ~
' M R '. . DAVIDSON: Do you. recollect what, 21e' -them problem'was, orl'dimagreement? 1 .
.; w -
- c (4 12 2- ~ MR. CALICUTTt- Visual in s pec tion . o f, -
+ "
4 2.- . . . .
A 23 L theiwelds./THe.' thought'the QC? person-was;being too- '
1
<ar ,
024 4 tight.
' .y~s o , 2
^
"i 25 R. DAVIDSON: ~ Now, there was .n o claim.
y N-
~,-
. , . ? =~.
. y - ,. '- s 3 - ' .w. %. s . .- . 3 m .!
g w .- o , . , . , .. . - "
-r '
= FEDERAL COURT-REPORTERS j
Q^,
. .g
, _ m
~.1 of-lany haras'sment, intimidation-or.threatenin.g'by 4
- 7) ( /, 2 - craft of.QC-personnel, was there?
p- ~ ^ '
8 13 MR. CALICUTT No, there wasn't..
~4 MR. D A V I D S O N'I' And none vice-versa?
5 ,
MR. CALICUTT .No.
D- 6 -
MR.'DAVIDSON Just a matter of
- n. Y 8 -
'7 , disagreement th4t the cra'ft had brought up with
, ,8 their supervisor?:
t.
9 MR.1CALICUTT: That's correct.
'A n d -- d o you"know whether
. 10) >
MR.:'DAVIDSON:
'1k ,Mr. Tanley took any action to resolve-the' matter 12 himself? .
V :13 MR. CALICUTTI- Yes, I do.
b 14 MR. DAVIDSON- Do you know' what'he did?:
- He had met with-isome of
' 16 ' the QCLlead,'probably Cappy himself,' but they'didn't -
_ 3 17 reach an agreement.
~ .
Y 18 MR.-DAVIDSON:- When'you say'" Cappy-
~
'19 .himself,." do_:you refer to: Cappy: Lawrence? - .
- 20. -
-MR. CALICUTT Yes.
, it ?
~
Do you remember.what. n z ,/ '21' -
.MR. DAVIDSON:
~
- . c
< .=22- his posi, tion.was.at.the time of the' occurrence? ,
2 3 -- MR. C A L I C U T T 2., No,'not ~ specifically'I
~g ,
'24 don't.- -
fx-
- - Y) '
' 2 5. MR.-DAVIDSON: What is~your6best a ,
C [ _
._ FEDERAL--COURT-REPORTERS s
e y, .
- ~;, -
- r; -
sy -
7'-
- j;7.
a -. ,
a ,. ,
m j- .
. ,45- +
~4"
.=
., r.,
'7
' s' / ._
g., , , ,
~
r.# /l-
' G^j~ , bQ , y ,&
'.,f ,_
. . ' . .,5 ,.
_ m-
/recoll<ection of what position hefheld~a't=-the' time 'in g ; j .- ,f. . . , . . .
ff v ' ? li
, ,sq $. N : .1 ~
~
l d,f f M2 "' ithe . QC .? o rg a n i z a t i_o n ? 3
- ~ ' '
o -
a..: ,
-3.. r MR..CALICUTT He was 'a QC.. lead y-8 . .
.g .. ;
73 *ai 7 '4 y Linspector, non-ASME inspector.: *1
., -:p- . .
- 5 . - '
MR.-DAVIDSON , That's non-ASME?
q '
, J .
^L '
-6 MR. CALICUTTs Yes.
+
, 4 7 . .MR.'DAVIDSON 1.- Su'bs q6ent to Mr., -
Tanley's offort to; resolve the iss6)e, he brought:;it-8
- / .v
- 1 hto you; whatqdil you do?J (j (
g.. . . - .
Y p
=
,;9 p.
4
, m,fylO.f
!? fw .
.* -- l l' .
}C-[te 's a thd own , went'byer e >
\,p\ A s ,
HR.. CALICUTT t . -- f y, s ..
.s c . . .
j r u_. illl p r o c e d, a r e s , talked. 'among : ou r selves .
.p* .
- t h e;L Maf, 7 / ', ' letR.'DAVIDSON 'When yoy may"you1:talktd>
~
~
~
1 12 .;
5
,r ( %4 . -f .,
c
.amon . gyos/rse, 2 ves , you=mean you, SSor3e Tanley and' gy) i ' y ;13. .p fgJ' :t mc .a' A: ,4
- 4e
.414f Mr b. U de (a,rtce ? A
}e ._
-s r 3 4 - s 1Right.g 3 ,
7 L15) .{4 ,/)(,MR4y .- .s
. CALICUTT : .-
3 }_ ^ - '
- 165 MR. DAVIDSON: ,Wasc a rif o n e'; els e ;
m ,
&~ 17 ~ involved?
1
%q ;% : =l lL A '
. j%e.:
T - y" N
'Ns(/.} [qht -at-the
+
, Ng.18 = ~ ; - M9. CALICUTT1 No -r s L c - , , t3 ,
W ' 19 . . present, no.. 'f ./ ,r ,
f
?
- 3 .) -
t
,
- f (N. *
.A O..M, . 2 ; 0 - =a
- 'Mp. DAMIDSON
- ,You.meahTaot at4that
- I ;*
- p/]%
s s
, , f- ) pte p .
p <21" time? -
c >
._,l, 1
- h. f ** T2 2 ' .f ;' Y. -
~
MR'. CALICUTTI No..
1,
.e 7 ( m
'{
~
- /
Afterp dd had this (2 3.- ; MR. DAVIDSON: -
.1 ,
q c !24:
i,d }a scu >s'p l a n , did you;t,each ?a resol..uf, ion? -
,n).
,d N.
7 ;Q 1%
H ., -> ts
' MR.. CAL 3CUTN \ Ye's , 4e d.id. a
^ g25} g f, am/ w s ;#
4, 6 r
~
- 9. .;
fijff l *(L- c
, , , - : \.,, , .;.
~~
- f
^
$$4. v v # _ T w , . x gadnAL'dCOURT REPORTER 5L - -
p ,3. W %
7, ,
- ' =
j --
c g Q' ; 40 , ' , ,
^ -y _~
46-
, d. t - x
, _.i. x , ;n '
- g, 1
, e '
~
j ' ~ ' ., x ' L.11 d ! f' -
MR.~DAVIDSON:' . Was anyone else
- r. g . e 41 1*'~- g, _
q.3.fG .2 1
- involved?( .
~. . ,.
~, ~ '
3, :
. M'R . CALICUTT Mr. . T,a n l'ey g o t' l ba c k i.kwrence gotjack with
> - with.the' craft.peoplefand Mr.
14 -
_. . o ,
.v . , s ,
, " , vf
- 5 ,
the-QC personnel,,and overything was solved.. .
4 - 4 h ? ^ '
.[ E. 6 M- ' , .; r-MR..DAVIDSON: Thank you., Other.than I
3 _ , 7) ?the >
i ncl idents' of. the snubiers: andithe stainless' ,
8 , .
a 's ' ;1,s t e e l ! s u h p s , w e r e ' y o u - i.n v o l v e d in'the, implementation c s
- 7. . , 4 7. . . _
, s
-i9 o'f.'the policy - f orl:the _ resolution Jof. disagreements
+. <
k; : ) ,10f ibetween craftLand-QA/QC perso'nnsl?
^ ' '
Mai CALICUTT " 'I ' m; s o r r y . , .Il d id n ' t,
- , 4 7
- 1. 123 understand,you.. , ,
+ , " -
>13 'J
-MR.1DAVIDSON: 4
- Icmay not have phrased
,'x)h .; '
14, :that correctly.- .Other'than'these twolincidentsith'at
- 15 :ydkjust7 mention'ed,were there.any,other'occas' ions .
a .
~
16 .on!which'y'ou were required ~to resolvexthe- .; _
,t ,
1
..; ., f
+
- ', , ; 17 ' "disagreeme~nt between craft personnel and QC/QA, thu's; <
gi'vingJimplementation-t6-the policy,fthat we h' ave-
~
"[' [l'8 !
a .c '
19 .been di'acussingL: here? E ,.
20 _
MR.-CALIC TTs' I'm-sure there probably' l
'21~ ~were, buts 1.can't remember a specific ^ ins tance. . t A1 12 2
['MR. DAVID.SOMt. Mr.fJohnson, were.y=ou -.
. ,' 2 3.. ,
ever-involvedlin anuincident concerni'ng the policy-y '
. v 24' 7that: QC/QA-personnel not be: harassed,-intimidated or/ --
o c -
~ '
,' , -25h ? threatened by. craft? m
.h
'.n ,
+
+ L2 ~
- .s .
FEDERALLCOURT REPORTERS
~ ~
c m -- 9- A-
y -_, .
, =47_
, , -d a ,
.< , -i g -
3 ,
pll i' MR. JOHNf70N Yes, ' sir..
> ,:2 ; ,
- .MR. DAVIDSON3 Could you describe that-t s
b , #
incidents .j n which you were involved'in 3 ri n c l~d e n t o r.
rr l
[the implementation or: application-of thht policy?
E4 ,
,c y- ,
,T5 -MR. JO(NSON: The first one was e with-
, s c
[6 ! Charles. Reeves.and" Mike Kenned'y.' They were' Class:5 .s.
9 E
[', 7' non-ASMEfinspectors. It~ happened one time we was on'
- y 8- night shift'with a Task Force groupsto-set'~up.- to. ,
9 finish the, hangers'in the Auxiliary Buildings
'~
'10 -
- Safeguards, whatever.
11 '
MR. ..DAVIDSON: About-whennwas that, -
,e 12 . sir?= * . ,
N
[13i A N R '. JOHNSONs,JAboutNtwoJyears'ago, Y)i } ,
~
.14 some th i ag 01.i ke' tha t..
-n u, p
i.<1 15- '
\ MR.'DAVIDSON: About July ~or4 August of r- , s 116. :1982?fs, - < s 1 W ~
1 7
, 17 ,
MR. JOHNSON:- 'S,omething like-that.j*
,1o 18'- .About twoyyears: ago. _
- t. F ,
=19 ~
And: we were having~p;cblems selling J hangers 5:
- s. . .
20' off 'on the-n1ght-shift.
~
- l. d' talked with George
.:. ~
. , , : 21~: -Bunt.who was;'over the n,y = :./dt pt.>ple and1also
+ ' -
. ..u c ,- .
.22 ;trying to takeJeareiof-the: hanger people on-days..,, _
, , .,, y .
o - se .
1
'23; JWhenever I comerin. con-nighttshift in afternoons, -
it4 George would get :v '. t h 1 m e and tell meTwhat, he neoded
- a. 9 3
2done-thk.tLafternoon?and tell-me what kind of:
-xe 25.
x 1. j - ;
- a , u. y g __
%. - 1; -
z.
= # 4/ jp' IFEDERAI. CO[URT " REPORTERS '_
- m. ~. . .. _
T . ,
y- 48
~
A< _.
4 j , ,
hs . ; [1: problems ~theyThadhdluring the(daytime,.
whst was sold,
'j q ,.- .
()/ ,
2' ,what L w a s.n ' t , s o :o'n ;a nd ! so . f o r th . ,
^
. -. ! r
- 3~ >
When Georgewould.give me"his turnover,'he
,s _ .n .
i
, .4l would :'tell me what.weshad to'do_'on nights. 'We would-
, 11. 5- : g o[i n" thr e' f i e ld ,: get linedfup a'nd we'd start to work.
'6 < +
M R '. DAVIDSON: You,were, atithis time,
- ' 4 7'_ La Eanger_ superintendent? '
,4 8 ,
-HR. JOHNSON: Night shift hanger. ,
s- 4 9 sup'erintendent. ~
t ,
- 10) HR.-DAVID' SON: s.. A n d..- y o u :Would consult .
lli wi_th Mr. . Bunt,'the, Task' Force leader, in'the' 4 ,
- . ., /i f 12' - . Auxiliary Sa'feguards Building'regarding'hangerstand' .
W "13 < (findEout what work would i.be _:a s s ig ned to you;andEthati
- t.A -
- 114 .would.be necessary.to'be~ completed {during.thei - .
l' ' 15 .' evening shift? (
, .m..
.16 ' MR..JO.HNSON:' .Rigbt'.
.}
17-M R '. DAVIDS,0Nr.:Would you;please
~ ~ '
18 continue. -
, t -
_ 19 ,
MR. JOHNSON : :Most of theJtime, two 1 20~ : hours _or so a'fter we' got'toJwork and.trying to sell -
- [ 21- - off1 hangers,iwe would have'the same problems come up-
.; 22- wi th .'the two.. inspectors,I'just mentioned. . They
- .23- would~not; buy off what1-the-day shiit' people bought Qi ';:f ,24,- df be6ause o'f tn e i r = i n t e r p r e t a t i o n - o f the n .
f 25.?: S
. procedures.. -
^
j; +,
b'
' FEDERAL COURT. REPORTERS
49 1 And whenever we would talk to them, there
() 2 would be no resolving. We would go with Mr. C.C.
3 Randall, which was their boss, when it first started 4 happening, and he would resolve the problems most of 5 the time. ~ Then as the work continued, time went on, 6 these problems continued to happen.
7 Mr. C.C. L ndall was not on the job on this 8 particular~ night, and I went to see if I could find 9 him and ran up with his two inspectors, Kennedy and 10 Reeves. And we talked a few minutes, and there.was 11 nothing that could be done, so I told them I had 12 been asked to make a recommendation on paper that 13 would possibly speed up production on night shift.
14 So I told them what I was going to do, have to 15 recommend that the QC personnel be moved days and 16 that we would do the work on nights. And the day 17 shift people would have -- excuse me -- the day 18 shift Quality Control people would have ample 19 supervision and engineering support to give them the 20 answers that they needed to be able to buy or unsat 21 the item.
22 MR. DAVIDSON When you say " buy or 23 unsat," you mean that your. view was that the day
=
24 shift QC ~ inspectors would be able-to either accept O 25 or reject the hangers with the support, advice and i
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS ,.
.; . p,-m . ~m v,,; - --
. - .n.
- ~~ ~
-v. - - - - .- ~
+ M ~ ' '
~50-QQ-pnK~ j,F y'
- g_ - w ,
. - g* . . .
r
, w r 1 g,g. ,.
l-h: i ,
'a '
J. ; .
n .
l1' -help.lof theirf superv'isors' who < were more readily.
s pg . . y , _
QfT javailable duringjthe day, and also7 because they^'
~
- 2 r k $ .: - @: y_ %
- f. , i . .. x.
lwould Dhave'; acce s s (to' eng i neering ,'? soi tha t .'any -lNCR's; '
o 43;
.+ .' , .-.. .
.T f F .-
- 1 ,
'orLunsat'is. factory IR?s. could-befevaluated,c properly?
[
g ,: ' '4- -
p h L .;
t -
Si , ,
1 .MR. JOHNSONt' That'.sDtrue. , ,
'E " , . . (.
'Andrwho. asked y o ia- t o
- 1 6c
+ g
' M R . L D.A V I D S O N : 4
.2 ,
g L. .
J 7: - makeythe recommendation o,n how tot improve thei~ ,
,w .
. . ~
- 'm_ % -
- z. ,
w~, c. n, . !8f.T ' situation? _
.W ,
..' ~ ; .
N
,s .
. 19 b - e ,
-MR . JOHNSON Ken'Liford.- ,
. , ~ ,
l T10. ,
3 MR. DAVIDSONE Mr. Liford asked.'you to
. .a. L .
("" :ll" look: into?the matter as to.why-so few hangers.-were ;. g l '-
b e i n g-,b o u g h t s. o f f , and to make a recommendation to,
~
~
1 23{
c c
~ '
-.w h o m ?.
' -1 #N)N E ' ' 13 - .
F ~_. y
- .14: , l..
M R '. JOHNSON: 'To makeJacrecommendatlon2 1: .M '. . '
/;..
~,- -
_al5
- to him' .;.
i
, 4 ta c
w
- 4 v. I' (M , 16 ,
- , ~
.MR..DAVIDSON:' 1Nas-that' recommendation .
~.__ .
_ m i-. , . -
' des'igned ; to explain to"Mr.:Liford what~ th'e prob 1'sm;
- 17 -
- 3
- J-
[f.. [ 3 : P;.
a::;'
.[{ "'
,18 .
. was?'
+ .
y
- +r$$ 19.
MR. JOHNSON: 'We were ..a l w a y s ,--T a sl .
~
7.f , .203 supervisors'and managers inhthis position,;we.were y,
, .>j.
, %wn "' .pe. L21. . ialways lookingffor more efficient' ways;to'do'.our= job.
y
~
@#E
~
22: lAnd that'beingfMr. Liford's job, he-'was:, looking.for s 9 T. 23[ Lansw'rs e to' solve'our problems onl night shift'.-
u.' :+. , n .
- '24 e 'MR. DAVIDSON
- And did you prepare. 4
,sua +
[e~yn >
~
'this, recommendation?
. 25* -
- i
_ .e
'(
% 9 .
2 ol FEDERAL COURTyREPORTERS t
- - _m -
. - - ., m. -
7 p .r- , -
"l c P 51 q -
~
u.
lE -
-l' , UMR. JOHNSON: .No , sir.' I never got to u, s ,
- (/* ~~%l. #
- 2 '
theipoint.of1'doing that. .
g . L ~' ' ' s
?3' '. MR..DAVIDSON: Why d'i'd you_not get to -
thehpoint".of makingithetrecommendation? '
h s
~ '
- 4. ,
.( .
'4
~1. 45, >
MR. . JOHNSON +
-Yes, I did makoL-it .
s.
3 ., ., ,
~ verbally.
- 6 ,,
Y -
q.,
MR. DAVIDSONt' You..never. wrote it up?
-8 x MR. JOHNSON - No.
Y
) %
. se . . .
I ? th i n k I interrupted
~
~9 MR. DAVIDSON:
.^ 10 .you hen you; were saying y.ou'hadia, conversation:with
, s L. m ' llE Mr.3 Mike-Kennedy-and Charles' Reeves _, the-two.QC(s T
- r .4 q who'worke'd with. Mike J Randall/on the htight shift in~
'12
.the Auxiliary Building. lA n d ' w h a t J l J :i t .. y o u . w e r e -
7o 9<. m 13 -
.~
w- , 3 G14 discussing <with them?. n wfX 15 .
MR. JOHNSON: ^ 'I' dis 5ussed w h a t-' I. h a d i
- r been; asked-to=do as far as thelrecommendation;was
.. ~
, .-16 : n e
- m' Q F . 4 2
' ~.
concerned,,and I.did not1want to hi ti f; them onLthe.
~
. 17
. .:l'8 - . blind s'i d e '. I was.. going"to make'a-recommendation-A 2 ' ;
" 19. - 'that..they;be sent da'ys.
G _ s . &
t .-
- sr
.y y, - 20 ,
MR.-DAVIDSON Yout were[ going $to;m'ake c
21- 'a. recommendation'thatj'Mr. Kennedy n'nde. M'r . ' Re e ve s b e' 5 .t
- '22- trans f erred 4 f rom-E the nightzstaff toltheidayistaff?'
ix , s. <
~ i 23" -? M R . '~J.O H N S O N 3- Not by name. The.QC
'I J#3 ; ;
^7,,,24" -
? person'nel on nights, non-A'SME o .- y. 3 side,;because -I think.'
- l ;" .
")P ' ~~
~
~25 there was three at the time.
, ~e. , ,
d
( . ~' ; ' < # 4
, ~ ~ '
j' , L" . .
FEDERAL;C_OURTE REPORTERSa
+ <
- y. . . - - - . . .
- 's *
.- ., _52
}-m
- W 2p
-c n ., -
i_
~~ '
- s n s 9?
l' _
M R .- DAVIDSON: 'So this-wasn't directed-N ;/ .
s-. s
~
2 i to'Lthose'lindividuals but,,rather, you thought'that .
+
+
[
-3 the QC inspection.should be done in tihe daytime?
147 MR. JOHNSON: 'That's true.
-5' ,
MR. DAVIDSON: But you had no
~
- 6. Intention of changing the personnel?
- 7 MR. JOHNSON ,No.
8 M- 0 M R '. DAVIDSON: You just wanted them to 9 do it during the daytime when they would have access
~
- 10 . to engineering and supervision so that there would 11'1 he--some consistency in their evaluation?
.12 ,
MR. JOHNSONt- 'That's true. So then I-13 left. -The next afternoon;I came' in to work --- ^
~ 14 .
MR. DAVIDSON I'm not through with 1
IIS . -this incident. ,
16 You told them about the - recommend a't i on; is
~
17 that correct?
4 18 MR. JOHNSON: That's,true.
e 19 MR. DAVIDSON: Did they say anything 20- to you when you told them that?
21- MR. JOHNSON: To my recollection, no.
3 .22 MR. DAVIDSON: They said.nothing?
23 MR. JOHNSONS- Not to my knowledge.
24 MR. DAVIDSON You walked in the room,'
fT-/ -
~
25 they said nothing. You discussed this with.them and f
FEDERAI. _ ___C_O U_R T _REP 0RTERS
_j
m .-.----m.
53 1 they said nothing. Did they speak to you at all?
) 2 MR. JOHHSON: Yes, sir.
3 MR. DAVIDSON: What did they say?
4 MR. JOHNSON: As._we first stated, that S was two years ago. What I'm fixing to say here 6 would not be per.so exactly what they said.
7 HR. DAVIDSON: The best you remember.
O MR. JOHNSON: The best I remember is 9 we talked a bit, we discussed the fact of what I was
~
10 saying.' They wanted to know my reasoning for it. I 11 told them at the time because Tie were spending too 12 much time on hangers in the evening on night shift.
13 I have people not doing anything two or three hours, 14 half a day gono, and that I needed to be able t6 15 sell the hangers if they were correct. If they 16 weren't,~I needod them unsatted.
17 MR. DAVIDSON: Why was there so much 18 dead time for your employees by virtue of the night 19 . inspections?
20 MR. JOHNSON: Because they would take
- 21 time to go to the field to do the inspections.
22 MR. DAVIDSON: When you say "they," QC 23 inspectors?
24 MR. JOHNSON: They would inspect the 25 hangers. QC would unsat the hangers. Then I would FEDERhL COURT REPORTERS
~ - - - - - - - - .-
y ,, ;
=
p,,,' ,. . _.
~
uw >
1 ~la.
u 54-yMY;7, 7-
', W '
,, ..s ~
y
. , . y- -
e 3
-v.
. , c +
4 e. ..- + ,. g
,. . . e . , . . .
,r
---r; ' l', lattmyjpeople.come to me and show'mo the procedures- .J JQ c- ;.
~
- ~
J2 Jth'atiseihad?to work with in the con s t r uc t i o ri; -
];g)$ ,
,:r > , .y., - y 3; procedures. * 't , ,,
- y.
- r , ,.
& 's, .
y -
' 4L i -Q h e'n I would;have.'to"go get w'ith;:$ hem and':
w~ ,
< +
- . 5c talk.with themLabout'it and see what they,ha'dJto say, - '
16: 1 4 Land:try to figure o'ut'what was right:and what was
~
- -Q_ _, ,
m7; . wrong.- cAnd'by the~timeLall thi's gotrdone, yo'u
- ~ < .
> ~ , .. ,
t ,1 ,
'SJ , probablyflost anywhere from two. hours.to' half a' day..
h5 *- , . _ , , , ~
- And; ~the time (I'mLdoing this with -them I got more:
-. 9 :
x ,
in~sp'ecbions ready'.
loi- So actually,.usually.. lost five.
o r s'i x . h'a n g e r s'.' '
11; .
~
. J 12 ' +
MR. DAVIDSON: So it'was your idea.
,b h [13 then[to-have Mr. Bunt, or.whoeverfwas "
the N/ - ,
14' superintendent 'in zthefdaytime,,.spendmallJthis time s f, - 15 ' ~ resolving >these; problems' so that"you could just
%y .. -
16 spend your time' supervising /your employees inj
" 4
< + U17 producing hanger'sifor inspection?- '
x.r;
- a. : '
'{ - 18 . MR. J O H N S O N s.- No, sir, that's9not? '
n
^
.-quite right. "a 19:, , ' .
4
,' 20, <
MR.: DAVIDSON: Why did'you think" - t h a t, . S
- 21 - having the inspectionsfthenfduring the daytime would.
{ .s ,
- , ..= ? , .
- , 22 safeLyou.'timejin the evening?.
- .
3:? ~ #23; MR. JOHNSON -- Decause t h e- d a y ; s h'i f t :
24 - people was buying'off items tha t' the night sh'ift -
g,a
'25 +
3personne'l w o u'i d .,n o ts. b u y .
,w ,
i
- p. ,L. ,
1 l
1 - ,, '
e t
4 F
I .I FEDERAL COURT _ REP _ORTERS ,
4 Aq , , ,-
- - 55' [
- s ~
4 _. -
~ , > > ,.
9 e 1: - -
.c-T '
11" JMR. DAVIDSONs. So you thought. there, o ,
fs; -
, AJM - was = inconslis tiencyf in - the . way in .hich the.procedurer,
~
, J 2' -
- ~ ,'
n b.n.. >
)3j were[being? mplemented? i
- g. ,
, + . . .
44-a' .MR.1 JOHNSON - That's true. ,
g
$_ 6 y ( v
. : 5Ng MR..DAVIDSONt1 And that.you' thought if
~;: m ,
y .
S 46' Lthe ' nig'ht inspector s were transferred.to the, day 1 P
~
shift,[that they would then become(aware of.what the
~
- g. 7
- proper ctandards.were and, more li'kely t h a n.- n o t ,
O would start buying off more hangers?
9 ,
, 1 l _
10 .
MR. JOHNSON: That's true.
11' , MR. DAVIDSON! Did'you-tell that to!
- q ;_
- 12 :
.: M r . Kennedy ~andsMr. . Reeves?
+
fy 13: MR. JOHNSON: That's true. 3 ,
LL , ,
> - 141 MR.'DAVIDSON What did'they say when[
' 15 y o.u :s a id t h ait ? 1
?l6 ,
~
l MR'. .J OH NSON : They[didn.'tx saynything.. a 1 -
17 ..MR. DAVIDSONS- -Did youTget angry with
~ 18 _them?-
v $
19 MR..JOENSON: No , 'si r .
~
- . t. ..
20 ,HR. DAVIDSON: ~Did they get angry with' I #
- 21 ycu?
- 2' 2 ' - ,. M R . L J O H N S O N t'. Evidently,-they did. <
m.
-I ' m .dt asking forf-y'ou
~
2 31 a .M R . DAVID, SON
. p 24 to r.. s p e c u l a t e . Did they raise their voices?
- n-3 j. <
N' ' - 25 MR. JOHNSON: ,They did not raise: their
~ +
1 N - -
-FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS , *"
- n. . =; c, W -
y ~:
T ~ w ,
= , 56 r n_,. '
<._. > ,, .y 3 _
"n a
,x q1 voices,y -
ml 4 Q. 2 -
a' ;MR. DAVIDSON s ['W a s - t h e r e any harsh.' ,
m - , .%
-e, )) - s- -. 5-
'words4 exchanged-between.you and ..them?: '
_ , .35 .
4 4 i. MR. JOHNSON: Noi sir.. ; ,
~ g- ,,
' ~
, ' ~ _ , $1 .J M R_.. 'D A V I D S O N : After you had that n
m ,
, *-, k?
L > 6 conversation, you left? -
7 _
MR.~ JOHNSON: That's;true.
8' :MR. DAVIDSON:~ What happenedithen?.
P (9-MR.' JOHNSON: We continued-.to finish
', 10 'off that night,~come in the next a f t e r n o o n'.- I'went
. p ,, ,
11 to;see C.C. 'Randall in the early; afternoon,~and=he
'12 ' was a-little bit irritable or.that'w'ay towardssme;in~
W . 4- s
- 13. the. afternoon, and we' talked)just a f e w I-' mi n u t e s .
'%J .
.14 Land he asked'me,.about:whytI.was-cussing him v and'why 15 I had.~made the position against hi.m I,hadtmade. I y- .
' + '
- 16 _ asked-himEwhat he wasLtalking about. ., .
Nj-. 17- MR. DAVIDSON . He saidxyou had been M ,
18' cussing him? 4
~
7 .
, 19 MR. JOHNSON- From his;QC'1 people.
r : toq,s. n 2
E
.g 20, .MR. DAVIDSON . Someone had told him-
^
you hadLcursed.#him'out?
~
' J 2.1 kSt ~
y, - :. .
22 MR. JOHNSON: Yeah.
4 f
m' ! . .
23- _-
-MR. DAVIDSON: .
What did*you say when' <
24 'he accusod you ofs making these. statements?
! p' . ,
C~ _
25 MR.' JOHNSON: I asked him how long I '
r
,m 5
m-I FEDERAL COURT' REPORTERS
y -
57.
L3 . ~ .
~ r o
+3 _
sp '
s-
~
1 had been working;with him on nights. I said, "How-6y txj 2 manystimes have.you heard-me curse since I'veibeen-
)r 3 on nights?" He said, "Not any." I'said, "That:
E, .4l 'should tell,you something..about the story-you're 0 '
l
'4~ '
l' 'yp }
5- getting." ,
t '
~6 ~ .MR. DAVIDSON: .What else"had-he been -
- 7 .. ' told,/other than,that you-were supposed to have
~
8^ cursed? -
^
- 19 'n MR. JOHNSON: That'I had1run down his.
- y. ,
-1
,. 710 -eredibility and his knowledge!af his job. . , -
w; llL MR. DAVIDSON: Was this true?
11 21 MR.- JOHNSON : No, sir.
.U
- r. .
fN 13 , MR. ..DAVIDSON: Who.had told Mr.
L) -
31 4 ,
LRandall this,~so far as you know?
- p ,
r*~- - 15 MR. JOHNSON:. So'as far as I know, it
. 16 '
.wouldLbe thertwojQC personnel.we' talked a b'o u t . ,
17 " MR. DAVID' SON l But'you-don't know th'at' la for.a fact? ,
19 MR.' JOHNSON: I don',t know.- ,
~
+ 20 MR. DAVIDSON: After you said to-Mr.
'21 Randall, "Have.you ever known me t' o use profanity?"
.j
.22 a n d ' h'e . s a i d , "No,.never,"'what then did you. discuss?.
V -
23 MR.-JOHNSON: He told me of the J ,)'
[ 24. accusations made.against me, 'not prior to this day
- ^
25 ' by.Mr. Charles Reeves and Mike Tanley.
8 I w f n . - 5:
- FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
58 1 MR. DAVIDSON: What accusations had
, 2 been made against you?
3 MR. J Oll H S O N : That I had run down.his 4 knowledgeability _of his job, his credibility, and 5 ~that I wanted to try and-_get his people moved from 6 inights to days. And he said he had a letter there, 7 and I asked him could I see it. Ile gave it to me.
8= I read the letter and discussed it with'him.
9 MR1 DAVIDSON: Who was the letter by?
10 MR. J O !! N S O N : The letter was by Mike 11 Kennedy and Charles Reeves.
12 M R'. DAVIDSON: So in other words,
'i 13 these two individuals with whom you had had the 14 discussion the prior evening and prepared a letter
~15 or memorandum to Mr. Randall in which they accused 16 you of having said some unkind things about Mr.
. 17 Randall and also engaging in some kind of conduct 18 that they thought was improper?
19 MR. JOIINSON: That's right.
20 MR. DAVIDSON: Is that correct?
21 MR. J O II N S O N : That's correct.
22 MR. DAVIDSON: Did you read the letter?
. 23 MR. J O ll N S O N : I road the letter.
24 MR. DAVIDSON: And what, to your 4
25 recollection, did it say?
A
. ~ .
FEDERAL COURT RCPORTERS
. _ _ ~ , _ ,
r _ ._.,_ - .r '
~; n 59 s ,
p .w
. .1 p ,
4
- 1. * '
M R . JOHNSONt' The letter.said that.I
- -A _ . . .
..had ranLdown his credibility and knowledge of-his
- 4) <
- 2..
had'got'upa$t with QC inspectors.
'3 job,z and.that .I r .
j4 'MR. .DAVIDSON:
So-they accused you of 3- .
5' : losing 1your temper? .
l
[, '
- 6- "
- M R .o JOHNSONt' . Y e a h' , < t h'e y d i d .- 1
?,
~
~7. ,MR. DAVIDSON1 ~ W e r e' the fact'in'that 8 ,1 - letter'or: memorandum true? .
.MR.' JOHNSON: No, sir.
9' '
- 6 s . . . .
'10 MR. DAVIDSONt Did.you tell-Mr.
I ll. 'Randall.whether;tliey were
~
true or not?
12 . MR.'JOHNSONt I discussed each' item, fy ' ' 13 " that was discussedfin the letter with Mr.'Randall,- ,
kj.
14' the ones'that~ was-true'andethe ones that'was'not '
- p ; ;
'15 .t r ue ._ ; ,
41 6 MR. DAVIDSOtit And was'hecsatisfied
~
. 17' with your. explanation?
~
18 ,
MR. JOHNSONt. Whenever I left there,
'19 he a n d -~ I was under the' general understanding that it ,
, L 2 0L ' .was. basically blown'out of proportion.
21 MR. DAVIDSON's And you had.not N 22 ,
' intended to or'in fact harassed, intimidated or
.(23 threatened either.of'theno two individuals, Mr.
.is
'24 ' Kennedy or Mr. Reeves?
-\ "j 25 MR.,JOHNSOH2 That was my t
+
.o ,
, ___ . F E D E R A L C,0 U R T _ . R E P O R T E R S ___ _ _ _, _ . , _ . _ __
^ ~
- 60 r 1 understanding.'
2 MR. DAVIDSON: And was that Mr. -
. 3. Randall's understanding, as far as you-knew?
'4 MR. JOHNSON: As far as I knew.
5 MR. DAVIDSON: 'Is'that the end of the 6 incident? '
- 7 MR. JOHNSON: No, sir.
O MR. DAVIDSON: What happened after 9 that?
10 MR. JOHNSON: I took a copy of the 11 letter that Mr. Randall let me have, went into my 12 office and wrote a reply or a- statement concerning 13 that letter and turned it in to my superiors.
)
14 MR. DAVIDSON: And to whom did you 15 turn it in?
16 MR. JOHNSON I gave the copy to Mr.
17 Liford. .
18 MR. DAVIDSOH Mr. Ken Liford? Did 19 you give it to anyono else?
20 MR. JOHNSON: Mr. Frankum got a copy 21' of the thing.
22' HR. DAVIDSON: So the only copy that 23 you gave out or distributed was to Mr. Liford?
24 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
2S MR. DAVIDSON: And did you discuss 1 FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
i~ -
61
('-
y j '
'l 5this letter or memoran'dum with Mr..Liford,~and your ,
-.3 ^
)
x
~2 response?
3 . MR. JOHNSON: He'had'the opportunity v 4 t'o ' r o a d it.before I ever got^back to the job. And .;
as
'5 -then when_,1 got back the next afternoon is when Mr.
I
. 6 Frankum wanted to talk with me. And after the fact.-- J 7 .after1I-talked with Frankum, I talked to Mr. Liford
< [ t. 8 again, and he tol me that's what.I should-have done, a .9 MR. DAVID' SON: You were asked by Mr.: ;
10' -Frankum to meet with him regarding this incident?
11 MR. JOHNSON: Yes.
12 MR. DAVIDSON: Was anyone else present
- i. .
D
" ,ey 13 st the meeting that you had with Mr. Frankum?
4
' 14 - MR. JOHUSON: Mr.. James Calicutt.
15 MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Calicutt was 16 'present., And what'did Mr. Frankum tell you?
s 17 -MR. JOHNSON: Every word he.said I do J '
18 not remember. But we talked about job policies and 19 how our work relationships with QC would be-handled..
20 MR. DAVIDSON: Did you understand him 21- to be reprimanding you?
- 22. MR. JOHHSON: I understood him, in 23 areas thatH1 may have been vague in, to hav'o ~ been
~
jq 24 reprimanding. The other areas that I had done'like-i l 25 I was supposed to have dono.
T, ~
FEDERAL COURT' REPORTERS
s _ _
62 1 M R .- DAVIDSON: When you say, "In the 2 areas I was vague in, I was reprimanded and the 3 other areas I was not," what do you mean? What did f
4 you mean?
5 MR. J O ll N S O N : That maybe I should not 6 have went as far as I did, discussing with two QC 7 persons what my recommendation was going to be until 8 I first talked to their leaders.
9 HP. DAVIDSON: Their supervisors?
10 HR. JOHNSON: Yes.
11 MR. DAVIDSON: Was that the end of the 12 incident, sir?
- ' 13 HR. J Oli N S O N : That was it.
14 MR. DAVIDSON Were there any other f
15 incidents in which you wore involved concerning the 16 policy against-harassing, intimidating or 17 threatening QA/QC personnel?
18 HR. J O i! N S O N : Ed Niedecken.
19 NR. DAVIDSON: Could you tell us the 20 circumstances and facts regarding that incident?
21 HR. J O ll!! S O ll The circumstances. I 22 was over the Paint Department in Reactor Humber 1, 23 trying to got it painted out. Wo had a foreman ,
24 named Danny Ackery in one area in putting in 25 applications with the inspector by the name of Ed FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
. . ~ ,, . ..e . .. .
. ~ >
', 7" - y ,
63 ;
- , , ,e ~
,,- s - :f t
,. ' n. - -
l'$ >
....,l .
. L' l1 Niedecken; working with'hi,. m Next to:Danny Ackery ,
.A 4j ,
2, - w'as alf o r j eman named Benny -- that-was wrong. .Mame p.
7 T.g _
o fj Hen ry , : and-21. don ' t , know wha t.- hi's ' la s t name
~
s* -
-3 .w'a s .'
1A k he had;approximately 20ihangers that
~
h 4' were ready
^
'5', Lfor, prime coat a p p l i c a t i o n~ '. t o ho put'on.s a- C . .>
~ have a
.6' . .And;we did.not QC; inspector to ,
. , , 7 ~ .y T. . inspect .the hangers to say it we could or'couldn't u -
y 81 ;put"it on1them. I spoke'withfEd Niedecken'ab'out it. ,
, 9, - Me :. sa id .he was. busy _ putting. a finished coat sf 71 0' . a p p l i~c a t i o n ' o n'~ t h o s e . so I'went up to'~ the:.QC to see.
'l1 if. ILeould find QC le'ad. They-were not+1nithe "
'12 trailer office. Coming.out of.the offi'ce, Ed
?W xy l131
~.
'Niedecken was,.up-there,fand-I' asked him1at.the time
.y :14 - what;was he doin.g,.and her toldJae nothing.
'.,~
~
' 15
- And I asked him again about being~able to 16 'do .the inspections for the'primeable c o a t ,.
1 17; , ' application? inspection.- -He said , he.Jwas not: goingfto-
,, 18- do the primeable coat' application inspection. I 4, _
s
~19 :lef t him and went 'o t try'to. find a QC lead.* I'come
.n
.'- .; 20 '
.backa round. to where Danny was at, and Eddie was
, i c,
^21' -backidown there again. (
- ? 2 2. ,
so I discussed with.Danny.Ackery'how many z L
. 2 3; peopleihe.had busy and 'h e told meLhe had them all 24' busy. painting.except for one, maybe-two finish coa't'
.- W_ . . 3
>#~",
25; painters. so then I asked Eddie'again was there_any
? ,-
( ,
q ,
g _ .
I '
'FEDERALuCOURT REPORTERS
64 1 way he could possibly inspect those hangers over 2~ there, because I could put those painters doing 3 somethi'ng else and I needed those other things 4 paintod.
5- And about that time Jim Ewely, which was 6 his supervisor, came' up, heard the conversation and 7- Jimmy told him that's what we would do. And Eddie 8' got 'h o t', shrinked off, used a few cuss words, said 9 he would not do today what he had been doing. And 10 Bob Horey saw all this going on and he asked Eddie 11 Niedecken could we have a word with him, and they 12 had a word or two on whatever.
13 And the next morning is when I found out
)
14~ that I'had been written up, along with Bob Morey, 15 for' intimidation of QC personnel.
16 MR. DAVIDSON: Did you know why Mr.
17 Niedecken had written you up?
18 MR. JOHNSON: I did not know.why at 19 the time, and I still do not know the real reason, 20 other than they were trying to say that I was trying 21 to tell QC where to go.
22 HR. DAVIDSON: And what work to do?
.23 HR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
24 HR. DAVIDSON: Well, how did you find 25 out that.you had-been written up by Mr. Niedecken?
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
m., ------ -- -
7 - ~. - - . . _ - ,
y,l-:: ,- ; % ,
3 765 "i ' ~
i s, s .
=
p 0 4 t y .
~1-
,- l M R '. J O H N'S O N t [ : B o'b M o r e y Iold t met about'
~.
[% .j -
4 2'2. - itithe'next morning.-
, s E
z.
3, n -MR.:DAVIDSON: And"did--anything occur ,
^
after-that'i.after you w e r ew ' ~ r i ti t e n up or, told that?-
^
- '"4" 4' -
15f -
M R '. : J O H N S O N
- Yes,; sir.
f '
6( 's .
MR. DAVIDSON: 'What happened?. .
77; 'MR. JOHNSON .
. Mr. Boyce'Grier called
- s '8' m'e ' t o his offico and he wanted: to[know what had-x-
9 happened. ,
7 7 10-MR.i DAVIDSON: Who'is Mr..Boyce Grier?y - -
r.
,7- -1 11 MR. JOHNSON I. don't know who he is i 12 - or what his-title' is.. .All Iiknow is that I was told L m G < .13 he-investigatesiall= allegations to_which. craft and L
. Q.J ,
- 14 QC.have" problems. '
- 15. ' M R . ' D A V I D S O N's And~did you speak'with
+-
~fp- '
, .- 16 : Mr. G r l:e r ?
x 17- MR. JOHNSONt- ' Y e s .1
~
'l8
~
MR. DAVIDSON: And did'he tell you ,
t 19' anything about the' incident?,
20 MR. ' JOHNSON s.' He asked me about the
- ; ~
, 12 1 - incident. 'r
'22 MR.'DAVIDSON: -
And you' ve' told him.as c
F
- 23. much l as you've told us -here about what had occurred?
I '
l- .' 24 MR. JOHNSONS Yes.
lffl U "' '25 ,
, MR.'DAVIDSONS Did he say anything- ,
p ,
i -_ - , , e ,
FEDERAI.. COURT REPORTERS
~
L ~.. .
- --v y y - -
g n . .y
~
a
, .66 -
w
,, l fgt 1- .after that? l
,+- m> -l Q z.
2 2- 'MR.' JOHNSON: No, sir. ., -1 h , ,
g, ,.3 2 MR. DAVIDSON Did:anyth,ing; happen f, ,
.-E 4 After.:your' interview wIth--Mr..Doyce Grier? ,
-t E5 MR. JOHNSON:;
Mr. Doug Frankum. called A b- '6
'me. ' 4
^
cfr ,
6
,7 . ..7- MR. DAVIDSON: Mr.:Frankum? .
t
'8- MR.DJOHNSON: Yes.
MR. 'DAVIDSON '
l <
~9 ,
And w at did Mr.
, 4 10 Frankum.want from you?.
11 MR. JOIINSON: Mr. Frenkum.wantedLto go one more timo onJour poli'cies as;far as QCL
~
12 -over"it~
- /mu 13
- ia concerned, that we do not tell QCoubere to go,
\ j'
[ T4 ~ what-to inspect, and that we must or should g e t:
--15 ahold of the-QC. lead . to tell him what we needed done.
h '- .N.
T
~16~ .And_by that time.I told him-my side,of the story, -
17~ 'that the only reason-I didn't1go'to QC lead-is 18: because we were all out in other schools that:were-
- 19. .being trained.
y 20 We only had one'QC lead that day for 'that
- , 21 . period of time, and he was.-doing something.'else.in
- 22 "the building; I;couldn't find him. And I told.htm 4
~
2.3 from ~ then'on,-I would be sure to get ahold of the QC
.24' 1
loads.:
' C) 125- Anything else happen MR'. DAVIDSON:
V
.c _
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS.
. m - .
67 s
1- after.that?
2 MR. JOHNSON: No, sir.
o 3 MR. DAVIDSON: Do you recollect when 4 you had that conversation with Mr.'Frankum?
5 MR. JOHNSON: Approximately four or 6 -five months ago.
7 MR. DAVIDSON: So in March or April of
-8 19847 9 -
MR. J O H ilS O N : Yes.
!- 10 MR. OAVIDSON: Other than these two 11 incidents.that you've just mentioned in which you
.12 were involved as the subject of an accusation of
~
13 harassment, intimidation or throatening, were you 14 involved as a supervison in dealing with any 15 incident involving the craft personnel that you 16 supervised?
- '17 MR. J O ll N S O N
- No, sir..
L 18 MR. DAVIDSON: Turning to.the other 19 policy that has been discussed here today, namely 20 the policy on how to handle disagrooments between
.21 craft and QA/QC personnel, were you ever involved in 22 resolving a disagreement or dispute between craft 23 and QC personnel with respect to procedures?
24 MR. J O H il S O N : Yes, sir.
m 25 MR. DAVIDSOti The matter had boon L FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
y +, . - -_ .-
y gg, ,
- ~ 'j '
w,' '
s s .m... -
1 l' broug"h't up'to your attention by a subordinate?
.3
,j lt MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
1 3 MR.=DAVIDSON Could you. describe.that o *. .4 - : incident?
r
-5 , MR.-JOHNSON One of them card 1 keys
- 6 was brought to my attention, I think, by Cleef Buck,
'71 whichLwas hanger general foreman. And what the
.8 ~ problemowas, QC had made accusation that we were >
-9 using smaller card keys in the pins than we should
' 10 .be using. And we tried to tell them the only ones
, 11- we' was using wasLthe keys that come with the pins.
~
+ 12' So"th'ey were still insisting that those keys were ri, 13 too small. -
c) '
14 So at that time I discussed the matter with 15 the QC lead and.also went to, Pat Clark,=and the; 16 proceduresEwas t'o change to allow lany. key to be used s 17 as long as the heads would not go through the hole,
-18 as longu as it was satisfactory.
+
"19 MR. DAVIDSON: Do youknow or i ,
20 recollect what Pat Clark's position was at'the time "21C of t'his incident? .'-
> 1
$2 2 '
MR. JOHNSON: My understanding is
~
23: project engineer. ,,
-' 2 4 -
MR. DAVIDSON - Can you think of any
, p: ,
'\~J 25 other occasion when you were involved in the ,
'?
t-l , ,_ FEDERAL COURT' REPORTERS
^ :;7 - -
69; u .
~
+
s !
1 %
g \
r, u
- 3. 5 - 1. resolu'ti.on f of Ja:. d i' sag reemen t between"QA/QC: personnel
'es ,
4 [, L '
~
2" a nd ic ra'f t?-
3 MR.-JOHNSON: One was;with pipei n 4 cicarances in the R-tunnelHon which-side /they would ,
u.
- 5. - be on. They~had'to have a - clearance of a'. sixteenth'
] 6 ;o f'a n -i nch ,- ;and. ' tihe .d rawi ng wouldtcall;for'just s .7 exactlyfone side.and the pipe.would be moved 'from .
v 8- - one sideJto the other, and you could never: get' it s
9' Lexactly like l 't was supposed to be there. So'we-
.10 ' went to QC' leads and back through Pat Clark and s ,
, [ .' 11 eng.ineers' and. resolved' that problem.
E' 11 2 MR. DAVIDSON: Are?there anyLother f'"3 ,13' incidents or' occasions that'you can ' recollect now
- w) 4 14 .- regarding you being-involved in the implementation s- ,
- 15. .of-the policy for ~ resolving disagreements;.between i16' QC/QA personnel and-craft?
17, MR. JOHNSON: Notfspecific stuff,.no, W. , i g'- , ~g 7 ;
- 1. '19 : HR. DAVIDSONs- Nothing rights now?
.V' s
20' MR.-JOHNSON 'No, ,ir.
21 HR.-DAVIDSON: Mr. Liford, earlier in
'22 =the testimony:here today,'it was mentioned that'you -
~
,. "23 'had some invo'lvement in one.of the incidents :in
' ~
(,, ~24 'which'Mr. Johnson was accused of harassment, t N 25 intimidation or threatening of QC-personnel; is that ,
l ,
2 FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
70 1 correct?
(f 2 MR. LIFORD: That's right.
3 MR. DAVIDSOlit I believe, in fact, you 4 mentioned that you had some involvement in one of 5 those incidents.
6 Could you tell us what incident it was that 7 you were referring.to and what involvement you had?
8 MR. LIFORD: On the night shift 9 turnover sheet that I got from Mr. Johnson, part of 10 that night shift turnover to me on day shift was a 11 copy of the allegations by QC and a copy of the
= 12 letter that Mr. Johnson sent me explaining the 13 allegations.
14 Early the next morning I picked this up, 15 read it, went to Doug Frankum's office to make sure 16 he was aware that we had an allegation coming down.
17 When I got to Mr. Frankum's office, Ron Tolnon was 10 already in his office with a copy of the letter from 19 the Quality Control inspector. tre sat, wont over 20 both the QC's allegation letter and Mr. Johnson's 21 answer to those allegations. And when I left the 22 office, Ron Tolson, who was OA manager, and Doug 23 _Frankum, project manager, were pretty well in 24 agreenent.
O 25 What they had was a misunderstanding more FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
71 I than a harassmen't and intimidation threatening type y 2 situation.
-3 MR. DAVIDEON- HH r . Liford, other than 4 Mr. Tolson and Mr. Frankum, was anyone 'ciso at that 5 meetingf i n which this incident was discussed with
~6 you?
7 MR. LIFOkD: No.
8 HR. DAVIDSON: After that meeting had I 9- concludod, at which-the three of you had agreed that
~
, 10- what was at issue was a misunderstanding rather than 11 an incident in which there had been harassment, 12 intimidation and threatening of a QA/QC person, what-7 13 happened?
14 MR. LIFORD: When I left, it was 15 agreed'that Mr. Tolson was going to call in the;QC-16 lead and the two QC inspectors that were involved-17 with the letter, and he was going to talk.t'o them.
18 Mr. Frankum was going to call in Mr. Johnson and
, 19 discuss the matter with him, and'both parties would 20 get together the following day. And if they had
'21 anything come out of the meetings other than what we p
+
22 'had'already discussed, then they would proceed 23 furthur. Otherwiso, end of subject.
24 MR. DAVIDSON: Were you involved or
.25 _did you participate'in any further meetings or I
L FEDERAL' COURT REPORTERS
- , , .-- 1.- - - - -
- g. -
. c, j2 yQg x'F 9;, j ,
7
( p< ,
- 'S .
s>s ;
ge m j.
m
(", 1: ' discussions ofJthis subject?
Ef-g w. ..g, .-
9- _
Af ' A 12;. . ,
?.M R . z L I F O R D Onlyc to the pointtof Mr.
, ,_ 't .. .
+
P
@ 3 ,
cFrankum-discussing with..me laterthis' discussion (with--
Johnson ~ and primar11'y:what come out,of his "4 ~ ,
, - 5, Ediscussion., -
s . . .
. , 4 6..: ,
M R '. : DAVIDSON: Could.you relate to u s.-
~
= ' ,7 f that-. conversation'that you had'with Mr. Frankum?-
s '
C - "8- . MR. LIFORDt. The end. result'was that,- - ,
~
9' dueito the earlier d'iscussions:between Johnson and . .
, \ 7 10, . ,theitwo QC-inspectors concerning problems ofgefting q 11 . inspections and the-results of' inspections', when Mr.
g- -
- 12 ' Johnson went in,to the next subject, which was the _ -
, , ~
W Af,
- 13, . . request for an evaluation and recommendation of the
' ~
J14 problems'on night's'hift and what to.do about them,-
15' .they interpreted;the. switch from one subject to [
.g 16 'another as a threat 1against. them personally more so
,s -
e 0
'17 :than. a: solution' to;-a ' problem., -
Thatis what the;. '
.. 7 ,<
4 .. . .. ,
r
~
~ ,18 misun,derstanding was. ,
~ '
.19 -
MR. DAVIDSONS.- And'Mr.-Frankun s >20'
'~
cuplain.ed this to you?- ,
a L 21i MR. LIFORD ' .That was in the
, L 2 21 ,
conversation,1 yes.
e
- :j-m 23 MR.fDAVIDSON: After you had the m.
.. ~.24: : conversation, was;anything f u r t tie r . d o ne or-said p s.
y, j; v .25' aboutDthe-incident? -
. s- <.,
s 4 s
+, t v. - ,
+ , FEDERAL-COURT REPORTERS
-_= -
g
- - ,4 t r -- ,
- 1. 73 .
< - Y -
,;(!/f !c:N'(
r.-
,, '/
I U. s
" N' ()ih/t . .lLIFORD .
Hot to;;my . knowledg e .
g ; , ,7
. Q,1 '>
y ,
f_ .2-
- l MR. DAVIDSONI- Mr. Liford, were;you
< . - ?
3 ,
'3' -involved in che second incident that Hr. Johnson
- v. !,
, 1, (s q
~4 : made mention:of-here-today?
. .. y "
5 HR.*LOPORDr Very - g f lightdy.
I was d'* .
,t , f, P- , 6 asiare of the incident. ,I a cawarA
- y/ some:
/ / ,) 3 g
-7 conversations.on it the ;sdbject.,)~ Mrv Johnson didnot
/
j.
work for me direc41y at the ti me , and I d.Tose to 1 ,
.,-E
, (t .
N 9 stand bacf.and'le{ people that were involved with-it
.. n I; 1n ,
. 10 ;take caretof 3 that problW,m, i.,. s and' s tay ou t of I it. H
\
y ;s, r t. w .
-lh 4 - lV MR'. D Ah.'IOdCM rs Mr. Calicutt, you. heard r- $ s- i
'/,.N g 12' . -
Mr. Johnson testify aboet'//n[ incident involving'an '
\ g X. 13 ~ al/.ugation of h a r tis a m e n t',,' it} t imid a t ipn and
'J'
+
lthreatening' j
lodged by'.-two'46ality Coretrol t'
, *+ .Q .f[ s y' ,
persons.
14- (; '
s .
4 f (g +
., q 3 15, Were'you involved or 'ln any way mado! aware'of that 3 x '
16 incident? ?
g L !..
17 .HR. I CALICU$ht I was made aware of it
^
q i . i 18 i by Mr. L i t o r d ,' ' a n d - I was present when Mr. Frankum q i-
~19' ' t a l.k ed ~ toj 'ri r . ' J o h n s o n .'
- g - ,
0- ,
'l /
\I iK,R. DAVIDSON: 'Do you recollect what '
lt t '
21'. tir'. ' Fp a n k,u m p a i d to(idr.(3bhnson?
ui
("$
t , ',tf.g '(
bi ; y 4 '/ Basically _the same 22 y\ .- CALICUTTs 5
(1 ', , ^\ f, I i ? ,
- f; 23i thing tesff.ije( to.
i p Mr.j[LifordhustL H ) i?, ',,s
24 -
p4 j}. HR. DAVIDSO?)J Whak is ;'your j~ -> . ' s- i ,.,A 1
,' 3
. 25 recollection'o't
what Mr. Fratokvrg sa id , since you I. ,
- g. g ,
J l \
y \
( ge 4 , 5
,' t '
c
3..
+ , b.
?
C /
t 4,4_.90_DERAL COURT _REPORTF4G i
m-c _
7 - ,
g.c ,
- : 741 a
9 . , ,
I 4'
f> ~E .. ,
J .LwerelpresentJat'thermeetingLand Mr. Liford-has P l1f . .
.. n
[ 2. '
~
,) [ ' testifled he was: not? - ,
y- . .
T
~( _;3' : M R'. = C A L I C U T T : .I don't.think I could- t e
, ,. ~
4'
- . '4 .
ladd:anything to.that.- -
.z :
iS! . '
MR. DAVIDSON: Do you have any 6; recollection'of what.took place at the. meeting? ,
..t j g
- 7' MR. . C A L I C U T T 's Just'said that.we would
+
L8 do our-business'with the QC leads.
( , -9 MR[ DAVIDSON's Did you have.any
.10 invbivementi or were you. aware of the second incident
} j -i a }11 that-Mr. Johnson mentioned, the one involving Mr. >
12 - Eddie Niedecken7 ,
I wasiaware t h a't it 13; .Mk. CALICUTT:
.,]>v ,.
i
^
J 14: ' happened. I did'n't have any. involvement in it..
' 15 ' MR. DAVIDSON - ,That concludes my ,
d '.'q , g' 6 [ direct examination of this panel.
r,
.. 17 '
.v.
- 18. 3
, l' 19 - > >
L L
I
- c. 20 - "
h 21-
- l. -
gg 5 s
}$- 5
- .' 24 .
. ;y tf
[;&'[
~
25' .
e .
lg4 ,
~
o
,~ ,
W
- . _ . _._ .. _ _' F. E D E R A L ..C.O U R.T...' R E P.=O R T E R S _ , _. .._ _ .___.... _ ._
75 1 CORRECTIONS AND SIGNATURE O 2 nicELLIuE CoRRECTiOu aEASOu 80R C >i x N o E.
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12
(:t 14 15 16 17 ,
I, K E N N E Til LIFORD, have read the foregoing 18 . deposition, and boreby affix my signature that same is true and correct, except as noted herein.
19 7 KENNETH LIFORD
-20 ..
SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this the 21 _
day of , 1984.
22 N O'2 A R Y PUBLIC for the 23 , State of Texas 24 My Commission Expires: _
O. 25 , x
. FEDERAL COURT REPORTURS
'f_l l l. _S l l E.
' ~
.- l ,. ,h . : y , f fNQ el-}?'l,,{[{k;_'_.;
76 1 CORRECTIONS AND SIGNATURE kI 2 PAGE/LINE CORRECTION REASON FOR Cli ANG E 3
4 5
6 7
8
-9 10 11 12 I) 14 15 16 17 I, JOHN R. JOHNSON, have read the foregoing 16 deposition, and hereby affix my signature that same
'is true and correct, except as noted herein.
19 J OliN R. J OlillSO N 20 SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this the 21 day of , 1984.
22 NOTARY PUBLIC for the 23 State of Texas 24 My Commission Expires:
O 25 FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
77 e
1 CORRECTIONS AND SIGNATURE
()- 2 PAGE/LINE CORRECTION REASON FOR CilANGE 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 l
l 'l l 12
- 3 (3) 14 15 16 17 I, JAMES W. CALICUTT, have read the 18- foregoing deposition, and hereby affix my signature that same is true and correct, except as noted 19 herein.
20 JAMES W. CALICUTT 21 SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this the day of _,_
, 1984.
22 23 UOTARY PUBLIC for the -
State of Texas 24 My Commission Expires
() 25 FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS
_ _ .~ _, .
78 1 STATE OF TEXAS )
() 2 3 1, Janet E. Schaffer, RPR,' Certified Shorthand 4 Reporter in and for the State of Texas, do hereby 5 certify that there came before me on the 19th day of 6 August, A. D., 1984, at the Glen Rose Motor Inn, 7 Glen Rose, Texas, the following named persons, to-wit:
8 Kenneth Liford, John R. Johnson and James 11 .
9 Calicutt, who were by me duly sworn to testify the 10 truth and nothing but the truth of their knowledge 11 touching and concerning the matters in controversy 12 in this cause; and that they were thereupon examined 13 upon their oaths and their examination reduced to 14 writing; same to be sworn and subscribed to by said 15 witnesses before any notary public.
16 17 I further certify that I am neither attorney or 18 counsel for, nor related to or employed by, any of 19 the parties to the action in which this deposition ,V-
$4 20 is taken, and further that I am not a relative or . .i, s.i .?
21 employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the ff 22 parties hereto, or financially interested in the i.,
( ff,.;
23 action. 3(,
3 24 df;r O 25 In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand n
[tP7,'
.- ;5 .
.r-" R .' ' [
. i 41
- ey _?_l.
FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS * ]Ak
_ _ . _ , _ _ _ ._ _ .. _ _ _ .<.. _ __ _ __ ___ _c.m -
- .____.. .~ _ . _ __.s__.
79
~
1 and affixed my seal this day of' August , A.D.,
O 2
'3-1984.
/
/
4 JANET E. SCHAFFER, 1543, RPR, CSR 5 IN AND FOR THE STATE _OF TEXAS 1226 Commerce, Suite 411 6 Dallas, Texas 75202 (214) 742-3035 -
7 8 My commission expires December 31, 1985 9
10 11
-12 0
14 15 16 17 18 19' 20 21 22 23 24
'O 25 FEDERAL COURT REPORTERS