ML20113G067
| ML20113G067 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1995 |
| From: | Fountain W ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20113F955 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-96-155 NUDOCS 9609260128 | |
| Download: ML20113G067 (42) | |
Text
_ . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ . . _ . _ . _ . _ . . _ . _ _ . - . ._ _ . . _ . . _ . _ . . . _ _ . . _ . . . . _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ . _ _
4 J
. 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + ++ +
1 i 4 OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS 4
I 5 INTERVIEW 6 ---------------------------------x
'7 IN THE MATTER OF: :
3, 8 INTERVIEW OF : Docket No. 4-95-016
? ,
WILLIAM JOSEPH FOUNTAIN :
9 10 11 ---------------------------------x 12 Friday, June 16, 1995 i i
13 14 Conference Room f
15 5485 U.S. Highway 61 i 16 St. Francisville, Louisiana 17 18 19 The above-entitled interview was conducted at 8:15 ,
20 a.m., when where present:
21 22 -
M;:l Hm[1Tj 23 CMERO. 4-05-016
- _,
___ ms 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W '
WASHINGTON O C 20005 (702) 2344433 9609260128 960815 C -
GARDE 96-155 PDR
1 ON BEHALF OF THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION:
2 JONATHAN ARMENTA, JR., Investigator 3 DENNIS BOAL, Investigator 4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 5 Office of Investigations 6 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 7 Arlington, Texas 76011 8
9 ON BEHALF OF THE WITNESS:
10 (None) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ,
20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
1 EggCEgplHGE j 2 MR. ARMENTA: For the record, this is an 3 interview of Mr. Bill Fountain.
1 1
4 Mr. Fountain, would you please spell your I
5 first name, middle name, and last name for the record, and j i
i 6 state your full name. {
7 MR. FOUNTAIN: It is William Joseph Fountain, f 8 actually. W-I-L-L-I-A-M, Joseph being J-O-S-E-P-H, and 9 Fountain, F-O-U-N-T-A-I-N. l l
10 MR. ARMENTA: Today is June 16, 1995, and it 11 is approximately 8:15 a.m.
12 Present at this interview, Mr. Fountain, is ,
t 13 Mr. Dennis Boal from our NRC Region IV office, Office of 14 Investigations, and Mr. Joe Gillis who is our court 15 reporter this morning. My name is Jonathan Armenta, Jr., l l
i 16 and I am an NRC investigator from Region IV out of :
17 Arlington, Texas.
18 This interview, Mr. Fountain, is being tape 1
19 recorded and will be transcribed b.,y the services of Mr. i 20 Joe Gillis.
21 Mr. Fountain, would you give us your physical :
22 address, please.
23 MR. FOUNTAIN: My home address?
24 MR. ARMENTA: Your mailing -- yes. Your ;
25 home address.
i NEAL R. GROSS l COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W 1 i202) 234-4433- WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433 {
t
1 MR. FOUNTAIN: }fc )
! 2 .
3I I
j' 4 MR. ARMENTA: And is this your mailing address !
)
! l
!' 5 also?
I 6 MR. FOUNTAIN: Yes.
J 7 MR. ARMENTA: Your telephone number, please.
8 MR. FOUNTAIN: My home number is dr) 9 4 l 10 MR. ARMENTA: Your date of birth?
11 MR. FOUNTAIN:
l 12 MR. ARMENTA: And your Social Security number?
13 MR. FOUNTAIN: ) 74 }
}
Are you employed at this time?
i 14 MR. ARMENTA:
't e
- 15 MR. FOUNTAIN
- Yes, j
[ 16 MR. ARMENTA: Would you tell us who you are j 17 employed by and your present position.
i 18 MR. FOUNTAIN: I am employed by Entergy
! 19 Operations, nuclear division. I am a technical specialist i
! 20 IV in the nuclear safety department, specifically in I 21 licensing.
1 22 MR. ARMENTA: And what are your primary P
! 21 duties?
i 24 MR. FOUNTAIN: My primary duties are the t 25 oversight and day-to-day operations of the site commitment l NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPOATERS AND T AANSCAIBERS 1323 RHODE (St AND AVE NUE N W (20?) 234 4433 W ASHINGTON D C 20005 (20?i 234-4433
!jt 1 L1 1 's
1 management system.
2 MR. ARMENTA: And how long have you been on 3 this position?
4 MR. FOUNTAIN: I have had this position for 5 one year this month.
6 MR. ARMENTA: Prior to that, what was your 7 position?
8 MR. ' FOUNTAIN: I was in the QA department.
9 Last year I was classified as a senior QA engineer. I was
- 0 lead auditor, performing audits,' participating in audits, 11 and also doing site surveillances. I was in the QA 12 department for nine years. Seven of those nine years as a 13 licensee employee; the first two years I was actually as 14 contractor employee, working for GSU supervision. I have 15 been on site since March of 1982 continuously.
16 MR. ARMENTA: And in 1984, you rolled over to 17 GSU?
18 MR. FOUNTAIN: No. In 1987 I actually rolled 19 over. I switched the first of July '85 into the GSU QA 20 department under GSU supervision, but at that point in 21 time I was not a GSU employee.
22 MR. ARMENTA: Okay. Who is your immediate 23 supervisor where you are at in nuclear licensing?
24 MR. FOUNTAIN: Tim Gates.
25 MR. ARMENTA: And when you were in OA who was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTE AS AND TAANSCRIBERS 1323 AMODE ISLAND AVENUE t' W 4202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
1 your.immediate supervisor over there?
2 MR. FOUNTAIN: My last supervisor there was ,
3 Bob Biggs.
4 MR. ARMENTA: And Mr. Biggs reported to --
5 MR. FOUNTAIN: Ken Giadrosich.
6 MR. ARMENTA: And Mr. Tim Gates reports to l 7 whom? ,
8 MR. FOUNTAIN: Otto Bulich.
9 MR. ARMENTA: Your director in nuclear 10 licensing and nuclear safety is --
11 MR. FOUNTAIN: Is Jim Fisicaro.
l 12 MR. ARMENTA: At this time, before we go any l
13 further, I would like to ask you, Mr. Fountain, to please 14 stand, raise your right hand, so that I.may administer the 15 cath.
16 Whereupon, 17 WILLIAM JOSEPH FOUNTAIN 18 having been first duly sworn, was called as a witness 19 herein and was examined and testified as follows: l 20 MR. ARMENTA: You may be seated. Do you have 21 an attorney present during this interview, Mr. Fountain?
22 THE WITNESS: No, I do not.
23 MR. ARMENTA: Do you want an attorney present?
24 THE WITNESS: No, I do not.
25 MR. ARMENTA: Before we went on record, you NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPORTER$ AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W Goh 234 4433 wASHtNGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433 i
. . _ , . . , y , . ._
1 and I talked about this interview, and is it your 2 understanding that this is a voluntary, of your own free 3 will interview?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.
5 MR. ARMENTA: Mr. Fountain, you can -- I would 6 like to tell you, inform you that at any time you can 7 terminate this interview. At any time you can interrupt 8 this interview for any reason, whether to take a break or 9 personal reasons, or to recollect your thoughts. Do you 10 understand that?
11 THE WITNESS: Yes.
12 MR. ARMENTA: I would like to also address, 13 Mr. Fountain, that this interview will be -- will focus on 14 personnel -- current personnel that are still working here 15 at RBS and some of the personnel that may have been --
16 that may have left RBS at this time, regarding issues of 17 50.7, which is the employee protection provision.
18 Under the Whistleblower Act, the NRC has made 19 some provisions to protect employees that raise safety 20 concerns and that may have some recourse if the licensee 21 should take any adverse action against them for raising 22 such issues of safety or technical issue.
23 Do you understand that?
24 THE WITNESS: Yes.
25 EXAMINATION 1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS f
i 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433 a <?02) 234 a433 l 1 I
1 BY MR. ARMENTA:
2 O Would you please briefly tell us your -- a 3 little bit about your educational background, your year of 4 your high school graduation, and your degrees that you 5 have; immediately following into employment history, from 6 nuclear to the present. Try to be as brief as possible 7 and give the time frames as close as possible correctly.
8 A Well, I graduated high school injl hl I
/ t 9 graduated college Auburn University in I have a 10 B.S. degree. Actually the specific degree is business 11 administration. My curriculum was industrial management.
12 I was in the textile industry from '73 to ' 82, 13 working in direct supervision and then in plant and 14 division level engineering. And in '82, I switched career 15 paths and started working at Riverbend in field quality 16 control for Stone & Webster. .
I i
17 I worked for Stone & Webster until ' 87, even l 18 though in '85, I switched over under GSU supervision, l
19 working ir the GSU QA department. ,I worked for GSU QA 20 department. for nine years, and last year in June, last i
21 year switched from OA to licensing. l 22 0 The time when you worked under GSU supervision, 23 those two years from '85 to '87, were you actually 1
24 considered a permanent employee of GSU or a contract --
25 A I was a contract employee.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS l 1323 AnoOE ISLAND AVENUE. N W I (202)2344433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 2344433
-7 /2 \ TAdi lh' 5
1 0 So from '87 to the present, you have been a 2 permanent employee of Riverbend Station.
3 A That is correct. Eight years this month.
4 0 Probably eight years. Okay. How long have you 5 been familiar with the NRC regulations, if not all, in 6 part?
7 A I started becoming familiar -- and, of course, 8 I guess that is a continuing process -- as soon as I went 9 to work in nuclear in '82, 10 0 Okay. So is it correct to assess that you have 11 been familiar with the nuclear regulations for over 12 12 years or so.
13 A Yes.
14 0 Is that correct?
15 A I have been here for a little over 13 years, so 16 I think you could easily -- yes. My awareness started 17 building in '82.
18 0 All right. It is my understanding that a 19 merger of -- between GSU, Gulf Sta,tes Utilities, and EOI, 20 Entergy Operations, Incorporated, took place on or about 21 the latter part of '93, early part of '94, officially 22 January 1, '94, GSU being the administrator of the 23 Riverbend plant. Is that correct?
24 A Yes.
25 0 Shortly after that or how soon after that NEAL R. GROSS COUAT AEPORTERS AND TRANSCA18ERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W 4202) 234 4 433 W ASHINGTON O C 20005 (202)2344433
l l 1 merger was in effect did EOI implement their employee -- ,
- j. L 2 their new employee appraisal system process?
i 4
3 A It was impleee.nted last fall, and I guess in 4 the. November time frame. That is my recollection. g t
j .5 Q Is that when they gave you the PPR and --
i ,
6 A No. When we -- performance planning and '
- l 7 review. Yes. .
I j 8 0 Is that when they first introduced that?
9 A No. That introduced that in the spring, after I
10 the merger was completed.
11 O Was that some sort of employee evaluation !
12 for --
13 A Yes. It was a different way of evaluating 1 1
1 14 employee performance. I 15 Q Okay. ;
1 16 A And they started the process -- well, they 17 initially implemented that last year, I guess, in the 18 spring. I guess I got my first one while I was still in 19 OA, I guess around the first of April last year. of 20 course, I was under it until -- when I switched to l 21 licensing, of course, the -- it changed, so that one was 1
22 effectively no good. j 1
1 23 0 And are you going to be evaluated as an i
24 employee every six months or every 12 months, every 25 quarter, or what is your understanding?
NEAL R. GROSS i COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 2344433
1 A The evaluatianc are for a yearly cycle. Of 2 course, they do have provision for an interim evaluation.
3 The PP&R forms are for a one-year cycle. That is what 4 our raises are on, a one-year cycle also. But they do a 5 mid-cycle evaluation, as I understand it also.
6 O This mid-cycle evaluation, is that a 7 performance evaluation, where they give you some kind of a 8 satisfactory, above average, or is it just a --
9 A In my mind it is. They tell you how -- give 10 you a flavor for how you are doing, compared to where 11 their expectations are.
12 O So when do they tell you that you have done 13 either an above average, average, or below average job?
14 Is it once a year? Is that going to be done every 12 15 months, to your understanding?
16 A Yes.
17 0 So from April '94 to April '95, you would have 18 one --
19 A I have had one. <
20 0 -- one evaluation.
21 A I have had one. One was completed. It was 22 completed at the same time --
23 0 What was the result of that evaluation?
24 A There were -- I guess I got it in February or 25 so this year. It was --
NEAL R. GROSS COUAT AEPOATE AS AND TAANSCAlBERS 1323 AHODE ISLA' N D AVENUE N W v202) 234 4433 W ASHINGTON D C 70005 (202) 2344433
1 1 Q How did you rate?
2 A I was considered -- they didn't give me a 3 number type rating. They gave me -- I think I was ,
\
4 considered a valuable contributor. You know, it is a list of -- a sequence of sheets there. I looked throagh 5
6 it. I had no negatives in the evaluation. Of course, 7 being a new employee in licensing, having only been there 8 at that point in time for eight months, I guess I really 9 couldn't expect to be considered a top employee initially 10 in a new department where I am not as familiar with 11 everything that goes on.
12 O What was your last GSU evaluation --
13 A The last --
14 0 What was the end result of that last GSU 15 evaluation? Satisfactory --
16 A My last three or four GSU evaluations were al.'
17 the top ranking, which I guess is -- it was -- what? --
18 satisfactory, outstanding, and superior, or whatever the 19 top one was. My last three or four were the very top.
20 0 For practical purposes of this interview, let's 21 suppose it would be outstanding.
22 A Okay.
23 0 Is that the top -- if it was outstanding, that 24 .s what you would have gotten?
25 A Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS COUAT AEPOATERS AND TRANSCA1BEAS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W
.202)2344433 W A$HINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
1 Q So this year, April '95, did you get an 2 outstanding also?
3 A No. I got valuable contributor which is -- no, 4 it is not. I was told that there were only two people 5 that got the outstanding in licensing, and I was not one 6 of the two.
7 Q Okay. So as a valuable contributor, you mean 8 to tell me -- maybe I don't understand what rating is the 9 top.
10 A I think they do call it outstanding now. It is 11 the top rating.
12 O I understand that also subsequent to this PPR 13 came a ranking process. Is that correct?
14 A Subsequent, in conjunction with, or whatever, 15 yes.
16 0 Well, I need to know what you think. Was it 17 done at the same time the PPR was implemented?
18 A Well, I didn't get my PPR results until this 19 year. Now, with the ranking, I guess -- ,
20 0 Well, let me see if you can understand my 21 question, Bill. May I call you Bill?
22 A Yes.
23 0 When the program was implemented, you said it 24 was in spring. Is that correct?
- 25 A Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPORTERS AND 1 AANSCRIBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W I?c2) 2344433 W ASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 7344433
h 1 O My questio'n is: When did they introduce the 2 ranking process? Was it then a week after? A month 3 after?
f 4 A Oh , no. I didn't hear anything about ranking 5 until last fall.
t e
6 o okay. And what is your understanding of the 7 ranking? They started telling you about the ranking !
8 process. What happened there? (
9 A Well, certain things kind of changed as we went 10 along there, but I guess initially, when they initially 11 told us about it, I thought everyone was going to get a ;
12 ranking basically between 1 and 9, 1 being top, 9 being )
i 13 worst. I gather from subsequent things I have heard on' l 14 it, that the company made a decision that they were only 15 going to tell the 9s, and the other people would be given 16 an idea of which bracket they fall into, but not actually 17 told, you know, a ranking number type thing.
18 So, yes. You know, I am aware that they 19 basically put me in the middle bracket for this year.
20 Now, whether -- I guess middle bracket could be considered 21 a 4,-5 or 6, you know, where 1 would take it, since there 22 are no negatives in my performance evaluation, that I was 23 probably, you know, around a 4. But I don't know that. I 24 mean, no number per se was indicated or given to me. So i l
25 it is my understanding that site personnel other than the NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPORTERS AND TRANSCAIBERS 1323 RHODF (SLAND A%ENUE N W 202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433
l 1 9s would only be given an' idea of where they fell from a '
i 2 one-third type bracket. ,
3 0 What was the criteria used to rank Bill i
4 Fountain?
5 A I -- the specific criteria, you are going to i
6 have to -- I don't know.
u Under GSU -- I am backtracking now. Under GSU, 7 0 8 when you were evaluated, did you know what you were being l l
9 evaluated under? What was the criteria that they used? ,
f 10 A well, we had a point system under GSU, and you 4
- 11 got'a different -- you had a point that was each - they l 12 had like eight or nine or ten things that were worth a
)
- 13 certain number of points each, and you got -- then they j 14 gave you a number of points compared to the value of that l 4
1 15 line item, whatever it was.
16 So'you could -- and then they added it up. I i
17 think 400 under the old GSU system was in effect for the 18 last two to three years was perfect, and so anytning over 19 350 was real good, was the top ranking, .' recollect. I
)
20 think anything basically between 300 and 350 was next, and 21 then so forth.
1 22 Q But it was obvious to you what line -- as you 23 said, what line item you were being evaluated on and how 24 you rated. Is that correct?
25 A Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPOATERS AND TnANSCAiBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W
.2026 234 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433
1 O Under this new system, Bill, I asked you what 2 criteria, and you said --
3 A It is not as clearcut. I mean, I don't have as 4 good a grasp of the specifics there. I don't have a good 5 grasp of the specifics. I mean, I can read my performance 6 evaluation type thing, and I can see the comments that 7 were made there, but how that was -- how they directly 8 took that and developed that into a, quote, ranking, I 9 don't know.
10 0 It is my understanding that GSU rated 11 employees -- ranked employees. Everybody was ranked 12 from --
l 13 A That is my understanding --
14 0 -- the top man to --
15 A Management employees.
I 16 0 -- the last employee here. And the basis of l l
17 that ranking, as I see it even in writing, is that they l l
18 have a matrix like the one illustrated on this chalkboard, f 19 something to that effect here on the right or on the left.
20 I still don't know which one is correct, and where on one 21 side of the matrix you have here potential; on the other 22 side of the matrix, you have performance.
23 And somewhere between the performance and l'
- 4 potential blocks of this matrix, every employee was going 25 to be ranked. Is that your understanding of the basis for NEAL R. GROSS COUAT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W i202) 234 a433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433
1 this performance -- or this ranking?
2 A Yes, I guess. I didn't even know that it fell 3 out in any kind of a matrix like this. I had heard 4 comments, but exactly how it works, I don't know.
5 0 What is your understanding of the purpose of 6 this ranking system?
7 A To identify both peak performers in particular 8 and probably to fast-track them for growth within the 9 company, and also to identify weak performers and to 10 probably also fast-track them for either improvement or 1
11 removal. ;
I 12 O That is how you perceive it.
13 A That is my perception.
14 0 It . a process by which we can get Joe here to I 15 work better if he is not meeting -- not working to full 16 potential. He can actually improve. Is that correct?
17 A Either - well, yes. Certainly if you are at 18 the bottom end, it is either -- they are pretty much 19 telling you outright: Either impr,ove or -- shape up or 20 ship out, would be one way to put it.
21 MR. ARMENTA: Mr Boal has some questions here 22 regarding the ranking process.
23 BY MR. BOAL:
24 0 Do you consider that to be a fair system?
25 A From several standpcints, yes. The only thing NEAL R. GROSS COuAT AEPOATEAS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W QC2) 734 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 2344433
I' 1 is that I guess I would like to have more specific insight into exactly how the process functions. I guess the 2
s 3 sub]ect -- there is potential for more subjectivity, I 4 guess. The less I know about it, the more -- I mean, the l
\
5 more --
6 Well, the more I know about it, the more f
7 comfortable I can be with it, I guess would be one way to I
8 put it. Another thing would be, you know, the more l 1
9 concise it is, the less that things like subjectivity can :
10 enter into it. But -- so I don't know. You can tell it a 11 lot of different ways, but I guess it -- )
How about if you were a 97 How would you feel 12 O 13 about it?
14 A Well, I am not -- I mean, my personal opinion, I am not jumping up and down for it anyway, but if I was a 15 I would probably be less happy about it. In my 16 9, 17 perception, GSU was -- you almost couldn't get fired per 18 se from GSU. Now, that is pretty clearly not the case 4
19 with Entergy, even though they really haven't fired, per i 20 se, a whole bunch of people.
d d
21 But certainly we can see everything i
- . 22 indicating, you know, change. I mean, we are changing the i
23 whole -- the electric utility industry, I guess, in h 24 general. Certainly this company is changing more to what l 25 I was used to when I was in the textile industry, which 4
NEAL R. GROSS ;
COUAT AEPORTERS AND TAANSCRIBERS i
i 1323 AMODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W WASHsNGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433 ,
$202i 234 4433 i
1 was the company that my brother still works for, Vanity 2 Fair, is a much higher pressure company than what this 3 used to be, in particular, where they fire people 4 regularly, even long-term employees.
5 So , you know, at any point in time, you are 6 subject to getting fired from that company. I ".ean, it is 7 under a performance sequence all the time, so the utility 8 industry hasn't been like that for several years, so it is 9 a change; it is an adjustment.
10 0 More specifically, our concern in this 11 investigation is that the subjectivity part of this 12 ranking system, whether by design or the way it fell out, 13 there is a potential that people known to be 14 whistleblowers or people who bring forth concerns or even )
1 15 just rather tenacious OA auditors could have been singled l 16 out for placement in that category 9.
17 Is that a perception that you have of this 18 ranking?
19 A Directly it is not a pe.rception, but 20 indirectly, it goes back to what I said a minute ago. The 21 less I know about it, the more, I guess -- well, I don't 22 know. You know, it could go on. I mean, the less defined it is, the more, I guess, potential there is for something 1
2:I il 24 like that to happen. The more subjectivity you bring into
^; -
the more potential for that type of thing to happen.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPOATE AS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W 2026 234 4433 W ASHINGT ON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
I 2 O Do you know where this -- who designed this 2 ranking system?
3 A I have no idea.
4 0 It just popped up one day here?
5 A I don't know. From my standpoint, it did.
6 0 Well, yours is not the only one. But that kind 7 of focuses the NRC's concern, whether there was -- whether 8 that was by design or by accident, that some of the people 9 who were known on this plant to be whistleblowers fell 10 into the category 9 rankings.
11 Are you aware of people that would meet that 12 ranking and that classification? I know you were not 13 officially informed who was 9s, but we also know it is a 14 strong --
15 A Well, in general, I have got a pretty good 16 grasp of the personnel on site that were -- that got 9s.
17 I am comfortable that I don't know every one of them, but, 18 you know, I mean, I may know most of them. There is 19 probably a couple of them that I d,on't know literally and a couple other names that I don' t know. But the majority 20 21 of them, yes.
22 O Could you -- would you say that the ones that 23 you know about were whistleblowers or were perceived as J
24 !whistleblowers?
25 A Ch, there is a couple of them, I guess, that NEAL R. GROSS COUAT AEPOATE AS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N Yv W ASHiNGTON D C 20005 (20212344433
> 2021234 -4433
1 were certainly in my mind are perceived that way, yes, i 2 that are -- well, one of them in particular that has got 3 that perception, that was classified, I gather, as a 9.
i 4 0 Would that have been the sole criteria for j l
5 their classification in your estimation? l i
6 A No.
7 Q There would have been other -- ,
8 A No. In my mind, the one in particular I am 9 thinking about was -- if it had been up to me, it would 10 have been done long ago. So that is kind of blunt, but 11 anyway -- ;
12 O Well, we appreciate blunt. It reduces down a l
13 lot of our gray areas here. That wouldn't have happened j 14 to have been a supervisor in QA, would it?
15 A Yes, it would.
16 0 I imagine that will be one of the people we 17 will discuss a little bit later. Could that possibly have 18 been.Mr. Roger Backen?
19 A Yes, it would. ,
20 Q All right. But what you have told Jonathan and 21 I is that, although part of the ranking process was 22 presented to you and explained to you, the actual details 23 were not made available to you. Is that correct?
24 A No. As f ar as, you know, knowing how, having i 25 any idea of exactly whether I am -- you know, what my NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202l 234 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 2344433 I
1 ranking was, 4, 5, 6, or whatever, like I say, they gave 2 me a perception that I am in the mid-bracket. But as far i
3 as how I got in this category or how I got in this 4 category,'to fall into wherever, you got me.
5 MR. BOAL: That pretty much covers the general i i
6 questions that we wanted to ask you. Jonathan, do you 7 want to proceed with your specific case, or --
i 8 BY MR. ARMENTA:
l 9 Q I just have another question, Bill. Do you 10 think it is unfortunate that some people were ranked 97 11 A Unfortunate? Yes. I think it is -- a couple 12 of the people there, I think, are ---that come to my mind i
13 have got more value than others. Some of them, I think -
14 you know, if the company wants to downsize, then certainly 15 some of these people that were picked as 9s would be, in 16 my mind, the people that would be most appropriate to be ,
17 at the top of the downsizing list, would be one way to put 18 it. So -- 1 19 Q I know you hesitated when I said the word 20 " unfortunate." Maybe if I use the word: Do you think some l 21 people were treated unfairly by the ranking process, l r
22 people that you know ranked 9? .
23 A There is a couple of people that -- I guess, 24 you know, we could go through it around the side. I think 25 there were a couple of people that were kind of caught in t e
r NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOATERS AND TRANSCA1BERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W i202) 2344433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433
1 it, and there is a couple of people that in my mind are --
r l 2 could be useful employees, for both short-term and long- ,
f
, 3 term, that got a 9.
i 4 0 In other words, some employees in your i i
5 estimation that could have been assets or potential-for i
! 6 the company were --
J 7 A Could have been'or, in fact, are assets.
t 8 0 -- were actually ranked on this 9 category.
?
I 9 A Yes, t
! 10 0 And'is it your understanding that if you are I
11 ranked 9, you are virtually almost going to be left
- j 12 without a job? Is that your --
13 A Well, it certainly puts you in an undesirable 14 position. I guess it remains to be seen what happens in 4 15 September.
Well, let me ask you. What does the ranking 9 16 0 17 employee mean to you?
18 A The ranking 9 means you are in trouble from an 19 employee's standpoint. So, you know, if the company is 20 looking to -- certainly the company is not looking to 21 increase the number of employees around here at this point 22 in time, so certainly if it comes to any kind of forced 23 decrease, then obviously the 9s are in trouble.
24 And then, of course, the way it was presented, 25 if you get two consecutive 9s, you are -- as far as I NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433 t?O2) 734 4433 1
i 1 know, that is still in effect. Two consecutive 9 2 rankings, you are automatically out. Now, whether that is 3 still in effect -- as far as I know, it is.
4 MR. ARMENTA: Bill, I think at the beginning 5 of the interview, we informed you that we were going to 6 cover areas where certain people had raised some issues 7 and concerns to the NRC, and what we would like to do is 8 ask your approval, if --
9 We have gone over some general, personal 10 background with you; we have gone over your educational, 11 employment history; we have also gone into a general 12 overview of your perception of the employee evaluation 13 performance system, and EOI's ranking process.
14 What we would like to do is stipulate this 15 information, so that it be applicable to the rest of the 16 interviews that we will conduct with you; in other words, 17 so that we will not have to go through this information 5
18 again; we can just stipulate this information on each one i
19 of these interviews. ,
i j 20 Is that agreeable with you?
t 21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
f 22 MR. ARMENTA: Okay. That is fine, so we will 4
23 do that.
- 2. 4 (Whereupon, at 10:05 a.m., the interview
- S continued as follows:)
NEAL R. GROSS COUAT REPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W s202)234 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202)2344433
- =. . .- - - . _ - - . . . - . - - .. . ~ . . . . _ _ . . - . . - . -
I !
t 1 MR. BOAL: We will go on the record.
l 2 For the record, this is an interview of Mr.
3 William Fountain and a continuation of interviews in which 4 it was stipulated that his personal, educational, employment, and knowledge about EOI's ranking process j 5
6 information be applied to this interview.
7 Today is June 16, 1995; it is approximately 8 10:05 a.m. This interview refers to Mr. Roger Backen, 9 case number 4-95-016, an alleged discrimination violation 10 under 10 CFR 50.7. j 11 BY MR. BOAL:
12 O Mr. Fountain, could we ask you to tell us when 13 you first met Mr. Backen here at Riverbend Station.
14 A Roger Backen was in operations QA when I went 15 to work down there in July of '85. At that time, he was 16 specifically in SRO school, as was Ken Gladrosich, so I 17 met him not immediately when I went into ops QA but later 18 in the year of '85.
19 O During your employment ,at Riverbend Station, 20 did you have occasion to work for Mr. Backen?
21 A Yes, I did.
22 O And over the approximately ten years that you 23 have been here at Riverbend Station, have you worked with 24 him enough that you have drawn an opinion about his 25 performance and abilities?
NEAL R. GROSS COURT AEPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W G02 234 4433 W ASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433
1 A Yes,-I have.
2 0 Could you provide us your opinion of Mr.
3 Backen's performance and abilities here at Riverbend 4 Station?
5 A well, Roger is a smart enough guy. There is no 6 question about that. I have differences in philosophy 7 with him through the years. I guess with -- back in the 8 '86 time frame, he was my acting supervisor for a period 9 of months, I guess while Glenn Kimble was in SRO school.
10 Glenn Kimble was the supervisor of record down there at 11 that point in time, and for a period of months and while 1 12 Glenn was gone, Roger Backen and Ken Giadrosich rotated in ;i f
13 being acting supervisor.
14 So that was tre first time that I had a subordinate working relationship with him. Then in 1989, 15 16 I guess, he and Mike Malik switched positions, and he came 17 up here as supervisor of the audit group, which is where I 18 was at that point in time, and became my supervisor again.
19 I worked under him and with him to,some degree, well, 20 through the years since '85.
21 In my opinion -- I remember back in the '87 22 time frame, '86 time -- I guess it was '87 when Ken 23 Giadrosich was promoted to QC supervisor, and I remember 24 at that point in time that Roger was irritated, that he 25 felt that he should have gotten the job. But in my mind, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS j 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE N W 202t 2344433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 2344433
i 1 as soon as I heard that they were going to promote j l
2 somebody, in my mind there was no question that Ken i 3 Giadrosich was preferable to Foger.
1 4 As a matter of fact, my opinion that Roger 5 made such a stink about it at that point in time, that 6 when they promoted somebody -- had another opening and 7 promoted someone here a year or so after that, that that 8 was part of the reason that they promoted him at that i 9 point in time. If it had been strictly my call, I would 10 never have actually made him a supervisor.
11 So I guess you can tell that I get -- well, 12 get a feel for my opinion type thing there. One of the 13 reasons that -- the primary reason that I -- one of the J
14 reasons -- well, maybe not the primary reason, but 15 certainly a big contributor to the reason that I went to 16 ops OA in 1990 was I was not jumping up and down to work ;
e 17 for Roger up here in the audit group.
18 of course, by that point in time, I had been 19 here for three years, and I got an, opportunity -- well, f
20 one of the other guys down there was not happy working for 21 Mike Malik. I had a good working relationship with Mike 22 Malik, and thought that Roger had not treated me fairly 23 with my performance evaluation for that year, 1990.
24 And, anyway, he had some restrictions 25 certainly from the company's standpoint at that point in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBE AS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W t202) 234 4433 W ASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
1 time. But, anyway, so I got to -- you know, the guy down 2 at the plant wanted to switch real bad, so I said, Okay, 3 so we will switch. So I went back down there, working for 4 Malik.
'S But, anyway, I guess part of that is 6 background, but it is secondary. I -- like I say, I have 7 got differences of opinion and approach to what Roger has. ,
8 Roger, in my mind, is not a degree of team player that 9 Entergy is looking for now.
10 I have not had a working relationship with him 11 for the last couple of years, so what he has done the last 12 couple of years, I am not specifically aware of. But --
13 so -- but otherwise, like I say, to begin with I never 14 would have -- if it had been my call, I never would have 15 promoted him to supervisor.
16 0 Is that based on his personality traits or --
17 A Yes.
18 Q -- or more on his performance traits?
19 A Well, like I say, from a capacity standpoint, 20 he is a smart enough guy. There is no problem there.
21 Q Excuse me. Capacity, is that a synonym for 22 intelligence?
23 A Yes. I mean, you know, he got to be a licensed 24 SRO, and you can't be a real dummy and get to be a j 25 licensed SRO.. So -- of course, I remember part of that l
NEAL R. GROSS j ,
COURT AEPOATERS AND TA ANSCRIBE AS i 1323 AMODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W j 202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433 6
4
l 1 sequence, too, where initially apparently they had 2 basically told both him and Ken Giadrosich that they 4
3 shouldn't go for the licensing exams, they didn't think '
i 4 they would pass.
5 Well, Roger bowed up and said, I am going i
i 6 anyway, and Ken Giadrosich folded and didn't go. Well, l l
7 Roger went and took the exam and passed, so therefore he 1
8 became a licensed SRO a year or so, year and a half before i 9 Ken Giadrosich. So that was a plus from Roger's :
]
1 10 standpoint.
1 11 But, you know, from other standpoints, I l
- 12 just -- I guess I just really didn't agree with his l l
13 approach in general. I didn't -- you know, he would -- I l guess too much wanting to hammer people, I guess, would be 14 15 one way to put it, write them up; write them up, Roger, l
16 type thing.
17 So, anyway, differences in approach; I guess 18 you could definitely said I would not have put him as a
- 19 supervisor. I think he could be ,- if he was kept more on 20 focus, certainly he was smart enough to be a decent asset.
21 I would not have used him as a supervisor.
22 O From what you said there, was there some kind 23 of a known rivalry, historical rivalry between Mr. Backen 24 and Mr. Giadrosich?
25 A Directly rivalry? I don't know. Not NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W j
- 20h 234 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 2344433 I
1 specifically that I am aware of, but like I say, I know --
2 you know, Roger is one of these guys that when he is 3 irritated about sometning he talks about it, so you know 4 what he is thinking. He makes it pretty clear, but --
5 0 Was he known to be a whistleblower or a person 6 who would raise safety concerns at the station here?
7 A I guess that is my perception.
8 0 Is that a negative attribute, to be a 9 whistleblower?
Fundamentally, it is not. Of course, it 10 A 11 couldn't be from a basic right type standpoint. I -- at 12 times, I have wondered that maybe Roger may have bent that 13 a little bit to his own -- that -- I don't know; I know 14 it is my perception that he has turned in a few things 15 through the years. Whether that is accurate or not, I 16 don't know.
17 But -- so certainly you need to have the right 18 to do that. Certainly you shouldn't be directly penalized 19 for doing that. At times I would like to think that most 20 things that you can -- if you approach it right, that you 21 can get the company to resolve it, and it should be 22 something of a last resort to have to do something like 23 that. But you can't put any specific parameters on saying 24 how you can't do this until it is a last resort thing.
25 So, anyway, you know, the specifics of what he NEAL R. GROSS I COUAT AEPORTERS AND TRANSCAIBEAS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W 1202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433 l
1 has turned in, when he has turned in, after what 2 parameters or what sequences, I don't know. But, yes. It 3 is my perception that he has turned in more than one thing i
l 4 through the years.
5 Q Do you know through the grapevine or personal 6 knowledge as to what Mr. Backen's ranking was here at --
7 A Through the grapevine, I take it that he is a 1
8 9. I did not have any conversation with him to that
- 9 effect, so I haven't directly heard it.
1 10 0 Does that surprise you that he is a 9?
11 A No, not really. I knew he had been on the 1
12 outs, would be one way to put it, for -- I mean, one thing 13 you can look at here, that he was a OA supervisor. You !
14 know, they shifted his responsibilities around; they put i
i 15 him over here, and then they try to -- you know, they 16 shipped him out of the departmenc.
i 17 of course, then they turned around here and,
- la you know, after they played this musical chairs, and all i
- 19 of a sudden, boom, they want to put another QA group in 20 here and bring a new supervisor in from outside. It i
21 wasn't -- I mean, it was a period of maybe a total of a x
22 l year or so here, but it wasn't a long time. I knew for a '
i j 23 period of years there that --
i 24 Certainly I knew Giadrosich's opinion of him 25 was low when he was working for Giadrosich, you know, once 1 i NEAL R. GROSS !
COUAT AEPOATE AS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 AMODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W 1202e 2344433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433 4
- ,- - n- -n-,- - - <~- - - a- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --
1 Giadrosich became manager or director, I guess at that t
- 2 point in time it was called, but anyway his supervisor. I i 3 didn't really disagree with that.
4 You know, I have made some negative 4
1 '
5 observations and comments about Roger. I have never had a fs I 6 direct or even any kind of specific falling out with You know, there has never been anything specific 7 Roger.
d i
z i 8 there. I just overall, just through the years, I have ,
t i
9 built a negative opinion of him.
l 10 Q Would you -- you said that you were aware of 11 Mr. Gladrosich's opinion of Roger. Would you know the
, 12 basis of that opinion? .
13 A The basis of it? I don't know if there was ,
14 one, quote, basis. I know that through the years and If i.
15 multiple occurrences, you know, Giadrosich just got i !
16 irritated to varying degrees. Of course, the same thing 3
i i 17 applied before. I know Frank Richter had irritated '
i 18 Giadrosich multiple times through the years, a couple of l
l 19 times real severely.
20 And I also know that Roger Backen had l 21 irritated Giadrosich multiple times through the years an I
i j 22 da few times real severely.
a 23 Q~ Would the basis -- in your opinion, would the 24 basis of his irrigation. Ken Giadrosich's irritation, at i
25- Mr Backen, would the basis of that have been the fact l NEAL R. GROSS j COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W 420?> 234-4433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433 ;
I t
1 that Mr. Backen brought up safety concerns?
2 A No.
3 0 It would be other matters.
4 A Yes.
5 0 Could you give us an example or an opinion what 6 the other matters may have been.
7 A I think a lot of it was just the way Roger 8 approached things. He was -- no problems getting Roger to 9 make a decision. Matter of fact, he -- every now and then 10 you run into somebody that is a little reluctant to make 11 decisions. Well, Roger would make a decision real quick.
12 Of course, like I say, he -- I realized that, you know, 13 when I was working with him, and I really -- I did my job l 14 and had not a lot of direct interface with him. l 15 I would give him the results when I got ,
16 through, but I didn't go to him for input in process l l
17 unless I specifically needed to. But -- because I knew a 18 lot of times by the way he would present things to him, 19 you know, a lot of his first comments -- early on, he was 20 going to say, Write it up, type thing, and at times, I 21 didn't -- you know, I was looking for more input, rather j i
22 than saying, you know, just write-it-up type thing.
23 but -- so I didn't -- I guess from just 24 general personality standpoint, I didn't really think he was a good choice for supervisor to begin with, back when 1
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS
'323 AHODE $ LAND AVENUE N W
'202) 234 4433 W ASH!NGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433
1 GSU promoted him. I am comfortable that if Ehrich Oswood 2 had not quit about three months before that last 3 supervisor job came open, that Ehrich oswood would have 4 got the job, but then Ehrich had quit and gone to INPO, so 5 they were --
4 6 That was one of the other things. There was 7 really nobody else that was readily available to promoted, 8 and Roger had been so unhappy when they promoted 9 Giadrosich before and made it so specifically apparent, I 10 think that they just decided to go on and give him the 11 job.
12 I guess, you know, Tom Crouse could gite srme 13 insight on that, since he was the manager at that time 14 frame. I don't know. Mike Malik and Ken Giadrosich, I am 15 comfortable, could give insight on that also.
16 0 Is that -- what you are making reference to, is 17 that people that had more definitive working relationship J
18 with --
i 19 A Well, Mike is and has been a supervisor around here for several years. of course, he is over there -- he 20 21 is not in QA anymore either. He is in IHEA, they call it.
22 What does IHEA stand for? I have forgotten all of a 23 sudden. I am drawing a blank on it.
24 But Mike was OA supervisor for several years, 25 so -- you know, several years. When I came up in December NEAL R. GROSS COUA1 AEPOATE A$ AND TRANSCRIBE A$
1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W w ASHrNGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433 20h 234 4433
1 '86, he was the audit supervisor up here, and then he went 2 down to surveillance as a supervisor, and then they
' shifted things around. He stayed down there as 1 1
l 4 supervisor, but he really kind of shifted out of QA a 5 couple of shifts.
6 In-house events analysis, that is what IHEA l
7 stands for. But -- I may not have answered what you asked 8 me. Talking, I kind of lost focus.
9 O Just trying to see if we can establish a basis 10 for Mr. Giadrosich's dislike or concern about Mr. Backen, 11 and I think you are trying to say that there were probably 12 other people that would have more direct knowledge.
13 A Well, I think, yes. I wish I could point to 14 some really specific things to say as examples, but I j 15 can't -- there is nothing really specific that comes i 16 immediately to mind. My general perception is that, well, l 17 like I say, first off that Roger should not have been
- 18 promoted to supervisor, and secondly that he --
at this 19 point in time, if he continues to gtay around here, then 20 it would be better not as a supervisor. But is my I
21 opinion, my perception. I can't give you any really 22 clear-cut examples right now to than to base it on.
I 23 0 That is fair enough, and we certainly 24 appreciate it.
1 25 MR. BOAL: Jonathan?
NEAL R GROSS 4 COURT REPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBERS C23 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W 1202) 234 4433 w ASHINGTON D C 2000$ (202) 2344433 I
1 BY MR. ARMENTA:
2 Q Mr. Backen's performance level, if I understand 3 you right, would rate above average. Is that correct, 4 based on his intelligence or --
5 A His performance level? No. I considered him 6 certainly the low man from a QA supervisor standpoint for 7 several years, from the time he became a QA supervisor.
8 As a QA engineer type thing, you know, back in '87 and 9 before, maybe he was effective, but that is long ago now.
10 I didn't like really his approach to supervision and his 11 approach to other aspects. I think he was not a real good i
12 team player, would be one way to put it. l 13 So -- !
1 14 0 In the area of truth and veracity, is he an l l
15 honest and truthful individual? I 16 A As far as I know, he is. You know, he is more l 17 prone, I guess, than most anybody I have run into, to make 18 reference to ANSI standards. I remember one of the 19 things -- one of the particulars I, remember, back when he 20 got bent when Giadrosich was promoted to supervisor and he 21 wasn't, was he had made references to like, I have written 22 three or four times, or whatever it was.
23 He had written a great deal more QUAFERs and J4 that type of stuff than what Giadrosich had, and -- I am
- 5 comfortable that was true, but is that a parameter for NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTE AS AND TRANSCAiBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND A'!ENUE N W 2021 234 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433 m4 , - , ,
, n- ---- ,--m- -
, - , - - - - vm w----m ------w w- -- - , --
1 making someone a supervisor? I mean, not in my mind it is 2 not. That doesn't automatically make you a good 3 supervisor.
4 I mean, you know, I am not saying 5 automatically what the implications are, but in his mind, 6 because he had written many more -- you know, three to 7 four times as many or whatever it was, but many more 8 QUAFERs than what Ken Giadrosich had, that that was a 9 determining -- you know, obviously if a significant 10 parameter that should have been considered before 11 promoting him instead of Giadrosich, but certainly in my ,
12 mind, I would have much preferred to have been supervised 13 by Giadrosich than Backen.
14 O Does Bill Fountain believe that Roger Backen 15 may have been singled out mainly or in great part because 16 of his involvement with Giadrosich? And I say 1
17 " involvement." Maybe I should say because of his i j
18 disagreement with Giadrosich.
19 A Not in my opinion. I think it is possible that 20 he has -- was singled out, was targeted, however you want 21 to phrase that, but he got a 9, when that in itself is 22 kind of being singled out.
23 But if you want my opinion, in my opinion it 24 was justified, so --
25 O Okay.
NEAL R. GROSS COUAT AEPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBEAS
?323 RHODE ISL AND AVENUE N W i?c21234 4433 W ASMiNGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433 I
1 A I mean, we can walk around it, you know, 2 several which ways, and you can probably figure that out 3 anyway from several comments I have made. ,
4 MR. ARMENTA: All right. Well, those are all 5 the questions that I have.
i 6 MR. BOAL: I am out of questions, too, 7 pertaining to this specific case number, 4-95-016. But r
8 before we close it, I would like to ask you, Mr. Fountain, i
9 if perhaps you may have something we might want to add at 10 this point about Mr. Backen before we close the record 11 that we haven't covered already.
12 THE WITNESS: No. I really can't think of 13 anything. I remember one example that I don't know if 14 this is of any direct relevance or not, but I thought of
}I 15 it, so I will go on and mention it to you.
4 16 I remember back after Roger came up here, I 1
17 guess as an audit group supervisor, in, I guess it was,
! 18 '89 -- or maybe it was '90, early ' 90 -- he was my l 19' supervisor up here. I had been here for a while. I was 4
lead auditor on a security audit. j l 20 21 I had finished up the audit; I had written the i
22 audit report; and I put it in there for him to look at,
- 23 and I was kind of keeping an eye on his office. I was !
24 sitting there, two cubicl'es away from his office, anyway i-25 because we had the teport classified as safeguards i
- NEAL R. GROSS COURT REiVATERS AND TRANSCRIBERS i 1323 RHOL1E ISLAND AVENUE. N W 4202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON O C ?0005 (202) 2344433
. 1 1 information, so, you know, I didn't want to lose track of i
2 specifically where the report was at any point in time.
3 Well, after it had been in there for four or 4 five hours, I went back and checked with him and said, you 5 know, Roger, have you got a chance to take a look-see at 6 that yet. So -- and he said, No. I said, Well, I was j 1
7 kind of wanting to get it out today, so he said, Well, let a me take a look-see at it. And he -- Okay. It looks good
)
9 to me.
10 So he spent about, you know, a minute, you j l
11 know, looking at a ten-page audit report. Well, actually 12 it was -- I considered it a pretty good piece of work from l 13 my standpoint. I really wanted him to take time to 14 actually look at it and absorb what it had to say and so 15 forth, l
16 But he didn't -- but he did sign it, so I got i 1
17 it out. So I don't know. Like I say, directly, maybe f
)
18 that is not of any relevance, but it was a particular i i
19 thing I remember. .
20 BY MR. BOAL:
1 21 O so, to you, if he would have been performing as 22 a competent supervisor to you, he would have taken more 23 than a couple of minutes to review an audit report that he 24 would sign in/out.
25 A I would have thought so. j NEAL R. GROSS COUAT AE PORTE AS AND T AANSCAiBERS i 1323 RHODE ISL AND AVENUE N W !
1202: 234 4433 WASM NGTON D C 20005 (202) 234 4433 f
1 MR. BOAL: Well, we appreciate your input on 2 this investigation interview, and it is approximately 3 10:28 a.m., and this interview is concluded.
4 (Whereupon, at 10:20 a.m., the interview in 5 the above-entitled matter was concluded.)
6 7
8 9
10 I
l 11 12 l
13 l ll 14 i 15 16 17 l 18 19 i s
20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W a202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON D C 2000$ (202) 234 4433
1 This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of:
Name of Proceeding: WILLIAM JOSEPH FOUNTAIN Docket Number (s). 4-95-016 Place of Proceeding: St. Francisville, LA were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commissian taken by me and thereafter reduced to typewriting by me er under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings, 7 s'
/ f .
W ,
L .L/
t Joe Gill s Official Reporter Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc.
t NEAL R. GROSS COU41 AEPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 AHODE ISL AND AVENVE N W
.202i 234 4433 w ass NGtON D C 20005 (202) 2344433 1
w EXHIBIT 85 l
1 Infctm2 tion in Qis recard was deleted $_ EXHIBIT 85
,5 in a:ccrdance witAth3 Freedom of Information >
Act, exemptiog /C FolA. 76 -/J4