ML20136E075
| ML20136E075 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 05/16/1983 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20136D878 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-415 NUDOCS 8511210418 | |
| Download: ML20136E075 (84) | |
Text
, - - - _. -- - - _ -
,1' o f9f INTERVIEW OF GERALD A. PHILLIP Judge Hoyt
~
Interview with Gerald Phillip on May 16, 1983 at Glen Ellen, Illinois at the NRC Headquarters for Region III.
Mr. Phillig( I would like to introduce myself and my name is Helen F. Hoyt.I'm an Administrative Judge with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel and my coleq_e Mr. Sebastian Alcot from the NRC General Counsels Office are here to interview you today, and the third person here in the room from Washington I is Ruth Ann Miller who is my law clerk. I think we should also have this record reflect that Mr. Lewis the Regional General Counsel or Regional Counsel Stephen Lewis is also 4
present in the room.
Mr. Phillip's, Mr. Alcot and I were assigned by Chairman l Palladino on May 6, 1983 to undertake an investigation into the allegations that were detailed in the November 16, 1982 memorandum to Chairman Palladino from Martin G. Malsch, _
Deputy General Counsel and that interview and that paper was rather tittled, Interview with Thomas Appelgate, and I am handing to you at this time, both the assignments from the Chairman to Mr. Alcot and myself and also a copy of the 8511210418 851106 .
2 memorandum. And at this time I'll ask you to take a moment and read those two documents and to also, I have a moment to review them.
Mr. Alcot In the memorandum from Malsch to Palladino there is a reference to IEs second investigation at Zimmer and I'm not sure what that refers to?
Judge Hoyt I think that is the one that stems from his second set of allegations, Mr. Phillip?
Mr. Phillip The investigation, it was initiated roughly in February of 82, I guess.
Judge Hoyt Yes, thah the one.
Mr. Phillip
. -. . . . - - . - . .=.
3 Okay.
Mr. Aloot Is-it 82 or 817 Judge Hoyt i
81 1
Mr. Phillip 81.
4 I
Judge Hoyt And that was Mr. Phillip's asking the question?
Mr. Phillip, I want to take you back to the period when you completed your report, which I believe that was in July of 19807 ;
I l
Mr. Phillip ,
1 I i l
Right.
l
- , , , - , -,,,w .,w-w~~ , ,-- - - - - - - ,-- - - ~ ~-- --,,--~wv w e * ~ " ~ ~ ~ - - * ~'^-w----=^~~T '* ' - * * ~ ' -~~~w-~-' ^
rv* *e'*# v
l 4
Judge Hoyt I start our period of questioning after that time. When did you become aware of any other already difficulties which may have stemmed from your report?
4 Mr. Phillip i
Any difficulties?
Judge Hoyt Yes sir.
, Mr. Phillip I think shortly after the investigation report was made I
public or at the time it was made public there were several request of several sources we could copy of it, one of which was from the Government Accountability Project, and they requested that I send, Mr. Devine asked me if I would send him a copy, and he also asked that I send Mr. Appelgate a copy as the aledger to him through the Governmental Accountability Project. And which I did. And shortly after I had transmitted those reports or copies of the report I
[ received a phone call from Mr. Appelgate and which he
+ - , < - - , -- , , ---,, ,,,----,, , --+ -- ~ - - - - - - -,,-------~~,---w ,p- - .--- - - - , -- . - - , - *n
5 indicated to me that the matter was not considered closed as far as he was concerned, he indicated that while we had to quote him " mutual respect for one another that there was going to be a problem with this for any problems that may come my way as a result of this thing" he wanted to assure me that it wasn't personal. That was probably the first indication that would perhaps be more coming down the line.
Judge Hoyt Did you hear anything from persons here in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission?
Mr. Phillip Not to my recollection, I think the first thing after that that I heard was that the Government Accountability Project had sent a document to, I'd forgotten the other organi-zation, not that it was originally addressed to who in turn were being requested to look at the NRC's handling of the investigation that I conducted, and making many allegations against my performance and conduct.
I Judge Hoyt i l
Can you put a time on that?
a -
~
6 Mr. Phillip It was some time in December of 1980.
Judge Hoyt Would you say about December 29, 1980.
Mr. Phillip I think it would be a little earlier than that. My recollection is somewere around December 20, there abouts.
Judge Hoyt Were you contacted by anyone by OIA about this GAP petition?
Mr. Phillip Not at that time.
Judge Hoyt When were you contacted, if ycu were?
Mr. Phillip
7 The bsst I can recall is when they came here to initiate their investigation of my investigations, and that would of been early 1981. There may have been telephone contact, not any great consequence, but I don't specificly recall any telephone contact. I think my source of that kind of information was through Mr. Keppler and my supervisors, possibly through someone in IEE Headquarters.
4 1
Judge Hoyt Who would that someone be in IE Headquarters Mr. Phillip?
Mr. Phillip Well, I don't specifically recall any contact but in all likelihood it would have been Bill Ward.
Judge Hoyt Do you recall the substance of any of the conversations you had with Mr. Ward?
Mr. Phillip No, I don't think I do, except that the, you know, he was, and this is largely conjecture because I have no clear
l 8
specific recollection of conversations. But I have the feeling that we were in telephone contact and it may have 1
been indicated that while there was going to be this
- investigation and I was probably inquiring as to what the nature of the investigation was, wha' t , I think initially, we weren't really sure who, whether OIA was going to conduct the investigation or somebody else, or what the handling was going to be at Headquarters. What the legal aspects may be.
whether or not the (I can recall organizations now, the Merit Systems Protection Board, I think it was) whether they would accept the GAP petition. Whether it was that kind of thing or whether the Commission was merely reacting to it.
Because of receiving allegation critical of the NRC which they could not afford to ignore or whether they would be required to by the Merit Systems Protection Board. I think there may have been some conversation with Ward concerning that kind of thing.
Judge Hoyt Sir, what did you understand the nature of the investigation that OIA was going to conduct was?
i Mr. Phillip -
r,-- ~ , r---,- n., ,-
,,-.,-wa e,-, .--.,--,e.-,-- ,,_._-.-p,..,---. -
. - .-,,--,,-_,,-.-,m--,,,,,,,-,,,,.,-.,.--r, - -
--,,,-------n,-,-,,
g 9
Well, the first direct contact that I can recall with OIA was when they came here and had an initial meeting with Mr.
Kappler and members of his staff including myself. In which they indicated they were initiating the investigation and its purpose and at that time I specifically quoted the question as to whether this had any legal ramification for me personally. What ever I was being investigated for, if you will, malfeasance, or whether, but I was assured that no, it was not an investigation of that source, it was an
- investigation to determine the adequacy of IEs procedures in' the area of investigations and it was not a personnel thing there were, I was not going to be liable from legal.
standpoints, I don't know if you could call it criminal or not but I think maybe those words used in the Government Accountability Projects petition. But anyway, I received assurance at that time that wasn't the nature of thing it was to look at the adequacy of our procedures and methods in doing investigations of this kind.
Mr. Aloot Mr.Phillip(,doyourecallwhospecifically,whoconv[Yed that impression to you?
1 Mr. Phillip
o .
10 Not with certainty, but I believe Dave Gamble was, in all, more or less the spokesman at that meeting-for OIA.
Mr. Aloot ,
You do not recall the date of that meeting?
Mr. Phillip I'm sure it could be obtained but I don't specifically recall it.
Mr. Alcot
([ ' as that.first general meeting of the investigation?
Mr. Phillip But it was the initiation of the investigation at least of the Region III office. I don't know whether they had done anything before they came here or not but it was there first day of the first visit here to kick the thing off. +
Judge Hoyt
~
11 DoyourecallMr.PhillipwhoelsewasontheinvestigatfA' '
team in Washington?
Mr. Phillip 1
No. but I'm trying to figure the name I've been out of l touch a little bit lately.- I want to say.., can somebody help me with that?
Judge Hoyt would the name Sincluir help?
l t
I Mr. Phillip Yes. I think it was Sinclair.
i Judge Hoyt John Sinclair?
Mr. Phillip John Sinclair, right.
Judge Hoyt
12
' Who else was associated with this investigation?
't Mr. Phillip Well, later on Mr. Cummings was out here hemself. And there were Judge Hoyt can you tell us when he was out? And by out here I take it we have been talking about out here at Glen Ellen.
Mr. Phillip Region III.
Judge Hoyt Region III?
Mr. Phillip Yes, in Glen Ellen. That was, oh, at least a month after the first visit by the first OIA people.
Judge Hoyt
-, - , , . - a n ,,- , -,n.
1 13 Was anyone else here?
Mr. Phillip
< Yes, it seems there was one other OIA individual and was not sure who that was now. I can't.
Judge Hoyt Could it have been Mr. Schnebelen?
Mr. Phillip Yes, I believe it was.
Judge Hoyt And what was his participation?
Mr. Phillip
, .Infact, he had been here at the first visit as well. I think there were three the first visit.
Judge Hoyt l
l
14 Was Mr. Schnebelen, Mr. Gamble and Mr. Sinclair all here at the same time? Throughout the investigation?
Mr. Phillip Well it really wasn't that cut and dried because I think they made some visits that were very brief in the office and they went elsewhere, for instance they went downtown to talk to the FBI people is my understanding, and I was not always totally aware of who was here and when they were here.
Judge Hoyt How many times did you talk with them, was it consistently ,
or throughout their stay here, or did you have one interview or?
Mr. Phillip No, there were, I think the first visit there was a lengthy interview that may have taken a better parts of two days.
There was the time that Cummings was here. There was another interview with he and I believe all four of the OIA people appeared.
Judge Hoyt
I 15 Lets go back to.the first interview Mr. Phillips, what was the focus of the questions that were addressed to you in that interview?
Mr. Phillip Well, it was to go over essentially everything I had done during the investigation from the initial contact as we knew it of Appelgate with the NRC and taking it out through the whole chronology of events in detail of everything I knew -
and did about and during that investigation. And with some
' interest in what written procedures and guidance we had to work from and that controlled our activities. And what documentation we had and we produced every bit of the documentation we had our intire investigative file on that.
Judge Hoyt The next interview you mentioned was that with Mr. Cummings present can recall about when that occurred Mr. Phillip?
Mr. Phillip Well, again, I think it was at least a month later.
Judge Hoyt
16 Can we get that assigned a period in time that would be closer than a month later? Would that be February, March?
Mr. Phillip I
Judge Hoyt If you have any notes please use them to refresh yourself?
Mr. Phillip Well, I, this is not my note but its a chronology that one of the other investigator, Jim Foster, put together when we were dealing with this thing. This indicates that I was interviewed initially on January 14, 1981, and again on February 19, 1981 along with Kavin Ward who worked with me on the investigation. And I believe that was the occasion when Mr. Cummings was present.
Judge Hoyt What the next interview?
Mr. Phillip
17 Judge Hoyt Let me stop this for a few minutes and let me ask what the focus of that second interview was again?
Mr. Phillips This dealt in much detail with weld records concerning three welds that were at issue during our investigation and in which we went over some additional records that the OIA people had apparently obtained from the Zimmer site. And they were asking me questions about what I knew or didn't know or what I may have done or not done in connection of into looking into those three welds.
Judge Hoyt Let me stop at this point Mr. Phillips and ask you what your background in this type of work is? Are you primarily an investigator?
)
Mr. Phillip !
I i
Well thats what I was employeed as during all of my time 1 with Region III.
18 Judge Hoyt And a how about your technical background, field?
Mr. Phillip I have essentially no technical background any little bit of technical knowledge I have would of been gained on the job in just being exposed to it.
l 1
Mr. Alcot By technical you mean engineering, physics, that kind of technical background?
Mr. Phillip Yea, knowledge for instance, in this instance of welding and radiography and that kind of thing. I have essentially no formal training in those areas.
Mr. Alcot What about in investigative techniques? -
Mr. Phillip
i
.19 Well, I initially came into the government as an
-investigator for the, what was then the Civil Service Commission, and worked for a while there doing background investigations, largely for them personnel type of investigations. I than moved, when I moved into the than AEC I went into the security business and worked in security for approximately 12, years and at that point I was offered a transfer into what was then the Division of Compliance of Region III, which is now part of I&E. And I was hired as an investigator with more emphasis on accident of incidents but also which included investigation of allegations in complaints about licensees in those early years, by early I mean 1966 until 1972, probably 80% plus of my investigative activities involved the byproduct materials program rather than reactor program, either construction or operation. I then spent a year and a half approximately in the Pittsburg Naval Reactors Operations Office, and then returned to Region III as an Investigator in April of 1974, and from that point on my time was fairly devided between reactor operations and construction as well as byproduct materials and investigations. But I was hired primarily not as a criminal investigator but as a general type investigator initially more on accidents than incidents than anything else.
Judge Hoyt
+,--.*,-,.,w-y,, ,..i-m-#-#p-+44,a.,.,__
.~ . . . . - - . . . _ . - . _ . _- .
20 Taking you back now to the interviews that you had with the OIA people, Mr. Phillips, I think the second one was February, was that correct? .
Mr. Phillip Yes, February 19.
Judge Hoyt Did you have any more interviews with the OIA people?
Mr. Phillip The next main contact that I can recall that I. had with them was not so much an interview although this indicates reinterview in August 4. My recollection is more though that that was a review of their report of their having .
l interviewed me as they had their writeup of their interview of me. I was to go over that and point out anything that I disagreed with or anything that I considered inaccurate or ;
whether thats my recollection and that that took place in August.
Judge Hoyt l
l l
l
21 Your contacts with OIA that they conducted their ,
investigation was the two, one in January, and one in l 1
February? l l
l l
- \
Mr. Phillip l
Primarily, yes.
Judge Hoyt Did you have any telephone calls from any of these people, Gamble, Cummings, Chnebelen, Sinclair?
Mr. Phillip During the investigation?
4 Judge Hoyt Yes sir.
Mr. Phillip That they were conducting. To the best of my recollection, no. If you are aware of one, please refresh my memory.
ry -
w_w, ---
- -,v-- -esw, ,% , =y -w --y --m y., . .w-.,,---- - - -yyw.-,- ,,yn-- c --w----,e 9 -- --
22 Judge Hoyt l
l When did you next have any contact with the OIA people, Mr. l Gamble, I'm sorry Mr. Phillip's?
Mr. Phillip Well, as I, according to this chronology that Foster put
~
together, that would have been in August. And that's when I believe they showed me their draft of writeup of their interviews with me and I was invited to point out anything that I felt was incorrect or inaccurate.
Judge Hoyt From February to August than you heard nothing concerning this investigation?
Mr. Phillip I can't say I didn't hear anything, I Judge Hoyt Were did you acquire any of the knowledge about the investigation from Mr. Phillip?
v w.-,_ . - , _ . , , , , . . . - , , . m ,
23 Mr. Phillip I don't recall anything specific but I',m sure this was the subject that came into conversations in and around the office there were possibly conversations with IE personnel and Headquarters, I may of in the course of conducting other business and inquired as to know when they are going to put their report or something of that kind. I don't no of anything Judge Hoyt Did you make those inquiries here in the office or did you contact anyone in Washington?
Mr. Phillip Well, as I say, I may have had, for instance, been in telephone conversation with someone like Bill Ward, or one of the other people in IE investigations and other business and this may have come into the conversation and said, you know, well, how or whats happening or something like that, but I dont recall anything specific.
24 Judge Hoyt -
Than when were you contacted in August, Mr. Phillip's?
Mr. Phillip According'to this chronology it was August 4. And I think I during that same visit they apparently,gave us their findings as of that time.
Judge Hoyt And now who were they Mr. Phillip's, that were here at the August 4 meeting, or was here in ?
Mr. Phillip Yes. .
Judge Hoyt Can recall the circumstances of them coming out?
Mr. Phillip
i 25 They said they were, I recall we had a meeting in the conference room and Gamble, Schnebelen, and Sinclair were present, and Gamble again was the spokesman and gave us a rundown of their general findings which translated roughly into what there was contained in their memo to the Commission.
Mr. Alcot
,At this August 4th meeting, you specifically recall Mr.
Sinclair being present?
Mr. Phillip I believe it was but I'm not positive. I know Gamble was there and that he was not alone and I can only sort of guessing that Schnebelen were probably there too.
Mr. Alcot But you do have specific recollection of Mr. Gamble?
Mr. Phillip Yes, because he was the spokesman.
4 26 Judge Hoyt When they tell you, when Mr. Gamble tell you at that time?
Mr. Phillip Well, he was really conveying this to Mr. Keppler and several members of the Region III population.
Judge Hoyt Do you recall who those people were from Region III?
Mr. Phillip There would have, gee, there were a bunch, Keppler, Davis, Norelius, I believe, I know that Jim McCartin was there, Kavin Ward was probably there. Gee, I don't recall, there were more than that but I don't recall.
Judge Hoyt What were the substance of their comments to you?
Mr. Phillip
a .
27
- Well, they indicated that they had concluded that our investigation at Zimmer was inadequate and detailed four or five criticisms.
Judge Hoyt What were those four or five criticism that you recall?
Mr. Phillip I'm sure there, I don't recall whether they differed in any way from the final conclusions as they drew or not but in my mind they were substantially the same as what was finally transmitted to the Chairman or to the Commission, as agreed.
Judge Hoyt Uhat else transpired at that meeting?
Mr. Phillip Well, I think the general reaction of the part of the personnel from Region III who were present were shocked and dismay and anger that they thought that it was unjust, that there it was not appropriate.
l 28 .
Judge Noyt 4
What was your contribution?
Mr. Phillip My recollection I said very little. There were, j ' Judge Hoyt 2
Why?
Mr. Phillip Because I felt I was the target, and obviously co some extent could be anything I could say would probably, because they were bias, after all Mr. Keppler is the boss was t'he i boss and was very capable of expressing Region III's view.
It was his place to do that as much as anyone.
Judge Hoyt t
was anything solicited from you? Were you asked to submit any comments about the report?
4 1
Mr. Phillip
29 At that meeting?
Judge Hoyt Yes sir.
Mr. Phillip I don't believe so. Not i
Judge Hoyt -
Did you volunteer to give any?
Mr. Phillip I may have had something to say somewere along the line but it was very little that I can recall. I don't recall anything specific but I said, I know I didn't keep my mouth closed completely because its not just in my nature, but I odo recall that there was more said by other people of the Region III staff than anything I had to say. And on much stronger terms.
e INVESTIGATION OF PHILLIP TAPE 1 SIDE 2 '
Judge Hoyt Side two of tape one.
l Mr. Phillip's going back to the interview on August 4 with Mr. Gamble reading the report, did he read the intire report to you, or did he give you copies of it, or how was that '
handled?
Mr. Phillip We didn't get copies of it, and my recollection is that he read the, I believe the summary that the period of the beginning of the report and perhaps the draft of the memorandum that was going to go from OIA 'to the Commission.
Judge Hoyt By the memorandum do you mean the letter of transmittal, memorandum of transmittal?
Mr. Phillip
2 Yes.
Judge Hoyt Do you recall what the reaction of that memorandum of ,
transmittal was?
Mr. Phillip Well, it was essentially partial of the memorandum and the summary at the beginning of the investigation report were essentially alike had certainly the same tenor in favor and '
the reaction was to that, at its entirety, and was inappropriate and not based on fact not reported.
Judge Hoyt That, maybe I'm confused a little bit, was that applicable to both the memorandum of transmittal and to the summary?
Mr. Phillip Thats my recollection. Yes. Because they both contain conclusion. -
Judge Hoyt l
l l
l
1
. \
l 3
Was there any effort to change that?
Mr. Phillip I think the Judge Hoyt Lets stick to the summary first. .
Mr. Phillip Well, I can't really separate the two.
Judge Hoyt All right.
Mr. Phillip Because in my mind it was juct one ball of this is what their final, their bottom was on their effort and how they viewed our investigation effort. I believe their reaction ' '
was is that they were extorted by Mr. Keppler and others to !
return to Washington and discuss further and to reconsider whether or not those findings were justified and I think i
l Ob
4 there was an indication that Mr. Keppler might want to talk to Mr. Cummings about this. But there was no indication that we felt that they should change this word or that i sentence or this conclusion it didn't get down into those specifics, just that the overall bottom line was not appropriate.
Judge Hoyt Who was it that they discussed the report with in Washington?
Mr. Phillip l
l It was my recollection, you mean the OIA people when they returned?
l l Judge Hoyt I
l j Yes.
l i
l Mr. Phillip I think it was indicated that these individuals which shculd go back the Headquarters reconsider along with Cummings what they were about to puLlish. This is essentially a final
+
5 draft, it hadn't been issued, but for all. practical purposes it was a finished product and Mr. Keppler I think was suggesting strongly that they reconsider whether it was appropriate or not.
Judge Hoyt Did you make any input into that?
Mr. Phillip I don' t believe I did.
Judge Hoyt Did you make any suggestions either to Mr. Kcppler or to Mr.
Gamble, Mr. Schnebel there was sections of that were inherit the wrong in that summary?
Mr. Phillip I'm sure that I purpose, not during the meeting I don't think, but probably later.
E Judge Hoyt I
o . -
6 At any later time?
Mr. Philip Oh, at a later time I'm sure I expressed my views that Mr.
Keppler as to what I thought of the report.
Judge Hoyt Is that immediately after the meeting or was sometime?
Mr. Phillip That would of been sometime later, not immediately following the meeting or that, some days or possibly weeks later.
Prior to the meeting we had gone over this writeup that they had of my review and I had pointed out several things that I thought they should change.
Judge Hoyt You mean prior to the general meeting you had a private meeting with these investigators?
Mr. Phillip
0
- 7 Yes.
Judge Hoyt ,
Were'did that occur.
Mr. Phillip In my office.
Judge Hoyt was that immediately prior to the meeting with the group or was that a day before?
4 Mr. Phillip I believe it was perhaps that morning and the meeting was in the afternoon or it was the preceding day prior to the meetint] with Keppler.
Judge Hoyt
> Who was that meeting with?
i j
Mr. Phillip
. . , Ab
8 That was just myself and Gamble and one other OIA individual, who my guess is Sinclair, but I'm not positive of that but one would have been Camble. And there we went over,.I read what they had written up concerning their interviews of me and I pointed out things that I felt they should change.
-Judge Hoyt .
Can you recall what these were?
Mr. Phillip There all detailed.in a memorandum or largely. My criticism of their writeup of their interview with me is detailed in a memorandum that I wrote subsequent to the issue of the report. There were a few other things that I'm sure I pointed out to them. That they did change just as a matter for factual services, that I don't recall specifically what they were, some changes that I pointed out that they should make that they did make before the report was actually published. I don't think they were particularly substantive but some of the things I pointed out that they should change they did not change and those things are included in this memorandum of September that I wrote.
e
9 Judge Hoyt Holding up a memorandum Mr. Phillip Yes, thats it. It doesn't have a date on it but its September some time three years.
Judge Hoyt You have been shown a memorandum from you to Mr. Keppler past through past through Mr. J. F. , Acting Director of Enforcement and Investigation Staff and I should recall now what the date this was. It had a date on it?
Mr. Phillip I
l It has a date, that particular copy doesn't. But it would of'been early September of 81.
l I Judge Hoyt i
l These are your comments after the report had already been released? Is that Correct?
4 4
- - - . . _ . _ . . -.---.,._..,.-_.m.. ..__.r..~._ ,,..m_ . , . _ , _ . _ _ . _ . , _ . _ . . , , , , - . - . , , _
10 Mr. Phillip 4
Yes.
Judge Hod Going back to that meeting that you had with the investigators, your sure Mr. Gamble was present who initiated that meeting with you and went over your statement with you, was it you or was it the OIA investigators?
Mr. Phillip That was the OIA initiated that and I believe the purpose Judge Hoyt Purpose, I'm sorry.
Mr. Phillip The purpose of that was, as I recall was, they wanted me to read this to be sure it was accurate and that it fairly represented what I had said.
4
,-e , , .e-, - ,. ,--_. - - . . ., , .-. - - - ----,-.. ,.. - ---- ,
7-
l 11 Judge Hoyt At that time you understood the focus of the OIA investigation to be what?
I Mr. Phillip I
As it was initially given to me at the initial meeting when they came out here in January or was that January or February, January.
Judge Hoyt And that was the Mr. Phillip To review the adequacy of our conduct of investigations, our procedures, and ways of doing business.
Judge Hoyt was it necessary in your opinion, Mr. Phillip's, in order to have reached the conclusion that were reached in that OIA report that these changes would be anything more than cosmetic?
12 Mr. Phillip Those changes that were discussed with me pertained to my interview were essentially to assure that they were accurate, that save them and ourselves embarrassment from the standpoint of inaccuracy not, in, I can't quite say cosmetic is quite the write word but nearly the write word for that. It was certainly not that it would significantly alter the content.
Judge Hoyt Would it add anything to the accuracy of the report?
Mr. Phillip They had adopted a lot of changes that I pointed out I think it would of been of increased the accuracy. Certainly there were just miss statements missleading out of context statements and things like that but I just pointed out, you know, that just was not correct. And some of those they changed, some they chose to leave in. There's a reference in it too. Take a minor thing and make a reference of my having to refer to my vast experience in the business. I have never used such words to them and never would of used them and I told them that's not appropriate. And I think
_ l
- 1. . .
13 they made a note of it but when the report came out it still said the same thing.
Judge Hoyt But you would of agreed that that is more of a cosmetic change, substance change wouldn't you?
Mr. Phillip Yes. Thats pretty much cosmetic, yes.
Judge Hoyt What was the most significant substantive changes that you recall that you wanted to make in tha't report?
Mr. Phillip I guess I would have to review my own memorandum.
Judge Hoyt
~
Would you like to review that sir?
Mr. Phillip
1 , ,
14 Yes. '
Judge Hoyt I'll give it to you and give you an opportunity to do that.
All right sir go ahead.
Mr. Phillip 1
Well, I, to preface this a little bit, my memorandum was intended, first of all, to point out that I thought there
. was a basic difference in understanding between OIA and IE as to the purpose of the investigation and allegations and views on that, and then to go on and then discuss specific points in their writeup of my interview in which I thought they had been inaccurate either by way of straight miss statements or by omission of pertinent information, that kind of thing. And attached to the memorandum then, is that portion of the OIA report with the statement that I'm referring to in my memo, being circled and numbered, or so Lthat you can cross reference them and compare what I said in
- the memo with whats in the report. Some of the things that concerned me was the way some of the writeup was worded indicated to me that they really didn't understand.
15 Judge Hoyt You've had a chance to review that memorandum of yours, sir.
Mr. Phillip i
A rather recursory way at the moment. The, as I believe I indicated what I thought that some of the ways that some of these things were written, indicated that they really didn't i
understand what we had said in our report, and what some of .
the questions were all about, they in some instances contributed the information to me, when it was not mine, it was something I was telling them that Appelgate had told me or something like that. There was one thing that perhaps is not significant from the standpoint of substance but which to me indicated that they were not really conducting the investigation in an objective fashion. And that has to do with their going into great details about Mr. William's difficulties during the time he and I were in Cincinatti, were reviewing Mr. Appelgate, in which he had difficulties with his automobile and getting documents reproduced and all of which was not really pertinent but they detailed and it F
look to me like they were trying mightly to embarrass people. And like manner, their- handling of our refusal to provide Appelgate transportation to the airport after we had I
seen him at the FBI offices in Chicago, the implication as I
( .
16 indicated in my memos, maid that we requested Appelgate to come to Chicago from Cincinatti and then we refussed to be good enough to give him transportation back to the airpore !
to go back to Cincinatti, which of course, is not the case at all. We heard from Mr. Appelgate prior to that meeting in which he was calling us when the offices of the Chicago news paper, and we made arrangements then, because he said he had evidence, concrete evidence, of criminal conduct. We said that the appropriate thing would be for him to meet with us and the FBI, and that it would be most convenient to do'that at the FBI offices since both the Chicago and Sun Times, and the FBI offices are in the downtown office. And it was under those circumstances that we met with Mr.
Appelgate in Chicago and so he didn't come up'here at our invitation or anything it wasn't that way at all. But the implication is that we were, we a dealt with him rather i shabbily and thats not the case at all. I think, and untill you were told all of this and yet its not contained in the report. And as I said in my memo I regard this kind of selective reporting is reprehensible and I still do. And I think that is a strong indication in my view that their conduct of the investigation of our investigation was not objective at all, that it was slanted at the outset.
Judge Hoyt
1 l
17 How was slanted?
4 Mr. Phillip I think they went into the investigation'with the objective of coming up with adverse findings. They had a strong motivation to do so.
Judge Hoyt
- Wh'at motivation do you think they had?
Mr. Phillip Well, for a period of approximately two years there had been an organizational controversy over the investigative turf, if you will, of each organization IE and OIA. And this -
presented a golden opportunity for CIA to gain some points against IE to show us up as not being able to do the job
-~
that they in effect at that time wanted to do themselves.
They were confined really by their charter to inhouse investigations and they had made efforts prior to this time of trying to get into the field into the licensee kind of thing and that was the provence of IZ. And they were trying to get into that area and this presented, to me, and to them, I believe, in my mind, an opportunity to make in roads m _ _ , . . - - , , - _ , ,- _ - - - - - - -
18 in that direction. The second motivating factor was that at the time that they were doing this investigation they, themselves, had been the subject of GAO audit and the GAO audit was very critical of the way they had conducted their business and the fact that they had allowed people who were the subject of their investigations the organizational heads to review their draft reports and to alter their them before they were issued in final and strongly implied, if not expressed, that OIA was in effect ineffective and factual.
So having being aware that this was a'GAO finding it behooved OIA to come out and come down hard on organization component inside the NRC to show and to demonstrate to GAO that they were not effectual that they always didn't come up with minor or inconsequential findings but they could come up with adverse findings in their own organization.
Judge Hoyt And this is the basis for the whole thing?
Mr. Phillip Thats my view.
i Judge Hoyt
19 In your experience do you ever show a report to a subject pr'ior to this release and ask them for their criticism of the report?
Mr. Phillip Never.
9 Judge Hoyt Did you find this whole process with OIA to be somewhat unusual?
Mr. Phillip 1
I considered it unusual.
Judge Hoyt And yet you did to make your comments about the report?
Mr. Phillip I was interested in it as being as accurate as possible, I think thats just the nature to try and be accurate.
20 Judge Hoyt You saw the report then on August 4th?
Mr. Phillip No. I didn't see the report, all I saw was there writeup of Judge Hoyt I'm sorry, you heard of it before?
Mr. Phillip No. All I saw was thei writeup of my interview, that portion of the report.
Judge Hoyt And you heard the summary?
Mr. Phillip And I heard their restoration.
Judge Hoyt
\
21 .
So theres a hearing and looking at the same time same day.
Did you see the report when it was issued?
j Mr. Phillip After it was issued I certainly did.
Judge Hoyt Did you notice any changes in the report as issued from what either you had seen or had been discussed with you prior to that time?
Mr. Phillip The only changes I noted at that time were these minor changes that they had accepted from me and I looked to see i if they had taken my comments and incorporated into changes in my interview. And in some cases, as.I said earlier, they took them and did make the changes and in many cases they did not. As far as the substance, I didn't, well, I didn't ha,ve anything in writing from the meeting that listed
) everything that they said but the tenor of the thing sounded alike to me, I really saw those substantive difference. I
22 '
didn't analyze, you know, piece by piece but it all came out adverse in my view.
Judge Hoyt l
Both on the 4th as issued?
Mr. Phillip Right.
Judge Hoyt Did summary of the report that you both heard and saw on the 4th coincide, that is did the report substantiate the summary?
Mr. Phillip Thats two different things, I think. The rundown that they gave us, I think, although I didn't go item by item, I think was substantially the same as it appeared in print and was issued. I don't think the body of the report sufficiently substantiates the conclusions they drew.
r Judge Hoyt
23 What conclusions did you think that their report substantiated that was not in the summary?
Mr. Phillip Well, I'm sorry, maybe I missed understood the question?
Judge Hoyt Maybe I phrased it badly. I think I did. The substance of the report, did it substantiate the findings that were made in the summary?
Mr. Phillip Not in my mind. No.
Judge Hoyt And whats significant differences did you find then?
Mr. Phillip Well, one of the things that were, I'd have to see their conclusions again. But one of the things that stands out in my mind is the that their's was inadequate documentation, I y , , , , - - - .,am -
y
Q-* 8 24 l i
don',t agree with that, I think the inadequate, the only real !
discrepancy between the documentation and the prescribe procedures that were of or, the hate to say prescribe it, procedures from which we were operating, the only departure had been that I hadn't prepared an identification sheet i
identifying people who were not named in the tepart and in my view that wr.s a minor thing. Did not call for a major conclusion of inadequate documentation, that ev'en that is not only necessary in this case was judge by me as not being necessary. There was only one individual consequences involved that would of required an identifier and that was Appelgate and everybody knew who IE was. Why you have.to generate a separate piece of paper te just to say the eledger is Mr. Appelgate. There were other indications in the file that identified him. I guess the other conclusions
, I don't specifically recall, but I think they were to far
- reaching a drastic for the basis on what matter from which information they had on which it was based. If they had come to conclusion such that IE as an organization did not have formal and detailed procedures which to guide l'
investigations and activities I think we would not argue about that at all. And I think that would of been a progressive and useful recommendation or conclusion that this is the weakness in your program and you aught do something about it. And I think that would have been worthwhile. That kind of conclusions I think would have i
25 served the real purpose. The positive purpose. But such was not the tenor of their conclusions.
Mr. Alcot Excuse me, do you think that type of recommendation would have been warranted given the background of the report given i
the finding or the data in the report?
Mr. Phillip You must remember that their announced purpose was to determined the adequacy of our efforts and procedures that we had in place for the time of investigations. Their conclusions should have point.ed to that same thing. And as I say, if they had concluded that IE did not have in place those procedures were adequate procedures of guiding the conduct of the investigation. What it would of been a ligitimate conclusions and would have been a positive kind of thing. It's something, here's something you can fix and make better. And to me thats worthwhile. Because there were no established procedures for the conduct of investigation that were blessed by IE and such. What we were using here in the Region was something that I wrote and -
had used as a presentation for the fundamental inspection course a segment on investigation. It's something that I l
l n ,
26 pumped out of my head and put down and was used, then the purpose of it was originally to give a presentation to new inspectors on what our investigation at NRC or IE was all about. And we adopted those as locally, not agency wide.
We used those locally as a guideline in the absence of anything issued by Headquarters, as our way of doing l business. There were some individual other kinds of pieces of paper providing guidance to us again that were either generated and subsequently approved by my boss at that time was Mr. Norelious or I generated or he may have generated it himself, but agency wide there were no procedures. And I i
think that would of been.a ligitimate finding of this investigation. And a worthwhile one.
Mr. Alcot Do you feel that such a finding would of been consistent, or certainly would say more consistent, with your understanding of the scope and purpose of this, of the OIA investigation?
Mr. Phillip -
Certainly. By all means.
Judge Hoyt
27 Were there any meetings, telephone calls, transpired after this meeting on April, I'm sorry, August 4th concerning this report of OIA?
Mr. Phillip Between myself and OIA?
Judge Hoyt All that you were party to either by being present or some other fashion.
Mr. Phillip I'm sure some place down the line and I probably couldn't place it at the time. There were some conversations between IE Headquarters and Mr. Keppler that I probably participated in. Which I think Mr. Stello or members of his staff may have asked for input on correspondence they may have been preparing or relating to.
o
. . I I
)
TESTIMONY OF GERALD PHILLIP TAPE 2 SIDE 1 Judge Hoyt Tape 2 side l'is a continuation of the interview of Mr.
4 Phillips and I'll continue along with the questions for a few minutes Mr. Phillip's.
Let me get you into the area of one each Thomas Appelgate.
When did you first meet him, Mr. Phillip's, if you recall?
Mr. Phillip Well, I first met him in person after having made arrangements with him on the phone, to meet him, where he was residing in Kentucky, is across the river from cincinatti.
Judge Hoyt 1
Well, let me then, perhaps I can use an unfortunate choice of words now.' When did you first become aware of Mr. Thomas Appelgate's existence and his relation to this Commission?
2 Mr. Phillip I received a telephone call from Bill Ward, IE Headquarters, lets see, in early 1980, I think my report would indicate the day or at least the day I interviewed him. At any rate, I received a telephone call from Bill Ward indicating that he had been intouch with this individual, who had made what it sounded as though they were very significant allegations alleging possession of tapes indicating criminal conspiracy on the part the management of Cincinatti Gas and Electric Company and the building management contractor for Zimmer.
l And he requested that I contact ,Appelgate and arranged to interview him, and at that time I was cautioned not to involve any of the Region III inspection staff because some of Appelgate's allegations might involve activities by the inspectors, and until we had gotten details of Appelgate's allegations, he thought it proven that we not involve inspector in the interview of Appelgate. And I went along with that suggestion, of course, and I think during that phone call, or one shortly thereafter, were offered the services of an investigator on Headquarters staff and Lynn
~
1 Williamson who accompanied me to interview Appelgate. The normal handling of interview of an alleger in reactor construction field would be to take an inspector with us for his technical competence in the area. But after following my contact from Ward I called Appelgate and arranged to see l
3 him a day, or two days after that to arranged the meeting with him for an interview to discuss his allegation. At that time Appelgate, although he didn't go into specific allegations, indic,ated to me what something you apparently had with Ward that he had these tapes which were evidence of management criminal conspiracy of the intersite and we thought we really had a dynamite situation here. So I preceded then to Cincinatti and methods with Appelgate along with Lynn Williamson. We re* viewed him for I guess overall probably between three and four hours.
During part of that interview of ?, Williamson left and went downtown to Cincinatti to make copies of some weekly reports that Appelgate had prepared while he was employed as a private detective while he had at this intersite. I don't know how much more detail you want me to go into.
Judge Hoyt As much as you feel thats necessary Mr. Phillip.
Mr. Phillip a
well, during the course of that interview Appelgate played
~
some tape recordings, or portions of tape recording, of conversations he had with people, non of them were n
4 management people. They were security guards, pipe fitters, possibly a radiographer, although I don't believe there was one. But they are people in those job categories. Most of the tapes were not of good quality since apparently he said that he had tape recorder taped to his leg when he was talking with these people, and. his discussions were being held while riding down the highway in a pickup truck, and one instance they were at a tavern someplace, must of been
~
sitting very close to the juke box because it was very difficult to here the conversation from the background noise. But he would play a one or two minute segment, or a five minute segment and then interpret for me and tell me what this was all about and that kind of thing so I really didn't get very much in the way of specific information from the tapes but and only herd those portion that he played that he chose to play for me. He never did play them from the beginning to end.
1 Judge Hovt i Would he give you a copy of those tapes?
Mr. Phillip He declined to give me the tapes.
l 1
, , - - - - . - - - i
I 5
Judge Hoyt Did you ask him for it?
Mr. Phillip Yes. He declined at that time to give me the tapes.
So most of the interview consisted of these oral allegations that he made and what his earlier contacts had been with the Commission and his displeasure with the reaction he got from us etc. up to that point.
- Judge Hoyt What other contacts did he have up to that point Mr.
- Phillips?
Mr. Phillip He indicated to me that he had contacted Mr. Cummings in OIA by telephone and had several telephone conversations with him.
Judge Hoyt
-e,,-,- ,- - - - - - - - -., - , , , , ,s.,- , , ,r-.- w,,, -- - - -,,,, ,,y, -- , -,-wn_ , ,-- ---- -. - -_. - , , .- --
6 Did he tell you what the dates or possible dates of those conversations were? ;
1 i
Mr. Phillip I don't recall whether he gave me the dates but a specific date he indicated that it had been during the preceding roughly two week period. Prior to my visit.
l Judge Hoyt l Which would place it about what period of time?
Mr. Phillip Well, I guess I would have to count back from the date of my interview which is in my report I'm sure.
Judge Hoyt So two weeks from the time you first saw the man since that is and when we could put that conversation you had with Mr.
Cummings.
Mr. Phill'ip
- - -" _ _ _ . - ._. ---_-_.___._._m , . ----,w-_.- ----w,,+ , , ,,.y. --
._ _ , _ - _ _ - __ . _, -. - - ._.-, y _ __ - _ ___. - -
7 That would be a good approximation. .
Judge Hoyt And thats of course James Cummings of OIA in Washington, is that correct?
Mr. Phillip Thats' correct.
He indicated that he had had these conversations with Cummings that he had been asked by Cummings to put some of this allegations in writing and to send them to him. And that at one point Cummings suggested that he think this over the weekend and then call him back and he said he got to thinking about it over a weekend and and he became angry because he had a lot of money on long dictance calls and now he was.being asked to go to the labor of reducing everything l to writing and he just was upset by being put to all this )
trouble when he was trying to bring the a matter of, in his i
mind, some significance to NRCs attention. And at that point he then decided that he wasn't going to go along with Mr. Cummmings request that he wanted to talk to somebody who was knew about Cummings and he then contacted the Commission's office the Commissioners office. And that they
8 intern had referred the matter down to the Inspection and Enforcement people and that Bill Ward had called to return his call and thats when I got into it.
Judge Hoyt Did Appelgate indicate that he had more than one conversation with Jim Cummings?
Mr. Phillip My-recollection he did, yes.
Judge Hoyt Did he give you any indication in what timeframe those conversations occurred in?
Mr. Phillip That would have been, sound like two weeks prior to my interview with him.
Judge Hoyt
l i
9 There was two or more, or three or more, conversations do you know?
. Mr. Phillip Icouldn'tgiveyouaspecifkenumberbutmyrecollectionis he indicated that there was more than one. I'm sure there was more than ore telephone conversation. That was his
' statement.
Judge Hoyt Mr. Phillip, what was your impression ~of Appelgate, was he a witness you would rely'on, did you find his information bazaar, or how would you characterize it?
Mr. Phillip Well, thats not an easy thing to do. He troubled me to some extent when I initially contacted him. He was very excitable as current seemed hyper on the phone. Had making these claims of great significance of criminal conspiracy, and that among management, high management personnel in these organizations. Then, when we met him,'he had us park in a church parking lot a block or so from were he was residing. .He was rooming with a couple, older couple. He f
10 met us in the parking lot and then walked with us to his home and we got into the house he took his coat off and he had a side arm strapped on him, and I was a little concerned at that point, as to how stable he was. And it was that 4
sort of thing that put me on edge a little bit. He j eventually Judge Hoyt '
Did he keep the weapon on or did he take it off?
1 Mr. Phillip He short time after that he took it off. But sometimes during the course of the interview he would be very excitable and other times very calm. He seemed to fluctuate a great-deal. He, a well, its not unusual, but he would jump from one topic to another frequently and salked about
- i. having been intouch with the FBI, and with Congressman or Senators office in Ohio. And his conversations with Cummings and it was all a little jumbled up but and that gave me a description of how he had come across this information that he had been originally hired to due a surveillance of a man whose wife suspected him playing around etc. and had come across some indications of timecard cheating on the part of personnel working at the Zimmer
-. - - - - + - - - - - - - .---.,.-.,,-%.. e_ ,,.%.s . _-._..,
_v , , , - _ _ , , , . , . . . _ _ , . - - - , _ _ - .
11 plant and then had convinced his employer that he should put
, under cover on the premises of the Zimmer plant to look into this timecard cheating by employees and that he had been there about three weeks and in the course of confirming the timecard cheating then got into what can generally be referred as quality control problems in the construction end i of the business. He was a little fuzzy on his current relationship with his employer at the time he was working under cover at Zimmer. The tapes that he had portrayed to -
me as being evidence of management conspiracy and his conduct etc. turned out, as I describe him in conversations that he taped while talking to pipe fitters and those type of people in a tavern which is a far cry from what we had
, been led to believe they were over the telephone. So this diminished, to some extent, his credibility in my eyes. He '
seemed to have no real conception of the things that would fall within NRC jurisdiction and which would be outside that jurisdiction and I tried to convey those things to him and clarify those things to him. And so all I took certainly seriously the allegations that he was making and he made and he did give me some specific information which is always great to have specific identity of welds that he said were defective. And as so while I had some concern about his stability I certainly had to take his allegation seriously and face value pending inveitigation of which I think is a standard approach that we took to all allegations.
f r
, - , . . w __ - , - , ., - - - - - _. . _ . - . . . . - -
12 -
Judge Hoyt Did-you find somewhat of a problem that'you had and if I'm 1
mischaracterizing this Mr. Phillips, please stop me. As a result of your findings some difficulty with the credibility of Mr. Appelgate did you recommend any investigation with that individual?
Mr. Phillip None what so ever on anything. It has never been my practice to find out anything about the alleger or his background other than that would be of value in determine his technical knowledge about the substance of this allegations.
Judge Hoyt Did you make any check, for example, looking at the local police records of this individual, any federal records that you might have access to as an investigator in term the individuals background?
Mr. Phillip None. 1 i
l 13 Judge Hoyt
~At any time?
Mr. Phillip At any time. To this day.
. Judge Hoyt Do you know whether or not any other individuals would have made some investigations of Mr. Appelgate?
Mr. Phillip Know one made any investigation of Appelgate, but I believe that there was some action by one or two people in Region III making some inquiry about of some sources.
Judge Hoyt Who were those individuals, if you recall, Mr. Phillip's?
Mr. Phillip
- s. .
14 Mr. Weil, who is investigator currently located here.. I believe made some kind of contact at sometime about Mr.
Appelgate but and I think he gave me some piece of information. I didn't ask for it he gave it to me and I heard it and ignored it.
Judge Hoyt Thats Mr. Weil with that information? .
Mr. Phillip Mr. Weil, yes.
Judge Hoyt How do you spell his name sir?
Mr. Phillip t
Weil.
Judge Hoyt Do you know where he may have acquired that particular information?
15 Mr. Phillip I believe from some law enforcement organization but I'm not Judge Hoyt Would that be a local law enforcement or sould that be a federal agency?
Mr. Phillip I really don't know. My impression of it was some contact he made in the State of Ohio. But who or what type of organization they reviewed, I really don't know. .
Judge Hoyt
- - Do you know whether Mr. Weil may have passed that I information on to OIA at someother point in time?
l .
i Mr. Phillip i
It's possible, but he would of had, I would doubt it, because he had no official or actual involvement in this Case.
l
t 16 Mr. Aloot Could you state what the substance of that information was
.to the best;of your recollection?
Mr. Phillip I don't really clearly recall, except that there was something*about his standing as a private investigator in the State of Ohio. And whoever Weil's contact.was either knew of or either knew somebody else who knew something
-about Appelgate and his general reputation as a private investigator, it=seems to me. But I really wasn't all that interested in it. You know, it's the kind of thing I suppose that is of casual curiosity, a thing to talk about over lunch, but it had no real bearing on the conduct of the NRC business as far as I was c6ncerned.
Judge Hoyt When the OIA was conducting it's investigation and the two interviews you had with them in 1981, did they ask you
, anything about this information Mr. Weil had given you?
Mr. Phillip -
17 Not to my recollection. No. I don't think the subject ever came up. They didn't ask me the kind of questions you are asking me at the moment. That I recall.
- Judge Hoyt N
Youdon'tknowwhethertheirN'hteorI'mwrong,orhowever$
they are right? A1.1 right. I'm not going to ask you any more on those, along that line, do you have any more else sir?
Mr. Alcot I have Judge Hoyt Yes.
Mr. Alcot I have basically one question.
Do you, did you acquire any knowledge regarding Mr.
Appelgate holding himself out as an NRC investigator or NRC consultant?
i 18 Mr. Phillip
/
Thatpring$somekingofavaguebell. But I can't remember what the context was. Somewhere somebody said something that they had herd that he had portrayed himself or had 4
presented himself to somebody in that light. But for the
- life of me I can't recall. Who I heard that from or under i '
what circumstances that he was said to have done that but it seems to me that sounds somehow' familiar.
f Mr. Alcot could you recall whether you heard this information while you[wereconductingyourinvestigationorduringOIA's investigation your investigation?
Mr. Phillip l This would be strictly a guess, I would think that it was after I completed my report. Sometime after that and I ,
don't know when.
Mr. Alcot
, O'kay. That exhaust my questions of the report.
I P
--.v- -w , . + . , _c-e. .- , , _ ...,-.r,,..-n. , , - - - - . . . . .-.-..% , _ . . _ , _ , _ . .,,--_--_..-.,.-------...,--m. _.-
- o. -
19 Mr. Phillip This kind of thing'is all sort of, maybe I took, I guess I've been criticized by all expertise to narrow a view t
sometimes, but I try to stay within what I fell is the NRC's area of jurisdiction and not move outside of it. And of anytime something kinds up thats out of our real mission than "I just, I hear those things and maybe I keep it in back of my mind for the time being, but I really don't use it, cause I just don't think its pertinent. My interest is whether the plant is built right. And those little tid bits just don't have minor, I don't really care whether the ledger is psycotic or not. If he gives me an allegation thats going to lead me to a problem that can be corrected and dealt with I don't realIy care.
Mr. Alcot 1
Just so long he or she is not psycotic in your presence.
Mr. Phillip
- They can be psycotic just as long as they are not violent.
i Mr. Alcot i
- , 4 20 Mr. Phillip, did yo,u bring with you any documents that you hadinyourpIN[k2pnthatrelatetoyourinvestigationof Zimmer or of OIA's investigation?
Mr. Phillip I've got a couple of pieces of paper that I thought you might be pertinent, Ireallydidn'tknowyereyouweregoing /
with this thing, or what the focus would be. I have a number of documents at home. Probably not quite as complete as been supplied. But I do have copies of my own report of the Government Accountability petition of Foster's memo and my memo commenting out of OIA's report and various things like that. But I don't think I have anything that is not accessible in the files that.you may already have in your possession. I believe OIA, for instances, has copies of everything that was in the investigative file, including a 4 chronology of things that took place during the course of my investigation, I.kept a log of everything, every time I I
L talked to Appelgate on the phone or etc. or any significant contact is all in this log. I kept a log in this case more complete than I ordinarily do. God knows why. I'm glad I did.
l Judge Hoyt l
l
~ - - - . - ,. _., . _ _ . , ___,.._,._m..,_.-.p.__, __r.y,. , ,_.._,_ _ _ _ _ , ..,m...
4 21 I wonder Mr. Phillip's would you make that log available to us?
Mr. Phillip It's here in this office somewhere, but I don't have a copy.
Judge Hoyt All right, sir.
Mr. Alcot Do you have a copies of any documents that would not be in the official NRCs files?
Mr. Phillip No. In one file or another I don't have anything other than that.
Judge Hoyt would that include any notes, memorandums you wrote for your own purposes, that you may have retained in your personal file at home?
7 .-
s e 22 Mr. Phillip No. I have no memos that I'v written other than what are in the files, anything I wrote is in the files.
Mr. Alcot Mr. Phillip, to the best of your recollection, was there any understanding or mentioned between Region III, yourOself, /
GAP, OIA or Mr. Appelgate, regarding whether OIA would
-monitor Region III's second Health and Safety investigation?
Mr. Phillip I have no knowledge in that area, in fact, the whole area of the second investigation I was essentially not involved in and have only passing knowledge just by being in the office among the people who were doing it. I have some smiting of information but I was purposely divorced from Zimmer at the time the GAP petition was issued. After that point I just was an arms reach from the whole thing.
Mr. Aloot Do you happen to know the reason why you were divorced from the second IE investigation?
e.
23 l Mr. Phillip ,
Well, I think it was considered inappropriate in view of the i j
OIA investigation, my activities etc. I don't think there was ever anything that w'as done officially, it was just sort of an uaderstood sort of thing. I certainly didn't want to be involved and I suspect that management felt it prudent
! that I not be involved. I would go along with that. It was
< just sort of a mutual thing. Well, you know, I caused enough trouble in that area. I may find new worlds to get troubled.
Mr. Aloot -
Based on your experience here in Region III, to your knowledge is it a requirement or policy here in Region III that allegation regarding potential problems at a nuclear power plant be reduced to writing before the office will act on this allegations? ,
Mr. Phillip Well, lets put this in focus of time. Let us, let me answer that in terms of say 1980. When the Appelgate affair began.
At that time there were no hard and fast policies such as you may find this hard to believe being from other parts of
x,- .
e.
l l
24 I i
this organization but in many ways the investigation program until very recently was pretty informally run sort of thing, but the general practice here and for many years I was the j i
only investigator in this office and only one of the three l in the country was to if you got a' telephone call from an I alledger, normally you didn't reduce that to writing you made arrangements with the ledger to go see him then you got through and maybe come back and you had all your notes, you -
still might not reduce the contents of that interview to writing and it was only when it got to the point of writing -
the report that you put down the specific allegations in the report and addressed each one. And that was the normal way ,
of doing it. It wasn't a prescribed way and it was only in period shortly a year or two prior or less before I i interviewed Appelgate that we initiated the practice it wasn't always followed to write a letter to the alledger I confirming what our understanding was at those allegations. l We did that with Appelgate but we didn't always do that and it was a relevantly resent practice and still not what I could consider a policy. But it was a practice. !
l l
l Mr. Alcot
. Al we Did this office of Region III require W4 to reduce his or her allegations to writing before Region III would respond.
f 25 Mr. Phillip 4 No.
Mr. Aloot You mentioned a letter to Mr. Appelgate, do you recall a date that letter was sent?
Mr. Phillip i V ItwouldofbeenwKithin,I'llsayoftwoweeksofmy interview of him and a copy of that is available, I'm sure.
Mr. Aloot J
Did you receive a response from Mr. Appelgate to your 3
letter?
l Mr. Phillip No. No correspondence, I may have had subst telephone ,
conversations with him.
- INTERVIEW OF MR. PHILLIP 4 - ,
TAPE 2 SIDE 2 i
i
.--c - - - - , , - , - - - - - - - , - , . , . . , , - - , - , - - , - - , , - - - - - - - , - - - , - - - - - --
4 .
~
s 26 Judge Hoyt '
continuation of the interview of Mr. Phillip's. .
You were responding to that last question?
Mr. Phillip My recollection of those conversations is that he did not disagree with the content of that letter. But I can't say that with certainty.
Judge Hoyt May I ask you did Mr. Appelgate ever write any letters to you, give to you anything to you in writing?
Mr. Phillip
- I'v gotten nothing from Mr. Appelgate in writing other than that he provided us copies of Lynn Williamson made. I have already interviewed those reports. But nothing else.
Mr. Alcot I have no more questions.
. . . _ __ . _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ __ __. __- ~ _ _ _
- _ v. -
27
. Judge Hoyt i
- I don't have any more questions at this time but we covered l our subjects.
Do you suppose, I don't think we have, Mr. Alcot and I have any more questions have of you at this time. I would like to do something I intended to do before we started and.that is read you magic sta'tement that we have been reading to all
. the interviewers, interviewees, I should say. And I think -
we covered most everything. You have had no objections to the recording the small cassette recorder that we have here ,
and that we have explained I hope to you on that these were intended for our own use and will remain in our files and will be used to transcribe merely the events of this interview. We would like to ask that you not discuss this interview with anyone in the Commissions office or any other a
office 'nd this request is made of you to insure that we will at what we have discussed today will not if it could influence any other person we may talk with about the OIA.
investigation. I would like also to tell you when we completed the investigation we will report our findings and recommendations to the NRC Commission.
I would like to ask you sir, if in result of our stay here in Glen Ellen and other interviews we may have if you are available and we do
.--~,,-wv.. .,,,,.....-.w,..g----.-y-----.~,.,-.....,-~e-- - . ~ , - ..--- , . -
~- -
1 28 have anymore questions maybe we can call upon you to help us again. Since you've been very kind to do so today. :
NW. Phillip Oh, certainly.
Judge Hoyt I appreciate that.
Stephen Lewis You will be making, if there is a transcript, you'll make it available to Mr. Phillip's himself.
Judge Hoyt Absolutely., if there is any transcript, w were going to make a transcript, I'm assuming as racon as the secretary can f-get it off these tapes. Ouy Appelgate affair tapes, anyway. k/
They may not always be the best quality but I think these off of this machine and in this very quiet atmosphere will ,
probably give us good transcript if Mr. Phillip's wa'nts a copy of his he may certainly have, sir. -
9
w 29 Mr. Phillip ,
I would appreciate getting one.
Judge Hoyt very well sir. Thank you Mr. Phillip's for your participation with us here today.
Do you have anything Mr. Alcot.
Mr. Alcot No, I don't.
Judge Hoyt That concludes the recorded matter on tape 2.
6 k-