ML20206S907
| ML20206S907 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 07/01/1986 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#386-946 CH, NUDOCS 8607070450 | |
| Download: ML20206S907 (151) | |
Text
- - - _
ORIG NA_
O UN11ED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE SIATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 50-289 (CH)
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR CORPORATION (Three Mlle Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1)
O V
LOCATION: HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA PAGES: 831 - 982 DATE: TUESDAY, JULY 1, 1986 I
j 6l 0 .I ace-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
O Official Reporters 8607070430 444 North Capitol Screet PDR T
ADOCK k hhg9 WaS % on, K M PDR (202) 347-3700 NATIONWIDE COVERACE
831
-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 4
5 In the Matter of :
6 GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR : Docket Nc.
(Three Mile Island Nuclear : 50-289(CH) 7 Station, Unit No. 1) :
8 9
10 11 Commonwealth Court Courtroom Number 2 12 South Office Building Commonwealth Avenue O 13 aerriesere, ree ev1vemie 14 Tuesday, July 1, 1986 15 16 The hearing in the above-captioned matter was 17 convened at 9:35 a.m., pursuant to recess, before the 18 Honorable Morton B. Margulies, Administrative Law Judge, -
19 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 20 D. C.
21 22 23 24 -
25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
832
-1 APPEARANCES:
2 On Behalf of the Licensee:
3 DEBORAH BAUSER, ESQUIRE SCOTT E. BARAT, ESQUIRE 4 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N . W.
5 Washington, D. C. 20036 6
On Behalf of Charles E. Husted:
7 MICHAEL W. MAUPIN, ESQUIRE M. CHRISTINA HENSLEY, ESQUIRE O Hunton-& Williams 707 East Main Street 9 P. O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 10 t
11 On Behalf of the NRC Staff:
12 GEORGE JOHNSON, ESQUIRE U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission O 13 " "i"9' ", o. c. 20555 14 On Behalf of the Intervenor, TMIA:
15 LOUISE BRADFORD, pro se.
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,
24 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 6646
.833
-1 CONTENTS 2 WITNESS 3 SAMUEL L. NEWTON Examination by Mr. Maupin Page 835 4 Examination by Ms. Bauser Page 862 Examination by Mr. Johnson Page 867 5 Examination by Ms. Bradford Page 879 Examination by Judge Margulies Page 902 6 Examination by Ms. Bradford Page 904 7
JOHN G. HERBEIN Examination by Ms. Bradford Page 909 Examination by Mr. Johnson Page 923 8
Examination by Ms. Bradford Page 929 9 CHARLES E. HUSTED Examination by Mr. Johnson Page 931 10 Examination by Ms. Bradford Page 948 Examination by Judge Margulies' Page 954 11 Examination by Ms. Bauser Page 957 Examination by Mr. Maupin Page 958 12 Examination by Ms. Bradford Page 963 O 13 8x"'a 's 14 Identified Admitted 15 Husted Exhibit Number 15 Page 838 Page 841
, Husted Exhibit Number 16 Page 842 Page 843 Husted Exhibit Number 17 16 Page 844 Page 846 Husted Exhibit Number 18 Page 847 Page 848 17 Husted Exhibit Number 19 Page 851 Page 853 Husted Exhibit Number 20 Page 854 Page 855
""* * * "" *# *9* #9*
18 Husted Exhibit Number 22 Page 857 Page 858 Husted Exhibit Number 23 Page 859 Page 859 19 Husted Exhibit Number 24 Page 860 Page 861 Husted Exhibit Number 25 Page 861 Page 862 Staff Exhibit Number 4 Page 867 Page 871 21 Husted Exhibit Number 26 Page 971 Page 973 22 23 24 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
834 leh - l- 1 PROCEEDINGS 2
(9:35 a.m.)
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: Good morning. We will proceed 4 with the last day of hearing in this proceeding.
- 9 5 I have before me a copy of the subpcena that was 6 served on Mr. Herbein. Mr. Herbein's counsel called me on 7 Frid.ay . His name is Jim Burns. He indicated that there was 8 a conflict with Mr. Herbein's schedule, and then suggested that 9 Mr. Herbein appear either yesterday, June 30th, or at 4 o' clock 10 today. ,
11 I told him the request was unreasonable. I got a 12 call from Mr. Burns yesterday, and he requested that Mr.
13 Herbein appear soine time in the early afternoon, more parti-14 cularly at 2 o' clock. I told him that it would be all right 15 if he appeared after the luncheon recess, at approximately 16 1:30.
17 We will now proceed with Mr. Newton.
18 MR. MAUPIN : Would you call Mr. Samuel L. Newton to 19 the stand, please?
20 JUDGE MARGUL'IES: Would you please step up, Mr.
l 21 Newton? I'm going to swear you in.
Will you raise your right
- 22 hand?
23 (The witness is sworn by Judge Margulies.)
24 JUDGE MARGULIES: Please be seated. You may proceed ,
25 Mr. Maupin.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage ~ 800 33H646
835
- - 1 Whereupon, 2 SAMUEL L. NEWTON 3 was called as a witness and, having been first duly sworn, was 4 examined and testified as follows:
5 EXAMINATION 6 BY MR. MAUPIN:
4 7 Q Would you state your name for the record, please?
J 8 A My name is Samuel L. Newton.
9 Q Mr. Newton, I have before me a document consisting 10 of twelve typed pages. It bears on the first page the style of 11 this case and is entitled, " Testimony of Samuel L. Newton."
12 Do you have a copy of that document before you?
13 A Yes, I do.
14 Q This purports to be your testimony. Do you have any 15 corrections you wish to make to the document?
16 A There is one correction on Page 6, sir.
17 Q Would you describe that for the Court?
18 A In the first line under subparagraph (c), the letter s 19 "TMIA" should be deleted, and the words "the Aamodts" should be 20 inserted.
21 MR. MAUPIN: For the benefit of the court reporter, 22 the name Aamodts is spelled A-a-m-o-d-t-s .
23 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 24 Q Mr. Newton, with the correction you have just 25 described, is the document entitled, " Testimony of Samuel L.
f ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
836
-- 1 Newton" true and correct to the best of your knowledge and 2 belief?
3 A Yes, sir, it is.
~
4 Q Do you adopt Ut as your testimony in this proceed-5 ing?
6 A I do.
7 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 8 evidence of the testimony of Samuel L. Newton with the correcti on 9 that has been described and ask that you instruct the court 10 reporter to bind it into the record at th,is point as though he 11 had read it aloud.
12 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any objection?
13 (No response.)
14 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be admitted into ev dence 15 as requested and bound into the record.
16 (The prepared statement of Samuel L. Newton 17 follows.)
18 19 20 4
21 22 23 24 4
v 25 i ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
i 1
L l
'e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Administrative Law Judge In the Matter of )
)
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR) Docket No. 50-289 (CH)
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear )
Station, Unit No. 1) )
TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL L. NEWTON My name is Samuel L. Newton. I am employed by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations as Manager, Training Data Support Section. On April 14, 1980, I joined Metropolitan Edison Company as group supervi-sor, Licensed Operator Training. At that time Charles Husted was an instructor in Non-licensed Operator Training; he reported administratively to Frank McCormick, who was group supervisor, Non-licensed Operator Training, but he taught classes-for licensed operators from time to time under my supervision.
In September 1980, I became responsible for all
. nuclear operator training, with the title of Supervi-sor, Operator Training. In February 1981, although
)
i
t .
i '
i O
i
- my responsibilities did not change, my title was changed to Operator Training Manager. When I assumed this assignment in September 1980, Nelson Brown took
! my place as group supervisor, Licensed Operator 1
4 Training and thereafter reported to me, and Mr. Husted became an instructor _in Licensed Operator Training, reporting to Mr. Brown.
I was promoted to Manager, Plant Training on June 1, 1983, and I remained in that position until I left GPU Nuclear on July 31, 1985, for my present assignment. Thus, from April 1980 until Mr. Husted l
1 left Training in June 1984, he and I worked closely i(
j together, and during the portion of that period that
) followed September 1980, when he became an instructor
! in Licensed Operator Training, he was my subordinate.
j In this testimony I will comment briefly on con-i
- versations that I believe Mr. Husted and I had with l l
respect to (a) the allegation that he had solicited l help on the April 24, 1981 SRO examination from Mr.
i
! Janes, (b) his July 29, 1981 interview by the-NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement and (c) his j October 23, 1981 deposition and subsequent testimony before the Special Master. I will then describe myf 4
I i
e e
O views about his job performance, attitude and integrity.
(a) The April 24, 1981 SRO Examinations I recall that when I first heard of the allega-tion that Husted had solicited help on the April 24, 1981 SRO examination from Mr. Janes, I was dumbfounded because I did not believe he would have done such a thing. I believe I talked with Mr. Husted about the allegation and that he denied it. I seem to recall Mr. Husted's telling me that he may have blurted out a rhetorical remark during the examination to the effect of "what the hell does this O#
mean?". I am not absolutely certain whether I recall Mr. Husted's telling me this or whether I read about it somewhere. In preparing this testimony, I have made no effort to determine whether there was any source in which I might have read this explanation by Mr. Husted.
(b) The July 29, 1981 Interview I am confident that I did not discuss this interview with Mr. Husted before it occurred. My best recollection is that Husted and I did discuss the interview after it occurred. In addition, I i
O
. - - _ _ - , . _ ,. . - - . _ - . . . . _ . - , , _ - - - _ . , _ m ,,- . - - . - _ . -
6
, f\
a believe it probably occurred between his first inter-view and his second interview, which took place on September 18, 1981. I also believe that I probably initiated the conversation with Husted and that I probably did so after reading page 39 of the August OIE Report on its investigation. I believe I would have initiated the conversation because of the report on page 39 that Husted had failed La answer questions posed by the investigators. This would mean that the conversation took place some time after August 11, 1981, which is the date of that Report. I seem to recall Mr. Husted's telling me that he was asked by the investigators whether he had heard any rumors about passing papers. I believe I recall Mr. Husted's telling me either (a) that he had actually heard a comment about " passing papers" or (b) that if he had heard such a statement it could, for all he knew, have referred to passing " news-papers" and that he would be reluctant to pass on I such a vague reference. I remember the " passing papers" phraseology clearly, because it made me reflect on the fact that when I was a young newpaper boy " passing papers" was indeed a phrase we had used
(
4
--- .,-- -. - . - . - r , .-,.r + ..w. m 4.,---
I
-) .
(J to describe their delivery. This is all I can recall d
about the conversation.
In preparing this testimony I have reviewed again the NRC's report of its July 29, 1981 interview of Husted, and I have reviewed Mr. Christman's notes of the same interview. I am aware that there is no indication in either document that the NRC's question on rumors was framed in terms of " passing papers." I am also aware of Mr. Husted's testimony that (a) he does not believe he was asked by the invescigators about " passing papers" and (b) he does not believe he recalled until after the July 29, 1981 interview the comment about " passing papers." Our conversation, of course, took place nearly five years ago. It is Possible that I do not remember our conversation t
correctly. It may have taken place after his second interview. It may be that I have confused what he told me he had remembered after he learned how 0 and W had cheated with the questions the NRC investiga-tors had asked. What I have set out above is my best recollection and my only recollection of the content of our conversation.
()
.__ , _ - , _ , ,.,___.-__,.v. y . , y._ ,..r. - _ .
t L C:)
I do recall, however, that I was not concerned as a result of our discussioa about Husted's answers
- to the investigators' questians. I believe that if I had formed an opinion to the effect that Mr. Husted had withheld information durtng his first interview,
! I would certainly recall that; but I did not form any such opinion. In fact, I was sufficiently satisfied that I did not thereafter cor.cern myself with Mr. Husted's first NRC Interview.
(c) Mr. Husted's October 1981 Depositior.
I recall that, following his deposition by TMIA -
) on October 23, 1981, Mr. Husted and I were discussing the matter. I asked him if he had a copy of the transcript and whether I might review it, and he gave
] l l me a copy. After reading the transcript of the i
! deposition, I remarked to Mr. Husted that it seemed
! to me as though there were several instances where j his responses sounded flip. He indicated that he was i
very nervous about the deposition and that he felt
- that one of the intervenors' attorneys had I deliberately tried to irritate him. He said that was i
why he had responded as he had. I discussed with him
} l j the necessity of staying calm and cool and not 1
4 e
1 i !
. __ _ _ _ . - . _ . . _ _ . . . _ _ . _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . , _ _ . _ , , _ . . _ - _ _ . __ ____.
i
!C:)
letting anyone irritate him so that his answers would be thoughtful and professional. He appeared to understand and be receptive to my comments.
. Thus, I was surprised when, during the hearing before the Special Master, our attorneys reported that they were upset with his performance; one of them described him as sounding like a " smart ass."
Since we were under a sequestration order, I could not discuss Mr. Husted's testimony with him.
Following the issuance of the Special Master's Report, however, which characterized Mr. Husted as 4
appearing to have little regard for the regulatory O process, I discussed the entire matter with him, including our earlier conversation about his deposi-tion. He assured me that he had remembered our conversation and that he had attempted during the hearing to follow my advice. He said he had been determined not to get upset and to stay calm, despite being very nervous, but he did not feel as though he had handled himself very well during the hearing. He felt as though he had overreacted in his attempt not to get flustered. He assured me that although he did not like having to be involved with this particular j
(
4 O
l aspect of the regulatory process, he did respect the need for and purpose of the entire regulatory I
! process.
(d) Mr. Husted's Job Performance I have reviewed Mr. Brown's testimony about the j effects of the cheating episode on the Training l
Department in general and on Mr. Husted in particu-lar. In terms of the physical demands that resulted from the cheating episode I believe he has fairly
]
! described them. I estimate that those of us in i Training were working from 50 to 70 hours8.101852e-4 days <br />0.0194 hours <br />1.157407e-4 weeks <br />2.6635e-5 months <br /> a week in the aftermath of the cheating. I can also support
{(
) his description of the adverse effects on Training i Department morale that resulted from the cheating, I'
the investigation and hearing, and the NRC require-l ment that the licensing examination be taken again in 1
- October 1981. I would defer to Mr. Brown's views on l
l the emotional effects that the cheating episode had ,
on Mr. Husted. Although Mr. Husted was in my chain of command and I saw him often, I did not interact i
! with him constantly the way Mr. Brown did. I have no l
reason whatever to dissent from Mr. Brown's views on
] this score. I do recall that the accusations made by i l
() .
i J
j! ,d
~ . - - . _ _ - - __ _ . _ . . _. ._ _
7 e
iOl 4
NRC at the Special Master hearing -- that Husted had tried to cheat on the SRO examinations -- had a
{ devastating effect on Mr. Husted's frame of mind. He l
- was very apprehensive about the prospect of i
i testifying at the hearing.
The first formal evaluation of Mr. Husted's per-formance that was done after my arrival was his 1980 evaluation. I shall refer to it as the 1980 Annual
+
Evaluation. It was prepared by his supervisor, Frank l
McCormick. I reviewed it and indicated my approval by signing it. It was favorable. It stated that he J
~
i was " honest and direct in his personal inter-j
( actions . . . .
i j I have also reviewed Mr. Brown's testimony with respect to Mr. Husted's performance evaluations q beginning in 1981. I do not believe that I have
! ever seen.the document he describes as the 1981 Draft. I saw and signed the document he describes as 1
! the 1981 Evaluation. My signature indicates that I I
approved of it. I consider it a favorable review, l
, given that all of the ratings were average or above.
)
I actually filled out the form described by
! Mr. Brown as the July 1982 Evaluation. I do not i
k i,
t i ,
i -
i O
~
recall why I did so instead of Mr. Brown. It was a very favorable review, showing improvement in several categories. I noted the " improvement in his enthusiasm and morale." The 1982 Annual Evaluation and the March 1983 Evaluation, both performed by i
Mr. Brown and signed by me, were also favorable to t
Mr. Husted.
! The next evaluation of Mr. Husted's performance, which I shall call the July 1983 Evaluation, was a merit evaluation performed by Bruce Leonard, who was then Operator Training Manager. Mr. Husted had a
become Supervisor, Non-licensed Operator Training in 1
() March 1983 and reported to Leonard. This evaluation, i
which I reviewed and endorsed, rated Husted above i
average in every Performance Factor and Account-4 l ability category. Mr. Leonard observed, and I ,
1 l
j agreed, that "his attitude is always professional and i
!l 4
this has provided an excellent example for peers."
4 Mr. Husted's 1983 Annual Evaluation, also pre-1 pared by Mr. Leonard and reviewed by me, was again a good one. The Training Department's final evalua-tion, which I shall call the June 1984 Evaluation,
- stated that "his positive attitude and professional
. . . . . _ - _ - . . ~ -- -.. . -. .-. _- - ._. . . _ . . _ _ . . - - - - _ .
} .
' I i i 4
( )
5
{ approach to the training program has maintained a i high morale in the section." The June 1984 Evalua-4
- tion coincided with Mr. Husted's transfer out of the l
. Training Department because of the condition imposed j by the Appeal Board.
The evaluations referred to above are not the
{
! only record we have of Mr. Husted's job performance. l
! As a result of the Partial Initial Decision in the -
i !
cheating proceeding, Mr. Hukill and Dr. Long instituted in 1982 a program of special performance monitoring for Mr. Husted's work. This monitoring continued through 1983. Pursuant to this program I j()
i actually monitored Mr. Husted's classroom performance I
! from time-to-time during 1982 and 1983 and I reviewed I
I the reports of similar monitoring by other TMI personnel. I also worked with Mr. Husted directly
- during late 1982 in preparing written requalification examinations, and I observed him during his simulator i
requalification training in January 1983. I never l saw any sign of poor attitude or anything less than a i
j professional approach to his work. My written i
appraisals of his performance prepared at the time I i observed him bear this out.
I i
)
i l
!__.-___._.__.___._._.___,_ _ _ . _ . . , _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ , _ . ~ . _ , _
i O
The written record of Mr. Husted's performance is consistent with my personal appraisal of him. He is, above all, conscientious. He took his work seriously and wanted t.o do it correctly. He took reactor safety seriously, and to my knowledge he never imparted any disregard for safety to his students. He respected the regulatory process and i
took seriously NRC and company examination require- ,
ments. In my view, he conveyed a sense of serious-noss and responsibility to the TMI operators that he taught. I have never had any reason to doubt his honesty. He was an important member of the Training O Department at TMI when I worked there. Based on my l personal experience with and knowledge of him, his attitude and his integrity make him well-qualified to I
serve as a licensed operator, licensed operator instructor, licensed operating training supervisor or supervisor of non-licensed operator training.
I l
1 i
l 0
837
-1 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I would now like to make 2 an effort to describe certain exhibits and to,have those 3 exhibits admitted into evidence in this proceeding.
4 I believe we have distributed the exhibits to you, 5 to the other parties , and we have given three copies of each 6 to the court reporter.
7 Let me describe the first. The first document is 8 a single piece of paper. It has information on both sides.
9 At the top of the first page are the words , in large print, 10 " Employee Performance Evaluation," and just under that, beside 11 the word "Name" is typed the words "Husted, C. E."
12 This document carries several signatures in the last O 13 three uees. eee1de the worde Eve 1ueeed ey is the eieneeure, 14 F. A. McCormick and the date, 10/22/80. And beside the words 15 " Reviewed ey" we find the signature , S. L. Newton, followed by 16 initials that look like RAK. And then the date, 10/24/80.
17 As I say, on the back page of this document, under 18 the heading, Supervisor's Comments" we find certain typed 19 mate rial .
20 I would like to have this document marked for identi -
21 fication as !!usted Exhibit 15, 22 JUDGE MARGULIES: Am I correct that we have not seen 23 this document before? That is , it wasn' t marked as an exhibit 24 in this proceeding?
25 MR. MAUPIN: It has not been marked as an exhibit ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage M 33 H 646
{ 838 i
-- 1 be fore .
2 JUDGE MARGULIES:
l It will be marked as Husted 3 Exhibit Number 15 for identification.
4 (The document was marked as
! 5 Husted Exhibit Number 15 for I
6 identification.)
7 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) i 8 Q Let me ask, Mr. Newton, have you marked -- do you 9 have a copy of this document, Husted Exhibit 15?
- 10 A Yes, sir.
11 Q And, have you marked it 15?
12 A I have.
!()
1 13 Q Can you tell me what the symbol in the upper left-1 14 hand corner on the first page of Husted Exhibit 15 says?
f 15 A The upper left-hand corner?
16 Q Yes.
17 A Inside the block there is an X --
18 Q There is a little oval in the upper left-hand 19 corner. Can you tell me what's inside that oval?
20 A I think that's a symbol for General Public Utilities ,
21 but I'm not a hundred percent sure. It looks like it says GPU 22 down the left-hand side.
23 Okay.
0 Mr. Newton, let me refer you to Page 9 of you r 24 testimony, your prefiled testimony, in this proceeding. There 25 is a reference beginning eight lines from the top of the page l
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
- 202 3r.3700 NationwW Cowrese 2336 6N6 l
839 d
. _ _ 1 to the 1980 annual evaluation.
2 a
Is Husted Exhibit 15 the 1980 annual evaluation 3
you are referring to at that point in your prefiled testimony?
4 A Yes, it is.
5 Q Can you tell us who Mr. F. A. McCormick was in 6 October of 1980?
7 A He was-the Supervisor of Non-Licensed Operator 8 Training.
9 0 Did he report to you?
j 10 A Yes, he did.
11 Q Was he Mr. Husted's immediate supervisor?
12 A Yes, he was.
13 0 Do you believe that Mr. McCormick filled this docu-14 ment out?
i 15 A Yes, sir.
16 Q By this document, I'm referring still to Husted 17 Exhibit 15.
18 Do you believe Mr. McCormick had personal knowledge j 19 of Mr. Husted's performance during the period covered by the 20 evaluation that is designated Exhibit 157 l 21 A Yes, sir.
i 22 Q Was this type of employee performance evaluation i
j 23 regularly filled out and maintained during 1980 for employees
]
24 such as Mr. Ilusted in the ordinary course of your Company's
! 25 business?
I i
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33 4 646
, _ _ _ . . _ . _ - . - - ~ _ - - . _ ~ _ _ . . _ - _ - . . _ _ _ . _ - _ - - _ _ _ .
840
-- 1 A Yes, sir.
2 0 Do you know where this ovaluation and evaluations 3 like it would have been kept in the Company's files during 4 1980?
5 A There were copies kept in the Training Department 6 records in the Manager of Training's of fice. There were also --
7 I'm not sure about 1980, but. I had over the course of time had 8 occasion to go to employee records in the Human Resources Of-9 fice, Personnel Office, and I did see original performance 10 evaluations in those records. ,
11 So, I would assume that that is where they were 12 kept.
n i j 13 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I now want to move the 14 admission into evidence of Husted Exhibit 15, the document that 15 has been marked for identification as Husted Exhibit 15.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any objection?
17 MS. BRADFORD: I have an objection. It seems to me 18 that these opinions that appear on the back of this document 19 are relevant to the very issues in this case, and it would see: n 20 that TMIA has the right to question the author of this documen t, 21 that is Mr. McCormick, as to why he held these opinions.
22 MR. MAUPIN: May I respond, Your Honor?
23 JUDGE MARGULIES : Yes, you may.
24 MR. MAUPIN: This document I believe is entitled to
'ud 25 be admitted under the business records exception of the hearsa v ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 80 4 336-6646
841 l k__ __ - 8 1 . rule, just as was the case with the 1984 and 19 85 evaluations 2 that were sponsored by Dr. Long on last Thursday. This parti-3 cular document was provided I believe to TMIA during the 4 original discovery period. And, an opportunity for TMIA to 5 pursue any questions they wished to raise about this document, 6 of course , existed during that discovery period.
7 JUDGE MARGULIES: Without ruling on the motion, Mr.
8 Newton, did you review this document as part of your duties?
9 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
10 JUDGE MARGULIES: And, how do ,we knov that? Is there 11 any way we can tell that by the document?
12 THE WITNESS: I signed it where it says " Reviewed (O; 13 By."
14 JUDGE MARGULIES: I will admit the document into 15 avidence on two grounds. one, that it was made in the regular 16 course of business; and , numbe r two , this witness reviewed the 17 document.
18 It will be admitted as Husted Exhibit Number 15.
19 i (The document, Husted Exhibit 20 Number 15 for identification, 21 was admitted into evidence. )
22 MR. MAUPIN: The next document, Your !!onor, is agair 23 a single piece of paper and again with information on both 24 sides, its front and back. It is entitled, " Employee Pe rformar co
('>S
( 25 Evaluation." And beside the printed word "Name" we find in ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
842 1 handwriting, Charles E. Ilus ted. This document has been signed 2 on the front. Beside the words " Evaluated By" it has been 3 signed by Nelson D. Brown. The date beside his signature is 4 6/29/82.
5 It has also been signed, beside the words " Reviewed 6 By," by S. L. Newton. The date appears to be 6/29/82. Under 7 " Supervisor's Comments" on the back , there is handwritten in-8 formation.
9 I would like to have this document, Your Honor, 10 identified as Ilusted Exhibit 16 for ident,1fication, 11 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so identified.
12 (The document was marked as
() 13 !!usted Exhibit Number 16 for 14 identification.)
15 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 16 Q Mr. Newton, may I direct your attention to the very 17 last line on Page 9 of your profiled testimony? There is a 18 reference there to a July 1982 Evaluation; and, the word 19 " Evaluation" carries an initial capital.
20 Is the document that has been described as !!usted 21 Exhibit 16 the document you refer to by the phrase, " July 1982 22 Evaluation" at the bottom of Page 9 of your testimony?
23 A Yes, sir.
24 0 Did you actually make the X's that appear beside 25 the eighteen evaluation categories on the front page of l I
l ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. l 202 347 3700 Nation =6de coversee soo 33 H 646 i
843 Jl Exhibit 167 -
5 2 A Yes, sir, I did.
3 Q Did you -- is the writing under " Supervisor's
~4 Comments" on the back page your writing?
5 A Yes , it is.
6 0 In short, is it truthful to say that you filled 7 out this evaluation on Mr. Husted?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 0 This is also, is it not, a review filled out on a 10 form in a manner in which such reviews are customarily filled 11 out and maintained hi the ordinary course of the Company's 12 business, is it not? At least, that was true during the
() 13 period in 1982 covered by. this evaluation, was it not?
14 A Yes, sir, that's correct.
15 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 16 evidence now of Husted Exhibit 16 for identification and ask 17 that it be treated as Ilusted Exhibit 16 in evidence.
18 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any objection?
19 (No response.)
20 JUDGE MARGULIES : It will be admitted into evidence ,
21 (The document, Ilusted Exhibit 22 Number 16 for identification, 23 was admitted into evidence.)
24 MR. MAUPIN: The next document, Your lionor, consista 25 of four pages. Each of the four pages has information only on ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 900 336 6646
844
_ l.1. 1 its front. On the first page in the upper left-hand corner is 2 the logo, I suppose, GPU Nuclear. The document is entitled, 3 " Employee Performance Review." There is an indication on the 4 first page beside the printed word "Other" that it is a merit 5 review.
6 Beside the word "Name" there appears in handwriting ,
7 Charles E. Husted.
8 on the fourth and final page of the document, there 9 are two signatures. Beside the words " Evaluated By" is the 10 signature, Bruce Leonard. And beside that signature, the date ,
11 7/13/83. Beside the words " Reviewed By" is the signature ,
12 S. L. Newton. And the date appears, 7/13/83.
13 I would like to have this marked as Husted Exhibit 14 17 for identification.
15 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so marked.
16 (The document was marked as 17 Ilusted Exhibit Number 17 'fo:-
18 identi fication. ) .
19 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 20 Q Mr. Newton, let me direct your attention to Page 10 21 of your profiled testimony, the second line of the first full 22 paragraph. There is a reference there to the July 1983 ,
23 Evaluation. Again, Evaluation has an initial capital.
24 Is the document that has been marked flusted Exhibit 25 17 the July 1983 Evaluation referred to in your profiled ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 800 334 4446
845 i
l k__ 12-- 1 testimony at the point I have just designated?
2 A Yes, sir.
l 3 o Your prefiled testimony indicates, at the same l
4 point, does it not, that Mr. Leonard, who signed this review 5 actually performed the merit evaluation; is that correct?
, 6 A That's correct.
7 0 At the time that Mr. Leonard performed this review, 8 did Mr. Leonard report to you?
f 9 A Yes, sir, he did.
10 0 Was Mr. Leonard Mr. Ilusted's supervisor at that 1
11 time?
i j 12 A Yes, he was.
)
() 13 0 Was Mr. Leonard in a position, to your knowledge,
] 14 to have knowledge of Mr. liusted's performance during the 15 period covered by liusted Exhibit 177 f
j 16 A Yes, sir.
j 17 0 Is this also a form of evaluation that was cu'stomari lg 18 performed and maintained for employees of GPU Nuclear Corpora-i 19 tion during the period that it purports to cover?
20 A Yes, sir, i 21 0 Do you -- is this -- do you know where this document.
22 would be kept in the Company customarily?
j 23 A Yes, sir. Also, again copies would be in the 24 Training Manager's file, in the personnel filee kept in the l
l 25 Training Manager's office. And also, in !!uman Resources.
l ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
m.m.m saw.w.co * * *
- 846 h3 1 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 2 evidence of Husted Exhibit 17 for identification as Husted 3 Exhibit 17 into evidence. .
4 The basis for my motion is precisely the same as 5 the basis for Husted Exhibit 15.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any objection?
7 (No response. )
8 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so admitted.
9 (The document, Husted Exhibit 10 Number 17 for identification, 11 was admitted into evidence.)
12 MR. MAUPIN : The next document, Your Honor, is a
(')
13 four-page document. Each p* age bears a writing only on its 14 front. On the front page, we have the logo in the upper left-15 hand corner, GPU Nuclear. And the title, " Employee Performance 16
~
Review." There is an indication by a handwritten X that it is 17 an Annual Review.
18 Beside the printed designation "Name," there appears,,
19 also in print, the words " Charles E. Husted" and certain other j 20 information.
21 on the fourth page of this document, the signature of[
22 Bruce Leonard appear; beside the words " Evaluated By." And 23 there is an indication that Mr. Leonard signed on 10/28/83.
24 The document shows that it was reviewed by S. L. Newton on n/
s- 25 10/28/83.
r ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
847 k__ __.14. 1 I request that you order that this document be 2 marked Husted Exhibit 18 for identification.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be marked Husted Exhibit 4 Number 18 for identification.
5 (The document was marked as 6 Husted Exhibit Number 18 for 7 identification. )
8 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 9 Q Mr. Newton, let me direct you to Page 10 of your 10 prefiled testimony, five lines from the bottom. There is a 11 reference to the 1983 Annual Evaluation. And Annual Evaluatio n, 12 those two words carry initial capitalization.
m s 13 Is the document that has been marked as Husted 14 Exhibit 18 the 1983 Annual Evaluation referred to at the point 15 I have just described in your prefiled testimony?
16 A Yes, sir.
17 0 And at the time that this document was filled out, 18 were you Mr. Leonard's immediate supervisor?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q And, was Mr. Leonard Mr. Husted's immediate super-21 visor?
22 A Yes, he was.
23 Q Do you believe that Mr. Leonard, when he filled out 24 this form, had knowledge of Mr. Husted's performance?
(m s/ 25 A Yes, sir, I do.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-66 4
848 hd --- -- 1 0 This, too, I take it is a formal document that is 2 regularly filled out and maintained with respect to -- or, was 4
3 regularly filled out and maintained with respect to GPU Nuclea r 4 employees in the regular course of business during the period 5 that the document purports to address?
6 A Yes, it was.
7 Q And would this document have been kept in the same 8 places as the exhibits that we have discussed earlier in the 9 previous examination?
10 A Yes, sir. ,
11 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 12 evidence of Husted Exhibit 18, the document that has been give n 13 that number for identification.
14 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any objection?
15 (No response.)
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so admitted.
17 (The document, Husted Exhibit 18 Number 18 for identification, 19 was admitted into evidence.)
20 MR. MAUPIN: The next document, Your Honor, is a 21 five-page document. Again, none of the pages bears any writing 22 on its back. On the front of the document, the logo appears, 23 GPU Nuclear.
24 And the title appears, " Employee Performance Review, 25 Beside the printed word "Name" on the first page, there appears ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
849 1.fi._ _ 1 in handwriting the printed name , " Charles E. Hus ted.
2 on the fifth and last page, there is an indication 3 that the evaluation was performed by Bruce Leonard, indicated And the date of that signatu[e is given as 4 by his signature.
5 6-26-84.
6 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 7 Q Mr. Newton, can you tell me, beside the words 8 " Reviewed By" -- do you have a copy of this document before 9 you?
10 A Yes, sir, I do.
11 Q Beside the words " Reviewed By" it appears to me 12 that the signature, S. L. Newton, appears. Is that your
/~ '
13 signature ?
14 A Yes, sir, it is.
15 0 Can you read that date?
, 16 A 6-26-84.
17 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, may we have this document 18 identified as Husted Exhibit 19 for identification?
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: What is the date on the first 20 page in the block that has written over it " Dates of 21 Accountabilities Reviews?"
22 MR. MAUPIN: Are you asking about its meaning or 23 simply what it says?
24 JUDGE MARGULIES: It's unclear on my copy as to what
- O' 25 the date is.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 NationwideCoverage - m336 6646
850
-- 3AL -- 1 MR. MAUPIN: Oh, I see. I'm sorry, Your Honor. I 2 thought you were talking about the second date that appeared 3 on that block.
4 JUDGE MARGULIES: No. The second date is clear.
5 The first date is unclear.
6 MR. MAUPIN: I cannot read that. We can ask the 7 witness if he can read it.
8 THE WITNESS: No, sir, I can't. I could expl'ain it ,
9 though, I think as to what it meant.
10 MR. MAUPIN: Would Your Honor care to have the r
11 witness explain whatever he can tell us about that block?
12 JUDGE MARGULIES: Yes, would you, please?
1
.(%_) 13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. If you go back to Exhibit 14 18, you will also see a block identical to that. It was 15 customary at the time that a performance appraisal was done at 16 the end of the annual cycle, that the individual's account ~
17 abilities for the next year would be addressed on a similar i
18 form which would then be k'ept in the records , and it would be 19 used as 'the basis for the Annual Evaluation the next year.
20 And periodically the supervisor was to sit down and 21 review with that individual those accountabilities. And that 22 is what these review signatures mean.
23 MR. MAUPIN: Has this document been marked for 24 identification yet?
25 JUDGE MARGULIES: I don' t believe so.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
-~
\
i i
851 l b_ la --. 1 MR. MAUPIN: Perhaps if we could have it marked as 2 Husted Exhibit 19, we could then discuss it by that nomen-3 clature ?
4 JUDGE MARGULIES : It will be marked Husted Exhibit 5 Number 19 for identification.
6 (The document was marked as 7 Husted Exhibit Number 19 for 8 identification.)
9 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 10 Q Mr. Newton, let me ask you to look at the first page 11 of Exhibit 19 and tell us, with respect to this particular 12 document, what the -- in the middle of that block there
() 13 appears beside the word "Date" a date that is ' clearly legible.
14 It says 5/30/84, does it not?
15 Do you see the point I'm looking at?
16 A Yes, sir.
17 Q And, underneath that, under the initials that appear 18 to be the initials CEH --
19 A Yes.
20 0 -- and under the designation " Supervisor" there 21 appears to be a "B."
22 A That's correct.
23 Q Would you say that that was " Bruce?"
24 A Yes, sir.
gs k-) 25 Q Can you either read or guess as to what might appea r ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
-202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33Mi646
852
- 19.- 1 in the two blanks headed "Date" and " Initials" above the ones 2 that we just described at the top of the block?
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: Rather than have him guess, let 4 him tell us what normally would be in there.
5 THE WITNESS: I would expect those to be initials 6 of Mr. Husted and Mr. Leonard.
7 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 8 Q And could you tell us why they would appear twice 9 in this block?
10 A Well, as I mentioned before, i,t was customary to 11 periodically have a review in the interval between Annual 12 Evaluations of accountability. And that could happen on more 13 than one occasion, especially if an individual's accountabilities 14 changed, if there was a new project assigned or something like 15 that.
16 Q Let me get you to address Page 10, two lines from the 17 bottom, of your prefiled testimony. Two lines from the bottom
's 18 of Page 10 of your prefiled testimony. j 19 There is a reference there to June 1984 Evaluation.
20 Is the document designated Husted Exhibit 19 the same document 21 as the one referred to in your testimony as the June 1984 22 Evaluatihn?
1 23 A y Yes, sir.
24 Q And, I take it, were you Mr. Leonard's supervisor 25 vnen this document, Husted Exhibit 19, was filled out?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Caverage 800 336 6646
853 20- 1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q And was Mr. Leonard Mr. Husted's supervisor?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 Q Would Mr. Leonard have been in a position to have 5 knowledge of Mr. Husted's performance during the period in 6 question?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 Q And was this document also filled out and maintained 9 in the regular course of business during the period that it 10 purports to cover for GPU Nuclear employees , this type of 11 document?
12 A Yes, sir.
()
I 13 Q Would this be kept in the same place as the other 14 employee performance reviews we have discussed this morn ng?
15 A Yes.
16 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 17 evidence of Husted Exhibit 19 for identification and ask' that 18 it be designated and treated as Husted Exhibit 19 in evidence.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be admitted into evidence 20 as Husted Exhibit Number 19.
21 (The document, Husted Exhibit 22 Number 19 for identification, 23 was admitted into evidence.)
24 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, the next document is a
~
l / '1
~J
- 25 five-page document, each page bearing information or writing ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33MM6
854 b__ - al 1 only on its front. In the upper right-hand corner of the 2 first page, we find on three lines, one following the other, 3 the words "Date," then " Instructor" and then " Evaluator."
~
4'
-~
The word " Confidential" is stamped in the upper 5 left-hand corner at an angle running downward from right to 6 left. And, Mr. R. A. Knief -- that's K-n-i-e-f -- Mr. Knief's 7 signature appears near the top of the page.
8 on the fifth and last page at the lower right-hand 9 corner, there is a signature , S. L. Newton, and the date , 9/15/
10 82, I believe.
11 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 12 O I believe that says '82. Can you confirm that, Mr.
m t l'3 Newton?
14 A Yes, sir.
15 Q Yes , you can confirm it or yes , it's 1982?
16 A Yes, it's 1982.
17 MR. MAUPIN: Thank you. Could we have this docu-18 ment marked, Your Honor, as Husted Exhibit- 20 for identifica-19 tion?
20 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be marked as Husted Exhibit 21 Number 20 for identification.
22 (The document was marked as 23 Husted Exhibit Number 20 for-24 identification. )
25 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing)
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
855 l k__ __. 22_ 1 Q Mr. Newton, could you just describe for the Court 2 in a general way what this form of document was customarily 3 used for in 1982?
4 A Yes, sir. It's an Instructor Evaluation. It was 5 used for the evaluation and instructional performance of all 6 the instructors in the Training Department.
7 Q There is handwriting -- aside from Mr. Knief's 8 signature on the first page, there is handwriting and certain 9 markings on the second through the fifth pages.
10 Is that your handwriting?
11 A With the exception of the initials at the bottom of 12 page 2, yes. And Mr. Husted's signature on Page 2, yes.
o, q_ 13 0 In short, did you fill out -- did you carry out 14 the evaluation that is described in this document and then 15 fill out this document?
16 A Yes, I did.
17 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, this being Mr. Newto'n's 18 own evaluation of Mr. Husted's performance , I move its 19 admission into evidence as Husted Exhibit 20 into evidence.
20 JUDGE MARGULIES : Is there any objection?
21 (No respons'e.)
22 JUDGE MARGULIES : It will be admitted as Husted 23 Exhibit Number- 20.
24 (The document, Husted Exhibit q).
7s gg Number 20 for identification, was admitted into evidence.) i ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage M 3 % 4646
1 856 3 - 1 MR. MAUPIN: The next doctment, Your Honor, is a 2 five-page document. Each page has markings only on its front.
3 In the upper right-hand corner of the first page, 4 again are the three words, words one after the other, "Date,"
5 and then " Instructor," and " Evaluator." Mr. Knief's signature ,
6 with the date 3-31-83 beside it, appears near the top o'f the 7 first page.
8 on the fifth and final page, Mr. Newton's signature 9 appears near the bottom of the page , with the date of his 10 signature it appears, 3/30/83.
11 I would like to have this marked as Husted Exhibit 12 21 for identification.
q_) 13 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so marked.
14 (The document was marked as 15 Husted Exhibi't Number 21 for 16 identification. )
17 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing)
Ig Q Mr. Newton, this is another Instructor Evaluation 19 fo rm, is it not?
20 A Yes, sir, that's correct.
21 Q And this form reflects an evaluation of Mr. Husted, 22 does it?
23 A Yes, it does.
24 Q And did you perform this evaluation and fill out I ; this form?
25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
857
--24 1 A Yes, I did.
2 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 3 evidence of Husted Exhibit 21 for identification as Husted 21 4 in evidence.
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so admitted.
6 (The document, Husted Exhibit 7 Number 21 for identification, 8 was admitted into evidence.)
9 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, the next document is a 10 document consisting of five pages. Again, in the upper right-11 hand corner it carries the words, one after the other, "Date,"
12 " Instructor," and " Evaluator."
(g,h 13 Mr. R. A. Knief's signatu'e r appears near the top of 14 the page.
15 On the fifth and final page, Mr. Newton's signature 16 appears and beside his signature the date, 5/9/83.
17 I ask that you have this marked as Husted Exh'ibit 18 22 in evidence -- excuse me, Husted Exhibit 22 for identifica-19 tion.
20 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so marked.
21 (The document was marked as 22 Husted Exhibit Number 22 23 for identification.)
24 BY.MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing)
O 25 Q Mr. Newton, is this also an Instructor Evaluation ;
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 33H646
858 25 _ 1 form dealing with Mr. Husted's performance and filled out by 2 you?
3 A Yes , it was . Yes, it is.
4 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 5 evidence of Husted Exhibit 22 for identification as Husted 6 Exhibit 22 in evidence.
7 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so marked.
8 (The document, Husted Exhibit Number 22 for identification, 4 9 10 was admitted into evidence.)
11 MR. MAUPIN : The next document consists of two 12 pages. Each page has markings only on the front.
() 13 The first page carries the title across the top, 14 " Instructor Evaluation Action Record." On the left-hand side, 15 just below the title I just described, there is printed, 16 " Instructor Name." And, written in handwritting under 17 " Instructor Name" is the word "C. E. Hus ted . " Under the' 18 " Evaluator Name" is the name "S. L. Newton." And the date 19 given is 7/19/83, 20 This document has been signed in the lower right-21 hand corner of the second page by Charles Husted, indicated 22 his signature is given as Instructor; and, S. L. Newton, 23 indicating that his signature is given as Evaluator.
24 I ask that this document, Your Honor, be marked as 25 Husted Exhibit 23 for identification.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33Mi646
859
, hE_ 1 JUDGE MARGULIES : It will be so marked.
2 (The document was marked as 3 Husted Exhibit Number 23 for 4 identification.)
3 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing) 6 Q Mr. Newton, is this also an Instructor Evaluation 7 form?
8 A Yes, it is.
9 Q Does this form represent the evaluation of 10 instruction by Mr. Husted that was performed by you?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 13 evidence as Husted Exhibit 23 in evidence, the document that 14 bears that number for identification.
15 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be marked as Husted 16 Exhibit Number 23 in evidence.
17 (The document, Husted Exhibit 18 Number 23 for identification, 19 was admitted into evidence.)
20 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, the next document 21 consists of a single page with writing only on the front.
22 In the upper right-hand corner, there is printed 23 " Inter-office Memorandum." And under that, what I have been 24 calleding the logo, "GPU Nuclear."
25 In the upper left-hand corner beside the word "Date" ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
860 l
2.2. - 1 appears the word " CONFIDENTIAL" in all capital letters; follow -
2 ing that, October 27, 1982.
3 on its face, this appears to be a memorandum from 4 S. L. Newton to R. L. Long and H. D. Hukill,li-u-k-i-1-1.
5 would you have this marked please as Hustod Exhibit 6 24 for identification?
7 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be marked Husted Exhibit 8 Number 24 for identification.
9 (The document was marked as 10 Husted Exhibit Number 24 for i
11 identification.)
12 BY MR. MAUPIN: (Continuing)
O 13 o ar "ewto=, ao vou aeve e coer of Exhibit 24 14 before you?
15 A Yes, sir.
16 Q Did you write this memorandum?
17 A Yes, I did. -
18 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into
, 19 evidence as Husted Exhibit 24 in evidence, the document that 20 has been given that number for identification.
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any objection?
22 (No response.)
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be admitted into 24 evidence as Husted Exhibit Number 24.
25 (The document, Husted Exhibit ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 800 336 6646
861
__2R __ 1 Number 24 for identification, 2 was admitted into evidence.)
3 MR. MAUPIN: The next document, Your Honor, 4 consists of two pages, each with writing only on the front.
5 In the upper right-hand corner, it also carries the 6 printed designation, " Inter-of fice Memorandum" and underneath i
) 7 that the logo, "GPU Nuclear."
4 8 In the upper left-hand corner, it shows the date as 9 June 3, 1983. And the subject is set out in all capital 10 letters, "C. E. HUSTED EVALUATION."
11 I ask that this document be marked as Exhibit 25 12 for identification.
()
73 13 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so marked.
14 (The document was marked as 15 Husted Exhibit Number 25 for 16 identification.)
BY MR. MAUPIN:
17 (Continuing) 18 Q Do you have a copy of Exhibit 25, Mr. Newton?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 Q Did you write Exhibit 25?
21 A Yes, I did.
22 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I move the admission into 23 evidence as Husted Exhibit 25~ in evidence, the document that 24 has been marked with that number for identification.
25 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be admitted as Husted ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. ;
202-347-3700 Nationwide coverase 800 3364M6
862 k_19__ __ 1 Exhibit Number 25 into evidence.
2 (The document, Husted Exhibit 3 Number 25 for identification, 4 was admitted into evidence.)
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: Are you ready to examine?
6 MS. BAUSER: Yes, sir.
7 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, may I interrupt for a 8 moment? There seems to be some question in our record keeping i
~
9 as to whether the record will show that Husted Exhibit 22 was 10 admitted into evidence.
11 Could we have that repeated on the record so there 12 will be no question?
() 13 JUDGE MARGULIES: My notes indicated that it was 14 admitted. If it wasn't, it is now.
15 MR. MAUPIN: Thank you.
j 16 EXAMINATION 17 BY MS. BAUSER:
18 Q Good morning, Mr. Newton. Mr. Newton, would you 19 describe your responsibilities -- what your responsibilities 20 are today as the Manager of the Training Data Support Section of 21 the Institute of Nuclear Power Operation's?
22 A Yes. I've held that position now for a month at 23 which time I've been in the office only half of that time.
24 But, basically, with regards to that particular section, one
() 25 f the things that the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide coverage 2 336 4646
863
_10__. __. 1 does is maintain a significant data bank of job task analysis 2 results for several different positions of individuals at 3 utilities , including operators , chemistry technicians ,
4 maintenance personnel and so on. This job task analysis is 5 extensive.
6 And its purpose is to provide the foundations for 7 training programs, and we are continually updating it based a on plant specific information submitted to us by utilities.
9 Q Can I take it a job task analysis would be an 10 analysis describing the skills necessary in order to qualify 11 for a particular job?
12 A That's correct. Not only the skills , but also the
- () 13 fundamental cn: academic or theoretical knowledge that is 14 required to also support those skills.
15 0 And, am I correct that you held another position at 16 INPO before this more recent position?
17 A Well, I was a member of the Training Assistance 18 Section, which is also part of the Training Assistance i 19 Department which is part of a larger training and education 20 division.
21 Q And, what did you do in that job?
22 A Some of the same things that I am continuing to do, 23 mostly take part in accreditation visits at other utilities as 24 a member of an accreditation team, also qualified as a, what we
({) 25 all a training and qualifi ati n evaluat r, which is one ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 6646
. ~_
864 k_. -- _J1 1 member of the plant evaluation team which is another thing
- 2 that the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations does. And I 3 guess finally basically provide assistance as requested in the 4 area of training to other utilities.
5 0 In the course of your responsibilities in that job, 6 did you come into contact with a lot of different instructors 7 in the area of operator training?
g A Well, I've been to I think twelve or thirteen 9 dif ferent plants now, and on almost every occasion I have, if 10 not actually observed ongoing instruction, certainly inter-11 viewed operator training instructors and/or supervisors.
12 0 I would like to ask you a couple of questions
() ' 13 about the last page of your testimony. As I understand --
14 well, I will just ask you this directly. If Mr. Husted had 15 been flippant or disrespectful in any way towards the NRC or 16 the NRC process in the course of his professional responsi-17 bilities, do you think you would know about that?
18 A Yes, I think I would.
19 0 And, I take it then it is your testimony that you 20 have no knowledge of any such instance or incident of such 21 behavior on the part of Mr. Husted?
j 22 A That's correct.
23 0 Do you believe that -- I know when you are talking i
24 about the attitude of Mr. Husted, you describe what you
() 25 believe that he felt, namely that he respected the regulatory ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33Ml646
865 k _ 22 1 process, et cetera.
2 Do you think that he communicated a sense of 3 responsibility about the regulatory process to his students?
4 A I don't think that the process in and of .itself, 5 the actual discussion of the NRC and its role, is done very 6 much in the course of operator training specifically. It is 7 more covered in general employee training for all individuals.
8 But I would say that the sense of responsibility 9 towards following procedures which are mandated in a sense 10 by the NRC certainly is taught in operator training; and, yes, 11 Mr. Husted would have emphasized that.
12 0 would you agree that if an instructor lacked a
() 13 sense of responsibility towards the NRC process that that 14 could be indirectly communicated to students by the attitude 15 the instructor displayed towards the subject matter?
16 A Yes, I would think so.
17 0 And, do you believe that Mr. Husted indirectly 18 communicated any such attitude ?
19 A No, I do not.
20 MR. BAUSER: I have no more, questions.
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: Mr. Johnson.
22 MR. JOHNSON: Your Honor, I would like to pass out 23 a document to the parties and to you, and to the court reporte r.
24 (Mr. Johnson distributes a document.)
() 25 MR. JOHNSON: This is a three-page document. The l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
866 b___23__ 1 first two pages are a letter on the letterhead of Shaw, 1
2 Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge. It is dated March 20 th , 19 84.
3 And it's addressed to the three judges of the Atomic Safety 4 and Licensing Appeal Board, Judges Edles, Buck and Kohl.
5 The second page is signed by Deborah B. Bauser, 6 counsel for Licensee.
7 And on the first page, the second paragraph, there 8 is a reference to an inclosed document, a letter dated March 9 7th, 1984 from Mr. H. Hukill, Director of TMI-l to Mr. J. F.
I 10 Stolz, Division of Licensing, Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regula -
l 11 tion, and to the contents of that letter as identifying the 12 Licensee -- the Licensee identifying to the staff the reviews
() 13 of the teaching performance, ability and attitude of Mr. DD 14 conducted in 1983. I believe Mr. DD was the code for Mr.
15 Husted in the prior proceeding.
16 There is a reference on the second page of the 17 letter to an inclosure which is not included with this docu-18 ment that I have given out here, which is not pertinent to thi s i Proceeding, and is not attached.
19 20 The third page is on a letterhead of GPU Nuclear.
I 21 It's dated March 7th, 19 84. It's addressed to Office of 22 Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Attention: J. F. Stolz, Chief, 23 OP erating Reactors Branch Number 4, Division of Licensing, 24 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
O)
(_ 25 And it's signed by H. D. Hukill, Director of 1
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
867
-- 4 4-- 1 TMI-1. I would like Flis document of three pages to be 2 marked for identification as Staff Exhibit.4, Your Honor.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so marked. Exhibit
~' ~~-
4 4 for identification?
5 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, please.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be so marked.
7 (The document was marked as 8
Staff Exhibit Number 4 for identification.)
9 10 EXAMINATION 11 BY MR. JOHNSON:
12 Q Mr. Newton, I'm sorry I didn' t greet you. I am
() 13 George Johnson. I am counsel for the NRC Staff in this 14 Proceeding.
15 Would you review -- take a look at the third page 16 of this document, which is the GPU letter of March 7th,1984, 17 signed by Mr. Hukill?
18 A Yes, sir, I have.
19 0 You have it, then?
20 A Yes.
21 0 Now, as I understand.your testimony up to this 22 point and the documents that have been offered by counsel for 23 Mr. Husted, under the listing of reviews that appear at mid-24 .page there under the columns, "Date," " Type of Review" and O 25 " Observer," the first entry is March '83, Classroom Teaching 1
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646 x.
1 868 35-- 1 Performance, Observer is Operator Training Manager. Is 2 that with reference to Husted Exhibit 21, the classroom 3 teaching performance that you did, March 1983?
4 A Yes.
5 0 And the next entry which says: May '83, Class-6 room Teaching Performance, Observer, Operator Training Manager ,
7 is that with reference to Husted Exhibit 22?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 Q And the third entry, July '83, Classroom Teaching 10 Performance, Observer, Manager, Training, is that a reference 11 to Husted Exhibit 23?
12 A Yes.
!w) 13 Q Okay. Skipping down to the last entry where it 14 says: October '83, Annual Performance Review, and the Observer 15 being Operator Training Manager, is that a reference to Husted 16 Exhibit 18, which was the review performed by Bruce Leonard 17 and reviewed by you?
18 A That 's correct. Yes, sir.
19 0 I would just like to continue to go over the other 20 items that are listed here to identify who did each review.
21 The November '83 Classroom Teaching Performance 22 review, the Observer is identified as Operator Training Manage c.
23 Who performed that?
24 A Mr. Leonard.
(_/ 25 0 Okay. And, would you have reviewed that?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6M6
869
-- --3 6- 1 A Yes, sir. ,
2 You did review it?
Q 3 A Yes, sir.
4 0 Okay. The November 1983 Classroom Teaching Per-
. 5 formance Review, it says : Observer, Manager, Educational 6 Project or Projects. It's somewhat cut off.
7 Do you know who did that review?
8 A Dr. Knief.
9 Q Okay. And, did you review or see that performance 10 review? ,
11 A Yes, sir, I think so. I think I have copies of both 12 of those in my briefcase.
() 13 Q Okay. And, the April ' 83 date , under Type of 14 Review, Counseling Discussion. It says the Observers were 15 Manager, Training.
16 Is that a reference to you?
- 17 A No, sir. That would have been Dr. Kniof at that 18 time.
19 0 Okay. And then it says, Operator Training Manager.
20 A That was me.
21 Q That's you?
22 A Yes.
l 23 Q Okay. And, Supervisor, Non-License Training, that's 24 Mr. Husted?
25 A Yes, sir.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
870 3.7 - 1 Q Okay. Now, these other three reviews were 2 January ' 83, April ' 83, and July ' 83, clearly were performance 3 reviews, and the Observers are identified as Manager, Plant 4 Operations.
5 Now, who is that?
6 A Michael Ross .
7 Q Did you see those?
8 A Not at the time they were done , no , sir.
9 Q When did you see them?
10 A I don't remember when I saw them first. At least, t
11 I don' t think I saw them at the time they were done. I may f 12 have been copied on them. I don't remember for sure. And I
() 13 don't remember when I first saw them.
14 I now have copies of those documents also in my 15 briefcase.
16 Q Does your testimony this morning, and your pre-17 filed testimony, consider all of these reviews in reaching 18 your conclusions?
19 A Yes, sir.
20 0 It does?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 MR. JOHNSON: Your Honor, I would move at this 23 time to admit this document that has been previously marked 24 as Staff Exhibit 4 into evidence as Staff Exhibit 4 in
() 25 evidence.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 2 336 6646
871
-1 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any objection?
2 MR. MAUPIN: No, sir.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: It will be admitted as Staff 4 Exhibit Number 4 in evidence.
5 (The document, Staff Exhibit Number 4 for identification, 6
was admitted into evidence.)
8 MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Your Honor.
9 BY MR. JOHNSON: (Continuing) 10 0 Mr. Newton, I refer you to your prefiled testimony, 11 at the bottom of Page 7 and top of Page 8, where you are 12 describing what Mr. Husted told you concerning his attitudes
() 13 towards the NRC.
14 And you say: He assured me that although he did not 15 like having to be involved with this particular aspect of the 16 regulatory process , he did respect the need for and purpose of 17 the entire regulatory process.
18 A Yes, sir.
19 0 Would you characterize or elaborate further what 20 you mean by -- what you understand him to have said to you 21 with regard to not having liked to be involved with this 22 particular aspect of the regulatory process?
23 A I think from the standpoint of the specific involve-24 ment in being deposed, in giving testimony and devoting a very 25 large portion of time to producing documents, answering ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
872 k__3a___ 1 Interrogatories and things of that nature, as a feature of --
2 and it's really a very small feature of the overall regulatory 3 process, the overall duties and respcnsibilities and things 4 that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission does, without trying to 5 sound smart myself, this isn't a pleasant experience. And I 6 don't know of anybody who really enjoyed it.
i 7 On the other hand, what I meant by the rest of 8 that statement is that I think all of us recognize the need for 1
i 9 a regulatory body and the functions that it fulfills. And that 's 10 what I meant by the rest of the statement.
11 Q On Page 8, in the middle of the page , you say : I t
12 would defer to Mr. Brown's views on the emotional effects that
!() 13 the cheating episode had on Mr. Husted.
,W' 14 A Yes, sir.
15 0 Okay. Would you say, based on your conversations 16 with Mr. Husted, that he was resentful of the situation that i 17 not only he but other operators were put in, and the Training 18 Department were put in, as a result of the -- first, the 19 cheating episode itself that occurred during the April '81 20 examination, particularly with respect to the investigation of 21 O and W's role in that, the fact that the NRC voided the 22 April 1981 exams and required new exams to be administered and j 23 taken in October 1981, and that Mr. Husted, among others , were 24 required to , in ef fect, accept responsibility for what might
(~T
,\/ 25 be characterized as the acts of a few individuals?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4 646
873 b__ 44. __ 1 A That's a long question.
2 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I was going to ask, I 3 wonder if Mr. Johnson might somehow make that more concise?
4 MR. JOHNSON: I agree. Yes.
5 BY MR. JOHNSON: (Continuing) 6 0 There were three or four items that I referred to.
7 One was the accusations and investigation of cheating during 8 the April 1981 examination, the requirement to take the 9 Operator licensing exam again based on the voiding of that 10 exam, and the various investigations that ensued and the 11 hearing process that ensued.
12 Would you characterize Mr. Husted as having been
() 13 resentful of having to become immeshed in what was essentially 14 an investigation of improper activities by a few individuals?
15 A I think that the biggest of those factors was the 16 decision by the Commission that all of the operators would 17 have to be reexamined, including Mr. Husted who held an SRO 18 license at the time.
19 And, yes, they were resentful of that. I attended 20 the meeting at which Mr. Denton personally informed all of 21 those operators that they were going to have to be reexamined, 22 and there was a great deal of resentment expressed at that 23 meeting.
24 On the other hand, I think given that the cheating
(')
'v 25 incident occurred, as f ar as the need to have an investigation, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
874 4.L - 1 I think everybody understood that. Again, I don' t think 2 anyone -- I think the people were apprehensive. I would 3 characterize them as apprehensive more than resentful of 4 being involved in the investigation.
5 I think the resentment again, as I said before, 6 sprung from the fact that most -- most of it anyhow, from the 7 fact that the operators were told they had to be reexamined, 8 even though Mr. Denton, at the time he told them that, he 9 informed them that they, the NRC, could find no other evidence 10 of cheating but that because they had not, entirely -- had not 11 proctored the examination one hundred percent, therefore, they 12 couldn't be sure and would require that everybody be reexamined .
() 13 Q Were you aware of Mr. Husted's -- let me back up.
14 Did you have regular contact with Mr. Husted during this time i
15 period, between April and December 1981?
16 A Yes, sir. We were both members of the Training 17 Departiaent, both in the Operator Training, involved in 18 oFerator training.
19 Q Did you observe during this period an attitude on 20 the part of Mr. Husted,a less than serious attitude,toward 21 his responsibilities as a member of the Training Department?
22 A No, sir.
23 Q In your testimony on Page 9, you say, in the second l 24 full paragraph: I have also reviewed Mr. Brown's testimony 25 with respect to Mr. Husted's performance evaluations beginning d
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 33645646
875 d2 -- -- 1 in 1981. I do not believe that I have ever seen the document 2
he describes as the 1981 draft. I saw and signed the document 3 he describes as the 1981 evaluation. My signature indicates 4 that I approved of it. I consider it a favorable review, .
5 given that all of the ratings were average or above.
6 Have you seen that draft document recently?
7 A I would --
8 Q The draft 1981 evaluation?
9 A I would say a month or so ago, yes, sir.
10 0 Okay. Let me show it to you.
4 11 (Mr. Johnson hands the witness a document.)
12 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I wonder if Mr. Johnson
() 13 would agree, for the sake of clarity in the record, that the 14 discussion is now centering on Husted Exhibit 3?
15 MR. JOHNSON: I would agree.
16 BY MR. JOHNSON: (Continuing) 17 Q I show you Husted Exhibit-3.
18 A Yes, sir. .
19 Q Would you look at the second page where it has a 20 listing of seventeen enumerated comments , and particularly 21 Item 6 where it says: Makes it through "hard" times. And 22 the word "hard" is'in quotes.
23 A Yes.
24 o Would you characterize this period in 1981, from
/~T
\_/ 25 April to December, which encompasses the NRC SRO and RO '
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 2 336 6646
876
-- 1 examinations which became the subject of the investigation by 2 the NRC, up through the hearing of the Special Master in 1981, 3 December 1981, as a period of hard times for Mr. Husted?
4 A Well, it wasn't certainly just for him. It was for 5 the Training Department in general and certainly for the 6 operators at TMI-1 at the same time.
7 And most of it involved -- in the first place, let 8 me try to explain the schedule as it existed in April of 1981.
9 I think we had just finished the original round of hearings in 10 April, so that was -- and I was involved in that., The exam, 11 the written part of the examination, was given in April, as you 12 have already stated.
/~)
(_j 13 At the time that that examination was 'given, it was 14 anticipated that the oral examination portion of the exam would 15 be given in the September / October time frame, because the Fall 16 of '81 restart was postulated.
17 So, one of the things we were trying to do even 18 before we found out in July of the cheating issue was trying to 19 anticipate, one, areas -- well, we were doing several training 20 things. One, we were trying to train on a number of the re-21 start modifications that had been done. We were finishing 22 training on a new issue called " mitigation of core damage,"
23 which was a new issue of mandated training by the Commission 24 for all plants.
25 We were also trying - to anticipate , from talking with i
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 900 336 6646
877 44- - 1 the operators, how they had done on the written portion of the 2 examination and, therefore, anticipating who might have failed 3 and might need to be reexamined and what training might we neec.
4 .to do so that we could be in time to support start-up so that 5 they could be reexamined and so on.
6 And, also then trying to conduct oral examinations, 7 Practice oral examinations to prepare them for the orals. So, 8 absent any of the cheating issue it was a busy time.
, 9 Q Would you characterize the investigation that a 10 number of people had to participate in as a result of the 11 cheating episode to have been part of the hard times that Mr.
12 Husted may have experienced?
O 12 ^ ree, ei=, only because, as I said before, the 14 apprehension that is involved in something like that I think, 15 and because of the more you get involved in it -- and I think 16 the biggest piece of what makes it a hard time, the more you 17 get involved in it the more it takes away from doing your 18 normal job.
19 Q That would be especially true if Mr. Husted were 20 suddenly cast in the role as a target or the investigation as 21 a person who may have cheated on the exam himself?
22 A Yes, sir.
23 0 What would you say that -- and, you say that you 24 agreed with the 1981 evaluation and considered it a favorable 25 one. And you also testified that you had a basically favorable ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
878 45 -- -- 1 impression of his performance of his work in the operator 2 training area during that period.
4 3 How would you characterize Mr. Husted's character
~
4 and integrity in the performan'Es 6f~h'is work in light of the 5 circumstances?
6 A I didn't see any problems with his work, with his 7 character or his integrity. I would have to remember that 8 it wasn't until the Fall when the hearings actually started 9 when the -- he was a possible target for the cheating came 10 bout. It was not in the report.
11 It wasn't until actual testimony was given I 12 believe. So --
() 13 Q What --
14 A -- I don' t think that really would have ef fected 15 the April to October time frame. And, as I said before, I 16 saw no problem with his character or his integrity.
17 Q Would you say that it's relatively easy to perform 18 well on the job during periods . of low stress and more dif ficult 19 to perform well on the job in periods of high stress?
20 A Well, yes, sir, I would think so.
1 21 Q And, do you think that the fact that Mr. Husted was 22 able to perform well on the job despite the fact that he was 23 going.through hard times speaks well of Mr. Husted's character?
24 A Yes, sir, I do.
25 MR. JOHNSON: Thank you. That's all I have.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverase 800-336-6646
879
-1 EXAMINATION 2 BY MS. BRADFORD:
3 Q Good morning , Mr. Newton.
4 A Good morning.
5 Q Mr. Newton, on Page 1 of your testimony , can you 6 tell me what were your responsibilities as a Group Supervisor 7 Licensed Operator Training?
8 A Basically, I was in charge of the prepar5 tion, 9 scheduling, conduct of the training program for licensed 10 operators in both Unit 1 and 2. ,
~
11 Q Did you supervise any individuals? And, if so, 12 how many?
O 13 ^ Yee. The enswer ie,ves, did. rememher thee 14 I supervised at that particular time directly Mr. Boltz and 15 Mr. Brown who were involved with Unit 1 training; Mr. Miller, 16 who was involved with Unit 2; and, Mr. Schiemann, who was 17 also involved with Unit 2 training.
18 So, I think about four people directly. Now, some 19 of the other instructors in the Operator Training Department 20 sometimes, as Mr. Husted did, conducted training for the 21 licensed operators.
22 0 And, on Page 2 you discuss Mr. Brown's. assignment 23 in 1980. What were Mr. Brown's duties prior to September of 24 1980?
25 A He was an instructor.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 233H646
880 7--- - 1 Q Did you play any -- did you recommend Mr. Brown 2
for promotion?
3 A Yes, I did.
4 Q And was his promotion, did that result in his first 5 supervisory position in the Training Department?
6 A Yes, ma'am.
7 Q Mr. Newton, have you seen a copy of Husted Exhibit 8 12, which are two pages of Dr. Long's notes of May 1982?
9 Have you seen this document?
10 (Ms. Bradford handed the witness a document.)
11 A Yes, ma'am. I saw it I think for the first time 12 last night.
() 13 Q Do you recall having a conversation with Dr. Long 14 that is reflected in Dr. Long's notes, Husted Exhibit 12?
15 A No, I don't.
16 Q Let me just refer you to Item 3, which appears on 17 the first page and continues over on to the second page of i
18 Husted Exhibit 12. The last item on the first page states :
19 Husted and Toole have never gotten along.
20 Was it your opinion that Mr. Husted -- first of all, 21 would you tell me who Mr. Toole is?
22 A Toole is Ronald J. Toole, who at the time was 23 operations -- I'm not sure what his exact title was at the 24 time. I think he's now -- his title now is operations and
() 25 Ma n enan e Director of TMI-1.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 2 33 Ml646
881
-- 1 Q In his position as instructor, would Mr. Husted 2 have been required to interact with Mr. Toole on a regular 3 basis?
4 A No, not very frequently.
5 0 Was it your opinion-in May of 1982 that Mr. Toole 6 and Mr. Husted did not get along?
7 A I think really the best way to describe that is 8 that both could be very blunt, and so when you have two blunt 9 objects meeting up against one another sometimes there is some 10 friction. ,
11 But, it was certainly I don't think a question of 12 professional -- lack of professional capability or feeling of 13 lack of technical competence. It was just a personality thing.
14 0 Where was Mr. Toole in relation to Mr. Husted in 15 the organization? Were they on the same level?
16 A No. They were in different chains of command, if 17 you will. Mr. Toole reports directly to Mr. Hukill and Mr.
18 Ross reports to Mr. Toole for Operations. I think at one 19 point in time -- I'm not entirely sure of this because of the 20 times when Mr. Husted lef t the Operations Department and when 21 Mr. Toole came to the Operations Department. There may have 22 been a period of time when Mr. Husted was in the organization 23 underneath Mr. Toole.
24 Otherwise, as far as a training instructor, he did 25 n t report to that chain at all.
i ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide coverase 800 336 6646
882
- - - - - - - - 1 Q Okay. Now, on the second page of Husted Exhibit 2 12, there is an entry there , and it states: Brown and Husted 3 also have trouble interacting.
4 Was that your opinion that is reflected there?
5 A I don' t know whe ther Dr. Long wrote that because 6 I told him that. But, there certainly was some dif ficulty at 7 that time. And I think it's kind of natural, as a matter of 8 fact.
9 And the reason is because Mr. Brown had just been 10 appointed as the supervisor. And one of the things, that some-11 times creates difficulty, is when from a group of peers one 12 individual is chosen as the supervisor.
() 13 Now, that is often a difficult situation. In fact, 14 my experience in the Navy was that when an enlisted individual 15 was promoted to the ranks of Chief Petty Officer, for example,
.16 he was nine times out of ten transferred, because they didn' t 17 want to have to try to maintain a different relationship.
18 Q Well, these notes were taken in May of 1982. And, 19 as I understand your testimony, Mr. Brown was promoted in 20 September of 1980.
21 A That's correct.
22 0 Is this note on the second page of Husted Exhibit 12 23 does that refer to some time period between 1980 and 19827 i
24 A Yes, ma'am. l 1 - 1
\> 25 Q Do you have a recollection as to when thar. situation l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 4M6
883 k4L __. __ 1 resolved itself? That is, when Mr. Brown's subordinates 2 adjusted to his having been promoted?
3 A Well, it was a combination of the subordinates 4 needing to adjust and a combination of Mr. Brown needing to 5 learn to be a supervisor. So, it was some of both.
6 And I think it was a gradual, maturing process.
7 To put a specific date on it, I can ' t do that .
8 0 Ind it was your opinion at the time that Mr. Brown lacked supervisory skills?
9 10 A Yes, ma'am, some of them.
11 o And I note that d1is states that Brown lacks 12 supervisory skills , as if it were being written to represent
() 13 he lacks skills in May of 1982. Was that your opinion in May 14 of 1982?
15 A With regards to a specific skill, which is 'a 16 supervisory skill which deals with interacting with your sub-17 ordinates, criticizing in a manner that can be termed as 18 constructive , and enabling them to see , you know, what you wan-:
19 them to do, why you want them to do it, and so on, Mr. Brown 20 had difficulty with that.
21 And, yes, that was my opinion.
22 O How many people did Mr. Brown supervise?
23 A Full time during that time frame, he would have 24 supervised Mr. Husted, Mr. Boltz. For a portion of the time ,
Mr. Miller. Some time during that time frame, Mr. Miller, who 25 ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 6646
884
-- 1 was an instructor went back into Unit 2 operations.
2 Mr. Schiemann. Three or four, maybe five, full 3 time people, 4 Q Did Mr. Brown have a problem interacting with 5 those other individuals?
6 A In some cases, yes, ma'am.
7 Q And this was through the period from 1980 to 1982?
8 He had those problems in that period?
9 A Yes, to the extent that I've talked about before.
10 0 Did you ever recommend that Mr. Brown be removed 11 from his supervisory position?
12 A No, ma'am.
13 Q Now, beginning on the first page of Husted Exhibit 14 12, in the Item Number 3, it states -- you are SLN identified 15 in that item, are you not?
16 A Yes, ma'am.
17 Q That you talked with Mr. Husted. And then itigoes 18 on to say: I don' t perceive that I have an attitude problem.
19 Was that a comment that Mr. Husted made to you?
20 A I believe so, yes, ma'am.
21 O When did that conversation take place? When did 22 he perceive that he did not have an attitude problem?
23 A I don't remember an exact date. I'm not even real 24 sure of the time frame anymore.
25 0 Was this at a time prior to May of 1982?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 80033tHl646
885 h . 52 __ 1 A Yes, it would have been.
2 o In your testimony -- and I will find the page in 3 just a moment.
~'
~~~~~~4 JUDGE MARGULIES: Would this be an appropriate 5 time to take a recess , Ms. Bradford? We've been going for 6 an hour and a half.
7 MS. BRADFORD: Certainly.
8 JUDGE MARGULIES: Let's take a 15 minute recess.
9 (Whereupon, a recess is taken at 11 o' clock a.m. ,
10 to reconvene at 11:15 o' clock a.m., this same date.)
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: Back on the record. You may 12 continue, Ms. Bradford.
r^x
,J 13 BY MS . BRADFORD: (Continuing) 14 Q Mr. Newton, on Page 3 of your testimony, Item B, 15 j you say you are confident you did not discuss the interview, 16 that is the July 29, 1981 interview, with Mr. Husted before it 17 occurred.
18 Do you recall having any discussion prior to 29 19 July '81 with Mr. Husted concerning the cheating incident 20 itself?
21 A No, I don't.
22 Q Did you discuss the investigation that had begun 23 prior to Mr. Ilus te d 's first interview?
24 A I don't think so. I don ' t remember.
/m
( I Q On Page 4, about the middle of the page, you state 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 6646
886 k_57 __. 1 that you recall Mr. Husted telling you that he was asked by 1
2 investigators whether he had heard any rumors about passing 3 papers. And that refers I believe to his first interview, 4 July of 1981.
f 5 Is that correct?
6 A Ye s , ma ' am . That's what my testimony says.
7 O And on Page 5 of your testimony, the very last i
~
8 sentence there, you have said that that is your best recol-9 lection of what occurred during your conversation with Mr.
10 Husted.
11 Is that still your testimony today, that your best I 12 recollection is that Mr. Husted told you that he was asked by
() 13 the investigators whether he had heard any rumors about passing 14 papers during his July 1981 interview?
15 A That he was asked whether he had heard any rumors 16 about passing papers?
17 0 Yes.
18 A Yes, ma'am. That's what I seem to remember.
19 0 And that memory has not changed as of today?
20 A No. I wish I could pinpoint the date of when he 21 and I talked. AIs I say, there is certainly a reason why I i 22 remember the phraseology. And that's in my testimony. And 23 that's really the only thing that sticks in my head.
24 But I can't pinpoint the date that we talked.
O 25 Q Do you recall how soon af ter the report of the ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
887 lk__53___ 1 first investigation, the August lith, 1981 report issued, how 2 soon after that report issued did you obtain a copy of the 4 3 report?
l 4 A I don't remember.
1 5 Q Do you recall if it was within days?
~
6 A I don't remember.
1 7 Q Did you sp'e ak with Mr. Husted immediately upon 8 reading the report, or Page 39 of that report?
.i i 9 A I don't know whether I talked to him immediately 4
10 or not. The reason why I place it in that time frame is 4
11 because it would appear to me that having read the report
]
12 I would have talked to him shortly thereafter.
1 1
() 13 But, that's why I place it in that time frame.
t 14 And that's really the only reason that I place it in that l 15 time f rame .
- 16 0 Is it likely that you would have received the i 17 report, a copy of the report, immediataly that it became 18 available?
19 A Probably not.
20 Q What is your --
d 21 A Probably not, because typically those reports l 22 came into our Licensing Department and they went through 23 routing. Usually, there were several copics made but i 24 typically if,it were to come into the Training Department it 25 would have gone to Dr. Knief first unless I was specifically i
i i
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 800 33H646
888 i1
-- 1 marked for a copy separately, an independent copy, rather .
2 than just a Training Department copy.
3 So, the likelihood is that there was a copy sent 4 to the Training Department and it probably went into Dr.
5 Knief's mail first. And so it probably was a matter of days 6 from the time that the company got it until I saw it.
! 7 0 Did you initiate the conversation with Mr. Husted --
- 8 A I don't --
9 0 -- that is on Page 39?
10 A I honestly don' t remember. But, I would think so.
- 11 And I think that's what my testimony says.
12 0 Was it your intention when you discussed that report
() 13 with Mr. Husted to learn what information he had failed to 4
14 give to the NRC?
15 A Do you have Page 39 of the report? You referred to 16 that a counle of times.
i 17
] (Ms. Bradford handed the witness a document.)
! 18 MR. MAUPIN: Your lionor, while we have this brief 19 pause would you ask Mr. Newton to be sure and keep his voice 20 up, particularly towards the end of his answers?
21 JUDCE MARGULIES: Would you please do that?
j 22 Ti!E WITNESS: Yes, sir.
23 BY 14S . BRADFORD: (Continuing)
- 24 0 okay.
25 A Now, would you ask your question again, please?
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 233H646
I
~
889 t
kE_____ 1 0 Yes. Was it your intention to learn from Mr.
i 2 Husted what information he had failed to give to the NRC 3 investigators?
i 4 A I think my intention was, as the second sentence 5 of the last paragraph on Page 39 says: However, for unknown i 6 reasons he declined to respond to this question or explain his i
7 reluctance to discuss this issue.
4 8 He was also asked whether any rumors or comments t
l 9 regarding instances of cheating on the exams had come to his j 10 atten tion . He acknowledged that he had heard rumors to this i
- 11 effect which he labeled as unconfirmed hearsay.
12 He refused to reveal any specifics of the rumors
() 13 or to identify the individuals who were allegedly implicated.
14 And it says: The individuals , if named, who were allegedly 1
j 15 implicated.
16 Basically, that whole paragraph was what I would 17 have gone to see Mr. Husted about or to discuss with him'.
4 18 0 So, it's likely you asked him questions along the 19 line, did he have any information?
20 A No. It's more likely to say: Well, why didn' t 21 you want to talk about that? Or, why didn't you want to talk - -
22 why did you decline to answer about reference material being 23 brought into the classroom? And, what were the rumors?
i
- 24 It's likely to have been that.
i () 25 0 And you said that you recall that he told you that - -
- ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
- 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33H646
890 i k-- E7 -- 1 Mr. Husted told you that he was asked by investigators whether 2 he had heard any rumors about passing papers.
3 Did you ask him why he didn't tell the investigator s, 4 or why he didn't tell the inves tigators what he knew?
5 A No, ma'am. What I -- the way I remember the 6 conversation , and as my testimony says , I don't remember 7 whether he actually told me that, yes, he had heard rumors 4
8 about the passing papers issue. Okay.
9 I think I asked him why, if he had heard rumors, j
10 he didn't -- why he was not willing to discuss them. And I i
11 don't remember whether he said, well, he hadn't heard any or 12 if he had he was reluctant to. I just don't remember either 13 case.
3 -.
l 14 And the issue, as I think my testimony says, was I
i 15 that there was a concern I think on his part about being
! 16 asked to discuss rumors and not having anything firm or 17 concrete to back him up of his aun knowledge.
I 18 Q Did he tell you that he was to be re-interviewed at 19 the time that you talked with him?
20 A I don' t remember.
- 21 Q Now, after you read Page 39 of the investigative 22 report, were you concerned that Husted might have withheld i 23 information from investigators?
j 24 A No, ma'am.
l(
25 0 on Page 6 of your profiled testimony, under the l ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
l 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 80S 33H646
i 891 S.- - 1 sub-heading C which refers to Mr. Ilusted's October 1981 2 deposition, you state, that you reviewed his -- the transcript 3 of that deposition and you were concerned about Mr. Ilusted's
- 4 attitude during that deposition.
5 You say here: There were several instances where 6 his responses sounded flip.
7 Now, in your review of that deposition, the
- 8 October 1981 deposition, were you able to identify -- excuse
! 9 me. Let me just rephrase that.
l 10 You go on to say: lie indicated that he was very 11 nervous about the deposition and felt that one of the 12 Intervenors' attorneys had deliberately tried to irritate j 13 him.
14 My question to you is: In your review of the
- 15 October '81 deposition, were you able to identify instances 16 where an attorney for the Intervonors themselves had 17 deliberately tried to irritate Ilusted?
18 A Not from reading the deposition, no, ma'am.
19 0 Did he point you to instances where --
20 A IIe talked more about the tone of conversation, the 21 gestures, the attitudes that he felt the attorneys were 22 displaying that don't come through in reading the deposition.
23 0 Was Mr. -- Mr. Ilusted was accompanied to that-24 deposition by an attorney for the Company, is that so?
25 A Yes, ma'am. I think it was Mr. Lloyd.
1
, ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
. . . . _ _ _ . = . -
i i
892
-1 Q Do you recall in your review of the deposition 2 where Mr. Lloyd made any objections concerning gestures?
j , 3 A No, I don't recall that.
2 4 Q Now, Mr. Husted I believe in his prefiled testimony 1 5 has described an incident where his performance during that 6 October 1981 deposition was used as an example of how not to 7 behave when testifying.
8 Do you recall that incident?
9 A The incident in the deposition?
10 Q No.
11 A or the incident where it was being used as an 12 example of how not to --
O ~- 13 o Where it wee beine used ee en exeme1e.
14 A Well, I don' t recall the incident per se unless he 15 is talking about a conversation that he and I had upon my i
! 16 reading it and discussing it with him. ,
l 17 Yes, I did discuss with him the places where 'I i 18 thought, having read the deposition, that he was flippant and 19 that I thought that that was inappropriate.
l 20 Q When did that conversation occur?
i i
21 A It was af ter the deposition obviously and certainly I
j 22 I think before his testimony before the Special Master. But, 23 the date, I don't know.
24 Q Now, in response to some questions from Mr. Johnson, lO 25 1 ee11 eve you ee1d ehee Mr. nusted wee noe the en1y individue1 ACE.FEDER L REPORTERS, INC.
! 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 300 336 4646
893 (L. - 1 experiencing hard times in 1981.
2 A Yes , ma ' am. That's true. I said something like l 3 that.
4 0 In fact, the operators were preparing for reexamina-5 tion and in preparation for restart.
~
6 A Yes, ma'am.
+
. 7 0 Was it your understanding that the Training Depart-8 ment itself came under a greater -- was subject to greater i 9 stress than the operators or than other departments at TMI?
10 A I think that for a specific group of individuals i
11 in the Training Department that that's true, yes.
12 Q Why is that?
13 A Because -- well, specifically, the licensed 14 operator instructors who were involved with Unit 1, because i 15 not only did they have to help prepare operators as-best they
, 16 could to be reexamined, they had to worry about their own 17 reexamination.
! 18 We were also starting to get involved, as were the 19 operators , of cource , in being questioned. We were I think 20 starting to get involved in preparing the Answers to 4
21 Interrogatories and responding to discovery requests and
- 22 things of that nature, which more so the Training Department 23 than any other department at TMI at that time.
24 0 That was in 1981?
l 25 A Yes, ma'am.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide coversee 800 3 4 4646
894 El 1 Q In responding to discovery requests, did you --
~
2 did the instructors personally have to gather the documents 3 which were responsive to the discovery requests?
4 4 A In some cases, yes, ma'am.
5 Q And that was in preparation for the hearing on 6 cheating?
7 A Yes.
8 Q So that activity would have begun in October of
! 9 1981?
10 A I'm not sure of the exact date. It was late 11 Summer or Fall of '81, yes. It was whenever the hearing was q 12 set, and I don' t remember when all of the different discovery O 13 detes were.
14 Q Now, you have been asked about Husted Exhibit 3, 15 which is the draf t of a 1981 evaluation I believe, which
! 16 Mr. Brown completed. That's the one with all of the circles 17 on it?
18 A Yes, ma'am.
19 Q Item 1 under " Supervisor's comments" states:
20 Must work with others. Does not accept constructive criticism 21 well.
22 Do you agree with that comment there?
23 A I would not agree that the comment that the
]
.j 24 criticism was always constructive, and I think that was a 25 large portion of the problem. And I think I discussed that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 80MM4646
895 2_ _ 1 earlier this morning.
2 Mr . Hus ted , at the time, did not -- it's like 3 many other people and I don't think more so than anyone else 4 in his position -- sometimes respond to destructive criticism 5 as opposed to constructive in a good fashion, or in a happy 6 fashion, I should say. And often I think that's the case 7 where an individual is working hard, takes pride in his work 8 and is conscientious, those people -- in my experience --
9 don't tend to respond to criticism, constructive criticism 10 ve ry we ll . ,
11 So, I don't think he is alone in that.
12 0 I might have misheard what you said at the begin-n
(,) 13 ning of that answer. I believe - .and you might correct me 14 if I'm wrong -- that you said that he would not respond to 15 destructive criticism well.
16 In your opinion, had Mr. Brown made destructive 17 criticism?
18 A Well, I'm trying to differentiate between approach-19 ing an individual and saying: You know, I recognize the 20 effort that you put into this, and it's really pretty good but 21 here are some ways you could improve it. And I would term 22 that as constructive criticism.
23 And that is as opposed to: We did a lousy job on 24 that. It has got to be better. The way a person would 25 respond to that, of those two situations, is likely to be ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
l 202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
896 fL1 - 1 very different.
2 Q Did you counsel Mr. Brown as to his supervising of 3 Mr. Hus ted?
4 A We discussed it, not specifically I think with Mr.
5 Husted but in general.
6 Q Now, Mr. Brown testified that this -- well, let .
, 7 me just ask you this. Had you seen this draft evaluation 8 prior to today?
9 'A Yes.
10 Q When had you seen it?
11 A I think the first time I saw it was when Mr.
'12 Maupin brought it with him to Atlanta when he came to
() 13 interview me. I don't know whether it was late May or early 14 June time frame.
15 0 Did you know that it was Mr. Brown's habit to 16 write a draft evaluation prior to the final evaluation?
17 A No, I don' t remember that I knew that.
18 0 Well, if in fact you had known it was his habit 19 prior to signing of f on the final evaluation, would you have 20 asked to see this draft evaluation?
21 A I don't know that I would have, no. What he 22 handed me as an evaluation in his appraisal of the individual.
23 It was not unusual, as a supervisor, for me , for example, to 24 take the evaluations that Mr. Brown wrote and look at them
() 25 and also look at the evaluations that in that time frame Mr.
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Naionwide Coversee 800 33 H 646
897 4
-1 McCormick would have written, trying to look at the group l 2 as a whole, because there were -- you try to make sure that 3 there is a consistency being applied into.the evaluation and 4 the assignments being made, because in some cases an evalua-5 tion like that would determine the amount of an annual pay 6 incre ase .
7 So you wanted to try and make sure that they were 8 consistent. And, so in some cases it would not be unusual for 4 9 me to sit down and say: If you compare all of your marks with 10 all of -- talking to Mr. Brown. Say: If you compare all of 11 your marks with Mr. McCormick's marks, you have consistently 12 graded everybody lower than he did. Let's talk about that.
O 13 tee'e 1ook et ehee.
14 or maybe that Mr. McCormick graded too high or i
15 vice-versa. That's the kind of interaction that took place.
16 And when the marks, the performance evaluation basically lef t 17 my office to go to the Manager of Training, who was Dr.'Kniof 4
18 at the time, then I didn't consider that just Mr. Brown's 19 evaluation or Mr. McCormick's evaluation but my evaluation, l ,
i 20 because I had to agree with those marks.
i 21 0 So, if you had seen an evaluation which contained 22 comments such as the comments contained in liusted Exhibit 3, 23 you would have set down with the person who wrote that J
24 evaluation and had some kind of discussion with him concerning 25 those -- 1 i
i ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. L 202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 33H646 l
898 5.-- - 1 A Yes, ma'am. I think that would be a normal 2 thing to do.
3 Q Is it usual when a supervisor fills out the 4 comments or fills out the evaluation, annual evaluation, 5 for him to make his evaluation based on a one-day or snap-6 shot event?
7 A No, it's not usual. In f act, most supervisors --
8 and I don' t remember whether this was the case with Mr.
9 Brown or not, I should say many supervisors keep a kind of 10 little file in their desk or something of each individual 11 where they can, over the course of a time frame, just put 12 pieces of paper in it if something occurs during that n
j ,) 13 evaluation period so that -- specifically so that they are 14 not influenced overly by the most recent occurrence.
15 0 I have here an employee performance review which 16 is dated November 2nd, 1982. I note that you have signed 17 that review?
18 l Do you have a copy of that?
19 A No.
20 (Ms. Bradford handed the witness a document.)
21 0 Do you have a copy of this?
22 A No. I don't have a copy of that.
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: lias this been identified in the 24 record by a number?
/
(J 25 MS. BRADFORD: No, it has not been identified.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
899 66- - 1 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do all counsel know what has 2 been tendered the witness?
3 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
4 MR. MAUPIN: I'm not sure I do.
5 MS. HENSLEY: Is it the Employee Performance Review 6 dated November 2, 19827 7 MS. BRADFORD: Yes, it is.
8 MS. !!ENSLEY : Can you tell us what signatures you 9 have on yours, Ms. Bradford?
10 MS. BRADFORD: On the last page of this document, 11 there appears the signature of Nelson Brown and Samuel L.
12 Newton, both dated 11/2/82.
13 MS. BAUSER: Excuse me, I think this is Ilusted 14 Exhibit 5.
15 MS. BRADFORD: It is? Yes, it is.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Signed 11/2/827 17 MS. BRADFORD: Yes.
18 JUDGE MARGULIES: That's !!usted 5.
19 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 20 0 I just have a few questions. On the second from the 21 last page, under the heading "Accountabilities," do you have 22 that page?
23 A YOS- l l
24 0 Under "Special Assignments" there appears an item, O 25 ASLB Ilearing. Could you explain to me what that special i
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 8043364N6
900
- 62. _ 1 assignment consisted of?
2 A okay. In the first place , to get listed in that 3 category as a special assignment, the directions for preparing
~
the evaluation I think discuss that those assignments nie~ded to
~
4 5 be something which occupied a significant portion of the 6 individual's time.
7 So, basically this evaluation would have been 8 involved in some of the things we have already talked about, 9 discovery, Interrogatories , things of that nature , as well as 10 material development, training material development, and I 11 should say redevelopment in many cases because following many 12 of the investigations, even from the initial investigations, O 13 goee-eccidene treinine meteriet ee raI wee eiseemineeed from 14 the standpoint of material being turned over to people and 15 never getting back. ,
16 It was just a number of times where copies weren't I
17 made and we basically had to rebuild the training program. I 18 think all of that is in the context of hearings.
19 0 So that you really are saying if documents were 20 lost and had to be reconstructed, that came under the title ,
21 "ASLB licarings?"
22 A In some cases, yes.
23 0 can you think of any other activity that might have 24 fit under that category?
25 A No, bacause I think those were mostly the time ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide coversee e5336 4646
- 901 7
. fib - 1 consuming issues.
2 Q And, do you know how long that activity continued?
l 3 A I think there was a respite, should we say, in 0
4 1983 for awhile. But, certainly -- and, of course, I don't i
5 think Mr. Husted was involved in the final go-around, but we a
6 went through more of that in 1984 in preparation for the final 7 round of hearings.
8 So, there was a period of time I think probably 9 during part of ' 82 and ' 83 where we really didn't have anything I 10 to do with regards to hearings or related to hearings with the 11 possible exception of -- I think we had to develop a couple 12 of procedures which then had to be approved by the Commission 13 and so on and so forth. But, that wasn't a significant, time-14 consuming activity.
15 0 The production of documents, would that have fallen t
16 to instructors to produce those documents?
l 17 A In some cases, yes.
]
18 0 There was an administrative staff, was there not,
]
i 19 for the Training Department?
I 20 A Yes. -
i .
- 21 0 Why is it that that administrative staff did not 22 take on those administrative responsibilities?
23 A Decause many times -- as far as purely copying i 24 them and things like that, certainly a lot of the administra-25 tive staff did get involved in that. But, really the I
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. I 202 347 3700 Nationwide coverase 800 344N6
902 kf2---- 1 researching and the identification of documents required 2 technical knowledge in many cases which the administrative 3 staff would not have possessed.
4 MS. BRADFORD: Okay. I have no further questions.
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: Mr. Newton, for the purposes of 6 the record, could you tell us what the Institute of Nuclear 7 Power Operations is?
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. It's a non-profit organiza-9 tion which was formed by the nuclear utilities af ter the 10 accident at Three Mile Island basically to serve as an instru-11 ment in helping to upgrade the performance of the industry.
12 It is financed by dues from member utilities, from
) 13 some international participants: and some supplier partici-14 pants like Westinghouse or General Electric.
15 JUDGE MARGULIES : Turning to Page 8 of your testi-16 mony, you say: I have reviewed Mr. Brown's testimony. And 17 subsequently, you make a similar reference.
18 Did you review only his written testimony or his 19 oral testimony as well?
20 THE WITNESS: Just his written, sir.
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: There was testimony by Mr. Husted ,
1 22 in which he made the following comment for his 1981 annual 23 evaluation. "It is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain 24 a positive working attitude which is leading to reduced 25 production and increased reduction in motivation."
l l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. I 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 804 336 6646
903 b----34 1 Are you familiar with that self-evaluation that he 2 made?
3 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. I think I've seen a copy 4 of it.
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: Did that statement in any way 6 affect your evaluation of his capability?
7 THE WITNESS: Mostly, it made me have a greater 8 respect for it, because I could see that he still was working 9 very hard, he still was being productive even though he felt 10 it was very dif ficult for him.
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: Starting at Page 21 of your 12 testimony, in dealing with the deposition and then you go on
() 13 to the hearing before the Special Master --
14 MR. MAUPIN: Excuse me -- Mr. --
15 JUDGE MARGULIES: I'm sorry. I was looking at 16 the Husted --
17 MR. MAUPIN: Page 6.
18 JUDGE MARGULIES: Starting at Page 6, you talk 19 about the deposition and the flippant attitude of Mr. Husted, 20 and then you talk about his performance before the Special 21 Master in which it was indicated that he did not take the 22 proceeding seriously.
23 How did you factor those occurrences into your ;
l 24 evaluation on Page 12?
25 THE WITNESS: I think the best way, having discussed i
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H446
i 904 k- --- 1 it with him, I didn't feel in any way, shape or form that 2 Mr. Husted had performed improperly through a conscious l
3 attempt on his part to do so. And, therefore , my evaluation 4 of his performance was mostly related to how he performed
'5 with regards to his professional job responsibilities.
6 The fact that he had difficulties at a hearing f 7 certainly, as I said, gave me concern about -- and discussing 8 for his own personal growth and things of that nature. But, 9 that really didn' t impact that much on what kind of an 10 instructor he was or what kind of a supervisor' he might turn 11 out to be, because it's a totally different environment.
12 JUDGE MARGULIES: I have no further questions of
() 13 this witness.
14 Do you have anything further, Mr. Maupin?
15 MR. MAUPIN: I have none.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Ms. Bauser?
17 MS. BAUSER: I have none.
18 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you have anything, Mr.
19 Johnson?
20 MR. JOHNSON: No, sir.
21 MS. BRADFORD: I have one.
22 JUDGE MARGULIES: All right.
23 EXAMINATION 24 BY MS. BRADFORD:
l 1
\/ 25 Q Mr. Newton, were you aware of the -- you have just ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4 646
905
-- 1 said in response to Judge Margulies' question that you 2 didn' t feel that Mr. Husted consciously performed badly.
3 Is that --
~
4 "A-- That's correct, yes, ma'am.
5 0 Are you aware of the agreement that was stipulated 6 between the Company and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 7 1983 in connection with Mr. Husted?
8 A Yes, ma'am, basically.
9 0 Were you -- did you have any input into that 10 agreement?
11 A I'm sure I was involved in the discussion with 12 Dr. Knief and Dr. Long.
() -
13 Q Did you agree with the conditions of the agree-14 ment?
15 A only in the sense that I felt it was something 16 that the Company had to do.
17 o I don't understand.
18 A Well, let me put it this way. I. don't think that 19
~
Mr. Husted deserved it, okay. But I felt that the Company's 20 response under the circumstances was appropriate.
21 Q So, if you didn't think that Mr. Husted was de-22 serving of the conditions which effected him in the -- as 23 they are outlined in the stipulation, I don't see how you l 24 can reconcile that with the fact that you felt the Company l
Os 25 was right in making that agreement. 1 ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 6646 ;
I
906
__10L __ 1 A Very simply -- and I've often had to explain the 2 very same thing to instructors and operators at TMI with 3 regards to questions of, well, why doesn' t the Company fight 4 this, that or the other thing. And the analogy that I would 5 always use with them at the time was something that I remember, 6 which was when I was a teenager and wanted the keys to the car 7 I would do anything Dad said just about to get the keys to the 8 car.
9 And , therefore , the Company really felt that by 10 making this concession, whether or not it was a deserved 11 concession on an individual's part, that it would or could lead 12 to getting authorization to restart TMI-1. There are some b) q, 13 times certainly when the welfare of an individual gets subjugated 14 to the overall welfare of the corporation, which in this case 15 was tied to restarting Unit 1.
16 And that's my explanation.
17 Q Did you -- if you did not believe that the 18 conditions as they are outlined in the stipulated agreement 19 were justified, did that have an effect on how you evaluated 20 Mr. Husted after that agreement was signed?
21 A Well, recognize that I don't think I did too many 22 initial evaluations of Mr. Husted after that agreement was 23 signed, because Mr. Leonard was his immediate supervisor at 24 the time. I reviewed them as Manager of Training.
/~T
(_/ 25 And, I think certainly we took into account his ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 6646
907 llk__ la __ l performance in the -- in light of what had happened to him, 2 and I think, yes, it effected us in the sense that we said:
3 Boy, I don't know that I could handle that that well or have 4 performed that well under those kind of conditions.
5 So, yes, in that respect I think we took that into 6 account.
7 Q When you say "we" are you_ including Mr. Leonard?
8 A Yes. And I'm certainly putting an opinion -- it's 9 an opinion that I have, not a fact.
10 0 Do you know if Mr. Leonard was of the opinion that 11 the stipulation was justified?
12 A I -- no , I don ' t know for a fact , one way or the es
(,)
13 other. I don't think he did, but then he wasn't there for a 14 lot of that time frame.
15 MS . BRADFORD: I have no more questions.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there anything further of this 17 witness?
18 MR. MAUPIN: No.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: You are excused, Mr. Newton.
20 Thank you.
21 (The witness stood aside.)
22 JUDGE MARGULIES: It's now almost 12 o' clock. 'Do 23 you have one additional witness to call, Mr. Maupin?
24 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, the only witness left,to O
(/ 25 be called, of course, for our part is Mr. Husted who has yet ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 ; Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
908 7.5- - 1 to testify on the subject of his job performance. I don't 2 know that I feel very strongly about the order of. witnesses ,
3 but it does strike me if that subpoena is returnable.at 1:30, 4 let me just put on the table the proposal that we have Mr.
5 Herbein first at 1:30 and then put Mr. Husted on once and for 6 all. If there are any questions that are prompted of Mr.
7 Husted that are prompted by Mr. Herbein's appearance, Mr.
8 Husted could be asked them then.
9 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, I did tell Mr. Burns 10 approximately 1:30. So, there may be some leeway in there.
11 If we resume at 1:30 and Mr. Herbein is not here --
12 MR. MAUPIN: Mr. Husted will go on the stand.
~
13 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is that agreeable to the'other 14 parties?
15 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Okay. We will recess until 1:30, 17 then.
18 (Whereupon, a recess is taken at 12 o' clock p.m.,
19 to reconvene at 1:33 o' clock p.m., this same date. ) ,
20 21 22 23 24 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800-3364646
909
-- 96 -- 1 AFTERNOON SESSION 2 (1:33 p.m.)
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is Mr. Herbein in the courtroom?
4 MR. HERBEIN : Yes, sir.
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: Would you please step up and be 6 sworn? We are ready to take your testimony.
7 MR. HERBEIN : Yes, sir.
8 (The witness is sworn by Judge Margulies.)
9 JUDGE MARGULIES: Please be seated over there.
10 You may proceed, Ms. Bradford.
11 Whereupon, 12 JOHN G. HERBEIN
() 13 is called as a witness and, having been first duly sworn, was 14 examined and testified as follows:
15 EXAMINATION 16 BY MS. BRADFORD:
17 Q Mr. Herbein, would you state your name and current 18 place of business for the record, please?
19 A John G. Herbein, Pennsylvania Electric Company.
20 0 Who was your employer in October of 1981?
21 A That would have been GPU Nuclear Corporation.
22 0 And what was your job title in October of 1981?
23 A Vice President of Nuclear Assurance.
24 Q In that position, did you have responsibility for 25 the conduct of the Training Department at TMI-l?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 80N36 6646
910 2.7 - 1 A That's true.
2 Q What was Dr. Long's responsibility in October of 3 1981?
~~
4 A He reported directly to me. And, he was actually~~
5 the Director or Manager of the Training Department.
6 Q Did you have a telephone conversation with Dr.
7 Long in October of 1981 concerning Mr. Husted?
8 A I've been shown notes that indicate that I had such 9 a conversation. I don't personally recall the details of that 10 conversation.
11 Q Did you make the telephone call to Dr. Long, or did 12 Dr. Long call you?
() 13 A I don't recall. -
14 Q Do you recall if you were on site at TMI at-the 15 time of that telephone call?
16 A I don't have a specific recollection of that. I<
17 would assume that I was.
18 Q Prior to your conversation, your telephone conversa-19 tion, with Dr. Long, had you had a conversation with Mr. Husted?
20 JUDGE MARGULIES: Could you be more specific, Ms.
21 Bradford?
22 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 23 0 In October of 1981, had you had a conversation with 24 Mr. Husted prior to your telephone conversation with Dr. Long?
25 A Because I have some prior knowledge of the line of
' ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 334Wl646
911 b-- - 1 questioning, I would state that I believe I did in regard to 2 a requirement by Bob Arnold, who was then the President of 3 GPU Nuclear Corporation, that all officers review specific key 4 points with those individuals involved with either the opera-5 tion of Three Mile Island or involved directly with the train-6 ing of those who supervised and operated TMI-1.
7 Q So, would you have had similar conversations with a 8 number of people prior to your telephone conversation to Dr.
9 Long?
10 A I believe that I would have talked to those indivi-11 duals in the Training Department that had specific responsibility 12 for training operations personnel in both Unit 1 and Unit 2,
() 13 and also at oyster Creek I think.
14 Q Do you recall having conversations with those 15 persons?
16 A I recall that I was required by the President to 17 have the instructional discussions with the individuals.- I 18 personally don't recall the details of those meetings. But I 19 believe there is a letter that I signed indicating that I held 20 the discussions and had gone over the key points required by 21 the President.
22 0 And the requirement by Mr. Arnold, was that the 23 sole purpose of your meeting with Mr. Husted?
24 A Understanding the context in which you are phrasing 25 your questions , I believe that's correct. Again, it relates ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-3364646
912 k- 74 -- 1 back to the requirement to talk to the people in the Training 2 Department and go over with them the approach and concepts 3 that GPU Nuclear wanted to ensure were held by all operations 4 personnel and all training personnel relative to the conduct 5 of examinations and operational activity.
6 Q Had then -- had you read the August llth, 1981 7 report of investigation prior to meeting with Mr. Husted in Octobdr of 1981?
8 9 A I'm sorry. I'm just not familiar with the August 10 lith document that you speak of. Perhaps if I could see it?
11 (Ms. Bradford handed the witness a document.)
12 Q Particularly, I would direct your attention to 13 P, age 39 of that report.
14 (The witness is looking at the document.)
15 A I may have read this report, but I have no recol-16 lection of Page 39 of the document dated August lith, 1981.
17 Q Have you seen'Husted Exhibit 11 in this current 18 proceeding? Have you seen a copy of Husted Exhibit ll?
19 MS. BAUSER: Would you provide the witness with a 20 copy , Ms . Bradford?
21 MS. BRADFORD: Let me find one.
22 MR. MAUPIN: May we hand the witness a copy?
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: Yes, you may.
24 (Ms. Hensley handed the witness a document.)
25 THE WITNESS: Would you please restate your ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coversee 800 33H646
913
-- 1 question, ma' am?
2 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 3 0 IIave you seen before today a copy of the notes, 4 which are Ilusted Exhibit 11?
5 A Yes.
6 Q When did you first see these notes?
7 A I believe it was maybe ten days or two weeks ago 8 when I was provided a copy.
9 Q IIave you reviewed these notes?
A I have looked at them, yes.
10 11 O Item 3 on Page 2 of these notes, it states the re :
12 I&E interviewers and llusted got cross-wise. That's why he was, 13 singled 'out by the Special Master.
14 Do you -- what do you understand the term "got 15 cross-wise" to mean?
16 A I'm not sure I can really give an interpretation 17 based on these notes. I can give you a personal opinion on 18 what the term " cross-wise" means , but whether or not it's 19 in the context of these notes I am not sure I can say.
20 0 Is that a term that you would use, a person got 21 " cross-wise?"
22 A I might use a term like that, or I might use one 23- that indicated going against the grain or was at odds or in 24 disagreement. I could use that term.
25 Q Do you have any doubt that these are things that -.-
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 2 336 4646
914 k__.El__. 1 or that that statement was a statement you made to Dr. Long 2 during a telephone conversation with him on October the 5th, 3 -1981?
4 A Dr. Long worked for me for a fairly long time in thc :
, 5 1980-1981 time frame, and I believe him to be a very honest 6 and reputable employee. And, if he made these notes and he 7 says that they were made during a phone conversation with me, 8 then I would not have any cause to disbelieve him~ or take issue 9 with that.
10 If Long says these are notes of a conversation or 11 discussion with Herbein, then I would say that's what they are.
12 Q The next entry af ter the one we have just been
() 13 discussing states: Husted wants Wilson to verify with I&E 14 that they know Husted heard two words at water fountain, 15 passing papers.
16 Do you recall discussing that topic with Mr. --
17 with Dr. Long?
18 A No, I do not. I have no independent recollection 19 of this phone call or the discussion that may have preceded the 20 taking of these notes.
21 Q Do you have any doubt that you did, in fact,- discuss 22 these things that are itemized here in Dr. Long's notes?
23 A I think I indicated in my earlier remarks that if 24 Long says these are notes of a conversation with Herbein, then
- s 25 I would support that that's what they are.
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
1 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646 202-347-3700
(
915 1 Q On Page 3 of Dr. Long's notes, about halfway down 2 the page, there appears there a notation: Husted concerned 3 about criminal penalties.
4 Do you have any recollection of what that entry 5 re fers - to?
6 A No, I do not.
7 Q Do you have any recollection in your discussion 8 with Mr. Husted whether he expressed concern that because of 9 his having got cross-wise with the I&E interviewers it might 10 result in criminal penalties? ,
11 A I have no recollection of that.
12 Q Do you have any idea what Mr. Husted -- why it was
() 13 that Mr. Husted wanted Mr. Wilson to verify with I&E that they ,
4 14 knew Husted had heard two words at the water fountain?
15 A I'm sorry. Could you go over who wanted Wilson to 16 verify with I&E?
17 Q Husted wanted Wilson to verify with the I&E that I
18 Husted had heard two words at the water fountain.
19 A And your question again was, did I --
20 Q Do you have any recollection, or do you b3ve any i
21 idea why it was that Mr. Husted wanted that verification made?
22 A I have no independent recollection of that.
l 23 Q On Page 3 of the notes, the second from the last 24 entry says: Concerned about exam past January.
() 25 What exam was .that?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33MI646
916
.B.3 _ 1 A I'm not sure that I agree with the words that 2 you have read.
3 Q Okay. How would you correct what I have read?
4 A I would read ~- ~ ~
5 MR. MAUPIN: Excuse me. Your Honor, I wonder if 6 you would ask Ms. Bradford to tell us how many lines from the 7 bottom of Page 3 she is starting her quote so we can all be 8 looking at the same thing?
9 MS. BRADFORD: It's the sixth line above. It's the 10 last entry in Item 4.
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is it the seventh line up?
12 MS. BRADFORD: From the bottom, yes.
h v 13 THE WITNESS: That's where I was reading, seven 14 lines up from the bottom of Page 3 of Long's notes, I wou]d 15 read the words: Concerned about exam procedure.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: I can't recollect what it actually 17 says, but if you recall I had Mr. Long read that specifi' cally.
18 So, it is in the record.
19 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 20 Q The entry immediately after that, would you read 21 that entry?
22 A JGH viewed:"Wouldn' t it be great if we had protected 23 O and W."
24 Q Do you recall making a statement like that?
25 A No, I do not.
I ace-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. _
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
917 lL4_ 1 Q Do you recall holding that opinion?
2 A I think I may in the context that following the 3 understanding that two of our shift. supervisors had cheated 4 on a Nuclear Regulatory Commission exam, we were all focused 5 on improving our examination procedures and specifically to 6 include, prior to anyone taking an exam, a briefing by those 7 administering the exam on the precise procedures and conduct 8 expected by the Company and the~ Company officials administering 9 the examination. And specifically, prior to each exam, it 10 was our opinion that it was necessary and important to explain 11 to everyone they should do their own work, that they would be 12 held accountable for doing their own work, and that cheating O 13 euee1ete1r w e1a eet de te1eretea-14 I recall holding that opinion. I recall sharing 15 that with a number of individuals in the training management 16 and training group.
17 Q Is it your belief that absent that explanation by 18 management or training management, Mr. O and Mr. W, or any 19 exam candidate was not aware that they were expected to do 20 their own work?
21 A Could you be a little more --
22 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I'm going to object to 23 that on the grounds that I can' t imagine what relevant answer i
24 it is going to provide.
25 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you wish to respond, Ms.
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646 ,
1
918
--8 5- 1 Bradford?
2 MS. BRADFORD: Well, I'm testing Mr. Herbein's 3 memory about these notes. He says he recalls these notes 4 inasmuch as he recalls holding the opinions expressed there 5 at the bottom of Page 3 concerning Mr. O and Mr. W.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: I will permit the question.
7 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 8 Q My question was: Absent an explanation of exam 9 Procedure, is it your -- or was it your opinion that exam 10 candidates did not know that they were expected to do their 11 own work?
12 A I honestly believe that they did know that they
() 13 were expected to do their own work. However, there are at times 14 in many of the activities that we undergo helpful reminders 15 that tell us all about requirements.
16 Fifty-five mile an hour speed limits are a good 17 example. And having that brought to focus before one is about 18 to engage in a key endeavor is meant as a helpful aid, not 19 meant to imply that people do not have an understanding of their-20 responsibilities but merely to reemphasize and refocus on 21 things that we trust and believe all of them already have 22 knowledge of.
23 0 And is it your opinion that Mr. O and Mr. W would 24 have been protected by an explanation or an admonition to do 25 their own work?
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 4646
919
-- -4 6-- 1 A My sense is that there would have been less of a 2 chance that they would have cheated on that exam had they 3 been reminded in a forceful and formal way.
4 Q Mr. Herbein, I have one more set of notes that I 5 would like you to review and identify for me, please?
a 6 (Ms. Bradford handed the witness a document.)
7 MS. BAUSER: Ms. Bradford, would you identify what 8 you have shown to the witness?
9 MS. BRADFORD: They are the notes that you 10 identified to me the other day as Mr. Herbein's notes.
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: Did you send me a copy?
12 MS. BAUSER: Yes, sir. They were served on r~% *
(_) 13 June 13th. I can provide you with a copy of them now.
14 (Ms. Bauser handed a document to Judge Margulies.)
15 JUDGE MARGULIES: Thank you.
16 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 17 Q Mr. Herbein, could you identify those notes for 18 me, please?
19 A I can identify that the notes are in my handwriting .
20 And I can probably read some of what the notes say. I'm not 21 sure I can provide any more enlightening comments on the 22 specifics or the context in which the notes were taken.
23 0 Would you read the first page for us, please?
24 A Husted telcon, p.m., 1 November '81. In the upper 25 right-hand corner it says : T&E. The second line says : Told s
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-370() Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
920 k___S7__ 1 Baci in interview. The next line says: Papers in second 2 interview should discuss with Matakis. Next line says:
3 second interview with Matakis. The next line says: When 4 reopened.
5 Q Did you take these notes during a telephone 6 conversation, or were these notes taken during a meeting? ,
7 A I don' t really recall. I'm not sure.
8 Q Is this a conversation with Mr. Husted?
9 A I don't know.
10 Q Given that his name is at the top of the page, 11 would that indicate that it possibly was a conversation with 12 Mr. Husted?
(~)
(_
13 A I think one could speculate and say possibly. But, 14 I can't state with certainty, because I don' t remember taking 15 the notes.
16 Q How about the second page of the' notes?
17 A It has a One circled in the upper right-hand corner .
18 Ab ut two inches down from the top it states the word 19 "Hettrick." I believe that's an individual's name, last name.
20 Then, there is a translation set of information 21 that reads: DD - Husted; U - Herman; GG - Smith (Dave);
22 then the letter G and the last name Banks; then the letter 23 H - Meyhew. Then, there is a line and the words, "Available 24 in the control room Monday. States recommendations, 25 abbreviated Recs - what State has said. And then there is a ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
, ._- ~ --
921
-8b 1 line and it says: Have received Rec'd. I think the next 2
word -- although it's very f aint -- is "reexam." But I'm 3 not sure.
4 Q Do you have any --
5 A I wasn't finished.
6 Q oh, excuse me.
7 A Then, it says: Banks. Then the word " suits."
8 It might be sits. And then the words "for reexam. "
9 0 Were these notes taken at the same time on the 10 lst of November ' 81, the second page?
11 were all of these notes taken at the same time?
12 A I can't state with certainty, but my sense is 13 that they probably were not. I believe they are separate and 14 apart.
15 And I'm not sure why I believe that. It's just
- 16 that in my mind they don't seem, to be related.
i 17 Q Let me just ask you a question concerning Husted
- 18 Exhibit 11. In Item 3 --
1 19 A I'm sorry. Is that Dr. Long's notes?
20 0 Yes, please. Item 3 states: Husted did sign up 21 for letter.
22 To what does that refer?
23 A Well, I'm not positive but I can give you an 24 opinion. I believe that means that Husted did sign up for i
25 the four or five key points that GPU Nuclear wanted us to make ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide coverage 800-336 6646
922
.&S - 1 to all of those that were involved in TMI operations and 2 involved with training of the operator's of TMI-l and.2.
3 0 I don't think I quite understand. They were key 4 points that the Company wanted to make? Is that your testimony ?
5 A That's true, that the Company wanted to ensure that 6 everyone that operated Three Mile Island 1 and was involved in 7 training of the personnel that operated TMI-1 and 2 understood 8 relative to taking examinations and in reviewing the incidents 9 that occurred in the April exam where senior reactor operators 10 cheated on their tests.
5 11 The summary of the concepts that they wanted to 12 ensure everyone signed up for had to do with being forthright t
O 13 a * "e t ~"e"ever ex 1" ti were
- xe" "a c 1"9 ror ra 14 if anyone had knowledge of specific cheating that occurred at 15 the time the April exams were administered.
16 Q How is it at -- how is it that the individuals had 17 to sign up for that letter? Was that letter just not foiwarded 18 to all of the employees at TMI?
19 .A I believe the letter was sent to everyone at TMI.
20 But these were additional management meetings to reemphasize 21 the key points and through oral discussion and interaction 22 verify eyeball-to-eyeball that people " signed up" i.e. agreed 23 with those principals and, in fact, would support them and 24 carry them out in their day to day activities, whether it was 25- Operating the plant or training those who operated the plant.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
.__--_-_----_____--_____________-_____-3700
923 llk__90 1 Q On Page 2 of Exhibit 11 under Item 4, it states:
2 Real concern about maintaining his license. The load was too 3 great.
~
4 Do you recall having a discussion with Mr. Husted 5 concerning maintaining his licence?
A No, I do not.
6 7 Q Do you recall having a discussion with him concern-8 ing the heavy load of his responsibilities in the Training 9
Department?
10 A No, I do not.
11 MS. BRADFORD: I have no further questions.
12 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you have anything, Mr.
p
's .) 13 Johnson?
14 MR. JOHNSON: Could I have a moment to consult with 15 Mr. Maupin?
16 JUDGE MARGULIES : Yes.
17 (Mr. Johnson and Mr. Maupin are conferring. )
18 EXAMINATION 19 BY MR. JOHNSON:
20 Q Good afternoon, Mr. Herbein. I'm George Johnson.
21 I'm counsel for the NRC Staff in this proceeding.
22 Ms. Bauser circulated to the parties on June 10th, 23 1986 a document consisting of two pages which I believe is an 24 item that you were alluding to in your testimony in answering l s_i 25 questions to Ms. Bradford. It has your signature, and I'm ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Natknwide Coverage 800 336 6646
924 k--4R-- 1 going to describe it. I'm going to show it to you.
2 Across the top it says: Inter-Office Memorandum, 3 GPU Nuclear. And it's dated October 22nd, 1981. The subject 4 is on the left and it's indicated, Individual Meetings with 5 TMI-l Training Department , SRO Instructors.
6 And on the le f t it s ays : To: R. C. Arnold. And 7 in the middle it says the Location, and it's indicated TMI.
8 I'm going to read this into the record, because I don't have 9 copies and I think it may be valuable to give the context for 10 Mr. Herbein's testimony.
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: How long is it?
12 MR. JOHNSON: It's signed at the bottom of the
()
y 13 first page, and it's only about fifteen lines.
14 JUDGE MARGULIES: You may proceed.
15 MS. BAUSER: Judge Margulies, would you like a 16 copy?
77 JUDGE MARGULIES : No. I will listen to it. Thank 18 Y "-
19 MR. JOHNSON: On the dates indicated, I met in 20 Trailer Number 118 with the following personnel from the 21 Training and Education Department and covered the points 22 indicated in Enclosure 1.
23 And then it's a tabular listing. The left column 24 it says: CC. And in the middle it says: Date, October 5th.
(J 25 Approximate time is the next heading, 0830. Then, the next ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
925 92 _ l. column is Duration. It says: One hour.
2 For BB, the date is 5 October; approximate time, 3 0930; duration, one hour.
4 The next line: DD; date, October 5; approximate 5
time, 1500, one hour.
Then the text picks up : As a result of reviewing 6
7 Enclosure 1 with above personnel, no one indicated that either 8 they cheated or had reason to believe that anyone else cheated.
9 In addition, all fully agreed with the five points of Enclosure 10 1. On October 16th and 19th, I again verified by telecon with 11 BB, CC and DD that their responses to me during the above 12 interviews very definitely indicated they did not cheat and did t 13 not have reason to believe at the time of the April NRC exam 14 that others cheated.
15 Signed -- and then it says : J. G. Herbein, VP, 16 Nuclear Assurance.
17 BY MR. JOHNSON: (Continuing) 18 Q Is that an accurate reading, Mr. Herbein?
19 A Yes, sir, I would say that it is.
20 0 And that's your signature?
21 A Yes, sir.
22 O Is that the document that you are referring to in 23 your testimony?
24 A Yes, sir.
25 Q And DD was Mr. Husted?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
926
-- 33 --. 1 A I can't state with certainty, but I believe that 2 there are records that would clarify that particular point.
3 Q But, Mr. Husted was among the people that you spoke 4 to?
5 A Yes.
6 Q on that day, October 5?
7 A I assume that's correct.
8 Q And the attachment -- I hesitate to go on, because 9 I don't want to burden you with all of the items here, but 10 of the five items that are on the next page, are they the item s 11 that you are referring to in your testimony in answer to the 12 questions of Ms. Bradford?
) 13 A That's right. Could they.be nummarized for the 14 record?
15 Q Sure. Go ahead.
16 A The points for Hukill and Herbein to cover following 17 oyster Creek review of the issues discussed in the lette'r --
18 and these also apply to TMI. One, sign up for supporting the 19 Company position set forth in the letter. Two, the Safety 20 and Licensing Board is going to be pursuing the issue of cheat" 21 ing further and you should assume you will have to testify unde r 22 o th, while giving a deposition or at the hearings.
23 Item 3. Only you know if you have cheated on the 24 exams or if you have reason to believe others cheated. But
() 25 you should understand that we expect that the facts, as they l
. 1 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33Ml646
927
&4-- 1 relate to examinations , will be relied on by the ASLB and 2 their decision will become known, especially the examinations 3 in April during which it is known cheating took place.
4 The fourth point. You are obligated to tell us 5 of any knowledge you have relevant to these issues.
6 The fifth point. We need you to understand all of 7 this and either sign up for following through on your re-8 sponsibilities or let us know now of your willingness to do so.
9 0 It's correct then that Mr. Husted was not being 10 11 singled out when you met with him on October 5th,1981?
i 12 A Well, he was singled out in that he was one of
() 13 those who had responsibilities for training and again it was 14 required that all of those that were in this key position of 15 either operating or training senior reactor operators get the 16 required briefing on the points that I just listed.
17 Q Okay. But, he was treated similarly to other 18 persons in the Training Department with similar responsibiliti es 19 A That's true.
20 Q I refer you back to the notes of Dr. Long of his 21 conversation with you on October 5th, 1981, which you were 22 answering questions on a few moments ago with Ms. Bradford.
23 Those are notes of the conversation that is indicated in that memorandum that you signed? Those are notes 24
([) 25 fr m the same meeting -- those are notes in which you describe l l
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. ;
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646 J
928 i G SS--- 1 your meeting of 5 October, which is also described in the 2 memorandum to Mr. Arnold?
3 A I believe you are asking me if these Long . telephone
'~
4 call notes refer to the sa5e meeting that the memorandum that' 5 we just went through that I sent to Arnold indicate.
6 And the answer to that is, I believe that's so.
7 I believe these notes do correlate and match up with the 8 memorandum I sent to Arnold saying that I talked with Husted 9
and the other two individuals.
10 Q At the time of that interview, do you recall that 11 Mr. Husted was a focus of concern with respect to his involve-12 ment in the cheating investigation?
() 13 A 'In my mind, I don' t ' recall that. I think I would 14 remember that. I think, as you stated earlier, he was treated 15 just like everyone else with similar responsibilities.
16 Q As a result of this meeting that you had on 5 17 October ' 81 with Mr. Husted, did you subsequently recomm'end 18 that he be singled out for attention or observation?
19 A I don' t recall that I did, and I don' t believe that 20 I did.
21 Q Did you form an opinion during that period as to 22 Mr. Husted's performance of his responsibilities as an 23 instructor of licensed operators?
24 A I'm not sure I can respond to that. I can respond 25 that whatever opinions I had are accurately, or at least ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
929 b___S6__ 1 certainly accurately represented in the letter that you just 2 read into the record and I, in turn, briefed on the enclosure.
3 Q Apart from the items that are covered in that 4 memorandum, I was really referring to, do you have any re-5 collection as to holding an opinion about whether Mr. Husted 6 was a conscientious employee, one with a positive attitude 7 toward his work?
A I don't recall having an opinion either way. But, 8
I'm sure that if I had a negative opinion I would recall it.
9 10 MR. JOHNSON: Thank you. I have no other yy questions.
12 JUDGE MARGULIES: Ms. Bauser?
) 13 MS. BAUSER: No questions.
14 MR. MAUPIN: I have no questions.
15 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you have anything further?
16 MS. B RADFORD: I just have one, Judge Margulies.
77 EXAMINATION 18 BY MS. BRADFORD:
19 Q You said in response to questions from Mr.
20 Johnson that Mr. Husted was not a focus of concern and that 21 in fact you met with him as one of a group of people that you 22 had to interview in that time span.
23 Did you make phone calls to Dr. Long about the ther persons that you interviewed?
24 ,
(-) 25 A The answer to that question is, I'm not sure if I ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Na.ionwide Coverage 800-336-6646
930
- 9 7-- 1 did or I didn't. I don't know.
2 o So, it's possible that as a result of your inter-3 view with Mr. Husted it raised questions in your mind which 4 resulted in this telephone conversation which is the subject 5
f Husted Exhibit 11?
6 MR. MAUPIN: Is the question, is it possible?
7 MS. BRADFORD: Yes.
8 THE WITNESS: I have no independent recollection 9
that I initiated the phone call to Long or that he initiated 10 it to me. And, just looking at the notes, it doesn' t appear 11 that this was the only topic discussed.
12 You will see, if you look at the notes, as I read f~')
\. /
13 them, on what I believe is Page 1 of 3 it indicates a 14 dif ferent subject matter than the one that pertains to'Husted ,
15 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 16 Q Okay. However, the subject of Husted occupied a 17 large part of that conversation. Would you say that was a 18 , fair statement?
19 A However you would choose to interpret the notes, 20 Ms. Bradford. I don't really have an opinion or knowledge of that.
21 22 MS. BRADFORD: Okay. I have no more questions.
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: Thank you for coming, Mr.
24 Herbein. You are excused.
(,
25 (The witness stood aside.)
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
1 931 98 JUDGE MARGULIES: Ms. Bauser, I would like to llk__ 1 2 return this document to you. Thank you.
3 MS. BAUSER: Yes, sir.
4 JUDGE MARGULIES: You may call your witness.
5 MR. MAUPIN: Would you recall Mr. Husted?
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: Yes. You may proceed.
7 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, Mr. Hus ted's _ prefiled 8 testimony deals with the subject of job performance , attitude 9 and integrity, beginning three lines from the bottom of Page 10 25 and continuing on through the end.
11 He is now available for cross-examination on that 12 subject.
() 13 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you have anything?
14 MS. B AUSER: No, sir.
15 JUDGE MARGULIES: Mr. Johnson?
16 MR. JOHNSON: May I have just a minute?
17 JUDGE MARGULIES: Certainly. -
18 (Pause.)
19 Whereupon, 20 CHARLES E. HUSTED 21 is recalled as a witness and, having previously been duly 22 sworn, was examined and further testified as follows:
23 EXAMINATION 24 BY MR. JOHNSON:
25 Q Good af ternoon , Mr. Husted. Mr. Husted, this is ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
932 29 _ 1 the prefiled testimony of Samuel L. Newton.
2 (Mr. Johnson handed the witness a document.)
3 A Yes.
4 Q Would you turn to Page 7 of that testimony?
5 A Yes.
6 Q There is a reference toward the top of this page 7 of an observation of -- I believe it was GPU attorneys 8 following the hearing before the Special Master in 1981.
9 It says: Thus, I was surprised when during the 10 hearing before the Special Master our attorneys reported that 11 they were upset with his performance -- and this is Mr. Newtor 12 talking. One of them described him as sounding like a smart-13 " ass."
14 Do you recall any conversation with any GPU 15 attorneys in which you were informed, or the observation was 16 made that you had sounded that way?
1 17 A I don't recall any specific conversations where -that 18 term was used to describe my actions before the Special Master .
19 0 okay.
20 A However, I did have a conversation -- or a conversa-21 tion had taken place in the Shif t Supervisor's of fice where 22 my conduct during the deposition was held up by Mr. Blake in 23 somewhat the same -- not exactly using those words but some-24 thing to that ef fect.
() 25 Q Did you also have a conversation with Mr. Blake ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
933 J.04 1 following your appearance before the Special Master?
2 A I had requested a meeting with Mr. Blake some time 3 after either the Special Master's report was issued or ALAB 4 772 came out. I'm not certain of the time frame, but I 5 think the record reflects when that interview took place.
6 Q Husted Exhibit 10, which is a confidential 7 Inter-office Memorandum, dated October 27th, 19 82, signed by 8 R. A. Knief, Manager of Plant Training, refers to I think what 9 I was trying to bring up.
10 And the last paragraph says: I also talked with 11 Mr. Husted briefly on October 20, 1982 and for about an hour 12 on October 22, 1982 before and after a session he had with h V 13 E. Blake of Shaw, Pittman. It was apparent that he" appreciated ~
14 and learned from the opportunity to gain a better understand-15 ing of the ASLB's perceptions of his attitudes toward training 16 and NRC requirements.
17 Is that what you were referring to?
A That's the interview that I referred to with Mr.
8 Blake, yes.
20 0 What was your reaction to his description and this nversation you had in October 1982?
21 22 A I can't recall at this time.
23 Q Was that the first time that you came to an l
24 understanding that your appearance before the Special Master i 25 ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 4646
i i-i 934 k-- -404- 1 A No. I'm quite certain that my appearance before 2 the Special Master and the way that it had been -- the way 3 that my appearance had come across had been brought up to me.
4 numerous times prior to that meeting with Mr. Blake.
5 Q Was it brought up to you shortly after you testifie!d 6 before the Special Master?
7 A I can't recall at this time when the first time 8
was that that was brought up to me.
1
- 9 Q When you returned to your work af ter your testimony l
l 10 before the Special Master, what was your attitude towards 11 your work?
12 A I don't recall specifically how my attitude was the 1
()
13 very next day, if I did in fact report to work the next. day,
} 14 although my attitude towards my work has always been very 15 Positive.
16 Q Well, taking it in a more general time frame ,
during the month or so following your testimony, which was 17 18 n December 10 th , 19 81, I assume you went back to work during a me; s that correct?
19 20 A Yes.
21 Q Did your testimony and your appearance before the 22 SP ecial Master -- let me back up for a second.
23 From your prefiled testimony, I understand that 24 you regretted the way in which you testified almost 25 immediately. Is that correct?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33Mi646
J 935 10.2 1 A I remember regretting the stupid, I think, state-4 2 ment. I don't recall at this time how I felt overall about 3 the appearance. I'm sure it was quite an emotional strain on
] 4 me.
5 Q Do you remember whether you felt satisfied with the 6 way you testified?
7 A I don't think I had any doubts about the overall 8 contents of my testimony. I think I had answered all the 9 questions that were put to me in a manner that I could best.
10 answer the questions.
l-11 And I felt that I had been truthful and honest in all my answers.
12 1
j ()- 13 Q S , when the Special Master's report came out in 14 April, you were surprised by his characterization of your 15 demeanor?
16 A I was not only surprised by his characterization of 17 my demeanor but also about his characterization of my honesty 18 and integrity and forthrightness.-
19 Q So, when you returned to work after the testimony, 20 your testimony, before the Special' Master, after December 10th ,
21 1981, you weren't effected one way or another by the proceeding 22 in terms of your work? That is, in terms of your attitude 1 23 towards your work?
24 A In terms of my attitude towards my work, I think if
() 25 anything this has had an effect of improving my attitude l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nanonwide Coverage 80433MI646
936 k-- - 143- 1 towards my work. I have become much more sensitized to 2 appearances. I have made a much greater effort towards 3 making sure that there was never a possible doubt in anyone's i
4 mind that there could ever possibly be a question about my a
5 honesty, integrity and my feeling towards the importance of 6 nuclear safety.
7 o Was this the reaction that you had following your -
8 December 1981 testimony? Or, was this your reaction following 9 the issuance of the report of the Special Master in April 10 1982?
11 A I would say it was probably after the issuance of 12 the Special Master's report that I became highly sensitized (O
_j 13 to appearances.
14 Q Do you think it was a motivating factor for you to 15 improve your performance of your responsibilities and your 16 interaction -- the way in which you interacted with co-workers 17 and supervisors?
18 A I'm certain that it had an influence, although I 19 don' t recall ever having a significantly great problem in 20 dealing with people, in dealing with supervisors, in dealing 21 with the procedural method in which we did our job.
22 The most significant thing I remember is it had an 23 effect on my consciousness of how things that I say can be 24 misconstrued or misinterpreted by other individuals.
() 25 0 ng me ram ew n -- say, j
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. j 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646 i
937 LQA 1 from the time that you were interviewed in July 1981, July 2 29th, and the coming out of the information about O and W 3 cheating on the April exams, and through your testimony in 4 December 1981, during that period would you say that you were 5 resentful, you carried some resentment toward~ the investigatior.
~
6 or toward the NRC?
7 A I think 'I would have to say that I probably resented +
8 the impositions that it had placed on us with regard to the 9 significant interference in the normal routine of our job.
10 We were three people doing a job that is now being 11 done by seven or eight people. So, we were extremely pushed 12 to the limit as far as what we were able to handle on a routine 13 basis, and with the imposition of having the disruption of the 14 start of the investigation and the continuing support that it 15 required, I believe I was resentful *of that because it required 16 a great deal of extra effort to not only get done what had tio 17 be done in line with teaching operators, but also fulfilling 3
18 the requirements of the items that Mr. Newton talked about 19 earlier today, the production of technical support for the 20 production of documentation.
21 Q Did you also have the same kind of feeling about 22 the voiding of the April exam and having to take the exam 23 again in October?
24 A I personally felt that .the voiding of that exam 25 was in effect Mr. Denton telling the people of this area that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
938 k__ 10 5 1 everyone of us had cheated on that exam, because he could not 2 stand up and say that his employees could verify that no one 3 else had cheated on the exam, 4 So, in my feelings, that was as though Harold Denton 5 had personally told me that I had cheated on that exam and, 6 therefore, I had to take another exam. -
Q And did you feel that was justified?
7
^ * " Y" 8
g Q In order to be an operator at Three Mile Island, 10 y u are required to have a valid license; isn't that correct?
11 A That 's correct.
12 Q And you could only get such a valid license through
()
13 qualification from that exam; *is that correct?
14 A My qualifications came from taking a reactor 15 Operator's exam and then subsequently taking a senior 16 reactor operator's exam years before the April 1981 exam.
17 The April 1981 exam was an exam that the Company 18 had requested so that the people in the Harrisburg area would 19 regain some confidence in the operators at TMI.- It was, in 20 my opinion, not an exam that each one of us had to take to 21 Prove that we were competent operators.
22 We had already done that in taking our initial 23 qualification exams.
24 Q But, in order --
() 25 A The voidance of the April exam and the taking of ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
I 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 e646
1 939 l.0 6 _ 1 another exam in October, to me proved nothing except that we 2 were capable of retaking exam af ter exam after exam, and that 3 we were indeed qualified to operate that nuclear station.
4 Q But, isn't it also true that if you had not 5 passed the April exam or the October exam that you would not 6 have been able to qualify to be an operator or senior 7 operator at Three Mile Island?
8 A Well, in the April exam --- failing the April exam 9
w uld have been no different than failing the initial SRO exam I t k several years before that. It would have meant-10 that I had enough weaknesses in my knowledge that I would not 12 have made a safe operator.
13 But I passed that April exam with probably a 90 14 to 94 percent average.
15 Q And you also passed the October exam?
16 A Yes, sir, I did.
17 Q You say, I believe it's on Page 13 of your prefiled 18 testimony -- now, I am referring to your-prefiled testimony, 19 not Mr. Newton's --
20 A I'm afraid I don't have a copy of that.
l 21 0 I will just read from it. If it's necessary, 22 your counsel can supply that. You say at the top of Page 23 13: There can be no doubt that my overall attitude and 24 morale in the months following the cheating episode were O
25 de1 ver- eeia 1= rittee comme ee vree rea ror v 1981 l
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
' 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
l
' 940 2 02 1 Annual Evaluation that: _It is becoming increasingly 2 difficult to maintain a positive working attitude which is 3 leading to reduced production and increased reduction in 4 motivation.
Still, I believe that I carried out my work in a 5
6 Professional and conscientious way.
In your opinion, did the difficulties that you 7
described, concerning having to requalify and the extra 8
burdens that the cheating episode had on the Training Depart-ment, that notwithstanding those dif ficulties , did you O
i yy continue to treat your work in the Training Department in a I
12 conscientious and serious fashion?
13 A Yes, sir, I did.
[V') ~
, 14 0 In your prefiled testimony toward the end on 15 Page 26, you say: I have never known -- excuse me. I have 16 never knowingly done or said --
- 17 MR. MAUPIN
- Your Honor, it might be helpful
- if 18 the witness had this.
19 (Ms. Hensley handed the witness a document.)
20 BY MR. JOHNSON: (Continuing) 21 0 would you please turn to Page 26, about halfway 22 down the page?
23 A Yes.
24 0 It says: I have never knowingly done or said
() 25 anything h the control room, the classroom or in my other ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646 .,
941 10.8- 1 conduct at work that would indicate a disregard for nuclear 2 safety.
3 Do you know, or can you recall ever being told by 4 a supervisor, colleague, instructee, that you indicated in 5 your work, the control room, the classroom or any other, a 6 disregard for nuclear safety?
7 A No. In fact, I would say just the opposite ~ is 8 true. I have been complimented in my regard for nuclear 9 safety and operator safety overall.
10 0 Have you ever been told that you conveyed a less 11 than serious attitude or sense of -- or that you communicated 12 a sense of disrespect for the training program or the NRC 13 examination process b'y any instructee, colleague or supervisor ?
14 A No, sir.
15 0 Did you, in fact, feel that you should shoulder at 16 least a part of the responsibility for the cheating that took 17 place on the part of o and W during the April exam?
18 A I think I would have to agree with Mr. Herbein's 19 comments in that we should have protected the people from 20 themselves by doing the things that we do now, making them 21 read a statement, making them sign stating that they agree 22 that the work they have done is their own.
23 I don't feel that as an individual I ever did 24 anything that would foster the idea that cheating is an O
V 25 acceptable way to pass an exam. But, I can't shoulder the ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
942
- 103- 1 entire burden myself, no.
2 0 Do you think that in the hearing before the 3 Special Master, to the extent that an impression may have 4 been given that you did not shoulder at least a part of the 5 responsibility, that that impression was an incorrect one?
6 A I'm not certain I understand your question. But 7 I would say if someone --
8 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, if you don't understand 9 his question, you ask him to clarify it.
10 THE WITNESS: Could you restate that?
11 BY MR. JOHNSON: (Continuing) 12 0 The question as stated was: Do you think you
() 13 gave the impression when you testified that you didn't 14 accept at least a part of the responsibility for the cheating t 15 A No, I don't believe I gave that impression, no.
16 0 When you testified and subsequent to your learning 17 about the cheating of 0 and W, did you in fact feel a sense 18 of responsibility?
, 19 A I'm not certain I felt a sense of responsibility, 20 certainly a sense of regret but I don' t think responsibility.
21 Q Did the fact that you learned about the cheating 22 of O and W cause some soul-searching on your part concerning t
23 what role you may have had in those events coming to pass?
24 A I'm certain I did, but I don't recall any
() 25 specifics that stick out in my mind.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 800 336 4646
- 943
._1la- 1 Q Did you agree with the program that Mr. Herbein 2 described? Did you agree that that was a way to prevent 3 those kinds of incidents reoccurring?
4 A I agreed that there was a need for a policy, but 5 I think initially I had some problems with the implementa-6 tion of it.
I 7 I can' t recall any specifics , but I know I had had discussions that surrounded the initial attempt at 8
1 implementing a procedure to prevent cheating in the future.
l 9 2
10 0 What kind of problems did you have?
A I don't recall at this time, but in preparation 12 for this hearing it has been brought to my attention that j
O -
12 or. tone hed rece11ed me mex1=e seetemenee et e meeetne
- 14 where the policy had been floored for discussion and that i
i 15 he recalled me having made some remarks.
16 But I don't recall exactly what they were.
, 17 0 Was this a meeting of June 4th,1982? It's '
j
- 18 contained in liusted Exhibit 14.
19 MR. JOllNSON : Do you have a copy of that exhibit l 20 you could show the witness, please?
21 (Ms. IIensley handed the witness a document.)
22 MR. JOIINSON : Thank you.
l 23 BY MR. JOIINSON: (Continuing)
. 24 Q At the bottom, seven lines up from the bottom of the first page where it says : IIDit's of fice , approximately 25 ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide cover soo 33 u ses
. _ - . - . - - .._ .- _ ____ _ _., _ _ _ . _ _ _-_ .~ . . _ _ _ . _ - - -
944
-M 1- 1 1315 to 1345 hours0.0156 days <br />0.374 hours <br />0.00222 weeks <br />5.117725e-4 months <br />, TMI meeting with HDil, RLL and C. Ilus ted.
2 Is that what you are referring to?
3 A No,' sir.
t 4 Q This is another meeting?
5 A This was a meeting that Dr. Long had called with the i
, 6 entire training staff in which Dr. Long himself was describing 7 the exam procedure and its implementation.
8 And he had asked for comments from the floor af ter his presentation was done. And apparently I had said some-9 10 thing that stuck in his mind because he had said something y1 about it and I recall in a conversation with Ms. Bauser 12 about Dr. Long's recalling something that I had said during
() 13 that meeting.
14 Q So you said something during this more or less 15 public meeting -- not public, but general meeting?
16 A Staff meeting in the Training Department.
17 0 Staf f meeting in the Training Department. What it 18 says here, it says: RLL and ilDil emphasized our concern that 19 Chuck recognized how his attitude was perceived in " hearings."
20 Was this something that was said in.the meeting?
21 A Not the meeting that I am referring to, no. The 22 meeting which I am referring to would have taken place
! 23 probably -- well, I don' t recall when the meeting took place.
24 It was a staff meeting to discuss the implementa-25 tion of the examination procedure.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
945 112_ 1 Q And you added some question about the implementa-2 tion; that is what you are saying?
. 3 A Yes.
4 Q But that's not what is described on these notes?
A No, I don' t believe so.
5 6 Q Was this meeting a meeting just between Mr. Hukill, 7
Mr. Long and yourself?
4 A I believe so, yes, sir.
8
- 9 Q Your reservations that you may have had about i
10 the implementation of the program, did that indicate that
- 11 you viewed the cheating incident or prevention of future 12 cheating in anvthing less than a serious manner?
13 A No. I would think it would be to the contrary.
14 I wanted to make certain that the procedure itself and the 15 implementation of the procedure was fully understood and 16 that the ramifications of cheating and being caught were 17 understood and were spelled out in the procedure itself.
! 18 I only say that because I recall that as being
- 19 one of the problems that I had with the original procedure 20 as it was implemented.
21 Q Were you concerned about the damage to co-workers, 22 public confidence in the safety of TMI and of your employers 23 that was caused by the cheating episode?
f A I'm not certain I followed all the parts of that f 24 question.
25 l
l ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 ' Nationwide Coverase 315 3364646
946
- 1 13- 1 0 Okay. Let me just give you some background. In 2 the decision of the Licensing Board, the statement was made :
3 We would expect him to be gravely concerned about the damage 4 to his co-workers, his employer and the public's confidence j 5 in the operation of the unit caused by the cheating episodes l 6 and failure of his own Training Department to create a 7 serious and organized environment during the training and 8 quizzes.
9 Were you, in fact, concerned?
10 A I --
, 11 0 Do you need to see the statement?
1 12 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I really hesitate. I 13 d n' t like to interfere with Mr. Johnson's examination. The 14 quote he just read from the Licensing Board deals with $everal 15 elem nts, public concern, Training Department performance.
16 One p ssibility might be to take them one at a l 17 time, take the ones he is most interested in. I think that 18 would prese.nt some nice simple questions and perhaps some risp answers.
- 19 JUDGE MARGULIES
- Do you have any objection, Mr.
20
- 21 J hnson, in terms of proceeding in that manner?
l 22 MR. JOHNSON: I will proceed in t. hat manner.
23 BY MR. JOHNSON: (Continuing) 24 0 Were you concerned about the possible damage to
'O 25 ce- erxere ceused av the che eine eeieedee end the fai1ere of ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 80033H646
947 k- 114. l~ the Training Department to create a serious and organized 2 environment during the training and quizzes?
3 A You touched on a lot of areas that I was certainly
$ 4 concerned about, but I am having a hard time following your 5 question.
6 0 I think the point here is, were you in fact con-7 cerned that the cheating episodes and the way in which this 8 may have reflected on the Training Department, were you 9 concerned about the ramifications on public confidence in
{
10 the operation of TMI-l?
i 11 A Yes, I was.
12 0 And were you concerned about the impact of these
- () 13 events and the Training Department's role in them in terms 14 of possible damage to your co-workers?
15 A Damage to not only co-workers but myself included.
16 0 And were you also concerned about the possible 17 damage to your employer that was created by the cheating 18 episodes and the Training Department's role in it?
i 19 A Yes, sir.
20 MR. J0liNSON : Thank you.
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: Let's take a 15 minute recess. ;
22 (Whereupon, a recess is taken at 2:55 o' clock p.m. ,
23 to reconvene at 3 :13 o' clock p.m. , this same day. )
24 JUDGE MARGULIES: Back on the record. You may
() 25 cross-examine.
l l
1
.! ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. l 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 33H646
948 h 115_ 1 EXAMINATION 2 BY MS. BRADFORD:
3 Q Mr. Husted, on Page 23 of your testimony at the
~
4 top of the page, you say there in that first full sentence :
5 I was in a terrible state of mind when I testified. Counsel 6 for the Company, perhaps because of constraints imposed by 7 the Special Master's sequestration order, spent very little 8 time with me before my testimony.
In the time that you did spend with counsel for the 9
10 Company, did he give you any instruction as to how to conduct 11 yourself during your appearance?
MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, I'm going to object just 12
' *"' ""*"*"9 " '"" '" " ' '""' "" "** " "
O ' ' '" --
13 ""'e "
14 that question is really a question that could have beeii~ raised 15 on last Wednesday when Mr. Husted spent all day addressing 16 those issues.
17 Now, I recognize that Mr. Newton this morning, 18 necessarily because he could only make a single appearance, 19 touched on some of these subjects. Nevertheless, I object 20 because it's not cicar to me that this is not a question that 21 could have been asked on last Wednesday.
22 JUDGE MARGULIES: Would you please respond to that?
23 MS. BRADFORD: Judge Margulies, I'm not sure that 24 I did not ask this question. I don't have access to the transcripts, and I'm not sure. I was just making sure that 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 33H646
949 llk__llE_ 1 the question is asked and answered. I don' t know if I 2 asked this question.
3 MR. MAUPIN: On that basis, she could repeat the 4 entire examination.
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is this just an isolated question 6 going back?
MS. B RADFORD : Yes. There is just one other one 7
8 that has to do with Mr. Herbein's testimony today.
9 JUDGE MARGULIES: I will permit that as an isolated 10 question but not as a course of going back through his prior 11 testimony that he testified about previously.
12 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing)
() 13 Q Would you like me to repeat the question?
14 A Would you, please?
15 0 My question goes to your preparation by counsel 16 f r the Company prior to your appearance before the Special 17 Master. Were you given any particular instructions on how 18 y u should behave?
19 A I'm not certain at this point what the special 20 instructions were that I was given by counsel. It -- I had 21 limited contact with counsel, but I'm not certain at this 22 time what the context of that counselling was.
23 0 And the last two sentences of that paragraph, you 24 say it really hadn't occurred to you that you might be n
( )
25 questioned at length about the NRC interviews. Is that not ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
950 117 consistent, inconsistent, with what was reflected in Dr.
llL__ 1 2 Long's notes of the conversation he had with Mr. Herbein as 3 to the fact that you were at odds or cross-wise with the 4 NRC interviewers?
5 A I can't personally make that connection, no.
6 Q Do you have a copy of Husted Exhibit 11?
7 A Not with me, no.
8 (Ms. Bradtord handed a document to the witness.)
9 o Is that --
10 A I now have a copy of Exhibit 11.
yy Q And those are notes that Dr. Long took of a 12 nversation he had with Mr. Herbein following Mr. Herbein's
, -) meeting with you. And in those notes it is reflected the v
- 4 fact that Mr. Herbein was aware that you were at odds, or 15 you had got cross-wise with the NRC interviewers.
16 My question to you is: Does that statement in 17 Dr. Long's notes reflect a recognition of the fact that you 18 would be questioned about your interview? And that, in fact, 19 was the reason why you had been singled out by the Special 20 Master to appear?
21 A I'm not certain that I could conclude from these 22 n tes that the context of my appearance before the Special 23 Master would center around the previous two interviews.
24 Q Did you have any thoughts as to why you, in fact, wr being called by the Special Master?
({ ) 25 ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 8043364646
951 llk__ _lla_ 1 A I don't recall at this time, no, why I thought I 2 was being called before the Special Master.
3 0 You said earlier today that Mr. Blake, who was 4 counsel for the Company, held up your appearance at the 5 deposition as an example of how people should not testify?
6 A That's correct.
7 0 Did you think that that criticism, or that was 8 justified, your being held up as an example?
9 A Yes, I do.
10 0 And, did you, in fact, think that you had behaved 11 in a less than serious manner in your deposition?
12 MR. MAUpIN: Same objection, Your Honor. That r~s I ) 13 isolated instance has now gone into about three instances.
14 And I believe this question and the previous 15 question, but certainly this question was asked on the 16 prior examination.
17 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you wish to respond?
18 MS. B RADFORD : If, in fact, I had asked that 19 question I will withdraw it.
20 JUDGE MARGULIES : I don't know if you have or you 21 haven't.
22 MS. BRADFORD: I have no way of knowing either.
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, what are you basing your 24 question on?
(Oj 25 MS. B RADFORD : I was basing my question on a ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
952 llk___112_ 1 res'ponse that Mr. Hus ted gave to Mr. Johnson concerning --
2 Mr. Johnson asked him a question about a statement in his 3 testimony where he was referred to as a smart-ass . His 4 response included that discussion of his being held up as 5 an example.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: I will permit the question.
7 THE WITNESS: Could I have the question again?
8 BY MS. B RADFORD : (Continuing) 9 0 I asked you, did you think at the time that you 10 were being held up as an example that that was justifiable?
A I believe I did at that time, yes.
11 12 0 Also, you testified in response to Mr. Johnson's f~)
v 13 questions that you felt that the April exam was not necessary?
14 And also that voiding the April exam was meaningless.
15 Did you have any resentment towar6 the Company for 16 their commitment for the April '81 exam?
17 A I'm not certain that I said that the April exam 18 was unnecessary. I bolieve that I said that the October exam was n t necessary.
19 20 0 Did you think that the April exam was necessary, 21 a necessary exercise?
22 A I believe at that point it was necessary for us 23 as a company and as operators to try and regain the confidencc 24 f the people of this area in our ability to operate the
(~3 nuclear plant, and if taking that exam would improve the
\_J 25 ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
. . - -. . . . .- . . _ - . . . . . - . . = _ . .
i !
953 j - 1 34- 1 confidence then it was necessary.
2 Were you aware if the operators felt it was a --
i O l 3 or held any resentment about having to take that exam?
).
t I
l 4 MS. BAUSER: I'm going to object to the question.
I
} 5 JUDGE MARGULIES: May I have the question read i I i 6 back, please?
7 (The court reporter read the last question back.)
8 JUDGE MARGULIES: The objection will be overruled.
I !
9 It has been numerous amounts of testimony today as' to what 10 the reaction of the operators was to the whole situation.
it You may answer the question. ,
1 12 THE WITNESS: I believe there was some resentment, 13 ve -
7 O. ,_
j 14 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) l 15 0 You have testified that you did not believe that i
j 16 that was justified, that resentment was justified?
I ,
j 17 That, in fact, to instill public confidence'you 1
I 18 felt the April exam was necessary? !
l l 19 A I believe that, yes. ,
\
20 0 How did you convey that? Or, were you able to
! 21 convey that to the operators? l 1 t i !
22 A I can't recall any specific classroom situations i
j 23 or interfaces where I would have addressed that question or i
24 that concept on its own. But, I believe that my conduct and l
my s toward prepadng for de exam could cenainly han 25 1
l 4
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 Nationwide coveraos 'soo 344M6
-. - , , ,- . _ 347 370o
)
954
+21- 1 been taken as a visible example of my regard for the Company's decision to have an April exam administered.
3 In response to questions from Mr. Johnson, you O
4 talked about a meeting that Dr. Long called and asked for 5 comments from the floor. You said that you made a comment 6 but you cannot recall.
7 My question to you is, was it critical of the NRC 8 procedures or the Company procedures?
9 A I believe it was specific to the company's procedure 10 which we were about to implement and that it was of a i
constructive criticism of the implementation of the procedure 71
.g or some of the mechanics of the implementation of the procedure .
13 And it was not so much the concept of having to l 14 have, or the necessity of, such a procedure.
i 15 MS. BRADFORD: I have no more questions.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Mr. Ilusted, in response to Ms.
17 Bradford's examination, you said that you didn' t feel that l
j 18 the April 1st exam was not necessary.
19 It's my recollection of the record, and I may be 20 mistaken but the record will speak for itself, didn't you 21 first testify that you believed that the April exam was 4
22 unnecessary and that it was only to satisfy the residents 1
l 23 of this area?
! 24 T!!E WITNESS : As I recall the contents of the 25 first question regarding my feelings about the April exam, it ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
t, 955 h 122_. 1 dealt with the April exam proving the qualifications of the 2 operators. I believe the operators were qualified to operate 3 the plant, and taking the exam certainly did further the 4 confidence in the operators themselves in their abilities.
5 But I believe it was primarily a political move 6 on the part of the Company to reinstill a sense of confidence 7 in the people in the area surrounding TMI.
8 My personal belief is that the operators going into 9 that exam felt that they were capable of operating the plant j 10 and fully qualified to operate the plant, because they were 11 already NRC licensed operators.
1 12 JUDGE MARGULIES: And you find no inconsistency
]
O .12 te" v "r eri r re e e e * 'het see *1 "7 1
14 THE WITNESS: In my own mind, I have no inconsistenc y.
1 15 I feel the operators were qualified and we did. need to 16 demonstrate to the peopic that we were qualified.
17 And I accepted the Company's request that we take 18 an ther exam to help foster that confidence.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: You previously testified that f
20 in your mind going back to 1981 it was wrong for Mr. Denton 21 to cancel the results of the April exam.
l ,
{ 22 Do you still feel that way?
23 Ti!E WITNESS : I believe Mr. Denton and the Company 24 were doing what they thought was necessary to improve the O 25 cenfidence 1 eve 1 ef the veev1e in this etee end in the enetre ,
j 1
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nailonwidecowress m3364646
L 956 llk__ L2' 1 United States. The nuclcar industry had taken a significant 2 blow with the accident and the cheating incident.
3 And cheating is not strictly limited to Three Mile 4 Island. There have been instances of cheating prior to the 5 cheating incident at Three Mile Island, and there have been 6 instances since the cheating incident here.
7 I think it was a necessary move on his part to do 8 something. And, in my own heart I think it was probably a 9 manuever that was very beneficial. But, I can't help but 10 think that prior to taking that exam I was qualified to 11 operate that plant and taking that exam, the -- while studying '
12 for the exam certainly helped improve my current memory, it
() ,
13 was not necessary to prove my qualifications to my co-workers 14 o:t to the NRC, because they had already licensed me to operate 15 that plant.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: This was not gone into, but I 17 w uld liketo know the answer to this. Does the license itself 18 have an expiration date on it?
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. Currently, an NRC license 20 has a two-year expiration date and a requirement of the licenso 21 of the facility dictates that an operator take a requalifica-22 tion exam annually and based on the results of that -- based 23 n passing the annual requalification exam, the license can be 4
removed overy two years wit 5out direct contact in taking an
[} NRC-administered exam.
i ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
957 l.24- 1 And we had only months before the April exam taken 2 a Company-administered requalification exam.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there anything further of 4 this witness?
5 MS. BAUSER: I have a few questions.
6 J DGE MARGULIES: Please proceed.
7 EXAMINATION 8 BY MS. BAUSER:
9 Q Mr. Husted, you were asked by NRC Staff counsel 10 some questions about responsibility for the cheating by Mr. O it and Mr. W. And I would like to follow that up with a few 12 questions.
v" '"e ""re O 12 '"t"" *""' 'r t"t"9 ev r'=e"' t" 14' any way in the responsibility for the cheating that occurred 15 in the 1981 exam?
16 A I think there are things that we could have done.
17 that may have prevented that cheating, and we were certainly 18 responsible for not having had the foresight to do that.
19 S , yes , I do.
20 0 And when you say that, are you including yourself 21 as part of the Training Department who shared in that 22 responsibility?
23 A Yes, ma'am.
24 MS. BAUSER: I have no more questions.
25 MR. MAUPIN: I do have a few questions. Let me ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
I 202 347 3700 Nationwide coverese 800 336 4646 l
P 958 1
b__ _L2 E__ 1 say that I have several preliminary questions. My effort 2 will be to demonstrate by the time I'm finished that they 3 are linked to the subject of Mr. Husted's job performance 4 and his attitude towards his job.
5 EXAMINATION 6 BY MR. MAUPIN:
7 0 I want to take you back briefly, Mr. Husted, to 8 the end of 1981 and early 1982, beginning with your 9 appearance before the Special Master.
The Special Master's report, as I recall, was 10 11 issued in April 1982. Going back to the hearing and focusing 12 on the question of whether you had solicited help from Mr.
() ^
13 James, you testified, did you not, categorically that you had 14 not sought help from Mr. James on that examination on April 15 24, 1981; is that correct?
16 A That's correct.
17 0 At or about the time that the Special Master's 18 report was issued, had you by that time learned what Mr.
19 James' testimony had been before the Special Master on that 20 subject?
21 A I believe I had read his testimony by that time, 22 yes.
23 0 What do you recall his testimony as having been 24 on the question of whether you had solicited help from him 25 n the April examination?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33(Hl646
959 k-- -b2 G-- 1 A I believe he had also categorically denied the 2 cheating accusation.
l 3 o was it your understanding that the Special 4 Master's report concluded that you had sought help from Mr.
5 James on that examination; is that correct?
4 6 A I believe that's correct, yes.
7 Q Did you consider that, the determination by the 8 SP ecial Master, to be wrong?
9 A Yes, sir.
10 Q Did you consider it to be unfair?
11 A Yes, sir.
12 Q The Special Master also concluded, did he not,
() 13 that you had failed to cooperate with the NRC investigators, 14 at least at the July 29, 1981 interview, that you had been 15 uncooperative I believe were the words?
A I believe so. Yes, sir.
16 17 Q Did you know at about the time that the Special 18 Master's report was issued whether Mr. Christman had 19 testified in that hearing before the Special Master?
20 A I believe I was certain that Mr. Christman had not 21 testified.
22 Q Do you know now whether you then had a view as to 23 whether his notes of the July 29 interview were made a part 24 of the record of the proceeding before the Special Master?
O)
(_ 25 A I d n't believe his notes are a part of that record, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwule Coverser 800 33Mi646
960 llk__ _121_ 1 Q Do you recall any questions directed at you of 2 any significant length in the Special Master's proceeding and 3 hearing before the Special Master designed to delve into 4 your actual attitude towards nuclear safety or towards the 5 regulatory process?
6 A None that I can recall.
7 Q There has been testimony here that in 1983, the 8 Company entered into -- GPU Nuclear Corporation entered into 9 a stipulation with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by which 10 it agreed that it would withdraw your operating license, 11 your NRC operating license.
12 Did you understand the purpose for which the
() 13 Company did that?
14 A Yes, sir, I did.
i 15 Q Was the withdrawal of your license a disappointment 16 to you?
l 17 A I would have to say very significant.
l 18 Q Did the withdrawal of your license adversely ef fect j l
19 in a significant way the job opportunities that were available 20 to you at GPU Nuclear Corporation? j 21 A Yes, it did.
22 O You could no longer serve as a licensed operator, 23 could you?
24 A That's correct.
7_
(/
_ 25 0 or teach licensed operators?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
961 l h --126- 1 A That's correct.
2 Q Or supervise the teaching of licensed operators?
3 A That's also correct.
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
4 Q In 1584, are you aware that the Appeal Board 5 entered a condition or found that a condition should be 6 imposed on the Company that had the effect -- it's really 7 the centerpiece of this proceeding -- of prohibiting you 1
8 from serving as a Supervisor of Non-Licensed Operator l l
l 9 Training; isn't that correct? -
10 A Yes, sir.
I 11 Q To your knowledge, was there in the record of 12 the proceeding before the Special Master any evidence such I
()
- 13 as the' kind that we have heard today about the way that 14 you performed your day to day training responsibilities or l 15 the attitude that you brought to those responsibilities?
16 A None that I'm aware of.
17 Q Did the imposition of that strike you as a fair 18 result? I'm asking for your personal opinion.
19 A No. I didn't think that was fair at all.
20 Q For purposes of the next question, I would like 21 f r you to try again to put aside for the moment the 22 question of the way you conducted your professional responsi-23 bilities.
24 How would you characterize, in terms of your
,m
(_) 25 personal life, the effect of the Special Master's report, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33(H5646
t 962 llk 121- __. 1 the withdrawing of your license, the condition imposed by 2 the Appeal Board, how did those things effect you over the 3 course of the three or four years in which they occurred?
4 A They have had a significant emotional impact.
5 0 My last question is, if you can switch over to 6 the principal issue that is before the Judge at this moment, 7 namely the attitude that you have brought to your work, how 8 would you characterize the way, if any, in which this 9 continuing emotional impact of these events, how has that 10 ef fected, in your opinion, the way that you have discharged 11 your duties during this period from late 1981 through the 12 Present?
() 13 Or, at least from the time of the i ncr9nce of uhe special Master's report to the present?
14 15 A I think my performance has always.been very good, 16 meaning not just good performance but better than average. :
17 I've always been very conscientious about being overly 18 prepared to instruct in a class. I've made an e xtra effort 19 to make sure that the operators were trained not only 20 technically to do their job, but held the respect for the 21 responsibility of their position.
l' 22 And because of this added burden that I've been 23 carrying, it has made it take more ef fort than it would 24 have had I not had to carry that burden.
() 25 MR. MAUPIN: That's all I have. l l
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
963
- 13.0_ 1 JUDGE MARGULIES: Mr. Johnson?
2 MR. JOHNSON: No further questions.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: Ms. Bradford?
4 MS. BRADFORD: I have a few.
5 EXAMINATION 6 BY MS. BRADFORD:
7 0 You state, in response to Mr. Maupin's question, 8 that you considered the Special Master's -- the conclusion 9 and findings regarding you in the special Master's report, that they were unfair.
10 11 Is that what you testified?
l'2 A I believe that's what I said, yes.
() 13 0 were you aware that prior to the issuance of the 14 Licensing Board decision, the Licensing Board offered an l 15 opportunity to all persons effected by the Special Master's 16 report to comment on that report?
1 17 A I don't believe I was aware of that.
18 Q You were never told by anyone in the Company 19 that you had that opportunity?
20 A I have no recollection of that at this time.
21 Q You told Mr. Maupin that you understood why the l
22 Company, in essence, stripped you of your license in the 23 agreement with the Commonwealth. You understood at the time 24 that that would be the outcome of that stipulated agreement?
() 25 A Yes, I did.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage M 33tHl646
964 131- 1 Q Did you have any input into that agreement?
2 A No, I didn't.
3 Q Was it your understanding that your supervisors 4 agreed with the need to take your license?
5 A Could you be more specific about individuals?
6 Q Did you discuss this stipulated agreement with 7 Mr. Newton?
8 A I'm certain we would have had discussions about 9 the stipulation, but I don't recall any specifics of such 10 discussions.
g Q Did you discuss the stipulatec agreement with Mr.
Brown?
(~') 13 A I'm certain we did discuss that issue; -yes. But, a '
14 I don't recall any specifics of any discussions.
15 Q Did you discuss it with Dr. Long?
16 A Yes, I did.
17 Q Do you recall the specifics of that discussion?
18 A I have a very limited recollection of that 19 discussion.
20 Q Do you believe you told those people, Dr. Long 21 and Mr. Brown and Mr. Newton, that you thought it was unfair 22 that you were to lose your license?
23 A I'm afraid I don't recall the discussions with 24 them, in enough specifics to recall that detail of the
) 25 conversation.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
965 h 112_ l Q Did you feel strongly at the time that it was 2 unfair?
3 A I believe in my conversation with Dr. Long I told 4 him that I thought it was unfair but that I recognized the 5 need for such a manuever on the Company's part to expedite restart.
6 7 Q So, you essentially agreed with the need to take 8 your license?
9 A I agreed with the necessity to limit the restart 10 Proceedings as much as possible so that restart could be yy expedited, and that my having a license to operate Three Mile 12 Island Unit 1 was felt to be part of that road-block in
( ) 13 restarting Unit 1.
14 And I agreed that the Company should do whatever 15 they felt necessary to expedite the restart of Unit 1. And 16 if that meant that my license should be removed, then they 17 should do it.
18 Q So, you agreed to that trade-off?
19 A Yes.
20 Q When you saw 1.he Appeal Board's decision, ALAB 772, 21 which contained the condition, referring to you , did you consult anyone in the management of GPU?
23 MR. BAUSER: Judge Margulies, I am going to 24 object. I realize there is a question inviting some of this
( ) discussion that Ms. Bradford is going into, but I really think 25 ,
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
966 llk__ _l32_ 1 unless I misunderstand the intent of her questions, it's not 2 directed at Mr. Husted's performance or even in his attitude.
3 It's directed at the motivations of the Company.
4 And I don' t think that that is the proper subject 5 f this proceeding.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES : Do you wish to respond?
7 MS. BRADFORD: Mr. Husted has stated he held these 8 P i nions at certain times, when the Special Master's report issued and when the Appeal Board decision issued. I simply 10 Em Probing to find out how far he pursued those opinions or 11 how strong those opinions were that those decisions were 12 fair or not fair.
13
(
O)s JUDGE MARGULIES: I will permit the question. On 14 redirect, he testified as to the unjustness of this area and 15 as to how it limited his job opportunity.
16 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question, 17 please?
18 BY MS. BRADFORD: (Continuing) 19 Q Yes. Af ter reading the Appeal's Board condition, 20 which affected you, did you consult with anyone in GPU 21 management?
22 A I'm certain that I did, but I don' t have any 23 independent recollection of who it was or when I made such 24 consultation.
s ) 25 0 Did you make any attempt to respond to that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 2 33 M1646
967 b-- -4 3+- 1 condition that was imposed that effected you?
A I'm not certain I knew at that time who I would 3 respond to.
4 Q Did you make an attempt to find out? I mean, it 5 was an important issue. Did you- make any attempt to find 6 out?
7 A No, I don't believe so, not that I recall.
8 Q From the time that you appeared before the 9 Special Master and until today, have you been involved in 10 proceedings such as this in that intervening time?
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: Could you be more specific, or 12 could you focus it?
().
13 BY MS. BRADFORD : (Continuing).
14 Q NRC hearings. Have you been involved in NRC 15 hearings between the time that you testified before the 16 Special Master and these hearings here today?
17 MS. BAUSER: Ms..Bradford, could I ask for a-18 clarification about " involved?"
MS. BRADFORD: I beg your pardon?
19 20 MS. BAUSER: Do you mean, did he participate in?
21 MS. BRADFORD: Yes.
22 JUDGE MARGULIES: Did he testify in hearings?
23 MS. B RADFORD: Testified.
JUDGE MARGULIES : Unrelated to this proceeding?
24
() 25
. ADFORD: Yes, unrelated to this proceeding.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 334W5646
968 k_. _l 7 R 1 THE WITNESS: No, I have not testified.
2 FG . BRADFORD: I have no more questions.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there anything further of 4 this witness?
5 (No response.)
JUDGE MARGULIES: You are excused , Mr. Hus ted.
6 7 Thank you.
8 (The witness stood aside.)
MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, may I raise one issue 9
with you? You expressed an interest -- I've lost track --
10 yy Monday or Tuesday of last week in having something in the 12 record that would give some of the flavor of the O and W (j 13 episode.
14 Late on that afternoon, counsel got together and 15 produced a three-page document, or four-page document, that 16 we introduced into the record the next day. And that was 17 done with my consent, let me be quick to say.
1 18 Your Honor may have reviewed that document and 19 concluded that it's entirely adequate. However, over the 20 week-end I had the opportunity to take stock of the transcript, 21 and while I don' t have the page in front of me in which you 22 made your request, I think I'm not satisfied that the two or 23 three page summary that we put in the record adequately 24 gives the flavor of the O and W episode.
25 And I proposed to the other parties here that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
969
--l % 1 unless you had some objection that we take the entire 2 report of investigation, dated August 11, 1981 -- that is 3 the investigation that ultimately ended up in the determina-4 tion that O and W had cheated -- and put that entire document 5 in the record.
6 We have the adequate number of copies to do that 7 now. And my understanding is that there is no objection g among the parties.
9 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any other way of 10 doing it? Is there any way of -- for going to the Licensing 11 Board decision that would be more compact and succinct 12 rather than --
I. .s) 13 MR. MAUPIN: My guess is that it probably 14 compactly and succinctly discusses in that document or in 15 the Special Master's report or in some other document the --
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: I don' t know what else is in 17 that report, and I don't know if it would be a good idea 18 for me to be reading the report in its entirety.
19 MR. MAUPIN: Well, since I don' t know what things 20 you fear you might find in it, I --
)
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: I don ' t know what's in it. 4 22 MR. MAUPIN: Basically, it contains the results 1
23 of the first NRC investigation. Correct me, fellow parties, 24 if I'm wrong. It includes the results of the first NRC 25 investigation that followed on the discovery of certain ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~
970 407- 1 parallelisms between two of the exam papers in the April 2 1981 NRC exam. It includes the summary that has already 3 been put into evidence. It includes reports of interviews 4 very much like the one that is the much talked about Page 39, 5 which is a part of this package.
~
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, does it go into other 7 parties? I've seen references in the reports to U and --
8 MR. MAUDIN: It includes the reports of the interviews with all of the persons I believe who were 9
interviewed during the first investigation. It includes 10 11 reports -- two or possibly three interviews of O and W, f r example. And it sets out the dates on which they made 12 O
\.)
13 certain statements.
14 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, would it also include 15 reports on Mr. James relationship to other parties and (
16 what his testimony was?
17 MR. MAUPIN: It happens not to have any report 18 of an interview with Mr. James because I believe it's_the 19 case that Mr. James was not interviewed until a second or 20 third investigation.
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, if the parties have no 22 objection, I have no objection.
23 MR. MAUPIN: To describe it on the record, it is 24 a document -- I hesitate to say -- consisting of 51 pages f typed material plus five enclosures. It is entitled, 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
971 l k__ 132. 1 " Report - "
The cover page is on the letterhead, United 2 States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C.
3 20555. It has stamped on it the date, August 11, 1981.
4 It is entitled, " Report of Investigation. " And l
5 it's Title is: Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating 6 Station, Unit 1/ Investigation of Alleged Cheating on Operator Licensing Examinations.
7 It has Case Number HQS-81-003. It has the signatures of Edward C. Gilbert. In fact, it has four signatures of Edward C. Gilbert, in each case signing for 10 I a different person.
11 '
And I suggest that it be admitted into evidence 12 as Husted Exhibit 26 in evidence.
Ii Ns' 13 I believe we violated your earlier admonition and
{
14 '
did not hand out copies prior to describing the document.
15 16 JUDGE MARGULIES: I don't think we are going to-17 have any problem with that.
18 MR. MAUPIN: We have three copies for the court 19 reporter and we have a copy for you. l 20 (The document was marked as 21 Husted Exhibit Number 26 for 22 identification . )
23 MR. JOHNSON: Is there a limited purpose for which 24 this is being offered?
( e) 25 MR. MAUPIN: The only person for which I intend ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 4646
972 139 l(__ 1 that it be admitted is that it is for the purpose of showing 2 its contents. I do believe it to be an accurate copy of 3 the report.
4 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, I would admit it for 5 a more limited purpose, to show the nature of the investiga-6 tion of O and W and what the investigation showed to give us 7 background, because there was quite a bit of testimony as to 8 0 and W and what they did. And i~t was a question as to how 9 it fitted into this proceeding.
10 But it would be solely for that limited purpose 11 of discussing -- of disclosing what the scenario was that 12 involved O and W.
() 13 MR. MAUPIN: That's fine with me.
14 MR. JOHNSON: That's fine with the Staff.
15 MS. BAUSER: Yes.
16 MS. BRADFORD: Yes.
17 JUDGE MARGULIES: Before we go on to the matter 18 of briefs, do the parties have anything further?
19 MR. MAUPIN: Only that -- well, no. I was going 20 to suggest that possibly if the parties talked among them-21 selves for a few moments -- a few minutes might be more 22 accurate -- we might recommend a schedule. _But perhaps 23 Your Honor has something in mind.
24 JUDGE MARGULIES : Well, first of all, I want to b,
g, 25 say that the document is admitted as Exhibit Number 26 into ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33H646
973 1-+0 - 1 evidence for the limited purpose that I stated.
MR. JOHNSON: I just wanted to make sure we had 3 the right designation. What is it?
4 JUDGE MARCULIFR; It's Husted Exhibit Number 26.
5 (The document, Husted Exhibit 6
Numner 26 for identification, 7
w s admitted into evidence.)
8 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Thank you, sir.
JUDGE MARGULIES : Before we go into the time 9
10 element for the briefs, I would like to state something as 11 to their content.
12 In the report and Order on the initial pre-hearing 13 conference, we set forth seven areas that were to be covered (v^] ~
14 in this proceeding. They include, one, the alleged soficitatic n f an answer to an exam question from another operator during 15 16 the April 1981 NRC written examination; two, the lack of forth-17 rightness of his testimony before the Special Master; three, 18 his alleged poor attitude toward the hearing on the cheating 19 incidents; and, four, his alleged lack of cooperation with 20 NRC investigators.
21 Then, there were three additional areas to be 22 covered. Five, what does Husted's performance of his 23 responsibilities with GPU reflect about his attitude and 24 integrity? Six, in light of the answer to 1 through 5, is any remedial action required with respect to Husted? And, us 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
974
_L4 L _ 1 seven, if remedial action is required, what is it?
2 Of course, I expect the parties to cover all of 3 those seven elements on brief. ,
4 The Appeal Board denied Mr. Husted's promotion to 5 supervising the instructing of non-licensed personnel. They 6 found him lacking in the ability to communicate effectively a 7 sense of responsibility as well as information. The Appeal 8 Board concluded that his conduct demonstrated a lack of s
9 respect.
10 Number one, I would like the parties to address 11 as to whether or not the Appeal Board placed an appropriate 12 standard on Husted in regard to his promotion. And, if so,
~
O 13 aia he 'ei t meet 1t?
14 MR. MAUPIN: You mean, did he fail to meet it 15 based on the evidence that has been presented in this 16 proceeding?
17 JUDGE MARGULIES: In this proceeding, yes. And 18 when I say in this proceeding, I would also like the parties 19 to take up the matter as to what Mr. Husted's testimony in 20 this proceeding itself, in terms of his actual appearing on 21 the stand, testifying during this week demonstrated as to 22 his forthrightness, attitude and his integrity. That's in 23 addition to what his prior testimony may or may not have 24 shown.
I 25 It's what his appearance in these five days of ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coversee M3364646
975 l.42 - 1 testimony has shown in terms of his forthrightness, attitude 2 and integrity.
3 Getting back to the Appeal Board, assuming he 4 did fail to meet the standard the Appeal Board set, should 5 he forever be barred from obtaining the position that he 6 held? I would like the parties to address that.
7 I would also like the parties to address the 8 question, has he now met the standard that the Appeal Board 9 set? Your position may be that he has always met it, but I 10 want to know in terms of, is there also evidence that he now 11 meets that standard.
12 Am I clear or am I unclear on that? Do you O 13 unaerecend thee2 14 MR. MAUPIN: Yes.
15 MS. BAUSER: Yes.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there anything further you 17 want to discuss in regard to the contents of the brief, as 18 to what should be covered?
MR. MAUPIN: I would like to ask whether it's 9
20 Your Honor's preference -- this appears to vary from Judge to 21 Judge -- that we include in our findings a procedural history 22 of this matter, taking us from the, for example, notice of 23 hearing or the Commission's first action,-giving Mr. Husted 24 the opportunity to seek a hearing up until the day the 25 hearing started?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage WM
976
_.14.L 1 JUDGE MARGULIES: I think it would be helpful, 2 because it is going to have to be a development as to how 3 this - the genesis of the entire matter progressed. And I 4 think that would be a natural part of that.
5 MS. BAUSER: Judge Margulies, do you have a 6 format preference other -- obviously in this case, we have a 7 series of questions from the original Order and some 8 additional questions now that I think can dictate the form to 9 some extent?
10 JUDGE MARGULIES: It is customary before the NRC 11 to prepare proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law 12 in the form of an initial decision.
And I w uld like to follow that policy here. It
('~l v
13 w uld be helpful if one party could do it, it need not be
~
14 15 all the parties, and that is to prepare a list of the 16 witnesses and a list of the exhibits. That, too, is 17 customary to have that.
18 MR. MAUPIN: Why don' t I simply say that Mr. Husted 19 will d that.
20 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is that acceptable to the other 21 Parties?
22 MR. JOHNSON: Yes.
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: Before you get started in discussing a schedule, I think it fair to tell the parties 24 25 what my schedule is. I am in the process of preparing an ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
977 l l k__ _l44- 1 initial decision in the Vogle case. I am on a Licensing 2 Board that has, within the past thirty days, been assigned 3 the responsibility of holding an expedited hearing in the 4 Shoreham emergency planning exercise matter. And that will 5 have to be given priority.
6 I just mention those things so that you should 7 keep those in mind in setting, or recommending the setting of 8
a briefing date.
If it would be helpful, I guess we can go off the 9
record now and give you an opportunity to discuss it among yourselves.
MS. BRADFORD : Judge Margulies, I have one comment.
r1 If I am to wait for the transcripts to come into the local 13
(_) '
14 PDR that won't happen for a month to six weeks. That's the 15 usual unless that can be expedited in some way.
16 MR. JOHNSON: Your Honor, it seems to me that '
17 the last time this question came up was when we had the' 18 deposition of Mr. Husted on April 29th. And Ms. Bradford 19 asked whether I could expedite the transmission of that 20 transcript to the Document Room. And I made every effort to 21 do that, the local Document Room.
22 MS. BRADFORD: Right.
23 MR. JOHNSON: Did you get that document in a 24 reasonably short time?
(k 25 MS. BRADFORD: It arrived there within two or three ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
- 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
978
_ 14.5_ 1 days of the request.
2 MR. JOHNSON: Well, I will attempt, as soon as I 3 have all of the transcripts, to do what I did with respect
~~
4 to the deposition transcript and perhaps she can have it 5 within a week.
I don' t promise, because it's a function of the 6
LPDR. But, I believe if it worked once it may work again.
7 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, let's go of f the record 8
and see if the parties can come up with a proposed schedule.
9 10 (Of f-the-record. )
11 MR. MAUPIN: Your Honor, the parties have 12 conferred and propose the following to you by way of a 13 schedule for proceeding from this point. We propose that I[ ll 14 the parties will all file simultaneously on August 15, 15 1986 proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, and 16 by that descripulon I mean to describing documents, complying 17 with the instructions you gave us on the record a few 18 moments ago.
19 And the parties would file also on August 15, 20 1986 such transcript corrections as they would like to see 21 made.
22 The parties further suggest --
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: When will the transcript pr p sal be made? As of when?
24 (s
w~'
a 25 MR. MAUPIN: I propose that each party would file ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
979 k__ 1 46. 1 its proposed changes on the same -- at the same time that 2 it files its proposed findings of fact and conclusions of 3 law.
4 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is that really helpful? I 5 w uld think that it should be done well in advance.of that 6 if there are meaningful changes so that all the parties are 7 working with the same document.
8 If you file it as of the same date you are 9 filing the proposed findings, it really doesn ' t --
10 MR. MAUPIN: Do you think August 1st would be 11 early enough?
12 JUDGE MARGULIES: I would think you would want
(')
v 13 the motion passed upon before you prepare your proposed 14 findings. But, if you don't find that a problem --
MS. B AUSER: Judge Margulies, let me take the 15 16 fall for this. I suggested that only because I have found 17 that frequently you find errors in the course of preparing 18 proposed findings.
19 Perhaps if we could back up a couple of weeks 20 where we would already be way in the process of working on 21 our findings but not so far in advance that we really don' t 22 catch the mistakes that one catches when you look at it 23 more closely --
24 JUDGE MARGULIES: If there are any material
$ 25 de fi ciencies , you want to catch them as early as possible so ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33& 66 4
980
.L4.7_ 1 that all parties are working with the same transcript. If 2 it's just types and things of that sort, it really doesn't 3 make any difference.
4 I haven' t been reading the transcripts . I don't 5 know if the parties have.
6 MS. BAUSER: Yes.
7 JUDGE MARGULIES: But if you think it's going to be 8
a m aningful exercise, then it should be in advance of filing 9 the proposed findings. If you think it's just a technical 10 compliance in terms of typos and things of that sort, it 11 really doesn't make any dif ference when it's filed.
12 I would have no problem with the 1st, but once again
[]) 13 is it going to be meaningful for me to go through the transcript 14 and then get out an order and be right up to the 15th or so 15 anyway? I don't thinkait would serve any useful purpose.
16 MR. MAUPIN: In light of your comments , we would 17 be prepared to file transcript corrections by the lith. I'm 18 speaking of July.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there any problem among the 20 parties on that?
21 MR. JOHNSON: That's mighty short notice.
22 JUDGE MARGULIES: How about another week if there 23 is a problem in terms of getting the transcripts for Ms. Bradford?
How about the 18th? I 24 I h MR. JOHNSON: Okay.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
981 b__ ldB .__ 1 MR. MAUPIN: The parties would propose -- I repeat --
2 to file the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law 3 as I've describe,d them earlier on Friday, August the 15th.
4 JUDGE MARGULIES: Now, does that mean in-hand?
5 MR. MAUPIN: We had not discussed that. I had 6
assumed that they would be served ilany manner acceptable under the regulations.
7 8
And I say that because we are proposing a date for 9 simultaneous filings of replies on September 5. We had not addressed that, Your Honor.
10 l' MR. JOHNSON: Well, why don' t we do it by expedited 12 delivery rather than in-hand?
() 13 MR. MAUPIN: We can certainly do that.
14 bE . BAUSER: Ms. Bradford, the filing of the 15 initial findings, we are talking about service, what type of 16 service, so the people receive them quickly to start working 17 on the final findings.
ig MS. BRADFORD : Well, I think I'm probably going to 19 have a problem.
20 JUDGE MARGULIES: How about if we move it up to 21 August 18th and September 8th in-hand? How does that sound?
22 Do the parties find that agreeable?
23 MR. MAUPIN: We do, Your Honor.
24 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
td>\ 25 MS. BAUSER: Yes, sir.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
982 h '.L4.9_ 1 JUDGE MARGULIES: Ms. Bradford?
2 MS. BRADFORD: I believe I can meet that schedule.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: That completes the parties '
4 proposal?
5 MR. MAUPIN: Yes, sir.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES : I will set July 18th as the date 7 for filing the corrections to the transcript. The simultaneous 8 Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law are directed 9 to be served on the parties, in-hand, on August 18th.
10 Responses to be filed simultaneously, are due to 11 be served on the parties on September 8th.
12 MR. JOHNSON: Is that also in-hand?
13 JUDGE MARGULIES: In-hand. Is there anything
(}) -
14 further?
15 MR. MAUPIN: No, sir.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: The record is closed. Thank you 17 very much.
18 (Whereupon, the hearing is concluded at 4:45 p.m.,
- *^* "Y' 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 6646