ML20214H403
| ML20214H403 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1986 |
| From: | Zimmerman R NRC |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 86-ERA-37, NUDOCS 8705270374 | |
| Download: ML20214H403 (118) | |
Text
, -__-_ .
- - ~
.~ -
-y _
4 5 ,
4 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF' LABOR OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION LAW JUDGE
~ ,
In the matter of '
-) '
)
-BLAINF P. THOMPSON, )' '
- ) r
~
Complainant, ). ,
) .
.)
~
. vs.
No. 86-ERA ' ~
ARIZONA' PUBLIC SERVICE )
~
COMPANY / ARIZONA' NUCLEAR POWER ) -
PROJECT,. .
)
)
j- ..
Respondent.
.)
)
?
. c DEPOSITION OF ROY ZIMMERMAN i Phoenix,~ Arizona.
- October 14, 1986 .
1:30 p.m.
PupAntd Foa:
H
_uVoss'& Associates. INC.
Ow East Canettback .
l Chuck Mullins 5*' * ' '
=h,u m m 2 l
,. Attorney at Law -
~
l
. (602) 2M+ooo
~
- (copy) *
~'
' By: . Carol Kelly Reill, RPR
~
~
A 4
~
t., - ,
.n 8705270374 861014 '
PDR ADOCK 05000528 '
u PDR
, T i
r 2
1 2 IEDEE 3
4 EXAMINATION Page 5
By:- Mr. Hayden 4, 100 6
7 By: Mr. Kohn 18, 105 8
9 10 EXHIBITS 11 12 No. 1 Newspaper article "Palo Verde security 41 j section rated low" No. 2 Newspaper article New Times Weekly 67 14 August 27 to Sept 2 "APS Part II, Files disappear in mysterious burglary" 15 No. 3 Newspaper article " Court Records 67 16 document spying" New Times Weekly 17 No. 4 Calundar page dated 9 Monday, December 70 1985 18 No. 5 Calundar page dated 16 Thursday, 1986 70 19 No. 6 Calundar page, at top " Services 70 20 performed today" 21 No. 7 Newspaper article "Palo Verde complaint 98
' Costs job'"
22 23 l 24 25 VOSS & ASSOCIATES,'INC.
~ -
r.
3
- - 1
- f.-
2-3 DEPOSITIOli OF ROY ' ZIlillER!!AN 4
5 commenced at 1:30 p.m. on October 14, 1986, at the offices 6 of Snell & Wilmer, 2900 VBC,- Phoenix, Arizona, before 7 CAROL KELLY REILL, a Notary Public in and for the County 8 of Ilaricopa, - State of _ Arizona.
9 10' 11 12 APPEARAliCES:
i 13 For the Complainant:
14 Government Accountability Project
!1r. Stephen 11. Kohn 15 !!s. Beth Payne 16 Coalition for Responsible Energy Education Mr. Ilyron Scott 17 Ms. Lyn licKay 10 For the Respondent:
19 SNELL & WILT 1ER 11r. William Hayden 20 !!s. Becky Winterscheidt 21 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
22 U. S. ITJCLEAR REGULATORY CORIIISSION Mr. Chuck !!ullins !
23 Also Present:
[ 24 Mr. Blaine-Thompson 25 VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
- w. >
m ___ - _ _ - - - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . ,
4 1 Phoenix, Arizona f October 14, 1986 2 1:30 p.m.
3 4 ROY ZIK!!ERf!AU 5 called as a witness herein, having been first-duly sworn, 6 was examined and testified as follows:
7 2
8 EXAMINATION 9 BY MR. HAYDEM:
10 Q. 11r . Zimmerman, for the record, would you 11 please give us your full name and address?
12 A. Roy Phillip Zimmerman. I live at 6334 Uest
( Yucca Street in Glendale, Arizona.
13 14 Q. Are you employed?
15 A. I work for the United States Huclear 16 Regulatory Commission.
17 Q. What is your current job title or commission?
18 A. I am the senior resident inspector at the 19 Palo Verde Generating Station.
20 Q. How long have you held that particular 21 position?
22 A. For approximately two and a half years.
23 Q. What position did you hold prior to that?
l
{
24 A. I was the senior resident inspector at the 25 Ginna, G-i-n-n-a, Muclear Power plant in Rochester, New c
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5-------------------.----------------.---=--------
5 1 York.
j 2 Q. Let me see If I can get the approximate 3 dates. You have held that position at the Palo Verde 4 Generating Station since approximately 1984?
5 A. Right.
6 Q. How about approximately at the Ginna plant?
7 A. About three-and a half years.
8 Q. Moving then prior to the Ginna?
9 A. I was the resident inspector at the Hillstone 10 Power Plant in Connecticut.
11 Q. For approximately how long?
12 A. Approximately one year. Prior-to that-I was
(' 13 a regional inspector at region 1 for approximately two 14 years. Prior to that I was a nuclear engineer with 15 General Electric Knolos, K-n-o-1-o-s, Atomic Power 16 Laboratory in Schenectady, - New York.
17 Q. Is it reasonable _for me to-assume that you 18 have a degree in engineering?
19 A. Yes, a degree in the United States Herchant 20 Marine Academy, marine engineering which is basically ,
l 21 equivalent to a mechanical engineer. 4 l
22 Q. Could you give us a feel for your duties, 23 your responsibilities in your current position as senior l 24 resident inspector at Palo Verde?
l 25 A. I manage a staff of four other technical L WOSS A I.SSOCIATESn_INC. ,
r---___ __ -_ _.-._ --- -__ _ ___.--__ __--___ __--__ __
6 f 1 inspectors and one administrative clerical support aide in 2 carrying out the region 5 resident inspection program at 3 the Palo Verde site for all three units. Primary function-4 is to protect the public's health and safety through our 5 ongoing safety to identify any safety concerns in the 6 operation, pre-operational testing and construction 7 aspects of ongoing work at Palo Verde.
8 0 Can you give me a feel for how the Palo Verde 9 Nuclear Generating Station compares to others that you are 10 familiar with? By " compare" I am talking about in size, 11 volume, how reactors are measured.
12 A. Palo Verde is the largest facility that I am
(' 13 aware of in the United States as a site. The actual 14 thermo capacity of each individual unit is as large as any 15 in the country.
16 Q. With that background, then, Mr. Zimmerman, 17 what I would like to do is direct your attention to .
18 February of this year 1986 and in particular, if you have 19 a recollection, to Tuesday, February 25th of this year.
20 Do you recall whether or not you received a phone call 21 from a Mr. Ed Van Brunt?
22 A. I can't be specific as to the exact .date, but 23 in that general time frame I do recall a conversation that
( 24 I had with Mr. Van Brunt over the telephone.
25 Q. . Here you f amiliar with who Mr. Van Brunt. was?
< 9 tot.%JGht@250W@h.]tL
r____________________________________
7 L
,_ 1 A. Yes, I was.
2 Q. Generally speaking, what is his capacity?-
3 A. He is the executive'vice-president for APS.
4 Q. APS would be the' managing participant?
5 A. . The licensee for the Palo Verde plant, the 6 site.-
7 Q. If I understand what 'you are telling me, you 8 don't have a vivid recollection of the date. Do you 9 recall what time of the day this -- let me even back up.
)
10 Let's start out with a foundation.
11 To the best of your. recollection did Mr. Van-12 Brunt call you or did you call Mr. Van Brunt?
(' 13 A. Mr. Van Brunt called me.
14 Q. By call, I assume we are talking about over.
15 the telephone?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. Do you have any recollection of the time of l
18 the day even, approximately, morning, afternoon?
19' A. I believe it was either late morning or early 20 afternoon. I'believe he called me from a car phone. I 21 believe he was on his way back to his downtown office ~from.
22 the Palo Verde site.
23 Q. To the best of your present recollection, i 24 will you relate to me the content of the conversation, the 25 telephone conversation that you had with Mr. Van Brunt?
m- . _
seeg 6
r______.______._______________.___________________.
8 1 A. ' Mr. Van Brunt was concerned that he' had 2 received a phone call from nr. Staggs'of the' Arizona 3 Republic shortly before he called me, and in that 4 conversation Mr. Staggs indicated some specific 5 information to Mr. Van Brunt dealing with preliminary 6 findings f rom a very recent NRC security inspection.
7 Mr. Van Brunt was concerned-that preliminary 8 information had been released to this reporter f rom the 9 NRC, which is not customary in his mind for the NRC to'act 10~ in that fashion. That normally we do not discuss-11 preliminary inspection findings until they have gone 12 through an NRC supervisory f review and are issued in a 13 final form in a documented inspection report.
14 He brought that concern to me. I 15 acknowledged his comment and indicated-that that is our 16 normal practice to not get into preliminary findings with the public until supervisory review has been performed and
~
17 18 the findings are finalized.
19 He requested some assistance-on my part in 20 determining what had transpired and I informed Mr. Van 21 Brunt that I would contact region.5 personnel and try to l
22 better understand what occurred and that I would give him 23 a call back.
( 24 Q. Mr. Zimmerman, do I assume f rom what you have
-25 just told me then that at the time you. received the call W6SLTtMEM GM4%_RR4
r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ ; _
9 1 from Mr. Van Brunt that you basically had little or no ,
2 background inf ormation cn1 the subject matter, that you .
3 were basically unaware of what had occurred?
4 A. -Hell, I had attended the NRC security Exit 5 Intervieu where the findings were discussed. That was the 6 the last dealings that I had on the inspection findings 7 until Mr. Van Brunt's phone call.
8- 0. Is it reasonable for me to assume from what '
9 you have already told me that after your telephone
. '10 conversation with Mr. Van Brunt that you had some' contact 11 with the region 5 office in Walnut Creek?
12 A. Yes. I initiated a call to regional security
(' 13 inspectors and management personnel, briefed them on the 14 conversation I had with Mr. Van Brunt and was informed by 15 them that they had already received a phone call 16 themselves from Mr. Staggs and that he was already quite 17 knowledgeable in some specifics regarding the inspection, 18 preliminary inspection findings, and the regional 19 individuals were quite surprised by that and the 20 information did not originate from the region 5 office.
21 Q. Let me ask a you couple of follow-ups on this 22 point. I understood your earlier testimony to be in Mr.
23 Van _ Brunt's conversation with you, I will use the word
( 24 " intimated" that the NRC may have been responsible for the 25 discloser of the information to Mr. Staggs.
'VOSS & ASSOCIATESo INC. ,_,
r _ ___ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _.__ _.__ _ _ _. _ _ _ _______ _ _ _ _
10 f
1 I take it your final comment to me a moment 2 ago was that you obtained some verification that that,had 3 not occurred?
4 A. That's right. Mr. Van Brunt initially 5- believed-during our phone call that the source of'the
. 6 information'was from the region 5 office. ' Based on my:
i 7 phone call with region 5 it became apparent that that was
, 8 not the case.
, 9 Q. I now want to focus in on just a little bit r
10 more detail. Now in your communication with region 5's j' 11 offices in Walnut Creek, are you at liberty -- and I.
12 phrase that question in that fashion, because it's clear
, 13 to me that there are probably certain aspects of internal 14 communications within region 5 that would not be --
15 HR. MULLINS:- So far I don't think 16 that -- that doesn't sound like we~are getting into 17 anything that's going to be a problem. If it is,-I'll let 18 you know.
19 Q. (BY MR. IIAYDEN) Can you identify for me_to 20 the best of your recollection with whom in Walnut Creek 21 you spoke on the day of your conversation with Mr.-Van 22 Brunt?
- 23 A. I don't recall all of the participants. _I i l
., 24 was on a conference call with a number of regional l i
25 individuals. I believe that Mr. Shuster was involved, Mr. l l
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
r____.___________________________._______.______________
11 1 Montgomery.and Mr. Scorano (phonetic). I au positive that
.j 2 Mr. Scorano was involved. As far as the other.two 3 individuals and anybody else that may have been present, I 4 don't recall the specific individuals.
5 Q. All right.
'6 A. The people that were involved were the 7 appropriate people to be asking the question whether they 8 had any knowledge of information having been-passed out 9 previously. They were involved with the inspection.
10 Q. Did you know at this point in time with whom 11 in region 5 Hr. Staggs had talked?
12 .A. I don't believe so. At this point in time
(~
13 today I know who he spoke.to. Going back I can't recall.
14 if I knew or not.
15 Q. Based on what you know or have you been 4
16 advised as of today, who do you believe that to be? .
17 A. Mr. Cook and Mr. Shuster.
18 Q. Do you recall whether.then in your 19 convercation -- and assuming that this day is February 20 25th, I know you have told us that may or may not be 21 correct, let's work on the assumption that that is correct-22 for the purpose of our questioning -- going-back then to-23 this conversation with the regional office, do you know if
^
. 24 Ilr. Cook was a party to those conversations?
25 A. I don't believe so.
~
VK6SM % lsBK@B8A91ESa INCA
- ----~----- - .-
12
~
1- Q. Do you recall whether you were. advised by 7
2 region 5 personnel in Walnut Creek that these events that ,
.3 you have described gave rise to a concern within the 4 region as to whether Safeguards information may have been 5 disclosed to an unauthorized ~ source?
6 A. I recall very well that'the region had a 7 concern based on the specifics that were relayed to them 8 f rom Ilr. Staggs. They were concerned what the disclosed 9 source was that allowed the information to- be passed .to 10 the' media. And based on the specifics-that were provided, 11 they were concerned whether Safeguards information may 12 have been released and the information given to the media.
(- 13 They requested that I return a call to 11r.
14 Van Brunt and advise-him of that concern, and make fir. van 15 Brunt aware that we are interested in. determining what-the 16 source of the information was, and for them to conduct-an 1
17 investigation to assure themselves-that Safeguards 18 information was not provided, and if it had been provided, 19 to take the necessary compensatory measures so that.the 20 security program at Palo Verde was not. compromised. ;
1 21 I advised 11r. Van Brunt of those concerns.
22 Q. Then it's appropriate to move to that 23 subsequent conversation.
l J. 24 Let me ask you one more question with respect j i
25 to your communipations with the Walnut Creek regional l l
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, IIIC.
13 1 office. In those discussions were you advised as to 2 whether fir. Staggs in communicating with the region had 3 given any. indication whatsoever as to where his source of-4 information had come from?
S A. No.
6 Q. Now, I think you have already testified that 7 you were directed by the regional office staff to contact ,
8 !!r. Van-Brunt. I believe you have already testified that 9 you did-so.
10 A. That's correct. ,
11 Q. . Did you do so on the same day that he 12 initiated the call to you?
(- 13 A. Within several hours.
14 Q. So do you have any recollection today of_-
15 approximately what time of the day the second conversation 16 with Mr. Van Brunt may have occurred?
17 A. Again, I can't be exact but I would say !
18 somewhere in the neighborhood of 1:00 or 2:00 in the ,
19 afternoon.
20 Q. Do you recall whether -- am I correct that 21 you initiated this phone-call?
22 A. The second phone call,.that's correct.
23 Q. Do you recall whether this was to a car-phone
( 24 or an office phone?
25 A. Again, I an not sure but'I believe he was ,
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
. _ - - - - _-, ~ - .-- .
14 l back in his office. I don't believe it was to the car
(
2 phone.
3 Q. This may be, I apologize, somewhat 4 repetitious, I think_you have already given us a feel for 5 what you were directed to advise Hr. Van Brunt. What did i
6 you advise Mr. Van Brunt in this conversation?
7 A. I advised Mr. Van Brunt that based on my 4
8 discussion with region 5 we had a concern that information 9 had apparently been provided to Mr. Staggs based on our 10 association with our inspection findings, and due to the 11 level of detailed knowledge on his part, it raised a 4
12 concern with us on whether the security plan may have been
(
13 compromised by Safeguards information having been i
14 improperly provided to Mr. Staggs.
15 I then informed Mr. Van Brunt that we felt it 16 necessary for APS to evaluate the source of the i 17 information and provide an investigation that would allow 1 18 them to determine whether the security plan had in any way 19 been compromised. If the investigation determined that to i 20 be the case, to take the appropriate compensatory 21 measures.
4 ,
- 22 Q. Is that a fair characterization of the entire 23 content of that conversation?
- ( 24 A. Mr. Van Brunt acknowledged my statement and j 25 said that he intended on.doing that.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
. _ _ , ,,- .. - ~
15
, 1 Q. That day did you have any further discussions 2 with Mr. Van Brunt or any other management official of 3 APS?
4 A. I don't believe so.
5 MR. HAYDEN: At this time I have no 6 further-questions.
7 MR. MULLINS: Hight be a good spot on 8 the record to take care of the document response to the 9 subpoena. There are five documents which Mr. Zimmerman 10 has which we are going to withhold on the ongoing 11 investigations exception. I will be preparing for both 12 counsel a menu description inventory of the five documents
(- 13 and I will forward that to you hopefully by the end of the 14 week.
15 The other documents -- first of all, in his 16 files there is a list of the complaints in lir. Thompson's 17 case which you provided me a copy with this week. I 16 presume you don't necessarily have to have them back?
19 11R. KOHN: Are those the exact copies 20 of what we gave you.
21 MS. PAYNE: We don't need them back.
22 11R. MULLINS:' Most of these are March 23 3, 1986, Thompson to Deblo, and then three pages of his
(, 24 appointment calendar, two of which you have in response to 25 the earlier subpoena. I would assume what we will do, if VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
-m-------_____
16 l you can copy this we will give -- they'can have the-
-(
2 originals, you can have a copy and he can have a copy, or 3 both of you can have copies and he can keep the originals.
4 That would be the best thing.
5 Off the record.
6 (Discussion off the record.)
7 HR. MULLIUS: Back on the record. As 8 per our understanding on the other documents, if you wish ,
9 to file an objection on the ALJ, of course, you are free.
10 HR. KOHU: Do you have some type of 11 document explaining these five documents?
12 MR. MULLINS: I will'by the end of the
(
13 week. Something similar to an inventory or something.
14 MR. KOHN: When we go back to DC I 15 apparently will need to sit down with you and see where 16 they all fit.
17 HR. HAYDEN: The only thing at this 18 juncture that causes me any confusion, I was not aware 19 that this witness had a subpoena duces tecum served upon 20 him.
21 MR. !$0LLINS: I would state that it l 22 perhaps was an oversight on my office's part that we had 23 received subpoenaes back in June for documents.
I 24 HR. HAYDEN: I may have been aware of 25 that. I may have forgotten it.
l VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. J
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _._____ _ _ _ _ _ . m e m e m 17 4
1 MR. MULLINS: .During all of our 2 documents production, I believe through the' document 3 production last week and today you will have gotten 4 everything. I have discussed this with my superiors over 5 the phone on the weekend and we are going to go back this 6 week and do some checking and make sure that you have a 7 copy of everything that we have-produced. I apologize for 8 the oversight on our part.
9 NR. IIAYDEN: Not a problem at all. The 10 question is, are these documents being produced pursuant 11 to the subpoena?
12 These here. I am trying to figure out how 13 ruch I need to have her reproduce.
14 l-IR. MULLINS: They are in his files.
15 They were sent from me to him last week. I sent them to 16 all the people who were going to be subpoenaed in our 17 region simply to give them an understanding of the nature 18 of the proceeding.
19 11R. 11AYDEN: I assume that she can 20 accomplish all of this.
21 I think you guys have said you don't want a 22 set of these.
23 11R. KOHN: Just'for the record, in 24 terms of these NRC subpoenaes, all four NRC witnesses, 25 Cook, Zimmerman, Shuster, and Schaeffer all received VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
18
, 1 subpoenas from Blaine Thompson. The'subpoenaes for 2 Zimmerman and Cook were identical to the subpoena which 3 you had already served upon them except for the subpoena ,
4 duces' tecum aspects of them. In terms of time and place,.
5 I am not sure of the place, like the time of the 6 deposition, just because we wanted them to produce 7 documents also. I just want to clarify that.
8 11R. IIULLINS: There was also on the 9 June group of subpoenaes a subpoena to the custodian of 10 records for region 5. ?!ost of those documents, which were 11 also in the file of Shuster and Schaeffer, included the 12 documents which were released in the depositions Thursday
- 13 and Friday.
14 11R. KOHN: I want to get back right now 15 to just a couple of preliminary questions.
16 17 EXA11INATION ,
18 BY liR. KOHN:
19 Q. Other than 11r. !!ullins, have.you discussed
, 20 the testimony you are giving today with any other 21 individual?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Who is that?
24 A. I spoke with Greg Cook this morning and I 4
25 spoke with Doug Shuster this morning.
i VOSS & ASSOCIATES, . INC. _ _
m ee m m n e m - ~ ~~ ~ n m ~ ~ n n- ~ ~ ~ ~ m - ~ ~ mn - -- ~
19 1 HR..HULLINS: For the record, I would 2 presume at some-point this summer he did discuss'lEls
^
3 testimony with Mr. Sholenburger who was regional counsel 4 at that time. Sholenburger, for the' record, is ill and i 5 normally would have handled this deposition in my place.
6 TIIC WITNCSS: That's correct.
7 Q. (BY HR. KOH!!) Were there any other 8 individuals you can remember discussing this deposition 9 with? .
6 J
10 A. Al Johnson.
11 Q. Anybody else? [
12 A. No, other than just some other NRC people in 13 my office to let them know where I was goin.g to be today. ,
14 as far as any specifics associated with-this case.
1 15 Q. Did you discuss this deposition with any 1
16 representatives of APS?
17 A. No. :t n
c 18 Q. Or employees?
4 19 A. No.
I :M) Q. Who is Al Johnson?
21 A. He is the enforcement coordinator-in region
]
22 5.
23 Q. Just for the record --
} 24 A. In Lou Sholenburger's absence Al Johnson has 4
25 been serving as a coordinator in arranging the times and I r
! - VOSS ' & ASSOCIATDS, ' INC.
mm-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mannn - - .
20 1- places for the depositionc from our standpoint.
2 Q. With Mr. Cook, can you explain, cah you tell 3 ,
me who initiated that conversation?
4 A. Mr. Cook. )
5 Q. At what time?
/ :
6 A. About 9:00 this' morning.
, 7 Q. Do you know why he called you?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Why?
10 A. He called for a subject.that is unrelated to 11 this deposition.
12 Q. How did the deposition get brought up in',the I
) .
13 conversation? .
14 A. I don't recall whether he-brought it up or I
~
15 brought it up. I don't recal1 if he mentioned it first or 16 if I mentioned it first.- That wasn't the reason for his 17 phone call.
i .
10 Q. What was discussed about the depocition?
19 A. Just the length of time was the primary
- 20 aspect.
21 Q. What else, anything else discussed?- <
22 A. People present came up.' I am not sure if it 23 was during my conversation with Mr. Cook or with Mr.
- 24 Shuster. It was mentioned that Mr. Scott and Mr. Thompson 25 were present at the depositions in. Walnut Creek.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES,-INC. , _
.k
>- ( s S 21 i
i Was anything said about those people?
> 1 Q. l 2 A. Nothing at all other than the fact that they- l 3 were there.
4 l O. Was anything else discussed?
5 A. No, other than just some very general 56- coaching to make sure to take time to think before ,
'7- talking, just get your. thoughts togetherhilefore 8 responding. That was the> extent of it.
s 9 -
Q. Was that'Doug Shuster?.
10 A. Right.
11 Q. Who initiated that call?
12 A. I initiated that call.
13 O. For what reason?
14 A. Basically'I made.that call at Mr. flullins' 15 request. '
16 MR. HULLINS: I am not sworn in but I 17 , asked him if t ere was a certain topic of the deposition i
18 that had been asked of several other individuals that had.
y 19 not been asked of lir. Shuster. I wanted to -- I thought 20 that it had not'been asked of 11r. Shuster. I wanted to 21 make sure of that.
~
22 Q. (BY MR. KOHN) Uhy did you make this call, if 23 you can just answer the, question?
, 24 A. I was requested by Mr. Hullins to call Mr.
25 Shuster.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES,'INC.
22 1 Q. What were you requested to' call him about?
2 A. Basically what Mr. Mullins just said.
3 MR. MULLINS: Tell him.
4 THE. WITNESS: Basically whether a 5 comment was made during Mr. Shuster's deposition about'a 6 statement that was -- that may have been raade at the NRC 7 Exit Meeting about the performance of Palo Verde in a 8 derogatory type of a statement that they were the worst in 9 their region.
10 Q. (BY MR. KOHN) Uhat were you calling up and 11 asl;ing Mr. Shuster?
12 A. Whether that subject came up during his 4
13 depositicn.
14 Q. Do you know why you were asking that 15 question?
16 A. No.
17 Q. What else did you talk to Mr. Shuster about?
13 A. Like I mentioned, it was either during that 19 conversation or the one with Mr. Cook that one of the two 20 ' gentlemen mentioned the fact that Mr. Thompson and.Mr.
21 Scott were at the deposition and, again, I think Mr.
22 Shuster just made the comment to gather your thoughts 23 before responding to a question. That was the extent of
- 24 it.
25 Q. How about Al Johnson?
VOSS &. ASSOCIATES, INC.
23 1 A. I spoke to Al Johnson several-times over the 2 last few weeks prior to'the depositions and that was 3 solely in the mode of arranging a logistics for where .the 4 deposition was going to be held and' when I was going to be 5 available for it. ,
6- Q. Did you review any documents in preparation 7 for this deposition?
8 A. Yes. I. reviewed the documents that are 9 presently being copied, Mr. Thompson's complaint'. I went i 10 back through _my personal log and removed the pages 11 associated with Mr. Thompson's previous discussions with 12 me and we presented those to you.
(
13 Q. Any other documents that weren't present in 14 this room that you reviewed for this' deposition?
15 A. The other documents are the five documents 16 that are being withheld. The ones that Mr. Hullins l
17 mentioned previously, s 1
18 Q. Any other documents?
1 19 A. I reviewed part 73 of 10 CFR,'to read the 20 book answer, definition of what constitutes' Safeguards 21 information. j l
22 Q. Anything else? !
l l
23 A. No.
-(. 24 Q. Do you know what section 210 of the Energy- j 1
25 Reorganisation Act is?
VOSS &~ ASSOCIATES, INC.
24 1 A. What it is?
i 2 Q. Yes.
7 3 A. Yes. It's a section that talks about, at 4 least in part talks about worker protection.
5 Q. Do you remember the first time that you read 6 that section?
7 A. Probably about a year ago.
8 Q. Did you read the actual law or the NRC 9 regulations, do you remember?
10 A. I read the act.
11 Q. A year ago?
12 A. Right. The first time that I read it was 13 about a year ago.
14 Q. Do you know why you read it then?
15 A. It was associated with an allegation. I 16 don't recall whether it was associated with tir. Thompson 17 or other allegations that I have been involved with.
18 Q. Other allegations of a potential violation of 19 section 210?
20 A. Again, I don't recall the specifics that got
)
21 me into looking at it, but it was an issue that got into l 1
22 worker protection. I wanted to see the words for myself i 23 that specifically addressed worker protection.
( 24 Q. That was about a year ago. Prior to that?
25 A. At least a year ago.
I VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
25 1 Q. Prior to'that had you ever -- you haven't t.
2 read _it. Did you ever read the NRC regulations concerning 3 employee protection prior to that incident?
4 A. I am not sure I understand that. What NRC .
5 . regulations are we talking about?
6 Q. Are you aware that NRC has regulations 7 regarding employee protection?
8 A. We have a number of manuals and. internal 9 procedures that talk about how we handle allegations but 10 we may be hung up on the semantics of the terminology,-I 11 don't know.
12 There are a number of documents that the NRC [
(
13 has. Some are generic to the inspection and enforcement 14 area. There are other documents that are regional 15 instructions.
16 Q. Okay. When I say " employee protection," what 17 I mean is legal protection under section-210 of the Energy 18 Reorganization Act.
19 11R. MULLINS: I think he is getting 20 hung up on the word " regulations." If I am not mistaken, 21 10-CFR which regulations govern NRC do not address 22 employee protection, if I am not mistaken.
23 Q. (BY HR. KOHN) With your. understanding of
( 24 that, do you know if 10-CFR addresses employee protection?
25 A. I don't recall an applicable part thatLit
'VOSS & ASSOCIATES,.INC.
4______________________________.__________________._._~__
26 1 addresses it. It may be in there. The first thing that g
2 comes to mind is section 210 of the act.
3 .Q. Are you specifically aware of anything in 4 10-CFR?
5 A. Not that I can recall offhand.
6 Q. In terms of these other documents, can you 7 please describe these_other documents that you have read?
8 Not 10-CFR, not section 210, but other sections that 9 regard employee protection?
10 A. We have regional instructions that describe 11 our handling of allegations.
12 Q. Now, do these go to the way you handle the 13 worker's allegation or the worker's legal rights under 14 section 210?
15 A. They basically describe the process by which 16- we work allegations.
17 Q. And eventually the section 210 would be-for 18 the Department of Labor to deal with?
19 A. No, not initially. If a worker comes to us 20 with a concern that falls into the realm of worker 21 protection, we will notify that individual that they need 22 to contact the Department of Labor within 31 days.
23 Q. Within how many days?
24 A. I believe it's 31. In a specific case I 25 would -- it's either 31 or seven. But before I would make
27-s 1 the statement to the worker, I would make sure that I ara
-2 accurate in how many days he has.-
3 Q. Did you ever attend any trainings with the 4 NRC about' employee protection? ,
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. What was that training?
7 A. Verbal regional training.
8 Q. Explain. When did it happen?
9 A. It's happened on various-occasions. There 10 hasn't been a one-time type of training session. The most' 11 recent time the training was given was probably within the 12 last six months or so.
I' 13 Q. Was this training just on worker protection, 14 employee protection?
15 A. No. It was on all facets'of handling of 16 allegations but it specifically did: deal with our 17 interrelationship with the Department of Labor and worker 18 protection. That was a significant part of the training-19 process.
20 Q. Do you remember what was discussed.at that 21 training?
22 A. The entire handling of the.-- basically it 23 was a verbal review of the regional instruction.
( 24 Q. If a worker comes to you and says, "I think I-25 'was' harassed and. intimidated because I spoke to you last 91@fLARBRVJ@W@ M .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - = -
23
- - I week," accord,ing to the regional instruction what are you 2 to do?
3 A. I don't recall the words of the regional 4 instruction. If the worker came to me and said that, I 5 would contact my management in the region and inform him 6 that that has been done.
7 Q. So the first thing you would do if a worker 8 came to you in a harassment is contact management?
9 A. First I would list down the concern. In most 10 cases I would document that concern and inform my 11 management of the concern.
12 0 Then what would happen?
(
13 A. It would follow through the process of the 14 regional instruction. It would go through a formal review 15 of the region. And regional management would make a 16 decision on what course of action to take.
17 MR. KOHN: Uould you be willing to 18 provide us a copy of this regional inspection?
19 MR. MULLINS: I will not commit myself 20 until checking on it. I believe that I would be able to.
21 Do you know of any reason I could not?
22 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I am not 23 sure.
( 24 MR. MULLINS: I will check on it and 25 get back.
__VOSS & ASSOCIATESn__INC.
29 1 Q. (BY HR. KOHH) Do you have a name of the 2 instruction?
3 A. It has a number,-
4 Q. Do you know what that is?
5 A. Not offhand.
6 Q. Essentially that's what you would be 7 instructed to follow? You would follow the regional 8 instructions?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Have you ever read any of the Department of 11 Labor decisions concerning section 210 of the Energy 12 Reorganization Act?
13 A. Not that I can recall.
14 Q. Have you ever read a decision of HacKowiak 15 vs. University nuclear Systems?
16 A. No. It doesn't sound familiar.
17 Q. Have you ever read a lecision or heard of a !
10 decision of the Secretary of Labor in Wedderspoo vs.
19 Hilrigan?
20 A. No. l 21 Q. Have you ever heard of that decision at all?_ !
22 A. Not without any dialogue. The names do not 23 sound familiar.
( 24 Q. Has anyone ever told you that the Secretary 25 of Labor issued a decision saying workers had the right to ;
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ,
30 g
1 go to the news media and discuss claims?
2 MR. HAYDEN: Objection; lack of 3 foundation. That may be counsel's reading of'a judicial-ll decision but~I think it's inaccurate to characterize it as-5 such to a witness.
6 With that. objection, if you want to 7 speculate.
8 THE WITNESS: Repeat the question. '
9 Q. (BY MR. KOUN) Has anyone anywhere at any 10 time told you that the Secretary of Labor issued a 11 decision which stated that going to-the news media would 12 be considered protected under-these whistle-blower protection laws, under Federal whistle-blower protection
~
13 14 laws?
15 A. No.
16 Q. And that is true, and if you didn't have that 17 - knowledge.ever, then you wouldn't have had that knowledge 18 on or about February 24 or February 18 when you spoke with 19 Mr. Van Brunt?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. Have you ever heard of a book by the name of 22 Protecting Environmental and Nuclear Whistle Blowers and 23 Mitigation !!anual?
24 A. No.
25 Q. .Have you ever, other than the regional
%6%tADGfMMM4% _ INCA 1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ , - = . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ =
31
-1 instruction and your review of section 210-itself, have 2 you ever reviewed any other documents' concerning the-
~
3 administration and enforcement of section 210 of the 4 Energy Reorganization Act?
5 A. There may be, as I. mentioned before, there 6 may be a procedure in the I.& E manual that addresses.
7' allegations. I don't-recall offhand. Any time I-wanted 8 to refresh myself on the process of procedure of internal 9 handling of'the organization I normally check the index of 10 the I & E manual. I will check with the region on 11 questions of employee protection of harassment.
12 11R. MULLINS: For the record I -will
(' 13 object.
14 Q. (BY 11R. KOHN) When'you say you will check 15 with the region on questions of employee protection of 16 harassment, who would you call?
17 A. It depends on what the subject of the 18 allegation is. I will normally always call my immediate 19 supervisor and from there I would normally, with his 20- approval, talk to the appropriate discipline in the 21 regional office.
22 Q. Who is your immediate supervisor?
23 -A. His name is Lew 11111er.
( 24 Q. Ilow do you spell Lew?
25 A. L-e-w. Last name is !! iller, ll-i-1-1-e-r.
WOSS B ASSOCIATCSo I!1Cn
32
. 1 Q. Uhat is his title?
(
2 A. He is the project section chief, project 9
3 section 2 section chief.
4 Q. Do you know who his boss is?
5 A. He works for Al Chaffy who is the branch 6 chief for the projects division.
7 Q. In terms of alleged violations of section 8 210, can you think of anyone else in the region with whom 9 you have spoken with?
10 A. No. In this particular instance I have 11 spoken with Mr. Shuster and Mr. Schaeffer regarding Mr.
12 Thompson's complaint.
13 Q. Is there any one like a regional person who 14 has some form of expertise in section 210?
15 A. Al Johnson is our allegation coordinator.
Was he in on that phone conference call with 16 Q.
17 Van Brunt -- not with Van Brunt, the conference call that 18 you did?
19 A. I know which one you are referring to. I 20 don't believe so.
21 Q. The date -- just for the record, what I am 22 talking about is that conference call -- I believe we 23 didn't establish a date -- the conference call you put in
( 24 after you initially heard from van Brunt.
25 'A. I am aware of which conversation you were armctrawceefvvat_55mL
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - . - - - - -=
33 d i
1 referring to. I don't believe that Mr. Johnson was 2 present for that discussion.
l 3 Q. Can you think of anyone else you have raised 4 work allegations with at the URC level? j 5 A. We discussed allegations within our own 6 office. There is a staff of four other individuals in our 7 office and ue have discussed allegations. And normally 8 when we discuss allegations, when I discuss allegations 9 with my supervision, it will initiate through my 10 supervisor and then branch out to the' appropriate people 11 from there.
12 Q. You testified on or about Februery 25th,
(' 13 1986, you received a call from !!r. Van Brunt while he was 14 driving in his car?
15 A. I believed he was in his car when he called 16 me.
17 Q. What made you think he was in his car?
18 A. Just recollection. I believe, I am not sure, 19 but I believe that he may have called me originally and I 20 was on the phone so my secretary gave me a number to reach 21 him, which was his car phone number. I don't recall if i
Normally you can tell from the sound of the 22 that was it.
23 phone. He may have told me he was on the car phone. My
( 24 recollection is he was in his car.
25 Q. And you testified that he was concerned about 1
- VOSS & ASSOCIATESa INC.
34 g
1 the fact that preliminary information had been released?
2 A. Right.
3 Q. Can you renenber his exact words?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Can you remember the substance of his 6 c:acerns?
7 A. The substance of his concern was not 8 specific. They were general and basically his concern 9 was, as is our normal practice, inspection findings from 10 an Exit Interview do not represent regional management 11 position until they have been reviewed in their region and 12 then an inspection report subsequently issued.
13 Normally we have always operated in that 14 fashion. The fact that information was issued to the 15 media based solely on an Exit Intervieu finding,-which is 16 considered preliminary by the NRC, concerned'Ur. Van 17 Brunt. >
18 Q. Did he mention Safeguards information at that 19 initial conversation? Did he mention to you release of 20 Safeguards?
21 A. I don't recall. The major thrust of the 22 conversation was as I stated.
23 Q. He thought that the NRC had done that?
24 A. He believed that the'information was_probably 25 issued by region 5 personnel. Nell, by region 5 personnel WO_SSAASSO_CIATESn INCn
" ^
- 35 3 ,
1 including myself.- One of his-questions was whether I-may 1
f 2 have spoken with Mr. Staggs regarding'the inspection 3 findings because I was at the Exit Interview also. I
- 4 informed him that I had not..
5 Q. Was he concerned that someone from the NRC 1
6 may have distributed this preliminary information?
)' 7 A. He was concerned that it was a deviation in 8 his mind from our normal practice of discussing 9 preliminary information with the media prior to that L 10 information being formalized and _ finalized,~ which I 11 believe Mr. Van Brunt got that understanding through his i 12 dealings with the NRC.
t
(' 13 We had three violations in this inspection.
14 That can be changed in the region to no violations or l 15 increased to six violations. The decision on the actual i
16 inspection findings are made by management.
17 Was it a deviation in' procedure? Was the
{
18 release of preliminary information a deviation from i
19 established procedure?
20 A. No, there was no information that was 21 released from region 5.
i 22 0. If it was true that region 5 had so release a f
23 that information --
t 24 A. Un-hmm.
l 25 O. -- would that have been a' violation of i
I l D
36 1 established procedure?
2 A. I would.say it was more of a deviation from 3 customary practice. In other'words,-I don't recall 4 reading anything that says that we can't do that. There 5 is nothing that I can recall that says we are not allowed 6 to provide draft information.
7 However, it is not a prudent action for us to 8 do that because it is draft information. It is 9 preliminary.
10 Q. Why isn't it a prudent action?
11 A. Because they only represent an inspector or 12 group of inspectors' findings. They do not represent NRC 13 regional positions until they are reviewed by regional 14 management and a formal written report issued. Then that 15 is a regional position.
16 So it would not be a true statement to say 17 that the URC identified "X" number of violations during 18 this inspection. It's not a true statement until the 19 findings are reviewed, evaluated and a written report 20 issued.
21 Q. Did you share lir. Van Brunt 's concern that 22 there might have been a -- someone from NRC may have acted 23 in an imprudent manner?
24 A. -Yes. I was interested in understanding why 25 we may have deviated. If, in fact, we did, why we may 6
37 ,
_. I have deviated from our normal practice.
-(
2 Q. How was'llr.; Van Brunt on the_ phone?
3 A. Concerned.
~4 Q. What did his voice sound like? What type of '
~
5 impressions did you-get from that?
6 A. I got the impression that - -the best word I 7 can use to describe it is he was concerned. He had.not-8 been accustomed to draft inspection findings being
_9 discussed outside an Exit Interview until the findings 10 were formalized.
11 Q. Was he upset in any way?
12 A. Well, he was concerned if the NRC did in fact ;
(^
13 release that information, he would have --'he gave me the 14 impression that he did not understand why we would have 15 acted that way because it is different from what he'is 16 accustomed to and what he thought he understood our 17 practice to be.
18 Q. Now when you called --
19 A. The important point to make on this is that 20 this is not, would not solely result only because it was ;
21 in the area of security. It could have been an inspection 22 in other areas as well, and my belief is that his concern 23 would have been similar if it had been in-another area.
( 24 Q. How much time transpired between the time you
.1 25 received that phone call and when you called up region 5? I WOSS E SSOCIATES iINCg , . , _ _ ..
___j
n _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ .__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.- _ _ _ _ _ _
38 1 A. Two minutes approximately.
2 Q. Who did you call at region 5? Who did you
~
3 ask for?
4 A. I don't remember. It would have -- I don't-5 recall. Normally it would either be my immediate 6 supervisor or it may have been somebody within the 7 security organization that I was trying to get ahold of.
8 Q. You don't remember who?
9 A. I don't remember who I asked for.
10 Q. When you put your initial call in, what 11 happened?
12 A. My initial call to the region?
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. I think I only recall one call. I don't 15 recall having a need to make more than one telephone .11.
16 When I called, and again I can't be specific 17 with you, but I believe that I started obviously with one 18 individual, made the concern known and shortly thereafter 19 we had a conference call. Whether that was an all-in-one 20 telephone call or it took a couple to orchestrate it, I 21 don't remember.
22 Q. Did you absolutely have a clear recollection 23 who was in on that call? Who did you actually remember 24 being there?
25 A. Mr. Scorano.
VOSS R ASSOCIATESn_INCn
c_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____._ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _
39
-1 Q. What is his role? What is his position?
2 A. Ile is the division director. So Mr. Shuster
- 3. works for !!r.11ontgomery who works for Mr. Scorano.
4 Q. Uhen you have mentioned your chain of command 5 earlier, is Scorano in your chain of command?
6 A. no.
7 Q. IIe is in a different chain of command?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. So you remembec he was on the phone?
10 A. Either tir. Shuster or Mr. Schaeffer or both 11 of them. There was security, direct security 12 representation f rom the inspection on that phone call.
(' 13 Do you remember who?
Q.
14 A. Like I said, it was either !!r. Shuster or fir.
15 Schaeffer. I don't recall which individual or whether it 16 was both of t'..em.
17 Q. Do you remember anyone else being in on the 10 call?
19 A. There were a group of people, more than two.
20 I don't recall exactly who it was.
21 Q. Okay. 110w , . did you say.on the telephone 22 call? What were the concerns you raised?.
I 23 A. I raised the concern that Mr. Van Brunt had H l
i 24 received a phone call f rom tir. Staggs of the Arizona 25 Republic and Mr. Van Brunt was concerned that we may have VOSS A ASSOCIATESe,_INC.
r_____________________________.__________.________
40 1 provided preliminary inspection results to the news media.
1 2 Something to that effect.
3 0 Who responded? Do you remenber who responded 11 ,
4 when you made that phone call? Who was doing most of the 5 talking in that conference call?
G A. No, I don't remember who responded. It was 7 not Mr. Scorano. It was other individuals that informed 8 me that they had spoken with Mr. Staggs and that the 9 information had already been known, the inspection 10 findings were already known.
11 Q. There was someone on the line who had that 12 day, probably the day before, who knows when, but had 13 actually spoken to Staggs?
14 A. Either spoken to him or had sufficient 15 knowledge whether direct or indirect that fir. Staggs was 1C aware of the preliminary inspection findings and was able 17 to make that statement in our discussion.
18 Q. At any time during this call to region or 19 your call on the phone with Van Brunt did anyone mention 20 any of the specific information that concerned anybody?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Did anyone say " fire doors, exits"?
23 A. No.
24 Q. At no time was there a briefing of -- when
)
25 you said Staggs said, did anyone give a briefing --
l 1
^
41 1 A. No.
(
2 Q. --
to you what Staggs said on the phone?
! 3 A. No, I don't believe that Mr. Van Brunt'did.
4- I don't believe anybody in region 5 did.
5 (Depos!. tion Exhibit !!o. CX-1 marked for 6 identification.)
7 Q. (DY !!R. KOHN) I am going to show the witness n
8 a copy of a document marked CX-1. It's a photocopy of an
. 9 article headlined "Palo Verde Security Section Rated Low."
f 10 Subtitic, "' Region's worst,' U.S. agency says; overall 11 performance called inadequate." By John Staggs, Arizona i 12 Republic staff, J (' For the record, the date 13 !!R. HAYDEN:
14 of that article?
15 11R. KOHli Date of February 26nd, 1986, 16 Wednesday.
17 THE WITNESS: Your question is, have I ever 18 seen this before?
19 Q. (BY MR. KOHN) Have you ever seen that 20 before, that article?
j 21 A. Yes.
! 22 Q. When was the first time you saw that article?
23 A. I would assume within a day or so after it
( 24 came out. I subscribe to the Republic so it was probably
- ]
25 within a day or so after it came out.
t
.VOSS & ASSOCIATESg;INC.
42 1 0 Do you know if you read it on the day it came 2 out?
3 A. I don't recall. I don't know. I can't 4 answer it. I don't recall.
5 Q.. At the time you had this conversation with 6 region, did anyone mention this article?
7 A. No, I don't believe so.
8 Q. During your conversation with region, who 9 told you what to say to van Brunt?
10 A. Mr. Scorano.
11 Q. What were his instructions to you?
12 A. To inform Mr. Van Brunt that the information
,13 that Mr. Staggs possesed was not provided to him by region 14 5 personnel to the best of his knowledge and that we had a 15 concern that the information was apparently provided by 16 another source. And based on the 1cvel of detail that Mr.
17 Staggs had, we were concerned whether the potential 18 existed that Safeguards information may have been 19 improperly provided to Mr. Stagga. And we wanted the 20 licensee to conduct an investigation to determine whether 21 we felt there was a prudent action for the licensee to 22 determine whether Safeguards information was in fact 23 provided to people without a need to know. And if in fact I
i 24 their evaluation determined that to be the case, we would 25 expect they would evaluate the compensatory measures that I h
o _ ___. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
43 1 needed to be implemented-and they would do so.
2 Q. Did anyone on that call say:that they had 3 asked Staggs what information that he had received?
4 A. Could you repeat that again?
5 Q. Did anyone say that they had questioned 6 Staggs about what the exact information was that he had 7 received?
O A. Not that I am aware of.
9 Q. Did you ever think about giving Staggs a call 10 and asking him what information he had received?
11 A. Did I?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. No. I was just serving to pass the 14 information on from Mr. Van Brunt to the region and then 15 relay region 5's message to Mr. Van Brunt.
16 Q. Was that ever reduced to writing what you 17 orally transmitted to Mr. Van Brunt?
18 A. Not by myself, no.
19 Q. To the best of your recollection, was there 20 any written correspondence asking APS to look into this ,
21 matter?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Do you know if APS cver formerly notified the
( 24 NRC concerning the results'of this matter?
25 A. No. As far.as the investigation goes?
928WLA_/NFM@JM*'m
46 1 0. Yeah.
2 A. I know that Mr. Shuster and his staff have 3 been following up on that.
4 0 Do you know if anyone from APS ever notified 5 NRC, I mean either you or you heard it from someone else 6 what the results were of their investigation into the
.12 7 release of Safeguards?
8 A. In my direct conversation with !!r. Shuster I 9 wanted to make sure that fir. Shuster was satisfied or in 10 the process of evaluating APS's review to determine 11 whether Safeguards information was in fact released.
12 Based on my conversation with Mr. Shuster, I 13 was satisfied that it was under review within the region.
14 0 Did you ever ask Mr. Shuster at any time 15 whether he thought Safeguards information had been 16 released?
17 A. Based on the information that !!r. Staggs 18 provided to the region, my understanding is that the 19 region did not consider that to be Safeguards information.
20 IIouever, as a result of the discussions with Mr. Staggs, 21 the region was not convinced that additional information 22 of a Safeguards nature may have been provided.
23 0. When you say "the region," who in the region?
24 A. The individuals that I referred to, !!r.
I 25 Scorano, !!r. Shuster, tir. Schaeff er.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, I!!C.
r________________________________________________________
45 1 Q. Okay. That's as of that one phone
(
2 conference?
3 A. During subsequent conversations, whether they 4 be over the phone or in person. I also had further 5 discussions with Mr. Shuster.
6 Q. What did he say?
7 A. The same statement that we concluded, that 8 based on the information that we heard from Mr. Staggs, we 9 were not aware of any Safeguards information that !!r.
10 Staggs stated.
11 Q. When you spoke with Van Brunt, did he tell 12 you he was considering polygraph exams?
i 13 A. I don't recall.
14 Q. In that conversation did Van Brunt mention to 15 you that he was going to use polygraph exams?
16 A. That's the same question. I don't recall. I 17 have thought about that. I honestly don't recall. I 13 don't recall whether Mr. Van Brunt mentioned polygraphs to 19 me during my second, ry return phone call to him or not.
20 Q. Did you ever tell Mr. Van Brunt, did you ever 21 give him any advice at any time about whether to use 22 polygraph e::ams for this?
23 A. !!o.
t 24 Q. Did you urge him to use then?
25 A. No.
Nh
46
, 1 Q. Do you know of_anyone from-NRC advising Mr.
2 Van Brunt or anyone from APS that they should use a 3 polygraph to determine this leak?
4 A. This particular item?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. No.
7 Q. Do you know if either you or anyone else you 8 may have heard f rom was advised prior to the utilization 9 of the polygraph examination that APS was going to use 10 polygraph exams in this investigation?
11 A. Hy discussions on the matter were with Mr.
12 Van Brunt and I don't recall the time frames, whether I
(' 13 knew f rom him that polygraphs were going to be used prior 14 to the implementation. It was around the same time frame.
15 Whether it was a day before, two days before, or a day or 16 two af ter, I don't remember.
17 Q. So you did have a conversation with 11r. Van 18 Brunt about the utilization of polygraph exams?
19 A. Somewhere subsequent to che telephone calls 20 on the day we have been discussing I became aware from APS 21 that polygraph exams were going to be administered, and I I
22 believe that I was told by !!r. Van Brunt. That may not be 23 accurate. That's where I think I heard it.
24 Q. Can you tell me the substance of that 25 conversation?
I
7_-______--------_-_____---__--.-_--_________
47 1 A. I don't even recall if it was Mr. Van Brunt.
t 2 I believe it was.
3 No, there is no other recollection other than 4 the fact f rom APS and, I believe, APS management. I 5 learned that they intended on using polygraph exams as a 6 result of following up.
7 Q. At that time did you give an opinion about 8 the utilization of polygraph exams in this context?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Did anyone ask your opinion?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do you know if anyone asked the opinion of i.
13 anyone from NRC7 14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. Had you ever asked or recommended that APS 16 use a polygraph examination in any other context?
17 A. Repeat it.
18 Q. Had you ever discussed the use of polygraph 19 exams with APS in any other context other than this 20 investigation?
21 A. I believe I did. I know that as a region we 22 had discussions with at least one member of APS management 23 regarding the use of polygraphs in a different set of 24 circumstances. I don't remember offhand whether I had i
25 those conversations as well or not, although I know they 92r623LAJM%%BJUMBRPM I
I 40 l
1 did take place.
2 Q. The polygraph exams did occur? !
3 A. No, the discussions between the NRC and the 4 licensee did take place.
5 Q. Do you know what that was all about?
6 A. That was associated with the original concern 13 7 that 11r. Thompson came to me about that dealt with a
'O female security guard that he stated had been harassed by 9 a female security guard.
10 Q. Can you tell me the discussions about 11 polygraphs that were initiated at that time?
12 A. Between the NRC and the licensee?
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. As I mentioned, I don't recall whether I had 15 any direct conversation or not, but what I do recall is 1
16 that I was informed that fir. Shuster who spoke with Mr.
17 Fearnou concerning the licensee's reluctance to use 18 polygraphs in that instance.
19 Q. Do you know of any documents or memos being 20 produced about that?
21 A. I don't know.
22 Q. Can you tell me more of what you heard about 23 this conversation?
! 24 A. Just that it took place and the licensee, my 25 understanding is, did not administer polygraph exams in VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
-n----nnnnnnnnn ..
_ _ _ ___. _-______--__m_____m 49 1 that instance.
2 Q. Do you know if the NRC has a policy on 3 polygraph examinations?
4 A. I don't believe that we do.
5 Q. Do you know what safeguards information is?
6 A. Do I know what Safeguards information is?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. As I stated earlier, I read the definition of 9 Safeguards information. My policy on Safeguards 10 information is anything that appears to get close to 11 something that I think may be Safeguards information, I 12 have a very low threshold and inform my management of any
(
13 information that I think may be Safeguards information 14 that may not be properly classified.
15 I don't make that decision myself. If I have 16 a concern, I raise it to people that are more 17 knowledgeable in that area than myself.
10 11R. KOlIN: Off the record.
19 (Rece ss .)
20 Q. (BY !!R. KOHN) Did you ever speak to Staggs 21 about this incident, meaning the allegation that he may 22 have had access to Safeguards information?
23 A. I don't recall. I spoke to Staggs many 24 times.
25 Q. For the record, who is 11r. Staggs?
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
- ___ _. _ _ - .__ _ _ m - _ - .__. _ _ - - _ - - _ _ - - - - ~ - - - - - _
'50 1 A. He is a reporter from the. Arizona Republic.
7 2 Q. Did Mr. Staggs call you for a comment 3 concerning the article when the preliminary findings were 4 released?
5 A. I don't recall.
6 Q. When you say you don't recall, so he could 7 have called you for a comment?
8 A. He may have. I don't know. He has called me 9 fairly frequently and we have discussed a lot of different 10 areas. I don't recall whether he called me for a comment 11 on this or not. Don't remember.
12 Q. Did anyone ever talk to you about illegal 4
13 drugs being used by any employees at APS?.
14 A. Has anybody ever?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. Yes.
17 MR. MULLINS: I would point out for the 18 record there are investigations ongoing around those by 19 the NRC office of investigations and if we start getting 20 into specifics of those investigations, I will interpose 21 an objection. You keep going and when it gets there --
22 Q. (BY MR. KOHN) To your knowledge, is there a 23 an ongoing investigation on illegal drug use by employees 24 at APS?
l 25 A. An ongoing investigation on employees by l
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
51 1 the --
t 2 Q. URC.
3 A. I don't recall. I know they have recently 4 been performing investigations in that area. Whether 5 there is one ongoing right now that still remains open, I 6 would have to check.
7 MR. KOIIN: Chuck, you are telling me O there is one that remains open?
9 MR. HULLINS: Yes.
10 MR. KOHN: By the NRC office of 11 investigation?
12 HR. MULLINS: Yes.
( 13 (BY MR. KOHU) When was the first time Q.
14 someone ever spoke to you about illegal drugs being used 15 on site that you can remember?
16 A. Approximately two-years ago, 17 Q. Do you know how that came up?
10 A. No, I don't recall who informed me of it.
19 Q. Do you know what type of drugs they were 20 talking about?
21 A. The majority of cases that I am familiar with 22 have normally been associated with marijuana and cocaine.
23 Q. Can you think of any other drugs that people i 24 you ever heard of have been -- that anyone had made an 25 allegation or a comment that drugs may have been consumed VOSS & ASSOCIATUS, INC.
i 52 1 by employees on the job?
2 MR. HAYDEN: For the record, objection.
3 I don't think there is any testimony about consumption of l
1 4 those drugs on the job yet. If I am wrong, I believe the .
5 witness can correct me.
6 THE WITNESS: I am not-aware of any l 7 drug use taking place inside the protected area at the 8 site.
) 9 Q. (BY MR. KO!!!D No one has ever told you that 4
) 10 someone actually used any drug in the protected area?
11 A. That's correct. I can't recall any case 12 where anybody ever informed me of that.
i 13 Q. Could you just now explain to me what you i 14 know of allegations concerning illegal drug use by 15 employees at APS? What do you know that?
i 16 A. I guess it's not specific enough for me to 14
- 17 answer. Could you rephrase the question?
! 10 Q. We will break it up. Two years ago you I
2 19 heard -- what did you hear two years ago about drugs?
20 A. I heard of an instance in the parking lot i
l 21 where there was, I believe, some marijuana found in a i
22 glove compartment of an automobile.
l 23 Q. Who told you this?
t 24 A. I don't recall the specifics. It was i
j 25 adequately handled at the time to my satisfaction.
I i
~
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
53 i
1 0. Do you know what happened?
2 A. I don't recall. The fact that I was 3 adequately staffed -- the individual was -- either the 4 individual was terminated or some other recourse was taken 5 that I felt was adequate when I heard about it.
6 0 Do you know if you actually did find 7 marijuana in someone's glove compartment?
8 A. I don't recall the specifics. That's as much 9 as I recall on that particular case.
10 0. What is the second time you ever heard 11 anything from anybody about illegal drugs at APS?
12 A. The next item comes to mind was an undercover
(
13 operation that APS ran prior to the licensing of Unit 1.
14 0. What happened? What do you know about that?
15 A. Several individuals were identified as having 16 used drugs off site. Those individuals were given urine 17 exams and the individuals that tested positive were taken 18 off. The ones that had work-related activities inside the 19 protected area were taken off of access into the protected 20 area when the results came in.
21 0. And the ones who did not test positive?
22 A. I don't believe there was any -- I don't 23 think there was any direct actions taken that I recall.
< 24 Q. Do you know what happened with the workers 25 who were -- the ones who tested positive and were removed, VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
54 1 do you know what happened to them after.that?
2 A. There were a few things that happened. The 3 Quality Assurance Department performed .a detailed review 4 of their work activities to determine what effect their 5 use of drugs may have had on the assigned areas of their 6 responsibility. That was reviewed by us and considered to .
7 be a relatively detailed investigation that they 8 conducted.
9 I believe that they were required to go to a -
10 rehabilitation center to determine whether they were 11 habitual users or occasional users and they were -- the 12 specifica escape me, but they were given a length of time 13 to become clean and then be retested.
14 If they retested clean, then they were put 15 back into, allowed to enter the protected area where they 16 were informed that in the future they could be randomly 17 subject to a urinalysis based on management's request.
18 Q. Do you know how many workers we are talking 19 about here?
20 A. Somewhere in the neighborhood of a half a 21 dozen.
22 Q. Do you know what drugs were investigated 23 initially by the undercover investigation?
24 A. Again, marijuana and cocaine is my 25 recollection.
VOSS r, ASSOCIATES, IllC.
55 1 0 What is the 3rd instance of drug use?
2 A. I guess the third thing that comes to mind is ,
3 following that drug investigation APS began getting a 4 number of anonymous calls regarding people that had been 5 using drugs. I think in all cases it was offsite and APS 6 performed similar types of follow-ups like the one that I 7 just mentioned.
O There were also some cases, I believe, over 9 the last year, I doa't know the details, but cases where 10 we have become aware of people mentioned for _possible drug 11 use and they have been responded to by the NRC by whatever 12 manner we determine to use for that particular case.
13 0. Let's step back to the third instance for a 14 second, which is they performed a similar follow-up. Are 15 you talking about a urinalysis with counseling?
16 A. The third case that I am trying to discuss is 17 just a collective third case. There was a period of time 18 where a number of individuals were alleged to have been 19 using drugs and APS initiated a program for evaluating the 20 particular allegations.
21 0. Do you know what that program was?
22 A. I think, again, I don't know the details. I 23 believe that they initially asked the individual and/or 24 his supervisor about whether he or she used drugs. Again, 25 I don't recall the specifics.
VOSS & A3SOCIATES, INC.
56 1 Q. Do you know if polygraph exams were ever 2 utilized in any of these drug investigations?
3 A. Not that I am aware of.
4 Q. Do you know if any employee was ever 5 terminated for the use of drugs, because they used drugs 6 they were fired?
7 A. In this undercover operation that was run, 8 there were several contractors that were identified and 9 since they didn't work for APS, APS couldn't terminate 10 those individuals.
11 But they informed the contract organization 15 12 that that individual's service was no longer required and 13 his badge was removed and he basically was taken from the 14 cite. IIe was not allowed accesa to the site. So he was 15 not per ce terminated by the facility. Ile was no longer 16 granted acceso.
17 Q. From what I understand, the ones that were 18 APS employees were then put through this urinalysis 19 counseling program. And the ones not employed by APS were 20 asked not to be on the site anymore?
21 A. That's a general recollection of what 22 occurred.
23 Q. Do you know if any of these people were ever-24 denoted as a result -- in other worda, let's assume they ,
25 than wcat through the process, llave you ever heard if any VOSS & ASSOCIATES, IllC. j
~ ,
57 1 of them were ever demoted because they had tested positive 2 on cocaine, let's say?
3 A. No, I am not aware of any cases.
4 Q. So the third, what we are now calling the 5 third of this collection of incidents, you know of no 6 terminations resulting from any of those investigations of 7 APS employees?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Now, lot's take the fourth instance or 10 collection of instances, however it's more comfortable for 11 you. What in the next drug incident that you are aware 12 of?
(
13 A. I don't think it pertains to what you are 14 interested in, but along the lino of druga or alcohol, I 15 mentioned cocaine, I mentioned marijuana. There have been 1G empty liquor bottles that have been identified in the past 17 at the construction cito. That's the next item that comes la to mind. That has occurred not frequently but has 19 occurred more than once.
20 I think following this was a case where I 21 think wo found an empty liquor bottle at the construction 22 facility. That's the next item that comes to mind.
23 Q. When you say "we found," that was an NRC
, 24 inspector that found it?
25 A. I believe no.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
50 1 Q. Do you know which inspector that was?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Do you know if APS, anyone in APS management 4 was asked to do an investigation on that, about that 5 liquor bottle, who was using it? Do you know what the 6 follow-up was?
7 A. I know we brought it to their attention.
8 Q. Do you know what happened?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Has there any requests -- I mean, when you 11 any you brought it to their attention, how did you bring 12 it to their attention?
13 A. Again, I don't recall the specifica 14 associated with it.
15 Q. With that third instanco, the collective 16 group of calls, were any of those calla going into NRC?
17 Uero they all anonymous tipo to APS?
la A. I think thoro was at least one instance that 19 came into the NRC.
20 Q. Ilow did URC interact with APS in this wholo 21 third instance? What was the relationship? Uoro you kept 22 informed about what was going on? ;
l 23 A. No. I was not a party to the apocific !
l 24 detalla. I know that allegations woro modo. I know that l l
25 APS had a policy that they followed. I know that Bochtel 1 i
l VOSS & ASSOCIATSS, INC.
59 I had a policy that they followed. I know that any 2 allegations that woro coming up to the region we were 3 interacting in one fashion or the other with the utility.
4 Q. We are talking about an alcohol instance, the 5 one about empty liquor bottlos, that would in my mind be 6 covered.
7 A. Okay.
8 0. I am using it as broad an I possibly can.
9 A. Okay.
10 Q. After that which we will now call, for 11 nothing better the fourth instanco, do you have a fifth 12 one? Was there another ovent?
(
13 A. The next one that conca to mind in what I 14 road about in thoco documento regarding !!r. Thompson's 15 statomonto. That's the next itom that I can recall.
16 11R. 11ULLI!!S: Ao wo have noted in other 17 testimony, we consider that part of an ongoing 18 investigation and profor not to got into very specific 19 quantions and answorn about thin incident.
, 20 f1R. KO!!!!: Okay.
21 IIR. !!ULLI!!S: Ho don't object to 22 gonoralized questions.
23 0. (BY !!R. K0!!!i) In thoro any one at !!RC moro
\ 24 knowledgoabic than you on the drug inouo?
25 A. I know that Owen Shackloton in our office of VOSS & AUSOCIATCS, I!!C.
60 1 investigations has a nu: abor of dealings in the drug area 2 with the licensco.
3 0. Do you know if any of the dealings he had are 4 different from the dealings you had?
5 A. Yos. I think that in this third grouping 16 6 that I mentionod, I believe that he was involved with at 7 1 cant one dealing with the licensoo on a drug-related a matter.
9 0. Okay. When you any -- let's go back to the 10 third group. What in its timo framo of the third 11 grouping, the anonymous tips?
12 A. It goon back to Unit 1 licensing which was 13 December of '05, so it was during the following throc or 14 four months.
15 0. So you are talking about the end of 805, IG carly '06?
17 A. Early '06, I believo. Maybe I am off by a la year. I am off by a year. We havo got to go back.
19 0. So it was December of '04 and January of '05?
20 A. First quarter of '05 basically.
21 0. Do you know how many calla came in at that 22 timo --
23 A. No.
1 24 0. -- with !!r. Shackleton?
25 Other than tho four inctancoc an we havo VOSG & ASSOCIATES, INC.
y___.__.___________.__.________.______._____._._______.____..__ _
61 1 categorized, do you know if he has any other -- if you 2 don't know, you don't know -- whether he knows of any l 3 other instancos of drug allegationa?
l 4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. Ic there any one cino that a drug allegation l
l 6 could have gono through, say, and you wouldn't know the l
7 specifica of the allegation, that may have gono through 8 another inopoctor up to region?
9 A. Suro. If it came through one of my people, I 10 foci confident that I.would know about it. !!owever, any 11 other inspector that dealo with Palo Vordo could have 12 gotton his -- could have gotton allegations as well. Our
(.
13 cocurity peoplo could have gotton allegations.
1 14 tin. 1-10LLINS: I assumo -- point of 15 clarification -- I annumo by " inspector" you arc 16 dictinguishing betwoon the throc people uho work in your l
17 offico and any one of a number of people in the various 10 disciplinen out of the Halnut Crook offico or out of 19 Washington?
20 Tilt MIT!! CSS: That'n right. I am not a 21 contor focal point for allegations in tho drug abuco area.
22 0. (BY !!n. Koll!1) !!avo any of the three l l 23 inopoctoru that report to you, have they over told you
\ 24 anything in drug-related storion or inntancou that you can l
25 remembor?
__________ - ____ __ _____ ______ _ w vn_ A N v r8 msv\ m c L _5 m e ___ - _ ____ _____ _ __-_ - _________ _
e----.---------.-.-------------------.--.-----..-----.--.-
l G2 1 A. This empty bottle was one.
2 Q. Other than the ones we went through, do you 3 remember whether they over caid to you, "Someone told no 4 this," where they called up region about that, any 5 recollection?
G A. !!o .
7 Q. Did you hear of an allegation regarding !!r.
O Prod Reidol, a shift cupervisor?
9 A. Yoo.
10 Q. What was that allegation?
11 A. That was accociated with this undercover 12 operation.
13 Q. Do you know what happened with that?
14 A. Ilo vaa one of the individuals that I 15 montioned that was removed from the protected area. Ito 16 was required to take a urinalysin exam.
17 Q. Do you know what happened, what the resultu I la of that urinalycle woro?
19 A. They touted positivo.
20 Q. Do you know for what drug?
l 21 A. I believo it van marijuana.
l 22 Q. Could it havo boon cocaino?
23 A. It could havo boon.
24 Q. Do you remember what position lir. Roidel l
l 25 holda?
-_ prr#iVR A 1VVTPeftrWVL__5MR _____ ___________________ ___
I-l 63 1 A. At that timo he was a supervisor.
2 Q. What is that position?
3 A. Ife van a licensed operator in the control l 4 room.
l 5 Q. When you say " shift supervisor," would he be 6 a supervisor --
7 A. Ile supervison the other licensed operatora 0 and nonlicensed operatcra.
9 Q. In that an important position?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Why?
12 A. !!c is a supervisor of other licensed and i
33 nonliconnod operators in the activitica of the unit.
14 Q. When you say that, what does that mean? In 15 that the person that sito in the control room like a pilot 16 on an airplano?
17 A. Ilin office in in the control room.
10 Q. Right in the control room?
19 A. You.
20 Q. Just for my own edification, is the control 21 room like uhon you soo picturca with all the lights and 22 gadgets and como poopic that are sitting thoro usually 23 dronned in whito?
( 24 A. That's the control room.
1 25 Q. Are they usually drooned in whito?
l
--- - -- - --- --__- -----_- - -- sm A PJgmamn M - _-----_-_--
r__.___________-.___.__.______.____._._______.___,___._.___._
64 1 A. 11 0
(
2 Q. Do you know whatever happened with 11r.
3 Reidel?
4 A. Ito was removed from chift and was not allowed 5 to perform his licensed dutica until he tested positive or 6 clean from his subsequent urinalysis and I believe went 7 through come rehabilitation.
8 Q. Do you know if he was ever re-employed?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. As shift supervisor?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. Do you know anything about a Mr. Bruce Rash, i
13 a load security engineer?
14 A. I know Bruce Rash.
15 Q. llave you ever heard any allegations 16 concerning illegal drug use concerning him?
17 A. I don't recall one tied specifically to his 18 name. Ilowever, I do recall it in the undercover 19 operation. An I & C individual in the security area was 20 also tested positive, instrumentation and control, who are 17 21 responsible for the inctrumentation in the security 1
22 region. ,
1 23 Q. What does that mean?
t 24 A. Performs tests and conducts maintenance on 25 instrumentation, cameras and such.
- 6 I
l 65 !
! 1 0 In that an important position? ,
j 2 A. Yes. !
't ,
j 3 0. Uhat does that position mean? Would you l 4 considor that a safety critical position? l i 5 A. It would not fall into our designation as i
1 6 boing safety-related equipment that he is working on.
I i 7 However, it is equipment that la associated with 8 maintaining the nocurity plan and program in operations.
t I
9 So, yes, it is an important position.
10 0. That deals with, I guess so, that would be
! l 1 11 socurity equipment? !
l I 12 A. That's correct. j
]
i t l 13 0. What are security equipmont items like?
1 l 14 !!R. MULLI!!S: In a general fashion. !
i 15 THC WITNCSS: Cameras, computers,
, 16 detection aido.
I 17 0. (BY !!n. KOHN) Uhat about a Debbie G1111 ham, 18 a security officer?
i
! 19 A. That name docan't sound familiar to me.
l
- 20 0. Tammy llampton, a socurity guard. Have you i
- 21 ever heard any allegations concerning her?
! 22 A. No.
1 23 0. Barbara Lisauti, a cocurity officor?
i J
4 1 24 A. No.
I 2 25 O. You have never hoard any allegations i i 1
1 ___ _ _ ___ _ __ __ _ _ ___ ___ ____ YMO6 _O __ M8M3@@n_8?d30____
66 1
l 1 concerning those throo?
i
~
2 A. That's correct.
3 0. Can you remember the positionc in the 4 undercover operation which, I guoco, would be number two l 5 category, number two, and number throo which in tho ,
G anonymous tipa, can you remember other pocitions or namou 7 of peoplu or categorios, what they worked in, liko load 8 accurity, I & C, shif t cupervicor? Can you remember who 9 eine was involved in that?
10 MR. !!ULLIUS: trait a minute. Would you 11 road the question again?
12 (Ponding quantion road by reportor.)
For the record I havo no
< 13 MR. !!ULLINS:
l 14 objection to the witnoon annworing by pooltions. I would i
l 15 probably interpoco an objection an to Privacy Act 16 information as to namoa.
17 !!R. I;0!!N: Positions will bo fino.
10 Tile WITNESS: I don't recall. Thoro 19 woro other individuals. Thoro was one clorical typo that 20 was annociated with nonoafoty-related activitico.
21 Ao far an other onon involved with 22 nafety-rolated activition, I bolicyo there wou at least 23 ono more than the two wo have talkud about. I don't 24 recall offhand tho department or titio of tho individualo.
25 !!R. 1tuLLIlls : Just no tho ALJ v111 havo
_ __ ___________ ____R%M AlVVTdTdSUVRL- JTfth__ _ _ _ ___
l G7 1 my thinking on the record in caso he wantu to look at it, l 2 the government han certain reatrictiona under the Privacy 1
3 Act for rolosning namoa. If you have a nano which you '
l 4 wish him to comment on, you are putting it in the record,
! 5 thereforo, he can discuss it. But we are kind of I L
! G sensitivo about putting namos in the record from our sido i
4 7 of the fonco. !
8 !!R. K0!!!!: I understand. If at somo
]
9 point we feel wo need a motion to compel a production of
)
i 10 those namos -- ,
i I
11 MR. 110LLINS: Then we can deal with i I
12 that when the timo comon.
J 4
13 0. (DY !!R.1:0!!N) !!r. Druce Rash of the I & C, i i 14 do you know what happened with him? Do you know if ho .
i !
15 wont to a robab program or what occurred?
j 1G A. I assumo it would be similar to the actions j 17 that Itr. Roldal wont through. That was my understandinq j 10 of the program that APS institutod. !
l i 19 (Dincuualon of f the record.)
i l 20 !!R. Koll!!: Dack on the record. Let the L
i
) 21 record reflect I am chowing the witnoon two documents, '
i j 22 both newupaper utorien, and for the record let'a mark up i l 23 the firnt one CX-2 and tho second one CX-3.
!' t 24 (Doposition Dxhibit Non. CX-2 and CX-3 marked 25 for identification.) !
1 I
- ------ . ----- -.--__ _---_-_-_ E% A/NPM@MR%JWth__ _
G8 1 0. (BY !!R. K01111) If you can just toll me, have 2 you over soon thoco articlos beforo?
3 A. No.
4 0. Let the record reflect that ho naid no to 5 CX-3, which in a photocopy of an article headlinad " Court G Records Document Spying" by !! ark Foldatoin, subheaded 7 "APS'o Socrot War On Protontorn," I think, !!cw Timon 0 llockly. This copy here in undated. It's a throo-pago 9 photocopy.
10 A. Ilo.
11 0. Let the record reflect that CX-2 is again 12 from flew Timoc Wookly. Again, the dato, this in actually 13 dated August 27 dash Septomber 2. Thoro in no year on it.
14 licadlined "The Front Pago, APS Part II, Filoa Disappear In 15 !!ysterious Burglaty" by !! ark Foldtoin.
16 You have never coon any of thoso two?
17 A. That'n corroct.
10 0. Ilavo you over heard of APS filen 10 disappearing?
20 A. I didn't road the articloo. I don't know 21 exactly what it portaina to.
22 0. !!avo you over hoard f rom anybody about APD 23 being accucod of photographing anti-nuclear i
24 demonstrators -- )
25 !!n. IIAYDC!!: Juut for the rocord, !!r. i
- .--------- __ _____EeYin A1WroYERrNRF#k_R____
GD l
Ja 1 Thompson's claim of whiotle blowing has nothing to do with 2 anti-nuclear demonstrators. Thoroforo, thic whole line of l
3 quantioning in totally irrolovant to the icauen in thin 4 litigation. It in timo consuming. Apparently we have 5 nomo timo problems.
6 !!R. !!ULLIllS: Go ahead, answer.
7 T!!C tlIT!! CSS: !!o.
0 0. (DY !!R. K0!!!J: llave you evor hoard of a 9 burglary at nocurity concerning anything, that thoro was a 10 burglary at nocurity at APS?
11 A. !!o.
12 0.
- Do you remoabor the first timo you mot Blaino
(
13 Thompson?
14 A. You.
15 O. Ilhon wou that?
16 A. That's when ho como to my offico to mako mo 17 aware of a concern that hc had. ,
i 10 0. Do you remember when that happonod?
19 A. The lattor part of 1905.
20 - 0. You don't romombor tho dato?
21 A. That'n corruct.
I 22 0. To the bout of your rocollection, what did 23 11r. Thompnon oay to you?
i 24 A. !!o caid that --
li 25 !!!t. 110!,LI!!U : F:xcuno mo. Just to L - - --- ---- --------____ _ mmn A>wamaruwst m - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _
1 I
70 1
1 remind the witnoce that he cannot give details of an 2 ongoing, comothing involving an ongoing investigation. He 3 can discucc in general the contento or what the subject l 4 matter la if it does relato to an ongoing investigation.
5 If it douan't relate to an ongoing investigation, then ho G can frooly discuco whatever it was.
l 7 Titc WIT!!ESS: I don't know whether thin 0 particular allogation la clocod or not.
9 In gonoral form ho mado me awaro of the 10 concorn ho had rogarding a femalo coeurity guard who wan 11 allogod to have boon haracuod and that ho felt that the 12 APS inventigation into the concern was not aufficiently 13 thorough.
14 Ma. MULLINS: If I am not mintakon, 15 that'n the contral inouo, one of the incidonto in thio 16 cano. Yet for the record there in otill an open 17 invoutigation concerning it.
10 HR. K0!!N: Thoro la?
10 HR. HULLItiS I believe thoro in an 20 opon invootigation concorning it.
21 Q. (DY HR. K0!!!!) Okay. And you bo11ovo thic l
22 happonod the lottor part of 10057 23 A. Yoo.
24 (Doposition Exhibit Nos. CX-4, CX-5 and CX-G l
25 markod for identification.)
l I
71 j
1 Q. (BY MR. KO!!N) I want to show you, this 2 morning you produced pursuant to a subpoena duces tocum 3 among other documents thrco documents of which I have 4 taken the liberty to mark CX-4, 5 and 6 rocpectfully. The 5 one is a calendar. On the top left-hand corner it says, G "9 lionday, December,1985," and it's apparently a calendar 7 for December of '05 or a page of one. On the right-hand 0 corner it goes from 8 down -- thoro is a corios of numborn 9 going from 0 consecutively to 12 and 1 to 5.
10 CX-5 on the top loft-hand corner it says "16 11 Thursday, January, '0G."
12 CX-G oayu in the top left-hand corner j
13 "Sorvicon Porformed Today." I am chowing the witness all 14 throo exhibits. If you look at any of thoso, do any of 15 those entrion indicate this first Thompoon contact?
16 A. !;o.
17 0. Can you remember what timo of the day it wac?
la A. I believe it was lato morning.
10 Q. Othor than what you have tontified to, can 20 you remember anything cloo (tr. Thompson said?
21 A. 110 provided uoro detalla regarding the 22 concern.
23 Q. Do you knou if ho -- did you ask him if he 24 wanced thin to bo a confidential complaint?
25 A. !!o.
_ _ _ - -- - -- -------_- _-.--_ ___ _-- _ __ ____N6TM A NYK@JMPMn__880% __ ___ _--_ _ _ _ ---_ _____-_
r i
(
72 1 0 You never asked him?
i l 2 A. That's correct.
j 3 Q. Did he make any statements about that?
.i t
4 A. He did say that he was -- he did have a l 5 concern that he didn't want this to come back at him. In i
l 6 other words, he was concerned, he was fearful if there was j
7 to be retribution. He did not request confidentiality.
l
! 8 Po11owing his comment, I mentioned to Mr.
i
! 9 Thompson if in fact he does feel that he has met with any 10 retribution, I would be interested in knowing about that.
11 Q. Did you inform him of section 210 of the i
) 12 Energy Reorganization Act?
i (
j 13 A. I don't believe so.
i 14 Q. Did you inform him in any way that it was 15 against the law for him to be retaliated against for these 16 disclosuces?
I l 17 A. I don't believe so.
I
! la 0 Did you inform him, discuss with him the
- 19 merits or demerits of confidentiality? Did you discuss it
- 20 at all? Did you raise it?
i 21 A. 11y recollection is no that we didn't discuss l
22 confidentiality. Again, what I do recall is that he was
) 23 interested in making me aware that ne had a concern in coming to the NRC and was concerned for fear of 24 25 retribution.
i 3
73 i
1 Again, I repeat myself. I stated that if in d
2 fact he feels that in the future he sees some retribution, 3 that he let me know about it.
4 Q. Did you tell him that if he did suffer 5 retribution that the NRC would come to his assistance?
6 A. No, 'I told him what I just said.
7 Q. Can you remember anything else about this 19 '
8 conversation?
9 A. Not that I haven't already mentioned.
10 Q. Did you ever write any memos or notes about 11 this conversation?
12 A. I don't believe so. I passed the information f'
13 on to regional offices as I stated earlier.
14 Q. How did your meeting with him end?
15 A. Ilow did it end?
16 Q. Yes..
17 A. The last thing I remember, again, was the i l
18 concern over retribution and my r;tatement that if he has l 19 any deals, if he has been subject to any retribution, to 1 l
I believe I told Mr. !
20 feci free to let me know about it.
21 Thompson that I would pass on his concern to regional 22 management which I did.
23 Q. Where did this occur?
24 A. In my office.
i 25 O. Where is that?
VQSS & ASSOQISTES, INC, 1
74 1 A. At the Palo Verde site.
2 Q. We have discussed f rom your perspective who 3 is in charge of Safeguards. In Safeguards issues who is 4 the IIRC person in charge?
5 A. Doug Shuster is the section chief.
6 Q. Is that the person you would go to on 7 Safeguards issues, or is he the man?
8 A. Depends on what I want, who I want to talk 9 to, what it's about.
10 Q. Let's say someone told you that there was a 11 potential leak of Safeguards information, would you talk 12 to Shuster about that?
13 A. I would talk to my boss about that and then I 14 would try to get ahold of Shuster, and if I couldn't get 15 ahold of Shuster, I would get ahold of Schaeffer or 16 somebody else in the security organization and make sure 17 that the information traveled up the chain.
18 Q. !!ow in terms of, say, an investigatfyn of 19 such, a hypothetical leak, would you take your calls --
20 would Shuster be the one who would say, "Roy, could you 21 handle an investigation of that nature"?
22 A. You will have to repeat the question. I 23 didn't understand it.
24 Q. Would an investigation into a leak of 25 Safeguards, would it be proper for that to initiate from VOSS & ASSOCIATES, It!C.
l 75
~
1 Shuster or at least having him sign off on it?
i 2 A. If the NRC was going to perform? If there 3 was an allegation?
4 Q. If there was an allegation into a leak of 5 Safeguards and someone wanted an investigation, either an L 6 APS or NRC investigation, would Shuster be signed off on 7 that one?
8 A. He would be part of the decision process.
9 Q. How about Schaeffer, would he be part of the 10 decision process?
11 A. Not necessarily. He may be.
12 Q. Would you ever conduct an investigation, you 13 personally, into a Safeguards leak unless it was 14 happening?
15 A. Not unless I was instructed to do so.
16 Q. And in the proper chain of command, whether 17 it came from your supervisor, Shuster at some point would 10 have ordered it or run through him?
19 A. Again, if I have an allegation regarding a 20 leak of Safeguards ~information, that is something that I 21 would make my supervisor aware of. I would make sure that 22 the security organization up there, their management was 23 aware.of it. Then if they needed my assistance any 24 further, I would follow their direction.
25 .Q. Would you ever either directly or indirectly l
VOSS~& ASSOCIATES, INC.
76
(
1 order an investigation into the leak of Safeguards if you 2 knew Shuster had no idea about what was going on?
3 A. I don't order investigations.
4 Q. Do you have any power to order an 5 investigation?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Do you make a recommendation?
8 A. I can recommend it.
9 Q. Uould you ever recommend an investigation on 10 a situation if you knew for a fact that Shuster knew 11 nothing about it, a Safeguards investigation? Would you 12 recommend one if you knew for a fact Shuster wasn't even 13 informed on it?
14 A. That Shuster wasn't informed?
15 Q. IIad no party whatsoever to it.
16 A. I am having a problem following your chain of 17 thought. If I am aware of an allegation regarding 18 security Safeguards information, I would go through the 19 chain as I mentioned it. That would be the chain I would 20 go through.
21 Q. I am just giving a hypothetical. Uhat 22 happens if you find out that there might be a leak of 23 Safeguards?
e 24 A. Okay.
25 Q. Someone in your office says, " Hey, Roy, I m rew
1 77 1 think we should investigate that."
2 You say, " Yeah, sounds good." You pick up 3 the phone, call van Brunt. " Yeah, I recommend an 4 investigation on'this," where you know that Shuster hasn't 5 signed off on it? . ,
6 A. That is not something that I would do. I 7 wouldn't get into that situation.
8 Q. So if you were going to recommend an 9 investigation --
10 A. It goes through the proper channels.
11 Q. And you would probably make sure that Shuster 20 12 was aware and eventually signed off on it?
13 A. There is nothing that would make Doug-14 Shuster -- make or break in that decision. Again, I would 15 go through my supervisor and the normal path f rom there 16 would be to security, either by me --
17 Q. Who is your supervisor?
18 A. Lew !! iller.
19 Q. Nas Lew lliller on that phone conference call 20 about the Van Brunt call?
21 A. No, he transferred me. First I briefed him 22 and then he wanted me to handle it with security. That's 23 what I 'id. d 24 The point I am trying to make is that if Doug i 25 Shuster is not available,'the wheels don't stop. There is 1
,.____.VOSS & ASSGCIATESg INC. _ _ _
78 1 management above him that would get involved in it.
2 Q. Who is that?
3 A. Jim 11ontgomery.
4 Q. Was he on the phone conference call?
5 A. Again, the same answer as before. I am not 6 sure.
7 Q. Who else? Who is above I!ontgomery?
8 A. Scorano.
9 Q. Was he on the call?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did you testify that he is not a safeguards 12 supervisor?
13 A. They do report to'him.
14 Q. Shuster reports to --
15 A. Montgomery.
16 Q. Who does Montgomery report to?
17 A. To Mr. Scorano.
18 Q. What is Scorano's position?
19 A. He is a division director in the area of 20 Safeguards and health physics matters. That's not his 21 exact title.
22 Q. Ilow after Blaine Thompson left your office in 23 December sometime --
24 A. Right.
25 Q. -- what did you do?
VOSS-& ASSOCIATES, INC.
79 1 A. I contacted Lew Ililler. I contacted Lew 2 Miller and then after briefing him I spoke with, I
. 3 balieve, Shuster and Schaeffer and made them aware of Mr.
4 Thompson's concern.
5 Q. On what-day did you communicate with Shuster, 6 Schaeffer and Itiller?
7 A. The same day. I believe I spoke with !! iller, 8 Schaeffer and Shuster. I am not positive that those were 9 the individuals.
-10 Q. What was --
11 A. It was the same day as when lir. Thompson came 12 to me.
(
13 Q. Do you remember the contents of-your 14 discussions with any of these people?
15 A. Just briefing them on the matter.
16 Q. Did you reduce any of-this to writing?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Did you ever reduce Thompson's complaints to 19 writing?
20 A. Yes.
I 21 Q. Uhen was that?
22 A. Some of them are included in the personnel 23 log.
t 24 Then there is also several documents that we 25 have withheld from disclosure, the five documents that we VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1
30 !
1 related to when we started.
(
2 Q. Some of those relate to --
3 A. Some of those relate to conversations with 4 Mr. Thompson.
5 RR. KOHN: Just for you, Chuck, with 6 those five documents and all the other documents, have you 7 given us or will you give us the name and date of those 8 documents?
9 MR. MULLINS: Yeah, we did for the ones 10 that we withheld last week. We will be doing the same. I 11 am going to be preparing NRC on them.
12 Q. (BY MR. KOHN) Can you remember what your 13 conversations were with either Hiller, Shuster or 14 Schaeffer that you had that day?
15 A. The conversations? Briefed them on the 16 details of my conversation with Mr. Thompson.
17 Q. You are saying that you kind of related to 18 them what Thompson had said to you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. What was Miller's reaction?
21 A. I don't recall the specifics. Like-I said, I 22 don't even recall whether I spoke specifically to Mr..
23 Miller or not. Basically, I served as a conduit, passed i
24 the information from Mr. Thompson into the regional .
25 office.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
\
l 81 i
1 Q. And what did they tell you?
2 When I say "they," what did Miller say? Can 3 you remember anything that any of. these people did 4 individually?
5 Do you remember what Shuster said or 6 Schaeffer said?
7 A. No.
8 Q. So do you remember anything that any of these 9 people said either individually or just a general 10 impression of what they said in response to after you 11 relayed the allegations?
12 A. No. Uc went over the details associated with
(
13 it and we talked about the possible rammifications as far 14 as the safety significance of the concern.
15 Q. Did anyone mention whether it was safety 16 significant or not?
17 A. Yeah. There was an aspect of.it that we felt 18 had some significance.
19 Q. What was that?
20 A. That's part of the ongoing investigation.
21 Q. Prior to this time had you ever heard of 22 Blaine Thompson before?
23 A. I don't believe so.
( 24 . Q. What did either of these three people 15 individually or collectively, what did they say to you?
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
82 1 A. They acknowledged the information that I gave 2 them. They asked me questions regarding information, 3 specific information. I relayed.the information to the 1
4 regional office. I answered any questions that they had 5 regarding it.
6 0 Uhat did they tell you to do, Miller, 7 Shuster, Schaffer?
l, 8 A. What did they tall me to do?
9 Q. Yes.
i 10 A. Nothing.
11 0. What happened next? What was the next time g
) 12 you met or ran into Blaine Thompson?
! 13 A. I believe that af ter the initial discussion 14 with !!r. Thompson, I f ollowed up, I believe, with a phone 15 call just to make him aware that the information was 16 passed onto the region so he was aware of that. I had ,
j 17 done what I had told him I was going to do with the 18 information.
19 Chronologically I would have-to go back and 20 take a look at some other documents to recall the very 21 next time that he came by and what the specific issue was.
22 Q. Do you know what document that is, the one 23 that you would have to review? Is that one that's being 24 withheld?
25 A. Yes.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
l 83 ,
i 1
1 Q. Do you remember the second contact you had 1 2 with Blaine Thompson? Actually a third, you had a phone 3 conversation?
4 A. I believe I had a phone conversation with Mr.
5 Thompson.
6 Q. Do you remember your third contact with him?
7 A. There were several other contacts with 11r.
8 Thompson. I don't recall exactly what the next subject 9 was that I dealt with Mr. Thompson on.
10 Q. Did you ever discuss !!r. Thompson's 11 complaints with anyone at APS?
12 A. No.
I' 13 Q. Did you ever discuss -- now, okay. This is 14 the original complaint. Have you ever discussed the 15 Blaine Thompson case with anyone from APS ever?
16 A. No.
17 Q. That would include his Department of Labor 18 proceedings?
l 19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. IIave you ever discussed Blaine Thompson with l l
21 anyone from APS ever?
22 A. The legal aspects have been discussed with me l 23 with APS. Ilever any specifics as f ar as concerns, but APS i 24 has informed me that a suit had been filed, that there 25 were going to be depositions taken, things of that nature.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
I 1
84 1 Q. Who was that?
2 A. Mr. Van Brunt.
3 Q. What did he say again?
4 A. Just what I just said.
5 Q. When was that?
6 A. I don't recall. Somewhere in the time frame 4 7 when the lawsuit was filed and at the time when the 8 depositions were being considered.
9 Q. Do you know how he communicated to you?
10 A. Just a passing comment with no details and no 11 follow-up discussion.
12 Q. Did you ever reduce that to writing, that 13 conversation?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Did you ever communicate with anyone f rom the 16 NRC about that contact with Mr. Van Brunt?
17 A. I don't recall. I may have passed on the 18 fact that there may be some depositions taken at some 19 time. I don't recall if I did or not. If I did, there 20 was never any long conversation about it. l l
l 21 Q. What exactly did Van Brunt say to you? )
1 i 22 A. He said that there was a -- I believe it was- .
! 23 Van Brunt that there was a -- there had been depositions
< l i 24 taken on a lawsuit being filed by a member of the security
- 25 organization and by name Blaine Thompson. !
i l
l VOSS &. ASSOCIATES,.INC.
.j' 05
) 1 Q. Do you have any recollection of when this I 2 ' discussion occurred?
! 3 A. No. It was a long time ago.
4 Q. Was it before you received a formal subpoena i
5 from APS?
i 6 A. I think it was right around the same time f 7 frame. I don't recall whether it was before or after. It i
8 was around that time frame.
I'
! 9 Q. Have you ever been involved in a section 210 i
10 case before, section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act?
l f
] 11 A. I understand. To the extent that we are i
12 sitting here today now? ,
l i( 13 No, just involved in any other way.
l Q.
I .
1 14 A. I don't remember if it was another one or if j 15 it was this one but I have been involved with review of 1
l 16 section 210 in the past. Whether it was this case or a l
17 previous one, I don't recall.
4
! 18 Q. Do you know of a previous case at APS? '
- 19 A.- No.
i 1
20 Q. Now do you remember bringing Blaine Thompson .
I 21 into your trailer to make a phone call to Shuster and Schaff er and f acilitating a call between Thompson and -
! 22 23 those two?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. What do you remember about that and when did i
i f VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
-7y g- .w
- e. #.,ey-y-- - ,y-iey-- -
r 9 =- ? T*= + "+Y- V * *--te = q -9=* ~ " 9 *"+T '-E W"
86 1 1 that occur?
2 A. I don't remember the details. In fact, I 3 didn't remember it at all until you just mentioned it. I 4 do remember it occurring nou that you mentioned it. I 5 don't remember what the reason was for setting up the 6 conversation.
7 Q. Do you remember a conversation with fir.
8 Thompson on or about January 13 th about his performance 9 evaluation?
10 A. Yes.
11 0 Can you explain to me what that was all 12 about?
13 A. !!r. Thompson was concerned that he had not 14 yet received his performance appraisal, that formerly the 15 performance appraisal is issued very timely and has always 16 been exemplary and he had not received one in a timely 17 fashion. He felt that was harassment on the part of APS 2
18 for bringing a concern to the URC.
19 Q. Ilow did you respond?
20 A. I believe I informed Mr. Thompson that I 21 recommended to him that he contact the Department of Labor 22 with that concern. The concern is in an area -- is 23 directly safety related that falls within the NRC,
, 24 something in the area of the performance appraisal. It 25 was a Department of Labor issue.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
87 i
1 Q. Did he ask for your help?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And did you say the URC couldn't help him?
4 A. I referred him to the Department of Labor and 5 suggested that if he wanted to talk further that he 6 contact !!r. Shuster.
7 Q. You are aware that the NRC can investigate 8 section 210 cases or cases of employment discrimination 9 based on protected activity, are you aware of that?
10 A. It is my understanding that we work in 11 conjunction with the Department of Labor.
12 Q. Are you aware that the NRC has the legal 13 right to conduct its own investigation under section 210 14 of the Energy Reorganization Act?
15 A. Yes, in part, yes.
16 Q. You look at it in terms of the employment 17 discrimination which occurred, not the subsequent 18 allegations.
19 Do you know that the NRC can look at an 20 employment discrimination case if it's dealing in section 21 210 of the NRC and ERA and they can investigate and make 22 findings?
23 A. I have not been involved.
24 Q. Do you knou that the IIRC has that right and 25 power?
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
08 1 A. The best answer I can give you is, yes, and I .
2 we work in conjunction with the Department of Labor.
3 Q. What are the rights and powers of the NRC in 4 terms of the section 210 case?
5 A. I can't quote you the rights and powers.
6 Q. As you understand them as when Blaine 7 Thompson came to you and asked you for help, what at that 8 time was your understanding of the rights and 9 responsibilities of the NRC?
10 A. Our responsibility was to make sure that Mr.
11 Thompson was aware that he needed to contact the 12 Department of Labor for bringing his complaint to light.
13 Q. Here you aware at that time that even if he 14 never went to DOL, you or someone in NRC could have 15 investigated his employment situation and made any form of 16 recommendations or orders therewith?
17 A. Solely by ourselves?
18 Q. Solely by yourselves.
19 A. Only in radiation protection matters.
20 Q. So it was your understanding -- were you 21 aware that if a utility harasses and intimidates someone 22 under section 210 and nothing else happens but harassment 23 and intimidation, it's only an employment discrimination 24 case, are you aware that the licensee can have their 25 license revoked for that offense? Were you aware of that?
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
89 1 Say, at the time when Blaine Thompson came 2 and spoke to you, were you aware of that that they could 3 have their license revoked just for that?
4 A. I don't have an answer to that.
5 Q. Again, at that time if the only thing they 6 had done was harass and intimidate the workers in terms 7 of -- forget their allegations, just on the basis of 8 harassment and intimidation someone from NRC could have 9 written a report, made a recommendation to suspend or 10 revoke the license of APS? Were you aware of that at that 11 time?
l 12 A. I am having a problem answering your question l
1 13 because I have never given thought to that before. If you l
14 tell me we had the ability to do it at that time, it 15 wouldn't have surprised me.
16 Q. At the time that Blaine came --
17 A. I wasn't thinking along those lines.
i 18 Q. Next yucation is, let's assume you knew at 19 the time Blaine Thompson came to you and told you about 20 his employment evaluation problem, that you thought that 21 regardless of what the DOL did, NRC had a legal duty or at l
22 least right to investigate and issue an order for a 23 memorandum remedy.
24 MR. HAYDEN: Can we get to the i
25 violation? If they found a violation or a remedy to that l . VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
90 1 violation?
(
2 Q. (BY MR. KOHU) If you were aware of those 3 powers cf the NRC -- well, I don't know if I will withdraw 4 that question for right now. I think I will withdraw that 5 question. I withdraw the question.
6 Did you tell any of your supervisors or 7 anyone that Blaine Thompson came to you.about his O employment evaluation problem?
9 A. Yes, 10 Q. Who did you tell?
11 A. Again, I don't recall exactly. I believe 12 that my immediate supervisor was aware of it and I believe l
13 that !!r. Shuster was aware of it.
14 0. You believe. Who do you remember telling?
15 A. I don't remember exactly who I told, so I am 1G telling you the people that I would normally tell and 17 those are probably the people that were told.
18 Q. Do you remember what their reactions were?
19 Do you have any specific recollection?
20 A. That the actions were proper to recommend to 21 Mr. Thompson that he contact the Department of Labor.
22 Q. Has there any other discussions about it?
23 A. No.
\ 24 Q. Do you know at any other time that -- did Mr.
25 Thompson relate any other complaints to you?
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, IUC.
' 91 1 A. Yes, one of them is on'the log.
2 Q. I want to show you CX-G which has already 3 .been discussed.
4 For the record, is that your handwriting?
l 5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Did you in fact write those comments?
7 A. I wrote that.
8 Q. If you could look at it, has it been changed?
i 9 Is that as you wrote it?
l 10 Do you know what day you wrote that on?
11 A. It says February 7th on the top of the page.
12 I assume it was February 7th.
! (
13 Your other question, has it been changed 14 since I wrote it?
15 Q. Is that what you wrote in your log on 16 February 7th?
17 A. I don't see any changes in it. I assume it l 18 was written on February 7th.
19 0. Would that be your normal standard procedure 20 to write an entry like that?
21 Hould you ever put an entry like that on a
- 22 day it didn't happen?
23 A. Sometimes I have made errors.
l 24 Q. You have?
25 A. Yes.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES,-INC.
~ . - .. - - . .- -
I 92 8
1 Q. 'Do you ' know in terms of an error you would i 2 make, has it ever been like you putting the wrong year or 3 a day or two difference? What types of errors?
4 A. Normally it is off-by a week.
5 0. Does this refresh your memory if it needed 1- 6 refreshing about a contact,'another contact with Blaine 7 Thompson?
t O A. Yes.
l 9 Q. Can you describe, explain to me what contact,
! 10 what happened?
11 A. There was a concern that'two female guards on 12 Mr. Thompson's shift were harassing a. third female guard
! 13 and Mr. Thompson needed to resort to a verbal order in 14 reprimand to one of the female guards in question for-her i
i 15 continued verbal assault on the third female guard. And-16 he did in fact give a verbal order that was tape-recorded.
17 And he played that tape-recording for me in my office. l 18 0. What was Mr. Thompson complaining about?
19 A. He was complaining over the fact that for one f 20 they continued to verbally abuse this third guard and also 21 that they lef t their posts and took their complaint' to a
!' 22 higher level of management, and as a result of that 23 complaint he was placed on administrative leave -with pay.
24 10 Did he say anything about this 'being in 25 retaliation to anything?
-VOSS & ASSOCIATES,-INC.
93 4
1 A. Can I look?
2 Q. I an again showing the witness'CX-6.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Did he ask for help from the HRC?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you remember what your response was?
7 A. More than likely my comment to Mr. Thompson 8 is that I would relay his concern to the regional office.
9 Q. If you see a safety problem, do you ever 10 communicate with APS management about that?
11 A. Yes.
12 0. Often, if you see a problem?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. In the plant?
15 A. Yes.
~
16 Q. Uhat is your title?
17 A. Senior resident inspector.
18 Q. What does that mean? What are your duties 19 there?
20 A. I conduct -- I have a staff of four other 21 technical inspectors and one clerical staff and I am 22 responsible for carrying out portions of the inspection 23 program at the Palo Verde site.
24 0. In terms of day-to-day events, are you kind 25 of a conduit person?
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
94 1 A. Depends on the issues.
2 Q. If Van Brunt called you?
3 A. If the issue is in the operational area, I am 4 more than a conduit. I am a direct follower of an event.
5 If it's something that is, say, the area of 6 security, I normally will take the role primarily of a 7 conduit to make sure the information gets fed accurately 8 to the responsible regional personnel.
9 If we observe something in the area of the 10 security during our normal everyday basis, we would 11 obviously follou that up.
12 Q. It's common for you to have contact with APS 13 management when Van Brunt calls you with a problem?
14 A. If he calla me with a problem?
15 Q. As he did in February on his telephone.
16 A. That particular type of issue never occurred 17 before.
18 Q. Had he called you in the past?
19 A. Yes, he and I talked frequently.
20 Q. Frequently when issues come up?
21 A. Come up, right.
4 22 Q. Did you ever speak with him about Thompson's 23 harassment and intimidation complaints?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Did you ever relay any of these concerns he VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
95 1 had to anyone from APS?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Did you ever ask Shuster or Schaffer or 4 anyone in region to relay a concern to APS?
5 A. No.
G Q. Concerning Thompson did you relay the fact 7 that he was looking for help to the NRC to Shuster and 8 Schaffer?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. What was their response?
11 A. I just passed the information to the office.
12 I don't recall uhat the response was.
13 Q. Do you have any information of anyone from 14 the NRC ever contacting anyone from APS --
15 A. Yes.
16 0. -- about Blaine Thompson?
17 A. Yes, about Blaine Thompson.
10 Q. And his problems? I am talking about his 19 complaints.
20 A. No, I don't have any knowledge of that.
21 There has been conversation between regional personnel and 22 APS management over this initial female guard harassment 23 issue. But, to the best of my knowledge, it was never 24 relayed in anything that would directly relate back to !!r.
25 Thompson.
i VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ]
96 1 Q. Now we have had, I guess, testitaony, we have t
2 the initial contact, we have the facilitation of the 3 telephone call, we have the contact that apparently 4 occurred on February 7 and the contact about the 5 performance evaluation. Have you ever had any other G contacts with Mr. Blaine Thompson?
7 A. Your question is whether I had?
8 Q. Other than these four incidents that we have 9 discussed, did you have any other contacts? It can be by 10 telephone, letter, oral, at a meeting, where it came up at 11 a meeting, anytime?
12 A. No meetings or anything. fir. Thompson did 13 stop by periodically and provided me information that he 14 asked me again as a conduit to send back to the region and 15 I did that.
16 There was information that lir. Thompson 17 supplied that he wanted to get to the region. I served as 18 the mailer of that information.
19 Q. Do you remember what that information was?
20 A. I believe this memo may have been one of the 21 items. There was on more than one occasion !!r. Thompson 22 provided me information. I think one of them was 23 performance appraisals that he gave me to send to !!r.
24 Shuster.
25 Q. Other than the two instances that you VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
97 1 testified to where Thompson specifically asked for 2 assistance, can you remember any other time where Blaine 3 Thompson by any form of communication asked you to get the 4 NRC to help him? Can you remember any others?
5 A. Well, the first instance was the firar time 6 that nr. Thompson came to me, there was the instance on 7 the performance appraisal, and there was the instance with 8 the time that he was placed on administrative leave with I
9 pay.
10 Q. Do you remember any others at this time?
11 A. No. There may have boon. Like'I said, I had 12 a number of phone calls from Mr. Thompson, a number of i
13 visits. There may have been additional times. If there 14 were, my actions would have been to apprise him of the 15 status of where his concern laid and what steps I had made 16 to relay his concerns to the region.
17 0. I want to show you an article that appeared 18 on June 10, 1986, in the Phoenix Gazette by Victor Dricks 19 headlined "Palo Verde Complaint ' Costs job.'" The quotes 20 are just with one stroke and not two.
21 Look it over.
22 A. Want me to read this?
23 0. Yeah, look it over.
24 MR. KOliN: Off the record.
25 (Discussion off the record.)
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
90 1 Q. (BY MR. KO1110 Back on the record.
I 2 Did you ever see this article before?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Do you regularly read the Phoenix Gazette?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Do you know anything about the facts 7 contained in this article? !! ave you ever heard of this 8 before? Is it new?
9 A. I had heard something about the chenist who 10 was disgruntled. It was never something that was brought 11 to us as a concern and apparently it was reviewed by the 12 licensee's allegation follow-up organization which they 13 call their hot line program.
14 The other instance in here that specifically 15 talks about water being transferred in a nuclear waste 16 storage tank to an outdoor evaporative pond is something 17 that we did revieu. I don't know whether the allegation 18 is open or closed, but that is something that has been 19 reviewed by the regional office.
20 Q. Do you know if it was confirmed or not?
5 21 MR. MULLINS: If that's part of an 22 ongoing investigation, I would direct the witness probably 23 not to answer.
24 TIIC WITNESS: I don't know whether it's 25 ongoing or not. I will leave it at that.
VOSS & ASSOCIATUS, INC.
99 i
1 (Deposition Exhibit No. CX-7 marked for 2 identification.)
3 Q. (BY MR. KOIIN) Do you know anything about 4 this incident reported in the CX-7, the Phoenix Gazette 5 article, where a Palo Verde worker was fired after he blew 6 the whistle?
7 Are you aware of this incident where the 8 allegation was that an employee was doused with 9 radioactive water?
10 A. No.
11 0. Ilad you ever heard of that before today?
12 A. There are occasions where people accidently 13 are contaminated with radioactive fluid in minor amounts.
14 That's not uncommon for it to occur at a power plant. I 15 don't know the specifics that are discussed in this 16 article.
17 Q. Did you ever make an attempt to contact this 18 chemist?
19 A. I have never seen the article. I don't know 20 uho the chemist is.
21 0 I would like to go off the record.
22 !!R. KO!!N: Off the record.
23 (Discussion off the record.)
24 0. (BY llR. KOIIN) One last question. My 25 question is, have you ever discussed any aspects of the VOSS '& ASSOCIATES, INC.
h
- 100 l .. 1 Blaine Thompson case with any of'your resident inspectors
- I 2 or the people who work with you at the site?
3 A. Yes. -
4 Q. Have you ever discussed the release of 5 Safeguards information with any of those people?
a 6 A. The issue associated with the Exit Interview?
' Yes.
7 Q.
A. Yes.
8 i 9 Q. Did you ever discuss the Cox Wyly incident 10 with any of those three people?
j 11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Did you discuss this deposition or any of the 4
13 legal proceedings of the DOL process with any of those 14 three people?
15 A. Yes. They know I am here today and they know i 16 what I am doing, yes.
! 17 Q. Did you ever discuss with any of those three !
i I people the Blaine Thompson complaints that he took to the
~
18 l 19 DOL, his harassment and intimidation complaints?
20 A. Yes.
21 HR. KOHli: That's it.
22 l 23 RC-EXA!!IMATION ,
24 BY HR. HAYDE!!:
25 Q. The only thing that has trancpired today, !!r.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. l
l 101 1 Zimmerman, and I think I am not fully following you on, 2 has to do with this entry in your log, exhibit CX, what's 3 been marked as CX-6.
- 4 MR. MULLINS: Is that Friday, February 5 7th?
6 MR. HAYDEN: Right.
i 7 Q. (BY MR. HAYDEN) Do you recall _ discussing G that entry earlier?
l 9 A. Yes.
10 Q. My mind was wandering when I heard you answer 11 some questions about the fact that you are not absolutely 12 certain that this contact that is reported in this writing 13 occurred on Friday the February 7th. I really don't
- 14 remember what you said.
15 A. The way the conversation went, I was asked, l
16 did I understand the question whether this entry goes to.
17 this -- to the date in the upper right hand corner, and 18 there is the possibility since the question was asked that i
19 perhaps the date is not the right date. Maybe I was on !
20 the wrong page. It's possible, but I am not. aware of it i
21 at this time, j 22 Q. Moving on from there, I read the subject
)
4 23 matter to be that Mr. Thompson is advising you that one 24 female security officer is unhappy about two other female 25 security offices. The word here is " attacking" her. Am I-t 7
VOSS & ASSOCIATCS, INC. )
. . -. = .. .- . . - - - . . . .. . _ _ _ - - _ _ - - - - .
102
- 1 reading that correctly? It says " verbally attacking"?
2 A. The words chosen'are to be as closely tied to 3 what I heard from Mr. Thompson. So that this wording that
- 4 I have used is normally wording that I heard from somebody 5 bringing the complaint.
i
. 6 Q. Based on your recollection of that 7 conversation with Mr. Thompson as it may be refreshed from 8 CX-6, was it in the nature that one of the female security 9 guards was complaining that she.didn't like what two of 10 the others were saying to her? Is that the essence of it?
, 11 A. Yes. One of the security guards felt that . ;
12 she was being verbally criticized by two other female 13 security guards. .
14 Q. Now my question is, do you have any 15 independent knowledge of your own whether the one saying i 15 that she is being verbally attacked;by the other two was 17 in fact so attacked or whether she may have been the one J
j 18 causing whatever the controversy was among the females?.
l! 19 A. I have never had any discussion with any of
, 20 the individuals named.
21 Q. Again, if I understand what you are telling a
22 me, you have written what Mr. Thompson is relaying to'you; 23 is that correct?
24 A. That's correct.
f 25 If I read on, it says paraphrasing here that Q.
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
103 i
'l he apparently sided with one of the females against the u 2 other two, told them to stop what they were doing_and then 6
3 issued some sort of warning to them; am I reading that 4 correctly?
5 A. I believe that the warning was primarily 6 issued to one female guard.
7 Q. Do I understand you to say that 8 simultaneously when advising-you of this that he also 9 played a tape to you that was a tape of this warning being 10 given?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Do you know from anything that he said to you
(' whether the parties being taped had been advised at the 13 14 time that they were being taped?
15 A. My recollection, which is questionable, was .
16 that he did inform the individual that she was going to be 17 taped.
18 Q. Probably that would have been on_the tape 19 then?
20 A. I can't answer that.
21 Based on your question, I do recall in our 22 conversation that Mr. Thompson mentions that the s '
23 individual was so informed.
( 24 Q. Going more now to the content -- did you 25 list'en to this tape?
VOSS &_ ASSOCIATES, INC.
104 1 A. Yes.
3 2 Q. Going then to the content of it, do you 3 recall whether Mr. Thompson did threaten some sort of A
4 action against someone he was speaking to based on what 5 you heard on the tape?
6 A. I guess I wouldn't say threatened. I.would 7 say that as his supervisor he informed her that she had 8 not responded to his past statements regarding her actions 9 to this third party and was giving her.an order on the 10 record that was taped requiring that she no longer 11 verbally attack this third individual, and if that were to 12 take place, that could lead to actions such as transfer 13 and things of that nature.
14 Q. Going on down through the story, do I 15 understand the next entry to indicate that apparently the ,
16 recipient of this warning / threat herself-then felt.
17 intimidated? This says fearful of retaliation from 18 Thompson and then went to Thompson's superiors to complain 19 about that. Am I getting a correct impression?
20 A. Yes. These two female guards then apparently 21 left their post and went to talk to Mr. Nelson and again 22 they expressed, according to Mr. Thompson, that they were 23 fearful of retaliation for having gone to Mr.-Nelson.
24 Q. Just up to this portion of this event, based 25 on your role as the senior inspector at the site, in there VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. .,
_ _ _ --_ _ _J
105 1 anything so far that would give rise to you of a concern 2 of the public health or safety in terms of events that we 3 have discussed so far?
4 A. No. But as I mentioned earlier, we maintain 5 a relatively low threshold to concerns,'and being that 11r.
6 Thompson had given us previous concerns, this matter was, 7 although to this. point it did not have any reflection of 8 impact on safety and public health, I decided to make sure 9 that the region was kept informed of this latest 10 development.
11 Q. I believe you also testified earlier that at 12 one point in time, I am not sure that it's at the same 13 point in time here, that Mr. Thompson showed you -- my 14 notes indicate " performance reviews of other employees."
15 Do I recall your testimony correctly?
16 A. I don't believe so. He brought -- I believe 17 he brought with him in one visit past performance 18 appraisals of himself and requested that they be sent on 19 to the region and that was conducted.
20 Q. So that was not performance reviews of other 21 employees?
22 A. That's correct. ;
23 MR. IIAYDCll lio other questions.
24 25 RE-EXA11INATION VOSS & ASSOCIATES, IllC. ]
105 1 BY MR. KOHN:
2 Q. Just for the record,.the attorney for APS 3 indicated that he was having a hard' time reading your 4 handuritten notes, i
5 Could you just read the notes that you put 6 into your calendar entering them onto the record?
7 A. This is reading from --
0 0 CX-6.
9 A. CX-6. " Blaine Thompson stopped by the 10 office," and then parentheses "I have his home phone 11 number which I won't read," close parens. Can we go off 12 the record for a minute?
f 13 !!R. KOHN: Off the record.
14 (Discussion off the record.)
15 11R. IIULLINS: Back on the record.
16 THE WITNESS: "Glenda Reichardt and 17 Patty Johnson have been verbally attacking Karen Anderson.
18 On Wednesday, February 5th,1986, he ordered Reichardt to 19 stop attacking Anderson on duty hours." I am left handed 20 and "or there may be the need to consider a transfer. At 21 1:30 Reichardt and Johnson left their post without 22 permission to speak with Doug Nelson. They told Nelson 23 they were fearful of retaliation from Thompson. At i 24 approximately 12:20, February 7th, Thompson was placed on 25 administrative leave with pay per employee relations. He VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
d -
i t
! i 1
107 i i
1 requested NRC help since he feels this action is 7
2 retribution for his coming to the NRC concerning the 7
3 harassment of a female guard earlier.
4 " Discussed above allegation with D.
5 Schaffer." l l
6 Q. (BY MR. KOHN) Tell me for the record what 7 exactly, what document you were reading from. I mean,.I 8 know it's been marked CX-6. What is that?
9 l A. This is an entry f rom a personal log that I i
10 maintain in my office. l l
11 ;
Q. The words you were reading from were your 12 ! own? ,
f !
l 13 A. That's correct. j 14 Q. That you had written previously?
15 A. Right. !
16 l MR. KOHN: That's it.
i 17 ; (Thereupon the deposition concluded at ;
18 5:25 p.m.)
19 20 21 h#
')l6Y[MMERMAN 23
( 24 f 25
i .
J CHANGES AND/OR' CORRECTIONS TO DEPOSITION PAGE LINE- CHANGE OR CORRECTION REASON FOR CHANGE i
U PHIL I f C oRK Ec Tiod IR 9 6 t t ita G 1
5 lG krJn LL S S f 6 LLrM C Coo I Ec 7c >
d 5 c rinnss ro ur < ner>:a c .z mm mas etatificn,ad .
f0 h b C H rnci' ~77tc R H 3 To
^
7 H< f h Ri-CLAfttucATmJ l C Hrocr ~Scoectaci To SC A n noo' X l'(LL I N C i 3l lI cu nasc sE ~o f" To 'o n " c t n e ofirn Ted 3J 5 c n ni=e s s rescuJ C 1
'40 1 C HnrJs & *=chAlf i To 'n Alf Cl A AIFICara')
$0 l] F &. fd6& St*tbLIN f To ,Jn7arao s C L A nu p>< A r,. a 5,.b 3 C 11 nact '*'J Tn i= F(c
- f-b d.~1. /3no td O T AT tac OF l-Ita f C L A /IAIC A I!0t] '
~ "
C) '1 10 C lin d sf B nsra " To 60s >MJJ C t Mlf s c n md 4
12/vda
%%a TGNATURE DATA ~
VOSS & ASSOCIATES l Court Reporters
108 1 State of Arizona )
) ss.
2 County of Maricopa )
3 CERTIFICATE 4 BE IT KNONN that the foregoing deposition was
.5 taken before me, CAROL KELLY REILL, a Notary Public in and 6 for the County of Maricopa, State of Arizona; that the 7 witness, before testifying was duly sworn to testify to 8 the whole truth; that the questions propounded to the 9 witness and the answers of the witness thereto were taken 10 down by me in shorthand and thereafter reduced to 11 typewriting under my direction; that the deposition was 12 submitted to the witness to read and sign; and that the 13 foregoing 107 pages are a true and correct transcript of 14 all proceedings had upon the taking of said deposition, 15 all done to the best of my skill and ability.
16 I FURT!!ER CERTIFY that I am in no way related 17 to any of the parties hereto nor am I in anywise 18 interested in the outcomo hereof.
19 DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, this 24th day 20 of October, 1986.
21 )
I 22 Notary Public 23 My Commission Expires:
24 _
Decembe r 13, 1989 25 'w~--. ., ,,
VOSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. l
~
. _ __ _ ._... _ -_ .. p
-- 2 l 7- .-r- 7 . WednesCy, Febru'ary 26,1986 j I
'd T* hf . . d. '
< r I e te t e W ar . the anthem by an aN-star rock choir that NYSE b'**
Amen tables D4
. D5 s y li ll 'l 'l l l i) 3 E- ;
] '
.a- a.k p ho $onraised Tuesday more night.than $30maion including song andfor famine reco,c of the rehef,year. butwon four Grammys *fuf,*g, y
f )'? [,,
-, w 6 6 - , .D 2 $ lost out to Bntosh pop star Phd Colhns for album of the year. D11* News D10' ""
l O.
l , c.. 1 ..
Salo Verde s'ecu[r'ty sectioar...,ated low gener 1," u uld say we're not happy with the security' legion's worst,' U.S. agency ;says; hodt 5"Urity pus nne 1 poorly completed reports'to the verall performance called adequate "We don'tr usually make comparisons" of security . Ed Van Brunt,~ vice president for nuclear operations at operations con ~cer'ning the 10 operating nuclear reactors in Palo Verde, said, "We don't agree with some of their t JOHr4 STAGGs . the region, but "it's tertainly not one of the better exampics," conclusions.1 really can't relate to where (Schuster) is coming -
uons poputue starr One pcrt of " 'e had an exit interview with them (after the impection),
- nerating mn Stat, was branded security the worst moperations the regmn" by Washington. at Palo Verde Nuclear - 8'f,5[,*'fc andnsista they never saidof anything Arizona, California, like that," Van Brunt added Oregin acialuf the 1).S. Nuclear llegulatory Commission durmg a Schuster stressed "Palo Verde has an acceptable ~ regard to the comparison with other nuclear power plants.
ent surprise inspection NitC officials said Tuesday, safeguards program. It can protect the health and safety" of ' However, he said,"We're going to set up some meetings to
' employees and the public. ' discuss" areas of disagreement regarding security issues.
It ar d safe y orke s an he pu$1 e ,
lie added,*But it has a long way to go. \an Brunt said he could not discuss sqcific steas of, Doug Schuster, chief of safeguards for th'e NRC*a ReE ion 5 Schuster sa,id he could speak m general terms only because security for the same reason (Schuster) can't.
- 1 Jim hlontgomery, chief of nuclear mater als safety and' . of security considerations and the fact that the report i
Palo is notVerde security is made up of three organizations.Two
.cguards for the region, refused for security reasons to are contract firms, Continental Security Guards Inc.and Tatt h L specifying thun yet lie complete.
said the. .roncern "is related to one part of their Companies International. The other is operated and directed Id n e the 1 er I o tg' Dne source said the areas of concern tanged from firearms program.There was a statement that one aspect of secunty; by the Arizona, Nuclear Powe ~
m!ifications, u,ndermanning, too much os ertime and fatigue. is the worst in the region, he said. , . - Palo Verde, D2 '
a_
- - .. - . = - . . . . _ _ _ - - . - . --
M 2 -3 m e = = s = E = g i g u. 5 2. g g. m s a '5':: = ; 5 sa a a g
- 2. "= . gE- 2* 5'gE-aT 2 -i gG 8 r a w , =-
!* o d*,5 g * " g a 9 & 3e3a*w3 EE >D R.d 9-N".
C 9 " * ., 9 F E 3 o a EM4 e i y E.E pi 5 @v
- l,l ,= a 2 3 2.p e, =i 9 8 $ @ @-3 yno,3 3 ng _-lo " r g s- g= = g ca @ , { * * -
- :': a E 8 ='2G.2 ra g T.r a = ==oaaq EEEg s a.
-,9
= *7 o k "= 3 D-e r*Jik2 >T~jkg a'*E 38 ~= = !: El E N3 "S53g 8 s N' k.5 5 g 'E 3 E w ? 3;, 5. =-3 @9 If E s
$ (\ <%
f 8
5 M e.B.8$-
O g.]
- rTNd a hEI b,'E#"
, e .- i -?N.
5 % h 3,
- . .__ %x7 t- e ,r a E ! 2= =;
, NomM.58: m.
- 3. = = = a s n N..!,I5E.5EDN!
.ay g:T =5
. ~E s s
e m
qj . w ;:E i
.* 5'" F E 2 3 S E " S i!razir,3:ss e9 a*gE 2. R.E E's gi g' 5y E*
Q s go. : 18.< 5";~ a = s,a.r 5 a. 5 Rr 3 EadrleA aaf a s a, w *Ee.a ya ,
IS E ;; &*? uEE9-~ ?' 3 r- 4 E. E' 3.B
- W
. rR 5 g- P-8:
./ i =a o. a..o- a?
- B.
. 2 2,3 = a 5~
EE?2 'E r EU" e- E Ea@~." 2.3 3 E5"' 5
X THE FRONT PAGE "
A P S PARTH Files Disappear in Mysterious Burglary by Mark Feldstein
, se -
. ff.eu , e~ nud .. pan. rhe.e - .e .,e e, ,e,,u e-meson . . ema = d. - e, e.,es,m, mm %, ,,.
- 4. u r ia rome. .a.d. nw ,,m,,,, -,, a,e
-n e me . - . o.s.w
- e. t
-, ou, . ore es,,, ,n,et,s, .,m,,
m.- nw .6 .es - ,e.,mre a ee.,.se ,e Anaens heetihaansa for Surmed aster. ness.
as, heart Se Aasne gase chas nas sueese. _N_, -. -a= = in in e, e n,.e ,e e, nas for AP$'s ass >nusamer (de em a pas. _aa in,.ee reef esesq ~apg ,,,,-
GrW ene anal ead nel tesstfetally restead LAe Eng Luss. *filas oeug gg my (lpg g,
- .. Iseten flee. *
- Moos =et. too days after APS funted *ll oewed be purry eevet for esumane e
, e'er ne fuse se ins pursuans te our suspam. se a here esis one guares pens taspe ems.
g, man. = = mi e,iceures M L,a.: udei.- screed Paie vna me, ,
- taoisd sets us and feed see sacus tne mesmAg eenrenneser Due
- A38.* $d. Ascene gaae. -if thee nie didal Luse end Due essised she enre resqueveg penasa te ama.aus ew greven and te our tne fle e erest te atend tursung se e*er ie laews. then one and APS Dang a ve'*
.*. eessionen is one eaa.aissmer amaram.
Lvons, suing auerne,<t.ent enveneses. 'You re egna. d's .er, mummessias she e
. ~
refuses esemens. *t don e inina n t an, of haeosase ones e e.t* Der east
- _See
,Je ; Few suseness.* ne tenf * ..Eveg af $ gewed.
d, i i ecuada's Let aseue n.'
mensag nere efrefe ime meegg fjpg aus eng messenses *
, Shanff desw, Enckson inie ihas Masre t > The taentro dreansmus uns the mas e y* 'o'",
{y. - .
- ere e:Aer *eheasia insies the iPasa Verere e<ne.m . - ,e ser.o ese **Aartne'steesas futume amme.
T 'A 11000 is speaarse inas eney sent enterup A
fe. . ', for une memes.* foor**ued se pere de oso l
/ '4 .
S o
+ .
, g. -
i i
- 1
.-
- I enh.-
y.g -g.
, 3o .< ~
A m.Pe smer m. ;!
e mim c.uerm.Wrt es,.mme me.e m.
etWr tune emneseas pasnourasse
_ ema .w 3 n.mm u. e.eu a.s.em.m. - aus %)W Wumarlma.
' %v"..
~; ,, ,
ears a Aramma, emmens meses emema.
tamm and mas eferumme senamed by eeMalarifft ^___ _
y(@_Jug.
gas Aty rfasst *
. , . . in . immen, Os ersare ammmmun. APS mesend en ng meWPt deseammme eut tense .*fe g_
3 rarueer *=r tar e.e sae atw rfw(3 a -e cow, mwe ,A. mee e enum e. m P -mm.ar. e - ,u. - -- %
4 ,.r - ef, ea.o./ - .rA ,s.e , e1 , e, m e n.oreauertev et ear em= me't ess.o L du
- mm ,,,.,m.er,
. ,$,, ens,ase, mume,mWriedesen M APS offhanei, amardse es** 7 w
,, 6,me g em,. h.
y V
exammmmy et sRhaen hem tema AFB and Lo s Asses. rosessmens for see Angene Ct.d Lehraum (fases fAC1L') feed htte gy .
TFWi! ne um tomrerus. eseep W esamervano ase sese #4r estabry resermee see es se g gym ,,, g - g,
/erve=uer e//kemm- The Pow ==t /eur e test e es coorse n e se aver egen e uresar g eeng,,,gsgy,,g,,, m ,,,g ,, ,
ensegr rae etumises /er ammes ansport ensame one sareresere ens se ear see eed
'emum beatiqamde et tme Arg ame
. smeer eaensary eerent esenasp. The ene peores e are n e/psanas one m.mee i e/sa=rP. * .
,e g sg
'mN eM,meme one wanen p
in tar coarnemos e/ste eres ene e rae senaser.en seresse ear vsese a end p=.eee -
g,, m ,,e $
j saamery*fier $4saf/) e//be and AP5A e sanimeneaW. A misveacus servey e/ A PS ,
j /tes e ese amonsud F/Ftte et esh Chimmy l
emes) duourammma See ==e astse shmeN't n ' _-
1 umenema carte the your Dy emeurys cause sug1mme etes dus Aasere /sr rae are,sre aus emee e, e Pos /bese <ar Peae /er immasenw A, j ease,summes far smuwg sur eum uma? tremedpun ame
/ewa==a a e amera o c. esser eque m.e en. ineWPi
! ame manM Asuen PuW 1erem Ca revene 4 Asseem to APS. m men nas ese pesume samenes eheart emet sur
- _ ed a 6ammenw hmers wesesenem? 6 @ - .
lawsWgemd
.,. m Smear," w as nw ,um ese e.w of.s,wn ... se -rim.mg*.'4 sq,es h l .en.e i- dar etter as ennf turner, officer es eus> mutu, monies tsiesse Less and Pese se=me=4-j
' Pteur sus the as e enest musetImme _ _ - ,';
I tiense De steenm for Pnesana eres anen teree e norwat soareamer. Samuse J.
nuceer treens on see amene of entree APS Due.
semamens to desaseenemP tt Wie Veer seudue pseur edusa. he '
g- "Ime emiman emnJtur .-
,,ammmme $mr"me neunt tueusemft**4 *
) *1es %sw rfwf3 has mornet wn.ie Lune sas Due eemse inas one e (
f%e eerstary een eveonee to me.e esten aseen nie eene own aan.ausseer ieseses. pommmees intes by APfertheahs at asseuramr ememarmuun
- Las enume, amomum, age to aughd suk
.* pensene - - ;
i Pase e ine tecies, eseries of ane Pale 4..
AP1 adsniamarsene ser*see momeost Jena *T1hry sumat treme Wiese doet fier se, en g l de Atasider ee=W Pant se femmary e i IE emWPt
' Sehen 4petusasse laat Mnere ghgas he.e IBut euW Md. me el 0 esmad bSf) Web i%
l'*"'*'Ise one eag eeriser. es lapiearv 4. APS been tesmes#ing aeout an essenhag desmen. tueT out e passnesei flue eustmast* l'htet .. *f mapB Bre sel, 65ed
- f teensteep managst W.Reafie I Laes turuist urgenee opt teenselh#g hte spes?
- esumM
- l e., m.sas of APs e nie en Pharme.
. ,,,,, M,WMMp4%
APs r.ied a ressee of ine owner, e . Tw in-Wet eeurp unm49 tese the APS e P*Laramt t #qBempeBI me ==
9-n6M me . . ,
seen.or
,u.
or
- . -.. semen. m we==. c== asneri e,.unn
,r
,m. .
~ 4,.e a,..u. e.,,0.u.,, , , . , m s.,m.. r,.ane.
.e a,. .
~.
.sm. enseawan m .em a
- s 9e es,.aus
, m mes e re ===
- r. e sou,-
ee. an,mem.. eere ,en .f e e, 'amee< = **u= Piemear-e 1 r,s come.m
.a. ee = - ineinear.a. - m ensas te-es== )
Luse i,sas ee sne eimmag es ino vasee eamise te aussesaae. ' anse semas t.aus. " * * * ' **
- _ _ _ _ - -- f I
J4GE N = NE87 TIstEs t?EEKL Y ~ AOC. 27-$EPT.1 S Mystenous Burglary A PS Workin' 2WitkSh ti co:-tmurdfrom parc 7 Anti-nuclear attorney St. Angelo said that he became concesned about possible coratistadtffrom fxrge f ,.m.
- 9.,,
r m.ww. .
,cy ,t departssicat, .
- sherys
- n. .
e idcotifyptber pad-a r Accordmg to Dec. APS did not request a concealment of evidence of APS ants-nu- Luse said the mala purpos(of his seest.'
Imgerprint check at the burglarized security algi section, or any polygrsph tests of possable clear survedlance when he notved that the ings with the sherifra deputmest ,wesjo )fr.4-iesseryarding' f,.sp to A$ ' ' scleard i
subpoenaed APS (des appeased to be cross- for upcoming anti-nuclear ge4)pns. l proup 50cidty for a blarch'of!
suspects _ indcacd with two other APS fdes which not to identify anti-nuclear leadgrs. , . . . g7f tbree'aberiffa sp. Fishk Dee said he dal nos requess further mves- were nos turned over durms the deposition. ~
i tig tion by the sherifPs office because he I use said he knew nothis.g about those Fisher would not comot ent on the sherif,er, [ produced a folde(
%dn't ihmk it was necessary " . department's cooperption wlth APS, whiteistill abpts o[lk o
several, other two ides, and that shey were not re. becaust of the pending Arizona Mobuiaa4 recenst protesta at Nor dad APS report the burglary in its laged to the stolen APS file, tion for Survivallawsuit asah44 the sher [and theTeenpe APS #1loe3 4'; '
- yt
% alycrpi Ifrs oface. *
. . The reasco they gave us was that they '
In his testimony, Fisher said that while he ? waared to knoy who these people were who' never kept a file on and-nuclear leaders, he- were vocauy active in the movement,' Fries-
- *
- did have some photographs of the demon- ner, now a Tempe attorney, said."They T/ze APS security ch. ief admits strators that were provided by APS.
.I was awa,c ,,m, said that in abe event that somethias caused
,,,e, m,S, ,,ad some ,,em ,o a,,es, someo .e, ,an,cd ,o
. gg the tu.ning of the burglary , was 3 photos and (I) requested to see them " he p know who they' are, what they ) poked sau. .
m:ntat we se re.so. ac,,a,s.- ,.
"an interesting coincidence,, and The sheriffs Jesk whers the anti-nuclear a - Fishcr confirmed that he met with Julian' photographs were stored was usuauy lock. . and Friesactin March of1977, but said that ed. Fisher testified, but he said that he may he did not remember whether he asked the 1
says hisfirst assumption is that
!?f
,t,", ** ^" *'* '".he,ifrs,,do.*" *"L 'i?,'* a"*"" .
- '* ~
restimony that Aes and the .
It was ,'an inside j.ob. ,, carimeni have cachan.ed ehoio.raohs and . tesiifiedm : . . 7
-it.s ,ossihi . ,4 r sidai4 sars r iahs,:
uiher information about anti-nuclear ; *What I want to know," Frienner said, a
procesacts appears to contradict pavy(p '
denials of such an arrangessent IQ y, ussupplead
/ddesing photographs r ts whether by APS to find the aboriffa l ; out who we were."
=cekly incident repor ofIheiss at Palo Ver- Ihe Nuclear llegulatory Comminion. On November 10.1979 M'a ricopa Coue 4 Julian and Friesner said that they com-de. the sederal ageixy sh.se oversees nuclear
- My main reason (for Idmg a pohce re- ty Sheriff Jerry llill said in an interview that plied with Fisher's request to identify'their Immer plants was nos informed of the bur-he had no knowledge of any photographing concagues. *We were new in the movement poco wts I wansed as a matter of accord." stary in the em cr plant's security section, of anti-nuclear demonstrators by APS.
Lrse saut. auswdmg to APS officials.
and just didn't want any trouble whh the And as recently as May 27,1900 APS polke," Friesner explained. "We didn't Dec sand lus stole'n (de conussed of cotwes "Iheve was no season to inform them," i of secusity memos he msote to I use, plus spoknman O. Mark DeMichele denicd that want to divert attention from the issue of '
saal secunty cooedm.isos Dec.
the ongmals of memos t use weone Io Dec. APS had fed any of its demonstration nuclear power,to the issue of con-
"I eanLly." APS atIouncy George II. photos to Ihe sherifrs office. *Our relation. frontation." .
Lese said that he nolonger has cuher the t yosn solJ the M'tr ylAfLS *mhat con- ship with Ihe sheriff's deparament memos Dee wsose so ham, or the copees of teens nie niose sh.in she dnappearaske--or Julian and Fricaner said thei the sherifPa the snemos he wroec to Dec *In the procns concerned itself prunardy with laying out photographs included shots Of at least a i
pmsible dnappe.arasue- of the e files, is of soueme fa!c enamsessame, si shey were how you got shn entosni.asson in the fasse preparations for the demonstratichs," pe ' dozen anti-nucitar leaders frong the Mwhcle stated. -
' Phoenis area.
sanplus os mesen's perded anysmwe we get adac" Me.in=hile. two Phoenis anti-nuclear ac- -
sk! of them."I is e ual ' .
libnis have sold I,he NEIF TIMES that the Of/([Sl8/fl
i . s.s .. .. . .
mummmmmunusses
' i i
APS' Secret War On Protesters l Court Records
! Document Spying by Mark Feldstein
}
ta a swore _^ _ eenasse by The adsome - -- of ass >eusunt immaws f.disers 9ese: T4d sener e/ orrerves dormeneau o persere of resroessemee e/
Ntw ttn(ES. APS nasunny snest Wuhana e rnaamia.
easpascseer pre <estrar er Art:eae Puedar Seewwe Comesar (AP3J #4e#
, T. Luse seat.ree ne omrimane, essa 's Assurmas is me ' - - APS has arseams e c e peaos e/ peers
- 4 4r see gases aset, comoear deaeed te rAe - easmsamme imme u fums res e se emi,,
wtvesserr ~ aeuseare e/ ser,e / ies t em eersvuu. rae sertner ca.e//ar AP3 y as eeu* et onmoviene et i essensitauean se emnetof APS. ausmer amawww e Anamas. .
j su.geasse come ww danswer se ene semeererers Poenetreens e/ mamames Whde ama et inne fue es,mw ee ns.e
- sense of a.ca -ce estesaed se ene Mw TIness. .eeg seter passes to es. *tf uw, .erent eene assunne eisenL*
he asene e an enervww. *t east ne ony ^ enmard, newionese ansen and ea/erre=eas erfices. Co.aredeans, e messeneens eartrary e/ APS /faar =
ow, snows ause." la menease. Ntw inewere, s nousew asune j ern ned suas e/rer a subaceas =es armed demeaser (Ae ceareats e/ #Ae mese ensa er se et ine 13 rue se ,e,e TtMAS nas unseveres e==ammes of aan.
eserv s ames ancieur cereeds. tissa ene4e.ee er sener gaeasermons of fo 4 ee 4 nunser survedasse ey - et two
{ ' T4s senes~sapereens
.,ees,a,e , .,e.ade/ coacecaed
~ ,,on,,. rAer etteraev.e s..e, ~n,r e APT eisett
~ ,f,eae, n, ase.sea,e .ea.r e e APs . es o um, -.i.r, me Paan
- eree eians tem i eseark Asmereae is ine inwee. me tua see,
' ' pass.euae e/ eice re rne enter .eree sempias ther rae e//er =es se erre=se se Luse istunea, =es avge maese anna inness temen if ane 400 paeownsen, earbeare sae repone*
i ee^ ee laamars 8. leae. He een le an eser*mrw. Lune in,e ine seios euap I Leod Rhades. speces=en for the Antone Cmt Lebe*rse t; area IACLL's tur of : _ _n enese.nees ines e, mesmanse e, enemere for Anamns heese.
i toed %Ew TItif3 me =es rearerned spoor ene tsaaerteen eev.een ene e,,gg, i3"*me ter $ wen. as nau-suser yme APS an, se n ene. = whee .e Are unas
' temesa, and law e=/orremeer e//iress 'Our gre= eat frer d s er m as av team
- st tune me hearmees Couss? Hun #1 f tame to rese upon ancieer egeet, r4e ergumeau fea norsened serwary .4,#cers * * * * * * * * ' * * * * * * * * **** N # * * *
- enol e rsasets teed to see trate and pnvece sa nansto, weresag resea**. The tem a
b' genroere e sem are e/peestent ead ra,eseos e/onvers
- I The easesteen seuee De tad seaes s **e#4ee or aos sae 'aew eve
- g ersved,
)
- 1, l aer,eer,e,r. ,o, re. ,.e,er ...,, , ear,.e,. .a .. .een , s .e. .es e ed ..
h .
I A.
6 j e grear f rom #4e Jr,se fe, p.,e,,,ge,,,e ja,,qe,,,, ,e se aan,,,,ea O C.
Annona Pwens Semse Cemenne. ine to APS emeievees ame mares e a ameser NiIW s' .- .
\
wkts APS umsmirury a e ammer luna '
j .argen usierv is rae Ross, besuaissa repen. el.entforene, measse APS TJa.am-na. -rou, m. s.me a. ,aese,wa. e, ars ee. une me =a.s =,- 1==me eus mm- em I ami. .s. .e.e.,.e,. 4,ue. . een .e s . io en aa. - a= w v s == == or APs so - m-m=, mas saw tems. ==me g une mouvessammy _ Ptumma ,*
, em tabanessund%mm-me et es gham core ne se erusie seen sevenisions ame einee information estasase e, n tw esen, ine eneograensas asemars se ass >
ares --
- 4. NW ** 4.' M e treenc orenous ua.emeess ey APl eineens TDet has herums wh N. N Damme ask TTneta Tweea.e .ea taas sne ee er sommes, nas ses mamine.
a no.e seen e,wasru. ee u.e-., , aus et e .-em-. Nauma ymened em er sa== esame"sim. vr D
i.e .t base oceanase inreten seureut. ee'e inst ieme%
Puuw Cageumma, ee 4 ___ _ _ % W W M Dmd." N Am$$.etAmaPeh..Yu ames pmW em mW e W ene,stum eshe-est l
a.
v- ' --
e
, og 3 -- -
e, \
e n' ee.n g, m. me a. ese m e ..rm.. o is
- s. y 1 ,
j
..'.3,-.. - -.,e ..-re,e=ameos Tm co amma,
==ma -. re e a. APs endamm-en ,
g e;
. . y ==== " h 34 ..
- 9.* v "W e ^,
hmemmme par APE.3mmenet and - N m.er tes '
' ene tas .
- 9 e.
_ ens s
_ Bus e a emme asummanneemmed
- s. . .
umisma.umd s 9W -.
ese une m amum.s m.m - <
} m., ee , '
a.-
i .l ,== .vaan Ann .or m we 3::==,heims e..-s n-on a,weeg j
.e. .e m. s--==
i
.I me se ,
""" 4, t
,e.Am,,,m.#O
-- m w
-~ ---_
i
, , .g
,g "
'f j mig
. . ;::33- _
Y I
'
- tems As . _ M-ear m
,e _.
no inem.s mee a. -- T' or en f ',em 4"'m
- w as meane,
=== &ms -
lunedeut ApuntC.dN j ?i ,.= ,a esanomens w
' ~
l lH.a h,, -
4,. .
I
APS' Secret War On Protesters
- ?
- % , r -
l l .
, - ci -
J-
... (
/
! ne ,
j -
t .
~ .. -
i ,
r n
- 2 i
- r I **
s, -
.o _
g.- -
g.,
-$- f f , M- g ,
i M . g::I hbbf l
. i
. . .i a i
\ .
};1 '
\
, ' L ~-
, , g..,
j.
t' m -
i( '
is /# ) {hy'r' , - {p / .'; ' . . .
The photographing appears to y,,.im .
- contradict previous statements . ._, ,
l ty APS officials that the power -
company had not maintained
~
~'
\ .
photographic files on anti-i
. ,,lW . '
i nuclearprotesters.
x' .T-
""""'1""_l.
I:-l?
'_ s
= = = = ._==. ==. f. c '. 7.====: a= L", _ x@. - . JE
! '::,=:L=.*~ * * ":.=.~. ~sm,, ,.
~, 0 0 : : :.'." c ~ : = .= b' ~ . -
~
, y l:' .
f-c W 4~ i W5?.":.:5[55~.:: re***.no en ener el v
f,_ W 5'
,, J -
4, .
)
- _ = _ _ = -
. . . . . summmmmmmme = =m - mmmmmm4 e
Bisbee Poetry Festival SP - -
less aavumm amase Poser, Fam es e theinense ague tums For as us esans on to asears fosseek sne se Casane 6'83. Siname.
Frae ans. P O. .e Joe Freemme.
. - .C - -
- ,,te .e m e ... .n um a..= ene
.e .r. manium
_., re ._ _. u _.
o.rii,te.
,i.na
- e. se ~ ,
, ,m
- a. .
- n. _ _m ._ .. . _m . .e m m e, _e-, .ese .
.e , .e a. ., e, n.
e.. _a o_e... e.a , . e a n.
( PreetaloI?
.n. ..
_m ,m ne
_...-e.em.r
- u. a u . . .
ne._.m c.co _. ,=. . a_ . .e, e Haireutters
- - . . i ..e m es,. ne -
.e omes . - e, . . , no
. io. es. .e c.a sa . e. -.
=n ...ss.o. - .m.e cw- . . -, s ou s en.no,a w
- e. t .a coa ca,. 1 ee esn 8 c .,.e see,ie. n. i.e.
ase Pew oriens, ame maae -
.e.e.m.. ,e= s.ne.. . . . by Jacue Hayes
- 15th A n. & lodlao School 2M 8111 4
I 4
s APS' Secret War -
i l On Protesters .e - r_ -.e ,. ,a . _ !
., , _ ,..-m ,n.
= =,s... cm_e . .
.e_ e...e ,_,_n._
_a
.e - .- . .
. m. m.. . \
__.m..,_-..m.._
m ._ _, w. ._e. .. eas ._a.m.4.._.o. _ . .. . m o
.. e,8_ _ , .. .n. :
_ _ ._ e. . . ,
4 .n...
-_.,.,.n..e.
. __ mn,-.e .nu a. _
~
,mmm.e.n. . se n.
. . . .. .na. ,
_ . . m..e n
- .t no j
e 9'El.,88 ee'a 8 9,
' ten nt* es'r*n=9Brel rts. n. = en..vaeas, ne $ist as.orea g te scris,te, d.f t.se.
use. .s., part et a *.e W 19 mm nas cow. .. a.m inn grs .. .e m no on.e iie ens saa.e as W F..e se esauf of before W srs .sraea. as the i me ne remnae pemwe s- , 't's* eart t .a in, nt.tw.
wer=an sa e .ne i.e en .m i.e p.m fW poes.t. letar ute .a em 471 as.g. e use innes vi .e.am semus *
- mi. we.ee 4M wmasin.meamen Dettansio ne. .eareess inas Art ions
.m acer pas .aw .a ine someen, ar smas.erseas ed ami sume asename.ws tan ne een taas w, *.e erinter* enees ,
latiet. ene %.mem la.e ne 4059 aos bee. .We tatsfi, are inse esil,
.nm naes==w se ine= ties surt.e I ase a.smse armou e te's
- am* wiser ismsm me.ne. eteeseus *ney re ene nra esmens,.one im j t one vane.m.e inse enn m am as enas . i rar==e enm iner owiwa .m onas ianse ese per nset ans a .as penes, a ne.e w ars smo,,. .e L e n. sus
- Dew =nne in e. He desmee ne eu. This weels. in I.rnsted eventities we are offering )
> o e w ea ,wn . = = nan. i ie
- ev = e===n. * .:twan .areweve H incred.ble $4 vin 8s on supere sound reprodupon fo.ra===-
i m.m m<m u.ae m.,e en . . Y*u' 88' ud ace,me, var ==== i.e w , , m . ,,
i es. sa e inas ami aeiner aemeaneses ans Art pamerstaer ease 8esames w n,sn m *e= in., ,=i . m.
ime = n.am,.
y- ,
m es.
w,,n.s.o ~ t= Pt.2$0 e - - ,.
ust . 'm.e
,ow wn.. m e e== is inn a m.v .s.e .. e ,.
. a.'o.w_ .ne.e *rd w n m, a new SALE . t13840 .
e ne .nei n.a * =e .e== . ,se m
, e se nm am. me t .e = ase i re. .m . reira um == es m is = = . m a e y en,=en as er e"n Pt.M00 me Las ease se one umsd e il .e essere Me.e e. We esas es,. .nse NUr U$T '770- SALE . $198"
{ es taas om.we of asm>eussser erome rs TtutS asses se ame APTe asu.easser ese inns no unse re.enfo one see of fb j
t *eis.ee le ensis*.es sera ocasseresen.
fGo. Dun 8Wues taas ne sensas au sue. me Foggste het fwit returned fManufaCtuf886
! 9ee i.as se in .f peew em on esmeros e.eeer esen.se et the esmane An. tfteef f afnout Caf Stateo a#nghileft. **
[ seem reve sana esmanse.eea.e emne aans me aanwun me one, teen.sneme eenfrietnie. fe Sww.se le.ums Thw new lene es now avaelage l tne eksemas en ene enres taas are tens ate nas emme se ,emeene se Asanne tXCLU51VELY ae He F6 Sales -
i car,ise ' ne east * ..Af+e ad, pas as=ut enesessese." ne east ta n mensin.nas .ie semis es.o.* An .ier=n George H t esse .es mere tuse t.e AP19 efebeustser f'ise .er$ erge fas fEgesNe 4/igF NeW I , ,
.nense on, ,e, w i= e es me ===
e,..erunn me w insasse w messe..e er= . ,SGS use.
ne.e e== = m.ar=, sw 4" -- ~ ,
.m see ==, smo e nu w aan He in.e em aes a.mee es e rime m.au,
.nm .m.* 4 m snm.
ame n enan .e me ae
- ema, nae et = =sw truts r.o=ae.
enws
.e.,
we wine enn.e.a. tae. enewee m-erne. **
. sF des densaseemer, u ene.neteese, .4 nesse. *ves na==. = mas 8,,10,,Wes,t
,, , y ,,,Main g g ,,Street,
,,,,, Meta fi ,n..cua ,et m e. ,enei, .es es is.esitasar the peu nere saur.
4c w art wenn se esmae. em one is. n,*i . at ,ee ce i.m..e ra U!M te n.m w w e_ aae
- we e .=e you ** *'
m e, art eensian enn Asin.?
i As ..re.orneas, nas rehesnes frams eup. . .
.silla,ue of am&a.stene pensa. .
g l
m_.. u,r.!ay.T.~DE.CEACER.~1085 iw mn t .: J.^.@id8We.- . .- ,
aiiaa5aa 2 2 34 5 e 7 a a 5 a ai?11 APPOINTMENTS Q SCHEDULED EVENTS er sa sem2 no 8 9 1011 121314 s ao a a 2a 24 a i HOURS l
.a4 as asp.29 a W.151617 1810 20 21.aolus 2m ai NAME PLACE IN RE- '
MONDAY 22 23 24 25 28 27 28
- DECEMBER,1M5 29 30 31 wE 22 Days Left
!,'J' TO BE DONE TODAY (mmt to mm ['Q,,) g[ i.
to I . . . . . . . . , . _ . . .
~ ~ - ~ -
ao m
=
. pti . . -. nQ4
^Y "
30 i
m d
is m
m
- l.
N oo
. ~ . _
ll M
44 oo is 30
~
4
g[
30
=
LI NOTES & MEMOS MADE TODAY
. . . - _ .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . Cd/ k Qu.u,k- d_WI i.
'l m ,
is .
= ,,...
N
}
i
...............n.,a.........w....a...............,..........a.,oi.............,.....,,,................,,,
i L. .
a ;;:gy A 7:8 0 1011 1 2 3,4 :e ;itga is im 3 3;;! simAPPOINTMENTS 8 SCHEDULED EVENTS 16's_n,a,;;;4 u uumca 5. 6 ap.at AN 12 1314 151617 :18 = 24 2e2s 2m I mg rwt iN RE: HOURS l THUftSOAY 10 20'21 22 23.24'25 l
- 26 27 28 29 30 31 349 Days Left '
JANUARY,1986 n" TO BE DONE TODAY (muett ua nts) _ _[hh ___h._ _)/b
..& --.hkoff , y Q g. g..$
i
, pg
- On o0 f I on \
i is a ce oO
=
441000 m
a m
'8 1120 no is
__l .E$Ef. VYV "
f' && _ ' . ff t.r9, St !,-
- , ' 3
- 5 ~) 7 . 5 ~) 9 oo
. - - . _ - - - . . _ . - - - - - - - . ~ . . - - - - . . . . - - - . . - . . . .
as to 00 fl
, l NOTES & MEMOS MADE TODAY m
I M .,
~
se 10.00 -
Jlc
. _ . . . . _ . . . . . . _ _ - . . - . . . . . . - _ ~ . . - i 4
_ - . _ . . . . . _ . _ _ _ = =
$l
.g ,
1 I
l
.o ,, n .. . . . . o . na .u i .u.. .. i m i n p uu -a w = " w .a a i ' m ' a a a "us "' u "" ""'"" '""" '" *"'"""'"'"^' " *"""""
l PTHOAY SERVICES PERFORMED TODAY em w.* . sem o., . resaum. ms I nouns! ron: IN RE: c :
DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES
.., im 8.*
33 . . . . . . .
~ ..
- 0. ._ .
_. i
.,y .,,..
- n. . . . . - _ . . - . . - . _ . - .
8
.._. ....., s
- 0. . ..,
a.
_ . . . . - . ~ . - . . . .
10M* . gp .
- e. "
7 .,
10 00 s.+
a 1
11.u.,1 . 3,..
88t .
9
~ .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
...m. .
, , := ..
18*
.~ . .. . . ~ . . . .
19* .
1a 4
gp h '
. .J.1,4 .
y.. . l., [h h4, .. . < ,(. $j 9- 0 3.** 9 .j k,,. .... .
. .x , .. .n. -
u.e. n .. n c:.x n y/s/et . A sai,./ ia...,.+ k. 0+J f A;; .e%lg a~k . . C ' ., C-
. . ?. $
n~ .%.::- , 2 e- n . , n u. A s n 'A ., , ' ,: o r. 6.
():g au A..::. .9,%
. 5 .A .. A
% G...'...hAk>...u yr a s p ,.. ,. ; . , ,. J L. ::;
- i.. K ,C g %* . /
ffA%
J.o % .* , A '_. no 2/t._P um O ' aLL An A ny n, n .d .,, w$ !.~ . :.s m. f/w .. .. . _
M &/ Npr iku . !<. c.c b., h i... W '.. 5 _
h .}e lin .4-4%.A.Ap.v..:. ' . . )N.
.a._ . ..b.)b A.
s <
\ ::: wm t.~
% .7
_'8 ... . .
f r,,.
f.
3g .- . .
.d%J. du s k di. e.. ..
u.. . . . . . - . . . _ . . . . .
(? .
P,*~,,
D 84 . . . .
et .
gp .
.a. .
. . . . . . - . . . . . . . A-
.. .,........,..n 4 .6..,t..s..e.h , eeg . 4 gh ,p q .g e.m.e...6. .W.2- 6.m.de i
.+5.&4... d prJ4s. h.s $s.
Peet813 m 9 6 L _______
O cm e. /0, /M e+, 4,....,c. w s m.
- - -- -.,. .. ,- m m-In another instance, the' chemist said,
.4..
{.EE.' Palo Verde officials ,' failed to make fgy,. y p U.
. ~ , . ~
proper radiation checks on thousands of
,v s v -E . ,,,_ , 'l.? '. - . L L .
e - .i.,q.
.;.V<,,c..
'r" ,_,
.m.. - Fro m, ~A-1 Eallons of water before it was transfe y p ,0 'N .4..,;*
4 . _ _. __ _ from a nuclear waste storage tank to an outdoor evaporative pond. _
1 {. Q.,
l ,
The chemist told The Cazette:"We've !
Bynum said the transfer of contami.
nated water was proper
- q%, .p,c ., . _ e, um ... got nowhere to go with our concerns.
w$r. . . vv. en .'; e " ' "; f . We're told not to talk to the press. There NRC officials sa.d i they would attempt .
~'..', are all sorta of quality.related roblems to contact the worker and mvestigate.
d,t ifg .D.I." %. #4 C Y C "I # %'
%N, p V ?' Y involving radiochemistry 'and only
" NRC spokesman Greg Cook said his BY W*r D' *' "- V g n th ng to no
- group is as concerned about the circum.
.. The Phoems Casette stances surrounding the chemist's dis.
" Things are sloppy out there."
A former worker at the Palo Verde i
. missal as they are about his claims of Nuclear Generating Station says he was Bynum acknowledged Monday that he discourages employees from talking to improprietics. '
. fired after,,he told his supenors and plant' mvestigators that dangerous chem,cals i the media during work hours.
this."R.e8ardless of what the mdividual's allegations, weway findheou and radioactive materials were being "They are not being paid for that," he
,3. appears to have been treated doesn't mishandled.s . said. "If' they're so concerned, they
. The worker, a chem.is t, . told The speak too well," Cook said.
should call the media on their own time."
Phoem,a Gazette he was dismissed last . Arizona Nuclear Power Proj. ec t offi.
The chemist said he was fired after- cials have said they encourage workers tc
' month after.he submitted a written . providing quality. assurance investigators .
complaint, using procedures Palo Verde come forward with complaints abou W2th an eight.page typed statement in c<fficials had recommended for reporting unsafe conditions.
which he descri, bed what he thought were unsafe practices. . "Our policy at ANPP has always bee:
' However, Palo Verde officials say the impropej practices. . ..
to encourage employees to speak ou lie said dangerous substances such as employee was released as part of a liquid nitrogen and sulfuric acid have i about any concerns"they may hav reduction in the subcontract work force. been carelessly handled by unqualified I regarding safety,' quality or any othe r >
, issues," Arizona Public Service Co. chic
. "We pr.ion
,tize, and we felt he was workers. executive officer Keith Turley told Pal most expendable," Palo
- Verde plant ' In addition', through carelessness, a Verde workersin a March 24 letter.
manager Joe Bynum said Monday. worker was doused with radioactive Bynum said the chemist"is a disgrun s water late last year while drawing a-tied employee" because he lost his job. sample from the primary coolant system,' l he said.
But he confirmed that the worker's a atio e being investigated by- Bynum confirmed that the previously p 9{ unreported incident occurred Dec.'? in The former worker's direct supervisors which a lab technician was doused with -
l declined to be interviewed. . . . . . . radioactive water. He said the incident <f j was not reported to the NRC or made 1.The' chemist asked not to be identi. public because the water did not touch I
fled, saying that although he has found ; the technician's skin,' and ,he wasn't.
I smployment at another* nuclear plant, he i _
t ;
fears reprisals. w -
I contaminated. . . .
Another worker was ' splashedI with lie said
- th['recent institution of . . radioactive water in' January while work.
polygraph tests of Palo Verde employees ing on a pipeline, an incident ' plant ~ '
suspected of providing information to the -
news media has made msny workers officials reported ,to the NRC and the fearful of talking to reportera, an issue media. ,
that also concerns the Arizona Corpora. '
- tion Commission,j ,
1 j
/The commission today was to discuss a I motion, filed' by the Coalition for Responsible Energy Education, that questions the propriety of. polygraph tests at Palo Verde. l s.. a rir.d, A 4 ' o
. m.. . .. , m.r Yl J
k