ML20238C753
| ML20238C753 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1987 |
| From: | Hofmann H BECHTEL GROUP, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20238C505 | List:
|
| References | |
| CIV-PEN, EA-84-137, NUDOCS 8712310200 | |
| Download: ML20238C753 (300) | |
Text
.
M3 \A_
g TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
~
In the Matter of:
GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION ) Docket No. 50-320 (Civil Penalty) l (Three Mile Island Nuclear )
DPR-73 Unit No. 2) ) License No.
)
) VOLUME II
)
I
_ Pages: 208 through 471 and 489 through 494 Place: San Francisco, California Date: August 20, 1987 Heritage Reporting Corporation Official Reporters 1220 L Street N.W.
Washington. D.C. 20005 (202) 628 1888 8712310200 871209 PDR ADOCK 05000320 PDR
( ) 1 BEFORE THE 2 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
5 l
6 l
7 In the Matter of: )
) Docket No. 50-320 8 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION ) (Civil Penalty)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear ) License No. DPR-73 g Unit No. 2) )
Volume II M) i 33 BE IT REMEMBERED that pursuant to adjournment, 12 that on. Thursday, the 20th day of August, 1987, commencing
. 13 at the hour of 9:15 a.m. thereof, in conference room 18 14 North, Law Offices of Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges, Two n; Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, State of California, k
6 16 personally appeared z
@ 37 HENRY LEE HOFMANN e
- p. is called as a witness by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
's g 39 who, being previously duly sworn by Notary Public, was 6
s 20 thereupon examined and interrogated as hereinafter set forth.
E g 21 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
represented by GREGORY A. BERRY, ESQUIRE who appeared as lt 22 23 counsel on behalf of the Commission.
24 25
.<-)
q,-
i I
________-_--_____-_.__________-_A
l l
( 1 208 2 THELEN, MARRIN, _ JOHNSON.& BRIDGES represented by=
'3 KENNEDY P. RICHARDSON, ESQUIRE, One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 4 1950, Oakland, California 94612, appeared on behalf of the 5 Respondent.
6 SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE represented by i 7 J. PATRICK HICKEY and DAVID R. LEWIS, 2300 N Street N.W.,
8 Washington, D.C. 20037, appeared as counsel on behalf of the i 9 Respondent, ,
10 000 11 12 t
13 V\
L/ 14 15 g
3 16 2 17 n
g 18 0
3 19 b
E 20 E 21 g
5 y 22 2?
24 25
.ps O
l.
209 r / \' CONTENTS' d 3 WITNESS PAGE 2
HENRY! LEE HOFMANN Examination by Mr. Berry 3
Examination by Mr. Richardson 4
EXHIBITS c,
HOFMANN'S IDENTIFIED
~
l 210 2 211 6
3 211 4 212 7
5 213 6 214 ,
8 i 7 227- l 9
8 318 10
-9 345 i3 1 362, 365 12 11 365 13 13 12 366 V 14 13 366 15 g
14 366 9 16 i s
! 15 425 17 16- 434 ;
g 18 17 440 f5 ig 18 441 E 20 19 441 21 20 454 22
[h 21 455 23 22 456 24 23 463
-25 24 (In Camera) 471 O
1
i 210 1 2 1 P_ p_1 1 I 1 O_ N_
l l 2 9:16 a.m.
3 MR. BERRY: On the record. Good morning.
4 This is the continuation of the. deposition of Mr. Hofmann.
! 5 HENRY LEE HOFMANN 6 was called as a witness by the Commission, being previously 7 duly sworn by the Notary Public to tell the truth, the whole 8 truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as follows:
9 MR. BERRY: Before we begin I have a few 10 preliminary matters that I'd Idke to take care of. In 11 reviewing the transcript from Mr. Hofmann's deposition of 12 June 25,.1987 I noticed that certain exhibits marked for 13 identification were not included in the copy of that
('N k- 14 transcript. And I would tender to the Court Reporter now 15 those documents that were marked for identification to be 16 included in this volume of the transcript.
17 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 1 which was identified 18 at page 8 of the deposition is the March 25, 1987 notice of 19 deposition of H. Lee Hofmann.
20 (The document referred to was 21 marked for identification as 22 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 23 Number 1.)
24 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr . Berry, I can't tell from 25 the transcript what that was. Let me get my notes from 9
BRIGGgREPORTING COMPANY
_ --- - _ ----- --- -- - - - - - - - ~
211 1 the last session. Maybe I can ascertain that from my notes.
2 MR. BERRY: Okay. And I'll state for the record 3 it's the notice of deposition.
1 4 MR. RICllARDSON: Yes. According to my notes it l 5 was the notice of-deposition.
6 MR. BERRY: Yes. Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 7 Number 2 is identified at page 9 of the transcript. And j 8 that is a one-page letter dated May 6, 1987 from Kennedy P.
9 Richardson to Gregory A ., Berry regarding the NRC/ Park civil 10 penalty proceeding.
11 (The document refcered to was 12 marked for identification as
,. s 13 Ho f ma ritt Deposition Exhibit l 14 Number 2.)
15 MR. RICHARDSON: Uh-huh. j 16 MR. BERRY: llofmann Deposition Exhibit Number 3 17 was identified at page 10 of the transcript; le a May 29, la 1987 letter from Mr. Ili c k e y , J. Patrick Hickey, addressed 19 to George Johnson of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
20 (The document referred to was 21 marked for identification as 22 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 23 Number 3.)
24 MR. RICHARDSON: Uh-huh.
25 MR. BERRY: Another document that was referred Ie ,
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
! _ _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _a
l 212 lllh 1 to during the course of Mr. Hofmann's deposition which was j 2 not marked for identification but made an exhibit to the i
3 deposition was Mr. Hofmann's resume. I would ask the Court ;
k 4 Reporter to mark this for identification as Hofmann 5 Deposition Exhibit 4.
6 (The document referred to was 7 marked for identification as 8 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 9 Number 4.)
io MR. BERRY: I ask Mr. Hofaann to review what i 11 has been marked as Hofmann deposition Exhibit 4 to confirm or ,
t 12 not whether that appears to be a copy of the resume that we 13 discussed during his deposition on une 25, 1987.
p 14 THE WITNESS: It appears to be a copy. I 15 MR. BERRY: Another document that was discussed ;
16 during the course of Mr. Hofmann's deposition on June 25, 17 1987 was Bechtel Directive 2.1 or 2-1, I should say. And 18 that would be the 1982 version. I seem not to be able to lay 39 a hand, my hands on a copy of that particular document but I 20 intend to do so. And I would ask the Court Reporter to 21 reserve the designation Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 5 for the 22 1982 version of Bechtel Directive 2-1.
23 24 25 O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]
i l .
213 !
_t (The document referred to was 2
marked for identification as 3
Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 4
Number 5.)
5 MR. BERRY: Wait a moment. Mr. Hofmann, do you 6 have a copy of the June 1982 version of Bechtel Directive 7 2-1?
8 THE WITNESS: Of June?
9 MR. BERRY: Yes.
10 THE WITNESS: I have April 22, 1982, 11 MR. BERRY: Oh, excuse me. That's the one I'm 12 referring to. If I said June I meant April. That's the 7s 13 version of the directive that was in effect during the time a
14 you conducted your investigation that we discussed the last 15 time.
16 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
17 MR. BERRY: Would counsel for GP be so good to 18 make -- l t
19 MR. RICHARDSON: Would you like a copy made?
20 MR. BERRY: Yes. l 21 MR. RICHARDSON: Sure. Would you like that done 22 now Mr. Berry or during the break?
23 MR. BERRY: It may be done at a break.
24 MR. RICHARDSON: Okay.
25 MR. BERRY: The next document that I would ask O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
i 214' lllh I the Court Reporter.to mark for identification is a March'24, 2 1983 inter-office memorandum from S.M. Pace of the Office of 3 Internal Auditing to Mr. H.F. Brush. And the subject if 4 Three Mile Island': Possible Employee Involvement with Job 5 Shop Operations. 'This is a document'that was discussed with 6 Mr. Hofmann during the last deposition session. And it was
~
7 not marked for-identification or offered as an exhibit to his 8 deposition. I would ask at this time that the Court Reporter 9 mark'the document i have just described as Hofmann Deposition 10 Exhibit 6.
11- (The document referred to was 12 marked for identification as 13 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit A
(-) 14 Number 6.)
15 MR. BERRY: I would ask Mr. Hofmann to review and 16 I would hand a copy of the exhibit, Deposition Exhibit 6'to 17 Mr. Hofmann and ask him to review that document and confirm 18 or not whether in fact that is a copy of the document that we gg discussed during the last deposition session.
20 MR. RICHARDSON: It's a bit unclear as to what 21 you mean by document discussed during last deposition. Can 22 you be a bit more specific with regard to the document?
23 MR. BERRY: What's been marked as Hofmann Deposi-24 tion Exhibit 6?
25 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, my point Mr. Berry is that 1
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
l !
l t l 215 l 1
we discussed I believe several documents during the last --
2 MR. BERRY: Is that one of the documents that we 3
discussed? Do you want a reference to the transcript page? I 4
I mean I think it's clear. I think the witness can answer 5 that question. I'm just asking him to confirm or not whether 6 the document I'm showing him now is the same document i 7 dated March _24, 1983 from Mr. Pace to Mr. Brush which bears 8 his initials, Mr. Hofmann's initials at the end of page 2. ;
9 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Hofmann, if you have a i 10 recollection of having discussed such a document during the 11 last session of your deposition you may answer that !
12 question.
7, 13 MR. BERRY: Is that the problem, you're unclear
( )
14 as to whether the witness remembers having discussed the 15 document?
16 MR. RICHARDSON: That seems to be the tenor of yotr 17 question. You're asking him from his memory whether he i 18 remembers such a document having been discussed and if so 19 whether this is a copy of that document.
20 MR. BERRY: I'm not just asking from his 21 memory. If there is anything he needs to look at to help 22 him fresh his recollection as to whether that document j j
23 that's been marked as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 6 was the 24 subject of questioning and is from the previous deposition 25 session, please feel free to --
O BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
216 l
llll 1 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, the difficulty Mr. Berry 2 is that the question is rather vague and overly broad.
3 I mean there's a lot of question. I mean as you know we 4 spent an entire day --
l 5 MR. BERRY: The question is preliminary in 6 nature, Mr. Richardson. I am not tricking the witness. My 7 only, my purpose.is to --
8 MR. RICHARDSON: No. I'm not suggesting that
~
g you're tricking'the witness. I'm trying to be helpful and' to suggest that perhaps if you can - -
11 MR. BERRY: Do you recall Mr. --
12 MR. RICHARDSON: And ask a direct question 13 whether --
rm J 14 MR. BERRY: All right.
15 MR. RICHARDSON: The witness believes this is a 16 copy of a particular document relating to his investigation, 17 I'm sure the witness will --
18 MR. BERRY: That's not the question that I want 19 to ask because the question, what I'm interested in 20 determining is whether we had discussed this document or I 21 submit we've discussed this document. And I wanted to 22 establish or confirm that this is a copy of the document that is described in the witness's previous testimony. It's 23 24 different question than what your comment is directed 25 toward. And maybe that might help you as to what my parpose O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
217 9 I is. But, you know, that is my intent and that is what I want 2 So let me try it this way.
to confirm. Do.you recall, Mr.
3 Hofmann, I asked you, and let me direct your attention to page 1 of what's been marked as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit ,
i 5 6. Do you see the fourth paragraph? Do you see where it 6 Do-you see that?
says Directive.2-1 was violated? f 7
lTHE WITNESS: Yes.
8 MR. BERRY: Do you recall at the last deposition 9 session I asked.you a number ~of questions regarding that 10 statement that appears in Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 6 that !
11 I just quoted?
12 THE WITNESS: I believe so.
13 MR. BERRY: And did 1 not refer you, did I not 14 refer you to a document when I asked you, when I directed 15 your attention to the statement that says, " Directive 2-1 16 was violated"? At the last deposition-did i direct you to 17 a document?
18 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Berry, it's obvious that 19 you directed him to a number of documents.
20 MR. BERRY: Well, this is a preliminary question.
21 MR. RICHARDSON: All right.
22 MR. BERRY: Did I direct you to a document, if L 23 you recall? ,
24 THE WITNESS: Quite frankly I do not recall.
l 25 MR. HICKEY: Mr. Berry, can I help? If you're BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
i
1 i
218 l 1
I looking for the reference in the transcript where I think 2 this document you're referring to is discussed, look at page 3 And then it goes on. And maybe that 128 at the bottom.
4 will help the witness and help you.
5 MR. BERRY: Thank you, Mr. Hickey. Yes. 1 1
6 MR. HICKEY: Is that the reference you wanted?
7 MR. BERRY: That will help. yes. At the last l
)
8 deposition session on' June 25, 1987 at page 128 of that )
1 1
9 transcript there appears a question to the witness, Mr.
10 Hofmann, put by me. 'It~ states, and I will read it in 11 full: "all right, I.vant to show you Mr. Hofmann" --
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Berry, let me, I'll offer 13 a suggestion. The problem is we have a transcript which
- 1
~
14 the witness has not reviewed and corrected. So it is not 15 a deposition yet in the case. But I think what you want j j
16 to do si --
l a
17 MR. BERRY: Excuse me, Mr. Richardson, j j
18 MR. RICHARDSON: Okay. Can I just complete? j 1
19 I think what you want to do is retroactively cure the 20 problem that this document had not been identified during 21 the first session. So what I will offer to do is that 22 where there is reference in the transcript of the first 23 session of the deposition to a memorandum from S.M. Pace to !
24 H.F. Brush dated March 24, 1983 I will stipulate that that 25 reference pertains to what you have now identified as j I
O BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
__ -_ - - - - - - m
219 L
lllh 1 Exhibit 6. I think that will solve all the problems that 2 you have in mind.
3 MR. BERRY: I'm sorry. As the witness has 4 indicated, could you rereat what you just said or --
5 MR. RICHARDSON: In other words, where there is !
6 reference in the transcript of the first session to a 7 memorandum from S.M. Pace to H.F. Brush dated March 24, 8
1983 I will stipulate that those references refer to the j g document;which'we have.now identified as Exhibit 6 to the 10 d5 position, p MR. BERRY: Before I accept your stipulation 12 let me just try.- I think I canfget'it from the witness --
,_ 13 MR. RICHARDSON: Quickly, one caveat. As Mr.
\/ g Hofmann has noted in the upper right hand corner there is 15 somebody's handwriting indicating Exhibit 1 I believe and 16 something else.
9 MR. BERRY: Yes, I believe this is an exhibit 18 to a previous deposition.
19 MR. RICHARDSON: I think we all agree that that 20 handwriting was not on the original memorandum.
I 21 MR. BERRY: Yes.
22 MR. RICHARDSON: All right.
23 MR. BERRY- Before I accept your stipulation 24 Mr. Richardson let me just try this and see if we can get it 25 fr m the witness. Page 131 of the transcript of the previous BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
220 llh 1 deposition session there is put to you, Mr. Hofmann, a 2 question by me and it states at line 5; "and those are your 3 initials down at the bottom where it says SMP:HLH for H.
4 . Lee Hofmann;_isn't that correct? Answer: that's right.
5 Question: and what is this document? Answer: this document 6 indicates what the' allegation -- What we understood the 7 allegation to be initially. This document in addition to 8 that indicates that there was an investigation conducted.
9 This lett'er or ~this memorandum also indicates certain 10 information that came to light during the conduct of the 11 investigation.- This memorandum also indicates that the 12 division had taken certain disciplinary action relative to 13 it's employee. It indicates also what the division intended 14 to do to minimize a reoccurrence of the situation and that 15 we closed the investigation." Do you remember giving that 16 answer, Mr. Hofmann?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 MR. BERRY: Do you recall what document you were 19 describing when you gave that answer?
20 THE WITNESS: I was describing the document that 21 I can j ust read it off.
22 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, with Mr. Berry's 23 permission why don't I mark this Exhibit 6?
l 24 MR. BERRY: Okay.
l L 25 THE WITNESS: This is the document, Exhibit 6 is l
O BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY j
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ .]
r 221 l
lll 1 the document to which I was referring in the deposition.
2 MR. RICHARDSON: Thank you.
3 MR. BERRY: As we discussed generally the last !
4 time when we met Mr. Hofmann this proceeding that we're I 1
5 engaged in today is known as a deposition. And the person !
6 transcribing this proceeding is a certified Court Reporter 7 and also a Notary Public. And you're under oath. You were g sworn the last time. Your remain under oath. During the g course of this proceeding I and perhaps Mr. Richardson or Mr.
10 Hickey will be asking you questions pertaining to this case.
11 And by this case I mean the matter of GPU Nuclear Corporation 12 It's an enforcement proceeding' brought by the United States 13 Nuclear Regulatory Commission against GPU Nuclear Corporation i -s\
'w) 34 for alleged violations of federal law or regulation. Your 15 testimony today has the effect and force of the testimony 16 y u would give if this were a hearing in a court of law.
p Of course the judge is not here so obj ections made by your 18 counsel to the questions that I may ask, we don't have the 39 benefit of having the judge to rule on those objections, i 20 That's why the rules provide that your counsel will state his o bj ec tion for the record and you will be required to 21 ]
22 answer the question except in those instances where your c unsel instructs you not to answer. Otherwise, you are 23 requird to answer. And in those caes, and I don't, I'm 24 25 hopeful that there won't be any that your counsel instructs BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY k
i l
l
222 i
h 1 you not to answer and that it's a matter that can be 2 handled either between your lawyers and myself or we can try 3 to contact the judge and get it resolved.
4 Mr. Hofmann, if at any time and I want to 5 emphasize it, if at any time during this deposition you feel 6 that any question that I ask you is ambiguous or unintelli-7 gible or that you are unable to understand or you fail to i
1 i 8 hear the question, I want you to tell me. Do you understand 1
9 that?
10 THE WITNESS: I hear what you're saying.
$i MR. BERRY: Okay. Well, let me repeat it i 12 because I think it's important and I want to emphasize it.
i 13 If it any time during this d e po si tion you feel that a question
's -) 14 that I ask you is ambiguous or vague or unintelligible or 15 that you didn't hear it or that you don't understand it, if 16 you have any concern or question about the interrogatory, 17 the question that I put to you I want you to tell me. And 18 I'll endeavor to cure any problems in the question as framed ig by me. I'll do my best to make it intelligible if it's 20 unintelligible. I'll try to solve whatever it is that makes 21 it difficult for you to understand the question, to clarify 22 any ambiguity or vaguness in the question. But I won't know any of this unless you tell me. And I would appreciate very 23 i 24 much if you tell me if you have a problem with my question.
i 25 Do you understand what I'm asking you, Mr. Hofmann?
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
- _ - - _ _ - _ i
. , ~ <- -
223
.i I understant' whnt yot'in asking.
THE Vit..ESS: '
2 Thank you. i 3 MR. BERRO: And will ' .Is u 'd o that fo- $ie?
4 THE WITNESH 7 will'do everything I can to tell 5 you the truth.
6 M R '. BEDY : Thank you. I know you will. If I y ask you a question aoout conversations you may have had ir, 8 , tlM past and you're t' n a l l e to 'eca13 the exaci sords,.I nten g the exact words that were usec in the coniersatio---I want; i.g 1 s
- g you to tell me that you're unable _to remenber exactly what -
si was said , bt.t give me your b e s t , r e c o l l t , .;. i o n , , t h'a gis" of
. r 12 the substance of what you recall.
- 13 MR. RICHARI30N: Well,-I -- /
14 . i t 't . BERRY: Let me finish. < Wha.c,I % int.erested
.. h s 15 in in your best recollection. And'a number of the inci'denta 16 and the events in.the matters that 'm going to be:cuestion--
17 ing you about took' place a number of years ago. So I don't 18 expect that you remember everything that was said ver'atiis. o to 19 No one expects that. f ym. But if ,nuLcomember what the 20 conversation was about, wbst the gist of the conversation ws3 what the substance of it was I went you.to tell me' c5at you 21 1
22 recall that. I FM . RICHARDSON: I appreciate your purpose in 23 saying what you just said Mr. Berry. But my hopc is that 24 l
25 where you are seeking the gist of the substance that ycu O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMP NY
___c _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ x m U _ _1 -
~
} . .j-i r4 i l _ . . _ ~,
l 224 i'
1 make t. hat clear in'your individual questioning because quite l .
2 often deperding on the context of the question and how the 3 question is'phrasi,dtthe witness can easily overlook that 4 desire. 4 5 MR. BERR.Y: I'll try to do that.
i.
6 MR. NICHARDSON: Okay. Fine.
7 , MR. ITERRY: itdJif it'h, that's what I mean, 8 if it's unclear I'm sure he#11 point that out for me.
g' <
, MR. RICHARDSON: Well, he may or may not.
10 'MR. BERRY: He or his counsel may point that 1
out, it c
12 MR. RICHARDS0N:" I think-that is really the '
13 domain of the questioner. And if he doesn't recall exact.
~h (V 14 words and you wish his recollection of substance --
15 MR. BERRY: Yes,'and'I --
16 MR. RICHARDSON: I think --
17 MR. BERRY: I said if I forget to do that I would f
18 expect that.either,the' witness ori the witness's counsel will 19 make that known to me.
20 MR. RICHARDSON: Well --
21 MR. BERRY: I don't expect to forget to do that, 22 MR. Richardson.
- l 1
23 MR. RICHARDSON: Okay. Well, I do not i n t e n n ,' -
24 I think'it's unfair for the witness, it's unfair to require 25 the witness to li ve up to that expectation.
O BRIGGS REPORTING bOMPANY
_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ./
i i
{ . -
l t I
b '
225
\
l h (3' MR. BERRY: That's why he's represented by l
2 counsel. I'll just repeat to you Mr. Hofmann, my purpose 3 .here today is not to trap you or to trick you in any manner.
f4' Llt's simply to. ascertain and discover that information about l
5 the f acts pertaining to this proceeding that you have within 6 .four knowledge. At the conclusion of this deposition the i 1
'7 ' Court Reporter who will be taking my questions your answers y will have it typed up, your answers, my questions, your 9 answers in a booklet and it will~be made available to me. I 10 will submit it to your attorneys who will make it available S.
jj to you. And you'll have the opportunity to review the 12 transcript'to'make,any changes or corrections you feel 13 necessary to the transcript. And you have the option of 14 signing the transcript. Although.I believe that in this 15 proceeding we've generally been waiving signature on the part 16 f the deponent's if I'm not --
37 MR. HICKEY: No, I don't think so.
is MR. BERRY: All right. Well, after you receive 19 it you'll have an opportunity to review it, make corrections 20 to it. I'll ask you to sign it, have it notarized, return it i
21 to your counsel and your counsel will return it to me, i 22 MR. RICHARDSON: I think there has been a practice )
i n behalf of some of the depo witnesses that based on an 23 24 agreement that I have with Mr. Johnson, they were relieved '
25 f the necessity of having of signing the transcript before a BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
226 lllh I notary. And what we've done is within the deadline fixed for 2 signing the transcript I'have submitted by letter a list of I
3 corrections to the Court Reporter. And at that point the 4 transcript has been deemed to have been signed by the witness.
5 MR. BERRY: Is that the arrangement you want 6 to continue with Mr. Hofmann?
7 MR. RICHARDSON: Yes.
8 MR. BERRY: Fine. Now, if you make changes or 9 ' corrections to your testimony that I'm entitled.to ask you 10 why you made the changes and comment upon those changes 11 before a judge at the hearing in this matter. And let me 12 j ust state because of thatsit is,important to all of us that 13 ur answers are full and complete'and correct. I have no
(~
(-)% 14 doubt that you. understand that,and that you will continue 15 to do so.' Do you underst'and everything that I've been 16 saying to you..Mr. Hofmann?
17 THE WITNESS: Well, you've said an awful lot to 18 me this morning. And it appears to be much like the what you 19 said at the outset of the other hearing.
20 MR. BERRY: Do you have any questions about 21 anything I've said?
22 THE WITNESS: Not at this point.
23 MR. BERRY: If at any time you have questions 24 about what we've discussed or what I've said to you this 25 morning I would ask you to raise them with me and I'd be e
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY 1
_ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ __.___________________.___d
i 227 h 1 happy to try to answer them if I can. Will you do that for 2 me?
3 THE WITNESS: I will do what I can to give you a 4 f ull and complete answer.
5 MR. BERRY: That's all anybody expects of you, 6 Mr. Hofmann.
7 I hand the Court Reporter a copy of a document.
8 I would ask her to mark it for identification as Hofmann 9 Deposition Exhibit 7. And for the record it is entitled to Notice of Deposition of H. Lee Hofmann. It's dated August 11 4, 1987. It's a Notice of Deposition filed by me in this 12 proceeding.
13
, (The document referred to was
\-
14 marked for identification as 15 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 16 Number 7.)
17 u MR. BERRY: 'Have you seen the document marked j 18 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 7 before Mr. Hofmann?
19 THE WITNESS: Are you addressing the question 20 to me?
21 MR. BERRY: Yes.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
23 MR. BERRY: You'll note, Mr. Hofmann, that in 24 the second full paragraph, the second sentence states 25 "except for those documents already produced or identified in O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY 1
1 I
l 228 lllh 1 response to prior discovery requests Mr. Hofmann shall be 2 bring to the deposition all records, notes, memoranda, files 3 and documents including personal notes and documents in his 4 possession or subj ect to his custody and control that relate ;
4 5 to 1.-any of the matters set forth in paragraphs 2 through 5 6 of the attachment to this notice, and 2. the consideration, 7 investigation, evaluation or resolution by Bechtel or GPU 8 Nuclear Incorporated of any of the safety concerns or claims g of harassment, intimidation, discrimination or threat of go reprisal raised by Richard Parks in his affidavit of March 3, 21, 1983." Do you see that?
12 THE WITNESS: Yes, I see that.
13 MR. BERRY: Do you have, except for those s r~s
-) 14 documents already; produced or identified in response to ,
i 15 prior discovery requests did you bring with you to this 16 deposition any documents responsive to the Notice of 17 Deposition?
18 THE WITNESS: I have brought nothing new.
39 MR. BERRY: Are there any additional documents 20 that are responsive to this request that have not yet been 21 that have not already been produced?
22 THE WITNESS: To my knowledge relative to the 23 investigation that I was involved with you have everything 24 I've got.
25 MR. BERRY: Okay. That's fine. Thank you.
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY L___________ . _ . - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
l 229 1
(Pause.)
2 EXAMINATION 3- 'BY MR, BERRY: !
4 Q Mr. Hofmann, do you recall if the last time we 5 were together I asked you how many special investigations '
6 you had conducted during your tenure as a, in the internal 7
audit department of Bechtel Corporation; do you recall me 8 asking you that' question?
)
9 A Generally, yes sir.
10 Q And do you recall what your answer was? I 11 A About 200.
12 Q Okay. So as I recall then you weren't sure, it
,7-13 was approximately, give or take?
~
14 A' That's right.
15 Q Have you made any effort since June 25th when 16 your deposition adj ourned to' find out the exact number of 17 special investigations you've conducted?
18 A I've reviewed the files in that regard.
19 Q Were you able to determine how many special 20 investigations you have conducted?
21 A Over what period of time, Mr. Berry?
22 Q During your tenure in the internal audit 23 department of Bechtel Corporation.
24 A 'Would that have been 1977 January to date, now?
25 Q Yes, to the present time.
O BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
230' llh 1 A To the present time. I, it is, I believe that 2 .the total count is about 160 that I have personally been 3 involved in. And that an additional 40 plus or minus were 4 under my direct supervision. Which would equate to about 5 200.
6 Q Now, can you be more specific as to what you did 7 when you stated that you reviewed the files? Could you be 8 more specific as to what you mean by you reviewed the files?
g A Reivewed the files in'what? I don't quite to understand the how, where you're coming from.
11 Q Okay. You said you reviewed the files.
12 A Reviewed the files in what context?
13 .Q In determining how many investigations you've
%> 1. conducted.
15 A Oh, I see. Well, we have records as to the 16 number of in"vestigations that we, special investigations that 17 we performed during a given year. Those records are the 18 files.
19 Q And that's what you did?
f 20 A Yes.
I 21 Q D you recall also Mr. Hofmann -- Mr. Hofmann, 22 what if any effort did you make to prepare yourself for your !
23 dep sition today? >
24 MR. RICHARDSON: That's a rather vague question.
25
(
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
.__ _ _ _ _ _ - . - - _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _________ ________ _______ __a
231 1
BY MR. BERRY:
2 Mr. Hofmann, did you review any documents in Q
3 preparation for your testimony?
4 A Yes.
5 MR. RICHARDSON: Were they documents that 6 you prepared --
7 MR. BERRY: In preparation.
8 MR. RICHARDSON: For specific answers or?
9 MR. BERRY: No. In preparation. Did you 10 understand the question or not understand that question?
11 THE WITNESS: Well, I'm rather new and naive 12 about all of these questions. So perhaps counsel sees
, 13 something in the question that I didn't.
. (, .)
14 BY MR. BERRY:
15 Q .Okay. -Did you review any documents to assist 16 you in respon" ding to questions tha't you believed might be.
17 put to you-by-me during this deposition?
18 A I reviewed some documents.
19 Q Would you identify ~for~me if you can the 20 documents you reviewed?
21 A Different interview notes that I had taken 22 during the investigation, sequence of events all of which 23 you have.
24 Q Yes. Anything else, Mr. Hofmann, any other q 25 documents?
l r
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY j l
1 i
u_m _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
i 232 L
lllh 1 A Well, I guess what you want me to do is go e through and list them independently. And I'll be happy to 3 do that.
4 Q I'm only interested in the documents that you 5 reviewed subsequent to your last deposition.
, 6 A All right.
7 Q Okay. Why don't we do that briefly?
8 A Briefly.
g Q Or strike, take as much time as you need.
- o MR. RICHARDSON
- You want individual itemization 33 of each note and --
12 MR. BERRY: He can just describe generally the 13 documents. I mean I don't, strike that.
14 BY MR. BERRY:
15 Q You said interview notes you reviewed. The 16 sequence of events you reviewed. Okay. And what else did 17 you revicW?
is A Let me take it from the beginning here if you'd gg like?
20 Q Sure.
21 A The memorandum from S.M. Pace.
22 Q Is that the document that's been marked as Depo-23 sition Exhibit 6?
i 24 A That's correct.
I 25 Q Okay.
f
!= BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY a___________ _ _ _ _ s
I 233 I
llh 1 A Bechtel Directive 2-1. I 2 Q And that's the document that will be marked as the 3 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 7. i 4 MR. HICKEY: 5I think you said before, Mr.
5 Berry.
6 MR.-BERRY: Oh, 5. You're correct. Thank you.
7 THE WITNESS: A document entitled Notification 8
Procedure Relative to 2-1 initialed by myself and dated (
9 January 11, 1983.
10 BY MR. BERRY:
33 Q Now, before you go on, Mr. Hofmann, there, and 12 I don't presume this to be the case but there~may well be 13 a document that you reviewed as the subj ec t of a procective
-s
-' g order entered into this proceeding. If that is the case 15 y u may want to consult with your counsel. I would suggest la that that's one document that you need not review for the 4
17 record on.this record here, jg A You're very kind, Mr. Berry. If I may continue?
gg Q Yes, please.
20 A Description of operations, internal auditing.
That's a' document, that's the title of a document. It's from 21 22 ur organization manual, section 4. And it's dated July 22, 1983 in two pages. A document I also reviewed a 23 document entitled Audit Number, File Number T-201. And that 24 25 is R man Numeral Four and it's called General. And that's in O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
234 1 two pages.
2 MR. RICHARDSON: I actually believe that's roman 3 six, 4 THE WITNESS: Six. Excuse me. You're quite i 5 right. Quite right.
6 MR. F.ICHARDSON: If I may interj ec t at this 7 point? Turning to the next document that you're now looking 8 at Mr. Hofmann, is this a document which you reviewed?
i 9 THE WITNESS: That's correct. $
10 MR. RICHARDSON: .To follow through on your, 11 the advise that you j ust gave a moment ago, Mr. Berry, 12 we'll stipulate that the witness did review the twelve page 13 document the first page of which bears the title Conducting
'-] 14 a Special Investigation. This is a document, a copy of 15 which Mr. Hickey provided you with yesterday and is and was 16 provided to you pursuant to the protective order which Judge 17 Smith recently entered. And without further ado I suggest 18 that any additional identification or description of the 19 document be reserved until such time as you intend to make 20 this an exhibit and examine the witness on it.
21 MR. BERRY: I fully agree, Mr. Richardson.
22 THE WITNESS: In adition, I reviewed my 1
23 resume.
24 BY MR. BERRY: l 25 Q And that is what's been marked for identification O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
235 llh 1 as Hofmann Deposition. Exhibit 4?
2 A That's correct. I indicated that I reviewed 3 the sequence of events ' generally and the interviews that I 4 obtained from Mr. Blizzard, Mr. Buell, Mr. Kitlin, Mr.
5 Parks, Mr. Rittle, Mr. Thiesing. That's about it.
6 Q Can you tell me how long you, how much time you 7 spent preparing'or reviewing the' documents, Mr. Hofmann?
l 8 MR.~ HICKEY: Did'you say prepar1ng or reviewing 9 the documents?
10 MR. BbRRY: Yes. Strike that.
11 BY MR. BERRY:
12 Q Can you tell me how much time you spent reviewing 13 the documents?
I7,)
A Well I, in an effort to refresh my recollection 14 15 so I could give to you the benfit of my understanding I 16 reviewed them yesterday, yesterday is Wednesday and Tuesday 17 as well and some part of Monday. Not eight hours a day but 18 from time to time.
39 Q Do you have any idea how many hours in total you 20 spent on parts of Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday?
21 A Maybe --
22 MR. RICHARDSON: Maybe? When you begin with 23 maybe then I've got to advise you Mr. Hofmann, Mr. Berry i
24 does not want you to guess or speculate. But if you feel '
25 you can give an approximation of which you are reasonably l
9 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _- J
236 lllh I sure'then please do so.
2 THE WITNESS: Approximately four or five hours 3 on each of those two days, Wednesday, Tuesday.
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q How about Monday, do you recall?
6 A Perhaps an approximation would be oh maybe about 7 the same in general. terms.
8 Q .Since we. met last have yo'u had an opportunity 9 to review .the transcript.of the of the June 25, 1987 10 deposition sessio'n?s 11 A When you say hav.e I had a chance, what do you 12 mean?
13 Q Have you seen it?
f ks)# 14 A I have seen the package.
15 Q Have you read the transcript?
16 A I have not read the total transcript.
37 Q Have you read parts of the transcript?
Is A I have read parts of the transcript.
39 Q What parts did you read?
20 A I don't have a copy of my transcript here and I 21 don't therefore can ' t tell you I don't believe with any degree 22 of accuracy how many pages I read.
23 Q I just happen to have a copy of your transcript 24 here. And if it will refresh your recollection as to what I 25 pages or how many pages you read feel free to look at it.
O BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
l
237 I 1 l l
lllh 1 And if you don't think it will refresh your recollection 1'
L 2 would you tell me that and we 'll j ust pass over it?
l 3 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I think what you're 4 asking the witness to do is to go through the transcript l-5 page by page.
l j 6 MR. BERRY: I'm not asking that at all. I'm 7 jusb asking the witness, I'm j ust asking, I asked the 8 witness whether he reviewed the. transcript. He said, not all
. i g of it. And I asked him had he reviewed parts of it. He io said, he's reviewed parts of it. I' asked him if he recalled 33 what parts he reviewed. And he said, he wasn't sure or 12 s mething to that effect. I' asked'him if I showed him a copy
- 13 of the transcript would that would he be able to refresh
\- his recollection as to what parts of the transcript he 14 15 reviewed. That's where we are. I'm not asking him to read 16 the entire transcript.
17 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Berry, but inherent in that 18 proposition is the premise that he has got to review the jg transcript that is the sum in order to figure out which 20 parts of the sum he may have looked at. And that --
21 MR. BERRY: I understand --
22 MR. RICHARDSON: Would be a lengthy exercise.
23 MR. BERRY: Your point is well taken.
24 MR. RICHARDSON: And I don't mean to obstruct you 25 but from a risk benefit, in terms of -~
O BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
238 i
h 1 MR. BERRY: Your point's well taken.
2 MR. RICHARDSON: A cost benefit standpoint there 3 really isn't much utility in it. l 1
3 4 BY MR. BERRY: l
}
5 Q Let me just, let mas ask you, Mr. Hofmann, I 6 Is there.any pa r dcular subject matter that you were looking 7 for or you were interested in.in reviewing the transcript?
8 A I was not interested in any particular subject 9 matter. I'was interested in how ---
to MR. RICHARDSON: Let_me. clarify that. Are you !
11 asking him.when he opened up the transcript did he have a 12 specific purpose or specific purposes in mind for doing 13 that?
%- 14 MR. BERRY: Yes. Yes. I'm trying to focus his 15 attention to see if there was, yes, if he had a specific 16 purpose in mind.
17 MR. RICHARDSON: He's not asking about concerns 18 which came to mind as you were reading the transcript.
19 He's asking whether you had a specific purpose in mind which 20 led you to open the transcript up to begin with.
21 THE WITNESS: No, I don't believe so other than 22 just to see what a transcript is all about.
23 BY MR. BERRY:
i 24 Q You'd not seen a transcript before?
25 A As I told you before, Mr. Berry, I have not been I
O BRIGG5 REPORTING COMPANY i
l' 239
~
1 deposed before. As a consequence I have not seen a 2 transcript before relative to a testimony that I might have 3 given in the past.
4 Q All right. Well, let me ask. As you were 5 reviewing the transcript for whatever purpose, I think 6 curiosity _is what you're saying, did you come across any 7 answer that you'd given that you'd like to change?
8 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, that is inherently an g overly broad' compound question. Under the rules of the NRC 10 there is a procedure in place whereby witnesses review a 11 transcript carefully and make whatever changes they feel i
12 are appropriate. This is really neither the time nor the 13 place to do that.
(D
'/
14 MR. BERRY: That's fine.
15 BY MR. BERRY:
16 Q Can you answer the question?
17 A Excuse me?
18 MR.' RICHARDSON: Can we have the question read ig back please?
20 MR. BERRY: I'll rephrase the question.
21 BY MR. BERRY:
22 Q As you were reviewing the transcript did you come across any answer that you'd given in that testimony that 23 you would like to correct? That's the question. Is your 24 25 o bj ec tion the same an the one you just made, Mr. Richardson?
O BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
r__.__
- 240 1 MR. RICHARDSON: In addition, it is, let me 2 point out if you are insistent on pursuing it the question is 3 vague, it's ambiguous, it is overly broad, it is compound.
4 You're asking him to, excuse me, to stretch his recollection 5 over what may be a body of many pages. It is not clear-what 6 you mean by answer. Often an answer may bave several 7 elements to it. You further are inquiring as to whether he 8 would like to change something which has implicit in that i
9 query legal considerations which he may now or at a later 10 time raisewith counsel. 'The question for all those reasons 11 is simply improper.
12 MR. BERRY: All right.
,_ 13 BY MR. BERRY:
('~) 14 Q 'Can you answer the c; u e s t i o n , Mr. Hofmann?
15 A Not with any degree of accuracy.
16 Q Does that mean that there were some but you don't 17 remember what they were or what do you mean by not with any 18 degree of accuracy?
19 A First of all, you must understand that the 20 purpose of my reviewing to a limited and a very surface 21 manner any of the pages or any of the paragraphs within the 1
22 pages on-that transcript was not to correct language. l t
I 23 Q Okay. I understand that.
24 A So thererore, that was not my purpose. j 25 Q Yes, I understand that. But what I was asking l
!e l
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY I l
m____________ ___ __ _
l l 241 I
l l
h 1 you is despite that as you were reviewing the transcript did 2 any, did you come across anything that you would, any answer 3 that you wold change? I mean, irrespective of the purpose 4 that led you to open the transcript in the first place I'm 5 asking once you had the transcript open and you reviewed 6 some'of the questions and your answers did y' come across an "
7 answer that you thought you'd want to change?
8 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objections as before. -And g may I have a continuing objection --
ja MR. BERRY: Yes.
ij 4
MR.' RICHARDSON: To this'line of inquiry?
12 MR.. BERRY: Yes. You may answer.
13 THE WITNESS: You referred to the transcript c
(
34 and that might be' understood to be,the total of I don't 15 know how many hundred pages. That is not what I read. I 16 didn't read the total of the document. So let us be quite 37 plain on that, Mr. Berry, i
18 DY MR. BERRY:
ig Q I understand.
20 A Okay? There may have been in my mind some areas 21 which appeared to be linguistically improper but I do not 22 recall at this time that there was any that I read, I do not 23 rec 11 that I read anything that would be substantially 2
24 different now than was in the transcript then.
25 Q When you said linguistically that some may have BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
1 242 l
h 1 come across and may have been linguistically wrong, I take it !
2 that you mean grammatically speaking?
3 A Yes. Some of the tenses were wrong, et cetera.
4 (Pause.)
5 Q Mr. Hofmann, at the last session I asked you l 6 some questions I believe your counsel described them as 7 hypothetical in nature. Do you remember me asking you 8 hypothetical questions?
9 A I would think that my recollection is that you 10 asked a number of hypothetical questions.
11 .Q Okay. I'm going to.ask' you another one. That is 12 I want you to assume.the facts I'm going to give you. I 13 don't want you to assume'any additional facts other than the l 6]
14 ones that I give you. X --
15 MR. HICKEY: Pardon me?
16 THE WITNESS: Excuse me.
17 BY MR. BERRY:
18 Q A person, we'll call him Mr. X. He works for 19 Bechtel at Three Mile Island He knows that Quiltec is a job 20 shopper. Do you understand what I mean when I say job 21 shopper?
22 A I imagine I'll have a number of questions after 23 you've completed what you've got to tell me here.
24 Q Do you understand job shopper?
25 A Well, why don't you give me a definition of job j 9
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
{
_--_______--_--___0
e l
l 243 l-llh 1 shopper, Mr. Berry?' y;g 2 MR. HICKEY: Do you mean j ob shop Mr. Berry, l 3 by.the way?
4 MR. BERRY: Yes. Yes. Job shop.
5 THE WITNESS: It's a job shop. What is a job 6 shop, Mr. Berry?
f 7 BY MR. BERRY: '
8 Q A job shop is a contractor. And this is pretty 9 common in nuclear industry. It's a contractor that contracts
'10 to utilities to provide workers, labor.
11 A Provide labor?
12 Q Yes. In a variety of disciplines, start up and test, g- 13 kl 34 A Pardon?
15 Q In a' variety of disciplines, start up and test,.
16 inspections, that general concept. But X knows that 17 Quiltec is a job shop. X knows that Y --
18 A That what?
19 Q Mr. Y, that Mr. Y asked Mr. X to have typed for 1
20 Mr. Y resumes.
21 A Mr. X knows that Mr. Y asked --
22 Q I see --
23 A I'm sorry. I want to help.
24 Q I appreciate what you're doing. You're doing 25 exactly what I was hopeful that you would do. X is asked by l
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
1 l i I
l 244 1
Y.
2 A All'right. Now, let's take that again now. Mr.
3 x__.
MR. RICH ARDSON: I don't think he's-finished 5 the, have you-or? i 6
MR.. BERRY: Just let me contin 3e.
7 BY MR BERRY:
8 Q We have X knows that Quiltec is a job shop.
9 Y asks X?
10 A Okay. Y asks X.
11 Q To prepare or to arrange.for resumes to be 12 typed.
13 A Y asks X.to arrange for resumes --
V 14 Q To.be typed --
15 A Okay.
16 Q For Quiltec.
17 A Okay.
18 X refuses to arrange to have the resumes typed.
Q 19 A All right.
20 Q At the time that X at this time, the time that 21 he's refused to have the resumes typed X knows that present 22 employees of Quiltec resigned their, resigned, present 23 employees of Qu11tec resigned their previous position with 24 Y's employer.
25 A I'm sorry. I want to follow but I'm not sure I O
BRIGG5 REPORTING COMPANY
245 lllh I do. X knows that the present employees of Quiltec resigned 2 from Y's. employer?
3 Q Right.
4 A Oh my.
5 MR. RICHARDSON: I don't think he means see as 6 by definition of present employee, could not have resigned.
7 Were they people who were recently in the employ?
8 BY MR. BERRY:
g Q' Present employees of Quiltec. People that work 3
l 10 for Quiltec now used to work for Y's employer.
l ti MR. RICHARDSON: Oh I'm sorry.
12 THE WITNESS: Oh. Well.now, that's a.little 13 different, isn't it? Used to. work, to work --
14 MR. BERRY: For Y's employer.
15 MR. RICHARDSON: You're, defining as not being 16 Quiltec's --
17 MR. BERRY: Excuse me?
18 MR. RICHARDSON: Y's employer I gather is not ig Quiltec?
20 MR. BERRY: We'll get to that.
21 BY MR. BERRY:
22 Q Do you have that?
23 A Well, I think so. I'm not, all these X's and 24 Y's, can we not establish a bit more, something a little bit 25 more specific? I never was very good at geometry.
O I
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY J
246 llh 1 Q Neither am I. Y is Bech t el 's client.
2 A Y is the client.
3 Q No. Y's employer. I'm sorry.
4 A Okay.
5 Q Y's employer is Bechtel's client.
6 A Y's. employer is for the client. Okay. So I 7 guess it would mean to say that used to work for the client?
8 Is that right?
9 Q That's correct.
10 A For the client. Okay. Well, that helps. You've 11 got to understand.
12 Q ,
Now, X-,
13 A -Is there a-name-to Mr.~X?
,e kY 14 Q X. This is a hypothetical.
l 15 A This is a hypothetical.
16 Q Yes. X keeps all that-information to himself.
17 A Oh, okay. X keeps, say it again please, keeps?
18 All that information?
19 Q To himself.
20 A All that information.
21 Q And by that information I mean the information, 22 the facts that I have asked you to assume. For thirty days 23 he does not share that information or disclose it to his 24 supeviser.
I 25 A X, is that X who does this?
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
247 lllh 1 Q Yes, X. Right, X.
2 A X does not share this, does not share what?
3 -Q The information that he knows, the facts you've 4 been asked to assume. X does not report that information --
5 A Does not record or report?
6 Q Report. And a month goes by, he doesn't report 7 it. Has X, all right now, one other bit of information.
8 This occurs in the time frame of the mid part of 1982, all 9 of this occurs in November 1982.
10 A This occurs in --
gg Q All of those facts, all these incidents I've 12 described take place --
13 A These facts --
I-)/ 34 Q In November 1982.
15 A ' Occurs.in.the time frame. No, it occurs in u5 November 1982?
17 Q ~Yes. Now, has X violated Bechtel Directive la 2-1?
I gg A Has X violated Directive 2-1.
20 Q That's the question.
21 A That's the question.
L 22 Q And do you understand the question?
i l- 23 A Oh, I don't think I do, Mr. Berry.
24 Q What don't you understand?
25 A I think we have some --
9 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
248 lllh 1 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I think preliminarily 2 I've got to register some objections for the record. I think 3 the hypothetical is incomplete and inadequate in several 4 respects in stating what is necessary to elicit --
5 MR. BERRY: Mr. Hickey, Mr. Richardson, excuse 6 me.
7 MR. RICHARDSON: An opinion.
8 MR. BERRY: Mr. Richardson, before you go on.
9 If you're going to be more specific than the points you're to making already, if you're going to go into for example 13 what's missing, what's lacking, I would ask we excuse the 12 witness while you state your objection for the record. There
~ 13 is no purpose in the witness being here to hear that infor-14 mation which is in'the nature of your legal objection to the 15 question. And I'm afraid it will tip the witness off as to 16 how he should answer the question.
17 THE WITNESS: Tip the witness off. Is this a 18 trick of some sort?
19 MR. BERRY: No, it's not a trick. But so, if 20 we're going to be more, if you're going to be more specific 21 than the points you've made already I would.just ask that the 22 witness step outside while you make those obj ec tions .
23 MR. RICHARDS0h: Well, we respectfully decline your l
24 request. The basis of my o bj e c tion is and I study the l
25 hypothetical more there may be other concerns I have, the S
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
--- -- ___-______- _ _ __a
1 249 lllh I capacity and job function of the, of Mr. X as employee of 2 Bechtel is not defined. It is not clear what connection Y 3 has with Quiltec in the hypothetical you've posed.
4 MR. BERRY: Mr. Richardson, are you contending 5 that the question that I --
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me. Let me --
7 MR. BERRY: Is improper?
8 MR. RICHARDSON: Complete my obj ec tion please.
g It's not clear from the hypothetical how many resumes have 10 been typed, whose resumes they are in relation to Quiltec.
11 It is --
12 MR. BERRY: Can you stop for a second please --
13 MR. RICHARDSON: No, let me --
rS k- 34 MR. BERRY: I want to catch up to what you're 15 saying. I'm going .to write down what you're saying.
n; MR. RICHARDSON: Okay.
37 MR. B'.IRRY: Okay. Thank you.
18 MR. RICHARDSON: It's not adequately clarified 19 with regard to how many former employees of Y's employer 20 left it's employ to go to work at Quiltec, when they 21 resigned, the circumstances under which they resigned. It 22 is unclear I think it should be spelled out as to the nature f X's knowledge about these people having resigned their 23 employment. Are we talking about rumor or firsthand 24 25 knowledge. Likewise, it's not spelled out as to the nature O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
- _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ - _ _ __-__-________-_____-____-________A
250 h 1 of the knowledge and source of the knowledge concerning what 2 Quiltec is. You say that X kept all of this information 3 to himself, are you referring to all of these hypothetical 4 facts or just some of them, with regard to the breach of 5 duty which is the subject of the question. It's unclear 6 when you sya that all these incidents occurred in November 7 of 1982 are the resignations occurring in November of 19827 8 I think you have to be more specific as to the timing of 9 these hypothetical events. It is not explained to the to witness as to why Mr. X declines to have resumes typed. At 11 the moment those are the reasons which underly my objection 12 that the question is incomplete for purposes of a 13 hypothetical questito.
14 MR. BERRY: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Richardson.
15 BY MR. BERRY:
16 Q Can you now answer the question, Mr. Hofmann?
17 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Hofmann, you may take as 18 much time as you need to-review this question.
19 THE WITNESS: I'd like in order for there to 20 be a determination as to whether X has violated Directive 21 2-1 we have to if we're going to be at all reasonable 22 understand a number of additional points relative to the 23 participants and to the environment. And if you wish me to 24 give you an answer which I may not be able to do even at 1
25 the conclusion, I would respectfully ask to obtain some 1
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
e, q
'1 [/ I M i
/; 251 O 1 additional d t
nformation from'(9u Welative to some' specifics.
2 BY MR. BERRY: '
3 Q What additionab n(ormation do you need to answer 4'
the question e Mr. \ x'ofmann?
5 A Okal. Now, Mr. X, who is Mr. X? Not b y , n a y,e 6 but by discipline, background, by you sa,y'h6's a Bechtel i i s. 'l 7
employee, by salary grade, U/ function. \ ,
8 Q Why is that important?- ,
Y . /j 9 A T.would think within any investiablion, Mr.
10 Berry, the individua2 that is being ' accused a;.L ol'those s ,.
t , s l
11 things are importan't. , p l \.
l 12 Q I'm asking why,,
rs 13 A Eell, in orat to make an equitable decision.
b 14
-0 Equitable. .Is that.what you do in an i F e 15 investigation, make an equitable decision?
16 A We.do' cur.very best to de1ermiva the tru'tn. 7 17 And the truth is the sarje as ejulirAle?
Q 18 A Uell, maybe from your standpoiat.it may be a 19 little different. But it normally it seems to me that the l
20 truth is mostly good and ! equitable is good.
21 Q What I'm trying to understand is if a person 22 committed a violation -- '
'e 23 A I didn't say that.
24 Q I'm asking the question. If a pershn committed ;
I 25 a violation the issue is whether he committed a' elolation or 9
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY )
a
i n *-
.l ,
252 i
~
h 1 whether he did not commit a violation.
What does equity or 2 salary grade or his job position'have to do with whether a 3 vio'.rcion was committed or not'?: ;i 4 A Well, Mr. Berry, I would ,t hink that in your l 5 busingss you'd be aware that motive is very important. Inteni 6 is very important. Design is very impbrtann.. The capac'Ity' 7 of the 1. avidual to make his mind.up es to what p o i .i t in _
t 8 time he vants to do. And that all has to do with his 9 background. So, that seems reascnable.
10 Q What other inforro lon would you need, Mr.
33 Hofmann? .
12 A I'd~ like to know when you say Mr.-X.vorks for 13 Bechtel I'd like to know what he wo,rks'at. !
<- ~
14 Q What his j ob rosition is?
15 A Pardon me? ,
16 Q Do you mean what his j o b - t.? cle is?
17 A No, I didn't say that.*
18 Q Well, what do you mean by what he works at?
39 A ~There's'a' difference between --
20 Q I'm asking -- I'm sorry.
i 21 MR. RICHARDSON: I think he's about to answer 22 the question.
23 MR. BERRY: Okay. j 24 THE WITNESS: I'd like to know what he does; his 25 duties and responsibilities in.his employment at Ber.htel on S
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
1 253 1 the Three Mile Island project.
2, BY MR. BERRY:
3 Q And why is that important, Mr. Hofmann? i 4 A It.is important to me because I would want to 3 know, it give me an idea as to the capacity of the individual 6 to relate to his environment. The capacity of the i y individual to relate not'only to his environment but the. j 1
8 people, plcces and things associated with his environment.
9 Q And what does that have to do with whether a 10 person committed the violation or didn't commit a violation? !
A Intent, Mr. Berry. Motivation, awareness of l
., 3 12 what is right and what it wrong relative to Directive 2-1. l l
13 Q And you can tell that by knowing what his i i I'Tl
~ 4 y duties and functions are? j 15 MR. RICHARDSON: As'a s'eparate isolated fact or 16 in conjunction with the~ totality of the facts?
17 . 1MR.' BERRY: In connection with the. totality of 18 facts.
19 THE WITNESS: I bel'ieve that, no. Let us 20 restate the question.
21 BY MR. BERRY:
i t 22 ,
Q Okay. The question was, can you tell what a 23 pers u's intent is by, knowing what his duties, job duties 24 Cnd functions are?
25 i A I think --
\
l !
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY E_____ _
I 254 l-h 1 MR. RICHARDSON: In relation to other facts which 2 are developed by the investigation; is that right?
3 MR. BERRY: We'll take that one first.
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q In relation to other facts that are developed 6 by the investigation.
7 A I believe the individual's function on the job i 8 site has something to do with his awareness as to what 9 happens within his environment. His duties and 10 responsibilities are an indication of the level of his 11 capacity to relate to this environment.
12 Q The more important his duties the greater his 13 capacity to relate to his environment; is that how it goes?
(~
l~ 5 /
14 A Well now, you're being very broad in your 15 reaction. And I believe-what you'd have to do if you were
! 16 to think in-terms of equity, Mr. Berry, is to rachet it to l
17 understand the circumstances relative to the specific 18 instance and draw a reasonable conclusion as a result.
ig Q I'm trying to --
20 A You can't do that if you don't know the people.
21 Q I'm trying to understand your answer. And your l
22 answer was, your testimony is that it is important to know i
23 what a person's. job duties and functions are is to help you 24 understand the capacity of the individual to relate to his 25 environment. That was your testimony. Now what I'm asking 9
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY i
l
l 255 l
h 1 is is it true that the more responsible the function of 2 duties the person holds the greater the ability of the 3 individual to relate to his environment and conversely the 4 less responsible position, duty and function the person 5 holds the less capable the person is to relate to his 6 environment? I mean is that what you're saying?
7 MR. RICHARDSON: Let me make sure I understand 8 this question. I gather you're asking him the abstract.
g Whether the mere fact that somebody is at a higher level 10 is at a higher salary rate or a higher horizontal level of 11 the company whether that in Mr. Hofmann's experience means 12 that he would have a greater ability to understand the 13 situation without regard to the specific nature of the f-(
14 employee's duties and what he was doing at the company. Was 15 that, isn't that the --
16 MR. BERRY: Yes.
17 THE WITNESS: I, guess what I'd like to do is 18 to ask the, question, ask of you the question again and 19 again ask your patience.
20 MR. BERRY: Fine. Would you read the 21 question back, Miss Reporter?
22 THE REPORTER: Let's see -- ]
MR. BERRY: Let me rephrase it. Let me just 23 24 go on, let me just repeat the question. ]
l 25 l 4
IIII (
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
- _ _ - - - _ . _ _ _ - _ . ____-__-_________________D
i 256 lllh 1 BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q Is the reason, strike that. Is part of the, 3 reason that you feel you need to know what a person's duties 4 and functions are because the duties and functions in the 5 position the person holds tells you something about the 6 person's capacity to relate to his environment?
7 A Duties and responsibilities tell me something ,
1 8 about a person's capacity to relate to his environment. It 9 also tells me a lot about his responsibility.
10 Q Now, what does it tell you about that person's 11 capacity to relate to his environment?
12 A Built into the duties and responsibilities of an 13 individual and I'm speaking of job descriptions and so forth em 14 is an indication of the degree of sophistication of the 15 individual, sophistication in a business sense. His ability 16 t'o handle day to day business activities, to analyze and 17 matters at various at his level or her level, to establish 18 a conclusion from his, their, .from h'is a r, a l y s i s , to 39 establish priorities, to relate to his the needs of his 20 supervisors and to establish responsibility for his actions.
21 When you think in terms of duties and responsibilities 22 relative to a particular employee of Bechtel I would think 23 that would be a reasonable and responsive answer to him.
24 Q Mr. Hofmann, this presumed sophistication that yot 25 Spoke of in your last answer is it ascending or descending?
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
- - - - - . - . _ - - _ . _ _ _ 1
257 llh 1 I mean is it higher up the organizational chart the presumed 2 sophistication greater or is it lesser?
3 MR. RICHARDSON: By higher up the organizational 4 chart are you simply referring to somebody who' earns more 5 money or are you referring to somebody who also has addition-6 al sophistication with regard to having additional knowledge 1
7 of particular aspects of the company or particular aspects 8 of the client's operation?
9 MR. BERRY: I'd say the organizational chart.
n) BY MR. BERRY:
11 Q Are you familiar with the organizational chart, 12 Mr. Hofmann?
13 A Which organizational chart?
fs
' -) 14 Q Bechtel's organizational chart ,
n; A Which one?
~
16 Q Are there more than one?
17 A Well, of course there are.
Is MR. RICHARDSON: We've been going almost two 39 hours and frankly if there's a convenient momen. I'd like 20 to --
21 MR. BERRY: Okay. After this question.
22 MR. RICHARDSON: Visit the restroom. !
l 23 MR. BERRY: After this question we'll take a 24 break.
25 l
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
258 1
BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q Which organizational chart are you most familiar i
3 with, Mr. Hofmann?
4 A Oh my. Which organizational chart am I-most 5 familiar with.
6 Q Let me strike that. Are you familiar with the 7
organizational chart for your department?
8 A I'm familiar with it, yes.
9 Q And are there people lower than you below you 10 on the organizational chart?
11 MR. RICHARDSON: That is if you looked at the 12 chart they're beneath Mr. Hofmann?
13 MR. BERRY: Yes. ;
~
14 BY MR. BERRY:
15 Q You know on the. organizational chart there are 16 boxes. And underneath the boxes there are other boxes.
17 And the boxes. indicate represent people holding certain 18 positions. You're familiar.-with what an organizational 19 chart generally connotes, aren't you, Mr. Hofmann?
20 A Yes, that's right. But that wasn't the 21 question.
22 Q Are there people beneath you on the organization-23 al chart?
24 A No, there are not.
25 Q Are there people above you?
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
- _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4
l
[
259 i 1 A Yes. j 2 Q You 're the, are you still the chief auditer for l
3 the internal auditing department?
4 A That is not my title.
5 Q Well, has your title changed?
6 A No sir, it hasn't changed since we last spoke.
7 My --
g Q Finish your answer?
9 A Yes, I finished my answer.
to MR, BERRY: Let's take a ten minute break.
11 (Whereupon, a short recess ensued.)
12 MR. BERRY: On the record.
,- 13 BY MR. BERRY:
14 Q Mr. Hofmann, let me direct your attention to 15 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 4.
16 MR. RICHARDSON: That's your resume. Can we 17 use this?
18 MR. BERRY: Sure. All of these are available to 19 you but just return them to the Court Reporter at the end.
20 BY MR. BERRY:
21 Q .I direct your attentio specifically to page 2, 22 page 3 of Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 4. Do you have page 3 23 pen to you, Mr. Hofmann?
74 A Yes sir, I have page 3 open to me.
25 Q Do you see the entry where the dates January '77 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY '
260 lllh 1 and 6-78 in the third column states chief auditer administra-2 tion?
3 A That's right.
4 Q And see the next entry, June '78, December '79 5 under the column of position summary of responsibilities, 6 significant accomplishments; under the position it states 7 as above?' And as above is chief auditer. And then the 8 next entry is January '80 to 12-81. Responsible and the 9 entry and it says, as above. Doesn't that reflect the title 10 that you held from January '77 through the present is it chief auditer?
12 A Mr. Berry I believe that your question had to 13 do with the organization chart of the internal auditing kyJ 14 department. And I would tell you that it would indicate 15 chief auditer-investigations.
16 Q Okay. So that's what you meant when I asked 17 you --
18 A I only related to the question you asked.
19 Q So your title has changed; you are no longer 20 chief auditer-administration. You're now chief auditer- l 21 investigations?
22 A Tha t would ap pear to be so though it is not a )
substitute change. l 23 24 Q Well, at least in that respect anyway your 25 resume is incorrect; isn't it? ]
I i
BRIGG5 REPORTING COMPANY
261 i
L 1
- A My resume is, needs to be updated.
i 2
Q And when did you assume this position of chief 3
auditer-investigations?
4 A Oh my. I don't think I can answer the question 5
with all the,-with any certainty. I simply don't know.
6 Q Well, have you held the position for more than 7
two months?
l 8 A Oh yes.
9 So at the last time we spoke you were the chief Q
10 auditer of investigations?
l 11 Oh, that's quite right.
l A But I answered at the 12 time the questions that you asked at the time.
(x 13 Q Okay. The record'will reflect'your answers 14 All right.
the last time. So getting back to.the su bj ec t 15 we were discussing. Let me ask, do you have direct 16 supervision over.any employees, Mr. Hofmann?
17 A Now, is that in'the present case or in the 18 past case?
19 In.the present case, in your present position?
Q 20 A And state the question again if you would 21 please.
22 Do you have direct supervision over any Q
23 employees?
24 MR. RICHARDSON: He said before the break, we may 25 need some clarification. Mr. Hofmann does for example I BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
l
262 h 1 believe some investigations where he supevised the investiga-2 tion. So are you referring to whether there are occasions 3 when he supervises people or are you talking about people 4 who he consistently throughout the year supervises?
5 MR. BERRY: The latter.
6 MR. RICHARDSON: All right.
7 THE WITNESS: That report to me directly --
8 BY MR. BERRY:
l 9 Q Yes.
10 A Is that what you're asking me?
Itl Q Yes.
e2 A At this time?
13 Q Yes.
/ .._T l
'J -
14 A Report to me directly at, is the, at the 15 time that you're speaking are you speaking of when my 16 superior is available or not?
17 Q When your superior is available?
18 A That's right.
19 Q Well, either way whether it makes any 20 difference.
21 A If my superior is not available I have people 22 reporting to me because I act in his stead. If he is 23 available then people would report to him. And when I'm 24 speaking about people, I'm speaking about auditers within 25 the internal auditing organization.
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ - - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1
i l
263 l 1 Q What's the title of your superior?
2 A Manager of internal auditing.
3 Q And then on the organization chart right under 4 him is the chief auditer which is yourself; that's correct, 5 right?
6 A Chief auditer-investigations.
7 Q Which is yourself?
8 A That's right.
9 Q And under you there are auditers? I mean the 10 next level down is auditer; is that correct?
11 A The next level down. I have nobody reporting.
12 to me on the organization chart.
,~ 13 Q Okay. Now, above your manager is there anyone
\~) 34 that he reports to?
15 A Yes. {
I 1
16 MR. RICHARDSON: This is referring to the 17 organizational chart for internal. auditing? ]
is 'BY MR.' BERRY:
l ig Q I asked your manager, the manager, your boss, l 20 y ur supevisor, the person you report to, I asked does he 21 report to anyone else?
l 22 MR. RICHARDSON: No, I understand that but up 23 until now your questions have been only in reference to an 24 organizational chart. Are you asking whether that is, 25 whether such a reporting relationship is depicted on the BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
264 h 1 organization department, the organizational chart for this 2 department or are you asking without regard to the 3 organizational chart does the mmiager of internal auditing 4 report to somebody'above him?
5 MR. BERRY: Let's stay clear.
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q On the organizational chart is there depicted a 8 reporting relationship between the manager of internal 9 audits, your boss,'and somone else?
10 MR. RICHARDSON: Above him?
11 MR. BERRY: Yes.
12 THE WITNESS: On the internal auditing department 13 organization chart there is no reference to my boss's
'Ok/ 14 superior.
15 BY MR. BERRY:
16 Q Does your boss have a superior?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Who is_your boss's superior?
19 A John Weiser.
20 Q What's his title?
21 A General counsel. As best I know it he's also 22 other things.
23 Q Now, earlier in your testimony you gave a long 24 answer explaining why knowing what a person's duties and ,
25 functions were, you gave an answer. And in that answer you BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
- _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /
265 l llh 1 stated that there is built in to the person's position and 2 title a level of responsibility and sophistication that goes 3 with that position. Do you recall that answer?
4 A Generally.
5 Q Okay. Now, what I want to ask you is with 6 respect to the general counsel who is the boss of the 7 manager of internal audits who is your boss, do you follow 8 me so far?
9 A I didn't get one word and I just want to be 10 sure that that word is not significant. Say again.
33 Q Well, just let me rephrase it. You're the 12 chief auditer for investigations?
13 A Yes.
/-~'T t s 14 Q- You report to the manager of internal audits 15 and he reports to the general counsel?
16 A That's correct.
17 Q Now, as we go up this chain, by the chain I mean 18 the chief auditer through to the manager of internal audits ig to the general counsel, when we go up that chain does this 20 presume sophistication that you spoke of earlier, is it 21 greater as you go up the chain or is it lesser?
22 MR. RICHARDSON: Sophistication with regard to 23 what?
24 MR. BERRY: What he spoke of?
25 MR. RICHARDSON: He was asking it in reference 4
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
266 lllh 1 to a particular hypothetical which had among other things --
2 MR. BERRY: He wasn't asking in connection with 3 any hypothetical. He was speaking generally as a proposi-4 tion and he understands that. Can you answer the question, 5 Mr. Hofmann?
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection.
7 THE WITNESS: You will remember Mr. Berry that I 8 indicated that the sophistication had to do with business l
9 activities. Let there be no misunderstanding in your mind I
10 as to what I intended to say.
11 MR. BERRY: There isn't.
1 12 THE WITNESS: Now, I would think as a reasonable 13 person that it is appropriate to believe that my boss has an l rm
'\~) 14 awareness of matters greater than, I'm speaking about 15 business matters, greater than I have. And we're' speaking 16 in the context of special investigations.
17 BY MR. BERRY: i 18 Q And how about general counsel; is his awareness 19 and soptristication greater than the manager of internal 20 audits? !
21 MR. RICHARDSON: With regard to special 22 investigate'ons?
23 MR. BERRY: No, that's not part of my question.
24 THE WITNESS: Well, it is part of this --
25 MR. RICHARDSON: Well then, same objection as BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
- ~ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ .___ i
267 lllll 1 before, vague--
2 MR. BERRY: All right. Fine, that's your 3 objection.
4 MR. RICHARDSON: The question is vague --
5 MR. BERRY: In a business sense as you 6 described.
7 MR. RICHARDSON: Could you read that again?
8 MR. BERRY: I'll repeat the question.
g BY MR. BERRY:
io Q Is the same true that the manager of internal 11 audits has a lesser awareness and sophistication than in the 12 business sense than the general counsel?
13- MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection as before --
-, s i
~' MR. BERRY: Okay. !
14 15 MR. RICHARDSON: It's vague, ambiguous and 16 unintelligible unless you --
17 MR. BERRY: Fine, answer the question, Mr.
8 18 Hofmann.
ig MR, RICHARDSON: Explain what business context 20 you're talking about.
21 MR. BERRY: Answer the question, Mr. Hofmann.
22 THE WITNESS: I think on the face of your j 23 question there's no answer necessary.
24 BY MR. BERRY:
25 Q Why?
l h
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
'268 l
1 A (No response.)
2 Q Why?
l 3 A It seems to me that this line of thought that l
4 you're pursuing has was derived and evolved from this l 5 particular hypothetical question. Certainly as to the 6 degree of sophistication as you, as you, I realized I used 7 the word. But I kind, I suspect that you're putting an #
l 8 interpretation on it which is different than I intended. {
3 9 Q Okay. Let me stop you there. What interpretation l 10 did you intend when you used the term sophistication?
11 MR. RICHARDSON: Well he's testified for about i
12 fifteen minutes at length on this --
13 BY MR. BERRY:
,~
k/ 14 Q Let's have it, let's have your interpretation, -
p5 Mr. Hofmann?
16 MR. RICHARDSON: His interpretation of what?
37 MR. BERRY: The term sophistication as he used ,
i' 18 the term. So there's no misunderstanding that I'm using it 19 in the same sense that you are.
20 THE WITNESS: THat you're not using it in the samt 21 sense that I am.
22 BY MR. BERRY:
23 Q Tell you what you mean by it, when you use that 24 term?
25 A Well, I believe that the term sophistication in a
/
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ -____ O
269 h 1 business sense is generally speaking based upon awareness of 2 people, places and things at a point in time. Which is 3 broader than, by the very nature of the individual's duties 4 and responsibilities than a subordinate and less than in 5 many cases than a superior.
6 Q Mr. Hofmann, you arc familiar with organizational 7 cherts, aren't you?
8 A I'm familiar with some organizational charts.
9 Q I mean in general you're familiar with what an !
10 organizational chart connotes, aren't you? !
11 A I guess maybe I might be, yes. ,
12 Q In a business setting.
g_s 13 A Pardon me?
)
14 Q In a business setting.
15 A In a business setting.
16 Q Yes.
37 A I understand the concept of the organization 18 chart, yes. Of course, ig Q As a' matter of fact you're an M.B.A. from 1
20 Stanford, right?
21 A Well, that's what I understand.
22 Q Okay. Now, is_it fair to say that an organiza-23 tional chart would depict the supervisory relationships with-24 in an organization; that is the person at the top, the very 25 top of the chart is superior to the people below him on the ,
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
270 1 chart?
2 MR. RICHARDSON: The question is a little bit 3 ambiguous. He started out' talking about a supervisory 4 relationship, would suggest that the person above is 5 supervising somebody below. Then you turned over to the 6 word superior. Some superiors supervise, others do not.
7 BY MR. BERRY:
8 Q Isn't it fair to say that the person at the top 9 oflthe chart is the ultimate supervisor in the organization?
10 A I have, I don't mean to be obstructive to you, 33 Mr. Berry. When you say supervisor I assume you, I just don't 12 know the full ramifications of what you intend me to 13 understand.
r r.
() 34 Q Fair enough, Mr. Hofmann.
15 A I'm sorry.
16 Q Fair enough.
37 A I'm trying to cooperate with you.
l 18 Q And I apprciate that very much. I really do. I 19 Is it fair to say,.Mr. Hofmann,'that the person at the top 20 f the organizational chart is ultimately responsible for the 21 actions, the business actions, I'm not talking about criminal 22 r personal stuff, business actions of the people beneath 23 him on the organizational chart?
24 MR. RICHARDSON: By business action do you mean l 25 s mething which does not violate rules or regulations of a i
h (
(
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY w ______ -_-___ _ ,
l l
271 lllh 1 civil nature and does not violate company rules of conduct?
2 And when you say --
3 MR. BERRY: Yes. Yes.
4 MR. RICHARDSON: And when you say ultimately 5 responsible --
6 MR. BERRY: Yes, that's what I mean.
7 MR. RICHARDSON: I gather you're not speaking, 8 are you speaking of responsibility for the personal results 9 achieved by a subordinate or responsibility only with regard 10 to the conduct of the department?
l 33 MR. BERRY: Which would you prefer, Mr. i 12 Richardson?
13 MR. RICHARDSON: I frankly don't have any (M
'J 14 preferences which I want to pursue through questions. 1 15 MR. BERRY: Okay.
16 MR. RICHARDSON: I just want to try to --
17 MR. BERRY: Okay. Can you answer the question, 18 Mr. Hofmann? You can't? Well, let me try it again.
19 THE WITNESS: No, wait a minute now. I'm 20 having, if we're speaking, you asked me if I understand what 73 an organization chart'is. Okay. Well, if you want to, 22 I understand what an internal audit organization chart is.
And I understand that there are boxes on an organization chart 23 24 some of which are higher on the page than others.
25 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY t
272 lllll 1 BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q Well, isn't it true that on most organizational 3 charts that there's a president at the top or someone --
4 A There's a what?
5 Q A president. A president of the company or 6 equivalent title. Beneath the president there are 7 vice presidents. And beneath the vice-presidents there are j 8 assistant vice-presidents. And beneath the assistant 9 vice-presidents there may be people who hold the title of 10 regional manager. And beneath the regional manager there 11 may be local manager. And beneath the local manager there 12 may be a person holding the title salesman. And beneath the 13 salesman there may be assistant salesman. And beneath the 14 assistant salesman there may be someone holding the-position 15 of salesman trainee. You're familiar with arrangements 16 like that, aren't you?
17 A Did you go to Stanford too?
18 Q. No, I wasn't that fortunate.
19 A I see. I' thought maybe you went to business I
20 school. 1 21 Q I did, but --
22 A Did you? Where'd you go?
23 Q We'll discuss that aother time. But generally 24 the arrangement I have described is not unusual, is it?
A On some organization charts I guess that's true. l 25 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY )
_ _ _ _ ___ _. ._. _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ .-_- . _ _ . - _ _ _ . _ _ _ . ___. ___ .-. ._________-____________s
273 llllh 1 Q And in the arrangement that I just described 2 isn't it fair to say that as each level of the ladder, that 3 the, for example the salesman trainee he reports to the 4 salesman. The salesman is the boss of the trainne and not 5 vice versa; isn't that correct?
6 A Generally speaking I guess that would be a safe 7 assumption.
8 Q And for example the president is the 9 vice president's boss. The vice president is not the 10 president's boss? I mean, that's fair to say, isn't it?
11 A I would think that would be a safe assumption 12 under most circumstances.
13 Q And that's generally what an organizational chart, 7-
\~J 34 it connotes that kind of arrangement, relationships, doesn't 15 it?
is A I think generally you've indicated the concept 17 involved.
18 Q You've never seen an organizational chart that 19 had the janitor, the janitor at the top of the chart and the 20 chairman of the board at'the bottom,-have you?
21 A No, not to my best knowledge.
22 Q All right. Now, getting back to the hypothetical 23 we w re discussing earlier, you mentioned among the addition-24 1 information that you needed was the identity of X. You 25 also said you needed to know what his duties and functions BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
274 lllh I were. And that's where we left off. What other information 2 would you need, Mr. Hofmann?
3 A Well, I know that you'll be patient with ne, 4 Mr. Berry.
5 Q I certainly will. j 6 A Because in my business, in my activity I have 7 a definite requirement, I guess. I feel it's a deep moral 8 obligation to find the truth. And I'm saying that quickly.
9 but I don't mean by the quickness of my speech to indicate to that it is any the less deep, sincere and powerful in the i 11 manner in which I conduct investigations and the manner in 12 which I seek information. That is fundamental to an 13 approach relative to matters of this sort.
C'%
kl 14 Q Mr. Hofmann,--
15 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me. Mr. Hofnana, have 16 you completed that answer?
17 THE WITNESS: I may wish to come back to it 18 later but I have right now.
19 BY MR. BERRY:
20 Q Okay. For the hypo that we've been discussing, 21 the hypothetical question we've been discussing you stated l
22 that you needed additional information in order to form an l l
23 pinion. And among the additional information you've 24 identified as'the identity of X or the accused, the nature of 25 his duties and responsibilities. Now, what I want to ask you BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J
275 kk 1 is do you need that information just to answer this, the 2 specific hypo I've put to you, hypothetical question I've 3 put to you or as a general part of your general practice 4 and investigation methodology, you know without regard to the 5 nature of the allegation or the alleged wrongdoing, do you 6 need this information?
7 MR. HICKEY: I have an obj ection to the form of 8 the question. I think it's vague.
9 MR. BERRY: What part of it's vague? I'll cure u) it.
33 MR. HICKEY: I'd have to have it read back to 12 tell you. But as --
- m. 13 MR. BERRY: Well, let me try to rephrase it i
~)
' then.
14 15 MR. HICKEY: I heard it it had several very 16 general terms in it that I wasn't sure what you meant by 17 it.
18 BY MR. BERRY:
19 Q When you stated Mr. Hofmann that in order to 20 answer the hypothetical question that I put to your earlier I I
21 y u needed to know the identity. And these are your terms.
1 22 And you needed to know who X was. You also stated you !
23 ne ded to know --
MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me. He said by 24 )
25 discipline, background, salary grade and function, f
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
276 l
l lllll l
1 MR. BERRY: Yes. All right. Okay.
l 2 BY MR. BERRY:
1 3 Q And you also stated you needed to know what his 4 duties and his functions were. And in particular you stated l 5 that that was important because it would tell you something 6 about the capacity of an individual to relate to his 7 environment. Now, my question to you is is information of 8 this type that I've just described important only for you 9 to answer the specific hypothetical question I put to you' 10 or do you customarily require that kind of information 11 whenever you perform an investigation irrespective of the
, 12 nature of the allegation?
13 A I require that type of information and I seek it n
kJ 14 on all investigations because I believe it is important to 15 know as much about Mr. X who is the accused in your 16 hypothetical as possible so that I might o bj ec ti vel y relate 17 to him as matters in the investigation evolve.
18 Q Okay. So, have you finished your answer?
19 A I would say that the items that I have indicated 20 to you that were of importance to me'are not the only items.
21 There are other items. And in each investigation there are 22 a different set of matters that are of interest to me 23 relative to that particular individual. In my investigations 24 people are innocent until proven guilty. I am not in the 25 matter, I am not out to get anybody. And I think that it is BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
l 277 1
only right'and responsible for me to not misunderstand not 2
only what the individual says to me later during an interview 3
or what he intends to say to me during the interview. And 4
much of that interpretation on my behalf has to do with my 5 knowledge about Mr. X.
6 Mr. Hofmann, if I were to give you a Q
7 hypothetical question -- '
8 A Another one?
9 Q No, strike that. I won't. So if I understand 10 you correctly what you're tel]ing me is that if you 11 received an allegation that a person stealing typewriters, a 12 Bechtel employee was stealing typewriters that belonged to
,2 13 the client that you would not be able to tell ne whether
('J 14 that was a violation of Bechtel Directive 2.1 unless you !
15 knew the nature and duties and the function of that person, i
16 what his job description was, what his j ob title was, among )
4 17 other matters? Is that what you're telling me. l 1
18 t MR. RICHARDSON: Well, that Mr. Hofmann that .j l
t 19 again is in fact a hypothetical question. And in that case I i
4 20 I've got to obj ect --
)
i 21 MR. BERRY: It's not a hypothetical question, j 22 MR. RICHARDSON: What facts Mr. Hofmann knows 23 about the alleged stealing. Whether certain substantial 24 evidence needs to be interpreted which may require an f 25 assessment of the individual's motive, state of mind. ;
I l
9 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY ;
l
l 278 I
l h 1 MR. BERRY: All right. And that's .iust the 2 question, Mr. Richardson. And if you would listen carefully 3 you would understand that was the question.
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q The question was you would not be able to give 6 me an answer to that question without knowing the information 7 the type that you described plus some other unidentified 8 information?
9 A l'm confused. I'm sorry.
10 Q I'm going to repeat the question.
11 MR. RICHARDSON: I gather we're not talking 12 about somebody who has confessed to stealing the client's
, 13 typewriter.
\-)
/
1-4 MR. BERRY: Let me just repeat the question.
15 BY MR. BERRY:
16 Q The question is that if you received an 17 allegation that a Bechtel employee was stealing typewriters 18 that belonged to the Bechtel's client, GPUN let's say, that 19 you could not say that that conduct, the conduct alleged 20 is a violation of Bechtel Directive 2.1 unless you had the 21 benefit of the information, the type you described such as 22 the nature, the duties and function of the accused. If 23 you did not know that you would not be able to offer an 24 opinion as to whether the conduct alleged, i.e. stealing 25 typewriters that belonged to the company is a violation of BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
- m. 3, i
'\
279
\
h 1 Bechtel Directive 2.1. Is that your testimcny.
2 MR. RICHARDSON: Same o bj e ction . This in effect 3 is a hypothetical question. It is' vague, ambiguous. It's t
4 incomplete. You're not advising the witness for examp3 --
5 MR. BERRY: I'm not -- '
s 6 MR. RICHARDSON: What inf orisctic)i he knows about n.
7 this allegation. Whether ths a31eged thief hAra confessed to 8 having stolen the typewriters, I think you've got to 9 indicate -- ;
in MR. BERRY: Can you anr,wer the question, Mr. Hofm it Hofmann? ,
12 MR. RICHARDSON: The extent to which a motive g t 0 13 and the state of mind of the individual in in issue which ,
7s 14 has yet to be resolved. i F
!1 ,.
15 MR. BERRY: Fine. That o bj ec tion ~1s n ot e d.,
BY MR. BERRY:
16 17 Q Now, can you, are you able to, answer the is question, Mr. Hofmann?
ig A Well, as I understand the question there is a 20 specific individual that bs; you call steals, stolen, stole 21 the typewriter.
22 MR. RICHARDSON: I don't think that das the ques-23 ti n. The individual --
24 MR. BERRY: !!e 's teljing me what his understand-sj 25 i"8 iS- j c
l .,
BRIGGS REPORTING COMP ANY
n . - !
~
l
. I 280 I l
lI 1 MR. RICHARDSON: He's alleged to have stolen --
2 MR. BERRY: Let him finish- his understanding.
3 THE WITNESS: And I don't 'm o w that that's true. 1 4 And I would think that in our society t would be unfair 5 to indicate that a person has committed a crime without there 6 being as much information about the situation coming to the 7 for so that it could be properly considered'by eppropriste 8 authorities before the thought is expressed that the.
9 individual steals a typewriter, et etera. You see, Mr.
10 Berry, I never accuse anybody of any krongdoing An'my 11 interviews, ever.
12 BY MR. BERRY:
13 Q The que.stion tidn't --
14 A~ So that's foreign to me. ,
15 Q 15e question did not presuppose that-you had, 16 MR. RICHARDSON: Have you finished your snaver?
17 MR. BERRY: And I would move to strike the 18 witness's last sentence as non-responsive.
19 BY MR. BERRY:
20 Q Let me just! approach it a different way. I 21 don't think you ' re understanding the question and perhaps 22 it's my; fault. So let me try it again and make it clear 23 what I'm asking you. I'm askir.g you, strike.that. Let me 24 preface this. Do you, recall when'I gave you the hypothetical 25 question earlier in the morning that the call of the question BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
Il[
281 i,
b 1 that I asked icu specifically was whether the conduct that J
2 I had described in the hypothetical question constituted a 3 .violatian o(~Bechtel Directive 2.1. I. asked you to assume 4 all those fbets were true and based on your expertise and
- 5 year knowletge'and your familiarity with Bechtel-Directive t
6 2.1 I asked you if -yot can offer an opinion as'to whether 7 that conduct const.it dte d a violation of Bechtel Directive g 2.1. Now I'm asking "ou a different question but'along f g the same lines. And lc asking you whether if a person is se alleged a Bechtel employee is alleged to have stolen-1 is ' typewriters that belong to Bechtel's client could you offer-(
n me an opinion as to whether that conduct if proved, if ,
13 established, that in fact the typewriter was stolen from the n
U 14 client by the Bechtel employee, if that conduct was proved, 15 whether that conduct violates Bechtel Directive 2.1? Can 16 you answer that question yes or no or some other way?
17 MR. RICHARDSON: -Well again, that's a 18 hypothetical question. I --
- g MR. BERRY
- What's hypothetical about it, Mr.
20 Richardson?
21 HR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me.
22 ,
MR. BERRY: 'You keep raising that obj ection --
t 23 ilill th6 gentleman yield? You keep raising the objection l 24 that is hyprthhetical. The question is not hypothetical.
25 The question is simply does stealing typewriters, is stealing 4
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY j f
.s s
---U-______.__________ l
282 i I 1 typewriters a violation of Bechtel Directive 2.1?
2 THE WITNESS: Well, that's not what I understood 3 the --
4 MR. RICHARDSON: My objection is the question is 5 vague and ambiguous. What do you mean by stealing;somebody 6 who consciously takes property from the client knowing.that 7 it is the client's propety and intendign to permanently 8 deprive the client of the property.
9 MR. BERRY: Do you know how you can steal 10 anything, Mr. Richardson, without having the intent to 11 permanently deprive the person of the loss of his property? i 12 If you do I would like you to explain it to me because it's 13 unfathomable to me that somebody could steal something
-Q
~/ 14 without having the intent to permanently deprive the 15 owner of the possession.
16 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, in response to your 17 last statement I'll rest my case on the fact that law 18 students and law professors spend often weeks debating what 19 the definition of stealing is.
20 MR. BERRY: Well, perhaps at your law school, 21 Mr. Richardson.
22 BY MR. BERRY:
23 Q Mr. Hofmann, can you tell me whether stealing, 24 strike that. Mr. Hofmann, .i s stealing a client's property 25 a violation of Bechte1' Directive 2.1; dc you know?
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
283 k 1 MR. RICHARDSON: 'Same o bj ec tions .
2 MR. BERRY: Fine.
3 THE WITNESS: Who is stealing the property?
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q The Bechtel employee.
6 A Is stealing unlawful, Mr. Berry?
7 Q Do you know?
8 A I'm asking you, Mr. Berry.
9 Q As I stated to you the last time we spoke I'm 10 asking the questions. We're taking your testimony. We're 11 interested in your knowledge. So let me ask you, is 12 stealing unlawful?
13 A If it is regarded in the legal sence as what I
\
14 believe it to be, stealing is illegal. I just want to be 15 sure that you and I understand it.
16 Q Okay. We understand that.
17 A And Bechtel Directive 2-1 indicates that anything 18 unlawful is a violation of the Directive.
19 Q So stealing --
20 A Committed by a Bechtel employee of coui_ .
21 Q Okay. So now, if you receive an allegation 22 against a Bechtel employee that he stole property belonging 23 to Bechtel's client and that's proven that in fact that 24 happened you can say whether Bechtel Directive 2.1 was 25 violated or not, can't you?
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ _ _ _ =
284 l 1 A It seems to me you've got two elements to the 2 question. One is that there is an allegation. And an 3 allegation doesn't mean that there is a violation of 4 Directive 2-1.
5 Q I see your problem and it's my fault and I'll 6 endeavor to correct it. The problem is --
7 A As I indicated, excuse me. In our terms 8 Dechtel employees are innocent until they're proven guilty.
9 Q I see. Allegation is the problem here. That's to my fault. Let me just rephrase it. If a Bechtel employee 11 is fond to have stolen property belonging to the client has 12 that Bechtel employee violated Directive 2-1?
13 MR. RICHARDSON: That is indeed a hypothetical O 14 question.
l 15 MR. BERRY: Okay. Answer the question.
16 MR. RICHARDSON: I'll be as brief as I can.
17 MR. BERRY: All right.
18 MR. RICHARDSON: Obj ection . The question is 19 incomplete, vague and ambiguous. Unless you provide 20 additional information concerning the circumstances under 21 which the property was found in the possession of the 22 Bechtel empoyee the circumstances with regard to his 23 knowledge concerning the stolen status of the property, the 24 circumstances in fact relating to what that employee's 25 intentions are with regard to the property, whether to BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
285 1
return it or to keep it for his own benefit.
2 MR. BERRY: All right. I understand.
3 MR. RICHARDSON: I think I could go on and on.
4 MR. BERRY: I think the term was ambiguous, 5
found to have stolen property.
6 BY MR. BERRY:
l 7
l Q What I mean is if af ter the investigation 8 conducted by, if after an investigation conducted by internal 9 audits it is determined that a Bechtel employee has in L
10 fact stolen property. belonging to the client has that l
11 Bechtel employee violated Directive 2-1?
12 A That would be, as I understand what you're 13 telling me that would be an illegal act.
14 Has he violated Directive 2-1?
Q 15 A What I'm telling you, illegal acts admitted by 16 Bechtel employees are violations of Directive 2-1.
17 So the answer to my question is, yes?
Q 18 Well, there are some portions of that question A
19 that we could explore in some further detail. But generally 20 speaking we do not, Bechtel does not condone acts against 21 the government. You can read it all here in Directive 2-1.
22 Anything that's illegal Bechtel doesn't condone. And 23 et cetera, et cetera. It's all here.
24 Q So Mr. Hofmann, do you need to know what the 25 person's duties and functions are to determine that stealing BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
286 I
lllll 1 property of the client is a violation of Bechtel Directive I
'2 2.1?
l 3 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me. Are you assuming 1
i 4 as a premise in that question that the person has already l'
5 been determined to have stolen the property?
6 MR. BERRY: Yes.
7 BY MR. BERRY:
8 Q So what does it tell you, Mr. Hofmann --
l l 9 MR. RICHARDSON: In other words, you're not jo asking him whether he would he may need to know about the 31 employee's duties, functions during the course of trying to 12 determine whether the property has been stolen.
13 MR. BERRY: What we've established, Mr.
(~~.
l
(- 34 Richardson, is that stealing that Bechtel does not 15 continence it's employees stealing the property of it's 16 clients. We've established that. That's the witness's 17 testimony. Now, my question to him is that given that why 18 does do you need to know what the person's duties and 19 functions are, what his title and job description is to 20 determien to answer the question that I put to you earlier 21 is whether stealing is a violation of Bechtel Directive 22 2.1?
23 MR. RICHARDSON: And I asked you to clarify 24 whether you're asking him with regard to a scenario 25 where the employee has already been determined to have stolen BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - = _ _ - _ _ _ . - __ _. s
287 lllh 1 the property. That is a different scenario than if you're 2 asking him whether he may need to know that information 3 in the course of investigating the case.
4 MR. BERRY: The employee has not been determined 5 to in fact have committed the crime alleged or the violation 6 alleged.
7 MR. RICHARDSON: So the investigation is in 8 progress?
k l 9 MR. BERRY: Right. And the allegation is the l
10 employee is stealing property belonging to the client.
l And the question is given that allegation why do you need to ij 12 know what his duties and functions and job description and 13 capacity to relate to his environment is? What significance 1 44 does that have to that allegation?
15 THE WITNESS: Bechtel I believe is it's n3 management is very sensitive to the needs of it's employees.
17 Bechtel management is not interested in hurting anybody 18 relative to a special Investigation. And that's all I can 19 Speak to here. There are because we have people who are 20 different, everybody's different, they have different 21 standards of sensitivity to what is right and what is wrong.
22 It is because of their backgrounds, their disciplines, their 23 attitudes, the things that have happened to them in life.
24 BY MR. BERRY:
25 Q So some Bechtel employees --
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
288 llh 1 A Now, wait a minute.. I haven't finished.
2 Q All right.
3 A If there is to be an investigation about an 4 . alleged violation of Bechtel Directive 2-1 it's been my 5 experience that Bechtel management when dispensing 6 discipline is very interested in equity. Not-dealing in a 7 high handed, autocratic manner. But dispensing an 8 understanding as to what happened under what circumstances 9 by whom and why in relation to that individual's standards of 10 approach to life. And in that way and I'm limiting it, I'm 11 not limiting it. There are other reasons'too I'm sure that 12 I could think of later. But the point is how can you, if 13 you have an understanding of the individual's personality, l'~)
k' 14 his level of approach to life, his duties and responsibilities ,
15 his capacity to perform and understand what's going on around 16 him, and that's what you're talking about then we can more 17 equitably understand the circumstances and effect appropriate 18 action.
19 Q Did you complete your answer?
A I believe I have right now.
20 21 Q Okay. Now, what other information would you --
MR. RICHARDSON: Incidentally it's a quarter of 22 23 noon and if there is a desire on your part to beat the 1 24 lunch crowd it is preferable to adj eurn prior to noon 25 otherwise you stand in line for quite some time at a BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY I
J
\
r 289 lllh 1 restaurant or a cafeteria.
2 MR. BERRY: All right. Let me ask a couple more 3 questions then we can adj ourn for the lunch hour.
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q What other, what additional information do you 6 need, Mr. Hofmann, in order to respond to the first 7 hypothetical that we discussed this morning?
8 A Well sir, the second statement that you made --
9 Q I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr. Hofmann, but if you p) can give me a list or itemization of it after yob do that 11 we can break for lunch. If it's, if you're going to 12 identify and explain in detail --
-s 13 A Pardon.me?
- \
N 14 Q But if you find the need that it's preferable to 15 identify the types of information and then explain why 16 it's important or elaborate on that answer then I would ask 17 you to do that.
18 A Well, it is, I'm not sure I understand that n; either.
20 Q Okay.
21 MR. RICHARDSON: I gather you're asking him for 22 what further information --
23 MR. BERRY: Yes. For example when he stated 24 that the two types of information you described already 25 like who is X , .the na tu re of his duties, his responsibilities BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ i
h f
( 290 l
l i
I 1 and things. If there's1a list or. series of or category of 2 information along those lines I would just appreciate if 3 you wold just identify them all for me and then we can come 4 back and elaborate on each of them if necessary after 1
5 lunch. 'But if you find it necessary to identify the type 6 of information and elaborate why you need that information 7 then I want to do that before we. break for lunch.
l 8 THE. WITNESS: Well Mr. Berry, there are a g number of matters that come directly to mind. But I don't 10 think that any one of them can be taken very quickly. And i
11 you indicated during the beginning of this session that if 12 there's any time that I would like to have a break that I 13 might so request one and I'm doing so now.
./~'
'ws) 14 MR. BERRY: All right. Well, that'll be fine.
15 Why don't we and just so everything is clear and we 16 understand it that's the question's that is pending. That'a 17 the question that we want to discuss when we return from 18 lunch. It's ten minutes to twelve by my watch. Why don't ]
i ig we return here at 1:00? Off the record. '
20 (Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the deposition was 21 recessed to reconvene at 1:00 p.m. this same day Thursday, 22 August-20, 1987.)
23 /// (Please continue reading on page 291.)
24 ///
25 ///
!!lh l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
J
291 L._.
L _A. _F _T E-R N O O_ _N
_ _ __ S E.S S _I.O N__
1:08 p.m.
L 3 E MR. BERRY:...Back on the record'. Mr. Hofmann, we're 4
going to' continue with~the subject we were discussing before-5 we broke ~for the luncheon recess. .You recall-that we.were '
6 ~
discussihg a hypothetical question that I propounded to you 7
carlier this morning. Let me repeat'the hypothetical, and 1
8 you will tell me what additional information you need in: J 9
order.to provide an answer to the hypothetical. It's the
.10 l
~
same question that was propounded to you earlier'. And, 1
11 just so' the ' record is: clear, for the af ternoon session why 12 don't we just have the question -- restate the-hypothetical 1 J -13 question, restate it, at this point.
14 X works-for Bechtel. Y works for GPUN. .X ' knows '
15 that --
16 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me,-before you said'X was l 17 a Bechtel employee at TMI. Is that --
18 MR. BERRY: I didn't even get-that -- X works for 19 Bechtel I got.
- 20. MR. RICHARDSON: I may not repeat these word for-21 word as I did, but I know the gist -- the sarae question, the 22 same essential facts in the previous question are contained 23 in this one, and;that's --
y , -
24 MR.~ BERRY:
Well,,the problem is, you see, the 25 witness has carefully made notes. 'When I state this question, s
a h
292-1-
if Ifleave out anything that's.in the other one,'the witness 2
'('~Y
_/ will tell them.
3 THE WITNESS : I just did.
4
- MR. BERRY: X is the Bechtel. employee'at'Three 5
-Mile Island?
6 THE WITNESS : Yes.
7'
.M:R . BERRY: All right, let's begin again. X works J
8 for Bechtel at Three Mile Island. Y works for GPUN at )
J 9
Three Mile Island.
10 THE' WITNESS: Works for GPN.
11 MR. BERRY:. GPUN. j 12 THE WITNESS: GPUN at Three Mile Island, Y --
, ,cc 13 MR. BERRY: X -- l 1
14 MR. RICHARDSON: Maybe it would be easier if I just 15 ask you a question rather than -- when you say Three Mile 16 Island are both.X and Y employed in connection with the same l'7 unit? There are two power units at.Three. Mile Island. You 18 want me to refer to it as TMI unit 1, TMI unit 2?
19 MR. BERRY: No, just what it was in the first 1
L20 answer, we'll just leave it that way. I don't think there.
21- was any distinction drawn. Otherwise --
22 ,
MR. RICHARDSON: Okay, do you understand that, so --
23 , MR. ~ BERRY :' Ot!herwise --
t w - ,.
24 . MR. RICHARDSON: X could work for TMI unit 1, and 25 -Y could be employed in connection with TMI unit 2, as TMI h
1
293 3 in general.
O 2 MR. BcRRY: otherwise, '11 suet esk enother 3
hypothetical question, and we'll just go through the same 4
l process all over again.
i 5
THE WITNESS: We're trying to be helpful.
6 MR. BERRY: Yes, well, I think if you let me state 7 the question -- if I state the question then we'll be able 8 to see that it's the same question that was propounded 9
initially. I'll start-again.
10 BY MR. BERRY:
11 X works for Bechtel at Three Mile Island nuclear Q
12 power plant. Y works for GPUN at Three Mile Island. X knows 13 that Quiltec is a job shop. Y asks X to have resumes typed 14 for Quiltec. X knows some current Quiltec employees.
15 A X knows that present --
16 0 -- Quiltec employees left GPUN to join Quiltec.
17 A GPN, to work for Quiltec.
18 Q X refuses to --
19 A To work for Quiltec, not the client, Quiltec.
20 0 X refuses to get the resumes typed --
21 A X refuses to get the resume typed --
22 Q, Thirty days pass without X recording this informa-23- tion to his superiors. And specifically, when I say informa-24 tion, this information, what I mean is the f act that X knows 25 that Q is a job shop, that X knows that he was asked by Y to
p , EV1 '
294 I
-4 have resumes typed, that X knows that some current Quiltec-2 employees left GPUN to go to work for Quiltec, that X refused 3
to have the resumes typed. These incidents -- and by these 4
1 incidents I mean X learns 'that O' is a job shop, .that Quiltec:
5 is a job shop. 'Y asked.X to have the resumes typed for 6
Quiltec.- X is aware that current Quiltect employees left 7
GPUN to work for Quiltec. X refused - Y's request to have 8
resumes typed.
9 MR. HICKEY: Excuse me, did you~ finish your sentence ?
10 MR. .BERRRY : Yes.
Il MR. RICIIARDSON: Let me ask a question.
12- MR. BERRY: No, I have one more fact. These q 13 incidents occurred in November of 1982.
V 14 - MR. HICKEY: Can I ask you one question, Mr.: Berry ,
15 just to make sure I understand what you -- you defined this 16 information by -- 30 days pass without.X reporting this 17 information, and then you define specifically.what this
- 18 information meant. P.nd then I heard you go through another 19 list of the same fa.:ts, but I.didn't understand what you q
'l 20 said, what you- were defining that time, the second time you {
l 21 ,just listed all-those specific facts. And I -- either.)I
' -4
'22 didn't hear sombthing,~or I didn't hear a full sentence about 23 what all that listing.of facts'went to the second time you 24 did it. Did I explain myself very well, I don't know if I did' 25 MR. BERRY: You made yourself clear. But I think
295 5 '
'1 -
I just- defined incidents again.- - Every time -- I used -the~
word twic'e, so I kept defining it twice.
3 Now, the question, Mr. Hofmann, is has X violated.
-4 l 'Bechtel directive to --
"5 MR. RICHARDSON: 'I. object.to the question on the l
6 same grounds which I stated after you. initially stated ~the 7
hypothetical. question this morning, which you're saying is, 8
indeed, the'~same hypothetical quest' ion. So, I see'no need {
9 to repeat those objections in that I can :have . a standing 10 objection --
Il
'MR.DBERRY: Yes.
12 MR. RICHARDSON: -- based on-thos'e grounds. In-1 13 addition, I will add,asua further ground that it is not' clear i 14 in your' question whether the employees who resigned from GPU 'I 15 and went to work for.Quiltec, whether these employees are 16 the ones whose resumes are' being asked to be typed. Further-17- more, it is not meaningful clear as to whose resumes are 18 being typed. They are resumes of non GPU employees, or GPU 19 employees, or what.
l 1
MR. BERRY:
~
20 Well,,with respect to that objection 21 ' I'.11 cure it 'and add' the additional f act , Mr. Hofmann, that' 22- the persons whose resumes X has asked to.have arranged typed 9+
23 are burrent GPUN employees.
24 MR. RICHARDSON : And I take.it, when you say resumes 25 type'd for Quiltec, these are resumes which are typed on
.a .- c
=:-____
.296 6
I
.Quiltec letterhead?
'2 MR. BERRY - If you want to say so. 'I just said
(j\ ;
l 3- resumes typed for Quiltec.
ll\
1 4
MR. RICHARDSON: Well,-then,-I'll add that as'a 5- .further. point which I submit needs to be clarified as to what
~6' you.mean by typed -- l 7 BY MR.-BERRY: I 8' O A11'right, Mr. Hofmann,Ecan you answer the question? I 9 A' Mr. Berry, with all due respect, I tell you that 10 -before~a. determination ~as to whether a'Bechtel employee has i
11 violated directive 241, we need to know additional informa-
]
12 tion. H 13 Q' Fine. And what additional information do you need-14 - to know? '
15 A All right, you tell me that Mr. X knows Quiltec.is 16 a job shop. Can- you please tell me what the basis of this -
'i 17, Mr. X's knowledge is?
-18 Q And why is that important to know that?
19 MR. RIC'HARDSON : Well, I was just going to -- have-120 youtconcluded~your answer?- ,
21 THE' WITNESS: I believe I have right now, but it's --
22 I will continue,later. 4 23 BY MR. BERRY: l 24 0 'Now, why -is that important to know that?
( 25 A The word no to one individual means one thing. It
b.
o --.
297 1
can mean--- the word no can mean~something quite different-
. . . 7.-
2 to a second or a third' party. :You have to ' take into con-
}{]{-
3 sideration a number of elements.
4 0 Y tells --
l 5 A ' Pardon.me?
6 Q The source'of P's knowledge is Mr. Y told:Mr. X j.
7 that Quiltec is a job ' shop.
.. . s 8 MR. HICKEY: Pardon me, you. referred to T?.
9 MR. BERRY: P.
10 MRi HICKEY: P? I'm back.on X and Y. -
1 1
11' 'THE ' WITNESS : Sorry,:I thought.I misunderstood, 1 I
12 but I guess I'-- H
'l jv 13 MR. BERRY: You didn't misunderstand.
U THE WITNESS:
14 Is that another character in here?
15' MR. BERRY: No we don't. The source of X's 16 knowledge is that Y told.X that Quiltec was a job shop.
17 THE WITNESS: What basis did Y have to tell X that 18 this.was so?'
19 MR.' BERRY: $Nhh is that important? r
< 1 20 THE WITNESS: Because -Bechtel takes matterst of 21 -this, sort ~~e v / seriously. We don't. If we're' talking about 22 hearsay, if we're talking about rumor, if we're talking about E
23 a myriad of(othdr" variations on that same concept, well let's1 '
- t. know about it.
' 24 25 MR. BERRY: Now, what I'm particularly interested I:
f.
298 8 in is what bearing did that have in connection with a deter-O .2 mination as to whether directive 2-1 has been violated.
3 MR. RICHARDSON: Asked and answered. He's already 4
explained.
BY MR. BERRY:
6 '
0 Y formed the company.
7 A What?
8 0 Y formed the company. That's the source of Y's 9
knowledge.
10 A Y formed what company?
Il O You asked me what was the source of Y's knowledge 12 that Quiltec was a job shop.
13 A And I'm asking you which company you're talking 14 '
about, Quiltec?
15 0 It's the same thing we've been talking about. And 16 I'm telling you thatttheisource of Y's knowledge that Quiltec 17 is a, job shop is that he formed it.
18 A So, Y formed'Quiltec?
19 Q Right. So, now you have that information, that X 20 knows that Quiltec is a; job shop because told him. And Y 21 knows because Y formed it. Now, can you answer -- can you
~
22 give me an answer to the question with that information?
23 MR. RICHARDSON: I think implicit in what you just 24 said is that X also knows that Y formed Quiltec; is that 25 right?
I
h.
'299-l 9 1 .
l- MR. BERRY: No,.it's what I stated. .X knows that
.- Y - that Quiltec is' a. job shop because Y told .him. -The-3 basis of Y's knowledge'is-th'at Y formed it. And with those 4 .
two additional facts, Mr. Hofmann, are you able to answer the l; question'as tolwhether directive 2-1 has.been violated?
6 > l THE WITNESS: Mr. Berry,-I'.m not'able to' answer E
h :7 the. question as you pose it, based upon the-information you've -
8:
. given'me to date.
E 9
MR. BERRY: Y'ou need additional information?
THE WITNESS: I would think w'e would~. ,
" -MR . BERRY:
, What' additional information do;you 12 need?.
13 THE WITNESS: You're saying that Quiltec -- now, I want to understand -- that Mr. Y did form Quiltec. Is 15 that what you're telling me?
16 MR. BER,RY : Yes.
)7 p. , .THE WITNE'SS: Anci ,is there any documentation f
'18" selative to that formation that is available to Mr. X?
I9 . 'MR . iBERRY : No '.
L +
']
20 THE WITNESS: Why not?
21 MR. BERRY': It's not in the hypothetical.
22 THE WITNESS: Well, certainly,Lif I were doing'an 23 investigation I might try to determine whether cr not there ;
i 24 was some. substance for the thought that Mr. Y did, in fact, i
25 form, and whether there 's some substance as to whether Mr. Y ;
I 1
l a _-______:---____-_-___--_______-__---- - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - _ - _ - - _ - - - - - _ _ - - . - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
300 I
10 continues to be a prominent member of the Quittee organiza-() 2 tion, either financially or otherwise.
3 BY MR. BERRY:
l 1
4 Are you saying, Mr. Hofmann, that if X did not Q
5 have an opportunity to review corporate documents that that 6 may influence your determination as to whether Bechtel 7 directive 2-1 was violated, based on the facts I gave you 8 when I propounded a hypothetical question to you?
1 9 A Well, Mr. Berry, all I'm saying is that -- what I'm 10 saying to you is that Bechtel management does not make snap 11 judgements based upon information that is not forthcoming.
12 We try very hard to obtain the greatest amount of information 13 about our employee and what he knows for a fact,versus what 14 he mayuhave heard as a rumor, et cetera, because the total 15 information that is obtained during the investigation has i
16 a bearing on the equity relative to the disciplinary action, 17 if any, that is dispensed at the end.
1 18 Q Yeah, you've stated that a number of times, Mr.
l 19 Hofmann. As I understand th'at, is what you're saying is that 20 this information goes toward the determining the penalty to 21 be exacted ac spposed to the guilt, or not, of the accused.
22 MR. RICHARDSON: I'll object. I think that mis-23 states his testimony. He made it very clear that it pertains 24 to the employee's motive and state of mind. And he pointed
() 25 ut that it may also be taken into account by management with
'J, 6
'301 l' ' .1
( 11 to the extent of discipline'to be imposed, if any. u Y'l '
2 k-/ MR. BERRY: 'Well, the witness's last answer'will 3
reflect 1what the witness said.
4 8 BY MR. BERRY:
'5 ,
Q Well, the f act i s in the hypothetical, Mr. = Hofmann,.
6
'is that X did not review any corporate? documents. His only 7
' basis for. knowing that Quiltec is a job shop is that Y told 8
him it was. Now --
9 A- ,Is that reasonable, Mr. Berry?
10 Q That's'the fact, Mr. Hofmann, and I'm asking you 11 . .
to assume that fact and ask you whether you can now -- '!
12 .
.MR. RICHARDSON: . Wait, Mr. Hofmann' if has been
() 14 clarified to mean that X does not know of any connection between Y and Quiltec. X simply tells him that Quiltec is a 15
~ job shop. .Sp, X does not know what source, or. basis, Y has
- 16 - a / t ,
for making the statement that -- :
17 THE WITNESS: 4 ,That's what I'm trying to get across.
, ;w.
MR. BERRY: 'Oh','no,.that's not right at all. You're 19 misstating the question, Mr.. Richardson.
20 MR. RICHARDSON : That's a clarification I made 21 5 minutes ago. .I asked you whether X knows that Y formed 22 Quiltec, and you said no.
23 MR. BERRY: I said yes, and;I said the source of 24 '
the knowledge was that Y told them that he had. 'Your questior.
25 was -- the witness's question was, well, did Y show X that
302 l 1
the documents, the corporate charter. And I said no. I mean, 12
'O v
2 you're confusing your witness, Mr. Richardson.
3 MR. RICHARDSON: I don't mean to, but I asked you 4
on the record when you say X knew -- I'm sorry, when you said 5
that Y knew because Y formed'Quiltec, I thought that implied 6 One, that Quiltec is a job shop; that Y told X two things:
7 and that Y ~knows that, because Y formed Quiltec. And when 8
I asked you, you said no, that's not what you meant , that 9
the only datum, or information, that Y 'gives X is that Quiltec 10 is a job shop, and X does not know anything beyond that. X 11 Now, does not know what the source of Y's information is.
12 if I'm mistaken in that, then I need some clarification.
Okay , well, we'll have some clarifica-() 14 MR. BERRY:
tion.
BY MR. BERRY:
16 Q Now, you have in mind the original hypothetical I
that/I' propounded at the start of the lunch break, and that 18 is we 've added a couple f acts to it. One of the facts is is that that X knows that Y -- X knows that Guiltec is a job 20 shop because Y told X that Quiltec is a job shop. The next 21 fact is, is that Y knows that Quiltec is a job shop because 22 Y formed Quiltec. The next fact is, is that Y told X that 23 he formed Quiltec. All right, now, with those three additiont.1 24 ' acts, are you now able to answer the question propounded to C:) 25 you at the beginning of the lunch break -- the afternoon
303 l 13 1 .
session, I'm sorry.
( .
A And that question is, has X violated directive 2-1?
3 Q Yes.
4 A I'm not able to answer that question.
5 O. And what additional information do you need now?
6 A What is the relationship, Mr. Berry, between Mr. Y 7
and Mr. X?
8 0 And why is that important?
9 A Conceivably,there might be coercion. There might 10 be some sort of undue pressure. There might be any number II of things that would cause Mr. X to act in an irregular 12 manner when he might not do so otherwise, because of Mr. Y 13
) and that relationship. That's why I'm asking that.
'l4 0 Whht do you'mean by undue pressure as you use the 15 term?
16 A It's h'ard to say. But it is a reasonable reaction 17 because -- and it is only hard to say because there are so 18 many different types, I would think.
19 0 Give me an example.
20 A Emotional, dominance, reporting relationships, 71 that's structural within the organization.
22 Q Are you giving me examples of undue pressure?
23 A When it's used negatively. And I would assume therc 24 are many other things.
25 0 Y is X's boss.
g , .
304 1
A Pardon me?
O ' X reports toLY?
I 3.
A Yeah.
4 0 Y is X's supervisor. That's the' relationship 5
between X and.Y. Now, with that fact are you:now able to j 0
answer-the question.
MR; HICKEY: You haven't changed that they don 1t 8
work for the same company? You. haven't changed the' fact'that 9
they- don't work for the same companyL by what you just said?
10 ;MR. BERRY : One is paid by GPUN, the other'is II paid by Bechtel.
. I2 THE WI,TNESS: How long have they known. Now, the c
13 answer to'your/ question; I; can 't answer your question, Id because there is more information I would like to have.
15 4
'BY MR.' BERRY:
7 16 'O Which is?
17 ; A .How'long have they known each'other?- Under what 18 conditions have they known each other?
19 Q They've known each other under the condition that 20 Y is X's boss.
21 Q No, no, under what conditions have they known each 22 other?- Does --
23 0 What do you mean'by conditions?
24 A Conditions. In their past have they known each l f
25 other as friends? Have they known each other as opponents?
i
305-I 15 Have they known each other socially? Have.they known'each 2' other in business relationships?. Have they established any L
{f 3
kin'dof'an understandingramong themselves over a period;of 4
time?l 5 An understanding of what?
0 6 LA An: understanding of~how they.each like to dk things, 7 howithey like to solve their problems'.
8 Why is.that information importantLto you, Mr.
.O , .
9 Hofmann, in answering the. question?
10 MR. RICHARDSON: -You know, in the spirit'of'trying' 11 to be.constructiveewe've now been in this deposition for ,
H
,12 more than.a day andja half. 'In fact, the first time was more j
r i ,
, , -: 7 13' than a normal' depo'sition day. And we went from 9 :00. till O..
14 .6 : 0 0. o ' clock . ,- I really question whether this hypothetical 15 question approach is fiui'tful for what you want to do.
~
Let 16 1me just:make.an" observation. I'm not going to instruct Mr.
17 Hofmann not to answer. He can proceed. But I think one
.18 dif ficulty you have, Mr. Berry, is Mr. LHofmann, .as he has
~19 testified, is an investigator. And as an investigator he 20 obviously -- he spends a great deal ofi time searching'for 21 and investigating the facts which he thinks'may be re' levant-22 totthe allegation. And, just as lawyers-do,.if you search
- 23. .for and you look for X,.Y, Z facts, some of them mayyprove 24 to'be irrelevant down the road. But for the purpose of the.
25 investigation you consider a great many things. And when-you ,
- _=_z_-- .____-__._:._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _
E 306 1 '
16 pose an abstract hypothetical.you're trying to. condense in
() v' 2 . - .
the space.of a few minutes what Mr. Hofmann in his job -- 1 3-I think what you 're asking him for is . you ' re .trying 'to : find 4 3 out what he does in'his job, what he spends days, if not ,
l 5 .
weeks,(doing. )
6- . .
MR. BERRY: No, that's certainly not true. That's.
7 never what I've asked the witness. I have just ; asked this 8
witness , who is purportedly an expert .f amiliar.with;-- an 9
expert investigator, and f amiliar with Bechtel directive 2-l',
10
,who by.his own testimony in? prior deposition sessions stated 11 .. .
r hs. conducted? approximate 1yL200. investigations. He's reviewed 12 the files , and reaf firmed- that- he's been involved in 200.
' () investi ations, 160 conducted by himself and 40 -- approximate ly 14
'40 with'other people. And the' purpose of these questions is 15 to ascertain'from this witness'what state of -- what consti--
16 tutes a violation of Bechtel directive 2-1. In other words, 17 what does Bechtel dir'ective 2-1 prohibit, what does it permit?
18 The witness has been with some reluctance to answer those 19 questions. And, no, 'therefore,'in an endeavor to probe the 20 basis for the reluctance and understanding, we've had to 21 go through this exercise. I agree with you, Mr. Richardson, l 22 that it's tedious; that it's been drawn out. I would suggest L 23 l
to you that -- and I 'm sure the record would reflect -- who, 24 if anybody, is responsible and at fault for that. But I am 25 t
going to take your suggestions and I think that this matter
.I / ,
l .i
~
. 307 s
,. i 17 1
will' just have to be revisited in a more forual setting, ar,W i q, y%
we'll just pass on it with this'last -- wichI this chuestion '
3 '>
- that.I'm going to ask.
1
.s., -r i
.a k
4 BY MR. BERRY:
l
<5 l Q , Mr . Hofmann, I want you to assume. that -- sifike l l t' 6
.that, a f M- k 7
In -during your tenure ;as c;hj ef auditor ih', Bechtel's 8
. department of int.ernal auditing, have you\ ever received. ary E ' calls, or requests for advice, from anybody employediby.
10 Bechtei as to wh' ether certain conduct proposed to be engaged , ,
j ll'
_ in wodid'be permitted:.by Bechtel directive 2-l? Do you j
.y 12- understand that question?
13
.A 3 Nould befpermitted by Bechtel directive 2-1? ;
14 Yes. And implicit in that in -- or prohibited?
.Q.
e ' , ,
15 A 'or in violatiot. of?
16 Q Yes.
17 A Have .I ever received calls askin( whe thG,9 a certcan !
\
18 set of ' circumstances were either inside or outside the ,
19 directive -- within the directive or as a violat ion of the 20 directive'? Certainly.
21 0 Yes. Have you ever offered'your opinion as --
22 you know, to the requestor as to whether the proposed conduct A
f 23 was within that. allowed by Bechtel directive 2-1 ~-- prohibited -
~
24 by.Bechtel directive 2-17 0 25 A Have I ever given an opinion?
p r
308 l'
18 0 Yes, when they asked you for' advice. Did you give t G 2 them advice? s 3
A I would think that I would give them; advice'.
4 Q Have you is the question?
~5 A Yes. And I would be very careful that the advice 6
that I~would give the individual would be couched in such 7
terms that there's no questico in his mind that there may 8
be a possible violation. And never have I, Mr. Berry, given 9
. cursory information, drawn a conclusion, that there was a 10 ' '
violation of directive 2-1, to my recollection.
11 Q okay, and I take it from what you're saying you've '
12
. never --
possible violation.
lll 14 A But the matter isn't over until the investigation is completed. And during that-15 period, Mr. Berry, any Bechtel employee is innocent. And 16 as innocent. he has not violated 2-1. ,
MR. HICKEY: Can I just add fer'the record, 18 please, that -- becaus: it won't show up, Mr. Hofmann -- )
19 that when Mr. Hofmann made that answer he just gave, he 1
20 twice emphasized by the tone of his voice the word possible l 1
21 when he talked about possible violations. And while it was I 22 very evident to those of us who are heie and could hear Mr.
23 Hofmann say that, the typed trarscript won't reflect your f l
l 2d emphasis on the word possible ).n tl.e phrase popsible violation, 25 unless we make that noto of it.
-i t ,
Y
? ,. 309 1 U l' ~
L 19 THE WITNESS: I' appreciate that: thought, counsel,
.bscause it's very important to me. And it's important'to
- -Bechtel.
O MR.; HICKEY: Thank'you, Mr. Berry.
MR. P ERRY ': Mr.?Hofmann, I want you to assume that
=t 6 yem a Bechtel employge.,1and.I call you~up for adv' ice.
THE WITNEDS:
Is this another hypothetical question,
.c
+
Mr. Berry? ,
.c s, ,
'9
'MR.. BERRY: lIt'sf'a'short one. We won't be on it .l t
1 10 long. j Il '
sTHE' WITNESS: kYou are.a Bechtel employee? l
, I2 MR. BERRY: Yes.
e.
t -+ .
f y; 13 -THE' WITNESS: All right.
.(_). -
s ,
s 14 MR BERRY: In fact, I'm a start up and test
~
\
15 engineer. That's what I do. I work at Three Mile Island, 16 unit 2. Our client is GPUN. I tell you during our conversa-t 17 tion that w'e're'having that I plan to form a corporation to j
.Sa perform start up and test services.
19 THE WITNESS: You tell me?
20 MR. BERRY: Yes.
21 THE titTNESG: During a conversation?
7 i E
-22 ME. EERRY: Yes, this is a conversation that we're '
y .
J i j 23 having.
24 ) THE-WITNESS: That you had planned to do what?
y 25 MR. BERRY: Start up and test services.
lN , .- ^
<* I S
L
lhh
.310-
~I 20 THE WITNESS: . That you plan to do .what?-
2 MR. BERRY: I plan to. form a corporation to s' tart 3
up-and test, okay. I also tell you that I plan.to. recruit 4
-the present GPUN start up'and test personnel to work for my-5~
, ' corporation.
6 .THE WITNESS: Some former, did you say?
7- MR. BERRY: Presen't.
4 4
, m
/8 * ' f MR) RICHARDSON': apresent GPU?.
- 9. MR. BERRY: Yes, current GPU and start up and test 10 ; personnel to work for my corporation. - I'll also tell'you t , ,
, j 11 that I' plan to keep my current.' job with Bechtel at Three 12 Mile: Island.' d d-I 'ask you, will the proposed co'urse of 13 action violate Bechtel.-directive 2-1?- What would your response 14 to me be? 'I assume, Mr. Richardson, you're going ~to' repeat
'5' 1 or ask.for your standing objection to continue on this 16 . hypothetical as well? And if so-that's got to be noted.
17 '- (Pause.) l l
MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I'd like to object. The
=
18 19 question is obviously generally stated. It's vague and 20 ambiguous. If the witness feels-that he can answer it, he 21 is free to-.do so.
/
22 BY MR. BERRY:
23 Q. Are you able to answer the question, Mr. Hofmann? l i
24 A And the question is, again? I hear the facts.
25 Q" No, the question is, when I ask you, will the i
i
___u_. ,--,._a_- - - - - - - - - _ - - - - , _ - - . . , , - -
5 . t 5 311
. 2 11 proposed; course of action that I described.to you, will they' 2
_ violate Bechtel directive 2.1,.and what would your answer 3
'to.me 'be, or what would you tell me,'is the question?
4' L , (Pause.)
' 5 In the' conversation-that, apparentl'y, we would'h' ave-A.
6'
.had'-- you and me -- when you tell me about your plan to-7 Iform'a_ corporation,'runder what circumstan'ces'is that.conver-t-
'8 sation?
9 g , I'm calling you'up and asking you.for advice.
. , , o a Those 10 are the circumstances.
Il '
, EA 'ON,yI see.
12 0 I haven't done any of this stuff yet. I'm con-
- templatingiit, and.I'm.asking your advice -- you", the expert-
. - 13 3
14 with respect'to Bechtel directive 2.1.
15 A. I would -- given what you have told me here, I 16 would direct 'you to read directive 2-1, and suggest to you 17 .that it's'quite possible, if it were implemented, a violation 18' of directive 2-1.
19 0 But you-couldn't tell.me'for certain without 20 equivocation? You couldn't say, "Mr. Berry, if you do that 21 you're in violation of Bechtel directive 2.1, based on the 22 facts.that you have made known to me." You wouldn't be able
- 23 to do that, would you?
24 MR, RICHARDSON: Excuse me, could you read .: hat 25 question back?
312 1
(Wnereupon, a playback was performed.)
22
'l h MR. RICliARDSON : I don't think this last question 3
is really understandable wher, you say without equivocation.
4 I didn't hear much equivocation in that last answer. And 5
if you'd explain; what you mean by equivocation I think the 6
. witness will be able to respond to the next question.
7 MR.1 BERRY: I take.it from your previous answer, 8
Mr. Hofmann, that you would not be able to say to me, without 9
qualification, you would not be able to say, "Mr. Berry, if 10 you engage in activity which you have just described to me, Il you will be in violation of Bechtel directive 2.1.'"
I2 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, right there you qualified --
I3 MR. BERRY: All right, let's start again.
I4 MR. RICHARDSON: You say if --
15 MR. BERRY: I withdraw the question, withdraw the 16 question.
17 MR. BERRY: I take it from your answer, Mr. hofmann, 18 you would not be able to say to me, "Mr. Berry, if you engage 17 in the actions which you have just described to me, you will 20 be in violation of Bechtel directive 2.1."
21 MR. RICHARDSON: I think the question is vague and 22 ambiguous. How is that different from his earlier answer?
23 MR. BERRY: All right, fine, the objection is noted.
24 Can you answer the question, Mr. hofmann?
25 ThE WITNESS: I believe my answer --
)
~313 23 j MR. BERRY: Can you answer the question, Mr. Hofmann? l l
h THE WITNESS: Prior is sufficient.
3 MR. BERRY: Answer the question.
1 THE WITNESS: Can I hear my answer back?
5 MR. BERRY: Can you answer the questi6n?
b 6
,, MR. RICHARDSON: I would -- you indeed may hear your 7
answer.
8
_MR. BERRY: No, no. I would request you -- I don't 9
want to hear his previous answer. I asked the witness a i
10 question. I want an answer to the question. And I would l Il request that you instruct your witness to answer the question. l l
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, Mr. Hofmann, you are entitled i
13 to incorporate a previous answer if you think that answer is I4 responsive to the question.
15 THE WITNESS: Quite frankly, I thought it was 16 responsive to the question.
l l'7 MR. BERRY: If you are not certain as to what the l 18 prior answer is, you are entitled to have it read back.
19 THE WITNLSS: As a matter of -- in order to clarify l 20 any misunderstanding I'd like to try it again.
21 MR. BERRY: How do you know that -- why did the l l
22 witness say that he answered the question, yet he answered i 23 the question already, if he doesn't even remember what he 24 said? If the witness answered the question, certainly he 25 would remember what his answer was, and he would just repeat 1
1 1314 i.
, -24 l' the answer..
r 2 MR. HICKEY- No, I thought -- I think .he said he 3 ;. thought'he had answered the 2uestion.- 1 J x l
( , _
~
l 4 'MR. RICHARDSON: (That's what he~said, and you
-{ , ;' "
, + ,
5 disputed that. An'd he's giving you the benefit of the doubt.
'6 - tliAt the Ahswer :$ay' Se differentothan het. remembers it; That' 7 being the case, itmake[quite-goodsense'tohave.it' read R
- i) '
8 b a'ck . '
9 MR. BERRY: Well,'too much time.has passed. 'And 10 .let me just'ask another question. Would you be in aiposition, 11 Mr. Hofmann,'to say to me, "Mr. Berry, if you engage in'the 12 conduct which you have described to me,-it is my' opinion that 13 ,you will be in violation of.Bechtel directive 2-1."
oO-
\m/ :
14 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection.
15 THE WITNESS: Mr. Berry,. all I.can tell you is 16 that.if such a question were asked of me,.I would say.to 17 you, there is the possibility of' violation of directive 2-1.
-18 We do not make a definite judgement. -And I think reasonable ~
i men wouldn't make a definite judgement about violations or 39 non vi 1 tion until such time as an act has been performed 20 and there are circumstances to support the act, and an 21 22 investigation has been made. The facts would come out from the investigation, Mr. Berry. At that point in time we 23
' 24 w uld be able to indicate whether or not there has been a vi lation.
25
315 25 BY MR. BERRY:
lh Q Have you completed l your answer?
3
'A. 'Yes, sir.
4 Q All right, let's move on. In this deposition 5
, session I asked you, Mr.' Hofmann, what is your practice as 0
the chief auditor for investigations for Bechtel after you 7
received a request to perform a special investigation. What 8
do you do next?
9 MR. RICHARDSON: Is that a question or just a 10 preface?
Il THE WITNESS: What is my -- I'm sorry?
I2 MR. BERRY: What do you do next?
13 MR. RICHARDSON: Is that a question or just a 14 preface?
15 MR. BERRY: -- the witness to a subject that we 16 already touched upon. I asked you that question, and do you 17 recall what your answer was?
18 MR. RICHARDSON: There were several questions along 19 those lines.
20 MR. BERRY: All right, I would particularly direct 21 your attention to page 122 of the transcript. The question:
22 "If I were a manager for Bechtel and called you up and said, 23 'Mr. Hofmann, I think John Doe is stealing company property.
24 Investigate. What do you do?" And there is some objection 25 by Mr. Richardson. Then there's the further statement by me.
- n '
316 '
'i
'I Let me' put this before you so t'he record will bet clear that
'2 6 -
QV 4 2
, you have,the"benefithof it.
24 .. , , ,
"With your procedures;and your
, , 4 , ,q -}d 1- t 3
L practices,.what is your next move?" And your: answer was --
4 LMR. ,RICliARDSONi Where are you here?
y . e 7
5 MR. BERRY: I'm'asking you a hypothetical question.
.6 Offlthe record.
7 (Discussion off the record.)
B MR. BERRY: When you state in your answer, " Wait 9 a minute, let me finish my statement -- you're;asking me 10 for a hypothetical question. -.At a pointaini. time, if a 11 question of that sort emne, it would be a whole myriad of ;
i 12 . circumstances that would have served energy on that issue. j
-13 .All of those unidentifiable, myriad of circumstances would-O. 14 play on whether there is significance. I'm not in a position !
15 to identify those myriad of circumstances."
16 Now, Mr. Hofmann, are you in a position today to 17 identify any of the' myriad of circumstances that would play 18 on whether there is significance to the allegation?
19 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me, I tnink we need to 20 know what allegation are you talking about?
21 MR. BERRY: You know, that was stated in the 22 hypothetical.
MR. RICilARDSON:
23 Which is what?
24 MR. BERRY: Look on page 122, line 3. Why don't
() 25 we shorten this. I'll withdraw the question.
317 27 1 MR. RICHARDSON : 'I think what happened here, as 2
(:) I remember, the question is what is the next step. And that 3
can depend on a myriad of circumstances. But I believe later 4
on, when you asked about his general practices, he did tell 5
you what the basic procedure was that he and his department 6
go through.
7 BY MR. BERRY:
L 8 l Q Mr. Hofmann, after you receive an allegation and 9
a request to perform an investigation, what is your next step?
10 A The allegation comes to us. We try to determine 11 if there is some significance -- substance to the allegation.
12 Sorry, significance is not the right word -- substance.
() 14 Q What does that mean?
MR. RICHARDSON: Well, Mr. Berry, we did spend 15 quite a bit of time on this very subject in the first session.
16 Now, are we just going to hash over old ground, or -- I 've 17 got notes and notes of questions on this very subject.
18 MR. BERRY: Do you have the answer?
19 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I think we're entitled --
20 MR. BERRY: Well, I think it's a different question.
21 MR. RICHARDSON: All right, go ahead.
22 MR. BERRY: Oh, I'll withdraw the question.
23 BY MR. BERRY:
24 Q We're going to get specific here. You received a request for -- to perform an investigation f rom a Mr. Brunner.
5-u' i 1 318 71 l'v f 3 -
j 28' That's your previous testimony. Is that correct?
()
-tm 2 LA, ,That's my recollection, yes.
3' "
-Q WitE respe~ct to'the Quiltec matter?
4 4
A~ :That s ' fine.
5 0 'Now, after you received that request -- after you.
6 finished speaking with Mr. Brunner -- what did you do next?
7 A. I went to see my boss and discussed'the issue --
8 the information that'Mr. Brunner had communicated to me with 9 my b'ss.-
o 10 0 What did you do after that, after you finished I 11 speaking with your boss? ,
12 A Th'e decision was made that I should travel to 13 Gaithersburg.
14 Q Who made'that decision?
15 A Well, I guess it was a' joint decision between my 16 -boss and myself. He has to-sign my travel voucher l'7 MR. BERRY: I ask the court reporter to mark as 18 Hofmann deposition Exhibit 8 a document entitled Notification 19 Procedure Relative to Directive 2-1. This document was i
1 20 produced by a Mr. Nistersan (ph.) shortly before the 21 commencement of the deposition session that was held June ,
i 22 25th,.1987 in this proceeding.
L 23 (The document referred to was i 1 :
I 24 marked for identification as j
() 25 Exhibit 8.)
i 1
l l
'. , _p r
$ ;&5 ; yy l l ' ;-
( /
t
( .c
- o. c i- ~
319-29:
1 BY'MR. BERRY:
-l 2' >
';O' lCSin/y6u identi'fy the document, that has ' been- marked l
3 l :as Hofmann deposition, Exhibit'87 o
4 A .Well, I know what you're looking at.
5 O Can you identify it for me, please', Mr. Hofmann?
0 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I think he wants you to-7
, explain ---
8 THE WITNESS: Read the top of.the page?-
9 MR. RICHARDSON: No, I --
10 MR. BERRY: 'I want you to tell,me what'it is.
Il MR. RICHARDSON: He wants you to explain'the i 12 purpose and the nature of the document.
13 THE WITNESS: Oh. 'Well., this is dated Januaryollth, 14' 1983. And this document here is in response to an' inquiry i 15- .by Brush, who was the. internal auditor department's executive 16 sponsor at,the time, as to the information displayed on this 17, procedure,.which is called Notification Procedure Relative 18 to Directive-2-1. It's answer to questions of Mr. Brush.-
19 BY MR. BERRY: ;
20 Q Is there an accompanying memorandum to what's been 21- marked as Hofmann deposition Exhibit 8 that would reflect.
22 that this was information provided in response to a request 23 from Mr. Brush?
24 A To corroborate my statement.
25' O That's.non responsive. l
y,
, w. , ;;yq f jr[ 3; ' }
s ., q fi j ' -
J320-n , r, ~~ ,
- 30- A! lYoufaskedjme for my
- recolle'ct~ ion,' and'this is really.
)
- what I recall, pd I don't know'-- I cannot lay my hands on 3
a'transmi$talime'mo'randum. f 4 -
)
O Well, what "I was asking was .more , bas ~ic andi pre-
]
5 l liminary than that. I'm asking you-, was there ever such a
- 4 6-document, a transmitta'l memorandum,. transmitting 1to Mr. Brush -f 7=
ithe. document ;that's been marked' as Hofmann deposition Exhibit 8' 87
'l j
1 9
3 There might have been. But it-'s not unlikely that,
)
10 this document 'that we' re looking at here --~ Notification i Il
' Procedure Relative to-Directive 2-1 -- was hand carried l
12 without transmittal.
13 Q Is this a procedure that's closelyifollowed by --
14 'well, strike -- d 15 Is"this a procedure, deposition Exhibit 8?
16 MR. RICHARDSON: What do you mean'by that question, i
17 does Exhibit 8 set forth a procedure.which must be complied
.i
~18 with? Is that what -- '
l 19 MR. BERRY: Well, I haven't got to that part yet.
20 I'm avoiding the compound objection.
21 MR. RICHARDSON: It isn 't clear to me whether by 22 this you meant whether there's a cover, or whether by this 23 you meant the content of Exhibit 8.
24 BY MR. BERRY:
'? 25 0 Is deposition Exhibit 8 a procedure of some kind, l
s
^' '
-" _. '* _ _m._
321 1
Mr. Hofmann?
lll A 'When you s" the word procedure, Mr. Berry, what 3
are you trying to itt v to me , so that I might understand 4
the magnitude, the pat ameters, of your definition?
5 Q Does Hofmann deposition Exhibit 8 set forth 6
requirements that must be followed by anyone?
7 A As I believe I testified just a moment ago, that 0
this paper that we're referring to as Notification Procedure Relative to 2-1 is an answer to questions posed by Mr. Brush, 10 not a procedure.
Il Q Hofmann deposition Exhibit 8 doesn't set forth 12 any steps that have to be taken by anybody?
13 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I think the confusion is, 14 your question seems to ask whether Exhibit 8 is a policy 15 itself -- that is, a source of rules or procedural require-16 ments. The witness has indicated that Exhibit 8 provides 17 information in response to questions. So, if you're really 18 asking the distinct question as to whether Exhibit 8 describen 19 what is a normal practice or procedure, that is a different 20 question, and perhaps that's what you have in mind.
21 BY MR. BERRY:
22 O Well, does Exhibit 8 describe a normal practice?
23 (Pause as witness reads.)
24 A It is a general description of normal practice --
25 of practice used generally. What am I saying? This paper
.-----.-,.----mm,.v,
.j.- .> .
2< , . ~
4 - )
r Y y
'322-I is:no'tmeant/No'be'a:paperthatwill'befollowedexactlyin 32 2
( ). all circumstances, wherever in the world. It is not the-3 intention of that. This paper is to give Mr. Brush a sort 1 4
of.a succinct answer to his question about opening memorandums ,.
5 as you will note B-1. What does.it contain. Who is it sent 6 to, or whatever. It doesn't mean that it has to be done !
7' every investigation.. And so with~the other paragraphs in 8 this'particular notification.
I 9
Q Just so we're clear, there is nothing'in what the. 1 10 document that's been marked as Hofmann deposition Exhibit 8 11 itself that. indicates that this is written response to any- .l 12 -request.by a Mr.. Brush or anyone else. And that's-correct, L\
13 isn't it? !
14 A There's nothing on the paper that says that, but i i
15- this is my recollection.
16 Q. Now, so do I understand you correctly, Mr. Hofmann, 17 that, for example, there's no requirement-that a closing 18 memo be issued?
l 19 A Well, I would think that if you were to ask me that 20 question specifically, it would be very hard for me to think 21 of a case where a closing memo wouldn't be required.
i 22 O You can't think of one, can you?
23 A No. !
24 Q Is there -- am I correct in my understanding that i 25 there's no requirement that an opening memo must be prepared?
2 I
e f *
,y p .- s ,ms --' - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
j, 323 .l
< r
" '" 9 33 2 -
l ('S) :
Q Now, what's the basis.for the reason that an opening 3
-memo.is not required, but,a closing memo is?
4 A A, closing memo is written after-the'. investigation S
is completed, Mr. Berry. l i
6-0 Is that the'only --
7.
3: A closing memorandum is written'after an investiga-
. tion is completed. It is the summation =of the investigation 1
9 1 in very succinct terms. It is our -- Bechtel's way of' '
1 i
10 advising our senior management of the allegation that an- f II investigation was completed, that what we found during the 12 -investigation,.what the corporate management has. decided as 13 a result of our investigation to do relative to disciplinary m
0'; .
I4 action. 'The closing memorandum also' indicates in its general 15 format how we can inhibit a reoccurrence of.such a problem 16 in the future, and what steps we've done to inhibit from a !
17 control stan0 point such a recurrence. And it also indicates 18 that internal auditing:-hes closed its investigation. That
'19 completes our file. So, yes, there are a number of reasons 20 why a closing: memorandum is written. Now then --
21 Q You haven't completed your answer?
22 A No, because you asked me two questions. And I'd 23 like the. opportunity to answer the first-question. And as 24 I understand the first question, Mr. Berry, is why wouldn't
) 25 . there be in all cases an opening memorandum written. Is'that i ,\
+
y, ,# , - r. ...
?
,f., 'l s '. ' ^
324T 1
1 34- not your first' question?
-)'
Of Yes, that's.the question,-you can answer that
~3 question. ;
4
'A But that was your question, was it'not?
5 Q. To tell you the truth, the answer was' so long tha't 6'
I've forgotten the question, but that:is a question thatfI- !
7 !
would like you to answer.
,8 I
A I'm glad we're both" fallible.
9 Q Yes.
10 A Now, Mr. Berry, there are times when'the urgency 11 of.the. request -- the nature of the allegation -- is such 1 12 '!
that advice to our management about starting'or openi'ngla!
)
13 l( }; spedial investigation is done verbally. Not' formalize'd in
- 14
- a very short memorandum called an opening memorandum,'and l
15 i that would include nothing other than what we1 understood the 16-allegation to be, and that we intended to investigate. That's ,
17 1 18 what an opening memorandum is. Now, a lot of things enter ]
into this -- distance, time, and circumstances I can't 19 1 describe because of -- each investigation is different.
20 0 Well, who is to prepare the opening memorandum?
21 A Well, it can be me, it can be my boss.
22 4
- j. Q But it's the department of internal audits that.
t' l 23 prepares it; am I correct?
24 1 A Well, yes, we are both employees of the department'
- c. ,,
of internalsauditing; ' '
l
. . - 1
?
$ g ?
I I
I
+ a v '
't
l
,.i.~
"325' 35 'Q- Just so we're clear,'it's the function of the !
h 2 3
. department of-internal. audits to prepare the opening, memo--
randum is an opening memorandum is to be prepared; is=that correct?
A Of course.
6 O Now,'did'you prepareo an. opening. memorandum after-l 7 you received.the request to conduct an.-investigation from 8 .Mr. Brunner?
9 A I don't believe.I did.
10 Why not?- Well, strike that.
0 Il Did your supervisor, did he prepare an: opening l i
12 memorandum?
13- A Not.to my knowledge.
14 Q If an opening memorandum was prepared it would 15 be included in"the file.of the investigation', wouldn't it?
'16 A Of course.
17 Q And you reviewed the. file, haven't you?
18 A Oh,.yes.
1 19 .Q You didn't see it in there, did you?
20 A No. )
21 Q Why didn't you prepare an opening memorandum?
22 A Because it isn't a requirement.
23 O And that's the .only reason you didn 't prepare it?
24 'A Well, Mr. Berry, you're asking me to go back how 25 many[ years ?, ' (
l l < ,
l . a
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ l
)
326 I
36 Q Back to the time that Mr. Parks was being investi-g 2 gated for an allege'd violation of Bechtel directive 2.1.
3
-A As I recall,that might have been in 1983. And this 4
is 1987. That's four years ago. And, Mr. Berry --
5 MR. RICHARDSON: Actually, I believe, it's more 6 than four years ago.
7 THE WITNESS: We were very busy'in our organization, 8 internal audit. And I can't begin right now to reconstruct 9 for you the pressures that we had at the time. But in our 10 good judgement it would appear to us at that time, since it 11 wasn't a requirement, that it was more important for us to 12 get me out to Gaithersburg to try to -- to start the investi-13 gation and understand the facts.
A 14 BY MR. BERRY:
15 0 As I understand from your previous answer when you 16 described the opening memorandum, you stated that it was a 17 succinct statement of the allegations, a short document. And 18 so what I'm understanding from you is that your office was 19 so busy that there was no time to prepare a short document 20 stcting the basis of the allegation that you had just received 21 from Mr. Brunner?
22 A Well, the connotation you put on that flow of 23 language is rather. negative. And I would suggest to you that 24 we had no reas'on in thefworld to want to hide from anybody 25 our intention to go to Gaithersburg and start an investigation
1 327 37 j l
on this matter. By hiding it, maybe you construe that that
< 'T 2
'N d was our interest; therefore, we didn't want to open -- create 3
an opening memo. And that's simply not true.
4 Q I'm just trying to understand why --
5 A Why, of course you are, Mr. Berry.
6 Q -- why a memorandum wasn't prepared, particularly 3 7 (
when I read Hofmann deposition ]xhibit 8, paragraph B, the !
S f
second sentence in there, it says " Management requests the ]
9 assistance of internal auditing." And that happened in the 10 case of Mr. Parks. Management requested the assistance of 11 internal auditing. Isn'tithat true?
12 A Where are you?
13 Q The second sentence under part B.
14 A " Management requests the assistance of internal 15 auditing."
16 0 Didn't that happen with respect to the Quiltec 17 matter?
18 A Of course, I went --
19 Q All right, then it says the current notification --
20 A By the way, of course I went, but bear in mind 21 we do not ask for the jobs.
22 Q I understand that,'Mr. Hofmann.
23 -
A They request our presence and we respond.
O I understand that. And I know that -- and that's I J 25
- ~
.what I said. The reading from this Hofmann deposition Exhibit
328 I
38 8, under part B, it states, the second sentence -- well, I'll
() 2 read the entire paragraph, part B: " Division special operaticn 3 '
and/or service management becomes aware of directive 2-1, 4
management requests the assistance of internal auditing."
s 5
And that's what we have in this case. You know, the Bechtel )
i 6 personnel at TMI, Three Mile Island, they became aware of j l
7 information that might indicate a possible violation of j 8 I directive 2.1. Isn't that true?
9 MR. RICHARDSON: Yeah, he said yes to that several ;
10 times, i 11 MR. BERRY: He hasn't said yes to that. i l
12 BY MR. BERRY: !
l 13 0 Isn't that true, Mr. Hofmann? l 14 A Well, if I<'didn't say yes directly I surely implied 15 it several other times, Mr. Berry.
16 0 We-l l , I prefer a direct answer --
17 A Why, of course, I'll be happy to accommodate, Mr.
18 Berry.
19 Q And this Exhibit goes on to say that management 20 requests the assistance of internal auditing. That happened.
21 Mr. Brunner called you and requested your assistance, of your 22 department. Then deposition Exhibit 8 goes on to say that 23 the current notification procedure is as follows: (1) openinc 24 memos, statement of allegations, (a) addressed to executive
,w
.[ ,) 25 sponsor of internal auditing; (b) copies to senior manager of
- 329 39 (1) .the concerned division, special operations and/or service;
-m 2
] ) (2) legal insurance department. Now, it states the current 3
notification procedure was as follows. Now, was that' current )
4 l notification procedure followed? It was not, was it? j 5
MR. RICHARD. SON : Well, he's already said there i 6 was no opening memorandum.
7 MR. BERRY: Well, that's a different question.
8 The current notification procedure was not followed in that 9
case, was it?
10 MR. RICHARDSON: Aren't we just really beating II around the bush?
i 12 MR. BERRY: Well, if you have your witness answer !
- 13 the question we can move on.
L~d I4 MR. RICHARDSON: It says notification procedures is 15 a follows: Item 1 is opening memo. He's testified there was ]
16 no opening memo. So, obviously, item 1 of what is being 17 described wasn't done.
l 18 MR. BERRY: Do you want to stipulate that the 19 current notification procedure was not followed by Mr. Hofmann , l r
I 20 Mr. Richardson? Will you stipulate to that? !
21 MR. RICHARDSON: I'll stipulate that there was no l 1
i 22 opening memorandum.
23 BY MR. BERRY: )
l 24 ,(F Ok'ay','well the. question is, the current notification
() 25 procedure was not followed. Isn't that correct, Mr. Hofmann?
l i
i l.
330 1
40 A Mr. Berry --
r'% - 2
't i sc' Q I would prefer-an answer to that question, Mr.
3 Hofmann.
4' A What makes you think that IL will"not answer the {
5 l question, Mr.. Berry? Mr. Berry --
6 t MR. RICHARDSON : I . gather the. reason he's pursuing -l 7
this, apparently implied in that question is that there's 8
a mandatory procedure, and he wants to know whether a 9
mandatory procedure has been violated by you concerning.the 10 l opening memorandum. ;
i 11 MR. BERRY: I'm following what's stated in the :
12 Hofmann deposition Exhibit 8, that says the-current notifica-13'
\
' ((r'J tion proceduresis as follows: (1) an opening statement, an 34 opening memo, stating ~the allegations is prepared. And I'm 15 asking whether that current notification procedure was followe d 16 by Mr. Hofmann with respect to ' the investigation of the Quilte :
17 matter.
18 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, then I was in error. The 19 !
q estion simply' adopts the literal wording of Exhibit 8. J 20 -
TH;E . .WI TNES S : .The so-called current notification j
21 !
procedure that is stated in this paper that we're talking !
22 1
,about was not followed in that there was no opening memo l
23 .
l
. generated. And by -- I~want you to understand, Mr. Berry, 24 that given circumstances, everything is variable. This is 0
(> 25 variable. This is not bad that we did not create an opening l<
l i
1,
i m.
,4 331 1 i 41 memo. We have not? created . opening memos in other investiga- '
2 tions. This.As nordifferent.
]
MR. BERRY: That's fine. I would. note for the 4
. record that there is nothing in Hofmann' deposition Exhibit'8 '
i S'
that indicates that the requirement is variable, that the 6.
procedure-is.not mandatory, that'it's discretionary on the 7
part of;the office of' internal audits.
8 MR. . RICHARDSON: Nor is there a lot about the 9
Constitution, which does not appear in the United States '
.10 Constitution --
1 Il BY MR. BERRY:
12 O Now, you wrote -- you're the author.of Hofmann.
I 13 deposition Exhibit 8, aren't you, Mr. Hofmann? l Tg i 14 :A It sure looks like'it.. My initials are down there.- ^{
15 at the bottom, Mr. Berry.
Il
)J 16 0 H.L.H, that's Henry Lee Hofmann?
17 A As far as I know. 'l 18
.O By the way, Mr. Hofmann, was any disciplinary 19 action ever taken I against Mr. Parks for the violation of i -
20 ,Bechtel' directive 2-1?
+
l 21 A Was any disciplinary action taken against Mr. Parks. {
- 22 l for violation of -- whiy would -- in what set of circumstances I 23 are you referring?
l 24 0' I'm referrring to the investigation that you.
25 conducted, that you subsequently closed out, and would the
t 332 1
.42 document that has been marked as Hofmann deposition Exhibit 6, 2.
(~)T v.
.where it states that directive 2-1 was' violated at the 3'
beginning of the fourth full paragraph on page 1 and the 4
second sentence on page 2 states that the division has 5
verbally reprimanded the engineer and reviewed with him 6
i certain appropriate policy writings. Also as counsel to {
7 1 secretary. The question to you is, was any disciplinary ;
I 8
action taken against Mr, Parks for the violation of directive 9
2-1 that you uncovered with respect to your investigation? '
10 MR. RICHARDSON: Objection, due to the fact that i
11 the tenn disciplinary action means a lot of dif ferent things 'l 12 to different people. I think you ought to define what you l f"}
v~
mean by disciplinary action.
BY MR. BERRY:
15 0 Mr. Hofmann, do you understand.the term disciplinary i 16 action?
17~
A It's very broad, sir.
18 ^
O Do you have a-definition of disciplinary action?
A. -Spanking, ,
l 20 0 Is that among the type of disciplinary action that 21 Lhecht'le takes w' hen its employees violate directive 2-l?
22 A No, sir, it certainly is not.
3 0 You wer'e jubt being f acetious , weren 't you?
24 r-A Well, sir --
)
25 MR. RICHARDSON: I think the question posed, because I
L a___________-_ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - -
I L
333 I
- 43 I
of its ' unlimited nature,_ begged a response pointing out -the I
[~}:
unt extremeelength to which the term 1might go. .I think-you need-3 to provide a meaningful definition and we can get on>with 2
4~
this..
5 MR. . BERRY: Well, we've played'that game..-You know, 1
6 that game just leads to further evasion, Mr. Richardson, and 7
7m not going to playithat game again with you this time.
8 MR. RICHARDSON: I'm not here to play a game. I'm
'- 9 here to conduct a deposition.-
10 BY MR. BERRY:
~
II Q Mr. Hofmann, let me direct your attention to the -
12 'second page of Hofmann deposition Exhibit 6.
13 A 4 yes, sir. ;
i i uJ .14 0 It says the division has verbally reprimanded the 15 engineer and reviewed with him certain appropriate policy 16 writings. 'i 1
17 A Yes, sir. f 18 Q Is a verbal fepri and disciplinary action?
19 MR. RICHARDSON: The same obj ection.
20 MR. BERRY : Fine. Answer the question, Mr. Hofmann, 21 MR. RICHARDSON: Disciplinary action has got to 22 beidefined.
23 MR. BERRY: Well, answer the question, Mr. Hofmann.
24 THE WITNESS: A verbal reprimand is a form of l
) 25 discipline within my understanding of the context of your
- }
334
-44~ 1
. request:- 1 yo'ur. question.
i
-2
. L. Q. Letime refer you back to Hofmann1 deposition' Exhibit 3
- 8. There's a heading B-3.
4 A' 'B-37 5
A Yes.-
6 0 'll read it. It states that "IfLdisciplinary
' '7 ,
action is. taken against an employee, the senior manager 8
sends a notification memorandum addressed to S.D. Bechtel, Jr. ,
9 copy.to manager of internal auditing." Was'that'done in this 10 case, Mr. Hofmann?
11 .
A Mr. Berry, I'm.not so sure that this document 12 c&lled Notification Procedure, dated January lith, 1983, was
. in B at .that time that we ' conducted this investigation.
(} 14 Q Now,'when~did you conduct your investigation 15 against Mr.' Parks?
16-A Well, March, wasn'tr.it?-
17 .
O } ,0ffwhat year ,JMr. ;- '
K 1982.
19 O And when was this document prepared?
A At a point prior to the inves'tigation.
21 0, Is there at date on the document, Mr. Hofmann?
- 22 A Why, of course there':s a date on the document.
23 Q And what is the date, Mr. Hofmann?
24 A And it is January lith.
25 0 And is that prior to your investigation on Mr. Parks ?
7 y ._
t'.
335 45- 1
.1
'A Certainly.- ., ,, ,
e
~ Q~ In' fact, it's prior to he receipt of the request 3 ' i L .for assistance from Mr. Brunner too; isn 't that true? \
l 4
!- A I don't'know that.
5
- Q You don't recall when you received the request for f
6 assistance.from Mr. Brunner?
7 A 1 alon' t think I do. iew 8 But I'd be happy to rg\
the notes and find out if I can.
l 9
Q Do you think it was'before January llrii, 19837 10 .
, nMR. RICHARDSON: Well, take your time if you need --
t 33
+
MR. BERRY: Take your time to answer that question.
12 Do you think it wasLbp# ore January. lith, 1983, Mr. Hofmann? ,.
Do.you have a present recollection?
~
, l.
w . s 7 .
14 MR. RICHARDSON: He's;revj.dNng s notes , . so why n
15 '
i don't.you -- ,
16 m
MR; BERRY: Np, ,I Mant his present re'colleegion.
17 - >
MR .#' RICHARDSON : Well, now,you're pointing aat.out.
p 18 Okay, that was' not made clear.
19 . * - }
BY MR. BERRY: , .
no M
Q Do you"have.a present recollection as to whether 21 you received the request for assistance from Mr. Brunner i 22 prior to January lith,19 83?
23 ~
A No, it's -- quite frankly, I'm a li'ttle fuzzy on j
24 l the 9 xact dates of Mr. Brunner's request. But if you would 25
! allow me to look at my notes, I'm sure thatt I'd be able to 1
I r ,
N'
l:
'336 j I
46 help you further.
(O Ld 2
.Q All right, please do.- Pleaseyrefre d your ree.nlec- t ' ,
M 3 tion as t'o 'when you received. the request for assistance' t d
from Mr. Brunner f that . led to your investigation of Quiltec.
I 5 -(gitness consults notes.)- ,
I- ,
g 6 'Is your recollection refrcuhed,'Mr. Ho.!mann?.. ,
- i; , x,.. 1 7 A Yes, sir, to a degdee. ,
l 8 Q Now, are you able;to 3 btate from your personal j I
9 ' recollection'asto;whenyoureceived'-,the'dateyouNere 1 h
l 10 notified "v Mr. Brunner dhat u- - and requeste'd to conduSM' ; vt t l 11 a special investigation regarding'Quiltec?
12 A' It was close to the 1st of March, 1983, someidf e 3 i, ,
13' inthatarea,.whichissubseyent'Lothe_date,Januarff1;hi
.O 14 Q Right. .Now, sov/ask the question and ask ,for the
. 1 j
} ,
.15 answer, is whether a memoraridum -- a notification m27arandrp: -
=
e ;g , g 16 'was addr'es'se'd and serit to Mr.' S .D . Bechtel, Jr. noNifying # '
8 >
p 17 him of the disciplinary actEon:taken against Mr. Parks?
18 .A To my'knoEledgp no memorandum was addressed to
+ .
19 S.D. Bechtel, Jr. relative to the disciplinary, aution9taken , .
20 againstLMr. Parks. 'An$'I'm telling you again that thi.!s a l
1 J
'm.x
! l
~ '
21 January publication may.'not have applied.
{
il 22 O Okay, yes, I know that you states that a number of lM
'N 23 times.
)J )
1 + ,.
24 /// (Please continue e reading on page 337.)
h '25 /// <
1 e
r 1
n -n. -
' l' ~q f ,
B1 ,
t+ 337
- g. -
if I ;s 1 , BV.fpa, i BERRY:
4/
r J.
'l
~2 . . - Q loN, again I ask, are you aware, Mr. Hofmann, that ]
) ," {
ll y ,. ,3 '
r i# tn.i s proceedince GPU--N haa taken a position that contradicts j 4 x ,
yours, i.i. , ' ,.1ut no disciplinary action was taken against
[4 ' ;(
3 Mi . Parke... .t' 6 / kR. RICHARDSON: Well, that is' argumentative.
'k < ;
7 /3,; BERRY: Now, the'?u's nothing argumentative 8 about the question.
t ;
9 BY MR. BERRY:
x ,
[10 Q Are you aware of that,'Mr. Hofmann?
( 11 MR. HICKEY: I have anJobjection to the question.
3:
/ 17 MR. BERRY: Okay.
13 MR. HICKEY: It misstates the record --
( , ,. '
'i ,
14 MR. RICHARDSO?: It calls for --
f1,:: Y 15 MR. / BERRY:
Eine.
{y 16 BY M.1. BERRT: ,
8
= 17 Q Are you aware --
18 MFa 111CHARDSON: -- a legal opinion.
5 l 19 ~ MP, . BERRY: What's the legal opinion, Mr. Richardson?
r< ('
s
- l 20 MR. RICHARDSON: Recause positions in a lawsuit (y "
c 21 tare frequently stated in legal pleadings and documents, and g 22 I think it'3 unfair to --
E ; i -
.l.g 23 M.R . BERRY: Okay.
s 24 MR. RICHi RDSON.: -- ask a layman to --
Y /' , 25 l 4R. DEERY: A.11 right.
{n
(% '_ j , e j' ;
\ ,
1._ 1, - _ _ _ . _ . - .
e F r
.. t 4 ,
,h a _ u . _ ______._____ _.______-_____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
B2 338 e i MR. RICHARDSON: -- interpret and opine --
2 MR. BERRY: Fine.
3 MR. RICHARDSON: -- on what those positions are.
4 BY MR. BERRY:
3 Q Are you aware, Mr. Hofmann, that GPU-N has taken 6 the position in this proceeding that no discip'linary action i
7 was taken against Mr. Parks for -- in regard to his alleged 8 involvement with Quiltec?
9 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection as before. Further-io more, the question is vague as to what you mean by "discipli-3 11 nary action."
12 MR. BERRY: Fine.
rg 13 MR. RICHARDSON: Are you aware that it misstates, i )
.ia and there has been no affirmation in the record as to the 15 premise of the question.
M 16 BY MR. BERRY:
[e I Are you aware of that, Mr. Hofmann?
8 17 Q 18 MR. RICHARDSON: Heard anything from --
5 l
19 THE WITNESS: No. I am not aware of that.
5 20 BY MR. BERRY:
E Let me bring it to your attention.
f8 l E 21 Q 22 I'm going to quote from a letter dated' October 21, 23 1985, addressed to Mr. James M. Taylor, the Director of the ;
h I 8
24 Office of Inspection and Enforcement in the United States 25 Nuclear Regulatory Commission from a Mr. P.R. Clark, who L ,)
y____-- _
. s f
I
__ i B3 339 i
i I understand is an official with GPU-N. It's in relation 2 or in regard to the matter of GPU-N Nuclear Corporation, I
3 Three-Mile Island Nuclear Station, this docket, and in response 4 to the Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil 5 Penalties, and I read from page 4 of this letter from 6 Mr. Park to Mr. Taylor, and this addresses a quote for 7 the Petroyka (ph.): 'the purported, quote, " improper and 8 intimidating interrogation of Parks regarding his involvement 9 with Quiltec."
l 10 Mr. Clark states that within one week of his inter-11 view, Mr. Parks's interview with you, Mr. Hofmann, Parks i
12 was promptly informed by.Bech'tel that no' disciplinary action
(-
13 would be taken against him."
14 A Who said that?
15 0 Who said it?
E j
c 16 A Who'said it?
! 17 Q A senior official GPU, yes.
O l 18 A Said that no action -- disciplinary action would 5
l 19 be taken against Mr. Parks?
5
{, 20 Q Yes.
W l 21 A When?
E 22 Q And he said this two years after you completed ;
g f 23 your investigation and authored what has been marked 8
24 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 6. You weren't aware of -- !
25 MR. HICKEY: Could I -- can I see the exhibit, O
i B4 340
- 1 please?
2 MR. BERRY: It's not an exhibit. Oh --
3 MR. HICKEY: Could I see the document you're reading 4 from? Are you goingoto make it an exhibit?
5 MR. BERRY: I haven't decided yet. It is, I believe 6 a part of the administrative record of this proceeding as 7 it is.
8 BY MR. BERRY:
9 Q The question was, were you aware of the position ,
10 of the statement that I just read, Mr. Hofmann?
11 A No.
12 O Okay, fine.
,e y 13 MR. HICKEY: May'I'see the document?.
) 14 (Document prof fered to Counsel. Whereupon, Counsel is perused the proffered document.)
{ 16 MR. HICKEY: Thank you. l 5
8 17 Where were you reading from, Mr. Berry?
O l 18 MR. BERRY: Page 4.
5 19 (Whereupon, Counsel perused the proffered document.)
r 20 BY MR. BERRY:
1 P j l 21 Q Are you aware, Mr. Hofmann, that approximately r r g
22 one month after you had received a closing memorandum stating
-l 23 that disciplinary action had been taken against -- or --
g-24 strike it -- state that disciplinary action --
25 A I'm sorry. I didn't understand those last words.
'% ,n
B "c-341 e i O Okay, well, let me just begin again.
2 Are you aware that one month after you had closed 3 out your investigation in regard to the Quiltec matter, that 4 Counsel for GPU-N took the position --
5 A Counsel for GPU --
6 Q Counsel for Bechtel took the position before the 7 United States Department of Labor that no disciplinary action a should be taken against Parks, and he was so advised by Wheeler 9 in a personal interview on March 22nd in relation to his to alleged involvement with Quiltec. Were you aware of that?
11 A No, no. Bechtel's legal staff?
12 O Yes. Took the position before the United States i i
r~s 13 Department of Labor that Mr. Parks was not disciplined or e i
\
14 that no disciplinary action was taken against Mr. Parks for 15 his alleged involvement with Quiltec.
c fe 16 MR. RICHARDSON: You now have several questions.
! 17 Are you --
0 l 18 MR. BERRY: No, there's only one question, and 1
19 I'll repeat it.
E 1 20 BY MR. BERRY:
h 21 Q Are you aware, Mr. Hofmann --
E g 22 MR. RICHARDSON: If the last item was meant to be 2
23 a paraphrase of the letter, it misstates the letter.
8 24 MR. BERRY: I will read the letter. It's a letter 25 dated April 2 6 th , 1983, to a Mr. David Fineberg, United States
'T l
\__/
I I
B6 342 i Department of Labor, from Mr. Kennedy P. Richardson, and l
2 it's a letter prepared in response to a DOL proceeding between 3 Mr. Parks and Becntel Corporation in which Mr. Parks raised 4 a number of allegations before the Department of Labor, one 5 of which was that he had been subjected to improper interro-6 gation for engaging in protected conduct. The letter'goes 7 on to explain circumstances or Bechtel's view of the circum-a stances relating to your interview with Mr. Parks.
9 And then in that letter Bechtel states to io Mr. Fineberg of the United States Department of Labor that -- 1 11 I quote: "Accordingly, it was concluded that no disciplinary 12 action should be taken against Parks, and he was so advised
~s 13 by Wheeler in a personal interview on March 22nd, 1983."
' )
14 BY MR. BERRY:
15 Q Question: Were you aware of this statement made f 16 by Counsel for Bechtel to United States Department of Lahor?
E 17 A I was certainly not aware of that statement as o
l 18 to disciplinary action should not be given to Mr. Parks.
s 19 Q Had you known that no disciplinary action should r
20 be taken against Mr. Parks, would that -- would you -- strike f
e
[ 21 that.
E 22 In light of the statement that I just read to you, f 23 isn't it correct that your memorandum of March 24th, 1983, 8
24 which has been identified as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 6, 25 is incorrect to the extent that it states that Mr. Parks m
i B7 343 e i was verbally reprimanded? Isn't that true?
2 MR. RICHARDSON: Objection. The question is vague 3 and ambiguous, argumentative. Your question falsely assumes a that the disciplinary action which is referred to in the 5 letter to Mr. Fineberg equates with a verbal reprimand as 6 stated in Exhibit 8 -- or is it Exhibit 6?
7 MR. BERRY: Six.
8 MR. RICHARDSON: Exhibit 6. And there's a temporal 9 problem as well with regard to whether the disciplinary action 10 referred to one document is prospective, vis-a-vis what state-11 ments may have been made to Mr. Parks on March 22 or before.
12 MR. BERRY: Okay.
,- , 13 BY MR. BERRY:
14 0 With that objection, can you answer the question, l 15 Mr. Hofmann?
2 16 A Respectfully, I'm -- with the language that's blon v
! 17 going back and.forth between Counsel here, I'd like to have O
l 18 the question restated.
5 U? O If the statement that I just read was made to the 5
y 20 Department of Labor by Counsel for Bechtel is true, then 21 the statement that you make in Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 8 e
n 22 that Mr. Parks was verbally reprimanded is not true, isn't 2
23 that correct?
8 24 MR. RICHARDSON: The same --
25 THE WITNESS: I don't believe --
%-)
m______.
344 B8 I I
1 MR. RICHARDSON: -- the same objection.
2 MR. BERRY: Okay. Well, that's your objection.
3 THE WITNESS: I don't believe so because I believe 4 the language is different in the statement, and I think the ;
i 5 language in the statement that you're referring to=in your !
6 book, "should" was indicated.
7 BY MR. BERRY:
8 Q Yes, but --
9 A Yes, "should." }
10 Q All right. Now, I just note that that was written 11 a month after you had written your memorandum stating action 12 had been taken, and a month later they're saying no action rs 13 has been taken yet.
N]"
14 A I did not say --
15 MR. RICHARDSON: Objection, mischaracterizes --
2 f 16 furthermore, the question is argumentative. Why don't yon 2 17 save this for the judge at trial.
O l 18 MR. BERRY: Well, we're going to repeat this to 1 ,
19 the judge. I'm,just asking the Witness was he aware of it.
t
(
l E
20 MR. RICHARDSON: But he's answered the question.
E 4 "o 21 He was not aware of that letter.
E 22 MR. BERRY: Okay.
e 23 MR. RICHARDSON: Do you need to take a short break, E
24 Mr. Hofmann?
I 25 THE WITNESS: Whatever. l s
(~
l
l i}
B9 345 1 MR. RICHARDSON: It's your pleasure. It would 2 be most kind. l 1
3' MR. BERRY: Off the record. 1 4 (Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) ;
.i 5 MR. BERRY: On the record. !
6 I ask the Court Reporter to mark for identification 7 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 9, a document three pages in a length, printing on both sides, entitled,
Subject:
Investi-9 gation, Possible Violations of Business Ethics, Conflict 10 of Interest, and Security of Information.
11 (The document referred to 12 was marked for-identification gg 13 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit q) 14 No. 9.)
15 MR. BERRY: This was made available to the Staff a
! 16 by GPU-N in discovery.
I 2 17 (Document proffered.)
O
[. 18 BY MR. BERRY:
5 19 0 Mr. Hofmann, have you ever seen a copy of this 5
. 20 document before?
e
[ 21 MR. RICHARDSON: Take your time,--Mr.'Hofmann if f
22 you need to look it over.
e h' 23 THE WITNESS: 'Sure.
5 i 24 (Whereupon, the Witness perused the above-proffered 25 document.)
O
1
- B10 346 l
1 THE WITNESS: Where's page number 2?
l 2 MR. BERRY: Is there not a page number 2?
3 THE WITNESS: Perhaps this is -- I don't think a this is a good copy.
5 MR. BERRY: It may have been a copying error.
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q Anyway, do you have a copy of the document that 8 has been marked for identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibi--
9 9 among the documents in your file that you have before you, to Mr. Hofmann?
11 MR. RICHARDSON: As the Witness has pointed out, 12 pages 2 and 4 of this document are missing.
f-g 13 THE WITNESS: The answer to your question is no.
'~
14 MR. BERRY: Okay.
15 (Whereupon, the Witness conferred with Counsel.)
3 16 BY MR. BE.RRY :
! 17 O Having reviewed pages 2 and 4 of the copy of the O
l 18 document that I handed to you, did that refresh your recollec-5 pa tion as to whether you've seen that -- a copy of that document 5
j 20 before, Mr. Hofmann?
W
[ 21 A Just t his document that's entitled, Bechtel Manage-E 22 ment Instruction, Internal Audit and Instruction No. 1.
I 23 MR. BERRY: Did you point something out to the E
24 Witness, Mr. Richardson?
25 MR. RICHARDSON: I don't think so.
,~
v i
i
, ;l l
l 1
Bil 347 I lllh 1 MR. BERRY: I thought I saw you. I'm sorry. Maybe 4
j 2 you --
3 MR. RICHARDSON: I didn't.
4 (Whereupon, the Witness conferred with Counsei.)
5 BY MR. BERRY:
6 Q' Now, you are familiar with this document, aren't I
7 you, Mr. Hofmann?
8 A Yes, sir.
9 Q And what is it?
Io A It is Internal Auditing Management Instruction 11 No. 1.
12 O What is an internal auditing instruction, Mr. Hofmann?
m s 13 A It's a guideline. It is a guideline, Mr. Berry.
( i
'~'
14 Q Okay. That -- I mean, I take it that it's not 15 mandatory?
2 j e 16 A Not in all of its estimates, no.
! 17 Q Do you have any mandatory requirements that apply 0
l is in connection with the performance of a special investigation, ,
5 19 Mr. Hofmann?
E
(
l
=
20 A Mandatory. Oh, my.
s E 21 Now, I would ask you to bear with me, Mr. Berry.
E g 22 O Okay.
f 23 A Each special investigation is really quite unique.
E 24 It's composed of a unique combination of elements. It wo 16 25 be inappropriate, if not morally incorrect, I would think --
-s C/
l
s s
?&
B12 , 348
, e 'l certainly I would think that it would not be within the spirit i
2 of our Bechtel philosophy to have a checklist that was man-3 datory so that each and every -- every item on the enecklist 4 would have to be done because it's -- you have to tailor 5 these -- the actions within a special investigation to the 6 unique circumstances of that particular investigation.
7 0 Well, let me ask you, are there any mandatory require-8 ments for audits as opposed to special investigations? f 9 A Mandatory requirements for audits. We have audit to work programs relative to compliance with personnel controls.
11 Q Are they mandatory?
12 A I don't believe that we consider them mandatorf ex 13 in all cases. We have to exercise prudent judgment-in the i )
v 14 application of the work program provisions.
15 Q So.there are no mandatory requirements applying 2 1 j 16 to the special investigations or audits conducted by the I s=
17 Department of Internal Audits?
o l 18 A Sounds to me like that's a loaded question, and E
"- I -- I don't know what you're getting at.
09 I
j 20 Q Straightforward --
21 MR .' RICHARDSON: There is some ambiguity there.
r 22 He's already testified that he can't recall of any instance g
f 23 when a closing memorandum was not prepared, and you refer 8
24 to " mandatory" as something which is invariable. He's already-i 25 given you an example of something like that. And going back e
L C-_______
h B13 349 )
- 1 to the auditing area, I mean, do you include by " mandatory 2 requirement," generally accepted accounting principles'which 3 some CPAs view as being mandatory applications?
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q You may answer the question now, Mr. Hofmann. ;
6 A I don't recall of any requirement that -- any --
7 any sequence of requirements as in a procedure that would 8 be -- that we have to adhere to in each and every special 9 investigation.
10 0 Is that you don't have to prepare an opening memo, 11 you don't have to prepare a closing memorandum?
12 A It's not true.
em. 13 Q You do have to?
)
l \
14 A I told you before that we always do.
is Q Well, that's different than what I'm asking you.
- 1
{ 16 I'm not asking what the general practice is. I'm asking e
! 17 what the requirement is, and you told me that you don't have i
o .
l 18 to prepare a closing memorandum, though generally that's s
l 19 done.
1 I j 20 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, the vice of the question, 21 Mr. Berry, is that, as the Witness has explained, you cannot E
g 22 complete an investigation without a closing memorandum.
0 23 BY MR. BERRY:
8 24 Q So then, the closing memorandum is required?
25 A Well, from that -- from an operational standpoint,
\
g
\.)
l f
1 E________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _
j
=i B14 350 0 1 yes.
l 2 Q All right, now, are there any other steps or measures 3 taken in connection with a special investigation that are 4 required to be taken?
5 MR. RICHARDSON: May I emphasize the word " required."
6 Whether by policy or whether by definition or --
7 MR. BERRY: Also by procedure. I 8 MR. RICHARDSON: -- by circumstances?
9 MR. BERRY: By procedure.
10 MR. RICHARDSON: By written procedure.
11 MR. BERRY: Yes, by written procedure.
12 THE WITNESS: May I respectfully look at the complete rx 13 copy of this document, the Internal Auditing Instruction
\"') 14 No. 1.
15 MR. BERRY: Entire Auditing Instruction No. 1, a
m i 16 okay.
2 17 MR. RICHARDSON: And do you include by " procedure,"
O l 18 Directive 2.l? ,
s 19 MR. BERRY: There is no testimony that Directive l 20 2.1 is a procedure, Mr. Richardson. ,
21 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, it's --
E g 22 MR. BERRY: So by definition, I don't include it.
2 23 MR. RICHARDSON: The Witness hasn't --
8 24 MR. BERRY: The Witness has never testified that 25 that is the procedure.
LY
B15 351
- i MR. RICHARDSON: Well, you -- you've never asked 2 him. I'm asking you;whetherc-- a. question which is premised 3 on a written procedure, does that include Directive 2.1?
4 MR. BERRY: I believe if'you go back and review 5 the Witness's prior testimony where he describes and explains 6 the purpose and nature of Directive 2.1, it'll be clear to 7 you that Directive'2.1 is not a procedure.
8 So naturally, I do not include Directive 2.1 as 9 the procedure.
i to MR. RICHARDSON: Well, then, I object, and my objec-31 tion to the question as vague and ambiguous stands. l 1
4 12 MR. BERRY: Okay.
'r,.s 13 (Pause as Witness reads a document.)
\ ,
'~ 14 BY MR. BERRY:
15 .Q Answer the question?
A I do not recall a series of -- of actions that f
e 16 1
E S 17 have to be -- have to be complied with relative to the investi-O l 18 gation of -- of special investigation items.
1
- pp Q Okay, now, how about a single action as opposed t
to a series, other than -- other than the closing memorandum?
l 20
[ 21 Is there any other single specific act that has to be taken W
= 22 which is required to be taken by procedure? v e
r 23 A Well, Mr. Berry, I'm sure you'll tell me what those E
24 requirements are, and I'd be happy to -- to discuss those 25 with you if you so choose.
U i
u__ _ _ . _
B16 352 i O You don't recall any?
2 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I think~again we're -- we've 3 got'a question which is rather' vague'and ambiguous, and are.
4 you speaking about'a discretionary step? In other words --
5- MR. BERRY: Mr.' Richardson,[howcanadiscretionary 6 step be mandatory? By definition that's absurd, and I would 7' appreciate- that if 'you just. refrain from interposing these e objections. I have not said anything about it'a number of :
9 times, but it's getting out of han'd, and the question put to to your Witness was a simple one. The question is only,.
11 Mr. Hofmann, are you aware'of any specific act that is required 12 by procedure .to be taken in connection with the special'investi-
,f 13 gation.
' ('- 14 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection. My point is there i
15 are many acts which are discretionary in the sense in that
{ 16 a human decision is required to perform them. Other acts e
! 17 may be by the circumstances necessary to initiate a scquence o
l 18 of events'. For example, do you include in your question a 5
19 contact from management to internal audit asking for an in-t 20 vestigation?
f
?
E 21 BY MR. BERRY:
E g 22 Q You can answer the question now, Mr. Hofmann.
M E
23 A Well, certainly, we always advise our executive 8
24 sponsor.
25 Q Are you required to advise your executive sponsor O
l l l
- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ l
I 'I 1
i i
I B19 355 ,
l Now, is an instruction a procedure is what I'm I 1 Q 2 asking. j 3 MR. RICHARDSON: Okay --
4 THE WITNESS: No, that's not what you asked.
5 MR. RICHARDSON: I think we're. going to have to ,
l 6 get some definition from you as to what you mean by " procedure. "
7 He's already described it as a guideline.
8 MR. BERRY: Okay, the guideline is -- !
9 BY MR. BERRY:
10 Q Do you know what a procedure is, Mr. Hofmann?
11 A Well, I'm sure you might be able to tell me at 12 this point.
gx 13 MR. RICHARDSON: It calls for speculation as to
, t 14 what is in your mind since you're the one asking the question.
15 BY MR. BERRY:
16 Q Are you familiar with the term " procedure,"
w
! 17 Mr. Hofmann?
O
$ 18 A Do I know it? l 5
l 19 Q Have you ever heard the term before?
r f 20 A Have -- in what context?
s l 21 Q Any context. Have you ever heard the term " pro-W g
22 cedure," Mr. Hofmann?
E 23 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Hofmann, that includes sailing, E
24 soccer, and any possible context.
25 THE WITNESS: I guess sometime in my close to 60 7- s i
)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ )
B18 354 i that we do. So if a person -- if you failed to do that, 2 you violated procedure in that -- you make it sound so bad, 3 Mr. Berry, to violate the procedure.
l l
4 MR. BERRY: I'm trying to understand. l I
5 THE WITNESS: Well, of course, you are, Mr. Berry. j 6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q You don't believe violation of a procedure is an j 8 undesirable thing? )
J i
9 A Mr. Berry, I wouldn't say that.
to Q Okay, well, I --
11 A Because you're -- you're very broad in that state-12 ment, and that would not be fair. I'm just saying to you rs 13 that we do advise our executive sponsor or our senior person,
\
'^] 14 the person to whom internal auditing department reports.
15 We advise them.
l 16 Q I'm just trying to understand, do yo] advise them l ,
a 17 because you're required to do so by procedure?
O l 18 A The procedure says that we should. It says if 5
- there is substance to an allegation, we open a special investi-19 r
I 20 gation, and we notify our counsel, our responsible senior f
8 21 officer. It's on page 4. It is a part of the procedure.
22 Q So.is Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 9 what you're 5 telling me, that's the procedure?
23 E
24 A Is this a procedure? This is a -- this is a Bechtel J
25 management instruction.
l /x x_-)
l
1 B17 353 i by a written -- by some written procedure?
2 A No, I didn't say " written," I said " advise."
3 Q But is there a written procedure that states that 4 it is your responsibility, your obligation to advise the 5 executive sponsor?
6 A In this management instruction.
7 Q In any -- any. procedure, any --
8 A Well, that's fine.
9 0 -- anything you have --
10 A I'm just asking for the management instruction.
ii O Oh.
12 A Just so that I could review it.
w 13 Q Oh.
+
\
la (Whereupon, the Witness conferred with Counsel 15 while perusing the referred-to document.)
e 16 MR. BERRY: Mr. Richardson, you can state and junt 9
0 i7 let me know when it's an appropriate time for you to have o
l is to leave in order to make your meeting. We'll just adjourn 5
19 at that time.
t h 20 THE WITNESS: It doesn't say that in here. It a
v 8 21 says special investigation notice by -- there's substance E
22 to -- apparent substance to the allegation that we open a 5
h 23 special investigation and notify our Counsel, its responsible B
24 senior officer? That's Bechtel internal audit's responsible s
25 senior officer. So I guess in a way that is required, and
( --
LJ
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . I
i 356 I
- 1 years, I might have heard the term " procedure," Mr. Berry. ;
l l 2 How can I help you?
3 BY MR. BERRY: ;
l i
4 Q Have you.ever heard the term " procedure" used in 5 connection with the Polar crane and Three Mile Island?
l l 6 A This is well outside my area of jurisdiction and 7 activity.
8 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, if you've never heard it, 9 just say you've never heard it.
10 THE WITN'ESS: I think that would be --
11 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, Mr. Hofmann, don't guess 12 or speculate.
,em 13 THE WITNESS: I can' t with any degree of certainty
)
14 say yes or no. I'm very sorry.
I 15 MR. BERRY: That's fine.
S f 16 BY MR. BERRY:
E 8 17 Q Okay, Mr. Hofmann, when you wrote Hofmann Deposition O
l 18 Exhibit 8 and you entitled it, " Notification Procedure" s
l 19 -- Counsel has it -- when you entitled it " Notification Pro-t 4
g 20 cedure," what do you mean by " procedure" as you used the j U
g 21 term in the document you authored? ,
e 22 A I believe -- I may be mistaken, and it wouldn't
? ,
= ,
j 23 be the first time, of course, but I believe I told you that ;
o 24 this is a guideline. A procedure is a guideline. This pro-25 cedure is a guideline.
,7q Y) l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ \
1 B21 l 357 l
l i Q Is that how you understood the term, that the term 2 don't fly, that instead of " Notification Procedure," it really 3 should have said " Notification Guideline"?
4 MR. RICHARDSON: That's argumentative.
l 5 MR. BERRY: It's not argumentative.
6 MR. RICHARDSON: He's told you what he meant by 7 the term " procedure" in the title.
8 MR. BERRY: No, that's not what he told us. What 9 he told us is that he --
10 MR. RICHARDSON: _Well, assuming -- i 11 MR. BERRY: -- regarded this whole entire document --
12 MR. RICHARDSON: No, you -- you are arguing --
i fx 13 MR. BERRY: -- as a --
+ \
14 MR. RICHARDSON: -- that the document -- !
15 MR. BERRY: -- as a guideline.
0 16 MR. RICHARDSON: -- whether it should he " guideline" d
8 17 and " procedure." That is your advocate position. You're O
l 18 arguing with the Witness.
5 19 BY MR. BERRY:
r
$ 20 Q Mr. Hofmann, is there a distinction in your mind E
s l 21 between'" procedure" and " guideline?" !
r g 22 MR. RICHARDSON: In what context? He's already 9
E 23 testified that in this context, they're equivalent.
8 24 BY MR. BERFY: )
l 25 Q Mr. Hofmann, in your mind, do you draw a distinction en A
l B22 358 i between " procedure" and " guideline" as you used the term 2 " Procedure" in Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 8?
3 MR. RICHARDSON: Asked.and answered.
4 MR. BERRY: All right, objection noted.
5 BY MR. BERRY:
l 6 Q Anyswer the question, Mr. Hofmann. I 7 MR. RICHARDSON: For the record, I have made the !
8 objection that you have already answered this question, apparent-9 ly several times, but go ahead'.
to THE WITNESS: Those terms are interchangeable rela-1 ij tive to this document. This is a guideline.
12 BY MR.. BERRY:
<s 13 Q Just so I'm clear, as I understand --
$\) A How can I help you?
14 15 Q -- as I understand your testimony, with respect E
l the term " guideline" and f 3
16 , to Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 8, 0
8 17 " procedure" are synonymous, j O
l is A How can I tell you any more specifically than I 1
- 19 have that these two are synonymous, the guideline and procedure r
20 relative to this document? This is not etched in concrete.
f s
[ 21 Q Okay.
E i 22 A This is not something that we have to apply -- i Q All right.
f 23 8
24 A -- each and every time. )
25 0 In answer --
LJ
B23 .
359 9 1 A From one period -- wait a minute. I'm not finished 2 yet. From one period of time to another period of time, 3 for one particular investigation versus a number of other 4 investigations, these are guidelines which are used with !
5 judgment, prudence, and discretion.
6 Q Okay, now -- now, as you stated that " procedure" g 7 and " guideline" as used in connection with Hofmann Exhibit 8 e are synonymous, let me ask you, are -- is the term " internal 9 auditing instruction" synonymous with -- as used in Hofmann to Deposition Exhibit 9 -- is that synonymous with the. term 11 " procedure" used in Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 8?
12 MR. RICHARDSON: May we have the exhibit? j
,3 13 (Document proffered.)
r i
'~
14 MR. RICHARDSON: This is the one without the 15 -- it is totally complete.
$ 16 BY MR. BERRY:
5 2 17 Q What I'm directing your attention is to the o
l' i
is language that appears on page 1 entitled Internal Auditing 19 Instruction, and I'm asking you whether -- is there any I
(
20 distinction that you draw between the term " instruction"
)
I 21 and the term " procedure" as used in Hofmann Deposition Ex-g a
g 22 hibit 8?
h 23 A Internal Auditing Instruction No. 1 is an audit 8
24 procedure. In my -- in the terms that I am used to understand- l 25 ing, it is more like a guideline. Now, does that help you? i ya L.]
B24 360 i O Yes, that helps.
2 Now, you just in your last answer used the term 3 " procedure." What do you mean when you say " procedure"?
4 A I would think a procedure would -- could take 5 many forms. I would think a procedure would have to have a.--
6 MR. RICHARDSON: For the last 10 minutes we've 7 been using your definition of " procedure."
8 MR. BERRY: I'm going to use something that the l 9 Witness understands. I mean, I'll accept his definition.
10 MR. RICHARDSON: Okay.
11 MR. BERRY: So let's have the definition. ,
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Okap, well, up until now, we've s 13 been -- you've been asking about a mandatory sequence of
! )
14 steps. Now you're: eliciting a definition which may differ 15 from that now?
O 16 MR. BERRY: We're past that.
! 17 MR. RICHARDSON: We're now past'that, o ,
l 18 MR. BERRY: Now we're asking the Witness. The I
19 Witness used the term " procedure," and I want to understand t'
20 what he meant when he used the term " procedure." The Witness l
8 21 was in the process of explaining it to us before you W
g 22 interrupted and --
n
'h 23 MR. RICHARDSON: But what he meant, in contrasting 5
24 Exhibits 8 and 9 with procedures.
25 MR. BERRY: I don't -- the Witness can tell us fs
_ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - -- .- - -- - J
B25 361 i what he meant. The record has -- the record will reflect 2 what the Witness's answer was and what was said.
3 MR. RICHARDSON: I thought that was the response 4 which gave rise to this next question.
l 5 MR. BERRY: Well, I'm not going to comment and 6 characterize his response. The Witness was in the process 7 of giving.us a. definition of the term " procedure" as he !
8 used in his testimony in response to a past answer, and 9 he was -- he was giving us that definition before you inter-10 rupted him.
11 THE WITNESS: By my answer, I would not want you, 12 Mr. Berry, to get the impression that there was an impropriety
,y 13 and/or an attempt for me to confuse you, and my -- if I
\j reference " procedure," I've tried very hard to explain to 14 is you that what you've showed me last -- in this last paper, h 16 the Instruction No. 1, was a guideline, and I've told you, E 17 I believe, several times, that -- what is this thing -- ;
O
$ 18 notification procedure. Well, it's -- the word " procedure" l 19 appears in the title of that particular document. It was i
20 meant to relate to a guideline.
f
[ 21 It just would appear to me that if there is to e
22 be discretion, if there is to be understanding in matters g
f 23 of investigations, for instance, that there must be latitude, E
24 and therefore, Bechtel in its wisdom has elected not to 25 put a straitjacket around special investigation, the --
xJ hm . _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ . __. .._ _ - _ m _ & - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _
B26 362 1 -- the process of investigating -- affecting special investi-2 gations.
3 BY MR. BERRY:
4 Q Or audits, for that matter too, is that right?
5 A Well, I guess that's -- audits -- compliance audits 6 I assume you're talking about?
7 Q Yes.
8 A Yes.
9 0 Yes, compliance audits. There is no straitjacket 10 imposed by Bechtel on compliance auditors either, is there? I 11 A That's my understanding.
12 Q They have guidelines as well?
rm. 13 A That's correct.
\'~W 14 Q No mandatory requirement, just guidelines?
15 A Well, I can't~ speak for the regular audit function j
16 nearly as much as I can for the special investigation function. ;
. 4 d
2 17 0 Okay.
O l 18 A So I hope that you'll be fair with me, Mr. Berry.
t 19 Q Yes. Okay, Mr. Hofmann.
I j f 20 MR. BERRY: Hand the Court Reporter this document, E
[ 21 have it marked for identification as Hofmann Deposition E
g 22 Exhibit 10.
( 23 (The document referred to 8
24 was marked for identification l 25 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit r'~T 26 No. 10.)
U u _-
B27 363
%, i i
O 1 MR. BERRY: And it is a document prepared by you, '
2 Mr. Hofmann, made available to the NRC in d.igcovery in this a proceeding enti.ticd Sequence of Events.
4 (Document proffered.)
l' 5 BY MR. BERRY: I s.
6 Q Do you have a copy of the document before vou, 7 Mr. Hofmann?
a (Whereupon, the Witness perusha the r9ove-proffered - q l
9 document.)
10 THE WITNESS: You included something else within ]
11 your exhibit, Mr. Berry. ,
3' 12 MR. BERRY: Oh, yes. Yes. i*'
c3 13 MR. RICHARDSON: Haveyoumarkedtkistasanexhibit?
14 MR. BERRY: Just did,'10.
15 Included -- the document.coneists of eight pages.
i 16 apparently it is a chronology of sequende of events, then 8 17 followed by a blank sheet, a' single-blanklsheet, followed o
l; 18 next by a document entitled, Calculation Sheet,.
Subject:
l 19 Interview of Daryl Blizzard, which is -- appears to be four r
f 20 pages long, and next following is another calculation sheet
., i
[ 21 entitled,
Subject:
Interview with J.W. Buell -- that's J f
a 22 B-u-e-1-1 -- which is three pages. 1
? I 23 MR. RICHARDSON: Did you mean to make alh that !
8 24 an exhibit? Wouldn't it be easier to break it up?
25 MR. BERRY: No, we'll just leave it all one exhit!(.;.
?
l
(,-,) l m.
w.-
u mgN
. 1
,, g ,o ,
/' o <
c Jt
.(- e
?
i
/ qt qj i
i j
- ' . r
~' *
w_. c ___, .4 B28 '
364 s
y .. #
9 1 Unless the Witness. thinks v it would be easier to handle. , , .
)..
>c 2 THE WITNESS: I don't know whdf you've got in j
/ "j '
j 3 mind, Mr. Berry. /..
y
.+
).
4 ' MR. BERRY: All right, why don ' t we ' ?..f st proceed ;
e" r V
^
~
^ '
5 now and don't break it up. '
._ y 6 And then next following is a two~ ' age document !
a l 7 entitled, Subject' . Interview Bahman, .
B-a- .j-m-a-n, Kanga, / )
9 8 K-a-n-g-a. And the'n Ninally attached is a Fingle sheet c
9 entitled Subjebt:C. Interview Ed Kitler., It's one p6ge.
10 BY MR. BERRY: >
i.
(
11 0 Do you 6aveJa copy of that document before you, 1
12 Mr. Hofmann? ,
c 13 A Yes, sir. << r (e). '
V. Do you recognize that docuraent?- 9 14 Q - ', .
l 15 A Those documents I recognize, yes, necause tpey;.. ' ~
. .s r
/{
16 are separate and idistinct. i
{6 8 17 0- The papers comprising HofmanIf Depositior. Exhifbit .
O I
{2 18 10 -- do you recognize,them? s 19 A I do, sir.,- ,
i E i 20 0 Were they prepare (i by you, Mr. Hofmann?
} a ,
e
! 21 A That appers.to be my printing, yes.r E
=
g 22 MR. BERRY: Off.the recor'd. 1 -
1
, f 23 (Whereupon, a'brief recess'was taken.)
8 24 MR. BERRY: On the record.
25 In a brief recess, I accepted Mr. Richardson's l ., c' i 1 y
/ <
' .w Y* r
~ _ - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - . -
c av
$ ,? z i,
j ,_ p ;y t'.: c 6$529 -%- t.
%a J- 365 i i suggestion and brokn up the document that had been marked
/
21 ton ide' notification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 10. I 3 therefore ask the Court Report to mark as Hofmann Deposition ^
i Exhibit 10 the eight page document that's entitled, Sequence
' of Events.
5
\
< 3, 15 6 (The document referrtd to, i l having been previously marked g 73 y ;
~0 for identification as Hoffman ni .
(' 9 .
Deposition Exhibit No. 10 h
+3 to ,
was withdrawn, and the referred
,a
- L il to document was marked for N identification as Hofmann 12 _
13 Deposition Exhibit No. 10.)
'~ 9 is MR. BERRY: Hofmann Deposition Exhibit lliis the i ,, 15 four-page document entitled, Interview with Daryl Blizzard i:;
b 16 previously described.
j 17 (The document referred to
' T 'o l 18 was marked for identification 1
19 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit t
20 No. 11.)
f
.[ ,
21 MR. BERRY: Fofmann Deposition Exhibit 12 is a E ;
y ,
22 three-page interview of J.W. Buell, B-u-e-1-1, previously e A .
as described.
8 3 174 ///
- 2s ///
p, f h ,9 a
?, 'b
'k .
-. - m._ l' .
B30 366 lh i (The document referred to I 2 was marked for identification 3 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 4 No. 12.)
5 MR. BERRY: Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 13 is a !
6 two-page interview with Bahman Kanga previously described. l 7 (The document referred to 8 was marked for identification 9 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 10 No. 13.)
i; MR. BERRY: And Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 14 12 is a one-page interview record with Ed Kitler previously q 13 described.
~'
14 (The document referred to 15 was marked for identification a
16 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit
! i7 No. 14.)
o l 18 BY MR. BERRY:
5
- 19 Q Mr. Hofmann, at the last deposition session, I'd i
I 20 asked you what was the subject of your investigation, and f
e 8 21 you pointed out to me that it was -- you were not conducting u
g 22 an investigation into Mr. Parks, but rather, you were con-n E
23 ducting an investigation into Quiltec. Do you recall me 8
24 asking you that question and you giving me that answer?
25 A Generally, yes.
O
I l
B31 367 i
i O Okay. Now, I direct your attention to page 2.
2 Keep those. Directing your attention to page 2 of Hofmann 3 Deposition Exhibit 10, you state on August -- there's an 4 entry that says, " August 3rd, 1981, Quiltec, Inc. was founded 5 in the State of Virginia," and it states the date of incor-6 poration of August 3rd,1981, the officers, and it lists j 7 four individuals, L.P. King, G.H. -- it's blank, a last a name. !
9 A That's not true.
10 Q Oh, G.H. King? That's what, your ditto mark?
11 A That's a ditto mark.
12 O Oh , okay. G.H. King, a B.J. Sloan, III,.and
-w 13 J . M. Hode (ph.). Then there is listed also a J.M. Hode (ph.)
14 as the agent and a director the same as the officers.
15 Question: What was the source for your information 2
ef 16 for the statement for the information reported in Hofmann E
8 17 Deposition Exhibit 10 that I just directed your attention O
l 18 to?
5 19 A Corporate Commissioner's Office, State of Virginia, t
20 Q Did you contact the corporate commissioner's Office?
l e
[ 21 A I did. I telephoned 804/786-3733.
t g 22 O When did you do that? i 2
23 A On March 16th, 1983.
8 24 O That is -- okay, that's after your interview with 25 Mr. Parks and the interview the following day, March 15th, e i
- l l !
l l L__ _ J
B32 368
)
j
(_ '
i with Mr. Parks and Mr. Sanford (ph.), correct?
2 A It would appear so, yes.
3 Q And that was after you interviewed, for example, i
4 Mr. Kitler, Mr. Kanga, Mr. Buell, Mr. Blizzard, is that i 5 right?
6 A Well, I would assume that those dates are all 7 Prior to March 16th.
8 O Is there a reason why you didn't contact the State 9 of Virginia Corporate -- Corporation Commission prior to 10 March 16th, 1983?
11 A I was busy.
12 Everything has priorities. !
,- s 13 O The this was not a high priority item?
14 A I felt that I had other things to do and that 15 this was a matter of record and I could access the Corporate 2 .
16 Commissioner's records of the State of Virginia at a point
! j7 when it was convenient to me.
O l 18 0 Okay. Directing your attention to page 3 of i
19 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 10 --
E j 20 A Page 3.
21 0 -- now, there's a column on the far -- furthermost i
g 22 left-hand column on the document that says "Date," and then I there's a middle column that says " Action." Then the third 23 E.
2a column on the right-hand side says " Source." See that, 25 Mr. Hofmann?
O 1
I i a _ __
369 333 9 1 A Yes, sir.
2 0 What does -- what's the purpose of the Date Column?
3 What do the entries under "Date?"
4 0 What do the injuries under --
5 A Entries -- the entries --
6 Q Entries.
7 -- under the date column signify?
e A Well, I would assume -- well, it sounds so --
9 the question sounds so -- so obvious as to the answer. The 10 -- the notations under the date column have -- have -- reflect 11 dates.
12 O Dates of what? I mean, what's the significance
,- 13 of the dates that are reflected on --
14 MR. RICHARDSON: There it becomes a compound question ,
15 There are any number of entries, and --
j 16 MR. BERRY: It's not a compound question, 2 17 Mr. Richardson. I asked the Witness what do the entries O
$ 18 under -- what is the significance of the entries under the s
l 19 date column.
E p 20 MR. RICHARDSON: And he's indicated those are --
21 MR. BERRY: All right.
E i 22 MR. RICHARDSON: -- those are dates.
2 23 MR. BERRY: Withdraw the question.
8 i 24 BY MR. BERRY:
25 Q Mr. Richardson, what is the significance of the
.r~~)
_J
l B34 370 1 entry, May, 1982, on page 3 of Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 10?
2 A You asked Mr. Richardson a question.
3 Q Oh, sorry. Mr. Hofmann, same question.
4 A The -- the significance I guess of that date is 5 according to what I understood to be the -- understood to 6 be so from Mr. Thiesing that that particular action occurred 7 sometime during May of 1982.
8 Q And is that generally true of throughout this 9 document, Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 10, for example, in 10 August-September, 1982, Mr. King asked Parks to get some 11 resumes typed for him?
12 A That's my under- -- that is correct, as far as
,3 13 I know, as far as the information was given to me.
'~
14 0 In other words, ycu are compiling what you thought 15 was a chronology of the date certain events happened that a
{. 16 were relevant to your investigation?
8
= 17 A It is a sequence of events, as it is titled.
O
$ 18 Q And the source column indicates the source of 1
19 the information that's reflected under the action column.
E 20 A Yes, sir, to the best of my understanding, s
} gi And like -- to extend that thought, though --
E g 22 Q Mmm-hmm. (Affirmative response.)
23 A -- this is another example of our trying very 24 hard to be as objective as we can in the compilation of 25 the facts necessary to -- for management to make an equitable l
k l
4 371 B35
- 1 decision.
2 Q All right. On page 1 of the document, of Deposition 3 -Exhibit 10, there's a paragraph under the word " allegation."
4 It says, "The allegation was that a general public utility 5- (GPU) employee, Larry King, had a financial interest in 6 a job shop called Quiltec, Inc., which-was hiring GPU people 7 away from work on the Three Mile Island Project. Further, 8 Bechtel employees with Parks, a Senior Start-up Engineer 9 Grade 25, and Rose Riddle (ph.), a-Secretary Grade E, assisted 10 Larry. King with his.Quiltec operation."
i 11 That was the allegation that you investigated?
i 12 A That's the allegation that we -- that came to ,
I f3 13 us at the initial -- the initial stages of our investigation.
~
14 Q Okay, now, is that the same allegation that --
15 that you. investigated? ;
{e 16 A Essentially that's what we investigated.
! i-7 Q Did you interview Mr. King?
o l 18 A No, sir.
I E
"- 19 Q Do you think it would have been useful to interview E
20 Mr. King since he is the one accused of having a financial e
E 21 interest in a job shop?
E 22 MR. HICKEY: Excuse me. Did you say "do you think" E
23 or "did you think?" I didn't hear the first word of your 8
24 question. Did you say "Do you think it would be useful?"
25 or "Did you think it would be useful?"
O
i I
)
B36 372 !
1 MR. BERRY: Did you think'. ;
4 2 MR. RICHARDSON: The fundamental difficulty I 3 have with the question is that I think you've got to pose 4 it with regard to the timing of Mr. Hofmann's investigation.
5 MR. BERRY: Yes, that's what we're talking about.
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Well --
7 MR. BERRY: The question supposes that. Why would 8 he be --
9 MR. RICHARDSON: I -- I -- I --
to MR. BERRY: -- interviewing Mr. King if the investi-11 gation is not over?
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me. As far as the objection, y la are y~u asking him whether at the outset of the investigation I
4 14 you thought it might be useful to interview Mr. King, vis-a-vis 15 at the mid-point of the investigation or at the end of the e
fe 16 investigation?
! 17 BY MR. BERRY:
O l 18 Q In the course of your investigation, Mr. Hofmann, 5
19 did it occur to you at any time to interview Mr. King?
?
20 A Occur -- did it occur to me at any time? Well, f
t o 21 any time is quite -- it's a long time.
22 O In the course of your investigation.
e 23 A And I would think that possibly, possibly it might 8
24 have occurred to me.
25 0 You don't recall whether it did?
m_m__ ._
1 B37 373
- 1 A Not with any degree of certainty.
2 Q Okay.
3 A However, Mr. King is not an employee of Bechtel, 4 and my jurisdiction relative to Mr. King is nonexistent, 5 and with the help of the State of Virginia, Corporations 6 Commissioner's Office, I was able to establish that as of 7 record, Mr. King was involved with Quiltec.
8 Q Did you interview anybody -- strike that.
9 Were all the individuals that you interviewed 10 in the course of your investigation of this allegation Bechtel 11 employees?
12 A Generally would think so. Interviewed. Oh, my l
,e~.s 13 -- my interpretation of " interviewing" is fact-gathering.
)
14 Unless you can help me with my recollection, Mr. Berry, 15 I -- I --
I would have to say that I can't recall any j ter-
{ 16 view that I conducted relative to this investigation ti '
I ,
a 17 wasn't with a Bechtel employee. l o I y 18 Q Is that why you didn't interview Mr. Rekart or q 2
19 Mr. Lionarens or Mr. Herlihy?
4 20 A Yes. .
e Because they were not Bechtel employees?
j
! 21 Q e
- 22 A It is my practice to, since I'm a Bechtel employeu, 2
23 and my jurisdiction and charter relates to Bechtel employees, 24 not to interview people who are not Bechtel employees.
l 25 I used a double negative. ]
1 i
l i
.B38 374 F
1 0 So if you're conducting an investigation of an 2 allegation against a Bechtel employee, you're prohibited a from interviewing a non-Bechtel employee?
4 A Mr. Berry, I note you-used the word " prohibit'ed."
5 Now, I -- from your questions, I understood you to relate 6 to the Parks investigation, and I understood you to relate 7 to the various investigations -- or the references that 8 are -- are written in under the source column of the sequence 9 of events.
10 Now, have you got something else in-mind, Mr. Berry?
11 Q 'Let me clarify that misunderstanding. The question 12 I'm asking you is whether in the course of performing an f .s 13 investigation of an allegation against a Bechtel employee, b) 14 are you prohibited from interviewing a person'who is not 15 a Bechtel employee?
E i
?
16 A Am I prohibited in'the course of another investi-8
=- 17 -- special investigation from interviewing someone who is h 18 not a Bechtel employee? That's my understanding of your
.s I 19 question.
t i
l 20 0 In any investigation.
i 21 A And I would tell you that the word " prohibit" e
u
- 22 is not so. Nobody prohibits me from interviewing.
m
! 23 Q So you can if you want.
8 24 A A person who is a non-Bechtel employee. Coitainly, 25 in some instances, I've interviewed vendors, but not in O
L i
B39 375 )
1 this case.
2 Q How about clients? Can you interview clients 3 if you want?
4 A Mr. Berry, you used the word "can I "
s, 5 Q That's what I'm asking, can you do that?
s 9
\ 6 A By that, it sounds to me like you have -- you 7 think,that there is a restriction on me. 1 8 Q That's what I'm trying to find out, whether there j i l 9 is __
10 A And I'.p trying to tell you,.Mr. Berry --
11 Q There is no restriction?
12 A -- in that I -- I guess I'm -- over a period of
- s. 13 time my judgment has been such, at least in the eyes of
\
14 our senior management, that if I felt a need under a parti-15 cular set of circumstances, a specific environment, all 0
[ ! 16 -- some of those elements we discussed at some length this i
E i 8 17 morning, that I can, and if I wish to, I will.
l 0 l l 1B Q So you could have interviewed Mr. King if you
{ 5 19 wanted to?
t 4
$ 20 A But of course, a
21 Q But you didn't.
E
- 29 A No, n
r l 23 Q Okay.
8 24 A Because I didn't feel it was appropriate. It 25 wasn't necessary.
(.- l
%/
. _ _ _ _ _ __ - __ _ _ - _ . m._ __ m.____
B40 376 1 1
1 Q Those are two different terms, " appropriate" l 2 and "necessary." Now, which was it? It wasn't appropriate, 3 or it wasn't necessary? l 4 A No. All right. I will strike'the word " appropriate ,"
5 and I will say it wasn't necessary.-
6 Q And why do you say it wasn't necessary?
7 A Because .I[ satisfied thro' ugh the State of Virginia's 8 records.that he was a principal in Quiltec.
9 0 Yes, but you couldn't satisfy yourself from those 10 records that he, for example, didn't coerce Mr. Parks into.
11 having the resumes typed, could you?
12 (There was no response.)
fw 13 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me. You're posing -
t
~'
)
14 issue which he hasn't indicated whether that was on 1 ne 15 which was presented by his investigation.
ll 16 MR. BERRY: Let me ask that quest) =na 'll 5
8 17 rephrase the question.
'O l 18 BY MR. BERRY:
1 19 0 When you contacted the State of Virginia, Department
{
a
} 20 of Corporations, whichever agency that you contacted, you-l
- i t
21 didn't learn from them anything that would indicate to you.
22 that Mr. Parks did not coerce -- that Mr. King did not coerce 1 : \
l l 23 Mr. Parks into having his resumes typed, did you?
8 24 A The question is quite interesting to me. I wouldn't 25 think that the Corporate Commissioner's Office would record t
IB41 377 i in the State documentation matters of that sort.
2 O And you didn't find anything, did you?
3 A Well, of course not. However, I gave Mr. Parks a every opportunity to indicate during my discussion with 5 him as to whether he was imposed upon by'Mr. King to do 6 something he felt was improper, and Mr. Parks did not bring 7 that up at all, as.to coercion.
8 Q Did you askihim whether he'd been coerced by 9 Mr. King?
10 A I gave him every opportunity, ii Q Did you ask him, or do you recall asking him that?
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Those precise words or words r~ 13 to that effect? Or any question which would elicit information 5
' as to why Mr. Parks had the resum5s typed?
14 15 MR. BERRY: Your objection is noted.
2 16 BY MR. BERRY:
t 17 Q Can you answer the question, Mr. Hofmann?-
18 A I asked --
g a
19 MR. RICHARDSON: The question is vague and ambiguous.
E 20 THE WITNESS: I asked Mr. Parks why he had the f
F 8 21 resum5s -- why he had the resumes typed, and he did not i
u 22 say coercion.
g f 23 BY MR. BERRY:
8 24 Q Okay.
1 25 A He said " friendship" or whatever.
O l
L l
i
i I
l B42 378 9 1 Q All right. That's your answer? Did you complete .)
2 your answer? l 3 A Yes, sir, I've completed the answer of that question. j 4 Q Did Mr. Parks know that Quiltec was a job shop?
5 A Yes, sir.
6 Q He told you that?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 Q He volunteered it, or did you ask him?
o A I asked him. Well, I asked him what job shops 10 are there active on the East Coast, and it's interesting I
11 to me that he named upwards of eight or nine, and the very 12 last one that he mentioned was Quiltec.
,w 13 Q Did you ask him the basis for his knowledge that i
'~ #
14 Quiltec was a job shop?
15 A Basis of his knowledge that Quiltec was a job 5
g 1-6 shop. I didn't think I had to, Mr. Berry, because Mr. Parks,
! 17 as I understand it, came from a job shop environment before O
- y. 18 he came to Bechtel. He in 1981 -- is my -- my general recollec -
= ;
l 19 tion -- knew Mr. King and others, knew of their intention E
g 20 to form such an organization such as Quiltec --
E 2 21 Q Yes -- ,
t 9 22 MR. RICHARDSON: No, excuse me. Are you --
2 l 23 THE WITNESS: No, I'm not finished.
8 24 And worked with Mr. King on a day-to-day basis, t 25 bearing in mind that job shops were a'ctive within that part l
r O
4 i
j
B43-379 1 of the United States and that part of -- that part of --
i 2 in that time frame. There's no question in my mind that 3 Mr. Parks new Quiltec was a job shop.
4 BY MR. BERRY: l 5 Q Have you completed your answer?
6 A Yes, sir.
7 Q Did you ask Mr. Parks whether he'd seen the docu-8 mentation incorporating Quiltec? I 9 A No, sir.
10 Q Do you know whether he had?
11 A No, sir.
12 Q Did you interview Mr. Sloan?
fs 13 A Don't believe so.
)
14 Q Was that because it wasn't necessary?
15 A Mr. Sloan wasn't a Bechtel employee, c
! 16 Q And that's why you didn't interview him?
l 8 17 A No. I didn't feel it was necessary.
O l 1a Q That's what I asked you.
5 i 19 A Very good. I'm glad you called that my -- that t
$ 20 to my attention.
z
?
[ 21 Q Do you know how Mr. King got the resumes that )
E g 22 he asked Mr. Parks to have typed? !
n N
[ 23 A (Pause.) All the resume ls?
8 24 Q Any of them.
25 A Any of them.
7s QJ l __
_ _ i
1 B44 380 ;
9 1 Q Mmm-hmm. (Affirmative response.) !
2 A I can't -- I -- I understand that he was given 3 some of the resumes, but I don't know that for a fact.
4 0 You didn't ask him, did you?
5 A Pardon me?
6 Q Well, strike that, i'
7 Can you identify any of the resumes that Mr. King 8 was given?
9 A Mr Berry, I never saw the resumes, so I would
~
to have difficulty in identifying .them other than to tell you 11 what others have told me.
12 O What's the basis for your information that Mr. King
,s 13 was given some resumes? l
\
' ') 14 A Parks.
15 Q Was that reflected in your notes anywhere?
a
!e 16 A Oh, well, now, maybe I was a little hasty there, 8
= 17 Let's take a look.
O l 18 (Whereupon, the Witness consulted documents.)
E l 19 THE WITNESS: I would like to change that last E
} 20 answer if I might.
W
! 21 BY MR. BERRY:
E g 22 Q Okay.
m E
l 23 A Because I don't see in the Parks -- in the Parks 8
24 interview a reference to those -- to any of the resumes being 25 given.
O L- ,
B45 381 i Q So are you changing your answer that Parks in 2 the source of the information that --
3 A Yes, I would have to.
4 Q -- King was given resum5s? l 1
5- A- Quite right.
6 0 But you're not changing your answer that King 7 was given some resum5s?
l 8 A That's what I was led to believe.
1 9 Q What' led you to believe that, Mr. Hofmann? j 10 A I know that's your next question.
11 (Whereupon, the Witness consulted documents.) .
1 12 THE WITNESS:- Thought it"had to do with Austin
.f 3 13 being surprisedfthat his resumA was one of those in.the i i
\"#
14 jumble of resumes that'was -- that Riddle wasEasked to type.' !
15 But I'm fuzzy on that.
g 16 BY MR. BERRY:
h
= 17 Q Did you interview Mr. Austin?
O l 18 A No.
1 19 2 You interviewed Ms. Rose Riddle, though, right?
E i 20- A That's correct.
a l 21 Q And you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe ;.
1 g 22 Ms. Riddle indicated that she'd heard from Mr. Austin that 9 23 the reason King was no longer on site was because of his 5
24 involvement with Quiltec, and it prompted her to mention 25 that she remembered typing resum5s for Quiltec. One of ;
O
i B46 382
- 1 those belonged to Mr. Austin.
2 Does that refresh your recollection as to --
i 3 A Yes.
4 0 -- whether you were told that by Ms. Riddle?
5 A That's what the notes say here on page 4 and 5.
6 The interview notes, that is. That he was surprised, his 7 being used for Quiltec purposes, Austin according to Riddle a was surprised.
.9 Q When you heard that from Ms. Riddle, did you find to her account of Mr. Sloan -- Mr. Austin's reaction credible?
11 Well, strike that. That's kind of unclear.
12 When you heard Ms. Riddle say that Mr. Sloan --
i' ry 13 A Mr. Sloan?
i
~#
14 Q Mr. Austin expressed surprise that his resume was is among the group typed up on QuiltecLletterhead, did you
{ 16 -- did it occur to you'that Mr. Austin's reaction as described e
! 17 by'Ms. Riddle may have been feigned?
18 A No, because it would seem to me that at that point B
19 in time, while.the start-up engineering processess and E
j 20 typing, the nuclear construction -- I can -- I can expect i
I 21 or suspect or believe quite easily that resum5s of individuals E
22 could be in circulation one point in time to another point l
23 in time.
8 24 Q You mean like a person that's presently employed 25 by one company may submit a resumA to another company?
m u.s
)
D47 383
- 1 A Is there anything wrong, Mr. Berry, with an employee 2 of Bechtel wanting to further his profession, increase his 3 income so that he can put more food on the table for his I 4 family?
5 O That's a good question. Can you answer that?
6 A I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
7 Q For example, Bechtel employee -- there's nothing 8 wrong with a Bechtel employee submitting a resume to Quiltec, 9 for example, is there?
l 10 A I would think that if that is what he wished to f 11 do, that would not be wrong.
12 O And I take it --
13 A Because we have no requirement that an employee
)
14 at Bechtel need be tied to an move with'our organization 15 throughout his working life. We have every reason to want
{e 16 to have our employees develop themselves to their full poton- ,
i
! 17 tial, either inside our organization or'outside of our organi-0 l 18 zation, and if he can find another. job that will give him i 5
l l 19 the opportunity to progress in his profession, bless him. !
1 t
4 4
{ 20 We might not want to lose him, but that's our problem. That's e
l 21 not the employee's problem. ;
E l
g 22 O I take it would you say there'd be nothing wrong '
f 23 with a Bechtel employee submitting a resume to Quiltec, E
24 but I mean, that also means that it wouldn't be a violation 25 of Bechtel to Directive 2.1. Am I incorrect in my understanding?
O l
i
4 B48 1 A Well, I'm a little surprised at the question, 2 but considering right at this time, I -- unless you have 3 some thoughts you want to explore in specific detail, I 4 can't think that -- that submitting a -- a Bechtel employee 5 submitting a -- a resume to a job shop, Quiltec, Quewrax, 6 whatever they might be, would be necessarily a violation 7 of 2.1.
8 Q And as you testified, that the major -- the nuclear i 9 industry at that time period, 1982, a number of job shops to up and down the East Coast and things, that there's nothing 11 wrong with a person trying to better himself by submitting 12 -- seeking additional employment or better employment oppor-
~s 13 tunities. Let me ask you this --
~'] 14 MR. HICKEY: Excuse me. Was there a questian 15 asked?
. 16 THE WITNESS: Was that a restatement.
2 17 MR. HICKEY: He changed his mind.
18 MR. RICHARDSON: 'He's withdrawing the question.
5 19 THE WITNESS: Oh, okay, I'm sorry.
E y 20 MR. BERRY: It wasn't a question. I was just --
s
[ 21 THE WITNESS: Misunderstood. Excuse mc:.
E g
22 BY MR. BERRY:
e 23 Q There'd be nothing wrong with a Bechtel employee 8
24 assisting a co-worker in obtaining a better employment situatic'n ,
25 would there?
O
l l
I I l l
B49 385
- 1 MR. RICHARDSON: What do you mean by " assisting"?
l 2 MR. BERRY: Helping.
3 THE WITNESS: Mr. Berry, come on, now. You're I
4 smiling, Mr. Berry. Even you can't believe that, i
5 MR. BERRY: I've had a wonderful time with you 6 today, and --
7 THE WITNESS: I'm so pleased. I'm glad --
8' MR. BERRY: -- that's why -- f 9 THE WITNESS: -- that I was a point of enjoyment 10 for you.
11 MR. BERRY: -- that's why I'm smiling now. i 12 THE WITNESS: Oh , sure. (Laughter.)
-w 13 BY MR. BERRY:
I 14 Q Do you have an answer for that question?
15 A Well, Mr. Berry --
{* 16 MR. HICKEY: Well, for the record, I'm objecting ,
i O
E 17 that it is vague and ambiguous as to what you mean by that.
18 THE WITNESS: I think we --
I 1
19 MR. HICKEY: " Assist" or " help."
t
,1 20 THE WITNESS: Oh, Mr. Berry. (Laughter.)
$ 21 MR. BERRY: Your Counsel has stated an objection, i
g 22 and the record will reflect Counsel's objection.
=
l 23 THE WITNESS: Are you serious with that question, j
E 24 sir? j 3
a 25 MR. BERRY: Yes, I -- l TID ,
l 4
B50 386 1 i
1 THE WITNESS: All right. 1 l
2 MR. BERRY: -- have not withdrawn the question.
3 THE WITNESS: You have not withdrawn the question?
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 O NO.
6 A Then, Mr. Berry, let's talk about assisting.
7 Q Okay.
a A All right.
9 What do you mean by " assisting," Mr. Berry?
10 Q I can give you an example.
11 A No, I -- just what's your definition? i 12 0 Hel Ping.
, ~x 13 A Helping.
l 14 O And you understanding what helping means, don't 13 you?
e Well, more or less. I -- I've learned how to f' 16 A l
8 i-7 spell it. ;
i f 18 MR. HICKEY: Same objection.
I
- in BY MR. BERRY
?<
=
20 Q We have a dictionary right here.
s 8 21 A Okay, " assisting."
t 22 Q I'll give you -- see if we have a dictionary defini-a 23 tion. " Help" -- to make things easier or better for one. ,
5 l
24 A. Assist." That's what I mean by " help."
25 Mr. Hofmann, that definition comes from Webster's O
l l
}
D 51 387 i New World Dictionary of the American Language.
2 A Thank you for that definition. Is that all there !
i 3 is to the meaning of your -- you see, sometimes the verbaliza- '
I 4 tion is different than the intent that you're trying to .
5 convey, and I want to be sure that I understand the 6 meaning of your -- of your question.
7 0 I'm meaning in the dictionary sense, by helping, a making it easier for another person to obtain a better positior 9 and to increase his salary and' improve his job prospects.
10 MR. HICKEY: Mr. Berry, Mr. Richardson has objected l '
11 to your earlier question on the same lines on the grounds 12 that it was vague, and I don't need to repeat the objection
-3 13 even though the question is a little bit different this ;
i l I 14 time, but let me just ask whether it doesn't appear to you !
15 that there is some ambiguity that may be troubling the Witness, e l l { 16 The fashion in which you intend him to understand that the l 2 l 2 17 help occurs -- it's not really the dictionary definition 6
l 18 of " help" that is puzzling anyone at the table, but when s .
19 your question asked if there's anything wrong.with someone )
r f 20 helping a co-worker and you don't say the way in which e !
l 21 you mean that the help occurred, then we're all kind of 1
= 22 at sea. So if you'd like to clarify, maybe we could -- '
E L 23 MR. BERRY: Thank you, Mr. Hickey. I think your I E '
24 point is well-taken.
25 Let me give you an example of what I consider j l
lllI j
~
i l
B52 388 ll h i help, Mr. Hoffman.
2 BY MR. BERRY:
3 Q A co-worker and a Bechtel employee mentions to 4 him that "I'm interested in a job with more responsibility 5 that pays more money. Do you know of -- do you have any 6 Prospects in mind for me?"
l 7 The Bechtel worker says, "Try Quiltec. You should a send them a resume."
9 Is there anything wrong with that?
10 (Pause.)
11 A Given just what you've indicated, Mr. Berry, I 12 would think that would be rather common practice on any j
-m 13 job site at that time -- point in time, particular moment, !
~I 14 when technical people were in such demand. I would think 15 that that might happen in the daily course of business on
{ 16 the job site, and I would not think that would be too bad.
2 17 0 Is that the same -- is that different from saying O
l 18 that it would not be wrong?
s p? A I don't think it's different from saying that 20 would not be wrong.
}
E g 21 Q Okay, well, let me give you another example of i
22 a Bechtel employee helping a colleague or a co-worker improve E
23 his job position and job prospects. The Bechtel employee's 8
24 co-worker comes in one day.and says, "You know, I'm kind 25 of tired of working for a paycheck. I want to go into O
B53 g 389 e i business on my own. The only think I know about is the l 2 start-up and test activities. If I had three start-up and !
3 test engineers, I could - "
4 A Excuse me?
S Q "If I had -- if I had three start-up and test 1 6 engineers to work with me, I could double my salary and 7 provide for my kids' college education, take care of my 8 grandmother. Do you have any idea where I can find some 9 start-up and test engineers?" .
io The Bechtel employee says, "I know three of my co-i it workers who might be interested in taking a new job." l j
12 As to Bechtel, is that wrong, or has the Bechtel
,3 13 employee done anything wrong?
\ )
14 (There was no response.)
1 15 MR. RICHARDSON: I think we have some ambiguity 2
16 in the areas where I think the question has got to be substan-2 17 tially clarified. It's not clear to me, for example, are O
l is you presupposing that the Bechtel employee who wants to set 1
in up his own business --
r
$ 20 MR. BERRY: It's not the Bechtel employee that
=
P !
! 21 wants to set up his own business. It's the co-worker that E
22 is not necessarily a Bechtel employee, d .
23 THE WITNESS: Excuse me?
8 24 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, that -- who might have been -- !
l 25 MR. HICKEY: I guess we could go back to pencil I
'Y l
i
[
l B54 390
}-
l i and paper here. .
2 Let's take it from --
3 MR. BERRY: I interrupted Mr. Richardson when he 4 was making his points, and if he has any others, he can 5 state them at this time.
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, as I understood your question 7 you have a Bechtel employee,who decides that he can make a more money by setting up his own start-up engineering business.
9 He turns to a co-Bechtel employee and asks, "How might I 10 do that?" And when the co-employee provides him a suggestion, 11 which I think escapes me but I gather was, "You might contact 12 Quiltec," so it wasn't clear to me whether the Bechtel employe e o 7s 13 who initially raised the issue took the initiative in approaching i 1 14 employee number two, whether his plan was to leave Bechtel 15 after setting up the business, or whether he would remain i 16 with Bechtel, and I guess it's implied in competition with 2 17 Bechtel, whether the employees who would work for the new 0
l 18 business would come from Bechtel or somebody else.
1 19 MR. BERRY: All right, your objection is not ill-r 20 founded, Mr. Richardson, and let me see if I can cure it.
f r
l 21 I'll just withdraw the question and try to rephrase it.
r g
22 BY MR. BERRY:
23 Q Mr. Hofmann, I'm a start-up and test engineer for E
24 Bechtel. I have a co-worker. He'c also'a Bechtel employee, 25 ctart-up and test engineer, and he mentions -- comes to O
t
]
s -t j 391 !
BS5 1 me one day and tells me that when he's tired ofhworking for 2 Bechtel, that he wants to go into business for himself. His
/
3 reason that he tells me is that he believes that he can l 4 make more money and have more control over hiS -- his - -
5 his time. Hetellsmethatifhehadthreeotherbtart-up 6 engineers to go work with him in this new enterprise, tha+
Y 7 he could double his salary, and he asks me whether I know \
8 any other start-up engineers who might be interested in 9 pursuing new employment opportunities. And I mention to 10 him, "Yes, I know three of my Bechtel colleagues who'are 11 also start-up and' test engineers who might be intere, tad 1
12 in that," and I mention to him that -- to my friend that 7~s 13 I'll discuss it with these three engineers and see if they're
)
14 interested.
15 A Who's going -- sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt
{W 16 you.
17 Q Now, and if I do that, if I go and talk to these O
l 18 three colleagues of mine and ask them whether they're interested, ,
5 l 19 have I done anything wrong?
E
} 20 (There was no response.)
W
[ 21 MR. RICHARDSON: By clarification, I think this E
g 22 is a clarifying question: The three Bec'htel employees --
f 23 they have not initiated the inquiry with either you or the 8
24 fellow who wants to start up the business.
25 MR. BERRY: As to what? J r '
O l "
i
1t s
- a f,
- -
V %
i 1 ? , f, B56 -
s 392
,e
- 1 MR. RICHARDSON: As to . leaving Bechtel. Undir ' '
your scenario, after you -- ,
3 MR. BERRY: Oh, I stated -- -
v 4 MR. RICHARDSON: -- after you have the'discussicn }
4 5 with the would-be -- well, the fellow who wanted to start l r
6 his own business, what-you are proposing is to take th4 initia-7 tive and contact these three Bechtel employees. ,
8 MR. BERRY: To see if they're interested'in joining 9 the proposed business enterprise of my friend. That's why. g.
i i
10 I'm contacting them. I'm not contacting them to see, "Well, 11 are you interested in moving on?"
12 MR. HICKEY: Pardon me?
g3 13 MR. BERRY: I'm not contacting them for the purpose
~
14 of determining whether they're happy where they are and whether 15 they're interested in moving on. As the question stated, e
16 I mentioned to the co-worker that I knew three guys who I d
2 17 thought might be interested in taking another job. So now O
l 18 I just volunteered to go and talk to them to see if they're i
! 19 interested -- would be interested in taking this particular t
(
20 job.
{
e
[ 21 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, then the question is hopeless-r
- 22 ly vague because of what he may say --
2 23 13. BERR7: Okay.
5 ;
24 MR. k!CHADLSON: -- in the act of --
25 MR. BERRY: All right. That's --
@ 1
. - - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _- i
7-i J t U
Bh? 393 l
s s 1 MR. RICHARDSON: -- you ask about leaving, and r
2 then you say he's going to talk to them'about moving on.
\
/' 3 I --
1
" J. 4 MR. BERRY: Okay.
r 5 BY MR. BERRY:
1" 6 Q Can you answer the question now, Mr. Hofmann?
I 7 MR. RICHARDSON: For the reasons I have just stated, c I think the question is unduly vague and ambiguous.
9 MR. BERRY: Fine. Okay, the objection is noted.
1 10 BY MR. BERRY:
11 Q Can you answer the question? ;
i 12 A Not under the present circumstances.
's !3 O Why not?
)
14 A Because I believe that it's vague.
15 Q In what respect, Mr. Hofmann, is it vague?
a
{W 16 MR. RICHARDSON: Could we take a minute break?
17 I want to get a Coke, glass of water.
O l 18 MR. BERRY: Off the record.
5 19 (Brief recess.)
e R
20 /// (Please continue reading on page 394.)
?
E 2 21 ///
r 22 ///
E
- 23 ///
a 2s ///
25 ///
A_,-
I L___ __ J
l I s I
l i 1 l 1 394 l hp1 i MR. BERRY: There was a question pending before l 2 the witness before the ercess that just ended, a recess 3 of approximately eight minutes long.
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q Mr. Hofmann, answer the question that was 6 Pending.
7 A With your indulgence, Mr. Berry, I would appreciate it if you could cause the question, after these !
8 g some eight minutes have expired, to be restated to me.
10 MR. BERRY: Off the record.
33 (Brief discussion off the record.)
12 MR. BERRY: On the record.
13 BY MR. BERRY:
'~')
. Q The question put in my notes was as follows.
y 15 Y u have two Bechtel employees, A and B. B goes up to 16 A and says, in effect, he wants to start up his own start-37 up engineering business for the purpose of making more 18 money. B tells A that if he could get three start-up 39 engineers to join in this business, B could make more money.
And this is where I start getting confused.
20 As I get it, A mentions the names of three Bechtel start-up 21 1
22 engineers and then goes to contact them. I am confused 1 as to what A does when A cont.. cts the engineers.
23 g My objection --
MR. RICHARDSON: We have your objection on the 25 l
g]
'L /
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i
1 395 ll hhp 2 3 record. You are supposed to be restating the question.
Why don't we just have restating the question. Your
! 2 t
! 3 objection has already been noted and is reflected on the 4 record.
5 MR. BERRY: The objection is the question is 6 vague, ambiguous, for the reasons already stated and, in 7
addition, I think additional clarifying information must 8
be provided concerning the; relationship among these people; g employee A's prior knowledge concerning whatever intentions these three Bechtel's employee's had.
to MR. RICHARDSON: You have stated that objection.
3, i
It is on the record now.
12 BY MR. BERRY:
'~N 13 l )
\/ Q Mr. Hofmann is that the question you had in 34 15 mind when you stated that you could not answer because 16 it was vague?
A I, quite frankly, have trouble with A's and 37 18 B's and X's and Z's and you will have to excuse my 39 inexperience in this matter, but I can follow the scenario, 20 I believe, that you are outlining down to a point and then I have a difficulty and I hope that you will be patient 21 22 with me.
23 I guess the first Bechtel employee called "A" mentions the names of there start-up engineers, as I 24 i 25 remember what you were telling me, to employee B; is that
,. a
+ 1 L,'
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
l 396 ghp3 1 correct?
2 Q Is that how you understood the question?
3 A Well, I am asking really to be enlightened here, 4 and if that were so, then B would ask the employees about 5 something.
6 Q Ard you don't recall what it was that B was 7 going to ask the employees?
8 A Well,'I don't recall even that my thought is ;
g correct in your question. i 10 MR. RICHARDSON: I thought "A" is the one who 11 talked to the employees.
12 BY MR. BERRY:
Q Mr, Hofmann, over the recess, did you consult r"3 13
{ /
k/ 34 with your attorney?
15 A Yes, sir.
16 Q Let me withdraw that. I will just withdraw 17 the question and move on.
18 I take it, Mr. Hofmann, that -- this question gg may have been asked and answered and I don't recall and 20 if it has, you can tell me so and refresh my recollection 21 as to what the answer is, and if not, well, just answer 22 the question.
23 Did the investigation determine whether 24 Ms. Rittle had violated Bechtel directive 2-1?
25 A I investigated Ms. Rittle relative to V
/~}
bkI3G5 REPORTING COMPANY j
397 lllhshp4 3 violation of 2-1, yes.
2 Q And did you determine that Ms. Rittle had 3 violated 2-1? g I'
4 A Ms. Rittle did violate directive 2-1. However, as I indicated this morning, Ms. Rittle's circumstances 5
6 were considerably different relative to her degree of 7
sophistication, understanding, her knowledge of ratifica-8 tions, as to her act. I have no reason to believe that g
she was anything other than a pawn in the hands of Mr. Parks .
Q Is that the reasons that Hofmann deposition 10 Exhibit No. 6 does not indicate --
A Excuse me, does not indicate?
12 Q Let me finish the question -- does not indicate
(
t'~'s 13
)
' ' that directive 2-1 was violated by Ms. Rittle.
34 15 (Pause.)
MR. RICHARDSON: I think you have misstated 16 17 and mischaracterized the exhibit.
MR. BERRY: Okay, very well, let me withraw 18 f the question and ask this one.
39 BY MR. BERRY:
20 Q Mr. Hofmann, does Hofmann deposition Exhibit 21 22 No. 6 state that Ms. Rose Rittle violated Bechtel directive
~
23 A Are y u asking whether those precise words are 24 25 used?
n.
(v ,]
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
-___w
i i
l l
1 398 l
ll Jh p5 1 Q Yes, are those precise words used?
2 MR. HICKEY: I think the memo speaks for itself.
3 MR. BERRY: Okay, objection noted.
i 4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q Can you answer that question, Mr. Hofmann?
6 A I don't see any --
7 Q The question is, can you find it in the memo, 8
the words, " Rose Rittle violated Section 2-1?"
g A No.
10 Q Okay, not Mr. Richardson limited the question i
13 requiring necessary follow-up._ When you drafted this 12 memorandum, which is Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 6, f~s 13 Mr. Hofmann, to be submitted to Mr. Brush, did you intend
( )
k/ 14 for Mr. Brush to get the impression, after reading this 15 memorandum, that Bechtel Directive 2-1 was violated by .
16 Ms. Rittle?
17 A I think that he could -- he could draw that-Is conclusion from the language from this memorandum, yes.
19 Q Is that the impression that you wanted him to 20 draw?
21 A Of course.
22 Q Direct your attention to Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 10, the sequence of events, page 8. There i 23 24 is entry under the date March 9, 1983, Lee Hofmann internal auditing traveled to Gaithersburg to start investigation. j 25 l
(
i 7"
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
l l
l
.L____--_-- 1
399 ll Ilp6 3 The circumstances were reviewed with -- and then there 2
is a list of 12 names -- 11, excuse me.
3 A I am sorry, what page are you on, sir?
4 Q Page 8.
5 MR. HICKEY: I think Nester Wheeler is one 6 person, Mr. Berry, so it is ll.
7 MR. BERRY: Eleven names.
8 BY MR. BERRY:
9 Q Do you see that, Mr. Hofmann?
A I see-12 names there. Nester and Wheeler are 10 33 separata individuals so there are 12 names.
Q Mr. Hofmann, is the order in which the names 12
~s g appear on page 8 of Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 10 the
., )
\/ order in which you interviewed the individuals listed?
g 15 A Not necessarily. I would have to look to determine the dates and so forth, but that wasn't the intent 16 g of the listing of the names here.
18 Q Well, I am asking, is there anything that will 1
'{
19 refresh your recollection as to whether the order listed 20 in Page 8 of Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 10 is, in fact, 1
the same order in which you interviewed the individuals. j 21 i
A For instance, I don't see any interview tab ]
22 l
23 here for Buzz Brunner and he is number one. ]
a 0 Are y u sure y u interviewed Mr. Brunner?
24 25 A I Spoke with him.
jq C/
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
400 l ll hip 7 1 A As I indicated before in my testimony, it is 2 normal for me to go to the individual, when I first come 3 home to a job site or an area office and start conducting 4 investigation, to talk with the gentlemen who first made 5 me aware of the allegation and that would be Mr. Brunner.
6 Q Can you tell me what you and Mr. Brunner talked 7 about? j 8 A The general circumstances of the investigation.
i 9 Q To the extent that you recall, your best l 10 recollection, what was said in that meeting? 1 11 A I believe I spoke to him about the various-12 interviews in whatever depth he felt was important, the interviews that I conducted.
73 13
( I N/ 34 Q So you feel certain that you conducted the 15 interviews before you talked to Mr. Brunner?
16 MR. RICHARDSON: I objection to the question.
17 It presupposes there was only one meeting, and that is 18 not so, I don't believe.
ig MR. BERRY: Well, the witness can say that.
20 MR. HICKEY: Well, he said earlier that he talked to Mr. Brunner on the telephone. I don't know 21 22 whether you are including that or not.
MR. BERRY: Well, I know you are not suggesting 23
)
that he conducted all the other interviews of Mr. Sanford, j 24 1
25 Buell, Blizzard, Kanga, Loomis, Flann, Rittle, Thiesing j l
i
/]
,_r BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY 3 i
1
]
n 401 )
l ll p8 3 and Parks before he talked to Mr. Brunner on the telephone.
2 BY MR. BERRY:
3 Q So did you have more than one meeting with 4 Mr. Brunner?
5 A It is probable.
6 Q Do you have a present recollection as to.whether 7 you had more than one meeting with Mr. Brunner? I A ell, Brunner was away from the office during 8
g a portion of the investigation but I would at least have 10 one meeting with Mr. Brunner, but I don't konw, I may have 11 had others.
O Now what I am asking, do you recall, as we sit 12
/N 13 here today, having the meeting with Mr. Brunner or are 1 Y 'l y you just speculating that you had a meeting with Mr. Brunner !
15 because it is customary to interview the person who made 16 the allegation?
37 MR. RICHARD 3ON: I dispute your characterization 18 of that as speculation. Often we have knowledge of 39 something based upon our practice and habit.
20 MR. BERRY: Well, if you want to hang your hat n that and say that establishes personal knowledge, 21 22 Mr. Richardson, then you are welcome to it. i THE WITNESS: I cannot tell you -- I cannot 23 g see myself speaking with Buzz Brunner at a specific point in time, when something of that sort probably occurred 25 l
v D)
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
402 Jp9 h 1 four years ago.
2 BY MR. BERRY:
3 Q And of course there are no notes in your 4 investigatory file to indicate that such a meeting took 5 place with Mr. Brunner as well. j 6 A Well, it wouldn't necessarily be. !
7 Q That, in fact, there aren't.
8 A That is right.
9 MR. BERRY: Are you suggesting the witness 10 anwered in haste, Mr. Richardson?
11 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, page 8 seems --
12 (Pause.)
1
'N 13 MR. RICHARDSON: I take it you are excluding
~
)
- ' 14 page 8 of Exhibit No. 10.
15 MR. BERRY: Yes.
16 BY MR. BERRY:
17 Q Is that how you understood the question, 18 Mr. Hofmann?
gg A That is correct.
20 Q Okay. Now Mr. Hofmann, do you recall when you 21 interviewed Mr. Sanford?
22 A There is no interview tab here in this Parks 23 file. As a consequence, I didn't interview Mr. Sanford I
24 in the same context as I -- or spirit as I -- interviewed the other people that are in the Parks file. I reviewed, 25
,/ ) l k' ;
i BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
403 j
\
l ll hhp 10 3 as the sequence of events indicates -- I reviewed the matter ,
l 2 with Mr. Sanford.
1 Well, Mr. Hofmann, do you recall when you had j 3 Q 4 the last --
5 A Well, I w uld think if there --
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Pardon me, you are asking for 7
his recollection independent of his notes?
MR. BERRY: If he has one. !
8 9
THE WITNESS: I would think that I int ~rviewed Mr. Pcrks -- and using the term interview in the sense 10 that I understand it, and that is relative to the gathering 33 f f cts and so forth -- last. However, it may be that 12 7~s, 33 there is something in my notes which would indicate somethinc l )
A> different and in order to help you I would be most pleased 34 15 to review my notes.
16 BY MR. BERRY:
Q You do that. Just let me state this, so we 17 are clear on what we mean by interview. For example, 18 Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 11 is entitled, Interview 39 f Darrell Blizzard and there are four pages of notes. ;
20 l 21 APParently you and Mr. Blizzard met at some time and had some discussion -- talk -- and you took some notes on what I 22 he told you. Is that what you consider an interview?
23 g A That is what I would consider to be an interview.
25 Q Okay, now it is in that respect that I mean (A)
~,
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
1 l
404 ll hhp 11 1 interview when I ask you, do you recall who was the last f 2 person you interviewed and I indicated that if you reviewed 3 your notes it may help you determine whether -- who, in 4 fact, was the last person you interviewed.
5 A It looks like, from my notes,- that, in the contexr.
6 of the definition you just indicated, that I interviewed 7 Mr. Parks the last.
8 Q Now with Mr. Parks there was a witness present i g at your request during that interview, wasn't there?
10 A Excuse me?
ij Q There was a witness persent at your request j 12 during your interview with Mr. Parks; isn't that correct?
fs 13 A- Yes.
I ']
- j4 O It was Mr. Wheeler.
15 A That is coreret.
16 0 And did you ask Mr. Wheeler to sit in on that 17 interivew?
18 A No, I didn't, no ig Q Who did?
20 A Management did.
21 Q Who in management, if you know?
22 A I believe it was Mr. Sanford and -- I believe 23 it was Mr. Sanford. ;
i.
24 Q Do you know why Mr. Sanford suggested -- or 25 did he suggest or did he select Mr. Wheeler?
.G v
ERIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
l 405 llhjhp12 3 A Do I know why?
2 Q Well, first, did Mr. Sanford suggest that you 3 use Mr. Wheeler at the interview or did he direct you to 4 use Mr. Wheeler at the interview, as the witness.
5 A Mr. Sanford did not direct me. It was Mr. Wheeler .
6 He selected Mr. Wheeler because Mr. Wheeler is a mature 7
objective person who is known to -- a person -- an objective 8
person. He is an individual who is highly regarded by g the Gaithersburg management and a person who would be able to relate, with objectivity, the -- what happened, what 10 3, transpired during the interview with Mr. Parks.
Q And did you know Mr. Wheeler before March of ,
12
.l 1983?
/;/
i 13 (d
34 A Oh, my. No, I don't think I did.
15 Q So I take it that your previous answer when 16 y u related why Mr. Wheeler was selected by Mr. Sanford 37 is based on what Mr. Sanford told you.
18 A Well, that is not altogether so, Mr. Berry, 1
39 because I stipulate to the management certain qualities 1
that I really expect of the witness so as to have a. !
20 conistency in application of matters of this sort and so 21 22 that we can have the highest degree of objectivity that We can muster.
g Q So you told management what you wanted and they selected Mr. Wheeler, and you assume Mr. Wheeler fit the 25 f
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_-__________a
i 406 hp12 1 qualifications that you decribed when you made the request. i l
I think generally that is so. !
2 A 3 Q That is fine, thank you. Now who else, besides 4 Mr. Parks, did management -- or did you request management 5 to provide a witness while you interviewed them? i i
6 A Who else did I request a witness?
7 Q Let me strike that and just start again. {
8 You interviewed Mr. Buell. Did you have a g witness?
10 A No, sir, 11 Q When you interviewed Mr. Blizzard, did you have- }
1 12 a witenss?
/"s 13 A No, sir.
l }
\/ i4 Q When you interviewed Mr. Kanga, did you have 15 a witness?
16 A No.
17 Q When you interviewed Mr. Loomis, did you have 18 a witness?
A Now let us be clear ehre, Mr. Berry. You are 19 20 reading from a list that indicates that these circumstances i
were reviewed with the individuals you have set forth to 21 these points. Now review is different than interviewing. l 22 d Q I understand. Point well taken. You inter-23 1
viewed Mr. Buell, though, didn't you. j 24 25 A I did interview Mr. Buell.
,s I
_/
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
l l
l l
l l 407..
ghpl4 1 0 And did you have a witness present when you 2 interviewed Mr. Buell? ;
3 A No, sir.
4 Q You interviewed Mr. Blizzard, didn't you.
k 5
A That is correct.
6 Q Did you have a witness present when you inter-7 viewed Mr. Blizzard?
8 A No.
9 Q You interviewed Mr. Kanga, didn't'you?
A That is correct.
10 33 Q Did you have a witness present when you inter-12 viewed Mr. Kanga?
- A No.
13 14 Q You interviewed Ms. Rittle, didn't you?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Did you have a witness present when you inter-17 viewed Ms. Rittle?
18 A No.
Q You interviewed Mr. Thiesing, didn't you?
39 A Y'S' 20 21 Q Did you have a witness present while you inter-22 viewed Mr. Thiesing?
23
^ U' Q You interviewed Mr. Parks, didn't you? j 24 25 A Yes.
A LJ i s
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l 1
r 408 llh 1 Q And you had a witness present during the inter-2 View.
3 A I sure did.
4 Q Now did you conduct any other interviews other 5 than those I have just mentioned? r 6 A Not to my knowledge.
7 Q Now why was Mr. Parks the only person to have 8 a witness present during his interview?
g A Well, sir, Mr. Parks was a part of the allegation and while I interviewed the various people who you have I jo 13 just recounted, those were interviews that had to do with 12 the gathering of facts. Now Mr. Parks' interview was'also 13 a matter of gathering of facts from him. However, because r3
, i K/ 14 there was an allegation against Mr. Parks that both I and 15 the Gaithersburg Power Division wanted to afford Mr. Parks l 16 the greatest protection we could, we got and had a witness 17 there because we wanted to exercise that added degree of ,
i 18 Protection to Mr. Parks. ;
19 I would not want to incorporate any kind of --
20 let me see if I can say this properly -- any kind of 21 prejudice that I might bring to that discussion, having 22 Spoken with a number of people in a number of interview 23 sessions. It is for that reason and a number of other 24 reasons, I am sure, that we want to have an independent I
25 person there who has no bias, not axe to grind, to hear
,r3 L ,)
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY j i
y . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l
}
}
409 l
1pl 6 1 what went on in that session and could then relate in his 2
terms what facts came to surface in that interview.
3 Q It is also true, isn't it, Mr. Hoffman, that 4 having a witness there, a witness selected by management, l 5
also afforded you some protection, isn't it?
~
6 A I guess that is true, if I had anything to be 7 protected from.
Q And Mr. Parks didn't have any say in selecting 8
g Mr. Wheeler did he?
A No, Mr. Parks had a great say-so in the gathering 10 f a witness from his standpoint to attend that same l 11 session.
12 Q Do you recall how long your interview with
[ 13 U Mr Buell lasted?
34 15 A Mr* BU*ll? i 16 0 Yes.
A I assume that I can look at my notes.
37 18 Q Sure, and that is all I want to know, if you ig have any idea how long an interview lasted, and then I 20 am g ing to ask you the same question with respect to the 21 ther people you interviewed except Mr. Parks.
A It isn't marked on the sheet. It is three pages, j 22 g Maybe an hour or so.
MR. HICKEY: What did you say, Mr. Hofmann? j 24 25 Did you say I think or maybe -- f BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
i i
l 410 I
ll 1pl7 1 THE WITNESS: Maybe. I said, I think maybe 2 an hour or so. It is three pages.
3 BY MR. BERRY:
4 Q Do you have Mr. Blizzard's interview?
I 5 A Mr. Blizzard's interview is four pages and I J 6 would think it would be that long or more, about an hour l
)
7 or more.
8 Q Do you recall how long your interview with -j g Ms. Rittle lasted? I 10 A Yes, sir, it looks like that lasted, according 11 to the notes here, about an hour, and that is about four l
}
12 pages. J 13 Q How about Mr. Kanga?
f'}
14 A That is more than that, that is an hour-and-a- ;
15 half, isn't it. Rittle was an hour-and-a-half.
16 Q Do you have a recollection as to how long your 17 meeting with Mr. Kanga lasted?
18 A It is two pages. It probably was around a half ig an hour, something-like that.
20 Q How about Mr. Thiesing?
21 A Let's see, we started at 10:00 o' clock and ended 22 at 1:00, according to the records here.
23 Q Now was it your practice, Mr. Hofmann, that 24 when you were conducting the interviews and taking the 25 notes, that -- was it your practice to try to reflect the eg
. ./
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
a i
______m _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
411 ll hipl8 3 exact specific words used by the interviewees?
2 A In all cases -- I guess you are referring to j
3 all cases. )
i 4 0 I specifically said your practice.
5 A My practice is to have the notes relfect as 6 honestly as they can my understanding of what was said 7
during an interview.
8 Q Your interpretation.
g A Well, two people talking, there has got to be j 10 interpretation, doesn't there.
jj Q Yes, I wanted to clarify that.
A However, don't misunderstnad me, Mr. Berry, 12
~!
c'; I w uld not change, nor would I load, now would I cause 13
! l
emphasis to be, because of my choice of language, to 34 15 preclude a point. I try to be as honest as I can in the 16 recording of what went on in those interviews.
g Q If you were quoting a person, one of your 18 interviewees exactly, his specific words, was it your .
39 practice to set it off in quotations?
20 A I have used quotation marks, yes, from time i
to time but I can't say that I used them all the time. !
21 22 Q What I am trying to understand is --
A If y u have got a specific, let's talk about 23 it.
24 0 I want to understand your notes when I review 25 je'g ,
\_/
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY 3 k
l i l 1 412 llhghp19 1 your notes of your interviews and I would interpret them 2 to read that, except where there are comments or statements j 3 set off by quotation marks, that everything else is your ,
l' 4 interpretation of what you were told z.nd the question to 5 you is, am I incorrect in reading your interview. notes 6 that way.
7 A I take it what you mean by interpretation is 8 a set of words which are different from the words spoken a g by the interviewee.
10 A Yes, in other words, not the exact specific 11 Word 8-12 MR. RICHARDSON: So he is saying, is it true i
33 that everywhere in your noter, where quotation marks do 7-~
I's '! 14 not appear, are you interpreting and using your own words 15 which are different from the itnerviewees'. Is that always 1
16 the case.
17 THE WITNESS: If that is what the question is, 1
18 I have to answer no.
19 BY MR. BERRY:
20 0 Okay, can you direct my attention to any of j 21 the interviews that have been marked for identification 22 where there is recorded in the notes the exact specific 23 words used by the interivewees that are not set out by 1
24 quotation marks? q l
25 A Well, I mean, we could start at the beginning I
/^';
C/
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY a I l
l
- - - _ _ - ._ 1
413 p20 3 of these interviews and go right thorugh them, if you wish 2 to. That is fine with me.
3 Q I just want you to give me an example.
4 A Well, here is Mr. Thiesing.
5 0 Okay, Mr. Thiesing, has he been marked for 6 identification?
7 MR. RICHARDSON: I don't think so.
BY MR. BERRY:
8 9
O So why don't we find -- take one of Mr. Blizzard, Mr Buell, Mr. .Kanga, Mr. Kittler'.
10 A Well, let's take Mr. Blizzard.
33 12 Q Okay, that is deposition Exhibit'No. 11.
A It says in the interview, on the title, 13 34 interview, Darrell Blizzard, dated March 10, 1983, page 15 1, that Darrell Blizzard has been with Bechtel 12 years 16 in May and that is what he told me.
Q And Mr. Blizzard used the words, been with 37 18 Bechtel 12 years in May.
A Yes.
19 Q Okay.
20 A And those do not have quotation marks around 21 22 them.
Q Okay, do you recall anything else in the Blizzard 23 24 interview that represents Mr. Blizzard's exact specific w rds that aren't set off by quotation marks?
25 O
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
1 l
414 i
hp21 1 MR. RICHARDSON: That you can recall today as i 2 having been his exact words, yet there are no quotation 3 marks.
4 THE WITNESS: February 18, 1983 in the a.m. The 5 date, those dates were given to me by him I
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q He is said February 1983 in a.m.
8 A That is right.
9 Q Those were his exact words. Do you recall to whether Mr. Blizzard said, "got request from Thiesing about 11 Quiltechnology."
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Where was this?
(~; 13 MR. BERRY: Page 1, under injury 2.
l *
\- 14 THE WITNESS: Well, that is eith e absolutely 15 exact or it is so close to it as it to be spurious of any 16 other interpretation.
17 BY MR. BERRY:
18 0 But you can't say one way or the other whether ;
i 19 it is an exact quote or not.
20 A I don't-recall specifically that that is what 21 happened. However, I would suggest to you and direct 22 you to the first two words there in the paragraph, Buell r
23 says. Now I might have left out a he, the word "he," or ;
24 I might have left'out some other minuto construction within 25 the syntax and the import of that particular statement, f'T $
fv ) J BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY l
l 415 l hp22 3 but that is what he told me.
2 Q You know that this is Mr. Blizzard's interview.
, A That is right.
4 Q In your interview with Mr. Blizzard, Mr. Buell ,
l 5 says, he got requests from --
6 A Sure, Buell got the request and that is why 7 Blizzard told me.
Q Mr. Hofmann, earlier today, in response to that 8
g first hypothetical question that I propounded to you early !
10 in the morning when we first began, you told me that you were unable to answer the question because you needed 11 l additional information. You identified some types of 12
~
additional information that you would need.
,/ } 13 "l
34 I recall that you stated that you would need 15 to know the person's job title, his function, his responsibility, his pay grade and that type of thing. Those 16 were the type of things you would be interested in. Do 37 18 you recall telling me that, Mr. Hofmann? j gg MR. RICHARDSON: He also indicated that there 20 w uld be other --
i 21 MR. BERRY: I said, among this type of thing. ;
22 MR. RICHARDSON: I just want to make it clear l
that there were other items in that question that he was 23 24 in need of. ]
25 MR. BERRY: Right.
(< ) ,i BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
- _-_ _ __ _ .__1
i 416 l kp23 1 THE WITNESS: I was going to answer your question 2 that yes, I do understand, but it was not limited to the 3 items that you just specified. There are other --
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q I think the question took that into consideration.
6 Now let me ask you, is one of the other items that you 7 would consider the relationship of the alleger to the 8 alleged?
9 A You know, I always got confused between trustor 10 and trustee and allegor and allegee. Let's be sure I 11 understand.
12 Q Mr. Parks is the accused. People bringing charges
'T 13 or raising allegations against Mr. Parks would be the
alleger.
14 l 15 A Well, let' say that Mr. Parks was the accused. {
l 16 Q Well, Mr. Parks was the accused, in fact, wasn't 17 he?
A t
18 Looks like it.
19 Q Okay, so the question is, do you consider it ,
20 important to know something about the relationship between 21 the accused and his accusers? Do you understand that 22 question? Do you understand that question, Mr. Hofmann? j l
23 MR. RICHARDSON: I think a term clarification is needed in that question. I 24 25 ////
l f'N
.)
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
i 417 llhghp24 i BY MR. BERRY:
i 2 O I believe when you used that term earlier, 3 relationship, Mr. Hofmann, you indicated that in their 4 reporting relationship, whether one person is the subordinate 5
and the other person is the superior, docile and another 6 person dominating and the other person in the relationship.
y able to exercise undue influence and duress and coercion 8
n the other person, that was relationship. ;
9 Do you take that into account? !
A Yes, I think we make an effort to reflect 10 33 properly on the management's decision-making standpoint l 12 we should take that into account.
g 33 Q Do you take into account the motive or the l l 34 possible motive of the alleger in making the allegation 15 against the accused?
16 MR. RICHARDSON: What do you mean by alleger? ;
THE WITNESS: Yes, I don't know -- !
37 18 MR. RICHARDSON: What do you mean by alleger?
gg MR. BERRY: The person that made the allegation?
20 THE WITNESS: Who did?
BY MR. BERRY:
21 22 O No, I am talking as part of your practice. I am n t talking a specific case. l 23 A Y u are n t talking about Parks.
24 25 Q No, not yet anyway. ,
I
,/)
f s
l 1
BRIGG5 REPORTING COMPANY l
418 l hghp25 1 A Certainly we try to take into consideration l
2 the motivation, the cause, the reason why an allegation 3 has surfaced.
I 4 Q In fact, Mr. Hofmann, one of the things you 5 do is, even before you undertake the investigation, is 6 determine whether there is substance to it, don't you?
7 A On things, yes.
8 Q And in making that determination as to whether g there is substance to the allegation, you would consider to the motives of the person making the allegation, wouldn't 11 you?
12 A Well, at the time we start the investigation
(~g 13 we may not know that.
i i
\/ 14 0 I mean, if a person calls you up and makes the 15 allegation, is that what happens?
16 MR. RICHARDSON: We are still confused. By 17 alleger, are you talking about the person who reports the 18 allegation to internal audit and requests an investigation 19 be undertaken or are you referring to the initial source 20 of information which leads division management to request 21 an investigation?
22 MR. BERRY: We will just start at the beginning 23 again.
24 BY MR. BERRY:
25 Q Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 10, sequence jm N J s-BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
t 5,
419 l kp26 i of events, the document we have discussed earlier, there s
2 is the statement, allegation. The allegat on e- and then 3 it goes on, we read this into the record already.
4 Who was the source of this allegation, Mr. Hofmann?
5 MR. RICHARDSON: The source in. terms of the 6 person or persons from he first heard the allegation?
7 BY MR. BERRY:
8 0 Who was the source of this all gation who caused you to write this down in Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 10.
'I -
g 10 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection to the question.
ij Are you referring to the initial source vis-a-vis
,< r 12 Mr. Hofmann or the actual person who first raises information 4
/~~N 13 which ultimately leads to the investigation? ,
! }
\
34 THE WITNESS: I think that is a perfectly valid 15 thought. The person that contacts internal auditing is 16 not making the allegation. He is reporting, as any good l g employee within Bechtel should report, according to the f 18 provisions of 2 1 of a possible ethical irregularity. He 39 is not accusing anybody. I never accuse anybody. ,;
MR. RICHARDSON: We are going to get into a i l 20 21 semantical argument and it is just going to delay things, i 22 MR. BERRY: That is fine. We are just going to make sure the record is clear.
23 BY MR. BERRY:
24 25 0 With respect to the allegation that was leveled
/~~' ,
[ \
V' BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY b
_ _ - - -- a
l 420 1
1p27 1 against Mr. Parks, the accusation that was leveled against 2 Mr. Parks, who raised that allegation?
l 3 MR. RICHARDSON: You are asking who informed I
4 Mr. Hofmann of that allegation? i 5 MR. BERRY: No, I am asking who made that ;
I 6 allegmLion.
7 MR. RICHARDSON: The question is vague.
8 MR. BERRY: The objection is noted again.
9 BY MR. BERRY:
10 0 Who made the allegation against Mr. Parks?
gj A Let's see if we can try to understand this and 12 I am certainly trying very hard, because I think there
~ 's 13 might be a semantic concern here or there might be an
(' >/
14 attempt to cause me to say something that isn't proper.
15 0 Okay, well, let me see if I can alleviate that.
16 A I am sure you wouldn't want to trick me or any 17 of that sort of thing.
is O Well, your lawyer is there to protect you from any tricks that I may try and I have never tried any. I 19 20 think you are too smart to fall into any trick that I may !
21 set.
22 A You are most kind, sir.
23 Q The allegation states, Mr. Hofmann, in part 24 that Rick Parks, a senior start-up engineer, grade 25, 25 and Rose Rittle, a secretary, Grade E, assisted Larry King i
/ /~,I
( ) -
ss BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
, ._ _ b
421 l ap28 1 with his quotes at operation.
2 Who told you? Who was the source of that 3 accusation, if you know?
4 (Witness confers with counsel.) r-5 0 Are you referring to a document, Mr. Hofmann?
6 A Yes, sir.
Q Would you identify for the record what document j 7
8 you are referring to?
g MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I think he will if you 10 give him a chance to review it.
11 BY MR. BERRY:
12 O I will let you finish reviewing the document 7s 13 you are looking at. Would you identify for the record
)
~#
14 the document you are looking at?
15 MR. RICHARDSON: Yes, he it looking at a 16 memorandum from J.W. Thiecing to H.D. Brunner dated
)
17 March 2, 1983.
18 BY MR. BERRY:
ig Q If you don't know who leveled the accusation 20 against Mr. Parks, I will accept that, Mr. Hofmann.
21 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, Mr. Berry, tne problem 22 we have here is your general expression of levelng an 9
accusation hardly fits the facts of this case. I think i 23 24 what the witness is trying to do is go through his file 25 to try to ascertain the sequence and the initial sources n
l [
t
's /
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY q
7 422 l hghp29 1 of the information whiel attributed Mr. Parks to the typing 2 of the resumes.
3 MR. BERRY: Fine. The opening depositions we 4 obtained is clear, that Mr. Parks is accused of -- or .l 5 alleged, if you will -- to have attributed Mr. King and 6 his Quiltec operation. Now somebody alleged that he had 7 done that. Now I am asking Mr. Hofmann to identify that 8 person if he can. If he can't identify him, he can just l 9 say so.
10 THE WITNESS: Well, apparently Rose Rittle 11 indicated to her superior, Mr. Austin, that she had typed 12 certain resumes.
r m. 13 BY MR. BERRY:
>i 14 Q And did Ms. Rittle allege.that Mr. Parks had j 15 assisted Mr. King with his Quiltec operation?
16 MR. HICKEY: You mean, use those words?
17 MR. BERRY: Yes.
18 THE WITNESS: Well, let's see, I have to read !
i 19 and try to refresh my recollection from the notes that 20 I have taken relative to Ms. Rittle. I am sure you will 21 allow me to do that.
22 MR. BERRY: I certainly will, i
23 THE WITNESS: It looks like, from my notes, 24 that Roce Rittle indicated to me that during mid-February l
25 of'1983 she advised her supervisor, Mr. Austin, that she l c ) :
L1 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY i
L- . - - - - ------
i 423 1 l
ll Ighp30 i had typed resumes on Quiltec stationary for Rick Parks.
2 BY MR. BERRY:
3 Q All right, Mr. Hofmann. Also the allegation 4 is that --- the other part of the allegation is that a GPU !
5 employee, Larry King, had a financial interest in a job 6 shop called Quiltec Corporation which was hiring GPE people l 7 away from work on Three Mile Island project. What was 1 8
the source of that allegation?
9 A I believe the base source of that information l
10 was Mr. Thiesing.
3i Q Okay, now in interviewing Mr. Thiesing, did !
12 y u inquire as to the relationship between Mr. King and
'N 13 Mr. Thiesing -- the job, the work relationship beteeen
- )
Mr. King and Mr. Thiesing?
34 15 A We discussed that to a degree.
16 Q Do you have any recollection as to how much 17 time you spent discussion that with Mr Thiesing?
18 A The relationship between he and Mr. King, j l
Well, we started at 10:00 and we 19 business relationship?
20 ended at 1:00 and I don't know that we certainly -- it ;
i did come up but I can't tell you how many minutes. I simply 21 22 don't know.
Q Did Mr. Thiesing inform you that he and Mr. King 23 24 had veen involved in a disagreement over the handling of 25 the polar crane?
?8 l [ }
w/
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
! 424 l
I l l knp31 1 A No. Let's see here. My general understanding 2 or recollection is that these two gentlemen did have dis- !
3 agreements on technical matters from time to time and 4 whether it be one type of technical matter or another, i
5 they did have professional disagreements from time to time.
6 MR. BERRY: Off the record. I i
7 (Brief recess.)
8 MR. BERRY: On the record.
9 MR. RICHARDSON: I am not saying that we are .
)
n) willing to resume another day. We are prepared to go to 11 7:00 o' clock and I will review the situation at that time, 12 which will include the option of seeking a protective 7T 13 order.
l )
-l 14 MR. BERRY: That is fine, that is certainly 15 your option. I would just point out to you that I have 16 traveled out here to San Francisco, California from 17 Washington, D.C. at great expense to the United States i 18 Government to take a deposition that was noticed and agreed 19 to by the parties for two days and if I don't finish today 20 I fully expect to resume this deposition and complete it.
t 21 It is certainly your option to not make your 22 client available to a deposition and it is your option i 23 and your prerogative to seek a protective order and if 24 you choose that course, the staff will respond.
25 During the recess I have asked the court reporter i
/ \
I E
%/'
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY 1
1
425 ll 1p32 1 to mark as Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 15 a copy of 2 youl interview notes with Mr. Thiesing.
3 (The document referred to was l 1
4 marked Hofmann Deposition {
5 Exhibit No. 15 for ;
I 6 identification.)
7 BY MR. BERRY:
8 0 W uld you review that and confirm that those are your interview notes with Mr. Thiesing? They also 9
10 ppear to contain -- there are eight pages of the Thiesing 11 notes. These are not your notes of the interview you conducted with Mr. Thiesing?
12 Mk. RICHARDSON: No, you have multiple pages i f') 13 34 which are attached as part of this exhibit. Why don't 15 we separate the Thiesing notes.
16 MR. BERRY: All right.
17 MR. RICHARDSON: For the record Exhibit No. 15 18 consists of eight pages of handwriting. On the first page 39 it bears the name Thiesing on the blank labeled " subject."
20 BY MR. BERRY:
g Q Is that your handwriting on Hofmann deposition 22 Exhibit No. 15, Mr. Hofmann? )
I 23 (Witness examines document.)
A It certainly appears to be. l 24 )
25 Q Is there anything that leads you to believe
/
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY I
1
____ ___ ____ _ .- J
426 1
I ll hap 33 1 that is not your handwriting?
2 A Not that I have noticed. 1 3 Q Would you review the document, Mr. Hofmann? a 4 (Witness examines document.)
5 MR. RICHARDSON: I.think the witness is indicating
/
6 is that insofar as he can make out handwriting, this is ,
1 7 his. l 8 BY MR. BERRY:
9 Q Well, let me direct your attention to page 6 to of 8 of Hofmann deposition Exhibit No. 15.
11 A Six of eight.
12 O And in particular I would direct your attention n 13 to the second bullet.
)
-' pt A The second bullet. Would you kindly read it i
15 for me, please?
16 0 Well, I will try to read your handwriting.
17 A You are most kind.
18 Q Jim T and King had reputation of being critical 19 of each other and others -- there is a word that I can't 20 make out. Can you make out the next word?
21 A Others might perceive Jim T. was taking a low 22 blow at King.
23 Q What was that statement made in response to?
24 What were the circumstances leading Mr. King to make that 25 statement?
, f)
\
1 j w/
l l
GRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY ;
1 I
1
---__--___a
42i l hjhp34 1 A Well, it would appear that with the statements l
2 that -- with the notes -- that preceded those statements, 4 1
Page 5, that we were discussing the -- discussing why this b 3
4 matter was brought up.
5 0 Why what matter was brought up?
6 A The Quiltec matter, and the ramifications of l 7 the Quiltec matter.
8 Q Am I understanding correctly, Mr. Hofmann, that 9 Mr. Thiesing was trying to telling you that if he had quoted 99 Mr. King, that other people may have felt that he had 11 another motive against him, namely to get rid of Mr. King?
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Read that question back.
(~T 13 (Question is read back.)
( /
MR. BERRY: I will repeat the question. l 34 !
I 15 BY MR. BERRY:
Q Isn't what Mr. Thi2 sing was trying to tell you !
16 17 was of his concern that if he reported Mr. King -- his ;
18 knowledge about Mr. King's involvement with Quiltec --
39 that other people would think he had an ulterior motive 20 for doing so, namely, to get rid of Mr. King? !
21 A I don't believe that was true.
22 Q It is not true that that is what he was trying 23 to tell you?
A That is right. I believe that your question 24 25 is leading me into an area that -- you are attempting for ;
i
/
!./
1 BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY t ___ _
l 1
428 hp35 1 me to agree, but this is c.^+ so.
? Q And what was Mr. Thiesing trying to tell you?
3 A Mr. Thiesing was trying to tell me that since j 4 I didn't know the job site and didn't know the personalities 5 involved, Mr. Thiesing was trying to be objective and trying j 6 to tell me that yes, Mr. King and he did have professional 7 differences and that he did not want -- Mr. Thiesing did j i
8 not want to cause Mr. King any slight that would appear j 9 negative to Mr. King because, just basically, Thiesing 10 didn't believe it was morally correct.
11 Q That is what he told you.
12 A Yes.
r~s 13 Q Now did it ever occur to you, Mr. Hofmann, l
x' 14 that Mr. Thiesing may have had an ulterior motive for 15 conducting this -- for taking any actions that he took 16 to inquire into Mr. King's alleged involvement with Quiltec?
17 A Well, I guess all kinds of things are possible.
18 Q Did it occur to you that he had an ulterior 19 motive?
i 20 A I guess --
21 MR. RICHARDSON: Are you asking him whether 22 he suspected that --
1 23 MR. BERRY: I asked him, did it occur to you l l
24 that Thiesing had an ulterior motive. 1 1
25 MR. RICHARDSON: Yes, I know, but the occurred j l
l /~N !
Nj'
< BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
429 ll Jhp36 1 pretty loosely.
2 MR. BERRY: Did it dawn on you, as was a question 3 raised in your mind?
i 4 MR. RICHARDSON: Did it dawn on you, did an 5 alarm clock go off on your brain.
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q Did you suspect, did you have any reason to 8
believe -- did it cross your mind -- that Mr. Thiesing g might have an ulterior motive in engaging in the actions 10 that he did?
gj MR. RICHARDSON: It is a multiple compound f 12 question with inconsistent elements. I thirk the last 1
(~T 13 phrase you used was, did you suspect tha? Thiesing had 4,
)
' '# Is that the question?
34 an ulterior motive. f 15 MR. BERRY: You are not planning on taking that i
16 out of my time, these objections that you are raising that 17 aren't well founded, are you, Mr. Richardson?
l 18 BY MR. BERRY: l 39 Q The question was, did it occur to you, as you 1 20 were interviewing Mr. Thiesing, that Mr. Thiesing had an ,
i 21 ulterior motive for having the Bechtel Procurement ]
22 Department check up on Quiltec. j MR. RICHAPDSON: Same objection; the question 23 24 is v gue and ambiguous.
25 MR. BERRY: All right.
,p
- ( _- )
l l
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
430 ap37 1 BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q And the witness understands the question, don't 3 you, Mr. Hofmann?
l 4 A At the time Mr Thiesing requested the information j 5 from the procurement department, I don't believe I had 6 a -- that I felt that Mr. Thiesing was acting out of spite 7 or that there was an ulterior motive.
8 Q You didn't even know about that. You weren't 9 even around when he was requesting this information. Are 10 you saying when he told you that he was doing this, you !
11 didn't believe he was doing it out of spite?
12 A You mean, tell them he had done it?
13 Q Yes.
r]
14 A I believe that'is true but Mr. Thiesing, to 15 me, appeared to be a very straightforward different sort 16 of individual. I had no reason to doubt his honesty.
17 Certainly his advice to me that there was professional l 18 friction between he and King spoke well of Mr. Thiesing. ;
I 19 Q Did it occur to you to ask Mr. Thiesing if he 20 and Mr. Parks had a reputation of being critical of each 21 other?
22 A Quite frankly, I am very fuzzy on that specific.
23 I don't recall.
24 Q Rather a significar.t piece of information if 25 Mr. Thiesing had stated that to you, wouldn't it?
j3 O
l _ _ _
l BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
-- _____ _ _)
431 llhghp38 i MR. RICHARDSON: Significant in wuat way?
i 2 BY MR. BERRY: l l
3 0 You would have wrote it down and reflected it 4 in your notes, would you?
$ A If he had stated it, I think that I would have 6 written it down in my notes. However, as to the significance 7 of the truth of the matter, him making the allegation, I
8 I don't believe that that was all that significant.
i 9 Q It is not reflected in your notes, though, is '
10 it?
3, A I don't see it here, quite frankly. I haven't 12 1 ked in minute detail.
13 Q Are you aware that -- are you aware of anybody j4 at the Three Mile Island site that had an interest in seeing 15 Mr. Parks rem 6ved from his position as an employee of 16 Bechtel Corporation?
37 A I don't know how many people we had, or how 18 many people were on that job site, gg Q You are not aware of anybody? l l
20 A That had an interest in removing Mr. Parks from 1 21 the job site?
22 O Yes.
A If I was terminating him from the employment !
23 24 f Bechtel?
25 Q Transferring him, terminating him.
,x !
I BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
l 432 ap39 1 'A At what~ point in time are you speaking?
2 0 During the time you were involved in this 3 investigation. l 4 A Not to my recollection. l 5 0 Were you aware, during the course of your 6 investigation, that Mr. Parks had previously criticized 7 the handling of the polar crane?
g A I am sorry, Mr. Berry, the handling of the polar 9 crane, I don't mean to be obstructionist hera, but I don't jo know what that means. j 1 Q You don't know what the polar crane is?
12 A No, the word handling.
rw 13 Q Were you aware at any time during your inves- ;
I
, /.
k/ 14 tigation that Mr. Parks had criticized the method by which 15 Bechtel proposed to utilize the polar crane? j 16 MR. RICHARDSON: That misstates the record. ;
37 I know of no such criticism.
18 MR. BERRY: All right, that objection is noted.
i 19 BY MR. BERRY:
20 0 Were you aware, during your investigation, of 21 any criticism.
22 A About what?
23 0 By Mr. Parks with respect to the handling of 24 the polar crane by Bechtcl?
25 A You are alluding, Mr. Berry, to things technical p3 s
)
BRIGG5 REPORTING COMPANY
433 l ap40 1 and, quite frankly, I don't'think I would serve you well 2 if I answered in the area of the technical and I would l
3 like very mrah to answer your question but I am just not 4 able to.
5 0 All right, very good. You interviewed Mr. Parks, 6 didn't you?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 0 And during the course of your interview with 9
Mr. Parks didn't he inform you that he believed that this 10 investigation that you were conducting against him was jj motivated by -- strike that.
In the course of your interview with Mr. Parks, 12
" didn't he inform you that it was his belief that your
<T 13 l
'"' investigation against him was motivated by desire on the 34 15 Part of TMI management to retaliate against him for certain 16 criticisms he had leveled?
37 A You know, Mr. Berry, I don't have any such is recollection of his advice in that regard and perhaps if 39 I were to look at my notes I might refresh myself but --
Q Please do, Mr. Hofmann.
20 21 (Witness examines documents.)
22 A No, Mr. Berry, I don't see a notation in my records that that occurred and I believe that if it had, 23 24 I w uld have noted it.
25 MR. BERRY: Let's mark the next exhibit Hofmann
(/
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
_ ______ ____ D
1 1
434 l 1
Ap41 1 Exhibit No. 16.
J 2 (The document referred to .
3 was marked for identification i I
4 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit !
5 No. 16.)
6 BY MR. BERRY: l 7 Q Is this a copy of the notes of your interview i 8 with Mr. Parks?
9 (Witness examines documents.)
And let me direct your attention to page six n) i 11 of Hofmann Deposition Exhibit No. 16 and next to the date, {
i 12 2-8-83 is particularly where I want you to focus your
('x 13 attention.
l !
's' 14 It states -- it looks like -- Bechtel employee, ,
i I
u5 unnamed -- can you read the next word -- walking --
16 A Walking from a parking lot. [
37 Q From the parking lot asked what had Parks been 18 doing to piss off management on this site. There had been 19 the comments regarding transfer off job site. Bechtel 20 employee repeated threat today -- Swaznik -- I think that 21 should probably be Frostic and Larry King in watered down 22 tone and intent. ;
23 Now you asked Mr. Parks what, if anything, he i
24 had done to piss off management on the site?
25 A This language here, generally -- this comment
,O l __l l
< BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
435 I llhghp42 1 here as noted on page 6 had to do with what he apparently l I
2 perceived as a threat and I notice, now that we are looking 3 at it, that --
4 MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Berry, did your question <
5 suppose that this statement, piss off management, is some !
6 kind of things that he had done or that he is talking about 7 the guy who makes the threat?
8 BY MR. BERRY: L 0 0 I am sure somebody used that language during ;
10 that meeting, didn't they, Mr. Hofmann, or is that your 33 understanding of what you heard during the meeting?
A The language is not mine. I assure you, 12 Mr. Berry, that I don't use that kind of language.
/^) 13
\ I didn't think you did.
g Q 15 A And the language is that of Mr. Parks.
16 O Now what, if anything, did Mr. Parks say in 17 an elaboration upon this statement that is reflected in 18 your notes?
39 A Well, as you look down further on the page,
)
20 it speaks about something about polar crane load tests.
21 I assume that one has to do with the other.
22 0 Okay, did you inquire into that polar crane {
I 23 1 ad test?
A Mr. Berry, I welcome whatever intelligence you 24 25 give to me but, quite frankly, polar crane load test
/}
BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
436 Jhp43 1 procedure is well outside my sphere of understanding and 2 I have'no particular concern with that.
3 /// (Please continue reading on page 437.)
('
4 ///
5 ///
j 6 ///
7 8
9 10 11 l
12
< ~x, 13
/
L' - 14 i
i 15 i
16 1 1
17 18 19 20 21 i
22 23 24 25
,~
f BRIGGS REPORTING COMPANY
1 l l 437 !
1 BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q During that meeting did Mr. Parks also inform you l
3 that the previous February 27, that is 1983, that he had 4 attended a meeting at which were present in Mr. Kanga's 5 office to discuss some of his comments that he made 6 regarding the Polar crane load test, and that at that ;
7 meeting Mr. Thiesing questioned some of the comments that l
]
8 Mr. Parks had made?
1 g MR. RICHARDSON: Where are you looking? j j
10 MR. BERRY: I am asking him, does he recall that.
11 THE WITNESS: On February 27th?
12 MR. HICKEY: Is that the date you meant to say, l.
13 Mr. Berry? /
14 MR. RICHARDSON: I think it was February 23.
~
15 MR. HICKEY: You said "27," I don't think that's 2
3 16 right.
2 17 MR. BERRY: I said 22nd.
i f 18 THE WITNESS: Sorry, I misunderstood you. On !
19 February 22nd Mr. Parks did indicate that he attended a j O
5 ! l E 20 meeting with a number of people, some of whom you have f 21 mentioned.
9 22 BY MR. BERRY:
l 23 Q And that Mr. Thiesing had questioned some 24 comments that Mr. Parks had made during that meeting; did 25 Mr. Parks tell you that?
I
/O l v ;
I
- o
t i
438
._, m
,) 3 A It is probable.
/ 2 MR. HICKEY: Are you saying you remember, Mr.
3 Hofmann?
4 THE WITNESS: Not specifically, no. I don't 5
remember specifically.
6 Well, wait a minute, here we are. It says, 7
according to Parks there was a question as to the validity g of his comments.
g BY MR. BERRY:
10 Q Where are you looking at?
33 A On page 7.
12 Q Now, had Mr. Thiesing told you about that meeting?
13 A Gosh, let's see, oh my. Right off hand, I don't 34 see any recordation to that effect.
15 Q Do you know what Mr. Thiesing's position was at 5
16 the time that you interviewed him, Mr. Hofmann?
? l 37 A Well, according to what I have got in the notes {
l n 18 here relative to Mr. Thiesing, it looks like he told me that s
5 19 he was a project manager, whatever that means.
6 5 20 Q D you know whether he was the director of l E
g, 73 recovery operations?
22 A It does say here, it goes on, I guess it says, "Also, manager, recovery programs," bracket, "GPU," bracket.
23 24 Q Then do you know what the function of the 25 recovery program division was?
/3 f
1 439 lh 1 A No, sir.
['
./
2 Q Did you know that Mr. Parks was employed in the 3 site operations department?
4 A Site operations, let's see. It may be that it 5 would say something in his personnel file.
6 Q Well, I am asking you did you know that at the 7 time you interviewed him?
e A I don't recall.
l 9 Q Do you know what the function of the site l 10 operations department is at Three Mile Island, Unit 2?
I 11 A No, sir.
12 Q Do you know that site operations had to approve 13 certain procedures before they could be implemented by the 14 recovery operations? Did you know that?
a 15 A No, no, I didn't know that. Please understand, R
9 16 Mr. Berry, I am not technically oriented. I don't pretend 17 to be. And I wouldn't suggest to you that I was.
I f 18 Q I understand, Mr. Hofmann. These are a lot of !
J
< l
[5 19 points that must be made for the record.
i
! 20 Do you know that site operations, due to the i s
y 21 nature of their responsibilities, that they could delay the 9
activities of the recovery operations?
[ 22 23 MR. HICKEY: Just for the record, so that I don't 24 have to keep interrupting, I assume, Mr. Berry, that I don't 25 need to state that I don't necessarily agree with your i
,)
i 1
l l
_______- )
l l 440 1
4 lllh 1 characterization of what effect. You are really looking at I
I a
f 2 what Mr. Hofmann's knowledge is.
3 MR. BERRY: Yes, right.
4 BY MR. BERRY:
5 Q Did you know that?
6 A Say that again, now.
7 Q Were you aware that site operations had the e authority to delay the activities of the recovery operations ,
9 department?
jo A No, sir, I don't, I did not know.
11 MR. BERRY: I ask the court reporter to mark for 12 identification Hofmann Deposition Exhibits 17, 18, 19.
I 13 Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 17 is a memorandum ]
8 14 from J.W. Thiesing to B.K. Kanga, dated February 26, 1983, .
is subject Quiltec Incorporated. It says copies to H.D. l E
[* 16 Erunner. It appears to be a ten-page hand-written i i memorandum. i f 17 i
e is (The document referred to was marked for j B l g 19 identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit j 6 !
S 20 Number 17.) j 21 MR. BERRY: Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 18 is a p
22 three-page memorandum from J.W. Thiesing to H.D. Brunner, t
23 subject Quiltec, with copies to B.K. Kanga, dated March 2, 24 1983.
25 ///
(n) m
_...___________w
i j
441 lllh 1 (The document referred to was marked for 4 identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 2
3 Number 18.)
4 MR. BERRY: And Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 19 is 1
5 a March 4, 1983 letter from Larry G. Santee to Mr. Robert j 6 Arnold, president of GPU Nuclear Corporation, enclosing 7 copies of interviews conducted with Rose Rittle, or notes of 8 interview with Rose Rittle. One set of notes is from James 9 Troebliger, and the other set of notes is from Larry G.
h Santee.
to 11 (The document referred to was marked for 12 identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 13 Number 19.)
14 BY MR. BERRY:
l g 15 Q I will show you these documents, Mr. Hofmann, and l
i 9 16 ask you if you reviewed those documents in the course of j 2 17 your investigation of the Quiltec matter.
l 18 (Witness in conference with counsel.)
- f. 19 MR. RICHARDSON: To speed things along, the 5
! 20 witness has indicated that he has got all three of these 21 exhibits in his file, with the exception of the typewritten memorandum' f rom Troebliger addressed to, quote, " Memorandum f 22 23 for record," dated March 3, 1983.
24 I am sorry, you have the first page of this 25 memorandum?
O
442 llh 1 THE WITNESS: But I don't have the second page.
I k) 2 MR. RICHARDSON: He is missing page 2 of the 3 memorandum.
4 MR. BERRY: Those documents are made available to 5 you in the form they were made available to the staff.
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q The question to you, Mr. Hofmann, was during the g course of your investigation of the Quiltec matter, did you 9 review those documents?
10 A Yes.
ji Q Deposition Exhibits 17, 18, and 19?
37 A Yes.
13 Q Did you read the documents?
14 A All the documents, except the second page of that 15 one exhilit.
F lx 16 Q That was 19?
17 MR. RICHARDSON: No, that is the second page el p 18 the typewritten memoradum from " oebliger to, quote, j g 39 " Memorandum for record," quote, dated March 3, 1983.
ci b 20 MR. HICKEY: That is part of 19; isn't it? Isn't E
d 21 that the last part of Exhibit 19?
E
$ 22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
b 23 BY MR. BERRY:
24 Q Now, let me direct your attention to Hofmann 25 Deposition Exhibit 18, page,2, Mr. Hofmann, the last r
l l
l
443 llh 1 paragraph.
2 A Which one are we speaking of, sir? I don't. Oh, i
3 this one here? a l
4 This one. Page 2, the last paragraph on page 2, Q
5 the last two sentences, where it states that Rich, " Rich 6 Gallagher also said that he had discovered Rose Rittle, 7 Bechtel Engineering secretary, typing Quiltec resumes after s hours last summer." And "last summer" would be the summer ,
9 of 1983?
10 A 1982, 11 Q Summer in 1982. "She had said that Rick Parks, 12 Bechtel operations engineer in plant operations had asked 13 her to do the typing for him. I have not yet received this."
14 Do you know who Rich Gallagher is, Mr. Hofmann? '
l g 15 A No, sir, I don't know that he is a Bechtel l }
l 3 16 employee.
17 Q Did you interview Mr. Gallagher? ;
l l<
18 A No.
l5 19 Q When you reviewed this document, Deposition E 20 Exhibit 18, it indicates, at least it does in Mr. Thiesing, s i l
S 21 that Mr_ Ga31nghar was aware, at least in the summer of f 22 1982, that Ms. Rittle had been typing Quiltec resumes after 23 hours. Isn't that what it indicates?
24 A According to this --
25 MR. RICHARDSON: Wait, wait.
, ?
~s
_________________w
444 lh 1 MR. BERRY: The witness's answer is "according to 2 this?"
3 MR. HICKEY: Oh, I thought that was Mr.
4 Richardson's question. When you said, "according to this,"
5 I wasn't looking.
6 THE WITilESS: I did not complete the answer, I 7 was stopped by counsel.
g MR. RICHARDSON: Would you repeat the question, 9 or read it back, please?
n) MR. BERRY: I will just rephrase the question.
it BY MR. BERRY:
12 Q According to Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 18, 13 doesn't it indicate that Mr. Gallagher was aware since at 14 least the summer of 1982, that Rose Rittle had typed Quiltec 15 resumes? Doesn't it?
R
, os A I get the feeling here that the statement refers I
17 to a single episode of typing of Quiltec resumes, and not !
g 18 consistent over a period of time, summer of 1982 to the date
- I g 39 of this memorandum, which was 3/2/83. j o
b 20 Q There has only been one instance of resume typing .
I E
E 21 identified by you in your investigation; wasn't there?
5 A To my knowledge.
lT 22 23 MR. HICKEY: When you say "one instance," you 24 don't mean necessarily one day -- one episode.
25 MR. BERRY: Yes, one episode. l
\ ,/
J 1
L_
445 L
[ '
t BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q' Do you have any reason to believe that the resume 3 typing that Mr. Gallagher discovered was different from the 4 resume typing that Ms. Rittle confessed to you?
i 5 MR. HICKEY: I have to object to that.
6 MR. RICHARDSON: It is argumentative.
, 7 MR. BERRY: There is nothing argumentative about 8 it.
9 MR. HICKEY: I have a different objection. I -
l 10 don't think there is a foundation for it, and I think it is 11 not consistent with other testimony in the record from Mr.
12 Gallagher.
13 BY MR. BERRY:
14 Q Can you answer that question, Mr. Hofmann?
A Can you repeat it?
{ 15
$ 16 Q I will repeat it. When you read this memorandum 17 during the course of your investigation, and when you read the sentence that said, " Rich also said that he had l
18 discovered Rose Rittle typing Quiltec resumes after hours
) 19 5
E 20 last summer," what did you understand that sentence to mean?
f 21 MR. RICHARDSON: Do you mean beyond what it says?
-8 THE WITNESS: Just what it says, I guess, g 22 23 BY MR. BERRY:
24 Q Did you understand that the resume typing 25 referred to in that sentence was the resume typing that Ms.
)
\._ ,r'
446 lllh j Rittle subsequently confirmed to you that she had undertaken 2 at the request of Mr. Parks?
(0 s 3 A That was my general understanding, time frames 4 being more or less in line.
5 Q This Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 18 states that 6 " Rich also said that he had discovered," that is Mr.
7 Thiesing's memorandum reporting what Mr. Gallagher said to 8
him.
9 MR. HICKEY: Pardon me? I didn't understand what jo you just said, Mr. Berry. Because you said something about 11 the Thiesing memorandum.
12 MR. BERRY: Strike the question, then.
13 BY MR. BERRY:
14 Q If Mr. Gallagher was a Bechtel employee, based on 15 this sentence that appears in Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 18 E
16 that I just read, would you have interviewed him?
9 A If Mr. Gallagher was a Bechtel employee?
f 17 g 3, Q Yes. I E l g 39 A Given the circumstances that were known to me !
6 i
$ 20 during my investigation? !
E I 21 MR. HICKEY: Or do you mean at the end of his s
! 22 investigation?
23 MR. BERRY: When he discovered this, when he read 24 the memorandum.
25 MR. HICKEY: Did he testify to that?
4 i
i
447 llh 1 MR. BERRY: Yes, he testified to --
{ 2 MR.-RICHARDSON: I think you have got to pin it 3 down in terms of at what point in the investigation, what 4 information he had already received as of when the issue was 5 being evaluated, if it was evaluated.
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q Can you answer the question, Mr. Hofmann? Can 8 you answer that question?
9 A Now, let me see if I can restate the question.
10 Q I will restate the question. Before I do, let me 11 ask you the foundational question. Do you recall when you 12 read this memorandum?
13 A Sometime during the investigation.
14 Q Can you be more precise as to when?
- 15 A No, quite frankly I can't.
R N 16 Q But you do distinctly recall reading the ;
E !
2 17 memorandum?
l l 1R A Generally, yes.
19 Q Now, after you read the memorandum, did you find E
E 20 it necessary to interview Mr. Gallagher? j s I h 21 A No.
9 And you didn't interview Mr. Gallagher?
l 22 Q 23 A Pardon me?
24 Q You did not interview Mr. Gallagher?
25 A That is correct. I did not interview Mr.
\
v
448 3 Gallagher.
( 'k 2 Q Why didn't you interview Mr. Gallagher.
3 MR. RICHARDSON: He just said it was because it 4 was not necessary.
5 BY MR. BERRY:
6 Q Why was it not necessary to interview Mr.
7 Gallagher?
g A Because the question in my mind was did Rose 9 Rittle type Quiltec resumes last summer.
10 Q .At Mr. Parks' request, too, though; right?
33 A Well, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And I 12 went to Rose Rittle.
13 Q And you didn't go to Mr. Gallagher?
14 A I indicated that several times. No, I did not go 15 to Mr. Gallagher,.I went to the source. It seems reasonable k
16 enough to me.
o i
! 37 MR. BERRY: Others will decide what was !
2 g 18 reasonable.
9 3 39 THE WITNESS: Quite right.
o b 20 MR. RICHARDSON: Absolutely. Looking forward to E
21 it, too.
$ \
F
!E 22 BY MR. BERRY: (
23 Q I turn your attention to Deposition Exhibit 19.
I 24 A Now, which one is that?
25 Q It is the March 4, 1983 memorandum.
O 9
449 1 A Is this it here, 19 or 177 g 2 Q 19. Now, on the cover page of that memorandum it
') 3 states in this letter from Mr. Santee to Mr. Arnold in the 4 second paragraph that the tone of the interview of Ms.
5 Rittle was set by Mr. Kanga by indicating to Ms. Rittle that 6 she was not being investigated, and that we were soliciting 7 details from her with regard to L.P. King's possible e conflict of interest. Do you recall when you read this 9 memorandum during the course of this investigation?
10 A No, I don't recall specifically when I read the 31 memorandum. But it was given to me during my investigation 12 and I read it.
13 Q Do you recall who gave it to you? Do you have a 14 present recollection as to who gave it to you?
15 A No , I am afraid I don't recall who gave it to me.
g 9 16 Q The memorandum reflects that Mr. Kanga had 17 interviewed, or had at least spoken with Ms. Rittle, and l
l 18 when Ms. Rittle disclosed that she had performed some typing 19 of Quiltec resumes for Mr. Parks.
5 E 20 A Oh, is that what it says?
21 Q It says "The tone of the interview was set by Mr.
?
Kanga by indicating to Ms. Rittle that she was not being l 22 23 investigated," et cetera.
24 MR. RICHARDSON: So, what is the question?
25 ///
O
450 llh 1 BY MR. BERRY:
, 2 Q The question is are you aware that Mr. Kanga was 3 present during the interview of Ms. Rittle where she 4 disclosed that she had performed some resume typing at the s request of Mr. Parks.
6 MR. RIC11ARDSON: In light of your preceding 7 question, are you asking whether this document --
8 MR. BERRY: I am not asking --
9 MR. RICHARDSON: -- indicates that Mr. Kanga was to present during the interview?
1 11 MR. BERRY: I am not asking whether the document 1
12 reflects that. I am asking the witness was he aware of that. I 13 MR. RICHARDSON: When you say "that," again, that ,
14 refers to Mr. Kanga being at the interview, which is your is proposition. There is no evidence in the record indicating 5
" l 16 that. It presupposes a premise which has not been affirmed. '
l g 17 BY MR. BERRY:
,e 18 Q Are you aware that Mr. Kanga was present during E l 6 19 an interview of Ms. Rittle attended also by Mr. Troebliger j c' l 5 20 and Mr. Santee? .
E l E 21 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection. The question
$ 22 assumes a fact which the witness has not affirmed, namely )
23 that Mr. Kanga was or that anybody is aware Mr. Kanga was at 24 that interview.
2s ///
p'
'v L_.
451 lllh 1 BY MR. BERRY:
2 Q Can you answer the question, Mr. Hofmann?
[}
3 A I only know what this memorandum tells me.
4 Q So you are not aware?
5 A And I did not see Mr. Kanga in that interview. j 6 What do you want me to say?
7 Q When you say you did not see Mr. Kanga in that 8 interview, what interview are you referring to?
9 A Well, the one that you are referring to, specific 10 to the March 4, 1983 memorandum from Santee to Arnold.
11 MR. RICHARDSON: Hold on, I look at the 12 Troebliger memo which says " Larry Santee and I interviewed 13 Rose Rittle."
14 MR. BERRY: All that could mean is that Mr. Kanga x is didn't ast any questions.
a 9 16 BY MR. BERRY:
17 Q Let me direct your attention to page 4 of that i l
h 18 exhibit. It states, Mr. Kanga gave Rose overview of Larry l i
l5 19 King's situation and stressed we were trying the facts E 20 relative to her typing resumes and asking her cooperation.
d i 21 Rose is not being investigated."
9 Now, I ask you, were you aware, during the time l l 22 23 you conducted your investigation, that Mr. Kanga had 24 attended an interview at which Ms. Rose Rittle acknowledged 25 that she had typed some resumes for Quiltec at the request O .
" " --- - ---__--___m_-_- - -__ m _-__ __ _ _
452 llh 1 of Mr. Parks?
2 MR. RICHARDSON: Again, the question is now
. C#
3 argumentative. Because the conclusion you extract from that 4 statement doesn't logically follow.
5 BY MR. BERRY:
6 Q Can you answer the question now, Mr. Hofmann?
7 You are aware of it, or you are not.
8 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection as before, tr.e 9 question is argumentative and assumes a fact which nobody 10 has affirmed, let alone this witness.
11 THE WITNESS: I would remind you, Mr. Berry, that 12 these matters that you are currently referring to are well 13 outside, happened at a different time than my l
14 investigation. And I don't believe that on March 4, 1983, I i 15 was even in the Gaithersburg area, let alone during the time k
o 16 when these interviews apparently were conducted -- this 17 interview Was apparently Conducted.
p 18 BY MR. BERRY:
5 19 Q After you read this memorandum, did it ever occur 20 to you, Mr. Hofmann, to ask Mr. Kanga why he did not speak
$ 21 with Mr. Parks to find out the details regarding L.P. King's g 22 possible conflict of interest? Did you ever ask Mr. Kanga t
23 that?
24 A Relative to this memorandum? No.
25 Q No, not relative to the memorandum.
O
453 llh 1 A That is what I thought you said.
/ 2 Q I said after --
3 MR. RICHARDSON: Did you ever ask Mr. Kanga if 8 Mr. Kanga had talked to Mr. Parks concerning what Mr. Parks 5 did with regard to the resumea?
6 BY MR. BERRY:
7 Q No. My question was after you read this a memorandum --
9 A Yes.
10 Q -- after you read it, did it occur to you to ask 11 Mr. Kanga whether he, Mr. Kanga, had spoken with Mr. Parks 12 to inquire as to whether Mr. Parks had any knowledge of Mr.
13 King's involvement with Quiltec?
14 A I don't believe I ever asked that question of Mr.
g 15 Kanga.
@ 16 Q That is fine. Did you know what Mr. Kanga's 2 17 responsibilities were at Three Mile Island, Unit 27 l
. I
$ 18 A Oh, my, only in the generalest of terms.
5 0
19 Q Did you know he was director of TMI Unit 2?
5 E 20 A No, I don't know that. !
i i 21 Q Do you know that Mr. Kanga was the ranking 9
official on site with the TMI Unit 2?
f 22 23 A Ranking official on site?
24 MR. RICHARDSON: Do you mean highest official?
25 ///
/a
(..Y 1
l l
l l
I i
I 1
454 l l
1 BY MR. ILERRY :
2 Q The seni.or-most on site person.
[
3 A I would have to qualify it that I believe Mr. l 4 Kanga was the most senior Bechtel official on that site.
5 MR. BERRY: I want to have the court reporter 6 mark for identification Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 20, a 7 document entitled Description of Operations, Internal g Auditing. This is a document made available to the staff on 9 discovery by Bechtel, as a matter of fact, shortly before 10 the deposition of June 23rd, 1987.
33 (The document referred to was marked for 12 identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 13 Number 20.)
14 BY MR. BERRY:
15 Q I believe you have previously identified this a
document, Mr. Hofmann, as the charter of internal audits.
f* 16 l
17 Is this in fact the charter or the internal audit department?
m 18 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me, are these words, l B
g ig " Charter IA?"
O 20 MR. BERRY: That is my handwriting. The document j 21 contains some marginalia, " Charter IA," that is my
$ 22 handwriting.
5 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, this is generally thought 24 to be the charter of the internal auditing organization 25 within Bechtel.
,x u ,)
455 1 BY MR. BERRY:
What effect does a charter have?
ip 2 Q i
3 A What effect dos a charter have? Well, it tells 4 you what the organization is, what its functions will be.
5 MR. BERRY: I also will have marked for 6 identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 21, a copy of a 7 document entitled --
8 MR. RICHARDSON: It is a two-page typewritten 9 document. At the upper lefthand corner is Roman VI, l 10 General. In the upper righthand corner it says " Audit 11 number," colon, blank. Below that is says " File number,"
12 colon, T dash 201.
13 BERRY: Yes. This document was made available to 14 the staff in discovery by counsel for Bechtel on the morning 15 of the deposition in June 25. j g
2 16 MR. RICHARDSON: I presume the handwriting in the 17 upper righthand corner is yours?
f 18 MR. BERRY: YeE. l 19 (The document referred to was marked for
?
E 20 identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit ;
21 Number 21.)
22 BY MR. BERRY:
{
23 Q Can you explain for me, Mr. Hofmann, what this 24 document, Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 21, is?
25 A This document noted as T-201 by its paragraph B l
l /3 C/'
1
456 llh 1 under Roman numeral VI called " General," paragraph B
() 2 indicates that it is a check list on Bechtel Directive 2-1, 3 business ethics, conflict of interest and security of 4 information. Would you like me to tell you how it was used?
5 Q No.
6 A What was your question, then?
7 Q You answered my question. The next question to 8 you is this document applicable to special investigations?
9 A Yes. It is how we might surface a possible to violation of Directive 2-1.
ji Q Which would lead to conducting a special 12 investigation?
13 A Which might lead to a special investigation.
14 MR. BERRY: Lot me show you now a document, and I 15 would ask the court reporter to mark it for identification 16 as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 22. It is a memorandum dated
=
~
g 17 March 21, 1983 addressed to the file from Robert Arnold,
- r. 18 subject termination of employment of Larry King. And I i s !
g 19 direct your attention to the second page of Hofmann j i
20 deposition Exhibit 22.
l l
$ 21 (The document referred to was marked for s
identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit lt 22 23 Number 22.)
24 MR. HICKEY: How many pages does that exhibit 25 have, please?
73
~.)
457 1 MR. BERRY: Four, r; \ 2 MR. HICKEY: Thank you.
ji 3 BY MR. BERRY:
4 Q Have you ever seen this document that has been 5 marked as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 22 before, Mr. Hofmann?
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse us, we are reviewing this 7 file now.
8 MR. BERRY: There is a "cc" indicated on this 9 exhibit that indicates copies were made available to a Mr.
10 Myers, a Mr. Wilson, a Mr. Clark, and a Mr. Kanga. Mr.
11 Hofmann doesn't appear to be on the circuit list.
12 BY MR. BERRY:
13 Q I was to direct your attention, Mr. Hofmann, to 14 page 2 --
a 15 MR. HICKEY: Did you get an answer to you a
$ is question of whether he had seen it before?
17 MR. BERRY: Oh, no.
f 18 THE WITNESS: Not to my recollection.
19 BY MR. BERRY:
5 l E 20 Q I direct your attention to page 2 of the 21 document, about two thirds of the way down the first 9
Paragraph, starting with the words "There were two aspects."
f 22 23 A "There were two aspects." 1 24 Q Yes. It states, "There were two aspects of 25 addressing Mr. King's association with Quiltec that made it
( I 1
l
__ _-__________-_a
f l, 1458' lllh :
i necessary to proceed very deliberately. Firstly, as.
indicated in attachments 2 and.3'- "
[k' 2
' Attachments 2 and 3
.3 are not-part of'this. exhibit. .'I. represent I.have not seen 4 attachments 2 and'3.
5 MR. HICKEY: They have been produced in discovery.-
-6 MR. BERRY:- I don't doubt that, Mr. Hickey.
'7 BY MR. BERRY:
g Q "There was a history of several weeks'
.9 disagreement between Mr. King and other members of the 10 organization about-the conduct.of activities which had 9
33.
potential. safety. implications." Were you aware',Mr.-
12 Hofmann, during the course of your. interview, that;there was 13 a history of several weeks of frequent disagreement between 0 94 Mr. King'and other. members of the organization about1 the a
35 conduct of: activities which had potential safety :
-k implications? -Were you aware of that, Mr. Hofmann?
16 9
MR. RICHARDSON: 'I think-there are'several 37 is objections here. There is no foundation laid that the
.n.
g 15 19 witness had contemporaneous involvement with the letter.
20 MR. BERRY: Nobody is asking him about this E
,g 21 letter.
W 22 .MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me. He has indicated h.
r that he has no recollection of having seen it before. You 23 24 are reading a lengthy sentence which has a number of 25 abstract, broad. terms.. So.in effect you are asking him to O
l 459 1
h 1 speculate as to what was in the mind of the author who wrote
//j 2 those words. Given the generality of the proposition, and 3 the fact that Mr. Hofmann has indicated he was not around 4 TMI. He went to TMI from San Francisco. There is simply no 5 foundation. And the question is also vague and ambiguous.
6 MR. BERRY: Of course that is another absurd 7 objection.
8 BY MR. BERRY:
I 9 Q The question to you, Mr. Hofmann, is were you to aware during the course of your investigation that there was 3i a history of several weeks of frequently disagreement 12 between Mr. King and other members of his organization about 13 the conduct of activities which has potential safety 14 implications? You were, or you were not.
g 15 A As I indicated to you before, relative to your l
3 16 inquiry as to the Thiesing circumstances, I indicated to you l v l
! 17 that Mr. King and Thiesing apparently had professional l l 18 differences from time to time. Now, those might not have 19 been my exact words, but certainly I think that would be a 5
E 20 reasonable recollection.
h 21 Q All right, Mr. Hofmann.
9 22 MR. RICHARDSON: Excuse me.
{
23 MR. BERRY: The answer is not completed?
24 MR. RICHARDSON: He is looking through his notes, 25 which I think is implicitly required by your question.
O E - - - - - - --
460 1 MR. BERRY: I think he answered the question.
nk 2 BY MR. BERRY:
cf 3 Q Do you need to look through your notes to 4 continue your answer, Mr. Hofmann?
5 A I would like to have the opportunity to clarify, 1
6 if there is some point. Because I want to give you the 7 best information I can.
8 Q Please do. In the meantime, let's pass on.
9 Also in Deposition Exhibit 22, Mr. Arnold goes on 10 to state -- well, let's not leave anything out.
11 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, you are inquiring about 12 what knowledge he may have had at the time. And I have 13 reierred Mr. Hofmann to page 4 of the Thiesing memorandum 14 dated February 26, 1983. You may want to consider that, 15 counsel.
i 16 BY MR. BERRY:
9 !
17 Q Had you read that memorandum, the Thiesing n 18 memorandum, Exhibit 17?
E g 19 MR. RICHARDSON: He has already testified that he o
! 20 did.
E 21 BY MR. BERRY:
5 3 22 Q So you were aware of it.
5 23 A We are attempting to bring - "I do not wish to 24 imply or give the appearance of implying that either Bechtal 25 or GPU as corporate entities or as Larry's supervisors were O
l'
.461; h .1 attempting to bring pressure on Larry" -- I. guess that is
~
2 Larry King - "to alter his position or that of" -- somebody 3 called " Hank Gershal ---regarding the Polar crane."
4 So you were aware of conflicts?
Q
!' 5 .A Well,,I was aware that they had professional y 6 disagreements from time to time..
7 Q Now,-the question to you, Mr. Hofmann, when:you a becameLaware of that, did it occur.to you, then, that there-9 was an ulterior motive on the part of Mr. Thiesing, for i
to example, to have Mr. King removed from his position? Did ,
11 that'not occur to you?
12 MR.' RICHARDSON: Same difficulty as'your earlier i
1 13 question.. I think we ended up by defining " occur" as 14 " suspect." Is that the' question? . Based-on what Thiesing told him in this memo and elsewhere, did he suspect' that
.{ 15
.9- 16 Thiesing had an ulterior motive?-
- 2. 17 BY MR. BERRY:
! 18 Q 7es.
5, 19 A It seems to me I --
N E 20 Q I believe you answered that question.
21 A I answered that question before; right.
t 22 And the memo goes on to state that "Since there g Q 23 are questions as to the extent of knowledge within the TMI-2 24 organization about Mr. King's outside business activities, 25 and the propriety with which Dr..Thiesing dealt with
~
O
462 llhs 1 information provided to him on the issue, I agreed with Mr.
(b9gr 2 Sanford of Bechtel's Gaithersburg office for Bechtel to 3 proceed with an investigation of those issues using one of 4 their internal auditors."
5 Mr. Hofmann, do you know whether Bechtel 6 proceeded with an investigation of the issue relating to the 7 Propriety with which Dr. Thiesing dealt with the information l
8 Provided to him on the issue of Mr. King's involvement with 9 Quiltec?
10 A My heavens, I guess I --
11 MR. RICHARDSON: I will ask for a little 12 clarification here. Are you asking if in fact Mr. Hofmann's 13 investigation encompassed Mr. Thiesing's activities? In 14 other words, did the investigation --
15 MR. BERRY: Did any investigation by --
5 is MR. RICHARDSON: Did the investigation gather up facts pertaining to Dr. Thiesing, or are you asking whether I f 17
= 18 an initial purpose of objective at the outset of the B
g 39 investigation was to investigate and evaluate Dr. Thiesing's 6
s 20 conduct?
E 21 MR. BERRY: Of course I am not asking either of 5
those things. My question is simple. You make it lt 22 23 difficult, Mr. Richardson.
24 BY MR. BERRY:
25 Q My question to you, Mr. Hofmann, was do you know l
l sr\
(,/
3
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - \
7 ..
- 463 h l1 whether:Bechtel conducted an investigation into the Y try 2 Propriety'with which Dr. Thiesing dealt with information d 3 Provided to-him on the' issue relating to Mr. King's 4 involvement with Quiltec? Do you-know whether~an 5 investigation was conducted on that subject?
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Same objection.
7 .THE WITNESS: Well, as I, understand this a situation it_would appear that the special investigation 9 that was conducted relative tio the Quiltec . matter was to effected, and that Dr. Thiesing was.a person that I 31 interviewed.
12 MR. BERRY: The record will indicate that that 13 answer was responsive.
14 Let me show you now, Mr. Hofmann, an' exhibit. I- !
is ask the court reporter to mark this a Hofmann Deposition g.
N 16 Exhibit 23. It is an affidavit of H. Lee Hofmann made 37 available to the' staff in discovery.
l 18 (The document referred to was marked 6
19 for identification as Hofmann
.[
!- 20 Deposition Exhibit Number 23.)
21 MR. HICKEY: What is the date on it?
o
!a 22 MR. BERRY: 2 October, 1984. I can't represent I 23 that it was made available to staff in discovery. I may 24 well have been part of a report. l 25 MR. HICKEY: I just was curious.
O
)
J
464 3 MR. RICHARDSON: I believe.that may be of an '84 y 2 report.either by GPU or'Bechtel.
'3 BY MR.. BERRY:.
4 Q. Do you. recall executing that affidavit, Mr.
5 Hofmann?
6 MR. RICHARDSON: Just a minute. He is still l 7 taking a.look.
8 THE WITNESS:- Yes, sir. ;
& 9 BY MR. BERRY:
10 Q What was.the purpose for executing this y affidavit, if you recall?
12 A I did this --
~
13 MR. RICHARDSON: Well,-you~are not at liberty to 0 34 divulge any communications that you may have h'ad with.
15 Bechtel's attorneys. So if you can answer that' question k Otherwise, 16 separate from those discussions,.you may do.so.
g
'{ 37 the discussions are privileged.
p 18 MR. BERRY: The question didn't call for a
'O 19 disclosure of privileged information.
6 5 20 BY MR.' BERRY: ';
E 21 Q Why were you asked to execute this affidavit, Mr.
[
R Hofmann?
'l 22 23 MR. RICHARDSON: The problem is if an' attorney 24 did that, then we are implicating privileged communication.
t 25 THE WITNESS: I did receive this from an attorney.
O -
1
___-______-_-_____-____O
I i
465 llh 1 BY MR. BERRY:
})q 2 Q Received what? Did you not write the affidavit 3 yourself, Mr. Hofmann?
4 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, any communication with j 5 Bechtel's attorneys, whether it involves their transmitting l
6 a document to you or something of verbal communication, that 7 is privileged, and you are not at liberty to divulge it. l 8 THE WITNESS: Then I am not at liberty to speak 9 to this.
10 MR. BERRY: Just so the record is clear, the 11 question to the witness is whether the witness wrote this 12 document that has been marked as Hofmann Depo Exhibit 23.
I 13 Have you instructed the witness not to answer?
14 MR. RICHARDSON: No. You may ask him that 15 question.
E 3 16 BY MR. BERRY: l 17 Q Did you write this document, Mr. Hofmann?
h 18 MR. RICHARDSON: And I gather you are asking him l a
19 whether to some extent he composed the language in the l 5 .
E 20 document? l i
21 MR. BERRY: Yes. I am asking him did he prepare 9
this document.
l 22 23 MR. HICKEY: You don't mean prepare this in a 24 physical sense?
25 MR. BERRY: No.
/
1 I
I l
466 )
lllh i MR. RICHARDSON: Well, no, I am sorry, that is i
qf) 2 how I understood the question. If you include whether he is ]
/
l 3 the source of the information in the document -- i 4 MR. BERRY: Well, I would assume that. It is an )
l 5
affidavit, Mr. Richardson. An affidavit, by its nature, I I
6 contains information of which the affiant has personal j 7 knowledge. So if you are saying that the witness is not the )
8 source of information that he is sworn to the truth of, and 9 he has no personal knowledge, I think we need to clarify l
10 that on the record. That is not how I understood it.
11 MR. RICHARDSON: No. That is precisely why I 12 interpreted your question as referring to physical 13 authorship, the person who types the material on the 34 document.
15 MR. BERRY: I take that to mean writing. No, I I ;6 don't mean type it.
z
! p EY MR. BERRY:
2 g 18 Q Did you write it, and I presume somebody else s
5 19 typed it. Or, if you did type it, you can tell me that, 20 too. Are the words reflected in that document words that E
21 y u authored, Mr. Hofmann?
E F
A Yes, I believe so.
l 22 l
23 Q Thank you. Now, in paragraph 1 of Hofmann 24 Deposition Exhibit 23, the last sentence states, "I attended 25 a meeting on March 14, 1983 between Richard Parks and myself
,x v
7-l l 4
)
467 l l
lllh 1 at which Mr. Richard Wheeler and Mr. Mark Kobi were also 2k >
2 Present. At all times I conducted the meeting in a 3 profesolonal manner." Do you see that? l 1
4 A Yes, sir. i 5 Q What do you mean when you say "I conducted the l 6 meeting in a", quote, " professional manner?"
7 A I have the benefit of my interviews with people 8 other than Mr. Parks so as to understand the facts as best I 9 could determine these facts being significant. I determined 10 from the State of Virginia the data that was available from 11 the Corporate Commissioner's office relative to Quiltec.
12 MR. BERRY: Mr. Richardson, I am going to have to 13 interrupt your client. I asked nim what he meant when he l 14 stated he conducted the meeting in a professional manner.
g 15 And now he is speaking to interviews conducted previous to 9 16 or subsequent to the meeting that is the subject of l
! i 2 17 paragraph 1. He is referring to contacts with the Virginia
{
l 18 Corporation Commission that occurred subsequent to the 19 meeting that is referred to in paragraph 1. What I am 5
E 20 interested in focusing on is what is the basis for the f9 21 statement that the meeting on March 14 with Mr. Parks was conducted in a professional manner.
l 22 23 MR. RICHARDSON: Well, I gather you are 24 suggesting that the witness is being non responsive.
25 MR. BERRY: That is exactly what I am suggesting.
(3 V
468 l 1 MR. RICHARDSON: The fallacy of your assertion, 2 Mr. Berry, is that you are assuming that the manner in which 7]7 3 one professionally conducts an interview can be determined 4 in isolation, that it is based solely on a particular 5 interview, rather than the planning and the sequence in 6 which an interview is planned with regard to an overall 7 investigation. I believe, before you interrupted the a witness, he was trying to explain to you that the interview 9 with Mr. Parks should not be viewed in isolation, but as io part of an overall professional inquiry.
11 MR. BERRY: And I am only speaking of what Mr.
12 Hofmann swore to in his affidavit. It doesn't say that "at 13 all times I conducted the investigation in a professional 14 manner." It says "the meeting," and it is the specific 15 meeting that is referred to. Now, with my comment on the k '
o 16 record --
z 17 MR. RICHARDSON: By that you are foisting your .
g 18 interpretation over on the witness. I believe you have 3 19 asked him what he meant by that. And with all due respect, 6 \
5 20 he is struggling to do that. !
l E
$ 21 BY MR. BERRY:
F Continue, Mr. Hofmann.
lt 22 Q 23 A The purpose of my previous statement was to give 24 you an indication that I was trying in a professional manner 25 to understand what the significant facts were before I spoke l
l
469 llh I with Mr. Parks, and so that I could utilize those facts in 2 as knowledgeable a fashion as I could. I also conducted n7 3 this meeting in a professional manner in that it was 4 structured as to evolution of topics and issues. It was 5 professionally done in that I did not lose my temper with 6 Mr. Parks, that I on several occasions indicated to Mr.
7 Parks my concern for him. I told him I didn't mean to hurt a him. I told him that he didn't have to stay in the 9 meeting. I conducted this meeting in a professional manner to in that I caused Mr. Parks to have a vehicle, an avenue, by 11 which he could express his concerns separate and apart from 12 the Quiltec matter to people in authority much higher than 13 myself.
I's >\
- 14 Q Have you completed your answer?
- 15 A I conducted this meeting in a professional manner il E l 9 16 because I treated Mr. Parks with respect and dignity. And I h
8 17 think that is generally why I would say and did say that I l l< 18 conducted this meeting in a professional manner. I I
i And Mr. Wheeler confirmed that you conducted the
[s 19 Q E 20 meeting in a professional manner as well; didn't he?
d y 21 A Let's take a look at the record and see.
9 i 22 Q Why don't you review Mr. Wheeler's notes that he l
{
23 took of your interview with Mr. Parks. ;
l 24 A I am reading from the notes of Mr. Wheeler. On 25 page 10, the last paragraph, indicates "Mr. Hofmann I
('-
l 1
470 lllh 1 conducted a professional interview," period, et cetera.
Mr. Wheeler was Mr. Parks' administrative
- 7) 'I 2 Q 3 supervisor; wasn't he?
4 A At least one step removed.
5 Q Well, do you know who the person was in between 6 Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Parks?
7 A I understand it was Mr. Kitler.
I e Q I believe Mr. Kitler may have been his functional l l
9 supervisor. But I am not specific about that. But in any j l
10 event, Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Parks there was a reporting l
11 relationship between Mr. Parks and Mr. Wheeler.
12 MR. RICHARDSON: Reporting in what sense? l 13 MR. BERRY: That Mr. Wheeler was Mr. Parks' 14 administrative supervisor.
15 BY MR. BERRY: ,
k o 16 Q At least for administrative matters Mr. Parks z
reported to Mr. Wheeler. Don't you understand that to be f 17 o 18 the case, Mr. Hofmann? !
s 3 ig A The terms that you use, sir, are to me a little i I
o 5 20 foreign. I am not sure I understand what you mean. I l E !
$ 21 understood that Mr. Parks was responsible to Mr. Kitler, and l 5
$ 22 that Mr. Kitler was responsible to Mr. Wheeler. Now, I may 5
23 be wrong. But I believe that is right.
24 Q We can agree that there is a line that can be 25 drawn between Mr. Parks and Mr. Wheeler. It may not be I) s-
471 llh I direct, there is possibly Mr. Kitler in between. But it
-/[
gi 2 would go Mr. Parks, Mr. Kitler, Mr. Wheeler?
3 A That is my understanding.
4 MR. BERRY: Now I want to have marked for 5 identification as Hofmann Deposition Exhibit 24 an in camera 6 exhibit. I would ask that the court reporter segregate out 7 the questions I now propound to the Witness as separate 8 transcript apart from the rest of the transcript.
9 This relates to a document made available to the 10 staff pursuant to a protective order approved by the 11 Administrative Law Judge in this proceeding. And it has 12 been agreed to by the parties and ordered by the ALJ that
,. 13 disclosure of this document shall be limited. This is the kJ 14 procedural device we are going to use to accord Bechtel the l
- 15 protection they requested. i E l
? 10 (The document referred to was marked 17 for identification as Hofmann e i g 18 Deposition Exhibit 24 In Camera.) l 19 MR. RICHARDSON: Before we go further, it is now l 5
E 20 past 7:00 o' clock. We have been going since 9:00 o' clock.
21 How much longer do you have, Mr. Berry?
8 g 22 MR. BERRY: It depends on the answers, but I 23 fully expect that we can be done in the next twenty 24 minutes. Off the record.
i l 25 (Whereupon, at 7:05 p.m., the deposition was J
f temporarily adjourned, to resume in in camera session.)
(
)
L __ ._ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1 0 2 3
O 4 Pages 472 through 488 are bound separately as an 5 IN CAMERA SESSION 6
7 8
l.
9 10 q 11 12 O >>
1 1
14 15 16 17 18 19 l
I 20 21
(
23 0 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation
<m, n.. u. ,
l 489 llh 1 IN CAMERA SESSION
- [r 2 (Whereupon, at 7
- 30 p.m., the deposition was 3 resumed.) !
4 MR. BERRY: I have a handful of questions to ask 5 you, Mr. Hofmann. Then you should be on your way.
- 6 MR. RICHARDSON: Is it clear to the court 7 reporter that the in camera portion will be sealed, as well 8 as this exhibit?
9 THE REPORTER: Yes. ;
10 MR. BERRY: Although, I must say I question the ii need for sealing this exhibit, in light of the witness's 12 testimony.
13 MR. HICKEY: Well, there is an order from the 14 judge to that effect.
15 MR. BERRY: Yes, k
o 16 BY MR. BERRY:
z 17 Q Mr. Hofmann, does somebody within Bechtel have a
{
j 18 responsibility to insure that newly hired employees are a
s 19 familiar with the provisions of Bechtel Directive 2-17 O
E 20 A It is my understanding that the personnel people, E
21 ouring the hiring process, have a responsibility to make a v
newly hired individual acquainted with Directive 2-1 to the lr 22 l 23 extent that he has read it and understands it.
24 Q In fact, Bechtel Directive 2-1 indicates that an 25 employee is supposed to sign an acknowledgement attesting to Im
~ ,
. , . ,, a . v. .. ,
1l 490
- 1. the fact that he has been furnished a copy of that directive 2 2-1, and he has read.it, and he understands the policies in J ?)[
3 terms of the directive, and that.he agrees to comply with 4 it. Is.that your understanding?
5 A- That.is my understanding; yes, sir..
.6 Q Did your investigation disclose whether Mr. Parks
-7 had in fact executed an acknowledgement of the types a
' contained on' attachment b of'Bechtel Directive 2-1, which is 9 Hofmann Deposition 57 to A I was unable to locate an acknowledgement of ii Directive 2-1 which was signed by Mr. Parks. That, I might 12 state, was a mitigating circumstance in the management i3 decision, no doubt.
b 14 Q Was any action taken against the person 15 responsible for failing to indoctrinate Mr. Parks into the
.R
.9 .16 requirements of Bechtel Directive 2-17 17 A Not to my knowledge.
18 Q Was any effort undertaken to determine who was 19 responsible for that oversight?
g
$~ 20 A I don't know that there was, because it appeared 21 to be an administrative holiday, a flap, as things will g 22 happen in the day-to-day business world.
23 MR. BERRY: That is all the questions I have for-24 you, Mr. Hofmann.
-25 THE WITNESS: Excuse me, sir?
O
491 lllh 1 MR. BERRY: You are through. I have no further gj
)
.I 2 questions, unless there is redirect.
3 MR. RICHARDSON: Let me briefly go through my 4 notes.
5 MR. BERRY: Off the record.
6 (Discussion off the record.)
7 MR. BERRY: On the record. We are in the non in a camera portion; is that correct, Mr. Richardson?
9 MR. RICHARDSON: Yes. We are not in camera.
10 CROSS EXAMINATION 11 BY MR. RICHARDSON:
12 Q Mr. Hofmann, this afternoon I believe you were 13 answering questions concerning whether Mr. Bechtel, Junior 14 should be informed of disciplinary actions which follow 15 internal audit investigations. Do you recall that subject?
I A Yes, generally.
d 16 ,
z l 17 Q Could you please tell us what your understanding
{
g 18 has been of the policy or practice concerning under what U 19 circumstances Mr. Bechtel, Junior should be informed of 6
5 20 disciplinary actions?
E
$ 21 MR. BERRY: Objection, best evidence.
5
$ 22 THE WITNESS: Well, I believe I indicated that b
23 the document that was being reviewed at the time of our 24 discussion was a guideline. And as such it did not have to 25 be followed in its extreme, in its constructive sense. In /
v
l l
l \
l 492 i the case of the notification to S.D. Bechtel, Junior, the lllh 1 G 2 guideline related to disciplinary action. But 32 the 3 day-to-day processing of special investigations, Mr. Bechtel 4 was advised only of terminations that resulted from 1
5 disciplinary action effected by the management of the 6 ' organization involved.
7 MR. RICHARDSON: Thank you. ;
I 8 MR. BERRY: I have some redirect.
9 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 10 BY MR. PERRY:
~
ij Q First, Mr. Hofmann, did Mr. Bechtel state that to 12 you, that he was only interested in disciplinary actions 13 involving termination?
14 MR. HICKEY: I don't think the witness said that.
~
15 MR. BERRY: That is the question I am asking him.
E 3 16 BY MR. BERRY:
9 9 17 Q Did he state that to you, that he was interested l l 18 in receiving only disciplinary actions involving l
2 ig terminations? j h 20 A It is my recollection that his office advised my 21 superior. Now, I may be a little fuzzy on that, and I might 22 well be wrong. But I tell you that that was the practice.
f 23 Q And did his office advise your office in writing 24 or orally, if you know?
25 A I don't know what form the advice came in. I
492 l
i lllh 1 the case of the notification to S.D. Bechtel, Junior, the 2 guideline related to disciplinary action. But in the
))GX '
3 day-to-day processing of special investigations, Mr. Bechtel 4 was advised only of terminations that resulted from 5 disciplinary action effected by the management of the 6 organization involved.
7 MR. RICHARDSON: Thank you.
8 MR. BERRY: I have some redirect.
9 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 10 BY MR. BERRY:
11 Q First, Mr. Hofmann, did Mr. Bechtel state that to 12 you, that he was only interested in disciplinary actions 13 involving termination?
14 MR. HICKEY: I don't think the witness said that.
15 MR. BERRY: That is the question I am asking him. 1 2
9 16 BY MR. BERRY:
17 Q Did he state that to you, that he was interested l l
l a
18 in receiving only disciplinary actions involving l5 19 terminations?
E 20 A It is my recollection that his office advised my l
f 21 superior. Now, I may be a little fuzzy on that, and I might
?
22 well be wrong. But I tell you that that was the practice.
{
23 Q And did his office advise your office in writing 24 or orally, if you know?
25 A I don't know what form the advice came in. I
/~'s !
ej l
l 1
l l
j
1 1
493 lllh 1 cannot tell you.
h[) 2 MR. BERRY: If there is a written documentation i
3 of that request, I would request counsel for GPU-N to make 4 that available to the staff.
5 For the next question we will have to go back to 6 the in camera portion. Off the record.
7 (Whereupon, at 7:38 p.m., the deposition was 8 adjourned, to resume and be concluded in in camera session.)
9 10 11 12
, s. 13
{ I
'\ /
14 15 h
o is .
z !
17 f
g is E I 5 19 l 9 !
$ 20 E !
$ 21 s
$ 22 2
23 24 26
(
m
- h. $
gg
, STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
') ss.
2 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
3 4 CERTIFICATE OF COURT REPORTER / NOTARY PUBLIC 5
.I, SHEILA L. BJORNLIE, a Notary Public in and for 6
ate of CaMorda, hereby ceMy Gat de whness 'in the foregoing deposition was previously duly sworn to testify the truth and nothing but the truth in.the within-entitled 7
cause; that said deposition was taken.at the time and place therein stated; that the testimony of the said witness was
,'8 reported by me, and thereafter transcribed by me and under my direction into typewriting; that the foregoiing is a full, 8
complete and true record of said testimony.
i0 I further certify that I am not of counsel or attorney for either or any of the foregoing deposition and caption
" named, or in any-way interested in-the outcome of the cause named in said caption.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and 13 affixed my seal this 22nd day of August, 1987. ,
14 , _
^15 f ~
o - --
Sheila L. Afjorn
^.
.l I' eg 0 g Mp$ ! Notary Publi The State of and for alifornia 8
- Nobv eveuc~Eaurown l 17 i.os ANGRES COUNTY
~
My Come gap res Nov 28,1990 B. 4 ig My commission expires:
y j November 28, 1990 19 h *.$
$ 5N 20 g-
$ ? 21 ;
o .
II 22 23 24 25 0
I-(
March 25,1987 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAN' JUDGE In the Matter of )
) Docket No. 50-320' GPU NUCLEAR. CORPORATION ) (Civil Penalty)
) License No. DPR-73 (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station ) EA 84-137 Unit No. 2) )
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF II. LEE HOFMANN Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. I 2.740s, the NRC Staff hereby gives notice that it shall take the deposition of H. Lee Hofmann, c/o J. Patrick Hickey, Shaw, Pittman , Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, N.W. ,
Washington, D.C. 20037, in the above-captioned proceeding. The deposition shall commence on Tuesday, April 28,1987, at 10:00 a.m. and continue until completed. The deposition will be taken at the offices of
Thelen , Marrin , Johnson & Bridges, One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 1950, Oakland, California, or at such other location as the parties may agree, before a notary public from Ace Federal Reports, Inc., 444 North Capitol Street, Washington, D.C. 20001.
Mr. Hofmann will be examined as to the issues covered by the attached Presiding Officer's " Memorandum and Order Following Prehearing Conference" (August 13, 1986). fr. Hofmann shall bring to the deposition all records, notes, memorands, files, and documents (including personal notes and documents) in his possession or subject to his custody,
'O g-f'
- e g,,
t
/,,
l or control that relate to: (i) any of the matters set forth in 112-5 of
~~
the attachment to this notice; and (ii) the consideration, investigation, evaluation, or resolution by Bechtel or GPU Nuclear Inc. of any of the
~
safety concerns or claims of harassment, intimid'ation, discrimination, or threat of reprisal raised by Richard Parks in his affidavit of March 21, l
1983.
i Gregory ,lan Berry Counsel ir N (C Staff
(
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 25th day of March 1987 O .
4 1
- f. .
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE In the Matter of )
) Docket No. 50-320 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION ) (Civil Penalty)
) License No. DPR-73 (Three Mile Island Nuclecr Station ) EA 84-137 Udt No. 2) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF H. LEE HOFMANN" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served '
on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class ,
or, as indicated by an asterisk , by deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 25th day of March,1987.
4 O *ive# w smita. rea-Admir.istrative Law Judge tree t t ni *e. 3r.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 2300 N Street, NW U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20037 Washington, DC 20555
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Steven L. Hock, Esq. .
Appeal Board Thelen, Marrin, Johnson, Bridges 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2 Embarcadero Center Washington, DC 20555 San Francisco, CA 94111
- Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
) (
OkMpM4m Gregory // lan f erry -
Counsel (r NEC Staff ( '
l 1
Wvo/L m j/wm --p t ~m / He4w .
/
THELEN. M ARHIN. JOHNSON & UNIDoES ATTORNCVS AT L Aw v.. s....c.oc.. cs=,s.
[ 0 3 8.0 M ouc gaiscR pt Aza a ' * * ** *' ' a ' a v a *
- w' ' " '
",',*******"* SusTEe9so '
new..., cc=$c..,eeo m..................., o uawo. c A 94eie ,
',a' w.=c.
,s ta c o.it. s.e.. ..e ..e.
idi51893 5495
,gtreo.ita e. ins sea soas
- .. so.g.c.e.u.
873025 " ~ ' * * * *
.. ............ ,...... .. ..........-e..c. ..~. 6..
,,,,c.....,,,,,........
-- -.....~...........,
May 6, 1987
)
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS / HAND DELIVERY Gregory A. Berry, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: NRC/ Parks Civil Penalty Proceedino
Dear Mr. Berry:
I am writing to reply to your letter of April 28, 1987 to Pat Hickey in which you inquired about circumstances requiring the postponement of Mr. Hofmann's deposition. Mr. Hofmann was directed by Bechtel management to travel to a foreign country to O investigate a problem of a confidential nature of considerable importance to the company. He informed me of his need to leave the country promptly after receiving these instructions on the afternoon of April 22. (He departed on April 23.) I in turn immediately notified Pat Hickey of Mr. Hofmann's inability to proceed with his deposition as scheduled for April 28, and asked him to notify you.
Mr. Hofmann apologized for any inconvenience his abrupt departure might cause, and assured me that he would advise me of the date on which he will return to the U.S. when this date becomes known. On the basis of his past foreign assignments, he estimated time. Needless to that he would be back in the U.S. in two to three weeks' say, I will communicate with both you and Mr.
Hickey to reschedule Mr. Hofmann's deposition for a mutually convenient time following his return.
I am at your disposal if you have any other questions.
Very r % rs, s
.J nedy P. Richardson
/' ~ ^ '
norable Ivan W. Smith (Via Fed, Exp,/ Hand Delivery)
J. Patrick Hickey, Esq. (Via Federal Express) /
fr/# [
l Q N hEl
./
V SHAW, PITTMAN, PoTTS & .TROWBRIDGE A pantwenswe# INCLUDemo pecorEStooNAL Commonatsoms
' 2300 N STRttT, N. W.-
ttLtx/camor wasMINGTON, D. C. 20037 03 2693 (SMAwLAw wsM) venoewsa orrsec
-
- esos ramu CarDrf Defvg vetepmour MCLEAte, VIRG8880A 28 tot
')**** ' ' ~
(70s) ?oo-7eoo May 29, 1987 j ,,L,,,,,,,,
(20&} 223 3?co & 223 37es warna: osacer o.AL wu-eca 873565 *
,,,,p;,7f',,,
663-8103 George E. Johnson, Esq.
Office of the General Counsel 9604 MNBB U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear George:
O V As you asked, we have enclosed a copy of the Notice of *O Deposition for Mr. Parks, which you agreed to transmit to him.
I have confirmed that Mr. Hofmann is available for a June 25 deposition at the Thelen, Marrin office in San Francisco (Two Embarcadero Center), and that he will be available as well on June 26 if necessary.
Sincerely, D
J. Patrick Hickey JPH:ms Enclosure cc: Service List en er g!r 3 1
L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - - "
? M I" HOMN DAT E __. April , 1982R p J- Chief Auditor
,~,.bM. ~.een.r.%.mWg.u_m..
ma , CL ASSIF IC ATION dj Internal Auditing
.A w -
ORGANIZATION & LOCATION
._,.....s FJ['ff
- 3. ~ _, . ~'
j San Francisco 2C E"*
, wgnh y BIRTHDATE 01/16/27 U*S*A*
,f s - CIT 12 E NSH!P
.y -
.h .;] ORIGINAL BECHTEL EMPLOYMENT DATE May 12, 1969 gI h dI *
~h RE EMPLOYMENT DATE(S) a bi[kh I "Nh SPOUSE'S NAME Joan P.
CHILDREN'S BIRTHDATES ID" t
PHOTO DATE - Jan. 1977 MILITARY SERVICE & R ANK U.S. Army, 21 nanths, PIr. l t
1 i
PROFESSIONAL LICENSES AND SOCIETIE3 '
)
tbne ; I
( ) !at
. i
! j i I i
EDU' CATION AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS l DEG RE E, CE RTIFICATE, ETC. SCHOOL MAJOR (OR SUBJECT) DATE ,
B.S. Invis and Clark Cbilege Accounting-Major 1950 law-Muor j l r
M.A. Mills College liberal Arts 1952 M.B.A. Stanford University Finance 1959 Directors' Advisory Group (DAG) 1981/1982 l
OTHER SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION (Refer to instructions before completing)
(
Bechtel:
3 Trust & 'Ihrift Invest 2mnt Comnittee, Assistant Secretary l Personal and Family: All nenbers of my family are in good health, l Outside Activities: Squash, Golf, Ccrmunity and Church activities, Stanford i l
Business School Assn.
language Capability: Spanish in High Sclool; German in Graduate Schcol
(~')
Aspirations: 'Ib assure greater responsibility within the area of ,, yf financial ard humn-resource managenent. (
p !
.1 .
jplf&
, %c,:, <cw: n n (
l< .
Is -
i
. l
- l. . .
(JSE SUPPLEMENTAL PAGE. lF REOUIRE D)
WORK HISTORY .
COMPANY. DIVISION OR ' POSITION HELD,
SUMMARY
OF DATES DEPARTMENT: RESPONSIBILITIES AND FROM TO LOCATION AND SUPERIOR SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS
~
1952 1954 U. S. ' Army Budget Fiscal Specialist, Comptroller's --
9 Section,' Ryukyus Command General Headquarters.
. *1955 '955 1 KMI-Television Directed live commercial productions Fresno, California in the studio.
Managed Educational, ' Religious and 19'56 1957 KET-T Television Santa Barbara, Calif. Public Service Programming. j 1958 1959 Stanford University Master of Business Admi.nistration Finance 6/59 5/69 Crockei National Bank Trust Officer (Probite, Inter-Vivos and San Francisco, Calif. Testamentary Trusts); Corporate Credit Analyst (Financial Projects for senior ;
management) and Loan Officer; Systems l Analy st. ]
5/69 1/71 Bechtel Corporation Finan,ce and. Accounting - Senior Systems Finance & Accounting Analyst '
San Francisco, Calif. ,
Jack Bennett l
1/71' 2/73 Bechtel Corporation ' Finance and Accounting - T.reasury Finance & Accounting Operations: Supervised the administration San Francisco, Calif. of lines of credit and letters of credit, e,]
b, Fred Searles -
6erporate shareholder and dividend records, Confidential'(Senior Management) l l
Payroll, Bechtel Trust and Thrift Plan books of account, Bechtel Profit Sharing
- Bonus Plan. (USE SUPPt cMENT AL P AGE.lF AEOutRE D) l -
-. ~
, 'gg S 6060 a O dd h hfD h
,;-----u==.====
/,
jf Tion OR POSITiO?J
- j nTrAENT; . SUf.iM AR Y OF i
goCATION AND SUPERIOR RESPONSIBILITIES AND 5 m-
-[ SIGNIFICANT ACCO:.tPLISH.'1ENTS I
n 1/77 Bechtel Corporation V' , Executive Services Manager (Manager of Executive Ccrnpensation l I i and Adninistraticn Executive Ccrnpensation Adnunistration San Francisco, Calif.
Adnunisters the Office of the Chainnan ~
H. B. Hahn Replacanent Planning, Purview Salary and Profit Sharing Bonus Plan Reviews.
1/77 6/78 Bechtel Corporation Internal Auditing Chief __ Auditor ' Administration San Francisco, Cplif. ResrWasible for: data processing audits; J. S. Bryant V personnel administration; and audit quality control. Conducted special investigations.
6/78 12/79 J. F. McGuinn As above.
1/80 12/81 J. Gasser Responsible for: general administration of department in absence of manager and upon his direction; special investiga-tiens relating to possible ethical irregu-1/82 11/83 larities that effect Bechtel worldwide.
S. M. Pace As above 11/83 Present G. V. Hedigan " "
O e
i O ~
BECHTEL' DIRECTIVE No. 2-1 .)
.. Page1of7' April 22,7J982
\
SUBJECT : BUSINESS ETHICS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND SECURITY OF '
i INFORMATION PURPOSE : To rettate the long established standards of high ethical conduct for ,,
Bechtel and its employees, to provide guidelines to avoid conflicts,cf interests or unethical practices and to establish policy for the '
security of Bechtelinformation.
j SCOPE : The policies contained in this Directive are applicable to all Bechtel .f entitles and employees worldwide.
POLICY DIRECTIVE :
General Statement of Policy Bechtel and its employees are subject to and must comply with the laws of the United States and other countries where it conducts business.
~
f- Bechtel and its employees shall observe and maintain high standards of _
ethical conduct in their relationships with clients, suppliers, I
subcontractors and others. Any action taken by Bechtel or its employees shall be fully justifiable and should not be cause for concern gr unf avorapie publicityy einbarrassment _if disclosed.
Each Bechtel employee is responsible for strict compliance with this policy and shall:
e Reject any plan, transaction or arrangement involving unlawful or unethical conduct.
o Avoid any arrangement, agreement, investment, employment, relationsbio, act or interest which is y appears to be contrary to
_the best interests of Bechtel g its chents or in any way might ~
i impair the performance of duties or the exercise of independent judgment or action with respect to the interest of Bechtel or its clients.
3 o
Maintain security of confidential or privileged information relating i
- to Bechtel or any of its activities including financial data related to operations of the Sechtel companies. Such information includes that furnished by c!!ents, suppliers, subcontractors, or others under 4
conditions of confidentiality.
o Provide professional and impartial opinions, judgments and actions O* j based on objective consideration of what is in the best interests of Bechtel and its clients. {
_ _ fD )
Replaces issue dated June 19, 1979 ' . ff 0300J !
/[///,g '
, N o. 2-1 Bechtel Directiva g Ptga 2 cf 7 i
... April 22,1982 O.
Relationships with Clients, Suppliers, Subcontractors and Others
- It is Bechtel's policy to deal only with clients and others having ethical standards compatible.with its own. No impropriety should or can be .k tolerated since this willinevitably impair the high ethical standards of all i those associated.
In situations in which Bechtel knows or is informed by a reliable source '
that a client, supplier, subcontractor or other articipant (including a J Bechtel employee) in a Bechtel project is acti illegally or unethically, a .
report of any impropriety should be made to the responsible Bechtel . j supervisor, who in turn will promptly bring it to the attention of the responsible Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager. The '
Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager will in turn notify -l the counsel of the appropriate Bechtel company and, at his/her option, t the Manager of Internal Auditing. l l
The responsible Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager or designee along with the responsible counsel, should discuss each report of impropriety with the highest feasible authority of the client, supplier, subcontractor or other organization. Should the impropriety or unlawful act not be resolved in a satisfactory manner, the matter should be
.Q brought to the attention of the responsible Executive Sponsor who may, at his option, present the facts to the Chairman or the Executive G Committee for their final consideration and judgment as to the s) appropriate action.
Outside Activites Employees are expected to devote their full time to Bechtel's interests during regular working hours. An employee's participation in outside activities should not infringe on his/her ability to do his/her assigned Bechtel job.
While employees are encouraged to participate in philanthropic, professional and community organizations, they must ensure that the manner of their participation in a particular organization does not imply Bechtel's endorsement or sponsorship. Requests for Bechtel's endorsement or sponsorship of a particular organization,' or for financial I
contributions thereto, should be handled according to the requirements of applicable Bechtel Directives.
Authorization to serve as a Trustee, Regent, Director or Officer of a philanthropic, professional, national, regional, or community organization .
or educational institution calling for significant time, financial contributions or endorsement by Bechtel may be granted on a selected basis. Approval by the responsible Executive Sponsor and notification to a the Chairman and Public Relations is required.
O' I 1
l
\
l
~
Bechtal Directiv3 Nc.2-1 j Page 3 cf 7 i April 22,1982 C .
Outside Activites (continued)
Approval by the Chairman or, at his option, the Executive Committee is required for service as a member of the board of directors of an outside company. The following factors will be considered regarding such service :
o Possible conflict of interest or adverse effect on the best interests of Bechtel or its clients, including distraction and/or interf erence with individual's responsibilities or activities of Bechtel; e Experience-broadening value ;
e Value to the community, if any.
Normally, only Directors of principal Bechtel companies will be approved to i serve on boards of publicly traded companies. l Confidential Information The employee must obtain the approva! of the responsible Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager prior to disclosing Bechtel ;
or client confidential or privileged information. '
O 8echte><imaeci istete-emts me rei ted e t - v 6e reieaseo oair with the approval of the Controller or Treasurer or their designee.
Responsibilities Division General, Special Operation and Service Managers shall furnish ,
each new employee (excluding field manual employees) a copy of this Directive and obtain the employee's signed acknowledgment of having read and understood the policies and terms therein. This acknowledgment shall be filed in the employee's Master Personnel File.
i Sample acknowledgment is shown in Attachment B. The Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager may adopt this or any substitute signed statement that will satisfy the requirements of the Directive.
Each employee has the obligation to inform his/her supervisor of any incidents or potential situations concerning unethical conduct, conflicts of interest or lack of information security.
. Whenever there is any question as to the legal implication or consequence of a given course of action, the advice of the Legal Department should be j sought. !
o !
l l
l
4 No.2-1 Bechtcl Dirrctiva Pcgo 4 cf 7 April 22,1982 Y
Implementation Although this Directive describes representative standards and guidelines, it cannot cover all situations except in general terms. Should unusual or special circumstances call for examination or interpretation of standards or guidelines or involve uncertainty about them the matter shall be submitted to the responsible Division General, $pecial Operation or i Service Manager. The approval of the Chairman, or at his option, the Executive Committee is required for any deviation appearing to be justifiable under the circumstances. Examples of conduct at variance with policy are listed in Attachment A.
Further implementation of this Directive, such as internal instructions or periodic reviews, shall be at the discretion of each Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager. )
Legal and Insurance will prepare and issue Management Instructions as required to provide further guidelines.
i c..
O *
)
d=
f Related Directives :
No.1-9 Bechtel Public Relations No. 2-16 Public Statements No. 3-6 Bechtel Political Contributions No. 3-7 Memberships and Contributions
[
~
No. 4-3 Secrecy Agreements and Restrictive Covenants No. 4-4 Secrecy Obligations to Foreign Governments or Their Agencies No. 4-13 Agreements with Representatives Outside the United States and Payments to Foreign Government Officials Related Management Instructions :
Legal Instructions No.113 Recruitment of U. S. Government Employees for Positions with the '
Bechtel group of companies
- No.120 Security Classification of Information and Data O- )-
1
~
.' Bechts! Directiva No. 2-1 Pcge 5 cf 7 l April 22,1982 ATTACHMENT A EXAMPLES OF CONDUCT AT VARIANCE WITH POLICY The following practices will be considered as deviations from policy. The examples given are not intended to cover all possible situations.
- 1. Ownership, directly'or indirectly, of a substantialinterest in a client, subcontractor, supplier or other service firm which is or might be doing business with or in competition with Bechtel, or with a present or prospective client of Bechtel. &"substantialinterest"_is one which will or might be significant or of relevance to any Becntel transaction or its results, or can at any time be so perceived. Since in a particular case the determination of whether an ownership is" substantial" will depend.upon all circumstances and points of view and will most likely be adjudged retrospectively, full disclosure and advance request for interpretation as provided under the " Implementation" provisions of this Directive is strongly encouraged in all cases. Such disclosure willin almost all cases ,
1 eliminate any actual or potential conflict of interest or policy deviation.
2.
Serving ataa of ficer, director, employee, committee member,gt g
- 7 feoresentative olor consultant to any company, firm gr bgss.2Re.r
- " than the Bechtel organization _when such serviceiconflicts with B_ echtel's Interests or detracts from or infringes in a significant way on the ~
1 canoloye_e's tTme or responsibilities with the company. A thember of an employee'sIEn3diate family serving in any of the above capacities may also create a situation of conflict.
- 3. Directly or indirectly owning, trading or dealing in real estate, materials, supplies, equipment or other property with the intent of selling or renting to Bechtel or its clients.
- 4. As a result of or through employment by Bechtel, using or causing or advising others to use any information as a basis to buy, sell or deal in stock or other interests in any present or prospective Bechtel client unless or until the information so acquired is public knowledge. ]
- 5. To seek or accept, directly or indirectly, from a client, contractor, subcontractor, supplier or service business (or its representative or agent) who is doing or might be doing business with Bechtel or a client of Bechtel :
e Any commission, fee or compensation of any kind.
e Any loan, advance, benefit or service which in any manner depends upon or is associated with Bechtel relationships, or deviates from the ordinary course of normal personal relationships on terms generally prevailing for such O relationships.
r ..
No. 2-1 ' Bechtel Dircctiva
. Pagn 6 ef 7 April 22,1982 ATTACHMENT A Y
0 l e Any gift or entert;inment of value beyond common courtesies ;
that may imply an oiligation to the donor or may be considered excessiv6 in poor taste or improper. '
c e Bechtel is opposed to giving Christmas, year-end or other gif ts l
. to clients. In geographical areas where such gif ts are customary business exchanges, the Division General, Special .
Operation or Service Manager shall be responsible for limiting l such practice and to ensure any gif ts shall be limited in value, '
held at the level of common courtesies and be free of any implication of obligation from the recipient. No' gifts considered excessive, in poor taste or improper shall be given.
6.. Knowingly participating or in any way being involved in :
e Unlawful or unauthorized payment or rebate, or any negotiation involving the same.
e Unlawful or improper disbursement of funds.
- 7. Without company approval using one's position in Bechtel to further outside interests gr to imply Bechters endorsement of politicalpolicies, O camaa> ns. er aims, or the ore 8 ct aed services of ethers.
.)
- 8. M g divertina Bechters know _how, internal information, equipment,
- tools, materials, supplies or t,he time and services of its personnel fg purpose not compatible wiE Bechters best interests.
- 9. Revealing for any purpose outside of appropriate business situations any '
confidential information belonging or entrusted to Bechtel.
I J
i i
O' i
l
-_-----_--_-------- a
s- Brchtal Directiva No. 2 .
Pega 7 ci 7 April 22,1982
' ATTACHMENT B ~
O 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (Bechtel Directive No. 2-1) -
' The undersigned acknowledges that :
1.- I have been furnished a copy of the Directive i
- 2. I have read Directive 2-1.
- 3. I understand the policles and 'terrns of the Directive and agree to comply with them.
Signature t
i
- . ,,- .~ . m n ,-
c,y . (. 1 a
^
Bechtel Power Corporation STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL Interoffice Memorandurh' ,
H. F. Brush Mo 83-104 I l
- Three Mile Island: Possible Employee D* -M#ch 24, 1983 l Involvement with Job Shop operations
- S. M. Pace O' Internal Auditing fcm" J. M. Komes C. W. Sandford 50/11/C-17 w 7700 ,
J. W. Weiser l R. M. Loomis !
The allegation was that a General Public Utility (CPU) employee ("the GPU employee") had a financial interest in a job shop which was hiring CPU people )
away from work on the Three Mile Island Project. Further, Bechtel employees I have assisted the GPU employee with his job shop operation.
Lee Hofmann conducted an investigation. It was established that the GPU ,
employee was the president of a job shop known as Quiltec, Inc. Several highly skilled people had left the client's organization and each of them may 1 have had an association with that job shop. l i
We determined that a Bechtel senior start-up engineer had received from the I GPU employee a number of personnel data sheets and was asked to have resumes typed from them. The engineer found a Bechtel secretary to type the personnel information into resume formats, which she did on her own time. He also paid the secretary $75 for which he was reimbursed by the GPU employee. The secretary later disclosed to her supervisors that she had typed the Quiltec, j Inc., resumes for the engineer. The engineer made no such disclosure until he ,
was interviewed by Lee. )
l Directive 2-1 was violated. There are mitigating circumstances. When he was hired in May of 1982, the engineer had very little orientation as to Bechtel l policies and procedures. We did not locate a signed Directive 2-1 Acknowledgement. He claims that his reporting relationship within the j integrated GPU-Bechtel employee mix on the project was clouded. He reported to the GPU employee on a day-to-day basis. On a t least one occasion, he found q himself in a position where he felt that his thoughts were being challenged. j "Ihe GPU employee seemed to give our employee a feeling of protection during l
the on going GPU-Bechtel technically oriented debates on the project. In q short, it appeared that even though he was a Bechtel employee, our engineer may have felt that he was not receiving support f rom his Bechtel superiors. j When the engineer was asked to get Quiltee resumes typed, possible ethical g) t ramifications did not occur to him.
1
%^ -
p,p f[
- i 1024 (5 4 4 I CL____________._____..__
l-To: H. F. B rush From: S. M. Pace Page'2 -
March 24, 1983 s-GPU has terminated its employee. The Division has verbally reprimanded the engineer and reviewed with him certain appropriate policy writings. Also, it has counselled the secretary.
The Division is taking steps to reestablish a closer relationship with. our employees on the project so that they are aware on a day-to-day basis of the support available to them from Division and project personnel.
1 Internal Auditing has closed this investigation J
. M. Pace SMP:HLH:cac
\ lk.
l f
1 s <
9 e
N
=-
.)-
8/4/87 UNITED. STATES OF AMERICA
! NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ,
-In the Matter of ' "*'
)
) Docket No. 50-320 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION ) (Civil Penaltv)
) License No. DPR-73
-(Three' Mile Island Nuclear Station ) >
EA 84-137 l Unit No. 2) )
1 1
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF H. LEE HOFMANN Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 2.740(a), H. Lee Hofmann is hereby given notice that he should appear _ at the office of Thelen, Marrin, Johnson s B ridges , Two Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, California 94111, at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, August 20, 1987, to resume his testimony by deposition upon oral examination. The deposition will be conducted before oe a notary public or an officer authorized by law to take depositions where taken. - The oral examination will continue from :- day to day until completed. Each subsequent day of testimony will begin at 9:00 a.m. and be adjourned at 6:00 p.m. until the next morning.
2
- Mr. Hofmann will be examined concerning the matters set- forth in paragraphs 2-5 of the attached Prehearing Order of August 13, 1986.
i:xcept for those documents already produced or identified in response to i prior discovery requests, Mr. Hofmann shall bring to the deposition all r ecords, notes, memoranda, files , and documents (including personal notes and documents) in his possession or subject to his custody or control that relate to: (1) any of the matters set forth in if 2-5 of the 1
attachment to this notice; and (11) the consideration, investigation, f O eveiuetion, er resoiution by Bechtei or ceu Necieer, inc. of env of the
'" ]
i 4
1
! - i O serety cemcerns er cieims or heressmeat. iatimidetrea. eiscrimiaetiom. or J threat of reprisal raised by Richard Parks in his affidavit of March 21,
'.1 1983. j i
s.-
r l
( ,
%retpry f En BAr'y b [,.104W
/
Counsel ly NRE Staff (
Date: August 3,1987 i
O O .
m .
. . _ y . . .
l .
-l
'O ^
unn AlJ B/13/86 USITED STATES OF AMERICA .
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE -
1 Ivan W. Smith .
f .
1 1, .
Jn the Matter of I h Decket No. 50-320rx General Public Utilities Nuclear l . License No. DPR.73 -
Cerperation ,J EA S4-137
- l [ASLEPHe. 2653401-OL]
(Three Mile Island, Unit No. 2) ,
1 (Civil Penalty) ,
I
..~
August 13. 19E6 n
.V
- lI( -
4, MEK0EANDUM AND ORDER FOLLOWING FRENEARING CONfTRENCE ..
a ,
')
Ccunsel for General Public Utilities and Counsel for the NRC Staff
.1cined te in a prehearing conference at Sethesda, Faryland on July 30 1555. .
Discovery is autherized te begin imediately. The ptrties and I teve agreed that discovery ray be had under the felleving bread issues:
- 1. Whether the NRC is barred from imposing a civil penalty in this proceeding'due to the dismissal with prejudice of the Departrent of'Laber proceedings charging discrimination against Pa rks. .
l 2. Whether Parks' replacement as Alterr. ate Startup and Test Superviser en February 23, 1583 constituted retaliation against
. Parts contrary to 10 CFR 5 50.7.
- 3. Whether Parks' interview by Messrs. Hofrann end Wheeler en Farch 14, ige 3 constituted retaliation against Parks centrary to' a Q 10 CFR i 50.7.
\ .
a
, . . . . . . .; . q g ,.- ,
.. : '..*/ .
79.. .
,1 ,
- Y 4
-2 ,
j 4 k'hether Parks' reeval as the prirary Site Operations' ' .
1 Departr.cnt representative en the Test k'erking Group for the polar' I crene project en Perch 17, 1963 was involuntary and, if so, whether it constituted retaliation against Farks centrary to 10 CFR I 50.7. .-
- 4 ,
- 5. k'hether Parks' placement en*1 eave cf absence with pey en
< Farch24,2553 constituted retaligtfen against Farks centrary to I
20 CFR I 50.7.
~ '
- 6. Sased en resclutien cf the issues (1)-(5) above: -
3
- a. whether Licensee violated NRC requirements as set ferth in the Actice cf Yiolation and Frepesed Irfcsition of Civil Fenalty issued en August.12,1955; and
- b. Whether, en the basis cf such violatien, the Merch 4
( 1955 Order Irpesing Civil Fenalty,shculd be sustained.
Discovery inc'luding answers to discevery requests, should be cepleted by Febrvery 1,1957. -
The parties should prepare fer en evidentiary hearing in the Spring cf 1557. Further prehearing requirements will be addressed in subsequer.t crders. -
jN!S '
han w. Sr.ith ADF.INISTF.ATIVE LW JUDGE Eethesda Fary1and l August 13. 1956 .
o .
~
i
______ L
al . i
?
f.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA .4 !
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LA5V JUDGE _
4
' ' ~
in the Matter of )
) Docket No. 50-320 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION ) (Civil Penalty)
) License No. D PR-73 (Three Mlle Island Nuclear Station ) EA 24-137 Unit No. 2) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF H. LEE HOFMANN" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the i following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk, by deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 4th day of August 1987.
D *lvan W. Smith, Esq. Ernest L. Blake, Jr.
\ Administrative Law Judge Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge c0 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 2300 N Street, NW U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20037 Washington, DC 20555
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Steven L. Hock, Esq.
Appeal Board Thelen, Marrin, Johnson, Bridges U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2 Embarcadero Center Washington, DC 20555 San Francisco, CA 94111
- Docketing and Servico Section Office of th: Sec.retary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 l
i Gregory Afi n Be ry' l
Counsel f( NRC Staff l l O !
o
(0 6/Ceuf l NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE i RETATIVE TO DIRECTIVE 2-1 !
O,m h -
)
l A. Division, Special Operation and/or Service Management becomes aware of a possible violation of Directive 2-1. Management conducts its own
]
investigation and effects its own discipline'a's required. ;
- 1. Directive 2-1 does not require that notification be given except in a project and then a report of the impropriety should be made to the responsible:
- a. Supervisor.
- b. Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager and
- c. Counsel of the appropriate Bechtel company.
- 2. Senior Management in SFHO (Executive Sponsor, The Chairman, et al) may receive no formalized notification.
- 3. Manager of Internal Auditing is unaware in most instances of the action taken.
B. Division, Special Operation and/or Service Management becomes aware of a possible violation of Directive 2-1. Management reauests the assistance of Internal Auditing. The current notification procedure is as follows:
! )
1. Opening memo - statement of allegation (s):
- a. Addressed to - Executive Sponsor of Internal Auditing.
- b. Copies to - the Senior Manager of:
- 1) Concerned Division, Special Operation and/or Service.
- 2) Legal and Insurance Department.
- 2. Closing memo - statement of allegation (s), findings of the investigation and action taken by management:
- a. Addressed to - Executive Sponsor of Internal Auditing.
- b. Copies to - the the Senior Manager of:
- 1) Concerned Division, Special Operation and/or Service Manager.
- 2) Legal and Insurance Department.
- 3. If disciplinary action is taken against an employee, the senior manager sends a notification memorandum:
- a. Addressed to S. D. Bechtel, Jr.
- b. Copy to - Manager of Internal Auditing.
- 4. If a criminal offense has been committed, notification is given to Legal and Insurance:
- a. Manager of the Insurance Department - so that a claim might be submitted if it is appropriate.
- b. General Counsel - so that if he approves, the matter might be referred to proper authorities for possible prosecution.
/7
] H;H:cac "# '" Vd 1/11/83 er
I[
p
- 1 Bechtel Management Instructions. Internal Auditing Instruction No. ' I T-I Page1 of5 Dated 3/27/85 initial issue i
. SUBJECT- INVESTIGATIONS - POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS OF BUSINESS ETHICS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND. SECURITY OF INFORMATION PURPOSE:
To establish responsibility, requirements and procedures for investigating matters involving possible violations of business ethics, conflicts of interest and security of information.
SCOPE:
This Instruction applies to all Bechtel entities and employees worldwide.
' INSTRUCTION:
General Responsibility Each employee has the obligation to notify his/her supervisor of any possible violation
.s of Directive 2-1 or the standards implied therein. The possible violation is to be brought to the attention of the responsible Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager. In accordance with Directive 2-1, the responsible Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager shall notify the Counsel of the appropriate Bechtel company and the Manager of Internal Auditing.
Division.'Special Operation. Service Management Conducts the Investigation Management may conduct an investigation, keeping counselinformed. If an allegation has substance, management is to notify its personnel manager and Internal Auditing of any personnel actions taken, such as reprimand or termination. In case of termination, counsel will notify the General Counsel, and management will notify the Executive Sponsor and the Vice Chairman.
Procedure for investigation by Management Responsibility Action Employee !. Reports the possible irregularity to his/her supervisor.
clj.,rw,- J-O hr 7 f4+^5
IA i
. Bechtel Management Instructions Internal Auditing instruction '
. No. I cq Page 3 of 5
(> Dated 3/27/85 Procedure for Investigation by Management (Continued)
Responsibility Actio6 Internal Auditing 9. Records and reports the information to its
. responsible senior officer.
Internal Auditing Conducts the Investigation The Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager may ask Internal Auditing to investigate a set of circumstances because cf a.partleulatsensitivjty_or_because of ,
possible political, media,Jegala.or..cilent ramifi ations. Some of the circumstance 1
~
I list'snal' Auditihg giherally investigates _relatelto poss'i'ble embezzlement, kickback _s, drug activity, thef t, conflict of interest, lack.ofjecurity of information, etc. When internal Auditing is active in a.n investigation, it shall instigate, perform and control the investigation in a manner it and its responsible senior officer determine appropriate to the circumstances.
Internal Auditing may independently become aware of situations within a Division, Special Operation or Service which require an investigation. Under such
.O- circe->t#c .i='r >^=eitiesc #i#itii of Internal Auditing's responsible senior officer.
">Pci>>= tisti#" iththecem #1 Procedure for Investigation by Internal Auditing-Responsibility Action Internal Auditing 1. Receives allegation.
- 2. Notifies the manager of the Bechtel .
organization concerned.
- 3. Performs a " preliminary inquiry" to g determine if there appears to be substance to the allegation.
- 4. If from the " preliminary inquiry" there appears to be:
O
r-
~b-Bechte! Minagement Instructions intzrn21 Auditing Instruction e.
, No. !
Page5of5 Dated 3/27/85 1 '.
Procedure for Investigation by Internal Auditing (Continued)
R_ responsibility Action Division General, 9. Concludes that the allegation either:
' Special Operation or Service Manager e has no or insufficient substance:
Notifies counsel and Internal Auditing.
Takes no further action.
e or, has subrtance:
- Notifies counsel, personnel manager, and Internal Auditing of consequences.
- If an employee is to be terminated, notifies Executive Sponsor and Vice Chairman.
Internal Auditing 10. If a felony was committed or if the nature of the violation requires a report, notifies O aaroari t aoiic >"ri eictie#-
- 11. Closes the investigation by notifying its responsible senior of ficer, General Counsel, the interested Division General, Special Operation or Service Manager.
f
_-_f#
Issued by: ' - ........ _. a
.c : : .- . . . . .
~
Signed by: ) e En%
/
Basis for issue:
Bechtel Directive No. 2-1, Business Ethics, Coni!! cts of Interest and Security of Information.
O l
l l
- a. 9 CALCULATION SHEET l l
.. ... DarE l DESIGN SY DATE CHECKED BY SHEET NO / 6/
D-c, , -8 a
==r . ;, c wuuruua ,u ua GLie9
~~
Sepuua f sonis
)Qu.s6asem :
1 1
THk RLL644nel won Twn7 A Slum A4ue J.)Truby L&.Pu..) &~ pen se,., Anwy xau4 app A An+ued DeiGNST bH R Tc15 SHep erntes.o hvsL7ss .Znenpea.or,o l wasew w+9 Honikf 6 fit /& Rusav hw e aemc.,
on m. 7x,au a 1s w o /h sses. S ar m
/.% ettibe as4 j A?sak A94M5 "s4 54.e4 rei
$7M T-of Apoten set ,6rwt ;25 An9 /2cs.s /Eo774 4 - 3 Seca.s.nnt Y, does *d " & Annav Mond woru
- 1. Hes,t?veurs.e efdE/ taro sw ,
1 n- mn weg bn& TR wn 4M THol$*N4 4.0an Moese A Y '
)45 M ill Rt R $4 Hen 4Heer#66A. '
- s-la-fa 4 Mot 1c)*1~*/6eo)w.,R5(6oot Jew ab A /Ae7%e.T piiYrpsords:n.
29 'S 22S 'o" Me (94L'?os Tn4,wss.}mus25uw)tf&RtH4H&&10 Ahofee-r.
,,./
/ /.
j .p & 20; O /
g f/0 '
fgn!)
' O 39 .4 CALCULATION SHEET
, ar., DATE DESIGN sv 0 ATE CHECKED BY ,
- s. SMEET Nog
/RoJECT JOB No.
sussEc7 __6 G O Pfe
- / ["> r $ MTA
~ cateutATiou so. ntE uo.
_: Q s
TvL9 2't /$osN.ti. } > R t i r e te. % Jhttrep /Lc w'e f 7m.3, A eo /Lorre L
)by$ffet h o}sTyp?6kc44%P t $ r~ g w s p p h. p ' p on ;* TusY 39 'I490 no
\
l 8Co)~?st . (IL,*t1*~$ta). {
.%~ w ).awy ka as , &sw Stoen (4e.nsun .rnacan ua wa ;
mss Pasue, urts.onts) kgsras, up r > t u s, P t. 1 R
&eex //M$
ss. l.rtM
) Tipt.W$O 7e8 4,4 .SMeem.81.ous An Twk $744c-op n
pp as.t.s
)%2++rn& conl' R
6:# 4 4 6 E A / M ( D s c t # 6: u 6.
u os ou,- w =no ~~ i~ n u se ma 1991 in Srnis Msn6ine's Nork To FM R. P>p;ta. a wivoa ceas-et quat.Tsc. THC
- 8. Offt R$
), h af XsN L Elt. P)ukmsi 2.&,# / My a A.T. kann 222 VP 4 W. W. Nopk. 'TRtans.
c 7 7p Nean ??6&nr R PtAthdbAS, - Ws Ar$ fsu.s von n san-, asa> u s- -, a,- ws na Rd1. $Y r$lt'Miht, OH h 4 R 1 3.'1 6 'r t *L A S A lAfLE4, Sw.m2 s.rmtr- OP sws, .nt,sA. Cum 'a f RT ? ilI, o ea -)wo *'4 2
- Leo) *f12.
h^
a
. ,m wo . .n.
\
CALCULATION SHEET ,
)
DATE DESIGN SY DATE CHECKED BY SHEE,NO. %
(none, .,o. ~ o.
aq,&s -: d. O . %7s
.-Ec, cA-r,. ~.. c .. .
Q>vs- pe.rsa --
sow & .
?nn As 2. ik 6fuwm , Anvosn
. Bea, 6Pa. , 6.pt sfu..u.,/ktse.r Jur Anw 'Tutt.w songTrm P),
&H6tsLt A,7a t.O 7'His.$te6 Tahti' $ Law bui94 / 4:49a H 6. 3dsAk 4* #1 s9 /2u wenft.
o n 'TH L .7 c 6 So A 7;y M :
A 1lkm &ctrot, wTo Ailv$eeLss Ata.<mam f.Wp/ weTN /#44V Me/4
- h. St D"F%I & d.et Ms To Po SW-op hamk of /l=1LTN .%nv4e t uer.tz L.
M 'to -1so,avo y/L 0- U*3 w u a ab w J ,a:n,k m,,e rms
- 4 (km6'99 Me4 4 % o w Qun. rte. .ru e l?vtt 76 e 2He, . ,
%u wm ws. a so9a u n,.wa u Trs Ponav.c 4 Ja %2E4T w &rxs.isc., /ktKb f2 Pvt lS4pi )pytst, y M v4, 6/u. Qm Lv.Thtt. Tviset.os s.a T r.5, s9e t Psa.sn ra r.aw Roex >kser. (asetm.f PMu.s. n E-vapmsd flspretis, . R Mas 9 fMas TD 6eT 6ewk. A ss m .s 7 Yesp , fen. % -
& baus. / %rias : '
I. A:.e.sEunt. p.nn sass.n. ~ B or.,ur /2. fe.sp & 4.ve h c.ue.n.4. 6 #a p% ped W y 6 2. quicru.e sue A nu w.,,e
- - * - - - ~ ~ - ~ ~ ' ~ ' - '
- ~______ L : _ --_7_ _r_~r:?_*'~ i
~
~
CALCULATION SHEET cATE DESIGN SY CATE CHECKED BY SMEET NO h
'8tOJECT JOB NO.
SUBJECT 6N #A M Ifb
. .y - u - CALCULATION NO. ~ FILE NO.
PMfe JRsirt em . -- Sev*:6 . Rv6/56X 49,cES )?T #m6's A2epoks,r 4,wagna Juww,u 7N3 ABt THk W To DG twa sssow ?dwes .P4 7Y/194L TML /2hS A . i lR/346 RtW4.0 6thestin DJRt. ash,
- wna & Tv'ft- ZmT,,cws Jt arra,. w TPa Pit 6se.c& &&W,Aarrue wor sms.nu As w=u . .-Rosr. \
i k$$ )#$k,LO k*1154. Af $eftm,. *
$ 4T & Lko.1'Ih-G l 7yPG TML ? sn=~$1. AtTTLk $L2. k:7714. i/
R.$rMe m edTVA..Ab w ?l O" Ps a Fnv* " e sxs.o o><.r m *r w m. lMIod6 6>sev& Atrit4 &ruwa w T&c.
, na wa-~ a.- n 2.5-Deja ib Q utt.1%c.M Srikl*WN'N NiTTL(c 7pjGh:.0 72/L M(sSuW ousst rut >tt,p 2.-s wskas, or
$ 4 tt. W K '$'id w b T W // e li.
Ch.rn T/cw k. 7o' eld fihStouT / 3 her#4, A LTT Uc. s G b w k " 4 (m12.$ '7 H k.s E N & sn r s * \ R. *)tt WL HSRitot.4 \ M /ArN Mi
- e. 4,u, A,,,nm 9 ). twt.duf )4rld, '
D;*' * '"'" " " A " " ' ' 74.P AkcitD \
? ,, 7e t . w +,w a s m w a c > w s ).
P' * * -s teure, m .um-a ..ww ww. ewe , -..% .
' a .3 . . ,,,
'C CALCULATION SHEET DATE DESIGN SY DATE CHECKEDBY SHEET NO M OJECT JOB NO.
w.aei *kh?= ek offuMTE, cueuar,on no. n.E no. Osk Ant-TLesu <- Sca_12.c.L . Av6l82$GM 19 = lML46 A rruAbe&tusp , N4. 4,ay,._ 1NA. alm TVs%R 4:. sGh$v+4.S.'2"inis g,rn k /3 S H 4:_ A ces.spnio ? S S t 3 - %
/AvWS PS
}-$o5 J / *f- Pru S .
% Menl 9 MtHL 6 k k. /M2ks Rwks, fs
$75e N.,17e .
75/<5 e.5 rua. om ra~4. n rsa a u v n a D ~DfM Wo86 MM 190Xsa THM' 9+w =t; As. TVPw -/ tat fnAk:S aP { 12:rrz-s. ?9 1 a w a. m fovfla s arL TJ+*i-T lR4ksJ)>TW5h$&Mj
.re- Quas.rk.C' .WsHL
.%pr)ocr rys.a Hsita.s.y,6Pa- .s,eun 12wu a7%,s.a rrc 1992. ?resst, J-spr GFu- }k: tco m u-r THis.sw s P2 ZHQre:Mk. doH&.g.4. 3)tr wn, 6as 86 70 M c/L fet2. LU Aarw.. Tkp s2&eae9,
,9 onG:.TtwG. &ftA Gwpu.y ss., /y91ewne l
THAT HksuLs.V WW h%ve. 4*rsksp ferst. f)veLT$e be. b.
. - - - . - - - + . - - - - - , ~
CALCULATION SHEET DaTE DESIG A BY DATE CMECKED BY SHEET No r~ g.mEcr sob ~o.
,_ c, wwa
. .x; do mn. -
o <cm,,,, ~ . ,,<E ~ o. n kAR .- $M, .
)492. J. k: Pj~ $ f L L. , $vC++1hW98 ; A 8fiA, TbhL%eH b f4 Q49 Lin., 7bbp 74/LS)tt6 TNer hw turn saankws .nm. m on& w m+,7un stena wetxc.o Fort.LQvatne..Zeee.) -
P&e. Yh) JNeHRf14.5 6 f44 A .n Hi'2 N4eet6 tat ,.Tvitcs've W TI6 39e t kp7 &ra . Ti/is$iastups7mp vars>nes P4
/ b u c e M a e rr. R v .s n m u 3 s r u s 4-pdy u s) TF+r 4h %
{j tu/H samtMsus we7N .6Los%t MtAILL-V. 4p . rte. n e..) Fsa 2. %.< 90s w ,n 69a. w; d ysc nrwaw na 19 s 3 f.x a, % W s et.os& W w su a,.@ m/tsw & 97 w A s p et t so 7 Host. w s Rse nis> uc. %n swr m, m-Pom Tt?henL /W s h% /to.re.r,- >ceud & 6 P4.4.,. ? ' 7Missew& ym.9 sitrw " f/s. M k m k m n er w p H r & k s-(bru k To J W . Wrio THassoa6 Tex. -Tt.u. /A,vsu 1&seintu T et w a u T>v a M T/A5 01ef ?Rb/2, AvD Ad2 fop t/)N TNthbrYto P'l 1485 To Pinp our t.asier d'k etov4 394a7 Soss.u fI
,.. , Qusu Tscauat.o6Y. Jh Rasm aM**do4 Y 0vLt. L &LD Hi$ & E9/ktleLG ZNfictvrs.w .782.
84122nao To wiM4 n b?:ed AM- Bu2.zinD PI WakH'T 7FA { >7/ Qui 4..f. ,
..-..------_3._~-~~___7__;__,;________= _
.- -~
.v c... u.
C I CALCULATION SHEET, . DATE DESIGN gy DATE CHECKED BY $HEETNo. ' f M JECT v: - JOB NO. _
- vssECT bMPEG M
- lib cAtcutAnow so. Fits wo.
;1t. U "
Pewt >9<42.- .- Mit . Buzzwo n Queu)McQy M u.-M me><.mc.
$vsu., novosw We%s HL.
T H J L % t t4 L P 4 W h 9 G W % : ;; + }tatt,. h a s, % Sr*Tk1Wou TMb Art..,r /reent Pt,.;rshi4. lbsrad .NddAJN
* -TN/45< N6 /* 2 M /L44 n rh h ti v re % (t w M r M k s ) {
+4u n n akr8 ws. wee use.zu '
l? vet *1G.en . 1'efiGSouG }>Os,rss,s9 $vkt,L G4dt.2.pato,
~
hu*'n~-O he,,449 R W Diktsy'a 7M5 r+% % w=p+ w LV/34nt/R) 6t.,2 2.2.Riw Fai-ftJS &satL.,7EC. ZHcernyMD , U i W.% " t9t3 His.>Houran J/s.<uno P ~= e j mA=s'cy
)P Z,*JW (49 7)$16, .Aeeraa/ h4*#
Je< as) preeant,
.n. N6 ie a s c,n u t .
S, ~2/tt)/26p/LGMH& mig dM) nirett<H SLIWWO )998//>trS Oc.?tU,. WJfs R9VtbkQ vanswe., g Mw =. yes t993, n vinssons qu9 7&t 9 /$vt:t Jhsvenskat. row 6m va Qas,wawme 7NA$nt6 98 kn.6$ W %>p w>M st.71Gs . O'
CALCULATION' SHEET DATG DESIGN 8? . DATE CHECKED BY SH EET No. M D.. aster . ... n
% g - o.m ,m .
_,_ E_ . pas. W <- 5& . Len Mwv/ M< n & A % .s plw ass J N f1tch 6Jtt-- t.derHbuT, TJtGH lAseTN AM
/*93 b'hfL 9 ).k.k. && L& Aprpr< 4, Tas!u:s 29es To seurun,aski4 sinstr auvkmsm 1 T95. <?!RWThe < e t ekt.ts. 92tvcv'P 4.usitt
/2. NEL /3/2uwNfust 2/*'d M d.. 35 C -Toa.d M/$ uvet.L e t % a rr 'e a. A r. m C P P. )6uzwo
& 9 M/hisa *?mr WP. R. Mw
- s Tm Ftvaar Ment. /
/bsa 4e .#v e,w.
N6 N C A8ea$o u.p
"'Mk'%[g/242$6.8 an 751se re dL ##'sp +nwtrup M.
-T. hcM lAVIM4 "TML >Himsuurem .rsnis. m .
Joineseo dee 4.% TV& n/v6$n6+rd-D3- M W M h 1 TGP LA5 Kbl Si+H fsette 1983 G&Ltet2.,NG5751 f h rs l 1NFlanat )9uprnaG & 7?fts
. . . A NcA4 R&/MW ly: .
. CALCULATION SHEET
~"' h . 2 * , * ~4*
CATE . DE51GN BY DATE CHECKED BY SMEET NO *
.ROJECT JOB NO.
SUBJECT A.I'rM /M ed $ O h $ f_I.- /. J 2 LATION NO.
.- FILE NO. -
) PR/tb& L t 0Ltuf*RQ -
Lu
%) & &c.u-i=-l,.TILa 11 yh-% e 7 Yc. G site-Hn-2 JMAt> o--g fpp;.e&
$ 2/<.m % $ 7 "e fk '-4L /2e)/dct.}/t674 :A":
- l/nn Mm+ihA. J.Gwin.7 Sv;B L, y
L O //i G A Gyt;I L v 8 b. 2 ,
?fcG4/$ &&k .9&~L f RW l.'h'/H ' u Bety 9 0'.c o r vau
<-? qnmu -
oT* / k y % cq y . d.m .>. - d, 4 lUd- s 6nww_<7 F 44u e n rpu ,-e/( s . ~m . I 5 L M . [...e ur u. P. .n.:.- 0 ftg2 o&E- [09(ms /Me(<p$dg4rd,*~ H50' /?Nu fi >fc g ta.cne)L]/hL.SineJMe.-.s :- c>ppi,epeu . { Nc or>s.,y.te,.y - ,. : . 7&ck 6Le M'W ) p.T &(vQ sp ,Vuk 2.p.;: _ y //ct w *
')~/L/As) J'O f,6f-)?(e :,.~ a-rd-kct QtyJP / /S//? '- Tip it n o ' ~ - - t. .
y/ /44 ToLQ 7)/h}P. TJfE 4 fE V # 3 B>wsst& % i 6/2'SH ' 67&- nt2-93 s&un&ap- % we S,uun uz 'Qocc 4 Ew u a. Fr n .m. x -. 7AinoiH 12.qtf i12'dL - 16 tug /MK l' 773 cd a rt.a Gf /2'<.9 i :. r. u ' -
- ? ks..
9 cTMCclj% )2.') / wi T H G S 7&(/""" h" f /%" <'+" = '. ' ' O - VLIE2,.4)d'Liz.2.<?izO h}c i%gdE sm 7<D c L Psvc.L h.41L L & e-np$ 7 n l* "G x.u p K s6 Th'/2Sw4. so se p,c,um. se,p'HV% j- ,j [
s
"'8"**
CALCULATION SHEET DATE D E"/U -@ 3 DESIGN SY DATE CHECKED BY - SMEET NO. # 1 4tOJECT gog un_ sus;Ect
~
4 t 2 N/ cAteutATion No. pitE so. c2 -n- Nus!LP voz p ibt.< 2 a.,;,,.in /- ,,e v rax.uw?l.Dj _l Gzs.e n e s tT J w k % & irich p~
-21 ) ,
wmL,i.; . i l& pky /,bL/22nAO ' Th! 14 4,fnAs &sry.srs2#5 Sw +1< h.-
,-.a ru.o-L s.ca.y.
Gcrag% w w nue.,y -radn.&J.,5;c l -
@<u. 7Aew -
aav - i4ue u po ?/w ovn-93 T h , }- % e t//fa W 7 k l Wf A 12 L CN* 5 ~L Hrt? //HuS140 76.L Mo. E h L4 2 2 s?- M) w e. Z / 6s & ps $ 6 6 D ($cT ? X- 3 9 Rr>pt2%s a No Skt7'1 w v
/ /r})
V $t. s * '/ R6tenf~
;wg i if.r+-DL 5 A ' rite.M/J h(L4 NH VHL %ik' . : .
/ $ c< 2 2-* W l Tf2rGe P '& %)HG - J-t8.t /So.59
/'
9 Le s t " )-r+ f) y /P w'5. /~/ 4 h -O l 9e 5146"L-96 lM6wir m wuer 944n.
@ ;?fAucNR *t %wc VM w -
= ~7h- ??4cNa u>do 6Axw.
6MSm 7ELHo
/ Jhet?& / /+hbnos m
/$op ~7f/M2 +llIW.
T L l H e 8 0 g_. - r pt6-H p /4. n u ?a w s Ihf a A9f ,,, wM W z.e, p)i z p<n &c e r y Q; I n P " l:- i- r @o 1
/$kcMc. ~ &ax. jot.9 /2da#7Rsrn Gram
. 'r CALCULATION SHEET 2""
j
- DATE O h - / t) % }
DESIGN BY DATE CHECKED BY SHEET NO. [ O.-e,Ee, , , , ~ .
.* E., . -;. A, rum .._,,o ~ ~ o. ,,<E .
I~
~
cAA/ a"YA.uatu- P c- t *^ > .?
.%~ .+ ,) r ,7M 7 NI / e 7Q Ho + & Ho w>& n A $ln.y) a & S.4 L- ~
Thl SLent! 3'3;c a h 6glidtl'unW .)S - G 4,n, nA &r - J, No dev.MW/-*QA T & 8 &77mT' flice zh aM S % s pi9 n r s? taw.. v N Karts - GLPG< tty /-an me.4, Tow Mins % misu ~ 7 %wbGkk.4esHr
)frLo24 ektW.
D Q f/ Lit 2.owa.4 6c7 0 .
. #4,-/ts,.e ,
Lstr Honnu . V'ea r e < R w s..
?.999 - SL2
/ ,m 7r $)rco wire ik W M 7~G.L. 9 te 8L& C4A~{f l V R//kPR&r) 8 /2bner w %& y "
w.w. kLa~L*LAN? /?6&/ /Hfr). HosTeo W'
. t bb b N i
ep. l Ruk,wa -
$Lisu pgm me t.nfH 7G. ) & 70 YMt-w '/ W i
9 7y . 7/ MAG 9 ?Mpo4)utstedtub 4ew-ift iN7fcWilcN . " G JMtrK &na) Htj2. Nrws. a +o "46 ta>t. /Mk Pew s., u e4 y skeue-(, i+nS : Rao+r St.of 2 H2r) 8W IRJLi17tiG9 /N' n f tpssK U( MGj n YVR.n M n
'j . ;$ 0.*
- 4 d
, CALCULATION SHEET DATE DES N SY DATE CHECKED BY SH EET NO 7 -- _
=
nLf no cw ~<
/2i%. JT
'-a m fHkvr aah%, r I Dent Mr>4E in Jrpr% 8 w1:&*
k w.-s Tw s , da? Dsv
- 1 $ c e. 2 %. m ) Q 7 tt s R y:,,- s u p .
/2+pa.;v? wed oor 7s h ae.;
T M W C..
- O N 9b"*' % ' $1 Ju- '.
y k v a .. 9 E- % , 70%5m/ Tb /}cGLc d>-ek ' 6 (c h Q p e.e.r w r .: , a+ Tn i5 c.n i.
)$ci u rhtp i.> wit 7es e p n 4
e
.o ee a
.a.r+. .- __
~
C'ALCULATION SHEET g . DATE @%.)d*$3 DE$1GN8Y DATE CHECKED 8Y SHEErNo. /! O~ O -' ~c m:. 'su8act T L 7c,p o ,c.m s
- Z h.). 4 , s 11- cucuuriou uo. ,uno?9-e
.N:
- ), [cG., La > . huht( hkesas.}ffgA.;><T/v{f p wpmAn-f if ya. m nycx J273s.
~
y cyT)ME f 2 y$4. hya 7a s%x: dazw Pn/ Akr 196n.. =>
. Qi,Q p .
3
~?sce'o , u ~n .,. '
fs 3 83h ' 7 Mtfr4t <> TreG- Avs.sc W GM , Gum. Shq J9M . $OM SVOI't Hf 5 PL Lsnev W:.f' To L g s.a V 7ra ElNs e ~ce
- p%Tu.
~
14fje <ti /e&c jwf$*, N4.$$,,,,5Ut% .: a
$1.9 Nc7 T4' & Jf L .u re ..-.~' >
7b WHm No utz6ewa Y -N 4w z-t % 'NO'd>- Sww>uS aw / -- T deG.b/}46 h p r n S C*t,e-1l .v..
- 2. - 3 en,'Ast 3 , 47/1C, 7GC yh LL 72) /H fput fl# fyk< ~~ i
$ + " t d stt- 1MfC M t C22f"C
_._. D' ' FE>.s- D , d a s L t. p ra w C . f S u t. w w %
=
54wa# k 7;&ue crxet. sem h/E/4// '
&#i4 w 6PP.
b~ bL.J3D2-W9 N W 97Rs'tYa.Q 4 Me"/P'70 M W S
- en Qvet.w thsG q{f~~AM y #' a exn 7
.~' w:
a CALCULAT!ON SHEET ' E OATE *D*-
- s. \
DESIGN ay DATE CHECKE08Y SMEETNO- S*
,. I S.OJECT
- JOS NO. _
SUBJECT *+ MM Nd' d'M Mb bI CALCULATION NO. "- F?tE NO. hvLY ta m;1 m .;T'irf), 6>e75
'^
V 72)L-Q TN/h$>/ H& " $>r72s%4;;* ,
.4 /.? ARhK' W G v in u & M w a s t. uy . -6 r b Tre/# 7tn 7ehv4' S$$.SJh ifof .ht.4/L%%CJfDc. 6.1 NN- c.-
9- TGf Jh04 LG, ': OE f fbl % M 7D'iM /buk' M1;W 5)J .lWM"'b '
- 1 E,
)pf.rtf J4/ZbtNc R .
~
l-VFIC 1%ty/ Ho CTMi% *sC NFC-(j Me p,anssu AGw21nM 704o TNaoudn but m wk9 n< ;??wrs- g$u H% r @ .P.a:5 Ra.23 )&w n u9 p-o v5sp 6>usez. ney nT?ps u.re w n ( 7sc u 4 us er ).s, Akww) der up,sr " 46 E u.- 7&4 7A - ,. 12nA Tunsen smo wsnf PHasnL E r w unus a d G n d. ~.-? l {prwic-c>sE. 7)W
'O^ 6en,a Ex; m % ??fy SQh&L uAvr ieem.
p,9 ssyp &yo //I r s4swwdL'
- fet %wef 9 NeyiL
. .- -_ 'Or' ? 2?"*!! 4 '
< h c/n n m
- - ^ > 'g~ *$ .,
- 3,o . r.
CALCULATION SHEET
.- DESIGN SY -) ( h o y I d h N D'I 5 D, ATE CHECKED BY DATE~-
- N' '
SMEET NO _# [
.,.1 6i*
O .*ROJECT ~ JOB NO.
.I--
Jt.4 /NL% LL susJECT
. . - y, cAtcutAtioN No. nLE so.
N[' # Q,2, GY(Y hY _- x - Of hMW (nr/E$ h kied>Y '**lI' W '
;pp+ratL I
h' - l I l I l O l U' 1
==--- - - - _
.. g .; . . .,
). .
CALCULATION SHEET , L
. ,, DATE h - ll" h '
d
. DE$lGN BY DATE CHECKED BY SHEET NO.
4 0 JECT JOB No. suwEer Smm 5:U.' 6## w 2 Ihu Cucuurion no. mE mo.
.J t
M) l%r8 RTL k P/fW u.a a 7H Se t6 wth ti>Pm 'T + ,,. ,N ? P. Gp JCers.n. r H e w n-r T W i !? e <.u , &.A
)$. A2 s e.g.uup fu(Poa+ H*$7vtW* v' /S o%Y
'T G L k.fa n t, t-<- 9hc t4%%- tnqw,. h ps 1* t/ s.es s.s. r s e. H C u c..
% e. u 8 9 A e$ pinl M.,,,~.i .ih, 1
g x , a .s m ar- A - w . n r k m as a Q uas.L.T h o H S H e . *bsfd & .
)). Psap 7-)/ 4.; J h w19 S t W ** = &= - t 0) G voa. M
}GenM'M)i} sc.45.f ed Q2, -NHw op<.Lnar W Nc ': %.:. , i
, frh&b- pO M M Qu es.s MR.
Q_ f.Znte ts+C' bs& As 7 T't tr, - s,, - ,, y- +
/?6 W c QJoeLnen ) owsrW Sst ri r6.k ~ )rp74ttvo We.Q
/5,* ? > 7e R,m.t " < -
/S s e y ;t. / E s c.e v u .
.5* 5:-2 *.
Rse. scc A W s P thesn? H t,t 7e T y>?g . 15-Zo &r$ h?v7 Sow ~t '
}?i=i'ift M M S"rTF /8+1b
/]f /$y Ro4KAfh-AS..
7 w sp a p a u.r w s m n w y. hkJo 6. MJIfM ]?o p>k )64 m f?/3mac7l
$N6 .R~?9pc t19RN beatTH 4?va uu-I'wa.,v XY - Sc*/ c t.- -'
" J5 4 o w/7 fr.7d gg . _ . . , , _ .--. .-_. M w/
y, rte E$ -
-5 fat / )Hfar &y
$7e7/ W e/!:*N >' >
77L )$.'c9f) t i 70 ~5St S-4,is -
. < .s ua nwL i 9 PA.G o*ss M 41 t+ M 9 v4*d h e krL/ !
To Jr%ti'fiu& n - 7g . a4s <g nemis. f)wkr hw?m. gfyr,?3 f &'Ao lj i;&lrM o
j ,
*S CALCULATION SHEET
.tc " ?4 e DATE DESIGN SY DATE
.r~. CHECKED BY SH EET NO.
'ROJECT '
gog so, j 2
' SUSJECT
. _"x.
CALCULATION NO. FILE NO. N.- zc, t. 5 .-
~
Sp}d49 19vAnen defM % ' lA)l&rW d* % a v t o s yng de se f ? Ae % bosr%mOGa. A GotuT4.tM. i O- ' S e b
;3 - . , t.
CALCULATION SHED' d f /db OATE U S *I A ""b 3 DESIGN 8Y DATE CHECKED 8Y SH EET NO. /d 0
/ROJECT JOB NO.
C','O.' C OT MS _ ib CALCtJLATION NO, FILE NO. -
- l. ED 17t.,QL )9pcrk?naf '.WJG-OP46 .
n- 9 'f 6 4 >.s T W ' A ID{Bsati
- 2. ,Lw nu:
' pt & Y=-
x-
- EWi%eFi9e.4.,, wa r xaan&&
$1TG
. m e . 2 . x s,.
h ,3t s '."* Y Y) N6 Lt.> h% e4no R Q u n,75-c k ~ /2 Y M 4 ^ "
/p**M 1Fi % Yh 4-c w64 l 1 % w x,ra, w n m w to waw ev w w .
- N k.W F.,,Jt. & y ? W e p $ 1 7 d tr.1 L Yrc& VN:v.* j K7t u W)'A9 wETW :
0.3. .R-c.> )? 8a ~3Tr% Vf65 96-N SLcRN ff A k7 hen hns 39t.rh.c pr:s ),iur A O va Ts.w. k rs n r G q uiu rs.a g s w A rn c- : kR4 . f . t.'r j m W/ *o., m w%
&T &*
V ->; 75chpie+4 3~h 4,n. W<,f t sT # i I,.r wl.M t@<L. - 7D--oms. w at.l 9, 4 ? wTth m*
/
h ~7]&7124. n -,, m run en 9. fasts py2s-hix
/
&yswer &&8 R % te.n 7)( 9{t g g+1 b ytt w., p A: ..
X ' db, . pl - 4- 17'Ddt wb-T To SW NoT VicB 96r4A. . b, V/Q -N'T 9Wy)P ag stry /}u DL1%ar-er>-> wM4 &+ w z % 406M9 os<>6 age. Wer m%Mr.4%# udeAs 70 $/ wad. Toi.P p p(f v4%e f 4-7Ms Gtoh~ t*%f Mq 4m
- .- .12W'?'Y^.6hY N W ~
,, s, u
'~
+ '
t CALCULATION SHEET DATE e' b * . " > _Q ' ' ' ' DESIGN BY DATE CHECKED BY SHEETNO b / # {
*ROJECT JOB NO
.-=, .
ru m-' cA_,- -E N, . fvot. 'Tc.v. f di LAA. Okh Ik "C.,$r@g7 /N'l
- l. 7e (.A) . 'TN/ & $"t s f , SD?6T ~ e o :
W ib en.prt P i O Yr' - 9"P ~'~ ity ?R6 R. ??t4*s>< 9/454 A E;:: w Wl /$ 2 r ;e #'(f)::~
.k't-jimi To ! .
f} K jdprebA 7.I, ./Marem
/kst:Lf
& PcL.
fr-+fl'1aa.:O '. ; m p z t s w$ / && %%f Abe'y A. \ P(7dJdy on Y- A1+ 4L. -s z.7,u , u m s/ Y coe ur w/)s,n; / a< a aid.L) pQ no n 2.Sv-#1NK.- W- t M 6 b & P > % c ~j A
; gn jq.82 etwsMme ,
o G nie=r . % n k m o w
/f,) & h Y $ Ih '
' G,Grdad-J'**\ k $- & .'. ?;/.*n.,^,
O. GPk h Mvg anM /sas,m seu)
']~/fM PL.<r7% t fgm ,, v$ / % ;
B>ot$ Ywup & g,s %k)u-)< 7 W A H r<t. N 4 4 N ti.
@WL jt es sow'm .C ep wC G7HM- '-p op 81c3b6 }lentTZr by u> wqjis. httk,Ls. 'steem.t, y ,
JSte)/ewa4) w M<ns fo * / ct) u <cro.c-o m, x- (5e + 19r9o v T* %.r-k. Ae W<> : d p uyeA . 7MiiM0i bitnes,. 2s,- 24 5 6/tL .L a et. e + a : TCL:P 7*& Sl5
&GexY /felt'b 12 4- W ?,c $
%oAH l uso kAnHf, }}g&Js.f p>tt cc1 V f/2&f.; s:wp7)h~
~
f6c.n0
$v wet e
&6M u k & w d't -
Pir.o r F='ertmt. ?'tcwir accenn he(he-se,t '-t ;'r?(+71 7tY+y o 77f t e-14Le)6er 6*r74
" }#, 1 9 k n u - N i s u ^ ? m b ir-r + y , fd6 Le n.L-) X H e 1,s n.s e. t-e GiTfe f/
h!' hl S-)4)~ "A A ep,p.54, ok wnu.4? H-i.t/AH+v,prseawn
- 4. O h e4 m red % -Wrswv.:lh*=.
- r m-rt.
1 - - - . - - - - - - .. .. - .
' '~ a.: . . t CALCULATION SHEET O :.. y : .;;,"~'. 1 1 : %.e ;g o. . O -L h r o.... ... ~e.u. : - . .. e ne C os cr so. ~o.
- , ruar, w.~,_ ..c, ~ o -
Bn&J
;r, r w -sJ ,
t'suT w aes &. a FJoi }2k:.Psert\
/d / e_4*rG A *v W 'y 7N'1 mrums nsw - /se/4 W ,=q. ;
foe:os.: 6d:-T JW
- f
.T u 4.ym no EsGezj/
e { M c3~5c d.). Loei24 $'onn Lz?hrM Her ):?rns.>,as !
$1 H 6 - /$v.Se iHT?es%T~
W.m w,>> wa.msnm q)u,wa
} wM$ hc7 6^^ Ann $")^4yf '".a G 4 R*2 J. % A w. n r ,L.o sez & ,
a V /N ha Acy'- 4 7#rE5Gi E NG Gs.J "
/ N/dir//L y $4.adeQ hlM*GCA LG tll-L '
(s>$/A..
.Toa n br w & f x Ws N 4 /2.re
+w > W~7xpTo b A.PaTowcNt.un trYz
&Hwmrad / ' JCi +s.
- . J.fraarcv j.c<.n> Ney Nav.s. .x.6e .w.
RPA:ur /24A:Jos / rrt i G lenn '..:. ho tT 4 ACA . O
.' .s > " ~" '
t CALCUL ATION SHEET. l _C3 _/2_Q.
._ , DATE DESIGN SY DATE CHECKED BY SH EE* NO. )
O._Ec, -
,,,N,
{ 2., n,ma .A.,_ _ . 1 1
% ~s < tcgJ,ajaa.: :i 3 pspr/cei)992-l 7/fsAf& }}&fetL&y l
/,Qm / u, 2 e a .Mdit dvkr +.a. /-
9er T &Pt L- ' P.9 Nc7 75l L. RN Y/&cPV u>g et.e }pa.i.am 4oa4 p.>,n~ r / ./ w .Do. l
.T m T rv+A%4 DRS /$ ve-KRra " d8it:
l 7 6 u . n h. 4 o h s. rs w 4-9- F w w +r 6 ? ?t.- "T h i. e.. w . L - can.-yeinql/&a.us,t.nw Tsm. NG
)$v %w/kok (6EM}
- Tbsp SQ A G w n> t.p e m as d a d aru.7.:a 4*H chkW w kw( TC.wr,-9
\ kswiins &.
> rwsq
< cw yta.La es. -
. , p, aux-
~75 THasp.,/2 w &
TiL Niy J w,- i.a a w A us p.>. t s..- hTC . (c1CL- r"
,N) v/2byrnis
- e. x n w $ J i
- 1 ~
Q/ 69t '- y M/e>vwzA 4 #wd #+f 8&epo c>N^^ 9'/f e4ecey 1o *$'6yr the"ge4dwa470 W$- q ,.
* ^ '
a- > t CALCULATION SHEET
, ,, Di1E g E /L-F 7 DESIGN BY DATE CHECKED BY '/
SHEETNO
$ ,noggc7 JOB NO
(.
....n, ..
ra hs& s e -,,. ~ .. ~ E .. . Ta 7'
~
714n99 - nc>r:wa - un as.a.v? T9 6 = A K c/rdds.-
~"/ W]
l W &Al l HOT /$partet.e..+.-. .
) NE4t 4 i' 4i n ]~
(9>#ea-- M E4_ V DTE-t%b &ft.t. hk A a i
- 4. De-r i492-7fet? & Qsci 6 A%- .
Q 5 STHW- Ao 7%% fbMIu .
%)# Mw &7e> 4:p M6 w r w rc,) x .
dJft ~4%,79k- Acym% n & N 4 Kt sv6 v TO lhWbt,l]4ih.s &i;
-Ti ~ T M 'n +H -A v-su.u+ute P%e:nd c%Ja .
be.n as ']'o LM o< DH4:.. Jtw. M9 Grhcr2 IAnnW 2Svr,-OP i A 7&ym. hla b Gl Q M o r 4 r w ' h i ^ r A b M d b t-t 7b M y -/7, //6 er/2 Si pe>T?a92. 26 s. . No Ti& iH es^ & T M409 12% s /?&c.m29 & %)HCy O-ez.u enpvawww wra rco 7ia T 77+ +r c Qtcovf tera $ L.e-tcrW 9 " f W ' F-
&4.P&n.LTt.-
R&.+es7.O T/ m f/.e M i W ? "
- o. tI /9'r 4 M.o?.& J h % .
' CALCULATION SHEET DATE C$ =. //~$ }
DESIGN 8Y CA1E CHECKED 8Y SMEET No
~-
O -cac' -
'c Nc suBuct
,, //h e s/ w c C.< cut 1,o~ ~o. ,,tE ~o. _
O&c.)9bi? ' 7/W I49 3 5 Msg J %rr.ts.) -
~
OuaT' &fu F'A r SN6 Aepm r 'to 22 6)S.cer4.L 4,/f,,,cw&J < A:'e n 6 jdt m s < PA> J Ws a . Ziw T /wps TH4T J-Y%u+hs. mgoe:,w: 4.ms = .nz. r Seu. wdn ,4e ::n-
'Ms 7MM kCu6, 7 /fseLLittt . T8it e srids t w .iW w k.c M LWMrm O v H-rv 6 m Atu' <4w wru f~T i
, / /
wM y r! sexfu. t- A 67?t. l- 4 ei a 5; degRnrunP"'72foi~<-te Dc-wf%tT AE b ,.> %) w T P> D NoT~ TelM TO 1
??74 9 Su> y peas & AMsarur iM4 /2u< ' '
er Ji? u 79g 4. & . 7- 6fot. Mc7 A.%cH?:.) ns / / Rh v ) . Z -i % . T Z F W T H M + 0 c- xL pA Tl&t+T &n~+ M 7 , w &y o Mr w119,a '1te6er1-)
- 6. M { b l F h =
6 Nrn;c P9&b8 4 g % &tm o , w- e.nnnu v n, -
- m. :p V o x3 Ti n /
a~ Wap A%2p St.n Pyc+ d.a@+-
\
\
' CAL.CULATION SHEET
. f.-. DATE _ 3* ?s a
/ /a[]
DESIGN BY DATE CHECKED BY SH EET No d O - Ecr -.~n wmc1 a _ ru iu m6 ciourio~ ~o. ,u ~a - tB -
$ ~
} p Ha7 71/wjd i i t u*2 AG M 0 Y
}p'd' pi if? 'r /Mm, h,y (c;h+nY 3 1umu, ~ nI. m wa/2vnM
$6po?MP n<e-rn TM4r y, .w f# 0 a q& 6 7* w T + J Ci e 6 S&G /2fs/Mnne/
fy0 /p2/ n5 e:Su72 &er- Gute:.N b7'Xh cy-- OT/{est.S* MA.)$16 ' CY } GU6-- 71+r+7 Wi ni. wm RT TQ A W BW
'7. Jr w T. #
4)K4 4 A+,si k WT diWG /$ WMs Cr+ E~ W W Asih6er/L) WJb e;I~ A ns c t: s A-M *N - \ Ha trv)@ k wwu W7ee/V/M-iJyy . Peu.T t.ut< t!H Mc% twnr ??WM4+rw /Wrw
~
/muwt h p,rG Tev T R )fC4 v-tsG W tT W h 4%4: c !
FWuM R 4A %c> s wmesvr-Jr7ee O Y 'Th%t>4 iG? u)m.fej&n P
\
Moi g />'ym'
-rn w 4 7e .
- a- ,
CALCULATION SHEET '.. Afe , h d /_/_*_ 1 eesio~ sv e4,e esecxeo sv s ser~o 8 9 -/ 8 i O -c, -.~> zue:ee, y Tid IAG] pl L estetur,ouno ma no. , h4 GJ t-Oh.G / 0?e?taArnM Yrs $krk.- Mif e- 49 1
'T~0 /MHk9.44JsTH 'k6Yf . j f%3,25 Fv6) q p L rpov 90W 7~et-O 36 T PV b o<A h oc<,& W -t both n OLj .r4, wT
~
/ weg 71rfa g Sk.,.). L n..?-L .
Shh S' lO X-= b tg V O Tr u T ikuM Tv t =r-Th< u E )4 & cr)NTb
\ /b+ek JT- n pg. +G+J'?. TbtE fi%T /4Mt. 24'&R %%-
-= www w Mrs r -
i aca 5? Wpc-n- Y&ac/s 4 O l anM szcs-t.c W W
- 0. Yh > 44 T/9Cf h a A* W W eo A N E'*$ f/f Nd7 //9t)h. F W Ho a6.9
$7ecTtf L f*t+lQ NW bl W hl*!" i fIVNI /=9 J/6 T n
7 v T w .- 7 %W w : m 4- M m . s' ogyo vMo @e/hS h C6 M ex G_ To L-Q
"'wk pLuy Fo np oe.>Y ts-9VR7 Quiu h s*
#'d G'-N4 t/ g p g swsu g WV4-Q lA.>t48r 71/G4 70G thm "4
< < df Grze Mff'k)bdW.
'O' isog n gm sa,y., _
f 7 m k Q v eq La C.'s % h - 72 w v. 4
}, , . w. r -
nn p. Asw new etg --- - .
t CALCULATION SHEET
, , DATE A **
- l l~ S -
DESIGN BY DATE CHECKED BY SMEET NO - e-![
.J
'AOJECT JOB NO.
W80 * '
. inh CALCULATION NO. FILE NO. -
nr in P v4 ns ~ 12s & w [ /96 14 4 #/24 A 3+m- M ,a:.m. w Ktt.]g,,Wp 75t Q
}}, 7ew 7 7 6 L / 8' oAd (* D A
- Lewk av vitai~ i e/s.e,r ta Gnp 12sen.;ny
* / Ase f a / '
r7n T ncup /3 9 /ksex>w HK- = y W)-r my .::= c;Putn u]~~' wHs (4.n 72;tddhw a 7*r /$s T- T bt *h TOL O Ti w T H g )).jpp fi-u:6 9%,2z- . B w v 6 r + c y r a V a v., t- p u e e t:.n.eu. I*r9> GI w- 7bLA W fAGqn oc7 g, w weu os.s3 7z4 w.fTetRH)
%, 2.z. Et ~. ToLP niu.>wa.rt. )
1 l lh Y rg.g p.rme ,9 c. 7 % k :. n ~ L9 o n pis.e. w i. k
- 1
%Aw 04-fu, v <
w mm4 yxL 0 5144 2 }/-7 kyaM y n Nc6 ,e ,. k. O,- Nor 9 " n w t. 5>stH #io-n d Win &j D O Bt #d-c._ 4,e9 6.
)
O . 2". - e egS UD Wa . '.m. . . ....a=== H. LEE HOFMANN g o'>44.s3 5:e:, MS dnFesZd>cb l
/h2JdS nn tawu w-wg O m* IDRs&LGA.Jte4a,,-
m ca.+ % s % M4M9
,as m
/m W o R Afn E&q inn,w us a d Av WS ud T U fnas M
- /rw fouy y 77opir Z WM
%imwwwiwprr
/lorM t.3< /N 4 /ZdDh h$&N/aldV
' use 9 h n- w'wh&h Ann. & L.
/Kn#X Mogr. St.H Sk2. ak:-
O p p _ g ,;
'f /6'
. g,9y4-
.h* J CALCULATION SHEET DATE DESIGN ey DATE CHECKED BY _ $ MEET NO _
'AOJECT
- JOB NO es .r-? y
~ -- CALC'ULATION NO. FILE NO ' I de g 59 #
I 1 l 4 i b. l
$ NUQ&L YO ((Ws.Wj q p 7,m ;_ ,;7 ,g ,s,, q R2 Mw. m n &J2./mg M o T is&ru nDu evto,jl%., g 5 ,,.g, ,
AgW MMGD '"F#' R fAMas, 7c s;;;;rtg i a,ra \ 4hK WHc%ag G ;ee o 7-/5-hjit
e .,
<. CALCULATION SHEET
- .rE c:B. , a-G 3 DE$lGN SY CATE CHECKED BY SMEET NC lL
*ACJEc7 JOB NO _
~. : , sus.;Ec7 T7T-(ta#f- ^ * ,
/ dM M_MS c4LeutATioN uo. rile wo.
Y. f,er%upsq.' $ M PMhs, A N LUVueQtL Cn E.f 57x5- a has $ PQ & w - $7>W: }}:oo 2:I5 1
?/ A W - 4 f6
$ f $&
/F Sw/
T/?$ K 'sif1 5 7 6c(2)R m w. }les c ~ ' '
/2e d 8 4 u sa>cw % Mx4 u-9)h.an ?f6rygnws sp>9 Glue.<-n%
O 704 *"9' W &#: APL /&ur wm . 7//+7S, c o ' S m/ -e rp PMupc m & l dtW w -. Mvg V
/
/ 6 4 f a k.7-.
/
Ds.s ) p-N$ Ptovn 7%H Q-Aue-.2%vr. , O
;se DATE' S&)4QQ OESIGN BY b# h
~
DATE CHECKED BY SHEET NQ O. - - Anw SUBJECT -2 CALCULAfl0N NO. FILE NO. Pp n os w/ s / Ten
/
)Gvf%tL l
Que t < M . .,67;per , ap / S G,At 6 % t _ _ 6e .1.1% e Lopp n / ML WY %*- Mf
- Ndf goc.nl yu l &
1 fm g kgf Lex 0%u
.. feps //6 A& d s O~
57 we n G u w y,;,>r - Ssom
- 2. N M h ht/Af.4 [ W .
W < V Kias ., f2, em & 4% c c r==.x Q et ff24.A , / / ' pas : Ne mg fws%%lw#s & w.y & &wM h w}nas>9ez. e~n em &enf 6 w A aTV//N6, e s, p ,a w g s ~ ,w . . na h[?e '
' :e .
CALCULATION SHEET re G-242 S. [ ess ~ er ears c sexio er -. s ser~c/3__ ,E O- -
. . . ict .
A+s. ette m ~~o- ,,ci ~o - R$7/D 4meL % 7YVE. 9 78 W v-4% NerAS 7[h? evny.d - Yk & , LAdd. t
&iwia a m a d &
<Whe W PS$K- .
Innws w w ca 7zy m qt w g- wm% h&ff/h ,c-a) prL- ) 7 $ ' m wn e a ., jy;;:.1 k#fd. d ^# 2* ' r~. "' 8H2ks
.psna ~~f c
wr>b 1?p f7Air >% dG
. bWH 72/Pbvd M/N6 S4tAL &J Wr i /J s v.&
Mw/d5 Gn f jps rsuxdam 5 ' C) MnG Sc z. 95 8 hk Meerzeted 1 THWh6 %s. } 9
,,_ ~
't. *>
CALCULATION SHEET
, , DATE O b"[h,)
DESICN BY DATE CHECKED BY SN EE' NC A Oc 'AOJECT Joe NO, [f \ SuSJECT Y' h CALCULATION NO. FILE NO
~'
s-O
}<t 86 s PAap47.
?f^9* Y Mn& 9 '
% 6' 4 fpAdre P wa ;:-0 Sw%er f44 #4 % d4 4+PGP Jt-+t. / A b !4? n 4 in I Xm a
/m cr . &m a m>e -
& M'~
7m,ra-#= u m nk f pfr e t. S rb e k pus.5%4 6 & Q D&v k ,xte2-s-sau le+rudsp M 7/4 e+r. i ON e.- n=H fi+rth's%:.kHee.
/?
y v ir e 7 wesar es ns. ~ I
. --s> . '
O' he a%4o6 S Mg toid yn Wfa i 7 ! " i n , p o x 7 P .'
4* - - 3* 6 C'ALCULATION SHEET f >J-f h b )
, DATE DATE - CHECKED BY SHEET NO $
dEslGN.,5CJECT ev v
, JOB NO SUBJECT
$ CALCULATION NO. FILE NO.
A 7M h Nb f
~~
~
f4fX6: .a l h& bC5-}-) SCC Do p ur 75 ** K Ah l Frwd 6x e ?
- 75
/%dy' 2e ** + Sde.ss) -7 fje =
75eM v
/eee & >
Q .hs&pr&j wg vwTys 5WAwente enef E m u,y s-o > n
?cca-rk 4iV4 C% .
. a 4wem -/#ense,fw;a M.
wwnwm b>p2.c,, w J St.p ort. 77P~ + b W4799& - Rt-e-w L dwL QS 7D Mh6 l'yyk /EeSs-+ oLD defsas resp fp se, Wt. rr W n ,s-*"ra Q. ;%g p pr-e.x, -S GPSM Mfi6 An- /&wl dww Cft=Jd, 1
4., , CALCULATION SHEET DArE .C " [ da=* ossic~ ev oars e sexiony . s ser ~o F A e. O - .., .. ~ o Mao
~
. . .cr _ m c.amm1,o~ ~ . ,,<,~o. - i
% i:, .2% p es n e ws. 4pjw&l pps m n m orx<.a- 72w tu-ak ; ,
u . y m . + s' , h '??&:L E*kW<A,cM i!= A'
#2 -/e- 6 5 e > -o a 1kes & w,,t' M.4 d ro#,vw;V-tw+ar wro vs g fp A % g7/fw - ne rvr.s %h '
m % m w s As f Dzmrsgfes. f 70?b Sw s-b uh n') & n A psaru nm-
.9wnwrw + , .ns w w.MGims? To;ns.+ rulran.
,n
@'h85 Mf A ,a n s m ,_ s a a v s s.
fm .22 /24exM
# / c.sv 4- 444G G
/
l s99 s-:- av % Yrs G WMb SRPStL v /f4ecsiM 1 Afvt.p n 1ki d t. M p t /te. Ep:H& 4e w G: us. l O Rhys w e.O = -
- QvW 50~5'WN - Y l
' :e . .
CALCULATION SHEET
,, , OATE " *
[/p h m . .. O -.=,
..m c ,ce. .. . m1 dagg m: . ...c, ; (dram .
c . < _1_ . .,<~, - c.yeauu 'd= % nL. YaAxs J): 5.. Tv&s w Mr+><M k. '4f8* - ;
%y Jda ut, ~ Nor /wtTs.9 70 PCG< y .
//;/o f6I /4eXS
#d1Cbei 4%34
}} l$ AsME (, J ^ gen s uu 4
\
0~ ^ NfyrtG A I fineisin Mmw -2 4/H1-W -6At
% +e= +
kpfsp, - SL = DW, Tbhl-ywe.sen.< -m W pia c $iiep rat. /A w w L - Wg, f g 7 4 4,u s .wp n nr
# qp /nwtrcy [
7p h% W+4. . Tau.we 6 maw "w% h SN$ [M hb-dd -
@ l9e% AMduen ych er' - 1 ht>y M t-O N fM -C ~-y 5 96f of '?/da+J" & S<1:
t o*@ .
~~'
CALCULATION SHEET CATE
- lb** $. h DEslGN BY DATE CHECKEDBY SHEET NO 9.40 JECT i ' JOB NO SUBJ kCT *'
b CALdVLATION NO. FILE NO
~
4t>#4 - 7sn 7N/ze@ 7prec -- 774_ wm m,u. 7n#2 d+
& 4 H Paw
&cw> -
3 $= :.wa-es. A9Ldk. wx/W o 8&cAumm. fW MA49G & w 3 W /fr S. 6 AL 7 Ci N>2c M %n. / m bAl . fem mw ) . m .Mm m Tr"6L jy 1 4 ae;, W ~/- / '
.< . i l i.
I g .
.n . ,
.j Tn- B t' kn~ga.- rm sw.71as.- ' .
O U
%byt: QuiWeeL, za Drie: z-es-ea ('
@ :3282iG2m=> M. D. Bew ~
l M tk be- k Sicn leH GPU., L. My a > Ja, trez, M s a.ere M @
- GPa- pa.rw.sjus/e s_.
ikdu r co~ d reed /, h tk. eE46 tkt S/cw un+ .V Secreuve ak~t his % p/ms M tid if woL ytwered- %t Ia- u.m s Lm O buims relaksQ witL Lar .
.Tpagud $.
~
c49 as aue. wve<>L. h
'& or cbtebw & M82, /kik. /kv-k -
seq up kff GMM. Yuns.a f tM,
%labhu Dave Bac w ,wtperkk
&d hk W M,h :1 ,
-, na eu u - s a w ae-
% 54 - L ~ t % N ec , 2L L Ax /s> f, llo 3
&a , kH ThD. I O, f wu */d g we a @a, W, an k ~&a wNW$0A (.
- V
/
pper M,
'. y c c. .-
i a -e.3
,. La/c L l98 2, & M, fla4 E U
"';: YEbi MOW y S w Bua~~ a,/~ Pa y , as L
~ y/ te A44 a NwaA- & w yi okL a -
m7 ena as s w 4%m&~ 3 % r- wc+ p k e W +
& f&Q L % y a chE ox y A M .
O c~ F 2, tv.5, M w G # ;u 9 jar 81 y b@
- My%
ayn%L @- M pbkl Lt & 3* ML % **
~
, A%
)%~i- EW M W V? .
nqapan. w b kaspp4adA & M. bk
- (w r y, o n .
ef W a~ 94 M V * *W
le
} . ' ' -f j -
$4.?
l G . ./ . h M .k 8 M M cazz- weut s" hM_' L I 6/4 BkE az4 I M eA4_. .adg_ gh.gt. . M 6ad Y A . $Qf'34L y d zfd ' 0*
. . ~
. (-
~-
p W . f . sa ,a, s. W s ym: l at
/. _re e M A- W .
O }
$ ~l
~
Th_ g//e
~
A. 8 c A T. d_. A % t : . - M Sub. ad.vice O -
- 3. W -dL_ , d- cp p uA/ .v. _c 6~ p da/aA. ;
O 9 sa j
" &u *~ .
sn qws bn-s A .- -.
?
q e ' 1 ga p i nynn a d
+x z A~c m ia w :
% /ds of e w m wA y v'
~
~
O # cfa z a^f 3 my Q&
- . -------_________M______________________
,s.
I c
,y .
4 Z . '4 ,6' - O C5(7 d%%~+ 4 w.p a M Iad , U d d u age. W i QW U &n. M~ % adit ~,es. M. Fe2
& LJ t/
fydd-
]MLW g M, M poJ
- W As fw-leL . A see b /ad tutww-d a ya nog 7 g'
&' & ddl 4 am L tc 4.a %
Ar A
~
fi<-A p p uaa n o n n . y a c~ ~ L w & A rt. f^" n % b- aRet yhk 6-v M f M A>5 yW cn p ,w &pp y -- - ik$ . (-7w,a &h.d, w,WW w.- k g.Au .) .T M Li tad o- - g p a _ x a s a m ,- _ GLA E wa~ u & M f a- ,q M. r a A p n,eb
'O l i 1 Y s q. .. 2 - lc - d : l . fh,O. V ft.v o '
- A *$ -fi& ww/WiWW
$ $a. ,9:. ..
b'd h Il f pL W N [*' s, r Af got 2r
$ gyi. ~
n n,My,ef..- at u a L& % # dy3&. T(Mf64n Zw& a-N.- -- a am p - A pwn9a ' O - r n p e p s-w esa .a p' JLe pam t w. m A po* q SAL - o wr en w a na e.'
. a 1/ M Esh ab . /+C~#e j, c h y-6ALC L C A-w A a asse-g c .-
2r e M , t e c- < % & o r ,pn p w , ate, 2 ,- & y ~ a p u d ; W . A' . Tut A.44 Q ..-
,%W GUL w t L Ond $%Js.a /
0 .
w----. - - - - - - - . _ _ _ - 6 h a.
'f , YO C 0[
$-24 R}
q *M9 -. O y i f , h cW W e W ~ d M y m . fe&. 1 L. M & y n 4% 1r s L,ck .,a~J-bt k LL M n a i;h y Ii t m , w a v;- 3 e M y b Aa. (cv k b d 6 4L ~ 7 % - e 7-1) j A eA A w eys m.
, vi .
O ~Z Cd%L. p /hudb2. n && Qdna.-
& Aa fw at J n p . & M H=c dp o m , .
am 6f ep '
# ,k M A.
$ c
~
92' y- M, w-T w // m* ang - l
,sW, e
- f. h ,w%.~ : >
.uu , wm_ n _-
)
% w~&)%pahn o
a A. a) ak- n agevo. p a dA @ k pn
c .~
~
fu(2.-24 -d j_ 4 G n y
., n.
e :. --"
- s. . . .
f .
~
Ql'e O. 't ' ,
/-
(57 6j f 2. 7 , 8 3 o
- Y3 7 .n.,
frL
- 2. 9 7
@ U mL W ~ &cca. at 70+ R,L,
~
A Y ?5 6
&- % aM y y 4. M A _
f n (+ a k. a a v. w fGA PU a4 W M. . O 9- call y A .-g d a 4 W L. . .... nw- etL. ecdaith y a. ca.a.R f w nn - nSe k. M te- pe. 11% .
,Jae.ac.w.... ..
6 & e- m ' I%.wE h,0
~
,' chats, .dc . & fAL L te- M a J.a ,
y n L vo+ int
%f p e. .
aym u w .
&ca&L ~
bom L W # m edu=s ~ l F z.2ad aAL gemt 4 gwp e o . m , l# #Y ~
t l
. / .+. ~r. c
?_ - C5 ' $.5
'Y O y .
+
]
M zwa. r g a l a w ,/ ~ E l t ; l _ '* Y M [ M c- ; n m. D- w fuktn ' 42d L ~% t & /ktb~
~
8 N b, '_ . W ,. [*
- 4 o e n saw
, em;.
Ag 1A. u h A 44 f Q % [f%Ar 4
. p
~
44 4.- l co w a,q n c p a tu e p ), . au L-cns - tu . [n w ... ..
*6** W % -)
Los 4 ( AN _ zz; & y ' - tO .# p & & A aAd,A+ Om . 8- che. My a:AJr A W f% A Gfah
l *. j t e 0 z-u-83
- g Amu + a - -
%%M we4 a<fe~ # A . M # p
%n n gza&n, as a a uap m yy~~ pa z&,a2 % . (Di/L Ba~%.w w p.
.~%%_%8 ap W -
m nu s u~. (sWe:d%~m W wn p:.- tyW my* Mi. W with GGetzL g2t W =a _
%4 cv % A @u^J fy mM.
QM %An i
#% & 8 (j. e . sZ. ---\
&%#. 5jWw ho"e. Arr % s ev M A M fA# h * ';y-9 J ak e ~ a A t g e, y % :.
& una % %M #ept put a m 9 k & _ - - - - - - - _ - - -- -
o . g L'9 :: .c,- - figt-?4 -s] 1 e . j
-Q. g.) -
yi - l l GXfn4:2 4a w D& A&g,J39 , l okn~ d a p A4 & e- _ . i i
)
~
O-I e
. . . ~ .
l O .
" ' ' ~ ' -
---m_m____.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . _
^%
v. n V Bechtel North American Ptwer Corporation- _c.oNTI DENTI AL Interoffice Memorandum H. D. Bruner Date March 2,1983 to Subject ' Quiltech, Inc. From J. W. Thiesing i of Recovery Programs Copies B. K. Kanga At THI-2 Administration Bldg. My inquiries related to Qu11 tech, Inc. resulted from concerns brought to me as a member of the management chain in the integrated GPUN recovery l organization by Bill Austin in early Tebruary. The chronology of events related to this issue is prwsented below. At the time Ben Sloan left GPU, in May or June 1982, comments were made to me by GPU persons, whose identity I cannot recall, to the effect that Sloan was being very secretive about his futurw plans and that it was rumored that he was in some business relationship with Larry King. I passed this off as idle conversation. O . In September or October of 1982. Hike Herliby, SRG Manager, left GPUN. I O was again told, probably by Dave Buchanan, that Her11by would not divulge his future intentions, but it was rumored that he was to be associated with Ben Sloan. Soon thereafter Ted Reckert, Plant Engineering, left GPUN. I was told by someone in GPU, probably Buchanan, that he was going out on his own to work in Texas. Late in 1962, Ken Lionarens, Plant Engineering, resigned. At that time , in-femation again surfaced from Buchanan and/or Bill Austin that he was going to work for some company in which Larry King had an interest'. On Tebruary 2,1983, while on a business trip with B1.11 Austin, he raised the issue of the tweently-departed GPUN personnel ed stated that he ( Austin) felt rwasonably sure that Herlihy, Reckert. Sloan and Lionarens had departed GPU directly to an engineering jch-shop of which Larry KJng was either president or, in some other way, had a substantial business interest. B1'1 expressed a concem regarding management iriaction~ en this issue since we had j lost four good performers to the same alleged source and he believed that ecrw were to follow. I told Bill that I would check into the matter and get back to him. Bill told me at that time that he believed the name of the corpany in question was Quill Engineering. I believed it likely that any information I would obtain later regarding Quill Engineering would be devoid of a King involvement. On about Tebruary 14, when I returned from vacation I called Bechtel Project Procurement and asked that they run a vender infomation survey on Quill Engineering (,what Quill Engineering was, whers it was located, who its
, ,,w u RESP. I Ex. 16 s
[Y 5474
l }. 9 58 Bechtel North American Ptwer Corporation
/"% CONFIDENTIAL -
O H. D. bruner
- m. ,
3/2/83 Page 2 I officers were , pers onnel resumes , etc. ). I called Project Procurement on about Te5ruary 16 and was informed that they tid had no luck. Quill wasn't I 1 in Dunn & Bradstreet or in any of their usual n ferences. That same day I asked Dave Buchanan if he had a more accurate corporate n ame . He said he believed the name was Quill Tech, Inc., and that he had heard someone suggest in the past that the company was located in Virginia. I called Project Procurement on Tebruary 17 and suggested they check recent corperate registrations in Virginia. I called Project Procunment on another matter on Tebruary 22 and inquired about the vender survey. I was inferned that they had located Quiltech, Inc. in the Virginia corporate registry, which provided the following infor-ation: Quiltech , Inc. John Hoade - Treasurer / Business Agent, Lynchburg, VA Larry P. King, Jr. - President Ben Sloan - Vice President A Ms. King (?) - a' iso an officer. ( I was told that their telephone inquiries had provided the following: Quiltech's telephone nur.ber is (516) 929-8300, ext. 357 cr 269 Quiltech has an office at 704 Lynden Rd. , Hershey (533-7342) and also an address at #4 Rosedale Hershey. I then asked the Project Procurement representative if he knew who any of these people were and he said he didn't. I informed him who 1,arry P. King and Ber Sloan were. Trem this point on I believe there were r;c further fechtel-initiated contacts with Quiltech. I subsequently learned, on Tebruary 23, that Procurement had no other contacts ex' cept a call on Tehruary 22 from a woman who was believed to be Ms. King. She accused Prcject Procurement of misrepnsenting Bechtel's interests, etc. ~ Because of his previous stats xnts of concem I called Dave Buchanan te -/ o!! ice on Tebruary 22 and asked him to reiterate his previcus cor:ents regart-ing substantive connections between former GPUN employees and Quiltech. Cave quoted Ted Reckert as having told him that Ted was working fer Quiltech at Sherebar. He quoted Ken Lionarens as having said he was werking for the same cerpany as Reckert. Dave quoted Ted Reckert as having told him that Mike Herlihy was also working for Quiltech. Rich Galligher was called in at Dave's suggestion and he said that Ben Sloan had told him last sur:mer that Larry King was president of Quiltech. Rich also said that he had discovered Rose Rittle (Bechtel engineering seentary) typing Quiltech resumesMer hours last s u:=mer. She had said that Rick Parks (Bechtel operations engineer g " in FIant y erations) Bad asked her to do the typing for ham, ta nave not yet s
~) ~ursuec y this issue. ) -
f 1
l-i
- h A
U Bechtel North American Ptyer Corporation ! CONFIDENTIAL . K. D. Bruner l l 3/2/83 i Page 3 , , _ i Late in the day on Tebruary 22, I pnesented the information to John Barton. j Due to Bahman Kanga's illness on Tebruary 23 and 24,. John and I did not con- l tact him until the afternoon of the 24th, at home. With John Barton's knowledge, I called you on Tebruary 23 in the evening and summarized the ; situation. k
. W. Thies wd O -
Ja'T:pf: O I
'O l 4
i
, ,e ).
Bechtel North American Ptmer Corporation 7 Engineers - Constructors (o f 15740 Shady Grove Road 1 ' Gaithersburg, Maryland 208771454 301 - 258 3000
- CONFIDENTIAL s' March 4, 1983
, 4 l l Mr. Robert C. Arnold, President I t GPU Nuclear Corporation Post Office Box 480
~ Route 441 South Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057
Dear Mr. Arnold:
In accordance with Mr. Kanga's instructions, enclosed you will { find signed copies of two (2) sets of notes to record an in- 1 terview on March 3, 1983, with Rose Rittle. One set of notes I]. - is from James'Troebliger and the other set is mine. I The tone of the interview was set by Mr. Kanga by indicating to Ms. Rittle that she was not being investigated and that we were soliciting details from her with regard to L. P. King's possible conflict of interest. Ms. Rittle was open and cooperative with us. 1 1
~
I am available to discuss these notes with you at your convenience. . Yours truly,
><(I WIs Larry G. Santee Manager, Program Controls LGS:ms Enclosures (2) 1 I
cc: B. R. Kanga (w/ encl.) o J. Troebliger (w/ encl.)
, _A /
egnuf
l 4 E d. rre.c l h , S c ig" 6 4 I Ge % t- b L S m e.r..( pO, P I oe- ? . 5d.Mcr- C , n. - e c ' & svdh s. * ' ' ' i i i
. . K --
2 N=*18;4 Y D C .$. GW6 N CC uc E6 & C,,Llb 3 __ _ l E.u,,O oc s b .4 a IC In se b, "I$&8 A3oc2>TA - Tu t v E'e /p . , ese 4 L. ; 5 (,* s; ../ c ,. 1
.= M
& t e.;,
J v ku Q i 6 /)e ge o l.? 2 * *a ta Ke $b" A a 13 Llt L w'- i
*.~.G ( -
T's.* . , l l 7 fc@ Sages g , ;L L'd u
- S u 9. w a.. 1 Ent w r 2. s o ? . . (-
8 0ul L "~.r L.- b n* =M W 9 l__. 10 , , , . , _ , ,_.,_,._.,2 e m . _. o m - 7,= ... r. _ . . e I , .A D
._.y ,_
11 i 12 . _b_gYL's t c / v r!Cb&,' ($r * ',O s ,.er c
- s. s er * , _
l 13 l 1* . %g- gL.*C L.,/g ag c &Lty,,,a 1. ac1, y *2 $ &Su,,, 1 $ l
. 15 .
1e 17
,,].',,
. g yf I_.,,
,;.. r 4 7"y pe
. O C._,j r &,.1 y .___. .' .. *
. 1.8 ...._
7w g Pe .- [ . .s. - 7 . , -- ;g.- 10 .
^ - 2C .. . .. 5 i N '- ~s.kG{ .. .: '..L.. D.Tr o'E" Y SEi h si L .(5.* I C, ~ s .'s
( 2i, .. . .. _ _._ y .g .._ _ __
. _ 22 .._ .. M. s.t.ir.'r .s c. m upSe h.c J,/.4m f. d .e c,,a 4 A..f.w.'a ,e..c :s
_ .. 23 . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . .. .. ..
.. . . 2' ._._$ O ..h.l C '. . l(u.c w' '. l . W l'. UL.7 i /_< A J*e ;r. " _
. . _ . 35 . . - . . . .. . . . _ . . ____?Ln' ^ 1. C C YH./__7.'5 Fz L 7. r.st 6 d . 8 :s 4 r.:..u L.; .k*: .
- 2' Gr G*6 .D5 <_c <t a . __ ._ . _ _ . . . _ . . ..
27 20 6ss # 5 it :- e s s J.: . /* _* a w 8ec.** l: .:. L .L.
~
- s. a. .u 39
. . . . . . . . . . . . . _. .e . . _ . . . . _ . . . .._ . ._ ...
" . . . _ . . . U .G. W 3.'4**<.
- fr.'i*tv .
V 't ' s.'...: n e;' .... ., _. ._ 31 32
. . . _._ _ OC.D C w.t. h. S. l.I . *L sa v_.s.* A L- .. . ._. .
33 3d h , f......a,, ,,,i. ap ., ,_ . . e r ., e..f. k,e. d *L a 4.Af g C. M._M p gj y . 7,, $ h.1.:2 h f[w gw_. jd
- g..h*. 2 I:c. h.ls.t. .I.C A uNW.2 35 w1 C., D s .*- c~: F.
3s .. S.4 .&1.sLp fAv..A i _- .y T ..g. J.'u,,..s 3. A . . . .. 37 Tu.g._& 7" . - r _< :. k'a .7,... +. .s u * ._G :1_ Q.1 g 4 o.. 3e big L/ c _,,Jer &><. sc 7 ..
.a r M. t I.,'u .l .
g ,.. f-3' (.e 6 t u.t 7. _$ E.it 7 -- , ee b.8 . .p_g
> 4s ,:_d .
'C No .Lfr 4. H L .5'9.: .ex.1.4_U W a.N. 'V' 4.as- NO T-n1 5ue i U e. ,. G. a8, , .or . a.s-e ::' ' < ' '. I r j b st . _ , , _.
as _ __._.d 3 .. .
!!., . ._ $t W 'T8C $-4 C- 's. L@' . ..
.._. d 5 ..
/ p4 4 4.c u 5
. Ut b dd _
.. .._._,. . ....h.# .
41., _ __ # e.lil.L. 8_ Ld. r" d8, .
. - (_'.1E3p# - ._. ___
ef W t Le (,n* ac., ._ C L r' w _ _ _. _ . _
v-4 h e.
- 4. .G -
r% 4,I CV & ~
\
yl - l i 1 3 p , . , 8 9
. es=8 6..F* _ -
A h N $g I l I ladp. h g 2 -- __. - -. . . 3 . 4 .. _ . _ . . ppa w.-N. 5 . . . . . . . . ..
.. l 6 - . .=
... -- . i l
7 . . . _ . .. - 3 _ 8 - ..- 9 . _ . . . 10, __ .. .
. _ 3 i
11 . -. . . . . . , .- _ . . ... - 12
- .D + pee . . ..P.D. .
13 .. . _ _ . .. - _ . . . . _ . l.i .
.a
.. . ld . _ _ . .. -
i I 15 . . ._ . .. _---- ... ;.
. . .I6 . . . . - . .. --
. 17 .. . .-_. . . . - _ -
.. 4 l
. . . . . . 18 . . -
I9 .. . .. . ._ ._, ... .. ... . . 20 . . . . . . . . _ . .. .
~.. '
O 2i
._L OO
. . .22 . _ . .
23 . ... . ....._, . .i - . 2d . . . ._ .. - . - ... _ . 3 .' .- . . . . . . - . . . . . _ _ . _ . ._ , 26 29 - d.= I . Y . . ... , . .. . _ . . _ --- .f . _ _ , 31 . . . .... .. _ . . . 32 . . . . . _ . .- _ 33 . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . .
/. .. .
/ a 3 -- . . . . . - - . .
, L, . b.
-. .35 . .- .. . . - _ . . - .. . . . - . - .
,3- sp J .2A. v?. - .
. . . . . . . .36 . . _ - _ . _ . . . . . . . . .... .-
37 . . 38 ---- -
. 39 _
_ . ..... _ j j d i., .. . _ i et .. _
#2 ,
... .. 44,, -
40 47 -- _ _ _. 8.h-N-m 48 4 9,,, ... ,
. 30 ,
11 m >tno-L Jman
.x A.ev;se
- Rest da72 g C, -
X-%1r7A/ . A $h00 gad kos?a o/MVI of l $sde sm>$ned i MO SfblSsCD .A $4ifE ptftals 75 G&iB R403 AfLn7M 10 l'dit Tffia A63am64 ; G-7t A*b Askt4 A4!!it cocARWAd R a is a r uia = =nars ( Le- La nr2 - essau ryn .a quiumeu m 2eek furs Asv.ss he n 7yM 7)st p*xar er aonw1; I QND 0075tht' Cf DstM0L % I460Af BW Q M M 42' feweiss typre er res6. ,a pbs:.ps,4= fj
~
WILu% & g- y &c )%g6 & r Gitc &.r w J.isam,as rso t u ner- es> suet
, Obe¬at6 )97~ l.6%ff" bl5" Aff"**6' "'kel11/SA.l60AefW.5 269ueier 7e r;W tsso~e woes not 001.fsc6 Vatt ws bio N'7$. ob & 7 bot. Nde. /S- So At <..:
&n-TEC l.E n G,: % c a.y Alc a ss l
Y of UffCA W $ 6;$ U JH tG.5
% MO Qsut.Kbsd m u , .m n has, .sa ><o - a xa.a 1
Aetu t>rsPosa n o A. 0 ~ he o,e> ur , ar- r,ar, r- - ,, u muo n. :
/tduS' Jisc6 n is se9e sAtt N,w Ana Mk.w vc- '\
sua 1>4 herf* W ofhnM K m sov6 m t.no saith.
e y 1 g weo mzna . Sus Asuo dia kria , wi,cr m seix ea
-tm /-my hx -
n % ,ej a nn ta u DG 8/LL M6timeo Q utL7FC. . A% f .s m o .h 4F - bfmos:co 77mc A%m sa Qwas 4r.rarme a a,,e sat Aara Ane su no as m a-Won & Abu 7'Yfib. Ort. L 76 o Ah56 ??W7 At* St:wrr,-1= BGd d w is.s w a att Av? BM , br ser zw w ka+*) wq a tawra m 1 O - l
%%c _
$ls3 \
9 , na i.... l JJ& ) L. Gr. Sn rce 3 3- e 2 O ' l
i
. . . .# E E E I. l o E E I I A L
. Intoro@ffloo Momorandum Muclear
~
~
Subject INVESTIGATION REGAFIING L. P. KING INTERVIEW WITH ROSE RITTLE 83/053 ~ Memorandum for Record Location TMI - Human Resourcas TO On this date, Larry Santee of Bechtel and nryself interviewed Rose Rittle, I a Bechtel amployee who was involved in the typing of resumes under the direction of Rich Parks. During the sununer of 1982, Ms. Rittle was requested by Mr. Parks to type resumes of a numbe:; of individuals on the stationary of Quiltec. Ms. Rittla was int,tructed to type these resumes during non-working hours and to keep everything she was doing very confidential. Ms. Rittle remembers typing at least 25 resumes, most of which were resumes of GPU employees. She specifically r== mhers typing the resumes of Larry King, Ben Slone, Mike Berlihly, Ted Rekart, Bill Austin, Willism Henry, III and Ken Ljonarons. Ms. Rittle was paid $75 for typing the resumes. She
,q ,
believes it took her 15 to 20 hours and that' she did it using company U equipment. l Ms. Rittle stated that she did not view this as unusual at that particular time because she had been asked in the past to type resumes. She said that she had notified no one of this assignment until yesterday, March 2, 1983 when she asked Bill Austin what was happening with the Larry King situation. Bill stated that it involved Larry's efforts with an outside consulting fi:=, Quiltec, that may compromise his effectiveness with GPU. Ms. Rittle stated to Bill that she had remembered typing resumes on Quiltec stationary and that. Bill's resume was one of the many that she typed. Rose stated that Bill Austin was quite surprised and stated to her that during 1982 Ben Slone had requested a copy of Bill's resume but Bill was uncertain of the disposition of it. g,_. Both Larry Santee and I recorded a written transcript of Ms. Rittle's answers to our questions and had her sign both written transcripts at the end of en: interview. We also requested that if Ms. Rittle had any resumes of the individuals mentioned or had any stationary belonging to Quiltec, if she would please provide that information to Larry Santee. Q - Aooceram
T r l' Investigation Regarding L. P. King Interview with Rose Rittle
,r] Page 2 ,
r (> ;s I I It is the writer's opinion that Ms. Rittle made an error in judgement when ' i she was asked to type the resuines, specifically her utilization of company bQ property. Before Ms. Rittle was interviewed by Larry Santee and myself, Mr. Kanga gave Ms. Rittle a brief overview of the Larry King situation.and stat'ed
~
to her t1;at we vere seeking her cooperation. I beli&~v'e it was quite clear that we.were not investigating Ms. Rittle, but solely seeking her cooperation , on information relative to a fair and conclusive evaluation relative to Mr. King.
- f. <
s l'
. /
J.,4.oebligef e ( Ar ba Manager - Human Resources ree Mile Island 2( JT/pir ! 9 i ( 4 1' f' s l l
! -i n
U N .
e Inttrnal Auditing ORGANIZATION MANUAL fir i/ [, j Section IV i . C 4 jl ) Page 1.of 2 July 22,1983 e
. DESCRIPTl N,OF OPERATIONS INTERNAL AUDITING '
s-Internal Auditing is responsible for ascertaining adherence torend evaluating the ef festiveness of policy, procedures and controls ; and for performing investigative, reporting and advisory functions worldwide. It is an independent Service that reports to Senior Management. Internal Auditing is also used as a means of training and developing Division, Special Operation, and other Service personnel through rotational assignments. Internal Auditing is responsible for conducting financial audits which include : 4 e Determining the extent of compliance with prescribed Bechtel financial sptems, policies and procedures, and with legal and statutory re.: sirements. ! e Determining the adequacy of internal checks and controls, including means for detecting and preventing errors, fraud, and unlawful appropriation. - e Determining the propriety, reliability and proper documentation of the ("')T ( accounting records and reports. i e Reviewing financial statements and reports to ascertain that a true and fair view is given of the financial position at a specified period. e Reviewing the methods used to arrive at earned gross margin. Internal Auditing also has responsibility for operational audits which incl 6de : s e Reviewing the degree of adherence to, and determining the adequacy of, j Division, Special Operation and Service operating controls as set forth in j Bechtel Directives, Management Instructions, division procedures, i, Personnnel Policies and similar documents, or, in their absence, with good business practice. e Determining the extent Bechtel financial assets (or client-owned financial assets under Bechtel's custody) are properly used, maintained and safeguarded. e Determining the extent Bechtel non-financial assets (or client-owned
, non-financial assets) are properly accounted for.
e \ Determining the degree of compliance with contractual terms and l i
' agreements, legal requirements, and local practices. ,
(} ' j p e, w Replaces issue dated February 22,1982 yfno , q , 03043 - f' r h -
ORGANIZATION MANUAL Int:rn:1 Auditing Section IV ! , Page 2 of 2 July 22,1983 ! O V ( l 3 Internal duditing will also conduct spe lal audits to a e Determine compliance with Bechtel's code of,elhics, and determine that business relationships are free from conflict of interest (Directive 2-1). - e Determine compliance with the Export Administration Amendments of 1977 (Directive 5-6).
]
e Review other practices as requested by senior management. ; Internal Auditing does not evaluate the efficiency or effectiveness of the Divisions, i Special Operations or Services in meeting management goals and objectives, nor does it comment on the performance of individuals or organizational units. 1 Audit findings and relate, recommendations will be reviewed with project, ] department, Division /Spee.'al Operation / Service management, and senior { management as appropriate, and their comments will be incorporated in Internal Auditing's reports. Although corrective action based upon audit findings and recommendations is a line management responsibility, Internal Auditing will issue periodic reports, summarizing recurring audit findings, to functional and senior management. Internal Auditing maintains liaison and coordinates all its activities with the oC external audit agencies used by Bechtel to avoid unnecessary duplication and to i provide efficient and effective audit control. I Internal Auditing will prepare an annual summary audit report for the Audit Committee, the cognizant E echtel Committee overseeing audits, and will prepare supplementary reports as rrquested by the Audit Committee or the Finance Co mmittee. - s 9
, /
\
l ,, Audit No.: ' l File No.: T-201 I l fT - V VI GENERAL (Cont'd) l B. Checklist on BECHTEL DIRECTIVE 2-1: " BUSINESS ETHICS, l . CONFLICT OF INTEREST and SECURITY OF INFORMATION" l 1. Review Directive 2-1 with the,m. embers of your audit team. Be aware of the intent and the various l examples given in the directive.
- 2. As the auditors progress through the audits of their disciplira",, have them be alert to the following:
- a. Media coverage: ,
Has there been any local newspaper, radio or television station coverage recently? If so, why?
- b. Client concern:
Has a client expressed any concern about:
- 1. Internal control weaknesses? If so, what are his specific concerns?
- 2. Security of his proprietary information?
- c. Client requests:
Has the client requested that we act in a way which causes you concern from an ethical point of view? *C
- d. Rumors:
Have you heard any rumors about possible ethical irregularities? If so, who, what,when, where and why?
- e. Unfair treatment:
Have any of our people, any suppliers or sub-contractors / contractors commented on:
- 1. Favoritism?
- 2. Unfair treatment?
- 3. Unusual requests?
- 4. Unusual pressures?
- f. Unusual friendships:
Are any of our construction people unusually friendly with any of our subcontractors or suppliers? How about our Procurement people? Accounting people? Subcontract / Contract Administrators?
- g. Ghosts-- .:?
6 think you have any ghosts as:
- 1. Suppliers?
- 2. Subcontractors / Contractors?
- 3. Employees?
fh/
- h. Use of assets for personal purposes: j
~Have you heard of our employees using any '
g, project' equipment, tools or materials for - ().i , their own use?
- 1. Private businesses:
- Do any of our people have private businesses "on the side". Do you think there may be a ,
conflict of interest? ,,
- j. Gifts:
j Have you heard that our construction people j received any gifts or loans from a subcontractor / I contractor or a supplier? How about any of our Procurement people? Controller's people? Sub-contract / Contract Administrators?
- k. Entertainment:
Any talk of entertainment provided by Suppliers / Subcontractors / Contractors which seems exorbitant relative to our standards?
- 1. Meetings:
Directive 2-1 reviewed in a staff meeting at least.once a year? When was the last time? When is the next time?
- 3. If the auditors become aware of a possible concern:
'O a. ' Talk with the auditor and review the cause of his/her concern.
- b. Take no action with the auditee.
- c. Telephone Lee Hofmann or Steve Pace as soon as possible.
- 4. Comments:
- a. Audit name and number:
Have Concern?
, , , , Yes No N/A
- b. Discipline
- 1. Controllers
- 2. Procurement
- 3. Contracts
- 4. Personnel
! 5. Data Processing l 6. } Other 7.
-n Team Leader
() Date 2/9/82
4*
%. .,4 *'rl,. 5 ,.
} ,
/ -. Intor Sffice M:morandum o March 21, 1983 ( j te Subject Termination of Employment of Larry P. King T3 File Location .- l The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the reason for termination. of employment of Larry P. King and aggregate with it the principal associ-ated documentation. On February 24, 1983, Mr. Clark informed me at our offices in Parsippany that he had been told by John Barton that Mr. King was the president of a company called Quiltec and that Quiltec had hired four former GPUN employees. We instructed Mr. Barton to meet with Mr. King along with Jim Troebliger, site Human Resources Area Manager, and determine from Mr. King if this was true. If confirmed, Mr. Barton was to suspend Mr. King without pay immediately. That meeting took place as directed and resulted in the suspension of Mr. King. (j
' _Mr. Clark was scheduled to have a meeting with Mr. King on February 25, 1983, as a result of an earlier memorandum (handwritten) from Mr. King to oe Mr. Clark requesting an opportunity to discuss with Mr. Clark Mr. King's .
concerr:s about TMI-2 activities, and a subsequent phone call from Mr. Clark to arrange the meeting. l On February 25, prior to meeting with Mr. King, Mr. Clark and I agreed that we should try to separate resolution of our concerns about Mr. King's out- , side business activities from the effort to address constructively Mr. King's l concerns about safety and management issues at TMI-2. We further decided ' that to facilitate dealing with Mr. King's safety concerns effectively, his status would be changed from suspension without pay to suspension with pay. We also decided to have Mr. Clark's February 25 meeting with Mr. King be for the purpose of understanding as clearly as we could the nature of Mr. King's safety concerns. Attachment 1 is Mr. Clark's documentation of the arrange- ' ment of the February 25 meeting and Attachment 2 are the notes taken by Mr. Clark and discussed with Mr. King at the February 25 meeting. Attachment 3 is a memorandum from me to Mr. King which sets forth my understanding of Mr. King's safety and management concerns regarding TMI-2 activities. Attachments 4 and 5 are letters to Mr. Lowe and Dr. Griebe establishing their charter for an independent investigation and evaluation of Mr. K(ng's concerns about potential safety issues. Dr. James Fletcher, Chairman af the TMI-2 Safety Advisory Board was informed by me on March 8 of Mr. K'ng's concerns and the Company's concerns about Mr. King's outside business W.- tivi ties. Dr. Fletcher was provided with a copy of Attachment 3. As a re-n sult of that r. notification, Dr. Fletcher arranged for Dr. Bruce Lundin, also l () a member of the TMI-2 Safety Advisory Board, to interview Mr. King on March 10. A0000648 // fycvwe s\ Q/ fg; w#
- o. l i
l! i . 4 . File March 21, 1983 Termination of Employme'nt L']% Page 2 of Larry P. King l Parallel with those activities, I undertook to pursue with Mr. King his - L involvement with Quiltec. On February 28 I met with Mr. King and gave him a letter containing 21 questions, a copy of which is included as Attachment 6. : At that meeting, I extended the time for his response to March 3. I again met with Mr. King on March 3 and at his request ex-tended the time for him to respond to 7:00 p.m. on March 9. Attachment 7 documents that agreement. I subsequently received Mr. King's response on March 9, a copy of which is included as Attachment 8. Based upon that re-sponse and the timing of notification of resignation from Mr. Herlihy and Mr. Rekart (set forth on pages 2 and 3 of Attachment 9) it was clear that Quiltec had finalized employment agreements with Mr. Herlihy and most likely with Mr. Rekart, both of whom were closely associated in their GPUN activi-ties with Mr. King, prior to those two individuals informing GPUN of their intention to resign. Although some additional time, as described below, , was needed to further understand all the implications of Mr. King's activi-L ties and whether he was being fully forthcoming in his letter of March 9. I met with Mr. King in the morning on March 11 and gave him a letter setting forth our initial assessment-of his letter of March 9. A copy of my March 11 letter is included as Attachment 10. That letter identified that I would need additional time to pursue our review of the information he had provided P but that he was subject to termination based upon the information he gave us
- d. in Attachment 8. There were two aspects of addressing Mr. King's associaticd e with Quiltec that made it necessary to proceed very deliberately. Firstly, as indicated in Attachments 2 and 3, there was a history of several weeks of frequent disagreement between Mr. King and other members of the organization about the conduct of activities which had potential safety implications.
Secondly was the fact that Dr. Thiesing, a Bechtel employee assigned as Manager-Recovery Programs, and with whom Mr. King had a substantial history of disagreements on technical issues, had been the one to tell.Mr. Barton of Mr. King's Quiltec activities. Since there were questions as to the ex-tent of knowledge within the TMI-2 organization about Mr. King's outside , business activities and the propriety with which Dr. Thiesing dealt with in-formation provided to him on the issue, I agreed with Mr. Sanford of Bechtel's Gaithersburg office, for Bechtel to proceed with an investigation of those issues using one of their internal auditors. Attachments 11 and 12 are copies of information provided to me by Mr. Kanga in conjunction with Bechtel's investigation of the role of their people in this matter which was undertaken by Bechtel management personnel prior to the arrival of Bechtel's internal auditor. I met with Messrs. Joe Chwastyk, Dave Buchanan, and Bill Austin during the afternoon of March 11. All three of them appeared willing to discuss openly with me what they knew of Mr. King's and other GPUN employees' involvement with Quiltec. Mr. Chwastyk could not recall knowing about Mr. King's offi-cial involvement with Quiltec prior to meeting with Messrs. King and Ben (] b Sloan at Mr. King's home although he was aware that after Mr. Sloan left GPUN's employment, Mr. King continued to have discussions with Sloan on technical matters. His recollection was that the meeting with Mr. King had occurred more recently than November,1982, although he could not recall when the meeting actually took place. He said that since that meeting he _m
'O' :.- .'.s .2 File March 21,1983 Termination of Employment fy:
v .- Page 3 of Larry P. King had not had ongoing involvement with Quiltec in any way although he had pro- ' vided Mr. Sloan with a copy of his resume and an invitation to Mr. Sloan to let him (Chwastyk) know if Mr. Sloan had somethfng'that would be attractive. Mr. Chwastyk further stated that he had asked Mr. King ^ -hether before or after the meeting at Mr. King's home could not be recalled) if Mr. King had looked at whether his Quiltec . activities were.a violation of the Company's Conflict of Interest policy. Mr. Chwastyk said that Mr. King asserted that he had reviewed the Conflict of Interest policy carefully and did not be-lieve he was violating the policy. Although I discussed this further with Mr.- King on March 11 I was not able to resolve the discrepancies in their two accounts. Mr. Buchanan stated that he had learned from Austin and Rekart in November, 1982, that Sloan, Herlihy, and Rekart were all working at Shoreham iluclear Generating Station for Quiltec and that Mr. King was associated with Quiltec. In early January Buchanan was informed that Mr. King was president of Quiltec. He stated that he gave the substance of that information to Dr. Thiesing in January. Mr. Buchanan stated that while he felt that what Mr. King was in-volved with was improper in light of his employment with GPUN, and was dis-turbed by the situation, he'saw no reasonable avenue for giving. visibility to the situation beyond talking with his immediate supervisor, Dr. Thiesing. Mr. Austin stated that he discussed his knowledge of the situation, wnich he gained as a' result of meeting a Stone and Webster employee at the November ANS meeting in Washington, D.C., with Mr. Buchanan (which was confirmed by Mr. Buchanan and was the reason Mr. Buchanan found out about the specifics from Mr. Rekart) and subsequently, .in the early part of February with Dr. Thiesing, while the two of them were on a business trip to Idaho. On the afternoon of March 12 I met with Messrs. Clark Kanga, and Barton. i I discussed witn them my conclusion that we should terminate Mr. King's employment. - On March 15, it was orally reported to me by Mr. Kanga that the internal auditor was told by Mr. Rich Parks that he had arranged for about a dozen !
. ,_. , resumes to be typed at the request of Mr. King. He stated further that Mr. King had given him $75 to pay for the typing and had sought his advice on formatting of the resumes. Mr. King denied requesting Mr. Parks have the resumes prepared and denied knowing whose resumes were involved. He acknow- i ledged paying for the work effort but denied he knew the typing was done by a Bechtel employee after normal working hours.
I reached the conclusion that it was necessary to terminate Mr. King because, although we probably did not know all of the details of his activities on
. behalf of Quiltec while he was a GPUN employee and of his knowledge of Mr. !
Sloan's activities on behalf of Quiltec invoiving GPUN employees, it was clear from his letter of March 9 that he was accountable as president of the company for making known to us the circumstances of his association with j i i i
V .. p)- N File . flarch 21, 1983
+
Termination of Employment of Larry P. King Page 4 Quiltec and their hiring of GPUN employees. His failure to understand and/oI feel that responsibility was such a fundamental deficiency that he could not be utilized effectively as an ' employee of GPUN. I would have reached the same conclusion regardless of when, and under what circumstances, I became aware of the conflict between Mr. King's obligations to GPUN and his outside business activities and responsibilities. . 1 I met with Mr. King on March 16 and notified him of my decision as set forth in Attachment 13. f l
;h Q
R. C. nold-
;) - Attachments (See attached list) i l
cc: T. L. Myers (w/ Attach) J. F. Wilson, Esq.(.w/ Attach) P. R. Clark (w/ Attach) , B. K. Kanca Iw/ Attach) ~ i 4 , .j 1 1
)
'b
,u
]
l AFFIDAVIT OF H. L. HOFMANN I, H. L. Hofmann, declare: l
- 1. I attended a meeting on March 14, 1983 between ;
Mr. Richard Parks and myself, at which Mr. Richard Wheeler and Mr. Mark Kobi were also present. At all times I conducted the meeting in a professional manner.
- 2. Early in the meeting I told Mr. Parks that he was under no obligation to talk to me, and that he could leave at any time. Mr. Parks chose to stay.
- 3. At no time during the March 14 meeting did I accuse Mr. Parks of any wrongdoing.
- 4. At several points during the meeting Mr. Parks became agitated.
- 5. Because Mr. Parks expressed a strong desire to discuss technical matters, I telephoned Mr. C. W. Sandford at Bechtel's offices in Gaithersburg, Maryland, to set up a meeting the next day between Mr. Parks and Mr. Sandford. Mr. Parks appeared pleased that the meeting for the next day had been arranged. The March 14 meeting ended on a professional note.
- 6. I also' attended the meeting on March 15, 1983, between Mr. Parks and Mr. Sandford. Mr. Wheeler was also present at this meeting.
i
- 7. Mr. Sandford was pleasant in manner throughout the meeting, and listened intently to everything that Mr. Parks At no time was Mr. Sandford abrupt in manner, and h
44 6 had to say.
.. /y4r?#13 4 -
1 1 e at no time did Mr. Sandford say anything that might be construed as an accusation directed at Mr. Parks.
- 8. Although I am not an engineer, Mr. Parks appeared I to discuss safety concerns only in general terms.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and was executed this 4 - day of October, 1984.
)' ,
' 11 LV fmann O
w
=t
- u. I s >
E
+4' 5;?:
h
!fY, 2.
<c
.I}}